Korzybski Files

"How About 'Evaluatics" – A Letter from the ETC. Archives

2012-01-21T14:46:00.000-08:00

I don't particularly care for 'general semantics'—that is, the term 'general semantics'. And I'm not alone. Many of the most dedicated students of and builders-upon Alfred Korzybski's work, popularly know as 'general semantics' have had to deal the problems associated with the term 'general semantics'.

Because of how people tend to automatically interpret the term—as an elaboration of 'semantics', the linguistic/philosophical study of 'word meanings'—there has always existed the tendency to understand the work as 'all about' language and linguistic 'meaning'—an excessively limiting viewpoint for those of us who have studied Korzybski's "up-to-date epistemology" with any significant seriousness.

At the time when I was most active at the Institute of General Semantics, Korzybski's co-workers such as my friend and mentor Charlotte Schuchardt Read, were still teaching and working there, and for them the term 'general semantics' remained as much of a problem as ever. For a time, those of us involved in the scholarly publishing and teaching then going on at the Institute, decided to insert a hyphen as in 'general-semantics' to at least mark it more clearly as a unified term. However we later decided against imposing this usage in any formal way, and stopped it as an Institute policy. (Although I prefer the hyphenated spelling and sometimes still use it, definitely correct and clarifying according to the Chicago Manual of Style when using a two-word term as a modifier as in "a general-semantics approach.") In my Radical General-Semantics classes today, I keep a special contribution box for any student to deposit a fine whenever they use the term 'semantics' when actually referring to 'general semantics'. (Writing or saying "GS" provides another way to avoid triggering automatic reactions associated with seeing or hearing the word 'semantic(s)'.)

As I fully document in Korzybski: A Biography, the confusion between 'general semantics' and 'semantics' had become problematic even for Korzybski. In the final years of his life he had come to realize the difficulties caused by people's signal reactions to the term 'general semantics' for his general theory of evaluation and to the term 'semantic' used as a modifier synonymous with evaluational. By the time of his sudden and unexpected death on March 1, 1950, various methods were being considered by him and his students to deal with the problem. If he had lived longer, it seems very likely to me that he would have changed the name of the discipline he had founded and modified the terminology even more than he already had done.

Here is a terminological solution proposed by one student, J. Russell Bruff, printed in the Correspondence section of the Spring 1949 issue (Volume 6, Number 3) of ETC.: A Review of General Semantics (published at that time, not by the Institute of General Semantics, but by the Society for General Semantics.) The Editor of ETC. at that time, S. I. Hayakawa was one of the people whom Bruff was referring to as using 'semantics' when talking about 'general semantics' and thus helping to perpetuate the confusion. (To his credit, Hayakawa did publish Bruff's letter.) However you evaluate Bruff's proposal, he pinpoints quite well some significant aspects of what remains an ongoing problem for those of us in 2012 who want to promote and develop Korzybski's work.

Sirs: In getting started in general semantics, I found myself seriously misevaluating the discipline at first depending solely on the printed word, I progressed but slowly. Gradually I came to understand that I was unconsciously permitting my older evaluation patterns of 'the meaning in the word,' etc ., to block my efforts to develop the new pattern in which the emphasis is placed upon the individual evaluating the symbol. And it became apparent to me that writers on general semantics were often encountering the same difficulty and fostering it by what they wrote. Thus 'language' was observed to be linked with 'action,' implying that language may function as an operationally effective agent influencing the passive object, the individual.

To free myself from this frequent unconscious reversion to the former orientation toward human behavior in sign-symbol situations as the outcome resulting from the effective operation of sign and/or symbols upon the individual, and to maintain more constantly the orientation toward human behavior as primarily an evaluation process occurring in an individual, I have found it helpful to avoid the use of certain terms. The words avoided were those which, because of past and present usage, I seemed persistently to associate with the older evaluation patterns.

Among these terms were the words meaning (as applied to symbols), signification, and, most important of all, semantics. The use of these words seemed too often to be associated with a misorientation and a misevaluation when judged in terms of the basic formulations of general semantics. Whenever I used these terms I seemed to be implying that in a situation involving a 'human individual in a sign-symbol field' the effective operator causing action was located outside the individual in the signs and/or symbols.

I finally considered the advisability of discarding the label 'general semantics.' Because much of my own difficulty in getting at the essential features of this discipline seemed traceable to my evaluations when the word semantics was encountered, I now feel that a new term should be selected to refer to this field. This conviction has been reinforced by my experience in trying to explain it to others. I have found myself faced with the difficult task of separating general semantics from semantics. Since general semanticists are frequently referred to as 'semanticists' and the term 'general semantics' is frequently shortened to' semantics,' it now seems to me that the verbal foundation has been laid for much unnecessary confusion.

In other areas of scientific work the scientist does not hesitate to discard a term when its use seems no longer suitable. If the use of the words 'meaning,' 'signification,' and 'semantics' is customarily associated with a misorientation in which the effective agent in behavior, occurring in a sign-symbol situation, is projected into the sign and/or symbol, then these terms should be avoided. And along with them the adjective 'semantic .' It may seem presumptuous of me to suggest discarding a well-established label such as 'general semantics.' But one should bear in mind that all I am attempting to do is to clarify my own thinking, to make the formulations of this new 'science of man' more effective in my own life, and also to facilitate my helping others to achieve a similar result.

The label which I have adopted as a replacement for 'general semantics' is derived from the word 'evaluate.' The process of evaluation in this discipline seemed to occupy a key position in relation to which the various other operational phases of general semantics were tributary. Therefore, from the word evaluate I have coined the term evaluatics for my use, and now whenever I encounter the expression 'general semantics,' I translate it, for my own use, into evaluatics or symbol-evaluatics. Where 'semantic' occurs as an adjective, I substitute the term 'evaluatic.' I should be happy to accept any other label than evaluatics if it should seem more appropriate. But with the current growth of the field of 'semantics,' which differs fundamentally from 'general semantics,' it seems to me imperative to adopt a new label to replace 'general semantics' if workers in this area are to escape unnecessary confusion .

—J. RUSSELL BRUFF Santa Ana College, Santa Ana, California

From the Stray Thought Bin – 'Humility'

2012-01-13T12:17:00.000-08:00

Humility seems like a good name for prudence; as Dirty Harry put it, "A man's got to know his limitations."

Quote of the Day – Language and Intelligence

2012-01-12T23:29:00.000-08:00

"It is commonly said that your language is as good as your intelligence. This is probably true to a large degree. But the opposite is also true. Your intelligence is as good as your language."
— Elkhonon Goldberg, (The Wisdom Paradox, p. 98)

Quote of the Day: The Wondering Self of Science

2012-01-11T20:36:00.000-08:00

"What we must grasp here is this: if one has a feeling of wonder, it is one's self that has it, and not another; if one feels the challenge of a question or problem and responds by research, it is one's self that feels the challenge and one's self that makes the response; if one observes, or judges or reasons, it is one's self that does it. And so it is with all the faculties that engender Science. Fear may suppress or paralyze them; evil education may destroy them; through long, habitual, blind, unreasoning submission to external authority—church, state or public opinion—they may perish utterly; but no autonomous being can surrender or delegate them and remain autonomous; they are humanistic faculties."
– Cassius J. Keyser, (Humanism and Science [1931], p. 102)

Rolf Sattler on "From Plant Morphology to Ken Wilber/Korzybski"

2012-01-09T09:21:00.000-08:00

Rolf Sattler, a retired professor of botany specializing in plant morphology, has moved onto even wider areas of exploration. Like many 'natural' non-aristotelians, Rolf discovered that Korzybski with startling clarity organized insights that he (Rolf) had already discovered for himself over his years of study and research. A blogpost, well worth reading. Thanks, Rolf.

From Plant Morphology to Ken Wilber/Korzybski From plant morphology to healing logic, wholeness, non-identity (Korzybski), integral philosophy (Ken Wilber, etc.), health, laughter, silence, mystery.

From the Stray Thought Bin - 'Expectations'

2012-01-07T15:50:00.001-08:00

I clearly realize that many of my problems in life have come from not having expectations that were low enough.

Quote of the Day...Month...Year...Century? - 'Knowledge and Ignorance'

2012-01-07T12:37:00.000-08:00

Something from Baltasar Gracian to brand into your consciousness if you say you want to follow Korzybski's teachings.

Aphorism #176 Have Knowledge, or know those that have Knowledge.

Without intelligence, either one's own or another's, true life is impossible. But many do not know that they do not know, and many think they know when they know nothing. Failings of the intelligence are incorrigible, since those who do not know, do not know themselves, and cannot therefore seek what they lack. Many would be wise if they did not think themselves wise. Thus it happens that though the oracles of wisdom are rare, they are rarely used. To seek advice does not lessen greatness or argue incapacity. On the contrary, to ask advice proves you well advised. Take counsel with reason it you do not wish to court defeat.

"A Difference That Makes A Difference"

2012-01-04T09:09:00.000-08:00

Over the years, I've heard people, especially those involved with NLP (Neuro-Linguistic Programming), use the phrase 'a difference that makes a difference'. It has a catchy sound to it and the notion intrigues a lot of people who, at the very least, think of it as a neat kind of play on words. Where did the usage come from?

