“What is it about human beings that enables them to, as you said earlier, make these noises that have such remarkable consequences? Among them is the consequence that they -do- relate to reality…”

— John Searle, in conversation with Brian Macgee on The Philosophy of Language.

“Originally, we acquired the strange dimensionality of consciousness that empowers our representational faculties from direct exposure to nonhuman intelligence in nature, and in… the domain we confusedly refer to as ‘the spiritual’.

Our original contact with both nature and this advanced (transentient) nonhuman intelligence radically altered the basis of our cognitive anatomy. Thereafter, we became capable of a limited version of what our teachers were doing with this ‘stuff’ that in us is ‘language’ and in them is something so astonishing that were you to experience it even for a moment, you would feel you had entered paradise.

Nothing like language is known or employed by the intelligence we acquired this relatively degenerate capacity from. To them, our ‘language’ would represent a broken, ineffectual ‘half-embodiment’ of what they know directly as a transcendent capacity which unifies communication and action in a way not entirely dissimilar to how, under the correct conditions and in the appropriate contexts, the ‘language’ of programming emerges in the computer as ‘action/ability/events’. Their ‘communications emissions’ result in ‘immediate change/education/evolution’ in beings and timespace.

In other words, where our language is only half-alive, theirs is transcendental, and inseparable from the direct accomplishment of its objects both instantaneously, and trans-temporally. What we call language is the wrapper of a kind of candy made… by the wavelike nonhuman intelligence which underlies the appearance, character and activity of all we see and know. Calling this intelligence by a tag is an absurd idea. Getting a direct experience of relation with it… that’s worth the candle.”

— Me