An inclusional worldview
WHY WE (WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS) NEED TO ‘RE-LEARN HOW TO SPEAK’
Dialogue, as spoken in the days of Shakespeare, it seems MORE ELOQUENT than today’s speech, SO WHAT HAPPENED TO OUR SPEECH AND WHY?
“Iain McGilchrist’s book, The Master and His Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World, makes the case that the left hemisphere has taken over our minds and reshaped the world in its image in a way that is good for neither humans nor the planet and everything that lives on it.
“A way of thinking which is reductive, mechanistic has taken us over,” said McGilchrist in The Divided Brain.
“We behave like people who have right hemisphere damage.
“The left hemisphere’s goal is to enable us to manipulate things, whereas the goal of the right hemisphere is to relate to things and understand them as a whole. Two ways of thinking that are both needed, but are fundamentally at the same time incompatible.”
“[The left hemisphere] treats the world as a simple resource to be exploited. It’s made us enormously powerful. It’s enabled us to become wealthy, but it’s also meant that we’ve lost the means to understand the world, to make sense of it, to feel satisfaction and fulfilment through our place in the world.”
Ok, McGilchrist is a NEUROSCIENTIST and he is describing what is going on from a NEUROSCIENTIST’S point of view, and his findings are REAFFIRMED in the languages of PHYSICS by Bohm and in PSYCHIATRY by Laing and Vygotsky and in Philosophy by Wittgenstein in the respective languages of their profession; i.e. THEY ARE ALL SAYING THE SAME THING; … i.e. as McGilchrist puts it, WE’VE LOST THE MEANS TO UNDERSTAND THE WORLD.
*** NOTE ON LANGUAGE USAGE * * *
Since my investigations have been based in PHYSICS and the REVOLUTIONARY RE-THINKING of PHYSICS which has taken things from MATERIAL OBJECTS IN EMPTY SPACE, to the ENERGY-CHARGED PLENUM where we now recognize MATERIAL FORMS to be CONDENSATIONS OF THE ALL-INCLUDING PLENUM aka WAVE-FIELD, my preference has been to use the language of DAVID BOHM. Bohm describes what is going on in the WAVE-FIELD based terms of “THE DROP OUT OF THE FEMALE CONJUGATE, referring the PEAKING and TROUGHING of the WAVE where the PEAKING is the MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING component of the WAVE and the TROUGHING is the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING component of the WAVE, … and HERE WE MUST NOT FORGET that EVERYTHING IS IN FLUX so that PEAKING and TROUGHING only give the APPEARANCE that there are “PEAKS” and “TROUGHS”. This is just a CAUTIONARY NOTE to remind ourselves that THERE ARE NO ACTUAL “THINGS” such “PEAKS” and “TROUGHS”, there is only “PEAKING” and “TROUGHING”. We can’t CATCH A PEAK and put it in on display as a stand alone item, and likewise in regard to the TROUGH.
It is NOT my desire to COMPLICATE THE HELL OUT OF THINGS, thus CONFUSING THE READER, but having “WORKED” on the challenges of communicating these things for many years, I know that EVEN famous thinkers like PIAGET (as Vygotsky points out) SCREW UP by FORGETTING THAT WHILE OUR LANGUAGE HAS THE CAPABILITY OF PUTTING TOGETHER AN AMALGUM OF “TRUTH AND LIES” (LANGUAGE IS “PUTTY IN OUR HANDS”) IT SUPPORTS OUR MISTAKEN ELABORATIONS ON “WHAT A PEAK DOES” (“WE SAY THAT” IT GROWS LARGE AND PUSHES THINGS) and “WHAT A TROUGH DOES” (“WE SAY THAT” IT DEEPENS AND OPENS UP AND REALLY SUCKS), our MANNER OF SPEAKING in terms of WAVES, if we are not careful, CAN CONFUSE THE ISSUE and MISREPRESENT PHYSICAL REALITY, and, YES, VYGOTSKY IS CORRECT, PIAGET HAS REALLY SCREWED US UP, but we are OVERCOMING HIS SCREW-UP IN THIS NOTE.
