Alex Antezana
5/4/12
IB Theory of Knowledge Essay
Word Count: 1598
‘The vocabulary we have does more than communicate our knowledge; it shapes what we can know’. Evaluate this claim with reference to different areas of knowledge.
This statement pursues to make a claim that could buttress the epistemology of the modern world and depict the limits upon us as beings. Knowledge acquisition is an intricate process, constantly being changed, limited and influenced by many factors, and the ‘truth’ behind the knowledge we attain is often problematic depending on the different depictions of the ways of knowing being used. In this sense, though vocabulary communicates knowledge, it can also shape what we know because vocabulary does not encompass all aspects of the knowledge, missing the totality of reality. If there were no exhaustive knowledge of the underlying concepts and meanings of vocabulary, the knowledge that we can gain from the vocabulary would be inadequate. Although vocabulary can be exclusive and restricted, the absence of vocabulary does not imply the absence of knowledge. As we consider and examine the problems with vocabulary and knowledge acquisition, a critical knowledge problem arises: Is knowledge derived from new vocabulary (thus influencing our thoughts and behaviors), or is vocabulary developed as a mere response to new knowledge?
Before assessing the statement, defining vocabulary is critical. In today’s world, we examine vocabulary as the words or phrases of a language and their understood meanings. In order to examine the role of vocabulary in which we communicate and gain knowledge in the different areas of knowledge, we must not only acknowledge vocabulary as a part of language but also as the highest expression of a paradigm, a theoretical framework, any system of symbols, techniques, tools, etc. “In science, a paradigm describes distinct concepts or thought patterns in any scientific discipline or other epistemological context.”(Thomas Kuhn) We use this system of symbols and techniques to communicate and express thoughts, opinions, emotions and more, thus claiming that vocabulary can limit and restrict the range of our knowledge (Philosophy).
Vocabulary sometimes shapes the way we think, the way we perceive and the way we behave. This claim stems from the concept that vocabulary does not always encompass the complete reality of a concept or idea. In essence, vocabulary is merely a simplification or generalization representation of knowledge. Similarly, in areas of knowledge like the human sciences, vocabulary limits what we can know in similar ways. Psychology, for example, is in “many everyday conversations, terms such as ‘ego’ and ‘repressing’ unpleasant memories are used, but not always with an appropriate understanding of the actual meanings and concepts behind these terms – a phenomenon which psychologists have named ‘psychobabble’” (Crane and Hannibal). Popular psychology, what scientists consider psychology concepts based on popular and public belief, is a side effect of the misuse of these psychological concepts and ideas. Though some knowledge may be correct in popular psychology, it is still partial and incomplete. Simply using and acknowledging these terms does not ensure that knowledge about Sigmund Freud and his methods of psychoanalysis will be acquired because these terms are only general representations and only encompass certain aspects of a greater thought, consequently communicating incomplete knowledge. Thus, what we can know becomes limited by vocabulary. Also, in ethics, simply knowing the words ‘good’ and ‘bad’ does not always indicate that people understand the full extent of their meanings. If we learn or come to know the concept of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ only through the vocabulary, our knowledge would be very limited and superficial; it would be like walking around with incomplete, ambiguous dictionary definitions. By trying to define complex and intricate words such as ‘right’ or ‘wrong’, we limit ourselves and take away from the knowledge. This knowledge problem can also be seen in logic (Language Acquisition). In Robert M Pirsig’s “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance”, Phaedrus uses a metaphorical knife to rationalize and dissect ideas and concepts to reach an ultimate truth with a simplified explanation, like vocabulary, but the opposite happens and he turns insane by over-rationalizing and taking away knowledge while trying too attain it. Phaedrus’ Knife can therefore be viewed as a form of detrimental assessment, whereby the essence (or, in the terms of the novel, quality) of the examined thing is destroyed in the process of the examination. This destruction is inevitable when using logical analysis, as quality is an unquantifiable property.
The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis supports vocabulary shaping the way we behave and think. There are two components to the hypothesis; first, the ‘strong’ version which states that thoughts and behavior are determined and claims that the language we speak determines the way that you will interpret the work around you; second, the ‘weaker’ hypothesis states that language merely influences your thoughts about the real world (Language Acquisition). An example of vocabulary manipulating our thoughts is propaganda such as “Rosie the Riveter” influencing women to take power and control their lives. Also, many politicians use loaded questions, glittering generalities and several other propaganda techniques in their political speeches to sway audiences into thinking like them. Language and our vocabulary provides a structure for thoughts, organizes our thoughts and enables one to communicate thoughts which in effect can influence thoughts by changing/ strengthening them through discussion (“Philosophy”). Does this imply that other cultures whose language does have not translations for concepts such as epistemology, quality, etc., mean they have not developed or though of those concepts yet, thus making them superior to us?
