The U.S. Presidential Election changes the Leader but not the System
WESTERN CULTURE DOES NOT CHANGE WITH CHANGE OF LEADERSHIP
Forward: The U.S. Presidential election of 2020 has been strongly polarized between the candidate of the conservatives/Republicans and the candidate of the liberals (Democrats). While this polarization vaguely follows the division of RIGHT and LIEFT as it has come to be known by terminology in French politics from the summer of 1789 when members of the French National Assembly met to begin drafting a constitution. The delegates were deeply divided over the issue of how much authority King Louis XVI should have, and as the debate raged, the two main factions each staked out territory in the assembly hall. The anti-royalist revolutionaries seated themselves to the presiding officer’s left, while the more conservative, aristocratic supporters of the monarchy gathered to the right.
The focus of this note is that the Conservative/Republican and Liberal/Democrat polarization arises from a conceptual ambiguity wherein the Conservative – Liberal split is not only a false dichotomy, but the tip of the iceberg in the confusing of understanding that derives from a DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, as discussed in this note.
* * *
The U.S. and WESTERN ‘SOCIAL OPERATING SYSTEM is based on BINARY LOGIC which is reductive and simplistic and when used to interpret and address complex realities, is the source of dysfunction, including the binary bipolar political splitting into the polarized conservative and liberal factions. This polarization is based on the false initial premise of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments deriving from a DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR (Nietzsche).
PRIDE (swollen EGO) as well as RECOGNITION/FAME derive from the DOUBLE ERROR based LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments.
SHAME (deflated EGO) as well as DEFAMATION/INFAMOUS, derive from the DOUBLE ERROR of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments.
REALITY does not support the abstract concept of LOCAL SOURCING which comes from the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, but supports, instead, relational transformation.
Modern physics REAFFIRMS the REALITY of relational transformation and REJECTS the DOUBLE ERROR based abstraction of LOCAL SOURCING.
WHAT’S THIS GOT TO DO WITH THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION?
The PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION is troubled by the UNNATURAL SPLIT in how WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS understand real-world dynamics (as contrasted with RATIONAL dynamics) which we know as the POLAR OPPOSITION between Conservatives and Liberals. WHERE DOES THIS SPLIT IN HOW WE SEE “REALITY” COME FROM?
WHERE IT COMES FROM IS FROM THE APPROXIMATIONS WE BUILD INTO LANGUAGE IN ORDER TO GIVE LANGUAGE SOME MEANS OF APPROXIMATELY ARTICULATING THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.
For example, the NAMING of the HURRICANE to impute LOCAL BEING to it, coupled with GRAMMAR to impute to the LOCAL BEING its own (notional) power of SOURCING actions and developments creates the representation wherein the HURRICANE sources the stirring up of the ATMOSPHERE.
The equally possible AMBIGUOUS alternative is in the NAMING of the ATMOSPHERE coupled with GRAMMAR to create the representation wherein the ATMOSPHERE sources the stirring up of the HURRICANE.
THIS POLARIZING AMBIGUIITY IS GENERAL AND IT PERMEATES AND CONFUSES WESTERN CULTURE SOCIAL DYNAMICS. It underlies the political splitting into Conservative and Liberal.
The Conservative prefers the masculine assertive option where the individual is conceived of as sourcing the actions of the social collective. (One bad apple can source rotting of the barrel)
The Liberal prefers the feminine accommodating option where the social collective is conceived of as sourcing the actions of the individual (“It takes a whole community to raise a child”).
In political elections of leaders, the WESTERN CULTURE public polarizes on the basis of the two opposite views of ‘leadership’ (the above cited ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal’ concepts of the sourcing of organized actions and developments).
NEITHER CONCEPT (conservative, liberal) IS BASED ON REALITY as there is NO SUCH THING AS “SOURCING”. The concept of “SOURCING” is abstraction fabricated from the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR. REALITY is relational TRANSFORMATION; i.e. the all-including transforming relational continuum aka the Wave-field aka the Tao.