*** END OF NOTE ON LANGUAGE USAGE * * * *
Ok, the above note is just a CAUTION to reminds ourselves that what we really need is a FLOW BASED LANGUAGE rather than the BEING BASED LANGUAGE that we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS are using, because by our giving a foundational role in our language to the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING (inventing things-that-be) and GRAMMAR (giving local authoring powers to the invented things-that-be), while it CONVENIENTLY BREAKS EVERYTHING UP INTO LOCAL, EXPLICIT SEPARATE FRAGMENTS, gives us in the same fell swoop, AN EXPOSURE TO ERROR BY WAY OF SPLITTING APART THAT WHICH, IN REALITY, IS INNATELY NON-SPLITTABLE; i.e. WHERE THE MATERIAL FORMS (CONTENT) AND THEIR ENERGY CHARGED PLENUM (CONTAINER) “ARE ONLY ONE”.
Indigenous aboriginals take for granted that EVERYTHING IS IN FLUX in which case they have a FLOW-BASED (VERB-BASED) LANGUAGE that supports the understanding of “MITAKUYE OYASIN” (EVERYTHING IS RELATED) since all ‘things’ are STRANDS in the WEB where the WHOLE THING TRANSFORMS AS AN INTERCONNECTED and INTERDEPENDENT UNUM.
BUT THIS IS DIFFICULT TO CAPTUER IN LANGUAGE IF WE IMPOSE INDEPENDENT BEING ON THE CONDENSATIONS “OF” and “IN” the ALL-INCLUDING FLOW; i.e. IF OUR STAKE IN THE GROUND for our LANGUAGE DESIGN is NOT based on an ALL-INCLUDING ENERGY-CHARGED PLENUM WITHIN WHICH THERE ARE CONDENSATIONS SO THAT EVERYTHING IS RELATED, AND WE INSTEAD WANT THE CONVENIENCE IN LANGUAGE, OF BEING ABLE TO TALK ABOUT LOCAL, EXPLICIT MATERIAL BEING THINGS, WE MAY NEED TO USE SOME SIMPLIFYING SHORTCUTS IN OUR LANGUAGE ARCHITECTURE;
And just as our Copernicus said to us : It is more convenient to suppose the earth turns round, since thus the laws of astronomy are expressible in a much simpler language ; this one would say: It is more convenient to suppose the earth turns round, since thus the laws of mechanics are expressible in a much simpler language’. Henri Poincaré, ‘Science and Hypothesis’, Ch. VII Relative Motion and Absolute Motion.
THAT IS, IF WE WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE HERACLITUS AND INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL MODELS OF THE UNIVERSE WHEREIN “EVERYTHING IS IN FLUX” so that the NONLOCAL and LOCAL IS ONLY ONE (an all-including transforming relational continuum), A MECHANICAL MODEL would be simpler which would consist of SEPARATE AND INDEPENDENT MATERIAL PARTS MOVING ABOUT AND INTERACTING WITHIN A NOTIONAL ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE. This will mean that every persisting material object will have ITS OWN MOVEMENT, thanks to the EMPTY SPACE CONTAINER which is NEEDED to support the INDEPENDENCE of the notional MATERIAL BEING BASED OBJECTS.
WHAT WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS OPTED FOR IN OUR MODELING OF REALITY WAS THE CONVENIENCE of expressing what is going on in a much simpler language’, the SIMPLIFICATION drawing from our inventing of an ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE as a CONTAINER for LOCAL, EXPLICIT MATERIAL OBJECTS, whereby we have JUST CREATED A SIMPLIFIED SUBSTITUTE PSEUDO-REALITY based on an EMPTY SPACE CONTAINER as a framing for ABSOLUTE MATERIAL OBJECTS AS CONTENT, of the type envisaged by Newton; “it seems probable to me, that God in the Beginning form’d Matter in solid, massy, hard, impenetrable Particles”. These ABSOLUTES of ABSOLUTE MATTER and ABSOLUTE EMPTY SPACE support the COPERNICUS-PREFERRED SIMPLE BINARY EITHER/OR LOGIC of the EXCLUDED MEDIUM based MECHANICS that avoid the LESS SIMPLE NONBINARY BOTH/AND LOGIC OF THE INCLUDING MEDIUM that is needed to support the understanding of a substantive space (energy-charged PLENUM) in which MATERIAL FORMS are CONDENSATIONS.
