{"id":1017,"date":"2011-02-18T19:51:30","date_gmt":"2011-02-19T03:51:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/?p=1017"},"modified":"2011-02-21T13:21:08","modified_gmt":"2011-02-21T21:21:08","slug":"transcending-science-and-religion-transcending-theory","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/transcending-science-and-religion-transcending-theory\/","title":{"rendered":"Transcending Science and Religion (Transcending Theory)"},"content":{"rendered":"

\n

\"\"<\/a>

Viewing a life-cycle removes the ecological (conjugate habitat-inhabitant relational) dimensionality<\/p><\/div>\n

\u2018Theory\u2019 is a way of understanding how the world works which in turn shapes our behaviour and how we relate to and engage with one another and with our shared living space.<\/p>\n

\u2018Theory\u2019 can be either religious or scientific and the theories of our culture are infused into us early on in our lives.\u00a0 As B. F. Skinner observes; \u201cSociety attacks early, when the individual is helpless.\u201d<\/span>.\u00a0 That is why children who grow up in a culture that embraces particular religious theories (God created nature in the form of a collection of local material beings) and scientific theories (the earth occupies the centre of the universe) tend to believe in the same theories, and to infuse into their children at an early age, these same theories.\u00a0\u00a0 As in the examples in parentheses, there tends to be overlap in these religious and scientific theories; e.g. the \u2018absolute being\u2019 of \u2018local material bodies\u2019.\u00a0\u00a0 Since the world is evidently \u2018evolving\u2019, there have been different religious and scientific theories that try to reconcile a world undergoing continual \u2018becoming\u2019 and a world portrayed in terms of a \u2018collection of material beings\u2019.<\/p>\n

\u2018Theory\u2019, in our culture, the dominant culture in the world today, which might better be termed \u2018capitalist-authoritarian\u2019 than \u2018Western\u2019 (the latter term becoming ambiguous with the rise of Chinese and Indian capitalism-authoritarianism), is predominantly \u2018Aristotelian\u2019.<\/p>\n

At the very base of the prevailing \u2018capitalist-authoritarian\u2019 theory lies the same \u2018anthropocentric\u2019 assumption that lies at the base of the monotheist religious theory of Christianity\/Islam\/Judaism; i.e. that we must manage ourselves and organize our communities on the basis of \u2018what people do\u2019, the goodness and productivity of their behaviours.\u00a0 This \u2018theory\u2019 that dominates in our culture, gives the ultimate foundational role in the world dynamic to \u2018being\u2019 rather than to \u2018becoming\u2019; i.e. the world is conceived of in terms of a collection of \u2018local material beings\u2019 that move and interact with one another within an otherwise empty space.\u00a0\u00a0 Space is a non-participant in this Aristotelian world view; i.e. it is conceived of as an absolute fixed, empty and infinite \u2018operating theatre\u2019 within which all of the action associates with the movement interaction of local material objects and organisms.\u00a0\u00a0 This view portrays the universe as \u2018inanimate\u2019 (dead) for the most part and only rarely and locally \u2018infected with life\u2019 or \u2018animate\u2019 material systems such as \u2018organisms\u2019 and \u2018cells\u2019.<\/p>\n

This view of the world is anthropocentrist and while it may be nonsensical [it derives from how our ego sees our \u2018self\u2019, as a local system with its own locally originating, internal process driven development and behaviour], it is the popular theory of both religion and mainstream science, theories that shape our individual and collective behaviour.<\/p>\n

Again, the notion that form, behaviour, and organization originates within human beings is delusion.\u00a0 Darwinism and genetics; theory alleging the locally originating, internal process-driven evolution of form, are delusional, as Nietzsche bluntly states in his \u2018anti-Darwin\u2019 notes in \u2018The Will to Power\u2019.\u00a0\u00a0 And once again, to be more precise, these theories are \u2018total fictions\u2019 but \u2018useful fictions\u2019 and the \u2018delusion\u2019 is not in using them as tools, but in confusing them for \u2018reality\u2019.<\/p>\n

Underlying these theories is the Aristotelian notion of \u2018intrinsic final cause\u2019 which places the ultimate source of causation in the interior of the developing entity; thus the reason that the acorn develops into an oak tree, according to Aristotle, is that \u2018it has what it takes\u2019 in its own interior, it pushes forth out of itself because of its innate built-in \u2018purpose\u2019 to \u2018become an oak tree\u2019.\u00a0 Belief in this notion of inbuilt \u2018telos\u2019, which is bluntly mocked by Nietzsche, is foundational to our modern capitalist-authoritarian approach to organizing our social dynamic.<\/p>\n

Plato, Aristotle\u2019s mentor, didn\u2019t agree with this theory which explained evolution of form in terms of inbuilt purpose.\u00a0 Plato believed that the world was held in place by a heavenly \u2018vortex\u2019, that the evolutionary force was \u2018outside-in rather than (or as well as) \u2018inside-outward\u2019 as Aristotle believed.<\/p>\n

Thus there is controversy over theory that is foundational to our current capitalist-authoritarian social dynamic.<\/p>\n

\n
[[Note the relationship between the three figures in the composite figure at the head of this essay.\u00a0 The satellite photo on the left implicitly shows the ‘ecological’ or ‘coevolutional’ (spatial-relational) view where the different hurricanes develop and move under one another’s simultaneous influence per Mach’s principle; “The dynamics of the habitat condition the dynamics of the inhabitants at the same time as the dynamics of the inhabitants are conditioning the dynamics of the habitat”<\/span>.\u00a0 In this picture we understand that the spatial-flow-plenum of the atmosphere is the parenting medium and the hurricanes are ‘ripples’ in the common spatial plenum.\u00a0 But by the time we have moved to the second time-lapse series of photographs to study the life cycle of a particular specimen, we have left behind the ecological dimensionality and are interpreting dynamics in terms of the ‘local being’ and ‘doer-deed’ dynamics in absolute space and time (x,y,z,t reference frame space).\u00a0 The third picture takes us back to Aristotle’s ‘acorn-to-oak-tree’ (apple-seed to apple-tree) notion of ‘intrinsic final cause’ which alleges the ‘powerboater’ nature of the evolving organism; i.e. casting it as a ‘local system with its own locally originating, internal process and purpose-driven behaviour’.\u00a0 Of course, he is ignoring the ecological dimensionality by starting with the ‘life-cycle view’, an error that has also been built into Darwinism and into the mainstream biological sciences in general, not to mention psychology and the social sciences [economics, political science].\u00a0 One might say that the dimension of ‘time’ that associates with change to a ‘being’ is a fictional dimension that obscures the ecological dimensionality associated with coevolving forms within a spatial plenum.]]<\/span><\/h5>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Some might label me \u2018anti-capitalist\u2019 and \u2018anti-authoritarian\u2019, but this would confuse me with others, since I know that there are people that interpret these terms literally; i.e. they see \u2018anti-capitalists\u2019 and \u2018anti-authoritarians\u2019 as people who would like to attack and eliminate \u2018capitalists\u2019 and \u2018authorities\u2019.\u00a0 I am not one of these simply because I believe that such a view is ‘more-of-the-same’ Aristotelian nonsense which presumes that \u2018capitalist behaviours originate from within capitalists, from inbuilt purpose\u2019, and that \u2018authoritative [top-down controlling] behaviours originate from within authorities, from inbuilt purpose\u2019.\u00a0\u00a0 My understanding of the sourcing of behaviour is like Nietzsche\u2019s, that it is rooted in \u2018becoming\u2019 and derives from the dynamic spatial plenum that we are included in, and which we are gathering features in.<\/p>\n

