"That she'd better obey him without trying to understand."
Communication
"Reason is the only means of communication among men, and an objectively perceivable reality is their only common frame or reference; when these are invalidated (i.e., held to be irrelevant) in the field of morality, force becomes men's only way of dealing with one another.
Concepts and, therefore, language are primarily a tool of cognition - not of communication, as is usually assumed. Communication is merely the consequence, not the cause nor the primary purpose of concept-formation - a crucial consequence, of invaluable importance to men, but still only a consequence. Cognition precedes communication; the necessary precondition of communication is that one have something to communicate. (This is true even of communication among animals, or of communication by grunts and growls among inarticulate men, let alone of communication by means of so complex and exacting a tool as language.)
~ Above found at Ayn Rand Lexicon - Communication
"The Miracle Worker by William Gibson . . . tells the story of how Annie Sullivan brought Helen Keller to grasp the nature of language. . . .
I suggest that you read The Miracle Worker and study its implications. . . . this particular play an invaluable lesson in the fundamentals of rational epistemology.
I suggest that you consider Annie Sullivan's titanic struggle to arouse a child's conceptual faculty by means of a single sense, the sense of touch, then evaluate the meaning, motive and moral status of the notion that man's conceptual faculty does not require any sensory experience.
I suggest that you consider what an enormous intellectual feat Helen Keller had to perform in order to develop a full conceptual range (including a college education, which required more in her day than it does now), then judge those normal people who learn their first, perceptual-level abstractions without any difficulty and freeze on that level, and keep the higher ranges of their conceptual development in a chaotic fog swimming, indeterminate approximations, playing a game of signals without referents, as Helen Keller did at first, but without her excuse. Then check on whether you respect and how carefully you employ your priceless possession: language.
And, lastly, I suggest that you try and project what would have happened if, instead of Annie Sullivan, a sadist had taken charge of Helen Keller's education. A sadist would spell "water" into Helen's palm, while making her touch water, stones, flowers and dogs interchangeably; he would teach her that water is called "water" today, but "milk" tomorrow; he would endeavor to convey to her that there is no necessary connection between names and things, that the signals in her palm are a game of arbitrary conventions and
that she'd better obey him without trying to understand.
If this projection is too monstrous to hold in one's mind for long, remember that this is what today's academic philosophers are doing to the young - to minds as confused, as plastic and almost as helpless (on higher conceptual levels) as Helen Keller's mind was at her start.
~ Above found at Ayn Rand Lexicon - Language
Most people could not identify the above is too monstrous for a mind, because they have never grasped the minds importance in life and what can hinder, harm, destroy, or ruin a mind. The sadistic situation the world has going on in my life, is a prime example that people think good minds should be able to endure sadisticalness, everyday, all day, year after year and more importantly behave rationally through it.
Monstrous to think such shit, while you enjoy life.