APN

Connect the dots: Western Culture is a Crazy-Maker

0

 

-1- As Nietzsche points out, the concept of things-in-themselves with the power of sourcing actions and developments is A DOUBLE ERROR OF LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR.

-2- Belief in the ‘double error’ gives rise to belief in ‘sorcery’ which is the source of ‘ego’. [“sorcery” is the belief in a name-instantiated thing-in-itself having the power of sourcing actions and developments]

-3- The reality of our experience of inclusion in a transforming relational continuum is OCCLUDED, thanks to the ‘double error’, whereby we INVENT REALITY in terms of name-instantiated “things-in-themselves” with notional powers of “SOURCING” actions and developments.

-4- Early Western Culture linguistic expressing of reality was POETIC, as it has to be to capture an impression of the reality of our inclusion as relational forms in a transforming relational continuum, as affirmed in modern physics, indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta

(more…)

The Tools Run Away with the Workman, the Human with the Divine

0

 

This essay explores how, to put it bluntly, Western culture ‘normality’ is driving us crazy by having us believe in a ‘double error’ based ‘reality’ which is essentially the repackaging in respectable attire [Newtonian scientific legitimizing] of middle ages superstitious belief in sorcery.  Because this aberrant belief in ‘sorcery’ has become the Western culture behavioral ‘norm’, the non-complying ‘dissidents’ [including indigenous aboriginals] who remain grounded in natural relational experience and who thus reject ‘sorcery’ and/or those who are manifestly confused by being pressured to conform to this Western culture ‘aberrant sorcery-based normality’, are themselves judged ‘abnormal’ and subjected to programs of remediation that increasingly include anti-psychotic medicating, psychotherapy, confinement in psychiatric hospitals and simple social devaluation on the basis of their poor record in the sorcery department.  Those who accept Western culture sorcery-based ‘aberrant normality’ as the ‘operative norm’ and do well within it, tend to be generously rewarded and given positions of influence and authority that locks the system in place [“lock-in by high switching costs”].  The expression ‘the ‘tools run away with the workman, the human with the divine’ alludes to how the tools of language and grammar REDUCE relational forms in the transforming relational continuum, such as ourselves, to (notional) name-instantiated things-in-themselves with their own incipient powers of sourcing actions and developments [the ‘double error‘].

 

INTRODUCTION:

The tools run away with the workman, the human with the divine – Ralph Waldo Emerson, The Method of Nature

It is impossible to capture, in explicit language, the reality of our experience of inclusion as relational forms in a transforming relational continuum.    Some cultures accept this and never try to go beyond regarding language as ‘poetic expression’ of our innately ‘fluid’ experiential reality.  The tool of language as employed by our intellectualizing faculty is nevertheless capable of using relational forms as the basis for constructing an INVENTED REALITY featuring relational forms as name-instantiated things-in-themselves with powers of sourcing actions and developments. This is something we could use as a rough but useful ‘go-by’ to aid our navigating within the transforming relational continuum, …OR, we could fall into the trap, as we do in Western cultural generally, of confusing our language and grammar based INVENTED REALITY, for our actual operative reality.

But Western culture over the past few centuries has been defining itself by falling into this trap.  GONE from our intellectualizing mind is the relational understanding that continues to come to us through our relational experience as relational forms in a transforming relational continuum.  That is, our explicitizing tools of intellectual abstraction have ‘run away with us’, so that we recast ourselves in our abstracting intellect as name-instantiated things-in-themselves with our own powers of sourcing actions and developments.

This ‘double error’, as Nietzsche refers to it, is the selfsame aberration as Emerson is referring to as  The tools run away with the workman, the human with the divine .  That is, the ‘double error’ is the use of language and grammar to ‘invent’, by the name-instantiating abstracting power of language, a notional ‘thing-in-itself’ that can, by means of the second conflating error, be notionally endowed with the powers of sourcing actions and developments.

The source of the animating dynamic termed ‘reality’, instead of being understood as ‘immanent’ in the transforming relational continuum, is, thanks to Western language and grammar, pushed down and inside the name-instantiated things-in-themselves created with the ‘double error’ and, the root sourcing of reality is thus relocated to the interior of notional (naming and grammar instantiated) ‘independently-existing things-in-themselves with their own powers of sourcing actions and developments.   This is the basis for Western culture’s intellectually contrived INVENTED REALITY which has, over the past few centuries, hijacked the behaviour animating helm formerly (naturally) manned by sensation-informed intuition.

That is, in our infancy, as with other (non-language-utilizing) forms in nature, our sensations inform us of our inclusion within the all-inclusive world-continuum.  This topological understanding of inclusion in the relational continuum never abandons us, but, in the case of humans, such awareness is exposed to being ‘covered over and buried’ by layers of intellectual abstraction which effectively ‘hijack’ reality constructing operations (eclipsing/burying our sensation based experience of relational inclusion).

This problem of the innate shortfall of language-stimulated intellection in capturing the ‘reality’ of our sensory experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum leads to further problematic complications in Western culture where is employed as if it were the ‘operative reality’.  For example;

The tools run away with the workman, the human with the divine – Ralph Waldo Emerson, The Method of Nature

“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

 “I am afraid we are not rid of God because we continue to believe in grammar” — Nietzsche

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.

The point is that the reality of our inclusion, as relational forms in the transforming relational continuum, is not EXPLICITLY expressible in language and can only be obliquely inferred as in poetic expression and/or ‘the Surprise version of the game of Twenty Questions’.  If we can ‘picture it’, it is not ‘reality’ (the all-including transforming relational continuum is not picturable; i.e. it cannot be visualized as something ‘out there in front of us’.)

