Pisteology

Pisteology (pronounced pi-stol-uh-jee)

(1) In theology, the branch dealing with the place and authority of faith.

(2) In philosophy, a theory or science of faith.

Circa 1870s: From the German Pisteologie, the construct being the Ancient Greek πίστις (píst(is)) (faith) + -eo- (faith) (akin to peíthein to persuade) + -logie.  The English form is thus understood as píst(is) +-e-‎ + -ology.  The Ancient Greek noun πίστις (pístis) (faith) was from the Primitive Indo-European bheydhtis, the construct being πείθω (peíthō) (I persuade) +‎ -τις (-tis); πεῖσῐς (peîsis) was the later formation.  Although in English constructions it’s used as “faith” (in the theological sense), in the original Greek it could impart (1) trust in others, (2) a belief in a higher power, (3) the state of being persuaded of something: belief, confidence, assurance, (4) trust in a commercial sense (credit worthiness), (5) faithfulness, honesty, trustworthiness, fidelity, (6) that which gives assurance: treaty, oath, guarantee, (7) means of persuasion: argument, proof and (8) that which is entrusted.  The suffix -ology was formed from -o- (as an interconsonantal vowel) +‎ -logy.  The origin in English of the -logy suffix lies with loanwords from the Ancient Greek, usually via Latin and French, where the suffix (-λογία) is an integral part of the word loaned (eg astrology from astrologia) since the sixteenth century.  French picked up -logie from the Latin -logia, from the Ancient Greek -λογία (-logía).  Within Greek, the suffix is an -ία (-ía) abstract from λόγος (lógos) (account, explanation, narrative), and that a verbal noun from λέγω (légō) (I say, speak, converse, tell a story).  In English the suffix became extraordinarily productive, used notably to form names of sciences or disciplines of study, analogous to the names traditionally borrowed from the Latin (eg astrology from astrologia; geology from geologia) and by the late eighteenth century, the practice (despite the disapproval of the pedants) extended to terms with no connection to Greek or Latin such as those building on French or German bases (eg insectology (1766) after the French insectologie; terminology (1801) after the German Terminologie).  Within a few decades of the intrusion of modern languages, combinations emerged using English terms (eg undergroundology (1820); hatology (1837)).  In this evolution, the development may be though similar to the latter-day proliferation of “-isms” (fascism; feminism et al).  The alternative spellings are pistology & pistiology.  Pisteology is a noun and pisteological is an adjective; the noun plural is pisteologies.

The early use of pisteology was in the context of theology and it appears in an 1880 essay on the matter of faith by the Congregational minister Alfred Cave (1847–1900).  The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) refers to the word as exclusively theological but in later editions noted it was also used to mean “a theory or science of faith”, reflecting its adoption in academic philosophy although the embrace must have been tentative because pisteology was (and remains) “rare”, listed as such by those lexicographers who give it a mention though what is clear is that it seems never to have been cross-cultural, remaining implicitly a thing of Christendom.  In a sense, it’s surprising it hasn’t appeared more, especially in the troubled twentieth century when matters of “faith and doubt” were questioned and explored in a flurry of published works.  Perhaps it was a division of academic responsibility, the devoted studying belief and the scholars the institution, the pragmatic settling for the Vatican’s (unofficial) fudge: “You don’t have to believe it but you must accept it.”

Pondering cross-cultural pisteology: Lindsay Lohan carrying the Holy Qur'an (Koran), Brooklyn, New York, May 2015.

While clearly the universities got involved and the intersection between pisteology epistemology (the study of knowledge and belief) does seem obvious to the point when the former might be thought a fork of the latter, its roots and concerns remained theological and Christian, exploring how faith functions in religious traditions, doctrines, and human understanding of the divine and many famous thinkers have written works which may be thought pisteological landmarks.  Saint Augustine of Hippo (354–430) wrote so widely it’s probably possible to find something which tracks the path of some direction in Christianity but underling it all was his famous admission: “I believe in order to understand”, more than a subtle hint that faith is a prerequisite for true comprehension of divine truth.  Saint Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274) lived 800-odd year later and was better acquainted with the philosophers of the Classical age.  Aquinas is sometimes said to have “integrated” Aristotelian philosophy with Christian theology and while this is misleading, he understood the spirit of reasoning from Antiquity was compelling and in a way that’s influential still, he argued faith and reason complement each other, defined faith as a virtue by which the intellect assents to divine truth under the influence of the will.  A central figure in Reformed theology, John Calvin (1509-1564) explored faith extensively in his Institutes of the Christian Religion. He described faith as a firm and certain knowledge of God's benevolence toward us, founded on the promise of the gospel and revealed by the Holy Spirit.  Martin Luther (1483–1546) probably thought this not so much a fudge as a needless layer, arguing that it was faith alone (rather than a virtuous life of good works) by which one would on judgement day be judged.  Faith then was the cornerstone of salvation in his doctrine of sola fide (faith alone), a rigor which would have pleased John Calvin (1509–1564).  The philosopher Søren Kierkegaard (1813–1855) was not a theologian but his writings had an influence on theological thought and in a nod to Aquinas highlighted the paradox of faith and what he called “leap of faith” as essential to authentic religious life and although he never explicitly discussed the “You don’t have to believe it but you must accept it” school of thought, it does seem implicit in his paradox.

For the bedside table: Karl Barth’s Kirchliche Dogmatik.

Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768–1834) is often styled “the father of modern liberal theology” and to him faith was an experiential relationship with the divine, rooted in a “feeling of absolute dependence.”  More conservative theologians didn’t much object to that notion but they probably thought of him something in the vein William Shakespeare (1564–1616) in Julius Caesar (1599) had Caesar say of Cassius: “He thinks too much: such men are dangerous.”  John Henry Newman (1801–1890) was one of those conservatives (albeit something of a convert to the cause who had a strange path to Rome) and he wrote much about the development of doctrine and the role of faith in understanding divine truth but it was the Swiss Protestant theologian Karl Barth (1882-1968) whose Kirchliche Dogmatik (Church Dogmatics (in English translation a fourteen-volume work of some six-million words and published between 1932 and 1967) that appeared the modern world’s most ambitious attempt to recover the proclamation of the word of God as the place where God's message of salvation meets sinful man: faith as an act of trust and obedience to God's self-revelation.  Barth’s contribution to pisteology was a rejection of natural theology, emphasizing faith as a response to God's revelation in Jesus Christ; it wasn’t exactly Martin Luther without the anti-Semitism but the little monk’s ghost does loom over those fourteen volumes.  Pius XII (1879-1958; pope 1939-1958), a fair judge of such things, thought Barth the most important theologian since Aquinas.

Barth though was a formalist, writing for other theologians who breathed rarefied intellectual air and he didn’t make pisteology easy or accessible and although Albert Speer (1905–1981; Nazi court architect 1934-1942; Nazi minister of armaments and war production 1942-1945) claimed to have read all fourteen volumes while serving the twenty year sentence (he was lucky to receive) for war crimes and crimes against humanity, (he had more time than most to devote to the task), he did acknowledge the conceptual and textual difficulties.  Barth seems not to have done much for Speer’s faith in God but, being Speer, he took from the six million works what suited him and decided he was atoning for his sins: “There is much that I still cannot comprehend, chiefly because of the terminology and the subject.  But I have had a curious experience.  The uncomprehended passages exert a tranquilizing effect.  With Barth's help I feel in balance and actually, in spite of all that's oppressive, as if liberated.”  Speer continued: “I owe to Barth the insight that man’s responsibility is not relieved just because evil is part of his nature. Man is by nature evil and nevertheless responsible.  It seems to me there is a kind of complement to that idea in Plato’s statement that for a man who has committed a wrong ‘there is only one salvation: punishment.’  Plato continues: ‘Therefore it is better for him to suffer this punishment than to escape it; for it sustains man’s inward being.’”

For those who want to explore Christocentric pisteology, Barth’s Kirchliche Dogmatik really isn’t a good place to start because his texts are difficult and that’s not a consequence of the English translation; those who have read the original in German make the same point.  Nor will those tempted by his reputation to try one of his shorter works be likely to find an easier path because his style was always one of dense prose littered with words obscure in meaning to all but those who had spent time in divinity departments.  When writing of German Lutheran theologian Isaak August Dorner (1809–1884) in Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century (1946) he wrote: “The assertion of a receptivity in man, the Catholic-type conception of the gratia preveniens which runs alongside this receptivity, the mystical culmination of this pisteology, are all elements of a speculative basic approach which can even be seen here, in Dorner.”  Is it any wonder some might confuse pisteology with piscatology (the study of fishing)?

Lipstick

Lipstick (pronounced lip-stik)

(1) A crayon-like oil-based cosmetic used in coloring the lips, usually in a tubular container.  Lip-gloss & lip-liner (hyphenated and not) are the companion products whereas lip balm is a non-cosmetic product to prevent drying & cracking of the skin.

(2) As “lipstick tree”, the shrub Bixa orellana, native to Mexico and northern South America.  The common name is derived from (1) the arils (tissue surrounding the seed) being the orange-red colourant annatto and (2) the texture & consistency of the arils recalling that of commercially manufactured lipstick.

(3) In slang, the canine penis.

(4) In LGBTQQIAAOP, as “lipstick lesbian”, a lesbian who displays traditional, conventional feminine characteristics (opposed to a “butch lesbian”).  Some guides to such things note (1) the term can be a slur if used in the wrong context and (2) in some sub-groups a “lipstick lesbian” is one attracted to “other feminine women”, as opposed to a “femme” (a feminine lesbian attracted to butch lesbians).

(5) In economics, as “lipstick effect”, a theory which suggests that during economic downturns, consumers display a greater propensity to purchase low cost luxury goods (such as premium lipsticks”.

(6) To apply lipstick to; to paint with lipstick.

1875-1880: A coining in US English, the construct being lip + stick.  Lip was from the Middle English lippe, from the Old English lippa & lippe (lip; one of the two sides of the mouth), from the Proto-West Germanic lippjō (lip), from the Proto-Germanic lepjan & lepô, from the primitive Indo-European leb- (to hang loosely, droop, sag).  The Germanic forms were the source also of the Old Frisian lippa & West Frisian lippe, the Middle Dutch lippe, the Dutch lip, the Old High German lefs, the German Lippe & Lefze, the Swedish läpp, the Norwegian leppe and the Danish læbe.  However, some etymologists have questioned the Indo-European origin of the western European forms and the Latin labium, though it’s said they agree the Latin and Germanic words “probably are in some way related” and the Latin may be a substratum word.  The French lippe was an Old French borrowing from a Germanic source.  Stick was from the Middle English stikke (stick, rod, twig), from the Old English sticca (twig or slender branch from a tree or shrub (also “rod, peg, spoon”), from the Proto-West Germanic stikkō, from the Proto-Germanic stikkô (pierce, prick), from the primitive Indo-European verb stig, steyg & teyg- (to pierce, prick, be sharp).  It was cognate with the Old Norse stik, the Middle Dutch stecke & stec, the Old High German stehho, the German Stecken (stick, staff), the Saterland Frisian Stikke (stick) and the West Flemish stik (stick).  The word stick was applied to many long, slender objects closely or vaguely resembling twigs or sticks including by the early eighteenth century candles, dynamite by 1869, cigarettes by 1919 (the slang later extended to “death sticks” & “cancer sticks).  The first known use of “lipstick” in advertizing was in 1877 (although some sources claim this was really a “lip balm” and lipstick (in the modern understanding) didn’t appear for another three years.  “Liquid lipstick” was first sold in 1938 and by the mid 1960s variations of the substance in a variety of liquid and semi-solid forms was available in pots, palettes and novel applicators.  Lipstick is a noun & verb and lipsticking & lipsticked are verbs; the noun plural is lipsticks.

