Civilization’s structures do not suppose a pure language structure; rather civilizations have a synthesized language on the basis of Macro-Culture. This synthesized language shows no pure language is possible in a civilization. Synthetization supposes pure language of civilization is a categorical mistake.

Mehr Garh of Balochistan is known as a very ancient civilization of world. If this civilization’s language was not Balochi, we could not prove this civilization as the civilization of Balochistan.

If the structural language of civilization is in synthesized form and this structural language has elements of Balochi language; thus, we suppose Baloch was not a nomadic nation.

Balochistan sought civilization. Macro-culture is an unit of civilization. Civilization supposes highly adjustment of collective lives to thinking, ethical, material and economical resources when collectiveness evolutionary passes cultural norms.

If Mehr Garh civilization had a particular language, probably civilization’s language was not from surrounding languages, but it has elements of surrounding’s language in its structure. From this discourse we cannot conclude that MehrGarh civilization was not a civilization of surrounding’s languages. Rather, we Micro-cultures of surrounding get together and develop a synthesized position. This position makes roots of civilization. We know macro-culture is a synthesized form of micro-cultures because macro-culture is unit of civilization.

Synthetization and Evolution

Man does not make society cultural because civilization’s unit is macro-culture. Macro-culture shows determinism of human being. If we analyze human beliefs; thus, we get it fixed. Without fixation of belief man does not path of practice. When he justifies his belief then he feels its fixation. When he fixes his beliefs and justifies them; thus, he practices his beliefs and he makes way of arguing his faith.

Human’s beliefs are formalized by the existing material resources, for instance, we seek China’s civilized structure of belief different from other civilization, i.e. Egypt’s and so on. Probably their elements of beliefs have some relations because beliefs on the basis of miracle get developed in meta-narrative, but although these beliefs are structurally different.

We seek a collective change of which human want in evolutionary history of human. He adjusts his assertion of belief of another assertion. Probably, he accepts new assertion supportive. But he finds elements of previous assertion of belief in new accepted one; moreover he finds some of elements in supportive assertion which are anti-thesis of previous assertion. He thinks elements of anti-thesis are more reliable and justifiable than previous. In this situation he makes a synthesized way and adopts new assertion as much justifiable. In this position, human collective life is ready to let previous go and to let new in. but men not free from the fixation of beliefs. Fixations of belief suppose collective life. Because when man generalizes society then gets abstraction of beliefs. Thus, we suppose existence of society which makes generalization of society possible. We generalize those things which are already available for generalization.

We find synthetization of language as that we seek synthetization of belief. Both have common roots of evolution. If we make a discourse about any civilization thus we get there was no pure language works, rather in synthesized form. In this situation when elements of surrounding’s language merged in synthesized form, in here when a language contributes more elements then it goes to be privileged language and it works. For instance, Balochi was a privileged language of Mehr Garh civilization. Thus it was not pure Balochi, rather it gets elements of surrounding’s language. When it works, it shows contributions of surrounding language. Knowing the actual existing of working language, first we do trace what language was privileged. Aftermath, we can know what languages had position of thesis and what another had.

If we analyze the above mentioned pattern, then we make a probable result that many of an occasion a synthesized language grows up from the thesis and anti-thesis language and it gets a new shape. Probably a new language grows and its structure, apparently, not from them. But its elements all come from surrounding languages. For instance, neither Balochi nor Brovi and nor Sindhi was privileged language of Mehr Garh. Unfortunately we probably find no such state of new language in history. Often in history we marginalize that privileged language gets easily adjustment of material resources. Moreover we find adjusted language is more justifiable than other languages. Finally we see privileged language is synthesized form of surrounding languages and it works. The whole discourse concluded on these points that, 1. Mehr Garh civilization is in Balochistan. 2, if anyone is not ready to sublime it a Baloch civilization so, 3, he never refers it non Baloch civilization. 4, finally, it is not necessary for us to analyze everything or notion in Aristotelian logic of proposition which shows assertion either be true or false.