Archive for September, 2020
Racism and EGO are connected by way of the WESTERN CULTURE belief in the abstraction of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR which gives rise to the abstract concept of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments. In the reality of our sensory experience, there is only relational TRANSFORMATION which is NONLOCAL. Because TRANSFORMATION is NONLOCAL and because Wave-field dynamics which constitute TRANSFORMATION are resonance based and IMPLICIT, such dynamics are INEFFABLE. They are the active, all-including energy field.
EGO derives from belief in the concept of a LOCAL independent SELF (thing-in-itself) with the notional (GRAMMAR-given) powers of locally sourcing actions and development. LOCAL SOURCING IS NOT A VIABLE CONCEPT! There is no such thing as LOCAL SOURCING in modern physics wherein dynamics are understood as NONLOCAL and RELATIONAL or in other words, as TRANSFORMATION.
Just as the discussion below shows how the conservative – liberal polar opposition is based on the erroneous belief in LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments, it follows, in general, that the attribution of LOCAL SOURCING ACHIEVEMENTS that differ by RACE or GENDER DO NOT EXIST. Therefore, there can be no argument over whether DIFFERENT SOURCING AGENTS (male, female, indigenous, European, black, white) associate with DIFFERING LEVELS OF SOURCING ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENTS.
RACISM is based on the notion that individuals of different race have different capacities for sourcing actions and developments.
The argument then proceeds along the lines that, for example, WHITES have greater capacities for sourcing beneficial actions and developments than BLACKS and/or indigenous aboriginals.
The point of this article is not to DEBATE which races have greater capacity for sourcing intelligent and beneficial actions and developments, the point is to demonstrate that there is no such thing as SOURCING actions and developments, there is only TRANSFORMATION in which we, ourselves, are included. The concept of LOCAL SOURCING is a DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar as established by Nietzsche and reaffirmed by Bohm. As Bohm points out, RATIONAL THOUGHT is over-simplification (falling far short of INTELLIGENCE) that secures the abstract notion of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and development. RATIONAL THOUGHT, by way of LOCAL SOURCING, gives rise to both RACISM and EGO.
The point in this article is not to argue whether racial group A has greater powers of sourcing actions and developments than racial group B, or that males have grater powers of sourcing actions and developments than females. The point is that here is no such hing as local SOURCING of actions and developments in the transforming relational continuum of our sensory experience.
PREFACE: We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are engineering the substitution of intelligence with reason (rationality).
Intelligence is, for example, where we understand that a fluid sphere as we imagine the Earth to be, can be scattering (as with volcanic eruptions) and gathering (as with subduction zones) AT THE SAME TIME.
Now, let’s remove the term “a fluid sphere” and imagine instead, a warm water ‘cell’ as might show up in a tidal zone to an observer with an infrared viewer. The nebulous ‘shape’ of the ‘warm patch’ will manifest ‘boundaries which are blurry and continually transforming. Grammatically, we speak of a ‘warm patch’ or ‘local thing-in-itself’ as if FIGURE and GROUND are TWO separate and distinct ontological entities. Although FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE in this case, and the differentiation is heat-flow-based, the VISUAL APPEARANCE is that FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO yet the combination of intellect and language is sufficient to rationalize a representation of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO.
The TWO-NESS is abstraction and we would be wrong to say that ‘warm FIGURE’ is ‘MOVING THROUGH’ the cool ‘GROUND’, giving the sense that FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO.
The more physically realistic capture of this dynamic is FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE as in TRANSFORMATION, but we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS avoid TRANSFORMATION because it opens the door to the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT. Indigneous aboriginal culture’s may speak of ‘Dances with Wolves’ (i.e. an IMPLICIT reference rather than an EXPLICIT THING-IN-ITSELF DESIGNATOR) so as to avoid imposing the mis-impression of EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT, an erroneous representation since all is included in the transforming relational continuum.
Meanwhile, in our WESTERN CULTURE, since the APPEARANCE is that FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO, our language and grammar ‘follow suit’ and this leads to a whole self-consistent collection of terms, a key exemplar being GROWTH. The GROWTH of a FIGURE is only possible if the FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO, otherwise we would have to acknowledge TRANSFORMATION where FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE, which is THE REALITY of our sensory experience, however it is a REALITY that is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT. As WIttgenstein observed in this regard;
7.0 Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. (“Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen”),
–Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
Once we have ‘dodged’ (through our use of language and grammar) having to deal with TRANSFORMATION, we have cleared the way to constructing representation based on GROWTH which simply IGNORES the reality of TRANSFORMATION, thus we can speak of the GROWTH of cultivated land (land planted with wheat or etc.) as if that were a ‘reality’ (yes, we can ‘take that kind of ‘GROWTH’ to the bank’ even though such language ‘drops from the mind’ the reciprocal SHRINKAGE of Wilderness, the GROWTH and the SHRINKAGE together constituting TRANSFORMATION).
