Inspiration Ain’t Never Been Narrativized


Inspiration ain’t never been narrativized.

Inspiration fills the heart, ego swells the head.

One’s personal narrative or ‘life story’ does not exist (it can’t be unravelled from the transforming relational continuum aka the Tao).

But a ‘personal narrative’ can be fabricated using the ‘double error’ aka the ‘ego’ where we use naming to invent an ‘independent being’ and notionally animate it with grammar (the ‘double error’).  By making ourselves out to be the sorcerers of our own actions, we get to build a narrative about ourselves starting from ourselves.

“Our judgement has us conclude that every change must have an author”;–but this conclusion is already mythology: it separates that which effects from the effecting. If I say “lightning flashes,” I have posited the flash once as an activity and a second time as a subject, and thus added to the event a being that is not one with the event but is rather fixed, “is” and does not “become.”–To regard an event as an “effecting,” and this as being, that is the double error, or interpretation, of which we are guilty.” – Nietzsche, ‘Will to Power’, 531

Our actions may be inspired.  That is, the relational circumstances we find ourselves situated in may inspire our movement (e.g. the child has fallen into the rapidly moving stream.   “We act swiftly” … so we say.   Or is it correct to say that ‘we act’?  In the transforming relational continuum the restoring of harmony and resonance is always pulling things (includigg ‘us’) together, as in ‘duning’.  There is no ‘dune’ that is the author of its own action, even though language and grammar spell it out this way (e.g. ‘the dune is growing longer and higher, the dune is shifting to the south, etc. etc.)    ‘Duning’ is a relational, resonant dynamic within the Tao, … i.e. within the transforming relational continuum.  The ‘humaning’ is like the duning.  When the little girl comes into the world, … in her prelingual, relational sensitivity, she is open to inspiration that fills her heart.  She is enthralled by the beauty of nature that she is included in, it is inspiration that fills her heart and inductively shapes her movements in infancy.

As she is taught language, she learns the technique of the ‘double error’ that replaces, through her ability to speak, the ‘inspiration that ain’t never been narrativized’, and she begins to articulate the inarticulable, very crudely at first and becoming less crude as she develops her language skills.  That is, she learns how to use language to articulate (crudely), the Tao that can’t be told, the relational continuum that she is innately included in.  Such articulation is so crude, that as Wittgenstein suggests, we can only use as a stimulus to ‘leap beyond it’, and after attained an ineffable understanding, tossing away the effable pogo-stick the supported the leap from the effable to a sentient intuition of the ineffable Tao.


A Blunt Assessment of our Western Culture Dysfunction




There persists a simple disagreement based in the foundation of thought and language that divides WESTERN CULTURE  from  — MODERN PHYSICS, INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL CULTURES, TAOISM/BUDDHISM AND ADVAITA VEDANTA

As Schroedinger argued (to no avail since the modern physics popular consensus went ‘the other way’), resonance (as in wave phenomena) is the primary reality and it is NOT simply equivalent to particle based reality as the majority vote by modern physicists decided.  (Bohm, Wittgenstein and Nietzsche are implicitly in the same camp with Schroedinger).

In terms of a simple example, one can think of the resonance associated with the ‘duning’ of beach sands in terms of (a) some coordinating forces among the sand particles, and/or (b) in terms of a field of energy-resonance giving rise to particles.  Can we start with ‘resonance’ as a field of influence that manifests in the particles becoming organized and building a dune?  Or, do we start with ‘resonance’ that is more basic even than a ‘particle-organizing influence’?

That is, could it be that resonant energy is all there is and the name ‘particle’ simply opens the way to a double error based means of picturing and talking about the inherently ineffable transforming relational continuum?  Schroedinger’s view was that ‘field’ is a sufficient foundation and that we did not need to insert particles in any foundational role. In other words, the concept of wave-particle duality was for him, language-based befuddlement.

Language and grammar are behind how we ‘think’ about this.  When one says that ‘love (resonance) makes the world go round’, could this explain the unexplained celestial ‘harmony of the spheres’?  The point is that if we first assume the existence of things-in-themselves, we are then obliged, by the logic of language and grammar, to explain their movements and developments. THIS IS THE DOUBLE ERROR OF LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR POINTED OUT BY NIETZSCHE.