Dior Rouge Lipstick #999.

In economics, the “lipstick effect” is a theory which suggests there is an identifiable phenomenon in consumer behavior in which there’s an increased propensity to purchase small, affordable luxury goods (“designer lipsticks” the classic example) during economic downturns as an alternative to buying larger, more expensive items.  The idea is that as a consumer’s disposable income contracts, the lure of luxury goods remains so although the purchase of the $4000 handbag may be deferred, the $50 lipstick may immediately be chosen, an indulgence which to some extent satisfies the yearning.  The theory is not part of mainstream economics and has been criticized for being substantially impressionistic although more reliable data such as the volume of chocolate sold by supermarkets had been mapped against aggregate economic indicators and this does suggest sales of non-essential items can increase during periods of general austerity.

Beauty Bakerie Lip Whip Matte Liquid Lipstick in Mon Cheri.

The phrase “put lipstick on a pig” is a clipped version of “even if you put lipstick on a pig, it’s still a pig” and it means that cosmetically altering something in the hope of making it seem more appealing than it is doesn’t alter its fundamental characteristics and flaws.  It’s a saying in the vein of “you can't make a silk purse of a sow's ear”, “you can’t polish a turd”, “mutton dressed as lamb” & “old wine in a new bottle” and is often used of products which have been updated in a way which superficially makes them appear “improved” while leaving them functionally unchanged; it’s often used of cars and political platforms, both products which have often relied on spin and advertizing to disguise the essential ugliness beneath the surface.  It’s been part of American political rhetoric for decades and usually passes unnoticed but did stir a brief controversy when Barack Obama (b 1961; US president 2009-2017) used: “You can put lipstick on a pig. It's still a pig.” as part of his critique of the “change” theme in the campaign of John McCain (1936–2018), his Republican Party opponent in the 2008 presidential election.  The reason Mr Obama’s use attracted was that earlier, Sarah Palin (b 1964) had said during her acceptance speech as Mr McCain’s running mate: “You know the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull?  Lipstick.”  It turned out to be the best line of their lackluster campaign.  Because of her well-publicized speech and the fact Ms Palin was the only one of the four candidates on that year’s ticket actually to wear lipstick (as far as is known), it was immediately picked up as a potentially misogynistic slur.  However, the outrage lasted barely one news cycle as the fact-checkers were activated to comb the records, revealing Mr McCain the previous year had used it when deriding the abortive healthcare proposal developed by the equally doomed crooked Hillary Clinton (b 1947; US secretary of state 2009-2013) while installed as FLOTUS (First Lady of the United States).

Lindsay Lohan in applying red lipstick and smoking a "stick", from a photo-shoot by Terry Richardson (b 1965) for Love Magazine, Spring/Summer Edition 2012.

Use turned out to be a long “across the aisle” thing. Thomas Harkin (b 1939; US senator (Democratic-Iowa) 1985-2015) applying it in 1989 to George HW Bush’s (George XLI, 1924-2018; US president 1989-1993) plan to send military aid to the El Salvador government and Ann Richards (1933–2006; governor (Democratic) of Texas 1991-1995) in 1992 added a flourish when she said of the administration’s call for the Democratic-controlled congress to move on a constitutional amendment to force the government to keep a balanced budget: “This is not another one of those deals where you put lipstick on a hog and call it a princess.”  The line received much attention and she added a new variation in 1990 when criticizing the administration for using warships to protect oil tankers in the Middle East (which she labeled a “hidden subsidy for foreign oil”): “You can put lipstick on a hog and call it Monique, but it is still a pig.”  At least in Texas, that may have achieved some resonance because in her failed 1994 gubernatorial race against George W Bush (George XLIII, b 1946; US president 2001-2009), her campaign used the slogan “Call it Monique” as a way of disparage her opponent’s proposals.  The use of “Monique” was apparently random; as far as is known there was no “Monique problem” in the White House of George XLI in the way there was a “Jennifer with a ‘J’ problem”. Commendably, Governor Richards did stick to the theme, unlike Mr Obama in 2008 who couldn’t resist a further metaphor in case his audience was too dim to understand the first, adding: “You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called ‘change’.  It's still going to stink.”  That was laboring the point by gilding the lily.

Helpfully, the industry has defined the math of "perfect lips" and helpfully for imperfect women, a lip pencil can be used to apply lip liner to make one's shape tend towards the perfect, providing the definition lines within which lipstick can be applied.  When using a lip pencil, a pencil sharpener is an essential accessory.

Nars Velvet Matte Lip Pencil in Dragon Girl.

People have been expressing the idea in different ways for at least centuries.  In 1732 the English physician and lay-preacher Thomas Fuller (1654–1734) published Gnomologia: Adagies and Proverbs; wise sentences and witty saying, ancient and modern, foreign and British which included “A hog in armour is still but a hog.”  The English antiquary & lexicographer Francis Grose (circa 1725-1791) included an entry for “hog in armour” in his A Classical Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue (1785) which he explained was “an awkward or mean looking man or woman, finely dressed.”  So, something like “mutton dressed as lamb”, a put-down rendered more cutting still by what used to be called the Fleet Street tabloids coining “mutton dressed as hogget”, a classic example of what used to be called bitchiness, a genuine red top speciality.  Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892) was an English Particular Baptist preacher (with all that implies) and although most of his prodigious writing was concerned with defending his sect against the encroachments of liberal & pragmatic theology and ritual, he did publish odd secular work including The Salt-Cellars (1887), a compendium of proverbs in which he noted: “A hog in a silk waistcoat is still a hog” meant “Circumstances do not alter a man’s nature, nor even his manners.”

