Today in my TOK class, Mr. Perkins divided us up into 4 small groups and discuss a topic he gave us. My group had to talk about the relationship between language, thought, and perception, and to try and define how they were related. We talked for a while, but couldn't really come up with relationship that everyone agreed to.
Here's what the majority of my group came up with (we defined "lead to" as one thing coming before the other [ex. perception can come before language], and "affect" as one thing making someone reconsider what they thought of or viewed before [ex. what someone tells you could make you perceive it differently]).
1) the relationship between language, thought, and perception can be best described by drawing them in a triangle/circle.
2) thought can lead to language and perception
3) perception can lead to language and thought
4) language can lead to thought, but not perception
5) all have an impact on/affect the others
When we joined with the other group, some people didn't agree with what we had come up with. Other ideas were that the relationship is better represented by a line (language had to turn into thought to become perception and vice versa), and that language could directly lead to perception.
Any different ideas of how the relationship between these three should be defined/explained? Or does anyone agree with the ideas we already came up with?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Definitions of Language, Thought, and Perception may be useful in arguing points for this post.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/language
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/thought
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/perception
Of the definitions, here are what I thought were the most encompassing:
Language- any system of formalized symbols, signs, sounds, gestures, or the like used or conceived as a means of communicating thought, emotion, etc.
Thought- a single act or product of mental activity
Perception- the act or faculty of apprehending by means of the senses or of the mind
That definition of perception is an interesting one. In discussion, we focused on perception via the five senses, but this definition suggests that the mind itself may be another form of perception. Theoretical telepathy aside, I don't see how this is possible. Raw information can't just enter our minds; it has to be converted into something we can understand, by our senses. Our eyes convert electromagnetic radiation into colors of light, our ears convert air disturbances into sound, etc. In short, we have to perceive before we can think.
Ben- the added definitions of the terms are very helpful. I have a question, though. Why must perception, in its definition, state act of apprehending? Must one understand what one sees/views through senses or mind in order for it to be 'perception'?
For example: a student who does not speak/read Greek leafs through a Greek text. Can't the student *perceive* that it is in a foreign language, while not *apprehending* its language?
Post a Comment