|
Is the language of science sufficient?
I feel like I need to write a 25 page essay just to explain my question, but I'm thinking no one would read it. So let me boil it down.
In recent times, when we describe our human condition, we typically default to the language of science.
"I'm depressed", "I have osteoporosis", "I am have a bipolar disorder"
But how is this any different from saying:
"A cloud has come over me", "Age has taken her toll on me", "My mood has its seasons"
What I am getting at is the emotional emptiness of modern language. Language once relegated to the laboratory has become the common speak of the blaring pharmaceutical commercial.
When I was younger I lived in Detroit. I spent a lot of time around black folks. The dialect lower class black folks speak to each other is frequently derided by the educated. It is not the language of science. It is not the language of Plato. But is is really inferior? Is it useful to quickly transfer precise data? Frequently, No. But is is inferior in its ability to impart emotionally intelligent meaning? I don't think so.
Wittgenstein and a cup of coffee anyone?
|