TWO CULTURES, TWO LANGUAGES, TWO “REALITIES”

OVERVIEW:

Many people believe that LANGUAGE is a technology supporting RE-PRESENTATION of things we have seen or experienced.  THIS IS NOT SO!  “The Tao that can be told is not the true Tao”  — Lao Tzu … and what is intended here is that the world of our sense-experience is of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum aka the all-including WAVE-FIELD which is NOT something that can be “REPRESENTED” in LANGUAGE since LANGUAGE can only deliver SYMBOL-BASED INFERENCES.

SYMBOLS ‘work’ by “BRINGING COMPLEX SENSE-EXPERIENCES TO MIND”, BUT the complex sense-experiences are BEYOND REACH OF REPRESENTATION.  For example, using the thumb and forefinger on one hand to form a closed, circular opening and pushing the forefinger of the other hand rhythmically in-and-out of the opening, is symbol-based ‘sign language’ for sexual intercourse, IT IS NOT A ‘REPRESENTATION OF SEXUAL INTERCOURSE’.  Sexual intercourse is sense-experience based.

The KEY POINT HERE is that LANGUAGE works by constructing SYMBOLS that remind us of various aspects of our complex “BEYOND REPRESENTATION” sense-experience of inclusion in the all-including transforming relational continuum aka the WAVE-FIELD.  There is a problem when we think in terms that our LANGUAGE is capable of constructing REPRESENTATIONS of REALITY when all that LANGUAGE is capable of, is to deliver symbols that may be able to ‘put people on the same page’, not by constructing LINGISTIC REPRESENTATIONS of the complex reality of our sense-experience but by constructing symbolic ‘triggers’ that can bring into our consciousness, memories of the complex reality of our sense-experience or memories of the complex experiences of others that we have learned about, which we can only ‘translate’ by association with our own somewhat ‘similar’ experiences.

The point is that LANGUAGE does NOT have the capability of REPRESENTATION of our sense-experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum, it HAS ONLY THE CAPABILITY OF BRINGING TO MIND SYMBOLIC LINKAGES TO COMPLEX SENSE-EXPERIENCE similar to the example of the fingers-based symbol suggesting sexual intercourse.  LANGUAGE ‘WORKS’ by putting people ON THE SAME PAGE  which means bringing to mind the same sort of complex sense experience; i.e. LANGUAGE “DOES NOT WORK” by “constructing REPRESENTATIONS of complex sense-experience reality that is in any case BEYOND CAPTURE BY THE LIMITED TECHNOLOGY OF LANGUAGE”.

The gifted writer’s GIFT is NOT measured by the quality of the language-based REPRESENTATION she has constructed, although it is popular to say so.  The PRIMARY goal of language is NOT the accurate REPRESENTATION of a scene or event but to put a group of disparate people ON THE SAME PAGE so that A COMMON UNDERSTANDING IS FACILITATED.   Words are symbols for familiar material forms and when people learn to use the same words for the same forms, language-based communications are enabled.

We make jokes about the arbitrariness in this process; e.g. “In France, they call this “une fourchette”, in Germany they call this “ein Gabel  and in England, we call it a ‘Fork’ which is what it actually is.”

We seem to have a problem with LANGUAGE here.  As Korzybski says, “the WORD is NOT the THING’.

Polish-American scientist and philosopher Alfred Korzybski remarked that “the map is not the territory” and that “the word is not the thing”, encapsulating his view that an abstraction derived from something, or a reaction to it, is not the thing itself.

But the deeper issue is that“THERE ARE NO THINGS” , there are only condensations in the transforming relational continuum aka the WAVE-FIELD which brings QUANTUM LOGIC into our language architecture and gets rid of the TOO SIMPLE BINARY LOGIC concept of MATERIAL OBJECTS seemingly existing ‘in their own independent right’, as if in an ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE.

So, the points is, again;

LANGUAGE ‘WORKS’ by putting people ON THE SAME PAGE  which means bringing to mind the same sort of complex sense experience; i.e. LANGUAGE “DOES NOT WORK” by “constructing REPRESENTATIONS of complex sense-experience reality that is in any case BEYOND CAPTURE BY THE LIMITED TECHNOLOGY OF LANGUAGE” (the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao). 

