Why ‘Heredity’ is Bullshit
HEREDITY IS A ‘FOLLOW-UP LIE’ THAT KEEPS AFLOAT THE FIRST TWO LIES OF ‘BEING’ and ‘CREATION’ (GENESIS).
***N.B. For us as Western culture adherents who accept ‘reality’ in terms of the abstractions of ‘things-in-themselves’ with powers of sourcing actions and developments, this note may be summarily dismissed due to it’s basic rejection of ‘beings’ with notional producer-of-product powers, which set up the intellect for belief in ‘being’ with powers of ‘creation’ which in turn sets the stage for the derivative concept of ‘heredity’. There is no ‘heredity’ in a transforming relational continuum, the reality of modern physics. The abstract concept of ‘genesis’ is set up by a ‘double error’ of language and grammar, as Nietzsche points out. There is no ‘genesis’ in the ‘Tao’ of Taoism/Buddhism, or in the ‘Great Mystery’ of indigenous aboriginal cultures, there is only the wave-field aka the transforming relational continuum. Our concept of ‘genesis’ derives from the ‘double error’ of language and grammar. ***
How the hell are we supposed to explain the orderly nature of the world once we invent the intellectual abstract notions of ‘being’ and ‘genesis’? This problem does not arise if we start off assuming the Tao, the world (our experiencing of reality) as inclusion in a transforming relational continuum, … but once we jumpstart an intellectual-conceptual reality based on ‘genesis’ of ‘things-in-themselves’ such as ‘human beings’ with notional powers of ‘sourcing actions and developments’ (the ‘double error so-called by Nietzsche) then we have abandoned our understanding of reality as inclusion in a transforming relational continuum, … AND, … we have as a result, as Pre-Socratic philosophers point out, inherited ‘the burden of concreteness’.
That is, we THEN have to explain everything in ‘the double error’ terms’ of things-in-themselves with their own powers of sourcing actions and developments. No more ‘duning’ (resonance phenomena that is purely relational), … the burden of concreteness obliges us to put into words and grammar the dimensions and movements and shape-changing of ‘dunes’, … a parts-wise breakdown of relational forms within the purely relational Tao-continuum which we are further obliged, by the burden of concreteness, to ‘re-animate’ mechanistically, with the use of grammar.
The burden of concreteness and its explicit animating of the notional things-in-themselves (which are now concrete constructions) arise from our abandoning of understanding reality as the Tao, the transforming relational continuum. Instead of the fluid ‘Logos’ of Heraclitus, we have to deal with EITHER ‘is’ OR ‘is not’ thing-in-itself world of Parmenides.
HEY! WE ONLY DID THIS ABSTRACT REDUCTION TO CONCRETE PIECES IN ORDER TO ‘BREAK INTO THE CONTINUUM’ SO AS TO RENDER THE INEFFABLE EFFABLE, SO THAT WE COULD SHARE OUR EXPERIENCES OF INCLUSION IN THE INEFFABLE TAO, SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAVE GREAT UTILITY EVEN IF WE HAD TO REDUCE REALITY TO SOMETHING LESSER THAN THE FULL-BLOWN REALITY OF OUR ACTUAL SENSORY EXPERIENCE OF INCLUSION IN THE TAO.
This double error based reduction of language and grammar is just an expedient tool to re-render the ineffable in effable and therefore shareable terms.
But, GUESS WHAT!… THE FUCKING TOOL HAS BEEN RUNNING AWAY WITH THE WORKMAN, THE EFFABLE WITH THE INEFFABLE, or as Emerson puts it, ‘the human with the divine’.
