Manhood of Humanity. Alfred Korzybski

of knowledge produce their kind in larger and larger families; the process goes on from decade to decade, from generation to generation, and the spectacle we behold is that of advancement in scientific knowledge and technological power according to the law and rate of a rapidly increasing geometric progression or logarithmic function.

      And now what must we say of the so-called sciences—the pseudo sciences—of ethics and jurisprudence and economics and politics and government? For the answer we have only to open our eyes and behold the world. By virtue of the advancement that has long been going on with ever accelerated logarithmic rapidity in invention, in mathematics, in physics, in chemistry, in biology, in astronomy and in applications of them, time and space and matter have been already conquered to such an extent that our globe, once so seemingly vast, has virtually shrunken to the dimensions of an ancient province; and manifold peoples of divers tongues and traditions and customs and institutions are now constrained [pg 021] to live together as in a single community. There is thus demanded a new ethical wisdom, a new legal wisdom, a new economical wisdom, a new political wisdom, a new wisdom in the affairs of government. For the new visions our anguished times cry aloud but the only answers are reverberated echoes of the wailing cry mingled with the chattering voices of excited public men who know not what to do. Why? What is the explanation? The question is double: Why the disease? And why no remedy at hand? The answer is the same for both. And the answer is that the so-called sciences of ethics and jurisprudence and economics and politics and government have not kept pace with the rapid progress made in the other great affairs of man; they have lagged behind; it is because of their lagging that the world has come to be in so great distress; and it is because of their lagging that they have not now the needed wisdom to effect a cure.

      Do you ask why it is that the “social” sciences—the so-called sciences of ethics, etc.—have lagged behind? The answer is not far to seek nor difficult to understand. They have lagged behind, partly because they have been hampered by the traditions and the habits of a bygone world—they have looked backward instead of forward; they have lagged behind, partly because they have depended upon the barren methods of verbalistic philosophy—they [pg 022] have been metaphysical instead of scientific; they have lagged behind, partly because they have been often dominated by the lusts of cunning “politicians” instead of being led by the wisdom of enlightened statesmen; they have lagged behind, partly because they have been predominantly concerned to protect “vested interests,” upon which they have in the main depended for support; the fundamental cause, however, of their lagging behind is found in the astonishing fact that, despite their being by their very nature most immediately concerned with the affairs of mankind, they have not discovered what Man really is but have from time immemorial falsely regarded human beings either as animals or else as combinations of animals and something supernatural. With these two monstrous conceptions of the essential nature of man I shall deal at a later stage of this writing.

      At present I am chiefly concerned to drive home the fact that it is the great disparity between the rapid progress of the natural and technological sciences on the one hand and the slow progress of the metaphysical, so-called social “sciences” on the other hand, that sooner or later so disturbs the equilibrium of human affairs as to result periodically in those social cataclysms which we call insurrections, revolutions and wars. The reader should note carefully that such cataclysmic changes—such “jumps,” as we may call them—such violent readjustments [pg 023] in human affairs and human relationships—are recorded throughout the history of mankind. And I would have him see clearly that, because the disparity which produces them increases as we pass from generation to generation—from term to term of our progressions—the “jumps” in question occur not only with increasing violence but with increasing frequency. This highly significant fact may be graphically illustrated in the following figure:

      Geometric evolution of the natural and technological sciences.—Peaceful progress.

      Arithmetical evolution of the so-called social “sciences,” accelerated by violent “jumps.”—Non-peaceful social progress.

      a'2, 2a, ab, bc, cd, represent the geometrical law of progression in the natural and technological sciences (peaceful evolution).

      A'2, 2A, AB, CD, EF, represent the lagging arithmetical law of progression in the so-called social sciences (peaceful evolution).

      Both of these during the same periods of time.

      [pg 024]

      BC, DE, FG, represent revolutions or wars, with the aftermath of revolution of ideas—the “jump”—violent readjustment of ideas to facts—forced by events.

      ab, bc, cd, and AB, CD, EF, take the same amount of time, but the second progression being much slower than the first one, the “jumps” or revolutions occur at shorter intervals as time goes on and thus more frequently force us to coordinate our ideas to facts. Periods of peace or seeming peace alternate more and more frequently with periods of violence; the mentioned disparity of progress in peaceful times is the hatching seed of future violence.1

      [pg 025]

      As a matter of fact these few mathematical considerations can hardly be called mathematics or mathematical philosophy; nevertheless, without bringing attention to these very simple mathematical ideas we should not be able to proceed any further than in the past. Our life problems have always been “solved” by verbalists and rhetorical metaphysicians who cleverly played with vague words and who always ignored the supremely important matter of dimensions because they were ignorant of it. There was no possible way to arrive at an agreement on the significance of words, or even the understanding of them. Let us take, for instance, such words as “good” or “bad” or “truth;” volumes upon volumes have been written about them; no one has reached any result universally acceptable; the effect has been to multiply warring schools of philosophy—sectarians and partisans. In the meantime something corresponding to each of the terms “good,” “bad,” “truth” exists as matter of fact; but what that something is still awaits scientific determination. If only these three words could be scientifically defined, philosophy, law, ethics and psychology would cease to be “private theories” or verbalism and they would advance to the rank and dignity of sciences.

      Here I may quote a characteristic of life as expressed by one of the “heroes” of my esteemed friend Harvey O'Higgins, in his book, From the [pg 026] Life, Imaginary Portraits of Some Distinguished Americans (Harper, N. Y.).

      “Warren never philosophized; he handled facts as an artisan handles his tools; but if he had philosophized, his theory of life would probably have been something like this: ‘There is no justice, there is no morality, in nature or in natural laws; justice and morality are laws only of human society. But society, natural life, and all civilization are subject in their larger aspects to natural laws—which contradict morality and outrage justice—and the statesman has to move with those laws and direct his people in accordance with them, despite the lesser by-laws of morality and justice.’ ”

      If such are the creeds of “distinguished people” anywhere, what better can we expect than that which we see in the history of humanity?

      But the fact that the old philosophy, law, ethics, psychology, politics and sociology could not solve the practical problems of humanity, is not any reason whatsoever why we should despair. The problems can be solved.

      To follow the reasoning of this book, it is not necessary to be a highly trained specialist; the only qualifications required