Celebrating ‘Miner’s Canaries’ in 2014

The individual is a reflection of the otherness.

The year 2014 has almost passed, so says my western psyche, while my indigenous intuition suggests that the ‘now’ of the relational activity continuum is a year later in its unending evolutionary unfolding than when I was experiencing the ‘now’ a year earlier.

Landslide-like emotional ‘breaks’ [reconfigurings of the social relational matrix] along with a criminal trial and conviction have unfolded and gathered form in the continually unfolding relational plenum, like storm-cells in the solar-irradiated atmo-hydro-bio-sphere.   I know now that these are not ‘events’-in-themselves, but new wrinkly folds in the continually transforming relational One-ness structure that will soon divulge what nobody anticipated, giving us the “life that is what happens to us while we are busy making other plans” [John Lennon].

miner’s canaries or pathogens?

Is this world beautiful even if it gives birth to holocausts and other miseries?   I recall a near-death experience when I was four or five that suggested that this was the case. I remember the initial struggle to ‘stay afloat’ which, being out of the question, gave way to a deep awareness of how pretty the bubbles from my last gasping breaths were as I was sinking towards the bottom [just before my rescuer so rudely interrupted this fantasmagorically beautiful interlude’]. ‘Letting go’ of material attachment seems to be the secret to opening the portal to the spiritual realm of nature, or rather ‘opening us’ to it. As Lao Tzu observed; ‘ever desiring, one sees the manifest; ever desireless, one sees the mystery’.’

I have a friend who nearly died of a heart attack on the dock in the marina and he listened to his friends describing how desperate his condition was, and how he was clutching at this throat and struggling to breath, … and he said that no matter how it looked, his near-death experience was all good. Coming from my own experience, I am thinking that things are not really as desperate as they seem to be, as we look into them from the outside.

~^~

The season of St. Nicholas is upon us, and this year, I have to give credit to the Russians for their potlatch-like gift-giving St. Nikolai tradition (giving from all to all) during the winter season [since I just learned about it], which bore no trace of the polarizing Christian morality that carries the threat of dividing out the ‘naughty’ from the ‘nice’ and employing a top-down centralized sourcing of gifts (from the North pole).

“Nicholas was wrongly represented as a charitable, benevolent man: saintly because he was beneficent. Absorbed in the figure of Father Christmas, Nicholas’s motivations for giving had become further skewed by the Victorian’s fixation with children. Kropotkin didn’t really understand the links, but felt that it reflected an attempt to moralise childhood through a concept of purity that was symbolised in the birth of Jesus. Naturally he couldn’t imagine the creation of the Big Brother Santa Claus who knows when children are asleep and awake and comes to town apparently knowing which have dared to cry or pout. But sooner or later, he warned, this idea of purity would be used to distinguish naughty from nice children and only those in the latter group would be rewarded with presents. Whatever the case, it was important both to recover the principle of Nicholas’ compassion from this confusing mumbo-jumbo and the folkloric origins of Santa Claus. Nicholas gave because he was pained by his awareness of other peoples’ hardship.” –Ruth Kinna

In fact, moral judgement seems more and more to me like the source of the world’s ills rather than the saviour. I resonate with Thomas Szasz’s observations in ‘The Myth of Mental Illness’ who points out that Western society has always needed scape-goats, … and moral judgements provide the necessary tools to satisfy that need with the product being ‘the mentally ill’, ‘criminals’ and ‘terrorists’, who, in the indigenous aboriginal culture, would be seen NOT as the jumpstart authors of these malevolent dynamics, but as people caught up in social relational dysfunction belonging to the full community.

As a student of modern physics and its counterpart, indigenous aboriginal physics [e.g. as described in F. David Peat’s ‘Blackfoot Physics’], I am familiar with how scape-goats are made using the tool of moral judgement and the principle of Mach [“The dynamics of the inhabitants are conditioning the dynamics of the habitat at the same time as the dynamics of the habitat are conditioning the dynamics of the inhabitants”]. We might call this ‘game’ of ‘scape-goating’, the ‘humiliator-biter’ game, giving the example of how it was used on indigenous peoples; e.g. the colonizers had the power to repetitively humiliate the indigenous people by depriving them of access to the essential, nurturing resources of their habitat by conditioning the habitat so that, for example, fisheries were depleted, forests clear-cut, and fences constructed to shut off traditional access.

This relentless power-to-humiliate was applied to selected inhabitants by the indirect path of conditioning the dynamics of the habitat, heightening relational tensions towards the threshold point where, like a persistently teased or poked dog, a violent release of tensional energy [bite-back] would occur, that could play out as a homicide or suicide; i.e. a stress-lowering reconfiguring of too highly tensioned relations.  At this point, moral judgement and retributive punishment would be applied to the author of the bite-back act as if that act could be fully and solely attributed to the ‘independent individual’ through whom it manifested, making scape-goats of all such individuals; i.e. making them pay for their attempt to resist the relentless power-to-humiliate imposed on them by their colonial masters.

This humiliator-biter scape-goating phenomenon appears to be characteristic of modern western society, and of course, there are many ‘biters-back’ that are still in ‘incubation’,  perhaps waiting for the ‘right moment’, and/or perhaps trying to manage the rising social relational stress without ‘popping off’ in a stress-releasing relational reconfiguration.

These people, who reach their stress threshold where ‘something has to give’;i.e. where they need to let go of the built-up tensions and reconfigure their social relations so as to reduce the stress-management overheads, can be called ‘miner’s canaries’ since their emotional distress signals ‘something wrong’ in the relational social matrix aka ‘habitat’, ‘environment’, that they are situationally included in.    They could ‘capitulate’ and conform like a chameleon to the social-environmental influence trends that are continually moving on through, but they do not.  They are the ‘spiritually attuned’, the one’s who can differentiate harmony and balance from rational drift of mainstream society.

It is high time for us to celebrate these ‘miner’s canaries’ who, because they don’t comply with the popular drift of the social relational matrix, are ‘scape-goated’.

~^~

So, this year, in particular, i would like to recognize and celebrate scapegoats, such as the so-called ‘mentally ill’ and other ‘folk-devils’ that have made witch-hunts the successful scape-goating excercise that it continues to be.   Szasz, in his chapter ‘The Scapegoat Theory of Witchcraft’, points out that Western society has needed scapegoats to fill gaps in the entrenched, one-sided ‘all-hitting, no-fielding’ worldview [which blinds itself to the ‘power-to-humiliate], and while ‘witches’ were the early incarnation, ‘the mentally ill’, ‘sexual predators’, ‘criminals’ and ‘terrorists’ are the modern equivalents [In the restorative justice paradigm of indigenous aboriginals, such behaviours are seen as social-relational dysfunction incubated within the community dynamic, not as the fully and solely sourced result of independent pathogens; e.g. the experiential preconditioning of the dog that is incubated within the relational social dynamics of the community is the deeper source of the ‘bite-back’, although moral judgement of the isolated ‘act’ can be used to scape-goat the dog. ].

