WESTERN CULTURE: Psychologically Hijacked by The DOUBLE ERROR
Just as schizophrenia is not resolved by getting the multiple personalities to cooperate with one another, the conflicts among races and nations are not resolved by ‘improving relations’ among these self-declared ‘independent entities’. They are resolved by an awareness that these divisions DO NOT EXIST, or as Schroedinger puts it; ‘Subject and Object are only ONE”
This perspectival overview comes from exploring the clash in what EAST and WEST, respectively, hold to be ‘REALITY’ and how this very basic difference in understanding derives from language and grammar. At the core the divide is how that which is perceived as GROWTH and DEVELOPMENT in the WEST is understood as TRANSFORMATION in the EAST. A ‘side-effect’ of the WEST’s casting of dynamics in terms of GROWTH and DEVELOPMENT is the imputing of LOCAL SOURCING which is also the source of EGO, PRAISE and BLAME, whereas the EAST’s understanding in terms of TRANSFORMATION derives from INSPIRATION, the difference having been captured in the adage; “INSPIRATION fills the heart, EGO swells the head’. While these influences shape the social dynamics of both EAST and WEST, there is a question of precedence that informs the difference in EAST and WEST ‘psychology’.
PRIDE associates most strongly with the ‘DOUBLE ERROR’ of language and grammar and it this DOUBLE ERROR that comes into play in, for example, clear-cutting 160 acres of Wilderness land replacing it with biological monoculture such as fields of wheat. By contrast, there is inspiration in living in a co-sustaining interdependent matrix of biodiversity in which ‘humanigs’ are just one of the interdependent participants. As F. David Peat observes in ‘Blackfoot Physics, ‘indigenous aboriginals’ planted a mix of corn, beans and squash (the ‘Three Sisters’) to sustain harmony within natural biodiversity.
We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS speak of the GROWTH of LOCAL farmland under monocultural cultivation, but what of the reciprocal LOSS of Wilderness biodiversity that comes with it, the two not really being “two” but being co-included in the overall context of NONLOCAL TRANSFORMATION.
This short PERSPECTIVE entitled WESTERN CULTURE: Psychologically Hijacked by The DOUBLE ERROR, delves into how WESTERN and EASTERN minds differ in their views on how GROWTH and TRANSFORMATION fit into ‘reality’ and how the psychological reality of the ‘The EAST’ accords with the NONLOCAL-TRANSFORMATION based understanding of modern physics, indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta, while the psychological reality of the ‘WEST’ continues to accord with the LOCAL-SOURCING of actions and developments (LOCAL GROWTH) based understanding of pre-modern (Newtonian) physics thinking.
Note that GROWTH is a back-handed way of asserting that FIGURE and GROUND are TWO, while TRANSFORMATION casts FIGURE and GROUND as ONE. Ambiguity arises where FIGURE and GROUND are TWO as to whether the FIGURE sources change in the ground or whether the GROUND sources change in the FIGURE. This is the BIPOLAR DISORDER that plagues WESTERN CULTURE which is absent in EASTERN CULTURE where the understanding is that FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE.
* * *
As Emerson puts it, ‘the tool has run away with the workman, the human with the divine.
Today’s reality has been deeply shaped by the development of LANGUAGE which is hugely useful in that it allows us to widely share (crude representations) of our experience so that we don’t all have to repeat the same mistakes or repeat the many unsuccessful trials that contribute to the development of valuable action and development approaches.
We don’t all have to be ‘pioneers’ and ‘get arrows up the arse’ in our quest for advancing our understanding. LAGUAGE-based sharing, while hugely valuable, is no substitute for sensory experience, and the shortfall can and IS the source of psychological confusion that is driving us WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS CRAZY Why “JUST” WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS and NOT EASTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS? This is what this note is about, and the ‘short answer’ is that while EASTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS employ the reduction of sensory experience to intellectual language-based abstraction as a ‘Wittgenstein ladder’ to BOOTSTRAP or in other words ‘make an intuitive leap’ to understanding of the INEFFABLE that lies beyond the EXPLICIT reach of language, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are employing language-based abstraction, as if it were a competent REALITY SURROGATE.
