This essay explores how, to put it bluntly, Western culture ‘normality’ is driving us crazy by having us believe in a ‘double error’ based ‘reality’ which is essentially the repackaging in respectable attire [Newtonian scientific legitimizing] of middle ages superstitious belief in sorcery.  Because this aberrant belief in ‘sorcery’ has become the Western culture behavioral ‘norm’, the non-complying ‘dissidents’ [including indigenous aboriginals] who remain grounded in natural relational experience and who thus reject ‘sorcery’ and/or those who are manifestly confused by being pressured to conform to this Western culture ‘aberrant sorcery-based normality’, are themselves judged ‘abnormal’ and subjected to programs of remediation that increasingly include anti-psychotic medicating, psychotherapy, confinement in psychiatric hospitals and simple social devaluation on the basis of their poor record in the sorcery department.  Those who accept Western culture sorcery-based ‘aberrant normality’ as the ‘operative norm’ and do well within it, tend to be generously rewarded and given positions of influence and authority that locks the system in place [“lock-in by high switching costs”].  The expression ‘the ‘tools run away with the workman, the human with the divine’ alludes to how the tools of language and grammar REDUCE relational forms in the transforming relational continuum, such as ourselves, to (notional) name-instantiated things-in-themselves with their own incipient powers of sourcing actions and developments [the ‘double error‘].

 

INTRODUCTION:

The tools run away with the workman, the human with the divine – Ralph Waldo Emerson, The Method of Nature

It is impossible to capture, in explicit language, the reality of our experience of inclusion as relational forms in a transforming relational continuum.    Some cultures accept this and never try to go beyond regarding language as ‘poetic expression’ of our innately ‘fluid’ experiential reality.  The tool of language as employed by our intellectualizing faculty is nevertheless capable of using relational forms as the basis for constructing an INVENTED REALITY featuring relational forms as name-instantiated things-in-themselves with powers of sourcing actions and developments. This is something we could use as a rough but useful ‘go-by’ to aid our navigating within the transforming relational continuum, …OR, we could fall into the trap, as we do in Western cultural generally, of confusing our language and grammar based INVENTED REALITY, for our actual operative reality.

But Western culture over the past few centuries has been defining itself by falling into this trap.  GONE from our intellectualizing mind is the relational understanding that continues to come to us through our relational experience as relational forms in a transforming relational continuum.  That is, our explicitizing tools of intellectual abstraction have ‘run away with us’, so that we recast ourselves in our abstracting intellect as name-instantiated things-in-themselves with our own powers of sourcing actions and developments.

This ‘double error’, as Nietzsche refers to it, is the selfsame aberration as Emerson is referring to as  The tools run away with the workman, the human with the divine .  That is, the ‘double error’ is the use of language and grammar to ‘invent’, by the name-instantiating abstracting power of language, a notional ‘thing-in-itself’ that can, by means of the second conflating error, be notionally endowed with the powers of sourcing actions and developments.

The source of the animating dynamic termed ‘reality’, instead of being understood as ‘immanent’ in the transforming relational continuum, is, thanks to Western language and grammar, pushed down and inside the name-instantiated things-in-themselves created with the ‘double error’ and, the root sourcing of reality is thus relocated to the interior of notional (naming and grammar instantiated) ‘independently-existing things-in-themselves with their own powers of sourcing actions and developments.   This is the basis for Western culture’s intellectually contrived INVENTED REALITY which has, over the past few centuries, hijacked the behaviour animating helm formerly (naturally) manned by sensation-informed intuition.

That is, in our infancy, as with other (non-language-utilizing) forms in nature, our sensations inform us of our inclusion within the all-inclusive world-continuum.  This topological understanding of inclusion in the relational continuum never abandons us, but, in the case of humans, such awareness is exposed to being ‘covered over and buried’ by layers of intellectual abstraction which effectively ‘hijack’ reality constructing operations (eclipsing/burying our sensation based experience of relational inclusion).

