PROLOGUE: “Reason” is the MALE-ASSERTIVE aspect of the coniunctio oppositorum of TRANSFORMATION.  The butterfly emerges in conjugate relation to the decline of the worm.  To speak of the GROWTH of the butterfly would be a psychological error that we foist on ourselves with the error of GRAMMAR which selectively isolates the male-assertive component of dynamics and simply ignores the female-accommodating component.  The bulldozers arrive to support the GROWTH of the TOWN because what is REALLY going on is TRANSFORMATION with its MALE-FEMALE conjugate aspects of GENERATIVE GROWTH and DEGENERATIVE ACCOMMODATION.

WESTERN CULTURE has designed its languages so as to SPLIT TRANSFORMATION INTO TWO SEPARATE (Male and Female) PARTS and IGNORE THE FEMALE, thus TRANSFORMATION is reduced to GROWTH and all of the crumbling and collapse of the old to make possible the emergence of the new is IGNORED.   That is, in WESTERN CULTURE language based REPRESENTATION, we design into our language, representation that SUBSTITUTES GROWTH FOR TRANSFORMATION.  There is an ‘economy’ in this REDUCTION of TRANSFORMATION (which is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT/RELATIONAL) to GROWTH which is LOCAL and EXPLICIT, in that by orienting to LOCAL GROWTH instead of NONLOCAL TRANSFORMATION, we can fabricate a SUBSTITUTE REALITY on a LOCAL PARTS-wise basis, as in the example of ‘the TOWN that is GROWING’.   This one-sided male-assertive construct LOCALIZES our representation of reality, or more accurately, INTRODUCES A LOCALIZED SUBSTITUTE REALITY where we NOW need address ONLY the actions and development of a notional LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF, ignoring the REAL REALITY of overall TRANSFORMATION.

WESTERN CULTURE languages have a DOUBLE ERROR based architecture which supports the construction of SUBSTITUTE REALITY wherein GROWTH takes the place of TRANSFORMATION, a SUBSTITUTION that allows us to FRAGMENT ‘REALITY’ (in which case it is no longer ‘reality’ but instead a ‘substitute reality’) into LOCAL PIECES such as ‘the TOWN’.  This opens the way to use of the abstract concept, GROWTH, based on a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF. The GROWTH of a THING is RATIO based and self-referential; i.e. the notion is that whatever is initially present is increasing in size.  This RATIO-ing up of ‘what is already there’, creates a SUBSTITUTE REALITY wherein we are no longer obligated to address the conjugate impact on the overall containing space as is the REALITY in our sense experience of inclusion in TRANSFORMATION.

THERE is no such thing as GROWTH of a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF in our sense-experience reality since (a) there is not such thing as a ‘thing-in-itself’, and (b) there is no such thing as an empty space of infinite extent that would be necessary for a form to GROW IN ITS OWN (male assertive) RIGHT without CONJUGATE (female accommodating) of the common GROUND it is situationally included in.

GROWTH is only possible in an abstract SUBSTITUTE REALITY wherein, so we say, FIGURE and GROUND are TWO separate and independent ontological entities.   In sense-experience REALITY, FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE and the only possible dynamic is NONLOCAL, RELATIONAL, TRANSFORMATION.

One-sided (male-assertive) abstractions such as GROWTH and PRODUCTION allow the construction of a SUBSTITUTE REALITY that is notionally LOCAL and BOUNDED in SPACE and TIME, … as far as our SUBSTITUTE REALITY ‘story-telling’ is concerned, a ‘story-telling’ which can be of great utility since it ‘gets around’ (substitutes for) the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT (purely relational) SENSE EXPERIENCE REALITY.

With our WESTERN CULTURE languages, we can construct this SUBSTITUTE REALITY based on BREAKING OUT A FRAGMENT of the transforming relational continuum (the reality of our sense-experience).  Thanks to this breaking out of a FRAGMENT of reality, such as ‘the TOWN’ (in reality, the TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM), we move our psyche inside a SUBSTITUTE REALITY wherein the SEPARATE FRAGMENTS are now understood as our OPERATIVE REALITY.

THUS, TRANSFORMATION, which is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT (relational) is REDUCED, within the SUBSTITUTE REALITY, to GROWTH which is LOCAL and EXPLICIT allowing us to break off PIECES OF REALITY and setting them up as new LOCAL SUBSTITUTE REALITIES that we can ‘get a handle on’ because they are now LOCAL and EXPLICIT as in the example of the TOWN that is GROWING that we have SUBSTITUTED for the TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM,

Having created the convenient language-based tool that allows us to construct a SUBSTITUTE REALITY which is a local FRAGMENT of sense-experience reality that we can GO INTO, such as ‘the TOWN’ and manipulate the contents IN DETAIL, as if the CONTENTS were local things-in-themselves (thanks to the power of language in constructing substitute realities).   So, are the houses under construction in our SUBSTITUTE REALITY of ‘THE TOWN’ … NOT REAL?   ARE THE DOORS AND WINDOWS and the CONCRETE FOUNDATION and the WALLS AND ROOFING or the HOUSES WE HAVE CONSTRUCTED,… NOT REAL?

How about we acknowledge that these things are MATERIAL and TANGIBLE but also acknowledge that there is a GREATER, ALL-INCLUDING REALITY wherein EVERYTHING IS IN FLUX.  This takes us back to where we have used language to SPLIT APART the MALE-ASSERTIVE CONSTRUCTION OF THE TOWN and the FEMALE-ACCOMMODATING of the Wilderness.  Our language DROPS OUT the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING ASPECT of REALITY (it becomes IMPLICIT).  EVERY NEW HOUSE WE CONSTRUCT implies a CONJUGATE SHRINKING of the Wilderness and the CONSUMPTION of FOREST for BUILDING SUPPLIES etc. etc. meaning that what is REALLY going on is TRANSFORMATION of the LANDSCAPE.

In a more comprehensive language architecture that didn’t have SO MUCH DROP OUT AS ENGLISH (the SAE languages in Whorf’s classification), we would NOT LEAVE OUT the CONJUGATE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING component of TRANSFORMATION, as leads to a reduction in our language representations to CONSTRUCTION and GROWTH and if these were REAL and sense-experience affirmable.  CONSTRUCTION and GROWTH are NOT REAL, they are one-sided male-assertive only ABSTRACTIONS.  They are A WAY OF TALKING ABOUT TRANSFORMATION which avoids the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT nature of TRANSFORMATION by fabricating a SUBSTITUTE REALITY wherein the LOCAL and EXPLICIT can play the FOUNDATIONAL ROLE in the REPRESENTATION.  Such REPRESENTATION is of a SUBSTITUTE REALITY and no longer a representation of REALITY since the transforming relational continuum is in continual flux.

