THE BIG LIE: The Linguistic Fabrication of BEING

The BIG LIE is a phenomenon which has been exploited by politicians.  It is written about by Hitler in Mein Kampf.  If the lie is small, the man on the street will call us out on it.  But when the lie is huge, and coming with the backing of ‘authorities’, as we have seen recently with Donald Trump and the BIG LIE that ‘the election was fraudulent’ and that ‘Trump was really the winner’, many people will believe ‘the big lie’.

There are BIG LIES that divide the world, and the one that has caught my attention is the BIG LIE OF “BEING” of the WESTERN CULTURE that I have grown up in.  How can BEING co-exist with a fluid world?

“In the writing of Heraclitus, to a larger degree than ever before, the images do not impose their burden of concreteness but are entirely subservient to the achievement of clarity and precision”

“Heraclitus had declared ‘being’ a perpetual ‘becoming’ and had correlated the two concepts with his ‘hidden attunement.’ Now Parmenides declared the two to be mutually exclusive, and only ‘being’ to be real.” — ‘The Intellectual Adventure of Ancient Man’, — ‘Henri Frankfort, H. A. Frankfort, John A. Wilson, Thorkild Jacobsen, and William A. Irwin.

The SOURCE of the BEING based world is DIFFERENTIATION as in the BINARY LOGIC SPLIT between the MATERIAL PARTICLE and EMPTY SPACE, and from THIS MOST ELEMENTAL BEING, a language architecture follows which is based on DIFFERENTIATION out the LOCAL and EXPLICIT where, in the end, everything can be understood in the context similar to that of the Russian doll, the Matryoshka, where the larger forms are built up from smaller forms so that in order to understand what might be termed the MACRO-REALITY, we can break it down into a parts-wise MICRO-REALITY.  This BEING based worldview is a BINARY LOGIC worldview based on  MALE ASSERTING ACTION of MATERIAL BEING-based STRUCTURES MOVING AND INTERACTING in EMPTY SPACE..

By contrast, the SOURCE of the BECOMING-based world is INTEGRATION rather than DIFFERENTIATION which is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT (relational) as in the formation of clouds which are ACCUMULATIONS arising from the INTEGRATION of CONDENSATIONS of the energy-charged PLENUM they are included in.  This INTEGRATION-BASED SHAPE-SHIFTING COMPRISED BY FEMALE ACCOMMODATING ACTION gives rise to FORMINGS WITHIN THE TRANSFORMING PLENUM.   These FORMINGS within the TRANSFORMING as relate with QUANTUM LOGIC (the BOTH/AND logic of the including medium.

NOTA BENE!   The language-based world of INTEGRATION where local forms are INCLUSIONS in the all-including energy-charge PLENUM so that ALL ARE RELATED, may be ambiguously captured in language by REDUCING their QUANTUM LOGIC FIGURE-INCLUDED-IN-GROUND relation with LANGUAGE that Re-presents them as “FORMS” within an EMPTY CONTAINING SPACE, creating a language-based SIMLIFIED SUBSTITUTE REALITY, a SUBSTITUTE REALITY that can be extended and adapted and maintained on the basis of the BINARY LOGIC architecture of MUTUALLY EXCLUDING material objects and empty space.

LIKE IT OR NOT, we WESTERN CUTURE ADHERENTS are continuing to deploy this BINARY LOGIC based SUBSTITUTE REALITY as our OPERATIVE REALITY, and it unfortunately DOES NOT MATCH OUR SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY which instead is capturable in the INTEGRATION based language scheme of INDIGENOUS ABORIGINALS, Taoists/Buddhists and Advaita Vedanat, their language architectures being QUANTUM LOGIC based where MATERIAL FORMS are actually INCLUDED in a containing space with is FULL (energy-charged) rather than empty  and in which the MATERIAL FORMS are CONDENSATIONS of the PLENUM.  This is in very basic DISAGREEMENT with the WESTERN CULTURE language based representation of a BINARY LOGIC based SUBSTITUTE REALITY where MATERIAL FORMS ARE ABSOLUTE THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES that are seen as having GRAMMAR-GIVEN powers of MOVING and GROWING and DEVELOPING “AS IF IN THEIR OWN RIGHT” with NO HELP from THE SPACE they are in since that SPACE is, in this WESTERN CULTURE SUBSTITUTE REALITY, construed to be an ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE VACUUM, which serves only as a notional PLAYING FIELD for the real stuff MADE OF MATTER which enjoys BINARY LOGIC supported BEING..

