Psycho-logical fate and freedom.

ALFRED KORZYBSKI wanted a science of humanity. As the title and subtitle of his 1921 book indicate--Manhood of Humanity: The Science and Art of Human Engineering--this was not a disinterested, academic pursuit. Having suffered and seen the suffering of others on the battlefields of World War One, he felt a burning need to promote the growth of "Human Engineering ... the science and art of directing the energies and capacities of human beings to the advancement of human weal." (1) Without a purposeful, systematic, and cooperative effort to create such a science-art, he feared that the energies and capacities of human beings would more likely continue to advance human destructiveness and suffering. (Korzybski eventually abandoned the term "human engineering" and came up with the term general semantics (abbreviated as "GS") to label the methodological fruits of his efforts toward such a science-art.)

In Manhood, Korzybski sought to begin a solid foundation for the science of humanity by defining "Man" (used by him at that time as a neutral term for "human being"). He wanted a functional definition: What do humans do that distinguishes them from other forms of life? In answer, Korzybski defined humanity as the time-binding class of life. Humans have the ability to symbolically organize or "bind" their experience and to receive and transmit the products of this effort from one person, group, and generation to another. This gives us humans the potential to benefit from and build upon the experiences and work of those who come before us and to do so at an accelerating rate.

After the publication of Manhood, Korzybski sought to understand the underlying basis of time-binding, its mechanism--how does it work? In pursuit of this understanding he made an in-depth study of mathematical foundations and mathematical (symbolic) logic, physics, psychiatry, psychology, colloidal chemistry, neurology, anthropology, and other fields. In the span of two years, from early 1925 into 1927, he studied psychiatric patients at St. Elizabeths Hospital in Washington, D.C., under the supervision of his friend, the distinguished psychiatrist William Alanson White, M.D., who headed that institution.

To understand how time-binding works, Korzybski considered it necessary to study its extremes. One end of the continuum of human time-binding behavior was represented by severe psychiatric cases--insanity. The other end was represented by scientists, mathematicians, and other inquirers when working at their best--sanity. To the so-called 'normal' person, hovering between the two extremes, he applied the label "unsane," a term suggested to him by psychiatrist Philip Graven.

Considering science and mathematics (including logic) in relation to psychiatric problems and daily life adjustment, as Korzybski did, seemed like a somewhat strange approach to many people (perhaps to some it still does). Writing about Korzybski's work, organizational management theorist F.J. Roethlesberger (who attended a seminar in the 1930s given by Korzybski) wrote:

   At this time there was considerable interest in comparing the way a
   child thinks (Piaget) with the way a primitive thinks (Levy-Bruhl)
   and with the way a neurotic thinks (Freud). Only a genius or a nut
   would have tried to compare the way a mathematician thinks (Russell
   and Whitehead) and the way a neurotic thinks (psychiatry). Korzybski
   was such a man. (2)

Korzybski's position may have seemed extreme to those who saw mathematics as dealing with some kind of extra-human, 'transcendental,' platonic realm. Even now (2005), this notion pervades much of the scientific-mathematical community. However, as far back as the 1920s Korzybski viewed mathematics as a language, a form of human behavior. He emphasized mathematics as a product created by and affecting human nervous systems, an exemplar of human time-binding effort.

A study of mathematics and those areas of science (e.g., physics) where mathematics is applied most extensively--via physico-mathematical methods--might provide useful data about human evaluative processes at their best. Understandings abstracted from this approach might have practical value in helping the man and woman on the street to become better time-binders. Might this indeed have some relation to psychiatrists' study of sanity? In these concerns, Korzybski was not entirely alone.

"Logical Fate"

Mathematician Cassius J. Keyser felt greatly stimulated by, and promoted, Korzybski's work. He seemed particularly impressed by Korzybski's notion about the pernicious effects of specific false assumptions about humans and the need to postulate a new, more accurate, basic view about human potentialities, i.e., time-binding.

