The other day the thought came to mind:<\/p>\n
‘<\/span><\/div>What if it were called “personal engineering”?<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
General semantics that is.\u00a0 Recall that the founder of general semantics, Alfred Korzybski, referred to his work in his first book Manhood of Humanity<\/em> as “human engineering.”\u00a0 That term came from his own work as an engineer as well as his dedication to improving humanity away from the destructive direction of war.\u00a0 Yet the term “human engineering” fell to the side when Korzybski introduced a more focused endeavor he called “general semantics,” which wasn’t so bad considering that the term “human engineering” might nowadays evoke images of test tubes or genetic manipulation.<\/p>\n
But the term “human engineering” provides a better description for what Korzybski aimed to do than the term “general semantics.”\u00a0 As I understand the term in the last few weeks, the term “general semantics” means something like this: It is the study of the meanings not just of words, but of something more general also.<\/em>\u00a0 That is, it is the study of the meanings of words, and<\/em> meanings of the organization<\/em> of words.\u00a0 It is the study of the meanings of language and also<\/em> the study of the meanings communicated by\u00a0the structure<\/em> of language.\u00a0 And even more generally than the purely linguistic, general semantics is the study of the meanings of words, and<\/em> the meanings of concepts, the meanings of events, … the\u00a0 meanings of anything, really.<\/p>\n
I came to this understanding slowly after reading up on Leon Chwistek, a mathematician\u00a0from whose\u00a0work Korzybski purportedly pulled the term “semantic.”\u00a0 From what I can tell, Chwistek introduced Korzybski to the notion of ordinal difference between concepts having the same name.\u00a0 Basically, if I have this in any way correct, Chwistek talked of the conceptual side of language structure and referred to his discussion\u00a0as “semantic.”\u00a0 For Chwistek, it seemed to me, the word “semantic” meant not just the meaning of words but the meaning of the structure of words, especially how we structure words in our heads.<\/p>\n
It may take you another read to follow that passage\u00a0because for some reason, when talking of meaning, things get confusing.\u00a0 And I haven’t read Chwistek directly as that would require some translation, so I may be way off.\u00a0 (But if I am way off, at least reading about Chwistek was inspiring!)<\/p>\n
The name “general semantics,” in my opinion, refers to the specific interest Korzybski had in human engineering.\u00a0 In engineering humanity away from war and onward to progress and prosperity, Korzybski studied the role language played in that engineering.\u00a0 More specifically, he focused on what people gleaned from particular language–both the content (words) and structure (punctuation, etc.).\u00a0 He wondered, If either were changed, would such changes yield a resolution of war and the invitation of progress and prosperity?<\/p>\n
A little ludicrous-sounding to suggest that by changing one comma, interplanetary war would stop and the Invention to Top All Inventions would be produced.\u00a0 But the power of Korzybski’s observations are felt\u00a0on the personal<\/em> level.\u00a0 That is, Korzybski\u00a0aims to get you<\/em> to change your language–both your content (words) and structure (punctuation, etc.).\u00a0 But more importantly, he\u00a0aims to get you to change your thinking.\u00a0 His linguistic manipulation basically forces<\/em> a consciousness of your thought habits and a responsibility over them, so that you carefully consider what you’re saying and communicating and can decide if you want to forward, say, something that is not scientifically knowable.\u00a0 Korzybski noted the presence of old metaphysics embedded in the structure of language.\u00a0 And he made it your responsibility to stop talking in the old metaphysical way (with his guidance, of course).\u00a0 Else, you’d be damned to continue the problems you repeatedly have.<\/p>\n
So, given the application you<\/em> need to do in the engineering of your<\/em> life, it seemed to me that “personal engineering” would be a nicer, less lofty-sounding, less-creepy-in-some-contexts term for the field of general semantics, were it to be renamed.\u00a0 In general semantics, you’re engineering yourself.\u00a0 The mass effect of others’ engineering themselves is human engineering.<\/p>\n
Plus, the term “personal engineering” clues the student into the aims of the field better than the term “general semantics” does.\u00a0 “General semantics” suggests merely the focus but eliminates the aim.\u00a0 When you study general semantics, you like it, but you also can\u00a0go, “So what?”\u00a0 The term “personal engineering” answers the “So what?” question:<\/p>\n
‘<\/span><\/div>General semantics, in order for personal engineering.<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The other day the thought came to mind: ‘What if it were called “personal engineering”? General semantics that is.\u00a0 Recall that the founder of general semantics, Alfred Korzybski, referred to his work in his first book Manhood of Humanity as “human engineering.”\u00a0 That term came from his own work as an engineer as well as […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[24,325,68,40,38,10,67,42],"class_list":["post-616","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general-semantics","tag-cognitive-mechanics","tag-general-semantics","tag-human-engineering","tag-leon-chwistek","tag-manhood-of-humanity","tag-meaning","tag-personal-engineering","tag-structure"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/616","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=616"}],"version-history":[{"count":19,"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/616\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":635,"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/616\/revisions\/635"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=616"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=616"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=616"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}