Indigenous aboriginal languages form representations of the LOCAL and EXPLICIT, not by CRUDELY CHOPPING THEM OUT OF THE TRANSFORMING CONTINUUM AND PRESENTING THEM AS CONCRETE THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES, but by using relational inference (e.g. ‘dances with wolves’)

In the writings of Heraclitus, to a larger degree than ever before, the images do not impose their burden of concreteness but are entirely subservient to the achievement of clarity and precision.”  — Frankfort et al, ‘The Intellectual Adventure of Ancient Man’

“English compared to Hopi is like a bludgeon compared to a rapier.” – Benjamin Whorf [i.e. Whorf is speaking of ‘English’ employed rationally rather than relationally (poetically), delivering content in terms of the absolute, local and explicit]


WESTERN CULTURE PSYCHOLOGICAL CONFUSION IS ARISING FROM OUR USE OF THIS “SUBSTITUTE REALITY” AS OUR “OPERATIVE REALITY” hence Emerson’s ‘the tool runs away with the workman, the human with the divine’.   When we hear talk of GROWTH and PRODUCTION, we must remember that these are abstractions of convenience.  These SUBSTITUTE REALITY based terms; GROWTH and PRODUCTION are convenient because they are LOCAL and EXPLICIT, MEANWHILE, the SUBSTITUTE REALITY obscures (eclipses by substituting for) the REAL (sense-experience affirmable) reality of TRANSFORMATION which is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT.

 * * *






This essay entitled When FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE becomes FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO explores the basic SPLIT in our way of understanding reality that divides us and can polarize us against each other, based on our different ways of ‘linguistically representing sense-experience reality’.   The “EAST” is the designation given to those of us who understand FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE, which is reaffirmed by Modern physics and has been the understanding of indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta.  The “WEST” is the designation given to those of us who understand FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO, which is confirmed by the BINARY LOGIC based understanding of Newtonian physics which, as Benjamin Whorf has shown, derives from the early WESTERN CULTURE language architectures of Europe.

Whorf’s point is that IT IS LANGUAGE that shapes our representations of reality, rather than sense-experience reality shaping our language-based representations.   Nietzsche reaffirms Whorf’s principle in pointing out the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR which liberates the FIGURE from the GROUND and allows us to construct FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO based representations such as ‘the TOWN is GROWING’, … giving us this SUBSTITUTE REALITY which totally occludes our FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE sense-experience grounded understanding of reality.  FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO propositions such as ‘The TOWN is GROWING’ is INTELLECTUAL ABSTRACTION that distracts our psyche from our FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE sense-experience reality (wherein our sense-experience informs us of our inclusion in the transforming relational continuum aka the Wave-field aka the Tao).

This essay shares understanding that reconfirms Whorf’s hypothesis that language shapes worldview.

The hypothesis of linguistic relativity, also known as the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis, the Whorf hypothesis, or Whorfianism, is a principle suggesting that the structure of a language affects its speakers’ worldview or cognition, and thus people’s perceptions are relative to their spoken language.

In particular, this essay reviews how our WESTERN CULTURE languages (Whorf’s SAE language architecture variant) reduces the QUANTUM logic based (FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE based) understanding of reality to the BINARY LOGIC based (FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO based) understanding of reality.   The problematic result is that we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS habitually FRAGMENT reality, breaking it down into NOTIONAL separate pieces and then using GRAMMAR to impute the ‘liberated fragment’ its own powers of action, growth and development.    Our WESTERN CULTURE language representations, as a result, are constructions of SUBSTITUTE REALITIES that seem to exist and function ‘on their own’ as separate fragments or ‘islands’ within an absolute empty and infinite containing space.   These WESTERN CULTURE SUBSTITUTE REALITIES are being employed as OPERATIVE REALITIES and this, as Bohm, Nietzsche and others have pointed out, is breeding SHIZOPHRENIA in our WESTERN CULTURE as manifests in the social collective in the Conservative-Liberal polarized opposition.

The indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta, since they embrace sense experience reality consistent FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE language structure, are not smitten by the psychological FRAGMENTATION that comes with the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO based SUBSTITUTE REALITY of WESTERN CULTURE language architectures.

* * * * * *



Our understanding of reality is influenced by language and the languages of EAST and WEST have built-in-‘topologies’ that shape our understanding of reality differently;

THE EAST:  Here, the understanding of reality is in terms of TRANSFORMING which can be understood in QUANTUM LOGIC terms wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE, as in the Modern physics relation between the electromagnetic field and matter wherein ‘matter’ is a ‘condensation of the electromagnetic field.  The continuing circle of re-congealing into tangible matter and redissolving into Wave-field as in the case of EARTHING or PLANETING in the all-pervading electromagnetic field manifests as TRANSFORMATION of the contents of the containing space. wherein CONTAINER-and-CONTENT-are-ONE and are continually undergoing TRANSFORMATION.  That is the basic nature of the ‘field-matter’ relation as discerned by Modern physics.

Since according to our present conceptions the elementary particles of matter are also, in their essence, nothing else than condensations of the electromagnetic field— Einstein, ‘Ether and the Theory of Relativity’

TRANSFORMATIOJN is symbolically represented by the Tai-Chi symbol which suggests the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE relation.


THE WEST: Here, the understanding of reality is in terms of CREATION and DESTRUCTION which can be understood in BINARY LOGIC terms wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO, and in the relation between material being that “IS” and emptiness that “IS NOT”, setting up the two opposing conditions of EITHER “IS” OR “IS NOT”.  This BINARY LOGIC, when incorporated into language-and-thought based representation, requires the concepts of CREATION/BIRTH and DESTRUCTION/DEATH. Reality based on the BINARY LOGIC couple of CREATION and DESTRUCTION give rise to a SUBSTITUTE REALITY which bypasses all references to TRANSFORMATION and “insists” that something EITHER “IS” OR “IS NOT”.   Newtonian physics encapsulates this WESTERN concept of reality based on the BINARY LOGIC whereby something EITHER “IS” OR “IS NOT”, removing all possibility of envisaging ‘reality’ in terms of TRANSFORMATION and thus introducing a SUBSTITUTE REALITY wherein basic change can only come through CREATION/BIRTH and/or DESTRUCTION/DEATH.





The case of Derek Chauvin and George Floyd resurrects the WEST and EAST Psycho-Schism wherein ‘Never the Twain Shall Meet’


While the WEST is PURIFICATIONIST with a JUSTICE system that orients to the identification and ELIMINATION of EVIL-DOERS, the EAST is RESTORATIVE with a Justice system that orients to RESTORING social-relational resonance as the antidote to emergent social-relational dissonance.  While WESTERN JUSTICE has the Newtonian Binary Logic outlook wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO, EASTERN JUSTICE has the Quantum Logic outlook wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE.


Thus, in the JUSTICE of the WEST, the individual is the AUTHOR of OFFENDING ACTION and the solution is to remove the OFFENDER from the social collective , while, in the JUSTICE OF THE EAST, dissonance in the social relational dynamic is the offender and the solution is to restore resonance in the relational dynamic of the social collective.   While the EAST’s understanding of strife in terms of relational dissonance is supported by Modern physics, the WEST’s understanding of strife as being AUTHORED by a PATHOGEN is supported by Newtonian physics, which itself derived from the DOUBLE ERROR based structure of WESTERN language and grammar (NAMING and GRAMMAR that implies LOCAL SOURCING of actions and development).  The abstraction of LOCAL SOURCING and hence the PURIFICATIONIST approach of identifying and removing/eliminating the LOCAL SOURCES of PATHOLOGY remains the CORNERSTONE premise of WESTERN JUSTICE, due to the associated belief in LOCAL SOURCING of BENEFICIAL actions and developments which plays a major role in WESTERN VALUES and REWARDS systems.