This problem of the innate shortfall of language-stimulated intellection in capturing the ‘reality’ of our sensory experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum leads to further problematic complications in Western culture where is employed as if it were the ‘operative reality’.  For example;

The tools run away with the workman, the human with the divine – Ralph Waldo Emerson, The Method of Nature

“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

 “I am afraid we are not rid of God because we continue to believe in grammar” — Nietzsche

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.

The point is that the reality of our inclusion, as relational forms in the transforming relational continuum, is not EXPLICITLY expressible in language and can only be obliquely inferred as in poetic expression and/or ‘the Surprise version of the game of Twenty Questions’.  If we can ‘picture it’, it is not ‘reality’ (the all-including transforming relational continuum is not picturable; i.e. it cannot be visualized as something ‘out there in front of us’.)

THE DOUBLE ERROR IS THE EMBODIMENT OF EGO, THE BELIEF THAT ‘WE HAVE THE POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS’.  THIS IS CRAZINESS; I.E. IT IS ABERRANT THINKING THAT IS EQUATED WITH WESTERN CULTURE ‘NORMALITY’, as has been pointed out not only by philosophers such as Nietzsche and physicists such as Bohm but also by psychiatrists such as R.D. Laing.

AVOIDING THE EXPOSURE TO ASSIMILATING OF WESTERN CULTURE CRAZINESS WHILE ONE IS LIVING WITHIN A WESTERN CULTURE SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT REQUIRES ONE TO ‘REGROUND’ IN RELATIONAL UNDERSTANDING, AS IS DEMONSTRATED BY INDIGENOUS ABORIGINALS, BUDDHISTS/TAOISTS AND ADVAITA VEDANTA ADHERENTS IN THIS SITUATION.

* * * END OF INTRODUCTION * * *

Language-and-grammar is an intellectual tool.  It can’t possibly capture the reality of our experience of inclusion in the real world of relational transformation. But, WATCH OUT! since the tool can and does ‘run away with the workman’ and this is regarded as ‘situation normal’ in today’s Western culture.

The world of our experience is of inclusion in a transforming relational continuum.  While sensory experience informs us of our inclusion, language is only capable of a REDUCED conveying of relational experience since language ‘names’ forms thus imputing persisting thing-in-itself being to inherently relational flow-features while grammar endows the name-instantiated things-in-themselves with notional powers of sourcing actions and developments.   Nietzsche refers to this as the ‘double error’ that Western culture uses to construct an INVENTED REALITY that is employed as ‘the operative reality’.

This INVENTED REALITY is a REDUCED REALITY relative to the physical relational experiential (sensation) based reality of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.  The reality of our flow-forms within flow (the Tao) is beyond capture in the intellectually reduced abstract terms of language and grammar.  However, language can be used in poetic mode which, while it does depend on ‘names’ that symbolize abstract things-in-themselves, does so only as an initial step of using the named things-in-themselves to construct, in the psyche, a web of relations as means of conveying understanding in purely relational mode, the ‘things’ used to develop the web-of-relations based impression having no persisting role.

For example, in the reality of the continually-relationally-transforming spherical form we know as ‘the earth’ that is an inclusion within the continually-relationally-transforming universe , we can get psychological traction for speaking about ‘it’ by ‘naming’ it and thus imputing ‘persisting existence’ to ‘it’ to support discursive intellectual exchanges that allude to the relational transformation that is going on, even though forms in the flow (Tao) are continually in flux and without ‘persisting thing-in-itself being’ as implied by the ‘naming’ capability of language.

Modern physics, in trying to use ‘thing-in-itself’ based language to refer to reality that is intrinsically fluid and relational, has used ‘The surprise version of the game of Twenty Questions’ (physicists Geoffrey Chew and John Wheeler).

Indigenous aboriginal languages similarly preserve the innate relational essence of reality by referring to things using webs of relations such as ‘Dances with wolves’.  The man who Western culture gives a fixed name (John Dunbar) imputing ‘thing-in-itselfness’, is thus given meaning in terms of his inclusion within the world understood as a web of relations where the relations are in precedence over the forms that are continually developing and redeveloping within the web of relations.