If the WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT says that his farm has GROWN from a 2 acre spread to its current 160 acre expanse, the EAST (and here I include modern physics, indigenous aboriginal cultures Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta) will object, pointing out that the purported “GROWTH” of the cultivated land area, is in reality associated with the reciprocal “SHRINKAGE” of Wilderness area such that TRANSFORMATION is what is ‘really’ going on.
In other words, there is no such thing as GROWTH since the GROWTH of a ‘thing’ implies that that ‘thing’ is separate and independent of the rest of reality as in the logic of FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO, whereas in the ‘real reality’ of our sensory experience, the world is given only once and FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE so that in the case of the cultivating of the land, what is going on is TRANSFORMATION and the notion of GROWTH is intellectual abstraction that is part of the CRAZY-MAKING belief system of us WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS. Because we encourage GROWTH of industry, towns, etc. as if such GROWTH were ‘real’, we leave the condition of the Wilderness flapping like a loose sheet in the breeze.
In short, WE BLIND OURSELVES TO THE REALITY OF TRANSFORMATION.
The title of this note; WESTERN CULTURE: Psychologically Hijacked by The DOUBLE ERROR is to further highlight the point made by Nietzsche, that we use the tool of the DOUBLE ERROR to notionally break up into pieces, the transforming relational continuum (the reality of our sensory experience). This is what makes the INEFFABLE EFFABLE, by way of substituting something new that appears to be LOCAL, thus seeming to overcome that which is INEFFABLE-BECAUSE-NONLOCAL.
The FIRST ERROR is NAMING which imputes LOCAL thing-in-itself-BEING to a relational form-in-the-flow, and we conflate this with the SECOND ERROR of GRAMMAR to impute to the NAMING-instantiated thing-in-itself, the notional power of SOURCING actions and developments. In place of an atmosphere that is hurricaning, we beget ‘the hurricane’ which GRAMMAR endows with ‘its own power of SOURCING actions and development.
This DOUBLE ERROR thus serves as to substitute a NEW language and intellection-based REALITY that replaces our INEFFABLE SENSORY-EXPERIENCE REALITY. What we gain from this is an ability to render EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT, that which is INEFFABLE-because-NOLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT.
What is going on here is NOT simply finding a means to EFFABLE-IZE the INEFFABLE, but fabricating an EFFABLE SUBSTITUTE PSEUDO-REALITY that can serve as INFERENCE of the real INEFFABLE sensory experience reality that lies beyond reach of the limited capabilities of the effable-izing tool of language.
What is a CRAZY-MAKER for us WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS is that we have fallen into the habit, after saying good-bye to poetic expression, of doing a direct substitute of our DOUBLE ERROR language based construction, for ‘reality’; i.e. we have traded out our sensory experience reality which is ineffable-because-nonlocal, for another pseudo-reality that is effable-because-local. The DOUBLE ERROR of language and grammar is the device we use to condition the intellect into making the jump from the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL to the EFFABLE-because-local.
The ’hurricaning’ of the atmosphere, given the DOUBLE ERROR treatment, become ‘the Huricane’ that roams about within the atmosphere. In other words, FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE is converted to FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO, or in other words, we replace the NATURAL BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDED medium with the ABSTRACT EITHER/OR logic of the EXCLUDED medium.
That is the ‘Devil’s Bargain’ we must make to replace the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT with the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT.
(See also the philosophical ‘Systems Science’ treatise; ‘The Name of the Devil is Suboptimization, which points to the craziness of trying to deal with ‘independent forms’ as in FIGURE and GROUND are TWO when the reality is that there is only interdependence where FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE)).
