Chapter 22 - "Just Work, Work, Work": Part 3 - Down and Out

Korzybski: A Biography (Free Online Edition)

Copyright © 2014 (2011) by Bruce I. Kodish 

All rights reserved. Copyright material may be quoted verbatim without need for permission from or payment to the copyright holder, provided that attribution is clearly given and that the material quoted is reasonably brief in extent.

Alfred and Mira’s situation in California seemed a little better [than Polakov's]. At least they were able to pay their bills and they had some money coming in from royalties, although the income from these was offset by their book purchases from Dutton charged to their royalty account. More or less stranded in California, they were living from hand to mouth. Their plan to return East and sail for Europe sometime in November began to seem unfeasible.

Soon after her San Francisco gallery exhibit in May, Mira went down to Santa Barbara to visit friends and hunt for portrait commissions. But while money continued to pour out for her hotel and living expenses, she was not having much luck finding lucrative commissions. Alfred referred to her as “living among the sharks”.

Meanwhile in San Francisco, Alfred contemplated their prospects with some dismay. Despite book sales going reasonably well, it was becoming clear his initial hopes of selling large numbers of books (enough to accrue a significant income) wouldn’t happen anytime soon. By January of 1922, Dutton would sell 2,275 books. More than 1000 copies were sold in the following year. Then sales tailed off to a few hundred per year until the last few years of the decade when sales dropped again to less than 100 per year.(5) 

In 1921, paid speaking engagements were not forthcoming. Alfred had contacted a number of lecture agencies and universities with no interest in him. Although he had had a few invitations to speak around San Francisco, his first paying engagement only came in September. A San Francisco bookstore, the Paul Elder Gallery, invited him to give two lectures that, though successful, provided very little money. In a letter to a friend in New York, Alfred described their gloomy outlook, “We are always working more than we should. I am writing my next book and my wife painting. We did not have any chance to enjoy California, just work, work, work.”(6)

                

Flier for Korzybski Lectures,
Paul Elder Gallery - San Francisco, Sept. 1921

In July, Alfred had moved to Berkeley. For one thing, he didn’t need all the space of the San Francisco apartment he and Mira had rented; and besides, the move made it easier for him to use the University of California library for his research. Luella Twining (who may have been an old friend of Mira’s) had a house near the campus and offered him a room for rent. Twining, a socialist and former labor organizer (7), had gotten a copy of Manhood as soon as it came out and become a devotee of time-binding. Alfred got permission to keep some trunks and suitcases in the old apartment and moved into Luella’s house. Alfred, who needed only a bed, and a desk upon which to spread his papers and books, felt as happy as he could be, which was in fact slightly depressed. Money was still tight. And he was missing Mira. But they were both plugging away, following what Alfred referred to as their ‘religion’—to keep on working.

Political Flyer featuring Luella Twining  (circa 1907),
from Alfred Korzybski's Personal Files

The thought of Alfred rooming in the home of a female friend while Mira was away may bring up the question to some readers: Did Alfred (or Mira) ever ‘get involved’ with anyone else? Mainly as a function of Mira’s need to travel for her work, this was not the first nor the last time the two of them would be living apart. But I have found no reliable indication in Korzybski’s well-documented life, or in interviews and discussions with those who knew either one of them, that either of them were unfaithful in their marriage. As in any marriage, they had conflicts. Indeed, years later, their differences led them to live apart. But sexual peccadillos do not appear to have been the basis of the split. After 1938, Alfred lived at the Institute of General Semantics building in Chicago and Mira in a nearby apartment. After 1946, when the Institute and Alfred moved to Connecticut, they had, as Robert Pula put it, a “Tallulah Bankhead style marriage”:

Tallulah Bankhead, daughter of an American Congressman and Speaker of the House, actress, and owner of one of the world’s best female whiskey-and-cigarette baritone voices, replied when asked in an interview if she and her then husband had separate bedrooms: ‘Dahling, separate bedrooms?! Separate cities!!” (8) 

If Alfred ever did succumb to temptations—if—he did so discreetly. His relationships with female students and with close female associates, like Kendig and Charlotte Schuchardt, though generally warm and friendly, appear to have remained completely professional.

Notes 

You may download a pdf of all of the book's reference notes (including a note on primary source material and abbreviations used) from the link labeled Notes on the Contents page. The pdf of the Bibliography, linked on the Contents page contains full information on referenced books and articles. 

5. The 5000th copy of Manhood of Humanity was finally sold sometime between May 1934 and April 1935. But Alfred and Mira got very little benefit from the subsequent 15% royalty increase. After the publication of Alfred’s second book, Science and Sanity in 1933, interest in Manhood—which had virtually no sales in 1932 and 1933—began to increase. But with only 10 to 30 orders per year, Dutton had little incentive to continue with another printing. With several hundred sheeted copies of the book still sitting in a warehouse, Dutton only bound the books when an occasional order came in. By 1944, these were gone. Manhood of Humanity was out of print. Meanwhile, the Institute of General Semantics had been promoting and selling the book. Korzybski bought the printer’s plates and obtained the copyright from Dutton but the IGS was unable to get it back into print until the fall of 1950. “Copyright Folder and Business Correspondence with Dutton about Manhood of Humanity”. AKDA 31. 

6. AK to Beatrice Irwin, 7/18/1921. AKDA 11.164. 

7. “Strike Leaders Facing Defeat”. New York Times, 3/8/1910.

8. Pula 2003c, p. 64. Alfred’s and Mira’s separation after 1946 had to do with exigencies of finance and health, beyond the control of either of them. By this time, they had resolved their marital conflicts. Up until Alfred’s death, they remained in frequent contact, and hoped to find some way to live closer and see each other more often. 