DEFINITION: — WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS: people who adhere to a social convention of accepting as their (our) ‘operative reality’, an abstract ‘double error’ based construction of ‘reality’ (a language and grammar INVENTED REALITY) which we INVENT so as to re-render the ineffable in an effable and therefore shareable form; i.e. in an intellect-digestible form that is fit for articulable ‘sharing’ of (a reduced version of) our ineffable sensory experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum. THIS WESTERN CULTURE HAS THE SALIENT FEATURE OF ITS HAVING LET THE TOOL OF LANGUAGE-BASED REDUCTION OF THE INEFFABLE TO THE EFFABLE, … ‘RUN AWAY WITH THE WORKMAN’. THAT IS, WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS ARE USING THE EFFABLE INVENTED REALITY TO HIJACK THE NATURAL PRIMACY OF THE INEFFABLE OVER THE EFFABLE SO THAT THE WESTERN CULTURE OPERATIVE REALITY IS NO LONGER NATURALLY GROUNDED IN THE INEFFABLE.
* * *
This ‘tool-running-away-with-the-worker’ (the effable running away with the ineffable) is the current situation in a global social dynamic that is dominated by Western culture adherents (whether fully committed or merely fellow-travellers), a social collective characterized by having let the tool that renders the ineffable effable, run away with the worker, meaning that the ineffable self has reduced his understanding of himself to an effable version of self; i.e. he has reduced himself [by way of a ‘double error’] to a local material thing-in-itself, notionally (egotistically) with its own powers of sourcing actions and developments.
All of this reduction is an abstract intellectual ‘device’ to deliver an ‘effable’ version of the ‘ineffable’ for the purpose of making it available for sharing and discussing and learning from (but watch out for confusing experience with fiction as in Orson Welles radio broadcast dramatization of ‘War of the Worlds’), without having to (or even being able to) actually experience it (e.g. a man cannot experience what a woman experiences, but can develop ‘empathy’ for her in her very different experiencing of inclusion in the world dynamic). In modern physics, indigenous aboriginal traditions, Taoism and Advaita Vedanta, the language and grammar enabled ‘effable’ accounts of reality are not confused for reality (the sharing circle is a means of extracting an ineffable understanding of reality from the coherencies in the relational confluence of multiple, seemingly separate, individual accounts of experiences of inclusion in the Tao, such coherencies giving rise to a ‘holodynamical’ understanding wherein ‘everything is in flux’. There is no observer-observed or self-other splitting.
Among Western culture adherents, however, « la raison du plus fort est toujours la meilleur » (the reasoning of the most powerful is always the best, or as Ivan Illich says in ‘Silence is a Commons’, the reasoning of the one with the most powerful loudspeaker is always the best).
Debating whose reasoning is best, throws away and squanders, the holodynamic understanding that is implicit in the individual experiences, that lies in the relational implications that can be ‘brought into coherent confluence’ within the sharing circle. That is, our individual experiences based on voyeur perspectives have the seeds of experiencing inclusion in a holographic unfolding, within them.
There is only a perspectival seeing, only a perspectival ‘knowing’; the more affects we are able to put into words about a thing, the more eyes, various eyes we are able to use for the same thing, the more complete will be our ‘concept’ of the thing, our ‘objectivity’.– Nietzsche
Western Culture acculturation continues to constrain the Western culture adherent to employ the double error based INVENTED REALITY as the ‘operative reality’. Mass murders are one of the manifestations of this aberrant understanding in ‘sorcery’ based thinking. Western culture promotes belief in the individual’s powers of sorcery, or more correctly, not only the ‘individual human’ but the named-entities powers of sorcery, whether the named entity is the ‘human’ or the ‘dune’ ‘that drifts’ or the ‘hurricane’ ‘that rages’ or the ‘continent’ (‘that drifts’) or the ‘sea-floor’ (that ‘spreads’). All of this double error based abstraction goes into the construction, within the intellect, of pseudo-realities that are employed by Western culture adherents as their ‘operative reality’.
Western culture adherents actually come to believe in the ‘independent existence’ of named entities such as ‘human beings’ and ‘nations’ and ‘corporations’, and believe, also, in their possessing of powers of sorcery of actions and developments. All of this coming from language-and-grammar triggered intellectual abstraction that is used to construct an INVENTED REALITY that serves as the Western culture adherents’ ‘operative reality’, … in the process, displacing (burying and occluding) the beyond intellect, sensory experience reality informed by our inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.
