Archive for June, 2019
How Western Culture “being-based reality” Usurps The Natural Primacy of “relational resonance-based reality”.0
RESONANCE based reality:
Three levels of experiencing resonance;
-1- sensory experiencing of resonance as in inclusion in vibration,
-2- visualizing resonance as in wave motion (e.g. duning as rippling), … and
-3- intellectually ‘snap-shotting’ visual imagery of transient ripple-forms so as to ‘capture’ them in a picture and identify the ‘picture’ with a ‘name’ (e.g. the name ‘dune’).
Sensory experience of resonance (1) is ‘ineffable’ in that it is innately beyond visual or other explicit means of capture and representation,, … however, (2) resonance manifests ‘indirectly’ by way of visible form as in duning where sand flows like ‘waves’ within the resonance (the duning waves are secondary to the resonance; i.e. they are NOT ‘the resonance’ but ‘infer’ the deeper reality of a resonance field that is inducing the rippling or ‘duning’ that makes the not-directly-visible wavefield manifest (e.g. as in a Kundt’s tube demonstration), … , … (3) ‘Snapshotting’ the ‘image’ of a rippling allows us to examine ‘a ripple’ as if the ‘ripple’ or ‘duning’ were a fixed entity existing as a ‘thing-in-itself’, a psychological impression that language allows us to abstractly concretize by ‘naming’.
Language and grammar are devices that stimulate psychological impressions, and Western culture adherents use ‘naming’ to impute abstract ‘thing-in-itself existence’ (i.e. persisting existence) to resonance based forms such as ‘ripplings’, hence the naming of an intrinsically evanescent but visually persisting long enough for snap-shotting and naming ‘dune’ puts the wielder of language and grammar in the position of being able to RECONSTRUCT resonance from the reduced basis of snapshot images that have been ‘name-labelled’ and RE-presented as ‘things-in-themselves’ whereupon they can be ‘re-animated’ with grammar so as to give the intellectually active mind (stimulated by language and grammar) an intuitive understanding of the ineffable phenomenon of ‘resonance’ in terms of language-and-naming instantiated ‘things-in-themselves’ conflated with grammar-instantiated powers of sourcing actions and developments.
The latter (in italics) is the ‘double error’ that we Western culture adherents are in the habit of making which Nietzsche identified as a chronic source of aberrant thinking in Western culture adherents.
This reduction of resonance as in ‘duning’, by means of language and grammar, to notional ‘things-in-themselves with powers of sourcing actions and developments’, opens the door to INVENTING REALITY (intellectually in the mind) in a reduced ‘mechanistic’ visual picturable ‘double error’ based representation, dropping out the fundamental reality of ‘resonance’ (which comes with sensory experience but which is ineffable and not capturable in visual picture form).
Our Western culture adherents’ employing of this ‘dumbed down’ visual picturable ‘double error’ based version of reality, while useful to us for purposes of crudely (linguistically) sharing our experience, is, where (MIS)taken as the ‘operative reality’, the source of delusion and social psychopathology.
‘Reality’ that is not based on ‘resonance’ (wave dynamics) is NOT ‘reality’ but intellectual contrivance that serves only to construct a shareable, but greatly ‘reduced’ (simplified) INVENTED REALITY. By ‘greatly reduced reality’, I am referring to the fact that the ‘double error’, imputes ‘thing-in-itself’ based ‘sorcery’ to be the animating agency of reality, (rather than relational transformation). Because there is an innate ambiguity in sorcery-based reality invention, it divides people on the basis of whether the ‘source’ is the ‘individual’ (conservative) or the ‘collective’ (liberal). This is an argument that divides Western culture sorcery-believers (Western culture is built from belief in sorcery aka ‘product-product abstraction). Since there is no such thing in the reality of our actual experience as ‘sorcery’ (i.e. language and grammar can be used to serve up an abstract ‘intellectual’ impression of ‘sorcery’). This intellectual abstraction is also termed the ‘producer-product dynamic’. The Western culture social division and argumentation set up by this (a) belief in the abstraction of ‘sorcery’, and (b) division of belief in ‘sorcery’ into two camps, one which believes in the individual as the source and another which believes in the collective as the source. Both sides of the argument; conservative and liberal, are ‘tilting at windmills’ since there is no such thing as ‘sorcery’ in the reality of our actual experience.
