Precision,

 

Ockham’s Razor is the scientific problem-solving principle, that suggests searching for explanations constructed with the smallest possible set of elements. Embodied Language (EL) is the language we are only able to produce, when we listen to the sound of our voice, while we speak, so that we can  hear and feel a sense of wellbeing. Everyone can do it, yet nobody does it, since we were conditioned to listen to others, while we speak, not to ourselves. In effect, Disembodied Language (DL) is our common way of talking, which sets the stage for how we deal with our language, as well as with all other behavior. If we really finally want to get serious about moving beyond the us-versus-them divide, which is tearing us apart, it is absolutely necessary, that we begin to differentiate between our own DL and our own EL.

 

The simplest explanation is usually the best one and nowhere is this more apparent, than in EL. Not only  results our unconscious, involuntary and effortful participation in DL, in imaginary, unnecessary and energy-draining complications, once it is stopped, we are wiser, because with ongoing EL, we attain self-knowledge, our Language Enlightenment (LE). If civil discourse and consensus-building is our aim, we must prevent all DL, so that we can engage in EL.  

 

When two competing hypotheses are presented about the same prediction and both theories have equal explanatory power, one should prefer the hypothesis that requires the fewest assumptions. In this case, EL is the preferred hypothesis. However, this philosophical razor is not meant to be a way of choosing between hypotheses that make different predictions. Anyone who has experienced and thus,  explored the difference between DL and EL, knows – although it is mechanically claimed, DL has equal or even better explanatory power than EL, because initially, from our DL-conditioning, EL seems to be more complex than DL – these two disparate ways of dealing with language predict different outcomes. To be clear, EL is not chosen, because others have acknowledged it to be parsimonious, but because we ourselves have individually determined, that our EL is true for ourselves. Nevertheless, we can all acknowledge, EL is true for each of us, individually. EL is based on N=1 and, surprisingly, we all agree.

 

A surgeon must cut with great precision and if we want to be able to cut through the abscess, which has been created by and is growing bigger and bigger, due to our DL – in which we, as speakers, don’t listen to ourselves – then, we must begin to talk with a sound, which represents our mutual sense of being completely at ease. The sharp tool we need, during our conversation, is our voice, but our voice of precision is gentle, sensitive, genuine and calm, not harsh, forceful, painful or frightening.

 

EL makes instantly clear to us, that any talk about the so-called efficacy of deep, empathetic listening in changing minds, is pure nonsense. If we manage to change from DL to EL, we will do so, without any reference to a non-existent mind, but by bringing our attention to speaking, listening, reading and writing. In other words, only overt language is addressed, because covert language doesn’t exist, as it is a fantasy-product of DL, in which we can never express ourselves how we would like to.  

 

The unfolding of our EL is something extra-ordinary. It is the resonant sound of our own voice, which we follow with great precision, which allows us to say things, we were never able to formulate during DL. The accuracy of our verbal behavior is substantially increased, as our EL implies a change of perception. Knowledge, in EL, isn’t something we retrieve from memory, but which we say or write spontaneously, because we have unshackled ourselves, even if it is only for a few moments, from our history with DL.  

 

Ongoing EL, allows for a precision of observation, which previously, with DL, was impossible. Before we can really know and instruct ourselves and each other, into what is the right thing to do, we must first diagnose things correctly. However, DL doesn’t even permit us to say what is, according to us, going on, so whatever we say, with DL, is creating nothing but problems. Sure enough, the polarization of how we communicate, is only further enhanced, by our isolation, while we are sitting in front of our screens, longing for a brief like, that is, a boost of dopamine.

 

Anyone who has paid attention to the lucidity and precision of what I am writing about, in this blog, must admit, this clarity doesn’t show up anywhere else. The four educational institutions I have been part of – Butte College, California State University Chico, Ryokan and Palo Alto University – were not interested in the precision, I brought to our use of our language. Although lots of people must have heard or read about me, nobody ever came to me and said: let us help you, to put this new way of dealing with our language on the map, we would be so proud, to have you as our alumnus. Instead, each of these institutions gave their full support to the dumbing-down of anti-free-speech, anti-intellectual equity-diversity-and-inclusion programs, which, as expected, has only created more DL and division.