SCIENCE AND SANITY - online book

An Introduction To Non-aristotelian Systems And General Semantics.

Home | About | Philosphy | Contact | Search




INTRODUCTION TO THE SECOND EDITION             li
Similarly, and tragically, this applies to medicine. Until recently we have had a split medicine. One branch, general medicine, was interested in the 'body' (soma) ; the other was interested in the 'soul' ('psyche'). The net result was that general medicine was a glorified form of veterinary science, while psychiatry remained metaphysical.* However, it has been found empirically that a great many 'physical' ailments are of a semantogenic origin. Only a few years ago general physicians began to understand that they cannot deal with humans without knowing something about psychiatry, and psychosomatic medicine began to be formulated. I cannot go into further detail here, except to mention that this is another constructive step away from the aristotelian system, which as applied trains us in artificial, verbal splits.
If we train in methods which in principle lead to splitting the personality, we obviously train or prepare the ground for dementia praecox or schizophrenia, which very often involves a split personality. At any rate, it does not seem to be advisable for sanity, and so proper evaluation of 'facts' and 'reality', to train our children in delusional methods. Personally, the author is always profoundly shocked that parents, who after all care for their children, can tolerate educators, physicians, scientists, etc., who train their children in such pernicious and hopelessly antiquated methods. I also always wonder whether educators, physicians, scientists and other professionals realize what harm they can do by disregarding factors of sanity, or by ignoring them.
It is pitiful to watch how even some of the most outstanding scientists in the world are unable to understand what a passing from one system to another means. Thus, for example, an Encyclopedia of Unified Science was projected. A number of very scholarly treatises were published in it, and yet because the difficulties were not faced squarely the authors are missing the point that neuro-semantic and neuro-linguistic mechanisms are involved and that we are passing from one system to another.
One of the tremendous obstacles in the revision of the aristotelian system is exactly the excellence of the work of Aristotle based on the very few scientific facts known 2,300 years ago. The aim of his work circa 350 B.C. was to formulate the essential nature of science (350 B.C.) and the forms and laws of science. His immediate goal was entirely methodological (350 B.C.), and he aimed to formulate a general method for 'all' scientific work. He was even expounding the theory of symmetrical relations, the relation of the general to the particular, etc. In his days these orientations were by necessity two-valued and 'objective'; hence
Konybski, Alfred. Neuro-semantic and Neuro-linguistic Mechanisms of Extensionaliiation. Amtrican Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 93, No. 1, July, 1936.