UNDERSTANDING AND BEING UNDERSTOOD By DR. SANFORD |. BERMAN INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR GENERAL SEMANTICS Post Otic Box 2469 + San Fs Catto 04126,odentning ad Big Uetond ony 162, 1965 and 1969 by Sud ean Al icin hook ate ed. Nop iso my espe nh mane atthe et ii pon nin Bea International Society For General Semantes ‘Sen Francico LECE.No— 72-75826 UNDERSTANDING AND BEING UNDERSTOOD. Contents ston 1. HOW OUR LANGUAGE GOVERNS OUR BEHAVIOR Why Look © Language? ‘Whats General Semantics? “The Importance of Logi Fate 2. HOW WE REACT TO WORDS AND THINGS The Behavior Sequence ‘hye Way in Which We Respond Msealuation: How We Berane Confsed 3. WHAT DO YOUMEAN? ‘Words Don’t Mean, Pople Mean! |AWord May Have Many Meanings Projection Can Cause Misinderstanding 4, UNDERSTANDING THROUGH AN OPEN MIND ‘Avo he Allee Aside Bevate of EstheriOr Onertaton Keep You Fest onthe Ground Use Indexing a Dating THE IMPORTANCE OF COMMUNICATION {6 UNDERSTANDING AND BEING UNDERSTOOD 1. THE PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENTIFIC METHODS IN INbustey 5 SUMMARY Behavior Should Fit she Word of Reality Meaing self Cap Mislead Us Non-Alles Leads o Proper Evasion 9. IRVING. LEE: THE SEMANTIC MAN 10. SUGGESTED READINGSHOW OUR LANGUAGE GOVERNS OUR BEHAVIOR Section One Good communication is good business. Research findings ‘consistently indicate that free, two-way communication results in improved morale, greater productivity, and smoother else tons hetween supervisor and subordinate. Communication is the basis for understanding, coordination, cooperation, and action But recognizing the importance of communication is not the same as practicing good communication, Every day we encoun- ter situations, ranging from the humorous to the teaic, in ‘which something has gone wrong becauxe of poor communica: tion WHY LOOK TO LANGUAGE? A classic example is the plight of the motorist whose car stalled on a main throughway ina congested Faster city ‘The battery was dead and all attempts to start the car were in vain, Finally, in desperation, the motorist lagged down a lady driver who agreed to push his car to got it started. The stranded driver carefully explained to the woman hit because the car was equipped with automatic transmission, ‘youTl have 10 get up to 30 of 35 miles an hour to get sme started." The lady nodded wisely and headed for her cr. ‘The man climbed into his car and waited for her push He waited and waited. After a while, he turned around to see where the woman was. She was there allright, and he was just in time to se her coming at him at 30 to 35 miles per hour‘Such misunderstandings are not the prerogative of women, ‘The National Foremen’s Institute reports the following example ‘A foreman told & machine operstor he was pasig: “etter clean up around here.” 1 wi en minus ater when the foreman’ stant phoned: "Sa, oss, nt tha bearing Sipert ik working on Je up in engineering pronto?” "You bat your swect Iie itis Why?” "Hle says you told him 10 Sop it and sep the place up. 1 thought Fetter make Sure?""Listem™ the foreman fled into fhe poe, "get hm Fight back on that jobs aot tobe ready in twenty Innes.” What the foreman had ie mind was for Sport {o gather ap the oily waste which was 4 fre and accident hazrd, This would not have taken more than a couple of tninutes, and there woul! have en plenty of tine fo finish the beating Bat Sipet wan't eared to understand what te foreman was trying tomy Many sh predicaments arise when our actions are based on fake assumptions. The study of pncral semantics wl help Us tinderstand what is voted in thew communication problems WHAT IS GENERAL SEMANTICS? “Semantics” isthe study of the “meaning of words” and of the history of changes in word mesnings. Out of this study has grown now, broader field of Interest which is known as "general semantics.” General semantics is the study ofthe rele tionship between language, thought, and human behavior I is concerned. with the ways in which our language and other Symbols can lead us {© make assumptions that influence our thinking and behavior. Whenever we speak, listen, think, observe, or make decisions, wwe ae also Taking assumptions. While you are reading this ‘manual, you ate making the assumption (consciously or uncon- Sciousiy) that your chair will hold you, T-am_making the "sumption that you ate sitting. The noted general semanticis Alfred Korzybski, has pointed out that wisdom begins when we "The Foreman’ Lene (February 8, 1950), published by NF, a division oA ISION oe become conscious of our assumptions? However, it is not always easy to recognize these, and we are often unaware of the effects of our unconscious assumptions upon our bchavioe ‘THE IMPORTANCE OF LOGICAL FATE The notion of unconscious assumptions and the concept of logical fate are important to our understanding of sehctal semantics. Logical fate, so-called ‘by the matheinatican Philosopher, Cassius Keyser, is a process in which certain conclusions’ and behavior follow logically from uncons:ious assumptions. In other words, if You make certain assumptions Your conclusions and behavior will automatically follow ‘Certain logical patter, Consider the following story. im Jones was standing on the comer waiting for 8 bus, ‘The corner was dark and lonely. Jim knew that many robbers were around that neighborhood because he was fait with it. While he was waiting for a bus, a man sneaked tip behind ‘him and hit him on the back. Jim whitled around quick sind socked the man with a hard eight squarely onthe jaw Was Jim fight in iting the man who sneaked up behind him? Teall depends on wheter Tim's asumption that Ue sn was a robber was comet. In any ese, he acted on the beh this astimption “The process of local fate also occurs when we communi cate, We actin accordance with what we aswume the oer Person meant. Tn this way, langage ftorseeally alec St peren 2 language fare great This manual will present some of the findings of general semantics Tt wil pot ot the way In which outealion ot the world around us influences our behavior: I wl sh Gate how the vatious meanings of 2 word can lea to confired ‘ommuniation. Finally, i wil explore the dangers of cet commen langage practi, “Ale Korybeki, “Foreword” to Lee, ing Jn Langue Habit i ‘Haman Afar (ee York: Harper & Brothers Pubes 1981) poHOW WE REACT TO WORDS AND THINGS Section Two We may think of ourselves as living in two distinct worlds One fs the world of words, the verbal world. The other isthe World of things, the nonerbal world. Words may be used to stand for the non-verbal phenomena which sutround Us, bat the words can never actually be the things they represent. Pinch yoursel. What you feel is non-verbal. You can certain- ly use wonds to deseribe what You felt, but you must distinguish between the verbal description and the non-verbal sensation you. sctually experienced. We often fail to make this distinction, By confusing words with the things they represent, we ave at conclusions which do not fit the facts A Iady in Porida entertained a group of people for dinner Everyone was delighted with the meal although no one could decide exactly what the main course was. After the dinner lady approached the hostess and ssi, “T enjoyed that food so ‘much. I would like to lear to prepare it Would you please tell me what we had?” The hostess turned to the ledy aid stid, “Yes, of course. You just had the pleasure of eating snake steaks.” Upon hearing that, the lady had the unfortie nate experience of seing her food forthe second time What was it to which this lady actually responded? It couldn't have been the nonverbal phenomenon, the snake steak, ecause she had enjoyed eating it. Instead, she was, responding to the word.:"snake” and all its associations Another example of this confusion between the verbal and the non-erbal isthe case of the seienoe professor wih pl i's request for a washroom mirror in his department. His request ‘was denied on the grounds that a miror was classified sy 4rnonscientific item," The undaunted professor then put in a new request. This time his morror was provided promptly. The ‘nly change in his requisition was the Use of a more technical {erminology. He asked for “one human reflector.” To understand the reactions in these examples better, let's take a Took at human behavior in ts simplest form, ‘THE BEHAVIOR SEQUENCE ‘The story of Jim Jones standing on the street comer illus trates the sequence of steps involved in human behavior. In the first place, something happened. In this case, someone crept up behind Jim and hit him on the shoulder. Next, and almost Simultaneously, Jim became aware of this happeaing through the action of his nervous system. He very quickly “sized up" what was going on, and this led to his response of turing about find socking the man in the aw. “These then are the four steps involved in human behavior: |, Something happens inthe non-verbal word 2. Arnervous impact creates awarenes of the happening. 3. vuluaion follows in which the happening is sized up. |4. Response occurs, ether in words oF actions, based on the evaluation “The third step, valuation, is the link, therefore, between non verbal [acts a8 they are and our behavior as iis elated fo these facts. Our evaluations must fit the Tacts of the situation if our responses are to be scientifically appropriate and intelligent Suppose thatthe man behind Jim had been an old friend trying to surprise him. Jim's violent response would then have been nore drastic than the sitution demanded. Lets take a closer Took at human responses. ‘THREE WAYS IN WHICH WE RESPOND There are thee different kinds of responses oF reactions which govern our behavior. The rst are called “reflex” Fesponses, These are simple acts which usually are involuntary ‘Muth of our behavior 4s based upon reflex responses to certain Simul, For example, what do you do of what happens when Someone shines a fashlight into the pupil of your eye? Your eye closes or the pupil constrics. Suppose & physictan taps Your Knee with e rubber hammer. If his aim i good, your le les What happens when you eat food? Fist, slivary changes ocr and then various gastric juices are produced to aid the digestive processes. Al these are reflex actions, We normally have no control over a reflex action. Th response is immediate, and completely. determined by ‘hi stimulus. In most cases, we can neither change the response nor prevent it We do, however, have some measure of control over the second and thitd types of response, The second type i what we fall a “signal” reaction. This reaction is similar to the reex response in that it too is almost immediate. But let's ss Bow i Giller, A bus driver, trying to make a turn in downtown Houston, was stopped by a woman driver who was moving into 2 dangerous position. The driver whistled sharply atthe woman who was apparently unaware ofthe bus. The woman stopped and looked around while the driver maneuvered his hus ino the opening. Asked by a passenger why he had whistled instead of honking, the driver replied, “About hall the women drivers in this town won't pay any attention to some body honking, but there ain't dame in Houston who won't stop and look when she heats x man whistle.” ‘The woman's response was a signal reaction, that i, learned response, Just asthe Woman had conditioned herself not to hear honking, she had also developed the habit of looking around when she heard a man whistle ‘An enlisted service man proves us with the following ills tration of a signal response. “We enlisted men were at bat ina hotly-contested baseball game with our officers when & private hit what looked like» Single to short right field. Instead of stopping at Fist, how fever, he foolishly started a wild: dash Tor second, Realizing then, that he couldn't make it, he scrambled back toward fits Now he was being chased in a rundown between the ienant playing first and the colonel playing secon! | looked like'a sure out, but just as the lieutenant ipped the ball buck to the colonel, the private snapped to attensaluting the colonel. Automatically, the colonel snapped the Salute Back and muffed the catch."* ‘Mis is another example of a conditioned or trained response fy which a signal conttols @ reaction. Animals are trained to behave in response to signal. The Russian scientist Pavioy, in hs classic experiments, conditioned dogs to salivate in response to the sound of 2 bell by ringing the bell every time he was ibout to ive them Food. Once conditioned, they would salivate When they heard the bell even though there was no food, The Shine Kind of unquestioning, automatic reaction is seen in an Snal's response fo certain commands given by its maser. AAs animal is not eapable of controlling his behavior in the face of sich stimuli However, man is, and itis important for hin fo lesen to do so, By responding witha signal eaction, he fuss several risks, Fist, he Is likely to misevaluate situations by Jumping to conclusions, or by. asuming that he knows what Someone else means. Secondly, he may never reach tue or valid Conclusions, because fe is bound by a non-scientific method Syhich does not rely upon observation of the facts, And finally, there is the question of ethics. Signal resctions can lead t0 Uunjustfied action against others. For these reasons itis preferable for us to react in a third way. In a ombol reaction, man controls his own behavior. There i & happening, and a person feels its impact, But, during the crucial sovonds while he evaluates the situation, he pauses. There is-a delay which cannot occur in the case of 2 reflex reaction and does not ocr in a signal reaction. It sat this time {hat fe observes and analyzes the situation. Then he reacts, not MISEVALUATION: HOW WE BECOME CONFUSED ‘When we fail to take time to observe and analyze, we often sing ourselves eeasting fo an improper evaluation. Misevaluation| Sci ol stupid, immature, and sometimes even destructive Iehavior, There are several forms which misevaluation can take Oph Bil Oran i Tue, quoted in Reader’ Digest, May 1958, p. 166 dentification of Words with Things One of the most common forms of misevaluation i the identification of words with things, Our presentalay cule presents an abundance of instances in which persons fall tO istinguish, between words and things. The party guest in Florida who became violenty ill when she leamed that she had onsumed sake seakcernly demonstrated hit frm of I our behavior isto be mature and inteligent, we must make proper evaluations. We must delay our reactions until we have evaluated the situation as itis. Reactions to words, without fegard to the non-verbal thing they represent, can lead us to behavior whichis inconsstone with the facts. Misunderstanding Even when wows are not confused with things, they are likely to have diffrent meanings for different pervons. This, leads to a second common form of miseauation, misunder standing. Misunderstanding results from a person's inablity 10 convey his meaning in hi efforts to commanate Directions and insiuctions, Tor example, ae frequently misunderstood. The foreman who tol! the machine operator to “Cleanup around here™ ale to convey what he meant. The ‘mathine operator misevauated the station because he did het Understand what the foreman mesne. The foreman also miscra tinted because he sumed thet the macht had Compre: tended hie meeage THis eayy To demonstrate the ease with which a mesage ma be misunderstood. Suppose someone tes you to write the word caton the blackboard. How i this open to misunderstanding? First thas not been speciied whew you are to do this. Right row, ten minutes fom now, oF tomorrow? Ad Hom many ‘tors are you to write? “The word ator spy “eat” With ‘hat tooB are you to wits? Chalk, peti Invisible nk? Which Backboard are you tous? One inthe Foor oF one in another room? Because of host of variable, meanings ate ways open to misunderstanding Acceptance of the Part forthe Whole Finally, acceptance of the part for the whole is «cause of ‘misevaluation. An isolated factor two does not enable ws to illin an accurate and complete picture of a situation. Take, for example, the report of an automobile race as released by the Russian press. According to the story which appeared in prin, the Russian entry came in second and the American automobile fame In next to last, How really this picture changes when we learn that there were only to cars competing inthe race!