The U.S. Presidential Election changes the Leader but not the System
The abstract, i.e. UNREAL concept of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments that derives from the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR is nevertheless deployed, in WESTERN CULTURE, as if it were the REALITY, giving rise to attributions of PRIDE and SHAME depending on how society assigns attribution of the SOURCING of BENEFICIAL and DETRIMENTAL actions and developments. NOTE THAT THE CONCEPT OF LOCAL SOURCING IS TAKEN FOR GRANTED IN WESTERN CULTURE, AND SUCH UNDERSTANDING IS SECURED BY ‘EGO’. EGO establishes the base-case pattern through the attributing of SOURCING of BENEFICIAL actions and developments as establishes HEROIC and DEMONIC figures, as supported in thought by the simplistic abstraction of BINARY LOGIC.
NOTA BENE: Modern physics and EASTERN CULTURES (indigenous aboriginal, Taoist/Buddhist and Advaita Vedanta) embrace A DIFFERENT FORM OF LOGIC WHICH IS NOT BINARY; i.e. a logic that has been termed QUANTUM logic or ‘the BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDED medium, as contrasts with the EITHER/OR logic of the EXCLUDED medium aka ‘BINARY LOGIC’.
In the earlier example of the HURRICANE and the ATMOSPHERE, while BINARY LOGIC assumes that FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO and gives the TWO ambiguous options of (a) The HURRICANE is sourcing the stirring up of the ATMOSPHERE, and (b) The ATMOSPHERE is sourcing the stirring up of the HURRICANE, … QUANTUM LOGIC assumes INSTEAD, that FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE such that the HURRICANE is NOT ONTOLOGICALLY SEPARATE from the ATMOSPHERE except by APPEARANCE, thus THERE IS NO AMBIGUITY as there is in the WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT conceptualizing of the same reality.
IN MODERN PHYSICS as in indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta, THERE IS NO ATTEMPT TO REDUCE REALITY TO THE BINARY OPPOSITES OF FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO. Reality as a flow-continuum (transforming Wave-field) is the assumed physical reality so that language based on LOCAL THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES and their actions, as given by the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR are understood as practical INFERENCES of a reality that lies beyond direct and explicit capture with language.
In WESTERN CULTURE THINKING, the BINARY SPLITTING of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO is fundamental to language-based constructions of an EFFABLE “REALITY” which is commonly accepted as the OPERATIVE REALITY, and not, as in MODERN PHYSICS and THE EAST, as inference of an ineffable reality that lies beyond the reach of language based on that which is LOCAL and EXPLICIT..
The example of the BINARY SPLITTING of HURRICANE and ATMOSPHERE or FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO, rather than accepting that FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE as in the Wave-field understanding leads directly to POLARIZING AMBIGUITY of the WESTERN CULTURE political “conservative – liberal” split where the populace divides against itself into polar factions on the question of whether the FIGURE (INDIVIDUAL) sources the stirring up of the GROUND (SOCIAL COLLECTIVE) or the GROUND (SOCIAL COLLECTIVE) sources the stirring up of the FIGURE (INDIVIDUAL).
In Modern Physics as in indigenous aboriginal, Taoist/Buddhist and Advaita Vedanta understanding, FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE (TRANSFORMATION manifests as ATMOSPHERIC HURRICANING in a FIGURE-add-GROUND-as-ONE sense. The BINARY LOGICAL SPLITTING OF FIGURE AND GROUND INTO TWO is intellectual abstraction that is not grounded in sensory reality. That is, the intellectual abstraction is for the purpose of rendering the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT (relational transformation) EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT (rational discourse).
In this reduction of the INEFFABLE to something EFFABLE, we reduce TRANSFORMATION to GROWTH. GROWTH is a RATIO-NAL abstraction as in ‘the GROWTH of the TOWN’ wherein the dimensions of the TOWN based on an fixed reference are measured at the start and end of a TIME interval. Of course as Heraclitus would point out ,we are included in a TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM so that we can’t measure the TOWN twice because everything is included in the transformation such that IT IS NOT THE SAME TOWN and we are NEITHER ARE WE THE SAME PERSON. What we have here is the all-including TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE, and the ORCHARD THAT GROWS LARGER is an abstract concept that does not outweigh or supersede, in reality the REAL REALITY of the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE.
