As you may know, unsanity is a popular topic in general semantics. It is distinguished in some way or another from insanity, but it’s not quite clear how the two concepts are distinguished in general semantics. In this post, I’d like to make a stab at distinguishing the two concepts.
‘For an updated perspective on this topic, click here for a post from December 4th, 2010.
In the last year, I’ve stumbled upon an understanding of unsanity by relating it to sanity. In general semantics, you are probably familiar with the adage “The map is not the territory.” That adage can be viewed as a metaphor for understanding speech and its relationship with physical reality. This adage also forwards a useful concept of sanity, and by default, a useful concept of unsanity.
Actual physical reality be thought of as a territory. Most speech (both written and spoken) is like a map of this territory–a map of actual physical reality. Putting these two notions together, sanity can be understood as having your speech in synch with actual physical reality.
‘“The Earth is fairly round.”
Unsanity can be thought of as not having your speech in synch with actual physical reality.
‘“The Earth is flat.”
What is implied by the statement that unsanity is not having your speech in synch with actual physical reality is that your speech forwards a delusional view of actual physical reality.
A way I like to put this is that unsanity is being fueled by fancy (rather than fact), and sanity is being fueled by fact (rather than fancy).
Now, insanity (with an i) is different than unsanity (with a u). “Insanity” and “unsanity” are not synonymous terms, nor should they be. In general semantics, insanity seems to be seen as something more problematic than unsanity. Here is where I take a stab at the differences between the two concepts.
Much of my current understanding of insanity comes from listening to people use the word “insane” or “crazy.” I have a pretty zany sense of humor, and it’s not uncommon for me to be affectionately called “insane” or “crazy.” (There is also a conceptual difference between “insane” and “crazy” but I’ll leave that for another post.1) In thinking about what I’m doing and what elicits the comment “You’re insane!,” it strikes me that the general thread running through my behavior that leads a person to say that is that I’m doing something that could get me into trouble. That is, insanity is behaving in a way that can cause oneself trouble. If I do something that could get me in trouble, someone might be inclined to call me “insane.”
For example, it might be insane for me to play on railroad tracks. It might be insane for me to drink bleach. It might be insane for me to say something rude to another actor. It might be insane for me to write a threatening letter. Etc. These actions aren’t truly insane, but instead they are judged by another person as insane. There may actually be nothing all that troubling about the actions, because I might be quite safe in doing them. (Think: Is a trapeze artist insane if he has a net? He might not be thought of as behaving in a way that is going to cause him trouble because he is protected …)
So, with this understanding that insanity is behaving in a way that causes onseself trouble, let’s compare it with unsanity, believing in fancy over fact, i.e., having one’s speech out of synch with actual physical reality.
Already you can see a very big difference. Unsanity has to do with conceptualization of reality. Insanity has to do with goal-directed behavior. Insanity in some sense is doing that which will interfere with the achievement of one’s goals rather than aiding one’s own pursuit. It is practially goal-opposing behavior. Unsanity has to do with reporting reality in a way that is inaccurate.
Given this, you may see how unsanity can lead to insanity. If I conceptualize the railroad tracks as safe to play on, I might get myself into trouble. If I conceptualize a net as secure when I do trapeze work, I might get myself into trouble.
I can’t say that at press I’m 100% behind these concepts of unsanity and insanity, but I’m liking the distinction so far. For example, as mentioned in prior posts, definition has to do with conceptualization, and it is goal-directed behavior, so unsanity can be seen as behavior and, at that, trouble-inducing. I’m okay for now for some overlap in the concepts, but generally speaking they are quite distinct.
If you have thoughts or your own distinction, please comment below.
NOTES
1. As for “crazy,” to give you a tease, it has more in my mind to do with unsanity than insanity. “Crazy” seems to me to deal more with how one organizes reality–that is, it has more to do with conceptualization than goal-opposing behavior.
May 15th, 2010
by Just some insane person
I came to believe “insanity” is simply when your world view differs enough from the rest of society to bring you into trouble. Or maybe it’s too different to communicate.
Who are we to tell someone he is insane? Peoples world views can be radically different and reality is in fact something created by the observer (that being me or you). People considered insane in western countries might be considered spiritual leaders elsewhere.
“Unsanity” might be the temporary version of it. Or a point where you can still translate your “insane” thoughts to resonable “sane” words.
August 23rd, 2010
by danielle
i can see how you think the things you do.
it makes perfect sence to me.
but, the thing that i disagree with is the could i get in trouble part.
the reason behind why i think that is because it is judged by another person.
they cannot tell what you are fully thinking or what your fully saying even if you explain it perfectly.
because they are not you!
they connot wrap there own brain around it unless they have felt the same exact feelings you have.
and in my opinion, lived the things you have, because thats what changes your opinions about things.
so i dont think what others say can really be right in proving some ones mental state.
in my opinion, i think im insain.
for the reason being, nbody can fully grasp the ideas i have in my head.
they might make sence to them, or how you explain it might be clear, but they can never fully pick up everything you feel.
for example: i have told many people that for me, time doesnt heal anything for me. it makes it worse. because each day i think about differnt reasons why it made me sad/angry whatever. and so each day i have a new emotional attachment to things because as i think about it, it not only hurts me more. but it makes me realize in how many ways it hurt me. therfor it gets worse.
and most of the time peoples responces to that are “you just gotta let go” and i fully agree. i do. but i have a huge wall built up that i cant get over things. ever. its like i brainwashed myself to be that way.
so in conclusion, i think insanity is feeling like nobody understands you at all. you are lost in your own thoughs,like nobody could understand the complexity of your saddness. at least thats how i feel.
p.s. im sorry, i cannot spell to save my life.
