Western Society Nuttiness ‘In a Nutshell’
The basics of understanding the nuttiness in Western culture based ‘social dynamics’ can be captured in point form as follows;
-1- The world of our natural experience is of inclusion in a transforming relational continuum; i.e. a ‘flow’ (Tao) inhabited by relational forms.
-2- There is no such thing as ‘being’. It is pure intellectual abstraction signaled by a ‘name’ or ‘noun’ in language
-3- There are no such things as ‘beings with action-authoring powers’. This is pure intellectual abstraction contrived by conjoining a ‘verb’ and a ‘noun’.
-4- ‘Ego’ derives from attributing ‘authoring powers’ to ‘oneself’ perceived abstractly as an ‘independent being’ defined [given imputed persisting stand-alone existence] by a ‘name’.]
-5- ‘Lock-in’ due to ‘high switching costs’ is a phenomenon affecting the social relational dynamic; e.g. once one has attributed ‘authoring powers’ to beings’ (as in the Western culture psychology), the inflating of the ego (sense of being-based self-authorship), gives rise to notional ‘high achievers and low achievers’. ‘High achiever’ and ‘low achiever’ are abstract concepts depending on the abstract concept of ‘being-based-authoring’ that have no ‘reality’ in the relational world of our actual experience (since there is no such thing in relational-experiential reality as being-based authorship).
The above 5 points capture the basic psychologically aberrant underpinnings of Western culture. (more…)
Western society seen as a society that ‘intellectually constructs its own reality’ (i.e. its own intellectual pseudo-reality)
This ‘reality inventing view’ can be understood by juxtaposing the Newtonian concept of nature with the modern physics understanding of the ‘real world of our actual relational experience’ as relational forms in a transforming relational continuum. The latter understanding comes to us through our inclusional relational experience, as in Taoism (inclusion in the ‘Tao’) and as in the Heraclitean worldview wherein ‘everything is in flux’ (every form is a relational form within the flow; aka an ‘apparition’).
In the world understood as ‘transformation’ —i.e. as a purely relational dynamic,— the cognitive traction based on notional locally existing things-in-themselves and their action-authoring dynamics is not available. What is ‘missing’ in the relational understanding coming directly from our experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum is the abstract concepts of ‘being’ (things-in-themselves) and ‘authoring’ (locally instantiated creative ‘sourcing’ or ‘sorcery’).
Three Ways of ‘Understanding’
There are three ways of understanding self and world, only one of which corresponds to a modern physics based understanding of the world. These three ways can be visualized by contemplating a whirlpool or ‘whorl’ such as a ‘hurricane’ and its relationship with ‘flow’. The three levels are as follows;
This PSI-SE (‘Spicy’) ‘Special Edition’ (#18) is in memory of feisty Martine Dodds-Taljaard, Stellenbosch University Systems Scientist and Apparition who recycled within the transforming relational continuum on June 4th, 2001. See also; http://www.goodshare.org/taljaard.htm ‘Politically Incorrect Humanism’: The Work of Martine Dodds-Taljaard.
Brief Summary of PSI-SE Philosophical Research Findings (Wordcount 236)
- Incoherence (formulating one’s actions based on an erroneous understanding of ‘reality’) pervades the Western social dynamic.
- Incoherence starts from Western language-based intellection that delivers abstractions which conflict with relational experience.
- The Western practice of putting intellection into an unnatural primacy over relational experience sources social dysfunction.
- Indigenous aboriginal culture, Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta support the natural primacy of relational experience over abstraction.
- Western intellectually constructed “_reality_“ errs in the linguistic-cognitive imputing of reality to ‘beings’, ‘authors’ and ‘acts’.
- The reality of our natural experience is of inclusion in a transforming relational continuum without ‘beings’, ‘authors’ and ‘acts’.
- ‘Beings’, ‘authors’ and ‘acts’ are abstractions of ‘appearances’ aka ‘apparitions’ that are relational experience based.
- Language and grammar are used to construct cognitive “realities” based on name-reified ‘apparitions’ [humans, hurricanes etc.]
