Received: from mail-qa0-f62.google.com ([209.85.216.62]:43815) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1YFevF-00065E-BX for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 00:21:26 -0800 Received: by mail-qa0-f62.google.com with SMTP id k15sf1641820qaq.7 for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 00:21:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:content-type:x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence :mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=laQ4dx8n0bXO14wqUQCTWwHbrkulm+EkQFQSsc2rrXc=; b=O2+KkPfudDXWjyIZWrs1cRa3M910xo3CU9lbuuu0B9UFGDELeMLamxJFEuv0/Q89Jg 30Tq/rDdTEHN4Z31mq+LkwT/XWZl29N1UhrMF0rGFT/7Yfi7gFwWWyi4e0eV4DUmguwq p2o0VCOoqEf38Zdxe9vwWJW1U87VNiaaKxKZYOyvW4NfzWPpzJggHOXD2PTFihGpUrkw z1PB34BNwlpiUkyUtzjsLxoOdFnKPf81dDUtyx1idYOV+NAgQgJrnO8Qxs8OghCfsa8m Y06cuFpodX0WxCMSOztj4G6v+lhDGHDRAe65wOdaVqncRAY4AIN3iSnqCavIUvQTRs0k 9GLw== X-Received: by 10.182.91.116 with SMTP id cd20mr62488obb.33.1422260478545; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 00:21:18 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.182.78.105 with SMTP id a9ls759058obx.90.gmail; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 00:21:18 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.182.33.38 with SMTP id o6mr116876obi.16.1422260478181; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 00:21:18 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 00:21:17 -0800 (PST) From: ravas To: lojban@googlegroups.com Cc: afkecatha@gmail.com Message-Id: <63c70fb2-f85a-49bf-8bac-848e04682b3a@googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: <4999df3f-bbbe-4885-997a-2c204183d092@googlegroups.com> References: <4999df3f-bbbe-4885-997a-2c204183d092@googlegroups.com> Subject: [lojban] Re: Questions about Lojban MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_Part_1_64303106.1422260477795" X-Original-Sender: ravas@outlook.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.8 X-Spam_score_int: 8 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: On Sunday, January 25, 2015 at 11:17:18 AM UTC-8, afke...@gmail.com wrote: > > Hello Everyone! > a'oi our main question is whether you would agree with this theory or not. > [...] Content analysis details: (0.8 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: googlegroups.com] 2.7 DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL RBL: Envelope sender listed in dnsbl.ahbl.org [listed in googlegroups.com.rhsbl.ahbl.org. IN] [A] -0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3 RBL: Good reputation (+3) [209.85.216.62 listed in wl.mailspike.net] 0.0 T_HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS From and EnvelopeFrom 2nd level mail domains are different -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (ravas[at]outlook.com) 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid 0.0 T_FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN 2nd level domains in From and EnvelopeFrom freemail headers are different -0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL Mailspike good senders ------=_Part_1_64303106.1422260477795 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_2_558028101.1422260477795" ------=_Part_2_558028101.1422260477795 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sunday, January 25, 2015 at 11:17:18 AM UTC-8, afke...@gmail.com wrote: > > Hello Everyone! > a'oi our main question is whether you would agree with this theory or not. > I agree with it. > Does being able to speak in a different, logical language also mean that > you are able to think in a different, logical manner? > And seeing that Lojban (most probably) is not your first language, do you > believe that people are able to learn to change the way they percieve > reality, just like they are able to learn a new language? > What is reality? Do we ever truly perceive it? I could say the brain records electromagnetic patterns which we then interpret as reality. Some people believe we generate and project reality. What is aware of the attention being placed on thought? I started learning Lojban last month and I can say that it has changed my thinking by making me aware of aspects of language. We could say that this would happen while learning any second language. I think the real proof will only be available when you are truly thinking in the second language, as opposed to translating in your mind. Before I realized the concept of linguistic relativity existed, I realized a major aspect of English (among other languages) is putting things into two categories: "good" and "bad", "right" and "wrong". I assume it started with the origin of language. Some of the first words undoubtedly had the meaning: "edible" and "not edible", "dangerous" and "not dangerous". But it's not strictly practical or fact based anymore... there are opinions and morals. So what happens when you simply swap the categories? Right is now wrong (morally). Good is now bad. Surely your life would change over night if you could accomplish this (and wanted to >_<). So for example, does someone who can speak a Native American language as > well as regular English have the possibility to view reality in two > different ways? > I don't think so. Perspective gained is perspective gained. Maybe if you could somehow completely segregate the two languages in your mind... Is this the reason you are so interested in Lojban, because it enables you > to think and perceive the world more logically? And if not, where did your > interest for the Lojban language come from? > I started and almost finished my own English spelling reform. (soon, door, foot... arg) Spelling reform is nothing new though; and I decided that no reform will ever be globally accepted because people value Etymology, and there is just too much that would need to be "translated" before we could stop teaching the old versions of words. The solution is simply to learn and promote a language with a phonemic orthography. I gave Esperanto a try and after a week or two I found http://www.101languages.net/esperanto/criticism.html (notice the quote at the top ;D) which made me aware of Ido and led me to the article http://idolinguo.org.uk/whyido.htm Every weakness of Esperanto I had noticed was in that article, and addressed in the Ido reform. However, the first article also made me aware of Lojban. I decided to learn Lojban because of the promotion of linguistic relativity, the fact that it is not Latin based, and my interest in programming. Side note: Since you already know English, I want to recommend the book "Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life". It helped me see detrimental aspects of English like: "I have to..." Now I always think "I choose to... because..." It also suggests some beautiful concepts such as considering: what do you want the person's reason to be for doing something for you. stela selckiku: > Perhaps the most perfectly Lojbanic of Lojban sentences is the sentence " > ", the empty sentence, which of course asserts nothing at all about > anything, and does so in perfect elegance. All of Lojban springs from this > emptiness. > Have you ever read anything by Walter Russel? From his book "A new concept of the Universe" (rather fitting for this conversation): *If the power to cause motion is in the balanced state of rest, it necessarily follows that energy is in the stillness of rest and not inmotion which is effect of cause. * -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. ------=_Part_2_558028101.1422260477795 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sunday, January 25, 2015 at 11:17:18 AM UTC-8, afke= ...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello Everyone!
 