THE DOUBLE ERROR IS THE EMBODIMENT OF EGO, THE BELIEF THAT ‘WE HAVE THE POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS’.  THIS IS CRAZINESS; I.E. IT IS ABERRANT THINKING THAT IS EQUATED WITH WESTERN CULTURE ‘NORMALITY’, as has been pointed out not only by philosophers such as Nietzsche and physicists such as Bohm but also by psychiatrists such as R.D. Laing.

AVOIDING THE EXPOSURE TO ASSIMILATING OF WESTERN CULTURE CRAZINESS WHILE ONE IS LIVING WITHIN A WESTERN CULTURE SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT REQUIRES ONE TO ‘REGROUND’ IN RELATIONAL UNDERSTANDING, AS IS DEMONSTRATED BY INDIGENOUS ABORIGINALS, BUDDHISTS/TAOISTS AND ADVAITA VEDANTA ADHERENTS IN THIS SITUATION.

* * * END OF INTRODUCTION * * *

(more…)

The Geometry/Topology of Taoism, Liberalism, and Fascism/Conservatism as Divides Society

0

 

ABSTRACT: the dynamic we understand as ‘reality’ seems to ‘come to us’ in three basic forms or ‘levels’ which nest within one another (e.g. as in the systems sciences work of Erich Jantsch [‘Design for Evolution’]).   These three ‘reality options’ accord with my own relational experience, and with my understanding of Nietzsche’s views, so I will proceed directly with a description of these three nested levels of reality, and tie them to popular divisions within human society.   Evidently, the key point for we Western culture adherents is that we have embraced belief in the ‘name-instantiated existence of things-in-themselves with their own powers of ‘sorcery’ [i.e. by ‘sorcery’ I mean the power of the name-instantiated thing-in-itself to source actions and developments’.  This abstract concept of ‘sorcery’ derives NOT FROM OUR ACTUAL RELATIONAL EXPERIENCE, but derives instead from Western language and grammar.  The abstract intellectual concept of ‘sorcery’ gives rise to two ‘versions of reality’ that we refer to as ‘conservative’ reality and ‘liberal’ reality.

(more…)

The Psychological Origin of the Political Divisions; Conservatives & Liberals

0

 

If anyone reading this can dispute the following, or qualify it, this would be of interest to me because all of my inquiry, and, as discussed herein, the inquiry of Nietzsche and Bohm and Wittgenstein and Emerson and others I have cited EVIDENTLY support these findings.  What I am talking about is the ‘delusional’ basis on which Western culture social collectives divide into opposing political camps termed ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal’ (e.g. ‘Republicans’ and ‘Democrats’).  This antagonistic dichotomy, is based on a ‘delusion’ which is popularly referred to in Western culture as ‘cause-effect’ and ‘producer-product’.  Nietzsche has exposed such ‘local sourcing of action and development’ as a language-and-grammar based ‘double error’.

(more…)

Two Minute Self-Test for Western Culture Bewitchment.

0

Are YOU Suffering from Bewitchment by Western Culture?

Two Minute Self-Test for Western Culture Bewitchment.

 

After reading the following, answer the simple questions, and check your result.

(more…)

Ego is the Belief in Sorcery Vested in the Archetype of the Independent Self

0

Forward::

As Nietzsche pointed out, the ‘double error’ provides a psychological foundation for Western culture cognition; the first error uses ‘naming’ to impute the ‘persisting independent existence’ of a notional thing-in-itself, conflating this error with the second error of using grammar to impute powers of sourcing actions and developments to the name-instantiated thing-in-itself.  The double error basis for ‘inventing reality’, ‘wallpapers over’ and ‘silences’ our understanding of reality in terms of inclusion in a transforming relational continuum.   Instead, the double error equips us to psychologically construct reality ‘bottom-up’, laying the foundations simply by using ‘naming’ [first error] to invoke the psychological impression of ‘thing-in-itself existence’ which is then grammatically ‘animated’ as if by its own ‘internal name-instantiated parts [repeat of first error] with their own [second error] grammatically imputed powers of sourcing actions and developments. There has been a slow, creeping ‘take-over’ of this double-error based Invented Reality in Western culture development, as referenced by Charles Dickens in ‘Hard Times’.

In the scene where Sissy Jupe, who has a romantic (relational) notion of a horse, encounters the scientific literalism of her teacher Thomas Gradgrind and his obedient student Bitzer, whereby; it can be established, firmly and rigidly, and every student should know, that a horse is; ‘Quadruped. Graminivorous. Forty teeth, namely twenty-four grinders, four eye-teeth, and twelve incisive. Sheds coat in the spring; in marshy countries, sheds hoofs, too. Hoofs hard, but requiring to be shod with iron. Age known by marks in mouth.’

Dickens ‘warning’ of Western culture’s slide into a hard form of ‘double-error reductionism’ which occludes the impression of reality as inherently relational as conveyed by poetic expression has gone unheeded, and we (Western culture adherents) are currently living in a popularly conceived and linguistically articulated reductionist INVENTED REALITY that is serving as our culturally endorsed ‘operative reality’.

The ‘naming’ triggered ‘double error’ of language and grammar allows us to ‘home in’ and ‘focus’ on ‘particular relational forms’ as and grammar allows us to portray the ‘named things’ as if they were self-animated, whether ‘humans’, ‘nations’ or ‘corporations’. This use of language and grammar equips us for psychological suboptimization’ i.e. illusion/abstraction whereby we undertake to ‘optimize’ a notional ‘thing-in-itself’ (person, nation, corporation) that we have psychologically created by ‘naming’. In some cases, the ‘naming’ can be applied to a relational form in the flow such as a ‘hurricane’ (e.g. ‘Katrina’) as the stem for imputing to it, its own powers of sourcing actions and developments; “Katrina is growing larger and stronger”, … “Katrina is ravaging New Orleans”, … “Katrina is weakening and dissipating”.   ‘Naming’ has ‘magic’ power that can hold the psyche hostage, by way of the ‘double error’, as ‘sorcery’.

