From Anti-Method to Ideolinguistics
This short discourse will discuss the very basic principle of language and reality from the philosophy point of view. There are some discourses have discussed about the philosophy of language. In this chance, I will discuss it again but we should try to get the understanding from other point of view. Habitually, philosophy of language is started from how people receive and produce a meaningful language by basing on some philosophy sects such as logical positivism, atomism and so on. Here, I try to find out how language is seen from a pioneer of anti-method thought and relate it with my Ideolinguistics principles. The discourse will be “The Language Cosmology” that discusses about how language and reality fits each other.
Positivism assumes that language is the reflection of reality or picture theory. Feyerabend rejects this positivism assumption. Feyerabend believes that realities are actually depended on the theories. Reality is reflected by a theory. For the example, all things fall down; this reality is understood by theory of gravitation. In other words, there is theory that mediates the understanding of reality. Meanwhile, experience and understanding occur through language. In Ideolinguistics, experience and understanding in daily life will construct idea. It refers to the definition of idea as derivation from eidos (Greek) that mean what is seen or what is recognized (further reading: The Original of Ideolinguistics) and language and idea is an unbreakable couple. Meaning that in language the experience and understanding of reality is occurred.
However, Feyerabend states that language is always limited. Language cannot reflect the totality of experience. People never understand reality purely by utilizing language. Of course, Ideolinguistics believes that here mind plays important role to reconstruct the objective reality to be a subjective reality (imaginary reality). In connection with this, Feyerabend then stated that “No experience which is pure, all is interpreted.”
Feyerabend assumes that there is an absolute mutual relationship between language and human reaction poles. Further, language is not only tooled to recognize facts or reality, but language also sharpening facts, reality or events. In this case, Feyerabend agrees with Benyamin L. Worff that language has certain cosmology that is a comprehensible outlook of world, situation that affects human mind, behavior and perception. In line with this, both Feyerabend and Worff agree with Determinism that human even think through language, human interpret reality through language.
Understanding of reality is relatively affected by culture and theories that basing it. Meanwhile human also percept, interpret and understand reality through language. It is important to keep in mind that theories are constructed in a certain space and time and it can be accepted or rejected in other space and time. Simply, it is very relative and contextual-cultural bound.
A construction of concept (concept of a reality), according to Worff, is closely related to certain culture and world view. Therefore, reality cannot be understood without understanding the language cosmology. It can be said that culture and world view help human to understand reality, however it must be a contextual understanding, not a universal understanding; there are contextual elements that basically affect object interpretation or reality. However, as human language, it must be universal. Reality must be universal for all. Here we should understand first of what the cosmology is.
Cosmology is the philosophical thought of the nature of the universe. Cosmological principle is the uniformity of universe; in any point and any direction, observers should look universe is homogeneous. It means that reality should be seen similarly from one observer to another. In connection with language, as Ideolinguistics believes that human language is universal as their idea. What produced or received by human are words, language is in human idea.
Every people have same idea about fire. They also have same perception about ice. However, when fire and ice is reinterpreted or reconstructed, here the culture plays its role. Fire for some cultures is holy and even sacral. In Islamic paradigm, fire is symbol of hell, and so forth. When fire is reflected by language, it will be defined in words such as fire is hot, etc. Here, words deal with difficulty to give a comprehensive understanding of fire, because some people may have different understanding of fire. Not all reality can be spoken or written by using words. However, human experienced it purely and there is idea about fire in their mind and that is language in Ideolinguistics principle; and every people have the same idea of fire. There are some exceptions, if someone cannot feel or experience fire because he or she has certain disease of skin or something, his idea about fire must be different. However, in this line, we are talking about experienced reality that constructs idea. Thus, inexperienced thing cannot be an idea; and this is out of Ideolinguistics context. Ideolinguistics principle that the primary language is what is seen (picture or gesture) or what is recognizable. Human recognize fire in the same way; touching or seeing it. What is produced to reflect the idea or object interpretation is words and not language.
Language cosmology is the nature of language movement in fitting with human idea to give meaning to reality. In very early time, human use picture and gesture to communicate or to transfer an interpretation each other. However, they realize reality and interpret it by seeing, observing, and involving the reality in their mind and soul. For example when Abraham saw sun and moon and then he thought that it was God, but then he rejected by said it was not God. It does not really matter how Abraham produced words or in what language Abraham spoke was. The matter is how did Abraham analyze and conclude his observation? Just come back to the background that underlain the history. Abraham was faced with some paganism beliefs that God was the fetish they created. Abraham’s idea about god was from natural and supernatural experience that inspired him to look for the God who creates him. Naturally, he did not see that the fetishes are doing universe or even a mosquito. Supernaturally he felt that there was a calling from his heart. All these are accumulation of experience and reality and these inspire Abraham to find out the truth. His curiosity to find out the truth (at least for himself) made him had to “re-collect” the information from the reality, experience and common sense. Here we can see that Abraham created a dialog between him and himself. He tried to correlate one idea to other, relate one reality to other and one experience to other. Finally he should to explain the correlation, in order to get a conclusion. In his great job he was done, of course, language in his mind would not stop working. He needed to utilize language to correlate all those mentioned above. This is the example how language fits into experience, reality and common sense. Ratio is directed by language, idea and language is a couple; that is the point. In other words, without language (inner language; Saussure considered this as inner speech) human cannot correlate idea, experience and reality…… (Read more??? Download Fulltext of this article)
Download PDF Version The Cosmology of Language