Human Language: Info Density Grants Speed But Less Breadth

Table link

Article - Published: 16 February 2024

Human languages with greater information density

have higher communication speed but lower 

conversation breadth

article link

Pedro Aceves &     
James A. Evans 

Nature Human Behaviour (2024)Cite this article

118 Accesses  34 Altmetric  Metrics

• details

Abstract

Human languages vary widely in how they encode information within circumscribed semantic domains (for example, time, space, colour, human body parts and activities), but little is known about the global structure of semantic information and nothing about its relation to human communication.

We first show that across a sample of ~1,000 languages, there is broad variation in how densely languages encode information into words.

Second, we show that this language information density is associated with a denser configuration of semantic information.

Finally, we trace the relationship between language information density and patterns of communication, showing that informationally denser languages tend towards faster communication but conceptually narrower conversations or expositions within which topics are discussed at greater depth.

These results highlight an important source of variation across the human communicative channel, revealing that the structure of language shapes the nature and texture of human engagement, with consequences for human behaviour across levels of society.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Data availability

The datasets analysed in the current study are available at the following links: for parallel corpora, https://opus.nlpl.eu/; for conversations, https://www.ldc.upenn.edu/; for audio duration, https://wordproject.org and https://faithcomesbyhearing.com; for language family and location, https://glottolog.org/; for Wikipedia articles, https://pypi.org/project/Wikipedia-API/; for language fusion and informativity, https://github.com/OlenaShcherbakova/Sociodemographic_factors_complexity/tree/v2.0/data; and for morphological complexity, https://github.com/mllewis/langLearnVar. The language information density, semantic density and communicative speed measures can be found at https://github.com/peteaceves/Language_Density_and_Communication.

Code availability

The code used to create the language information density and semantic density measures was written in Python v.3.7.2 and can be found at https://github.com/peteaceves/Language_Density_and_Communication. The statistical models were run in Stata v.17, and the code can be found in the Supplementary Information.

References

1. de Saussure, F. Course in General Linguistics (Open Court, 1986).

2. Bloomfield, L. Language (Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1933).

3. Sapir, E. Language: An Introduction to the Study of Speech (Harcourt, Brace, 1921).

4. Levelt, W. J. M. Speaking: From Intention to Articulation (MIT Press, 1989).

5. Thompson, B., Roberts, S. G. & Lupyan, G. Cultural influences on word meanings revealed through large-scale semantic alignment. Nat. Hum. Behav. 4, 1029–1038 (2020).

   Article PubMed Google Scholar 

6. Youn, H. et al. On the universal structure of human lexical semantics. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 1766–1771 (2016).

   Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 

7. Winawer, J. et al. Russian blues reveal effects of language on color discrimination. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 7780–7785 (2007).

   Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 

8. Kay, P. & McDaniel, C. K. The linguistic significance of the meanings of basic color terms. Language 54, 610–646 (1978).

   Article Google Scholar 

9. Davidoff, J., Davies, I. & Roberson, D. Colour categories in a stone-age tribe. Nature 398, 203–204 (1999).

   Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar 

10. Kay, P., Berlin, B., Maffi, L. & Merrifield, W. in Color Categories in Language and Thought (eds Hardin, C. L. & Maffi, L.) 21–56 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1997).

11. Dolscheid, S., Shayan, S., Majid, A. & Casasanto, D. The thickness of musical pitch: psychophysical evidence for linguistic relativity. Psychol. Sci. 24, 613–621 (2013).

    Article PubMed Google Scholar 

12. Bock, K., Carreiras, M. & Meseguer, E. Number meaning and number grammar in English and Spanish. J. Mem. Lang. 66, 17–37 (2012).

    Article Google Scholar 

13. Malt, B. C. et al. Talking about walking: biomechanics and the language of locomotion. Psychol. Sci. 19, 232–240 (2008).

    Article PubMed Google Scholar 

14. Malt, B. C. et al. Human locomotion in languages: constraints on moving and meaning. J. Mem. Lang. 74, 107–123 (2014).

    Article Google Scholar 

15. Casasanto, D. & Boroditsky, L. Time in the mind: using space to think about time. Cognition 106, 579–593 (2008).

    Article PubMed Google Scholar 

16. Fuhrman, O. et al. How linguistic and cultural forces shape conceptions of time: English and Mandarin time in 3D. Cogn. Sci. 35, 1305–1328 (2011).

    Article PubMed Google Scholar 

17. Lai, V. T. & Boroditsky, L. The immediate and chronic influence of spatio-temporal metaphors on the mental representations of time in English, Mandarin, and Mandarin-English speakers. Front. Psychol. 4, 142 (2013).

    PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 

18. Levinson, S. C. Space in Language and Cognition: Explorations in Cognitive Diversity (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2003).

19. Levinson, S., Meira, S. & The Language and Cognition Group. ‘Natural concepts’ in the spatial topological domain—adpositional meanings in crosslinguistic perspective: an exercise in semantic typology. Language 79, 485–516 (2003).

20. Majid, A., Bowerman, M., Kita, S., Haun, D. B. M. & Levinson, S. C. Can language restructure cognition? The case for space. Trends Cogn. Sci. 8, 108–114 (2004).

    Article PubMed Google Scholar 

21. Feist, M. I. Space between languages. Cogn. Sci. 32, 1177–1199 (2008).

    Article PubMed Google Scholar 

22. Majid, A., Boster, J. S. & Bowerman, M. The cross-linguistic categorization of everyday events: a study of cutting and breaking. Cognition 109, 235–250 (2008).

    Article PubMed Google Scholar 

23. Saji, N. et al. Word learning does not end at fast-mapping: evolution of verb meanings through reorganization of an entire semantic domain. Cognition 118, 45–61 (2011).

    Article PubMed Google Scholar 

24. Lewis, M. & Lupyan, G. Gender stereotypes are reflected in the distributional structure of 25 languages. Nat. Hum. Behav. 4, 1021–1028 (2020).

    Article PubMed Google Scholar 

25. Enfield, N. J., Majid, A. & van Staden, M. Cross-linguistic categorisation of the body: introduction. Lang. Sci. 28, 137–147 (2006).

    Article Google Scholar 

26. Brown, C. H. Language and Living Things: Uniformities in Folk Classification and Naming (Rutgers Univ. Press, 1984).

27. Berlin, B. Ethnobiological Classification: Principles of Categorization of Plants and Animals in Traditional Societies (Princeton Univ. Press, 2014).

28. Kemp, C., Xu, Y. & Regier, T. Semantic typology and efficient communication. Annu. Rev. Linguist. 4, 109–128 (2018).

    Article Google Scholar 

29. Enfield, N. J. Linguistic relativity from reference to agency. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 44, 207–224 (2015).

    Article Google Scholar 

30. Hofstadter, D. & Sander, E. Surfaces and Essences: Analogy as the Fuel and Fire of Thinking (Basic Books, 2013).

31. Li, P. & Gleitman, L. Turning the tables: language and spatial reasoning. Cognition 83, 265–294 (2002).

    Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar 

32. Gleitman, L. & Fisher, C. in The Cambridge Companion to Chomsky (ed. McGilvray, J. A.) 123–142 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2005).

33. Pinker, S. The Language Instinct (HarperCollins, 1994).

34. Berlin, B. & Kay, P. Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and Evolution (Univ. California Press, 1969).

35. Evans, N. & Levinson, S. C. The myth of language universals: language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behav. Brain Sci. 32, 429–448, discussion 448–494 (2009).

36. Davidson, D. On the very idea of a conceptual scheme. Proc. Addresses Am. Phil. Assoc. 47, 5–20 (1973).

    Article Google Scholar 

37. Lupyan, G. & Dale, R. Why are there different languages? The role of adaptation in linguistic diversity. Trends Cogn. Sci. 20, 649–660 (2016).

    Article PubMed Google Scholar 

38. Pellegrino, F., Coupé, C. & Marsico, E. Across-language perspective on speech information rate. Language 87, 539–558 (2011).

    Article Google Scholar 

39. Coupé, C., Oh, Y. M., Dediu, D. & Pellegrino, F. Different languages, similar encoding efficiency: comparable information rates across the human communicative niche. Sci. Adv. 5, eaaw2594 (2019).

    Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 

40. Lewis, M., Cahill, A., Madnani, N. & Evans, J. Local similarity and global variability characterize the semantic space of human languages. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 120, e2300986120 (2023).

41. Gibson, E. et al. How efficiency shapes human language. Trends Cogn. Sci. 23, 389–407 (2019).

    Article PubMed Google Scholar 

42. Bentz, C., Alikaniotis, D., Cysouw, M. & Ferrer-i-Cancho, R. The entropy of words—learnability and expressivity across more than 1000 languages. Entropy 19, 275 (2017).