< Part 2      Part 4 >

Return to Table of Contents 

Chapter 22 - "Just Work, Work, Work": Part 2 - Marketing Manhood

Korzybski: A Biography (Free Online Edition)

Copyright © 2014 (2011) by Bruce I. Kodish 

All rights reserved. Copyright material may be quoted verbatim without need for permission from or payment to the copyright holder, provided that attribution is clearly given and that the material quoted is reasonably brief in extent.

Manhood of Humanity never seemed in danger of becoming a huge bestseller. Macrae had anticipated an interested but limited scientifically-inclined audience. He expressed pleasant surprise as nationwide interest in the book grew through the summer of 1921 and into the fall. Published at the end of June, the first printing of 1500 copies was exhausted by the end of August. Dutton quickly had another 1500 printed with half of them bound at once. Half of these were sold almost immediately. 

Publicity consisted of Dutton’s marketing efforts (fliers and review copies, book store placements, and some advertisments) and whatever interest Alfred, in California, and his friends, mainly in New York City, could muster. How would they spread the word? In 1921 radio barely existed as a form of mass media. (The first commercial radio station, KDKA in Pittsburgh, had only begun limited broadcasting at the end of 1920.) Movies were still silent (though some kind of newsreel coverage could not be ruled out). Television was an inventor’s novelty, and the internet, email, etc., yet undreamed. It seemed crucial to get news about time-binding and the book into print. Newspapers were the main form of daily mass media news and entertainment. Even small cities normally had more than one daily paper with editors always on the lookout for content.

First page of an E. P. Dutton Advertising Flier for Manhood of Humanity
(Click here to download pdf of entire six page flier)

Alfred, savvy about publicity, energetically made contacts and did what he could to bring his work into public awareness. Especially throughout this and the next year, he and his friends used personal contacts, letters, speaking engagements, reviews, and articles in newspapers, magazines, and journals in order to get Manhood of Humanity in the public eye. And as the notion of time-binding became more well-known, word-of-mouth began to take effect to some degree.

Macrae felt impressed by the ardor of Alfred and his friends. Keyser, for example, made significant efforts. Almost sixty and not in the most robust of health, he still had teaching responsibilities and was trying to finish Mathematical Philosophy, his magnum opus which he had been working on for years. He wouldn’t let anything he didn’t consider essential distract him. Although he had already edited Manhood, he gave the full measure of whatever spare time he had to promoting Alfred’s book.

With Keyser’s permission, Alfred had a local printer make reprints of Keyser’s May Phi Beta Kappa address on the subject of time-binding, entitled “The Nature of Man”. Alfred then privately distributed it to select individuals he met or was corresponding with. (As was typical of Korzybski, he made friends with the printer who then joined his network of “time-binders”, began corresponding with Alfred and his other friends, and ended up offering Alfred a special deal for the printing costs.)

Meanwhile Keyser had an article published in the June issue of the academic journal The Pacific Review on “The Mathematical Obligations of Philosophy” which mentioned Alfred’s new book (much of this became “Lecture I – Introduction” of Mathematical Philosophy). Keyser also reviewed Manhood for The Bookman (published in September) and The New Republic (never published) and The New York Evening Post. The September 9 edition of Science, published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), carried Keyser’s May address on its front page. This gave Korzybski’s work an obvious boost of prestige and brought it to the attention of the large number of professional scientists and engineers who saw the journal. The Science article was reprinted in the January 1922 The Hibbert Journal: A Quarterly Review of Religion, Theology and Philosophy. Keyser’s elaboration on the theme, “Korzybski’s Conception of Man and Some of Its Implications”, appeared in the December 1921 volume of The Pacific Review.

Keyser’s enthusiasm for Korzybski and his work was heartfelt. And he was making his promotional efforts for Korzybski do double-duty for his own work—combining the Science address with the December Pacific Review article, he formed the penultimate chapter of Mathematical Philosophy. (Korzybski later called this, Chapter XX, “an exceptionally deep and beautifully written contemplation”(2) and the best short discussion of time-binding he knew. Years later, he made sure to have it placed after the Appendices in the Second Edition of Manhood, eventually published some months after his death.) Besides his articles and review, Keyser was also making an effort to mention Korzybski’s work in academic gatherings and personal conversations and meetings, whenever it seemed appropriate.

Polakov was also doing his part to push the book. Though he couldn’t find consulting jobs, his severe financial woes and concomitant psychological depression didn’t stop an outpouring of reviews, articles and speeches. The American Federation of Engineering Societies, under Herbert Hoover, had come out with a report on industrial waste, i.e., inefficiency—Walter’s area of specialty. The report gave him an opportunity to write some articles which expanded upon his “Principles of Industrial Philosophy”. The New Republic published one such article, “Waste”, in its July 6, 1921 issue. Since the editors expunged all his references to Korzybski, Walter (and Alfred) wondered if they didn’t have some kind of ill will toward Korzybski’s work. They later got some confirmation of this when they discovered the editors had pitted Walter against Keyser for reviews of Manhood and then subsequently published a hostile review from someone else.

The July 1921 issue of The World Tomorrow, a progressive Christian monthly, published a piece “Ecce Homo” [“Behold Man”] by Polakov which functioned as an extended review of Manhood. And though Walter also seemed like the perfect person to write a review for The Nation, William Fielding, Alfred and Walter’s friend from the “Time-Binding Club”, ended up writing one for the August issue. Walter, meanwhile had a review in the August Management Engineering and The New York Times gave him a page and a half in its Sunday, September 4, issue for an article with the headline “New Theory of Man – Count Korzybski Offers “Time-Binding” as the Key”. By this time newspaper, magazine and journal editors around the country were taking note and Manhood of Humanity was getting reviews and notices from coast-to-coast.

