In pride, in reas’ning pride, our error lies;

  — Alexander Pope, ‘An Essay on Man: Epistle I’

 

REASON is driving us NUTS!   It is just too simplistic for the real-world of our sense-experience.  If we want to understand mass killings, we need to understand how REASON SCREWS US UP, as Alexander Pope pointed out, but who was listening in our WESTERN CULTURE since we are taught from birth to be proud of our reasoning capability.  If we have a “high IQ”, we ‘have it made’ in WESTERN CULTURE.

PROBLEM!  “REASON”, as Goedel’s Theorem tells us, is ALWAYS INCOMPLETE.

Reason derives from RATIO as where we say; ‘if we double our wheat growing acreage, we will double our production and earnings’.  This is how we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS ‘reason’, but there is no mention here about the fact that as the CULTIVATED area ‘grows’, there is a conjugate ‘shrinking’ of WILDERNESS so that the “REAL” as in ‘actual sense-experience reality’ is that the space we are living in is TRANSFORMING.

What about the GROWTH of the area of the land we are cultivating; that is REAL is it NOT?

Reflection informs us that “it is LOGICAL to think in terms of GROWTH but LOGICAL is NOT REAL”.  When we use the word LOGICAL, we habitually assume ARISTOTELIAN LOGIC which is NOT THE SAME AS QUANTUM LOGIC.

If we are talking about GROWTH, we could be THINKING of GROWTH in terms such as the GROWTH of cultivated acreage as if on a flat plane that is so vast that all we need to consider in measuring GROWTH is the RATIO of acres before and acres after our cultivating efforts, as constituting GROWTH of the cultivated land.

HOWEVER, if we are in the space on the spherical surface of the earth, as the area of cultivated land GROWS, so also, in reciprocal relation, the WILDERNESS acreage is SHRINKING.  And we know that the WILDERNESS is which most preserves the DIVERSITY that has been evolving since TIME IMMEMORIAL in which we HUMANS, or better, HUMANINGS since we are still included in the overall TRANSFORMING, participate. (i.e. The term HUMANING acknowledges that we are included in the ongoing, transforming relational continuum).

So the point is that together with the GROWTH of CULTIVATED LAND, there is the CONJUGATE SHRINKAGE of WILDERNESS LAND.

This is why Modern physics couldn’t use BINARY LOGIC to capture representations of reality, because BINARY LOGIC is INCOMPLETE.  Sure, its RATIO based (‘rational’ or ‘reason-based’) representation addresses the GROWTH of the CULTIVATED LAND, but it doesn’t, at the same time, comprehend the SHRINKAGE of the WILDERNESS, and that is because BINARY LOGIC is FLATSPACE LOGIC.  If we lived on a flat space of infinite extent, then we could describe GROWTH of the cultivated land without having to make reference to the SHRINKAGE of WILDERNESS, but since we live in a spherical space on the surface of the Earth, in order for our propositions regarding what goes on here to be REALISTIC, they must take into account the SHRINKAGE of WILDERNESS that is conjugate to the GROWTH of cultivated land.  In other words, we need are more complex kind of LOGIC that goes to places that BINARY LOGIC cannot reach.

BUT WE COMMONLY STICK WITH THE CONCEPT OF GROWTH which derives from RATIO, hence ‘rationality’ aka ‘reason’ because it is MORE SIMPLE.

We may recall WHY we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS did not, as the indigenous aboriginal culture did, understand the cosmos as an inter-related-unity (mitakuye oyasin).  It was an early bias seeking simplicity in LANGUAGE based capture of reality that found expression here;

“And just as our Copernicus said to us : It is more convenient to suppose the earth turns round, since thus the laws of astronomy are expressible in a much simpler language ; this one would say: It is more convenient to suppose the earth turns round, since thus the laws of mechanics are expressible in a much simpler language’. Henri Poincaré, ‘Science and Hypothesis’, Ch. VII Relative Motion and Absolute Motion

The “much simpler language” is the language of BINARY LOGIC wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO.  In modern physics, FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE; i.e. ‘matter’ is a condensation of the electromagnetic field, so we cannot use BINARY LOGIC in language based representations of reality, but must instead use QUANTUM LOGIC where FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE, or in other words, the world (Wave-field) is all-including.

