INTRODUCTION: Systems Sciences Pioneer Kenneth Boulding is the source of the statement; ‘The Name of the Devil is Suboptimization’.  This refers to the reality that we live within a world of relational interdependencies that our WESTERN CULTURE has turned a blind eye to in our anthropocentric suboptimization where we shut off acknowledging the essential reality of ‘all is related’.

NAMING plays a key role in this abstract anthropocentric ‘declaration of independence’.   That is, NAMING is a language based DECLARATION of the LOCAL, INDEPENDENT EXISTENCE of the NAMED phenomenon, no matter how NONLOCAL and INTERDEPENDENT it may be.  Suboptimization is encouraged by NAMING a ‘system’ that is NOT REALLY a LOCAL, INDEPENDENT SYSTEM-IN-ITSELF but is in fact a resonance-sustained confluence of relational interdependencies  Suboptimization, because it MISTAKENLY assumes the INDEPENDENCE of the subsystem being optimized, can induce the degeneration of overall systemic resonance into dissonance, the price paid for ‘suboptimizing’ an assumed-independent-system which is, in reality, relationally interdependent.  Shakespeare’s metaphor of the ‘POUND OF FLESH’ in ‘The Merchant of Venice’ is a kind of ‘archetype’ for the WESTERN CULTURE practice of ‘suboptimization’ as in monocultural agriculture, where we carve a square plot out of a complex mutually supporting ecosystemic landscape, inserting in its place a geometric, monocultural wheat-field.  We may even kill the diversity with herbicide to make way for the monoculture.

Such suboptimization is a radical departure from multiculture-diversity-sustaining development characteristic of nature, and from the land cultivating approach of indigenous peoples which acknowledges that natural life lives in the intersecting confluence of mutually-supportive relational diversity.  F. David Peat, modern physics co-researcher with David Bohm, in his book Blackfoot Physics, points out how indigenous cultures acknowledged that ‘everything is relationally dependent’ (‘mitakuye oyasin’), employing agriculture in a multicultural approach; e.g. the Mohawk people’s cultivating of the Three Sisters; beans, squash and corn in acknowledgement of the importance of relational synergy deriving from diversity.

Suboptimization assumes that it is possible to split FIGURE (subsystem) and GROUND (system) into TWO, however, in Nature, FIGURE (subsystem) and GROUND (system) are only ONE, and so it is also in the Wave-field understanding, SELF-and-OTHER (SUBJECT and OBJECT) are only ONE, which implies that sub-optimizing environmental supportive conditions for our wrongly-presumed ‘independent’ (mono-cultural ‘human’) self, creates problems for our ‘real self’ which is inextricably, relationally included in the overall Wave-dynamic aka the Tao.  The understanding that the relational dynamic of Nature does NOT split into separate and independent subsystems as NAMING and GRAMMAR so easily portray it, is foundational in Boulding’s aphorism; ‘The Name of the Devil is Suboptimization’.  Suboptimization is an abstract concept that we have given a foundational role to in our WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT social dynamic, leading to psychological confusion that manifests in ‘anthropocentrism’ and ‘racism’.

* * * END of INTRODUCTION * * *




Do unto others as you would have them do unto you… This could be compared to the ‘source-receiver duality in Newtonian physics.  It’s what we come up with in language and grammar based on FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO (i.e. SELF-OTHER-as-TWO)

Taken literally, it is an IMPLICIT way of infusing belief in an abstract binary structure of reality. It is like ‘forgiveness’ which is a back-handed way of reducing NONLOCAL relational dissonance to LOCAL SOURCING of PATHOLOGICAL actions and development.

In the reality of our sensory experience, FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE as in modern physics (i.e. SUBJECT-and-OBJECT-are-ONE, … and SELF-and-OTHER-are ONE).

“The world is given to me only once, not one existing and one perceived. Subject and object are only one. The barrier between them cannot be said to have broken down as a result of recent experience in the physical sciences, for this barrier does not exist.” – Erwin Schroedinger

Therefore, the behavioural ethic becomes, … move within the transforming relational continuum so as to cultivate relational harmony (move so as to dissolve the cultivating of relational dissonance).   We do this in the flow of freeway traffic when the traffic is heavy and the relative moving of vehicles becomes our fluid guide rather than the fixed guide-lines painted on the ‘roadway’.  We can sustain harmony in this relative fluid sense whether driving in a fleet of dune-buggies over the desert or wherever.

