 |
|
TOWARD UNDERSTANDING E -PRIME
Robert Anton Wilson
E-PRIME, abolishing all forms of the verb "to be,"
has its roots in the field of general semantics, as presented
by Alfred Korzybski in his 1933 book, Science and Sanity. Korzybski
pointed out the pitfalls associated with, and produced by, two
usages of "to be": identity and predication. His student
D. David Bourland, Jr., observed that even linguistically sensitive
people do not seem able to avoid identity and predication uses
of "to be" if they continue to use the verb at all.
Bourland pioneered in demonstrating that one can indeed write
and speak without using any form of "to be," calling
this subset of the English language "E-Prime." Many
have urged the use of E-Prime in writing scientific and technical
papers. Dr. Kellogg exemplifies a prime exponent of this activity.
Dr. Albert Ellis has rewritten five of his books in E-Prime,
in collaboration with Dr. Robert H. Moore, to improve their clarity
and to reap the epistemological benefits of this language revision.
Korzybski felt that all humans should receive training in general
semantics from grade school on, as "semantic hygiene"
against the most prevalent forms of logical error, emotional
distortion, and "demonological thinking." E-Prime provides
a straightforward training technique for acquiring such semantic
hygiene.To understand E-Prime, consider the human brain as a computer.
(Note that I did not say the brain "is" a computer.)
As the Prime Law of Computers tells us, GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT
(GIGO, for short). The wrong software guarantees wrong answers.
Conversely, finding the right software can "miraculously"
solve problems that previously appeared intractable.It seems likely that the principal software used in the human brain consists
of words, metaphors, disguised metaphors, and linguistic structures in general.
The Sapir-Whorf-Korzybski
Hypothesis, in anthropology, holds that a change in language can alter
our perception of the cosmos. A revision of language structure, in particular,
can alter the brain as dramatically as a psychedelic. In our metaphor, if
we change the software, the computer operates in a new way.Consider the following paired sets of propositions, in which
Standard English alternates with English-Prime (E-Prime):
- lA. The electron is a wave.
- lB. The electron appears as a wave when measured with instrument-l.
- 2A. The electron is a particle.
- 2B. The electron appears as a particle when measured with
instrument-2.- 3A. John is lethargic and unhappy.
- 3B. John appears lethargic and unhappy in the office.
- 4A. John is bright and cheerful.
- 4B. John appears bright and cheerful on holiday at the beach.
- 5A. This is the knife the first man used to stab the second
man.- 5B. The first man appeared to stab the second man with what
looked like a knife to me.- 6A. The car involved in the hit-and-run accident was a blue
Ford.- 6B. In memory, I think I recall the car involved in the hit-and-run
accident as a blue Ford.- 7A. This is a fascist idea.
- 7B. This seems like a fascist idea to me.
- 8A. Beethoven is better than Mozart.
- 8B. In my present mixed state of musical education and ignorance,
Beethoven seems better to me than Mozart.- 9A. That is a sexist movie.
- 9B. That seems like a sexist movie to me.
- 10A. The fetus is a person.
- 10B. In my system of metaphysics, I classify the fetus as
a person.The "A"-type statements (Standard English) all implicitly
or explicitly assume the medieval view called "Aristotelian
essentialism" or "naive realism." In other words,
they assume a world made up of block-like entities with indwelling
"essences" or spooks- "ghosts in the machine."
The "B"-type statements (E-Prime) recast these sentences
into a form isomorphic to modern science by first abolishing
the "is" of Aristotelian essence and then reformulating
each observation in terms of signals received and interpreted
by a body (or instrument) moving in space-time.Relativity, quantum mechanics, large sections of general physics,
perception psychology, sociology, linguistics, modern math, anthropology,
ethology, and several other sciences make perfect sense when
put into the software of E-Prime. Each of these sciences generates
paradoxes, some bordering on "nonsense" or "gibberish,"
if you try to translate them back into the software of Standard
English.Concretely, "The electron is a wave" employs the
Aristotelian "is" and thereby introduces us to the
false-to-experience notion that we can know the indwelling "essence"
of the electron. "The electron appears as a wave when measured
by instrument-1" reports what actually occurred in space-time,
namely that the electron when constrained by a certain instrument
behaved in a certain way.Similarly, "The electron is a particle" contains
medieval Aristotelian software, but "The electron appears
as a particle when measured by instrument-2" contains modern
scientific software. Once again, the software determines whether
we impose a medieval or modern grid upon our reality-tunnel.Note that "the electron is a wave" and "the
electron is a particle" contradict each other and begin
the insidious process by which we move gradually from paradox
to nonsense to total gibberish. On the other hand, the modern
scientific statements "the electron appears as a wave when
measured one way" and "the electron appears as a particle
measured another way" do not contradict, but rather complement
each other. (Bohr’s Principle of Complementarity, which explained
this and revolutionized physics, would have appeared obvious
to all, and not just to a person of his genius, if physicists
had written in E-Prime all along. . . .)Looking at our next pair, "John is lethargic and unhappy"
vs. "John is bright and cheerful,’ we see again how medieval
software creates metaphysical puzzles and totally imaginary contradictions.
