Relational Coherency Avoids “the Incompleteness of Finite Binary Logic Systems” (Goedel’s Theorem)

 

Relational Coherency can inform us in a more comprehensive (integration) way than Binary Logic Either/Or progressions culminating in explicit closure (differentiation).

 

Relational coherency is the method of the indigenous aboriginal Learning Circle where the ‘talking stick is passed’ and all participants have the opportunity to share their experience-based knowledge by ‘speaking from the heart’.  Participants may thus benefit from the understandings that emerge from the relational confluence of the rich mixture of personal experiences.  The LOGIC implied in this relational coherency approach is QUANTUM LOGIC, the BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDING medium which DOES NOT APPLY BINARY LOGIC BASED DIFFERENTIATION TO REDUCE RELATIONAL FORMS IN THE FLOW to a notional INDEPENDENT ELEMENTS BASED DATA SET, setting the stage for discrimination between superior and inferior elements so as to isolate the SUPERIOR elements.  In QUANTUM LOGIC, the understanding of any included form is inextricably bound up in an understanding of the all-including PLENUM since the included forms are CONDENSATIONS of the all-including PLENUM aka the WAVE-FIELD.

 

In the relational coherency approach to optimizing understanding (rather than the ‘refining’ or distilling out of that which is ‘most relevant’) offers us an INARTICULABLE UNDERSTANDING that is RELATIONAL COHERENCE based, which ‘takes form in the web-of-relations’ connecting the diversity of experiences being shared.

 

The relational coherency approach to understanding differs fundamentally from the BINARY LOGIC based ‘purification’ or ‘distillation’ approach where a multiplicity of (pre-processed) INTERPRETATIONS (thoughts from the interpreting intellect rather than raw feelings from the heart) are sifted through, two at a time, selecting in each binary comparison, the superior of the two, so that an overall ‘winning candidate for what is TRULY REALITY’ is ultimately selected.  This BINARY LOGIC based filtering of a multiplicity of intellectually pre-conditioned contenders for ‘REALITY’ is used to select the REALITY contender ‘that is MOST TRUE’.

 

But here we run into the limitation inherent in using BINARY LOGIC; a limitation that is given in Goedel’s Theorem of the INCOMPLETENESS of all finite systems of Binary Logic.  For example, if we stablish as TRUE that ‘the TOWN is growing’, this says nothing about the REALITY that there is a CONJUGATE SHRINKING of the WILDERNESS.  Thus, ESTABLISHING THE TRUTH, as in confirming the BINARY LOGIC proposition ‘the TOWN is growing’ is limited by the Goedel’s Theorem ‘Incompleteness of all finite systems of binary logic’.  THE MESSAGE IS THAT ‘ESTABLISHING LOGICAL TRUTH’ has no traction on “ESTABLISHING THAT WHICH IS REAL” due to the INCOMPLETENESS of all finite binary logic-based systems of propositions.

 

Here we spot an intrinsic difference between ‘the relational coherency approach to REALITY’ and ‘the binary logic approach to TRUTH’, since as Goedel’s Theorem warns, all finite systems of binary logic are innately INCOMPLETE, setting up conflict between TRUTH and REALITY since statements regarding the GROWTH of the TOWN may be TRUE, like all BINARY LOGIC TRUTHS, they are INCOMPLETE and REALITY may be far LESS SIMPLE than the SIMPLE LOGIC TRUTH such as ‘the TOWN is GROWING’; i.e. as Sherlock Holmes might have said to WATSON, … WATSON, you idiot, can you not see that the REALITY is that the WILDERNESS IS SHRINKING and the LANDSCAPE IS TRANSFORMING and that LOGICAL TRUTH is always INCOMPLETE, but this WESTERN CULTURE habit where LOGICAL TRUTH is seized upon and used as the OPERATIVE REALITY, dysfunction arises that has become the downfall of WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE-GUIDED SOCIAL DYNAMICS.

 

QUANTUM LOGIC is LESS SIMPLE than BINARY LOGIC in an important way; i.e. QUANTUM LOGIC, the BOTH/AND LOGIC of the including medium, addresses the INTEGRAL NATURE of our sense-experience of inclusion in the all-including WAVE-FIELD aka the transforming relational continuum aka the Tao.