LET’s NOT FORGET that this DOUBLE ERROR of GRAMMAR that lets us replace the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT with the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT, that engineer the replacement of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE with FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO, … is just an expedient tool that enables language-based sharing of relational phenomena that are beyond capture in the LOCAL and EXPLICIT terms that are basic to language and grammar.
Emerson’s point that we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have allowed ‘the tool to run away with the workman, the human with the divine’, … refers to the fact that the DOUBLE ERROR is simply a temporary expedient to allow to articulate and share a ‘cut-out snapshot’ of the transforming relational continuum; e.g. “the Hurricane” portrayed in FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO instead of the “hurricaning of the atmosphere in the solar system in the universe [the Wave-field]” wherein FIGUER-and-GROUND-are-ONE.
So, instead of the ‘humaning-in-the-transforming-relational continuum’, … the DOUBLE ERROR allows us to invent a substitute reality wherein FIGURE and GROUND are TWO, and then we can start talking about the FIGURE (the ‘human’, the ‘hurricane’) as if it had the powers of sourcing its own actions and development; eg. “Hurricane Katrina is growing larger and stronger and is devasting the city of New Orleans”). The Allies have devastated the Germans etc. etc. in all cases letting these DOUBLE ERROR constructs replace and substitute for the ‘real reality’ of relational TRANSFORMATION.
By now, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are so accustomed to this DOUBLE ERROR SPEAK that we have forgotten that it is only valid for use as a Wittgenstein ladder that triggers an intuitive leap to the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT that lies innately BEYOND the reach of the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT.
WEST SPLITS FROM EAST in that WEST and its Newtonian science is in the habit of understanding the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT intellectual pseudo-reality as THE BASIC REALITY, while modern physics, and the EAST understands the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT sensory experience reality as the BASIC REALITY. That is; while the WEST’s understanding of ‘hurricane Katrina is devastating New Orleans’, the EAST’s understanding is that we are included in a NONLOCAL, transforming relational continuum in which turbulent eruptions and subductions emerge and manifest, being LOCAL relational features within the NONLOCAL TRANSFORMATION, lend themselves, to being candidates for the DOUBLE ERROR treatment of NAMING to impute LOCAL BEING and GRAMMAR to impute the power of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments.
The DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR gives us the makings of a whole new surrogate pseudo-reality (and in fact, many such pseudo-realities) that allows us to do an END-RUN around the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT as is the innate nature of the transforming relational continuum.
While the EAST makes use of language’s DOUBLE ERROR capability to trigger an intuitive leap to the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT that lies beyond the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT, the WEST employs the DOUBLE ERROR directly, as the OPERATIVE REALITY. This is a CRAZY-MAKER, and the WEST remains STUCK within it due to the complex dynamic known as LOCK-IN-BY-HIGH-SWITCHING-COSTS. This LOCK-IN comes about by DOUBLE ERROR based abstraction-triggered EGO and SOCIAL STATUS based on the belief in the ‘independently-existing human’ and its notional POWER OF LOCALLY SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS.
In fact, in WESTERN CULTURE language and grammar stimulated thinking (as distinct form sensory experience based understanding), anything with a NAME can be understood as a LOCAL thing-in-itself with its own power of SOURCING actions and developments; e.g. a NAME designates a LOCAL thing-in-itself ‘human’, ‘animal’, ‘nation’, ‘corporation’ which can be conflated with GRAMMAR that endows it with the notional power of SOURCING actions and developments. GOODBYE WORLD AS THE TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM, .. HELLOW SURROGATE WORLD AS A COLLECTIION OF LOCAL DOUBLE ERROR MACHINES WITH THEIR OWN (NOTIONAL) POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS.
What we have here are the intellectual abstract ingredients for constructing a SURROGATE mechanistic world based on DOUBLE ERROR dynamics. The EAST makes use of the abstract constructions of language as a helping aid for making an intuitive leap to the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT, while the WEST makes use of the abstract constructions of language to serve up a SURROGATE REALITY for use as the OPERATIONAL REALITY. That is why Emerson speaks of ‘the tool runs away with the workman, the human with the divine’.
