NONLOCALITY vis a vis RATIONALITY
Consider how WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are locked into THINKING in BINARY LOGICAL terms. Take the concept “GROWTH” , for example. It carries with it the BINARY implications of FIGURE and GROUND as TWO, and we use it all the time in our language based representations of reality.
Newton tried to develop a science of dynamics that would handle the movement of three or more bodies under one another’s mutual influence. He couldn’t get there and had to stop with TWO BODY movement as in FIGURE and GROUND as TWO.
“An exact solution for three bodies, exceeds, if I am not mistaken, the force of any human mind” – Isaac Newton
I am going to connect this with Bohm’s point that we have the capability of INTELLIGENCE based understanding but commonly employ the abstractions of RATIONAL thought. Nietzsche makes the same point in his critique of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR which, together, conjure up the BINARY ABSTRACTION of GROWTH. We talk about GROWTH as if it were something REAL, but it is just the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-abstracted-asTWO (otherwise the FIGURE could not GROW without the GROUND reciprocally SHRINKING to accommodate such GROWTH). What is REAL is NOT GROWTH but TRANFORMATION wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE as in a Wave-dynamic. Since the TRANSFORMING relational continuum is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT (i.e. the Wave-field is ‘everywhere at the same time’), The abstract DOUBLE ERROR concept of THING-IN-ITSELF GROWTH serves as an expedient that is EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT.
EXAMPLE: We could argue over whether the DYNAMICS of the HURRICANE (including GROWTH) source the dynamics of the ATMOSPHERE, or whether the dynamics of the ATMOSPHERE source the GROWTH of the HURRICANE. In reality, the HURRICANE (FIGURE) and ATMOSPHERE (GROUND) are ONE TRANSFORMING CONTINUUM so we don’t have to live with the ambiguous question of whether the HURRICANE sources the stirring up of the ATMOSPHERE or whether the ATMOSPHERE sources the stirring up the HURRICANE. In the modern physics FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE understanding, there is only TRANSFORMATION of the relational continuum (Wave-field) and there is no such thing as SOURCING of LOCAL actions and developments. The WESTERN CULTURE conservative – liberal POLAR opposition as to whether SOURCING is ‘one-to-many’ (one bad apple SOURCES rotting of the whole barrel) or ‘many-to-one’ (it takes a whole community to SOURCE the raising of a good/bad child) is an unresolvable dichotomy because, in the reality or our sensory exerpience, unlike in the DOUBLE ERROR abstractions of NAMING and GRAMMAR, THERE IS NO LOCAL SOURCING, there is only TRANSFORMATION as is the basic nature of the Wave-field aka the Tao.
Ok, this is going to ‘get us WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS into trouble’, this reduction of everything to BINARY LOGIC as in the reduction to TWO-BODY dynamics just because NEWTON’s mathematics could NOT handle the 3+ body problem (where motion of three or more bodies derives from their simultaneous mutual influence). For example, three or more spherical soap bubbles squeezing together involves simultaneous mutual influence that manifests as transformation of the bubble spheres into hexagonal cells. Thus Newton’s theory not being able to handle the THREE-BODY PROBLEM boils down the psyche not being able to REDUCE all dynamics to EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT abstraction. TRANSFORMATION is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT. If we constrain our understanding to the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT as in the DOUBLE ERROR constructions of NAMING and GRAMMAR, then we exclude TRANSFORMATION from our these language-based conceptualizing of reality.
TRANSFORMATION requires the BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDED medium wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE as in Wave-frield reality, while representations in the DOUBLE ERROR terms of NAMING-instantiated LOCAL things-in-themselves-with GRAMMAR-instantiated powers of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments gets by with the EITHER/OR logic of the EXCLUDED medium wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND are TWO. The issue is not that the latter is MORE TRUE than the FORMER, the issue is that the former is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT while the latter is EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT so that if we want to go with UNDERSTANDINGS OF REALITY THAT WE CAN SHARE WITH LANGUAGE, we must stick with the DOUBLE ERROR constructions of NAMING and GRAMMAR, whereas if we want to understand reality in the full-blown sense of the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM, we must understand that it can’t be reduced to explicit and direct language and language-based sharing and that language can only go so far as to serve as INFERENCE of the fluid reality that lies beyond FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO capture..
This standard behaviour, in our WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENCY, of reducing reality to BINARY LOGIC, is a crazy-maker, but it is our certified ‘operative reality’ which features the abstraction of GROWTH in place of TRANSFORMATION. You can see that there is a ‘loss of dimensionality’ here, in our understanding of dynamics. That is, there is a ‘loss of dimensionality’ in what we take to be REALITY.
