{"id":3,"date":"2009-11-02T02:35:20","date_gmt":"2009-11-02T10:35:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/208.76.86.26\/~jfyhppsi\/wp\/?p=3"},"modified":"2015-05-04T07:38:45","modified_gmt":"2015-05-04T15:38:45","slug":"introduction","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/introduction\/","title":{"rendered":"Introduction:"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u2018Aboriginal Physics\u2019<\/em><\/strong>connotes our pre-Enlightenment\/Medieval understanding of the ceaselessly unfolding \u2018fluid\u2019 world in which we formerly saw ourselves and all things as being included. \u00a0The Enlightenment brought with it a different way of \u2018seeing\u2019 things — \u2018seeing\u2019 the world not by the flow itself, but by way of \u2018representations\u2019 that ‘froze” the flowing dynamical forms of nature; representations such as\u00a0maps, diagrams and later \u2018photographs\u2019, whereas aboriginal or medieval \u2018physics\u2019 – an\u00a0implicit rather than explicit\u00a0field of study –\u00a0saw \u2018dynamics\u2019 as a fluid-unfolding wherein the persisting patterns-in-the-flow were not yet given static ‘local’\u00a0form as frozen ‘representations’.\u00a0\u00a0A storm-cell in the flow of the atmosphere in medieval times was still ‘seen’ in terms of\u00a0‘the flow that was always there’\u00a0that spawned\u00a0‘swirlings’ within itself,\u00a0while\u00a0in Enlightenment representation, the same storm-cell came to be ‘seen’ as a ‘local system’ with ‘its own local agency’.<\/p>\n

Something radical happened to our manner of\u00a0‘seeing’\u00a0and understanding<\/em><\/strong> in the transition from\u00a0the Aboriginal\/Medieval worldview\u00a0to the\u00a0Enlightenment worldview, the notional ‘parentage’\u00a0of ’cause’ and ‘result’ was inverted.\u00a0\u00a0 In our ‘Enlightenment’ way of ‘seeing’, changes in the habitat are understood as being ’caused’ by the actions and interactions of ‘local’ objects\/organisms\/systems (the ‘inhabitants’), but in the Aboriginal\/Medieval\u00a0way of\u00a0‘seeing’, the APPARENTLY ‘local’ objects\/organisms\/systems\u00a0 (‘inhabitants’) were understood as being both animated by, and created by,\u00a0the changes in the habitat.\u00a0\u00a0Today, many people\u00a0would say\u00a0that ‘storm-cells’ in the flow of the atmosphere ‘stir up’ (’cause’ change in the flow of) the atmosphere, but the fact is that it is the changes in the flow that not only animate the behaviour of the included cells, but create those cells.\u00a0\u00a0 Similarly, we may see the Colorado river as the cause of that huge ‘irregularity’ in the terrain we call the ‘Grand Canyon’, but the fact is that the Colorado river, like any\u00a0other river,\u00a0is the ‘result’ of irregularities in the terrain, … and we may see\u00a0the trouble-makers\u00a0in the streets of Paris in the summer of 1789 as the cause of irregularities in the\u00a0social terrain, but the fact is that the\u00a0trouble-makers\u00a0were the ‘result’ of irregularities in the social terrain.<\/p>\n

This inversion in the direction of sourcing or \u00a0‘parental relation’ of habitat-dynamics and inhabitant-dynamics, accompanied by the reduction of the reciprocal habitat-inhabitat relation to a one-sided inhabitant-causal view, has permeated Western Enlightenment-perception generally.<\/p>\n

That is, Enlightenment physics constructed its notion of \u2018dynamics\u2019 on the back of its \u2018representations\u2019,\u00a0\u2018housing them\u2019 not in a ceaseless, innovatively-unfolding \u2018flow\u2019 but instead, in a notional \u2018absolute, fixed and empty (Euclidian) space where \u2018change\u2019\u00a0is rendered in terms of the actions\/interactions of \u2018local objects\/organisms\/systems\u2019; i.e. in terms of \u2018representations\u2019 of the naturally\u00a0occurring flow-features.\u00a0 Having so thoroughly infused these ‘representation’ based dynamics into our Enlightment psyches, our ability to return to ‘seeing’ dynamics in a natural ‘flow-form’ manner has become extremely difficult.\u00a0\u00a0 Yet\u00a0to do so\u00a0lends great power to the resolving of today’s most troublesome issues, which are often the product of\u00a0the Enlightenment view of dynamics.<\/p>\n