Because the WEST continues to support belief in SORCERY; i.e. belief in the abstract concept of the LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and development (termed the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR by Nietzsche) WESTERN JUSTICE continues to REACT in a PURIFICATIONIST fashion, to seek removal of a perceived OFFENDING SOURCE rather than, as in the EAST, to RESTORE social-relational resonance where relational dissonance has emerged.


Thus, the WEST and the EAST have developed different ways of CONCEIVING OF REALITY and while the EAST has stayed with a relational reality that is affirmed by Modern physics, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have ‘stuck ourselves into’ a SUBSTITUTE REALITY’ based on the BINARY LOGIC of Newtonian MATTER and SPACE where the action of a FIGURE (a notional NAMING-instantiated ‘THING-IN-ITSELF’) with its own GRAMMAR-given powers of AUTHORING action and development, EITHER “is” OR ‘is not’, the AUTHOR of a CONSTRUCTIVE or DESTRUCTIVE action and development.  This WESTERN ‘SUBSTITUTE REALITY’ with its ‘IDOLS’ gifted by GRAMMAR with powers of AUTHORING actions and developments, is nothing like the EASTERN sense-experience-informed REALITY wherein ‘everything is in flux’ so that ‘relations’ are in an innate primacy over ‘material forms’ (material forms are, as Einstein and Modern physics points out, are ‘condensations of the electromagnetic field’).


WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS, with our BELIEF in LOCAL THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES WITH OUR OWN (notional) POWERS OF AUTHORING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT, FIGURES that purportedly live in a GROUND that is separate and independent of the FIGURES (in a BINARY LOGIC sense) are continuing to employ this SUBSTITUTE REALITY as our OPERATIVE REALITY.  NOTA BENE:This IS ‘NOT’ REALITY, it is a SUBSTITUTE REALITY based on the abstraction of BINARY LOGIC, and it is the basis of our WESTERN PURIFICATIONISM wherein we reject the sense experience affirmation of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum aka the Wave-field aka the Tao.


All of this is relevant to what is happening in the trial of Derek Chauvin, but since WESTERN JUSTICE remains as it has long been, a PURIFICATIONIST process for the ELIMINATION of EVIL DOERS, … the general WESTERN CULTURE public as well as the WESTERN CULTURE AUTHORITIES are naturally proceeding according to the established PURIFICATIONIST principles of WESTERN JUSTICE.  This comes with the prices of CONFUSION and DYSFUNCTION since WESTERN JUSTICE is not dealing with sense-experience reality but is instead dealing with an intellectually constructed SUBSTITUTE REALITY wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO which in turn opens the way for the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR that implies LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and developments, CONTRARY TO MODERN PHYSICS and CONTRARY TO OUR OWN SENSE-EXPERIENCE as affirm FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE reality where relations are in a natural primacy over ‘things’.


* * *


Why the Dionysian and Apollonian?



When we explore our use of language in representing our sense experience PERCEPTIONS, we notice a basic difference between representing the furnishings and social goings on in our cabin in the bowels of he Titanic and continually TRANSFORMING dynamics of the world we are included in.


Inside our cabin, we see LOCAL things that are EXPLICIT that can GROW larger such as the construction of a temporary stage for an orchestra for a dance party while outside in the ‘open’, the reality is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT where everything is in flux and continually undergoing TRANSFORMATION.    Even this mighty ship, the Titanic that we are inside of, is not SEPARATRE from the all-including NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT dynamic of TRANSFORMATION.


IF WE PONDER what is going on, we can see where the notion of the all-including WAVE-FIELD comes from, with which the relational forms and their seeming ‘interactions’ must be the creations of our own inventive minds, since our sense is that the world is ONE THING which is undergoing TRANSFORMATION whereby relational forms are continually gathering and scattering and where absolutely everything is in flux.


We know, intuitively, that this understanding of inclusion in a fluid reality of TRANSFORMING that is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT is what our our SENSE EXPERIENCE is affirming.  We also know, intuitively, that our language-based capture of this fluid sense-experience reality makes use of a REDUCED, SUBSTITUTE REALITY wherein we impute LOCAL and EXPLICIT form to what are intrinsically dynamic shapes in the all-including fluid sense-experience reality.  Language can’t possible capture this all-including fluid dynamic of the TRANSFORMING relational continuum because TRANSFORMATION is ephemeral and non-persisting while the words of language have meaning that is persisting.






It is very difficult to ‘make a point’ in discussing highly emotion packed issues which is philosophical and which changes the way we are looking at, and understanding the issue.


For example, if we are black and another black person is killed in an interaction with white police the chance that suspicion of anti-black bias on the part of the white police officer is likely to arise.


This situation would be understood differently in different cultures.  for example, in indigenous aboriginal culture, there is no assumption of LOCAL AUTHORING of actions as there is in our WESTERN CULTURE.  In indigenous aboriginal culture the understanding of dynamics are relational as in relational harmony and relational dissonance.  Emergent developments are not understood on the basis of LOCAL AUTHORING of actions, such as killing, as in our WESTERN CULTURE understanding of dynamics.  In a social collective, interactions can be like a BUMPER CAR game such that while CAR 17 smashes into CAR 51 whose operator is killed, CAR 17, while included in the dissonance, IS NOT THE AUTHOR OF THE death and damage.


The WESTERN CULTURE notion of LOCAL AUTHORING as in ‘Derek Chauvin killed George Floyd’ does not make sense in either Modern physics or in the EASTERN CULTURE  Instead, one would say that relational dissonance developed  which involved a collision in which George Floyd died.   David Bohm explains this in his example of the death of Abraham Lincoln and how the physics of the dynamics in question do not support the DOUBLE ERROR based proposition that John Wilkes Booth killed Abraham Lincoln.


As Bohm points out, there were many things leading up the event including he invention of gunpowder and the invention of the gun.


While we are so accustomed to it we no longer question it, our habit is to employ a DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR to SIMPLIFY our representing of reality.  This is NOT Modern physics reality and it is NOT indigenous aboriginal reality, it is WESTERN CULTURE REALITY that comes from long time usage of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR that SIMPLIFIES the representation of reality thus formed.


Reflection will affirm that we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have a habit of constructing simplified SUBSTITUTE REALITIES based on the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.   An example that Nietzsche gives is “lightning flashes” … and Nishitani gives the example that ‘FIRE BURNS” but in both cases this is a DOUBLE ERROR since the lightning is the flashing and the FIRE is the BURNING’.   But what this DOUBLE ERROR achieves, is to INTERJECT the impression of LOCAL AUTHORING of action and development.






