Language and The Development of Consciousness

[mosaix]

Following on from Phyrebrat's 'Internal Voice' thread...

For many years I've pondered on how I think and develop ideas. I definitely think in English sentences (there was a time when I was writing programs in machine code when some of my words were replaced by the machine code equivalent!).

When I'm resolving, say, a programming problem that I haven't met before I have a conversation with myself along the lines "What if I...", then a few moments later "No, that won't work because..." etc.

I fully understand that these voices are coming from one and the same person (or are they?) and I also sometimes ponder if schizophrenia is, somehow, related to not recognising this.

But why can't I resolve problems like this without verbalising them internally? On the other hand I know that there are processes in my brain that do problem solving 'in the background' so to speak. On occasion, with a particularly knotty problem, and when I'm least expecting it, a solution will pop into my head fully-formed and unprompted.

But what I wanted to discuss here is this: without language is it possible to have consciousness? Indeed, is it the development of language the start of consciousness? Is the ability to have internal conversations with oneself, and thereby recognise 'self', the trigger for the start of consciousness?

I'm quite prepared for this post to be considered as the incoherent thoughts of a nut-case and for someone better informed than I am to bring me to my senses.

Edit: Wouldn't it be awful for me and hilarious for the rest of you if it turned out that I was the only person who had these 'internal conversations'?

 

[Vertigo]

For me I tend to liken this concept to the quantum conundrum of the act of observation changing the phenomenon being observed. As soon as I ask myself if I think in words and sentences I definitely do think in words and sentences but I'm not convinced I'm always doing so when I'm not observing my own thoughts....

How's that for sounding crazy?

As to your question about language and consciousness, I wonder if you haven't got a bit of a chicken and egg situation there...

Isn't one of the key consciousness things supposed to be self recognition; seeing yourself in a mirror and recognising that it is you not someone looking at you? Something I believe Dolphins can do.

 

[Ursa major]

But what I wanted to discuss here is this: without language is it possible to have consciousness?

I find it hard to imagine non-verbal consciousness... but I suspect that this is because even where the mind is not specifically using words to process something, it interprets/reports the processing in words. Of course, if we define consciousness as "being conscious of" whatever it is we're doing, and we analyse ourselves using words, then, by definition, consciousness must be verbal. But that isn't really helpful, is it?

We can hit the same problem with HB's fox. It was clearly working out how to achieve something, but was it conscious of doing so... or was it just doing it (whatever that means)?

Given these problem with definitions, I'm not sure we can ever be entirely sure that consciousness can be non-verbal, until we are truly able to recognise consciousness that's very "similar" to our own in a creature with no facility for language**.


By the way, I know my subconscious mind (or, at least, a part of it) can processes words, because puns often pop into my head unbidden, and did so before I decided*** that making puns should be something I would do as a conscious activity****.


** - At which point, we'll start having issues with how we define language.... Does an alien that communicates solely with images, or scents, really not using language? Are those images and scents not words in a very real... er... sense? All we'd really be able to say was that the language was exclusively non-verbal, which isn't much help at all.

*** - At least part of my ability to come up with conscious puns is the direct result of having to force myself to understand -- or at least to recognise -- the ones I found my saying without any conscious intention of doing so. Saying something funny when you are the only one who doesn't realise that you have done so isn't a particularly good look. And as a bonus, I can actually stop myself from saying them (hard as this may be to imagine).

**** - Ironically, when one trains oneself to do something, it gradually becomes more "automatic", and so no longer is an exclusively conscious activity.

 

[Ursa major]

Isn't one of the key consciousness things supposed to be self recognition; seeing yourself in a mirror and recognising that it is you not someone looking at you? Something I believe Dolphins can do.

I have trouble imaging how they might process this without something along the lines of having the thought, "That is me". Do they just get a warm fuzzy feeling knowing that they're seeing themselves rather than another dolphin (who/which may potentially be hostile or a playmate)?

Do they wonder how it is that they can see themselves? On seeing the mirror, do they store the concept of "something by which I can see myself" or is it purely an extension of many animals' division of the world into "me" and "not me"?

 

[Vertigo]

I have trouble imaging how they might process this without something along the lines of having the thought, "That is me". Do they just get a warm fuzzy feeling knowing that they're seeing themselves rather than another dolphin (who/which may potentially be hostile or a playmate)?