The point is that GROWTH is ABSTRACTION. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS GROWTH in the reality of our actual sensory experience because there are no ‘things-in-themselves’ and NAMING does overcome the reality that everything is in flux.
WATCH OUT! Because we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are operating as if GROWTH were REAL (we have oriented our activities in support of a GROWTH ECONOMY), … the REAL REALITY of TRANSFORMATION is ‘dropping off our radar screen’ and TRANSFORMATION is happening in the manner of ‘the loose sheet that is flapping in the gale’ while we turn our backs to it and concentrate on GROWTH.
We can SAY that ‘the TOWN is GROWING larger’ but that is just a RATIO-NAL view, which as Bohm points out, is abstraction that undercuts INTELLIGENCE which is informing us that what is really happening is that the landscape is TRANSFORMING.
When we down-shift from INTELLIGENCE to RATIONALITY, we substitute the EITHER/OR logic of the EXCLUDED medium for the (quantum) BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDED medium.
That is, we are intellectually free (in the realm of abstraction) to shift our reality from Newtonian EITHER/OR logic of the EXCLUDED medium to the BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDED medium (aka ‘quantum logic’). When we do this, our understanding of dynamics may then shift from GROWTH and SHRINKAGE (or ‘PRODUCTION-and-CONSUMPTION’) as in a FIGURE and GROUND as TWO conceptualization, to TRANSFORMATION as in a FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE sense.
As Bohm points out, we have the choice between RATIO-nality and INTELLIGENCE. If we prefer to speak in terms of ‘the Town is growing larger’ (without mentioning how the Wilderness is reciprocally shrinking; i.e. without mentioning how what is really going on is TRANSFORMATION), we stay in the domain of RATIO-nality. However, if we acknowledge the innate reciprocal relation between the GROWTH of the town and the SHRINKAGE of the Wilderness (which gets much messier in reality without the tidiness implied by our employing the NAMING-based abstractions of ‘TOWN’ and ‘WILDERNESS”), then we acknowledge the ‘real’ reality of TRANSFORMATION of the landscape.
For the indigenous aboriginal as also for modern physics, there is no question about what is going on as we are understanding it through our sensory experience and not simply through our mental manipulations of language-based abstraction; i.e. what is really going on is TRANSFORMATION. There is no such thing in the real world of our sensory experience as ‘the GROWTH of a TOWN’. Such RATIO-NAL statements fail to even make reference to the landscape in which this ‘TOWN’ resides. The four-leggeds, the winged and slithering ones will nevertheless experience what is actually going on which is TRANSFORMATION of the all-including relational continuum.
So what RATIO-nality does is to build on the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR (Nietzsche) wherein we impute the existence of a LOCAL thing-in-itself by NAMING and conflate this with grammar to impute the power of GROWTH to the NAMING-instantiated thing-in-itself (e.g. “The TOWN”). The concept of ‘the Town growing’, once it gets into our mind, allows us to use our RATIO-NALITY to picture the Town as a small thing at TIME 1, then as a larger thing at TIME 2 and because we keep using the same NAME for the TOWN, we give ourselves the impression that IT IS THE TOWN THAT IS GROWING, and we become forgetful of the GREATER REALITY of the TRANSFORMING relational continuum or ‘landscape’ that the TOWN is a relational feature within.
The point is that we can use either RATIO-nality or INTELLIGENCE to get a mental CONCEPTION of what is going on, and while the RATIO-nality constrains the picture to a LOCAL FIGURE in a separate GROUND (i.e. the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO conceptualization), INTELLIGENCE opens up our understanding to the TRANSFORMING relational continuum within which the TOWN is a feature, in a FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE sense. There is no such thing as GROWTH in a TRANSFORMING relational continuum. The concept of GROWTH is abstraction coming from the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.
WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have been moving progressively towards SUBSTITUTING RATIONALITY for INTELLIGENCE, in which case the impression in our minds that ‘the TOWN is GROWING LARGER AND MORE POPULOUS and MORE PRODUCTIVE’, as if were ITS OWN SOURCE of actions and development (thanks to the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR). This notional LOCAL TOWN THING-IN-ITSELF with its notional powers of sourcing its own GROWTH and development hijack our conceptualizing of reality, and wallpaper over, in our consciousness, that which really going on (i.e. TRANSFORMATION of the relational space wherein what we are calling ‘the TOWN’ is a relational feature),
Ok, if we accept that the world of our sensory experience is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT, as is the nature of the transforming relational continuum aka the Wave-field aka the Tao, … then in order to EFFABLE-ize so as to share even a crude reduction of, or allusion to our actual (infeffable) experience, it makes sense to invent a language tool based on REDUCTIONS to that which is EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT, as in the example of the ‘warm patch’ in the fluid flow where we, for convenience, re-cast the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE reality, linguistically, into a FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO conceptualization.