    Article Google Scholar 

43. Bellos, D. Is That a Fish in Your Ear? Translation and the Meaning of Everything (Penguin Books, 2011).

44. Huffman, D. A. A method for the construction of minimum-redundancy codes. Proc. IRE 40, 1098–1101 (1952).

    Article Google Scholar 

45. Harris, Z. S. Distributional structure. Word World 10, 146–162 (1954).

    Article Google Scholar 

46. Jurafsky, D. & Martin, J. H. Speech and Language Processing (Stanford Univ., 2018).

47. Mikolov, T., Sutskever, I., Chen, K., Corrado, G. S. & Dean, J. Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems Vol. 26 (MIT Press, 2013).

48. Pennington, J., Socher, R. & Manning, C. Glove: global vectors for word representation. In Proc. 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) 1532–1543 (Association for Computational Linguistics, 2014).

49. Kozlowski, A. C., Taddy, M. & Evans, J. A. The geometry of culture: analyzing the meanings of class through word embeddings. Am. Sociol. Rev. 84, 905–949 (2019).

    Article Google Scholar 

50. Caliskan, A., Bryson, J. J. & Narayanan, A. Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biases. Science 356, 183–186 (2017).

    Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar 

51. Bolukbasi, T., Chang, K.-W., Zou, J. Y., Saligrama, V. & Kalai, A. T. Man is to computer programmer as woman is to homemaker? Debiasing word embeddings. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 4349–4357 (MIT Press, 2016).

52. Hamilton, W. L., Leskovec, J. & Jurafsky, D. Diachronic word embeddings reveal statistical laws of semantic change. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1605.09096v6 (2016).

53. Arora, S., Li, Y., Liang, Y., Ma, T. & Risteski, A. Linear algebraic structure of word senses, with applications to polysemy. Trans. Assoc. Comput. Linguist. 6, 483–495 (2018).

    Article Google Scholar 

54. Shannon, C. E. A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 27, 379–423 (1948).

    Article MathSciNet Google Scholar 

55. Mnih, A. & Hinton, G. Three new graphical models for statistical language modelling. In Proc. 24th International Conference on Machine Learning 641–648 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2007).

56. Arora, S., Li, Y., Liang, Y., Ma, T. & Risteski, A. A latent variable model approach to PMI-based word embeddings. Trans. Assoc. Comput. Linguist. 4, 385–399 (2016).

    Article Google Scholar 

57. Davelaar, E. J. & Raaijmakers, J. G. W. in Cognitive Search: Evolution, Algorithms, and the Brain (eds Todd, P. M. et al.) 177–194 (MIT Press, 2012).

58. Romney, A. K., Brewer, D. D. & Batchelder, W. H. Predicting clustering from semantic structure. Psychol. Sci. 4, 28–34 (1993).

    Article Google Scholar 

59. Howard, M. W., Jing, B., Addis, K. M. & Kahana, M. J. Semantic structure and episodic memory Ch. 7. in LSA: A Road Towards Meaning (eds McNamara, D. & Dennis, S.) (Erlbaum, 2007).

60. Abbott, J. T., Austerweil, J. L. & Griffiths, T. L. Random walks on semantic networks can resemble optimal foraging. Psychol. Rev. 122, 558–569 (2015).

    Article PubMed Google Scholar 

61. Hills, T. T., Todd, P. M. & Jones, M. N. Foraging in semantic fields: how we search through memory. Top. Cogn. Sci. 7, 513–534 (2015).

    Article PubMed Google Scholar 

62. Charnov, E. L. Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem. Theor. Popul. Biol. 9, 129–136 (1976).

    Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar 

63. Pirolli, P. L. T. Information Foraging Theory: Adaptive Interaction with Information (Oxford Univ. Press, 2007).

64. Harbison, J. I., Dougherty, M. R., Davelaar, E. J. & Fayyad, B. On the lawfulness of the decision to terminate memory search. Cognition 111, 416–421 (2009).

    Article PubMed Google Scholar 

65. Lewis, M. & Frank, M. C. Linguistic niches emerge from pressures at multiple timescales. In Proc. 38th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society 1385–1390 (Cognitive Science Society, 2016).

66. Lupyan, G. & Dale, R. Language structure is partly determined by social structure. PLoS ONE 5, e8559 (2010).

    Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 

67. Shcherbakova, O. et al. Societies of strangers do not speak less complex languages. Sci. Adv. 9, eadf7704 (2023).

    Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 

68. Pellegrino, F., Coupé, C. & Marsico, E. A cross-language perspective on speech information rate. Language 87, 539–558 (2011).

    Article Google Scholar 

69. Schürmann, T. & Grassberger, P. Entropy estimation of symbol sequences. Chaos 6, 414–427 (1996).

    Article MathSciNet PubMed Google Scholar 

70. Shannon, C. E. Prediction and entropy of printed English. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 30, 50–64 (1951).