For example, we speak of the GROWTH of cultivated farmland without mentioning the reciprocal reduction of Wildnerness. This comes from RATIONAL INTELLECTION where we arrange our thinking so as to impute LOCAL GROWTH of by the combination of NAMING and GRAMMAR; e.g. Farmer Jone’s cultivated cropland has GROWN to double the size it was last year. Notice how TIME has crept in here together with GROWTH, and notice how there need be no mention of the RECIPROCAL shrinking of Wilderness lands; i.e. we just DODGED TRANSFORMATION by using RATIO or RATIONALITY and I suppose that would be in order if we lived in a flat plane of infinite extent, but our sensory experience informs us that the surface of a sphere fits better with our sensory experience, so that by expanding the cultivated area, we are at the same time shrinking the wilderness area, or in other words TRANSFORMATION is a more apt way of capturing everyday dynamics of our sensory experience.
But, as Newton IMPLIED, once we get beyond TWO BODIES (BINARY LOGIC) as in FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO, … we go beyond the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT to the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT. “An exact solution for three bodies, exceeds, if I am not mistaken, the force of any human mind” – Isaac Newton
You may be thinking that I am talking about going from TWO Bodies to ONE, which I am, but the “ONE” is NOT a ‘body’ aka a ‘LOCAL thing-in-itself’ but a fluid continuum aka FIELD full of relational forms which Bohm compares to salt-water taffy that is continually getting pulled out and enfolded back into itself as one TRANSFORMING UNUM.
So, how do we go wrong in constructing realities with BINARY LOGIC aka the EITHER/OR logic of the EXCLUDED MEDIUM instead of a more competent logic, like the BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDED medium of quantum physics where FIGUER-and-GROUND-are-ONE?
Making GROWTH out to be ‘something real’ and substituting it for TRANSFORMATION is a prime example of where we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are going wrong. Below is a simple example, and it puts two body and three body logic into perspective. Note that Bohm and Nietzsche and others discriminate between these different systems of logic that go into our intellectual construction reality.
We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS argue over whether it is the individual that is the primary SOURCE of actions and developments in our society, or whether it is the social collective that is the primary SOURCE. This issue arises throughout our WESTERN social dynamic and it is based on belief in the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING (which imputes the existence of local things-in-themselves) and GRAMMAR (which imputes to the notional LOCAL things-in-themselves, the power of SOURCING actions and developments. THIS PSEUDO REALITY is abstraction that bears not resemblance to the transforming relational continuum in which we and everything are included in.
SIMPLE EXAMPLE: explaining the psychological impact of reduction to BINARY THINKING
People are always on the move and we can see this within generations of people and across generations and they are in search sustainable living for themselves and their families. We could model this in terms of climbers who were attempting to attain some higher ground or summit much like mountain climbers. The climbers may ‘pitch their tents’ along the way and it will happen that a number of people ‘’pitch their tent’ at a convenient geographical landing, as the move onward and upward and after reaching one peak they are in a position to see other, possibly higher (more resource loaded peaks), so they will descend and seek their fortune elsewhere, stopping briefly in the same ‘camping grounds’ they had stopped over in previously. As people move along in search of a better life, like ants in search of food, these camps they stop over in grow more crowded then less crowded. If there is a snowstorm at the summit, those on their way up may ‘hold up’ in the lower elevation camps and proceed on up as the weather improves.
If we focus only on the ‘camps’ or ‘towns’, we will likely speak of THE GROWTH and DECLINE of the TOWN, and change the signage showing the ‘population’ of the camp. If we were to interview the few people who ‘stayed in place’ in a particular camp, they could tell us of the GROWTH and DECLINE of the camp. These are DOUBLE ERROR expressions. The DOUBLE ERROR is where we put together NAMING and GRAMMAR to construct the intellectual abstraction based impression of LOCAL GROWTH The psyche takes this in and imagines that the LOCAL TOWN is GROWING and SHRINKING “OVER TIME”.
BUT WHAT IS GOING ON HERE IS INNATELY “NONLOCAL” and when the heavy snowfall comes at the peak, more people will be stalled in the TOWNS on their way up and the TOWNS will swell in population and we will speak of this in terms of the GROWTH of the TOWN.
GROWTH is a LOCAL phenomenon based on the BINARY concept of RATIO but what is going on here is NONLOCAL. If we interview the people in the TOWN and they speak to us RATIONALLY, they will tell tell us that they are in charge of their movements and so that the GROWTH of the TOWN can be explained in terms of the decision-making of travellers who make their own decisions as to whether to keep moving or to stopover in a camp while the weather improves.
