TRANSFORMATION OBVIATES PATHOGENS
(PANDEMIC: Sorcery based or Holodynamic?)
When the ambient conditions are right for an algae bloom or for a phenol phthalein solution to TRANSFORM from yellow to red the TRANSFORMATION is NONLOCAL.
Modern physics, wherein the Wave-field (the ambient condition) is the primary reality, informs us that NONLOCALITY is primary in our sensory experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum aka ‘Wave-field’ aka ‘the Tao’. In the fluid-flow of Wave-field, FIGURE and GROUND are ONE (i.e. INHABITANT AND HABITAT ARE ONE). This INEFFABLE topology is characteristic of holography (holodynamics). It is ineffable since figure and ground are in continual flux (TRANSFORMATION is the primary reality).
Classical physics and Western culture intellectual representation of reality is grounded in LOCALITY. As Nietzsche has pointed out, the abstract concept of LOCAL being and LOCAL sourcing of action is the abstract artifact of the DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar; i.e. the FIRST ERROR is NAMING which imposes LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF BEING on a visible relational form-in-the-flow-field, conflated with GRAMMAR that imputes the power of SOURCING actions and developments to the NAMING instantiated thing-in-itself.
This DOUBLE ERROR reduces the ineffable to effable (we can’t capture in fixed words a universe that is in continual flux but must ‘fix’ a relational form by labelling it and then we get what the ancients called the ‘burden of concreteness’ where we have to manage with words, its actions and developments.
RESONANCE is a NONLOCAL phenomenon (e.g. the hurricane) that we REDUCE to LOCAL with the DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar. That’s just for sharing ‘rough copy’. REALITY is nevertheless RESONANCE based and thus innately NONLOCAL
* * *
We are included in the Great Harmony aka the Tao aka the Wave-field and it is ineffable; i.e. if we remain silent and without language, we can understand the Tao through relational experience, … but if we want to use language to give representation to the Tao, we must deal with the fact that words capture fluid forms as persisting things-in-themselves; e.g. hurricane Katrina. This name ‘stays the same’ but the form it refers to is a NONLOCAL, RESONANCE based formING that is continually transforming as is everything in the Great Harmony aka the Tao aka the Wave-field.
In other words, every form is a relational dynamic as is easy to understand in the case of hurricane Katrina (as a stirring in the vastness of the transforming relational continuum aka ‘universe’), and it is our natural understanding as natural forms that are NOT using language and grammar to reduce the transforming relational continuum we and all forms are included in.
However, in the array of differing forms in the flow we distinguish ourselves, and based on persisting form and movements and because we have language and grammar, we associate the word ‘human’ with this characteristic form, and by this NAMING, we can split out a distinctive type of form and also a particular form to reference using spoken language. Language also has GRAMMAR so that not only can we use NAMING to split out a form as if it were a LOCAL independently-existing thing-in-itself, we can use GRAMMAR to impute to it, its own powers of SOURCING actions and developments.
In the case of the hurricaning or the boiling in the flowing streaming, by fixing a LOCAL identity on the NONLOCAL relational boiling or hurricaning, we can shift the SOURCING agency from NONLOCAL to LOCAL, which essentially ‘gets by’ the INEFFABLE nature of the NONLOCAL (which goes on without end as in the cycles of relational transformation). That is, this language and grammar-based reduction of the NONLOCAL to the LOCAL renders the ineffable (in this reduced-to-LOCAL form) effable.
Our LOCAL, effable language based reduced representations open the way to SHARING an informative semblance of our observations and experiences of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum, albeit in reduced form which can only INFER the ineffable-because-fluid reality that we can’t capture directly because we (being an inclusion in it) and ‘it’, are in continual flux.
While some humanings (EASTERN, modern physics) employ the reductive representations of language as INFERENCE TO STIMULATE INTUITIVE INSIGHT of the ineffable transforming relational continuum, acknowledging that ‘The Tao that can be told is not the true Tao’, … other humanings (WESTERN) employ the reductive representations of language and grammar as DIRECT AND EXPLICIT REPRESENTATIONS OF ‘PHYSICAL REALITY’.
The modern world, in so far as social relational organization (government, industry and other reason-based social dynamics) are concerned, are currently following the WESTERN practice of regarding the reductive representations of language and grammar as DIRECT AND EXPLICIT REPRESENTATIONS OF PHYSICAL REALITY. THIS IS PROBLEMATIC; I.E. IT IS THE SOURCE OF SOCIAL DYSFUNCTION.
This note explores the psychological-philosophical influences shaping our different conceptualizations of ‘reality’; e.g. as differ between WEST and EAST. While I present this in a WESTERN style, my understanding accords with the EAST as does modern physics based understanding that is very different from the WESTERN ‘reality’..
