Archive for February, 2023

The SOURCE of FRAGMENTATION of WESTERN CULTURE SOCIAL COLLECTIVES

0

LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE is the SOURCE of FRAGMENTATION of WESTERN CULTURE SOCIAL DOLLECTIVES

In my continuing philosophical investigations, things continue to fit together and make more sense.  This note summarizes findings to date, which are supported by the work of many including Nietzsche (double error), Bohm (fragmentation), Vygotsky (good clue in his insight on the union of nonlocal and implicit with the local and explicit and more).

 

The key take-aways are with respect to how living in a wave-field plays out in our language architectures and language-influenced thinking.   Of course our sense-experience is primary but our modern culture is using ‘language to put it all together’ and as Emerson warned, the tool of language is running away with the workman which is also what Nietzsche is saying using different words.  Schroedinger puts it must succinctly in the terms; ‘subject and object are only one’, … which we can also relate to Bohm’s finding that we live in an all-including energy-charged PLENUM in which there are figures such as ourselves which are CONDENSATIONS of the PLENUM which manifests the QUANTUM LOGIC relation between the material forms and the ‘space that is not empty but full’ in which they are condensations.

 

Given that our language imparts a foundational role to binary logic which splits apart matter and “empty space” while Modern physics and indigenous aboriginals, Taoists/Buddhists and Advaita Vedanta adherents all have the QUANTUM LOGIC understanding that material forms are CONDENSATIONS of the all-including energy-charged PLENUM aka ‘the wave-field’ there is a whole lot of consistency of understanding in these QUANTUM LOGIC oriented groups and everything I have studied and experienced puts me in that same camp.

 

Ok, I have read Bohm and listened to ‘Bohmians’ and while I agree with what is being said, for the most part, it does not make all of the connections that can be made, like the connections of Vygotsky and also Ernst Mach who sort of got left behind even through he was adamant about the links between the psyche and physics, saying that we needed to understand the two as one psycho-physical system.

(more…)

Indigenous Aboriginal QUANTUM LOGIC and Western Culture BINARY LOGIC

0

FORWARD: This FORWARD is a bit of a mea culpa which is to point out that I have often fallen into the habitual trap of speaking in terms of REPRESENTATIONS of REALITY which turns out to be a CLEAR MISTAKE because language does not support the construction of REPRESENTATIONS of REALITY (the reality of our sense-experience in the transforming relational continuum is much too complex; e.g. as Lao Tzu says; ‘The Tao that can be told is not the true Tao’.)

What LANGUAGE provides is not the capability of constructing REPRESENTATIONS but the capability of SENDING SIGNALS and it is up to the RECEIVER to put Humpty Dumpty together again which, depending on the receiver’s history of sensory experiences and visual imagination, may come up with something that will call for the ritual of giving one another the ‘HIGH FIVE’ indicating that ‘we have arrived on the same page’.  However, there is no screen projection showing the respective visualizations side-by side, and if there were, it might show, when two American citizens who bump into one another in darkest Africa and HIGH FIVE each other, whereupon they may shortly thereafter discover that one of them is a right wing Republican and the other a left wing Democrat.   There point is, agreement can be shallower or deeper and we don’t always dig down deep enough to check out the fullness of our agreement.

Thus the INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL and the WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT may communicate in the SIMPLE Common Average European language architecture which is BINARY LOGIC based since the INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL, having been ‘colonized’, had learned to speak English, even though learned as a ‘first language’, an INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL language that is QUANTUM LOGIC based and which is less simple than WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGES which are BINARY LOGIC based.  For example, while the indigenous aboriginal would speak in terms that meant “There is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’, he would nevertheless understand what the WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT meant by ‘the TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING things’, even though this is a SIMPLIFYING REDUCTION of the afore-mentioned ANDROGYNOUS ‘TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING’ proposition.  So it is easy for those indigenous aboriginals who grew up learning the LESS SIMPLE form of LOGIC (the QUANTUM BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING medium) to deal with the “DUMBED DOWN” to BINARY LOGIC (the EITHER/OR LOGIC of the EXCLUDED medium) LANGUAGE discourse.

GOING in the opposite direction from the SIMPLE to the LESS SIMPLE, when one has not ‘grown up with’ the LESS SIMPLE, is not so easy; i.e. the WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT who has learned a LANGUAGE that encourages THINKING in ONE-SIDED MALE ASSERTING BINARY LOGIC terms such as “the TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING goods’ will have more difficulty in shifting from this SIMPLE view to the LESS SIMPLE QUANTUM LOGIC (ANDROGYNOUS) terms of “There is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE” which includes the CONTENT and CONTAINER in conjugate relation.

In mathematical terms, this LANGUAGE shift, in the DUMBING DOWN direction, corresponds to shifting from the LESS SIMPLE QUANTUM LOGIC STRUCTURE  to the SIMPLE BINARY LOGIC STRUCTURE, which is EXACTLY what is happening when we shift from ‘There is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’ (ANDROGYNOUS FEMALE ACCOMMODATING RECEPTION in conjugate relation with MALE ASSERTIVE EFFECTING) … to ‘The TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING products’, (ONE-SIDED MALE ASSERTIVE AUTHORING).