 

BINARY LOGIC is SIMPLER than QUANTUM LOGIC.  Whereas the material form is, in less simple QUANTUM LOGIC, an included feature in the all-including energy-charged PLENUM (e.g. We may think in terms of a WHORLING in the FLOWING where the WHORLING “IS” the “FLOWING”), BINARY LOGIC simplifies ‘this mental picture’ by capturing ‘the WHORL’ as a separate and independent ‘thing-in-itself’ notionally with ‘its own (grammar-given) POWERS OF LOCAL AUTHORING OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS.

 

While ‘the WHORLING’ and the ‘FLOWING’ are ONE in QUANTUM LOGIC, … in the BINARY LOGIC rendering, there is both a SPLITTING OUT of the WHORLING from the FLOWING and recasting it in as the ‘NOUN’ ‘WHORL’, no longer an action but a SUBSTANTIVE (having a separate and independent existence), now with its own grammar-given powers of LOCAL AUTHORING of ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENT. 

 

This BINARY LOGIC REDUCTION by way of LANGUAGE and GRAMMAR is characteristic of WESTERN CULTURE Common Average European language architecture and has been termed by Nietzsche, the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR which is used to establish an impression of ‘reality’ featuring a NAMED BEING or SUBSTANTIVE with its own LOCAL POWERS of AUTHORING of ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENT.

 

Thus, BINARY LOGIC, because we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have given it a FOUNDATIONAL ROLE in our LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE, injects, in a manner reminiscent of the SIMPLE CUCKOO dropping its eggs in a LESS SIMPLE birds nest, a SIMPLE FILLER for a LESS SIMPLE SOCKET.  So, instead of;

 

the QUANTUM LOGIC construct such as ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’, we have the option in LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURES, of;

 

… the SIMPLER BINARY LOGIC constructs such as ‘the TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING goods and services’.

 

* * * RECOUPING WHERE WE HAVE BEEN IN THIS PHILOSOPHICAL-LINGUISTIC INVESTIGATION titled;

 

Relational Coherency Avoids “the Incompleteness of Finite Binary Logic Systems” (Goedel’s Theorem)

 

We have reviewed the basic, alternative architectures of LANGUAGE and THOUGHT that distinguish the LANGUAGE AND THOUGHT systems of indigenous aboriginal cultures and the LANGUAGE and THOUGHT systems of WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS.

 

What has been shown is that Indigenous aboriginal thought and language systems support understanding that is RELATIONAL COHERENCY based, while WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS thought and language systems support understanding that is BINARY LOGIC based.

While the former Indigenous aboriginal relational coherency based THOUGHT and LANGUAGE system is robust and AVOIDS ‘the INCOMPLETENESS of FINITE BINARY LOGIC SYSTEMS (Goedel’s Theorem), the WESTERN CULTURE THOUGHT and LANGUAGE SYSTEM falls prey to the INCOMPLETENESS exposure.

 

FRAGMENTATION in WESTERN CULTURE is rampant due to the dominant role of BINARY LOGIC in WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE and THOUGHT.  As the humorous ditty by ‘Flight of the Concords’ opines ‘Too many ‘dicks’ on the dance-floor’, WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE is the source of FRAGMENTATION due to the DROPPING OUT of the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONJUGATE in its language architecture, leading to, for example, the normalizing of GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION of goods and services’ as if these were ‘REAL’ in their own right, as if there were no need to mention the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONJUGATE of the SHRINKING OF WILDERNESS.

 

Indigenous aboriginal language architecture, by contrast, is INTEGRATION based, as in ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’ so the that MALE ASSERTING CONJUGATE of ‘TOWNING’ is INCLUDED in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE so that the LOCAL and EXPLICIT (the TOWNING) is understood as SECONDARY to (and implicitly included in) the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT (the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE) in which case there exists a QUANTUM LOGIC BOTH/AND relation wherein the MALE-ASSERTING “TOWNING” IS AT THE SAME TIME “BOTH” ITSELF, the item of content, and at the same time, its own container, the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE.  That is, the “TOWNING” is an included feature in the ”TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE”.

