There are two realities available to literate humans by contrast to the one reality available to sentient-non-literate relational forms;

-I- SENSUAL NON-PICTURABLE REALITY OF INCLUDED RELATIONAL EXPERIENCE: the reality of our inclusion in the transforming relational continuum that is beyond the capability of linguistic expression (the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao).

-II- INTELLECTUAL-PICTURABLE REALITY OF LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR: the reality of voyeur contemplation in the ‘double error’ terms of things-in-themselves that source actions and developments.

Intellectual-picturable reality is prone to an ambiguous splitting into two ‘sub-realities’; i.e. ‘nature’ (II-a) and ‘nurture’ (II-b), both of which make use of name-instantiated ‘things-in-themselves’ (e.g. ‘beings’) with notional powers of sourcing actions and developments.  The ambiguous split arises on the basis of whether one assumes that the individual is the root creative source of the collective dynamic (conservative reality) as in ‘One bad apple spoils the lot’, …  or whether the collective dynamic sources the individual dynamic (liberal reality) as in ‘It takes a whole community to raise a [good/bad] child’.

Western culture employs a type II INTELLECTUAL-PICTURABLE REALITY based on language and grammar while modern physics, indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta employ a TYPE I SENSUAL NON-PICTURABLE REALITY as associates with RELATIONAL EXPERIENCE.

TYPE I SENSUAL NON-PICTURABLE REALITY is the reality of PRE-LINGUAL sensory experience (e.g. as in infancy) which is prior to the self-other split, a splitting that is intellectual that is triggered by language and grammar.  Meanwhile, while this prelingual undivided self (a resonance within the flow-continuum) sublimates beneath the culture based re-casting of self in intellectually divided self-other terms, it persists as near-forgotten natural experience.   However, language and grammar put us into the TYPE II INTELLECTUAL-PICTURABLE LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR BASED pseudo-reality of self-other dividedness where we ‘talk about’ reality as if it is ‘going on ‘out there’ outside of us, as if it is given by the visual images that we presume REFLECT activities going on out in front of us as if we are voyeurs of reality rather than included experients of reality.

The ‘infinite regression’ that associates with observing our self in a mirror gives us the sense that the visual image reflects something that explicitly exists ‘right here’ and ‘right now’ and is complete-in-itself (including our own mirror-reflected image of our ‘self’).  ‘Naming’ compounds this mirror-based illusion of local explicit ‘being’ by the innate ‘permanence’ it invokes; i.e. naming brings on the psychological impression of the existence of a persisting thing-in-itself being which grammar conflates by imputing to it its own powers of sourcing actions and developments (the ‘double error’).

Thus, the intellectual constructions we invent by ‘naming’ visible flow-forms to impute thing-in-itself being to them, and using grammar to impute powers of sourcing actions and developments to them, termed ‘the double error’ by Nietzsche, equips our intellect with the Western culture foundational belief in ‘sorcery’ which has become more euphemistically known as the ‘producer-product’ capability.  THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS THE PRODUCER-PRODUCT CAPABILITY in modern physics reality, indigenous aboriginal reality, Taoist/Buddhist and Advaita Vedanta reality; i.e. ‘reality’ is instead one thing and one thing only, – the transforming relational continuum in which we are included experients.  Reality is experiential, it is not ‘intellectual invention’ reducible to language and grammar; … i.e. language and grammar based INVENTED REALITY is intellectual abstraction based (picture-based) and not grounded in relational experience.

For example, the language and grammar based reports of an invasion by aliens in Orson Wells radio dramatization of ‘War of the Worlds’ in 1939 conjured up a convincing mental picture based ‘invented reality’ that created widespread panic.  In fact, most of what ‘we know to be true’ comes from language and grammar accounts of places we have never been and events we have never participated in.  This language and grammar based intellectual ‘world view’ is an INVENTED REALITY that is unlike our (non-picturable) relational experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.  Language and grammar INVENTED REALITY TRUTHS are open to being contrived and manipulated by influential others, setting people against one another on the basis of INVENTED REALITIES that are often mutually contradictory, as in the case of conservative and liberal ‘politics’.  It is because these realities are INTELLECTUAL INVENTIONS that they can be mutually contradictory, and not because ‘one of them is false’ while ‘the other is true’.