Why not avoid the first error (imputing the existence of name-instantiated things-in-themselves) in which case there will be no need for the second, conflating error wherein we endow the name-instantiated thing-in-itself with the power of sourcing actions and developments (i.e. the power of ‘sorcery’).  By introducing the double error, we give ourselves the foundation for ‘talking about’ reality but it comes at a price; i.e. if we can talk about reality in terms of name-instantiated things-in-themselves and their powers of sourcing actions and developments, we can no longer understand reality as the Tao (the transforming relational continuum).  As Wittgenstein points out in his final proposition in Tractatus Logico Philosohicus;

“Of that which we cannot speak, we must pass over in silence” (“Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen”), — Wittgenstein

If we reduce reality to something we can speak about, it is no longer the reality of our actual experience of inclusion in the Tao.  As understood in modern physics (Bohm, Schroedinger), indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta, reality is beyond capture by language, however, language can be employed in an inferential mode, to ‘jog our sensibilities into leaping beyond the explicit intellectual meaning-giving capabilities of language to bring forth an implicit intuitive understanding of the ineffable Tao (the all-including, transforming relational continuum).

The direct and explicit meaning that language and grammar ARE capable of, can only provide the makings of an INVENTED REALITY, and this is problematic since Western culture is employing this INVENTED REALITY as its ‘operative reality’.  In what way this is problematic is the subject of this essay.

* * * end of introduction * * *




-1- Western culture adherence is a ‘crazy-maker’.  We, the Western culture collective ask ourselves to subscribe to the ‘double error’ which is essentially ‘sorcery’.  Yes, it’s the same abstract concept that Western culture adherents embraced in the middle ages.  The psycho recipe is simple; First, use language to formulate a ‘name’ that imputes some ‘thing-in-itself’ with persisting existence and conflate this with grammar that psychologically endows the name-instantiated thing-in-itself with notional powers of sourcing actions and developments.

By ‘naming’, a relational flow-form we psychologically impute persisting thing-in-itself being (an intellectual abstraction) to the named flow-form (flow-forms are all there is in the Tao of our actual sensory experience).  The ‘duning’ becomes ‘a dune’ at which point we inherit the ‘burden of concreteness’ in that we have to invent grammar to explain the relational transformation in which the form is an appearance.  Here comes the ‘inhabitant’ – ‘habitat’ split and the rest of the double error accoutrements that associate with ‘sorcery’ aka ‘the producer-product dynamic’.

In other words, by ‘naming’, we create an abstraction that connotes persisting thing-in-itself existence.  e.g. the ‘dune’ is no longer understood as a resonance-based ‘duning’ in the Tao/flow (an appearance or apparition or phantom-form within the Tao/flow).  Whereas ‘motion’ and ‘development’ were included in the ONE DYNAMIC of relational transformation, our move to ‘abstract out’ a form by ‘naming’ the form and thus abstractly endowing it with persisting thing-in-itself existence, has earned us that psychological overhead that Pre-Socratic philosophy terms ‘the burden of concreteness’.

The point is that when we Western culture adherents psychologically objectify flow-forms in the flow by naming them and thus imputing persisting thing-in-itself existence to them, we inherit the psychological overheads of having to speak to their movements and developments, overheads which we don’t have when we intuitively accept forms as appearances within the ONE-FLOW or Tao.


Sense-Experience reality vis a vis Western culture intellectual INVENTED REALITY


There are no ‘people’, peopling is an appearance within the holodynamic (the Tao).

* * *

-1- The world of our sensory experience is an energy flow-field; it is a transforming relational continuum that has been termed the Tao (Lao Tzu) and/or the Logos (Heraclitus).

“The Tao that can be told is not the true Tao” – Lao Tzu

The world is an ineffable flow-continuum; i.e. a holodynamic.  As Wittgenstein observes,

“Of that which we cannot speak, we must pass over in silence” (“Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen”), — Wittgenstein


-2- The world as a flow-continuum (holodynamic) cannot be captured by language since language consists of names or nouns and names signify persisting existence and there are no things with persisting existence in the Tao.  Since the flow continuum cannot be captured DIRECTLY by language since everything is in flux, the work-around is to use the names and animating verbs as ‘Wittgenstein ladders’ to conjure up an impression of the transforming flow-continuum (holodynamic)

  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. Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.”

  — Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico Philosophicus


-3- Western culture reality is unique in its use of sorcery IN AN EXPLICIT SENSE.  In the transforming relational continuum; i.e. in reality understood as the transforming relational continuum, there are IN THE REALITY OF OUR SENSORY EXPERIENCE no name-instantiated ‘things-in-themselves’ with powers of sourcing actions and developments; i.e. this is the ‘double error’ of language and grammar as pointed out by Nietzsche.  This language and grammar based double error conjures up a psychological impression of a ‘thing-in-itself’ that ‘eclipses’ and ‘occludes’ the understanding of our natural experience wherein there are only relational forms without persisting being’ (as expressed by ‘mitakuye oyasin’).



