Half a Century of Science in Psychology

Scientific Neologisms Coined by Leon James

For the Period 1958-2008

Including an Analysis of the Natural and Spiritual Properties of Neologisms

(formerly: Leon A. Jakobovits)

University of Hawaii

2008 (version 26a)

With the collaboration, since 1976 of
Dr. Diane Nahl

This is Part I

Part I || Part II || Part III || Master Neochart ||

Part I

Consider this little experiment

Syntactic Levels of Neologisms
Sentential Neos

The Spiritual Poetry of Neologisms

The Spiritual Dimension of Neologisms

Where are neologisms located? Where do they come from?

The Indeterminacy of Meaning || Bio-Geographical Taxonomy of Spiritual Neologisms || The Trinity of Neos || Discourse Thinking Neo Production Procedures || The Spiritual Ladder of Ascending and Descending Neologisms || Neo-Biology || The Un-reality of the Grand Monster || The Non-existence of Evil Neos || Neo-Communication Theory || Throwing Neos at One Another – The Spiritual Neo Ball Game || The Descent of the Divine Neo Through the Mental Layers || The Utility of Scientific Neologisms

Go to Part III

Meta-Neos in Education and Training || Neologistic Discourse Analysis || The Divine Neo Fulfills Itself in the Reality of Conjoint Neocharts || Conjoint Neos || Intimacy Neos || The Impossibility of Keeping Track of All Our Neos || Neos, Words, and Correspondences || Scientific Activity and Research About Neologisms || Related Links

The Master Neochart (overall) || Neochart by Sub-Categories || My Favorite and Major Neos by Year

Part I starts here

Preface

Note: This report is ongoing (see the version number indicated above).

In the course of collecting the various new expressions that appear in my writings, I came to realize that neologisms are indeed new or novel constructions, but they are the norm, rather than the exception. Every speaker and writer, even every thinker, produces neologisms as a normal by product of speaking, writing, and thinking.

I offer this article with two purposes in mind. First, as a case history of neologistic productions in the science area, tracing the appearance of scientific neologisms over a period of half a century of my publications in psychology. The three main periods and topic areas are specified in My Neochart. Second, I hope this will encourage others to keep track and collect the continuous production of their neologisms. I think that the practice of collecting neologisms may become an important and useful area of study of the human mind (see the Chart entry on Community Cataloguing Practices). The future databases of neologisms may contain not merely a listing of them, but their definition and explication, the biographical conditions of their creation, such as date, topical context within which each appears, tracings of its diffusion through their adoptions by others, collateral and independent constructions of homonymous neologisms, and so on.

I believe that everyone can benefit from the practice of collecting their own neologistic productions over time. It is a form of biographical record keeping. It is also a form of cultural history, a charting of community cataloguing practices by which human beings keep track of their perceptions, insights, experiences, thus life itself.

Neologistic records, graphs, and charts of a group or community, make visible the topic focus of its people. It is their very consciousness -- their preoccupations, their interests, their values, their desires. Neolgistic records create a spiritual geography of our vertical community depicting thought and meaning, idea and truth. No doubt a “Human Atlas of Neologisms” may eventually be derived from world-wide neologistic databases, that can show the mental unity of the human race, and possibly, the directionality of its spiritual destiny.

I encourage you to begin keeping track today!

General Introduction

In the early 1950's I was an undergraduate majoring in psychology at McGill University in Montreal, Canada. It was my second year of living in an English speaking community and my freshman year was a real challenge. English was my 11th language -- for the record, in order: Yiddish, Hebrew, Hungarian, Rumanian, Flemish, French, Latin, Greek, German, Spanish, English. Since my specialty in psychology was in the area of psycholinguistics, people sometimes asked me if I became a psycholinguist because of so many languages I know. I was always afraid that people might find out that I really only knew one language, English, which I started learning in high school as a foreign language before I enrolled in college in an English university. I stopped using all the other languages, which I only knew as a child. Besides a little French that's left over, an adult I have been pretty much unilingual.

In 1958 as a junior in college, I was hired as a research assistant by Dr. Wallace E. Lambert. This started my official career as a scientist, researcher, and author of articles and books in psychology. In my undergraduate honors thesis I proposed a new explanation for how practice in one modality can have effects on another modality. I demonstrated that hearing a new word spoken on a tape several times will lower the visual recognition threshold for that word. Using the new (1949) neurophysiological theory of Donald Hebb (whose seminar we were required to take as graduate students), I argued that repeated auditory input of a word would create neural pathways high up in the central system hierarchy, so that there would be overlapping priming effects across modality of input. I made a diagram to show the relation and called it cross-modality transfer effects. That was my first neologism, which the dictionary defines as the creation of a new word or expression.

When I google the expression “cross-modality transfer” I find out that there are 55 sites or documents that use this expression, and one of them is a page showing the abstract of a journal article titled “Cross-modality transfer between pictures and their names” (1980). There appear to be no connection between my neologism and the use of this expression by others after that. Since I have constructed many neologisms in my half-century career as scientist and author, I am delighted to check up on them from time to time, to see what happened to them, and how they have diffused into the minds and writings of others.

My most successful neologism is the expression “semantic satiation” which I constructed in my Ph.D. Dissertation in 1960. While I was working on my doctoral dissertation I co-authored several research articles with Dr. W. E. Lambert, whose grant funded my undergraduate and graduate assistantships. In my dissertation I defined semantic satiation as the reduction in intensity of meaning of a word when it is repeated, heard, or inspected. I related it to the reduced neural firing caused by massed repetitions of an invariant stimulus input. I developed the generality and theoretical significance of the concept in my Master’s Thesis (1960), and then in my Doctoral Dissertation (1962 at McGill University). Subsequently I co-authored several more articles with W. E. Lambert, and several on my own. There is a sense of delight I am experiencing, and awe, when I google “semantic satiation” today (in 2008) and find over 2,000 results listed.

Interestingly, a related neologism I coined in the same dissertation was "cross-satiation", which was short for "cross-linguistic satiation effect." I demonstrated that when a bilingual person repeats a word in one language, the intensity of the meaning of the translated word in the second language, shows the satiation effect as well. This cross linguistic transfer effect of neural fatigue has apparently not been investigated by anyone since (however this conclusion is based on a Google search only).

I have not made a systematic study of this, but my limited sampling results tell me that only about 15 percent of the entries trace the concept back to me. At first I was a bit shocked and indignant, but then had to laugh at myself for such an unworthy sentiment. All ideas that come to us enter our conscious awareness, poof, they are there, and they were not there just an instant ago. Where did they come from, these new ideas, new meanings, new understandings and insights? Certainly I cannot claim that they are from me, but only through me. Our cognitive organ is not only a thinking instrument but also a reception instrument, receiving ideas from the world of ideas, which many have called the spiritual world, and more recently, I have called the “mental world of eternity.” This neologism is so new that google gives only my writings for this expression.

My point is that I feel ridiculous, and quite a bit pompous, to want to take credit for all my neologisms so that others to perpetuity will have to acknowledge that it was coined by one Leon James (Jakobovits). Reflection shows that I and all others use neologisms that we do not attribute to the originator, and some that we have included in our vocabulary so that it is ours – why should we have to trace it back? At any rate, it would make an interesting piece of research, I think, to study the laws of neologisms to see how the backwards attribution process in academic referencing works. Now, since google, everything has speeded up. Information across the world travels faster than the few seconds it takes us to view the screen contents in front of us.

I hope that this neochart might be of service to those who are going to research this issue in the future. At the same time it provides me with the opportunity to present a partial index of what I consider my most useful ideas in psychology, or rather, the scientific ideas that I was privileged to receive. What made me so privileged? Today I know the answer: it was my love for these particular ideas that made my mind to serve as a suitable receptor for them. I believe that others can examine these ideas with interest, and if they love them, they can make them part of their own thinking, and thus make them their own. Giving neologisms to each other is the mutual enrichment of community mental life.

When I was a college student one of the early concepts I learned from Introductory Psychology (taught by the illustrious Donald Hebb) was the German word Zeitgeist (literally: the spirit of the times), which is the idea that people of a generation independently come up with the same ideas, inventions, and innovations since it is “the spirit” of the age, and it is this spirit for which the cognitive organs of various people act as receptors, given the individual’s special love for them. And, pop, in comes the new idea, insight, perception, or understanding.

I coined the expression "applied psycholinguistics" in 1978. Today Goggle gives over 8,000 sites that use this term. I would hypothesize that very few of these are traceable back to me, most of the 8,000 occurrences representing several independent strands. I would consider this a normal process of the independent constructions of neologisms by a number of scientists whose thinking was influenced by the focus of the times. The 1970s saw the rapid expansion of the new hybrid field of psycholinguistics and thousands of researchers and writers were active in this area.

The Master Neochart contains hundreds of entries with a zero occurrence, which means that these neologisms and new phrases do not appear in any of the hundreds of billions of pages that Google indexes. An example is "Clicking as a spiritual act" (which I coined in 1997) and does not occur among the billions of documents and trillions of sentences people have posted on the Web. This surprises me given the intense focus in our society on filtering Web sites to protect people from materials they consider offensive, or to protect them from phishing and malicious viruses. To protect children from falling on explicit adult sites parents and teachers use filtering software that prevent them from clicking on whatever they want. So I would have thought that people would connect "clicking" to a decision that has social and moral implications. To click or not to click is a dilemma that faces hundreds of millions of people every day, not just for spiritual and moral reasons, but certainly I would think, including these.

Another example is the expression "community cataloguing practices" which I coined in 1978. It does not occur anywhere in today's infopshere of the World Wide Web. This does not surprise me since it is so specialized, viewing community practices in terms of how people catalogue or keep track of what counts as what in their social environment. The expression "feminizing the marriage" (which I coined in 2000) does not occur in the entire universe of the World Wide Web. This is very surprising since "feminizing" or "feminization" is listed with over 150,000 occurrences and marriage with 1.5 million occurrences. The non-occurrence of "feminizing the marriage" or "feminizing marriages" shows the force and power of "neologistic constructions" to combine words that resist being together due to intellectual climate. In contrast, "feminizing husbands" does occur but it is associated with female domination, sex change, or pornography. This is why I rescinded my neologism of "feminizing the husband" and am no longer using it in my writings. The expression "surrendered husband" (which I coined in 2002) occurs hundreds of times, but in various different senses.

Not knowing much about what others have researched on neologisms (see what I have gathered here from the Web). It appears from my empirical self-witnessing that neologisms are new word combinations that pop into our awareness when we are grasping for an expression that will describe a perception we have of a sensation, idea, or feeling. This definition of neologisms overlaps with the way linguists describe the cognitive operation of everyday verbalizations in talk or discourse. In other words, neologisms are the result of normal ordinary language competence and performance. Every speaker of a language constructs neologisms as a routine practice in daily social life and in private thinking.

My wife Dr. Diane Nahl and I coined a number of neologisms in our 2000 book Road Rage and Aggressive Driving. One of them is "anti-road rage awareness" which has an occurrence of zero, other than my own use of it. Again this surprises me, given the fact that I introduced my 1997 congressional testimony with the title “Symptoms of Road Rage." Today it has become a daily topic in newspaper articles and thousands of Web sites. The expression "road rage awareness" occurs 280 times today, which shows its growing topical interest. Interestingly, I coined the expression “anti-road rage awareness activities” in 2000 but it still has a zero occurrence, except for my articles and letters on the Web.

The difference between our neologism of "anti-road rage awareness" and the widespread use of "road rage awareness" is that in our book we focus on "road rage remedies" or "remedial road rage," using such other neologisms as "children against road rage," "road rage nursery," "road rage scenario analysis," "road rage prevention," "road rage legislation," etc. Within this context there is the idea of "anti-road rage" activities, hence "anti-road rage awareness exercises." The expression "anti-road rage" occurs 8,600 times in various contexts, e.g., anti-road rage TV ad, anti-road rage bumper stickers, anti-road rage laws, but not "anti-road rage awareness." This shows that as a new topic area develops (road rage was introduced around 1985), various features or facets are progressively uncovered by perception of the issues involved. Hence the number of neologisms in a specific subject area gradually grows as a reflection of its semantic and structural maturity.

A new information practice at amazon.com (and other sites) is to provide phrases from the book that have a low statistical probability of occurring together in other books or text. For the Road Rage book amazon.com provides these "improbable" expressions:

Key Phrases - Statistically Improbable Phrases (SIPs): (learn more)

aggressive driving laws, supportive driving, traffic emotions, against road rage, driver enforcement, supportive drivers, driving psychology, aggressive driving behavior, surf rage, rage tendency, lane hopping, dashboard dining, driving partner, aggressive drivers, speed enforcement, driving philosophy, driving personality, road ragers, highway community, driving attitudes, emotional territory, road rage incident, older drivers, furious driving, rage incidents

Except for three or four expressions in the list above, the remaining may all be considered neologisms. This shows that neologisms consist of low probability combinations of words. "Supportive driving" is a true neologism as it appears to be not present prior to our 2000 book. Today it is listed 1010 times by Google (May 30, 2008). By inspecting the results I determined that most of these are what's known as "false drops" to professional searchers and librarians. Two false drops that occur repeatedly is "driving, supportive" (which is not a phrase), and "supportive driving position," which is a reference to car seats. But there are about 50 occurrences of the "supportive driving" phrase that we coined in our 2000 book, and most of these can be traced back to our book, our DrDriving.org Web site, or a newspaper interview and story.

The expression "driving philosophy" is listed by google 16,500 times but most of them are not talking about drivers' philosophy but about a philosophy that "drives" a project, program or movement. There does appear to be about a dozen independent coinage for "driving philosophy" in the sense of motorists. Our neologism of "driving personality" and "driving personality makeover" does not occur anywhere independently of us.

In scientific discourse it is a universal practice to address the neologisms that scientists and reviewers construct in each other's literature. One of the most influential neologisms of the past one hundred years in linguistics and psychology was introduced in Noam Chomsky's doctoral dissertation at MIT in 1957. He called the new approach he was proposing for linguistics "generative grammar." Chomsky elegant and technically powerful theoretical proposal and demonstration instantly ignited the field of linguistics, precipitating a classic version of "scientific revolutions" that spilled over into psychology and cognate fields, spawning psycholinguistics, cognitive science, information science, and the new "scientific" approach of the language teaching profession. All that from one neologisms "generative transformation" (and a family of related or derivative expressions).

