N.B. It is impossible to capture in words, the transforming relational continuum (the Tao), but one can use word-based (metaphorical) inference to stimulate an intuitive understanding. –“A man’s reach must exceed his grasp or what’s a meta phor?” (-McLuhan et al)

We use language and grammar to reduce the inherently nonlocal , relational) Tao to local and explicit abstraction, to render the ineffable Tao (a reduced version thereof) ‘effable’.  For example we employ language and grammar to re-cast nonlocal resonance as in ‘duning’ to local material mechanics as in …  ‘dunes with their own powers of sourcing actions and developments.  This effable-izing is made possible thanks to the ‘double error’ of language and grammar identified by Nietzsche (i.e. using ‘naming’ to impute ‘local existence’ and conflating this with grammar to notionally endow the ‘naming-instantiated local things-in-themselves the powers of sourcing actions and developments.  While the EAST employs such abstract reductive tools only as an insight-triggering go-by to enable language-based  (effable) sharing of (ineffable) experiencing of inclusion in the Tao, .. the WEST has allowed this reductionist tool and its constructions to be employed as the ‘operative reality’ ;  thus, as Emerson observes; the tool runs away with the workman, the human with the divine’.

  * * *

Once upon a time there was Chinese philosopher who intuited that the universe was a great ball of fluid energy that was in continuous transformation.  He called it the Tao.

While there were many features within this Tao, there were no features that had a distinguishable ‘beginning’ or ‘ending’ nor even a persisting separate thing-in-itselfness, and everything; that is, all visible forms that were included in the Tao, were without beginning and ending and separate existence.  They were ‘relational forms’ like boils in a boiling fluid, nonlocal formings emerging locally (because our viewing of them localized them by their emerging into our awareness), forming and enlarging and spreading outwards and becoming one with the flow. Even though our vision distinguished between forms, our experience was of inclusion in a fluid continuum.

Lao Tzu’s understanding was that because all forms were continually transforming features within the Tao, … it did not make sense to give them names since names did not change and all forms were relational forms undergoing continual transformation in the Tao.

But naming the forms was very useful for sharing observations and for discussing the transformation that was going on in the common living space.   It was more important to say; ‘watch out, there is big waterspout heading in your direction’, … than to be stopped from speaking by the understanding that ‘the Tao that can be told is not the True Tao’.   That is, there is a certain practicality, the practicality of sharing our impressions, in naming ‘formings’ that are purely relational and without ‘being’.

Naming the waterspout, a ‘waterspout’, Lao Tzu pointed out, was misleading since the word ‘waterspout’ does not change while there was nothing in the swirling transformation that was not included in the changing.  More erroneous still was the tendency, after naming the flow-form, … to use language that suggested that ‘the waterspout was moving’.  But the waterspout was itself relational motion and not a ‘thing-in-itself’ that was ‘moving’ as that sort of language implied.

Still, Lao Tzu could use this language to alert his neighbour (his fellow flow-form) who was working in his barn (a relational feature within the transforming Tao).  Whereas previously he could only truthfully say; ‘Beware, transformation is unfolding in a manner that may bring us injury’!, … with the double error language he could say, ‘waterspout heading straight for Yo Ling barn!

Lao Tzu reasoned that Yo Ling would appreciate this warning and would understand that what Lao Tzu was really speaking of was unfolding relational transformation, and that Lao Tzu’s use of the double error was just an attention-getting expedient which did not refer to the real physical phenomena but only to ‘appearances’.

When there was duning, it was more expeditious to speak of ‘the dune that is about to bury Yo Ling’s horse stable., than to say; ‘Now is time for Yo Ling to consider how transforming landscape manifests as duning’.’

