Algebraic and Geometric Logic

Author(s): Ter Ellingson-Waugh

Reviewed work(s):
Source: Philosophy East and West, Vol. 24, No. 1 (Jan., 1974), pp. 23-40
Published by: University of Hawai'i Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1397600 .
Accessed: 14/09/2012 06:09

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of Hawai'i Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophy
East and West.

http://www.jstor.org
Ter Ellingson-Waugh Algebraic and geometric logic

INTRODUCTION

Ludwig Wittgenstein, in the Philosophical Investigations, advances the sug-

gestion that "uttering a word is like striking a note on the keyboard of the
imagination (Vorstellungsklavier)."
If we gave this suggestion a slightly different meaning and weight than its
author intended, we might extend the image like this: Words struck as notes
on the Vorstellungsklavier belong to various "modes of discourse"-everyday,
scientific, economic, etc.-analogous to the musical modes. The related words
(notes) of a given mode of discourse, for instance, mathematics, are consonant
with others in the same mode, and dissonant with respect to other modes, such
as the discourse belonging to ethics or aesthetics. The words of a given lin-
guistic mode are "in tune" with each other to a very high degree: the terms
used in logic, for example, are assigned quite precise positions and interrela-
tions. It is just this precise "tuning" within the separate modes, however, that
creates problems of dissonance when we combine them, for example, when we
attempt a logical analysis of ethical propositions.' The result is usually "clash-
ing" or "noisy"; we end up with something that is good logic but bad ethics,
or ethically satisfactory but logically faulty.
Intermodal dissonance was historically an important practical problem for
Western musicians and was finally solved by a system called "equal tempera-
ment." Their solution was to tune their instruments slightly out of tune with
the exact pitches of any single mode, but approximately in tune with the pitches
of every mode.2The system was established firmly by composers like Bach, who
wrote works for such a "Well-tempered Keyboard" (Wohltemperierte Klavier).
Thus our image of the problems of "dissonance" between separate linguistic
"modes" presents its own solution: in the comparison of separate modes, the
best result will be an approximate degree of precision that slightly distorts,
but in its main outlines adequately represents, the separate modes. The result
would be not a "true" usage of either mode, but a workable comparison of them.

Ter Ellingson-Waugh is a graduate student in Buddhist Studies at the University of

Wisconsin,Madison.
1 This conception of dissonance between separate linguistic modes would seem to be
potentially homologizableto Leon Festinger's Theory of Cognitive Dissonance.
2 This account slightly distorts the actual historical problem,which was that of dissonance
between different keys, not modes. Keys are transpositionsof a basic modal structure to
different pitch levels which do not alter the modal structuresthemselves (two such modal
structures-major and minor-were transposedto twelve pitch levels each, giving a total
of twenty-four keys). Because linguistic systems vary structurallyas well as in content-
that is, they vary not just in vocabularybut also in usage and criteria of significance-the
concept of structurally differing "modes"seems more applicable. By thus distorting the
musical facts, I bring my account slightly out of tune with accurate musical discourse; at
this cost, the analogy to language systems is rendered more consistent. Philosophers, on
the other hand, should feel dissonancein the impressionisticcharacter of the whole argu-
ment.
24 Ellingson-Waugh

The "logic of ethics" would be neither pure logic nor ethics; but it might be
more useful for some purposes than either illogical ethics or unethical logic.
The outcome of comparative efforts along these lines would be, adapting
Wittgenstein's term, a Wohltemperierte Vorstellungsklavier-a "Well-tem-
pered Representational Keyboard"-that would be adequate for communica-
tion between all the various disciplines and that hopefully would allow for the
possibility of transposition into the mode(s) of everyday discourse as well.
This goal may or may not be achievable. If such a harmonizing of separate dis-
cursive modes were possible, the possibility would almost certainly have to
rest on a basis of a shared cultural heritage and environment.
For intermodal dissonance must become greater as we try to communicate
across cultural boundaries.3 The structures of our discursive modes (which
may be either the images or the vehicles of our cognitive structures) vary cul-
turally: Christian and Buddhist ethics, Hindu and Napoleonic jurisprudence,
vary in their structures as well as in their contents. Doing "ethics," while taking
account of both Christian and Buddhist definitions, is like trying to perform
"music" simultaneously in the scales of Rag Todi and C major. If anything
comes out at all, it must sound very strange to adherents of both systems, or
totally alien to one. The second of these results achieves nothing new. The
first, if both sides can "tune in" after the initial shock, might provide a useful
basis for mutual expression and evaluation.

