50

 It would appear that Stapleton is confused. He speaks in contradictions. But he is supported by Dorothy Sayers who says much the same thing: ”we can explain nothing in terms of itself, but only in terms of other things.” That also seems a little circular. But together they do say something important. They say that when we think we are being pretty specific, we are not because the nearest we can get to something is to give it a label, and labels always fall short.

Consider, do you ever think you ‘understand’ something? What is the literal meaning of the word? It means to ‘stand under’. But why is standing under something an explanation for what is going on in your head? Or if, when you say ‘I get it’, what have you got? The point (note the word) of these examples is to show that words are labels for a thing, not the thing. Thus Stapleton’s contradiction is true. Thus Sayers also is clear and to the point.

So what? Why is something that obvious important? One answer is that there are human experiences—love, grief, sympathy, regret, etc.— that may be easily misunderstood or not grasped (note the word) correctly if we do not keep in mind that there is a distance between the label and the labeled, and there is room for wandering mis- perception in that gap.

Another reason for caution is that there are ‘deep’ things that interest many. Is there life or something that is not part of the material universe? What is the difference—if any—between the mind and the brain? Does the word, God, mean anything? As we think about these matters, we should keep in mind that we cannot apprehend any- thing directly, simple or profound, that, as Sayers says, “all words are analogies.” It does not follow, however, that there is nothing to think about.

Whispers, a set of reflections by J. Streed (www.johnstreed.com). You know the idea. Some saying or epigram or adage, some proverb or maxim, some thought, serves as a springboard for observations of one kind or another.