8 ms·

Ursula K. Le Guin also pointed this out, at least in her book "The Dispossessed". For example: "This is my brush" vs "This is the brush that I use" regarding --

Ursula K. Le Guin also pointed this out, at least in her book "The Dispossessed". For example: "This is my brush" vs "This is the brush that I use" regarding -- in part -- the concept of ownership [be it personal or communal].

perl4ever 6y ago
That idea (words shaping thought) is near the top of my list of "stupid things that smart people believe and repeat". Think about the history of words with a negative connotation that people try to replace, and how the new euphemism acquires the previous negativity. dang doesn't like it when people say correlation is not causation, but dammit, the fallacy is everywhere! Changes in language accompany changes in thought, but it's not causal.
- drdeadringer 6y ago
  I mentioned an author using a fictional society's phrasing to influence that society's thought process on ownership. It was relevant to what I was commenting to. Please do share more about this "stupid idea" regarding "words shape thought"; as you say, I seem smart enough to share and repeat something stupid so I must be able to understand you further.
  - nmfisher 6y ago
    > I mentioned an author using a fictional society's phrasing to influence that society's thought process on ownership. I haven't read that particular book, which is an oversight I'll have to correct on my next holiday. With that in mind, couldn't society's thought process on ownership drive the phrasing, not the other way around? In other words, maybe you can't change thought processes by changing phrasing.
  - jhbadger 6y ago
    The problem is that often you hear things like "Tribal people X have no word for 'lying' in their language" as if that meant that they couldn't understand the concept. But of course they do, even if they call it "not telling the truth". Similarly, people like to point out words in languages like German that are compound words, and as amusing as things like "Donaudampfschiffahrtsgesellschaftskapitän" (Danube steamship company captain) are to English speakers, it isn't as if we can't understand the concept. There just is no evidence that people of different languages think differently.
    - thwarted 6y ago
      > There just is no evidence that people of different languages think differently. Languages are used to express ideas. We have debates on this very website about the expressiveness of languages, how expressiveness of language enables (in)efficiency, and which languages are best for a given task. The expression of a thought influences and, in some cases, limits the kinds of thoughts that can be expressed. This is evident when you see things like someone "writing Java in perl".
      - perl4ever 6y ago
        I've been writing perl in VBA. It seems to me that this, or your example, demonstrate the opposite of language controlling thought. People have thoughts that are very different from the norm in the language they are using, and they find a way to express them. In fact, I've been recently trying to express my usual programming concepts in a language that's far more of a straitjacket than VBA.
    - Gravityloss 6y ago
      Yeah, I agree. A lot of this "weird thing about culture X" is nonsense. It works especially well for people who haven't experienced many different cultures.
  - Retric 6y ago
    It’s a failure to understand language. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eskimo_words_for_snow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eskimo_words_for_snow Meanings evolve and often doesn’t follow the literal words used. “Pull yourself up by your bootstraps” for example has seen it’s meaning dramatically shift over time. Basically as soon as a phrase has a well known meaning, that meaning can begin to drift.
  - perl4ever 6y ago
    An author can define a fictional society's language and thought processes any way they please. I read The Dispossessed over 20 years ago and can't recall the quote you meant. If it wasn't about the nature of real reality, but about the relationship of the author to a constructed world, then referring to it was inconsistent with my expectation of relevance, and I did misunderstand. The only clarification I can think of for my response is to reiterate that the context I was assuming was the belief that controlling language allows one to control thoughts of real people. My reaction isn't that it should or shouldn't, just that it obviously doesn't. Maybe "control" would be a better word than "shape", after further contemplation. I agree that words shape thought, because in general, actions shape thought. But nobody can control thought by controlling language. It's futile. Unless you are privileged to be designing the universe.
    - pmoriarty 6y ago
      "that the context I was assuming was the belief that controlling language allows one to control thoughts of real people. My reaction isn't that it should or shouldn't, just that it obviously doesn't." Is the government subjecting people to enhanced interrogation or torture? Are they placing them in detention or prison? Are people undocumented immigrants or illegals? Is someone a <respectful term> or "just a <derrogatory term>"? Is someone a freedom fighter, a terrorist, or a traitor? To the Nazis, were Jewish people human or subhuman? Can a given historical event be called a genocide? To me it's pretty clear the words used to describe people and their actions influences how these people and actions are viewed and understood. This is one reason why propaganda is so effective, and why violence often follows the dehumanization of certain groups of people, in which word choice tends to play an important role.
      - perl4ever 6y ago
        Any examples you can give demonstrate different thoughts that people can still have, because the attempt to control has failed. If there is an example of successful thought control through language, how is anyone going to be able to think of it, by definition?
- BurningFrog 6y ago
  Steven Pinker coined the term "Euphemism Treadmill". https://stevenpinker.com/files/pinker/files/1994_04_03_newyorktimes.pdf https://stevenpinker.com/files/pinker/files/1994_04_03_newyo...
- zerocrates 6y ago
  It's certainly understandable that it's a concept that writers would gravitate to.
- daseiner1 6y ago
  almost like the word itself doesn’t matter, but the meaning of that word? words don’t have a fixed meaning
- danmaz74 6y ago
  It's not a simple cause effect relationship, but if you want a real world example of how words can shape thought and have real effects on the world, look up "death tax" Vs "succession tax".

