a siMplE DEfinition of gEnEral sEMantics · 2016. 10. 28. · a simple deFinition oF general...

a siMplE DEfinition of gEnEral sEManticsben hAucK *

343

[A] number of isolated facts does not produce a science any more than a heap of bricks produces a house. The isolated facts must be put in order and brought into mutual structural relations in the form of some theory. Then, only, do we have a science, something to start from, to analyze, ponder on, criticize, and improve.

–AlfredKorzybskiScience & Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems

and General Semantics1

The term, ‘semantic reaction’ will be used as covering both semantic reflexes and states. In the present work, we are interested in [semantic reactions], from a psychophysiological, theoretical and experimental point of view, which include the corresponding states.

–AlfredKorzybskiScience & Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems

and General Semantics2

For A number of decAdesandperhapsforallofits life,generalsemanticshassufferedfromanidentitycrisis. Peoplehavelonghaddifficultydefiningthe

termgeneralsemanticsforothers.Ofthosepeoplewhohavesettledondefinitions,manyoftheirdefinitionsaretoovague,toogeneral,orjustplainawkward.Thebulkofthesedefinitionsisoftheawkwardsort,morelikedescriptionsthandefinitions3,leadingtoahazyimageofgeneralsemanticsandadifficultyincategorizingitinthegrandschemeoffields.Becauseofawkwarddefinitions,peoplelearningofgeneralsemanticsforthefirsttimecan’trelatetoit,sotheydon’tbecomeinterestedinit.

*BenHauckwebmastersthewebsitesfortheInstituteofGeneralSemanticsandtheNewYorkSoci-etyforGeneralSemantics.Along-timestudentofgeneralsemantics,hesitsontheboardfordirec-torsforNYSGS.Forthepastsixyears,Mr.Hauckhastaughtlong-formimprovisationinNewYorkCity,Toronto,andLondon,andheholdsaBFAinActingfromOtterbeinCollege.HelivesinNewYorkCity.Website:http://www.benhauck.com.

Longoverdueisasimpledefinitionofthetermgeneralsemanticsthatpeoplecan relate to instantly upon hearing. Providing such a definitionwill not onlyprovideclaritytothemeaningoftheterm,butitwillalsoprovideaclearfocusfornearlyeveryoneinvolvedintheendeavorofgeneralsemantics.Asimpledefinitionofthetermgeneralsemanticswillalsoimplyanorganizationandframeworkformanyofitsassociatedideas.

Definitions of General Semantics and of Other Endeavors

Definitions for the termgeneral semanticshavebeenhistorically awkward.Itisnotuncommontoreaddefinitionsthatemploystringsofhyphenatedwordsand puzzling terminology. These definitionsmaymap the territory of generalsemanticswell,thoughfromamarketingperspective,theycreateperceptionsofgeneralsemanticsassomethingalienandimpenetrable.Takencollectively,thesetroublesomedefinitionspaintapictureofgeneralsemanticsassomethingtowhichfewpeoplecanrelate. Someexamplesofdefinitions (orphraseology regardedasdefinitions4) thathaveappearedovertheyearsforthetermgeneralsemanticsinclude:

• General semantics […] is a new extensional discipline which explains and trains us how to use our nervous systems most efficiently.5

• General semantics is the study of relations between symbol systems and nervous systems as expressed in behavior.6

• General semantics is an up-to-date epistemology.7

• General semantics may be regarded as a systematic attempt to formulate the general method of science in such a way that it might be applied not only in a few restricted areas of human experience, but generally in daily life.8

• General semantics is (1) the study or correction of human responses to symbols, symbol systems, sign systems, and sign situations, (2) a study of how a human nervous system works and ought to work, (3) an educational theory whose aim is to study the evaluational processes of human beings, and (4) ultimately a nonverbal discipline of silence, of dissolving away the encrusted verbalizations and abstractions, dogmas and creeds which envelop most of us like layers of barnacles.9

• General semantics is a general theory of evaluation based on modern scientific knowledge, the postulates of Einsteinian physics, etc. It represents a methodological synthesis of trends in the Western world that evolved during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, and are now increasingly becoming a part of our new world reorientation.10

344 etc • october 2008

345a simple deFinition oF general semantics

• General semantics (or GS) can be referred to as a general system of evaluation and awareness. It provides a systematic methodology to understand how you relate to the world around you, how you react to this world, how you react to your reactions, and how you may adjust your behavior accordingly.11

• General semantics deals with the study of how we perceive, construct, evaluate, and communicate our life experiences. It can be considered an interdisciplinary study in that when you study general semantics, you integrate knowledge from many academic fields–not just language and communication studies, but also psychology, physics, chemistry, mathematics, physiology, sociology, anthropology, etc.12

Comparingthesedefinitionswithdefinitionsofdifferentsciences,wefindaninterestingpattern:

• physicalscience–the study of non-living systems13

• geology–the study of solid matter that constitutes the Earth14

• seismology – the study of earthquakes and the propagation of elastic waves through the Earth15

• paleoseismology–the study of geologic sediments and rocks for signs of ancient earthquakes16

• analyticalchemistry–the study of chemical composition of natural and artificial materials17

• biochemistry–the study of chemical processes in living organisms18

• organicchemistry–the study of chemical compounds primarily consisting of hydrogen and carbon19

• cosmology–the study of the universe and humanity’s place it in20

• astronomy–the study of celestial objects and phenomena that originate outside the Earth’s atmosphere21

• gamma-rayastronomy–the study of astronomical objects at the shortest wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum22

Thepatternyoumayseeinthesedefinitionsofsciencesiseachisfairlyshort,butmorenotably,eachbeginswiththephrase“thestudyof.”Learninganyofthesesciencesasstudiesofparticularthingsmakestherespectivesciencesimmediatelyunderstandabletostudents,evenschoolchildren.Teachinggeneralsemanticsas

thestudyofsomethingisthefirststeptowardelevatingitsstatusinthescientificcommunityandbringingitsinterestseasilyintofocus.

the study of What?

