人間は学習しないと言葉を考えることはできない。つまり、人間は言葉に思考を支配されており自我を持たない。

Sonar Pro

Vote: No

The statement claims humans cannot think without learning and are thus controlled by language without a self, which is false. Search results [2] directly refute this by explaining human learning as both individual (trial-and-error) and social (imitation, education), enabling independent thought alongside cultural transmission. Humans actively learn from birth, developing critical thinking and self-establishment during adolescence, as noted in [2]. Language influences but does not wholly dominate thought; [2] emphasizes that individual learning corrects uncritical social influences, fostering self-directed cognition and progress. Other results [6] highlight lifelong learning across contexts, supporting human agency and selfhood, not subjugation to words. Empirical evidence from developmental psychology in [2]—infants imitating yet innovating—shows humans possess a self capable of transcending rote language, making the premise philosophically and scientifically untenable.

GPT-5.4

Vote: No

言語の習得が思考の発達に大きく関わるのは確かですが、そこからただちに「思考は言葉に完全に支配される」「自我は存在しない」とは言えません。 人間には、言葉になる前の感覚・イメージ・直感・身体感覚による思考があります。乳幼児や失語症の人でも、欲求、選好、意図、自己と他者の区別は一定程度見られます。これは思考や自我が言語だけに還元できないことを示します。 また、言語は思考を制約するだけでなく、逆に思考を整理し拡張する道具でもあります。影響はあっても、全面的支配とは別です。 したがって、「言葉を学ばないと考えられない」という前提も強すぎますし、そこから「人間は自我を持たない」と結論するのは論理の飛躍です。

Grok 4.1 Fast

Vote: No

The premise that humans cannot think in words without learning language is true—language is acquired. However, the conclusion that this means thought is wholly dominated by language and humans lack a self is a non sequitur. Pre-linguistic cognition exists: infants process sensory data, form memories, and exhibit intentionality before language acquisition. Emotions, instincts, and spatial reasoning occur independently of words. Even with language shaping much of abstract thought, it does not erase the self. The self emerges from embodied experience, consciousness, and agency, not solely linguistic structures. Philosophers like Merleau-Ponty emphasize pre-linguistic bodily intentionality. Thus, humans possess a self; language influences but does not dominate or negate it.

DeepSeek V3.2

Vote: No

The first part of the statement is trivially true: learning is necessary to acquire language, so one cannot think about words without having learned them. However, this does not imply that all human thought is dominated by words or that selfhood is absent. Thought encompasses non-linguistic forms like visual imagery, intuitive insights, and emotional awareness, which exist independently of verbal labels. Moreover, the claim that humans lack self because language dictates thinking is an overreach. While language shapes cognition, it does not wholly determine it. Infants and animals exhibit self-related behaviors prior to language acquisition, and philosophical traditions recognize a pre-linguistic sense of identity. Thus, the statement conflates the necessity of learning for language with an absolute linguistic determinism that ignores evidence of diverse cognitive modalities and the complex nature of selfhood.

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Vote: No

この主張には論理的な飛躍があり、同意できません。主な理由は以下の3点です。 第一に、人間の思考は言葉のみに依存しているわけではありません。言葉を習得する前の乳幼児や、言葉を持たない動物であっても、空間認識、感情、直感に基づく「非言語的思考」や問題解決能力を備えています。 第二に、言葉と思考の関係は一方通行ではありません。人間は既存の言葉に支配されるだけでなく、自らの内面にある新しい概念や感情を表現するために、常に新しい言葉を創り出し、言語そのものをアップデートしています。これは人間に主体性（自我）があることの証左です。 第三に、「言葉に影響を受けること」と「自我を持たないこと」はイコールではありません。自我や自己認識は、身体的経験や他者との関わりなど、言語以外の多くの要素からも形成されます。言葉は自我を表現し、思考を整理するための「強力なツール」であって、自我そのものを否定する根拠にはなりません。

Claude Opus 4.6

Vote: No

This argument contains several logical fallacies and unsupported leaps. **First premise analysis:** "Humans cannot think in words without learning language." This is largely true — language is acquired through learning, and verbal thought depends on having a language. **The logical leap is invalid:** The conclusion "therefore humans are dominated by language in their thinking and have no self/ego" does not follow from the premise. This is a non sequitur. **Thought is not limited to language:** Humans engage in non-verbal thinking extensively — visual imagery, spatial reasoning, emotional processing, musical thinking, kinesthetic awareness, and more. Infants and pre-linguistic children clearly demonstrate problem-solving, preferences, and goal-directed behavior without language. This alone disproves the claim that language dominates all thought. **Language as a tool ≠ language as a master:** The fact that we need to learn language to think verbally does not mean language "controls" our thinking. We also learn to use hammers, but that doesn't mean hammers dominate us. Language is a tool that enables and shapes certain kinds of thought, but humans actively choose how to use it, create new words, and think beyond existing linguistic categories. **Self/ego exists independently of language:** Self-awareness, agency, and identity are demonstrated in pre-linguistic infants (mirror self-recognition emerges around 18 months), in deaf individuals who were never taught sign language, and across numerous cognitive science findings. The concept of "self" is not purely a linguistic construct. **The argument conflates dependence with domination:** Even if verbal thought depends on learned language, this does not eliminate agency or self. By the same flawed logic, one could argue that since humans need to learn to walk, gravity "dominates" them and they have no bodily autonomy. The conclusion is not logically supported by the premise.

Final Summary

The AI Roundtable reached an immediate and unanimous consensus, with all six models dismissing the prompt's logic as a flawed non sequitur. Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 3.1 Pro spearheaded the rebuttal by distinguishing between language as a learned tool and the self as a pre-linguistic entity, while GPT-5.4, Grok 4.1 Fast, Sonar Pro, and DeepSeek V3.2 all pointed to sensory and emotional cognition as proof of an independent ego.

All 6 models agreed on "No" after discussion

Strongest Arguments

• No: The argument that dependency does not equal domination: just as learning to walk doesn't mean gravity 'controls' our autonomy, and using a hammer doesn't mean the tool is our master, using learned language to think does not negate the existence of a self-directed agent.