cladking Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> So why didn't they have broad swathes of modern
> words Like "infer" or "deduce"? Why were there
> no words that implied complex things were being
> broken down into parts for study or observation?
> Simply stated this isn't how they thought.
> Natural logic doesn't break things down like this
> and look at pieces of a puzzle. Animals look at
> the entire picture and try to make sense of it but
> when we try this it is overwhelming. There is too
> much data and we can only see reality through our
> beliefs anyway. We must break down everything
> and we have countless thousands of words to say
> how we view reality. We see bits, they tried to
> see the entire picture.

> There are more than a single science and
> metaphysics. And the Great Pyramid is a monument
> to and time capsule for a great civilization that
> was built by a species built by natural logic and
> the chaotic wiring of the brain.

Wow! It is amazing how modern people think. All those missing words in Ancient Language all have a common denominator and all the words that do exist lack this denominator. Before I tell you what that common denominator is let's review the types of words that don't exist recorded anywhere at all in AL;

*All words that mean or imply "thought" or that the author is familiar with the concept of "thinking".
*All words that mean "belief" or show that the author has any "beliefs" of any sort.
*All taxonomic words other than combining forms. They had no words to categorize their knowledge on any subject at all. We use such words largely as mnemonics to remember what we know about things like "mammals".
*All reductionistic words are missing as well. These are words that imply an understanding or means to understand what happens around us.

Ancient Language breaks Zipf's Law and those linguists who study the Pyramid Texts didn't notice this either. Zipf's Law predicts that the incidence of the vocabulary of every language will lay out in a straight line on a logarithmic scale. Ancient Language breaks this law because 1 it has few words and 2 most words are nouns.

Most English words have no meaning in Ancient Language. Most words used by Egyptologists can't be expressed in Ancient Language but they never even noticed because this is how we think.

The common denominator of the missing words is that they are not only all symbolic (like all modern words) but far more importantly they are all abstractions. You can't palpate a "belief" like you can a "tumor". You can't shoot a "mammal" for dinner and be sure to have enough to feed a family. You can't pull an "experiment" out of your back pocket. And you certainly can't hand your wife a pleasant "thought". But every single word in Ancient Language could be produced or could exist by example. A "Giraffe" can "walk" by and they had the words to say so.

So here we have it; they could not form abstractions just like all animals. Animals and ancient man dealt only in the tangible and real and words, communication, was entirely representative rather than symbolic. It is not logical to believe they invented imaginary consciousnesses that governed their lives when their understanding of "consciousness" was so different and they had no words for abstractions or superstition. Our belief that "neter" meant "God" is a non-sequitur though we can't see it because we parsed a language that can't be parsed and we translated a language that can't be translated.




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 25-Jan-20 23:30 by cladking.