Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Babble


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Babble Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Babble - 9/17/2006 11:08:50 AM   
Chaingang


Posts: 1727
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: offline
The Tower of Babel myth has antecedents, one of which is from Sumerian mythology: the Nam-shub of Enki.

The two things you must know first:
1. a Nam-shub is a kind of magical spell.
2. The "Me" mentioned in Sumerian myths are universal decrees of divine authority - invocations that spread arts, crafts, and civilization.

-----

The Nam-shub of Enki

Once upon a time, there was no snake, there was no scorpion,
There was no hyena, there was no lion,
There was no wild dog, no wolf,
There was no fear, no terror,
Man had no rival.
In those days, the land Shubur-Hamazi,

Harmony-tongued Sumer, the great land of the Me of princeship,
Uri, the land having all that is appropriate,
The land Martu, resting in security,
The whole universe, the people well cared for,
To Enlil in one tongue gave speech.

Then the lord defiant, the prince defiant, the king defiant,
Enki, the lord of abundance, whose commands are trustworthy,
The lord of wisdom, who scans the land,
The leader of the gods,
The lord of Eridu, endowed with wisdom,
Changed the speech in their mouths, put contention into it,
Into the speech of man that had been one.

-----

The myth is about linguistic disintegration.

Why did Enki confuse man's single tongue? Humanity was in harmony with its many gods; the gods in turn were also pleased with humanity ("Harmony-tongued Sumer, the great land of the Me of princeship"). Then something went wrong and the myth tell us that a "trustworthy" god did something to confound the single language used by men. Is the myth about a magical spell (a Nam-shub) or is the myth itself a magical spell whose subject just happens to be the purpose of the spell - the reading of which is meant to cause something to happen?

That language, or the utterance of certain sounds, is dangerous is an idea that resonates from the ancient past to the present day. The walls of the city of Jericho were felled using sound. Many magickal traditions claim the naming of certain powers gives one temporary control over those same forces. Utterance is equated with power. Authors as recent as Frank Herbert have developed the idea that the uttering of a person's name can be a great weapon - a word that kills. The U.S. has recently developed a nonlethal weapon sound weapon called a "Long Range Acoustic Device," or LRAD for short.

Speculation on the subject of what exactly happened and why abounds. Some people believe that something akin to a computer virus (this would be the Burroughsian "Language is a Virus" theory) was present in man's speech and that by confusing language Enki was able to stop the progress of the virus. Some people further believe that the purpose of this ancient myth is two-fold: while the story itself relates the idea of linguistic disintegration, the story is itself a kind of incantation which causes linguistic disintegration. To hear the tale is to fall victim to it's viral influence - to have one's speech confounded if one is under the influence of a word virus.

One issue remains outstanding: what was the possible nature of the original "word-virus"?

Julian Jaynes, in "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind", argues that early man was not conscious in the modern sense - he lacked self-awareness and could not think of himself as an independent, self-willed, singular "I." Why? Because the two halves of the brain were not connected then as they appear to be now. Instead, the right brain formulated ideas and plans, which were perceived by the left brain as literal voices emanating from outside the self. In effect, early man hallucinated constantly, living his life obeying voices the origins of which remained mysterious to him - voices that actually emanated from a different part of his own brain. This is where the gods came from - each person's god accompanied him constantly through life, always telling him what to do.

Where did the gods go? What happened to connect the two halves of the brain into a single unit? The complex conditions of the world forced human beings to integrate the left and right brains and become self-aware, self-willed beings in order to cope with their circumstances and survive. The human brain adapted to it's environment that the human species might survive - nothing more than the theory of evolution at work.

Crisis - Adaptation - Survival.

The original "word-virus" was the idea of God in the bicameral brain. The joining of the two halves of the brain into a more coherent unit with the concomitant emergence of consciousness (such that people became aware of themselves for the first time) was the death of the idea of God. People became aware that the other halves of themselves were indeed not only not the voice of god but merely another aspect of themselves.

The Nam-shub of Enki may be a description of this evolutionary process in the form of a myth.

Enki, whose command lines are trustworthy, wrote himself out of the story.

