SCIENCE AND SANITY - online book

An Introduction To Non-aristotelian Systems And General Semantics.

Home | About | Philosphy | Contact | Search




1            INTRODUCTION TO THE SECOND EDITION
and communicable, non-aristotelian system was produced. The main difficulties ahead are neuro-semantic and neuro-linguistic because for more than 2,000 years our nervous systems have been canalized in the inadequate, intensional, often delusional, aristotelian orientations, which are reflected even in the structure of the language we habitually use.
It may be helpful to indicate some historical facts of the development of our orientations since Socrates (469-399 B.C.). Socrates was the son of a sculptor and himself did some work with the chisel and his hands. He became an important founder of a school of 'philosophy'. In brief, this school had very high standards for science, seeking the application of the science of the time to life, so that it became what may be called a 'school of wisdom'.
One of his students, Plato (427-347 B.C.), who came from an aristocratic jamily, became the founder of a different school, called the 'Academy', and the 'father' of what may be called 'mathematical philosophy'. Unlike his teacher, he began, in his 'Doctrine of Ideas', to verbally split humans into 'body' and 'mind', as if they could be so split in living beings. He built a system of 'immaterialism' or 'idealism'.
Aristotle (384 - 322 B.C.), the son of a physician, was the student of Plato, and particularly interested in biology, other natural sciences, etc. He founded the most influential of the three schools, which is called by his name. He was undoubtedly one of the most gifted men mankind has ever known. As usual in such cases, the study of one branch of knowledge leads to another, so Aristotle was led to the study of 'logic', linguistic structure, etc., about which he produced scholarly treatises or textbooks, ultimately formulating the most complete system of his time. Because of the completeness of the system, backed by powerful influences, it has moulded our orientations and evaluations up to the present. The man on the street, our education, medicine and even sciences, are still in the clutches of the system of Aristotle, a system inadequate for 1941 yet perhaps satisfactory 2,300 years ago, when conditions of life were relatively so simple, when orientations were on the macroscopic level only, and knowledge of scientific facts was practically nil (see p. 371 ff.).
In Aristotle's system ay applied, the split becomes complete and institutionalized, with jails for the 'animal' and churches for the 'soul'. Now we begin to realize how pernicious and retarding for civilization that split is. For instance, only since Einstein and Minkowski do we begin to understand that 'space' and 'time' cannot be split empirically, otherwise we create for ourselves delusional worlds. Only since their work has modern sub-microscopic physics with all its accomplishments become possible.