How FEELINGS Transcend INTELLECT in Delivering UNDERSTANDING

0

 

Our sensory (‘feeling’) experience is of inclusion within a transforming relational continuum; i.e. inclusion in the Tao/Wave-field.

 

Because we are included in a continual flux (aka transformation),  our reality is ineffable, and because we want to discuss and share our experience, we develop language and grammar which must necessarily be based on a reduction of our experience of inclusion in transformation in order to share ‘something’ in effable terms.

 

This means that what we are able to talk about is not the ‘reality’ of our actual experience of inclusion in the Tao or Wave-field (this is ineffable) but what we able to talk about is an ‘intellectual reduction’ of the ineffable.  The implication is that the reality of our FEELINGS is reality, … a reality that is beyond reach of language and grammar based intellection.

 

This intellectual reduction is a reduction from our intuitive feeling based inclusion in the all including ‘transformation’ of the ‘wave-field’ (the Tao) to an abstract intellectual language and grammar based construction of a pseudo-reality wherein NONLOCAL transformation gives way to LOCAL THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES notionally WITH POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS (i.e. the DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar pointed out by Niezsche).

 

The first error is NAMING (to reduce a flow-form to a notional LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF and the second error is GRAMMAR, words that we put together that gives us the intellectual impression that the naming-instantiated THING-IN-ITSELF has the POWER OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT.

 

This ‘DOUBLE ERROR’ ‘sidesteps’ the INEFFABLE fluid ONE-NESS of the Tao (Wave-field) by RECASTING flow-forms as LOCAL THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES with their own POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS, … in language and grammar based intellectual representations.   This language based intellectual MOCK-UP is a TOOL for enabling a half-assed effable representation of the innately ineffable Tao, … a TOOL WHICH WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS EMPLOY AS OUR OPERATIVE REALITY, … WHILE it is used merely as a throw-away tool of INFERENCE in modern physics, indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta.

 

As Emerson points out, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS let the TOOL run away with the WORKMAN; i.e. we redefine WHO WE ARE with the DOUBLE ERROR tool of language and grammar and this is where we make ourselves, in our psyche, into SORCERERS of actions and developments, per the DOUBLE ERRROR, and no longer understand ourselves as being included in the Tao and ONE WITH EVERYTHING.   We lose the EASTERN power of ‘one with everything’ and gain the WESTERN power of ‘independent being based ‘sorcery’.  Thus we trade out “Inspiration that fills the heart” for ‘Ego that swells the head”.

Language and grammar based intellectual stimulation lets us do this ‘make-believe’ recasting of who we are, and while the EAST understands that this is just a tool of inference or ‘Wittgenstein ladder’ to facilitate sharing a reduction-based allusion to the ineffable Tao, … the WEST accepts and employs this reduction as the ‘operative reality’.    This is a CRAZY-MAKER for us WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS.  The intellectual ‘doer-deed’ or ‘producer-product’ pseudo-concept is just a cheap way of conjuring up the psychological notion of SORCERY along with some artificial ego-inflation.

(more…)

Trump’s Contribution to Exposing the Fallacy of Truth and Reason

0

 

WHAT’S GOING ON IN THE TRUMP ERA  (in the psyches of we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS) ?

 

It could just be that we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are FINALLY coming to grips with the reality that TRUTH and REASON are both SCAMS.

 

TRUTH and REASON, as pointed out by Nietzsche, are absolutist concepts that we invent in order to REDUCE the Tao aka the Wave-field aka the transforming relational continuum so as to effable-ize it; i.e. so that we can use language to TALK ABOUT SOMETHING THAT INFERS THE TAO even though we can’t directly capture the Tao in language since it is a fluid continuum (wave-field).

 

As Nietzsche shows, in order to reduce the ineffable flow to something effable, we use a ‘double error’ approach.  The first error is NAMING to freeze a flow-form in the flow (e.g. a boil in flowing water) to psychologically impart THING-IN-ITSELF-BEING to the flow-form while the second error of GRAMMAR conflates the first by imputing the power of sourcing actions and development to the NAMING -instantiated thing-in-itself.

 

Ok, so while we cannot talk directly about the Tao since it is a transforming relational continuum, a flow-continuum, there are boils and swirls and hurricanes and vortices that, while such forms-in-flow are APPEARANCES in the flow aka Tao aka Wavefield, they do give us an ‘entrée’ for language based discussion of the Tao.

 

Of course, the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao since we are using APPEARANCES as the basis of making all these double errors to extract something effable from the ineffable..  E.g. the whorl that we call ‘hurricane Katrina’ is an appearance in the flow that we use NAMING and GRAMMAR to impute thing-in-itselfness and powers of sourcing its own actions and developments to.  The nonlocal dynamic of the flow-continuum is thus reduced, in our language-stimulated intellect, to a LOCALLY SOURCED  dynamic, thanks to the double error of NAMING and GRAMMAR.

 

As useful as this reduction to effable from ineffable is, we have to be alert to the following problem; when we use language and grammar to SPLIT APART BOIL AND FLOW, and to IMPUTE THE POWER OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS to the NAMING instantiated thing-in-itself; i.e. to the BOIL, … we see from the symmetry that, having SPLIT APART the BOIL from the FLOW, we would just as well impute the powers of sourcing actions and developments to the now separate FLOW, so that our understanding would be that the FLOW is sourcing the BOIL.

 

THIS AMBIGUITY IS WHERE THE CONSERVATIVE – LIBERAL SPLIT IN UNDERSTANDING REALITY COMES FROM.

(more…)

From Whence the Conservative – Liberal Polarization?

0

 

 * * * BEGIN PROLOGUE: * * * 

EAST AND WEST SPLIT re the EFFABLE-IZING of INEFFABLE REALITY

In the political news on television, there is much discussion on how people support OPPOSING views on ‘the correct way to behave’, as in the ‘pro-life’ – pro-choice’ polarization.  In WESTERN CULTURE, views become ‘polarized’ as in the politics of conservatives and liberals because of innate ambiguity in how one ‘understands reality’ once we break it down by way the DOUBLE ERROR (Nietzsche).  For example, the introduction of the concept of ‘forgiveness’ is like inserting a cuckoos egg into the nest of a bird of an entirely different feather.  That is, ‘relational complexity’ can cultivate harmony or dissonance, which is purely relational and entirely without LOCAL SOURCING (an intellectual abstraction).   The abstract concepts of LOCAL existence and the SOURCING of actions and developments come from the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.

The DOUBLE ERROR arises from the need to find an effable (language-based) way of expressing the ineffable Tao.  That is, the reality of our sensory experience of inclusion in the Wave-field aka ‘the Tao’ aka ‘the transforming relational continuum cannot be captured in language and grammar since language and grammar works by capturing and holding something that is continually transforming; i.e. “the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao”

In order to ‘explicitize’ (digitize) fluid phenomena, we are forced to the device of ‘sample-and-hold’ .  That is, since FIGURE AND GROUND ARE ONE IN TRANSFORMATION (fluidity), in order  to talk about this, we have to NAME the FIGURE, and in so doing we impute LOCAL BEING to the FIGURE and then add the SECOND ERROR of GRAMMAR to impute to the NAME-INSTANTIATED LOCAL BEING its own powers of SOURCING ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENT.  By this DOUBLE ERROR, we liberate FIGURE from GROUND and abstractly endow the FIGURE with its own powers of SORCERY of GROWTH and DEVELOPMENT (GOODBYE relational transformation aka the Tao aka the Wave-field, … HELLO BIRTH, GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT, DECLINE and DEATH! ).

The abstract language and grammar based ‘sample and hold’ digitization of reality that serves as a means of effable-izing the ineffable, gives rise to the concept of ‘an act’s such as an ‘act of kindness’ or an ‘act of violence’ such as a rape or murder.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS “AN ACT”.  IT PART OF THE SAMPLE-AND-HOLD DIGITIZATION OF REALITY USED TO REDUCE THE INEFFABLE TAO (transforming relational continuum) to an EFFABLE REPRESENTATION.

THERE ARE NO ‘VIRTUOUS ACTS’ AND THERE ARE NO ‘EVIL ACTS’ IN A TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM BECAUSE THERE ARE NO ‘ACTS’.   THE ‘ACT’ IS A DOUBLE ERROR OF LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR that breaks into the transforming relational continuum (the Tao, the Wave-field) and abstracts out a DOUBLE ERROR based abstraction; The first error is NAMING to impute thing-in-itself existence to a relational form in the Tao and conflating this with GRAMMAR to impute the power of sourcing actions and developments to the NAMING instantiated thing-in-itself.  For example, ‘DUNING is relational resonance that inductively gathers dust, sand, straw, twigs into wave-shaped piles.  Language and grammar gives us the means to invert the natural order of things and to speak in terms of ‘the DUNE’ (name-instantiated thing-in-itself) and ITS ACTIONS as when say IT FORMS and IT DEVELOPS and it GROWS longer and higher and IT SHIFTS across the desert floor.

BUT THERE IS NO ‘IT’ THAT PERFORMS SUCH “ACTS”.  THERE IS ONLY THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM AND THE.

Jean Valjean’s alleged “ACT” of the theft of a loaf of bread would be easily ‘proved’ by Crime Scene Investigation, but such proof assumes that “an ACT” is a meaningful concept!  But “an ACT” is a kind of SAMPLING of space-time that assumes that reality can be broken down into LOCAL samples of space that ‘change over time’.  This is abstraction that is not supportable by our sensory experience, nor is supportable in modern physics.

