3 ms·

This only serves to form unnecessary barriers. If tomorrow, everyone spoke the same language (ignore which one it was), society would be better off. History an

This only serves to form unnecessary barriers. If tomorrow, everyone spoke the same language (ignore which one it was), society would be better off. History and historical culture, on their own, are a bad reason to do something (ie learning from history makes sense. Doing something for no other reason than the length of time its been does not) The rest is just about which language and who chooses. The only thing this sort of bill does is make it harder to get to a better state. At least here they are not pretending it's helpful to do it

re-thc 4y ago
> everyone spoke the same language (ignore which one it was), society would be better off. Would it? It would matter which language. It'd benefit those most familiar with it today. People have been laughed at for their accents when learning a language. How does this help? You can't just flip a switch. It'd create a huge inequality divide moreso than today. Some countries are surviving because they use a different language that's not English i.e. less impact from globalization.
- DannyBee 4y ago
  I posited a world where flipping a switch was possible and the result was perfect. All your complaints are about a world where that isn't true, and so are literally inapplicable. You can argue this is unrealistic, but i'd simply point out the rest is a question of tradeoffs - how fast you do it, what language you pick, etc, there are no perfect answers. That is no reason not to make progress. As for practicallness: In a world of 8 billion people, literally anything you do (something, nothing, whatever) will cause hardship for someone. It's not even an interesting goal to try. Doing nothing causing hardship. Moving forward causes hardship. Combine this with the fact that the unfortunate reality of humans is that one of the main ways that change happens writ large is through seeing the suffering (and success!) of others. I don't think you will change that part of our psychology anytime soon. The sad truth is we don't all get a perfect, or even good, life. You can't make progress on this, either, without causing hardship to some. Does that mean you should not try? Because you will never make progress in steps that are only positive for everyone, or even often get the chance to choose who it gets to be negative for.
Quarrelsome 4y ago
> If tomorrow, everyone spoke the same language (ignore which one it was), society would be better off. It wouldn't last. Within years it would devolve into various creoles and with centuries; almost entirely different languages. Language is not merely functional but cultural and has purpose outside of meaning (e.g. identity).
- DannyBee 4y ago
  This only serves to backup my point that culture preservation for no meaningful goal is highly dangerous. Language-as-identity as a way of separating people has no meaningful use case that is positive for society.

re-thc 4y ago

> everyone spoke the same language (ignore which one it was), society would be better off. Would it? It would matter which language. It'd benefit those most familiar with it today. People have been laughed at for their accents when learning a language. How does this help? You can't just flip a switch. It'd create a huge inequality divide moreso than today. Some countries are surviving because they use a different language that's not English i.e. less impact from globalization.

DannyBee 4y ago
I posited a world where flipping a switch was possible and the result was perfect. All your complaints are about a world where that isn't true, and so are literally inapplicable. You can argue this is unrealistic, but i'd simply point out the rest is a question of tradeoffs - how fast you do it, what language you pick, etc, there are no perfect answers. That is no reason not to make progress. As for practicallness: In a world of 8 billion people, literally anything you do (something, nothing, whatever) will cause hardship for someone. It's not even an interesting goal to try. Doing nothing causing hardship. Moving forward causes hardship. Combine this with the fact that the unfortunate reality of humans is that one of the main ways that change happens writ large is through seeing the suffering (and success!) of others. I don't think you will change that part of our psychology anytime soon. The sad truth is we don't all get a perfect, or even good, life. You can't make progress on this, either, without causing hardship to some. Does that mean you should not try? Because you will never make progress in steps that are only positive for everyone, or even often get the chance to choose who it gets to be negative for.

Quarrelsome 4y ago

> If tomorrow, everyone spoke the same language (ignore which one it was), society would be better off. It wouldn't last. Within years it would devolve into various creoles and with centuries; almost entirely different languages. Language is not merely functional but cultural and has purpose outside of meaning (e.g. identity).

DannyBee 4y ago
This only serves to backup my point that culture preservation for no meaningful goal is highly dangerous. Language-as-identity as a way of separating people has no meaningful use case that is positive for society.