ted lumley

FORWARD: Benjamin Whorf overtly stated what Nietzsche, Bohm and Wittgenstein also imply, that we are included in an IMPLICATE ORDER that we reduce to an EXPLICATE ORDER for the purpose of rendering EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT that which is IN REALITY, INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT (the Wave-field aka the Tao).

Whorf points out that the NEWTONIAN PHYSICS abstraction of local material things-in-themselves, notionally with their own powers of sourcing actions and developments (that which Nietzsche calls ‘the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR), …came from our early WESTERN CULTURE language and grammar, that is where NEWTON got these concepts from.

WESTERN SCIENCE (Newtonian) featuring matter, force, and motion is therefore NOT an explanation of the dynamics of Nature, but is instead a SUBSTITUTE REALITY that is LOCAL and EXPLICIT, such abstraction opening the way for language-based representation that is shareable.  The SUBSTITUTE REALITY that we build with DOUBLE ERROR based language constructs is ‘consistent within itself in a ‘house-of-cards’ like sense’, but is in no way a REPRESENTATION of the reality of our sensory experience.  The SUBSTITUTE REALITY reduces TRANSFORMATION to GROWTH, as with The TOWN that is GROWING’ in place of the LANDSCAPE that is TRANSFORMING.

This language that SUBSTITUTES GROWTH for TRANSFORMATION gives us LOCAL and EXPLICIT definition which is ‘only good for’ stimulating a needed INTUITIVE LEAP the the NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT reality of our sensory experience’.  However, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are become characterized by our psychological replacement of REAL REALITY with the SUBSTITUTE REALITY..

* * *

WESTERN CULTURE “ECONOMIC REALITY” puts GROWTH into a DYSFUNCTIONAL PRECEDENCE over TRANSFORMATION

The following THREE PART COMMENTARY aims at ‘homing in’ on what might be described as the core conclusion of Whorf’s Hypothesis, which is that classical physics, wherein we make the BINARY LOGICAL SPLIT between MATTER and SPACE, rather than being something we have discerned through our investigations of Nature, is instead, a formal structuring of the Western Culture language which we invented … NOT as a means of CAPTURING an approximate representation of an INEFFABLE reality, … BUT RATHER as a means of CONSTRUCTING A SUBSTITUTE ‘EFFABLE’ REALITY that WE ARE ABLE TO ARTICULATE.   For example, our WESTERN CULTURE language-and-grammar gives us the capability of ARTICULATING the GROWTH and DEVELOPMENT of “THE TOWN” wherein we use the representational ploy of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO, … BUT our language is too limited a representational medium to accommodate capture of a TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE which implicitly includes within it the fluid dynamic of TOWNING wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE, as in the reality of our SENSORY EXPERIENCE of inclusion in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.  The intellectual treatises declaring the LOCAL, INDEPENDENT EXISTENCE of the TOWN or the COUNTRY are abstractions of the mind which do not, in ‘real life experience’, over-ride the reality of our inclusion in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM aka the ‘WAVE-FIELD’ aka ‘the Tao’.

That is the theme of this TRILOGY; the exposing of the reality, as Whorf has pointed out, that we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have developed language NOT as a system for capturing an approximation of the REALITY OF OUR SENSORY EXPERIENCE, but to instead gives us the means of CONSTRUCTING A SUBSTITUTE REALITY.  CLASSICAL PHYSICS, formalized by NEWTON, is not ‘informing us of the ‘fluid relational phenomenon of Nature-as-TRANSFORMATION’, but is teaching us how to construct an internally self-consistent SUBSTITUTE REALITY, where the notion of the LOCAL TOWN that is GROWING LARGER and MORE PRODUCTIVE … “SUBSTITUTES AND TAKES OVER” … from the reality of the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM aka ‘the Wave-field aka ‘the TAO’.

MEANWHILE, “the SUBSTITUTE REALITY of the reductive language of Newtonian physics that CAN BE TOLD, is NOT the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM REALITY.

