The WESTERN ERROR of Putting DIFFERENTIATION before INTEGRATION in LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE
PREFACE: DIFFERENTIATION is a simple BINARY LOGIC concept that, when used in problem-solving, is like the implanting of the Cuckoo’s egg that infuses a TOO-SIMPLE nest-occupying that substitutes for the LESS-SIMPLE arrangement which is the natural, rightful occupier. This is a metaphor for our WESTERN CULTURE habit of using too-simple BINARY LOGIC based linguistic representations to convey complex aspects of our less-simple sense-experience phenomena that require QUANTUM LOGIC representation. The more we become habituated with using simple BINARY LOGIC NEED-FILLERS where QUANTUM LOGIC RESOLVING is needed, the more we simply SILENCE the DEMAND the unsatisfied demand for resolving the LESS SIMPLE QUANTUM LOGIC PROBLEMS.
For example, the problem of IMBALANCE is a QUANTUM LOGIC problem which may be over-simplistically perceived as a BANARY LOGIC problem; for example, the problem of a RICH and POOR IMBALANCE that manifests as a proliferation of RE-BALANCING AGENTS that in BINARY LOGIC terms are THIEVES or PATHOGENS since the greater simplicity of BINARY LOGIC limits representation to “EITHER” correct behaviour “OR” incorrect behaviour, whereas BALANCE and IMBALANCE are understandings coming from QUANTUM LOGIC, the BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING medium.
While BINARY LOGIC is capable of informing us in EITHER/OR terms of whether we are INCREASING the area of cultivated land, say from 300 acres to 5000 acres, we would need the less simple QUANTUM LOGIC to inform us on the changing BALANCE of cultivated (monoculture) land to wilderness diversity land. On a sphere with a surface area of 5100 acres, the one-sided MALE ASSERTING ONLY BINARY LOGIC measure of GROWTH of cultivated land, while ACCURATE and TRUE, is TOO SIMPLE to capture the QUANTUM BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING medium. The BINARY LOGIC based GROWTH implies that the GROWTH is relative to an ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE CONTAINING SPACE where there is only the sense of MALE ASSERTING ‘GROWTH’ and NO sense of a CONJUGATE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING which is an OPEN BUT LIMITING SPACE as in the area on the surface of a sphere.
The BINARY LOGIC based language concept of GROWTH of a DIFFERENTIATED BEING is SIMPLE in that it is based on the assumption that the DIFFERENTIATED BEING resides in an ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE OF INFINITE EXTENT while the corresponding QUANTUM LOGIC based assumption involves the BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDING MEDIUM where we now bring into “play” (i.e. into psychological comprehension) the awareness of BALANCE as in the progressive FILLING UP BY MALE ASSERTING GROWTH of a FINITE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING SPACE.
Thus, our linguistic representation in one-sided RATIO-NAL terms of GROWTH is TOO SIMPLE (it is in effect assuming an absolute infinite empty containing space) because there is an evident need for a LESS SIMPLE linguistic representation, seeing that the CROPLANDS are in a SPHERICAL SPACE so that the sense-experience reality comprehends the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING SHRINKING of the WILDERNESS AREA in CONJUGATE RELATION to the GROWING of the CULTIVATED AREA. Thus the requirement for a less simple QUANTUM LOGIC relation this capable of conveying BALANCE in the sense of the BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING medium as represented graphically with the Yin/Yang symbol which implies that in a spherical space, as it fills with one MALE-ASSERTING thing, there is a conjugate shrinking of the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING openness. For example in the spherical space on the surface of a sphere, as more of the surface area is cultivated or industrialized, there is a simultaneous, conjugate SHRINKAGE of WILDERNESS DIVERSITY.
Because of the SPHERICAL FINITE SPACE limitation (which doesn’t come into play with ‘GROWTH’ since GROWTH assumes ONE-SIDED MALE ASSERTING SELF-REFERENCING ‘RATIO’ WITHIN an ABSOLUTE EMPTY and INFINITE SPACE), we have, in the finite spherical space, BOTH the MALE ASSERTING GROWTH in a RELATIONSHIP with a FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONJUGATE within a FINITE INCLUDING MEDIUM. This “IS” the configuration captured in the Yin/Yang symbol where the circle conveys the finite space of the sphere and the darker fill implies the FEMALE while the brighter fill implies the MALE.
In BINARY LOGIC we have the SIMPLE EITHER/OR choice of OPPOSITES (black and white, right and wrong) while in QUANTUM LOGIC we have the LESS SIMPLE BOTH/AND choice of BALANCE and IMBALANCE. While the European colonizer tends to think in the BINARY LOGIC terms of the desirable GROWTH of CROPLANDS as if in a FLAT PLANE of INFINITE EXTENT, the INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL tends to think in the QUANTUM LOGIC terms of the desirable BALANCE of WILDERNESS and CULTIVATED CROPLANDS within a SPHERICAL SPACE of FINITE EXTENT.