With Alfred and Mira planning to go to Europe, Alfred had designated Walter in the “Preface” of Manhood “…to act, with my authority, as my representative to whom any further queries should be addressed in my absence from America.”(3) Although the Korzybskis had not yet left the country, Walter was already getting inquiries. One, from Ford Hall Forum, which had a large auditorium in Boston, asked him to speak there on time-binding on October 23. Alfred was delighted Walter had been offered this opportunity and even more delighted afterwards when he learned how it came off. Walter spoke on “Korzybski’s New Law of Life” to a standing-room-only audience of over 1000 people. He spoke for over an hour, answered questions for another hour, and after his lecture got mobbed on the street outside the hall by eager listeners. Ironically, the speaker’s fee barely covered his train fare, lodging, and meals and he returned home from all this adulation to his new living quarters in New York City—a maid’s closet in the building where he had had his office. He had recently been evicted from his apartment for failure to pay rent. (His daughter Catherine, who had lived with him, had already moved in with a friend.) (4)

1921 Newspaper Advertisement for Walter Polakov's presentation
on "Korzybski's New Law of Life" at Boston's Ford Hall Forum

Notes 

You may download a pdf of all of the book's reference notes (including a note on primary source material and abbreviations used) from the link labeled Notes on the Contents page. The pdf of the Bibliography, linked on the Contents page contains full information on referenced books and articles. 

2. Korzybski qtd. in Schuchardt [Read] 1950b, “Editor’s Note”, p. x. 

3. Korzybski 1921, p. xiii. 

4. Polakov to AK, 10/6/1921. AKDA 12.66. 

< Part 1      Part 3 >

Return to Table of Contents 

Chapter 22 - "Just Work, Work, Work": Part 1 - Introduction

Korzybski: A Biography (Free Online Edition)

Copyright © 2014 (2011) by Bruce I. Kodish 

All rights reserved. Copyright material may be quoted verbatim without need for permission from or payment to the copyright holder, provided that attribution is clearly given and that the material quoted is reasonably brief in extent.

The “Great War” had scarred Korzybski both physically and psychologically. Great troubles loomed, perhaps even another more disastrous war. But despite his memories and forebodings, he seemed incapable of cynicism. He had retained his enthusiasm, warmth, earthiness—and bluntness. He had married a large-hearted woman who carried an actual golden rule with her wherever she went. Together, they deeply felt people could do better, the world could do better. After all, Alfred had clearly demonstrated (so they thought): humans, as the time-binding class of life, have at least the potential to progress.

However, Alfred also knew a good-hearted intention to help could be worse than useless if unconstrained by an accurate view of actualities. His own earlier attraction to the sort of view expressed in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion had come out of his deeply held concern for people’s well-being (particularly in Poland) combined with an uninformed, simplistic understanding of Jewish life. His deep investment in the principle of rooting out false knowledge had required him to challenge himself once his antisemitic beliefs had come to the surface so starkly. This provided another lesson about the necessity of not taking anything for granted (least of all his own opinions), of being open to facts, and of being willing to modify his opinions in accordance with them. Doing good required a clear head.

Korzybski’s commitment to clarity, which he had cultivated over the years, provided the ‘secret’ behind his knack for solving problems of all kinds. He wanted to extract its essence and convey it to others. Now (1921) he was putting it in terms of mathematical logic. But it seemed based on an even more general orientation—a system of principles (however unclear at present) behind the physico-mathematical revolution going on around him.

These principles connected with what his father had first taught him as a child, i.e., the feel of the calculus—looking at the world, even daily life, in terms of dynamic functions, differential equations. Leibniz again—the first to use the term “function” as the name for mathematically expressed relationships between variables. Things, people, ideas were not fixed and final however they might appear. Rather, everything in the world took part in a process of growth and change. Concurrently, if things seemed confusing, an order still existed behind the confusion, an underlying network of invariant relationships that might reveal itself for someone daring enough to inquire. Function. Differentiation. Integration. This way of looking at things, part of his engineer’s mentality and worldview—how could he convey it? 

Parabolas

He felt and knew more than he could clearly say about it. He remembered the teacher who had scolded him—“If you think you know it but you can’t say it, you probably don’t.” He now saw his first book as only an introduction to something much larger and more significant. What he was now studying, the new work in the foundations of mathematics and the recent revolution in physics, seemed to him to have come from this source of clear-headedness and rigorous thinking, the physico-mathematical and engineering ‘spirit’ that had fed him from childhood onwards. He was struggling now to remove the dross and confusion (his own primarily) and to more lucidly express his vision of this source—the source of the time-binding power. Somehow, he thought, there was a way of making the highly abstract and esoteric work he was now studying meaningful and applicable to everyday life.

Alfred had been corresponding with his friend Gilchrest, the Canadian who had tutored him in English at Petawawa. He wanted to know Gilchrest’s opinion of Manhood. Later in 1921, Gilchrest wrote that he considered the book “most excellently written”, but added:

…I do not think you have yet made the practical value of your discovery apparent to ordinary people. That may come later, in your next book. For example, I have no idea what would be your first step towards solving the problems of life or making things better. And that is the sort of advice that is most needed in the opinion of such prosaic and such dull individuals as I. (1)

Alfred could certainly agree. If he could clarify the broad system of principles behind the physico-mathematical revolution, he could provide such advice. In the meantime, he had been trying to sell some books.

Notes 

You may download a pdf of all of the book's reference notes (including a note on primary source material and abbreviations used) from the link labeled Notes on the Contents page. The pdf of the Bibliography, linked on the Contents page contains full information on referenced books and articles. 
1. Gilchrest to AK, 10/24/1921. AKDA 11.727. 