August 23rd, 2010
by Ben Hauck
The Author
Danielle,
Thanks for commenting! I agree with you that others can’t really “be right in proving someone’s mental state.” They are not you, and they don’t have the ability to observe what you are thinking in your head. Instead, they can only witness expressions, but the expressions are not absolutely telling of mental state. (For example, look to actors like me, who deliberately in their work express in character what is not necessarily what they personally think.)
In re-reading my post, I’m drawing a comparison between the words “unsane” and “insane” in order to help understand their differences specifically within the field and literature of general semantics. To add to the definition in the post, I think insanity tends to have a particular feeling of being unable to control or feeling out of control. Feeling out of control of your ability to heal, especially when others seem to heal with time, may make you feel a bit insane. Feeling out of control of your ability to put aside angering or saddening thoughts may make you feel a bit insane as well. Both of those feelings together may make you feel even more insane. Feeling out of control of your ability to let down your wall may also make you feel a bit insane, worsening the feeling of insanity.
I might say, then, that a possible consequence of feeling insane is feeling that nobody understands you at all, that you are lost in your thoughts. Essentially what is going on, though, seems to me that When everyone around you seems to be able to overcome some issue, but you aren’t able to overcome that issue or some similar issue, you end up feeling alone. So you arrive at the experience of loneliness. That is, the feeling of loneliness is a potential consequence of feeling unable to do something (relative to everyone else’s seeming ability). Feeling insane is another possible consequence because you feel different from everyone else, misunderstood by everyone else, etc.
As a note, Danielle, you may find benefit in seeking out a support group for bipolar or depressed people. Support groups can be quite enjoyable. What is really nice about such groups is that in them, most of the people have problems and they get an open and supportive environment in which to talk about them. I would not be very surprised if you went to one and found out that, Hey, there are some people here who are a bit like me, who are lonely in a similar way as me, who have trouble letting their walls down or getting past angering or saddening thoughts, who feel insane. And among those people, you may even find people who have figured out ways to deal. The result of attending a support group is that you will start to feel less lonely and more belonging, less insane and more sane. You might still be different from those in your social circle, but it’s only because your social circle is relatively small and there are a lot of people on this huge planet with a number of problems much like yours.
Write back here so I know you got this. I hope this was of some help to you.
Cheers,
Ben
September 12th, 2013
by Mike Abb
I often talk of this concept and that is what led me to your site. I think of the unsane as the middle ground between sanity and insanity. This is the ground where creative and out of the box ideas are made. One caveat is that once you leave the world of sane it’s very hard if not impossible to return. The only other route is going further towards insane where your ideas become clouded and distracted to the point of harming you or others. You touch on this in your article that “crazy” is thinking its ok to play on the railroad tracks. That being said the unsane doesn’t have to stop you can live out your life in this realm and never dip into insanity. You are born sane and through experience and personal creativity you can start formulating your brain to think differently (abstract thought) and begin to leave the sane world behind and enter into the unsane. Not sure if ever journey to insanity means you make a stop on the unsane road stop though. There maybe a straight shot to the insane land no layovers in the unsane.
November 19th, 2016
by Darryl R Taylor
I have been given to understand that ‘unsane’ is actually the categorization appropriate to those who choose to reject the duality of sane/insane.
The logical extension of either terms leads to a bizarre convergence of meaning, for instance “sane” in it’s ultimate form would be complete and total understanding of reality as it is, including the perception of reality on the part of any other beings within that reality, or lacking omniscience at the very least having no false perceptions of reality.
This is functionally omniscience on the par of the divine,or a particularly dumb stone (this admittedly is difficult to verify as neither “God” nor rocks are particularly forthcoming about their observations, so either could be considered to be literally “dumb”).
Insane at it’s ultimate terminus would be a consciousness with no touchstones whatsoever with consensual or whatever objective reality that there might be.
This would imply a consciousness or observer that exists wholly within a realm of it’s own creation, as anything else would entail some measure of congruence with reality and therefore, sanity.
That could be considered to be a description of what it would be experienced by an omnipotent deity, although potentially the aforementioned stone might also have that perspective.
Since as the Harvard philosopher, stage magician and Aikido master so amply put it “Man is God, but I am not THAT man”, to not fall into the delusion of being God that is the insanity of either extreme, the ultimate “false dilemma”, it seems prudent for an ignostic such as myself to subscribe to the relatively sane, but somewhat crazy, philosophy of being “unsane”.