In other words, this note explores how we are NOT using the TRANSFORMATIONAL understanding of what is currently going on (the understanding of modern physics, indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta. In our WESTERN ‘popular reality’, our standard news coverage is ‘double error’ based. The ‘double error’ is constituted as follows; the first error is NAMING that imputes LOCAL thing-in-itself existence, while the second error of GRAMMAR conflates the first error by imputing the power of SOURCING actions and developments to the NAMING-instantiated thing-in-itself. This ‘double error’ mode of representation REDUCES the reality of our sensory relational experience to an abstract-but-effable (articulable) pseudo-reality that we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are accustomed to using in our discourse (this ‘ineffable reality reduced to effable reality) as our ‘operative reality’. The ‘double error’ reduces NONLOCAL TRANSFORMATION to LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments.
An example of the ‘double error’ is where we say things like ‘The hurricane grew larger and stronger and devastated New Orleans’, or, ‘the fighter jet successfully took out the targeted enemy leader’. In both cases we fail to mention the greater reality of relational TRANSFORMATION. We sometimes ALLUDE to transformation by references to ‘collateral damage’. That is, a lot more is going on than is covered in our simple and explicit language and grammar constructs. For example, we speak of the GROWTH of our farm or of our town but THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS “GROWTH” and such statements illustrate Goedel’s Theorem of the inherent incompleteness of all finite systems of logical propositions. That is, the growth of cultivated land is at the same time, the (unmentioned) shrinking of Wilderness area. We can talk about the GROWTH of cultivated area and we can talk about the RECIPROCAL SHRINKAGE of Wildereness area (which implies a spherical rather than FLAT space) but the limitations of language won’t let us go that ‘one step farther’ to capture relational TRANSFORMATION as characterizes the universe aka ‘Wave-field’ we are included in. This inclusion-in the transforming relational continuum (aks Tao aka Wave-field) is ineffable; i.e. it is beyond EXPLICIT capture in language and grammar ‘double error’ terms of LOCAL THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES, notionally with their own powers of SOURCING actions and developments.
Reality is INCLUSION IN THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM and while we understand it through our sensory experience of inclusion in it, because it is inherently NONLOCAL and comes in one uninterrupted bundle; i.e. ‘the transforming relational continuum’, … it is INEFFABLE. The ‘double error’ is the use of abstraction to REDUCE the ineffable to something effable and this is where WEST and EAST (together with modern physics) part ways as to the understanding of REALITY with the WEST opting to employ the reduced-to-effable peudo-reality as the ‘operative reality’ while the EAST holds on to the ‘ineffable’ as the ‘operative reality’, employing the REDUCED-TO-EFFABLE double error based pseudo-reality featuring LOCAL things-in-themselves notionally with ‘their own powers of SOURCING actions and developments’. This is WESTERN CULTURE “REALITY” and it is a CRAZY-MAKER! The self-deception that can come as a surprise to us WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS is that ‘reason’ (logical analysis based understanding, otherwise known as REASON) is at the bottom of this CRAZY-MAKING WESTERN CULTURE; i.e. our natural intuition avails us to an understanding of the ineffable; i.e. our inclusion in a transforming relational continuum in which there are no LOCAL things-in-themselves because ‘everything is in flux’ (Heraclitus).
What this boils down to is that our means of understanding REALITY (our inclusion in the transforming relational continuum) can’t be based on LOCAL things-in-themselves with the notional powers of SOURCING their own actions and developments, as is the double error basis of REASON (don’t forget, our intuition, even as babes-in-arms, can give us understanding that transcends the ‘limits of logic and reason’; e.g. as infants our understanding of the world is topological and without the explicit self-other split.
Moving our Understanding Beyond ‘the Pathogen’ (i.e. moving from Newtonian materialist thinking to Modern Physics relational thinking)
How this impacts understanding of ‘reality’ as it pertains to ‘COVID 19’ which WESTERN MEDICINE portrays as a PATHOGEN.
WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have fallen into the habit of representing ‘reality’ in ‘double error’ terms. The first error is NAMING to impute ‘independent thing-in-itself being’ and the second, conflating error of GRAMMAR imputes the power of SOURCING actions and developments to the NAMING-instantiated thing-in-itself.
This is the basis of Newtonian physics and it is the basis of our Newtonian science concept of ‘PATHOGEN’.
The ‘modern physics’ alternative to the PATHOGEN view is RELATIONAL IMBALANCE, but RELATIONAL IMBALANCE is ineffable, encouraging REDUCTION to the ‘double error’ based PATHOGEN abstraction.