DIFFERENTIATION is a LANGUAGE base qualifier that employs BINARY LOGIC to FRAGMENT the language-based representation of our sense-experience reality (of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum) so as to SEPARATE OUT a relational feature in the flow, such as the TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE, setting it up as a notional LOCAL, EXPLICIT THING-IN-ITSELF (‘BEING’); i.e. ‘the TOWN’ whereupon GRAMMAR can be used in a LANGUAGE based representation scheme to impute LOCAL AUTHORING POWER as captured in the SIMPLE expression ‘the TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING goods and services (this exemplifies the ‘Cuckoo’s egg’ SIMPLIFIED BINARY LOGIC SUBSTITUTE REALITY injection which LOCKS OUT the needed LESS SIMPLE NON-LOCAL and IMPLICIT QUANTUM LOGIC sense-experience consistent linguistic representation; e.g. ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’.
While DIFFERENTIATION and its COHORT, BINARY LOGIC, are given a FOUNDATIONAL ROLE in WESTERN CULTURE language based REALITY CONSTRUCTIONS, INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL CULTURES, by contrast, employ the LESS SIMPLE but QUANTUM LOGIC based INTEGRATION in the FOUNDATIONAL ROLE in LANGUAGE.
The INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL QUANTUM LOGIC expression, ‘THERE IS TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’ captures the BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING MEDIUM relationship where the TOWNING is NOT “A LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF’ but a relational resonance feature within the transforming relational continuum, which does not SEPARATE from the all-including transforming relational continuum aka the WAVE-FIELD. This LESS SIMPLE QUANTUM LOGIC REPRESENTION in terms of TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE serves a FOUNDATIONAL ROLE in the INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL LANGUAGE system and does not suffer the fate of being LOCKED OUT as in WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE schemes, in a Cuckoo’s Egg like caper, by the MORE SIMPLE BINARY LOGIC based language architecture.
* * *
EXAMPLE of the LOCK-OUT of QUANTUM LOGIC language construction by BINARY LOGIC language construction.
A RICH AND POOR IMBALANCE (QUANTUM LOGIC) that is inducing the PROLIFERATION of REBALANCERS, MISLABELLED as PATHOGENS, that is inducing the PROLIFERATION of REBLANCERS (misidentified as pathogens), may be temporarily subdued by ANTI-PATHOGEN remedies (such as removal by police) but because the IMBALANCE persists, NEW REBALANCER VARIANTS will continue to EMERGE pending resolution of the DEEPER, QUANTUM LOGIC ISSUE OF IMBALANCE. WESTERN CULTURE MEDICINE, JUSTICE and COMMERCE is MESMERIZED by the popular Cuckoo’s egg like SUBSTITUTING of TOO SIMPLE BINARY LOGIC based ATTACKING PATHOGEN INTERPRETATIONS of LESS SIMPLE QUANTUM LOGIC IMBALANCE phenomena where the REMEDY is the QUANTUM LOGIC RESTORING of BALANCE rather than the BINARY LOGIC ELIMINATION OF PATHOGENS.
THE WESTERN CULTURE hang-up on BINARY LOGIC misinterpretation of relational IMBALANCE as ‘the attack of pathogens’ leads WESTERN MEDICINE into attempts to eliminate PATHOGENS without addressing IMBALANCE. While ANTI-PATHOGEN remedies (such as removal of pathogens by police or other anti-pathogen means) may show temporary remission of symptoms, because the root issue is imbalance, NEW REBALANCER VARIANTS will continue to emerge until the deeper, QUANTUM LOGIC issue of IMBALANCE is resolved, and while the misguided ANTI-PATHOGEN response, may deliver temporary respite, its action of eliminating the REBALANCERS will be paving the way for the emergence of NEW VARIANTS of QUANTUM LOGIC REBALANCERS mistaken for BINARY LOGIC PATHOGENS.
There is a congruency between the SIMPLE and LESS SIMPLE relationship of BINARY LOGIC and QUANTUM LOGIC and the relationship between DIFFERENTIATION (FIGURE and GROUND are TWO) and INTEGRATION (FIGURE and GROUND are ONE)
* * * end of preface * * *
We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have ‘grown up’ using a DIFFERENTIATION based LANGUAGE: e.g. ‘the TOWN is GROWING” (is “SEEN” or “ENVISAGED” as no longer included in the overall transforming continuum)
INDIGENOUS ABORIGINALS, in their traditional language usage, have ‘grown up’ using an INTEGRATION based LANGUAGE: i.e. ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’ (is “UNDERSTOOD” as INCLUDED in the overall transforming relational continuum.
DIFFERENTIATION based LANGUAGE gives us a different sense of REALITY than INTEGRATION based LANGUAGE; i.e. if we say ‘the TOWN is GROWING’, our understanding of the dynamics of ‘reality’ are NOT the same as if we say ‘THERE IS TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’ because with DIFFERENTIATION, the FORM that we are DIFFERENTIATING, we are SEPARATING OUT of the CONTINUUM (the transforming relational landscape continuum) and NOTIONALLY setting up as a LOCAL, EXPLICIT THING-IN-ITSELF or what we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS specify in OUR LANGUAGE and GRAMMAR as a NAMING based BEING.
