THINKING WITHOUT LANGUAGE (1)

Language starts as a tool external to the child used for social interaction. The child guides
personal behavior by using this tool in a kind of self-talk or "thinking out loud."
Initially, self-talk is very much a tool of social interaction and it tapers to
negligible levels when the child is alone or with deaf children. Gradually self-talk
is used more as a tool for self-directed and self-regulating behavior. Then,
because speaking has been appropriated and internalized, self-talk is no longer
present around the time the child starts school. Self-talk develops along a rising
not a declining, curve; it goes through an evolution, not an involution.

Thinking without language?

Can we think without knowing any language? Searching in the internet for opinions about this
question, leads to a broad spectrum of answers. Some claim that one can also think in pictures. Or that
one has to think to learn a language. I also read that neurosciences already proved that thinking
without language is possible. However, answers with philosophical references often deny that one can
think without language.

To understand this, let us discuss it’s both aspects-

Can we think without using language?

Short answer, yes. But it’s not that simple. We don’t have to use words to think. I can
think about my brother without his name or the word ³brother´ crossing my mind. We can
think about what we want to do tonight; design the floor plan of a house (or a yurt, but
that’s another story); create a symphony; develop various aspects of a theory. We can
project ourselves into the future, or go back to our past; solve complex problems. All
without recourse to words.
THINKING WITHOUT LANGUAGE (2)

We will get a little back into evolution. There should definitely have been a time where
we did not have languages. So people did find it difficult to put their ideas across and
communicate. So they started drawing pictures. But pictures have a problem - they are
polysemous. If I show you an apple, it can mean an apple, a fruit, a red color etc., So
there is always an ambiguity in communication. So to avoid this our ancestors moved a
little bit up the abstraction scale and languages were born. Some times even language is
ambiguous and that is where a more strict formalism like mathematics comes in.
In order to fully hold it in our mind, give it certain
persistence, we usually need some sort of language or code. Not necessarily a natural
language could be mathematical or musical notation, or a number of other codes. For
many things, words are a wonderful tool when it comes to taking hold of our thoughts.
Language is useful in the prehension of thought, to give it a more stable form. In a way,
to transmit it to ourselves. In some cases it is not possible such as we can take an
example of a born child who is naturally deaf so for him or her it is not so easy to think
without language.

Is thought possible without a prior language?

Here it gets Trickier. I don’t think it possible to reach a certain level of thinking without
having beforehand integrated (I prefer this word to learning´) a language. Language
gives a basis with which to structure (without necessarily influencing ± let’s not get into
that one) our thought processes.
Of course, it’s pretty hard to adequately judge the intellectual capacities
of someone who cannot speak, with whom a structured enough communication is not
possible. On the other hand, we can see that many intellectual things are possible without
language: simple problem solving; creation and use of rudimentary tools; collaboration;
even playing tricks. All of these have been observed in primates. Yes it is possible to
think without language.
Language is only one of the expressions of Communication
that we use. We also use concept, visual, audio and sensory methods to communicate. If
you want proof, try using language to describe "red." (Or any color).You can't. But you
can show someone red--and they will understand you! Babies aren't born with language,
yet, they think. Animals don't use language (not that we understand) and have extremely
limited communication skills compared to humans, but they also think. A person born
without the ability to speak or see or hear would have to be able to communicate with or
without language--such as Helen Keller did--she did not learn language until she was
nearly 10 years old.
THINKING WITHOUT LANGUAGE(3)

Think of the IQ tests (if you have solved one), and some of those problems with
figures. When one thinks of which figure doesn’t fit, or something like that, what we do
are things like rotating the figure in our minds, or imagining the mirror figure, or
something like that. That is surely thinking and conscious act, and it doesn’t seem that it
is done in language.

Thinking without language

Ludwig Josef Johann Wittgenstein (26 April 1889 – 29 April 1951) was an
Austrian-British philosopher who worked primarily in the areas of logic, philosophy of
mathematics, philosophy of mind, and philosophy of language has given his perspective
towards this issue by giving an example,I will briefly introduce Wittgenstein's argument
starting with his famous paragraph (219)-

Suppose everyone had a box with something in it: we call it a 'beetle'. No one can look
into anyone else's box, and everyone says he knows what a beetle is only by looking at
his beetle. Here it would be quite possible for everyone to have something different in his
box. One might even imagine such a thing constantly changing. But suppose the word
'beetle' had a use in these people's language. If so it would not be used as a name of a
thing. The thing in the box has no place in the language-game at all; not even as a
something: for the box might be empty. No, one can 'divide through' by the thing in the
box; it cancels out, whatever it is.

To give some explanations: Wittgenstein considers language as a game. The game

has certain rules (like grammar) but is learned by practice. Therefore, studying language
has to focus on the practice / use of language. Wittgenstein makes this argument against
sensations as private objects. In terms of private sensations, I can never be sure whether
the sensation is the same sensation I had last time as I used the same word for it.

Conclusion-
Now, we can come back to the original question: Can we think without language? The
answer is rather simple and straight-forward: The question has no meaning. 'Thinking' is
an abstract word defined by the use in the language game. Therefore, we cannot use 'to
think' in a context (without language) where the word 'think' has never been used nor
THINKING WITHOUT LANGUAGE(4)

Defined nor practiced.

In case of thinking without language, there is not even a question without the reference.
So, in conclusion, the question cannot even be reasonably asked whether we can think
without language.

References –
Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations, 3rd. ed, tr. G. E. M. Anscombe (Oxford:
Basil Blackwell, 1972 [1953]), para. 219.

A project made by:-

RAVI BISHT
10609106 (R2)