mirror of
git://git.9front.org/plan9front/plan9front
synced 2025-01-12 11:10:06 +00:00
158 lines
6.3 KiB
Text
158 lines
6.3 KiB
Text
.LP
|
|
.ce
|
|
.ps 16
|
|
.CW
|
|
ALL THAT IS
|
|
.R
|
|
|
|
.ps 8
|
|
.CW
|
|
tags: 1970, missus_camilla, violet
|
|
.R
|
|
|
|
.PP
|
|
.ps 10
|
|
Violet used her stylus to press against the reflective surface of
|
|
her school leaf. Presently, a margin message from Missus Camilla
|
|
appeared, signaling the class to begin writing.
|
|
.PP
|
|
.ps 10
|
|
Violet began:
|
|
|
|
.fp 1 R H
|
|
.fp 2 I HI
|
|
.fp 3 B HB
|
|
.fp 4 BI HM
|
|
.QP
|
|
Words are insufficient to communicate all that is.
|
|
.LP
|
|
.QP
|
|
Having 'a problem' with this would imply that I think any other
|
|
state of affairs is remotely possible. The fact is that I have to
|
|
accept my best current thinking on the subject, and right now I
|
|
haven't come up with any reasonable counter to the observation that
|
|
language is inescapably circular. To me, this means that at best we
|
|
can only approximate The Truth at any given moment\(emand since we
|
|
can't make these determinations with any significant certainty (e.g.,
|
|
to judge the accuracy of our approximations), 'A' can only equal 'A'
|
|
on a localized, individual level.
|
|
.LP
|
|
.QP
|
|
And yet, 'A=A' is the fundamental assertion of logic. I think there
|
|
is a tendency to try and expand too far upon this basic construction.
|
|
The subjective assumptions applied by logic tests too often outpace
|
|
language's ability to accurately map the salient factors at hand. Too
|
|
much emphasis is placed upon how the logic is articulated, with very
|
|
little attention paid to the structure of the logic itself\(emwhich,
|
|
presumably, should transcend the language that was used to describe
|
|
it.
|
|
.LP
|
|
.QP
|
|
This presents an interesting\(emI'd say insurmountable\(emproblem,
|
|
and was essentially the point of my previous two papers. 'A=A.' Fine.
|
|
But what the hell is an
|
|
.I
|
|
A?
|
|
.R
|
|
And who says so? The answer is that it
|
|
all depends on who you ask.
|
|
.LP
|
|
.QP
|
|
I don't think the fact that we have managed to evolve grammars
|
|
which are effective at managing objects and activities, effective at
|
|
managing the processes of machines, even, is evidence that those
|
|
grammars are universally descriptive of our entire shared reality.
|
|
Success in a single, limited area does not imply universal success on
|
|
a grand scale, even if many times a simple set of rules can exhibit
|
|
emergent behaviors that transcend the original description.
|
|
.LP
|
|
.QP
|
|
Consider the following stories. Observe how these seemingly correct
|
|
articulations of reality work at cross\-purposes to the protagonist's
|
|
intentions, yet still manage to exhibit a peculiar efficacy all their
|
|
own:
|
|
.LP
|
|
.QP
|
|
.B
|
|
1.) Occupied Poland. A man held a job at a stroller factory. His
|
|
child needed a stroller. Being short on money, and being handy with
|
|
his tools, the man decided to steal all the necessary parts from his
|
|
workplace and assemble the stroller at home. Wary of arousing
|
|
suspicion, he limited himself to absconding with only a single
|
|
component each night. After many such nights, the man took an
|
|
inventory and noticed that he had managed to acquire almost all of the
|
|
parts on his list. Finally completing the assembly, the man discovered
|
|
that instead of a new stroller for his son he had assembled a fully
|
|
functional, modular sub\-machine gun.
|
|
.LP
|
|
.QP
|
|
Does this mean that a stroller is in fact the very same thing as a
|
|
sub\-machine gun? After all, the man had worked in the factory for
|
|
many years and was quite experienced at his job (which consisted
|
|
chiefly of speed\-buffing several types of polished parts as they came
|
|
whizzing past his station on an assembly line). In this case, the
|
|
value of 'A' was at first disputed; then investigated; and finally,
|
|
revised. In the end, would it have been sufficient to simply continue
|
|
referring to the finished product as a stroller? Why or why not?
|
|
.LP
|
|
.QP
|
|
.B
|
|
2.) A radical priest gains increasing infamy with the native
|
|
residents of a Roman\-occupied garrison town in Jerusalem. After he has
|
|
been put to death by a civilian court\(emadministered by his own
|
|
people, no less\(ema cult religion springs up around him, and a legend
|
|
begins to solidify around the memory of his living days. Indeed, the
|
|
legend glorifies even the most mundane aspects of his life. His story
|
|
is at first spread verbally, but is eventually written down by various
|
|
scribes, disparate of geography and generation, who never quite
|
|
managed to cross paths with the priest or his followers. (Granted,
|
|
when the priest was supposedly executed, the scribes in question had
|
|
yet to be born.)
|
|
.LP
|
|
.QP
|
|
I'm sure you can follow this one to its obvious conclusion. After a
|
|
certain point, the language used to describe a legend begins to
|
|
transcend the actual events, to take on a life of its own. The events
|
|
themselves remain unobserved, wholly obscured from view. At best:
|
|
irrelevant.
|
|
.LP
|
|
.QP
|
|
The above are clearly examples which reinforce the notion that all
|
|
languages are tautologies. For this reason, 'A=A' can only apply
|
|
universally when the definition of 'A' is immutable, cannot be
|
|
tampered with as it travels from one side of the equation to the
|
|
other. (This fact does tend to break the discussion into many
|
|
different levels, including questions of control over so\-called shared
|
|
languages [e.g., dictionaries, popular idiom], but the problem of
|
|
complexity comes part and parcel with the problem of precision.) 'A=A'
|
|
may well be subjectively true, but the equation is necessarily based
|
|
upon assumptions that may be incorrect. The uncomfortable truth about
|
|
our knowledge of the world is that it is almost always filtered
|
|
through a mediating source of questionable benevolence. Think about
|
|
that. The ultimate impossibility of neutrality. Even if we momentarily
|
|
eschew the likelihood of intentional misrepresentation, we must accept
|
|
that once language escapes our minds and begins to interact with the
|
|
language of others, we lose personal control over its context and
|
|
meaning. At this point, rationally, we should acknowledge that we can
|
|
no longer verify that 'A' means what we think it does. Thus, we come
|
|
to glimpse the limitations of logic itself.
|
|
.LP
|
|
.QP
|
|
Language initiates us into a special kind of 'cargo cult.' We
|
|
scramble, frothing at the mouth like so many tropical savages,
|
|
attempting to reenact a Reality that we're just
|
|
.HI
|
|
certain
|
|
we've
|
|
experienced, all in the vain hope that we might someday entice that
|
|
Reality to return to us, laden with crates full of movie reels,
|
|
Coca\-Cola, and fresh cartons of cheap American cigarettes. At that
|
|
point, we presume, we'd all be farting through silk.
|
|
.LP
|
|
.QP
|
|
Violet
|
|
.LP
|
|
.fp 1 R GA
|
|
.fp 2 I GI
|
|
.fp 3 B GM
|
|
.fp 4 BI GMI
|