For example, when forests become desiccated to the point that a forest fire develops from a spark from a chain saw, or the discarding of an incompletely extinguished cigarette, we use the abstract ‘cause-and-effect’ or ‘producer-product’ model and speak in terms of the fire in the on-sided producer-product terms wherein an action or development is understood as arising from some SOURCING AGENCY. This abstract (double error of language and grammar) based notion of LOCAL SOURCING is linguistic reductive simplification that ‘effable-izes’ the ineffable reality of RELATIONAL TRANSFORMATION of ‘the Tao’ aka the Wave-field.
TRANSFORMATION is NONLOCAL which makes it ‘ineffable’. While the ‘ineffable Tao’ or ‘Wave-field’ is the accepted reality of modern physics and EASTERN cultures (indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta) which can only be INFERRED as in modern physics’ ‘surprise version of the game of Twenty Questions’, … , the WESTERN CULTURE ‘operative reality’ reduces the ineffable reality of TRANSFORMATION to ‘effable’ representation in the abstract terms of LOCAL SOURCING OF ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENTS via the ‘double error’ of language and grammar.
The TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM also known as the Wave-Field also known as the Tao is reality as affirmed by modern physics and is also the reality affirmed in indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta.
The relational understanding of the world dynamic which is the ‘reality’ of the EAST and modern physics differs radically from the ‘reality’ of the WEST which is ‘double error’ based, as Nietzsche has pointed out. The ‘double error’ is where EGO comes from so it is fair to say that the WEST’s view of reality is EGO-based and also that the concept of PATHOGEN is EGO-based.
INTRODUCTION – SYNOPSIS – PRELUDE
GROWTH is a concept that comes with a built-in dependency on another abstract concept; i.e. A LOCAL THING THAT EXISTS.
TRANSFORMATION is a relational concept that does NOT depend on LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELFNESS as GROWTH does.
While our sensory experience-based intuition UNDERSTANDS TRANSFORMATION, … TRANSFORMTION is NONLOCAL and is thus INEFFABLE since we cannot point to it and say; ‘See, transformation is going on right over there. Transformation as in the Wave-field dynamic is INEFFABLE because it is NONLOCAL and we cannot point to it and identify it by a visual sighting. We are included in TRANSFORMATION (aka the Tao aka the Wave-field) and this means that the TRANSFORMATION that can be told and pointed to and photographed is NOT the true TRANSFORMATION.
The point is that while TRANSFORMATION (the Wave-field aka the Tao) is ineffable, it is the reality of our sensory experience of inclusion within it. GROWTH is an abstract VOYEUR visualization based concept that RENDERS THE INEFFABLE EFFABLE in terms of the LOCAL, and while there is no REAL LOCAL in the transforming relational continuum, we can use language to CREATE LOCALITY by NAMING forms within the transforming relational continuum that appear to persist as LOCAL THINGS IN THEMSELVES (i.e. even if they are boils in fluid flow that have the deceptive APPEARANCE of persisting ‘thing-in-itselfness’ and thus invite us to BAPTIZE/CHRISTEN with a NAME so as to impute persisting thing-in-itself being to an innately NONLOCAL phenomenon with an associated LOCAL APPEARANCE or APPARITION.
By using NAMING to orient our attention to a LOCALLY APPEARING resonance feature, we can reduce TRANSFORMATION to terms of GROWTH of NAME-INSTANTIATED THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES which we can use GRAMMAR to ‘animate’ so as to give us an EFFABLE intellectual RE-presentation of the ineffable and purely relational flow-form.
Our CULTURE (in both EAST and WEST) has come up with language and grammar that gives us a deceptively SOLID, APPARENTLY LOCAL reality by substituting GROWTH of LOCAL THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES for the purely RELATIONAL TRANSFORMATION of the Wave-field. Of course, GROWTH is an abstraction that we ‘bring-into-being’ INTELLECTUALLY, in terms of the intellectual invention of THINGS-THAT-GROW. This is an intellectual ‘work-around’ to help us get past the limitations of language since we are faced with the challenge of TRYING to articulate (even if it has to be by inference) the ineffable ‘Tao’ (the transforming relational continuum).
In the EAST, the REDUCTION of TRANSFORMATION to GROWTH … IS NOT FOR THE PURPOSE OF EMPLOYING GROWTH AS SOMETHING ‘REAL”, BUT ONLY AS A MEANS OF USING ‘GROWTH’ AS A DEVICE FOR ALLUDING TO TRANSFORMATION, WHICH IS NONLOCAL AND INEFFABLE. ‘GROWTH’, AS an innately LOCAL phenomenon is an ALLUSION that builds dependently from a NAMING-instantiated THING-IN-ITSELF. This ILLUSION of GROWTH is just that, an ILLUSION. The ILLUSION known as GROWTH is something we concoct because we need to concoct it because TRANSFORMATION is NONLOCAL and thus ineffable while GROWTH is the effable reduction of the ineffable TRANSFORMATION. That is; the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao, but we have the ability to make the Tao crudely tellable (effable, articulable) in a reduced representation wherein we abstractly reduce TRANSFORMATION which is purely RELATIONAL and NONLOCAL (and thus ineffable) to GROWTH of a NAMING instantiated thing-in-itself which is EXPLICIT and LOCAL…. BUT WE USE THIS ONLY FOR INFERENCE AND DO NOT TAKE IT ‘LITERALLY’.