Relational references to forms that avoid ‘objectifying’ the form as a ‘thing-in-itself’ are said to be ‘poetic’ metaphor; “A man’s reach must exceed his grasp or what’s a meta phor?” (-McLuhan et al)

However, it has happened within Western culture that while ‘poetic understanding’ was a popular, if not ‘the dominant’ approach to using language to share understanding of reality, it was overtaken by the ‘literalism’ of Newtonian science which approached an understanding of reality NOT IN THE IMPLICIT RELATIONAL TERMS, … but instead, … IN EXPLICIT ABSOLUTIST REDUCTIONIST TERMS, wherein the ‘things-in-themselves’ psychologically instantiated by ‘naming’ were given the foundational role (in developing an intellectually explicit understanding of reality), not just in terms of ‘material thing-in-itself existence’, but thanks to the ‘double error’ (Nietzsche) were endowed with notional powers of sourcing actions and developments.

Western culture language and grammar thus supply the makings for INVENTING REALITY in EXPLICIT ‘DOUBLE ERROR’ TERMS  of name-instantiated things-in-themselves with (notional) powers of sourcing actions and developments.

Examples; ‘humans’, ‘nations’, ‘corporations’.

So, our experience from infancy is of relational-topological inclusion; i.e. it is the experience of inclusion within a transforming relational continuum, but the tool of language as employed in Western culture gives us the option to intellectually REDUCE the reality of inclusion in the Tao, to an INVENTED REALITY based on the ‘double error’ of name-instantiated things-in-themselves (‘humans’, ‘nations’, ‘corporations’) notionally with powers of sourcing actions and developments, hence;

The tool (of language) runs away with the workman, the human with the divine – Ralph Waldo Emerson

The point is that, according to our experience and to modern physics, we are relational forms in the transforming relational continuum, however, according to our intellectualizing of ourselves by means of language and grammar and the Western culture ‘double error’, we imagine ourselves to be ‘things-in-ourselves’ with powers of sourcing actions and developments.  This is where ‘the tool of language runs away with us, the users of this tool’, … so that we no longer understand ourselves relational confluences intrinsically included in the transforming relational continuum, but instead intellectually understand ourselves, thanks to language and grammar, as name-instantiated, independently-existing things-in-ourselves notionally with our own powers of sourcing actions and developments [‘there goes the relational continuum!’; i.e. relational reality is ‘wallpapered over’ by the intellectual language-and-grammar Invented Reality).

Ok, language and grammar has us portraying ourselves (and tending to believe ourselves) to be ‘independently-existing’ ‘sorcerers’.   This abstract conceptualizing wherein we notionally (intellectually) split ourselves out of the flow (Tao) introduces some ambiguous reality options into our ‘invented reality’ with regard to the ‘boil’ and ‘flow’ topology/geometry; e.g. third option, ‘the boil stirs up/sources the flow’, second option, ‘the flow stirs up the boils’, and the first option, boil-and-flow distinction is ‘appearances’; i.e. this is how relational transformation ‘appears’).   These three levels of reality (the lower two levels assuming ‘sorcery’ and the upper level, relational transformation) are ‘reality’ informing options available to us, that are described by systems sciences researcher Erich Jantsch in ‘Design for Evolution’.

Level 3; termed ‘nature’ in the ‘nature’ – ‘nurture’ dichotomy.  Here we see ourselves as the source of our own actions and developments; i.e. as the ‘boil’ in the ‘flow’ that is stirring up the flow. Associated aphorism; “A bad apple spoils the barrel”.  This sorcery-based view aligns with the ‘conservative’ view of realty (or, in other words, the conservative view of reality derives from this level 3 sorcery view).

Level 2; termed ‘nurture’ in the ‘nature’ – ‘nurture’ dichotomy.  Here we see ourselves as the ‘boil’ in the ‘flow’ that is being stirred up by the ‘flow’ at the same time as the ‘boils’ are stirring up the ‘flow’.  Aphorism “It takes a whole community to raise a child”.  This sorcery-based view aligns with the ‘liberal’ view of reality’.

Level 3; termed ‘transformation’ [there is no ‘sorcery’ involved in this purely relational level of reality].  This relational transformational understanding of reality is captured in the indigenous aboriginal expression ‘mitakuye oyasin’, ‘all my relations’ (everything is related).

