The brown spot on the apple signals that the APPLE is INCLUDED in the TRANSFORMING relational continuum which is also known as the ‘Wave-field’ and/or ‘the Tao’.

The word GROWTH is key to understanding the WESTERN CULTURE psyche in that it SUBSTITUTES the LOCAL concept of RATIO-based change for the NONLOCAL reality of TRANSFORMATION.  Just ‘watch the brown spot of ROT on the apple GROW larger as the apple GOES BAD.

This conceptualizing of GROWTH as REAL is the WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT’s psychological REPRESENTATION of reality.

EASTERN CULTURE (indigenous aboriginals, Taoists/Buddhists and Advaita Vedanta) along with modern physics would say that the apple is a relational form within the all-including Tao, or Wave-field where TRANSFORMATION is the ongoing dynamic.  In other words, the apple is NOT to be misconstrued as a “LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF” just because we can RE-PRESENT it that way using the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR which permits us to say; ‘the APPLIE is GROWING’ and/or ‘the APPLE is ROTTING’.

Such phraseology is MESMERIZING and puts us into a SUBSTITUTE REALITY where the NONLOCAL dynamic of TRANSFORMATION is set aside and we construct the SUBSTITUTE reality featuring NAMING-instantiated (notional) LOCAL things-in-themselves notionally with “THEIR OWN” powers of SOURCING actions and developments; e.g. ‘SEE the ROTTEN SPOT ON THE APPLE GROW’.

“GROWTH” is an abstract concept based on RATIO aka REASON which allows us to conceive phenomena in LOCAL terms as is the inherent notion captured within GROWTH.   The inventing of GROWTH lets us dodge having to come up with a language that directly grapples with how to RE-present TRANSFORMATION which is NONLOCAL as in ‘everywhere at the same time’ (the nature of the Wave-field).

While the languages of WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS construct SUBSTITUTE REALITIES based on GROWTH which has a basic dependency on RATIO (hence ‘rationality’), the languages of indigenous aboriginals, Taoists/Buddhists and Advaita Vedanta AVOIDS the imputing of LOCAL BEING and instead preserves the natural primacy of RELATIONS as in relational transformation; hence the relations based inference as in ‘Dances with Wolves’ instead of ‘John Dunbar’.  The former suggests that the ‘manning’ is a relational participant within a larger NONLOCAL relational game while the latter NAMING (‘John Dunbar’ designation) coupled with GRAMMAR delivers the psychological impression of a LOCAL SOURCING AGENT.

This IS the DOUBLE ERROR noted by Nietzsche, and it SETS UP in the psyche, the impression that the NAMING instantiated THING-IN-ITSELF has within it the GRAMMAR-GIVEN powers of SOURCING actions and developments.   NOW WE HAVE LOCAL INCIPIENCE of actions, thanks to RATIO which lets us do an ‘end run’ around the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL dynamic of TRANSFORMATION which is ‘everywhere-at-the-same-time’ as is the nature of the Wave-field.  The DOUBLE ERROR is as follows;

STEP ONE: (FIRST ERROR).  Use NAMING to impute LOCAL thing-in-itself being

STEP TWO: (SECOND ERROR). Use GRAMMAR to impute the power of SOURCING actions and development to the FIRST ERROR based notional LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF.

Ok, this doesn’t capture TRANSFORMATION but it does give us the abstract SUBSTITUTE of GROWTH which is one way to ‘get around’ the INEFFABLE nature of TRANSFORMATION which is ‘everywhere at the same time’ as is the nature of the Wave-field.  In other words, our SUBSTITUTING of GROWTH which is a RATIO based concept, for TRANSFORMATION, allows us to construct conceptualizations of reality which stem from THE LOCAL and don’t have to comprehend the INHERENT NONLOCALITY of TRANSFORMATION.   Of course, GROWTH pivots from the things we NAME and leaves floating like a loose sheet in the breeze, the conjugate aspect of SHRINKAGE of the UNNAMED conjugate UNKNOWN aka the Wilderness.

In our talk of the GROWTH of the TOWN, we can go into GREAT EXPLICIT DETAIL as the CONSTRUCTION of streets and houses and all of the LOCAL “components” that go into the GROWING TOWN, … enough to take our mind off of the REALITY that what is really going on here is TRANSFORMATION of the overall LANDSCAPE (the transforming relational continuum).

