AUTHOR’S PREFACE: Language that has a dependency on the abstract voyeur viewable concept of LOCAL THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES is ‘not up to the task’ of capturing the REALITY of an all-including transforming relational continuum wherein everything is in flux.

Engineering a language based scheme for REPRESENTING a reality that is in continual flux, involves some ‘trickery’.  The ‘bootstrapping’ approach described by Wittgenstein is to use the notional ‘existence’ of ‘local things’ to establish a web of relations among, whereupon the purely relational web will be the ‘take-away’ and the ‘things-in-themselves’ disposable expedients;

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.

 7.0 Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. (“Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen”),

–Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus

The thing-based illustration e.g. of the TOWN that is GROWING with its many streets and buildings ‘under construction’ is a PICTURABLE CARTOON which we could flesh out with STICK-FIGURE WORKERS and RESIDENTS or with a high resolution DOCUMENTARY FILM.  The narration accompanying the CARTOON can describe, in great detail, the construction activity including the importation of construction materials, the quarrying of sand and gravel for concrete, the smelting of iron ore for steel beams, the logging and milling of trees for lumber, the hiring and training of construction workforce, etc. etc.

However convincing a ‘reality’ captured in this documentary, because of its VOYEUR representation mode, it can never move beyond its CARTOON status in that ‘what is going on’ it is always ‘out there in front of us’ and the workers always seem to be moving around as if they are ‘free things-in-themselves’ driven by their internal instructions, as informed by some ‘master plan’ or some previously acquired skills.

AT SOME DEPTH WITHIN OURSELVES, we INTUITIVELY understand that this CARTOON activity we picture as ‘going on out in front of us’ is contributory to the constructing of an intellectual SUBSTITUTE REALITY that liberates the CARTOON characters from the transforming relational continuum, and re-establishes them as LOGICAL OBJECTS participating in a VISIBLE CONSTRUCTION DYNAMIC.

SUCH PSYCHE-INFORMING CARTOONS play the same role as ‘LOGICAL PROPOSITIONS’ in Wittgenstein’s above comments.  In other words, these CARTOONS are NOT to be taken literally;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.”

The high resolution filming of the construction of the TOWN is one of those THROW AWAY LADDERS.   The indigenous aboriginal people whose sense-experience is of inclusion in the transforming landscape, ‘see’ (intuit) ‘the TOWN’ as a TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE, and NOT as some ‘LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF’ accorded ‘its own local BEING’ thanks to the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR of Standard Average European language constructions.

In our sense-experience reality, THERE IS NO “LOCAL TOWN THAT IS GROWING”, … THERE IS ONLY “TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE” (i.e. in the transforming relational continuum aka the Wave-field aka the Tao).  The MENTAL PICTURE of THE TOWN THAT IS GROWING is a VOYEUR VIEWABLE CARTOON that is not qualified as a SUBSTITUTE for the REALITY of TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE.

WATCH OUT!  THE POINT IS THAT DIFFERENT language architectures induce intellectual understanding of sense-experience reality in different ways!  THE CARTOON reality where we “SEE” ant-like workers swarming over the new TOWN-SITE and CONSTRUCTING the NEW TOWN is a CARTOON-like visual presentation, as could be captured in a DOCUMENTARY FILM, that gives us the impression that the TOWN is ‘under construction’ and is GROWING LARGER and MORE POPULOUS as the new dwellings become OCCUPIED.

Since the REAL REALITY (sense-experience reality) is that of TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE, the CARTOON in which workers and residents are continually constructing new edifices and GROWING the LOCAL TOWN is a PICTURE-supported SUBSTITUTE REALITY that is INTELLECTUAL ABSTRACTION (hence ‘CARTOON’) that is NOT SENSE-EXPERIENCE SUPPORTED.

In WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT SOCIETY, because the language architecture gives a foundational role to the abstract concept of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and development, by way of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, the CARTOON representations made thus available support the fabrication of a SUBSTITUTE REALITY which is LOCAL SORCERY based.  No matter how convincing the documentary film footage of the CONSTRUCTION of the NEW TOWN, it remains, in ESSENCE, a CARTOON which is hijacking, in the psyche, and SUBSTITUTING FOR, the REAL REALITY of the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE (i.e. the transforming relational continuum).