Whistleblowing on Western Culture



Western culture is a crazy-maker, as R.D. Laing author of The Divided Self succinctly points out.

The pseudo-reality promoted by Western culture as the ‘operative reality’ is based on the ‘double error’ that is chronic in Western culture thinking, as pointed out by Nietzsche;

First Error: Using ‘naming’ to impute the persisting existence of a thing-in-itself

Second Error: Conflating the first by imputing powers of sourcing actions and developments to the name-instantiated thing-in-itself

This double error of language and grammar conditions the intellect so as to think of dynamics NOT IN TERMS OF RELATIONAL TRANFORMATION as implied by our sensory experience, and as constitutes the ‘reality’ of modern physics, indigenous aboriginal cultures, Buddhism/Taoism and Advaita Vedanta, … but in terms of ‘sorcery’.

The world experienced through our sensations of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum is ECLIPSED by language and grammar stimulated intellectual construction that reduces reality by means of the double error to synthetic terms of picturable things and the notional actions and developments of these things, eclipsing our sensation based understanding of reality in terms of the all-including Tao or Logos or ‘field’, and substituting in its place, an empty space locally populated by name-instantiated ‘things-in-themselves’, intellectual abstractions arising by way of the ‘double error’.

Naming makes a powerful impression on the mind.  For example, the name ‘Poland’ (see ‘The Changing Borders of Poland’ ) does not depend on the existence of some explicit entity since ‘naming’ creates, in the mind, the notion of a ‘thing-in-itself’ that can then be used in language and grammar based ‘story-telling’.  The ‘boil’ in the ‘flow’ has us thinking of the ‘boil’ as a real ‘thing-in-itself’ but the boil is simply the way that ‘flow’ appears to us; i.e. the boil is an ‘apparition’.  The same is true for the hurricane and the same is true for the human and for all name-instantiated thing-in-themselves abstractions.


How Trump Exposes the Sorcery-Based Divide in Western Culture



Western culture continues to foster belief in sorcery, whether in the systems sciences terms of the ‘producer-product dynamic, or the old fashion alchemical sense of ‘sorcery’.  In either case, it is pure abstraction ungrounded in the reality of our actual sensory experiencing of inclusion in the ineffable Tao, the ‘field’ of modern physics.

‘Sorcery’ is sustained in the Western psyche by the ‘double error’ of language and grammar (Nietzsche) and it abstraction that presents to the psyche in two mutually opposing ways captured in the title ‘Mephistopheles et l’Androgyne’ (English title ‘The Two and the One’) by anthropologist Mircea Eliade.

The double error is the language and grammar technique we Western culture adherents are employing that sustains the illusion of ‘sorcery’, the same sorcery as believed in in the Western culture’s medieval era, which has never ‘gone away’ (Newton ‘embedded it’ in Newtonian physics); i.e. modern Western culture continues to cultivate belief in ‘sorcery’ that feeds the ego.

The belief in sorcery divides Western culture adherents into opposing camps that we call ‘conservatives’ and ‘liberals’.   ‘Sorcery’ does not arise in modern physics, indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta, all of which understand reality as a relational energy field or flowing continuum (the Tao).


Interrupting Western Culture’s Continuing Descent into Psychosis



How we can switch from being part of the problem (of Western Culture’s Descent into Psychosis) to becoming part of the solution.


The core of the problem is our (Western culture adherents’) belief in ‘sorcery’, which as Nietzsche points out, is built into our language and grammar by the ‘double error’ i.e. by;  (first error) believing in the ‘existence’ of name-instantiated ‘things-in-themselves’ and conflating this by (second error) imputing powers of sourcing actions and developments to the name-instantiated thing-in-itself.


How Western Culture “being-based reality” Usurps The Natural Primacy of “relational resonance-based reality”.



RESONANCE based reality:

Three levels of experiencing resonance;

-1- sensory experiencing of resonance as in inclusion in vibration,

-2- visualizing resonance as in wave motion (e.g. duning as rippling), … and

-3-  intellectually ‘snap-shotting’ visual imagery of transient ripple-forms so as to ‘capture’ them in a picture and identify the ‘picture’ with a ‘name’ (e.g. the name ‘dune’).

