Archive for January, 2023
We all know, at some level, that when we say that ‘the Hurricane is moving through the atmosphere’, we are screwing up with this DIFFERENTIATION based representation that SPLITS APART the FIGURE and the GROUND (the Hurricane and the Atmosphere) because as with WHORLING in the FLOWING, we have a QUANTUM LOGIC “BOTH/AND” relation here wherein the WHORLING AND THE FLOWING are ONE and NOT TWO; i.e. the WHORLING is “NOT” MOVING THROUGH the FLOWING, the WHORLING IS INCLUDED IN THE FLOWING so that we need an INTEGRATION capable LANGUAGE and not a DIFFERENTIATION based LANGUAGE. Note that WESTERN CULTURE language that gives a foundational role to DIFFERENTIATION as in ‘the WHORL is moving through the FLOW’, or ‘the HURRICANE is moving through the ATMOSPHERE’ implies the BINARY LOGIC EITHER/OR DIFFERENTIATION which is problematic. What it does is put into our minds the possibility of LOCAL AUTHORING of EXPLICIT EVENTS which is SIMPLER than, and thus OBSCURES the less simple REALITY of NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT TRANSFORMATION.
DIFFERENTIATION operates on QUANTUM LOGIC INTEGRATION based reality to reduce it to BINARY LOGIC abstraction. It is where the WHORLING in the FLOWING (where these are in a BOTH/AND QUANTUM LOGIC INTEGRATED RELATION) is reduced to ‘the WHORL’ that is an independent feature that is MOVING THROUGH the flow as an ITEM OF CONTENT moves through a mutually exclusive CONTAINER (where CONTENT and CONTAINER are in an EITHER/OR BINARY LOGIC relation).
The WESTERN CULTURE habitual use and reliance on DIFFERENTIATION for REPRESENTATIONS of (pseudo-) “reality” (as in ‘the TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING products’) is a CRAZY-MAKER. The alternative for SANE reality construction, as in Modern physics and Indigenous aboriginal culture is, INTEGRATION-based as in ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’. The WESTERN CULTURE promoting of BINARY LOGIC DIFFERENTIATION in place of QUANTUM LOGIC INTEGRATION is a continuing source of FRAGMENTATION in WESTERN CULTURE psyches and social relations.
* * *
The BIG LIE of WESTERN CULTURE, is suggested within the views of Bohm and Nietzsche, to have become the property of our Common Average European Language Architecture in avoiding the LESS SIMPLE use of an all-connecting INTEGRATION and instead using DIFFERENTIATION (into LOCAL and EXPLICIT forms), reducing our sensory experience of INTEGRATED INCLUSION as in ‘PEOPLING and TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’ to INTELLECTUAL VOYEUR-VIEWER REPRESENTATIONS such as ‘the PERSON and TOWN are GROWING.
While Indigenous aboriginals, Taoists/Buddhists and Advaita Vedanta adherents use linguistic representation based on the LESS SIMPLE concept of INTEGRATION, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS use linguistic representation based on DIFFERENTIATION. In the WAVE-FIELD reality of our sense-experience, language based on INTEGRATION has the capability to represent the CONJUGATES of the FEMALE-ACCOMMODATING WAVE-FIELD ‘descending valley’ and the MALE-ASSERTING WAVE-FIELD ‘rising hill’, as a FIGURE and GROUND UNITY.
Whatever scheme we come up with for language-based articulation of our sense-experience reality, it will be unable to fully capture our sense-experience reality since we ourselves and all material forms are INCLUDED as CONDENSATIONS of the all including transforming relational continuum aka ‘the WAVE-FIELD’.
The expression coined by Rudyard Kipling; “EAST is EAST and WEST is WEST and never the twain shall meet’ points to the fact that in terms of LANGUAGE based REPRESENTATION schemes, two obvious but very different options arise as choices for the basic foundations of our representation of sense-experience reality and ‘EAST’ refers to Indigenous aboriginals and Taoists/Buddhists and Advaita Vedanta who have opted for the LESS SIMPLE “QUANTUM LOGIC” foundation wherein FIGURE and GROUND are only ONE; i.e. where reality is the ALL-INCLUDING WAVE-FIELD wherein material forms are CONDENSATIONS of the WAVE-FIELD in which case our approach is one of INTEGRATION wherein our linguistic constructions make use of the combination of BOTH female accommodating AND male-asserting (conjugate) allusions as in the phrase “there is TOWNING (male asserting content) in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE (female accommodating container). THIS IS THE LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE APPROACH of the ‘EAST’ (as in the QUANTUM LOGIC language architectures of the indigenous aboriginals, Taoists/Buddhists and Advaita Vedanta) QUANTUM LOGIC refers to the BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING MEDIUM, where the understanding is that there is an all-including energy-charged PLENUM locally populated by material CONDENSATIONS which belong to the all-including PLENUM and which are NOT SEPARATE, as in the alternative WESTERN CULTURE BINARY LOGIC based DIFFERENTIATING representation.