Western culture adherents are divided as to whether ‘reality’ is best explained in level 3 terms (conservatives) or in level 2 terms (liberals) and this sets up a major political divide along with constant disagreements over the correct course of actions..  Both of these levels assume that reality is constituted by ‘things-in-themselves’ with powers of sourcing actions and developments (the ‘double error’ exposed by Nietzsche).

However, both Western conservatives and liberals see indigenous aboriginals as failing to have developed similar levels of understanding and skills that, in Western culture, have given rise to so many great inventions and discoveries that have been contributing to the health and comfort of humans living on the earth.  Ayn Rand’s words capture the common Western culture understanding that the ‘environment’ is something separate from the ‘human’ and is therefore something that can be ‘owned’ and ‘exploited’ rather than the ‘greater relational self’ that one is included in;

“They [the indians] had no right to a country merely because they were born here and then acted like savages. The white man did not conquer this country. And you are a racist if you object, because it means you believe that certain men are entitled to something because of their race. You believe that if someone is born in a magnificent country and doesn’t know what to do with it, he still has a property right to it. He does not. . . .Any European who brought with him an element of civilization had the right to take over this continent, and it’s great that some of them did.” — Ayn Rand

So, the point is that many of the ‘advancements’ authored by Western culture adherents were ‘advancements beneficial to humans’ AS IF HUMANS EXIST SEPARATELY FROM THE REALITY THEY ARE INCLUDED IN.

In systems sciences terms, this falls into the general category of ‘suboptimization’ which is based on the notional ‘independence’ of a ‘sub-system’ from the ‘suprasystem’ it is included in.  Of course, if the ‘system’ is ‘not really independent’ of the suprasystem, … while improvements can seemingly be made that benefit the (presumed independent ‘system’), they will necessarily ‘suboptimize’ the dynamics of the suprasystem.  In plain language, if we improve lives for humans at the expense of the lives of other animals and the water and air etc. based on man’s notional independence of the environment, this ‘subotimization’ DOESN’T MAKE SENSE if the ‘everything is related’ (mitakuye oyasin) as is the understanding of indigenous aboriginals as is also the understanding of modern physics.

Suboptimization, for example, is the operative principle of the herbicide ‘Roundup’ which pre-empts the natural relational eco-harmony between the local plant/organism and its eco-environment so that the plant behaves one-sidedly (suboptimizes as an independent system), exploiting its surroundings, growing faster and larger in an independent, unbalanced, unsustainable manner until it collapses under the weight of its own independently asserting excesses.  An analogy would be the ‘mother country’ that grows large and powerful by drawing nurturance and strength from its colonies not in a balanced symbiosis but by ‘sucking them dry’ so that the whole colonial matrix subducts from its excessive self-consumption.

System sciences such as Martine Dodds-Taljaard and György Jaros express the basic problem with ‘suboptimization’ in our relational world, in their paper;

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

The point is that whether we are ‘talking about’ a ‘human’, a ‘nation’, or a ‘corporation’, our intellectual action of ‘naming’ such relational flow-forms does not really ‘convert them’ from relational forms in the flow to ‘independently-existing things-in-themselves’, notionally with their own God-like powers of sourcing actions and developments.  That is the Nietzschean ‘double error’ of language and grammar.  As Nietzsche observes;

“I am afraid we are not rid of God because we continue to believe in grammar” — Nietzsche

The ‘God’ from ‘grammar’ illusion derives from a ‘double error’ of grammar that reduces ‘appearances’ (apparitions) associated with relational transforming to events that are notionally ‘sourced’ by some ‘subject author of sorcery’ as follows;

“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

* * *

The above is an outline of how relational transformation is REDUCED by language and grammar to the intellectual, abstract, double-error based terms of ‘thing-in-itself’ instigated ‘sorcery’.

This gives rise, in Western culture intellectual constructions of reality, to two opposing versions of ‘reality’, both of which are based on the abstract (double error based) notion of ‘sorcery’; i.e. the conservative view of sorcery as originating from within a single independent being, … and the liberal view of source as originating within an independent collective (a nation or organization).