What appears to be happening is that while we reduce the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT by way of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR to the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT, … for the expedient purpose of being able to share EVEN A CRUDE REDUCTION or INFERENCE of the INEFFABLE, to use in discourse as a tool for triggering in the recipient mind, INFERENCE of the INEFFABLE, such a tool of INFERENCE is IN NO WAY FIT to serve, LITERALLY, as a SUBSTITUTE REALITY, so that when we hear that ‘THE TOWN IS GROWING LARGER AND MORE POPULOUS AND PRODUCTIVE’, … we must remember, as the indigenous aboriginal inevitably will, that the primary reality is the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT transforming relational continuum aka the Wave-field aka the Tao.
Our DOUBLE ERROR based representation of the ‘TOWNING WITHIN THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM’ by assigning a NAME to it (FIRST ERROR since NAMING imputes persisting LOCAL BEING) and then using GRAMMAR (SECOND ERROR) to impute to ‘the TOWN’ its own powers of SOURCING actions and developments (GROWING larger and more populous and productive) achieves the desired psychological effect of constructing a reduced but EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT intellectual conceptualization of the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT relational form in the flow.
While our INTELLIGENCE continues to recall the greater reality of the inherently INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL transforming relational continuum, our RATIO-NAL intellection, thanks to the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, now has the means of constructing in the intellectually abstracting psyche, a pseudo LOCAL reality, which can only be a pseudo-reality since the real reality of TRANSFORMATION is the inherently NONLOCAL Wave-field aka the Tao.
The RATIONAL intellectual pseudo-reality is something we can articulate, share and discuss and learn from, although we will mislead ourselves if we fail to keep ‘in mind’ that such abstractions as LOCAL BEING and GROWTH are ABSTRACTIONS that can only INFER the TRANSFORMING REALITY that lies beyond reach of the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT (i.e. the LOCAL and EXPLICIT being something we ‘conjure up’ using NAMING instantiated LOCAL BEINGS with GRAMMAR supplied powers of SOURCING actions and developments, as in the example of ‘the TOWN that is growing larger and more populous and productive’.
If at some point there were close to 100 percent of us who, when we spoke of ‘the Town growing larger and more populous and productive’, would understand that the indigenous aboriginal understands as in Chief Seattle’s speech, that the over-riding REALITY is the transforming relational landscape in which the Town, is a relational feature, and NOT a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF with its own powers of GROWING and SOURCING actions and developments, … many of that 100 percent have become forgetful as we become engaged with the needs of the GROWING TOWN understood as a LOCAL thing-in-itself, and being pre-occupied with LOCAL development needs, become forgetful our inclusion in TRANSFORMATION aka ‘the Tao’ aka ‘the Logos’.
Heraclitus spoke to this problem of forgetfulness as follows;
Of the logos [aka the Tao, the Wave-field], which is as I describe it, people always prove to be uncomprehending both before they have heard it and once they have heard it. For, although all things happen according to the logos, people are like those of no experience, even when they do experience such words and deeds as I explain when I distinguish each thing according to its phusis (nature / constitution) and declare how it is; but others are as ignorant of what they do when awake as they are forgetful of what they do when asleep.
Those who hear and do not understand are like the deaf. Of them the proverb says: “Present, they are absent.”
In other words, falling into the habit of understanding reality by way of RATIO-NAL intellection is like saying LOOK NOW, … and see ‘the TOWN GROWING’ and sprawling out over the land, as if it were a cancerous growth, while something inside us, that lies deeper than our RATIO-NAL intellectual constructions; i.e. our INTELLIGENCE, is delivering the intuition that what is really going on is our inclusion in TRANSFORMATION.
Because this inclusion in TRANSFORMATION that our INTELLIGENCE is informing us of is ineffable, it has to lie in waiting in the darkness that lies behind all the foreground RATIO-NAL intellectual intercourse> OUR WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT ERROR is to imploy RATIO-NALITY as our ‘operative reality’. Conversely, the indigenous aboriginal, when he hears the RATIO-nal statement that ‘The TOWN is GROWING’ will translate ‘on-the-fly’ to ‘the landscape is TRANSFORMING’ which reunites the FIGURE and the GROUND-as-ONE which the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR has split apart into FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO.
