Healing Thinking and
Being
(Book manuscript by Rolf Sattler)
Chapter 4
Healing Thinking through Non-Identity
(Korzybski)
“Whatever you might say the object “is”, well it is not” (Korzybski)
It has become fashionable to insist on all sorts of identity.
However, as Korzybski and others have emphasized, there is no
identity of word and object, map and territory, object or
territory and reality. Thus, words and language can give us
only a pale reflection of reality, which ultimately is
unnamable. Disregarding the non-identity of language and
reality can lead to negative psycho-logical reactions,
conflict, violence, and war. Thinking with an awareness of
non-identity is healing and healthy.
Language and Reality
As
he grew older and wiser, Albert Einstein noted: “In my youth
I thought Truth can be known. Now I think otherwise; now I
think, Truth is unknowable and will always be
unknowable” (Albert Einstein,
quoted by Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh. 1978. The Way of
Tao. Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass, p. 100). Although many people, including
scientists, might disagree, Einstein’s assertion is based on
solid evidence: we know that our perception is limited due to
the organization of our brain, nervous system and sensory
apparatus. Some species of animals can perceive aspects of
reality that are beyond our direct experience. For example,
bees can see beautiful ultraviolet patterns in flowers that
are invisible to us; bats can generate and perceive sounds
that are beyond our perception. But even if our perception
were more truthful, the language, language structure and
logic we use to formulate insights, restrict and distort that
which is, namely Truth. In other words, “human experience
gets filtered and mediated by contingent features of human
sensory organs, the human nervous system, and human
linguistic constructions” (Wikipedia page on
General Semantics). Linguistic
constructions comprise words and the language structure
and logic that relate words to one another. “Words are
probably one of the deepest and most unconscious filters
we have” (Falconar, T. 2000. Creative
Intelligence and Self-Liberation. Korzybski,
Non-Aristotelian Thinking and Eastern
Realization. Crown House
Publishing, p.VI). “Most of us human beings think that we
are masters of words; the truth is they master us, we are
enslaved by words” (Ibid., p. 3). They master us in a way
that tends to remove us more or less from reality because
they fragment the wholeness of reality. Through words,
“languages have taught us to separate things such as mind
and body, time and space, outside and inside (Ibid., p.
6). But “there is no
such thing as
an object in absolute isolation” (Korzybski, A. 1958.
Science and Sanity. The International Non-Aristotelian
Library Publishing Company, p. 60/1). Everything is
interconnected and integrated into an all-encompassing
whole, which is the whole universe or Kosmos. Therefore,
“to use words to sense reality is like going with a lamp
to search for darkness” (Falconar, ibid. p.3).
Nonetheless, words can be useful, especially if it
understood that “words are not the things we are speaking
about” (Ibid., p. 60). Words refer to concepts that are
abstractions from the all-encompassing whole. Even the
particular objects (fragments) they refer to, they cannot
cover entirely. They cover only an aspect because “an
object has many characteristics on different levels such
as the macroscopic, microscopic and sub-microscopic. Most
of these characteristics are unknown to us and so they are
not included in the word we give it, the object’s name
(ibid., p. 7).
Whatever you might
say
the object “is”, well
it is not (Korzybski, ibid.
p. 35).
Hence, there is no identity of the word and the object it
refers to. The word (concept) represents only a selection of
some of the characteristics of the object.
Let me illustrate
this by some examples. The word that refers to the concept
“apple” is defined by some characteristics of apples such as
their development, shape, anatomy, etc. It leaves out many
characteristics of apples such as their beauty, brilliance,
and interconnectedness with the all-encompassing whole.
Thus, Magritte painted an apple and below the image he wrote:
“Ceci n’est pas une pomme” (This is not an apple). This may
appear puzzling or nonsensical to many people, but it is
clear that a painting of an apple is not an apple but only an
image of an apple, and an image of an apple is not the same
as an apple, it is not identical with the apple because an
image of an apple cannot include all of the characteristics
of an apple. Like a word, it cannot cover the whole object.
Therefore, whatever we say the object is, be it by an image
or a word, it is not because the object is much more than
what the image or word implies.
Another example: “John is a criminal”. Again, John is much
more than what the definition of criminal entails. He is also
a human being with positive emotions more or less similar to
those of other human beings.
Words refer not only to single objects but also to categories
of objects such as “apple” or “human being”. It is important
to realize that every member of the category, such as every
human being, is unique. What holds members of a category
together are only the characteristic(s) that define the
category. Very often it is difficult to find such
characteristics that apply to all members of the category
(see, e.g., Sattler, R. 1986. Biophilosophy.
Analytic and Holistic Perspectives. Heidelberg/New
York: Springer, pp. 82-85). For this reason it is difficult
or impossible to make generalizations. Much harm has been
done by inappropriate generalizations.