‘Naming’ serves communicating in the manner that ‘wheels’ on a car serve to ‘get us to our destination’ of ‘making our point’ in a ‘direct’ manner since by ‘naming’, we ‘define’ the persisting thing-in-itself existence of the ‘named explicit entity’.  Language allows us to formulate the psychological impression that the hurricane named ‘Katrina’ is the source of turbulent flow.  In other words, language allows us to employ the abstraction of ‘sorcery’ by way of ‘naming’ and ‘grammar’.  Relational transformation is ‘occluded’ by this grammar based inference of name-instantiated things-in-themselves with the powers of ‘sourcing’ actions and developments.  This use of ‘naming’ to locally ‘jumpstart’ (source) actions and developments per the ‘double error’ is difficult to extricate ourselves from so as to recover understanding that is in terms of ‘relational transformation’ rather than ‘thing-in-itself based sorcery’.  In other words, Western language and grammar usage ‘tricks and traps the psyche’ through the invoking of local ‘name-instantiated, local thing-in-itself jumpstarted ‘sorcery’.  Sure, it is a short-cut means of communication, but how do we get from such ‘double-error’ based understanding to understanding in terms of inclusion in a transforming relational continuum?

That ‘double error’ issue is put on display by Nietzsche as a Western culture psychological dysfunction; e.g.

“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

What this ‘double error’ does is to occlude or ‘cover up’ with this ‘cheap intellectual double-error wallpaper’, our natural experiencing of dynamics in terms of relational transformation.  ‘Naming’ gives us ‘lightning’ as a notional ‘thing-in-itself’ which grammar conflates with powers of sourcing actions and developments.  Language gives it form in terms of a picture that is available to voyeur perception that is bereft of experiential-sensational content.  We trade out our relational experience for a piece of illustrated intellectual wallpaper.  This opens the door to our current Western culture situation wherein a virgin teenager can know far more about sexual intercourse than her uneducated by sexually experienced counterparts.  Western culture has had a strong tendency towards embrace of a mode of understanding that puts ‘name’ based intellectual knowledge into an unnatural primacy over our experience of inclusion in a nameless relational continuum where “the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao”.

‘Naming’ is far more direct and ‘to the point’ than relational understanding.  This can be seen for example, by way of modern physics; ‘Surprise version of the game of Twenty Questions’, and/or by the ‘sharing circle’ of indigenous aboriginal tradition where understanding of ‘reality’ including ‘self’ and ‘other’, is developed from ‘relations’ as in ‘mitakuye oyasin’ (all my relations).  On the other hand, the Western culture ‘ego’ that is triggered by the abstract concept of the ‘independent thing-in-itself’ is ‘naming-instantiated’.  In indigenous aboriginal cultures, ‘naming’ is used to develop relational understanding that lies intrinsically beyond the psychological powers of ‘naming’; i.e. to imply a floating, relational make-up to the individual, in the same manner as the ‘surprise version of the game of Twenty Questions’ of modern physics.

‘Naming’ has a powerful psychological influence on understanding.  If we see a ‘stars-and-stripes’ shoulder patch on a person’s garment, or a Texas licence plate on the car someone is driving, the name ‘American’ or ‘Texan’ may hijack the helm of our understanding and shut down understanding that is available to us through the experience of relational interaction. This exposure is only an exposure where intellectual understanding has been put into primacy over relational experience based understanding.

Depending on our own experiential and cultural-intellectual history, we may have very different meanings to assign to the name ‘American’, but the point I wish to make here is that ‘naming’ can hijack how we understand things by aborting our natural process of relational inquiry that allows us to develop understanding through experiential co-immersion in the transforming relational continuum. Language, grammar and ‘naming’ (the ‘double error package’) are a great but deceptive ‘intellectual short cut’ to understanding that, in some cultures, has been given a ‘throw-away’ supporting role, while in Western culture, it ends to be a ‘tool that has run away with the workman’ .

For example, if a person says they are a ‘Christian’, that is just a ‘name’.  What does that have to do with the reality of our actual relational experience?  Some say that “the only true Christian was Christ”, indicating once more as in ‘Dicken’s warning’, that ‘naming’ opens the door to an unnatural psychological inversion that puts the understanding coming from ‘naming’ and ‘language-and-grammar triggered intellection’ into an unnatural precedence over our real-life grounded relational experience.  Sure, it may be expedient to use name-labeling as a means of rapid-fire informing on what we are looking at, as with a stars-and-stripes or ‘union-jack’ shoulder patch, but that ‘convenience’ leads us to into psychological submersion in a shallow double-error based INVENTED REALITY.  This point is made by Emerson in ‘The Method of Nature’; i.e. the tools run away with the workman, the human with the divine.

In other words, ‘naming’ is a tool of convenience that puts the spotlight on a relational feature in the flow that is in no way ‘locally knowable’ since, like the boil in the ‘flow’, it is the manifesting of inherently ‘nonlocal’ phenomena.  In Western culture, ‘naming’ is commonly used to reduce a relational forms in the transforming relational continuum to notional ‘things-in-itself’ that can be used within double error based constructions to INVENT REALITY, however, this INVENTED REALITY based on the double error abstraction is nothing like the reality of our actual relational experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum, hence Charles Dicken’s ‘complaint’ expressed through Gradgrind and Bitzer in ‘Hard Times’.