We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS seem to be on a current trend where RATIONALITY, wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND_are-TWO (the inhabitant-habitat and production-consumption split) has taken over the job of operative reality construction from our INTELLIGENCE wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE (where inhabitant-and-habitat and production and consumption are reunited within TRANSFORMATION).
We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS seem to be at a point where we are putting RATIONAL ABSTRACTION into an unnatural and dysfunctional primacy over INTELLIGENCE, not just in our speech, but in our understanding.
* * * END OF PREFACE * * *
When we experience and/or observe a swirling in the atmosphere, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS tend to try to capture this, as all events in general, in the DOUBLE ERROR based terms of NAMING and GRAMMAR. We come up with statements such as ‘A hurricane is stirring up the atmosphere’.
This approach invites the inverse alternative; ‘the atmosphere is stirring up a hurricane’.
Philosophers over the Ages have struggled with how this splitting can confuse our psyches. Mircea Eliade wrote an entire book on this one issue entitled ‘Mephistopheles et L’Androgyne’, the English title being ‘The Two and the One’.
In our WESTERN CULTURE, people divide into polarized groups on the question of whether the individual sources a stirring up of the social collective or whether the social collective sources a stirring up of the individual. Was it really Hitler that stirred up the German people? What it the stirred up British people that produced a Churchill? Are such ‘leaders’ naturally born with this local genetic power of sourcing coordinated actions or are they ordinary people who circumstances put them in the center of things? Does the figure condition the ground or does the ground condition the figure as in the NATURE or NURTURE dichotomy?
We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS continue to struggle with this question which begins with the emergence of some or other BIPOLAR DISORDER (war, insurrection, conflict etc. which seems to be able to manifest not only between individual persons or nations etc. but sometimes also within them as in civil wars, which within an individual is termed schizophrenia (a clinical version the BIPOLAR DISORDER that is rampant in WESTERN CULTURE).
While we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS struggle in search of answers to questions such as ;’does the hurricane source the stirring up of the atmosphere?’, … or ‘does the atmosphere source the stirring up of the hurricane?’ … EASTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS DO NOT GO THERE, because of our basic understanding, which has been reaffirmed by modern physics, the real dynamic of the world we share inclusion in is TRANSFORMATION, as in the Wave-field of modern physics which is a transforming relational continuum that is everywhere-at-the-same-time.
TRANSFORMATION HAS NO “SOURCING”, so that the BINARY ambiguity wherein EITHER the hurricane SOURCES the atmospheric flow OR the atmospheric flow SOURCES the hurricane, NEVER ARISES and thus there is no AMBIGUITY in TRANFORMATION.
As philosophers have noted, people have struggled with the question of whether FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE ( as understood in modern physics and by EASTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS including indigenous aboriginal cultures), or whether FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO (Newtonian physics and WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS).
An ALTERNATIVE TITLE:to this short article is “Reconciling Nietzsche and Bohm”.
The article starts with an interrogation into the WESTERN CULTURE conservative – liberal Bipolar Disorder, showing how it originates with EGO-based belief in ‘local sourcing’ of actions and developments (in reality, there is only relational transformation; i.e. the concept of ‘local sourcing’ is the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR as Nietzsche points out).
David Bohm comes to the same conclusion which he expresses in terms that ‘rationality’ is a degenerate form of ‘intelligence’. Bohm’s point is that taking a ratio reduces TRANSFORMATION which is what our INTELLIGENCE informs us is reality, to LOCAL GROWTH which is what our rationalizing intellect slips into place as a substitute pseudo-reality. For example, if we are indigenous aboriginals we are likely to orient firstly to the transforming landscape. If we are of European cultural extraction, we will understand ‘what is actually going on’, NOT in terms of TRANSFORMATION but in terms of birth and growth; e.g. the birth and growth of a ‘new Town’.
The RATIONAL concept of GROWTH (smaller to larger is a RATIO-nal abstraction) supports the abstraction of the birth and growth of the Town. WHICH REALITY IS THE “REAL” REALITY? … is it the birth and growth of the Town (the ‘rational’ view), or is it the transformation of the landscape (the Intelligent view)? [this distinction between ‘rational’ and ‘intelligent’ is Bohm’s]
This split in how we may conceive of reality is where Nietzsche’s observation of our DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR comes in, as well as Bohm’s observation of the diffference between RATIO-NALITY and INTELLIGENCE.
The DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR is not ‘an accident’. The DOUBLE ERROR provides a means of ‘breaking in’ to the transforming relational continuum to establish a LOCAL launching pad for ‘effable-izing’ the ineffable-because-nonlocal-and-implicit TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.
Likewise, RATIONALIZING provides an abstract means of ‘breaking in’ to the transforming relational continuum to establish a LOCAL launching pad for ‘effable-izing’ the ineffable-because-nonlocal-and-implicit TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.