By contrast, modern physics, indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoist/Buddhist cultures and Advaita Vedanta understand reality as a transforming relational continuum in which we are relational flow-forms in the manner of ‘boils’ in ‘flow’; i.e. identifiable by ‘appearance’ without imputing the ‘double error’ ‘thing-in-itselfness’ with ‘powers of sorcery’ as in Western culture language and grammar INVENTED REALITY constructions.

So, what about the amazing engineering achievements of Western culture from the pyramids to the New York skyscrapers, to flying machines, computers, television, cell phones etc. etc. … are they not ‘real’ and do they not reflect the superior ‘smarts’ developed by Western culture?

The world/universe in its entirety can be understood as a transforming relational continuum.  That is the primary ‘reality’ (level 1 reality in Jantsch’s three levels of reality).  The development of a skyscraper or system of airports and air travel, while we can use language and grammar to capture and describe it as a system in itself, is nevertheless, in the larger reality of our actual experience, included within the transforming relational continuum.  The fact that language and grammar allow us to ‘break relational forms’ out of the continuum and animate them as notional ‘things-in-themselves’ with powers of sorcery, by way of the ‘double error’ simply says that we have the ability to use language, grammar and intellect to construct INVENTED REALITIES.  However useful such language and grammar based INVENTED REALITIES may be to our intellectual modelling of the world of our experience, it is only a Western culture habit to put more value on language based intellectual understanding than on included relational experience.  The virgin children who develop a deep intellectual understanding of sexual relations may far outscore their own parents in test of knowledge therein, and intellectual knowledge tends to be given more value in Western society than actual experience (e.g. the hiring of business college graduates directly into business management positions to supervise operations that they have no prior shop-floor experience of).  Allowing intellectual knowledge to take precedence over actual relational experience is a Western culture exposure to dysfunctional social dynamics.

For example, Orson Welles radio broadcast of ‘War of the Worlds’ on October 30, 1938 was, for many listeners (who missed his initial warning that the radio presentation was a dramatization of a fictional work) MIS-taken to be a live news reporting of an alien invasion of the earth.   The ensuing panic underscores how language-stimulated psychological-intellectual INVENTED REALITY can ‘over-ride’ the reality of our actual (in-the-now) experiencing of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.

This type of misplaced elevating of language-stimulated intellectual INVENTED REALITY into an unnatural precedence over the reality of our actual relational experience is a ubiquitous pitfall in Western culture which is avoided in cultures such as indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta.

Ego is the ‘engine’ of suboptimization, whether in the form of the pride of an individual, corporation or nation ‘in its own independent being’ and in ‘its own innate powers of sorcery’.

Ego swells the head while inspiration fills the heart.

The feeling of inclusion within a transforming relational continuum as in ‘mitakuye oyasin’ is relational experience based.  It differs fundamentally from ego in that ego keys to the sense of self of the individual, nation or corporation in the ‘double error’ context of ‘things-in-themselves with their own innate powers of sourcing actions and developments’.

Western culture, it might be said, ‘runs on ego’, the name-instantiated sense of individual self, the name-instantiated sense of national self, the name-instantiated sense of corporate self, intellectual abstraction as described in the double error terms of Nietzsche.

Summary in the form of supportive imagery.

Western culture is heavily invested in the psychologically aberrant subscription to a ‘double error’ based INVENTED REALITY.  It is the everyday talked about, debated and social organizing ‘operative reality’ of Western culture.  IT IS NOT REAL, but rather intellectual abstraction.

