Language, Status & Identity (The Human Contradiction) ANT101

Language, Status, & Identity

On the manner of Linguistics: It of the profoundest magnificence that Mammalia and Mammaliaformes (mammalian) life forces have the wondrous capability that is communication – language. Language is strange; it has origins that cannot truly be rooted to any form of ascribed foundation, existential life’s fundamentalist virtuoso is shrouded within mystery. Herein, the correlative factorizations that led to our common-day existence will be discussed, the factors of bewildering magnitude.
The concepts of language, status and identity will be thoroughly explained for how they intertwine into this incredulous network of communicative complexity. There are invariably diverse species, genera’s and genus’s living amongst each other, all having exclusively distinct hierarchal complexity to them; this is the mystery of life’s sociality, unbound.
The discussion I chose has impersonal ponderings (though, curious and vast), bearings to me, as I’ve an attachment of a sort to evolutionary principles; to that which I am most versed in, is of evolutionary concept; thusly, it is in immeasurable pleasure, that I share my ideals and subjections.
(1)Within the aforementioned social hierarchies exists numerous subgenres of divergent classification. Though, hierarchal privilege is unfair and unwarranted, natural selection, sexual selection, and divergence of character are our founding factors for life in its’ conceptualization of behavior, mode of innumerability, and comprehension of potentiated discourse; moreover, the more profound a sophisticated language (metalinguistic), and the greater the coherent usage seems, such acts as a determinant for social class, education level, and/or background, and intellectual stature.
Humankind hasn’t comprehensive understandability of all species, genera and genus, but we’ve some idea on all aforementioned, and it is within our findings throughout generational academia, we’re able to forwardly advance in scholarly research and concept of deep-rooted languages, extinct, historic, concurrent and calculably foreseeable.
It is as of recent (in knowable history), we’re exploring the researches and findings of our predecessors; as our technology and capacity of scientific advancement continue, so also does our overall understanding of life’s fundamental questions. We’re a long way from knowing even a fraction of the collectivized concepts, however, at least we’ve come this far, as to have understandability of complex and beautifully esoteric things, as such immensity is unearthed, our mesmerizing states of perplexity and awing curiosity plunder unto rapturous wonder.
In the following ways, I’ve deductively summed palpable explanatories for confounding questions. There are only two explanations for the aboriginality of language: creation and evolution; and they’re exclusive to themselves, as they cannot coincide or entwine.

The first ideal conceptualization is of this ideological phenomenon we call ‘the food chain.’” Within this chain (and such is arguably inaccurate), humankind (hominid) sits atop the hill as a metaphorical king. Where did such an asinine ideal come from? Of rabbinical texts (notably, the Book of Genesis), the (Dead Sea-Scrolls), and the (Apocryphal Scriptures), it is evidentially observable, in written noting, that mankind has an divination of orating ordinance over all other living things; consider the cited stories, and for purposes of this exemplary, taking place within the contemporary Americas, the story of ‘Adam & Eve’” will be used.

Here is an excerpt(s) from which I’ve referenced: [Sic] ‘” (24) ¶ And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.’[Sic] (25) And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.’[Sic] (26) ¶ And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.” [Sic] “(19) And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. [Sic] (20) And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.’” ([Sic] the first book of Moses, called genesis - Chapter 2. (1611). Explain God’s ruling of orated dominance given to Adam over all the beasts, small and great.) ([Sic] the first book of Moses, called genesis. (1611). In the Holy Bible, King James Version, Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.)

The second idealized conceptualization is of humankind’s self-conceived personifications, deviations, classifications, and differentiations amidst the variations of domestications (Mar2014, Vol. 89 Issue 1, p21-38. 18p.) As would be determined by survival of the fittest (in evolutionary principle), the arrogant, the strong and the smart would be best equipped to survive, and if such is true, then that is reasoning (substantiated) enough for humankind’s self-ordained supremacy over all other life-forces.
In this situational exemplary, the fittest of the species, genera’s and genus’s developed civilizations for their own sort of subclass diversifications, within classifications and vastly divergent speciation, humankind was borne anew, and separated from the ‘animal kingdom.’ Because of this self-pursued domestication of ones’ own genera, humankind has been forlorn within naturalistic defeatism; meaning, of course, we’ve assumed higher social stature than other mammaliaformes, bringing birth to an age of superiority complexion, and consequently resulting with the unspeakable terror that is servitude of all that is different from our own species.

Mankind (with statistical inference and majority), consumes all other living organisms, yet, not that our own kind; of course, there are exceptions among us. So be it, far from the disharmonic peace of the animal kingdom, we’ve further set ourselves away from civilization, of relativistic agreeability, and subsequently (as products of age and timeless disdain), we’ve devolved so far as to develop a hierarchy among our own kind, in very specific conceptions, astray even after our division from the aboriginal singularity – the singular unison of mammaliaformes.
Our hierarchal dividing of language has distinctly detached cultures from other cultures, races from other races, man from woman, elderly from young, and wealthy from poor. Of these such dividers, exists a cruel segregation of our own species among our own genera and genus’s. To perceive the following as despairing, or as joyful is of subjective demeanor. In all, the language dividers harvest such barriers between what respected hierarchies define to be intellectually, morally, ethically and ideologically obsolete and/or inferior, versus the idealized superiority of the aforementioned (of classified segregations.) Social disarray, intellectual dissonance and political differentiation rule the human race in many grave ways.

As profoundly hapless and dismayingly bereaving it may be, such is shone in observable truth; the absolute segregation of cultural indifference, of religiosity, sociality, politics, biologics, ethnocentrism and pseudospeciation, personification and/or anthropomorphism by definitive demeanor, is known by everyone instinctively, to be true.
Consider monetary deviance, the wealthy and the poor (in proportional destitution), and (statistical invariance), do not generally relate, communicate, or even live within the same habitual surroundings, for their endeavors may be assimilar, and their personalities far different, they both share a common antecessor, and a passion for significance, of acclamation and social status.
There is, within the societal division, a resting differentiation of deviation (in the senses of education, wealth, cultural/familial background and ideological principle), that which classify, divide and split us, into categorizations for assimilatory propagation. And in this profoundest disturbance of sorrowful thought, is humankind evermore astray from the garden, or perhaps, humankind is in a state of (constant, of course, though, happening within our lifetimes, possible) evolutionary happenings; so to speak, humankind will see itself evolved within this generational period of humanity. As aforementioned, scientifically, and philosophically theoretic, there are only two causation of grand quintessence.
It is within this conclusive summary, the following has been discussed (in layman’s), that of cultural influence and animalistic hierarchy, that of the fittest survivability and unwarrantedly claimed dominance, and that of engineered speciation, in all and either aspectual consideration, it seems the grand causation is one in the same. REFERENCES

BOUZAT, J. L. (2014). DARWIN'S DIAGRAM OF DIVERGENCE OF TAXA AS A CAUSAL MODEL FOR THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES. Quarterly Review Of Biology, 89(1), 21 38. [Sic] – 94336635
[Sic] The first book of Moses, called genesis. (1611). In The Holy Bible, King James version, Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from http://search.credor...genesis/0978184– 9721271
All Rights Reserved; 2011-2015; copyright protected: (T3T Innovations); Jacob A. Eder; Darkly Origins/Eerie Flickering;