The point is not to ‘forgive the dog’ for killing the infant, or to ‘forgive’ one man for killing another, the point is that the society that is so revolted and outraged at the dog’s action, and that imposes moral judgement on, and demands the extermination of the dog so that it can never do such a horrific thing again, is the same society that cultivates the experiential preconditioning  in the dog that sources its violent action.

Individuals can be held responsible for crimes but they cannot be held ‘fully and solely responsible’ since dysfunction in the social relational dynamic [the dog that was teased and poked many times] finds expression through individuals, but does not jumpstart from within the individuals as Western justice assumes.   Restorative justice derives from this understanding;

 

“Aboriginal justice is not based on equality but on difference and developing distinct identity. A justice rooted in relationships with the land and with all of creation leads to a concern for the healing of all, including those who have harmed others – both ‘offenders’ and ‘colonializers’. Justice as healing is here a justice that does not accept the paradigm of winners and losers. Similarly, it does not accept the notion of individual guilt. Aboriginal justice is a communal sense of justice which does not shy away from holding persons responsible for harms. Rather, it sees such acts as an opportunity to strengthen the person, the community and the nation through a healing process. (W. D. McCaslin, ‘Justice as Healing; Indigenous ways’), cited in Jarem Sawatsky’s ‘Justpeace Ethics: A Guide to Restorative Justice and Peacebuilding’.

Science or ‘scientism’, says Szasz, is tied up in all of this since science would have us believe that organisms are ‘independent, intention-driven systems, so that when everyone in the community uses their power to humiliate and poke a mangy dog they don’t like, one poke too many may ignite an incendiary flare-up where the pokeur gets bitten. The moral judgement of Western retributive justice is then applied to the ‘flare-up’ through the mediating of a ‘neutral’ judge (one of the pokeur community) who will interpret this ‘act of biting’ as if it jumpstarted out of the interior of the accused seen as an independent intention-driven organism. The dog thus takes the scapegoat hit for the social dysfunction in the pokeur community.

This year, I have written to people [including the local member of parliament and the local newspaper (which published my comments as a guest editorial)] about how Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, on September 11, 2002, the first anniversary of 9/11 tried to get honest about this scape-goating, and in a CBC national television interview with Peter Mansbridge, conceded that the colonial powers or G8, was a pokeur community that was using scape-goating to mask our own social relational dysfunction. His controversial comments were widely replicated around the world under the appropriate title ‘Power to Humiliate’. Here is the core of what he had to say;

[CBC’s Peter Mansbridge] “By the end of the day [9/11], what were you thinking about in terms of how the world had changed?”

[Prime Minister Jean Chrétien] “… it is a division in the world that is building up. And I knew that it was the inspiration of it.  For me, I think that the rest of the world a bit too selfish, and that there is a lot of resentment…. You know, the poor, relatively, get poorer all the time. And the rich are getting richer all the time. … You know, you cannot exercise your powers to the point of humiliation for the others.  And that is what the Western world, not only the Americans, the Western world has to realize, because they are human beings too, and there are long-term consequences if you don’t look hard at the reality in 10 or 20 or 30 years from now.”

“I do think that the Western world is getting too rich in relations to the poor world,” he said.

“And necessarily, we’re looked upon as being arrogant, self-satisfied, greedy and with no limits. And the 11th of September is an occasion for me to realize it even more.”

As Senator Douglas Roche commented in the huge ‘Don’t make excuses for terrorists’ stir that followed Jean Chrétien’s Mansbridge interview on the first anniversary of 9/11;

“This was a very perceptive comment [Jean Chrétien’s]. It was waiting to be said–needed to be said. It was something that many of us have been saying for a long time. Any anti-terrorism policy has to be seen within the totality of economic and social conditions that are the obvious spawning ground of this desperate activity.”

* * *

Animals and/or humans that are relentlessly abused are likely to hit that ‘straw that breaks the camels back’ threshold that is well known in nature [termed ‘self-organized criticality’ in nonlinear physics]. As with the dog that bites the n+1th pokeur, Western justice is called in, bringing a ‘neutral judge’ selected from the ‘normative ground’ of the pokeur community to investigate the ONE manifest action without considering the experiential pre-conditioning incubated within the social-relationally dysfunctional pokeur community.

The concept of ‘terrorist’ arose from the need for a ‘scapegoat’ for community social-relational dysfunction that corresponds to ‘the witch’.   As Szasz notes, the interesting thing about witch-hunts is that ‘claims’ and ‘confessions’ take precedence over inquiry into what is really going on, so that ‘terrorists’ may confess that they are, for example, responding to a voice of God in their heads that is instructing them to kill the Great Satan [the U.S. and its allies]. Collective schizophrenia is an ideal scapegoat.

Of course, I am not, in this seasonal acknowledging of those who suffer, celebrating the ‘damage’ that associates with scapegoats or their inquisitor/tormentor provocateurs, only the suffering that so many people endure who are in the incubation phase of the scape-goating process; i.e. who are being cultivated for it by being relentlessly humiliated via the indirect process wherein those with the ‘power to humiliate’ are conditioning the common habitat in such a manner as to selectively deprive others of natural access to essential nurturing resources.

The indigenous aboriginal peoples of the world that have been under the yoke of global colonization for a half-millenium are clear candidates amongst those who can be recognized for their suffering.   There are many others that merit recognition as well, due to an evident surplus demand for scapegoats that is running ahead of supply.

As Szasz points out, scape-goating is helped out by ‘science’ [or scientism, which has us take [believe in] science models ‘literally’]j. Meanwhile, there is no physical reality in isolating the one action of the dog biting and imputing stand-alone meaning to this isolated act out of the context of the progressive development of the phenomena [the experiential conditioning of the dog’s manner of ‘fielding’ a ‘hit’; … ‘experiential preconditiong’ that arises from its being raised within a pokeur community]. As it turns out, the notional isolating, in local space and time, of the ‘biting act’ is a synthetic simplifying technique built into the foundations of science;

“Origin of Mathematical Physics. Let us go further and study more closely the conditions which have assisted the development of mathematical physics. We recognise at the outset the efforts of men of science have always tended to resolve the complex phenomenon given directly by experiment into a very large number of elementary phenomena, and that in three different ways.

First, with respect to time. Instead of embracing in its entirety the progressive development of a phenomenon, we simply try to connect each moment with the one immediately preceding. We admit that the present state of the world only depends on the immediate past, without being directly influenced, so to speak, by the recollection of a more distant past. Thanks to this postulate, instead of studying directly the whole succession of phenomena, we may confine ourselves to writing down its differential equation; for the laws of Kepler we substitute the law of Newton.

