| Moderator: |
Gerhard Bischoff |
| eMail: |
Euyasik (at) gmx (dot) net
|
|
| Author |
Brett Zamir |
Brett Zamir, living in the USA, initiated a web-site "onetongue.com". There he discusses topics concerning constructed languages. Included is an experiment how to spread the ideas of an international language.
Isn't this just a Utopian Dream?
Perhaps the greatest reason for resistance to this idea (or any great idea) is a lack of belief in its possibility (as well as a credible plan of implementation).
As to the first point, the self-defeating belief that humans are inherently aggressive (and thus incapable of coordinating mutually beneficial arrangements for the benefit of all or achieving the "utopian" ideals of peace) is itself among the greatest barriers to peace. This fully applies to the concept of a unifying world language as well.
There are many signs that justify belief that the time is ripe for such a language and that it is possible now.
We might look at how many other regional and international alliances which seemed to be but dreams have and are coming true, for example.
Recent achievements such as the Euro in Europe; economic, political, and civil regional and international cooperation, etc. testify more lucidly now than ever to the possibility of people achieving such win-win collaborations in this age as a universal language offers.
The ultimate sensibility of free trade (another ultimately win-win or "positive sum gain" situation), while similarly accompanied by many legitimate concerns which must be dealt with (e.g., increases in violation of human rights abroad, environmental degradation, loss of jobs as its implementation brings added competition, etc.), should win out eventually, as it already has to lesser degrees in nation-states and prior levels of political organization. The same can be true for free trade of ideas by a common auxiliary language.
Or, if a unilateral disarmament can be arranged among all the nations (with international monitoring and strong punitive measures against transgressors), everyone would benefit by the nations resources not going into an industry which did not actually produce something inherently useful to people. The same can be said with the benefits which will accrue when nations begin to realize that by disarming their insistence on a particular language (or by showing apathy by not getting involved in the issue), all their people would benefit by the release of energies spent into people "arming" themselves with inherently useless knowledge of various languages’ grammars, their multiple vocabulary to express the same concept, etc. Redundancy will be eliminated, and people can work on things of benefit to humanity.
Such solutions, while of mutual benefit of all, are often among the ideas which receive the most resistance, because they seem to good to be true! But it is indeed the case that many good things are actually easy to achieve and of benefit to all.
The whole idea of learning multiple languages shows sometimes people do TOO much work, without taking a small amount of time and energy to consider with forethought and vision how to resolve things such that their lives and those of others could make their lives easier -- even much, much easier.
| 