Conservative language uses representations wherein individuals stir up the social collective which is like the geometry of hurricanes assertively stirring up the atmosphere while Liberal language uses representation wherein the social collective stirs up the individuals which is like the geometry of the atmosphere inductively stirring up hurricanes.  Neither of these BINARY LOGIC based, purported ‘representations of reality’ are ‘representations of reality’.  They are simple BINARY LOGIC based abstractions (OF MUTUALLY OPPOSING POLARITY) intended, AS LANGUAGE TYPICALLY IS INTENDED, at getting people ‘on the same page.’  THE MUTUALLY OPPOSING VIEWS ARE NOT ‘REPRESENTATIONS OF REALITY’ (the transforming relational continuum is beyond the reach of LANGUAGE), they are simplified abstractions designed to ‘get people on the same page’.   

The ‘real reality’ is too complex for words (everything is in flux), however, the QUANTUM BOTH/AND LOGIC of the INCLUDING MEDIUM (WAVE-FIELD) takes us closer to the ineffable Tao by having us realize that we can forget about the BINARY LOGIC debate where Conservatives argue that HURRICANES ARE MALE ASSERTING AND STIR UP THE ATMOSPHERE, while Liberals ARGUE THAT THE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING ATMOSPHERE INDUCTIVELY STIRS UP THE HURRICANES .  This is because in the QUANTUM  LOGIC BOTH/AND view, THE SOLAR IRRADIANCE FIELD INCLUDES BOTH FEMALE ACCOMMODATING ATMOSPHERE and MALE ASSERTING HURRICANES, dissolving the LANGUAGE based ERROR of the BINARY LOGIC SPLIT THAT “WE SEE OUT THERE through our Voyeur eyes” and OPENING OUR AWARENESS TO OUR INCLUSION IN THE ALL-INCLUDING WAVE-FIELD.

 * * *

REALITY “JUST IS” but it is the habit of us TWO-LEGGEDS to use LANGUAGE to fabricate REPRESENTATIONS of our experience of INCLUSION in this TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.  Right away we run into the problem that ‘the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao’ because ‘everything is in flux’.   SO, THE ‘WORK-AROUND’ is to INVENT A SYSTEM OF SOUNDS or SYMBOLS THAT CAN AT LEAST STIMULATE MENTAL IMAGERY THAT ‘REMINDS’ US of OUR “IN-THE-FLOW’ SENSE EXPERIENCE ADVENTURE.

We call such a system ‘LANGUAGE’ and right from the GET-GO we can FORGET about the HOPELESS QUEST of ARCHITECTING a LANGUAGE that will give us a FULL and ACCURATE PRESENTATION because our sense-experience is of inclusion in THE ONE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM which is, at least as far as us finite HUMANINGS-IN-THE-FLOW are concerned, UNBOUNDED in SPACE-TIME; i.e. it is THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.

LANGUAGE ‘comes out in little sound-bytes’ so for sure, in developing a system of LANGUAGE, we are going to have invent LEGO-LIKE PIECES that we can PIECE TOGETHER to come up with REPRESENTATIONS PRESENTATIONS that can tap into and remind us of COMMON SENSE-EXPERIENCES that we retain in our ‘MEMORY’ so that LANGUAGE is, at base, a MEMORY-JOGGING SYSTEM where what’s being conveyed IS NOT COMING FROM SOME LITERAL CONSTRUCTION but from some sense-experience.   The ADVERTISER understand this and the ‘AD’ for a bottle of whiskey that says CANADA AT ITS BEST is using the natural relational association power of the mind to catch hold of the ‘TITS’ imagery.  This is called SUBLIMINAL ADVERTISING but LANGUAGE ITSELF is a game of communicating by using SUBLIMINAL STIMULATION because as Korzybski and others have pointed out,  ‘THE WORD IS NOT THE THING’ which would be more realistically expressed ‘the WORD is NOT THE SENSE-EXPERIENCE’ since there are no ‘THINGS’ in our sense experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.