When I speak here of Western and Indo-Tibetan "logic," I expect the

discussion to grate on the ears of both Western and Tibetan logicians.
Western logic is now usually defined as something like "the principles of
valid inference,"4or "the science of necessary inference."5 By such definitions,
the system I am comparing is not really "logic" at all, since it involves neither
sequential inference nor principles of validity. But I am using in this discus-
sion a quite different conception of Western logic. Rather than defining logic
by its intentions and goals, as in the definitions quoted, I attempt to character-
ize it in terms of how it appears "from the outside"-to describe its practical
applications rather than to define its theoretical essence. Accordingly, looking
at current logic textbooks and the use of logic in current philosophical writings,
it seems possible to describe Western logic-not its theory or history, but most
of its current practice-as the symbolic transposition of semantic contents into
a mathematicalframework.

8 Of course, interculturaldissonancecan be useful for some purposes,as when some forms

of Oriental dress or thought are adoptedby Western "counterculture"groups. Dissonance
becomes,as it were, a feature of a certain aesthetic style.
4 William and Martha Kneale, The Development of Logic (London: Oxford
University
Press, 1971), p. 1.
5 Willard V. O. Quine, Elementary Logic, rev. ed. (New York: Harper
Torchbooks,
1965), p. 1.
25

This is also the sense in which I define the Tibetan system discussed here
as "logic." It is not so characterized by Tibetan philosophers. Their "logic"
(Sanskrit pramana, Tibetan tshad ma), like ours, is concerned with inference,
validity, and argumentation, and is closely related theoretically to epistemology
and historically to the practice of dialectic and debate. The system I describe
belongs, by contrast, primarily to the ritual rather than the philosophical mode.
Thus the entire system of Buddhist formal logic and all the current and
historical exceptions to the currently dominant Western usage are left out of
the picture. Hopefully the new comparative point of view achieved by this
method will justify the amount of dissonance created by these omissions. My
goal is to expand the Western concept of "logic" into a broader and more flexi-
ble form; I have left the Tibetan concept of tshad ma totally untampered with.
My characterizationof logic, of course, could be dismissed as dealing "only"
with the techniques of logic. Likewise, the philosophical analysis of language
could be rejected as dealing not with the substance of philosophical thought
but merely with the technical devices by which it is expressed. To those in-
clined to such rejections, this discussion will be of little use; but I hope it will
hold some interest for others.

Most of Western philosophy has closely adhered to a traditional methodology

of linear, discursive presentation. In recent decades we have become aware
that underlying this methodology there functions a logical system whose basic
operations are those of algebraic quantification and negation, and that our
linguistic formulations can thus be readily translated into sequences of mathe-
matical symbols. This discovery seems to reinforce the prejudice that our
methods are "scientific," although perhaps not yet fully perfected, while other
systems used in other cultures are primitive, imprecise, and in Walt Kelly's
terms, "mythillogical."
Some items, of even our own experience, seem to clash with our familiar
logical structures, such as the constancy of the speed of light, or some findings
of particle physics. And, on the other side, some critical observers have helped
reveal to us the logic of foreign views and ways. Anthropologists, particularly,
have been active in trying to expand our consciousness of possible alternate
modes of thought, from Frazer's famous characterizationin The Golden Bough
of magic as "false," primitive science, to Levi-Strauss' exploration in The
Savage Mind of the "science of the concrete." There is also increased philo-
sophical investigation of non-Western thought systems, particularly those of
the Oriental high cultures. Yet the impression persists that because our logic
is fundamentally mathematical, it is also fundamentally superior.
But we make a serious mistake if we assume that the only mathematical logic
26 Ellingson-Waugh

