Transcribe
Translate
Vampire, whole no. 8, December 1946
Page 19
More information
digital collection
archival collection guide
transcription tips
[[cartoon text]] Portrait of a gostak in the process of distimming a pair of doshes. [[end cartoon text]] identity", the label, or word, has been accepted for the thing itself. This practise, coupled with the use of high-order abstractions, composes the worst fault of language. For example, it is evident that the word cat is a label for a physical thing which can be observed and described. The word, meaning nothing in itself, is merely used for convenience. However, when dealing with abstractions like "liberty", "justice", "freedom", etc., there is a decided tendency to make the word a living, breathing entity in our minds. The statement: "Liberty is more precious than economic security" is meaningless, because it involves the use of three high-order abstractions without giving any idea as to what they refer in the physical world. In this connection, Chase uses the term referent, introduced by Ogden and Richards in The Meaning of Meaning. to indicate the thing a word stands for. To quote: "Indeed, the goal of semantics might be stated as 'Find the referent'". In chapter six, devoted to Korzybski's Science and Sanity, Chase points out that the theme of Korzybski's entire study is the statement that "If we wish to understand the world and ourselves, it follows that we should use a language whose structure corresponds to physical structure." Korzybski also advocates a wider general knowledge of mathematics, and an effort to avoid making identifications and using abstractions except when one is fully conscious of so doing. Semantics, then, necessarily invalidates the fields of philosophy, formal logic, classical economics, Marxist economies, and practically everything else which we have been accustomed to use as a rule and guide in our thinking. Why is this so? Because all these fields almost entirely refer words to other words, with the actual referents hazy at best, or sometimes even non-existent. What is meant by "good", "evil", "truth", "justice", "socialism", "communism", "democracy"? There are no physical things to which these words directly refer. Quoting Chase once again: "For the individual, as I can testify, a brief grounding in semantics, besides making philosophy unreadable, makes unreadable most political speeches, classical economic theory, after-dinner oratory, diplomatic notes, newspaper editorials, treatises on pedagogics and education, expert financial [[second cartoon text]] A FAN ARRIVES IN HADES -And for your punishment, my friend, you shall spend the rest of eternity semantically analyzing all fanzines ever published! AAAGHH! [[end second cartoon text]] -19-
Saving...
prev
next
[[cartoon text]] Portrait of a gostak in the process of distimming a pair of doshes. [[end cartoon text]] identity", the label, or word, has been accepted for the thing itself. This practise, coupled with the use of high-order abstractions, composes the worst fault of language. For example, it is evident that the word cat is a label for a physical thing which can be observed and described. The word, meaning nothing in itself, is merely used for convenience. However, when dealing with abstractions like "liberty", "justice", "freedom", etc., there is a decided tendency to make the word a living, breathing entity in our minds. The statement: "Liberty is more precious than economic security" is meaningless, because it involves the use of three high-order abstractions without giving any idea as to what they refer in the physical world. In this connection, Chase uses the term referent, introduced by Ogden and Richards in The Meaning of Meaning. to indicate the thing a word stands for. To quote: "Indeed, the goal of semantics might be stated as 'Find the referent'". In chapter six, devoted to Korzybski's Science and Sanity, Chase points out that the theme of Korzybski's entire study is the statement that "If we wish to understand the world and ourselves, it follows that we should use a language whose structure corresponds to physical structure." Korzybski also advocates a wider general knowledge of mathematics, and an effort to avoid making identifications and using abstractions except when one is fully conscious of so doing. Semantics, then, necessarily invalidates the fields of philosophy, formal logic, classical economics, Marxist economies, and practically everything else which we have been accustomed to use as a rule and guide in our thinking. Why is this so? Because all these fields almost entirely refer words to other words, with the actual referents hazy at best, or sometimes even non-existent. What is meant by "good", "evil", "truth", "justice", "socialism", "communism", "democracy"? There are no physical things to which these words directly refer. Quoting Chase once again: "For the individual, as I can testify, a brief grounding in semantics, besides making philosophy unreadable, makes unreadable most political speeches, classical economic theory, after-dinner oratory, diplomatic notes, newspaper editorials, treatises on pedagogics and education, expert financial [[second cartoon text]] A FAN ARRIVES IN HADES -And for your punishment, my friend, you shall spend the rest of eternity semantically analyzing all fanzines ever published! AAAGHH! [[end second cartoon text]] -19-
Hevelin Fanzines
sidebar