Sensory experience of resonance (1)  is ‘ineffable’ in that it is innately beyond visual or other explicit means of capture and representation,, … however, (2) resonance manifests ‘indirectly’ by way of visible form as in duning where sand flows like ‘waves’ within the resonance (the duning waves are secondary to the resonance; i.e. they are NOT ‘the resonance’ but ‘infer’ the deeper reality of a resonance field that is inducing the rippling or ‘duning’ that makes the not-directly-visible wavefield manifest (e.g. as in a Kundt’s tube demonstration), … , … (3) ‘Snapshotting’ the ‘image’ of a rippling allows us to examine ‘a ripple’ as if the ‘ripple’ or ‘duning’ were a fixed entity existing as a ‘thing-in-itself’, a psychological impression that language allows us to abstractly concretize by ‘naming’.

Language and grammar are devices that stimulate psychological impressions, and Western culture adherents use ‘naming’ to impute abstract ‘thing-in-itself existence’ (i.e. persisting existence) to resonance based forms such as ‘ripplings’, hence the naming of an intrinsically evanescent but visually persisting long enough for snap-shotting and naming ‘dune’ puts the wielder of language and grammar in the position of being able to RECONSTRUCT resonance from the reduced basis of snapshot images that have been ‘name-labelled’ and RE-presented as ‘things-in-themselves’ whereupon they can be ‘re-animated’ with grammar so as to give the intellectually active mind (stimulated by language and grammar) an intuitive understanding of the ineffable phenomenon of ‘resonance’ in terms of language-and-naming instantiated ‘things-in-themselves’ conflated with grammar-instantiated powers of sourcing actions and developments.

The latter (in italics) is the ‘double error’ that we Western culture adherents are in the habit of making which Nietzsche identified as a chronic source of aberrant thinking in Western culture adherents.

This reduction of resonance as in ‘duning’, by means of language and grammar, to notional ‘things-in-themselves with powers of sourcing actions and developments’, opens the door to INVENTING REALITY (intellectually in the mind) in a reduced ‘mechanistic’ visual picturable ‘double error’ based representation, dropping out the fundamental reality of ‘resonance’ (which comes with sensory experience but which is ineffable and not capturable in visual picture form).

Our Western culture adherents’ employing of this ‘dumbed down’ visual picturable ‘double error’ based version of reality, while useful to us for purposes of crudely (linguistically) sharing our experience, is, where (MIS)taken as the ‘operative reality’, the source of delusion and social psychopathology.

‘Reality’ that is not based on ‘resonance’ (wave dynamics) is NOT ‘reality’ but intellectual contrivance that serves only to construct a shareable, but greatly ‘reduced’ (simplified) INVENTED REALITY.  By ‘greatly reduced reality’, I am referring to the fact that the ‘double error’, imputes ‘thing-in-itself’ based ‘sorcery’ to be the animating agency of reality, (rather than relational transformation).  Because there is an innate ambiguity in sorcery-based reality invention, it divides people on the basis of whether the ‘source’ is the ‘individual’ (conservative) or the ‘collective’ (liberal).  This is an argument that divides Western culture sorcery-believers (Western culture is built from belief in sorcery aka ‘product-product abstraction).  Since there is no such thing in the reality of our actual experience as ‘sorcery’ (i.e. language and grammar can be used to serve up an abstract ‘intellectual’ impression of ‘sorcery’).  This intellectual abstraction is also termed the ‘producer-product dynamic’.  The Western culture social division and argumentation set up by this (a) belief in the abstraction of ‘sorcery’, and (b) division of belief in ‘sorcery’ into two camps, one which believes in the individual as the source and another which believes in the collective as the source.  Both sides of the argument; conservative and liberal, are ‘tilting at windmills’ since there is no such thing as ‘sorcery’ in the reality of our actual experience.