DIFFERENTIATION and INTEGRATION are the alterative forms of language that are respectively employed in linguistic capture of the dynamics of our sense-experience of inclusion in the all-including energy-charged PLENUM aka the WAVE-FIELD.

THE WEST, UNREALISTICALLY (since it is the source of physical and mental FRAGMENTATION) give DIFFERENTIATION the foundational role in the LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE so that WESTERN CULTURE languages formulate linguistic representations of the world dynamic by DIFFERENTIATING and FRAGMENTING the dynamic, which is in reality a fluid continuum, into SEPARATE PIECES by way of the mathematical operation of DIFFERENTIATION.  For example, WESTERN LANGUAGE DIFFERENTATES out “THE TOWN” as in ‘THE TOWN IS GROWING’ if it were a SEPARATE BEING based FEATURE and uses this DIFFERENTIATION approach to construct a language-based SUBSTITUTE REALITY built up from DIFFERENTIATED FRAGMENTS using NAMING and GRAMMAR to impute BEING and then notionally equipping the BEINGS with GRAMMAR-given POWERS OF LOCAL AUTHORING.

THE INDIGENOUS ABORIGINALS,  REALISTICALLY, give INTEGRATION the foundational role in the LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE so that INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL languages formulates linguistic representations of the world dynamic by INTEGRATING the visible LOCAL and EXPLICIT MALE ASSERTING FEATURES within the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT (relational) LANDSCAPE, capturing the fluid nature of the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE.  For example INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL LANGUAGE “INTEGRATES” “TOWNING” AND THE “TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE” as in “THERE IS TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE” capturing the reality that there is just one all-including transforming relational continuum aka the WAVE-FIELD aka the Tao

The BIG LIE is “BEING”

“BEING” is abstraction that supports the CONSTRUCTION OF A LINGUISTIC BEING-BASED SUBSTITUTE REALITY, a LINGUISTIC SUBSTITUTE REALITY BUILT UP FROM NOTIONAL INDEPENDENT MATERIAL “BEING-THINGS” by way of “DIFFERENTIATION”.  This is the WESTERN CULTURE VOYEUR VIEWER CHOICE for the foundation of a language-based representation of our sense-experience reality.

STAYING WITH OUR SENSE-EXPERIENCE in our architecting of LANGUAGE led the indigenous aboriginals to ACKNOWLEDGE the “CONTINUAL BECOMING” of the world of our sense-experience of inclusion therein.  Taking this tack of designing language on the basis of our sense-experience of INCLUSION leads to a language architecture that is “INTEGRATION” based, where all of the separate voyeur viewings must somehow be INTEGRATED as in the indigenous aboriginal aphorism “mitakuye oyasin” (“all my relations” or “everything is related”).

A DIFFERENTIATION based language gives us ‘the TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING, PRODUCING’ as if the TOWN were a ‘BEING’ with grammar given powers of LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and development.

An INTEGRATION based language gives us ‘the TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE as if the TOWNING is a fluid development within a FLOW like a BOILING in the RAPID FLOWING.

DIFFERENTIATION has us constructing a SUBSTITUTE REALITY where we can examine life as a voyeur looking in on life as if through a microscope, understanding the whole by way of first homing in and understanding the DIFFERENTIATED PARTS.