Modern physics; relativity and quantum wave dynamics, takes us full circle, out of the world view in terms of Enlightenment ‘representations’ and back to a worldview in terms of \u2018thingless connectedness\u2019 (energy-field-flow), a world of innate \u2018interdependence\u2019 of all things with all things (as with \u2018gravity\u2019), where matter is energy resonance and space is not the empty container of Enlightenment thinking, but the energy-field flow itself, whose flow-forms that are continuously gathering and re-gathering, are what is \u2018really beneath\u2019 those Enlightenment \u2018representations\u2019; i.e. the static-pattern extracting maps, drawings and photographs that are, for our convenience, substituted for the dynamical features in the flow.<\/p>\n

Still, however easy it was for us to shift our primary view of \u2018reality\u2019 from fluid forms to static \u2018representations\u2019 in terms of stand-alone \u2018local objects\u2019, it is not so easy to shift back, from \u2018representations\u2019 to \u2018flow\u2019.\u00a0 That, meanwhile, is the focus of this \u2018Aboriginal Physics Newsletter\/Blog.\u00a0 Each newsletter will examine a current \u2018social issue\u2019 from the point of view of how it can be \u2018seen\u2019 and \u2018understood\u2019 in a world of flow.<\/p>\n

One of the troubling \u2018fallouts\u2019 of the Enlightenment shift to portraying dynamics in terms of \u2018representations\u2019 is that (habitat-inhabitant) \u2018spatial-relations\u2019 become invisible, as when we talk about storm-cells moving from here to there and doing this or that, as if they really were \u2018local objects with their own local agency\u2019 rather than features in a continuously unifying\/unfolding fluid-dynamic.\u00a0 \u00a0Rendering the world dynamic in terms of \u2018representations\u2019 facilitates discourse (since \u2018representations\u2019 are foundational elements in language) but when such \u2018idealisation\u2019 is confused for \u2018reality\u2019, the notion arises that nature and society can be \u2018controlled\u2019 by man (when all he \u2018really\u2019 has control over is his own \u2018representations\u2019).<\/p>\n

The word \u2018control\u2019 is not something that associates with nature\u2019s self-organising processes.\u00a0 Medieval\/aboriginal communities gathered in the manner that ants gather around drops of honey or desert nomads gather around oases.\u00a0 The continuous (transgenerational) inflow and outflow, which sprouts communities like wild desert flowers, presents the observing eye with persisting \u2018apparently local\u2019 patterns which are inherently dynamic but which are amenable to static \u2018representation\u2019. \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0The spatial-relational flow that lies at the heart of this self-organising community is lost in the effective \u2018reduction\u2019 to \u2018representation\u2019.<\/p>\n

Representations are made of the community (maps), the dwellings (drawings) and the people (photographs) and Enlightenment man deceives himself by thinking he can be in control and put together communities where, when and as he chooses to. \u00a0\u00a0Local chiefs, whose power of leadership derived from their attunement with the spirit of \u2018self-organisation\u2019, were undercut by the Enlightenment notion of centralized (power along radial lines of sight) \u2018representative government\u2019.\u00a0 (When the \u2018map\u2019, backed up by a large army, showed that they were inside of the newly defined boundaries of a centrally governed state, their conjugate habitat-inhabitant relation as an organising influence had to go).\u00a0 Thus, deliberate controlling action based on a combination of rational vision, mission, values, and \u2018representations\u2019 took over as the dominant mode of organisation, eclipsing the \u2018self-organization\u00a0induced by a conjugate habitat-inhabitant relation.<\/p>\n

