ABSTRACT: It APPEARS as if something is playing out in our WESTERN CULTURE social collectives, akin to the “MINER’S CANARY” effect.  THAT IS, WESTERN CULTURE’s LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING scheme has DROPPED OUT the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING WAVE-FIELD conjugate and is GOING WITH ONLY THE MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING conjugate.   Consider what happens when a LESS SENSITIVE PERSON observes a MORE SENSITIVE PERSON as in the analogy of the MINER’S CANARY.  What the less sensitive observer will see is what looks like a CRAZY bird that keeps banging into the ceiling which ‘looks crazy’ because the less sensitive observer is NOT SENSING the rising TOXICITY in the environment  (e.g. as if in a room that is filling from the floor upwards towards the ceiling, with toxic invisible odorless gas).  What the less sensitive observer sees is a bird that has GONE CRAZY.  COULD THIS BE HAPPENING IN MODERN WESTERN CULTURE.  There is a clue to support that this is the case, in that a sizeable fraction of the populace is in EMPATHY with seemingly ‘out of the blue’ ASSASSINS or would-be ASSASSINS such as LUIGI MANGIONE and THOMAS MATTHEW CROOKS (a would-be assassin who shot at and grazed TRUMP).

If we ‘had it in our heads’ that we lived in a gas-filled environment which seemed steady and unchanging to us LESS SENSITIVE OCCUPANTS but was rightly understood as INCREASINGLY TOXIC by the MORE SENSITIVE (or those more exposed to the rising toxicity) then the erratic behaviour of the MORE SENSITIVE would be seen as ABERRANT BEHAVIOUR by the LESS SENSITIVE who were NOT AWARE OF THE ACTUAL RISING TOXICITY IN THE ENVIRONMENT.  IF LUIGI MANGIONE, THOMAS MATTHEW CROOKS and the rising number of other ASSASSINS, were in some form or fashion, MORE SENSITIVE to rising TOXICITY in our SOCIETY, their violent actions could be understood as attempts to combat the RISING TOXICITY.  But as in the story of the Miner’s Canary, most of us lack the sensitivity to PERCEIVE THE RISING TOXICITY in which case we interpret the VIOLENT RESPONSES OF THOSE THAT DO, to THEIR BEING INSANE.

CLUES that this may be the case in TODAY’S WESTERN CULTURE SOCIAL COLLECTIVES are that there are many people who are SENSING the RISING TOXICITY that COME OUT OF THE WOODWORK and SHOW THEMSELVES, in support of a person that throws themself OVERTLY in a BODY and SOUL committing manner, into a COUNTERATTACK against the RISING TOXICITY; e.g. Luigi Mangione.

LET’S NOT FORGET that in the indigenous aboriginal culture, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita, there is the understanding that ‘everything is related’ in which case THERE ARE NO ‘BEINGS’ to classify as EITHER good OR bad, as is also the understanding in the QUANTUM LOGIC of Modern physics, in which case there is no equivalent to the PURIFICATIONISM of WESTERN CULTURE where, instead of understanding STRIFE as IMBALANCE for which the remedy is the RESTORING OF BALANCE, the REMEDY for STRIFE is the purificationist ELIMINATING of the BAD ‘BEINGS’.  This is leading to problems generally in the WESTERN CULTURE and particularly in the U.S. where there have been a large number of “MASS SHOOTINGS”.   In Cultures where the understanding is that ‘everyone is related” (mitakuye oyasin), the VIOLENCE is understood as relational dissonance impacting STRANDS IN THE WEB wherein EVERYONE IS INVOLVED in which case RESTORATIVE JUSTICE is aimed are resolving relational dissonance and restoring relational resonance among STRANDS in the WEB. In the mental model of STRANDS IN A WEB, when VIOLENCE ERUPTS, as in a relational WEB, the STRANDS that become casualities are not seen as succumbing within a BINARY LOGIC PERPETRATOR VICTIM context; i.e. indigenous aboriginal justice orients to the restoring of balance and harmony among the STRANDS in the WEB rather that to the ELIMINATING OF ‘GUILTY BEINGS’ as in WESTERN CULTURE justice which is HUMAN “BEING” based where the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR informs us in DOUBLE ERROR (NAMING AND GRAMMAR) terms of the LOCAL AUTHORING or VIOLENCE and KILLING.  

