Seven Words You Can't Say on TV: Is Swearing the Oldest Form of Language?

October 31, 2008

Seven Words You Can't Say on TV: Is Swearing the Oldest Form of Language?

"I told him to be fruitful and multiply, but not in those words."

Woody Allen

Is the gap between objective and inner reality the reason we have difficulty understanding large numbers, the way statistics works, scientific theories like quantum physics or how to navigate the complexities of modern society, which is so different from a small tribe of hunter-gatherers?

Harvard cognitive scientist and experimental psychologist, Steven Pinker's new book, The Stuff of Thought examines what it is we have been able to find out about the mysterious, intuitive ways in which the human mind works using the most unique characteristic of our species, language, as the main source of information.

Deeply ingrained in all the world's languages are conceptions about sex, intimacy, power,fairness--as well as ideas of divinity, degradation, and danger. This intuitive model of reality is a product of natural selection: the way it parses the world around us, the way it uses shortcuts and assumptions would have served our hunter-gatherer ancestors well, but it is less than perfect for dealing with some of the problems we face in the 21st Century.

One of the most compelling chapters is entitled "The Seven Words You Can't Say on Television," which examines the psychology of taboo, why it would involve concepts centered around sex, bodily secretions, and gods and their trappings and what the "blaspheming brain" is really doing. Pinker suggests that swearing might be our oldest form of language, given that the basal ganglia, a brain structure that is evolutionarily older than the cerebral cortex, seems to be involved, and that many aphasic patients, who cannot make or understand sentences, retain the ability to swear.

"The Games People Play" addresses indirect speech and implied meanings, and what they tell us about our conceptions of social relationships. As one reviewer observed: "If you ever need a game theory matrix to decide whether to attempt bribing a police officer who seems intent on giving you a speeding ticket, or to choose which sexual come-on to employ with a date, don't miss this chapter."

Despite overwhelming evidence that the human mind is an imperfect product of natural selection in an ancestral environment, Pinker is optimistic about human nature and our ability to transcend the limitations of our intuitive models of reality.

In the last chapter, "Escaping the Cave" (referring to Plato's allegory of prisoners in the cave), he points out not only the dangers that our intuitive thinking can pose, but how remarkable human achievements are in light of them.

"Though language exposes the walls of our cave," he says, "it also shows us how we venture out of it, at least partway. People do, after all, catch glimpses of the sunlit world of reality. Even with our infirmities, we have managed to achieve the freedom of a liberal democracy, the wealth of a technological economy, and the truths of modern science."

Steve Pinker "The Stuff of Thought" Video.

Posted by Casey Kazan.

Posted at 12:18 AM in Language | Permalink

Email this post

Show your support.

Recommend this article!

| |

Comments

INTERESTING : and so what ??
Shall anybody on this planet speak with scientific language ??

Why not to learn and properly use billions of so called scientific Acronyms invented who knows by whom ????

Words that are forbidden in the TV ??? Atavic brain ??
Are they sure about a relation between these two ...if any at all ??

If I would ask the presenter of a scientific TV program 'what do you think about electron-neutrinos' : what mass thay have or have they any mass at all ??
What kind of an answer can I expect ??
Electron -neutrinos or Whimps ??? I DO not think this would be the answer.

May be it is better to ask those who escaped the caves or somebody else that says "Though language exposes the walls of our cave ".

Posted by: claudio | November 01, 2008 at 01:57 PM

Swearing is a cultural constant. Thre was a book called " Maledicta ", a big glossary of swear words, written in the 70's. Swearing may help the thinking process in some ways. Escaping rude & / obscene language is like escaping sunlight in the Mojave !!!!

Posted by: EvilCosmicMonkey From Knoxville | November 04, 2008 at 10:04 AM

-what mass thay have or have they any mass at all ??

-what mass thay have or have they any...

-thay have or have they...

-thay...

I stopped reading after this line.

Posted by: anonymoose | November 21, 2008 at 12:33 PM

PROFanity (not so much for artistic sake) is what people use to PROFoundly express or exaggerate a point.
If a [venture/adventure/misadventure] is not life-threatening, a person may say, "Oops!" If, on the other hand, a situation is extreme this negative verbage will almost always show its face. Try watching the movie 'PLATOON' DUMMIED DOWN FOR TV; incoming mortar fire, RPGs, small-arms fire...and Charlie Sheen yelling, "Darn it!!" Now, imagine the REAL THING; heavy artillery fire near an American post in Viet Nam, two soldiers running towards their unit. One of them yells, "M...........!!" Someone yells back, "You Americans?!" The response; "Hell, yeah!" With that one twelve-letter utterance those two soldiers were easily recognized and it was probably enough to save them from being shot by their own unit.
For the sake of argument, PROFanity does hold a niche in our society BUT ONLY WHEN USED IN EXTREME SITUATIONS!

Posted by: Marty Ferguson | March 17, 2009 at 08:20 AM