Part 2 >

Return to Table of Contents 

Chapter 21 - Leibniz's Dreams: Part 4 - The Dream of a Universal Language

Korzybski: A Biography (Free Online Edition)

Copyright © 2014 (2011) by Bruce I. Kodish 

All rights reserved. Copyright material may be quoted verbatim without need for permission from or payment to the copyright holder, provided that attribution is clearly given and that the material quoted is reasonably brief in extent.

The dreams of Leibniz, known as a ‘rationalist’, in some ways extended and refined those of the ‘empiricist’ Bacon. But for Leibniz, a mathematician, an intrinsic part of his dream included a proposal for a “universal language” or “universal characteristic” growing out of mathematics. Alfred, as a lover of mathematics and a good mathematical ‘journeyman’, seemed very much in tune with Leibniz here. 

As early as Pythagoras and Plato, people had wondered at the ‘miracles’ of mathematics and seen it as a model for other areas of thought. By the 17th century significant parts of natural philosophy, i.e., the science of mechanics and astronomy, were beginning to yield to mathematical treatment with astonishing success. It surely seemed, as Galileo commented, as if the Almighty had written the book of nature in the language of mathematics. Leibniz was convinced “there is nothing which is not subsumable under number”(14), if we only knew how to do it. Number had exactness, and exactness—the inevitablility of correct conclusions—appeared as the holy grail. Why? Because when rightly understood it led to agreement—universal agreement.

Even the simple operations of arithmetic might in a certain sense be made more exact through mechanization. In pursuit of this, Leibniz had designed and built the first four-function calculator. In other areas of mathematics, Leibniz also found more exact operations could at least be facilitated by an apt notation, such as the symbolism he designed for calculus—still used today.

Could anything like this be done for traditional logic and the even more inexact areas of knowledge and everyday language? Leibniz seemed to think so. As he put it in his 1677 essay “Preface To A General Science”, his “universal characteristic” entailed developing a new language for the perfection of reason. This language would allow people to express themselves with the exactness of arithmetic and geometry. With it, arguments and errors would dissolve as conversation would come to resemble calculation. Possibility or pipe dream? Leibniz thought he could do it. But ultimately he didn’t succeed in his long-term project of mathematizing everyday discourse. However, the vision did inspire a large portion of his work. His founding of the discipline of symbolic/mathematical logic, even though he was not able to carry it very far, is considered by many to be the closest he got towards the goal of a universal characteristic.

More than 100 years later, the English mathematician George Boole formulated the first system of mathematical logic, in his 1854 book, Investigation of the Laws of Thought. (Boole expressed delight when he learned he had in fact followed in Leibniz’s footsteps.) According to Keyser, Boole’s work initiated a revolution in mathematics and logic, by showing their deep relationship. Russell and Whitehead and others had built and were building upon it.

Korzybski had had many discussions with Keyser about these developments and was immersing himself in this work. He felt and knew its importance. But the work—with its high level of abstractness—seemed remote and forbidding, not anything like a universal language applicable to everyday life. For example, with the elaborate and exotic apparatus of their algebraic symbology, Russell and Whitehead had taken 379 pages just getting to the point of showing how 1+1=2. Alfred felt there was something in what they had done, and in the other books he was studying, relevant for living life. He wanted to draw it down to earth—make it practical for the man, woman, and child in the street. 

From Russell and Whitehead's Principia Mathematica, Vol. 1, First Edition, p. 379 

This was the project he was developing in the summer of 1921, as Manhood of Humanity was getting publicized. He wanted, if he could, to topple the idols impeding people’s ability to time-bind. He had accomplished the first step. People now had the formulation of time-binding by which they could clearly and consciously view themselves as time-binders. Mathematical logic and the exact physico-mathematical sciences seemed to hold the key for the next step—to liberate the time-binding mechanism.

In his new book Alfred hoped he could bring to life an updated version of the dreams of Leibniz, Bacon, and others. Building from the notion of time-binding and from the revolutionary new mathematics and science of the the early 20th century, Korzybski was groping to construct a methodological foundation for a science of humanity. He would continue his career of troubleshooting now on a much more general scale.

Notes 

You may download a pdf of all of the book's reference notes (including a note on primary source material and abbreviations used) from the link labeled Notes on the Contents page. The pdf of the Bibliography, linked on the Contents page contains full information on referenced books and articles. 

14. Leibniz 1979 (1951), “Towards A Universal Characteristic [1677]”, p.17. 

< Part 3

Return to Table of Contents 

Chapter 21 - Leibniz's Dreams: Part 3 - Idols of the 'Mind'

Korzybski: A Biography (Free Online Edition)

Copyright © 2014 (2011) by Bruce I. Kodish 

All rights reserved. Copyright material may be quoted verbatim without need for permission from or payment to the copyright holder, provided that attribution is clearly given and that the material quoted is reasonably brief in extent.

A universal encyclopedia of knowledge and a general science of discovery would, in Korzybski’s terms, necessarily accelerate the time-binding power of Man by helping to extend the methodology of science and mathematics to more and more areas of human life. First, however, a great deal of the ‘deadwood’ blocking the rate of time-binding would have to be removed from the ‘tree of culture’. As Korzybski wrote in Manhood of Humanity: 

Metaphysical speculation and its swarming progeny of blind and selfish political philosophies, private opinions, private “truths,”and private doctrines, sectarian opinions, sectarian “truths” and sectarian doctrines, querulous, confused and blind—such is characteristic of the childhood of humanity. The period of humanity’s manhood will, I doubt not, be a scientific period—a period that will witness the gradual extension of scientific method to all the interests of mankind—a period in which man will discover the essential nature of man and establish, at length, the science and art of directing human energies and human capacities to the advancement of human weal in accordance with the laws of human nature. (12) 

