Archive for June, 2020
INTRODUCTION: Systems Sciences Pioneer Kenneth Boulding is the source of the statement; ‘The Name of the Devil is Suboptimization’. This refers to the reality that we live within a world of relational interdependencies that our WESTERN CULTURE has turned a blind eye to in our anthropocentric suboptimization where we shut off acknowledging the essential reality of ‘all is related’.
NAMING plays a key role in this abstract anthropocentric ‘declaration of independence’. That is, NAMING is a language based DECLARATION of the LOCAL, INDEPENDENT EXISTENCE of the NAMED phenomenon, no matter how NONLOCAL and INTERDEPENDENT it may be. Suboptimization is encouraged by NAMING a ‘system’ that is NOT REALLY a LOCAL, INDEPENDENT SYSTEM-IN-ITSELF but is in fact a resonance-sustained confluence of relational interdependencies Suboptimization, because it MISTAKENLY assumes the INDEPENDENCE of the subsystem being optimized, can induce the degeneration of overall systemic resonance into dissonance, the price paid for ‘suboptimizing’ an assumed-independent-system which is, in reality, relationally interdependent. Shakespeare’s metaphor of the ‘POUND OF FLESH’ in ‘The Merchant of Venice’ is a kind of ‘archetype’ for the WESTERN CULTURE practice of ‘suboptimization’ as in monocultural agriculture, where we carve a square plot out of a complex mutually supporting ecosystemic landscape, inserting in its place a geometric, monocultural wheat-field. We may even kill the diversity with herbicide to make way for the monoculture.
Such suboptimization is a radical departure from multiculture-diversity-sustaining development characteristic of nature, and from the land cultivating approach of indigenous peoples which acknowledges that natural life lives in the intersecting confluence of mutually-supportive relational diversity. F. David Peat, modern physics co-researcher with David Bohm, in his book Blackfoot Physics, points out how indigenous cultures acknowledged that ‘everything is relationally dependent’ (‘mitakuye oyasin’), employing agriculture in a multicultural approach; e.g. the Mohawk people’s cultivating of the Three Sisters; beans, squash and corn in acknowledgement of the importance of relational synergy deriving from diversity.
Suboptimization assumes that it is possible to split FIGURE (subsystem) and GROUND (system) into TWO, however, in Nature, FIGURE (subsystem) and GROUND (system) are only ONE, and so it is also in the Wave-field understanding, SELF-and-OTHER (SUBJECT and OBJECT) are only ONE, which implies that sub-optimizing environmental supportive conditions for our wrongly-presumed ‘independent’ (mono-cultural ‘human’) self, creates problems for our ‘real self’ which is inextricably, relationally included in the overall Wave-dynamic aka the Tao. The understanding that the relational dynamic of Nature does NOT split into separate and independent subsystems as NAMING and GRAMMAR so easily portray it, is foundational in Boulding’s aphorism; ‘The Name of the Devil is Suboptimization’. Suboptimization is an abstract concept that we have given a foundational role to in our WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT social dynamic, leading to psychological confusion that manifests in ‘anthropocentrism’ and ‘racism’.
* * * END of INTRODUCTION * * *
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you… This could be compared to the ‘source-receiver duality in Newtonian physics. It’s what we come up with in language and grammar based on FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO (i.e. SELF-OTHER-as-TWO)
Taken literally, it is an IMPLICIT way of infusing belief in an abstract binary structure of reality. It is like ‘forgiveness’ which is a back-handed way of reducing NONLOCAL relational dissonance to LOCAL SOURCING of PATHOLOGICAL actions and development.
In the reality of our sensory experience, FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE as in modern physics (i.e. SUBJECT-and-OBJECT-are-ONE, … and SELF-and-OTHER-are ONE).