Lao Tzu knew that the Tao cannot be told, … i.e. that what is REALLY going on cannot be told;

“Ceaseless in its action, it yet cannot be named, and then it again returns and becomes nothing. This is called the Form of the Formless, and the Semblance of the Invisible; this is called the Fleeting and Indeterminable. We meet it and do not see its Front; we follow it, and do not see its Back.”–Lao Tzu

Therefore what is being told is not real.  There is no ‘dune’ – ‘thing’ and there is no ‘thing-that-is-moving’ in the transforming relational continuum (the Tao).  To say that ‘the waterspout’ (or ‘the dune)’ is growing larger and moving to the south’ is not about ‘reality’. Reality is the all-including Tao (wave-field) and it is ineffable.  But the double error of language and grammar is useful for alluding to what is unfolding (by reducing the nonlocal and rendering it [some facsimile of it] in terms that imply ‘local’.)

The utility of saying “there is a big waterspout heading in your direction” is evident even if it is a misrepresentation of what is in fact the nonlocal, relational-transformational dynamic.  Even without postulating ‘independent beings’, there is a Nature-inbuilt tendency to cultivating and sustaining relational harmony within the Tao.

The catspaw (the wind-induced pattern on the surface of the ocean) is a nonlocal phenomenon that emerges where ‘ocean meets sky’.   It is like a puckering up in anticipating kissing (M.’s emulating of kissing her parrot Pacquot, she used to get into SMR wave mode during neurofeedback).   It is the same sort of pregnant moment as the server feels in tennis when the tennis ball one has thrown up in serving attains the position calling for the racket to connect with it; i.e. the pregnant moment when the falling ball and the swinging racket are pulled into a mutual communion, not just to ‘make contact’ but to transform-motion in a meaningful manner, fertilizing a transition into a higher (4th) dimensionality.  Awareness that elevates into this higher, ‘curved space’ dimensionality, is elusive and eludes the explicitness of our direct glance (as with the mythical ‘Aletheia’ mentioned in Kepler’s writing, who is always flitting about ‘in the corner of our vision’ but disappears when we try to look upon her directly with a crow’s eye voyeur stare).  The sand waves as resonance in the sand-sea are a living, shifting continuum, a ‘puckering’ of the desert sands’ that we see ‘out of the corner of our eye’, that vanishes in our employing of our voyeur crows-eye focus on ‘the dune’ which has us thinking, instead, of a LOCAL dune-thing-in-itself that is moving, … i.e. something with the powers of sourcing its own development and movement, and no more a NONLOCAL ‘puckering’ or ‘resonance’ in the sand-sea (the wave-field  view).

In M’s neurofeedback experience, this puckering up  comes with the feeling of immersion in non-local influence; i.e. one is neither the assertor nor the receptor, nor is one at the mercy of whether to be EITHER ‘assertive’ OR ‘receptive’, male-ish or female-ish, both of which are LOCAL in nature (local inside-outward assertoring and local outside-inward receptoring), … instead, puckering as in the catspaw, is a nonlocal phenomenon, an expression of heaven and earth (above and below) as a coniunctio oppositorum or coincidentia oppositorum.

Resonance does not come from ‘dunes moving together in a coordinated fashion.  There are no local things-in-themselves and naming something a ‘dune’ does not over-ride the reality of the Tao; i.e. ‘naming’ does not bring things-in-themselves into existence; ‘duning’ remains an inherently non-local resonance phenomenon.  To speak of ‘the dune that moves’ is a ‘double error of language and grammar (Nietzsche).  Duning is ‘resonance’ which is a nonlocal ‘puckering up’.

The fact that M’s ‘puckering up’ is associated with sensorimotor rhythm wave-mode (SMR) which takes one out of ALPHA wave-mode (either/or reasoning mode) is significant since ‘puckering up’ is like the inductive influence in a magnetic field which is nonlocal (as with a magnet hidden beneath a blank sheet of paper on which iron filings are inductively organized by the magnetic field as exemplifies the non-local influence of ‘field’).  Nonlocal influence is ‘real’ however, it manifests locally as in the case of the waterspout/tornado and such local manifesting can be ‘concretized’ by language and grammar.