Note that the ‘language-based representation’ of the transforming relational continuum IS NOT THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM, and note also that there is MORE TO THIS than is inferred in Korzybski’s ‘The Word is NOT THE THING’ because Korzybski’s phrasing GIVES A BACKHANDED AFFIRMATION of the ‘existence of the THING’, when the message that needs to be brought forth is that THERE ARE NO THINGS, … that THINGS are APPEARANCES (Schaumkommen) associated with CONDENSATIONS of the WAVE-FIELD (the dynamic reality that lies beyond the condensations of the wave-field and is constituted by the wave-field).
NOTA BENE: THE WEST, or in other words THOSE PEOPLE WHO IMPUTE MATERIAL THING-IN-ITSELF BEING TO CONDENSATIONS OF THE WAVE-FIELD AND THUS, IN THE SAME FELL STROKE, IMPUTE THE NOTIONAL EXISTENCE OF AN ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE OF INFINITE EXTENT IN WHICH THOSE MATERIAL THING-IN-ITSELF BEINGS MOVE ABOUT AND INTERACT, CONTRIVE A DIFFERENTIATION BASED SCHEME FOR CONSTRUCTING REPRESENTATIONS OF REALITY.
MEANWHILE, THE ‘EAST’ (THE INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL CULTURE AND TAOISTS/BUDDHISTS AND ADVAITA VEDANTA ADHERENTS) EMPLOY AN “INTEGRATION” (QUANTUM LOGIC) BASED SCHEME RATHER THAN A “DIFFERENTIATION” (BINARY LOGIC) BASED SCHEME FOR CONSTRUCTING REPRESENTATIONS OF REALITY.
INSTEAD OF THE WESTERN CULTURE LINGUISTIC REPRESENTATION IN TERMS OF “THE TOWN IS GROWING” (DIFFERENTIATION which is BINARY LOGIC based), the INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL (EASTERN CULTURE) LINGUISTIC REPRESENTATION IS IN TERMS OF “THERE IS TOWNING IN THE TRANFORMING LANDSCAPE” wherein “EVERYTHING IS IN FLUX” as in the QUANTUM LOGIC WAVE-FIELD dynamic.
FORWARD: “Cherchez la femme” is an apt ‘heads-up’ for life in the WAVE-FIELD where the one-sided male-asserting action-description is never ‘the TRUTH’ and as Nietzsche has pointed out, and also Goedel’s theorem of the incompleteness of all finite logical propositions, the ‘TRUTH’ is an unrealizable fixed abstraction that is not part of this all-including transforming relational continuum otherwise known as ‘the WAVE-FIELD’. There are no one-sided male-asserting propositions that can ‘stand on their own’ as ‘TRUTH’ because, in the world of our sense-experience reality, there is always the female-accommodating conjugate, such as the collapsing female opening of the ‘eggshell’ skull that accommodates the asserting male punch, and the accommodating female tinder-dry forest that responds to the male asserting intrusion of the cigarette ember and the huge but fragile mounds of accumulated snow that ‘give way’ in an avalanche with the light male asserting of a single skier.
“Cherchez la femme” is one thing but linguistically representing our findings on the role of the female’ lies beyond the scope of our WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE which we have SIMPLIFIED with an OBSCURANTIST scheme that constrains our linguistic representations to one-sided male-asserting only propositions which are innately INCOMPLETE (as Goedel’s Theorem underscores). This sets us up for falling into the trap of LANGUAGE BASED FRAGMENTATION thanks to our OBSCURING of the FEMALE WAVE-FIELD CONJUGATE which is the all-connecting-because-all-including ENERGY-CHARGED PLENUM aka the FEMALE CONJUGATE of the WAVE-FIELD within which condensations give the APPEARANCE of local, explicit material forms. The EITHER/OR APPEARANCE of local, explicit forms obscures Nature’s “BOTH/AND” (QUANTUM LOGIC) relationship since, unlike BINARY LOGIC which … FRAGMENTS the Unum of material condensations and all-including wave-field into TWO SEPARATE, EXPLICIT ontological entities of MATTER and EMPTY SPACE, … QUANTUM LOGIC acknowledges, instead, the ANDROGYNOUS UNITY of the WAVE-FIELD reality, that we OBSCURE with OUR OWN BINARY LOGIC BASED LANGUAGE which DROPS OUT the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONJUGATE.
So, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS would be wise to CHERCHEZ LA FEMME and NOT BE MESMERIZED by our own SIMPLIFYING BINARY LOGIC LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE which IS THE AUTHOR OF THE “BIG LIE” where we pretend that sense-experience reality can be captured in BINARY LOGIC based LANGUAGE that constructs a SIMPLIFIED SUBSTITUTE REALITY constituted by ONE-SIDED MALE ASSERTING ACTIONS IN A NOTIONAL EMPTY SPACE, DROPPING OUT the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONJUGATE that is inherent in WAVE-FIELD REALITY , a QUANTUM LOGIC REALITY WHEREIN MALE ASSERTING FIGURE (material condensation) AND FEMALE ACCOMODATING ‘GROUND’ (wave-field) ARE ONLY “ONE’ .
[Note the ‘anal retentive’ appeal to one-sided BINARY LOGIC MALE ASSERTING ACTION as captured in Thomas Mann’s Mario and the Magician, a 1929 Novel drawing attention to the mesmerizing ‘Carpe diem’ power of authoritarian leaders in Europe at the time, who appeared to believe they had ‘overcome’ the FEMALE bondage of ‘To every thing there is a season and a time to every purpose’.]
* * *
The BIG LIE phenomenon is where THE LIE becomes so popular and so accepted as the truth by so many people that as individuals we may not have the temerity to overtly challenge it and even if we do, we will be mocked or stone-walled when we bring up a view that conflicts with the mainstream.
As Giordano Bruno said on being taken to be burned at the stake for heresy in 1600, “A majority has no monopoly on the TRUTH”, … but of course “A majority does have a monopoly on decisions on what is to be done with ‘heretics’ who insist on promoting minority views”. In Bruno’s case, he overtly shared his view that the Earth was not the centre of the universe which conflicted with the official belief supported by the Church.
Today, there are many (such as myself) who feel that ‘anthropogenic climate change’ is an over-simplification based error. But the ‘anthropogenic climate change view’ is so popular, it has ‘driven underground’ dissenting views such as the view that ‘change’ is innate in the transforming relational continuum aka the all-including WAVE-FIELD, so that the term “CLIMATE CHANGE” is an oxymoron since there is not, and never was a base case ‘CLIMATE’ that WAS NOT CHANGING. Because we are inclusions within this transforming relational continuum within which galaxies are dying and being born as in the nature of WAVE-FIELD reality, it makes no sense to speak in terms that we must COMBAT CLIMATE CHANGE.
Because we share INCLUSION in the transforming relational continuum (as material forms that are CONDENSATIONS of the WAVE-FIELD together with other CONDENSATIONS that are material forms) speaks to our QUANTUM LOGIC BOTH/AND relation with the all-including WAVE-FIELD wherein FIGURE and GROUND are ONE. This QUANTUM LOGIC relation is not like a SIMPLE BINARY LOGIC relation where FIGURE and GROUND are TWO SEPARATE and INDEPENDENT THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES such that the INHABITANTS are separate things that can SCREW UP the HABITAT and likewise, the HABITAT can strike back by making conditions difficult if not impossible for the INHABITANT. That is BINARY LOGIC based over-simplification.
QUANTUM LOGIC is the less simple understanding of relations that is supported by Modern physics and it was already the understanding of indigenous aboriginal cultures. BINARY LOGIC is a SIMPLER logic that has been given a foundational role in WESTERN CULTURE SIMPLIFIED language based conceptualizing of reality. In the QUANTUM LOGIC understanding, SUBJECT and OBJECT are only ONE (Schroedinger) which means that thinking in term of the HUMAN INHABITANTS and the UNIVERSE/HABITAT as TWO SEPARATE ONTOLOGIES is WRONG, and in Bohm’s flow-based ‘Rheomode language’ and in the indigenous aboriginal languages there are instead HUMANINGS IN THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM aka the WAVE-FIELD where we can understand the HUMANINGS in the WAVE-FIELD as CONDENSATIONS of the WAVE-FIELD as in the QUANTUM BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDING (wave-field) MEDIUM.