When the dynamics of habitat are no longer ‘seen’ as the source of \u2018organisation\u2019 of the \u2018inhabitants\u2019 so that the clusters of dwellings and the flow-through of generations of inhabitants that we once called \u2018communities\u2019 can be reduced to \u2018representations\u2019, local \u00a0independently-existing objects called \u2018communities\u2019, \u2018houses\u2019 and \u2018people\u2019, then we are NOTIONALLY in control (i.e. we are not in control of \u2018dynamical forms-in-the-flow\u2019 but only \u2018in control\u2019 of \u2018representations\u2019 of dynamical forms).\u00a0 \u00a0And since we impute to these \u2018representations\u2019 of \u2018community\u2019 their own \u2018local agency\u2019 we can plunk them down anywhere (as with indians in land \u2018reserves\u2019), their own local agency now having to substitute for their medieval\/aboriginal conjugate habitat-inhabitant relation or their \u2018flow-feature in the flow\u2019 nature.<\/p>\n

Western thinking, in mainstream science, medicine, politics, sociology and even religion, is fully ensconced in the Enlightenment reducing of flow-forms to static \u2018representations\u2019, giving rise to incoherence and widespread social dysfunction. \u00a0The Aboriginal Physics Newsletter will select current issues and review them in the light of how Enlightenment representation leads us into irresolvable paradox and inhibits our ability to resolve such issues, inviting comments and dialogue that can help to improve the clarity of what is going on, and strengthen our ability to deal with it.<\/p>\n

The ‘inversion’ that has taken place in the way we see things, that we need to re-invert so that we can see things as we used to in our Aboriginal\/Medieval mode, is radical and subtle.\u00a0 The first Aboriginal Physics Newletter addresses the Western medical model, where this inversion in how we ‘see things’ has cropped up before, in the work of Pasteur and B\u00e9champ, work that will be frequently cited in these newsletters.\u00a0 Their view was that that ‘terrain-dynamics’ or ‘habitat-dynamics’ were the source of the ‘inhabitant dynamics’, thus the view that the\u00a0proliferation of microbes was the result, rather than the ’cause’ of illness (‘illness’ being changes [unbalancing] in the terrain).\u00a0 Furthermore, their view was that the microbes were not only animated by changes in the terrain but were created by them, as parallels the conjugate habitat-inhabitant relation of storm-cell and flow.\u00a0 This ‘inverted’ way of seeing dynamics, which flipped the mothering source to the habitat, was seriously received by medical professionals in the first part of the twentieth century as can be seen in books such as ‘B\u00e9champ or Pasteur’ by E. Douglas Hume.\u00a0\u00a0 However, Enlightenment representation, the basis for ‘seeing’ in terms of the inhabitant-dynamics\u00a0being the parent of habitat-dynamics, \u00a0is woven into the fabric of our everday lives and\u00a0the resistance to re-inversion is enormous.\u00a0\u00e9<\/p>\n

* * *<\/p>\n

Newletter Epilogues:\u00a0 Author’s Subtext . . .\u00a0 APN #___<\/strong><\/p>\n

A review of the\u00a0‘author’s subtext’ (comparable to the ‘producer’s subtext’ in the ‘special features on a\u00a0DVD) \u00a0follows immediately after\u00a0each issue of the Aboriginal Physics Newsletter (preceding open commentary), authored by one or more of the small circle of ‘inclusionality-researchers’ who have been working for some time on overcoming the major obstacles in articulating the ‘flow view’.\u00a0\u00a0That is, the ‘author’s subtext’ review\u00a0will not\u00a0be a critique of Newsletter content per se<\/em> but will address the perceived shortfalls or strengths in capturing the difference between the ‘Enlightenment view’ and the Aboriginal\/Medieval\u00a0‘flow view’.<\/p>\n

Open comments\u00a0are invited\u00a0on\u00a0either content or ‘author’s subtext’.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u2018Aboriginal Physics\u2019connotes our pre-Enlightenment\/Medieval understanding of the ceaselessly unfolding \u2018fluid\u2019 world in which we formerly saw ourselves and all things as being included. \u00a0The Enlightenment brought with it a different way of \u2018seeing\u2019 things — \u2018seeing\u2019 the world not by the flow itself, but by way of \u2018representations\u2019 that ‘froze” the flowing dynamical forms of […]<\/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-3","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\/3","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=3"}],"version-history":[{"count":21,"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8,"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3\/revisions\/8"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}