Freud's neologisms of "psychopathology of every day life" and the "super-ego" are among many he constructed. Within one century Freud's "depth psychology" neologisms, tied together by the doctrine of unconscious motivation, has penetrated and infused the intellectual life of hundreds of millions around the world, finding their way into science, literature, novels, popular magazines, movies, TV, commercials, songs, courts, hospitals, psychotherapists, clergy, everyday topics. I used of one of Freud's neologisms "psychodynamic" to create the neologisms of "ethnodynamics" (1977) and "astrodynamics" (1981). The word "astrodynamics" occurs 164,000 on the Web, so it is clear that it may have already been in use by thousands of people when I coined it anew by myself. This is in line with my definition of neologisms as an ordinary everyday cognitive construction practice. Oh, that sounds like another neologisms, "cognitive construction practice" Let me google it, just a moment............................OK, I'm back. The results that there are 8,400 Web sites using the expression "cognitive construction" but no occurrences for the neologism I just made up "cognitive construction practice."

What about "cognitive construction" in the context of "neologisms"? I found only one document that qualifies. So it looks like the idea I had of "neologisms as ordinary cognitive constructions," might qualify as a "neologistic expression" (there goes another one --- ......................... OK, it occurs 13 times in google). I have been talking about neologisms several times a day with my wife as I was writing working on this document (heavy duty linking job!!). At one point she said to me: You are a neologist. Quick let me google that. ............ Yep, it's been around on 18,000 documents.

What is the opposite of neologisms? Perhaps trite expressions that no longer carry meaning, yet have an important ritualizing function in exchanges -- Yes, yes. No, no. I see. What the heck is this! What's wrong? How are you. Thanks a million. I hate when people...In the 1960s generative semanticist Fillmore neologued the expression "formulaic expression" to refer to speech acts that have a ritualizing function primarily, and no longer convey meaning apart from that ritualizing. And we know that much of human exchange involves speech act ritualizing in order to create a receptive conversational environment-- So, how've'you been? What's up, bro. No kidding. Well, gotta go now. Entire conversational exchanges can sometimes be composed of mostly of formulaic expressions and ritualizing. When people talk to pets or babies they regularly say semantically nonsensical things that are pure emotional ritualizings -- Oh, you're supercute. Yep. Supercute. Look at you. Just look at you. So cute. So cute. Oh, yeah. This is something. Yeah, yeah. So cute. We can call these expressions "phatic neologisms."

neologist (nee-OL-uh-gist) noun. One who coins, uses, or introduces new ... So Esther has invited Levey's neologists to think up a more appropriate word." ...
wordsmith.org/words/neologist.html

A "word smith." But so is every ordinary speaker. Noam Chomsky in the late 1950s impressed my generation of psycholinguistic students when he gave a theoretical explanation and a convincing argument why it is that almost every sentence people speak on any day are unique constructions. Empirical evidence showing the accuracy of this principle was provided by many other researchers later. People don't say the same sentences except for short often repeated expressions. The longer a sentence the more likely it is that it will be unique. Try this easy experiment. Type a paragraph or short letter about anything you like. Now select and copy various segments of your sentences, starting with just two words, then three, and so on, and paste it into a Goggle.com query window. What are the results? How many words of your sentences do you need before goggle shows that it does not occur among the billions of documents and hundreds of billions of word sequences others have written. This experiment will prove to you that most of the sentences you speak to your parents or friends are unique (except of the repeated phrases that are more like ritualizing than communicating content).

Note: For more autobiographical details see my article on Historical Autobiography

A Definition of Neologism

A neologism is a word, phrase, or expression that describes a perception, insight, or concept for the first time.

The desire to describe the new perception creates the neologism through content available in one's memory and understanding. Without this desire to describe, there would be no description, and no neologism. Love invents what is pleasing to it. Every neologism is the product of a particular love. Love is an objective and organic operation of the affective organ in our mind. This affective operation is activated by the substance of spiritual heat flowing in from the Spiritual Sun in the mental world of eternity, where all human feelings and thoughts exist or are located. We subjectively experience this mental physiology as a feeling we call love.

There is an endless variety of loves and sub-loves, which are called affections. The expression “being affectionate” refers to an affection of love for someone, expressed through sensorimotor determinations that the individual manages according to group practice and culture. A husband’s love for his wife (affective organ) invents a new idea in his mind (cognitive organ) about how to express this love in his sensorimotor determinations, that become visible in the physical body’s actions, such as inventing a surprise for her, or inventing a new term of affection for her, or a new tone or way of saying it, or a new way of touching or squeezing, and so on. These behavioral neologisms are love’s products by which it is satisfied, and lives.

Love produces sensorimotor neologisms by means of cognitive neologisms. The sequence of production and inventiveness follows this anatomical pattern:

Affective à cognitive à sensorimotor

Love à idea à expression

Spiritual heat à spiritual light à experience

Affective neologism à cognitive neologism à sensorimotor neologism à behavioral neologism

Love is called here an affective neologism because every love or affection is unique. No two loves or affections can ever be the same. Swedenborg reminds us that one can see this uniqueness in people’s faces and facial expressions. The physical face is an expression of a person’s love, and especially what he calls “ruling love.” All loves are arranged in an organic hierarchy like the chart of executives and managers in a business organization, or in the armed forces, and so on. One’s ruling love is king. All the sub-loves or affections are ruled by the ruling love. Affections that are contrary or incongruent with the ruling love are not around, or are on their way to expulsion. Cognitions are affections in outward garb. A semantic neologism (cognitive) is merely an affective neologism in external disguise. And a sensorimotor neologism is a joint product of the marriage between affective and cognitive neologisms.

From this we can see that affection, idea, sensorimotor determination, and physical execution are all involved in any human behavior or interaction. Since every affection or love is unique, it strives to conjoin with a unique idea that corresponds to that unique love. And from this you can see that every utterance and expression of a human being is a neologism

Hence the study of neologisms is the same as the study of speech acts and discourse. It doesn’t seem that way upon appearances, or else, why do we need the word neologism in addition to the words like speech act, utterance, word, or expression. How is neologism different from any expression, given that all expressions are unique?

According to appearances, the word or phrase spoken or written may be the same as that of another person, or that of the same person saying something earlier. So it seems that words and expressions are recirculated and used constantly as the speech or paragraph proceeds. But this is only an appearance when we capture as in a freeze frame the word or expression and consider its meaning. But the actuality of that meaning cannot be separated from the actuality of that event when it was expressed or used by the speaker or writer. This context of use is the actuality of what was said in that situation. But all situations are unique. Hence the actual content meaning, or referent of the expression used in that instant, was actually unique, and hence a neologism.

I discussed this issue in 1999, referring to its original discussion in my 1974 book The Context of Foreign Language Teaching:

This finding was important. I generalized it to my work in psycholinguistics where it turned up as "the Principle of Indeterminacy of Meaning" in which I argued that the definition of a word allows us to put words together in a sentence, and this sentence does not have a definition as the words themselves have. One version of this principle will be found in this chapter.

Since we use sentences to communicate, I concluded that the communicative value of the sentence, that is, its meaning, is indeterminate, and is serviceable only because it homes in as title, to the general area. My final conclusion was original and revolutionary, namely, that sentences are encapsulated titles for paragraphs, pages, and chapters which we would have to write or say to describe our experiencing in a more specific or referential manner.

This led to the idea that a new paradigm of linguistics or psycho-linguistics needs to be developed in which we deal with the syntax of titles as encapsulated references to particular operations of human experience. If you want, you can look at a paper I wrote on titles.

Since there are three levels of thinking and describing, there are three types of neologisms.

Neologistic expressions are treated differently in science than in poetry, literature, or commercial products and trademarks. For the inspired poet or song writer every line can contain a novel way of using a word or a novel way of combining ordinary words. Scientists tend to avoid new constructions and expressions, unless it is required by the presentation of a new explanation, theory or method. New words are introduced into English every year, according to philologists:

New technology, new fashions, new problems, new attitudes: the world is changing all the time and so is the English language. Every year new words are invented. Some become a permanent part of the language; others fall out of the language again when they are no longer needed. The Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary contains many words that have recently come into the language. (...)

COMPOUNDS are the commonest type of new word, when two existing words are combined to give a new meaning. It is not hard to guess what an asylum seeker is, or home-schooling, if you know what the elements mean. One new combination inspires another. You probably know hardware and software, but do you know liveware and wetware, formed on the same principles? New words can be easier to remember if they rhyme, for example chick flick or shock jock, or alliterate (= repeat the same first letter), for example pester power and drag-and-drop. (...)

New products which are introduced are another source of new words, especially if the type of product becomes particularly associated with one brand. This has happened, for example, with Bluetooth™ and Palmcorder™. Sometimes these brand names become so well-known that they can even be used as verbs: If you don’t know what it means, you can google it. (...)

NEW MEANINGS for old words: sometimes the need for a new word can be filled by extending the meaning of a word that already exists. For example, in a business context a beauty contest is an occasion on which several competing companies or people try to persuade somebody to use their services; and wallpaper in computing is the background that you have on your computer screen. (...)

The above is from:
http://www.oup.com/elt/catalogue/teachersites/oald7/about_OALD/new_words_1?cc=global#part1

The expression "The Scientific Meaning of Christmas" which I constructed in 2004 does not occur anywhere. Here we have an example of a neologism that uses commonly known terms like "scientific meaning" (44,000) occurrences and Christmas (450 million), but is expressing an idea for which there is much resistance in our intellectual climate that strives to separate science and religion. The same holds for "Spiritual meaning of songs about cars" (which I coined in 2007). I coined "Spiritual psychobiology" in 1982 and it has not surfaced anywhere else.

The most recent scientific neologisms I constructed occur in this article which I started in March 2008. For instance, I just searched the expression "homonymous neologisms" (coined above in an earlier paragraph), and got only one link: it was a link to this document which I published on the Web in mid-March and kept updating as I worked on it.

By the time this article was 112 pages long on May 30, 2008, it had added 846 neos to the Master Neochart, which then contained 2013 entries (published version 24d).

Everyone writes or speaks unique sentences. Try it out. Type a note to your friend. Select a sentence that is longer than six words, copy it and paste it into a Web search engine query window, making sure you enclose it into quotes. You will find that many of your sentences are actually unique in the Web environment containing many trillion sentences. Let's take the last sentence ("You will find...") and paste the entire sentence into google. The results show that no such sentence exists in the huge infosphere of sentences in English. A few days from now the search engines will show one document, namely this one. This sentence would not be considered a scientific neologism.

Now let's take a portion of the sentence: "containing many trillions of sentences" -- there are no occurrences. This phrase would not be considered a scientific neologism. The phrase "trillions of sentences" shows up only seven times, which surprises me. Repeatedly I seem to be surprised at how few occurrences there are for what appears to me like a likely combination. This shows that people may not able to predict neologisms (this would make an interesting experiment in psycholinguistics, or else a nice new game). For instance given another portion of the sentence above, "sentences are actually unique in the Web environment," my expectation would be that this would definitely occur many times. Yet when I google it, there are no occurrences. Research needs to determine what makes certain word combinations and meanings unlikely to occur. Of course, I am only considering the corpus of sentences on the Web that are publicly available for search bots to index and deliver as results. But this is such a huge population of sentences that it should be representative of all sentences that have been created in English by the past few generations. I am discussing written sentences mostly.

The beginning portion of the sentence "You will find that many of your sentences are actually unique" does not occur anywhere. Even curtailing it to "You will find that many of your sentences" does not occur. Despite this, it is obviously not a neologism. If we check for ""You will find that many" -- we get 130,000 occurrences. "many of your sentences" gets 14,000, and "many of your sentences" gets 14 million occurrences. The portion "many of your sentences are actually unique" has zero occurrence, as does "many sentences are actually unique." This really surprises me. "Sentences are unique" would surely occur many times -- actually, it occurs a mere 26 times. And "your sentences are unique" does not occur anywhere (what a surprise!). The fact that sentences tend to be unique for the most part has been known since Chomsky's focus on it starting in 1960. The sentence "Most sentences are unique." occurs only once and is attributed to author Richard Dawkins' book on evolution. Where is Noam Chomsky? (a sentence that occurs 12 times!). "Where is Leon James" does not occur anywhere. "Where is Diane Keaton?" occurs only once, but "Where is George Bush" occurs 1,500 times, and "Where is God" occurs 230,000 times.

The expression "framed presentations or exhibits" occurs only once (by me), while "frame presentations" occurs 9,000 times, "framed exhibits" occurs 360 times, and "presentations or exhibits" occurs 350 times. The expression "standardized routines for processing information" occurs once (by me), even though "standardized routines" occurs 3,000 times, and "processing information" occurs more than one million times. Taking a frequently used expression ("information processing") and combining it with a less frequent expression ("standardized routines") results in a unique expression. Is "standardized routines for processing information" a scientific neologism? I would think that it is. However, in the neochart below I have listed mostly one, two, and three word expressions used to refer to a theoretical or descriptive construct.

We need to become aware of the numerous anti-neologisms in our daily mental life. Anti-neologisms are Ahrimanic forces of fossilization that invade perfectly healthy neologisms and turn them into what linguists have called “formulaic expressions” (Fillmore comes to mind). It is discussed in the literature under various topics such as trite phrases, stale expressions, popular sayings, and conversational rituals (Goffman comes to mind). Here is a dialog made-up exclusively of anti-neologisms:

A: Hi, how you doing.

B: Good. How about you.

A. Yeah, good. What’s up.

B. Dunno. What’s up with you.

A. Well, I gotta go. See yeah.

B. Yeah. See yeah.

These are actually useful anti-neologisms in and of themselves, because as we know from ethnomethodological psycholinguistics, performing the sequence of these interactions by A and B constitutes for them as having had a conversation and a social encounter. If later someone asks A: “Did you talk to B today?” then B can truthfully answer “Yes.” So ritualistic anti-neologisms have an important social function and utility. But there may be others that are more insidious, more destructive and hellish of human endeavor.