This shift from indigenous aboriginal language architecture which is QUANTUM LOGIC based to WESTERN CULTURE language architecture which is BINARY LOGIC based is the equivalent of the mathematical shift from COMPLEX to REAL signal.

What is the difference between real and complex signal?

A real signal at any given time takes its value in the set of real numbers, and a complex signal takes its value in the set of complex numbers.  

AN IMPORTANT POINT HERE is that LANGUAGE is not a system that employs REPRESENTATIONS, it is a system that employs SIGNALS that trigger the coming-to-mind of some sense-experience based situation that is in general unique to the individual.  The words SEXUAL INTERCOURSE signal recall of a certain sense-experience.  Those same words trigger very different sense-experience recall in the FEMALE than they do in the MALE.

 

SO, the PROBLEM is NOT that ‘THE WORD IS NOT THE THING’.  The PROBLEM IS THAT LANGUAGE DOES NOT, as assumed in WESTERN CULTURE, TRANSMIT REPRESENTATIONS; LANGUAGE TRANSMITS SIGNALS that induce sense-experience recall.

 

* * * end of INTRO * * *

 

 

 

 

 

 

Woven together with the KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID penchant for BINARY LOGIC based SIMPLIFICATION is the following COMMON WESTERN CULTURE CONFUSION deriving from the BELIEF IN “THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES”;

 

Polish-American scientist and philosopher Alfred Korzybski remarked that “the map is not the territory” and that “the word is not the thing”, encapsulating his view that an abstraction derived from something, or a reaction to it, is not the thing itself.  –Wikipedia

 

 

THERE ARE NO “THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES”.  WE LIVE IN AN ALL INCLUDING TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM AKA THE WAVE-FIELD.

 

So, while Korzybski is saying that SOMETHING IS AMISS in our LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE, … HE IS MISSING THE KEY POINT which is that THERE ARE NO THINGS, but there are CONDENSATIONS of the all-including ENERGY-CHARGED PLENUM also known as the WAVE-FIELD.

 

WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS generally ACCEPT this comment of KORZYBSKI because it is evident that SOMETHING IS AMISS in our LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE, but his statement doesn’t DIG DEEP ENOUGH. Korzybski’s proposition GIVES BACK-HANDED SUPPORT TO THE BELIEF THAT THERE ARE “THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES” and simply PUTS DISTANCE between the LINGUISTIC DESCRIPTION OF THE THING and THE THING, … reaffirming that THERE ARE THINGS and its just that its not straightforward to use WORDS to IDENTIFY the THING.

 

THE ‘REAL ISSUE’ is that “THERE ARE NO THINGS” since we share inclusion in an all-including fluid dynamical world aka the WAVE-FIELD WORLD which is a TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.

 

GOODBYE BINARY LOGIC! …  HELLO QUANTUM LOGIC!

 

It is the notional EXISTENCE OF THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES that forces us to INVENT an ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE which is necessary for there to be THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES because THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES are INDEPENDENT of the world in which they share inclusion.

 

Of course, MODERN PHYSICS has fallen in line with INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL, TAOIST/BUDDHIST and ADVAITA VEDANTA understanding wherein the WORLD IS AN ENERGY-CHARGED PLENUM (the WAVE-FIELD) locally populated by CONDENSATIONS where these CONDENSATIONS, like clouds in the atmosphere, are BOTH themselves AND the all-including energy-charged PLENUM.   This is the QUANTUM LOGIC “BOTH/AND” relation which is the understanding of the basic make-up of the world of Modern physics, Indigenous aboriginals, Taoists/Buddhists and Advaita Vedanta adherents.

 

We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS “ARE NOT PICKING UP ON THIS UNDERSTANDING” BECAUSE OUR LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE IS BINARY LOGIC BASED AND BINARY LOGIC IS INNATELY SIMPLER THAN THE QUANTUM “BOTH/AND” LOGIC WHICH captures the relationship between the ALL-INCLUDING PLENUM and the VISIBLE, TANGIBLE CONDENSATIONS OF THE PLENUM, a BOTH/AND LOGIC that is called “QUANTUM LOGIC”.

(more…)

Tonto’s Conversion of the Lone Ranger

0

 

LONE RANGER:  Tonto, I would like to return to our discussion on language and while I appreciate that the Comanche language has some subtle capabilities beyond the capability of English, I am still not clear why you do not acknowledge the superior clarity and precision of English.

TONTO: Kemo sabe, sometimes, clarity is achieved in language at the expense of reality, as in the common practice among English speakers of applying the simple EITHER is OR is NOT logic which we Comanche’s do not use since our logic comprehends BOTH is AND is NOT.

LONE RANGER: That’s part of the lack of clarity that I am referring to, a clarity that is readily achieved in the English language.

TONTO: We Indians are all for clarity, providing that it does not involve a sacrifice of understanding, as is the case in English language clarity which is based on DIFFERENTIATION which DROPS OUT perception of INTEGRATION.  Where you say, ‘the TOWN is GROWING’, which differentiates the TOWN from the transforming landscape, we say the equivalent of ‘there is TOWNING in the transforming landscape’.