 Newtonian physics gives us a tool for CONSTRUCTING a SUBSTITUTE REALITY that is no longer INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT but is now EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT, … the shortfall being that IT IS NEITHER ‘REALITY’ nor nor is it an APPROXIMATION of REALITY, it is a SUBSTITUTE REALITY.  We users of this DOUBLE ERROR based SUBSTITUTE REALITY are NOT FINISHED when we finish constructing the language based REPRESENTATIONS of the SUBSTITUTE REALITY (e.g. the CONSTRUCTION of a TOWN that continues to GROW) because we still have to make the INTUITIVE LEAP from the ABSTRACTION of ‘the GROWTH OF THE TOWN’ to the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE which is all-inclusive and which includes the TOWNING DYNAMIC which our language has allowed us to SPLIT OUT by  * * * SUBSTITUTING FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO for FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE * * *, and in the process re-locating our psychological perspective into this SUBSTITUTE FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO pseudo-reality in the guise of a VOYEUR OVER-SEE-ER, something this is not pot available to the TOWNIE in the TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.

Our WESTERN CULTURE error is to FORGET that the DOUBLE ERROR based SUBSTITUTE REALITY only qualifies for use as a TOOL OF INFERENCE and to, INSTEAD, employ the DOUBLE ERROR (LOCAL SOURCING) pseudo-reality as the ‘operative reality, infusing aberrant thinking and behaviours into the dynamics of WESTERN CULTURE social collectives.  Goodbye NONLOCAL TRANSFORMATION, hello LOCAL GROWTH!

PART ONE of THREE

WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are seriously ‘hooked’ on BINARY LOGIC but our faith in such simplistic logic is being seriously challenged, by REALITY.

(more…)

WESTERN CULTURE DOES NOT CHANGE WITH CHANGE OF LEADERSHIP

Forward:  The U.S. Presidential election of 2020 has been strongly polarized between the candidate of the conservatives/Republicans and the candidate of the liberals (Democrats).  While this polarization vaguely follows the division of RIGHT and LIEFT  as it has come to be known by terminology in French politics from the summer of 1789 when members of the French National Assembly met to begin drafting a constitution. The delegates were deeply divided over the issue of how much authority King Louis XVI should have, and as the debate raged, the two main factions each staked out territory in the assembly hall. The anti-royalist revolutionaries seated themselves to the presiding officer’s left, while the more conservative, aristocratic supporters of the monarchy gathered to the right.

The focus of this note is that the Conservative/Republican and Liberal/Democrat polarization arises from a conceptual ambiguity wherein the Conservative – Liberal split is not only a false dichotomy, but the tip of the iceberg in the confusing of understanding that derives from a DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, as discussed in this note.

  * * *

The U.S. and WESTERN ‘SOCIAL OPERATING SYSTEM is based on BINARY LOGIC which is reductive and simplistic and when used to interpret and address complex realities, is the source of dysfunction, including the binary bipolar political splitting into the polarized conservative and liberal factions.   This polarization is based on the false initial premise of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments deriving from a DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR (Nietzsche).

PRIDE (swollen EGO) as well as RECOGNITION/FAME derive from the DOUBLE ERROR based LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments.

SHAME (deflated EGO) as well as DEFAMATION/INFAMOUS, derive from the DOUBLE ERROR of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments.

REALITY does not support the abstract concept of LOCAL SOURCING which comes from the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, but supports, instead, relational transformation.

Modern physics REAFFIRMS the REALITY of relational transformation and REJECTS the DOUBLE ERROR based abstraction of LOCAL SOURCING.

WHAT’S THIS GOT TO DO WITH THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION?

(more…)

FORWARD: For those living on the surface of a sphere, ‘gathering’ is, at the same time, ‘scattering’.   If we ‘stand back from visually observing either of these, we understand, instead of EITHER one OR the other wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO, the process of TRANSFORMATION wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE.   GATHERING and SCATTERING, CLUSTERING and DISPERSING are NOT TWO but ONE.  The mountain climber is intrigued by the exhilarating challenge of the climb to the summit and tends to dismiss his descent into valley-dwelling normality.  Experiencing highs and lows is transformative, yet the appreciation of transformation seems, by WESTERN CULTURE habit, to be overshadowed by continuous repetition of pictures of climbers clustering around the summits.  Transformation, which is nonlocal and implicit thus seems to be overshadowed by a focus on the local and explicit.  The abstraction of the local and explicit is capturable with great visual acuity while transformation is the effective reality that vision can only infer. Our WESTERN CULTURE cultivates a confusing habit of substituting the explicit for the implicit in language-based reality construction.