SO, because indigenous aboriginals (and Modern physics) see people in the manner of STRANDS IN THE WEB  (or CONDENSATIONS IN THE PLENUM) wherein EVERYTHING is related, outbreaks of VIOLENCE are understood as being of NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT (relational) instead of LOCAL and EXPLICIT origin, hence JUSTICE is RESTORATIVE as facilitated by the HEALING CIRCLE where the community comes togather to recultivate harmony and balance among the STRANDS-IN-THE-WEB.  This is consistent with the understanding of mitakuye oyasin (everything is related as with strands in a web) and it is consistent with Modern physics wherein material forms are condensations of the all-including energy-charged PLENUM aka wave-field.   THERE ARE NO SUCH THINGS as INDEPENDENT BEINGS, and thus no IDENTIFICATION of GOOD INDEPENDENT BEINGS and BAD INDEPENDENT BEINGS; i.e. where VIOLENCE/STRIFE erupts in the indigenous aboriginal STRANDS IN THE WEB based community, while incurably problematic STRANDS may be removed, that is the exception.  There is nothing comparable to the WESTERN CULTURE PURIFICATIONIST PUNISHING AND PURGING OF THE BAD BEINGS and REWARDING AND RETAINING of the GOOD BEINGS.  

While WESTERN CULTURE PIONEERS ADMIRED THE INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL COMMUNITY APPROACH, the WESTERN CULTURE BELIEF IN ‘INDEPENDENT BEINGS’ was in BASIC CONTRADICTION to the INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL ‘INTERRELATED and INTERDEPENDENT STRANDS-IN-THE-WEB BELIEF.

 

“To Engels, Morgan’s description of the Iroquois [In Lewis Henry Morgan’s Ancient Society and The League of the Haudenosaunee or Iroquois] was important because “it gives us the opportunity of studying the organization of a society which, as yet, knows no state.”  Jefferson had also been interested in the Iroquois’ ability to maintain social concensus without a large state apparatus, as had Franklin.  Engels described the Iroquoian state in much the same way that American revolutionaries had a century earlier: “Everything runs smoothly without soldiers, gendarmes, or police, without nobles, kings, governors, prefects or judges; without prisons, without trials.  All quarrels and disputes are settled by the whole body of those concerned. . . . The household is run communistically by a number of families; the land is tribal property, only the small gerdens being temporarily assigned to the households — still, not a bit of our extensive and complicated machinery of administration is required. . . . There are no poor and needy.  The communistic household and the gens know their responsibility  towards the aged, the sick and the disabled in war.  All are free and equal — including the women.” — Bruce E. Johansen, Forgotten Founders.

 

THE SENSITIVITY TO INVISIBLE TOXICITY in the ENVIRONMENT INVOKES LESS SIMPLE QUANTUM LOGIC, the BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING MEDIUM where there can be substance that is BOTH itself AND the energy-charged PLENUM it is included in.  This requires language that goes BEYOND BINARY LOGIC.  BINARY LOGIC can handle the difference between EITHER material bodies OR empty space, but TOXINS bring into play the LOGIC of the INCLUDING THIRD aka QUANTUM LOGIC.  With BINARY LOGIC, we ask only whether the behaviour of the CANARY is NORMAL or ABNORMAL and there is no ‘complicating inquiry’ (not in our BINARY LOGIC user culture) that opens the door to the possibility that there is a CONTAINING AMBIANCE (such as the WAVE-FIELD) i.e. an INFLUENTIAL HABITAT instead of the EMPTY SPACE, that could change the behaviour of the INHABITANT so that in our inquiry into the behaviour of the INHABITANT, we could not limit our inquiry to THE INHABITANT by itself but would have to expand it to include the INFLUENCE OF THE HABITAT on the INHABITANT and the COMBINATION of the TWO.  This requires an investigative logic that goes beyond BINARY EITHER/OR LOGIC OF THE EXCLUDED MEDIUM to QUANTUM BOTH/AND LOGIC OF THE INCLUDING MEDIUM which opens our consideration to the possibility of AMBIENT INFLUENCES on CONTENT behaviour.

WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE TO GO BEYOND ANALYZING THE INDIVIDUAL FOR AN EXPLANATION OF THEIR BEHAVIOUR in the case of the combination of A SENSITIVE INDIVIDUAL and a TOXIC ENVIRONMENT SO IT WOULD BE FOLLY TO, IN GENERAL, LIMIT OUR INVESTIGATION OF THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE CRAZY ACTING INDIVIDUAL, TO THE INDIVIDUAL, because we would then be OVERLOOKING the POSSIBILITY that THE ENVIRONMENT (SOCIAL AMBIANCE or CHEMICAL AMBIANCE) is SOURCING or HELPING TO SOURCE THE INHABITANT BEHAVIOUR.

