Module Map: Review and Reflection In this final week of the course, we will introduce only one new item related to General Semantics - an explanation of extensional orientation. But we have five short articles we think provide a nice wrap-up to review and reinforce some of the broader aspects and applications of General Semantics. First, a reflection on the role that GS played in the lives and works of the "Grand Master" science fiction writer Robert A. Heinlein, and Albert Ellis, father of Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT). Then we have an excerpt of one of the last articles written by Aldous Huxley, from the November 1963 issue of Playboy Magazine in which he extols the benefit of General Semantics. Steve's essay on stereotypes ties together the physics insights of Niels Bohr with what we currently know about brain science. Mary's conclusion of her Awareness and Action e-textbook offers some very good tips to students. Wendell Johnson's "After You've Studied General Semantics" concludes the readings with advice that's just as relevant today as it was in 1945. Following the readings, we have two pages of resources - Steve's map of Korzybski's General Semantics, and a list of course materials that can be Artwork by Alice Webb Art downloaded or accessed online. Finally, on Wednesday, 19 February, we will post individual videos to conclude the presentation of course materials. Your role in this final week will be to participate in a special Discussion and submit one last 250-word essay. No time for goodbyes yet - we have a week of work awaiting. Please note: Canvas Network has requested that you complete an end-of-course survey. You can complete this at any time during the week. Extensional Orientation The final GS formulation to cover in this course is one we've mentioned and referenced several times during the past five weeks. However, we haven't really defined or explained it. Perhaps that's because, without the previous readings and discussions and videos, a description of extensional orientation may not have made much sense. But since an extensional orientation can be considered as the practical objective of General Semantics in action and practice, let's briefly explain the differences between extensional and intensional. 2/18/14, 10:38 PM 1 of 22 Intensional and Extensional The first thing to understand is that you will not find these terms in a dictionary. Alfred Korzybski used these two words, spelled with an 's' in the middle instead of a 't', to denote a continuum of attitude, behavior, or orientation. Intensional orientations are based on verbal definitions, associations, etc., largely disregarding observations as if they would involve a "principle" of "talk first and never mind the life facts." Extensional orientations are based on ordering observations, investigations, etc., first and the verbalization next in importance. — Alfred Korzybski Similar to the table we used to illustrate the differences regarding Consciousness (or Awareness) of Abstracting- Evaluating, we can consider intensional and extensional orientations as exhibiting the following characteristics in terms of degrees on a continuum. Relies primarily on verbal definitions. Gives primacy to observed or reported facts. Uncritically accepts validity of labels, categories, Focuses on individuals or specific items, challenges classifications, properties. Prone to 'animalistic' appropriateness of group labels. Recognizes evaluations (hardening of the categories and differences among similarities, similarities among dogmatism); allness. differences; non-allness. Exhibits signal reactions: immediate, reflexive, Exhibits symbol reactions: delayed, considered, conditioned, "hot button" responses. attentive responses. Lacks consciousness or awareness of abstracting; Conscious or aware of abstracting (non-identity). confuses or reverses the order of abstracting. Uses the extensional devices of indexing and dating. (Identification) Prone to either/or, two-valued evaluations. Recognizes multi-valued potential for evaluations. Recognizes inferences as inferences, sets a high Prone to confuse inferences as facts. standard for 'facts.' 