* Th this case, the facts of the situation were deliberately incomplete. But exen where this is not so, people jump to false ‘onclsons because they forgot that they have only a selection fof facts drawn from the infinite numer which exists in the non-verbal world. Our mental pictures will difer greatly accord- Ing to which fcts we select and which ones we overlook. ‘Am I responding to mere words or is my behavior based on the facts a6 they are? Do I really know what the other person means? Do I relly ee the whole picture or do [just think Ido? ‘These are three questions we must ask ourselves before we actif 'we wish fo avoid misevaluation, “From "Wanna Conse” (Editors, Cheero Daly News, Apel 7, 1989, WHAT DO YOU MEAN? Section Thise Almost daly, we see problems arise because of someone's inability to convey 10 someone else what he means. A pesson| may know clearly what he means and he may express if accu ely, but this no assurance that the listener will got his message or that he will understand it. Both speaker and listener lunconsciously assume that they understand each other. This ss hot true, The explorations of general semanticists into the nature of meaning have revealed how some characteristics of ‘our language cause Behavior which lads to communication pro blems. WORDS DON'T MEAN, PEOPLE MEAN! We often, talk about “the meaning of words.” The very ‘expression, “te meaning of words,” implies that meanings ss Jn Words. However, general semantiist Living J. Lee has explained that this is 2 false asumption and # major cause o ‘misunderstanding. According to Lee, it a myth that words Contain meaning, and this fallacy has become knows as “container myth."" In the same sense that 2 sugar bow | empty until someone fill H with sugar, words ate devoid meaning until someone uses them and adds his meanings (0 them Ting 7 Les "On « Mechaniam of Maundertnding,” in Gry. Wioe S\(ed), Promoting Growth Toward Matty i erring What 19 Reo Supplementary Edwctionsl Monographs, No. 74 (Cheap: Univer ‘Chea Pres, 1951) pp 8690,Another way of looking at this point isto realize that lan- levage i rbitrary. A word isan arbitrary symbol which has been “signed lo stand for some non-verbal objec. This fact was obviously not understood by the lady who said to 4 famous astronomer, “tTeel such an admiration for Yyou asttonomers because of your wonderful discoveries about the universe. But the most wonderful of all, it seems to Ine, is your discovery of the names of the planets. How, for instance, did you ever manage to find out thatthe Ted planet ‘ame Mars relly i Mars?” The notion that the red planet, so conspicuous among the hacavenly bodies, was frst observed and then arbitrarily namted Mars did not occur to this lady. How disilusioned she would be ‘she knew thatthe name Mars was attached fo this stellar body in much the same way we assign a name toa street. SI, Hayakawa has called this “linguistic aivete." He says, “symbols and things symbolized are independent of each other; neverthaless, we all have a Way of feeling as if, and Sometimes acting asf, there were necessary connections. For example, there is the vague sense we all have that foreign Junguages are inherently absurd: foreigners have funny names for things, and why can’t they call things by their right ames? This feeling exhibits itself” most stronaly in those Fnglsh and American tourists who seem to believe that they fan make the natives of any country understand English if they shout Toud enough... they fel that the symbol is Inherently connected in some way with the things symbol she The arbitrariness of the language is painfully obvious in the sample of the witing American and his English friend who Were driving through London when the latter mentioned that his windscreen needed cleaning. "Windshield," the American crtected. "Well, over here we eallit windscreen.” “Then you're Wrong," angued the “American. “Afterall, we Americans invented the automobile, and we call his a windshield.” "That's al vety wll. old boy,” snapped the Englishman, “but who Invented the language? ESOT Wapalawa, Lanpuape te Thowoht and Action (New York: Harcourt Brace and Company 1949), 9p. 27.28 a A WORD MAY HAVE MANY MEANINGS ‘Another characteristic of our language which causes problems is its ambiguity. Since there is no fixed, one-to-one relationship between words and meanings, a word may have many uses. It ‘may mean many diferent things “This litle poem is composed of a number of words which are commonly used to representa variety of objects ‘Where can a man buy a cap for his knee? ‘Ora key fora lock of his hair? Can your eyes be called an academy Because there are pupils there? In the crown of your head What jewels are found? Who crosses the bridge of your nose? Could you use a shingling inthe roof of your mouth? [Nails inthe end of your toes? Could the erook in your elbow be sent to jail? How can you sharpen your shoulder blades? ‘Could you sit in the shade ofthe palm of your hand? Or beat on the drum of your ear” Does the calf of yourleg eat the eom on your toe? ‘Then why grow corn on the ear? ‘The 500 most used words in the English language have at least 14,000 different definitions, The fact that a number of ‘meanings may be assigned to a given word explains why mes- ages are subject to misinterpretation and why our communica- tion is open to misunderstandings. With such odd aginst us, it ‘becomes a real challenge to convey a specific meaning or intent successfully. And there is still one more factor we must consider {inthis whole discussion of meaning PROJECTION CAN CAUSE MISUNDERSTANDING Since wards do not contain meanings, it is necessary for ws to project meanings into them when we use them. These projec tions are strongly influenced by each person’s own experiences; ‘consequently, each person may have a unique personal meaning for any given word. Problems arise when we assume that word has the same meaning for other people as it has for us 1B‘On the basis of their imited experience, children project ‘meaning into the language they hear. The Lord’s Prayer, for example, has had fo withstand considerable abuse from children living to learn it from mumbling congsegations. One little boy was heard to. say, "Harold be they name.” The request of another was, “Give us this day our jelly bread.” And a New ‘York child petitioned, “Lead us not into Penn Staton.” ‘Adults do the sume thing, sometimes, on a more sophisti cated level, Recently, I rode-an aieplane from San Francisco to Chicago. I was deeply engrossed in @ book on the game of bridge when the stewardess stopped and looked over my shoul. der. "That must be a fascinating love story you are reading,” she commented. Started, I looked at the chapter heading with fresh eyes. IU Was entiled, “Free Responses after the Original Pass These discrepancies in interpretation cause some of the jveatest communication problems in industy, For example, we see the superintendent passing through the shop convoyed by the foreman. Being ina jovial mood, he makes a comversitional comment that “the girls seem happy this morning, the way they are talking and laughing.” The foreman thinks, “Is he hinting that I shouldn't allow them (o talk? Does he think I don't keep proper discipline? Those gils ought to have sense enough to stop talking and act busy when he's round. Maybe I better move Mary off by herself because she always get the others started taking.” ‘The bos leaves, quite unaware that his comments have Been interpreted a criticism. As soon a he is gone, the foreman Dbawis out the girls for talking and not paying attention to their works he moves the Marys around, and itis weeks or ven months before the final ripples of disturbance have died own? In avoiding the misundetstandings which arse from projec- tion, we should keep in mind these suggestions: 1 Remember that meanings are in people, notin words. 2. Be conscious that a word may have more than one mean ing (be aware of the ambiguity of language) 13. Be conscious that we lear meanings from past experi “TBunighB Gander, nd David G, Moore, Human Relations i ndatry (Gide Mooi nob: Ricard Deen, Ine, 1955) 14 4. Be conscious of projecting our own meanings into what others are saying. 5, If you are the speaker, ask the listener if you. If youare the listener, ask the speake inderstands hat do YouUNDERSTANDING THROUGH AN OPEN MIND Section Four In our dally use of language, our attitudes and our ways of thinking can at any time lead us {0 communication faut ‘They affect our motivation to communicate, ou listening efTee- tiveness, and, ultimately, our behavior. We should be familiar ‘enough with the problems they can eause so that We can recoR- nize and cope with these when they appear. AVOID THE ALLNESS ATTITUDE One of the greatest blocks to communication isthe “allness” attitude. 1 manifests itself in people who fal to listen because they're already thinking to themselves. “I know all about that.” Because they assume that they know all there isto know about something, these people develop a number of poor thinking, listening, and speaking habits, People afflicted with an aliness attitude (and most of us are) fail to realize that there are many factors which limit our aequaintance with things. Individually, we are bound by the Span of our intellectual abilities and our senses, We are bound by the current body of existing knowledge, the confines of time and space, culture, language, and education. Finally, we are imited by our own interests, which determine the way we see the world and the facts we sclet from the total non-verbal environment. The allness attitude oF orientation leads + person {o overlook these limitations. Ie causes him to act as though he knows all about something and assume more knowledge than he really has.The following story ilstates the allnessatitude. ‘A young man sid ina faint voice, “You don't want to buy any Iife insurance, do you?” “I certainly do-not.” the sales ‘mansger replied. “I thought you didn’t,” the embarrased solicitor said, and he headed for the door. Then the sales ‘manager called him back and addressed him steraly. "My job 's to hire and train salesmen, and you're about the worst salesman T've ever seen, You'll never sell anything by asking people if they don't want to buy. But, because you're apparently just starting out, 'm going to take out $10,000 ‘worth of insurance with you right now. Get an application blank” Fumbling, the salesman did so. “Another word of advice, young man. Leatn a few standard onganized sales ls.” “Oh, Ive already done that,” the salesman replied. ve got a standard talk for every type of prospect. This ‘my organized approach to sales managers.” This sales manager thought he knew it all, but this did not prevent him from making 2 colossal fol of himself. Non-liness ‘on his part might have prevented this: ‘Nomaliness is simply te realization of the limitations of our knowledge. If we realize that we do.not know it all, we a ‘much less likely to be misled into faulty thinking and speaking practices. Let's look at some of these practices which accom pany the allnes attitude BEWARE OF EITHER/OR ORIENTATION ‘The allnes orientation tends to distort a person’s sense of values, a6 well as his way 10 thinking. Many problems are created when we assume that things are either one extreme or the other, either black or white. Actually, thee are four differ lent approaches we can use in our evaluations Fits, and worst, isthe onesalued ovlentation. Thi leads to the kind’ of overgeneralized evaluations which we know as Sereotypes. The one-valued approach admits to the possibility fof only one truth. “All lawyers are shysters"” “All cops are trooked.” “All mothersin-aw ate dificil” “Al labor leaders are tacketeers.” The people who make such statements are sing allnss language. Words like “al,” “always.” “never,” tend t0 push our thinking into se, rigid patterns itis dificult to get 8 agreement when someone not only refuses to see the other siles Of the picture, but actually denies the existence of any other ‘ie, This kind of thinking is dangerous because We live in ® world where things change constantly. When we fil lo reco nize the fact of change, we begin to misevaluate, Foo this feason, the one-valued approach can only lead us into trouble ‘Next, there are two Kinds of twovalued approaches. There ate the conpadictory two and the contrary two. The “contra itary two" involves an assertion and a denial. In other wows, ther yes oF no, postive or nezative, The contradictory to ued approach is justified when it applies to situations in ‘which there really is no middle ground. Hete, the either/or way Of thinking and speaking Is appropriate. Fither you came to work today or you did not, Both extremes cannat possibiy be Tm the case of the “vontrary two,” statements are mate sbout ‘things which exist at the opposite ends ofa seale. This scale has ‘continsous variations between the two extremes, Therefor, the tse of “either/or” language and thinking forces us into a false Genial of the existence of the middle ground or continuous variations which extend from one extreme tothe other. Finally, there is the maté-valued approach, Except for the situation of the “contradictory two," this isthe most desirable approach to logical thought and action. The multivalued Approach searches out differences, gradations, and alternatives It enables us to evaluate every situation anew and to refuse to let previous judgments close oor minds to the uniqueness ‘each particular ease. This approach is the bass of the seientii method ‘Some examples of two-talued orientation show us just how dangerous this kind of thinking can be. These examples should make the advantages of the multivalued approach quite trident Many of the terms we use in the English language are what wwe call polar terms, Something is either hot oF cold, ight or tvrong, good of ad, smart or dumb. We ae either Democrats or Repubidean, labor or management, guilty or innocent. The vse fof Such terms implies that only exiremes exist. Yet water may bbe lukewarm, tepid, room heat, or many other degrees of temperature between the polar extremes of hot and cold. But stil we use the ferms hot and col, often implying that there is nothing between these two, By doing this we oflen preclude the 1ssbility of eashing agreement with thers, and may aetally Therese the opportune for isgreement to occ ven our nopolar terms tend not tobe taly neutral: Many of iin seat lean foward ae extreme or the other. What term would you tse to describe the exact middle point of tempersture between hot and col? "Tepitfabout a close ax vee'ein get, and tills Sight tendency toward hot, With Thea of enti. frm ich ot neue and ‘medians® ou language does not suply us with any terms to ‘express a middle point. pe ~ A New York Times Linotype operator inadvertently created such a word one day. The story which appeared in the paper mncerned a certain Public official who is considered to be~ot So said the story~a''pood” security risk. The word "pood” angles in mid-air between good and poor: not t00 good, not (oo. poor. Many things fall Into this category. Shows, sports, -Soking, health parties, and so many others may be “ood.” Svch a word offers tremendous possibilities. To retum to the dangers of using the twowalued approach, we can conclude that this approach: 1. "Pushes us further away from others than we are or ought to be in our disagreements with them, Males it difficult to take a moderate stand on an ise. Forces us to polar extremes. ‘Males it difficult for us to tum to a third alternative oF possibility. 5. Closes us off from further means of problem-solving KEEP YOUR FEET ON THE GROUND calicng that, within the framework of our own perpec- st ony me othe ome i whch ir Ss now realy fo demand the concept of absraction, We ‘hulse how hshonder abstraction sen cts sto misvauate ‘Words in our lmpunge may be ated to represent fact stern evel, some more specif, some more general. Atte ‘erro employed becomes les spect, we may hk of 5s line bier in level of sbstraction. Te wont "hat {Ge Stampin faty ape. The word mitre” ie more ‘cect refersto-man things besides chai. And the fem ‘nanufactued em stil more abst 20 Low-onder abstractions are_words that are specific and onarete, They have direct reference to an individual thing in the real world ata given time. Highonder abstractions are words that are ambiguous or vague, They may have many meanings fand interpretations, the number increasing as the level of Sbstraction becomes higher. Contrary to popular belie, high ‘onder abstractions are not meaningless. Rather, they are 100 ‘meaningful ecause they can mean all things to all men. "As the order of abstraction becomes higher, the possibility of projection and misunderstanding increases. ““Federalese" the terminology in which many bureaucratic irectves are’ written, provides us with some outstanding iustrations of high-order abstraction leading fo chaos. It bowed low to the ments of plain English, however, when & New York City plumber wrote to the Bureau of Standards that he found hydrochloric ackd good for cleaning out {logaed drain pipes. He received the following esponse from the Bureaus “The efficacy of hydrochloric acid ts indisput- thle, but the corrosive esdue is incompatible with metallic permanence.” The plumber wrote back that he was lad that {he Bureau agreed with him. To this the, Bureau wrote nother reply "We cannot assume responsibilty forthe pro- uction of toxic and noxious residue with hydrochloric acid ‘ind suggest that you use an alternative procedure.” By return mail, the planer again expressed his pleasure that the fpovernment thought his idea Wasa good one. In desperation, {he Bureau broke down and wrote to the plumber in plain English. Their final message was, “Don't use hydrochloric sci it eats ell out of the pipes.” It doesn’t take much to imagine the catastrophes that could arise from continued ute of sich high-order abstractions. Where ‘do we find these abstractions? Certainly, they appear often in peaches, orders, directives, and other forms of communication lied in industry and the government. Here, for example, is “the Speech for All Occasions,” which could be given any where, any time, to anyone Mr. Chairman, ladies, and and undeserved privilege to addres such an audience as see tpefore me. At no previous time inthe history of civilization have greater problems confronted and challenged the ingen {ty of man’s intellect than now, Let us look around us. What ado we see on the horizon? What forces are at work? Whither re we drifting? Under what mist of clouds does the future Sand obscure? My friends, casting aside the raiment ofall Taman speech, the crucial test for the solution is the sheer per orceul. application of those immutable laws which Towa the cortidor of time have alvays guided the hand of fan, groping ts it were, for some faint beacon light. Without {hese great vial prneiies, we are but puppets responding to hhumat Fancy, falling entirely to grasp the hidden meaning of Jr aIL We must address ourselves to these questions which pret for answers and solution. The isue cannot be avokded ‘here they stand It is wpon you and you, and yes, even upon ine, that the yoke of responsibilty falls, What then is our {uiy? Shall we continue to drift? No! With a the emphasis oF hy being, I hurt back the message, “No.” Drifting must Stop. We must press onward and upward toward the ultimate oi to which all must aspire. But T cannot conclude my Roearks, ‘deat. friends, without touching. briefly upon = Subject which I know is steeped in your buried conscience. 