SUNDAY, SEP 23, 2018: NOTE TO FILE
Universes of Discourse
To believe or not to believe...
Eric Lee, A-SOCIATED PRESS
TOPICS: THE TWO CULTURES, FROM THE WIRES, HUBRIS, COMMUNICATION DISCONNECT
Abstract: After attending the First North-South Conference on Degrowth held in Mexico City 2018, I revisited thoughts on the Two Cultures. Nothing I said translated into meaningful speech. There was a near total disconnect. It was as if I lived in a different universe of discourse, or had given my talk in Pig-Latin.
TUCSON (A-P) — In the beginning:
In every discourse, whether of the mind conversing with its own thoughts, or of the individual in his intercourse with others, there is an assumed or expressed limit within which the subjects of its operation are confined. The most unfettered discourse is that in which the words we use are understood in the widest possible application, and for them the limits of discourse are co-extensive with those of the universe itself. But more usually we confine ourselves to a less spacious field. Sometimes, in discoursing of men we imply (without expressing the limitation) that it is of men only under certain circumstances and conditions that we speak, as of civilized men, or of men in the vigor of life, or of men under some other condition or relation. Now, whatever may be the extent of the field within which all the objects of our discourse are found, that field may properly be termed the universe of discourse. Furthermore, this universe of discourse is in the strictest sense the ultimate subject of the discourse.
—George Boole, 1854
So the issue of concern is that different intelligentsia types (aka wordsmiths) inhabit different universes of discourse or domains of discourse, and the set of all discourses is a multiverse lacking a common ground. But so far as we know we live in a universe of perhaps two trillion galaxies, each containing billions of solar systems. So there are more galaxies in our universe than all storytelling animals who have ever lived, each of whom conceptually inhabit slightly to foundationally different universes of discourse, adding up to billions of universes of discourse. This implies disconnect.
Perhaps the better term is 'galaxy of discourse' when applied to an individual. Human discourse, thereby, is in a state of disconnect. This is so if every object of discourse, or concept, references only other concepts as mirrors in a house of mirrors reflect each other. As a system of discourse, each galaxy 'is in the strictest sense the ultimate subject of the discourse'.
Perhaps because each wordsmith is also a primate, specifically a member of the last group of hominids standing (likely due to ancestral proclivities to exterminate other competing bipeds), wordsmiths are inclined to form tribal-like associations sharing a common galaxy of discourse within which they compete to tell better stories where 'better' is entirely determined by the intra-tribal social approbation received or withheld upon hearing the narratives each wordsmith member offers (such as at academic conferences) based on averaged group like and dislike.
About 45 years ago I by chance wondered into a conference of Postmodernists as the doors were open. As is par for my course, I knew nothing, absolutely nothing about postmodernism, being a poor, dumb, ignorant SOB from the hood who just didn't get it (anything). But being 'post modern' seemed like it might be a good thing, maybe even a cool thing, so I listened as attentively as I could. But the hours and speakers passed, and nothing was said, insofar as I could parse into anything I could understand (being a mere science nerd). I had wandered into a different galaxy of discourse having no apparent overlap with mine.
Later I read C.P. Snow and realized I was not alone. So there are at least two cultures within academia, but within the other (the one that doesn't do the science thing), there are many sub-cultures that come and go over time. There may seem at times (at conferences) that within the science tribe there are many equivalent sub-cultures, but over time those whose narratives are not supported (are falsified) by the data (or evidence), drop away. As the decades pass, the science narrative iterates towards one coherent narrative about life, the universe and everything (which may or may not be liked), perhaps because there really is one universe (so far as we know or can know) that is the Cosmos, aka Nature. If there is only one cosmos, one story, then one story, the most likely story, should be to outcome of inquiry, or the endeavor to find things out via guess-then-test.
More recently, Sept. 2018, I spent five days (two part days) at a Degrowth Conference in Mexico City. But I didn't wander in, it was planned, involved two days on buses to get there, and cost a bit, though not much as, being a life-long autodidact, I claimed the student rate. Offering to give a talk was free, so I did, and of 57 who also offered, I was for some inexplicable reason among the 31 giving break-out talks between the main speakers. My experience, in one word, would be 'disconnect'. For those able to tolerate my wordiness, I'd add 'communication disconnect'. And, no, I'm not referring to the amateur to lack of translations at the break-out talks (the main presentations were professionally translated English/Spanish in real time).
All of the main speakers had twenty minutes, and, well, it was deja vu, a repeat of the postmodernist discourse, though with a bit more reference to current events as parsed by the speakers. I suppose an example should be offered. On one list of goals, the shortest was 'Collective envisioning of alternative futures'. Sounds good to me, but no alternative future was envisioned, and I'm guessing a Global Caliphate is not being envisioned, but who am I to say? For more, I have only one handout, and the first paragraph:
"Across the world, there is resistance to the dominant, ecologically destructive and socially inequitable model of 'development' that has been imposed by capitalist, statist, and patriarchal forces. Simultaneously there is a search for radical and/or systemic alternatives to this model. These range from initiatives in specific sectors such as sustainable and holistic agriculture, community-led water/energy/food sovereignty, solidarity and sharing economy, worker take-over of production facilities, resource/knowledge commons, and inter-ethnic peace and harmony, to more holistic or rounded transformations such as those being attempted by the Zapatista and the Kurds in Rojava."
