How LANGUAGE CAN DISTORT REALITY

“Die Philosophie ist ein Kampf gegen die Verhexung  unsres Verstandes durch die Mittel unserer Sprache” (Philosophy is a battle against the bewitchment of our intelligence by means of our language.)” – Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations

AUTHOR’S PREFACE:

This article reviews how LANGUAGE is the ROOT SOURCE of FRAGMENTATION in the dynamics of our Common Average European language speaking social collective, a dysfunction that has spread through the world with the spread of English and other European languages.  This FRAGMENTATION is NOT a pervasive problem in those indigenous aboriginal social collectives that have retained their indigenous languages as their first language.

A language-based representation of our sense-experience reality requires a language architecture with a QUANTUM LOGIC foundation.  BINARY LOGIC is insufficient (it is innately SIMPLER than QUANTUM LOGIC).

Where BINARY LOGIC splits FIGURE and GROUND (matter and space) into TWO so that we see the material FIGURE as moving through the EMPTY GROUND (space),…

QUANTUM LOGIC comprehends FIGURE and GROUND as ONE so that we understand the FIGURE (matter) as being a CONDENSATION of the electromagnetic WAVE-FIELD (ground).  The empty space was part of the BINARY LOGIC simplifying abstraction which is not needed in the QUANTUM LOGIC WAVE-FIELD.

Our COMMON AVERAGE EUROPEAN language architecture tends to DISTORT REALITY by DROPPING OUT the FEMALE CONJUGATE of the ANDROGYNOUS WAVE-FIELD dynamic and substituting an ABSOLUTE, EMPTY and INFINITE CONTAINING SPACE. The loss of the FEMALE CONJUGATE leads to one-sided MALE-ASSERTIVE REPRESENTATIONS which are source of FRAGMENTATION.

* * *      * * *      * * *

What Benjamin Whorf classifies as the Common Average European (CAE) Languages contain within them the seeds of FRAGMENTATION, and this note is written to ELUCIDATE on how this occurs.

The LANGUAGE-based FRAGMENTATION problem, which David Bohm points out is not constrained to FRAGMENTING ‘what goes on out there’ in the dynamics of the social collective, but also ‘what goes on IN HERE’ and can be the source of SCHIZOPHRENIA and PARANOIA.

AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS LANGUAGE-BASED FRAGMENTATION IS BINARY LOGIC.

Since we are right now using that particular form of language (CAE) that we could say is INFECTED with this PITFALL that we may or may not FALL INTO, it is a bit tricky to explain WITH this CAE language because the nature of the FRAGMENTATION problem is that important information is DROPPED OUT because of our desire for SIMPLIFICATION in our language-based REPRESENTATION.

This SIMPLIFICATION is NOT FOUND in indigenous aboriginal language or in FLOW-BASED (relational) languages, which is why David Bohm suggested that we CAE language users needed to switch to A NEW LANGUAGE LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE such as the flow-based design he called Rheomode.  Meanwhile, he discovered that the indigenous aboriginal languages ALREADY EMPLOYED THE FLOW-BASED (NON-FRAGMENTING) LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE.

My goal in this note is to TAKE THE READER DIRECTLY TO THE ROOT SOURCE OF THE FRAGMENTATION TRAP WHICH IS OUR USE OF WHAT NIETZSCHE HAS LABELLED “THE DOUBLE ERROR OF NAMING AND GRAMMAR” which INFUSES FRAGMENTATION into our rhetoric with the imputing of LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and development.

WARNING: This language architecture I am right now using employs this DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR but I am going to try to do a work-around in my manner of expressing things.

THE CORE OF THE FRAGMENTATION PROBLEM is our use of BINARY LOGIC where we should be using QUANTUM LOGIC.  For example, we use the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR to impute LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and developments as a SHORT CUT because we are trying to use language to construct representations of our sense-experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum which is challenging (i.e. it is challenging to come up with verbiage that  represents our experience of inclusion in the flow or ‘in the Tao’ as it called in the East).

IMPORTANT: In both LANGUAGE and THOUGHT, we make a distinction between (A) the LOCAL and EXPLICIT and (B) the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT and we find this distinction also in mathematics in the division between INTEGRATION and DIFFERENTIATION.  DIFFERENTIATION is a SIMPLIFYING operation wherein we MAKE A MAP which shows only the CHANGE IN SLOPE; i.e. the DIFFERENCES in the LANDSCAPE.  This distinction is also found in LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURES.  For example, in the fully integrated LANDSCAPE mode, the language will convey something like ‘THERE IS TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’.  This is exemplary of the architecture of indigenous aboriginal language architectures.  Note that the language is FLOW-based and gives he impression that everything is in flux.  The CAE languages, like English, will bypass the fully INTEGRATED TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE and use DIFFERENTIATION to extract the following; ‘the TOWN’ (this is the FIRST ERROR in what Nietzsche refers to as the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR’. The SECOND ERROR is GRAMMAR which we use to ANIMATE the DIFFERENTIATED FRAGMENT, hence ‘the TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING GOODS AND SERVICES.