“The world is given to me only once, not one existing and one perceived. Subject and object are only one. The barrier between them cannot be said to have broken down as a result of recent experience in the physical sciences, for this barrier does not exist.” – Erwin Schroedinger
Therefore, the behavioural ethic becomes, … move within the transforming relational continuum so as to cultivate relational harmony (move so as to dissolve the cultivating of relational dissonance). We do this in the flow of freeway traffic when the traffic is heavy and the relative moving of vehicles becomes our fluid guide rather than the fixed guide-lines painted on the ‘roadway’. We can sustain harmony in this relative fluid sense whether driving in a fleet of dune-buggies over the desert or wherever.
In general, our moves can only be relative. Therefore, we do not ‘have your own moves’ and there is only the NONLOCAL while LOCAL has no meaning. This NONLOCALITY which is the ‘real reality’ is not capturable ‘as-is’ in language (language makes use of LOCAL concepts which fall innately short of capturing the NONLOCAL). That is, the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL can be REDUCED and made language-effable using the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR where NAMING is used to establish LOCAL thing-in-itself BEING and GRAMMAR is used to impute the LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments.
The ‘DOUBLE ERROR’ is the ‘trick’ we use to make language based REPRESENTATION of our fluid reality (the Wave-field aka ‘the Tao) possible. The FIRST ERROR is NAMING of a flow-form to ‘isolate it’ from the transforming relational flow-continuum (e.g. ‘DUNING’ which is a resonance phenomenon that we REDUCE to “DUNE”) so that what is actually a NONLOCAL phenomenon is RE-presented as coming from something LOCAL. The SECOND ERROR is GRAMMAR wherein we impute to the LOCAL thing-in-itself that we create with NAMING, ITS OWN notional power of SOURCING actions and developments (e.g. the DUNE is growing higher and longer and is shifting across the desert floor).
Thanks to our application of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, we have REDUCED (but only in our language-stimulated intellectual abstracting) the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT resonance phenomenon of “DUNING” to something EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT.
Within the actual Wave-field, everything is fluid and forms are relational and resonance-based. So, there is good reason why EASTERN CULTURE’s ‘Zen’ recommends adding an ‘ing’ suffix to all NAMES (nouns) to remind ourselves that FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE, … NOT TWO as in “EITHER DUNE” “OR DESERT”, or “EITHER HUMAN-INHABITANT” or “HABITAT’ (i.e. there is DUNING and HUMANING within the transforming relational continuum).
In other words, we have TWO CHOICES of LOGIC for constructing our representations of REALITY, the WESTERN CULTURE habitual EITHER/OR logic of the EXCLUDED medium wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO, … and the Quantum physics BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDED medium wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE.
DUNING is a feature within the TRANSFORMING Wave-field space. Because it is NONLOCAL (resonance based and thus purely relational) and IMPLICIT), it is INEFFABLE; i.e there is no ‘IT’ there as we can’t find a beginning and ending of it; it is as if the land is SMILING or WRINKLING or TRANSFORMING so that while we can use language to speak of ‘a LOCAL SMILE’ or ‘a LOCAL WRINKLE’, the overall transforming landscape is what is the most basic REALITY. “WRINKLING” of the land is how TRANSFORMATION manifests and while we can use the NAMING and GRAMMAR DOUBLE ERROR capability of language to reduce ‘what is going on’ to “‘the DUNE’ that is growing higher and longer and is shifting across the “DESERT FLOOR”, all of this is abstraction concocted for the purpose of reducing the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT to the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT.
What the hell is the ‘DESERT FLOOR’?