HERE WE ENTER INTO AN ABSTRACTION-BASED SUBSTITUTE REALITY THAT IS “LOCAL” that we can describe in great detail, and in so doing we simply abandon (psychologically) the conjugate ‘Wilderness’

The abstract notion of the GROWTH of a LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF (e.g. the TOWN) is a RATIO-based abstraction.  It is the second ERROR of the DOUBLE ERROR cited by Nietzsche, the FIRST ERROR being the imputing of LOCAL BEING by way of NAMING, and the SECOND ERROR of GRAMMAR imputing the power of LOCAL GROWING to the NAMING imputed LOCAL thing-in-itself.

This DOUBLE ERROR gives us a LOCAL SOURCING FOOTHOLD by way of RATIO aka REASON wherein we first NAME the TOWN to ‘put it on the map’ and then we use grammar to say that ‘the TOWN is GROWING’, so not only have we used language (naming) to abstractly establish a LOCAL BEING-BASED PRESENCE, but we have used language (grammar) to abstractly equip the NAMING-instantiated “LOCAL THING-IN-ITSELF” with ITS OWN GRAMMAR-GIVEN POWERS OF SOURCING ACTIONS and DEVELOPMENT, … hence, … ‘The TOWN is GROWING larger and more populous and productive.

This is RATIO-based abstraction otherwise known as REASON-based abstraction.  Thanks to REASON, we can establish LOCALLY INSTANTIATED GROWTH as in ‘the TOWN is GROWING’.  This is DOUBLE ERROR based abstraction that, when we confuse it for REALITY, is a CRAZY-MAKER, as Nietzsche points out;

“Reason” in language!—oh what a deceptive old witch it has been! I fear we shall never be rid of God, so long as we still believe in grammar.  – Nietzsche

 NOTA BENE: ‘RATIO’ aka ‘REASON’ aka ‘RATIONAL INTELLECTION’ which is the mother of GROWTH delivers up the impression of LOCAL instantiation of development which we CAN AND DO “SUBSTITUTE” for the INEFFABLE-BECAUSE-NONLOCAL dynamic of TRANSFORMATION which is EVERYWHERE AT THE SAME TIME, as is the nature of the Wave-field aka ‘the Tao’.


ANSWER: You promote belief in FIGURE-AND-GROUND-AS-TWO so that the FIGURE can ‘GROW’ INDEPENDENTLY of the ‘GROUND’, thus avoiding the FIGURE-AND-GROUND-AS-ONE ‘CONSTRAINT’ OF TRANSFORMATION which is what makes it INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL.

PROBLEM! By ‘cutting into TRANSFORMATION’ which is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL and notionally (by way of abstraction) SUBSTITUTING the abstraction of LOCAL SOURCING, we introduce AMBIGUITY since the LOCAL SOURCING could be either MALE or FEMALE; e.g. does the HURRICANE source stirring up of the ATMOSPHERE (male sourcing) or does the ATMOSPHERE source stirring up of the HURRICANE (female sourcing)?  This is like a coin toss that can come up either way as is the origin of the ‘conservative’ – ‘liberal’ dichotomy.

Because the concept of LOCAL SOURCING is secured by EGO, we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS (who are believers in LOCAL SOURCING which is the defining attribute of WESTERN CULTURE) are afflicted by this polarizing division into the male and female branches of this synthetic dichotomy.  Which is it; does the HURRICANE source the stirring up of the ATMOSPHERE or does the ATMOSPHERE source the stirring up of the HURRICANE?

ANSWER: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS “SOURCING”, there is only TRANSFORMATION.  In plain terms, the conservative – liberal split is a male-female form of splitting which is FORCED UPON US in our WESTERN CULTURE approach to EFFABLE-IZING the INEFFABLE dynamic of TRANSFORMATION by SUBSTITUTING the abstract concept of LOCAL SOURCING which opens up a male-female ambiguity as in the adages; ‘one bad apple sources spoilage of the whole barrel’ (male assertive sourcing) and/or ‘it takes a whole community to source the raising of a child’ (female inductive sourcing).

“GROWTH” is the embodiment of “LOCAL SOURCING” of development which we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS “SUBSTITUTE” for the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL reality of TRANSFORMATION.

