• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Language, the most lovely evidence of God.

I am talking about " Spoken verbal language", not sign language. Sign language is a language, and I hold no intrest in arguementation about that, I am not against it or anything, its just not part of my theisis here now. I am not going into sign language, and willnot debate it.

Peace.

The title of the thread is "Language, the most lovely evidence of God."

By definition sign language is part of the discussion.
 

mickiel

Well-Known Member
From the inside jacket of "Signs Of Resistance"

During the early nineteenth century, American schools for deaf education regarded sign language as the "natural language" of deaf people, using it as the principal mode of instruction and communication. These schools inadvertently became the seedbeds of an emerging Deaf community and culture. But by mid century, an oralist movement developed that sought to suppress sign language, removing Deaf teachers and requiring deaf people to learn speech and lip reading. Historians have all assumed that in the early decades of the twentieth century oralism triumphed overwhelmingly.

Susan Burch shows us that everyone has it wrong: Deaf students, teachers, and staff consistently and creatively subverted oralist policies & goals within the schools. Ultimately, the efforts to assimilate Deaf people resulted in fortifying their ties to a separate Deaf cultural community. In "Signs Of Resistance" Susan Burch persuasively reinterprets early twentieth century Deaf history. Using community sources such as Deaf newspapers, memoirs, films, and Sign Language interviews, Burch shows how the Deaf community mobilized to defend sign language, increased its political activism, & claried its cultural values. In the process, a collective Deaf consciousness, identity, & political organization were formed.

Burch, Susan.Signs Of Resistance: American Deaf Cultural History, 1900 To 1942. New York University Press. New York, London. 2002.

The author is an Associate Proffesor of History at Gallaudet University.


Thisw is what I base my position upon.


I have no gripes with your opinion, peace to you.
 

Skepsis2

Member
Well just exactly what points are you trying to make?

Peace.
Just one point. If humans(other life forms also included) and their life support systems were designed by an all knowing supernatural being then there should be no design flaws. Right?
 

nrg

Active Member
Animals are nowhere near this complexity, because they have nowhere near the consciousness that humans hold.
This is the one thing that you've proven with your deductive reasoning; that humans have a firmer grasp on how to communicate accurately than other animals. But that's it.
 

mickiel

Well-Known Member
This is the one thing that you've proven with your deductive reasoning; that humans have a firmer grasp on how to communicate accurately than other animals. But that's it.


Thats it in your head, but it goes much farther in mine.

Peace.
 

Skepsis2

Member
mickiel -
Can you give a reasonable explanation as to why you think that language is evidence of god other than your own unsupported opinion?
 

mickiel

Well-Known Member
What? Is that because you do not consider yourself a member of the Animal Kingdom, Class – Mammal, Order - Primate, Subspecies – H. sapiens sapiens.


I am not an animal, I am not continous with the idiot hiearchy of speechless apes.

Peace.
 
I am a human, humans are not animals. We are not primates , and I refuse to bow to the idiot pathology of useless dogma that lays my heritage to waste.
refusing to believe something never invalidated it. and the fact that you said "refuse to" rather than "choose not to, based on facts," you are sorta invalidating yourself. perhaps the only reason you haven't recognized the truth in human's inclusion in the animal kingdom is because you refuse to do so. it's probably based on pride, but there's nothing shameful about being an animal.

So you're a vegetable then?

perhaps a mineral?
 

mickiel

Well-Known Member
refusing to believe something never invalidated it. and the fact that you said "refuse to" rather than "choose not to, based on facts," you are sorta invalidating yourself. perhaps the only reason you haven't recognized the truth in human's inclusion in the animal kingdom is because you refuse to do so. it's probably based on pride, but there's nothing shameful about being an animal.



?


Man if you want to live your life believing your an animal, well thats you and yours. I am not a part of your world. And don't want to be.

Peace.
 

Skepsis2

Member
Man if you want to live your life believing your an animal, well thats you and yours. I am not a part of your world. And don't want to be.

Peace.
Now that's a statement I won't argue with.
You haven't answered my question.
Can you give a reasonable explanation as to why you think that language is evidence of god other than your own unsupported opinion?
 
Last edited:
Top