Next, we try to decompose the phenomena in space. What experiment gives us is a confused aggregate of facts spread over a scene of considerable extent. We must try to deduce the elementary phenomenon, which will still be localised in a very small region of space.  — Henri Poincaré, ‘Science and Hypothesis’, Chapter IX, Hypotheses in Physics”

Of course we all know that if we are a community of pokeurs with the power to humiliate and are in the habit of poking others many times [e.g. indirectly, by conditioning the dynamics of the habitat] and getting away with it, those others may reach a threshold where they bite back.

The ‘secret’ in scape-goating or ‘witch-hunting’ is (a) to employ a binary ‘good’ and ‘evil’ moral judging that can be applied to isolated ‘acts’, and (b) to supply a supposedly neutral judge that will represent the community [a high priest as in the Inquisition] who will orient his inquiry and assessments to local-in-space-and-time ‘acts’ [as in science] so that one does not have to “consider in its entirety, the progressive development of a phenomena”.   The beauty of this is that the very act of having the ‘neutral’ judge represent the pokeur community indemnifies the community from any and all culpability.

That is, the judge is doing what he does in the service of the community and begins his inquiry into the process on the basis of an ‘offender-victim’ model wherein an allegation has been made that a dog has bitten a member of the community. The task for judge and court in such offender-victim formulations, is to determine whether the allegations of a malicious act or acts are well-founded or not, and the issue of experiential preconditioning of the biter by social relational dysfunction in the pokeur community has no way to enter into this process.

In the restorative justice of indigenous aboriginals, the eruptions of dissonance are seen as dysfunctions in the social relational dynamics of community that are manifesting through particular individuals, not jumpstarting from out of their interiors. That is, dysfunctions in the social relational dynamics of the pokeur community are seen as the source of the experiential preconditioning that makes the ‘biter’ intolerant and ready at the striking of a match, to ignite into an incendiary flare-up.   The restorative justice healing approach is by way of transforming or reconfiguring the social relational dynamic via a ‘circle process’.   The ignition and flare-up, rather than being an ‘act in itself’ is the incubated culmination of the progressive development of a phenomena.

Of course, those who are too open and honest on this topic, like Jean Chrétien, threaten to give the whole scape-goating game away by reminding us how our pokeur community has been experientially preconditioning the prospective scape-goats so that the eventual ‘biting act’ can in NO WAY be viewed and analyzed as an act in itself wherein the roots of the act are purported, by the moral judging justice system, to dead-end in the internal processes of the ‘biter’.

So, let’s celebrate those who have not yet bitten back but are nevertheless having to suffer relentless submission to the ‘power to humiliate’.

For those scape-goats in the so-called ‘mentally ill’ category [schizophrenics, bipolars, monopolar depressives etc.] , the situation is particularly insidious and orients mostly to women [W.H.O. reports that roughly twice as many women as men suffer ‘affective disorders’]. In this scape-goating, the sensitive ‘miner’s canaries’ that buckle under the relational social stresses in our society are regarded as ‘being ill’.

For example, in ‘Crazy for You: The Making of Women’s Madness’, Jill Astbury interprets the World Health Organization study showing that women have twice the incidence of ‘affective disorders’ (depression, bipolar disorder etc.) as men, in terms that

“The research stemming from this viewpoint had a systemic blindness. It could literally not see what it was doing, as the normative quality of its own presuppositions had made them invisible.” – Jill Astbury

 

These female ‘miner’s canaries’, then, were interpreted as being defective since the research did not consider, in its investigations, whether the source of their relatively poorer ‘hitting results’ was coming from ‘hitting’ or from ‘fielding’ [the social relational dynamics] they were hitting into.

[[N.B. The references to ‘hitting’ and ‘fielding’ are to the metaphor of baseball, as used by Stephen Jay Gould in ‘Full House’, to point out that the general case is that dynamics are ‘hitting-fielding’ and it is impossible to solve explicitly for the separate contributions of ‘hitter’ and ‘fielding’ to the ‘hitting results’.  It is only the imaginary imposing of absolute space and absolute time that synthetically reduces ‘hitting-fielding’ to ‘all-hitting, no-fielding’]

In other words, people who are rightfully feeling depressed about the societal dynamics that they are inextricably bound up in are told ‘THEY are sick’. As Szasz points out, ‘science’ regards those with affective disorders as ‘in bad shape’ and undertakes valiant efforts to ‘make them better’.   Meanwhile, people in this condition often do not want to make themselves ‘get better’ as their ‘ill-at-easeness’ derives from tensions/stresses in the relational social matrix they are uniquely situationally included in. When one of those included in the interdependent stresses in a mutually influencing social relational matrix erupts in emotional distress, should this be seen as the ‘miner’s canary’ effect that is pointing to the need to resolve dysfunction in the dynamics of the habitat that are conditioning this inhabitant’s dynamic?   Or,

“Throughout history this dichotomy of Hygienic health through natural harmony and Aesculapian healing by intervention eternally recurs. Hippocrates, the great Greek father of medicine, returned to the former tradition and stressed the treatment of the person as a whole, reflecting and participating in a natural order of natural health. The good physician assisted nature after the manner of “similia similibus,” treating like with like. An example of this would be applying hot compresses to augment the inflammation of a local infection. Hippocrates taught that the body was endowed with the ability to cure itself and that the outward signs of disease were laudable manifestations of this process. … The counter current of allopathic medicine, often based on the opposite principle of “contraria contrariis” (that is, attempting to counteract external symptoms by producing an opposite effect) was not buried with the ruins of the Aesculapian temples. It has reappeared throughout history and at times has coexisted to a remarkable extent with the natural harmony concept of Hygiea. The Gnostics of early Christian times developed rather elaborate rituals for the expulsion of disease. Disease by their understanding represented the adversary forces of evil over which a mystical salvation could be effected by the initiates. Their invocation with the word “abrucadabra” survives in the vocabulary of prestidigitators of modern times. To my knowledge this incantation is not in frequent use today by many members of the modern medical profession, no matter how heretical their personal philosophy.” — Robert Herwick, M.D.

The phrase uttered by Louis Pasteur on his deathbed, in conceding that Antoine Béchamp had been correct in his rejection of Aesculapian pathogen/germ theory was ‘Le microbe n’est rien, le terrain est tout’ (the evil pathogen is an illusion, deficiencies of nurturance in the terrain are the real source of dissonance). This speaks to the question that arises when we have an eruption of dissonance that manifests through an individual within the relational social matrix; i.e. it is a ‘miner’s canary’ that is signalling dysfunction in the relational social matrix, or is it an evil pathogen that is in need of some kind of allopathic exorcism, pharmaceutical or incantational [abrucadabra]?