THE MIND-TWISTER here is that while we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are accustomed to accepting that NAMING imputes PERSISTING BEING to the flow-form that is NAMED, whether a NATION or a TOWN or an ORCHARD, the greater reality is that of the transforming relational continuum, as accepted in Modern Physics, indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta.
YES, we can use the word GROWTH, which is abstraction, but only to allude to TRANSFORMATION which is real.
The DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR allows us to construct abstract animations that are EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT; i.e. “the ORCHARD is growing larger and more productive” which is where THOUGHT takes over from sensory experience of inclusion in a transforming relational continuum (The transforming LANDSCAPE).
The Conservative – Liberal political polarization is based on the artificial BIPOLAR (BINARY LOGIC based) splitting AS APPLIED TO THE ABSTRACT CONCEPT OF LOCAL SOURCING, a concept that is supported by EGO.
THERE IS NO “REAL” AMBIGUITY HERE BECAUSE THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS LOCAL “SOURCING”, THERE IS ONLY TRANSFORMATION. LOCAL “SOURCING” IS SOMETHING WE INVENT to ‘get by’ the INEFFABILITY of reality as a transforming relational continuum, a reality that is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT.
THERE IS NOTHING NEW HERE THAT HASN’T BEEN LAIDE DOWN IN MODERN PHYSICS AND IN THE UNDERSTANDING OF INDIGENOUS ABORGINAL CULTURES, TAOISM/BUDDHISM AND ADVAITA VEDANTA.
OUR WESTERN CULTURE, HOWEVER, REMAINS GROUNDED IN THE ABSTRACTIONS OF BINARY LOGIC SUCH AS ‘RIGHT’ AND ‘WRONG’ AND THE BEHAVIOURAL COUNTERPART; ‘GOOD’ AND ‘EVIL’. This ‘binary logic’ is built into our WESTERN CULTURE model of reality via assumptions as to the basic NATURE of MAN;
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
This popular WESTERN CULTURE conceptualization of humanings in the transforming relational continuum, continue on to be radically at odds with the understandings of modern physics, indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta. The above assumptions form the basis of EGO as in PRIDE and SHAME, which incorporates the abstract concept of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments; i.e. the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.
Western culture celebrates and punishes on the basis of knowledge of the SOURCING AGENTS of actions and developments per the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.
THERE IS NO SOURCING IN THE REALITY OF OUR SENSORY EXPERIENCE OF INCLUSION IN A TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.
MEANWHILE, ‘SOURCING’ HAS BEEN GIVEN “THE FOUNDATIONAL ROLE” IN WESTERN CULTURE ‘REWARDING’ AND ‘PUNISHING’.
Those societies that are most PROUD and REWRDING of their sourcing of GOOD actions and developments, by way of binary logical consistency, are most ASHAMED and PUNITIVE of their sourcing of BAD actions and developments;
The U.S. penal population of 2.2 million adults is by far the largest in the world.”Just under one-quarter of the world’s prisoners are held in American prisons. The U.S. rate of incarceration, with nearly 1 out of every 100 adults in prison or jail, is 5 to 10 times higher than the rates in Western Europe and other democracies. — The Growth of Incarceration in the United States Exploring Causes and Consequences (2014) Consensus Study Report
SUMMARY: The U.S. Presidential Election changes the Leader but not the System
CHANGING OUT THE LEADER DOES NOT CHANGE OUT THE SYSTEM BUT REINFORCES IT, since the public is asked, once again, to accept a social system in which the members divide and polarize against THEMSELVES on the basis of a binary logical split in the manner of perceiving reality (i.e. in the DOUBLE ERROR terms of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments).
