what language are you speaking

words, words, words. our language is what has defined our entire state of being. when did we get here? how did we allow this to happen? a number of examples come to mind of how language has limited our experience of the world and ourselves. more importantly ourselves. how could anyone possibly find the articulation to encompass the indescribable? these letters, these symbols, are too small to be used in understanding the meaning of "is".

i came across a video of a young guy talking about embodiment and representation. first of all, it made me long for people that i used to have really mind-numbing conversations with. mind-numbing in the sense that i always found myself getting caught up in the unimaginable, like trying to comprehend the size of the universe. secondly, i found it very comforting to hear that some stranger, somewhere in this world, has had similar questions.

with an impending transition, i've been experiencing a number of emotions. but, when i try to share them with people i cannot quite explain what is going on inside. it gets frustrating because they can't exactly know the balance between excitement and fear, the ratio between joy and anxiety. sometimes i wish i could just touch someone so that they could hear my inner thoughts, and know that silent monologue. but, instead i've had to try to verbalise these things, and without consciously doing it i categorise and label.

in the video, the guy says: all of our thought activity is a function of the way our brains are structured rather than the way the objective world is structured... language is part of our experience, but language is essentially a biological activity. it isn't an objective representation of the world. we can't logically picture reality with human language. like vichenstein said, 'the meaning of a word is the way that it's used in a particular social context. it has no independent meaning in and of itself but within that context'.

this makes me wonder about how we must, every day, somewhat revert to those social transgressions, if i may. that we knowingly restrict ourselves by continuing to encase our experience with the meanings that have been taught to us. i even think it applies to both ends of the spectrum in terms of personal experience. my sister is going through a terrible personal struggle. with the suicidal death of one of her friends she has spun into questioning her own mortality, her ideas about existence, and her understanding of herself as a part of the universe. i know it scares her, but rather than allowing herself to be inside of those feelings she falls back on social constructs of acceptable thoughts and behaviours. apparently she cannot be sad because she has everything that should make her happy. she doesn't think that she's allowed to feel negative because there is someone else who must live with much less than she has. to be fair, sometimes it is good to be reminded that living in canada is a blessing in many ways, and that most of us do have a warm home, an education or opportunities for self-fulfillment, and people that we know and care about. we can easily find ourselves taking those things for granted. but, i don't think it is right that she doesn't give herself the permission to experience the world uniquely.

on the other hand, i also wonder about the l-word. love. so many definitions. but, do we limit our experience of love by using words? in my experience, when you meet someone and grow to love them, you understand that love before your mind thinks it. but, within our society and these constantly changing cultural norms (or abnorms), the labeling of these feelings tends to precede the innate understanding. and sometimes, we claim a love that we never feel at all. why? what do we achieve? do we "fit in"? i would much rather go my entire life in the company of a man who never told me he loved me, but showed me, than hear "i love you" and never truly believe it.