A case for treating language as a carrier, not knowledge itself
The hypothesis argues that may rely too heavily on forms of representation that were shaped by human limits. Human meaning moves through several steps: experience becomes a concept, the concept becomes speech or writing, and another person turns that language back into a concept and a rough version of the original experience. In this view, language is a way to move knowledge between minds, not knowledge itself.
Language did not originally exist to store knowledge, perform , or represent reality as a perfect internal format. Modern often use language for all of those jobs at the same time.
Key points
- Language is framed as a carrier of knowledge, not knowledge itself.
- Human communication turns experience into concepts, then language, then reconstructed meaning in another mind.
- The argument says language was not built for knowledge storage, , or perfect reality modeling.
- Modern often uses language for all of those roles at once.
- AI agent builders can use this as a reason to rethink text-heavy memory and designs.