There is a polarizing of the social collective in the U.S. and in the WESTERN CULTURE world generally, that derives from language that falsely imputes the power of SOURCING actions and development to NAMING-instantiated ‘things-in-themselves’, whether ‘humans’, ‘nations’, ‘corporations’ etc.
This ABSTRACT and UNNATURAL imputing of LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF BEING by way of NAMING (FIRST ERROR) and then conflating this first error by using GRAMMAR to impute the power of SOURCING actions and development to the NAMING-instantiated THING-IN-ITSELF (SECOND ERROR) … SETS UP AN UNREAL AMBIGUOUS BIPOLAR CONFLICT in WESTERN CULTURE social collectives.
This confusing polarizing of the social collective arises from the use of NAMING and GRAMMAR based LOCAL and EXPLICIT abstraction as a means of conveying TRANSFORMATION that is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT. Since TRANSFORMATION as in the Wave-field is a NOLOCAL CONTINUUM, which is what makes it INEFFABLE (it just goes on without terminating), the use of a DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR is the ‘work-around’ that we SUBSTITUTE for the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT fluid Wave-field reality. This work-around or SUBSTITUTE REALITY gives the impression of a FIGURE-and-GROUND-based LOCAL SOURCING which comes at the price of introducing AMBIGUITY; i.e. DOES the FIGURE source the actions and developments of the GROUND or does the GROUND source the actions and developments of the FIGURE.
There is no answer to this since the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO conceptualization comes from the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR which notionally mobilizes the NAMING based FIGURE as if in its own right, and thus granting it the INDEPENDENCE of being able to move about within and to source changes in the GROUND. Since language does not have ‘its own built in intelligence’, language can alternatively give the active role to the GROUND so that the GROUND can be ‘seen’ as sourcing the actions of the FIGURE.
THUS, THE AMBIGUITY of the type; DOES THE HURRICANE SOURCE THE STIRRING UP OF THE ATMOSPHERE OR DOES THE ATMOSPHERE SOURCE THE STIRRING UP OF THE HURRICANE. As modern physics (relativity) informs us NEITHER OF THESE BINARY OPPOSITE LOGICAL PROPOSITIONS IS TRUE, because there is no such thing as LOCAL SOURCING and what is going on in reality is RELATIONAL TRANSFORMATION.
The LIBERAL-CONSERVATIVE POLAR OPPOSITION DERIVES FROM THE SPLIT IN HOW TO UNDERSTAND SOURCING. There are TWO BINARY LOGICAL options;
(a) Conservative: the individual is the basic source of the dynamic that animates the social collective,
(b) Liberal: the social collective is the basic source of the dynamic that animates the individual.
OBSERVATION: There is no such thing in reality as LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments, there is only relational transformation. EGO is the basis of belief in LOCAL SOURCING and EGO comes in TWO FORMS, the PRIDE in the INDIVDUAL as dominates in the conservative following, and the PRIDE in the social collective as dominates in the liberal following.
As EGO subsides, this POLAR CONTENTION subsides. As EGO builds, this POLAR CONTENTION builds.
Thus EGO is a DISTRACTION that interferes with our dropping back and calming down and thus allowing a reassessment of the very basics of BINARY LOGIC based Polarization, calling into question the legitimacy of BINARY LOGIC ITSELF as having the foundational role in REASONING.
“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
“In pride, in reasoning pride, our error lies;” — Alexander Pope
CLOSING WORDS re “The U.S. Presidential Election changes the Leader but not the System”
Our WESTERN CULTURE social collective can easily divide and polarize against itself on the basis BINARY LOGICAL THINKING aka RATIO-NAL thinking aka REASON which we are indeed very proud of. For example, have we not put REASON in first place even over INTUITION which brings with it understanding in terms of TRANSFORMATION? The WESTERN CULTURE giving over the primacy of understanding to REASON has been leaving the INTUITION of TRANSFORMING in the lurch leading to the construction of skyscrapers, highways and skyways and a huge abundance of material products, enough to rival the TRANSFORMATION that man is included in, and thus to suggest that we humans may be approaching the point where are in control of nature (ignoring the challenge of COVID 19).