Do they wonder how it is that they can see themselves? On seeing the mirror, do they store the concept of "something by which I can see myself" or is it purely an extension of many animals' division of the world into "me" and "not me"?

Hmmm I'm afraid that lot are all way beyond my ability to answer.

 

[mosaix]

Isn't one of the key consciousness things supposed to be self recognition; seeing yourself in a mirror and recognising that it is you not someone looking at you? Something I believe Dolphins can do.

And elephants apparently. In one experiment I saw, a white cross was painted on an elephant's forehead. When it was stood in front of a mirror it examined the cross (not the reflection) with its trunk.

 

[Vertigo]

And elephants apparently. In one experiment I saw, a white cross was painted on an elephant's forehead. When it was stood in front of a mirror it examined the cross (not the reflection) with its trunk.

Now you mention it I remember hearing about elephants as well. I'm sure there are some others.... octopuses perhaps?

 

[HareBrain]

When I'm resolving, say, a programming problem that I haven't met before I have a conversation with myself along the lines "What if I...", then a few moments later "No, that won't work because..." etc.

Having said in the other thread that I don't tend to think in coherent language, I believe I do so when problem-solving, i.e. when I must keep my thoughts on track and have them work in a logical manner to have much chance of success. So thoughts can be directed, otherwise I believe the default state is a kind of chaos soup (familiar to anyone who's tried meditation).

But what I wanted to discuss here is this: without language is it possible to have consciousness? Indeed, is it the development of language the start of consciousness? Is the ability to have internal conversations with oneself, and thereby recognise 'self', the trigger for the start of consciousness?

If by consciousness you mean awareness of oneself as a separate entity, then probably, I think. Without language, how do you know that "I" is not the same as "you"? (I.e. both parts of something larger.) The elephant with the cross on its forehead might not have been aware of that distinction; it might "merely" have understood the concept of a mirror (which is hardly that surprising given that water reflects).

Has anyone else here read The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind by Julian Jaynes?

 

[The Judge]

Are there any cases of children being born deaf and blind -- or the mythical raised with wolves -- who learn language very much later in life? If so, would they achieve consciousness only at that late stage? Infants wouldn't be able to understand let alone explain the concept of consciousness and any difference between the non-verbal and the communicating self, but older children and adults might well be able to grapple with it and confirm if there were indeed a difference. (I was going to cite Helen Keller, but apparently -- which I hadn't realised -- she was able to hear and see at birth, so language use and any connection to consciousness might have been a continuation/enlargement of what had occurred before she lost her sight and hearing.)

Anyhow, regarding the problem-solving issue, I've just played a couple of games of Spider Solitaire to check, and at no point in the game-playing do I think in complex sentences. The nearest to any verbalised thought is

(a) when I'm trying to memorise hidden cards. (If a face-up card is moved to another column, the card immediately beneath is turned, disclosing its face. That action can then be undone, so leaving the original in place and the underneath card again hidden. Recalling what is hidden and where, is useful in deciding how to proceed.) In that case I'm internally muttering eg "queen, seven, six"
(b) when I swear having made a wrong decision.​

I certainly don't think "What if I try this one?" and the like. Everything except the memorising and swearing takes place on a non-verbal level of scanning, checking, turning cards, undoing etc. The only time I started to think in complex sentences with verbs and the like was when I began mentally composing this post.

 

[HareBrain]

I certainly don't think "What if I try this one?" and the like.

I can tentatively narrow down my use of sentences in problem-solving to trying to predict a series of effects when "programming" (writing checking scripts for SPSS). "If this happens, that would, but if that variable doesn't then equal that ..." etc. Sometimes I actually speak it aloud. I think it was the same when I used to play chess. Would that count as coherent sentences? (If that's what you mean by "complex".) Do you not do something similar with Spider Solitaire, whatever that is?

consciousness

I think one problem with this discussion is that we might all mean different things by this word, and it's difficult for any of us to define what we do mean by it.

 

[mosaix]

Are there any cases of children being born deaf and blind -- or the mythical raised with wolves -- who learn language very much later in life? If so, would they achieve consciousness only at that late stage? Infants wouldn't be able to understand let alone explain the concept of consciousness and any difference between the non-verbal and the communicating self, but older children and adults might well be able to grapple with it and confirm if there were indeed a difference. (I was going to cite Helen Keller, but apparently -- which I hadn't realised -- she was able to hear and see at birth, so language use and any connection to consciousness might have been a continuation/enlargement of what had occurred before she lost her sight and hearing.)