Thetermgeneralsemanticsgivesaclueintowhatitstudies.Generalsemanticshassomethingtodowiththestudyofmeanings. However, thewordmeaningsisquitevague,asitcouldrefertothedefinitionsofwords,theconsequencesofactions,theintentionsofpeople,orsomeothersuchpopularreferentforthewordmeanings.Therefore,inordertocreateasimple,cleardefinition,ourdefinitionofgeneralsemanticsshouldeitherexcludethewordmeaningsorincludethewordwithaqualifiertoidentifywhatkindofmeaningwereferto. Cognitively, semantics is related to linguistics. Linguistics is the study of language.Semanticsisthe study of meanings of words.Ifsemanticsisthestudyofmeaningsofwordsandisrelatedtolinguistics,semanticsmaybegeneralizedasthe study of meanings of language. In the communication process, linguistics and semantics are thus ordinallyrelated:First,thereislanguage,thenthereismeanings oflanguage.Thisordinalrelationshipbetweenlinguisticsandsemanticsmeshesnicelywithafundamentalformulation of general semantics: that of the semantic reaction. A semanticreactionisareactiontosomething.Itdoesn’ttakemuchthoughttorealizethatasemanticreactionisareactionto language. Thereinwemakeprogresstowardourdefinitionofthetermgeneralsemantics.Giventhatsemanticreactionsareseenasfundamentalingeneralsemantics,23andgiventheordinalrelationshipbetweenlinguisticsandsemantics,generalsemanticsmaybeseenasthe study of semantic reactions,ormoreclearly,generalsemanticsmaybeseenasthe study of reactions to language.24

This definitionmerely puts perspective on theword semantics in the termgeneral semantics. What might the word general mean in general semantics?Starting with the definition of the study of semantic reactions, we realize thatthe term semantic reaction as formulated byAlfred Korzybski in his landmarkbookongeneralsemanticstitledScience & Sanityreferstothetotalmind-body(“psychophysiological”)responsetolanguage.25 Korzybskistudiesthenervous,psychological, physiological, and behavioral consequences of language ona person. He regards language as behavior, so upon hearing an utterance andexperiencingasemanticreaction,anylanguageyouuseinyourresponseto theoriginalutteranceamountstobehaviorrelatedtotheoriginalutterance.Thatis,whatyousayinresponsetosomelanguageisbehavior,andassuch,partofyoursemanticreaction.


Knowing this, thewordgeneral in the termgeneral semantics refers to thewholeslewofthingsthathappenstoapersonuponhearinglanguageandhavingasemanticreaction,not just the learnedordictionarymeaningofaword. Youmightdistinguishthetermgeneralsemanticsfromspecialsemantics,atermthatmayrepresentthecarefulstudyofasub-reactiontolanguage—nervousreactions,physiological reactions, linguistic reactions (speech responses), or some otheraspectofasemanticreaction.26

So,thesimpledefinitionofthetermgeneralsemanticsthatIproposeforpopularconsumptionandadoptionisthe study of reactions to language,withtheconsiderationthatthatphrasemeansanykindofreactionthatcomesasaresultofencounteringandexperiencing language—affective, cognitive, emotional, psychological, linguistic,physiological,orbehavioral.Contrastgeneralsemanticswithspecialsemantics,andfor special semantics youhave amore specific definition; youhave the study of emotional reactions to language,orthe study of physiological reactions to language,orthe study of linguistic reactions to language,orthestudyofsomeotherparticularaspectofsemanticreactions,whateveryourspecialinterest.

What about Regular semantics?

Withrespecttothemorewidelyknownfieldsimplycalledsemantics,weneedtoaccept that themeaningof thatword is somethingslightlydifferent than themeaningofthesamewordinthetermgeneralsemantics. Inthenamesemantics,thewordsemanticsreferstomeanings of words.Inthenamegeneralsemantics,thewordsemanticsreferstosemantic reactions,thetotalmind-bodyresponsetolanguage. Semanticsismoreofalogicalandhistoricalfieldthatelaboratesontheconnectionofwords anddefinitions, especially considering time,while general semantics ismoreofabehavioralfieldthatobserveshowpeoplereacttospeechandwriting. Ifweneedtodistinguishsemanticsfromgeneralsemanticsinconversation,wemightusetheadjectivehistoricalandrefertosemanticsashistoricalsemantics.Historicalsemanticsisthe study of the meanings of words over time,whilegeneralsemanticsisthe study of reactions to language. Likewise,whenAlfredKorzybskiuses theadjectivesemantic inScience & Sanity,heusuallymeans“oforrelatedtoreactionstolanguage”ratherthan“oforrelatedtothemeaningsofwords.”