As Schroedinger says;

“The world is given to me only once, not one existing and one perceived. Subject and object are only one. The barrier between them cannot be said to have broken down as a result of recent experience in the physical sciences, for this barrier does not exist.” – Erwin Schroedinger

So. Modern physics cannot use BINARY LOGIC even though Newtonian physics did so.  This is because when we use BINARY LOGIC we construct a SUBSTITUTE REALITY wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO.  For example, using BINARY LOGIC, we can say ‘The TOWN is GROWING in size and population and PRODUCTION of goods’ as if the TOWN was ‘enlarging and acting in its own right’, when what is really going on is the TRANSFORMING of the LANDSCAPE wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE (i.e. where there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE) and there is no longer any ‘TOWN” thing-in-itself as language allows within the SUBSTITUTE REALITY we construct with BINARY LOGIC..

Language is in error where we make statement such as ‘the TOWN is GROWING.  As Nietzsche points out, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS commonly build a DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR into our language-based representations or reality, which exemplifies our use of RATIO (every time we say that the TOWN or the CHILD or the NATIONAL PRODUCT is GROWING.  This is all ABSTRACTION.

Modern physics understands physical REALITY in the CURVED SPACE terms wherein FIGURE -and-GROUND-are-ONE so that as the FIGURE, for example the AREA of CULTIVATED LAND, “GROWS”, there is (to capture it crudely) a simultaneous CONJUGATE SHRINKAGE of the WILDERNESS land which, overall, is a seamless field based TRANSFORMATION.  NOW WE CAN SEE what’s wrong with GROWTH as a concept, it is BINARY LOGIC based and it fails to address the REALITY of the CONJUGATE SHRINKAGE-OF-WILDERNESS which are in realiy a seamless conjugate relation constituting TRANSFORMATION.

CHECK THIS OUT.  Where can we use GROWTH to represent change (recall that GROWTH is based on RATIO and thus BINARY LOGIC) and where do we have to upgrade to TRANSFORMATION (QUANTUM LOGIC)?

ANSWER: AS FAR AS THE “REAL WORLD” OF OUR SENSE EXPERIENCE GOES, WE CAN’T USE GROWTH ANYWHERE TO REPRESENT ANY ASPECT OF OUR SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY BECAUSE IN OUR SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY, THERE IS ONLY “TRANSFORMATION”.  “GROWTH” is ABSTRACTION based on the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMAMR.

HEY! What is going on here because WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS, in our language-based representations of reality, use GROWTH all over the place; the GROWTH of our CHILDREN, the GROWTH of our TOWN, the GROWTH of our ECONOMY, and so on and so forth. IT SEEMS TO MAKE SENSE, SO HOW CAN THIS BE EXPLAINED?

ANSWER: As Nietzsche has pointed out, there is a problem with REASON and it is that REASON builds on EGO, as Alexander Pope was pointing to as problematic; i.e.   In pride, in reas’ning pride, our error lies;  Our common WESTERN CULTURE brand of ‘reason’ is RATIO-based and the concept of GROWTH is based on RATIO.  However, if we were to acknowledge, as in the real sense-experience world, the conjugate SHRINKAGE of WILDERNESS, we would need a new language, a flow-based language since fluidity is where the asserting and the accommodating are ONE.  This is the nature of Bohm’s Rheomode, and the indigenous aboriginal langauges, but it is not the architectural nature of ENGLISH and the CAE (common average European) languages such as English.

Reason and PRIDE (EGO) come with LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURES like the CAE languages which employ the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.  EGO-PRIDE comes with the notion of LOCAL AUTHORING POWER and this is RATIO-based or REASON-based..  Nietzsche points out that the notion of LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and developments comes from the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR; e.g. ‘the TOWN is GROWING’.

NO! that is NOT what is going on in sense-experience reality.  In sense-experience reality there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE and the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE is what our sense-experience affirms, while the concept of a local TOWN thing-in-itself that is GROWING is INTELLECTUAL ABSTRACTION.  But we WESTERN CULTURE AHDERENTS are in the habit of letting LANGUAGE based INTELLECTUAL ABSTRACTION take over from our SENSE-EXPERIENCE.