In the WEST, the REDUCTION of TRANSFORMATION to GROWTH is a ‘tool that is running away with the workman’ (Emerson). In contrast with the EAST, WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS DO TAKE THE DOUBLE ERROR CONSTRUCTS LITERALLY AS IF THEY ‘SPEAK THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH’. So, when the EASTERN CULTURE ADHERENT declares that Robin Hood has stolen grain from the King’s Granary and Jean Valjean has stolen bread from the Baker (acts that could be confirmed by Crime Scene Investigation), he is saying the same thing as the WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT, …. BUT THERE IS A VERY BASIC DIFFERENCE IN UNDERSTANDING, BECAUSE THE EASTERN CULTURE ADHERENT UNDERSTANDS THESE ACTS AS BEING IN THE SERVICE OF RESTORING BALANCE AND HARMONY IN THE REAL PHYSICAL RELATIONAL DYNAMIC (distribution and ingestion of nutrients). In other words, these acts by Robin Hood and Jean Valjean serve to alleviate the imbalance between regions of excess and regions of deficiency. In this case, the act of NAMING as in NAMING the PRODUCER of the PRODUCT (the grain, the bread) which is based on the intellectual double error of language and grammar, is given reality-establishing precedence over the physical relational reality. USING ‘NAMING’ or ‘TITLE’ in ‘double error’ language and grammar constructions, is, in the WEST, given precedence over an understanding of inclusion in TRANSFORMATION.
Chief Maquinna of the Nootkas did not see things in the producer-product context, but saw humans as humanings within the Great Harmony. Meanwhile, even ‘Dances-with-Wolves’ has the producer product geometry as immersion in the Great Harmony is ineffable.
“Once I was in Victoria, and I saw a very large house; they told me it was a bank and that the white men place their money there to take care of, and that by-and-by they got it back, with interest. We are Indians and have no such bank; but when we have plenty of money or blankets, we give them away to other chiefs and people, and by-and-by they return them, with interest, and our hearts feel good. Our potlatch is our bank.” [for the full letter and associated context (jailing of first nations people for continuing with the potlatch tradition) see ‘First People First Voices’, edited by Penny Petrone, University of Toronto Press, 1991]
The immanent questing for relational harmony, … the GREAT HARMONY of the indigenous aboriginal peoples, manifests as relational TRANSFORMATION. This ‘reality’ is ‘everywhere at the same time’ and comes to us as sensory experience. It comes to Jean Valjean and to Robin Hood as intuitive INSPIRATION wherein we give ourselves up to the sustaining and restoring of relational balance and harmony. This is where the behaviour of diving into the rapids or into the burning building on a rescue mission comes from. INSPIRATION is not based on logical analysis. INSPIRATION that manifests in cultivating and sustaining relational harmony fills the heart while EGO from calculated analytical thoughts of one’s ‘heroic acts and achievements’ swells the head. These ‘animators of dynamics’ differ in that EGO is inside-outward sourced as with PRIDE in notional ‘producer-product achievements’ admired by the social collective, and the avoiding of being perceived as the author of ‘producer-product’ actions that bring public SHAME, … while INSPIRATION lies beyond such self-centred (LOCAL EGO-CENTRIC BASED) motivations and seeks only to cultivate harmony in a NONLOCAL relational sense.
INSPIRATION is a NONLOCAL influence (the opposite of which is DISHEARTEN) that recalls the Wave-field and one’s experience of inclusion in a web of sensory relations while PRIDE AND SHAME are influences that act out of a notional (intellectual-logical abstracting) LOCAL CENTRE OF SELF (EGO). While the EAST in each of us keeps the former in a natural precedence over the latter, the WEST in each of us allows the latter to hijack the natural primacy of the former, putting (intellectual calculating based) PRIDE and SHAME ahead of relational-sensation-based INSPIRATION and ENNUI/DISHEARTENING. DIFFERENT CULTURES FORM ON THE BASIS OF WHICH OF THESE ‘DIPOLES’ ARE GIVEN PRECEDENCE OVER WHICH; I.E. THE DIFFERING CULTURES OF EAST AND WEST.