The concept of “an ACT” or a TRANSACTION such as REPRODUCTION is REDUCTIVE ABSTRACTION designed to reduce the ineffable to effable representation.  If we impute REALITY to Jean Valjean’s “ACT” of stealing a loaf of bread; i.e. if we ‘break down the transforming relational continuum’ into bite size LOCAL space and time blocks holding so as to isolate “AN ACT” then we be substitute a LOCAL perspectival glimpse into the Tao continuum and imputing ‘reality’ to it.  It is the Tao that is real in our sensory experience and we can only know it intuitively.  The ACT is not something REAL, it is the DOUBLE ERROR REDUCTION of language and grammar.  It is abstraction that is otherwise known as LOCAL SORCERY or the ‘PRODUCER-PRODUCT’ dynamic, a radical reduction of the transforming relational continuum

It was probably WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT’s PRIDE as in EGO that first LEGITIMIZED the DOUBLE ERROR concept of LOCAL SOURCING OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS, and BLAME for the sorcery of evil acts was the ‘fill in the binary logical blank’ demanded so as to legitimize the popular embrace of PRIDE which plays a major role in shaping WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS social dynamics.

Reproductive acts and genetic determinism are currently in a state of confusion because of issues with their dependency on the POTENCY of an ACT such as SPERM FERTILIZING AN EGG.  THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN ‘ACT’ AND NO SUCH THING AS LOCAL SOURCING OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS.  THERE IS ONLY RELATIONAL TRANSFORMATION WHICH IS INEFFABLE AND THE DOUBLE ERROR SERVES TO REDUCE THE INEFFABLE TO SOMETHING EFFABLE, BUT THAT SOMETHING EFFABLE IS “NOT” REALITY.

NOTA BENE: While TRANSFORMATION (the Tao, the Wavefield) is all-inclusive and thus ineffable (i.e. it lies innately beyond the effable REDUCTION to LOCAL THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES, with their associated TIME-based concepts such as BIRTH, DEVELOPMENT, DECLINE, DEATH).  This reduction of the ineffable to a broken apart effable is A VERY USEFUL TOOL so long as we do not “LET THE TOOL RUN AWAY WITH THE WORKMAN, THE HUMAN (EFFABLE) WITH THE DIVINE (INEFFABLE), … WHICH, OF COURSE, IS PRECISELY WHAT WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS ARE IN THE HABIT OF DOING.

Note the one-sidedness of DOUBLE ERROR in that it SPLITS OUT AND ANIMATES the FIGURE (inhabitant) on its own, apart from the GROUND (habitat).  When we are talking in terms of animated FIGURES, we don’t even mention the GROUND/HABITAT.  This ONE-SIDED SORCERY of FIGURE-based actions and developments (by way of the ‘double error’ of naming and grammar)  OPENS THE DOOR TO A LOGICAL AMBIGUITY in that GRAMMAR ‘doesn’t care’ if we likewise give ONE-SIDED SORCERY powers to the GROUND/HABITAT.

Does the man source the times [i.e. does an individual source the organize the dynamics of a social collective], OR, do the times source the man [i.e. does the organizing of the social collective source the individual’s actions?]. In other words, did the man named HITLER source the disastrous WWII times, … or did the times source the man (did the punitive terms of the Treaty of Versailles source a Hitler?)

This ambiguity is linguistically triggered in our minds through the DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar which gives rise to the concept of LOCAL, ONE-SIDED SORCERY, which we invent to break the impasse of the ineffability of relational TRANSFORMATION which is all-inclusive.  As in the Zen koan of ‘wind and flag’, the ambiguity is innately ambiguous BECAUSE what is really going on is TRANSFORMATION, NOT the jumpstart abstraction of SORCERY in any of its WESTERN CULTURE configurations such as ‘Cause-and-Effect’, ‘Producer-product dynamics’ etc.

Ok, one-sided SORCERY sidesteps the ineffability of relational transformation in which we are included, but it introduces an innate ambiguity in the once we break apart the FIGURE-AND-GROUND UNITY that is implicit in TRANSFORMATION, by homing in on the FIGURE and using the double error to give it it’s own powers of sourcing actions and developments, it becomes apparent that having endowed language and grammar with this capability, there is nothing stopping anyone from making the GROUND the SORCERER of action and development instead of the FIGURE.  This is the source of the Conservative – Liberal BIPOLAR SPLIT in the WESTERN CULTURE social collective and it is also the source of bipolar disorder/schizophrenia in the WESTERN CULTURE individual.

THIS LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR BASED FIGURE-and-GROUND SPLITTING IS A CRAZY MAKER! … BUT ONLY IF WE TAKE the FIGURE-and-GROUND SPLIT TO BE ‘REAL’, as we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have fallen into the habit of doing.  In modern physics, as also in indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta, … THE FIGURE AND GROUND SPLIT IS NOT REAL; I.E. THE INHABITANT-HABITANT SPLIT IS NOT REAL, it is an expedient for effable-izing the ineffable, but only a ‘Wittgenstein ladder’ to infer the ineffable that lies innately beyond it.   What is REAL is also INEFFABLE; i.e. it is the all-including relational transformation aka WAVFIELD wherein FIGURE-AND-GROUND-ARE-ONE.

In the case of the reductions we are forced to resort to, to render the ineffable in a half-assed effable form based on binarizing FIGURE and GROUND, all the hard, explicit BINARIES must, in the interpreting mind, be reduced to relations within the context of transformation as in the relational dynamics of HARMONY/DISSONANCE which in turn opens the door to the concept of ‘being in phase’ or ‘out of phase’, and to a HOLODYNAMICAL or WAVEFIELD understanding of reality.  When we are driving in a busy freeway where relational dynamics are everything, the concept of CORRECT or ERRONEOUS sorcery of behaviour gives way to understanding dynamics in terms of cultivating harmony or dissonance; i.e. there is no longer the abstract notion of ‘SORCERY’ of actions and developments.

THE POINT OF THIS NOTE IS TO ILLUSTRATE HOW ‘EAST’ AND ‘WEST’ SPLIT IN THE EFFABLE-IZING OF THE INEFFABLE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM OF OUR NATURAL EXPERIENCE, … SO THAT WE CAN REDUCE IT TO EFFABLE, SHAREABLE DISCOURSE.

 

THE KEY TAKE-AWAYS ARE;

-1- The relational transformation we experience inclusion in is INEFFABLE because the entire system including ourselves, IS IN FLUX.

-2a- There is NO LANGUAGE-BASED MEANS of reducing omni-perspectival (holodynamic) FLOW of TRANSFORMATION where everything is in flux, to LANGUAGE-BASED TERMS.

-2b- LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR can be used to come up with a REDUCED EXPRESSION of the holodynamic FLOW OF TRANSFORMATION by means of the abstract terms of LOCAL SORCERY OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT.  THUS, instead of inside-outward asserting and outside-inward inducing being ONE, as in transformation, we can speak of them as TWO as in SOURCE and SINK.  The problem is, TRANSFORMATION IS WHERE THERE IS ONLY ONE, not TWO.

-2c- If we cast reality in terms of LOCAL, INDEPENDENTLY-EXISTING THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES (rather than in terms of form-filled fluid transformation), we have to PRETEND that the THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES are LOCALLY SOURCED and undergo GROWTH and DEVELOPMENT and subsequent DETERIORATION and DEATH, as in a continual LIFE and DEATH cycle.

2d.  In understanding forms NOT as THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES but as relational features in the flow (Tao, Wavefield), we do not have to BELIEVE in the LOCAL EXISTENCE OF THINGS IN THEMSELVES WITH POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS (the ‘DOUBLE ERROR’).

CONFUSION arises because the flow-based understanding of reality is INEFFABLE and by this I mean, for example, FORMS are made of resonance and are purely relational and are not separate from the world as a whole (They are not separate from the world as a transforming relational continuum). This means FORMS are not BORN and they do not GROW and DEVELOP and SOURCE actions and developments, but are instead REALTIONAL FEATURES IN THE ONE-FLOW (the Tao);

Ok, but if we are WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS who are, as we know, brought up to believe in CREATION aka SORCERY, then our tool of ‘reason’ (which deals in LOCAL BEING SOURCED ACTIONS AND EVELOPMENTS and is not nearly as comprehensive as relational intuition) screams out for an explanation in terms of SORCERY, which is an understanding in terms of ‘some thing’ which is responsible for ‘sourcing’ an action or result (NOTE that there is no SORCERY in TRANSFORMATION). So, although we experience inclusion in TRANSFORMATION which is INEFFABLE, we are relational flow-forms that like to share our experiences and learn from them, …we have devised an ‘end run’ to partially get around the fact that our experience is innately ineffable BECAUSE IT IS FLUID, AND THERE IS NO LOCAL AUTHORSHIP OF ANYTHING WHICH COULD HAVE HELPED US TO BREAK INTO THE NONLOCAL, UNBOUNDED WAVE-FIELD AKA ‘TAO’.   SO WHY NOT USE THE DOUBLE ERROR OF LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR TO NOTIONALLY BREAK IT DOWN INTO DOUBLE ERROR BASED LOCAL SOURCERY.

-3- LOCAL SORCERY IS AN ABSTRACT CONCEPT THAT IS INJECTED INTO THE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT MIND, AS POINTED OUT BY BENJAMIN WHORF, through NEWTONIAN PHYSICS, which is essentially the capture of abstraction such as LOCAL SORCERY in language and grammar.   For example, Newton’s third law, which is the source of binary thinking among WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS, comes up with the separate binary notions of “ACTION” and “REACTION” (i.e. “For every action, there is an equal and opposite reality”).   This binary couple establishes the abstraction of LOCAL SOURCING, the ‘stake-in-the-ground that calls out for its being invented so as to render the ineffable transforming relational continuum effable.  Once we have established the existence of both ACTION and REACTION, we can focus in on ACTION as if in its own right as the DOUBLE ERROR, the first of which is Naming (to impute LOCAL thing-in-itself being, and the second of which is GRAMMAR to impute the power of sourcing actions and development to the LOCAL thing-in-itself (first error).