 

This QUANTUM LOGIC relation and our MISTAKE of simplifying it to BINARY LOGIC, can be ‘mentally reviewed’ by considering the WHORLING in the FLOWING in the rapidly flowing river or surging tidal flowing.  The WHORLING is the ‘APPEARANCE’ of the FLOWING so there are NOT TWO THINGS HERE; i.e. the WHORLING does not “MOVE THROUGH” the “FLOWING”, the WHORLING IS THE FLOWING.  The APPEARANCE of TWO THINGS is just ‘APPEARANCE’ (Schaumkommen).

 

As Modern physics has shown, this QUANTUM LOGIC relation is the relation between material forms and the all-including energy-charged PLENUM; i.e. the invisible WAVE-FIELD.

 

This brings us back to;

 

  Relational Coherency Avoids “the Incompleteness of Finite Binary Logic Systems” (Goedel’s Theorem)

 

And we can now consider the PROBLEM with developing a LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE that gives a FOUNDATIONAL ROLE to ‘SCHAUMKOMMEN’ (appearances) as is the case with our Common Average European language architectures.

 

WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS, if we TAKE OUR LANGUAGE SERIOUSLY, are forces to put our LANGUSTICALLY INFORMED INTELLECT in priority over our SENSE-EXPERIENCE informed understanding of reality.  So, while our sense-experience is informing us that the GROWTH OF THE TOWN is at the same time the SHRINKING of the WILDERNESS, which is a QUANTUM LOGIC reality, … our LANGUAGE INFORMED INTELLECT is being told ONLY THAT ‘THE TOWN IS GROWING’, and because our intellect is capable of all kinds of abstraction that lies beyond the realm of that which is sense-experienceable, LANGUAGE can put together such BINARY LOGIC FORMULATIONS.

 

In this BINARY LOGIC representation, our compliant mind may oblige by giving us the early small TOWN, the larger TOWN and the highly developed METROPOLIS, OUT OF THE CONTEXT of the all-including, TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE wherein, like the understanding that a man can’t step into the same river twice because it is not the same river and not the same man, we might also say that a TOWN can’t situate within the same LANDSCAPE twice because it is not the same LANDSCAPE and nto the same TOWN.

 

This is simply making the QUANTUM LOGIC POINT that the world dynamic is TRANSFORMATION wherein there is no such thing as GROWTH, since GROWTH is what is said to happen to a LOCAL EXPLICIT THING-IN-ITSELF that is situated within an ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE, the operative conditions enabling the abstract concept of GROWTH.

 

In sense-experience reality, there is TRANSFORMATION and it is ALL-INCLUDING and we share inclusion in it as affirmed by Modern physics and the all-including WAVE-FIELD PLENUM.  EVERYTHING is INTEGRATED as is the nature of the WAVE-FIELD in which material forms are CONDENSATIONS included in the WAVE-FIELD.

 

LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE REVIEW;

 

In light of the WAVE-FIELD ‘architecture of reality’ where the basics are the all-including WAVE-FIELD populated by CONDENSATIONS that APPEAR as material forms, a system of language must avoid ASSIGNING BEING based ‘reality’ to the condensations since the reality is the TRANSFORMING and local explicit forms are ‘appearance’, so it is problematic to architect language that reduces the PLENUM to EMPTINESS and PROMOTES ‘APPEARANCES’ to MATERIAL BEINGS in the EMPTINESS.

 

A LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE is needed that avoids giving a foundational role to APPEARANCES  and instead preserves the TRANSFORMING CONTINUUM essence.  One way to approach this is to RE-GROUND, shifting the FOUNDATION from the notional MATERIAL BEING THINGS to the relations among them which imply the WAVE-FIELD dynamic in which they are CONDENSATIONS.

 

If we were to base our language on MATERIAL BEINGS and WHAT THEY DO, we are relying on BINARY LOGIC wherein these MATERIAL BEINGS are independent of the EMPTY SPACE that we say they are included in (space must be empty if material forms enjoy ‘independent being’)

 

Although we cannot rely the material forms for any foundational role in a LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE that is intended to be consistent with our sense-experience reality of inclusion in the WAVE-FIELD, we can approximate the relational WAVE-FIELD DYNAMIC by orienting our language to the relations among the material body dynamics, avoiding the incomplete information coming from an understanding where we see material forms as separate from and moving through an empty space (the BINARY LOGIC representation).  That is, a language based on material bodies as if moving in empty space is an INCOMPLETE and too simple view of what is really going on since the material forms are CONDENSATIONS of the ENERGY-CHARGED PLENUM which ‘looks like an empty space’

 

The movement of material bodies is only the superficial reality that we will be stuck with if we design language based on it.  There is a deeper story wherein our understanding is that what looks like emptiness is an energy-charged plenum and what looks like material things-that-be (with persisting existence) are instead condensations of the all-including wave-field that is a continuing transforming. 

