LINGUISTIC REV IS ION
had admitted, being carried away again by the structural implications of the old language and his s.r.
This linguistic slavery makes criticism very difficult, for the majority of critics with their s.r defend unconsciously structural and linguistic implications, instead of analysing open-mindedly the structure of the facts at hand. All our advances are going very slowly, very painfully and haltingly, because the new work in science, the Einstein and the new quantum theories included, is all of a non-el structure, while our daily languages are el and absolutistic and twist pathologically our habits of 'thought' and s.r. No help is forthcoming from the so-called 'psychologists'. Not to keep the reader guessing too long, let me say here although this will be explained at length later onthat the main achievement of Einstein was precisely in the fact that he refused to divide verbally 'space' and 'time', which experimentally cannot be so divided. This was accomplished by the help of the mathematician Minkowski, who invented a language of new structure; namely, the four-dimensional 'space-time', in which to talk about events. This device made the Einstein General Theory possible, and affected the new quantum theories. In the present work, in order to be able to talk about the organism-as-a-whole, we must introduce this non-el principle as fundamental and apply it.
The first science to break the traditional structural ring was geometry. Full-fledged E systems were built. Following these E systems. N systems were built (Einstein, quantum), and the 'time' is ripe to build a -system, which the present writer originated in his Manhood of Humanity, and which is formulated as a structural outline of a general theory in the present volume.
As soon as this new -system was definitely formulated, a most curious, natural, and yet unexpected result became apparent; namely, that the three new systems, the ., , and the have also one underlying structure and metaphysics. This fact adds to the importance of the situation. All these three new systems have been produced independently. They express between them the structural and semantic urge and longing of all modern science. Their mutual interdependence, mutual structure, mutual metaphysics, mutual method are helpful, for when the vital nature of the issues at hand is clearly seen, it will be found expedient to start from this interdependence as a basis, although, historically speaking, it was not a factor in the production of these systems.
This does not seem to be clearly understood by all scientists. I have read, for instance, scientific papers in which Einstein is reproached that he did not start with E geometries, but only at a later stage incorporated them into his system. This argument, of course, is not against