For example, if, in a relational social dynamic which might have been at some point fully nomadic and on-the-move (as is the general case since ‘everything is in flux’), a tendency to gather together manifests, … the ‘gathering together’ may have been induced by a favorable situational access to food and water. In other words, the ‘gathering together’ may not have been by ‘rational decision-making’. Yet, it is possible for us to psychologically IMPOSE on such gathering, the notion that the gathering was the result of the deliberate intentions of those included in the gathering, inverting what actually transpired, which was within the overall framework of continuing transformation which is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT, … and making it out to be the product of RATIONAL INTENTION. That is, the Town may be a gathering induced by a sheltered fresh-water spring or fish-filled lake.
Note that GRAMMAR makes it possible to attribute AUTHORING POWERS to whatever we give a NAME to, hence “the Town is growing larger and more productive”. This is where we use RATIO as in our ‘rational thinking’ to impute LOCAL SOURCING of GROWTH and PRODUCTION, … which serves as a surrogate replacement for TRANSFORMATION. The advantages are clear; -while LOCAL SOURCING and GROWTH is EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT, TRANSFORMATION is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT (TRANSFORMATION is relational as is the nature of the Wave-field aka the Tao). RATIO allows us to DO AWAY WITH relational interdependence as is implicit in TRANSFORMATION, and to instead impute LOCAL SOURCING. Eg. the Town doubled in size over TIME (e.g. the past 2 years). Note that once we have used NAMING to ‘declare the independent local existence of the town-in-itsel, we can infer change to this ‘thing-in-itself’ such as GROWTH ‘over time’. We need not mention what the landscape in which the Town is included is doing since NAMING and GRAMMAR allow us to treat the Town as if it were a LOCAL thing-in-itself.
This use of language LIBERATES a relational feature within the transforming relational continuum from the transforming relational continuum and notionally (abstractly) sets it up as a NAMING-instantiated thing-in-itself with its own (notional) GRAMMAR-given powers of sourcing GROWTH and actions.
This EFFABLE-izing of the INEFFABLE, thanks to the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR based reduction of the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT to the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL and EXPLICIT, is a tool of great utility in that it enables language-based sharing of crude reductions of our ineffable experience of inclusion in the Wave-field aka the Tao.
BUT WAIT A MINUTE! WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS ARE LETTING THE REDUCED REALITY THAT THE TOOL ENABLES, SERVE AS OUR OPERATIVE REALITY. For example, to say that the TOWN IS GROWING is a crude way of alluding to TRANSFORMATION of the entire landscape (and Wavefield continuum). REALITY remains the transforming relational continuum and pasting the NAME-LABEL ‘TOWN’ on an innately relational development in the overall flow of the transforming relational continuum, GIVES US AN ABSTRACT FOOTHOLD for EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT REPRESENTATION of that which is INEFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT. IN THE REALITY OF OUR SENSUAL EXPERIENCE, there is no LOCAL TOWN-thing-in-itself that is GROWING (that notion is the abstract construction of language and grammar). There is only the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM which includes the entire landscape in which the TOWNING (a relational development and NOT a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF) is included).
AGAIN, since TRANSFORMATION is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT and is ongoing ‘everywhere-at-the-same-time’ as is the nature of the Wave-field aka the Tao, … IT MAKES UTILITARIAN SENSE TO INVENT A REDUCTION-TO-EFFABLE of the INEFFABLE (opening the way to language-based sharing), and that is what Nietzsche has pointed to as the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, the NAMING which imputes LOCAL EXISTENCE to a relational form in the flow, and the GRAMMAR which imputes the notional power of SOURCING actions and developments to the NAMING-instantiated notional LOCAL thing-in-itself.
A RECONCILING of NIETZSCHE and BOHM, who were coming from the same place here, can be seen as follows;
Nietzsche points to our use of the DOUBLE ERROR to artificially IMPLANT ‘LOCAL SOURCING’ to break into the transforming relational continuum, which is INEFFABLE because it is an all-including continuum in which we ourselves are included. The DOUBLE ERROR uses NAMING to implant a local EXISTENTIAL thing-in-itself presence while GRAMMAR is the second error that conflates the first by imputing the power of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments to the NAMING-instantiated (notional) thing-in-itself.
Bohm points out our use of RATIONALITY and INTELLIGENCE, and our WESTERN CULTURE’s DRIFT towards reality constructions that are preponderantly based on RATIONALITY, subverting INTELLIGENCE and thus inverting the natural order of understanding reality wherein INTELLIGENCE prevails over RATIONALITY. For example,TRANSFORMATION (which our INTELLIGENCE intuits) delivers understanding that runs deeper than PRODUCTION and CONSUMPTION which are RATIO-NAL concepts which imply LOCAL increase and decrease but which cannot directly capture TRANSFORMATION.