(to be continued)

Consider this little experiment

My sentence and its parts

Goggle occurrences

“Community implies a socio-cultural manifold that excludes uncharted zones, positions, or spots.”

1 community implies a socio-cultural manifold that excludes uncharted zones

1 community implies a socio-cultural manifold

1 socio-cultural manifold

3 socio-cultural

4 million

manifold

15 million

community

1 billion

The first three rows occur only by me in this article from 1978. "Socio-cultural manifold" can be considered one of my neologisms, and it is coined independently by two other writers. "Socio-cultural" would not be considered my neologism, and neither would "manifold" or "community." Neologisms are always embedded in a sentence. A sentence length varies from one word to unknown limits. The longer a sentence the more difficult it is to understand, and individuals differ in ability and willingness to decipher the meaning of long sentences. As a practical approach I would say that the longer a sentence fragment is, the less it qualifies as a neologism. Most neologisms would be no longer than three words. It would be nice if we could find on the Web a frequency distribution of words in combinations, starting with single words, two-word expressions, three-word expressions, etc. Such data would allow us to investigate the cognitive and affective mechanisms that create neologisms.

In 1977 I coined the neologism "role type enactment" to refer to the consistent performance of a style of acting and speaking in a particular social setting or relationship. Today thirty years later Goggle shows no occurrence of this expression in the mega-trillions of three-word expressions in English on the Web. I want to understand what spiritual force, or if you prefer, what mental force keeps these three words from occurring through all this enormous activity of writing on the Web. What expressions people type out, or think and say, is not a random event that just happens without a specific cause making it happen. Nothing in science is random in the sense that nothing is making it happen. Every event we can observe must have a cause. It is the cause that scientists are always searching for in whatever they observe as a fact. What causes me to think of "role type enactment" thirty years ago, and what causes hundreds of millions of other English speakers writing trillions of three-word combinations on billions of Web documents, to avoid "role type enactment"?

Does the answer have to do with semantic focus of perception?

To investigate this possibility let's look at the semantic environment where the neologism "role type enactment" came into occurrence. Here are two prior paragraphs in the article:

We [Diane and I] are raising an important methodological issue which requires full and adequate treatment. This cannot be done here, but we want to illustrate some of the issues involved with a concrete example: the problem of defining the notion of "conversational environment" objectively. Intuitively, it is clear that saying something in the course of a conversation is an adequate device for introducing a change in the sociocultural environment of the participants, i.e., saying something can arouse reactions on the part of hearers in the same way that altering the physical or physiological environment can produce reactions. In fact, saying thing in the course of verbal exchanges constitutes the most prominent method use in human communities for affecting the sociocultural environment, especially when we include saying things to one's Self.

Despite this prominence of verbal exchanges in the community the objective definition of what constitutes a functional conversational spot is difficult to obtain in the most ordinary of situations. As Goffman has argued, few verbal exchanges can be explained, even in crude terms, using such devices as Question/Answer, Request/Legitimization, Attack/Defense, Mover/Reply Move, and the like, for it is quickly discovered that most of talk in natural situations is totally spontaneous and reactive. This means that talk, like other behavior, is responsive to contingencies in the environment rather than to deliberate or conscious strategies of moving and responding to moves, and therefore, the functional units are to be discovered independently of conscious strategies. We intend to show that the functional units of talk in conversation are occasioned by parameters that are independent of conscious awareness, hence inaccessible by methods that average subjective reports as in survey research or experimental data dependent on instructions.

In other words, my attention was focused on trying to find a measure for what was known in ethnomethodology in the 1970s as "conversational environment." Here I was focusing specifically on the nature of conversational interaction as being spontaneous rather than consciously intended. This means that the style of interaction cannot be discovered by having speakers answer various questions about why they interact in a particular way at a particular time. They are just reacting and acting and interacting. And then we say this:

The objective definition of conversational environment can be approached through the delimitation of segments of conversation which are independently defined from such subjective features as topic or content of talk. We shall illustrate this possibility using the transcript already discussed above and attributed to individual A. Note that the episode involves four persons identified in terms of their appearance as follows: (... skipping)

Tabulating the talking turns in the above manner (Figure 2a) more nearly brings out the consequences of the first transformation, i.e., of treating a conversation as a sequence of interactive links. For example, it shows that the transformation is topological, viz., the four-dimensional phenomenon known as conversational episode (place-time specifications) receives a topographic projection whose mathematical or geometric properties can be exploited for describing less visible features of verbal interactional activities. For example, counting the number of interventions or measuring the length of the line five a characterization of each participant's behavior: this too is a major theoretical step that needs careful treatment. In other words, merely counting the number of interventions does not constitute a characterization; instead, it constitutes a measure of participation for this particular observed event. We are proposing, however, to upgrade the significance of the count into a measure of role type, or some such term denoting characteristic behavior. (See Chapter 9, Section [9.3.II.2.1 - 2D].)
From: http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy/instructor/applied4.html zzz

In other words, the environment or character or style of a conversational interaction can be objectively defined or measured by taking sub-segments of the interaction (=lines of a conversational transcript) and seeing how the sub-topics mentioned in the exchange are linked together. Typically, person A might mention topic X while person B reacts to it by mentioning another topic. The second topic gets discussed for three or four talking turns, then A comes back to the first topic. And so on with other topics. So topics weave in and out of each other during a normal spontaneous conversation. The last sentence in the paragraph above introduces the idea of "role type" which is a prior neologism I have been discussing for three years prior to the writing of this paragraph. And so we continue:

In particular, the issue of characterizing role behavior is much easier since we are then dealing with the problem of how to catalogue community practices in conversations, -- a much simpler task for the present.

In terms of the notion of role type, then, we can say that number of interventions, and their distribution, are indices of a person's habitual conduct in social situations, while at the same time we are to stress that "social situations" must not for our purposes be defined in terms of an arbitrary set of variables chosen by an investigator, whatever the variables may be. To sum it up: conversations are information "environments" shaped or constructed by talkers through the content of their responses to other talkers. It is a mutual and reciprocal interaction or communicative exchange in which talkers perform for each other, making impressions upon the others, affecting them, arousing emotions in them as a reaction to what content they chose to perform, and how the performance was delivered. This goes on at a very rapid pace since not only do talkers overlap in speech, but they also perform for each other continuously -- remaining silent, looking intent, yawning, shaking the head, looking away, saying a sequence of Mhm..mhm's, opening eyes wide, grimacing, or taking a talking turn by saying something, which involves a series of speech acts -- agreeing, disagreeing, expressing humor, drawing an implication, saying something unrelated, and so on. This performance or enactment in the exchange is the talker's "role type enactment." That semantic focus required a neologism to mark it, identify it as a phenomenon about conversational exchanges.

In 1977 I wrote this sentence in an article:

"My work has led me to the formulation of an understanding of cultural behavior that recognizes the modulations of individual seeking and suffering as actualized reifications of culturally standardized ritual possibilities"

Of course the entire sentence is unique. But if you take two and three sentence combinations within the sentence, you obtain several scientific neologisms:

1. understanding of cultural behavior (only 17 occurrences)

2. formulation of an understanding (40 occurrences)

3. modulations of individual seeking (zero occurrences)

4. actualized reifications (zero occurrences)

5. standardized ritual possibilities (zero occurrences)

6. suffering as actualized reifications (zero occurrences)

I would have thought that "understanding of cultural behavior" would occur many thousands of times, instead of just 17. I was so amazed that I had to redo the search on google three times, and then I checked yahoo. I have no explanation for the non-usage of the expression "understanding of cultural behavior." The expression "cultural behavior" occurs nearly 200,000 times, and the word "understanding" occurs more than 800 million times. So why so few occurrences of "understanding of cultural behavior"?

According to Marbe's Law, which I learned as an undergraduate major in psychology in the 1950s, frequency of occurrence of a word or expression in a community reflects the degree of interest shown for that topic. Topics and words that are popular reflect general interest in it by the population or group. As an example, here are some topics and their frequency of occurrence on Yahoo.com:

games

4.1 billion

money

4 billion

children

2.5 billion

sex

1.5 billion

God

1.25 billion

crime

790 million

federal government

450 million

parenting

200 million

nightmare

million

terrorists

120 million

Alzheimer

100 million

jihad

50 million

Ronald Reagan

35 million

road rage

14 million

psycholinguistics

2 million

neologisms

2 million

---------------------------------

------------------

typing mistakes

240,000

ennead

200,000

neurosemantics

130,000

ethnopractice

20

glossolids

0

I had difficulty finding words or topics that occur less than 100,000, except for my neologisms. It's a different situation with two-word combinations:

Britney Spears                200 million
sport utility                      20 million
heavy use                        8 million
dual citizenship                3 million
dual control                      1.5 million
spiritual progress              900,000
cultural behavior                200,000
preferential status              100,000
border patrol                      74,000
smoking hazard                 10,000
endless excesses              56
emotional territoriality          3
hexagrammatic morphology 0

It's much easier to find two word combinations that are either frequent or infrequent.

With three-word combinations it's easier to find less frequent combinations than the other way.

games people play               2 million
tax preparation services        1.3 million
role-playing experiences       20,000
several alternative types        1,300
context-embedded learning   350
Mobius strip book                 0

The more words that make up a combination, the harder it is to find frequent occurrences, and they quickly tend to become unique.

Consider these Yahoo generated occurrences:

incredibly 153 million

bright 444 million

yellow 1.8 billion

patterns 380 million

---------------------------------------------------------------------

"incredibly bright" 36 million

"yellow patterns" 18,000

"bright yellow" 9.5 million

---------------------------------------------------------------------

"bright yellow patterns" 99

"incredibly bright yellow" 265

---------------------------------------------------------------------

"incredibly bright yellow patterns" 0

In other words, if you take four frequently used words (hundreds of millions of times on the Web), and you combine them two at a time, three at a time, and all four at a time, the combinations quickly get much smaller, and finally unique.

Syntactic Levels of Neologisms

I think that ordinarily scientists think about neologisms as new “terms” or “terminology” made up of one word. Lists and dictionaries that keep track of neologisms provide them as single words. But neos come in any length. As you can see from The Neochart here, and from the neocharts of others, neologisms vary in number of words from 1, to two-word expressions, the three-word phrases or combinations, and in fact to any length. There is no limit to the number of words in neologisms. The probability of an expression being a neologism approaches certainty in proportion to the number of words it contains. According to linguistic research in the Chomskyan era most people’s sentences in discourse are unique.

Here is one syntactic typology of neologisms that might be useful for research on neologisms:

· Single word neos (“new terminology”), including titles of books and articles, trade names, and endearing neos or put down neos.

· Phrase level neos (mostly between 2 and 5 words)

· Speech act neos (the entire expression is used with interactional significance)

· Sentence level neos or sentential neos (the entire expression makes a whole sentence)

Sentential neos express a full assertion or make a comment about some subject. Philosophy sentential neologisms are also known as “sayings” about life and truth, also known historically as “proverbs,” and in Zen tradition as a “koan.”

Sentential Neos

Sentence neos are neos constructed as a full sentence. The sentential neo makes a complete stand alone assertion. It expresses an argument, a conclusion, a doctrine, a philosophy of life. Categorized neocharts contain selections of sentential neos arranged by time or topic that express the author’s understanding, knowledge, and wisdom.

Here are some examples of sentential neos about life and truth sampled from The Master Neochart:

