[tlhIngan Hol] Instinct yes, but of what kind ?

Will Martin willmartin2 at mac.com
Mon May 13 10:29:42 PDT 2019


My instincts are different. See below.

charghwI’ vaghnerya’ngan

rInpa’ bomnIS be’’a’ pI’.




> On May 11, 2019, at 5:53 AM, mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> jevreH:
>> We can differentiate between instinct and non-instinct to a degree
>> (with a healthy grey area between instinct, intuition, and cognition)
>> because we are sapient, and have higher cognitive functioning.
> 
> I totally agree with jevreH. Totally.

I agree less, simply because I don’t presume that “lower” animals are less intelligent based on my ignorance of any means of communicating with them. A common feature of Deaf culture is that they have to put up with hearing people who presume that Deaf people are stupid because they don’t understand spoken English.

While there is limited evidence to the contrary, it’s quite possible that crows are smarter than you, and you just don’t know it. The line between sincere superiority and unwarranted arrogance tends to be invisible to those exhibiting either.

> I'm in the market place of Qo'noS; I stand before of a seller who
> tries to make me buy an ancient cat. I suspect something's wrong,
> because that cat is inexpensive. It's my instinct, telling me
> something's wrong.
> 
> I leave that seller, and in a dark alley, I realize two klingons armed
> with knives are following me. It's the survival instinct, telling me
> to fight or flight.

My instinct would be simply to smile. 

Awww. They want to play. 

Why consider running?

Bring it.

> I escape the romulans, and I see lurSa' and be'etor; it's the sexual
> instinct which kicks in.

lurSa’ and be’etor? 

That’s when my survival instinct would kick in. I would proceed VERY CAREFULLY, scanning the area for safe exits, while following diplomatic protocols to avoid drawing their attention, or giving them a reason to attack. Be aware of where my weapons are without making any telling gestures to let THEM know where my weapons are.

I mean, it’s nice that they are female and all, but there are two of them, and either one is dangerous alone. Together?

Two Klingon guards with knives? Playground roughhousing. LurSa’ and be’etor? Chills down the spine. Fight or flight. Preferably, flight. Live to fight another day.

The mind’s soundtrack is going “Ah-oooo-gah! Ah-oooo-gah! Battle stations! Prepare to dive!"
...
> With this being said, I'll be using {Duj} with regards, to all kinds
> of instincts.
> 
> Unless of course, someone can add to this discussion arguments, which
> could convince me otherwise.

I’m not all that sure that sexual instinct is something anyone should ever trust.

How many lives have been ruined because somebody trusted their sexual instinct?

Sexual instinct too often chooses your life partner based on how much you like his or her hair length, color, or straightness/curliness, or eye color, or the shape of his or her chest. You can spend years paying for a couple of hours of activity that seemed like a good idea at the time, but gee, there are all these other hours of the day when this person is not pleasant to be around, and is not helpful or considerate or particularly interested in your well being.

I honestly believe that choosing a mate should be a mental task of the highest cognitive order. Tell your animal within to keep its opinion to itself. You really should think this one through, thoroughly. Make sure you choose someone you like to spend time with all those hours you are NOT having sex.

Because you WILL be spending MOST of your hours with this person NOT having sex.

Odds are far greater that you can figure out how to enjoy sex with someone you like a lot, than that you can figure out how to make all of your critical life decisions with someone whose every glance takes your breath away.

> But the fact that 'oqranD, wrote {Duj tIvoqtaH}, doesn't narrow down
> the context of {Duj}. We can't expect 'oqranD, to have used every word
> in every possible way.
> 
> Unless he has said "don't use a word that way", then I see no reason
> to limit ourselves.

This is where I believe that language bends to the quality of functionality between people trying to communicate. Most of the time, I agree with your statement, but the simple truth is that one can always grab for a rarely used branch of meaning for a word in English when translating into Klingon and lose the person trying to follow your message. Just because you can put your interpretation of an idea into Klingon doesn’t mean that the person you are speaking or writing to can understand what you were trying to say.

To write or speak well, you need to be able to put an idea into Klingon and get that meaning out of the resultant message without needing to know that thing you were thinking of when you used a word in an unusual way.

So, I do see reasons to limit ourselves. I’m not saying this as an extreme statement of limitation. I’m saying it as a reaction against extreme loss of boundaries.

Most of the time you are right, but this declaration of yours can go too far. It is quite possible to use words in ways Okrand never warned us not to, and in doing so, fail miserably to communicate.

> ~ m. qunen'oS
> tera' joH, qo' joHna', qavan
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190513/98e3295e/attachment.html>


More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list