Dior Addict Lip Gloss Glow Oil in 007 Raspberry.

But it was pigs & lipstick which became the most common form but apparently only after the mid 1980s although the incongruity of the juxtaposition of pigs and lipstick had appealed earlier appealed to some.  In 1926 the “colorful” journalist Charles Lummis (1859-1928) had a piece in the Los Angeles Times which included: “Most of us know as much of history as a pig does of lipsticks.” but the first known appearance of the modern phrase is thought to have been in the Washington Post in 1985, quoting a San Francisco radio host who suggested plans for renovating Candlestick Park (instead of building a new downtown stadium for the Giants “…would be like putting lipstick on a pig.”  After that it’s never gone away, an anti-abortionist in 1992 quoted as saying of legislative amendments of which he did not approve: “You don't want to put lipstick on a pig” and Rick Santorum (b 1958; US senator (Republican-Pennsylvania 1995-2007) added spelled it out, telling the chamber legislative reforms to government subsidies for southern peanut and sugar farmers were the lipstick while the pig was the subsidy programme itself.  In 1998, the often lachrymose Republican John Boehner (b 1949; Speaker of the US House of Representatives 2011-2015), apparently while dry-eyed, bemoaned what he called a “rudderless Republican congress”: "When there's no agenda and there's no real direction, what happens is you really can't have a message; you can put lipstick on a pig all day long, but it's still a pig.”

Lipstick, lip gloss, lip liner & lip balm

Lipstick is primarily for style, there to add color (and they are produced in just about every shade imaginable) but it also protects and to some extent hydrates the lips, indeed, some have additives for just this purpose.  The texture can be creamy, matte, satin, or glossy and lipsticks have included glitter and even a swelling agent for those who want a plumper-lipped look although it applied with some expertise, even an unadulterated lipstick can provide the visual effect of greater fullness. 

Lip Gloss can be used either as a stand-alone product or as a finisher over lipstick, somewhat analogous with a “clear coat” over paint, providing a “varnishing” effect.  What lip gloss does is add shine and often a hit of color to the lips.  As the name implies, the texture is glossy and although usually lightweight, the finish can be sticky, models often applying lip gloss sever times during a photo-shoot to ensure the luster is constant.  They’re mostly sheer or translucent, though some have shimmer or glitter added, thus they can produce a (sort-of) natural, shiny look or add visual depth to lipstick.

Fenty Beauty Stunna Lip Paint Longwear Fluid Lip Color in Uncensored.

Lip Liners (applied with a lip pencil) are a maintenance tool.  What a lip liner does is define the edge of the lips, providing a protective barrier which prevents feathering or bleeding of lip color (ie from a lip stick or lip gloss.  Almost always matte, lip liners are essentially pencils for the lips and their use requires the same firm consistency in application that an artist adopts when putting graphite to paper.  Specialists caution it does take practice to master the art and their golden rule is “less is more”: begin with several light applications until technique is honed and arcs can be described in one go.  Done well, a lip liner can be outline the lips, fill them in for longer-lasting color and to a remarkable extent, change the appearance of their shape.

Lip Balm is only incidentally a beauty aid; they’re used to moisturize, soothe, and protects lips from dryness or chapping so are used by those playing sport, sailing rock-climbing and such.  Most are creamy and waxy, designed to endure for several hours of outdoor use (and often include a sunscreen) although some intended for those in indoor, dry-air environments (such as air-conditioned offices) are lightweight and glossy; aimed at the female market these are often flavored (mandarin, cherry, strawberry etc).  The indoor variety typically are transparent or lightly tinted and while some can be used as a base under other products, not all lipsticks or lip glosses are suitable; it depends on the composition.

1976 Lincoln Continental Mark IV, Lipstick Edition.

The Ford Motor Company’s Lincoln Continental Mark IV (1971-1976) was a classic “land yacht”, a class of car which was a feature of the US motoring scene of the 1960s & 1970s; it was an exemplar of the “personal luxury car”, a subset of the breed.  Although an exercise in packaging inefficiency which today seems remarkable, the Mark IV was a great success for the corporation and was highly profitable because it was built on the same platform as the Ford Thunderbird with which it shared both a mechanical specification and a substantial part of the structure with only some panels, interior fittings and additional bits & pieces distinguishing the two.  The pair was among the industry’s most profitable lines and in 1976, Lincoln released the first of its “designer” series Mark IV’s, “trim & appearance” packages which included touches from the associated designers (Bill Blass, Cartier, Givenchy & Pucci) and to ensure those watching knew just which design house’s bling a buyer had chosen, the C-Pillar “opera window” (a much-loved affectation of the age) was etched with the signature of the relevant designer.  More profitable even than the standard line, of the 56,110 Mark IVs produced in 1976, 12,906 were one or other of the designer editions.

1976 Lincoln Continental Mark IV, Lipstick Edition.

As well as the “branded” designer edition cars, beginning in 1973, Lincoln made available its LGO (Luxury Group Option), trim package which offered a color-coordinated exterior, vinyl roof, and interior with the color mix changed each season.  For 1976, the theme was “lipstick” and the “Lipstick Edition” was available in either white (with lipstick red coach-lines) or lipstick red (with white coach-lines); all interiors featured button-tufted white leather upholstery with red accent stripes.  A quirk of the Lipstick cars was there were two choices of material for the vinyl roof, one called “Cayman” (designed to resemble alligator skin) and the other the familiar padded top which covered only the rear portion of the roof and buyers could have either red or white material.  Red or white, the Lipstick cars were distinctive machines but the white cars were apparently the more popular and estimates vary greatly of how of the approximately 1,250 Lipstick Editions were red.