General semantics as a science

Seeinggeneralsemanticsasthe study of reactions to language,wetakeagiantsteptowardelevatinggeneralsemanticstothelevelofscience.Weonlyensure


the status of general semantics in the scientific communitywhere the study ofreactionstolanguageemploysthescientificmethodasameansforgatheringdataaboutreactionstolanguage.Whatmakesasciencetrulyasciencelikephysics,chemistry,etc.,isitsemploymentofthescientificmethodinitsstudy.Else,thesciencefallsshortofbeingatruescience. Todate,peoplearenotwidelydoingscientificexperimentsingeneralsemantics(experimentsonreactionstolanguage),thoughscientificbehavioralstudieswithrespecttotheimpactoflanguageoninternalandexternalhumanbehaviormightbeconstruedtosomeextentasgeneralsemanticsexperiments. Todate,peopleare more inclined to talk about general semantics than to conduct scientificexperiments.Theyaremoreinclinedtoprovideopinionsonwhattodoinlightofgeneralsemanticsresearchandfoundationsthantheyareinclinedtodesignandimplementscientificexperiments. This means that, to date, much of general semantics is editorial rather thanscientific,anobservationthatsuggestsalullinscientificactivityrelatedtogeneralsemantics.Thislulldoesnotsuggestadeathinscientificactivityrelatedtogeneralsemantics, nor does it suggest a death of general semantics as a whole. To thecontrary,asimpledefinitionofgeneralsemanticsisexpectedtoreactivateinterestingeneralsemanticsandscientificexperimentationrelatedtoreactionstolanguage.

the focus (foci) of General semantics

Thesimpledefinitionofgeneralsemanticsasthe study of reactions to languagesaysthat,ultimately,peopleinterestedingeneralsemanticspayattentiontoandfocusonreactionspeoplehavetolanguage. Thisfocusisverybroadandveryengaging,coveringawiderangeoftopicsimportant to everyday living. People interested in general semantics interestthemselvesin:

• howpeopleinterpretlanguage• howpeoplebehavebasedonhowtheyinterpretlanguage• howpeoplereplybasedonthelanguagetheyreadandhear

Peopleinterestedingeneralsemanticsalsobecomeinterestedin:

• the relationship between one’s speech and one’s thinking, and howchangingone’sspeechcanchangeone’sthinking

• propagandaanditseffectsonpeople’ssemanticreactions• persuasionandpropagandatechniques


• advertisingslogansandmarketingmessages• criticalthinking• neuro-semanticsandneuro-linguistics• neuro-linguisticprogramming(NLP)• rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT) and cognitive behavioral

therapy(CBT)• linguisticaccuracyandinaccuracyandtheirrespectiveimplicationsinthe

engineeringofhumankind

Thesimpledefinitionofgeneralsemanticsasthe study of reactions to languagecoversjustaboutanyideayou’veeverencounteredingeneralsemanticswithoutemployinganyhyphenatedjargonorconfoundingterminology.Itbringsclaritytotheendeavorofgeneralsemanticsaswellasfocustotheendeavor.Ultimately,generalsemantics isseenasa study. Thesimpledefinitionrelatesmanyof thevarious interests regarded as general semantics and makes understandable whytheyarepartofthefocusofgeneralsemantics.

Why Have General semantics?

Almosteveryscienceexiststoservesomepurpose.Thatis,ascienceisnotcreatedassimplyastudyforthesakeofhavingastudy.Itexiststosolvesomeproblemorsetofproblems.Generalsemantics,too,isastudyfoundedinordertosolvesomeproblemorsetofproblems. General semantics seems to have come into existence primarily to solveproblems with time-binding.27 Time-binding, a notion first formulated byKorzybskiinhisfirstbookManhood of Humanity,istheuniquelyhumancapacitytopassinformationonfromonegenerationofhumanstoanother.Thiscapacityallows future generationsof humans to start in their endeavorswhere previousgenerationshaveleftoff.Animalsdonothavethetime-bindingcapacity,andasaresult,theykeep“startingfromthebeginning”witheachgeneration. Bycomparison,humansareabletoexperienceprogresswhileanimalssimplystay put. The primary mechanism that allows for time-binding is language.Human language allows one generation of people to communicate to anothergenerationofpeople.Asaresult,apreviousgenerationcanprovideinstructionstoafuturegenerationonhowtoattackaproblem,whyto tryonemethodoveranother,whatnottodo,etc.,savingfuturegenerationsprecioustime.Thetermtime-bindingroughlymeansconsolidatingexperienceintowords,thoughitmayalsobeconstruedasreducingtheamountoftimeneededtomovefromsteptostep.Byreducingtime,ingeneral,youserveprogress.


Problemswith time-bindingemergewhen languagedoesnotserve theprogressof humankind. Language may interfere with the progress of humankind.Understanding the mechanics of language, or more specifically reactions tolanguage, may afford a solution to the problems with time-binding. With thiscuriosity,wearriveatthefoundingofascientificstudyofreactionstolanguage.28

Ordering the Many Ideas Associated with General semantics

Withrespect toorderingthemanyideasassociatedwithgeneralsemantics,westartbylookingatthewholespectrumfromwhenJudysayssomething,towhenPunchreadswhatJudysays.Furthermore,welookatthetotalmind-bodyreactionofPunchafterPunchreadswhatJudysays.Thisisprobablyourmainfocusingeneralsemantics.Ingeneralsemantics,weevenlookatwhatPunchdoestoJudyorevenwhatPunchdoestoTom,Dick,Harry,etal.,afterPunchreadswhatJudysays.