In modern physics as in indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta, ‘naming’ is an expedient to trigger understanding that is purely relational as in the realty of our actual experience of inclusion in a transforming relational continuum. As Emerson pointed out, the tool of ‘naming’ has tended, in Western culture, to ‘run away with the workman’.  In Western culture (in our current era, we are experiencing decline in the perceived value of poetic (relational) expression) by its being displaced by a rising influence of ‘name-dropping’ and its associated ‘double error’ psychological impact (i.e. the psychological impression of being-based sorcery is supported by ‘naming’).  As a result, we are cultivating ‘ego’-based ‘lock-in’ with ‘high switching costs’.  That is, language and grammar abstraction-based (i.e. naming-instantiated things-in-themselves-with powers of sorcery-based) ‘ego that swells the head’ has been steadily unseating and usurping the natural precedence of  purely relational ‘inspiration that fills the heart’. 

* * *

 

 

Summary: … Termed the ‘double error’ of Western culture by Nietzsche, the first error uses ‘naming’ to impute the ‘persisting independent existence’ of a notional thing-in-itself, conflating this error with the second error of using grammar to impute powers of sourcing actions and developments to the name-instantiated thing-in-itself.   ‘Ego’ is the psychological ‘embodying’ of the ‘sorcerer’ archetype within forms in the transforming relational continuum which are inherently relational.  Examples of psychologically invented ‘sorcerers’ include (a) a name-instantiated ‘human being’, (b) a name-instantiated ‘nation’, (3) a name-instantiated ‘corporation’ or ‘organization’.  By way of the double error’, such abstract (language-and-grammar instantiated) entities are understood, psychologically, as ‘independent things-in-themselves with incipient powers of sourcing actions and developments’.  This ‘double error’ is the source of Western culture ego and the INVENTED REALITY based on it.

* * *

(more…)

Fear and Loathing in Humboldt Saskatchewan

0

 

The psychological currents that gather and surround tragedies, such as the Humboldt bus crash, are complex, and all the more so in Western culture where the discipline for ‘good’ versus ‘evil’ judgement that generally prevails has low tolerance for fence-sitter meditations.

This (my) exploration into the complexities that associate with tragedy includes conjecture that may, in Western culture, be disturbing and judged to be in poor taste, but the aim of this psychological investigation is to explore real but uncomfortable possibilities in the hope of liberating a deeper understanding that can contribute to condolence.

(more…)

The Concept of ‘Production’ is a Modern Western-Culture Disguise for ‘Sorcery’

0

* * * BEGIN PREAMBLE * * *

“I am afraid we are not rid of God because we continue to believe in grammar” — Nietzsche

This proposition can be understood in the context of the common Western culture ‘double error’ of grammar pointed out by Nietzsche, wherein we use language to (1)”name’ a relational form in the flow and thus impute persisting ‘thing-in-itself’ existence to the named form (in spite of its purely relational essence as with a ‘boil’, ‘whorl’, hurricane etc.), and (2) notionally endowing the naming-instantiated thing-in-itself with powers of sourcing actions and developments.

THE DOUBLE ERROR:

“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

This ‘double error’ has become so ubiquitous in Western culture intellectual representations that it ‘infects’ the foundations of our understanding.  We speak in terms of ‘climate change’ (a double error) and we speak in terms of ‘product production’ (a double error) which confuses our understanding of ‘reality’ by imparting psychological impressions of independently-existing things-in-themselves (‘climate’, ‘production’) with powers of sourcing actions and developments (‘climate-changes’, ‘products’). That is, our experience of inclusion in relational transformation in reduced, by way of the language and grammar based ‘double error’, to visual representation that appears, ‘in our mind’s eye’, to be ‘out there in front of us’.  ‘Reality’ is not ‘picturable’, … it is our relational experiencing of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.  The double error is a language-and-grammar based intellectual device to reduce our experience to flat-screen voyeur visualization.

That is, the grammar-based ‘double error’ triggers in the mind, the impression of a ‘local being’ with powers of sourcing actions and development.  The abstract notion of locally incipient sourcing of actions and developments has, in Western culture, been alternatively attributed to ‘sorcery’ (magic) and to ‘God’.  In either case, the understanding of the world of modern physics, indigenous aboriginal, Buddhist and Advaita Vedanta, in terms of a transforming relational continuum is PSYCHOLOGICALLY ECLIPSED AND OCCLUDED by this grammatical ‘double error’ based ‘sorcery’ wherein ‘being’ is first pushed underneath an unfolding relational development and given the notional power of sourcing the action and development.

“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’

From this language and grammar ‘double error’ comes, ‘sorcery’ which, in modern Western culture has been ‘sugar-coated’ and euphemized as ‘production’.

There is no such thing as ‘production’ in the real relational world of our actual experience [it IS ANOTHER WORD FOR the ‘double error’], … the concept of ‘production’ is a linguistic-intellectual abstraction that has no place in the transformational reality of our actual relational experience.  To speak of ‘production’ is to speak in the medieval terms of ‘sorcery’.  ‘RELATIONAL TRANSFORMATION IS ALL THERE IS’.

Western culture’s economically motivated focus on the intellectual language and-grammar abstraction of ‘production’ (aka ‘sorcery’) blocks Western culture adherents from tuning in to their physical-experiential sensing of the ‘real’ reality of continuing relational ‘transformation’ in which they/we/all are situationally included.

The Western culture drive to ‘produce’ is intellectual abstraction exemplary of aberrant thinking in terms of ‘double error’ (Nietzsche).  The ‘double error’ is where one employs language and grammar to (1) use ‘naming’ to psychologically imply the ‘reality’ of an independently-existing thing-in-itself, and (2) conflating this first abstraction with a second grammar-based abstraction that notionally endows the name-instantiated ‘thing-in-itself’ with powers of ‘sourcing’ actions and developments

“PRODUCTION” aka “SORCERY” is a ‘double error’.  THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ‘PRODUCTION’ IN THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM OF OUR ACTUAL EXPERIENCE.