In general, our moves can only be relative.  Therefore, we do not ‘have your own moves’ and there is only the NONLOCAL while LOCAL has no meaning.   This NONLOCALITY which is the ‘real reality’ is not capturable ‘as-is’ in language (language makes use of LOCAL concepts which fall innately short of capturing the NONLOCAL).  That is, the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL can be REDUCED and made language-effable using the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR where NAMING is used to establish LOCAL thing-in-itself BEING and GRAMMAR is used to impute the LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments.

What does a dune do?  It is not a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF but a resonance feature, a ‘dunING’ within the transforming relational continuum (the Wave-field), … and likewise, a human is a ‘humanING’ as are all ‘the-ings’.  It is NAMING plus GRAMMAR that is the DOUBLE ERROR that imputes LOCAL SOURCING of actions and development and in our intellectual constructions, we use this DOUBLE ERROR to construct a LOCAL EFFABLE pseudo-reality to overcome the INEFFABILITY of NONLOCAL REALITY.  (Nota Bene: As Wittgenstein and modern physics and Nietzsche point out, our DOUBLE ERROR based LOCAL, EFFABLE pseudo-reality is only good for use as an EFFABLE ‘Wittgenstein ladder’ or BOOTSTRAP device to IMPLY the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL.)

We say that ‘The DUNE is growing higher and longer and is moving across the DESERT FLOOR but this is all binary logical CONTRIVANCE which imputes FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO but this is just to render the INEFFABLE EFFABLE because while resonance is primary, it is NONLOCAL and thus INEFFABLE.  We can say ‘THERE IS DUNING’ but is an ABSTRACT REDUCTION to impute ‘the LOCAL EXISTENCE OF “A DUNE”.

‘NAMING’ brings forth the POUND of FLESH problem as in Shakespeare’s ‘Merchant of Venice’.  Where does “the DUNE” start and end?  Where does any NAMED form ‘start and end’? How about my ‘farm’?  It has, according to me, GROWN from 2 acres to 64 acres and I can prove it with ‘before’ and ‘now’ pictures.  “NAMING” a thing-it-itself is the FIRST ERROR and GRAMMAR as in the verb GROW is the second error.  If the farm GREW, then the uncultivated Wilderness had to SHRINK which implies that there is neither LOCAL GROWTH nor LOCAL SHRINKAGE but only relational TRANSFORMATION.   Where does my FARM start and end?  Like the ‘POUND OF FLESH’ it is a notion that language can put together that is entirely unrealistic.  The FARM is a superficial concept because the rocks beneath are continuous and in flux and the atmospheric flow above it is continuous and in flux.  Meanwhile language represents the FARM as LOCAL and of FIXED existence and notionally with its own powers of LOCAL SOURCING (“producing”) products (thanks to the ‘DOUBLE ERROR’ of NAMING and GRAMMAR).


“GROWTH” is an add-on ABSTRACTION that builds from the FIRST ERROR of NAMING to impute LOCAL thing-in-itself existence.  We say the FARM GROWS from 2 acres to 160 acres but make no mention of the reciprocal SHRINKAGE of the uncultivated Wilderness, the FIGURE and GROUND as TWO (at least in language and grammar) that reduce, in reality, to FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE that is undergoing TRANSFORMATION.


If the FARM is a REAL THING-IN-ITSELF, why not have the owner cut it out like the pound of flesh and ship it to an orbiting space-station to provide food for the occupants?  Does the FARM “REALLY EXIST”?  OR DO WE HAVE TO REGROUND OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE FARM IN THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM?


Modern physics exposes why the taking of a ‘POUND OF FLESH’ is impossible; i.e. HUMANING is a relational forming within the transforming relational continuum and this inseparability of the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE would have us understand forms as NONLOCAL developments in the transforming relational continuum.  Since that which is NONLOCAL is INEFFABLE, … the reduction to EFFABLE is achieved by the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR which is where we get “THE” FARM with “ITS” power of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments such as the PRODUCING of PRODUCTS.