INTEGRATION does not “LET GO” of the fundamental importance to understanding the WHOLE in which case the PARTS are understood in the context of their relationship within the whole matrix of relations, relations which are continually changing so that this language (English) that I am now using has a problem keeping up since it makes use of THINGS in order to get to RELATIONS unlike the indigenous aboriginal language architecture and Bohm’s Modern physic ‘Rheomode’ language which uses the INTEGRATION of RELATIONS in order to ‘get to’ THINGS rather than vice versa.  Given that THINGS are the INTEGRATION of RELATIONS we will never get to a realistic understanding of THINGS by way of DIFFERENTIATION, as observers of our culture such as Charles Dickens makes note of;  

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’

DIFFERENTIATION is BUILT IN to the ARCHITECTURE of WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGES which does not stop some users of the language from LETTING GO of the LOCAL and EXPLICIT ARCHITECTED CONSTRAINTS and getting SLOPPY ON PURPOSE so as to convey understanding that are innately relational such as associate with CONDENSATION or INTEGRATION which transcends the ‘DIFFERENTIATED SUM OF THE PART’

INTEGRATION tends toward capture of the GESTALT that is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT and lies BEYOND THE SUM OF THE LOCAL and EXPLICIT PARTS.  There is MYSTERY in ‘INTEGRATION’ as in the TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE.  The mystery extends our inquiry indefinitely so that TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE means something much more profound than ‘the TOWN which is GROWING and DEVELOPING and PRODUCING THINGS’ as in the DIFFERENTIATION based language capture.  In the INTEGRATION based understanding, language must LET GO of its LOCAL and EXPLICIT mode of capture and fall-back on the more fundamental foundations of the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT as in ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE where this understanding TOWNING just KEEPS GOING AND GOING and leaning on the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE with its relatively unknown and ageless history, which is the MAGIC in Sissy Jupe’s understanding of ‘the HORSE’ that was so bothersome to her teacher, Thomas Gradgrind.

We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have become a THOMAS GRADGRIND emulating social collective.  We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS will take the local valley apart and industrialize it using DIFFERENTIATION as if we were BLIND to the natural reality of INTEGRATION, just as we have used DIFFERENTIATION to intellectually DIVIDE the innately INTEGRAL WORLD up into 195 notionally SEPARATE and INDEPENDENT COUNTRIES.  We do this INTELLECTUALLY with LANGUAGE and GRAMMAR and our WESTERN CULTURE demands that everyone must BUY IN to the BIG LIE of BEING and participate in the FRAGMENTING by DIFFERENTIATING the world using LANGUAGE and the DOUBLE ERROR combination of NAMING and GRAMMAR.  No wonder the indigenous aboriginals BALKED at ASSIMILATING this language based construction of a DIFFERENTIATION based SUBSTITUTE REALITY which WESTERN CULTURE CONTINUES TO EMPLOY AS THE OFFICIALLY ENDORSED OPERATIVE REALITY.

Nowadays, in the era of a dominant WESTERN CULTURE where the global social collective is supporting the abstract notion of DIFFERENTIATING the world into 195 so-called INDEPENDENT NATIONS, the openings for a RETURN TO SANITY of acknowledging the reality of INTEGRATION wherein EVERYTHING IS RELATED (mitakuye oyasin) as also in Modern physics, is POSTPONED by the notional success of the WESTERN CULTURE ‘SYSTEM’ as measured through the DOUBLE ERROR LENSES of notional LOCAL AUTHORING e.g. of CULTIVATION of LAND and INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT and ALL KINDS of ONE-SIDED MALE ASSERTING ONLY DIFFERENTIATION based undertakings with are understood OUT OF THE CONTEXT OF INTEGRATION.

INTEGRATION, if we were to use it, would break us out of the POPULAR WESTERN CULTURE THOMAS GRADGRIND MODE of UNDERSTANDING and radically REFORMULATE our UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IS GOING ON, which is currently constrained by DIFFERENTIATION whereby the SUCCESS of LOCAL, EXPLICIT PROJECTS fails to comprehend the CONJUGATE impact of the SHRINKING of the WILDERNESS as is included in the reality of living in a spherical space.