1 {fer to thet spirit hich gleams from the eyes of a new-born babe; that animetes the tawdry masses, that sways all the hosts of humanity, past and prevent. Without this enengizing principle, all comimerce and industry are hushed and will een fron this earth as surely as the crimson sun follows the elden sunshine. Mark you, Ido not scek to unduly alarm or Shares the mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters gathered before me in this vast assembly. But 1 would indeed be octeant to the high resolve which T made as a youth if {did ot at this time and at this place, and with the full elizing Sense of responsibility which I astume, publicly declare and ‘Sifim my dedication and my concentration to the etemal principles and receipts of simple, ordinary, commonplace [istice. For what, in the lst analysis, i justice? Whence docs come? Where dacs it go? Isit ponderable? It isnot. Justice isnone ofthese things. And yet, on the other hand iti all of these things combined. While [cannot fell you what justice Fh this much | can tell you. That without the eneirling arms Uijustice, without her shield, without her guardianship, this Ship of state wil sail through uncharted seas, narrowly avoid- {na rocks and shallows, Neaded inevitably to the harbor of Clarity, Justice, justice, justice... fo thee we pay homage. To thee we dedicate our laurels of hope. Before thee, we n kaeel in adoration, mindful of thy great power, mute before thy inscrutable destiny. aa Audiences usualy bust into gles of applause when this speech ts delivered, Bul, what specially, does it mean? Nothing! Ht 20 fll of high-order abstractions that we an Droectany mcaning we wish into The speaker eer cpt ay to Justice. Bur what is ustie? He himoct says he cannot fell you what iti. The margin for misunderstanding of this Speech is tremendous because ils abtrct, vague Terms present The that helps to pinpoints meaning. This i why genera semanticists urge people to keep thei fet on the ground verb Iyenths means ving. deta, quoting. fats and figures, Mentoning dates and» places, focusing on the sible, the udibie, and the measurable, and refering fo direct experiences father than to hazy thoughts, vague opinions, and general ides USE INDEXING AND DATING “To be resonable and intelligent, ou thinking and talking must tthe facts nthe word of ety. The worl of realy Yast complex structure, constantly i sate of change. But Surlunguage ofa diferent nature, Tt implies thatthe wor Static and‘unchangng. It doesnot rele the chase which take place inthe world around us This discrepancy between th tature ofthe eal world andthe nator of ox language ca ex Unto micrfuston If we tend fo accept words as being tu tepresentations of the fas ge ly spotant raters of the el wo onidentity (or difeences) and proces (oF change). Consider Iii ie characentos A fare kno thre emo tho things nthe world of realty that are Anica Identical {wing ae not iden in al respects, Two pless of snd ot (0 ‘Sowtlakes ave not identical, We can think about wens, ot wre cannot fin it tn other words differences are characteristic Se suctre of realy, while snares ae ereted by the ma itt And amit ae an sens attend (get srs in our langage, We se the singe sb “Demo” or example 0 reer to milions of peopl, cach af whom cast a Demoertic vote inthe elton. Yet eich 0 {hee ba umigely diferent person who has his ows oun About labor, vl eh and lca polite sues. 23How can we overcome this tendeney of our language to imply similarity? How can we gear our communication and behavior to the differences which observation reveals? In other Words, how can we make our language fit the structure of reality? We can do this by applying an indexing principle to our language. That is, we ean point up differences by adding a sub- Script oF index number to the specific objects covered by a sence term, For instance, worker 1 is not worker 2, boss Tis fot boss 2, and situation Ts not situation 2. By doing this, we ‘ange the structure of our language to fit the word of reality: {look at the misevaluation that occurs when we fal to do his. Samuel Johnson said, “1 am willing to love all mankind, xcept at American,” A man in Milwaukee who, after walking Up tO & policeman and socking him on the jaw, sid, “I don’t like poligemen. Thad all this inside of me. Now I guess i's feleased.” Theres the ease of the small boy in New Britain, Connecticut, who marched up 10 a department store Santa Claus, punched him in the nose, and yelled, “That's for not bringing me a bicycle last year." Finaly, ther is the young lady who suddenly rushed up toa stranger and started beating him ‘with her umbrella yelling, “How dare you remind me of some- fone T hate!" The rewards of seeing differences are great. In any field scicnce, business, industry, government-the demand is for {individ who can see differences. A man's earning power is fften commensurate with his eapacity to produce new ides, 0 take chances-in other words, to think and act differently ‘he second characteristic of the teal world, the fact that iis in ¢ state of change, aso requires e form of indexing for reor- nizing time differences, Everything in the World is constantly ‘hanging, Some of these changes occur atthe sub-microscopic level and are not visle to the naked eye. Thus, the chair you fre sting on is changing, the desk you work at is changing, and {You too are changing (take look ata picture of yourself taken 20 years ago). Science 1846 1s not science 1962, military ‘defense 1948 is not military defense 1962. By dating things, we indicate that we are aware of the differences between them at fiver times in history. When we date our evalutions in this ‘way, we will Keep ou thinking inline with the changing facts of| reality. The Following episode shows how necessary i Is Tor us| to ve-valuate situations continually 4 During a heavy flood little girl was perched on top of & house with a small boy. AS they watched articles float along ‘they noticed a desby hat on the water. Presently the hs tured and came back, then tunned again and went down stream. Alter it went away, it tured and came back again ‘The little gil said, "Did you see that derby? Fist it goes downstream, then it tums and comes back.” The boy replied, “Oh, that’s father. He ssid, ‘Come hell or high water, 'm going to cut the eras today!" How often do we run our business of our own lives in this same manner—by refusing fo change our ways of thinking (0 fit the changing facts. One of America's most important philos- fophers, ‘Charles Sanders Peirce, std, "The scientific. spirit requires a man to be at all times ready to dump his whole ‘artload of lies the moment experience is against him.”‘THE IMPORTANCE OF COMMUNICATION Section Five 1 was pleasantly surprised recently when I met an old friend fof mine, a philosophy professor, who immediately remarked “You kiow, you certainly are in the right field. Everywhere you go you hear people in business or education talking about “This came aa suprise because thie profesor has een mos critical of General Semantics and the emphasis on commune tion in earlier books and discussions. As most people ase when others agree with them, I was happy to see that this heretofore Critical profesor “ha finaly seen the light!” ‘Almost all of the executives that T lecture 10 oF come i contact with agree that communication is one of the most important areas in business and industry and that thelr Job involves communication, in one way or another, 85 or 90% of the lime. And yet, there are dreadfully few courses on com ‘munication in the Schools of Business and Inlstrial Relations (Centers at our leading colleges and universities. Lam not talking about courses in public speaking and letter writing. While these courses are important, Iam referring to the job that we ate ontinually engaged in. And when this kind of 2 course is presented, we invariably get the response, “I have taken communication courses before, But nothing lke this. | dhousht that i was going to be another course in letter wnting.” ‘There are some general communication principles thal spply to all Kinds of communication which ae related to the scenic method or the methods of science, These are general principles that can be applied to human communication. The first, and one of the most important. isthe pause, delay and analysis in our communicating and. behavior Manyrmisunderstandings and disagreements result from an automatic, Uiger-like response to someone else's words, statements oF behavior If we could but pause and delay a lite longer than we normally doa two-second activity delay—we would not hive Some of the arguments and disagreements in which we find ‘ourselves, One of the most common problems in communication is jumping to conclusions or acting on inferences as Uf they were factual The sclenist knows the difference between his infer ences and statements of fact and we should too, Ttis the fasiest thing in the World to pass off inferences a i they were facta, bu ic takes litle more wisdom fo know the difference between the two and behave accordingly. Anotier common harrier to effective communication isthe closed mind, the "knoweitall” We are all subject to this “all nest” orientation, in one way or another, for itis extremely ‘bile IC keeps us from asking question, trom observing, from Saying “I don't know. Let's see.” We are all subject to its subtlety of not asking questions when we should, of not listen- ing co the other person from his point of view and refusing to change our ways of thinking or behaving when the changing Facts indicate that we should And, it appears that our educational institutions have not done very go0d jab either in helping us to recognize and liminate. this “allnest” orientation, For we find st among Ph.D.'s, M.D., among men in positions of authority, in all fareas adn all degrees. We seem to need special training in the ‘alization of the limitations of our knowledge, in not assuming ‘more knowledge than we really have, in the ability to say, “I ont know... leU's see.” When we are able to atk questions, Wwe can get on the other person's channel of communication, Bus, too often we do not ask questions, We tend to assume more knowledge’ than we really have, which leads toward ‘misunderstanding, disagreements, accidents and other kinds of problens The problem of misunderstanding. is one of the most ‘common and pernicious. The amount of tine and money that is ‘vasted due to misunderstandings and otherwise poor commeni- ation (s dificult to estimate. Bue its enormous indeed, Why ‘do people have misunderstandings? There are many reasons, of ‘course, but lt us mention usta few. ‘One of the causes is the assumption on the part of the speaker that the listener understands him, Having spoken speakers offen unconsciously assume that the listener under Stands him. He, therefore, falls ¢0 aid the listener in geting on his channel of communication by asking him if he understands. Listeners, foo. unconsciously assume that they understand the speaker, They fail o ask the speaker, "What do you mean?” for "Joe, this what you meant, or wanted me to do” ‘There. ate. two unconscious assumptions that lead toward misunderstandings. Fist, we unconsciously assume that others tie words as we do, that others mean what we would mean if te were doin the talking Second, we assume that meanings re in words, that words contain meaning. But, words don't mean PEOPLE mean. Meanings are not in words, they are In people [As the famous philosopher, Charles Sanders Peirce sit, “You {do not get meaning, you tespond with meaning” ‘So, both the speaker and the listener must be conditioned to ask questions Usually one question will be suicent. Bu, ii ‘the assumption that we do understand when we don't tha gts tus into so many problems in communication. ‘There is one last assumption that is, perhaps, the most unfor- tunate ofall and is a major cause of the poor communication that we find today. This i the assumption that we don’t need to improve our communication. Although most people, espe ally top executives, realize the importance of communication, ‘some of them do not relly fee it fo be important or, they fel they do not need to improve their communication. These tend to be the ones who need it the most! ‘So, the fist problem in communication s getting people 10 realize=to really believe—that itis an important problem. Only then are they ready to improve their communication, t0 work fon themselves. For, improvement in communication does not ‘ome from without, but from within,UNDERSTANDING AND BEING UNDERSTOOD* Section Six Let me ask one question, How important is communication in your work? How much of commuuniation do You do on your 0b? Studies show that upwards of 85% of what executives dois 2 process of communication, | tried to find out someti about the communication structure in your company” omething about the working of communication. We find penerally a tremendous lack of concern about communication tnd the teaching of communication in business and industy What I would like to do this morning isto present four berets to effective communication and to show your little bit of the fechnique that we use in teaching, Lam not only concemned with teaching individuals intellectually, some of the principles (of communication. The important thing is, how ein we. be trained that way? There are at least (Wo diferent kinds of Iknowledge—by direct experience and by second hind reports In terms of education, there is big difference between know. ing something intellectually or actualy Behaving in terms othe principles. From my point of view. we do not know comin cation until we actually get it into aur nervous systems. There fore, the question is how can we train and not just fexch, How can we train executives or individuals generally to Behave sn the ferms of the principles of general semantics or of sommiinics tion? Now I have a little quiz here—1 will give you a couple of questions just to indicate the technique of teaching or taining {used to give this litle quiz that I made about eight years ago before al of my communication courses und then al the ch of ‘Spencer tan Internationa Management Confrence. athe course, One of the young ladies said, “You know, this isthe only course Ihave ever taken in which T knew les at the end of the course than T did at the beginning.” Now what does that Iican” We will see later on, Why did we have some of the ‘misundetsandings in the movie? You will see that some of us fst ourselves into difficulty because We sometimes assume more Knowledge than we really have In this process of communication we cannot assume too much, Baseally what we try to-do is what we try to do in psychiatry and psychotherapy. ‘This is why, in-my particular oure in communication, itis a combination of general seman tics, psychology, sociology, semantics, even psychoanalysis or psyohiatry, because to be effective communicators we must Be, Dbviowsly, good mental health. Basically, what we want Individuals to da is fo be conscious of thelr assumptions! In bther words, asking individuals, "What are you assuming?” What assumptions are you making about the other individual? A-of us continue #0 make assumptions at all times, We make 'ssumplions while we ate driving a car. Infact these are some of the principles of general semantics that we are applying. at Northwestern University’s Traffic Institute. We find that the causes of aceidents afe not 50 much mechanical failures but failures in human evaluarion-wvays of thinking oF Ways Of sizing up a situation We teach a course in Communication Skils in Industry atthe Industtil Relations Center at the University of Chicago from the point of view of semantics and general semantics. Now, ‘many of you have heard the word semantis, but how many of {You know wht the word means? It isthe study of "meanings ff words” and the history of meaning changes. How about feneral semantics. Have any of you heard of general semantics? ‘This i « comparatively new science, Actually it was created by 1 Polish scientist named. Alffed Korzybski i 1933 in a lage book called Setence and Sanity. This is the study of the rela tionship between language, thought and human behuvior. Now, 's there & relationship between the kind of language we use and ‘our ways Of thinking? Ts there? Is there & relationship between the kind of language we use, the thinking we do and the human | ‘bchavior manifested? In some respects these principles are old Sif, but they ae just being touched upon today Lt us make an analysis of human behavior. There are usually at Jest four phases involved in human behavior. (1) there is & 2 happening which leads to a (2) nervous reaction which leads to (G) hnman evaluation later, which in tum usually leads (0 (4) lalk and/or act, All kinds of human behavior, except a simple teflex action that I will talk about willbe concerned with these 4 phases. For example, I drop the craser, Ths i the happening. ‘There is also a nervous impact and then there is 2 human eval tion, a way of thinking or taking a point of view. Were there an Awful lt of evaluations going on in the movie? Were thers an awful lot of assumptions made, points of view being taken? And While the boss did not think he was communicating, he Was communicating. There is a new science which is called kinesics Which i the study of bodily movements. In fat all of you are ‘communicating to me right now. This i called non-verbal com ‘munication How many of you were taught in schoo! that words have ‘meaning? Most of us were. May Tsay that ts this unconscious assumption that leads toward misunderstanding. Iwill amply that. This is why from this point of view of general semantics, a relatively new study, we are concerned with the effect that words have on human behavior and our ways of thinking. So, we will be concerned primarily with human evaluation your way of thinking, my way of thinking, in all situations. Is st proper or sit improper? We will be concerned, in our course on ‘communication, in taining men in what constitutes proper fevaluation-in making our evaluations or our ways of thinking Tit the facts, fi the structure of the world of realty. Actually, if ‘we think about it, we have an awful lot of miscualuations misevaluations which do not ft the Facts. Twill only point out & few of these because T do not have time, obviously, to give demonstrations orto give too many illustrations. ‘Now, what do we mean by a basic pattem of misevaluation ‘ora misunderstanding? Again, let me illustrate with these litle {quizzes or little demonstrations because, 1o me, thie is one of the best ways of doing it. I have a picce of chalk and