Talk:Alfred Korzybski

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Alfred Korzybski page.
Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (`~~~~`). New discussion topics go at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new topic. New to Wikiquote? Welcome! Frequently asked questions. This is not a forum for general discussion about the page's subject.	Talk page guidelines Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Don't bite the newcomers!

Unsourced[edit]

Wikiquote no longer allows unsourced quotations, and they are in process of being removed from our pages (see Wikiquote:Limits on quotations); but if you can provide a reliable, precise and verifiable source for any quote on this list please move it to Alfred Korzybski. --Antiquary 16:55, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If we consider that all we deal with represents constantly changing sub-microscopic, interrelated processes which are not, and cannot be 'identical with themselves', the old dictum that 'everything is identical with itself' becomes in [today's understanding of the universe] a principle invariably false to facts." (Note: Korzybski used "1933" to specify the current understanding. This editor has subsituted the "more general" form: [today's understanding...])

If a psychiatric and scientific enquiry were to be made upon our rulers, mankind would be appalled at the disclosures.

Bankers, priests, lawyers,... politicians, [and news media] constitute one class [of our rulers] and work together. They do not produce any values but manipulate the values produced by others, and often pass signs for no value at all. Scientists and teachers also comprise a ruling class. They produce the main values mankind has, but, at present, they do not realize this. They are, in the main, ruled by the cunning methods of the first class.

Our rulers: politicians, 'diplomats', bankers, priests of every description, economists, lawyers, etc. and the majority of teachers ... ignorant of modern science, scientific methods, structural linguistic and semantic issues of [today] and ... historical and anthropological background, without which a sane orientation is impossible.... as long as such ignorance of our rulers prevails, no solution of our human problems is possible.

There are two ways to slide easily through life: to believe everything or to doubt everything; both ways save us from thinking. (Note: this is an adaptation of a quote from Henri Poincaré#Science and Hypothesis (1901))

God may forgive your sins, but your nervous system won't. (Korzybski states that it is not his quote in S&S)

It is amusing to discover, in the twentieth century, that the quarrels between two lovers, two mathematicians, two nations, two economic systems, usually assumed insoluble in a finite period should exhibit one mechanism, the semantic mechanism of identification — the discovery of which makes universal agreement possible, in mathematics and in life.

Any proposition containing the word 'is' creates a linguistical structural confusion which will eventually give birth to serious fallacies.

If words are not things, or maps are not the actual territory, then, obviously, the only possible link between the objective world and the linguistic world is found in structure, and structure alone.

Let us repeat the two crucial negative premises as established firmly by all human experience: (1) Words are not the things we are speaking about; and (2) There is no such thing as an object in absolute isolation.

It is now no mystery that some quite influential 'philosophers' were 'mentally' ill.

...a few philosophers really do important work. This applies to the so called 'critical philosophy' and to the theory of knowledge or epistemology. This class of workers I call epistemologists to avoid the disagreeable implications of the term 'philosopher'.

In the rough, a symbol is a sign that stands for something... Before a noise, etc., may become a symbol, something must exist for the symbol to symbolize.

Incorrect symbolism... is bound to undermine any possibility of our building a structurally human civilization.

...the main achievement of Einstein was precisely in the fact that he refused to divide verbally time and space, which experimentally cannot be so divided.

We should not be surprised that we find meaningless noises in the foundation of many old 'philosophies', and that from them arise most of the old 'philosophical' fights and arguments.

...the analogy between the noises we make when these noises do not symbolize anything which exists, and the worthless checks we write when our bank balance is zero...

If, in spite of all contrary evidence, or the lack of positive evidence, [a person] holds persistently ... such affective beliefs is seriously ill, and, therefore, no amount of evidence can convince him.

Thus, we see that one of the obvious origins of human disagreement lies in the use of noises for words.

We read unconsciously into the world the structure of the language we use. The guessing and ascribing of fanciful, mostly primitive-assumed structure of the world is precisely what 'philosophy' and 'metaphysics' do. The empirical search for a world-structure and the building of new languages (theories) ... of similar structure ... is precisely what science does.... It develops in the natural order, while metaphysics of every description uses the reversed, and ultimately a pathological order.

[A Game:] We begin by asking the meaning of every word uttered…Then we ask the meaning of the words used in the definitions and, and this process is continued for no more than ten or fifteen minutes until the victim begins to speak in circles...

...provided we could define all terms. But this is impossible... We thus see that all linguistic schemes, if analyzed far enough, would depend on undefined terms.

It would be interesting to see the Behaviorists deny that the writing of a mathematical treatise, or of some new theory of quantum mechanics represents a form of human behavior which they should study. Some day they must face the fact that they have neglected to consider a great many forms of human behavior — the most characteristic forms at that — and that therefore, they could not produce an adequate theory of the nature of the 'human mind'.

Aristotelian , Euclidian [line, space, length] and Newtonian [speed of light] systems... have a few unjustified infinities too many… when such an infinity is introduced into the denominator, it makes the whole expression vanish. In other words, faulty, insufficient observations leads to the introduction of ... fanciful "infinities".

The Non-Aristotelian, Non-Euclidian, and Non-Newtonian trilogy is more general than Aristotelian, Euclidian, and Newtonian trilogy... because the older systems are just particular cases of the new Non-Aristotelian, Non-Euclidian, and Non-Newtonian trilogy.