WE must ascertain, of course, whether or not it really is true that ‘the TOWN GROWS larger and more productive’, because the indigenous aboriginals are spreading the word that the ‘real reality’ is that the LANDSCAPE IS TRANSFORMING, and that the expression ‘the TOWN GROWS larger and more productive’ is just a DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, as Nietzsche has also suggested.
If GROWTH is part of the DOUBLE ERROR abstraction then our WESTERN CULTURE’s frenetic pursuit of GROWTH could instead be engendering TRANSFORMATION in the manner of the sailor’s loose sheet in the windstorm.
In fact, that’s how Nietzsche was calling it, as also Bohm, Wittgenstein and Schroedinger.
* * *
If we are celebrating the Liberal win of the U.S. Presidential Election, then we are at the same time reaffirming the (false) reality of the BINARY LOGIC based split into ‘conservative’ (Republican) and ‘liberal’ (Democrat) political factions.
This polarized reality is “false” in the sense that both poles of the conservative – liberal dichotomy are based on the assumed ‘reality’ of LOCAL SOURCING which is the UNREAL ARTIFACT of the DOUBLE EROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR as pointed out by Nietzsche.
* * *
As in a hotly contested football match, there are some happy winners and some sorry losers tonight as regards the U.S. Presidential Election.
From a philosophical point of view, there is also interest, from the point of view that opens up to all manner of social relational organizing in the world, not just that of the US or the WEST but including the organizing of EASTERN and indigenous aboriginal cultures.
In this broader look, the POLARIZATION that we see in the U.S. election is more of an anomaly beckoning to be understood in a more ‘global’ context.
That, it is highly extraordinary to see people POLARIZE so evenly on such a huge scale as in the U.S. presidential election. It brings to mind those situations in physics wherein TWO things that are equal and opposite turn out to be ONE where the TWO-ness is only APPEARANCE.
This TWO-as-ONE situation is the case when we realize that the BINARY EITHER/OR LOGIC of the EXCLUDED MEDIUM that we have been using in classical physics is inadequate for addressing the full complexity of physical reality and that ‘Quantum’ BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDED medium is required. For example, instead of understanding the HURRICANE as something separate that ‘moves through’ the ATMOSPHERE, we can understand the HURRICANE as ‘how the TRANSFORMING ATMOSPHERE is APPEARING. This is the understanding in terms of the transforming relational continuum aka the Wave-field aka the Tao.
Why should people of opposing viewpoint withing a large social collective split into two opposite and nearly equal polar opposite groups? In modern physics, there is only ONE thing there and it is DIVIDING AGAINST ITSELF and we are wrong to argue over whether ‘the HURRICANE is sourcing the stirring up of the ATMOSPHERE’ or whether ‘the ATMOSPHERE is sourcing the stirring up of the HURRICANE’ because, as modern physics informs us, THERE IS NO LOCAL “SOURCING’ as is implied by FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO, … there is only TRANSFORMATION wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE. It is the assumption of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO that implies LOCAL SOURCING which in turn implies ambiguity as to whether FIGURE is sourcing the stirring up of the GROUND or whether the GROUND is sourcing the stirring up of the FIGURE.
So, where did we get this DOUBLE ERROR notion of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO? We got it from Newtonian physics, but where did Newton get it from? Newton got it from language, as Benjamin Whorf has pointed out;
It is sometimes stated that Newtonian space, time, and matter are sensed by everyone intuitively, whereupon relativity is cited as showing how mathematical analysis can prove intuition wrong. This, besides being unfair to intuition, is an attempt to answer offhand question (1) put at the outset of this paper, to answer which this research was undertaken. Presentation of the findings now nears its end, and I think the answer is clear. The offhand answer, laying the blame upon intuition for our slowness in discovering mysteries of the Cosmos, such as relativity, is the wrong one. The right answer is: Newtonian space, time, and matter are no intuitions. They are recepts from culture and language. That is where Newton got them.”