AUTHOR’S REAL-TIME INTERJECTION: As I write this, the reader may see that I am having trouble with LANGUAGE as to how to handle the AMBIGUITY associated with that part of the dynamic that belongs to the INHABITANT and that part of the dynamic that belongs to the HABITAT in which case I would suggest that there is NEED for a language that HAS NO DEPENDENCY ON ‘BEING’ in which case we would be better off, as Bohm has said, with a FLOW-BASED LANGUAGE (e.g. Bohm’s Rheomode or an indigneous aboriginal flow-based langage) whereby we dould AVOID the use of BEING and the complications it brings by way of constraining our LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING to BINARY LOGIC based SPLITTING APART “INHABITANT” and “HABITAT”. 

Just as it makes sense to speak in the fluid terms of “THE TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE”, it makes sense, as well, to speak in the fluid terms of “the INHABITINGS IN THE TRANSFORMING HABITAT” where the operative relationship is the BOTH/AND LOGIC OF THE INCLUDING MEDIUM, where the INHABITANT or MATERIAL FORM is understood as a CONDENSATION of the HABITAT or ENERGY-CHARGED PLENUM aka WAVE-FIELD).   This is NOT ONLY AN ADMISSION THAT THE LANGUAGE I/WE ARE USING, which is a BEING-based and thus BINARY LOGIC based LANGUAGE, is TOO SIMPLE and UNABLE TO DEAL WITH the QUANTUM LOGIC REALITIES that characterize our REAL LIFE EXPERIENCE.  OK, it was ME that for reasons of LINGUISTIC expedience, employed the term TOXIC ENVIRONMENT (TOXIC HABITAT) to try to explain changed behaviour in the INHABITANT, however, this difficulty in LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING derives from the imposing of the ABSTRACT CONCEPT OF “BEING” as applied not only to INHABITANT but also to HABITAT, unlike indigenous aboriginal languages where one can speak in terms of HUMANINGS in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM aka WAVE-FIELD where the HUMANINGS are “BOTH” themselves “AND” the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM they share inclusion in.  OK, I will close this note without being able to resolve this issue, which is the NEED for a FLOW-BASED LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING SCHEME which avoids THE ABSTRACTION OF “BEING”; e.g. “THERE IS TOWNING AND HUMANING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE” (wherein everything is in flux).   Ok, that’s what the writer NEEDS but its WHAT THE SOCIAL COLLECTIVE CHOOSES FOR THE COMMON LANGUAGE that establishes the COMMON GROUND (and how logically ‘complete’ that COMMON GROUND is going to be; i.e. BEING based COMMON GROUND is LIMITING while FLOW-BASED COMMON GROUND makes widespread communication possible, and what has been CHOSEN currently, and which REMAINS THE COMMON LANGUAGE is language that gives a FOUNDATIONAL ROLE TO ‘BEING’ which GROUNDS THE LANGUAGE in SIMPLE BINARY LOGIC, which is what is making the writing of this note DIFFICULT.

SIGNS of a TOXIC ENVIRONMENT would be where many SENSITIVE people are SECOND GUESSING what the SYSTEM is BLAMING ON THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE MALE ASSERTING INDIVIDUAL that they know from their own SENSE-EXPERIENCE, is being INDUCED by a TOXIC ENVIRONMENT. IN QUANTUM LOGIC, a MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING cannot be separated from its FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING conjugate (they are two sides of the same concept).  Vygotsky in his study of THOUGHT and LANGUAGE affirms that the SCIENTIFIC (local and explicit) and SPONTANEOUS (nonlocal and implicit) are two sides of one CONCEPT; “Though fundamentally different in nature, the development of scientific and spontaneous concepts represent two sides of the same concept formation.”   

ALL OF THE EVIDENCE SUPPORTS the NON-EXISTENCE of LOCAL BEING-based AUTHORING (it is abstraction as in the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR), in which case, blaming VIOLENCE on a “LOCAL AUTHOR”, whether the VIOLENCE of the CEO or the VIOLENCE of his KILLER is misplaced.

* * *

Understanding “HOW” the Popular Support for Killer Luigi Mangione can be explained by common sensitive awareness to rising TOXICITY in the social NORM.

“What we call ‘normal’ (in WESTERN CULTURE), is a product of repression, denial, splitting, projection, introjection and other forms of destructive action on experience” — R.D. Laing

 * * * * * * * * 

 

(more…)