The DOUBLE WHAMMY of BINARY LOGIC and INCOMPLETENESS IN LANGUAGE
INTRODUCTION: This essay, entitled; “The DOUBLE WHAMMY of BINARY LOGIC and INCOMPLETENESS IN LANGUAGE” explores the manner in which WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE simplifies and abbreviates conceptual constructions to the point that the conceptualization of the ‘common language ground’ (serving as a ‘COMMON REALITY’) that enables group communications is no longer consistent with our sense-experience affirmed REALITY, but employs an intellectual conceptual SUBSTITUTE REALITY based on BINARY LOGIC and ‘TRUE’ but ‘INCOMPLETE’ LOGICAL PROPOSITIONS. For example, whereas INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL languages and Modern physics fashion language that speaks in QUANTUM LOGIC terms such as ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM’, … WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE CONSTRUCTIONS support the MORE SIMPLE BINARY LOGIC based expression; the TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING goods and services.
QUANTUM LOGIC is based on BOTH/AND logic as with WHORLING in the FLOWING where the WHORLING and the FLOWING are ONE.
BINARY LOGIC is based on the EITHER/OR logic where the WHORLING is understood to be separate from, and MOVING THROUGH the FLOWING.
Modern physics and indigenous aboriginals have the QUANTUM LOGIC understanding that HUMANINGS are included in the TRANSFORMING relational continuum, while WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have the BINARY LOGIC understanding that HUMANS are independent beings that author their own actions and behaviours while moving about within a separate and independent passive containing space.
While this here LINGUISTIC communication is in MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING terms (i.e. in terms of ‘what things do’) which is BINARY LOGIC based, this communication is INCOMPLETE in that it is DROPPING OUT THE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING CONJUGATE, unlike indigenous aboriginal language (and Modern physics) where BOTH MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING AND FEMALE ACCOMMMODATING/ENABLING are included as in ‘There is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’ where we have a QUANTUM LOGIC proposition that incorporates BOTH MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING as in ‘TOWNING’ and also FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING as in ‘IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’.
THE FIRST ‘WHAMMY” of The DOUBLE WHAMMY of BINARY LOGIC and INCOMPLETENESS IN LANGUAGE can thus be seen as the DROPPING OUT of the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING WAVE-FIELD CONJUGATE which REDUCES QUANTUM BOTH/AND LOGIC to BINARY EITHER/OR LANGUAGE. In the WAVE-FIELD structure of nature’s dynamic, we have “BOTH” the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING “AND” MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING conjugates, as in the actual sense-experience affirmed physical reality on inclusion in the WAVE-FIELD.
GIVEN THAT the purpose of LANGUAGE is to come up with signal-based messaging with the capability of sharing conceptualizations of sense-experience affirmable dynamics, we must be ‘on guard’, in this case, for a DROPPING OUT of the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING CONJUGATE which is the INTEGRATING agency in language based conceptual constructions. The effect of DROPPING OUT the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING CONJUGATE is to impute FULL AND SOLE AUTHORING CAPABILITY to the MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING DYNAMIC, which gives rise to ‘the TOWN is GROWING’ (MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING ONLY) WITHOUT the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING AS ‘IN THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM’)
WHY WOULD WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS JUST DROP OUT THE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING WAVE-FIELD CONJUGATE IN OUR LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE, since it is INNATELY INCLUDED IN SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY?
The REASON is that this DROP-OUT of the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING and the SUBSTITUTING of ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE means that the users of language enjoy simplification in which language need capture ONLY the simple MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING dynamic, which is equivalent to the assumption that SPACE IS AN ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE VOID. As Copernicus puts it the BINARY LOGIC conceptualization leads to much simpler language;
And just as our Copernicus said to us : It is more convenient to suppose the earth turns round, since thus the laws of astronomy are expressible in a much simpler language ; this one would say: It is more convenient to suppose the earth turns round, since thus the laws of mechanics are expressible in a much simpler language’. Henri Poincaré, ‘Science and Hypothesis’, Ch. VII Relative Motion and Absolute Motion
ONE CAN IMAGINE THE GREATER ISSUES FACING THE LANGUAGE ARCHITECT IF HE WERE TO AGREE TO A LANGUAGE DESIGN THAT, INSTEAD OF TREATING MATERIAL FORMS AS SEPARATE FROM THE CONTAINING SPACE, WE WOULD VISUALIZE AND SPEAK OF A SITUATION WHEREIN THE WHORLINGS ARE IN AN ENERGY-CHARGED PLENUM WHEREIN MATERIAL FORMS ARE VIBISBLE CONDENSATIONS WITHIN THAT TRANSFORMING NON-VISIBLE PLENUM IN WHICH CASE EVERYTHING IS IN FLUID UNUM (WAVE-FIELD) AND ALL VISIBLE MATERIAL FORMS ARE CONDENSATIONS OF THE NON-VISIBLE PLENUM.
In this case, the ‘REALITY’ we must UNDERSTAND is NOT the simplified BINARY LOGIC REALITY in terms of MATERIAL FORMS and their MOVEMENTS and INTERACTIONS in an ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE, but the ‘REALITY’ of the overall TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM aka ENERGY-CHARGED PLENUM aka WAVE-FIELD in which material forms are CONDENSATIONS of the ENERGY-CHARGED PLENUM aka WAVE-FIELD.
IN THIS CASE, it is NOT SUFFICIENT to base our language on material forms and their movements, as it would be if the material forms were included in an absolute empty space. Instead, the material forms are CONDENSATIONS of the all-pervading ENERGY-CHARGED PLENUM, a dynamic understood in terms of the QUANTUM “BOTH/AND” LOGIC OF THE INCLUDING MEDIUM.