The FACTORY PRODUCTION may manifest as, for example, a large warehouse filled with manufactured products while the FACTORY CONSUMPTION may show up as holes in the ground (excavations for taking aggregate for concrete, mined shafts for extracting metal ore) and in forests (trees taken for wood) etc.). RATIO-NALITY will capture the MORE of PRODUCTION and also the LESS from CONSUMPTION but it takes INTELLIGENCE to understand both as one that we understand as TRANSFORMATION. Because TRANSFORMATION is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT, we have to give it a back seat when we are using NAMING and GRAMMAR language exchanges that deal with the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT. That is, RATIONALITY gets the prime position in language exchanges while INTELLIGENCE is not articulable as it is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT
NIETZSCHE’s expression “PHILOSOPHIZING WITH A HAMMER” IS pointing to the problem that we have been letting DOUBLE ERROR based constructions of reality of RATIONALITY SUBSTITUTE for the fullblown reality of our sensory experience. Wittgenstein later makes the same point; i.e. that what we can put into EXPLICIT statements IS NOT REALITY, it can only be INFERENCE of an INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT reality that lies beyond reach of the EFFABLE;
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. (“Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen”),
–Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
This is also what Nietzsche intends with his ‘PHILOSOPHIZING WITH A HAMMER’ approach; i.e. the understanding embodied in the INEFFABLE because-fluid reality can’t be directly articulated but we can indirectly INFER it through networks of explicit propositions where the implicit relations are the ‘take-away’ reality.
“Reason” in language!—oh what a deceptive old witch it has been! I fear we shall never be rid of God, so long as we still believe in grammar.
We need to get past RATIONALITY if we are to get to INTELLIGENCE. If we ‘take a hammer to’ the proposition that ‘The Town’ is growing larger and more productive’, … we may expose the living landscape in which the townING is a relational development. This living landscape that includes everything just goes on forever (it is the Wave-field) so it is INEFFABLE because of its persisting continuiity. NAMING as with ‘the Town’ imposes a local thing-in-itself presence, and the second error of GRAMMAR conflates this imputing to ‘the Town’, powers of SOURCING actions and developments. Ok, after smashing the abstract concept of ‘the Town’ we intellectually imposed with the DOUBLE ERROR, we get back the continuous transforming landscape which we CAN’T capture with language because it is in continual flux.
BUT THAT’S OK because we can get it back in our understanding even though it is inarticulable.
OK, NOW FOR BOHM who is making the same point as Nietzsche but using different basic concepts to construct his explanation; i.e. the difference between RATIONALITY and INTELLIGENCE.
Rationality is where we chop everything down and give the Town its own powers of GROWTH by way of RATIO. We say that at time T1 the town is made up of 1200 people and produces 200 tons of product, and that later, at time T2, the town is made up of 1800 people and produces 300 tons of product. This is how we employ RATIO to REVERSE ENGINEER the abstract concept of LOCAL SOURCING.
TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON HERE, consider problem of trying to articulate and share our experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum wherein everything is in flux, including ourselves. If we use NAMING, this injects something ‘fixed’ into the transforming continuum and GRAMMAR imparts to it, notionally, its own powers of SOURCING; e.g. we say the volcano is the LOCAL SOURCE of extrusions of magma and elsewhere on the same globe we say there are ‘subjection zones’ wherein there are intrusions that recycle previously extruded materials. By employing NAMING and GRAMMAR we construct representations of extrusions and the intrusions as separate LOCAL phenomena. This is RATIONAL understanding which localizes our conceptualizing of phenomena which is inherently NONLOCAL Our intelligence is capable of understanding the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL however our language can only be used as a tool of inference of the INEFFABLE, therefore, rational expression becomes the basic medium that can be used to stimulate intelligent understanding.
Western Culture has fallen into the habit of employing rational intellection, NOT as inference tool, but as the operative reality.
The following text of this article explores how our hangup on ‘the ‘rational’ induces dysfunction in our understanding as manifests, for example, in the conservative-liberal polarization.
The transforming relational continuum is ineffable because it is a continuum and in order to fabricate an effable allusion we must synthetically BREAK INTO IT which leaves us with the ambiguous option of constructing our ‘effable’ starting from either one of the two pieces. For example we can reduce the transforming earth to visual imagery as a sphere that is (a) changing by continually erupting and extruding molten lava or (b) changing by continually subducting and consuming existing features. These are not really TWO LOCAL DYNAMICS but ONE NONLOCAL DYNAMIC of TRANSFORMATION. Our visiual perception gives us a local perspective which constrains us to perceiving extrusion and subduction as TWO separate dynamics, and is unable to capture the omni-directional reality of TRANSFORMATION. Another example of this AMBIGUITY that arises from our imputing LOCAL SOURCING is hurricanes and atmospheric flow; i.e. we can ambiguously imagine TWO LOCAL DYNAMICS there; .. the hurricane stirs up the atmosphere and the atmosphere stirs up the hurricane. We can overcome this ambiguity by realizing that TRANSFORMATION itself does not involve ambiguity, it is only our abstract reduction of TRANSFORMATION which is NONLOCAL, by way of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR that engineers the reduction to LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments. .
