Kialo requires cookies to work correctly.
Should we have a single global language?
A global language would kill diversity of thought and culture.
Within a generation of implementation, vast amounts of culture and literature would be completely inaccessible. This would represent a massive and irreparable rupture with history.
Language is used to partition reality into concepts. Different languages = different partitionings, which can be more or less suitable to solve thought problems.
Using different languages teaches people
to think in different ways.
Going to a single global language would harm the diversity of thought.
A language is far more than just a collection of words or sounds to express a message. A language is identity, culture and is what makes our world so rich and diverse.
This would lead to the homogenisation of society, whereby a single culture would win out over all others.
The existence of a global language does not necessarily involve the eradication of others.
Diversity in langauge is in itself divisive.
Eventually, local dialects of the global language would develop, bringing back diversity.
Americans, British and Australians speak the same language, yet they have diversity of thought and culture.
Culture is expressed in a myriad of ways - art, dance, architecture - which is not dependent on language.
A single global language would greatly benefit culture, as it would further encourage people from different cultures to interact and share ideas, so these ideas could be developed.