This QUANTUM LOGIC BOTH/AND reality (where the CONDENSATIONS are, at the same time, the ENERGY-CHARGED PLENUM they are included in, … is not nearly as SIMPLE to capture in language as the BINARY LOGIC EITHER MATTER OR EMPTINESS pseudo-reality where one only has to address what is going on with the MATERIAL FORMS.
We live in a WAVE-FIELD REALITY or in other words, in an ENERGY-CHARGED PLENUM within which material forms are CONDENSATIONS which means that the relation between the FORMS and THE PLENUM IS QUANTUM BOTH/AND LOGIC based which is less simple than BINARY LOGIC as supports the MATTER and EMPTY SPACE EITHER/OR relation.
NOTA BENE: In this upgrading of language-based understanding, from BINARY LOGIC to QUANTUM LOGIC understanding, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS ARE LAGGING BEHIND both Modern physics and the indigenous aboriginal language architects since they are employing QUANTUM LOGIC language where one says the equivalent of; ‘There is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’ rather than the BINARY LOGIC ‘THE TOWN IS GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING goods’.
THIS IS THE FIRST WHAMMY, the BINARY LOGIC WHAMMY OF THE DOUBLE WHAMMY which “BLOCKS US” from employing QUANTUM LOGIC in language because the ‘logic slots’ are quickly filled with BINARY LOGIC, SHUTTING OUT all opportunity for employing QUANTUM LOGIC. For example, once we say ‘the TOWN IS GROWING, which is one-sidedly MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING and is SIMPLER than ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’ which is a conjugate combination of FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING and MALE ASSERING/ACTUALIZING, … we have FILLED THE SLOT with this SIMPLER BINARY LOGIC and there is no easy way to BACK OUT and RESTART with the LESS SIMPLE QUANTUM LOGIC.
For example, it is simpler to speak of GROWTH of CROPLANDS and go on an on about ploughing and fertilizing and fencing the CROPLANDS and harvesting and so on, but all the while there will be changes in the SHRINKING WILDERNESS and overall, what is going on is TRANSFORMATION of the whole GESTALT which includes the shrinking WILDERNESs and the GROWING CROPLANDS which we break out in parts and discuss with LANGUAGE as if what was going on in ‘the parts’ was the TRUTH, but no discussion of the GROWTH of CROPLANDS because it does no address what is going on in the SHRINKING WILDERNESS, and if it were to, the topic would be the TRANSFORMING of the LANDSCAPE, but by now we are getting into something WE ARE INCLUDED IN, which is too big a topic to capture in words.
This would have us recall that our stories about CROPLANDS DEVELOPMENT are BULLSHIT since the reality is the overall transformation which includes BOTH the GROWTH of the CROPLANDS AND the CONJUGATE SHRINKING of the WILDERNESS, or in other words, an OVERALL TRANSFORMATION in which we all share INCLUSION.
That is, in saying ‘the TOWN is GROWING, we are using the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR which imputes LOCAL POWER OF AUTHORING ACTION and DEVELOPMENT to ‘THE TOWN’ even though it is only a TOWNING that is a DEVELOPING WITHIN THE ALL INCLUDING TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM. Once we the FOCUS on ‘the TOWN’ and ‘its GROWING’, we have set up a SUBSTITUTE REALITY which is DROPPING OUT THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE in which the TOWNING is included, and our BINARY LOGIC language is implying, instead, that ‘the TOWN’ is a LOCAL, EXPLICIT THING-IN-ITSELF with its own powers of AUTHORING growth, development and production.
NO! NO! NO! … … we do not want this SIMPLE BINARY LOGIC model, we want the LESS SIMPLE QUANTUM LOGIC MODEL wherein the TOWNING is included the TRANSFORMING, so that we have in our sights the same SCATTERING-GATHERING feature as in the ANT CLUSTERING where SCATTERING-GATHERING had the APPEARANCE of a LOCAL THING (the CLUSTER) notionally with its own LOCAL AUTHORING POWERS responsible for the ‘CLUSTERING’. This is WRONG since the CLUSTERING is a SCATTERING GATHERING resonance feature and NOT a LOCAL, EXPLICIT THING-IN-ITSELF called ‘the CLUSTER’ with ‘ITS OWN POWERS OF AUTHORING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT. The same is true in the case of ‘the TOWN’ which is a GATHERING-SCATTERING resonance feature AND NOT a LOCAL, EXPLICIT THING-IN-ITSELF called ‘the CLUSTER’ with ‘ITS OWN POWERS OF AUTHORING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT.
So, the FIRST PART of the DOUBLE WHAMMY of BINARY LOGIC and INCOMPLETENESS IN LANGUAGE is where we MISTAKENLY USE NAMING to IMPUTE BINARY LOGIC based LOCAL BEING of ‘the TOWN’ as in ‘the TOWN is GROWING’, , … simplifying the less simple QUANTUM LOGIC “TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING” wherein there is NO LOCAL BEING-that is GROWING, but where everything is in flux.
THE SECOND PART of the DOUBLE WHAMMY of BINARY LOGIC and INCOMPLETENESS IN LANGUAGE
is where we MISTAKENLY use GRAMMAR to impute LOCAL AUTHORING in a MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING sense WITHOUT MENTIONING the CONJUGATE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING that makes MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING possible; i.e. as in the SHRINKING OF THE WILDERNESS. Here we have to acknowledge the Goedel’s Theorem assertion that “ALL FINITE LOGICAL PROPOSITIONS are inherently INCOMPLETE” and how our WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE is replete with TRUE PROPOSITIONS which are innately INCOMPLETE such as where we say that ‘the TOWN IS GROWING’ which is a TRUE proposition even when radically INCOMPLETE since it makes no mention of the CONJUGATE SHRINKING OF WILDERNESS.
