An inclusional worldview
Insight: The Conservative – Liberal Schizophrenia
INTRODUCTION:
Of the logos, which is as I describe it, people always prove to be uncomprehending both before they have heard it and once they have heard it. For, although all things happen according to the logos, people are like those of no experience, even when they do experience such words and deeds as I explain when I distinguish each thing according to its phusis (nature / constitution) and declare how it is; but others are as ignorant of what they do when awake as they are forgetful of what they do when asleep.
Those who hear and do not understand are like the deaf. Of them the proverb says: “Present, they are absent.”
— Heraclitus
Heraclitus’ above cryptic comment reflects the problem of shifting from the classical Western ‘EITHER/OR logic of the excluded medium’ to the modern physics ‘BOTH/AND logic of the included medium (quantum logic), the latter which is implicit in Heraclitus’ flow-based (Tao-based) understanding of reality.
To understand the phenomenon that Heraclitus is referring to, consider the problem that associates with speaking about ‘duning’ in the ‘desert’. The Western culture adherent will speak in such terms as ‘the dune is growing larger and shifting to the West across the desert floor’. The indigenous aboriginal understands this phenomenon in the same way as modern physics; i.e. this is relational transformation as associates with ‘resonance’ (wave-field phenomena). Western culture is using the ‘double error’ of language and grammar that reduces this resonance phenomenon by ‘naming’ to impute local, independent thing-in-itself being (first error) and conflating this with grammar (second error) to endow the name-instantiated thing-in-itself with powers of sourcing actions and developments.
The duning as resonance based transformation becomes, by way of this language and grammar based double error reduction, the dune that is growing larger and longer and shifting across the desert floor.
In a conversation where several Western culture adherents are joined by an indigenous aboriginal, the indigenous aboriginal will understanding the statement that “the dune is growing larger and longer and is shifting across the desert floor” because this puts together a ‘picture’ that she will understand in her usual ‘mitakuye oyasin’ manner (everything is in flux). In other words, she will make the leap from the literal meaning of the words to the understanding in terms of being included in a transforming relational continuum. The mental leap of reduction from the 4D or higher dimensional wave-space to the lower 3D space of local closed form material objects is easy, however, however, for someone who was taught from childhood to understanding reality in double error terms of Western culture adherents, the 4D understanding is not even ‘on their radar screen’, and the 3D reality is ‘all she wrote’.
While the indigenous aboriginal and the Western culture adherent will be able to communicate very effectively on many topics, their respective sense of the nature of the world they live in and their relationship therein will be very different. For example, while the Western culture adherent will be understanding things according to the EITHER/OR logic of the excluded medium, the indigenous aboriginal will be understanding things according to the BOTH/AND (quantum) logic of the included medium (where the duning is NOT ‘dunes moving across the desert floor, but wave dynamics manifesting through the sandy material (i.e. not coming from the dynamics of the sandy material). Carlo Rovelli captures this as follows in ‘Quantum Gravity’;
In Newtonian and special relativistic physics, if we take away the dynamical entities – particles and fields – what remains is space and time. In general relativistic physics, if we take away the dynamical entities, nothing remains. The space and time of Newton and Minkowski are reinterpreted as a configuration of one of the fields, the gravitational field. This implies that physical entities – particles and fields – are not all immersed in space, and moving in time. They do not live on spacetime. They live, so to say, on one another. It is as if we had observed in the ocean many animals living on an island: animals ‘on’ the island. Then we discover that the island itself is in fact a great whale. Not anymore animals on the island, just animals on animals. Similarly, the universe is not made by fields on spacetime; it is made by fields on fields.” — Carlo Rovelli, in ‘Quantum Gravity’
As in Heraclitus complaint, people hear an explanation of flow-based reality (the Tao), which is like hearing an explanation of how the splitting of the figure and the ground (whorl in the flow) where these two things are just ‘appearances’ rather than having ontological separateness. But Western culture adherent tend to immediately ‘lose their intuitive grasp’ of the purely relational ‘wave view’ and revert to speech that assumes an ontological ‘figure-ground’ splitting since Western culture language and grammar ‘builds this ontological splitting’ in, by way of the ‘double error’ of using ‘naming’ to impute thing-in-itself being to a relational flow-form and conflating this with by using grammar to impute the power of sourcing actions and development to the name-instantiated thing-in-itself.