DIFFERENTIATION has the impact of serving up in the PSYCHE a VISION based IMAGE of a LOCAL and EXPLICIT FRAGMENT of ‘what is out there’, … which ‘sets the stage’ for further REDUCTION of the FRAGMENT into COMPONENT FRAGMENTS as part of a LANGUISTIC REPRESENTATION SCHEME, … where we develop an understanding of ‘a horse” in a LANGUAGE supported analytical-reductionist sense.
Charles Dickens in ‘Hard Times’ in the sequence where ‘Sissy Jupe’s relational understanding of a horse is ‘put down’ by her teacher Thomas Gradgrind who insists on grounding all understanding in ‘being’-based ‘facts’ as is the way of mainstream ‘science’;
“Now, what I want is, Facts. Teach these boys and girls nothing but Facts. Facts alone are wanted in life. Plant nothing else, and root out everything else. You can only form the minds of reasoning animals upon Facts: nothing else will ever be of any service to them. This is the principle on which I bring up my own children, and this is the principle on which I bring up these children. Stick to Facts, sir!”
‘Bitzer,’ said Thomas Gradgrind. ‘Your definition of a horse.’
‘Quadruped. Graminivorous. Forty teeth, namely twenty-four grinders, four eye-teeth, and twelve incisive. Sheds coat in the spring; in marshy countries, sheds hoofs, too. Hoofs hard, but requiring to be shod with iron. Age known by marks in mouth.’ Thus (and much more) Bitzer.
— Charles Dickens, ‘Hard Times’
Notice that NOT ALL CULTURES are like WESTERN CULTURE in having developed LANGUAGE based on DIFFERENTIATION which uses FRAGMENTATION to BREAK OUT A PIECE OF REALITY and develop understanding of that PIECE by breaking the PIECE down into SMALLER PIECES.
This TECHNIQUE of DIFFERENTIATION gives a FOUNDATIONAL ROLE to the ABSTRACT CONCEPT of ‘BEING’; e.g. by imposing the ABSTRACT condition of BEING on the HORSING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE, we set the stage for FURTHER FRAGMENTATION where we define the ‘HORSE’ in terms of notional COMPONENT PARTS or ‘ANATOMY’ of the ‘BEING-THING’
“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.”
Modern physics, and Indigenous Aboriginal cultures employ LANGUAGE based on INTEGRATION which derives from the understanding that all things are related (mitakuye oyasin), as Modern physics explains in terms of our sense-experience reality being one of INCLUSION IN THE ONE ALL-INCLUDING TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM aka the WAVE-FIELD in which MATERIAL FORMS are CONDENSATIONS of the ONE, ALL-INCLUDING WAVE-FIELD, the MEDIUM OF THE CONTINUAL INTEGRATING of all of the CONDENSING MATERIAL FORMINGS comprising the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.
* * *
WESTERN CULTURE REALITY by LANGUISTIC REPRESENTATION: DIFFERENTIATION based INDEPENDENT MATERIAL BEINGS INSULATED AND SEPARATED FROM ONE ANOTHER BY AN ALL INCLUDING EMPTY SPACE
INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL REALITY by LINGUISTIC REPRESENTATION: INTEGRATION based MATERIAL CONDENSATIONS WITHIN AN ALL-INCLUDING ENERGY CHARGED PLENUM (aka ‘WAVE-FIELD’).
IS SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY CAPTURABLE in DIFFERENTIATION BASED LANGUAGE? Does WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE capture a good representation of sense-experience reality? — NO!
IS SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY CAPTURABLE IN INTEGRATION BASED LANGUAGE? Does INDIGENOUS CULTURE LANGUAGE capture a good representation of sense-experience reality? — YES!
WAVE-FIELD REALITY wherein material forms are CONDENSATIONS of the WAVE-FIELD is NOT a REALITY that can be captured by NAME-LABELLING the MATERIAL FORMS SUCH AS ‘HUMAN BEINGS’ THAT ARE CONDENSATIONS since this is like studying atmospheric dynamics by studying CLOUD MOVEMENTS. That is, the DYNAMICS OF MATERIAL FORMS are SECONDARY to the primary DYNAMIC of SPATIAL-RELATIONAL TRANSFORMING wherein MATERIAL FORMS are CONDENSATIONS WITHIN THE TRANSFORMING.
The INVENTING of LANGUAGE based on NAMING the MATERIAL FORMS puts our LADDER UP THE WRONG WALL and can only lead to the construction of a SUBSTITUTE REALITY based on the dynamics of MATERIAL FORMS which is NOT THE PRIMARY REALITY. The PRIMARY REALITY is the TRANSFORMING WAVE-FIELD and MATERIAL DYNAMICS are SECONDARY ‘SCHAUMKOMMEN’ aka ‘APPEARANCES’.
