Is there an Assembly Language for Philosophy?

Question

In philosophy it seams that the largest part of most works in any language are dedicated to explaining the particular meaning of the specific vernacular as intended by the author.

When programming computers we commonly use a higher level languages to make the code understandable by humans, but C++ or Java can have many different implementations which will result in the same Assembly and the same Machine Codes. Machine language is to low, and only really good for the computer. Assembly though is simple, constant and meaningfully to humans.
So is there a language which is consistent and meaningful with a strictly limited vernacular; which can be expanded into a higher language for human convince, but can always be compiled back to the original?

Answer 1

Well it's like in literary theory... When we use words they are supposed to represent certain things. However, there is no one-to-one correspondence, and particular words used are arbitrary. As in, there's no reason a bush is called a "bush", it's just convention developed over time. And while when you say "bush" most people know what you mean, there are a variety of things it could mean to different people... a small tree, a shrub, a hedge... And every person who hears the word has a different mental impression of it, so you are not able to directly communicate your actual exact mental image when you use the word. So when people hear language and understand it, regardless of whether it's the language of philosophy or anything else, they are given impressions as to what it means but they never have direct access to the thoughts behind the language. The access they have to other's thoughts, and often to their own thoughts, is limited by language. The communication is sufficient to express our ideas on a functional basis, but the amount we can communicate is rather basic compared to the actual richness of information we contain.

So really, our abstract thoughts are the machine code. As C++ is a simplification for the purpose of communication, but also a limitation on the full abilities of what pure machine code can accomplish, so are our words to our thoughts. They can be compiled back and forth in a single person, but every human mind has its own peculiar system of thought that does so slightly differently. There is almost certainly a basic similarity in thought process when you break it down enough, but because it would be so broken down it could never be communicated or confirmed since we need language to communicate.

The basic fundamental thought processes/machine code would probaby be what makes up the unconscious (or really that's probably the entirety of what the unconscious is, machine code...), which we don't consciously have access to, so that's another reason that fundamental language couldn't really be discovered or understood if there is indeed one common to all humans.

Unless we develop telepathy...

Answer 2

I kind of doubt it guy. The reason being that we use words to communicate, and it is the human experience that causes words to take on deeper and multiple meanings. Words are meant to be descriptive. What we need for an assembly language of philosopy is to strip away all of the coloring, leaving only terms as black and white as any geometry textbook. Good for math and science, but not fit for philosophy, which also deals with life. George Orwell gave it an interesting attempt in his "1984" novel though.

Answer 3

Just because seams seem to be seamed; which could encourage you to seam the unseamed, does not mean that every unseamed seems to be waiting to be seamed by you, although that's exactly what it seems.

I gotta tell you, and don't get me wrong, this IS a great Q, thank you!0!

Binary stuff seems to be the seam that you're looking for.

Answer 4

the 1st question is are you attempting to try this with the help of your self or soliciting for God for help in this quest? study Matthew 7:7 "Ask,and it shall settle for you: seek for, and ye shall discover; knock, and it would be opened." Now this is to no longer say that in case you ask for a clean automobile God provides you with a clean automobile. Ask God for the element repetedly. it may no longer be the time which you will recieve the present. are not getting indignant with God in case you under no circumstances recieve it. which will in basic terms tutor you probably did no longer deserve it. i'm hoping that i become waiting to assist a sprint.