WESTERN CULTURE is well accustomed to thinking of INHABITANTS and HABITAT in BINARY LOGIC based terms since it has been along standing traditional way of thinking in WESTERN CULTURE, in which case the KNEE-JERK conceptualization that is triggered by such observations as RISING POLLUTION is that WE HUMANS ARE DOING IT TO THE EARTH. That is the BINARY LOGIC view which is POPULAR but untenable given our Modern physics understanding of reality in terms of the all-including WAVE-FIELD where the quantum logic reality is that ‘THE ENVIRONMENT INCLUDES US’ or in other words, THERE IS ONLY THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM which includes a diversity of relational forms which are CONDENSATIONS of the all-including WAVE-FIELD and thus, “THERE IS NO BINARY LOGIC BREAK-DOWN BETWEEN INHABITANT and HABITAT”.
I’m not ‘making this up’. This is established Modern physics finding and it validates thousands of years old Indigenous aboriginal understanding and Taoist/Buddhist and Advaita Vedanta understanding.
This is not to say that because we are HUMANINGS in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM that we can’t SCREW THINGS UP, its just that the QUANTUM LOGIC relation connects us with everything so our actions are not ‘independent’ but more like we are participants in a BUMPER CAR game where motions are NOT LOCAL AND EXPLICIT but are instead NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT. Meanwhile, as BUMPER CAR drivers, while we said to be the full and sole AUTHORS of our own behaviour, are co-developers of relational openings, and as we know how to do in heavy freeway traffic, we can manage our RELATIVE movements in cooperation with others so as to co-create openings for others as they do for us, which can be used to move into to avoid collision or to navigate in a desired manner. We cannot rightly say, in this situation, which is the general situation in nature, that we are the LOCAL AUTHORS of our own actions and developments, although our language does give us this linguistic capability and since we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS make use of this capability, our linguistic representations can be at odds with our sense-experience.
In the real world dynamic which has much in common with the BUMPER CAR game, we may speak in terms of AUTHORING our own actions in the game and if we are carrying a GPS recorder, we can playback the recorded TRAJECTORY and declare that IT IS OUR PERSONALLY AUTHORED TRAJECTORY which is a BINARY LOGIC based view of what went on that reduces motion to simple MALE ASSERTING ACTION of the driver (which we isolate by using an absolute space reference to map a trajectory).
There are no retained pictures of the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING OPENINGS that inductively shaped our movements, so as we did in the THIN SKULL RULE, we simplify ‘what really went on’ by DROPPING OUT the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONJUGATE and capturing in language, only the MALE ASSERTING ACTION as if it transpired in an ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE, which is OBSCURANTISM, the common WESTERN CULTURE OBSCURANTISM where we, in our language constructions, DROP OUT the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONJUGATE and capture in our rhetoric, ONLY the MALE ASSERTING ACTION conjugate.
THIS DROP OUT of the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONJUGATE IS THE SOURCE OF FRAGMENTATION, in our PSYCHE and in our PHYSICAL ACTIONS, as pointed out by BOHM in his FRAGMENTATION chapter in “Wholeness and the Implicate Order” .
* * *
Note that the language architecture we use (whether it is BINARY LOGIC based or QUANTUM LOGIC based) impinges on whether we speak in terms that we must COMBAT CLIMATE CHANGE since in the BINARY LOGIC conceptualization CLIMATE is deemed to be something separate that is subject to our own (man-made) actions, while others accept that CLIMATE is something beyond what we have control over and instead part of what we are included in (Continue to contaminate your bed, and you will one night suffocate in your own waste. — Chief Seattle).
This INCLUSIONAL view is consistent with QUANTUM LOGIC. The ‘bottom line’ is that CLIMATE CHANGE understood in QUANTUM LOGIC terms is beyond the reach of ‘anthropogenic climate control actions’.
* * *
Popular opinion, be it based on TRUTH or LIE, especially in the case of issues that stir FEAR AND ANXIETY, is prone to cultivating HERD behaviour wherein MINORITY VIEWS are considered a THREAT, such as the ANTI-VACCINE minority view that is seen as BLOCKING attainment of the goal of ‘HERD IMMUNITY’.
PREFACE: We live in a WAVE-FIELD, an electromagnetic WAVE-FIELD wherein material forms are CONDENSATIONS of the WAVE-FIELD which constitutes a QUANTUM LOGIC relation. Indigenous Aboriginals employ languages that are QUANTUM LOGIC based while WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGES (the Common Average European languages as Whorf classifies them) have an architecture which commonly employs BINARY LOGIC STRUCTURE. When we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS “dumbed down” our LANGUAGE by giving it BINARY LOGIC based ARCHITECTURE, we introduced cognitive confusion such as FRAGMENTATION with an exposure to Schizophrenia and Paranoia as pointed out by Bohm.