AN EXAMPLE OF the MISTAKING of ‘APPEARANCES’ for ‘REALITY’ is WESTERN CULTURE REALITY by LANGUISTIC REPRESENTATION: DIFFERENTIATION based INDEPENDENT MATERIAL BEINGS INSULATED AND SEPARATED FROM ONE ANOTHER BY AN ALL INCLUDING EMPTY SPACE
AN EXAMPLE OF AVOIDING the MISTAKING of ‘APPEARANCES’ for ‘REALITY’ is INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL REALITY by LINGUISTIC REPRESENTATION: INTEGRATION based MATERIAL CONDENSATIONS WITHIN AN ALL-INCLUDING ENERGY CHARGED PLENUM (aka ‘WAVE-FIELD’).
In other words, the WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE BASED REPRESENTATION of MATERIAL FORMS and their ACTIONS and INTERACTIONS supports the construction … NOT OF ‘REALITY’ …. but of an ABSTRACT SUBSTITUTE REALITY which is BINARY LOGIC based as given by notional ABSOLUTE NAMING-instantiated MATERIAL BEINGS with GRAMMAR-given notional POWERS of LOCAL AUTHORING OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT.
BY CONTRAST, INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL CULTURE LANGUAGE REPRESENTATION of REALITY is of MATERIAL FORMS as CONDENSATIONS of the all-including transforming relational continuum aka WAVE-FIELD
In this QUANTUM LOGIC REALITY where material forms are CONDENSATIONS of the all-including WAVE-FIELD, there is no such thing as a MATERIAL BEING and thus no MATERIAL BEINGS WITH POWERS of AUTHORING LOCAL, EXPLICIT MATERIAL ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENTS such as the ‘CONSTRUCTION OF A TOWN’. We can UNDERSTAND the ‘APPARENT’ “CONSTRUCTION OF THE TOWN” as the product of our PSYCHOLOGICAL ‘DIFFERENTIATING’ or SELECTIVE VISUAL FOCUS, which if we backed of and viewed the entire TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE together with the indigenous aboriginal elder, from an elevated location which facilitated an INTEGRATED VIEW OF THE OVERALL LANDSCAPE IN WHICH THE TOWNING IS INCLUDED, … then the concept of ‘the TOWN GROWING’ would be ABSORBED and INTEGRATED within the larger REALITY of the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM, in which case the the larger INTEGRATING VIEW “INCLUDES” the smaller “DIFFERENTIATED” VIEW and is thus MORE COMPLETE and LESS SIMPLE.
As Goedel’l Theorem of the INCOMPLETENESS of all FINITE LOGICAL PROPOSITIONS implies, the DIFFERENTIATED VIEW, while INCOMPLETE is nevertheless LOGICALLY TRUE. In other words the observation that ‘the TOWN is GROWING is “LOGICALLY TRUE” but at the same time INCOMPLETE since it fails to acknowledge the CONJUGATE SHIRINKING OF WILDERNESS that occurs together with the GROWTH of the TOWN.
WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE, meanwhile, has been BUILT ON A FOUNDATION OF DIFFERENTIATION, UNLIKE INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL LANGUAGE, which has been BUILT ON A FOUNDATION OF INTEGRATION wherein the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE “INCLUDES” “TOWNING” and this is a LESS SIMPLE REALITY wherein language based INTEGRATION is given PRECEDENCE over language based DIFFERENTIATION. Instead of using language to ‘talk’ in the DIFFERENTIATING terms of ‘seeing’ ‘THE TOWN GROWING’ as if ‘the TOWN’ is a material ‘BEING’ with its own powers of AUTHORING GROWTH and DEVELOPMENT, we have the option of using language to ‘talk’ in the INTEGRATION based terms of ‘there is TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’ as if ‘the TOWNING’ is a FLUID FEATURE (relational form) in the transforming relational continuum.
LOGICALLY SPEAKING, thanks to the effect described by Goedel’s Theorem, we can employ TWO VERY DIFFERENT REPRESENTATIONS OF ‘REALITY’, BOTH OF WHICH ARE ‘TRUE” but while they are BOTH TRUE, ONE OF THESE REPRESENTATIONS is LESS SIMPLE than the other; i.e the INTEGRATION based view of TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE which is a QUANTUM LOGIC view, is “LESS SIMPLE” than the DIFFERENTIATION based view of ‘the TOWN is GROWING’ which is a BINARY LOGIC view that is SIMPLER than the INTEGRATION based view.
The GREATER SIMPLICITY of the BINARY LOGIC view comes from the REMOVING of the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING WAVE-FIELD CONJUGATE (the ‘VALLEY’ the ‘TOWNING’ is DEVELOPING WITHIN) and using langauge and grammar, SUBSTIUTING THE ABSTRACTION OF AN ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE OF INFINITE EXTENT and thus ARTIFICIALLY LIBERATING the MALE ASSERTING CONJUGATE FROM ITS FEMALE ACCOMODATING WAVE-FIELD CONJUGATE. INSTEAD OF INTEGRATION of FIGURE and GROUND (TOWNING IN THE VALLEYING), language can give us DIFFERENTIATION of FIGURE and GROUND (the TOWN is GROWING and DEVELOPING and PRODUCING products)
DIFFERING PYSCHOLOGICAL IMAGES OF REALITY CAN THUS BE CAPTURED IN LANGUAGE BASED REPRESENTATIONS THAT DEPEND ON THE OPTIONS OF DIFFERENTIATING FIGURE AND GROUND AS IN ‘THE TOWN IS GROWING’, OR INTEGRATING FIGURE AND GROUND AS IN ‘THERE IS TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’.