 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 – Philosophical Investigations.

We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have become STUCK within the ‘simplified’ SUBSTITUTE REALITY of our own making; i.e. the TOOL of CARTOON based RE-presentation of reality has (as Emerson observes) ‘run away with the workman’).  As in indigenous aboriginal languages and as in Bohm’s ‘Rheomode’ language, there is no TOWN, there is only TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE. The concept of ‘the TOWN that is GROWING’ is an artifact of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, a CARTOON.





The TURNING POINT for the WEST was RIGHT HERE where those who were influential in architecting our SAE (standard average Euopean) languages encountered the challenge to architecting language posed by our inclusion in a reality that is in continual flux;

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

Once we design a language that makes a BINARY LOGICAL separation of the FIGURE from the GROUND we are on our way to CONSTRUCTION OF A SUBSTITUTE REALITY which is much SIMPLER than the reality of our sense-experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.

We use ‘language’ to reduce our visual sensing of relational forms-in-the-flow to CARTOONS wherein the FIGURE is seemingly (thanks to NAMING and GRAMMAR, liberated from the GROUND.  These CARTOONS can ‘hold us captive’ so that we cannot ‘find our way back’ to our natural sense of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum, but remain captives of a CARTOON world;

 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 – Philosophical Investigations.

The SIMPLIFIER in our WESTERN CULTURE SAE language architecture is the injection of the abstract concept of SORCERY or in more euphemistic terms, LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and developments by way of (as Nietzsche has pointed out), the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.  SORCERY is the accessory to the NAMING and GRAMMAR based CARTOONING of reality.

Once we say ‘the earth turns round’, we hammer into the mind, BINARY LOGIC as the basis of our spoken (language-captured) SUBSTITUTE REALITY.   This WESTERN CULTURE spoken, or written, language-based REPRESENTATION of reality departs from our sense-experience reality once we choose the path of ‘more convenient’ representation wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND are TWO instead of ONE.  This split-up clears the way for a CARTOON like RE-PRESENTATION of our FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE sense-experience reality.  When we say ‘the TOWN is GROWING, we PICTURE the TOWN as a CARTOON THING that is GROWING.

Note that “the convenience” in the statement; “It is more convenient to suppose the earth turns round” is the convenience of SUBSTITUTING a figure-and-ground-as-TWO CARTOON wherein (the EARTH and SPACE are RE-PRESENTED as TWO distinguishable ontological entities,.

In this case, the FIGURE-as-a thing-in-itself and the containing SPACE as a thing-in-itself), … are abstractions we SUBSTITUTE for the figure-and-ground-as-ONE NON-PICTURE-REPRESENTIBLE REALITY (such a ‘picture’ would have to continue unbounded in spacetime)..  A local picturable piece of reality is a CARTOON that is NOT REALITY (e.g. the CARTOON of Robin Hood removing grain from the King’s granary is NOT REALITY.

This NON-PICTURE-REPRESENTIBLE FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE reality is our basic sense-experience reality as understood through Modern physics and in indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and ADVAITA Vedanta.   Talking about it is beyond the scope of BINARY LOGIC and we instead need Quantum logic, the BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDED medium as can be intuited from the finding that;

the elementary particles of matter are also, in their essence, nothing else than condensations of the electromagnetic field— Einstein, ‘Ether and the Theory of Relativity’

Since the relationship between matter and field requires the BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDED medium and this is the general case in nature, it is misleading to construct representations of reality in FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO CARTOON terms.   Another way of saying this is that when we use FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO representation, we are constructing representations of a CARTOON-like SUBSTITUTE REALITY.  The proposition ‘The TOWN is GROWING’ is an example of  this CARTOON-like SUBSTITUTE REALITY wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO.

If our language-based representations are to be consistent with the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE REAL TREALITY, then we would have to say, there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE which acknowledges the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE reality supported by Modern physics.

Understanding that ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE is consistent with our sense experience of inclusion in that TRANSFORMING space, but not with our VOYEUR VISUAL OBSERVING “OVER TIME” where we can take a time sequence of mental visual snapshots of “THE TOWN” and, so we say, ‘SEE IT GROW’.