It seems likely that this appealed to Keyser, in no small part, because of his own work in humanistic mathematics and logic. Keyser had a special interest in the 'thought' processes of mathematicians and especially the role of postulation in mathematics, science, and life. For more than two thousand years, Euclid's geometry had been considered 'the' geometry of this world. Euclid's axioms, viewed as 'self-evident,' included this postulate: through any point outside of a line, only one other parallel line can be drawn. This was finally challenged in the nineteenth century by several mathematicians such as Bolyai, Lobachevski, Riemann, and Gauss. These men found that they could create equally consistent and valid non-euclidean geometries by postulating either no parallel lines or an indefinite number of them.

The resultant revolution in mathematics entailed a greater recognition than previously of the logical freedom of humans in creating postulates or assumptions. The propositions of Euclid represented not 'the' geometry of this world but rather a geometry, one among many. Indeed, modern physicists have found that some non-euclidean geometries more closely approximate some features of the world that they study than does the euclidean.

The time-binding shift from euclidean to non-euclidean geometry exemplifies what Korzybski considered the mathematical structure of human knowledge. From our postulates, i.e., our assumptions, premises, presuppositions, expectations, etc.,--often unconscious--conclusions follow. We can, however, revise and change our assumptions. According to Keyser, mathematics involved a consummate logical effort to make conscious and to work out the implications of assumptions, premises, principles, etc. "Mathematics is the study of Fate--not fate in a physical sense, but in the sense of the binding thread that connects thought with thought and conclusions with their premises." (3)

Keyser's notion of "logical fate" helped Korzybski in his writings in the mid-1920s as he sought to understand the general role of assumptions in human time-binding behavior, including sanity. Mathematicians argue with great passion about highly abstract and esoteric problems. Nonetheless, mathematical language, because of its simplicity, allows us to see important aspects of human evaluating, e.g., the fateful role of our assumptions, the importance of structure, etc., in a particularly clear way.

Korzybski's primary interest in developing his formulations lay not in mathematics and science as such. His interest in these as human behavior, in terms of forms of representation and languages, consisted in discovering what methods he could derive from them for improving human evaluation in general. In this regard, the relation of terminology to assumptions appears crucial. The assumptions, premises, basic postulates, etc., that we live with, and sometimes die by, involve undefined terms.

Every Word a World

In any verbal discussion, even logical, mathematical, and scientific ones, it is not possible to verbally define all your terms, i.e., your words. Take a definition, a verbal delineation of the properties or qualities that distinguish a particular category of objects from any other, e.g., "Man is a rational animal." Take each term and further define it. Define each word of your verbal definition, etc. (I suggest you actually do this, at least for a few minutes, to get a 'feel' for what I'm talking about. Otherwise you will miss something basic that you will not be able to get from just reading these words.)

At a certain point, which will not take very long, you will find yourself 'running around in verbal circles.' You will likely come upon certain terms that appear basic to you in the area under discussion. You will not be able to provide a completely adequate verbal definition of those terms. Korzybski called them "undefined terms."

Undefined terms refer to non-verbal experiences ('thoughts' and 'feelings' included). Eventually, with an undefined term, we must leave the crystallized realm of words and satisfy ourselves with some unexpressed, perhaps amorphous-seeming experience that is not words. This may reveal for each of us our metaphysics--our basic, usually-out-of-awareness presuppositions, assumptions, etc.

Undefined terms may correspond to what some philosophers, following Descartes, have called "clear and distinct ideas." Undefined terms also seem to correspond to the philosophical "a priori." A great deal of philosophical exertion over the centuries appears to have involved the end point of reaching this level: "Now, I've got it."

For Korzybski, stating your undefined terms, rather than defining all your terms, provided the important starting point of providing basic postulates about any area under discussion. Undefined terms fix the limits of your metaphysics or worldview. It is important to emphasize that these terms point to non-verbal levels of experience, not to words, formulas or symbols. This has profound implications for how we understand and deal with our problems. Korzybski wrote:

   He who accepts uncritically the vocabulary made by X, accepts
   unwillingly and unbeknowingly X's metaphysics. This fact is of very
   great importance. If we accept the vocabulary made by X and the
   metaphysics made by Y, we are lost in inconsistency, the world is an
   ugly mess, unknown and unknowable." (4)

As a formulator, following Keyser, Korzybski was concerned with uncovering the implications of different doctrines and their related terminologies. Even more than Keyser, he explored the practical life-implications of terminologies-doctrines (word 'worlds'?) for individuals. He therefore felt the importance of clearly communicating his findings not only to scientists and mathematicians but also to the "educated layman." These efforts necessarily found obstacles in the 'baggage' of habitual 'meanings,' the statistical average of usage, that people give to words.