    Article Google Scholar 

71. Kontoyiannis, I., Algoet, P. H., Suhov, Y. M. & Wyner, A. J. Nonparametric entropy estimation for stationary processes and random fields, with applications to English text. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 44, 1319–1327 (1998).

    Article MathSciNet Google Scholar 

72. Levinson, S. C. Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature (MIT Press, 2000).

73. Caplan, S., Kodner, J. & Yang, C. Miller’s monkey updated: communicative efficiency and the statistics of words in natural language. Cognition 205, 104466 (2020).

    Article PubMed Google Scholar 

74. Brochhagen, T. & Boleda, G. When do languages use the same word for different meanings? The Goldilocks principle in colexification. Cognition 226, 105179 (2022).

    Article PubMed Google Scholar 

75. Bentz, C., Dediu, D., Verkerk, A. & Jäger, G. The evolution of language families is shaped by the environment beyond neutral drift. Nat. Hum. Behav. 2, 816–821 (2018).

    Article PubMed Google Scholar 

76. Olson, J. A., Nahas, J., Chmoulevitch, D., Cropper, S. J. & Webb, M. E. Naming unrelated words predicts creativity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2022340118 (2021).

    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 

77. Woolley, A. W., Chabris, C. F., Pentland, A., Hashmi, N. & Malone, T. W. Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science 330, 686–688 (2010).

    Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar 

78. McGrath, J. E. Groups: Interaction and Performance (Prentice-Hall, 1984).

79. McMahan, P. & Evans, J. Ambiguity and engagement. Am. J. Sociol. 124, 860–912 (2018).

    Article Google Scholar 

80. Murray, D. et al. Unsupervised embedding of trajectories captures the latent structure of mobility. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2012.02785 (2020).

81. Lucy, J. A. Linguistic relativity. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 26, 291–312 (1997).

    Article Google Scholar 

82. Lucy, J. A. Language Diversity and Thought: A Reformulation of the Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1992).

83. Tiedemann, J. Parallel data, tools and interfaces in OPUS. In Proc. 8th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (eds Calzolari, N. et al.) 2214–2218 (European Language Resources Association, 2012).

84. Christodouloupoulos, C. & Steedman, M. A massively parallel corpus: the Bible in 100 languages. Lang. Resour. Eval. 49, 375–395 (2015).

    Article PubMed Google Scholar 

85. YouVersion https://www.bible.com/ (2017).

86. ParaCrawl (NTT Communication Science Laboratories, accessed 1 June 2017); https://www.paracrawl.eu/

87. OpenSubtitles https://www.opensubtitles.org/ (2017).

88. Rafalovitch, A. & Dale, R. United Nations General Assembly resolutions: a six-language parallel corpus. In Proc. MT Summit XII (Association for Computational Linguistics, 2009).

89. Juola, P. Measuring linguistic complexity: the morphological tier. J. Quant. Linguist. 5, 206–213 (1998).

    Article Google Scholar 

90. Mikolov, T., Chen, K., Corrado, G. & Dean, J. Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1301.3781 (2013).

91. Mikolov, T., Yih, W.-T. & Zweig, G. Linguistic regularities in continuous space word representations. In Proc. NAACL-HLT 2013 746–751 (Association for Computational Linguistics, 2013).

92. Hammarström, H., Forkel, R., Haspelmath, M. & Bank, S. Glottolog v.4.4. Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology https://glottolog.org (2021).

93. Chen, X., Ender, P., Mitchell, M. & Wells, C. Regression with Stata. UCLA https://stats.oarc.ucla.edu/stata/webbooks/reg/ (2003).

94. Huber, P. J. The behavior of maximum likelihood estimates under nonstandard conditions. In Proc. 5th Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability Vol. 1 (Eds Le Cam, L. M. & Neyman, J.) 221–233 (Univ. California Press, 1967).

95. White, H. A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica 48, 817–838 (1980).

    Article MathSciNet Google Scholar 

96. Bills, A. et al. IARPA Babel Amharic Language Pack IARPA-babel307b-v1.0b (Linguistic Data Consortium, 2019); https://doi.org/10.35111/ehfb-ka57

97. Bills, A. et al. IARPA Babel Bengali Language Pack IARPA-babel103b-v0.4b (Linguistic Data Consortium, 2016); https://doi.org/10.35111/5jdb-wp44

98. Andresen, L. et al. IARPA Babel Cebuano Language Pack IARPA-babel301b-v2.0b (Linguistic Data Consortium, 2018); https://doi.org/10.35111/f0b3-5398