Operationalizing the statements, as physicists since Bohr have
learned to operationalize, we find that the E-Prime translations
do not contain any contradiction, and even give us a clue as
to causes of John’s changing moods. (Look back if you forgot
the translations.)"The first man stabbed the second man with a knife"
lacks the overt "is" of identity but contains Aristotelian
software nonetheless. The E-Prime translation not only operationalizes
the data, but may fit the facts better-if the incident occurred
in a psychology class, which often conduct this experiment. (The
first man "stabs," or makes stabbing gestures at, the
second man, with a banana, but many students, conditioned by
Aristotelian software, nonetheless "see" a knife. You
don’t need to take drugs to hallucinate; improper language can
fill your world with phantoms and spooks of many kinds.)The reader may employ his or her own ingenuity in analyzing
how "is-ness" creates false-to-facts reality-tunnels
in the remaining examples, and how E-Prime brings us back to
the scientific, the operational, the existential, the phenomenological–to
what humans and their instruments actually do in space-time as
they create observations, perceptions, thoughts, deductions,
and General Theories.I have found repeatedly that when baffled by a problem in
science, in "philosophy," or in daily life, I gain
immediate insight by writing down what I know about the enigma
in strict E-Prime. Often, solutions appear immediately-just as
happens when you throw out the "wrong" software and
put the "right" software into your PC. In other cases,
I at least get an insight into why the problem remains intractable
and where and how future science might go about finding an answer.
(This has contributed greatly to my ever-escalating agnosticism
about the political, ideological, and religious issues that still
generate the most passion on this primitive planet.)When a proposition resists all efforts to recast it in a form
consistent with what we now call E-Prime, many consider it "meaningless."
Korzybski, Wittgenstein, the Logical Positivists, and (in his
own way) Niels Bohr promoted this view. I happen to agree with
that verdict (which condemns 99 percent of theology and 99.999999
percent of metaphysics to the category of Noise rather than Meaning)–but
we must save that subject for another article. For now, it suffices
to note that those who fervently believe such Aristotelian propositions
as "A piece of bread, blessed by a priest, is a person (who
died two thousand years ago)," "The flag is a living
being," or "The fetus is a human being" do not,
in general, appear to make sense by normal twentieth-century
scientific standards.
This text comes from:
D. David Bourland, Jr. & Paul Dennithorne Johnston, "To
Be or Not: An E-Prime Anthology," International Society for General
Semantics, 1991, pp. 23-26
Robert Anton Wilson has published science fiction, historical
novels, poetry, and futuristic sociology, and he has two plays
published.An earlier version of this article appeared in Trajectories,
no. 5, the newsletter published by Robert Anton Wilson. Reprinted
from Etcetera 46, no. 4 (Winter 1989).Also see Robert Anton Wilson’s "Quantum
Psychology," (E and E-Prime, Chapter 13, pages 97-107), New Falcon
Publications, 1990
The verb forms of "to be" that E-Prime excludes includes
the words: "is, are, were,
was, am, be, been,"
and their contractions.
Addendum
by Jim Walker
Originated 09 Sep. 2001
I have received several emails criticizing Wilson’s article
where they point out that the use of E-prime seems to make statements
unusually longer than necessary. Indeed, all of Wilson’s E-prime
examples above contain longer sentences than their commonly expressed
standard English variants. Please realize that in some cases,
especially when explaining difficult scientific concepts, you
actually need more words to express a concept accurately
and clearly. But in many other cases, E-prime can clarify a concept
more concisely with fewer words. It depends on the situation.
Make everything as simple as possible but no simpler.In Wilson’s examples, he might have chosen to convert, "The
electron is a wave," to "An electron appears wave-like."
The statement, "The car involved in the hit-and-run accident
was a blue Ford," can convert to, "I recall a blue
Ford involved in the hit-and-run accident," and so forth.One critic of E-prime wrote: "A jury will be much more
impressed with the statement: ‘This is the gun that fired the
bullet that killed Mr. Jones’" than its E-based: ‘This weapon
which has the characteristics of a gun has produced the same
markings that seem to mar this bullet that allegedly made Mr.
Jones appear dead."Of course anyone can force E-prime into a longer form if one
wishes, but I could shorten his first version to a more direct:
"The bullet fired from this gun killed Mr. Jones."There do, however, appear some forms of expressions that tend
to have shorter sentence structures than E-prime constructions.