Korzybski's treatment of 'logic' and 'psychology' illustrate something of his language problems. It gradually became clear to Korzybski that the term "logic" had baggage related to the traditional treatment of logic in isolation from the human behavior of individual human nervous systems. Likewise "psychology,' the study of human behavior, had often been understood as unrelated to logic and mathematics. But logic is made by humans and has effects on behaving human nervous systems. And, as Korzybski had come to see things, an adequate study of human behavior cannot occur without taking mathematics and logic into account as languages and forms of human behavior. How to communicate this?

Korzybski found that he needed to change the structure of his language in a particular way in order to convey his intentions. By the time Science and Sanity (1933) was published, Korzybski was consistently putting single quotes as a safety device around the terms 'logic' and 'psychology' to emphasize the dangers of the traditional, elementalistic implications of these terms. (Elementalism involves a false-to-fact isolation within our language--and related evaluating--of something that does not exist in such isolation in the world.) He also introduced a new, non-elementalistic term "psycho-logic(s)" that could be used in preference to either 'logic' or 'psychology' to emphasize that the study of human behavior must necessarily embrace so-called mathematical-logical issues. In the remainder of this article, I'll follow this usage as I discuss some general issues of "psycho-logical fate" in science and life.

Psycho-Logical Fate in Mathematics and Science

The "celebrated man and woman in the street" as well as those who are called 'scientists' and 'mathematicians,' can begin to apply a generalized scientific, mathematical viewpoint by becoming aware of psycho-logical fate, the (perhaps unintended) consequences that follow from our unexamined assumptions.

Not only can we become aware of our assumptions, we can also claim and use our freedom to choose and revise them. Once assumptions have been stated and their consequences worked out at least to some degree, empirical investigation can test them in relation to observations and experiments. This combination of 'logic' and experience makes possible the rejection, correction and revision of assumptions, including those involved with undefined terms. This revision provides one of the most important of the time-binding 'tools' for science and sanity.

In general semantics we're concerned with practical consequences. Accordingly, the consequences of a given set of assumptions (embedded and embodied in a terminology) include attitudes and behavior. Mathematicians and scientists appear notable because, at least in the limited realms of their work, they attempt to search for and explicitly state their assumptions, work out the implications of them, test and revise them. However, even here, problems may result from supposedly accepting the metaphysics (basic assumptions) of modern science while applying the vocabulary and metaphysics (involving structure of language and logic) from a bygone period.

Also in their daily lives, scientists and mathematicians--like the rest of us--often remain unconscious of the frequently inadequate assumptions they've inherited. These inadequate assumptions can therefore continue to 'promote' their undesirable effects, leading to various degrees of unsanity and insanity. This explains why scientists and mathematicians may not function any more sanely than other people.

Psycho-Logical Fate in Daily Life

Other people's 'psychology,' or rather their psycho-logic, may make more sense to us if we can understand the premises or assumptions under which they and we operate. We can learn to avoid blame and bitterness in this way. Those with whom we disagree may not 'be' bad but rather simply acting from a different, though perhaps mistaken, set of assumptions.

The model for the diagram below was created by Korzybski to visualize the psycho-logic of Keyser's formulation of "logical fate."

* A1 represents a possibly mistaken set of assumptions.

* C1 represents the conclusions and consequences, including the attitudes and behavior, that follow from A1.

* A2 represents a different, possibly more accurate set of assumptions, with C2 the consequences resulting from these.

* The wavy lines indicate the incongruity of trying to get to the more satisfactory consequences without revising the old assumptions.

* Arrow I shows the revision of assumptions required to get to the new consequences (arrow II).

