It is NOT possible for one member of the community to rise up and kill other members of the community where ‘community’ implies relational interdependence, … that would be an ‘error of grammar’ .  But is IS possible for dissonance to emerge together with harmony, within a transforming relational continuum.



Understanding mass killings requires an understanding of why psychological studies of the mass killers do not reveal that these individuals (many of whom are white Western culture males) are NOT significantly different from the NORMAL Western culture adherent.   There is a problem with what we hold to be ‘normal behaviour’ in our Western culture.

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’;

A prime example of Western culture aberrant thinking is the belief in the ‘producer-product’ dynamic, this is a linguistically re-upholstered version of the medieval belief in ‘sorcery’.

It is evidently ‘normal’ (among Western culture adherents) to consider some individuals to be ‘more productive’ than other individuals and to allocate rewards and recognition (and/or punishments and condemnation) on this basis.  This is the basic ‘craziness’ in Western culture, the manifestation of which we refer to as ‘ego’.  In ‘reality’, we share inclusion in a transforming relational continuum, and there are not local points of emergent ‘sorcery’ (producer-product phenomena), such concepts are language and grammar-based abstractions that are not ‘grounded’ in our experience of inclusion in a transforming relational continuum.

Mass murders are rooted in the Western culture belief in ‘sorcery’ and its abstract cohort ‘ego’.  Instead of understanding ourselves as relational forms within the transforming relational continuum, language and grammar (the tool that has ‘run away with the workman’ as Emerson observes), encourages us to understanding ourselves as ‘independent beings’ with ‘our own powers of sourcing actions and developments.

The tendency to aberrant behaviour (including extreme forms like mass murder) derives from Western culture belief and adherence itself, as Nietzsche points out.  This aberrance arises from the fact that we Western culture adherents are psychologically conditioned from infancy to believe in ‘the double error’ of language and grammar which induces belief in the ‘naming’ instantiated independent existence of ‘things-in-themselves’ (first error) conflated with (second error) wherein we use grammar to impute to these ‘things-in-themselves’ the powers of sourcing actions and developments.

Cases in point include naming-instantiated (notional) things-in-themselves such as individual humans, nations, corporations.  In other words, we use this ‘double error’ to ‘break down’ and ‘reduce’ the transforming relational continuum, … the reality of our actual sensory experience, … into language and grammar based, intellectually manageable terms.  The Tao (the transforming relational continuum) that cannot be told then becomes (with the double error-based reduction) ‘tellable’ or ‘articulable’ via ‘language’, although it is no longer ‘the true Tao’.   For example, the purely relational dynamic of ‘duning’ is something we use language and grammar to ‘reduce’ by way of the ‘double error’; e.g. ‘the dune is growing longer and higher and is shifting to the south.   What was only accessible to our purely relational intuition, since it was included in the overall relational transformation that is all-including (and which includes ourselves), then becomes accessible to our spoken tongue, but not without losing its essence nature of inclusion within the transforming relational continuum.

By using the ‘double error’ to ‘break out the relational form’, we are able to articulate (approximately) what was innately inarticulable (the Tao; i.e. the all-including field/flow that includes us), but what we are then articulating is not ‘the true Tao’ ( i.e. not the true all-including flow) but some sort of ‘allusion’ to it.  In modern physics and in indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta, language is used ‘indirectly’ as in ‘The surprise version of the game of Twenty Questions’.

Meanwhile, in Western culture, ‘duning’ is of a purely relational origin; i.e. there is no ‘dune’ that ‘sources’ its own movement and development, yet Western culture language and grammar based expression employs ‘the ‘double error’ to reduce the ‘duning’ (a purely non-material-dependent relational resonance phenomenon that becomes visibly manifest through sand grains collecting in it) to a name-instantiated thing-in-itself (‘dune’) which grammar notionally endows with the powers of sourcing actions and developments, as in ‘the dune is growing larger and taller and is shifting to the southeast’.  The primary physical reality is the purely relational resonance phenomenon.  The visual impression, on the other hand, can be ‘objectified’ using the double error of language and grammar.

