What are these words worth?
 Coyote 12

(This article orig. appeared appeared in a 1990 CCT and was then reprinted in
the now defunt, THANATEROS #4...This was one of theBedhangers best in my
opinion. Daniel Henderson)


    The more one studies human behavior, the more apparent it becomes that the
English language is hopelessly ineffective in describing the types of
experience which could be classed as paranormal. Although, we have inherited
one of the most expressive languages on the planet, we still find ourselves
stammering when it comes to describing magickal and neurological phenomena. We
need a new terminology to describe what we feel. Before we begin such a
process, it might be useful to summarize the current theory on how we process
symbolic information.
    Whether we are aware of it or not, everything we process through the brain
is a symbol. Any sensory perception or thought must be converted into some sort
of code to be run through the electro-chemical system of the brain. A useful
model is, of course, the computer. The thought is data, the brain itself is
like hardware. The data has to be rendered compatible to be run through the
hardware. Research has shown that we actually see the world around us upside
down. Within a few days after an infants eyes open, its brain learns to flip
everything it sees upside down, so that the visual data is easier to apply.
This probably becomes fully automatic within months. If we can subconsciously
edit out such a huge perceptual shift, one can wonder what else gets edited
out. Well return to that thought later.
    The brain consists of ten billion neurons, which operate, like a computer,
on a binary basis. They are either on or off. In a sense, a particular thought
is a specific neural trail though the brain. No two thoughts share exactly the
same path. There are a thousand trillion synapses in the human brain. A synapse
is the point at which two or more neurons interconnect. So when we see
something, a neuron near the optic nerve is electrically activated. The impulse
travels to the synapse at the end of that neuron. If the impulse is powerful
enough, it jumps across the synapse, triggering the next neuron. This process
is over in a fraction of a second, and the charge fades out. Most perceptions
fade before we have time to interpret them, which is a large portion of the
editing process mentioned before. It appears possible to cause the neurons to
reactivate again and again, giving us time to analyze them. There appear to be
two ways that we are able to accomplish this. One way is the way we remember a
poem, conscious repetition. The other way is if the current meets no resistance
in its path, it can flow easily to the next neuron, and so on, until it
connects to the original neuron, and it just continues in this circular pattern
until it meets some form of resistance. If this pattern is repeated enough
times, little synaptic bridges form along that circuit, which saves a lot of
energy, since the impulse doesnt exhaust itself jumping across the synapses.
    Most lower animals are born with many of these bridges hardwired in.
Thus, a lion might have furry and running wired to dinner in his brain.
So the lion will treat anything running and furry as food. Humans seem to be
unique in the sense that we are born without any such bridges. We have to
create our own. The process of conditioning is actually the process of creating
these synaptic bridges to inter-relate and categorize the things we perceive.
    In this process, we are forced to create archetypes, to abstract. We see
both a pine, an oak, with or without leaves, and generalize them all as trees,
even though each is an individual, and each is very different from the others.
We have to do this, both to save time and memory space. Every time we see a
tree (or anything else), we create a neural circuit, which leaves a tiny
neuro-chemical afterglow, making it slightly easier for the next impulse to
jump across the synapse. After triggering this same circuit many times, the
bridge becomes progressively easier to cross. This is interesting because, in a
sense, all that we know is like a scratch in a record. When we place the
stylus there, the thought plays over and over, either until the record stops
spinning, or we move the stylus to another groove. A frequent thought is
literally a loop.
    Thus, our knowledge could be measured by the number of loops we possess.
The loops become much stronger the more they are used. An unfamiliar sensory
stimulus must travel a new neural path. That is why we have trouble visualizing
an unfamiliar face or piece of machinery. The more often we experience the new
thing, the more the synaptic bridges harden.
    So how does this all relate to language? Anytime we learn a new thing, we
are able to call it up anytime we think of it. If we have assigned a name to
this complex impulse, we are able to file a certain amount of its attributes
under this name. Ask a four year old what a car is, then ask a mechanic. Youll
get very different answers. The mechanic has a great deal more synaptic bridges
stored under car than the child.
    So, to learn and use a new word creates a physical change within the brain.
The problem is that our electrical impulses tend to go along the most traveled
neural paths. It requires effort to fuse new bridges. But without these new
bridges, new paths of thought are impossible, except by accident.
    It is altogether possible that this is the neurological explanation of
magick. By performing a ritual using a setting and words, smells, etc. that are
alien to us, we are actually trying to speed up the process of synaptic
bridging. The success of a specific ritual depends on how successful we are in
creating a neural lockgroove.

