Arthur Brooks reflects on the challenges of writing about substantial themes like meaning, love, and happiness, noting the inadequacy of language. He cites philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein, who argued that language cannot fully encapsulate life's essence. Citing Wittgenstein’s claim that "the limits of my language mean the limits of my world," Brooks emphasizes the irony of articulating this idea through language. He also mentions research indicating that misunderstandings frequently occur in human communication, particularly among those who are close to one another, adding further complications to conveying meaning effectively.
For a long time, I believed that at some point -maybe after writing a million more words-I would finally arrive at the ability to adequately express what it is that I'm seeking.
Wittgenstein explained that language can never convey the fullest understanding of life. "The limits of my language," he wrote, "mean the limits of my world."
Wittgenstein was no doubt conscious of the irony of making this argument through language. But in so doing, he offered a path to getting beyond words and to apprehend, after all, the ineffable essence of what we seek.
Human communication is rife with misunderstanding, as social scientists have long observed. Researchers writing in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology in 2011 showed that people misunderstand the intended meaning of what others say.
Collection
[
|
...
]