IN SUM, … TYPE II REALITY, the INTELLECTUAL-PICTURABLE REALITY OF LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR, is the behaviour-shaping INVENTED REALITY that serves as the Western culture ‘operative reality’. This INVENTED REALITY is based on the ‘double error’ that facilitates the intellectual construction of mental imagery in terms of name-instantiated things-in-themselves (first error), conflated by grammar that endows these ‘things-in-themselves with (second error) notional powers of sourcing actions and developments.

Out of this ‘double error’ of name-invoked ‘beings’ with ‘powers of sorcery’ comes ‘ego’, the sense of one’s own power of sorcery that in turn invokes the emotions of ‘pride’ and ‘shame’.  In general, ‘naming’ gives rise to the intellectual abstraction of ‘being’ and ‘beings’ that include ‘humans’, ‘nations’ and ‘corporations’, all seen (understood), thanks to the ‘double error’, as having ‘their own powers of sourcing actions and developments’.  These are the intellectual ‘chess pieces’ used to construct the MENTAL PICTURE BASED INVENTED REALITY that serves Western culture as the ‘operative reality’; i.e. the intellectually constructed and linguistically expressed ‘reality-out-there’, an INVENTED REALITY that ‘wallpapers over’ our consciousness of the ‘reality’ of our relational sensory experience wherein we are inclusions in the transforming relational continuum, a reality that, as Lao Tzu points out, is beyond linguistic articulation (The Tao that can be told is not the true Tao).

As inclusions in the transforming relational continuum, we do not have to ‘leave the house’ to cultivate and sustain harmonious relations with the world we live in.  As Alan Watts notes;

“Taoists view the universe as the same as, or inseparable from, themselves so that Lao-tzu could say, “Without leaving my house, I know the whole universe.” This implies that the art of life is more like navigation than warfare, for what is important is to understand the winds, the tides, the currents, the seasons, and the principles of growth and decay, so that one’s actions may use them and not fight them.” ~Alan Watts

However, in Western culture, the INTELLIGENT, ARTICULATE and WELL-EDUCATED VIRGIN CHILD may ‘know more’ about sexual relations and giving birth than her sensually-experienced (carnal knowledge informed) parents.  As Heraclitus observes; ‘the learning of many things does not teach understanding’.   While we intuitively distinguish between giving our children ‘sex education’ and ‘sex lessons’, we may, ourselves, take advice from politicians who have learned many things (e.g. the glory of waging and winning war) without ever having experienced such things.  In fact, after those who have experienced war have passed, it is far easier for intellectually gifted orators to excite the ego and fire up young blood with visions of glory that can cultivate a quorum for precipitating a new war.

The ‘double error’ is what gives us (first error) THE IMPRESSION OF OUR INDEPENDENT-OF-THE-WORLD EXISTENCE conflated with the second error of OUR NOTIONAL POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS.  This ‘intellectual double error archetype’ of jumpstart ‘sorcery’ is also known by the ‘producer-product’ designation.

The ‘double error’ has turned out to be intellectual self-trickery that re-formats the purely implicit relational reality implied by ‘Dances with Wolves’  (indigenous aboriginal approach to linguistic expression of innately implicit relational reality) and ‘the ‘surprise version of the game of Twenty Questions’ (modern physics ), reducing the implicit to the explicit by way of name-instantiated independent-being based mechanics; e.g. ‘dances with wolves’ becomes ‘John Dunbar’ sources such-and-such actions and developments.  That is, we use NAMING to psychologically invent a ‘thing-in-itself’ as the abstract base for equipping it with ITS OWN POWERS OF SOURCING actions and developments.  THAT IS, THE DOUBLE ERROR AND ‘SORCERY’ ARE ONE AND THE SAME PSYCHOLOGICAL ABERRATION.