* * *
A Personal Insight and Reflections on the PATHOGEN Concept (e.g. COVID 19)
This is a story of an experience that was of value to me which was passed to me by others so I am just sharing it in case it can be of help to others. (POSTSCRIPT: It is now followed by more general reflective discussion)
It is really about how it is possible to understand ‘reality’ in the manner of an indigenous aboriginal, something that indigenous aboriginal friends such as Jacques Rainville (Abenaki-Quebecois) have suggested that I may have managed to articulate more effectively in WESTERN-CULTURE-SPEAK than is often the case with indigenous aboriginals whose understanding is far superior to mine but which may suffer severely from ‘running the gauntlet’ of translation into English.
You may not ‘accept’ this ‘indigenous aboriginal’ understanding of reality (which is supported by modern physics), which I will describe in this note, but my point is just to try to share it with you and to assure you that it is the reality that makes sense to me, and to indigenous aboriginal peoples, and it is open to any of us to accept as ‘reality’, … but when we do accept it, many of our understandings of reality depart from what we habitually take to be reality in our normal WESTERN CULTURE conditioned mindset. For example, the concept of ‘pathogens’ such as COVID 19, rapists, murderers, criminals etc. DISAPPEAR, and division into ‘conservatives’ (Republican viewpoint) and liberals (Democratic viewpoint) disappear.
What is common about these disappearances is that in the indigenous aboriginal and modern physics understanding of reality there are only RELATIONS and there are no BEINGS such as ‘human beings’, notionally with their own powers of sourcing actions and developments. That reality ‘gives way’ to the relational reality wherein some philosophers like Alan Watts have renamed every thing by putting an ‘ing’ suffix on the words so that ‘humans’ become ‘humanings’, meaning that we are part of something greater than ourselves (i.e the Wave-field aka the Tao aka the transforming relational continuum). This is the implication of ‘mitakuye oyasin’ (everything is related).
THE EAST-WEST SPLIT: REALITY IN TERMS OF TRANSFORMATION (EAST) VS GROWTH (WEST)
This comment on belief in GROWTH versus TRANSFORMATION points directly to the CRAZY-MAKER in WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENCE.
-1- Consider the ‘double error’ when we use the abstract concept of GROWTH in our language and grammar representations of ‘reality’.
We speak of the GROWTH of the land we have ‘under cultivation’ and what comes into the mind’s eye is a small field of grain, that is, from year to year, getting much larger, perhaps starting from a few acres in size and growing to over 100 acres in size.
What we don’t speak about is the chopping down of trees and removal of stumps and rocks and chasing out of gophers and foxes that is associated with our GROWING the size of the field of grain. It’s not that our proposition concerning the GROWTH of the field is NOT TRUE, it’s more like the surprise finding of Goedel’s theorem that all systems of logic are fundamentally INCOMPLETE. In other words, while our talk of the GROWTH of the farm is logically TRUE, such TRUTH is evidently an INCOMPLETE TRUTH because what is also involved in the same action is a SHRINKING of the WILDERNESS, the living space of wild animals and birds.
The talk of GROWTH of cultivated land evidently FAILS TO MENTION THIS OTHER ASPECT OF THE SAME REALITY, … which is the SHRINKAGE of ‘wilderness’ (uncultivated land).
IN REALITY, what is going on is TRANSFORMATION and there is no such thing as GROWTH. GROWTH is logical abstraction that is innately INCOMPLETE. This issue raises questions as to how our use of language and grammar captures SPACE and CONTENT (HABITAT and INHABITANT, FIGURE AND GROUND), or if there are such things. For example, the boil and flow distinction in the river bend may ‘appear’ to be separate things (the boil seems to enjoy persisting LOCAL PERSISTING BEING’ while the flow is purely relational transience).
There are questions here in regard to how we capture and reduce our voyeur visual observations to language and grammar. In particular, we are prone to the ‘double error’ as Nietzsche points out, where we are faced with capturing CHANGE as in TRANSFORMATION, in language and grammar; NOTE THAT TRANSFORMATION HAS NO LOCAL AUTHOR.
“Our judgement has us conclude that every change must have an author”;–but this conclusion is already mythology: it separates that which effects from the effecting. If I say “lightning flashes,” I have posited the flash once as an activity and a second time as a subject, and thus added to the event a being that is not one with the event but is rather fixed, “is” and does not “become.”–To regard an event as an “effecting,” and this as being, that is the double error, or interpretation, of which we are guilty.” – Nietzsche, ‘Will to Power’, 531
The double error of language and grammar allows us to capture TRANSFORMATION (in reduced form) in language. Why the double error reduction? Because TRANSFORMATION is the Wave-field dynamic which is EVERYWHERE AT THE SAME TIME, or in other words NONLOCAL and NONLOCAL DYNAMICS ARE INEFFABLE even though these ineffable-because-nonlocal dynamics are the reality of our actual sensory experience of inclusion in the Tao (Wave-field).