possible is our traditional algebraic type. Centuries ago, another kind of sys-
tem was invented and elaborated within the tradition of the Tantric religions
of India and Tibet, which can only be described as a geometrical logic. Our
algebraic system utilizes sequential techniques of quantification and negation.
Neither of these is possible in the Indo-Tibetan geometric system, which in-
stead demonstrates configurational relationships of similarity (symmetry) and
congruence. Equivalence can be shown in both systems; but in the algebraic,
it is a quantitative equivalence, while in the geometric, it is a qualitative kind.
And, while we have recently learned to present our formulations as constructs
of abstract symbols in algebraic equations, the Indians and Tibetans have
traditionally presented their formulations in pictorial symbols structured
within geometric constructs known as mandalas.

II

The basic form of the mandala (Fig. 1) is that of a circle enclosing a square
whose diagonals are its diameters. Since the mandala represents simultaneously
a cosmogram, a psychogram, and a purified ritual site where religious powers
(dbang) can be obtained, the geometric elements of circle and square have
various meanings.
The circle represents the cycle of samsara, of worldly existence and re-
births, and may contain pictorial representations of secular scenes (Fig. 2).
Its connotations are of unstructuredness, endlessness, and intolerably unbroken
regularity. At the same time, it is a boundary which sets off and defines by con-
trast the special character of the structured system within it. Its outer ring is
the fire of Enlightenment which burns away misconceptions. Its middle ring
is of vajra (rdo rje), showing the diamondlike sharpness, clarity, and indes-
tructible solidity of Enlightenment. Next, there may be (as in Fig. 2) an "in-
side" structured view of the worldly cycle, according to the Buddha's system
of the chain of Dependent Origination (pratityasamutpada). Finally, the inner
circle is formed of the petals of the divine lotus upon which Enlightened rebirth
takes place. Logically, the circle serves to enclose (bracket) and define a sys-
tem which is contiguous with itself, but which, because of its structured nature,
is of a fundamentally different quality.
The square, by contrast, is a highly regular structure. Its diagonals sub-
divide it into four congruent isosceles, right triangles. Visually it is a palace,
its walls hung with jewels and topped with royal parasols; its gates facing
the four quarters of the world, crowned with pairs of unicorn deer (bse ru),
"listening" with one-pointed concentration to the wheel representing the Bud-
dha's teaching, the true gateway to the palace. Logically it is a structure into
which symbols may be inserted to postulate relationships of similarity and
equivalence.
27

FIG. 1. Mandala of the Four Guardian Kings. Lokesh Chandra and Raghu
Vira. A New Tibeto-Mongol Pantheon, vol. 14. New Delhi, The International
Academy of Indian Culture, 1964, p. 33. (Courtesy: Dr. Lokesh Chandra)
28 Ellingson-Waugh

FIG. 2. Mandala of Sri Cakrasamvara.Lokesh Chandra and Raghu Vira.

A New Tibeto-Mongol Pantheon, vol. 14. New Delhi, The International Acad-
emy of Indian Culture, 1964, p. 63. (Courtesy: Dr. Lokesh Chandra)
29

