Posts by ted lumley
Modern physics supports the understanding of reality of the EAST.
The simplest way of describing this difference between reality as understood in the EAST from reality understood in the WEST, that I can find, is the following;
EAST: the EAST employs the BOTH/AND logic of the included medium. In other words, if I am using my EAST mindset, I will understand ‘FIGURE’ and ‘GROUND’ as ONE.
WEST: the WEST employs the EITHER/OR logic of the excluded medium. In other words, if I am using my WEST mindset, I will understand ‘FIGURE’ and ‘GROUND’ as TWO separate and independent things.
EXAMPLE: the ‘duning’ in the ‘desert’ seen in terms of FIGURE AND GROUND. This example is to illustrate how we can see the relationship between FIGURE and GROUND according to the BOTH/AND logic of the EAST versus the EITHER/OR logic of the WEST.
EAST: Duning is a NONLOCAL dynamic (resonance phenomenon) that has NO LOCAL sourcing agency. Nonlocal phenomena include the dynamics of iron filings that come together in the NONLOCAL influence of a magnetic field.
WEST: The ‘dune’ is a LOCAL phenomenon (material dynamic) wherein grammar imputes to ‘the dune’, its own LOCAL sourcing agency; “The dune is growing larger and longer and shifting to the south”.
EAST: the FIGURE in the GROUND is one means of understanding ‘humanings’. The ‘ing’ suffix indicates that the humaning is an included dynamic FIGURE within the transforming relational GROUND.
WEST: the ‘human’ is a FIGURE in the GROUND as understood as an INHABITANT in the HABITAT. There is no ‘ing’ suffix on ‘human’ here because the ‘human’ is understood as a separately existing ‘thing-in-itself’ whose actions and development are understood as locally instantiated.
The world we are included in is a ‘wave-field’ which is a transforming relational continuum wherein everything is in flux.
We ‘see’ things’ but these ‘things’ are purely relational, continually changing forms within the ONE-FLOW or wave-field; i.e. the flow is the basic ‘reality’ and it is ineffable because words impute persisting ‘thing-ness’ to whatever we ‘name’ in order to talk about it.
We ‘name’ a hurricane but the hurricane is a continual gathering and regathering or swirling within the transforming relational continuum aka ‘the Tao’. There is a locally appearing ‘form’ but there is no ‘local thing-in-itself’; i.e. the world of our actual sensory experience is characterized by NONLOCALITY because all forms are continually gathering and regathering within the overall flow, aka ‘Tao’ aka ‘wavefield’.
We can live in this fluid reality without talking as many of our related forms do; i.e. the winged forms, the four-legged forms, the slithering forms and other forms that get by without using language to share and learn from one another’s experience. We can revert to non-word-based-language communications too when we train horses or mingle with people whose language we don’t know.
There is no LOCAL. LOCAL is an abstract intellectual concept drummed up with language and grammar. There is only the NONLOCAL in our sensory experience informed intuition of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum aka ‘the Tao’ aka ‘the wave-field’, which comes before the NAME-instantiated intellectual conceptualizations that contribute to a house-of-cards pseudo-reality.
The double error of language and grammar injects LOCALITY into our intellectualizing mind. There is no LOCALITY in our sensory experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.
The injecting of LOCALITY is part of the intellectualizing of our ineffable sensory experience of inclusion in NONLOCAL transformation aka ‘the wave-field’ aka ‘the Tao’.
Language based reductive intellectualizing of our ineffable inclusion in NONLOCAL relational transformation aka the Tao aka the wave-field opens the way to ‘effable-izing’ the ineffable, although as Lao Tzu points out; ‘the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao’.
In this regard, Western culture is suffering from a case of ‘the tool running away with the workman’. That is, the tool of language and grammar which reduces the ineffable to an ‘incomplete’ ‘effable’ (e.g. as where the NOLOCAL resonance phenomenon (wave-field phenomenon) of ‘duning’ is reduced to the LOCAL pseudo-phenomenon of ‘dunes’ that grammar imputes as having the power of sourcing their own actions and development; e.g. ‘the dunes are shifting to the south and are growing taller and longer’.
This is a reduction of the NONLOCAL wavefield (resonance) phenomenon to the LOCAL pseudo-phenomenon that is made possible by a ‘double error’ of grammar, as Nietzsche has shown; the first error is ‘naming’ to impute (in the abstracting intellect) the impression of LOCAL thing-in-itself existence and we conflate this with the second error of grammar to impute the power of sourcing actions and development to the name-instantiated thing-in-itself. We thus reduce the NONLOCAL resonance phenomena of duning to the LOCAL thing-in-itself, ‘dune’, notionally with its own grammar-endowed action and development authoring powers. While the reality of our sensory experience is ‘resonance’ based, our intellect supported by the tool of language and grammar, REDUCES the resonance (NONLOCAL phenomena), to an intellectual impression of LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF (‘dune’) based phenomena. The NONLOCAL phenomenon of ‘duning’ is thus replaced by the LOCAL (double error base) intellectual abstraction of ‘dunes’ which we use grammar to notionally equip with their own powers of sourcing actions and developments.