But from the understanding deriving from our sense experience of inclusion in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE or in other words from our sense experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum, what we understand is that the TRANSFORMATION is ALL-INCLUDING and the TOWNING is included in the TRANSFORMING.

That is, our sense-experience-reality is …. the experience of inclusion in a transforming relational continuum and it cannot be captured in language (the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao).

It bears repeating, for emphasis;

It is more convenient to suppose the earth turns round” is the convenience of SUBSTITUTING a figure-and-ground-as-TWO PICTURABLE REPRESENTATION (the EARTH and SPACE are represented as TWO distinguishable ontological entities, the FIGURE-as-a thing-in-itself and the containing SPACE as a thing-in-itself) for a figure-and-ground-as-ONE NON-PICTURE-REPRESENTIBLE REALITY.

The VOYEUR view is a figure-and-ground-as-TWO PICTURABLE REPRESENTATION which serves up a kind of caricature of reality, a SUBSTITUTE REALITY as in the case of ‘the TOWN is GROWING’ which is, as Nietzsche has pointed out, the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.  Because we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS accept propositions such as ‘the TOWN is GROWING’ as reality when it is in fact only an abstract SUBSTITUTE REALITY, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS run into trouble in our using this SUBSTITUTE REALITY for our OPERATIVE REALITY.  We think that it is “TRUE” that ‘the TOWN is GROWING’ and think we are the AUTHORS of that growth and it may be TRUE in the sense of BINARY LOGIC based TRUTH with its EITHER ‘IS’ OR ‘IS NOT’ CHOICES.

However, as Goedel’s Theorem reminds us, all such (finite) logical truth propositions are incomplete, and in this case, while IT IS TRUE THAT THE TOWN IS GROWING, it is also a radically INCOMPLETE TRUTH because it leaves out the CONJUGATE SHRINKAGE OF THE WILDERNESS, which is necessary to bring home the full REALITY which is that the LANDSCAPE is TRANSFORMING.

What is UNVEILING ITSELF here is that there is both a HIGH ROAD and a LOW ROAD to LANGUAGE-BASED REPRESENTATION; i.e. the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE basis of representation where we say ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’, which preserves the NON-PICTURABLE FLUID nature of reality, and the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO basis of representation where we say ‘the TOWN is GROWING’ which is a PICTURABLE SUBSTITUTE REALITY

MODERN PHYSICS corrects the WESTERN CULTURE choice of the PICTURABLE DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR based representation of a SUBSTITUTE REALITY but Modern physics philosophers such as David Bohm believed they had to come up with a NEW LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE wherein the representations were able to capture the NON-PICTURABLE in order to do so.  This was the flow-based language architecture termed Rheomode by David Bohm who late in his life discovered that the indigenous aboriginal languages such as Algonquin had ‘already been there, done that’.  That is, the indigenous aboriginal languages employ a representation wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE, as in the NON-PICTURABLE flow-based reality of our sense-experience.

We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have been thoroughly, over generations, socially and culturally conditioned in language-based constructing of PICTURABLE SUBSTITUTE REALITIES based on BINARY LOGIC as in the ‘more convenient’ representation wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO.  Thanks to this SIMPLIFICATION (in language-based representations), we can THINK OF THE FIGURE as if it were a LOCAL, INDEPENDENT THING-IN-ITSELF, with “its own” GRAMMAR-given powers of AUTHORING actions and developments.   Once we grow from infancy getting culturally conditioned in this manner to PICTURABLE language constructs, it is NOT EASY to liberate our intellect from this OVER-SIMPLISTIC, BINARY LOGIC based way of building language-based SUBSTITUTE REALITY representations.  In a flow-based language, what we inferred to be a TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE, would, IN OUR BINARY LOGIC based language, be captured in PICTURABLE terms such as ‘the TOWN is GROWING’ where each new element constituting this GROWTH can be explicitly pointed out

Once we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS start thinking in these abstract BINARY LOGIC based terms, we start conceiving of ‘THE TOWN’ as a thing-in-itself which can GROW ‘in its own right’ (as if it were situated within an absolute empty and infinite containing space — an abstract illusion).   In our delusion triggered by this illusion, we LOSE TOUCH WITH THE ACTUAL REALITY of TRANSFORMATION wherein the “GROWTH” of the “TOWN” is CONJUGATE with the “SHRINKING” of the “WILDERNESS”.