 

Relational Coherency Avoids “the Incompleteness of Finite Binary Logic Systems” (Goedel’s Theorem)

 

If we design our language to give a foundational role to BINARY LOGIC propositions such as ‘the TOWN IS GROWING’, we run smack into the Goedel’s Theorem problem of the INCOMPLETENESS of all FINITE LOGICAL PROPOSITIONS.

 

With BINARY LOGIC we are dealing with the precipitate APPEARANCES which is just the MALE ASSERTING CONJUGATE.   We know that ‘the TOWN is GROWING’ is just the male asserting CONTENT which is failing to mention the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONTAINER which is the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE within which there is TOWING.   In order for our language NOT to be grounded in secondary SCHAUMKOMMEN or APPEARANCE, we have to develop a LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE SCHEME that re-grounds language NOT IN THINGS, since they are secondary CONDENSATIONS of the wave-field but uses some kind of device to BOOTSTRAP our way back to the NONLOCAL and NONVISIBLE FEMALE CONJUGATE which gives meaning to the LOCAL and EXPLICIT MALE ASSERTING CONJUGATE. 

 

Wittgenstein was exploring this same avenue as indicated by the following;

 

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 problem of designing a language to deal with a WAVE-FIELD reality that is a transforming relational continuum is a challenge that involves avoiding any foundational role for material being.

 

In this regard, Relational Coherency Avoids “the Incompleteness of Finite Binary Logic Systems” (Goedel’s Theorem)

 

There is a noticeable “incompleteness” in the BINARY LOGIC wording ‘the TOWN is GROWING’ since there is no mention of ‘THE GROWING TOWN BEING INCLUDED IN ANYTHING’.  This shortfall is NOT FOUND in the indigenous aboriginal language where the LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALZATION is instead, ‘THERE IS TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’.  In this case, there is no exposure to Goedel’s Theorem of Incompleteness in all finite systems of BINARY LOGIC, nor is there the exposure to FRAGMENTATION that comes with the DROPPING OUT of the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONJUGATE, as with LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE CONSTRAINED to one-sided MALE ASSERTING PROPOSITIONS.

 

 * * *

 

 

SUMMARY: —Relational Coherency Avoids “the Incompleteness of Finite Binary Logic Systems”

We live in the TRANSFORMING RELATION CONTINUUM aka the ENERGY-CHARGED PLENUM aka the WAVE-FIELD which is the all-including container within, in a QUANTUM LOGIC BOTH/AND reality, there are CONDENSINGS as material forms and dissipating in the manner that fog banks form and dissipate in the energy-charged PLENUM of the atmosphere. It is important to note that the relationship between CONTENTS (condensations) and CONTAINER (wave-field aka energy-charged plenum) is a QUANTUM LOGIC “BOTH/AND” relation which means that the CONDENSATIONS “DO NOT MOVE THROUGH” THE PLENUM, what we see that “APPEARS” like a form that is moving is instead the TRANSFORMING of the PLENUM.  As with the FOG BANK, a map showing temperatures and humidity will show that drops in temperature or rising of humidity is the source of the changing shapes and distribution of the FOG BANKS although the APPEARANCE is that of BANKS that grow and move and shrink and dissipate.  In REALITY, there are no LOCAL, EXPLICIT ‘BANK-THINGS’ that are capable of ‘CHANGING SHAPE’ or “MOVING’.  Instead, what we are seeing is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT relational developments, akin to LENSES OF WARM WATER in the ocean that we can ‘pick up’ with sonar and watch these lenses forming, growing and shrinking and moving.

 

In this preceding description I am inventing THINGS where there are no actual ‘things’, only physical conditions within an undivided whole that give the APPEARANCE of THINGS.

 

This is the QUANTUM LOGIC relation of MATERIAL FORMS (condensations of the wave-field) and the WAVE-FIELD.  There is NO MOVEMENT OF THINGS, there is only TRANSFORMING OF THE PLENUM.