As Korzybski was not the first to hold such a dream of scientific and cultural advancement, neither was Leibniz. Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1626), had gotten there before. Bacon had championed the move away from dry medieval scholasticism toward the modern experimental study of nature. He had proclaimed, “Knowledge is Power” and had hoped to usher in “The Great Instauration”—a golden age of science-based progress. Before Leibniz, he sought to create a universal encylopedia of knowledge. And he too had written about a general science, an art of thinking and discovery he hoped to advance. In his 1620 work, Novum Organum, he had presented this new system of thought, hoping to replace or at least expand on the logic of Aristotle. This would require recognizing and dealing with,

Four species of idols [sources of error which] beset the human mind, to which (for distinction’s sake) we have assigned names, calling the first Idols of the Tribe [intrinsic to general human nature, perception, etc.], the second Idols of the Den [intrinsic to each individual’s idiosyncracies and training], the third Idols of the Market [related to language], the fourth Idols of the Theatre [related to doctrines and beliefs]. (13) 

Portrait of Sir Francis Bacon by Abraham van Blyenberch (c. 1618)

In Manhood of Humanity Korzybski had quoted at length from Bacon’s discussion of these idols. They seemed to summarize some of the major impediments to human understanding and successful time-binding which characterized the childhood of humanity. To clarify the mechanism of time-binding, Alfred would need to make a less ‘literary’, more exact formulation of how the ‘idols’ of the ‘mind’ were formed.

Notes 

You may download a pdf of all of the book's reference notes (including a note on primary source material and abbreviations used) from the link labeled Notes on the Contents page. The pdf of the Bibliography, linked on the Contents page contains full information on referenced books and articles. 

12. Korzybski 1921, pp. 44-45. 

13. Bacon qtd. in Korzybski 1921, pp. 42. 

< Part 2      Part 4 >

Return to Table of Contents 

Chapter 21 - Leibniz's Dreams: Part 2 - Leibniz's Dreams

Korzybski: A Biography (Free Online Edition)

Copyright © 2014 (2011) by Bruce I. Kodish 

All rights reserved. Copyright material may be quoted verbatim without need for permission from or payment to the copyright holder, provided that attribution is clearly given and that the material quoted is reasonably brief in extent.

To what extent Alfred knew of Leibniz’s work before meeting Keyser remains unknown. But Keyser had referred to Leibniz and his dreams in his own writings. Undoubtedly by the summer of 1921, Alfred had at least seen these references in his readings of Keyser’s work. In Leibniz, Alfred sensed a kindred spirit and he went on to study Leibniz’s life and work. 

Leibniz was born in 1646 at the tail-end of the Thirty-Years War in Germany. Although he received a doctorate in jurisprudence and had been offered a university professorship, Leibniz spent most of his professional life in the service of German princes, first the Elector of Mainz, and then two successive Dukes of Hanover. These latter patrons deemed that the most significant work that one of the greatest intellects in human history could do, was to write a chronicle of the Hanover family. (The family now seems important mainly because of its connection to Leibniz.) In his ‘spare time’, among other accomplishments, Leibniz managed to invent the differential and integral calculus (independently of Isaac Newton), founded the disciplines of symbolic logic and analysis situs, i.e., topology (although he failed to develop either of these to any significant extent), and carried on extensive scientific-philosophical and diplomatic activities and correspondence throughout Europe.

Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716)

Perhaps at least in part because of the era of European disharmony he had been born into, Leibniz was obsessed with dreams of universalism and unification. One of his dreams was of universal peace in Christian Europe. He had floated a scheme for unifying the Protestants and Catholics (at least in Germany) after more than a century of conflict since the start of the Reformation. The scheme never got off the ground. He also wanted to unify the various areas of knowledge. He wrote, “The entire body of the sciences may be regarded as an ocean, continuous everywheres and without a break or division.”(7) He felt strongly that the sciences were the “greatest treasure of mankind”.(8) In addition, his experience as a mining engineer in the Harz Mountains of Germany may have reinforced his conviction about the necessity of uniting theory and practice in order to gain the greatest benefit from this treasure.

As the Duke of Hanover’s librarian he had access to texts from all over Europe and even China. As an inventor cum mathematician cum scientist he had been stimulated and encouraged by his meetings with some of the age’s best “natural philosophers”. These experiences fed further dreams of the unification of the sciences and scientists. While living in Paris and visiting London, he had become a member of both the French Academy and the Royal Society of London. This inspired him to work at establishing other societies in Europe for the sharing and dissemination of scientific knowledge. In this regard, he helped found the Prussian Academy in Berlin and before his death in 1716, corresponded with Tsar Peter the Great, in an effort to found a Russian Academy in St. Petersburg.

Scientific unity could be promoted in other ways too. Leibniz dreamt of a universal encyclopedia. Even at the end of the 17th Century he was worrying about the effects of the “horrible mass of books which keeps on growing” and “the indefinite multitude of authors”.(9) 

…[W]ith books continuing to increase in number, we shall be wearied by their confusion…some day a great, free and curious prince, a glorious amateur, or perhaps himself a learned man, understanding the importance of the matter, will cause to undertake under the best auspices what Alexander the Great commanded Aristotle to do with the natural sciences,…namely that the quintessence of the best books be extracted and joined to the best observations, not yet written, of the most expert in each profession, in order to build systems of solid knowledge for promoting man’s happiness. …such a work would be a most durable and great monument of his glory and constitute an incomparable debt which all mankind would owe him. (10) 

Such a system, he speculated, could lead to new discoveries “by examining each science with the effort necessary to discover its principles of discovery, which once combined with some higher or general science (namely, the art of discovery), may suffice to deduce all the rest or at least the most useful truths without needing to burden the mind with too many precepts.”(11) 

Notes 

You may download a pdf of all of the book's reference notes (including a note on primary source material and abbreviations used) from the link labeled Notes on the Contents page. The pdf of the Bibliography, linked on the Contents page contains full information on referenced books and articles. 

