PREFACE: We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are engineering the substitution of intelligence with reason (rationality).

Intelligence is, for example, where we understand that a fluid sphere as we imagine the Earth to be, can be scattering (as with volcanic eruptions) and gathering (as with subduction zones) AT THE SAME TIME.

Now, let’s remove the term “a fluid sphere” and imagine instead, a warm water ‘cell’ as might show up in a tidal zone to an observer with an infrared viewer.  The nebulous ‘shape’ of the ‘warm patch’ will manifest ‘boundaries which are blurry and continually transforming.   Grammatically, we speak of a ‘warm patch’ or ‘local thing-in-itself’ as if FIGURE and GROUND are TWO separate and distinct ontological entities.   Although FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE in this case, and the differentiation is heat-flow-based, the VISUAL APPEARANCE is that FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO yet the combination of intellect and language is sufficient to rationalize a representation of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO.

The TWO-NESS is abstraction and we would be wrong to say that ‘warm FIGURE’ is ‘MOVING THROUGH’ the cool ‘GROUND’, giving the sense that FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO.

The more physically realistic capture of this dynamic is FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE as in TRANSFORMATION, but we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS avoid TRANSFORMATION because it opens the door to the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT.  Indigneous aboriginal culture’s may speak of ‘Dances with Wolves’  (i.e. an IMPLICIT reference rather than an EXPLICIT THING-IN-ITSELF DESIGNATOR) so as to avoid imposing the mis-impression of EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT, an erroneous representation since all is included in the transforming relational continuum.

Meanwhile, in our WESTERN CULTURE, since the APPEARANCE is that FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO, our language and grammar ‘follow suit’ and this leads to a whole self-consistent collection of terms, a key exemplar being GROWTH.  The GROWTH of a FIGURE is only possible if the FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO, otherwise we would have to acknowledge TRANSFORMATION where FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE, which is THE REALITY of our sensory experience, however it is a REALITY that is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT.  As WIttgenstein observed in this regard;

7.0 Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. (“Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen”),

–Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus

Once we have ‘dodged’ (through our use of language and grammar) having to deal with TRANSFORMATION, we have cleared the way to constructing representation based on GROWTH which simply IGNORES the reality of TRANSFORMATION, thus we can speak of the GROWTH of cultivated land (land planted with wheat or etc.) as if that were a ‘reality’ (yes, we can ‘take that kind of ‘GROWTH’ to the bank’ even though such language ‘drops from the mind’ the reciprocal SHRINKAGE of Wilderness, the GROWTH and the SHRINKAGE together constituting TRANSFORMATION).

The point is that GROWTH is ABSTRACTION.  THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS GROWTH in the reality of our actual sensory experience because there are no ‘things-in-themselves’ and NAMING does overcome the reality that everything is in flux.

WATCH OUT!  Because we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are operating as if GROWTH were REAL (we have oriented our activities in support of a GROWTH ECONOMY), … the REAL REALITY of TRANSFORMATION is ‘dropping off our radar screen’ and TRANSFORMATION is happening in the manner of ‘the loose sheet that is flapping in the gale’ while we turn our backs to it and concentrate on GROWTH.

We can SAY that ‘the TOWN is GROWING larger’ but that is just a RATIO-NAL view, which as Bohm points out, is abstraction that undercuts INTELLIGENCE which is informing us that what is really happening is that the landscape is TRANSFORMING.

When we down-shift from INTELLIGENCE to RATIONALITY, we substitute the EITHER/OR logic of the EXCLUDED medium for the (quantum) BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDED medium.

That is, we are intellectually free (in the realm of abstraction) to shift  our reality from Newtonian EITHER/OR logic of the EXCLUDED medium to the BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDED medium (aka ‘quantum logic’).  When we do this, our understanding of dynamics may then shift from GROWTH and SHRINKAGE (or ‘PRODUCTION-and-CONSUMPTION’) as in a FIGURE and GROUND as TWO conceptualization, to TRANSFORMATION as in a FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE sense.

As Bohm points out, we have the choice between RATIO-nality and INTELLIGENCE.  If we prefer to speak in terms of ‘the Town is growing larger’ (without mentioning how the Wilderness is reciprocally shrinking; i.e. without mentioning how what is really going on is TRANSFORMATION), we stay in the domain of RATIO-nality.  However, if we acknowledge the innate reciprocal relation between the GROWTH of the town and the SHRINKAGE of the Wilderness (which gets much messier in reality without the tidiness implied by our employing the NAMING-based abstractions of ‘TOWN’ and ‘WILDERNESS”), then we acknowledge the ‘real’ reality of TRANSFORMATION of the landscape.