Difference and Differences That Make A Difference
Difference qualifies as one of the most important fundamental undefined terms in the non-aristotelian worldview that Alfred Korzybski delineated. In a world where the premise of non-identity rules (the world we actually seem to live in), where no two objects however similar are 'exactly the same in all respects', difference indeed seems fundamental.

As a term, difference, also qualifies as one of the important multiordinal terms that Korzybski talked about. Although, I can give a dictionary definition of a multiordinal term, the specific 'meaning' of a multiordinal term only becomes clear in a specific context of discussion when one specifies the level of abstraction the word refers to. What does that 'mean'? For now, I'll roughly give Korzybski's simple rule for determining if a word qualifies as a multiordinal term: Can the term be applied to itself and still make sense? Can you fear fear? Can you be in love with love? Can you hate hate? Can you feel anxious about your anxiety? Can you have knowledge about knowledge? Can you think about your thinking? This is not just playing with words, but points to the multiordinal (multi-leveled) and concomitant self-reflexive character of the human nervous system and human evaluating. Thinking2 about thinking1 is not the same as thinking1. And how you think about what you think may be crucial.

Okay, back to the subject of this little (still) article: difference, another multi-ordinal term. In a non-identity world, a world of differences, we can have differences that make a difference (for given individuals with given purposes) and differences that don't (when we recognize similarities). For sane evaluating we need to recognize both similarities (where the differences among the different individuals viewed as 'same' don't make a difference for our purpose) and differences that do make a difference.

For Korzybski, difference was not the absence of 'sameness' (that would make 'sameness' fundamental, which seems a basic structural assumption of the aristotelian metaphysical worldview). Korzybski reversed this: 'sameness' or more clearly similarity constituted a species of difference; Difference, not 'sameness', seems more basic. As he also pointed out, a world of absolute difference between two things seems as impossible as one where absolute sameness exists. With every thing entirely different from everything else, recognition and knowledge would be impossible. In a non-identity world, difference appears fundamental; there exist only different kinds and degrees of differences. (See Science and Sanity, page 165.) What I've written here may—or may not)— seem obvious; Korzybski wanted to get people to understand it and, more importantly, apply it in their everyday evaluating (not necessarily so easy, even if understood).

Although Korzybski may have used the phrase 'a difference which makes a difference' somewhere, I have thoroughly searched through his published writings and have not found it used. Korzybski's student and co-worker Wendell Johnson seems to deserve credit as the first to specifically talk about differences that make a difference and those that don't. Here's a bit from the discussion in his 1946 introduction to GS, People in Quandaries:

The law of identity sometimes holds sufficiently for practical purposes, in spite of its structural defectiveness. Therefore we can use it many times, but we should always be aware of our use of it. When eating peanuts, for example, we may proceed on the practical assumption that peanuts are peanut, that peanut1 is peanut2, that they are the same. Even so, we should remember that they are not, that ultimately peanuts are not peanuts, that is, peanut1 is not peanut2. The differences, generally speaking, make no important difference, of course, and we can for the most part disregard them. But if we are basically oriented to non-identity, we will bite into the bad peanut that may be found in almost any bag, without bursting into invective against "these damned peanuts." We will merely discard peanut1 and go on to enjoy peanut2, since basically we had not assumed that they would be the same anyway. Therefore, an occasional bad peanut is not cause of shock, no generator of tensions.

It is "in principle" that different things are the same. This is to say, it is on relatively high levels of abstraction, "in general," "on the average," "for practical purposes," "in main essentials," with regard to certain more or less important respects (not in all respects) that two different things may be evaluated, spoken of, or dealt with as though they were identical. For certain purposes specific differences may not make a difference; what is important is that we realize that differences exist and that we recognize the conditions under which they do make a difference. This is to say that what is important is that we be fundamentally oriented to non-identity so that we shall be prepared for differences at any time. It is precisely the differences we least expect that tend to make the biggest difference, that have the gravest consequences and demand the most difficult readjustments. [People in Quandaries, pages 178-179].

Gregory Bateson and Difference
The usage 'a difference that makes a difference' is usually ascribed to the non-aristotelian (in the korzybskian sense) anthropologist Gregory Bateson, who used it in the Alfred Korzybski Memorial Lecture that he gave for the Institute of General Semantics (IGS) in 1970. Bateson had had a long peripheral interest and association with Korzybski's work, having briefly corresponded with Korzybski in the late 1940s (the two men exchanged papers), and then having written a number of the dialogues with his daughter, he called them "metalogues", which were published in ETC.: A Review of General Semantics starting in the early 1950s (ETC. was then edited by S. I. Hayakawa and published not by the IGS but by the International Society for General Semantics).

Bateson certainly qualified as a non-aristotelian before he ever heard about Korzybski (see Naven, a self-reflexive study of the anthropological fieldwork he did in New Guinea among the Iatmul, first published in the 1930s). But at some point, sometime in the 1940s, he appears to have read some of Korzybski's work, and probably other GS literature, including it seems nigh certainly Wendell Johnson's 1946 book, People in Quandaries.

So, as far as I know, as a matter of historical record, Wendell Johnson was the first to use 'a difference that makes a difference' as a significant formulation while explaining Korzybski's premise of non-identity. This takes nothing away from Bateson's brilliance. As a theorist Bateson built upon the notion of difference, and a difference that makes a difference in original and significant ways for the human sciences, starting it seems with his AKML paper: "Form, Substance, and Difference", which I read soon after it was published and which I still recommend most highly. I would find it most instructive for some serious student or students—perhaps they are reading this now—to trace the development of the notion of difference and differences of differences from Korzybski to Wendell Johnson to Bateson in much greater detail than I've done here (without getting lost in verbalism). That would constitute a genuine contribution to korzybskian GS scholarship. Any takers?

Radical General Semantics I

2012-01-01T15:26:00.000-08:00

Gad Horowitz teaches what he calls "Radical General Semantics". I respect his work highly and consider myself a student-teacher-practitioner of Radical General-Semantics too. So much crap has been written and taught about Korzybski's work, so much misreading and superficial understanding of it, that it seems that some different term should be used to refer to what Korzybski actually wrote and taught and to present-day attempts to build upon it in a creative and useful way, a way responsible to the actual korzybskian tradition. It looks to me like Gad Horowitz is doing just that. More power to Gad Horowitz and Radical General-Semantics in 2012!

Gad Horowitz [(r)GS] - Theoretical Introduction & Overview of Radical General Semantics from FastBodies on Vimeo.

From the Stray Thought Bin - 'Menus and Meals'

2011-12-19T21:03:00.000-08:00

If you think the menu 'is' the meal, you'll have to eat your words.

From the Stray Thought Bin - 'The Heroic Task of Every Generation'

2011-12-16T15:30:00.000-08:00

The heroic task of every generation of time-binders (that's us humans): appropriating our inheritance from those who came before us. Every generation does the task to some degree poorly or well. What makes the task heroic?: The stakes are always high and for every new generation, including our own, its particular inheritance is never the same as—indeed is necessarily different than—any that came before.

From the Stray Thought Bin - 'Contagion'

2011-12-11T01:55:00.001-08:00

Wouldn't you like it if everyone came down with a contagious ease?

ONLY MAYBE On GENERAL semANTICS? Nothing But!

2011-12-09T20:49:00.001-08:00

Nice blogpost with lots of links from a student(s) of Robert Anton Wilson on RAW, Korzybski, GS, and my biography of Korzybski. Thanks, guy(s).

GENERAL semANTICS

Graham Rae on Korzybski and William Burroughs

2011-12-09T20:44:00.001-08:00

William Burroughs, a rapt student with perfect attendance at Korzybski's 1939 August seminar, later said that he "...was very impressed by what Korzybski had to say. I still am. I think that everyone, particularly all students should read Korzybski. [It would] save them an awful lot of time." (Korzybski: A Biography, p. 457)

Scroll down on the linked page to read Graham Rae's piece on Korzybski and Burroughs.

Korzybski on Wealth - Something for Tea Party Patriots and Occupy Wall Street Enthusiasts

2011-12-09T14:07:00.001-08:00

"...[W]ealth consists of those things—whether they be material commodities or forms of knowledge and understanding—that have been produced by the time-binding energies of humanity, and according to which nearly all the wealth of the world at any given time is the accumulated fruit of the toil of past generations—the living work of the dead. It seems unnecessary to warn the reader against confusing the "making" of money by hook or crook, by trick or trade, with the creating of wealth, by the product of labor."

—Alfred Korzybski, Manhood of Humanity, p. 115

From the Stray Thought Bin - 'The Speed of Thought'

2011-12-08T16:00:00.001-08:00

If relativity theory has abolished infinite speeds in physics, then the speed of 'thought' is not infinite either.

Quote of the Day: Lies & Truth

2011-12-08T11:00:00.001-08:00

Look into the Interior of Things.