The Unnamable
Regardless of weather a word refers to an object, or a
category of objects, or a category of categories, “reality is
far from words and it is very different from what a naïve
person thinks it is” (Falconar, ibid. p. 7). Therefore, to
come closer to reality, we have to become silent. Instead of
using words immediately as we encounter a new situation, it
would be helpful to pause and first experience the situation
non-verbally. Subsequently, we could use words, while
recognizing that “there is always more than can be said about
anything” (Wikipedia page on Structural
Differential). “Whatever
we may say will not be the objective level, which remains
fundamentally un-speakable…The objective level is not
words…neither can it be understood as ‘non-expressible by
words’ or ’not to be described by words’, because the
terms ‘expressible’ or ‘described’ already presuppose
words and symbols (Korzybski, ibid., p. 34). Thus, the
recognition of the non-identity of word and object,
language and reality, leads to the recognition of the
primordial importance of silence that has been emphasized
in many contemplative traditions of the East and West. It
leads to the recognition of the Unnamable that can be
experienced in meditation
(see Chapter
5).
Korzybski’s Structural
Differential
Although the Unnamable is of primordial importance, words and
language remain, of course, important for communication. And
although words and language are far from reality, they have
some connection with reality because they are abstractions
from reality, which means that they contain some selected
features of reality. Korzybski devised the
Structural Differential to indicate the
relation between the word and the object, between the object
and reality, and between different levels of abstraction.
Figure 4-1. Explanation in text.
Figure 4-1 illustrates the relation between three words and
the object they refer to (Different levels of abstraction and
the relation of the object to reality are not included). The
large upper circle represents the object, and the very large
number of dots within it represents the characteristics of
this object. The three small squares represent three words
(concepts) that refer to the object. As indicated by the
lines, the words (concepts) are defined by a relatively small
number of the characteristics of the object. Therefore, the
words are not identical with the object, they do not cover
the whole object: they are abstractions from the object,
which means that they are defined only by a selection of some
of the characteristics of the object. (Note that the many
characteristics of the object (represented by dots) are also
abstractions because the object is an integrated whole, and
different objects are integrated into the all-encompassing
whole of reality)
Different characteristics of the object can be selected to
define a word (concept). For example, from the object called
John we can select the characteristics that make him a
criminal, or we can select the characteristics that make him
a lover, or we can select the characteristics that make him a
sad person, etc. Each abstraction refers to one aspect of
John, but none captures John entirely.
The squares in Figure 4-1 can also represent maps, in which
case the circle represents the territory of these maps.
Obviously, “a map is
not the territory it
represents, but, if correct, it has a similar
structure to the territory,
which accounts for its usefulness (Korzybski, ibid. p. 58).
As with words (concepts), we can have different maps that
refer to the same territory. For example, one can have
morphological, geological, economic, ethnological, and many
other maps that refer to a country like Canada. None of these
maps “is” Canada, all of them are abstractions from Canada
based on different selections of characteristics.
Ken Wilber devised a map of the Kosmos (called AQAL map)
whose basic structure is a hierarchy (holarchy). This map is
based on a selection of traits that support a hierarchical
interpretation of reality. However, as I have shown in my
e-book “Wilber’s AQAL
Map and Beyond” and in
“Ken Wilber, Holarchy, and
Beyond”, one can
also select characteristics that support non-hierarchical
interpretations. There is no conflict between these
apparently contradictory interpretations if one can see
that they are based on different selections of traits,
different abstractions. However, if we confuse
abstractions with reality, then conflict arises and this
conflict can be more or less harmful depending on the
situation.
Harmful Thinking and Healing Thinking
Harmful thinking confuses abstractions with the objects or
reality from which they have been abstracted. In contrast,
healthy and healing thinking is based on an awareness of
abstraction, which is an awareness of the non-identity of map
and territory, word and object, word and reality.
Most, if not all conflicts and wars appear to be based on or
related to a lack of awareness of abstraction. If we think
that the other person or nation “is” evil, then, if we want
to eradicate evil, we feel that we have to fight or kill. If,
however, we recognize that that person or nation is evil and
good and infinitely more than we can express in words, then
we can become silent and connect also the goodness. Jampolski
(Jampolsky, G.G. 1979. Love is Letting Go of Fear. Millbrae,
CA: Celestial Arts, pp. 124-125) recounts how one night he
was called to see a patient on the locked psychiatric ward.
As he could see through the small window in the door of the
patient’s room, the patient had become very violent and
aggressive. Jampolsky was scared and afraid to enter into the
patient’s room. However, as he continued to look through the
window, it occurred to him that in spite of his forceful and
aggressive behavior, the patient was also scared. Admitting
to each other that they were scared created a bond and as a
result Jampolsky could walk into his room, talk to him and
give him medicine without getting hurt. If he had seen in him
only the obvious aggressiveness, if he would have simply
labeled him as an aggressive patient, he could not have
treated him peacefully. Kierkegaard wrote: “Once you label
me, you negate me”.