As David Bohm observed in “Wholeness and the Implicate Order’;




“… society as a whole has developed in such a way that it is broken up into separate nations and different religious, political, economic, racial groups, etc. Man’s natural environment has correspondingly been seen as an aggregate of separately existent parts, to be exploited by different groups of people. Similarly, each individual human being has been fragmented into a large number of separate and conflicting compartments, according to his different desires, aims, ambitions, loyalties, psychological characteristics, etc., to such an extent that it is generally accepted that some degree of neurosis is inevitable, while many individuals going beyond the ‘normal’ limits of fragmentation are classified as paranoid, schizoid, psychotic, etc


This can be seen as a FRAMING PROBLEM wherein the architecture of language is such as to require us to FRAGMENT the all-including transforming relational continuum aka the WAVE-FIELD aka the Tao in order to build finite, shareable messages.  Our physical reality as understood in the WAVE terms of WAVE-PARTICLE DUALITY as NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT wherein “the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao” and where we must open up to what Krishnamurti refers to as CHOICELESS AWARENESS (while ‘letting go’ of our EGO so that we are NOT voyeurizing but are included in our awareness.).


One might say that, in this sense-experience of choiceless awareness, we are opening up to the WAVEFIELD mode of sense experience which is TIMELESS and RELATIONAL, perhaps comparable to a NEAR-DEATH experience where our awareness becomes NONLOCAL, releasing us from the LOCAL EGO-based VOYEUR JUDGEMENTS of WHAT’S OUT THERE as in the SELF-OTHER SPLIT which characterizes the PARTICCLE side of WAVE-PARTICLE duality.


The FRAMING problem comes when we leave the WAVE domain and use our PARTICLE DOMAIN comprehension.  We must choose ‘how big a BITE of the material reality we want to take.  Should we choose a FRAME that shows Robin Hood doing his rebalancing by taking from the rich and giving to the poor?   Or should we choose a FRAME that excludes one ‘giving to the starving child’ and keep within the FRAME only the act of stealing from the King’s granary?


The Holy Trinity vis a vis The George Floyd-Derek Chauvin Affair



Easter Sunday: April 4th, 2021


Modern physics is to Newtonian physics like the Holy Trinity is to the BINARY LOGIC of GOOD and EVIL.  Throughout history, people have been divided on this issue of ‘The TWO and the ONE’ as discussed in Mircea Eliade’s anthropological book dedicated to this topic, ‘Mephistopheles et l’Androgyne’ ‘(the Engish title is ‘the Two and the One’).


The story is this; we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS adopted BINARY LOGIC as the basis for our REASONING (aka ‘ratio-nal language-based thinking) because IT SIMPLIFIES REALITY, making it possible to formulate language based representations in relatively few words, whereas, the reality of our sense-experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum cannot be captured in a finite number of words because ‘everything is in continuing flux’.


We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS, …. BUT NOT INDIGENOUS ABORIGINALS, TAOISTS/BUDDHISTS and ADVAITA VEDANTA ADHERENTS, … adopted BINARY LOGIC (EITHER ‘IS’ OR ‘IS NOT’) as the basis for formulating linguistic representations of reality, … BECAUSE IT SIMPLIFIES THE TASK OF FORMULATING REPRESENTATIONS of “REALITY”.  This “SIMPLIFIED REALITY” is thus a “SUBSTITUTE REALITY” which is no longer “REALITY” but something that we can put into language-based expression and thus exploit the ‘understanding-sharing’ capabilities of language.


The story of WESTERN CULTURE includes the story of SCREW-UPS resulting from the SIMPLIFICATIONS OF REALITY introduced by REASONING aka RATIO-NALITY made possible by our employing of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.  This brings us to the issue of THE HOLY TRINITY because in SIMPLIFYING our language by the use of BINARY LOGIC (figure-and-ground as TWO) REASON, we lose our psychological grasp of the QUANTUM LOGIC (figure-and-ground-as-ONE) of SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY.   We SELL OUT in a kind of Mephistophelian deal where we get the SIMPLIFICATION delivered by BINARY LOGIC based REASON and PAY THE PRICE by sacrificing our grip on REAL SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY.


For example, it is SIMPLER to split relational TRANSFORMATION (which eludes capture in language by its being NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT) into MALE and FEMALE parts as, for example, in ‘The HURRICANE is sourcing the assertive stirring up of the ATMOSPHERE’ and/or ‘The ATMOSPHERE is sourcing the inductive stirring up of the HURRICANE’.  This is, in essence, the split that separates CONSERVATIVES and LIBERALS into two POLAR opposing camps.


This only happens in our WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENCE because there is no such splitting going on in flow-based language using societies since in a fluid dynamic, FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE (as ‘boil’ and ‘flow’ in river current are ‘one’) and we say instead, ‘there is HURRICANING in the ATMOSPHERE’.  In this case, the HURRICANE and the ATMOSPHERE are NOT TWO SEPARATE AND INDEPENDENT THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES, the TWO are only ONE as is the understanding embraced by the ‘EAST’; i.e. the indigenous aboriginal culture, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta and the AMBIGUITY DOES NOT ARISE AS IT DOES IN THE WEST because the HURRICANING is a property of the ATMOSPHERING wherein the whole lot is part of the continuing fluid reality (the transforming relational continuum).


NOTA BENE:  Kipling’s  “EAST IS EAST AND WEST IS WEST AND NEVER THE TWAIN SHALL MEET” stems from this CULTURE-DEFINING-CHOICE wherein the EAST opts for FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE where the FIGURE is assumed to be a development WITHIN THE GROUND while the WEST opts for FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO such that the FIGURE is viewed as being INDEPENDENT of the GROUND.  Modern physics reaffirms THE EAST’s understanding of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE where there is HURRICANING in the ATMOSPHERE and NOT “A HURRICANE THING-IN-ITSELF’ that is GROWING-on-its-OWN and ‘MOVING THROUGH THE ATMOSPHERE’ as if the ATMOSPHERE were as passive containing space that the MALE HURRICANE was ‘steamrolling its way through’.  BUT WAIT A MINUTE, the splitting into TWO also liberates, in the psyche, the conjugate option of the ATMOSPHERE as authoring the inductive stirring up of the HURRICANE, so that once we opt for the BINARY LOGIC SPLIT of FIGURE-and-GROUND-into TWO, we serve ourselves up TWO AMBIGUOUS REALITY OPTIONS; the MALE option where the HURRICANE assertively stirs up the ATMOSPHERE and the FEMALE option where the ATMOSPHERE inductively stirs up the HURRICANE.





This reportage on philosophical investigations into the meaning of our everyday ‘reality’ as we try to establish it through language reaffirms the findings of Mach, Nietzsche and Bohm, … as well as Poincaré, Wittgenstein, Schroedinger and others. There is much commonality in these findings but also significant differences.

Disagreements over ‘what is reality’ abound and different cultures deal with this differently since, for example, while WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS believe that there reality is ‘in common’ and thus DEBATE over ‘who has the best understanding of reality’, the resolution of which is established by the tongue-in-cheek principle of Lafontaine; ‘La raison du plus fort est toujours la meilleure’ (the understanding of the strongest is always the best).   In the EAST, the indigenous aboriginal culture employs the ‘learning circle’ wherein participants share their unique personal sense-experiences of reality such that the ‘take-away’ for circle participants is an ineffable-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT ‘relational’ understanding, even though the shared ‘inputs’ are effable-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT.