Since this reductive binary implication is ‘built into’ our Western culture language and grammar, our comments are implicitly ‘laden’ or ‘contaminated’ with it, contaminating everything we say with its binary implication. This problem comes about from the property of Western language and grammar of reducing the ineffable understanding of inclusion in the Tao (flow) to effable, visual representation; i.e. i.e. understanding reality in the Tao sense requires us to shift our understanding beyond visual representation as-implied by Western language and grammar’ and the ‘double error’.
A picture held us captive. And we could not get outside it, for it lay in our language and language seemed to repeat it to us inexorably. –-Wittgenstein
* * *
The following note explores the source of ‘schizophrenia’ in Western culture as in the ‘splitting’ that divides ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal’ . This exploration concludes that the root source of ‘schizophrenia’ is ‘reason’ aka ‘logic’ (the Western culture EITHER/OR logic of the excluded medium, as gives rise to an innate ambiguity exposed in Gestalt psychology as the ‘figure/ground dichotomy’ and in Western culture generally (by way of the double error of language and grammar) as the ‘inhabitant/habitat’ split. Modern physics, on the other hand, has required a non-binary, ‘inclusive’ logic, the BOTH/AND logic of the included medium (Stephane Lupasco et al), which has been the traditional logic of indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta. This BOTH/AND logic of the included medium is suggested by the Tai-Chi symbol with its ‘ambiguous non-dual dualism (viewing this symbol elicits questioning in the psyche as to whether there is just one form with the appearance of dual aspects or whether there are two separate forms.). This opens the way to a bifurcation that seems to be where EASTERN psyches and WESTERN psyches split, and also where modern physics departs from Newtonian physics.
The findings of inquiry into this ambiguity, by Nietzsche, Wittgenstein, Bohm and others suggest that Western culture adoption of the EITHER/OR logic of the excluded medium is the source of general ‘schizophrenia’ (i.e. schizophrenia as the ‘norm’) in Western culture, making it very difficult for those ‘miner’s canaries’ living within a Western culture adherent social collective, who ‘smell a rat‘ that unsettles their psyche, an unsettling that is treated by the Western culture at large as THEIR problem, and thus administering drugs and psychiatric treatments designed to return the miner’s canaries to thinking that is firmly grounded in the EITHER/OR logic of the included medium, the Western culture way of reasoning deemed ‘normal’.
The suggestion here, supported by the works of Bohm, Nietzsche, Wittgenstein, Emerson and others is that EITHER/OR LOGIC IS A CRAZY-MAKER since it is inherently ambiguous and it aeads to the polarizing of views in the social collective as manifests in the conservative and liberal factionalizing, and manifests WITHIN the Western culture acculturated individual that eschews ‘taking sides’ within a split social collective, by the individual’s having to throw their own bodily self into the ‘keeping things together’, an exercise akin to having one’s opposite-side limbs tied respectively to two teams of horses pulling in opposite directions. That is, the sensitive ‘miner’s canary’ throws their very ‘self’ into the gap the heal the polarizing split in the Western culture schizophrenic social collective they are included in.
Modern physics shows that an understanding of physical reality requires the BOTH/AND logic of the included medium, wherein the separateness of the boil and the flow is understood as ‘appearance’ and THERE IS NO BINARY, ONTOLOGICAL SPLITTING in the reality of our experience of inclusion in the Tao, aka the transforming relational continuum, aka the wave-field.
It is the Western culture ‘lock-in’ to EITHER/OR logic of the excluded medium as the default tool for trying to make sense out of reality hat is the crazy-maker impacting Western culture social collectives, via a ‘splitting’ (schizophrenia) which manifests at the level of the social collective (as the conservative-liberal polar splitting), and if this splitting is resisted by the individual, at the level of the individual (rather than the splitting OF INDIVIDUALS WITHIN THE COLLECTIVE, since the individual self becomes the ‘buffer’ for splitting in the social collective, this can give rise to huge pull-apart tensions in the individual who then seeks relief by cultivating an internal psychologically buffering self-other splitting within herself, which can become very disorienting and lead to behavioral instability diagnosed as ‘disorder presumed to be ‘root-source-arising’ within her’ (e.g. HER ‘bipolar disorder’ or HER ‘schizophrenia’).