It is easy and convenient, thanks to the reductive capacities of language and grammar, to shift the attribution from nonlocal to local sourcing, by one’s use of language and grammar in the producer-product localizing phraseology as in …  ‘the waterspout is growing larger and stronger and is moving to the East’.

In this manner we superficially overcome (wallpaper over) the nonlocal nature of the phenomenon and reduce it to a local producer-product dynamic THANKS TO LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR!  Western culture adherents concoct REDUCTIVE CONSTRUCTIONS OF REALITY that give a foundational role to producer-product dynamics, THUS OBSCURING NON-LOCALITY WHICH IS THE BASIC, NATURAL PHENOMENON.

Getting in touch with ‘nonlocality’ is getting in touch with the Tao and it is inherently nonlocal and beyond BOTH inside-outward assertor-ing AND outside-inward receptor-ing, … both of which are as far as we can take ‘puckering’ when we try to limit our portrayals within a three-dimensional space; i.e. in order to capture ‘nonlocal puckering’ we need a topology that is four dimensional or more.  Insofar as our language is limited to three dimensional objects in three-dimensional space, such language falls inherently short of being able to capture nonlocal puckering.  Hence ‘the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao.  Duning is nonlocal puckering; it is beyond the dimensional scope of local 3D dynamics.

Another way to say this is that 4+ dimensional phenomena can’t be articulated in terms of three-dimensional objects in three-dimensional space.

Thus neurofeedback which trains us (reminds us that we have the capability of 4+ dimensional sensory experience and restores our ability to get a handle on it) in regaining access to such higher dimensional awareness (SMR) as associates with sensory experience of inclusion in the Tao.  This higher dimensional awareness takes us beyond the binary logic of rational intellection aka ‘reason’.  As Nietzsche points out;

“In Reason’ in language!  ……..(Note how Nietzsche points to ‘being’ as the underpinning of ‘reason‘; i.e.  … “Being is thought into and insinuated into everything as ‘cause’; from the concept ‘ego,’ alone, can the concept ‘Being’ proceed.)

 “In Reason’ in language! .– oh what a deceptive old witch it has been!  I fear we shall never be rid of God, so long as we still believe in grammar.” – Nietzsche, ‘Twilight of the Idols’

Reason is limited binary thinking in terms of EITHER ‘is’ OR ‘is not’ as in 3D figure-and-ground phenomena which lacks the dimensionality of the ‘quantum logic’ of BOTH ‘is’ AND ‘is not’ as in nonlocal phenomena such as duning or ‘puckering’ wherein ‘figure-and-ground’ as no longer two mutually exclusive realms but embody a yin/yang (tai-chi) coincidentia oppositorum relation.

The ‘bottom line’, as we might say, is that ‘reality’ (the reality of our sensory experience of inclusion in the wave-field aka transforming relational continuum aka ‘the Tao’) has a ‘higher dimensionality’ than the three dimensional EITHER ‘is’ OR ‘is not’ word-pictures we commonly use to share our observations and experiences with one another.

That is, language and grammar are tools that facilitate sharing BY WAY OF REDUCING THE INEFFABLE TAO TO EFFABLE TERMS OF 3D OBJECTS IN 3D SPACE THAT WE ‘MOVE ABOUT’ WITH ‘GRAMMAR’.  ‘Duning’ is a nonlocal 4+ dimensional NONLOCAL phenomenon that we reduce, with the reductionist tools of language and grammar, to 3D terms of independently-existing objects like ‘dunes’ that we depict as moving within an absolute containing space .  For example, we say that “the dunes ‘shift across the ‘desert floor”.

This is reduction from the nonlocal dynamics that are 4+ dimensions to the abstract 3 dimensional pseudo-world of language and grammar.

Understanding things in terms of the fluid wave-field worldview (the Tao) clarifies so many misconceptions that come from the reduced-by-language-and-grammar-to-3-dimensions ‘thing-in-itself’ producer-product world view that is the popular and ‘officially’ dominating Western world view.  It is a synthetic world that we intellectually construct with the abstractions of language and grammar.

