Rating: ![3 stars](http://www.reviewfocus.com/images/stars-3-0.gif) Summary: Cautious Praise Review: I've read this book three times, but I do not have the professional or academic qualifications to verify the author's rarified theoretical assertions. That said, I *can* verify that some of the techniques described in S&S have assisted me often in problem solving. Some will dismiss this claim as mere anecdotal evidence, but i believe it has enough indirect support to warrant further investigation. See the high success rates of therapeutic techniques in the cognitive-behavioural psychologies, which use principles equivalent to those of g-s. (For what it's worth, I do not know of a more effective nondrug therapeutic orientation than cognitive-behavioural psychology.) To korzybski's credit, however, he was concerned centrally not with therapeutic methods, but with preventive and educational methods.I believe the strength of his system lies in its accessibility to children and uneducated people. It provides a simple evaluative framework that does not rely on a priori religious or animalistic assumptions about 'human nature'. Nevertheless, do not expect your kids or your run-of-the-mill blue collar worker to read S&S. Although Korzybski said this work was intended for the "average intelligent layman," that seems too generous -- he draws frequently from findings in psychiatry, physics, higher mathematics, neurology and similar abstruse fields. If a nonacademic person truly is motivated to read S&S, I would recommend keeping a comprehensive dictionary on hand. Many issues are addressed by the author. I believe here he made his greatest mistake and he acknowledged this in places -- especially when he said the aims of his work exceeded the energy of any one man. I wonder how many mistakes he made in S&S in his over-exertion and his desire to see his life's work come to fruition. I recommend taking lightly the extremists of the pro and con camps, both represented in these reviews. This includes those who consider korzybski a 'paradigmatic genius', as well those who dismiss the whole of g-s because korzybksi sometimes made foolish claims, or because some of its followers act in a dogmatic or 'cultish' manner. Both types seem of a similar coin to me. Ultimately, S&S should be read with some prior knowledge of the issues with which korzybski deals. It would find its best context in a broad curriculum of humanism, materialism and naturalism.
Rating: ![5 stars](http://www.reviewfocus.com/images/stars-5-0.gif) Summary: The Most Underestimated Book Of The 20th Century? Review: In his book, Science and Sanity, Alfred Korzybski succeeds in presenting to his readers a distillation of many seemingly diverse branches of knowledge, including: Anthropology, Biology, Education, Logic, Mathematics, Neurology, Physics, Physiology, Psychiatry, Semantics, etc. Specialists in the above mentioned disciplines may be disappointed or even insulted at Korzybski's general, integrative style. However, Korzybski was mainly concerned about extracting the aspects of the above mentioned disciplines that have the most human value. Korzybski's attitude was definitely NOT "science for science's sake." Instead, he sought to integrate diverse branches of knowledge into a system that would be simple enough to teach to young children, so that each young child would begin life with the knowledge and wisdom that took the human race centuries of labor to achieve. Of course, if this goal could actually be achieved, the progression and survival of the human race would be greatly enhanced! Although Science and Sanity is certainly a difficult book to read and understand, Korzybski's system can be easily taught to young children. The reason for this is that Korzybski summarized his system as a non-verbal diagram. Probably, the wisdom of thousands of books are represented non-verbally on that diagram! It's true that one must know what the different parts of the diagram represent in order to appreciate or understand it; however, Korzybski's system is certainly unique in that one can explain the system to another while referring (pointing) to a diagram. This visual aid, called the Structural Differential, could be used in the education of young children as a way of simply and easily imparting "the wisdom of the ages." Note: Science and Sanity uses some abbreviations throughout the book. There are charts on pages 15 and 16 that explain these. Don't miss those charts, or you'll miss the whole book!
Rating: ![5 stars](http://www.reviewfocus.com/images/stars-5-0.gif) Summary: A clear, hard path to a clear, disciplined world-view. Review: In writing "Science and Sanity" Korzybski created a "Disk Operating System" for organizing the modern human mind in its efforts to identify and grasp the essentials, the "reality", from within the vast ancient enveloping cultural cocoon of history, myth, custom, practice, and superstition which is our civilization, and into which each new human being is born, ill-prepared. He succeeded. His models of "symbolic", "objective", and "scientific" reality - when finally assimilated on the non-verbal level - cut clean paths through the tangled and conflicting communications of this new "Information Age".