Now we can speak of the ACTION of the LOCAL FARMER as he cultivates his 160 acre ‘plot’ as if this one-sided ACTION ‘makes sense’.  What goes missing is the equal and opposite REDUCTION of the uncultivated land, … which will ‘catch up with us later’ as the uncultivated land continues to SHRINK in reciprocal relation to the GROWTH of the cultivated land.  EVIDENTLY there is IN REALITY, neither GROWTH of cultivated land NOR SHRINKAGE of uncultivated land, THERE IS ONLY TRANSFORMATION since the sum total of cultivated and uncultivated land remains constant.

The Tao is INEFFABLE because transformation is innately NON-LOCAL.  The binary split in Newton’s third law, into ACTION and REACTION introduces an artificial duplicity that allows us to speak of ACTION in a one-sided manner, as if we could forget its siamese-twin binary.  This is what divides WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS into ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal’.  In the conservative view we attribute the source of ACTION to the individual and REACTION to the social collective.  In the liberal view we attribute the source of ACTION to the social collective and REACTION to the individual.

WHICH IS CORRECT?   NEITHER!  …  … since THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS SORCERY.  LOCALLY INSTANTIATING SORCERY IS IMPLIED BY NEWTON’S THIRD LAW WHICH WAS REALLY INVENTED IN ORDER TO RENDER THE INEFFABLE EFFABLE.  That is, one had to break into the transforming relational continuum somehow, to establish LOCAL STARTING POINTS FOR SOURCING ACTIONS, … so as to be able to TALK ABOUT the INHERENTLY NONLOCAL transforming relational continuum aka WAVEFIELD.

The result is that WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have gotten into the habit of choosing one or other of the binary pair (ACTION/REACTION) as in INDIVIDUAL LEADER and FOLLOWING SOCIAL COLLECTIVE (conservative) or  LEADING SOCIAL COLLECTIVE and FOLLOWING INDIVIDUAL HERD-MEMBERS.

This innate ambiguity arises from the unreal abstract BINARY assumption of NEWTON’S THIRD LAW OF MOTION; FOR EVERY ACTION THERE IS AN EQUAL AND OPPOSITE REACTION.

THIS IS NOTHING OTHER THAN AN INTELLECTUAL ‘DEVICE’  (TRICKERY) TO BREAK INTO THE INEFFABLE TAO (THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM) SO AS TO CONJURE US SOME REDUCTIVE EFFABLE ARTICULATIONS OF THE INEFFABLE.

YES, OF COURSE IT IS USEFUL, BUT IT IS USEFUL IN THAT IT OPENS UP OUR ABILITY TO GIVE REDUCED-BUT-EFFABLE RENDERINGS OF THE INEFFABLE TAO (THE ALL-INCLUDING TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM AKA WAVE-FIELD), … BUT IT IS ONLY GOOD FOR USE AS A TOOL OF INFERENCE AS USED IN THE EAST, AND BECOMES A CRAZY-MAKER WHEN USED LITERALLY AS A SUBSTITUTE REALITY.

EASTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS STICK TO THE INFERENTIAL USAGE WHILE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS HAVE POPULARLY OPTED FOR ITS LITERAL USE, WHICH SPLITS WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS INTO TWO POLAR OPPOSITE CAMPS; I.E.

Choosing one or other of the binary pair (ACTION/REACTION) as in INDIVIDUAL-LEADER-ACTION and FOLLOWING-SOCIAL-COLLECTIVE-REACTION (conservative) or  LEADING-SOCIAL-COLLECTIVE-ACTION and FOLLOWING-INDIVIDUAL-REACTION.

NOTE that this innately ambiguous dichotomy only arises from the synthetic act of imputing this artificial LOCAL ACTION-REACTION abstraction, which was what was needed in order to REDUCE the ineffable NONLOCAL dynamic of the Tao, the transforming relational continuum, to something LOCAL and thus EFFABLE.  Newton did not come up with his ACTION/REACTION law from studying nature, but as Benjamin Whorf noted, it came from alchemical ideas (WESTERN CULTURE BELIEF IN SORCERY) and Newton just put it into the clean terms of binary logic (ACTION-REACTION).

From the form-plus-substance dichotomy the philosophical views most traditionally characteristic of the “Western world” have derived huge support. Here belong materialism, psychophysical parallelism, physics–at least in its traditional Newtonian form–and dualistic views of the universe in general. Indeed here belongs almost everything that is “hard, practical common sense.” Monistic, holistic, and relativistic views of reality appeal to philosophers and some scientists, but they are badly handicapped in appealing to the “common sense” of the Western average man–not because nature herself refutes them (if she did, philosophers could have discovered this much), but because they must be talked about in what amounts to a new language. “Common sense,” as its name shows, and “practicality” as its name does not show, are largely matters of talking so that one is readily understood. 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 recepts from culture and language. That is where Newton got them.” — Benjamin Whorf

Inserting the abstraction of binary logic into our language-stimulated mental modeling of the Tao (crudely) solves the ineffability problem but injects a BELIEF IN SORCERY based ambiguity as manifests in the conservative-liberal split.

IN THIS CASE, instead of being stuck with the ineffability of inclusion in a transforming relational continuum aka Tao aka Wave-field that ‘CANNOT BE TOLD’ because it is in continual flux, we can use NAMING to impute ‘thing-in-itself existence’ to a resonance feature such as a hurricane, lightning bolt, duning, humaning etc., all of which are resonance forms in the transforming relational continuum, … and then using a DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar to make them out as being LOCAL SORCERERS OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS!

This is what the DOUBLE ERROR is all about.  The guile packaged into it is the coming up with a way of doing and end-run against the ineffability of the all-including TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM aka the Tao, aka the Wave-field.  The trick is to use language to invent a LOCAL thing-in-itself, notionally with the power of SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS.  This will allow us to notionally break the unbounded transforming relational continuum into LOCAL PARTS with their own SOURCING POWERs which is to say, render the ineffable effable.

“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

Ok, that is ‘the price’ we have to pay to render the ineffable as crudely effable thus shareable via language which the ineffable is clearly NOT.

BUT HERE IS WHERE EAST (AND MODERN PHYSICS) PART WAYS WITH ‘WEST’ BECAUSE WEST IS ON A CRAZY-MAKING TRIP OF EQUATING THE DOUBLE ERROR BASED REDUCTION WITH ‘REALITY’. …. NO, NO , NO, NO!  THE DOUBLE ERROR BASED REDUCTION DELIVERS UP A CRUDE INFERENCE TO THE INEFFABLE REALITY, AND IT CAN’T BE (WITHOUT CRAZY-MAKING CONSEQUENCES) CONFUSED FOR ‘REALITY’.  THIS IS WHERE ‘THE WEST’ SPLITS OF FROM ‘THE EAST’ AND PUTS INTO SELF ON TRIP TO CRAZY-MAKING LAND.

This is why modern physics departs from WESTERN CULTURE’s DOUBLE ERROR BASED CONCEPTUALIZING OF REALITY aka SORCERY-BASED CONCEPTUALIZING OF REALITY.

Here is Wittgenstein’s warming in regard to accepting effable propositions as ‘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, Tractatus Logico Philosophicus

OK, how does the above commentary tie to the initial comment;

In the political news on television, there is much discussion on how people support OPPOSING views on ‘the correct way to behave’, as in the ‘pro-life’ – pro-choice’ polarization.

As explained in the above, the use of DOUBLE ERROR based reduction of the ineffable Tao (our experience of inclusion in the Tao) puts ‘reality’ in terms of notional NAME-instantiated LOCAL THINGS IN THEMSELVES with notional powers of SOURCING actions and developments.

As is evident, that is a radical departure from our sensory experience of inclusion in a transforming relational continuum wherein everything is included in the flux, including ourselves.

What my writing seeks to bring the reader’s attention to, is where this REDUCTION, which is abstruse abstraction, goes visibly wrong.  We can capture this ‘going wrong’ as follows;

-1- By naming a FIGURE, we split the FIGURE out of the GROUND as a separate thing-in-itself.

-2- We then use GRAMMAR to ‘remobilize’ the FIGURE which didn’t need its own mobilizing sorcery prior to the FIGURE AND GROUND being split, by language and grammar, into two separate and distinct ONTOLOGIES.  In other words, we use language and grammar (the DOUBLE ERROR) to convert the relational form-flow into a notional LOCAL, INDEPENDENTLY-EXISTING THING-IN-ITSELF, NOTIONALLY WITH ITS OWN POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS.

-3-. WHERE THE OPPS! COMES INTO PLAY.  Since we equipped GRAMMAR with power to impute the POWER OF SORCERY to a named relational form and thus ‘take it out of the Tao’ and remobilize it as a notional THING-IN-ITSELF with its own GRAMMAR-GIVE powers of sourcing actions and developments, … this GRAMMATICAL SORCERY CAPABILITY we invented is applicable NOT ONLY TO THE INHABITANT BUT ALSO TO THE HABITAT… UH-OH!

Sure, we did this reduction to one-sided LOCAL SORCERY to reduce the ineffable to effable since we can use it to notionally (abstractly) ‘break into the transforming relational continuum’ and start describing the activity from wherever we want.  We can start if from where Jean Valjean steals a loaf of bread, rather than from where he sees a starving child crying out for food.  SORCERY is convenient in that it opens the way to LOCALIZING the SOURCE of an ACTION and DEVELOPMENT when the reality is that this no LOCAL SOURCING.  If a young actress wants to win over a Harvey Weinstein to get her acting career going, the concept of LOCAL SOURCING is a DOUBLE ERROR based construction that imputes LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments.

If we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS did NOT believe in DOUBLE ERROR BASED SORCERY, we would not have EGO (as Nietzsche pointed out, EGO comes from the DOUBLE ERROR) and we would not give credit to a PRODUCER for PRODUCER-PRODUCT ACHIEVEMENTS.  We would, in fact, be like indigenous aboriginal cultures and like modern physics, wherein the dynamics of reality are understood as relational transformation.  i.e. LOCAL SOURCING of ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS DOES NOT EXIST!  It is an abstraction arising from the DOUBLE ERROR of LANGUAGE and GRAMMAR.