WHAT DID WE JUST DO WITH THIS ‘DOUBLE ERROR’ LANGUAGE CONSTRUCTION?

We CHOPPED OUT A PIECE from the INTEGRATED LANDSCAPE, used NAMING to give it notional LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF status, then we invoked GRAMMAR to notionally ‘ANIMATE’ the NAMING-INSTANTIATED LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF FRAGMENT that we NAME-LABELLED ‘the TOWN’.  This is the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR pointed out by Nietzsche, and what it allows us to do is to INVENT a FRAGMENTATION based scheme that allows us to build REPRESENTATIONS of, … shall we say, “REALITY”, … or better, “SUBSTITUTE REALITY”, .. which can begin with a LOCAL FRAGMENT.

WAIT A MINUTE!  Since our sense-experience informs us that we are included in an overall transforming relational continuum wherein everything is in flux, … HOW CAN THIS LOCAL FRAGMENT SUCH AS WE ARE CALLING ‘THE TOWN’, THAT WE SAY IS “GROWING, DEVELOPING AND PRODUCING goods and services, … BE “REAL”?

EVIDENTLY, “THE LOCAL FRAGMENT’ we are NAMING ‘the TOWN’ is something we have DIFFERENTIATED OUT of the INTEGRAL TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE, and we have done this DIFFERENTIATION to SIMPLIFY the task of REPRESENTATION  so that we may use a form of language-based representation that is LOCAL and EXPLICIT which is what we get by way of DIFFERENTIATING the INTEGRAL CONTINUUM.

ACHTUNG!  NOTA BENE! Recall from the nature of DIFFERENTIATION that there is a LOSS OF INFORMATION because DIFFERENTIATION is SIMPLIFICATION and we are DROPPING OUT the FEMALE CURVACEOUS LANDSCAPE ASPECT which TIES EVERYTHING TOGETHER, … TOWN, VALLEY, MOUNTAIN, the WHOLE LOT!  Once we DROP OUT the INTEGRATING LANDSCAPE and SELECTIVELY FOCUS ON ‘THE TOWN’, we are dealing with A VERY DIFFERENT BEAST!  NOT ONLY IS IT NOW A “LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF’, WE HAVE REPLACED THE FEMALE CURVY LANDSCAPE ASPECT OF ITS ANDROGYNOUS SELF WITH …. WITH ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE OF INFINITE EXTENT.

TALK ABOUT ‘SIMPLIFICATION”!  This DIFFERENTIATION CAPER is more like a JACK-THE-RIPPER OPERATION.  DO YOU WANT TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THE FEMALE BREAST?  HERE, I HAVE SLICED ONE OFF AND PUT IT ON THIS PLATE SO THAT YOU CAN GET A MORE LOCAL AND EXPLICIT UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT A BREAST IS, OR WHAT A “TOWN” IS.

When a drop of honey drips from a hive high up in the tree and lands on the ground below there is a continuing GATHERING-SCATTERING of ants as the come to fetch some honey and deliver it to their families, and if we stare too long at the GATHER-SCATTER RESONANCE, we will see something LOCAL and EXPLICIT where where is there is in reality NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT, and we may NAME this LOCAL and EXPLICIT form ‘the CLUSTER’ and fleshing this out with our Nietzschean second half GRAMMAR of our DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, we may speak of the alternating GROWING and SHRINKING of the “CLUSTER” as if the “CLUSTER” were the LOCAL AUTHOR of ITS OWN GROWTH and SHRINKAGE.

WHAT WE NOW HAVE IS AN “ALL-MALE-NO-FEMALE” DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR based DYNAMIC.

THIS IS “SIMPLIFICATION”  WHICH GETS RID OF THE FEMALE ASPECT WHICH IS TOO MUCH TROUBLE TO CAPTURE IN LANGUAGE BECAUSE IT IS NONLOCAL AND IMPLICIT.  SO WHY NOT DIFFERENTIATE OUT THE LOCAL AND EXPLICIT WHICH WILL MAKE OUR LANGUAGE BASED REPRESENTATION MUCH “SIMPLER”.   TRUST ME, … CAN YOU NOT SEE THE “CLUSTER” GROWING AND SHRINKING?  THIS IS SOMETHING WE CAN FOCUS IN ON AND DESCRIBE IN GREAT DETAIL BECAUSE IT IS LOCAL AND EXPLICIT AND CONTAINED IN A VERY SMALL AND COMPACT LOCAL FORM.