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

Keyser's notion of "logical fate" and Korzybski's psycho-logical elaboration of it predated by many years Thomas Kuhn's notion of "paradigms." The psycho-logical fate model provides a broader perspective than that of Kuhn, since it includes people's everyday 'thinking' as well as the activities of scientists. (Kuhn, deservedly, in my opinion, is considered by many as one of the major twentieth-century formulators in the philosophy of science. I view Keyser and Korzybski similarly.)

A particular perspective in science often develops, according to Kuhn, through "puzzle-solving" within a particular paradigm, the term he applied to the framework of assumptions, beliefs, values, and techniques that defines a field at a particular time. In terms of the psycho-logical fate model, this corresponds to the movement from A1 to C1. When such puzzle-solving can no longer account for significant 'facts,' a "scientific revolution" can occur, involving the birth of a new paradigm. This roughly corresponds to the revision of assumptions from A1 to A2.

Some have suggested that Kuhn insufficiently emphasized the criteria for choosing one 'paradigm' or set of assumptions over another and thus provided some enthusiasts with a smokescreen for 'pseudo-science.' In regard to this issue, the GS approach seems clear. While we cannot function without assumptions, not just any new set of assumptions will do. Our time-binding abilities and psycho-logical fate intertwine. We inherit most of our assumptions, premises, postulates, undefined terms, etc. We remain trapped by their consequences, like a fly in a honey jar, unless we can find a way to revise them for our benefit.

This surely doesn't mean that "anything goes." After explicitly stating our assumptions, we can evaluate them on the basis of internal consistency, simplicity, explanatory range, predictivity in relation to new observations and experiments, etc. These criteria provide some basis for judging some assumptions as better (i.e., more beneficial) than others and thus for revising our old assumptions. Insofar as we can do this, we behave 'scientifically,' with a scientific attitude, even in areas of life that have not traditionally been considered 'scientific.' We have some means for making progress, i.e., for time-binding. (6)

Psycho-Logical Fate in Personal Problem-Solving

Psycho-logical fate also has applications in the personal time-binding represented by psychotherapy and personal problem-solving. It adds new power to the teachings of Epictetus, Spinoza and others. Non-adaptive 'emotions' and dysfunctional behaviors may result not from external events but from the belief-based judgments we make upon events. The use of generalized mathematical-scientific methods of uncovering and challenging assumptions, beliefs, etc., (as well as other aspects of GS discussed in my book Dare to Inquire) provides an opportunity for a more satisfactory response to life.

In this regard, Korzybski taught his work to psychologists and psychiatrists. Under the aegis of William Alanson White, M.D., he did educational/preventive work with the psychiatric patients at St. Elizabeths Hospital. Although he did not provide therapy, he continued throughout his career to do educational/preventive work individually and in seminars with many people who had problems in living. Some individuals were sent to him by psychiatrists who wanted his educational work to supplement their treatments.

Since then, many major formulators and many practitioners in the related fields of psychotherapy, counseling, and consulting have been influenced by Korzybski. For example, in the area known as "Cognitive-Behavior Therapy," the approach of Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) was developed by Albert Ellis, who studied and makes significant use of Korzybski's work. Isabel Caro has developed her Cognitive Therapy of Evaluation based on GS. (Her book, General Semantics in Psychotherapy, shows some of the extent of GS influence in that field.) Korzybski's work has also been recognized by Lou Marinoff, one of the leaders in the developing field of "philosophical practice and consulting." (7)

Psycho-logical fate, the relation of assumptions to behavior, is not total or exclusive. People have wonderful abilities to compartmentalize their beliefs: to restrict them to limited areas of their lives or to hold contradictory views concurrently. Sometimes, if they hold 'nutty' beliefs in some areas, this compartmentalizing can actually help them stay relatively sane. Nonetheless, so-called 'normal' people all too often do act on their beliefs to an extent sufficient to increase problems and misery for themselves and/or others.

