<\/p>\n
Author’s Prologue:<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n Dear Reader; Imagine for a moment that you have been born and raised in the indigenous aboriginal culture.\u00a0 You know that you ‘understand reality differently’ than a Western culture acculturated person.\u00a0 But you also know that modern physics has shown your ‘relational understanding’ to be very much in accord with modern physics.\u00a0 If you can hold this understanding in your mind, as you read this, and thus remain open to the understanding that there is a relational (modern physics) world view that is more comprehensive than, and which ‘includes’ as a reduced representation, the ‘beings-wiith-powers-of-sourcing-actions and developments based Western Invented Reality, the option will then be available to reflect on which of these ‘realies’ merits primacy over the other.\u00a0 In fact, if one puts the relational reality in primacy, the being-based reality is still accessible as a reduction of the relational reality, however, if the being-based reality is given primacy, the relational reality is ‘eclipsed’.<\/p>\n My philosophical researches (exploring the philosophical researches of many others) have turned up the following;<\/p>\n -1- Western culture \u2018reality\u2019 is nothing like indigenous aboriginal culture reality, which I guess is obvious, but the important point, to me, is this observation by David Bohm in this regard, which my own personal researching affirms (i.e. the foundational role of \u2018relations\u2019 as understood in indigenous aboriginal cultures);<\/p>\n A few months before his death, Bohm met with a number of Algonkian speakers and was struck by the perfect bridge between their language and worldview and his own exploratory philosophy. What to Bohm had been major breakthroughs in human thought \u2014 quantum theory, relativity, his implicate order and rheomode \u2013 were part of the everyday life and speech of the Blackfoot, Mic Maq, Cree and Ojibwaj.\u201d \u2013 F. David Peat, \u2018Blackfoot Physics\u2019<\/em><\/p>\n -2- Western culture reality in an INVENTED REALITY THAT IS BASED ON LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR<\/p>\n The important [understanding-inverting] point to pick up on here is that Newtonian physics is a simplified construction of reality based on the structures of language and grammar.\u00a0 NOTA BENE! The point is that Western language and grammar CAME FIRST and Newton extracted his (Newtonian) physics from the structures of language and grammar; i.e. the noun (name) became the basis for \u2018thing-in-itself beings\u2019, and the \u2018name-verb grammatical contribution because the basis for the concept of \u2018thing-in-itself-based sourcing of actions and developments.<\/p>\n That is; the very basic foundations of Newtonian physics have become the foundations of the \u2018Invented Reality\u2019 that serves as the \u2018operative reality\u2019 of Western culture. Benjamin Whorf studied and compared the mapping between languages and cognitive impressions and came to the following conclusion; i.e. that Newtonian physics, and the Western understanding of \u2018reality\u2019 that comes with it, derives from language which first came up with the abstract notions of the existence of things-in-themselves with their own powers of sourcing actions and developments;<\/p>\n \u201cIt is sometimes stated that Newtonian space, time, and matter are sensed by everyone intuitively, whereupon relativity is cited as showing how mathematical analysis can prove intuition wrong. This, besides being unfair to intuition, is an attempt to answer offhand question (1) put at the outset of this paper, to answer which this research was undertaken. Presentation of the findings now nears its end, and I think the answer is clear. The offhand answer, laying the blame upon intuition for our slowness in discovering mysteries of the Cosmos, such as relativity, is the wrong one. The right answer is: Newtonian space, time, and matter are no intuitions. They are receipts from culture and language. That is where Newton got them.\u201d \u2013 Benjamin Whorf, \u2018The Relation of Habitual Thought and Behavior to Language\u2019\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n Thus, it is not the case that Newtonian physics is \u2018capturing\u2019 \u2018the way the world works\u2019, \u2026 Newtonian physics is capturing the way people talk about the world;<\/strong><\/em> i.e. Newtonian physics is constructing an INVENTED REALITY based on the way that Western Europeans \u2018express themselves linguistically\u2019.\u00a0 For example, humans are NOT REALLY things-in-themselves with their own powers of sourcing actions and developments, that is an impression that comes from Western language based ‘talk’ that has been \u2018codified\u2019 as (Newtonian physics).\u00a0\u00a0 As modern physics informs us there are no \u2018things-in-themselves\u2019 with the powers of sourcing actions and developments; \u2026 that is abstraction brewed up by language and grammar.