Sep 29, 2000 © Steve Stockdale 2000 ThisIsNotThat.com 1 The Language of Awareness: Taking Responsibility for Meanings integrating what goes on in here

Sep 29, 2000 © Steve Stockdale 2000ThisIsNotThat.com

1

The Language of Awareness:Taking Responsibility for Meanings

integrating what goes on ‘in here’ with what goes on ‘out there’

… differences that make a difference ...

and

Applying what we ‘know’


2

The trouble with people is not so much with their ignorance as it is with their knowing so many things are not so.

– William Alanson White

1


3

“Time-binding”

Alfred Korzybski (1879 - 1950)• born in Poland, a “nobleman”• raised in four languages• studied engineering, mathematics• wounded in World War I serving in the

Russian calvary • experienced the devastating effects of men’s inhumanity against men • published Manhood of Humanity (1921),

Science and Sanity (1933)

What makes humans ‘human’?How do they differ from other living things?


4

“Time-binding”

Plants:

Animals:

Humans:

bind (organize) chemicals - nutrients, soil, water, oxygen; photosynthesis

bind (organize) chemicals like plants + bind (organize) space; self-moving

bind (organize) chemicals like plants + bind (organize) space like animals+ bind (organize) time

Humans possess the unique ability to “bind time” - to build on the accumulated ‘knowledge’ of others


5

“Time-binding”

Language is the tool that enables time-binding

• Inter-generational:– transfer knowledge and wisdom from generation to

generation; avoid “re-inventing the wheel”– child can build on the work and discoveries of the parent,

and all those who have preceded– word of mouth, books, plans, diagrams, maps, pictures,

instructions, libraries, music, codes, signs, symbols, etc.• Intra-generational:

– exchanging knowledge and wisdom among contemporaries; “cooperate and graduate”


6

but ...

How is it that we humans have advanced so far in science, mathematics and technology, yet we demonstrate so much confusion, misunderstanding, and violence in our interactions with others and within ourselves? - Milton Dawes

“Time-binding”

What accounts for the advances of science?What accounts for the lack of advancement of societies?

4


7

A Scientific Approach

Observe,Collect Data Hypothesis

Test, Experiment

Hypothesis confirmed?

Scientific Orientation:• Facts first, then assumptions, conclusions, beliefs• Tentative conclusions due to available data• Tentative conclusions due to ever-changing processes• Theories accepted as theories, based on data to date• Predictable outcomes - a key objective

No

Yes


8

We should be careful to get out of an experience only the wisdom that is in it - and stop there; lest we be like the cat that sits down on a hot stove-lid. She will never sit down on a hot stove-lid again - and that is well; but also she will never sit down on a cold one anymore.

– Mark Twain

Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts.

– Anonymous (tacked to Einstein’s board)

5

6


9

So far we’ve discussed ...

• Do we apply what we ‘know’? (Do you apply what you ‘know’?)

• Korzybski’s “time-binding” distinction: the ability of human beings to transfer knowledge and build on the achievements of others

• Language, and manipulation of symbols, serves as the tool that enables time-binding

• Humans have been more effective time-binders in science, engineering, mathematics, etc., than in our sociological endeavors (i.e., we’re still killing each other)

• A certain approach, or orientation, has facilitated the advancement of the sciences - a scientific approach


10

All our knowledge has its origins in our perceptions.

– Leonardo da Vinci

The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes, but in having new eyes.

– Marcel Proust

We see the world as ‘we’ are, not as ‘it’ is, because it is the ‘I’ behind the ‘eye’ that does the seeing.

– Anais Nin

7

8

9


11

‘Abstracting’ Model

1. Something Happens (“What Is Going On” - WIGO)

2. Sensory, Nervous System Impact of WIGO

3. ‘Evaluation’ (‘Report’ of What Happened)

4. ‘Meaning’ of the ‘Evaluation’‘Meaning’

Behavior

Feelings

Judgments

Conclusions

Reactions

Thoughts Attitudes

etc.