(more…)

THE PSYCHOSIS CALLED ‘WESTERN CULTURE’: A PRACTICAL ANTIDOTE

0

 

 

The intellectual-social dynamic of Western culture has fallen prey to the aberrant practice of employing language-and-grammar based ‘logic of the EXCLUDED middle’ to intellectually construct an INVENTED REALITY  that serves as Western culture’s ‘operative realty’.  ‘INVENTED REALITY’ linguistically-intellectually over-writes’ and ‘occludes our EXPERIENTIAL REALITY of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum as described with the logic of the INCLUDED middle.  So, instead of being inspired as ‘Robin Hoods’ who throw ourselves into the cultivating/sustaining of relational balance and harmony, we Western culture adherents become ‘intellectual JUDGES committed to‘PROGRESS‘ in the linear, binary logical terms of ‘feeding/growing good’ while starving/shrinking ‘bad’.

 

 

‘Progress’ is a word that ‘tips us off’ to the psychosis that is built into Western culture.  The concept of ‘progress’ (linear time based trend towards more-good-less-bad) is supported within a ‘house of cards’ manner by what Nietzsche terms ‘the double error’ of imputing ‘reality’ to name-instantiated things-in-themselves (first error), …  with powers of sourcing actions and developments (second error which extends the first error in a Pinocchio’s nose-like extension).   There is no ‘progress’ and no ‘things-in-themselves with powers of sourcing actions and developments’ in a transforming relational continuum, the world or our actual relational experience which we ‘know’ even in our pre-lingual experiential understanding as infants, a prelingual understanding that is purely topological relations based [1].

‘Progress’ has been exposed as a sham by systems scientists who refer to it a ‘suboptimization’.  Given that we live in a transforming relational continuum, belief in the possibility of suboptimization is ‘psychosis’ since it is impossible to isolate, within a transforming relational continuum, some ‘thing-in-itself’ There are none!  That is; ‘things-in-themselves’ are the intellectual artifact of hanging ‘names’ on relational forms in the flow).   A ‘human being’, … an ‘independent nation’, … a ‘corporation’ are cases in point; i.e. we ‘name them’ and the intellectual/psychological effect of naming them imputes persisting ‘thing-in-itself being’ to them, whether the named thing is a nation, a person or a corporation.

‘Progress’ is psychologically invoked by language and grammar that employs the double-error abstractions of name-instantiated things-in-themselves, notionally endowed with powers of sourcing actions and developments together with the abstraction of ‘time’ as a linear progression from ‘past’ to ‘future’.   The abstract double error combo together with the abstraction of ‘linear time’ is put together in language and grammar packages to stimulate in the intellect, the psychological impression of self-sourced intention-driven change.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS INTENTION-DRIVEN CHANGE IN THE REALITY OF OUR ACTUAL EXPERIENCE OF INCLUSION IN A TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.

There is, however, the INVENTED REALITY that we put together with language and grammar that develops along a notional axis of ‘time’ from past to future.  Using language and grammar constructs such as ‘Katrina is growing larger and stronger’, … ‘Katrina is ravaging New Orleans’, … ‘Katrina is weakening and dissipating’, … we can intellectually analyze and REDUCE sensations [As in Mach’s ‘Analysis of Sensations’] so that we can express them in terms of ‘things-in-themselves’ with notional powers of sourcing actions and developments.  (more…)

Developing Awareness of the INVENTED REALITY of Western Culture

0

 

SYNOPSIS:

Experiential reality, as understood by the indigenous aboriginal, and/or by the ‘indigenous aboriginal within each of us’, is inherently ‘relational’ and thus very different from the intellectual-cognitive ‘being’-based reality understood by the Western culture adherent, the latter’s ‘sense of self’ being re-engineered by the intellect to incorporate the ‘double error’ described by Nietzsche; i.e. the abstract ‘reality’ that is in terms of name-instantiated things-in-themselves, notionally with ‘their own local powers of sourcing actions and developments’; a sense of ‘self’ also known as ‘the ego’.

The pre-acculturation centre of organismic understanding is topological (relational in a manner that is independent of the abstract notion of name-instantiated things-in-themselves’) as described by F. David Peat in Mathematics and the Language of Nature‘;

To the infant’s developing mind, topology comes before geometry. In general, deeper and more fundamental logical operations are developed earlier than more specific rules and applications. The history of mathematics, which is generally taken as a process of moving towards deeper and more general levels of thought, could also be thought of as a process of excavation which attempts to uncover the earliest operations of thought in infancy. According to this argument, the very first operations exist at a pre-conscious level [i.e. ‘pre-intellectualizing’ level in the conscious and intuitive infant] so that the more fundamental a logical operation happens to be, the earlier it was developed by the infant and the deeper it has become buried in the mind.” – F. David Peat,

It is therefore possible for Western culture acculturated individuals to ‘escape’ from the psychosis-inducing influence of double-error based abstraction, which is language-and-grammar (intellect) based, by re-developing direct access to natural relational understanding that has been ‘covered over’ and buried by our Western culture acculturation, to restore the relational mode of understanding to its natural primacy, and thus escape from the psychosis-laden Western culture with its ‘double-error’ based INVENTED REALITY.

Our desire to restore ‘relational reality’ to its natural primacy tends to have been ‘buried’, in Western culture adherents, by one’s imagined ‘role-play’ within the INVENTED REALITY that may be delivering an ego-inflating (double-error based) sense of ‘independent being’ with powers of ‘sourcing actions and developments’.