UNFORTUNATELY for us, DIFFERENTIATING employs BINARY LOGIC to put the SPOTLIGHT FIRMLY AND EXCLUSIVELY ON THE LOCAL AND EXPLICIT ‘Bitzer,’ said Thomas Gradgrind. ‘Your definition of a horse.’

BINARY LOGIC ‘does this to us’, while QUANTUJM LOGIC would have us conceive reality in the INTEGRATING terms of HORSING IN THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.

CHARLES DICKENS, through through the guise of Sissy Jupe in ‘Nard Times’ was expressing the ‘dehumanizing’ that was underway with INDUSTRIALIZATION which is synonymous with DIFFERENTIATION and FRAGMENTATION.  That is, INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS have a focus on the LOCAL and EXPLICIT and once one orients the focus to the LOCAL AND EXPLICIT, one is UNDERSTANDING how the TOWN IS GROWING which is the DIFFERENTIATION based understanding of the development and if we choose to put words to this DIFFERENTIATION based view, we are unable at the same time, to linguistically articulate HOW THE LANDSCAPE IS TRANSFORMING which is the INTEGRATION based understanding of the development

In CHARLES DICKENS ‘HARD TIMES’, the theme is a critique of INDUSTRIALIZATION where there is a DIRECT, HARD, LOCAL, EXPLICIT ACTION FOCUS as is characteristic of INDUSTRIALIZATION.  As the interchange between Gradgrind and Bitzer illustrate, the shifting paradigm of the times was OBSCURANTIST in that it focused on ACHIEVEMENTS that were LOCAL and EXPLICIT … and OUT OF THE CONTEXT OF THEIR RELEVANCE and MEANING in terms of the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT.   

What Dickens was illustrating was that there is a certain way of THINKING that is stimulated by a certain way of SPEAKING which affirms Lev Vygotsky’s research of THOUGHT and LANGUAGE which does not agree with Piaget’s views where the two are conceived of as mutually independent.  But here with Gradgrind and Sissy Jupe, there is a highlighting of how different ways of speaking influence our mode of action, and getting down to serious business in an INDUSTRIALIZATION sense meant using language that homes in and focuses on the LOCAL and EXPLICIT as if the understanding that derives from this focus can be used as the OPERATIVE REALITY for actions and development.

BUT THIS APPROACH IS A SCREW-UP since THERE IS NO REALITY in that which is LOCAL and EXPLICIT out of the context of the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT (relational).  However, LOCAL and EXPLICIT specifications are used by engineers to construct local ‘structures’ such as TOWNS and DAMS and DAMS have been used to create RESERVOIRS which are LOCAL and EXPLICIT but which have NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT impact

In other words, BINARY LOGIC, which gives us the LOCAL and EXPLICIT is over-simplification and in NATURE, the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT prevail.  The Take-away here is that BINARY LOGIC serves up UNREAL OVER-SIMPLIFICATION while QUANTUM LOGIC is capable of conveying an IMPRESSION of the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT and thus the transforming relational continuum which is our sense-experience grounded reality.

Today, in 2022, we have moved through the turbulence marking the entrance into INDUSTRIALIZATION and are now INSIDE OF IT and are an INCLUDED PART OF IT, so that it has become largely invisible.  If we in the middle of a CLEAR-CUT in the forest and our job is simply to ENLARGE IT, this is a BINARY LOGIC operation and we have no overall QUANTUM LOGIC “BOTH/AND” perspective of the changing BALANCE between the WILDERNESS and the CLEAR-CUT which would inform in the LESS SIMPLE, changing GESTALT terms of TRANSFORMATION.

INDUSTRIALIZATION has a LOCAL EXPLICIT BINARY LOGIC focus (e.g. HAVE WE EXPANDED THIS INDUSTRIAL PARK OR NOT) and is BLIND TO the LESS SIMPLE QUANTUM LOGIC reality of TRANSFORMATION.