Western culture’s operative reality is the explicit reality based on the double error; i.e. WESTERN CULTURE ‘REALITY’ IS AN ‘INVENTED REALITY’ that is in terms of name-instantiated things-in-themselves with powers of sourcing actions and developments.  This explicit being-based abstraction is radically unlike the implicit reality of relational forming within the transforming relational continuum, yet it is serving as the basic ‘operative reality’ of the Western culture social collective.

* * *

Nota Bene!  I am writing this commentary in a language that builds abstract intellectual accounts formulated on the ‘double error’ foundation. Such language is incapable of directly expressing the relational reality that we are discussing.  Therefore, my words can only be understood as inference regarding the transforming relational continuum that is innately beyond the expressive capability of language (“Listening not to me but to the Logos, it is wise to consider that all things are one” — Heraclitus).  I am repeating what many other writers have ‘run into’ in trying to share, in language, impressions of a relational reality that lies beyond the capability of language.  As Wittgenstein put it, the speaker/writer and listener/reader are limited by explicit use of language, with respect to ‘getting on the same relational-experiential (implicit) page’ and thus forced to resort to implicit inferential use of language; i.e. using language NOT AS A CONVEYOR OF LITERAL MEANING BUT AS A TOOL FOR STIMULATING IN THE READER/LISTENER, UNDERSTANDING THAT LIES BEYOND LANGUAGE, AS IN ONE’S EXPERIENCE AS AN INFANT WHICH IS PRIOR TO THE LANGUAGE INDUCED SELF-OTHER SPLITTING;  Pleasure and pain can be communicated ‘implicitly’ and is the primary mode of communications of an infant prior to the self-other split enabled by the learning of language.  The point is that relational experience is the primary reality and it is beyond the understanding-conveying capabilities of explicit linguistic messaging.  Nevertheless, language can ‘at least’ be used ‘obliquely’ to imply or infer sensory experience that is beyond language’s explicit conveyancing capacities.

6.54 My propositions are elucidatory in this way: he who understands me finally recognizes them as senseless, when he has climbed out through them, on them, over them. (He must so to speak throw away the ladder, after he has climbed up on it.)

He must surmount these propositions; then he sees the world rightly.

 

7.0 Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.

So, I am herewith ‘going on record’ to state that my writing, while it may not come across as ‘poetic’, is, as in poetic usage, constituted so as to share understanding through implicit relational referencing, as in building networks of relations.  This is an approach that uses language for a task innately beyond that which it is structurally qualified for; i.e. to share the ineffable relational experience of inclusion within a transforming relational continuum, a continuum that is ‘continually in flux’ wherein there are no ‘things’ with ‘persisting thing-in-itself existence’ and therefore no things with powers of sourcing actions and developments as lend themselves to language-based (double-error-based) expression.

That is, the hurricane we name ‘Katrina’ is a relational form in a transforming relational continuum that involves no persisting existence (everything is in flux).  Meanwhile, the psychological attaching/associating of a ‘name’ imputes persisting existence to forms such as the ‘boil’ (as I herewith ‘name’ it) in the turbulent flow in the bend of the river.  The visual persistence of the ‘boil’ is a psychological impression rather than a material reality [as Heraclitus points out, we can’t step into the same river twice since it is not the same river and we are not the same we].  Insofar as Katrina, the named entity, captures our attention, our psyche or intellectualizing self is caught up in an ‘anthropomorphism’ that incorporates the double error archetype; i.e. Katrina, thanks to grammar, is understood to be the ‘source’ of actions and developments.  ‘Sorcery’ is abstraction that eclipses an understanding of the same phenomena in terms of relational transformation. The result is a loss of dimensionality in our understanding; i.e. sorcery is local, transformation is nonlocal.