* * *

Capturing our sensory experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum lies beyond the capability of language and grammar.  The best we can do with language is to use it to construct mental representations that ALLUDE TO or INFER the fluid relational reality that lies intrinsically beyond the reach of language.   In other words, since our sensory experience of inclusion in the Wave-field aka the Tao is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT (that is the nature of the Wave-field aka ‘the Tao’), … are constrained, by the limitations of language, to use language based representations to INFER the fluid reality that lies beyond EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT basics of language.

This note reviews this challenge of using language to ‘effable-ize the ineffable sensory experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum aka the Wave-field aka ‘the Tao’.

I am using language to share these thoughts, and our WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT language-based mode of representation has its limits that ‘show up’ in shortfalls in our ability to share sensory experience via language-based representations.  Understanding the architecture associated with the reductions of sensory experience that we are forced to make in order to articulate even a REDUCED REPRESENTATION of such experience is non-trivial because the unabridged sensory experience is always out there beyond the reach of words.  We can only make INFERENCE to the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT by way our language being based on the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT.  Sometimes we make very crude representational reductions of reality to share our experience and other times we make less crude representational reductions.

For example, we use very little experience grounded information in speaking in the visual imagery based terms of ‘the BIG DIPPER’, and use relatively more experiential grounding when we put words together to try to capture something as ‘connected’ and mobile as a CLUSTER of gnats or fruit-flies.  The following is a brief review and deconstruction of our tactics for visually representing, or rather, trying to visually represent, fluid reality.  The aim of this review is to point out the psychological confusion that can come with it.

* * *

There are three basic interfaces here which can to distinguished by the following class labels;

TITBAs: Things-in-themselves-by-APPEARANCE based on FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO: examples included ‘the Big Dipper’ which is a form based on OUR psychological ‘connecting of the dots’ that have very little to do with one another.

TITBOs: Things-in-themselves-by-ORGANIZATION based on FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO: examples include ‘the CLUSTERING’ of fruit flies or small insects forming ‘clouds’ which vary from smaller and more dense to larger and less dense while retaining their same population of constituents.

RAFs: Relational association FORMINGS which are NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE: examples include storming formings such as hurricaning and convecting currents which do NOT depend on the abstract (DOUBLE ERROR based) concept of LOCAL THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES with their own (GRAMMAR-given) powers of SOURCING actions and developments that characterizes FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO conceptualization.

(more…)

As Nietzsche points out, REASON derives from a DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, for example “the TOWN is GROWING’.

We might also speak of a TOWNING in the transforming LANDSCAPE

What we have here are TWO representation options

OPTION 1: FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE.  In this option, the TOWNING is like the spotting on a transforming apple.  As the spot grows larger, the unspotted area shrinks in reciprocal proportion.  This is the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE mode of understanding this development.

OPTION 2: FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO.  In this option, the TOWN is understood as a LOCAL thing-in-itself that grows larger RELATIVE TO ITSELF.   This is the so-called RATIO-NAL aka REASON based understanding and it is deeply entrenched in WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT thinking.  REASON is referred to by Nietzsche as ‘the DOUBLE ERROR’ of NAMING and GRAMMAR (first we name the spot on the transforming apple ‘the TOWN’ and then we conflate this with GRAMMAR and say ‘the TOWN is GROWING LARGER’.  In other words we use RATIO to reference the GROWTH of the TOWN to ITSELF instead of acknowledging the pairing of the GROWING of the TOWN and the CONJUGATE SHRINKING of the WILDERNESS.

WHY DO WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS use RATIONAL THINKING (OPTION 2) so extensively?

(more…)