Let's deconstruct this:
"Across the world, there is resistance to the dominant, ecologically destructive and socially inequitable model of 'development' [i.e. resistance to empire-building that has been going on for seven to eleven thousand years...there always has been resistance, but empire-building is what the unmanaged system selects for in the short-term secondary to the Maximum Power Principle] that has been imposed by capitalist, statist, and patriarchal forces [patriarchal 'forces', i.e. behavioral patterns (atavisms) that have worked (been selected for) to build empires from chiefdom to nation-state levels since before the Indo-Europeans left their steppes as it has for others elsewhere and when, and more recently capitalist economies and democratic nation-state building is what worked to grow the fossil-fueled economy unto overshoot and global domination secondary to being enthusiastically (or not) supported by 99+% of humans living in industrial society who failed to work to destroy it, but spent their lives serving it (with or without enthusiasm), including academics who educate others to serve the SYSTEM if only as wordsmiths, some of whom may think their rhetoric 'radical', yet all serve, i.e. anyone who has or wants money and knows what to do with it. Rhetorical opposition doesn't count, nor do any guys in smoke-filled rooms as they aren't running the cruise ship of fools.]. Simultaneously there is a search for radical and/or systemic alternatives to this model. [When has there ever not been? But are alternatives selected for? If they serve business-as-usual they are, but not otherwise, as evidenced by, most recently, the last 300 years of Euro-Sino history.] These range from initiatives in specific sectors such as sustainable and holistic agriculture [I'll guess they're thinking 'permaculture' and not Kogi swidden slash and burn agriculture or traditional Hopi corn and sisters agriculture that produces 4 bushels of corn per acre vs 175 with fossil-fuel inputs whether grown using tractors or an army of permaculturalists that could not be fed by the 175 bushels], community-led water/energy/food sovereignty [references indigenous 'rights' to water/energy/food without reference to managing a system in which population is too large and per capita consumption too high, where there is a severe longage of demand], solidarity and sharing economy [and social economy, impact economy, Doughnut Economy, Gig/demand economy, new value economy, green economy, circular economy, value-added economy (e.g. the more than 600 different crypto currencies in circulation),... 'alternative economies' as if alternatives to biophysical economics are 'real'.], worker take-over of production facilities [been done, and then what? Will workers work to degrow the business?], resource/knowledge commons [knowledge may be copied at low energy cost, but freely shared 'resources' in an unmanaged commons equals tragedy], and inter-ethnic peace and harmony [tribal identities (whether based on ethnic, racial, political, religious, linguistic, regional, historical, traditional and other largely belief-based differences) plus scarcity = conflict that increases scarcity, that increases conflict...and the outcome is what? Peace and harmony with lots of love added?], to more holistic or rounded transformations [words, words, words] such as those being attempted by the Zapatista and the Kurds in Rojava [Ignore the primate prattle and consider the what-is the words obfuscate. If words matter, wordsmiths should give mistah Kurtz his due, his pronouncement on the cancerous industrial society he was a product of and on the services he, along with all the other hollow men and women, provided: 'The horror! The horror!']."
I listened to hours more, but if asked I'd have had nothing to say that would be meaningful within the given galaxy of politicized degrowth discourse. I use 'politicized' as political discourse is now dominate in the West, whereas in fourteenth century Oxford, the shared narrative about life, the universe, and everything would have been filtered through a religious, theocratic Bible-based God's Mandate narrative. Elsewhere and elsewhen a Koranic narrative dominates and dominated. Imagine wandering into a Jehovah's Witness convention (easy for me as I actually did and several volunteered an hour or so trying to educate me) and someone mentions a virgin birth. You mention that perhaps a novel pathway in ovarian teratoma could result in a chimeric human parthenote that included a mutation enabling continued development into a human being. But then you withdraw the suggestion when you learn the offspring was apparently a male as parthenogenesis produces female offspring. You suggest that perhaps the offspring of Mary was female, but transgendered....no, stop, sorry, wrong universe of discourse, forget I said anything that anyone could consider meaningful.
But back to the sample of degrowth discourse: as I have degrees in crop and soil science, I could speak to the 'sustainable' agriculture bit, after first trying to demystify the word 'sustainable', but I would likely only manage to annoy, or otherwise say things of no interest as I would not be speaking emphatically and shaking my fist while doing so. As for the 'ecologically destructive and socially inequitable' bit, I could and would have a good deal to say, but it would be parsed entirely in terms of science-speak (e.g. HANDY) and the data/evidence for each claim. My proposed 'real solutions' would be considered in the same terms. If I were to speak for twenty minutes about degrowth issues and proposed solutions, I'm guessing I would be saying nothing that most could parse into anything (politically) meaningful, because, well, I would be speaking outside their galaxy of discourse. If I had given my talk in Pig Latin, it would have had the same effect, even on those who may be fluent in Pig Latin. So, there it is, a whole bunch of words saying 'communication disconnect', to which may be added, 'alas'.
If I were to give another talk at a degrowth conference, I'm thinking the title would be Degrowth and the Two Cultures. I'd have to read up on degrowth discourse in an attempt to conceptually speak the language, then look for common ground, such as common concerns. In science-speak, what is there to say about degrowth of the economy and human population that can also be said in humanity-speak? I could summarize. Unfortunately I'd have to conclude that humancentric humanity-speak was unable to give proper expression to the dynamics of the world system, was unable to traffic in 'real solutions', and so was part of the problem(s) and not the solution(s). No one would like what I said, but I'm easy to dismiss or ignore, which is the predicted outcome, but I not only could be wrong, I probably am and am willing to be surprised, so I'd try hard to come up with something coherent to say that actually could matter, perhaps even be worth considering.