For the indigenous aboriginal as also for modern physics, there is no question about what is going on as we are understanding it through our sensory experience and not simply through our mental manipulations of language-based abstraction; i.e. what is really going on is TRANSFORMATION.   There is no such thing in the real world of our sensory experience as ‘the GROWTH of a TOWN’. Such RATIO-NAL statements fail to even make reference to the landscape in which this ‘TOWN’ resides.  The four-leggeds, the winged and slithering ones will nevertheless experience what is actually going on which is TRANSFORMATION of the all-including relational continuum.

So what RATIO-nality does is to build on the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR (Nietzsche) wherein we impute the existence of a LOCAL thing-in-itself by NAMING and conflate this with grammar to impute the power of GROWTH to the NAMING-instantiated thing-in-itself (e.g. “The TOWN”).  The concept of ‘the Town growing’, once it gets into our mind, allows us to use our RATIO-NALITY to picture the Town as a small thing at TIME 1, then as a larger thing at TIME 2 and because we keep using the same NAME for the TOWN, we give ourselves the impression that IT IS THE TOWN THAT IS GROWING, and we become forgetful of the GREATER REALITY of the TRANSFORMING relational continuum or ‘landscape’ that the TOWN is a relational feature within.

The point is that we can use either RATIO-nality or INTELLIGENCE to get a mental CONCEPTION of what is going on, and while the RATIO-nality constrains the picture to a LOCAL FIGURE in a separate GROUND (i.e. the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO conceptualization), INTELLIGENCE opens up our understanding to the TRANSFORMING relational continuum within which the TOWN is a feature, in a FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE sense.  There is no such thing as GROWTH in a TRANSFORMING relational continuum.  The concept of GROWTH is abstraction coming from the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.

WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have been moving progressively towards SUBSTITUTING RATIONALITY for INTELLIGENCE, in which case the impression in our minds that ‘the TOWN is GROWING LARGER AND MORE POPULOUS and MORE PRODUCTIVE’, as if were ITS OWN SOURCE of actions and development (thanks to the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR).  This notional LOCAL TOWN THING-IN-ITSELF with its notional powers of sourcing its own GROWTH and development hijack our conceptualizing of reality, and wallpaper over, in our consciousness, that which really going on (i.e. TRANSFORMATION of the relational space wherein what we are calling ‘the TOWN’ is a relational feature),

Ok, if we accept that the world of our sensory experience is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT, as is the nature of the transforming relational continuum aka the Wave-field aka the Tao, … then in order to EFFABLE-ize so as to share even a crude reduction of, or allusion to our actual (infeffable) experience, it makes sense to invent a language tool based on REDUCTIONS to that which is EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT, as in the example of the ‘warm patch’ in the fluid flow where we, for convenience, re-cast the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE reality, linguistically, into a FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO conceptualization.

What appears to be happening is that while we reduce the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT by way of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR to the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT, … for the expedient purpose of being able to share EVEN A CRUDE REDUCTION or INFERENCE of the INEFFABLE, to use in discourse as a tool for triggering in the recipient mind, INFERENCE of the INEFFABLE, such a tool of INFERENCE is IN NO WAY FIT to serve, LITERALLY, as a SUBSTITUTE REALITY, so that when we hear that ‘THE TOWN IS GROWING LARGER AND MORE POPULOUS AND PRODUCTIVE’, … we must remember, as the indigenous aboriginal inevitably will, that the primary reality is the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT transforming relational continuum aka the Wave-field aka the Tao.

Our DOUBLE ERROR based representation of the ‘TOWNING WITHIN THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM’ by assigning a NAME to it (FIRST ERROR since NAMING imputes persisting LOCAL BEING) and then using GRAMMAR (SECOND ERROR) to impute to ‘the TOWN’ its own powers of SOURCING actions and developments (GROWING larger and more populous and productive) achieves the desired psychological effect of constructing a reduced but EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT intellectual conceptualization of the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT relational form in the flow.