We have said that the geometric logic expressed in the mandala is, like
algebraic logic, mathematical; it is also symbolic. But its symbols, being not
abstract but pictorial, are also not single-valued but multivalent. This feature
is crucial to understanding the workings of the system. By use of multivalent
symbolization, a number of sets of symbolic equivalence can be simultaneously
diagrammed and, subsequently, interpreted on various levels as the need
arises. Criteria of abstract simplicity are here abandoned, while symbols are
selected for their richness and complexity. Biological elements (plants and
animals), human figures (Buddhas), and cultural objects (royal robes and
ornaments, weapons musical instruments, etc.) are characteristic of the sym-
bols used. Their combination produces symbolic composites which are religi-
ously, psychologically, and culturally highly evocative, such as the weapons-
carrying, bull-headed fierce Buddha known as "The Diamond Terrorizer"
and "The Slayer of Death" (Vajrabhairava/rdo rje 'jigs byed, Yamantaka/
gshin rje gshed, Fig. 3).
These are not arbitrary creations. Images, as objects of contemplation to
purify the body, mind, and senses have to be created in wrathful as well as
peaceful aspects, and sometimes with multiple heads and hands, so that they
suit the physical, mental, and sensuous capacities of different individuals
striving for the final goal.6
So the multivalence of the symbols used is both intentional and functional.
What about their systematic usage in the mandala?
Take the case of Figure 1. According to a structural convention, the four
quarters of the central square are assigned to the four directions of the com-
pass and given their associated colors:
West
Red
South Center North
Yellow White Green
East
Blue

Superimposed upon this stylized cosmic map we see a planetary configuration

of five figures surrounding a larger central figure. The central figure is a
peaceful form of Vajrapani(phyag na rdo rje), patron of Tantra and a symbol
of the fierce, protective aspect of Buddhism. His satellites here are the four
great Guardian Kings of the Four Quarters, who also represent this fierce,
protective aspect in a lower, more worldly form. We thus have here the
symbolic, diagrammatic subdivision of a general concept into its (worldly

6 Dalai Lama XIV Bstan 'dzin rgya mtsho, An Introduction to Buddhism (New Delhi:
Tibet House, 2509 B.E.).
30 Ellingson-Waugb

FIG. 3. Vajrabhairava(Rdo rje 'jigs byed). Collectionof Field Museum,

Chicago.
31

directional) concretely structured components. Formally, two kinds of rela-

tionships are postulated:
(1) equality and similarity of the satellite figures positioned in the four
quarters of the square, and (2) subordination of the planetary figures to the
central, implying a holistic, integrated reality which can be seen "outwardly"
as a system of structured components. Geometrically, the use of concentric
circles implies the equivalence of symbols pictured at three different levels of
organization. These are: (a) the circle outside the square, symbolizing reality
as cyclic, undifferentiated, and chaotic; (b) the circle within the square,
structured by the geometric subdivisions of the square, picturing reality as a
structured composite made up of related component parts; and (c) the central
circle with the Buddha image, representing an undifferentiated, holistic, inte-
grated view. These are successively higher ways of regarding the same
reality, which might be called experiential, analytic, and Enlightened, respec-
tively. Each is valid for its own level; we might think of them as three
different lenses for viewing the same picture from different perspectives.
Geometrically and logically, repetition of the circular form and concentricity
indicate equivalence of what is symbolized at the various levels, while their
position inside or outside of the structured square indicates the analytic level
at which they are to be taken. The central circle actually is to be considered a
dimensionless point, at the intersection of the circles' radii and the square's
diagonals.
The "equivalence" of these symbols is a different kind of equivalence from
that postulated in algebraic formulations. To be sure, the symbols in the inter-
mediate, quartered circle seem equivalent in a normal way, as the mytho-
logical guardians of the western, northern, eastern, and southern quarters are
said to be "equal" in power and importance: w =n = e'= s. Furthermore,
the set of four is equal to some sort of protective aspect or quality of Bud-
dhism: p = (w + n + e + s). And this protective aspect is also equivalent
to the central symbol, the Buddha Vajrapani: p = V. But then: V = (w +
n + e + s), which is false, since Vajrapani represents a qualitatively differ-
ent level of symbolization than the Four Guardians. This qualitative shift is
not represented within the algebraic system and has to be taken as a failure
of the rule of equivalence, like the failures encountered in quotational contexts.
We could, perhaps, accommodate the difference by considering one symbol,
(V), to be metalinguistic or metasystemic. However, there is no difficulty in
accommodating the qualitative shift in the geometric formulation of the
mandala, because qualitative equivalence can be easily expressed by geometri-
cally similar shapes in concentric relation.
Furthermore, this particular instance represents a very simple use of the
geometry of the mandala. Its real usefulness becomes apparent when we con-
sider a more complex case which exploits the multivalence of symbols to
32 Ellingson-Waugh