In short, the problem begins with the general Western culture social collective’s embrace of classical EITHER/OR logic of the excluded medium as the basis for intellectual constructions of reality, a logic that NOTIONALLY/PSYCHOLOGICALLY splits apart the ‘inhabitant’ from the ‘habitat’, the ‘figure’ from the ‘ground’ (by contrast with the ‘quantum logic’ of modern physics which understands the distinction between ‘inhabitant’ and ‘habitat’ or ‘figure’ and ‘ground’ as ‘appearance, as with a boil in flow (e.g. a dynamic relational equilibrium) rather than a split into two thing-in-itself ONTOLOGICAL ENTITIES. EITHER/OR LOGIC IS A CRAZY-MAKER WHICH SPLITS THE WESTERN CULTURE SOCIAL COLLECTIVE INTO CONSERVATIVE AND LIBERAL, WHILE THOSE ‘NOT TAKING SIDES’ ACCOMMODATE THE SYNTHETIC LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR PROVOKED SPLITTING, WITHIN THEIR SELF, which can get very confusing. The Western culture majority, having ‘split’ on a whole-self basis into conservative or liberal camps and thus seen as a ‘normal’, become the embodied definers of ‘normality’ and thus the adjudicators of what is ‘not normal’ (those not embracing one or the other of the social split into conservatives and liberals but try to buffer the split within their own ‘self’ fall into the category of ‘abnormals’ (bipolars, schizophrenics) for whom the ‘cure’ or those the schizophrenic normals see as ‘abnormals’ lies in restoring the ‘abnormals’ the schizophrenic ‘normal’.
The problem with language is the problem with using language to ‘reason’ where we invoke the EITHER/OR logic of the excluded medium. ‘Poetry’ on the other hand, serves us well (it employs relational inference as a means of sharing experience of inclusion in the Tao). ‘Reason’ based on the EITHER/OR logic of the excluded medium, on the other hand, is a ‘crazy-maker’!
“Nothing indeed has exercised a more simple power of persuasion than the error of Being, as it was formulated by the Eleatics for instance: in its favour are every word and every sentence that we utter! — Even the opponents of the Eleatics succumbed to the seductive powers of their concept of Being. Among others there was Democritus in his discovery of the atom. “Reason” in language! (... wherein … Being is thought into and insinuated into everything as ‘cause’; from the concept ‘ego,’ alone, can the concept ‘Being’ proceed..…) ….. 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’
* * * end-of-introduction * * *
I thought this note (below at the bottom of this comment) from a psychologist in regard to the conservative-liberal split might provide some insight into the confusion that currently reigns re ‘anthropogenic global warming’ that manifests in conservative-liberal polarization as to the basic nature of reality (i.e. is action and development sourced in a ‘one-to-many’ topology (conservative) or in a ‘many-to-one’ topology (liberal); i.e. is it the case that ‘one rotten apple rots the whole barrel of apples, … or is it the case that ‘it takes a whole community to raise a [good/bad] child’?
What I would like to share is that this polarizing division persists BECAUSE OF A POLARIZING DIVISION IN THE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERING INTELLECT that derives from a Western culture induced belief in the ‘reality’ of the abstract concept of ‘production’ (formerly known as ‘sorcery’).
THERE IS NO SUCH THING IN SENSORY-EXPERIENCE-REALITY, AS ‘PRODUCTION’. IT IS LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR ABSTRACTION-BASED ILLUSION THAT BECOMES DELUSION WHEN WE PUT IT INTO PRECEDENCE OVER OUR SENSORY EXPERIENCE OF INCLUSION IN THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM AKA ‘TAO’. “Production” = ‘Sorcery” = ‘Delusion’.
THE CONCEPT OF PRODUCER-PRODUCT PRODUCTION is an INTELLECTUAL language-and-grammar stimulated ‘MIRAGE’ that REPLACES AND OCCLUDES (wallpapers over) the reality of our sensory experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum (Tao, wave-field). ‘PRODUCTION’ is a ‘cuckoo’s egg’ planted in the nesting ground where our understanding of reality is continually developing and issuing forth.