SO WE CANNOT,  AT THE SAME TIME,  OPEN UP OUR OBSERVING TO THE ALL-INCLUDING TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE (THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM).  IF WE ARE SEARCHING FOR FOOD, THIS LOCAL AND EXPLICIT DETAIL IS OF PRIME IMPORTANCE BECAUSE IT LETS US CAPTURE AN UNDERSTANDING THAT INFORMS THE LOCAL AUTHORING OF OUR ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT.

* * *

A language architecture that employs this DIFFERENTIATION based FRAGMENTATION is what is packaged up in our Common Average European language architectures.   We have all used formulations such as ‘the TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING, PRODUCING goods and services” which leaves us with the impression that there are LOCAL AUTHORS of things that we can REWARD or PUNISH for their LOCAL AUTHORING ACTIONS.  ALL OF THIS IS GOING ON WITHIN THE DIFFERENTIAL BASED SUBSTITUTE REALITY.

THIS REDUCTION TO ‘DIFFERENTIALS’, WHICH EMPLOYS THE BINARY LOGIC BASED DOUBLE ERROR OF NAMING AND GRAMMAR, MAKES LANGUAGE BASED REPRESENTATION MUCH “SIMPLER”.  Here’s an example;

-1- We start with our experience of inclusion in a transforming landscape wherein there is TOWNING in the transforming landscape.

-2- We accept that this transforming landscape is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT (undergoing relational transformation).

-3- We see the difficulty in formulating a language architecture which would capture the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT and see an opportunity for constructing a SUBSTITUTE REALITY REPRESENTATION based on DIFFERENTIATION using the “DOUBLE ERROR” combination of NAMING and GRAMMAR”; i.e. NAMING to differentiate a relational form and proclaim it to be a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF as distinguished by its NAME, and GRAMMAR to give the now LOCAL and EXPLICIT FRAGMENT that has been ‘differentiated out of the transforming relational continuum’, ITS OWN POWERS OF AUTHORING DEVELOPMENT AND ACTIONS.

-4- We employ this DIFFERENTIATION technique based on the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR to construct a FRAGMENT based REPRESENTATION in terms of a SIMPLIFIED SUBSTITUTE REALITY based on LOCAL NAMING-instantiated DIFFERENTIAL FRAGMENTS notionally possessed of GRAMMAR-given powers of AUTHORING actions and developments.  This SHIFTING of the authoring essence from the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT (WAVE-FIELD) of our sense-experience to the LOCAL and EXPLICIT constructs of our INTELLECT, greatly SIMPLIFIES that task of language-based REPRESENTATION.  In other words, instead of generating language by transcribing DIRECTLY from our SENSE-EXPERIENCE of inclusion in the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT, we can inject an INTERMEDIATE STEP of INTELLECTUAL RECONFIGURATION which EXTRACTS the FIGURE from the GROUND (the MALE from its UNION with the FEMALE) by way of DIFFERENTIATION so as to SYNTHETICALLY LIBERATE the MALE FIGURE by RE-INSTALLING IT IN AN EMPTY SPACE of INFINITE EXTENT, FAR FROM THE CLUTCHES OF ITS FEMALE CONJUGATE.

-5- We must REMEMBER to TAKE CARE of DROP OUT as arises from the language-based DIFFERENTIATION operation where, in REDUCING the INTEGRAL LANDSCAPE through DIFFERENTIATION (e.g. from TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE to ‘THE TOWN THAT IS GROWING, DEVELOPING, PRODUCING’).  MENTAL NOTE TO SELF: WE MUST REMEMBER THAT OUR USE OF THE DOUBLE ERROR OF NAMING AND GRAMMAR IS CREATING A FRAGMENT BASED ‘SUBSTITUTE REALITY’ WHICH IS BASED ON DIFFERENTIATING AND ‘LIFTING OUT’ THE ‘LOCAL AND EXPLICIT’ FOR RE-PRESENTING IN THEIR OWN RIGHT, AND IN THE PROCESS, ‘DROPPING OUT’ THE INTEGRATING LANDSCAPE THAT IS THE NONLOCAL AND IMPLICIT UNIFYING MEDIUM.

-6- WARNING: If we FORGET to REMEMBER to TAKE ACCOUNT OF THE DROP OUT of the INTEGRAL LANDSCAPE from the DIFFERENTIATION based SIMPLIFIED SUBSTITUTE REALITY we have developed, then we may fall into the trap of CONFUSING our simplified SUBSTITUTE REALITY for our OPERATIVE REALITY.   THERE IS TROUBLE WHERE WE EMPLOY THE SIMPLIFIED SUBSTITUTE REALITY AS OUR OPERATIVE REALITY. The conceptual SIMPLIFICATIONS we employ in language based representations as an expedient in disseminating “the gist” of a more complex ‘target’ we are constructing representations of, always has the the following exposure, as Kepler points out, routinely crops up in the ‘academies’ where, once again, it is CONVENIENT to SIMPLIFY our language based representations to more simply convey ‘the gist’ of the matter.  This leaves the exposure wherein the simplified representation is implemented as the operative reality; i.e.