Sure we would like a shareable reality, and that’s why several cultures including the indigenous aboriginals, employ the sharing circle that allows the participants to come to an understanding of the ineffable experience of inclusion in the transforming continuum, by way of bringing a diverse multiplicity of relational experiences into connective confluence so as to extract the ineffable coherencies (the understanding of inclusion in a holodynamic; … a transforming relational continuum).
How many mass murders will it take for us to get the (Western-) ‘Culture Against Man’ message of anthropologists such as Jules Henry, endorsed and reaffirmed by psychiatrist/philosopher R.D. Laing.
As it turns out, the movers and shakers in Western culture adherency are those enjoying the fruits of mass belief in sorcery (the producer-product abstraction) that elevates the most powerful ‘sorcerers’ so that their influence over how to understand and manage Western society remains dominant.
This is called, in nonlinear science, ‘lock-in-by high switching costs’, the reason why inferior products persist in their domination (e.g. Microsoft Windows). So many people become dependent on things ‘as they are’ where people who have carved out a sustainable space for themselves in spite of the craziness of the system it is included in, are reluctant to let go of what they have gained even if its continuance is helping to sustain an overall screw-up.
The ethic alluded to by ‘Let he who is without sin cast the first stone’ points to the basic problem of ‘lock-in-by-high switching costs’. That is, even though the system is screwed up and is unfair and abusive to many from whom it garners its support and continuance from, it continues to be sustained by such support from those whom it is abusing. The single mother with hungry children is open to exploitation by pimps and other abusive ’employers’. The exploited, in the pursuit of their own and their children’s survival, may help to sustain a sick system ‘as it is’, even if it swells the ego of its exploitative members and ensures their persisting domination.
The pervasiveness of this sort of ‘prostituting’ is hard to measure. One might associate with any occupation a ‘desperation’ index which could for some be low or even negative (i.e. for those thrilled with their occupation) but for many, depending on place and time, the desperation index may be high even when ’employment is full’; e.g. as in the time of Henry IV.
Why, then, it is like if there come a hot June, and this civil buffeting hold, we shall buy maidenheads as they buy hob- nails, by the hundreds.
Desperation does not show up in the employment statistics, yet employment may become, in large measure (for many), a form of prostitution that is ‘locked-in by high switching costs’. Much has been written about Western culture in the same vein as ‘Culture against Man’ by anthropologist Jules Henry; e.g. Ernest Becker’s in his Pulitzer prize winning commentary on Western culture;
“The great perplexity of our time, the churning of our age, is that the youth have sensed — for better or for worse — a great social-historical truth: that just as there are useless self-sacrifices in unjust wars, so too is there an ignoble heroics of whole societies: it can be the viciously destructive heroics of Hitler’s Germany or the plain debasing and silly heroics of the acquisition and display of consumer goods, the piling up of money and privileges that now characterizes whole ways of life, capitalist and Soviet.” – Ernest Becker, ‘Denial of Death’
How is our Western culture ‘desperation index’ doing? Is the ‘lock-in by high switching costs’ bottling up some rising levels of desperation? Where is the rising incidence of mass murders coming from? Ok, from people who have ‘gone off their rockers’, but is it still fair to say that we humans are ‘independent beings with our own powers of sourcing actions and developments’ (the ‘double error’)? If Lao Tzu and modern physics understanding is on target, then we are all inclusions in a transforming relational continuum so that mitakuye oyasin (we are ‘all our relations’) applies (there are only relational harmonies and relational dissonances). The concept of ‘sorcery’ of ‘good’ and/or the ‘sorcery’ of ‘bad’ are unreal abstractions, there are only relations and thus there is only harmony and dissonance. The abstract concept of an economy based on ‘sorcery’ is a double error based abstraction that is a crazy-maker.
