Weaponization,  

 

Today, I heard something in the news about the weaponization of language. It is astonishing, how both the left and the right keep accusing each other of using language to influence public opinion, in an attempt to maintain or gain power. Nobody seems to bother about the obvious fact, that they are both constantly attacking each other and trying to shut each other up. There is no real conversation going on politically, as everyone engages in Disembodied Language (DL). If there would be any dialogue, DL would stop and we would have Embodied Language (EL). In my opinion, this important issue is never properly addressed by anyone. Supposedly, it isn’t possible, but it is possible and it is very necessary.

 

Weaponization characterizes DL, our usual way of talking and is, therefore, much more common than we are willing to admit. Human relationship is as bad as it is, because, generally speaking, we don’t really talk, but we pretend, defend, attack, distract, dominate and intimidate. Our problems stem from how we talk and unless our DL is stopped, they will only increase. Addressing and solving our problems requires EL, but no one is talking about that except me. However, each human being must solve his or her own problems. No one can solve the problem of DL for someone else. This writing isn’t some critique on our society, but simply my experience of my own way of life, which is, almost without any problems, because I always make sure my EL can continue.  

 

I know the difference between DL and EL and I have recognized, that with DL, I cannot be myself. This is why I rather talk with myself, so I can have EL, than talk with you and be dragged into DL again. I don’t make any claims about never being affected by your DL or by my own long, dreadful, problematic history with it. Staying away from you or from anyone with DL, is all I can do, to prevent the inevitable: getting contaminated again with dull, dumb, disgusting DL.

 

I abhor and refuse your meaningless way of talking, but take great care of how I treat my own language. To my knowledge – which derives from my ongoing EL – the sickening social contagion of DL has never been clearly articulated. This is why it is rampant everywhere. There are things, we can only come to know, if we, first, stop our DL and proceed with EL. This is, of course, in essence, a scientific endeavor.

 

Scientists, involved in research, try to control for their own biases and are always on the look out for confounding variables. This thorough approach has to be applied to how we talk with one another. Take a moment, to consider the immense implications of what I am saying. Yes, you may laugh, because it is already sad enough, that things are as screwed up as they are. What I write comes from what I say to myself. Simply stated, I consider talking with others unscientific, as only talking with ourselves can be scientific. Please, hear me out, as my observation has to do with listening to myself, to the sound of my own voice, so I can hear, whether the sound, I produce, while I speak, represents my wellbeing or not. My observation has nothing to do with your usual obsession with visual stimuli, that is, with words, but with aural stimuli, with my own voice.  

 

I can only engage in EL, to the extend, that my own voice continues to express a sense of feeling safe and secure. DL instantly takes over, the moment, I feel threatened, fearful, hurt, stressed or, otherwise, uneasy again. However, it is my conditioning history, which determines my perception of aversiveness or appetitiveness. Talking with DL cannot be scientific, as with DL, I always demand the listener’s attention with the sound of my voice. In DL, speakers, in one way or another, coerce listeners. Anyone with any knowledge about scientific behavior, should be able to agree and acknowledge, that DL is unscientific.  

 

Considering the undeniable, devastating fact, that DL is going on everywhere, twenty-four-seven, it is now clear, we engage in unscientific, superstitious, fearful, stressful, chaotic, distracting, upsetting and foolish conversation all the time, without realizing it. The issue of scientific speech has never received the right kind of attention, as only written treatises get academic approval. This state of affairs, which makes even the brightest of the brightest neglect spoken communication, is becoming increasingly untenable. Scientists should be the first ones to engage in and appreciate EL, as their attitude to reality is one of inquiry and curiosity. Ask yourself this question: how often does it occur, in your life, that you are able to say exactly what you wanted to say and what you say is understood and, therefore, resulting in positive outcomes, which enhance your own life as well as the lives of others? We all know such happy occasions happen very rarely, if at all.

 

With DL, we have in vain continued to believe, that we have problems communicating with each other, but the real issue is and has always been, that we have problems communicating with ourselves. We are out of touch with ourselves, because of our DL and unless our DL is stopped, we cannot engage in EL. It appears as if we are unable to stop our DL, but once we listen to ourselves – instead of each other – while we speak, we effortlessly and gracefully step out of our conditioning history and – without any practice – we are able to engage in EL. Certainly, we can and we will stop our DL and engage in EL, as this is mankind’s only option to a brighter future. Make no mistake, our DL is driving us to destroy ourselves.  

 

EL is scientific speech. Once we have it, we agree, we have it, as DL, our biased speech, has ended. As stated, scientists should have been able to have EL, all along, but never did, as their priority was to put their findings in writing. If they gave a lecture about their research, their way of speaking was scripted, that is, they repeated what they had written. They  acted their way of talking and impressed others with their knowledge. Although, they themselves, perhaps, never intended to do so, this is what they have always done, as they have never spoken with EL about their science, as there was never such an opportunity. Besides, they couldn’t do that, as they really absolutely didn’t know how to do that. Even the best teachers, the wisest professors, the most brilliant philosophers, never engaged in EL with their audiences. I know you find this hard to believe, but once you have identified the difference between DL and EL, you cannot deny this historical fact.

 

EL is totally novel and it remains exciting, because it is scientific. Moreover, with EL, we acquire reliable self-knowledge, which improves our lives in every possible way. There is no end to scientific discovery and, yes, our way of talking either sets the stage for exploration, observation, description, explanation and verification or not. DL doesn’t do and cannot do what EL does. It is as simple as that. I don’t care if nobody listens to me, as I listen to myself and know that what I say is true. I speak on my own authority and that is my Language Enlightenment (LE). I have described the difference between DL and EL in the way that nobody else has. Of course, people have tried to address what I am talking about, but they  always failed, as they have never stopped their DL.

 

I consider myself a scientist and, in my view, EL is of tremendous importance for the advance of science as well as for the teaching of science. As long as our DL has not been stopped and replaced by ongoing EL, our education will fail to cultivate the scientific attitude, necessary to live happily and sanely, in a world, which is created and sustained by science.

 

In conclusion, what went on in the name of EL, was never EL. It was always merely the assumption of EL. Stated differently, in spite of our scientific advances, DL has continued unabated. This writing is one of the first and only writings, that is based on ongoing EL. I don’t care if there is a book published about this or a scientific paper, as it is true, regardless of anyone’s opinion. I once attempted to get a Ph.D. in Psychology, but withdrew from my study, because none of the so-called scientific, academic people were brave enough to speak with me, to explore my thesis in a conversation. I also taught Psychology for many years, but they rather support the unscientific teaching of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion than EL. I have left academia and everyone, who apparently wants to continue with DL, as it is more important to me, to talk with those, who can have EL with me.