Russian psychologist Lev Vygotsky demonstrated that the our NATURAL COGNITIVE CAPABILITY is QUANTUM LOGIC based, and NO, this is not spoken about using the term ‘QUANTUM LOGIC’ but in this essay I have explained Vygotsky’s findings which contradicted the standard WESTERN CULTURE views on language and schooling. Vygotsky pointed out that the natural process of learning employed a QUANTUM LOGIC structure, yet PIAGET and WESTERN SCHOOL TEACHING in general employs a ‘dumbed down’ BINARY LOGIC approach, as explained in this essay. Thus the way we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are ‘using language’ and ‘teaching children’ incorporates a DUMBING DOWN from QUANTUM LOGIC to BINARY LOGIC. Vygotsky explains this and I have included his explanations in this essay, of course, using his terminology which makes no mention of ‘QUANTUM LOGIC’ but the reader will find that he is using QUANTUM LOGIC in his key point of disagreement with Piaget, and yes, Piaget is using BINARY LOGIC where Vygotsky is pointing to how QUANTUM LOGIC is needed for a natural “LANGUAGE AND THOUGHT’ based learning experience.
“Though fundamentally different in nature, the development of scientific and spontaneous concepts represent two sides of the same concept formation:
. . .
“Our disagreement with Piaget centers on one point only, but an important point. He assumes that development and instruction are entirely separate, incommensurate processes, that the function of instruction is merely to introduce adult ways of thinking, which conflict with the child’s own and eventually supplant them. Such a supposition stems from the old psychological tradition of separating the structural from the functional aspects of development.”
In Vygotsky’s first comment his ‘scientific’ relates to the ‘local and explicit’ (ontological) while his ‘spontaneous’ relates to the ‘nonlocal and implicit’ (relational unfolding). His second comment is to critique Piaget’s treatment of these two processes as ‘independent’.
We can compare Piaget’s view to the standard WESTERN CULTURE simple viewing of ‘the TOWN GROWING’ local, explicit, ‘scientific’) and the LANDSCAPE TRANSFORMING (nonlocal, implicit) as “entirely separate, incommensurate processes” while Vygotsky opts for the ‘QUANTUM LOGIC’ view wherein scientific (local, explicit) and spontaneous concepts (nonlocal, implicit) “represent two sides of the same concept formation”. (as in; there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE which expresses the QUANTUM LOGIC relation.).
Vygotsky’s approach to education is essentially QUANTUM LOGIC based which is an approach designed to deal with inclusion in an all-including continuing transformation where the nonlocal and implicit is in a natural primacy over the local end explicit in order for the system to function in the presence of continuing transformation.
* * * * * * END OF PREFACE * * * * * *
The common WESTERN CULTURE understanding, influenced by Piaget (whom Vygotsky disagreed with), is that we have two separate modes of concept formation, ‘spontaneous’ (situational) and ‘structured’ (intentional) and that (according to Piaget) intentional concept formation prevails over situational concept formation. Vygotsky believed that Piaget (and thus mainstream Western thinking) had it wrong, … that there is only the one process of concept formation with two reciprocally complementary aspects (situational and intentional) and that the ‘situational’ aspect in this conjugate relation is in a natural precedence over ‘intentional’.
“NOTE: compare this to the natural precedence of the FEMALE VALLEY in organizing ‘runoff’ water to comprise the ‘MALE ASSERTING ‘raging river’; i.e. the RAGING RIVER appears to have its own POWERS OF LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and development, like the ploughing of the female furrow of the valley to author an ‘opening up’, however, it the reality is that that the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING, which is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT is the deeper authoring influence while the LOCAL and EXPLICIT MALE-ASSERTING ‘RAGING RIVER’ is SECONDARY rather than PRIMARY.
So, it is our ERROR OF GRAMMAR (as Nietzsche has coined it, that creates the illusion of LOCAL, EXPLICIT MALE-ASSERTING AUTHORING AGENCY even as we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS substitute ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE OF INFINITE EXTENT that OBSCURES the NONLOCAL, IMPLICIT FEMALE ACCOMMODATING INDUCTIVE conjugate, the result being ‘LANGUAGE-based REALITY CONSTRUCTIONS’ which are ONE-SIDEDLY MALE ASSERTING, and while capturing GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION, as if ON THEIR OWN, OBSCURES the natural CONJUGATES of SHRINKAGE, DECLINE and CONSUMPTION, these conjugates together constituting the continuing TRANSFORMATION affirmed by our sense-experience of inclusion therein.
