An inclusional worldview
Archive for November, 2025
The PRE-PUBLICATION DRAFT
0November 23, 2025
by ted lumley
in APN
The data are coming together to say this to me, … WESTERN CULTURE is undergoing a kind of self-implosion which is captured by some (as in attached article by Gilchrist) as dropping out the RIGHT BRAIN and GOING SOLELY WITH THE LEFT BRAIN (in his two-brains model). Although I deal in wave-fields rather than split brain theory, he is clearly talking about a real shift in the general ‘understanding approach’ of WESTERN CULTURE which is tied to our differing LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING APPROACHES. That is, there are differences in LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING APPROACH between indigenous aboriginals who employ “FLOW-BASED” linguistic conceptualizing such as “THERE IS TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE” wherein EVERYTHING IS IN FLUX INCLUDING OURSELVES, … to “BEING-BASED” linguistic conceptualizing such as “THE TOWN IS GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING goods”, and my friend HENRY is GROWING DEVELOPING and PRODUCING goods”.
I am ready to publish my understanding of what is going on here, which reviews the findings of Bohm, Vygotsky and others, and so I am open to receiving suggestions from anyone in regard to potential facilitators (people who edit and ‘coach’ the writer as to how to EFFECTIVELY present such materials). Or if anyone reading this may be interested in being a kind of EDITOR/ADVISOR, that could help me get these understandings of things into an appealing and digestible presentation form. (my contact address is emiliano@goodshare.org)
Basically, my presentation will take the reader (or listener or viewer) through an understanding of how our presentations to ourselves of our wave-field world, we have split into two conjugate parts (male asserting/actualizing and female accommodating/enabling AND THEN, DROPPED OUT THE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING part (component) and SUBSTITUTED IN ITS PLACE, ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE, so that our LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING of REALITY has DRIFTED INTO a ONE-SIDED MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING based LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING scheme (e.g. we have shifted from ‘to everything there is a season and a time to every purpose’, to simply one-sided male asserting/actualizing constructs that DROP OUT the FEMALE ENVELOPE (the season which is somehow appropriate for certain types of action, as also implied in Shakespeare’s “there is a tide in the affairs of men…”. In terms of the conjugate relational combination of female accommodating/enabling (the appropriate season) and male asserting/actualizing action, what commonly happens in our WESTERN CULTURE linguistic conceptualizing is that while our actions continue to be inductively shaped by unfolding events, our language has shifted towards purely one-sided captures of WHAT WE DO (the male asserting/actualizing conjugate aspect) DROPPING OUT the predominating, ever-present female accommodating/enabling situation. YES, WE CAN MAKE OUR OWN ONE-SIDED PLANS OF MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING, AND CARRY THEM OUT without sensitivity to the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING conditions. For example, the CHARGE OF THE LIGHT BRIGADE.
There is also the CONTRASTING views of ROBINSON CRUSOE who tried to reshape the SOUTH SEAS DESERTED ISLAND environment he was marooned on, into something more like what he had become accustomed to in European home situation, … and SUZANNE DE LA PACIFIQUE who was also marooned on a SOUTH SEAS DESERTED ISLAND and who, instead of imposing her FRENCH customs on her environment, opened herself up to a personal transformation putting her in HARMONY with the NEW ENVIRONMENT she found herself in. In other words, we are always in this confluence of what WESTERN CULTURE might call the NATURE-NURTURE influences based on the model of the HUMAN BEING which is notionally a SEPARATE and INDEPENDENT BEING with internal action asserting/actualizing powers as well as capabilities to respond and adapt to environmental influences. Such a model is BINARY EITHER/OR LOGIC OF THE EXCLUDED MEDIUM based (there are either MATERIAL ENTITIES OR EMPTY SPACE and thus very different from the indigenous aboriginal and Modern physics understandings which are NONBINARY BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING MEDIUM based where the individual is an INTERCONNECTED and INTERDEPENDENT flow-feature in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.