<\/p>\n -3- \u2018Lock-in-by high-switching costs\u2019 is a common nonlinear dynamic that explains why Western culture, which serves as the dominant culture in the world (indigenous aboriginal cultures and Taoist\/Buddhist and Advaita Vedanta REALITIES are not the dominant \u2018OPERATIVE REALITY\u2019 in the modern world social dynamic). The \u2018INVENTED REALITY\u2019 based on the abstract notions of \u2018beings\u2019 with powers of sourcing actions and developments is the globally dominating \u2018operative reality\u2019 IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT IT IS THE PRECIPITATE OF EARLY WESTERN LANGUAGE STRUCTURE THAT WAS CAPTURED IN NEWTONIAN PHYSICS AS A FORMALIZED CODIFICATION OF THE SIMPLIFIED\/ABBREVIATED WAY THAT WESTERN PEOPLES ARTICULATED THEIR OBSERVATIONS AND EXPERIENCES\u2019 i.e. in terms of notional \u2018name-instantiated things-in-themselves notionally with the powers of sourcing actions and developments.<\/p>\n The \u2018Lock-in\u2019 comes from incorporating in the social dynamic, for example, the rewarding and punishing of people or nations or organizations based on seeing them as \u2018beings\u2019 (things-in-themselves) with their own powers of sourcing actions and developments.\u00a0 This is language-instantiated madness!<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0 But it is the \u2018INVENTED REALITY\u2019 of Western culture that has been implemented as the \u2018operative reality\u2019 in Western social dynamics.\u00a0 What this has produced is; (a) a comprehensive positive hierarchy of people elevated in social status and showered with honours and rewards [those perceived as beings whose powers of sourcing have given rise to actions and developments perceived in a favourable\/exceptional light], and; (b) a comprehensive negative hierarchy of people demoted in social status and dumped on with abuse and punishments [those perceived as \u2018beings\u2019 whose powers of sourcing have given rise to actions and developments perceived in an unfavourable light.]<\/p>\n The \u2018elevating\u2019 of favoured people into positions of power and influence over changes to (evolving of) the social system and the dis-empowering of disfavoured people so as to remove their influence on changes to the social system constitute \u2018lock-in\u2019 that perpetuates the deploying of an archaic language-based \u2018Invented Reality\u2019 as the \u2018operative reality\u2019 of the Western culture social dynamic.<\/p>\n As ridiculous and \u2018psychosis-inducing\u2019 as this Newtonian physics based (early Western language-based) Invented Reality is, it continues to be the globally dominant \u2018operative reality\u2019 because of the massive lock-in it enjoys. People are elevated to positions of authority on the basis of their proficiency in \u2018sourcing<\/em><\/strong> actions and developments\u2019 deemed \u2018beneficial to society. But in modern physics, there is no such thing as \u2018beings\u2019 with the power of \u2018sourcing\u2019 actions and development!\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n One can thus see lock-in in terms of having given higher authority or even veto power to those who are most benefiting from the policies of elevating people like themselves.\u00a0 The emperor does not want to hear that \u2018the new clothes of Emperorship that he is wearing\u2019 are \u2018all in his head\u2019.\u00a0 In other words, the basis of his being rewarded and elevated in social status; i.e. his independent-being-based sourcing of actions and developments, …\u00a0<\/em><\/strong> is \u2018imaginary\u2019<\/em><\/strong>].\u00a0 The concept of \u2018being-based sourcing of actions and developments is the imaginary cognitive construct of language and grammar, as becomes evident in the relational view of modern physics and indigenous aboriginal cultures.\u00a0 However;<\/p>\n We\u2019 who explore such topics, cannot easily share them because (a) they do not fit into the typical dinner conversation format of our present culture, since to express them takes a lot of relational connections that can\u2019t fit into a rapid-fire repartee, and (b) because the humanism \u00a0implicit in trying to share them is not seen as \u201ca humanism of real worth\u201d since it undermines, besmirches or topples the esteemed icons, pillars of society, founding fathers, and celebrities of the culture-in-place.\u00a0 \u2013 Henri Laborit, \u2018La Nouvelle Grille\u2019<\/em><\/p>\n To conclude this Author’s Prologue, <\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n If we can summon up the audacity to consider it, Western culture has ‘piled up’ a massive ‘lock-in-due to high switching costs’ which is preserving the Newtonian physics based ‘Invented Reality’ featuring belief in name-instantiated ‘beings’ with powers of sourcing actions and developments.\u00a0 The dimensions of this ‘lie’ that the Western social collective tells itself have grown so big that it would be unthinkable to acknowledge it.\u00a0 It is like the ‘big lie’ described by Hitler in ‘Mein Kampf’ that is so big that most people don’t have the audacity to question it.\u00a0 That is, there are no ‘beings with powers of sourcing actions and developments’, … such mind-hijacking grammatical fabrications are abstract reductions of the transforming relational continuum of our included experience. The boil and the flow are one and NOT two.<\/p>\n * * * * * * * * * * END OF PROLOGUE * * * * * * * * *<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The concept of binary opposites (life and death being an exemplar) are the abstractions of language and grammar<\/em> <\/strong>that the Western culture psyche tends to employ as a foundational \u2018logical truth\u2019 in its \u2018Invented Reality\u2019.