! Assembly of The Elder Troth - Article - Schmitt

What is The AET?

Contacts Database

The Assembly of The Elder Troth would like to welcome you to our website. Please click on the links to the left to enter the relevant area of our site.

Heil and welcome to the Articles section of the Assembly of The Elder Troth website. Here you can find items written by many wide and varied folk. The idea is to provide a venue for discussion, debate and education amongst the folk by giving people an individual flavour to the information provided. Every article here is the work of its' author. Copyright rests with the Author, reproduction is prohibited without the authors permission.

Definitions/Classification - by Dirk Schmitt

Let us commence by looking at the very fact that we interpret the world around us at a point called, First Access. This point is when our sensory receptors gain information about the world around us, in essence, we experience reality. Now, from that point we have a transform, which takes place based on cultural and linguistic lines, and that transform is the process of assigning a label to what we experience. A certain taste, say Strawberry, tastes a certain way, and we call that Strawberry, but who's to say that it isn't really tripe, or maple, or dirt? The social convention of the definition of Strawberry is what makes the difference. We use labels and words to be able to communicate. Gods, here it's all we have in real terms to communicate. How we label and organise the world around us, is important, to the extent that we need such things if we are to be able to operate in a complex society.

We have objective reality, but what it is, is indescribable, for as soon as you label something, you've made a decision about what that thing is. Now, this can vary from the normal process of calling a Strawberry just that, or calling it a gooberhefflumox. One behaviour is considered normal, the other abnormal. Why? After all, the second word no doubt could be the subjective reality of a person, and they could be adamant that no, that's what it is, and whilst we know it to be a Strawberry, that one person remains staunch. So, whom is wrong? Well, there we have a philosophical conundrum. To be able to operate in society, we have an accepted definition of something, clearly, say the word and a mental image comes to mind, and maybe we even start salivating. Say the other word and you'll be looked at strangely, or avoided. So, can we have subjective reality at all, well, yes, of couse, in fact we have one already, for a Japanese person will call a Strawberry something entirely different to what I call it, but both of us are 'right'.

Unfortunately there is no really easy and singular answer here, and there-in lies the greatest problem to my way of thought. That of operating in a world where sometimes things have the same word, but have subtle nuances of difference. Lets face it, a Strawberry is a Strawberry no matter what language, real or imagined, after all, we have physical evidence of what it looks, tastes and feels like. Words which define religions, philosophies, etc, have so many variables within them, that we end up automatically using our own definition, and invariably, someone is going to miss the point. Take Folkish for example, there is such a wide variation in the nature of such a term insofar as to just how it is interpretted. Do this as an exercise in your own head. Let your mind go blank for a second. Folkish. What somes to mind first for you? Now, try it for Universalist. How about Theod. Tribalism. Christianity. Islam. Post-modernism. Now, I am expecting that each time, when you see the word, certain associations come up. In most instances, these associations will be different, in some cases widely, in others, only different in small areas, or in some details. Clearly then, there is a great deal of possibility for miscommunication when we are working with different ideas about the same term. Clarification helps, indeed, and the best thing about writing, is that you can look back at what you've written and come to the conclusion of whether or not it's what you actually wanted to say in the first place.

The capacity and capability to make determinations and judgements about non-definite concepts is something that requires information. Clearly, we cannot have all the information about an individual or a system, for in most cases, the amount of information required to make a definitive judgement or determination is far too great to ever be collected. Hence we have the option, either:

a) Accept that we cannot have all the information and make no determinations or judgements and treat every single person we encounter in exactly the same manner; or

b) Accept that we cannot have all the information and make determinations and judgements based on our knowledge in any given circumstance or situation.

In instance a) invariably the answer given by those advocates of such a system is to be fully open and accepting. The problem with such a system is that it requires all other persons to operate on exactly the same level and makes no allowances for human nature itself. It may end up being a Utopian society if everyone did it, but invariably there are some people whom would use such acceptance for furtherance of their own agenda and personal gain. Communism is a prime example of an ideology which is sound in theory, but fails dismally in practice.

So, invariably, most people work on level b), often even those whom like to state they are working in manner a). It is astonishing the number of people whom advocate acceptance of others, and when engaging with people whom disagree with them, often become arguementative and even aggressive in denouncing those whom would make judgements and be discriminating based on information that they have to hand.

It is all fine and well to demand that someone outside ourselves, looks upon us, and accepts us as we define and label ourselves, but invariably, that simply isn't going to happen. It simply isn't in human nature. It is impossible to go around without labelling things, and likewise it is impossible to go around without labelling people whom we meet, it's instinctive, and invariably unconscious. Likewise, on an electronic communications list, labels are created based on the information that is disceminated by a person through their postings. Over years, we may gain further and valuable insight into the nature of a person and thus come to a better understanding of their position and how their thought processes work, and initial impressions, and dare one say it, labelling, may change, or may be consolidated and solidified as patterns of belief are established.

HOME | Articles Home | Top Of Page

Page maintained by Schmitt Services

Last Update: Sunday, March 12, 2006