An inclusional worldview
Archive for January, 2026
LANGUAGE AND LOGIC AS THE SOURCE OF SOCIAL CONFLICT
0January 25, 2026
by ted lumley
in APN
My philosophical inquiries into the FRAGMENTATION of our WESTERN CULTURE based society REAFFIRM Bohm’s and Shroedinger’s findings that while we live in a world whose physical dynamic is beyond capture in a simple BINARY LOGIC basis, BINARY LOGIC has nevertheless been given a foundational role in our LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING by way of the SPLITTING APART of MATTER and SPACE. In addition to Bohm and Schroedinger who have cited the need for non-binary logic based (flow-based) languages (e.g. Bohm’s Rheomode and Schroedinger’s Advaita Vedanta based Atmavit-Mahavit combination), there have been ‘campaigns’ by Buddhist scholars such as Alan Watts that encourage WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS to BREAK FREE of DEPENDENCY on TOO-SIMPLE BINARY LOGIC based linguistic conceptualizing. By embracing INADEQUATE BINARY LOGIC as the “GOLD STANDARD” for WESTERN CULTURE linguistic conceptualizing, we BLOCK OUT ACCESS to the complexity needed for capturing the BASIC NONBINARY LOGIC OF THE INCLUDING MEDIUM that “DOES POSSESS” the capability of characterizing the foundational structure of the physical world we are living in.
SIMPLE BINARY LOGIC based linguistic conceptualization, while it is adequate in supporting linear concepts such as GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION of BEING-based entities as if within an EMPTY SPACE, LACKS THE CAPABILITY TO SUPPORT FLOW-BASED PHENOMENA, the complexity of which DEMANDS NONBINARY LOGIC in support of TRANSFORMATION of the OVERALL energy-charged PLENUM wherein there is no longer dependency on logcal material being that enjoys persisting local existence and operates ‘in its own mechanistic right’. For WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS addicted to the BINARY LOGIC GOLD STANDARD, the switch to NONBINARY BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING MEDIUM where ‘strands and web are one’ is non-trivial. At some level in the WESTERN CULTURE PSYCHE, there remains the acknowledgement of the FOUNDATIONAL ROLE of the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT with its lava-like capacity for REDUCTION into LOCAL and EXPLICIT structure, yet without ever losing its innate NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT TRANSFORMATIVE CAPABILITY.
THE DROP-OUT of essential understanding of the transformative nature of the physical world in which we share inclusion comes from the attempt, such as by Copernicus, and earlier (500 BCE) by Aristotle who introduced a foundational simplification into our linguistic conceptualizing of reality by SPLITTING APART into successive SEQUENTIAL components, the highs and lows of our wave-field world, a departure from Heraclitus’ understanding of the SIMULTANEOUS nature of highs and lows which captures the wave-field based physics of our sense-experience reality. (Note that the ‘peak’ and ‘trough’ of the wave are SIMULTANEOUS and only APPEAR SEQUENTIAL, an “APPEARANCE” (schaumkommen) that has ‘tricked’ influential WESTERN CULTURE researchers such as Piaget who, as pointed out by Vygotsky, has infused the error into his teaching/learning approach, of splitting into two separate parts the conjugates of LOCAL AND EXPLICIT (the peak) and NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT (the trough) as if they possessed separate ‘stand-alone’ existences.
Piaget has thus introduced into WESTERN EDUCATION a teaching approach that DROPS OUT the bothersome and seemingly unnecessary NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT (wrongly assuming its BINARY LOGIC based independence from the LOCAL and EXPLICIT) and thus infusing into the TEACHING APPROACH a simplifying one-sided emphasis on the LOCAL and EXPLICIT as if IT ACTUALLY EXISTED IN IS OWN INDEPENDENT RIGHT, WHICH IT DOES NOT! SPLITTING APART, for example, the LOCAL and EXPLICIT GROWTH OF THE TOWN from the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT “CONJUGATE” SHRINKING OF WILDERNESS. This is a SERIOUS ERROR that encourages the WESTERN CULTURE misguided focus on one-sided GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION!
