Mixed Modes and Daily Experience

Locke's conception of words is that arbitrary signification is a daily reality.  From person to person the signs of the word itself varies immensely.  However, the problem of words only presents itself in conversation with other people.  Our inner discourse is directly connected with our ideas so there is no room for misunderstanding in either the words or in the way that someone else would interpret the words.

 Wouldn't this then mean that our own discourse is the most true discourse?  If talking to others only muddles true ideas shouldn't we only discuss important issues with ourselves?  This is not the case since we can be forced to consider other viewpoints by the presentation of others.  Our inner discourse then reasons us to a point where we believe concretely.  However, this raises the other point of how words affect our daily realities.  For the most part when we speak we don't actively acknowledge the words that are transmitting the ideas.  Rather we directly understand the concepts that are being told to us.  This allows for the ambiguity of language to unnoticed and for us to let this imperfection go uncorrected.

Locke defines the three ends of language as this, "First, to convey our ideas.  Secondly, to do it with quickness. Thirdly, therewith to convey the knowledge of things" (Locke 825).  All of these things create a space where the words disappear into and this perpetuates the ambiguity of language since it goes by unnoticed.

Works Cited:

Locke, John. “From An Essay Concerning Human Understanding.” The Rhetorical Tradition: Readings from Classical Times to the Present, Second Edition. Ed. Patricia Bizzell and Bruce Herzberg. New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2001. 814-827.