OK, … HERE’S WHERE EAST AND WEST SPLIT; i.e. on the approach to effable-izing the ineffable or in other words ‘LOCALIZING the NONLOCAL’.
PREFACE: This note is not what it may appear to be since I am posting it in a venue where the reader may expect to find the ‘normal’ WESTERN CULTURE assumptions on reality’ built into the rhetoric. In this case, however, where the author (moi) is coming from is the EASTERN or modern physics assumptions on reality; i.e. where reality is understood as inclusion, as relational forms, in the transforming relational continuum. In this latter understanding, we are NOT assuming ourselves to be name-instantiated LOCAL THINGS-IN-OURSELVES notionally equipped with EGO-based POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS. Those assumptions are the DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar, as pointed out by Nietzsche. It is those errors that ‘take us out’ (psychologically) of the Tao (the transforming relational continuum aka the ‘Wave-field’ and drop us into a world of empty space populated by notional LOCAL things-in-themselves with their own powers of sourcing actions and developments (the double error).
We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS continually reinforce this double error based illusion (delusion) through our continual use of language which repeats these abstract representations such as BIRTH and GROWTH and AGING and DEATH to us over and over again, so that we lose our grasp of the reality of our sensory experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum aka ‘the Tao’ aka the ‘Wave-field’.
We do this ‘dumbing down’ of reality for a good reason; i.e. because the Tao is ineffable and is beyond expression in language and grammar. Language and grammar can only be used to INFER the Tao which lies innately beyond reach of language and grammar. The ‘EAST’ accepts that language is only capable of INFERENCE of the true Tao that lies innately beyond capture in language and grammar (as Lao Tzu says; ‘the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao’). Meanwhile, the WEST, by which I mean us WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS, accepts the reductive representations of the Tao, of language and grammar, as the ‘operative reality’, so that for example, DUNING which is a Wavefield resonance phenomenon, is reduced with language and grammar to the ‘double error’ based terms of a NAMING instantiated thing” in itself with GRAMMAR given (notional) powers of SOURCING actions and developments (as Alan Watts points out, we do the same with ‘humaning’ as we do with ‘duning’). This reduction of purely relational resonance formings to intellectual local objects overcomes the ineffability that is innate in the transforming relational continuum (the Tao, the Wave-field) by abstractly establishing a LOCAL presence that can be used as the SOURCING POINT of actions and developments, thus ‘breaking into’ the seamless flowing continuum of the Tao (which makes it ineffable) and impute a LOCAL source of actions and development (the ‘double error’) WHICH “IS” EFFABLE.
This ‘effable-izing’ of the ineffable, for the practical purpose of being able to discuss and share and learn from a ‘crude reductive representation’ of the ineffable fluid reality (the Tao), is very useful as an INFERENCE of the Tao that lies innately beyond it. It is like a ladder that gives as an intuitive glimpse of that which cannot be explicitly articulated, … inference that WIttgenstein describes as a kind of intellectual approximation of the reality that, being in continual flux, is only accessible through intuitive inference. In this sense, it is like an intellectual ladder that can take us to where we can ‘glimpse’ an understanding that is beyond capture in the explicit representations of language and grammar;
6.54 My propositions are elucidatory in this way: he who understands me finally recognizes them as senseless, when he has climbed out through them, on them, over them. (He must so to speak throw away the ladder, after he has climbed up on it.)
He must surmount these propositions; then he sees the world rightly.
7.0 Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.
–Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico Philosophicus
So, this following NOTE on BIRTHDAYS and AGING, … which are backhanded ways of implying LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF BEINGS, notionally with POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS (the ‘double error’ of language and grammar as pointed out by Nietzsche), is intended to open up a view into the greater reality of the transforming relational continuum in which we, and everything is included, wherein there is no such thing as BIRTH and GROWTH and AGING and DEATH, … all of these abstract concepts are coming from the ‘double error’ constructs of language and grammar. They are commonly used for constructing effable representations of the ineffable, but only in the WEST are such effable representations accepted as the OPERATIVE REALITY, … while in the EAST, as in modern physics, … these double error based representations are employed as ‘ladders of inference’ that allow our intelligence to make a leap of inference to the ineffable insight that lies innately beyond the reach of effable representation.