It’s not like this ‘double error’ has not been publicly and openly ‘brought to light’; it has been clearly stated by Nietzsche along with the pitfalls associated with it. The following two quotes from Nietzsche (a) point to the basic ‘double error’ problem, and (b) how this error impacts our psyche and gives rise to ego as associates with belief in one’s ‘power of sorcery’;
“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
* * *
“In its origin language belongs in the age of the most rudimentary form of psychology. We enter a realm of crude fetishism when we summon before consciousness the basic presuppositions of the metaphysics of language, in plain talk, the presuppositions of reason. Everywhere it sees a doer and doing; it believes in will as the cause; it believes in the ego, in the ego as being, in the ego as substance, and it projects this faith in the ego-substance upon all things — only thereby does it first create the concept of “thing.” Everywhere “being” is projected by thought, pushed underneath, as the cause; the concept of being follows, and is a derivative of, the concept of ego. In the beginning there is that great calamity of an error that the will is something which is effective, that will is a faculty. Today we know that it is only a word.” – Nietzsche, ‘Twilight of the Idols’
The points to remember here are;
See also, in this trilogy, in addition to this article ‘Overview of How Western Culture Breeds Psychosis;
* * *
In plain terms, the source of aberrant thinking derives from ‘the double error’ (Nietzsche) of language and grammar that is ‘built in’ to Western language and grammar. This double error has us believing in ‘sorcery’.
Instead of understanding reality as in modern physics, through experiencing inclusion within the transforming relational continuum, reality in Western culture is understood ‘intellectually’, through everyday language and grammar discourse, in the ‘double error’ terms of name-instantiated things-in-themselves, notionally with powers of sourcing actions and developments (‘sorcery’).
In reality as understood NOT as in the Western culture mainstream’s ‘operative reality’, but in modern physics, indigenous aboriginal, Taoist/Buddhist and Advaita Vedanta cultures, visible, tangible ‘forms’ are NOT understood as local, solid material ‘things-in-themselves, but as relational features in the flow (Tao) which can be thought in the same sort of sense as sand ‘duning’. Language and grammar allow us to reduce the intrinsically relational phenomenon of ‘duning’ to terms of ‘dunes’, notional things-in-themselves that are no longer resonance based features in the overall flow (transforming relational continuum).
WHAT THIS IS ABOUT: (i.e. ‘A Concise Account of how Western Culture Breeds Psychosis‘)
The world dynamic is characterized by many tensions arising from political, religious and philosophical differences. This note is to introduce a philosophical discussion entitled; “A concise account of how Western culture breeds psychosis”
The viewpoint aligns with modern physics and is thus very different from the viewpoint that evidently dominates in shaping current Western culture social dynamics. For example this viewpoint conforms with the understanding of reality found in indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta. The language and grammar stimulated source of this difference in the understanding of reality is explored in the article.
The following is a brief introduction/overview of the article;
* * *
According to modern physics, reality is a dynamic relational field (‘the Tao’), a transforming relational continuum including everything, ourselves included. This field may be thought of in terms of ‘resonances within resonances’ and we, ourselves, may think of ourselves as resonance within ‘the Resonance’ (the Tao).
Reality, as thus understood, is in continual flux and is ‘ineffable’ i.e.
“The Tao that can be told is not the true Tao” – Lao Tzu
“Of that which we cannot speak, we must pass over in silence”. – Wittgenstein
This ‘reality’ is ineffable; i.e. it is relational transformation wherein ‘everything is in continuing flux’ (Heraclitus). Because language makes use of explicit terms (‘names’) that signify things-in-themselves with persisting existence (forms that are NOT in flux, or ‘structures’ rather than ‘processes’), such linguistic utterances, being explicit, cannot directly refer to ‘reality’. Words signifying ‘things-in-themselves’ (abstractions in a world of flow) can only serve as expedients which can, with the help of grammar’, indirectly allude to ‘flow’ and thus to the basic reality as understood in modern physics.
This note is a summary of the findings of the psychological investigations that have been shared on this ‘Aboriginal Physics’ website.
Warning: Understanding how language and grammar, as used in Western culture, is at the bottom of this ‘Culture Against Man’ phenomenon (as Jules Henri put it) requires the reader’s close vigilance since the language that is hiding self-deception within it, is the same language I am using herein to explain Western culture language and grammar based self-deception.
“REPRODUCTION” is pure abstraction that has no place in the reality of our actual experience
There is no such thing as ‘reproduction’, it is language and grammar invoked intellectual abstraction. Experientially, there is only relational transformation. ‘Production’ refers to ‘products’ understood as ‘structures’. There are no ‘structures’ in ‘process’ where ‘process’ is a transforming relational continuum. ‘Structures’ are the intellectual abstractions; artifacts of language and grammar.
