![\"Underthought,](\"https:\/\/sidewaysthoughts.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/12\/words-underthought-meaning-011-1024x675.jpg\" "\\"Underthought,")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
We take much for granted in our everyday communication.<\/p>\n
Take for example a simple statement like \u201cLet\u2019s go for a beer<\/em>\u201d.\u00a0 Taken explicitly, you and I will not \u201cgo\u201d for a beer per se, but we both understand the meaning of the statement to be that we will eventually end up at a pub drinking some form of liquid.<\/p>\n There is also a deeper level of inferred meaning related to the context in which the statement is said, also known as connotation<\/a>. If you and I are in conflict, the statement may mean I intend to reconcile. If I want a romantic relationship with you, the statement may infer a date of some sort. If it is after work, the purpose may be either celebration or resignation. If we don\u2019t know each other and I say this while waiting with you at a crosswalk, I may be intentionally creating an awkward situation.<\/p>\n Yet deeper than this, there may be an unspoken and perhaps unknown meaning behind the statement, similar to the concept of\u00a0subtext<\/a>.\u00a0 Perhaps my request comes from a need for validation, for community, or for connection.\u00a0 Going for a beer may be a symbol that all is right in the world or my projection that things are about to become unsettled.<\/p>\n It is to this last level of meaning that we are introduced to the notion of the \u201cunderthought<\/strong><\/em>\u201d.<\/p>\n I encountered the notion of \u201cunderthought\u201d in\u00a0Mike Harding\u2019s<\/a>\u00a0review<\/a>\u00a0of Irish novelist James Joyce<\/a>\u00a0and philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein<\/a>.\u00a0 The reason for the introduction was my own research into Wittgenstein\u2019s work on the meaning behind language mentioned in a Coursera Massive Open Online Course (MOOC)<\/a>\u00a0I am taking from Duke University called Think Again: How to Reason and Argue<\/a>.<\/p>\n Harding presents underthought as a concept used by Joyce to refer to \u201cthe thoughts that the thinker appears to know, but does not wish to acknowledge, at the same time as he is actually responding to them.<\/em>\u201d and \u201cthe half-formed thoughts and sensations that appear to be responded to by the thinker.<\/em>\u201d We acknowledge and respond to underthought, but are either unable to or we choose not to connect the meaning of the underthought with the words that we use.<\/p>\n This is not surprising, given the potential chasm between underthought and what we communicate.\u00a0 Wittgenstein shares that \u201cthe inexpressible (what I find enigmatic and cannot express) perhaps provides the background, against which whatever I was able to express acquires meaning.<\/em>\u201d He observes that \u201cthere is always to be found a dark background, which we are only later able to bring into the light and express as a thought<\/em>\u201d.<\/p>\n Our efforts to bring the underthought \u201cinto light<\/em>\u201d can be considered from two perspectives.\u00a0 First, as inferred above, we can attempt to uncover the inexpressible; to capture, coax and cajole our hidden thoughts into becoming known as if pushing shifting sands up from the ocean depth.<\/p>\n An alternative perspective is to examine our conversations and our conscious thoughts as if from the top-down. We try to deduce the underthought behind what is observable, like performing a crime scene investigation where we are unsure if a crime has even been committed.<\/p>\n Both situations appear difficult to the point of being unattainable.\u00a0 As a path towards the second perspective, Wittgenstein proposes the following exercise:<\/p>\n \u201cSay a sentence, perhaps “The weather is very fine today.” … Now think the thought of the sentence, but… without the sentence.<\/em>\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n It should also be noted that it is not ideal to be doing this analysis on our own.\u00a0 As Michel Ter Hark<\/a> notes, \u201cintrospection cannot be the way one learns their meaning. Instead, meaning is based on use, on shared practices with others. To support this claim Wittgenstein is cited as saying that inner processes stand in need of outer criteria<\/strong>.<\/em>\u201d This notion of external input to defining our internal meaning gives credence to our\u00a0propensity\u00a0to share in a social setting and participate in mutual introspection<\/a>.<\/p>\n There are a few practical areas where the notion of underthought may be applied.<\/p>\n What is the underthought of the brand, the unspoken brand identity<\/a>\u00a0or brand personality<\/a>\u00a0with which people identify? When you look at a logo, billboard or a television commercial, what is it that is not said? How would the brand be described without using the words and symbols they use to describe themselves?<\/p>\nThe underthought<\/h2>\n
Practical examples in brands, organisational culture, social media<\/h2>\n
Brands<\/h3>\n
Organisational culture<\/h3>\n