THESE CHOICES OF LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE LEAD TO DIFFERENT LANGUAGE BASED REPRESENTATIONS OF REALITY THAT IMPACT HOW THE LANGUAGE-USERS ‘SEE THEMSELVES’ AND OTHERS; I.E. THE DIFFERENTIATION BASED LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE GIVES RISE TO THE ABSTRACT, BINARY LOGIC BASED NOTION OF THE ‘INDEPENDENT BEING’ WHICH LANGUAGE CONFLATES WITH GRAMMAR THAT IMPUTES TO THE ‘BEING’ ITS OWN POWERS OF LOCAL AUTHORING OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT, … WHILE THE INTEGRATION BASED LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE SUPPORTS THE QUANTUM LOGIC RELATION OF THE RELATIONAL FIGURE IN THE CONTINUALLY TRANSFORMING GROUND.
Thus, the title of this note is DIFFERENTIATION VERSUS INTEGRATION: One’s CHOICE of LANGUAGE is one’s CHOICE OF REALITY
DIFFERENTIATION SUPPORTS MALE ASSERTING DYNAMICS SUCH AS ‘the TOWN is GROWING’ and/or INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION IS GROWING.
INTEGRATION SUPPORTS the FEMALE-ACCOMMODATING – MALE ASSERTING CONJUGATE TRANSFORMING SUCH AS ‘there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’.
These trigger in our psyches TWO DIFFERENT IMPRESSIONS OF REALITY AND THIS IMPACTS OUR BEHAVIOUR.
NOTA BENE. OUR SENSE EXPERIENCE “DOES NOT CONTROL HOW PSYCHE IS USING LANGUAGE TO CRAFT INTELLECTUAL INTERPRETATIONS OF REALITY”; i.e. SENSE EXPERIENCE REALITY IS SENSE EXPERIENCE REALITY.
There will be real physical impact for us depending on WHICH LANGUAGE BASED INTELLECTUAL VERSION OF REALITY (the DIFFERENTIATION VERSION OR THE INTEGRATION VERSION) we use in our behavioural engaging with what our preferred language contends is “REALITY”. That is, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS typically go with the DIFFERENTIATION based language architecture which affirms that the TOWN enjoys its own INDEPENDENT GROWTH and DEVELOPMENT, while INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL CULTURE ADHERENTS typically go with the INTEGRATION based language architectures which affirms that there is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE.
In the WESTERN CULTURE case, the people are grounding in the language based concept of DIFFERENTIATION and implicitly making a DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE for their TOWN which sets the stage for their SUBOPTIMIZATION of their TOWN consistent with the DIFFERENTIATION based LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE which is imputing INDEPENDENCE to it which provides the REASON based grounds for SUBOPTIMIZATION.
In the INDIGENOUS ARORIGINAL CULTURE case, the people are grounding in the language based concept of INTEGRATION and implicitly making of DECLARATION of MUTUAL INTERDEPENDENT INCLUSION (mitakuye oyasin) of all things including the four-leggeds and winged and slithering ones.
WHICH OF THESE CULTURES IS FINDING THE BEST MATCH BETWEEN THEIR REAL-LIFE SENSE-EXPERIENCE and their LANGUAGE-BASED REPRESENTATIONS OF REALITY? Does the DIFFERENTIATION based linguistic representation of reality match up to sense-experience better than the INTEGRATION based linguistic representation of reality, or vice-versa?
For example, does ‘the TOWN IS GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING stuff’, exemplary of the DIFFERENTIATION based linguistic representation of reality match up to sense-experience reality? … to the same degree of matchup as ‘There is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE, exemplary of the INTEGRATION based linguistic representation of reality?
EVIDENTLY the former DIFFERENTIATION based linguistic representation is a SIMPLIFIED representation which is based on the MALE ASSERTING WAVE-FIELD CONJUGATE ONLY (i.e. by DROPPING OUT the FEMALE ACCOMODATING WAVE-FIELD CONJUGATE), … while the latter is the fully INTEGRATED FEMALE-ACCOMMODATING and MALE-ASSERTING COINCIDENTIA OPPOSITORUM aka the WAVE-FIELD, and INSPECTION shows that ‘DIFFERENTIATION’ comes from the DROPPING OUT of the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONJUGATE and that this DROP-OUT is the source of linguistic FRAGMENTATION.
* * *
With the above background, … ERICH JANTSCH’S THREE LEVELS OF CONSCIOUSNESS…. REVISITED!