As regards the academies, they are established in order to regulate the studies of the pupils and are concerned not to have the program of teaching change very often: in such places, because it is a question of the progress of the students, it frequently happens that the things which have to be chosen are not those which are most true but those which are most easy. And by that division in things which makes different people form different judgements, it so happens that certain people are in error contrary to their own opinion.” – Johannes Kepler, ‘Harmonies of the World’

-7- SUMMARY: Our CAE language architecture employs DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR based “SIMPLIFICATION” so that USERS must remain aware of the DROP OUT as associates with the reduction of the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT to the LOCAL and EXPLICIT (e.g. DROP OUT as in the DIFFERENTIATING OPERATION that reduces “TOWNING in the transforming landscape” to “the local TOWN” that is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING goods and services as if in an ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE OF INFINITE EXTENT”.  

The above 7 points associated with the underpinnings of our language architecture are unlikely to be brought to mind during our habitual use of language in contriving representations that suggest ineffable sense-experiences, BUT IF THEY WERE, we would STEER CLEAR OF BINARY LOGIC based propositions which is (BEWARE) what the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR are serving up.

BINARY LOGIC the EITHER/OR logic of the EXCLUDED medium comes bundled with DIFFERENTIATION so that when we DIFFERENTIATE the TOWN from the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE we are imposing the EITHER/OR requirement which is what DIFFERENTIATION is ALL ABOUT.  If we are IN THE TOWN, then we ARE NOT, AT THE SAME TIME, IN THE COUNTRYSIDE, “SO WE SAY” because we are infusing BINARY LOGIC into our language-based SUBSTITUTE REALITY CONSTRUCTIONS.

QUANTUM LOGIC, the BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDING medium, would have us form language based representations such as in indigenous aboriginal language wherein FIGURE and GROUND are only ONE.  For example, TOWNING is a relational developing within the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE.  This QUANTUM LOGIC representation is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT.

In other words, if we apply the DIFFERENTIATING OPERATION to the QUANTUM LOGIC REALITY, we get the BINARY LOGIC BASED SUBSTITUTE REALITY wherein we are EITHER in the TOWN OR in the COUNTRY but NOT IN BOTH AT THE SAME TIME.

Thus, DIFFERENTIATING takes us from QUANTUM LOGIC SENSE-EXPERIENCE AFFIRMED REALITY wherein FIGURE and GROUND are ONE, to BINARY LOGIC ABSTRACTION BASED SUBSTITUTE REALITY wherein FIGURE and GROUND are TWO, … where the GROUND is now an EMPTY SPACE OF INFINITE EXTENT so that what we have is a SUBSTITUTE REALITY THAT IS “MISSING” the FEMALE CONTAINER aka the LANDSCAPE,

IS THERE REALLY “A TOWN’ IN ITS OWN INDEPENDENT RIGHT?

NO! NOT IN SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY, but when we use the DIFFERENTIATING OPERATION, we CREATE a SUBSTITUTE REALITY which extracts the LOCAL and EXPLICIT from the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT and OUTFITS THE LOCAL AND EXPLICIT WITH A NEW ABSTRACT CONTAINER; i.e. an ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE OF INFINITE EXTENT in place of the LANDSCAPE aka the FEMALE CONJUGATE.

In the QUANTUM LOGIC of Modern physics and indigenous aboriginal language constructions, FIGURE and GROUND are ONE so that we would say; ‘THERE IS TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’.

FOLLOWING THE ‘DIFFERENTIATION’ OPERATION THAT REDUCES THE NONLOCAL AND IMPLICIT (transforming relational continuum) to the LOCAL and EXPLICIT, we now speak in the BINARY LOGIC based terms of ‘the TOWN that is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING products and services’. (all we have now is MALE ASSERTING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS while the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING has DROPPED OUT leaving only an ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE OF INFINITE EXTENT.)

OK, this may seem REPETITIVE but as Wittgenstein pointed out, when we are trying to articulate something that is WHOLE such as the transforming relational continuum, but are starting from language that has already FRAGMENTED things, then we have a lot of ‘weaving together’ to do, as Wittgenstein points out;