While our INTELLIGENCE continues to recall the greater reality of the inherently INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL transforming relational continuum, our RATIO-NAL intellection, thanks to the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, now has the means of constructing in the intellectually abstracting psyche, a pseudo LOCAL reality, which can only be a pseudo-reality since the real reality of TRANSFORMATION is the inherently NONLOCAL Wave-field aka the Tao.

The RATIONAL intellectual pseudo-reality is something we can articulate, share and discuss and learn from, although we will mislead ourselves if we fail to keep ‘in mind’ that such abstractions as LOCAL BEING and GROWTH are ABSTRACTIONS that can only INFER the TRANSFORMING REALITY that lies beyond reach of the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT (i.e. the LOCAL and EXPLICIT being something we ‘conjure up’ using NAMING instantiated LOCAL BEINGS with GRAMMAR supplied powers of SOURCING actions and developments, as in the example of ‘the TOWN that is growing larger and more populous and productive’.

If at some point there were close to 100 percent of us who, when we spoke of ‘the Town growing larger and more populous and productive’, would understand that the indigenous aboriginal understands as in Chief Seattle’s speech, that the over-riding REALITY is the transforming relational landscape in which the Town, is a relational feature, and NOT a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF with its own powers of GROWING and SOURCING actions and developments, … many of that 100 percent have become forgetful as we become engaged with the needs of the GROWING TOWN understood as a LOCAL thing-in-itself, and being pre-occupied with LOCAL development needs, become forgetful our inclusion in TRANSFORMATION aka ‘the Tao’ aka ‘the Logos’.

Heraclitus spoke to this problem of forgetfulness as follows;

Of the logos [aka the Tao, the Wave-field], which is as I describe it, people always prove to be uncomprehending both before they have heard it and once they have heard it. For, although all things happen according to the logos, people are like those of no experience, even when they do experience such words and deeds as I explain when I distinguish each thing according to its phusis (nature / constitution) and declare how it is; but others are as ignorant of what they do when awake as they are forgetful of what they do when asleep.

Those who hear and do not understand are like the deaf. Of them the proverb says: “Present, they are absent.”

— Heraclitus

In other words, falling into the habit of understanding reality by way of RATIO-NAL intellection is like saying LOOK NOW, … and see ‘the TOWN GROWING’ and sprawling out over the land, as if it were a cancerous growth, while something inside us, that lies deeper than our RATIO-NAL intellectual constructions; i.e. our INTELLIGENCE, is delivering the intuition that what is really going on is our inclusion in TRANSFORMATION.

Because this inclusion in TRANSFORMATION that our INTELLIGENCE is informing us of is ineffable, it has to lie in waiting in the darkness that lies behind all the foreground RATIO-NAL intellectual intercourse> OUR WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT ERROR is to imploy RATIO-NALITY as our ‘operative reality’.  Conversely, the indigenous aboriginal, when he hears the RATIO-nal statement that ‘The TOWN is GROWING’ will translate ‘on-the-fly’ to ‘the landscape is TRANSFORMING’ which reunites the FIGURE and the GROUND-as-ONE which the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR has split apart into FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO.


We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS seem to be on a current trend where RATIONALITY, wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND_are-TWO  (the inhabitant-habitat and production-consumption split) has taken over the job of operative reality construction from our INTELLIGENCE wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE (where inhabitant-and-habitat and production and consumption are reunited within TRANSFORMATION).

We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS seem to be at a point where we are putting RATIONAL ABSTRACTION into an unnatural and dysfunctional primacy over INTELLIGENCE, not just in our speech, but in our understanding.

* * * END OF PREFACE * * *



When we experience and/or observe a swirling in the atmosphere, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS tend to try to capture this, as all events in general, in the DOUBLE ERROR based terms of NAMING and GRAMMAR.  We come up with statements such as ‘A hurricane is stirring up the atmosphere’.

This approach invites the inverse alternative; ‘the atmosphere is stirring up a hurricane’.

Philosophers over the Ages have struggled with how this splitting can confuse our psyches.  Mircea Eliade wrote an entire book on this one issue entitled ‘Mephistopheles et L’Androgyne’, the English title being ‘The Two and the One’.