What do I mean by ‘take over’?  What I mean is that with expressions like ‘the TOWN is GROWING larger and more populous and productive, we are constructing an abstract SUBSTITUTE REALITY which is consistent with BINARY LOGIC based concepts like ‘the TOWN’ which either ‘IS” or ‘IS NOT’ existing as a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF, and not one of these fuzzy-wuzzy ‘nonlocalities’ like ‘A TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM’.

WE PAY A PRICE FOR OUR LANGUAGE BASED CONSTRUCTING OF THIS SUBSTITUTE REALITY with its FIGURE and GROUND as TWO ABSTRACTION where the TOWN now sits in a notional ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE (Euclidian space), and this PRICE is FRAGMENTATION which brings with it MENTAL ABERRATION.

In the spherical space of our sense-experience reality, there is no such thing as GROWTH wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO, …  there is only TRANSFORMATION wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE, which is equivalent to stating that BINARY LOGIC must be superseded by QUANTUM LOGIC if we are to avoid radical distortion in our LANGUAGE based REPRESENTATION of sense-experience reality.  So, NO, it is NOT TRUE that ‘THE TOWN IS GROWING’ (that is BINARY LOGIC based abstraction), …. HOWEVER, what is “REAL” and sense-experience-confirmable, is that ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’ or ‘TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM’).

As mentioned, WE PAY THE PRICE OF FRAGMENTATION (it is a CRAZY-MAKER) when we construct SUBSTITUTE REALITIES that are supported by LOGICAL propositions such as ‘the TOWN IS GROWING’ which LOCALIZE reality and have us FORGET about the sense-experience reality we are included in wherein “there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE”. There is no ENTRANCE and EXIT to the TOWNING, TOWNING is an appearance based aspect of the TRANSFORMING CONTINUUM; it is a DISTINGUISHABLE but not SEPARATE development.

Can you imagine walking inside what we say is ‘the TOWN’ and exploring the buildings on “its STREETS and AVENUES”?   Could you imagine doing a similar walkabout in a ‘TOWN’ on a lower deck in the Titanic?  You could describe in great detail, the shops and theatre and bars etc on this lower deck, as if this FRAGMENT of reality could be safely employed as the OPERATIVE REALITY, … until, … what was that sudden bump and shaking, that nearly knocked us off our feet?  We saw nothing, and only FELT something, as if our vision was missing some essential aspects of reality.  This that go ‘bump’ in the night..

WHAT IF IT TURNED OUT THAT REALITY IS SOMETHING BEYOND THE REACH OF MY VISION, SOMETHING I AM INCLUDED IN BUT WHICH IS SO VAST AND UNBOUNDED THAT IT IS INACCESSIBLE TO MY VISION?  My inertial mass senses accelerations originating from well beyond he reach of my visual sensing, as is the reality  that makes ‘inertial guidance’ accessible to us. Thus our ‘FEELINGS’ tap into the whole universe while our ‘VISION’ FRAGMENTS the space we share inclusion in.  By using VISION-that-FRAGMENTS for LANGUAGE-based REPRESENTATIONS of reality, we ‘FRAGMENT REALITY’ and concoct a ‘SUBSTITUTE REALITY’ so that some of us, such as we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS, have learned to employ a FRAGMENT of reality as our OPERATIVE REALITY; e.g.  ‘The TOWN that is GROWIING’, which is LOCAL and EXPLICIT  and thus unlike the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM’.  While the former is BINARY LOGIC based, the latter is QUANTUM LOGIC based.

This TOWN-that-is-GROWING seems a lot like the SHOPPING CENTRE that is GROWING within the belly of the Titanic in the respect that we are using our VISION to FRAGMENT reality and employ GRAMMAR to conjure up a FRAGMENT based SUBSTITUTE REALITY which is LOCAL and EXPLICIT and is no longer part of the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM; i.e. ‘the TOWN that is GROWING’.  HERE! let me show you a MAP of the TOWN.  Check it out, you can find and explore all of the streets and avenues shown on this MAP. You will find them all ‘in place’ exactly as mapped. Watch out for the construction though, as they continue to GROW the size of the shopping centre by adding new shops on this middle deck in the belly of the Titanic.