There is a truth in Schopenhauer’s view that philosophy is an organism, and that a book on philosophy, with a beginning and an end, is a sort of contradiction [Elsewhere Wittgenstein quotes Heraclitus “everything is in flux” on this same problem of being forced to capture a complex continuing dynamic by notional ‘parts’]. One difficulty with philosophy is that we lack a synoptic view. We encounter the kind of difficulty we should have with the geography of a country for which we had no map, or else a map of isolated bits. The country we are talking about is language, and the geography its grammar. We can walk about the country quite well, but when forced to make a map, we go wrong. A map will show different roads through the same country, any one of which we can take, though not two, just as in philosophy we must take up problems one by one though in fact each problem leads to a multitude of others. We must wait until we come round to the starting point before we can proceed to another section, that is, before we can either treat of the problem we first attacked or proceed to another. In philosophy matters are not simple enough for us to say ‘Let’s get a rough idea’, for we do not know the country except by knowing the connections between the roads. So I suggest repetition as a means of surveying the connections.”  — Wittgenstein

SUMMARIZING THIS POINT and putting it in context, we can see, by juxtaposing the indigenous aboriginal language architecture approach where would speak in terms of ‘THERE IS TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’ , alongside our COMMON AVERAGE EUROPEAN typical formulation of this same thing, … THE TOWN IS GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING products and services’, it is easy to see that the latter is using the DIFFERENTIATING OPERATION to SPLIT OUT or FRAGMENT sense-experience reality so as to put a LOCAL and EXPLICIT AUTHORING FOCUS on that which is innately NONLOCAL AND IMPLICIT; i.e. the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.

DID I SAY ‘FOCUS’?

YES, and this is like PUTTING A SPOTLIGHT ON A CONTINUOUS LANDSCAPE  TO ILLUMINATE and HIGHLIGHT ONLY A PORTION OF THAT NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT transforming relational continuum so as to SERVE UP ON A PLATTER (the SPOTLIGHT PLATTER) A SELECTED PORTION which is LOCAL and EXPLICIT and having been isolated from the transforming relational continuum.  So, WHERE DO THE SPOTLIGHTED PERFORMERS NOW RESIDE NOW THAT ‘EVERYTHING HAS GONE DARK’ BEYOND THE ILLUMINATED ZONE OF THE SPOTLIGHT?  IN NOWHERESVILLE!  IN THE DARKNESS OF AN ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE OF INFINITE EXTENT so that they are no longer included in a living squirming transforming relational continuum, A NONLOCAL AND IMPLICIT FLOW-FIELD that is IMPOSSIBLE to capture in LOCAL and EXPLICIT terms.

NO WONDER that the indigenous aboriginals had opted for a FLOW-based language as also the Rheomode language of David Bohm, developed for the Modern physics requirement of acknowledging the WAVE-FIELD nature of reality; i.e. the transforming relational continuum reality wherein everything is in flux.  The reality wherein the visible forms are CONDENSATIONS of the WAVE-FIELD is a reality wherein QUANTUM LOGIC is needed for language based representation.  QUANTUM LOGIC is the BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDING medium as captures the relational topology of CONDENSATIONS in the TRANSFORMING WAVE-FIELD, which are like WHORLING in the FLOWING.  We can use a butterfly net to SCOOP THE WHORLING OUT OF THE FLOW and observe it flapping around like a trapped salmon.  The WHORLING and the FLOW are ONLY ONE.  FIGURE and GROUND are ONLY ONE.  WAVE-FIELD and CONDENSATION ARE ONLY ONE.

SIMPLIFICATION MAKES ITS ENTRY by way of BINARY LOGIC IN LANGUAGE where instead of acknowledging that FIGURE and GROUND are ONE as in QUANTUM LOGIC, the BOTH/AND logic of BALANCE, we create a SUBSTITUTE REALITY wherein FIGURE and GROUND are TWO as implies BINARY LOGIC wherein there is an EITHER/OR relationship between FIGURE and GROUND.

This is really the very basics of our MODERN SOCIETY PROBLEM OF FRAGMENTATION.  The FRAGMENTATION comes into play firstly in the MIND which is conditioned by LANGUAGE; i.e. by the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR which implies LOCAL AUTHORING.   LOCAL AUTHORING is the basis of FRAGMENTATION since it ABSTRACTLY BREAKS OUT THE MALE ASSERTIVE FROM the ANDROGYNOUS WAVE-FIELD and SUBSTITUTES for the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING, AN ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE OF INFINITE EXTENT.

NOTA BENE!:  THIS IS THE PRICE WE PAY (TO DO ‘A DEAL WITH THE DEVIL’, SO TO SPEAK) TO BE ABLE TO HAVE LANGUAGE THAT WE CAN USE TO TREAT OF PHENOMENA THAT ARE INHERENTLY NONLOCAL AND IMPLICIT (RELATIONAL AS IN FLUID) ON A LOCAL, EXPLICIT BASIS.  MIRCEA ELIADE’S title ‘Mephistopheles et l’Androgyne’ and systems science pioneer Kenneth Boulding’s ‘The Name of the Devil is Suboptimization (FRAGMENTION), are both pointing to how our CAE LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE reduces the WAVE-FIELD dynamic; i.e. the basic dynamic of our sense-experience reality, to an abstract LOCAL AUTHORING dynamic, thanks to the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.