Did Jean Valjean\u2019s criminal behaviour (stealing a loaf of bread because he could no longer bear to hear starving children crying as they were put to bed hungry) come from his internal criminal purpose?\u00a0\u00a0 No, it came from the growing gap between the wealthy\/privileged and the poor\/underprivileged in French society of that pre-1848 revolution era that inspired Victor Hugo\u2019s \u2018Les Miserables\u2019.\u00a0 This sort of \u2018Robin Hood behaviour\u2019 is nature\u2019s way to seek the restoring of balance.\u00a0 For example, when one region (equatorial) is enjoying thermal energy surplus and another (polar) is suffering thermal energy deficiency, a convection cell emerges like a spinning witch\u2019s broom to sweep energy from the regions of surplus into the regions of deficiency.\u00a0 Robin-Hood responses are immanent in the dynamics of Nature, and humans (themselves gatherings within the dynamic spatial plenum of Nature) can \u2018feel it\u2019 when they live within such surplus\/deficiency gradients and some, like Jean Valjean, let their behaviours be orchestrated by the imbalances they and others are experiencing in the dynamics of the living space they share inclusion in.<\/p>\n

This notion, that the behaviour of an individual is orchestrated by the dynamics of the living space that he is situationally included in, contradicts Aristotle\u2019s theory that \u2018the behaviour buck stops\u2019 with the internal purpose of the individual.\u00a0\u00a0 Our western justice system would agree with Aristotle since Aristotelian theory has been built into its design.\u00a0\u00a0 Courts do not include themselves in their inquiry.\u00a0 They represent ‘the moral authority’ of the state.\u00a0 The basis of authoritarian systems is that those on top control the behaviours of those beneath them.\u00a0 The law and the courts are \u2018above\u2019 the people they are judging.\u00a0\u00a0 Can you imagine a court where the judge and prosecutor take off their robes of authority, admit that they too are involved, and everyone \u2018just works it out\u2019 in a reasonable fashion?\u00a0 One has to go back to stateless societies such as were evolved in the Amerindian culture to see understandings of behaviour that do not assume that the behaviour originates fully and solely from internal processes (intellection and purpose).<\/p>\n

The demand of modern physics that ‘the tools of inquiry be included in the inquiry’ equates to the suspending of the notion of ‘moral authority’.\u00a0\u00a0 To bring the observer inside what he is observing and thus suspend the split between the ‘morally authorized’ and the ‘morally judged’ is the way of the Amerindian tradition but certainly not the way of the sovereign state.<\/p>\n

The ‘observer effect’ of modern physics brings the observer inside the spatial plenum that he is observing and puts him in the same position as the storm-cell in the spatial plenum of the atmosphere; i.e. the dynamics of the flow-plenum are influencing his dynamics at the same time as his dynamics are influencing the dynamics of the flow-plenum [Mach’s principle].\u00a0 This view that behaviour originates in the dynamics of the living space and orchestrates individual and collective human behaviour violates the Aristotelian theory and since Aristotelian theory is built in our mainstream scientific theory, it also violates the theory of our biological sciences which claims that an organism (such as a human organism) is a \u2018local system with its own locally originating, internal-process driven behaviour\u2019 that moves about and interacts with other such local systems within an absolute, fixed, empty and infinite (euclidian) operating space.\u00a0\u00a0 The theory is that wherever space is not occupied locally by some material object or organism, it is empty.<\/p>\n

Modern physics, meanwhile, contradicts mainstream science by theorizing that space is an energy-charged plenum and material entities are secondary \u2018ripple\u2019 features in the plenum.\u00a0 This comes close to taking us back to Plato\u2019s vortex notion wherein the earth on the inside, is held together by what it is included in; i.e. \u2018the heavens\u2019.<\/p>\n

This is all very fine, but how does this Aristotelian \u2018reduction of reality\u2019 to local entities in themselves, which is in effect a reduction from \u2018nonlocally orchestrated becoming\u2019 to \u2018locally manipulated being\u2019, play out in our community dynamics?<\/p>\n

Consider a healthy and harmonious community that has, for many years, been successfully following a plan for \u2018sustainable living\u2019.\u00a0 At the end of the year, they gather in the town hall and bring in an accountant who provides a breakdown of who has contributed what to the community\u2019s economy, so that the entire \u2018community domestic product\u2019 has been accounted for.\u00a0\u00a0 The proud and successful residents of the community commit to another \u2018five year plan\u2019 and agree that they should all raise their production targets by 20% to make their community even more affluent; i.e. to achieve \u2018economic growth\u2019.\u00a0 They fully believe that this growth is ‘in their control’.<\/p>\n

An interested journalist from another community, who sometimes attends these meetings, comes back for the annual meeting three years later and finds the town hall and the town in a terrible state of disrepair.\u00a0 In the town-hall meeting, the people look ragged and depressed, they argue with one another over who is holding the system together.\u00a0\u00a0 The town is in Oklahoma and dustbowl conditions of the 1930s have arrived replacing fertile green fields with gravel plains and dust-dunes.\u00a0\u00a0 Most of the people are gone, their movements having been orchestrated by the movements of the greenery within the dynamics of the habitat.\u00a0\u00a0 While the view presented by the accountant was that all of the production of the community could be traced back to the individual\/individuals responsible for it, it now appeared as if that the behaviours of the farmers and community members in general did not start from the human individuals.\u00a0 That is, it appeared that the view of a community in terms of the dynamics of the humans that lived in the community, the anthropocentric view of community, was not an adequate view of community.\u00a0 An old Indian in the region had suggested that \u2018humans do not produce corn\u2019.\u00a0 When humans see that corn grows, this orchestrates their behaviours, that they then call \u2018farming\u2019, but humans do not produce corn, the earth does.\u00a0 Meanwhile the accountant had credited farmers with being the source of the production of crops, in keeping with the Aristotelian tradition, which insists that behaviour is locally originating and thus that production of the community originates within the community, rather than being orchestrated by the spatial dynamics the community is included in, like \u2018climate\u2019 that keeps green-fertile zones and brown-infertile zones moving about like mice, and so orchestrating cat-like behaviours on the part of humans.<\/p>\n

One could say that humans (organisms) are like sailboaters whose drive-power and steerage derives from the dynamics of the space they are included in so that their behaviours are orchestrated by the spatial dynamics they find themselves uniquely, situationally included in, while the Aristotelian and mainstream scientific theory would say that humans (organisms) are like powerboaters whose power-drive and steerage are in-board and whose behaviours are thus locally originating, internal-process-driven behaviours (as if the space they are in is a passive, non-contributing reference frame).<\/p>\n

A second example is one in which an aboriginal community of a few hundred commits to continuing on with their traditional ways of living which have proven very successful over thousands of years.\u00a0 Then, a million or so Europeans move in all around them so that they are in the eye of a doughnut-shaped population whorl.\u00a0 The aboriginals, because the living space they share inclusion in is radically transformed, find that their behaviours are inevitably being orchestrated by the dynamics of the transformed dynamics of the space they share inclusion in.<\/p>\n

Clearly, the behaviour of the aboriginal community is not a \u2018locally originating, internal process driven behaviour\u2019 as the Aristotelian theory claims.<\/p>\n

In fact, Mach\u2019s description in terms of a conjugate habitat-inhabitant relation would seem to fit very well \u201cThe dynamics of the habitat condition the dynamics of the inhabitants at the same time as the dynamics of the inhabitants are conditioning the dynamics of the habitat.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Nietzsche\u2019s anti-Darwinist model (which parallels Mach\u2019s) also fits well; i.e. \u201ca process of diffusion, in which endosmosis predominates over exosmosis\u201d<\/span>.<\/p>\n