The following DISCUSSION develops the conceptual background needed to explore this mistaken belief in ‘reproduction’. The distinction between ‘structure’ and ‘process’ plays a key role. ‘Reproduction’ refers to the ‘replicating of a particular structure’ but ‘structures’ are intellectual abstractions that do not ‘really exist’ in a fluid, process based world. The world as understood in modern physics is a transforming relational continuum; i.e. a world without ‘structures’ since it is a world where everything is in continuing relational flux wherein ‘structures’ are NOT REAL but are abstractions based on ‘snapshot visual appearance’ of relational forms-in-flow. Visual ‘snapshotting’ ‘freezes’ the flow-forms and plays the same role as ‘naming’; i.e. the name persists in the psyche and keeps repeating the same definition over and over again to us, just as a visual ‘snapshot’ keeps repeating to us the same ‘thing-in-itself’ image to us over and over again.
Once we name the continuously transforming flow form (hurricane) ‘Katrina’, the persistence of the name ERRONEOUSLY implies the persistent ‘being’ of a structure where, in fact, there is only ‘process’. We conflate this first error of name-instantiating the abstraction of a local thing-in-itselfness by a second error of grammar that erroneously imputes to the first error (the name-instantiating ‘existence’ of a thing-in-itself structure ), its own powers of sourcing actions and development.
This ‘double error’ is embedded in Western culture language usage so it it difficult to escape from it within Western culture language using social collectives since we keep repeating this ‘double error’ to ourselves over and over again.
The remembrance of war, … the tragedy, the suffering and sacrifice, the joy and celebration of re-establishing peace and harmony is, like all things, open to understanding in terms of either substance or process*, the material facts or the relational unfolding, … where ego swells the head over our victory as the good defeating evil, or where inspiration fills the heart as dissonance transforms into harmony. [* https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/process-philosophy/]
Remembrance of war brings out Culture-based differences in psychological interpretation that divide West and East — Christianity/Judaism/Islam and Western secular belief, …. from indigenous aboriginal, Taoist-Buddhist and Advaita Vedanta Eastern belief. The nature and ramifications of this difference between understanding reality by way of process versus substance in the case of ‘Remembrance’ is the topic of this note.
— A Language and Grammar induced “psychological wormhole” between TWO REALITIES (East & West), (Nietzsche & Newton), (Sanity & Sorcery)
Are you ready to travel through the wormhole? It is a safe ‘return trip’ that can be repeated so that you can use it any time.
Be advised that “I can take you there but I cannot show you the way.” That is; “The Tao that can be told is not the true Tao” – Lao Tzu
HERE WE GO!
It may seem incongruous to write an introduction to an article that has been worked on to be made as condensed and complete in itself as one can make it, but perhaps there is merit in using two views, one speaking as a voyeur of some complex phenomenon, and a second where the voyeur re-situates so as to add dimensionality to the first view by adding a view from within it. As a tour-guide, one spends most of the time pointing and talking about ‘what is out there’ in front of us, but what we are sensing/experiencing as we participate in the guided tour is being involuntarily captured and could also be shared in a memoir. The tour guide needs to be objective and focused mainly on ‘what is out there’ but all the while he is included in a relational experience which he might recount later in stories of ‘my life as a tour guide’. Such double entry book-keeping has been suggested as a general approach to group discussions wherein, in the left hand column one records one’s actual comments, and in the right-hand column, one records ones inner thoughts arising as one is speaking, something that we normally do not share as our private thoughts can be X-rated or critical of sacred/revered works or of others in the group.
In any case, we do have these two sources of expression, our deliberate, openly shared intellectual expression as in knowledge-sharing,… and our situational experience induced private thoughts that we ‘edit out’. The evident need for integration of the objective fact and the associated subjective emotions is suggested in Ernst Mach’s ‘Analysis of Sensations’ and it is a constantly ‘felt need’ in my sharing of ‘psychological investigations’. As Mach observes;
“The science of psychology is auxiliary to physics. The two mutually support one another, and it is only when they are united that a complete science is formed. From our standpoint, the antithesis of subject and object in the ordinary sense, does not exist.” — Ernst Mach – The Analysis of Sensations, and the Relation of the Physical to the Psychical.
My thought is that bringing into connective confluence what we are feeling as we are using language in rational communications mode could help to overcome the incompleteness of language-based communications relative to relational experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.