TRANSFORMATION cannot be EXPLICITLY captured in PICTURES as GROWTH can be.  TRANSFORMATION seems to be smeared throughout everything (as one might expect with field-based phenomena) While GROWTH can be identified as the DIFFERENCE between an EARLIER and LATER version of THE SAME THING.  The key here is the “SAME THING” ASSUMPTION.  This assume that ONTOLOGICALLY PERSISTING THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES are possible, although such a concept is abstraction deriving from the persistence of NAMING-based IDENTITY in the intellectually abstracting mind.

While TRANSFORMATION is the REALITY and it is NONLOCAL, IMPLICIT and cannot be EXPLICITLY CAPTURED in PICTURES, our FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO BINARY LOGIC is much kinder to us and serves up for us, a SUBSTITUTE REALITY where we “PICTURE” in our mind’s eye ‘THE TOWN” and by comparing a sequence of ‘PICTURES-OF-THE-TOWN’ we “SEE” the “TOWN GROW”.



Heraclitus ‘has Modern physics on his side’ when he observes that ‘One can’t step into the same river twice because it is not the river and not the same person stepping into it’ (everything is in flux).  In this case, THE TOWN CAN’T GROW because the TOWN is instead the TOWNING in the TRANFORMING RELAITONAL CONTINUUM and the FIGURE-and-GROUND (TOWNING and TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE) are just ‘ONE’ and NOT ‘TWO’.

So, the reality is that “TOWNS DO NOT GROW”, … the reality is that “LANDSCAPES TRANSFORM”, the latter understanding including both MALE and FEMALE conjugates in ONE dynamic; i.e. the MALE ASSERTING GROWTH of the TOWN and the FEMALE OPENING and ACCOMMODATING RECEPTION of the WILDERNESS.  It is not possible to have the GROWTH of the TOWN without a conjugate REDUCTION of WILDERNESS, but in saying this, I am ‘IN THE REALITY OF SENSE EXPERIENCE’.   As far as things go ‘IN THE BINARY LOGIC SUBSTITUTE REALITY OF GEOMETRIC ABSTRACTION’, … it is perfectly possible to “ONE-SIDE” the representation and construct a purely MALE-ASSERTIVE PICTURE of the GROWTH of the TOWN wherein the shrinkage of WILDERNESS is entirely ignored.  In fact,

It is more convenient to suppose the TOWN GROWS, since thus the laws of mechanics are expressible in a much simpler language. the same point as made by Henri Poincaré, ‘Science and Hypothesis’, Ch. VII Relative Motion and Absolute Motion

One may try and devise one’s own language and then see how things get complicated when, if one makes a change to the representation, it changes everything; i.e. the first house built on the planet changes the whole planetary landscape because, in the reality of our sense-experience, we don’t have an absolute Euclidian space frame that we can isolate our house construction within, so that our ‘house construction’ is NOT A LOCAL, EXPLICIT THING-IN-ITSELF kind of development, but, as the indigenous aboriginal would see it, it is a TRANSFORMATION of the overall spatial relational continuum wherein ‘everything is in flux’.

IF we develop a language architecture that lets us speak in terms of ‘the TOWN IS GROWING’ instead of acknowledging the REALITY wherein THERE IS TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE, then it is clear how this LOCALIZING of the dynamic simplifies the task of language based representation; i.e.   It is more convenient to suppose the TOWN GROWS, since thus the laws of mechanics are expressible in a much simpler language.

The “laws of mechanics” in this case, BINARY LOGIC, enable the notion of the FIGURE being an INDEPENDENT THING-IN-ITSELF that is capable of MOVEMENT and/or GROWTH “IN ITS OWN RIGHT”, thanks to the implicit absolute, empty and infinite containing space that is implied by BINARY LOGIC based phraseology wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO.  Who among us WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS ‘blinks an eye’ on hearing expressions such as ‘the TOWN is GROWING larger and more populous and productive’?

