User blog comment:Deathundothee/Can We Write a Universal Pictorial Language?/@comment-3998736-20130518200104

An issue with this might exist with inherent cultural bias through association; A language needs this. A pictoral writing system/language even more so; in various languages words have a broader or narrower sense based off of how we sort them into categories; there are numerous kinds of love for example which the Greeks differentiate between with completely different words while we use adjectives; how deep is the distinction between Familial and Romantic love? Do they merit the same symbol with a secondary one to show difference? Or entirely different symbols? You can't pick either one without some bias.

Some conlangs might try to minimize this, but categories are something fluid which we make to suit reality rather than the other way around, so sooner or later arbitrary choices will have to be made and it will get harder for some and start loosing universality.

Some relatively simple communication can be made neutrally; Love v. Hate, Peace v. War, Food, etc, etc. But for something universal with what I would call language [ie. possesses a syntax and can express complex/abstract concepts], I would say you're going to end up with something similar to Esperanto; a relatively useful auxlang for a certain number of cultures which comply to a few common features; no set of pictographs might be understood carteblanche by a human picking them up ten thousand years later.