Language as a Driver and Inhibitor of Human Conscious 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 and mathematical 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 reasoning processes that allows them to define the foundations and justifications of the conclusions to emulate reality in their minds. The research on languages and semiotics began at the end of the seventies. It was developed at The Unicist Research Institute and led to the development of unicist linguistics.

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 ethic 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.

The Functionality of Languages

The languages people use should not only be depending on the person but also on the subject and the environment, an individual is dealing with. Languages provide the code to reason things in order to make adaptive decisions. It has to be clarified that human intelligence is the tool humans have to decide how to better adapt to a specific environment.

The research in the field of business and social behavior led to the definition of two different types of organizations: those that work as closed systems and those that work as open systems.

Organizations as Closed Systems

The organizations that work as closed systems have a fully controlled environment to deal with, and therefore there is no need to manage languages that deal with the ambiguity or the complexity of the environment.

The basic languages that are used in these types of organizations are the operational language and the analytical language that suffice to manage controlled environments. The operational language is for the activities that deal with operation and the analytical language is necessary to control processes.

Both aspects are sustained by mathematical language to manage efficiency and statistical language to manage the uncertain aspects of organizational behavior.

These organizations are effective when the four dominant languages are integrated, meaning that analytical works are sustained by mathematical support and operational works are sustained by statistical approaches to solve uncertainties.

Operation research and system dynamics are examples of the applications of these languages in these types of organizations.

Organizations as Open (Adaptive) Systems

A system is adaptive when it is feedback-dependent. Organizations that work as adaptive systems are integrated into the environment which requires managing ambiguous language to deal with the adaptive aspects, synthetic language to define and manage the concepts of the social functions, factual language to solve complex problems, diplomatic language to manage the conflicts with the environment and figurative language to ensure the consensus of decisions.

It has to be considered that the languages needed to manage businesses and social organizations as adaptive systems include the operational, analytical, mathematical, and statistical languages to ensure that the adaptive and non-adaptive aspects are managed.

The use of languages requires that each function be managed using the necessary language to “read” reality without perception fallacies to ensure the functionality of the decisions.

Unicist linguistics includes the use of the unicist standard language which is a metalanguage that allows integrating the use of languages to ensure the adaptability of the behavioral processes and the assurance of results.

Reading Types

The reading of the nature of reality can either be done in the environment itself or using an encoded means, which can be written or spoken language, images, sounds, or any other means that communicates reality with human beings.

When individuals act, their actions can be based on “playing by ear” or on “grounded playing”. There are hundreds of celebrities in the world playing by ear. But there are thousands of celebrities in the world playing based on groundings.

“Playing by ear” celebrities may be extremely successful based on their extraordinary talent and they succeed in solo activities or small groups. But when an orchestra is needed, the reading of music is required. The reading of music is basic when synergy is necessary. Classical music has little room for celebrities who play by ear.

Levels of Readers

1. 

   Literal reading: This segment reads the nature of reality based on the universal description of the signifiers (signs).
2. Interpretative reading: This segment reads the nature of reality based on the universal meanings of the signifiers (signs).
3. Comprehensive reading: This segment reads the nature of reality based on the introjective interpretation of the signifieds that have been recognized.
4. Conceptual reading: This segment reads the nature of reality based on the rediscovery of the signifieds, using the information that comes from introjective interpretation.

Reality has been read when it has been emulated in mind

People can manage those problems whose solutions they are able to emulate in mind. Different functional intelligences allow the emulation of different types of solutions. This process was named “Thought Experiment” and has become a popular domain through Albert Einstein’s work.

The unicist evolutionary approach was developed to build structural solutions in adaptive environments. This requires emulating reality in mind. This emulation is materialized in the building of a model that has to be homologous to the real world. This model must allow envisioning a specific functional reality and also experiencing it.

Language as the structure for conscious reasoning

Languages allow the structuring of 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 the origination of language is based on dualistic thinking, which is natural to the human neural system.

Its evolution drove it to a superior level of intrapersonal and interpersonal communication that upgraded the functionality of these processes. The type of language itself works as an attractor in these communication processes.

Syncretic language works as a “point attractor”, analytic language works as a “cyclic attractor”, factual language works as a “torus attractor” and synthetic language works as a “strange attractor”.

If you are not familiar with the functionality of attractors, we recommend accessing the Chaos Theory.

That is why syncretic and analytic languages provide the security framework for communication.

On the other hand, factual and synthetic languages foster freedom-oriented approaches to integrate reasoning processes with 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.