"Things are generally other than they seem, and ignorance that never looks beneath the rind becomes disabused when you show the kernel. Lies always come first, dragging fools along by their irreparable vulgarity. Truth always lags last, limping along on the arm of Time. The wise therefore reserve for it the other half of that power which the common mother has wisely given in duplicate. Deceit is very superficial, and the superficial therefore easily fall into it. Prudence lives retired within its recesses, visited only by sages and wise men."
——Bathasar Gracian, Aphorism #146 from The Art of Wordly Wisdom

From the Stray Thought Bin - 'Confined by a System'

2011-12-07T23:03:00.001-08:00

The fact that you reject all systems of thought as confining, doesn't mean that you are not confined by one.

Steven Lewis Review of Korzybski: A Biography

2011-12-06T09:44:00.000-08:00

I've known Biology professor Steven Lewis for a number of years and he definitely qualifies as one of only a handful of people worldwide whom I consider genuine Korzybski scholars (it's a small small 'pond', folks). So his opinion about my biography of Korzybski definitely counts for me. I'm happy to say he liked it. He wouldn't B.S. me and I wouldn't want him to. Here's what he says about it: "At last, a book-length biography of Korzybski.".

The Last Science and Sanity Podcast

2011-12-05T13:51:00.000-08:00

The Science and Sanity Podcast group, hosted by Heron Stone, has finished its reading of Korzybski's book. I'm not a fan of the computerized-voice chapter readings, but the discussions, available on iTunes and Talkshoe, have kept me very interested indeed. Since I discovered the group only a few months ago, I feel happy to have had the opportunity to contribute to its final few sessions.

After the group finished Book II with a discussion of Chapter XXXI - "Concluding Remarks", I contributed to the last three sessions that followed :

For the first on Nov. 20, Heron played an audio recording (38a) of the speech (and subsequent Q&A period) I gave on "Korzybski's Legacy: What Is It? How Do We Carry It On?" in New York City in October at the 2011 Institute of General Semantics (IGS) Conference. The presentation gives an overview of Korzybski's life and work and the subsequent development of it at the IGS and elsewhere. You can read about it and download a pdf of the presentation here. A lively Science and Sanity podcast group discussion followed afterwards (38b).

Then, on Nov. 27 I did a presentation on "The Genesis of Science and Sanity" (39) based on the research I did in writing Korzybski: A Biography. Listen to this for an 'executive summary' of what Korzybski was aiming at and the process he went through in producing his great work.

Yesterday, December 4, I talked about the 'problematic'—for many—final Book III of Science and Sanity (40). Because of its heavy-looking mathematical and scientific content, even many people who have read the rest of the book, decide to skip it. I discussed what Korzybski was trying to accomplish by writing it and gave an approach to reading it that I think can help reduce the intimidation factor of that part of the book or even the intimidation factor of the rest of the book.

I've been told that 'no one likes to hear a recording of their own voice'. That certainly fits me. But I'm still learning. And even given the ums, ahs and some digressions that I didn't care for, I feel pleased that I did manage to pack a lot of content into the presentations. Download the four audio segments 38a, 38b, 39 and 40 for your iPod/mp3-player from iTunes or Talkshoe Together these four provide a solid introduction to Korzybski's work for any curious person who wants to learn more and a good introduction to Heron Stone's entire S&S podcast series. I hope you enjoy the discussions as much as I did.

The General Evaluational Value of Mathematics and the Exact Sciences

2011-11-25T10:11:00.000-08:00

"Now those who are professionally engaged in human affairs, economists, sociologists, politicians, bankers, priests of every kind, teachers . , [etc.,] 'mental' hygiene workers, and psychiatrists included, do not even suspect that material and methods of great general semantic [evaluational] value can be found in mathematics and the exact sciences. The drawing of their attention to this fact, no matter how clumsily done at first, will stimulate further researches, produce better formulations and understanding, and ultimately create conditions where sanity will be possible." —Alfred Korzybski, Science and Sanity, p. 538

"The Canvas Is Not The Territory" - Dom Heffer on 'General-Semantics' and a Painter's Process

2011-11-24T11:59:00.000-08:00

Painter Dom Heffer from England attended the end-of-October GS conference in New York City, where he spoke on the subject of his work featured on the cover of the latest ETC.: A Review of General Semantics. I hung out a bit with Dom and found him a very well-read and serious student-practitioner of 'general-semantics', err...I mean korzybski's non-aristotelian applied epistemology.

Dom's conference talk "The Canvas Is Not The Territory" went over the ground covered in his accompanying ETC. article, “The Spectacled Society: General Semantics and a Painter's Process.” If you don't want to pay $15 to download the issue containing the article (hey, Institute of General Semantics people, isn't that a bit steep for something you're trying to promote?), you can go to this interesting blogpost by theheuristiclaboratory.org.uk, which gives a quick rundown on Dom's recursive (self-reflexive) painting process, which he documents through his art (it's recursive or self-reflexive, don't you see). Dom's website, IdeasInTheVoid.com also has a lot of interesting things about Dom's creations. Here's a link to what he showed at the conference which came with his accompanying commentary: "The Canvas Is Not The Territory." Korzybski's student Charles Biederman wrote a book published in the late 1940s called Art as the Evolution of Visual Knowledge. Check out Dom's self-reflexive take on visual knowledge.

Quote of the Day: 'Language and Evolution'

2011-11-15T17:23:00.000-08:00

"The formation of different languages and of distinct species, and the proofs that both have been developed through a gradual process, are curiously parallel...."
—Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man 1871

"Korzybski's Legacy: What Is It? How Do We Carry It On?" - presented by Bruce I. Kodish, Author of Korzybski: A Biography, at the 2011 Institute of General Semantics (IGS) Weekend Symposium, "Communicating in the 21st Century", on 10/29/11 at the Princeton Club, New York City

2011-11-14T20:48:00.000-08:00

Here are links to the text and audio of the presentation I gave at the Institute of General Semantics (IGS) Symposium - "Communicating in the 21st Century" on Saturday, Oct. 29, 2011 at the Princeton Club in New York City.

Marty Levinson, President of the IGS Board of Trustees introduced me to the group. Marty organized a great conference and I want to thank him and the IGS Board for inviting me and being willing to listen even though I had some difficult things to say about the present state of GS and the IGS. I felt nervous delivering this talk and you'll probably tell when you hear it. But I consider it one of the most important presentations I've ever made, and a valuable one for someone who wants to get a running start as to what Korzybski and his work are about.

Here's the opening paragraph:
Korzybski’s legacy: what ‘is’ it? How do we carry it on? In the way that I’m using the term legacy here, as “a thing handed down by a predecessor,” Korzybski’s legacy has a number of related aspects. Partly, it consists of tangible objects: artifacts and archives left behind. Partly it consists of the Institute of General Semantics itself. However, mainly today I want to focus on what Korzybski taught, the legacy of the wide-ranging system of formulations, known as GS (‘general semantics’). Korzybski advised that when you study someone’s work “…read not only what you read, but study the author.”[1] In other words, do your best to get inside his or her head, find out what problems they tackled, what questions they asked, what they wanted to say. I’ve studied the author and I want to share with you some of what I’ve learned about Korzybski’s work. What constitutes the core of what he taught, his legacy? How has it come down to the present? What opportunities exist for us now to carry it on?

[1] Korzybski: A Biography, p. 8

I want to thank my friend Heron Stone of Gendo for his help in editing the audio recording and getting it up on the Gendo podcast, which I heartily suggest that you subscribe to. He's the closest thing to an internet Socrates I've met.

Here's the audio link of Gendo Podcast 689

Here's a link to the pdf of the edited and augmented text

"Acceptance Speech" by Bruce Kodish on receiving the 2011 S. I. Hayakawa Book Prize from the Institute of General Semantics for Korzybski: A Biography

2011-11-10T15:09:00.000-08:00

It seemed like just a few days after Steve Jobs died that his biography came out. It took 61 year for Alfred Korzybski's. Why did it take so long? Interesting question, I'm not going to answer now. But if you wonder why I wrote Korzybski: A Biography, I thought it had been long enough.

My friend Robert P. Pula, extraordinary scholar and teacher of korzybskian general-semantics and a former Executive Director of the Institute of General Semantics, had been working on a biography of Korzybski for many years. After he died unexpectedly in early 2004, I felt impelled 'to pick up the torch'. What Korzybski and his co-workers developed and taught was not entirely written down but had an oral and tacit dimension received through personal contact and handed down in often unspoken and even un-speakable, i.e., silent and non-verbal, ways. As a long-time close friend and co-worker of Charlotte Schuchardt Read—Korzybski's confidential secretary and literary assistant—I wanted to convey the feel of Korzybski and his work that I had gotten from her (and others) which I feared might otherwise get lost.

I first encountered Korzybski's work in the early 1960s around the age of 13. I've studied it most of my life and worked at the Institute of General Semantics on its education and publication staffs for several decades in its post-Korzybski but still quite korzybskian heyday in the latter half of the 20th Century. I pursued and obtained a doctoral degree in Applied Epistemology/'General Semantics'. I spent seven years researching and writing Korzybski: A Biography. In all that time, I've managed to learn something. So don't be intimidated by the size of my book (694 pages including endnotes, bibliography and index): If you want to get to the core of what Korzybski taught, then I think that all of my time will save you a great deal of your own time. Besides, I did my best to make it a good read.