So, LANGUAGE is a scheme based on constructing SYBOLIC REPRESENTATIONS PRESENTATIONS.  Note that, as just explained in the critique of what Korzybski said, LANGUAGE is a SCHEME for constructing PRESENTATIONS (not REPRESENTATIONS OF THINGS) such as ‘CANADA AT TITS BEST’ or simply ‘TITS’ which does its job at the SUBLIMINAL LEVEL which is where the memory of SENSE-EXPERIENCE persists. If I say that I want a HOT-DOG what I get will be what the other person ASSOCIATES with the word HOT-DOG.

The point is, and this is an important point in understanding how LANGUAGE BASED COMMUNICATIONS WORK, that the MEANING is NOT IN THE WORD ITSELF but in the THINKING that is stimulated by the utterance of the word which in this case is NOT a HOT, SWEATY LIVE ANIMAL, but something entirely different that comes to mind in the minds of members of the INSIDER GROUP using the same word-based signaling scheme.

IN THE END, LANGUAGE is not ‘talking about things’ but is INSTEAD LANGUAGE is PUTTING PEOPLE ON THE SAME PAGE or more-or-less the ‘same page’ since ‘CANADA AT ITS BEST’ is not going to put women on the same SUBLIMINAL PAGE as men.   But no-one-said that LANGUAGE is a perfect system where the messages convey understanding in LOCAL, EXPLICIT TERMS, because what’s involved is the CONJUGATE RELATION of TRANSMITTER and RECEIVER which is LESS SIMPLE than a PLUG and SOCKET in the manner that QUANTUM LOGIC is less simple than BINARY LOGIC.

QUANTUM LOGIC is the BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDING MEDIUM where the CONNECTION is like that of the WHORLING in the FLOWING which is like an ‘automatic transmission’ or turbine where conjugate relation of the WHORLING in the FLOWING is NOT BINARY LOGIC based; i.e. we cannot speak in terms of EITHER the WHORLING OR THE FLOWING but must speak in term of BOTH the WHORLING AND the FLOWING where these two are NOT SEPARATE LOCAL AND EXPLICIT THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES and in a BINARY LOGIC relation.  As in the case of PLANETS as CONDENSATIONS of the all-including WAVE-FIELD PLENUM, the entire ‘system’ of the ALL-INCLUDING PLENUM and the CONDENSATIONS WITHIN THE WAVE-FIELD PLENUM are “ONE”, which is the BOTH/AND QUANTUM LOGIC relation as implied by the YIN/YANG symbol where the MALE CONTENT and FEMALE CONTAINER do not SPLIT APART CLEANLY INTO TWO SEPARATE BUT OPPOSITE (MALE AND FEMALE) PARTS, but as with the WHORLING in the FLOWING there is an AMBIGUITY here as in the CLOUDS and ATMOSPHERE where CLOUDS are LOCAL and EXPLICIT (meaning SEPARATELY DISTINGISHABLE) FORMS that are “NOT” SEPARATE AND INDEPENDENT in a persisting MATERIAL-BEING based sense.

So, LANGUAGE can serve as a tool for SUBLIMINAL MESSAGING, … QUANTUM LOGIC ESSAGING and BINARY LOGIC MESSAGING, all of which are PSYCHOLOGICAL CONDITIONING SCHEMES for helping to put a multiplicity of participants in the LANGUAGE GAME ‘on the same page’ which means to bring to mind thoughts which open up a ‘channel’ for sharing memories of sense-experience, whether such experiences were physical-sensual or purely intellectual psychological.

We often use language in a manner that mixes together representations grounded in sense-experience and representations grounded in language-based intellectual exchanges.  In our language based exchanges there is often ambiguity as to whether what is being spoken about is coming from sense-experience for from intellectual linguistic exchanges.  As the joke goes, make sure that your child is getting sex education rather than sex instruction at school, thus illustrating the ambiguity between intellectually acquired understanding and behaviour and sense-experience acquired understanding and behaviour.

This AMBIGUITY as to whether the language based PRESENTATIONS we are sharing are coming from SENSE-EXPERIENCE or from INTELLECTUAL EXCHANGES leads to confusion as exemplified by the Orson Welles radio dramatization of the War of the Worlds where his seeming ‘live’ reporting of he arrival of creatures coming out of space-ships was ‘taken literally’ by many listeners, who had tuned in AFTER the preliminary announcement that this was a radio dramatization of a fictional work by H.G. Wells.

