THE COMMON LANGUAGE

Language is a method of communication, and an expression to convey others. Is a process of invitation that attracts others towards one’s feeling, is natural gift from nature to express emotion, desire, anger, sorrow, appeal, caution, mood and etc; feelings is an environment that leads brain to react and send chemical signals to body to act that indicates others. There is no species without feelings and when they live in groups they have feelings of others also.

What is most important is that even today we use our body language to express ourselves and feelings in spite of massive development in language systems and day to day/ time to time conversations. Only language that does not need grammar, spelling, adjective, singular/plural etc; and yet everybody can understand and response to this. Except a few body language actions of expressions, all are similar in human behavior. These few changes are due to variations in society behaviors. Most noticeable parts of bodies are used while expressing like eyes, face, hands, forehead, shoulder, lips, fingers, nose etc; and among these body parts most common are face, fingers and hands.

In forgive me!!! Both hand and face act, during affection entire body acts, in anger face and hand, even saying my foot face acts.

[size=150]Italians use more commonly hands, French uses more commonly lips and shoulders, English use more commonly face, Asians use more commonly head movement for yes or no. [/size]

I believe you are right when you say we naturally communicate with others. And in that sense I believe every part of nature communicates to some degree however simple it may be. The mere fact that it exists is the most simplest of communications. The real gift however is our ability to recognize this communication. It is more amazing to me that, like you said, that we all have feelings. Although everything may communicate I do not believe all thing have feelings. I do not believe a couch or a chair, a tv or a window has feelings. Therefore I believe we have a larger responsibility to communicate because beyond merely existing we also feel. With our feelings we can then express everything we can see, hear, feel, taste, and smell. Furthermore, gathering those senses over time we can express what those senses have taught us. We have a culminated sense of “truth.” You say that language is incomplete and in most cases I would agree with you. But I don’t think that it always is incomplete. I believe the best form of communcation will use any method available. What is most important about its effectiveness is its ability to express the truth.

Art, I believe, is the most complete form of communication. When a person, being as sensitive as possible, gathers all the information that he or she can, creates an idea out of the culmination of that information that has been sensed, tests his or her idea in instances repeatedly, and finally learns to express the information gathered as exactly as he or she can. Communication often is more instantaneous like in the examples you have given. But that communication to me only represents small truths of the moment. True communication takes a lot of time and effort. It takes a lot of feeling and understanding, practice and purging of imperfection. True communication speaks directly to the soul which is the part of us that feels and understands truth.

We do communicate a lot with body language which is why it is so hard to lie to someone’s face. We can’t seem to do it without touching our noses or otherwise betraying ourselves.

I believe you are dead on the money when it comes to art. You use the word “understanding”, implying both reason and passion. Some people disagree with me, but there is a lot of philosophy in a good novel.

I mean “anything” is in life form. :unamused:

Click the link below and view some photo examples of body expressions:
:unamused: sadashivan.com/freephotos4ur … /id33.html :unamused:

(see below, had some technical difficulties)

here’s the thing:

primary language: interpretations by one being of another being’s behaivior. the being being observed is not intentionally communicating (notice this language is not at all suitable for discussing philosophy)

secondary language: emotion. the act of emoting is the simplest form of mutual communication (still not there).

tertiary language: the presentation of labels for ideas, concrete subjects, and actions in an effort to communicate through rudimentary dialogue (not quite there yet).

quaternary language: the presentation of labels for ideas, concrete subjects, and actions combined with grammar and syntax in an effort to communicate clearly through conversation (nope).

the reason ALL of these but the first (the reason for the first is quite obvious) fall short of being able to be used in philosophical discussion is that they are ALL based on more than one being’s observations and thoughts, the latter of which exist only in language form (a personalized language).

then throw in the mixing-and-matching of labels, and you’ve got a communications system which only appears to be flawless in it’s conveyence of thoughts.