MODERN PHYSICS, meanwhile, has REAFFIRMED the understanding of INDIGENOUS ABORIGINALS that;
“Space is not empty. It is full, a plenum as opposed to a vacuum, and is the ground for the existence of everything, including ourselves.” (David Bohm).
RECALL THAT THE TITLE (AND AIM) OF THIS NOTE IS “WHY WE (WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS) NEED TO ‘RE-LEARN HOW TO SPEAK’”
We can think about this. BINARY LOGIC PROPOSITIONS ARE TOO SIMPLE TO USE IN OUR LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZATIONS.
As Bohm and Vygotsky and Iain McGilchrist and others have noted (each in their own versions of language which vary according to the different professions), “A way of thinking which is reductive, mechanistic has taken us over”… “We behave like people who have right hemisphere damage.”
PAUSE FOR A SECOND…
LET’S THINK ABOUT WHAT ‘EGO’ HAS BEEN DOING TO US (e.g. the CONSERVATIVE – LIBERAL POLARIZING that continues to INTENSIFY). This is based on differences in how we use LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING to build our impressions of reality. In their polarizing argument, Conservative and Liberal disagreement are stemming from LOGICAL PROPOSITIONS such as YOU LIBERALS HAVE BEEN SCREWING UP EVERYTHING while we CONSERVATIVES are MAKING EVERYTHING WORK AGAIN.
This is ALL ABOUT respective ACHIEVEMENTS in the category of MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING without MENTIONING CONJUGATE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING.
We may attribute the OWNER the new CONDOM FACTORY, great skills that led to his HUGE BUSINESS SUCCESS, … without mentioning that his factory came on stream coincident with public awareness of the AIDS EPIDEMIC, which was never in the plans, but which was responsible for huge increases in condom sales.
THE POINT HERE is that OUR WESTERN CULTURE LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING SCHEME is ONE-SIDEDLY BASED ON MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING and RARELY MENTIONS the FEMALE ACCOMODATING/ENABLING that is ALWAYS conjugate and is always the OVER-RIDING INFLUENCE on dynamics that, IN WESTERN CULTURE, are in our LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING SCHEME, FULLY AND SOLELY ATTRIBUTED TO MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING.
The ONE-SIDED MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING ONLY (as if we lived within an absolute empty and infinite space) is what IAIN MCGILCHRIST CLAIMS IS “TAKING OVER” AT THE EXPENSE OF THE DROPPING OUT of the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING.
Consider this, we used to repeat things like “TO EVERYTHING THERE IS A SEASON AND TIME TO EVERY PURPOSE” as a REMINDER that the world we live in is NOT simply driven by MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING, and NOT ONLY is there a FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING conjugate but THE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING CONJUGATE IS PRIMARY!!! When we give an account of what we have done over the past year, it is all about US (MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING) and within such language, there is no mention of the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING opening up of opportunity here and the shutting down of opportunity there that has been inductively shaping our scurrying around to make a living, … ALL OF WHICH WE ARE SPEAKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF ‘I DID THIS AND THEN I DID THAT AFTER WHICH I DID SUCH AND SUCH’ which underscores what McGilchrist is saying;
“A way of thinking which is reductive, mechanistic has taken us over,” said McGilchrist in The Divided Brain.
WHAT HAPPENED TO ‘TO EVERYTHING THERE IS A SEASON’? WE STILL HAD IT IN 1599 WHEN SCHAKESPEARE WAS WRITING ABOUT HOW “THERE IS A TIDE IN THE AFFAIRS OF MAN” meaning that what is going on CANNOT BE CAPTURED IN ONE-SIDED MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZATIONS THAT CONVEY “WHAT THINGS DO” because that FAILS TO INFORM US OF THE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING; i.e. HOW OPPORTUNITIES HAVE BEEN OPENING UP FOR US AND HOW TOXIC OR NURTURANT THEY ARE PROVING TO BE.