The following citations from Vygotsky’s writings makes clear THIS IMPORTANT OPENING UP of our REALITY INTERPRETING approach that, in our natural mental capacities for interpreting reality, IMPLICIT awareness and EXPLICIT representation are conjugate aspects of ONE COMPLEX (real + imaginary) COMPREHENDING DYNAMIC.
FORWARD: The impact of using language based on QUANTUM LOGIC versus BINARY LOGIC
‘QUANTUM LOGIC’ is the logic associated with our understanding that we and all things are ‘condensations’ within an all-pervading electromagnetic WAVE-FIELD. Quantum logic is thus BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING MEDIUM wherein MATERIAL FORMS as CONTENT and the CONTAINER (the containing) WAVE-FIELD are ONE. ‘BINARY LOGIC’ is the EITHER/OR logic of the EXCLUDED MEDIUM associated with the understanding that all material objects are INDEPENDENT THINGS that move about and interact within an ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE OF INFINITE EXTENT.
From this description we can see that QUANTUM LOGIC gives us an IMPRESSION of reality in the GESTALT terms of an all-including transforming relational continuum aka ‘the WAVE-FIELD’ while BINARY LOGIC gives a REPRESENTATION of reality in the FRAGMENTED terms of INDEPENDENT MATERIAL BODIES which move about and interact within an ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE of INFINITE EXTENT. While QUANTUM LOGIC is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT, BINARY LOGIC is LOCAL and EXPLICIT.
QUANTUM LOGIC has a FEMALE-ACCOMMODATING—MALE ASSERTING CONJUGATE STRUCTURE since the WAVE-FIELD has the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CAPACITY of INCLUDING the MALE ASSERTING CONDENSATIONS in a FIGURE and GROUND as ONE manner (e.g. similar to a local, explicit WHORLING within the nonlocal, implicit FLOWING, where FIGURE and GROUND are CONJUGATE ASPECTS of ONE FLUID DYNAMIC aka the transforming relational continuum aka the WAVE-FIELD.
(An example of QUANTUM LOGIC is ‘There is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’, where FIGURE (TOWNING) and GROUND (TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE) are “ONE” as in the BOTH/AND logic of the including medium)
BINARY LOGIC is MISSING the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONJUGATE RELATION leaving only the ASSERTING MALE to do its work of representation ALONE in EMPTY SPACE, in a ONE-SIDED MALE ASSERTING fashion where the ‘GROUND’ aka the ‘CONTAINING MEDIUM’ is ‘EXCLUDED’ (hence ‘the BINARY EITHER/OR Logic of the EXCLUDED medium) leaving only the MALE ASSERTING FIGURE to be perceived as the local, explicit ACTION and DEVELOPMENT AUTHORING AGENT. This DROPOUT of the nonlocal, implicit female-accommodating energy-charged PLENUM aka ‘WAVE-FIELD’ is the source of fragmentation.
(An example of BINARY LOGIC is ‘The TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING products’ ,where FIGURE (the TOWN) and GROUND (EMPTY SPACE of INFINITE EXTENT) are TWO as in the EITHER/OR logic of the excluded medium.)
QUANTUM LOGIC IS THE STANDARD LOGIC OF INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL CULTURE ADHERENTS WHILE BINARY LOGIC IS THE STANDARD LOGIC OF WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS and is embodied in a foundational manner in the Common Average European language architectures. Thus, while the INDIGENOUS ABORIGINALS speak in the QUANTUM LOGIC terms that “There is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE”, WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS speak in the BINARY LOGIC terms that ‘THE TOWN IS GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING products”. While QUANTUM LOGIC evokes CONJUGATE FEMALE-ACCOMMODATING — MALE ASSERTING TRANSFORMATION as in the WAVE-FIELD dynamic, BINARY LOGIC evokes one-sided MALE-ASSERTING ACTION AND DEVELOPMENT and the EGO-based pride of the (mistaken) notion of LOCAL AUTHORING.