Vygotsky raises an important point (essential to in-depth understanding) here, in that WE CAN’T LEGITIMATELY SPLIT what is essentially the WAVE-FIELD into a PEAK (male asserting/actualizing) and a trough (female accommodating/enabling) and then KEEP THE MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING while TOSSING OUT THE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING, … NOT BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE UNFAIR TO THE FEMALE COMPONENT but BECAUSE THESE TWO DO NOT SPLIT APART, THEY ARE FLIP SIDES OF A SINGLE COINAGE (which is why we have to have complex (real + imaginary) mathematics in dealing with our WAVE-FIELD reality. Vygotsky criticized Piaget for Piaget’s SPLITTING APART of SCIENTIFIC (local and explicit) and SPONTANEOUS (nonlocal and implicit) linguistic conceptualization, pointing out that these dual aspects of language are CONJUGATE and like the peak and trough of a wave, DO NOT SPLIT APART INTO TWO SEPARATE THINGS so that one could KEEP THE MALE ASSERTING PEAK and DROP OUT the encumbering FEMALE TROUGH as in our commonly used WESTERN CULTURE linguistic conceptualizing scheme..
This screw up appears to come from EGO supports the notion of LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and development which is NOT REAL but a fabrication based on the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR; e.g. ‘the TOWN is GROWING’ which makes no mention of the conjugate SHRINKING of WILDERNESS. ACHTUNG! NOTA BENE! We are making the same mistake that Piaget made that Vygotsky pointed out, THE GROWING OF THE TOWN and the SHRINKING of the WILDERNESS … ARE NOT TWO SEPARATE AND INDEPENDENT ACTIONS, they are CONJUGATE aspects of the ONE DYNAMIC of TRANSFORMATION of the overall LANDSCAPE. Vygotsky CATCHES PIAGET in making the MISTAKE of BUILDING INTO OUR WESTERN CULTURE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM the practice of teaching our children (too) SIMPLE BINARY LOGIC based linguistic conceptualizing. This is the source of many problems in WESTERN CULTURE social dynamics and it is the reason why WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have NOT accepted, as makes sense and as the indigenous aboriginals and Modern physics have, the NONBINARY BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING MEDIUM as the foundation for linguistic conceptualizing. Vygotsky has pointed out this MAJOR ERROR which persists in the WESTERN CULTURE family of linguistic conceptualizing schemes.
“Though fundamentally different in nature, the development of scientific [local and explicit] and spontaneous [nonlocal and implicit] concepts represents two sides of the same concept formation” [implying a WAVE-BASED STRUCTURE].
“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.” –Vygotsky
THIS is pointing to a FOUNDATIONALLY IMPORTANT ERROR in our WESTERN CULTURE linguistic conceptualizing scheme which Vygotsky is flagging; i.e. while our observations support a WAVE-FIELD based structure of the world we are living in and ‘talking about’, wherein the LOCAL and EXPLICIT MATERIAL FORMS AND THEIR ACTIONS ARE ONLY APPEARANCE (e.g. the TOWN is GROWING) while the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT ENERAGY-CHARED PLENUM is the REALITY (i.e. the LOCAL and EXPLICIT CONDENSATIONS of the PLENUM (wave-field) are only APPEARANCE (Schaumkommen, in Schroedinger’s language).
GETTING CLOSE TO GOING TO PRESS WITH THIS INVESTIGATION
0November 12, 2025
by ted lumley
in APN
My investigative scheme is to bring everything into connective confluence, and so, for example, it does not make sense to come up with fragmented understandings when the original meaning involves many INTERCONNECTIONS and INTERDEPENDENCIES. Systems scientists (like Martine Dodds-Taljaard and the pioneers of systems science such as Kenneth Boulding) capture this in the expression ‘The name of the devil is suboptimization’. This WARNING is just common sense because the world of our SENSE-EXPERIENCE is such a world (a wave-field) wherein everything is INTERCONNECTED and INTERDEPENDENT, where there are rivers that run through multiple countries and what one country does to that river; e.g. fish it out, or pollute it etc. in optimizing their needs as if they REALLY WERE “INDEPENDENT” as their “DECLARATIONS OF INDEPENDENCE” purpurted them to be. SUBOPTIMIZATION of the “DECLARED” INDEPENDENT NATIONS impacts what happens in all the other countries the river passes through. That action by that one country which pays no attention to how it impacts other countries is called SUBOPTIMIZATION, but it is more like GLOBAL SCREW-UP.