The whole universe, the people alone.

_____________________________

"Everything flows, nothing stands still." (Πάντα ῥεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν μένει) - Heraclitus
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Babble - 9/17/2006 1:20:42 PM   
Rule


Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline
Thank you very much for the very important ancient text, Chaingang. I did not know about it before, or I forgot about it. Now I have seen clearly where I struggled with  the obscure before (though my earlier conclusion likely was the same, but not as unequivocal).
 
I am so happy that I will almost not say anything about your accompanying comments.
 
Except for this: do you truly believe that because some guy does a vocal count down that the rocket causally lifts up into the heavens?

(in reply to Chaingang)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Babble - 9/17/2006 9:11:38 PM   
Chaingang


Posts: 1727
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: offline
Talk, its only talk
Arguments, agreements, advice, answers,
Articulate announcements
Its only talk

Talk, its only talk
Babble, burble, banter, bicker bicker bicker
Brouhaha, boulderdash, ballyhoo
Its only talk
Back talk

Talk talk talk, its only talk
Comments, cliches, commentary, controversy
Chatter, chit-chat, chit-chat, chit-chat,
Conversation, contradiction, criticism
Its only talk
Cheap talk

Talk, talk, its only talk
Debates, discussions
These are words with a d this time
Dialogue, dualogue, diatribe,
Dissention, declamation
Double talk, double talk

Talk, talk, its all talk
Too much talk
Small talk
Talk that trash
Expressions, editorials, expugnations, exclamations, enfadulations
Its all talk
Elephant talk, elephant talk, elephant talk

_____________________________

"Everything flows, nothing stands still." (Πάντα ῥεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν μένει) - Heraclitus

(in reply to Rule)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Babble - 9/17/2006 10:52:53 PM   
NastyDaddy


Posts: 957
Joined: 9/8/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chaingang

... the right brain formulated ideas and plans, which were perceived by the left brain as literal voices emanating from outside the self. In effect, early man hallucinated constantly, living his life obeying voices the origins of which remained mysterious to him - voices that actually emanated from a different part of his own brain. This is where the gods came from - each person's god accompanied him constantly through life, always telling him what to do.


Would that not mean all mankind was right-handed and therefore there were -no- left-handed -or- ambidextrous humans... while only the primates beating their chests produced any lefty south paws?

There seems to be a crack in your right-handed armor. By the way, who were the primates listening to during their ideas and plans of peeling the banana before eating it?

_____________________________

"You may be right, I may be crazy... but I may just be the lunatic you're looking for!"

(in reply to Chaingang)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Babble - 9/18/2006 1:54:23 AM   
Chaingang


Posts: 1727
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: offline
Julian Jaynes is dead and you'd have to ask him. And anyway, it's just a theory to address certain cultural issues of the ancient world. I am pretty sure it doesn't travel well across species that are also end products of evolution in their own right. Sure, we may have a common prior ancestor in our evolutionary past but it doesn't mean that we arrived at the same points in the exact same ways as is clearly evidenced by the fact that we are no longer the same species as other primates.

Complain to "mother nature" about her shot gun approach to life. We don't need no other stinking primates 'round here!

or...

Ask a monkey.

_____________________________

"Everything flows, nothing stands still." (Πάντα ῥεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν μένει) - Heraclitus

(in reply to NastyDaddy)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Babble - 9/18/2006 2:17:32 AM   
meatcleaver


Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline
Hmm Many primates are self aware or at least I am led to believe in what I have read so one would expect humans to have been self aware quite early on.

One of the problems with early languages is apparently how small they are and so leave large gaps in early human ability to communicate complex ideas. One of the theories regarding early humans is that they used imagery to internalise their experience of the world which later gave way to more sophisticated language. Even today we use drawings and diagrams to help us understand concepts and ideas, language still being rather a crude form of communication and open to misunderstandings, especially when one adds in cultural differences into the equation.

(in reply to Chaingang)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Babble - 9/18/2006 3:08:19 AM   
LadyEllen


Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline
A fascinating text, which though with obvious differences, is akin to the Norse which describes a situation where mankind already existed but were shaped and given conciousness (in short) by the Gods. (And very different to the Bible).

