FORWARD:  Since sense-experience reality is something that naturally precedes intellectual interpretation and language-based reality representation, it might be thought of as a kind of anchor that keeps our intellectual representations of reality from ‘drifting’ too far from the ‘basic sense-experience reality’.  However, there is an abundance of language-based representations and interpretations and speculations and imaginings that may not be ‘grounded’ in sense experience, so that what we take to be ‘reality’ can become highly ‘speculative’.  Rumors in the street can lead to people being lynched for crimes they did not commit, and much much more so that what ‘we take to be reality’ is subject to considerable error.

We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have a particular way of constructing a SUBSTITUTE REALITY that SIDESTEPS the INEFFABLE nature of the transforming relational continuum that we share inclusion in.  This WESTERN CULTURE SUBSTITUTE REALITY approach differs from the language based reality representing approaches of indigenous aboriginal cultures in that we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS employ FRAGMENTATION as a means of sidestepping the INEFFABLE nature of the transforming relational continuum whereas indigenous aboriginal language and EASTERN (Taoist/Buddhist and Advaita Vedanta) language architectures employ an approach where FRAGMENTING is only used in the intermediate step of constructing relational webs that, while they employ LOCAL FRAGMENTS, do so only in a preliminary manner for constructing webs of relations.   For example, while the WESTERN CULTURE may use the word TOWN to impute a LOCALLY EXISTING THING-IN-ITSELF (FRAGMENT of REALITY) that can be empowered by GRAMMAR that imputes to it its own powers of AUTHORING actions and developments, the indigenous aboriginal culture employs verb-based language where TOWNING signifies a relational dynamic WITHIN THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM in keeping with the sense-experience reality wherein EVERYTHING IS IN FLUX.

THE WESTERN CULTURE APPROACH TO REPRESENTING REALITY WITH LANGUAGE does not retain the innately fluid nature of sense experience reality but constructs a SUBSTITUTE REALITY that gives a FOUNDATIONAL ROLE to notional LOCAL THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES or FRAGMENTS of REALITY; for example, ‘the TOWN is GROWING’, rather than as in indigenous language based representation which gives the equivalent of TOWNING-in-the-TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE, retaining the understanding as in WAVE-FIELD dynamics that ‘everything is in flux’.  In this case, QUANTUM LOGIC where FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE remains prevalent and there is no ‘step down’ to a BINARY LOGIC based SUBSTITUTE REALITY where FIGURE-and-GROUND-are TWO.

The WESTERN CULTURE APPROACH to LANGUAGE based REPRESENTATION is cultivating a LOCK-IN to BINARY LOGIC which is the source of psychological FRAGMENTATION.  That our WESTERN CULTURE social collective is experiencing the continuing advancement of EGO-based FRAGMENTATION is the warning message of both David Bohm and Friedrich Nietzsche.


* * *



 … Western Indusrial Society… has its basis in the analytic‐reductionistic 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 …” – Martine Dodds-Taljard, systems scientist.



We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have architected language NOT from the point of view of our being included in the transforming relational continuum, but from the point of view of a VOYEUR OBSERVER of REALITY which PSYCHOLOGICALLY SPLITS OUT THE OBSERVER FROM THE OBSERVED.  As Nietzsche points out, this VOYEUR approach introduces a BINARY LOGIC division between the OBSERVER and the OBSERVED wherein we conceive of the OBSERVED as the LOCAL AUTHOR of its own actions and development.


The one-sided MALE-ASSERTIVE concepts of GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION derive from the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR (e.g. “The AVALANCHE came crashing down the mountain, destroying the village below”).   What is missing is the HOLE that was opened in the side of the mountain and the understanding that the opening of the hole (the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING) together with the MALE ASSERTING constitute TRANSFORMATION).  Meanwhile the psychological abstraction of RATIO  introduces the ONE-SIDED MALE-ASSERTIVE concept of RATIO aka REASON as implies LOCAL AUTHORING  (i.e. where some  LOCAL BEING THING is growing LARGER)


“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.” —Nietzsche, “Twilight of the Idols, or, How to Philosophize with a Hammer”

RATIO or REASON, is a concept that allows us to GROW SOMETHING LOCAL AS IF IN ITS OWN RIGHT whether it is an INFANT or a TOWN, and since it is in its own right, this implies that it resides within AN ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE OF INFINITE EXTENT, otherwise there could be NO SUCH THING AS “GROWTH”, there could only be TRANSFORMATION in wherein FIGURE and GROUND are ONE.  That is, without our abstract inventing of ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE CONTAINING SPACE, we would be unable to conceive of the GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTIVE capability of the FIGURE as if IN ITS OWN RIGHT (as in the MALE ASSERTIVE sense).