here is blackboard. Tell me to do something that T cannot possibly ‘misunderstand and T will show you that 1 can misunderstand ny directive that you give me. Have you ever given wht You thought was a simple directive sand, for one reason or another, it was misunderstood? fam only ilustrating that the moment that you and luse words, don't be surprised if we will have misunderstanding Okay, this is one kind of a misevaluation, At the sk of ‘confusing you too muck, let me ask you to do-one other simple 3kind ofan illustration, because it has very profound effects on four ways of thinking. Will you pinch your finger and tell me Wwhat you fell. You suy you felt “pain,” "pressure," “the other finger,” ete, This man says that he felt “silly.” Allright. You sir, you say that you cannot tell me what you felt. Good! ‘Let me say one thing. | am extremely pleased. This man has learned fester than any student I have ever met. I very often, however, get this within the fist hour of instruetion, They very often change their way of thinking 2s you will se. This is good Now, notice what Tam talking about. Iam talking about the base patterns of misevaluation. Are these words what you fel Tam saying that this is not-what you felt. Let me go one further-you cannot tell me what you felt. [il go one further than that, No matter what you say anything is, it isn't! Are you confused? Now the only reason I introduce my courses in this ‘way i because confusion i the beginning of learning, In other words you are giving me words that stand for the nonverbal fesling right? Now, what you fell inside of your skin was not the words-right? This is not what you felt. What Wwe are tying to illustrate is the important fact dhat you and 1 live in the world of not words oF the non-verbal world. If we are ‘olng to have proper evaluation we must separate the world of| Words and the world of notwords-the non-verbal world and the World of words that stand Tor the nonverbal world. Basical- ly, what we are teaching is the application of the scientific method. To what degree do we try to make the world of reality fit the words that we use and the stereotypes inside of our ‘heads eather than trying to make our language fit the structure ‘of the world of reality. Here is one example to illustrate the Gifference between words and things. Not too long ago there ‘was-a lady down in Florida who was having a party fora group of friends. After the dinner, 2 lady came up to her and sai, “My hushand enjoyed that Tood very much-would you please tell me what we had.” The hostes tured tothe lady and sad, “"Yes-you just had the pleasure of eating snake steaks.” Upon hearing that she had the unfortonste experience of seeing her food forthe second time. ‘Now the question is what was she responding to? Was she responding to the non-verbal facts or was she responding to the Words and verbal asociations. The general question is, t0 what degree is your thinking or my thinking, your decision, etc. based upon a response to fats ori it vi oF in terms of words, 34 verbal association, stereotypes, efe.? We could spend several hours on this one concept alone ‘The man who developed this system, Allred Korzybski, asked the question, “Why do we have so many misunderstandings? Why do we have so many wars? Whats the difference between insane people and the sine?” What do “insane” people do” Often, they try to make the world of reaity fit what in their heads) How about sane people? Where do we find sanity at i best? Take engineers, take scentists-what do they do? They analyze the structure of the world of reaity-then they ty © rake their language, their formulae, their thinking. ft the Structure of the world of reality. The “insane” people reverse the process, Then Kor2ybski asked the question, “How about {you and me? What do we do?" We are certainly not insane, bt Wwe are nol too sane sometimes, either So, Korzybski called you land me, not sane oF insane, but unsane. What do we mean by that? We mean thatthe difference between insanity and sanity is not one of king, but af degree, We, too, make an aif ot oF projections, inferences and Jump to conclusions which are exactly the same a insane people although not nearly the egree Will you take your pencils and paper? 1 will not ask for the answers, but I would oly like to indicate to you hove a comm ication course i run and what Tam after, Lam sre that of ‘you will got it right away. Notice Lam after the assumptions of these people in the story, Let me read you a shot story. Then T will ask 6 questions and will you answer true, false or don't Know: ‘im Jones was standing on the comer waiting for 3 bus. The ‘comer was dark and lonely. Jim knew that many robbers were faround that neighborhood because he was familar with it While he was waiting for a bus a man sneaked up behind him and hit him on the back. Jim whirled around quickly rs! he Socked the man with a hard right squarely on the jaw All sight Either true~false~or don’t know. {() The bus Jim was waiting for was late (2) Jim was right in hitting the man before he robbed him. 3) Such intelligent action will always result in capture more robbers, (4) This robber should have hit Fim Jones harder before he had a chance to turn around. 35(5) The robher landed on the side wale and did not succeed inhis attempt, (©) Jim should not have stuck the man. Notice what we are getting at, We havea situation, we have @ nervous impact, we have an evaluation (taking a point of view, Sising up the Situation, « way of thinking) and finally talk undo, as it this ease, act. Lam not only concerned with the ‘csumptions of Jim but of all of us wha have different assump- tions. This s what we are geting (1) The bus Jim was waiting for was late—don’t know? Notice what an interesting discussion you can have with some- fone who would answer true, If we would answer true~we may hve the tendency of projecting into situations things which are not there sndjor acting on inferences instead of fac. (2) Jim was right in hitting the man before he robbed him. So you tink itis a misevaluaton in hiting the guy-—in turning round and swatting him? He should have hit him? Who should hhave hit whom? T see-if you are standing on adark corner and someone comes up and hits you on the back the proper evaluae tion is to {um around and sock him. You think this is proper evaluation? This Ts one of the things we will see. A hit to one ‘man isa tap to another. How hard isa hit? So to this one-don't (G3) Such intelligent action will always result in capturing more robbers. False? Don’t knove? Was the action intelligent? Notice how you will have different interpretations of such an ambiguous statement oF question. am asking you todo some- thing that you shouldn't do in the fist place-but only a8 a leaching technique. Obviously, you all see what [am getting a, The individuals that have a tendency of answering true, tru, {nie of oF inferring too mcs (A) This robber should have hit Jim Jones harder before he had chance to tuum atound. Let me ask the question is this a robber? You say the question said so. Let me point this out. 1 Said answer in terms of the story—right? Let me illustrate what 1 am taking about. Lats visulize that we have a glass container vt bottle with ship inside of it. The question is how do we {ke the ship ost. You can’t break the bottle. Thee is no string attached so that you can make it smaller and pull it out, ou an’ sil #€ out because the bottle is s0 big and the end is thi big. You can't burn it-you have to take itout in one piece. We hve an answor here-we take it out the way we put iin, This 6 ‘man asks, “Can you say the hell with it?" Yes you can if you don't want the answer. This s very often what you can do in all kinds of situations if you don’t want the answer. How do you get it out~the same way you put it in, “Poot” | just took it out! I put tin verbally, Just took it out verbally What 1am illustrating is the difference between words and things. By my saying that he isa robber does not make him a robber. What lam trying to show you i the tremendous differ- fence between the world of words and the world of not words 15) The robber landed on the sidewalk and did not succoed inhi attempt. Don't know? Allright (6) Jim should not have struck the man, It is very dificult situation obviously. But one of the reasons that men and women get killed is because they resist too quickly and the ther person might well have 2 gun or Knife. 1am basically Saying that they are losing their heads by responding. too ‘quickly and ehis isthe frst kindof principle we teach for effec: tive communication ‘We must consider this in terms of three different kinds of principles or reactions, there are three different kinds of human Feactions (1) there i a reflex action. Lam not going to put this allon the board because actually i will take too much tine, but the reflex action is the kind of inborn reaction that we have, You shine slight into the pupil ofthe eye and what happens? It closes, gets smaller, Okay, this ia rellex action. I is inborn, i's ‘Quick, is immediate, it's automatic, there isnot much that you and I'can do to change it although psychologists say that some Feflex actions can be modified to a degree. When you eat food you have some gastrointestinal changes, but the import thing is that itis quick and the stimulus controls the eacto ‘The kind of reaction that we ate concemed within commint ‘ation is what we would call signal reaction. Now whereas the Fellex action is not learned or conditioned iti inborn~a signal ‘reaction i also quick, impulsive, automatic, but again the difer- fence is that this is conditioned or leaned. We find that this tendency to respond too quickly is one ofthe important factors fof misunderstanding, arguments and communication failures. For instance. “A lady in our town who may be best descebed as a perpetual talker was asked by one of her long suffering neigh bors if she ever thought about what she was going to say before saying it. “Why no" said the lady solemnly-"how on ea ‘ould L know what I think about a thing until ve heard what | have to ay on the subject” Foere is another example of this signal reaction, In driving, for example if we ate on a slippery road and if someone runs out in front of the car what isthe impulsive thing to do? Slam on the fake. Is thet proper evaluation in that situation? The safety fxperis aso fell we that if we ate walking through very busy thoroughfare and cars are going every which way and someone yells to you, “Look out," Hf you immediately jump to one side Sou will get hit 3 out of S times. I you pause, delay, analy7e tnd observe you will gt hit only 2 out ofS times! Tar going to conclude with this one example. This isa very ‘quick and imputsve ation. "A Houston bus driver was trying to make a tum down toven but'a woman driver, who was apparently unaware of the bus, ‘was ‘moving. info a dangerous position. The driver whistled Shuply, The woman driver stopped and looked, and the bus driver jockeyed his bus through the opening. Asked by 2 passe: ct wity he hod whistled instead of honking the driver replied, "EXhout half of the women drivers won't pay attention to some fone honking, but there aint dame in Heuston that won't stop fd look when she hears a guy whistle!” “This too isa reflextike reaction a stimulus and immediate response. We will se why this signal reaction wil lead toward Allother kinds of misevaluations. ‘Basically, forget about the telex action because there is not rich we can do about it, We are concerned with (2) and (3). Signal reactlons are quick, impulsive, an automatic Kind of reac- tion, This docs fot mean that swe should not make quick flecisions, Very often you and I must make quick decisions, Sbviousy. Lean the distinction between a quick decision and {snap judement, where we assume too many things, where we jump t0 conclusions, ete, The 3rd kind of reaction is what we {ul the symbol reation. This is where you have the pause, the ‘elay, the observation and an analysis, before you respond. The ‘question may_be rais, "Well, isn't this what js meant by the Sign “Think?” Many of you have this sign. To me, and only because I am trained inthis particular kind of reaction, the ‘word pause is more operational than the word “think.” To me the word think is very ambiguous when I think about “Think.” What Uo you mean by “Think”? The word “pause” tells me what fo do or not to do. It isa litte bit more operational, but "gsin this may be just a semantic quibble. “The reason 1 put thie principle atthe beginning of my course is thit the fendeney to fespond too quickly is an important 3 vatiale factor in misunderstanding. If you and I could only learn to pause and delay for only 2 seconds longer than we noninally do, if we can pause or delay to ty to analyze moze facts, we would have ntore of the variables of the situato With this kind of a symbol reaction, oF pause or delay, would ive be pressed into inaction or indecision? Not at all. You and ‘ust make decisions -we must act. We try to gel as many of the Yariable factors ae posable, Do we (ry and Wait unt all the facts are in? Obviously not. Your behavior and my behavios is based on degrees of probability, never on certainly. because ve fan never be certain about anything. One of the dangers of this kkind of signal reaction is that it makes us have what we cal habitual reactions, We become creatures of habit. Now is habit sod of bad? We can talk ahout habit No. Tang habit No. > ‘That is why I am using No. | and No. 2 because very ofter words can mean many, many different things as we will see. The First $00 words in the dictionary have over 14,000 dictionary meanings. This is one of the reasons why we have misundes Sanding. Habit No. I-lot us eal this “good.” By habit No. 1 mean the kind of habitual behavior that saves time and enesiy then you do a job in a particular way. But the kind of habit that | am concemed with the one involved with a signal kind of tection, isa bad kind of habit. It is the kind of habit in which ‘we do jab in the sume old way and ifthe situation changes we {> not change our ways of thinking 10 fit the new fact or changing sitution. Drivers of alzplanes sometimes get them= Selves into lot of trouble, In fact this recent accident, if you! hhave reed some of the details on that, state that it was case by the inability of the pilot to change his old ways of flying the ‘old type of plane to the new jet. Similarly with automobile Grivers: When you and Late driving aca, the road is slippery land someone runs out in front of the car, what i the impulsive thing to do? Jam on the byakes? Is that proper evaluation in that stuation? This is where habit No, 21s bad. May Tsay { don’t have. time to talk about the tremendously important Principles of change. You and I should always he psysholozics: Iy or emotionally ready to change our ways of thinking 0} behavior ff the facts dictate. The structure of the work! of reality # change oF process. Basically, what this kind of orien tion does isto teich us how to make our ways of thinking (it the structure of the world of reality If T were to ask you-is this able changing? It is setting folder! Are you changing? What Lam basically siying is that she eystnucture of the wold of realty is that of processor change. Leave the table here for 20 years-it won't be the same. Take a look at a picture of yourself 20 or 30 years ago. You will all have verification of change. If we are going to make our evalua- ‘ions fit the changing world obviously we must change our Ways of thinking to Tt the facts I can think of no more important principle or your job oF in business or industry, What happens {o business or industry if they do not keep up to date? Here isan example ofa bad kind of signal reaction, a habitual reaction inapproptate for @ new situation. "We enlisted men ‘were a bat tn a hotly contested baseball game with our officers Winen private hit what looked like a single to short right Geld Instead of stopping at first, however, he foolishly stated a wild dash for second. Realizing then that he couldn't make it he scrambled back toward fist. Now he was being chased in a run down between a lieutenant playing first and a colonel playing Second. It looked like sure out, but just as the lieutenant Nipped the hall back to the colonel, the private snapped t0 siention, saluting the colonel, Automatically the colonel Snapped the salute Back and mufed the eatch!