Meanwhile, in the wave-field worldview of our sensory experience of inclusion in the nonlocal dynamics of the Tao, everything is in flux and there is no explicit distinction between forms and flow (inhabitants and habitat).  That distinction between inhabitant and habitat is intellectual rather than experiential and comes from our language and grammar triggered intellectual constructions (3D visual pictorials).

Because everything is in flux, reality can’t be captured in language that ‘names’ the forms in the world since ‘names’ impute fixed ‘being’ to the innately non-fixed flow-forms in the transforming relational continuum (the Tao).   Naming brings with it ‘the burden of concreteness’ whereby we are obliged to come up with ‘grammar’ to represent ‘flow’ in the discretized terms of the movement of name-instantiated things-in-themselves.  This intellectual abstraction-based REDUCTION serves up an intellectual surrogate reality that is then in terms of name-instantiated things-in-themselves with grammar-given powers of sourcing actions and developments.   Thus, IN THE WEST, ‘The tool (of language and grammar-based reduction of the Tao) runs away with the workman, the human with the divine’.

This ‘re-envisaging of the 4+ dimensional flow we are in (the Tao) by way of the intellectually contrived tools of language and grammar delivers for us a REDUCED-TO-MAKE-SHAREABLE surrogate-but-articulable (reduced to 3 D) rendering of the ineffable (4+ D) reality of our sensory experiencing of inclusion in the Tao.

THIS REDUCED-TO-3D inhabitants-in-habitat abstraction PERMITS LANGUAGE-BASED RENDERING OF (a reduced semblance of) THE INEFFABLE TAO; i.e. the language-and-grammar based reduction to a 3D surrogate reality delivers the huge benefit of being able to linguistically/intellectually share knowledge of (a reduced semblance of) our experience of inclusion in 4+ D Tao, …  so that we can learn from one another’s relational (form-in-flow) experiences of inclusion in the Tao so as to; (a) avoid experiences which are unpleasant and injurious, and (b) become aware of and increase our involvement in experiences that are pleasurable and nurturant.

The tool of language and grammar DOES NOT REVEAL THE REALITY OF OUR SENSORY EXPERIENCE OF INCLUSION IN THE TAO, WHICH IS ‘INEFFABLE’, … IT INSTEAD CONSTRUCTS A DIMENSIONALLY-REDUCED PSEUDO-REALITY THAT IS IN TERMS OF ABSOLUTE SPACE LOCALLY POPULATED BY NAME-INSTANTIATED (NOTIONAL) THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES WHICH ‘WE’ ANIMATE WITH GRAMMAR, AS IN ‘PRODUCER-PRODUCT’ SCHEMATA.

So, instead of ‘duning’ as the manifesting of nonlocal resonance which requires 4+ dimensional reality, we abstractly squash this down to name-instantiated 3D objects (‘dunes’) situated within and notionally moving about in 3D space.  NO MORE NONLOCAL RELATIONAL TRANSFORMATION BECAUSE IT IS ‘ECLIPSED’ AND ‘WALLPAPERED OVER’ BY THE POPULAR 3DIMENSIONAL REDUCTIONS OF LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR.

 

***NOTA BENE!   This critical review is NOT ‘knocking’ the massive benefits of SHARING  that comes with a common language, based on a reduced representation of our ineffable experience, … HOWEVER, for the EASTERN and indigenous aboriginal cultures, THE TOOL OF THE REDUCTIVE LANGUAGE-BASED REPRESENTATION OF OUR INEFFABLE EXPERIENCE, that reduces it TO AN EFFABLE AND SHAREABLE VERSION (PSEUDO-REALITY), … DOES NOT CONFUSE SUCH LANGUAGE-REDUCED REALITY for the reality of our actual sensory experience of inclusion in the Tao, a confusion that DOES occur in the WEST.

