4 ms·

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 succe

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?

pmoriarty 6y ago
I don't believe that some thoughts are impossible for users of certain words, but do believe their thoughts are influenced by the words they use and hear used all around them, and some thoughts are less likely in such people. For instance, in Nazis who truly believed that Jewish people were subhuman, empathetic thoughts towards Jewish people were less likely. Also, I don't agree that attempts at control have failed. I think they have often succeeded.
- perl4ever 6y ago
  This is confusing me greatly for a fairly brief comment. - "Thoughts are not influenced by words" would be a silly claim, and I disavow it. - I am disoriented by your throwing out "some thoughts are impossible for users of certain words", not knowing who and where you think that was claimed. That's not the only way one could try to control thoughts with words. The method people seem to try a lot is to eliminate words to prevent thoughts, which seems like kind of the opposite. - On what basis do you presume you have good insight into the psychology of Nazis? I mean really, that's awfully glib. - Your last two sentences don't seem mutually exclusive, but having them together seems to imply they should be, which means I don't know what you are trying to say. Can you give an example of successful control at any rate?
  - danmaz74 6y ago
    Making some thoughts impossible by controlling language was a point in George Orwell's 1984.
    - perl4ever 6y ago
      It was referenced back up at the top. And 1984 has been part of my mental landscape for maybe a quarter century, so my opinion that reality is different has been calcified gradually over time.
KSteffensen 6y ago
It may not be possible to control but it's certainly possible to subconsciously influence, which is as good or better. Advertisement works, even though it's not thought control.
watwut 6y ago
Yes, his. Calling torture enhanced interrogation helped people to accept torturing for years. The in group continues accepting it and continues torturing. Nazi were quite successful in turning Germany the way they wanted, in making soldiers hate and in making them comit atrocities. That was succesfull language manipulation. They lost war for unrelated reasons.
- perl4ever 6y ago
  It's a cliche! If it was successful thought control, then we couldn't have a discussion about it. Nobody would know what you were referring to. In the end, people will get old, and forget history, and die off, and the feedback loop will go around and around and what people believe will evolve. But nobody will have successfully controlled what people think. I totally agree that everybody is trying to influence everyone else's thoughts through language. That's what words are for. Nobody could reasonably disagree with that, and I never intended to.
  - justin66 6y ago
    > If it was successful thought control, then we couldn't have a discussion about it. Nobody would know what you were referring to. I wonder if you believe that this kind of absolute, unsubtle thought control is what Ursula Le Guin was talking about with the brush example, or what the parent post was talking about. Or even what Orwell was talking about.
    - mercer 6y ago
      To me it seems that's what the discussion boils down to. I agree that words cannot 'control' thoughts fully, but I also agree that Ursula Le Guin didn't argue this at all but rather that the /way/ we use words has an effect on how we think about these concepts, and as such can be used for manipulation. There are plenty of studies that show that saying the same thing in different wording can drastically change how people feel about these things. The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is really popular in the full 'thought-control' kind of way, and I do believe that that is not well supported.
    - 6y ago

pmoriarty 6y ago

I don't believe that some thoughts are impossible for users of certain words, but do believe their thoughts are influenced by the words they use and hear used all around them, and some thoughts are less likely in such people. For instance, in Nazis who truly believed that Jewish people were subhuman, empathetic thoughts towards Jewish people were less likely. Also, I don't agree that attempts at control have failed. I think they have often succeeded.

perl4ever 6y ago
This is confusing me greatly for a fairly brief comment. - "Thoughts are not influenced by words" would be a silly claim, and I disavow it. - I am disoriented by your throwing out "some thoughts are impossible for users of certain words", not knowing who and where you think that was claimed. That's not the only way one could try to control thoughts with words. The method people seem to try a lot is to eliminate words to prevent thoughts, which seems like kind of the opposite. - On what basis do you presume you have good insight into the psychology of Nazis? I mean really, that's awfully glib. - Your last two sentences don't seem mutually exclusive, but having them together seems to imply they should be, which means I don't know what you are trying to say. Can you give an example of successful control at any rate?
- danmaz74 6y ago
  Making some thoughts impossible by controlling language was a point in George Orwell's 1984.
  - perl4ever 6y ago
    It was referenced back up at the top. And 1984 has been part of my mental landscape for maybe a quarter century, so my opinion that reality is different has been calcified gradually over time.

KSteffensen 6y ago

It may not be possible to control but it's certainly possible to subconsciously influence, which is as good or better. Advertisement works, even though it's not thought control.

watwut 6y ago

Yes, his. Calling torture enhanced interrogation helped people to accept torturing for years. The in group continues accepting it and continues torturing. Nazi were quite successful in turning Germany the way they wanted, in making soldiers hate and in making them comit atrocities. That was succesfull language manipulation. They lost war for unrelated reasons.

perl4ever 6y ago
It's a cliche! If it was successful thought control, then we couldn't have a discussion about it. Nobody would know what you were referring to. In the end, people will get old, and forget history, and die off, and the feedback loop will go around and around and what people believe will evolve. But nobody will have successfully controlled what people think. I totally agree that everybody is trying to influence everyone else's thoughts through language. That's what words are for. Nobody could reasonably disagree with that, and I never intended to.
- justin66 6y ago
  > If it was successful thought control, then we couldn't have a discussion about it. Nobody would know what you were referring to. I wonder if you believe that this kind of absolute, unsubtle thought control is what Ursula Le Guin was talking about with the brush example, or what the parent post was talking about. Or even what Orwell was talking about.
  - mercer 6y ago
    To me it seems that's what the discussion boils down to. I agree that words cannot 'control' thoughts fully, but I also agree that Ursula Le Guin didn't argue this at all but rather that the /way/ we use words has an effect on how we think about these concepts, and as such can be used for manipulation. There are plenty of studies that show that saying the same thing in different wording can drastically change how people feel about these things. The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is really popular in the full 'thought-control' kind of way, and I do believe that that is not well supported.
  - 6y ago