The Instigator
InVinoVeritas
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

One's native language structure affects one's world view (Linguistic Relativity)

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
InVinoVeritas
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/17/2012 Category: Science
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,521 times Debate No: 22075
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (13)
Votes (1)

 

InVinoVeritas

Pro

Definitions:
Language:
Complex system of communication used within a group of people. [1] To simplify this debate and avoid the introduction of irrelevant exceptions, we will only be talking about one's native language, or first acquired language.
And to clarify further, structure of language: The rules that govern a language (i.e., its grammar.)
World view/Conceptualization of world: fundamental cognitive orientation of an individual or society encompassing the entirety of the individual or society's knowledge and point of view. [2]

Resolution: The structure of a language affects the ways in which its native speakers are able to conceptualize their world.

(Pro will attempt to affirm the resolution. Con will attempt to negate the resolution.)

The first round of this debate will be strictly reserved for discussion of terms of debate and definitions.

Thank you (and only accept if you think you would be able to maturely handle this complex topic and willing to put in the research.)

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org......
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org......
The_Fool_on_the_hill

Con


I ask my opponent to forfeit because he has completely decided to change his whole position after I already accepted. Changing it to the position I hold.


What is worst of all, his change is based on my argument in my second last debate. He read my argument. And decided to change his argument to account for it, I know it because I am a practising philosopher and it’s my theory. Secondly it’s not fair to change the debate like that after somebody accepted. We don’t need this on DDO.


We know he is lying because


His copy and paste worked fine so he is completely lying. You can check out where his past comes from and see he is phony.


http://www.debate.org...


So the debate is over I don’t even want to debate with such a person, this is where he copying or should I say plagiarizing, his new position. I am sure he has some link that may be similar, but obviously he didn’t have it before and its directly in my debate that ended yesterday.


Please Vote Con by disqualification!!!



This the argument I gave


Language is a complex set of physical symbols used to communicate our ideas. That is every word is a symbol which presupposes an idea. In order for communication to take place the ideas which the word relates to must be similar in the speaker and interpreters mind.


That is language symbolized reality. It could only at best describe reality. But you cannot define anything into reality. To define a word is simply to assign a set of words, to another. (You have only changed symbols around) Unless this set of world symbolized some reality its useless and even harmful, if you take it as reality.


That is, just to assign a set of symbols to a symbol is circular if they don’t actually symbolize anything. E.g. I could define my computer as boot, but what was formally called computer remains the very same regardless of my definition. A subjective definition is useless because the purpose of language is to communicate objectively. Most people are not aware of what I am saying right now. This philosophy is as fresh as I speak it, its straight from the hill™.


Reality has its own attributes whether we like it, accept it, agree with it, believe in it, assert it, vote for it or not. All we do we can do with language is categories it and describe it. Reality could never be wrong but we could articulate it wrong.



I am forfeiting because I am not going to argue against my very own created theory. This is wack!!


Pls Vote Con by disqualification!!!


Debate Round No. 1
InVinoVeritas

Pro

Okay. Thanks a lot. Looks like I'm going to have to start this debate again...
The_Fool_on_the_hill

Con

The_Fool_on_the_hill forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
InVinoVeritas

Pro

"I am forfeiting because I am not going to argue against my very own created theory. This is wack!!"

I win.
The_Fool_on_the_hill

Con

I hope people get what I am saying. It is based of this, I agreed with the resolusion, and he went and ready one of my past debates, and seen my theory and then after the fact want to change the resolusion to account for my argument would be devistating to his position. This is his message from out of the post:

:Sorry, I copied and pasted my last debate, and the full links didn't copy...

:The structure of language is surely not "the only way to conceptualize them." Language strictly categorizes things around us that are inherently there, regardless of the concreteness of their language-based definitions... or whether or not a language-based definition even exists. The way we perceive things through our world view is certainly a separate concept. What I will strive to do in this debate is to bridge these separate ideas and try to form a relationship of causation between them.

Please vote Fool by disqualification. We dont need this kind of crap on DDO
Debate Round No. 3
InVinoVeritas

Pro

Um... what?
The_Fool_on_the_hill

Con

The_Fool_on_the_hill forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by The_Fool_on_the_hill 4 years ago
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Its gross to see such dark sides of people. People that will through morals out the door for something so trivial. Its sad.
Posted by InVinoVeritas 4 years ago
InVinoVeritas
Con's name suits him well. I never changed the resolution.
Posted by The_Fool_on_the_hill 4 years ago
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Obviously you don't get it. I agree to the resolution, and he went and read my previous debates and now he want to change the resolution to account for my position. that obviously would win the debate.
This is what he is trying to change. (Hate is blinding isn't it!)

Sorry, I copied and pasted my last debate, and the full links didn't copy...

The structure of language is surely not "the only way to conceptualize them." Language strictly categorizes things around us that are inherently there, regardless of the concreteness of their language-based definitions... or whether or not a language-based definition even exists. The way we perceive things through our world view is certainly a separate concept. What I will strive to do in this debate is to bridge these separate ideas and try to form a relationship of causation between them.
Posted by The_Fool_on_the_hill 4 years ago
The_Fool_on_the_hill
what are basing anything on. I gave the evidence right there. its as clear as it gets. DO you think its okay to change the resolution after the debate has started? really
Posted by tarkovsky 4 years ago
tarkovsky
The worst part about it is how oblivious the fool is to how bad of an embarrassment this should be for him. We all know just how unread he is now. Anyway, I'd be willing to debate as con even though I fully agree with the resolution. Give me a couple days and I'll send you a challenge pro.
Posted by socialpinko 4 years ago
socialpinko
Two terrible opponent's in a row. I feel your pain.
Posted by The_Fool_on_the_hill 4 years ago
The_Fool_on_the_hill
And I know its mine because Its my actual theory. I am philosopher. SO you can hide it.> GET OUT HERE>
Posted by The_Fool_on_the_hill 4 years ago
The_Fool_on_the_hill
It doesn't say that on your other debate. your lying. . You should be disqualified! For forfiet you can't change your the whole debate like that after I accepted.!!
Posted by The_Fool_on_the_hill 4 years ago
The_Fool_on_the_hill
I can't stand dishonest people.!
Posted by The_Fool_on_the_hill 4 years ago
The_Fool_on_the_hill
No way you should should forfiet I seen your other post .. it doesn't say that. !!

Forfiet!!
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Travniki 4 years ago
Travniki
InVinoVeritasThe_Fool_on_the_hillTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: So Jake (aka Fool) said that pro stole his arguments, and gave us a link to a debate he did not participate in to prove it...plus pro hadn't yet posted an argument yet...and I could make little out of what else Jake was saying..