In other words, what has happened to our INCLUDING IN OUR LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZATION BASED REPORTING, THE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING CONJUGATE WHEREIN … “TO EVERYTHING THERE IS A SEASON AND TIME TO EVERY PURPOSE”
HAVE OUR EGOS BECOME SO INFLATED THAT WE FEEL THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT WHAT “WE HAVE DONE” AS IF THAT IS ALL THERE IS TO IT, AS IF OUR PATH WITHIN THE SOCIAL RELATIONAL DYNAMIC WAS DETERMINED SOLELY BY OURSELVES; AS IF THOSE WE SHARE THIS SPACE WITH WERE NOT HELPING TO OPEN UP CHANNELS IN SUPPORT OF OUR FORWARD MOVEMENT AS WE TEND ALSO DO FOR THEM, A PROCESS THAT REQUIRES PATIENCE AND COOPERATION, even if language allows to SPIEL OFF A LIST OF ONE-SIDED MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING MOVES AS IF THE FEMALE ACCOMODATING/ENABLING CONJUGATE WAS NO LONGER IN ITS NATURAL PRIMACY IN SHAPING OUR MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING MOVEMENT.
* * * * *
I suspect that the reader will see the following point; i.e. that NOT ONLY ARE WE CAPABLE OF USING LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING TO CONSTRUCT ONE-SIDED MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING STORIES OF OUR ACTIONS WHICH DROPS OUT THE PRIMARY INFLUENCING ANIMATORS THAT SHAPE OUR MOVEMENTS ; i.e. THE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING that is CONJUGATE to our MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING, … WE ARE GROWING ACCUSTOMED TO USING THESE SIMPLIFIED ONE-SIDED MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING STORIES OF OUR ACTIONS AS OUR “OPERATIVE TRUTH”.
We can TRICK OURSELVES with this because of Goedel’s Theorem of the INCOMPLETENESS of all finite logical propositions. For example, the claim that ‘THE TOWN IS GROWING’ is verifiably TRUE but this TRUTH is MISSING any commentary on the fact that there is a SHRINKING OF WILDERNESS that is CONJUGATE with the GROWTH of the TOWN which means that what is IMPORTANT TO OUR UNDERSTANDING IS NOT ONLY WHAT IS TRULY GOING ON (WHICH IS THE TOWN’S GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION of goods) WHICH IS LOCAL AND EXPLICIT, BUT WHAT IS “REALLY” GOING ON, which is the TRANSFORMING OF THE LANDSCAPE which is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT.
WHAT IS TRULY GOING ON: THE TOWN’S LOCAL and EXPLICIT “GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT and PRODUCTION” (this is Schaumkommen, Appearance)
WHAT IS REALLY GOING ON: THE NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT “TRANSFORMING OF THE LANDSCAPE”.
With this understanding “in hand”, we can return to “A way of thinking which is reductive, mechanistic has taken us over,” said McGilchrist in The Divided Brain.
We can now bring out into the open, how this shift is occurring by comparing ourselves and our linguistic conceptualizing scheme (which is BEING based) with indigenous aboriginals and their linguistic conceptualizing scheme (which is FLOW based).
BEING-BASED LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING SPLITS APART LOCAL and EXPLICIT “CONTENT” from the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT “CONTEXT”, thus permitting the DROPPING OUT of the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT “CONTEXT” (this DROPPING OUT OF THE NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT CONTEXT is Vygotsky’s CRITIQUE of Piaget’s design of how we teach our children.
“Though fundamentally different in nature, the development of scientific [local and explicit] and spontaneous [nonlocal and implicit] concepts represents two sides of the same concept formation” implying a WAVE-BASED STRUCTURE.
“Our disagreement with Piaget centers on one point only, but an important point. He assumes that development and instruction (spontaneous and scientific) are entirely separate, incommensurate processes, that the function of instruction is merely to introduce adult ways of thinking, which conflict with the child’s own and eventually supplant them. Such a supposition stems from the old psychological tradition of separating the structural from the functional aspects of development.” –Vygotsky
COMPARE VYGOTSKY’S COMPLAINT ABOUT WHAT PIAGET AND WESTERN CULTURE EDUCATION ARE DOING which is (A) CONFUSING A TWO-SIDED CONCEPT FOR TWO ENTIRELY SEPARATE CONCEPTS, and (B) DROPPING OUT “ONE OF THE CONCEPTS” (when there are “NOT” TWO SEPARATE CONCEPTS) so that what is being taught to children based on PIAGET’S design of teaching, is WHAT IS BEING CALLED “THE SCIENTIFIC CONCEPT” AKA “THE LOCAL AND EXPLICIT” which DOES NOT EXIST “IN ITS OWN RIGHT”.