The tool includes the abstract concept of GROWTH which imputes, in a back-handed way, the notion of a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF (first ERROR of the DOUBLE ERROR) with, (second ERROR of the DOUBLE ERROR) its GRAMMAR-given own power of SOURCING actions and development aka “GROWTH”.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ‘GROWTH’ IN A TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM, but GROWTH does imply that there is something LOCAL and INDEPENDENT that is endowed with its own powers of making itself larger. All we need for this abstraction is a NAME and some GRAMMAR. Ok, give me a NAME, .. how about ‘the FARM’. Now give me some GRAMMAR such as the verb ‘to GROW’ and we have ‘The farm has grown from its original 2 acres to more than 160 acres and its production of wheat has increased proportionately to that growth.
GUESS WHAT, this DOUBLE ERROR treatment is splitting apart FIGURE (the farm) from GROUND (the countryside). Where is there mention of the WILDERNESS that must be shrinking in inverse proportion to the farm’s GROWING. Maybe we are too focused on the farm’s ‘growth of production’ to see what is really going on (TRANSFORMATION as in FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE; i.e. farm-and-countryside-are-ONE). Given that FARM and COUNTRYSIDE are ONE, GROWTH of the FARM is abstract and impossible and the reality is TRANSFORMATION of the countryside as manifests in SHRINKAGE of the Wilderness reciprocal to the ‘GROWTH’ of the cultivated land.
As can be seen, language that is grounded in the binary terms of NAMING-instantiated things-in-themselves that ‘ARE’ or ‘ARE NOT’ set the stage for the concept of LOCAL things-in-themselves that GROW, … FORCE UPON US BY DINT OF LOGICAL CONSISTENCY, the NOTION of a CONTAINING SPACE that is INDEPENDENT of the LOCAL THING THAT IS GROWING, … hence we have FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO, otherwise, we could not have the GROWTH of the FIGURE. But in EASTERN understanding, as in modern physics, FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE as in the transforming relational continuum.
Ok, we can see the problem here, the problem of our need, if we are to have a competent language and grammar, of garnering an EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT pseudo-reality (a reality available to language) from out of the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT real-reality. To overcome this problem we have to engineer a splitting up of FIGURE-and-GROUND-into-TWO separately discussable (abstract) entities.
WATCH OUT! HERE COMES AMBIGUITY!
Does one bad apple source the rotting of the whole barrel, or does it take a whole community to source the raising of child?
WHERE DID THIS CONCEPT OF “SOURCING” COME FROM?
GUESS WHAT! By getting rid of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE “TRANSFORMATION” because of its innate AMBIGUITY that PREVENTS language based articulation (i.e. other words, TRANSFORMATION is INEFFABLE). , … by invoking the abstract concept of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO, while this delivers EFFABLE-ness by supporting the concept of LOCAL SOURCING of actions and developments, we are at the same time, OPENING THE DOOR to another type of AMBIGUITY (we are just trading out one ambiguity for another) by opening up dual possibilities wherein the FIGURE can SOURCE changes in the GROUND and/or the GROUND can SOURCE changes in the FIGURE.
Does the INHABITANT source changes to the HABITAT or does the HABITAT source changes to the INHABITANT? This is one of those unresolvable puzzles like the Zen koan of wind-and-flag; i.e. does the flapping of the flag source the wind or does the wind source the flapping of the flag.
THE ANSWER to such puzzles comes through the realization that we are included in a transforming relational continuum WHEREIN THERE IS NO LOCAL “SOURCING”, there is only NONLCOAL relational TRANSFORMATION.
But that’s not much help because it simply takes us back the realm of the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE, … which is why we invented, with the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR, the realm of the LOCAL and EXPLICIT wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-TWO.