I’m sure you will notice how much the SHOPPING CENTRE has GROWN since you saw visited the Shipyard earlier on.  GROWTH is what can happen to LOCAL, EXPLICIT CONSTRUCTIONS.  GROWTH makes us forget all about our inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.  GROWTH HAPPENS, RIGHT THERE IN FRONT OF OUR EYES.  Growth can be captured on a MAP, or at least on a series of MAPS, but that’s because it is RATIO-based and RATIO is the abstract basis of LOCAL GROWTH.

* * *

Ok, all of this ‘story-telling’ is laid out here just to make the point that our LANGUAGE lets us abstractly FRAGMENT reality and box up LOCAL PORTIONS OF REALITY with language-based REPRESENTATIONS.  Once we have used language to develop a FRAMEWORK, we can use GRAMMAR to impute the GROWTH of a notional LOCAL ENTITY within this FRAMEWORK such as the new shop on a middle deck within the belly of the Titanic.

But is this “new shop” really an ADDITION to the structure, that we can see ‘in front of us’ when we are on that deck, or is it part of the TRANSFORMATION of that space we ARE INCLUDED IN as our inertial guidance systems inform us?  Gravity-wise, and we can feel this in our flesh and bones, we are inertial masses included in the GRAVITY FIELD which implies that ‘everything is related’ (mitakuye oyasin), so a question arises here;

QUESTION: Where does FRAGMENTATION COME FROM?

ANSWER: FRAGMENTATION COMES FROM LANGUAGE; i.e. FROM THE DOUBLE ERROR OF NAMING AND GRAMMAR – Nietzsche

That’s right; when we put the words together to say ‘the TOWN is GROWING’, we are FRAGMENTING reality, creating a SUBSTITUTE REALITY based on LOCAL, EXPLICIT THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES with notional GRAMMAR-given powers of AUTHORING actions and developments.  THIS IS WHERE FRAGMENTATION DERIVES, from the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR!

SUBSTITUTE REALITY: is the reality we construct with the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.

While Nietzsche is telling us where FRAGMENTATION COMES FROM (the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR), Bohm is warning us about FRAGMENTATION (e.g. in Wholeness and the Implicate Order) and developing techniques to avoid our being entranced by it, and trying to help us to get back in touch with our sense-experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.  Vygotsky, in THOUGHT and LANGUAGE, is giving us a guided tour through our youth-to-adult developing of cognition of ‘reality’ as a REAL plus IMAGINARY conjugate relation that has built in evolutionary capability, and showing us how, in developing language based articulation of the transforming relational continuum we are included in, we must keep the IMAGINARY (the everyday-relational unfolding) in its natural precedence over the REAL (the fixed and explicit aka scientific), something that PIAGET had got upside-down, perhaps because WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS had already made the upside-down mode a WESTERN CULTURE STANDARD.

For example, ‘TOWNING’ belongs to the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT that we can IMAGINE as going on WITHIN THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.  By FRAGMENTING IT OUT OF THE CONTINUUM, or “CONCRETIZING IT”, we make it over into something REAL; i.e. something LOCAL and EXPLICIT which we can then delve into and describe in terms of FRAGMENTS (e.g. the Church, the Town Hall) within the FRAGMENT we call the TOWN as in a Matryoshka structure).  WE ARE NOW IN A FRAGEMENTATION BASED SUBSTITUTE REALITY featuring the LOCAL and EXPLICIT and NO LONGER in the sense-experience reality aka the NONLOCAL – IMPLICIT TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM aka the Wave-field aka the Tao..

REASON IS WHAT PUTS US INTO THIS FRAGMENTATION -BASED SUBSTITUTE REALITY, and this is DRIVING US NUTS because we are employing this SUBSTITUTE REALITY … NOT as a tool of INFERENCE but as an OPERATIVE REALITY, a REALITY that is BROKEN UP INTO SEPARATE AND INDEPENDENT FRAGMENTS like the Matryoshka.

CLOSING SUMMARY STATEMENT:

All three of the philosophers cited here; Bohm, Nietzsche and Vygotsky, have messages which elucidate on how we use language to develop representations that FRAGMENT reality, and while the FRAGMENTATION can help us to address the real sense-experience reality which is the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM, , our ‘taking it apart’ into FRAGMENTS as an expedient to facilitate sharing  (of some semblance of) our sense experience of inclusion in the continuum, with one another,  does not mean that as interpreters of the fragments, we can assume that THE FRAGMENTS HAVE A REALITY OF THEIR OWN.

