In his class introduction today, my physics teacher made the arguement that science is really the only subject that aims to teach its pupils "the truth". He made the case that all other subjects are not based on learning the real, hard facts of life (math is only applied knowledge, history is written by the victors of wars, etc.). His explanation for English was that it only taught the rules of language.
The rules of language? Just grammar?
While I don't completely disagree with Mr. PhysicsTeacher, I'd have to say he's missing the big picture of the study of language. We're a class that is on a mission to understand the semantics of language - the meanings, implications, and effectiveness of words. But semantics is only one branch of English. There's grammar, of course, and literature, poetry, speech, lingustics, and more. So why does this vast intellectual realm exist if it doesn't strive for .... the truth?
Or does it seek "the truth", just not in the physical realm? What is the importance of English? Why bother learning the semantics of language?
Your thoughts?
(emily donahue)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think that Mr. PhysicsTeacher is forgetting that language is the way he communicates everything -- the science of physics that he will teach you, the opinion that he adamantly shares concerning science, the means by which we strive for "the truth". Everything. How else will we communicate if not for language? We can't use telepathy. Even then, our transferring thoughts would be in some language, because over the evolution of human beings and through the passage of time, people have figured out that language is the best way of communicating. In the very beginnings I'm imagining it was very hard to signify what one wanted, I've learned from sixth grade that primal, animal-like grunting and pointing was used before communication developed into more. We apply language in many, many different ways, such as through forms of technology, and there are many, many different languages in the world. This abundance of language exemplifies how significant and useful language is.
ReplyDeleteLanguage is definitely important, for all the reasons Tori mentions and more. However, I understand what your physics teacher was saying about no one teaching the truth. Granted, he should include physics in there because of all the math in it. Anyway, truth is a tricky thing becasue its all about perception. For example, if two people get in a fight and a mediator asks them to explain they will give two different stories, and both will see there side as the truth. There is only one "truth" but finding that truth is often difficult. Certainly English attempts to find this truth and explain it, but how does it succeed?
ReplyDeleteLiterature especially seeks to find the truth. We have all read countless novels that attempt to explain human nature, often with one contradicting the other. They attempt to find the truth, but do they? Human nature is certainly too complex for there to be a truth to teach. All an author can do is write people as he sees them through his perspective. Some people will see things his way and others won't. This doesn't make one wrong and one right, just different. So, which one of their perspectives is the truth? With such a complicated subject, can you even have one truth?
When it comes to grammar and semantics, I don't really understand what your teacher meant about that not being the truth. I suppose one could argue these principles as false or unable to be proven, but it's not a strong argument.
~Becca LaRosa
Frankly, I think that, due to Mr. PhysicsTeacher's affinity for Physics and apathy for English, his views are a bit biased of any other subject except the one he's teaching. There's nothing wrong with that, but he must understand that just because he prefers science to english, it doesn't mean everyone else necessarily agrees with him.
ReplyDeletePeople's goals and interests in life are different. If everyone were to agree that Physics was more interesting than any other subject, then life would be too mundane. Difference is key for a more diverse society.
Mr. PhysicsTeacher was expressing his opinion, not stating a fact.
-Chloe Martianou
I think this issue revolves around the question, "What is truth?" I would think that Mr. PhysicsTeacher would define "the truth" as that which can be proven with physical evidence. The Pope, however, almost certainly believes that God truly exists, though scientific evidence to support to this claim is little to none. To use some of Hayakawa's terminology, I would ask, "Does truth pertain to things of strictly extensional meaning, or does it extend to include things of extension AND intenstional meaning?" If only the extensional, then our anonymous physics teacher could make a reasonable argument. Semantics, however, enable us to consider things beyond the concrete. If one includes the metaphysical with the physical when defining truth, then language is a crucial field to study when philosophizing about "the truth". In fact, it may be the best.
ReplyDeleteColin Groundwater
Without language, there would be no truth. There wouldn't be any physics either. The principles of physics had to be discovered over time, and the various scientists had to communicate with each other, which they did through language.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with Mr. PhysicsTeacher that English, or any other language, is not "the truth" in the common sense of the word. It cannot be proven, and, except for grammar, it is usually not written down in textbooks.
I just looked up "truth" in the dictionary, and one of the definitions was "an obvious or accepted fact". The word here that I liked was "accepted". Sure, the rules of grammar and semantics can't be proven like the laws of physics can, but they are accepted by the general population, and that is what makes them "true".
-Audrey Kindsfather