All of this points to a basic exposure in LANGUAGE BASED COMMUNICATIONS due to the fact that we are TRAFFICKING … NOT IN REPRESENTATIONS, … BUT IN PRESENTATIONS which have NO DIRECT BASIS IN SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY but are a system of symbolic PRESENTATIONS intended to trigger REMEMBRANCE of sense-experiences as a means of using LANGUAGE to put us ‘on the same page’.  ONCE AGAIN THE REMINDER that ‘the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao’ since, in our sense-experience reality, we are included in the transforming relational continuum aka the WAVE-FIELD wherein ‘everything is in flux’.

VARIATIONS ON THE THEME of ARCHITECTING LANGUAGES to use as TOOLS to PUT US ON MORE OR LESS THE SAME PAGE, whether in the context of EDUCATION as in the SEX EDUCATION example, or INSTRUCTION as will help prepare an individual to undertake some actual sense experience in the transforming relational continuum.

THERE ARE DIFFERENT LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE SCHEMES and NONE OF THEM rise to the occasion of RE-PRESENTING REALITY since REALITY is our sense-experience reality of INCLUSION in the transforming relational continuum.

WHAT, THEN, are the MAIN SCHEMES of constructing “NOT ‘REPRESENTATIONS’ OF REALITY” but ‘SCHEMES FOR PUTTING US ON THE SAME PAGE’ through the use of this MIND-STIMULATING device we are calling LANGUAGE which comes in a variety of forms.

The TWO MAIN SCHEMES of ARCHITECTING LANGUAGE divide us into the CULTURES OF EAST AND WEST or INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL and WESTERN CULTURE.

LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE SCHEME ONE: BINARY LOGIC, the WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE SCHEME.

The BINARY LOGIC scheme uses the ‘DOUBLE ERROR’ (Nietzsche) scheme of NAMING and GRAMMAR for constructing WORD-based PRESENTATIONS (i.e. again, NOT RE-PRESENTATIONS since sense-experience reality of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum is not ‘RE-PRESENTABLE’).  An example of the NAMING and GRAMMAR combination which gives the notion of LOCAL AUTHORING, is ‘the TOWN is GROWING’

LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE SCHEME TWO: QUANTUM LOGIC, the INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL and EASTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE SCHEME

The QUANTUM LOGIC scheme is flow-based and thus AVOIDS all language structures that involve LOCAL BEING and LOCAL AUTHORING and instead employ a ‘VERB-based’ structure which alludes to the transforming relational continuum which is, in MODERN PHYSICS terms, the all-including WAVE-FIELD dynamic which has the FEMALE-ACCOMODATING —MALE ASSERTING CONJUGATE RELATION STRUCTURE.   SINCE this is a FLOW-BASED SCHEME it does not support RE-PRESENTATION but is consistent with the transforming relational continuum wherein the dynamic reality is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT or in other words PURELY RELATIONAL (as expressed by ‘mitakuye oyasin’).  An example of this NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT FLOW-BASED LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE IS: ‘There is TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’.   This is NOT a “RE-PRESENTATION” of anything, this is an ALLUSION that ‘bottoms out in’ relations that are FLUID.

WE DO NOT SAY THINGS LIKE ‘the TOWN IS GROWING’ as in WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE because that implies the SUBSTITUTING of an ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE OF INFINITE EXTENT, for the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING WAVE-FIELD CONJUGATE as is the WESTERN CULTURE method of SIMPLIFICATION of LANGUAGE-based PRESENTATION by way of the REDUCTION of the linguistic psychological referencing scheme to one-sided MALE ASSERTING ONLY APPEARANCE.  * * * NOTE the use of the term “APPEARANCE” and not “REPRESENTATION” * * *

The LANGUAGE GAME consists of using symbolic utterances or written symbols to put multiple people ON THE SAME PAGE in terms of ‘WHAT THEY ARE THINKING’, and who knows WHAT thoughts individuals are thinking because they are taking them from their own unique sense-experiences which may be physical or psychologically stimulated.   The point is that we have a WORKING LANGUAGE SYSTEM when we can get to the point of COORDINATING BEHAVIOURS through the use of the LANGUAGE SCHEME.  What is actually going on in the mind is not only too complex to use, but less important than the coordinating of behaviour that associates with LANGUAGE usage.

