Change Reality By Changing Language
Introducing new metaphors into the conversation may be the best way to change realities, either one’s own or those of others. Howard Gardner, the noted educational theorist who introduced the concept of multiple intelligences, has argued that the process of changing minds is that of changing “mental representations." If the language one utilizes is capable of changing one’s reality, then the introduction and appropriation of new language, new symbols, and new metaphors into the conversation may result in a change of perception by the other. This understanding of the role of language is derived from the later thought of Ludwig Wittgenstein, who explored the power of language to organize and articulate ideas. Gardner describes it such: “Later Wittgensteins saw language as creating the cognitive worlds in which we are enmeshed."
Some may dismiss this as simply another manifestation of "the power of positive thinking." But even that movement had its merits, when not overly saddled with the crass, popular versions of it. If language is not merely an articulation of ideas or things but is actually the means by which we organize those ideas or things, then we can choose by our actual words at least a bit what our reality will be. Maybe that's what God did when he spoke the world into existence.
[See Howard Gardner, Changing Minds: The Art and Science of Changing Our Own and Other People’s Minds (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2004). ]
Some may dismiss this as simply another manifestation of "the power of positive thinking." But even that movement had its merits, when not overly saddled with the crass, popular versions of it. If language is not merely an articulation of ideas or things but is actually the means by which we organize those ideas or things, then we can choose by our actual words at least a bit what our reality will be. Maybe that's what God did when he spoke the world into existence.
[See Howard Gardner, Changing Minds: The Art and Science of Changing Our Own and Other People’s Minds (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2004). ]

2 Comments:
"If language is not merely an articulation of ideas or things but is actually the means by which we organize those ideas or things, then we can choose by our actual words at least a bit what our reality will be."
This, as I remember, is one of the premises of George Orwell's 1984. The government changed the English language with the intent of making crime (including dissent against those in power) impossible. All negative words (such as "bad") were changed to more neutral words (such as "ungood.") Those in power reasoned that if the populace doesn't have the words to use to think about crime or rebellion, then they cannot actually commit crime or rebellion.
However, the difference between 1984 and your post is that in 1984 language was destroyed (by removing large chunks of vocabulary) to create sheep-like conformity, while this post advocates "the introduction and appropriation of new language, new symbols, and new metaphors into the conversation." Rather than making people less able to express themselves and clearly define reality in words, you are advocating making people more able to express themselves, and that makes all the difference.
Thanks for noting the difference, anonymous.
Post a Comment
<< Home