That is, the language-reduced pseudo-reality is a TOOL THAT DOES NOT, IN THE EASTERN ACCULTURATED MIND, RUN AWAY WITH THE WORKMAN, THE HUMAN WITH THE DIVINE, as is happening in the WESTERN ACCULTURATED MIND.  In the EAST, the tool of language and grammar based abstract constructions of reality DOES NOT RUN AWAY WITH THE WORKMAN because, in the EAST, the ineffable Tao continues to be understood as the primary reality while language-reduced pseudo-realities are used only as ‘throw away’ ladders to give a glimpse of the ineffable Tao that lies intrinsically beyond the effable.  As Wittgenstein expresses this;

6.54 My propositions are elucidatory in this way: he who understands me finally recognizes them as senseless, when he has climbed out through them, on them, over them. (He must so to speak throw away the ladder, after he has climbed up on it.

He must surmount these propositions; then he sees the world rightly.

“7. Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.”

  — Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico Philosophicus

A constructively interfering matrix of propositions can infer something which lies innately beyond them.  The ‘surprise version of the game of Twenty Questions of modern physics (Geoffrey Chew and John Wheeler) makes this case.   Understanding can lie in bringing a multiplicity of interfering propositions into connective confluence and extracting the coherency that develops in the confluence as the take-away understanding (as also in holography).

The reductive tool of language and grammar, however useful, in its raw state, for ‘sharing’ reasoned perspectives on ‘reality’ is innately ambiguous and incomplete;

“La raison du plus fort est toujours la meilleure’ – Lafontaine.

The individual reason-based perspective is innately incomplete (Goedel’s Theorem of Incompleteness).  This is the shortfall in visual perspectives such as Jean Valjean ‘stealing a loaf of bread’.  It fails to expose the larger ‘relational transformation’ dynamic wherein Jean Valjean was moving bread from regions of surplus to regions of deficiency, by giving the bread to a starving child.  The single perspectives of Western rational judgements, backed up by DNA tracing and super-scientific crime-scene-investigation (CSI) constrains itself to single perspectives and thus blinds itself to relational transformation, which requires the omni-perspectival view.

There is only a perspectival seeing, only a perspectival ‘knowing’; the more affects we are able to put into words about a thing, the more eyes, various eyes we are able to use for the same thing, the more complete will be our ‘concept’ of the thing, our ‘objectivity’.– Nietzsche

But in the WEST, the tool DOES run away with the workman, the human with the divine, and that is the PROMINENT feature THAT DISTINGUISHES THE CULTURES OF THE EAST FROM THE CULTURES OF THE WEST.

The language based reduction of the ineffable Tao enables an effable reduction that opens the way to sharing a reduced but effable semblance; e.g. non-local resonance (wave-field dynamic) that manifests as ‘duning’ is ineffable in that it is inextricably included in the Tao (it is a nonlocal phenomenon).  Language can reduce if from a nonlocal to a local phenomenon; i.e. to a ‘dune’ which grammar can notionally re-animate in a local sense (‘the dune is growing larger and moving south).  Now we can get down to sharing understanding of ‘reality’ (or some crude reduction of it) by talking about local, explicit things-themselves and their explicit actions and developments via the ‘double error’ of language and grammar.  This will be an abstract constructed reality good enough for sharing some crude reduced sense of reality, but certainly not qualified as a substitute for the Tao.

The WESTERN culture craziness lies in SUBSTITUTING LANGUAGE BASED (DOUBLE ERROR) REDUCTION OF THE TAO FOR THE TAO, THE EFFABLE FOR THE INEFFABLE.  THE EAST USES THE REDUCTION MERELY FOR INFERENCE AND NOT AS A SUBSTITUTE REALITY; I.E. IN THE EAST, THE TAO REMAINS THE PRIMARY REALITY.

 

The ‘LOCK-IN” to this WESTERN Dysfunction and Remediative Interventions:

The lock-in this Western dysfunctional reduction of reality, as Nietzsche has pointed out is ‘ego’ which comes bundled with the reductionist producer-product concept which reduces non-locality (as in the reality of our 4+ D experience of inclusion in the Tao (the transforming relational continuum) to local, thing-in-itself based actions and developments (the ‘double error’).