EVERY WESTERN CULTURE LAND DEVELOPER who describes his LAND DEVELOPMENT in MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING TERMS is serving up LOGICAL PROPOSITIONS which are TRUE but INCOMPOLETE in that they fail to acknowledge the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING CONJUGATE SHRINKING OF THE WILDERNESS, which is FULLY REAL and which, together with the MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING, informs us of the TRANSFORMING that is ALL-INCLUDING and continually underway.
While WE FEEL AS IF WE ‘KNOW WHAT WE ARE DOING’ IN OUR MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION WORK, having presented all the engineering details and models of what the FINISHED DEVELOPMENT will LOOK LIKE and what activities it will FACILITATE, … none of this fine engineering precision touches on the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING CONJUGATE REDUCTION of the WILDERNESS, a WILDERNESS interdependent with the atmosphere and solar irradiance dynamics which is UNKNOWABLY COMPLEX (involving not less than the entire universe), thus making a FARCE out of the fine-grained explanation by engineers in terms of the MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING conjugate.
The MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING calculations laid out in WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE hat specifies in great detail, the GROWTH OF THE TOWN, … DROPS OUT THE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING CONJUGATE and is thus UNGROUNDED IN SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY which acknowledges our inclusion in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM which is UNKNOWABLE. As Lao Tzu says, ‘“The Tao that can be told is not the true Tao’.
Our sense-experience informs us of our inclusion in the transforming relational continuum aka the Tao which is unknowable.
THE DOUBLE WHAMMY of BINARY LOGIC and INCOMPLETENESS in LANGUAGE is a reminder that we share inclusion in a TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM that, while we can have the sense-experience of inclusion within in, is innately unknowable, thus limiting the WEIGHT we should place on our INTELLECTUAL CONCEPTUALIZATION of ‘WHAT IS GOING ON’ vis a vis our IN-THE CONTINUING-MOMENT relational sense which supports our sustaining of inner-outer balance and harmony within the the overall GREAT HARMONY aka all-including WAVE-FIELD.
WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are currently suffering from FRAGMENTATION that derives from ascribing ‘reality’ to our intellectual constructions of language based simplified SUBSTITUTE REALITIES built on a LOCAL, EXPLICIT basis which we are allowing to HIJACK the innate PRIMACY of our sense-experience reality. As Ivan Illich warns in Silence is a Commons, the hijacking of the COMMONS OF SILENCE by whomever has the loudest loudspeakers, puts us at the mercy of the slickest speakers who have access to the microphone.
* * *
Our WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE is, first of all, INTELLECTUAL ABSTRACTION BASED in which case it has ‘lifted off and separated’ from grounding in SENSE-EXPERIENCE, and is prepared to infuse SIMPLIFICATIONS into LANGUAGE, so as to expedite the COMMUNICATION even though at the expense of employing SIMPLER LOGIC and LESS COMPLETE PROPOSITIONS (note that, as Goedel’s Theorem proves, LOGICAL PROPOSITIONS that are TRUE are always innately INCOMPLETE, so that we have control over JUST HOW MUCH INCOMPLETENESS WE CHOOSE TO BUILD INTO OUR PROPOSITIONS. Should we construct propositions that speak of the GROWTH of CULTIVATED LAND, which fails to mention the CONJUGATE SHINKING OF WILDERNESS DIVERSITY? That is up to us WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE USERS because the LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE we have designed employs ONLY THE MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING CONJUGATE which is sufficient to inform us on the GROWTH of CULTIVATED LAND as if in an EMPTY SPACE OF INFINITE EXTENT, without obliging us to make any mention at all what is really going on in our sense-experience reality which includes the CONJUGATE SHRINKING of WILDERNESS DIVERSITY.
This WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE TRADITION OF SPEAKING IN ONE-SIDED MALE-ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING TERMS and DROPPING OUT THE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING CONJUGATE, has us speaking of GROWTH (of the cultivated area) without mentioning the SHRINKING (of the WILDERNESS LANDS), these GROWTH (of cultivation) and SHRINKING (of wilderness) together constituting TRANSFORMATION of the all-including PLENUM aka WAVE-FIELD.
What we are talking about here is “The DOUBLE WHAMMY of BINARY LOGIC and INCOMPLETENESS IN LANGUAGE”
When we DROPPED OUT THE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING CONJUGATE, we left ourselves with LANGUAGE based on BINARY LOGIC, the SIMPLE LOGIC OF ONE-SIDED MALE ASSERTING ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENT which would be ‘OK’ if we lived in an ABSTRACT FLAT SPACE or EMPTY SPACE OF INFINITE EXTENT where THERE WAS NO FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING CONJUGATE, but in the real world of our sense-experience, there is BOTH a FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING and a MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING CONJUGATE which are characteristic of the ALL-INCLUDING ENERGY-CHARGED-PLENUM aka WAVE-FIELD in which we share inclusion.
IN OTHER WORDS, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING ACTIONS, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION since those propositions, while true, ARE INCOMPLETE, and fail to mention the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING CONJUGATE RELATION, these two together implying OVERALL TRANSFORMATION. The MALE ASSERTING AVALANCHE that crashes down the mountainside, although we don’t mention it, is the flip side of the FEMALE OPENING OF A HOLE IN THE MOUNTAIN FLANK, and this implies TRANSFORMATION where the IDENTITIES of the MOUNTAIN-which-is-shrinking-and-the-VALLEY-which is shallowing appear to reflect the deficiency in language that associates with Heraclitus ‘A man can’t step into the same river twice because it is NOT the same river and he is NOT the same man’.
In other words, in the world of our sense experience, EVERYTHING IS IN FLUX and a LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE that employs NAMING based THINGS-THAT-BE is IN TROUBLE FROM THE GET-GO, and that TROUBLE is manifesting as FRAGMENTATION OF REALITY.
The DOUBLE WHAMMY of BINARY LOGIC and INCOMPLETENESS IN LANGUAGE IS THE SOURCE OF FRAGMENTATION.