™ This i a kind of stupid and inappropriate reaction in this particular situation. In other words, in signal reaction, the Stimulus controls your behavior, wheres in the symbol reaction You have the pause, you have the delay, you have the observa: thon, you have the analysis and then you have the reaction, You control the situation. The situstion does not control you. One ofthe best examples ean think of is the Orson Welles man from Mars broadcast. Remember that? [just ead in the paper itey tad @ similar incident in England. This is what I mean by misevaluation people Who confuse fact with fiction, To what ogee, again, can We make Our evaluations fit the non-verbal ‘yond? Notice how this tendency to respond too quickly can cad to unjustified inferences. "In Vancowver fo take a new job, 2 young Woman was searching for a room. She answered several us, but each time the vacancy had already been filled. Then, on 2 suburban street, she saw a "Room for Rent sign and dashed in at the same time asa young man obviously on the same mision, The landlady fooked at them end sakd “We don't take married couples" and promplly shut the door. The young woman looked at the man, blushed and smiled, and rang the door bell sgain The young lady then told the landlady “But you don’t under stand-I am not maried to this man.” ‘Te landlady gave her & black look and this time slammed the door in her facel™ 0 Do secretaries make inferences about the boss? How often do bosses make snap judgments toward subordinates? Or workers make inferences. shout their hosses? George Santayana, the Tamous philosopher, has said, “The aim of education is the condition of suspended judgment on everything.” How often do Yyou oF | assume more knowledge than we realy have? We will fee that this is one of the reasons why we don’t listen why we can't listen because we make up our minds to9 quickly. In our ‘Courses we have police chiefs or army officers a the very fist day some of them communicate to me-they come to class and ‘communicate non-erbally as if t0 say, “Okay boy, show me Something I don’t already Know!” Sometimes we gt university ‘students with this kind of an attitude and they are disappointed because they don’t lear one thing the whole semester. The closed mind is one of the barriers to effective communication, Te is not because students can't learn. It is because of the attitude they bring Finally, here is one example of how a ‘symbol reaction leads to longevity. One 90 year old man was Asked “What was the contributing factor toward your long lie?” He replied, “Well, when my wife and I got marred we used to argue alot and so we decided that when we got mad T Would take a walk around the block and s0 one of the reasons for my long life is plenty of fresh air and exercise.” This would be the fist principle—to pause and delay. It does us precious little good if'we understand it only intellectually. How can you and 1, and T include mys at all times, low can we manifest these ‘principlesget them into our nervous systems. Ths is so {important for all levels in busines and industry ‘Let me start a new principle. You hear something jingling ‘Can you make a statement of fact that I have money in my pocket? Or can you make a statement of fact that I have car Keys? I make a Statement that if I push tis switch down the lights will go out. Now my question i, "Can I make a statement ‘of fact?” They may go out” All ight, lets try it and see. IFT try it and see-then can I'make a slatement of fact? What Lam ‘saying is that thore isan important difference between a state- ‘ment of fact and one involving an inference. How often do you dnd I try to pase off inferences as if they were statements of fact or how often do other people act on inferences a i they ‘were statements of fact? Did we se lot of inferential behavior in that movie? So the second principle is training ourselves in knowing the difference between statements of fact and inte fence, Imiade the statement that iF I push the switeh the light 4will go off. Is it purely an inference or a assumption? Now let ‘me push the switch up. Now can we make # statement of Fact that I pushed the switch and the light went out. Tht is some ‘thing. ove see-right? Let-me very quickly thon consider a tremendously important principle-what are. the differences between a statement of fact anda statement involving an infer 1 should lke to consider two different kinds of statements, A statement of Tact (by statement of fact we mean a descriptive Statement) and a statement involving an Inference (by this we ‘mean an opinion, an assumption, te). What are some of the differences oF criteria of statements of fact and statements involving an inference? (1) A statement of fact can only be ‘made after observation. A statement of fact can only be made aller you have observed something, whereas an inference can be ‘made anyiime. Before, during oF after observation or, usually the ease, with no observation a all A statment of fact, by this T mean ‘a description, ean only be made after we have observed something. Obviously we cannot describe something Until we have observed it 2) and these are the two most impor, tant characterities of this-No. 2 is especially important, A Statement of fact stays with what can be observed. Did the secretary make some inferences about the boss in that phone conversion? Did she act asi they were true, as if they were statements of fact? As we will se, one of the reasons why we 2 into so many difficulties, not only in communication but in human relations, is because we s0 often jump to conclusions We need more of this kind of training in communication because communication lies at the hear of coontination and cooperation. This is why Isay we underestimate the importance of communication. The more we have big military orpanisa, tions, the more we have big busines, big zovernment, big industry, the more important will be communication, This i obviously the only. way that you can have: men working together in coordinating ther activities Now for the second characteristic of an inference. A state ‘ment involving en inference goes beyond observation. What do 1 mean by that? ICT say it isa statement of fact that T have ‘money inside of my pocket, ths goes beyond what we have ‘observed, This involves an inference an assumption. Now Lam not saying that we should not make inferences. We should make inferences-we do make inferences. Your life and my ife-our 42 lives are lived on the inferential level, but wisdom begins wien we know the difference between the two. The food executive the good scientist, they are the men who know the difference between the two. For example. “My mother rented 8 ro0. to two boys whom she did not know. She was a little worried ot first but in a few days she stopped fretting. They must be nice boys she explained. They have towels from the ¥M.CA" Ths secoms lke @ statement of fact andy a8 we will see, one of the easons why we get into so mich difficulty i because thete no grammatical difference between statement of fact and one involving an inference. “They must be nice boys because thy have towels from the Y.M.C.A." What js the statement of fact, we can make about this? They have towels from the YMC.Athat is a fact? They lifted the towels from the YIMC.A\—that's an infereneethey might have bought them right? Notice, there ia sharp and important difference between te two. If you think about most of the misunderstanding nd ‘roubles between people it is because they confuse inferences with statements of fact. Okay, Now about the statement here they have towels from the Y-M.C.A. Is that a statement of fact” ‘They have Y.M.C.A. on them or they are marked Y.M.C.A. This isa statement of fact. This does not involve an inference this 's 4 description-one you can actually see. Think about this Lind (of an orientation. This does not mean that we willy-nilly agre= with everything I can't go into the total area ofthe techniqucs of agreement. What this does mean, however is that we teach ‘ourselves the principles of agreement and especially if we must, disagree (and we openly invite disagreement) the question 1s hhow can you and I lear to disagree agreeably ‘There is something wrong with our ways of evaluating whe we disagree disigreeably. Notice the two dlferent ways of evaluating here=the same set of facts or eiumstances but tv different ways of sizing up the situation. “A welled bus os Proceeding down a Boston thoroughfare when a truck cut sharply into its path and only the bus diver’s quick wits snd action, prevented disister. Pale and shaken he voiced his estimate of the vanishing truck driver's character, otsin sind ‘mode of life in words appalingly stark. Then, remembering the audience at his ack, he turned to face them. A little white haired woman forestlled his apology. “My congratulations, she said, “upon an admirable presentation of what we may reason ably assume to be the facts.” One situation two i 43i rouhes certainty, whereas inferences have tow righ degrees of probability. Now obviously, the reason that I say it {eiking orga ngage to the Wor of reality We ony have “4 card inthe wallet. He rang the bell and, when a man answered, ‘ve him & sound thrashing and a warning. Monday the husband ‘was fined and given a suspended 30 day jail sentence in Munici pal Court. The owner of the bifold had moved trom the Address onthe identification ca Police officers are involved in inferences all the time. Some police officers too often act on inferences asf they were state ‘ments of fact. Itcan be avery dangerous kind ofan assumption for you and me. Now this doesn't mean that if they are ina dangerous position and somebody is holding a gun on them they say, “Now let’s see-inference or fact." They may have a ballet in'them before they decide. They had better act as if it ‘were a statement of fact when they are ins dangerous postion But how often have police officers-have all of us-jumped to conclusions. A man who was bullied by police and handcuffed 1 drunk when he wes actually suffering (rom a spastic condi tion, said “This is the sort of thing that I moved away from Birmingham to get away from. Ifa spastic or a cerebral palsy Victim comes to town the cops swarm all over him." If they see 8 cerebral palsy victim walking down the street they assume and Jump to conclusions that he is drunk, Just think about all the ‘behavior involved in the movie. Wasnt it centered pretty mich around this. All of them making unjustified inferences and acting as if their inferences wer statements of fact. And finaly, (4) a statement of fact-we can make a relatively limited number whereas inferences we can make an unlimited ‘number. It's the easiest thing in the world to make inferences This Is why itis o difficult to stay on the factual level. For instance this isa blackboatd eraser, Make a slatement of fact about it. Lam holding it~all right. That isa statement of fact. Tt Js gray. Afler a few statements, however, we soon find that we exhaust the descriptive statements and pas off inferences ay if they were factual We can make inferences without any effort, It is so easy to make inferences, Finally, (5) if we stay on the factual or descriptive level of at least know the difference between the two, agreement is more posible. Whereas on the level invoWing inferences of assimptions this will led toward disagreement, especially if we confuse the two. Columnists of| Confidential Magazine are notorious for passing off inferences asif they were statements of fact. There ate many examples. don’t have to go into that because we are all Familiar with it Here is one example. Notice low factual it sounds but itis 45purely an inference. An arrogant red rooster was giving chase to fluttering little hen. She scrambled onto the highway to scape him and was run down by a truck. Two old maids on a hnearby porch witnessed the tragedy. "You see," sid. one of them with an approving nod, “she would rather die.” Notice Ihow factual it sounds. Think back into some of your own state- ments and notice again how easy it i to assume they are descriptive [Now for the 3rd basic misevaluation. The first one I talked about wat a signal reaction which leads into the 2nd misevalua- tion of jumping to conclusions or acting on inferences as if they were-a facts Let me atk the question, "Can we ever know all bout anything? Do we ever know all about anything?” As far fs we know a this time we do not know all about anything Now my next question is, “Have you ever found someone who cts as if he knows all about something?” This Is the thied basic Imisevaluation, Ie isa very subtle kind oF a thing. Now, let me very quickly ask some questions. Why can't ‘we know all about anything? Or, what are the limiting factors ‘of our acquaintance with things, (1) Tot us say the physical position, We can only observe this table or anything ele from ‘our own physical point of view. (2) our psychological position, {G) time limitations. (4) education. And may T also add, of| ‘course, de to the fact that we have men here from many ‘ilferent cultures, one of the most important sreas ia terms of| ‘communication ae (5) cultural differences. We can make avery Ineresting communication or semantic analysis of the dificul- ties that we have in the UN. and we will see why. What we basically do in observing and communicating sto abstract, or select some characteristics and eliminate others. This i all that you snd'I could do. This is why we cannot know all about “anything, (6) The human nervous system is another limiting factor. A dog. can heat « much higher pitch. We have to have telescopes oF microscopes as an extra, nervous system to get ‘down 0 the microscopic level. We can't even get down to the Submicroseopic level of electrons, protons, neutrons. No one has ever seen an electron but we sce the reaction oF the results of it Here i what we mean by abstracting or selecting During a recent economic mission to Greece, Ambassador Porter tells of what took place. "A banquet was given in my hhonor in Macedonia. When I was finally asked to speak it was pest midnight. As I was tired and sleepy T made my remarks 46 —neerernnsnertnenen nein brief but cordial, ‘tis indeed a pleasure to be here tonight with you good sitizens of Greece. You Grecks and we Americans hhave very much in common, We lke 10 eat, we like to drink and wwe just like to sit around and talk." The next day the pop blazed on ite front page that I insulted the Greek peoole ‘Ambassador Porter, the paper reconded, said. that we Greeks ‘were just like Americans—pluttons, drunkards and gossips. ‘This is @ natural process of communication. We abstract and select and we eliminate so many things that we cannot know al bout anything. Infact, as psvchologists say, what we say tells ‘more about ourselves than what we are talking about Here is another example relative to this process of abstrac tion On a Texas golf course a shapely mis, attired in the briefest of shorts, stepped up to the No. | tee and prepared 0 address the bill, Three caddis and five male golfers stepped aside and watched. She swung prettily, hooked the ball and lost sight of it. "Can you tell mo where my ball went?” she asked the om lookers. Sheepish grins passed aver eight faces. Not one of them ha his eye on the ball What do we most when we are not conscious of this abstract ing process? We run into 4 particular kind of an orientation that we call the “allness” orientation, This isthe base third kind of 4 misevalustion. This is assuming more knowledge than we really have. It is a very subile kind of a thing. This is not tealizing or recognizing the fact that we cannot know sll about Anything. Is this kind of an orientation we make a stateme petiod, exclamation point. [sad it~ that's it! This is one of tie Feasons why we misunderstand each other. It is not Hat people Cannot learn but they fall victin to the disease of psychologtal arteriosclerosis~a sort of hardening of the attitudes! Our desire isto. change individuals from the allness orientation to a non allness orientation. By this we mean the realization of the limitation of one's knowledge. With the allness orientation we sort of unconsciously, (and may I say itis an extremely subtle kkind of thing) sty “I know" or "T know all bout it" Thisis| not the scientific attitude. The scientific attitade and the now fllnes orientation says, “I don't know." I think one of the most important departments "of your organivation 1st Research Department, Resoarch is predicated on the assur tion, “I don't know.” Because the moment you say "don't know” something else follows, We usally siy “ets see." This ais what leads toward experimentation or product studies expan- sion or what have you. Thomas Edison has said "Show me's thoroughly satisfied person and I wil show you a failure” In a ‘ivoroughly satistied man~he has a period or exclamation point aller his behavior. But to a man who has a non-alines orient ‘ion there isalways more to be leamed, Instead ofa period aftr his sentence, he puts an ETC. In fact this i the title of our Journal of General Semantics-it is called “Ete.” This means that no matter what you fad in the Journal-more could always be suid. One of the things we try to train executives and our selves isin manifesting the ets. How can you and I get this et, into our nervous system. Charles Kettering has said, "Sor ‘minds are lke conerete~all mixed up and permanently set This is the ainess orientation. The mind thats permanently set, ‘The assumption that what vas good enough for our company 10 years ago, 5 years ago is good enough today. If our military owpanizations had this kind of an allnes orientation, non- ‘changing and static orientations, we would be a second class power in three yeas or less. Things are changing 80 fast, Your Drientation, my orientation, must be in terms of change ot process because the structure of the world of reality is change Notice this subtle Kind of allness orientation. The young man said ina faint voice, “You don't want to buy life insurance, do you.” “I certainly’ do not," the sales manager replied. “I thought you didnt,” the embarrassed solicitor sid and headed for the door. Then the sales manager called him backtand audreseed the confused and frightened young man. “My job to hire and train salesmen and you ae about the worst salesman [ have ever seen. You'll never sell by asking people if they don't want t0 buy, But because you are apparently just starting out, 1 son going to take out $10,000 worth of insurance with you right how. Get out an application blank." Fumblingly the salesman did so and the deal was closed. Then the sales manager sti, Another word of advice young man—tearm 2 few standard, organized sales talks” “Oh, Thave aleady done tha,” the sles: ‘man replied, “have got’a standard talk for every type of prospect. This ismy standard onganized talk to sales managers.” Notice how subtle tht is—assuming more knowledge than We realy have. Socrates sid, “Know thy limitations.” Go back to Confucius, to Aristotle, ete. This is old stuf but the point lam ‘aking is how do you and I learn to get this into our nervous 4s systems? “Do unto others as you would have others do unto ‘You.” This is what we want to achieve, How do you achieve i Like the mother said to the litte boy, “John, bes good hoy be 8 good boy.” And John getting pretty exasperated sid, "Yeah, but how the hell do T e's good hoy!” My main question is, do ‘we have @ traning device to train men? So far our communica. tion courses have not moved in this diretion. From this point ‘of view you and T do not know how to communicate until we have it ia our nervous system, Finally, let me conclude with this one example. Notice how tremendously subtle this alness orientation is because st keeps us from listening or observing ‘A fiend of mine who is the father of 12 volunteered to babysit one evening so his wife could have an evening's elaxa- tion at the movies. “Don't let 2 single one of them come down sais,” his wife instructed