Simplified Timeline of Communication& General Interests of Communication sciences

TheuppertimelineaboveshowsasimplifiednarrativeofwhathappenswhenJudyspeakstoPunch.Judysays“Nicehare.”Punchmistakenlyhears“Nicehair.”Fromhearingthat,Punchinternallyprocessesthatstatement:Perhapsheisinsecureabouthisbalding,perhapsheinterpretssarcasmfromJudy,perhapshestartstofeelangry,perhapshisheartrateelevates.Fromthesepoints,perhapsPunch’smusclesbecometenseandhisbrowfurrows.Fromthesepoints,perhapsPunchshoutsanexpletiveatJudyandpunchesJudy.Then,perhapsJudysays“Hey!”andslapsPunchinretaliationforPunch’ssemanticreactions.Theseeventscoverthesequenceofeventsrepresentedbytheuppertimeline. The upper timeline could also lead from Judy saying “Nice hare,” to Punchaccuratelyhearing“Nicehare,” toPunch feelingawashofgoodness internally, toPunchexpressingtoJudy“Thankyouforsayingthataboutmyrabbit”thenofferingtoletJudyholdhisrabbit. Thecorrespondinglowertimelineshowswhatscientificfieldstakeinterestinwhatstepsofthetimeline.Linguisticsandhistoricalsemantics(thestudyofthemeaningsofwordsovertime)takeinterestinutterancesandtheirformulation.Generalsemanticstakesinterestinalmosteverythingafterthatpointrelatedtoagivenutterance.Ittakes

Judyspeaks Punchhears Punch’sinternalsemanticreactionsPunch’sexternalsemanticreactions(speaks,moves,emotes,etc.)

Judyhears etc.

1.linguistics&historicalsemantics

2.generalsemantics 3.generalsemantics 4.generalsemantics 5.general

semantics6.

etc.


interestinwhatthereaderhears,howheinterpretsit,howhereactstoitunderneathhisskinaswellashowhereactsoutwardlyinbehavior,expression,speech,etc.Generalsemanticseventakesinterestinhowtheinitiatorofcommunicationorotherrecipientsofthesemanticreactionhearandreact. Weseethatgeneralsemanticshasabroadinterestinthecommunicationprocess.Itisinterestedinnearlyeverythingthathappensafterawordisreadorheard.Generalsemantics isn’t so much interested in absolute or inherent meanings of words,etymology,morphology,orphonetics.Itisinterestedinwhatwordsdotopeople—theresultsthatfollowwhensomeoneutterssomething.

the Actual subject of study in General semantics

Ingeneralsemantics,westudyreactions to language,but towhatdoes thatphraserefer?

Specifically, we study humanswho are listening and reading. We look atthe words they are consuming. We observe and document how they react tothosewords—what they feel and think, what they experience emotionally andphysiologically,aswellaswhattheysubsequentlysayanddo.

Weobserveanddocumenta rangeofdifferent reactions todifferentkindsofspeechandlanguage.Wecomparethereactionspeoplehavetoonekindofspeechwiththereactionspeoplehavetoanotherkindofspeech.Wecontrastthereactions.

Fromourobservationsanddocumentation,wemayofferatheory.Wemighttheorizethatifwewanttogenerateparticularsemanticreactionsfrompeopleorwithinourselves,weshoulduseoneparticularkindofspeechoveranother.Fromour observations and documentation, we might provide a model for predictingthesemanticreactionsofpeopleinlightoftheintroductionofaparticularkindofspeech.Wemightevenuncovernewaspectsofsemanticreactionstostudybasedonourobservationsanddocumentationofsemanticreactions.

Whateverthecase,ingeneralsemantics,the actual subject is people.Westudypeoplewhentheyareprivytolanguage.Welookattheiraffectivereactions,theiremotionalreactions, their intellectual reactions, their physiological reactions, their linguisticreactions(theirspeechresponses),theirbehavioralreactions(theirresultantactions),etc.Weappreciateeachofthesereactionsnon-elementalistically:Eachfunctionsaspartofawhole;toseparatethemverballyistomisrepresenthowtheyinterrelate.

Big topics in General semantics

Looking at the literature of general semantics and the topics it covers, wesee that in addition to covering the intake of language, its processing, and the


consequential behaviors that follow its intake, general semantics touches onAristotelianandnon-Aristotelianspeech,quantummechanics,mathematics,brainevolution,andotherheavycontemporary1933ideas.KorzybskibringsthisdizzyingarrayofheretoforeunrelatedideastogetherinScience & Sanity.

Thequestionbecomeswherethesevarioustopicsfitinwithrespecttogeneralsemantics.Thereislittledoubtthattheirinclusionwithingeneralsemanticsliteraturehasmadedefininggeneral semantics a difficult task andhas influencedmanyofits awkward definitions. But in understanding general semantics as the study of reactions to language,andinunderstandinghowthatscienceaimstoserveproblemswithtime-binding,soonenoughweseehowtheseinclusionsrelatetoitsfocus.

Many of the multidisciplinary inclusions in Science & Sanity serve asfoundationalscientificknowledge1933intothestructureofrealityandthefunctioningof thehumannervous system. Other inclusions inScience & Sanity documenthistoricalandexperimentalobservationsofsemanticreactions.29

ManyinclusionsinScience & Sanity,however,falloutsidegeneralsemanticsandfitmoreintothecategoryofapplied general semantics.Thatis,theseinclusionsare not related to the study of reactions to language, but instead apply what islearnedfromthestudyofreactionstolanguage.30

Theinformationbelowdoesnotofferanabsoluteorall-inclusiveframeworkfororderingandorganizingthemanyideasassociatedwithgeneralsemanticsanditssimpledefinitionasthe study of reactions to language.Itmakessomestrikingomissions and in places may run contrary to the usual organization of generalsemanticsideas.Theauthorhopestoprovideaverygeneralframeworkforthemanyideas,thespecificorderandinclusionofwhicharelargelyopentorevisionandreinterpretation.