However, such a proposition amounts to construction of a BINARY LOGIC based SUBSTITUTE REALITY wherein ‘the TOWN’ is presented as a LOCAL, INDEPENDENTLY-EXISTING THING-IN-ITSELF that is capable of GROWTH IN-ITS-OWN-RIGHT, as if it were situated within an absolute empty and infinite containing space, instead of, as our sense-experience affirms, within the FIGURE-AND-GROUND-AS-ONE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE.

Bohm’s, and Modern physics requirement for a flow-based language, goes back to the basics of our sense experience wherein there is no such thing as a FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO based “reality”, an abstract SUBSTITUTE REALITY deriving from the consideration; It is more convenient to suppose the TOWN GROWS, since thus the laws of mechanics are expressible in a much simpler language.

Imagine if we were a mixed culture group of language architects and we had the job of describing, in words and grammar, the reality of the WHOLE NONLOCAL AND IMPLICITLY TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE.  Our group discussion might have gone like this;

Indigenous aboriginal: I believe we need a relational language because everything is in flux and if we use words which imply fixed ontology to signify a ‘local form’, from the moment we NAME it, it is moving on to become something other than when we NAMED it  As we know from our sense experience, everything is in flux, even mountains and valleys are included in the ongoing transformation and all things are related such that the valley are not two separate ontologies.   We need a RELATIONAL or FLOW based language that is without dependence on word-based abstractions that imply ontological persistence of PICTURABLE THING-IN-ITSELF BEING so as to secure our sense-experience of inclusion in the transforming flow-continuum.

Western culture man: The utility of language lies in how well it opens up our ability for sharing our observations and experiences, in which case, the simpler we can make the language, the more we open up the scope of sharing, even if what we are sharing are representations that are not those which are most true but those which are most easy to capture and share.  A language which is based on NAMING and GRAMMAR radically simplifies the task of constructing shareable representations since it allows us to BREAK OUT the FIGURE from the GROUND and to construct PICTURABLE representations that concentrate on the FIGURE and its actions and developments.  Why try to cover the whole world with leather and address NONLOCAL issues when we can strap leather on our own feet and address the LOCAL issues as and where we need to?  The GROWTH of the TOWN is far simpler to address than the TRANSFORMATION of the LANDSCAPE.  In addition, the GROWTH of the TOWN can be captured in a series of pictures of the TOWN provided one assumes that the TOWN is the SAME TOWN (i.e. that one ‘can step into the same river twice’)..

As we now know, this issue led to the TWO SEPARATE EAST and WEST CULTURE FOLLOWERSHIPS, the BINARY LOGIC of FIGURE and GROUND-as-TWO based SUBSTITUTE REALITY CONSTRUCTION continuing to be the dominant choice within the WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENCY.  Thus, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS continue to construct language based representations in the form of SUBSTITUTE REALITIES such as ‘the TOWN is GROWING’, whereas EASTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS, now supported by Modern physics, continue to construct language-based representations in the form of relational TRANSFORMATION such as TOWNING-in-the-TRANSFORMING-LANDSCAPE, so that FIGURE-and-GROUND-remain-as-ONE (so that one CANNOT step into the same river twice), and there is NO BINARY LOGIC based BREAKDOWN into FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO, as in our WESTERN CULTURE SUBSTITUTE REALITY.

THE RESULT:  While the EAST understanding is in the NON-BINARY ‘QUANTUM LOGIC’ based FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE terms of TOWNING-in-the TRANSFORMING-LANDSCAPE, the WEST understanding is in the BINARY LOGIC based FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO terms of ‘the TOWN is GROWING larger and more populous and productive’.

How should we COMPARIATIVLEY APPRAISE these two (NON-BINARY versus BINARY) modes of representation?   In our WESTERN CULTURE BINARY LOGIC based representation preference, we are able to invest in much more LOCAL DETAIL in regard to the GROWING TOWN because we only have to address what is going on in THE TOWN, since we are using BINARY LOGIC to split it out of the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE and recast it as an abstract LOCAL TOWN-THING-IN-ITSELF with its own GRAMMAR-given powers of AUTHORING actions and development.

The TOWN is something we can capture PICTURES of ‘over time’ so as to assess its GROWTH assuming that there is such a thing as ontological persistence associated with the forms we attach NAMES to.  On the other hand, if everything is in flux, then ‘the TOWN can’t step into the same LANDSCAPE twice, for it is not the same TOWN and it is not the same LANDSCAPE.