What is the nature of a ‘miner’s canary’ or ‘identified patient’ that signals dysfunction in the relational social matrix that is incubating ‘biters’, and its various manifestations; ‘mental illness’, ‘criminality’, ‘sexual violence’, ‘terrorism’?

What is the nature of an ‘evil pathogen’ that harbours internally resident malevolent purpose that is the full and sole sourcer[or] of dissonant behaviour; i.e. the crazy person, the criminal, the sexual predator, the terrorist?

The assumption of ‘inhabitant-habitat-INTERdependence’ will give us back ‘the miner’s canary’ while the assumption of ‘inhabitant-habitat-independence’ will give us back ‘the evil pathogen’.

When we choose the ‘evil pathogen’, we are essentially accepting, as Szasz accuses us of, ‘scientism’;

Instead of embracing in its entirety the progressive development of a phenomenon, we simply try to connect each moment with the one immediately preceding. We admit that the present state of the world only depends on the immediate past, without being directly influenced, so to speak, by the recollection of a more distant past.

Our globally dominating [via colonization] Western society has institutionalized as its default approach, ‘scientism’, and thus the view of the person through whom dissonance erupts as a ‘pathogen’, rather than a ‘miner’s canary’.   Thus, the ‘isolated act’ is accepted as ‘meaningful in itself’ [out of the context of the progressive development of the phenomenon] is the ‘remedial’ techniques that are being perfected are aimed at ‘early detection’ and ‘rapid isolation/elimination’ of the pathogen.

Zero-tolerance and ‘pre-emptive strikes’ are techniques in support of this allopathic view and practice, and these are essentially the modern day versions of cultural scape-goating ‘witch-hunts’ that make ‘miners canary’s out to be folk devils’.   Moral judging of isolated acts is at the bottom of all of this.

As Stan Cohen observes in ‘Folk Devils and Moral Panics’;

“Societies appear to be subject, every now and then, to periods of moral panic. A condition, episode, person or group of persons emerges to become defined as a threat to societal values and interests; its nature is presented in a stylized and stereotypical fashion by the mass media; the moral barricades are manned by editors, bishops, politicians and other right-thinking people; socially accredited experts pronounce their diagnoses and solutions; …”

Looking at these goings on from the point of miners-canary-eye view, it is the relational social matrix they are included in that is the source of the dysfunction incubating tensions/stresses, so while the dominating society sees the miner’s canary as ‘sick’ and in need of ‘remedial action’ that will restore it to ‘normality’, the miner’s canary takes on the stance of a heretic, seeing society’s ‘normality’ as ‘dysfunctional’;

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

Resistance to remediation that aims to ‘return one to normality’ is not something that the miner’s canary is going to easily accept, yet to refuse amounts to confessing to be a heretic.

Szasz makes the following comments;

“The involuntarily hospitalized mentally ill are regarded as “bad” and valiant efforts are made to make them “better.” Words like “good” and “bad” are used here in accordance with the dominant value system of society. … In the framework of traditional medical ethics, the patient deserves humane attention only insofar as he is potentially healthy and is willing to be healthy —just as in the framework of traditional Christian ethics, the heretic deserved humane attention only insofar as he was potentially a true believer and was willing to become one. In the one case, people are accepted as human beings only because they might be healthy citizens; in the other, only because they might be faithful Christians. In short neither was heresy formerly, nor is sickness now, given the kind of humane recognition which, from the point of view of an ethic of respect and tolerance, they deserve.”

That is, in the framework of traditional medical ethics, the pressure is on the ‘miner’s canary’ to accept that the dissonance that manifests through him is coming from inside-of-him, and he’d better believe that if he wants to be looked upon as a worthwhile human being.

Meanwhile, there is evidence in support of the ‘miner’s canary’ view in which dissonance derives from the dynamics of the habitat and is expressed THROUGH the dynamics of the inhabitant [i.e. through the inherent ‘inhabitant-habitat-INTERdependence’ relationship.

For example, the incidence of ‘mental illness’ has risen in lockstep with the advancing industrialization [mechanization] of society, suggesting that social relational stresses have a primary role to play [although many prefer to postulate biological cause arising in association with industrialization];

“Thirty years ago an American psychiatrist, E. Fuller Torrey, wrote a research paper suggesting that the current rates of functional psychosis (schizophrenia and manic-depressive illness) were not transhistorically constant, but rather a psychiatric side effect of advanced industrialization. For Torrey, government statistics over the previous two hundred years demonstrated a constant increase in the rates of the most severe mental disorders. Positing that these functional psychoses were “recent” diseases, he proceeded to identify possible biological culprits, including an as-yet-undetected virus circulating in industrial cities since the early nineteenth century. Apparently, the paper was rejected by every journal to which it was sent. The Invisible Plague is the author’s book-length rebuttal to the skeptics who dismissed so long ago his “recent disease” hypothesis.”

Supporting the social relational origins of  the dysfunction, is research such as has been consolidated in the paper; ‘Mental Health and Ethnic Minorities’ by Cochrane and Sashidharan, that show that the incidence of schizophrenia in non-native born blacks in the U.K. is 3-5 times higher than native born blacks. As the researchers point out, this effect cannot be due to genetic difference

“From the outset it will be clear that most of the research in this field has followed the conventional epidemiological or medical paradigm by focusing on mental ill health as the dependent variable. It is, therefore, not surprising that there is a lack of empirically grounded research on mental well-being or the psychological resilience and survival of minority groups in this country” — R. Cochrane (University of Birmingham) and S. P. Sashidharan (North Birmingham Mental Health Trust) in ‘Mental Health and Ethnic Minorities’

Conclusion of ‘Celebrating The Miner’s Canaries’

The most direct way to approach this ‘conclusion’ is to directly state that ‘pathogens exist only in intellectual concept’.  They do not exist in the physical reality of our natural experience.  In other words, there are no ‘independently-existing, internal process driven and directed ‘things-in-themselves’ that operate independently of the habitat that they reside in.    Like the noun-and-verb European/Scientific language-and-grammar construct—- ‘Katrina is ravaging New Orleans’,—- language  based intellectual RE-presentations can take shortcuts with physical reality.  Amongst relational forms in a transforming relational activity continuum, the behaviour of a relational form is a reflection of the transforming continuum as noted in Mach’s principle.  This is the implication of;

“[In nature]… “the individual parts reciprocally determine one another.” … “The properties of one mass always include relations to other masses,” … “Every single body of the Universe stands in some definite relations with every other body in the Universe.” Therefore, no object can “be regarded as wholly isolated.” And even in the simplest case, “the neglecting of the rest of the world is impossible.” – Ernst Mach

As indicated in the opening statements, while we have an intellectual interpretational choice as to whether the ‘dissonant element’ in the social relational matrix is a ‘miner’s canary’ [relational matrix-sourced dissonance] or a ‘pathogen’ [matrix-battling-element-sourced dissonance], modern physics and our own experience-based intuition would only give us one choice, and that is the ‘miner’s canary’ choice. The pathogen option is an intellectual interpretation deriving from applying moral judgement in combination with scientific thinking as physically real, though it is out of the context of the experiential preconditioning that is incubated through one’s inclusion in the continually evolving relational social matrix].