What ‘comes through’ generally is that in society at large, we tend to DIVIDE on the basis of understanding reality in one or more of three manners; REDUCTIONISM, HOLISM and TRANSFORMATION.

REDUCTIONISM (conservatism) is an understanding of reality based on belief in male-assertive LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and developments as if ‘from a single point of light’ (or ‘particle’).  HOLISM (liberalism) is an understanding of reality based on belief in female-inductive LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and developments as if from a social collective.  TRANSFORMATION is based on NONLOCAL AUTHORLESS emergence.

For example, the REDUCTIONIST/conservative will see the HURRICANE as AUTHORING a male-assertive stirring up of the ATMOSPHERE while the HOLIST/liberal will see the ATMOSPHERE as AUTHORING a female-inductive stirring up of the HURRICANE.  Both of these options imply LOCAL AUTHORING and both are EFFABLE by way of NAMING-and-GRAMMAR (the ‘DOUBLE ERROR’ cited by Nietzsche).

TRANSFORMATION, on the other hand, is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT and thus INEFFABLE, although it is the Wave-field reality aka the Tao which is everywhere-at-the-same-time, which is the nature of WAVE-FIELD.  The COMBINED implication of the EARTH EXTRUDING new (volcano-effusing) materials and the EARTH SUBDUCTING established CRUST is TRANSFORMATION.  That is, the coniunctio oppositorum of the MALE ASSERTIVE EXTRUSION and the FEMALE INDUCTIVE SEDUCTION is TRANSFORMATION wherein there is no longer any need for the notion of an AUTHOR.  Instead of the EARTH EXTRUDING-and-the-EARTH-SUBDUCTING, these two imply an AUTHORLESS, androgynous EARTHING in the Wave-field.

The notion of ‘AN EARTH’ as the androgynous coincidentia opporitorum  involving AUTHORING of both EXTRUSION and SUBDUCTION gives way to the AUTHORLESS phenomenon of a purely relational EARTHING or PLANETING in the Wave-field.   This EARTHING is NOT a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF, … i.e. it is NEITHER a MALE-EXTRUDING THING-IN-ITSELF NOR A FEMALE SUBDUCTING THING-IN-ITSELF but an androgynous THINGLESSNESS without local AUTHORING properties as is the nature of Wave-field forms.


UNDERSTANDING the INEFFABLE is one thing, but SHARING what we understand is another thing, and in order to develop language to support sharing of the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT, the INEFFABLE reality must be ‘compromised’ in one way or another (the male-assertive REDUCTIONIST compromise where ‘the HURRICANE is AUTHORING the stirring up of the ATMOSPHERE or the female-inductive HOLIST compromise where ‘the ATMOSPHERE is AUTHORING the stirring up of the HURRICANE.

In both cases, there is the psychological impression of LOCAL AUTHORING of action and development.  We use language to impose this psychological SPLIT by virtue of language being incapable of directly capturing TRANSFORMATION and thus forcing the REDUCTIONIST and HOLIST splitting so that some of us speak in terms that ‘the TOWN is AUTHORING its own GROWTH and development (the male-assertive-reductionist local authoring view), … while others are speaking in terms of ‘the LANDSCAPE is AUTHORING the development of TOWNS’ (the female-inductive-holist local authoring view).    DOES the TOWN author, by assertive action, the inflating and filling in of the LANDSCAPE’ in the manner of the male organ in the female receptacle, or does the LANDSCAPE author, by seduction, the emergence and expansion of the TOWN in the manner of the female organ that induces the swelling and growth of the male insertion? Is the seductive CUNTRY the primary agency or is the asserting TOWN the primary agency?

Evidently, language is not sufficiently equipped for capturing what is REALLY going on which imposes a danger to our psychological well-being insofar as our language-based constructions of reality are falling short on either the male assertive (reductionist) side of expression or on the female inductive (holistic) side of expression.

Physics, being a language-based form of knowledge-sharing has an exposure with regard to the limitations of language (such as being able to capture and share representations ONLY in a reductionist (conservative) or holist (liberal) fashion, the reality of TRANSFORMATION  being NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT and thus INEFFABLE (beyond language’s representation capability). BUT MEANWHILE, WE ARE NOT “UNAWARE” OF THIS SHORTFALL OF LANGUAGE BECAUSE OUR SENSE-EXPERIENCE INFORMS US THROUGH ‘CHOICELESS AWARENESS’. This means that our SENSE-EXPERIENCE-INFORMED PSYCHOLOGICAL AWARENESS is more deeply informing than our intellectual-language-articulable RATIONAL KNOWING.  This means that our psyche has comprehending capability that extends beyond the reach of language-stimulated intellection.

The science of psychology is auxiliary to physics.  The two mutually support one another, and it is only when they are united that a complete science is formed.  From our standpoint, the antithesis of subject and object, in the ordinary sense, does not exist.” — Ernst Mach. ‘The Analysis of Sensations and the Relation of the Physical to the Psychical, 

No-one ever said that language was capable of fully capturing our sense-experience and such would seem intuitively to be out of the question, so that reducing sense-experience to language-based expression will inevitably involve ‘drop-out’.  This leaves us with an exposure to schizophrenia, as pointed out by Bohm since the reduction of sense-experience to language splits into the two options of REDUCTIONISM (conservatism) and HOLISM (liberalism) available through spoken and written language communications.

PSYCHOLOGICALLY, we can make that intuitive leap from the bipolar opposites of male-assertive authoring and female-inductive authoring to AUTHORLESS TRANSFORMATION, as where we see the EARTH AUTHORING male-assertive EXTRUSIONS and the EARTH AUTHORING female-subductive INTRUSIONS, this coniunctio oppositorum, INTUITIVELY comprising the one NON-AUTHOR driven dynamic of TRANSFORMATION in which EARTHING is an included relational dynamic rather than a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF.

BUT IF WE ‘BALK’ and fail to make the intuitive leap, we are condemned to that schism which divides reductionists/conservatives and holists/liberals into POLAR OPPOSING CAMPS with their interminable-because-innately-unresolvable polarizing disagreements, and for those who don’t like to fight with their brothers and sisters, this schism can be ‘swallowed’ into one’s own psychological ‘internals’ as in ‘BIPOLAR DISORDER’ and “SCHIZOPHRENIA’.  The way out for those so afflicted, beyond switching to an EASTERN culture, is to restore the natural primacy of sense-experience of inclusion in relational TRANSFORMATION, over language-based rational intellection.


* * * END OF EPILOGUE * * *




There are many philosophical investigations that point to how screwed up our popular WESTERN CULTURE conceptualization of reality is, and there is a CONSISTENCY to them.  By ‘them’ I include the philosophical investigations of Mach, Nietzsche, Bohm, Poincaré, Wittgenstein, Schroedinger and others. I would include Einstein in this but with the proviso that Einstein and Mach disagreed over ‘the existence of particles’ or ‘atoms’, an abstraction that is preserved in the present day ‘consensus version’ of Modern physics by probability theory (wave-particle duality).  See footnote [1].