One can relate \u2018the dynamics of people\u2019 to \u2018exosmosis\u2019 and \u2018the dynamics of space\u2019 (the dynamic suprasystem the local system\/community is included in) to endosmosis, and our experience then validates the reality of this Niezschean\/Rolphian view of evolution as \u201ca process of diffusion, in which endosmosis predominates over exosmosis\u201d.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2018Endosmosis\u2019 is where there is flow from the outside to the inside of the cell while \u2018exosmosis\u2019 is where there is flow from the inside to the outside of the cell. We are back to Plato and Aristotle\u2019s argument again; i.e. is the cell held in place by \u2018endosmosis\u2019 as Plato would argue, or by \u2018exosmosis\u2019 as in Aristotle\u2019s theory?\u00a0 Our Aristotelian theory based biological sciences allow only one possibility, that the \u2018cell\u2019 has locally originating, internal process driven behaviour; i.e. that \u2018exosmosis\u2019 prevails over \u2018endosmosis\u2019; i.e. that the cell corresponds to the \u2018powerboater\u2019 analogue and not to the \u2018sailboater\u2019 analogue.\u00a0 (Some [a tiny minority of] researchers within the biological sciences are attempting to oust the Aristotelian model; e.g.\u00a0 http:\/\/www.brucelipton.com\/excerpt-chapter-one\/<\/a><\/p>\n

[Disclaimer: While Bruce Lipton is in my view, on target in his support for Lamarck and in arguing the need for medicine to upgrade from Newtonian physics to quantum physics where ‘field shapes matter’ rather than vice versa, his ideas on ‘programming the subconscious are radically retrograde and go back to inventing locally originating sources for behaviour via the deus ex machina notion\u00a0 of ‘programs in the subconscious’.\u00a0 While teaching how to input your own programs into the subconscious with a super-learning techique called EFT may be a good way to make a living, it is delusion-squared in my view.\u00a0 My guess is that shifting our sense of our identity from ‘centres-of-doing’ to ‘centres-of-experience’ is a tough leap to assimilate and thus, Lipton, on arriving at the jump off point, balked and ended up inventing an enhancement to our ‘centre-of-doing’ view of self that deepens our ‘Ding-an-sich’ ‘being-based’ view of ourselves by adding more inboard powerboating gear.] <\/span><\/p>\n

Jean Baptiste Lamarck\u2019s theory of evolution paralleled Nietzsche\/Rolph\u2019s.\u00a0 Lamarck attributed evolution to \u2018les fluides incontenables\u2019 (‘fluids that can contain but which cannot themselves be contained’)<\/span> <\/em>such as thermal fields, gravitational fields, electromagnetic fields, and Lamarck insisted that there was \u2018just one physics\u2019 (one physical phenomenon that did not recognize a split between the \u2018animate\u2019 and \u2018inanimate\u2019 realms).\u00a0 As Lipton says;<\/p>\n

\u201cNot only did Lamarck present his theory fifty years before Darwin, he offered a much less harsh theory of the mechanisms of evolution. Lamarck\u2019s theory suggested that evolution was based on an \u2018instructive,\u2019 cooperative interaction among organisms and their environment that enables life forms to survive and evolve in a dynamic world. His notion was that organisms acquire and pass on adaptations necessary for their survival in a changing environment. Interestingly, Lamarck\u2019s hypothesis about the mechanisms of evolution conform to modern cell biologists\u2019 understanding of how immune systems adapt to their environment as described above.\u00a0 … One reason some scientists are taking another look at Lamarck is that evolutionists are reminding us of the invaluable role cooperation plays in sustaining life in the biosphere. Scientists have long noted symbiotic relationships in nature.\u00a0 …Suffice it to say that after four months in paradise, teaching in a way that clarified my thinking about cells and the lessons they provide to humans, I was well on my way to an understanding of the New Biology, which leaves in the dust the defeatism of genetic and parental programming as well as survival-of-the-fittest Darwinism.\u201d<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Once we have succeeded in holding at bay the fictional binary-theory of a world of \u2018local material being\u2019 versus \u2018void space\u2019, then we can explore, once again, the notion that the evolution of form and behaviour is not one-sidedly inside-outward as Aristotle would have it, but having both an outside-inward and inside-outward origin.<\/p>\n

As Michel de Montaigne (1533-1592), lawyer, magistrate, mayor (of Bordeaux) pointed out, we could not achieve what we do without being fed ideas and nourishment from the populated habitat in which we are included (endosmotically).\u00a0 However, our cultural habit is to describe ourselves in this one-sided inside-outward (exosmotic) way where we talk about \u2018our achievements\u2019 as if they are the doer-deed products of a \u2018local system with its own locally originating, internal process-driven behaviour\u2019, even though they would be impossible without the outside-inward (endosmotic) flow of support.\u00a0\u00a0 As Montaigne addresses this cultural habit of egoistically speaking as if we are all exosmosis and no endosmosis (as if everything flows from us, from our [powerboater] inboard power and steerage);<\/p>\n

\u201cLet him hide all the help he has had, and show only what he has made of it.\u00a0 The pillagers, the borrowers, parade their buildings, their purchases, not what they get from others.\u00a0 You do not see the gratuities of a member of a Parlement, you see the alliances he has gained and honors for his children.\u00a0 No-one makes public his receipts, everyone makes public his acquisitions [achievements].\u201d<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Not only does Montaigne show how we do this in our material transactions; i.e. how we one-sidedly view \u2018economy\u2019, he points out that we do the same when it comes to \u2018ideas\u2019;<\/p>\n

“Let the tutor make his charge pass everything through a sieve and lodge nothing in his head on mere authority and trust: let not Aristotle’s principles be principles to him any more than those of the Stoics or Epicureans. Let this variety of ideas be set before him; he will choose if he can; if not, he will remain in doubt. Only the fools are certain and assured. For if he embraces Xenophon’s and Plato’s opinions by his own reasoning, they will no longer be theirs, they will be his. He who follows another follows nothing. He finds nothing; indeed he seeks nothing. We are not under a king; let each one claim his own freedom. Let him know that he knows, at least. He must imbibe their ways of thinking, not learn their precepts. And let him boldly forget, if he wants, where he got them, but let him know how to make them his own. Truth and reason are common to everyone, and no more belong to the man who first spoke them than to the man who says them later. It is no more according to Plato than according to me, since he and I understand and see it the same way. The bees plunder the flowers here and there, but afterward they make of them honey, which is all theirs; it is no longer thyme or marjoram. Even so with the pieces borrowed from others; he will transform and blend them to make a work of his own, to wit, his judgment. His education, work, and study aim only at forming this.”<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Our cultural habit of building an \u2018identity\u2019 for ourselves on the basis of \u2018what we do\u2019, our \u2018doer-deed achievements\u2019 is totally undermined once we suspend our belief in one-sided Aristotelian thinking.\u00a0\u00a0 It is useful to revisit how we ever got to seeing ourselves in terms of \u2018local beings\u2019 rather than as gatherings within the energy-charged plenum of space, the latter ‘becoming’ view of ‘self’ being in terms of conjugate habitat-inhabitant relations (i.e. by \u201ca process of diffusion, in which endosmosis predominates over exosmosis\u201d<\/span>.<\/p>\n

One thing to bear in mind about \u2018identity\u2019 and \u2018doing\u2019 is that the picture changes considerably once we suspend the notion of local \u2018beings\u2019 and thus suspend the notional \u2018split\u2019 between the \u2018animate\u2019 and \u2018inanimate\u2019 realms.\u00a0 This split arose because in a world seen as being composed of a collection of \u2018local material beings\u2019, there are those \u2018beings\u2019 which manifest behaviours that are internal process driven (\u2018living organisms\u2019) while the majority of \u2018local beings\u2019 are seen as lacking in internal process driven behaviours and thus deemed \u2018lifeless\u2019 (made of \u2018inanimate\u2019 matter).\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 In the view where space is understood as an energy-charged plenum which gathers (and re-gathers) within itself \u2018flow-features\u2019 in the manner of storm-cells gathering in the flow of the atmosphere, the \u2018local being-based\u2019 notion of \u2018doer-deed\u2019 dissolves.\u00a0 That is, there is just one evolutionary dynamic and it is the spatial-relational evolution of the energy-charged plenum.\u00a0 The flow\/plenum may engender many whorls and the whorls may condition the flow at the same time as the flow is conditioning the whorls, but as with the wind, flag, mind Buddhist parable, when we try to respond to the question, which moves which, when we open our mouth to answer, we are wrong.\u00a0 The dynamics of the many children and the dynamics of the parenting medium are in conjugate habitat-inhabitant relation.\u00a0\u00a0 What we know is that the local visible rotating pinwheel of ‘the hurricane’ (we have no justification to impute local being to it, apart from our own convenience) is indeed ‘visible’ while the rotating flow-fields which are engendering a multiplicity of ‘hurricanes’ are invisible and nonlocal.\u00a0 That the visibility of the flow-feature is ‘local’ does not imply that the flow-feature is local in a behavioural sense (‘doer-deed’ sense).<\/p>\n