perl4ever 6y ago

That idea (words shaping thought) is near the top of my list of "stupid things that smart people believe and repeat". Think about the history of words with a negative connotation that people try to replace, and how the new euphemism acquires the previous negativity. dang doesn't like it when people say correlation is not causation, but dammit, the fallacy is everywhere! Changes in language accompany changes in thought, but it's not causal.

drdeadringer 6y ago
I mentioned an author using a fictional society's phrasing to influence that society's thought process on ownership. It was relevant to what I was commenting to. Please do share more about this "stupid idea" regarding "words shape thought"; as you say, I seem smart enough to share and repeat something stupid so I must be able to understand you further.
- nmfisher 6y ago
  > I mentioned an author using a fictional society's phrasing to influence that society's thought process on ownership. I haven't read that particular book, which is an oversight I'll have to correct on my next holiday. With that in mind, couldn't society's thought process on ownership drive the phrasing, not the other way around? In other words, maybe you can't change thought processes by changing phrasing.
- jhbadger 6y ago
  The problem is that often you hear things like "Tribal people X have no word for 'lying' in their language" as if that meant that they couldn't understand the concept. But of course they do, even if they call it "not telling the truth". Similarly, people like to point out words in languages like German that are compound words, and as amusing as things like "Donaudampfschiffahrtsgesellschaftskapitän" (Danube steamship company captain) are to English speakers, it isn't as if we can't understand the concept. There just is no evidence that people of different languages think differently.
  - thwarted 6y ago
    > There just is no evidence that people of different languages think differently. Languages are used to express ideas. We have debates on this very website about the expressiveness of languages, how expressiveness of language enables (in)efficiency, and which languages are best for a given task. The expression of a thought influences and, in some cases, limits the kinds of thoughts that can be expressed. This is evident when you see things like someone "writing Java in perl".
    - perl4ever 6y ago
      I've been writing perl in VBA. It seems to me that this, or your example, demonstrate the opposite of language controlling thought. People have thoughts that are very different from the norm in the language they are using, and they find a way to express them. In fact, I've been recently trying to express my usual programming concepts in a language that's far more of a straitjacket than VBA.
  - Gravityloss 6y ago
    Yeah, I agree. A lot of this "weird thing about culture X" is nonsense. It works especially well for people who haven't experienced many different cultures.
- Retric 6y ago
  It’s a failure to understand language. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eskimo_words_for_snow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eskimo_words_for_snow Meanings evolve and often doesn’t follow the literal words used. “Pull yourself up by your bootstraps” for example has seen it’s meaning dramatically shift over time. Basically as soon as a phrase has a well known meaning, that meaning can begin to drift.
- perl4ever 6y ago
  An author can define a fictional society's language and thought processes any way they please. I read The Dispossessed over 20 years ago and can't recall the quote you meant. If it wasn't about the nature of real reality, but about the relationship of the author to a constructed world, then referring to it was inconsistent with my expectation of relevance, and I did misunderstand. The only clarification I can think of for my response is to reiterate that the context I was assuming was the belief that controlling language allows one to control thoughts of real people. My reaction isn't that it should or shouldn't, just that it obviously doesn't. Maybe "control" would be a better word than "shape", after further contemplation. I agree that words shape thought, because in general, actions shape thought. But nobody can control thought by controlling language. It's futile. Unless you are privileged to be designing the universe.
  - pmoriarty 6y ago
    "that the context I was assuming was the belief that controlling language allows one to control thoughts of real people. My reaction isn't that it should or shouldn't, just that it obviously doesn't." Is the government subjecting people to enhanced interrogation or torture? Are they placing them in detention or prison? Are people undocumented immigrants or illegals? Is someone a <respectful term> or "just a <derrogatory term>"? Is someone a freedom fighter, a terrorist, or a traitor? To the Nazis, were Jewish people human or subhuman? Can a given historical event be called a genocide? To me it's pretty clear the words used to describe people and their actions influences how these people and actions are viewed and understood. This is one reason why propaganda is so effective, and why violence often follows the dehumanization of certain groups of people, in which word choice tends to play an important role.
    - perl4ever 6y ago
      Any examples you can give demonstrate different thoughts that people can still have, because the attempt to control has failed. If there is an example of successful thought control through language, how is anyone going to be able to think of it, by definition?
BurningFrog 6y ago
Steven Pinker coined the term "Euphemism Treadmill". https://stevenpinker.com/files/pinker/files/1994_04_03_newyorktimes.pdf https://stevenpinker.com/files/pinker/files/1994_04_03_newyo...
zerocrates 6y ago
It's certainly understandable that it's a concept that writers would gravitate to.
daseiner1 6y ago
almost like the word itself doesn’t matter, but the meaning of that word? words don’t have a fixed meaning
danmaz74 6y ago
It's not a simple cause effect relationship, but if you want a real world example of how words can shape thought and have real effects on the world, look up "death tax" Vs "succession tax".