Expectations


12

‘Abstracting’ Model

1. Something Happens

2. Sensory Impact

3. ‘Evaluation’

4. ‘Meaning’‘Meaning’

Behavior

Feelings

Judgments

Conclusions

Reactions

Thoughts Attitudes

etc.

Non-verbal

Verbal

Inferences

What we sense is NOTwhat happened

What we describe is NOT what we sense

What it means is NOT what we describe

We cannot ‘know’ all that happens


13

‘Abstracting’ ... over Times

‘Meaning (1)’

Behavior

Feelings

Judgments

Conclusions

Reactions

Thoughts Attitudes

etc.Inferences

‘Meaning(3)’ ‘Meaning(4)’

...‘Meaning(2)’

t(1)

t(2) t(3) t(4)


14

You don’t get meaning. You respond with meaning.

– Charles Sanders Peirce

I perceive that we inhabitants of New England live this mean life that we do because our vision does not penetrate the surface of things. We think that that is which appears to be.

– Henry David Thoreau

10

11


15

‘Abstracting’

• Humans can only perceive a fraction of ‘What Is Going On’ around us

• Our experiencings of WIGO are limited and incomplete

• Our understandings of WIGO are limited and incomplete

• What we sense is not WIGO

• What we can describe is not what we sensed

• What we infer, assume, conclude is not what we described

• We project our ‘meaningful’ abstractions forward into our future WIGOs


16

How many Black Dots?


17

– Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch

Who rules our symbols, rules us.

– Alfred Korzybski

If your language is confused, your intellect, if not your whole character, will almost certainly correspond.

12

13


18

“The map is not the territory”

• Structurally similar

• Relations

• Order

• Limited features

• Made by mapmaker

• Static - must be updated

• Dynamic, complex

• Process-oriented

• Macroscopic

• Microscopic

• Sub-microscopic


19

“The map is not the territory”“The word (symbol) is not the thing”

• Structurally similar

• Relations

• Order

• Limited features

• Made by mapmaker

• Static - must be updated

• Dynamic, complex

• Process-oriented

• Macroscopic

• Microscopic

• Sub-microscopic


20

“The word (symbol) is not the thing” (?)duh-uh!

…but what about:• Superstitions?• Jinxes?• Taboo words?• Word magic?• Advertising?• Propaganda?• Political speeches?

Do we sometimes react to words

as if they were ‘things’?George Carlin


21

“The word (symbol) is not the thing”A little different attitude …

Sing them over again to me,

wonderful words of life;

let me more of their beauty see,

wonderful words of life;

words of life and beauty

teach me faith and duty.

Beautiful words, wonderful words,

wonderful words of life.

Beautiful words, wonderful words,

wonderful words of life.

“Wonderful Words of Life”,

Philip Paul Bliss, 1874


22

“The word (symbol) is not the thing”

Words don’t ‘mean’ … only a person does. There is no meaning in a word. We sometimes talk about this as the ‘container myth’. Now you can put something in a glass – water, dirt, sand, anything. A glass will hold something, and we can talk about this as a ‘container’. A word, however, is not a container in the way a glass is. A container of ‘meaning’ is a man, a woman, it’s you. It’s you listening, it is I talking. It is I listening, it’s you talking. A word doesn’t ‘mean’.

-Irving J. Lee, (1952)- Professor of Speech, Northwestern Univ

What is your attitude toward words and language?

0


23

What’s your attitude toward words?

“… baaad words!”

(Not!)