Now, \u2018who are we\u2019, now that we have lost our \u2018local beingness\u2019 within the evolutionary flow?\u00a0 How are we to understand our own \u2018identity\u2019?<\/p>\n

The analogue of the storm-cell is useful here since in our culture, we knowingly \u2018reduce\u2019 the identity of storm-cells that we acknowledge to be \u2018ripple-in-the-flow\u2019 features to \u2018local beings\u2019 with \u2018doer-deed\u2019 behaviours, just as our Aristotelian theory has us do to ourselves.<\/p>\n

Imagine that we are observing several contemporaneous hurricanes from satellite photography or from continually mapping the spatial distribution of surface air-pressures and wind velocities.\u00a0 Each storm cell looks like a rotating pinwheel that is doing its own thing (gathering form, dissipating, strengthening, weakening, heading north, heading west etc.)\u00a0 These can be viewed as the local centres of ‘exosmosis’.\u00a0 But we know that their predominating origin is the invisible nonlocal rotating flow field (the common, conjugate endosmotic relation) and that the \u2018rotating pinwheel\u2019 images (centres of exosmosis) that we see are secondary to the rotating flow field (endosmotic spatial plenum) i.e. the several storm-cells (centres of exosmosis) are ripples on the back of the same beast (endosmosis).\u00a0 But our Aristotelian theory would have us develop a \u2018category\u2019 for these multiple ‘rotating pinwheel’ forms based on similarities in their VISIBLE APPEARANCE (e.g. their spiral arms, their central eye, their \u2018wall clouds\u2019 around the eye, their extreme low pressure in their centres etc. etc.).<\/p>\n

Once we have established the \u2018category\u2019 or \u2018set\u2019 of \u2018local beings\u2019 that we are calling \u2018hurricanes\u2019, we can differentiate them by the measured differences in their similarities, as we do with the category \u2018humans\u2019.\u00a0 Humans have two legs and two arms, a head and so on; i.e. an anatomy composed of local parts.\u00a0 In the case of the hurricanes, we have their wind velocities that put them into five different sub-categories, we have their size in terms of the diameter of the visible \u2018rotating pinwheel\u2019 and the intensity of the pressure minimum in their eye-centre.\u00a0 In addition to this, because we see them as \u2018local beings\u2019, we impute to them their own \u2018location\u2019 and \u2018trajectory\u2019 and in fact their own \u2018life-cycle\u2019 which ranges from one day to thirty-one days while the average is nine days.<\/p>\n

By the time we have given the hurricane a \u2018category of being\u2019 and all the other attributes that relate to it, such as its own life-cycle and history of doer-deed activities, then we have pretty much forgotten about the multiple hurricanes being simultaneously mutually influencing ripples on the back of the same beast (coevolutional flow-features within a common spatial flow-plenum).\u00a0\u00a0 That is, we have artificially lifted them out of the One evolutionary dynamic and re-animated them as notional \u2018local beings\u2019 with their own \u2018locally originating, internal-process driven behaviours\u2019.\u00a0\u00a0 The influence of space, which is actually the parenting plenum\/medium, is no longer needed to be taken into consideration; i.e. the notion of conjugate endosmotic-exosmotic diffusion, or of a conjugate habitat-inhabitant relational dynamic, is no longer needed because we have reconstructed the physical phenomenon in the Aristotelian powerboater terms of local system with their own locally originating, internal power and steerage driven behaviours.<\/p>\n

Such an identity, the implied ‘powerboater’ identity,\u00a0 is commonly called \u2018the ego\u2019.\u00a0\u00a0 It is foundational to Aristotelian theory, which is in turn foundational to (much) religious theory as well as to our mainstream (pre-relativity\/quantum) science theory.<\/p>\n

If we suspend imposing \u2018categories\u2019 of \u2018being\u2019 on our experiencing of the world and reductively re-casting the world dynamic in those terms, then our own identity reverts to a \u2018gathering\u2019 in the unfolding evolutionary dynamic; a gathering that is uniquely situationally included in the ceaselessly innovative, spatial-relationally unfolding spatial plenum.\u00a0\u00a0 Furthermore, in an evolving spatial plenum, the flow is the thing that continually gathers and regathers and since there is no boundary between \u2018being\u2019 and \u2018non-being\u2019 but only the \u2018continuing present moment\u2019, we unfold from the flow and infold into the flow.\u00a0 In other words, the past and the future are enfolded in the present moment, as is the relationship of whorls in a fluid-flow.\u00a0 As Nietzsche says in Thus Spake Zarathustra;<\/p>\n

\u201cTwo paths meet here; no one has yet followed either to its end. This long lane stretches back for an eternity. And the long lane out there, that is another eternity. They contradict each other, these paths; they offend each other face to face; and it is here at this gateway that they come together. The name of the gateway is inscribed above: \u2018Moment.\u2019\u201c – Nietzsche<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Our \u2018identity\u2019 then, once we suspend the fictional notion of \u2018local being\u2019, is that of a \u2018conditioner\u2019 or \u2018co-evolver\u2019 (see Bruce Lipton\u2019s discussion of evolution referenced above) of the energy-charged spatial plenum in which we are uniquely situationally included.\u00a0\u00a0 This is the \u2018identity\u2019 that has been assumed in the Amerindian philosophy (Mitakuye Oyasin \u2013 \u2018We are all related\u2019, \u2018man belongs to the Earth [spatial plenum]\u2019, … \u2018the Earth does not belong to man\u2019 [the space we inhabit is not passive, it is our parenting milieu].\u00a0\u00a0 As Ralph Waldo Emerson also says, our ‘local being-ness’ is only visual appearance, like the persisting local image of the cataract which is really a feature within the continuous flow, thus the flow not only inhabits the organism (flow-feature) but creates it.<\/p>\n

Our Aristotelian theory is \u2018breaking down\u2019 in many different ways, not the least of which is in rising suspicions as what \u2018capitalism\u2019 and \u2018authoritarianism\u2019 may be doing to us. \u00a0Meanwhile, as discussed above, it is our \u2018ego\u2019 that holds the Aristotelian theory in place since Aristotelian theory of one-sided inside-outward (centrally-controlled) development of form, behaviour and organization is nothing other than our egotist sense of self which we have infused into the foundations of our world view.<\/p>\n

The recent Egyptian and Tunisian protests that have down the authoritarian regimes that have prevailed there, signals a rejection of that notion of \u2018justice\u2019 wherein a \u2018moral authority\u2019 above imposes \u2018moral laws\u2019 (laws of the land) on the people below.\u00a0\u00a0 As Michel de Montaigne, a much loved sixteenth century magistrate says;<\/p>\n

