this post was submitted on 25 May 2025
23 points (87.1% liked)

Showerthoughts

34559 readers
1051 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
vatlark@lemmy.world
forkball@lemmy.world
Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
SuperEars@lemmy.world
23
It's easier to inform language with language than with experience. (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by rainrain@sh.itjust.works to c/showerthoughts@lemmy.world
8 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Because 1) language requires no translation from experience 2) language is relatively easy to record, communicate and analyze.

Thus it is inevitable that our language will slide from "reflecting reality" to "reflecting itself".

Consider where that's going.

all 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

Wittgenstein moment !

But yeah, it's always important to make sure you're not just saying words, you're not just drawing the map of a non-existent terrain. Many people do this without knowing (what the hell does "MAGA" truly mean? How can a corporation also "be a person"? Even a pink elephant makes more sense and is more conceivable.) It's also important to remember that many things cannot be easily/fully understood solely through words, but can only be met through experience and understood through reflection in the framework of words. This is why you can't just "tell someone something" and expect them to "listen". The words went through, sure, but they lack the rest to be on your side of the debate.

[–] not_woody_shaw@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Yeah, this is why an adult can learn a new language in a couple of months, whereas a newborn takes several years to grasp just the basics, and more than a decade to get good at it.

To misquote Eddie Harris, "It's no big deal to learn another [language] once you know one. All you gotta do is have nerve."

[–] rainrain@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I personally think the second language is easier to pick up because languages are 99% alike. But that is beside my point.

My point is that slide into self-reflectingness.

Like one of those old xerox machines. A copy of a copy of a copy.... till the original image is gone, replaced with something crazy.

[–] entropicdrift@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 6 days ago

So, you're interested in entropy, as it applies to information?

[–] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

You might be interested in reading up on the debate of “Prescriptive vs Descriptive” approaches in a linguistics context.

[–] rainrain@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Can you gimme the short version?

[–] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Sure - Wikipedia says it better than I could hope to:

As English-linguist Larry Andrews describes it, descriptive grammar is the linguistic approach which studies what a language is like, as opposed to prescriptive, which declares what a language should be like.[11]: 25  In other words, descriptive grammarians focus analysis on how all kinds of people in all sorts of environments, usually in more casual, everyday settings, communicate, whereas prescriptive grammarians focus on the grammatical rules and structures predetermined by linguistic registers and figures of power. An example that Andrews uses in his book is fewer than vs less than.[11]: 26  A descriptive grammarian would state that both statements are equally valid, as long as the meaning behind the statement can be understood. A prescriptive grammarian would analyze the rules and conventions behind both statements to determine which statement is correct or otherwise preferable. Andrews also believes that, although most linguists would be descriptive grammarians, most public school teachers tend to be prescriptive.[11]: 26

[–] rainrain@sh.itjust.works -3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yeah, I get the basic idea. I was hoping for a little more on the actual implications tho. Preferably in conversation form rather than copypasted.