SCIENCE AND SANITY - online book

An Introduction To Non-aristotelian Systems And General Semantics.

Home | About | Philosphy | Contact | Search

58                       II. CENERAL ON STRUCTURE
stein's theory, in contrast to Newton's theory, gives us such a language, similar in structure to the empirical facts as revealed by science 1933 and common experience.
The above definitions are not entirely satisfactory for our purpose. To begin with, let us give an illustration, and indicate in what direction some reformulation could be made.
Let us take some actual territory in which cities appear in the following order: Paris, Dresden, Warsaw, when taken from the West to the East. If we were to build a map of this territory and place Paris between Dresden and Warsaw thus:
we should say that the map was wrong, or that it was an incorrect map, or that the map has a different structure from the territory. If, speaking roughly, we should try, in our travels, to orient ourselves by such a map, we should find it misleading. It would lead us astray, and we might waste a great deal of unnecessary effort. In some cases, even, a map of wrong structure would bring actual suffering and disaster, as, for instance, in a war, or in the case of an urgent call for a physician.
Two important characteristics of maps should be noticed. A map is not the territory it represents, but, if correct, it has a similar structure to the territory, which accounts for its usefulness. If the map could be ideally correct, it would include, in a reduced scale, the map of the map; the map of the map, of the map; and so on, endlessly, a fact first noticed by Royce.
If we reflect upon our languages, we find that at best they must be considered only as maps. A word is not the object it represents; and languages exhibit also this peculiar self-reflexiveness, that we can analyse languages by linguistic means. This self-reflexiveness of languages introduces serious complexities, which can only be solved by the theory of multiordinality, given in Part VII. The disregard of these complexities is tragically disastrous in daily life and science.
It has been mentioned already that the known definitions of structure are not entirely satisfactory. The terms 'relation', 'order', 'structure' are interconnected by implication. At present, we usually consider order as a kind of relation. With the new four-dimensional notions taken from mathematics and physics, it may be possible to treat relations and structure as a form of multi-dimensional order. Perhaps, theoretically, such a change is not so important, but, from a practical, applied,