 

This is the Modern physics understanding of REALITY and it is also the indigenous aboriginal understanding of REALITY as pointed to by the expression ‘mitakuye oyasin’ (everything is related).  EVERYTHIN “IS” RELATED BECAUSE ALL ‘THINGS’ ARE CONDENSATIONS OF THE ALL-INCLUDING WAVE-FIELD.

 

THUS,… this essay and most of my writing is about how we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are retaining a LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE which is BINARY LOGIC based which we use to construct BINARY LOGIC PSEUDO-REALITIES based on ABSOLUTELY EXISTING MATERIAL OBJECTS in ABSOLUTELY EMPTY SPACE, as for example, where we say ‘the TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING goods and services’, a one-sided male-asserting proposition that makes no mention of the female accommodating WILDERNESS that is SHRINKING (opening up) to accommodate the GROWING of the TOWN.   Our SENSE-EXPERIENCE does not need the LANGUAGE based descriptions using GROWING of the TOWN and SHRINKING of the WILDERNESS to understand the GESTALT change of TRANSFORMATION.

 

So, Indigenous aboriginals, Taoists/Buddhists and Advaita Vedanta have ‘gone with’ language that captures the equivalent of ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’ which retains BOTH MALE ASSERTING (there is TOWNING) and FEMALE ACCOMMODATING (in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE).  Such language captures the full ANDROGYNOUS structure of the WAVE-FIELD, and contrasts with WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE WHICH “DROPS OUT” the FEMALE ACCOMMODATIN CONJUGATE.  In the terms of COMPLEX SIGNAL, while Indigenous aboriginal language architecture is constructing conceptualizations with both the REAL and IMAGINARY components, the WESTERN CULTURE language architecture is constructing conceptualizations with only the REAL component and DROPPING OUT the IMAGINARY component.

 

This can also be stated in the EQUIVALENT terms that; while the WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE employs only the MALE ASSERTING CONJUGATE as in ‘the TOWN is GROWING, the indigenous aboriginal LANGUAGE employs BOTH the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING and the MALE ASSERTING conjugates as in ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’.

 

LANGUAGE -SOURCED FRAGMENTATION of the PSYCHE and SOCIAL RELATIONS is the price that WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are paying for our having adopted as our LANGUAGE STANDARD a BINARY LOGIC based LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE that DROPS OUT THE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONJUGATE that is retained in Indigenous aboriginal culture LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE (and the linguistic approach of Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta.

 

So, it is WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS, because of our LITERAL use of BINARY LOGIC language architecture (which has become common in the WORLD through popular use of ENGLISH, FRENCH, ITALIAN, GERMAN etc.) whose social relations and psyches are becoming increasingly FRAGMENTED as pointed out by David Bohm;

 

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

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

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

 

 

KEEP IN MIND that this FRAGMENTATION is coming through the WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE: where we say ‘the TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING goods and services’, a one-sided male-asserting proposition that makes no mention of the female accommodating WILDERNESS that is SHRINKING (opening up) to accommodate the GROWING of the TOWN.  

 

Instead of using language architectures such as are used by indigenous aboriginals, Taoists/Buddhists and Advaita Vedana that retain the female accommodating conjugate and thus acknowledge the WAVE-FIELD structure of reality; i.e. LANGUAGE where we say; ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’ which retains BOTH MALE ASSERTING (there is TOWNING) and FEMALE ACCOMMODATING (in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE).  Such language captures the full ANDROGYNOUS structure of the WAVE-FIELD, and contrasts with WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE WHICH “DROPS OUT” the FEMALE ACCOMMODATIN CONJUGATE. 

 

 * * *

NOTA BENE: My experience has been that most English speakers have a profound TRUST in the communications capabilities of “Shakespeare’s language” aka “the King’s English”, so that it is NOT EASY to share the finds presented herein which combine findings from Bohm, which establishes the PROBLEM of FRAGMENTATION and the findings of Nietzsche, who established the PROBLEM with WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE in particular; i.e. the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR which is the source of LOCAL AUTHORING which is in turn the source of FRAGMENTATION since there is NO SUCH THING AS LOCAL AUTHORING in the real world of our sense-experience in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.