(note in this regard, the concern of Dr. Iain McGilcrist [cited further on in this text] who argues that “many of the problems our society faces stem from the fact that the left hemisphere of our brains has come to dominate our minds and lives;” i.e. in modern physics grounded terminology, we are displacing the nonlocal and implicit with the local and explicit in our linguistic conceptualizations, as for example with the emphasis on growth, development and production, ignoring the conjugate shrinking of wilderness, decline of existing structure and consumption of nonrenewable rare materials.).
This type of WESTERN CULTURE EXCHANGE of SIMPLE BINARY EITHER/OR LOGIC of the EXCLUDED MEDIUM, which reduces our understanding to EITHER MATERIAL PRESENCE OR EMPTY SPACE, does indeed achieve a SIMPLIFICATION in our LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZATIONS of physical reality, but at the COST of simplifying our UNDERSTANDING to such a degree that this is contaminating our linguistic conceptualization-guided PHYSICAL OPERATIONAL DYNAMICS. For example, the MAJOR CONFLICT in MODERN WESTERN CULTURE SOCIAL DYNAMICS between those with the CONSERVATIVE worldview and the LIBERAL worldview is ROOTED in the use of the TOO-SIMPLE BINARY LOGIC in the foundations of our linguistic conceptualizing.
This PROBLEM is NOT resolvable at the level where we are applying too simple BINARY EITHER/OR LOGIC OF THE EXCLUDED MEDIUM which is being employed by BOTH CONSERVATIVES and LIBERALS and is unable, because intrinsically TOO SIMPLE, to engage as needed, in LESS SIMPLE issues involving NONBINARY BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING MEDIUM.
That is, instead of understanding material forms as independent of the space they occupy (the ARISTOTELIAN linguistic conceptualizing of the world which gives precedence to absolute material being as if in empty space), the actual physical complexity of (wave-field based) NATURE demands a linguistic conceptualizing capability that can deal with HERACLITEAN NONBINARY “BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING MEDIUM” relations. This less simple (NONBINARY) conceptualizing capability is needed where the material form is a CONDENSATION of an all-including energy-charged PLENUM. The linguistic conceptualizing requirements in this case include the BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING MEDIUM as was the understanding built into early linguistic conceptualizing schemes, including those of indigenous aboriginals (the BOTH/AND logical relation of STRANDS IN THE WEB wherein ‘everything is related’ [‘mitakuye oyasin’] as has been affirmed by the modern physics concept wherein material forms are CONDENSATIONS of the energy-charged PLENUM ).
OUR WESTERN CULTURE ADDICTION TO THE USE OF TOO-SIMPLE BINARY LOGIC IN FOUNDATIONS OF OUR LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZATIONS IS THE SOURCE OF FRAGMENTATION THAT IS UNRESOLVABLE WITH BINARY LOGIC.
Kristi Noem and the Conservative – Liberal CONFLICT
0January 12, 2026
by ted lumley
in APN
POSTSCRIPT TO: KRISTI NOEM and the DEA ABSCONDITA
My guess is that FEW PEOPLE would NOT ‘pick up’ on the “EXTREME DIFFERENCE” between the outlook of KRISTI NOEM versus the outlook of Minneapolis mayor, Jacob Frey on the ICE shooting and killing of Renee Nicole Good. But perhaps even FEWER PEOPLE would be contemplating Nietzsche’s point that such events cannot be understood in a limited “LOCAL, EXPLICIT” context because of their “NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT MAKE-UP”.