him as she went out, He promised to ‘carry out orders to the letter and had just settled down to 8 book when he heard steps on the stairway. “Get back upstairs land stay there,” he commanded stemly. He readin peace for a few minutes and then again heand soft footsteps. This time he ‘added the threat of a spanking. Soon aguin he detected stealthy ‘sounds and dashed out justin time to see a small lad disappear up the top steps. He fad hardly retumed to his book when a ‘neighbor came in dstrctedly. "Oh, Fred,” she wailed, "I can't find my Willy anywhere. Have you seen him?” “Here ¥ am, ‘Ma,” sald tearful voice from the top of the stairs. “He won't Jet ine go home!” Well, this isa kind ofa stupid way of thinking fr behaving in this situation. It isthe kind of orientation that, keeps us from looking again, Iti the kind of orientation that rakes us say, “No-it didn't work last week, s0 it wouldn't ‘work today.” This is not the orientation of the selentst. This i ‘ot the orientation of the successful business or organization, Sst because it didn't work last week dacs not necessnly mean that it won't work today. This is why pilot studies are so ‘tremendously important in business or in industry. This isthe difference between the prescientifc era and the scent ea Science began when we had the inductive method-when we had experimentationwhen we had pilot studies. The pre: Scientific era was the era of reasoning only, argumentation and Verbal analysis. Solving. problems through discussion and {through debate. This is fine, but it has its imitations hecause we ‘ean argue until Doomsday whether something will or will not °work, The only way you can solve a problem is to stop talking tnd do or see or example, the old question: If we blow air through the twovrubber tis hanging at fhe ond of tings, wil herbs I move out or wil they move in I we argue or if we SPBI7 Togs which way wil they. move? Reasoning or “common Jeol ella that they would moe out. But ll You hare {edo & ny the expenment and you wile that they more Many people sé tht you could not bul a eavertharsit racine This why Tsay hore a tremendous diference Tetwees common sens nd uncommon see, We could tak for ours about the importance of uncommon sense te difference tetweenan Enon an Einstein and an average prion. Tretinoin in lst misunderstanding ad et us cal hi tne asundetanding of potion ot bypaning have seed Altern quizes that 1 give my ataents because this happens tube bet techni that I Koow of You and ae not Open 1G Siegoanns We coud fo into the poychology of mothating Mronse the, poychology of perstasion. ‘There tt a definite {eile to We wed with diferent nividals and this happens SEMEN image dat think works etter than jos the ‘fastuc appoach I'jou and I ean be shown wherein We mix sate en T think we wil do someting about it. Wil you fost te the scratch paper an itm read couple of these? Aik Sou answer eter yes or no? I wil sot go nto al ofthese But we wil tthe bast of what Lam diving. Answer ther * ‘Do you know what or whom I am referring to? I will go quite uty just ay you and tspeak in ordinary convertion, 1 esata thar much of your commeniction i the verbal Kin rgh? Person to person-and thi why tis kind of a Stieation is important besmow Ideals mosty with person to Sion communication Okay. do you know who mean when | Sy President Roosevelt President Truman ‘Third strike Time Harper's Magazine Lite Stor Face so 9, Glass 10, Ford LL. Lincoln 12, Washington 13, Elliott Roosevelt 14. Franklin Roosevelt 15. Jack Benny 16. Rochester 17. Lucky Strike 18, Cigarette 19. Camel [Now 1 am sure that you will recognize that in creating this litte test I sort of skewed the facts. Now you willsce why the ‘young lady said that she knew less at the end of the course than ‘he did atthe beginning. Basically, what she i saying, i that she ‘topped assuming knowledge that she didn't have. Let's go over this quickly #1. How many of you suid “yes” to President Roosevelt” Do you know who I meant? Now notice what I siy Jo you know of what, of whom I meant. I know that you know w 0 {YoU meant, Dut in this process of communication, how ean we get on the other person's channel or level? It may be what 2 50-S0x hore. But we will sce that this whole proces of ‘communication i involved in terms of probability never terme of certaingy #2. How many of you said yes to President Truman? More? Notice how the probsbility goes up higher Did anyone say no? Why sir? Ob, there may be 8 president Truman of the D.M.A. Bros. or something Again, ‘We can never be certain. The moment we are certain—this is why we have misunderstanding Because the moment we are certain in communication we fi > stop and say, “Joe, did you mean such and such?” This is ‘important in orientating our behavior in terms of probability "#3. Third. Strike. What do I mean? Do you know what ‘mean? Okay. I may have meant baseball. The 3rd strike the coal strike in 1943. Bowling. It coukd mean any number of things. How sbout#4—Time. Do you know what I mean whe time? Time magazine~Time Marches On, et. *#5—Harper’s Magazine, Probability ges upright? And! til we eannat be certain, I was in the sevice with a man named Harper. He was 2 machine gunner and we used to tak about stHarper's magazine. 1 am kidding. But again, and we will see ‘why, you cannot be certain, #5 Life. No. #7-Star No. #98-Face. No, #9-Glass. No. 10-Ford. No, #1I-Lingoln, No. 12-Washington. No. ZLs-Filott Roosevelt, Yes. Notice the probability but secenily his son got marred in Evanston. If he didn’t havea son the probability Would be higher in contradistinetion to Franklin Roosevelt. No-right? Because it could be elther senior or '¢15-Jack Benny, The probability higher. 2 16-Rochester. No, (8 17- Lucky strike. No. 18 Cigarette. Some of you may answer yes—you are not saying what cigarette. "#19-Camel-No, How many of you found yourself saying yes, yes, yes, atthe beginning and then no, no, no atthe end. Were there some of ‘you? Okay. This is why T give this kind of a test, to show us to “wat degree we have a tendency of projecting too much mean Ing into other individual's words. Now T am not soying that we sould not project. We must project. In fact, life 8 series of projections, ‘but wisdom begins when we are conscious of our projections? Now T wonder i { could have someone come Up snd read tis. Anyone like to try it? Just read it quite quickly, 5 we read in everyday life. (Several people ead it as follows!) et you a drink you can't read this aloud correct. Pari in ‘he Spring Slow-men at work-Once in a lifetme—Bird inthe hana. Now let me read it as it i. “Paris in the the Spring~Slow, son at at work-Once is, 24 lifetime- Biel in he the hand" The words ate repeated, 1 have used this demonstration many times, even going around an entire clas two or three times, ‘They projeted Into the words what they expected to vee, This “iustrates the psychological phenomenon of projection. NNow let us star learning briefly about language usage. The fist thing. we lear about language usage i the fact that words are ambiguous, Words can take many meanings. Words can be used in many, ‘many different senses and we must be conscious of the ambi uity of language. Other individuals can and often do mean different things when they use words. For example, the word ine.” Tt might be a surname, straight line on the paper, line iand in line, couse of direction, line of goods, “What my radio network, telephone, hold the lin, bate line. We could go on indefinitely. Words are ambiguous. They can mean ‘many, many different things, Now what do T mean by this phenomenon of projection or by-pussng? This is when the Speaker means one thing and the listener means something else. The speaker means one thing and the listener responds with something else. For example. ‘A woman who insisted she had a “tight to slp any man who is rude to me, even & policeman”-got 2 choice between a $50.00 fine and 30 days in jail. She ssteamed, "Tl take the 30 days” “That's okay with’ me,” replied Magistrate Hyman Bushel after a hectic session with attractive brunette, Mrs Barbara Rubi. Her husband, however, intervened and paid the fine. Mrs. Rubi, the wife of a banker, was charged with striking 1 policeman in Central Park affer he complained her dog wat running unleashed. “All I did was say [intended to write out a summons,” the policeman said, “when clear out of the sky she punched me with her clenched fist.” But Mes, Rubi sid, “He fsked me for my credentials and 1 thought when they ak for ‘credentials you were supposed fo hand them $5.00. 50 when he sked me for my credentials I said, "Here is my credentials and hit him inthe face with my hand. said “you will not got $5.00 ‘rom me, you grafter!” Why do we have these misunderstandings? Because the speaker means one thing-the listener means something ele. There are two unconscious assumptions underlying this mis evaluation of projection (2) We unconsciously assume that other people use language a8 we would if we were doing the talking. We know that we can se language in many, many different ways because we learn the jeaning of words" from our past experiences and our lan- snuage is arbitrary. For example, the Lord's Prayer has had to withstand considerable abuse especially from children’s trying fo Tear it from mumbling congregations. One litle boy was heard to pray “Harold be they name.” Another said, “Give us 33this day our jelly bead.” A New York child petitioned “Lead ‘us not into Penn Station.” (2) Here is the second unconscious assumption, We are wight thot words have meaning. From the point of Yew of {Stee somantcn words don't mean anything. Words don't ‘Reon people mei’ In thi proces of communication, we can ne wo diferent modes of communiating. We ca either have Uhr attention on the words of the ater person (and hee we Stop the prow of communication fo soon) a We can Toes SP ftenn om the person wing the ord In oder fo et on {he sume chanral of comaonertion, we a the fstener mast ivelaur attenton on the speaker In other wordt theres MY deme of misunderstanding, dont be aa to ask, "What you ean, Joc?" The bund of comminiction ot oniy oo he pear to speak specially and concretely. 1 wish we fal more tin to dscess how to speak more speiclly an ‘swt But the burden also upon the xen. Sometimes Sou aes speaker, you ast main positon of authority, the {Steer itr ook you, "Sir, id You mean that F should do fhukvand such" they then po ost and. misunderstand your Srmmands You, a he person nator, mus ao a them sr'zetung onthe tame chanel of comminiction by ying "Qe aid you asume that I mean such and such, Do you know shat want you todo?" In other words, good communication is from the point of view of both speaker and listener. Let me say a quick word bout the use ofthe dictionary, because the dictionary perpet Stes the false gssumption that meanings are in words. We call this the container myth-the mythical assumption that mean- ings are in words ‘A school teacher told her pupils to listen to their parents ‘comversition and if they heard’ 2 new word, to look up its mening in the dictionary and write a sentence using the word properly. The next day she asked Johny what new word he Fad learned and he replied that he had heard the word “preg: han” which the dictionary defined as “to carry a chil.” The feacher asked, “Johnny, have you a sentence in which you have tied the word propery?" He replied, “Yes ma'sm, The fireman Climbed the ladder into the buraing building and came down pregnant” Now, in terms of dictionary definition, this right. Because, “to cary 9 child” isambiguovs. Bu, the moment you s4 ‘encounter human uses, you run into diffiulty. You can never be certain what another person means ‘t-was Tunch time. The elderly clerk opened his sandwiches Jooked at them and exclaimed bitterly, "Cheese sandwiches! ‘Always cheese sandwiches!” “Why don't you ask your wife 10 {ix you another kind of sandwich," colleague asked. "Who's married?” said the man indignantly. "L make these sandwiches ysl!" Basically, what Iam talking about now, is that wissom begins when you and I are conscious of our projections in han Communication, Here is another example of projection. A ‘motorist was driving toward New York when his ca stalled. The battery was dead. He flagged a woman driver and she agreed to [push his car Yo get it stared. Because his car has an automatic transmission, the driver explained, "You will have f0 get up to 30 or 35 miles per hour to get me stated." The lady nodded wisely. The driver climbed into his car and waited and waited ‘Then he turned around to see where the woman wes. She as there all ight, coming at him at 30 t0 35 miles an hour Remember, words don't mean anything - people mean. And Sinai the est example to iaseate tis hse one rah T don’t tke Bill,” confided a coed to her roomate. “He knows too many naughty songs.” “Does he sing ther fo you?” asked the friend “Well, no~but he whistles them.” T have covered four basic kinds of misevalustions. (1) The signal reaction, the tendency to respond too quickly. (2) Acting fon an inference as if it were a fact. (3) The “allness” oncats tion, which keeps us trom listening, from observing, trom keep ing an open mind. (4) The misevaluation of projection or by: passing Teet'me just conclude with this one example, to show you tha, basicaly the whole orientation i in tying to get ws down to the facts; to the world of realty. Sometimes, howewe although facts indicate that we should change our points! view, or our way’ of thinking, the allness orientation is still there and we still Insist on maintaining the old ways of thinking “There was once a man who went around saying, "You know 1 think I am dead." His friends finally persuaded him to consul 4 psychiatrist. When the patient told the psychiatrist that he ‘thought he was dead, the psychiatrist told him to clenct is fists, stand before a mirror and say "Dead men don’t bleed.” He ss{old the man to repeat this about 6 times each day saying, "Dead men don't bleed.” He told the man € go home and carry fot his instructions and return at the end of the month. The putient carted out the psychiatss’s instructions and atthe end Ef the month he retuned. The psychiatrist told him once again to go through the motions. ‘The reason he told the man to tigen his fists, wass0 thatthe man's veins would come to the ‘Srvice of his wrists The man lightened his fists, and just ashe Sih "Dead men don't bleed,” the psychiatrist jabbed a scalpel into the man's wrist, The ‘blood aushed out and the man holleed, “By God-dead men do bleed!” [let me say one thing, lalways end my courses with this final word of advice and Iv mean this very, very sincerely. Don’t belive one word T have said! Go out and try it. Thank you all very much, Bibliography Doober, M. Joseph (ed) Eifective Communication on dhe Job (New York! American Management ‘Association, 1515 Broadway, Times Square, New York 36, N. ¥., 1956) Hayakawa, 8.1 Language in Thought and Action (New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co, 1949) Johnson, Wendell People in Quandaries (New York Harper & Bros, 1946) Lee, ving J Language Habits tn Human Affairs (New York: Harper & Bros. 1941) Lee, ving How 10 Talk with People (New York Harper & Bros, 1952) 56 ‘THE PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENTIFIC METHODS IN INDUSTRY Section Seven Scientific Method is closely connected with the social virlues of impartiality, Bertrand Rusell Only science, exact science about human nature itself, and the most sincere approach to it by the aid of the most ‘omnipotent scientific method will deliver man from his present gloom and will purge him from his contemporary shame in the sphere of inter-human relations. ~Paviov With the advent of space travel and atomic energy its easy to see that we are living in an age of science. If we would but compare society today against the society of one or two Inundred years ago, we Would arrive atthe conclusion that this the age of science and the application of the scientific method. But, what if our successors in the next one hundred years were to analyze our sccomplisiments and, especially, our behavior? Would we appear scientific to them? Jus as the 19th ‘century was not very selentific compared to the 20th century, So the 20th century will appear tobe in its infancy compared 0 the 2ist century in seience,scletitic progress and the applica tion of science to human betterment. ‘Science, a8 an important factor in human life, i elatively recent. It probably best begins with Galileo some three hundred Years ago tnd Tor the next two hundred years remained the sole province of the academician or the leamed of the community. 