The reason why modern physics and EASTERN CULTURE understanding of ‘reality’ coincide is because they are both understanding that the physical reality of our sensory experience cannot be reduced to explicit representation but is only accessible through relational inference; (e.g. as in ‘the Surprise version of the game of Twenty Questions’ of modern physics philosophers such as Geoffrey Chew, that allows us to approximate that which is purely relational and without a basis in LOCAL BEING, as is the general case in the Wave-field reality that we experience inclusion in. Bootstrapping is means of ‘effable-izing’ the ineffable (because purely relational).
“When you formulate a question, you have to have some basic concepts that you are accepting in order to formulate the question. But in the bootstrap approach, where the whole system represents a network of relationships without any firm foundation, the description of our subject can be begun at a great variety of different places. There isn’t any clear starting point. And the way our theory has developed in the last few years, we quite typically don’t know what questions to ask. We use consistency as the guide, and each increase in the consistency suggests something that is incomplete, but it rarely takes the form of a wel-ldefined question. We are going beyond the whole questionandanswer framework.”
Birthdays and GROWTH and AGING are abstractions that help to support the house of cards abstraction of the DOUBLE ERROR based pseudo-reality which is our WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT operative reality;
* * *
February 29th REFLECTIONS on the CONCEPT of BIRTHDAYS and AGING
This is just to share an explanation of ambivalent feelings on celebrating the ‘anniversary’ of a ‘birth-day’, and its connection with the EAST-WEST split.
To come straight to the point, and this is not hard to understand as evidenced by the fact that a large part of the world understands it implicitly (e.g. indigenous aboriginals, Taoists/Buddhists and Advaita Vedanta adherents, not to mention modern physicists such as Bohm, Schroedinger and also Nietzsche who got his modern physics preview from Roger Boscovich), … there is no such thing as ‘birth’ in the transforming relational continuum aka the Tao aka the Wavefield. ‘BIRTH’ is a binary logic-based concept wherein there is suddenly SOMETHING where there was up to that BIRTHING moment NOTHING. This binarization of relational transformation is ABSTRACTION that is given language and grammar-based representation in the WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT belief system..
Far more ‘real’ in terms of sentient experience is the understanding of reality in terms of RELATIONAL TRANSFORMATION wherein novelty is continually emerging in reciprocal relation to familiarity that is submerging. The continual outwelling of novelty and inwelling of familiarity are conjugate aspects of the one dynamic we call ‘flow’ or ‘transformation’.
In the WEST, but NOT in the EAST, the language and grammar-based REPRESENTATION of REALITY employs the abstract reductive concept of GROWTH. ‘GROWTH’ is planted in WESTERN MINDS like a cuckoo’s egg or ‘Trojan Horse’, that makes a clandestine entry into the natural family of things, hatching out and ejecting the natural inhabitants of the nest.
The concept of ‘growth’, as in the ‘growth’ of a ‘town’, as people stream into ‘it’ from all points of the compass is ONE-SIDED ABSTRACTION since there is no mention of the relational transformation this involves. If the sons and daughters of many families withdraw from their long-time family and friend relations and pack up and move to join in the growth of a new town, the ‘change-reality’ includes BOTH the LOSS of their relational participation where they were AND their contribution to the ‘GROWTH’ of the ‘new town’. The REALITY here is thus TRANSFORMATION of relational space rather than the GROWTH of a ‘new thing-in-itself’ (town).
“G R O W T H’ is the abstract INTRUDER that triggers in the WESTERN INTELLECT a reduction of the RELATIONAL understanding of REALITY in the double error based terms of name-instantiated things-in-themselves with grammar instantiated powers of SOURCING actions and developments.
THERE GOES REALITY UNDERSTOOD AS ‘RELATIONAL TRANSFORMATION’ AND HERE COMES REALITY UNDERSTOOD IN TERMS OF ‘GROWTH’. As relational forms gather and scatter in a Heraclitean evolutionary dynamic, WESTERN CULTURE reductionism RECASTS this relational transformation in the REDUCED terms of GROWTH of notional name-instantiated LOCAL things-in-themselves, notionally with their own powers of SOURCING actions and developments.
HERE IS WHERE EAST AND WEST UNDERSTANDINGS OF REALITY PART WAYS AND WHERE MODERN PHYSICS AFFIRMS THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE EAST.
THAT IS; REALITY IS ‘RELATIONAL TRANSFORMATION’ WHILE THE PSEUDO-REALITY OF ‘GROWTH’ DERIVES FROM THE ‘DOUBLE ERROR’ OF LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR’.
