Amazon.com Widgets

Does a limited vocabulary reduce ability to reason?

Asked by: Kreakin
  • Reduce ability to streamline view point thus reduces ability to reason

    Limited vocabulary becomes a big hurdle in expressing exact feeling. This limits ability to express clearly and cleverly.Limited vocabulary makes one to say general things.Reasoning can be done in better way if more words are available. Without exact clear and lucid word reasoning will become superficial.Thus limited vocabulary becomes limitation on ability to reason.

  • If you don't know what someone is talking about

    You can't picture the thing they're talking about in your mind, obviously this limits the ability to think about what design flaws there might be in whatever thing they're talking about.

    Also the field of logic that one needs to understand to reason well uses uite a bit of advanced vocabulary.

  • Though in part it depends on what is meant by reason

    If by reason you mean like reasoning as in reasoning with another person then definitely.

    If you just mean thinking "reduce" isn't always the right word but it changes it. Language effects thought. However, a person may sometimes think of things visually rather than verbally and sometimes this way may be more effective but if you have a big vocabulary you may be disinclined to think visually rather than verbally and so take longer or make more errors in some cases. Of course one could know when to use different types of thinking with practice.

  • A rich vocabulary allows for more expression of thought.

    We should all broaden our vocabulary as doing so allows us to express ourselves more succinctly.
    This allows for a way to reason on a given topic with more focus and greater depth.
    It should also mean that we are be able to express ourselves in broader terms and be less superficial in our meanings.

  • Yes, it absolutes says a lot, or rather, says very little about your thought process.

    The idea that you can sustain an argument or a belief without substantial reasoning to support it means you are overly relying on your appearance or reputation that precedes you. When tasked to substantiate yourself and you are found to be at a lost for words, per se, then this dearth of reason is exposed by your superficiality.

  • Yes, it absolutely says a lot, or rather, says little about your thought porcess.

    The idea that you can sustain an argument or a belief without substantial reasoning to support it means you are overly relying on your appearance or reputation that precedes you. When tasked to substantiate yourself and you are found to be at a lost for words, per se, then this dearth of reason is exposed by your superficiality.

  • It absolutely signals a lack of deliberation and debate.

    The idea that you can sustain an argument or a belief without substantial reasoning to support it means you are overly relying on your appearance or reputation that precedes you. When tasked to substantiate yourself and you are found to be at a lost for words, per se, then this dearth of reason is exposed by your superficiality.

  • Yes, we think in words.

    Yes, a limited vocabulary reduces ability to reason, because words, even words in thought, are the way that people reason. Without a large vocabulary, a person is unable to give their reason a voice. It is important to be able to communicate with your own thoughts, as well as with others, through vocabulary.

  • Of course it does!

    I lived and studied in Madrid specifically to learn Spanish. It took me awhile to develop an eclectic vocabulary. Once I did, I was finally able to deal with more complicated situations effectively like: clearing up misunderstandings, expressing exactly how I'm feeling and what I want/need, and negotiating terms of a contract.

    Clearly, my ability to reason was greatly hindered until my vocabulary in Spanish expanded. Learning a second language also enhanced my ability to reason in English.

  • Yes with no doubt

    A person with a limited vocabulary struggles to find the words they also often give up.They know what they want to say they just do not know the words for it and they don't want to do it .A person with rich vocabulary can twist the words to make new arguments even if they aren't good thinkers.We should keep in mind=d if someone is skilled in debating it does not all come from a rich vocabulary,and if someone cant debate they could be just not very goo thinkers.

  • The deaf still reason

    Deaf people, even those that do not know how to read are capable of being able to reason very well, some of them even do it much better than normal healthy people at times. I hope people can take this into consideration really well because it is actually true ok.

  • Correlation (due to cultural factors), but certainly no causation

    Doing exceptionally on the vocabulary section of the Verbal section of the SAT does not, by any means, mean that you will do better on the logical reasoning section of the LSAT. There is admittedly a correlation between expansive vocabulary and high reasoning capacity (because the cultures with expansive vocabularies tend to emphasize the activity of formal "reasoning" more than those with more limited vocabularies), but there is no evidence of causation between them. A vocabulary is, in a sense, the VARIABLES of logical reasoning, and more variables does not mean that can reason more efficiently; rather, it means that more variables happen to be culturally relevant to you. Reasoning is not about the variables themselves, but rather how those variables are used. I recommend reading William Labov's article "The Logic of Nonstandard English" for more information about this matter.

  • We should understand the difference between "vocabulary" and "concepts"

    "Vocabulary" is the word itself while the "thoughts" are the "definitions" of that words or terms. To give an example, every word you see is part of the vocabulary. What I typed here is part of the vocabulary. It extends from "is, are, was, were" to words like "philosophy, mathematics, quantum physics, rummage, guile," and etc. Concepts on the other hand comprises the "definition". A tree for example, its concept include its characteristics of having roots, trunk, stem, leaves, etc. Let's assume that I don't know the word "tree", but I know the concept, therefore, I can still express myself.

    Reasoning does not rely on how many words you know; rather, on how you formulate your thoughts and concepts. In fact, reasoning links concepts. While it requires vocabulary, the limits you have there isn't a necessity. As long as you can express your thoughts and pattern it in a structured way, you can reason!

  • NO, reasoning differs from the communication of reasoning

    A limited vocabulary to some degree limits a person's ability to communicate with others, particularly with those who place high value on the use of a colorful and expanded vocabulary. A limited vocabulary also limits, to some degree, a persons ability to understand what is being spoken. The lack of advance vocabulary does not impair a person's ability to have rational thoughts or to make logical judgments. The communication of a concept, or decision, differs from the formation of the concept or decision. A limited vocabulary does not reduce a person's ability to reason.

    A person with an excellent command of vocabulary can also fail in communicating the basis for their reasoning. They do this if they fail to communicate in a manner that their target audience understands. This doesn't mean that they failed in their reasoning; it does mean that their use of language is impairing their ability o communicate. The same can be said for a person having a limited vocabulary. They may have difficulty putting their thoughts into words that are familiar to their audience. For either situation a solution lies in the willingness to ask questions, rephrase responses, and learn new words.

    What I call reasoning my father called "common sense". I understand his concept of "common sense" because of my association with him. To him it meant something akin to attacking a problem or question by thinking through it. In words that he would not have used, he applied logic to the process of evaluating concepts and forming opinions, or judgments.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.