This is where Western culture EGO comes from since the relational forms in the wave-field (Tao) that might be more aptly termed ‘humanings’ rather than ‘humans’, analogous with ‘duning’ rather than ‘dunes’, … succumb to the sense of LOCAL PERSONAL POWER given to them by the language and grammar double error reduction that recasts we ‘humanings’ in terms of LOCAL things-in-themselves, notionally with our own powers of SOURCING actions and developments. THIS IS WHAT ‘EGO’ IS MADE FROM.
‘Duning’ is the manifesting of RESONANCE (relational wavefield dynamics) which is inherently NONLOCAL and the wavefield aka ‘the Tao’, is inherently INEFFABLE because it is NONLOCAL.
So, in order to ‘EFFABLE-IZE the INEFFABLE we must ‘LOCALIZE-the-NONLOCAL’; i.e. the resonance based forms in the Tao we understand to be ‘duning’ or ‘humaning’, figure-in-ground formings wherein the ‘figure’ and ‘ground’ is ‘appearance’ based and NOT ‘ontology’ based. As with the figure and ground in a Cat’s paw where a gust of wind induces a ‘puckering up’ of the water, there is no ontic independence of the ‘puckering’ (figure) and the water (ground). In the Tao as understood in modern physics as the ‘wave-field’ aka the ‘transforming relational continuum’, … as with figure and ground generally whether termed ‘inhabitant’ and ‘habitat’ or whatever, there is no ‘ontic independence’
But because there is no ontic separation of figure and ground in the real-life reality of the Tao (wave-field) in which all is included; i.e. because distinguishing between figure and ground is purely ‘appearance based’ as with the Cat’s paw moving over the ocean and the ocean, it is an error (the double error spoken of by Nietzsche) to say that ‘the cat’s paw is moving’. The water surface is ‘puckering’ but there is no LOCAL ‘thing-in-itself’ (‘cat’s paw’) ‘moving’ across the water.
In the Tao, and in the understanding of modern physics and the wave-field, there is never any LOCAL thing-in-itself with the power of sourcing its own movement and shape-shifting as we Western culture adherents use language and grammar. Yes, there is ‘duning’ as in wave-field resonance phenomena (‘puckering’ of the spacetime continuum) but there are no LOCAL things-in-themselves with ‘powers of sourcing actions/movements and development). LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELFNESS is language and grammar based abstraction. LOCAL THINGNESS does not exist in the Tao; i.e. it does not exist in our actual sensory experience of inclusion in the inherently NONLOCAL transforming relational continuum (the wave-field aka the Tao).
But here we are, we NONLOCAL ‘humanings’ in the Tao, and we have developed a very useful method of dumbing down the NONLOCAL to an ersatz LOCAL for SHARING our ineffable experience of inclusion in the Tao. And the fact that we have developed ‘language and grammar’ to make possible the ‘SHARING’ of a dumbed down version of the ineffable NONLOCAL Tao, … may diminish but not extinguish the huge value of ‘rendering intellectually shareable’ a reduced to effable version of the ineffable.
WHAT REDUCTIONS ARE INVOLVED IN MAKING THE INEFFABLE-BECAUSE-NONLOCAL Tao EFFABLE?
ANSWER: — THOSE REDUCTIONS THAT REDUCE THE NONLOCAL TO THE LOCAL.
THE REDUCTION FROM NONLOCAL TO LOCAL BRINGS INTO PLAY AN UNAVOIDABLE AMBIGUITY;
OUR SENSORY EXPERIENCE is our primary reality, and it is ‘ineffable’ since it is our experience of inclusion in a transforming relational continuum aka wave-field aka the Tao which is a NONLOCAL DYNAMIC.
NONLOCALITY which characterizes the wave-field (the Tao) is where the descriptor of the world-as-relational-flow, as ‘INEFFABLE’ comes from. The Tao which can be told is not the true Tao.
Humanings are like hurricanings and like all formings in the ‘flow’ (the Tao). The ‘ing’ suffix is to convey the fact that ‘everything is in flux’ and THERE IS NO SUCH THING IN THE REALITY OF OUR SENSORY EXPERIENCE AS A ‘LOCAL’ THING-IN-ITSELF. IN OTHER WORDS, ‘NONLOCALITY’ PREVAILS IN THE REALITY OF OUR SENSORY EXPERIENCE.
