This post is about models of the world and symbol shuffling. I will describe how words act as symbols for concepts and how we our communication with one another is limited by shared understanding of systems. This way of looking at things answers questions like,

• Why is it so difficult to define words like "a", "to", "the", etc.
• How do advertisers/politicians/etc. use "trigger words" to manage your feelings (and wallets)?
• How are skills related to each other?
• Why is it hard to learn the rules of cricket?

Things and Actions

You've probably heard it said that if you learn any one programing language, it will be much easier to pick up a second/third/fourth/etc. Allow me spell out in more plain terms why this is so.

Using any "general purpose" programing language, there are basic operations you may want to do. For example, you might want to:

• Read/write files
• Deal with clocks/time
• Manipulate text/strings
• Serve or request web content

A person without any programing background may have some fuzzy ideas of what these operations are, but likely understands them only in some limited context. E.g. a file is something you can attach in Gmail, which is found somewhere on a harddrive.

Learning programing means that you have to get more specific understanding of what is involved in these operations. Learning some ("general purpose") language for the first time means you will have to learn about these things. Some examples of these languages are: Python, C#, Ruby, JavaScript (with Node), and.... Common Lisp. All of these languages can do these basic things.

For someone who already programs in one language, learning a new programing language is often asking "how do I do action XYZ in language ABC. It is easy to compose a search query if you know exactly what you're looking for. You have a base knowledge of concepts (you understand computing as a system) and then you can learn the unique features and idiosyncracies of any languages you use; you are not-relearning an entire new system with every new programing language.

Keywords and Systems

Many symbols (e.g. words in spoken and written language) can only be understood in the context of a system. This is one reason why it is very hard to usefully define "grammatical" words like prepositions, articles, and the like.

Understanding any complex system means knowing how stuff "fits together". Often times, this knowledge comes through exposure and without explanation. Copying enough patterns, one can assimilate knowledge of these patterns and successfully replicate them, sometimes with intentional variations.

Many musicians know very little "music theory" but get along just fine having a great time with their instruments and voices. Asked to define something like "harmonics" or whatever, many skilled musicians would be at a loss of words—they could show you lots of things, but they couldn't say much useful stuff explaining what they're doing in a different system (e.g. Standard English) unless they already had some experience thinking about teaching/learning.

Systems have atomic (in the sense of "indivisible") things in terms of which other things are described. Eager beginners may want to hear explanations of what these elementary things are (e.g. How do particles in Japanese work?!). They will likely be frustrated by the responses they get back; even with ample explanation, they may not be able to correctly reproduce target patterns.

Meanwhile, the person that just learns a guitar strum pattern rather than going into fancy rhythm this and that theory may soon be playing songs.

Assimilating knowledge of a system (and then refining that model) is ultimately how learning of complex things happen. Trying to go very deep into understanding little pieces may work eventually, but from my experience I think that it usually doesn't. Imagine getting hung up on studying a foreign language until you "understand" how some little grammatical word works. The practical way forward is just to learn a whole bunch of (easy to "understand") vocabularly and then gradually see patterns in which stuff is put together.

Likeness Between Systems

Insofar as systems are simialr to one another, it is not difficult to learn and master new systems. For example, I hear the mechanics of good golf swings are similar to hockey stick swings. Transferring concepts between these systems means a golfer will probably more quickly learn hockey stick swinging technique than say... a jazz pianist, all other things being equal.

On the other hand, learning a completely new skill (e.g. computer programing) can be very tough because you have to assimilate a whole body of conceptual knowledge before being able to properly order some symbols.

Simplified Systems and Manipulation

People use technical-sounding language to drivel on about topics all the time.

For example, in health/nutrition related topics, you might get someone talking about sodium this-or-that. In what sense do they mean "sodium"? Without a more complete understanding of chemistry/biology fundamentals, this person is trying to use a technical sounding term outside of its domain.

Yet, doing stuff like this is often enough to win the confidence/trust of people. If someone looks good/fit, and they mouth off utter bullshit in terms of words/symbols, they may be accepted on authority.

Sounds smart and seems to work, so we can roll with that.

Shallow knowledge, words getting thrown around without model comprehension... this is how powerful people manipulate fearful masses.

Case Study: Condescending IT worker

A Condescending IT worker may lord his esoteric computer knowledge over customer service/marketing/etc. This person may throw around random technical words that he assumes the people he is talking to don't really understand to assert his position of being "the technical one".o

Ah yes, it is easy. We just need to migrate the ABC to the XYZ using such-and-such fancy shmancy technology. Lol! Automation is cool. Do u automate things?

For the non-IT people the symbols this Condescending IT worker is using have only one meaning—"I am going to use a system you don't understand to do a thing you are at my mercy for". It is a nerd display of dominance, not an attempt to get othe rpeople to understand the technical workings of some system.

Case Study: Esoteric interest "geek"

Another character you may have met is someone who is always into stuff other than what is mainstream; insufferable hipsters!

Rather than succeeding in some realm with well-defined systems (e.g. a profession, mathematics, speaking a foreign language), they instead turn to maximally esoteric things to compete with nobody but assert their authority on something unknown to you.

Thing about music lady that doesn't ever play piano or guitar, but instead makes some sounds on such-and-such ethnic instrument from a culture that is not her own. Or consider art guy who never does realistic art and instead rambles on about such-and-such theory of this-and-that.

These people get knowledge of some esoteric systems and then try to assert control over you (often subtly) by lording their specialist knowledge over you (and other "normal people" in society).

Case Study: Institutional Talking Heads

I introduced two sorts of "loser"ish characters here to lead gently into discussing the more threatening force—institutionally approved talking heads and the authority of the state, big tech, and the like.

These people use the same tactics, albeit more skillfully, than the aforementioned characters.

In this blog, I've many times repeated the point that with regards to COVID-19, we just don't know what's going on. Yet, tons and tons of people rose to the occasion to tell everybody else what to do based on such and such "science" or counts of who-knows-what gathered in who-knows-how way.

There's lots and lots of conversation of the form,

We know what is going on. Here's a WORD to latch onto. Now, do what we say and oppose who we tell you is the bad guy.

More on tactics later.