IF WE BELIEVE IN LOCAL AUTHORING, THEN WE BELIEVE IN SUBOPTIMIZATION.  This BELIEF in LOCAL AUTHORING EQUIPS US FOR THE INVENTING OF ‘INDEPENDENT NATIONS’ TO WHICH WE ATTRIBUTE POWERS OF LOCAL AUTHORING.  In FACT, the DOUBLE ERROR gambit of imputing LOCAL AUTHORING has us CONSTRUCTING ENTIRE SUBSTITUTE REALITIES.

THIS DOUBLE ERROR OF NAMING AND GRAMMAR IS THE LINGUISTIC ROOTSTOCK OF PSYCHOLOGICAL AND PHYSICAL “FRAGMENTATION”.

Do we REALLY BELIEVE that the UNITED STATES IS AN “INDEPENDENT NATION” as implies LOCAL AUTHORING POWER‘ when it is evident that WE LIVE IN A WORLD CHARACTERIZED BY GLOBAL INTERCONNECTEDNESS AND MUTUAL INTERDEPENDENCE?’

It is impossible to separate out SOME LOCAL CORE ESSENCE from the RHIZOME LIKE RELATIONAL MATRIX that is the DYNAMIC ACTUALITY.  We can use words to speak of the CLUSTER of ants that grows and shrinks ‘over time’ but the reality is that the GATHERING-SCATTERING or CLUSTERING is a VERB and NOT A NOUN.  The self-deception of LOCAL AUTHORING POWER comes only from the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR wherein we invent the word CLUSTER and append GRAMMAR to impute to it, NOT ONLY ITS OWN NOTIONAL LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF BEING, BUT THEN CONFLATE THIS ABSTRACTION WITH GRAMMAR GIVEN POWERS OF LOCAL AUTHORING.

WHAT STARTED OUT IN SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY AS GATHERING-SCATTERING RESONANCE FEATURE, IS RECAST WITHIN AN ABSTRACT SUBSTITUTE REALITY AS A LOCAL AUTHOR OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS.

THE FOLLOW-ON INSANITY, ONCE WE DEPLOY THE DOUBLE ERROR OF NAMING AND GRAMMAR TO INVENT THE ‘LOCAL AUTHOR’, IS TO GO THROUGH THE MOTIONS OF OPTIMIZING WHAT LOOKS THE SUPERIOR PERFORMING AUTHOR AMONG THE ‘LOCAL AUTHORS’.   THIS IS CALLED ‘SUBOPTIMIZATION’.

But, there is no such thing in our real life sense-experience as LOCAL AUTHORING , which is problematic since WESTERN CULTURE practice of COMPETITION is BASED ON IT, which too often torpedoes COOPERATION.  As Nietzsche pointed out in his ANTI-DARWIN comments, DARWINISM drew too much from the Charles Darwin’s exposure to crowded conditions in LONDON and the notion of a STRUGGLE FOR SURVIVAL.   DARWIN gave the false sense of a MALE ASSERTIVE DRIVE to his observations by employing the usual WESTERN double error of NAMING and GRAMMAR abstraction which FRAGMENTS reality into a plethora of INDEPENDENT LOCAL AUTHORS of actions and developments.  Thus ONE-SIDED MALE ASSERTIVE AUTHORING PUSH, makes the mind forgetful of the natural precedence of the FEMALE INDUCTIVE within the ANDROGYNOUS WAVE-FIELD dynamic.   The TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE is a GATHERING-SCATTERING RESONANCE PHENOMENA and to use language to construct a MALE ASSERTIVE SUBSTITUTE REALITY, which is an interesting IF ONE-SIDED INTELLECTUAL ABSTRACTION, is not supported by our sense-experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum aka the WAVE-FIELD aka the Tao, as supported by Modern physics.

What is CONFUSING us here is the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR ABSTRACTION that introduces as SUBSTITUTE REALITY based on “LOCAL AUTHORING” of actions and development.  Once we BITE on this notion of LOCAL AUTHORING, we open the door to the SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST abstraction where “FITNESS” implies “PROFICIENCY IN LOCAL AUTHORING of ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT”.   Once we get on board the notion of a multiplicity of INDEPENDENT ORGANISMS WORKING ON THEIR OWN ‘SUBOPTIMIZATION’, as in the WESTERN worldview, but certainly NOT in the indigenous aboriginal worldview wherein ‘everything is related (MITAKUYE OYASIN, then what else could SUBOPTIMIZATION imply other than NATURE is FRAGMENTED because WITHOUT a multiplicity of INDEPENDENT ENTITIES, the CONCEPT of SUBOPTIMIZATION where ONE THING is improved more than THE OTHER THINGS COULD NOT EVEN EXIST.  In other words, where the “MULTIPLICITY OF FORMS’ is only in the QUANTUM LOGIC terms of MULTIPLE CONDENSATIONS within the ONE WAVE-FIELD, neither COMPETITION nor SUBOPTIMIZATION make sense; i.e. BOTH of these concepts have a dependency on the assumption of their INDEPENDENT EXISTENCE.  DECLARATIONS of INDEPENDENCE are an INTELLECTUAL DEVICE that does over-ride the REALITY of PHYSICAL INTERDEPENDENCE even though such DECLARATIONS are often used as the rallying call for NATIONALIST SUBOPTIMIZATION INITIATIVES.

