Language as a driver and inhibitor of human intelligence
The objective of the research was to find a way to forecast human behavior based on the use of languages and to define the natural languages necessary to approach different realities in different contexts. Language can be defined as a system of communication and of reasoning which makes use of representations, metaphors and grammar. Language is the code that humans use in conscious thinking processes that allows them emulating reality in mind. The research on languages and semiotics began at the end of the seventies at The Unicist Research Institute.
Facts and future human actions are implicit in the use of language.
It is also the mask of a culture’s ethics. A language is both an individual expression and the expression of the culture in which an individual lives and tries to adapt.
The ethics that underlies a culture is represented in the structure of the use of the language, in colloquial expressions, in the aphorisms of such language and in its metaphors.
This synthesis introduces the unicist ontology of language that is used in the development of behavioral forecasts.
A language may be rationally filtered, it can be self-censored or it can be foreseen in its hypothetical consequences.
But the implicit unicist ontology of language cannot be hidden if the one who is hearing truly listens.
Language as the structure for conscious reasoning
Languages allow structuring the conscious reasoning process of individuals. Babies do have reasoning processes that are based on “intuition”, and have a very low level of abstraction capacity. Abstraction evolves with the evolution of an individual.
The functionality of language, depending on the type of thought, sustains the human adaptation processes. It must be considered that language is based on dualistic thinking which is natural to the human neural system.
That is why syncretic and analytic languages provide the security framework to communication.
On the other hand, factual and synthetic languages foster freedom-oriented approaches to integrate reasoning processes with the external reality.
Language as the code for communication
Communication is the most evident function of a language. Internal or external actions of an individual or groups of individuals are implicitly promoted by communication.
- An adaptation process to generate added value to the environment and obtain the counterpart.
- A process of introjective empathy. The individual that is communicating has to introject the object of communication in order to apprehend reality.
- A process of “influential-sympathy”. This requires that individuals have to “vibrate” in a syntonic way with the environment. Having “influential-sympathy” requires exerting influence on the syntonic “vibration” with the environment to ensure the possibility to share experiences with others.
- A participation process. When pastime is the goal, participation processes have to be the implicit purpose of communication.
- A “projective-empathic” process, which is the starting point of any communication. Communication begins with the projection of our beliefs on the external reality.
- A process of “emotive-sympathy”, in which both sides discover that they might share the same emotions.
Language as the ethical mask of a culture
Language is the central tool of a culture. That is what we call its “ethical mask”. The habits and myths are subjacent in a language, including the functional projective and introjective mechanisms that are used by the culture.
A language that is used in different cultures has divergent attributes influenced by each culture’s social ethics.
Ethics establishes the rules of reasoning processes and sustains communication. The ethical mask of languages establishes the link between language and ethics. This establishes the type of the complementation of the participants of a communication process.
A communication between peers requires managing the same level of ethics.
There is a language for each level of ethics. The ethical mask materializes the utopia implicit in each level of ethics.
The Unicist Ontology of the Functionality of Words
Interpersonal written or spoken language requires the use of words which, according to their meaning, define the functionality of communication.
This description explains the functionality implicit in the use of words.
Conceptually, based on their meaning, there are four different “types” of words:
- Empty words: are those words that have no rational meaning in the context they are being used. They have multiple non structured meanings with no shareable purpose. Adjectives that have no adverbial function are empty words.
- Hollow words: are those words that are able to integrate in a unique sense the meanings given to them by emitters and receivers. In these words there is an implicit tacit purpose underlying.
- Full words: are the words with a unique irrefutable meaning for those involved in a communication process. They are the solid container where hollow words fit in.
- Ambiguous words: are the words having two different meanings. One of the meanings is functional to the communication process and the other is dysfunctional.
The Unicist Ontology of Ambiguous Language
It is a language functional for the description of essences in order to approach the integration of reality in its possible oneness. It uses relational logic to operate in the field of ambiguity.
It allows simplifying reality by approaching it using homologies. Ambiguous language and synthetic language are used as synonyms. When synthetic language is used properly, receivers are able to apprehend the essences of a situation, fact or action.
Ambiguous language is necessary to influence adaptive environments. Ambiguous language has no value in the field of operational problems.
The objective of ambiguous language is to generate added value based on a dialogue within the limits of the available information on the problem being faced.
There are two different types of dialogues when using ambiguous language: the dialogue with the facts and the dialogue with the people who are participating in the solution.
Pilot tests are the way to dialogue with facts using ambiguous language.
The Unicist Ontology of Figurative Communication
The use of language in a communication requires accepting the fact that in order to do something there has to exist real consensus.
Words are naturally filtered before they are spoken or written. This filter can build the necessary fallacies to think that some communication is happening while in fact a different communication is occurring.
That is why communication can only be measured in the results produced by the real consensus.
The achievement of real consensus might imply knowing the structural differences between the parts that are communicating. In this case it allows knowing the consequences of the differences.
The use of figurative communication allows avoiding the dysfunctional filtering of communications, providing messages that drive naturally towards real consensus.
That is why people who cannot assume a responsibility of something, cannot understand figurative communication.
The purpose of figurative communication is to achieve real consensus which means achieving a rational, emotional and conceptual consensus.
Achieving real consensus requires solving the conflicts that are generated by interests, needs, beliefs, lack of knowledge, etc.
The Unicist Ontology of Messages
The purpose of a message is to deliver information. This purpose is achieved by adding value to the receiver and the energy conservation function is given by the credibility of the message.
The value added allows the message to be remembered. The meaningfulness of data is a condition in order to store them in the long term memory of an individual. The information might be remembered, but it can only be used if it is meaningful.
A message is an object that needs to be carefully defined if the message has multiple users or receivers. When it is a univocal message, the design has to respond to the possibilities that the information included can be decoded by the receiver.
Information without credibility cannot be integrated unless it is based on a stimulus of human weaknesses. Gossip is an example of this case. The lack of credibility generates doubt in the mind of the receiver and doubt provokes inaction.
The conscious ideas an individual has are structured using the reasoning framework of his language and using the semantic and the syntax that represent the language’s intrinsic logic.
From an ontological point of view there are two types of linguistic structures to deal with communication and reasoning:
- “Backward chaining”, which approach reality from the end to the beginning.
- Forward chaining, which approach reality from the beginning to the end of the process.
Both approaches have to be used in order to have a non-fallacious perception of reality. Languages have different functional structures depending on their backward or forward orientation.
The syntax of a language defines the natural approach of a culture in order to adapt to reality. .
In every language there is an implicit reasoning structure. Therefore there are languages with attributes for artistic expression, for hard-sciences, for soft-sciences, for dualistic philosophies, for integrative philosophies, and so on. The language in which assertions are expressed, generates the cultural preconceptions on their validity.