if we didnt have a language, would we still be avaliable to think?

Question

When we think we are thinking our thoughts in words. Our thoughts and language are intercontected and can´t be sepparated..so my question is, can we just think without a language, can our thoughts be free of been just thoughts??
thanks for all your answers.

Answer 1

i would answer with a yes. spoken language (words) is thought externalized, or at least the thoughts we want to share with others in order to communicate. we think in words as that is what we have been taught since childhood(we have learned thru immitationas all animals) no matter what the language. but we could also think in symbols (eg chinese, etc), images, etc if so taught. but there are times when our thoughts cannot be communicated simply because we cannot find the exact words for them-usually when it comes to complex feelings. recent technology has developed new words to fit its "thought" and its processes. and as language is a way of externalizing thought, then logically thought (is some form whether childish or advanced) would have to come first. i think therefore i am said a philosopher and t is logical thought process that diffrentiates man from animal, lending man the ability to create language.

Answer 2

I would say that this depends what you mean by thinking. Many people light use the example of a new born baby. For example they feel pain and can express this feeling without language; but, then again, so can my pet dog.

All this tells us is that people, like many other animals have a pain response. The ability to express things through language is perhaps a higher form of communication that is on a progressive scale of consciousness; with adult humans being a higher consciousness than babies.

I would be tempted to say that what we might call thinking without language is actually instinct, and that thinking in the rational sense of the word is actually thinking.

The difficulty lies in drawing a line between what is instinct and what is thinking; and when does a baby's form of communication stop being baby talk and become a proper language.

Answer 3

Thanks for the question...
Perhaps the answer begs the question:
That is, what does it mean to think?

I would say your premise is open to question:
That is that we do NOT always use words to think.

I propose a thought experiment:
Attempt to plan out the major activities of your day without words, but only images...
It may be a struggle, but I believe you are up to the task...
Is this not thinking?

In the past, the idea of thought and language were believed to be strictly human capacities...

Today, the scientific community had accepted many animal communications as forms of speech that imply thought.

Let's say we don't know language, but only math...
Would our ability to solve a complex problem imply the use of language if we could not communicate with others? Perhaps the question is partly whether its possible to have internal without the capacity for external communication. We may not have learned societal languages, but have been able to figure out complex problems for ourselves...

I believe that thought and language take many forms. For example, a mother cheetah may need to recognize what prey to go after... Would her going after a certain size prey that is not too much of a challenge, and yet would adequately feed herself & her pups show evidence of thought?

The fact that you have asked such a question shows that your thought processes are intact and well-developed!

Thanks again for the question!

Answer 4

Every action begins with a thought. So thoughts would definitely have to come before language. If we didn't think we wouldn't even have the thought to create a language in the first place. The first written words were actually "pictures" . . . so pictures would have to have been the first language.

Answer 5

Well, I was thinking about this the other day about babys. They don't know words yet, so do they think? I think that of course they do because they have emotions, they know when they hurt, or are hungry, or tired. Even without words, they have thoughts. So if you remove language from an adult, I would say that, yes, we would still think. It's just that we think in words because we know words, if we didn't, we would still have thoughts in our own internal language that has no words.

Answer 6

I don't think we could think at the level of abstraction that we do.

I think we could think at a higher order than, say, chimps, by imagining, though -- imagining things happening and imagining the points of view of other people. If we did this, we might end up being able to symbolize in our heads, without language, and achieve some very abstract ideas. But it'd never be like what we've got with language.

I see what you mean by "free" thoughts, but remember, there are a lot of thoughts you might never have had without language to bring them to you from someone else's mind. We're part of culture, and it's part of us.

Answer 7

Is not language only thoughts that we have constructed into symbols? If we give a word to an object the word does not become the object; the truth of the object exists beyond the word. The most direct way to communicate would be telepathically. ~thought waves~

Answer 8

We would still be able to think but we won't necessarily attach words to thoughts. Babies, for instance, are able to know and think about being hungry or tired and they express how they feel even though they do not yet have a language. Imagine if you in pain not having a language wouldn't stop you from feeling it.

Answer 9

Language is merely needed to describe to other people your thoughts and feelings - even then words can never encompass or describe exactly what it means to feel pain or love, or be hungry or nervous. I know that I don't think in words, although words are tied in very much alongside many of my ideas.

We do not think in words, words merely present themselves when we wish to share our thoughts with others. As I write this, I know more or less what I am going to say, but it takes time for the words to come to me - more or less at the speed I am typing. The thoughts are generating the words - not vice-versa. Certainly, it is nonsensical to suggest that words or method of expression are required in order to think.

Rather, being able to communicate is so critically essential to survival that any creature capable of thinking has had to evolve commication in order to survive, even if their language is incredibly basic.

Answer 10

It has oftimes been said that "humans stand within language," a phrase that conveys the fact that we use language not only to express our thoughts but also to conceptualize our thoughts.

If we were not to have language, yes we could still "think." However the constructions couldn't be nearly as profound kr complex. ...And perhaps the early thinking endeavors would be to form symbolic and expressive language that would get us to the next level ...on the road to where we are today!