There is dysfunction built into WESTERN CULTURE social dynamics, which David Bohm describes as FRAGMENTATION.  But where does this FRAGMENTATION ‘come from’?

A ‘first order’ answer to this question is that FRAGMENTATION comes from LANGUAGE, from our DROPPING OUT of the FEMALE WAVE-FIELD CONJUGATE so that our LANGUAGE based REPRESENTATIONS of Reality are in ONE-SIDED MALE-ASSERTING TERMS while the FEMALE CONJUGATE, which is naturally deserving of PRIMARY STATUS, is “DROPPED OUT” by way of the SUBSTITUTING of ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE.

So, instead of WAVE-FIELD conjugate relation wherein FEMALE ACCOMMODATING induces conjugate MALE ASSERTING, we have, IN OUR WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE-BASED REPRESENTATIONS of ‘REALITY’, the ONE-SIDED, MECHANISTIC MALE ASSERTING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS ON THEIR OWN.  This one-sided MALE ASSERTING SUBSTITUTE REALITY is the COMMON LANGUAGE-based ‘OPERATIVE REALITY’ in WESTERN CULTURE.

EXAMPLE: Where we have the CONIUNCTIO of FEMALE-ACOMMODATING and MALE-ASSERTING as in where ‘THERE IS TOWNING (male-asserting) IN THE  (female-accommodating) TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’ , our WESTERN CULTURE LINGUISTIC SIMPLIFICATION SERVES UP THE FOLLOWING ‘REDUCTION’ … The TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING products”.

This kind of language embodies DIFFERENTIATION, as it ‘differentiates out’ the ‘TOWN’, using the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR to impute LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and development (i.e. ‘the TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING products and services’.

This DIFFERENTIATION based (BINARY LOGIC based) LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE  is very familiar to ENGLISH LANGUAGE users and Common Average European language users, but the INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL language users, and the Taoists/Buddhists and Advaita Vedanta language users employ INTEGRATION based (QUANTUM LOGIC based) LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE as exemplified by ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE (or transforming relational continuum)’.  In this case, we understand TOWNING as an INTEGRAL FEATURE WITHIN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE WHEREIN EVERYTHING IS IN CONTINUING FLUX.

NOTA BENE!  There is a NATURAL PRECEDENCE in the use of INTEGRATION based language and DIFFERENTIATION based language in the PSYCHOLOGY of THOUGHT AND LANGUAGE as explained by Vygotsky in “THOUGHT and LANGUAGE”;.  That is, as we take everything in that is going on around us in the particular situation we find ourselves in, our outside-inward thinking is in INTEGRATING mode, bringing everything into connective confluence to extract the coherencies, … but in our RESPONDING to our situation, our thinking is now DIFFERENTIATING as we develop different courses of action and make our selection.

 

In ‘Thought and Language’, Lev Vygotsky points out that ‘spontaneous concept formation’ induced by the situation we find ourselves in, and ‘scientific concept formation’ which we can think of as our corresponding intention driven response that is inductively actualized by the unfolding situation, are a single system; i.e. a situational-intentional nonduality.   We might compare this with a Dionysian-Apollonian nonduality

 

PROBLEM!: PIAGET has had a strong influence on WESTERN CULTURE views on thought and learning which relate to the DIFFERENCE between the INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL and WESTERN CULTURE understanding, where the INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL comprehension puts INTEGRATION into natural precedence over DIFFERENTIATION  whereas PIAGET (and we can look to his views as characterizing the prevailing WESTERN CULTURE views), ignores the NATURAL CONJUGATE RELATION between THOUGHT and LANGUAGE.

(more…)