In getting rid of (so to speak) ONE FORM OF AMBIGUITY, we manufacture ANOTHER FORM OF AMBIGUITY, which is even MORE problematic in that the ambiguity of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE was with respect to the loss of INDEPENDENT IDENTITY, the ambiguity of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO is with respect to the SOURCING of actions and developments; i.e. does the sourcing come from the FIGURE or does the sourcing come from the GROUND.
Note that, in the case of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE, we have the BOTH/AND logic of the INCLUDED medium, so the ambiguity is tied up with the understanding that the basic dynamic is not deriving from ‘local figures’ or from ‘ground’ but is coming from relational TRANSFORMATION, … whereas in the case of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO we have the EITHER/OR logic of the EXCLUDED medium, so we must invoke an understanding of change that is SOURCED and here the ambiguity arises as to whether change is SOURCED EITHER by the FIGURE OR by the GROUND. For example, do continents drift or does the seafloor spread? This ambiguity disappears if understand continents in the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE terms of fluid forms within a fluid continuum.. Language TAKES AWAY this fluid (TRANSFORMATION) option once we reduce our understanding by way of NAMING and GRAMMAR to terms of LOCAL things-in-themselves with their own powers of SOURCING actions and developments (the “DOUBLE ERROR”).
WHICH AMBIGUITY DO YOU PREFER?
The WEST generally prefers the ambiguity of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO which imputes the INDEPENDENCE of the individual FIGURE such as the humaning in the flow which the DOUBLE ERROR reduces to the LOCAL, INDEPENDENT, BEING with its own GRAMMAR-given powers of SOURCING actions and developments. In this case, the splitting of FIGURE and GROUND into TWO is NOT SIMPLY, as it is in the EAST, FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING DISCARDABLE PROPOSITIONS THAT CAN STIMULATE AN INTUITIVE LEAP TO THE INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT Wave-field reality aka the Tao aka the Logos. The WEST thus ends up with a FIGURE that is INDEPENDENT of the GROUND, unleashing the ambiguity as to whether the FIGURE is sourcing changes in the GROUND or whether the GROUND is sourcing changes in the FIGURE.
If we want to understand reality as FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE, we have to accept our inclusion in the the realm of the INEFFABLE, as Wittgenstein points to in his final proposition in Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus;
“7. Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.” (“Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen”), — Wittgenstein
While the EAST uses language to break the INEFFABLE barrier, or rather to do an end run around it employing the language of the LOCAL, EFFABLE and EXPLICIT which serves only as inference from which we can launch and intuition-based leap to the INEFFABLE, the WEST is in the habit of using language in in a READ-MY-LIPS mode which insists that the reality constructions based on the LOCAL, EFFABLE and EXPLICIT are ready for prime-time usage as the OPERATIVE REALITY.
Therefore, when I say that I have GROWN my farm from 2 acres to 160 acres and have GROWN my wheat production from 40 bushels per growing season to 320 bushels per growing season, I am speaking of this GROWTH as something REAL and expect you, as a WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT in good standing, to take me at my word, and NOT listen to either modern physics or to the old indigenous aboriginal standing on the hill above my farm, talking wishy-washy nonsense about TRANSFORMATION being more real than GROWTH of cultivated land;
“You must teach the children that the ground beneath their feet is the ashes of your grandfathers. So that they will respect the land, tell your children that the earth is rich with the lives of our kin. Teach your children what we have taught our children, that the earth is our mother. Whatever befalls the earth, befalls the sons of the earth. If men spit upon the ground, they spit upon themselves. … This we know, the earth does not belong to man, man belongs to the earth. This we know. All things are connected like the blood which unites one family. All things are connected. Whatever befalls the earth, befalls the sons of the earth. Man did not weave the web of life, he is merely a strand in it. Whatever he does to the web, he does to himself.”— “Chief Seattle”
What would happen to our concepts of LOCAL GROWTH and PRODUCTION if we were to listen to the Chief? What would happen to US and our own EGO based awareness of ourselves as LOCAL independent beings with powers of SOURCING actions and developments? We would be lost inside the transforming relational continuum, or perhaps not ‘LOST’ since we are ONE-with-EVERYTHING. As Schroedinger put it, SUBJECT and OBJECT are just ONE and our conscious mind, if not our rational thinking, is continually aware of this;
Mind is, by its very nature, a singulare tantum. I should say; the overall number of minds is just one. I venture to call it indestructible since it has a peculiar timetable, namely mind is always now. There is really no before and after for mind. There is only a now that includes memories and expectations. But I grant that our language is not quite adequate to express this… “–Schroedinger
The intended ‘point’ of this note; WESTERN CULTURE: Psychologically Hijacked by The DOUBLE ERROR
is that we make the DOUBLE ERROR so as to produce an EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT surrogate to trigger an intuitive leap to the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT REALITY (of our experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum.
