Body-language and nonverbal communication

language is not language

language is not language

this morning a professor of philosophy critizised scientific language in an interview. The different sciences produce their own languages. This is understable concerning the field they are engaged in. This is understable regarding the various specialized issues they are busy with. This is understable because each science lives so to say in it´s own field, in it´ s own sphere.  And this is understable because each social or scientific field needs to have it´s own language to communicate more easily and more quickly.

But it´s not understable when thinking about those who are not integrated in this field. Who are excluded by not being able to understand the specific language the one or other scientist is using…………………………..

It´s even worth when thinking about those who don´know that they are excluded.

Language, especially scientific language has to reach also those people who it concernes. Those people who pay for this science, pay that this science can at least exist. And those people who at the end want to or have to take profit out of the scientific results.

But most of all scientific language has to be so  concrete, so direct, so understable because being understable for most of the people is a proof of science tested self-affirmation of science. This proof functions as a sign that scientific results are right and popular accepted.

So if there is any question, any complaint or any critics on my language, please feel free to tell me. I need your feedback. — 😉

And thus I ask myself how the scientific languages develop for example in East and West, in Europe or China or Japan? How do people there think about it.


Submit comment