Reality is NONLOCAL and we cannot carve out a POUND OF NONLOCALITY.  Nevertheless, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS employ the DOUBLE ERROR to do just that, to abstractly reduce the NONLOCAL to LOCAL.


This EFFABLE-izing is indeed useful as it overcomes the reality wherein;

Of that which we cannot speak, we must remain silent’ – (“Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen”) –Wittgenstein’s final statement (7.0) in Tractatus Logico Philosphicus).

However, our effable-ization is not capturing REALITY, it is only capturing a caricature of reality; the DUNE does not capture DUNING within the transforming relational continuum (wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE) and the HUMAN does not capture HUMANING within the transforming relational continuum (wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE).

Whereas modern physics and ‘the EAST’ accepts that FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE and that the reduction to FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO is an effable-izing tool.

The WEST is allowing the tool to run away with the workman, the human (effable) with the divine (ineffable) by employing the effable as the OPERATIVE REALITY, rather than as INFERENCE of an INEFFABLE REALITY.  As Bohm points out, language and grammar structures such as Robin Hood stole the king’s grain and John Wilkes Booth killed Lincoln are effable-because-LOCAL expressions that can only infer the ineffable-because-NONLOCAL dynamics of the transforming relational continuum aka the Wave-field aka the Tao.

The WEST employs these reductive effable-izations as the operative reality while the EAST accepts these reductive effable-izations only as INFERENCE aka ‘Wittgenstein ladders’ that can only INFER the NONLOCAL reality that lies beyond the capture powers of language.  Language and grammar is only good for INFERENCE by way of abstract reductions to LOCAL things-in-themselves with GRAMMAR based powers of SOURCING actions and developments (the “DOUBLE ERROR”).

The WEST (i.e. we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS) have let this tool run away with the workman (Emerson, Nietzsche) meaning that we have used it to recast OURSELVES as LOCAL things-in-ourselves with our own GRAMMAR-given (notional) powers of SOURCING actions and developments.  This DOUBLE ERROR combination of NAMING and GRAMMAR can be used to impute LOCAL powers of SOURCING actions and developments to whatever we want to NAME; e.g. DUNES, NATIONS, HUMANS, RIVERS, LAKES, VOLCANOES, … bypassing and obscuring the reality of relational TRANSFORMATION.

DOES FIRE BURN and DOES LIGHTNING FLASH?  Well, these are LOCAL events and expressing things in these terms makes it possible to use a finite number of words to express these notional LOCAL reductions of dynamic features within the transforming relational continuum.  As Goedel’s theorem says, meanwhile, all finite propositions of logic are innately incomplete.  Yes, Robin Hood ‘took’ grain from the King’s granaries and Jean Valjean ‘took’ a loaf of bread from the bakery, and these propositions can be ‘proven true’ but they are fundamentally INCOMPLETE like fine detail within a much larger landscape.

FIRE BURNS and LIGHTNING FLASHES epitomize the DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar that imputes LOCAL SOURCING where there is no such thing; i.e. where there is only relational TRANFORMATION.  Since the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM  aka the Wave-field aka ‘the Tao’ is all-including and includes ourselves, it is INEFFABLE, hence we use the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR to come up with an effable reduction which is good for INFERENCE of the innately INEFFABLE Wave-field reality.

Modern physics and the EAST (indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta) use the DOUBLE ERROR reduction for INFERENCE (IMPLICIT representation of reality) while we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT use the DOUBLE ERROR reduction as EXPLICIT representation of reality.  This WESTERN substitution of the EXPLICIT for the IMPLICIT as the operative reality gives rise to the abstractions of POUND OF FLESH and ancillary aberrations such as the concept of GROWTH. (of a farm, human etc.), which eclipses the reality of relational TRANSFORMATION.


* * *

The following WESTERN mantra makes us whacko by imputing local powers of sorcery to ourselves in the anthropocentric interpretation of this ‘Golden Rule’;

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you…

Muslim Sufi thinker Ibn Arabi sees the golden rule as applying to all creatures: “All the commandments are summed up in this, that whatever you would like the True One to do to you, that do to His creatures.”