\u201cThe justice which in itself is natural and universal, is otherwise and more nobly ordered, than that other justice, which is special, national, and constrained to the ends of government. \u2026There cannot a worse state of things be imagined, than where wickedness comes to be legitimate, and assumes with the magistrate\u2019s permission, the cloak of virtue . . . . The extremest sort of injustice, according to Plato, is where that which is unjust, should be reputed for just.\u201d \u2013 Michel de Montaigne (1533-1592)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This system of justice, which our dominant culture has propagated throughout the world through the Aristotelian theory based institute of \u2018the sovereign state\u2019 (the land and population of the world is now partitioned into 195 such sovereign states all suffering from this same flawed ideal of \u2018justice\u2019 whereby the state assumes a moral authority that prevails over all those who reside within the self-declared and violence-backed imaginary boundary lines of the state.\u00a0 This form of organization is based on the binary notion that the \u2018inside\u2019 of the sovereign state is mutually exclusive of the \u2018outside\u2019; i.e. that the state possesses \u2018local being\u2019 within the imaginary boundary lines, though not outside them.\u00a0\u00a0 As historians of law have pointed out, this is a \u2018religious\u2019 concept;<\/p>\n

\u201cAll significant concepts of the modern theory of the state are secularized theological concepts, not only because of their historical development … but also because of their systematic structure.\u201d (Bartelson, Jens. A Genealogy of Sovereignty<\/em> 1995)<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cState sovereignty “is a ‘religion’ and a faith.\u201d … \u201cThe skillfully drawn borders that cartographers have provided for us are … spiritual and philosophical abstractions representative of a form of quasi-belief. They are … not detached maps of reality as proponents would have us believe. These geographies reflect an ardent desire to make (or impose) sovereignty a physical reality as natural as the mountains, rivers and lakes…. \u201c.” – Lombardi, Mark Owen. “Third-World Problem-Solving and the ‘Religion’ of Sovereignty: Trends and Prospects.”<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

[quotes cited by Peter D’Errico, law professor emeritus, University of Massachusetts in ‘Native American Sovereignty: Now you see it, now you don’t’<\/a><\/em><\/span> ]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Thus, it is our cultural habit to see the \u2018sovereign state\u2019 in the same Aristotelian theory (powerboater) based manner as classical biology sees the \u2018organism\u2019, as a \u2018local system with its own locally originating, inboard power and steerage driven behaviour\u2019.\u00a0\u00a0 Even though we know that sovereign states are like octopuses whose tentacles and suckers wrap around the planet drawing nutrients (petroleum, minerals, cheap labour) from the global habitat into themselves, but all the while talking in the manner described by Montaigne; \u201cThe pillagers, the borrowers, parade their buildings, their purchases, not what they get from others.\u201d\u00a0 The voice of the sovereign state is the collective ego speaking.\u00a0 As Einstein observed; “Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind.”<\/p>\n

When we read philosophical investigations such as those of Montaigne and Nietzsche, we can understand what is being said but \u2018how easy is it to shift out of the ego based identity that our Aristotelian theory based culture automatically imposes on everything, including ourselves?\u00a0 For example, the corporate employer, when it asks for our resum\u00e9, does not want to hear us go on about all the help we got from the peopled habitat in which we were situationally included, they want to hear our resum\u00e9 in terms of \u2018what we did and what we can do\u2019 because a corporation is an Aristotelian organization just like classical biology\u2019s \u2018organism\u2019 that sees itself in the powerboater terms of a \u2018local system with its own locally originating, internal process driven behaviour\u2019 that interacts with (competes with) other such powerboater systems within an absolute fixed, empty and infinite (passive) operating space.<\/p>\n

Community (naturally evolved community) never functioned in powerboater mode like the corporation.\u00a0 The green valley orchestrated the arrival of settlers and the new dynamic of valley and people opened up new possibility which orchestrated the behaviour of the sons and daughters of the settlers and orchestrated the arrival of more settlers.\u00a0\u00a0 The participant in the community developed and grew by drawing ideas and nutrients from the community\/habitat in which he was situationally included, at the time as the community drew ideas and nutrients from him.\u00a0 The dynamics of community followed Mach\u2019s principle; \u201cThe dynamics of the community [the populated green valley] condition the dynamics of the members at the same time as the dynamics of the members are conditioning the dynamics of the community\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0 The natural community did not evolve as in the anthropocentric view wherein every human member throws himself body and soul into the doer-deed project of bringing about a \u2018desired future\u2019.\u00a0 The natural community is a gathering in the spatial plenum which evolved more as \u201ca process of diffusion, in which endosmosis predominates over exosmosis\u201d.<\/p>\n

So, why do our universities continue to teach Aristotelian theory with its \u2018being\u2019 based \u2018doer-deed\u2019 dynamics as if it were \u2018really\u2019 how the world worked?\u00a0 Aristotle wasn\u2019t perfect.\u00a0 His idea that \u201cmaterial bodies fall to earth with a speed proportional their weight\u201d persisted for a thousand years until refuted by Galileo and as Bertrand Russell commented;<\/p>\n

Aristotle maintained that women have fewer teeth than men; although he was twice married, it never occurred to him to verify this statement by examining his wives\u2019 mouths. \u2013Bertrand Russell, , Impact of Science on Society <\/em><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Kepler may have come close to the answer as to \u2018what\u2019s wrong with our universities\u2019 and how physics can contradict itself on the nature of \u2018space\u2019 in his observation;<\/p>\n

“As regards the academies, they are established in order to regulate the studies of the pupils and are concerned not to have the program of teaching change very often: in such places, because it is a question of the progress of the students, it frequently happens that the things which have to be chosen are not those which are most true but those which are most easy. And by that division in things which makes different people form different judgements, it so happens that certain people are in error contrary to their own opinion.” \u2013 Johannes Kepler, \u2018Harmonies of the World\u2019<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Insofar as most of us recognize that the Aristotelian model of the organism as a local system with its own locally originating inboard power and steerage driven behaviour is \u2018fiction\u2019 but continue to employ it as if it were \u2018true\u2019, we are all \u2018in error contrary to our own opinion\u2019.<\/p>\n

Since it is the \u2018ego\u2019 that is at the base of all of this, what does it take to \u2018let go of the ego\u2019?<\/p>\n

Evidently, it is akin to the process a worm goes through in becoming a butterfly, one has to let oneself go into the darkness and let one\u2019s existing being degenerate in order to open the way for the new self to emerge.\u00a0 This has been referred to as \u2018the dark night of the soul\u2019 since at the time one\u2019s present identity degenerates and falls away, there are no guarantees that a new and more beautiful identity is going to come out of the darkness and use a sky-hook (endosmosis) to pull itself into place.\u00a0\u00a0 There is huge \u2018fear\u2019 of falling into a state of total chaos and disorder, to become unravelled, a babbling idiot.\u00a0 The same fear is there in the collective that would like to let go of their top-down authoritarian organizational scheme (that of the sovereign state).\u00a0 Will a beautiful Phoenix arise out of the ashes, or will there just be \u2018ashes\u2019 if one lets go of the authoritarian system that one believes has been \u2018holding everything together\u2019 Aristotle-style (the Platonic heavens-vortex source of form, behaviour and organization has been purged from our popular belief system).<\/p>\n

Of course, when we are young, we have much less problem in letting go our established understanding so that it can be subsumed from the outside in by a more comprehensive understanding.\u00a0\u00a0 The trouble is that letting go of the fiction of Aristotelian theory is to let go of the established cultural foundation, what we take for \u2018reality\u2019, so it really is like \u2018changing tires on the vehicle\u2019 while we are speeding down the freeway in it; i.e. the necessary \u2018letting go\u2019 really does involve a \u2018dark night of the soul\u2019 where we fear that if we let go of our Aristotelian rationality, that will be \u2018all she wrote\u2019 and we will make ourselves into babbling idiots waiting for something in the heavens to reinvent us, that never comes.<\/p>\n

If we are to evolve and let go of our Aristotelian religious and scientific being-based foundations, what would it look and feel like?<\/p>\n

In order to get a glimpse into this, we can review the experience of the Amerindian Iroquois five-nation Confederacy and their \u2018Great Law of Peace\/Harmony\u2019 which avoided top-down authoritarian structure and moral authority issued judgments and control;<\/p>\n

