ted lumley

OVERVIEW of TWO VERY DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO ‘CONSTRUCTING’ AN ‘EFFABLE’ VERSION OF OUR INEFFABLE REALITY, SHOWING HOW THE ‘DOUBLE ERROR’ OPTION THAT IS IN COMMON USE IN WESTERN CULTURE IS A CRAZY-MAKER.

OPTION 1: INEFFABLE TO EFFABLE REDUCTION: THE RELATIONAL INFERENCE (modern physics, indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta)

OPTION 2: INEFABLE TO EFFABLE REDUCTION; THE DOUBLE ERROR OPTION (the Western culture ‘standard’)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

(more…)

The folly of Western culture belief in the double error of sorcery and in using it as a basis of reward and punishment.

“IN A NUTSHELL”, …  the nuttiness bred into Western culture adherents lies in (1) the inability of the intellectual tools of language and grammar to capture the ‘ineffable’ sensory experience reality of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum (i.e., inclusion in the ‘wave-field’ aka the Tao); (2) the development and use of language in human cultures to reduce the ineffable to effable, so as to enable ‘sharing’  and ‘comparing’ (of language-based reductions of our ineffable experience); and (3) the ‘double error’ whereby our language based reduction usurps the natural primacy of our unreduced ineffable sensory experience based reality (i.e. the tool [of language based reduction] runs away with the workman, the human with the divine’ (Emerson)  Note: The ‘double error’ is (first error) the use of ‘naming’ to impute ‘independent-thing-in-itself being’ to relational flow-forms, conflated by (second error) the grammar based imputing of powers of sourcing actions and developments to the name-instantiated (notional) thing-in-itself.

The above-described language-and-grammar based ‘hatchet job’ on the Tao,  to render our ineffable sensory experience of inclusion in the Tao ‘intellectually effable’, sets the stage for deploying intellectual double-error based reduction as our ‘standard Western culture operative reality’.  This reductive ‘double error’ substitution is an overly simplistic ‘tool’ that, however useful as a supportive tool, is, in Wittgenstein’s terms, an expedient ‘ladder ‘to facilitate a leap to an understanding that lies innately beyond explicit reach.  Meanwhile this ‘double error’ based language has been employed in Western culture, NOT AS A TOOL OF INFERENCE  (which is all that explicit language can be), but as our Western culture ‘normal’ means of  constructing an EXPLICIT INVENTED REALITY that  is used as our ‘operative reality’ and therefore shapes our ‘normal’ individual and collective Western culture adherent behaviour; … a ‘normal’ that is far from ‘natural’.

While the intellectual reduction of the ineffable Tao (1) to effable (shareable) language (2) by way of the ‘double error’ (3) is something we can get used to using NOT AS A LANGUAGE-AND-GRAMMAR SPRINGBOARD TO THE INEFFABLE  TAO that lies INTRINSICALLY BEYOND LITERAL EXPLICIT MEANING, but rather as THE ARTICULATION OF AN EXPLICIT REALITY-IN-ITSELF.

THIS IS THE “DOUBLE ERROR” ; i.e. first to use ‘naming’ to reduce pattern in the flow to notional ‘things-in-themselves’  and conflating this with the second error of imputing powers of sourcing actions and developments to the naming-instantiated (abstract) thing-in-itself.  To use this double error as a ‘springboard’ to infer thing-less (relational) transformation (the Tao) that lies beyond language based ‘explicit’  representation is one thing, but to use the double error based ‘explicit reality’  NOT as a springboard but as as a direct substitute reality is Western culture craziness.  It is a case where; The tool runs away with the workman, the human with the divine”  as Ralph Waldo Emerson captures it in ‘The Method of Nature’

The use of language merely for relational inference is ‘poetic’ usage, and it is only such ‘implicit’  forms of language that can get by the fact that ‘the Tao that can be (explicitly) told is not the true Tao.  To employ language as if it were, in its EXPLICIT RATIONAL-INTELLECTUAL MODE, CAPABLE OF CAPTURING AND SHARING REALITY, MAY BE ‘NORMAL’ WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT PRACTICE, BUT SUCH ‘NORMALITY’ IS ‘CRAZINESS’

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

 It is impossible for the explicit voyeur views of ‘reality’ (i.e. views that deliver double error based constructions) , … to ‘synch up’ with  the reality of our sensory  experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum (the Tao).  Western culture adherents popularly opt to employ the  ‘reduced-to’ double error (things-in-themselves-with-powers of sourcing actions and developments) INVENTED REALITY  as the ‘operative reality’ while modern physics, Indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta instead opt for giving sensory experiencing of relational transformation first dibs on our understanding of ‘reality’.  This involves the use of language only in a ‘supportive role’; i.e. in a NON-EXPLICIT (implicit/inferential) manner, avoiding the reduction to EXPLICIT double error based terms and instead using  IMPLICIT INFERENCE as in ‘poetic’ usage and as in ‘The surprise version of the game of Twenty Questions’.   

WATCH OUT! because in this inferential  (relational) reality, there is no such thing as ‘sourcing’ of actions and developments and no such thing as ‘producer-product’ dynamics;  there are only relations as in ‘mitakuye oyasin’.

THE SHOCKER IS THIS!  … Western culture ‘operative reality’ employs the double error based ‘producer-product’ pseudo-reality AS IF IT WERE “REALITY”.  In other words, our Western culture adhering practice is to use the double error based (‘producer-product’ based) INVENTED REALITY as our PRIMARY REALITY, effectively ‘demoting’ our sensory experience based reality of inclusion in the Tao (the transforming relational continuum) to secondary status, which is like ‘wallpapering over’ our naturally primary reality, with a superficial pseudo-reality.  This intellectual double-error based superficial pseudo-reality is what we Western culture adherents are employing as ‘reality’, and this is a crazy-maker.

(more…)

Resonance ‘is’ Reality 

Resonance is the ineffable relational sensory experiencing of inclusion in the Tao that cannot be told (The Tao that can be told is not the true Tao’ — Lao Tzu).

The understanding of indigenous aboriginal cultures AND modern physics is that resonance (the wave-field) is the primary reality.  Resonance is something we can ‘feel’ but which is beyond capture in language-based intellection.  “The Tao that can be told is not the true Tao” is a precautionary reminder of the pitfall of letting the surrogate ‘reality’ constructed with the tools of language-and-grammar and the ‘double error’ (Nietzsche) ‘run away with the workman’.   Emerson issues this same warning and Nietzsche elaborates on it, but it is nevertheless a pitfall that manifests in Western culture’s embrace of an INVENTED REALITY that is far from the reality of our sensory experience.

(more…)

It is NOT possible for one member of the community to rise up and kill other members of the community where ‘community’ implies relational interdependence, … that would be an ‘error of grammar’ .  But is IS possible for dissonance to emerge together with harmony, within a transforming relational continuum.

UNDERSTANDING THE RISE OF MASS KILLINGS

Understanding mass killings requires an understanding of why psychological studies of the mass killers do not reveal that these individuals (many of whom are white Western culture males) are NOT significantly different from the NORMAL Western culture adherent.   There is a problem with what we hold to be ‘normal behaviour’ in our Western culture.

What we call ‘normal’ is a product of repression, denial, splitting, projection, introjection and other forms of destructive action on experience.” – R. D. Laing, author of ‘The Divided Self’;

A prime example of Western culture aberrant thinking is the belief in the ‘producer-product’ dynamic, this is a linguistically re-upholstered version of the medieval belief in ‘sorcery’.

(more…)