To conclude: I want to thank Marty Levinson [President of the IGS Board of Trustees], Jackie Rudig [IGS Vice-President] and the entire Institute Board of Trustees for giving me this award and for the opportunity to be here with all of you. Let's celebrate Korzybski here, his work, all of those who've carried it on and built upon it up to the present. And let's celebrate the Institute of General Semantics, which had its 73rd anniversary this year. Let's do it!

—Bruce I. Kodish,
October 28, 2011

From the Stray Thought Bin – 'Haste'

2011-11-04T11:09:00.000-07:00

My haste may look like waste to other people.

Institute of General Semantics 2011 Conference (Initial Post-Conference Debriefing)

2011-11-01T09:40:00.000-07:00

I'm reserving today and perhaps the rest of the week for DDD. I don't mean that I'll be spending my time watching episodes of "Diners, Drive-ins and Dives" (although I'll probably do that too); I mean I'll be Downloading (my rather chock-full cranium), Debriefing myself after a mega-busy, mega-stressful weekend in NYC at the IGS conference (lot's of input, lots of challenges, but not a lot of sleep), and Decompressing (just chilling, relaxing and 'vegging out') which often doesn't come easily to me.

First of all, kudos to IGS President Martin Levinson and his program committee for putting together a great conference at the Princeton Club. I counted about 40 people on Saturday and somewhat fewer on Sunday (there seemed like somewhat more people at the Friday night banquet which featured awards and Sherry Turkle's Alfred Korzybski Memorial Lecture). The high quality of audience and presenters made up for the smallish crowd. I'll be blogging on korzybskifiles.blogspot.com about stuff related to the conference and my award, including providing a copy of my presentation on "Korzybski's Legacy...", as well as discussing Sherry Turkle's talk and some of the main themes that seemed to emerge from the different presentations, as well as links and discussions about some of the interesting people I met at the conference.

I probably know more about the history of the Institute of General Semantics (IGS) and its varying historical and ongoing challenges/problems than anyone else alive—having had a continuous working association with the organization since 1979 up to the present, and having studied its history in depth (Korzybski: A Biography qualifies, among other things, as a comprehensive history of the first, pivotal 12 years of the IGS during Korzybski's lifetime). Although it's been quite a while since my wife Susan and I have had any significant involvement with the operation or policies of the IGS, the leadership of the Institute-2011 seemed willing at this juncture to hear some constructive suggestions and criticisms which I provided both privately and publicly to them. The Institute has had major organizational challenges over the last few years and I commend the leadership and those interested members of its governing board of trustees who demonstrated their openness to begin to deal with difficulties in a constructive way.

I deeply appreciate the great honor they have bestowed upon me: their major book prize for Korzybski: A Biography. I experienced their appreciation of the book as deeply genuine. It also honors them because it demonstrates their desire to reconnect to the korzybskian tradition which for various reasons has gotten lost at the Institute (once the major bearer of that tradition) over the last 10 or so very difficult years. That provided a major theme of my public presentation to the group, which happily seemed very well received by the audience—including the Institute leadership, who appear to want to go forward in a productive and positive way.

Meet Bruce Kodish in New York City, Oct. 28-30 at this Extra Special IGS Annual Event

2011-10-19T20:16:00.000-07:00

The Institute of General Semantics (IGS) will continue a long tradition by hosting the 59th annual Alfred Korzybski Memorial Lecture (AKML) and Symposium in New York City at the Princeton Club in Manhattan from October 28 to 30. (That's just a little more than a week from now—oh my.) It starts off Friday Evening, Oct. 28 with a cocktail hour followed by a banquet dinner and then what looks like a very interesting talk by famed anthropologist of digital electronic life and the Internet, Sherry Turkle, author of the new book Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other. Besides the speaker and the other interesting people attending, I will be there getting the 2011 IGS Book Prize for Korzybski: A Biography.

Mr. B. K. Parekh will receive the prestigious J. Talbot Winchell Award for his exceptional service in furthering the field of GS.

Then on Saturday, Oct. 29 and Sunday, Oct. 30, the Institute and its co-sponsors will host the symposium at the Princeton Club, "Communicating in the 21st Century." Have a good look at the tentative program and you'll see a variety of fascinating titles and presenters. Kudos to IGS President Martin H. Levinson and the other program planners for putting together such an impressive lineup of speakers.

In my presentation on Saturday afternoon: "Korzybski's Legacy: What Is It? How Do We Carry It On", I intend to entertain and enlighten as I present what I consider the core of what Korzybski developed and taught. My presentation will end with a Q&A session. I think this could serve as a good lead-up to the final session on Sunday—scheduled from 11:00 am to 1:00 pm—An Audience Round-Table Discussion on the Direction and Future of GS moderated by Marty Levinson. You'll have a chance 'to put your two-cents in' (or more) on the future of GS. I feel excited—to say the least. I'd love to meet any of my Korzybski Files readers, FaceBook friends, and Twitter followers and anyone else reading this who lives in the New York City Area.

Here's a link to register for all or some of the the AKML weekend events. You'll get a big bang for your buck with the $15 dollar fee for the combined AKML and Symposium (minus the dinner). Come on out if you can, for all or some of the proceedings.

Korzybski Files Meets Gendo

2011-10-06T20:48:00.000-07:00

Korzybski Files Meets Gendo?

No, unlike Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman or King Kong Meets Godzilla, it's not a bad horror movie.

Rather, gendo is the name that its originator, Heron Stone, came up with for the approach he put together for "language rehab" for "brain-damaged language monkeys," i.e., you and me. Now, you see a connection, don't you?

Heron, who considers himself a "brain-damaged language monkey" too, encourages people to recognize what he calls the "five stupidities of the English language." You can hear his podcasts of internet conversations with fellow earthlings from around the planet at gendo - a way of language.

He considers Alfred Korzybski, a great influence and also runs a once a week Science and Sanity discussion group, which he records and also podcasts. I had never heard of him or gendo before, so felt pleasantly surprised when he recently contacted me (he had just bought Korzybski: A Biography). We have had a few discussions on Skype, including the following—which became gendo podcast 662—in preparation for me participating in his Science and Sanity group, later that week.

In this conversation we talk about gendo, Korzybski: A Biography, and various and sundry GS and non-aristotelian related topics. You can listen to or download the file of our discussion here: #662 - 1-on-1 with Bruce Kodish. #665 features the Science and Sanity group discussion that I participated in that next Sunday. Enjoy!

Also check out Heron's website gendo.net and search iTunes for the Science and Sanity podcast.

2011 Hayakawa Book Prize To Be Awarded For Korzybski: A Biography

2011-09-23T12:21:00.000-07:00

The Institute of General Semantics (IGS) will present me with its 2011 S. I. Hayakawa Book Prize for Korzybski: A Biography at the Alfred Korzybski Memorial Lecture (AKML) Banquet on Friday, October 28 at the Princeton Club in New York City.

My getting this award may seem ironic, given some of the criticisms I've detailed about Hayakawa in the biography and in past articles (especially "Getting Off of Hayakawa's Ladder," but also "In the Name of Skepticism: Martin Gardner's Misrepresentations of General Semantics," and "Contra Max Black: An Examination of Critiques of General-Semantics," ) published in the General Semantics Bulletin.

Nonetheless, I've never denied Hayakawa's talents as a writer, editor and teacher. His elaboration of Korzybski's work, however attenuated much of it has seemed to me, has no doubt had some good effects. Here's an account of Hayakawa's influence on one person.

The Institute began giving the Hayakawa Prize in 2009 and I feel honored to have my name added to those of the two previous winners and their truly excellent books:

Laura Bertone

2009

Hidden Side of Babel: Unveiling Cognition, Intelligence and Sense. (Buenos Aries: Evolución, 2006.)

Bob Eddy

2010

Graymanship: The Management of Organizational Imperfection. (Lake Mary, FL: GIST Publishing Co., 2010.)

I'll attend the AKML Banquet to receive the prize and look forward to hearing Sherry Turkle, who as the 59th Annual Alfred Korzybski Memorial Lecturer will be presenting material from her latest book, Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other. Turkle has done important research which actually provides corroborating data for one of Korzybski's earliest predictions: that the rapid growth of technology and associated socio-cultural changes would increasingly challenge human abilities to cope and to relate to one another (elaborated in his 1921 Manhood of Humanity).

A two-day symposium entitled "Communicating in the 21st Century" will follow. I'll speak on Saturday, October 29 on "Korzybski's Legacy: What Is It? How Do We Carry It On?"

I make an effort to keep minimum expectations about everything that I can and definitely do expect to have an interesting time

From The Stray Thought Bin – 'Advertising'

2011-09-08T17:02:00.000-07:00

Advertising - gilt by association.

"Becoming More Fully Human"

2011-08-30T13:56:00.000-07:00

Recently a number of people have become interested in previous works by me and my wife Susan, including the book Dare to Inquire: Sanity and Survival for the 21st Century and Beyond.

Here's a nice fat slice of that book, Chapter 4 - "Becoming More Fully Human," where I elaborated on Susan's formulating about some korzybskian notions, humanist 'philosophy', and the work of Abraham Maslow, among other things.

Some of you may find it controversial.