In the reality of our actual sensory experience, there is only relational transformation. The limestone quarry does not ‘PRODUCE’ limestone regardless of what is promoted by the LIMESTONE PRODUCTION COMPANY, whose shares of ownership in this notional ‘thing-in-itself’ (independently existing productive enterprise) one can buy on the stock market. AGAIN, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ‘PRODUCTION’, THERE IS ONLY RELATIONAL TRANSFORMATION AS IN THE ‘TAO’.
The Western culture is distinguished by its language-and-grammar based ‘double error’ practice of ‘naming’ to impute thing-in-itself-existence (to a human, nation, corporation) conflating this with grammar that imputes the power of sourcing actions and developments to the name-instantiated thing-in-itself. ‘PRODUCTION’ is intellectual abstraction and not ‘of the real world of our sensory experience’. BUT LOOK OUT BECAUSE ‘PRODUCTION’ (E.G OF POLLUTANTS AND GREENHOUSE GASES) replaces, in the language-and-grammar stimulated (tricked) mind, TRANSFORMATION (the sensory experience affirmed basis of reality).
Again: … The abstract concept of ‘PRODUCTION’, formerly termed ‘SORCERY’ derives from the ‘double error’ of language and grammar. The double error (first error) uses naming to impute thing-in-itself existence, and then conflates this with grammar (second error) by imputing the power of sourcing actions and developments to the (first error based) name-instantiated thing-in-itself.
THERE IS HUGE UTILITY in this (if used with caution) in that it allows us to SHARE AN EFFABLE REDUCTION OF THE INEFFABLE reality of our inclusion in the Tao. Sharing lets our actions be informed, guided and shaped by awareness of the painful and pleasurable experiences of others so that we can bypass the painful and go directly to the pleasurable.
Of course, this gives us an exposure to others’ incorrect interpretation of their own experience, as in the psychological experiment where chimpanzees are sprayed with cold water when they turn a bright red tap, so that they teach everyone in their group never to touch that tap and even after the cold water spraying apparatus is removed and after the group members are changed over time, the conditioned behaviour of avoiding the read tap persists, so that while the situation has changed and the turning of the tap will no longer result in cold-water spraying, the avoidance of that behaviour is perpetuated by group self-policing, blocking the evolving of the group’s understanding in concert with the evolving circumstances they are included in.
IN OTHER WORDS, THE REDUCTION OF THE INEFFABLE TAO (CONTINUAL FLUX) TO EFFABLE LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR CAPTURE AND SHARING, INSERTS AN INAPPROPRIATE (abstract, unreal) PERMANENCE INTO THE EFFABLE PSEUDO-REALITY that obscures experience based understanding of the ineffable Tao.
It is important to remember what ‘has to give’ to render the ineffable effable; i.e. what has to give is the impermanence inherent in a fluid reality (this is the natural ‘reality’) so that the EFFABLE CONSTRUCTED REALITY, which is a SHAREABLE REALITY, … has to sacrifice the understanding that ‘everything is in flux’ of ineffable reality, in order to reduce the ineffable Tao to an ‘effable’ and thus ‘shareable’ reduced surrogate.
As Emerson points out, this reduction of the ineffable to the effable by the tool of language and grammar has to sacrifice something to reduce the ineffable to the effable, and the name-instantiating reduction to ‘thing-in-itself being’ entails a sacrifice that applies in all such reduction of flowing-formings in the Tao, including the reduction of the human flowing-forming, by way of the double error of language and grammar, to a notional fixed and persisting thing-in-itself with powers of sourcing actions and developments.
CLEARLY, THE CONCEPT OF ‘MOTION’ IS SHIFTED, BY THE DOUBLE ERROR OF LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR, FROM THE THINGLESS-CONNECTEDNESS OF THE TAO (THE RESONANCE OR ‘WAVE-FIELD’) TO GRAMMAR-BASED MECHANICS OF THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES SHIFTING (LIKE DUNES) WITHIN A NOTIONALLY IMPLIED FIXED (ABSOLUTE) REFERENCE FRAME. This abstract binary inhabitant-habitat split (as also the ‘figure/ground’ split in Gestalt psychology) is an intellect-conditioning device that comes bundled into language and grammar.