WESTERN CULTURE social collectives are experiencing progressive psychological and social FRAGMENTATION due to the DOUBLE WHAMMY of BINARY LOGIC in combination with INCOMPLETENESS (Goedel’s Theorem).
The use of BINARY LOGIC instead of QUANTUM LOGIC delivers a DUMBING DOWN of our LANGUAGE-based CONCEPTUAL CONSTRUCTIONS and this DUMBING DOWN is COMPOUNDED in being combined with the (Goedel’s Theorem) INCOMPLETENESS of LOGICAL PROPOSITIONS. This DOUBLE WHAMMY is the source of rising FRAGMENTION in WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE-INFORMED PSYCHES.
Once we start talking about GROWTH and DEVELOPMENT; e.g. of the TOWN that is expanding and adding more streets and avenues and buildings to what might have started off as a PONY EXPRESS stop with a Café and Boarding house, we identify this as GROWTH and our focus on ‘the TOWN’ is such that we DO NOT SEE THE ‘BIG PICTURE’ which is the TRANSFORMING OF THE LANDSCAPE as this and other TOWNS appear initially as DOTS on the LANDSCAPE, but soon flesh out and in their expanding reach out towards one another like nodes in a rhizome that threatens to BLANKET to whole PRAIRIE.
SO STRONG is this sense of MALE ASSERTING EXPANSION of the TOWNS that one LOSES TRACK of the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING of the PRAIRIE in its giving up with DIVERSITY-RICH WILDERNESS LAND that enables the GROWTH of the TOWNS.
SHOULD WE EVEN USE THE TERM ‘GROWTH’ since it is only capturing the MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING CONJUGATE of the overall TRANSFORMATION which includes the FEMALE ACCOMODATING/ENABLING CONJUGATE?
In reflecting on such issues, we may question how WE would ARCHITECT LANGUAGE if it were up to us. Should our LANGUAGE DESIGN be grounded in abstract symbols as in an ALPHABET based scheme, or should our LANGUAGE DESIGN bypass intellectual-conceptual sophistry and use natural relations; for example, should we use SENSE-EXPERIENCE GROUND RELATIONAL REFERNCES such as ‘Dances with Wolves’ or ABSTRACT SYMBOL BASED CONSTRUCTIONS such as ‘JOHN DUNBAR’ which FOCUS SOLELY ON THE NOTIONAL EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL, EXPLICIT THING-IN-ITSELF?
In NATURE, everything is in flux within THE ALL-INCLUDING WEB-OF-LIFE aka the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM aka the ENERGY-CHARGED PLENUM aka the WAVE-FIELD aka the Tao. Our LANGUAGE DESIGN could follow one of these two strategies, one which which puts INTELLECTUAL ABSTRACTIONS like ‘JOHN DUNBAR’ FIRST where are NO CLUES as to the NATURE of what we are ‘TALKING ABOUT’ embedded in the language, where the message is in terms of a series of ABSTRACT SYMBOLS which we must use LOOK-UP TABLES to ‘DE-CIPHER’, there being no clues in the symbols making up ‘John Dunbar’ as to ‘what the thing really is in a worldly sense-experience context.
On the other hand, our LANGUAGE DESIGN could be based on an appeal to our SENSE EXPERIENCE and point to how a thing fits into the NATURAL-RELATIONAL scheme of things, as with DANCES WITH WOLVES. In WESTERN CULTURE social collectives, NAMES tend to SEND A MESSAGE AS TO HOW to UNDERSTAND IT, that goes beyond our natural sense-experience, as in WESTERN CULTURE where one is expected to CURTSY or BOW to ROYALTY where the person is understood on the basis of THEIR TITLE which in WESTERN CULTURE, by CONVENTION, “OVER-RIDES” a natural sense-experience based understanding of the thing. We are trained to recognize WHAT A KING IS, by his APPEARANCE (the CROWN and ROBES etc.) rather than by our sense-experience based interactions with that ‘person’. As with our appearance-based recognition of snakes (red and black, that’s a jack; red and yellow kill a fellow) subtle differences in appearance can signal important physical differences. For example, the poisonous coral snake has red stripes on yellow stripes while the similar size and appearance scarlet king snake which is non-poisonous has red stripes on black stripes.
What is AT PLAY HERE is the difference between understanding by way of SENSE-EXPERIENCE versus INTELLECTUAL ASTRACTION. If, on a lonely strip of country road, we encounter a group of HELLS ANGELS on HARLEYS, .. our responses may be different than if we encountered a group of motorcyclists on HONDAS.
The point is that we can be INFORMED INTELLECTUALLY BY ABSTRACT SYMBOLS and we can be INFORMED SENSE-EXPERIENTIALLY by relational understanding. This ambiguity is the source of the aphorism “SHOOT FIRST AND ASK QUESTIONS LATER’.
What we are working towards here is an understanding of The DOUBLE WHAMMY of BINARY LOGIC and INCOMPLETENESS and ‘on the way there’, we are reviewing the ambiguity that can be built into language where we may be infusing references to sense-experience and/or to intellectual abstraction. Yesterday’s meeting between a RUSSIAN and a UKRAINIAN is likely to have been shaped by the unfolding relational dynamics without being influenced by ABSTRACTION based DESIGNATIONS as in NAMING. As Shakepeare’s Romeo and Juliet
‘Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.
What’s Montague? It is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What’s in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call’d,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name,
And for that name which is no part of thee
Take all myself.
In EXPLORING HOW LANGUAGE IMPACTS OUR UNDERSTANDING, we see that we have TWO WAYS OF KNOWING;
INTELLECTUAL ABSTRACTION BASED: The BINARY LOGIC THING-IN-ITSELF assessment based on VOYEUR JUDGEMENTS which gives forth LOCAL and EXPLICIT ATTRIBUTES (weight, height, number of arms, legs, gender features etc.)