LONE RANGER: But this is exactly my point since that is more information than we need.  We don’t need to draw a map of the world in order to address what is going on in a local town.

TONTO: When we Comanches use words to describe reality, we are describing THE WORLD WE ARE INCLUDED IN and NOT some limited portion or FRAGMENT that we pick up with a Crow’s eye voyeur stare.  In other words, our language is designed to let us speak in terms of the INTEGRAL WHOLE within which we all share inclusion in, as is intended in ‘mitakuye oyasin’.  Our language is NOT designed to FRAGMENT reality as the White man’s languages do.

LONE RANGER: But you must be able to see the benefits of ‘homing in’ on the specifics of our immediate local and explicit concerns, like the need to construct shelters for our families.  For this we need language that helps us coordinate actions needed to construct the local and explicit house or town we are working on, and this language must have the capability of breaking things down into parts as used in construction.

TONTO: What you are describing is the fragmentation that we indigenous aboriginals avoid which is YOUR use of DIFFERENTIATION based language where WE use INTEGRATION based language. While you speak of the GROWTH of the TOWN, we speak of TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING continuum which is what is actually occurring in the world we all share inclusion in.  In other words, our language speaks from the point of view of INTEGRATION rather than DIFFERENTIATION, acknowledging that we and all things are included in this ONE world so that if any of us mess it up, we all experience the consequences.

LONE RANGER: But language capable of DIFFERENTIATION allows us to focus in the LOCAL and EXPLICIT so that we can optimize our overall environment by improving each part, such as a TOWN with a well-focused improvement initiative such as the CONSTRUCTION of new homes, schools and businesses.

TONTO: While your language of DIFFERENTIATION may develop the ILLUSION that what you call SUBOPTIMIZATION is possible, our language of INTEGRATION reminds us that SUBOPTIMZATION IS AN ILLUSION due to the reality that ‘everything is related’ or as we say, ‘mitakuye oyasin’.  While DIFFERENTIATION in your language may have you thinking in terms that your TOWN is a little isolated FRAGMENT of reality that you can ‘improve’ ‘on its own’, the reality is that we all share inclusion in the ONE “GREAT HARMONY” wherein everything is related.

(more…)

Simplified Summary of Psycho-Linguistic Reality Construction

0

 

Following below this ‘technical’ introduction is a short summary of Psycho-Linguistic Reality Construction, the techniques we use to GIVE VOICE to our sense-experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum, also referred to as the all-including WAVE-FIELD and ‘the Tao’.   It is evident that our views are DIVIDED as in the aphorism ‘EAST is EAST and WEST is WEST and never the twain shall meet’ (Rudyard Kipling) and this DIVISION sheds light on how THOUGHT and LANGUAGE can be ‘connected in more than one way.

This structural difference comes from a ‘preference’ as to whether we prefer to ‘SEE THINGS’ by way of DIFFERENTIATION or INTEGRATION; i.e. for example, do we want to psychologically use DIFFERENTIATION to SPLIT OUT ‘the TOWN’ and proceed to give a detailed ‘break-down’ that describes ‘the TOWN’ as if it were a LOCAL, EXPLICIT THING that can be ‘taken apart’ so that we can come to know ‘IT’ by ‘its’ component parts.  Or, do we want to acknowledge that ‘everything is in flux’ so as to understand that there is “TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE” in which case there are no assumptions of a LOCAL, EXPLICIT ‘BEING’ based entity and we thus need a LANGUAGE that is capable of working with NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT relations that are the stuff a fluid world (such as a WAVE-FIELD world) is made of.

We thus have the option of TWO DIFFERENT BUT RELATED LANGUAGE-based CONCEPTUALIZING SCHEMES.  Acronyms may be useful here for recalling these two different CONCEPTUALIZING OPTIONS; i.e. INTEGRATION and DIFFERENTIATION.

 

L.E.A.P. stands for Local, Explicit, Asserting, PART.  (example, a WAVE ‘PEAK’)

N.I.R.T. stands for Nonlocal, Implicit, Relational, Transformation. (example, WAVE ‘TROUGH’)

 

*NOTE that in the spherical space of our sense-experience of inclusion therein, the female ‘seafloor spreading’, being nonlocal and implicit is ‘higher dimensional’ and not the simple opposite of the local and explicit ‘continents that drift’, the latter expressing one-sided male-asserting action with no mention of the ‘female accommodating conjugate’.  The DROP OUT of the female accommodating conjugate leaves in its place, the impression of absolute infinite emptiness thus ‘freeing us up for constructing a language architecture based solely on one-sided male-asserting actions and development’.

Had we oriented our language architecture to the less simple ‘seafloor spreading’ as in a spherical space, this ‘nonlocal, implicit female accommodating’ sea-floor spreading is QUANTUM LOGIC transformation, …  while the simpler local, explicit, male-asserting ‘continents drifting’ is BINARY LOGIC based wherein things-in-themselves such as ‘continents’ “EITHER” move “OR” do not move and ‘IF they move, they move as if  without need of FEMALE ACCOMMODATING as if in an ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE OF INFINITE EXTENT.