Sarah Palin and Barack Obama, 2008.  Sarah Palin was wasted in politics and was a natural for Fox News and such.

Atavism

Atavism (pronounced at-uh-viz-uhm)

(1) In biology (most often in zoology & botany), the reappearance in an individual of characteristics of some (typically) remote ancestor which have not manifested in intervening generations.

(2) An individual embodying such a reversion.

(3) Reversion to an earlier or more primitive type (a “throwback” in the vernacular).

(4) In sociology and political science, the recurrence or reversion to a past behavior, method, characteristic or style after a long period of absence, used especially of a reversion to violence.

1825-1830: The construct was the Latin atav(us) (great-great-great grandfather; remote ancestor, forefather” (the construct being at- (akin to atta (familiar name for a father) and used perhaps to suggest “beyond”)  + avus (grandfather, ancestor) + -ism.  The –ism suffix was from the Ancient Greek ισμός (ismós) & -isma noun suffixes, often directly, sometimes through the Latin –ismus & isma (from where English picked up ize) and sometimes through the French –isme or the German –ismus, all ultimately from the Ancient Greek (where it tended more specifically to express a finished act or thing done).  It appeared in loanwords from Greek, where it was used to form abstract nouns of action, state, condition or doctrine from verbs and on this model, was used as a productive suffix in the formation of nouns denoting action or practice, state or condition, principles, doctrines, a usage or characteristic, devotion or adherence (criticism; barbarism; Darwinism; despotism; plagiarism; realism; witticism etc).  Atavism & atavist are nouns, atavic, atavistic & atavistical are adjectives and atavistically is an adverb; the noun plural is atavisms.

The primitive Indo-European awo meant “adult male relative other than the father”, the most obvious descendent the modern “uncle”.  The English form was influenced by the French atavisme (the coining attributed usually to the botanist Antoine Nicolas Duchesne (1747-1827 Paris) and was first used in biology in the sense of “reversion by influence of heredity to ancestral characteristics, resemblance of a given organism to some remote ancestor, return to an early or original type”.  The adjective atavistic (pertaining to atavism) appeared in 1847, joined three year later by the now rare atavic (pertaining to a remote ancestor, exhibiting atavism).  Atavism (and its related forms) are none of those words which can be used as a neutral descriptor (notably in botany) or to denote something positive or negative.  Although the core meaning is always some “past or ancestral characteristic”, it tends to be pejorative if use of people or human cultures reverting to some “primitive characteristics” (especially if they be war or other forms of violence.  In the vernacular, the earthier “throwback” has been more common than the rather formal “atavistic” although the circumlocution “skip a generation” is often used for traits that occur after a generation of absence and “throwback” anyway became a “loaded” term because of its association with race (in the sense of skin-color).

Medicine has constructed its own jargon associated with the phenomenon in which an inherited condition appears to “skip a generation”: it’s described often as “autosomal recessive inheritance” or “incomplete penetrance”.  While the phrase “skipping a generation” is not uncommon in informal use, the actual mechanisms depend on the genetic inheritance pattern of the condition.  Autosomal Recessive Inheritance is defined as a “condition is caused by mutations in both copies of a specific gene” (one inherited from each parent).  This can manifest as an individual inheriting only one mutated copy (which means they will be a carrier but will remain asymptomatic) but if two carriers have issue, there is (1) a 25% chance the offspring will inherit both mutated copies and express the condition, (2) a 50% chance the offspring will be a carrier and (3) a 25% chance the offspring will inherit no mutations.  Thus, the condition may appear (and for practical purposes does) skip a generation in those cases where no symptoms exist; the classic examples include sickle cell anemia and cystic fibrosis.  Incomplete Penetrance occurs when an individual inherits a gene mutation which creates in them a genetic predisposition to a condition but symptoms do not develop because of environmental factors, other genetic influences or “mere chance” (and in the matter of diseases like those classified as “cancer”, the influence of what might be called “bad luck” is still probably underestimated, and certainly not yet statistically measured.  In such cases, the mutation may be passed to the next generation, where it might manifest, giving the appearance of skipping a generation and the BRCA1 & BRCA2 mutations for (hereditary) breast cancer are well-known examples.

Lindsay Lohan and her lawyer in court, Los Angeles, December, 2011.

In political science, “atavism” is used to refer to a reversion to older, more “primitive” means of furthering political ends.  Although it’s most associated with a critique of violence, political systems, ideologies, behaviors or economic policies have all be described as “atavistic” and their manifestation is linked often with ideas presented as representing (and implicitly offering a return to) a perceived “golden age”, a past structure which is idealized; it appear often as a reaction to change, notably modernity, globalization, or what is claimed to be a “decline in values”.  Political scientists identify stands in nominally non-violent atavism including: (1) Nostalgic Nationalism.  Nationalist movements are almost always race-based (in the sense of longing for a return to a “pure” ethnicity in which a population is “untainted” by ethnic diversity.  It’s usually a romanticization of a nation's past (historically, “purity” was less common than some like to believe) offering the hope of a return to traditional values, cultural practices, or forms of governance.  (2) Tribalism and Identity Politics. A call to primordial loyalties (such as ethnic or tribal identities), over modern, pluralistic, or institutional frameworks has been a feature of recent decades and was the trigger for the wars in the Balkans during the 1990s, the conflict which introduced to the language the euphemism “ethnic cleansing”, a very atavistic concept.  Tribalism and identity politics depends on group identities & allegiance overshadowing any broader civic or national unity on the basis of overturning an artificial (and often imposed) structure and returning to a pre-modern arrangement. (3) Anti-modernism or Anti-globalization. These are political threads which sound “recent” but both have roots which stretch back at least to the nineteenth century and Pius IX’s (1792–1878; pope 1846-1878) Syllabus Errorum (Syllabus of Errors, 1864) was one famous list of objections to change.  The strategy behind such atavism may be identifiably constant but tactics can vary and there’s often a surprising degree of overlap in the messaging of populists from the notional right & left which is hardly surprising given that in the last ten years both Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021; president elect 2024) and Bernie Sanders (b 1941; senior US senator (Independent, Vermont) since 2007) honed their messaging to appeal to the same disgruntled mass.