DON’T BE MISLED BY THE DOUBLE ERROR OF LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR; i.e. the physical phenomenon is a purely relational resonance phenomenon THAT IS NOT, IN ITSELF, VISIBLE.  What we ‘see’ (that which is visible) is SECONDARY to the basic resonance (wave) phenomenon and it is the persisting visual images that provide us with ‘traction’ for employing double error based language and grammar; i.e. “THE DUNE” which is “GROWING LARGER AND TALLER AND SHIFTING TO THE SOUTHEAST”.


Western culture language and grammar keys to visual phenomena which is secondary; i.e. ‘Look!  the iron filings are shifting!’, … ‘Look!  The dune is growing broader and longer and shifting across the desert floor.’


‘Look! The human infant is growing broader and longer and is crawling across the kitchen floor’


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

The point is that; (A) our experiencing of the world is the experiencing of inclusion within a transforming relational continuum (‘the Tao’ or ‘the field’) and this experience lies innately beyond the expressive capability of language and grammar.  (B) The corollary to (A) is that WHAT WE ARE ABLE TO ARTICULATE IS ‘BY INFERENCE’ AND IS NOT THE REALITY OF OUR ACTUAL EXPERIENCE OF INCLUSION IN THE TRANFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.  We cannot physically ‘get outside of’ the flow (Tao) in which we, ourselves are included relational forms.  The use of language and grammar to ‘re-invent ourselves’ in the ‘double error’ context, as ‘things-in-ourselves with powers of sourcing actions and developments is psychological abstraction.  The physical reality of the Tao remains the primary reality while the language and grammar double error based INVENTED REALITY is an intellectual abstraction based ‘tool’ wherein we using ‘naming’ to give ourselves (intellectually though not physically) ‘being’ as ‘things-in-ourselves’ with notional powers of sourcing actions and developments.  In Western culture, this ‘tool’ born of expediency (to allude to the Tao that cannot be told) has been ‘running away with the workman’.

“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’

Language is a tool that allows us to use language and grammar to ‘intellectualize’ the non-intellectualizable Tao.  The Tao the flow we are included in that we are informed of through our purely relational experiential sensing.  The tool of language allows us to construct visual pictures of the relational reality we are included in, as if we were external voyeurs of a reality that is external to us; i.e. as if we are ‘inhabitants’ of a ‘habitat’ that we can see ‘out there in front of us’.   Instead of all action residing within the Tao (the transforming relational continuum), language and grammar allow us to construct an intellect based INVENTED REALITY, … a ‘tool’ that we can use as a crude ‘go-by’ to ‘infer’, for cognitive expedience, inferential knowledge that alludes to ‘the Tao that cannot be told’.

Intellectual-psychological confusion can arise from using the tool of double error based INVENTED REALITY.  It is only an ‘alluding’ to a relational reality (the Tao) that lies intrinsically beyond direct/explicit capture by language.  For example, as humans, we are included within the transforming relational continuum, yet language and grammar equip us to speak (and think) in term of our having constructed a house, or a highway, or a city.  These notional human-authored (human-sourced) constructions are easily put together and shared, intellectually, with language and grammar, and once everyone is talking about them, they become part of the language and grammar based INVENTED REALITY.

The reality of the Tao, the transforming relational continuum, is the reality of our sensory experience and it cannot be reduced to language and grammar.  As described above, the language and grammar based producer-product reality (double error based reality) is an expedient tool that allows us to allude to the beyond-articulation relational reality.  The tool of language and grammar allows us to construct a pseudo (invented) reality that can serve as a ‘go-by’ to allude to the beyond-explicit articulation relational reality (the Tao).  Wittgenstein points to this as follows in his final proposition in ‘Tractatus’;

6.54 My propositions are elucidatory in this way: he who understands me finally recognizes them as senseless, when he has climbed out through them, on them, over them. (He must so to speak throw away the ladder, after he has climbed up on it.