present simultaneous relationships of categories on several qualitatively

different levels, as in the often-mentioned Mandala of the Five Tathagatas.7
The Tathagatas, or Jina (rgyal ba), are a group of Buddhas found in the
top order of the pantheon. They are deployed in a mandala with the layout
given above:
West-Red
Amitabha
South-Yellow Center-White North-Green
Ratnasambhava Vairocana Amoghasiddhi
East-Blue
Aksobhya
In this case, the center is taken as a fifth direction.8 Depending on the system
followed, the central figure might be taken either as one member among
equals, or, as both one member and at the same time the apotheosized embodi-
ment of the whole set of five.9
The Tathagatas collectively embody a large number of sets of symbolic
associations. Some of these are shown in Table 1. Besides being associated
with specific directions of the compass and colors of the spectrum, they also
represent the systematic divisions of the physical elements, the constituents of
the human personality (skandha/phung po), the passions, the senses, differ-
ent "families" (rigs) of followers whose personal characteristics and inclina-
tions correspond with the qualities represented by a specific individual
Tathagata, and several other sets of associations. Thus, the geometric struc-
ture in which they are situated affords a means of simultaneously diagram-
ming, through symbols, corresponding patterns of relationships between sets
of categories where comparison would ordinarily be quite difficult even be-
tween individual members of different sets.
The geometry of the mandala furnishes a basis for the structural comparison
of different types of systems; and, it is in this structural comparison of entire
systems that its superiority to the algebraic equation becomes evident. Levels
of meaning can be projected outward through an indefinite number of con-
centric circles, as in Figure 2. And each symbolic component of a mandala
can be structurally subdefinedby a subordinate mandala; or, viewed in another
way mandalas can be arranged into an encompassing mandala, so that it is

7 The fullest discussion is found in G. Tucci, The Theory and Practice of the Mandala
(New York: Weiser, 1970).
8 The list of directions can be expanded to include up, down, and those intermediatebe-
tween the four compasspoints.
9 Cumulativeenumeration,counting the sum of a set as one of its members,is a common
Tibetan technique.AnthropologistR. E. Miller considers this type of enumerationto con-
stitute a persvasive pattern in Tibetan culture (private communication).
Table 1 Symbolismof the Five Tathagatas
Amoghasi
Vairocana Ratnasambhava Amitabha Don yod 'g
Rnam par Rin chen 'Od dpag med pa
snang mdzad 'byung nas "Boundless "Unfaili
Tathagata "Illuminator" "Jewel-born" Light" success

Direction Center South West North

Color White Yellow Red Green
Element Space Earth Fire Water
Passion Ignorance Pride Passion Jealousy
Skandha Form Feeling Perception Action
Sense Sight Hearing Smell Taste
Family* Tathagata Jewel Lotus Extensive
Symbol Wheel Jewel Lotus Crossed va
Animal Lion Horse Peacock Winged d
from G. Tucci, Tibetan Painted Scrolls, Vol. I. Rome, 1949, pp. 238-240.
*Adapted
Families grouped according to system of Anuttara-yoga-tantra
34 Ellingson-Waugh

possible to generate mandalas of mandalas (Fig. 4). The structure is infinitely

replicable at all levels of description, and every aspect of the system under con-
sideration can be simultaneously diagrammed in symbolic form within the
structural model.