Anyhow, regarding the problem-solving issue, I've just played a couple of games of Spider Solitaire to check, and at no point in the game-playing do I think in complex sentences. The nearest to any verbalised thought is

(a) when I'm trying to memorise hidden cards. (If a face-up card is moved to another column, the card immediately beneath is turned, disclosing its face. That action can then be undone, so leaving the original in place and the underneath card again hidden. Recalling what is hidden and where, is useful in deciding how to proceed.) In that case I'm internally muttering eg "queen, seven, six"
(b) when I swear having made a wrong decision.​

I certainly don't think "What if I try this one?" and the like. Everything except the memorising and swearing takes place on a non-verbal level of scanning, checking, turning cards, undoing etc. The only time I started to think in complex sentences with verbs and the like was when I began mentally composing this post.

Interesting re the game TJ. But I wonder what the thought processes would have been if you were playing the game for the first time?

Re what we mean by the term 'consciousness': there was a New Scientist special on it a while back. I'll see if I can find it and post a link.

 

[Stephen Palmer]

This is the one to go for:

 

[The Judge]

I can tentatively narrow down my use of sentences in problem-solving to trying to predict a series of effects when "programming" (writing checking scripts for SPSS). "If this happens, that would, but if that variable doesn't then equal that ..." etc. Sometimes I actually speak it aloud. I think it was the same when I used to play chess. Would that count as coherent sentences? (If that's what you mean by "complex".)

Yep. I used "complex" simply because it's arguable my internal cry of "Sh*t!" when I do something wrong is both coherent and a sentence!

Do you not do something similar with Spider Solitaire, whatever that is?

Nope. No verbalised thoughts at all in planning what to move, it's all sub-verbal. Actually "planning" is going too far, as that suggests some coherence of step A followed by step B, because although I do have consecutive moves of that kind there's no "Move this then move that" consciously thought, it's all kind of automatic. I'd have said instinctive, except it seems wrong to describe playing a card game in such terms. I am very much in the flow when I play, though, which might have something to do with it, and the odd occasion I can't get the game to come right with all the cards taken up, it's usually because I've not been quite "there" (wherever "there" is).

Interesting re the game TJ. But I wonder what the thought processes would have been if you were playing the game for the first time?

Yes, that's an interesting thought. It could well be that I've played it so often I've moved from a conscious "Do this then try that" strategy to kind some of learned-instinct, if such a thing is possible. (And I do win consistently, so I'm not moving stupidly and trusting to luck all the while.) How do you play chess? Do you fully consider all your moves in the way HB seems to have done?

 

[mosaix]

Chess is a strange one TJ. First there are recognisable patterns on the board that immediately spell 'advantage' or 'danger' and these jump out at me after my opponents move or, unfortunately, sometimes after mine.

Then it probably is a lot of 'if I do that then...' for as many moves ahead as I can picture the board. And that's probably because after each move there is a new set of problems to resolve, so it's like new game each time.

 

[Lumens]

Isn't one of the key consciousness things supposed to be self recognition; seeing yourself in a mirror and recognising that it is you not someone looking at you? Something I believe Dolphins can do.

Dolphins also have sonar though, as an extra sense. Who knows what that is like, but it is highly likely that they know they are not looking at another individual.

Ironically, when one trains oneself to do something, it gradually becomes more "automatic", and so no longer is an exclusively conscious activity.

Also known as muscle memory, if I understand you correctly. It allows us to do things "faster than thought", since thinking takes quite a lot of time. In fact, it has been proposed that speaking out loud what your "thought process" is, can impede our ability to make sound choices.

People with a lot of experience in a field, like firefighters, have to make quick desicions based on a lot of input. If they are asked to think aloud, they lose their intuitive grasp of the situation and also spend too much time trying to express what could well be abstract thought.

Experiments have been done on problem solving as well, getting people to explain how they are attacking a totally new situation. It seems to slow it down a lot.

It's never simple. I am not sure an internal dialogue, when there is one, goes through the same steps as spoken language. Try to think of your way to work, or somewhere familiar. You skip through it in huge steps, and perhaps not even in a linear way. Inside your mind, "Language", as an understandable stream of audible noises, could be completely alien to somebody else, even if it is makes complete sense in your mind as you are thinking it.