That is, the pathogen option requires us to assume that the act of the dog ‘biting’ is meaningful as an isolated act, and is subject to moral judgement, even though our experience-based intuition is telling us that such behaviour is a reflection of the social relational dynamic that the dog is included in.  This is the assumption that is used in science to generate ‘economy of thought’..

We admit that the present state of the world only depends on the immediate past, without being directly influenced, so to speak, by the recollection of a more distant past. — Poincaré

‘Miner’s canaries’ are living lives that reject capitulating to the drift of herd behaviour [behaviour that comes from language-based organization; i.e. the type of human organization that is based on ‘intellectual common interest’ and ‘intellectual common purpose’ rather than the natural bioregionalism based organization that is available to all relational forms including humans].  The ‘miner’s canaries’ are sensing problems in the social relational dynamic they are included in at the same time as the social relational dynamics they are included are sensing problems with them.

‘Miner’s canaries’ appear in many forms, some angry and attacking, some trying to break off relations and some can be like Bodhisattvas that have a special ability to sense harmony and balance, so that they can provide a ‘reference point’ for those variously caught up in the situational dissonances in the relational social matrix; … a reference point that will persist as a guiding light until the last of those who have drifted into dissonance will have found a path restoring them to harmony and balance within the relational spatial unum of a world that is given only once.

There is no evidence of the existence, other than as an intellectual concept propped up by noun-and-verb language-and-grammar, of a pathogen.

The celebrating of ‘miner’s canaries’ is the celebration of the natural experiencing of life as in ‘we are all related’, and liberation from literal acceptance of the intellectual REpresentations of language [the illusion based reality of ‘Maya’].

miner’s canaries or pathogens?

* * * * *

FOOTNOTE-SCHOLIUM:   The politics of pathogens

There is a story, in the indigenous aboriginal oral tradition; ‘Who Shall Speak for Wolf’?’.  The context is that wolf and man used to live in harmony with one another, however, when man, who was forced to move his village due to continued exposure to storms and floods, met in council, there was no-one who spoke for wolf, and man’s new village site was on the traditional breeding ground of wolf.  This was like a humiliating ‘poke’ to wolf and the relational social tensions, compounded by living in close proximity to man (e.g. inducing wolf to steal food from man and inducing man who feared for the safety of his children to kill wolves).  Both wolf and man were transformed by these developments, and wolf, having suffered abuse from man, became abusive towards man, and man, having suffered abuse from wolf, became abusive to wolf.  Man continued to have the power to humiliate wolf by encroaching on his breeding grounds and because of these relational tensions, even minor actions on the part of man were igniting incendiary responses on the part of wolf.

Both wolf and man were trying to cultivate a nurturing space for their children but both shared inclusion in a common space, where, as it would be said today by modern physicists;

“The dynamics of the inhabitants are conditioning the dynamics of the habitat at the same time as the dynamics of the habitat are conditioning the dynamics of the inhabitants” — Mach’s principle.

This reciprocity between all inhabitants sharing inclusion in a common relational space means that there can be no fixed identities, as words like ‘wolf’ and ‘man’ would seem to imply in our noun-and-verb Indo-European/Scientific language and grammar.  Instead;

‘No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it’s not the same river and he’s not the same man.’ — Heraclitus

or,

‘No inhabitant ever steps in the same habitat twice, for it’s not the same habitat and he’s not the same inhabitant.’

It is impossible to construct a house in the forest without destroying some forest; i.e. we live in a relational space where change is by way of relational transformation.   In terms of modern physics;

“[In nature]… “the individual parts reciprocally determine one another.” … “The properties of one mass always include relations to other masses,” … “Every single body of the Universe stands in some definite relations with every other body in the Universe.” Therefore, no object can “be regarded as wholly isolated.” And even in the simplest case, “the neglecting of the rest of the world is impossible.” – Ernst Mach

As Benjamin Whorf, Nietzsche and certain other philosophers have noted (Poincaré, Wittgenstein, McLuhan), our mind tends to be captured by the manner in which noun-and-verb language-and-grammar imputes ‘being’ to continually transforming relational forms [man, wolf] in the relational activity continuum.  This linguistic idealization of ‘being’ is an ‘error of grammar’ that is the root of the concept of the ‘pathogen’, which depends on the notional splitting apart of ‘inhabitant’ and ‘habitat’ and the corollary viewing of an individual inhabitant can as an ‘independent system with internal process driven and directed behaviour that operates in a habitat [absolute space and absolute time] that is independent of the inhabitants that reside and operate within it’.

This is the ‘simplifying assumption’ that delivers ‘economy of thought’ [Mach] whereby;

“Instead of embracing in its entirety the progressive development of a phenomenon, we simply try to connect each moment with the one immediately preceding. We admit that the present state of the world only depends on the immediate past, without being directly influenced, so to speak, by the recollection of a more distant past.”– Origin of Mathematical Physics, Henri Poincaré

This is a process of REpresentation that breaks things down into ‘its parts’ and puts these parts ‘back together’ in order to ‘explain what it is and how it works’.  This is the mechanical world view which derives from ‘analytical inquiry’ and which views a relational form as if it were an independent entity with its own internal process driven and directed behaviour.  These forms are given notional ‘independence’ by REpresenting them relative to ‘fixed reference frames’ (absolute space and absolute time) where the spatial magnitude or ‘growth/shrinkage’ is seen as changing ‘over time’ [i.e. this infers that the thing that is changing has a persisting identity [an ‘independent being’] which is undergoing alterations;

Assuming the present depends only on the immediate past

One might graph the historical growth and shrinkage of a country (e.g. Poland) ‘over time’ in this manner, or the historical growth and shrinkage of a commercial enterprise, as if these things were ‘independently-existing machines’ so that their growth and shrinkage would NOT BE ACKNOWLEDGED  to be in the sense of “[In nature]… “the individual parts reciprocally determine one another.” but would be instead relative to a fixed reference frame [absolute space and absolute time].  