A spiritual husband loves his wife spiritually as well as naturally.
A wife loves numerous masculine traits and ideas that her husband has.
According to the Swedenborg Reports, such as is our love, such is our understanding, and consequently, such is our neo production.
Affections are eternal in the mind.
Affective operations remain deep seated.
After resuscitation we exist in the celestial marriage in some society of the Grand Human.
Afterlife in eternity = the mental world.
All constructions by people are existential neologisms.
All human beings have an inborn love for neo production and neo reception.
All neologisms are sourced from Divine Neologisms.
All neos come down from God into the mind of its inventor.
All other purposes in the running of the universe are subordinated to this one purpose. (conjugial love)
Anatomical layers of the human mind form its consciousness.
A neochart is an index of one’s intellectual autobiography.
At this point probably no one knows the answer.
Automobiles are powerful and obedient.
Behavioral intentions are exhaling operations.
Being good to others is possible only from God.
Born into eternity means born into the mental world of humanity.
Born into eternity means immortality.
Both heavenly and infernal loves are empowered by the Divine Psychologist.
Both types of loves exist in the human mind from birth.
Clicking is a spiritual act.
Causes are mental phenomena.
Cognitions are affections in outward garb.
Cognitive organ is right next to the sensorimotor.
Collective self is embodied in the sensorimotor environment.
Communication always presupposes an audience.
Congestion is often not caused by the road, but by the way drivers are driving.
Congestion makes you feel frustrated and panicky.
Consciousness and awareness oscillate, while experience is continuous.
Context alters the meaning of the neologism.
Context of use is the actuality.
Conversational neos constitute a rich and rewarding motivational resource.
Correspondences are relationships between natural and spiritual neos.
Correspondence is the relationship between cause and effect.
Creating facilities for the hells in the natural mind allows God to present us with temptations.
Creation and the universe exist for the purpose of fostering this love between a husband and a wife.
Cross-cultural sharing of neo production builds a unified globalism anchored in mutual love.
Death is also called hell.
Disagreements are in-authentic.
Discourse analysis is an open-ended enterprise.
Divine Love is received in the affective organ of an individual.
Divine Psychologist gives a new peace.
Divine Psychologist provides a methodology or spiritual discipline to allow us to win this battle for eternity.
Do I put it on my neochart then?
During the life of the first generations of people on this earth there was no evil.
Effects of the heart inflow into the lungs.
Emotionally intelligent thinking empowers drivers.
Enlightenment is the mental state of reasoning from realities.
Equity husbands negotiate and haggle.
Every evil love has sway over every human being – until regeneration.
Every human being is born into the mental world of eternity in a permanent spiritual body.
Every individual’s mind is exposed to the same Spiritual Sun in eternity.
Every love has a built in power to consume itself.
Every love is unique, possessing some unique feature of good, some unique virtue or quality.
Every neo is an immortal neo.
Every object, quality, or operation is a Divine Neologism.
Everyone is created capable of seeing the Spiritual Sun.
Everything suddenly slows to a crawl, but there's no obstruction.
Evil is nothing but the distortion of good.
Evil loves, or lusts, are consummated in abominable ways.
Experience is an act of living through an event.
Fear to tread on the toes of another’s foot.
From self to conjoint self – this is the journey that the Lord has created for us.
Glad you enjoyed looking at my neos.
God and eternity do exist.
God honors both by supplying the events for either. (our cooperation or resistance)
"God in me" corresponds to the Divine Psychologist.
God is at the center of every neo.
God is the basis of reality and sanity.
God makes sure that we are not tempted beyond our ability or readiness to resist.
God manages everything by rational necessity.
God manages the mind of atheists.
God’s Divine Love is within every affective neo.
God’s Divine Wisdom is within every cognitive neo.
God’s Divine Proceeding is within every sensorimotor neo.
Good and truth stream out of the Divine.
Google that to get there.
Heaven is the Grand Human.
Heavenly loves possessed by human beings are dead without the Divine Love within them.
Heavenly loves are living mental substances.
He knows it, he feels it.
He must reciprocate by conjoining himself to her. (husband and wife)
He was stupefied by this celestial appearance and reality.
He witnessed their conjoint self, shining from their faces, their beauty, and their wisdom.
Hell is the Grand Monster.
Hellish loves conjoin themselves with hellish thoughts.
Heaven cannot battle hell apart from our loves.
Heavenly life is the happiness of neologisms.
Heavenly loves in the natural mind represent and correspond the uncorrupted layers of our spiritual mind.
Hence it is that the conjunction is possible between them, being in reciprocal loves.
Hey, let's have a neo party online.
Human neos are the direct result of Divine Neos.
Humans are born into a dualist creation.
I call this new coupled person, new coupled self, by the title “conjoint self.”
I enjoy your fertile neo production procedures.
I fought hard to remain a behaviorist.
I googled it.
I had to defend the idea that mental processes are behavioral processes.
I now realize that the possibility exists that I may forget that I am already enlightened.
I remind myself daily about heaven and hell.
I watch myself like a hawk a field mouse. (warning to myself)
If it is a thought that can exist in heaven, then it is a good thought, and I can love it.
If we stop producing neos we cease to have life.
Infernal ideas in hell are anti-neotic, contrary to inventiveness.
In a pointed sense neos are zones of community ignorance.
In layer 7-consciousness (rational mind), our neo-construction is affective and spiritual in focus and meaning.
In layer 8-consciousness (materialistic mind), our neo-construction is cognitive and abstract in focus and meaning.
In layer 9-consciousness (corporeal mind), our neo-construction is sensorimotor and concrete in focus and significance.
In order to get out of the equity model, the husband needs to be enlightened by celestial love.
In order to understand this rationally let’s bring it down to anatomy and see how this actually works.
In the Divine Love infinite unique loves exist as one Divine Love.
In the Swedenborg Reports God reveals a new scientific theory.
In the Swedenborg Reports this is called “shunning evils as sins.”
Inside every neo you produce lives the Divine Neo in which your neo is sourced.
It is a heaven of neos!
It is not possible for the natural mind to be housed in the physical body.
It is our life, each of us immortal humans.
It is a spiritual war zone.
It is the antidote to warfare and ethnocentric antipathy.
It is the chart of your spiritual journey.
It is the method of neologisms. (spiritual victory in combat)
It is their very consciousness.
I’ve been trying to keep track of all my neo productions – written, conversational, and reflective.
Levels of spiritual consciousness are purely rational.
Love (A) perceives through the senses (S) what is usable for its fulfillment.
Love directs cognitive operations (C) to formulate a plan or method of attaining its fulfillment.
Love invents what is pleasing to it.
Love is consummated when it conjoins itself to a thought.
Love produces sensorimotor neologisms by means of cognitive neologisms.
Loves to dominate her more than to be intimate with her.
Loves to retain for himself some areas of independence.
Makes a mistake, tailgates, or changes lanes unnecessarily.
Many people are driving around in a constant seething rage.
Masculine neologistic productions clash with feminine ones.
Maxed out baby– no dinner for you tonight. (while weighing myself)
Mental children are stillborn in hell.
Mental conjunction requires reciprocal organic structures.
Mental ether is created as an expanse around the Spiritual Sun which forms its center and its highest point.
Mental world has the human anatomical form.
Meta-neos are necessary communicative devices.
Moses, Paul, and Swedenborg: Three Steps in Rational Spirituality.
My re-awakenings assume a new pattern.
Natural marriages on earth are designed by God to foster the psychological growth of our inborn conjugial character.
Natural mind is tied by correspondence to the physical body.
Neologisms are born in the minds of human beings.
Neologisms are eternal.
Neologisms are new meanings, hence new truths from new loves.
Neolgistic records create a spiritual geography of our vertical community.
Neomalies are anomalous neologisms.
Neo construction in conversation has an anatomical dimension and relevance.
Neo production of a group or society is an index of its inventiveness, adaptability, survivability.
Neopsychology is theistic psychology.
Neo refers to a mental operation or state of one individual that is being induced upon another individual.
Neos are constructed out of rational ether that forms the expanse of the mental world of humanity.
Neos are immortal mental packets made of spiritual substances.
Neos are new words, either singly, or in new combination.
Neos are speech acts we produce that are expressions or images of our inner loves.
Neos increase cognitive load.
New knowledge outpaces old theory and old method.
No neos are produced in hell.
No one knows a neo prior to its construction by just one person.
No love exists that is not heavenly from the Grand Human or hellish from the Grand Monster.
Non-theistic psychology adopts this materialistic perspective.
Non-theistic psychology has nothing to say about mental anatomy.
Now it is permitted for a husband and wife to create a heavenly union here on earth.
One’s ruling love is king.
Only if we know both can we choose from our own love.
Only love in the heavenly layers of our mind is capable of bringing neo-babies into eternity.
Our afterlife isn’t real unless it has a solid foundation somewhere.
Our cognitive life of thinking is in the service of our affective life of loves.
Our motivation for searching for this understanding is the love we have for making sense.
Our ruling love makes everything happen in our sensorimotor dream environment.
Our spiritual race on this earth is born Fallen.
People obtain their ideas and ideals from the neos of others.
People’s thinking may remain neoless.
People who benefit each other from their neo-construction procedures feel integrated in a community of humanity.
Rationality is what theory is made of.
Regeneration is the process of undergoing temptations in spiritual combat.
Remember that the warfare refers to ourselves.
Science does not base its theories and explanations on mere data.
Scientific revolutions are normal.
Self-witnessing is observational, objective, empirical, and behavioral.
Sentential neos pack a complete assertion.
Sharing neos in communicative transactions affords mutual satisfaction.
She burns with longing for affective intimacy.
She can only obtain this if he wants to have that with her.
She feels things by perception.
She can only obtain this if he wants to have that with her.
She just knows it, because she perceives it.
She receives the conjugial from the Lord directly, while he does not.
Shortly after resuscitation everyone is led to discover their ruling love in the natural mind.
Similarities have bonding effects.
Singing is a cultural resource.
So it is clear that “final neo” is a neo.
Spiritual development is cyclical and recursive.
Spiritual meaning is to appropriate spiritual truths.
Such is the zone of the mental world that we live in every day.
Swedenborg didn't quite fit like the others did.
Swedenborg interviewed conjugial couples in layer 4 of the mental world of eternity.
Swedenborg Reports identify many loves that are described in Sacred Scripture.
Swedenborg saw how a conjugial couple appears as one Angel from a distance.
Swedenborg saw the actual book in a temple that housed it. (his book Arcana Coelestia)
Swedenborg's presence is private, intimate and tacit.
Swedenborg was unique in that he worked within the positive bias.
Talking is the most common and enjoyed human activity, both here, and in the afterlife.
That instant the temptation ceases.
The beginning purpose and the end purpose of all creation is conjugial love.
The community is endangered when God is denied.
The consciousness of self is life.
The battle of evil vs. good, and its sub-battle of falsity vs. truth, is a battle that we keep going.
The details are revealed in the correspondential sense of the Old Testament Sacred Scripture.
The diffusion of neos to others is the basis of community existence.
The Divine Neo that is within your own neo is the relationship of love.
The Divine Love cannot be divided into pieces of itself.
The Divine Psychologist with every person’s mind manages the details of this mental warfare.
The Divine Trinity is the ultimate reality and rationality.
The first is an infernal love, the second is a heavenly love.
The fulfillment of each unique heavenly love is to see its own good in another human being.
The future lay in science, not something lesser.
The Grand Human and the Grand Monster are in every human being.
The heaven that I found here, now that I am entering old age, is the conjugial unity I live with my wife Diane.
The heavenly and hellish societies battle each other inside our thoughts and feelings.
The inherited loves of the natural mind are contrary to this unity.
The individual’s ruling love is given the opportunity by the Divine Psychologist to make that choice.
The layers of our mind are the layers of the spiritual world.
The letters, words, and expressions are celestial-rational correspondences of what God actually spoke.
The Lord comes and exists in our mind through that Testament.
The love of our conjugial partner gradually disengages us from the un-reality of selfhood as an individual.
The meanings we perceive and become conscious of are those that are selected by our love.
The mental layer where hell operates in every human mind is devoid of neo production.
The mental world is made of spiritual substances streaming out of the Spiritual Sun in every person’s mind.
The mental world of heaven is very real, more real and solid, than a palace on earth on a big island.
The more complete you try to make your Neochart, the further behind you get.
The natural marriage turns into a spiritual marriage as the husband spends more of his time in the unity mood.
The neo that one person loves to produce is enjoyed by another person when it is received.
The physical is a derivative reality from the spiritual.
The possibility arose that feeling states and states of enlightenment are independent of each other.
The power of this union rests on the Letter of the Third Testament. (conjugial union)
The principal love in the unity model is to maintain intimacy at all three levels – sensorimotor, cognitive, affective.
The rest are in our vertical community. (independent witnesses)
The result of this activity of our mental organs is experienced by each person as consciousness of a unique self.
The same spiritual heat inflows into every individual’s affective organ.
The self-witnessing method was empirical.
The source is within the cause which is within the effect, and so, the Divine Neo is within the heavenly neos that are within the natural neos (“within” is the relationship of correspondence).
The spiritual body contains our mental organs.
The spiritual poetry of neologisms is hidden within each one of them.
The spiritual substance of good, in the form of spiritual heat enters the affective organ of the spiritual mind.
The spiritual world of the afterlife is nothing else than the mental world of human kind.
The unassimilated do not talk.
The Spiritual Sun is in every person.
The study of theistic psychology starts and ends with human mental anatomy.
The two people ordinarily alternate turns for performing for each other.
Theistic psychology is brain based.
Then our spiritual mind is opened and we have heaven within us.
There is only one mental world.
There are two kinds of loves and each kind has distinct properties.
There are two kinds of ruling loves in the mental world of eternity.
There are no other created sources for loves. (Grand Human and Grand Monster)
There are no others beside you who see what you see in my writings.
There is an endless variety of loves and sub-loves, which are called affections.
There is no way of fully explaining anything.
There is only one mental world and every person is born into it, and remains in it forever.
There was a potential of evil in the mental world of eternity.
These are examples of celestial sensorimotor intimacy neos within which are cognitive intimacy neos, within which are affective intimacy neos.
These behavioral neologisms are love’s products by which it is satisfied, and lives.
These heavenly trigger loves include the love of innocence in obedience and surrender to the parental order that is a representation of God’s order.
These inherited loves operate as impulses and triggers in the affective hierarchy.
These sub-loves are like assistants to the chief loves.
They are joined in all their loves through a reciprocal conjunction of their mental anatomy.
They are our mental children, immortal, indestructible, existing forever in the mental world of eternity. (neos)
They are philosophical and spiritual statements.
They are then united to eternity as soul mates.
They are sourced in either the Grand Human or the Grand Monster. (all loves)
They understood the meaning of my speech act.
Think of the afterlife as living in a purely mental world.
This affective conjunction is reciprocal between masculine love and feminine love.
This celestial marriage produces as offspring the endless neos in the universe.
This dream like reality in eternity is very real.
This is our inherited anatomical connection to the hells.
This is the power that is accessed through the mental doorway of neocharts.
This is what it means that the Divine cannot be divided.
This is why we are called the fallen race.
This life exists in a mental world, not physical.
This life is the life of our neos.
This infernal marriage spawns the sensorimotor world of hell, which Swedenborg has described.
This is called sharing meaning. (neo construction)
This is what is called human life. (consciousness of a unique self)
This negative rebellious selfish love comes from their connection to the Grand Monster societies.
This spiritual is the mental.
Those who would profane, are not enlightened.
To be consumed is the purpose of a love’s existence.
To be good, you must love being good.
To love another’s neos is to love God in whom the neos are sourced.
Unelightenment is to reason from appearances.
Uses gestures and his body to intimidate her or to punish her.
Was his method intuitive or empirical? (Swedenborg)
We are at war against our self and within our self.
We are immortal, living forever.
We are incorporated into the anatomical framework of the Grand Human.
We are then in a mental zone called death.
We become collective personalities.
We belong to heaven in eternity.
We call it a traffic wave.
We can cooperate or resist. (the Divine Psychologist)
We can see in babies and toddlers the hatred of this love of obedience.
We can see this principal heavenly love in infants.
We come into existence with two bodies.
We continue our immortal life in our spiritual mind.
We don’t actually live on earth.
We have it forever – self or life.
We have our immortality since birth.
We inherit aggressive and dangerous driving patterns as children.
We know from the Letter as well that the Lord is in every person.
We live in eternity in our spiritual body.
We may possess numerous heavenly loves, and in each of them the Divine Love is present in full.
We produce neos by means of our ability to rationally understand what we perceive and observe around us.
We receive heavenly neologisms from Sacred Scripture and commandment neologisms from our conscience.
We speak according to our motives and intentions, which come from love.
We therefore have a choice whether we are going to love the hell in us or the heaven in us.
What God calls good is what can take us to heaven.
What is a neo?
When we are free, we will to think and to do that which we love.
What we choose from our own love, remains forever as ours.
Without spiritual temptations we would never be able to perceive that we are inverted.
You are producing an affective neo when you have a new love, intention, or motive.
You are producing a cognitive neo when you have a new thought, plan, or principle.
You are producing a sensorimotor neo when you have a new sensation, movement pattern, or verbal expression.
You are then the independent witness, and only one is strictly needed.
You can’t be good until you want to.
Your email is full of neos.
Your mental world is my mental world is every one’s mental world.
Your own neos are entry points to your relationship to God.