In simple terms; in order to be able to ‘talk about’ TRANSFORMATION which is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL (everywhere at the same time), we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS choose to SUBSTITUTE the abstract concept of “GROWTH”, the term we use for “LOCAL SOURCING” because this is an EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT concept.  It allows us to avoid having to deal with (IN OUR LANGUAGE BASED REPRESENTATION GAMBIT) “NONLOCALITY” as is the ESSENCE of TRANSFORMATION.

NOTA BENE: What we are talking about here are the challenges involved in capturing in EFFABLE LANGUAGE, the INEFFABLE experience of inclusion in the transforming relational continuum aka the Wave-field aka the Tao.   We have no trouble in our SENSORY EXPERIENCING of inclusion in TRANSFORMATION!  THAT IS WHAT LIFE IS!  The problem is not with experiencing the INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL, the problem (challenge) is with how to devise a way of using LANGUAGE to build EFFABLE RE-PRESENTATIONS of the NONLOCAL.   When we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS hit this impenetrable BRICK WALL, we opted to engineer a SUBSTITUTE REALITY that is EFFABLE-because-LOCAL and EXPLICIT.

This is where TOWNING in the TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE (wherein FIGURE-and-GROUND-are-ONE) got reduced to the TOWN that is GROWING larger and more populous and productive, giving us the impression that the TOWN is something liberated from the LANDSCAPE and is afloat as an INDEPENDENT ENTITY in a notional ABSOLUTE SPACE, opening the way to our imputing of the abstraction of GROWTH to the TOWN-as-a-LOCAL-THING-IN-ITSELF with its own powers of SOURCING GROWTH and development and production.

Evidently, we can employ the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR to re-render FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE of TRANSFORMATION in the SUBSTITUTE-REALITY terms of FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO.  Now we can imagine we are watching “THE TOWN GROW”  while the indigenous aboriginal standing right beside us is watching “THE LANDSCAPE UNDERGOING TRANSFORMATION”.  WHICH ONE OF US IS TAPPING INTO REALITY?

Yes, clearly it is the indigenous aboriginal who is recognizing what is going on as TRANSFORMATION (which is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT) and he and we understand this DIRECTLY FORM OUR SENSORY EXPERIENCE WITHOUT LANGUAGE.  It is the ploy of rendering an EFFABLE (language-based) REPRESENTATION that has motivated us to invent a SUBSTITUTE REALITY that IS EFFABLE-because-LOCAL-and-EXPLICIT, so as to be able to share, through language-based discourse, SOME SEMBLANCE of our sensory experience.

Language-based sharing is generally by means of constructing visual pictures (in words) which RE-PRESENT, in VOYEURIZING fashion, sensory experience reality.  We can ‘picture’ and EFFABLE-ize the experience of being boiled in oil, but this is a far cry from experiencing inclusion in such voyeur-accessible dynamics.

The VOYEUR-IN-US that is created by our act of visual observation SPLITS FIGURE and GROUND into TWO when, in reality, as Schroedinger points out, FIGURE-and-GROUND (as in SUBJECT and OBJECT) … ARE ONLY ONE!

“The world is given to me only once, not one existing and one perceived. Subject and object are only one. The barrier between them cannot be said to have broken down as a result of recent experience in the physical sciences, for this barrier does not exist.” – Erwin Schroedinger

NOBODY is saying that it is NOT USEFUL to report on experiences as an ‘outsider’ by way of picturable representations fashioned with words, however, it would be a mistake to trade out or mix and match such picturable RE-PRESENTATIONS, with ‘carnal knowledge’, aka sensory experience.  The virgin Ph.D. in sexual relations may “KNOW” far more about sexual relations than the highly sense-experienced sexually active experient will ever know, … but intellectual knowledge is not the equivalent of sensory experience aka ‘carnal knowledge’.  We send our children to school for ‘sex-education’ but not for ‘sex-training’.

The voyeur views that can be captured by language SPLIT SUBJECT AND OBJECT INTO TWO, freeing up the SUBJECT so that it seems capable of its own GROWTH, in a FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO sense, and is thus, as far as language goes, LIBERATED from the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE experience of inclusion in TRANSFORMATION.

This opens the way to EFFABLE-izing in FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-TWO terms, the FIGURE-and-GROUND-as-ONE sensory experience reality of inclusion in TRANSFORMATION which is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL-and-IMPLICIT-because-continually-in-flux.

“GROWTH” is the centre-piece of WESTERN CULTURE self-deception.  THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS “GROWTH”.  “GROWTH” is a RATIO-based abstraction which gives us the false impression of LOCAL SOURCING as captured in the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR.