RELATIONAL EXPERIENCE BASED: The understanding based on relational interactions which is like the QUANTUM LOGIC BOOTSTRAPPING UNDERSTANDING
[Geoffrey Chew]: “when you formulate a question, you have to have some basic concepts that you are accepting in order to formulate the question. But in the bootstrap approach, where the whole system represents a network of relationships without any firm foundation, the description of subject can be begun at a great variety of different places. There isn’t any clear starting point. And the way our theory has developed in the last few years, we quite typically don’t know what questions to ask. We use consistency as the guide, and each increase in the consistency suggests something that is incomplete, but it rarely takes the form of a well-defined question. We are going beyond the whole question-and-answer framework’.
This purely RELATIONAL VIEW has no dependence on a LOCAL EXPLICIT THING-IN-ITSELF understanding but BACKS IN on an understanding of ‘the THING’ from its WEB OF RELATIONS, to the point that our understanding is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT (relational) and no longer has any dependence on LOCAL, EXPLICIT CONSTRUCTION.
This ‘BOOTSTRAPPING’ APPROACH is Wittgenstein’s approach to philosophical investigation, as follows;
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 DOUBLE WHAMMY of BINARY LOGIC and INCOMPLETENESS IN LANGUAGE
Our SENSE-EXPERIENCE is of INCLUSION in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM aka the WAVE-FIELD aka the Tao, and it is NOT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE CAPTURED IN LANGUAGE. As Lao Tzu reminds us, ‘The Tao that can be told is not the true Tao’. And as Korzybski observes, “The map is not the territory” , and “The word is not the thing” , encapsulating his view that an abstraction derived from something, or a reaction to it, is not the thing itself”.
I would like to “nit-pick” Korzybski’s proposition here because I don’t believe there is ANY SUCH THING as “the thing itself” and in my own writing, I avoid the use of ‘REPRESENTATION’, the term ‘REPRESENTATION’ being a back-handed way of affirming “the existence of a thing-in-itself”.
As just mentioned, our Modern physics and indigenous aboriginal understanding is that we live in a TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM wherein everything is in flux and “there are no “things-in-themselves” which is why I use the term “CONCEPTUALIZATION” and never (unless by oversight)“REPRESENTATION”.
My view is that this is NOT A MINOR ITEM because “REPRESENTATION” is a back-handed way of affirming the existence of a “THING-IN-ITSELF” . While the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUM IS FAIR GAME FOR CONCEPTUALIZING, IT IS BEYOND THE REACH OF ‘REPRESENTATION’. As Lao Tzu observes; ‘The Tao that can be told is not the true Tao’.
For example, there is no ‘TOWN’ that we could fashion a REPRESENTATION OF, where there is TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE because extracting the TOWNING is IMPOSSIBLE and akin to Shylock’s taking of a ‘pound of flesh’. There is NO WAY to extract and lift out ‘a pound of flesh’ without messing up the whole transforming relational continuum. Likewise, there is no way to extract ‘the TOWN’ from the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM because ‘the TOWN’ is referring to ‘the TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM which wherein ‘TOWNING’ is ‘APPEARANCE’ that belongs to the undivided CONTINUUM and is NOT a LOCAL, EXPLICIT THING-IN-ITSELF, notionally with ‘its own powers of LOCAL AUTHORING of ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENT as our WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE based CONCEPTUALIZING suggests.
WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE equips us for CONCOCTING CONCEPTUALIZATIONS that ‘FRAGMENT’ the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM of our SENSE-EXPERIENCE. The CONCEPTUALIZING IS NOT THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM; i.e. the TAO THAT CAN BE TOLD IS NOT THE TRUE TAO.
Please Note that propositions such as “The map is not the territory”, and, The word is not the thing” suggest, in a back-handed way, that “THERE IS A TERRITORY” and “THERE IS A THING”. THE POINT IS that it is NOT THE CASE that our LANGUAGE is NOT UP TO THE JOB OF CONSTRUCTING REPRESENTATIONS of ‘the TERRITORY’ and/or CONSTRUCTING REPRESENTATIONS of ‘the THING’, the point is, INSTEAD, that there are no representable TERRITORIES or THINGS or anything that is LOCAL and EXPLICIT and thus REPRESENTABLE in the FLUID CONTINUUM aka “THE NONLOCAL, IMPLICIT, TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM” aka ‘the WAVE-FIELD’. That is Lao Tzu’s point is saying ‘the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao’.
Ok, what we have going on here concerns the WESTERN CULTURE attempted use of LANGUAGE to capture REPRESENTATIONS of a “REALITY” that is ASSUMED TO BE REPRESENTABLE.
For example, is it possible to capture in language based representation, the construction of a TOWN? Most WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS would respond ‘YES’ to this question since they are using language in this manner every day. But the indigenous aboriginal will BALK because of his acute awareness of the UN-REALITY of the LOCAL and EXPLICIT, and the Modern physics oriented will be with him on this, since there can be no (MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING) LOCAL and EXPLICIT ACTION without a CONJUGATE NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT FEMALE ACCOMMMODATING/ENABLING, and these two may be spoken of separately but they imply A COMPLEX CONJUGATE UNITY which manifests as TRANSFORMATION.
SINCE TRANSFORMATION is the SENSE-EXPERIENCE AFFIRMED REALITY, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TOWN, because it is just LANGUAGE BASED ABSTRACTION while our SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY is informing us of the CONJUGATE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING SHRINKING OF THE WILDERNESS that is INSEPARABLE FROM THE MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALING CONSTRUCTION based GROWTH of the TOWN, and while the latter is LOCAL and EXPLICIT, the former is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT. YES we could have a camera crew set up to take daily pictures to record the continuing progress being made in this CONSTRUCTION OF A TOWN, but while camera focuses our attention on the LOCAL and EXPLICIT, we are include within a transforming relational continuum and our actions are contributory to this TRANSFORMATION that we, ourselves, are included in. Our inclusion is NOT going to show up on the VOYEUR VIEW pictures capturing the GROWTH OF THE TOWN as a LOCAL and EXPLICIT photographic OBJECTIVE.
