No Boundaries

"Reality is made of language. Whatever we think reality is, it is an entirely private matter until we describe it -- either linguistically, mathematically, through painting, through dance, through innuendo -- whatever it is, reality then undergoes the formality of actually occurring when it is languaged, and what I've noticed about these psychedelics is that they are catalysts for language...these things [McKenna's DMT entities] are attempting to communicate a new dispensation of the Logos. They are holding out the possibility that language need not be processed by the ears, that language can become, under certain radical situations of neurological perturbation, visible, that literally the word condenses into visible space, and they were urging me to do this."
--Terrence McKenna during his Camden Centre lecture (1992)

Terrence McKenna is always a fascinating fellow to read and and listen to. He has that Irish "gift of the gab" (as Jai/Mojoman has put it to me) where he can apparently just ramble on and on without much forethought and yet string together schizoanalytically many intellectual concepts and ideas almost magically reaching conclusions to his (and his audiences) surprise. A gifted orator and, while some of what he describes is clearly questionable, even incomprehensible for most, his overall contribution toward a new, broader, psychedelic ontology and history is a cornerstone in the pantheon of 20th century thinkers.

Visible language is still an extension of the vocal sound, almost a supplemental emanation from a new kind of vocal unit, an evolved language that came from beyond the imagination. And yet, this telepathic quality is keenly linked to some kind "neurological perturbation--"psychedelic technologies--that the ancient shamans and neo-shamans alike have explored and developed. It's important to note that McKenna is suggesting that the language we use today is derivative of that "Visual language" and while his cosmic gnomes may be communicating to him from some indefinite space and time, that the same cosmic gnomes spoke in visual terms to the ancients who had no concepts of illegality mixed in with their most sacred vision-inducing ceremonies. In the US, we have allowed laws to rob us of the essential "collective evolution" that the relationship to the psychedelic has always related to man. We are not completely separate from that experience (there has and will always continue to be an underground--and even new technologies, like "virtual reality" may surprise and delight us psychonauts yet). Even the brain itself produces reserves of DMT, so we are all in posession of illegal substances by the very nature of our biology. I look forward, and predict, that our cognitive liberty will be restored within a few decades. I am sad that Terrence cannot be with US to witness that time. Visible language is not new so much as it is lost on most of us Earthlings.

And on the general subject of language and reality, McKenna is not really entering entirely new territory, but certainly acting as an innovator on important concepts that have come from his philosophical forebears. Let us look at a quotation from the Benjamin Whorf that provides much of the foundation upon which McKenna stands in the above quotation:

"We dissect nature along lines laid down by our native languages. The categories and types that we isolate from the world of phenomena we do not find there because they stare every observer in the face; on the contrary, the world is presented in a kaleidoscopic flux of impressions which has to be organized by our minds—and this means largely by the linguistic systems in our minds. We cut nature up, organize it into concepts, and ascribe significances as we do, largely because we are parties to an agreement to organize it in this way — an agreement that holds throughout our speech community and is codified in the patterns of our language... all observers are not led by the same physical evidence to the same picture of the universe, unless their linguistic backgrounds are similar, or can in some way be calibrated."
--Benjamin Whorf in "Language, Thought and Reality" (1956)

Yet, even with a similar lexicon, how can we be sure that we are ever describing the same abstract thing. So taking another leap back into history, the work of Alfred Korzybski, way back in 1933 published the first edition of his "Science and Sanity" (the pivotal document which birthed an entire science called "General Semantics") set forth the principle that "THE MAP IS NOT THE TERRITORY." The word (the logos) is not the thing-in-itself, but merely a semantic/liguistic representation (a symbol) that evokes a general class of objects and concepts, but never approaches the actual complexity and indefinite thing-in-itself on the "silent level" of perception HERE and NOW. I am sure that members of the intelligentsia like Whorf, McKenna, and many others openly admit that their thought systems are derivatives from Korzybski's innovation. Robert Anton Wilson (arguably one of our keenest 20th century minds on the planet) claims to read "Science and Sanity" at least once annually (along with "Ulysses" by James Joyce) and draws much of his analytical and skeptical genius and inspiration from the late and great Korzybski. I have sat down with "Science & Sanity" and I have found it a challenging task of mind to complete, to say the least; to this day, I've never finished the volume, but I know that it's a piece of writing that I will return to time and time again as my own knowledge and thinking matures and will prove a tome worthy of continuous study and enlightenment.

I'm not sure who said it, and I'm probably paraphrasing here, but I've always like the statement that 'language has a definite center, but no boundaries.'