FREE ESSAY ON PHILOSOPHY OF MAN I: PERCEPTION

PHILOSOPHY OF MAN I: PERCEPTION

Philosophy of Man I: Perception 
Linguistic ability affects man in his specifically animal operations. Discuss with
reference to any one of the senses.
In the following assignment, we intend discussing the way our linguistic abilities affect
man's specifically animal operations. We would like to start by pointing out the
advantages this ability gives us, and how it distinguishes the human being from the
animal. Moreover, we will analyse the way in which language influences us as human beings
with particular reference to vision.
It is a universally acknowledged fact that human beings possess a larger brain than
animals. This allows us to co-ordinate our lives better and communicate with each other
on a higher, more sophisticated level. We exchange information through the use of
language. Language is a mode of communication where from a limited number of words we can
produce an infinite number of sentences. It gives us the chance to discuss ideas, and
look at the world with a critical eye. This process provides us with the opportunity to
stimulate our intelligence which in turn enables us to improve our means of
communication. It is of utmost importance to note that we have developed our linguistic
abilities in as much as we not only have the option of interacting verbally and through
signs but also on a written basis. This means that we do not always have to be face- to
face with someone, but can also exchange information over long distances and refer across
time.
In other words the fundamental difference between man and all other creatures on the
planet is that man has linguistic abilities and that we are able to reflect, whereas
animals simply act on instinct. It is language which enables us to move from instinct to
consciousness and self-consciousness. Through our ability to verbally communicate with
each other, our language can replace and emphasise certain actions. Animals, on the other
hand can only show affection towards each other by either licking each other's faces or
playing together. We humans not only show affection through body contact, but also
through the way we express ourselves. Furthermore, the only way that animals can solve
their indifferences is through physically attacking each other, whereas we can resolve
our interpersonal conflicts through a rational discussion. This is all due to the fact
that human beings are able to verbally communicate their feelings, emotions and
thoughts.
The central question still to be examined is : How does language actually influence our
specifically animal operations ?
A case in point would be that when we look at an object, for example a tree, do we see it
in its pure, realistic and natural way or is language imposing a certain influence on the
way we look at this tree ? Do we regard it as an object of nature which is a tall woody
plant having a single, usually, long and straight main stem, generally with a few or no
branches on its lower part ? Or are we simply seeing it that way because of the context
of the language in our culture ? One theory which supports this point of view is the
Saphir - Whorf hypothesis. It suggests that the structure of a language influences the
way in which its speakers view the world today. Since the languages of the world differ
greatly in regard to their semantic and structural characteristics, it seems somewhat
logical to argue that people speaking widely different languages would also differ in the
way they viewed and thought about the world. An example may illustrate this point. If one
must classify things such as camels, automobiles or snow in certain ways, then one must
perceive them differently from someone who does not require to make these distinctions.
Eskimos may have a number of different meanings for the word snow, whereas we only have
one. In Maltese, for example, there is no word which specifically describes the word 
snow . It is translated as  silg which literally translated means  ice . 
From this we can deduce that it is still debatable whether we perceive the world in its
real form or whether we are affected by the language of our society without us realising.
Hence one can infer that language imposes meaning on everything existing in our world
through the human being. 
If it were not for our need to communicate meaning, language would not exist. Of all the
functions of language, the communication of meaning from one person to another is one of
the most significant. Consequently, meaning must be placed at the centre of any attempt
to explain language. But, meaning lies not in the words but in the people. We use words
to approximate the meanings we wish to communicate, but these words still remain
imperfect and incomplete representations of our meanings.
After having delved deeper into this subject, we can conclude that language is the trait
which decisively distinguishes man from all other creatures and that human language is
arguably that single most remarkable characteristic which we have, the one that most
truly sets our species apart. Without language we could hardly have created the human
world we know. We owe it to this unique characteristic that we have been able to develop
our world the way we know it today. Hence, we can say that language is what makes us
human and human language is unique. Undeniably, other creatures do have a way of
communicating with each other and appear to do this through some sort of signalling
system which allows them to pass on information within their species and occasionally
even with members outside their own species. The bottom line is that the human language
is so utterly different from all of these other signalling systems, that we are obliged
to treat it as a truly unique phenomenon. 
Bibliography
BIBLIOGRAPHY
* Ronald Wardhaugh, An Introduction to Sociolinguistics, Second edition, Blackwell
Publishers Ltd, 1996.
* Joseph A. DeVito, Human Communication - The Basic Course, Fifth edition, Harper Collins
Publishers Inc, 1991.
* R.L. Trask, Language - The Basics, Routledge,1996