20.03.2013 Views

You Are Not Book.indb - Stephen H. Wolinsky Ph. D.

You Are Not Book.indb - Stephen H. Wolinsky Ph. D.

You Are Not Book.indb - Stephen H. Wolinsky Ph. D.

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

42 / <strong>You</strong> <strong>Are</strong> <strong>Not</strong><br />

some sensations (or perceived aspects) of something in<br />

reality are left out of the meaning of the label for that<br />

thing. Any word or description can represent only some<br />

aspects of something in reality. As Korzybski put it: ‘The<br />

object has more characteristics [such as its features or<br />

qualities] than we can include in the . . . definition of<br />

the label for the object.’ (Korzybski, Science and Sanity,<br />

p. 414)” (Sawin)<br />

“Korzybski often used the terms map and territory<br />

to help explain the difference between the non-verbal<br />

levels of reality (territory) and the verbal levels (maps),<br />

consisting of words, descriptions, beliefs, theories, etc.<br />

(Korzybski, Science and Sanity, p. 58) With language we<br />

create map-like descriptions of the territory of reality.<br />

The map is not the territory and the word is not the<br />

thing, and there is ‘. . . no connection between the symbol<br />

and that which is symbolized.’ (Hayakawa, Language<br />

in Thought and Action, p. 22) Among other things, this<br />

last quote means that just because there is a word for<br />

something that does not mean that the something actually<br />

exists. For example, as far as scientists know, there is<br />

no thing or process in the real world which corresponds<br />

to the word ‘luck.’” (Sawin)<br />

This becomes a major departure point in both appreciating<br />

and understanding the problem with modern-day psychology.<br />

First let us begin by understanding that the description or<br />

symbol of the thing is not the thing. In this way characterizing,<br />

diagnosing, or typing people in some way can only describe<br />

behavior, but the description is not the thing it is describing.<br />

Moreover, “there is no connection between the symbol, (diagnosis<br />

character type, etc.) and the symbolized (the person<br />

to whom it is referring). Furthermore, just because the nervous<br />

system symbolizes something or someone, this does not

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!