AUTHOR’s PROLOGUE: Western Language-Induced Bipolar Disorder
This essay has been written from the point of view that popular WESTERN CULTURE investigation of ‘psychological disorder’ HAS ITS LADDER UP THE WRONG WALL, as suggested by Cochrane and Sashidharan among others;
From the outset it will be clear that most of the research in this field has followed the conventional epidemiological or medical paradigm by focusing on mental ill health as the dependent variable. It is, therefore, not surprising that there is a lack of empirically grounded research on mental well-being or the psychological resilience and survival of minority groups in this country” — R. Cochrane (University of Birmingham) and S. P. Sashidharan (North Birmingham Mental Health Trust) in ‘Mental Health and Ethnic Minorities’
That is, if the investigation orients to ‘what is wrong with this person?’, it is unlikely to deliver answers to the larger question of ‘what is wrong with us?’ (as a social-relational collective). Jill Astbury raises the same question in ‘Crazy for You: The Making of Women’s Madness’ in her inquiry into the World Health Organization study showing that women have twice the incidence of ‘affective disorders’ (depression, bipolar disorder etc.) as men;
“The research stemming from this viewpoint had a systemic blindness. It could literally not see what it was doing, as the normative quality of its own presuppositions had made them invisible.” – Jill Astbury
In other words, by orienting the investigation to … ‘what is wrong with these ‘canaries’, we are doing the equivalent of investigating what is wrong with the oddly behaving miner’s canary out of the context of the variations in the ambient conditions (e.g. the web of relations) they are included in. So long as we pride ourselves on our ability to push on forward no matter how our actions may be cultivating a more toxic ‘normal’ ambiance (“when the going gets tough, the tough get going”), the more sensitive among us will progressively experience ‘breakdown’ (made less visible through pharmaceutical “numb-down”), a signal that should give us cause for reflection on ‘where we are going’ so that we do not put our children on a bus trip to hell.
The “ticket’ for such a “bus trip to hell” by way of Bipolar Disorder’ comes in the form of a ‘Declaration of Independence’ , the WESTERN CULTURE EGO-DEFINING ABSTRACTION which ‘makes sense’ only where intended in a relational context wherein the INDEPENDENCE is in terms of relational associations within the ONE Great Harmony (the Wave-field) where FIGURE and GROUND are ONE and NOT in the EGO based abstract sense of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO where the FIGURE is DECLARED INDEPENDENT of the GROUND, a conceptualization of reality which builds BIPOLAR DISORDER into WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENCE.
When does an ILLUSION become a DELUSION? … ANSWER: When we employ it as our operative reality.
Nietzsche’s example the “DOUBLE ERROR” of ‘LIGHTNING FLASHES’ and Nishitani’s example of ‘FIRE BURNS’ illustrate how we can use language and grammar to construct representations that ‘BREAK INTO’ the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL dynamics of Wave-field reality (aka ‘the Tao’, aka ‘the transforming relational continuum’).
As David Bohm points out, our sensory experience is of inclusion in THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM (the Wave-field) which is an experience that language can only imply but CANNOT EXPLICITLY CAPTURE since the Wave-field is in flux everywhere-at-the-same-time.
That is, the Wave-field “IS” TRANSFORMATION which is purely RELATIONAL so in order to use the reductive tool of language to even approximately capture TRANSFORMATION, we employ language in a REDUCTIVE, DOUBLE ERROR mode, using notional NAMING-instantiated things-in-themselves with GRAMMAR-instantiated powers of SOURCING actions and developments. This DOUBLE ERROR mode of language captures EFFABLE-because-LOCAL representations of the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL dynamic of TRANSFORMATION.
For example, ’DUNING’ is a resonance phenomenon which is NONLOCAL which our INTELLECT can reduce to LOCAL geometric forms that we call DUNES, opening the way to our INVERTING of the dynamics of REALITY with language and grammar, imputing LOCAL BEING with the word “DUNE” and notionally endowing this intellectually-fabricated abstraction with “ITS” OWN POWERS of movement and development as in the language and grammar construct; ‘The DUNE is growing higher and longer and is shifting towards the ocean’. This is the DOUBLE ERROR in action; i.e. in its intellectual-representation-conditioning action.
We can’t build a city in the same Wilderness twice for the Wilderness is not the same Wilderness and the city is not the same city.
(Shifting understanding from Euclidian space to Spherical space)
The proposition “We can’t build a city in the same Wilderness twice for the Wilderness is not the same Wilderness and the city is not the same city” flags a difference in how we understand reality associated with differing conceptualizations of space. (Spherical space is not the same as Euclidian space; i.e. In the (spherical) space of our sensory experience, as the cultivated area grows, the Wilderness area reciprocally shrinks; i.e This is NEITHER GROWTH nor SHRINKAGE per se (i.e. GROWTH and SHRINKAGE are both flatspace concepts), it is TRANSFORMATION (‘TRANSFORMATION’ is a more ‘dimensionally-competent’ spherical space conceptualization).