"Becoming More Fully Human"

"What 'is' General Semantics?"

2011-08-29T17:29:00.000-07:00

Interviewer Luke Ford asked me "What 'is' General Semantics?" Here's a piece of that.
"What 'is' General Semantics?"

Quote of the Day- 'The Sneer of the Future'

2011-08-28T17:32:00.000-07:00

"The present is no more exempt from the sneer of the future than the past has been."
——Cassius J. Keyser (Mole Philosophy and Other Essays, p. 152)

From The Stray Thought Bin – 'What Are You Doing Here?'

2011-08-20T00:07:00.000-07:00

If you don't consider yourself a life-long learner, what are you doing here?

Quote of the Day- 'Creating Worlds'

2011-08-13T16:52:00.000-07:00

"Languages create worlds to live in, not just in the minds of their speakers, but in their lives, and their descendents lives."
—Nicholas Ostler,
Ad Infinitum: A Biography of Latin, p. 20

From the Stray Thought Bin – 'The Pressing Question'

2011-08-12T16:09:00.000-07:00

Whatever and whenever you know and do, you abstract and all you can know are your abstractions. What's ultimately important is not so much a high-level intellectual understanding of this, but rather its low-level, moment-to-moment living recognition and use. How do I practice consciousness of abstractions and conscious abstracting in my daily life? That seems to me the pressing question. And not just personally for me .

From the Stray Thought Bin – 'The Best of All Possible Worlds'

2011-08-04T16:26:00.000-07:00

Voltaire's blindness—he thought Leibniz was an optimist.

From the Stray Thought Bin – 'Do The Math'

2011-08-04T16:24:00.000-07:00

Do the math—even if you get the wrong answer.

Ralph C. Hamilton — His Memory is a Blessing

2011-07-27T15:50:00.000-07:00

Ralph C. Hamilton, a personal assistant of Alfred Korzybski's in the late 1940s, died yesterday, in his 90s after a brief period of failing health. You'll read about Ralph and some of what he had to say about his friend Alfred in Korzybski: A Biography. Ralph gave me a tremendous amount of time and help; we became friends and I'll miss him. I had just sent Ralph a bound galley proof of the book and his son, Bruce, told me that he was able to tell his father that it was out, and the he (Ralph) had a prominent place in it. Ralph smilingly replied, 'That will ensure my notoriety.'

From the Stray Thought Bin – 'Experts'

2011-07-19T11:09:00.000-07:00

Some experts end up making problems overly complicated, as opposed to experts who end up making solutions as simple as possible.

Quote of the Day- Words and Deeds

2011-07-19T10:20:00.000-07:00

"Easier said than done."
—American Folk Saying (some variant in many different cultures).

You are cordially invited to attend the Alfred Korzybski 132nd Birthday Celebration

2011-07-02T15:14:00.000-07:00

Alfred Korzybski 132nd Birthday Celebration

Time	Sunday, July 3 · 12:00am - 11:30pm

Location	Anywhere you can think of

Created By	Bruce I. Kodish

More Info	Celebration here begins with official publication release of Korzybski: A Biography. Start your own celebration by pinching your finger and saying out loud:"Whatever I say it 'is', is not it." (As an alternative, you can pinch your finger and say out loud:"Whatever I say it 'is', it is not.") Then if you connect via facebook, go to facebook/korzybski.biography and answer the question: "How are you celebrating Korzybski's Birthday?" Also feel free to post your comments, etc. here.

Korzybski: A Biography – Here At Last!

2011-06-28T17:33:00.000-07:00

Web page with link for ordering on Amazon.com

Korzybski: A Biography – Back Cover Wordle

2011-06-25T18:42:00.000-07:00

Korzybski Biography Update-6/20/2011

2011-06-20T12:57:00.000-07:00

Terribly remiss I have been, dear readers.

I apologize for the sparsity of my blog posts here as of late. But I have a great excuse.

We (Susan, my wife and editor, and I) just finished an almost all-consuming, two-week period of final proofreading and have now submitted the book files to the printer for publication. We expect to release the book to the public very soon. It will take a short time to get it available on Amazon.com and other places. But for those of you who have been eager to see the book, it's not long in coming now. I think you'll like it and I'm nigh sure you'll learn some surprising things about Korzybski and 'general semantics' that you didn't know before.

Korzybski Biography Update- June 1, 2011

2011-06-01T16:09:00.000-07:00

Awaiting printer proofs for final editing of the long-awaited Korzybski: A Biography. Anxious readers will have the book very soon.

From the Stray Thought Bin – 'Genius'

2011-05-23T09:55:00.001-07:00

Even a genius is not a genius in everything.

How Language Shapes Thought

2011-05-22T12:36:00.000-07:00

In the third paragraph of this important article How Language Shapes Thought cognitive psychologist/anthropologist Lera Boroditsky explains one of the reasons why so many cognitive scientists, linguistic scholars and others have ignored or dismissed Korzybski's work for so long (See for example his discussion of 'language' and 'thought' in last 1950 paper, The Role of Language in the Perceptual Processes*). Noam Chomsky's hegemonic reign over the field of linguistics and what became cognitive science, was just beginning and Korzybski's non-essentialist, non-elementalistic vision of language and human behavior which paralleled that of Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf was not going to find congenial audiences in those swayed by Chomsky's work. In 2011, that is clearly changing.

* I would have linked to the article on the Institute of General Semantics website, but it appears no longer available there.

"The Map Is Not The Territory" - There Are Signs All Around!

2011-05-20T16:19:00.000-07:00

From The Stray Thought Bin – 'Mere Appearance'

2011-05-03T13:37:00.000-07:00

There is not necessarily anything mere about appearance, even if it doesn't accurately reflect what is going on.

From The Stray Thought Bin – 'Sloganeering and Superficial Thought'

2011-04-17T15:56:00.000-07:00

There is no substitute for thinking carefully and deeply about those things that matter most; unfortunately, this takes more time than what many people wish to give it and as a result they succumb to sloganeering and superficial thought.

Quote of the Day- 'Semantics'

2011-04-17T01:00:00.000-07:00

“For the immediate future, probably the loose-thinking ‘semanticists’ a’ la Stuart Chase, will introduce many popular cliche’s and make [the] term ‘semantics’ a hissing and byword, so that it will cease to be used by serious scientists.”

——Benjamin Lee Whorf *

* From a 1941 letter, qtd. by Penny Lee in The Whorf theory complex: A critical reconstruction., 1996. John Benjamins Publishing Co., Amsterdam/Philidelphia.)

Book Review - Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief Approaches to a Science of Life

2011-04-11T10:15:00.000-07:00

Perceptual Control Theory (PCT) is at the forefront of a major and needed paradigm shift in the human sciences, part of the non-aristotelian socio-cultural-scientific revision that Alfred Korzybski long hoped to foment.

Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief Approaches to a Science of Life, a book of correspondence between William T. Powers (the chief formulator of PCT) and his close colleague, the late Philip J. Runkel (social psychologist and research methodologist), will give the interested reader an irreplaceable inside view (and a very human one) of the developing work-in-progress in PCT over the last several decades and into the new millennium.

It seems well nigh certain that Korzybski would have felt delighted to see the substantial standing and growing structure that Powers and Runkel, two early and serious students of his work (see the Name Index), have produced on such korzybskian foundations. Let me explain.

In his 1933 magnum opus, Science and Sanity, Korzybski presented his system of applied epistemology (labeled "general semantics") as his contribution to the foundations of a "science of man." As early as his first 1921 book Manhood of Humanity, he had expressed the importance of non-linear, circular ("spiral") causation for understanding human behavior. But his rough working intuition of circular mechanisms didn't line up with the psychology of his day, which mainly operated within the stimulus-response paradigm. So although he regretted the lack of what he considered a "scientific psychology" (an exact theory of the circular mechanisms of behavior didn't exist) he was forced when formulating his own work to make use of the best, though inadequate, studies of his day.

Almost as soon as he became aware of the notion of feedback, which began to rise into public awareness after World War II under Norbert Wiener's rubric "cybernetics", Korzybski leaped on it as "a turning point in the history of human evolution and socio-cultural adjustment." But it took a long time after Korzybski's death in 1950 before William T. Powers' 1973 book, Behavior: The Control of Perception actually showed how negative feedback control, long touted by cyberneticists, might function as the core for an exact and overarching scientific theory for psychology.

Powers is not just a psychological theorist—as an engineer he had intimate contact with the 'guts' of actual mechanical servomechanisms. He's had lots of experience with human servomechanisms too. The detailed research program for psychology entailed by Powers and colleagues, emphasizes human autonomy, a phenomenological perspective, and the rigorous modeling of behavior. Their program has already begun to get carried out, although acceptance has been slow by the larger social/behavioral 'science' which still operates under the burden of the outmoded but still pervasive stimulus-response, linear cause and effect, paradigm.

The editor of Dialogue... Dag Forssell had done a tremendous service by getting it into print, along with his excellent introductory discussion and supplementary material. Go to his Living Control Systems website , and if you don't get Dialogue... right away, get one of his other books on PCT to start with. (Dag also has a generous amount of free material to peruse.) For the serious student of Korzybski's work, interested in developing it further in 2011, mastering the basics of PCT seems essential. When you are hooked, you will have to have Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief Approaches to a Science of Life.