Rating: ![5 stars](http://www.reviewfocus.com/images/stars-5-0.gif) Summary: The map is not the territory, find the territory. Review: Korzybski has something to teach us. It can change our lives - for the better. It can improve the quality of life throughout the planet. It can replace what is with sanity. It can help and please and allow us to live better, happier, and more productive lives. But it must first be understood. That takes practice. It does not rush from the pages to our minds. There is that which we must do, and doing it we know it. Korzybsky spent his life applying what he learned to everyday life and to every field of science he had time to ingest. He could cut through the endless rhetoric to the core of the matter. He was in touch with that which is non-verbal. He was in touch with the territory. He can teach us to do the same. Laurence Sherzer, (lsherzer@harfor.campus.mci.net) Maryland, USA
Rating: ![5 stars](http://www.reviewfocus.com/images/stars-5-0.gif) Summary: A Classic of the Century Review: Korzybski is requisite. This book would save our culture if just a small fraction of the world took it seriously. Another reviewer included AE Van Vogt on the Semantic "must read" list. Bravo! "World of Null-A" is also a classic. SI Hayakawa is a disciple of Korzybski, and has also written excellently on the subject. For non-theoretical writing on Korzybski, ie., writing that implements his theories into practice, try the poet Joyce James, also a Korzybski devotee. Her "The Judas Compound" is still in print (and here on Amazon). Finally, "People in Quanderies" by Wendell Johnson is a Semantic classic, unfortunately out of print.
Rating: ![5 stars](http://www.reviewfocus.com/images/stars-5-0.gif) Summary: Serious Reading: Attention Span Required! Review: Like some of the other reviewers, I first read S. I. Hayakawa's classic "Language in Action" (later updated to "Language in Thought and Action") before wondering who Alfred Korzybski was and why Hayakawa spoke so highly of him. Eventually I bought "Science and Sanity" from the Institute for General Semantics and read straight through the book in two days. I am over 50 years old, so I learned to read and write well during my high school years, largely because I didn't watch much television. I had no trouble reading korzybski's book quickly, in spite of its rather large size. The TV generation, though, may just not have the attention span for a book such as this. Too bad for them! Korzybski warns the reader early in the book that it contains serious material, and so it does. I found his treatment of "infinity" and "variables" alone worth the effort of reading the book. His material on Ivan Pavlov gave me new information on the contributions of that neglected genius. His treatment of Bertrand Russell's "propositional function" and "theory of types" inspired me to actually read Russell on these subjects. His principles of general semantics have provided me with a useful framework for analyzing early Buddhist psychology, the theme of my Master's Degree thesis. Korzybski, like Hayakawa and Wendell Johnson, advocates elimination of the "is" of identity and the "is" of predication from our language. Unfortunately, they went on using the verb "to be" in their own writing and this somewhat detracted from the weight their message might otherwise have carried. Still, Korzybski's student, D. David Bourland, Jr., went on to pioneer the use of E-Prime (English without the "is") and I can testify to the worth of following his example. Aristotle's superstitious ghost can now rest in peace. Korzybski could have written better than he did, but then, the value of the book lies in the ideas he proposed and the intelligent men he inspired. That he failed to spoon-feed those suffering from Attention Deficit Disorder, a modern euphemism for too much television, says more about weak readers than it does about his poor (if indeed we can call it that) writing. Read the book once, then read it again, and then start putting general semantics to work in your own reading, writing, and--most importantly--thinking. If you don't do anything else in your life, get rid of the verb "to be" and you will have gotten more from Korzybski than you will ever get from another author. The rest of the book will then just amount to layers of frosting on the cake. Warning, though! Once you do, you will hardly ever again read a book or listen to another person speak without recoiling from the dogmatism they espouse with every use of that malignant little Aristotelian invitation to identification, rationalization, and objectification.
