Quote:
Originally Posted by Jway
Interesting.
I interpret (Divine) Word as Voice.
|
For any voice to have meaning there must be a symbolic language with syntax to communicate said meaning.
Quote:
|
That can be understood in human constructs, though I think it plausible to understand Voice of God as with and without Sound. Hard to conceive of human voice without sound, yes?
|
If God ever spoke without words or sound how could we ever know what he said? Even if one hears voices that aren't there one needs to hear them via a symbolic language. Otherwise it would just be noise.
Quote:
|
I hardly believe that Divine Word within traditional theology refers to our (human) symbolic language. Though there is correlation. I can understand the connection being made. And I find interesting the hypothesis that the rise of symbolic language (verbal and textual) is what makes us human. Though it almost seems disadvantageous from an evolutionary perspective. As a tool for communication, advantageous. As a construct that pulls a veil (of interpretation) over physical reality, it seems not very well thought through. Introducing and allow for idea that the Word is "out there" rather than within, where the Voice is actually heard.
|
It's my private theory, I''l admit, and I haven't seen too many others approach the definition of human consciousness this way. Julian Jaynes and Noam Chomski come closest to my way of thinking, and they both have been refuted by conservative thinkers on the subject. I am not a conservative thinker on the subject, and I don't believe human consciousness is matter of brain parts or nervous tubules. Human consciousness is not analog, but digital. We even have evidence of human consciousness being taught to apes when Koko learned how to communicate with her trainer using a symbolic language with syntax.