As with the indigenous aboriginal culture understanding of ‘mitakuye oyasin’ as also with that of modern physics, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta, there is a global concept of ‘others’ that does not degenerate into an encouragement for birds of a common feather to constrain their efforts to promote well-being among those of their own kind, a degenerate reduction that is common in WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENCE.  In fact, the notion that the formings within the transforming relational continuum exist independently of one another derives from ‘the DOUBLE ERROR of grammar’.

There need be no ‘elevating’ and singling out of the HUMAN species and/or a particular RACE or COLOUR of human in this aphorism (Do unto others as you would have them do unto you) since the understanding is (can be) that FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE.  Only in the binary logic abstraction where FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO does the notion of ‘independent LOCAL existence’ arise (and then, it only arises in the intellect and is not supported by sensory experience). Nevertheless, BELIEF that FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO characterizes WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS.

Neanwhile, NO ‘RACE’ or ‘SPECIES’ or ‘GENDER’ based DISTINCTION (these are all appearance-based language-concretized reductions) can OVER-RIDE the reality of FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE  as captured by ‘mitakuye oyasin’ and as supported by the understanding of reality of modern physics’ INEFFABLE Wave-field aka ‘the Tao’.

‘the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao’. – Lao Tzu

“Listening not to me but to the Logos, it is wise to remember that all things are One.”  – Heraclitus

“You must teach the children that the ground beneath their feet is the ashes of your grandfathers. So that they will respect the land, tell your children that the earth is rich with the lives of our kin. Teach your children what we have taught our children, that the earth is our mother. Whatever befalls the earth, befalls the sons of the earth. If men spit upon the ground, they spit upon themselves. … This we know, the earth does not belong to man, man belongs to the earth. This we know. All things are connected like the blood which unites one family. All things are connected. Whatever befalls the earth, befalls the sons of the earth. Man did not weave the web of life, he is merely a strand in it. Whatever he does to the web, he does to himself.”— “Chief Seattle”

 * * *


APPENDIX I  The LOGIC-based DIVIDE that separates EAST and WEST








It would be equally ‘on target’ to phrase this;

EAST is EAST (and EAST is the BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDED medium where FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE)


WEST is WEST (and WEST is the EITHER/OR logic of the EXCLUDED medium where FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO)

so that;


EAST understands REALITY as IMPLICIT (i.e. since FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE, there is a basic ambiguity between, for example, ‘the DUNE’ and ‘the DESERT’ and when we understand DUNING as the manifesting of resonance that is continually re-arranging the DESERT and blurring the distinction between DUNING and DESERT, this reminds us that EVERYTHING-IS-IN-FLUX (Heraclitus) so that the basic REALITY is TRANSFORMATION wherein LOCAL FORMS are IMPLICIT.

WEST understands REALITY as EXPLICIT which APPEARS to remove the ambiguity in the EAST’s understanding of REALITY, … or DOES IT?  Since, in the WEST’s REALITY, FIGURE-and-GROUND-are TWO, we can understand the dynamics of each one ‘separately’.  Thus we can say that the raging river sources ‘erosion’ and ploughs a furrow in the valley floor, producing ‘the Grand Canyon’.  OR DOES IT?  Maybe it is the seductive action of the valley floor subsiding and ‘opening up’ that inductively sources the flow’s organizing, entry and penetration.


“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.

In other words, the concept of ‘THE DUNE’ is not only given priority over the concept of “DUNING” but as Parmenides popularized it, the  understanding of DUNING in terms of ‘resonance’ or ‘Wave-field’ is entirely cast out.  That is, Parmenides convinced us (the WEST) that only ‘the DUNE’ is REAL; i.e. only LOCAL and EXPLICIT forms are ‘REAL’ (although ‘LOCAL’ and ‘EXPLICIT’ are abstractions)

Parmenides influence in reducing REALITY from IMPLICIT-because-NONLOCAL (e.g. ‘DUNING’) to EXPLICIT-because-LOCAL (e.g. ‘the DUNE’) was picked up in the WEST as the basis for understanding ‘humaning’ in the flow, rendering these ‘formings’ in language, grammar and intellect as EXPLICIT, LOCAL HUMAN THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES.