[[NOTE: In discussing our understanding of phenomena by two different paths; i.e. experience and intellection, we have to be on the alert for subtle shifts of meaning.  Classic examples of confusion in this regard include ”pathogen” and ‘forgiveness”.  Pathogen is the commonly perceived ‘source’ of ‘pathology’ but ‘pathology’ can refer to ‘relations out of balance’ so that rather than there being a ‘source’ of such pathology, there could be a falling out of relational balance.  For example, ‘c. difficile’ has been labelled as a pathogen responsible for many deaths from colitis, however, c. difficile is a normally innocuous bacteria in the gut that experiences massive proliferation in the wake of the administering of antibiotics which destabilize the natural balance in the bacterial ecosystem in the gut; i.e. the imbalance is the problem and while it is next to impossible to eradicate with ‘more antiobiotics’, it is easily resolved by ‘fecal micriobiota transplant’ (FMT) that rebalances the gut microbiotics.  There is no ‘pathogen’, there is only relational imbalance.  So one has to be wary of the medieval superstitions that pervade “allopathic” healthcare.  ‘Forgiveness’ is another deception that brings the ‘sorcery’ assumption in through the back door; i.e. ‘forgiveness’ comes into ‘being’ by first assuming the sourcing of some harmful action, a common Western culture offender-victim view of strife, however, in indigenous aboriginal cultures, an eruption of dissonance that precipitates injury is seen as arising from imbalance in the relational social network that the whole social collective is co-responsible for sustaining balance in (as implied in mitakuye oyasin), thus the damage done is seen as arising from tensions in the relational matrix that it is everyone’s responsibility to sustain harmony in.  The ‘source’ is not seen simply in terms of ‘the action of an offender’, but rather as the product of relational tensions in the social collective that manifest in an offender-victim short circuit within the relational social matrix.  i.e. everyone is co-responsible and there is no intellectual reduction of this relational dysfunction to a guilty-offender—innocent-victim ‘binary’.  …  This short note has been included to exemplify the dysfunction that arises from the ‘double error’ and its implication of ‘sorcery’ as is found in the ‘producer-product’ abstraction.  The relational understanding of phenomena borrows form experience and runs deeper than the intellectual abstractions of ‘sorcery’.].

.

Meanwhile, we can use language and grammar within a world of flux to psychologically capture impressions and logically impose ‘persisting being’, by assigning a name to a persisting visual impression, using naming as an abstract ‘stub’ to impute ‘thing-in-itself being’ (first error) and conflating this first error by imputing to ‘it’ the notional (second error) powers of sourcing actions and development.  Awareness of the ‘double error’ is key to following this ‘explanation’ of the source of Western culture cultivated aberrance that plays out through collective ‘belief’ in the INVENTED REALITY that our Western culture deploys as the ‘operative reality’.  This INVENTED REALITY eclipses and occludes the ineffable relational reality of our inclusion as relational forms within the transforming relational continuum.  That is, since our ‘window’ into reality is our ineffable sensory inclusion within the transforming relational continuum, installing a visual ‘picture show’ that purports to allow us to see into an ‘ongoing picturable reality’ is a giant ‘con’ since reality is innately NOT PICTURABLE.

The many different contenders that purport that ‘their picture of reality’ is the ‘correct picture of reality’ overlooks the basics; i.e. that reality is NOT PICTURABLE because it is the transforming relational continuum we share inclusion in, that we understand by our sensory inclusion within it, as with the sensory inclusion of boil in flow as ONE, the intellectual splitting into ‘two’ being nothing other than language and grammar based ‘appearance’ (apparition).

To recoup and summarize, then, we have available to us, two very different realities, as follows;

-I- SENSUAL NON-PICTURABLE REALITY OF INCLUDED RELATIONAL EXPERIENCE: the reality of our inclusion in the transforming relational continuum that is beyond the capability of linguistic expression (the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao).

-II- INTELLECTUAL-PICTURABLE REALITY OF LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR: the reality of voyeur contemplation in the ‘double error’ terms of things-in-themselves that source actions and developments.

Western culture social collectives have opted to popularly employ (and impose by force) -II- INTELLECTUAL-PICTURABLE REALITY OF LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR.