\u00a0 As Benjamin Whorf has shown, the \u2018truth\u2019 of binary opposites is not something that goes on in nature that we express with language, but something we express with language that contributes to our Western culture \u2018Invented Reality\u2019;<\/p>\n \u201cIt is sometimes stated that Newtonian space, time, and matter are sensed by everyone intuitively, whereupon relativity is cited as showing how mathematical analysis can prove intuition wrong. This, besides being unfair to intuition, is an attempt to answer offhand question (1) put at the outset of this paper, to answer which this research was undertaken. Presentation of the findings now nears its end, and I think the answer is clear. The offhand answer, laying the blame upon intuition for our slowness in discovering mysteries of the Cosmos, such as relativity, is the wrong one. The right answer is: Newtonian space, time, and matter are no intuitions. They are receipts from culture and language. That is where Newton got them.\u201d \u2013 Benjamin Whorf, \u2018The Relation of Habitual Thought and Behavior to Language\u2019\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n Modern physics does not see the \u2018boil\u2019 in the \u2018flow\u2019 in terms of binary [action=reaction] opposition as Western culture with its aberrant \u2018Divided Self’ does [i.e. where language splits apart \u2018habitat\u2019 and \u2018inhabitant\u2019 as with \u2018human\u2019 and \u2018environment\u2019.\u00a0 The distinction between \u2018boil\u2019 and \u2018flow\u2019 is RELATIONAL APPEARANCE and not BEING-BASED.\u00a0\u00a0 The DIVIDED SELF of Western culture is the product of language and grammar; it is a corollary to the language and grammar based binary opposite of \u2018life\u2019 and \u2018death\u2019.<\/p>\n The reason why \u2018life\u2019 should appear in a \u2018dead universe\u2019 has never been established by (Newtonian) science (the \u2018science\u2019 that is popular in Western science continues to be Newtonian science).\u00a0 In modern physics, there is no such binary division between \u2018the living\u2019 and \u2018the dead\u2019 since the understanding is that \u2018forms\u2019 are relational features in a transforming relational continuum.\u00a0 Modern physics affirms the world view of Heraclitus wherein forms are continually gathering and being regathered within the flow (the transforming relational continuum).\u00a0 In other words, the forms we see and engage with, since they are relational forms in the all-including flow (energy field), are \u2018appearances\u2019 or \u2018apparitions\u2019.<\/p>\n \u2018Apparitions\u2019 may sound \u2018spooky\u2019 to us, but that is only because of where we are \u2018coming from\u2019 in our mind, which has been culturally conditioned by living in a Western culture that employs language and grammar that treats absolute binary opposites as \u2018real\u2019, employing them as such in Western \u2018Invented Reality\u2019 that is in terms of name-instantiated \u2018things-in-themselves\u2019 (\u2018inhabitants\u2019 as in the binary opposite \u2018inhabitant\u2019 \u2013 \u2018habitat\u2019 dichotomy).\u00a0 In the \u2018new reality\u2019 of modern physics (which replicates the \u2018old reality\u2019 of indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism, Advaita Vedanta), purely relational \u2018field\u2019 is the basic reality and the flow forms that come and go within the transforming relational field-continuum only take on (in our psyche) the abstract condition of \u2018being\u2019 by way of psychological inference that associates with \u2018naming\u2019 (the imputing of persisting being to a relational form in the transforming relational continuum).<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The language and grammar-based construction of an \u2018Invented Reality\u2019 follows from the reduction of relational flow-forms to abstract, notional \u2018things-in-themselves\u2019.\u00a0 Western culture has been obliged, in the wake of the first abstract assumption of \u2018being\u2019 to construct a language and grammar based system that explains the \u2018sourcing\u2019 of the actions and developments that are, in this Invented Reality\u2019, necessarily \u2018sourced\u2019 by \u2018name-instantiated beings\u2019 (these include the abstractions termed \u2018human-BEINGS, \u2018nation-BEINGS, \u2018corporation-BEINGS etc.)\u00a0\u00a0 The language and grammar based \u2018Invented Reality\u2019 is a psychological construction that, while it could be employed as a useful \u2018Wittgenstein ladder\u2019 to aid us in making the leap\u2019 to a purely relational understanding, is used \u2018literally\u2019 in Western culture \u2018Invented Reality\u2019.<\/p>\n That is, the binary opposites of \u2018life\u2019 and \u2018death\u2019 (\u2018being\u2019 and \u2018non-being\u2019), \u2018inhabitant\u2019 and \u2018habitat\u2019 etc. stir understanding in the psyche in the form of an \u2018Invented Reality\u2019 which Western culture adherents employ as their \u2018operative reality\u2019.\u00a0 This leads to aberrant understanding such as imputing to name-instantiated \u2018beings\u2019 the notional powers of sourcing actions and developments.