[Author’s comment: This essay opens the door to comparisons between understandings that differ based on WHICH TYPE of LOGIC is being used in their capture and presentation; i.e. the LESS SIMPLE NONBINARY BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING MEDIUM and/or the SIMPLE BINARY EITHER/OR LOGIC of the EXCLUDED MEDIUM. For example, we may describe the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE in which there is TOWNING as a dynamic, included feature wherein the TOWNING is INCLUDED within the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE as requires the BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING MEDIUM, and ALTERNATIVELY, we may SEPARATELY FOCUS on ‘THE TOWN’ and describe ‘the TOWN’ as a LOCAL, EXPLICIT THING-IN-ITSELF that is undergoing “ITS OWN GROWTH and DEVELOPMENT” as if within an EMPTY REFERENCE FRAME. A note on the differing, CULTURE-BASED logic preference can be found in Appendix II]
Ok, that is just one example of PROBLEMS arising from “TAKING SERIOUSLY” our DECLARATIONS OF INDEPENDENCE and corresponding MAKE-BELIEVE (behaving as if we were independent and thus pursuing SUBOPTIMIZATION while in reality we are woven into a matrix of INTERCONNECTIONS AND INTERDEPENDENCIES), This is why our WESTERN CULTURE SOCIETY is commonly FRAGMENTED because even within a country where WE SAY things are divided up into provinces or states, there are problems with, for example, the more populous provinces or states consuming or messing up more of the atmospheric or river system based resources and in the process screwing up access to resources essential to the innately INTERCONNECTED and INTERDEPENDENT brother and sister provinces and states. By using language that (falsely) treats the provinces or states as INDEPENDENT, we contradict the physical reality of our own presuppositions;
As regards the academies, they are established in order to regulate the studies of the pupils and are concerned not to have the program of teaching change very often: in such places, because it is a question of the progress of the students, it frequently happens that the things which have to be chosen are not those which are most true but those which are most easy. And by that division in things which makes different people form different judgements, it so happens that certain people are in error contrary to their own opinion.” – Johannes Kepler, ‘Harmonies of the World’
In plain and simple terms, if we are sometimes speaking of the TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE and implying the BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING MEDIUM where the TOWNING is a dynamic FEATURE WITHIN the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE, … and AT OTHER TIMES, speak of the TOWN AS IF IT WERE A THING that is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING goods, while it makes our linguistic conceptualizing SIMPLER, puts that SIMPLER CONCEPTUALIZATION … “AT ODDS WITH”… our sense-experience affirmed awareness wherein THERE IS TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE.
We can see that this is a general issue because of our WESTERN CULTURE habit of TALKING ABOUT THINGS and WORKING ON THINGS as if they are SEPARATE THINGS even though we live in a world that is INTERCONNECTED and INTERDEPENDENT (an ‘energy-charged PLENUM filled with CONDENSATIONS.)
Inquiry into WHAT IS GOING ON HERE causes us to reflect on the type of LOGIC we are using, and while indigenous aboriginals and modern physics use NONBINARY BOTH/AND LOGIC OF THE INCLUDING MEDIUM, Western Culture folks commonly use BINARY EITHER/OR LOGIC OF THE EXCLUDED MEDIUM (where we assume that space is empty). So, consider how BINARY LOGIC ‘works’ (has us thinking) in the case of INDEPENDENT NATIONS. We actually COMPETE on an INTER-NATIONAL basis in such things as concern material GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION. Once we start TALKING in BINARY LOGIC terms of GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION there is a DISCONNECT in that what is REALLY GOING ON is TRANSFORMATION of the OVERALL LANDSCAPE.
For example, supposing that all the nations in the world are COMPETING in their production of wood products. Canadian forest product industries are in competition with American and Brazilian and Russian etc. forest product producers and all of these competitors are investing in their own industrial GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION, … but while nobody is talking OUT LOUD about it, what is also occurring is SHRIINKING of the FORESTS, AGING and COLLAPSING of the former DEVELOPMENT, and outright CONSUMPTION of what is being PRODUCED, … and all of these FEMAEL ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING conjugate dynamics add together with all of the MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION so that “WHAT IS REALLY GOING ON IS TRANSFORMING OF THE OVERALL LANDSCAPE”.
Indigenous aboriginals use language that is “FLOW-BASED” rather than “BEING-BASED” so that there is acknowledgement that The GROWING OF THE TOWN IS PART OF A TRANSFORMATIVE DYNAMIC that includes the SHRINKING of WILDERNESS , so that one can never rightly speak GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION a if these were REAL THINGS because THEY ARE NOT REAL THINGS. What is REAL is the TRANSFORMING of the LANDSCAPE which includes BOTH the MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION TOGETHER WITH (IN ONE CONJUGATE PACKAGE WITH) SHRINKING of WILDERNESS, AGING and COLLAPSE of prior DEVELOPMENT and CONSUMPTION of PRODUCTION. The REALITY of what’s going on here is TRANSFORMATION of the LANDSCAPE, an understanding that is built into indigenous aboriginal FLOW-BASED LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING while our WESTERN CULTURE LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING is in terms of MATERIAL-BEING based GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION.