Intellectual-picturable realities are ‘double error’ abstraction based and we can construct many different versions of such reality and argue over which reality is the correct reality (as with conservative reality and liberal reality) but the cannot be resolution SINCE THERE IS NO “EXPLICIT” REALITY.  Explicit realities are intellectually contrived fictions. the incessant Western culture political division and argument over ‘which reality is the correct/actual reality’ is a pointless argument since there is no explicit reality.  We fabricate explicit realities by way of the ‘double error’, generating ‘things-in-themselves’ such as humans, nations and corporations that we purport to be ‘things-in-themselves’ with ‘their own powers of sourcing actions and developments’ (the ‘double error’).  There is no point in arguing ‘which is the correct reality’ as we do, since there is no ‘explicit reality’; i.e. the reality of experiencing inclusion in a transforming relational continuum is not reducible to explicit terms of ‘things-in-themselves with powers of sourcing actions and developments’.

Meanwhile, our ego, either as an individual or a nation or as a corporate collective, being based on the ‘double error’ allows us to make up stories of our great achievements that feature ourselves as ‘sorcerers’.  These egotist stories are double error based INVENTED REALITIES.   They are intellectually contrived ‘abstraction’ that is not grounded in the reality of our actual relational experience as relational forms included within the transforming relational continuum.  We notice that arguments over which of these intellectual INVENTED REALITIES is the ‘true reality’ get decided by ‘the principle of Lafontaine’; La raison du plus fort est toujours la meilleure’ “the reasoning of the most powerful is always the best”.  The ‘official reality’ thus gets flipped about with the frequency that new political leaders are ‘put in charge’ (it is their responsibilty to decide which of the debated realities is the ‘true reality’).   Western governments come and go, conservative and liberal, Trump and Obama, each of them shaping their operations according to ‘their own reality’ and very often scoffing at the ‘reality’ that is shaping the policies and actions of others.

Why can’t they home in together on ‘the real reality’?  The reason why is; THERE IS NO REAL EXPLICIT REALITY!  IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO REDUCE A TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM IN WHICH WE ARE INCLUDED TO EXPLICIT ‘DOUBLE ERROR’ TERMS OF ‘THINGS-IN-THEMSELVES WITH POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS. Western culture adherents continual arguing over ‘who has the best handle on the ‘real reality’ proceeds relentlessly, on the basis of belief that there is an explicit language-and-grammar capturable reality.  There is no explicit reality.  The double error conceptualizing of reality is just that, a ‘double error’.  In the reality of our actual experience, there are no name-instantiated things-in-themselves with powers of sourcing actions and developments, therefore such language and grammar ‘double-error based INVENTED REALITY falls radically askance of the relational reality of our actual experience; i.e. the ineffable reality of our actual experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.

This leaves those of us who embrace relational reality and who regard Western culture popular reality as intellectually contrived INVENTED REALITY, such as modern physicists (e.g. Bohm and Schroedinger), philosophers (Nietzsche, Wittgenstein, Emerson), indigenous aboriginals, Taoists/Buddhists and Advaita Vedanta adherents, OUTSIDE OF THE CIRCLES OF REGULATORY INFLUENCE.  The impact is that Western culture regulatory administration imposes the implications of INVENTED REALITY, imputing the power of sorcery of actions and developments (the double error) to notional name-instantiated things-in-themselves; e.g. ‘human beings’, ‘nations’, ‘corporations’.  These notional ‘things-in-themselves’, notionally with their own powers of sourcing actions and developments, Western culture assesses in a binary ‘good’ and ‘bad’ sense, consistent with the binary logic of ‘is’ or ‘is not’ that is used in support of their ‘being’.  ‘Rewards’ and ‘punishments’ follow from such assessments, leading to an elevating in social status, respect and material rewards of those deemed ‘sorcerers of good’ and a diminishing of social status, disrespect and material punishments of those deemed ‘sorcerers of bad’.

Adherence to this ‘double error’ based INVENTED REALITY leads to social-relational aberrance that manifests in many ways; e.g. rewarding and punishing is based on abstraction that identifies the ‘sorcerers’ of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ even though, in the -I- SENSUAL NON-PICTURABLE REALITY OF INCLUDED RELATIONAL EXPERIENCE, such designations make no sense.  Meanwhile, Western culture has been cultivating ‘lock-in’ by ‘high-switching costs’ (a nonlinear dynamic)  in these sense that the assessments of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ have been used to give disproportionately larger or smaller influence over changes to the current Western culture social system and values, on the basis of the currently dominant ‘operative reality; -II- INTELLECTUAL-PICTURABLE REALITY OF LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR.