We could use the same sort of sequence of photographs to capture the GROWTH of a CHILD, and this notion of ‘the GROWTH OF A CHILD’ where simple BINARY LOGIC hijacks our CONCEPTUALIZING and DROPS OUT the QUANTUM LOGIC reality option wherein “THERE IS CHILDING IN THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM’ as is consistent with our understanding of REALITY as INCLUSION within the ONE ALL-INCLUDING ENERGY-CHARGED PLENUM aka the WAVE-FIELD, as CONDENSATION therein and NOT as a SEPARATE and INDEPENDENT ENTITY, so that OUR DEVELOPMENT is TIED UP WITH THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT OF THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM IN WHICH WE ARE INCLUDED.
The FACT that we can use our INTELLECT together with LANGUAGE to CONSTRUCT a CONCEPTUALIZATION of TOWNS that GROW and HUMANS that GROW as if in their own right WITHIN AN ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE sets us up for construction a psychological ‘slide show’ in which are the STAR PERFORMER, where we are encourage to think of ourselves as independent agents and achievers (authors of actions and developments) consistent with WESTERN CULTURE RELIGIOUS TEACHINGS;
THE DIGNITY OF THE HUMAN PERSON
1730 God created man a rational being, conferring on him the dignity of a person who can initiate and control his own actions. “God willed that man should be ‘left in the hand of his own counsel,’ so that he might of his own accord seek his Creator and freely attain his full and blessed perfection by cleaving to him.”26
Man is rational and therefore like God; he is created with free will and is master over his acts.
FREEDOM AND RESPONSIBILITY
1731 Freedom is the power, rooted in reason and will, to act or not to act, to do this or that, and so to perform deliberate actions on one’s own responsibility. By free will one shapes one’s own life. Human freedom is a force for growth and maturity in truth and goodness; it attains its perfection when directed toward God, our beatitude. —The Catholic Catechism
There is nothing in our sense-experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum that supports A VIEW OF OUR SELF AS AN INDEPENDENT MATERIAL FORM INHABITING AND MOVING ABOUT AND INTERACTING IN AN ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE OF INFINITE EXTENT, as in our WESTERN CULTURE language-based narrative.
As in the language based conceptualization of our CONSTRUCTING OF THE TOWN, our ability to capture a succession of PICTURES OF THE TOWN, which is already an absurdity since TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM can’t be photographed since is it is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT.
The APPEARANCE of the TOWN, marked by highway signage that INSTRUCTS us in this matter by telling us that we are NOW ENTERING PLEASANTVILLE and that we are NOW LEAVING PLEASANTVILLE, … but even where signs say “you are now ENTERING THE UNITED STATES” and “you are now LEAVING the UNITED STATES”, signage that would be MOCKED by indigenous aboriginal culture adherents whose understanding that ‘everything is related’ (mitakuye oyasin), … points to how language-based INTELLECTUAL ABSTRACTION is placed in a PRIMACY OVER SENSE-EXPERIENCE in WESTERN CULTURE language-informed social collectives, and such TRAINING is part of ‘growing up’ within a WESTERN CULTURE social collective.
As in the Christian religious understandings such as;
1731 Freedom is the power, rooted in reason and will, to act or not to act, to do this or that, and so to perform deliberate actions on one’s own responsibility. By free will one shapes one’s own life
There is the BINARY LOGIC based setting up of LOCAL AUTHORING that could ‘GOOD’ or ‘BAD’.
This goes hand in hand with the DROPPING OUT of the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING CONJUATE so as to construct a SIMPLIFIED SUBSTITUTE REALITY based solely (one-sidedly) on MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING dynamics. By acknowledging ONLY MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING dynamics, in our LINGUISTIC CONSTRUCTIONS, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERING, ‘COMMON AVERAGE EUROPEAN’ LANGUAGE USERS,
AS CONDENSATIONS OF THE ALL-INCLUDING WAVE-FIELD, WE ARE INNATELY INCLUDED IN SOMETHING GREATER THAN OURSELVES; i.e. WE ARE CONDENSATIONS IN THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM which is RADICALLY UNLIKE an ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE populated LOCALLY with INDEPENDENT BEINGS “who are equipped with free will and who are masters over their own acts”.
The LATTER SUPPORTS BELIEF IN FRAGMENTATION by way of the MISCONCEPTUALIZATION OF OURSELVES AS INDEPENDENT BEINGS, interesting intellectual conceptual abstraction that is OUT OF JOINT with our sense experience supported understanding that WE ARE CONDENSATIONS IN THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM which is radically UNLIKE an ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE populated LOCALLY with EXPLICIT INDEPENDENT BEINGS who are equipped with free will and who are masters over their own acts.
When the point comes that our WESTERN CULTURE design and use of language has us setting ourselves up as INDEPENDENT BEINGS with our OWN LOCAL AUTHORING POWERS OF ACTION AND DEVELOPMENT, … thanks to what our LANGUAGE BASED CONCEPTUALIZATIONS, such as DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR based LOCAL AUTHORING, are infusing into our mind, … FRAGMENTATION is the obvious result, not to mention SCHIZOPHRENIA and PARANOIA as Bohm has suggested.
When a group of WESTERN CULTURE people get together to CONSTRUCT A TOWN, they make calls for building materials that may spread out all over the world and as these goods are brought into the construction site, how can we describe what is going on here as THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TOWN that is OVER THERE, OUT IN FRONT OF US, which is intellectual abstraction since the REAL, SENSE-EXPERIENCE AFFIRMED STORY is NOT CONSTRAINED TO MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING, but includes FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING (the world opening itself up to accommodate/enable) to MAKE POSSIBLE the MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING. Thus it is a NON-STARTER to speak in terms of MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING as if concerning LOCAL, EXPLICIT CONSTRUCTION, since it could not happen WITHOUT the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING CONJUGSATE SUPPORT.
