Here’s another weird post (making an unbroken string of 50+, for those keeping track at home). What exactly is Adamic, the pure tongue of Heaven?
The post refers to Hayek and his view of the free market. He saw it as an information-aggregating mechanism. Language is another. That got me thinking.
The information markets currently aggregate is imperfect. That is, part of the information they aggregate is individual preference, and in this world individual preference is evil and unschooled. We don’t mind, because we’re not using the prices the market generates to tell us the intrinsic value of things, or at least we shouldn’t. But this does suggest that, in a day when everyone’s desires were baptized and sanctified, we could use the market to understand the intrinsic value of things. That would be a perfect market, but not in the sense of of ‘perfect’ that economists usually use. A perfect market in their sense is one in which there is perfect knowledge, no barriers, etc.
In which of these senses would celestial language be perfect? I’m sceptical that a language would be perfect in the first sense, that is, that the sounds and forms in it would intrinsically reflect reality. (Though see the admission in the second paragraph. I just don’t know. It’s possible that there might be at least some non-arbitary intrinsic elements of the perfect language). In the second sense, a language is perfect merely because it is the perfect vehicle for the exchange of information (or, at least, it is as good as possible at exchanging information). But if a language is arbitrary, I don’t see how this criterion could be met unless the participants in the language either had non-language means of conveying information along with what was spoken, or else they had so much knowledge and experience about everything that they were able to give very precise meanings (tentative example: I could say ‘dog’ having acquaintance with all all the billions of examples of beings that, in our language, belonged to that class or, possibly, I could just use the word in our language for the particular dog I had in mind). Now, in a sense this seems silly, because what need would there be for language if there were perfect knowledge of everything? Perhaps there isn’t. Perhaps language in heaven is only used in ritual, in courtesy, and in play. But no matter. The real problem with this second sense is that humans have sometimes been inspired to speak with the tongue of Adam (e.g., Adam), and humans don’t usually have perfect knowledge. Perhaps they were given it temporarily for the duration of their utterance? Or perhaps they only imperfectly understood their utterance, like children who’ve memorized a poem? I don’t know.
I would like to puzzle out something about the ‘perfect’ language of Adam, but I don’t have the wisdom. A scholar I asked once to help ignored me, because he had too much prudence. I hope you will have less prudence than he and more wisdom than me.