Rating: ![5 stars](http://www.reviewfocus.com/images/stars-5-0.gif) Summary: Serious Reading: Attention Span Required! Review: Like some of the other reviewers, I first read S. I. Hayakawa's classic "Language in Action" (later updated to "Language in Thought and Action") before wondering who Alfred Korzybski was and why Hayakawa spoke so highly of him. Eventually I bought "Science and Sanity" from the Institute for General Semantics and read straight through the book in two days. I am over 50 years old, so I learned to read and write well during my high school years, largely because I didn't watch much television. I had no trouble reading korzybski's book quickly, in spite of its rather large size. The TV generation, though, may just not have the attention span for a book such as this. Too bad for them! Korzybski warns the reader early in the book that it contains serious material, and so it does. I found his treatment of "infinity" and "variables" alone worth the effort of reading the book. His material on Ivan Pavlov gave me new information on the contributions of that neglected genius. His treatment of Bertrand Russell's "propositional function" and "theory of types" inspired me to actually read Russell on these subjects. His principles of general semantics have provided me with a useful framework for analyzing early Buddhist psychology, the theme of my Master's Degree thesis. Korzybski, like Hayakawa and Wendell Johnson, advocates elimination of the "is" of identity and the "is" of predication from our language. Unfortunately, they went on using the verb "to be" in their own writing and this somewhat detracted from the weight their message might otherwise have carried. Still, Korzybski's student, D. David Bourland, Jr., went on to pioneer the use of E-Prime (English without the "is") and I can testify to the worth of following his example. Aristotle's superstitious ghost can now rest in peace. Korzybski could have written better than he did, but then, the value of the book lies in the ideas he proposed and the intelligent men he inspired. That he failed to spoon-feed those suffering from Attention Deficit Disorder, a modern euphemism for too much television, says more about weak readers than it does about his poor (if indeed we can call it that) writing. Read the book once, then read it again, and then start putting general semantics to work in your own reading, writing, and--most importantly--thinking. If you don't do anything else in your life, get rid of the verb "to be" and you will have gotten more from Korzybski than you will ever get from another author. The rest of the book will then just amount to layers of frosting on the cake. Warning, though! Once you do, you will hardly ever again read a book or listen to another person speak without recoiling from the dogmatism they espouse with every use of that malignant little Aristotelian invitation to identification, rationalization, and objectification.
Rating: ![5 stars](http://www.reviewfocus.com/images/stars-5-0.gif) Summary: GOOD FORTUNE STRIKES.......ONE OF THE FIRST BOOKS I READ Review: modest, understated, comprehensive, introduces a discipline, an earthy "semantics", not academic, are you ready for an engineer's love ? a loving work by a generalist. a subtle "human engineering", haunting, poor "thinking" might be worse than no "thinking" at all! good ROI.
Rating: ![5 stars](http://www.reviewfocus.com/images/stars-5-0.gif) Summary: TOP Review Review: Ms. M. Kendig said: "What about Science and Sanity 1971?" "Last spring, reflecting on that question, I dashed off a note on 'Up-Dating an Open-Ended System.' Before I could revise it for publication I got a letter from Russell Meyers and - happily for me - he included his 1971 evaluations of S & S - some paralleling my own, some going far beyond what I'd dare write as a layman, lacking (as I do) Dr. Meyers' professional qualifications in neuro-medical sciences and as a 'learned generalist'. I quote him in full below." Dr. Russell Meyers said: "...I have just re-read Science and Sanity (my 8th run) and am so deeply impressed with it as to now say, without reservation, that, disregarding its rhetoric (in the main, its repetitious statements), it is far and away the most profound, insightful and globally significant book I have ever read. "With some knowledge of the interim developments of science and the socio-political events that have materialized since 1933, I can say in retrospect that any modifications that might now have to be made in the original text would be trivial, mainly technological supplements; none in principle ('structure'-as-function). A.K. has proved far more a prophet than he would ever have allowed himself to fancy. What a tremendous breadth and depth of insight, analytic and synthetic achievement!" [June 1971] The late Russell Meyers, MD, FSC, was Chief of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Williamson Appalachian Regional Hospital, 1963-; formerly Chairman, Division of Neurosurgery, and Professor of Surgery, University of Iowa, 1946-1963. [Dr. Meyers died in 2001, I believe.]
Rating: ![5 stars](http://www.reviewfocus.com/images/stars-5-0.gif) Summary: A Remarkable and Useful Book Review: On its publication, Science And Sanity received the high praise of many prestigious scientists, such as W. Horsley Gantt (who had worked with Pavlov), and the criticism of a few self-appointed defenders of science, such as Martin Gardner (who was a philosophy major, not a scientist). Basically, the book develops a system different from, but similar too, scientific method -- a practical system for applying scientific values and attitudes in any situation, not just in a laboratory. It is a system that, like science, emphasizes checking the facts. For example, take Korzybski's theory of time-binding. One reviewer here described time-binding as "storing information." But if you check the facts (actually read the book), you will find that Korzybski defined time-binding as the ability to pass information from one generation to the next. Because of this ability, human beings progress (at least in some ways), but animals do not. For instance, beavers build dams that are just like the beaver dams built a million years ago, but the stucco houses of human beings today are quite different from the mud huts of 20,000 B.C. Our ability to bind time has made this possible, and animals can't do it (in anything more than a negligible way).
|