NOTE THAT the levels are in an inclusional hierarchy where level 1 includes all 3 levels, level 2 includes level3 and level 3 is the ‘on its own’. The examples given are often as follows; Level 3 is our consciousness of standing on level solid ground. Level 2 is where we are in a swimming pool with others so our movements are not fully and solely our own since the others’ movements in the pool help to shape our moments, and level 1 is where were are all condensations in the common flow so there is no longer any binary question of whether our movements are stirring up the flow or whether the flow is stirring up our movements. Our content in container relationship is more like that of of warm water within a containing mass of cooler water. We may ‘watch the sonar display’ and ‘say’ that the warm, low density lens is ‘growing’ or ‘moving’ or vanishing or emerging but ‘IT’ IS NOT AN ‘IT” as ‘it’ has no ‘local authoring powers’, but only a “LOCAL APPEARANCE”.
Level 3, the lowest level of consciousness is where we might think of ourselves as if we are driving in an open space world and we are in FULL and SOLE MALE ASSERTING CONTROL of our own actions and development.
Level 2, the next-to-lowest level of consciousness is where we might think of ourselves as if we are driving within the flow of freeway traffic wherein FEMALE-ACCOMMODATING HOLES in the flow are inductively shaping our MALE ASSERTING ACTIONS
Level 1, the highest level of consciousness is where we might think of ourselves as if we are like one of those low density warm lenses in the flow; i.e. WE ARE THE FLOW but just as Modern physics speaks of material forms as CONDENSATIONS of the all-including WAVE-FIELD we are QUANTUM LOGIC FEATURES as described by the BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING medium.
How do different LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURES ‘relate’ to this LEVELS OF CONSCIOUSNESS.
FIRST, we have to account for the MAJOR BREAK as discussed earlier, between our choice to build language on the basis of DIFFERENTIATION (WESTERN CULTURE and/or INTEGRATION (INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL CULTURE (and Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta). DIFFERENTIATION is implicit in levels 3 and 2 but INTEGRATION is implied in level 1. In other words, in our level 3 and level 2 conceptions of reality, in both of these levels we are thinking in BINARY LOGIC terms the FIGURE and GROUND SPLIT where we, as MATERIAL FIGURES, “MOVE THROUGH” the separate CONTAINING GROUND.
LEVEL 3 is an ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE so that all our language has to deal with is capturing ourselves as INDEPENDENT MATERIAL FORMS WHO ARE AUTHORS OF OUR OWN ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENT as if we are free to move about in the EMPTY SPACE which is locally populated by MATERIAL FORMS of an animal, vegetable or mineral resource nature, as well as other forms similar to ourselves. Here in LEVEL 3 CONSCIOUSNESS, our language has us speaking in as if our actions are fully solely our own, which is due to the notional ’empty space’ we are in which does not let the dynamics of others influence our dynamics thanks to our being separated by what our language implies is a vacuum.
LEVEL 2 is similar to LEVEL 3 as we are again the AUTHORS of our BEHAVIOUR but in this case, it is more like we are all in a swimming pool together where others can ‘make waves’ that can partly shape our movements. In other other words, we see ourselves in a common medium that is partly conditioning our movements as our movements are at the same time time conditioning the dynamics of the medium we share inclusion in. For example, if we are in a crowd at a football game we may be pushed against a person of the opposite sex or against a young child with this being ‘out of our control, in which case we will apologize for our being a CONDUIT for the relational dynamics we are situationally included in, rather than the LOCAL AUTHOR of our own movements. So this is LEVEL 2 CONSCIOUSNESS
BOTH LEVEL 3 and LEVEL 2 are based on the ABSTRACTION of DIFFERENTIATION based on BINARY LOGIC separation of matter and space and a proliferation of independent material beings including humans that are notionally equipped with their own LOCAL AUTHORING POWERS. The ‘CONSERVATIVE VIEW’ perhaps influenced by EGO, employs LANGUAGE that casts the “HUMAN” as an “INDEPENDENT BEING” with the POWERS of FULL AND SOLE AUTHORING of his own actions and developments; e.g. as the proud rugged individual. The ‘LIBERAL VIEW’, perhaps influenced by COLLECTIVE EGO, employs LANGUAGE that casts the ‘UNITED SOCIAL COLLECTIVE’ as the FULL and SOLE AUTHOR of their OWN ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENT’; e.g. as the proud race, family nation etc.
LEVEL 1, the HIGHEST level of consciousness is NO LONGER BASED ON DIFFERENTIATION, but rather on INTEGRATION where “WE ARE THE FLOW” as in the sensory intuition of our material aspect as being a CONDENSATIONS of the all-including WAVE-FIELD. In order to capture this in language, we have to move beyond the BINARY LOGIC of levels 3 and 2 to QUANTUM LOGIC where material forms are understood in terms of the BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING (WAVE-FIELD) MEDIUM. This is is the consciousness level aspired to in indigenous aboriginal cultures as also in Taoist and Vedic culture wherein we are ONE WITH EVERYTHING; i.e. we ARE the WAVE-FIELD we are included in.
