Indicative prefixes: contrasting epi with extra

Sensing Epiterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) (Part #2)

---

[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]

---

This exercise follows from several earlier investigations of prefix usage and potential (Exploration of Prefixes of Global Discourse: implications for sustainable confidelity, 2011; New Paradigms via a Renewed Set of Prefixes? Dependence of international policy-making on an array of operational terms, 2003; Conceptual Gaps and Confused Distinctions: possible ambiguities in the translation of interrelated concepts. 1974; Conceptual Distortions from Negative Descriptors: non-governmental vs. anti-governmental, 1974).

The introduction has focused on the possibility of a fruitful approach to the relation between what are distinguished by categories. In practice this is a methodological trap since it is difficult to use language in this way. In "extraterrestrial", use of "extra" implies a relation between "terrestrial" and "non-terrestrial" -- with the focus switched to the "non-terrestrial" and not on the relation between the two.

One inspiration for use of "epi" here follows from the problematic outcome of the Human Genome Project. This mapping of the human genome was originally promoted widely as providing information capable of explaining all human variability -- as being genetically determined. With the successful completion of the mapping it became apparent that, although valuable, there was also a need to focus on the changes in gene expression or cellular phenotype, caused by mechanisms other than changes in the underlying DNA sequence. This contrasting focus is termed epigenetics -- in which the prefix "epi" is indicative of notions such as over, above, or outer (as discussed below). Use of "extra", as with "extragenetic", was considered inappropriate for this purpose.

In the light of this genome mapping example, rather than "extra-terrestrial" (with its strong implication of "non-terrestrial"), what might "epi-terrestrial" then suggest? "Extra-terrestrials" may not exist tangibly in the sense that many would wish them to exist -- and this is consistent with the view of those who do not believe they exist. "Extra-terrestrials" may however exist in other senses -- yet to be understood -- for which the term is less appropriate.

As with the assumptions originally associated with genome mapping, is much of science effectively focused conceptually on "terrestrial" when further insight might be derived from "epi-terrestrial" -- understood in terms of "changes in expression", whether of "life" or intelligence? If science is primarily focused on the tangible (or measureable), is this to be compared with "terrestrial" (as in the genetics case) -- with the "extra-terrestrial" effectively corresponding to the "extra-tangible", as being especially "terrestrial"? This could be construed in the light of occasional use of "very earthy" as a descriptor, although any implication of being "well grounded" is another matter.

The genetics example raises the essentially dynamic cognitive possibilities, as yet unexplored, potentially associated with "epi". Framed in this way, "extra-terrestrial" as currently envisaged might even be understood in terms of questionable projection of "terrestrial" science methodology onto the phenomena to which astronomy is especially attentive -- as another "natural science". Hence the cautionary reference of Ursula Le Guin: There are no right answers to wrong questions.

As noted, "epiterrestrial" is an uncommon term primarily associated with botanical descriptions of some orchids -- namely epiphytes growing in trees, rather than rooting into the soil. The term is borrowed here as an indication of modes of life best understood as not being "rooted" within the conventions of "terrestrial thinking". This borrowing is necessarily a literary device, justified only by the inadequacies of language conventionally rooted in the tangible. There is of course a degree of charm to the appropriate association with an exotic flower of striking elegance.

---

[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]