THIS WESTERN CULTURE TEACHING TECHNIQUE (NOTIONALLY) SPLITS APART THE LOCAL and EXPLICIT from the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT (they are NOT two separate things and thus “the LOCAL and EXPLICIT does NOT EXIST IN ITS OWN RIGHT”), The USE OF THE LOCAL and EXPLICIT takes us into the realm of what is purely ABSTRACTION, whereupon we DROP OUT the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT, … which is to say that WE STOP TALKING ABOUT THE NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT wherein EVERYTHING IS IN FLUX, … and proceed with MAKE-BELIEVE TALKING based on a LOCAL and EXPLICIT THAT DOES NOT EXIST; e.g. WE CANNOT SPEAK IN TERMS THAT ‘THE TOWN IS GROWING” WITHOUT HAVING OUR MIND SPLIT APART THE TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE “FROM THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE” AND INVENT AN ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE TO RE-SITUATE THE “SPLIT OUT TOWN” INTO A NOTIONAL (ABSTRACT) ‘EMPTY SPACE VENU” WHERE IT WILL HAVE THE POSSIBLITY OF “GROWING IN ITS OWN SEEMINGLY INDEPENDENT RIGHT”.
BUT THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS “GROWTH” IN THE REAL SENSE-EXPERIENCE AFFIRMED WORLD OF OUR INCLUSION, AS CONDENSATIONS, WITHIN THE ALL-INCLUDING TRANSFORMING RELATIONAL CONTINUUM aka ENERGY-CHARGED PLENUM. “GROWTH” is, as Nietzsche pointed out, one of those words, LIKE “DEVELOPMENT” and “PRODUCTION” that exploit the ABSTRACTION that comes from the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR that imputes LOCAL AUTHORING which DOES NOT EXIST within the real world the all-INCLUDING WAVE-FIELD where everything is in continual flux.
* * * * * * *
The MOST DIFFICULT ASPECT (for us WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS) of this needed RE-TOOLING of LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING SCHEME so as to restore FLOW as primary and REMOVE ANY/ALL DEPENDENCE ON ‘BEING’, LIES IN THIS NECESSITY OF SUBSTITUTING NONBINARY BOTH/AND LOGIC OF THE INCLUDING MEDIUM (wherein material forms are condensations of the all-including energy-charged plenum) for what has been the WESTERN CULTURE’S SIMPLE STANDARD of the BINARY EITHER/OR LOGIC of the EXCLUDED MEDIUM (wherein material forms are absolute independent material objects situation in an absolute empty and infinite space).
The RE-TOOLING of our LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING SCHEME IS DIFFICULT because of our UNFORTUNATE (SELF-CONFUSING) HABIT of GRAMMATICALLY MOBILIZING ON ITS OWN the MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING conjugate (by using the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR). THE MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING conjugate does not, in reality, exist out of the context of its relation with the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING conjugate. For example, once we start to speak in terms such as ‘THE TOWN IS GROWING’, we have (A) broken apart the TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE which is NOT TWO THINGS but an ANDROGYNOUS UNUUM which we BREAK APART INTO TWO THINGS (EMPTY SPACE AND MATERIAL BEING) using the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR to CREATE a LOCAL, EXPLICIT and INDEPENDENT MATERIAL OBJECT IN AN IMPLIED ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE, … and (B) using GRAMMAR to impute LOCAL AUTHORING POWER to the NAMING-INSTANTIATED LOCAL, EXPLICIT THING (the TOWN), thus creating a notional LOCAL, EXPLICIT THING-IN-ITSELF with its own notional GRAMMAR-GIVEN POWERS OF LOCAL AUTHORING OF ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT, that is operative within a notional ABSOLUTE EMPTY AND INFINITE SPACE.