Note: Additional sentence neos appear in the Categorized Neochart and in the Master Neochart.

For more examples of philosophy sentential neologisms relating to Swedenborg and spirituality, consult this:

The Sayings and Aphorisms of Leon James, Emanuel Swedenborg, and Jesus of Nazareth

Face work neos (Goffman comes to mind) refer to speech act neos that people routinely construct in interaction with others. For example: “I am so, so super sorry!”—which has a google occurrence of just one. Or: “I am so excited that I can hardly wait you know." – which has a zero occurrence.

Neocalendars are calendars that provide ‘a neo a day’ feature, or ‘a neo of the month’ feature. Some day soon someone will provide a neo widget with an RSS feed to provide for digital delivery systems for neos and desktop neos. Similarly, neocards are cards people send each other with a neo message. Chicken soup neos are intended to soothe one’s mental environment and feed it with hope neos and self-confidence building neos.

The Spiritual Poetry of Neologisms

Sentential neos pack a complete assertion. They are philosophical and spiritual statements. By selecting all the sentential neos in a neochart and sorting them alphabetically, we produce the poetry of neologisms. The spiritual poetry of neologisms is hidden within each one of them. This follows the universal principle expounded in the Swedenborg Reports that successive degrees are together in simultaneous degrees.

The familiar cause-effect sequence is an instance of this, though it is generally unknown to the scientists today. Everyone knows that cause is first, then effect follows. But few people know that the cause is within the effect. People think of the cause as the precipitating causal event in the past. This is because they have a purely physical or materialistic explanation (layer 8C) of cause and effect. It is like intellectual Flatland. A dimension of reality is eliminated, leaving something flat or flattened. It is conceptual reductionism. The Swedenborg Reports restore conceptual duality, consequently true reality. Duality is declared and revealed in all Sacred Scripture. It is God’s Word, therefore Divine Truth, which is reality itself.

Duality encompasses two worlds, one physical in time, and the other mental in eternity. This is also called the spiritual world or the afterlife. Born into eternity through a dual body, one in each world, we ‘pass on’ at death and resuscitate a few hours later in the spiritual body and our own familiar mind and identity of self. To say that we “pass on” is to speak according to the appearance, especially to those still “on earth.” The scientific specifics revealed in the Swedenborg Reports indicate that our mind and self are in the spiritual body only, and therefore we are born into eternity and stay there. We are merely not conscious that our spiritual body is functioning in the mental world of eternity. Our thoughts and feelings are in that immortal spiritual body in eternity. So instead of actually “passing on” from “this side to that side”, we are merely becoming conscious that we are already in the mental world of eternity from birth. This new spiritual consciousness is made possible by the dying and resuscitation process. It is something we look forward to with anticipation, though we also know from Sacred Scripture that we are responsible for preparing ourselves before that process of consciousness transition. If we awaken unprepared, we follow our inherited ruling love of doing everything for the sake of self only. This love exists in the Grand Monster, in the hells of the human mind. But if we awaken from resuscitation being prepared, we have undergone character reformation and regeneration through resisting temptations. Then we have a heavenly ruling love that pulls us irresistibly to conjugial life in the Grand Human.

The two worlds are tied together in an integral coordination. Every event in the physical world of time and nature is called an effect, and every event in the mental world of eternity and the Spiritual Sun, is called a cause. The effect once it comes about, cannot exist by itself but must have the cause within itself. This is the Divine Law of Correspondence between the natural and the spiritual, between physical and mental. In the discourse of many people, including scientists, the word “natural” is normally opposed to “spiritual,” and the word “physical” is normally opposed to “mental.” Few people have suspected or known that these two sets refer to each other. “Natural” refers to “physical,” and “mental” refers to “spiritual.” Consequently, natural and physical refer to phenomena in time, and these are effects, while spiritual and mental refer to phenomena in eternity (not in time), and these are causes.

These two, the physical and the mental, or in other words, the natural and the spiritual, are correspondences and are fully determined by the laws of correspondences. These are revealed in the Swedenborg Reports. Correspondences apply only across discrete degrees. The physical and the mental are in discrete degrees. This means that nothing from the physical can come into contact with the mental – they are separate universes. But they are tied to each other, point by point, phenomenon by phenomenon, object by object. A mental object is in the world of causes, thus the spiritual world. That particular mental object has an effect in the physical, and the two are functionally tied and determined by each other. For instance, the existence of the substance of water in the physical world is an effect whose cause is the existence of the substance of truth in the mental world. The mental world of eternity is a rational ether or expanse or field created by the Spiritual Sun. This phenomenon was visually observed by Swedenborg over the course of 27 years of daily dual consciousness, from age 57 to 84 when he was separated from his physical body in 1772. In his spiritual consciousness he was able to see the sensorimotor neos appearing in the various layers of the mental world of eternity, which is shaped overall into the appearance of the Grand Human. Every person he talked to in that spiritual consciousness (layer 4, Third Heaven) was able to see the Spiritual Sun.

The Swedenborg Report describe the Spiritual Sun as an aura that localizes the point of interchange between God and creation. God As He is in Himself, infinite, unknowable, unapproachable created mental and physical existence by means of this Divine Aura or Substance that flows out of Him and into His creation. The Spiritual Sun is therefore called Layer 1 of the mental world of eternity. From the Spiritual Sun issue an endless variety of mental substances out of which human minds are organically constructed. There are two types of spiritual substances, each infinite in their own. One type is spiritual light coming from the Spiritual Sun, and the other type is spiritual heat that is within the light. What is amazing is that the mental substance of spiritual light is nothing else than truth upon which is based rationality and the functioning purposeful order of reality. Further, the mental substance of spiritual heat is nothing else than love from which is constructed our will to live and survive.

When we are conceived and born God forms a spiritual body that contains the three systems of mental organs we call affective, cognitive, and sensorimotor. These organs are constructed out of the substances of spiritual heat and light. Since spiritual heat (Divine Love) and spiritual light (Divine Truth) are Divine substances they are living and immortal. Anything constructed out of the substances of the Spiritual Sun is therefore indestructible and permanent. Our spiritual body and its mental organs are born into eternity and remain immortal and eternal. Our self and identity as a unique person remains forever and is indestructible. That’s nice to know, right? I thought so myself when I first found out, in 1981, having found the Swedenborg Reports in our university library on the campus of the University of Hawaii. My wife and I were searching for Bible Commentaries and came across a shelf of 40 books written by one man, E. Swedenborg. We each took a volume home and have kept reading, studying, and researching those volumes since then.

The order of reality has therefore been created with the Spiritual Sun creating the mental world of eternity, and then, outside of that by a discrete degree, creating the physical world in time. This is the sequential order of phenomenal existence in creation –

Spiritual Sun à mental world of eternity à physical world in time

Source à cause à effect

These are created into discrete degrees, which means that the substances of the Spiritual Sun are the constructing elements of the mental world of eternity, and that these constructing elements do not become part of each other. Our feelings are constructed out of spiritual heat, which is Divine Love. That Divine substance is “in us” as components, but they are not part of us. This is because Divine substance cannot mix with non-Divine. This is the relationship of discrete degrees and correspondence. The Divine substance out of which our affective organ is constructed is the cause, while our affective operations and feelings of love, are the effects. Cause and effect are discrete, one is within the other, but they cannot mix or touch.

Quoting from the Swedenborg Reports:

SS 28. It will be comprehended by the learned that these three may be called end, cause and effect; also being, becoming and existing: the end is being, the cause is becoming and the effect is existing. Consequently, in everything that is complete there is a trine, called the first, the middle and the last; also, the end, the cause and the effect; and also being (esse) becoming, (fieri), and existing (existere). When one understands these things then also does one understand that every Divine work is complete and perfect in its last; and also that the whole is in the last, which is a trine, because the prior things are simultaneously therein. (SS 28)

It is similar with what is mental in relation to the physical. The mental is prior and is the cause, while the physical is posterior and is the effect. The cause cannot mix with the effect but they correspond to each other and act together, and live together. When the Source is within the cause and the two together are in the effect, the sequence is completed in simultaneous order. This is the order of reality. Here are some diagrams that depict and discuss simultaneous order of a variety of things in discrete degrees:

diagram 1 || diagram 2 || diagram 3 || diagram 4 || diagram 5 || diagram 6 || diagram 7 ||

Now let us go back to the introductory paragraph of this Section:

Sentential neos pack a complete assertion. They are philosophical and spiritual statements. By selecting all the sentential neos in a neochart and sorting them alphabetically, we produce the poetry of neologisms. The spiritual poetry of neologisms is hidden within each one of them. This follows the universal principle expounded in the Swedenborg Reports that successive degrees are together in simultaneous order.

The spiritual poetry of neologisms is “hidden” within each neo.

In other words, what was successive in its construction is now contained in its final form, which is the linguistic expression itself, born in the reflection procedures of the cognitive organ, and which we call an idea. If there is a motive or intention or desire in the affective organ that wants to conjoint itself to this new born idea, then the conjunction gives fruit, delivers a mental baby to the pair of mental organs. This mental baby is born in the sensorimotor organ and is visible there. The three mental organ systems are in discrete degrees and react to each other by correspondence. A feeling from the affective organ is a different thing than a thought in the cognitive organ. The two cannot be continuously or contiguously together except by correspondence. They are made of different substances that cannot mix because they are reciprocal to each other. Every part of one is the reciprocal of the corresponding part of the other. They fit together to make a whole. Their relationship or marriage is that of conjunction – one fitting into the other, the two making a whole.

Your neochart is an index of your autobiographical record as a human being. It is a representation of your intimate relationship to God.

Inside every neo you produce lives the Divine Neo in which your neo is sourced. Your own neos are entry points to your relationship to God. Your neo, sourced as it is in a Divine Neo, is the visible offspring you produced and stands as proof of your intimate relationship to God. This intimacy is obvious since the Divine Neo that is within your own neo is the relationship of love. You had to make yourself love Divine Neos before you could construct any neos of your own. This shows that there are fake neos that don’t have a Divine Neo within them, but only the neo of a fake god, and this usually is the Self elevated to a capital. Spiritually insane neos carry meaning that is constructed from a hellish marriage between an evil hurtful love in the affective organ and a distorted justification in the cognitive organ that makes it acceptable to construct fake neos, God-less neos.

An instance today of this attitude is the negative bias in science that excludes the Swedenborg Reports from its literature, research, and teaching. The justification given (1) that knowledge of God is not science, and (2) that other scientists cannot see what Swedenborg saw, is not methodologically well founded, not true to the freedom of scientific inquiry. I have examined the Swedenborg Reports from my training of half a century of science, and have found them to be scientific. If others make this examination, I am confident that they too will corroborate this conclusion. Hence to refuse to examine the evidence (“negative bias” science), is a position not rationally well founded. The love that keeps this bias going strong, generation after generation of scientists, is not based in the Grand Human. It may have to do with humanistic pride to want to keep God out of the formula of our lives. But the community is endangered when God is denied, since God is the basis of reality and sanity.

People who feel like rejecting this conclusion may want to reconsider when they remember that the natural rational mind (layer 7Ce) where we form these ideas and principles, is immersed in the negative bias of materialism. People can elevate their consciousness to the interior-rational layer (7Ci) that is informed by Sacred Scripture. There we learn that God manages science, manages thoughts, manages correspondences, manages events, manages reality. Knowing this, understanding it, trying to figure it out, makes us really intelligent and spiritually sane, knowing our excellent future, knowing how to get there.

There are three types of neos: Affective neos, Cognitive neos, and Sensorimotor neos.

We are most aware of cognitive neos which are words put together to express a new idea seen for the first time by the thinker or speaker. This is a sense-making procedure involving a new configuration of meaning elements. When we construct a cognitive neo we are responding to our desire to capture in a semantic freeze frame this new meaning, this new rational relationship that has entered our understanding and presented itself there to our cognitive eye. We see something new in our mind, and we desire to codify it, fossilize it, capture it into a cognitive unit, which is the neo. People talking to each other produce a stream of cognitive neos for each other’s reception and consummation.

When someone throws a cognitive neo at you, you receive it into your cognitive organ where you apply sense-making procedures to it. The sense-making procedure (also called “appraisal” or “interpretation”), is supervised by the affective procedure of value-attachment, which will allow you to consummate the incoming neos. Value-attaching a neo that you have just appraised gives you the opportunity to consummate its meaning. You might for instance say out loud, “Oh, that’s a wonderful expression” (or “strange expression”), etc. Or you might say nothing, but still evaluate it to yourself (“I like that expression.” Or “That’s such a truism. I should remember that.”).

Once the communicated neo is consummated, it is ready for optimizing. This is where commercial, military, and educational uses might be available. All patentable products or copyrightable text are neos born in the cognitive organ of some inventor or writer.

Affective neo production includes new loves, new values, new motives, new satisfactions, new ways of having fun and being happy, new ways of loving others. Affective un-neos are the opposites of these.

Cognitive neo production includes new ideas, new concepts, new patterns, new understandings, new descriptions, new doctrines from Sacred Scripture.

Sensorimotor neo production includes new appearances, new styles, new products, new ways of performing, new ways of interacting and communicating.

One of the great cognitive neos that started modern science was the heliocentric construction by Copernicus of the first correct arrangement of our solar system. Until then the un-neo of an earth-centric universe reigned in the mind of philosophers and theologians.

It’s interesting to point out that the earth-centric universe is not true physically, as proven by Galileo, but is true spiritually, as proven in the Swedenborg Reports.

God chose our planet earth to effect the Divine Incarnation. The reason is that of all the myriad of inhabited planets across the billions of galaxies, this earth is the only one that has supported a scientific civilization based on rational methods of thinking. In order for God to complete the creation of the human race, He had to acquire for Himself a Natural Body in the physical world. He had prepared this momentous event since the beginning of the generations of people on this earth. God’s Natural Body contained a Spiritual Body in which was a natural mind with its three layers (corporeal (9), scientific (8), external rational (7e). It also contained a spiritual mind with its three layers (First Heaven (6), Second Heaven (5), and third Heaven (4).