Here we see, because we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have chosen one-sided MALE ASSERTING and DROPPED OUT FEMALE ACCOMMODATING, a language architecture that is ONLY ASSERTING and NEVER ACCOMMODATING which is the language-based source of FRAGMENTATION since there is nothing ‘connecting’ the ‘local, explicit, male-asserting, drifting continents’ in our language based construction. 

However, our  sense-experience-primed intuition will be influencing our thoughts to keep everything in relational balance and demanding an interpretation of overall INTEGRATION as in transformation, our language being nevertheless free to construct a DIFFERENTATION based FRAGMENTATION comprised of LOCAL, EXPLICIT CONTINENTS notionally with their own (GRAMMAR-GIVEN) POWERS OF DRIFTING-ACTION and DEVELOPMENT.   Note that there is this scenario no notion of an ALL-INCLUDING PLENUM IN WHICH MATERIAL FORMINGS SUCH AS CONTINENTINGS ARE CONDENSATIONS as in Modern physics.

As far as the LOGIC of these DETACHED, ‘drifting’ CONTINENTS goes, as Goedel’s Theorem points out, all finite systems of logic, while logically TRUE, are INCOMPLETE, thus we are free to speak in terms of the LOGICAL TRUTH of one-sided MALE ASSERTING ONLY “CONTINENTS DRIFTING” without mentioning any FEMALE CONJUGATE such as SEAFLOOR SPREADING.  On the other hand, if our language architecture is designed to give the foundational role to the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING SEAFLOOR-SPREADING, then the MALE ASSERTING is ‘implicitly included’.  One might even conclude that the MALE ASSERTING is NOT NEEDED since it is IMPLIED by the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING; i.e. in the all-including energy-charged PLENUM (WAVE-FIELD), MALE ASSERTING MATERIAL FORMS ARE SCHAUMKOMMEN (APPEARANCE).

Thus, if we have a flow-based language architecture as in Modern physics and as in indigenous aboriginal culture and say; ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’  or there is ‘CONTINENTING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’, we avoid falling into the TRAP of using language that FRAGMENTS reality as happens when we use the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR to suggest MALE ASSERTING LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and developments as with, for example, ‘the TOWN is GROWING’ and ‘the CONTINENT is DRIFTING’ which gives a FRAGMENTED PICTURE due to the connecting role of the FEMALE CONJUGATE (the all-including WAVE-FIELD PLENUM) having gone MISSING due to language-architecture choices.

When we use MALE ASSERTING propositions such as ‘CONTINENTS ARE DRIFTING’ and ‘TOWNS ARE GROWING’ without mentioning the FEMALE CONJUGATES of SEAFLOOR SPREADING and ‘WILDERNESS SHRINKING’ which, if they were mentioned in our language constructions, will guide our thinking so as to comprehend the overall “INTEGRATED GESTALT’ of TRANSFORMATION, avoiding an understanding in terms of FRAGMENTATION that comes when we DROP OUT the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING (wave-field) CONJUGATE. 

The FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONJUGATE IN LANGUAGE is essential in establishing the QUANTUM LOGIC relation as between the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING  CONJUGATE and the MALE-ASSERTING CONJUGATE where the latter is a CONDENSATION of the former in which case there is no FRAGMENTATION, and that which language and APPEARANCE casts in the BINARY LOGIC terms of MATERIAL BEING and EMPTY SPACE, must instead be understood in the QUANTUM LOGIC terms of the all-including energy-charged PLENUM aka WAVE-FIELD and CONDENSATIONS therein, which constitute a BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING medium. 

WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE COULD HAVE  OPTED FOR A QUANTUM LOGIC FOUNDATION AS IN MODERN PHYSICS AND INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE, BUT THE SIMPLER BINARY LOGIC FOUNDATION WAS CHOSEN INSTEAD, THE RESULT BEING ‘FRAGMENTATION’ BASED REALITY CONCEPTUALIZATIONS which, as Bohm has pointed out, are the ongoing source of schizophrenia and paranoia in WESTERN CULTURE social collectives (due to the infusion of BINARY LOGIC into language based conceptualizations to serve up simplified  (binary logic based) substitute realities).

That there are problems of FRAGMENTATION arising from WESTERN CULTURE BINARY LOGIC based Psycho-Linguistic Reality Construction is the communications aim of this note.  The following abbreviations are to help retain the main elements of how our language can be confusing our understanding; in particular, the WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE embodies a DIFFERENTIATION based reduction from the sense-experience affirmed reality of an all-including INTEGRATION; i.e. a DIFFERENTIATION based reduction from the N.I.R.I. to the intellectual SUBSTITUTE REALITY of the L.E.A.F. 

N.I.R.I stands for Nonlocal, Implicit, Relational, INTEGRAL. (example, WAVE ‘TROUGH’)

 

L.E.A.F. stands for Local, Explicit, Asserting, FRAGMENT.  (example, a WAVE ‘PEAK’) 

 

If we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS were using N.I.R.I. capable language architecture there would be no need for these mind-jogging acronyms because we would already by working on the LESS SIMPLE plane in which the MORE SIMPLE plane is included.  But because we are using, as our understanding-supporting language, the simpler L.E.A.F. language architecture, we get stuck trying to come up with language based articulations of phenomena that are beyond capture in the simple L.E.A.F. language architecture.  If we do not remind ourselves of the limitations of our language architecture with respect to capture capability, we are exposed to endless reformulations of language based explanations in the belief that our problems of not reaching agreement are due to the limitations in our argument rather than to limitations in our language   The former can be fixed by improving the argument but the latter cannot be fixed without improving the language.