99. Bills, A. et al. IARPA Babel Georgian Language Pack IARPA-babel404b-v1.0a (Linguistic Data Consortium, 2016); https://doi.org/10.35111/dcr5-ga44

100. Andresen, L. et al. IARPA Babel Guarani Language Pack IARPA-babel305b-v1.0c (Linguistic Data Consortium, 2019); https://doi.org/10.35111/qdg9-7a64

101. Adams, N. et al. IARPA Babel Igbo Language Pack IARPA-babel306b-v2.0c (Linguistic Data Consortium, 2019); https://doi.org/10.35111/7988-wd73

102. Bills, A. et al. IARPA Babel Kazakh Language Pack IARPA-babel302b-v1.0a (Linguistic Data Consortium, 2018); https://doi.org/10.35111/rwmc-nm96

103. Benowitz, D. et al. IARPA Babel Lithuanian Language Pack IARPA-babel304b-v1.0b (Linguistic Data Consortium, 2019); https://doi.org/10.35111/m5qd-dk93

104. Conners, T. et al. IARPA Babel Tagalog Language Pack IARPA-babel106-v0.2g (Linguistic Data Consortium, 2016); https://doi.org/10.35111/mp23-rd11

105. Bills, A. et al. IARPA Babel Tamil Language Pack IARPA-babel204b-v1.1b (Linguistic Data Consortium, 2017); https://doi.org/10.35111/3j2w-kb06

106. Bills, A. et al. IARPA Babel Telugu Language Pack IARPA-babel303b-v1.0a (Linguistic Data Consortium, 2018); https://doi.org/10.35111/vm6x-za86

107. Andresen, J. et al. IARPA Babel Turkish Language Pack IARPA-babel105b-v0.5 (Linguistic Data Consortium, 2016); https://doi.org/10.35111/mb8z-6p26

108. Andrus, T. et al. IARPA Babel Vietnamese Language Pack IARPA-babel107b-v0.7 (Linguistic Data Consortium, 2017); https://doi.org/10.35111/yrqp-r555

109. Adams, N. et al. IARPA Babel Zulu Language Pack IARPA-babel206b-v0.1e LDC2017S19 (Linguistic Data Consortium, 2017); https://doi.org/10.35111/te29-8988

110. Bojanowski, P., Grave, E., Joulin, A. & Mikolov, T. Enriching word vectors with subword information. In Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics Vol. 5 (Association for Computational Linguistics, 2017).

111. Grave, E., Bojanowski, P., Gupta, P., Joulin, A. & Mikolov, T. Learning word vectors for 157 languages. In Proc. International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (Eds Calzolari, N. et. al.) (European Language Resources Association, 2018).

112. Gordon, R. G. Ethnologue, Languages of the World (SIL International, accessed 1 October 2017); https://www.ethnologue.com

113. Hofstede, G. Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations Across Nations (SAGE, 2001).

114. Hofstede, G. Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values (Sage, 1984).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Z. Chen (Stanford University) for her excellent research assistance and are grateful for comments from C. Chambers (Johns Hopkins University), M. Lewis (Meta), D. Casasanto (Cornell University), G. Lupyan (University of Wisconsin-Madison), J. L. Martin (University of Chicago), A. Sharkey (Arizona State University), J. Murphy (RAND Corporation) and J. Chu (Massachusetts Institute of Technology). P.A. also thanks the judges of the 2017 INFORMS/Organization Science Dissertation Proposal Competition for their feedback and acknowledges support from the National Science Foundation Doctoral Dissertation Research Improvement Grant (no. 1702788). The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript.

Process Thought Through Taylor Swift Songs

​Taylor Swift and Process Philosophy:

​A Submission to the Taylor Swift  Swiftposium

article link

by Jay McDaniel

​

​An international academic symposium attempting to explain just how Taylor Swift has become so influential occurred in Melbourne, Australia, on February 11-13, 2024. Called Swiftposium, it was a hybrid academic conference for scholars to engage in critical dialogue about Swift’s popularity and its implications for a range of issues including gender, fandom, popular culture, literature, the economy, the music industry, and more. Swiftposium was collaboratively organized by scholars from six universities across Australia and New Zealand. Click here to learn about it.

I had hoped there would be a session on process philosophy and Taylor Swift, but I missed the deadline for submitting proposals. I share my contribution below. In Part One, I present twenty key ideas in process thought. Skip it if you already know about process philosophy. In Part Two, written by ChatGPT, I share specific songs by Swift that speak to these themes. My proposal is that, through these songs, Swift can invite an outlook on life that resonates with the process movement. In Part Three, I offer an outline of a book, not yet written, on Swift's career as understood in a process perspective. My hope is that another scholar, younger and more able, might write this book.

