What is the current take on Chomsky's 'language acquisition is hard-wired into the brain' theory? I remember reading ten years or so ago that a scientist had isolated a gene that led to kids having trouble learning to speak normally (I have no citation, unfortunately). Would this be proof that Chomsky was right?

I remember reading a biography of George Orwell in which Orwell and A.J. Ayer met in a hotel in France and spent an evening together (in the hotel bar, I hasten to add). The biographer (with a literary background) described them whimsically as 'two men of near-genius'. Is the concept of genius pointless? If it depends who you ask, surely it is - John Lennon, Babe Ruth, Jackson Pollock, etc. and it can't simply be a question of aesthetics when applied to Newton or Aristotle, say. I reckon there are no criteria outside of a dictionary. How does philosophy deal with such vague terms? Thanks.

Hello, My question is about definitions and I would like to know what it means to define something. From I what can tell, definitions seem to describe relations between processes, objects and other type of relationships. If I were to ask, "Define yourself", What am I really asking here? Can an answer be provided without referring to something else? Because I would at least not associate "define yourself" with physical attributes, the person´s job, career, family situation, personality attributes or any other sort of descriptions...or am I just way off? Hopefully you can sort out some of my confusion. Thanks in advance. M.

Can we think without words? If not, how can we explain the very first intention to build a language when our ancestors had no word? (sorry, I must improve my English I am from Argentina)

Have there been any systematic attempts to determine what the most difficult language(s) to learn as a second-language may be? Is the difficulty of second-language acquisition necessarily tied to the second-language's similarity to one's first language, or otherwise dependent on some inherent or acquired capacity of one's brain to learn a given second-language? Or are there some languages which are more difficult to learn as a second-language across the board, so to speak? If so, what sort of formulae might be used to determine the difficulty of the acquisition of a given second-language?

I read that questions are directive speech acts, where the questioner requests for some information or, in any case, for an answer. An exception is usually accepted for rhetorical questions. Being a teacher who has to examine students, I often ask questions, but I'm never requesting information or, at least, never on the questioned subject. My students are also always absolutely free not to answer, and I will certainly not blame them for that. Does this mean that my questions aren't real questions?

During a heated argument about social placement resulting from speech, a close friend of mine asked me "WHY should I speak correctly?" The question was an inclination that he wanted to be persuaded by my answer, more so that just asking for a fact on the matter. As I answered him, he started to dismiss my opinions, question everything I posed with a simple phrase: "But if I CHOOSE to speak improperly, and I know I can switch back to proper speach (he tried to make it seem to me he had prior knowledge of more enhanced words that he could use when I know he did not (he is pretty dull)), then shouldn't it not be held against me to do so?" I disagree with him. If one knows how to speak properly, they should not need to be persuaded into doing so, they should just do so, knowing it is correct and proper to do so. Can one of you please afford an opinion on this argument.

Why is there anything weird about the sentence 'This very sentence is false'? If it is that the sentence seems to be true AND false, what makes it so different from certain ambiguous sentences which are true and false as well? If it is that the sentence seems to be neither true NOR false, what makes it so different from imperatives and questions which are neither true nor false as well? (The reformulation 'The proposition expressed by this very sentence is false' does not help, it seems, because it fails to express a proposition at all.)

Hi - My question is as follows It is possible for anyone ( alive or dead ) to 1.Make any kind of statement ( including those made in response to this question ) which is not a statement which claims that a. Something is possible ( or impossible ) b.Something is actual ( or not ) c.Something is necessary ( or not) Please note that I am NOT asking about the truth of the statement but only the form in which it is stated - So, for example - A statement which claims that 'Triangles have four sides' ( though false) could be classified as making the claim as a possibiliy, actuality or necessity ( subject to clarification by the maker of the statement ). Also if possible could I have a response to the isues of 'Explanation' what is an 'explanation' - I've often read in textbooks that some author is not offering an 'explanation' but rather a 'description'. Regards - Colin

What is a concept? How are they formed? Is there such a thing as an objectively correct way of conceptualizing something?