Language boundaries.
Inherited diversity.
You defend the the middle-down boundary.
even when teh same words are used, everyone has slightly different definitions of the same exact word.
take the word, “god,” it means something very different to many people,
or words like socialism, happiness, freedom, hate and love, these are just basic words that mean so many different things to many different people.
We all construct our own unique dictionary 
No.
Language is not just words. Otherwise you would forget it the moment you look aside the screen.
It’s the sounds, which can be written any way, really. I don’t want to mess with your brain, I just mean that you mispell the foreign words, for example.
So there’s “glue” in between. This serves as a picture only, I don’t prove its validity. By the “glue” I mean meaning.
Well, since the words are very easily confused even withing one language (‘one’ is simplification here) and ‘somehow’ people function still, they rest on something else. The meaning. That the meaning is not limited to words alone is as if understood, but taken more deeply would open up a new forum inside this Forum, I think. Let’s not go there.
To the end. We agree to the meaning, words take care of themselves basically themselves. What I mean by language in that regard and light, is meaning, as the basis, etc. When I speak of language boundaries, it’s meant what you have thought really. Like some of the ILP’s here.
Well, as you can see (or not), I use words knowing what I mean first. The secrets which I shouldn’t say is that you think best without words.
Wanted to mix some letters at the end to see if you understand them, even though they (words out of them) aren’t in any dictionary, but there’s no need, I think. By the way, dictionary is a thing. What you have (simplification) in use (arguable, philosophically, not personally although the latter shouldn’t offend you) is vocabulary.
I have an almost funny experiment with that on my mind, but laters.
Ah, the riddle: you shouldn’t search for the meaning either. You create it.
Well, to the stupid: what is he talking about? Nothing. Go, running.
I could on and on, due to the subject’s vastness, but I can limit my pleasures.
Love you.
By the way, you don’t seem to have gotten what the topic really reffers to. Not person to person to person. A moment before this one I opened one about thinking. When taken how you took it, the answer (mine, at the top) is too broad, vague and almost useless.
If you think for a while (or deep, or seriously, hell, I don’t know) about the way I think (playfully) and how people think (grooves) - vast generalizations! - you will know that the reason people don’t think the same way I do lies, generally, in language boundaries, as reasoned post above.
Some have more facts (in fact phenomena resemblances, but let’s leave it now) and don’t go crazy. I wonder how. They are crazy, or they’re some of mine kind.
When your head expands your thoughts should also, I should joke. BUT IT’S JUST A METAPHOR.
Na + Nu + RKITF = P
Where Na = numeric value of natural influences (genetics, mostly)
Nu = numeric value of nurture influences (%90 of everything else)
RKTTF = number of times Chuck Norris has Roundhouse Kicked you In The Face
and P is the final derrivitive for individual personality.
Why don’t all flowers look alike?
- The soil they grow in
- The genetic makeup
Why don’t people think alike?
- The soil they grow up in
- The genetic makeup
You vastly underestimate the power of Chuck Norris’s Roundhouse kicks.
Only if they involve unpredictable variation.
Oh, but they do…they’re like a binary system to the alterations of life, seperating those who have, and haven’t recieved chuck’s ‘blessings’