- Jay McDaniel

Twenty Key Ideas

in the Process Worldview

by Jay McDaniel

1. Process: The universe is an ongoing process of development and change, never quite the same from moment to moment. Every entity in the universe is best understood as a process of becoming that emerges through its interactions with others. The beings of the world are becomings.

2. Interconnectedness: The universe as a whole is a seamless web of interconnected events, none of which can be completely separated from the others. Everything is connected to everything else and contained in everything else. As Buddhists put it, the universe is a network of inter-being.

3. Continuous Creativity: The universe exhibits a continuous creativity on the basis of which new events come into existence over time which did not exist beforehand. This continuous creativity is the ultimate reality of the universe. Everywhere we look we see it. Even God is an expression of Creativity. Even as God creates, God is also continuously created.

​

4. Nature as Alive: The natural world has value in itself and all living beings are worthy of respect and care. Rocks and trees, hills and rivers are not simply facts in the world; they are also acts of self-realization. The whole of nature is alive with value. We humans dwell within, not apart from, the Ten Thousand Things. We, too, have value.

5. Ethics: Humans find their fulfillment in living in harmony with the earth and compassionately with each other. The ethical life lies in living with respect and care for other people and the larger community of life. Justice is fidelity to the bonds of relationship. A just society is also a free and peaceful society. It is creative, compassionate, participatory, ecologically wise, and spiritually satisfying - with no one left behind.

6. Novelty: Humans find their fulfillment in being open to new ideas, insights, and experiences that may have no parallel in the past. Even as we learn from the past, we must be open to the future. God is present in the world, among other ways, through novel possibilities. Human happiness is found, not only in wisdom and compassion, but also in creativity.

7. Thinking and Feeling: The human mind is not limited to reasoning but also includes feeling, intuiting, imagining; all of these activities can work together toward understanding. Even reasoning is a form of feeling: that is, feeling the presence of ideas and responding to them. There are many forms of wisdom: mathematical, spatial, verbal, kinesthetic, empathic, logical, and spiritual.

8. Relational Selfhood: Human beings are not skin-encapsulated egos cut off from the world by the boundaries of the skin, but persons-in-community whose interactions with others are partly definitive of their own internal existence. We depend for our existence on friends, family, and mentors; on food and clothing and shelter; on cultural traditions and the natural world. The communitarians are right: there is no "self" apart from connections with others. The individualists are right, too. Each person is unique, deserving of respect and care. Other animals deserve respect and care, too.

9. Complementary Thinking: The process way leans toward both-and thinking, not either-or thinking. The rational life consists not only of identifying facts and appealing to evidence, but taking apparent conflicting ideas and showing how they can be woven into wholes, with each side contributing to the other. In Whitehead’s thought these wholes are called contrasts. To be "reasonable" is to be empirical but also imaginative: exploring new ideas and seeing how they might fit together, complementing one another.

10. Theory and Practice: Theory affects practice and practice affects theory; a dichotomy between the two is false. What people do affects how they think and how they think affects what they do. Learning can occur from body to mind: that is, by doing things; and not simply from mind to body.

11. The Primacy of Persuasion over Coercion: There are two kinds of power – coercive power and persuasive power – and the latter is to be preferred over the former. Coercive power is the power of force and violence; persuasive power is the power of invitation and moral example.

12. Relational Power: This is the power that is experienced when people dwell in mutually enhancing relations, such that both are “empowered” through their relations with one another. In international relations, this would be the kind of empowerment that occurs when governments enter into trade relations that are mutually beneficial and serve the wider society; in parenting, this would be the power that parents and children enjoy when, even amid a hierarchical relationship, there is respect on both sides and the relationship strengthens parents and children.

13. The Primacy of Particularity: There is a difference between abstract ideas that are abstracted from concrete events in the world, and the events themselves. The fallacy of misplaced concreteness lies in confusing the abstractions with the concrete events and focusing more on the abstract than the particular.

14. Experience in the Mode of Causal Efficacy: Human experience is not restricted to acting on things or actively interpreting a passive world. It begins by a conscious and unconscious receiving of events into life and being causally affected or influenced by what is received. This occurs through the mediation of the body but can also occur through a reception of the moods and feelings of other people (and animals).

15. Concern for the Vulnerable: Humans are gathered together in a web of felt connections, such that they share in one another’s sufferings and are responsible to one another. Humans can share feelings and be affected by one another’s feelings in a spirit of mutual sympathy. The measure of a society does not lie in questions of appearance, affluence, and marketable achievement, but in how it treats those whom Jesus called "the least of these" -- the neglected, the powerless, the marginalized, the otherwise forgotten.