OK, there are STILL more mistakes as to how we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS express things with our simplistic one-sided MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING ONLY way of speaking about CHANGE that we are being forced to deal with, than these I have mentioned, and NOTICE that the core problem is that our WESTERN CULTURE LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING APPROACH is to USE THE MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING aspect ONLY
This MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZATION is NOT REAL because it is constrained to the LOCAL and EXPLICIT and leaves out mention of the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT.
In other words, we capture all of the male asserting/actualizing stuff which is LOCAL and EXPLICIT such as the TOWN is GROWING, but we DROP OUT MENTION of the female accommodating/enabling stuff which is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT which is the more basic part of TRANSFORMATION. So here we see the problem, in our WESTERN CULTURE LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING SCHEME, of FRAGMENTATION pointed out by Bohm, and we can see how we add to that problem when we consider Goedel’s Theorem of the INCOMPLETENESS OF ALL FINITE LOGICAL PROPOSITIONS (i.e. this includes these one-sided incomplete MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING PROPOSITIONS such as ‘THE TOWN IS GROWING’). Goedel’s Theorem is reminding us that this PROPOSTION, “THE TOWN IS GROWING” is INCOMPLETE. NOTA BENE! … WATCH OUT BECAUSE WE ARE CONFUSING OURSELVES BY FRAGMENTING OUR LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING OF REALITY with all of these INCOMPLETE LOGICAL PROPOSITIONS such as “THE TOWN IS GROWING” without mentioning the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING conjugate “THE WILDERNESS IS SHRINKING”.
WHY WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS ARE STAYING ON THE “LEMMING LEAP” PATH
0November 4, 2025
by ted lumley
in APN
AUTHOR’S PREFACE: The Title refers to the fact that as we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS continue to DROP OUT the female accommodating/enabling conjugate from our linguistic conceptualizing; i.e. as we continue to use BEING based linguistic conceptualizations such as ‘the TOWN is GROWING’ (the male asserting/actualizing part) while SAYING NOTHING about the conjugate SHRINKING of WILDERNESS (the female accommodating/enabling part) and thus SAYING NOTHING about the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE, WE ARE, IN EFFECT using language to construct a SIMPLIFIED VOYEUR VIEWED PSEUDO-REALITY (the TOWN is GROWING) which is AT ODDS with our INCLUDED SENSE-EXPERIENCE AFFIRMED REALITY (there is TOWNING in this all-includingTRANSFORMING WORLD; i.e. the TOWNING is a FEATURE WITHIN THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM and we HUMANINGS are also FEATURES within the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.
––– NONBINARY (BOTH/AND LOGIC OF THE INCLUDING MEDIUM) INCLUSION OF MAN-IN-EARTH (CONDENSATION OF WAVE-FIELD IN WAVE-FIELD):
This we know, the earth does not belong to man, man belongs to the earth. This we know. All things are connected like the blood which unites one family. All things are connected. Whatever befalls the earth, befalls the sons of the earth. Man did not weave the web of life, he is merely a strand in it. Whatever he does to the web, he does to himself.”— “Chief Seattle”
This is supported by Jantsch LEVEL 1 (TRANSFORMATION) MODE of AWARENESS where we see ourselves as included in an ALL-INCLUDING TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM. However, we continue to struggle with lesser, BINARY LOGIC based forms of AWARENESS
––– BINARY (EITHER/OR LOGIC of the EXCLUDED MEDIUM) SPLIT OF MAN AND EARTH (“MATERIAL BEING” IN EMPTY SPACE):
Genesis 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
This is supported by the LEVEL 3 CONSERVATIVE and LEVEL 2 LIBERAL modes of AWARENESS wherein we conceive of ourselves (or believe ourselves to BE) INDEPENDENT BEINGS with our own DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR-given powers of LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and developments as if we were NON-INCLUDED INDEPENDENT BEINGS acting and interacting in an ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE.