Consider the following statement:

The TOWN is GROWING in size, population and production of goods and services.

We utter such things all the time and people accept them, but there is no mention of the REDUCTION of the Wildereness.

In fact, there is no mention of the stumps in the countryside that gave up trees to the construction of the TOWN, and the quarries around the countryside that provided the gravel for the concrete in the TOWN’s houses and streets, the mines around the countryside that gave up their ore for the smelting of metals used in the construction of streets and building of the TOWN.

“THE TOWN IS GROWING” sounds like another one of those RATIO based abstractions aka REASON based abstractions that ignores the reality of the conjugate relation of GROWTH of the EXPLICIT with the DECLINE of Wilderness or IMPLICIT.

The REALITY IS, when we make a full accounting of just what is involved, the holes in the ground where minerals have been mined, the stumps where trees have been logged, the watery pools in the gravel pits where aggregate for concrete has been removed, that TRANSFORMATION of the LANDSCAPE is what is really going on and to use language that asserts that ‘the TOWN is GROWING’ is a major deception.

BUT WE KNOW ABOUT THAT from Goedel’s theorem which says that all finite propositions of logic are INCOMPLETE.  So, to say ‘the TOWN is GROWING’ may be LOGICALLY TRUE but radically INCOMPLETE.

WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS seem to have put a lot of trust in REASON or RATIO based intellectual representations as in GRAMMAR based INFERENCE, …   even as Nietzsche is warning us of the pitfalls in this approach;

“Reason” in language!—oh what a deceptive old witch it has been! I fear we shall never be rid of God, so long as we still believe in grammar.  – Nietzsche

TRANSFORMATION is clearly ‘what is REALLY going on’ and who would deny this?  Just because we can’t effable-ize TRANSFORMATION, which has led us WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS to develop a DOUBLE ERROR based means of constructing an EFFABLE SUBSTITUTE REALITY does not mean that we are justified in ‘turning our back’ on the REAL REALITY just because it is INEFFABLE.

Sure the SUBSTITUTE REALITY that is EFFABLE is a great tool that allows us to voyeurize  in picture based representations, the TRANSFORMING relational continuum of our sensory experience that we are included in.  OUR WESTERN CULTURE problem is that instead of using it is a tool of INFERENCE of the INEFFABLE REALITY of TRANSFORMATION that lies innately beyond our SUBSTITUTE REALITY REPRESENTATIONS, we are deploying the SUBSTITUTE REALITY because it is EFFABLE as our OPERATIVE REALITY.

This is a case of ‘the TOOL’ of the SUBSTITUTE REALITY ‘running away with the workman’, the EFFABLE with the INEFFABLE’, or as Emerson puts, “the tool runs away with the workman, the human with the divine’.

As a social collective, instead of understanding ourselves as sharing inclusion in the transforming relational continuum wherein re-sourcing is understood as NONLOCALLY in NATURE as gives rise to the Potlatch custom;

“A potlatch is a gift-giving feast practiced by Indigenous Peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast of Canada and the United States, among whom it is traditionally the primary governmental institution, legislative body, and economic system” — Wikipedia

… we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS employ the DOUBLE ERROR based concept of LOCAL SOURCING as the foundational operating principle of the SUBSTITUTE REALITY.   It is built into WESTERN CULTURE language architecture.

This belief in the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR that imputes LOCAL SOURCING is where TRANSFORMATION is reduced to GROWTH (a local ‘reason’ or ‘ratio’ based abstraction).  The measurement of GROWTH is RATIO based (reason-based) and is not sufficiently comprehensive to begin to comprehend TRANSFORMTION.  The measurement of planetary GROWTH by volcanic EXTRUSION moving matter from inner to outer and the CONJUGATE planetary SHRINKAGE by SUBDUCTION moving matter from inner to outer co-constitute TRANSFORMATION.  However, GROWTH and SHRINKAGE are both based on RATIO aka ‘rational’ intellection aka ‘reason’ and we would do not even need these two terms for understanding purposes, ONLY FOR LANGUAGE BASE SHARING PURPOSES since TRANSFORMATION is INEFFABLE-because-NONLOCAL.