\u201cTo Engels, Morgan\u2019s description of the Iroquois [in Lewis Henry Morgan\u2019s Ancient Society and The League of the Haudenosaunee or Iroquois] was important because \u201cit gives us the opportunity of studying the organization of a society which, as yet, knows no state.\u201d Jefferson had also been interested in the Iroquois\u2019 ability to maintain social consensus without a large state apparatus, as had Franklin. Engels described the Iroquoian state in much the same way that American revolutionaries had a century earlier: \u201cEverything runs smoothly without soldiers, gendarmes, or police, without nobles, kings, governors, prefects or judges; without prisons, without trials. All quarrels and disputes are settled by the whole body of those concerned<\/em>. . . . The household is run communistically by a number of families; the land is tribal property, only the small gardens being temporarily assigned to the households \u2014 still, not a bit of our extensive and complicated machinery of administration is required. . . . There are no poor and needy. The communistic household and the gens know their responsibility toward the aged, the sick and the disabled in war. All are free and equal \u2014 including the women. \u201c \u2014 Bruce E. Johansen, Forgotten Founders<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

After centuries of bloody wars, these Amerindian peoples (Iroquois five nations) followed the myth of the Peacemaker, Dekanawidah.\u00a0 Dekanawidah is like the musician who knows how to transform dissonance into harmony, to make a sour note become part of the follow-on harmony, to tame an awkward action or remark by the transforming power of humour.\u00a0 In the Peacemaker myth, Dekanawidah undoes the kinks in the crooked mind of the evil sorcerer Adodarhoh, who has been a prime obstacle standing in the way of peace and harmony and makes him the keeper of the eternal fire of the five nations.<\/p>\n

Dekanawidah gives us a model for participating in the world on the basis of \u2018becoming\u2019 rather than \u2018being\u2019.\u00a0 His profile in the modern era is that of a Nelson Mandela who negotiates with others would call \u2018the evil white racist colonizers\u2019 and vow to never negotiate with.\u00a0 Like Dekanawidah, he sees these Adodarhoh types as brothers whom a darkness has descended up, who are firstly \u2018brothers\u2019 as in the \u2018Mitakuye oyasin\u2019 tradition.\u00a0\u00a0 Dekanawidah understands that evil behaviour is not born in the interior of the individual (as in Aristotelian thinking) but derives from the spatial dynamics that not only inhabit the individual but gather him into emergent form.\u00a0\u00a0 The sour chord relative to the prior sequence can be \u2018made good\u2019 by the sequence of chords not yet played.\u00a0 The present moment does not depend on the past, it is the moment of confluence where the already defined out-thrusting of assertive actuality is in coniunctio with the opening of spatial possibility, and Dekanawidah and Mandela understand this while those who base their understanding in \u2018being\u2019 do not.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, Winston Churchill, from the mid 1930\u2019s on, predicts that war with Germany and the evil Nazis and their evil leader Hitler, is inevitable.\u00a0 Unlike Mandela, he insists that there will be no negotiating with the devil, because evil behaviours are born in the interior of evil beings and there is nothing to be done but to purify the world of such evil.\u00a0 The \u2018being-based\u2019 view can lead only to purification while the \u2018becoming\u2019 based view understands that behaviour derives not from the interior of \u2018beings\u2019 but from spatial dynamics.\u00a0 In 1919, on the signing of the harsh \u2018Carthaginian peace’ of the Treaty of Versailles, cartoons appeared in the newspapers predicting another war in 21 years when the newborn Germans, living in punishment and humiliation for what their fathers had allegedly done, would be of military age.<\/p>\n

\n

\"\"<\/a>

A generation of humiliation can cultivate a formidable army<\/p><\/div>\n

Harold Nicolson, a British delegate at Versailles, declared the treaties \u2018neither just nor wise\u2019, and called the delegates \u2018very stupid men\u2019.\u00a0\u00a0 But Winston Churchill believed that the treaty was the best that could be achieved, and that\u00a0 \u2018the wishes of the various populations prevailed\u2019, a tough attitude of the type, it could be argued, that keeps the military-minded continually employed, making them, at the same time, both heros in vanquishing \u2018evil others\u2019 and cultivators of \u2018evil others\u2019 in a continuing cycle.<\/p>\n

The non-negotiating stance of Churchill and those coming from the Aristotelian \u2018purificationist\u2019 view prevailed and set the stage for a purificationist good-versus-evil war.\u00a0 The holocaust occurred in 1941-1945 and 80 million people were killed in the 1939-1945 war, years after Churchill had been presenting the view of inherent evil originating in the people of Nazi Germany and its leader, Adodarhoh, … or rather, Adolph Hitler.\u00a0 \u2018Rule Britannia, Britannia rule the waves\u2019 was part of the infantile disease of Europe, the \u2018measles of the world\u2019, that Einstein spoke of.\u00a0 The imposing of order by a notional \u2018moral authority\u2019 is the operating principle of the sovereign state.\u00a0 Our culture celebrates purificationist beliefs such as those of Winston Churchill or Ronald Reagan and George Bush.\u00a0 It is the essence of the Aristotelian theoretical approach.\u00a0\u00a0 At the same time, we celebrate the unbelievable success of Nelson Mandela.<\/p>\n

We know where the being-based world view leads.\u00a0 It leads to \u2018purificationism\u2019 rather than to \u2018transformation\u2019.\u00a0 It is the way of Darwinism, competition and \u2018survival of the fittest\u2019 that as a growing minority of biologists like Bruce Lipton claim, is a fiction that in no way reconciles with biological\/ecological reality.<\/p>\n

It is the philosophy of Dekanawidah\/Mandela that can open the way to community wherein\u00a0 \u201cEverything runs smoothly without soldiers, gendarmes, or police, without nobles, kings, governors, prefects or judges; without prisons, without trials. All quarrels and disputes are settled by the whole body of those concerned<\/em>.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Mandela opened that door though the persisting Aristotelian organizational schema of the sovereign state may temporarily close it again for a while.\u00a0 What is needed is a community of Dekawidahs\/Mandelas, and that was the role of the \u2018Peacekeeper\u2019 myth in the long-lasting (1500 years) Iroquois five-nation confederacy.\u00a0 Perhaps it is what is emerging in the apolitical uprisings against top-down authority in Egypt and Tunisia.<\/p>\n

Presently, we have the world divided up into 195 sovereign states; i.e. capitalist-authoritarian communities like the Oklahoma town (prior to the dustbowl era), that believe that the future of their community depends only on themselves.\u00a0\u00a0 We have a full-blown case of the infantile disease called \u2018statism\u2019.\u00a0\u00a0 The Darwinist leader-led states promote belief in the notion that they are \u2018local systems with their own locally originating, inboard power and steerage driven behaviours\u2019 that can become whatever they want to become if they are fully committed to it and throw themselves body and soul into the project.\u00a0 This is our today\u2019s community we are talking about, our today\u2019s political systems which, because of the Aristotelian theory based belief in the inside-outward origination of form, behaviour and organization, are staunchly capitalist and authoritarian.<\/p>\n

As a global collective, we are fearful of what might happen if we back away from imposing top-down moral authority controls on \u2018ourselves\u2019.\u00a0 We know about the inversion of view that modern physics suggests, where empty space populated by local material being is inverted and space becomes an energy-charged plenum in which those \u2018local beings\u2019 are now ripples in the plenum induced by invisible nonlocal influence, as with storm-cells in the flow-plenum of the atmosphere.\u00a0 Cells that are born in the service of cultivating, nurturing and sustaining balance and harmony in the dynamic spatial plenum.\u00a0 We are in the position of the worm that has to let its present self degenerate in order for a beautiful new self to arise from the ashes and we are in doubt as to what will happen to us if we let our existing \u2018world order\u2019 fall away, if the Phoenix does not arise from the ashes.\u00a0\u00a0 As Fran\u00e7ois Lur\u00e7at (professor emeritus in physics at the University of Paris) observes in \u2018Le Chaos et L\u2019Occident\u2019 (Chaos Theory and the West);<\/p>\n