I believe if one looks at how languages evolve, taking just the Germanic strain of Indo-European, it seems clear that the main cause of language differentiation is isolation from the majority original language. Thus at some stage, there was a coherent Indo-European people, which migrated from somewhere in southern Russia in two directions - one group south and east into Persia (Iran), Pakistan and India and the other group west and north into Europe. The similarities of ancient European and Indian religions also indicates a coherence at some point in the past. As the westward group divided further, it formed groups isolated from one another, leading to language groups (Germanic, Romance, Slav etc), and then further division of those smaller groups led to a north south division in the Germanic group (southern Germanic, comprising German, Dutch, Flemish, English, and northern comprising Danish, Icelandic, Norwegian, Swedish). That we know that at some point around 1500 years ago the southern speakers were still mutually intelligible and the northern also (in the form of Old Norse), along with research carried out by the Grimm brothers amongst others, supports this idea of isolation leading to variation and eventual separation from the original group language. I would therefore reject the mythological notion of some "virus" which made language diversity either happen or which required such diversity as a counter measure as having much currency, although as this is a myth the purpose of which is to explain diversity at a time and in a culture which benefitted from myth in a different way in which we see things, it retains great value in itself as long as one can maintain the mindset of the culture from which it arose; it is in the maintenance of that mindset that the myth will be properly understood.

The model I can support is one in which language arises from primitive conciousness as a literal means of expression (ie it does not deal with abstract concepts at its first stage), amongst a population which agrees on certain sounds meaning certain things. As the language becomes more complex in vocabulary, the basic sounds are combined to form new words to name new items, describe new activities and so on. The works by Guido von List (a late 19th century Austrian folklorist) tried to demonstrate such a process of gradual complexity within Indo European and thence into his native German (though working backwards), and though some examples he gives more difficult to follow, some do seem to give good evidence for this. Basic sounds like "f", "s" and "t" for instance are seen as root sounds deriving from great antiquity and expressing a basic concept (not a word or thing as yet). As the language develops, vowels (which also have a meaning in themselves at the basic level) are added to make the first words proper, and then as further development takes place, more sounds are added to distinguish one thing within a concept from another. For instance (using a hypothetical in English rather than List's work which I dont remember in detail!), the sound "f" could convey the concept of "food, eating and food bringer" as a single idea, the sound "a" (ar) could convey the concept of "animal, person, moving thing", the sound "th" could convey the idea of "run, walk, hunt", and so in combination, the word "fathar" (father) would mean "one who hunts and brings animals to eat".

Lastly, sounds do have definite effect on the psyche and it would seem also on the environment as magical incantation. As with my experience of the divine which I mentioned in another thread, I dont expect anyone to believe this, but I have worked with runic galdrar and I have found it to be true both in application to myself and in blind application to others. (My mother's back pain cleared up very quickly, and she had no idea I had done anything, and I also stopped an alcoholic from drinking using such magical methods, unbeknownst to the person concerned). That the runes themselves hark back to the work of List with his primitive sounds system, (this is where List got his idea from), indicates to me some evidence for such a system although this is difficult to establish now with so much time and so many language changes having taken place. However, that the runic incantations can exert such effects shows that they must be integral in some way to our being, and for this reason became the source of spoken language.
E

(in reply to meatcleaver)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Babble - 9/25/2006 6:22:33 AM   
Chaingang


Posts: 1727
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: offline
I couldn't read this article without thinking about its implications re: Julian Jaynes' ideas:

"Scientists discover 'shadow person'"
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/686

The temporoparietal junction is known to be involved in creating the concept of ‘self’, and the distinction between ‘self’ and ‘other’. According to the researchers, stimulation of this region interfered with the patient’s ability to integrate information about her own body, leading to her experience of a ‘shadow person’.

-----

Curiouser and curiouser...

_____________________________

"Everything flows, nothing stands still." (Πάντα ῥεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν μένει) - Heraclitus

(in reply to LadyEllen)
Profile   Post #: 8
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Babble Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.062