Thus the conservative – liberal splitting is a psychological BIPOLAR DISORDER pivoting from the initial ERRONEOUS assumption of LOCAL SOURCING which comes with the price of introducing and synthetic ambiguity, which has no place in the all-including TRANSFORMATION. The notion that LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments IS REAL derives from and is sustained by EGO.
END OF PROLOGUE
Why we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS Can’t Shake off our Conservative-Liberal Bipolar Disorder
This split derives from unreal abstraction.
-1- “We all know” that the liberal who is a lazy-good-for-nothing will be out there demonstrating for more ‘government handouts’.
-2- “We all know” that the conservative who exploits powerless unfortunates to enrich his own coffers will be conniving to ensure a good supply of impoverished and desperate to sustain his ‘superior status’
What we have here, in these polarizing descriptions of ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal’ is exemplary of the ‘incompleteness of all finite systems of logic’, as Goedel pointed out. Opposite interpretations of the same system are not only possible but common. One may say that the flapping of the flag sources movement of the air, but another may say just the opposite, that movement of the air sources flapping of the flag. Which is it? WHAT IF THERE IS NO ‘CORRECT ANSWER’? OR COULD the CONSERVATIVE and LIBERAL VIEW BOTH be CORRECT?
This issue has been understood and explained, but it is held in place and persists because of the very basic error that sets up the artificial polar dichotomy in the first place which is the NAMING and GRAMMAR based DOUBLE ERROR of language.
That is, we make an implicit mistake in assuming that movement IS SOURCED (there is no ‘LOCAL SOURCING in TRANSFORMATION as it is purely RELATIONAL). This notion of LOCAL SOURCING is the abstract product of EGO where we invoke the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR to jumpstart-generate the local SOURCING of actions and developments. THERE IS NO “LOCAL SOURCING” OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS within the TRANSFORMING relational continuum.
The CONSERVATIVE – LIBERAL split is not going to be resolved because both of the opposing views are based on belief in LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments which is DOUBLE ERROR based ABSTRACTION which reduces TRANSFORMATION to the BINARY terms of PRODUCTION and CONSUMPTION (BIRTH and DEATH).
“Listening not to me but to the Logos, it is wise to consider that all things are one” — Heraclitus
This proviso offered by Heraclitus used to be, for me, an intriguing sidebar aimed at preparing the reader of a treatise for some kind of non-literal interpretation. Now it is a phrase that comes naturally to me as I set out to share the findings of a philosophical investigation of the Nietzsche kind, wherein one ‘philosophizes with a hammer’.
The gist of this essay is SUPPORT for such ideas one finds in Anti-psychiatry and in Systems Science theorizing as in ‘The Name of the Devil is Suboptimization’ (Martine Dodds-Taljaard et al). The ‘Anti’ in Antipsychiatry is not the EITHER accept it OR reject it kind of ‘Anti’ of binary logic but the ‘there’s more to it than this’ warning as might be found on a modern medication with claims to be able to eliminate an unwanted condition but not without introducing new, hopefully ‘lesser’ unwanted conditions as ‘part of the package’.
Anti-psychiatry implies more than this; it implies the ‘miner’s canary’ issue in its full-blown sense wherein it is NOT the canary that needs healing but the environment in which the canary is included. Fixing the individual canary is one of those expedients like wearing boots instead of cleaning up the floor; i.e. the dysfunction is deepened by such ‘side-stepping’ of reality.
The problem here is that which Nietzsche calls the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR which imputes the abstract notion of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments, … removing from our sensory experience prompting, understanding of reality as inclusion in TRANSFORMATION; i.e. inclusion in the Wave-field, aka the Tao, aka the transforming relational continuum.
Psychiatry, as in the above metaphors, is akin to outfitting the members of our WESTERN CULTURE society, particularly the sensitive ‘miner’s canaries’ with ‘boots’ that protect the wearer by ‘numbing them’ to the rising intensity of dysfunction in the WESTERN CULTURE social dynamic. When we go to see the ‘shrink’, we are likely to be given a prescription that does nothing for the ambient crazy-making nature of WESTERN SOCIETY, but seeks to ‘numb one’ (particularly the sensitive ones that are quick to intuit the endemic dysfunction) to its innately pathological effects.
