{"id":900,"date":"2010-12-04T12:53:49","date_gmt":"2010-12-04T17:53:49","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/?p=900"},"modified":"2010-12-04T12:53:49","modified_gmt":"2010-12-04T17:53:49","slug":"general-semantics-as-social-science","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/2010\/12\/04\/general-semantics-as-social-science\/","title":{"rendered":"General Semantics as Social Science"},"content":{"rendered":"

Keeping with the recent thread of discussion<\/a> looking at general semantics socially, it starts to seem to me that general semantics, at least in part, falls within the general field of social science.<\/p>\n

This classification would be new to me.\u00a0 Usually, general semantics is sorted into the general fields of linguistics or communication.\u00a0 Aspects of general semantics support these classifications with general semantics’s care for how we communicate and its interest in particular language modifications.<\/p>\n

Yet, it seems to me that with its\u00a0roots in\u00a0the\u00a0passionate desire to benefit\u00a0humankind and its progress, general semantics isn’t just a language study or a communication study.\u00a0 It’s a study of society<\/em> (and, even more generally, a study of humanity).\u00a0\u00a0General semantics\u00a0is not looking just at how you<\/em> speak, but how people<\/em> speak, and the results that happen when a lot of people speak in the same ways, sane or unsane.\u00a0 Its recommandations are<\/em> for you, but they’re also for others<\/em>, aiming for the cumulative effect that comes when you all<\/em> follow the recommendations: saner interactions, saner social circles, a saner society, a saner humanity.<\/p>\n

In the past, I’ve proposed “personal engineering”<\/a> as another name for general semantics.\u00a0 In keeping with the social thread herein, it would seem that that name for general semantics\u00a0would\u00a0shift to “social engineering.”\u00a0 That is, perhaps another name for general semantics would be “social engineering.”\u00a0 But that term is somewhat disparaged, plus, Alfred Korzybski’s original name for his work and discipline is similar, and perhaps more apt: “human engineering.”<\/p>\n

There should be a point made in such names, though, because of the deprecation that may trail its use: The “engineering” involved is constructive, not malicious.\u00a0 General semantics might be called “constructive social engineering” for there isn’t anything malicious about its recommendations.\u00a0 General semantics does not advocate language modifications for some kind of illicit gain; its recommendations are for the benefit of society and humanity and the scientific and social progress that it inherently wants.\u00a0 It is for the benefit of future generations of people, who rely on our<\/em> achievements for the construction of their own futures.<\/p>\n

We’re like the inventors of\u00a0printing presses\u00a0for the future generations’ laser printers.\u00a0 We’re like the inventors of calculators for the future generations’ smartphones.\u00a0 If we don’t achieve now, the future generation will be burdened with achieving then.\u00a0 General semantics aims to engineer society in order\u00a0to settle now and provide for the future, as opposed to settling into unsane practices that will impede progress and expend the future.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Keeping with the recent thread of discussion looking at general semantics socially, it starts to seem to me that general semantics, at least in part, falls within the general field of social science. This classification would be new to me.\u00a0 Usually, general semantics is sorted into the general fields of linguistics or communication.\u00a0 Aspects of […]<\/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":[94,213,9,68,215,212,67,60,216,95,214,211,123,11],"class_list":["post-900","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general-semantics","tag-alfred-korzybski","tag-communication","tag-definition","tag-human-engineering","tag-humanity","tag-linguistics","tag-personal-engineering","tag-progress","tag-sane-interaction","tag-sanity","tag-social-engineering","tag-social-science","tag-society","tag-unsanity"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/900","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=900"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/900\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":908,"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/900\/revisions\/908"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=900"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=900"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/benhauck.com\/offthemap\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=900"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}