The unicist ontological structure of interpersonal communication includes:

1. An adaptation process to generate added value to the environment and obtain the counterpart.
2. A process of introjective empathy. The individual who is communicating has to introject the object of communication in order to apprehend reality.
3. 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 of sharing experiences with others.
4. A participation process. When pastime is the goal, participation processes have to be the implicit purpose of communication.
5. A “projective-empathic” process, is the starting point of any communication. Communication begins with the projection of our beliefs on external reality.
6. 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 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 complementation of the participants of a communication process.

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.

The results of this research help individuals to diagnose reality based on the facts implicit in what is said.

Conceptually, based on their meaning, there are four different “types” of words:

1. 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.
2. Hollow words: are those words that are able to integrate in a unique sense the meanings given to them by senders and receivers. In these words, there is an implicit tacit purpose underlying.
3. Full words: are words with a unique irrefutable meaning for those involved in a communication process. They are the solid container where hollow words fit in.
4. Ambiguous words: are words that have 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 for simplifying reality by approaching it using homologies. Ambiguous language and synthetic language are homologous. When synthetic language is used properly, receivers are able to apprehend the essence 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 a way to dialogue with facts using ambiguous language.

The Unicist Ontology of Mathematical Languages

Mathematics is a language that allows for conscious reasoning based on its capacity to confirm the functionality and validity of actions in the real world. It is a cognitive technology that allows approaching problems based on their quantitative aspects to confirm their functionality. Mathematics is a technology that allows measuring the consequences of the qualitative aspects of actions in the real world. From an operational perspective, it can be used for two purposes:

1. For Solution Building
2. For Problem Detection

The purpose of solution-building is driven by the active function of mathematical modeling based on the development of algorithms. These algorithms are sustained by the energy conservation function that is defined by the knowledge of the mathematical explanations of operational solutions.

The purpose of problem detection is driven by the pattern-finding capacity that defines the active function of the process. These patterns are validated by the energy conservation function that is given by the mathematical explanation of operational problems.

Based on this structure we have defined four different levels of mathematical languages that are needed to achieve conscious reasoning including the quantitative aspects of any functionality.

These languages are:

• Arithmetical language: which deals with the basic functions of quantitative approaches to the real world.
• Differential language: which deals with differential calculus and homologous analytical approaches that allow quantifying variables of an entity.
• Integral language: which deals with integral calculus and homologous systemic approaches to deal with systemic environments.
• Conceptual language: which deals with the foundations of mathematical solutions based on their level of adaptability and complexity.

The use of the necessary adequate mathematical language closes the circle of validation of knowledge. It is only possible in non-adaptive environments or systems where their evolution is insignificant and can be disregarded. In adaptive environments, statistics and probabilities are palliatives, that cannot confirm the functionality of knowledge but can be used to operate.

Diplomatic Language

Diplomatic language has one particular purpose which is to construct an environment of cooperation on the grounds of a competitive context in which each side uses its power of dissuasion. Diplomatic language is a particular application of ambiguous language.

1) This language uses a reasoning structure that belongs to a higher level of ethics than the one being used in the context. This higher level of ethics implies using a higher level of logical structuring, adding more value and generating more influence on the environment.

The use of this language implies managing time beyond the immediate. This is why people believe diplomacy is slower than what is needed.

2) Diplomatic language needs to be ambiguous, so as to give room to the dissuasion power without generating a confrontation conflict. The dissuasion power works as a taboo element so it can only be communicated in an ambiguous way. The ambiguous language is a conceptual language that integrates parties because each party projects what it needs to hear. The management of ambiguity has given birth to jokes about diplomats.

3) In the diplomatic language the role of an individual is separated from his/her person. This way there can be conflicts between roles without affecting personal relationships. In the same way, institutional matters are generally separated from personal issues, and State matters are separated from governmental issues.

The Unicist Ontology of Figurative Communication

The use of language in 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 for avoiding the dysfunctional filtering of communications, providing messages that drive naturally toward real consensus.

That is why people who cannot assume responsibility for 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 “maximal strategy” of a message is sustained by the value it adds. The “minimum strategy” is given by its credibility.

The value added allows the message to be remembered. The meaningfulness of data is a condition in order to store it 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 possibility 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.

Conclusion

The research demonstrated that language is necessary to define the foundations and justifications of the conclusions of any reasoning process. Language needs to be able to describe the mental model that is used or has been used.

Different fields of action require different models people need to be able to manage with the necessary functional intelligence. Therefore, there is no integration of all languages because people do not need all languages to solve a specific problem. The more language people manage, the wider their action field.

The conscious ideas an individual has, are structured using the reasoning framework of her/his language and using the semantics and 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:

1. “Backward chaining”, which approaches reality from the end to the beginning.
2. Forward chaining, which approaches 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, soft sciences,, dualistic philosophies, integrative philosophies, and so on. The language in which assertions are expressed generates cultural preconceptions about their validity.