From The Stray Thought Bin – 'Sharp Distinctions'

2011-04-07T16:59:00.000-07:00

I shave with Occam's Razor.

Korzybski and Trigant Burrow – 'We are all insane and headed for worse'

2011-03-29T12:31:00.000-07:00

In 1927, when psychiatrist Trigant Burrow (1875–1950) came out with his first book, The Social Basis of Consciousness, Korzybski had already begun corresponding with him. Alfred also corresponded with Burrow’s colleague, psychiatrist Hans Syz. Although Burrow had had an early interest in Freud’s work and psychoanalysis, he had been forming his own views outside of the main psychoanalytical circles. Beside his M.D., he had gotten a PhD in experimental psychology focused on the physiology of attention. His approach to therapy—he pioneered in group therapy and social psychiatry—developed out of his interest in the interactions among the physiological, phenomenological, interpersonal, and socio-cultural aspects of maladjustment. Burrow may have coined the word “neurodynamic” (he was one of the first to use the term) and went on to explore the role of attention and symbolism in neuroses.

Burrow had independently gotten very close to a great deal of what Korzybski had formulated in his general theory. Korzybski sought to emphasize the commonality of their work. But Burrow’s understanding seemed intuitive, his language cloudy. Alfred had hopes that his own work could suggest ways to bring greater formulational clarity to Burrow’s efforts. Burrow didn’t see it that way. In his book, Science and Man’s Behavior, published posthumously Burrow wrote:

I would not make all this ado about the wide disparity between…[us], were not Korzybski so determined to proselytize me on the ground that “we are saying the same thing.” Perhaps we are. But do our organisms feel the same way? (1)

Regarding Burrow, Korzybski in later years didn’t waver from the opinion that he expressed, with only slight exaggeration, to his friend Roy Haywood in early 1928, “His [Burrow’s] main thesis is that we are all insane (neurotics), do not know it and are headed for worse. I quite agree with him.”⁽²⁾

Notes

1. Burrow 1953, p. 295.

2. AK to H. L. Haywood, 1/2/1928. Alfred Korzybski Digital Archives 21.571.

Quote of the Day- 'First Words'

2011-03-27T00:41:00.000-07:00

“The few first words with which mankind started its vocabulary were labels for pre-scientific ideas, naïve generalizations full of silent assumptions, objectifications, of non-existents,…Our daily speech and in very large measure our scientific language is one enormous system of such assumptions.”

—Alfred Korzybski

“Fate and Freedom” (1923/4), Alfred Korzybski Collected Writings, p. 18.

From The Stray Thought Bin – 'Sage Advice'

2011-03-25T08:39:00.000-07:00

Enough conversation about it, just do it.

Quote of the Day- 'Doctrinal Creatures'

2011-03-24T17:32:00.000-07:00

“Because of logical fate, the analysis of doctrine, which underlies all human activities, becomes the most important—nay, the all-important—fact for all the future of man.”

—Alfred Korzybski, "The Brotherhood of Doctrines" (written, 1922) in Alfred Korzybski Collected Writings.

Korzybski's 'Odd' Work

2011-03-24T17:20:00.000-07:00

Korzybski’s work would appear not only at odds with but also odd to people whose view of objectivity and rationality required sharp boundaries between philosophy and science, mathematics and science, disparate fields of science, and between these various theoretical areas and practical life. Where many saw sharp boundaries, Korzybski explored murky borderlines and found unceasing connections. In his own time, only a few philosophical ‘renegades’ like Gaston Bachelard, Oliver Reiser, F. S. C. Northrop and L. L. Whyte would pay serious attention to his work.

Quote of the Day- "Our Speech"

2011-03-18T10:09:00.000-07:00

"All life therefore comes back to the question of our speech, the medium through which we communicate with each other. . . . The more it suggests and expresses the more we live by it—the more it promotes and enhances life. Its quality, its authenticity, its security, are hence supremely important for the general multifold opportunity, for the dignity and integrity, of our existence."*

—Henry James.

*Qtd. in SIGNIFICS AND LANGUAGE (1911) by Viola Welby (Title-page epigraph)

From The Stray Thought Bin – 'Difficult Things'

2011-03-10T00:00:00.000-08:00

If 'difficult' things got easy, you wouldn't consider them "difficult".

Korzybski: A Biography – Table of Contents

2011-03-04T13:31:00.000-08:00

Korzybski-philes eagerly await the forthcoming publication of Korzybski: A Biography.

As a bit of a teaser, here's a link to the Table of Contents

The book will be available very soon.

Bartender, I'll have a "Korzybski" please.

2011-03-03T11:26:00.000-08:00

Alfred Korzybski became friends with R.B. Haseldon, curator of manuscripts at the Huntington Library in Southern California. The two men had a lively correspondence for a number of years before and after the publication of Science and Sanity in 1933. Haseldon, who had developed a considerable interest in Korzybski’s work, seemed full of fun, inventing a cocktail which he called “The Korzybski” with the following formula, as reported third-hand later on in a newspaper snippet:

“...You take a large cocktail shaker and place therein: 3 parts gin, 2 parts applejack, 3 parts dry vermouth, 1 part sweet vermouth. Stand this in the refrigerator for one hour, then drink and note results. Better still, have someone note the results for you. You soon reach the nonverbal level, where one can point, but cannot utter.” *

Note

* “Punk and Incense,” Trenton N.J. Advertiser, March 27, 1938. Alfred Korzybski Digital Archives 2.833.

From The Stray Thought Bin – 'Man' and 'Animal'

2011-03-02T09:31:00.000-08:00

Smith 1 may live in a world of phantasm and delusion that Fido can never know.

Korzybski's 'Respectability'

2011-02-15T14:38:00.000-08:00

Some academics and others overly interested in conventional respectability would probably not find Korzybski easy to take. He had plenty of idiosyncrasies to sneer at, from his blunt manner of speech, to the khaki clothes he favored, to the rolls of toilet paper that he unashamedly kept on his desk for nose blowing.

Other things made him easily misunderstood, like his profound hearing loss, which made conversations with him difficult. Since he had only a degree in engineering, those inclined to do so could easily mistake his remarkable erudition in dozens of subjects as bogus, the profundity of his aims and broad scope of his concerns as arrogance, his claim to have formulated the first—as far as he knew—non-aristotelian system as ridiculous, and his claim to have developed a practical methodology that could help one understand and ameliorate “the quarrels between two lovers, two mathematicians, two nations, two economic systems., [etc.]...”(1) as absurd.

Careless interpretations of his lectures or writings might easily follow, confusing his taking of all human knowledge as “within his scope”—certainly legitimate for a worker in epistemology—with “taking all knowledge as within his competence,” which he never pretended. (2)

Korzybski often said, “I say what I say. I do not say what I do not say.” He would also repeat that he ‘offered no panaceas’ but this didn’t stop the misinterpretations of some people who still came to the conclusion of one seminar student, “You seem to say that every human problem can be solved by general semantics.” Korzybski replied “Every thing I say is limited, limited, limited!”—a statement (or something like it) he repeated often. (3)

NOTES

1. Korzybski 1994 (1933), p. 761.

2. Communication scholar Neil Postman—Editor of ETC. for 10 years from 1976 to 1986 (when it was still published by the ISGS)—made this claim years later in an error-ridden essay entitled “Alfred Korzybski” in his book Conscientious Objections: “Korzybski’s thought was grandiose in that he took all knowledge to be within his scope [p. 138]....[I]n taking all knowledge as within his competence, Korzybski’s reach exceeded his grasp [p. 145].” As with S. I. Hayakawa, many people presumed Postman to know a lot more about Korzybski and his work than he actually did. Unfortunately, like Hayakawa, Postman seemed to presume this too.

3. Ralph Hamilton (who worked as an assistant to Korzybski from 1947 to 1949) to Bruce Kodish, Nov.17, 2005. For examples of Korzybski’s “epistemodesty” see Korzybski 1994 (1933), pp. 10, 43–44, 142–144.

From the Stray Thought Bin - "Purpose"

2011-02-07T09:23:00.001-08:00

Like most people whose purpose it was to have no purpose, he was a rotten failure at it.

From the Stray Thought Bin - "Injustices"

2011-02-06T00:00:00.000-08:00

Imagined injustices may be the most damaging of all.

Quote of the Day- "Expect the Minimum"

2011-02-03T17:05:00.000-08:00

"If you expect, say 'nothing', in the actual living, bumping against facts, impact with the environment, you will find the facts better than you expected. You will be encouraged. You will not be cynical; you will not be bitter, etc. Life then will be happier for you as living protoplasm reacting to the impact of the environment. Expect the minimum."*
———Alfred Korzybski

*General Semantics Seminar 1937: Olivet College Lectures, Third Edition. p. 90

From the Stray Thought Bin - "The Believer in Magic"

2011-01-30T14:30:00.000-08:00

For the believer in magic, words are just words with no substance behind them. Yet he wants his words to be something more and so he takes them as the substitute for substance.

