The Fuzz word
According to New Oxford Dictionary opinion, a word is defined as: a single distinct meaningful element of speech or writing; or as: a single distinct conceptual unit of language.
For ‘an element of speech’ read: a (complete) sound bite
For ‘an element of writing’ read: an ended (hence quantised) non-linear scratch.
For ‘fuzzy’ read: unclear, foggy, cloudy, therefore incomplete and uncertain.
A fuzz word is a single indistinct because multiple or incomplete meaning element of speech or writing, and so on.
A fuzz word appears to the naïve hearer as a distinct, single meaning word because the hearer (or reader) does not discriminate. Basically what happens is that the naïve hearer (or reader) superimposes her (or his) own meaning, derived from his or her own experience, upon the word, thereby making it distinct (hence a unit).
In principle, every word is fuzzy in that every word is a metaphor, that is to say, a word merely represents (i.e. in a different shape, hence i.e. symbolises or iconises for more efficient use) a (complex) personal experience but is not actually that experience. A word is an arbitrary sound bite (or scratch mark) on an arbitrary map that is not an actual territory. Hence the actual meaning of a word changes from territory (i.e. from user) to territory (i.e. to user).
In practice, a word is fuzzy if and when it conveys multiple meanings or concepts. Obviously, such words as ‘home’, ‘I’, ‘car’, ‘heaven’ or ‘God’ are fuzzy.
A fuzz word is created (deliberately) if and when an experience is fuzzy. Since it presents as a single unit, it initially appears distinct (i.e. closed), thereby suggesting that the experience (hence personal meaning) it symbolises is also distinct. However, if understood as fuzzy, the word cannot be processed to closure, hence leaves the individual in a kind of trance during which he or she cannot respond.
A distinct (because ended, closed) word (i.e. a symbolic surface structure) is created to symbolize a (usually vast, complex and every changing) fuzzy experience in order to close, end or limit that experience and make it manageable.
A non-fuzzy (i.e. a closed or unitised experience symbolised with a) word becomes fuzzy (i.e. open ended, uncertain, hence of diminishing semantic content) if and when it symbolises many different meanings derived from many different experiences.
A non-fuzzy (single meaning) word becomes fuzzy if and when it is examined discretely (i.e. in depth) to the detail of the original and usually extremely complex experience is uncovered. Hence, ‘the devil (Pali: mara, derived from mata, meaning death) is in the detail’. In other words, clean communication happens only if detail is deleted, for instance, as in maths where the numeral 1 can only operate (as a universal or absolute) because it is un-referenced. The Heart Sutra’s infamous claim that “Form is emptiness, emptiness is form” was made possible by deleting the detail ‘of inherent essence’ (≈ atta).
Politicians (who seek to control and manipulate the outer life) and priests (who seek to control and manipulate the inner life) use fuzz words (fundamentally red herrings) deliberately either to indicate a general direction to be followed (or experience to be achieved), thereby avoiding a clearly defined (with detail) goal and responsibility for failure, or to confuse or create anxiety or fear, the latter functions being their primary mode of softening (i.e. opening) up the already confused and anxious, thereby sustaining or increasing control and power over them (a method frequently used by Wall Street investment bankers hustling people to invest in sub-prime mortgages).
The Buddha’s most expedient fuzz words (the first 2 have multiple meanings, the other 3 no clear meaning) representing his key notions are:
The main Christian fuzz (because detail deleted) words are:
God, Christ, holy, heaven, spirit (≈ pneuma ≈ breath), soul (≈psyche), sin, redemption.