Elizabeth Boody Schumpeter (1898-1953, left) & Joseph Schumpeter (1883–1950, right).  It was his third marriage.

Austrian political economist Joseph Schumpeter used the word “atavism” in his analysis of the dynamics which contributed to the outbreak of World War I (1914-1918), something he attributed to the old, autocratic regimes of Central and Eastern Europe “dragging the modern, liberal West” back in time.  Schumpeter believed that if commercial ties created interdependence between nations then armed conflict would become unthinkable and US author Thomas Friedman (b 1953) in The Lexus and the Olive Tree: Understanding Globalization (1999) suggested the atavistic tendency of man to go to war could be overcome by modern commerce making connectivity between economies so essential to the well-being of citizens that no longer would they permit war because such a thing would be so dangerous for the economy; it was an attractive argument because we have long since ceased to be citizens and are merely economic units.  Friedman’s theory didn’t actually depend on his earlier phrase which suggested: “…countries with McDonalds outlets don’t go to war with each other” but that was how readers treated it.  Technically, it was a bit of a gray area (Friedman treated the earlier US invasion of Panama (1989) as a police action) but the thesis was anyway soon disproved in the Balkans.  Now, Schumpeter and Friedman seem to be cited most often in pieces disproving their theses and atavism remains alive and kicking.

Now

Now (pronounced nou)

(1) At the present time or moment (literally a point in time).

(2) Without further delay; immediately; at once; at this time or juncture in some period under consideration or in some course of proceedings described.

(3) As “just now”, a time or moment in the immediate past (historically it existed as the now obsolete “but now” (very recently; not long ago; up to the present).

(4) Under the present or existing circumstances; as matters stand.

(5) Up-to-the-minute; fashionable, encompassing the latest ideas, fads or fashions (the “now look”, the “now generation” etc).

(6) In law, as “now wife”, the wife at the time a will is written (used to prevent any inheritance from being transferred to a person of a future marriage) (archaic).

(7) In phenomenology, a particular instant in time, as perceived at that instant.

Pre 900: From the Middle English now, nou & nu from the Old English nū (at the present time, at this moment, immediately), from the Proto-West Germanic nū, from the Proto-Germanic nu, from the primitive Indo-European nū (now) and cognate with the Old Norse nu, the Dutch nu, the German nun, the Old Frisian nu and the Gothic nū.  It was the source also of the Sanskrit and Avestan nu, the Old Persian nuram, the Hittite nuwa, the Greek nu & nun, the Latin nunc, the Old Church Slavonic nyne, the Lithuanian nū and the Old Irish nu-.  The original senses may have been akin to “newly, recently” and it was related to the root of new.  Since Old English it has been often merely emphatic, without any temporal sense (as in the emphatic use of “now then”, though that phrase originally meant “at the present time”, and also (by the early thirteenth century) “at once”.  In the early Middle English it often was written as one word.  The familiar use as a noun (the present time) emerged in the late fourteenth century while the adjective meaning “up to date” is listed by etymologists as a “mid 1960s revival” on the basis the word was used as an adjective with the sense of “current” between the late fourteenth and early nineteenth centuries.  The phrase “now and then” (occasionally; at one time and another) was in use by the mid 1400s, “now or never” having been in use since the early thirteenth century.  “Now” is widely used in idiomatic forms and as a conjunction & interjection.  Now is a noun, adjective & adverb, nowism, nowness & nowist are nouns; the noun plural is nows.

Right here, right now: Acid House remix of Greta Thunberg’s (b 2003) How dare you? speech by Theo Rio.

“Now” is one of the more widely used words in English and is understood to mean “at the present time or moment (literally a point in time)”.  However, it’s often used in a way which means something else: Were one to say “I’ll do it now”, in the narrow technical sense that really means “I’ll do it in the near future”.  Even things which are treated as happening “now” really aren’t such as seeing something.  Because light travels at a finite speed, it takes time for it to bounce from something to one’s eye so just about anything one sees in an exercise in looking back to the past.  Even when reading something on a screen or page one’s brain is processing something from a nanosecond (about one billionth of a second) earlier.  For most purposes, “now” is but a convincing (an convenient) illusion and even though, in certain, special sense, everything in the universe is happening at the same time (now) it’s not something that can ever be experienced because of the implications of relativity.  None of this causes many problems in life but among certain physicists and philosophers, there is a dispute about “now” and there are essentially three factions: (1) that “now” happened only once in the history of the known universe and cannot again exist until the universe ends, (2) that only “now” can exist and (3) that “now” cannot ever exist.

Does now exist? (2013), oil & acrylic on canvas by Fiona Rae (b 1963) on MutualArt.

The notion that “now” can have happened only once in the history of our universe (and according to the cosmological theorists variously there may be many universes (some which used to exist, some extant and some yet to be created) or our universe may now be in one of its many phases, each which will start and end with a unique “now”) is tied up with the nature of time, the mechanism upon which “now” depends not merely for definition but also for existence.  That faction deals with what is essentially an intellectual exercise whereas the other two operate where physics and linguistics intersect.  Within the faction which says "now can never exist" there is a sub-faction which holds that to say “now” cannot exist is a bit of a fudge in that it’s not that “now” never happens but only that it can only every be described as a particular form of “imaginary time”; an address in space-time in the past or future.  The purists however are absolutists and their proposition is tied up in the nature of infinity, something which renders it impossible ever exactly to define “now” because endlessly the decimal point can move so that “now” can only ever be tended towards and never attained.  If pushed, all they will concede is that “now” can be approximated for purposes of description but that’s not good enough: there is no now.

nower than now!: Lindsay Lohan on the cover of i-D magazine No.269, September, 2006.

