|
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: Dukkha Atta
Dhamma
Tathagata
Buddha Samma-sambodhi Nirvana. The main Christian fuzz (because detail deleted) words are: God, Christ,
holy, heaven, spirit (≈ pneuma ≈ breath),
soul (≈psyche),
sin, redemption.
|