[286] with that which makes man man, namely with the power of language. Our first discussion dealt with religion and language, with the distinction of ordinary language which grasps finite^a reality, and symbolic language in which ultimate concern expresses itself. We tried to show WHY

language makes man man, namely because language moves in universals^b, and universals liberate from the given situation to which all other beings are subjected. Being in bondage of their given nature means being subject to the concrete situation, and the problem of the concrete situation with which plants as well as animals have to deal all their lives. Man is able, in the power of language, to transcend the given situation, to abstract or universalize (therefore the terms "abstractions" or "universals") from the given situation, and in this way to overcome the bondage to it. Man's freedom is a function of his language^c, and man's language is a function of his freedom. Therefore you can never teach a NON-human being language, because you cannot transform him, or it, into something which has the nature of freedom. This was our first consideration.

The second consideration dealt with the first way in which man transcends the given reality, as what is traditionally called homo faber, man who fabricates, man who produces tools and transforms the given reality with the help of tools into another reality, into the reality of the technical realm^d, the realm which is now the dominant realm of most of our daily life. Then we discussed the relationship of religion to the technical realm, what it does for us and in how far it is dangerous for the question of ultimacy^e, because it produces means and hides ends. The question of ultimate concern