IN REALITY, it is neither the case that ‘the HURRICANE sources the stirring up of the ATMOSPHERE (the conservative view) nor is it the case that the ATMOSPHERE sources the stirring up of the HURRICANE (the liberal view). Both of the former are FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO representations and both depend on the concept of LOCAL SOURCING which is NOT REALITY. In the Modern physics understanding, FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-only-ONE (Schroedinger, Bohm et al).
To ‘cut to the quick’, what I am saying is that the conservative view and the liberal views are conjugates of each other in the same manner as the HURRICANE and ATMOSPHERE and other FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE or INHABITANT-and-HABITAT-as-ONE Modern physics examples. (See also Erich Jantsch’s 3 levels of conceptualizing reality wherein level 3 is the conservative reality, level 2 is the liberal reality and level 1 is reality as TRANSFORMATION as in Modern physics.)
NOW we can understand the argument between the conservative and liberal in terms of the conservative saying that the HURRICANE is sourcing a stirring up of the ATMOSPHERE while the liberal is saying the ATMOSPHERE is sourcing a stirring up of the HURRICANE while ‘what is really going on’ is TRANSFORMATION and there is no need to invoke the ABSTRACTION of LOCAL SOURCING (there is such thing as LOCAL SOURCING. It comes from the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR)..
We live in a TRANSFORMING relational continuum wherein there is no such thing as LOCAL SOURCING, apart from that which we invent by way of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR. However, such INVENTION can be of practical use because without it, TRANSFORMATION, because it is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT remains INEFFABLE. The DOUBLE ERROR allows us to substitute something LOCAL and EXPLICIT for the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT as when we substitute LOCAL and EXPLICIT SUBSTITUTE; ‘The HURRICANE is sourcing the stirring up of the ATMOSPHERE. But such substitution of the LOCAL and EXPLICIT could also be in the form; ‘The ATMOSPHERE is sourcing the stirring up of the HURRICANE’.
In conveying TRANSFORMATION, language lacks the necessary complexity carrying capability, and if we try to use it anyhow, we can only do a half-assed job, or rather two half-assed jobs. So, as Wittgenstein ends up saying in his final proposition in Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus;
7.0 Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. (“Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen”),
How is it that WESTERN CULTURE social collectives fall into this pattern of intellectual polarization that is often referred to as the politics of LEFT and RIGHT?
How this polarization arises and why it persists is the topic of the following essay (now posted above);
This exploration covers the same ground as NIETZSCHE in his DOUBLE ERROR inquiry and Bohm in his differentiating of RATIO-nality (REASON) as distinguished from INTELLIGENCE/INTUITION. Both investigations expose how language is forced to reduce phenomena wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE to NAMING and GRAMMAR (DOUBLE ERROR) ABSTRACTIONS wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO.
-1- Benjamin Whorf on how Newton extracted his laws of motion from language.
From the form-plus-substance dichotomy the philosophical views most traditionally characteristic of the “Western world” have derived huge support. Here belong materialism, psychophysical parallelism, physics–at least in its traditional Newtonian form–and dualistic views of the universe in general. Indeed here belongs almost everything that is “hard, practical common sense.” Monistic, holistic, and relativistic views of reality appeal to philosophers and some scientists, but they are badly handicapped in appealing to the “common sense” of the Western average man–not because nature herself refutes them (if she did, philosophers could have discovered this much), but because they must be talked about in what amounts to a new language. “Common sense,” as its name shows, and “practicality” as its name does not show, are largely matters of talking so that one is readily understood. It is sometimes stated that Newtonian space, time, and matter are sensed by everyone intuitively, whereupon relativity is cited as showing how mathematical analysis can prove intuition wrong. This, besides being unfair to intuition, is an attempt to answer offhand question (1) put at the outset of this paper, to answer which this research was undertaken. Presentation of the findings now nears its end, and I think the answer is clear. The offhand answer, laying the blame upon intuition for our slowness in discovering mysteries of the Cosmos, such as relativity, is the wrong one. The right answer is: Newtonian space, time, and matter are no intuitions. They are recepts from culture and language. That is where Newton got them.” — Benjamin Whorf