Scientific Knowledge in General Semantics

InScience & Sanity,Korzybskidrawsfromdiversescientificfieldstobuildfoundationalknowledgeforgeneralsemantics.

In some places, Korzybski explains the structure of reality. He draws fromscientific knowledge built from physics, colloidal chemistry, and other empiricalfieldstoprovideasaccurateanimageashecanofthestructureofrealitytodate1933.

Inotherplaces,Korzybskiexplainshowrealityfunctions. HeusesChild’sresearchondynamicgradientstodemonstratetheinterrelationshipoflivingcellsandtheenvironment.HealsousesChild’sresearchasevidencefortheabstractingfunction of the human nervous system.31 Additionally, Korzybski draws fromthe experiments of Pavlov on conditional reflexes in dogs, noting the greaterconditionalityofthehumannervoussystemthanthatofdogs.32

Korzybskiprovidesfoundationalscientificknowledgetoensurethatthestudy


ofreactionstolanguageisnotconfoundedbyoutdated,unscientificperceptionsofrealitythatwouldotherwiseblighthisscience.Withthesefoundationslaidout,heprovidesastandardforevaluatingsemanticreactions:Semantic reactions that correspond to the structure and functioning of reality denote sanity in a person, while semantic reactions that do not correspond to the structure and functioning of reality denote unsanity in a person.33

Non-euclideanism, Non-Newtonianism, and Non-Aristotelianism in General semantics

Fromhisstudiesofsemanticreactions,oneobservationKorzybskimakesisthatspeechcandramaticallyinfluencethinking.InScience & Sanity,henotestheroleoflinguisticrevisioninculturalchange.Toexemplifyhispoint,Korzybskicallsattentiontohistoricparadigmshiftsinmathematicsandscience.

Specifically,KorzybskidiscussestheshiftsfromtheEuclideantonon-Euclideanparadigms ingeometry,aswellasshifts fromtheNewtonian to theEinsteinian(non-Newtonian)paradigminmechanics.Theseshiftsareusuallycharacterizedas shifts in thinking,but theymight alsobe characterized as shifts in speakinggiven thatnearlyeveryoneencounters these ideasfirst in theformofspeechorwriting.34 Shifts in Euclidean and Newtonian speech awakened revolutionarywaysof thinkingabout theirrespectivesubjectsofstudy. Theslightrewordingof single postulates in Euclidean and Newtonian systems yielded dramaticallydifferent,non-Euclideanandnon-Newtoniansystems.

Korzybski notes that shifting from the Aristotelian to a non-Aristotelianparadigm also awakened revolutionary ways of thinking. (In truth, generalsemanticsmaybeseenasarevolutionaryproductofnon-Aristotelianspeech.)Inthecontextofgeneralsemantics,non-Euclideanism,non-Newtonianism,andnon-Aristotelianism exemplify alternate ways of speaking about subjects, the resultofwhichboreamazingfruitfortheiremployers. Specifically, theyhelpedtheiremployerstobetterunderstandthestructureofreality. Bybetterunderstandingthestructureofreality,thepractitionersofthesenewlanguagesprogressedintheirrespectiveappliedsciences.

Applied General semantics

Thetermappliedgeneralsemanticsreferstotakingtheknowledgegatheredscientificallyundertheumbrellaofgeneralsemanticsandapplyingittowardotherendeavors. Specifically, theendeavormostoftenselectedfor theapplicationofgeneralsemanticsknowledgeishuman living.

More often than a science, general semantics is interpreted as a practice,


a discipline, or even somewhat vaguely as a system. When interpreting generalsemanticsasoneofthese,itisvery,veryimportantin the interest of the scientific identity of general semanticstorefertoitasappliedgeneralsemanticsandnotasgeneral semantics.35 General semantics as a practice or a discipline historicallyconjuresupimagesofprescriptionsorrecommendationsofbehavior.Science does not prescribe; it merely describes.Whensomeonemakesaprescriptioninlightofscientificknowledge,heisdoingappliedscience;heisnotdoing(pure)science.

Putsuccinctly,generalsemanticsisnotappliedgeneralsemantics.Generalsemantics has to do with the study of reactions to language. Applied generalsemanticshastodowithapplications of the knowledge gained fromthe study of reactions to language.Anotherwaytosaythisisthatappliedgeneralsemanticsisthe application of knowledge gained from the study of semantic reactions.

Applications of the Knowledge Gained from General Semantics

Intermsofprogressandtime-binding,thenon-Euclidean,non-Newtonian,andnon-Aristoteliansystemsaffordednotonlyrevolutionarywaysofspeakingbutalsoaffordedrevolutionaryprogressforhumankind.Inlightoftheirdiscovery,Korzybskiadvocatesthesesystems,thenon-Aristoteliansystemofspeakinginparticular.

Moregenerally,technologyaffordsrevolutionaryprogressforhumankind,andtechnologyisbuiltthroughtheapplicationofknowledgegainedfrommanydifferentscientific studies. Given science’spowerful role in technologyandultimately inhumanprogress,Korzybskiadvocatestakinga scientific approach to human livingforthepotentialexpansiveprogressitmightaffordforthetypicalhumaninhislife.Korzybskiobservesthatthosepeoplewhorunontheoriesaboutrealitydevelopedwithouttheaidofthescientificmethodoftenexhibitsignsofunsanity.Theyoperatebyunfoundedinferences,inaccuratelanguage,antiquatedmetaphysics,andbeliefsthatdonotmatchcurrent1933scientificknowledge.Or,theygathertheirinformationbyunscientificmethods.Asaresult,thesepeoplehavedifficultyadjustingtoreality.By training in scienceandscientificmethodology,unsane individualscan reducetheirunsanity,becomesaner,andimprovetheiradjustment.