BOTTOM LINE: Based on the testimony of our real-life sensory experience, there is no such thing as GROWTH, there is only TRANSFORMATION.
‘GROWTH’ depends on the abstract concept of LOCAL (i.e. a locally existing thing-in-itself as the ‘stub’ that is undergoing ‘GROWTH’.
‘GROWTH’ is simpler than TRANSFORMATION because it makes an abstract splitting between content and container or ‘inhabitant’ and ‘habitat’ which conjures up the abstract concept of LOCAL existence so that we can develop a simpler system of language and grammar to represent change LOCALLY as with the INHABITANT without having to deal, AT THE SAME TIME, with simultaneous changes in the HABITAT as is the case with TRANSFORMATION.
That is, because we can notionally SEPARATE AND ISOLATE the FIGURE from the GROUND as if they were TWO separate things (i.e. as if the INHABITANT and the HABITAT were TWO separate things), … we can reduce the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL to the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL.
TRANSFORMATION is IMPLICIT and INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL. Our sensory experience is of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum (the Wave-field/the Tao). TRANSFORMATION implies FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE.
GROWTH is EXPLICIT and EFFABLE-because-LOCAL. Our intellectual representations are constructed from visual observations that reduce the NONLOCAL to the LOCAL (e.g. DUNING which is resonance that is inherently NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT is reduced to DUNE which is LOCAL and EXPLICIT) by the FOCUSING power of visual closed-form perception concretized by NAMING, and re-animated with the intellectual conceptualizing of GRAMMAR which imputes the POWER of SOURCING of GROWTH and MOVEMENT to the NAMING-instantiated thing-in-itself, ‘DUNE’. This is the “DOUBLE ERROR” of language and grammar pointed out by Nietzsche where we reduce TRANSFORMATION wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE to GROWTH wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO.
Out of this DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR arises the abstract intellectual splitting of DUNING (FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE) into DUNE-and-DESERT (FIGURE and GROUND as TWO). The ONE dynamic of TRANSFORMATION is thus intellectually RE-presented by way of the DOUBLE ERROR as TWO separate DYNAMICS; that of “THE INHABITANT” and that of “THE HABITAT”. Note that in modern physics, as in indigenous aboriginal cultures, INHABITANT-and-HABITAT-are-ONE (i.e. The ONE is the all-including Transforming Wave-field continuum aka ‘the Tao’).
THE DOUBLE ERROR as the source of AMBIGUITY
Not only does the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR reduce the NONLOCAL-and-thus-INEFFABLE TRANSFORMATION to the LOCAL-and-thus-EFFABLE LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments, it does so AMBIGUOUSLY.
A picture held us captive. And we could not get outside it, for it lay in our language and language seemed to repeat it to us inexorably. –-Wittgenstein – Philosophical Investigations.
Positive assertions such as “FIRE BURNS” establish the “localness” of actions and developments, as in the DOUBLE ERROR combination of NAMING and GRAMMAR. It is a DOUBLE ERROR, as Nietzsche points out, because NAMING imputes LOCAL thing-in-itself BEING (an abstraction which is not supported by sense-experience reality) and GRAMMAR is a device by which we impute the power of SOURCING actions and developments to the NAMING-instantiated LOCAL thing-in-itself BEING. What began as TRANSFORMATION as in seasonal desiccating of the vegetation-laden landscape and its breaking out in a rash of lightning-ignited patches of combusting vegetation, is REDUCED, thanks to the DOUBLE ERROR, to a NUMBER of LOCAL FIRES that ‘are BURNING’.
To say that FIRE BURNS or that LIGHTNING FLASHES or that I GROW is a DOUBLE ERROR as Nietzsche has pointed out which imputes LOCAL BEING based SOURCING of actions and development, abstract constructions that we SUBSTITUTE for the relational transformation we experience inclusion in. Notice how TRANSFORMATION which is INTRINSICALLY “NONLOCAL” and thus INEFFABLE is replaced by the abstract “LOCAL” and thus EFFABLE by the employing of the DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar.