In our WESTERN CULTURE, people divide into polarized groups on the question of whether the individual sources a stirring up of the social collective or whether the social collective sources a stirring up of the individual.  Was it really Hitler that stirred up the German people?  What it the stirred up British people that produced a Churchill?  Are such ‘leaders’ naturally born with this local genetic power of sourcing coordinated actions or are they ordinary people who circumstances put them in the center of things?   Does the figure condition the ground or does the ground condition the figure as in the NATURE or NURTURE dichotomy?

We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS continue to struggle with this question which begins with the emergence of some or other BIPOLAR DISORDER (war, insurrection, conflict etc. which seems to be able to manifest not only between individual persons or nations etc. but sometimes also within them as in civil wars, which within an individual is termed schizophrenia (a clinical version the BIPOLAR DISORDER that is rampant in WESTERN CULTURE).

While we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS struggle in search of answers to questions such as ;’does the hurricane source the stirring up of the atmosphere?’, … or ‘does the atmosphere source the stirring up of the hurricane?’  … EASTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS DO NOT GO THERE, because of our basic understanding, which has been reaffirmed by modern physics, the real dynamic of the world we share inclusion in is TRANSFORMATION, as in the Wave-field of modern physics which is a transforming relational continuum that is everywhere-at-the-same-time.

TRANSFORMATION HAS NO “SOURCING”, so that the BINARY ambiguity wherein EITHER the hurricane SOURCES the atmospheric flow OR the atmospheric flow SOURCES the hurricane, NEVER ARISES and thus there is no AMBIGUITY in TRANFORMATION.

As philosophers have noted, people have struggled with the question of whether FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE ( as understood in modern physics and by EASTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS including indigenous aboriginal cultures), or whether FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO (Newtonian physics and WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS).

The ‘quantum logic’ of FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE is where we (as EASTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS) understand the hurricane as a disturbance in the flow which gives the APPEARANCE OF FIGURE AND GROUND asTWO while in reality, FIGURE and GROUND are ONE.

The ‘BINARY LOGIC’ of FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO’ is where we (as WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS) understand the hurricane as something separate from the atmosphere that ‘moves through the atmosphere’   Note that this splitting of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE (quantum logic) into FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO (binary logic) plays the foundational role in ratio-nal thinking’.  If we say that our area planted in wheat is doubling, or that the agricultural lands of WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS is trebling, we our losing our psyches in world of ratios; i.e. in ‘rational thinking’ and making ourselves forgetful of the reciprocal shrinkage of Wilderness lands which, together with the ‘growth’ of cultivated lands is TRANSFORMATION and ‘GROWTH’ no longer makes any sense.  The point is that RATIONALITY can hijack our cognition and take over our thinking, blacking out our intelligence (as in Bohm’s definitions which points out the over-simplicity of ‘rationality’ relative to ‘intelligence’.  GROWTH comes from RATIONAITY while TRANSFORMATION comes from INTELLIGENCE>

As you can imagine, language has a lot to do with how we develop our understanding of such things, from childhood.  Based on pure sensory experience, there is no question that the basic phenomenon is TRANSFORMATION which does not involve the abstract concept of LOCAL SOURCING which is where the ambiguity creeps in.  Meanwhile, TRANSFORMATION is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT, which is fine, but not so fine when we wanted to develop language so that we could capture shareable representations of reality.

SACRIFICES had to be made in order to garner the huge benefits of being able to share language-based REPRESENTATIONS of reality, and the BIG sacrifice was that TRANSFORMATION had to go, because it could not be captured in language because TRANSFORMATION is a Wave-field dynamic that is EVERYWHERE-AT-THE-SAME-TIME and thus INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT.

The SACRIFICE required, was to come up with a language scheme that was capable of reducing the NONOCAL-and-IMPLICIT to the LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT.   Thus, TRANSFORMATION which manifests in many ways including the gathering and scattering of hurricaning and which is unbounded in the Wave-field aka the Tao, has to be reduced to a characterization or something, which is BOUNDED and LOCALIZED, which we can POINT TO, and thus share and explore and discuss as if it were a local thing-in-itself, EVEN THOUGH it remains a relational feature in the transforming relational continuum aka the TRANSFORMATION..

Would we encounter any problems in engineering such as reductive system, that stripped the relational feature from the transforming relational continuum known as ‘the hurricane’ and accept what the Presocratics called ‘the burden of concreteness’ that comes with this, since we know have to develop a language and grammar capability for constructing representation for ‘ITS’ growth, development and actions’.