I am going to leave this exploring of levels of consciousness now, while picking up on the main theme of this essay;
The WESTERN ERROR of Putting DIFFERENTIATION before INTEGRATION in LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE
DIFFERENTIATION comes into play in LEVELS 3 and 2, both of which involve DIFFERENTIATION which plays the foundational role in LOCAL AUTHORING. First we must be able to use DIFFERENTIATION to select out a relational form and as we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are accustomed to doing, give it a NAME and this NAMING is IMPORTANT because it is a DECLARATION OF BEING where we NOT ONLY endow the NAMED FORM with BEING, but do so to prepare the ground for what Nietzsche calls the SECOND ERROR of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR which is to use GRAMMAR to notionally endow the JUST-NAMED-THING with “ITS” OWN POWERS OF LOCAL AUTHORING OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT.
DIFFERENTIATION * * * DIFFERENTIATION * * * DIFFERENTIATION * * * WITH THE DOUBLE ERROR OF NAMING AND GRAMMAR
DIFFERENTIATION SELECTS OUT A RELATIONAL FORM IN THE FLOW, GIVES IT A NAME THAT IMPUTES LOCAL MATERIAL BEING and EMPLOYS GRAMMAR to ENDOW THE NAMING-INSTANTIATED BEING with “its own” notional POWERS OF LOCAL AUTHORING of actions and development.
LEVEL 1 CONSCIOUSNESS DISSOLVES THE BINARY LOGIC BASIS OF MATERIAL FORMS by substituting QUANTUM LOGIC CONDENSATIONS of the ALL-INCLUDING WAVE-FIELD which involves the BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING WAVE-FIELD MEDIUM where the MATERIAL FORMS which are CONDENSATIONS are “BOTH” themselves “AND” the WAVE-FIELD medium they are included in, much like the low density warm lenses of water in the ocean which show up on sonar viewing which responds to a distinction which is QUANTUM LOGIC based. That is, there is clearly identifiable DISTINCTION here but we have no technology with which we can construct a NET or CAPTURE DEVICE that will be able to extract the warm, lower density water lens out of the cooler body of water, any more that SHYLOCK, the MERCHANT OF VENICE, could have extracted a pound of flesh from his defaulting debtor without spilling a single drop of blood. ASSIGNING a NAME does not establish BEING.
* * *
DIFFERENTIATION is an AMBIGUOUS CONCEPT which splits into TWO SUB-OPTIONS; i.e. DIFFERENTIATION as INNER-OUTER and DIFFERENTIATION as OUTER-INNER, for example where ‘the HURRICANE is STIRRING UP THE ATMOSPHERE’ (inner-outer male-asserting) and/or ‘the ATMOSPHERE is STIRRING UP THE HURRICANE (outer-inner female inductive).
NOTE THAT BOTH OF THESE DIFFERENTIATION OPTIONS are ABSTRACTIONS because the HURRICANE is NOT A MALE ASSERTING AGENT, the HURRICANE is NOT a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF notionally with its own powers of AUTHORING ACTION and DEVELOPMENT, the HURRICANE is an APPEARANCE associated with the purely relational dynamic of HURRICANING so WE CAN’T LOOK AT THE HURRICANE AS IF IT WERE THE LOCAL AUTHOR OF ITS OWN RATIONAL DYNAMIC, … LOOK, INSTEAD, OVER YOUR HEAD TURNING OUR EYES SKYWARD AT THE HOT SUN ABOVE. This SOLAR IRRADIANCE is like the PUPPETEER pulling the strings that STIR UP THE AIR IN THE ATMOSPHERE and the WATER IN THE OCEAN and setting things all in motion while CORIOLI’S FORCE PUTS A CIRCULAR SPIN ON IT.
BUT, WAIT A MINUTE! SINCE THE AUTHORING OF THIS CIRCULATING FORCE is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT and is thus not the LOCAL and EXPLICIT action of the HURRICANE, we don’t have to trouble ourselves with whether the CIRCULATING FORCE is MALE ASSERTING as in ‘the HURRICANE IS STIRRING UP THE ATMOSPHERE, or FEMALE INDUCTIVE as in ‘the ATMOSPHERE IS STIRRING UP THE HURRICANE’ because THERE IS NO LOCAL, EXPLICIT AUTHORING SOURCE.
BOTH the MALE ASSERTING ATMOSPHERIC CIRCULATION STIRRING UP OF THE HURRICANE or the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING ATMOSPHERIC CIRCULATION INDUCTIVELY STIRRING UP THE HURRICANE are BOTH LINGUISTICALLY PRESENTED AS LOCAL AUTHORING INFLUENCES AND THE REALITY IS THAT SOLAR IRRADIANCE IS A NONLOCAL INFLUENCE WHICH IS LOGICALLY BEYOND THE ‘LOCAL AUTHORING’ CONCEPT AND BEING NONLOCAL AND IMPLICIT INVOKES QUANTUM LOGIC AS IN ‘TRANSFORMATION’ AS RELATES TO THE WAVE-FIELD DYNAMIC.