“Wonderful words of life … ”

“Words don’t ‘mean’ … people

‘mean’ …”


24

A more ‘scientific’ attitude toward language

1. Differentiate “facts” from “inferences”

Lee’s Criteria – “Facts”1. Can be made only after

observation or experience

2. Stays with the observation; does not speculate or presume as to intent or motivation

3. As close to certainty as humanly possible – would you bet your life on it?

Lee’s “Inferences”1. Can be made anytime,

even present or future

2. Goes beyond what is observed, speculates intent, purpose, motivation, etc.

3. Expressed in terms of degrees of possibility or probability – not worth betting your life!


25


2. Avoids “either-or”, “black-white”, “right-wrong”, “for-against”, etc.; acknowledges ambiguity, shades of grey; views possibilities across a spectrum or continuum (“more-less”)

3. Recognizes multi-causality of events … many causes, many effects; avoids “the reason why”, “the cause of”; hardly ever only one cause

4. Given uniqueness of individual experience, maintains a “to-me-ness” orientation: (or the email version – “IMO”)• “it’s cold in here … to me”• “that movie was a waste of money … to me”• “he’s the most boring teacher … IMO”


26


5. Recognizes the structural flaws in the Subject/Predicate grammar:

“The roses are red”

• Is “red” (the color) a ‘quality’ inherent in the rose?• Or is “red” (the color) a product of an individual

observer’s nervous system?• Is the rose “red” to someone who is color blind?

“The roses appear red – to me”


27


6. Recognizes differences among individuals:

- Teacher(1) is not Teacher(2); Minority(1) is not Minority(2)

7. Recognizes change over time:

- Ursula(2000) is not Ursula(1990)

- Bowl of milk(Monday) is not Bowl of milk(Friday)

8. Appropriately reflects the actor of the action

9. Limits inappropriate use of “absolutes”, such as: all, none, every, without exception, 100%, exactly, absolutely; and “is”

10. Recognizes “more could be said” – “etc.”


28

Maps, Territories, Words and Meanings

• “The map is not the territory”

• A good map is structurally similar to the territory

• Our abstractions - evaluations, meanings, judgments, etc. - are not ‘the territory’

• A good mapmaker must update her maps

• What do words ‘mean’? What do people ‘mean’? What is your attitude toward words and ‘meaning’?

• Distinguish between facts and inferences

• Apply a more scientific approach or attitude toward your language habits … make your language better ‘map’ what you know about the world around you


29

“So what?”


30

If you are distressed by anything external, the pain is not due to the thing itself, but to your estimation of it; and this you have the power to revoke at any moment.

– Marcus Aurelius

The power men possess to annoy me, I give them by a weak curiosity. No man can come near me but through my act.

– Ralph Waldo Emerson

God may forgive your sins. But your nervous system won’t.

– Alfred Korzybski

15

16

17


31

Me and Pavlov’s Dog …

Conditional Response

Conditioned Response

(no Evaluation)

saliva‘Meaning’

BehaviorReactionsStopGoSlowLookTurn …

“He made so mad, I could just spit!”


32

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

Self-Actualization

Self-Esteem

Love, Belongingness

Safety Needs

Physiological Needs

Ver

bal

No

n-v

erb

al

‘Meaning’

WIGO


33

He who learns and learns and yet does not what he knows, is one who plows and plows yet never sows.

– ancient Persian proverb, quoted by Alfred Korzybski

18


34

“Now what?”


35

Responsibility

Language Thoreau

Meanings

Awareness

Korzybski

Time-binding

PavlovMaslow

AngellScientific Approach

Facts

Beliefs

Theories

‘Nsync

Differences

Conditional Response

Inferences

‘Knowledge’etc.

Nin

Proust

Peirce

da Vinci

Abstracting

Sinatra

Mathers

Maps

Territory

So … what do you ‘know’? What will you apply?

Expectations

So what?

Carlin


36

What’s the “Take-away”?

Other memorable “take-aways”:• “Follow the yellow brick road”• “Follow the money”• “Show me the money”• “Plastics”• “May the Force be with you”


37

Here’s your “Take-away”

Look for the relations

ThisIsNotThat.com

Documents

Sep 29, 2000 © Steve Stockdale 2000 ThisIsNotThat.com 1 The Language of Awareness: Taking Responsibility for Meanings integrating what goes on in here