Nietzsche points to how we engineer our WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE to formulate a DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR to fashion this one-sided RATIO based (REASON based) ILLUSION of LOCAL AUTHORING of GROWTH and DEVELOPMENT.


“Our judgement has us conclude that every change must have an author”;–but this conclusion is already mythology: it separates that which effects from the effecting. If I say “lightning flashes,” I have posited the flash once as an activity and a second time as a subject, and thus added to the event a being that is not one with the event but is rather fixed, “is” and does not “become.”–To regard an event as an “effecting,” and this as being, that is the double error, or interpretation, of which we are guilty.” – Nietzsche, ‘Will to Power’, 531


This DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR gives us the makings of REASON which we use to break down CHANGE as in the transforming relational continuum, into LOCAL FRAGMENTS.  Instead of the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE of our sense-experience which is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT (relational), we employ the INTELLECTUAL DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR to INTELLECTUALLY CONSTRUCT a  reduction of our sense-experience of inclusion in TRANSFORMATION to LOCAL and EXPLICIT impression of ‘the TOWN that is GROWING’.




WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE derives from this DOUBLE ERROR based ABSTRACT ARCHITECTURE and gives the language a REASON or RATIO based which makes it possible to CONSTRUCT REPRESENTATIONS OF SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY by way of LOCAL FRAGMENTS, without having to capture an impression of the overall transforming relational continuum to ‘put the local fragment’ into the ‘global context’.  Instead, this WESTERN CULTURE REASON based SYSTEM challenges our authoring creativity to construct reality FROM THE BOTTOM UP; i.e. from the LOCAL proceeding outwards to the NONLOCAL.   While our sense-experience reality informs us that “THERE IS TOWNING IN THE TRANFORMING LANDSCAPE”, this method of RATIO aka REASON allows us to invent a LOCAL TOWN and then employ GRAMMAR to TO EMBELLISH IT with the powers of GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION (e.g. of goods and services).  The LOCAL TOWN is thus MADE INTO (thanks to the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR) the LOCAL AUTHOR of its own GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION.




WITH THE DOUBLE ERROR OF NAMING and GRAMMAR, we introduce a SUBSTITUTE REALITY which we can describe, with our DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR based language representation scheme, which is BINARY LOGIC based.  That is, the relational form features in the flow are selected OUT OF THE FLOW and, using the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, set up as independent FRAGMENTS (such as HUMANS or TOWNS) notionally with their own powers of LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and developments (including the PRODUCTION of goods and services).  In this way, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have constructed a language scheme that liberates us from the complication that ‘everything is related’ (a sense-experience reality that is thus ineffable-because-nonlocal-and-implicit/relational).


The indigenous aboriginal or EASTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have meanwhile ‘bit the bullet’ and accepted that the ineffable nature of the transforming relational conttinum and developed a relational language architecture which, while it employs the abstract of BEING, does so only as a temporary expedient for constructing a relational representation, as is captured by Wittgenstein in his following comment in TRACTATUS LOGICO PHILSOSOPHICUS;


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 use of BEING is thus only a temporary expedient for developing a matrix of relations which, once established, not longer has need of the abstract BEING based entities.


HERE WE SEE A ‘PLAYOUT’ of nature itself as where BEING (matter) is understood as a “condensation of the electromagnetic field”, implying a FIGURE and GROUND as ONE QUANTUM LOGIC relation rather than a FIGURE and GROUND as TWO BINARY LOGIC relation.


All of the above goes to support the understanding that our WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE BASED REPRESENTATION has a FRAGMENTATION based ARCHITECTURAL approach wherein the LOCAL BEINGS should not be TAKEN LITERALLY but only used for the extraction of relational understanding.


HOWEVER, the WESTERN CLUTURE ADHERENT ‘habit’ has shifted from using language to develop POETIC RELATIONS which are NOT to be taken literally, to using language to develop TERSE, EXPLICIT CONSTRUCTIONS, such as ‘the EARTH IS TURNING ROUND’ on the basis that these are SIMPLIER than encoding and extracting RELATIONS based meaning as in POETIC usage which preserves the fluid nature of our sense-experience reality.