This is the same mistake as Vygotsky points out that Piaget is making (restated here for ease of access);
“Though fundamentally different in nature, the development of scientific [local and explicit] and spontaneous [nonlocal and implicit] concepts represents two sides of the same concept formation” implying a WAVE-BASED STRUCTURE.
“Our disagreement with Piaget centers on one point only, but an important point. He assumes that development and instruction (spontaneous and scientific) are entirely separate, incommensurate processes, that the function of instruction is merely to introduce adult ways of thinking, which conflict with the child’s own and eventually supplant them. Such a supposition stems from the old psychological tradition of separating the structural from the functional aspects of development.” –Vygotsky
By DROPPING OUT THE FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING (the NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT aka SPONTANEOUS) from its CONJUGATE RELATION with the MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING (the LOCAL and EXPLICIT aka SCIENTIFIC), the continuing one-sided MALE ASSERTING/ACTUALIZING LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING is a LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALING that is LIMITED TO THE MECHANICAL and no longer WAVE-FIELD COMPETENT. What Piaget’s simplifying is doing, as Vygotsky is pointing out, is that it is REDUCING the linguistic conceptualizing of WAVE-FIELD phenomena from WAVE-FIELD level linguistic conceptualizing (e.g. “There is TOWNING IN THE TRANSFORMING LANDSCAPE”) which is NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT…. to MECHANICS level linguistic conceptualizing (e.g. “The Town is GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING products”) which is LOCAL and EXPLICIT.
Another example of the Piaget style REDUCTION to the MECHANICAL is where we speak of the growing pile of rocks in the valley associated with the avalanche, which is TRUE but as Goedel’s theorem of the INCOMPLETENESS OF ALL FINITE LOGIC PROPOSITIONS suggests, while the PROPOSITION (the avalanche dumped a great pile of rocks in the valley) IS TRUE, it is NOT COMPLETE since we have NOT mentioned that the mountain is no longer the same mountain and the valley is no longer the same valley, or in other words, the BEYOND THE LOGICAL TRUTH which is in the LOCAL and EXPLICIT (VOYEUR VIEWING) TERMS of WHAT THINGS DO, there is the REALITY of NONLOCAL and IMPLICIT TRANSFORMATION which is ALL-INCLUDING and which includes OURSELVES, as is also referred to as ‘the PLENUM’ or ‘the WAVE-FIELD’.
“Space is not empty. It is full, a plenum as opposed to a vacuum, and is the ground for the existence of everything, including ourselves.” (David Bohm).
The PLENUM is undergoing continual TRANSFORMATION, or, … the CONTINUING TRANSFORMATION goes by the name ‘PLENUM’
* * * * * * * *
WHY WE (WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS) NEED TO ‘RE-LEARN HOW TO SPEAK’
Indigenous aboriginals, as we know from David Bohm and F. David Peat (Blackfoot Physics) have developed a flow-based linguistic conceptualizing system that supports the STRANDS in the WEB relations to capture the interconnectedness and interdependence of all material forms in the transforming relational continuum. This relationship wherein everything is related (“MITAKUYE OYASIN”) leads to RESTORATIVE JUSTICE because it is IMPOSSIBLE TO IDENTIFY A LOCAL AUTHOR OF TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGE. So where there is RAPE or MURDER or THEFT, this is understood as DISSONANCE IN THE WEB that IS VENTING THROUGH A STRAND IN THE WEB and the response is the HEALING CIRCLE which is meant to restore RESONANCE in the WEB since the VIOLENCE “VENTING THROUGH THE STRAND” derives from IMBALANCE and DISSONANCE in the WEB. While the VIOLENT STRAND is the CONDUIT for VENTING of TENSIONS BUILDING IN THE WEB, the VIOLENT STRAND IS NOT THE AUTHOR OF THE VIOLENCE in which case, ELIMINATING or PUNISHING the VIOLENT STRAND is NOT a CURE for the IMBALANCE and DISSONANCE in the WEB. The HEALING CIRCLE is the CURE where the TALKING STICK is passed so that people can speak from their hearts and not from their heads, and it is this process that can recultivate balance and harmony in the WEB.