McLuhan points out that that this view of relational forms as ‘machines’ that reside in absolute space and absolute time is a fallacy;

“Many people would be disposed to say that it was not the machine, but what one did with the machine, that was its meaning or message. In terms of the ways in which the machine altered our relations to one another and ourselves, it mattered not in the least whether it turned out cornflakes or Cadillacs.” — Marshall McLuhan, ‘Understanding Media’  [the transforming relational ‘medium is the message’]

McLuhan reminds us that while our sciences may model the growth and shrinkage of a relational form [e.g. a sovereign state or a commercial enterprise] relative to a fixed reference frame, growth and shrinkage are reciprocally accommodated by all of the relational forms in the relational activity continuum.  In other words, in the relational space of the physical reality of our natural experience, relational transformation is the only possibility.  In the bio-space on the surface of the sphere of the earth, if there is growth of urban areas, there is at the same time shrinkage in forest and prairie.  The measuring of things in absolute units of measure such as feet of metres is deceptive since it implies that the space that something is expanding in is absolute, yet in the physical reality of our natural experience, living in the finite and unbounded bio-space on the surface of the earth, there is always ‘reciprocal disposition’; i.e. the growth of one ‘thing’ such as a ‘city’ must be reciprocally accommodated by the shrinkage of other things sharing inclusion in the common relational space.

Starbucks may measure the growth of their business using a curve like the one above which says nothing about the reciprocal accommodating of the diverse inhabitants sharing inclusion in the common living space, such as mom&pop coffee shops, but those shops are no longer ‘what they were’ because the transforming of relational space is the primary dynamic, and the names we give to the continually transforming relational forms within that space, … ‘names’ that impute persisting being/identity to the relational form, …are intellectual idealizations that do not ‘trump’ the continuing relational transformation that is the primary physical dynamic.   That is, the noun-signifiers of language that we assign to continually transforming relational forms to give them notional persisting identity as ‘independent beings’, that we have inflect verbs to make it appear as if they are the local jumpstart authors of their own behaviour, are not the primary movers and shakers in nature’s dynamics that they language and intellect makes them ‘appear to be’;

What we observe as material bodies and forces are nothing but shapes and variations in the structure of space. Particles are just schaumkommen (appearances). – Erwin Schroedinger

The above ‘sample-and-hold’ graphic also reflects on ‘language’ in that, as Mikhil Bakhtin points out, words samplings from a collective consciousness [of a particular language user group] and every use of them is transforming the transforming relational continuum of collective consciousness. That is, Bakhtin points out that consciousness is like a plenum [energy-charged fullness] and the transmitter/speakers and receiver/listeners [that come and go generation after generation] have secondary roles as agents of transformation of the persisting consciousness-plenum. The speaker borrows words from the common repository [they would not be usable words unless they were understood in common] and by using them invites the listener to bring forth his own experience in deciphering them, continually transforming the commons of consciousness in the process.

If we now look back on the wiggly curve in the sample and hold graph, it may be possible to see that the fixed reference frame, BLOCKS THE MIND from acknowledging the physical reality of our natural experience, that the ups and downs of the Starbucks curve are in reciprocal relation to the comings and goings and expandings and contractings of other relational forms [mom&pop coffee shops and other enterprises] in the relational activity continuum “[In nature]… “the individual parts reciprocally determine one another.”   For example, if we look at an animated graphic of ‘The Changing Borders of Poland’ we can see that ‘Poland’s identity’ is a lesser reality than “the individual parts reciprocally determine one another.”

To speak of a ‘pathogen’ is, conversely, to put more credence into the notion of ‘independent being’ than to acknowledge the natural precedence of the relational nature of forms over the idealized concept of ‘independent being’.  The notion that it is the ‘state’ [common purpose pursuing collective] or the ‘enterprise’ [common interest pursuing collective] that is doing the growing and shrinking is a language and intellect based illusion that is the source of ‘incoherence’ in our collective social relational dynamic.

* * *

Perhaps I can make my overall ‘conclusions’ more clear by saying the same thing in a slightly different way.   There seems to be nothing in our real-life experience [nothing apart from language-based intellectual REpresentations] to support a belief in pathogens; i.e. there are only ‘miner’s canaries’ where we are speaking of microbes or humans that become ‘estranged’ from the relational social matrix they are situationally included in.  The concept of ‘beings’ with persisting independent ‘identities’ are ‘appearances’ that are synthetically concretized in the intellectual REpresentations of noun-and-verb language-and-grammar.  The identifiable ‘forms’ we can see and touch are ‘relational forms’, …’hitters’ that reflect the ‘fielding’ they are included in like the abusive biting dog [‘hitter’] is a back-reflection of the dog-abusing society [‘fielding’]  and it is impossible it separate out, exactly, the respective contribution of ‘hitting’ and ‘fielding’ to the results of their engaging.

I would therefore accept, as the physical reality of our natural experience, Rumi’s observation that ‘The fault is in the blamer.  The spirit sees nothing to criticize’.

The manner in which the ‘miner’s canary’ is transformed, by Western society, into a ‘pathogen’ can be seen by comparing the shift in ‘modes of organizing’ from the natural waterhole, oasis, or fertile valley orchestrated comings-goings from which mutual supporting relational social dynamics develop, … to language-and-intellect based ‘common purpose’ modes of organizing.

To explore this, we could follow the experience of a man with the dual personalities of man and dog, the primary difference in this exploration being that the dog does not speak a noun-and-verb-European/Scientific language-and-grammar, and thus does not tune in to ‘common purpose’ based organizing since it is language and intellection based.  When one thinks of a diverse mixture of participants operating within a common space without any common purpose, one thinks of ‘anarchy’ [the absence of any authoritarian hierarchy to keep everybody pulling in the same direction].   Meanwhile, the organizing mode of indigenous aboriginals has been described as ‘indigenous anarchism’ since it was organizing that did not involve any central authority or any compulsory ‘common purpose’ that was agreed to and enforced by a ‘supreme central authority’ as in the Western mode of organizing known as ‘sovereigntism’. This ‘indigenous anarchism’ was admired for its organizational effectiveness;

“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 consensus 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 gardens 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 toward the aged, the sick and the disabled in war. All are free and equal — including the women.” — Bruce E. Johansen, Forgotten Founders

The harmonious relational dynamics of the ‘indigenous anarchist community’ highlighted by the absence of authoritarian structures and the absence of the imposing of intellectual formulations of ‘common purpose’ enforced by moral judgement and retributive justice, …  is in striking contrast to the Western approach to ‘social dynamics management’  In the ‘relations-first’, ‘beings as appearances’ view of indigenous aboriginals and modern physics, while there can be plenty of ‘conflict’, there can be no ‘pathogens’ since the inhabitants are to the habitat as storm-cells in the atmosphere are to the atmosphere [the inhabitants are relational forms that are continually gathering and being regathered within the relational activity continuum/habitat].