As indigenous aboriginal who have opted for the NON-BINARY representation in terms a TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM, we are faced with an ALL-or-NOTHING situation because everything is related (“mitakuye oyasin”) and when there in changing in the TOWNING there is overall TRANSFORMATION because the reality is that FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE and the TOWNING is something WE DISTINGUISH within the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.  That is, we EASTERN CULTURE flow-based language users DISTINGUISH ‘the TOWNING’ by APPEARANCE without imposing on it ONTOLOGIC INDEPENDENCE.  In this case, the relations basis of the language architecture doesn’t have us ‘painting ourselves into a corner’ by imposing FIXED AND PERMANENT IDENTITY by way of the NAMING process as in WESTERN CULTURE FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO (BINARY LOGIC BASED) language architecture tradition..

As Poincaré implied, there is a downside to the “more convenient” benefit that comes from the BINARY LOGIC based language architecture;

It is more convenient to suppose the TOWN GROWS, since thus the laws of mechanics are expressible in a much simpler language

In other words, when we talk about ‘the mechanics’ of constructing the TOWN as associates with its GROWTH, … WE CAN DROP OUT the real phenomenon wherein the LANDSCAPE IS TRANSFORMING and stick with the SUBSTITUTE REALITY where we only have to speak in terms of LOCAL CHANGE as in the details of the GROWTH of the TOWN as if it were a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF with its own GRAMMAR-given powers of AUTHORING GROWTH and DEVELOPMENT.  This LIGHTENS OUR LOAD, as far as language-based representation goes, CONSIDERABLY, because, in reality, what is going on is the TRANSFORMING OF THE LANDSCAPE and that requires an infinity of words to describe because it is unbounded in spacetime; i.e. it is the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM aka the Wave-field aka the Tao.

WHAT ARE THE PROBLEMS ARISING from our use of this BINARY LOGIC based reduction we use to construct a SUBSTITUTE REALITY wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO?

FORGETFULNESS is a major PROBLEM.  So long as we are THINKING in terms of the SUBSTITUTE REALITY wherein the GROWTH of the TOWN is taken to be REALITY, we are not, at the same time, thinking of the CONJUGATE REDUCTION of the WILDERNESS.


Since there are FINANCIAL BENEFITS arising from activities associated with the GROWTH of the TOWN, these FUEL MORE GROWTH even though there is no such thing, in sense-experience reality, as GROWTH, there is only TRANSFORMATION.  Thus, TRANSFORMATION become a loose sheet flapping in the gale as activity orients to GROWTH which is ABSTRACTION; i.e. GROWTH IS NOT WHAT IS GOING ON, WHAT IS GOING ON IS TRANSFORMATION of the LANDSCAPE.

BUT IF THERE IS PROFIT IN CONTRIBUTING TO GROWTH, why get philosophical and question the legitimacy of the concept of GROWTH?  One reason why that it is taking the unquestioning believers in GROWTH and everyone else as well, on a bus trip to hell since WHAT IS REALLY UNFOLDING IS TRANSFORMATION which is now flapping wildly about lake a sail with a loose sheet in a gale, because of the WESTERN CUTURE ADHERENT orienting to the pursuit of GROWTH in what is conceived to be HUMAN AUTHORED GROWTH of construction and production, as if such GROWTH were something REAL.  But if we CAN SEE THE TOWN GROWING and speak of this as if it were a REALITY, then the reality of TRANSFORMATION of the LANDSCAPE simply disappears from view, having been replaced by the SUBSTITUTE REALITY featuring the GROWTH of the TOWN as if the BINARY LOGIC based FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO abstract depiction of the TOWN were REAL.

FOLKS, and by this I mean WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT friends and family, … WE HAVE OUR LADDER UP THE WRONG WALL.  There is no such thing as GROWTH, there is only TRANSFORMATION.   GROWTH is an artifact of BINARY LOGIC wherein we split FIGURE and GROUND -into-TWO using the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, as pointed out by Nietzsche.  The TOWN and COUNTRY ARE NOT TWO, although our DOUBLE ERROR language lets us speak as if this were the case.