Everybody knows that “TROUBLE HAS BEEN BREWING” and it involves POLARIZING ANIMOSITY between ADMINISTRATORS and the ADMINISTRATED where the ADMINISTRATORS are AUTHORIZED while the ADMINISTRATED are UNAUTHORIZED; i.e. this ORDER imposing approach is radically unlike an indigenous aboriginal HEALING CIRCLE where everyone is an equal. In this WESTERN CULTURE ORDER IMPOSING APPROACH some people are AUTHORIZED and others are UNAUTHORIZED. IMPOSING CHANGE through AUTHORITY is common in the WESTERN CULTURE VERSION OF “DEMOCRACY” which is radically unlike, for example, the indigenous aboriginal version of “DEMOCRACY” where Decision-making frequently emphasizes extensive community consultation and striving for consensus, rather than simple majority rule, to ensure harmony and broad community support.
These differences are underlain by the MORE RADICAL difference in that indigenous aboriginals have the understanding of ‘mitakuye oyasin’, that everyone is related in the manner of STRANDS IN THE WEB OF LIFE whereas WESTERN CULTURE has implemented a system based on the assumption that EACH PERSON, rather than being a STRAND in the INTERCONNECTING and INTERDEPENDENT WEB, as an INDEPENDENT BEING with “ITS OWN POWERS OF LOCAL AUTHORING OF ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENTS, which is of course UNREAL (ABSTRACT) LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZATION that has us WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS believing in the FALSE NOTION of “LOCAL AUTHORING” of actions and development. While Nietzsche has expounded on the DOUBLE ERROR foundation of “LOCAL AUTHORING”, HOWEVER, THE WESTERN CULTURE PRACTICE OF USING THIS “REALITY FRAGMENTING DEVICE” CONTINUES TO DISTURBE THE WESTERN CULTURE PSYCHE AND THUS SOCIAL DYNAMIC;
Our judgement has us conclude that every change must have an author”;–but this conclusion is already mythology: it separates that which effects from the effecting. If I say “lightning flashes,” I have posited the flash once as an activity and a second time as a subject, and thus added to the event a being that is not one with the event but is rather fixed, “is” and does not “become.”–To regard an event as an “effecting,” and this as being, that is the double error, or interpretation, of which we are guilty.” – Nietzsche, ‘Will to Power’, 531
In its origin language belongs in the age of the most rudimentary form of psychology. We enter a realm of crude fetishism when we summon before consciousness the basic presuppositions of the metaphysics of language, in plain talk, the presuppositions of reason. Everywhere it sees a doer and doing; it believes in will as the cause; it believes in the ego, in the ego as being, in the ego as substance, and it projects this faith in the ego-substance upon all things — only thereby does it first create the concept of “thing.” Everywhere “being” is projected by thought, pushed underneath, as the cause; the concept of being follows, and is a derivative of, the concept of ego. In the beginning there is that great calamity of an error that the will is something which is effective, that will is a faculty. Today we know that it is only a word.” – Nietzsche, ‘Twilight of the Idols’
SO, THIS DOUBLE ERROR OF NAMING and GRAMMAR, which has undeservedly been given a foundational role in WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE AND THOUGHT is the source of FRAGMENTATION in WESTERN CULTURE by way of its use in LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING. To say “THE TOWN IS GROWING” (this is an example of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR) PROMOTES THE IMPRESSION OF THE TOWN AS A NOTIONAL “LOCAL ENTITY”, NOTIONALLY WITH “ITS OWN POWERS OF LOCAL AUTHORING OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT” (in this case, “ITS OWN GROWTH”). We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS ARE SO ACCUSTOMED TO HEARING AND USING THIS “DOUBLE ERROR” THAT WE NO LONGER SEE THAT IT IS A “DOUBLE ERROR” in which case, we ACCEPT the NOTION of “LOCAL AUTHORING” which is a MASSIVE SOURCE OF FRAGMENTATION that does not occur, for example, in indigenous aboriginal culture where the use of FLOW-BASED (RELATIONAL) LANGUAGE captures the SENSE-EXPERIENCE AFFIRMED REALITY where “THERE IS TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE” wherein everything is in INTERCONNECTED and INTERDEPENDENT FLUX, as affirmed by Modern physics (wherein material forms are CONDENSATIONS of the all-including ENERGY-CHARGED PLENUM aka wave-field).