\u201cThis dream of domination [implied by ‘determinism’] has henceforth lost all legitimacy and persists for no other reason than our \u2018mental inertia\u2019.\u00a0 An historical epoch has come to an end and we struggle to conjecture what is going to succeed it.\u00a0 Isn\u2019t the need truly well overdue for us to draw on the lessons of the past and recognize where we now are?\u00a0 I would say that a problem is posed to us by allowing ourselves to remain within the framework fixed by this work: to understand the findings of 20th century science.\u00a0\u00a0 By \u2018to understand\u2019 I intend this; not to constrain our understanding to the step-by-step reasoning of physics, but to be able to put these findings into the context of an interpretation of the world.\u00a0 From this point of view, it is necessary to recognize, in my opinion, that we have not understood (Not \u2018we\u2019, the specialists, but \u2018we\u2019 the educated public). \u2018Chaos\u2019 and also \u2018relativity\u2019 and \u2018quantum mechanics\u2019, for example, remain for all practical purposes impenetrable to the educated view.\u00a0 It is necessary, I believe, to acknowledge with Emmanuel Levinas that we are participating in the end of a certain way of understanding.\u00a0 Will we know how to recognize this?\u00a0 Will we know how to discern the characteristics of another way of understanding, larger and less constraining? Therein lies another story that is in the process of unfolding.\u201d<\/em><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

* * *<\/p>\n

Conclusion:<\/p>\n

This culture that predominates in the world, call it \u2018capitalist-authoritarian\u2019, or whatever, is a mode of understanding oneself, others, and the world as a whole, that is based on \u2018being\u2019, and by \u2018doing-authored-by-beings\u2019 \u2013 a \u2018doer-deed deterministic\u2019 view of the world.<\/p>\n

One first identifies \u2018beings\u2019 on the basis of visual appearance and then develops an understanding of \u2018them\u2019 based on \u2018what they do\u2019, how their form changes, and their behaviour, and the way they interact and organize in \u2018space\u2019 and \u2018time\u2019. \u00a0\u2018Beings\u2019 have life-cycles and thus we can understand \u2018beings\u2019 in the historical terms of what they have done and what they have experienced over their life-cycles. \u00a0\u00a0That is, we understand \u2018beings\u2019 not only as centres of origination of form, behaviour and organization, but also as \u2018centres of experiencing\u2019.<\/p>\n

If we were to accept the view in modern physics that \u2018space is an energy-charged flow-plenum in which flow-features gather and are regathered, as in the analogue of the (storm-)cell, then it would follow that, ‘before all else’<\/em>, these forms, these \u2018cells\u2019, are \u2018centres of experience\u2019.\u00a0 \u00a0Their \u2018local being\u2019 would then be, as Nietzsche says \u2018total Fiktion\u2019. \u00a0But of course this \u2018Fiktion\u2019 would also be a \u2018useful Fiktion\u2019 since it enables us to talk about these forms and compare their \u2018experiences\u2019.\u00a0 More than this, it brings to us the possibility of a ‘world described by theory’, since theories require word based propositions that treat of ‘things that be’ and their interactions.<\/p>\n

As a \u2018centre of experience\u2019, the hurricane feels\/experiences \u2018influence\u2019 (in-flow, endosmosis) of the invisible, nonlocal fields (pressure field, thermal field, gravity field) in which it is situationally included.\u00a0 ‘The Germans’ from 1919 to 1939 (in the wake of WWI) were feeling the unhelpfulness and antagonism of their European neighbours.\u00a0 In the case of the aboriginal community that became surrounded by millions of European colonizers, their experience as a ‘centre-of-experience’ was no longer so richly supported by the now transformed habitat in which they shared inclusion. \u00a0In the picture of multiple contemporaneous hurricanes [first figure, left hand side] there is an evident sense of individuals as \u2018centres of experience\u2019 that are reforming, moving and organizing under the influence of one another and the common flow-plenum in which they share inclusion.\u00a0 \u00a0What is being \u2018felt\u2019 by these \u2018centres of experience\u2019 are the invisible, nonlocal fields of influence they find themselves included in. \u00a0What is \u2018seen\u2019 are the visible, local changes in form, behaviour and organization.<\/p>\n

We can see the behaviours and organization in the aboriginal community changing together with transformation of a habitat now augmented by a halo of millions of European colonizers. \u00a0\u00a0The aboriginals tell us that their desire is to sustain their old ways of doing things but that this is impossible in the transformed habitat. \u00a0To say that the behaviour of their community is a locally originating, internal process and purpose driven behaviour, would be nonsense. \u00a0It would similarly be nonsense to impute purely local origination to the behaviour of the German community in the 1919 \u2013 1939 interval.<\/p>\n

It thus becomes clear, moving to the middle and right hand pictures in the composite first figure, that if the observer orients to the life-cycle (heredity) of the organism\/cell\/collective, their is a \u2018switch\u2019 from understanding the entity as a ‘centre-of-experience’, to understanding it as a \u2018centre-of- doing\u2019, where the evolution of form, behaviour and organization is now deemed to originate within the entity.\u00a0 \u00a0In this switch from \u2018centreof-experience\u2019 to \u2018centre-of-doing\u2019, we lose the ecological (coevolutional) understanding of the development of form, behaviour and organization. \u00a0\u00a0We recognize in this, Montaigne\u2019s critique of how we understand \u2018economy\u2019, in terms of what an individual or group \u2018produces\u2019 without accounting for what he\/it receives from the habitat he is included in, in the manner that the Oklahoma community accounted for their prosperity by allocating it entirely to the doer-deed productive behaviours of the human members of their community, until the dustbowl conditions arrived and made nonsense of that \u2018accounting\u2019.<\/p>\n

Everywhere in our Aristotelian culture where we establish the \u2018identity\u2019<\/em> of the \u2018cell\u2019 or \u2018organism\u2019 or \u2018collective\u2019 \u2018as a centre-of-doing\u2019<\/em> into an unnatural primacy over establishing its \u2018as a centre-of-experience\u2019<\/em>, conflict arises. \u00a0True, \u2018Germans\u2019 are a collective or category or set that we call a \u2018race\u2019 (Darwin refers to \u2018the favoured races\u2019) because \u2018their members all look alike\u2019 and because \u2018their members have similar doer-deed habits\u2019 and this continues through generations of Germans that rise up from the soil and are recycled by the soil in the region that we name after them, \u2018Germany\u2019. \u00a0But that is just the local, visible, material aspect that associates with the \u2018life-cycle-of-a-centre-of-doing\u2019<\/em> view, the \u2018acorn-to-oak-tree\u2019 \u2018telos-driven\u2019 view of Aristotle which denies the living space the \u2018centre of doing\u2019 is situationally included in of any primary role in shaping the \u2018identity\u2019 of the thing.\u00a0 That is, we purge from the \u2018identity\u2019 of the organism\/system\/collective any primary role for its \u2018ecological\/coevolutional-centre-of-experience\u2019<\/em>, in the shaping of its form, behaviour and organization.<\/p>\n

Our justification for this radical omission, this insult to our experience, seems to be that \u00a0we trust most of all our visual sensing, which keys to apparent local material presence, more than our experience which informs us of the invisible, nonlocal fields of influence in which we are included.<\/p>\n

The \u2018German race\u2019 that the Treaty of Versailles authors, in their self-appointed, excluded-observer, moral-authority judging roles, to punish, was a mere definition, a notional category, a genus and a set of members, a definition and word-label based idealized \u2018box full of beings’ that, in reality, was continually being replenished and filled with a flow of new babies growing into men and women.\u00a0 It was like Emerson\u2019s \u2018cataract\u2019; something that appears \u2018to be a thing in itself\u2019 while in fact being a visual flow-feature that we objectify using definitions and language. \u00a0As John Stuart Mill observed; \u201cEvery definition implies an axiom, that in which we affirm the local existence of the object defined.\u201d.<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