The “only now can exist” faction find tiresome the proposition that “the moment we identify something as happening now, already it has passed”, making the point that “now” is the constant state of existence and that a mechanism like time exists only a thing of administrative convenience.  The “only now can exist” faction are most associated with the schools of presentism or phenomenology and argue only the present moment (now) is “real” and that any other fragment of time can only be described, the past existing only in memory and the future only as anticipation or imagination; “now” is the sole verifiable reality.  They are interested especially in what they call “change & becoming”, making the point the very notion of change demands a “now”: events happen and things become in the present; without a “now”, change and causality are unintelligible.  The debate between the factions hinges often on differing interpretations of time: whether fundamentally it is subjective or objective, continuous or discrete, dynamic or static.  Linguistically and practically, “now” remains central to the human experience but whether it corresponds to an independent metaphysical reality remains contested.

Parole

Parole (pronounced puh-rohl or pa-rawl (French))

(1) In penology, the (supervised) conditional release of an inmate from prison prior to the end of the maximum sentence imposed.

(2) Such a release or its duration.

(3) An official document authorizing such a release (archaic except as a modifier).

(4) In military use, the promise (usually in the form of a written certificate) of a prisoner of war, that if released they either will return to custody at a specified time or will not again take up arms against their captors.

(5) Any password given by authorized personnel in passing by a guard (archaic but still used in video gaming).

(6) In military use, a watchword or code phrase; a password given only to officers, distinguished from the countersign, given to all guards (archaic but still used in video gaming).

(7) A word of honor given or pledged (archaic).

(8) In US immigration legislation, the temporary admission of non-U.S. citizens into the US for emergency reasons or on grounds considered in the public interest, as authorized by and at the discretion of the attorney general.

(9) In structural linguistics, language as manifested in the individual speech acts of particular speakers (ie language in use, as opposed to language as a system).

(10) To place or release on parole.

(11) To admit a non-US citizen into the US as provided for in the parole clauses in statute.

(12) Of or relating to parole or parolees:

(13) A parole record (technical use only).

1610–1620: From the Middle French parole (word, formal promise) (short for parole d'honneur (word of honor)), from the Old French parole, from the Late Latin parabola (speech), from the Classical Latin parabola (comparison), from the Ancient Greek παραβολή (parabolḗ) (a comparison; parable (literally “a throwing beside”, hence “a juxtaposition").  The verb was derived from the noun an appeared early in the eighteenth century; originally, it described “what the prisoner did” (in the sense of a “pledge”) but this sense has long been obsolete.  The transitive meaning “put on parole, allow to go at liberty on parole” was in use by the early 1780s while the use to refer to “release (a prisoner) on his own recognizance” doesn’t appear for another century.  The adoption in English was by the military in the sense of a “word of honor” specifically that given by a prisoner of war not to escape if allowed to go about at liberty, or not to take up arms again if allowed to return home while the familiar modern sense of “a (supervised) conditional release of a inmate before their full term is served” was a part of criminal slang by at least 1910.  An earlier term for a similar thing was ticket of leave.  In law-related use, parol is the (now rare) alternative spelling.  Parole is a noun & verb, parolee is a noun, paroled & paroling are verbs and parolable, unparolable, unparoled & reparoled are adjectives (hyphenated use is common); the noun plural is paroles.

A parole board (or parole authority, parole panel etc) is panel of people who decide whether a prisoner should be released on parole and if released, the parolee is placed for a period under the supervision of a parole officer (a law enforcement officer who supervises offenders who have been released from incarceration and, often, recommends sentencing in courts of law).  In some jurisdictions the appointment is styled as “probation officer”.  The archaic military slang pass-parole was an un-adapted borrowing from French passe-parole (password) and described an order passed from the front to the rear by word of mouth. Still sometimes used in diplomatic circles, the noun porte-parole (plural porte-paroles) describes “a spokesperson, one who speaks on another's behalf” and was an un-adapted borrowing from mid sixteenth century French porte-parole, from the Middle French porteparolle.

The Parole Evidence Rule

In common law systems, the parol evidence rule is a legal principle in contract law which restricts the use of extrinsic (outside) evidence to interpret or alter the terms of a written contract.  The operation of the parol evidence rule means that if two or more parties enter into a written agreement intended to be a complete and final expression of their terms, any prior or contemporaneous oral or written statements that contradict or modify the terms of that written agreement cannot be used in court to challenge the contract’s provisions.  The rule applies only to properly constructed written contracts which can be regarded as “final and complete written agreements” and the general purpose is to protect the integrity of the document.  Where a contract is not “held to be final and complete”, parol evidence may be admissible, including cases of fraud, misrepresentation, mistake, illegality or where the written contract is ambiguous.  The most commonly used exceptions are (1) Ambiguity (if a court declares a contract term ambiguous, external evidence may be introduced to to clarify the meaning), (2) Void or voidable contracts (if a contract was entered into under duress or due to fraud or illegality, parol evidence can be used to prove this.  In cases of mistakes, the scope is limited but it can still be possible), (3) Incomplete contracts (if a court determines a written document doesn’t reflect the full agreement between the parties, parol evidence may be introduced to “complete it”, (4) Subsequent agreements (modifications or agreements made after the written contract can generally be proven with parol evidence although in the narrow technical sense such additions may be found to constitute a “collateral contract”.

