Beyond Gulliver’s Travels: Lessons from the Grand Academy of Lagado

"We next went to the school of languages, where three professors sat in consultation upon improving that of their own country."

Introduction

Sigmund Freud once observed, "The poets and philosophers before me discovered the unconscious. What I discovered was the scientific method by which the unconscious can be studied." This quote, highlighted in a 1940 journal article by Philip R. Lehrman, underscores Freud's acknowledgment of the profound insights poets and philosophers had already gleaned long before the rise of modern scientific inquiry. Freud's other sentiment, "Everywhere I go I find a poet has been there before me," further illustrates the deep interplay between creative imagination and philosophical thought (Freud Museum London https://www.freud.org.uk/)

In this article, we will explore the intricate relationship between poets and philosophers, especially focusing on their shared investigations into the nature of language. We will trace this connection through the satirical critique of Jonathan Swift, whose commentary on Enlightenment-era views on language foreshadowed some of the revolutionary ideas later articulated by Ferdinand de Saussure.

As T.S. Eliot insightfully remarked, "The Naming of Cats is a difficult matter, / It isn’t just one of your holiday games," highlighting the complexity of understanding how language relates to reality and how names correspond to things in the world—a challenge that both poets and philosophers have grappled with over the centuries.

Grand Academy of Lagado: The Gullible Nature of Language

In Chapter V of Gulliver's Travels, Part III ("A Voyage to Laputa, Balnibarbi, Luggnagg, Glubbdubdrib, and Japan"), Gulliver visits the Grand Academy of Lagado, an institution renowned for its impractical and whimsical experiments. Among the bizarre schemes presented, one particularly stands out: the proposal of "entirely abolishing all words whatsoever" in favor of communicating through objects. Proponents of this radical idea argue that "since words are only names for things, it would be more convenient for all men to carry about them such things as were necessary to express a particular business they are to discourse on."

This passage is a satirical critique of the idea of reducing language to a mere system of labels. The absurdity is highlighted by the impracticality of the proposal—"if a man’s business be very great, and of various kinds, he must be obliged, in proportion, to carry a greater bundle of things upon his back," especially for those with complex or varied needs. Additionally, this system would have the "great advantage" of serving as a "universal language, to be understood in all civilised nations," they believed, since common objects would be universally recognized.

Swift's depiction of the Grand Academy of Lagado is a critique of the Enlightenment's emphasis on reason and scientific progress, particularly the belief that language is simply a catalog of names for preexisting things. This satirical take challenges the reductionist view that language merely functions as a straightforward system of labels.

The Enlightenment's views on language presented in this passage draw from a long-standing philosophical tradition. In fact, it closely mirrors the famous passage from Aristotle's On Interpretation (16a3-8), where he succinctly encapsulates his philosophy of language.

Aristotle's On Interpretation: Its Resonance with Enlightenment Views on Language

In On Interpretation (16a3-8), Aristotle explores the essence of language, asserting that "spoken sounds are symbols of affections in the soul, and written marks are symbols of spoken sounds." He argues that, while the symbols—whether spoken or written— differ across cultures, the underlying mental states they represent are universally shared. These mental states, in turn, correspond to "actual things" in the world, which are "the same for all" people.

His view laid the groundwork for Enlightenment thought, which regards language as a system of naming, where words act as labels for preexisting ideas and objects. This perspective holds that language serves as a direct link between thought and reality, with words functioning as a nomenclature that corresponds to universally recognized concepts.

Jonathan Swift critiques this simplistic view in Gulliver's Travels through his portrayal of the Grand Academy of Lagado, where scholars propose an extreme reduction of language to a system of physical objects, suggesting that the complete abolition of words would be more efficient. They argue, as we saw above, that if "words are only names for things," carrying the actual objects would make communication more practical. Moreover,  such a method could act as a "universal language," due to the universal recognition of common objects.

By pushing the Enlightenment's ideas to their extreme, Swift reveals the complexities and absurdities inherent in viewing language as merely a set of detachable labels, disconnected from the nuances of human social interactions.  Ferdinand de Saussure also criticizes this simplistic view of language in his lectures and writings, as reported in Course in General Linguistics.

Language, Reality, and the Space Between: Bridging Naïve Realism and Poststructuralism

The relationship between language, thought, and reality has been a central debate among philosophers and linguists. As we have seen, the views held by Aristotle and later by Enlightenment thinkers laid the groundwork for what is often referred to as Naïve Realism or nomenclaturism. This perspective treats language as a direct tool for naming and describing the world, suggesting that words act as labels for pre-existing objects and concepts. According to this view, there is a clear correspondence between language and reality, with words serving as transparent windows to an objective world.