However, while vocabulary does not always encompass the totality of reality, the absence of vocabulary does not necessarily suggest the absence of knowledge, as that claim indicates. For example, often times when experiencing an emotion such as happiness we are unable to describe the feeling with vocabulary, does this mean we do not know ‘happiness’ even though emotion is considered a way of knowing? While humans may not be able to express certain subjects, it does not equate to a lack of knowledge (Diploma Programme). For instance, consider what several people in the Western culture deem as a fundamental skill in math and in life – the ability to count and understand the concept of ‘quantity’. We often equate having a range of vocabulary that describes numbers with that of knowing how to count and knowing how numbers work. However, in the language of a small Amazonian community, the Piraha, a vocabulary for numbers is non-existent; they use “hói”, “hói”, and “baágiso” to express quantities meaning “near one”, “some”, and “several”, respectively (Frank, Fedorendko, and Gibson). While they have no numbers, this does not imply that they have no knowledge of the concepts associated with numbers, like the ability to count or the concept of a specific ‘quantity’. In 2008, the cognitive neuroscientist, Michael Frank, and his colleagues conducted a study to prove these assertions of language. When villagers of the Piraha were presented with some spools of thread and were told to give the researcher the same number of balloons by lining up the balloon next to the spools one-by-one, they were able to accomplish the task correctly, indicating their ability to comprehend the concepts of ‘quantity’ and ‘calculating’ (Frank, Fedorendko, and Gibson). Thus, this again displays that in some parts, knowledge does not need to be limited by precise vocabulary and language because not all knowledge and concepts can be expressed and represented with vocabulary and language.
Similarly, The Hopi Indian tribe is known for their intriguing language, due to its lack of verb tenses and resulting inadvertence to any notion of time. Does this mean since they have an inadvertence to time; the Hopi Indian tribe has no perception of time? A study was conducted to examine this claim, when given a task the Hopi Indian tribe completed the task in varying lengths of time. The closest that the Hopi language comes to a sense of time are two words in the entire language: one meaning “sooner” and another meaning “later” (“Philosophy”). By discovering these two words, it assertions can be made to say the tribe have some concept to time although their perception on time may be different from ours.
Also, some opposition to Whorf’s hypothesis cites three main points: translatability, universalism, and differences between linguistic and non-linguistic events. The notion of translatability refers to the fact that different languages may have different ways for dividing up their categories of words it is still possible to translate from one language to another. Some languages may have one word for what another language has five or six words for, but the idea is the same and the thoughts are the same. Universalism is the idea that all independently created languages follow certain universal structures. This is supported through Noam Chomsky because he states that all language is innate thus all languages share a similar set of axioms (“Philosophy”). Finally, researchers also believe that “linguistic events” (evidence about thought through language) must be compared independently to “non-linguistic events” (evidence about thoughts gained through other means than language) before a correlation can be found. For example, an art piece does not have vocabulary on it but the mere sight of the image/ art piece translates and emotion or type of knowledge (Language Acquisition).
Language acquisition varies from different ideologies and streams of thought, ranging from language determinism to innate language acquisition. The different modems of language acquisition play an integral role in the claim that vocabulary determines the way we think and behave. Vocabulary simply does not always restrict what we know or, vice versus. Language determinism and statements about vocabulary not encompassing all aspects of a concept favor the argument that vocabulary does shape the way we think. However, Thus, though there is validity in the claim, the knower must be aware of the limitations of the claim and the fact that knowledge can be acquired without the words or symbols we already have like universalism and translatability of certain concepts.
Works Cited:
Crane, John, and Hannibal, Jette. IB Psychology Course Companion: International Baccalaureate
Diploma Programme. USA: Oxford University Press, 2009. Print.
Frank, Michael C., E. Fedorenko, and E. Gibson. “Number as a cognitive technology: Evidence
“Language Acquisition.” ThinkQuest. Oracle Foundation. Web. 05 May 2012. <http://library.thinkquest.org/C004367/la3.shtml>.
“Philosophy of Linguistics.” (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). Web. 05 May 2012. <http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/linguistics/>.
“Thomas Kuhn.” (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). Web. 05 May 2012. <http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/thomas-kuhn/>.