 

Some people, including CHARLES DICKENS have noted a troubling trend in ENGLISH LANGUAGE communications which is close to the heart of the problem of FRAGMENTATION; i.e. REDUCTIONISM where ‘the whole’ is broken down into ‘parts’; e.g. where TOWNING in the transforming landscape as is captured in the SENSE-EXPERIENCE OF BOTH WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS AND INDIGENOUS ABORIGINALS is reduced to ‘the TOWN that is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING goods and services;;

 

 Charles Dickens in ‘Hard Times’ in the sequence where ‘Sissy Jupe’s relational understanding of a horse is ‘put down’ by her teacher Thomas Gradgrind who insists on grounding all understanding in ‘being’-based ‘facts’ as is the way of mainstream ‘science’;

 

“Now, what I want is, Facts. Teach these boys and girls nothing but Facts. Facts alone are wanted in life. Plant nothing else, and root out everything else. You can only form the minds of reasoning animals upon Facts: nothing else will ever be of any service to them. This is the principle on which I bring up my own children, and this is the principle on which I bring up these children. Stick to Facts, sir!”

 

‘Bitzer,’ said Thomas Gradgrind. ‘Your definition of a horse.’

 

‘Quadruped. Graminivorous. Forty teeth, namely twenty-four grinders, four eye-teeth, and twelve incisive. Sheds coat in the spring; in marshy countries, sheds hoofs, too. Hoofs hard, but requiring to be shod with iron. Age known by marks in mouth.’ Thus (and much more) Bitzer.

 

— Charles Dickens, ‘Hard Times’

 

What I am saying is that while we are all (“BOTH” WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS and INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL CULTURE ADHERENTS) equipped with SENSE-EXEPERIENCE AWARENESS of the QUANTUM LOGIC nature of REALITY, wherein, for example, when there is MALE-ASSERTING GROWTH OF CULTIVATED LAND, there is CONJUGATE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING SHRINKING OF WILDERNESS as is the nature of dynamics in the all-including WAVE-FIELD reality, when it comes to LANGUAGE BASED CONCEPTUALING OF REALITY, there has been a steady shift in WESTERN CULTURE, towards REDUCTIONISM which Kickens is ‘complaining about’.

 

WHY IS DICKENS CRITIQUING this shift to reductionism?  REDUCTIONISM is FRAGMENTATION, the reducing of the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM which is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT to a SUBSTITUTE REALITY which is composed of the LOCAL and EXPLICIT. Such a fragmented SUBSTITUTE REALITY is something we create using DIFFERENTIATION which reduces the dynamic of TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE and ‘pops out’ or ‘differentiates out’ ‘the TOWN’, … transferring ‘IT’ (which is really the activity of TOWNING) into a notional empty containing space where we can apply DIFFERENTATION to ‘think’ and ‘talk’ about it in the manner promoted by GRADGRIND.

 

In the indigenous aboriginal language, INTEGRATION is used rather than DIFFERENTIATION.  It is ‘DANCES WITH WOLVES’ which is integration rather than JOHN DUNBAR which is DIFFERENTIATION wherein we isolate a LOCAL BEING which we can use LANGUAGE to understand as a LOCAL, EXPLICIT thing-in-itself.  The same is true for ‘the TOWN that is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING goods and services. 

 

But in the case of CONDENSATIONS in a WAVE-FIELD, which language will speak of in terms of ‘the TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’, INTEGRATION is implicit and there is no FRAGMENTATION because the WAVE-FIELD is ALL-INCLUDING and material forms are CONDENSATIONS of the WAVE-FIELD.

 

We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have the natural capabilities of the indigenous aboriginals and vice versa and infants taken captive by the other culture adapt within that other culture and learn the language and it is LANGUAGE wherein the orientation to either DIFFERENTIATION (the TOWN is growing) or INTEGRATION (there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE).

 

The FRAGMENTATION problem reviewed in the earlier quote form (1 FRAGMENTATION AND WHOLENESS (from Wholeness and the Implicate Order by David Bohm) is a FRAGMENTATION PROBLEM coming from LANGUAGE and in particular from LANGUAGE that CONCEPTUALIZES by way of DIFFERENTIATION (e.g. the TOWN is GROWING) rather than form LANGUAGE that CONCEPTUALIZES by way of INTEGRATION (e.g. ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING landscape).

 

Once we use language to SPLIT THE TOWNING OUT OF THE TRANFORMING LANDCAPE we inherit the BURDEN of having to use language to manage all movement and development of the THING-IN-ITSELF called ‘the TOWN’ or ‘the HUMAN’, ‘the HORSE’ or whatever.