-4- The OOPS here, applies to the WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS’ practice of accepting DOUBLE ERROR based pseudo-reality as our OPERATIVE REALITY.  But in the reality of our actual sensory experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum, THERE ARE NO SUCH THINGS AS LOCAL INDEPENDENT BEINGS WITH THEIR OWN POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS.

* * *

PROLOGUE SUMMARY:

The reality of our inclusion in the transforming relational continuum is ineffable.

Modern physics, indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta are all of the same understanding.

In order to reduce so as to express an understanding of the Tao, we have to reduce it to something which it is not.

We can do this with the DOUBLE ERRRO as described by Nietzsche.

The EAST employs this DOUBLE ERROR reduction of the ineffable Tao (transforming relational continuum we are included in) as a tool of INFERENCE which positions the mind for making an intuitive leap to a sense of the ineffable.

The WEST employs this DOUBLE ERROR reduction as REPLACEMENT REALITY which the WEST employs as the OPERATIVE REALITY.   THIS IS A CRAZY-MAKER which constructs ‘reality’, LITERALLY, in the DOUBLE ERROR terms of NAME-INSTANTIATED THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES WITH THEIR OWN (NOTIONAL) POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS.  The symptoms of this CRAZINESS include EGO, the conceptualizing of TRANSFORMATION in terms of the BIRTH and DEATH of NAME-INSTANTIATED THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES,  the CONSERVATIVE-LIBERAL split and BIPOLAR DISORDER/SCHIZOPHRENIA

* * *

 

* * * END OF PROLOGUE * * * 

 

* * *

 

Re the division in regard to Trump’s impeachment and in general in the conservative –  liberal polarization.

 

the polar division in understanding of ‘reality’ between conservatives and liberals is DELUSIONAL   both of the polar opposing views are based on the illusion of ‘sorcery’ which Nietzsche has pointed out is a ‘double error’ of language and grammar.   it is the same illusion as in the Zen paradox (koan) of wind and flag, which sources the move of which?   the Zen answer, which agrees with the modern physics answer is NEITHER, since what is going on is relational transformation in which there is no such thing as ‘the sourcing of actions and developments’ aka SORCERY.

 

CONSERVATIVE VIEW: the individual is the SOURCE of actions and developments

 

LIBERAL VIEW: the social collective is the SOURCE of actions and developments.

 

REALITY as in the INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL view, the modern physics view, the Buddhist/Taoist and Advaita Vedanta view, is that there s only transformation, no SOURCING of actions and developments; i.e.g no GROWTH.  We speak of the growth of a city, but fail to mention the corresponding shirinkage of undeveloped land.   Therefore, it is abstraction to speak of ‘growth’ as there is only transformation in the real world of our actual experience.  ‘Growth’ is the abstract artifact of thinking in terms of absolute space.  in the curved space of the real world of our sensory experience, as the town GROWS larger, the undeveloped land correspondingly shrinks in size, and if GROWTH of developed land continues to shrink and what people living in that space will experience is TRANSFORMATION as development transforms the undeveloped lands.

 

IN OTHER WORDS, ‘GROWTH’ IS NON-EXISTENT ABSTRACTION BASED ON THE ABSTRACTION OF EUCLIDIAN SPACE WHICH DOES NOT TRANSFORM WHEN SOMETHING WITHIN IT ‘GROWS’ SINCE IT IS INFINITE AND THERE IS NO RECIPROCAL ‘SHRINKING OF UNDEVELOPED SPACE’.  Only in absolute space can there be GROWTH.  in the REAL WORLD SPACE OF OUR SENSORY EXPERIENCE, the GROWTH  of a development within the space is impossible, there is only TRANSFORMATION.

 

as in the Zen koan BOTH CONSERVATIVE AND LIBERAL VIEWS ARE WRONG because there is only relational TRANSFORMATION, there is no GROWTH which implies the SOURCING of DEVELOPMENT of a THING-IN-ITSELF.

 

Conservatives and liberals get ‘crosswise’ over the mistaken belief that the INHABITANTS are the SOURCE of improvements in the HABITAT, and on this mistaken assumption, the issue crops up as to whether the INDIVIDUAL is the basic SOURCE of the improvements in the HABITAT or whether the SOCIAL COLLECTIVE is the SOURCe of the improvements.  The question arises as to whether ONE BAD APPLE SOURCES ROT OF THE WHOLE BARREL, or whether IT TAKES A WHOLE COMMUNITY TO SOURCE THE RAISING OF A [GOOD/BAD] CHILD.

 

BOTH ARE WRONG because the notion of LOCAL INDEPENDENT THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES (people, towns, nations) that are the SOURCE of their own GROWTH/DEVELOPMENT is UNREAL ABSTRACTION, there is only relational TRANSFORMATION and the abstract concept of things-in-themselves comes from NAMING which we conflate to impute powers of SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS with GRAMMAR.   That is, NAMING and GRAMMAR based ENDOWING with POWERS of SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS are the DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar that Nietzsche speaks of.

 

For those who care to (dare to?) follow this through, one discovers why EAST is EAST and WEST is WEST and never the twain shall meet, as well as why Bohm comes to the conclusion that ‘EAST’ has ‘got it right’ and that ‘WESTERN CULTURE is a CRAZY-MAKER;

 

“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 point is, once again (as stated above);

 

-1- BOTH the CONSERVATIVE view of reality as well as the LIBERAL view of reality are CRAZY in that BOTH ASSUME the DOUBLE ERROR (sorcery), the difference being that the conservatives see the individual as the source of actions and developments while the liberals see the social collective as the source of actions and developments.

 

AS IN THE ZEN KOAN OF WIND AND FLAG and as in SCHROEDINGERS point that SUBJECT AND OBJECT ARE ONE, … there is no such thing as SORCERY in the sense that the SUBJECT acts on the OBJECT or the INHABITANT ACTS ON THE HABITAT (as in the notional GROWTH of cultivated land), there is only RELATIONAL TRANSFORMATION wherein, SUBJECT AND OBJECT ARE ONE, as in the understanding of modern physics, indigenous aboriginal culture Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta.

 

The conflict between the views of the CONSERVATIVE AND THE LIBERAL do not exist because this conflict is based on different ways of understanding how actions and developments ARE SOURCED (i.e. whether by individuals [conservative] or whether by social collectives [liberal].   THE ANSWER IS “NEITHER” BECAUSE THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS THE SOURCING OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS, … THAT CRAZY NOTION ARISES FROM THE DOUBLE ERROR OF LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR.  THERE IS ONLY RELATIONAL TRANSFORMATION, as in ‘The Tao’ aka ‘the Wavefield’ aka ‘The transforming relational continuum.

 

* * *

 

what is going on today, with the polarization between CONSERVATIVES AND LIBERALS,  … is the exact same thing that Jonathan Swift wrote about in GULLIVER’S TRAVELS in the guise of two different peoples we polarized against one another on the basis of which was the correct end to open a hard-boiled egg.

 

You may not agree, but it is evident to me that the current polarization between TRUMP supporters and TRUMP opponents is of precisely the same nature; i.e. it is based on EGO and the dispute over whether pride should be based on the AMERICAN INDIVIDUAL and his power of SOURCING ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENTS, … or should be based on the AMERICAN SOCIAL COLLECTIVE and its power of SOURCING ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENTS.

 

BOTH ARE WRONG!  THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS LOCAL SOURCING OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS, … SUCH ABSTRACT COMES FROM THE DOUBLE ERROR OF LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR.

 

If anyone reading this were to read Bohm and or Schroedinger and to come to understand and agree with them that the reality we experience inclusion in is the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM otherwise known as ‘the Tao’ aka ‘the Wavefield, ..

 

THEN IT FOLLOWS THAT both of the polar options of ‘conservatism’ and ‘liberalism’ NO LONGER MAKE ANY SENSE BECAUSE THEY ARE BOTH BASED ON ‘SORCERY’ AKA ‘CAUSE AND EFFECT’ AKA ‘THE PRODUCER-PRODUCT DYNAMIC’ AND THE ASSOCIATED CONCEPT OF ‘GROWTH’ WHICH IN TURN IMPLIES ‘THING-IN-ITSELFNESS’.

 

* * *

 

The PRO-TRUMP and AGAINST-TRUMP polarized politics is exactly what Jonathan Swift was writing about in Gulliver’s Travels.  There is absolutely no substance to the argument of either faction since the argument is based on WHETHER THE INDIVIDUAL IS THE SOURCE OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS IN A NATION, OR WHETHER THE SOCIAL COLLECTIVE IS THE SOURCE OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPS.    BOTH SIDES OF THE ARGUMENT ARE WRONG!

 

WHY?  … BECAUSE ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS ARE NOT SOURCED!   IN REALITY, THERE IS ONLY RELATIONAL TRANSFORMATION.

 

WE WESTERN CULTURAL ADHERENTS HAVE BEEN RAISED TO BELIEVE THAT ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS ARE LOCALLY “SOURCED”.  THAT “IS” “THE DOUBLE ERRROR”.

 

EASTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS, INDIGENOUS ABORIGINALS, TAOISTS/BUDDHISTS AND ADVAITA VEDANTA ADHERENTS HAVE BEEN RAISED TO BELIEVE THAT WE ALL SHARE INCLUSION IN A TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.  THIS HAS BEEN REAFFIRMED BY MODERN PHYSICS.  IN THIS UNDERSTANDING OF REALITY, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ‘THE LOCAL SOURCING OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS.