It’s not like this ‘double error’ has not been publicly and openly ‘brought to light’; it has been clearly stated by Nietzsche along with the pitfalls associated with it.  The following two quotes from Nietzsche (a) point to the basic ‘double error’ problem, and (b) how this error impacts our psyche and gives rise to ego as associates with belief in one’s ‘power of sorcery’;

“Our judgement has us conclude that every change must have an author”;–but this conclusion is already mythology: it separates that which effects from the effecting. If I say “lightning flashes,” I have posited the flash once as an activity and a second time as a subject, and thus added to the event a being that is not one with the event but is rather fixed, “is” and does not “become.”–To regard an event as an “effecting,” and this as being, that is the double error, or interpretation, of which we are guilty.” – Nietzsche, ‘Will to Power’, 531

* * *

“In its origin language belongs in the age of the most rudimentary form of psychology. We enter a realm of crude fetishism when we summon before consciousness the basic presuppositions of the metaphysics of language, in plain talk, the presuppositions of reason. Everywhere it sees a doer and doing; it believes in will as the cause; it believes in the ego, in the ego as being, in the ego as substance, and it projects this faith in the ego-substance upon all things — only thereby does it first create the concept of “thing.” Everywhere “being” is projected by thought, pushed underneath, as the cause; the concept of being follows, and is a derivative of, the concept of ego. In the beginning there is that great calamity of an error that the will is something which is effective, that will is a faculty. Today we know that it is only a word.” – Nietzsche, ‘Twilight of the Idols’


The points to remember here are;


Overview of ‘How Western Culture Breeds Psychosis’



See also, in this trilogy, in addition to this article ‘Overview of How Western Culture Breeds Psychosis;

A Concise Account of How Western Culture Breeds Psychosis


Introduction to: “A Concise Account of how Western Culture Breeds Psychosis”


* * *

In plain terms, the source of aberrant thinking derives from ‘the double error’ (Nietzsche) of language and grammar that is ‘built in’ to Western language and grammar. This double error has us believing in ‘sorcery’.

Instead of understanding reality as in modern physics, through experiencing inclusion within the transforming relational continuum, reality in Western culture is understood ‘intellectually’, through everyday language and grammar discourse, in the ‘double error’ terms of name-instantiated things-in-themselves, notionally with powers of sourcing actions and developments (‘sorcery’).

In reality as understood NOT as in the Western culture mainstream’s ‘operative reality’, but in modern physics, indigenous aboriginal, Taoist/Buddhist and Advaita Vedanta cultures, visible, tangible ‘forms’ are NOT understood as local, solid material ‘things-in-themselves, but as relational features in the flow (Tao) which can be thought in the same sort of sense as sand ‘duning’.  Language and grammar allow us to reduce the intrinsically relational phenomenon of ‘duning’ to terms of ‘dunes’, notional things-in-themselves that are no longer resonance based features in the overall flow (transforming relational continuum).


Introduction to: “A Concise Account of how Western Culture Breeds Psychosis”



WHAT THIS IS ABOUT:       (i.e. ‘A Concise Account of how Western Culture Breeds Psychosis‘)

The world dynamic is characterized by many tensions arising from political, religious and philosophical differences.  This note is to introduce a philosophical discussion entitled; “A concise account of how Western culture breeds psychosis”

The viewpoint aligns with modern physics and is thus very different from the viewpoint that evidently dominates in shaping current Western culture social dynamics.  For example this viewpoint conforms with the understanding of reality found in indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta.  The language and grammar stimulated source of this difference in the understanding of reality is explored in the article.

The following is a brief introduction/overview of the article;

* * *

According to modern physics, reality is a dynamic relational field (‘the Tao’), a transforming relational continuum including everything, ourselves included.  This field may be thought of in terms of ‘resonances within resonances’ and we, ourselves, may think of ourselves as resonance within ‘the Resonance’ (the Tao).

Reality, as thus understood, is in continual flux and is ‘ineffable’ i.e.

“The Tao that can be told is not the true Tao” – Lao Tzu

“Of that which we cannot speak, we must pass over in silence”.  – Wittgenstein

This ‘reality’ is ineffable; i.e. it is relational transformation wherein ‘everything is in continuing flux’ (Heraclitus).  Because language makes use of explicit terms (‘names’) that signify things-in-themselves with persisting existence (forms that are NOT in flux, or ‘structures’ rather than ‘processes’), such linguistic utterances, being explicit, cannot directly refer to ‘reality’.  Words signifying ‘things-in-themselves’ (abstractions in a world of flow) can only serve as expedients which can, with the help of grammar’, indirectly allude to ‘flow’ and thus to the basic reality as understood in modern physics.


A Concise Account of How Western Culture Breeds Psychosis


This note is a summary of the findings of the psychological investigations that have been shared on this ‘Aboriginal Physics’ website.

Warning: Understanding how language and grammar, as used in Western culture, is at the bottom of this ‘Culture Against Man’ phenomenon (as Jules Henri put it) requires the reader’s close vigilance since the language that is hiding self-deception within it, is the same language I am using herein to explain Western culture language and grammar based self-deception.


Go to Top