Archive for September, 2020
Ernst Mach in ‘Analysis of Sensations’ puts forth the understanding that ‘sensations’ are primary and thought is secondary. If sensory experience is primary in the world, as even in a gyroscope or ‘atom’ as in the sensation of the gravity field, there is no need to impute a primary role for ‘LOCAL BEING’ as with ‘matter’ since understanding the world as ‘flow’ is fully tenable, as in Heraclitus’ worldview.
With ‘THOUGHT’ comes the concept of NAMING and with NAMING comes the concept of LOCAL BEING, providing a notional LOCAL material basis for actions and developments, that may then be employed to overcome the INEFFABLE reality of NONLOCALITY wherein the world dynamic is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT as in an energy FLOW-FIELD.
THOUGHT thus abstracted from NAMING and GRAMMAR, the ‘DOUBLE ERROR’ as Nietzsche terms it, serves up an ABSTRACT AND ARTIFICIAL but EFFABLE basis for CONSTRUCTING REALITY in such a fashion that this pseudo-reality STAYS FIXED and UNCHANGING while we use language to ‘play around with it’ and adapt it, with NAMING and GRAMMAR.
For example, in our sensual experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum, ‘we’ as an awareness within the flowing Wave-field, which could be understood as purely relative as with a vortex or hurricane, are in a world that does not depend on our having to use the abstractions of LOCAL EXISTENCE as propped up by NAMING and GRAMMAR (the DOUBLE ERROR), but being a fluid world with us as fluid formings within it, would be INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT.
But it may be that even ephemeral flow-forms in the flow are imbued with, as are all flow-forms that are ‘of the flow’, with a consciousness that is innate within the flow-field (the Wave-field aka the Tao). Many philosophers and modern physics investigators have come to the conclusion that reality is a ONE-ness or Unum firstly, that the abstracting tools of NAMING and GRAMMAR can break down into abstract LOCAL ENTITIES notionally with their own GRAMMAR-given powers of SOURCING actions and developments (that ‘is’ the DOUBLE ERROR pointed out by Nietzsche).
The INEFFABLE is thus reduced to something EFFABLE thanks to the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR. For example, Wave-field resonance such as DUNING that is inextricably included in the transforming relational continuum, thanks to the DOUBLE ERROR, can be LOCALIZED by imposing the name DUNE on a visualizable portion of the continuum (we are in this case crossing the threshold from sensory experience into the realm of intellection aka THOUGHT). Once we CREATE a LOCAL BEING with the intellectual device of NAMING, we can compound this first error with the second error of GRAMMAR so as to impute the power of LOCAL SOURCING OF actions and development to the NAMING-instantiated (abstract) LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF.
This DOUBLE ERROR equips us for overcoming the INEFFABLE nature of inclusion in a fluid reality, but as the Presocratic philosophers observed, it comes at a price; i.e. the ‘burden of concreteness’ since we now take it upon ourselves to manage the articulation of motions and development of the pieces that NAMING has broken out of the Wave-field aka the Tao.
At this point, our new intellectual reconstruction of (a reduced) reality that is now in pieces, a necessary reduction of the relational continuum which is INEFFABLE to a piece-based reduction which IS EFFABLE.
MAKE NO MISTAKE, the EFFABLE REDUCTION is NOT the equivalent of the UNREDUCED INEFFABLE, but this mistake of SUBSTITUTING the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT reduction for the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT Wave-field aka ‘Tao’ is the core characteristic of WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENCE. This is where Emerson’s ‘tool running away with the workman’ observation is pointing to; i.e. we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are letting … “the (effable-izing) tool run away with the workman, the human with the divine so that we let go of the INEFFABLE and we give to the EFFABLE the foundational role in our WESTERN CULTURE construction of an ‘operative reality’.
This substituting of the EFFABLE for the INEFFABLE is like the planting of a cuckoo’s egg in the nest of a very different bird, so that it gets to draw nourishment from the nourishment-providing aspect of a system that is very different in an overall sense, kind of like putting a Volkswagen engine in a Porsche because ‘it is easy to make the substitution’.
We Western Culture Adherents like to simplify reality so as to facilitate verbal sharing of at least some reduced facsimile of the reality of sensory experience which is, itself, INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT, as is the basic nature of the Wave-field in which we are included.
Reduction of the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT to the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT is the job of language and grammar.
The great division between the cultures of the EAST and WEST lies in the fact that while the EAST “remembers” that the reduced-to-language REPRESENTATION of reality is NOT the reality, the WEST “forgets” and thus behaves as if the intellectual-conceptual representation of reality made possible by the reduction techniques built into language and grammar (the ‘DOUBLE ERROR’ as Nietzsche terms it) was the ‘operative reality’. Once we reduce the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT Wave-field reality of our actual sensory experience, to EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT materialist reality of our intellectual discourse, our WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT habit is to treat this reduction as if it were the ‘operative reality’. Once we have this surrogate intellectual pseudo-reality in hand, our habit is to simply DISCARD the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT sensory-experience reality.