What this sidestepping of the REAL issue does is pave the way for continuing increase in ambient psychological pathology. Actions which reduce the socially disruptive effects of miner’s canaries natural responses, mistaken for psycho-pathology, are in fact shutting down the natural ‘warning system’ that something is amiss in WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT SOCIETY.
That ‘something amiss’ is being MISINTERPRETED as arising in the individual, per the WESTERN CULTURE DOUBLE ERROR based model of reality, wherein we use NAMING to impute local thing-in-itself BEING, and conflate this with GRAMMAR to impute the power of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and development to the NAMING-instantiated “LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF” that is GRAMMAR-equipped, notionally, with “ITS OWN POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENTS”.
‘There goes’ the reality of our sensory experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum!; i.e. our awareness of the greater reality of TRANSFORMATION, because we have, with the DOUBLE ERROR, reduced relational TRANSFORMATION to the BINARY DUALITY of PRODUCTION and CONSUMPTION; i.e. we have reduced the NONLOCAL (Wave-field) phenomena of TRANSFORMATION to the LOCAL MECHANICAL ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENT; e.g. the CONSTRUCTION and GROWTH of the LOCAL TOWN in place of the NONLOCAL TRANSFORMING of the LANDSCAPE.
As David Bohm points out, this is the same reduction as manifests between INTELLIGENCE and REASON, and Nietzsche was right there with the same understanding a century earlier, although he described it in different terms. What is in common is the point that we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have been giving precedence to REASON over INTELLIGENCE and this is a CRAZY-MAKER. What our INTELLIGENCE informs us is REALLY going on is TRANSFORMATION of the relational space or ‘LANDSCAPE’ while REASON reduces this NONLOCAL dynamic to abstract LOCAL particulars by means of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.
REASON is what informs us in terms of RATIO so that we know that when we DOUBLE the acreage we have planted in wheat, we reap DOUBLE the PRODUCTION of wheat.
INTELLIGENCE is what informs us in terms of RELATIONS so that we know that if ‘the money keeps coming to keep increasing the GROWTH of PRODUCTION’, if we employ this simple RATIO-nale as the shaper of our actions and developments, … we will be TWISTING OFF from our INTELLIGENCE based awareness of TRANSFORMATION that is informing us that GROWTH is too simple and that in concert with the GROWTH of cultivated land, there is a reciprocal SHRINKAGE of Wildeness land, these two; GROWTH of the intentionally cultivated and the SHRINKAGE of the natural balancing oriented DIVERSITY constituting TRANSFORMATION, as in the transforming relational continuum.
TRANSFORMATION, being INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT is otherwise termed ‘the Wave-field’, ‘the Tao’, ‘the Logos’. Because it is INEFFABLE we talk about something else that we are able to talk about; i.e. that is EFFABLE and the ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENT of LOCAL THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES is something we can ‘talk about’ like the GROWTH of our fields of wheat cultivation, and the associated GROWTH of PRODUCTION of WHEAT which is matched by the GROWTH of CONSUMPTION of WHEAT. This is RATIO-cinative talk which is all abstraction because what is really going on, as we are informed of by our sensory experience of inclusion therein, is TRANSFORMATION.
EAST accepts that INCLUSION IN the TRANSFORMING relational continuum aka the Wave-field aka the Tao, is our sensory experience REALITY which is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT.
WEST accepts the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT abstract language based construction of “REALITY” as “REALITY”, thanks to EGO which can then lay claim to the DOUBLE ERROR based LOCAL SOURCING of ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENTS.
This confusing of the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLCIT for “REALITY” and our substituting it for the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT is a CRAZY MAKER on a WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENCE wide scale. It goes hand-in-hand with the substituting of RATIONALITY for INTELLIGENCE.
WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are now firmly ensconced in using RATIONALITY or REASON for all of our problem-solving needs so that we are trapping ourselves like Sisyphus in attempting to employ REASON to get us out of problems that arise from our use of REASON instead of INTELLIGENCE. “REASON” aka “RATIONALITY” with its concepts of GROWTH and CONSUMPTION that substitute for TRANSFORMATION, is too simple a system for dealing with our inclusion in a transforming relational continuum.
IN order to break ourselves out of our attachment to this dysfunctional inversion of putting REASON before INTELLIGENCE, we have to figure this out by putting INTELLIGENCE into its natural precedence over REASON, because REASONING hasn’t got the ‘horsepower’ to take us there.
What I am saying here is UNREASONABLE; i.e. such understanding requires our intelligence because reason cannot get us there.
* * * END OF INTRODUCTION * * *
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.