Thus, we are persuaded to DUMB-DOWN TRANSFORMATION in order to be able to use some facsimile or inference of it in our language-based discourse.  While the indigenous aboriginal cultures along with Taoism/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta employ relational inference (Dances with Wolves) in language, we WESTERN CLULTURE ADHERENTs employ the construction of SUBSTITUTE REALITY featuring LOCAL SOURCING (John Dunbar is a LOCAL independent being with his own powers of SOURCING actions and developments; i.e. the DOUBLE ERROR based SUBSTITUTE REALITY).

This is how we get to the point where we say ‘the TOWN is GROWING’ without making mention of the chopped down forests, the holes from mining aggregate and iron ore etc. and the acid rain from smelter smoke etc.  The proposition; ‘The TOWN is GROWING’ invites us to step inside a new SUBSTITUTE REALITY wherein we can move ahead focusing on the GROWTH and DEVELOPMENT of the TOWN  … AS IF THIS WERE “REAL” while all the while, the LANDSCAPE is TRANSFORMING in a manner that includes conjugate relation with what we are calling GROWTH and DEVELOPMENT of the cultivated/developed lands.


THERE GOES TRANSFORMATION!  Except for some ancillary head-scratching where we ponder on a separate basis; ‘how to address rising pollution, resource depletion, deforestation etc. and how we can develop ‘more sustainable’ social-industrial approaches. Meanwhile, our WESTERN CULTURE economic activity continues to be based on GROWTH although suspicion as to the legitimacy of ‘growth’ is rising;

Opinion: Sooner or later, we have to stop economic growth — and we’ll be better for it

The end of growth will come one day, perhaps very soon, whether we’re ready or not. If we plan for and manage it, we could well wind up with greater well-being.

January 8, 2019 — Both the U.S. economy and the global economy have expanded dramatically in the past century, as have life expectancies and material progress. Economists raised in this period of plenty assume that growth is good, necessary even, and should continue forever and ever without end, amen. Growth delivers jobs, returns on investment and higher tax revenues. What’s not to like? We’ve gotten so accustomed to growth that governments, corporations and banks now depend on it. It’s no exaggeration to say that we’re collectively addicted to growth.

The trouble is, a bigger economy uses more stuff than a smaller one, and we happen to live on a finite planet. So, an end to growth is inevitable. Ending growth is also desirable if we want to leave some stuff (minerals, forests, biodiversity and stable climate) for our kids and their kids. Further, if growth is meant to have anything to do with increasing quality of life, there is plenty of evidence to suggest it has passed the point of diminishing returns: Even though the U.S. economy is 5.5 times bigger now than it was in 1960 (in terms of real GDP), America is losing ground on its happiness index.

The article stops short of acknowledging that TRANSFORMATION is the real REALITY since the equating of REALITY to LOCAL SOURCING is an EGO based conceptualization which is foundational to WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENT thinking.  In other words, ‘GROWTH’  IS IMPLIED by THE DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR THAT IS EGO-SUPPORTED IN OUR WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENCY.

We can only get to the real reality of TRANSFORMATION by letting go of belief in the abstract concept of GROWTH but TRANSFORMATION is NONLOCAL which means that EGO based on LOCAL SOURCING ‘has to go’.   We WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are not known for being a culture whose adherents can ‘let go’ of the abstract concept of LOCAL SOURCING, not just because we have EGO that swells our head and delivers undeserved recognition and rewards to us, but because LOCAL SOURCING gives us the capability of attributing relational dissonance to EXPLICIT OTHERS so that we all don’t have to get ‘tarred with the same brush’ and can instead OFFLOAD attribution for dissonant unfoldings to particular OTHERS.

Indigenous aboriginal cultures cannot do this offloading since ‘mitakuye oyasin’ means that everything is related as within the transforming relational continuum or ‘the GREAT HARMONY’ which is innately NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT.

The WESTERN CULTURE, because it is set up so as to not only reward and recognize those who we attribute the LOCAL SOURCING powers that contribute most to the well-being of our social collective, but to give them disproportionate influences over changes to our existing understanding of reality, means that we are LOCKED IN BY HIGH SWITCHING COSTS’.   This is a well-known nonlinear dynamic which does a lot more than giving Microsoft a monopoly on where we can run our computer programs, it gives monopoly status to a multiplicity of inferior ‘products’ and ‘practices’, including, of course, the inferior practice of identifying the major CONTRIBUTORS of beneficial SOURCING actions and development, instead of acknowledging NONLOCAL origination.

* * *