Those expressions usually involve some form of lie, deception
or an attempt to convert or convince someone, especially in religions,
political ideologies, or advertisements (see below).Another concern I hear from people involves a false belief
that those who advocate the use of E-prime wish to change the
English language through some form of coercion, or lawful action.
Folks, E-prime serves as a linguistic tool, not as an instrument
of power. I know of no advocate of E-prime, including its inventors,
who desire to change the history of literature or to force people
to use E-prime. Almost all of the works of literature, poetry,
and religious scripture contain abundant uses of non-E-prime
and I’ve yet to meet an E-prime advocate who wishes to change
that.Interestingly some advocates of E-prime claim that if you
examine the history of literature, the works which contain the
largest number of "to be" words usually involve the
most vague or misleading concepts. The works that contain the
least number of "to be" words usually come across much
clearer. For an example, the preamble of the U.S. Constitution
stands as a fine example of natural E-prime.Nor have I heard its advocates demand E-prime for all expressions.
In some cases E-prime would hinder the aim of its authors. For
example, in the use of colloquial language, satire, jokes, lies,
religious scripture, advertisements, or propaganda, E-prime could
actually block the author’s intent.For example, the Army’s motto, "Be all you can be,"
works as a powerful propaganda ploy to get naive boys to join
the service. The motto appears so grandiose, yet what does it
mean? The imagination can fill that empty "be" word
with visions of heroic battle and grandeur. Converting the motto
to E-prime would weaken it to some form such as, "Do all
that you can do." Of course "do" here represents
what the Army wants you to do such as clean toilets, run until
exhausted, or risk death in a war that you haven’t a clue about.
The Army has recently changed its motto to an even scarier lie:
"Be an Army of One." No doubt the Army here attempts
to appeal to the individualist but the entire concept of soldiering
involves submission to authority, and to follow orders without
question. Yet can you imagine what might happen if a soldier
actually believed himself as an army? I don’t know about you
but I’d stay a long distance from him.The little word "is" gets used more than any other
word in the English language. This gives politicians, advertisers
and scam artists the ability to fool and lie to the public. Since
"is" and "be" contain only two letters (or
only one letter in contractions), the advertisers can make their
lies short and concise. Falsehoods don’t need lengthy explanations,
and they tend to survive best when shortened to their easiest
remembered forms.Below describes some examples of famous advertisement slogans:
"Coke is it." (Coca-Cola)
"A diamond is foreever." (De Beers Consolidated)
"Guinness is good for you." (Guinness)
"Plop, plop, fizz, fizz, oh what a relief it is."
(Alka Seltzer)"Don’t be vague. Ask for Haig." (Haig Scotch)
"It is. Are you?" (The Independent)
"You don’t have to be Jewish to love Levy’s."
(Levy’s Rye Bread)"The future’s bright. The future’s Orange."
(Orange)"Where’s the beef?" (Wendy’s)
And here gives some other examples that work better without
E-prime (but what in the world do they mean?):"And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM…."
(God in Exodus 3:14)"I yam what I yam and that’s all what I yam." (Popeye the sailor man)
"The Truth is from thy Lord; so be not at all in doubt."
(English translation of the Koran, 2.147)"How are you?" (common greeting)
"You are my sunshine, my only sunshine."
(folk song by Jimmie Davis)"Will you be my Valentine?" (Valentine saying)
"Is that all there is?" (Song sung by Peggy
Lee)Of course anyone can express vagueness and falsehoods just
as easily with E-prime, but it wouldn’t have the impact without
"to be" forms. So if you want to lie, deceive, or convert
someone, stay away from E-prime.
Other references on the internet:
- E-Prime and Linguistic Revision, by C. A. Hilgartner:
- http://www.hilgart.org/papers_html/091S196.B07.html
- Quantum Psychology: E and E-Prime, by Robert Anton Wilson
(an earlier version of the the above article):- http://www.rawilson.com/quantum.html
- E-prime: The Spirit and the Letter, by Ralph E. Kenyon Jr.
- http://www.xenodochy.org/gs/e-prime.html
- Discovering E-Prime, by Elaine C. Johnson
- http://learn-gs.org/library/elaine-eprime.htm
Books:
To
Be or Not: An E-Prime Anthology, D. David Bourland, Jr. & Paul Dennithorne
Johnston,More
E-Prime: To Be or Not II, by Paul Dennithorne Johnston (Editor), D. David
Bourland Jr. (Editor)E-Prime
III!: A Third Anthology, by D. David Bourland (Editor), Paul Dennithorne
Johnston (Editor)Quantum
Psychology , (Chapter 13) by Robert Anton Wilson
Some people see a problem with the Sapir-Whorf-Korzybski Hypothesis (that
the structure of different languages defines the way a person behaves and
thinks). For my comment on this, click here.