- When behaviour is informed and shaped by such abstract reality constructions, the result is incoherence in the social dynamic.
- The reality of indigenous aboriginal cultures, Buddhism, Advaita Vedanta and modern physics is ‘apparition’, NOT ‘being’ based.
- Modern physics affirms the physical reality of ‘apparitions’ (relational forms in the transforming relational continuum).
- A whorl in the flow (hurricane), a human, a material form, are ‘apparitions’ (field flow-forms) that have no independent material existence. Language based ‘naming’ of such ‘apparitions’ imputes ‘thing-in-itself being’ to the ‘apparitions’, literal belief in which is the source of ‘incoherence’ in the relational social dynamic.
* * *
What follows below is supportive ‘elaboration’; i.e. the essential points are covered in the 12 point 236 word preceding summary.
Understanding the Deception Whereby ‘Western Culture’ Appears More ‘Advanced and Competent’ than Indigenous Aboriginal and Buddhist Cultures.
Introduction: How can it be that David Bohm, Erwin Schroedinger and others have endorsed the indigenous aboriginal and Buddhist cultures as embodying a deeper and more true-to-experience understanding of the world that is validated by modern physics while the popular and dominant ‘Western culture’ seems so much more ‘advanced’ than indigenous aboriginal and Buddhist cultures?
Experiencing a ‘Stroke of Insight’ opens up one’s ‘understanding’ to the answer to this question through it’s effect of ‘attenuating’ ‘being-based cognition’ which, in modern Western culture, has established a ‘locked-in’ dysfunctional precedence over ‘relational’ cognition.
The cognitive deception of ‘being’ comes to us through ‘language and grammar’, undermining our naturally evolved ‘animal’ capacity for ‘non-being’ relational cognition as in ‘the Tao’ of Buddhist understanding which parallels the ‘everything is related’ “Mitakuye Oyasin’) of indigenous aboriginal culture.
The source of the deceptive ‘superiority’ of Western ‘being’-based culture can be seen by considering the systems sciences ‘attack’ on ‘suboptimization’
(e.g. ‘The Name of the Devil is Suboptimization’
“The above aphorism, attributed to Kenneth Boulding, points to the inherent weakness characterizing the mindset and socio‐economic, political, educational and managerial practices of Western Industrial society as it developed over the past 300 years. It has its basis in the analytic‐reductionistic scientific paradigm, which, despite the remarkable technological applications it spawned, is inappropriate, conflict‐generating and dysfunctional in a world characterized by global interconnectedness and mutual interdependence …” — György Jaros and Martine Dodds-Taljaard
That is, Western society, in orienting to improving the living conditions of humans seen as ‘independent beings’ is ‘suboptimizing’ the health of humans understood as relational forms in the transforming relational continuum as is the understanding of modern physics. That is, in indigenous aboriginal culture, the human is understood NOT AS AN INDEPENDENTLY-EXISTING BEING’, but as a complex of relations within the relational continuum, hence ‘mitakuye oyasin’, (‘all my relations’ or ‘everything is related’).
I feel like I’m at another ‘milestone’ point in my researches and I wanted to share it with you and get your feedback, if possible.
My guess is that you, all of you, are fully able to ‘free-think’ and explore without having to endorse or reject.
Basically where I’m now at (the understanding associated with my research seems to evolve and deepen as in a fractal view of the earth). I don’t think there is an ‘end point’ but I can tell you briefly where I’m at, which I’d like to ‘capture’ as in the film business where they shoot a scene and say ‘that’s a wrap’.
The Owl and the Human engage on the topic of the Foundations of Western Cognitive Understanding
One day, the owl and the man struck up a conversation in which the man was going on about all the improvements that he and his fellow villagers had made to the land. The owl replied; ‘oh yes, I have heard you humans speak of this concept of ‘improvements’ to the land which becomes the basis for taxing yourselves. It is a curious thought that you could improve on Nature even though we are all included in nature, … kind of like biting and chewing on one’s own teeth.