GIVEN THAT WE HAVE DROPPED TH TECHNIQUE OF USING LANGUAGE FOR ITS RELATIONAL CONTEXT and ARE NOW USING THE ‘FRAGMENTS’ FOR THEIR ‘LOCAL THING-IN-ISELF’ MEANING, there has been a shift to REFINING the FRAGMENTATION in order to refine meaning encoded in language (instead of developing that refinement by means of a web of relations).  In the implicit relational approach to language based sharing of experience we speak of TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING REALTIONAL CONTINUUM wherein the TOWNING is a relational feature withing the transforming relational continuum.   While in the explicit, ‘objective’ approach to language-based sharing of experience, we speak of the TOWN as if it were a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF composed of streets and avenues on which there are houses and people living inside the houses, leading to a LOCAL and EXPLICIT FRAGMENTATION based  language architecture for experience sharing.


While the TOP-DOWN language representation approach proceeds ‘downward’ from its TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE grounding base which preserves the fluid nature of reality, the BOTOM UP language representation approach uses NAMING and GRAMMAR to FRAGMENT our sense-experience reality, allowing us to start from the smallest FRAGMENTS that suit our preference.  Thus we can describe the TOWN in terms of “ITS BUILDINGS” or “ITS OCCUPANTS” and thus UNDERSTAND THE TWON in that bottom-up sense.  While both these TOP-DOWN and BOTTOM UP choices of language-based representations are available to us, the WESTERN CULTURE option has homed in on the BOTTOM UP approach, which RIGHT FROM THE START, … GET RID OF THE FLUID ANTURE OF SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY, .. and BEGINS with NAMING instantiated things-in-themselves with GRAMMAR-given powers of LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and developments.   This is where FRAGMENTATION comes into play since in order to get MORE PRECISION, we employ more FRAGMENTATION, going inside the TOWN to the BUILDINGS and inside the BUILDINGS to the OCCUPANTS etce.


In the TOP-DOWN language representation approach, our ‘base-case’ is the transforming relational continuum which is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT (relational) which requires a FLOW-BASED language (Bohm proposed Rheomode, but discovered that Algonquin already existed as a flow-based language).  The point here is that THIS PROBLEM OF BOTTOM UP LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE IS UNIQUE TO US WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS since other cultures (e.g. indigenous aboriginals, Taoist/Buddhist and Advaita Vedanta) have opted for TOP-DOWN language architectures which being with the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT dynamics of relational transformation.  LOCAL DETAIL in this language architecture comes by bringing a multiplicity of MALE-ASSRTIVE PROPOSITIONS into connective confluence so as to be able to extract the FEMALE ASSOCIATIVE CONNECTIONS by bringing a multiplicity of male-assertive propositions into connective confluence in the mind so as to extract the coherencies therein.  In other words, the EASTERN LANGUAGE USER will encode the message IMPLICITLY in the relations among the propositions, rather than DELIVERING THE MESSAGE EXPLICITLY.  Instead of ‘the TOWN is GROWING’, the indigenous aboriginal language will say ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’..


In our WESTERN CULTURE FRAGMENTATION BASED LANGUAGE, once we have BROKEN OUT the ‘TOWN’ we can follow up by getting more and more detailed and explicit in our breakdown of the TOWN but sine HUMPTY DUMPTY fell off the wall and the TOWN is now split out of the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM we cannot use relational context from the TRANSFORMING COUNTRYSIDE to extend our understanding of ‘what is a TOWN’, whereas in the language architecture where we speak of TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE, there is plenty of scope for expanding our understanding of TOWNING in terms of the transforming relational continuum in which the TOWNING is a dynamic relational feature.


WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS, while we have in the past made more common use of POETRY based sense experience representation for sharing purposes, have been shifting more towards literal and explicit representations and away from nonlocal, implicit expressions such as “SHALL I COMPARE THEE TO A SUMMER’s DAY, THOU ART MORE LOVELY AND MORE TEMPERATE” (Shakespeae)


EXPLICIT FRAGMENTATION appears to have ‘taken over’ in our WESTERN CULTURE approach, as Bohm observes, and this is the source of PSYCHOLOGICAL ABERRANCE.


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

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

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


Nietzsche, Wittgenstein and Bohm are all pointing to the same basic PROBLEM that crops up in our WESTERN CULTURE SOCIAL DYNAMIC, which DERIVES from psychological aberrance induced by our WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE which FRAGMENTS our sense-experience reality by way of REASON or RATIO and the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, all of which supports the abstract concept of LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and developments.