WESTERN religious doctrines incorporated this abandonment of the EAST’s NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT understanding of REALITY BY SUBSTITUTING the LOCAL and EXPLICIT understanding of REALITY.  This is made clear, for example, in WESTERN religious writings which SPELL OUT what has also been embedded in WESTERN SECULAR “RATIONAL” REPRESENTATION OF “REALITY”; (Note that the EAST’s ‘humaning’ as relational flow-forming as in FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE is purged and the FIGURE is now given the DOUBLE ERROR treatment of NAMING and GRAMMAR to remove the inter-dependency of FIGURE and GROUND’.  WESTERN HUMAN DECLARES HIMSELF TO BE INDEPENDENT and notionally endouwed with his own (DOUBLE ERROR based) POWERS OF SOURCING actions and developments,… abandoning the EASTERN FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE understanding, an abandonment expressed, for example, in the following;

Man is rational and therefore like God; he is created with free will and is master over his acts.

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.

1732 As long as freedom has not bound itself definitively to its ultimate good which is God, there is the possibility of choosing between good and evil, and thus of growing in perfection or of failing and sinning. This freedom characterizes properly human acts. It is the basis of praise or blame, merit or reproach.” – Vatican Archives, The Catholic Catechism

While this particular expression of the WESTERN CULTURE pervading ‘belief which ‘happens to be a CATHOLIC-CHRISTIAN expression of belief, it is a belief that is basic in WESTERN SECULAR CULTURE which can be expressed at the level of LOGIC, and in this case the EITHER/OR logic of the EXCLUDED medium wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO which is INCOMPATIBLE with the FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE logic of the INCLUDED medium which is the LOGIC OF THE EAST and also THE LOGIC OF MODERN PHYSICS.

It is important to keep in mind that the IMPLICIT form of AMBIGUITY in the EAST’s BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDED medium (where FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE) is not RESOLVED in the WEST’s reduction to EITHER/OR logic of the EXCLUDED MEDIUM (where FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO) but is DODGED by just forgetting about the dynamics of GROUND and attributing dynamics entirely to the FIGURE;

“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.”

Of course, by extracting the ‘BEING’ by way of ‘NAMING’ we impute INDEPENDENCE to the FIGURE and invest all SOURCING of action in the FIGURE, reducing the GROUND to a lifeless, non-participating reference frame.


The WEST, by investing everything in the EXPLICIT concept of LOCAL SOURCING , instead of accepting the IMPLICIT concept of NONLOCAL TRANSFORMATION as the grounding reality as in the EAST (and as in the Wave-field of modern physics), the WEST has opened the door to TWO conflicting versions of the EXPLICIT LOCAL SOURCING, one of which is seen as deriving from the INDIVIDUAL and another which is seen as deriving from the COLLECTIVE, splitting WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS into TWO OPPOSING FACTIONS termed ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal’, the former insisting that the TRUE ROOT of SOURCING derives from the LOCAL individual and the latter insisting that the TRUE ROOT of SOURCING derives from the LOCAL collective.

The EAST, meanwhile, has no stake in this INTELLECTUAL POLARING  DIVISION since the EAST’s understanding in terms of TRANSFORMATION DOES NOT INVOKE THE CONCEPT of LOCAL SOURCING, which the WEST has meanwhile ‘picked up on’ from the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.

* * *    * * *    * * *



(NOTE:  BINARY LOGIC is the EITHER/OR logic of the EXCLUDED medium which is the logic of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO, … a logic that is less capable than the modern physics  BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDED medium which is the logic of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE as in the Wave-field aka ‘the Tao’).


The ROBIN HOOD ‘surplus-deficiency’ rebalancing EXAMPLE

In the BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDED medium; i.e. the logic of the EAST, we would SAY, in regard to the actions of Robin Hood in correcting the imbalance of the surplus stores of grain in the King’s warehouse and the deficient stores of grain in the people’s pantries, Is NOT SOURCED from internal volition of Robin Hood, but is SOURCED from the surplus-deficiency disparity which induces rebalancing agency that is the animator of Robin Hood’s action that lies deeper that ‘his own interior’.