III

Western thought does not seem to have evolved a geometric logical system of a
complexity and sophistication comparable to that which we have described in
the mandala. Some theoretical recognition of this mode of thinking does exist,
and, particularly in the social sciences, there is a growing practice of struc-
tural, diagrammaticmodes of analysis. We will briefly consider both of these
theoretical and practical parallels.
A close approach to the distinction made here between geometric and alge-
braic logic is the standard psychoanalytic distinction between "primary" and
"secondary" mental processes. Secondary process is ordinary "logical" dis-
cursive, linear thought, which is unambiguous, verbal, cognizant of reality,
contradiction, truth or falsity, and so forth. Primary process is the mode of
pictorial symbolic representation characteristic of unconscious thought, which
is especially visible in dreams:

They reproduce logical connection by approximation in time and space.

... A causal relation between two thoughts is either left unrepresented or is
replaced by a sequence. . . . The alternative "either-or" is never expressed
in dreams, both of the alternatives being inserted in the text of the dream as
though they were equally valid. . . . Ideas which are contraries are by pref-
ference expressed in dreams by one and the same element. . . . similarity,
consonance, the possession of common attributes is very highly favored by the
mechanism of dream formation. The dream work makes use of such cases
. . by bringing together everything that shows an agreement of this kind into
a new unity.'0
This "new unity" is achieved through the mechanism of overdeterminationof
dream symbols; that is, symbols are selected by multiple causal processes,
which combine with each other at various symbolic levels, so that each symbol
is associated with several different thoughts and each thought is expressed
in several different symbols. Thus, "The fact that the meanings of dreams are
arranged in superimposed layers is one of the most delicate, though also one
of the most interesting, problems of dream-interpretation.""1All of these fea-
tures of primary process thought-spatial presentation of relationship, con-
struction of multivalent symbols by combining pictorial elements, presentation
of systems structurally rather than sequentially, and superimposition of mean-

10 S. Freud, On Dreams (1901) (New York: Norton, 1952), 64-66.

11 S. Freud, The Interpretationof Dreams (1900). (Standard Ed.) (New York: Basic
Books, 1956), p. 219.
35

FIG. 4. Mandalaof mandalas.Lokesh Chandraand Raghu Vira. A New

Tibeto-MongolPantheon,vol. 14. New Delhi, The InternationalAcademyof
Indian Culture,1964, p. 24. (Courtesy: Dr. Lokesh Chandra)
36 Ellingson-Waugh

ing layers-we have found in the geometric logic of the mandala. We might
add that the feature of combining contradictory elements into a single symbol
is also used there, as in the fire which both destroys and enlightens, or the
sexually and aggressively active Buddha who has transcended the worldly
passions.
A further emphasis appears in Freud's later work; "The function of judg-
ment is concerned ultimately with two sorts of decision. It may assert or deny
that a thing has a particular property; or it may affirm or dispute that a par-
ticular image or presentation exists in reality."l2
That is, secondary process functions (judges) by predication and existential
quantification, and by negation and falsification. In the primary process func-
tioning of the unconscious id, however, "there is nothing that could be com-
pared with negation; . . . there is nothing that corresponds to the idea of time;
there is no recognition of the passage of time and . . . the id of course
knows no judgments of value: no good and evil, no morality."13 Again,
by comparison, the mandala does not admit negation. There is no way
of presenting a negation within a diagrammatic system; the nearest possibility
is simply to exclude an element from the diagram. Also, time is represented
cyclically rather than historically; that is, its passages literally "not recog-
nized," since what comes after also went before and is now present.14 And
much of the symbolism presented is overtly morally ambiguous, with its
idealized violence and lust.
And, remarkably, the symbolic mode of thought in the primary process is
presented as something primitive, "archaic," and "infantile."15Remarkably,
because this assessment accords so well with our ethnocentric bias against
symbolic modes of thought in "primitive" cultures. The relative prominence of
primary process in infantile and psychotic thought, art, and religion is very
frequently called to our attention.
Is pictorial, diagrammatic representation then simply a primitive or patho-
logical substitute for normal, logical thought processes ? Perhaps; but, if so, then
only in the spontaneous, unelaborated forms produced by individual infants,
artists, and dreamers. The difference between these forms and the mandala
is that the latter incorporates a logical, mathematical structure by which the
pictorial symbols are integrated into a geometric system and understood ac-
cording to an elaborate, sophisticated set of conventions. Between a product of
this system and a private fantasy, there is a difference just as great as between
12 S. Freud, "Negation,"StandardEdition Vol. XIX, p. 236.
13 S. Freud, New IntroductoryLectures on Psychoanalysis (1933). In The CompleteIn-
troductoryLectures (Standard Ed.) (New York: Norton, 1966), p. 538.
14 On cyclical and historical time, see Mircea Eliade, The Sacred and the Profane (New
York: Harper Torchbooks,1961), pp. 104 ff.
15 S. Freud, IntroductoryLectures on Psychoanalysis, Standard Ed., in Complete Intro-
ductory Lectures (New York: Norton, 1966), chapter 13.
37