This intellectual abstraction (double-error) based INVENTED REALITY nevertheless serves to organize social activity, for example, in the construction of a skyscraper or entire modern city.  In the understanding of modern physics and indigenous aboriginals, such activity is understood in terms of the transforming of the relational continuum in which we (and all things) are included.  The tool of language allows us to represent such construction in terms of the ‘double error’ of language and grammar; i.e. in terms of name-instantiated things-in-themselves with powers of sourcing actions and developments.  In this common intellectual and language-stimulated representation we ‘drop out’ the REAL SOURCE which is the all-including relational continuum, and instead ‘insert’ or ‘plug in’ the ersatz sourcing agency of the human, the sourcing agency of the nation, the sourcing agency of the corporation etc.  As Nietzsche points out, the concept of ‘sorcery’ arises from a ‘double error’ of language and grammar; i.e. relational transformation is the only ‘real’ (relational experience supported) dynamic;

“In its origin language belongs in the age of the most rudimentary form of psychology. We enter a realm of crude fetishism when we summon before consciousness the basic presuppositions of the metaphysics of language, in plain talk, the presuppositions of reason. Everywhere it sees a doer and doing; it believes in will as the cause; it believes in the ego, in the ego as being, in the ego as substance, and it projects this faith in the ego-substance upon all things — only thereby does it first create the concept of “thing.” Everywhere “being” is projected by thought, pushed underneath, as the cause; the concept of being follows, and is a derivative of, the concept of ego. In the beginning there is that great calamity of an error that the will is something which is effective, that will is a faculty. Today we know that it is only a word.” – Nietzsche, ‘Twilight of the Idols’

 

“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

There is ample evidence here, pointing to the fact that Western language and grammar based INVENTED REALITY which we Western culture adherents talk and write about and employ as the ‘operative reality’ that guides our Western individual and collective social behaviour, is ‘double error’ intellectual abstraction based.  Points of note are that this INVENTED REALITY portrays us and our organizations (nations, corporations) as ‘things-in-ourselves’ with powers of sourcing actions and developments.   This INVENTED REALITY is supported by the ‘ego’ which is essentially the ‘belief in the double error’ wherein we employ language and grammar to ‘name’ relational forms and use grammar to infuse them with powers of sourcing actions and developments.

This language and intellection based INVENTED REALITY ‘takes the place of’ (wallpapers over) our relational experiential reality of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.  Correspondingly, ‘ego’ (the notional internal sourcing motivator within the local independently-existing thing-in-itself) takes the place of ‘inspiration’ (the relational influence that inductively orchestrates relational transformation).

The notional ‘independence’ of the ‘sourcing agency’ is what leads to local ‘suboptimization’ as if developments were ‘locally sourced’ as in the intellectual Western culture ‘producer-product’ abstraction, that blinds one to the reality of nature as relational transformation.

To a pre-lingual observer, the development of a city would be understood, NOT in terms of a name-instantiated thing-in-itself explainable in terms of ‘its’ properties, dimensions and characteristics, but in terms of the transforming relational continuum within which the city is a not-explicitly-identifiable feature.  Language and grammar would be required to ‘break out’ such features within the transforming relational continuum as notional ‘things-in-themselves’ such as a ‘city’ or ‘human’ etc.

Western culture adherents speak as if they are the sorcerers of developments such as ‘cities’ as if cities are ‘things-in-themselves’ just because we named them as such, when they remain inseparable from the ‘real reality’ of the transforming relational continuum.

When we Western culture adherents fall into the ‘double error’ trap and conceive of ourselves as the ‘sorcerers’ of ‘things-in-themselves’ such as ‘cities’ and ‘nations’, this is where;

The tools (of language) runs away with the workman, the human with the divine – Ralph Waldo Emerson

The tools of language lie behind Western culture adherents evolving of cultural values and practices that attribute unfolding ‘good’ or ‘bad’ developments to ‘sorcery’ and which ‘identify’ the particular sorcerers so as to give rewards for ‘good’ developments and ‘punishments’ for ‘bad developments’.  This sorcery based understanding and practice clashes fundamentally with the understanding of reality as relational transformation of modern physics and ‘mitakuye oyasin’, … however the belief in sorcery is ‘locked-in’ by ‘high switching costs’ as associate with personal ego, national ego and corporate ego.

“Nationalism in is an infantile disease; it is the measles of mankind’ – Einstein. 

Einstein’s rebuke should not be interpreted as ‘slighting the infant’, however, since the infantile understanding of the world is in topological terms of inclusion in a transforming relational continuum wherein there is no such thing as ‘sorcery’, the basis of ‘ego’ in the Western culture acculturated individual, nation and corporation.

* * *