He must surmount these propositions; then he sees the world rightly.

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

Our propositions speak in ‘producer-product’ terms, as in the example where we reduce ‘duning’ to ‘dune’ and use grammar to notionally give producer-product powers to ‘the dune’ as part of this ‘language game’.  In the same way we reduce the ‘humaning’ (a relational development within the transforming relational continuum) to a ‘human’ and use grammar to notionally give producer-product powers to the ‘human’.  In this way, we are exposed to the tool running away with our self, so that if we construct ten houses in our lifetime, we start to see our lives on the basis of producer-product accomplishments, and lose touch with our real experience of inclusion within the transforming relational continuum.  As inclusions within the transforming relational continuum, our producer-product achievements or ‘ends’ are transient relational forms in the flow, as we ourselves are.

 A man’s wisdom is to know that all ends are momentary, that the best end must be superseded by a better. But there is a mischievous tendency in him to transfer his thought from the life to the ends, to quit his agency and rest in his acts: the tools run away with the workman, the human with the divine. – Ralph Waldo Emerson, ‘The Method of Nature’

 * * *\

UNDERSTANDING THE RISE OF MASS KILLINGS in our aberrance-inducing Western culture

Western culture cultivates belief in the ‘producer-product’ view of reality based on the ‘double error’ of language and grammar wherein name-instantiated things-in-themselves (first error) are imputed to have (second error) powers of sourcing actions and developments.    The double error allows us to reduce the Tao that cannot be told (since it is a transforming relational continuum) to double-error based terms that ‘can be told’.   The producer-product concept is a Western culture ‘double error’ based means of constructing a ‘tellable’ INVENTED REALITY.

This is an aberrance-inducing INVENTED REALITY in that it imputes producer-product powers to name-instantiated things-in-themselves (humans, nations, corporations).


The producer-product concept is a language-and-grammar based intellectual abstraction.  It is a delusion that has become foundational to Western culture operative beliefs, leading to inflated and deflated egos.  In modern physics and in indigenous aboriginal understandings of reality, there are only ‘relations’ (‘mitakuye oyasin’); e.g.


“Once I was in Victoria, and I saw a very large house; they told me it was a bank and that the white men place their money there to take care of, and that by-and-by they got it back, with interest. We are Indians and have no such bank; but when we have plenty of money or blankets, we give them away to other chiefs and people, and by-and-by they return them, with interest, and our hearts feel good. Our potlatch is our bank.” [for the full letter and associated context (jailing of first nations people for continuing with the potlatch tradition) see ‘First People First Voices’, edited by Penny Petrone, University of Toronto Press, 1991]


THE WESTERN CULTURE BELIEF IN THE PRODUCER-PRODUCT CONCEPT IS A CRAZY-MAKER.  The producer-product concept is an artefact of the double error of language and grammar.  To attribute productive authorship to humans seen in double error terms (as name-instantiated things-in-themselves with powers of sourcing actions and developments) is psychological aberrance that is accepted, in Western culture society, as ‘normality’.

The producer-product understanding is the source of ‘ego inflation’ and ‘ego-deflation’.  ‘Blame’ and ‘forgiveness’ are vacant concepts empty of meaning since they pivot from the empty concept of ‘sorcery’.  In the U.S., as people of colour or those deemed by whites as ‘foreigners’ grow in relative proportion within traditionally predominating White European culture, BECAUSE OF THE GENERAL WESTERN CULTURE BELIEF IN THE (double error-based) PRODUCER-PRODUCT DYNAMIC, there is suspicion as to the fairness of the social systems of allocation of material well-being.