a set of algebraic logical equations and a baby's first sentences. Because the
mandala organizes its symbols by a culturally elaborated structure, it is the
basis of a logical system; and its geometric system shares with our algebraic
the common status of a mathematical symbolic system.
As for the applicability of geometric systems outside of mythological and
ritual contexts, we are at present witnessing a considerable growth of efforts
to arrive at diagrammaticunderstandings of social "structures" by social scien-
tists. These efforts have so far utilized forms similar to the following paradig-
matic diagram of the "basic structuralist hypothesis," as adapted by Leach
from Lane.16

capacity

Deep Deep

Surface Surface

Speech, Myths Patterns of

discourse marriage and family
relations

< Cultural metaphors >

(shifts of register)
We have here the mandala's methodology of diagrammatic representation of
a basic structure, which can be replicated simultaneously at different levels and
with different groups of referents, and combined into an overall structure at a
metasystemic level. The efficiency of this approach becomes apparent when one
tries to devise a similarly economical verbal formulation of structural relation-
ships between language, myth, kinship, and the structure of structure itself.

16 EdmundLeach, "The Influenceof Cultural Context on Non-Verbal Communicationin

Man," in R. Hirde, ed., Non-Verbal Communication(Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity
Press, 1972), p. 332.
 38 Ellingson-Waugh

By such diagrams, one can present systemic, metasystemic, and subsystemic

formulations relating to several different systems simultaneously.
Of course, this presentation is relatively crude when compared with that of
the mandala. There is some rudimentary usage of geometric similarity, paral-
lel, and convergence. But the precision of structural configuration and the com-
plexity of symbolic expression found in the mandala are simply not possible in
these elementary diagrams. We will have to advance further in our under-
standing of both structural relationships and of diagrammatic symbolization
before more highly sophisticated forms of presentation become useful to us.
The impetus to develop this kind of understanding does exist. Leach says of
the structuralist approach:
At the heart of the argument is the thesis that (a) the phenomenon of me-
dium transfer by which we are able to express the spoken word and music in
written signs, and (b) the integrative capacity whereby simultaneous signals
received through the senses of seeing, hearing, tasting, touching, smelling, etc.
are felt to constitute a single rather than a multiple experience. Both imply
that, at some level of the mind, we are endowed with an innate structuring
capacity which is most easily conceived of in algebraic terms-the "algebra"
being the structure which is common to all the diverse cultural manifestations
in which the operations of the mind may be observed.17

