TERMINOLOGY AND MEANINGS 23
the only possible content of 'knowledge' and of meanings. On the lowest level of our analysis, when we explore the objective level (the unspeakable feelings in this case), we must try to define every 'meaning' as it conscious feeling of actual, or assumed, or wished., relations which pertain to first order objective entities, psycho-logical included, and which can be evaluated by personal, varied, and racial - again un-speakable first order - psychophysiological effects. Because relations can be defined as multi-dimensional order, both of which terms are non-el, applying to 'senses' and 'mind', after naming the un-speakable entities, all experience can be described in terms of relations or multi-dimensional order. The meanings of meanings, in a given case, in a given individual at a given moment., represent composite, affective psycho-logical configurations of nil relations pertaining to the case, coloured by past experiences, state of health, mood of the moment, and other contingencies.
If we consistently apply the organism-as-a-whole principle to any psycho-logical analysis, we must conjointly contemplate at least both aspects, the 'emotional' and the 'intellectual', and so deliberately ascribe 'emotional' factors to any 'intellectual' manifestation, and 'intellectual' factors to any 'emotional' occurrence. That is why, on human levels, the d term 'psychological' must be abolished and a new term psycho-logical introduced, in order that we may construct a science.
From what has been said, we see that not only the structure of the world is such that it is made up of absolute individuals, but that meanings in general, and the meanings of meanings in particular - the last representing probably the un-speakable first order effects - also share, in common with ordinary objects, the absolute individuality of the objective level.
The above explains why, by the inherent structure of the world, life, and the human nervous system, human relations are so enormously complex and difficult; and why we should leave no stone unturned to discover beneath the varying phenomena more and more general and invariant foundations on which human understanding and agreement may be based. In mathematics we find the only model in which we can study the invariance of relations under transformations, and hence the need for future psycho-logicians to study mathematics.
It follows from these considerations that any psycho-logical occurrence has a number of aspects, an 'affective', and an 'intellectual', a physiological, a colloidal, and what not. For the science of psychophysiol-ogy, resulting in a theory of sanity, the above four aspects are of most importance. As our actual lives are lived on objective, un-speakable levels, and not on verbal levels, it appears, as a problem of evaluation,