SUMMARY:

We have TWO THINGS GOING ON HERE, DIFFERENT WAYS OF CONCEPTUALIZING REALITY and DIFFERENT WAYS OF LANGUAGE BASED REPRESENTATIONS OF CONCEPTS and this GETS CONFUSING because we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS employ a LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE that DROPS OUT the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING WAVE-FIELD CONJUGATE; EXAMPLE, we can speak of the GROWTH of the INDUSTRIALIZED AREA “WITHOUT MENTIONING” THE CONJUGATE SHRINKING OF THE WILDERNESS.  We do this with what is called in mathematical terms DIFFERENTIATION.  As GRADGRIND demonstrates, DIFFERENTIATION is an alternative way of understanding by imagining that there is a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF and using language to DIFFERENTIATE it and break it down into component parts to linguistically articulate WHAT IT IS (i.e. the BEING-based communications architecture).   For the more imaginative approach, there is the option of understanding ‘the thing’ in the context of the web of relations it is included in, ‘relations’ which extend outward in space and backwards in time basically without limit, … making the LOCAL FORM understood in this NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT way, something of a mystery; e.g. ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’  where the ‘TOWNING’ is a living form of “INTEGRATION”.

LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE affords us this distinguishing DESIGN APPROACH and we can see that INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL LANGUAGE DESIGNERS OPTED FOR INTEGRATION while WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE DESIGNERS OPTED FOR DIFFERENTIATION so here we are today experiencing the results of our WESTERN CULTURE having adopted the DIFFERENTIATION based design approach wherein we keep using FRAGMENTATION which mirrors the INDUSTRIALIZATION APPROACH as critiqued in Dicken’s ‘HARD TIMES’ which was making its entrance Dicken’s era and is now FULLY INSTALLED AND NEARLY INVISIBLE because it has become STANDARD THINKING PRACTICE; i.e. everything is based on DIFFERENTIATION and FRAGMENTATION (LGBTQ, INDEPENDENT NATIONS, etc.) while INTEGRATION is and after-fact synthetic patch-job.

THE UPSIDE DOWN SUBSTITUTE REALITY which puts DIFFERENTIATION before INTEGRATION as is coming from our UPSIDE-DOWN LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE constitutes the BIG LIE of our times.

NATIONS and CORPORATIONS and INDIVIDUAL HUMANS AND GENDER TYPES, in this WESTERN CULTURE UPSIDE-DOWN TREND, are DECLARING THEIR INDEPENDENCE generating FRAGMENTATION.

WESTERN CULTURE ‘BELIEF’ in DIFFERENTIATION and ‘FRAGMENTATION’ is encouraging a global trend by individuals and groups to SUBOPTIMIZATION

“The above aphorism (The Name of the Devil is Suboptimization’), attributed to Kenneth Boulding, points to the inherent weakness characterizing the mindset and socio‐economic, political, educational and managerial practices of Western Industrial society as it developed over the past 300 years. It has its basis in the analytic‐reductionist scientific paradigm, which, despite the remarkable technological applications it spawned, is inappropriate, conflict‐generating and dysfunctional in a world characterized by global interconnectedness and mutual interdependence …” — György Jaros and Martine Dodds-Taljaard  (International Society of Systems Sciences)

INTEGRATION , as is implicit in the indigenous aboriginal language architectures (e.g. “there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE”… associates with TRANSFORMATION  and does NOT lead to FRAGMENTATION and SUBOPTIMIZATION as DIFFERENTIATION does.