“The above aphorism (The Name of the Devil is Suboptimization’), attributed to Kenneth Boulding, points to the inherent weakness characterizing the mindset and socio‐economic, political, educational and managerial practices of Western Industrial society as it developed over the past 300 years. It has its basis in the analytic‐reductionistic scientific paradigm, which, despite the remarkable technological applications it spawned, is inappropriate, conflict‐generating and dysfunctional in a world characterized by global interconnectedness and mutual interdependence …” — György Jaros and Martine Dodds-Taljaard  (International Society of Systems Sciences)

With 195 NATIONS in the world DECLARING THEMSELVES TO BE “INDEPENDENT”, and therefore to be fully and solely responsible for their own conditions of WEALTH or POVERTY, we are once again in that position where THE BIG LIE has been SWORN TO BE TRUE so many times that it has become UNTHINKABLE to COME CLEAN and admit that it is BULLSHIT.

Can we honestly say that the poor but ‘free’ countries in the world are the AUTHORS OF THEIR OWN DESTINY?  How could they be … in a world characterized by global interconnectedness and mutual interdependence”?

* * *

IT IS EVIDENT THAT WHAT IS PROMOTED AS ‘TRUTH’ IN OUR WESTERN CULTURE WORLD IS NOT GROUNDED IN SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY.  EARLIER, WE SAID ‘WHY NOT’; In the earlier comments,

A language architecture that employs this DIFFERENTIATION based FRAGMENTATION is what is packaged up in our Common Average European language architectures.   We have all used formulations such as ‘the TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING, PRODUCING goods and services” which leaves us with the impression that there are LOCAL AUTHORS of things that we can REWARD or PUNISH for their LOCAL AUTHORING ACTIONS.  ALL OF THIS IS GOING ON WITHIN THE DIFFERENTIAL BASED SUBSTITUTE REALITY.

THIS REDUCTION TO ‘DIFFERENTIALS’, WHICH EMPLOYS THE BINARY LOGIC BASED DOUBLE ERROR OF NAMING AND GRAMMAR, MAKES LANGUAGE BASED REPRESENTATION MUCH “SIMPLER”.

NOW, WHAT JUST HAPPENED?

WE LIKELY AGREED ON WHAT OUR LANGUAGE IS DOING TO US AS IN THE BOLD HIGHLIGHTED PARAGRAPH DIRECTLY ABOVE, BUT WE KNOW WHAT THE AGREEMENT WITH THAT WOULD MEAN?  IT WOULD MEAN THAT Martine and György (and Modern physics and indigenous aboriginal cultures) ARE SPOT ON IN THEIR COMMENT THAT “WE LIVE IN A WORLD CHARACTERIZED BY GLOBAL INTERCONNECTEDNESS AND MUTUAL INTERDEPENDENCE” and that is a world in which DECLARATIONS OF INDEPENDENCE and INTER-NATIONAL COMPETITION MAKE NO SENSE AT ALL.

WE CAN’T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS WITHOUT OUR MINDS BECOMING FRAGMENTED, as Bohm is suggesting;

1 FRAGMENTATION AND WHOLENESS (from Wholeness and the Implicate Order by David Bohm)

The title of this chapter is ‘Fragmentation and wholeness’. It is especially important to consider this question today, for fragmentation is now very widespread, not only throughout society, but also in each individual; and this is leading to a kind of general confusion of the mind, which creates an endless series of problems and interferes with our clarity of perception so seriously as to prevent us from being able to solve most of them.