The Process 
of Abstraction
    We have seen why the human brain must abstract and edit out certain stimuli
in order to cope with the overload of sensory input, now it is time to try and
explain how this process takes place. Alfred Korzybski invented a model for
this process which he called the Structural Differential, which will serve
our purposes as well as anything. (See Fig. 1)
    The round area marked E we will call the Event. Each point on that plane is
one attribute of that event . For example, the piece of paper that this
magazine is printed on appears white. It is made of millions of molecules of
bleached woodpulp, some of which are covered by symbols, which are really
composed of carbon molecules which where adhered to the paper by static
electricity, then burned on. Each of these attributes could be represented by a
point. We know that each of these molecules is in perpetual motion, and that
the color we perceive as white is actually the entire light spectrum reflected
off of those molecules. Since we know that this piece of paper is really in
constant motion, it seems like a good exercise to think of it as an event
rather than an inert thing.
    Now, since we could never list each molecules attributes or location
accurately for any specific moment in time, one edge of the plane E is broken
off, to show that our definition or perception of any event can never be
complete. We could define an infinite number of points for event E. In the
actual process of seeing this event, there are a number of attributes that
are imperceptible to our nervous system, such as the motion of the molecules,
the component colors of the spectrum of white light, etc... Thus, when we see
an event, the number of attributes becomes finite, although still very large.
What you or I might see, we will call V, the Visual Object. The lines
connecting E to V are the attributes of the event which we are physically
capable of seeing. The points on the event-plane which are not connected to V
are already left out. What we first have to realize is that it is not possible
for us to see an event in its entirety. Ever. This is the reason that some of
the attribute lines have been left dangling. This point cannot be stressed
enough. What we see is not what we see. So the step from event to perceived
object (V) is what we would call a First Order Abstraction, in that it is one
step away from what is actually happening. A great deal has already been edited
out in the mere process of perceiving it. 
    The act of seeing V triggers the familiar neuron circuit for paper,
magazine, and so forth, calling your brains attention to this fact. The
naming of these attributes narrows their number yet further, as we become
mentally aware of its presence. Well label this Second Order Abstraction N.
    Please note that at this point, the perceived event still exists only in
purely neurologickal terms as yet. We cannot discuss it without labeling it
somehow. The dictionary definition of this Neural Event leaves out a number of
attributes of the paper, its taste and color, for instance. This Third Order
Abstraction is Labeled L-1.
    It is rare that we refer to the woodpulp that comprises most paper, and
which is included in the definition of paper, so at the point of recognition of
paper, we have generated a Fourth Order Abstraction, which is labeled L-2. It
is only at this point that we are able to make any kind of statement about
piece of paper, which would then be a Fifth Order Abstraction (S), as our
statement reflects our opinion of the paper. We can then make statements about
the statement, on an infinite basis.
    Now if a concrete event like paper is abstracted to this degree, imagine
the number of abstractions required to discuss a concept like freedom or
magick! One of the main reasons we so violently disagree over such abstracted
subjects is that we assume that everyone defines  a word like magick in a
similar way. Similar perhaps, but not identically. If you want to avoid an
argument, its always wise to ask, What do you mean? You will be astounded at
how often it will turn out that the misunderstanding is based on the assumption
that you are both talking about the same thing. In many cases, you are not!
    The verbal abstraction is not the event! This can be more simply put. If a
map were perfectly accurate, you would be able to see yourself reading the map,
and on that map would another you...ad infinitum. The map is not the territory!
No matter how accurate our language, it can never approximate the event. The
event we discuss, or think about is always at least two or three Orders away
from the actual event we think we are describing .
    Try to become more aware of this process of abstraction. Try to sense
events with more of your nervous system. Sight is in reality one of the least
reliable and easily tricked of all our senses. Taste events, feel them, smell
them, Try to make your abstracting process include as many attributes as you
can. The more attributes you are aware of, the more accurate your abstractions
will be. The more accurate your abstractions, the better you will be able to
communicate about events with other people.
    If you practice this process of abstracting, you will become more aware of
how few people even know that they are constantly doing so. And the mere act of
being aware that the map is not the territory will make you more tolerant of
their abstractions.
    Youll realize how absurd it seems to say that anything is anything. It
seems that way to me. This linguistic foible is called the is of identity. Once
you have realized that the map is not the territory, you will realize that
nothing is anything. It only seems that way to you via your process of
abstraction. This point seems crucial to anyone embarking on a magickal path.
We have to realize that we all perceive events, interpret words, in our own
unique way. The only assumption we have any right to make is that each of us
see events in a completely unique way. Certainly, there are points of mutual
agreement, but the deeper you go, the less subtle these differences are. By
realizing that each of us is constantly abstracting in completely different
ways, we can take the time to assure ourselves that we are talking about the
same event before we start to argue.

Thee Word 
Made Flesh
    In thee beginning was thee Word, or so they say. And it triggered new
synaptic bridges and new association. Butter, it be-came well-trodden and thee
meanings be-came stale. Thee newness ov synapse to xplore be-came lesson less
free-quent. Thee language e-volved, or d-volved-like thee main stream ov thee
cult-ure it reflected. As thee words were used, re-used, ab-used, thee meanings
b-came further d-tached from the original Spirit each Word represented.
    So thee sentences were cut-up and meaning was restored, like an old lover
in new lingerie. And new Words OV Power were created. Butter thee process ov
Creation has just b-gun. A word like b-gun triggers new ass-ociations. New
associations trigger new neural paths. New Paths create new modes of thought.
Or revive forgotten ones. It b-cums thee Word made Flesh, perhaps literally, if
thee brain is bridged synaptickally. If a definition for a new Word takes, it
could alter thee structure ov your Nervous System permanently!
    Thee Temple is in thee process of creating a jargon. This serves a number
ov very use-full functions. First, it mystifies and intimidates, as well as
intriguing and attracting, those unfamiliar with it. Second, by definition and
repetition, it facilitates thee creation ov new Synaptic Bridges in thee brains
ov those who take the time to learn their meanings. To turn a paragraph ov
philosophy and turn it into one Word ov Power is to create a mnemonick system
which can simplify thee process ov modifying ones own behavior. Or sadly, that
ov another, Thee jargon ov Dianetics/Scientology is a shining example. They
enslave thee Humyn Spirit with thee creation ov thee Word, TOPY hopes to use
thee same power to liberate it. To create terms for processes which actually
stimulate thee humyn brain to create new possibilities and solutions in very
unconventional ways.