 * * *

 

 

PROLOGUE: Exploring the essentials of ‘reality’, linguistically, as I am doing here, is limited by the ‘limitations’ of language.  The language based scheme of ‘constructing impressions of reality that prevails in Western culture; i.e. the language scheme which authors Western culture INVENTED REALITY, employs the ‘double error’ (Nietzsche) wherein relational forms are given psychological/intellectual representation by (Error 1) ‘naming’ to impute ‘persisting being’, and (Error 2) ‘compounding’ Error 1 by imputing the power of sourcing actions and developments to the naming-instantiated ‘things-in-themselves’.

This intellectual, language and grammar based Western INVENTED REALITY has, by way of ‘acculturation’ during our early development from infancy, served as an intellectual ‘operative reality’ that sits over top of and occludes the natural reality of our sensory experience.  That is, the natural reality of our pre-lingual relational (topological) experience that precedes name-instantiated intellectual conceptualizing is ‘covered over’ or occluded by language-and-grammar based intellectual constructions (INVENTED REALITY).

To the infant’s developing mind, topology comes before geometry. In general, deeper and more fundamental logical operations are developed earlier than more specific rules and applications. The history of mathematics, which is generally taken as a process of moving towards deeper and more general levels of thought, could also be thought of as a process of excavation which attempts to uncover the earliest operations of thought in infancy. According to this argument, the very first operations exist at a pre-conscious level [i.e. ‘pre-intellectualizing’ level in the conscious and intuitive infant] so that the more fundamental a logical operation happens to be, the earlier it was developed by the infant and the deeper it has become buried in the mind.” – F. David Peat, ‘Mathematics and the Language of Nature’ (referring to Piaget).

The radical departure from the inherent primacy of relational experience over the reduction, to language and grammar based intellectually constructed abstraction that serves as ‘reality’ is characteristic of Western culture.  By contrast, indigenous aboriginal cultures have developed language, and a method of using language, that does not ‘over-ride’ the inherent ‘relational’ nature of our experience; i.e. ‘mitakuye oyasin’ (all my relations) is an indigenous aboriginal expression that reminds one that ‘everything is related’ so that the relational dynamic as implied by constructing a web of relations is understood as the primary reality, while the named forms used to weave the relational web are expedients that can be forgotten once the relational understanding is gained.   Wittgenstein has also described this process although Western culture’s mainstream mode of INVENTING REALITY treats the abstract language and grammar constructions in terms of ‘things-in-themselves with powers of sourcing actions and developments’ … as the ‘operative reality’

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.

(Wittgenstein’s final two propositions in ‘Tractatus Logico Philosophicus)

Wittgenstein’s approach in using language is to get beyond ‘things-in-themselves’ as implied by ‘naming’, to get to purely implicit, relational understanding.  This expedient employing of naming forms (which imputes explicit thing-in-itself representation) as an expedient to get to purely relational representation is ‘built in’ to the indigenous aboriginal languages, and into modern physics representations and is termed ‘bootstrapping’;

[Geoffrey Chew]: “when you formulate a question, you have to have some basic concepts that you are accepting in order to formulate the question. But in the bootstrap approach, where the whole system represents a network of relationships without any firm foundation, the description of our subject can be begun at a great variety of different places. There isn’t any clear starting point. And the way our theory has developed in the last few years, we quite typically don’t know what questions to ask. We use consistency as the guide, and each increase in the consistency suggests something that is incomplete, but it rarely takes the form of a well-defined question. We are going beyond the whole question­and­answer framework.”

So, as newborns of any culture, we sense relations; i.e. we ‘are’ relational forms in a transforming relational continuum.

Depending on which culture we are raised in, we learn languages that we can use to REDUCE our relational experience to linguistically expressible conceptualizations.  This is where the division has emerged between indigenous aboriginal cultures, whose languages preserve the natural primacy of relational reality (mitakuye oyasin), and Western culture adherents whose languages equip them for ‘speaking with forked tongue’.  For example, English language allows one to (a) construct a reality wherein the ‘boil’ sources the ‘flow’ (the behaviours of the individuals are the source of the behaviour of the collective), and/or (b) construct a reality wherein the ‘flow’ sources the ‘boil’ (the behaviour of the collective is the source of the behaviours of the individuals).  One bad applies spoils the whole barrel ‘works’ but so does ‘it takes a whole community to raise a child’.

This ‘forked tongue’ confusion in Western culture not only ‘divides the social collective’ (into ‘conservatives’ and ‘liberals’), it is at the origin of ‘The Divided Self’.  For example, we may attribute the source of our successes to ‘our self’ and the source of our ‘failures’ to the circumstances in which we are situationally included, or should it be ‘the other way around’?.  Which is the real source?

The more basic issue here, which is not present in indigenous aboriginal cultures, Buddhism/Taoism or Advaita Vedanta, is in assuming the ‘reality’ of a ‘source’.  While Newtonian physics made use of the abstraction of ‘force’ as a ‘source’ of actions and developments, Newton borrowed this from the realm of the ‘occult’.

“It is sometimes stated that Newtonian space, time, and matter are sensed by everyone intuitively, whereupon relativity is cited as showing how mathematical analysis can prove intuition wrong. This, besides being unfair to intuition, is an attempt to answer offhand question (1) put at the outset of this paper, to answer which this research was undertaken. Presentation of the findings now nears its end, and I think the answer is clear. The offhand answer, laying the blame upon intuition for our slowness in discovering mysteries of the Cosmos, such as relativity, is the wrong one. The right answer is: Newtonian space, time, and matter are no intuitions. They are receipts from culture and language. That is where Newton got them.” – Benjamin Whorf, ‘The Relation of Habitual Thought and Behavior to Language’ 

Included in the Newtonian physics package of concepts is the ‘sourcing force’ which has no place in the relational transformation of modern physics, except as a language and grammar based abstraction; i.e. F=ma describes how a mass is accelerated by an applied force.  The ‘bouble error’ operates beneath this by first supposing the existence of a name-instantiated thing-in-itself notionally with powers of sourcing actions and developments.  If this double error were true, Newtonian physics can elaborate on it and ’embellish’ our understanding, in spite of it being abstraction based on ‘the double error’ from the get-go.  For example, man’s ego has us see our ‘self’ as the ‘source’ of actions and developments and Newtonian physics does not question the ‘double error’ in the reasoned proposition we Western culture adherents make, for example, the reasoning that if Fred carries a 200 pound object up a flight of stairs to a 10 foot higher elevation, in 5 seconds, ‘the power he generates’ in the process will be (200 x 10)/5  =400 foot-pounds per second (1 horsepower is 550 foot pounds per second).