Meanwhile, the ‘price’ of sustaining this innately aberrant double-error based Western culture adherence continues to climb by way of the continuing separation of ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’ (due to the aberrant double error assumption of ‘sorcery’), which is being seen as ‘trickery’ (treachery) inflicted by the haves on the have-nots, … which is precisely what it is, and it is becoming more transparently obvious every day. Who ‘really’ believes that the newly appointed CEO is, on average, sourcing 1000 times more value into the social dynamic than the ordinary ‘employee’? How did this rise from 15:1 in 1960 to 1000:1 in 2019? It was not from the worker-level assumptions but from the CEO-level assumptions. This belief in sorcery leads to a lot of emotions as where the European-descent colonizers see their sorcery based rewards being reduced to less than the sorcery based rewards to recent non-European descent immigrants.
SORCERY AND HEREDITY ARE CAST FROM THE SOME MOLD. ONCE WE ASSUME ‘SORCERY’ OR ‘LOCAL INCIPIENCE OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS’ IT FOLLOWS THAT WOULD EXPLAIN SIMILARITIES IN SIMILAR DEVELOPMENTS ON THE BASIS OF THEIR BEING BEGOTTEN FROM THE SAME ‘SOURCE’.
THE PROBLEM IS THAT THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A ‘SOURCE’, … THERE IS ONLY RELATIONAL TRANSFORMATION. THE CONCEPT OF ‘SOURCE’ IS ‘DOUBLE ERROR’ BASED (The first error is the use of ‘naming’ to instantiate notional thing-in-itself existence, and the second error conflates this first error by imputing the powers of sourcing actions and developments to the naming-instantiated thing-in-itself.
For example, prior to the imposing of a double error, ‘duning’ is a relational dynamic known as ‘resonance’, however, by ‘naming’ each ‘mounding’ in the resonance (the wave-field) we impute ‘being’ the named wave-envelope which then serves as the ‘stem’ or ‘stub’ for imputing the powers of ‘sourcing’ to. We can then say, the dune is growing larger and higher and is shifting to the South … GOOD-BYE RELATIONAL RESONANCE, THE PRIMARY PHYSICAL PHENOMENON!
If we ‘stay with’ the abstract double error based notion of the ‘dune’, we can attribute to the ‘dune’ its own powers of genesis which must reside somewhere within it, perhaps in a ‘gene-pod’ that must consist of containers loaded with genesis-actualizing energy. HERE, AGAIN, IS A DOUBLE ERROR OF LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR THAT WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS ARE EMPLOYING IN OUR HOUSE-OF-CARDS CONSTRUCTIONS.
HEREDITY IS A SCAM! IT IS A CASE OF ‘REVERSE ENGINEERING A SOLUTION’ FOR AN UNREAL ABSTRACTION (GENESIS). IF THERE IS NO GENESIS, THEIR IS NO GENETIC LINEAGE AND THERE IS NO HEREDITY.
WHEN THE WAVE-SPACE TRANSFORMS, WE SEE NEW INHABITANTS (RELATIONAL FLOW-FORMS);
“As is described by Nijhout, genes are “not self-emergent,” that is genes can not turn themselves on or off. If genes can’t control their own expression, how can they control the behavior of the cell? Nijhout further emphasizes that genes are regulated by “environmental signals.” Consequently, it is the environment that controls gene expression. Rather than endorsing the Primacy of DNA, we must acknowledge the Primacy of the Environment!” —Bruce Lipton, ‘The New Biology’
The same ‘dropout’ of ‘genesis’ as associates with recognizing the transforming relational continuum as primary is seen in modern physics;
In Newtonian and special relativistic physics, if we take away the dynamical entities – particles and fields – what remains is space and time. In general relativistic physics, if we take away the dynamical entities, nothing remains. The space and time of Newton and Minkowski are reinterpreted as a configuration of one of the fields, the gravitational field. This implies that physical entities – particles and fields – are not all immersed in space, and moving in time. They do not live on spacetime. They live, so to say, on one another. It is as if we had observed in the ocean many animals living on an island: animals ‘on’ the island. Then we discover that the island itself is in fact a great whale. Not anymore animals on the island, just animals on animals. Similarly, the universe is not made by fields on spacetime; it is made by fields on fields.” — Carlo Rovelli, in ‘Quantum Gravity’
SO, THE MESSAGE IS THAT THE UNIVERSE (REALITY) IS A TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM. THERE IS NO ‘SPACE CONTAINER’ OR ‘HABITAT’ THAT IS OCCUPIED BY ‘INHABITANTS’.