Moral judgement is the basis for interpreting ‘miner’s canaries’ as ‘pathogens’ and ‘independent being’ is the necessary assumption on which moral judgement hinges.  The notion of ‘independent being’ follows from the monotheist Creation myth wherein ‘man’ is created as an independent being [‘inhabitant-habitat-independence’].   Science [mainstream] has supported this ‘independent being’ interpretation of man [by invoking a notional absolute space and absolute time as his reference framing [inhabitant-habitat-independence].  This silhouetting of man as an ‘independent being’ operating in a habitat that is independent of the inhabitants that operate within it, leads to the notion that the individual is ‘fully and solely responsible for the results of his own actions’.  The philosophical problem here is that in the physical reality of our natural experience, it is impossible to separate out the contribution of the ‘doer’ [hitter] and the ‘done-to’ [fielding] to the results.  As mentioned in the essay, the very same act of tossing a match that has been innocuous in the past can ignite an incendiary flare-up depending on the experiential preconditioning of the forest. This is the case of ‘inhabitant-habitat-INTERdependence’ as captured in Mach’s principle.   For the dog aspect of the persona, those pushing their own crony group ‘common purpose’ may have poked him many times to make him comply with their wishes, and after the n’th time, the poking may take him beyond his threshold of tolerance and he may ‘bite back’.    This ‘dog aspect’ of man is not going to accept that the moral judgement of the pokeur society imposed on his act seen as if he is fully and solely responsible for it.  This can be explored by examining ‘indigenous anarchism’ wherein justice is ‘restorative’ since it is assumed that all things are related and no thing ‘exists independently of the rest’.

…

1. There is no such thing as ‘an anarchist’ except by inference. Anarchism is an organizing dynamic achieved by diverse participants. The relational dynamic of organizing is ‘anarchist’ but this does not arise from the ‘common intention’ or ‘common purpose’ of individual ‘anarchist units’, each manifesting ‘anarchist behaviour’. The diversity of participants in a mutually supportive ecosystem are not ‘putting the system together from ‘common intention’; instead, the relational niche-need openings [the richly populated water-hole or oasis that beckons] inspires their assertive actions. The flora in the human digestive tract that sustain the human are not directed by ‘the body’s common purpose’, they are attracted to warm, damp tunnels.

2. Indigenous anarchism functions like nature’s anarchism, it is a relational dynamic that is not intellectually directed by ‘common purpose’. E.g. ‘bioregionalism’ is not intellectually directed by ‘common purpose’, … the evolving of various shapes and sizes of community and their interactions [as in an aerial view of the interweaving tapestry of naturally evolving communities] is not intellectually planned, or delivered. ‘L’être n’est rien, le terrain est tout’, ‘L’habitant n’est rien, l’habitat est tout’ (the ‘being’ or ‘inhabitant’ is nothing, the habitat is everything’). That is, the habitat persists as a continually transforming relational space in which relational forms or ‘inhabitants’ are continually gathering and being regathered [language-and-grammar reduce relational form to ‘beings’].

3. There is no need to develop a consensus as to ‘how an indigenous anarchist should behave’ (see 1. and 2.), since ‘anarchism’ is a relational mode of organization in which a diversity of participants who need not speak ‘the same language’ and need not believe in any ‘common purpose’, participate [e.g. the diverse forms that participate in a mutually supporting ecosystem].

4. The reason why indigenous anarchism employs ‘restorative justice’ rather than the ‘moral judgement based retributive justice’ is because ‘the moral judgement’ is an intellectual idealization based on monotheism which pictures man as an inhabitant that is ‘independent of the habitat’ and parasitically feeding off of it; i.e. an independent being that is notionally fully and solely responsible for its own behaviour, … behaviour that is morally judged to be EITHER ‘good’ OR ‘bad’ depending on whether or not it supports the intellectually derived ‘common purpose’ of the crony group [if you are not with us, you are against us]. Western society metaphorically pokes people with sticks like men poke dogs (particularly those who do not support crony group formulated ‘common purpose’), and when those ‘dogs’ bite, the ‘supreme authority’ that forms from ‘common purpose’ uses ‘science’ with its absolute space and absolute time reference-framing, to hold the biting dog fully and solely responsible for his action [out of the context of his experiential pre-conditioning by the dog-poking ‘crony common purpose based society’. As Poincaré notes, this ‘ignoring’ of the physical reality of experiential pre-conditioning [‘habitat-inhabitant INTERdependence’] is built into mathematical physics and into mainstream science;

“Instead of embracing in its entirety the progressive development of a phenomenon, we simply try to connect each moment with the one immediately preceding. We admit that the present state of the world only depends on the immediate past, without being directly influenced, so to speak, by the recollection of a more distant past.”– Origin of Mathematical Physics, Henri Poincaré

The restorative justice of indigenous anarchism does not ‘forget’ that this dog-poking-to-‘encourage’ compliance with ‘crony common purpose’ is the deeper sourcing of authorship of ‘dogs-biting’; i.e. the ‘dogs-biting’ are the reflection of the abusive nature of the society they are included in.  There is no support in the physical reality of our experience, for morally judging the ‘dogs-biting’ on the basis that the dogs are independent systems with internal process driven and directed behaviours that operate in a habitat that is independent of the inhabitants that reside and operate within it and are, therefore, fully and solely responsible for ‘their own behaviour’.

Dogs do not do things according to intellectual agreement; i.e. their behaviours are natural, so that if dogs are abused by the society they are in, this will source abusive behaviours in the dogs. They have no intellectual reasoning that says to them; ‘Look, we were more powerful than you and we subjugated you and made slaves out of you, and that is all in the past. We are going to judge your behaviour in the present as if your behaviour in the present depends only on the immediate past, just as in the architectural foundations of science.  It is a criminal act to bite another person and we as masters, abide by these same moral laws as you slaves do and the fact that we ‘have been doing most of the poking’ and you have been ‘receiving most of the poking’ is beside the point. Besides, our ‘power to humiliate’ is a dog-poking that is not strictly based on physical force, but is mostly based on permeating the living space with fear and threats; i.e. ‘see how well behaved the herd or dog pack is’ after we make examples of a few of those who resist complying with ‘common purpose’.’

In the understanding of the dog-half of the man, the world is experienced as a relational activity continuum; … for him there are none of these intellectual notions of ‘independent being’ and ‘actions’ that are isolated in space and time such as the dog’s action of biting.

“Instead of embracing in its entirety the progressive development of a phenomenon, we simply try to connect each moment with the one immediately preceding. We admit that the present state of the world only depends on the immediate past, without being directly influenced, so to speak, by the recollection of a more distant past.”– Origin of Mathematical Physics, Henri Poincaré

The dog-man can only “embrace in its entirety the progressive development of a phenomenon”; i.e. it is language-based intellection that enables the man-half of his persona to ‘see things’ in terms of ‘independent beings’ that are the local jumpstart authors of local-in-space-and-time ‘actions’ whose results they are fully and solely responsible for.   For the dog-man, the ‘recollection of a more distant past’ is built into his experiential preconditioning, just as much as the ‘recollection of a long hot summer’ is built into the experiential preconditioning of the forest in which a normally innocuous match tossing ignites an incendiary flare-up.