What is REALLY going on, is relational transformation in which the man is included; i.e. the man is a relational form in the transforming relational continuum.  To employ language and grammar to concoct the cognitive (intellectual-conceptual) impression that the man ‘generates’ (i.e. ‘sources’) action and development is the ‘double error’ that Nietzsche alerts us to (i.e. the name-instantiating of a notional thing-in-itself, notionally with powers of sourcing actions and developments).

The reality of our actual relational experience is of inclusion in a transforming relational continuum.  WE ARE NOT ‘INDEPENDENT BEINGS’ WITH POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS!   THAT IS THE DOUBLE ERROR!   That is, it is cognitive misconception facilitated by Western culture style language and grammar.  Of course, it is possible for a social collective (such as the Europeans who came to live in the same space and mix with indigenous aboriginals) to persist in employing the ‘double error based INVENTED REALITY’ as THEIR operative reality, even while interspersed within indigenous aboriginal culture adherents who continue to understanding ‘reality’ in a purely relational (mitakuye oyasin) sense.

The reality of the non-indigenous Western culture adherents is the ‘INVENTED REALITY’ in which the ‘double error’ based understanding prevails; i.e. the Western culture adherent sees himself as an ‘independent being’ with his own powers of sourcing actions and developments.  His cultural belief in INVENTED REALITY  makes him egotistical in that he will claim to be the ‘source’ of ‘productive developments’, while his ‘forked tongue’ capability will have him attribute  the ‘sourcing’ of ‘destructive developments’ to others or to the collective which he sees as ‘split apart’ from himself.

Meanwhile, the INVENTED REALITY is language and grammar constructed abstraction based on the ‘double error’; i.e. the use of ‘naming’ to psychologically create notional ‘things’-in-themselves’, notionally with powers of sourcing actions and developments; i.e. there is no such thing as ‘sourcing’ in the real world of our relational experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.  As Whorf stated in his above-cited comment, the abstract concepts of Newtonian science come from language and not from our experience-based intuitions of the reality we experience inclusion in.

In the INVENTED REALITY that Western man employs as the ‘operative reality’, he refers to the skyscrapers, the highways and the air transportation systems ‘he has sourced with his ingenuity’ as ‘improvements’ on the ‘raw land’.   But that is intellectual self-deception of the ‘double error’ type.  The only possible dynamic in the reality of our actual relational experience within the transforming relational dynamic is ‘transformation’ (as with transforming relational forms in the transforming relational continuum).

We are all included in ‘relational transformation’; i.e. we are all transient forms within the transforming relational continuum, but, thanks to language and grammar, we are able to use a ‘double error’ to reduce the transforming relational continuum, conceptually (psychologically) to terms of notional (name-instantiated) things-in-themselves, notionally with the powers of sourcing actions and developments.   For example, the ‘first error’ allows us to name the relational form in the transforming relational continuum ‘Katrina’  (the hurricane) to impute to a swirling in the transforming continuum ‘persisting thing-in-itself existence’ (‘the psychological effect of ‘naming’), and concatenating with this the ‘second error’ of imputing the power of sourcing actions and developments to the thing-in-itself we just created with ‘naming’).  We Western culture adherents then proceed with employing the double-error-based ‘INVENTED REALITY’ as our ‘operative reality’.   We enthusiastically claim authorship of positively perceived ‘sorcery’ while vehemently denying responsibility for negatively perceived ‘sorcery’.  Of course, in the reality of our actual relational experience, ‘sourcery’ does not exist, there is only relational transformation.  Of course, ‘the reality of our actual relational experience’ is not the operative reality of Western culture.  The operative reality of Western culture is the INVENTED REALITY where ‘heroes’ and ‘villains’ (‘angels’ and ‘devils’) doe exist, thanks to the ‘double error’ wherein we use naming to impute persisting ‘thing-in-itself being’ to relational forms and psychologically embellish this by endowing the ‘things-in-themselves’ with notional powers of sourcing actions and developments.

A cross comparison of Western culture patterns of understanding reality with indigenous aboriginal patterns of understanding reality may elucidate on the psychosis cultivating propensities of Western culture and the relational stability cultivating propensities of indigenous aboriginal cultures.

Example of Western culture pattern of understanding reality;

“What we call ‘normal’ is a product of repression, denial, splitting, projection, introjection and other forms of destructive action on experience.” – R. D. Laing, author of ‘The Divided Self’

The ‘double error’ of Western culture gives the individual the impression she is an ‘independently-existing thing-in-herself’ endowed with powers of sourcing actions and developments.  This is the source of the ‘divided self’ which occludes the topological understanding of the relational self of our early development (infancy) as a boil in the flow where the ‘self-other’ division is ‘appearance’.

