by Diesel Heart

As you may have realized from the last article, this small series of food for thought highlights my opinion on facilitating less restriction on communication. The last one brought awareness to the understanding that I do not believe words should be taken offensively when not used harmfully. That's only a small part of it, though. Have you ever felt dimwitted because you didn't know the right word to use? Have you ever hesitated speaking out of fear of ridicule based on the chance that you'll come off as less intelligent? I know I have and at some point in my life, I began to think about that until I came to an opinion. Before I disclose the opinion, I want to bring up some preliminary aspects of what made it.
 

For example, I briefly touched upon the words segregation and labels. Both of these have a broad perspective of context, don't they?

When you look at the English language, you can deduce quite a lot and some of it is subject that's often used in humor. Just think about how many words we have that basically mean the same thing or sound the same with different meanings. It's one of the facets that make it one of the hardest languages to learn and truth be told, many of us don't know the convoluted rules of grammar perfectly. Language evolves and while our brains are pattern-making machines, I honestly cannot say that any of us fully enjoy restriction when it comes to expressing ourselves. Why would we put them in expressing ourselves through speech and communication?

Over the centuries of speech, we've had cultures spawn different languages and all of them use sounds and patterns. The further spread out mankind goes, the more diverse language became. There are plenty of words, however, that have stayed consistent and one of them is 'God.' Not every language says this word the same, though. In Latin, it is called Deus. In Japanese, it is called Kami. There are even some cultures that have different ways to express the idea of a god, such as Deva from the Sanskrit language. That alone teaches us through observation that the word is diverse in and of itself.

Another thing we can observe through the fact we've evolved language is that our words have multiplied significantly as well as our understanding. If I asked you what magic was, you'd likely provide me an answer similar to 'a phenomenon unexplained by science.' That's my paraphrased definition at least. Now, for those of you that never went looking, we've come to understand in modern times that what used to be thought of as magic is now being applied in technology. Just imagine for a moment if you went back in time to days of the Ice Age and you stumbled upon a clan of cavemen. If you pulled a lighter and created fire at the flick of a thumb, do you believe that they'd understand what happened?

They could call you a magician. They may even call you - wait for it - a god. To them, you are someone that has an unnatural ability and manipulates the energy of life at their fingertips. They don't have the knowledge or the speech articulation to cohesively describe things the way we do. They're limited in what words they could use. To all of them, whatever label they give to what just happened will be universally understood after it spreads. It will remain that way until context or something else comes along to change the word. Magic and science can easily be seen as interchangeable in that respect in my opinion.

Now, you may be asking yourself what this has to do with lessening restriction in communication. You may believe that the information above is nothing more than my rudimentary perspective on history. I just hope you understand that I'm not trying to convince you that I'm right or wrong; this is nothing more than an offered thought to ponder.

Have you ever felt like someone is being pretentious when they correct a use of word? For example, I recall a conversation I had in the past where I said a word with numerous synonyms that could be applied to the sentence. Everyone understood what I meant but there was one in the group that felt it necessary to point out that I should've used one of those synonyms instead. Keep in mind, this was a casual conversation. I honestly felt like he was trying to challenge me or validate himself for whatever reason. Perhaps it was nothing more than my pride but the others shared my opinion. Can you recall an instance in your life where you were being corrected on vocabulary based on technical difference?

For example, let's pick a random word for this article. 'Rudimentary' will be our example here. It has two definitions: involved or limited to basic principles; of or relating to an immature, undeveloped or basic form. The definition provide you with different words that mean the same exact thing in the most 'rudimentary' ways. Take the sentence I used it in. 'You may believe that the information above is nothing more than my rudimentary perspective on history.' I could easily say 'You may believe that the information above is nothing more than my uneducated perspective on history' and draw the same conclusion. I don't feel there is any higher tier of enlightenment or understanding between those words.

Essentially, the meaning of this article is addressing how we allow words to instigate conflict, often over the most 'rudimentary' reasons. I'd like to continue challenging you to think about this subject. It's something I've become quite passionate about and if you're looking for some motivation on why, understand this: when I humbled myself with this controversial reflections, I've been able to shrug off verbal attacks and understand how to mediate a conflict between two other people. It's helped me see the world, to see how we interact, in a different perspective and that, in my opinion, benefits everyone. It advocates peaceful communication and reduces the issues we may have with society today.

Sincerely,

Diesel Heart