Now you may be thinking, how is he going to write a BRIEF account of ‘reality’ after having introduced such a complex idea as arguments over Wave-particle duality and the probability theory ‘solution’ contested by Mach, which as Mach pointed out, leads to the need to UNIFY physics and psychology.  How much explanation is THAT going to take?


My approach in this note is to point to how these different views manifest in our psychological impressions of reality in terms of either FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE (the Wave-field view) and FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO (the Particle view) and to our WESTERN CULTURE historical architecting of language with a BUILT-IN FIGURE-and-GROUND-AS-TWO …”REALITY ARCHITECTURE”.


If we can see how this can SPLIT us into TWO DIFFERENT CAMPS, which we might call EAST and WEST (recall that Bohm acknowledges that indigenous aboriginal languages preserve the UNDIVIDED WHOLENESS of sense-experience reality as in the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE view of reality.


AND, NO, THIS REALLY “IS NOT” DIFFICULT STUFF! because we know how to employ either/both of these approaches to comprehending reality as the following SIMPLE EXAMPLE shows;


[EAST] In the relational language architectures such as indigenous aboriginal cultures where FIGURE-and-GROUND-is-ONE, … we say that “THERE IS TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE” which accommodates reality where everything is in flux, consistent with Modern physics.


[WEST] In our WESTERN CULTURE binary logical EITHER matter OR space language architecture, the same sense-experience is reported as THE TOWN IS GROWING LARGER AND MORE POPULOUS AND PRODUCTIVE.


NOTA BENE! THERE IS A “DOUBLE ERROR” in the [WEST] language based representation of reality. The DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR is what stimulates the psyche’s construction of LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and developments.  This is of KEY IMPORTANCE in understanding the difference between the language-based REALITY CONSTRUCTIONS of WEST and EAST.  — THERE IS NO “DOUBLE ERROR” in the [EAST] presentation of the same sense experience phenomenon.


One more thing to keep in mind is that this brings forth TWO types of LOGIC and we are using LOGIC in language to construct REPRESENTATIONS OF “REALITY”.  The EAST’s linguistic REPRESENTATION OF REALITY employs the BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDED medium wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE while the WEST’s linguistic REPRESENTATION OF REALITY employs the EITHER/OR LOGIC of the EXCLUDED medium wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO.


Goedel, Nietzsche and Mach




WHY “REASON” IS EFFING US UP (US WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS), and NOT indigenous aboriginals and others who stay away from hard-core reliance on “REASON”                            .


For the answer, first consider the following quote by Poincaré, and then the discussion that follows it.


And just as our Copernicus said to us : It is more convenient to suppose the earth turns round, since thus the laws of astronomy are expressible in a much simpler language ; this one would say: It is more convenient to suppose the earth turns round, since thus the laws of mechanics are expressible in a much simpler language. . This does not preclude maintaining that absolute space, that is to say the mark to which it would be necessary to refer the earth to know whether it really moves, has no objective existence. Hence, this affirmation; ‘the earth turns round’ has no meaning, since it can be verified by no experiment; since such an experiment, not only could not be either realized or dreamed by the boldest Jules Verne, but can not be conceived of without contradiction; or rather these two propositions; ‘the earth turns round,’ and, ‘it is more convenient to suppose the earth turns round’ have the same meaning; there is nothing more in the one than in the other. “ — Henri Poincaré, ‘Science and Hypothesis’, Ch. VII Relative Motion and Absolute Motion


What this establishes, and it is a very general practice in WESTERN CULTURE language-based representations, … is a DOUBLE ERROR based SUBSTITUTE REALITY that avoids complex language based constructions.   IMAGINE, for example, how difficult it would be to capture the transformation associated with cross-pollination where honey bees move about from flower to flower in a flower-filled meadow.   IMAGINE, for example, how difficult it would be to capture the transformation associated with seeds and insect eggs being gathered and scattered on the mud-caked tread in one’s boots as one travels around the countryside or even around the earth.   TRANSFORMATION of relational diversity associates with actions that we normally capture in language in a kind of simplified icon-based representation where we speak about the movement and changing relational interactions of “A HUMAN” with no mention of the inevitable ‘microbial’ gathering and scattering that is an inextricable part of such movement.  (See, for example;  https://www.bbc.com/news/health-43674270  )


The point is that the view of humanings in modern physics wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-ARE-ONE is supported by the microbial level view.  We might have known we couldn’t get away with saying things like John flew Maine to Mexico when the microbial level reality makes I seem more like the movement of a GYRE or TWISTER from Maine to Mexico which is no longer MOTION of ONE THING within ANOTHER THING (figure-and-ground as two) but is instead ONE MOTION within ANOTHER MOTION, like a little WHORL within a BIGGER WHORL.  While it may APPEAR, so we say in our news reports, that, the TWISTER is “MOVING THROUGH” the ATMOSPHERE, the sense-experience reality is that there is TWISTERING in the ATMOSHEREING; i.e. FIGURE-and-GROUND-ARE ONE! … AND NOT TWO!


The point is that our WESTERN CULTURE SUBSTITUTE REALITY CONSTRUCTIONS are based on FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO, and if the reality is, as our sense-experience affirms, that FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE, as in the mictrobiome view wherein ‘humanings’ are microbial assemblages, then the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR based SUBSTITUTE REALITY needs revising so as to shift gears from the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO topology back to FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE topology.


Nietzsche’s ‘Twilight of the Idols’ speaks to the point that complex forms such as the microbial assemblage as a local relational collection within a fluid continuum as a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF is an IDOL that is on its way out, which is as Modern physics would have it, and Bohm’s UNDIVIDED WHOLENESS  is jus the FLIP-SIDE of TWILIGHT OF THE IDOLS.  In the former, Bohm has the tough task of trying to describe UNDIVIDED WHOLENESS which we can sense experience through CHOICELESS AWARENESS, … while Nietzsche has taken on the conjugate task of DISCREDITING THE LOCAL THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES into which the DOUBLE ERROR has divided everything up to create the abstract FRAGMENTED world.


Bohm has taken the ‘high road’ and the NEAR-IMPOSSIBLE TASK of describing UNDIVIDED WHOLENESS, as through choiceless awareness, while Nietzsche has taken the ‘low road’ of discrediting the IDOLS, those separate things-in-themselves that we have invented with the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.  It is impossible to embrace UNDIVIDED WHOLENESS without ‘SMASHING THE IDOLS’ that are the basis of WESTERN CULTURE SUBSTITUTE REALITY.


My impression is that we are all of different personality biased preferences so ‘SMASHING IDOLS’ can be done as an initial preparatory step to ‘clear the way’ for embracing UNDIVIDED WHOLENESS.  When I mock the DOUBLE ERROR language structures suggesting the GROWTH of a TOWN, I am just clearing the way for the intuitive acknowledging of the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE which informs us of the UNDIVIDUAL WHOLENESS, in the belief that this might make it easier to see what is going on.  For me, the direct embrace of UNDIVIDED WHOLENESS …. WITHOUT…. SMASHING IDOLS, … is more difficult because the GROWTH of the TOWN ‘hangs around in the psyche’ as Wittgenstein points out;


 A picture held us captive. And we could not get outside it, for it lay in our language and language seemed to repeat it to us inexorably. –-Wittgenstein – Philosophical Investigations.


