The trouble with language

In both of the authors we read this week, there was an intrinsic issue with conveying things in written language. Though their issues were different, there is a common theme in what was at fault. This is that language is too restrictive in its structure. Nietzsche argues that language produces and reinforces this idea of separation of subject and verb, that is the separation of the doer and the deed. Heidegger, on the other hand, tries to use the language to express this very abstract concept of Being and of the human being Da Sein. However, despite careful choices of terminology to try and distinguish these vague concepts, the essays become clunky and hard to decipher. Nietzsche explicitly and Heidegger with his unwieldy sentences demonstrate how problematic and influential language can be. According to Nietzsche, the seduction of language has been instrumental in the enforcement and spread of the slavish mode of evaluation. The creation of the idea of a moral plane that is in between the doer and the deed seems to be entirely analogous to the idea of subject and verb. This seduces us to the idea that there is a choice involved with will and action, where Nietzsche would say there is no distinction to be made. Heidegger has a problem when he has to use the same word to describe three separate entities, which sound not be confused with each other. The strict rules of language often cause problems when discussing such complicated and abstract issues as being and morality.

However, there is a definite need for the strictness and simplicity that languages provides us. If we were to do away with the idea of subject and verb and instead focus on the action we would lose our sense of individuality and instead be what we do, and everyone who did the same thing would be the same person, as it were. Not only is this concerning in the sense of losing our identity and becoming something of a mob based solely on our will and actions, it would also be incredibly impractical. Who you refer to would change based one how their will and actions change. Though this is the idea Nietzsche is getting at, I cannot imagine a simple way to keep these things straight and simple at the same time. Also, introducing a new way to discuss the more abstract concepts would also take away from practicality of language. We would not need this whole new set of language for our everyday lives, so it would likely be soon out of use, as a language is determined by how many people speak and understand it.

So is there a way to change our language system so it is more conducive to what Nietzsche and Heidegger want without losing its necessary simplicity?