Those who polarize on the BINARY LOGIC issue of whether the (male-asserting) hurricane stirs up the atmosphere or whether the (female accommodating) atmosphere stirs up the hurricane, … if they can pause to become aware of their being immersed in the heat of the sun overhead, may become aware of the QUANTUM LOGIC structure of the phenomenon where it is no longer a BINARY LOGIC EITHER/OR issue since the AUTHORING AGENCY is coming from the solar irradiance infused WAVE-FIELD, and thus from NEITHER the MALE ASSERTING HURRICANE NOR the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING ATMOSPHERE. but from the ENERGIZED MEDIUM (the WAVE-FIELD) which includes BOTH the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING and THE MALE ASSERTING.

We are reminded here of how our LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE supports our DROPPING DOWN to the BINARY LOGIC based SIMPLIFICATION and this is the popular default in WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE based representation, which is a PITFALL THAT IS NOT PRESENT in indigenous aboriginal culture because of the less simple QUANTUM LOGIC LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE wherein FIGURE and GROUND are ONE rather than TWO (this is simply a restatement of the BOTH/AND QUANTUM LOGIC structure).  Once we use the L.E.A.F. based ‘dumbing down’ to LOCAL AUTHORING by way of the LINGUISTIC DEVICE of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, we take it for granted that what we are talking about is REALITY as if our language could only serve us in our articulating of the reality that comes to us from our sense-experience of inclusion in the world.

However, our LANGUAGE is NOT SIMPLY PUTTY IN OUR HANDS, not when we allow it to DUMB DOWN our linguistic articulation of our sense-experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum to VOYEUR DIFFERENTIATION.   The abstract tool of DIFFERENTIATION used in language based constructions allows us to FRAGMENT OUT the HURRICANING IN THE ATMOSPHERING (a QUANTUM LOGIC BOTH/AND RELATION), and use the Linguistic DUMBING DOWN of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR to construct a BINARY LOGIC based SUBSTITUTE REALITY featuring the HURRICANE as a notional LOCAL EXPLICIT THING-IN-ITSELF notionally with its own GRAMMAR-given POWERS OF LOCAL AUTHORING of ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT as if IN AN ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE (a substitute for the all-including PLENUM aka WAVE-FIELD).

BOTTOM LINE: our WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE has us SUBSTITUTE for our N.I.R.I. sense experience of integrated inclusion in the transforming relational continuum, our L.E.A.F  intellectual construction of fragmented interactions isolated from each other in an absolute, empty and infinite ‘insulating’ space.

 

N.I.R.I stands for Nonlocal, Implicit, Relational, INTEGRAL. (example, WAVE ‘TROUGH’)

L.E.A.F. stands for Local, Explicit, Asserting, FRAGMENT.  (example, a WAVE ‘PEAK’) 

 

* * * * * * 

 

 

 

 

SIMPLIFIED SUMMARY of MY FINDINGS (from philosophical investigations into WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE-based social dysfunction)

 

My findings mirror the key findings of Nietzsche and Bohm which both point to language-induced psychological confusion within a fragmented reality.

(more…)

GESTALT or FRAGMENTATION: How LANGUAGE shapes “REALITY”

0

 

 

 

Language Architecture comes in two forms, the nonlocal-implicit QUANTUM LOGIC GESTALT form which assumes INTEGRATION (see upper part of above diagram)

 

And the local-explicit BINARY LOGIC “DIFFERENTIATION” form which assumes EMPTY SPACE SEPARATION (see lower part of above diagram)

 

INDIGENOUS ABORIGINALS, TAOISTS/BUDDHISTS and ADVAITA VEDANTA adherents along with MODERN PHYSICS see the world as FLUID INTEGRATION as in a WAVE-FIELD.

 

WESTERN CULTURE, with its concepts such as EVOLUTION see the world in terms of DIFFERENTIATION (how did all those different INDEPENDENT MATERIAL FORMS come to “BE”?

 

BUT WHO SAYS THEY ARE ‘INDEPENDENT MATERIAL BEINGS’?   EVIDENTLY, ‘LANGUAGE SAYS SO’, … however, we know that Copernicus FRAGMENTED the model of the cosmos by suggesting that ‘the EARTH TURNS ROUND’ which implies a BINARY LOGIC SPLIT between ‘the EARTH’ and whatever it is TURNING AROUND IN’, … so if the EARTH is made of MATTER as was the WESTERN CULTURE notion.

