|
| 阅读上一个主题 :: 阅读下一个主题 |
| 作者 |
 语言和思维 |
 |
| 所跟贴 |
你上文中的很多结论,在学术上是需要很坚实的证据和推理的,有吗?你对此题目知之甚少 -- Anonymous - (2795 Byte) 2005-2-28 周一, 上午4:45 (449 reads) |
zhangmingzhao
[博客]
[个人文集]
游客
|
|
|
作者：Anonymous 在 罕见奇谈 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org
Let's start from the beginning. I critized the contemporary method for studying human thought. And I suggested a shift of focus from the language to the history of civilization as the premises for studying thought. Do you agree or not agree? If not, please tell me how to explain the evolution of irrational religious thoughts by examing the holy scriptures ONLY? How can this question be irrelevent? Would you explain more?
What I cited in my previous writing all came from scientific studies. The one pediatric pschologist was Piaget; His counterpart Vygotzsky's School. At least before written language was born, human culture had existed for enons, and you are not going to suppose they were creating all the distinct things by shear instincts. As to oral language, you can hardly believe that abstract ideas could possibly be conveyed through generations by amorphous sounds (the primitive voice must lack distinction at the beginning). The reasonable initial vehicles are physical objects. E.g. knots representing figures.
I hope you understand my points by now. Otherwise, our arguement cannot go on.
作者：Anonymous 在 罕见奇谈 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org |
|
|
| 返回顶端 |
|
 |
| |
|
|
您不能在本论坛发表新主题
您不能在本论坛回复主题
您不能在本论坛编辑自己的文章
您不能在本论坛删除自己的文章
您不能在本论坛发表投票
您不能在这个论坛添加附件
您不能在这个论坛下载文件
|
based on phpbb, All rights reserved.
|
