-1

I was contemplating reality as a simulation when I had a eureka thought. The thought (or idea) is how the simulation creator and the simulated relate to each other. It came to me all in a flash, but I was able to describe the thought in full back to myself, without words. But when I went to verbalize it, to make audible the words in my head, I failed at it. My brain couldn’t slow down to the speed of my mouth without losing the clarity of the thought. Is the skill of rendering complex ideas into words teachable? How are philosophers able to recreate the words of the mind into the words of the mouth, or pen?

2
  • Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. – Philip Klöcking Mar 29 at 11:17
  • Neither a philosophical issue, nor a psychological one. Being capable of recognizing ideas, split them in parts, being able to put them in words and knowing when and how to express them is an art: rhetoric. Remember Bunge, science=what lies on books; technique=apply science with your resources, hands/voice/whatever; art=solving other's issues with your technique; so, rhetoric is an art, which requires a developed technique, which requires a deep knowledge of something. – RodolfoAP Mar 30 at 8:11
-5

You can translate each of your thoughts into symbolic logic and use SD and SD+ to discover different properties like truth,validity...

Look at books by Edward de Bono, like 6 Thinking Hats

4
  • If you can't explain a thought with words, how will you translate it into symbolic logic? Symbolic logic is a small subset of what can be expressed in language. – curiousdannii Mar 29 at 2:21
  • Try mind mapping. It uses pictures and symbols instead of words. – Eudoxus Mar 29 at 12:28
  • 1
    The OP is describing a problem that a lot of non-technical people have, for example, a children. You expect a children to do this? This solution is worst than the problem! – RodolfoAP Mar 30 at 8:15
  • Why is my solution worst than the problem. The OP states he can’t translate his thoughts into words. When l can’t do it l use mind mapping which uses pictures and symbols to relay an idea @RodolfoAP – Eudoxus Mar 30 at 11:56
2

Philosophy is the art of translating those insights into words, and like every art it takes some time to develop your 'voice'. The only way to do that is to sit down and do it, step back and look at it with a critical eye, and then sit down and do it again. You have the tools — analysis, analogy and metaphor, logic, etc. — so sharpen them any way you can and put them to work.

I suggest you start by scribbling. When you have that kind of flash, sketch it out on paper any way that makes sense to you; make the idea concrete. Then start the critical thinking process, asking yourself how you will make this idea sensible to others. What logic do others need to see that might not be clear? What assumptions are you invoking that may not be self-evident? What language can you use that others will find accessible? Don't expect instant gratification, because it will take time and effort to piece it out.

3
  • WRONG: "Philosophy is the art of translating ... insights into word". Philosophy is neither an art, nor has anything to do with translations or even rhetorics. Among other things, philosophy approaches language, but as an object of study (philosophers study solipsism or rhetorics), not a subject (not all philosophers are solipsists, or rhetorics). – RodolfoAP Mar 30 at 8:24
  • @RodolfoAP: I'm sorry you feel that way, but I think you'd find that most philosophers disagree with you. – Ted Wrigley Mar 30 at 15:37
  • Thanks for the encouragement and study advice, Ted. Providing insight into my own behavior, learning and edifying is why I’m here - regardless of whom it benefits. Even if it only benefits me. – ThoughtsNotBots Mar 30 at 16:14
0

Outside the realm of pure logic, math and science, trying to clarify and transfer some private qualitative experience or ideas into public correct words is always full of traps here and there, that's one of the main reasons why philosophers so far haven't successfully completed such a grand project of Alphabet of human thought.

For me a major practical issue to apply to real life situations is due to epistemic contextualism and relativism, especially when you're dealing with beliefs, cultures, justifications and religions. In real life situations, background context is much more complicated than pure scientific or logic realm since it's essentially a nearly infinite network with too many parameters. So to achieve your goal of transferring ideas to words correctly, you need to squarely focus on context clarification and simplification. Even after doing so, due to modern society's numerous kinds of relativism, your carefully transferred words will still get misunderstood inevitably by many holding different views than yours.

Some schools of thought completely reject language word as the unit of our innate ideas and thoughts at our fundamental cognitive level, under this view, your wish is impossible to be perfectly achieved even in theory...

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.