SUSPICION/MISTRUST AND TENSIONS LEADING TO OUTBREAKS OF VIOLENCE AND MASS MURDERS are reminiscent of Jules Henry’s ‘Culture Against Man’, in the implied sense that ‘payback time has arrived’.  It’s now ‘Man Against Culture’.

Why has it taken so long?  As Henri Laborit explained, it is because the people who the system falsely credits with superior producer-product powers (powers of sourcing actions and developments) are delegated authority, by the social collective, as to what changes will be made to the system.  This makes it very difficult to make changes that refute the legitimacy of the product-product view, since we have apportioned disproportionate power over changes to people on the basis of their perceived producer-product actions and developments.  ‘Sharing’ the view that the ‘producer-product concept is nonsensical is not easily articulated and mounts to an ‘Emperor’s new clothes’ ‘de-frocking’ of currently recognized ‘pillars of Western society’;

We’ who explore such topics, cannot easily share them because (a) they do not fit into the typical dinner conversation format of our present culture, since to express them takes a lot of relational connections that can’t fit into a rapid-fire repartee, and (b) because the humanism  implicit in trying to share them is not seen as “a humanism of real worth” since it undermines, besmirches or topples the esteemed icons, pillars of society, founding fathers, and celebrities of the culture-in-place.  – Henri Laborit, ‘La Nouvelle Grille’

In our upside-down thinking Western culture, it’s payback time; i.e. While we have acknowledged ‘Culture Against Man’, what is emerging is ‘Man Against Culture’. How do you ‘kill a culture’?  One might assume that a starting point would be to kill culture-adherents, the one’s who sustain the normal operations of the culture which is so unjustifiably biased in favour of the few and against the many.

Such retributive logic would of course depend on first making the ‘double error’ of assuming that there exist social collectives as ‘things-in-themselves’ with powers of sourcing actions and developments.

But the ‘double error’ was the psychologically imagined source of the problem.  Physically eliminating the imagined source of the imagined problem.  In other words, ‘sorcery’ is an illusion.  The ‘duning’ is not really a thing-in-itself (a ‘dune’) with the producer-product powers of building and shifting etc.  The duning is a purely relational resonance phenomenon that inductively orchestrates ‘duning’.  A resonance feature such as a ‘dune’ has no internal powers of sourcing actions and development.  Such an impression is intellectual abstraction triggered by language and grammar.  What holds for ‘duning’ also holds for ‘humaning’.  ‘Humans’ are not ‘things-in-themselves’ with their own powers of sourcing actions and developments.  That is the ‘double error’ of Western culture that serves as the basis of an INVENTED REALITY.


The first problem is the Western culture promoted belief in the double error; i.e. the belief in name-instantiated things-in-themselves with notional powers of sourcing actions and developments.  On this basis, a phony system of rewards and punishments is established.

As David Bohm points out, it is oversimplification born of language and grammar to attribute the source of Lincoln’s death to John Wilkes Booth.  The real world of our experience is of inclusion in a complex web of relations that CANNOT be reduced to simple cause-effect transactions.  The ‘cause-effect’ (‘producer-product’) abstract model of social dynamics is ‘double error’ based.  It gives rise to an INVENTED REALITY that is nothing like the reality of our sensual experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.

This INVENTED REALITY is the Western culture ‘normal’.

In the current atmosphere of rising incidence of mass murders, one might hope for a ‘return to normal’, but for Western culture, the problem is that ‘normal’ is the problem; i.e. Western culture ‘normal’ is the source of culture-pervading aberrance as in anthropologist Jules Henry’s exposition ‘Culture Against Man’; an anthropological view that is reaffirmed in psychology;

  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 standard Western culture approach to such problems as incipient violence is NOT a rallying of the social collective to recultivating relational harmony, but is instead ‘double error’ based ‘purificationism’, the chasing of our own shadows with the aim of eliminating evil and amplifying ‘good’  This is where the Western culture-pervading crazy-making keeps flowing from.

* * *