This FRAGMENTATION based notional LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and developments is an impression we INJECT as a SUBSTITUTE REALITY in place of THE ALL-INCLUDING TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.  This is where the abstract notion of ‘the TOWN IS GROWING LARGER AND MORE POPULOUS AND PRODUCTIVE ‘ comes from.  It is NOT REAL in the sense of SENSE-EXPERIENCE REAL, but is REAL in the abstract terms of SUBSTITUTE REALITY based on BINARY LOGIC wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO.


GONE from this SUBSTITUTE REALITY  is the QUANTUM LOGIC of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE and here in full force is the BINARY LOGIC which notionally LIBERATES the FIGURE from the GROUND, and thanks to GRAMMAR, mobilizes the notional BEING based FIGURE so as to impute to it, its own powers of LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and developments.  This abstract BEING based notion of LOCAL AUTHORING is the foundational underpinning of the SUBSTITUTE REALITY which allows the construction of SUBSTITUTE REALITY based on LOCAL THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES with their own (notional) powers of LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and developments (i.e. this is the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR that Nietzsche points out).


This WESTERN CULTURE system of language based representation leads to psychological confusion as implied in the systems science’s observation cited in the leadoff to this note and repeated here for reference;  Note that Suboptimization implies the LEGITIMACY of FRAGMENTATION as if it MAKES SENSE to optimizing living conditions in the UNITED STATES (based on the notional INDEPENDENT BEING of the UNITED STATES) when our sense-experience reality is that we live in a world characterized by global interconnectedness and mutual interdependence … Recall that the sense experience grounded reality of all non-human inhabitants and also non WESTERN CULTURE ADHERING human inhabitants does not support the abstract intellectual DECLARATIONS OF INDEPENDENCE which are part of the CRAZY-MAKING FRAGMENTATION operative in the WESTERN CULTURE psycho-social dynamic.  


The Name of the Devil is Suboptimization’

 “The above aphorism, 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‐reductionistic 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)

FRAGMENTATION derives from the architectural structure of WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE, and thus the FRAGMENTATION as in ‘the INDEPENDENT OF NATION-STATES and INDIVIDUAL HUMAN BEINGS’ is ILLUSION picked up in the PSYCHE as the PSYCHE develops its INTELLECTUAL representations of reality.


Indigenous aboriginal culture and Modern physics understandings are in agreement that we “humanings” are included within the transforming relational continuum and thus  “in a world characterized by global interconnectedness and mutual interdependence …”” . Nevertheless, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have embraced a BINARY LOGIC based SUBSTITUTE REALITY and are employing it as our OPERATIVE REALITY.


Thus, while we visualize our actions as contributing in a MALE-ASSERTIVE manner to the CONSTRUCTION of a TOWN or some such LOCAL, EXPLICIT STRUCTURE, that we assume is an INDEPENDENT FRAGMENT disconnected from the ‘rest of the world’, the reality is that we ourselves and everything we are doing is included within the transforming relational continuum.   The DYSFUNCTIONAL RESULT is that as while we TALK IN TERMS OF the analytic‐reductionistic scientific paradigm, and the notional remarkable technological applications it has spawned, what is really going on is the all-including TRANSFORMATION.


Our issue, today, is that we are employing the SUBSTITUTE REALITY as our operative reality and thus while our intellectual thinking is in terms of our constructing TOWNS etc., our sense experience is informing us that we are conditioning the developmental dynamics of the TRANSFORMATION we are included in at the same time as the TRANSFORMATION is conditioning our developmental dynamics.


HERE IN THIS UNDERSTANDING WE HAVE the QUANTUM LOGIC where FIGURE and GROUND are ONE (inhabitant and habitat are ONE).  There is NO FRAGMENTATION going on in this QUANTUM LOGIC based sense-experience reality.  But while this is the REALITY REPRESENTATION of the indigenous aboriginal culture and of the Taoist/Buddhist and Advaita Vedant a adherent, it is NOT the REALITY REPRESENTATION of the WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT.  We continue to give our intellectual support to the SUBSTITUTE REALITY based on NAMING-instantiated (notional) THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES with GRAMMAR-given powers of LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and developments, a FRAGMENTATIVE SUBSTITUTE REALITY that we are currently employing as our OPERATIVE REALITY.




As in the example of the TOWN that is GROWING, WE CAN SEE THIS IMAGERY in spite of the DOUBLE ERROR basis because as we look at the TOWNING in the transforming landscape, we forget that the TOWNING belongs to the transforming landscape and we start seeing a TOWN  that seems to be GROWING IN ITS OWN RIGHT because we have this word TOWN in our mind and if a TOWN is a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF, what we are looking at must be ‘he TOWN GROWING’.  This PICTURE that we attach the persisting name TOWN to gets into our mind and we can’t see the transforming landscape (in which there is TOWNING) for the TOWN and ITS GROWING and DEVELOPING.