“I AM GROWING” is an effective “DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENT LOCAL BEING” that ABSTRACTLY (in our intellectual constructing of reality) SPLITS US OUT OF the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM and GRAMMATICALLY endows us (in the intellectual constructions of our mind) with our own LOCAL powers of actions and development. Within this DOUBLE ERROR, not only do we make ourselves out to be LOCAL and INDEPENDENT BEINGS, we make ourselves out as having our own POWERS of LOCAL SELF-SOURCING of actions and development.
Nietzsche delves into this as follows in ‘The Will to Power’;
Modern physics informs us that reality is inclusion in the transforming relational continuum which is like living within a hologram; i.e. living within TRANSFORMATION (the Wave-field).
Note that what is intended here is NOT ‘living within a ‘continually transforming world’, because THERE IS NO “WORLD”, there is only TRANSFORMATION. In other words, TRANSFORMATION IS THE WORLD.
If we FIRST presume there is a WORLD that contains many things, including ourselves, then we are screwing up all possibility of getting to an understanding of reality as in modern physics and indigenous aboriginal cultures.
FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE, … is the basic reality of the Wave-field (and hologram), while FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO is the abstract REPRESENTATION we construct with language and grammar based DOUBLE ERROR. The FIRST ERROR is NAMING which imputes (within the intellect) the LOCAL existence of a thing-in-itself (e.g. DUNE) and the SECOND ERROR, which conflates the first, is GRAMMAR that imputes to the NAMING-instantiated thing-in-itself, the power of SOURCING actions and developments. (e.g. the DUNE is growing higher and longer and is shifting across the ‘desert floor’).
Note that in imputing ontological independence and the power of independent movement to ‘the DUNE’ (or ‘HUMAN’ or ‘TOWN’ or etc.) we invoke BINARY LOGIC as in FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO independently existing ontologies wherein the FIGURE can roam about in the GROUND or in other words the INHABITANT can roam about in the HABITAT.
That, as Nietzsche points out, is a DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar. It is also the birth of SORCERY in the sense that this DOUBLE ERROR imputes the independent action and development (growth) of the FIGURE that is perceived as independent of the GROUND.
In modern physics, as in indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta, FIGURE -and-GROUND-are-ONE, as is also the case with the hologram, hence Bohm’s Holographic Universe.
This is the CULTURE-DIVIDER wherein us WESTERN CULTURE adherents hold that FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO as in PRODUCER-PRODUCT dynamics while the EASTERN CULTURE, along with modern physics, holds that FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE as in TRANSFOMATION.
Our WESTERN CULTURE fosters belief in SORCERY. This belief in SORCERY comes with the DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar, described by Nietzsche, the FIRST ERROR is the use of NAMING to impute local thing-in-itself existence to whatever relational feature in the transforming flow-continuum is given the NAME; e.g. person, nation, corporation, bacterium, virus etc. The SECOND ERROR is GRAMMAR that imputes the power of LOCAL SOURCING to the NAMING-instantiated (notional) thing-in-itself, hence ‘LIGHTNING FLASHES’ (Nietzsche) and FIRE BURNS (Nishitani).
This DOUBLE ERROR allows us to use language and grammar to LOCALLY JUMPSTART ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS; i.e. to ‘break into the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL flow-continuum’ aka the Wave-field aka ‘the Tao’ and reductively render it in EFFABLE-because-LOCAL terms. For example, the familiar resonance phenomenon that manifests as DUNING is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL but we can use the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR to reduce it to “the DUNE’ that ‘grows higher and longer and shifts across the ‘desert floor’” which is EFFABLE-because-LOCAL.
Now we have something LOCAL to attribute development and actions to; “This DUNE X-34 centred at latitude X and longitude Y developed in the sandstorm that started yesterday and has grown to several metres in height and about 50 metres in length, and has been steadily shifting towards the coast”.
Note how the DOUBLE ERROR allows us to shift from the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL (resonance) to the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL (mechanistic).