We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS have mastered the production of the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT surrogates, but instead of using them to tickle our intuition into making a leap to the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT, we are letting this tool ‘rune away with the workman’, the human (local) with the divine (nonlocal)
* * *
BIPOLAR DISORDER (Miner’s Canary Syndrome)
What we call ‘normal’ is a product of repression, denial, splitting, projection, introjection and other forms of destructive action on experience.” — R.D. Laing
The injection of BIPOLAR AMBIGUITY into the WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT psyche is the source of the community level splitting of the social collective into polar opposite factions on the basis of whether the individual is the basic source of the dynamics of the social collective or whether the social collective is the basic source of the dynamics of the individual. This manifests in the bipolar political splitting into preservative and liberal factions. This split is coming from the same psychological split which follows the choice of conceiving of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO. Does one rotten apple source spoilage of the whole barrel (the entire social collective) in which case the appropriate action would be to purify the barrel by removing ‘rotten apples’. Or, does it take a whole community (the entire social collective) to source the raising of a good individual, in which case one needs to work on the whole community to make it the ‘right stuff’ in which case the emergence of a bad apple is a reflection on the condition of the whole barrel.
Note that in both cases, the notion is one of a SOURCING of good or bad social dynamics. This is the WESTERN CULTURE view. In the EASTERN culture view, as in modern physics, there is no SOURCING, there is only relational transformation, therefore, the question is only of relational harmony and relational dissonance, much as in a heavy flow of freeway traffic which is fully ‘relational’ and we can no longer reduce the unfolding actions and trace them back to an individual that ‘sourced them’. If a cat or dog or raccoon darts across the heavy traffic flow, there will be braking and swerving that may go on for a long time, and if there is a collision, far from the initiating of the action, WESTERN CULTURE practice is to nevertheless point to an EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT perpetrator and victim, and avoid the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT relational unfolding REALITY.
The same DOUBLE ERROR prevails in the identification of BENOGENS as with PATHOGENS and in this case leads to rewards and recognition rather than punishment and denigration. This is an example of the BIPOLAR DISORDER that accompanies WESTERN CULTURE putting into an unnatural precedence the EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT over the INEFFABLE-because NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT.
LOCK-IN BY HIGH SWITCHING COSTS.
IN the preceding section, we see how BIPOLAR DISORDER permeates WESTERN CULTURE social collectives, and thus how we find ourselves in a society that believes in rewards and punishments as ‘incentives’ to foster BENEFICIAL and discourage PATHOGENIC actions and developments (in accordance with the DOUBLE ERROR understandig).
Because of this, we cultivate a conservative society where the social collective is divided up into Benogens who are respected and rewarded based on the notion of their SOURCING of beneificial actions and developments and Pathogens who are despised and punished based on the notion of their SOURCING of pathogenic actions and developments.
In the relational understanding of modern physics and the EAST, there is only TRANSFORMATION wherein the social dynamic may involve relational resonance and/or dissonance, as in the example of driving within the flow of freeway traffic where we find ourselves immersed in a NONLOCAL relational dynamic which is INEFFABLE-because-IMPLICIT.
* * *