Self-Awareness Question: What You Do

[ysabetwordsmith]

Folks have mentioned an interest in questions and conversations that make them think. So I've decided to offer more of those. This is the current list on self-awareness.

71. What can you do really, really well?

Pretty much anything that involves words made of language.

Comments

[kengr]

Well, computer languages have things that function a bit like words but they lack a lot of being "real" languages.

As for you last bit, I still recall when I figured out that I *didn't* think in English. I had an obvious (to me) concept and then discovered that rendering this concept into English would take a ridiculous amount of verbiage.

So the "mutually suitable" bit has major fails sometimes.

I think I do some of my thinking with abstract "symbols". And that part of my brain works a lot more like a higher grade version of a perceptron than "normal" brains do.

So symbol X is a point in a multidimensional space define by a bunch of is/is not decision (definitions).

That *is* the way our brains identify letters, shape and objects. And I do have a strong visual orientation, though I have a stronger "physical" orientation when learning many things.

Basically *telling* me how to run a machine isn't likely to stick, even if you re demonstrating as you go. But telling me what to do *as I'm doing it* works well.

I can use written explanations well, but they have to be well written so I can follow along. But as I discovered dealing with one shrink, I can't learn social stuff that way. I'd need to have someone talking me thru it as I did it or else have some other sort of help that adjusted to what was happening. :-(

[(Anonymous)]

>>As for you last bit, I still recall when I figured out that I *didn't* think in English. I had an obvious (to me) concept and then discovered that rendering this concept into English would take a ridiculous amount of verbiage.<<

I have run into situations where tactile communication or posture/movement are quicker/more efficient ways to ask a question (or make a point) than speaking.

Related: sometimes an idea has so much attendant context that it is very difficult trying to explain it to someone without the context. (This can happen with cross-cultural communication, or between different subcultures, or between differently priviliged groups.)

>>So the "mutually suitable" bit has major fails sometimes.<<

I would say that mutually suitable is a combination of:

1) Being able to produce and recieve the info. (If you are using speech, the other person must be able to hear, if they reply in Sign you must be able to see - or feel if using tactile Sign.)

2) Being able to comprehend the info. (If you cannot understand ASL/computer code/signal flags they do you no good, even if you can perceive them.)

3) Affinity/learning style. (Your preference for hands on learning over written.)

Basically, "mutually suitable" to me means I have to figure out what everyone can perceive and understand, _then_ choose the option with the highest efficiency-mutual-intelligibility.

>>I think I do some of my thinking with abstract "symbols".<<

I've had entire conversations in pictograms. Sometimes adding hand signals, writing, and mishmash words from multiple languages. As long as the idea gets across, it's fine.

If you are interested this is an interesting pictograms language:
https://omniglot.com/writing/blissymbolics.htm

Also movement writing:
https://www.movementwriting.org/

------

Also, now that I think about it some animals will use symbolic meanings to convey concepts without developing a language. (I know a cat who figured out a symbol for the concept "[Want] clean litter human!")