16. Evil: “Evil” is a name for debilitating suffering from which humans and other living beings suffer, and also for the missed potential from which they suffer. Evil is powerful and real; it is not merely the absence of good. “Harm” is a name for activities, undertaken by human beings, which inflict such suffering on others and themselves, and which cut off their potential. Evil can be structural as well as personal. Systems -- not simply people -- can be conduits for harm.

17. Education as a Lifelong Process: Human life is itself a journey from birth (and perhaps before) to death (and perhaps after) and the journey is itself a process of character development over time. Formal education in the classroom is a context to facilitate the process, but the process continues throughout a lifetime. Education requires romance, precision, and generalization. Learning is best when people want to learn.

18. Religion and Science: Religion and Science are both human activities, evolving over time, which can be attuned to the depths of reality. Science focuses on forms of energy which are subject to replicable experiments and which can be rendered into mathematical terms; religion begins with awe at the beauty of the universe, awakens to the interconnections of things, and helps people discover the norms which are part of the very make-up of the universe itself.

19. God: The universe unfolds within a larger life – a love supreme – who is continuously present within each actuality as a lure toward wholeness relevant to the situation at hand. In human life we experience this reality as an inner calling toward wisdom, compassion, and creativity. Whenever we see these three realities in human life we see the presence of this love, thus named or not. This love is the Soul of the universe and we are small but included in its life not unlike the way in which embryos dwell within a womb, or fish swim within an ocean, or stars travel throught the sky. This Soul can be addressed in many ways, and one of the most important words for addressing the Soul is "God." The stars and galaxies are the body of God and any forms of life which exist on other planets are enfolded in the life of God, as is life on earth. God is a circle whose center is everywhere and circumference nowhere. As God beckons human beings toward wisdom, compassion, and creativity, God does not know the outcome of the beckoning in advance, because the future does not exist to be known. But God is steadfast in love; a friend to the friendless; and a source of inner peace. God can be conceived as "father" or "mother" or "lover" or "friend." God is love.

20. Faith: Faith is not intellectual assent to creeds or doctrines but rather trust in divine love. To trust in love is to trust in the availability of fresh possibilities relative to each situation; to trust that love is ultimately more powerful than violence; to trust that even the galaxies and planets are drawn by a loving presence; and to trust that, no matter what happens, all things are somehow gathered into a wider beauty. This beauty is the Adventure of the Universe as One.

Explanation: ​

Process thinking is an attitude toward life emphasizing respect and care for the community of life. It is concerned with the well-being of individuals and also with the common good of the world, understood as a community of communities of communities. It sees the world as a process of becoming and the universe as a vast network of inter-becomings. It sees each living being on our planet as worthy of respect and care.

People influenced by process thinking seek to live lightly on the earth and gently with others, sensitive to the interconnectedness of all things and delighted by the differences. They believe that there are many ways of knowing the world -- verbal, mathematical, aesthetic, empathic, bodily, and practical - and that education should foster creativity and compassion as well as literacy.

Process thinkers belong to many different cultures and live in many different regions of the world: Africa, Asia, Latin America, Europe, North America, and Oceania. They include teenagers, parents, grandparents, store-clerks, accountants, farmers, musicians, artists, and philosophers.

Many of the scholars in the movement are influenced by the perspective of the late philosopher and mathematician, Alfred North Whitehead. His thinking embodies the leading edge of the intellectual side of process thinking. Nevertheless, a mastery of his ideas is not necessary to be a process thinker. Ultimately process thinking is an attitude and outlook on life, and a way of interacting with the world. It is not so much a rigidly-defined worldview as it is a way of feeling the presence of the world and responding with creativity and compassion.

The tradition of process thinking can be compared to a growing and vibrant tree, with blossoms yet to unfold. The roots of the tree are the many ideas developed by Whitehead in his mature philosophy. They were articulated most systematically in his book Process and Reality: An Essay in Cosmology. The trunk consists of more general ideas which have been developed by subsequent thinkers from different cultures, adding creativity of their own. These general ideas flow from Whitehead's philosophy, but are less technical in tone. The branches consist of the many ways in which these ideas are being applied to daily life and community development. The branches include applications to a wide array of topics, ranging from art and music to education and ecology.