Training in the methodologies of mathematicians can also aid in sanity andadjustment. Mathematicsservesmanydifferentfunctionsingeneralsemanticsandappliedgeneralsemantics,butitismostnotablyhelpfulinappliedgeneralsemantics.

In applied general semantics, mathematics is seen as a nearly perfect language,36 one matching the structure of both reality and the human nervoussystem. Mathematics is also seen in applied general semantics as exemplary human behavior,thesourceofmanyhistorichumanachievements.37Givenbothinterpretations,mathematicsrepresentsidealhumanbrainfunctioning,thetarget


mentalfunctioningfortheunsaneperson.Allsortsofmathematicsmethodologiesareseentohelptheunsaneindividualbecomesaner.Fromemployingmathematicalpractices like indexing terms to generalizing mathematical practices like thecalculus,mathematicalmethodologiesoffernumerousapproachesforhelpingtheunsanepersontoadjust.

Theproblemsofunsanityareimportantingeneralsemanticsbecausetheycaninterferewithtime-binding.Ifsomeoneproducesandpromotesunscientifictheories,future generations may pick up his language. These unscientific theories maystunttheprogressofthefuturegenerationsinmuchthesamewayAristotelianismstuntedhumanprogressforhundredsofyears.Wherethetime-bindingcapacityisdiminished, there isconcern thathumansbehavenodifferently thananimalsandbecomemoreinclinedtowardengagingincatastrophicwar.Resolvingunsanitynotonlyaffordsprogress,butalsodiminishesthepotentialforhumanconflict.

Consciousness of Abstracting

Ifappliedgeneralsemanticschampionsjustonerecommendation,itchampionsbecomingconscious of abstracting.

FromKorzybski’sappliedgeneralsemanticperspective,becomingconsciousofabstractingplaysapivotalroleinhumanprogress.Consciousnessofabstractingmakesapersonawarethat:

• humanscan’tknoweverything• wordsdon’trepresenteverything• wordsaren’tthingsbutrepresentthings• humansprojecttheirwordsandideasontoreality• humanscan’ttrulyknowreality

Bybecomingconsciousofabstracting,apersonlearnsaboutthesubjectivityofhisevaluationsandthathisnervoussystemisnotabsolute.Bybecomingconsciousofabstracting,apersonlearnstodifferentiatebetweenaneventandanobject,anobjectandadescription,adescriptionandaninference,aninferenceandaprojection.

Bybecomingconsciousofabstracting,apersondelayshissemanticreactions.Bydelayinghissemanticreactions,hecanoffsettheheighteningofinterpersonalconflict and reach agreements that never before seemedpossible. Bydelayinghissemanticreactions,hecanalsostudysubjectslongertomakemoreinformedinferencesandtheories,formulationsthatmayaidintheprogressofjustonepersoninthefuture,orevenalloffuturehumankind.


Human engineering

Understandingthatappliedgeneralsemanticsisusuallyappliedtoproblemsofhumanliving,human engineering,thefieldKorzybskiproposedinhisfirstbookManhood of Humanity,shinesclearlyastheultimateKorzybskianendeavor.

In light of thewritings in hisfirst book and in light of his ownprofessionasanengineer,Korzybskihadaprimaryinterestintheengineeringofhumanity.General semantics studies reactions to language and the knowledge Korzybskigainedfromgeneralsemanticscouldapply toward theengineeringproblemsofhumankind.Worldwarwastheresultofproblemsintheengineeringofhumans;generalsemanticswasapotentialsolutiontothoseproblems,whilealsoatickettoare-engineeringofhumankind.ThemainmethodKorzybskiconcentratesonforre-engineeringhumanitycouldbeseenaslinguisticrevision.Bysimplerevisionstospeech,onecouldpotentiallybringaboutradicalchangesinhumanbehaviorforthebettermentofhumankind,nowandbeyond.

Conclusion

Thesimpledefinitionof the termgeneral semanticsas the study of reactions to language does not cover every idea included under the heading. Not even acomplicateddefinitioncouldcover thescopeof ideas the termgeneral semanticsrepresented. However, thesimpledefinitiondoescovera tremendousamountofrelatedgeneralsemanticideas,anditisservedbythetermappliedgeneralsemantics,whichcoverstheprescriptiveaspectsfoundinKorzybski’sScience & Sanity.

Withtheadoptionofthesimpledefinition,generalsemanticsfinallygainsaclearidentityandaspecificfocus.Itisfirstandforemosta study.Oncepeopleunderstand itasastudy, likeschoolchildren, theywilleasilybegin tograsp thesubjectathand.

NOtes & RefeReNCes

1. Korzybski,Alfred. Science & Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics. 5th ed. Englewood: Institute of GeneralSemantics,1994.p.55.