SHOULD WE THEN SAY THE MOVEMENT OF THE PEOPLE IS EXPLAINABLE IN TERMS that they are INDEPENDENT BEINGS (as NAMING suggests) with their own powers of SOURCING actions and development (as GRAMMAR suggests)?
This is like saying that the movement of electrons from the negative to positive plates of a vacuum tube is a binary dynamic, … but if we put a charged GRID in between the cathode and anode, while it is still true that the binary relational of negative and positive is the basis source of the dynamic, the THIRD player is the charged GRID which is like the changing weather in this climbers example. This THIRD INFLUENCE means that the system is no longer BINARY. We now have the THREE BODY PROBLEM or the THREE mutual influences complexification. But as Newton pointed out, we don’t have a LANGUAGE to capture the three body phenomenon.
“An exact solution for three bodies, exceeds, if I am not mistaken, the force of any human mind” – Isaac Newton
In the case of three simultaneous influences; i.e. in the case of the mountain climbers, we have FOR STARTERS, the ASSERTING FIGURE and the ATTRACTING GROUND, and then we have this THIRD influence (e.g. the AMBIENT WEATHER aka the FIELD in which both FIGURE and GROUND are included).
What we are talking about here is the shift from BINARY EITHER/OR logic of the EXCLUDED medium to the “Quantum” BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDED medium which gives us the THREE-INFLUENCE RELATION where the WEATHER plays the same role as the GRID in the vacuum tube which may either encourage or discourage the BINARY movement as relates to the passage of electrons from the Anode to the Cathode.
The camps or TOWNS in the example can be said to undergo LOCAL GROWTH or LOCAL SHRINKAGE but to focus on the LOCAL distracts us from what is really going on which is the NONLOCAL dynamic of TRANSFORMATION.
Compare the TRIO of WEATHER (1), PEOPLE GATHERING (2) and PEOPLE SCATTERING (3). The concept of GROWTH associates with GATHERING (2) and the concept of SHRINKAGE associates with SCATTERING (3) while WEATHER (1) is an influence that is like the charged grid in the vacuum tube.
If we interrogate the people who are actually making the moves into to camp and out of the camp, they will claim to be INDEPENDENT BEINGS with their own powers of SOURCING actions and development in which case we can attribute the movement in the binary terms of those who GATHER and those who SCATTER and both of those groups will claim that they are INDEPENDENT BEINGS with their own powers of SOURCING actions and developments; i.e. EITHER they chose to move on OR stay put. So long as we speak in terms of BINARY LOGIC, the action will be explainable in this manner. Meanwhile, they are INCLUDED in the ATMOSPHERIC WEATHER which acts as the THIRD element in the vacuum tube which either INDUCES amplification of movement or INDUCES attenuation of movement.
This gives us the THREE BODY PROBLEM or rather a THREE INFLUENCE PROBLEM which we can understand in terms of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE since the both the opposing elements are included in the ATMOSPHERIC FIELD which can encourage or discourage movement between the camps (or in or out of a particular camp or TOWN).
While our INTUITIVE INTELLIGENCE (Bohm) gives us this larger THREE-INFLUENCE understanding, we also have access to the RATIONAL understanding where population of a camp or TOWN can either GROW or SHRINK, … or can it?
We could understand what goes on in terms of purely relational SCATTERING and GATHERING as on the surface of a sphere where, if there is SCATTERING, it is at the same time, GATHERING since in spherical space (the space on the surface of a sphere) these are conjugates of each other (gathering relative to one pole is at the same time scattering relative to the opposite pole).
A circular area on a sphere implies a conjugate circular area as in ‘cultivated land’ and ‘Wilderness’ such that if the spherical area of cultivation GROWS, the spherical area of Wilderness SHRINKS. The concept of GROWTH is now ‘TOO SIMPLE’ because it is LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT and is no longer meaningful. Instead, the concept of TRANSFORMATION which is NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT does work, although it is INEFFABLE.
Since we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS habitually construct our realities with DOUBLE ERROR based language and grammar (i.e in terms of NAMING-instantiated LOCAL things-in-themselves with GRAMMAR-imputed powers of SOURCING actions and developments), we are confronted with the inability of such language to capture NONLOCAL dynamics such as TRANSFORMATION. WE INTUIT THAT TRANSFORMATION IS THE WAVE-FIELD REAITY that We and everything is included in, but as Lao Tzu pointed out ‘the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao’.