So, … JANTSCH’S THREE LEVELS OF CONSCIOUSNESS shed light on the different LANGUAGE BASED FORMULATIONS we can impute the physical goings-on here to. Right out of the starting gates we can see the DIFFERENTIATION and INTEGRATION OPTIONS, the former being the linguistically inspired cognitive path taken by us WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS and the LATTER being the linguistically inspired cognitive path taken by INDIGENOUS ABORIGINALS. That takes care of LEVELS THREE AND TWO of the JANTSCH THREE LEVELS OF CONSCIOUSNESS, … but where does the LEVEL 1 come from? The LEVEL 1 arises, “NOT” from the DIFFERENTIATION BRANCH because once we IMPUTE LOCAL AUTHORING as we do in the case of the HURRICANE in the ATMOSPHERE, because we are in a SPHERICAL SPACE, we always encounter the MALE-ASSERTING — FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONJUGATE ACTION POSSIBILITIES; e.g. when we say ‘the STORMY AREA of the Earth’s atmosphere is GROWING, this also means, whether we linguistically articulate it or not, that there is a CONJUGATE SHRINKING of CALM AREA of the Earth’s atmosphere.
NOTA BENE: We only get this ANDROGYNOUS AMBIGUITY in association with using language to imply DIFFERENTIATION, where, for example, if we want to DIFFERENTIATE between the stormy area and the calm area of the Earth’s atmosphere. DIFFERENTIATION imposes a BINARY LOGIC RELATION.
As with the indigenous aboriginal languages, we can use INTEGRATION to UNAMBIGUOUSLY DISTINGUISH among things, as in ‘There is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’, a QUANTUM LOGIC relation where we visualize the TOWNING as being INCLUDED IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE, not DIFFERENTIATED in a BINARY LOGIC sense but distinguishable in a QUANTUM LOGIC sense. That is, INTEGRATION involves a QUANTUM LOGIC RELATION.
IN SHORT, WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE BASED DIFFERENTIATION SPLITS REALITY INTO A FEMALE AND MALE DIVISION while INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL LANGUAGE BASED INTEGRATION UNIFIES REALITY WITHIN AN ANDROGYNOUS WAVE-FIELD UNUUM.
THE THREE CHOICES OF LANGUAGE-BASED REALITY CONSTRUCTION ARE:
WEST -3- DIFFERENTIATION based MALE ASSERTING LOCAL AUTHORING (conservative)
WEST -2- DIFFERENTIATION based FEMALE ACCOMMODATING LOCAL AUTHORING (liberal)
EAST -1- INTEGRATION based WAVE-FIELD ANDROGYNOUS “NONLOCALLY AUTHORED” TRANSFORMATION (non-aligned).
As noted, the PATH OF LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE ROOTED IN DIFFERENTIATION LEADS TO THE NOTION OF TWO POLAR OPPOSITE TYPES OF LOCAL AUTHORING, while the PATH OF LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE ROOTED IN INTEGRATION LEADS TO THE NOTION OF ANDROGYNOUS TRANSFORMATION.
As Bohm points out, WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are suffering from FRAGMENTATION based on the use of DIFFERENTIATION based LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE.
WE are ‘IN TROUBLE’ because (A) OUR SOCIAL COLLECTIVE BEHAVIOURS are DOMINATED by WESTERN CULTURE LINGUISTIC DIFFERENTIATION which is now DIVIDING AGAINST ITSELF, and (B) BY BEING LOCKED-IN BY HIGH SWITCHING COSTS where the OPINION-SHAPERS IN WESTERN CULTURE SOCIAL COLLECTIVES ARE GIVING DIFFERENTIATION THE PRIORITY INFLUENCE IN REVISING THE SOCIAL STATUS QUO ON THE BASIS OF THEIR ‘LOCAL AUTHORING ACHIEVEMENTS’.
SINCE, in this current condition, BINARY LOGIC based DIFFERENTIATION which cultivates FRAGMENTATION and optimizes on the basis of PURIFICATION, PREVAILS OVER QUANTUM LOGIC INTEGRATION which optimizes on the basis of cultivating RELATIONAL BALANCE, this leads to a situation wherein the QUANTUM LOGIC ‘REBALANCERS’ are viewed through BINARY LOGIC lenses as PATHOGENS for which the ‘REMEDY’ is PURIFICTION (elimination of REBALANCERS misidentified as PATHOGENS).
* * *
LASTLY, TO REPEAT, FOR EMPHASIS: WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS HAVE ADOPTED A LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE WHICH IS BINARY LOGIC DIFFERENTIATION BASED SO THAT ALL DYNAMICS ARE SEEN AS ORIGINATING FROM ‘LOCAL AUTHORING’ and where DISSONANCE from RELATIONAL IMBALANCE IS MISINTERPRETED as coming from LOCAL PATHOGEN AUTHORS of actions and developments so that the REMEDY is seen as PURIFICATION, the REMOVAL of the LOCAL AUTHORS of PATHOLOGICAL ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS. THIS WESTERN CULTURE MISCONSCEPTION (the DUMBING DOWN FROM QUANTUM LOGIC TO BINARY LOGIC) permeates WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE as employed in the fields of JUSTICE, MEDICINE and COMMERCE.
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
“The above aphorism (The Name of the Devil is Suboptimization’), 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‐reductionist 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)
* * *