In the NONBINARY BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING MEDIUM based linguistic conceptualizing, there is TOWNING and HUMANING in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM. EVERYTHING is included in the TRANSFORMING PLENUM, including OURSELVES.
In the BINARY EITHER/OR LOGIC of the EXCLUDED MEDIUM based linguistic conceptualizing wherein the TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING goods, we visualize this as if the GROWING TOWN is situated within an ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE. We do not ‘see’ in this visualization, the SHRINKING of WILDERNESS. The TOWN seems to have a LIFE OF ITS OWN, a MALE ASSSERTING/ACTUALIZING thing-in-itself where “THE TOWN” is no longer a TOWNING that is an inextricably included RELATIONAL FEATURE WITHIN THE ALL-INCLUDING TRANSFORMING PLENUM.
In the BINARY EITHER/OR LOGIC of the EXCLUDED MEDIUM based linguistic conceptualizing, WE CONCIEVE OF OURSELVES AS SEPARATE and INDEPENDENT MATERIAL BEINGS with “OUR OWN” GRAMMAR GIVEN POWERS OF AUTHORING ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENTS; i.e. as INDEPENDENT HUMANOIDS. The INDEPENDENT BEING conceptualizing SIDESTEPS our SENSE-EXPERIENCE GROUNDED REALITY wherein the TOWNING or HUMANING is a relational FEATURE WITHIN the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM, as captured in indigenous aboriginal culture with the STRAND in the WEB conceptualization and in Modern physics with the CONDENSATION of the ALL-INCLUDING ENERGY-CHARGED PLENUM.
* * *
IF WE CHOOSE BEING-BASED LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING THEN WE CANNOT BE INCLUDED IN OUR OWN LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZINGS since MATERIAL BEING based THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES CAN ONLY EXIST (maintain their independence) WITHIN AN ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE.
IF WE CHOOSE FLOW-BASED LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING THEN WE OURSELVES, as FLOW-FEATURES, ARE INCLUDED IN THE MANNER of A STRAND IN THE WEB OR a WHORLING in a FLOWING, IN OUR OWN LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING where we are DISTINGUISHABLE NOT BY OUR INDEPENDENCE (WE ARE “NOT” INDEPENDENT OTHER THAN BY OUR APPEARANCE). That is, the WHORLING has an APPEARANCE that is “DISTINGUISHABLE” from the FLOWING it is included in, but IT IS NOT INDEPENDENT of the FLOWING. In fact the WHORLINGS IN FLOWING ARE ALL INTERCONNECTED and INTERDEPENDENT since they are FLOW-FEATURES and there is ONLY ONE FLOW, hence the “seeming” “INDEPENDENCE” of a FORM IN THE FLOW (e.g. a WHORLING IN THE FLOWING) is only “APPEARANCE”.
CONFUSION CAN ARISE in the case where a LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING scheme is used that gives a FOUNDATIONAL ROLE to BEING where the WHORLING-IN-THE-FLOWING is LINGUISTICALLY CONCEPTUALIZED as a NOTIONAL “WHORL” THING-IN-ITSELF with (“ITS OWN”) GRAMMAR GIVEN POWERS of LOCAL AUTHORING of LOCAL AUTHORING of ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENT. Another way to say this; THERE IS NO PLACE FOR “BINARY EITHER/OR LOGIC” in linguistic conceptualizing of sense-experience since EVERYTHING IS INCLUDED WITHIN THE NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT (relational) FLOWING CONTINUUM and the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT (relational) FLOWING is ONE THING while the WHORLINGS aka CONDENSATIONS, are only LOCAL and EXPLICIT IN APPEARANCE which a COMPELLING REASON for NOT DESIGNING A LANGUAGE that builds in a FOUNDATIONAL ROLE for BEING. As Schroedinger reminds us, BEING is only APPEARANCE (Schaumkommen).
Our indigenous aboriginal brothers and sisters are saying, in their flow-based language, the equivalent of … “In the transforming landscape wherein there is increasingly more TOWNING that is encroaching on, and shrinking the WILDERNESS so that this new MIX has a growing imbalance in favour of the European-man’s interests which leads to more of the European-man’s constructions at the expense of the loss of Wilderness and loss of four-leggeds and winged and crawling ones”.