The man-man may understand that his ‘identity’ is fixed and therefore that his ‘self’ or the ‘he’ in ‘he is fully and solely responsible for the results of his own actions’ … is eternally independent of the ‘other’ who is the recipient of his ‘bite-back’ [in which case he can ‘plead guilty’ while the pokeur society, which is playing the neutral judge role, is assumed to be entirely without responsibility.

However, the man-dog, lacking the language and intellection based concept of ‘independent being’, will understanding himself and his ‘quantum entanglement’ with the human society in the context that;

‘No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it’s not the same river and he’s not the same man.’ — Heraclitus

or,

‘No inhabitant ever steps in the same habitat twice, for it’s not the same habitat and he’s not the same inhabitant.’ — Heraclitus

* * *

ROUGH NOTES:

Another insight-giving dimension to the source of the ‘drift’ in the dynamics of the relational social matrix is the jumping-ship from bioregionalism to ‘common-interest’ based community.   As Szasz notes, linguistic communications are most responsible for the divergence between the organizing mode of humans and animals. Without language, organization is [for both animals and humans] primarily orchestrated by bioregionalism where communities form as comings-and-going to/from water-holes, oases, fishing ports, fertile-valleys, grasses-rich prairies, mountain-meadows etc.   Noun-and-verb-European/Scientific language-and-grammar based exchanges opened the way for ‘common interest’ driven and directed organizing, which RE-presented human activity in an ‘all-hitting’, ‘no-fielding’ manner.   This is also the mode of RE-presentation of dynamics in mainstream science, and it leads to intellectual RE-presentations of dynamics in terms of local-in-space-and-time ACTS, a synthetic simplification [based on assuming absolute space and absolute time] that makes possible moral judgement based justice.

The acknowledging of relational space makes the ‘allopathic view’ IMPOSSIBLE since the individual relational form can no longer be considered an ‘independently-existing thing-in-itself’, but is instead seen as a relational feature in the relational activity continuum.   That is, nature is essentially a relational unity, as pointed out in the appended citations.

The ‘bottom line implication’ is that the allopathic view is not physically realistic [it is a kind of shorthand mapping aka ‘economy of thought’ (Mach)] and as with the relation between microbes and terrain in ‘le microbe n’est rien, le terrain est tout’, … so it is, in general, that ‘l’habitant n’est rien, l’habitat est tout’ , in which case, the existence of ‘pathogens’ [independently existing doers of bad deeds] is impossible and ‘miner’s canaries’ [aka ‘agents of transformation’] are the general case.

The point here is not that there are no APPARENT pathogens like an Adolf Hitler etc., the point is that dynamics are ‘hitter-fielding’ in nature, which means that the hitting results are orchestrated and shaped by the experientially preconditioned fielding [space is NOT absolute, or in other words, the dynamics of the inhabitants are NOT independent of the dynamics of the habitat (Mach’s principle).

* * *

Nature is essentially a relational unity — Mach

“[In nature]… “the individual parts reciprocally determine one another.” … “The properties of one mass always include relations to other masses,” … “Every single body of the Universe stands in some definite relations with every other body in the Universe.” Therefore, no object can “be regarded as wholly isolated.” And even in the simplest case, “the neglecting of the rest of the world is impossible.” – Ernst Mach

Nature is essentially a relational unity – Kuhlmann reporting on current modern physics views.

“By the principle of Occam’s razor, physicists and philosophers prefer ideas that can explain the same phenomena with the fewest assumptions. In this case you can construct a perfectly valid theory by positing the existence of certain relations without additionally assuming individual things. So proponents of ontic structural realism say we might as well dispense with things and assume that the world is made of [relational-spatial] structures, or nets of relations.” – Meinard Kuhlmann, ‘What is Real’, Scientific American, August 2013

Nature’s dynamics have been falsely RE-DEPICTED in terms of ‘being’ and ‘what things do’ — Nietzsche

“Indeed, nothing has yet possessed a more naive power of persuasion than the error concerning being, as it has been formulated by the Eleatics, for example. After all, every word and every sentence we say speak in its favor. Even the opponents of the Eleatics still succumbed to the seduction of their concept of being: Democritus, among others, when he invented his atom. “Reason” in language — oh, what an old deceptive witch she is! I am afraid we are not rid of God because we still have faith in grammar.” – Nietzsche, ‘Twilight of the Idols’

Nature’s dynamics are a relational continuum, ‘actions’ are fictions, and moral judgements make no sense — Nietzsche

“How false is the supposition that an action must depend upon what has preceded it in consciousness ! And morality has been measured in the light of this supposition, as also criminality. . . . The value of an action must be judged by its results, say the utilitarians: to measure it according to its origin involves the impossibility of knowing that origin. But do we know its results ? Five stages ahead, perhaps. Who can tell what an action provokes and sets in motion ? As a stimulus ? As the spark which fires a powder-magazine ? Utilitarians are simpletons —“
.
“The re-establishment of “Nature”: an action in itself is quite devoid of value ; the whole question is this: who performed it? One and the same ” crime ” may, in one case, be the greatest privilege, in the other infamy. As a matter of fact, it is the selfishness of the judges which interprets an action (in regard to its author) according as to whether it was useful or harmful to themselves (or in relation to its degree of likeness or unlikeness to them).”— Nietzsche on ‘Morality’ and ‘Herd Behaviour’ in ‘The Will to Power’

The ‘transmitter’ and ‘receiver’ or ‘subject’ and ‘object’ are not really two things, but aspects of one dynamic – Schroedinger

“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.” – Erwin Schroedinger

The energy-charged relational activity continuum is one habitat whose inhabitants are agents of transformation — Mach

“the dynamics of the inhabitants are conditioning the dynamics of the habitat at the same time as the dynamics of the habitat are conditioning the dynamics of the inhabitants” – Mach’s principle

Science is a kind of shorthand for making a map that is NOT the territory [a finger pointing to the moon that is NOT the moon]

“Science itself, … may be regarded as a minimization problem, consisting of the completest possible presenting of facts with the least possible expenditure of thought” —Ernst Mach

Science that reduces our view of self and the world to ‘pure mechanics’, derives from noun-and-verb Indo-European/Scientific language-and-grammar. As Whorf notes;

“. It is sometimes stated that Newtonian space, time, and matter are sensed by everyone intuitively, whereupon relativity is cited as showing how mathematical analysis can prove intuition wrong. This, besides being unfair to intuition, is an attempt to answer offhand question (1) put at the outset of this paper, to answer which this research was undertaken. Presentation of the findings now nears its end, and I think the answer is clear. The offhand answer, laying the blame upon intuition for our slowness in discovering mysteries of the Cosmos, such as relativity, is the wrong one. The right answer is: Newtonian space, time, and matter are no intuitions. They are receipts from culture and language. That is where Newton got them.” – Benjamin Whorf, ‘The Relation of Habitual Thought and Behavior to Language’