7. Leibniz 1979 (1951), “The Horizon of Human Knowledge [After 1690]”, p.73. 

8. Ibid, “Precepts For Advancing The Sciences And Arts” [1680], p. 33. 

9. Ibid., pp. 29–30. 

10. Ibid., p. 32. 

11. Ibid., pp. 39-40. 

< Part 1      Part 3 >

Return to Table of Contents 

Chapter 21 - Leibniz's Dreams: Part 1 - Introduction

Korzybski: A Biography (Free Online Edition)

Copyright © 2014 (2011) by Bruce I. Kodish 

All rights reserved. Copyright material may be quoted verbatim without need for permission from or payment to the copyright holder, provided that attribution is clearly given and that the material quoted is reasonably brief in extent.

In the final pages of Manhood of Humanity, Alfred had presented a dream for the future of humanity which seemed to expand upon some of the old Polish ideals he had grown up with*:

In humanity’s manhood, patriotism—the love of country—will not perish—far from it—it will grow to embrace the world, for your country and mine will be the world. Your “state” and mine will be the Human State—a Cooperative Commonwealth of Man—a democracy in fact and not merely in name... guided ...by scientific men, by honest men who know. Is it a dream? It is a dream, but the dream will come true. It is a scientific dream and science will make it a living reality. (1) 

How to bring about this dream? Korzybski made an admittedly vague proposal for “the establishment of a new institution which might be called a Dynamic Department—Department of Coordination or a Department of Cooperation” (whether wholly governmental or not, it didn’t seem quite clear). Korzybski wrote: “Its functions would be those of encouraging, helping and protecting the people in such cooperative enterprises as agriculture, manufactures, finance, and distribution.”(2) 

However, now that Manhood of Humanity had been published, Alfred wasn’t planning to dwell on this or any other social, economic, or political applications of the time-binding notion. He hoped others would do so. His need to figure things out in the most comprehensive way, what he called his “innate abstractness”—one of the main factors driving him to write Manhood—was still driving him. It led him now to explore and uncover the foundation of time-binding, its underlying mechanism.(3) Since he seemed inclined to see the broadest theory as potentially the most practical, he had confidence this might actually lead to some far-reaching social benefits.

What lay at the foundation of time-binding? It seemed to him that the very mathematical spirit he had tried to apply in developing his definition of Man, exemplified time-binding at its best. He had given this spirit—the spirit of rigorous thinking—more attention in his original manuscript. But in the editing process, he had moved it into the background. In the published book, much of his discussion of mathematics had either been deleted or moved to an appendix or footnote. Now he wanted to move time-binding to the background—as it were—and to shift his focus to this mathematical side. He felt strongly that by digging into the foundations of mathematics and the physico-mathematical sciences, he would be digging to uncover the roots of time-binding itself.

Much of the deleted material was contained in a manuscript of Manhood which he had loaned some time before to an acquaintance in New York City, a businessman and writer named John Martin. He could get other manuscripts in various states of revision but this was the first draft, which contained material not available in the other versions. Now in San Francisco, he urgently wanted it back. He wrote to Martin asking for its return. But Martin had loaned the draft to someone else, hadn’t been able to locate the man he had given it to, and didn’t seem to understand Alfred’s urgency. Martin sent back a curt letter and several months of somewhat acrimonious correspondence ensued until Alfred finally did get it back.

Perhaps he had needed the draft. Still, he had also begun to find deeper issues in his theory, issues he simply hadn’t dealt with in the first book or at least hadn’t been able to treat with much clarity. He had already established that “Language no doubt is an essential instrument or vehicle of time-binding.”(4) But how did it work to impede or improve progress? Perhaps there were problems with some of the language he himself had been using. How did this all relate to mathematics? Somehow, he felt, the mathematical theories of dimensions and types could be extended to “bring order in the confusion of wrong language and wrong logic in the affairs of men”.(5) But how exactly? In broad terms, he knew what he was aiming for. If Manhood contained his “special theory”, to use an analogy with Einstein’s work on relativity, he was now aiming to formulate a more “general theory”. But what did he need to do to get there?

Such a general theory, he expected, would have great practicality, an application to life that Russell and Whitehead, among others, had not been able to demonstrate. This was the thrust of the new book he was planning. He had already started to work on it before the publication of Manhood. Macrae had an option to publish it. The book would deal with the dreams and ideals of Man and the problems of human happiness from this mathematical perspective. He had hoped to be able to get it out within four to five months (it would take 12 years) and already had a title—When Dreams Become True: The Mathematical Theory of Life.

The title referred to Alfred’s dreams but also alluded to the dreams of Leibniz. Among the many historical figures studied by Korzybski, Leibniz looms as one of his greatest conscious and acknowledged influences. Years later, Alfred would include him (spelling his name with a “t”, i.e., “Leibnitz”) in the list of those to whom he dedicated his second book. This was not only for Leibniz’s discovery/invention (along with Newton) of the calculus, which over the years so inspired Alfred. The dreams of Leibniz—various schemes and speculations Leibniz proposed over his lifetime to advance mathematics, science, and society—stirred Alfred as well.(6) 

Notes 

You may download a pdf of all of the book's reference notes (including a note on primary source material and abbreviations used) from the link labeled Notes on the Contents page. The pdf of the Bibliography, linked on the Contents page contains full information on referenced books and articles. 
* The motto “For your freedom and ours”, used by Polish fighters in various independence movements around the world, encapsulates the universal democratic ideal long interlinked with traditional Polish patriotism. See Olszer. 