 

‘Quadruped. Graminivorous. Forty teeth, namely twenty-four grinders, four eye-teeth, and twelve incisive. Sheds coat in the spring; in marshy countries, sheds hoofs, too. Hoofs hard, but requiring to be shod with iron. Age known by marks in mouth.’ Thus (and much more) Bitzer.

 

By contrast, the emerging  of HORSES in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE is an INTEGRATION oriented understanding of the romantic type preferred by Sissy Jupe which is also Modern physics consistent.

 

TO CONCLUDE, WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE is ARCHITECTED with a DIFFERENTIATION orientation as with the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR which DIFFERENTIATES AND FRAGMENTS, ASSIGNING NAMES to the FRAGMENTS and using GRAMMAR to impute LOCAL AUTHORING POWER to the NAMING-INSTANTIATED THING-IN-ITSELF.  

 

This PROMOTING of the MALE ASSERTING CONJUGATE along with the DROPPING OUT OF THE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONJUGATE, has become a routinely used FOUNDATIONAL FEATURE of WESTERN CULTURE Common Average European Language architectures.

 

FRAGMENTATION is a serious problem as Bohm points out, and it is coming from the use of DIFFERENTIATION in LANGUAGE rather than INTEGRATION.  Since DIFFERENTIATION is a BINARY LOGIC based operation while INTEGRATION is a QUANTUM LOGIC BASED, the needed ‘adjustment’ is a shift in LANGUAGE usage in WESTERN CULTURE which restores QUANTUM LOGIC to all those situations where BINARY LOGIC is currently being used, such as JUSTICE, MEDICINE and COMMERCE.   QUANTUM LOGIC is the logic of BALANCE.  The BALANCE orientation is ALREADY OUT THERE in INFORMAL PRACTICES of JUSTICE, MEDICINE and COMMERCE, however, the WESTERN JUSTICE SYSTEM is heavily invested in legislated binary logic based regulations which are BLIND to issues of BALANCE and days of celebration of UNOFFICIAL BALANCE-RESTORING AGENTS such as Robin Hood and Jean Valjean seem to be over.  WESTERN CULTURE MAINSTREAM MEDICINE, also, has seen anti-pathogen orientation take over from the balance orientation

 

Anti-pathogen approaches are a DEGENERATE response to imbalance that is ideally resolved by rebalancing, however, those benefitting from imbalances are a major force for perpetuating them.  Medicine persists in putting the anti-pathogen orientation ahead of the rebalancing orientation under the long-standing influence of allopathic medicine post Hippocrates.

 

Attacking single issues is a tortuous path forward, like that of Sisyphus, but which may bring a general awakening to the LANGUAGE based origin of FRAGMENTATION coming from the use of LANGUAGE with ARCHITECTURE that DIFFERENTIATES in a BINARY LOGIC EITHER/OR fashion rather than INTEGRATING in a QUANTUM LOGIC BOTH/AND fashion.

* * * 

In the ARCHITECTING OF LANGUAGE, we have the OPTION of INTEGRATION ; “THERE IS CLUSTERING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE”, which is a QUANTUM (BOTH/AND) LOGIC interpretation, and we have the OPTION OF DIFFERENTIATION “THE CLUSTER IS GROWING and DEVELOPING”, which is a BINARY LOGIC (EITHER/OR) interpretation. 

The WESTERN CULTURE choice of giving the FOUNDATIONAL ROLE in LANGUAGE to DIFFERENTIATION rather than INTEGRATION is the SOURCE of FRAGMENTATION.

REDUCTIONISM proceeds by way of LINGUISTIC DIFFERENTIATION where the WHOLE is deemed to be LOCAL and EXPLICIT as in the SUM OF PARTS, not to be confused for HOLISM of the all-including ENERGY-CHARGED PLENUM aka WAVE-FIELD NATURE of REALITY as conveyed with INTEGRATION based LANGUAGE where the WHOLE  is the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT  WAVE-FIELD while the CONDENSATIONS are APPEARANCE.  Meanwhile, “PSYCHO-LINGUISTIC DIFFERENTIATION” substantivized in WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE with NAME-TAGS attached to relational forms that bootstrap INDEPENDENT IDENTITY as notional LOCAL, EXPLICIT THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES, footings that GRAMMAR ordains with LOCAL POWERS OF AUTHORING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS, thus providing the foundational elements for a DIFFERENTIATION based PSEUDO-REALITY with LOCAL, INCIPIENT SOURCING AGENCY.  This is the ORIGIN of LINGUISTIC FRAGMENTATION.