 

THE LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR TRIGGERED BELIEF IN LOCAL SOURCING OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS IS WHAT MAKES US WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS CRAZY.  WE MANY ASK DOES THE MOVING AIR SOURCE THE MOVEMENT OF THE FLAG FLAP OR DOES THE MOVEMENT OF THE FLAG SOURCE THE MOVEMENT OF THE AIR?  THE ANSWER IS THAT WE LIVE IN A TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM WHERE THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS “LOCAL SORCERY”.

 

* * *

 

The POLARIZNG  ASSOCIATED WITH THE TRUMP IMPEACHMENT is thus RIGHT OUT OF GULLIVER’S TRAVELS; i.e. it is based on EGO which is based on the belief in the DOUBLE ERROR (first error) ‘NAMING’ is used to invoke the notion of LOCAL thing-in-itself BEING, conflated with (second error) ‘GRAMMAR’ which is used to impute the power of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and development to the notional name-instantiated LOCAL thing-in-itself.

 

In modern physics as in the relational understanding of indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoish/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta, as with Heraclitus and Lao Tzu, EVERYTHING IS IN FLUX and the DOUBLE ERROR of naming and grammar simply imposes LOCAL BEING on forms in the flow; e.g. KATRINA IS GROWING LARGER AND STRONGER AND IS DEVASTING NEW ORLEANS.

 

LETS BE REAL!  WE, LIKE KATRINA THE HURRICANE, ARE INCLUDED IN THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM!   Katrina is NOT REALLY a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF WITH POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS.  ‘SHE’ is a relational form within the transforming relational continuum that we, for our discursive convenience, slap a label on (which psychologically imputes persisting thing-in-itself BEING) so as to facilitate SHARING our perceptions of the Tao we are each uniquely included in, and which NO-ONE is outside of with an ‘overall’ view of.

 

Our observations, that we capture in language and put in reports that we share with others, are VOYEUR PERSPECTIVES that fall far shot of capturing what is really going on (i.e. the transformation that we share inclusion in).  We may call what we observe and report it as ‘the truth’ but it is ‘our very limited personal truth’ which fails to capture the truth as understood as the transforming relational continuum in which we all share inclusion.  Since our personal truths are all unique and different, how do we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS resolve this?  We resolve it according the principle documented by LaFontaine; « La raison du plus fort est toujours la meilleure »  (The reasoning of the most powerful is always the best”).

 

SUMMARY/CONCLUSION re Trump’s Impeachment Proceedings and the general Conservative-Liberal Schism

 

WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS continue to believe in ‘sorcery’ as the foundational dynamic in reality.  Yes, we have changed the name ‘sorcery’ to ‘the producer-product dynamic’ and to ‘cause and effect’ but it is still the same old SORCERY of the Western middle age belief.  modern physics supports EASTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS with their belief in reality as relational transformation.

 

The conservative-liberal split is based on a belief in sorcery (the ‘double error’) as the animator of the world dynamic; i.e. the first error of naming is to impute LOCAL thing-in-itself BEING, conflated with the second error which uses grammar to impute the power of sourcing actions and developments to the (first error) name-instantiated thing-in-itself.

 

The WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT social collective thus succumbs to CRAZY-MAKING beliefs, all three of which are based on ‘sorcery’; (-1-) conservatives who believe that sorcery is a power arising from individuals, (-2-) ‘liberals who believe that sorcery is a power arising from social collectives.  This abstract belief comes with a built in basic ambiguity of the wind and flag type; i.e. does the mood of the individual come first and source the actions of the social collective as in the conservative belief? … or, … does the mood of the social collective come first and source the actions of individuals in the collective as in the liberal belief?.  BOTH OF THESE ARE WRONG BECAUSE THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ‘SORCERY’, THERE IS ONLY RELATIONAL TRANSFORMATION.   (-3-)  ‘bipolars/schizophrenics’ who believe that both polar options for sorcery are available within the individual so that there is no need to join in either of the dysfunctional mutually polarized groups ‘out there’.

 

The bipolars/schizophrenics are off to good start in not wanting to join either of the two sorcery based opposing poles and if they were not living in a sea of polarization, perhaps things would work out for them, but insofar as they are living in a sea of polarization, they may be pulled in opposite directions at the same time and without some easily accessible ability to shift their psyche out of bipolar mode, they will be stuck trying to intellectually solve the problem of whether they, as both flag and wind at once, are going to do some flapping or accept being flapped, and in this manic-depressive oscillation, both of the opposite emotions are fuelled by ego based belief in ‘sorcery’ (I am the SOURCE of this wonderful action/development/success! … er, no … I  am the SOURCE of this horrible action/development/failure!).   This is the EGO speaking (the ego is our double error sense of self as LOCAL things-in-ourselves with our own powers of SOURCING actions and developments). [In the indigenous aboriginal culture where transformation is in place of sorcery, the binary poles of sorcery based pride and sorcery-based shame give way to the relational equivalents of experiencing inclusional (‘one-with-everything’) harmony or dissonance.]

 

In indigenous aboriginal understanding, as in modern physics BOTH/AND logic of the included medium, FIGURE AND GROUND ARE ONE (SUBJECT AND OBJECT ARE ONE)

 

“The world is given to me only once, not one existing and one perceived. Subject and object are only one. The barrier between them cannot be said to have broken down as a result of recent experience in the physical sciences, for this barrier does not exist.” – Erwin Schroedinger

 

Therefore, there is no basis for the FIGURE AND GROUND SPLIT as in the INHABITANT AND HABITAT SPLIT and no basis for REDUCING TRANSFORMATION … TO … GROWTH (e.g. in the resonant relational transforming that manifests as DUNING, our reductionist talk in DOUBLE ERROR terms of LOCAL DUNES that ‘grow larger’ and ‘shift across the desert floor impresses our intellect which is right at home with reductions to binary abstraction.

 

Re Trump’s Impeachment Proceedings and the general Conservative-Liberal Schism, these proceedings are within the SORCERY paradigm which is subject to basic ambiguity as in whether the flag’s flapping sourced the air’s moving or whether the moving air sourced the flag’s flapping.   There is no clear answer since ‘SORCERY’ is not really what is going on  (it is the DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar).  What IS REALLY going on, as modern physics attests is relational TRANSFORMATION.

 

I am well aware that very few WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTs reading this essay, even if they could find no fault in its findings AGAINST THE CONCEPT OF SORCERY which people are using to condemn either TRUMP or his Democratic attackers, would back off their positions for or against TRUMP since we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are psychologically-culturally conditioned to make judgements using the ego-based concept of SORCERY.  My point in writing this is share understanding on how our WESTERN CULTURE social dynamic IS A CRAZY-MAKER, which effects some of us more heavily than others.

 

In my view, it is clear that some of us are sensitive ‘miner’s canaries’ that start flapping about confusedly because we sense that there’s something amiss in the space we are situationally included in. If we were the much less sensitive miners, we would accept the disturbing flapping about of our sisters the canaries, as indicative of something amiss in the common environment that less sensitive others such as ourselves, are not detecting.   Of course, if we thought it a virtue that we had the roughness and toughness to persist in our living and working in an environment even as it was getting more and more oppressive and dysfunctional, we might wear it as a survivalist ‘badge of honour’ even as the more sensitive among us began ‘dropping like flies’.

 

‘Crazy-for-you’ is the title coined by Jill Astbury a publication on her research into The Making of Women’s Madness’  wherein she reviewed The World Health Organization statistics on the mental ill health of females which show that women have twice the incidence of ‘affective disorders’ (depression, bipolar disorder etc.). The findings suggest that male-dominated patterns of social behaviour that are imposed on everyone in the social collective associate with maladies that show up in the more sensitive members of the social collective.  In this case, it would not make sense to study the individual manifesting the problem on her own, since it would be the influence of the relational social dynamic she resides in that is responsible.  In other words, the origin of the manifest symptoms would be NONLOCAL in the environment rather than LOCAL within her.  Therefore, like the drunk who searches under the streetlight for the watch he lost on a dark section of the street “because the search conditions are better there”, research into the maladies of sensitive ‘miner’s canaries’ that drills down looking for an internal source is never going to discover that the something that’s amiss is immanent in the ambient conditions in the environment.

 

The research stemming from this viewpoint had a systemic blindness. It could literally not see what it was doing, as the normative quality of its own presuppositions had made them invisible.” – Jill Astbury

 

Sensitivity is NOT a weakness and chemical numbing-down is not an apt response to escalation in the oppressiveness and dysfunctionality of the environment. Miners do, in fact, APPRECIATE the sensitivity of the canary as also the sensitivity of a Geiger counter on a visit to Chernobyl.

 

The lead-in to my comments was the division in regard to Trump’s impeachment and in general in the conservative –  liberal polarization.

 

For me, the conservative-liberal split over the Trump impeachment initiative brings attention to a basic psychological aberrance in WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENCE; i.e. belief in SORCERY.  This is CRAZY-MAKER that is drawing us into deepening social dysfunction and it needs to be recognized for the double error based misconception that it is.  Such recognition would have more wide-ranging benefits than could ever come from the Trump impeachment initiative per se.

 

* * * * *

Crazy For You: Western Culture’s Majority Vote Based ‘Reality’

0

 

 

AUTHOR’S PROLOGUE; Crazy for You – An Inquiry into the Enigma of Bipolar Disorder/Schizophrenia and More

 

The “Double Error of language and grammar” (Nietzsche) provides an understanding of ‘Bipolar Disorder’/Schizophrenia and how this develops through loving relations.   The Double Error is an exposé of WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT understanding-gone-wrong, in that the reality of relational TRANSFORMATION is being unnaturally superseded, in our language stimulated intellection, by SORCERY (i.e. by the double error based notion of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments).

 

When ‘the concept of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments’ (aka ‘SORCERY’) is ‘taken literally’ (rather than as a simplistically reduced means of inferring transformation that has been termed a ‘Wittgenstein ladder’), this literal conceptualizing is a CRAZY-MAKER.  IT IS A CRAZINESS THAT PERVADES WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENCE and  it comes from the DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar.