Can YOU see “THAT TOWN GROWING”?   I can see it hear all kinds of talk about it and it makes it hard as hell for my perception to ‘cut through’ and see the UNDIVIDED WHOLE wherein there is TOWING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE.


Like Nietzsche, I want to knock out that TOWN because I can’t see the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE for the “GROWING TOWN”.








When we read written narratives, we have the option of understanding ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENTS as being either LOCALLY AUTHORED or NONLOCALLY AUTHORED (e.g. as in a BUMPER-CAR-GAME.   Intellectual works involve this same ambiguity in regard to the their ‘origin’ or ‘authorship’.  Newton spoke of ‘standing on the shoulders of giants’ and Michel de Montaigne spoke of bees that picked things up from here and there unintentionally which contributed to unfolding reality in a manner that was not of their deliberate intention.  This suggests a reality that is more complex than simple LOCAL AUTHORING and is more like a BUMPER-CAR GAME wherein WE ARE NOT AUTHORS of our actions and developments, due to our inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.  As in the BUMPER CAR GAME, we may APPEAR to be the AUTHOR of an action even though the action does not ORIGINATE with us, thus we are NOT THE AUTHOR but we are instead a PARTICIPANT in a relational dynamic that transcends our LOCAL ACTIONS and RELATED DEVELOPMENTS, as in the case of the honey bees.

Our investigation will reveal that there is no such thing as a LOCAL AUTHOR of actions and developments, this being ABSTRACTION that derives from the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR as Nietzsche points out.  In other words, language allows us to formulate representations of reality such as ‘bees make honey’ but the imputing of LOCAL AUTHORING is simplifying abstraction as in Nietzsche’s example of the DOUBLE ERROR; ‘Lightning flashes’ where the flashing IS the lightning and there is no LOCAL AUTHOR called ‘lightning’.   In the same sense there is an overall, all-including relational dynamic in which bees and honey-making are included such that speaking in terms of the BEE as a LOCAL AUTHORING AGENT is abstraction born of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.

WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are in the habit of constructing A SUBSTITUTE REALITY based on LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and developments based on the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.  While the reality of our sense experience is of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum which is a NONLOCAL DYNAMIC, NONLOCAL DYNAMICS are INEFFABLE since our WESTERN language accords to the LOCAL and EXPLICIT the foundatonal role.  While statements that imply LOCAL AUTHORING such as ‘the bee makes honey’ DO AN END-RUN around the obstacle of INEFFABILITY of our sense-experience reality of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum which is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT, what we are putting ourselves into, with such DOUBLE ERROR based abstraction, is a SUBSTITUTE REALITY featuring notional (NAMING-INSTANTIATED) THING-IN-ITSELF BEING with notional (GRAMMAR-GIVEN) powers of AUTHORING actions and developments.  This REDUCED to EFFABLE-because-lOCAL-and-EXPLICIT SUBSTITUTE REALITY facilitates the construction of the Apollonian pseudo-“reality”.

Problems develop when we employ the SUBSTITUTE REALITY (the Apollonian abstraction which is only good for INFERENCE of the Dionysian [fluid or Wave-field] reality, as a DIRECT SUBSTITUTE REALITY.  These problems characterize modern WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT social dynamics.

* * *  END of PRELIMINARY NOTE * * *



The following EIGHT points (numbered in German) list the ‘basic ingredients’ that go into our WESTERN CULTURE construction of a NAMING and GRAMMAR-based SUBSTITUTE REALITY that is so familiar to us that we automatically ‘pick up on it’ (through reading or hearing English or one of the ‘Standard Average European’ (Whorf’s terms) languages.

The SAE language SERVES UP FOR US A “SUBSTITUTE REALITY” which is a SIMPLER REALITY that the REAL REALITY of our SENSORY EXPERIENCE: i.e. it is “SIMPLER” to express in language.

Yes, what I am saying (which has been said many times by others, such as Poincaré) is that trying to construct REPRESENTATIONS of reality with language based on fixed entities (nouns or names implying LOCALLY EXISTING THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES) is IMPOSSIBLE in the sense that such a language cannot represent a flow-continuum (the transforming relational continuum aka the Wave-field aka ‘the Tao’ wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE.   The architecting of a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF based language has, by definition, a FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO topology wherein the FIGURE “MOVES THROUGH” the GROUND and does not capture situations like the HURRICANE in the ATMOSPHERE understood as a HURRICANING OF THE ATMOSPHERE implying the REAL FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE topology.

Here we have the primary architectural design criterion used in the development of SAE languages such as English; i.e. SIMPLICITY.  And what is meant by simplicity in language architecture is AVOIDANCE of having to capture the entire transforming relational continuum when talking about our experiences, since, IN REALITY (i.e. in the REALITY of our sense-experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum aka the Wave-field aka the Tao), there is just one continually transforming world, which we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have chosen to RE-PRESENT in a PIECE-MEAL fashion.

EXAMPLE: Where our sensory experience is informing us that THE LANDSCAPE IS TRANSFORMING and that this includes the TOWNING as GROWTH that is conjugate with SHRINKING OF WILDERNESS, our choice of language architecture has us speak in terms of ‘the TOWN’ as if it were a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF which was the GRAMMATICAL AUTHOR of its own GROWTH, as in ‘the TOWN is GROWING’.

Here we ‘kiss goodbye’ to REALITY, the sense-experience reality of our inclusion in a TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE wherein TOWNING is manifest, NOT simply in terms of “A TOWN” that is ITSELF GROWING and DEVELOPING, … but in the context of TOWNING as an included feature within the overall TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE which also includes the CONJUGATE SHRINKING of the WILDERNESS.





AUTHOR’S PREFACE: Language that has a dependency on the abstract voyeur viewable concept of LOCAL THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES is ‘not up to the task’ of capturing the REALITY of an all-including transforming relational continuum wherein everything is in flux.

Engineering a language based scheme for REPRESENTING a reality that is in continual flux, involves some ‘trickery’.  The ‘bootstrapping’ approach described by Wittgenstein is to use the notional ‘existence’ of ‘local things’ to establish a web of relations among, whereupon the purely relational web will be the ‘take-away’ and the ‘things-in-themselves’ disposable expedients;

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. (“Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen”),

–Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus

The thing-based illustration e.g. of the TOWN that is GROWING with its many streets and buildings ‘under construction’ is a PICTURABLE CARTOON which we could flesh out with STICK-FIGURE WORKERS and RESIDENTS or with a high resolution DOCUMENTARY FILM.  The narration accompanying the CARTOON can describe, in great detail, the construction activity including the importation of construction materials, the quarrying of sand and gravel for concrete, the smelting of iron ore for steel beams, the logging and milling of trees for lumber, the hiring and training of construction workforce, etc. etc.

