Socio-Oeconomic Effect of Terminology Used in Teaching of Physics

That the effect of terminology used in the teaching of physics is more profound than is the effect of terminology in the teaching of the theory of evolution of the species ("Darwinism"), is very arguably the case. If this be accurately so, then it may well be that the vocabulary employing such socio-politically-charged terms as "laws", "forces", "power", and the like in the teaching of physics is having a more detrimental social effect than is such phraseology as "survival of the fittest", "struggle for survival", "necessity of competition", and the like in the teaching of biology. The single-word terms used in the teaching physics would naturally have a more subtlely seductive effect on the socio-oeconomic thought-pattern, than would the multi-word phrases used in teaching biology; for the simple reason that phrases are more easily dissected to determine their validity (and rejected if found invalid, or as in this case inapplicable to socio-oeconomic circumstances) than are single words. [The same is true in theology, where single words like "sin" and "salvation" have a more ready grip on the imagination than have phrases like "immaculate conception" or "inerrancy of scripture". (Many "liberal" religious seminaries and ministers who have largely abandoned those doctrinal phrases may have barely modified their positions on the single-word terms.)]

Because single words are (psychologically) not easily analyzable, adhaerance to them is more dogmatically based (less easily able to be reasoningly discussed) than longer phrases – witness the nearly undiscussable opposition, e.g., between (in metaphysics) "materialism" and "idealism". The qualified (better-specified by being made into phrases) specific varieties of "materialism" and "idealism" are more reasonably discussable than are the gross difference implied by the single-word terms. Experiential confirmation (or otherwise) is more easily locatable in the cases of semantically qualified (multi-word phrase) terminology; whereas single-word terms (and this applies to such vocabulary as "laws", "forces", "power") may slip through the ethical safeguards of one’s lifeway experience. The abundant use of such one-word terminology may misguide (the more simple-minded elements of the populace, that is) into accepting tyrannical government, maltreatment of socio-oeconomic classes of the population by governments, etc.

A solution to the subtlely misleading terminology currently used in the teaching of physical science, would be to speak

of "co-operation" instead of "power",

of "mutuality" instead of "forces",

of "consensus" instead of ‘laws".

In order to convince the teacher of physics of the urgent need for emendation of their terminology, some considerable exposure of them to findings on the historic socio-political effects (effects rendered through human psychology) of linguistic structures may be necessary.

Whoever incorrigibly would keep on teaching physics using terminology known to that teacher to be promoting, in world-affairs, tyranny, intolerance, and warfare; to reasonable expectations such must be regarded as doing an ongoing disservice to humanity in a deliberate and praemeditated ("cold-blooded") way. And the fact that the teacher of physics may be hired by the political state to feed such disinformation into impressionable students’ mind would hardly absolve from guilt; any more than the "hireling priest" who is preaching war (often preaching thus in the office of a "military chaplain") as per the dictates of the political state, is at all absolved of similar (though perhaps more direct) guilt.

As concerning a goal for the evolution of humanity (as deemed so by the cosmic-intelligence principle), a perfecting of public ethics through carefulness in speech (and in thought) to exclude any words or phrases having a malicious (or construible as malicious) meaning or connotation. Thus, our speech (and thought) ought to forego (not use) such terms as "force", "law", and the like (commonly used by physicists); or such terms as "punishment", "retribution", and the like (commonly used by judges); or such terms as "ridicule", "denunciation", and the like (commonly used in "political science"). When commonplace speech is perfected, then metaphysics and theology will automatically likewise perfect themselves. Then, as a reward for perfecting these, the cosmic-intelligence may supply humanity with praeternatural powers (to perceive whither one will go after death, to visit those who have passed on from this mortal coil, etc.).

Achieving perfection of speech is more necessary and feasible than direct elimination of socio-oeconomic ills; for those ills are simply condign results of self-befouled thoughts. (Capitalistic exploiters and war-mongers are natural products of unpleasant language, which must lead to promotion of unpleasant deeds.)