The concept of ‘LOCAL’ is abstraction that we invent for the practical purpose of rendering the ineffable Tao effable. For example, the inductive forms within a flow such as a ‘cat’s paw’ that we see when the wind induces a pattern of ripples on the surface of the ocean, INFORMS US VISUALLY IN A LOCAL SENSE even though the real physical phenomenon is unbounded in space-time. The sense of LOCAL is thus VISUAL and that which is VISUAL and LOCAL is something we can share by pointing to it and developing language to describe it.
The SHAREABILITY of the LOCAL-VISIBLE opens the way to bringing our awareness to a common FOCUS and it thus tends to ECLIPSE our understanding of the physically real NONLOCAL, NON-VISIBLE phenomenon which we INTUIT is the primary phenomenon. That is, OUR SENSUAL EXPERIENCE of INCLUSION IN A NONLOCAL PHYSICAL PHENOMENON (the atmospheric wind flow) comes right after our VISUAL OBSERVATION of the LOCAL CAT’S PAW, and while the NONLOCAL windflow is the ‘PRIMARY REALITY’, the SECONDARY REALITY of the LOCAL-VISIBLE cat’s paw, because it is LOCAL and VISIBLE and thus SHAREABLE, becomes the COMMON basis that serves our communicating and organizing, … thus leaving behind, as far as our gesturing and signalling communications go, … the REAL, NONLOCAL PHYSICAL PHENOMENA.
The ‘cat’s paw’, being LOCAL in its VISIBLE aspect, has the potential to organize and connect our intellectual focus as in pointing and gesturing and the more evolved signalling such as language and grammar based discourse.
NOTE THAT this precedence of orientation to the VISUAL, which orients us to the LOCAL has great utility in that it can ORGANIZE our intellectual attention to the point that there is a ‘drop out’ of our sensory awareness in the REAL phenomenon, which is NONLOCAL, in which we are INCLUDED.
The point here with this cats-paw example is that what organizes our COLLECTIVE INTELLECTUAL focus is that which is LOCAL and VISIBLE, … leaving in the lurch, our fullblown sensory awareness of INCLUSION IN THE NONLOCAL FLOW AKA ‘THE TAO’.
OUR WESTERN CULTURE ORIENTATION TO EXTRACTING UNDERSTANDING OF THE NONLOCAL FLUID (WAVE-FIELD) WORLD ON THE BASIS OF THE LOCAL AND VISIBLE is like the story of the drunk who loses his wallet on a dark and unlit portion of the street but searches for it under the streetlight because the ‘search conditions are better there, where one can see things more clearly’.
We can all see the cat’s-paw and thus it can ‘organize our attention’ and provide us with a ‘common’, LOCAL-because-VISIBLE reference point.
BUT WHAT IF WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE NONLOCAL, NON-VISIBLE IS THE PRIMARY REALITY? This is the actual case since matter is a precipitate of the wave-field. This opens up for us a deeper understanding of what is going on than than the understanding based on that which is LOCAL-BECAUSE-VISIBLE.
Pre-amble: Why Western Culture is So ‘Successful’ and ‘So Troubled’.
‘Success’ in the culture of the WEST is measured in ‘producer-product’ terms where ego swells the head (we see ourselves as name-instantiated things-in-ourselves who we impute to be LOCAL, INDEPENDENT authors of actions and developments. This language and grammar intellectual ‘double error’ eclipses the RELATIONAL reality of our sensory experience of inclusion in NONLOCALITY; i.e. inclusion in the transforming relational continuum (‘the Tao’) wherein inspiration fills the heart.
In understanding ourselves as belonging to NONLOCAL relational transformation (the Tao), there is no need to INVENT the concept of LOCAL BEING and LOCAL SOURCING of ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS as is done in language and grammar by inventing the PRODUCER-PRODUCT concept.
Because the WEST makes mental models of reality in terms of ABSTRACT LOCAL individual and collective (name-instantiated) producer-product agents that deliver SUCCESS in the abstract intellectual PRODUCER-PRODUCT sense, the relational transformation that is the NATURAL NONLOCAL reality of our sensual experience, submerges beneath our active intellectual awareness (we drop from consciousness the inherently NONLOCAL nature of the Tao dynamic.