3It did not affect the lives of ordinary men and, in fat, only within the past one hundred years has science played an Important en effecting role on the lives of the “average man.” The influence of sclence on our ives will become increasingly so in.a geometric ratio in the future generations. Not only in Terms of what science is able €o produce, but in terms of the Changes in the nature of man himself in his selEconcept and, therefore in is ways of thinking, communicating and behaving ‘We have sen some changes, for example, of the racial problem in the United States, especially inthe South during the pest ten or twenty years. There have been many chan poliial thinking since the First World War from a nation america First-and Only” philosophy with no intemational entanglements ot allnees {0 an international foreign policy fealizing that nations cannot be separated through space. So rapid has been the scientific progress in space Might, atomic and Iydrogen bombs, intercontinental ballistic miss, transporte tion and communication, that drastic change in our outlook has been made mandatory inthe pas fifty years. The “model T mentality” in the space age has no place in politcal thinking today. ‘Science is primarily knowledge and a method of arving at that knowledge. ‘Through the process of induction it seeks feneral laws from number of particular fats. Science as Knowledge, however, is not its only important attribute; it is ‘becoming increasingly. valuable in changing, modifying or manipulating nature itself and, so, finding a new and untealiz. thle nmportanve for the future. Seience, in its theoretical and practical sense, has fad many important implications. and Fesulls, I has not only modified sience itself, but the societies, fpoverninents and culfutes within which we find science. It has Thd.a spiralling effect outside itself of which itis ony a part ‘Man has in the past, and continues ta large degree in the present, beet unable to realize hs Ropes, desires and potential- files because he has largely een ignorant of the means of {ccomplishment-of the scientific method. But as this lack of Knowledge disppeared he has gradually been able to cope with his environment, to chinge existing institutions, to modify society and himsell in the same proces. But, as we are coming to se, insofar as man is wise in the intelligent use of science and the scientific method, this new- found power and knowledge can be of great benefit to himself ss and future generations. Insofar as he is unwise and ignorant as to the power and potentiality of science for ood or evi. the ‘opposite i logically certain to result, We sll ne land the wistom inutlizing science i we ae to ache ‘of society capable asa result ofthe scientific metho! ‘THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD It must first be realized that there i# no such thing as she scientific method. There ate many scientific methods, but its Similarity is in the approach and testing of knowisdge. It basically consists of observing fats, making hypotheses ore fences about these facts and then testing these inferences or ‘generalizations. The scientific method indicates that other ‘Observers, using a similar set of facts and technique ‘would artve at similar concTusions. The wo the scientific method, observation and. generalization, ‘make itself available to other observers for similar esting Facts and hypotheses are not isolated for they both exist within the general body of scientific knowledge. Facts are ‘obviously significant in science because they help t0 establish or refute some general lav. Science, although it stats ‘om observation of the particular, is not only concerned with the particular, but with the general as wel, ‘The scientific method isnot a simple process. There are many variables involved. A careful choice of Significant fasts ol 48 8 consideration of other means of arriving at laws other than by mere generalization, ae important in the scientific method For many years men suid that "You cannot fly © heavier than air machine” or “Unsupported bodies in the air will fll” But you merely have to look at the airplane, balloons or kites to see the falsity ofthese generalizations The scientific method is practiced consciously and produc tively by only a minority of men. These minority confine the scientific method, likewise, {0 only a small numberof problems But we find a gzeat deal of untested opinions by’ the majorty {and sometimes that minority of scientists) on such complex Problems” as. in religion, politics, economics, psycho! psychoanalysis with a dogmatism that is wholly Foreign t0 the Scientific method. It is a curious psychological fact that the 50Scientist, who thas a greater “right” to be certain in his conclu- ‘ons, is usually tentative. Whereas most of usin our untested Spinions, who should be tentative, ae usually certain, This i, ‘of course, an interesting psychological corollary. Tt is an odd fact that subjective certainty is inversely proportional to objec- ‘uve certainty. The less reason a man has to believe he is right the more vehemently and certain is he that he is right If-we would analyze the behavior of man in many areas we would se that the scientific attitude is forelgn to him. He Urdulaes in fantasy, wish fulfillment, false expectations, illogical ‘ferences and invalid conclusions. The difficulty resuits when These unscientific attitudes are carried over into the important jonsmaking areas that have far reaching effets GALLILEO, KEPLER AND NEWTON The scientific method came into its own with Galileo (1564-1642) and Kepler (1571-1630). Kepler discovered that ne planets move around the sin in elipes rather than in circles. To the ancient mind it was assumed that the heavenly bodies moved in eirles, although modern man has been brought 1p with the Knowledge that the heavenly bodies move in an elliptical fashion, Kepler and Galileo established the fact, through the sclentitic method, that the earth and. planets go around. the sun Copomicus had first postulated this theory, along with some tacly Greeks, but they offered no scientific proof. Galileo and Kepler induced ftom the observation of particular. facts, established quantitative laws and predicted future. particular facts. This was the scientific method which was particularly shocking. t contemporary aithorities because it. Was ah Important break from the law of authority. to the law of ‘observation. Truth was determined, not by some authority Who Said it to be so, but by. the omnipresent and omnipotent cuthorty of observation and the scienifle method. Galileo's thrust against authority is best exemplified in his contradiction of Aristotle's Physics, which stated that 2 body Weighing ten pounds would fall through a given distance in ‘onetenth the time for a body weighing one pound. To prove his {cory empirically, he went to the top of the Leaning Tower of Piss with 2 ten pound ball and a one pound ball, Just as his «o | fellow professors atthe University of Pist were about to go to their classrooms, he summoned ther attention. He dropped the two weishts They hit the ground almost simultaneously, How- frer, the professors, wishing to believe the authority of Aristotle rather than their own eyes, efused to believe that Astle could be in eror Galileo thus discovered the Law of Falling Bodies, according to which, apart fom the resistance of the ai, bodies fall with ‘constant acceleration. This was a generalization made from & ‘number of facts, the actual falling bodies that he had tested, His generalization was confirmed, however, by subsequent experiments lke i Gulieo also made a telescope and invited other professors to look through it at Jupiter's moon, but they refed because Aistotle did not mention thes satelites. ‘This conflict between authority and investigation is the conflict between deduction and induction, between the lunscentiic method and the scientific method. Deduction pre- supposes the finding of the general law oF first premise from authority, or that which is “selFevident.” But deduction as 2 ‘means of obtaining knowledge collapses when its premises are doubted. The wrong oF impotent method was used in ariving at the first premise oF “gonetal law” upon which the deduction was based, and so the conclusion was no more “true” than the original premise. This is only one of the many weaknesses of the deductive method oF argument from authority. Iti inextricably tid up With a certain kind of an attitude, While Socrates sai that he ‘vas wiser than his contemporaries because he alone knew that hhe knew nothing, Galileo could have sid, with trth, that he ‘knew something, but he knew lite. His Aristotelian contempo- rates, however, knew little ur thought they knew much. This isthe unscientific attitude prevalent in many areas todsy. Sir Isage Newton (1682-1727) was born in the year in which Galileo died. His Principia attempted to explain the whole solar system, from the three laws of motion and the law of gravite tion, by purely: mathematical deduction. However, although [Newoon's Principis retains the deductive form of Aristotle and the early Greeks, itis quite different from the purely deductive approaches to Knowledge since the law of gravitation is not Supposed to be self-evident, but is arived at inductively fom Kepler's laws, It illustrates the interrelationship hetween the otdeductive and the inductive. From observation of particular facts, it aves by induction ata general law, and by deduction from the general law othcr particular facts are inferred. This is the scientific method, from the specific to the general and from the general to the specific, based upon observation, testing, easoming, logie-rather than deduction from authority alone. SCIENTIFIC TECHNIQUE Paycholoists have pointed out how alittle baby, due to the ‘people eround him, wall get the feling of omnipotence when very ey elicits the response he wishes. Paget indicates how bis reasoning is 8 product ofthis socal sense of others immediately Fulilng his wishes. However, later on, te child is foreed to the fealzation that his wishes might be opposed by others and that his wishes are not necessarily the only important ones, nor the most logical or truthful TT the child’ wishes are not the only determinant of truth or the best course of action, what other alternatives are available? Reasoning, as pointed out by Praget, develops as a method of ‘ariving at social truth upon which men can tend to agree’ ‘This is one of the values of the scientific method. It tends to void solve the disputes which arise when personal emotion is Tegarded as the test of (ruth, But the scientific method also ves power over the environment, the power of adapting to the hanging situation and thereby controlling and predicting. The attr successes of the scientific method has given it its prestige Perhaps the most important characteristic of the scientific ‘technique is that ie proceeds from experiment, not from tradi- tion. Where you find the sttitude of tradition you wil find little br no change, litte or no progress. Wherever you find the Sticntitie technique of experimentation and testing of new ideas {You will find commensurate progress. It is this spirit which Enaacteries modeen seience and modern times, as contrasted with the unscientific thinking and. spirit of more than «wo hundred years ago. SCIENTIFIC INDUSTRY “The scientific method is being applied in modern industry, in fact the Industrial Revolution isa good example of the change © {o the scientific technique. Scientists and research have become avery important pat of the scientific technique in industry ‘But, while we have seen the advent ofthe scientific method in bisiness and industry, it has not been understood and applied fn the human level, While itis much easier to apply scienttic methods in the natural sciences itis much mote difficult to Apply in psychology and human relations. ‘We still somehow, feel that there isa distinction between pure and applied science, or between seience and industry. Its Well known in the history of industry, however, that the mos theoretical and speculative research has sometimes lod to the ‘most important and practical applications in industry. In the last generation, science has rapidly assumed a responsiblity o leadership in industry and the problems which contront the top executive involve factors which require seientif assistance or knowledge for their solution. Ia this age, neatly all of the problems of organization and management involve seientine factors of one kind or another. Companies cannot afford Co leave the administrative control in the hands of those who ars {ignorant ofthe methods of science! Tf an Industry were to apply the scientific technique, if management as well as labor were able to be trained in the ‘cienific method, attitude and spit, i would then come close te being the best and most productive possible. Mdealistically Would be an industry free from the terrors and chains o absolute authority and bureaucracy. Bureaucracy and the Scientific method are incompatible in philosophy and practice While the scientific attitude emphasizes uncertainty and doubt authoritative bureaucracy is the theory and practice of political fr industrial certainty. We shall always noed traflic managers, Production managers, bureaus, planners and ditectors. In any brpanized society, whether political or industrial, there many functions which require someone to count, contol elegate, measure. and authorize. But bureaucracy, as ar ‘administrative theory of what is good and what Is ruc, is t00 blten the sovereignty of the ego that grows out of counting, ‘controling, delegating, measuring and is inherent authority ureaueracy, n is deeper and more philosophical sense, i any blind devotion to The System. In ps¥cholopieal terms, 1s the belief and expectation that by finding, developing, ond perfecting the correct techniques of measuring, counting, ec, Will then become possible to turn the administration into a Sure ‘Thing 6But while the Sure Thing oF the bureaucratic longing for sibsolute certainty is a quality of man, the achievement of sbsolute certainty woukl be, for any man, the lost of his wumanity. For. only in the regions of uncertainty function asa human being! While we need measurements and systems to deal with the tive warld, these do not affect the qualitative uncertainty in management or in our lives generally. They seem to work ‘rich finality only for those who have ignored the uncertainty In ‘heir personal lives~and bureaucracy isthe simple answer, the at solution to the complexity and uncertainty of industrial ‘minagement or of life's problems oa SUMMARY Section Eight “The discussion on the preceding pages has tried to provide an understanding of the relationship between language and Iehavior, ‘The framework for this discussion has been the principles advanced by the general semanticsts. Let's briefly eview some of the points we've covered and see how awareness Of them can help us to improve our day-to-day communication, BEHAVIOR SHOULD FIT THE WORLD OF REALITY First, we saw that there are really «wo distint worlds in which we live the verbal world of words and the non-verbal World of things The words are merely symbols which represent Destand forthe non-verbal realities, Human behavior ‘may be broken down into four phase. Something happens. A nervous impact creates awareness ofthe happening. Next, the penon sizes up the situation with an fraluation, And’ then, on the bass of his evalution, he responds "We saw that proper evaluations are more likely to be made when we eahibit 2 symbol reaetion- when we pause, observ, Gnd evaluate the situation not merely in terms of the verbal Tepresentations which symbolize ie but as it really exists. Such ‘valuations lead us t behave in accordance withthe fact ofthe real non-terbal word ‘Misevaluation usually occurs in one of three forms. The frst identification of words with things. uch identification causes tus to react to words af if they were things. Soon our behavior no longer fits the facts as they are, Second, there isthe problem 6s‘of projection, where we unconsciously assume that we know what the other person meant because we know what it means to ts. This isa frequent source of misunderstanding. Finally, there is acceptance of the pert for the whole, a practice akin to al ress, We must never hehave as if we know all there isto know because this type of behavior inhibits us from learning addi ‘onal and pethaps crucial facts MEANING ITSELF CAN MISLEAD US ‘There are characteristics inherent in language which we should be aware of if We are to avoid misevaluating the world found us. One of the most significant of these characteristics lis in the very nature of words It is easier to respond only 10 non-verbal stimuli when we ate aware of the following qualities of words [Words do not mean. The myth that words contain mean ing is based upon incoprect sumptions. 2, Wonds are arbitrary. Because there is no one-to-one relationship between words and things, words ae assigned {o certain things by agreement or socal convention, 3, Words have many uses, Just as one specific object may be referred fo by a. number of different words, so 100, 8 specific word may be used to refer toa numberof differ ent objects. This multiusage of words accounts for many ‘misunderstanding, 4, Meanings are in people. Words become meaningful only ‘when we, on the bass of our past experiences, project our ‘own meanings into them NON-ALLNESS LEADS 70 PROPER EVALUATION Finally, we saw how certain practices in our communication cause us fo develop improper thinking and speaking habits. We looked at thee practices which generally go hand-in-hand with the allnessattitide, the atitade that we know all there i £9 know about something 1. Bither/or orientation widens the gaps between people. The undiseriminating use of the “eitheri’thisway-or ieethatway" approach forces people to take extreme 66 positions in disagrements which might be resolves hnandled in some other way. 2, Use of high-order abstractions pushes us farther from: instead of closer to, the non-verbal facts to which should be responding. Too much abstraction makes our ‘communjation vague, ambiguous, and meaningless. 