While this reduction by way of the inhabitant-habitat splitting succeeds in rendering the ineffable effable (at the cost of sacrificing the divine to the pseudo-liberating of the local, material human-thing-in-itself), it is by no means competent for ‘replacing’ the ineffable; i.e. it is only good for inferring the ineffable which is innately beyond the scope of effable-ization. That is why Wittgenstein describes the effable-izing capability of language and grammar as a tool that lets us make an intuition-based ‘leap’ from the false basis of the effable, to the real basis of the ineffable Tao.
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
THE INEFFABLE = THE TAO = THE DIVINE
The abstract concept of ‘being’ triggered in a ‘backdoor entry manner’ by the word-instantiated concepts of ‘producer’, ‘product’, ‘production’ enables the intellect-based effable-izing of the ineffable Tao. That is, the wave-field resonance phenomenon of ‘duning’ is reduced to ‘the dune’ as the nominal producer of self-initiating actions and self-development as in ‘the dune is growing longer and higher and is shifting across the ‘desert floor’. The ‘desert floor’ is invented so as to liberate the ‘dune’ from ‘duning’ (resonance phenomena aka wave-field phenomena).
The ‘double error of language and grammar’ is what we use to notionally ‘liberate’ ourselves from the Tao and set ourselves up as ‘independent-human-beings’ notionally with our own powers of sourcing actions and developments (that IS the ‘doube error’ of language and grammar).
At some intuitive-if-not-psychological level, we understand that ‘everything is in flux’, including ourselves, and therefore that the ‘producer-product’ logic is bullshit; i.e. our actions do not REALLY jumpstart from our notional ‘independent thing-in-itself being’ since the absolutism of ‘being’ (with producer-product powers) is merely language and grammar stimulated psychological invention that is unsupported by sensory experience. The trouble starts (in Western culture adherency) when we give precedence to the abstractions of language and grammar such as ‘creation’, ‘sorcery’, ‘production’ over our sensory experience and thus deny that the primary reality is that ‘everything is in flux’.
A man’s wisdom is to know that all ends are momentary, that the best end must be superseded by a better. But there is a mischievous tendency in him to transfer his thought from the life to the ends, to quit his agency and rest in his acts: the tools run away with the workman, the human with the divine. – Ralph Waldo Emerson, ‘The Method of Nature’
In other words, our attributing to ourselves the status of ‘thing-in-itself being’ with ‘powers of sourcing actions and developments’ aka ‘producer-product powers’ as per the double error of language and grammar INFLATES THE EGO via the producer-product abstraction, when we let it override our sensory experience of inclusion in the Tao. It is the double error of language and grammar that installs in the psyche the name-instantiated impression of independently-existing things-in-themselves with the grammar instantiated impressions of their having God-like powers of sorcery;
“In Reason’ in language! … Being is thought into and insinuated into everything as ‘cause’; from the concept ‘ego,’ alone, can the concept ‘Being’ proceed. … – 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’
HOW TO SUMMARIZE THE IMPACT OF THIS ON THE ‘REALITY CONSTRUCTION’ OF OUR WESTERN CULTURE CONDITIONED PSYCHE?
The key point is that our experience of inclusion in the Tao is ineffable, which prevents us from articulating and sharing it which would be of immense benefit if we could share it; e.g. we could extend our knowledge of the world well beyond the understanding we glean from our actual and direct ineffable sensory experience.
OH, BUT WE CAN AND DO EXTEND OUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE WORLD THROUGH LANGUAGE BASED SHARING OF EXPERIENCES, .. SO YOU SAY.
Well, kind of, but language does not overcome the ineffable nature of our experience of inclusion in the Tao, … it simply uses the tool of language to ‘dumb down’ our experience of inclusion in the Tao to the point that the ineffable can be ‘effable-ized. As continually transforming forms in the flow (Tao, wave-field), we are like the duning understood as a resonance within the flow (wave-field), that we can impose a ‘name’ on that persists even though there is nothing persisting in an ontological sense in the wave-field flow, where forms are continually forming and reforming. That is, the persistence of being associates with the psychological impression associated with ‘naming’.
A picture held us captive. And we could not get outside it, for it lay in our language and language seemed to repeat it to us inexorably. –-Wittgenstein
SO, IT IS NOT ONLY POSSIBLE TO ‘CONSTRUCT’ A PSEUDO-REALITY BASED ON NAME-INSTANTIATED THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES, NOTIONALLY WITH THEIR OWN POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS (the ‘double error’ of language and grammar), WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS ARE IN THE HABIT OF CONTRUCTING SUCH ERSATZ REALITIES. What’s more, we Western culture adherents are using this abstract surrogate reality, to displace the purely relational reality of our actual sensory experience of inclusion in the Tao.