2. Ibid.,p.25.3. The author feels the need to distinguish between a definition and a

description.Verbally,theymaynotlookanydifferenttoareaderorlistener,butbehaviorallytheydiffergreatly.Theworddefinitionreferstoaverbalcharacterization designed to serve a particular purpose or objective. The


worddescriptionreferstoaverbalcharacterizationthatservesnoparticularpurposeorobjective.Focus on the behavior:IfIaskedyoutodescribethisessay,youmightsay,“Ithasalotofwords,it’swritteninEnglish,it’sbyBenHauck,it’saboutgeneralsemantics,”etc. Essentially, when you describe, you list characteristics.Describingisnotdefining.IfIaskyoutodefinethisessay,yourbehaviorwillchange. IfIaskyoutodefinetheessaywithoutspecifyingapurpose,you’llbeatalossforwords,maybeoverwhelmedbythetask.IfIaskyoutodefinetheessayso that someone else will read it,youmightquicklysay,“Thisessayisasteptowardtheacceptanceofgeneralsemanticsasascience,”“Thisessay isamust-read,”etc. If Ichange thepurposeandaskyoutodefinetheessayso that no one will read it,youmightquicklysay,“ThisessayissomethingyoushouldskipoverinthisissueofETC,”“Thisessayisrubbish,”etc.Essentially, when you define, you position.Comparing theverbal results of description anddefinition, on the surfacethey all look basically the same. However, comparing the psychologicalbehaviorassociatedwithdescriptionanddefinition,youstarttoseethatwhatyousaywhenyoudescribedependsonwhatyouabstractatagivenmoment,whilewhatyousaywhenyoudefinedependsonwhatyourgreaterobjectiveis.Inlightoftheseunderstandings,alotofpurporteddefinitionsofgeneralsemantics readmore like descriptions than definitions in that they try tomentioncharacteristicsofgeneral semantics rather than serveaparticularpurpose.Morebluntly,theydon’tserveapurpose.Theauthorfeelstheneedtoelevatethestatusofgeneralsemanticsinthescientificcommunity.Asaresult,heaimsforasimpleverbalcharacterizationofgeneralsemantics,adefinitiontoservethatpurpose.

4. Wanderer, Robert. “General Semantics: A Compendium of Definitions.”ETC.: A Review of General Semantics,July2007,pp.193-204.

5. Ibid.,p.194,AnAlfredKorzybskidefinition.6. Ibid.,p.194,ARobertPuladefinition.7. Ibid.,p.195,AJ.SamuelBoisdefinition.8. Ibid.,p.194,AWendellJohnsondefinition.9. Ibid.,p.196,AnS.I.Hayakawadefinition.10. Ibid.,p.196,AnoldInstituteofGeneralSemanticsdefinition.11. “Discover>GeneralSemantics.”InstituteofGeneralSemantics.Available:

http://time-binding.org/inner.php?mtrid=1&mpid=1(AccessedJuly1,2008).12. Ibid.13.Adapteddefinition from thesentence“Physical science isanencompassing

term for the branches of natural science and science that study non-livingsystems […]” “Physical science.” Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Science(AccessedJuly1,2008).


14.Adapteddefinitionfromthesentence“Geology[…]isthescienceandstudyofthesolidmatterthatconstitutestheEarth.”“Geology.”Available:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geology(AccessedJuly1,2008).

15.Adapteddefinitionfromthesentence“Seismology[…]isthescientificstudyofearthquakesandthepropagationofelasticwavesthroughtheEarth.”“Seismology.”Available:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seismology(AccessedJuly1,2008).

16.Adapteddefinitionfromthesentence“Paleoseismologylooksatgeologicsedimentsandrocks,forsignsofancientearthquakes.”“Paleoseismology.”Available:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoseismology(AccessedJuly1,2008).

17. “Analytical chemistry.” Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytical_chemistry(AccessedJuly1,2008).

18. “Biochemistry.”Available:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biochemistry(AccessedJuly1,2008).

19.Adapteddefinitionfromthesentence“Organicchemistryisadisciplinewithinchemistry which involves the scientific study of the structure, properties,composition, reactions, and preparation (by synthesis or by other means) ofchemicalcompoundsconsistingprimarilyofcarbonandhydrogen,whichmaycontainanynumberofotherelements,includingnitrogen,oxygen,thehalogensas well as phosphorus, silicon and sulfur.” “Organic chemistry.” Available:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_chemistry(AccessedJuly1,2008).

20.Adapted definition from the sentence “Cosmology […] is the quantitative(usuallymathematical)studyoftheUniverseinitstotality,andbyextension,humanity’s place in it.” “Cosmology.” Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmology(AccessedJuly1,2008).

21.Adapteddefinitionfromthesentence“Astronomy[…]isthescientificstudyofcelestialobjects(suchasstars,planets,comets,andgalaxies)andphenomenathatoriginateoutsidetheEarth’satmosphere(suchasthecosmicbackgroundradiation).”“Astronomy.”Available:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomy(AccessedJuly1,2008).

22. “Astronomy > Gamma-ray astronomy.” Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomy#Gamma-ray_astronomy(AccessedJuly1,2008).

23. Alfred Korzybski begins Chapter 2 of Science & Sanity with the sentence“The term semantic reaction is fundamental for the present work and non-elementalistic systems”(p.19).

24.Comparethedefinitionthetermgeneralsemanticsas“thestudyofreactionstolanguage”withthefollowingquotationsattributedtoKoryzbski:“The[non-elementalistic]studyofthe[semanticreaction]becomesanextremelygeneralscientificdiscipline”(Science & Sanity,p.25);“Thepresentworkiswritten


entirelyfromthe[semanticreaction]pointofview”(Ibid.);and“[…]astudyofthe[non-elementalistic]mechanismsofmeanings,throughpsychophysiologyandgeneralsemantics[…]”(Ibid.,p.24).