3, Failure to recognize the process of change causes us to ‘overgenerlize and stereotype, These common miseval tions can be avoided when we seck differences and tiniqueness instead of similrtis in any situation. Inde ing and dating help us to do this. [Nonallnes isthe realization of the limitations of our know edge, If eich of us can develop an open mind, ready to asimit few facts and to change its convictions on the basis of new tridence, we are on the way to achieving a nomallnes ast. ‘This atinide, coupled with an awareness of the principles of| feneral semantics, should help us to better understand our oven behavior at expressed in our daily communication.IRVING J. LEE: THE SEMANTIC MAN* Section Nine Only a few of those individuals who had the honor of work: ing with Irving J. Loe will know what truly areat man he was. For here was the embodiment of the principles of general Semanties-of extensionalization to the fullest we have known, living J. Lee not only understood Alfred Korzybsk's principles as [ew scholars di, but even more, he applied them €o his own behavior in dealing with individuals, stwations, problems, sd in| ‘gaining a deeper insight into the world around him. The Eemantic man’ is the creation of hi own assomptions; he both the sculptor and the marble. ‘What is a ‘semantic man’ (or woman) like? If a person were to apply the principles of general semantics to his own behavior what kind of individual would he be? What will he do, for he will not only understand the principles of extensionalization Intellectualy’ but he will hve internalized these principles in {terms of behavior. How, then, shall we draw our profile ofthe "semantic man"? These are some of the questions raised by Irving Lee. But they did not go unanswered by him. It is the forte of a “semantic man’ not only to ask meaningful questions but 10 Took for the answers. So the answers to these questions are those of our semantic man about "the semantic man,” While | am sure Dr. Lee did not look upon himself as the perfect Semantic man, he saw in this profile the operations to be performed in ‘onder 10 achieve & closer resemblance to this Imythical person, For Dr. Lee was conscious ofthe fact that this GENERAL SEMANTICS BULLETIN. Numbers 18 & 19, 1955 Repuntod by Permision, oo“semantic man’ was fletion, a mythical creation nowhere to be found in the world of realty. But if he had taken a closer look at himself he would have sen himsell sb others saw hima the best example of the “semantic man" we have had. ‘What, then, is this ideal man like? How does he behave? What will he do in’ approaching problems, situations and in desing ‘with others? “The semantic man will tend to do a good deal of listening and qucrying-of asking questions. He wants to know what the Other fellow means, not what words mean. For he is continually Conscious of the fact that words don't mean, people mean. He knows of the tremendous ease of oversimplifying the process of communication, and the misealuation of projection which resulls whenever people stop this process of communication too soon. He knows of the many conflicts, confusions, arguments and disagreements which result when people pay mote attention to words than they do to the people using words. He realizes that words can be used in many different ways according to the experiences or even whins of the use, and in oder not to close the channel of communication one must understand the mean ings in people, notin words, ‘Before making an important decison the semantic man will rant more facts. In his speaking, listening, eading or behaving the knows of the simplicity and ease~and also the dangers~of acting on too few facts. So he is constantly looking for new facts upon which to base his evaluations, But while he i ‘conscious of other variable factors which might come into Day in any situation, he understands that he must act on whatever factual data he has. He knows of the folly of waiting unt all ‘the facts ae in,’ for this not only an impossibility but it wll lead toward indecision, procrastination and nonprodictivty “This ideal extensional man will more likely note rather than dismiss any novel or unusual ideas. He knows of the many’ cases in the history of ideas or scientific advancement where people were too prone to ‘pooh-pooh’ or enitcize ideas which later tured out to be important in man’s advancement. leving Lee realized but could not alway’s understand why some highly ineligent professors (and others) were so prone to criticize and attack certain ideas without the requisite Knowledge upon Which to. base 2. scholunly criticism, He invited. scholzly| ritcism based upon aevurate knowledge. But he saw around him too many examples of the proclivity of dismissal of novel 0 for unusual ides. He felt that the new or the novel should either be aovepted nor rejected but tested. Only alter adequate {esting or scrutiny should the new and the novel be judges "The ‘semantic man’ is interested in the important question, ‘hy do we disagree” He knows that we very offen look [or diferent things or see things differently because of a number of ‘atiable factors, And it was one of the desierats in the Ceaching lind Hfework of Dr. Lee to look for and understand those diet fences, The problem confronting our ‘semantic man” is how to ‘Come to agreement; not how to win the verbal fight. He is perfectly willing to look forthe sources of human disagreement Because, he understands that disagreement might lead to agreement if we were to "ook again’ or try to delimit some of the variable factors. ving Lee recognized that some disses iments could easily be resolved once the important factors of Gisagreement were pointed out, But he also recognized that ‘ther kinds of disagreement were not so easy to reconcile that one of the follies of man is C0 try to soWe these difficult problems 100 easly and 100 soon without getting fo the heart Of the disagreement. Ina world of so much disagreement Dr. Lee felt that the ‘principles of universal agreement” were neces sary and important to teach and apply if man is to achieve =| happier ite "The “semantic man’ is aware of the difference between 8 deseriptve or factual statement and one involving an inference, He will not confuse his inferences or assumptions with state iments of fac. And his behavior will be accordingly. He will be a Title less prove to jump to inferences, and when he does so he twill know that he did, and fe will then retrace his steps. He Knows that most of our lives see lived on the Inferential level, but wisdom and mature behavior result when one is conscious ff the differences between acting on inferences as inferences, fnd acting on inferences arf they were factual ‘So our mythical fully extensional man will continue Co test himself against facts, He will not only check his inferences fzainst the facts, but also observe whether or not he is oven iy words or by the nonverbal facts. For he has leamed, not ‘only from the wisdom of Confucius, Agusiz, Frew, Pavion Korzybski and others, but from experienc, that man is more fften influenced by words and verbal asociation than he is by the facts of reality. The semantic man’ manifests an extensional rather than an intensional onentationThe “semantic man’ will be a little more willing to be both Independent and cooperative. Irving Lee didnot look upon ese characteristics a8 being contradictory, but complemen lary. Besides being” cooperative with others, this extensional man must also manifest initiative and the freeenterprising spiet ‘which results in the timebinding productivity of a free and ‘open mind. 1 know of no individual who was more both Independent and cooperative than Dr. Lee. He manifested a ron-alines independence because he recognized that individuals ‘must believe in and act on their own convictions. And yet they ‘ust be willing (0 change their convictions the moment the facts are against them He realized that the notrallness orienta ion didnot lead toward vacilation or apathy, a8 some is wrongly assumed. The “semantic man’ has deep Cconvitions, assumptions, values, ete, but he understands that hhe must not hold these with a dogmatic “know:tall” attitude He is always willing to listen with an open mind to the assump tions and beliefs of others, no matter how contrary they might be tis own, He respects, with dant, the abstracting pro cesses of other Manifesting the extensional orientation, he will use is eyes and ars more than one normally does. He wll do more looking and doing than ressoning and talking, for he realizes that Scientific advancement and the solution of problents come only ‘when theorizing and talking stop and experimenting begins. His ‘motto is, ‘I don’t know. Let's se” He solves problems, there ‘ore, not by talking or verbalizing but By doing. He will keep his and ears open for differences a8 well a similarities, for he Will be far more curious about things and not limited to the Similarities implied by the structure of the language he uses. Whenever Dr. Lee was asked ifa certain idea" was worth trying or iF it would work, his answer invariably was, "T don't know. Let's see" He was a! master of putting ideas to work to sce if they were worthy, for this is an important yardstick of the loving J. Lee was one of the most dynamic individuals who cr lived. His ability to ‘got things done’ with the bighest Standards was one of the unique characteristics of this brillant man. Yet, in another way, he was one of the least hurried and impetuous men one could meet, He realized the importance of manifesting. symbol reactions, of taking more time=a "two second activity delay’~in dealing with life's problems. On one n particular occasion e group of psychology students continually Interrupted his lectures throughout the hour by asking, Is this Professor Evans? clas!" of “ls this Philosophy BIO”, etc. Most ‘other professors probably would have become quite exasperated at such intrusions. Bur Irving Lee, manifesting «symbol eaction each time, did not Become istated. He checked his {ssumptions until he was informed that this was a psychological experiment to see to what degree fe behaved in terms of the principles he (aught. Those psychological experimenters and his ‘own students were given an example of these principles in action Here we find another important characteristic of the ‘semantic man,” He is much more eager to inquire as t0 the adequacy or proper evaluation he shows wien he is angry, imitated, discouraged, fearful, disiking, ete. Irving Lee often ‘maintained that usually some kind of misevaluation is involved in every case of iritation, anger, Tear or prejudice and iti the ‘mark of an extensional man to check himsell as tothe adequacy of his evaluations ‘The ‘semantic man’ engages freely in phatic communion, fiction reading, pooty, ete, but he knows the difference between fiction and fact, He can enjoy oF partake in both with ‘equal Taility, but he is quick to differentiate between the two land not act ‘on the fictitious as if it wore factual. Dr. Lee recognized the psychological importance of ‘small talk” and his magnetic personality attacted countless students and others t0| his office for what, I suspect, very often turned out tobe phatic ‘communion, He was one of few professors who always had String of students and adults waiting outside his office ‘ostensibly to talk over a problem. Upon closer observation, hhowever, one could see that they left his office fooling highly lated and that many of them did not always visit him about thei schoo) problems but just to talk with him. His was an indescribable magnetic power that drew all kinds of individuals toward him the moment they wete within this orbit. Irving Lee fel that very little of what general semanticst say runt counter to the great principles of humanity, oF ethical, ‘moral, of religious codes. But he felt that in general semantics ‘they are stated more explicily than in many other statements, and an operational method is given by which t0 achieve these fends, He believed it important that we keep looking for al sorts n‘of convictions, faiths and goals, but he always remained aware ore tte The “semantic man’ is also aware of the ease of over: simplifying, the ese of attributing causes to things. He doesnot thinkin tems of a cause and effec relationship but ers of ‘functional formula where an effec is produced by 2 number ‘or variable factors. To him the world not s simple additive Sifu where varies can be easly dissected and aflsibuted = anes” It is, to0 often, nonadditive afar where complexity Sud multiptiity of eauses more closely eesemble the sruture {the wold, So, just as it easy to Took forthe simple case Snd effect relationship, tis ako eaty to oversimplify the problemsotution nexus by looking for the solution to the problem when there well may be more than one. Such spite Tesumptions he believes are inadequate in a” world of Complexity, change, varity and nonadaitvty. ‘The ‘semantic man sable to achive degrecs of specificity in his talking (hen necesary) far more than ib now generally done. For he realizes that there are degres of inclusion, generality, vagueness and ambiguity just a thre are degres of onetotenes and specificity, and there are times when he mot Inder. chainindex and date his satements. Apresment and Understanding result whenever individuals specify what hey are ing about (ndeNing) t what tne (dating) elaine to what Situation or envgonment (chait-indexing), Iving Lee was 4 Inaster at achieving specifiy in his own talking apd especialy fn orcing (inellactaly) his stents to think i terms. of Indexing, dating and. chaimindexing One of the. greatest bencits hata student of general semntcs could abtatn from conversing with Dr Lee" wes in-dstingushing between an Smbiquous and vague statement (or hayes) and specific and concete statement. Many PAD. candidates had to re Sxamine and usually revie thir ways of thinking du tothe penetrating and piercing questions raised by this semantic man. His ait tose the specifi, to drav ou further reltonshipe fin concisions, was ofthe mos rllant kind “To anyone, therfore, who had heen associated with Dr, Lee and had the opportunity to have dntellcteal discussions with him, this was" one of the most rewarding experiences, The ability" to" examine and’ reexamine important. ideas and questions according to the general serantes discipline o Shu odious proces. But one soon leaned this uncommon sense " (to 2 degree) by example not by preachment. Dr. Lee was more Interested im teaching others by example than by preaching or by exposing the misevaluations of others. He knew that belore fn individual could teach the principles fo others he must ist ‘Decome extensional himself Ax Wendell Johnson says, ‘If you want to become a genius find yourself a genius and follow him round.’ So itis with the ‘semantic man.’ His best teaching device is his own behavior, which a semantically oriented fbsener might profit by. ‘To Irving Lee, only when an individual manifests the principles of general semantics does he know them, for learning i a nonclementalistic function. "The ‘semantic man’ will always be willing to admit when he ocan't know. "I don't now’ becomes an intellectual motto for fhm, He understands the unfortunate results which follow when people estme more knowledge than they realy have. The nom ines orientation, the “I don't know” admission, becomes 3 Stimuus to find out, to search further, to gain more Tacts and to Tewen one’s sphere of ignorance. He knows that the ‘l know it AP sssumption is one ofthe unconscious assumptions that stops Tearning, hinders scientific advancement and keeps & man from Talfiling his time-binding. capacities. This realization of the imitation of one's knowledge can lead toward proper eval tion regarding. degrees of probability In determining furore ction, One will then take calculated risks regarding the las of| probability, in accordance ith the fats at hand, and relative {he situation being dealt with “The "semantic man’ keeps reminding himself of the doctrine by rereading the basic books Irving Lee used to kiddingly sv that the good student of general semanties must reread Science and Sanity every six months-but it takes six months to read fhe book, OF course, this means that the student would cons tantly be reading. Science and Sanity. He realized the Importance of rereading the basic books for, ashe often stated, tah time he woud reead Science and Sanity he would lear Something new or gain some new insight that might have tscaped him in previous readings. The ‘semantic man’ does ot fssume that having read the basic Iiterature that he “knows it He must continue to reread, reexamine and see new rcllion ‘hips and applications with each reading. He realizes, also, that fone does no just read Science and Sanity. One imust study for there are many idess, principles and relationships which ae hot specifically stated ut t00 offen implied oF left undelines 8he had supplied examples of all the principles, Korzybski said, the book would be many times larger than it already was, So tmuch ofthe material was left to the wisdom of the student, As his abstractions are relative to his own interests and know: flue, and a8 these are constantly changing, so his abstractions ‘rom each reweading would change, take on new relationships, and lead foward new insights, Learning n an on-going process Finally, Ieving Lee believed that the “semantic man” doesn't talk these principles, le does them. He realizes that all that seneral semantics can do isto provide an attitude ora set with ‘vhich to approach problems, Dr. Lee believed that one doesn’t apply general semantics, one achieves an extensional attitude, orientation and ‘behavior~in the broadest terms~facts fist then talk or behave, This, then, is De. Leo's profile of the ‘semantic man.’ This is wat ine believed such a man would look like were he to behave in erms of the principles of general semantics. But while no individual can be completely extensional at all times, Dr. Lee ‘himself approached this extreme degre of extensonaliation as few persons do. His was an_unusvally briliant mind, He jnderstood these principles and he knew how to apply them to schieve extensional behavior, I the ‘semantic man’ is time-inder, if he i a productive person who leaves more than he took, then Dr, Lee's many articles and books are 2 ving mementa to what an important contribution such @ man ean make to all humanity. In this day And age there isa need for men to rise above the producers of the past. There i a need to progres in geometric progression if ‘man is to full his human potentiality: Manhood of humanity cen only be achieved when great and learned scholars, semantic ‘nen of the future, carry om the important work of lessening ot eliminating the many” conflicts, confusions, disagreements, prejudices and wars which have been a “human’ characteristic for so many centuries, living J. Lee played an important role in achieving these ends, fr his teaching, lecturing and writing aided many in gai lng # better understanding of themselves as well as the world round them. And those who came in contact with him and profited from his wisdom eld him highly with a deep and Testing reverence ‘SUGGESTED READINGS Dooker, M. Joseph (ed) Efetive Communication on the Job, New York: “American Management Association, 1956 Haney, William V. Communication: Patterns and Incidents. Homewood, I: Richard D. Irvin, Ine, 1960, Hayakawa, .1 Language "in Thought and Action. New York! Harcourt, Brace & Co., 1949, Johnson, Wendell People in Quandaries. New York Harper & Bros, 1946, Lee ving J. Language Habits in’ Human Affairs Now York: Harper & Bros, 1941 Lee ving J. How 10 Talk with People. New York: Harper & Bros, 1952, nPost Office San Francis, Cali