A picture held us captive. And we could not get outside it, for it lay in our language and language seemed to repeat it to us inexorably. –-Wittgenstein


If we developed a movie film taken of the TOWN we could see on each successive frame the picture of the town and over a long period the TOWN would be slightly different and we would say that that is due to the TOWN “AGING” just as we think of ourselves as AGING, but this AGING simply SUPPORTS the regarding of the TOWN as a thing-in-itself that is CHANGING.  This constitutes a SUBSTITUTE REALITY wherein we no longer hang on to understanding wherein everything is in flux wherein there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE.  IF WE AGE, THEN THE TOWN MUST AGE TOO, thus the concept of AGING is like the concepts of GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION, ALL OF WHICH IMPLY LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and development.  These are the makings of a SUBSTITUTE REALITY featuring GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION in place of TRANSFORMATION.


That is how our language captures it and that is how ‘it looks’ because when we see ‘the TOWN’ we see a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF and GRAMMAR allows us to impute to the TOWN THING-IN-ITSELF its own powers of AUTHORING ITS GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT and its powers of its own DEVELOPMENT and its PRODUCTION of goods and services.  This language supported representation thus constructs a SUBSTITUTE REALITY whereby we LET GO OF our sense-experience reality featuring TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE (wherein ‘figure’ and ‘ground’ are ONE).


THIS WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE GAME that constructs a SUBSTITUTE REALITY IS THE SOURCE OF FRAGMENTATION and with it, the notion of LOCAL AUTHORING and the EGO that also comes with it, as well as the AUTHORING based concepts that merit REWARDS and PUNISHMENTS that are based on the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.  The EGO and the abstract notion of LOCAL AUTHORING go hand in hand as does the sense of GUILT that is basic to the WESTERN CULTURE CHRISTIAN DOUBLE ERROR OF NAMING and GRAMMAR based belief experience..




WE ESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have engineered language (the CAE COMMON Average European languages in Whorf’s nomenclature) for building REPRESENTATIONS that give a foundational role to FRAGMENTATION.  In this approach to REPRESENTATION of sense-experience reality, the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR is used to construct a FRAGMENT based SUBSTITUTE REALITY featuring notional LOCAL NAMING-instantiated THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES (FRAGMENTS) that can be ANIMATED with GRAMMAR to SIMULATE the transforming relational continuum which is itself INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT (relational).


This approach suffers from the HUMPTY DUMPTY problem; i.e. while we FRAGMENT reality to avoid that INEFFABLE nature of the transforming relational continuum, and while the FRAGMENTS can simulate reality through using them within a matrix of relations where THE RELATIONS ARE THE TAKE AWAY and NOT the FRAGMENTS, there is a tendency to impute primary reality to the FRAGMENTS instead of the web of relations that associate with the FRAGMENTS.


The ants continually GATHER and SCATTER  and the CLUSTRING of ants appears to GROW and SHRINK, tempting us to speak in terms the ANT CLUSTER or ANT TOWN that then becomes the LOCAL EXPLICIT CLUSTER THING with its own powers of AUTHORING gathering and scattering, … even though the GATHERING and SCATTERING is primary and the CLUSTERING that appears as CLUSTER that grows and shrinks, is SECONDARY.  Our WESTERN CULTURE language and grammar will use NAMING and GRAMMAR to impute BEING to the CLUSTER and then use GRAMMAR to notionally endow that BEING with “ITS OWN POWERS OF AUTHORING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS”.  The CLUSTER then becomes the LOCAL AUTHOR of actions and developments within a new SUBSTITUTE REALITY, leaving behind all mention of the RESONANCE PHENOMENA of GATHERING-SCATTERING which is the DEEPER understanding of THE CLUSTER and which develops from the dynamic relational space that includes the CLUSTER and much  more.  This elevating of resonance forms within the transforming relational continuum to the status of LOCAL AUTHORS of their own development and actions OBSCUJRES the deeper sense-experience reality based on the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT (RELATIONAL) as is the nature of the transforming relational continuum.


We are left with the problem of having employed the SUBSTITUTE REALITY which is LOCAL and EXPLCIT as a replacement for our real sense-experience reality’ which is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT; i.e. it is inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.




* * *