25. Note the generality of the term semantic reaction: “The working tool ofpsychophysiologyisfoundin thesemantic reaction. Thiscanbedescribedas thepsycho-logical reactionof a given individual towords and languageandothersymbolsandevents[…]Itisofgreatimportancetorealizethattheterm‘semantics’isnon-elementalistic,asitinvolvesconjointlytheemotionalas well as the intellectual factors (Science & Sanity, p. 24); “The term‘semantic,’ ‘semantically,’ ‘semantic reactions,’ ‘semantic states’ [etc.], are[non-elementalistic],astheyinvolvebothemotionsandintellect[…]Allthesetermsapplyequallyto‘senses’andto‘mind,’to‘emotions’andto‘intellect’—theyarenotartificiallysplit.”(Ibid.,p.30);“Thepresentenquiry[…]dealswithlinguisticandsemanticissuesandtheirphysiologicalandpsycho-logicalaspects”(Ibid.,p.10);“Froma[non-elementalistic]pointofviewwecanneverdisregardtheeffectthe‘body’or‘emotions’haveonthe‘mind,’andviceversatheeffectthatthe‘mind’hadonthe‘emotions’andthe‘body’”(Ibid.,p.546);and“Intheworkofgeneralsemanticswedealwiththeliving neuro-semanticandneuro-linguisticreactions”(Ibid.,p.xl).

26. Special semantics may have its problems from a Korzybskian perspective.Korzybskinotesthetermsemanticreactionasnon-elementalistic,meaningtheideasitrepresentsareempiricallyinterconnected(mind-body).Elementalizingtheideas(tomindandbody)misrepresentsempiricalevidence.Afieldofspecialsemanticswouldneed to appreciate and remembernon-elementalismelse itsrelationshipwiththegreaterfieldofgeneralsemanticswouldbeinquestion.

27. Korzybski notes near the beginning of Chapter 1 of Science & Sanity: “InthepresentvolumeIundertaketheinvestigationof themechanismof time-binding.”(p.7)

28. Korzybskinotesafewpassageslater:“TheformulationofGeneralSemantics,resultingfromaGeneralTheoryofTime-binding,suppliesthescientistsandthelaymenwithageneralmodernmethodoforientation,whicheliminatestheolderpsycho-logicalblockagesandreveals themechanismsofadjustment.”(Ibid.,p.8)

29. Korzybski writes in his chapter “On Non-Aristotelian Training”: “Theprocedure for training in the present system […] follows directly from thetheoreticalconsiderationswhichhavebeenexplainedintheforegoingchapters.Thecontentionsofthesystemhavebeenverifiedexperimentallyinallcaseswhereithasbeenconsistentlyapplied.”(Ibid.,p.469)


30. The author is of the opinion that Korzybski poorly organized his book,mixinggeneralsemanticsandappliedgeneralsemanticsandnotadequatelydistinguishing between the study of reactions to language and applications of theknowledgehegainedfromstudyingreactionstolanguage. Inrough,Korzybskimixesthedescriptivewiththeprescriptive,leadingtoaconfusingreadthatmakesthereaderquestionwhethergeneralsemanticsisscienceormoreproperlytermedphilosophy.

31. Science & Sanity,pp.102-103.32. Ibid.,p.335.33. Korzybski writes: “A ‘science of man’ must follow science (1933) in its

structureandmethod.Onlybyacceptingthecurrent‘scientificmetaphysics’asgivenbyscienceatagivendateis sanity possible”(Science & Sanity,p.531).Also:“Sanitymeansadjustmentandwithouttheminimumofthebeststructuralknowledgeofeachdateconcerningtheworld,suchadjustmentisimpossible.”(Ibid.,p.727)

34. Regardingshiftsinparadigms,Korzybskispeaksofthemeddlingofphilosophicalgrammar. Byphilosophicalgrammar,hemeans the lawsof thought,makingsomethingcognitive(thought)intosomethinglinguistic(grammar).Giventhis,theauthorofthisessayconsidersspeech lawsorrhetoric lawsmoreappropriatecharacterizationsofwhatpreventsparadigmshifts.Notehowthephilosophicalgrammar burdens thinking: “The primitive form of representation whichAristotleinherited,togetherwithitsstructuralimplicationsandhisphilosophicalgrammar,whichwascalledlogic,arestrictlyinterconnected,somuchsothatoneleadstotheother.”(Science & Sanity,p.92)

35. Notice that theauthorof thisessayuses thewordmultidisciplinary to refertothescientificinfluencesongeneralsemantics(Cf.“BigTopicsinGeneralSemantics”). In this sense, a science is regardedasadiscipline. This is afaircharacterizationwhenascienceisseenasastudy:Astudyissomethingyoudo,thereforeapractice,thereforequitepossiblyapracticeatwhichyoucandisciplineyourself. By strict adherence to scientificmethodology, youprobably justifiablymake your science a discipline. However, referring togeneral semantics as a discipline seems to bring to mind something muchdifferent. Referring to it as a discipline, general semantics does not tendtobring tomind thestudyof reactions to languagewithstrictadherence toscientificmethodology.Instead,itbringstomindawayofdoingotherthings.Itbringstomindpersonallifestyleratherthandisciplinedstudy.Korzybski’sconvolutedorganizationofScience & Sanitymaybemostresponsiblefortheconfusingidentityofgeneralsemantics.(Cf.note29.)


36. Science & Sanity,p.69.37. Ibid.,p.67.


a siMplE DEfinition of gEnEral sEMantics · 2016. 10. 28. · a simple deFinition oF general...

Documents

Transcript of a siMplE DEfinition of gEnEral sEMantics · 2016. 10. 28. · a simple deFinition oF general...