LETS BE HONEST, there is NO SUCH THING AS THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TOWN in SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY. WE ALL SHARE INCLUSION WITHIN THE ONE ALL-INCLUDING TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM. Our language equips us for LANGUAGE GAMES in which we, or those we choose to adulate and elevate can be STAR PERFORMERS who we endow, with the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR to be LOCAL AUTHORS of actions and developments. These formulations of artificial BINARY LOGIC REALITIES in which we set ourselves up as LOCAL AUTHORS and PRODUCERS of actions, development and production.
WHEN WE ACKNOWELDGE, AS WE MUST IF WE WISH TO KEEP OUR INTELLECTUAL CONCEPTUALIZATIONS CONSISTENT WITH OUR SENSE-EXPERIENCE, the natural PRIMACY of the overall TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM in which the CONSTRUCTION OF THE TOWN is INCLUDED, … IT BECOMES EVIDENT THAT WHAT WE ARE REFERRING TO AS ‘THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE TOWN’ IS LANGUAGE-ENGENDERED “INTELLECTUAL CONCEPTUALIZATION” WHICH ONLY ‘APPEARS’ TO ‘EXIST’ DUE TO OUR INTELLECTUAL FRAMING OF THE WORD-BASED CONSTRUCTION IN AN ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE.
IN THE REAL WORLD OF OUR SENSE-EXPERIENCE, THERE CAN BE NO ‘GROWTH OF THE TOWN’, WITHOUT A CONJUGATE SHRINKING OF THE WILDERNESS, THESE TWO (MALE ASSERTING GROWTH OF THE TOWN’ AND FEMALE ACCOMMODATING SHRINKING OF THE WILDERNESS)
CONSTITUTING THE ONE DYNAMIC OF TRANSFORMATION..
TRANSFORMATION’ IS QUANTUM LOGIC BASED AND IS THE ‘LESS SIMPLE’ UNDERSTANDING WHICH DOES NOT HAVE TO BE SUPPORTED BY IMPOSING A NOTIONAL ABSOLUTE FIXED EMPTY AND INFINITE REFERENCE FRAME AS THE ABSTRACT BINARY LOGIC BASED CONCEPT OF ‘GROWTH’ THAT IS BASED ON A LOCAL AND EXPLICIT (NOTIONAL) MATERIAL ENTITY REQUIRES.
‘GROWTH’ IS A POPULAR ABSTRACTION THAT IS A ‘DODGE’ THAT ALLOWS US TO AVOID ACKNOWLEDGING THE SENSE-EXPERIENCE AFFIRMED REALITY OF TRANSFORMATION. IN REALITY, THERE CAN BE NO ‘GROWTH’ , WHICH IS A MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING ACTION, WITHOUT CONJUGATE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING ‘SHRINKING’, THESE ANDROGYNOUS CONJUGATES CONSTITUTING ‘TRANSFORMATING’ WHICH IS ALL-ENCOMPASSING AND BEYOND THE SCOPE OF LANGUAGE BASED ‘REPRESENTATION’. IN OTHER WORDS, ‘GROWTH’ , WHICH IS LOCAL AND EXPLICIT, IS A ‘EUPHEMISM’ FOR ‘TRANSFORMATION’, WHICH IS NONLOCAL AND IMPLICIT.
THE WESTERN CULTURE PROBLEM IS, THAT OUR LANGUAGE PROMOTES BELIEF IN THE ‘REALITY’ OF ‘GROWTH’, ‘DEVELOPMENT’ AND ‘PRODUCTION’, ALL OF WHICH ARE MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING ABSTRACTIONS WHICH HAVE DROPPED OUT THE FEMALE ACCOMMODATIN/ENABLING WAVE-FIELD CONJUGATE.
AS THE SOCIAL FRAGMENTATION CONTINUES TO MOUNT, WESTERN CULTURE RESPONSE CONTINUES TO BE BASED ON THE UNREAL ABSTRACTION (DOUBLE ERROR OF NAMING AND GRAMMAR BASED) OF LOCAL AUTHORING, SO THAT THE REMEDY IS SEEN AS THE ELIMINATION OF THE PERCEIVED AUTHORS OF FRAGMENTATION, HOWEVER, AS IN THE INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL CULTURE, IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ‘LOCAL AUTHORING’ AND THAT WHAT ARE POPULARLY PERCEIVED AS ‘LOCAL AUTHORS’ ARE CONDUITS FOR RELEASE OF TENSIONS ARISING WITHIN THE SOCIAL COLLECTIVE.
JUST AS IN THE FINDINGS OF PSYCHIATRISTS THAT TENSIONS IN THE SOCIAL MATRIX FIND EXPRESSION THROUGH PARTICULAR INDIVIDUALS (SENSITIVE ‘MINER’S CANARIES’) AND IT IS A MISTAKE, THAT IS COMMON IN WESTERN CULTURE, TO REGARD THE INDIVIDUAL ‘LIGHTNING ROD’ OR ‘MINER’S CANARY’ TO BE REGARDED AS THE LOCAL AUTHOR OF ABERRANT ACTION SINCE HE OR SHE IS MERELY THE CONDUIT THROUGH WHICH RELATION TENSIONS IN THE SOCIAL COLLECTIVE USE AS AN OUTLET.
WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE EQUIPS US FOR CONCOCTING CONCEPTUALIZATIONS THAT “FRAGMENT” THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM” of our SENSE-EXPERIENCE. THUS WE ARE ‘PUTTING OUR LADDER UP THE WRONG WALL’ AND PURSUING THE ELIMINATION OF UNDESIRABLE LOCALLY AUTHORED ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS WHEN THE REALITY IS THAT THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ‘LOCAL AUTHORING’ (IT IS THE DOUBLE ERROR OF NAMING AND GRAMMAR).
