{"id":785,"date":"2010-10-01T11:36:35","date_gmt":"2010-10-01T15:36:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/?p=785"},"modified":"2010-10-01T11:36:35","modified_gmt":"2010-10-01T15:36:35","slug":"comparing-the-terms-institute-and-society-within-the-field-of-general-semantics","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/2010\/10\/01\/comparing-the-terms-institute-and-society-within-the-field-of-general-semantics\/","title":{"rendered":"Comparing the Terms “Institute” and “Society” within the Field of General Semantics"},"content":{"rendered":"

General semantics, a field founded by Alfred Korzybski<\/a> in 1933 with the publication of his book\u00a0Science and Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics<\/a><\/em>, had long been led by two organizations.<\/p>\n

The first was the Institute of General Semantics<\/a>, out of which Alfred Korzybski taught a number of students.\u00a0 The second was what became known as the International Society for General Semantics.\u00a0 Offhand, I don’t recall the exact foundational information for\u00a0this society, though it survived until the early 2000s when it merged with the Institute of General Semantics. Now, apart from the influence of the New York Society for General Semantics<\/a>\u00a0and a handful of other organizations in countries outside the United States, general semantics is largely led by the Institute of General Semantics.<\/p>\n

In recent days I’ve been thinking about what it’s like for general semantics to be led by an institute as opposed to a society.\u00a0 The word “institute” suggests “a place for learning,” and the Institute of General Semantics’s rudiments back up that interpretation of the word.\u00a0 The word “society” suggests “a group of people of a particular interest,” and the International Society for General Semantics’s rudiments backed up that interpretation of the word with its multi-national membership base of people interested in general semantics.<\/p>\n

However, these days the Institute of General Semantics’s role as “a place for learning general semantics” has faded, or perhaps better said, is on hold.\u00a0 The frequency of retreats and seminars on general semantics have diminished since the 1940s-1970s.\u00a0 I recall going on a week-long seminar at Alverno College that was incredibly satisfying and stimulating, yet that was in 2005, the last seminar of its kind that I know of that was not tied in with a symposium or conference.\u00a0 Nowadays a number of social and logistical factors make it very hard to coordinate a seminar in general semantics: travel costs being a major factor, but also simply interest.\u00a0 Despite its incredible influence on major fields and thinkers, general semantics is a hard sell in a culture nowadays that darts from subject to subject by clicking for free, a culture that has a tough time maintaining attention on one subject long enough to absorb it more than superficially.<\/p>\n

For this reason, a website is an important method for reaching culture these days.\u00a0 However, it becomes hard to take the online, offline, and into classes for greater learning.\u00a0 Frankly, an “institute” is not for the informational darters we now have.\u00a0 Considering the rise of online social media and its overwhelming popularlity, a “society” seems more in tune with the current culture.\u00a0 In fact, it may be that a “society” is what drives an “institute,” as opposed to an “institute” driving a “society.”<\/p>\n

Think about it this way.\u00a0 First you have a group of impassioned people interested in a particular subject.\u00a0 From this group, ideas start to develop, one of which might be, “Hey, we should set up a school to teach this subject.”\u00a0 So you have a society first, an institute second.<\/p>\n

Think about it also this way: It is people<\/em> who drive a particular field.\u00a0 The word “institute” does not bring to mind “people” as effectively as the word “society” does.\u00a0 A society is composed<\/em> of people.\u00a0 An institute is composed of bricks<\/em>.\u00a0 An institute is more a building or a location than a person or people.\u00a0 Surely, people teach<\/em> at institutes, but they are an afterthought when the word “institute” comes to mind.<\/p>\n

So in the interest in popularizing general semantics, one step I’m wondering about is whether we in general semantics should roll back the leadership of the Institute of General Semantics and shift back into the leadership of the International Society for General Semantics.\u00a0 To that point, note that ETC: A Review of General Semantics<\/a><\/em>, the journal that is still published quarterly, was the product of the Society as opposed to the Institute.<\/p>\n

And also to that point, by leading\u00a0with a society as opposed to an institute, we disclaim that we are impassioned\u00a0people of a particular attractive interest, that we aren’t impenetrable bricks beyond which is taught a\u00a0mysterious subject.\u00a0 We’re porous, accessible, and want to be with others of that interest.\u00a0 And sure we’ll teach general semantics to you, possibly inviting you to\u00a0an institute for a lesson, but perhaps we’ll just socialize, and in so socializing build something else apart from an institute like another related subject, or a totally new subject, etc.\u00a0 Our passion is our strength, and in looking to other fields, other influential Societies, their passions are on the table as well.\u00a0 Leading as a society\u00a0would give\u00a0general semantics persuasive power, power that\u00a0would enable it to endure into the future.<\/p>\n

So I wonder.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

General semantics, a field founded by Alfred Korzybski in 1933 with the publication of his book\u00a0Science and Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics, had long been led by two organizations. The first was the Institute of General Semantics, out of which Alfred Korzybski taught a number of students.\u00a0 The second was what […]<\/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":[122,123],"class_list":["post-785","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general-semantics","tag-institute","tag-society"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/785","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=785"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/785\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":794,"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/785\/revisions\/794"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=785"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=785"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=785"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}