If we are ‘social distancing’, our movements are relative to others, and they are no longer ‘our own movements’.  Maybe they never were?  Maybe we have always ‘been distancing’ and living in a ‘Bumper Car’ reality (imagine ‘Bumper Cars fitted with electrostatic bumpers that repulsively avoided contact in the same manner as ‘social distancing’).  We have experienced situations in which we felt that we have been ‘given a push’ to do something, and then again, felt as if we have been ‘held back’ from achieving what we are capable of achieving, so does it ‘make sense’ to speak of ourselves in the DOUBLE ERROR (Nietzsche) terms of ‘NAMING-instantiated LOCAL, independent beings’ (first error) with ‘our own GRAMMAR-given powers of sourcing actions and developments’ (second error)?  Is that so-called ‘DOUBLE ERROR’ not an ‘abstraction’ that allows us to REDUCE our ineffable-because-NONLOCAL Bumper Car reality to an effable-because-LOCAL self-start reality?

In a Bumper Car Reality, we could continue to speak of our movements in the ‘first person’ as in the DOUBLE ERROR language and grammar construction, where we claim to be the full and sole author of “our own actions and achievements”, … departing from this tack only when these actions fail to meet with approval, rewards and recognition, in which case we resort to complex explanations involving ‘extenuating circumstances’.

This is where LOCAL sourcing of actions and developments gives way to NONLOCALITY and this FLIP is a double edged sword; i.e. our EGO likes to take credit for SOURCING actions and developments generally recognized as GOOD while avoiding being seen as SOURCING actions and developments recognized as BAD.  In reality, there is no such thing as SOURCING since everything is in a relational flux.  That is, in a Bumper Car Reality, there is NO explicit AUTHORSHIP as gives rise to EGO.

My uncle may give me access to his vegetable garden and orchard and I may profit by that (my bumper car gets a push forward), and the crows may beat me to the cherries (my bumper car gets pushed backwards, AND STILL I TALK ABOUT MYSELF IN THOSE DOUBLE ERROR TERMS… I did this, and I did that, … even as I might in the ‘Brownian motion’ of participation in a bumper car session.

As Schroedinger (in the same vein as Nietzsche) points out in ‘What is Life?’, … we persist in using language and grammar to RE-PRESENT our sensory experiencing of actions in DOUBLE ERROR based terms; e.g. I accelerated, turned left, then braked a bit to pass into an opening, accelerated again, and all of this is describing a bumper car session where movements are purely relative and NOT absolute, yet the language and grammar representation I am constructing makes it sound as if I am the full and source of ‘my actions’ and my developing ‘story’ or ‘history’.

Let’s be real!  We are pushed forward and held back or knocked back and sideways, … and then we construct our representations of this using the DOUBLE ERROR, saying: “I skillfully wove my way through the crowd so as to get where I am today. WHAT HAPPENED TO ALL THOSE HELPFUL BUMPS FORWARD AND ALL THOSE UNHELPFUL BUMPS BACKWARDS?

How can a bumper car driver articulate what REALLY goes on?  And if we decide to just ‘tell it as if we were the authors of our own actions and developments’; i.e. as is what happens when we employ the DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar, … what does this do to THE EGO?  We know that in this bumper car reality, there will be those that ‘make great advances’ and those that ‘get mired down and stalled’, and that our system of language and grammar is unable to capture what is REALLY going because its SOURCING is NONLOCAL and that makes it INEFFABLE.

(more…)