AS DISCUSSED IN PRIOR NOTES, and as underscored hereabove by Nietzsche, “EGO” is the SUSTAINER of this FALSE NOTION OF LOCAL AUTHORING given by the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR as in the example “THE TOWN IS GROWING” (here we have the LOCAL and EXPLICIT MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING ON ITS OWN) which eclipses the sense-experience affirmed REALITY that “THERE IS TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE” (here we have the full complement of NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING in conjugate relation with the LOCAL and EXPLICIT MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING). The LATTER linguistic conceptualizing scheme with the full ANDROGYNOUS COMPLEMENT is found in indigenous aboriginal linguistic conceptualizing schemes (STRAND IN THE WEB schemes) but in WESTERN CULTURE, LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING has evolved in such a manner as to DROP OUT the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING conjugate hence reference to the DEA ABSCONDITA aka GODDESS IN HIDING.
NOW, WESTERN CULTURE IS HAPPY WITH THIS DROP OUT BECAUSE IT SHIFTS CREDIT FOR LOCAL AUTHORING AWAY FROM THE NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT AND FALSELY REPOSITIONS IT AS IF ORIGINATING FROM THE LOCAL AND EXPLICIT; instead of THERE IS TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE which is the full ANDROGYNOUS conceptualization, WESTERN CULTURE has developed the habitual DOUBLE ERROR of going with ONLY THE MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIIZING conjugate consisting of the combination of NAMING-INSTANTIATED BEING animated by GRAMMAR-instantiated AGENCY. THIS WORKS AS A COMMUNICATIONS DEVICE but AT THE EXPENSE of SWAPPING OUT A FULL-BLOWN ANDROGYNOUS REALITY CONCEPTUALIZATION FOR A HALF-ASSED, MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING ONLY, CONCEPUALIZATION, which is EGO-INFLATING due to its FALSELY IMPLIED LOCAL AUTHORING POWER, and this EGO INFLATION IS WHY THIS SERIOUS DOUBLE ERROR BUILT INTO OUR WESTERN CULTURE LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING SCHEME “PERSISTS”.
DONALD TRUMP, EQUIPPED WITH THE DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR CAN CLAIM “I BUILT MAR A LAGO” AND “I CAPTURED NICOLÁS MADURO”. HERE WE HAVE THE MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING “ON ITS OWN” without acknowledgement of the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING as implicit in “TO EVERYTHING THERE IS A SEASON AND A TIME TO EVERY PURPOSE”. That is, I may put words together to say that I launched my Hobi-Cat from Fort Walton Beach, but SHOULD I ACKNOWLEDGE THE FACT THAT I waited for the gap between two breakers on the beach, picking the exact moment between the breaking waves to tighten the sheet and fill sail, scooting out into deeper water to avoid getting smacked by the next incoming breaker. What I am describing is the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING conjugate to my MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING agency. The FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING CONJUGATE is actually the PRIMARY REALITY while my MALE ASSERTING/ACTIONS are only APPEARANCE (Schaumkommen). It is our EUROPEAN LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING SCHEME that has us DROP OUT the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING CONJUGATE and THIS DROPOUT DOES NOT OCCUR IN indigenous aboriginal and other flow-based linguistic conceptualizing schemes where one says something like; “THE WIND AND SURF PICKED UP THE SAILBOAT LIKE A TOY AND SCOOTED IT OUT INTO THE OCEAN as a sailor onboard rode it like a bucking bronco pulling on the sail-sheets like reins.
There is ambiguity here with respect to the AUTHORING SOURCE OF ACTION. While we are familiar with the verse “to everything there is a season and a time to every purpose” which clearly gives the highest level of influence to the transforming relational continuum we share inclusion in, we appear to have INVERTED THE ORDER of things when we say “I sailed the Hobi-cat from Fort Wilton beach to Destin harbour”. The point is that the linguistic conceptualizing scheme we are using seems to FLIP MODES without our announcing it.
MODES OF WHAT?
Most Recent Comments