Just as it is with all people born on this planet, God’s Natural Mind was connected by inheritance to the societies of the Grand Monster. In order to disconnect this inherited natural mind from the hell societies, God-Man had to regenerate His inherited natural mind before He could make it Divine, and hence, truly His Own. To accomplish this God-Man had to do what no human being could, before Him. This was the very purpose for which He wanted to be Incarnated and acquire for Himself a Divine Natural Body that He could take to Himself in eternity, so that those in the afterlife of eternity could see Him visually, and touch Him with their hands. This visible touchable God is called The Divine Human. There is only One God. Until the Incarnation God could only be seen as the Spiritual Sun. This is because He had not acquired for Himself a Sensorimotor Body, which is the ultimate of human life. Swedenborg was told by those who live in layer 4 consciousness (Third Heaven) that the Divine Human sometimes appears to them face to face and talks with them.

The method that God-Man created to regenerate His Natural Mind is the method that every human being after that, must use to regenerate his or her natural mind. This method involves three steps:

(I) God-Man creates a new evolutionary layer in His natural mind. This is layer 7i or the interior-natural layer. This organ never existed in the current split-brain spiritual race, though it did exist in the earlier whole-brain celestial race that first lived on this earth (“the Most Ancient Church”). The interior-natural layer (7i) that God-Man constructed in the human natural mind actually completes the full evolution of the human race. With this new interior organic system in our rational mind (layer 7i) we are able to raise our consciousness to the spiritual and celestial level, almost as if our spiritual mind became conscious. Through this entirely new ability our rational mind has been able to evolve progressively for two thousand years and to produce modern science, society, and a global civilization.

This evolution could not have occurred on any other planet in the universe, and it is on this account that God was Incarnated on this earth. Hence it is that viewed spiritually, this earth is the center of the universe. All other human generations have been benefitted by the organic evolution that took place on this earth. The entire human race is kept by God as one organic unit called the Grand Human, and its opposite, the Grand Monster. These organic entities operate as one so that whatever changes occur in one place, affect all the other places, each in its own unique way.

You can see from this that neo production is the basis upon which human evolution depends. Layer 7i neos are the higher correspondences of Sacred Scripture that we can extract and organize into a science called theistic psychology.

The Spiritual Dimension of Neologisms

The construction of novel sentences, novel expressions, novel words, novel nonsense words, nicknames, names of endearment, titles, lyrics, names of people, streets, places, products, lifestyle practices, etc. -- these are normal speech acts all speakers of a language employ constantly. Children at play produce novel verbalizations that may be called nonsense neologisms or meaningless neologisms. I have neologued many romantic neologisms of endearment to describe the diversity of conjugial delights her appearance and presence initiates in me. According to my favorite author, no two things can ever be the same because all created things, qualities, or events must reflect God's infinity (Swedenborg). In other words, if things were not absolutely unique the created universe would not accurately reflect the creativeness of God, in whom "infinite things make one" (Swedenborg). In other words, all creations by God and all constructions by people are existential neologisms.

Emanuel Swedenborg (1688-1772) was a voluminous writers. The current publication of his entire works translated in English take up nearly 50 volumes. About 37 of these were written after his dual consciousness was awakened at age 57. I have been studying these volumes since 1981 and have based my work on it since then, especially my 18-volume project called "theistic psychology." I coined the neologism "the Swedenborg Reports" to refer to this collection of scientific reports on his observations during his dual consciousness. He was quite surprised when he found himself one day being conscious of two worlds simultaneously. One was the conscious awareness of the natural world through his natural mind and physical body, the other was the conscious awareness of the spiritual world through his spiritual mind and spiritual body. Every human being is born into eternity, with a temporary physical body attached to the natural mind, and a permanent or eternal spiritual body attached to our spiritual mind. The Swedenborg Reports are the first scientific reports on the afterlife world. No scientist before him had direct observational access to the dying process and the resuscitation process that takes place a few hours after the death of the physical body.

In 27 years of full conscious awareness of the spiritual world, Swedenborg observed thousands of people being resuscitated and was able to talk to them, both strangers and people he knew in this life. He also interviewed people who had lived on this earth thousands of years ago, yet appeared in the "flower of youth" in their heavenly habitations in eternity. Some of my favorite neologisms coined by Swedenborg are these:

the Divine Human

the as-of-self

discrete degrees

conjugial love

interior sense of Sacred Scripture

natural, spiritual, celestial senses

science of correspondences

spiritual rational

celestial rational

spiritual natural

ruling love

spiritual heat or love

spiritual light or truth

Spiritual Sun

One Person in Three Divine Aspects

Grand Man (or Grand Human)

spiritual doctrine

Most Ancient Church

Pre-Adamites

In my attempt to render the Swedenborg Reports into contemporary psychological ideas and methods I had to coin a variety of neologisms such as these:

theistic psychology

the mental world of eternity

the Divine Psychologist

mental anatomy

spiritual psychobiology

genes of consciousness

substantive dualism

conjoint self

doctrine of the wife

surrendered husband

sweetheart rituals

unity model of marriage

substitution technique

self-witnessing

Perizonius thesis

Grand Human

Grand Monster

The act of constructing neologisms has a spiritual dimension or significance when examined from the perspective of the Swedenborg Reports. Note the etymology of neologism: neo=new and logos=word or meaning. Thus, neologism=new word or meaning. The Swedenborg Reports present the view that a new spiritual age was ushered in by God through Swedenborg's Writings in which God reveals through him the science of correspondences that describes the laws by which God manages the universe in its various layers or discrete degrees. These laws are contained in the "spiritual sense" of Sacred Scripture.

All Sacred Scripture is Divine Speech or Truth that has descended from God and was transformed from a celestial meaning, to a spiritual meaning, to a natural meaning. The natural meaning of Sacred Scripture is the literal meaning. By applying the knowledge of correspondences to the verses and words of the literal sense of Sacred Scripture, one can extract the spiritual and celestial senses that are hidden within it. This extraction process is possible only when the individual is enlightened by God to see these more interior truths within the literal sense. Everyone is enlightened by God who is willing to stop acting and thinking from selfish traits, and wants to become a "new person" who is altruistic and happy with heavenly enjoyments.

This new human ability accessible to every human being now and in the endless future is called the New Word or the New Church. Thus "neologism" has a spiritual meaning that refers to this New Word, this new consciousness that God is bringing about, a new step in the evolution of human consciousness. When we coin a new term in science we are enacting the new human consciousness which is a more interior thinking, more spiritual and rational, closer to truth, to Divine Truth or Rationality.

The process of constructing neologisms must be connected to the process of sharing them.

The adoption of neologisms by others and from others is a spiritual sharing called "spiritual love" by Swedenborg. Every person is a neologist and constructs neologisms every day in ordinary speaking, writing, and reflecting. The process of thinking produces neologisms as a by product. To speak is to create. The inventiveness of our thinking and speaking is produced by our love -- what it is that we want and desire to express outwardly. The nature of love is to strive to externalize. To achieve this external existence, love transmutes by correspondence into thinking and reflecting, then at last into doing and sensing.

Speaking more anatomically, every human being is a threefold self -- affective self, cognitive self, sensorimotor self. Each self resides and operates within its own specialized organ -- affective organ, cognitive organ, sensorimotor organ. These mental organs are fused into operational synergy by the Divine laws of correspondences that activate and coordinate the layers in every human mind. The affective organ is a receptor for spiritual heat, while the cognitive organ is a receptor of spiritual light. In other words, our feeling and willing are subjective experiences resulting from the operations of the affective organ stimulated by spiritual heat. And similarly, our thinking and reflecting are subjective experiences resulting from the operations of the cognitive organ stimulated by spiritual light.

This operational synergy between the affective and the cognitive, between the inner willing and its understanding, transforms itself by correspondence into an outward existence in the sensorimotor organ, whose operations we experience as sensing, moving, verbalizing, and doing. The threefold self is therefore an anatomical construction activated by God through the inflow of spiritual heat and light. What is truly amazing is that spiritual heat and light are live substances, not at all like physical heat and light that come from the natural sun. In fact, the Swedenborg Reports fully establish the existence of the Spiritual Sun in the mental world of eternity. From age 57 to his passing on at 84, Emanuel Swedenborg was a dual citizen, living a dual life, one through the physical body in the natural world of time and place, and the other through the spiritual body in the mental world of eternity, which he called "the spiritual world." He daily wrote copious notes of his observations, which have been published and translated and known as the Writings of Swedenborg. They amount to about 30 volumes.

Swedenborg confirmed that the Spiritual Sun is visible to all who raise their threefold self consciousness to the highest layer of their mind called the celestial-rational layer or "Third Heaven." He encountered and interviewed numerous inhabitants of this mental layer of humanity. These people told him that they had been born on earth in "Most Ancient" times and had been living in their Third Heaven since their death. Swedenborg marveled at their appearance and how they looked in their "early youth," which I take to mean around the age of 20. And what was even more amazing and delightful to discover, was that they were living as married couples in what Swedenborg called "conjugial love."

These Most ancient people were special and different from the race that evolved subsequently on this earth. We are part of the split-brain race whose genius and mentality is called spiritual, while the Most Ancients were a celestial race and their brain was not split into a left and right hemispheres. They were unable to simulate, lie, or act outwardly contrary to what they felt inwardly. Whereas our spiritual race can separate and break up the perfect synergy between willing and thinking and speaking. Our threefold self has evolved to be able to act somewhat independently of each other. As a result we are able to alternate between mental states called heavenly, and others called hellish. For instance when people drive in traffic it is common to alternate between relatively calm or good states and negative or agitated states. Sometimes it is called the Jekyll-Hyde syndrome. This kind of alternation is impossible for the celestial race, but for us, not only is it normal but the ability that makes it possible for us to regenerate the threefold self from its inherited negativity.

God works with every individual, continuously being active in the operations and synergy of the threefold self. From birth to endless eternity we are co-managers with the Divine Psychologist in the domain of our mind. God's management procedures are carried out through two types of forces acting on us. One is called "immediate influx" and the other is called "mediate influx." This refers to the way spiritual heat and light from the Spiritual Sun enters or inflows our threefold organs in the spiritual body. God's Divine Love inflows as spiritual heat substance, while God's Divine Truth inflows as spiritual light substance. The "flow" of spiritual substances first enters the layer of the mind that is closest to the Spiritual Sun. This is called the Third Heaven of mental eternity. Every human being is born into time and born into eternity. One is through a temporary physical body in the natural world, the other is through a permanent spiritual body in the mental world of eternity (or the "spiritual world").

Upon the death of the physical body, we lose contact with the physical world. A few hours later we awaken in our spiritual body. Remember that all along, since birth, our threefold self resides in the spiritual body in the mental world of eternity. When we lose connection to the physical world, we merely continue as before in the spiritual body. There is actual "passing on" or going anywhere. Our self and consciousness, our thoughts feelings and sensations, are already in the mental world of eternity. These have never been, and never could, exist in the physical world, as for instance in the brain of the physical body. Feelings, thoughts, and sensations are immaterial, hence cannot exist in something material.

Swedenborg observed then interviewed thousands of people who have just been resuscitated in the conscious awareness of the spiritual body. He describes the 30-hour process in some detail. He himself had been conscious in his spiritual body from age 57 onward, while normally one regains spiritual consciousness only after resuscitation, when natural consciousness ends. As a result of his dual existence for 27 years, Swedenborg was able to write the Swedenborg Reports which gives science for the first time in history, an empirical glimpse into the world of the afterlife.

One of the most far reaching discoveries Swedenborg's has made is that the threefold self has the spontaneous or automatic ability to project or create a sensorimotor environment that reflects, represents, and corresponds to the affective and cognitive organs acting in synergy. We have a foretaste of the mental world of the afterlife in eternity right now, when we are engaged in dreaming during sleep. We can gain a rational understanding of our afterlife if we reflect on what we are doing when we are dreaming.

It is the threefold self that is doing the dreaming during sleep. When we remember the dream upon awaking, especially when it is vivid, we can still picture or visualize parts of it. Our dreams are sensorimotor expressions and creations of the cognitive and affective organs acting together. We can actually experience sensations in all our modalities -- we can see things, taste and smell them, we can grab things, we can be held down by force or locked up in a room, and we can talk, eat, make love, even fly and transport ourselves instantly anywhere at any distance. This is the power of the sensorimotor organ in giving us subjective experiences. And all the operations of the sensorimotor organ are reactions by correspondence, to the operations in our affective and cognitive organs.

This is what Swedenborg discovered when he became conscious in the spiritual mind, the spiritual layers of our mental anatomy, into which all human beings arrive after resuscitation. The environment of the afterlife is somewhat similar and congruent with the environment here on earth. When people are resuscitated they see their spiritual body as similar to their former physical body -- it looks like it, feels like it, operates like it. We also know this from our dreams where the mental body (or dream body) of others, and our own body, appear just like the physical body we are all familiar with. Of course they are not similar in construction, the physical body being made of physical matter from the physical planet and sun, while the spiritual body and its threefold system of mental organs, is constructed out of the spiritual substances of the Spiritual Sun. The spiritual body cannot die, cannot starve to death, or get sick from germs and poisons, cannot be held by force in a room, cannot be disciplined against its own will. The spiritual body and its mind is forever free.

Swedenborg observed the interaction patterns between people in their life of eternity. Everything you see around someone, and everything that happens there, is a construction of our "ruling love." This refers to the affective hierarchy that is embedded anatomically in our affective organ. We develop and grow this hierarchy of feelings and intentions by the life choices we make every day, and every hour or minute of the day. All choices that are freely made, that is not coerced by circumstances or people, are called free will choices of love. It is love that dictates and determines the choices we think about and execute. Since we alternate all day between heavenly and hellish loves, we slowly and gradually construct our love hierarchy, both in the heavenly category of operations, and in the hellish. By the time we "pass on" in our consciousness from this world to the next, which occurs at resuscitation, we "arrive" in the other life fully equipped and loaded with our loves in both categories.

