Alphabet: Expanding or Limiting Our Horizons?

Think about the English language.

Ultimately there are 26 letters that are combined in an incredible number of ways to depict our thoughts, dreams, aspirations, etc.

Twenty-six.

We read a whole book, but yet we only read 26 unique identifiers. Combined in multiple ways. Over. And. Over.

Quite discouraging.... or is it?

Ponder all of the possible ideas, feelings, directions, visions, etc. that we can portray. It's mind boggling.

But now I want you to explore a different thought. What if we had more letters? What if we had less?

There are obviously thresholds that exist to limit the number of letters that could exist. For example:

1. Effectiveness of the letters dependent on their uniqueness and necessity
2. Ability to learn and reproduce the letters through sound
3. Number of sounds that exist that can be expressed in new letters

How about if we had more letters? Would we be more creative? More intelligent? More efficient at communication? Would our minds be more free to express themselves and induce thought?

How about if we had less letters? Would we be more creative because there are limits on our resources? Would we be more intelligent because there is less restraint on thought by language and more intellectual focus on body language and emotions? Or could it be the complete opposite?

Is our mind inside the light bulb of language?

There are obviously benefits and disadvantages to both having more letters and less letters in our alphabet depending on the environment you live in and type of lifestyle that you live.

Explore your mind.

HMMMM

If the human race lost all technology and basically began over again or aliens discovered our planet after we wiped out, I have a theoretical question. If they find one book and one book only that had pictures of humans, dogs, birds, and dinosaurs talking to one another, would they assume that all creatures were intelligent and communicated and lived together?

If the answer is yes, are archeologists perhaps making mistakes in how they analyze the sophistication or lack thereof of ancient civilizations?

Another About Intelligence

Once again on the subject of intelligence being a direct correlation to atheism, I have another proposal, another viewpoint that might interest others. First off, the insults by atheists against monotheists that state the "idiocy" of believing in a higher being are pointless in the sense that in the long run it does not matter because according to the majority of these people, there is no after-life and therefore no point in trying to convince someone. On the other hand, for monotheists insulting atheists by saying they are bad people for simply not believing in something they do, it is extremely hypocritical. The majority of religions do not support judging people or spreading anger, and this is exactly what being accusatory and judgmental does. There is simply no reason why people can't have different beliefs and allow others to hold different beliefs without forcefully and hypocritically try to convince everyone else that they are wrong. ANYWAYS I digress. It is undoubtedly difficult for an intelligent person to not fully understand a subject because they often find themselves easily comprehending everything presented to them. Now obviously intelligent people will be offended that I am insulting their intelligence by saying they can't understand something, that in fact, no one can fully grasp something. Can there be something that does not have a beginning and an end? Of course there are people who claim to understand it, infinity is simple to understand in mathematics.... But is it? One can't fully wrap their mind around never not existing (apologies for the double negative). How about creation in general? Can something come from nothing? What is nothing? It is the definition of itself. It is similar to the concept of zero. You can describe nothing as the absence of something, but you need something to describe nothing. Quite ironic. What created the nothing? But then that means there was something. Physicists and various scientists can claim to explain the origin of the universe. But it is doubtful that anyone can fully grasp the concept of nothingness, of that nothingness magically turning into something. Maybe the old versions of Holy books are meant to be altered through time, I do not mean that in any blasphemous way. I support discovery and innovation as most humans do and ironically support peace and allowance of others to their own opinions while not interfering, all while at the same time I am creating a blog that is meant to bring about arguments. I will continue on these thoughts later because things are beginning to seem like a paradox.

Different Way of Looking at Things

Here's a video from a young man who has not just followed the Church but looks at things in a different way. As I believe with many things, although you may not agree with a viewpoint someone has given, there is always something to learn or consider from what is said. 

Enjoy

Pondering

Studies have shown that those with higher levels of intelligence are less likely to practice some form of religion (the general information on this can be viewed here on Wikipedia...  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_intelligence ) The information does state that those with higher intelligence levels tend to be more skeptical of ideas presented and do not merely accept things as often without large amounts of evidence. I have another spin on the reasoning to why those more intelligent may not believe in a higher being. What if the reason is merely that there is an underlying natural resistance to admitting that there is something more intelligent and ultimately superior to something other than ourselves? Do extremely intelligent people just not want to believe that there is something smarter than themselves? Is it just a matter of humans being too proud in themselves and unwilling to accept inferiority? Are the intelligent really more intelligent even on this matter, or just merely more conceded in their abilities? Just a different way of looking at things.