BUT THERE IS A GOOD ‘REASON’ FOR DOING THIS, and that is that our double error based language renders the ineffable effable so that we can share our experience (or reduced to effable expressions of it) via the medium of language. WHAT IS CONFUSING HERE IS THAT THIS TOOL THAT REDUCES THE INEFFABLE REALITY TO RE-RENDER IT AS A SHARE-ABLE EFFABLE REALITY, RE-RENDERS OUR ‘SELF’ IN THE PROCESS. That is, the double error of language and grammar abstracts the relational form in the Tao as a name-instantiated thing-in-itself with powers of sourcing actions and developments. Naming thus become like ‘magic’ as in the medieval tales of the naming wand (the sword Excalibur) that transforms fluid forms into ‘knights’ with magical powers of sorcery.
ALL OF THIS ‘MAKE-BELIEVE’ SERVES TO RENDER THE INEFFABLE EFFABLE AND THIS HAS BECOME, IN THE MODERN ERA OF WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENCY (which stands apart from modern physics, indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Avaita Vedanta Tao grounded realities) THE ‘OPERATIVE REALITY’.
IT IS ONE THING TO EMPLOY THE DOUBLE ERROR BASED REDUCTION OF THE INEFFABLE TO THE EFFABLE AS A TOOL OF INFERENCE. AS IN THE EASTERN TRADITION, BUT QUITE ANOTHER TO EMPLOY THIS REDUCTION AS THE ‘OPERATIVE REALITY’. This is where EAST (along with modern physics) and WEST head off in these two very different directions in their respective conceptualizing of ‘reality’.
This has been expressed in terms of Western culture adherents ‘having let the tool run away with the workman, the human with the divine’. This is implicit in Western culture belief in the ego-instantiating ‘producer-product dynamic’. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS THE PRODUCER-PRODUCT-DYNAMIC, THERE IS ONLY THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM (THE TAO).
The Western culture adherent belief in ‘sorcery’ aka ‘producer-product dynamic’ is the ersatz psychological foundation of the concept of anthropogenic global warming. It is impossible to conceive of reality in terms of inclusion in a transforming relational continuum at the same time as conceiving of reality in terms of inclusion as an ‘inhabitant’ in a ‘habitat’ where both are understood in an ontological context. SO, THE ONTOLOGICAL REDUCTION OF REALITY TO AN INHABITANT AND HABITAT DICHOTOMY, WHILE A USEFUL PSYCHE-MOBILIZING INFERENCE THAT ENABLES THE EFFABLE-IZING OF THE INEFFABLE, IT DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR SUPERSEDING THE INEFFABLE FLUID ‘TAO’ REALITY, it qualifies only for rendering the ineffable crudely effable, and here I would stress ‘crudely’ since the effable version of reality is by no means competent for superseding the ineffable, it is only good for rendering a reduced-but-shareable version of the ineffable.
But, ‘superseding’ is precisely what Western culture adherence is doing, hence the phraseology of Emerson re ‘the tool of language and grammar is running away with the workman, the human with the divine.’
HOW TO ‘REMEMBER’ THE ESSENTIALS OF WHAT HAS BEEN SAID HERE IF ONE SO DESIRES;
REMEMBER THE FOLLOWING;
-1- The reality of our actual sensory experience of inclusion in the Tao (wave-field) is ineffable.
-2- Since ineffable reality is not shareable through the intellectual device of effable constructions, what is shared through effable constructions is not ‘reality’. An ‘inferential leap’ is necessary to take us beyond the effable to awareness of the ineffable (the ‘Wittgenstein ladder’).
-3- The producer-product abstraction is an effable construct that is merely a jumping off platform that must not be confused for ‘reality’; i.e. ‘The Tao that can be told is not the true Tao’.
-4- Ego is producer-product based pride that associates with intellectually CONSTRUCTED PSEUDO-REALITY (the double error based reality).