“As regards the academies, they are established in order to regulate the studies of the pupils and are concerned not to have the program of teaching change very often: in such places, because it is a question of the progress of the students, it frequently happens that the things which have to be chosen are not those which are most true but those which are most easy. And by that division in things which makes different people form different judgements, it so happens that certain people are in error contrary to their own opinion.” – Johannes Kepler, ‘Harmonies of the World’
In what manner, then, does the ‘new-and-reduced-to-effable pseudo-reality’ of the WEST impact our WESTERN CULTURE social dynamic from the EASTERN social dynamic where THE ACTUAL INEFFABLE reality of our sensory experience as accepted?
How we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS confuse ourselves with our language and grammar.
“There is a tide in the affairs of men / Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune.” – Brutus, in ‘Julius Caesar’.
If I ‘go with the flow’ in pulling the boat up onto the beach, I nevertheless say; ‘I pulled the boat up on the beach’.
Life is like that, your working associates may ‘make you look good’, particularly if you are ‘their boss’.
Can we ever ‘really claim’ that ‘I did such and such’, like ‘mow the lawn’, … or should I be giving credit to the invention of the gasoline engine?
How ‘casual’ we are with our use of language and grammar. Nietzsche speaks of ‘the DOUBLE ERROR’ of NAMING and GRAMMAR which equips us to make simple statements that imply LOCAL actions and developments. This GRAMMAR based abstract conception of LOCALLY SOURCED action and development is what Nietzsche calls ‘the DOUBLE ERROR’.
WHY DO WE MAKE THIS DOUBLE ERROR? — because we live within a transforming relational continuum which is INEFFABLE because it and us are in continual flux. This all-including reality is also known as the Wave-field and ‘the Tao’. We can’t point to something which is everywhere at the same time such as the transforming relational continuum aka the Wave-field aka the Tao that we and everything are included in. In order to ‘get around’ this ineffable-ness of the reality of our inclusion in the transforming relational continuum; i.e. our inclusion in a NONLOCAL dynamic that is greater than the forms that are included in it (since everything is in flux), we employ the DOUBLE ERROR. The first error is NAMING a flowing form to impute to it LOCAL thing-in-itself existence, and we conflate this with a second error of GRAMMAR to impute to the NAMING-instantiated thing-in-itself the notional powers of LOCALLY SOURCING actions and developments. Now we’re talking! Of course this is not without a few snags that are going to ‘catch us up’ in our tricky attempt to sidestep the ineffability of our fluid reality.
SNAG NUMBER ONE: If a gathering is forming in the flow such as a crowd of human forms, we run into the ‘there is a tide in the affairs of man’ type of complication wherein, we may find ourselves in a situation akin to someone selling iced cokes on a blazing hot day. The DOUBLE ERROR constructions of language let us simply say that ‘we sold a lot of cokes’ which is a story about us and ‘our achievement’ as we are the SOURCE of that achievement. This sort of reality construction is the most common and it defines the ‘conservative’ view of reality which is the simple and straight forward (no complications) view of reality. “I sold a lot of cokes”. Is this TRUE?
This is just a note with philosophical musings in it and I know I tend to spend a lot of time on such things, more than most has been my impression, at least in my post age 55 living time.
It seems evident that we live in an operative reality that has taken shape from the many different thoughts and activities of many different people along with a diversity of environmental influences that are different in that they don’t change across the intellectual artifice of national boundaries.
So, there are lots of things to explain ‘our differences’ between one and other whether on an individual basis or on a group basis. As individuals, we are each unique but as social animals, we do tend to have that put us in various ‘birds of a feather’ behavioural groupings.
In this matter, I empathize with T.S Eliot and Erwin Schroedinger who call themselves Mahavits as in the Hindu Advaita Vedanta terminology referring to individuals who believe in the connectedness of all things but who behave in such a manner to be consistent with the culture they live in, … in our case the WESTERN CULTURE, where the common belief is that we are all independent beings with our own powers of sourcing actions and developments, … a belief that Nietzsche refers to as the DOUBLE ERROR since it comes from NAMING that imputes local independent being (first error) and GRAMMAR that imputes to the ‘local independent being’ its own powers of LOCALLY SOURCING actions and developments (second error).
I call this a CRAZY-MAKING belief and in my way of understanding the world, I can see how that WESTERN CULTURE popularly supported CRAZY-MAKING belief is ‘continuing to play out’. Since I have spent the 20-plus years exploring this, I could write a book on it, or perhaps have written the equivalent of several books on it, on my www.goodshare.org/wp website. Periodically, I get in philosophical discussions with other on the differences between my philosophy (which is essentially congruent with modern physics in those aspects of modern physics which match up with amazing consistency with indigenous aboriginal understanding of reality, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta.
Recent exchanges have helped me to think of more concise ways of sharing the basic differences in my philosophy and the ‘standard WESTERN CULTURE mainstream’ which seems mostly a mix of Jewish, Christian, Muslim and WESTERN-atheist views of reality, which together, cook up the WESTERN CULTURE worldview which I refer to as a CRAZY-MAKER. I call it a CRAZY-MAKER because it splits FIGURE and GROUND into TWO which is a BIPOLAR DISORDER from those who see reality as I do which is more or less as according to modern physics, indigenous aboriginal, Taoist/Buddhist and Advaita Vedanta cultures. There understandings of reality are very UNLIKE the WESTERN CULTURE understanding of reality in that all of the former understand the world as ONE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM, aka the Wave-field aka the Tao which is, of course, INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and IMPLICIT as Wave-field continuum must necessarily be.
