[Myrmornis]

Thanks, your noun/process suggestion is interesting. Perhaps that is indeed a good way of characterizing what happened in biology. It's clear that biology has stumbled into a linguistic/philosophical trap; if it were actually science they wouldn't have been "working on it" since Darwin! I'll try to find time to look at the philosophy you refer to.

Do you know of comparable "messes" like the one in biology that you suspect were caused by a lack of more process-based language?

Are there some human languages that are more process-based than English?

It makes me wonder whether what the LLMs have captured in their training data might be effective for looking over different languages to see if there are any interesting different ways of handling "species".

[keiferski]

I think it's probably just a problem with every field. Specifically though, at least for my interests, is traditional theology: God being omnipotent, eternal, etc. causes a lot of philosophical problems, which is what Process Theology aims to address. A lot of this goes back to Plato's idea of forms, which are essentially eternal, unchanging concepts.

I can't seem to find much on the idea that certain languages are more suited to this than others. Theoretically a verb-oriented language would be better.

To me it seems like a giant philosophical project: to create a language that is process-first. It might simply be beyond the capability of humans to actually use such a language in the world, though: which is where AI might be interesting, as it doesn't have the kinds of cognitive limitations on delineations like humans do.