Quote:
Originally Posted by KnifeMissile
It looks like "literally" would have been a better word than "seriously..."
|
Looks like.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnifeMissile
You said all this while still evading the question. What the hell?
I highly doubt you know where this is heading since my axe to grind is against Creationism and this is not heading there. I asked you about language being instinctual 'cause your opinion on that would determine whether this was a semantic argument or not. This is valuable information in terms of the debate but you persist on pretending the question was never posed. I have no idea what this sort of denial is about...
|
Then, why don't you quit beating around the bush and just give us (me) that information?
Oh, very well... I'll answer your bloody question. (Really, at first I merely overlooked it. Then, after I saw you getting anxious because I didn't answer it, like it was your trump card or like you were dangling it out in hopes to ensnare me, I began to purposely ignore it. Because, I've learned to be on guard against trolls, on these message boards.)
Is language instinctual for mankind or did we figure it out? Hmm... I never really thought about it, and I haven't read any information on the subject, but I suppose originally language was the product of mankind's instincts. But eventually, mankind discovered – i.e. we figured out – new and more powerful ways to communicate; the first big one being "writing", but before that, there were ways like oral tradition and story telling and cave paintings; ways to express complex thoughts and ideas, ways to transmit information over time and space, and ways to preserve knowledge. And
that, for sure, is due to mankind's intelligence.