As Nietzsche has pointed out, the ‘double error’ of language and grammar is an abstract reduction of reality that can give us a false sense of reality IF and WHEN, instead of using the double error as ‘inference’ of an ineffable reality that lies innately beyond the reach of language and grammar, we use the ‘double error’ reduction of reality as our ‘operative reality’.  The use of language in ‘Wittgenstein ladder’ mode (i.e. language used to obliquely INFER the ineffable (-because-continually-in-flux) reality that lies beyond explicit capture in language) can induce intuitive understanding of the ineffable flow-based reality.

In Nietzsche’s example, lightning can be thought of as purely relational resonance like the ‘DUNING’ of sand, a purely relational phenomenon belonging to an overall transformation rather than ‘a DUNE thing-in-itself’ with its own power of sourcing actions and developments. By using ‘subjectizing’ formulations such as ‘lightning flashes’ and ‘dunes shift across the desert floor’, we make a ‘double error’ (the first error is to use ‘naming’ to impute thing-in-itself being, and the second error, ‘grammar’, conflates the first by imputing the power of sourcing actions and developments (“sorcery”) to the name-instantiated thing-in-itself.

 

WHY DO WE MAKE THIS DOUBLE ERROR?

 

We make this DOUBLE ERROR because ‘transformation’, the reality we really want to articulate, is NONLOCAL in spacetime and while it is the real Wavefield reality, it is ineffable-because-NONLOCAL.  The NONLOCALITY of TRANSFORMATION manifests like the ‘catspaw’ pattern where wind roughens the surface of the ocean but there is no LOCAL SOURCE of such manifestation.  Resonance features in fluid-flow are also an example of NONLOCAL phenomena.  Transformation is something we can’t break into effable LOCAL parts as is the case with the transforming relational continuum aka the ineffable Tao.

In other words, WE USE THE DOUBLE ERROR TO REDUCE THE INEFFABLE WAVE-FIELD (TAO) TO EFFABLE, LOCAL TERMS. For example, the inherently NONLOCAL (and thus ineffable) resonance phenomenon of DUNING requires a reduction to effable if we are going to share our experiences/observations in regard to ‘duning’.  The DOUBLE ERROR is the means of reducing the ineffable DUNING to effable expression (e.g. ‘the dune is growing larger and shifting across the ‘desert floor’).  This injection of a SUBJECT as the notional source of action and development in language and grammar construction delivers an intellectual impression of LOCAL instantiation of actions and development, overcoming (in the intellect, at least) the barrier of ineffability of NONLOCAL phenomena.

 

The CRAZY-MAKER is that WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENCE involves treating the DOUBLE ERROR REDUCTION NOT JUST AS A USEFUL-BUT-NOT-REAL  INFERENCE OF NONLOCAL REALITY, BUT TREATING IT AS THE “LOCAL OPERATIVE REALITY”.  That is, there is ‘duning’ but there is no DUNE and no REALITY in imputing ‘thing-in-itself being’ to the notional ‘DUNE’ by ‘naming it’ DUNE (‘naming’ imputes persisting being as if there is a ‘spirit’, the same ‘spirit’ within the form we observe within the transforming relational continuum).  If the form is the hurricane, naming the hurricane ‘Katrina’ will impute persisting thing-in-itself being to the LOCAL FORM, even though the form is NONLOCAL and there is nothing LOCAL about the form other than how it APPEARS to the observing intellect, an appearance that we intellectually CONCRETIZE with NAMING).

‘Crazy-for-you’ is the title coined by Jill Astbury in her research into ‘psychological disorders’ such as ‘bipolar disorder’, which has a far higher rate of incidence in women than in men, suggesting that male-dominated patterns of social behaviour that are imposed on everyone in the social collective could associate with maladies that show up in the more sensitive members of the social collective.  In this case, it would not make sense to study the individual manifesting the problem on her own, since it would be influence of the relational social matrix she resides in that is responsible.  In other words, the origin of the manifest symptoms would be NONLOCAL rather than LOCAL.  Therefore, like the drunk who searches under the streetlight for the watch he lost on a dark section of the street “because the search conditions are better there”, research into the maladies of sensitive ‘miner’s canaries’ that drills down looking for an internal source is never going to discover that the something that’s amiss is immanent in the ambient conditions in the mine.

 

The research stemming from this viewpoint had a systemic blindness. It could literally not see what it was doing, as the normative quality of its own presuppositions had made them invisible.” – Jill Astbury

 

This systemic blindness associates with DOUBLE ERROR thinking (thinking in terms of LOCAL SOURCING) rather than in terms of NONLOCALITY.  The same ‘systemic blindness’ has been encountered by psychiatric studies of schizophrenia as presented in ‘Mental Health and Ethnic Minorities’.  The researchers show that the incidence of schizophrenia in non-native born blacks in the U.K. is 3-5 times higher than native born blacks. As the researchers point out, the implication is that we are not going to discover the source of the illness within the individual, no matter how deeply and intensively we investigate the individual’s ill health as if it were the property of the individual.  While “mental ill health” implies something wrong with the individual, mental well-being points to relational/environmental influences.

 

“From the outset it will be clear that most of the research in this field has followed the conventional epidemiological or medical paradigm by focusing on mental ill health as the dependent variable. It is, therefore, not surprising that there is a lack of empirically grounded research on mental well-being or the psychological resilience and survival of minority groups in this country” — R. Cochrane (University of Birmingham) and S. P. Sashidharan (North Birmingham Mental Health Trust) in ‘Mental Health and Ethnic Minorities’

 

WHY DO WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS ASSUME ‘LOCAL SOURCING’ RATHER THAN NONLOCAL TRANSFORMATION?

 

THE DOUBLE ERROR OF LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR =  THE IMPUTING OF LOCAL SOURCING OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS, APPLIES not only in medical affairs but in the psychological assessment of reality in general.

 

The insight in CRAZY FOR YOU points to something going on that goes much farther than the topics of gender-based or race-based investigations of psychological health.  It opens the door to understanding phenomena in terms of NONLOCALITY that we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS reduce to LOCAL so as to render the ineffable effable.  What is CRAZY is to let the LANGUAGE  AND GRAMMAR BASED DOUBLE ERROR reduction tool ‘run away with the workman’, … the human (effable) with the divine (ineffable).  While DUNING implies ‘resonance’ as in an ineffable NONLOCAL TRANSFORMATION, the intellectual-linguistic reduction to DUNES that grow  larger and shift across the ‘desert floor’ enables expression in the effable DOUBLE ERROR based terms of LOCAL SORCERY of actions and developments.

 

NONLOCALITY clashes with the DOUBLE ERROR SORCERY based view of reality of WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS where LOCAL incipient SOURCING is used in constructing an intellectual representation of dynamics.

 

To believe, literally, in SORCERY is where the EGO comes from (as well as belief in the abstractions of sorcery of GOOD and EVIL actions and developments).  This is where CRAZY FOR YOU originates as a kind of ‘humoring’ of a loved one who is possessed by the delusional belief in his own powers of SORCERY.

 

This is where the reality of NONLOCALITY gets superseded, in the psyches of WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS by the abstract concept of LOCAL incipience of name-instantiated things-in-themselves, notionally with their own (grammar-given) powers of SOURCING actions and developments; — in short, the DOUBLE ERROR).  DUNING as transformation thus gives way to DUNES with powers of SOURCING actions and developments (e.g. shifting and growing).

 

ACCEPTING OUR LOVED ONES EVEN WHILE THEY ARE DELUSIONALLY BELIEVING THEY POSSESS THEIR OWN POWERS OF SORCERY IS THE ORIGIN OF ‘CRAZY FOR YOU’.

 

Such DOUBLE ERROR based delusion has become the NORM of WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENCE.

 

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

 

CRAZY FOR YOU, is where we feign belief in SORCERY (the DOUBLE ERROR) in order to join together with loved others in accepting and supporting the DOUBLE ERROR illusion as the basis of our ‘OPERATIVE REALITY’.

 

The Enigma of Bipolar Disorder/Schizophrenia is explainable in terms of the CRAZY—MAKING DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar. The DOUBLE ERROR of SORCERY is not ‘reality’, it is CRAZINESS, but EGO feeds on it and it has become the NORM of WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENCE.

 

They are playing a game.  They are playing at not playing a game.  If I show them I see they are, I shall break the rules and they will punish me.  I must play their game, of not seeing I see the game.”  R. D. Laing – ‘Knots’

 

CRAZY FOR YOU involves joining in an aberrant WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT game that is sustained by love.

 

“It is Henry’s contention that in practice education has never been an instrument to free the mind and the spirit of man, but to bind them. … Children do not give up their innate imagination, curiousity, dreaminess easily. You have to love them to get them to do that. Love is the path through permissiveness to discipline; and through discipline, only too often, to betrayal of self.”  R. D. Laing

 

* * * END OF AUTHOR’S PROLOGUE * * *

 

 

“The majority has no monopoly on the Truth” 

– Giordano Bruno (burned at the stake in 1600 for his prescient modern physics beliefs and other heresies).

 

BOTH WESTERN and EASTERN cultures substitute SORCERY for TRANSFORMATION as an expedient for REDUCING the ineffable-because-nonlocal to the local-and-thus-effable.  For example, the resonance phenomenon of DUNING born of NONLOCAL influence can be reduced (as Nietzsche points out) by the DOUBLE ERROR

The DOUBLE ERROR is comprised of (A) NAMING (reducing the resonance phenomenon to a notional LOCAL name-instantiated thing-in-itself) it ‘a DUNE’, and (B) GRAMMAR (conflating the first error of NAMING by imputing to the LOCAL NAME-instantiated thing-in-itself the POWER of SOURCING action and development.