BINARY LOGIC TOGETHER WITH LOGICAL PROPOSITIONS (which are innately incomplete) JOINTLY SET UP A ‘DOUBLE WHAMMY OF MISCONCEPTION SUCH AS FRAGMENTATION. WHEN WE SAY ‘WE ARE CONSTRUCTING A TOWN’, … THIS IS UNREAL SINCE IT DROPS OUT THE SHRINKING OF THE WILDERNESS WHICH IS THE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING THAT IS CONJUGATE WITH THE MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING, THESE TWO TOGETHER CONSTITUTING THE ANDROGYNOUS WAVE-FIELD REALITY AS ASSOICATES WITH OVERALL TRANSFORMATION.
IN OTHER WORDS, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ‘THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TOWN’, IT IS A DOUBLE ERROR OF NAMING AND GRAMMAR WHICH IMPLIES ‘LOCAL AUTHORING’. WHAT “IS” GOING ON IS “TRANSFORMATION” AS WHEN THERE IS GROWING OF THE TOWN (THE MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING) COMES TOGETHER WITH THE SHRINKING OF THE WILDERNESS (THE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING). THE TOWN DESIGNERS, ENGINEERS, CARPETNTERS AND CONSTRUCTION LABOURERS ARE ALL INCLUDED IN THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM, WHICH INCLUDES THE LANDSCAPE IN WHICH THE TREES ARE HARVESTED FOR LUMBER AND THE ROCKY SOIL IS HARVESED FOR CONCRETE AND THE IRON ORE SEDIMENTS ARE MINED FOR MAKING STEEL, … THUS WHAT IS ‘REALLY GOING’ ON IS ‘TRANSFORMATION OF THE LANDSCAPE’ WHICH INCLUDES THE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING OPENING UP RESOURCE EXTRACTION TO SUPPORT THE MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING OF THE CONSTRUCTION, AND THESE TWO TOGETHER CONSTITUTE THE TRANSFORMING OF THE LANDSCAPE.
THUS, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ‘CONSTRUCTION OF A TOWN’ IN THE REAL WORLD OF OUR SENSE-EXPERIENCE. ‘CONSTRUCTION’ IS LANGUAGE BASED ABSTRACTION WHICH SUGGESTS ONE-SIDED MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING AS IF IN ITS OWN SINGULAR RIGHT.
THERE CAN BE NO ‘NEW CONSTRUCTION’ WITHOUT THE EXTRACTION OF BUILDING MATERIALS BY LOGGING, MINING ETC. IN WHICH CASE, WHAT IS GOING ON IS “NOT” SIMPLY “CONSTRUCTION” BUT “TRANSFORMATION”.
The DOUBLE WHAMMY of BINARY LOGIC and INCOMPLETENESS IN LANGUAGE” is exemplified in the notion of ‘THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE TOWN’. The FIRST ERROR in the DOUBLE WHAMMY is that there is NO SUCH THING AS ‘A TOWN’, a LOCAL, EXPLICIT BEING thing. THAT is BINARY LOGIC abstraction since there is only ‘TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’ which is the QUANTUM LOGIC understanding wherein FIGURE and GROUND are only ONE while ‘the TOWN’ and ‘the LANDSCAPE’ are imputed to be two separate things in WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE, so that one can speak of the GROWTH of ‘the TOWN’ as if ‘in its own right’. However, in SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY, there is only TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANSCAPE and the notion of ‘a TOWN’ as a THING-IN-ITSELF is BINARY LOGIC ABSTRACTION.
The SECOND PART OF THE DOUBLE WHAMMY is ‘INCOMPLETENESS’ . As Goedel’s Theorem informs us, “ALL FINITE LOGICAL PROPOSITIONS ARE INCOMPLETE’ and in this case, the claim of CONSTRUCTION OF THE TOWN is a LOGICAL PROPOSITION which may be TRUE but such a proposition is NOT COMPLETE because it DROPS OUT ALL MENTION of the CONJUGATE SHRINKING OF THE WILDERNESS and is thus OBSCURANTIST.
OUR SENSE-EXPERIENCE is informing us that we share inclusion in the ALL-INCLUDING, NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT, TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM. OUR intellectual abstraction based CONCEPTUALIZATIONS, meanwhile, include LOCAL, EXPLICIT MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING CONSTRUCTION such as the CONSTRUCTION OF THE TOWN. These LOCAL, EXPLICIT CONSTRUCTIONS are NOT REAL in a SENSE-EXPERIENCE AFFIRMABLE SENSE. What is going on is that there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE but there are NO TOWNS as LOCAL, EXPLICIT THINGS-iN-THEMSELVES WITH THEIR OWN POWERS of LOCAL AUTHORING of GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT, that having been shown by Nietzsche to be the ABSTRACT CONCEPTUALIZATION FORGED BY THE DOUBLE ERROR OF NAMING AND GRAMMAR.
IN SHORT, there is no such thing as ‘the CONSTRUCTION OF TOWNS’, … IF WE ‘LOOK AGAIN’ we see the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE in which there is TOWNING. LANGUAGE may be used that ABSTRACTLY DROPS OUT the ALL-INCLUDING TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE, RIPS OUT and resituates ‘the TOWN in ‘its own INDEPENDENT RIGHT’ within an ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE, where it can enjoy GRAMMAR-driven GROWTH and DEVELOPMENT, as a LOCAL, EXPLICIT, INDEPENDENT THING-IN-ITSELF which is no longer included in the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM but which is NOW INCLUDED in an ABSOLUTE EMPTY and INFINITE SPACE, as an INTELLECTUAL CONCEPTION that is NOT SENSE-EXPERIENCE AFFIRMABLE.
* * *