From the Stray Thought Bin - "The Art of Sanity"

2011-01-23T01:00:00.000-08:00

Sanity, adequate adjustment to life facts (including ones' own potential), seems like an art that requires taking unceasing aim at a perpetually moving target. Still, it's important to aim.

From the Stray Thought Bin - "Mastering Our Psycho-Logical Destinies"

2011-01-20T10:45:00.000-08:00

In everyday life, most of us are 'slaves' to the makers of our vocabularies, while the power to examine our assumptions and revise them (the postulational attitude) provides a way to master our psycho-logical destinies.

Work In Progress (12/30/2010)

2010-12-30T14:17:00.000-08:00

Damned hard to do much weblog posting lately.

My excuse?

Finishing up the biography of Korzybski that I've been working on for the last seven years.

Two days ago I wrote the last sentence of the final chapter.

Today I finished writing Acknowledgements and am starting on Language Notes and Polish Pronunciation Guide. I still have an Introductory Note for the Endnotes Section in the back of the book.

Then we print out the whole manuscript, do the final edit and proofreading before doing the index.

We have a designer and a basic cover design that needs to get done.

And then...gulp...the book will be just about ready to come out.

Korzybski: A Biography due to be published in the Spring of 2011.

The Tyranny of Words 1938

2010-12-15T13:15:00.000-08:00

Here is a brief excerpt for those who are interested from my forthcoming book, Korzybski: A Biography:

At the start of 1938, people mainly in the U.S. were getting excited about Stuart Chase’s book, The Tyranny of Words, just published that January. Chase, by then a popular non-fiction writer and social critic, had decided to examine his tools—i.e., words. By studying ‘semantics’, he hoped to learn “how words behave, and why [verbal] meaning is so often frustrated.”(¹ )

Chase had become aware of Korzybski’s work as early as 1935 and had studied it, as well as the writings of Malinowski, Ogden and Richards, P.W. Bridgman, and others. In 1937 Chase began corresponding with Kendig, Korzybski, and Walter Polakov; the latter had guided Chase through Science and Sanity. Chase’s resulting book emphasized the commonalities amongst the various formulators he had investigated. Without question The Tyranny of Words drew a lot of interest to the works of these men. But whatever use the book may have served as a simple introduction to their writings, Chase’s melding of their different approaches obscured the uniqueness of the individual formulators. Chase’s purposeful neglect of the psycho-logical, inner life of the individual especially shortchanged Korzybski. (2) His treatment of general semantics contained a number of other subtle and not-so-subtle misrepresentations. (An early reviewer, Henry Hazlitt, who had not read Science and Sanity, argued that Chase misinterpreted the other formulators as well.) (3)

In late 1937, when Polakov saw excerpts in The New Republic from the soon-to-be-published book, he wrote to Alfred: “[Chase] must be spanked.” (4) He felt bothered by, among other things, what he saw as Chase’s apparent animosity towards higher-order abstractions. As Korzybski had emphasized repeatedly—apparently not enough—science is not possible without them. Once the book was released, Walter wanted to give it a favorable review but felt that he couldn’t since, in his opinion, it didn’t do justice to Korzybski. He wanted Alfred’s opinion on the matter. (5) Alfred replied that, given his limitations, Chase hadn’t done such a bad job: “I sincerely suggest do not give Hell to Chase, neither try to explain your semantics [in any possible review]. I suggest praise his book, although you may suggest he did not go far enough." (6) As Korzybski told his first Institute of General Semantics seminar class later that year: “[The Tyranny of Words] is a fine first attempt [at popularization]. Not sharp; not good enough. Superficial, but the best there is, just the same.”(7) (Korzybski may have been too generous in his assessment of the benign impact of the book, since many of its readers appeared to incorrectly conclude that it accurately represented Korzybski’s work.)

At the start of 1938, The Tyranny of Words—the first popular book dealing in a significant way with Korzybski’s work—had no competition. Widely publicized and reviewed, its publication marked the beginning of a new level of public recognition for Korzybski. The Reader’s Guide to Periodical Literature, a widely-recognized index of ‘popular’ magazines in the U.S. and Canada, provides a rough indication of popular print media attention to a topic. Korzybski had received a surprising amount of newspaper and magazine coverage over the years. However, prior to 1938, The Reader’s Guide had only one reference to him or his work—his 1929 Science obituary of Vasiliev (in Volume VIII, published in 1932). With Volume XI, covering the period from July 1937 to June 1939, things changed. There were five articles directly related to The Tyranny of Words listed under “Stuart Chase”. Most of the articles listed under “Semantics” (used for the first time as a heading) also related to Chase’s book. Many of these articles at least mentioned Korzybski. Another article was listed under the heading “Korzybski”. “General Semantics” was not used as a heading at all. Over the remainder of Korzybski’s life, subsequent editions of The Reader’s Guide (published every few years) would index a respectable number of articles directly related to his work (listed mainly under “Semantics” or his name—never as “General Semantics”).

Notes:

1. Chase 1938, p. 7.

2. Chase 1938, p. vii.

3. Hazlitt, “On the importance of meanings: Stuart Chase attempts to popularize recent studies in the relationship of words, thoughts and things,” The New York Times Book Review, Jan. 23, 1938.

4. Walter Polakov to AK, 11/29/1937. IGS Archives.

5. Walter Polakov to AK, 1/5/1938. IGS Archives.

6. AK to Walter Polakov, 1/15/1938. IGS Archives.

7. Korzybski 1938, Transcript of July 1938 IGS Summer Seminar, p. 65. Unpublished. IGS Archives.

Korzybski & GS in India 2010

2010-12-13T16:51:00.000-08:00

Here's a report on the third national workshop-cum-seminar on “Alfred Korzybski and His Impact on Language, Communication and Cultural Studies” organized by Balvant Parekh Centre for General Semantics and Other Human Sciences, Baroda, India and the English and Foreign Languages University, Shillong, India. The workshop took place in Shillong from 25th-27th October, 2010.

Korzybski Conference in India

Quote of the Day- "Humanity"

2010-12-06T16:53:00.000-08:00

“Humanity is a peculiar class of life which, in some degree, determines its own destinies; therefore in practical life words and ideas become facts—facts moreover, which bring about important practical consequences.”
———Alfred Korzybski*

* Manhood of Humanity, Second Edition. 1950 (1921), p. 47.

From the Stray Thought Bin - "...And More Maps"

2010-12-01T09:10:00.000-08:00

Some people seem to use the saying "The map is not the territory," as a way to wash out all claims and viewpoints into some kind of tepid equivalency: "It's all just opinions...B.S. ...your narrative...your map...my map...maps all we have...yadda yadda yadda." Post-Modernist Couldn't-Care-Less-ism.

Sure, up to a point, we can't get beyond viewpoints and opinions. Everything that is said is said by someone—opinions and viewpoints...Maps.

But...

We do presume some 'territory'. (At least I do.) There are 'things' we bump into whether we want to or not.

Some viewpoints provide a better look at a presumed territory. Some opinions seem more useful. We shouldn't be shy. Some maps give us greater predictability, seem more useful, thus better than others for given purposes in dealing with the 'territories' of life. Including the fact that other people may operate by dramatically different maps.

We can and should strive for more fruitful viewpoints, more informed opinions, better maps. Which presumes that some maps may be better than others for some purposes. Indeed, yes.

And yes, our maps will still not be the territories they represent—ever. As far as I know.

From the Stray Thought Bin - "...And Maps"

2010-11-30T13:49:00.000-08:00

"The map is not the territory."

"What kind of idiot would say that a map was the territory?"

What kind of idiot would act as if it was?

From the Stray Thought Bin- "Maps and Maps"

2010-11-29T09:52:00.000-08:00

To someone convinced that their map 'is' THE territory, saying that "the map is not the territory" doesn't have to present them with a problem; it just doesn't apply to their map.

From the Stray Thought Bin-New Media

2010-11-12T15:39:00.000-08:00

The existence of a new communication medium does not obliterate the need to remain conscious of abstracting. Au contraire—whatever new possibilities Twitter brings, your Tweet is not the territory either.

From the Stray Thought Bin - Dirty Windows

2010-11-10T13:22:00.000-08:00

In the old lingo, one’s ‘mind’ mediates one’s knowledge of anything.

And it seems all too easy for people to treat their ‘minds’ like ‘windows’ which they look through but never see.

It may not be so easy to get people to see the ‘window’ and to see, among other things, the obscuring, distorting ‘dirt’—some of it language-related—that they've gotten used to ignoring.

First, you have to look at your own ‘dirty window'— hard work even for the most intelligent.

From the Stray Thought Bin - Walking the Talking

2010-11-10T13:12:00.000-08:00

One has to consciously work to develop a habit of talking differently,

not just talking about talking differently.

The Map and Territory...Again

2010-11-09T10:37:00.000-08:00

Another korzybskian echo...

The controversial satirist Michel Houellebecq has won France's top
literary award, the Goncourt Prize, for his book The Map and the
Territory

Houellebecq Wins Top French Book Prize

From the Stray Thought Bin- Verbalism

2010-10-26T08:52:00.000-07:00

For most of his life he fed on definitions and now he suffered from hardening of the categories.