This is why, for example, REPUBLICANS/CONSERVATIVES and DEMOCRATS/LIBERALS can work together within a ‘FREE ENTERPRISE SCHEME’, … TO A POINT, because BOTH BELIEVE in the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR based abstraction of LOCAL AUTHORING.  However, the CONSERVATIVE’S understanding is that the INDIVDUAL is the ROOT SOURCE of AUTHORING ACTIONS AND ACHIEVEMENTS while the LIBERAL’S understanding is that the SOCIAL COLLECTIVE is the ROOT SOURCE of AUTHORING ACTIONS AND ACHIEVEMENTS.

This is usually IMPLICIT in LANGUAGE based formulations since if we say; ‘TOGETHER, WE HAVE BUILT A STRONG ECONOMY’, there is no overt revealing of whether ‘WE’ means a collection of independent individuals (CONSERVATIVE) or independent collections of individuals (LIBERAL).  This can become the source of division when the CONSERVATIVE seeks to EMPOWER THE BEST INDIVIDUALS and WEED OUT the LESS PERFORMANT INDIVIDUALS (one rotten apple spoils the barrel) where the LIBERAL seeks to EMPOWER THE FULL SOCIAL COLLECTIVE in the belief that ‘IT TAKES A WHOLE COMMUNITY TO RAISE A CHILD’.  Both of these LOCAL AUTHORING based beliefs are BINARY LOGIC based as is basic to the concept of LOCAL AUTHORING where a  person or a group “EITHER” AUTHORS AND ACTION OR DEVELOPMENT “OR” DOES NOT AUTHOR AN ACTION OR DEVELOPMENT.

OK, THOSE ARE TWO VERSIONS OF LOCAL AUTHORING which is the BELIEF STRUCTURE of WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS.

For the INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL CULTURE, THERE IS NO LANGUAGE-CULTIVATED BELIEF IN LOCAL AUTHORING THEREFORE THE DIVISION INTO CONSERVATIVE AND LIBERAL DOES NOT ARISE.  The LANGUAGE-CULTIVATED BELIEF in INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL CULTURE IS OF INCLUSION IN THE ALL-INCLUDING TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM wherein EVERYTHING IS RELATED (mitakuye oyasin).

SO, WHAT WE HAVE GOING HERE IS …. TWO CULTURES, TWO LANGUAGES, TWO “REALITIES”

NOTA BENE:  THE LANGUAGES NEVER GET CLOSE TO CAPTURING “REPRESENTATIONS” OF  OUR SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.  LANGUAGES orient to putting multiple people ON THE SAME PAGE so as to cultivate collective coordinated action which could be like a LEMMING march over a cliff dropping into the sea.  The point is that LANGUAGE-FACILITATED COORDINATION of BEHAVIOUR could facilitate WAR or COLLECTIVE SELF-DESTRUCTION thanks to the COORDINATING SUPPORT FROM LANGUAGE.

LANGUAGE IS “NOT” A SCHEME for giving rise to a shareable version of SENSE-EXPERIENCE.  SENSE-EXPERIENCE lies beyond the expressive capability of LANGUAGE since it is of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.  LANGUAGE is ONLY GOOD for putting groups of people on the SAME PAGE and wisdom contained in that SAME PAGE may be very limited as for example, in the common belief in LOCAL AUTHORING which leads to the CONSERVATIVE – LIBERAL POLAR OPPOSITE SPLIT due to the mistaken assumption of the ‘reality’ of ‘local authoring’.   THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ‘LOCAL AUTHORING’ in our sense-experience reality of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.   LOCAL AUTHORING comes from the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR as Nietzsche has pointed out.  We can use LANGUAGE to construct PRESENTATIONS  featuring LOCAL AUTHORING but these are NOT RE-PRESENTATIONS because LOCAL AUTHORING DOES NOT EXIST.  IT IS LANGUAGE BASED ABSTRACTION which has a ONE-SIDED MALE ASSERTING ONLY STRUCTURE which has DROPPED OUT the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING CONJUGATE of the WAVE-FIELD, the WAVE-FIELD which is otherwise known as the TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM in which material forms are CONDENSATIONS as in the QUANTUM LOGIC understanding.

