Language Gap 

There is often, if not always a certain futility to communication. To illustrate, I propose a fictional character, who I will call Descartes. Descartes ponders the possible existence of an all powerful force bent on decieving him. Though he may slip into a solipsistic funk for some time, our wise Descartes eventually realises that there is indeed an all powerful force bent on convincing him of a particular version of Reality. He calls this force "The Universe". Having seen the sun rise day after day, Descartes is willing to believe, wether it is deception or not, that which The Universe would have him believe to be true will be reasonably consistent. Descartes is now ready to interact with this Convenient Reality, and the denizens thereof.

Descartes, being the perceptive fellow that he is, notices that some interactions are very explicit. He is able to guage the effectiveness of his communication by the result. The utterance "Beer" often has a predictable and favorable result, even when spoken to people who understand nothing else that he says. Some interactions, however, garner an unexpected, indirect, or uninterpretable result. At times, he is not even sure if the actions of the inhabitants of the Convenient Reality are meant to be communication or not. What is the poor guy to do? Our Descartes, as I have already metioned, is wise, and confines himself to explicit communication, the bulk of which consists of requests for "Beer". Luckily, Descartes is also a fictional character, and needs nothing else. As for those of us in the Real World, it is best to avoid smiling at gorillas.

© Ben Grieser 2001