>Date: Sat, 17 Jun 1995 14:33:44 -0400
>From: Slingr@aol.com
>Subject: 'Extensional'...again


On Sat, 10 Jun 1995, Richard Plourde wrote, in response to a question from
Cindy Forsha,  re: the definition of "extensional": 
> "Extensional" operates as one of the g.s. jargon-words.  If someone 
> asked you for an example of a pencil, and you replied "a tubular object 
> with a graphite/hardened-clay tube running down the center, used as an 
> instrument for placing marks on paper" then you would not have given 
> an extensional example.  You would have used words to describe words. 
> If, on the other hand, you'd looked around, picked up a pencil, wrote 
> something on a piece of paper with that pencil, and then pointed to 
> the pencil (no words at all), then you would have provided an 
> extensional example.  For "extensional," consider "not abstract." 
 
Then Emory Menefee responded on 11 June: 
>A good summary, though I'm a little bothered about the "no words at all" 
>condition.  Pointing (or feeling, or listening, etc.) constitutes the 
>ultimate extensional act, but the complete message would seem to need 
>connecting with the language.  That is, one should say, or write out 
>"pencil," then point to it to make the whole operation have meaning. 
>Beyond all that, of course, we have a jillion words that don't even begin 
>to relate to things that can be pointed to, but that's another problem. 
 
My thought is that these responses oversimplify the general semantics
implications of the term "extensional". Not mentioned in either response is
an associated word,  "intensional". To anyone, like Cindy, who would like, in
my opinion, a more complete summary of this, I'd point you [:)] to the Summer
1994 ETC., p. 224, to the article by Bob Pula. (If you don't recognize Pula's
name, he wrote the Foreword for the 5th Edition of _Science and Sanity_ which
was just published.) 
 
Aspects of 'extensional' and  'intensional' emphasized by Bob include: 
 
1. These words most importantly act as adjectives, or modify, the word 
"orientation". In other words, the 'thing' which is 'extensional' is one's 
"orientation".  
 
2. This 'extensional orientation' is characterized or observed, according to
Pula, in one who "assigns priority, sooner or later, to lower order,
non-verbal, 'silent' orders of abstracting...is habitually at least prepared
to say about his/her utterances, "Let's check it out. And if we can't, I'll
hold my view tentatively. In extreme cases, I'm  willing to recognize that my
utterances are mere speculations, and I'll act  accordingly.""   
 
3. He further explains, "the extensional person does *not*, by virtue of
being 'extensional', refuse or lose the ability to formulate with the most
sophisticated  wordsmiths....knowing 'deep in her/his bones' that the word is
*not* the thing, the extensional artist is likely to pay closer attention to
those very things and life-events that constitute the cauldron out of which
'art' emerges." As examples, he says that an extensional politician "remains
in touch with the territory and promotes programs to ameliorate societal
conditions rather than engage in unobservant applied ideology. The
extensional social activist pays close attention to observable, documentable,
correctable ills and eschews the fanatical imposition of a merely personal,
self-pleasing agenda on a hapless society." 
 
4. By contrast, one with a more 'intensional orientation' manifests "*over*- 
commitment to or *over*-dependence on definitions, verbalizations ("If I can
define it, I *know* it."), while disdaining or simply being unaware of a need
for observation, for generating and checking *data*, and for being willing to
engage in *self-challenging* formulations, such as "How do I know that? Why
do I say that? What evidence might I discover which might disconfirm what I
am claiming, what I have just said?" An intensionally-oriented person does
not or will not ask such questions. 
 
5. Finally, Pula cautions, "I emphasize that "intensional" and "extensional"
are not  formulated as "opposites" - suggesting a choice between incoherent
babble and incoherent silence. Both terms relate to *degrees* of commitment
to behaving sanely within the non-verbal/verbal plenum." 
 
6. You may ask yourself, "How can I behave more 'extensionally'?" I believe
this is addressed by Korzybski's 'extensional devices' - dating, indexing,
quotes, hyphens, and, of course, etc. D. David Bourland's article "Changing
"Human Nature"" in the Fall 1994 ETC. on page 309 discusses this in Mr.
Bourland's unique style and wit. 
 
So, to Richard's statement that "If someone asked you for an example of a
pencil, and you replied "a tubular object  with a graphite/hardened-clay tube
running down the center, used as an  instrument for placing marks on paper"
then you would not have given an extensional example." - I would say that
description is MORE extensional than if I replied "a pencil is the means of
the common folk to overcome the tyranny of the aristocracy." (which is
another way of saying the pen is mightier than the sword) 
 
Maybe this helps. Maybe not. 
 
Regards, 
 
Steve Stockdale 
aka slingr@aol.com