WE WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS ARE USING A SIMPLE LINGUISTIC CONCEPTUALIZING SCHEME that employs the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GRAMMAR which constructs linguistic conceptualizations that are in terms of LOCAL, EXPLICIT MATERIAL THINGS AND WHAT THESE THINGS DO, which is the SCIENTIFIC VIEW “ON ITS OWN AND WITHOUT THE SPONTANEOUS.
“Our disagreement with Piaget centers on one point only, but an important point. He assumes that development and instruction (SPONTANEOUS and SCIENTIFIC) are entirely separate, incommensurate processes, that the function of instruction is merely to introduce adult ways of thinking, which conflict with the child’s own and eventually supplant them
WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS … OVERALL, … ARE MAKING THE MISTAKE OF PIAGET POINTED OUT BY VYGOTSKY which means that we are using a FRAGMENTED VIEW coming from BINARY LOGIC based LOGICAL TRUTHS which, while TRUE are INCOMPLETE and fall short of being able to deal with our SENSE-EXPERIENCE “REALITY”. It is DECEPTIVE to speak the TRUTH as to how we are GROWING, DEVELOPING and PRODUCING which is INCOMPLETE in that it FAILS TO MENTION the conjugate SHRINKING of WILDERNESS, the DISENTEGRATING earlier DEVELOPMENTS and the CONSUMPTION of raw materials etc. to support PRODUCTION., i.e. it is DECEPTIVE to speak the way we WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS SPEAK (we DROP OUT the FEMALE ACCOMMODATING/ENABLING CONJUGATE).
THAT’S WHY WE (WESTERN CULTURE ADHERENTS) NEED TO ‘RE-LEARN HOW TO SPEAK’
WHAT WILL CHANGE IF WE RE-LEARN HOW TO SPEAK IN A MANNER THAT IS MODERN PHYSICS CONSISTENT AND THUS IN THE MANNER OF INDIGENOUS ABORIGINALS?
Here is just one example; RE-LEARNING means MOVING TO LEVEL 1 AWARENESS;
The CONSERVATIVE – LIBERAL SPLIT WILL DISAPPEAR. This SPLIT is based on the FALSE notion of LOCAL AUTHORING which derives from the DOUBLE ERROR of NAMING and GARMMAR. There is AMBIGUITY in the understanding of LOCAL AUTHORING that manifests in the split into CONSERVATIVES and LIBERALS based on ERICH JANTSCH’S 3 LEVELS of AWARENESS where LEVEL 3 (the LEAST AWARE) AWARENESS is CONSERVATISM, where LEVEL 2 (NEXT LEAST AWARE) AWARENESS is LIBERALISM and the highest level of awareness LEVEL 1 AWARENESS (MOST AWARE)
LEVEL 3 CONSERVATIVE AWARENESS: ASSUMPTION OF INDEPENDENT BEING AND COMPETING WITH ONE ANOTHER ON A FLAT PLAIN IN THE OPEN AIR
LEVEL 2 LIBERAL AWARENESS: ASSUMPTION OF INDEPENDENT BEING COMPETING WITH ONE ANOTHER AS IF IN A BODY OF WATER WHEREIN EVERYONE MODERATES ONE’S SPLASHING BECAUSE ONE IS AWARE OF HOW THE DYNAMICS OF OTHERS CAN IMPACT OUR DYNAMICS and VICE VERSA.
LEVEL 1 INDIGENOUS AWARENESS: ASSUMPTION OF EVERYTHING IS RELATED AS WITH STRANDS IN A WEB (based on the understanding that we are all related as in interconnected and interdependent as with STRANDS in a WEB). This leads to RESTORATIVE JUSTICE and HEALING CIRCLES. MODERN PHYSICS SUPPORTS THIS LEVEL 1 AWARENESS wherein EVERYTHING IS RELATED (as with condensations of the all-including energy-charged plenum aka strands in the web).
IN WESTERN CULTURE, AWARENESS LEVELS 3 and 2 are “LOCKED IN BY HIGH SWITCHING COSTS” and by the distraction of level 3 and 2 polarizing strife..
* * * * *
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.