THE BIG LIE is the SUBSTITUTE REALITY that is engendered by a language designed for DIFFERENTIATION rather than INTEGRATION, that has us constructing BINARY LOGIC based REPRESENTATIONS such as ‘THE TOWN IS GROWING’ rather than a language designed for INTEGRATION, that has us constructing QUANTUM LOGIC REPRESENTATIONS such as ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’   

I entitled this “THE BIG LIE: The Linguistic Fabrication of ‘BEING’” because DIFFERENTIATION is the operation that reduces relational dynamics as in ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’ to a LOCAL, EXPLICIT NAMING-instantiated BEING of ‘the TOWN that is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING products’ that we can NOTIONALLY equip with the powers of LOCAL AUTHORING (of GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION of products) with GRAMMAR.   ‘BEING’ is the ‘BIG LIE’ that serves as the foundation for the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR based construction of the BELING WITH LOCAL AUTHORING POWERS.

There is no “BEING” in the transforming relational continuum aka the WAVE-FIELD.  THERE ARE NO ‘HUMAN BEINGS” that EXIST and MOVE ABOUT and INTERACT IN AN ABSOLUTE EMPTY and INFINITE SPACE.  INSTEAD, there  HUMANINGS in the transforming relational continuum aka the WAVE-FIELD aka the Tao.

We all know, from our sense-experience, that we are included in a dynamic greater than ourselves, as when we are included in a freeway traffic flow where our movements are relational to the transforming web of relations we share inclusion in.  In this case, we do not have ‘our own movements’ as described by a particle with a trajectory we measure in terms of flat space coordinates as if it had ‘meaning’ ‘in its own right’.  Our moving is relative to the relational matrix we share inclusion in.  We ARE CONDENSATIONS in the ALL-INCLUDING ENERGY CHARGED PLENUM aka the WAVE-FIELD where what is going on is TRANSFORMATION, where there is a QUANTUM LOGIC BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING MEDIUM relation between the CONDENSATION and the WAVE-FIELD.

We need a different ‘flow-based’ language to capture this REAL QUANTUM LOGIC REALITY which is unlike the BINARY LOGIC BASED SUBSTITUTE REALITY we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS ARE CONTINUING TO USE.   Bohm has made this argument, developed his Rheomode Language and acknowledged that indigenous aboriginal languages such as Algonquin, have the need flow-based, QUANTUM LOGIC conveying capability.

Instead of speaking in such terms as ‘the TOWN is GROWING’, which is DIFFERENTIATION based language, to capture the dynamics of our sense-experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum aka the WAVE-FIELD aka the Tao, we may use an INTEGRATION based language capable of conveying that there is ‘TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’ where the TOWNING is an included feature WITHIN the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE as reflects the QUANTUM LOGIC relation.  

The indigenous aboriginal languages satisfy the QUANTUM LOGIC requirements

 * * * * * * * * * * * * 

ABSTRACT: 

“THE BIG LIE: The Linguistic Fabrication of BEING” is an essay intending to throw light on how we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS  are using a BEING based language to construct a SUBSTITUTE REALITY that has become the GLOBALLY POPULAR OPERATING REALITY.   The language based development of  SUBSTITUTE REALITY constructions makes use of DIFFERENTIATION  rather than INTEGRATION (as in the Indigenous aboriginal languages and as in Modern physics).   For example, DIFFERENTIATION reduces ‘TOWNING in the transforming landscape’ to ‘the TOWN”, a BEING based ABSTRACTION which is then remobilized with GRAMMAR.  In sense-experience reality THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A BEING-BASED TOWN, such abstraction exists only in a BEING-BASED SUBSTITUTE REALITY which is ‘padded’ with a notional ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE, OBSCURING the QUANTUM LOGIC reality of CONDENSATIONS within the all-including energy-charged PLENUM aka the WAVE-FIELD.

FOOTNOTE:  Extract from Nietzsche’s “Twilight of the Idols, or, How to Philosophize with a Hammer”

“Nothing indeed has exercised a more simple power of persuasion hitherto than the error of Being, as it was formulated by the Eleatics for instance: in its favour are every word and every sentence that we utter!—Even the opponents of the Eleatics succumbed to the seductive powers of their concept of Being. Among others there was Democritus in his discovery of the atom. “Reason” in language!—oh what a deceptive old witch it has been! I fear we shall never be rid of God, so long as we still believe in grammar.”