2/18/14, 10:38 PM 2 of 22 Recognizes the non-elementalistic nature of items or Prone to elementalistic evaluating, presuming that events that may be separated verbally but cannot be different words mean that their different referents separated in the non-verbal 'reality'; uses extensional exist in isolation, separation. device of the hyphen. Uses conditional language that reflects humble Uses absolutistic, unconditional, and all-presuming awareness of the tentative, uncertain, and limited language that presents false-to-fact assurance and nature of human knowledge; uses the extensional certainty. device of etc. In Drive Yourself Sane: Using the Uncommon Sense of General-Semantics, Susan and Bruce Kodish explain: When we orient ourselves by verbal definitions, when we prefer preserving our maps (even maps without territories) to checking them out against 'facts,' when we fail to become aware of our assumptions and inferences and to test them out when possible, when we identify different levels of abstracting, we behave intensionally. When we orient ourselves towards 'facts,' when we check our maps against possible territories, when we clarify and test our inferences and assumptions, when we don't identify different orders of abstracting, we behave extensionally. Intensional and extensional orientations also exist on a continuum. We know of no one who exhibits a purely extensional orientation. Unfortunately, abundant examples of people near the other end of the continuum exist. Some of them are confined to institutions. Some of them speak, write books, appear on radio and television and run institutions. Most of us appear somewhere in between. (p. 126) Heinlein and Ellis: Converging Competencies by Steve Stockdale Published in ETC: A Review of General Semantics Volume 64 No. 4, October 2007 On July 7, 2007, the Heinlein Centennial was held in Kansas City to celebrate what would have been the 100th birthday of acclaimed “Grand Master” science fiction author Robert A. Heinlein. Heinlein is generally acknowledged as one of the four great American science fiction writers, along with Isaac Asimov, Ray Bradbury, and Arthur C. Clarke. Among his most notable books are Starship Troopers, Stranger in a Strange Land, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, and Time Enough for Love. 2/18/14, 10:38 PM 3 of 22 On July 24, 2007, Dr. Albert Ellis died at age 93 in New York City. His front-page obituary in the New York Times referred to him as “one of the most influential and provocative figures in modern psychology.” He originated the field of psychotherapy known as Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) and authored more than 70 books, including Overcoming Procrastination, How to Live With a Neurotic, A Guide to Rational Living, and How to Stubbornly Refuse to Make Yourself Miserable About Anything — Yes, Anything. These two accomplished and celebrated men would seem to have little in common — one a Midwesterner, Naval Academy graduate, futurist, with an almost cult-like following of fans; the other a New Yorker who was referred to as “the Lenny Bruce of psychotherapy,” known for his blue language and results-oriented approach to talk therapy. And yet Robert Heinlein and Albert Ellis shared a common perspective, or point of view, that developed from the same source — Alfred Korzybski and general semantics. Heinlein came to general semantics through Stuart Chase’s The Tyranny of Words (1938) and attended two seminars with Korzybski in 1939 and 1940. In a speech in 1941, Heinlein made the seemingly outlandish assertion that Korzybski was “at least as great a man as Einstein” based on his “monumental piece of work,” Science and Sanity. Ellis, so far as I know, never met Korzybski but credited him (and general semantics) as a major influence in his development of REBT, using descriptors such as brilliant, masterpiece, and pioneer. I attended the Heinlein Centennial in Kansas City. One of the panel sessions I attended was on “The Competent Man.” I learned this was a theme of Heinlein’s that recurred throughout his novels. An oft-repeated quote from Heinlein’s novel Time Enough for Love concerns competency as a general trait: A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. I had the privilege to hear Dr. Ellis speak on one memorable occasion a few years ago. In recalling that talk and in reviewing several of his writings, it seems to me that “competency” was also a recurring theme in his work, specifically as it related to cognitive competency. As the lives and contributions of these two great men — Robert A. Heinlein and Dr. Albert Ellis, just seven years apart in age — shared the news pages in the same recent month, we choose to devote this special section in this issue of ETC to them. The best years of your life are the ones in which you decide your problems are your own. You do not blame 2/18/14, 10:38 PM 4 of 22 them on your mother, the ecology, or the president. You realize that you control your own destiny. — Albert Ellis I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do. — Robert A. Heinlein What We Could Become I have read only enough of Heinlein’s writings to have a minimally-informed appreciation of his work. But I know something about the field of general semantics, which certainly influenced Heinlein’s point of view during his early years as a writer and is unmistakably reflected in character and plot development throughout his work.