Re: future language

From: Grant Callaghan (
Date: Tue Apr 30 2002 - 16:00:33 BST

  • Next message: Wade Smith: "Re: Shakers"

    Received: by id QAA17302 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Tue, 30 Apr 2002 16:06:28 +0100
    X-Originating-IP: []
    From: "Grant Callaghan" <>
    Subject: Re: future language
    Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 08:00:33 -0700
    Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
    Message-ID: <>
    X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Apr 2002 15:00:34.0609 (UTC) FILETIME=[C7AFC210:01C1F057]
    Precedence: bulk

    >The only case when we have reverse of the Babel syndrome is when
    >cultures associated with languages start to die out. IMO, that's bad.
    >As simple as that....
    Cultures the world over are dying out. It's only "bad" because you don't
    like it. Words like "good" and "bad" only mean anything when they are used
    to mean good or bad for some purpose. A butter knife is bad for cutting
    steak but good for spreading butter. It's not inerently good or bad. That
    analogy applies equally well to all cultural tools. They are good as long
    as they help us do what we need to do and bad when they no longer fulfill a
    purpose. Outside of that, good and bad just communicate how we feel about
    something. A good movie is one you enjoyed. A bad movie is one you didn't.
      Used in this way, good and bad only express information about your
    feelings, not about the movie itself.

    I'm sorry if I sound pedantic here. It's one of my pet peeves that people
    use words in an absolute sense which only have any meaning when used in a
    realative sense. Feel free to ignore my outburst.



    Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.

    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Apr 30 2002 - 16:42:08 BST