We see language as the primary means we have to convey our ideas. And hugely powerful it is. Often cited as the primary reason humans became the most dominant species on earth. But the relationship of language to thought is contentious and unknown. Once seen as a transparent medium for ideas, in the 20th century philosophers from Russell and Wittgenstein to Heidegger and Derrida overturned this everyday assumption arguing either that language was woven into the way that we think or more strongly that language was the structure of thought. But this view has been challenged by linguists and evolutionary biologists who maintain that thought is independent of language and that we, and other living beings, have other forms of communication.
Should we see language as independent of thought and if so what does thought consist of? Or does language make thoughts possible and provide the framework through which we see the world? Or is the opposition of thought and language itself a mistake?
Psychologist and psycholinguist Steven Pinker locks horns with post-postmodern philosopher Hilary Lawson as they debate the opposition between language and thought.