Western languages are strongly VISUAL image dependent. Our rhetoric constructs cartoon-like depictions explaining, praising or mocking VISUALLY familiar figures and forms. A person is something relationally complex, a ‘flow-feature’ that is continually transforming that is far too complex to be summoned to mind by a fixed symbol such as a NAME or a VISUAL ICON aka PICTURE. In fact, how could we explain a humaning in this world without acknowledging innumerable webs of relational influence that end up ‘making the individual’ ‘one with everything’?
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.
That’s right, draw a picture or take a photograph and then we can trap that individual inside his own picture. Language is what we use to make ‘word pictures’ which LOCALIZE and humaning in the manner that the word ‘hurricane’ localizes an inherently NONLOCAL relational fluidity. Our actual experiencing of the world is sensory-relations based but our intellectual understanding of the world is highly picture-based since language presents us with word-pictures, whether of the fairy princess or the big bad wolf, and the complexities of real people, as in Bob Dylan’s lyrics, … ‘ain’t never been photographed’.
This essay explores the role of VISUALIZATION in our WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT social collective and points out how VISUALIZATION such as reduces TRANSFORMATION to GROWTH is a WESTERN CULTURE CRAZY-MAKER.
* * *
This note is a brief assessment of why WESTERN CULTURE is a CRAZY-MAKER and how one may extract oneself from the grips of WESTERN CULTURE CRAZY-MAKING even while one is immersed within it.
The single point that one may remember NOT to forget that encapsulates the essence of WESTERN CULTURE CRAZY-MAKING is the LUNACY of belief in GROWTH. This LUNACY derives from our given a foundational role to VISION which isolates instead of FEELING which includes. Innate in our sensing experience is our ‘inertial guidance’ where we don’t need VISION to inform us of our inclusion in the transforming relational continuum. Blindfold us and give us a ride on the back of a motorcycle, up town and down town and all around the town and the likelihood is that, blind-folded or not, our sensory experience will be informing us in terms of our relative spatial relational sense. Is this an embellishment that ‘adds to’ our visual sensing? NO! Our visual sensing is an embellishment that adds to our gravity-informed sense of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.
Gravity gives rise to ‘inertial guidance’, a kind of ‘gut feeling’ or ‘intuition’ that is implicit and less deceptive than visual sensing. It would be more ‘telling’ to weigh visitors to the gold mine before and after their visit then doing a visual body search.
VISUAL observation of the GROWTH of a volcano is something we will talk about as if it is a ‘reality in itself’ but extrusion over here is implies ‘intrusion’ elsewhere and thus the reality of TRANSFORMATION and illusion (delusion) of VISUALLY perceived GROWTH.
There is no such thing as GROWTH, not of children, not of towns, not of corporations, not of populations, not of the incidence of COVID 19, because GROWTH, as Nietzsche has quite rightly pointed out, is a DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.
The first thing we need to support the abstraction of GROWTH is a notional LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF which we can say is ‘undergoing GROWTH’. THis ‘thing’ could be a person (a notional LOCAL thing-in-itself), a town (a notional LOCAL thing-in-itself), or a business (a notional LOCAL thing-in-itself). These notional (NAMING-instantiated) things-in-themselves are said to GROW, but this is only a WESTERN CULTURE abstraction based on the notion that FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO which means, for example, that the TOWN can grow larger and take up more space in the countryside; i.e. we say that THE TOWN ACTIVELY GROWS while the countryside plays the role of a PASSIVE-SUBMISSIVE ‘holding tank’. In modern physics as in the indigenous aboriginal culture, we would instead speak of TRANSFORMATION wherein the Wilderness SHRINKS in reciprocal relation to the GROWTH of the TOWN (cultivated area).
This choice of how we interpret APPEARANCE, in the very different terms of GROWTH or TRANSFORMATION pivots the cultures of EAST (belief in TRANSFORMATION which is purely RELATIONAL) and WEST (BELIEF IN GROWTH as in CREATION of ‘something not previously existing’ and DESTRUCTION of something ‘previsously EXISTING’: e.g. the GROWTH of a FOREST or the GROWTH of area burned by a forest fire).
While the EAST opts for TRANSFORMATION as ‘the dynamic of reality’, the WEST opts for CREATION and DESTRUCTION as ‘the dynamics of reality’.
For a brief discussion on the difference between GROWTH and TRANSFORMATION see the following;
The simple TWO PART THESIS being advanced here is that;
-A- There is no such thing as GROWTH since there FIGURE and GROUND are ONE and the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR does not liberate the FIGURE from the GROUND, allowing the FIGURE to GROW in its own right. When the town is said to GROW, the Wilderness reciprocally shrinks and what we have instead of GROWTH is TRANSFORMATION.
-B- THERE IS ONLY TRANSFORMATION (that is the nature of the transforming relational continuum aka the Wave-field aka the Tao.