1. Korzybski 1921, p. 199-200. 

2. Ibid., p. 200. See pp. 200-203 for more detail on Korzybski’s Dynamic Department proposal. 

3. AK to C. J. Keyser, 6/20/1921. AKDA 11.335-338. 

4. AK to V. S. Sukthankar, 6/12/1921. AKDA 11.388. 

5. AK to Keyser, 6/6/1921. AKDA 11.409-411. 

6. Indeed, he noted twice in Science and Sanity—the book that was finally published 12 years later—that the system presented in it implied a theory of universal agreement that would allow “the dreams of Leibnitz” to become “a sober reality.” Korzybski 1994 (1933), pp. 52, 287. 

Part 2 >

Return to Table of Contents 

Part V - Science and Sanity

Notes 

You may download a pdf of all of the book's reference notes (including a note on primary source material and abbreviations used) from the link labeled Notes on the Contents page. The pdf of the Bibliography, linked on the Contents page contains full information on referenced books and articles. 

1. Korzybski qtd. in Mordkowitz “Listener’s Guide to Alfred Korzybski’s 1948-1949 Intensive Seminar”,  General Semantics Bulletin 52 (1985), p. 58. 

Return to Table of Contents

Chapter 20 - Manhood of Humanity: Part 5 - Kudos and Criticisms

Korzybski: A Biography (Free Online Edition)

Copyright © 2014 (2011) by Bruce I. Kodish 

All rights reserved. Copyright material may be quoted verbatim without need for permission from or payment to the copyright holder, provided that attribution is clearly given and that the material quoted is reasonably brief in extent.

Even though he felt grateful for the newspaper coverage, Alfred seemed inclined to raise his eyebrows at the purple prose of screaming headlines. But he hardly had a right to grumble about the exaggerations of headline writers. Both he and some of his friends sounded at times as if the discovery of time-binding signaled the imminent coming of the messianic age. Reading some of his letters of this period does give a sense of overreaching. For example, did Alfred actually discover and formulate a “natural law, of equal if not more importance than the law of gravitation” as he wrote to more than one friend.(18) Did the theory of time-binding indeed provide the first scientific understanding of wealth? (19)  

Keyser had warned him about this sort of over-the-top enthusiasm which could sometimes burst through in his speech and writing. Keyser considered Korzybski’s work and approach of such value, it didn’t need to be goosed with exaggerated-sounding claims which might put off potentially sympathetic members of his audience. But especially in this early period of his formulating, Alfred seemed to have a particularly strong urge to help—or even to save—mankind. Sometimes this urgency—this impatience to do away with what he saw as preventable ignorance about the nature of Man—created an obstacle in the form of rhetorical excess. On the other hand, would Korzybski have gotten as far as he had or continue to develop his work further, if he hadn’t considered his definition of Man of such great importance? Would he have gotten so far in stimulating the interest and enthusiasm of others? Readers’ enthusiasm seems apparent not only from some of the published reviews but also from unsolicited letters Korzybski received from many individuals over the next few years when the book was still much in the public eye.

Though Korzybski may have succumbed to hyperbole at times, he remained open to criticism. This continued throughout his career. He had every intention of getting the things he was formulating as right as he could get them. He had sought criticism when he first approached authorities in the fields Manhood touched upon to review his manuscript (people like Moore, Keyser, Polakov, Wolf, and Loeb, amongst others). He also asked for honest commentary, critical or otherwise, from his friends and they often gave it to him. Not all their comments were laudatory. He subscribed to a clipping service—which gathered positive, negative, and in-between reviews and book notices from around the country. And a few individual readers also sent their unsolicited critical comments and reviews. Although positive reviews pleased him, he wanted people’s honest opinions.

Some criticisms, he found, missed his intended points, either partially or entirely. If he could account for this by some failure of expression or lack of clarity on his part, he tried to correct it when he could. On the other hand, some of the people who missed the point seemed determined to misinterpret him or to go out of their way to nit-pick. Depending on the person or situation, he would often make an effort to communicate further to get his point across before giving up. A second broad category of individuals had legitimate questions, suggestions, factual corrections, or logical points. He saved every review and letter and appeared to try to learn from them all. He gave every personal comment or letter the utmost attention.

The protestation of Mrs. E.B. Darling, a lady from Berkeley whom he had met, provides a small example. An animal-lover, Mrs. Darling had been deeply interested in Alfred’s explanations of time-binding and wanted a copy of the book. However, Korzybski’s distinction between humans and animals seemed to imply to her the possible denigration of animals; she had serious misgivings. Korzybski wrote:

Dear Mrs. Darling:
I am sending under separate cover a copy of my book “Manhood of Humanity”. I do not wish to hurt your feelings, kind feelings toward animals, as a soldier and farmer I know animals and love them. In my book I use sometimes an expression “beast”, but this expression does not apply to animal, animals are just dear animals, “beast” is applied only and exclusively to man-animals which because man is not an animal when he wants to be an animal he becomes a “beast” in every respect LOWER than an animal. With this in mind I hope you will like the book.
Very sincerely yours. (20)

His definition of humanity and his exponential law did present problems. Humanity was defined in terms of its capacity to make progress. But how was progress to be exactly defined in order to be observed and measured?

Nonetheless, whatever its flaws, he continued to affirm the significance of what he had done. His law or formula did indicate an exponential, accumulative potential in humans, the existence of which he affirmed throughout his life. Others before him may have observed and commented on the phenomenon but as far as he knew, no one before him had isolated and labeled it in functional, actional, comparative terms—as he had done—and affirmed it as the necessary starting point for a deductive science of Man. For Alfred, who held the model of the exact (or mathematical) sciences as an ideal, such a science of Man should aspire to be as postulational as possible, i.e., based on initial definitions and premises comprising a theory to be elaborated deductively, tested, and revised.

