Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- hypothesis-one [2024/04/14 11:42] – brian.m
+++ hypothesis-one [2024/05/14 13:36] (current) – jjswikiadmin
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ==== HYPOTHESIS ONE: CONSCIOUSNESS IS BASED ON LANGUAGE ====
-Consciousness, as Jaynes carefully defined it, is a learned process based on metaphorical language; it is generated and configured (but not determined) by metaphorical, figurative expressions. Word changes lead to concept changes, and concept changes result in behavioral changes. Language is not merely a means of communication, but is an organ of perception. Language alone does not lead to introspective conscious mind. What is crucial is the concepts a certain language possesses that allow the generation of consciousness. Jaynes, of course, was not the first to see a vital link between figures of speech and how we think, but his argument is radical in how it postulates that metaphors generate conscious experience itself.
+**Theoretical Claim**
+Consciousness, as Jaynes carefully defined it, is a learned process based on metaphorical language; it is generated and configured (but not determined) by metaphorical, figurative expressions. Word changes lead to concept changes, and concept changes result in behavioral changes. Language is not merely a means of communication, but is an organ of perception. Language alone does not lead to introspective conscious mind. What is crucial is the concepts a certain language possesses that allow the generation of consciousness. Jaynes, of course, was not the first to see a vital link between figures of speech and how we think, but his argument is radical in how it postulates that metaphors generate conscious experience itself. The intimate linkage between subjective consciousness and language has been explored by [[https://www.julianjaynes.org/resources/supporting-evidence/consciousness-and-language/|many others]].
 We speak of our minds as being “quick,” “slow,” “agitated,” “nimble-witted,” “strong-“ or “weak-minded.” The mind‒space in which these metaphorical activities transpire has its own collection of adjectives; we can be “broad-minded,” “deep,” “open,” or “narrow-minded”; we can be “occupied”; we can “get it,” let an idea “penetrate,” or “bear,” “have,” “keep,” or “hold” something in mind. As in physical space a thing can be at the “back” of our mind, in its “inner recesses,” or “beyond” our mind, or “out” of our mind.
-**Metaphrands, Metaphiers, Paraphrands, and Paraphiers**
+**Supporting Evidence**
+//Metaphrands, Metaphiers, Paraphrands, and Paraphiers//
 For Jaynes metaphor’s persuasive power comes from its four components working together: The unknown thing to be described (metaphrand) and the known thing doing the describing (metaphier). For example, in the expression “time flies like an arrow” time is the more abstract, difficult-to-conceive metaphrand while arrow is the more concrete, easier-to-grasp metaphier. Note, however, that it is not really the arrow itself that provides the descriptive impact, but something about the arrow—its unstoppable speed, linear preciseness, determined directionality—that imparts explanatory power. These secondary, ancillary meanings are called paraphiers. A metaphier, then, possesses associated paraphiers which become the paraphrands of the metaphrands.
 It is the network of meanings in which a concept is embedded that grants expressive power to figures of speech (though not all metaphors are particularly generative). Consciousness is the metaphrand when generated by the paraphrands of verbal expressions, but the functioning of consciousness is, as it were, the return journey. Consciousness becomes the metaphier containing past experiences, incessantly and selectively operating on unknowns such as future plans, decisions, and partly remembered pasts, on how we define our selves and what we want to become.
+//Evidence from Child Development// - Bill Rowe?