Example of modern physics and indigenous aboriginal culture patterns of understanding reality;

A few months before his death, Bohm met with a number of Algonkian speakers and was struck by the perfect bridge between their language and worldview and his own exploratory philosophy. What to Bohm had been major breakthroughs in human thought — quantum theory, relativity, his implicate order and rheomode – were part of the everyday life and speech of the Blackfoot, Mic Maq, Cree and Ojibwaj.” – F. David Peat, ‘Blackfoot Physics’

The Western culture INVENTED REALITY would have our intellectualizing mind picture ourselves as ‘independent beings’ strolling through a ‘habitat’ that is intrinsically separate from inhabitants such as ourselves, so that such language-and-grammar stimulated psychological impressions of ‘reality’ eclipse and occlude our relational experience based sense of inclusion in a transforming relational continuum.  We then see ourselves as independently-existing ‘sorcerers’ of actions and developments, no longer as relational forms in the transforming relational continuum.

Such a distorted ‘Divided Self’ impression of reality comes to us by way of language and grammar which empowers the intellect to take control and demote relational experience based intuition from its natural precedence.  Thus, language is a kind of nemesis of Western culture acculturated man, since it is a tool which gives us the psychological capability of dividing ourselves out of the transforming relational continuum and recapturing ourselves (psychologically) as ‘independent beings’ with our own powers of sourcing actions and developments; whereby; the tools run away with the workman, the human with the divine.

* * *  * * *  * * *

As has been discussed elsewhere in this ‘series’ on how Western culture cultivates aberrance in the social dynamic, those ‘miner’s canaries’ that cannot let go of their intuitive grasp of the essentially ‘relational’ basis of reality, and who ‘have trouble’ with ‘walking the talk’ of the ‘double error’ wherein they must understand themselves as ‘independently-existing things-in-themselves with their own innate powers of sourcing actions and developments (i.e. where they are forced to ‘grow an ego’), this breeds schizophrenia aka ‘the divided self’ since the ‘natural self’ is NOT separate from the world one is situationally included in.   This natural relational understanding is the ‘norm’ in indigenous aboriginal culture as it is in modern physics, however, it is seen as ‘illness’ in Western culture where the ‘divided self’ is the ‘norm’.  The divided self is the Western culture ‘norm’ that is deemed ‘mentally healthy’ yet in the case of the relationally sensitive, such ‘culturally-correct’ role-play as a ‘Western culture normal’ can bring on psychosis, the Western culture treatment for which is to restore the individual to the culturally accepted aberrant state that is the source of her psychosis.  While the alternative to restoring the overall dysfunctional Western culture collective to a natural relational equilibrium is an ideal (but impractical-in-the-short-term) goal, the recovery of the sensitive ‘miner’s canary’ from psychosis brought on by the stress of immersion in Western psychosis-inducing culture can be approached by;

(a) immersion within an empathic circle of others, as in ‘rehabilitation’ where ‘recovery’ is facilitated.  However, ‘recovery’ is seen in the Western culture as something which is undergone by the individual, whereas, the ‘recovery’ is in fact the recover of the relational social environment that the ‘miner’s canary’ has been moved into.  Western culture, following the recovery perceived as the ‘repairing of the individual’ when the ‘recovery’ is the repairing of the social relational ambiance the individual is included in, encourages the ‘healed individual’ to return to the psychosis-inducing Western cultural dynamic that is the real source of the psychosis, whereupon the descent into yet another bout of psychosis ensues.  In other words, what needs to be remediated to avoid psychosis is the social environment the ‘miner’s canary’ is situationally included in, rather than something within the miner’s canary.

(b) re-situation within a social-relational environment that is not heavily invested in Western psychosis-inducing (double error based) social dynamics.  For example, in social environments where mutual caring/empathy is in primacy over competition or corporate objectives infused with belief in the individual/organization/nation in the double error sense of a name-instantiated thing-in-itself, noitionally with the powers of sourcing actions and developments.   A point to remember is that the double error manifests within organizations that cultivate ‘double-error’ based beliefs such as ‘individualism’, ‘nationalism’ and ‘corporatism’.

The ‘double error’ that is foundational to Western culture INVENTED REALITY is intrinsically tied to ‘ego’; i.e. in social collectives that would have one see oneself as an independently existing thing-in-oneself with powers of sourcing actions and developments, ego rules, whereas in empathic relational collectives ‘inspiration’ is in a natural precedence over ‘ego’; i.e. Ego is a swelled head, inspiration is a full heart’  and avoidance of ‘double error’ based psychosis requires situating oneself within a relational dynamic that ‘runs on inspiration first’, ‘ego second’.  To invert this natural order is to let the tools run away with the workman, the human with the divine. In other words, the individual in the reality of modern physics, indigenous aboriginal culture, Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta, is innately ‘relaitonal, without ‘independent being’ and without ‘powers of sourcing actions and developments’, … such abstract conceptualizations being the produce of language and grammar supported only by the calculations of the intellect, and not supported by the experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.
 * * * END OF PROLOGUE * * *

 

Unless one is born into and/or raised in an indigenous aboriginal and/or Buddhist/Taoist or Advaita Vedanta culture, it is not easy to assimilate the full ‘meaning’ of the understanding that we Western culture adherents have psychologically entrapped ourselves in an INVENTED REALITY.  I have continually explored and written about the INVENTED REALITY since it has been the source of rising psychological aberrance in our Western society that manifests in mass murders, psychological imbalances, political divisions and other abnormalities that we Western culture adherents have taken to be ‘the norm’;

 

“What we call ‘normal’ is a product of repression, denial, splitting, projection, introjection and other forms of destructive action on experience.” – R. D. Laing, author of ‘The Divided Self’

 

Laing endorsed the similar views of anthropologist Jules Henry, author of ‘Culture Against Man’ whose philosophical investigations, like my own, suggest that Western culture is fomenting conflict within itself, as also in Nietzsche’s ‘double error’ (the use of language (naming)) to invent ‘things-in-themselves’ with the notional powers of sourcing actions and developments).

(more…)

Go to Top