BUT IF WE REMAIN STUCK WITH THE HABITAT-INHABITANT SPLIT AND THE NOTION OF ‘GENESIS’ OF ‘INHABITANTS’, THERE IS THE AMBIGUITY AS TO WHETHER the outside-inward environmental GENETIC INFLUENCE over-rides the inside-outward asserting GENETIC INFLUENCE or vice versa.
Such unanswerable ambiguous issues rise or fall with belief in the concept of ‘sorcery’. There is no need to invoke the concept of sorcery (the double error) where we understand reality in terms of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.
SORCERY’ only arises when we want to reduce the ineffable to something effable, and we have to break into the Tao and inject local sources within it to make it ‘effable’. As Nietzsche observes;
“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 DOUBLE ERROR ARISES FROM THE NECESSITY OF REDUCING THE INEFFABLE TO SOMETHING EFFABLE SO THAT WE CAN SHARE OUR INEFFABLE EXPERIENCE OF INCLUSION IN THE TAO (or some crude semblance thereof), AND NOT BE FORCED TO REMAIN SILENT.
“7. Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.”
However, as Wittgenstein noted in the immediately preceding (penultimate) proposition;
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.
HEREDITY IS BULLSHIT BECAUSE ‘BEING’ AND ‘GENESIS’ ARE BULLSHIT. Or, in more polite terms, these terms are abstractions that are used in the construction of an INVENTED REALITY (in which the ineffable is reduced to effable) that we Western culture adherents tend to employ as our ‘operative reality’. This is a case of ‘the tool running away with the workman’ since we are using this tool NOT MERELY to reduce the ineffable to the effable, the divine to the human , … for a rough ‘look-see’, but we Western culture adherents are instead using it as a ‘replacement’; i.e. we are using this ‘BEING’ AND ‘GENESIS’ based (DOUBLE ERROR BASED) ‘INVENTED REALITY’ as our ‘OPERATIVE REALITY’. This is like capturing our lives in a movie so that we can understand it by way of REDUCING IT TO A VOYEUR VIEWING, as if our own verbal account were an adequate substitute for our actual included sensory relational experience. This is where we come to the limitations of language as in the Western culture adherent’s concept of ‘telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God’.
“What, then, is truth? A mobile army of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms – in short, a sum of human relations, which have been enhanced, transposed, and embellished poetically and rhetorically, and which after long use seem firm, canonical, and obligatory to a people: truths are illusions about which one has forgotten that this is what they are; metaphors which are worn out and without sensuous power; coins which have lost their pictures and now matter only as metal, no longer as coins.” — Nietzsche, –Über Wahrheit und Lüge im aussermoralischen Sinne, (On Truth and Lies in an extra-moral sense).
Not only do ‘effable truths’ fall short of our ‘ineffable experience’ of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum (the wave-field aka the Tao), they lead us into the dysfunction of believing in ‘BEINGS’ with powers of ‘GENESIS’ and to a system of ‘rewarding’ and ‘punishing’ on the basis of such belief (in reality, there is only ‘duning’, there is no ‘dune’), rather than to the purely relational (no-beings and no genesis) way of the Tao, of relating so as to encourage resonance and discourage dissonance.
* * *