a'oi

our main question is whether you would agree wi= th this theory or not.
 
I agree with i= t.
 
 Does being able t= o speak in a different, logical language also mean that you are able to thi= nk in a different, logical manner?
And seeing that Lojban (most probably) is not your first language,= do you believe that people are able to learn to change the way they percie= ve reality, just like they are able to learn a new language?

What is reality? Do we ever truly perceive it?
I= could say the brain records electromagnetic patterns
which we then int= erpret as reality.
Some people believe we generate and project reality.<= br>
What is aware of the attention being placed on thought?
 I started learning Lojban last month
and I can say that it has changed= my thinking by
making me aware of aspects of language.
We could say= that this would happen while learning any second language.
I think the = real proof will only be available when you are truly thinking in the second= language,
as opposed to translating in your mind.

Before I rea= lized the concept of linguistic relativity existed,
I realized a major = aspect of English (among other languages)
is putting things into two cat= egories: "good" and "bad", "right" and "wrong".
I assume it started with= the origin of language.
Some of the first words undoubtedly had the me= aning: "edible" and "not edible", "dangerous" and "not dangerous".
But i= t's not strictly practical or fact based anymore... there are opinions and = morals.
So what happens when you simply swap the categories?
Right i= s now wrong (morally).
Good is now bad.
Surely your life would change= over night if you could accomplish this (and wanted to >_<).

=
So for example, d= oes someone who can speak a Native American language as well as regular English have the possibility to view reality in two=20 different ways?
 
I don't think so. Perspec= tive gained is perspective gained.
Maybe if you could somehow completel= y segregate the two languages in your mind...

Is this the reason you are so interested in Lojban, because it enab= les you to think and perceive the world more logically? And if not, where d= id your interest for the Lojban language come from?

I started and almost finished my own English spelling reform.
= (soon, door, foot... arg)
Spelling reform is nothing new though; and I d= ecided that no reform will ever be globally accepted
because people valu= e Etymology, and there is just too much that would need to be "translated"<= br>before we could stop teaching the old versions of words.
The solution= is simply to learn and promote a language with a phonemic orthography.
=
I gave Esperanto a try and after a week or two I found
http://www.1= 01languages.net/esperanto/criticism.html
(notice the quote at the top ;D= )
which made me aware of Ido and led me to the article
http://idolin= guo.org.uk/whyido.htm
Every weakness of Esperanto I had noticed was in t= hat article,
and addressed in the Ido reform.
However, the first arti= cle also made me aware of Lojban.
I decided to learn Lojban because of t= he promotion of linguistic relativity,
the fact that it is not Latin bas= ed, and my interest in programming.

Side note:
Since you already = know English, I want to recommend the book
"Nonviolent Communication: A= Language of Life".
It helped me see detrimental aspects of English like= : "I have to..."
Now I always think "I choose to... because..."
It al= so suggests some beautiful concepts such as considering:
what do you wan= t the person's reason to be for doing something for you.

stela selckiku:
Perhaps the most perfectly Lojbanic of Lojban sen= tences is the sentence " ", the empty sentence, which of course asserts nothing at all about=20 anything, and does so in perfect elegance. All of Lojban springs from=20 this emptiness.

Have you ever read anything by Wal= ter Russel?
From his book "A new concept of the Universe" (rather fittin= g for this conversation):
If the power to cause motion is in the bala= nced state of rest, it necessarily follows that energy is in the stillness = of rest and not in
motion which is effect of cause.
=

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsub= scribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http:= //groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
------=_Part_2_558028101.1422260477795-- ------=_Part_1_64303106.1422260477795--