Thus art, science, technology, and human work in general, are divided up into specialities, each considered to be separate in essence from the others. Becoming dissatisfied with this state of affairs, men have set up further interdisciplinary subjects, which were intended to unite these specialities, but these new subjects have ultimately served mainly to add further separate fragments. Then, society as a whole has developed in such a way that it is broken up into separate nations and different religious, political, economic, racial groups, etc. Man’s natural environment has correspondingly been seen as an aggregate of separately existent parts, to be exploited by different groups of people. Similarly, each individual human being has been fragmented into a large number of separate and conflicting compartments, according to his different desires, aims, ambitions, loyalties, psychological characteristics, etc., to such an extent that it is generally accepted that some degree of neurosis is inevitable, while many individuals going beyond the ‘normal’ limits of fragmentation are classified as paranoid, schizoid, psychotic, etc

* * *

SUMMARY/ REFLECTION

This essay was not very long but it challenges our mind because it brings to the surface that because we speak the language we do, we cultivate FRAGMENTATION within our minds.  This is brought on by the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR which we use to impute LOCAL AUTHORING.   This notion of LOCAL AUTHORING comes to us in comments such as ‘the TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING, PRODUCING, and if this MAKES SENSE to us, WE ARE IN TROUBLE because there is only one SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY and it is of INCLUSION IN TRANSFORMATION in which case we should employ language that is saying something like; THERE IS TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE which captures the inherent ANDROGYNOUSness of TRANSFORMATION.

So, our Common Average European language ‘works’ by constructing a SUBSTITUTE REALITY which DIFFERENTIATES the ANDROGYNOUS flow-based sense-experience reality and comes up with a ONE-SIDED MALE ASSERTIVE SUBSTITUTE REALITY CONSTRUCTION wherein the FEMALE CONJUGATE has been REMOVED and  in its place, the SUBSTITUTION of ABSOLUTE EMPTY and INFINITE SPACE.  This, of course, makes our CAE language architecture MUCH SIMPLER because trying to capture FEMALE CONJUGATE of the WAVE-FIELD which is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT is a ‘BEAR’ from a language architecture point of view.

OF COURSE, WE WERE NOT OBLIGED TO SPLIT OUT THE LOCAL AND EXPLICIT in the first place, which is what forced the DROP OUT of the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT, but we WANTED TO DO THAT because that is what has enabled FRAGMENTATION which allows us to capture with language, representations of that which is LOCAL and EXPLICIT which is a challenge since we all share inclusion in the transforming relational continuum aka the WAVE-FIELD aka the Tao.

So, we achieved the goal of having language that could capture things in a LOCAL and EXPLICIT representation as with ‘the TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING, PRODUCING, but this was at the PRICE of DROPPING OUT THE FEMALE CONJUGATE (WAVE-FIELD reality is ANDROGYNOUS).

The way that BINARY LOGIC and QUANTUM LOGIC come into play here BINARY LOGIC, the EITHER/OR logic of the EXCLUDED medium can ‘handle’ the SIMPLIFIED REALITY that is one-sidedly MALE-ASSERTIVE as per the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, however BINARY LOGIC is NOT CAPABLE of dealing with ANDROGYNOUS relations whereas QUANTUM LOGIC, the BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDING medium, is capable.

For example QUANTUM LOGIC describes the WAVE-FIELD phenomena wherein FIGURE and GROUND are ONE; i.e. where the MATERIAL FIGURE is a CONDENSATION of the WAVE-FIELD.  This is LESS SIMPLE than the BINARY EITHER/OR LOGIC as were MATTER and EMPTY SPACE satisfy the MUTUAL EXCLUSIVITY condition.

BECAUSE our CAE language representations tend to be heavily loaded with BINARY LOGIC based EITHER/OR structures, it is very difficult, even with knowledge of what is going on, to adjust one’s language usage to GO TO QUANTUM LOGIC and avoid the DEGENERATE COLLAPSE into the more SIMPLE BINARY LOGIC based representations.  For example, all talk of the GROWTH of THINGS is BINARY LOGIC laden and we make a lot of use of terms like GROWING and DEVELOPING and CONSTRUCTING and PRODUCING, all of which are one-sided MALE ASSERTIVE BINARY LOGIC based terms which make no mention of FEMALE ACCOMMODATING.

COULD WE REPAIR ENGLISH SO AS TO GIVE IT ANDROGYNOUS (WAVE-FIELD) CAPABILITY?   Bohm was instead going to create Rheomode, but discovered that Algonquin which has the androgynous capability was already ‘operative’.

But we can make adjustments like saying; ‘There is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’  gives us the INTEGRAL view instead of the DIFFERENTIATED view as ‘the TOWN is growing’ which is the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR structure which imputes LOCAL AUTHORING.

ALL CONSIDERED, there is HUGE CULTURAL BAGGAGE tied up in our CAE LANGUAGE HISTORY so that starting with a new language seems like a necessary path to take.

MEANWHILE the political arguments we have, with our CAE language can only end in impasse since the CAE language lacks the dimensionality needed to address QUANTUM LOGIC sense experience reality.  For example, where BINARY LOGIC sets us up for EITHER RIGHT OR WRONG JUDGEMENTS, there is no such thing in QUANTUM LOGIC, there is only BALANCE and IMBALANCE.  In the former, the resolution is by way of PURIFICATION, the ELIMINATION of that which is WRONG.  In the latter, the resolution is by way of RESTORING BALANCE which is what the HEALING CIRCLES are all about.

* * *

.