By "algebraic"Leach appears to mean the use of symbolic variables-for which

different referents (values) can be substituted-within the basic mathematical
structure. However, as we have see, it is also possible to interchange symbols
within a geometric logical framework. In the case of the mandala, this involved
pictorial, multivalent symbols rather than abstract, single-valued ones.18 More-
over, we have seen that the mandala excels at precisely those two operations
which Leach emphasizes: (a) "medium transfer" (also describable as meta-
systemic interchange of elements)19 at a highly complex level, by use of
multivalent symbols; and (b) structural integration of these symbols into geo-
metrically patterned symbol-systems which replicate the structural patterns of
the referent systems, and which, because of symbolic multivalence, simulta-
neously present divergent referent systems as a structural unity.
It would therefore seem that our "innate structuring capacity"-or at least,
the common structure that underlies structures-can best be conceived not in
algebraic, but in geometric terms. Leach himself admits, " . . . any inferences
which are made about the 'algebraic structures of the mind' are mere guesses
about the mechanism of a black box which is inaccessible to inspection. ...
Even so, structuralists fully appreciate that the sorts of guesses which they

17Ibid.
18However,mandalasof abstractsymbolsalso occur.
19See Ellingson,"ClassifyingMusicalNotation Systems,"paper read at Society for
Toronto,1972.
Ethnomusicology,
39

have so far been able to put forward are quite rudimentary."20There are prob-
lems in applying conventional truth-testing criteria to structural analyses.
What exactly "are" structures, or in what sense do they "exist"? How are
structural analyses verifiable or falsifiable? Some structuralists realize that the
level of meaning of their formulations is rather different from that of ordinary
descriptive discourse, as when Levi-Strauss begins his study of myths with
. . . it would not be wrong to consider this book itself as a myth: it is, as it
were, the myth of mythology."21And both Levi-Strauss and Leach have been
compelled to look outside the range of normal algebraic logical structures, par-
ticularly into the area of musical forms, to furnish structural analogues for their
formulations.22It would therefore not be entirely fantastic to assume that the
elaboration of geometric-logical structures would be a useful area of investiga-
tion for social scientific theorists. The growing use of diagrammatic-symbolic
presentation seems to indicate a tendency in this direction already.
No such tendency seems to exist in philosophy itself. There are, of course,
the Venn diagrams, which utilize only the geometric devices of inclusion and
congruence, and which function mainly as an adjunct of more elaborate alge-
braic formulations, as a pedagogical device. Geometry will probably enter
philosophical logic as algebra did, by the back door of applied and theoretical
science.
But far from being primitive or imprecise, geometric logic is complementary
to algebraic-when its system is sufficiently elaborated-and can be used in
conjunction with it. Despite their differences, the two systems are to a degree
mutually translatable, at least at the level of individual elements or individual
relationships. A mandala can be described in verbal discourse, although it
would be far less efficient to do so than to diagram it. And because of this
capacity for translation, I have refrained from characterizing geometric logic
as nonlinguistic. Some linguistic formulations, like poetry, seem to follow a
logical plan of organization, which is more geometric than algebraic. Even
Levi-Strauss' book, mentioned above, follows a plan which at times is seen as
music and at other times as myth.
It remains to work out in detail the grammar of geometric structures. We
would have to specify the linguistic meanings of the geometric conventions
used in structures like the mandala: similarity, congruence, concentricity, bi-
section, quartering, subdivision, inclusion, radiation or projection, tangency,
parallelism, perpendicularity, and the rest. We would also have to reach a bet-
ter understanding of the uses of multivalent and pictorial symbolism. Only then

20Leach, op. cit., p. 333.

21C. Levi-Strauss, The Raw and the Cooked (New York: Harper Bros., 1969), p. 12.
22Levi-Strauss, op. cit., 14 ff.; Leach, op. cit., 318 ff.
40 Ellingson-Waugh

could we explore the uses of geometric logic with that of algebraic and legi-
timately compare its usefulness.
At present, we can at least recognize the existence of geometry as the legiti-
mate basis for a mathematical logic and recognize that its application has been
elaborated in the context of some Asian philosophies to a degree of sophistica-
tion the extent of which we are still unable to grasp. This realization could be
the ground for an impartially comparative view of other philosophies, and the
base on which we build new understandings of the structures of our thoughts.