In other words, disproportionate influence over changes to the current publicly supported version of ‘reality’ has been given to those who rate highly on the abstract binary of ‘goodness’ – ‘badness’ which applies to notional ‘people as things-in-themselves with powers of sourcing actions and developments’; i.e. the psychological ‘double error’ pointed out by Nietzsche.  This constitutes ‘lock-in by high switching costs’ due to the social elevating in influence on this ‘double error’ basis.

Lock-in is the situation wherein the social collective gives disproportionate influence on making changes to those who are unfairly benefiting from the system in place.  The needed changes would thus ‘deflate’ in status and rewards and recognition, those to whom Western culture has been erroneously attributing powers of sorcery to, and correspondingly inflating their status and rewards and recognition, along with disproportionate influence over changing the current system of rewards and recognition.  As Henri Laborit points out, this delivers ‘lock-in’ with ‘high switching costs’ in regard to moving from the simplicity of the explicit order of reality to the complexity of the implicit order of reality;

We’ who explore such topics, cannot easily share them because (a) they do not fit into the typical dinner conversation format of our present culture, since to express them takes a lot of relational connections that can’t fit into a rapid-fire repartee, and (b) because the humanism  implicit in trying to share them is not seen as “a humanism of real worth” since it undermines, besmirches or topples the esteemed icons, pillars of society, founding fathers, and celebrities of the culture-in-place.  – Henri Laborit, ‘La Nouvelle Grille’  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Laborit

 

Western culture thus uses language and grammar to replace the implicit, relational reality of our actual sensory experience, with the explicit, thing-in-itself sorcery based intellectual pseudo-reality as the (Western culture) ‘operative reality’.

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.

What we can picture is ‘too small’ to capture our experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.  But what we do picture is scenes in our mind’s eye where we portray ourselves in ‘double error mode’ as the ‘thing-in-itself’ sorcerers of explicit results.  This picture is difficult to ‘set aside’ so that we can get back in touch with the undivided self of our infancy;

A man’s wisdom is to know that all ends are momentary, that the best end must be superseded by a better. But there is a mischievous tendency in him to transfer his thought from the life to the ends, to quit his agency and rest in his acts: the tools run away with the workman, the human with the divine. – Ralph Waldo Emerson, ‘The Method of Nature’

That is, in using this language that we are using in this communication, and describing ‘what we are doing’, this portrayal is ‘laden’ with the explicit reality concepts that we must get beneath to get to the natural ‘reality’ that is intrinsically implicit.  This is why Bohm foresaw the need to design a relational language that he called Rheomode, however, as he discovered, indigenous aboriginals had already developed such a language’;

A few months before his death, Bohm met with a number of Algonkian speakers and was struck by the perfect bridge between their language and worldview and his own exploratory philosophy. What to Bohm had been major breakthroughs in human thought — quantum theory, relativity, his implicate order and rheomode – were part of the everyday life and speech of the Blackfoot, Mic Maq, Cree and Ojibwaj.” – F. David Peat, ‘Blackfoot Physics’

My contention, which is consistent with Bohm’s and Nietzsche’s, is that we are, through the current dominance of Western culture in its choice of ‘operative reality’ (i.e. double error based INVENTED REALITY), supporting the cultivating of social aberrance.

The ‘way out of’ escalating aberrance is to restore ‘reality I’ to its natural precedence over ‘reality II’

-I- SENSUAL NON-PICTURABLE REALITY OF INCLUDED RELATIONAL EXPERIENCE: the reality of our inclusion in the transforming relational continuum that is beyond the capability of linguistic expression (the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao).

-II- INTELLECTUAL-PICTURABLE REALITY OF LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR: the reality of voyeur contemplation in the ‘double error’ terms of things-in-themselves that source actions and developments.