THUS, the NONLOCAL resonance phenomenon of DUNING, thanks to the DOUBLE ERROR, is reduced to ‘the DUNE’ which is given (with GRAMMAR) its own notional powers of SORCERY (e.g. ‘the DUNE is growing longer and higher and is shifting across the desert floor’).

WHY DO WE DO THIS DOUBLE ERROR REDUCTION?

REALITY IS ‘THE INEFFABLE TAO’, THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM AKA THE WAVE-FIELD, … a “NONLOCAL” dynamic, and influence that is NONLOCAL is INEFFABLE.

The DOUBLE ERROR is an expedient for ‘effable-izing’ the ‘ineffable’.  Instead of the unbounded NONLOCAL resonance phenomenon of ‘DUNING’, the DOUBLE ERROR reduction gives us the LOCAL mechanical phenomenon of ‘the DUNE with its own (GRAMMAR-given) powers of SOURCING action and development.

The archetype for this DOUBLE ERROR reduction is ‘the SELF’ made into the grammatical SUBJECT, the ‘I’.

As Nietzsche points out, this invention of the SUBJECT as a purported LOCAL SORCERER of actions and developments is TRICKERY (Unart).

 

“Unsre Unart, ein Erinnerungszeichen, eine abkürzende Formel als Wesen zu nehmen, schließlich als Ursache, zum Beispiel vom Blitz zu sagen: „er leuchtet“. Oder gar das Wörtchen „ich“. Eine Art von Perspektive im Sehen wieder als Ursache des Sehens selbst zu setzen: das war das Kunststück in der Erfindung des „Subjekts“, des „Ichs“!”

–Nietzsche, Der Wille zur Macht

(Note: Ursache – sourcing agency, cause).

ENGLISH:

“Our absurd habit of regarding a mere mnemonic sign or abbreviated formula as an independent being, and ultimately as a cause; as, for instance, when we say of lightning that ” it flashes.” Or even the little word ” I.” A sort of double-sight in seeing which makes sight a cause of seeing in itself: this was the feat in the invention of the ” subject ” of the ” ego.” – Nietzsche, The Will to Power

WHY THIS TRICKERY?

(more…)

The Usurping of Transformation by Growth, Topology by Geometry

0

WESTERN CULTURE CRAZY-MAKER: THE USURPING OF TRANSFORMATION BY GROWTH, TOPOLOGY BY GEOMETRY

We are born with an intuitive sense of topological discrimination of FIGURE and GROUND as ONE, but in WESTERN CULTURE are quickly taught to supersede TOPOLOGY with the lesser concept of GEOMETRY, a substitution that radically reduces our understanding of the natural world dynamic, replacing TRANSFORMATION with GROWTH.   Instead of understanding a loaf of white bread turning blue as ‘TRANSFORMATION’, we speak of the GROWTH of a ‘SPOT’ of ‘MOLD’.

This is the DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar pointed out by Nietzsche; the first error is NAMING to impute LOCAL thing-in-itself BEING to a form that we observe by way of our voyeur visualizing sense, while the second error of GRAMMAR conflates the first by imputing the power of SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT to the NAMING-instantiated thing-in-itself.  This double error approach of language and grammar would have us speaking in terms of GROWTH OF BEING; for example we speak of THE GROWTH OF BLUE MOLD ON A PIECE OF BREAD.

IN THIS DOUBLE ERROR BASED CONSTRUCTION OF THE ABSTRACT CONCEPT OF “GROWTH”, WE ARE INVENTING THE LOGIC OF THE EXCLUDED MEDIUM AND BY SUBSTITUTING ‘GROWTH’ FOR ‘TRANSFORMATION’.

THE ‘BLUE SPOT OF BREAD ” IS NOW THE ‘FIGURE’ THAT LANGUAGE ENDOWS WITH AN ONTOLOGICAL EXISTENCE SEPARATE FROM THE ONTOLOGICAL EXISTENCE  THAT LANGUAGE GIVES TO THE WHITE BREAD ‘GROUND’  AND ‘GRAMMAR’ SECURES THIS ABSTRACT ONTOLOGICAL INVENTION OF LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF BEING BY IMPUTING LOCAL JUMPSTART POWER OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT TO THE ‘BLUE SPOT’ THAT NOW GOES BY THE NAME ‘MOLD’.

Once we employ this double error in constructs such as ‘The spot of mold is growing larger and darker’ we have focused in on the ‘spot’ and imputed to it ITS OWN LOCAL POWER OF GROWTH.

In other words, WE HAVE REPLACED THE UNDERSTANDING OF TRANSFORMATION WITH THE CONCEPT OF ‘GROWTH’..

(more…)

Sorcery Versus Transformation

0

SORCERY versus TRANSFORMATION  (LOCALITY versus NONLOCALITY)

WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENCE is characterized by giving the abstract concept of LOCAL SORCERY a foundational role in the intellectual (language and grammar based) construction of reality.  ‘SORCERY’, the notional ‘double-error’ concept of ‘local’ ‘sourcing’ of actions and developments as in the common WESTERN CULTURE ‘PRODUCER-PRODUCT concept, is the intellectual concept that is used, in WESTERN CULTURE, to articulate and understand the social dynamic.   The ‘double error’ used to create the notion of ‘sorcery’ is; (first error) NAMING to impute LOCAL thing-in-itself existence to VISION-ACCESSIBLE relational forms ‘out there in front of us’, conflating this with (second error) GRAMMAR to impute the power of sourcing actions and developments to the LOCAL NAMING-INSTANTIATED THING-IN-ITSELF.  Thus, for example, the visual appearance of LOCAL plant sprouts ‘pushing up and out of the ground’ in spring is THUS captured in language and grammar within such double error based representation that substitutes the effable psychological-intellectual impression of LOCAL SOURCING, in place of the actual ineffable NONLOCAL Wave-field based transformation.

THE VISUAL SENSING of FORMS (as in TRANSFORMATION) REDUCED TO EFFABLE EXPRESSION with LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR allows us to employ intellectual DOUBLE ERROR based constructions of REALITY in terms of LOCAL SORCERY.  While our sensory experience is of inclusion in relational fluid-turbulence that, for example, features a water-spout or ‘twister’ out there in front of us (the VOYEUR-VISIBLE ASPECT OF THE RELATIONAL PHENOMENA WE ARE IMMERSED IN), we are able to intellectually SPLIT OUT the visible aspect ‘on its own’ and by name-labelling forms; e.g. Katrina, and animating them (intellectually-conceptually) with grammar, we construct a FUNDAMENTALLY REDUCED pseudo-reality based on binary FIGURE AND GROUND dynamics; i.e. ‘Katrina is growing larger and stronger and is devastating New Orleans’.

In our intellectual engineering of this language and grammar VOYEUR VISUALIZATION based DOUBLE ERROR REDUCTION, we DROP OUT the understanding coming with our fullblown SENSORY EXPERIENCE of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.  REALITY, on this basis of VOYEUR VISUALIZING and double error reduction to terms of things-in-themselves with notional powers of sourcing actions and developments is REDUCED to ‘something going on out there’ that is sensed ‘in here’, SPLITTING ‘self’ and ‘other’ into two mutually exclusive realms, AS FAR THE INTELLECT GOES, BUT AS FAR AS OUR SENSORY EXPERIENCE GOES, SUBJECT AND OBJECT ARE STILL “ONE”.

The subject-object split, meanwhile REDUCES the ineffable Tao to something ‘effable’ such as our voyeur visualizing of flow, the flow-forms in which we can intellectually ‘trap’ and intellectually ‘label’ (NAME) and intellectually ‘animate’ with GRAMMAR, creating in the intellectualizing mind, an synthetic double-error based pseudo-reality BASED ON LOCAL SORCERY, REDUCED FROM NONLOCAL RELATIONAL TRANSFORMATION.

This reduction from NONLOCAL RELATIONAL TRANSFORMATION to LOCAL SORCERY renders that which is ineffable in REDUCED but ‘effable’ terms.  The double error tool of reduction, meanwhile (as pointed out by Emerson and Nietzsche), has in WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS ‘run away with the workman, the human with the divine’.

IN SIMPLE TERMS, ‘SORCERY’ HAS USURPED ‘TRANSFORMATION’ in our WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT conceptualizing of REALITY.

This REDUCTION from TRANSFORMATION to SORCERY employed not just as a tool of inference but as THE OPERATIVE REALITY has become the WESTERN CULTURE CRAZY-MAKING ‘NORMAL’ as R.D. Laing and others have pointed out.

(more…)

How God Left the Earth and Got Up in the Sky

0

How God Left the Earth and Got Up in the Sky

Man arranged God’s relocation when man switched from grounding his understanding of the dynamics of reality from TOPOLOGY to GEOMETRY.

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,

When did GEOMETRY overtake TOPOLOGY?

It’s not likely that you can remember when you were first taught ‘language and grammar’ but as WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS, we start working on our children soon after they are born to teach them the ‘names’ of “every THING”.

Naming DISTINGUISHES ONE FORM FROM ANOTHER FORM as in MOUNTAIN and VALLEY, a separation that passes over TOPOLOGY and has us thinking in terms of GEOMETRY as in the GEOMETRY of FORMS which exist as THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES.  In Kepler’s Mysterium Cosmographicum (1597), the five Platonic solids dictate the structure of the universe, giving a role of fundamental to geometry in understanding ‘reality’;

“Geometry existed before the Creation. It is co-eternal with the mind of God… Geometry provided God with a model for the Creation… Geometry is God Himself.” Thus said Johannes Kepler, Harmonice Mundi, The Harmony of the World (1619), book IV, Ch. 1

Once popularized among WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS, this imputed primacy of GEOMETRY did an ‘end run’ in our minds, around the natural precedence of TOPOLOGY.  Can we not see ourselves as WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT parents, pushing this geometry of solids down our children’s receptive psychological intakes like force-feeding geese by cranking food down into them through a worm-gear for our own pleasure-purpose (to produce some thing delicious as ‘foie gras’ to please ourselves).