However, this representationalist approach to language provoked a significant reaction, particularly in the 20th century. Deconstructionists and poststructuralists challenged the notion of a stable relationship between language and reality, arguing that meaning is not fixed but is instead continually deferred through an interplay of signifiers, with no ultimate signified grounding this chain of meanings. For these theorists, language does not merely reflect the world but constructs it, leading to a world where signs refer only to other signs, and meaning remains perpetually elusive. This radical position can sometimes suggest that the world is entirely a construct of language, reducing it to an endless chain of interpretations.

Both perspectives—Naïve Realism and Poststructuralism—offer valuable insights, but they also overlook a crucial aspect of human experience. Unlike animals, whose communication often relates directly to immediate and concrete realities (such as signaling the presence of a predator), humans interact with nature through more abstract and flexible constructs. Our ability to imagine and plan for scenarios that do not exist in the present allows us to navigate a complex world in ways that transcend mere immediate responses. This abstract relationship with reality does not deny its existence; rather, it illustrates our adaptive capabilities, enabling us to survive and thrive in diverse environments.

Saussure's theory of semiology offers a nuanced way to understand this dynamic. He posited that the relationship between the signifier and the signified is arbitrary but stable within a given linguistic system. While there is no inherent connection between a word and its meaning, this link is maintained by social conventions. Saussure emphasized the interdependence of the signifier and the signified—they are inseparable yet distinct components of a linguistic system.

A middle ground between naïve realism and poststructuralism can be found by recognizing that while language mediates our relationship with our surroundings, it does not sever us from it. Language allows us to represent, manipulate, and explore the external world in sophisticated ways, even if there isn't a one-to-one correspondence with external objects.

This perspective acknowledges that objective reality exists independently but is engaged through a flexible, adaptive system of language. It reflects a balance that respects both the insights of naïve realism and the critical perspective of poststructuralism, understanding our relationship with reality as one of mediated engagement rather than direct reflection or mere construction.

Conclusion

The exploration of language and its relationship to reality, from Aristotle’s symbolic system to Swift’s satire and Saussure’s semiology, reveals the complexity of how we communicate and understand the world. Swift’s Grand Academy of Lagado humorously critiques the idea of language as a mere catalog of labels, while Saussure refines this critique by showing that meaning is not inherent but arises from the relationships between signs.

As poststructuralists later argued, meaning is fluid and perpetually deferred, emphasizing the constructed nature of language. However, this doesn't mean that language separates us from reality. Rather, it provides a dynamic, species-specific system through which we engage with the world. Language doesn't perfectly mirror our surroundings, but this flexibility actually enhances our ability as a species to adapt and survive. It doesn't disconnect us from the environment; instead, it allows us to navigate it more effectively.

By balancing the insights of both naïve realism and poststructuralism, we can appreciate that while our understanding is shaped by language, it remains a meaningful engagement with the object. This nuanced view respects the contributions of past thinkers while embracing the complexities of contemporary linguistic theory, offering a sophisticated way to navigate the interplay between language, thought and reality.

Related Posts

Purr-spectives: The Philosophy of Naming Cats and Derrida's Double Reading

https://derridaforlinguists.blogspot.com/2023/10/blog-post_07.html

Naming and Meaning: From 'The First Morning' to Saussure's Semiology

https://derridaforlinguists.blogspot.com/2024/04/blog-post.html

Bibliography

Swift, Jonathan. Gulliver’s Travels. Project Gutenberg eBook #829. February 20, 1997. Updated September 6, 2023. Produced by David Price.

Saussure, Ferdinand de. "Course in General Linguistics." Translated and annotated by Roy Harris. With a new introduction by Roy Harris. Bloomsbury, 2013.

Saussure, Ferdinand de. Cours de linguistique générale. Edited by Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye, with the collaboration of Albert Riedlinger. Arbre d’Or, Genève, 2005.

Chandler, Daniel. Semiotics: The Basics. 3rd ed. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge; New York: Routledge, 2017.

ARISTOTLE. Categories and De Interpretatione. Translated with Notes by J. L. Ackrill. Clarendon Press, 1963. Clarendon Aristotle Series. Edited by J. L. Ackrill and Lindsay Judson. Published in the United States by Oxford University Press Inc., New York, 2002.

Aristotle. Complete Works. 2012. "Complete Works." Identifier ark:/13960/t23b75x4g. ABBYY FineReader 8.0. 300 Ppi. Open Source Collection.