When we finally put the package together and say things like; ‘the hurricane is growing larger and stronger and is devastating New Orleans’, we have definitely turned our backs on TRANSFORMATION that is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT, … and we are fully committed, psychologically and rhetorically, to our game of concretization which is in terms of the EFFBLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT.


Ok, we use NAMING and GRAMMAR to split ‘hurricaning’ which is a manifesting of TRANFORMATION as in the transforming relational continuum aka the Wave-field aka the Tao, which is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE, … into FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO.  NAMING gives us ‘the HURRICANE’ which is now a logical thing-in-itself (FIRST ERROR) while the SECOND ERROR is GRAMMAR which we use to impute the power of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments to the NAMING-instantiated thing-in-itself (HURRICANE)


Although the hurricane and atmosphere were ONE as in ‘how TRANSFORMATION APPEARS’, by reducing this appearance of hurricaning which is innately included in the transforming relational continuum, so something LOCAL and separately existing, we ambiguously created a separately existing CONJUGATE; i.e. the reciprocal part of the atmosphere that is NOT the hurricane which is continuing to transform but now having to do so separately from the hurricane which we have used NAMING and GRAMMAR to liberate and do its own local thing.  In psycho-engineering this NAMING and GRAMMAR based split-out for the HURRICANE, we have created a GHOST-LIKE alter-self that could come back to ‘haunt’ us.  For example, does the hurricane stir up the atmospheric flow (if these are TWO) or does the atmospheric flow stir up the hurricane?   HEY!  We don’t have this issue with TRANFORMATION because FIGURE-and-GROUND are ONE in TRANFORMATION.

WHILE TRANSFORMATION remains the PHYSICAL REALITY OF OUR  SENSORY EXPERIENCE, our rational intellections with its language and grammar constructs can only ‘work’ on a FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO baseis.  The reduction of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE to FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO is thanks to the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR; i.e. “Hurricane Katrina is growing larger and stronger and is devastating New Orleans.”

So long as FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE, there is only TRANSFORMATION and the abstractions of LOCAL BEING and LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments such as GROWTH have no role in our reality construction formulations.  In other words, TRANSORMATION is NONLOCAL-and-INEFFABLE and MUST BE REDUCED TO LOCAL and EFFABLE by introducing the abstract concept of LOCAL “GROWTH”

Instead of observing that the landscape is transforming as new European colonizers arrive on Turtle Island, those colonizers will capture reality in terms of the LOCAL GROWTH of new towns and new industries and new fields of wheat and agricultural products.   As Bohm points out , this kind of talk is ‘rational talk’ and lacks the dimensionality of INTELLIGENCE.  Our intelligence understands that when we speak in RATIONAL (ratio-based) terms of GROWTH, which is REALLY going on is TRANSFORMATION which acknowledges the conjugate shrinking of Wilderness lands.

The intellectually – rationally constructed reality based on GROWTH is an abstract pseudo-reality that serves well to reduce the ineffable and substitute ‘something effable’ that passes for ‘reality’ but this ‘substitute reality’ is only good for serving up an INFERENCE of the ineffable that lies innately beyond its reach, and our WESTERN CUTURE ADHERENT ‘Bipolar Disorder’ comes from pushing this rational reduction of reality with its abstractions of LOCAL NAMING-based BEING and GRAMMAR based LOCAL SOURCING (e.g. ‘GROWTH’), as the operative reality, infusing such operative reality with BIPOLAR DISORDER wherein some opt to understand the hurricane as sourcing a stirring up of the atmosphere (conservative) while others (liberal) understand the atmosphere as sourcing a stirring up of the hurricane.  This is what comes of the conceiving of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as TWO when the reality of our sensory experience informs us that FIGURE-and-GROUND are ONE.  (Schroedinger; “SUBJECT AND OBJECT ARE ONLY ONE”).


The WESTERN CULTURE CONSERVATIVE and LIBERAL both understand reality in FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO terms so that the HURRICANE and the ATMOSPHERIC flow are seen as TWO separate things-in-themselves (one may follow this also in terms of the human individual and the human social collective).

Does the individual (hurricane) source the stirring up of the human social collective (atmosphere), in which case, it would be possible to select the most powerful individuals and discard the weak and non-contributors.

Does the human social collective (atmosphere) source the stirring up the individual (hurricane), in which case, it would be possible to dismiss the most powerful individuals (hurricanes), since they are NOT LOCAL SOURCES but merely CONDUITS for sourcing powers brewed up within the social collective.