 

All these things being considered, it seems probable to me, that God in the Beginning form’d matter in solid, massy, hard, impenetrable, moveable Particles, of such Sizes and Figures, and with such other Properties, and in such Proportion to Space, as most conduced to the end for which he form’d them; and these primitive Particles being Solids, are incomparably harder than any porous Bodies compounded of them; even so very hard as never to wear or break in pieces: no ordinary Power being able to divide what God himself made one in the first Creation.”  –Isaac Newton, Opticks: or, A Treatise of the Reflexions, Refractions, Inflexions and Colours of Light

 

HELLO BINARY LOGIC SPLITTING OF REALITY INTO MATTER AND SPACE (DIFFERENTIATION)!   GOODBYE QUANTUM LOGIC INCLUSION OF MATTER IN FIELD (INTEGRATION).

 

HELLO ALSO, with DIFFERENTIATION, to the concept of EVOLUTION of the FORMS “WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS HAVE DESIGNED LANGUAGE TO DIFFERENTIATE”. (once we linguistically differentiate and split out relational flow forms, resituating them in empty space, their continuing development is no longer comprehended WITHIN a transforming relational continuum).

(more…)

BEYOND THE BINARY

0

 

There but for fortune, go you or I”  —Phil Ochs

Whether we speak in terms of ‘the Grace of God’ or in terms of ‘probability’ and ‘chaos theory’, we know, at some level, that we cannot understand a person’s actions in the ONE_SIDED MALE-ASSERTING terms of LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and developments.

We live in a WAVE-FIELD world which is ANDROGYNOUS, where it may be true that WE CALL THE SHOTS regarding our own actions (insofar as we consider ourselves ‘independent’), but we do not control THE UNFOLDING SITUATION WE FIND OURSELVES IN which is the FEMALE CONJUGATE of our SENSE-EXPERIENCE of INCLUSION IN WAVE-FIELD reality.

Show me the prison, show me the jail

Show me the prisoner whose life has gone stale

And I’ll show you a young man with so many reasons why

There but for fortune go your or I

 

BEYOND THE BINARY is ‘where we live’.  The reality of our sense experience IS NOT SUBJECT TO THE SIMPLIFICATIONS THAT WE USE IN OUR LANGUAGE BASED SYMBOLIC CONSTRUCTION which we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS take to be SUBSTITUTE REALITIES that we use as our OPERATIVE REALITY.

NOTA BENE:  Our WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE is NOT CAPABLE of REPRESENTATION of our sense-experience reality, it is only capable of us a SIMPLIFIED BINARY LOGIC based SYMBOLIC ‘GO-BY’ where we use word combinations to construct ‘GO-BYS’ such as ‘the TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING goods and services’   … But in the REAL REALITY of our inclusion in the ALL-INCLUDING transforming relational continuum aka the WAVE-FIELD, we would do better to employ a LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE that was NOT BINARY LOGIC BASED , as this is, but, instead, QUANTUM LOGIC based, such as ‘There is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’, which preserves the sense-experience affirmed  reality wherein EVERYTHING IS IN FLUX, as is the nature of the all-including transforming relational continuum aka the WAVE-FIELD.

QUANTUM LOGIC captures the WAVE-FIELD reality wherein material forms are CONDENSATIONS of the all-including WAVE-FIELD whereas BINARY LOGIC imposes the ABSOLUTE MATERIAL BEING in ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE abstraction which has us TALKING and WRITING about MOTION in terms of the MOVEMENT and INTERACTION of the ABSOLUTE MATERIAL OBJECTS as if in an ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE of INFINITE EXTENT.

(more…)

TWO CULTURES, TWO LANGUAGES, TWO “REALITIES”

0

 

OVERVIEW:

Many people believe that LANGUAGE is a technology supporting RE-PRESENTATION of things we have seen or experienced.  THIS IS NOT SO!  “The Tao that can be told is not the true Tao”  — Lao Tzu … and what is intended here is that the world of our sense-experience is of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum aka the all-including WAVE-FIELD which is NOT something that can be “REPRESENTED” in LANGUAGE since LANGUAGE can only deliver SYMBOL-BASED INFERENCES.

SYMBOLS ‘work’ by “BRINGING COMPLEX SENSE-EXPERIENCES TO MIND”, BUT the complex sense-experiences are BEYOND REACH OF REPRESENTATION.  For example, using the thumb and forefinger on one hand to form a closed, circular opening and pushing the forefinger of the other hand rhythmically in-and-out of the opening, is symbol-based ‘sign language’ for sexual intercourse, IT IS NOT A ‘REPRESENTATION OF SEXUAL INTERCOURSE’.  Sexual intercourse is sense-experience based.

The KEY POINT HERE is that LANGUAGE works by constructing SYMBOLS that remind us of various aspects of our complex “BEYOND REPRESENTATION” sense-experience of inclusion in the all-including transforming relational continuum aka the WAVE-FIELD.  There is a problem when we think in terms that our LANGUAGE is capable of constructing REPRESENTATIONS of REALITY when all that LANGUAGE is capable of, is to deliver symbols that may be able to ‘put people on the same page’, not by constructing LINGISTIC REPRESENTATIONS of the complex reality of our sense-experience but by constructing symbolic ‘triggers’ that can bring into our consciousness, memories of the complex reality of our sense-experience or memories of the complex experiences of others that we have learned about, which we can only ‘translate’ by association with our own somewhat ‘similar’ experiences.