Returning to our example of the camps that GATHER and SCATTER based on the NONLOCAL TRANSFORMING WEATHER THAT WE ARE INCLUDED IN, … we say that these camps or TOWNS are LOCAL THINGS-in-themselves which GROW and SHRINK (THANKS TO “NAMING” and “GRAMMAR” and the DOUBLE ERROR). GROWING and SHRINKING derive from the abstract concept of RATIO which is actually a logical error termed PETITIO PRINCIPII, as Poincaré pointed out. This DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR is what allows us to INVENT LOCAL SOURCING as is implied by the world/concept GROWTH.
ALL OF THIS CONTRIVANCE GOES INTO RATIO-NAL INTELECTION and it fits with Newton’s physics which Newton based on locally born language and grammar, as Whorf has pointed out; i.e.
From the form-plus-substance dichotomy the philosophical views most traditionally characteristic of the “Western world” have derived huge support. Here belong materialism, psychophysical parallelism, physics–at least in its traditional Newtonian form–and dualistic views of the universe in general. Indeed here belongs almost everything that is “hard, practical common sense.” Monistic, holistic, and relativistic views of reality appeal to philosophers and some scientists, but they are badly handicapped in appealing to the “common sense” of the Western average man–not because nature herself refutes them (if she did, philosophers could have discovered this much), but because they must be talked about in what amounts to a new language. “Common sense,” as its name shows, and “practicality” as its name does not show, are largely matters of talking so that one is readily understood. It is sometimes stated that Newtonian space, time, and matter are sensed by everyone intuitively, whereupon relativity is cited as showing how mathematical analysis can prove intuition wrong. This, besides being unfair to intuition, is an attempt to answer offhand question (1) put at the outset of this paper, to answer which this research was undertaken. Presentation of the findings now nears its end, and I think the answer is clear. The offhand answer, laying the blame upon intuition for our slowness in discovering mysteries of the Cosmos, such as relativity, is the wrong one. The right answer is: Newtonian space, time, and matter are no intuitions. They are recepts from culture and language. That is where Newton got them.” — Benjamin Whorf
In simple terms, RATIO-NALITY is based on the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR which was the basis for early languages in WESTERN EUROPE, and it is constrained to expressing reality in the simplistic terms of LOCAL GROWTH which RATIO can handle since RATIO assumes the existence of a LOCAL thing-in-itself that GROWS or SHRINKS “RELATIVE TO ITSELF”. This is based on the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO conceptualization. In the case of soap bubble-FIGURES in a confining airspace GROUND, FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE, or in other words the dynamic is TRANSFORMATION into a FIGURE-and-GROUND-as_ONE HEXAGONAL collective,
The DOUBLE ERROR concept of a LOCAL thing-itself FIGURE with its own powers of SOURCING actions and development (an INHABITANT with actions and development DEEMED INDEPENDENT of its HABITAT aka ‘FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO, is no longer viable here, being superseded by the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE dynamic of relational TRANSFORMATION. Reflection will show that that it is only the abstract DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR which PRESENTS FIGURE and GROUND as TWO separate and independent realities wherein the FIGURE is said to GROW while the GROUND provides a NOTIONAL non-participating venue. THis is made conceptually-logically possible (in the realm of abstract thinking) by substituting ABSOLUTE SPACE populated by INDEPENDENLY-EXISTING THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES (“thank you, NAMING AND GRAMMAR’) in place of the all-including transforming relational continuum,
A NEW CONCEPTUAL REALITY can be constructed based on the abstractions of ABSOLUTE (EUCLIDIAN) SPACE that language can populate notional LOCAL things-in-themselves, notionally with their own powers of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments as contrived using the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR. GOODBYE TRANSFORMATION, HELLO RATIONAL-MECHANICS.
Such DOUBLE ERROR based RATIO-NAL language architecture with its basis in LOCAL THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES notionally with powers of SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT (GROWTH) is FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO abstraction that falls innately short of capturing the reality of our sensory experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum. We need a THREE COMPONENT LANGUAGE wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE as in a FIELD based HOLODYNAIC but the topology of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE where everything is in flux is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT. This is where we understand DUNING in DESERTING as resonance and thus in a FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE sense (a Wavefield sense).
Our INTUITIVE INTELLIGENCE informs us that there is something more going on than we are putting together with our RATIONAL INTELLECTION. So long as we constrain reality with RATIONAL INTELLECTION, we are imprisoning ourselves in a reduced, synthetic world of LOCAL things-in-themselves, which GROW over TIME and we let this SURROGATE REALITY based on the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR take the rightful place of the reality of our INTUITIVE INTELLIGENCE which informs us in terms of the NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT TRANSFORMATION that we are included in.
* * *