Should we understand reality as a world constituted by name-instantiated things-in-themselves with their own powers of sourcing actions and developments as in the WEST? Or, should we understand reality as inclusion within a transforming relational continuum as in the EAST and as in modern physics? In spite of the arrival of modern physics which supports the reality of the EAST, MODERN WESTERN CULTURE REALITY remains hung up on what Nietzsche terms as ‘the double error’ of language and grammar: … the first error being the use of language for ‘naming’ that imputes persisting thing-in-itself existence to visual flow-forms in the Tao including ‘humanings’ and the second (compounding) error being GRAMMAR that allows us to impute the powers of sourcing actions and development to the naming-instantiated thing-in-itself. Thanks to this language and grammar based ‘double error’, we are able to CONSTRUCT our WESTERN CULTURE abstraction-based ARTICULATE pseudo-reality.
As Bohm and Schroedinger point out, modern physics supports ‘reality’ as understood by indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taosim/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta; i.e.in the NONLOCAL terms of the transforming relational continuum. By contrast, the WESTERN CULTURE UNDERSTANDING OF REALITY continues to be in terms of LOCAL things-in-themselves-with-notional powers of sourcing actions and developments (the double error). The double error based concepts of; … the PRODUCER-PRODUCT dynamic, GROWTH, and EVOLUTION, all support a ‘double error’ conceptualizing of reality in terms of SORCERY (local sourcing of actions and developments).
While WEST associates reality with LOCAL SOURCING OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS, EAST associates reality with NONLOCAL TRANSFORMATION. Modern physics reaffirms the reality of the EAST and rejects the assumed LOCAL SOURCING reality of the WEST, however, the WESTERN CULTURE belief in LOCAL SOURCING OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS is ‘LOCKED IN BY HIGH SWITCHING COSTS’. This ‘lock-in’ has been established through many centuries of the WESTERN CULTURE practice of rewards and punishments associated with belief that ‘forms-in-the-Tao are LOCAL things-in-themselves-with-their-own-powers of sourcing actions and developments (the ‘double error’). How this ego-based delusional practice is a CRAZY-MAKER that permeates the WESTERN CULTURE social dynamic, is explored herein;
* * * END OF INTRODUCTION * * *
Something big is stirring in the WESTERN CULTURE SOCIAL COLLECTIVE. It manifests in the Republican-Democratic polarization in the United States (and in the general WESTERN CULTURE conservative-liberal polar antagonism). It manifests in the Indigenous Aboriginal actions in Canada that are interrupting transnational rail traffic.
This ‘stirring’ associates with our different ways of understanding of ‘reality’ as with duality and non-duality; the self-other split, the inhabitant-habitat split, the figure-and-ground split which divides EASTERN and WESTERN understandings of ‘reality’, We may be divided within ourselves or among ourselves by dual options of understanding ‘the Two and the One’ (as explored in Eliade’s Mephistopheles et l’Androgyne’). Are self-and-other as with boil-and-flow ONE THING with a dual appearance, or ‘two things’ as language and grammar make them out to be? How we understand this splits EAST and WEST.
The EASTERN understanding of ‘reality’ (figure and ground as ONE) is consistent with modern physics, indigenous aboriginal reality, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta.
The WESTERN understanding of ‘reality’ (figure and ground as TWO) is what Newton used to precipitate Newtonian physics (see Benjamin Whorf’ review of this).
What is tricky for WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS to ‘remember’, but which is the pivot between understanding of reality in the NONLOCAL-FLUID terms of the EAST or the LOCAL-EXPLICIT-BEING based terms of the WEST, is that language and grammar REDUCE reality that is innately INEFFABLE in order to contrive an EFFABLE and thus shareable (albeit by way of an approximating reduction) allusion to’ the INEFFABLE reality of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.
In the current WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT social dynamic that predominates in the global social dynamic, there is widespread belief in the ‘reality’ of double error language and grammar constructs, as pointed out by Nietzsche.
The first error is where we use the language based ploy of NAMING to infer LOCAL independent existence to a relational form (all there is in the transforming relational continuum aka Tao, is relational ‘formings’). The second error (GRAMMAR) conflates the first by imputing the power of sourcing actions and developments to the NAMING-INSTANTIATED THING-IN-ITSELF. Thus, the purely relational resonance phenomenon of desert sand DUNING is REDUCED by way of the ‘double error’ to an abstract LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF terms a “DUNE” that GRAMMAR ‘animates’ so as to impute to it, ‘its own powers of sourcing actions and developments. Thus we use language end grammar to build an ANIMATION wherein the DUNE becomes something we see (in our intellectual linguistic pseudo-reality constructions) as having its own powers of sourcing actions and developments.
HOORAY! LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR give our intellects the capability of REDUCING the ineffable-because-IMPLICIT, NONLOCAL-RELATIONAL TRANSFORMATION, … to something (artificial yet articulable) LOCAL AND EXPLICIT. The HOORAY is because this ‘double error’ reduction allows us reduce the inarticulable to the articulable and thus to share (albeit in reduced rom) our ineffable experience of inclusion in the Tao.