Parole & probation

Depending on the jurisdiction, “parole” & “probation” can mean much the same thing or things quite distinct, not helped by parolees in some places being supervised by “probation officers” and vice versa.

In the administration of criminal law, “parole” and “probation” are both forms of supervised release but between jurisdictions the terms can either mean the same thing or be applied in different situations.  As a general principle, parole is the conditional release of a prisoner before completing their full sentence and those paroled usually are supervised by a parole officer and must adhere to certain conditions such as regular meetings, drug testing and maintaining employment and certain residential requirements.  The purpose of parole is (1) a supervised reintegration of an inmate into society and (2) a reward for good behavior in prison.  Should a parolee violate the conditions of their release, they can be sent back to prison to serve the remainder of their sentence.  As the word typically is used, probation is a court-ordered period of supervision in the community instead of, or in addition to, a prison sentence.  A term of probation often imposed at sentencing, either as an alternative to incarceration or as a portion of the sentence after release.  Like parolees, individuals on probation are monitored, often by a probation officer (although they may be styled a “parole officer”) and are expected to follow specific conditions.  Probation is in many cases the preferred sentencing option for first offenders, those convicted of less serious offences and those for whom a custodial sentence (with all its implications) would probably be counter-productive.  It has the advantage also of reducing overcrowding in prisons and is certainly cheaper for the state than incarceration.  Those who violate the terms of their probation face consequences such as an extended probation or being sent to jail.  The word “parole” in this context was very much a thing of US English until the post-war years when it spread first to the UK and later elsewhere in the English-speaking world.

Langue & parole

In structural linguistics, the terms “langue” & “parole” were introduced by the groundbreaking Swiss semiotician Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913) and remain two of the fundamental concepts in the framework of structuralism and are treated as important building blocks in what subsequently was developed as the science of human speech.  Within the profession, “langue” & “parole” continue to be regarded as “French words” because the sense in that language better describes things than the English translations (“language” & “speech” respectively) which are “approximate but inadequate”.  Langue denotes the system (or totality) of language shared by the “collective consciousness” so it encompasses all elements of a language as well as the rules & conventions for their combination (grammar, spelling, syntax etc).  Parole is the use individuals make of the resources of language, which the system produces and combines in speech, writing or other means of transmission.  As de Saussure explained it, the conjunction and interaction of the two create an “antinomy of the social and shared”, a further antinomy implied in the idea that langae is abstract and parole is concrete.

The construct of the noun antinomy was a learned borrowing from the Latin antinom(ia) + the English suffix “-y” (used to form abstract nouns denoting a condition, quality, or state).  The Latin antinomia was from the Ancient Greek ἀντινομία (antinomía), the construct being ἀντι- (anti- (the prefix meaning “against”), ultimately from the primitive Indo-European hent- (face; forehead; front)) + νόμος (nómos) (custom, usage; law, ordinance) from  νέμω (némō) (to deal out, dispense, distribute), from the primitive Indo-European nem- (to distribute; to give; to take))  + -ῐ́ᾱ (-íā) (the suffix forming feminine abstract nouns).  The English word is best understood as anti- (in the sense of “against”) +‎ -nomy (the suffix indicating a system of laws, rules, or knowledge about a body of a particular field).  In law, it was once used to describe “a contradiction within a law, or between different laws or a contradiction between authorities” (a now archaic use) but by extension it has come to be used in philosophy, political science and linguistics to describe “any contradiction or paradox”.  A sophisticated deconstruction of the concept was provided by the German German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) who in Kritik der reinen Vernunft (Critique of Pure Reason (1781)) explained that apparent contradictions between valid conclusions (a paradox) could be resolved once it was understood the two positions came from distinct and exclusive sets, meaning no paradox existed, the perception of one merely the inappropriate application of an idea from one set to another.

So langue is what people use when thinking and conceptualizing (abstract) while parole what they use in speaking or writing (concrete), Saussure’s evaluative distinction explained as “The proper object of linguistic study is the system which underlies any particular human signifying human practice, not the individual utterance.” and the implication of that was that langue is of more importance than parole.  In the English-speaking world, it was the work of US Professor Noam Chomsky (b 1928) which made the concept of langue & parole well-known through his use of the more accessible terms “competence” & “performance”.  Chomsky’s latter day role as a public intellectual (though a barely broadcasted one in his home country) commenting on matters such as US foreign policy or the contradictions of capitalism has meant his early career in linguistics is often neglected by those not in the profession (the highly technical nature of the stuff does mean it’s difficult for most to understand) but his early work truly was revolutionary.

Noam Chomsky agitprop by Shepard Fairey (b 1970) on Artsy.

Chomsky used “competence” to refer to a speaker's implicit knowledge of the rules and principles of a language, something which permits them to understand and generate grammatically correct sentences which can be understood by those with a shared competence.  Competence is the idealized, internalized system of linguistic rules that underlies a speaker's ability to produce and comprehend language. It reflects one’s mental grammar, independent of external factors like memory limitations or social context.  Performance refers to the actual use of language IRL (in real life), influenced by psychological and physical factors such as memory, attention, fatigue, and social context.  Performance includes the errors, hesitations, and corrections that occur in everyday speech and Chomsky made the important point these do not of necessity reveal lack of competence.  Indeed, understood as “disfluencies”, (the “ums & ahs” et al) these linguistic phenomenon turned out to be elements it was essential to interpolate into the “natural language” models used to train AI (artificial intelligence) (ro)bots to create genuinely plausible “human analogues”.  Chomsky argued competence should be the primary domain of inquiry for theoretical linguistics and he focused on these abstract, universal principles in his early work which provoked debates which continue to this day.  Performance, subject to errors, variability and influenced by non-linguistic factors, he declared better studied by those in fields like sociolinguistics and psycholinguistics.