The man then spoke proudly of his long tradition of applying his intelligence to the challenge of design and construction to ‘improve’ the land as exemplified by his present village that he and his friends had constructed that was replete with ‘mod cons’ that ‘made their lives a lot easier’.
The owl could not resist reminding the man of his earlier statement in which he spoke of how this verdant valley with its babbling fish-filled brooks, its game-filled forest and grain-filled fields had induced the men and their families to settle and ‘develop’ the land; saying;
“while you speak of your village as something you have constructed, as if fully from your own will and volition or ‘productive nature’, … you also speak of being ‘attracted’ by the beauty and fertility of this valley, which you described as a ‘teat’ that nourishes you, and/or a cornucopia, that in your softer moments you refer to as ‘mother earth’, … a ‘horn of plenty’ that you and your fellow villagers draw nourishment from. So, were your actions in constructing your village driven by your inside-outward asserting will and intention, … or were they inductively actualized by the outside-inward orchestrating pull of this richly resourced valley environment?”
An Experience-based Note on How a Left Brain Stroke Changes ‘Cognition’
(Explaining why it is called ‘A Stroke of Insight’)
the mental action or process of acquiring knowledge and understanding through thought, experience, and the senses.
Quite simply, a left-brain stroke wipes out the concept of ‘being’ that comes from ‘naming’. If I can’t recall a person’s name in my post-stroke cognitive mode, it is because the cognitive technique of ‘understanding things’ by way of ‘being’ has ‘dropped out’ or at least been seriously impacted.
All is not lost, however, as relational cognition INCLUDES being based cognition, as I have written about in my series of ‘Post-Stroke-Impression’ notes. The ‘three levels of understanding’ model of Erich Jantsch covers that ground; i.e. nature, nurture and flow, … which he illustrates in terms of a person on land, swimming in the flow, and then included as a flow-feature. These three modes of cognition in which level 1 (flow) includes levels 2 and three while level 2 includes level 3, … makes total sense to me.
Exploring the relational reality that lies beyond ‘being’-based abstraction
‘We’ who explore such topics, cannot easily share them because (a) they do not fit into the typical dinner conversation format of our present culture, since to express them takes a lot of relational connections that can’t fit into a rapid-fire repartee, and (b) because the humanism implicit in trying to share them is not seen as “a humanism of real worth” since it undermines, besmirches or topples the esteemed icons, pillars of society, founding fathers, and celebrities of the culture-in-place. – Henri Laborit, ‘La Nouvelle Grille’
What is confusing us is ‘calling a spade a spade’, ‘what a named thing ‘really is” which distinguishes it from ‘what it is not’. As understood within the abstract concept of ‘being’, there are only the two choices of ‘is’ or ‘is not’. This ‘logic of the excluded third’ began to overtake the purely relational understanding of Heraclitean flow as the basis of Western cognition, starting from the time of Parmenides (circa 500 BCE).
“In France, they call this ‘une forchette’, … in Germany, they call this ‘ein Gabel’, while in England, we call it a ‘fork’ which, of course, ‘is what it actually is’”. In this pleasantry, allusion is made to how words that could signify purely relational forms emerging in a flow, are cognitively hardened (reified) to impute thing-in-itself ‘being’ to what is, in the reality of our actual experience, relational form (i.e. names impute ‘being’ to relational forms in the transforming relational continuum, not only in the case of hurricanes in the flow of the atmosphere but in the case of humans/organisms and relational forms in general, in the natural (relational) world of our actual experience. That is, relational forms in the transforming relational continuum are the physical-experiential reality.
Originally sent to [list].
Here is a short (what is intended as) ‘elucidating’ on the ,,, problem of understanding the abstraction of ‘being’ as belonging to ‘physical reality’ rather than belonging to ‘abstraction’.
I would describe the endemic problem, in ‘Western culture’ of ‘belief in the reality of being’ [not recognizing ‘being’ as a linguistic poetic ‘cognition-bootstrapping tool’] as the core source of social dysfunction termed ‘incoherence’ by Bohm.