Nationalism is the social collective version of the double error and Corporatism is the version associated with the ad hoc declaration by corporate ‘naming’ of a notional local producer-product sorcery fountainhead.

This WESTERN CULTURE folly of letting the tool of reductionist language and grammar ‘run away with the workman’, the human with the divine’ is a crazy-maker.  It locks us Western culture adherents up, thanks to the intellect hijacking the helm of our understanding by its abstract reduced-to-effable-3D world constructions, even though the world of our sensory experience is of inclusion in the ineffable 4+ dimensional world of the Tao.

YES:—THE EAST (AND MODERN PHYSICS) IS HONOURING THE RELATIONAL REALITY OF OUR SENSORY EXPERIENCE BY ACKNOWLEDGING THE INEFFABLE 4D+ NATURE OF THE TAO (THE ALL-INCLUDING WAVE-FIELD WITHIN WHICH FORMS ARE IN FLUX)

NO: — THE WEST (AND NEWTONIAN PHYSICS) IS IN ERROR IN REGARDING AS ‘REALITY’, THE REDUCTION OF THE TAO BY WAY OF THE ‘DOUBLE ERROR’ TO 3D TERMS OF NOTIONAL THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES, NOTIONALLY WITH (GRAMMAR-GIVEN) POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS.

For example, there is ‘duning’ which is a 4+D nonlocal phenomenon but there are no ‘dunes’, … they are flow-forms REDUCED-TO LOCAL 3D abstract ‘things-in-themselves’ synthetically ‘mobilized’ or ‘animated’ by grammar.

As is obvious, huge benefits accrue from our being able to have ‘language’ that allows us to ‘share our experience’, NOT OUR REAL EXPERIENCE SINCE IT IS INEFFABLE, but a reduced version of our experience which reduces our ineffable experience of inclusion in the Tao, to the pseudo reality of participating as local 3D inhabitants in an abstract infinite 3D space habitat whereby our actions and developments are locally inside-outwardly sourced, … OOPS, … or are they locally outside-inwardly sourced?  does one bad apple spoil the barrel, or does it take a whole community to raise a [good/bad] child?  Does the flapping flag source movement of the air or does the moving air source the flapping of the flag?   [Answer, there is no need to invoke ‘sourcing’ in understanding that is relational transformation based since nonlocal dynamics do not imply ‘local sorcery’.

‘SORCERY’ is INTELLECTUALLY required when we INTELLECTUALLY reduce reality to 3D space notionally populated by name-instantiated 3D objects aka local independently-existing 3D things-in-themselves.

The reality of our actual sensory experience is of inclusion in 4+Dimensional flow (Tao) aka THE transforming relational continuum aka THE ‘wave-field’.

IF THIS SEEMS COMPLICATED AND HARD TO KEEP IN MIND, … REMEMBER THIS; Language delivers shareability of experience by employing the abstractions of language and grammar to substitute effable abstractions for our ineffable experience of inclusion in the Tao,  WE MIGHT SAY THAT WE CONSTRUCT A REDUCED-TO-3D WORLD/GROUND THAT WE IMAGINE OURSELVES AS 3D FIGURES IN.

NONLOCAL DUNING IS THUS REDUCED TO LOCAL ‘DUNES’ SEEN AS (the name ‘dune’ instantiated) ‘THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES’, DESERT INHABITANTS THAT SHIFT ACROSS THE FLOOR OF THE DESERT HABITAT.

This is very useful for sharing this reduced to 3D allusion (visual portrait) of our 4+D sensory experience of inclusion the nonlocal Tao, a sharing that without some such reduction would remain unshareable, … however, … we Western culture adherents have fallen into the trap of confusing this abstraction based 3D reduction for ‘reality’ and actually putting it, like a 3D Cuckoos egg, into the inner sanctum of our 4+D sensory experiential awareness.

* * *