[nh23423fefe]

this just seems like some Wittgenstein mistake

>"thinking and reasoning require language"

we are just going to argue about what thinking and reasoning are because the sentence is meaningless.

Clearly animals think and reason and dont have language.

Or clearly thinking and reasoning is a process of symbol manipulation contingent on language itself because nothing else provides the means to ground the symbols nor the rules to encode acceptable manipulations.

[TheLoafOfBread]

I am bilingual and I have noticed that in my head, meaning of the word (symbol) and sound of the word (language) are two different things, where language is dependent on meaning, but meaning is not dependent on language.

I can think in my native tongue or English, but I can also use just abstractions to think - i.e. designing architecture of a software tool or using math. What I am finding frustrating is to have abstract idea in the head and be limited by language in expression of that idea, so much so, that sometimes it is easier to paint a picture of that idea than try to express it in written form. Language is a projection of abstract mind with massive loss of contextual information. But you don't need language to have an abstract mind.

[tanepiper]

If you've lived with animals, of course they have language - it's what we would call (from a human-centric perspective) "non-verbal". My two dogs absolutely understand and can reason from certain words they learn, one I've raised as a puppy from day 0.

[nh23423fefe]

I could easily argue they don't have language, only associative learning.

Otherwise why would you be careful not to say the word "walk" around your dog when you didn't intend to go walking.

If you pick up a leash and say, "we are not going on a walk" what will your dog do?