The world as understood in modern physics is a transforming relational continuum. This is the fluid world of Heraclitus, indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta wherein developments are INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL and where FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE.
The world as understood in classical physics is a world of material objects in empty space wherein developments are EFFABLE-because-LOCAL and where FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO.
SORCERY as a locally incipient birthing of being is a concept that is impossible in the world of modern physics, indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta where ‘everything is in flux’ (where TRANSFORMATION is the basic reality aka the Wave-field dynamic aka the Tao)
Our WESTERN CULTURE obsession with SORCERY brings with it the associated superior social status for those believed to be major contributors in the SOURCING of VALUABLE actions and developments and the associated inferior social status for those believed to be lesser contributors in the SOURCING of VALUABLE actions and developments and/or contributors to the SOURCING of negative actions and developments.
Nowhere is this SORCERY based values systems stronger than in the UNITED STATES where those seen as SOURCING valuable actions and developments are treated as HEROES while those seen as SOURCING little of worth are ignored and those seen as SOURCING disruptive or destructive actions and developments are perceived as VILLAINS.
In modern physics as in indigenous aboriginal cultures, reality is understood in terms of relational transformation (LOCAL SOURCING DOES NOT ARISE). Actions and developments may be DESCRIBED as manifesting LOCALLY as in LIGHTNING FLASHES and FIRE BURNS but these expressions are DOUBLE ERROR reductions of the NONLOCAL RELATIONAL TRANSFORMATION that is the primary reality.
The point is that SORCERY is not REAL but is a language and grammar DOUBLE ERROR based EFFABLE-IZING device useful for INFERRING the INEFFABLE. “NAMING” establishes a LOCAL thing-in-itself existence while GRAMMAR equips the LOCAL thing-in-itself with the notional powers of SOURCING actions and developments.
In our WESTERN CULTURE, the deservedness of the allocated socially requisite praise and rewards for SORCERY achievements is often highly controversial. The correction sought has been with respect to the relative equitability of deservedness of SORCERY credits; e.g. are males and whites being given more rewards and praise than females and blacks, for the same feats of SORCERY? Equitability corrections are in progress, but the deeper problem remains untouched by this WESTERN CULTURE social initiative since the root of the problem is that there is no such thing as SORCERY aka the PRODUCER-PRODUCT dynamic, there is only TRANSFORMATION.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Our common WESTERN CULTURE use of language conjures up representations in terms of the LOCAL SOURCING OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS by NAMING-instantiated things-in-themselves. This is a DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar (Nietzsche) and it is the source of a general craziness in our WESTERN CULTURE, as is the topic of this note. This ‘general craziness’ includes the polarizing division into politically opposite factions termed ‘conservatives’ and ‘liberals’. This Polar Division associates with a basic ambiguity infused into the WESTERN PSYCHE by the DOUBLE ERROR That is; ‘is it the individual’s thinking that sources the group’s thinking or is it the group’s thinking that sources the individual’s thinking? . ‘Does the man source the times or do the times source the man?’ Did Hitler source WWII or did WWII source the rise of Churchill?
I keep using words that imply that SORCERY is a real dynamic, but it it, really? Nietzsche says NO! What ‘sorcery’ (the notion of LOCAL SOURCING OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS) is, is a DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar as where we say LIGHTNING FLASHES and FIRE BURNS. The first error is NAMING that imputes LOCAL thing-in-itself BEING, and the second, conflating error is GRAMMAR that imputes the power of sourcing actions and developments to the NAMING-instantiated LOCAL thing-in-itself.
We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are schooled in the belief in an ‘individual’s powers of SORCERY of EITHER good OR evil actions and developments. In fact, such powers of SORCERY can be credited to anything we care to NAME such as a person, nation, animal, insect, corporation etc. This notion of having the personal power of SORCERY gives rise to EGO.
There is no SORCERY in the transforming relational continuum aka ‘the Wave-field’ aka ‘the Tao’ aka ‘the reality’ of modern physics., there is only TRANSFORMATION.