However convincing a ‘reality’ captured in this documentary, because of its VOYEUR representation mode, it can never move beyond its CARTOON status in that ‘what is going on’ it is always ‘out there in front of us’ and the workers always seem to be moving around as if they are ‘free things-in-themselves’ driven by their internal instructions, as informed by some ‘master plan’ or some previously acquired skills.

AT SOME DEPTH WITHIN OURSELVES, we INTUITIVELY understand that this CARTOON activity we picture as ‘going on out in front of us’ is contributory to the constructing of an intellectual SUBSTITUTE REALITY that liberates the CARTOON characters from the transforming relational continuum, and re-establishes them as LOGICAL OBJECTS participating in a VISIBLE CONSTRUCTION DYNAMIC.

SUCH PSYCHE-INFORMING CARTOONS play the same role as ‘LOGICAL PROPOSITIONS’ in Wittgenstein’s above comments.  In other words, these CARTOONS are NOT to be taken literally;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.”

The high resolution filming of the construction of the TOWN is one of those THROW AWAY LADDERS.   The indigenous aboriginal people whose sense-experience is of inclusion in the transforming landscape, ‘see’ (intuit) ‘the TOWN’ as a TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE, and NOT as some ‘LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF’ accorded ‘its own local BEING’ thanks to the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR of Standard Average European language constructions.

In our sense-experience reality, THERE IS NO “LOCAL TOWN THAT IS GROWING”, … THERE IS ONLY “TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE” (i.e. in the transforming relational continuum aka the Wave-field aka the Tao).  The MENTAL PICTURE of THE TOWN THAT IS GROWING is a VOYEUR VIEWABLE CARTOON that is not qualified as a SUBSTITUTE for the REALITY of TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE.

WATCH OUT!  THE POINT IS THAT DIFFERENT language architectures induce intellectual understanding of sense-experience reality in different ways!  THE CARTOON reality where we “SEE” ant-like workers swarming over the new TOWN-SITE and CONSTRUCTING the NEW TOWN is a CARTOON-like visual presentation, as could be captured in a DOCUMENTARY FILM, that gives us the impression that the TOWN is ‘under construction’ and is GROWING LARGER and MORE POPULOUS as the new dwellings become OCCUPIED.

Since the REAL REALITY (sense-experience reality) is that of TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE, the CARTOON in which workers and residents are continually constructing new edifices and GROWING the LOCAL TOWN is a PICTURE-supported SUBSTITUTE REALITY that is INTELLECTUAL ABSTRACTION (hence ‘CARTOON’) that is NOT SENSE-EXPERIENCE SUPPORTED.

In WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT SOCIETY, because the language architecture gives a foundational role to the abstract concept of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and development, by way of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, the CARTOON representations made thus available support the fabrication of a SUBSTITUTE REALITY which is LOCAL SORCERY based.  No matter how convincing the documentary film footage of the CONSTRUCTION of the NEW TOWN, it remains, in ESSENCE, a CARTOON which is hijacking, in the psyche, and SUBSTITUTING FOR, the REAL REALITY of the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE (i.e. the transforming relational continuum).

 A picture held us captive. And we could not get outside it, for it lay in our language and language seemed to repeat it to us inexorably. –-Wittgenstein – Philosophical Investigations.

We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have become STUCK within the ‘simplified’ SUBSTITUTE REALITY of our own making; i.e. the TOOL of CARTOON based RE-presentation of reality has (as Emerson observes) ‘run away with the workman’).  As in indigenous aboriginal languages and as in Bohm’s ‘Rheomode’ language, there is no TOWN, there is only TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE. The concept of ‘the TOWN that is GROWING’ is an artifact of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, a CARTOON.





The TURNING POINT for the WEST was RIGHT HERE where those who were influential in architecting our SAE (standard average Euopean) languages encountered the challenge to architecting language posed by our inclusion in a reality that is in continual flux;

It is more convenient to suppose the earth turns round, since thus the laws of mechanics are expressible in a much simpler language.— Henri Poincaré, ‘Science and Hypothesis’, Ch. VII Relative Motion and Absolute Motion

Once we design a language that makes a BINARY LOGICAL separation of the FIGURE from the GROUND we are on our way to CONSTRUCTION OF A SUBSTITUTE REALITY which is much SIMPLER than the reality of our sense-experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.

We use ‘language’ to reduce our visual sensing of relational forms-in-the-flow to CARTOONS wherein the FIGURE is seemingly (thanks to NAMING and GRAMMAR, liberated from the GROUND.  These CARTOONS can ‘hold us captive’ so that we cannot ‘find our way back’ to our natural sense of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum, but remain captives of a CARTOON world;

 A picture held us captive. And we could not get outside it, for it lay in our language and language seemed to repeat it to us inexorably. –-Wittgenstein – Philosophical Investigations.

The SIMPLIFIER in our WESTERN CULTURE SAE language architecture is the injection of the abstract concept of SORCERY or in more euphemistic terms, LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and developments by way of (as Nietzsche has pointed out), the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.  SORCERY is the accessory to the NAMING and GRAMMAR based CARTOONING of reality.

Once we say ‘the earth turns round’, we hammer into the mind, BINARY LOGIC as the basis of our spoken (language-captured) SUBSTITUTE REALITY.   This WESTERN CULTURE spoken, or written, language-based REPRESENTATION of reality departs from our sense-experience reality once we choose the path of ‘more convenient’ representation wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND are TWO instead of ONE.  This split-up clears the way for a CARTOON like RE-PRESENTATION of our FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE sense-experience reality.  When we say ‘the TOWN is GROWING, we PICTURE the TOWN as a CARTOON THING that is GROWING.

Note that “the convenience” in the statement; “It is more convenient to suppose the earth turns round” is the convenience of SUBSTITUTING a figure-and-ground-as-TWO CARTOON wherein (the EARTH and SPACE are RE-PRESENTED as TWO distinguishable ontological entities,.

In this case, the FIGURE-as-a thing-in-itself and the containing SPACE as a thing-in-itself), … are abstractions we SUBSTITUTE for the figure-and-ground-as-ONE NON-PICTURE-REPRESENTIBLE REALITY (such a ‘picture’ would have to continue unbounded in spacetime)..  A local picturable piece of reality is a CARTOON that is NOT REALITY (e.g. the CARTOON of Robin Hood removing grain from the King’s granary is NOT REALITY.

This NON-PICTURE-REPRESENTIBLE FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE reality is our basic sense-experience reality as understood through Modern physics and in indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and ADVAITA Vedanta.   Talking about it is beyond the scope of BINARY LOGIC and we instead need Quantum logic, the BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDED medium as can be intuited from the finding that;

the elementary particles of matter are also, in their essence, nothing else than condensations of the electromagnetic field— Einstein, ‘Ether and the Theory of Relativity’

Since the relationship between matter and field requires the BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDED medium and this is the general case in nature, it is misleading to construct representations of reality in FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO CARTOON terms.   Another way of saying this is that when we use FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO representation, we are constructing representations of a CARTOON-like SUBSTITUTE REALITY.  The proposition ‘The TOWN is GROWING’ is an example of  this CARTOON-like SUBSTITUTE REALITY wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO.


Go to Top