 

[Ursa major]

Also known as muscle memory

I was thinking more of mental tasks than physical ones, given we're looking at conscious, and unconscious, ways of thinking. (I'm pretty sure my muscles don't use words. )

 

[Lumens]

I was thinking more of mental tasks than physical ones, given we're looking at conscious, and unconscious, ways of thinking. (I'm pretty sure my muscles don't use words. )

Ah yes, of course. As a martial artist, and an improvising musician, the division between muscle memory and mental tasks is never that clear cut to me. When adapting to an ever changing but familiar situation, it all comes together. A lot of it is not conscious, at least to an experienced person.

Apologies for my messy post - I think I was trying to say that the mind may not use words either. In the end, it's all just chemistry and electrical impulses, whether in the muscle or brain. "Language" is what comes out when we communicate with each other.

 

[Ursa major]

No need to apologise.

There's nothing wrong with looking at muscle memory... which, I suppose, is more like program memory than data memory, as it drives a series of processes, some of which are quite complicated. I seriously doubt that there is an easily defined boundary between it and some of the other things we're talking about.

For instance, a pianist may play a long piece of music (some pieces can have individual movements longer than half-an-hour), and much of what s/he is doing could, after many years, be sort of automatic. Yet no two performances will be alike. Now it may be that some of the differences are simply a matter of "error" -- which doesn't mean that wrong notes are being played (or the right ones are, but in the wrong order...) -- just that the way they're being played is not how the pianist either wants them to be, or expects them to be. Most differences will, one would hope, be due to how the pianist feels like playing the piece at that time, at that location, to that audience (if there is one)... which means that there is a subtle, and perhaps not so subtle, relationship between the apparently "automatic" actions and the apparently conscious ones.

 

[Montero]

I do know that a lot of my problem solving is with pictures, not language. Unless you call pictures language. I run pictures in my head and when I was learning chemistry, if it got too complex for my head then I did some 3D modelling with bits of wire and plasticine.
There are people who can think in mathematics (that being another language). Some of them were my chemistry lecturers (especially the theoretical chemistry ones). I can do maths, I can follow it (with a bit of a run up) and I can work through to writing maths to describe the physical/theoretical chemistry problem - but to understand fully I need pictures.

One of the things I have to work on with writing, is translating the film in my head to being words on a page, which will then create a film in someone else's head (assuming that is how the other person reads a story).

In terms of being aware of self - cats. Cats know very well that they are wonderful individuals, with a sense of worth and personal space.

 

[tinkerdan]

At the risk of bandying about definitions of words and all, I think that there might be some benefit to defining both what is meant by consciousness and language.

Let's take language; as ridiculous as it might seem the first language we learn is one of two--body language or tonal. Long after that we learn to put words to some of those and eventually we transcend that to more abstraction. And my guess would be at this point we're delving into the area above and beyond abstraction for this question. (This is overly simplified to attempt to be brief.)

Likewise consciousness has several levels. The most rudimentary would be waking up and recognizing there is a world around us. In that respect all animals have this type of consciousness since it's vital to survival. Eventually you reach a point of self-awareness, which also has levels. Animals are self-aware to a very rudimentary place that they might perhaps feel the world revolves around them and that there are other animal out there. Case in point my dog Ginger spends a large portion of time watching the cues from us to determine when she needs to assert herself to remind us to feed her and several other basic function that we're there to serve(she is aware of other cats and dogs and people and is guarded about sharing her resources[us]with these others).

At some place along the scale our awareness is such that we realize that the world doesn't revolve around us.

Through all of that we really don't have to go that far beyond the stage where we've interpreted the tonal and physical languages beyond defining those essentials. It is when we become aware of others and the fact that we don't all think the same or respond to cues in the same manner that we need to formalize language to exchange ideas. [Again this is over simplified.]

The point is that the consciousness we're talking about I think might go beyond self-consciousness and into an awareness and acceptance that others have a separate consciousness.

We can have some self-consciousness without language and language becomes necessary to interact with other self-conscious beings.

We can have thoughts without words; however words help convey them to others, though in some cases if we fail in that we can always fall back on pictures which can express thousands of words.