Live up to your name — or rectify you name
Natural categories group beings are named according to a certain organization of their natural characteristics, based on the similarity of the object with the beings recognized as typical of the category.
Social categories are groupings of persons sharing the same type of social role. King, nobleman, were considered as natural categories, now clearly as social categories, as minister, teacher, leader are social functions. There is a dispute about man, woman, father, son… whether they should be considered as social roles or natural categories. In a famous passage of the Analects,
Live up to the name of the social category you belong to!
The speech made by General de Gaulle on 3ay 30 1968 uses self-argued statements:
As for the legislative elections, they will take place within the period established by the Constitution, unless the whole French people are to be gagged, preventing them from speaking as they are prevented from living, by the same means that prevent students from studying, teachers from teaching and workers from working.
(Charles de Gaulle, Speech on May 30, 1968[1])
In a well-made world, “students study, teachers teach and workers work” if not, the semantic disorder argues the abnormality of beings who don’t act according to their essential principle.
This is an argument based on the name, « let the students study » that is to say « be worthy of their name ». The argument traces the social order over the natural order (Plantin 2021, Name; Derivatives). The name of the category to which the person belongs expresses the norm that governs his behavior.
These self-evident arguments are based on a license to infer according to which the derivational families are semantically consistent. The morphological similarity may obscure deep semantic differences between the root word and the derived word, which meaning may range from the conservation of the root meaning, to opposition between their connotations or argumentative orientations, to the complete independence of meanings in synchrony. By a kind of antanaclasis S. Orientation, the following exchange plays on the opposite argumentative orientations of words belonging to the same lexical family, politic:
S1 — By signing this compromise at a convenient moment, the president made a highly political decision.
S2 — We are just witnessing a new example of the President’s usual politicking
***
Or rectify your name
Duke Jing of Qi asked Confucius about government. Confucius replied,
« Let the ruler be ruler, the ministers ministers, the fathers fathers, the sons sons sons. » (AnalectsENO, 12.1)
We consider that « to be ruler, minister… » is to fulfill a social function while « to be father, to be son » is to fulfill a natural function. A father, a son cannot not be father, son. Confucius’ requirements seem empty, because tautological; but they are not.
The social category name is not equivalent to a set of descriptive property; it is an imperative.
A ruler is a ruler only if he governs according to the model of exemplary Kings, such as King Wen. A bad ruler is not a ruler; he should not be called a ruler. A bad father is not a father; he should not be called a father.
A woman who does not behave according the rules of exemplary women is not a woman and should not be called woman nor considered as a woman.
By turning bad, they lose their name.
To unduly bear a name is an usurpation. When such wrong names become current – most of the rulers, fathers, students are actually not fathers, etc, chaos prevails.
It seems that this vision extends to artefacts. A table is defined by its place and function as defined in the ritual. In the West, we sit and eat at a table. If we dance on a table, the table is no more a table. Same for a gourd:
AnalectsENO, 6.25 The Master said, A gourd that is not a gourd – is it a gourd? Is it a gourd?
Note ENO: Gourds were used as a certain type of wine vessel, called, therefore, ‘gourds’. This passage must refer to some irregularity of vessel usage, and, in doing so, raise the issue of the distortion of language to cover up unorthodox conduct. An implied meaning might be that a ‘ruler’ who does not properly ‘rule’ should not be called a ‘ruler’ – an idea that has come to be known as part of a doctrine called ‘the rectification of names’.
[1] Quoted after http://archives.charles-de-gaulle.org/pages/espace-pedagogique/le-point-sur/les-textes-a-connaitre/discours-du-30-mai-1968.php (11-08-2017)