Swedenborg discovered that after resuscitation people go through a psychologically and emotionally intense series of mental states during which they are progressively exploring their love hierarchies through experiences and events arranged and provided by the Divine Psychologist. This intense Divine psychotherapy has but one purpose: to bring people in touch with their ruling love and its hierarchy of sub-loves. At last all pretenses of the personality fly out the window, leaving in place the ruling love and its total and absolute control over the threefold self.

Now this ruling love takes over the person's existence. It dictates what the person intends, desires, thinks, and does. Every love that is incompatible or contrary to the ruling love, gets banished forever to the outmost regions of the mind, and they just lie there, inert, no longer operative, as if no longer alive. By the laws of existence in the mental world of eternity, the sensorimotor environment or appearances begin to reflect the new person, now stripped of anything ambivalent. The threefold self is now rendered completely consistent, completely unified.

If the person's ruling love is a heavenly love, a love that is compatible with heavenly order in the heavenly layers of the mental world of eternity, then the person begins a new life of eternity in the heavenly zones of the mental world of humanity. Bit of the ruling love is a hellish one, a love that is incompatible with heavenly order, the the person begins a new life in the hellish zones of the mental world. Thus it is that some people live in heaven, and others in hell.

Swedenborg explored the mental spaces of Heaven and Hell. He describes how people live in habitations, cities, gardens, mountains, and how these sensorimotor appearances are beautiful, benign, spacious, and diverse in the case of the heavenly layers, and how they are ugly, noxious, cavernous, dark, and filled with unspeakable horrors that the inhabitants there impose on each other, playing out their infernal loves, hatreds, and insanities. When those who are in hell are taken up in consciousness to the sensorimotor environment of the heavens in their mind, they experience even more severe tortures of the mind than the worst they have in hell. They feel torn apart from the inside seams of their being, and they spontaneously precipitate themselves back into their hellish loves, environment, and companions. There they feel revived due to having their infernal loves back. For without one's loves, one is not alive.

Even more amazing discoveries are described in the Swedenborg Reports. He was allowed to receive a bird's eye view of the mental world of eternity. And from that perspective he confirmed the shape of the mental world of humanity: the heavenly layers are in the shape of a Grand Human in angelic appearance, and below that, the hellish layers of the mind are in the shape of a Grand Monster. Swedenborg's spiritual geography is therefore identical to mental anatomy. The shape of our threefold self is a human form, and every organ is in the human form as well. Swedenborg visited the various spiritual societies that form the Grand Human and the Grand Monster, and he would refer to his location by reference to the body parts. He would say that he is "in the province of the liver" or in the region of the uterus, or heart, or lungs, or pancreas. The Grand Human and Monster possess the organs of both sexes. People live in one region or another as determined by their ruling love. Those who have compatible ruling loves are close to one another, which means that they communicate with one another more than with distant societies whose ruling love is at variance.

And even more amazing: the character or mentality of the people, as determined by their ruling love, corresponds to the functions and properties of the organs they live in.

And further, Swedenborg discovered that the societies in the Grand Human and Monster are completely integrated and function synergistically. There is a common "respiration" that affects every society mutually. There is a constant "communication" of all operations in the threefold self of every person in a society with all others in that society. And after that, there is a similar reverberation of influence that spreads across the entire mind of humanity. Every single love, thought, and sensation experienced by one human being reverberates and is communicated to the entire network of human beings. As Swedenborg puts it, in the eyes of God all human beings are integrated and seen as one human being.

Now we can get back to the role of neologisms in all this.

All life is of love and all love reflects the infinity of God's love. Love is behind all neologisms. Think of a sentence you wrote or said recently to someone. Where did that sentence originate from? It came from some love, something you wanted to say to someone, something you desired to express in words, some perception or insight you've had by looking at something, or thinking about it. Love comes out on the wings of some thought or idea, and shows itself in the medium of sensorimotor appearances. Heaven is a sensorimotor appearance created by heavenly loves acting through heavenly thoughts. Heavenly loves enter our affective organ through spiritual heat, and transforms itself as the accompanying thoughts, which then produce the environmental appearances, objects, sensations, and actions.

Neologisms are therefore affective loves in cognitive form that create the word, phrase, or sentence.

If you want to know the quality of a person's love, look at the neologisms they produce. The meaning of each neologism is a spiritual map of where the love is that produced it, or, that is within that meaning. Every meaning contains a love. The meaning and the love become one, like husband and wife become one in the conjugial couples of our heavenly society. The marriage between our love and its meaning engenders the coming into existence of a neologism. The parents of the neologism are the love and its meaning. An operation in our affective organ ("love") forms a union with a corresponding operation in our cognitive organ ("meaning"), and the two together create a corresponding operation in our sensorimotor organ, which is the neologism when it activates the speech mechanisms, or the typing-texting of the fingers. The source of the neologism is the love, and the love is an inflow of the spiritual heat into the affective organ.

Such is the nature of infinite Divine love. Its infinite intensity comes out into the created universe through the Spiritual Sun, which Swedenborg described as an aura surrounding the Divine Human. This Spiritual Sun is the origin of all loves in the mental world of eternity. God's infinite love is infinitely diverse and abundant, which is why everything that comes into existence must be unique. No two things that exist can be identical since every thing is created from some love, and all loves from the Divine Human are infinite and unique. This means that there are also infinite truths in God since every love must be married to its own truth. All meanings are forms of truth, and also, forms of truth that are distorted or falsified by the loves of each individual. Spiritual light is truth substance itself, and spiritual heat is love substance itself. Swedenborg interchanged the words love and good, and also the words truth and wisdom, from which come knowledge, intelligence, and wisdom.

In a pointed sense neos are zones of community ignorance. No one knows a neo prior to its construction by just one person. The diffusion of neos to others is the basis of community existence. People obtain their ideas and ideals from the neos of others. This is the process of cultural enrichment. Neo production of a group or society is an index of its inventiveness, adaptability, survivability. Cross-cultural sharing of neo production builds a unified globalism anchored in mutual love. It is the antidote to warfare and ethnocentric antipathy. People who benefit each other from their neo-construction procedures feel integrated in a community of humanity. All neos come down from God into the mind of its inventor. To love another’s neos is to love God in whom the neos are sourced. God is at the center of every neo.

Neologisms are new meanings, hence new truths from new loves.

When a neologism is born in the mental world of eternity, its location in the mind is either in the Grand Human or in the Grand Monster. Neologisms form a continuous reverberation within the spiritual societies that gave birth to its existence in the mind of an individual on earth, who is reflecting, speaking or writing. From there the reverberation of neologisms continue to the adjoining mental societies, and eventually every human being that ever existed or was born, experiences the results of that original reverberation of the birth of the neologism. Since every neologism is a unique spiritual child, it becomes the source of endless new meanings being added to the human understanding. This allows the generations to cumulate in intelligence and form ever more advanced, more humane, more heavenly civilizations on earth.

Each new generation thus benefits from this more advanced mentality and is able to create still more advanced and marvelous neologisms, that will further enrich the spiritual societies of eternity. This endless cycle of progress in the marriage of love and truth within each threefold self, is the organic mechanism that God provides for the endless evolution of the Grand Human, the endless expansion our loves and intelligences, with heaven and earth working together, the spiritual-celestial and the natural-corporeal acting by correspondence as one.

Be conscious of your neologisms and keep track of them. The semantic map or web, they form reveals the nature of your immortal existence in eternity.

Commercial neologisms like trademarks and product names are guaranteed by federal law the right to remain unique. Although one can use the name for other than commercial purposes, the owner can request a judge to prohibit certain ongoing uses by others of that name or title. Literary neologisms cannot be copyrighted, and once introduced or published, they are quotable and usable by anyone, including commercial dictionaries. Scientific neologisms are considered literary products and have no claims to ownership, except historical. Entertainment neologisms include titles of books, scripts, movies, and television programs. These are treated as commercial products and ownership of title and script are protected by federal copyright and patent laws.

Masculine neologisms are fundamentally different from feminine neologisms. One is the product of a man’s cognitive organ, while the other is the product of the feminine cognitive organ. Nothing in a man can be like anything in a woman, and vice versa (see here). I have not made an empirical study of this, and if anyone does, or already has, please email me if you would. It is well known that childish neologisms, that is, neologisms produced by the mind of children, revolves around the sensorimotor awareness of self. They respond with involvement and enthusiasm to little phonological games and interactions that involve verbalizing sound patterns and rhythms. They like stories where the teller imitates sounds of people, things, and animals. When they are a little older, they move on from sensorimotor neologisms to cognitive neologisms and invent clever and engaging limericks that people over the centuries have kept track of (the name Opie comes to mind). Adolescents respond with heart to patriotic neologisms that facilitate the development of a sense of belonging and identity. Young adults fall in love with affective neologisms or romantic neologisms found in the lyrics of songs. They also begin to be enmeshed in political neologisms in which they find a source of validation and self-confidence. Religious neologisms gain their deeper influence on people as they move into mature adulthood. Worshippers gain access to the doctrines and belief systems embodied in the titles of rules, principles, and creeds. In theistic psychology readers and students are introduced to the correspondential sense of Divine Neologisms, which are the words and expressions in Sacred Scripture.

As Swedenborg demonstrates, the Divine Style of Sacred Scripture is composed from Divine dictation or direct inspiration, and is such that every word and expression in it carries three meanings: the literal, the spiritual, and the celestial. Literal Divine Neologisms are expressed in a natural language and in the context of a particular cultural and historical milieu. This is why the literal sense of Sacred Scripture from different religions and time epochs appear to show independence or disagreements and contradictions. This is a necessary consequence of socialization practices in all cultures and places. We must provide intellectual content to religion so that children can be socialized into it, and so that adults can hold on to it with loyalty and belief, and pass it on to their children. This generational process of transmission of religious neologisms requires that their content be congruent with the content of the culture and belief systems that are being practiced. Hence it is that all Sacred Scripture in the literal sense reflects the content of the culture and civilization. God manages the two together, namely, the evolution of civilization and culture, and the progressive revelations in Sacred Scripture over the millennia and centuries.

But the spiritual and celestial senses of Sacred Scripture from different religions, cultures, and epochs are not only compatible but similar in intellectual content. The Swedenborg Reports demonstrate that every Literal Divine Neologism encapsulates within itself, a Spiritual Divine Neologism, and within that, a Celestial Divine Neologism. Everyone who studies the language or science of correspondences revealed in the Swedenborg Reports can perform this extraction process from the literal-historical, to the generalized spiritual, to the universal celestial. This threefold embedding of meaning and consciousness in Sacred Scripture is the physiological process that activates and maintains the threefold self of every individual – sensorimotor self, cognitive self, affective self.

The Literal Divine Neologisms of Sacred Scripture create and establish the sensorimotor self of every human being. The Spiritual Divine Neologisms of Sacred Scripture create and establish the cognitive self of every human being. The Celestial Divine Neologisms of Sacred Scripture create and establish the affective self of every human being.

The sensorimotor self is constructed out of our sensations, sensory involvements, and motor readinesses and determinations. The cognitive self is constructed out of our thoughts, reflections, images, and understandings. The affective self is constructed out of our feelings, loves, intentions, and desires. Hence it is that human consciousness and civilization is produced and managed by the Divine Neologisms in Sacred Scripture. The specific cause-effect connection varies with cultural and individual personality. The connection is more direct when people acknowledge Sacred Scripture as Divine Speech or Absolute and Divine Truth given to humanity for the growth and development of every human being. The connection is more indirect when people deny that Sacred Scripture is God’s Divine Speech or Word. The minds of people who reject the idea that God is real are nevertheless equally managed by God, without which the individual would cease to be human and intelligent. God manages the mind of atheists and others who have a system of beliefs that deny or exclude God, since without this Divine omnipotent management or control, the thoughts of the individual would not remain coherent and adaptable to survival.

The Swedenborg Reports, written in the 18^th century, constitute a neologistic revelation as opposed to a “new” revelation which implies something different and foreign. But a neologistic revelation is a revelation about the old and familiar, now seen in a “new light,” which means that “new truths” are now seen in the old that were not seen by anyone before. Thus, the Swedenborg Reports (more commonly known as “the Writings of Swedenborg”), are a neologistic revelation about the Old Testament and the New Testament. These two Sacred Scriptures were studied by thousands of serious scholars and scientists for many centuries, generation after generation, and yet not one single individual saw the correspondential meaning that is hidden within these Sacred Scriptures. The Swedenborg Reports reveal the correspondential sense of the Old and New Testaments. This is not a “new” revelation, but a neologistic revelation about the old and familiar.

For instance, the New Testament has this verse:

nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you.(Luke 17:21)

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2017:21,

What does it mean to say that “the kingdom of God is within you”? Generations of thinkers have been involved in this issue. Wikipedia summarizes a number of these views, which I sample here:

(…) Albert Schweitzer, Rudolf Bultmann, Norman Perrin and Johannes Weiss argued that Jesus’ “Kingdom” was intended to be a wholly futuristic kingdom. These scholars looked to the apocalyptic traditions of various Jewish groups existing at the time of Jesus as the basis of their study ^[22], ^[23], ^[24], ^[25]. In this view, Jesus was an apocalyptic preacher who would bring about the end times and when he did not see the end of the cosmic order coming Jesus embraced death as a tool in which to provoke God into action.

The most common view of the “Kingdom” in recent scholarship is to embrace the truths of both these parties – present reality and future manifestation. Some scholars who take this view are N.T. Wright and G.R. Beasley-Murray. In their views, the “Kingdom” that Jesus spoke of will be fully realized in the future but it is also in a process of “in-breaking” into the present. This means that Jesus’ deeds and words have an immediate effect on the “Kingdom” even though it was not fully manifested during his life. Even greater attention has been paid to the concept of the “Kingdom of God” by scholars during the current third quest for the historical Jesus (of which N.T. Wright is associated). (…)

The present aspect of the Kingdom refers to the changed state of heart or mind (metanoia) within Christians (see Luke 17:20-21), emphasizing the spiritual nature of His Kingdom by saying, "The Kingdom of Heaven is within (or among) you." The reported activity of Jesus in healing diseases, driving out demons, teaching a new ethic for living, and offering a new hope in God to the poor, is understood to be a demonstration of that Kingdom in action.