SURE, it is simpler to speak of the GROWTH of the TOWN using BINARY LOGIC as if FIGURE-and-GROUND-were-TWO so that we can discuss what is going on with the TOWN as if in its own right, because, otherwise, we have to deal with the unbounded TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE.

The Modern physics and indigenous aboriginal approach is STICK WITH LANGUAGE THAT IS IN RELATIONAL TERMS without introducing the abstraction of NAMING-instantiated THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES like ‘TOWNS’ which one then has to animate with GRAMMAR as if they exist as things-in-their own right.   So long as NAMING refers to fluid forms, as with TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE, we avoid CONSTRUCTING ABSTRACT SUBSTITUTE REALITIES such as where ‘the TOWN is GROWING” (forcing us to INVENT a NOTIONAL absolute empty and infinite containing space for our GROWING TOWN to operate in, such as a Euclidian space frame)


BINARY LOGIC lets us construct language based representations that split FIGURE-and-GROUND into TWO so that we don’t have to address, in our language based constructions of reality, the entire TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM, but enables us to reduce our representation to addressing only LOCAL FORMS such as ‘TOWNS’ and since we have split them out and their changing is no longer handled in the broader context of their inclusion in the transforming relational continuum, we need A GRAMMAR that can deal with change on this ONE-OFF basis of the notional (NAMING-instantiated) LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF, hence ‘the TOWN is GROWING’ reconstitutes the change aspect which is implicit in TRANSFORMATION which is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT.

The burden of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR is the price we pay to dodge the reality of the transforming relational continuum which, as far as language based representation goes, presents us with challenge of representing the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT not to mention INFINITE as are the parameters of the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.  By breaking this down into LOCAL PIECES as we break down “TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’ in the ‘the TOWN that is GROWING larger and more populous and productive’, … we are forced to package up with the TOWN this local AUTHORING capability as part of the ABSTRACT LOCALIZING SUBSTITUTE REALITY CONSTRUCTION.  That is, this is a SUBSTITUTE REALITY we are constructing with our BINARY LOGIC splitting of FIGURE-and-GROUND-into-TWO and we have to follow through with the invention of a scheme for LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and developments, which would otherwise be incorporated within the overall transforming relational continuum.

This SUBSTITUTE REALITY that we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS INVENT is FAR SIMPLER than our sense-experience reality and far easier to speak about and share with one another, but then, of course, IT IS NOT REALITY, it is only a SUBSTITUTE REALITY that we have simplified for user convenience.

It is more convenient to suppose the TOWN GROWS, since thus the laws of mechanics are expressible in a much simpler language

In this case the simplification to the ‘laws of mechanics’ refers to the fact that in using language based representations of the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM just to ‘get to’ address this local FORMING as in this TOWNING in the TANSFORMING LANDSCAPE, one would have to articulate the entire transforming relational continuum since that is the REALITY and it is ONE THING and not REALLY divisible into separate pieces as implied by THE TOWN IS GROWING.

So, what we are talking about here are TWO DIFFERENT REALITIES, the first reality is the sense -experience reality that can’t be captured with a finite word-string because it is an ongoing relational continuum that is not broken up into local pieces.   What we INEFFCT ARE DOING WITH OUR DOUBLE ERROR NAMING AND GRAMMAR CONSTRUCTIONS is the building of a SUBSTITUTE REALITY wherein we can ENVISAGE the ‘GROWING TOWN’ but at the cost of ‘NOT BIENG ABLE TO SEE THE FOREST FOR THE TREES’ (not being able to see the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE for the sprouting up of LOCAL TOWNS as in abstract FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO BINARY LOGIC SPLITTING).

THE SUBSTITUTE REALITY THUS ‘TAKES OVER’ as the OPERATIVE REALITY  even though it is only the FIGURE aspect of the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO, BINARY LOGICAL SPLIT OUT of the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE reality of our sense experience.


This is a recipe for social dysfunction which manifests in many ways in WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENCE, including Pre-modern physics science and politics which are ridden with BINARY LOGIC based SUBSTITUTE REALITIES that imply LOCAL SOURCING of ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENTS (Local ‘SORCERY’).

* * *