To Keyser and others, Alfred could certainly admit some frustration about the limits of his own formulating. Even within the book, he had noted some of its limitations. The book “aimed to be only a sketch [p. 204]. ...Many topics have not even been broached [p. 208].” While writing the book, he had felt more directly interested in social and economic issues and reform. Now he no longer wanted to elaborate upon the implications/applications of time-binding for economics, politics, etc. Rather, he wanted to understand the mechanism of time-binding—how it worked. Manhood provided a start, but he still hadn’t gotten to the core of what he wanted to understand.

Notes 

You may download a pdf of all of the book's reference notes (including a note on primary source material and abbreviations used) from the link labeled Notes on the Contents page. The pdf of the Bibliography, linked on the Contents page contains full information on referenced books and articles. 

18. AK to William J. Fielding, 4/24/1921. AKDA 11.548-550; AK to Basil Manly, 6/13/1921. AKDA 11.369. 

19. AK to William J. Fielding, 6/12/1921. AKDA 11.387. 

20. AK to Mrs. E.B. Darling, 7/13/1921. AKDA 11.226.

< Part 4

Return to Table of Contents 

Chapter 20 - Manhood of Humanity: Part 4 - "Please Drop This Time-Binding"

Korzybski: A Biography (Free Online Edition)

Copyright © 2014 (2011) by Bruce I. Kodish 

All rights reserved. Copyright material may be quoted verbatim without need for permission from or payment to the copyright holder, provided that attribution is clearly given and that the material quoted is reasonably brief in extent.

Soon after arriving, Alfred went to visit Professor Guido Marx of the Stanford University Department of Mechanical Engineering. Marx, well-known for his work on systematic analysis in machine design, also had a broader interest in the social responsibilities of engineers. In the spring of 1920 Marx had lectured on that subject in New York at the New School for Social Research under the auspices of Thorstein Veblen. He also gave popular lectures to the citizenship classes at Stanford and helped found the American Association of University Professors. Having corresponded with Korzybski since the autumn of 1920, he seemed naturally drawn to the notion of time-binding. Alfred had given him a copy of the manuscript which he was “reading with interest although at times not with understanding.”(13) 

After their meeting, Marx wrote to Korzybski and offered to put together a “smoker” gathering of academics whom he thought would have an interest in hearing Korzybski speak—exactly what Alfred had been looking for. Alfred described the May 28 meeting in a letter to Keyser:

A friend engineer, who is a professor at Stanford [Guido Marx] got interested in Time-binding and gave me a smoker where there was about 25 professors. The audience was very mixed, engineers, philosophers, economists, lawyers, biologists, mathematicians, linguists, and so on. It was a rather difficult task to satisfy them all. I was told later on that I did well, they were very friendly anyway. I was quiet and careful in my expressions. I explained that the speaking of this subject is so difficult that a serious exposé could be given only in writing. They understood my difficulties and were lenient to the form.  

I had some gratifying moments. Few days before I met a young very promising biologist from Columbia, Calvin Bridges which is already an acknowledged authority on heredity. He read the MS. And at the smoker he made a fight for my theory and gave the explanation of the Biological App. AND EXPLAINED TO THEM THE VALUE AND APPLICATION OF THE SPIRAL THEORY...After the lecture an old lawyer, professor of Stanford and mayor of the town said that’s all moonshine and nothing new...a fight began in which I did not participate, the audience was simply dying from laughter. It was the most funny thing I ever witnessed, and especially when the lawyer could not find arguments, and with desperate gesture said in a sad voice to the biologist, “Please drop this time-binding.” We all rolled on the floor [with laughter] for about five minutes.(14) 

Alfred got a few pieces of good news from Keyser at the end of May. Dutton had picked up Keyser’s book Mathematical Philosophy. Korzybski had recommended the book to Macrae and felt overjoyed. Also in June the Pacific Review of the University of Washington would publish an article by Keyser, “Mathematical Obligations of Philosophy”, which mentioned Alfred’s forthcoming book. The third piece of news had perhaps the greatest importance for Alfred. In a few days, Tuesday May 31, Keyser would give the annual Phi Beta Kappa address at Columbia University on “The Nature of Man”. The address, centering on Korzybski’s formulation of time-binding, was subsequently published in the September 9, 1921 issue of Science. Keyser decided to make it the basis of the penultimate chapter of Mathematical Philosophy. Keyser would continue to promote Korzybski’s work whenever he had the opportunity and Alfred felt deeply grateful.

Alfred and Mira, ‘on pins and needles’, awaited the publication of Manhood of Humanity, expected for the end of June. In the meantime, the San Francisco papers printed a few articles on Mira and her exhibit. The articles included some mention of Alfred. In the May 29 San Francisco Chronicle, the headline of another article specifically about Alfred read, “Fourth Dimension Discovered at Last! Secrets of Algebra and Soul Bared[.] New Mathematical Theory By Count”. (15) On June 26, The Boston Evening Transcript published a four-page article based on an interview with Polakov entitled “Korzybski, Time-Binder, Upsets Darwin and Proves the Golden Rule True”.(16) A couple of days later, the book went on sale.(17)

Notes 

You may download a pdf of all of the book's reference notes (including a note on primary source material and abbreviations used) from the link labeled Notes on the Contents page. The pdf of the Bibliography, linked on the Contents page contains full information on referenced books and articles. 

13. Guido Marx to AK, 5/19/1921. AKDA 11.493. 

14. AK to C.J. Keyser, 5/29/1921. AKDA 11.466. 

15. “Fourth Dimension Discovered at Last!...”. San Francisco Chronicle, 5/29/1921. AKDA 1.103. 

16. “Korzybski, Time-Binder, Upsets Darwin...”. Boston Evening Transcript, 6/26/1921. AKDA 3.13. 

17. John Macrae to AK, 6/27/1921. AKDA 11.273. 

< Part 3      Part 5 > 

Return to Table of Contents