WAR is a symptom of Western Allopathic Psychological Orientation
There has always been the Hygiean – Aesculapian Division in how we understand the dynamics of nature. The Hygiean approach is the cultivating and sustaining of balance and harmony while the Aesculapian approach is to root out and eliminate ‘pathogens’ or ‘trouble-makers’. If we first orient to the cultivating of balance and harmony, we can use the ‘elimination of pathogens’ as a ‘back-up’ last resort, as in indigenous aboriginal cultures, … but if we move the anti-pathogen (Aesculapian) approach into primacy, it becomes our first course of action. The Robin Hoods and Jean Valjean’s of the world with their Hygiean ethical orientation INSPIRE us while the brute force anti-pathogen approach associates with the ego of those who consider themselves on the side of ‘good’ with respect to their ability to ‘eliminate that which is bad’.
Once we elevate the allopathic Aesculapian approach into primacy over the Hygiean and make it the first course of action, we give no mercy to the Robin Hoods and Jean Valjeans but follow the anti-pathogen course of removing all that disturb the current equilibrium even if that current equilibrium preserves gross imbalance as with rich and poor. In other words, there is no longer any room for Hygiean recultivating of balance and harmony once the anti-pathogen orientation is given precedence.
WAR is the social-dynamic that corresponds to the anti-pathogen approach, which was recognized as problematic by indigenous aboriginal peoples as recorded in the GREAT PEACE of the Iroquois as also in the indigenous aboriginal folklore generally, which is why such folklore accords with modern physics understanding of the way that Nature works.
Pathogen elimination has become the first course of action of Western society, rather than the back-up. Philosophically and scientifically, there is no such thing as a pathogen, but there is relational polarization that can give rise to a ‘short-circuit’ where someone or something ‘gets zapped’. The natural remedy is as found in the ‘healing circles’ of indigenous aboriginal cultures where the root source of relational imbalance (polarization) is addressed and dealt with.
Western culture has largely opted for elevating the allopathic approach to the first course of action, in both the management of relational dynamics within the individual and within the dynamics of the social collective. This is problematic particularly where the influences giving rise to polarization continue undiminished or are even amplified by the anti-pathogen actions. The anti-pathogen approach has become the single tool for addressing conflict, and as with the man whose only tool is a hammer, everything is looking like a nail.
REMEMBRANCE, for Hygieans, is something we want to be recorded in a picture of the reconciled ‘sides’ shaking hands. This is the way of the PEACEMAKER, as in the indigenous aboriginal (e.g. Iroquois) legend of the peacemaker, Dekanawideh, does not seek to overthrow or exterminate the evil (pathogen) Adodarho, but to meet and find re-conciliatory harmony through mutual participation in relational transformation that subsumes polarized tensions.
We know, from natural experience, this kind of ’Hygiean’ REMEMBRANCE and how natural and harmonious it feels because it is very often our natural ethic in resolving interpersonal strife, and it has the same topological relational form as in the stories of Robin Hood and Jean Valjean, where ‘rebalancing’ is the first-sought remedy for antithetical polarization, rather than taking the imbalance to the abstract extreme of division into the binary opposites of ‘good’ versus ‘evil’. As Heraclitus pointed out; in nature, such extreme opposites are the ingredients of harmony as in the pulled string of the Lyre, … the point is not to persist in opposition until EITHER one OR the other prevails, but to move forward so as to transcend the polarization to a new understanding where BOTH the one AND the other are mutually accommodating. This is referred to as QUANTUM LOGIC OF THE INCLUDED MEDIUM, in modern physics wherein ‘figure’ and ‘ground’ are NOT TWO mutually exclusive things-in-themselves, but only appear so, as with the duning and desert floor, where language and naming is what imputes ontological thing-in-itself TWONESS where there is UNITY that merely gives the appearance of TWONESS, as with figure-and-ground in a fluid dynamic.
REMEMBRANCE can thus also come in our acknowledgement of ‘mitakuye oyasin’, ‘we are all related’ by our common inclusion within the transforming relational continuum aka ‘the Tao’ aka ‘the Great Mystery’ aka the Logos’ aka ‘the wavefield’.
MEANWHILE, WESTERN CULTURE ‘REMEMBRANCE’ can harden and entrench our Aesculapian EITHER GOOD OR BAD, EITHER WINNER OR LOSER way of thinking by celebrating the ‘defeat of an enemy’ and thus stopping short of celebrating the reunification of brothers who had become polarized against one another. Do we want to understand the achievement of our fallen-in-battle friends and relatives as their contribution to WINNING THE WAR, … or to the re-establishment of peace and harmony? Do we want to continue to walk the proud walk of winners and spit on the defeated, or do we want to embrace our war-alienated brothers and rejoice in the healing of a bitter division? What of these understandings do we want to associate with the REMEMBRANCE of the sacrifice of our fallen brothers, … the Hygiean or the Aesculapian understanding?