The point is that LANGUAGE does NOT have the capability of REPRESENTATION of our sense-experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum, it HAS ONLY THE CAPABILITY OF BRINGING TO MIND SYMBOLIC LINKAGES TO COMPLEX SENSE-EXPERIENCE similar to the example of the fingers-based symbol suggesting sexual intercourse.  LANGUAGE ‘WORKS’ by putting people ON THE SAME PAGE  which means bringing to mind the same sort of complex sense experience; i.e. LANGUAGE “DOES NOT WORK” by “constructing REPRESENTATIONS of complex sense-experience reality that is in any case BEYOND CAPTURE BY THE LIMITED TECHNOLOGY OF LANGUAGE”.

The gifted writer’s GIFT is NOT measured by the quality of the language-based REPRESENTATION she has constructed, although it is popular to say so.  The PRIMARY goal of language is NOT the accurate REPRESENTATION of a scene or event but to put a group of disparate people ON THE SAME PAGE so that A COMMON UNDERSTANDING IS FACILITATED.   Words are symbols for familiar material forms and when people learn to use the same words for the same forms, language-based communications are enabled.

We make jokes about the arbitrariness in this process; e.g. “In France, they call this “une fourchette”, in Germany they call this “ein Gabel  and in England, we call it a ‘Fork’ which is what it actually is.

We seem to have a problem with LANGUAGE here.  As Korzybski says, “the WORD is NOT the THING’.

Polish-American scientist and philosopher Alfred Korzybski remarked that “the map is not the territory” and that “the word is not the thing”, encapsulating his view that an abstraction derived from something, or a reaction to it, is not the thing itself.

But the deeper issue is that“THERE ARE NO THINGS” , there are only condensations in the transforming relational continuum aka the WAVE-FIELD which brings QUANTUM LOGIC into our language architecture and gets rid of the TOO SIMPLE BINARY LOGIC concept of MATERIAL OBJECTS seemingly existing ‘in their own independent right’, as if in an ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE.

So, the points is, again;

LANGUAGE ‘WORKS’ by putting people ON THE SAME PAGE  which means bringing to mind the same sort of complex sense experience; i.e. LANGUAGE “DOES NOT WORK” by “constructing REPRESENTATIONS of complex sense-experience reality that is in any case BEYOND CAPTURE BY THE LIMITED TECHNOLOGY OF LANGUAGE” (the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao). 

Conservative language uses representations wherein individuals stir up the social collective which is like the geometry of hurricanes assertively stirring up the atmosphere while Liberal language uses representation wherein the social collective stirs up the individuals which is like the geometry of the atmosphere inductively stirring up hurricanes.  Neither of these BINARY LOGIC based, purported ‘representations of reality’ are ‘representations of reality’.  They are simple BINARY LOGIC based abstractions (OF MUTUALLY OPPOSING POLARITY) intended, AS LANGUAGE TYPICALLY IS INTENDED, at getting people ‘on the same page.’  THE MUTUALLY OPPOSING VIEWS ARE NOT ‘REPRESENTATIONS OF REALITY’ (the transforming relational continuum is beyond the reach of LANGUAGE), they are simplified abstractions designed to ‘get people on the same page’.   

The ‘real reality’ is too complex for words (everything is in flux), however, the QUANTUM BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING MEDIUM (WAVE-FIELD) takes us closer to the ineffable Tao by having us realize that we can forget about the BINARY LOGIC debate where Conservatives argue that HURRICANES ARE MALE ASSERTING AND STIR UP THE ATMOSPHERE, while Liberals ARGUE THAT THE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING ATMOSPHERE INDUCTIVELY STIRS UP THE HURRICANES .  This is because in the QUANTUM  LOGIC BOTH/AND view, THE SOLAR IRRADIANCE FIELD INCLUDES BOTH FEMALE ACCOMMODATING ATMOSPHERE and MALE ASSERTING HURRICANES, dissolving the LANGUAGE based ERROR of the BINARY LOGIC SPLIT THAT “WE SEE OUT THERE through our Voyeur eyes” and OPENING OUR AWARENESS TO OUR INCLUSION IN THE ALL-INCLUDING WAVE-FIELD.

 

 * * *

 

 

 

REALITY “JUST IS” but it is the habit of us TWO-LEGGEDS to use LANGUAGE to fabricate REPRESENTATIONS of our experience of INCLUSION in this TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.  Right away we run into the problem that ‘the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao’ because ‘everything is in flux’.   SO, THE ‘WORK-AROUND’ is to INVENT A SYSTEM OF SOUNDS or SYMBOLS THAT CAN AT LEAST STIMULATE MENTAL IMAGERY THAT ‘REMINDS’ US of OUR “IN-THE-FLOW’ SENSE EXPERIENCE ADVENTURE.

 

We call such a system ‘LANGUAGE’ and right from the GET-GO we can FORGET about the HOPELESS QUEST of ARCHITECTING a LANGUAGE that will give us a FULL and ACCURATE PRESENTATION because our sense-experience is of inclusion in THE ONE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM which is, at least as far as us finite HUMANINGS-IN-THE-FLOW are concerned, UNBOUNDED in SPACE-TIME; i.e. it is THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.