-5- The confusing of the double error based effable for the ineffable is the ‘crazy-maker’ of Western culture adherents. It is schizophrenia inducing. As alluded to in the Zen koan — Does the flag movement source the air movement or does the air movement source the flag movement, language and grammar introduce an ambiguous splitting (this is the conservative – liberal splitting; i.e. does one rotten apple source the spoiling of the whole barrel, or does it take a whole community to source the [good/bad] behaving child? The Western culture adhering mind remains TO THIS DAY WITHIN THE RANKS OF OUR WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS ‘stuck’ on the horns of this dilemma, which ‘falls away’ with the modern physics understanding (and indigenous aboriginal, Taoist/Buddhist and Advaita Vedanta understanding) that there is only relational transformation and thus NO SUCH THING AS SORCERY (see the bold highlighted instances of ‘source’ in this paragraph)
-6- anthropogenic sourcing of global warming is psychological delusion stemming from the double error of language and grammar
“Our judgement has us conclude that every change must have an author”;–but this conclusion is already mythology: it separates that which effects from the effecting. If I say “lightning flashes,” I have posited the flash once as an activity and a second time as a subject, and thus added to the event a being that is not one with the event but is rather fixed, “is” and does not “become.”–To regard an event as an “effecting,” and this as being, that is the double error, or interpretation, of which we are guilty.” – Nietzsche, ‘Will to Power’, 531
-7- As philosophers such as Henri Laborit have noted, Western culture adherence brings on ‘ego’ via the belief in ‘sorcery’ (the double error of language and grammar).
Laborit expresses this dilemma in his intro to ‘La Nouvelle Grille’; pioneers who try to bring in new understandings that undermine established reward and recognition standards. expose themselves to ‘getting arrows up the arse‘ (my ‘translation’);
We’ who explore such topics, cannot easily share them because (a) they do not fit into the typical dinner conversation format of our present culture, since to express them takes a lot of relational connections that can’t fit into a rapid-fire repartee, and (b) because the humanism implicit in trying to share them is not seen as “a humanism of real worth” since it undermines, besmirches or topples the esteemed icons, pillars of society, founding fathers, and celebrities of the culture-in-place. – Henri Laborit, ‘La Nouvelle Grille’ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Laborit
* * *
CLOSING OBSERVATION : re Postscript to Interrogating the ‘climate change’ consternation
Western culture adherence is ‘locked in’ by ‘high switching costs’. That is implicit in Laborit’s observation. It is hard (for some) to contemplate that Western culture adherence, including the splitting into conservative and liberal conflicting views of reality, is intellectual abstraction that is unsupported by sensory experience, but that is exactly what modern physics implies, in its supporting of the reality embraced in indigenous aboriginal cultures.
A few months before his death, Bohm met with a number of Algonkian speakers and was struck by the perfect bridge between their language and worldview and his own exploratory philosophy. What to Bohm had been major breakthroughs in human thought — quantum theory, relativity, his implicate order and rheomode – were part of the everyday life and speech of the Blackfoot, Mic Maq, Cree and Ojibwaj.” – F. David Peat, ‘Blackfoot Physics’
Last but not least, … I introduced this discussion with a reference to the note (copied below) “from a psychologist in regard to the conservative-liberal split since it may provide some insight into the confusion that currently reigns re ‘anthropogenic global warming’ that manifests in conservative-liberal polarized differences as to the basic nature of reality (i.e. is action and development sourced in a ‘one-to-many’ topology (conservative) or in a ‘many-to-one’ topology (liberal).
If you read the article below (i.e. the short excerpt I have extracted), … {this comment finishes following this artice}
Article in ‘Psychology Today’;
* * * BEGIN ARTICLE EXCERPT * * *
Why We Divide into Liberals and Conservatives
Each has something to offer in the game of life.
Posted Dec 13, 2018
… an excerpt …
Tolerance of Inequality
In a highly competitive world as conservatives see it, success is interpreted as the result of a combination of talent and hard work.
For this reason, they are opposed to the redistributive processes that characterize welfare states. They also reject progressive taxation under which the high earners pay much higher rates, effectively subsidizing poorer segments of the population who earn less.
Whereas liberals see the poor and destitute as largely being victims of misfortune, such as the unlucky fate of being born to poor minority parents, conservatives emphasize the role of personal defects, such as drug dependency, and unwillingness to work.