Of course, explanation in terms of a surplus-deficiency gradient being the source of a dynamic is NOT a possibility if our ‘model’ of reality is constrained to the abstract DOUBLE ERROR conceptualization featuring NAMING-instantiated things-in-themselves with GRAMMAR-instantiated powers of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments.

This DOUBLE ERROR based conceptualization, as Nietzsche describes with the example ‘LIGHTNING FLASHES’ and Nishitani describes with the example ‘FIRE BURNS’, SYNTHETICALLY LOCALIZES the SOURCING of the action and development.  In this case, Robin Hood’ becomes the

LOCAL jumpstart SOURCING AGENT of the removal of the King’s surplus stores of grain and its resituating in community regions of deficiency.

In a relational understanding, the dynamics of a ‘Robin Hood’, are induced by the ambient surplus-deficiency gap which inductively gives birth to resolving actions which induce Robin Hood’s participation.

Visual picture based ‘evidence’ and other physical supporting evidence (e.g. fingerprints, DNA left at the crime scene) will be more than sufficient to establish that Robin Hood took the King’s gold, a radically superficial analysis of the dynamic that fails to see or explore the deeper relational roots of this action and development.

Meanwhile, the sourcing of this action did not simply initiate within Robin Hood but derived ‘upstream’ of Robin Hood in the purely relational surplus-deficiency gap.  One might say that Robin Hood was ‘putty in the hands’ of this intuitive balance-restoring instinct.

The one who takes from the rich and gives to the poor might say to the rich as he takes their grain; … “nothing personal, squire, but there are kids down the road who are starving to death while huge surplus stores are sitting idly in your warehouses’.

The surplus-deficiency relational gradient animator of Nature does not quietly defer to WESTERN CULTURE intellectual-social protocols and laws employing abstract EITHER/OR logic such as in ‘rightful ownership’.   Nevertheless, relational strife mounts as the surplus-deficiency gap mounts, and such strife can blossom into fullscale revolution.  As with tensions in the landscape which, if they strengthen relentlessly, may launch avalanches, so it is also with the surface-deficiency gap in human social relations.

WEST LOCAL SOURCING of PRODUCER-PRODUCT development.  is EFFABLE because LOCAL and EXPLICIT but has FIGURE-GROUND SOURCING ambiguity— continental drift -OR-seafloor spreading.  This SOURCING based ambiguity also shows up in the conservative-liberal polarized views on SOURCING.   There is also the wind and flag ambiguity, desert and dune ambiguity [do the dunes SOURCE their own shifting over the desert or does the desert SOURCE the DUNES and there shifting?].  The EAST’s TRANSFORMATION never suffers from such ambiguity in the first place because there is no LOCAL SOURCING of ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS in THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM and thus no contention over whether the LOCAL SOURCING is authored by the FIGURE (the flapping flag that SOURCES the wind) or by the GROUND (the wind that SOURCES the flag’s flapping).

BINARY LOGIC, the mainstay of WESTERN CULTURE conceptualizing of reality, is ‘too simple’ to capture TRANSFORMATION, but such simplicity makes it a popular choice for general usage in constructing representations of reality.  It is far easier to ‘teach’ to our children than the BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDED medium.  So we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have INSTITUTIONALIZED binary logic because of its simplicity even though it puts us ‘at odds with ourselves’.

“As regards the academies, they are established in order to regulate the studies of the pupils and are concerned not to have the program of teaching change very often: in such places, because it is a question of the progress of the students, it frequently happens that the things which have to be chosen are not those which are most true but those which are most easy. And by that division in things which makes different people form different judgements, it so happens that certain people are in error contrary to their own opinion.” – Johannes Kepler, ‘Harmonies of the World’


BINARY LOGIC SIMPLIFIES reality by reducing FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE (Wave-field reality) to FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO so that we can split out the FIGURE from the GROUND and animate the FIGURE on its own. This reduces the IMPLICIT to the EXPLICIT, the NONLOCAL to the LOCAL and thus the INEFFABLE to the EFFABLE.  This reductionist tool is very useful for effable-zing the ineffable, however, it is a REDUCTION of the ineffable and is up to scratch for substituting for the ineffable.  As Wittgenstein points out, this reduction only gives us a platform for making a intuitive leap BEYOND to get to the INEFFABLE.

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

 * * *