Polish Accent, Anyone?

2010-10-25T11:50:00.000-07:00

How to Speak with a Polish Accent

"Count Korzybski"- A Note on the Polish Nobility

2010-10-22T13:04:00.000-07:00

Alfred Korzybski was born into an aristocratic Polish family in 1879, a time when the power and prestige of the Polish nobility had already considerably faded. He acquired the title of "Count" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hrabia) from both his mother's and father's side. The Korzybski family in particular, part of the huge Habdank Skarbek clan, traced its noble lineage back to earliest days of the Polish nobility (or szlachta), before the establishment of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. They remained one of the few families allowed to use the noble title after the Commonwealth was established.Although the szlachta were disappearing as a class by the time of Korzybski's birth, their culture had become inextricably linked with Polish national culture. The culture of the szlachta also left an enduring mark on Korzybski.

Nobility-related norms had gradually filtered into all levels of Polish society to become the basis of what historian Jan Szczepanski called the "traditional Polish personality ideal." Among other things, this ideal consisted of "readiness for the defense of the Catholic faith, readiness for the defense of the fatherland, a highly developed sense of personal dignity and honor, and full-blown individualism, an imposing mien, chivalry, intellectual brilliance, and dash." (1) So brought up in the late 19th Century among what was left of the Polish aristocracy (and from one of the most ancient families), it is not surprising that Korzybski's personal behavior as an adult reflected much of this ideal in action. (Although he had fairly early abandoned the Roman Catholic faith as a value worth defending.)

By the time he began his work in America, Korzybski had generalized the szlachta ethic: He had come to accept the potential 'nobility' of every human. And in tending to consider everyone as his 'noble' equal and himself as theirs, he also tended to treat everyone (whatever his or her credentials, rank, or fame) with equal respect—and equal directness. This appears to have bothered some individuals who seemed to have considered themselves deserving of special deference.

After he came to America, he did not insist on the title although he certainly did not eschew his lineage. Although some people used it as a term of respect when addressing him in letters or referring to his person, some critics found it a reason for suspicion . As Allen Walker Read, a close friend and student of his, noted:

"Being a 'foreigner' (I use quotation marks) also was a disadvantage to him, especially when he had the suspicious title of 'Count'. Lecturers from abroad, like the flamboyant Count Hermann Keyserling, had imposed themselves by self-promotion on American gullibility . Too many German Freiherren had paraded themselves as 'Counts'. (I may say, parenthetically, that Korzybski did not seek out the title 'Count', in spite of the standing of his family in the Polish aristocracy, but it was fostered by his wife, a talented American portrait painter, who believed it was useful to her to be called "Countess Korzybska .")" (2)

Notes
1. Jan Szczepanski. Polish Society, New York: Random House (1970), p. 167

2. Allen Walker Read. "Changing attitudes toward Korzybski’s General Semantics." The Alfred Korzybski Memorial Lecture, 1983. General Semantics Bulletin 51 (1984), p. 16

Korzybski on Leadership

2010-10-20T15:52:00.000-07:00

Some leadership tips derived from Korzybski by the Leadership Connections Group in merry old England. Nice work!

Build powerful trusting relationships. Help from Alfred Korzybski

From the Stray Thought Bin - Bacon

2010-10-17T15:35:00.000-07:00

Like just about everything else it seems,
in epistemology things go better with Bacon.

Quote of the Day - Science and Schizophrenia

2010-10-14T18:46:00.000-07:00

"Generally speaking, the systems of natural science do not differ from schizophrenic systems because of any difference in a desire for a unifying logical integration. The difference lies solely in the treatment of empiric data. With systems of natural science, the empiric data are primary and the theory secondary; at every step the logical implications of the theory are tested empirically, with the theory modified in the light of the empiric observations. With schizophrenic systems, on the other hand, the theory comes first and the facts are selected, defined, and correlated for the sake of buttressing the theory..."*

——George Kingsley Zipf

*Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort: An Introduction to Human Ecology, p. 304

From the Stray Thought Bin - Pavlov

2010-10-12T11:53:00.000-07:00

Pavlov was my salivation.

From the Stray Thought Bin - Delusions

2010-10-09T15:48:00.000-07:00

Some grand delusions begin with a little choice.

"The Map Is Not The Territory" - The Notion is Getting Around

2010-10-08T18:56:00.000-07:00

Illuminated on the wall inside a building of the free university of Berlin

In an exhibit on the history of the urban transportation

"Language is a map" by Tim O'Reilly

From The Stray Thought Bin- Delayed Evaluation

2010-10-06T09:18:00.001-07:00

defamiliarize

dehabituate

decondition

degree of conditionality

differentiate

differentially activate

disentangle detachment

delight

despair

do it again

From the Stray Thought Bin - GS 101

2010-10-05T12:31:00.001-07:00

'Meanings' are inside of us and are not verbal—not even 'verbal meanings'.

Evaluation, Language and Politics (Democrats, Republicans and...?)

2010-09-28T11:16:00.000-07:00

Although I am not a partisan of either major political party, I find this article by George Lakoff ( a fairly adamant liberal Democrat) very interesting because of its general evaluational (semantic) slant. Lakoff is well-known as a cognitive linguist and has written some very interesting books on the broader aspects of how people make 'meanings' and how this relates to behavior, political and otherwise. I think readers of this blog will find his article of interest too.

But as someone of classical liberal/libertarian/centrist views, I take issue with something which Lakoff puts forth, something which seems rather significant about how he looks at the world. He indicates people are "inconsistent" if they they appear to straddle what he calls the 'liberal' frame and the 'conservative' frame. Perhaps some are. But if there are more than two frames, people like me may simply have a different frame which may appear inconsistent to those stuck in a two-valued one. Those like Mr. Lakoff?

Why the Democrats Response to the Pledge Has Been Inadequate

From the Stray Thought Bin-"Humility is Endless"

2010-09-16T21:28:00.000-07:00

I am humble.
You are more humble than me.
You are arrogant about your humility.
I am humble about mine.
I guess that makes me more humble than you.
Hmm, I guess that's pretty arrogant of me to think that.
Given that, I feel quite humble now.
Which makes me more humble than you.
Hmm, I seem rather arrogant about my humility.
I guess I should feel some more humility about that.
Now I'm even more humble than I first thought.

Quote of the Day-'The Art of Science'

2010-09-06T12:14:00.000-07:00

"After all, science as science is nothing more than scientific method, as has often been remarked; and scientific method is nothing more than an empirically verifiable language. On the other hand, the art of science, like any other art, is a knowledge of the great questions, and the discussion and solution of these questions in terms of a particular kind of social language—the language of empirical verifiability—which to a very considerable extent is acultural. If one will, one may say that the arts include science, whose medium of expression is the language of empirically verifiable operations."

—— George Kingsley Zipf *

*Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort: An Introduction to Human Ecology, pp. 330-331.

"Growing Up Sci Fi"

2010-08-25T10:37:00.000-07:00

Don Fagen, co-leader of the legendary Jazz-Rock group Steely Dan, has written about the influence that Korzybski's work had on him via his science fiction reading—A.E. Van Vogt, etc.—as a kid growing up in the Fifties. Interesting stuff! Here's the link:"The Cortico-Thalamic Pause: Growing Up Sci Fi"

From The Stray Thought Bin- "Know Thyself!"

2010-08-22T11:42:00.000-07:00

"Know Thyself!"
Oh, of course, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Not so fast, it's one of the most difficult tasks you can do.
Really.

"My Dear Russell": Korzybski and Bertrand Russell Part III

2010-08-22T09:54:00.000-07:00

Korzybski felt a deep indebtedness to Bertrand Russell for his theoretical insights (for years he kept a small photographic portrait of Russell, along with one of Einstein, on his office wall). The two men carried on an intermittent correspondence for years, eventually meeting face-to-face in 1939 when Russell, in Chicago, came for a brief visit to the Institute of General Semantics to see Korzybski there.

Afterwards, although, their correspondence remained polite, Alfred gradually began to vent more of his frustrations to Russell (it would have been out of character for him not to speak bluntly and Russell had demonstrated that he hadn't bothered much with Korzybski's work). In a lengthy letter to Russell in 1946 (perhaps the last one he wrote to him), Korzybski said:

"Some of my students in London told me some amusing gossips that my Science and Sanity was so against your grain that you threw the book into the Atlantic. Should this be true, it would be sad news, because your great work in Mathematical Foundations is at the very core of a non-aristotelian revision...Well, my dear Russell, your bloody ‘types’ if translated…and applied in daily life do work…Your behavior and platonic verbal fictions, no matterhow clever, and ‘academic’, are read by few ‘intellectuals’, but they cannot be workable, and so cannot be applied in general education. Yet your ‘types’ gave a formulation in crisp terms. I worked it out in a language applicable to life, and when people are trained in it in childlike terms, which applied even to ‘mentally’ ill it works astonishingly…"(1)

In a short note Russell told Korzybski that he had heard the story too but assured him but that he had not thrown Science and Sanity into the Atlantic. (2)

Notes

1. A.K. to Russell, 7/27/1946. IGS Archives.

2. B. Russell to A.K., 8/9/[1946]. IGS Archives.