In his 1924 paper on Time-Binding: The General Theory, Korzybski noted:

  Man is ultimately a doctrinal being. Even our language has its silent
  doctrines, and no activity of man is free from some doctrines, so that
  the kind of metaphysics a man has, is not of indifference to his world
  outlook and behavior. (8)

The pathway to psycho-logical freedom can begin in an individual's recognition of his or her own "doctrinal being." However, verbalized understanding of the above issues is not sufficient for achieving such freedom. In order to create a pathway from blind fate to open-eyed freedom (which makes conscious use of the mechanism of psycho-logical fate), an individual also needs to actively explore, test, and--when necessary--revise his or her own doctrinal system using the methods and practices of general semantics and related approaches.

NOTES

1. Korzybski, (1921) (1952), p.1.

2. Roethlesberger, pp. 70-71.

3. Qtd. in Korzybski (1921), p. 207. I cannot find this exact quote in my copy of Keyser's Mathematical Philosophy. However, it nicely and succinctly summarizes Keyser's formulation of logical fate.

4. Korzybski (1990a), Time-Binding: The General Theory (First Paper, 1924), p. 75.

5. Modified from Korzybski's diagram. Used with permission of the Institute of General Semantics and Korzybski's Literary Estate.

6. For Korzybski, 'identity'--defined as 'absolute sameness in all respects'--constituted the major deeply held, unexamined and false-to-fact assumption underlying potentially avoidable semantic (evaluational) problems in science and life. Non-identity--the denial of identity--constitutes the main premise of Korzybski's non-aristotelian system. See Dare to Inquire, pp. 160-161.

7. Both Ellis and Marinoff have discussed the relation of GS to their work in their Alfred Korzybski Memorial Lectures. See Ellis (1993) and Marinoff (2003a).

8. Korzybski, (1990a), Time-Binding: The General Theory (First Paper, 1924), p. 77.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Caro, Isabel and Charlotte Schuchardt Read, eds. (2002). General Semantics in Psychotherapy: Selected Writings on Methods Aiding Therapy. Brooklyn, NY: Institute of General Semantics.

Ellis, Albert. (1993). General Semantics and Rational-Emotive Therapy. General Semantics Bulletin 58: pp. 12-28.

Epictetus. Trans. by Elizabeth Carter. Enchiridion. The Internet Classics Archive[c] by Daniel C. Stevenson. Available at http://classics.mit.edu/Epictetus/epicench.html.

Keyser, Cassius J. (2001) (1922). Mathematical Philosophy: A Study of Fate and Freedom. Honolulu, HI: University Press of the Pacific.

Kodish, Bruce I. (2003). Dare to Inquire: Sanity and Survival for the 21st Century and Beyond. Pasadena, CA: Extensional Publishing.

Korzybski, Alfred. (1994) (1933). Science & Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics. Fifth Edition. Preface by Robert P. Pula. Brooklyn, NY: Institute of General Semantics.

Korzybski, Alfred. (1990). Collected Writings: 1920-1950. (Collected and arranged by M. Kendig. Final editing and preparation for printing by Charlotte Schuchardt Read with the assistance of Robert P. Pula.) Brooklyn, NY: Institute of General Semantics.

Korzybski, Alfred. (1950) (1921). Manhood of Humanity. Second edition. Brooklyn, NY: Institute of General Semantics.

Kuhn, Thomas S. 1979. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Second Edition, Enlarged. International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, 2 (2). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Marinoff, Lou. (2003a). "General Semantics and Philosophical Practice: Korzybski's Contributions to the Global Village." General Semantics Bulletin 69-70: 13-26.

Marinoff, Lou. (2003b). Therapy for the Sane: How Philosophy Can Change Your Life. New York: Bloomsbury.

Roethlesberger, F.J. ed. by George F.F. Lombard. (1977). The Elusive Phenomena. Boston: Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University.

BY BRUCE I. KODISH*

* Bruce I. Kodish, Ph.D., lives and works in Pasadena, California. A veteran scholar-teacher of general semantics, he also has a private practice in physical therapy and the Alexander Technique of posture-movement education. This article has been adapted, with extensive revisions, from his book Dare to Inquire: Sanity and Survival for the 21st Century and Beyond, published by Extensional Publishing. Dr. Kodish is currently researching/writing a biography of Alfred Korzybski. Copyright [c] 2005, Bruce I. Kodish.