The German babies were born with \u2018original sin\u2019, the sins of their fathers, imposed by the moral authority of militarist politicians such as Churchill, sins that isolated into a \u2018holier-than-thou\u2019 realm, the self-appointing, self-anointing moral authorities who sat in judgement, a binary-thinking mutual exclusion that rests dependently on putting the view of organisms and collectives as \u2018centres of doing\u2019 into an unnatural primacy over viewing them as \u2018centres of experience\u2019.<\/p>\n

Could we understand ourselves as \u2018centres of experience\u2019 firstly, and thus acknowledge our inclusion within an ecological\/coevolutional [spatial plenum based] becoming, and acknowledge at the same time that our understanding of ourselves as \u2018centres-of-doing\u2019 is a \u2018total Fiktion\u2019 albeit a \u2018useful Fiktion\u2019 (so long as we use it as a tool without letting that tool \u2018run away with the workman\u2019 as Emerson suggests that it has)?<\/p>\n

In order to do this, we would have to accept the natural primacy of the invisible, nonlocal field-dynamics of the energy-charged flow-plenum over the forms that gather within the plenum, as the Amerindian tradition did and as modern physics would also have it, where \u2018material forms\u2019 are \u2018ripples\u2019 in the energy-charged space-plenum. \u00a0We would have to understand ourselves firstly as \u2018centres of experience of invisible, nonlocal fields of influence\u2019<\/em> defined by our situational inclusion within the energy-charged space-plenum, and only secondly (in a \u2018useful Fiktion\u2019 sense) as \u2018local, visible material centre-of-doing systems\u2019<\/em>.\u00a0 (as ‘sailboater-centres-of-experiencing’ rather than as ‘powerboater-centres of doing”)<\/p>\n

Heredity, a derivative notion that rests dependently on the ‘life-cycle’ view,\u00a0 is then seen as \u2018useful Fiktion\u2019 that is secondary to ecological coevolution as it transpires in the energy-charged space-plenum. \u00a0That is, the fact that we can see the different emerging and developing material forms and track their life-cycle development through successive generations does not require that we impute the evolutionary force to be something \u2018locally originating\u2019 within the form, as with Aristotle\u2019s notion of\u00a0 \u2018telos\u2019, the will of a \u2018centre-of-doing\u2019 to compete, to dominate, to survive.\u00a0 The evolutionary force of the \u2018centres-of-experience\u2019 in an energy-charged plenum is evidently to put oneself in the service of restoring balance and harmony within a ceaselessly innovatively unfolding spatial-relational dynamic.\u00a0 Is this not the will of a Dekanawideh\/Mandela and doesn\u2019t the manner in which their behaviour brings resonant approval within us confirm that this same will resides within all of us, and indeed within storm-cells and all things in nature?<\/p>\n

That Nietzsche called it \u2018will to power\u2019 came about because of his sense that this will arises continually within us (within things) in association with something that degenerates leaving an unsatisfied niche need.\u00a0 If our vision degenerates, our hearing wants to rise to the occasion and make up for it, restore overall [i.e. ‘OVERALL’ IN THE SENSE OF PLENUM-PERVADING] balance and harmony. If our brother or sister dies who has been caring for another, we step in to sustain balance in this balance-sustaining-induced web of relations.\u00a0 In the unfolding universe, new forms emerge, like convection cells, to continually restore balance.\u00a0 The endosmosis of the habitat engenders the exosmosis of the inhabitant, or rather they co-engender one another as in Mach’s principle.\u00a0 We cannot simply start from \u2018local material being\u2019, as Aristotle and Darwin do and impute internal will to material forms, leaving only a notional internal \u2018will to survive\u2019 to explain the development of their form, behaviour and organization.\u00a0 The spatial plenum invited them into becoming to fill a need.\u00a0 As Emerson implies, life is this relation between \u2018centre-of-experience endosmosis\u2019 and \u2018center-of-doing exosmosis\u2019 but that we tend to transfer our thought from \u2018life\u2019 to a focus on our \u2018acts\u2019;<\/p>\n

\u201cWhilst a necessity so great caused the man to exist, his health and erectness consist in the fidelity with which he transmits influences from the vast and universal to the point on which his genius can act. The ends are momentary: they are vents for the current of inward life which increases as it is spent. 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.\u201d – Ralph Waldo Emerson, ‘The Method of Nature’
\n<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Who are we then, if we emerge as a centre-of-experience in the experience-permeated spatial plenum? \u00a0\u00a0Certainly not simply the products of our parents who, themselves emerged to fill some unfolding need. \u00a0The sense of \u2018deep ecology\u2019 comes to mind in a manner that is not entirely unlike astrology; i.e. that the present need that invites us into emergent becoming is rooted in the deep and distant ecological past bidding us to take on form and behaviour unique to our situational inclusion in the plenum yet inhabiting material bodies that are repetitive in their material form and organization. \u00a0 We may be ‘old souls’ or ‘young souls’ depending on the historical development of the balance-restoring need.\u00a0 Every hurricane is born into its familiar visible, local, material, rotating pinwheel form [that we use to categorize these ‘cells’ and view them as multiple independent units], yet the ‘pinwheel’ simply bookmarks what we can’t see, the ‘centre-of-experience’ that is continually emergent \u2018in the moment\u2019, drawing from the unbounded past and future; living in a ‘moment’ that Nietzsche describes as the gateway of outer (the opening of [endosmotic] energizing spatial possibility) and inner (the blossoming of [exosmotic] creative, material potentiality).<\/p>\n

\u201cTwo paths meet here; no one has yet followed either to its end. This long lane stretches back for an eternity. And the long lane out there, that is another eternity.\u201d<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

What comes forth from the moment, as the musician knows, does not depend solely on the past, the note that first breaks the silence is a discordant note which is ‘made good’ by the musician’s follow-on chords that transform the discordancy into harmony (the musician does not purge and disown, as in the common politics of purificationism).\u00a0 The way of the musician is the way of Dekawanidah and Mandela.\u00a0 The nations of the world were like the contemporaneous hurricanes, working their ecological influence on their brother, South Africa’s notional (to some) ‘evil racist white colonizer collective’.\u00a0 Had Mandela’s view of ‘collectives’ been in terms of ‘centres-of-doing’ he could have assembled an alliance of ‘the good centres-of-doing’ to back him and the ANC in a purificationist initiative to purge South Africa of its evil white racist ‘centre-of-doing’, but as it happened, he chose to see these collectives as ‘centres-of-experience’ that were capable of harmony-restoring coevolution.\u00a0 One might say that he let ‘endosmosis’ (the sailboater ethic) prevail in its conjugate relation with ‘exosmosis’ (the powerboater ethic).<\/p>\n

It is necessary, I believe, to acknowledge, as a cultural collective, that we are participating in the end of a certain way of understanding, a way that has had us impute\u00a0 an unnatural precedence of \u2018centre-of-doing\u2019 identity to nature\u2019s forms (organisms, cells, collectives) over their\/our ‘centre-of-experience’ identity. \u00a0 As Fran\u00e7ois Lur\u00e7at also mused; will we know how to recognize that this shift is needed?\u00a0 Will we know how to discern that there is another way of understanding, a way that has us acknowledge the natural primacy of our [as cells, organisms, collectives] \u2018centre-of-experience\u2019 identity over our ‘centre-of-doing’ identity after more than two millennia of getting it, as a culture, upside down?\u00a0 Therein lies another story that is in the process of unfolding.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u2018Theory\u2019 is a way of understanding how the world works which in turn shapes our behaviour and how we relate to and engage with one another and with our shared living space. \u2018Theory\u2019 can be either religious or scientific and the theories of our culture are infused into us early on in our lives.\u00a0 As […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1017","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-apn","count-0","even alt","author-emile","last"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1017","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1017"}],"version-history":[{"count":20,"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1017\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1021,"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1017\/revisions\/1021"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1017"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1017"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1017"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}