 

LANGUAGE ‘comes out in little sound-bytes’ so for sure, in developing a system of LANGUAGE, we are going to have invent LEGO-LIKE PIECES that we can PIECE TOGETHER to come up with REPRESENTATIONS PRESENTATIONS that can tap into and remind us of COMMON SENSE-EXPERIENCES that we retain in our ‘MEMORY’ so that LANGUAGE is, at base, a MEMORY-JOGGING SYSTEM where what’s being conveyed IS NOT COMING FROM SOME LITERAL CONSTRUCTION but from some sense-experience.   The ADVERTISER understand this and the ‘AD’ for a bottle of whiskey that says CANADA AT ITS BEST is using the natural relational association power of the mind to catch hold of the ‘TITS’ imagery.  This is called SUBLIMINAL ADVERTISING but LANGUAGE ITSELF is a game of communicating by using SUBLIMINAL STIMULATION because as Korzybski and others have pointed out,  ‘THE WORD IS NOT THE THING’ which would be more realistically expressed ‘the WORD is NOT THE SENSE-EXPERIENCE’ since there are no ‘THINGS’ in our sense experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.

 

So, LANGUAGE is a scheme based on constructing SYBOLIC REPRESENTATIONS PRESENTATIONS.  Note that, as just explained in the critique of what Korzybski said, LANGUAGE is a SCHEME for constructing PRESENTATIONS (not REPRESENTATIONS OF THINGS) such as ‘CANADA AT TITS BEST’ or simply ‘TITS’ which does its job at the SUBLIMINAL LEVEL which is where the memory of SENSE-EXPERIENCE persists. If I say that I want a HOT-DOG what I get will be what the other person ASSOCIATES with the word HOT-DOG.

 

The point is, and this is an important point in understanding how LANGUAGE BASED COMMUNICATIONS WORK, that the MEANING is NOT IN THE WORD ITSELF but in the THINKING that is stimulated by the utterance of the word which in this case is NOT a HOT, SWEATY LIVE ANIMAL, but something entirely different that comes to mind in the minds of members of the INSIDER GROUP using the same word-based signaling scheme.

 

IN THE END, LANGUAGE is not ‘talking about things’ but is INSTEAD LANGUAGE is PUTTING PEOPLE ON THE SAME PAGE or more-or-less the ‘same page’ since ‘CANADA AT ITS BEST’ is not going to put women on the same SUBLIMINAL PAGE as men.   But no-one-said that LANGUAGE is a perfect system where the messages convey understanding in LOCAL, EXPLICIT TERMS, because what’s involved is the CONJUGATE RELATION of TRANSMITTER and RECEIVER which is LESS SIMPLE than a PLUG and SOCKET in the manner that QUANTUM LOGIC is less simple than BINARY LOGIC.

(more…)

How to AVOID WESTERN CULTURE SUBSTITUTE REALITY ENTRAPMENT

0

 

PART I. 

 

We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are like our indigenous aboriginal brothers and sisters when we are engaging relationally, on a sense-experience basis, BUT WHEN WE START TALKING, LOOK OUT!  

 

When we start relying on LANGUAGE for our understanding of ‘reality’ (the so-called ‘reality’ the we put together with language), we PART WAYS with our indigenous aboriginal brothers and sisters because we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS use a simplistic language architecture that is BINARY LOGIC based or in other words ‘DIFFERENTIATION’ based whereas, indigenous aboriginal s (and also Modern physics, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta adherents) use a LESS SIMPLE language architecture which is QUANTUM LOGIC based, or in other words, ‘INTEGRATION’ based, … a language that acknowledges the all-including WAVE-FIELD nature of our reality. 

 

A simple example of the difference is where we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS say ‘the TOWN is GROWING’ which demonstrates our DIFFERENTIATION based approach to LANGUAGE DESIGN; i.e. we differentiate out the TOWN from the LANDSCAPE it is included in and use a form of language that re-establishes ‘the TOWN’ as a THING-IN-ITSELF that we apply GRAMMAR to so as to impute to ‘the TOWN’ … ITS OWN LOCAL POWERS OF AUTHORING GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT.   In our minds’ eye we imagine the TOWN as a LOCAL, EXPLICIT THING-IN-ITSELF that is ‘getting bigger’ and ‘more populous’ with ‘businesses’ that ‘produce products’.  This is a DIFFERENTIATION based pseudo-reality which we have developed a full system of language for, and LANGUAGE IS A SCHEME WHERE WE USE WORDS THAT PUT US ON THE SAME PAGE, SO THAT WE CAN ‘SHARE’ THOUGHTS BY REDUCING THE THOUGHTS TO A COMMON SHAREABLE SYSTEM OF SYMBOLIC REPRESENTATIONS.

 

The thing is that there is more than one LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE for doing this and the various LANGUAGE schemes divide into TWO basically different approaches; i.e. DIFFERENTIATION which is BINARY LOGIC (EITHER/OR) based and  INTEGRATION which is QUANTUM LOGIC (BOTH/AND) based, and while WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are using the DIFFERENTIATION based LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE, the indigenous aboriginals, Taoists/Buddhists and Advaita Vedanta adherents are using the INTEGRATION based LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE.  For example;

  (more…)

Go to Top