Whatever was the startup incentive for us WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS, we sure as hell managed to wean our children OFF OF TOPOLOGY (the purely relational understanding of reality) and get them exclusively oriented to GEOMETRY with its abstraction of LOCAL THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES identified by NAMES.

(more…)

The TRAP-DOOR Entries to Our WESTERN Flatspace Reality

0

FORWARD:

WEST SPLITS FROM EAST WHERE FORGIVENESS SUPERSEDES COMPASSION

(‘FORGIVENESS’ is a backhanded means of affirming BINARY (perpetrator-victim) TORT while ‘COMPASSION’ embraces NONDUALITY as in ‘mitakuye oyasin’.

“The world is given to me only once, not one existing and one perceived. Subject and object are only one. The barrier between them cannot be said to have broken down as a result of recent experience in the physical sciences, for this barrier does not exist.” – Erwin Schroedinger

The reality of sensory experience of inclusion in relations naturally precedes the  binary self-other splitting of rational intellection.

* * * * * * * * * *

EASTERN sanity comes from understanding that we are included in the GREAT HARMONY (the Tao, the Wave-field) while WESTERN craziness comes from belief that we have powers of SORCERY.  This belief is called EGO.

COMPASSION for self and others within relations wherein we experience pain is natural since there is no such thing as LOCALLY INSTANTIATED SORCERY (such developments are relative). (e.g. for the unloved child there is no JOY and this can manifest as the NONLOCAL origin of abusive conflict as acknowledged in ‘mitakuye oyasin’, as develops WITHIN the web of relations).

FORGIVENESS mistakenly confirms the CRAZY-MAKING belief in LOCAL SORCERY and BLINDS us to the reality of NONLOCALITY.

Beware the DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar!  It gives us SORCERY as a tool of inference that, if taken literally, can run away with the workman, making him believe the power of SORCERY is incipient in him and in relational forms in general that we objectify with our act of assigning names to relational forms.

Thus, in our psyche (in our intellectual pseudo-reality constructions), we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS use NAMING AND GRAMMAR to brew up double error based SORCERY and eclipse the relational reality of mitakuye oyasin, the reality of our common inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.

COMPASSION is the Bodhisattva ethic that dissolves the self-other split, UNLIKE FORGIVENESS, which is born of ‘noblesse oblige’, concretizing the BINARY guilty-innocent self-other split as it imputes magnanimity to the FORGIVER and a debt of gratitude to the FORGIVEN.

* * *

 

The sensory-experience reality of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum (the Tao, the Wave-field) is INEFFABLE and we are thus challenged to; (a) Come up with a REDUCTION of the ineffable to employ it (a necessarily deficient reduction) as an effable substitute/surrogate-reality to help us INFER the ineffable reality that lies innately beyond explicit/objective capture, and (b) NOT FALL INTO THE TRAP of employing the effable surrogate-reality as if it were the ‘actual reality’.

While EASTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS (and modern physics) achieve these two aims, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS typically achieve ONLY the first and FAIL to achieve the second.

* * * END OF FORWARD * * *

 

It is possible  to start with a fluid space and to use naming to populate the fluid space  with notional things-in-themselves.  These names can be embellished with grammar to make their imputed objects appear to AGE and SUBMERGE, and new names can be added to simulate emergence of new naming-instantiated objects that ‘have their own grammar-instantiated powers of’ GROWTH and DECLINE within an abstract binary interval bounded on one end by BIRTH and on the opposite end, by DEATH.   Thus any ‘naming-instantiated objects’ such as a ‘person’, ‘nation’, ‘organization’ or ‘organism’ can be created and associated with a relational form-in-the-NONLOCAL flow (‘the Tao’, aka the Wavefield) making it out to be a LOCAL, independently-existing THING-IN-ITSELF; … then using such abstraction to REDUCE RELATIONAL TRANSFORMATION … (the reality of our actual sensory experience of inclusion therein)…  to terms of LOCAL things-in-themselves manifesting binary (ON/OFF) BIRTH to DEATH LIFE-CYCLES that INHABIT an otherwise empty HABITAT.  The combination of BIRTH and DEATH and HABITAT and INHABITANT is a ‘double error’ twice over that is the ‘price’ of coming up with an effable rendering of the ineffable Tao.  If we were to understand the whorl in the flow in terms of FIGURE AND GROUND AS ONE as in modern physics, we would need NEITHER the binary INHABITANT-HABITAT SPLIT NOR the binary BIRTH AND DEATH of the INHABITANT.  The phenomena of emergence and subsuming of flow-forms becomes EXPLICIT in the psyche with the intellectual double error of language and grammar.

Instead of the NONLOCAL, UNDIVIDED transforming relational continuum, which is INEFFABLE, we can use flatspace visualization to REDUCE this to a LOCAL, DIVIDED THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES-BASED surrogate pseudo-reality which is EFFABLE.

“CHANGE” is a synthetic (UNREAL/ABSTRACT) pseudo-phenomenon that shows up as an artifact in our intellectual reduction of the transforming relational continuum (the Tao aka the Wavefield, the Heraclitean flow) to the abstract LOCAL, DIVIDED ‘double error’ pseudo-reality of NAME-INSTANTIATED THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES (first error) with notional grammar-endowed POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS.

With these reductions built into our language and grammar, we are well on our way to accommodating the construction of a pseudo-reality that we can visualize ‘out there in front of us’, and thus MAKE AN END RUN around the obstacle of INEFFABLE-NESS of the all including transforming relational continuum.  Since we are included in the ‘flow’ aka the transforming relational continuum, visual portrayals of things as if they are out there in front of us are a radical reduction of our sensory experience of inclusion.  The DUNE that we can see ‘over there’ (out in front of us) as ‘it grows longer and higher and shifts across the desert floor’, as if on a movie screen is imagery that is taking our awareness out of a sense of inclusion within the transforming relational continuum.  We are instead building ‘knowledge’ of a world that we can understanding by ‘gazing into it’ as if it is ‘a world OUT THERE’, rather than a transforming relational continuum in which we are included which, admittedly, is an effable experience EVEN THOUGH IT IS THE PRIMARY REALITY.

Once we apply the ‘double error’ of language and grammar to reduce OUR NOTION OF OUR SELF to terms of a VISIBLE LOCAL thing-in-itself with POWERS of sourcing actions and developments, we have lost touch with our sense of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.  Sure we can think of the TORNADO as a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF WITH POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS, but it is much more than that!  In order to understand it we must not limit our understanding to the visual aspect.  The TORNADO may be ‘coming towards us’ as far as visualizing it is concerned but it is behind us at the same time as it is in front us, in fact, and as far as wavefield energy goes, we and the whorl we are watching ‘out there in front of us’ are all included in the wavefield.

(more…)

Topological Meditations

0

 

Topological Meditations

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,

My feeling is that ‘topology’ plays an important role in shaping our understanding of ‘realty’, yet it is IMPLICIT in the language we use, helping to shape our understanding UNCONSCIOUSLY.  For example, we commonly employ the word GROWTH as if it refers to a reality, but the ‘growth’ on some thing (e.g. a town) on the surface of a sphere is NOT POSSIBLE since the concept of ‘growth’ is innately incomplete in its failure to capture the simultaneous reciprocal shrinking of the undeveloped land.  Only if the growing town were on a plane of infinite extent would the term GROWTH (which is one-sided in that refers to the thing-in-itself that is ‘growing’) be appropriate.  In the case that the surrounding undeveloped land is shrinking by the same amount the town is growing, we would have to use a terms like TRANSFORMATION rather than GROWTH to capture this.

Such understanding is in the realm of TOPOLOGY and while we are born with this tool of understanding at the ready, … it is, in our WESTERN CULTURE, soon ‘trained out of us’ as we are taught language which orients us to name-instantiated things-in-themselves.  This is the realm of GEOMETRY rather than TOPOLOGY and as is the thesis explored in this note, the reduction of TOPOLOGY to the GEOMETRY OF THINGS, is a WESTERN CULTURE CRAZY-MAKER.

(more…)

The Soleimani Affair vis a vis Adodarho

0

UNDERSTANDING HOW WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENCE IS A CRAZY-MAKER

There is much that is common to EAST and WEST such as in our natural intuition of “letting the soft animal of our body love what it wants to love”.  We can see this natural intuition play out in nature generally and not just in the ‘humanings’ in the Great Resonance aka the Tao aka the Wave-field aka the Transforming Relational Continuum.  So, the intuition of ‘letting the soft animal of our body love what it wants to love’ is something common to people of both WESTERN and EASTERN INTELLECTUAL HABITS.

It is the difference in intellectual habit that distinguishes EAST and WEST, so that one might never ‘detect’ this difference so long as one’s relational interactions within a mix of EASTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS AND WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are constrained to the playful ‘soft animal of the body’ variety.  Only if that stern and penetrating crows-eye intellectual scrutinizing comes into play does the difference between EAST and WEST become manifest.

That is, EAST AND WEST DIVIDE when we leave behind INTUITIVE UNDERSTANDING and shift gears to INTELLECTUAL REASONING and the division comes about due to the WEST’s LITERAL interpretation of the ‘double error’ of language and grammar, the double error of REASON wherein the first error is ‘naming’ that imputes abstract ‘independent thing-in-itself existence’, conflated by the second error of grammar that imputes the power of sourcing actions and developments to the name-instantiated thing-in-in-itself.

This ‘double error’ is where INTELLECTUAL REASONING based on the abstraction of LOCAL jumpstart SOURCING OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS shows itself.

This ‘double error’ is where the belief in SORCERY comes from which is secured in the intellectualizing mind by FORGIVENESS and/or BLAME.  In BOTH cases, there is an affirmation that an action or development is being LOCALLY SOURCED by some or other THING-IN-ITSELF.

(more…)

Go to Top