The WESTERN CULTURE PANDORA’S BOX unleashing of a plethora of DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR based LOCAL AUTHORING AGENTS is the source of increasingly divisive FRAGMENTATION, … FRAGMENTATION that is firstly in LANGUAGE-STIMULATED PSYCHES, propagating from there to SOCIO-PHYSICAL FRAGMENTATION (e.g. as in DECLARATIONS of INDEPENDENCE).

BECAUSE WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE PERSISTS IN PROMOTING FRAGMENTATION and because the WESTERN CULTURE RESPONSE is to language programs of ELIMINATION or INCARCERATION of bothersome FRAGMENT, there is a PRE-OCCUPATION with the ELIMINATING of OFFENSIVE ‘FRAGMENTS’ that FUELS the FIRES of FRAGMENTATION rather than OPENING THE MIND TO THE REALITY of INTEGRATION and the NON-REAL SUPERFICIALITY of DIFERENTIATION;.

For example, DECLARATIONS OF INDEPENDENCE BUILT INTO WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE, AS WITH DOUBLE ERROR OF NAMING ANG GRAMMAR BASED ‘LOCAL AUTHORING’, ARE THE PSYCHO-LINGUISTIC SOURCE OF FRAGMENTATION.   THE WESTERN CULTURE MIS-IDENTIFICATION OF THE SOURCE OF STRIFE IN THE SIMPLE BINARY LOGIC TERMS OF THE CLASH OF POLAR OPPOSITE FORCES OF ‘GOOD’ AND ‘EVIL’, WHERE THE ‘PERCEIVED REMEDY IS THE ‘ELIMINATION OF EVIL’, IS A DIFFERENTIATION BASED ABSTRACTION THAT OBSCURES THE INTEGRATION BASED UNDERSTANDING IN THE QUANTUM BOTH/AND LOGIC TERMS OF BALANCE AND IMBALANCE WITHIN THE PLENUM WHERE NATURAL REMEDIATION IS BY WAY OF RESTORING BALANCE..

WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS’ MISTAKEN, SIMPLE BINARY LOGIC INTERPETATION, IS THE SOURCE OF RISING FRAGMENTATION THROUGH PURSUIT OF PURIFICATION (ELIMINATION OF DIFFERENTIATION BASED EVIL).  THIS BINARY LOGIC INTERPRETATION IS A ‘TOO SIMPLE’ INTERPRETATION WHICH IS SUBSUMED IN LESS SIMPLE QUANTUM LOGIC, BY IMBALANCE.

WESTERN CULTURE’S ‘DIFFERENTIATION’ BASED LANGUAGE IS THE SOURCE OF FRAGMENTATION AND THE MORE WE USE SUCH ‘DYSFUNCTION-INFECTED LANGUAGE’ IN TRYING TO SORT OUT THE DYSFUNCTION, THE MORE WE DIG OURSELVES DEEPER INTO THE DYSFUNCTION of FRAGMENTATION.

CHARLES DICKENS attack on the rising indoctrination promoting the use of DIFFERENTIATION “IN PLACE OF INTEGRATION” as in the Thomas Gradgrind and Sissy Jupe incident in ‘Hard Times’ was ‘WRITING ON THE WALL’ for what has been and continues to be a WESTERN CULTURE shift, via LANGUAGE, from understanding based on INTEGRATION to “understanding” based on DIFFERENTIATION.  The teaching in great detail of the TOWN and its components and activities, does NOT deliver an UNDERSTANDING of TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE.  Likewise the teaching in great detail of the HUMAN, and its components and activities, does not deliver an UNDERSTANDING of HUMANING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE.

While the former understanding is by way of BINARY EITHER/OR LOGIC where the INHABITANT and HABITAT are MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE (differentiation) the latter understanding is by way of QUANTUM BOTH/AND LOGIC where INHABITANT is INCLUDED in HABITAT as with WHORLING in FLOWING (integration).  

* * *