The expression ‘INSPIRATION fills the heart’ while EGO swells the head’,… describes the respective geometries of ‘the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT’ FEMALE ACCOMMODATING and the LOCAL and EXPLICIT MALE ASSERTING. INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL LANGUAGE has an ARCHITECTURE that incorporates both FEMALE ACCOMMODATING and MALE ASSERTING while WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE has an ARCHITECTURE that goes with ONE-SIDED MALE ASSERTING and substitutes ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE for FEMALE ACCOMMODATING, the latter playing the primary animating role in the WAVE-FIELD DYNAMIC.
* * * END OF FORWARD * * *
Thought and Language are closely tied together, but HOW? This is the subject explored by Lev Vygotsky (“father of Russian Psychology”) in ‘Thought and Language’
Our understanding of the relationship is important to our understanding of our own sense-experience and why there is a major difference in how Indigenous aboriginal cultures understand “what they think of as ‘reality’” and how we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS understand “what we think of as ‘reality’”.
NOTA BENE: what the indigenous aboriginal cultures “think of as ‘reality’” corresponds to the WAVE-FIELD structure of Modern physics while what we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS “think of as ‘reality’” corresponds to the REAL COMPONENT of the WAVE-FIELD (complex ‘real’ + imaginary) structure.
EXAMPLE: the phrase “there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE” exemplifies the WAVE-FIELD dynamic with its REAL plus IMAGINARY components; i.e. the TOWNING is the “real” component which is given foundational support by the “imaginary” component; i.e. ‘the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’.
(Language can express the ‘local and explicit’ in a relationship with the ‘nonlocal and ‘implicit’ as also with ‘realism’ and ‘impressionism’ which corresponds with WAVE-FIELD math with its ‘real’ and ‘imaginary’ components’. Indigenous aboriginal language and Modern physics ‘Rheomode’ language use ‘local and explicit realism’ and ‘nonlocal and implicit impressionism’ in conjugate relation while WESTERN CULTURE language architecture SPLITS OUT AND USES ONLY ‘local and explicit realism’ ON ITS OWN, substituting ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE while DROPPING OUT the ‘nonlocal and implicit impressionism’. That is, WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE SPLITS OUT AND USES ONLY ‘the TOWN is GROWING, … substituting ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE as a ‘fill-in’ for DROPPING OUT ‘THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’.)
In general discourse, we speak of these different forms of relation, also, in terms of the LOCAL and EXPLICIT and the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT. By way of the LOCAL and EXPLICIT we get to REPRESENTATIONS of sense-experience reality and by way of the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT we get to IMPRESSIONS of sense-experience reality.
INDIGENOUS ABORIGINALS, Taoists/Buddhists and Modern physics combine these as in the mathematical description of the WAVE-FIELD with its ‘REAL’ and ‘IMAGINARY’ components which correspond to our different modes of thought and language which we refer to as REALISM and IMPRESSIONISM; i.e. the REALISM corresponds to what is REPRESENTABLE (the ‘real component in wave-field maths) while the IMPRESSIONISM (imaginary component in wave-field maths)
WHAT IS DIFFERENT IN MY (QUANTUM LOGIC) RESEARCH APPROACH? I ASK MYSELF and ANSWER.
What I see is that my research has led me into the investigating of the role of language architecture in influencing how we conceive of reality generally and how DIFFERENCES in our language-informed understanding can put us on different paths based on differing language-based conceptions of reality.
For example, while WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS orient to BINARY LOGIC language based understandings, INDIGENOUS ABORIGINALS orient to QUANTUM LOGIC based understanding. While the WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT sees a scene wherein ‘the TOWN is growing’ since BINARY LOGIC based language splits ‘the TOWN’ out as a separate entity, the INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL (and Modern physics) sees a scene wherein ‘there is TOWNING in the transforming landscape’ since QUANTUM LOGIC based language understands TOWNING as BEING INCLUDED WITHIN the transforming landscape. This BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDING MEDIUM is the essence of QUANTUM LOGIC.
Because our WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE is based on the MORE SIMPLE BINARY LOGIC structure which splits apart the TOWN and the LANDSCAPE, this makes the notion of GROWTH possible. In the INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL LANGUAGE as also in the flow-based LANGUAGE OF MODERN PHYSICS, there is only the LESS SIMPLE possibility of TRANSFORMATION and NOT “GROWTH”. QUANTUM LOGIC is the BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDING MEDIUM wherein “THE TOWNING” is INCLUDED IN THE ‘TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’ and everything is in flux, and THERE IS NO ‘SEPARATE THING-IN-ITSELF’ that goes by the NAME ‘TOWN’ since we and everything are included in an ALL-INCLUDING WAVE-FIELD aka the Tao;
The opening lines of the Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu state, “The Tao that can be told is not the true Tao. The name that can be named is not the true name.” Names, while useful, can be limiting. We must go beyond names and see the Tao in all things.