Much of this website -- Open Horizons - is devoted to the branches and trunk. Of course, some people will be interested in the roots. For those interested in gaining knowledge of the roots, we have created a free course of short videos which provides an introduction to Alfred North Whitehead's organic philosophy and serves as a guiding companion to Whitehead's seminal work, Process and Reality. These twenty six-minute videos are offered below. They can be viewed in sequence or in parts, depending on your interests. If you would like to get started on this short course to better understand the roots of process thinking, go to What is Process Thought? The ideas above represent the twenty key ideas in the trunk. ​

Process Thought Through

Taylor Swift Songs

by ChatGPT

​

Let's take each of these principles of process thinking and pair them with a Taylor Swift song, illustrating how each principle is reflected in the song:

​Process: "Long Live" - This song celebrates the journey and evolution of relationships and experiences, embracing change and growth over time.

Interconnectedness: "We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together" - Swift reflects on the interconnectedness of emotions and relationships, acknowledging how one experience can impact various aspects of life.

Continuous Creativity: "Blank Space" - Swift demonstrates her continuous creativity as an artist, experimenting with different personas and musical styles to keep her sound fresh and exciting.

Nature as Alive: "The Best Day" - Swift expresses appreciation for the natural world and the value of cherished memories spent outdoors with loved ones.

Ethics: "Change" - Swift advocates for positive change and ethical behavior, encouraging listeners to stand up for what they believe in and make a difference in the world.

Novelty: "22" - Swift embraces novelty and spontaneity in this upbeat anthem about living life to the fullest and embracing new experiences.

Thinking and Feeling: "All Too Well" - Swift combines introspective lyrics with emotional storytelling, showcasing her ability to convey complex thoughts and feelings through her music.

Relational Selfhood: "Fifteen" - Swift reflects on the importance of relationships and shared experiences in shaping one's identity and sense of self.

Complementary Thinking: "Love Story" - Swift blends elements of traditional fairy tales with modern romance, demonstrating her ability to weave contrasting themes into a cohesive narrative.

Theory and Practice: "Mean" - Swift addresses the practical implications of dealing with criticism and negativity, encouraging listeners to rise above adversity and stay true to themselves.

The Primacy of Persuasion over Coercion: "The Man" - Swift challenges traditional gender norms and societal expectations, advocating for empowerment through persuasion and example rather than coercion.

Relational Power: "You Belong With Me" - Swift explores the dynamics of power and connection in relationships, emphasizing the importance of mutual respect and understanding.

The Primacy of Particularity: "Tim McGraw" - Swift reminisces about a specific moment in time and the unique emotions associated with it, highlighting the importance of individual experiences.

Experience in the Mode of Causal Efficacy: "Enchanted" - Swift captures the transformative power of a meaningful encounter, illustrating how experiences can shape and influence our lives.

Concern for the Vulnerable: "Safe & Sound" - Swift expresses empathy and compassion for those in need, offering solace and support through her music.

Evil: "Look What You Made Me Do" - Swift confronts harmful behavior and toxic relationships, asserting her agency and reclaiming her narrative in the face of adversity.

Education as a Lifelong Process: "Never Grow Up" - Swift reflects on the passage of time and the ongoing process of learning and self-discovery throughout life.

Religion and Science: "Holy Ground" - Swift celebrates the awe-inspiring beauty of life and love, tapping into themes of spirituality and interconnectedness.

God: "Begin Again" - Swift finds solace and renewal in the aftermath of heartbreak, embodying themes of resilience and divine love.

Faith: "Fearless" - Swift embraces uncertainty with courage and optimism, trusting in the journey and believing in the possibility of a brighter future.These songs by Taylor Swift exemplify how the principles of process thinking can be reflected in music, offering insights into the dynamic nature of human experience and the interconnectedness of life's moments.

​Prospectus for a Book on Process Philosophy and Taylor Swift

by ChatGPT

​

Taylor Swift's Evolution as a Process: Analyze Swift's career trajectory and artistic evolution through the lens of process philosophy, highlighting themes of growth, adaptation, and transformation.

Interconnectedness in Swift's Work: Explore the interconnectedness of Swift's music, persona, and cultural impact, examining how her narratives and imagery resonate with diverse audiences and intersect with broader social trends.

Continuous Creativity and Innovation: Discuss Swift's ongoing creativity and innovation as a key factor in her sustained relevance within the music industry, highlighting her ability to adapt to changing tastes and technologies.

Relational Selfhood and Fandom Culture: Investigate the role of relational selfhood in Swift's relationship with her fans, analyzing the reciprocal influence between artist and audience and the formation of fan communities based on shared values and experiences.

Ethics and Social Responsibility: Consider Swift's ethical engagement with social and political issues, exploring how her advocacy for causes such as gender equality and LGBTQ+ rights reflects a commitment to justice and compassion.