As Bohm points out, LANGUAGE, in WESTERN CULTURE, beyond being of immense value in putting us on a HIGHLY SIMPLIFIED ‘same page’, is the source of SCHIZOPHRENIA and PARANOIA.

* * *

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 indivdiual; 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, psychologic etc. 

The ‘BOTTOM LINE’ in this note on ‘TWO CULTURES, TWO LANGUAGES, TWO REALITIES’  is that LANGUAGE is INCAPABLE OF “REPRESENTATIONS” of REALITY (reality is inclusion in the continually transforming WAVE-FIELD and is NON-REPRESENTABLE).  LANGUAGE is INSTEAD a system of construction of SYMBOL based APPEARANCES which can put different people ON THE SAME PAGE as supports COORDINATED ACTION.   For example, ‘the TOWN is GROWING’ is a SYMBOL based APPEARANCE which is a far cry from the SENSE-EXPERIENCE reality of INCLUSION in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE.  While ‘the TOWN’ is a SYMBOL in this LINGUISTIC SYMBOL BASED CONSTRUCTION which comes nowhere near conveying the sense-experience reality of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum, the LANGUAGE-SHARED SYMBOLS provide a means of coordinating the actions of those who have learned the agreed ASSOCIATIONS between the SYMBOL based constructs (e.g. the WORD-SYMBOLS — TOWNS and GROWTH)— and isolated-because-DIFFERENTIATED aspects of SENSE-EXPERIENCE REALITY (as in the WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE case).  For example, the WORD ‘TOWN’ is used to DIFFERENTIATE AND SEPARATE OUT ‘the TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE FROM THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE.

“DIFFERENTIATION” is the REDUCTION from QUANTUM LOGIC SYMBOL-BASED-ALLUSION to BINARY LOGIC SYMBOL-BASED-ALLUSION which is THE BASIS of WESTERN CULTURE LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE.  SYMBOL-BASED “ALLUSION” is all that LANGUAGE IS CAPABLE OF; i.e. LANGUAGE is “NOT CAPABLE OF  REPRESENTATION” of sense-experience reality of INCLUSION IN THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM aka the WAVE-FIELD.   MEANWHILE, THERE ARE TWO APPROACHES TO SYMBOL-BASED “ALLUSION”  in LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE ; “INTEGRATION” and “DIFFERENTIATION” ;

“INTEGRATION” is the UN-DIFFERENTIATED QUANTUM LOGIC SYMBOLIC ALLUSION; e.g. ‘THERE IS TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE’. which supports the sense-experience reality of the all-including transforming relational continuum, by using SYMBOLISM that preserves the RELATIONAL FLUIDITY of NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT TRANSFORMATION.  

“DIFFERENTIATION” is the REDUCTION of QUANTUM LOGIC SYMBOLIC ALLUSION to BINARY LOGIC SYMBOLIC ALLUSION; e.g. ‘the TOWN is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING products and services”.  “DIFFERENTIATION” thus “SEPARATES OUT” the FRAGMENT that has been DIFFERENTIATED , making it appear as if this FRAGMENT “EXISTS IN ITS OWN INDEPENDENT RIGHT” and is the LOCAL AUTHOR of ITS OWN ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT.  This is achieved in LANGUAGE with the use of the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR as Nietzsche has pointed out, together with the invoking of the ABSTRACT ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INDIFININITE ‘CONTAINING’ SPACE.”. 

WHETHER ONE IS USING DIFFERENTIATION based LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE or INTEGRATION based LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE , the communication scheme is one of SYMBOL-BASED ALLUSION.  The point is that, as great an invention as LANGUAGE is, it is a system of SYMBOL-BASED ALLUSION which FALLS FAR SHORT OF CAPTURING OUR SENSE-EXPERIENCING of INCLUSION IN THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM.  Furthermore, the DIFFERENTIATION based (BINARY LOGIC based) SYMBOLIC ALLUSION scheme incorporates an exposure to FRAGMENTATION where we put SYMBOLIC ALLUSION into an unnatural primacy over our sense-experience.   LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE based on INTEGRATION (e.g. the Indigenous Aboriginal languages) is QUANTUM LOGIC based and does not have the problem of FRAGMENTATION as WESTERN CULTURE BINARY LOGIC based LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE does. 

 * * *