One may be theoretically aware of abstraction and yet forget
it in practical situations. To help us remember, Korzybski
devised the Structural Differential and extensional semantic
devices. One of these devices is to add “etc” in conjunction
with “is”. For example, instead of saying, “Jampolki’s
patient is aggressive”, one would say, “he is aggressive,
etc”, which includes his other traits and indicates that his
aggressiveness is an abstraction. Furthermore, instead of
referring simply to Jampolski’s patient, one would refer to
Jampolski’s patient-October 22, 2009-universe, which
indicates the context and his connection with the universe.
Hyphens are used to emphasize interconnectedness such as, for
example, the organisms-as-a-whole-in-the-environment.
Quotation marks are used to indicate the highly abstract
nature of a word such as, for example, “love”. Korzybski
pointed out how the use of the extensional devices can be
healing and thus lead to greater sanity (see also
E-Prime, a language
structure that avoids the verb to
be. Thus,
instead of saying “You are beautiful",
one would say “You look beautiful (to me)",
which implies a relation between you and me).
One might find these extensional devices contrived or
awkward. Of course, one does not need them, if one is always
aware of abstraction. But who, except perhaps some rare
individuals, can claim to be always aware of abstraction. We
have been deeply conditioned by a language structure that
implies the law of identity, and therefore it is not
surprising that identity is a major issue for many people,
groups, nations, etc. However, “every identification is bound
to be in some degree a misevaluation (Korzybski, ibid., p.
XXXIV). And misevaluations tend to lead to conflict and
possibly even war.
We are often unaware that “we read unconsciously into the
world the structure of the language we use” (Korzybski,
ibid., p. 60). But even if we are aware of the importance of
language structure, we may not fully realize to what extent
it affects our psyche. Korzybski emphasized that
“psychological” can mean “psycho-logical”, which underlines
the importance of logic and language structure for our
psyche. He also referred to semantic reactions. If we use the
“is” of identity, semantic reactions may be negative and lead
to insanity. For example, if we say this person or this
nation is evil, such a statement may lead to paranoia and
insanity.
The use of the “is” of identity and the lack of awareness of
abstraction can also lead to “a tendency to make static,
definite, and, in a way, absolutistic one-valued statements.
But when we fight absolutism, we quite often establish,
instead, some other dogma equally silly and harmful. For
instance, an active atheist is psycho-logically as unsound as
a rabid theist (Korzybski, ibid., p. 140). When we forget the
characteristics left out in the abstraction, we tend to think
that we are right and that our statement is the only possible
one.
Conclusions
1. There is
strong evidence that Truth (that which is) is unknowable and
cannot be expressed through words.
2. Words fragment the wholeness of reality. No object
referred to by a word exists in isolation.
3. Words are not identical with the objects they refer to.
Maps are not identical with the territory they refer to.
Hence, whatever we say the object or the territory is, it is
not. There is always more than can be said about anything.
4. To come closer to reality, we have to be silent. Words and
language cannot capture reality. Therefore, it is advisable
to refrain from verbalizing immediately when we encounter a
new situation. It is advisable to first pause, see, sense,
intuit, visualize, and only then verbalize, if it is
necessary or desirable.
5. To illustrate why words cannot capture an object and
reality, Korzybski devised the Structural Differential, which
makes evident that words are much less than the object or
reality they refer to.
6. Words (concepts) are abstractions from the object or
reality, which means that they are defined by only relatively
few of the large number of characteristics of the object.
What we call the characteristics of the object are also
abstractions from the wholeness of the object, and objects
are abstractions from reality.
7. From the same object or territory different abstractions
are possible through a different selection of
characteristics. If this process of abstraction is
understood, there is no conflict between different
abstractions: they complement each other.
8. Healthy and healing thinking recognizes the process of
abstraction, whereas harmful thinking implies an
often-subconscious belief in the identity of map and
territory, word and object, or word and reality.
9. Extensional devices, suggested by Korzybski, aid in a
healthier use of language.
10. Language structure and logic affect our psyche: they are
psycho-logical. Lack of awareness of the process of
abstraction can lead to insanity, conflict and war.
11. If children and adults were taught the process of
abstraction and the use of extensional devices, we would live
in a saner world.
Continue with
Chapter 5 on
Language
Transcending Logic, or return to
Table of Contents of this book ms on
Healing
Thinking and Being.
For more quotes from
Korzybski’s Science
and Sanity and
Falconar’s Creative
Intelligence and Self-Liberation. Korzybski, Non-Aristotelian
Thinking and Eastern Realization, see Wisdom Quotes.
Home