* * *
HOW DOES ‘POLITICS’ COME INTO THIS?
Soldiers tend to be faithful followers of political leaders that represent the ‘sovereignty’ of their nation, and many nations demand of their citizens the solemn oath of allegiance that includes the commitment to ‘bear arms’ in support of their nation, which means, in support of the leader of their nation, whatever sort of individual that may be.
Western culture has this penchant for binary thinking in terms of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ and the exalting of ‘winners’ and the demeaning of ‘losers’, although political leaders appeal to the noble and heroic spirit of those in their armed services to throw themselves body and soul into the fray in support of their nation and their national leader. In fact, such encouragement is common to all nations, and citizens swear oaths that they will support their nation’s leader, and that is seen in Western culture as an ‘honourable’ thing.
Who, What, When, Where, Why are the five W’s of ‘reporting’ on ‘what is going on’, as if ‘what is going on is NOT the nonlocal unfolding of the Tao, but is instead ‘local’ origination.
IS THIS REALISTIC?
My answer would be ‘NOT!’. Who says that ‘reality’ should be LOCALLY emergent?
Reflection will show that reality as in the relational (wave-field) understanding of reality of modern physics, indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta is inherently NONLOCAL.
NONLOCALITY IS INEFFABLE, and this is not a problem for that aspect of ourselves that wants to give ourselves up to cultivating and sustaining harmony in the world; i.e. in the transforming relational continuum or ‘Tao’ of Lao Tzu or Logos of Heraclitus.
How does this Bodhisattva ‘way’ of participating in the world that is very unlike the stilted and mechanical ‘walk-the-intellectual-talk’ way of Western culture, … the way of the Tao wherein we ‘let the soft animal of our body love what it wants to love’, fit into place, … for example, could we DISCOVER the Tao with our Western culture ‘five W’s of reporting?. If we have to use ‘naming’ to ‘nail down’ the ‘who or what’ and thus establish ‘thing-in-itself’ being, and then use ‘where’ and ‘when’, are we not simply DEFINING the EXISTENCE OF MATTER, SPACE AND TIME?
WHO SAYS THESE FIVE W QUESTIONS ARE MEANINGFUL? ARE THEY NOT LIKE ‘CUCKOO’S EGGS’ THAT MAY HATCH OUT AND TAKE OVER WHAT COULD HAVE BECOME A MUCH MORE MEANINGFUL UNFOLDING OF UNDERSTANDING? What about ‘nonlocality’ as in the Tao? Is nonlocality ‘not important’?
Reflection will show that nonlocality and ‘ineffable’ go together, as do ‘local’ and ‘effable’, so that the reduction of nonlocal to local is the reduction of ineffable to effable, thus the ‘five w’s’ are a kind of ‘reduction engine’ for reducing the ineffable to effable.
Western culture imposes the concept of 3-dimensions into the intellectual, language and grammar reality modeling of its Western culture adherents. This is a CRAZY-MAKER! Three-dimensional reality’ is NOT REALITY, it is abstraction. There is no way to reduce the Tao to 3-dimensions without losing the basic ineffable essentials of the wave-field; i.e. the transforming relational continuum.
We can explore this via The Western Crippled Cuckoo of Immunization.
Language-Turbocharged Shareability vis-à-vis the EAST – WEST Divide
In order to glimpse into how the psyche’s of EAST and WEST have ‘parted ways’, it is elucidating to use one’s imagination to ‘rewind’ and review the story of the dizzying ride of man’s language-supercharged development of intellection.
Can we imagine, … starting from the era when man was mainly grunting and gesturing and not much farther along in communicating his ineffable sensory experience than diverse other of nature’s forms, …. the kickoff of the amazing accelerated learning curve of language-enabled ‘shareability’ (of ideas, experiences, knowledge) that has come with the developments of common languages?
We are still, today, experiencing the rocketing acceleration of intellectual ‘shareability’ via ‘internet’ based technologies. HOWEVER, if the floodgates of sharing are ‘grilled’ so that what is being shared is other than our sensory experiencing of inclusion in the Tao (which is ineffable) but language based ‘reduction’ thereof, … to what extent is our intellectual understanding in the language-informed ‘commons’ being weaned from sensory experience?
This essay is not simply to gaze in awe at the rocketing advances in knowledge-sharing that have come with humans’ symbol-based (visual image-informing) linguistic communications, but to critically scrutinize the impact of the rapid growth in synthetically liberated, language-based intellectual understanding, from our ‘included-in-the-Tao’ sensory-experiential understanding, … spotlighting the nature of the EAST – WEST split in this regard.