That is, if we don’t want to drive ourselves NUTS, we have to use our intuition to pull the FRAGMENTS into connective confluence and extract the relational coherencies therefrom, since that is the only way to tap into TRANSFORMATION; i.e. our flow-based sense-experience reality is not capturable in a FRAGMENTED piecemeal fashion.  Those FRAGMENTS, such as ‘the TOWN is GROWING’, … are not VIABLE for REALITY REPRESENTATION ‘on their own’ but must be understood in the larger context of TRANSFORMATION as in “there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM”.

What is ‘going on’ with us WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS is that we have fallen into the trap of FRAGMENTING REALITY by construction FRAGMENT-based REPRESENTATIONS such as ‘the TOWN is GROWING’ instead of acknowledging the sense-experience reality of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum by saying ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM’, which is like speaking of WHORLS-in-FLOW wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE, and thus stopping short of imposing a FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO FRAGMENTING of reality.

However, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS “ARE” falling into the dysfunction of employing the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO FRAGMENTED SUBSTITUTE REALITY as our OPERATIVE REALITY

This is why Emerson speaks of the TOOL of language, …  as can substitute the LOCAL and EXPLICIT for the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT; … “running away with the workman; the human with the divine”.

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.

“ONE’S ACTS” are NOT REAL, but are instead DOUBLE ERROR based ABSTRACTION that we concoct to CONSTRUCT a SUBSTITUTE REALITY that is EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT or in other words FRAGMENTED (into manageable pieces) by way of DOUBLE ERROR REDUCTION based on NAMING and GRAMMAR.

RETAINING the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT as the primary REALITY is the understanding of indigenous aboriginals and Modern physics; i.e. if there is RAPING and MURDERING and THIEVING, the reality is NOT the LOCAL and EXPLICIT, the REALITY is the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.  This means that the issue is  RELATIONAL DISSONANCE that is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT and there is no such thing as a LOCAL AUTHORING SOURCE (this LOCAL AUTHORING notion derives from the DOUBLE ERROR and NAMING and GRAMMAR).

SO, WE CAN FORGET ABOUT SEARCHING FOR THE LOCAL AUTHORING SOURCE since THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS LOCAL AUTHORING in the transforming relational continuum.  But as in indigenous aboriginal cultures, we can identify the LIGHTNING RODS through whom the tensions of RELATIONAL DISSONANCE have found release.  These Lightning rods ARE NOT AUTHORS, but the do imply dysfunction in the relational dynamics of the society-at-large, so the solution is, for example, a HEALING CIRCLE wherein everyone comes together to subsume the relational tensions that are the REAL SOURCE of the LIGHTNING ROD ZAPS that we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are in the habit of attributing to the LIGHTNING ROD as if he/she were the LOCAL JUMPSTART AUTHOR of the dissonance.

This mistaking the LIGHTNING ROD for the AUTHOR is supported in WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS by EGO.

 In pride, in reas’ning pride, our error lies;

That is, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS ERRONEOUSLY hold that “ONE’s ACTS ARE REAL” when they are instead ABSTRACT ARTIFACTS OF THE DOUBLE ERROR OF NAMING AND GRAMMAR. So, Life is more complicated than that; i.e. Our inclusion in the transforming relational continuum is more complicated than that, so that we have to look beyond the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR that serves us up the ABSTRACTIONS of LOCALLY AUTHORED ACTS.

And when we ‘look beyond’ the simplistic LOCAL and EXPLICIT, we find a BUMPER CAR like complex wherein NONLOCALITY prevails and where there is a collision, while there is TRANSMITTER AND RECEIVER combination, the TRANSMITTER is NOT the LOCAL AUTHOR since the dynamic is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT and NOT … LOCAL and EXPLICIT.

This where EAST departs from WEST because we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS like to “KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID” and impose FRAGMENTATION so as to serve up a LOCAL PERPETRATOR (TRANSMITTER) AND LOCAL VICTIM (RECEIVER) rather than understanding the dynamic in the EASTERN fashion, in the relational terms of RESONANCE and DISSONANCE which are NONLOCAL and without AUTHORSHIP.

As Bohm says, our IMPOSING of FRAGMENTATION on ourselves is DRIVING US NUTS (schizophrenic)!

 

* * *