This ambiguity divides us WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS into ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal’ polarized camps.


It is possible for any of use to employ NAMING and GRAMMAR constructs such as ‘a hurricane is sourcing a stirring up of the atmosphere, … and… ‘the atmosphere is stirring up a hurricane’, .. without committing ourselves to the REALITY of such allusions.

BUT WATCH OUT!  because this type of SOURCING statement, when used to describe human actions, gives rise to EGO and to INFLATED EGO if the SOURCING is deemed positive and beneficial and heroic to DEFLATED EGO if the SOURCING is deemed negative and destructive and villainous.

In indigenous aboriginal culture understanding (as in modern physics), since there is no assumption of LOCAL SOURCING, there is no assignment of EGO-inflating or EGO-deflating LOCAL SOURCING authorship.  Where there is murder or rape, the inquiry turns to the relational dynamics of the social collective and dissonance therein; i.e. a NONLOCAL development such as tensions in a relational network in which a local ‘snapping’ manifests without there being an assumption of LOCAL SOURCING.  As when a rabbit darts across a busy freeway, the swerving and screeching of braking and accelerating may go on for some time and involve hundreds of driver and may resolve without incident but if a collision ensues, it will, in WESTERN CUTURE, be interpreted as a LOCAL BIPOLAR DISORDER involving a perpetrator and victim, as that his how WESTERN CULTURE ‘JUSTICE’ understand dynamics.

LOCAL SOURCING is an abstraction which is effable-because-local-and-explicit and we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS use it as expedient rhetoric to break into the transforming relational continuum which is ineffable-because-nonlocal-and-implicit.

The reduction of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE of TRANSFORMATION to the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO of PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION is a useful reduction that, while it drops out the essential understanding, leaves sufficient inference to enable the interpreter to use intelligence to intuit the pre-reduction ineffable understanding.

What is not useful is the employing of the reduction to FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO as the ‘operative reality’, since this common practice in WESTERN CULTURE engenders BIPOLAR DISORDER which splits the social collective in two and polarizes them against themselves on the basis of whether LOCAL SOURCING works in a one-to-many fashion or in a many-to-one-fashion.  This is a live and continuing polarizing debate in WESTERN CULTURE as manifests in the conservative – liberal BIPOLAR DISORDER based on NOTHING REAL.  That is, the conservative – liberal BIPOLAR DISORDER stands or falls on the legitimacy of the concept of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments, … which is where the arguments from as to whether such SOURCING comes from the hurricane (FIGURE) and animates the atmosphere (GROUND) or whether the SOURCING comes from the atmosphere (GROUND) and animates the hurricane (FIGURE).  Again, TRANSFORMATION has no need of SOURCING, … it is only language’s need to reduce the ineffable to the effable where the LOCALIZER of SOURCING comes into play, to LOCALIZE the NONLOCAL dynamic of TRANSFORMATION to render the ineffable (a reduction thereof) in effable form.

When we split a continuum into TWO SEPARATE PARTS; i.e. FIGURE and GROUND, … it is inevitable that AMBIGUITY arises as to wether the FIGURE sources changes in the GROUND or whether the GROUND sources changes in the FIGURE.  Eg. does the man source the making of the times? … or do the times source the making of the man?.  TRANSFORMATION removes the need for the abstraction of local SOURCING so that the ambiguity never arises, however, since TRANSFORMATION is ineffable, we reduce it to the binary abstraction of PRODUCTION and CONSUMPTION which become the popular binary surrogate substitutions for TRANSFORMATION.

As Bohm points out, while our RATIONALITY won’t catch the incompleteness in this binary reduction of TRANSFORMATION to PRODUCTION and CONSUMPTION, our INTELLIGENCE will, and even though we can only talk about volcanic EXTRUSIONS LOCALLY over here and SUBDUCTION ZONES LOCALLY OVER THERE, while the earth’s volume remains constant, our INTELLIGENCE is informing us of ‘something’ our RATIONALITY (limited to GROWTH and SHRINKAGE) cannot, and that ‘something’ is TRANSFORMATION which is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT which is free from the psychologically bipolar disordering ambiguity inherent in the DOUBLE ERROR based splitting into PRODUCTION and CONSUMPTION.


* * *