The Seventh-day Adventist Church accepts the doctrine of the Kingdom of God dividing it into two phases. These are, the Kingdom of Grace which was established immediately after Adam and Eve sinned, and the Kingdom of Glory which will be fully established when Christ returns to earth for the second time.

(The above is from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Heaven )

As you can see from this no one was able to think of the correspondential sense that lies hidden in this verse of Sacred Scripture. Divine Speech is Divine Truth itself, and Divine Rationality and Wisdom, and is the source of whatever rationality and understanding human beings are permitted to borrow from God, and to possess “as-of self” in freedom. Every word and expression of Sacred Scripture must have a correspondential sense, and in fact, has a series of correspondential senses since these are arrayed in the mental world of eternity, from its top, which is God, through the layers of the human heavens, and finally and ultimately, in the natural language in which Sacred Scripture comes to us externally in our natural conscious mind. This is called Divine Literal Neologisms, as mentioned above. This Divine literal-historical sense is the ultimate transformation of Divine Speech as it descends across the layers of the mental world of eternity (more commonly known as the “spiritual world” or the afterlife of immortality).

The knowledge of correspondences revealed in the Swedenborg Reports gives scientists a new technology of knowledge extraction or a new spiritual discourse analysis, that provides us with a scientific methodology able to translate Divine Literal Neologisms into Divine Spiritual Neologisms and into Divine Celestial Neologisms. This is literally a Jacob’s Ladder by which we can carry our scientific methodology across the array of discrete layers in eternity (or “discrete degrees”), with each layer or degree getting closer to God’s Divine Speech. The Writings of Swedenborg are called “the New Word” but not in the sense of a “new” revelation, but in the sense of a neologistic revelation of the Old and New Testament Sacred Scriptures, which are then called “the Old Word.” To say it again, the New Word does not replace the Old Word, but strengthens it, reveals its inner sense, which is infinite, because Divine Speech is in it.

The Divine Literal Neologism written in one English version as “the Kingdom of God is within you” is the external literal-historical sense that contains within it an internal Divine Spiritual Neologism. What is this? You can see from the Wikipedia summary that no one has known this. In the Swedenborg Reports we finally have the answer through revelation of the knowledge of correspondences, which are cause-effect connections between Divine Literal Neologisms and Divine Spiritual Neologisms. The “Kingdom of God” in the literal sense corresponds to the mental world of eternity in the spiritual sense. This is the world which contains the mental layers called “heaven” and “hell.” At the moment of our death here on earth, the resuscitation process begins. Swedenborg observed this process numerous times for 27 years. It takes about 30 hours to complete, and then we awaken as if from sleep, and begin our life of immortality in the mental world of eternity, supplied with a spiritual body (which we have from birth), and a mental environment that responds or reacts to our thoughts and feelings, as dreams respond and react to our wishes, desires, or fears.

The Divine Literal Neologism “within you” corresponds in its spiritual sense to the individual’s mind, which is born in the mental world of eternity and exists there forever. Hence, the entire Divine Literal Neologism “the Kingdom of God is within you” corresponds to the heavenly mental states we have after resuscitation – “if, and only if, we love and enjoy these heavenly mental states.” This is the Divine Celestial Neologism.

Divine Literal Neologism	Divine Spiritual Neologism	Divine Celestial Neologism
the kingdom of God is within you	the heavenly mental states we have after resuscitation	if, and only if, we love and enjoy these heavenly mental states

Where Are Neologisms Located? Where Do They Come From?

Neologisms come into existence in the mental world of eternity and they remain there forever. Neologisms are immortal spiritual objects or entities. Neologisms float around in the mental world of eternity like white and red corpuscles patrol the blood stream in the circulatory system of the physical body, along with numerous other elements and compounds, which are both beneficial and harmful, even deadly. Evil neologisms are anti-neologistic forces in the mental world of eternity. Evil is defined in the Swedenborg Reports as the “corruption of good,” while good is defined as spiritual heat from the Spiritual Sun flowing into the mental layers of humanity and into our affective organ where they produce good in our will or willing, that is, they incline us and propel us to “good works” which are good uses. In other words, our good abilities, skills, intentions, and thoughts originate and are rooted in the inflowing spiritual heat from the Spiritual Sun. It is an organic inflow and a biological process, like the inflow of physical heat into a plant on earth, which has the consequence of generating and producing organic physiological operations by which the cells grow, reproduce, and multiply, and with this organic bulk comes the growth, health, and use of the plant, that is, its usefulness to human beings, animals, other plants, and the environment.

Everything that is good is the good that inflows from the Spiritual Sun. Should this inflow cease for a moment, every good then disappears. The good that inflows belongs to and remains part of the Spiritual Sun, just as the heat that inflows from the physical sun into the plant on earth, is now in the plant, and its atoms and cells, but is not part of the plant. The heat remains part of the sun. And so the good in us is not part of us, but is in us. And since this good in us is God’s good through the Spiritual Sun, it remains God’s good. And hence it is that God is in us. Neologisms existing and floating around in the mental world of eternity are substantive forms of cognitive good in our mind. They are Divine Literal Neologisms ultimating, not in Sacred Scripture, as we discussed above, but in human consciousness. God’s Consciousness is a fusion of Divine Good and Divine Truth in Himself, in His infinite Essence that cannot be fathomed or described or known by mere finite human beings. In order for God to have a personal relationship with a human individual, God-As-He-Is-in-Himself entered creation through the Spiritual Sun, which is the emanation from His infinite Love and infinite Wisdom or Rationality. Divine Truth is from God’s Divine Rationality or Wisdom, and good is from God’s Divine Love. Our affective organ is an organic receptor of spiritual heat, and our cognitive organ is an organic receptor of spiritual light.

The Spiritual Sun is the origin of all created substances. First there is a living organic mental sphere or ether of rationality created around the Spiritual Sun. This living substance called rational ether is the mental world of eternity into which the human mind is born, and in which it exists forever as an immortal individual, and collection of individuals called “spiritual societies” in the Swedenborg Reports. It is constructed out of the spiritual substances of heat and light that endlessly and forever stream out of the Spiritual Sun in infinite variety, diversity, and quality. The mental world of eternity is endless, borderless, boundless. It is human through and through. This is because God-As-He-Is-in-Himself is Human, and thus God as He Is Outside of Himself and in creation, is also Human. In fact, Swedenborg reports that when he was present in consciousness in Layer 4 of the mental world of eternity, he was able to see the Spiritual Sun visually, and gives a description of it. And in fact, he reports that everyone whose consciousness is raised to that layer, can see the Spiritual Sun. He conversed about it with many who in the afterlife existed in that layer, which is also called “the Third or Highest Heaven.” When we arrive there after our second death, we begin a life of endless conjugial happiness in that Divine Human layer, where God overlaps with human beings through our reception of His Omniproprium. We are then quasi-omniscient persons, understanding everything about whatever we think of. And our loves are then heavenly loves in endless variety and quality of good. Our thoughts are then correspondences of Divine Celestial Neologisms. Our loves are then correspondences of conjugial love in endless variety and quality of good.

When we become celestial angels we assume the role as chief architects in the evolving construction of the mental world of eternity. The loves that we then receive in our affective organ from the Divine Human through the Spiritual Sun, give rise by correspondences to the loves and affections of people whose consciousness is in a lower layer called the Second Heaven. The correspondences of their loves and truths form the loves and affections in the layer below called the First Heaven. All three Heavenly layers in the mental world of eternity are connected by organic correspondence to the three layers that form the Natural Mind. You are reading this in your consciousness in the natural mind, which has three layers: from top down: the rational layer (layer 7), the sensual or sensory layer (layer 8), and the corporeal layer (layer 9). This is the layer that is closest to the temporary physical body and its sensory input through physical matter and energy (layer 12). In between is the spiritual body (layer 11), and the natural limbus or cutaneous membrane (layer 10) (see the Anatomical Chart of Layers).

One of the most significant Divine Neologisms appears in this verse of the New Testament Sacred Scripture that begins the Gospel of John, the last of the Four Gospels:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)

For the past two thousand years much has been written about this mysterious sounding verse. It was not fully understood until the Swedenborg Reports arrived on the scene in the eighteenth century. Today from the perspective of theistic psychology this verse can receive a scientific meaning that is rationally integrated into mental anatomy, spiritual geography, and theology. This rational integration is based on nothing but Sacred Scripture. And it is confirmed scientifically by observation and experiment over the 27 years of Swedenborg’s daily life as a conscious dual citizen in both the world of time and the world of eternity.

From this evidence we now can explain scientifically how it is that “the Word was God.”

Several more things are revealed in the ensuing verses:

He was with God in the beginning. 3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4In him was life, and that life was the light of men. 5The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood^[a] it. 14The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only,^[d] who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

In theistic psychology it is known that the creation of the universe by God was by means of the Spiritual Sun, which is an emanation from God and contains the substances of good and truth in infinite variety. Spiritual heat within spiritual light, flowing out from the Spiritual Sun into creation, produces the mental world of eternity where human beings are born and exist as immortal feeling and thinking subjects.

Once the mental world of eternity was created, a physical world in time and space was created. The content of the physical world was fashioned in accordance with the content of the mental world of eternity. Hence it is that every planet, every object, every physical property comes into existence when inert physical matter from any sun or star, including the sun itself, and all its components, corresponds through its property to some property of the mental world of eternity. In this way nature is nothing but a theater of the spiritual, and correspondences dictate the connection as cause dictates effect.

The correspondential meaning of “the Word” in the above passage is “Divine Truth,” and this is the same as “spiritual light from the Spiritual Sun.” In other words, “the Word” or spiritual light creates all things that are created. Spiritual light enters the cognitive organ of every individual and sets it “online” with the Spiritual Sun, hence, God. Whatever flows out of the Spiritual Sun is part of God and is God. This is because God cannot be divided, so what is God in the Spiritual Sun must be God in the spiritual light that flows from it.

Thus it is that God is in us, as written in the New Testament Sacred Scripture.

We are not part of God, for this would mean that God is divided. But the infinite can be within the finite as the spiritual is within the natural, or as the whole is in the part. God in us does not mean that anything whatsoever of ours is Divine, for this would bean that God is divided. But God in us is necessary for every human being since without this there is no source of life for the individual. God in us as His own spiritual light is what we call “our life.” Should God in us cease as a continuous co-Presence in our mental organs, we would no longer have any life.

It is said that “the Word became flesh.” This is a historical reference to the birth of the Divine Child two thousand years ago. It is known that Christians celebrate this event every year as Christmas. But Sacred Scripture is not only relevant to religion, but also to science, even if in a different way. For instance, if there is a God who is omnipotent (positive bias in science), then it follows logically that Sacred Scripture is absolute truth brought to humanity’s natural consciousness by God. Then it follows that the Incarnation Event occurred as told in Sacred Scripture. Then it follows that this is a scientific revelation about God. It is scientific because it is true, and it shapes all of reality, its history, our evolution, and the current events of our individual lives. However, all of this may be true and scientific, but it is necessary to show this, and it is necessary that people understand it rationally so that they themselves can think about it and talk about it.

games	4.1 billion
money	4 billion
children	2.5 billion
sex	1.5 billion
God	1.25 billion
crime	790 million
federal government	450 million
parenting	200 million
nightmare	million
terrorists	120 million
Alzheimer	100 million
jihad	50 million
Ronald Reagan	35 million
road rage	14 million
psycholinguistics	2 million
neologisms	2 million
---------------------------------	------------------
typing mistakes	240,000
ennead	200,000
neurosemantics	130,000
ethnopractice	20
glossolids	0

Half a Century of Science in Psychology

Scientific Neologisms Coined by Leon James

For the Period 1958-2008

Including an Analysis of the Natural and Spiritual Properties of Neologisms

University of Hawaii

2008 (version 26a)

With the collaboration, since 1976 of Dr. Diane Nahl

This is Part I

Part I || Part II || Part III || Master Neochart ||

Part I

The Master Neochart (overall) || Neochart by Sub-Categories || My Favorite and Major Neos by Year

Part I starts here

Note: This report is ongoing (see the version number indicated above).

I encourage you to begin keeping track today!

A new information practice at amazon.com (and other sites) is to provide phrases from the book that have a low statistical probability of occurring together in other books or text. For the Road Rage book amazon.com provides these "improbable" expressions:

neologist (nee-OL-uh-gist) noun. One who coins, uses, or introduces new ... So Esther has invited Levey's neologists to think up a more appropriate word." ... wordsmith.org/words/neologist.html

Note: For more autobiographical details see my article on Historical Autobiography

A neologism is a word, phrase, or expression that describes a perception, insight, or concept for the first time.

Love produces sensorimotor neologisms by means of cognitive neologisms. The sequence of production and inventiveness follows this anatomical pattern:

Affective à cognitive à sensorimotor

Love à idea à expression

Spiritual heat à spiritual light à experience

Affective neologism à cognitive neologism à sensorimotor neologism à behavioral neologism

I discussed this issue in 1999, referring to its original discussion in my 1974 book The Context of Foreign Language Teaching:

This led to the idea that a new paradigm of linguistics or psycho-linguistics needs to be developed in which we deal with the syntax of titles as encapsulated references to particular operations of human experience. If you want, you can look at a paper I wrote on titles.

Since there are three levels of thinking and describing, there are three types of neologisms.

The above is from: http://www.oup.com/elt/catalogue/teachersites/oald7/about_OALD/new_words_1?cc=global#part1

By the time this article was 112 pages long on May 30, 2008, it had added 846 neos to the Master Neochart, which then contained 2013 entries (published version 24d).

A: Hi, how you doing.

B: Good. How about you.

A. Yeah, good. What’s up.

B. Dunno. What’s up with you.

A. Well, I gotta go. See yeah.

B. Yeah. See yeah.

(to be continued)

With the collaboration, since 1976 of
Dr. Diane Nahl

neologist (nee-OL-uh-gist) noun. One who coins, uses, or introduces new ... So Esther has invited Levey's neologists to think up a more appropriate word." ...
wordsmith.org/words/neologist.html

The above is from:
http://www.oup.com/elt/catalogue/teachersites/oald7/about_OALD/new_words_1?cc=global#part1