These differing perspectives generate very different views of inequality. Liberals see it as a social problem that government must relieve. Conservatives are more comfortable with inequality and accept the Biblical assertion that the poor will always be among us.
Whether it is the threat of a dangerous world, or empathy for the sufferings of others, political orientation has a strongly emotive basis. Each perspective can be interpreted as an adaptive response to different environments whether it is the world we grew up in that affects brain biology, or the current environment. In each case, how we respond is affected by our genotype that is a product of our evolutionary history.
* * * END ARTICLE EXCERPT * * *
DISCUSSION:
This article reflects the common Western culture perspective that incorporates an unstated psychological belief in the ‘producer-product’ abstraction; i.e. the conservative – liberal division, as discussed in the article, is based on the assumed ‘reality’ of the ‘double error’ of language and grammar (the producer-product abstraction which is the modern ‘cover’ for medieval ‘sorcery’).
As the author says, These differing perspectives generate very different views of inequality
The acceptance of ‘inequality’ is a ‘back-door psychological’ entrance for bringing in the abstract concept of ‘being’. It is akin to the backdoor entrance of ‘blame’ by way of ‘forgiveness’. ‘Blame’ is abstraction that smuggles in and by stealth establishes the psychological reality of the producer-product dynamic. There is no place for ‘blame’ in a transforming relational continuum.
In the relational reality of ‘mitakuye oyasin’, there is only harmony and dissonance, and our relative actions can cultivate and encourage the one (which is at the same time amounts to disrupting and discouraging the other) as in the BOTH/AND logic of the included medium aka quantum logic; i.e. where attenuating the one is at the same time amplifying the other and vice versa. Those are the only options in the relational world of flow (of the Tao). Only in the absolutized world of the double error abstraction are there (name-instantiated) ‘independent things-in-themselves’ with (grammar instantiated) ‘powers of sourcing actions and developments’.
WHAT I AM SAYING IS THAT WESTERN CULTURE PSYCHOLOGY IS ITSELF THE SOURCE OF SCHIZOPHRENIA BY GIVING CREDENCE TO THE ABSTRACT CONCEPT OF ‘INEQUALITY’. INEQUALITY BRINGS IN BY THE BACK-DOOR STEALTH ROUTE, A FOUNDATIONAL ROLE FOR ‘BEING’ IN REALITY CONSTRUCTION.
To run this by again, I think you can see that the author accepts the legitimacy of the concept of ‘inequality’, however, ‘inequality’ depends on the abstraction of ‘being’ as in A is not equal to B as ‘White’ is better than ‘Brown’ or ‘Youth’ is better than ‘Age’. In the quantum logic of the included medium, there are no equalities nor inequalities since such concepts are built on the back of the abstraction of ‘being’.
As the author suggests, the split between conservatives and liberals pivots from two VERY DIFFERENT VIEWS OF INEQUALITY;
These differing perspectives generate very different views of inequality. Liberals see it as a social problem that government must relieve. Conservatives are more comfortable with inequality and accept the Biblical assertion that the poor will always be among us.
* * * *
There is no ‘being’ in the Tao, and thus there can be no ‘inequality’, as is also implicitly affirmed in ‘mitakuye oyasin’. The belief in being (not as an expedient abstracting device but as something ‘real’) is a crazy-maker that leads to the schizophrenic ‘double error’ based splitting of inhabitant from habitat, ‘figure’ from ‘ground’ as in the producer-product abstraction, occluding the innately fluid nature of reality of inclusion in the Tao.
CONCLUSION:
Reason” in language! … oh what a deceptive old witch it has been!
REASON IS DRIVING US CRAZY!
By ‘REASON’, I intend (as does Nietzsche) the EITHER/OR logic of the excluded medium. This is the source of the schizophrenia as manifests in the conservative-liberal polar opposite views of how dynamics are sourced (i.e. from one-to-many according to the conservative and from many-to-one according to the liberals.
(editing note: summarize the following and reconcile with one-to-many and many to one)
Whereas liberals see the poor and destitute as largely being victims of misfortune, such as the unlucky fate of being born to poor minority parents, conservatives emphasize the role of personal defects, such as drug dependency, and unwillingness to work.
These differing perspectives generate very different views of inequality. Liberals see it as a social problem that government must relieve. Conservatives are more comfortable with inequality and accept the Biblical assertion that the poor will always be among us.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.