This is a TRANSFORMATION that is NOT acknowledged in languages that speak in terms of GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION of goods which are UNREAL LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING SCHEMES common to WESTERN CULTURE communications that fail to acknowledge, and which simply DROP IT OUT all mention of the conjugate (to growth, development and production) SHRINKING of Wilderness, the AGING of developments and the CONSUMPTION of that which is PRODUCED, … all of these FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONJUGATES contributing … TOGETHER WITH (i.e. IN CONJUGATE RELATION WITH) THE MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING “GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCTION”, … TO an OVERALL TRANSFORMING, thus exposing the INCOMPLETENESS of the LANGUAGE we are using, the INCOMPLETENESS that DISTORTS all of our positive assertions as to what is going on, as Goedel’s Theorem of the INCOMPLETENESS of all finite logical propositions points out must be the case.
The reference to LEMMINGS in the title of this essay is to point out how we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are moving forward EN MASSE, in pursuit of CONSTRUCTING SOME EXPANSIVE AND WONDERFUL (anthropocentric) LIVING QUARTERS, but there is just ONE WORLD and we are CANNIBALIZING THE WORLD THAT WE ARE AT THE SAME TIME CONSTRUCTING beause we are INCLUDED in that world that we are at the same time EXPLOITING, not realizing that; THE WORLD WE LIVE IN IS NOT SOMETHING SEPARATE FROM OURSELVES.
“The world is given to me only once, not one existing and one perceived. Subject and object are only one. The barrier between them cannot be said to have broken down as a result of recent experience in the physical sciences, for this barrier does not exist.” This is equvalent to what Chief Seattle is saying; i.e. “Man did not weave the web of life, he is merely a strand in it.”
This PREFACE is a REMINDER that WE ARE INCLUDED IN THE WORLD of our SENSE EXPERIENCE (we are included in the BOTH/AND LOGIC OF THE INCLUDING MEDIUM sense, as with STRANDS in a WEB); THE WORLD is NOT SOMETHING SEPARATE THAT IS OURS to EXPLOIT/CONSUME.
END OF AUTHOR’S PREFACE:
* * * * * * * * *
We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have heard PLENTY OF WARNINGS about being on the PATH TO DEEPENING DYSFUNCTION (e.g. Jules Henry’s ‘CULTURE AGAINST MAN’ strongly supported by renowned Psychiatrist Ronald Laing), but MOST OF US do NOT have the CONFIDENCE to depart from the basic traditions of our FAMILY and our CULTURE, … UNLESS, … WE COULD ALL MAKE THE MOVE TOGETHER, which is NOT going to happen. For example;
“T.S. Eliot studied Eastern religions in detail at Harvard, learning some Sanskrit and some Pali, and soon concluded that “their subtleties make most of the great European philosophers look like schoolboys.” For a young man disillusioned with his banal surroundings and desperate to break away from his family, there was something wonderfully aloof, impersonal and invulnerable about the Buddhist notion of the spirit, free of all attachments and desires. And by the time he was composing The Wasteland, which ends, of course, with the chant “Shantih shantih shantih,” he was genuinely considering a conversion to Buddhism. But the truth was, he wrote, “my only hope of really penetrating to the heart of that mystery would lie in forgetting how to think and feel as an American or European: which for practical as well as sentimental reasons, I did not wish to do.”
Schrodinger seems to have had the same problem. …” — Ned Beauman, ‘Great Mahavits’ January 4, 2010
WE ARE MOSTLY ALL PROUD PEOPLE THUMBING OUR NOSE AT APOCRYPHAL PREDICTIONS ABOUT THE PATH OUR WHOLE SOCIO-CULTURAL GROUP IS SAID TO BE PUSHING FORWARD ON.
HOW DID WE “BECOME LEMMINGS COMMITTED TO THIS PILGRIMAGE TO HELL?” Ronald Laing together with Jules Henry have given us the answer;
It is Henry’s contention that in practice education has never been an instrument to free the mind and the spirit of man, but to bind them. We think we want creative children, but what do we want them to create? — ‘If all through school the young were provoked to question the Ten Commandments, the sanctity of revealed religion, the foundations of patriotism, the profit motive, the two party system, monogamy, the laws of incest, and so on … — there would be such creativity that society would not know where to turn. … Children do not give up their innate imagination, curiousity, dreaminess easily. You have to love them to get them to do that. Love is the path through permissiveness to discipline; and through discipline, only too often, to betrayal of self.” R. D. Laing
TO IGNORE OR NOT TO IGNORE???
Most Recent Comments