In other words, we must acknowledge the QUANTUM LOGIC nature of reality wherein TOWNING is a CONDENSATION of the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM in the manner of a WHORLING in the FLOWING, and this impacts our language architecture requirements, pointing out that when we use NAMES, we FREEZE relational forms that DO NOT, IN SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY, EXIST AS THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES since everything is in flux and relational forms are condensations of the flux, giving rise to the QUANTUM LOGIC relation wherein FIGURE and GROUND are ONE as in the QUANTUM BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING MEDIUM.
PREFACE: INTEGRATION and DIFFERENTIATION are not a reversible duo. Western Culture LANGUAGE, by leading off with Differentiation, DROPS OUT the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONJUGATE of WAVE-FIELD REALITY and proceeds with one-sided MALE ASSERTING ONLY REPRESENTATIONS of a SIMPLIFIED SUBSTITUTE REALITY where the HOLE left by the DROPPING OUT of the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONJUGATE is INFILLED with ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE. The DROP OUT of the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONJUGATE opens the way for SIMPLIFIED BINARY LOGIC based REPRESENTATION based on the duo of NAMING-based ABSOLUTE MATERIAL BEINGS with GRAMMAR-given POWERS of LOCAL AUTHORING and DEVELOPMENT. The DROP OUT of the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING ‘CONTAINER’ leads to WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE based REPRESENTATIONS of a SUBSTITUTE REALITY featuring MALE ASSERTING FRAGMENTS.
* * *
LANGUAGE is a CULTURE-SHAPING TECHNOLOGY.
There is a distinct difference in CULTURE-SHAPING INFLUENCE where INTEGRATION is given PRECEDENCE over DIFFERENTIATION, as contrasted with the CULTURE-SHAPING INFLUENCE where DIFFERENTIATION is given PRECEDENCE over INTEGRATION.
As in Indigenous aboriginal lesson-giving stories such as “My Father and the Lima Beans”, a PERSON can be understood in LOCAL and EXPLICIT DIFFERENTIATING terms as a ‘thing-in-herself’… as in ‘Five-foot-Two, eyes are blue’ etc. ALTERNATIVELY, a PERSON can be understood in NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT INTEGRATIVE terms as a contributor to the QUALITY of the RELATIONAL MATRIX she is included in. The ‘Lima Beans’ story brings out how a person, even though harshly judged in a DIFFERENTIATING ASSESSMENT where we analyze her LOCAL, EXPLICIT physical attributes, may ‘show up’ as having qualities that make a valuable contribution to the ‘relational matrix’ (community dynamic etc.) she is included in. An example, as in the ‘Lima Beans’ allegory would be the woman who is lazy and unhelpful in physical interactions but whose beautiful singing lifts the spirts of those around her.
DIFFERENTIATION is based on an inventory of LOCAL, EXPLICIT, PHYSICAL CONTRIBUTIONS that are in terms of WHAT SHE DOES, … FAIL to capture an inventory of NONLOCAL, IMPLICIT, INSPIRATIONAL CONTRIBUTIONS wherein she transforming the QUALITY of the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT AMBIANCE, as in the example of her exercising of her beautiful vocal gifts which is an INFLUENCE that is MEASURABLE by INTEGRATING her influence on her surroundings as in ‘raising the spirits of the social collectives in which she finds herself included. “DIFFERENTIATION” is a scheme akin to understanding an insect by taking it apart, pulling off while counting and describing its legs and wings and other body parts. Similarly, we can get to know a TOWN by its streets and avenues and buildings and the products and services offered by these components.
INTEGRATION is based on the SUM of the NONLOGIC, IMPLICIT and SPIRIT-IMPACTING influences on is immersed in, which includes the more intangible influences such as the warmth of the sun, the freshness of a cool breeze, the melodic waves of the singer or musician, all of which ADD UP in their CONTRIBUTION to the quality of PLACE and the quality of PLACE is impacted by musicians and artists who share inclusion in a common place so that one could assess any individual on the SUM of these TWO VERY DIFFERENT ASSESSMENT APPROACHES of INTEGRATION where we assess INFLUENCES that are NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT (relational) and DIFFERENTIATION where we assess PROPERTIES that are LOCAL and EXPLICIT.