\u00a0 Thus, in the Western culture \u2018Invented Reality\u2019, the name instantiated \u2018nation\u2019 is credited with the powers of sourcing actions and developments.\u00a0 <\/em><\/strong>In the same manner, the name-instantiated \u2018human being\u2019 is credited with the powers of sourcing actions and developments.\u00a0 And again, the \u2018corporation\u2019 and \u2018organization\u2019 are name-instantiated psychological \u2018beings\u2019 with the notional powers of sourcing actions and developments, and used as foundational elements in the language and grammar construction of an \u2018Invented Reality\u2019.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n The foundational element (abstraction) in this Western culture language-and-grammar based \u2018Invented Reality\u2019 us the abstract \u00a0concept of the \u2018being\u2019 with powers of sourcing actions and developments.\u00a0 This foundation of \u2018sorcery\u2019 is usually \u2018set up\u2019 by a quasi-religious \u2018ceremony\u2019 such as \u2018Baptism\u2019 or \u2018Christening\u2019 or \u2018Incorporation\u2019 (a ceremony that declares the instantiation of \u2018being\u2019 of a \u2018thing-in-itself\u2019 by way of \u2018naming\u2019).\u00a0 This is all culture-invented \u2018hocus-pocus\u2019 (sorcery) that has become such a common part of Western culture \u2018Invented Reality\u2019 that it\u2019s bizarre abstract nature is now as commonplace in Western culture as water to fish; i.e. we look right through it without seeing it.\u00a0 For example, we can\u2019t see the habitat while we are focusing on the inhabitants.<\/p>\n Not being able to see the habitat while we are focusing on the inhabitants translates, in \u2018systems theory\u2019 to the fact that the we can\u2019t understand the \u2018suprasystem\u2019 by investigating a \u2018system\u2019 that is included within it. Systems theorists such as Russell Ackoff acknowledge that the understanding of a \u2018system\u2019 is enhanced by understanding the suprasystem it (and other systems) are included in, however, systems scientists \u2018split\u2019 on whether the relationship between system and suprasystem is mutually inclusive (\u2018boil-in-flow\u2019 as \u2018appearance\u2019) or mutually exclusive (\u2018boil\u2019 in \u2018flow\u2019 as two separate things; one thing-in-itself included in another \u2018thing-in-itself\u2019).\u00a0\u00a0 Modern physics assumes the former while Newtonian physics, and Western culture \u2018Invented Reality\u2019 assumes the latter.<\/p>\n Ok, back to the title of this note;<\/p>\n Western Culture Belief in the Binary of Life and Death is Psychosis Inducing.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n This is the \u2018binary\u2019 that serves as the foundational \u2018archetype\u2019 for the construction of the Western culture \u2018Invented Reality\u2019, and it comes from language and grammar.\u00a0 To repeat the key portion of the earlier quote from Benjamin Whorf;<\/p>\n Newtonian space, time, and matter are no intuitions. They are receipts from culture and language. That is where Newton got them.\u201d \u2013 Benjamin Whorf, \u2018The Relation of Habitual Thought and Behavior to Language\u2019\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n Western Culture Belief in the Binary of Life and Death is Psychosis Inducing.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n I am repeating the title proposition so that it doesn\u2019t keep \u2018slipping away\u2019 from our psyche\u2019s retention as it re-cloaks itself in the habits of being-based cognition.<\/p>\n There is no \u2018life and death\u2019 in a transforming relational continuum but there is relational transformation which explains how it is that \u2018forms\u2019 become manifest in appearance (outwell within the flow) and then rejoin the flow (disappear as in being subsumed within the flow).\u00a0 This \u2018transformation\u2019 is continuously ongoing whether or not someone invents \u2018language\u2019 to capture impressions of what they are seeing and experiencing [since we are included in it, we can\u2019t get outside of it to see it in an \u2018overall context\u2019].<\/p>\n Different cultures have approached the challenge of intellectual capture and articulation of something that is innately beyond capture\/visualization by a relational form that is included within the transforming relational continuum.\u00a0 That is, we cannot get outside of it to snap a picture of it; i.e. we can certainly snap pictures, and gazing at these pictures gives us the impression that we are observing \u2018reality\u2019 but how can we observe a \u2018reality\u2019 that includes us?\u00a0 Right, there is no way.\u00a0 It is impossible\u2019\u00a0 All we can do, as Nietzsche points out is to bring into connective confluence many different visual perspectives and harvest them for connective confluences, something that happens in the mind, and is beyond visual presentation, since what the mind understands are the relational coherency in the connective confluence.<\/p>\n However, pictures induce in us psychological (flatspace) impressions of the \u2018reality\u2019 we are included in and we tend to mistake these \u2018impressions\u2019 for \u2018representations of reality\u2019, thence comes the \u2018Invented Reality\u2019 wherein we \u2018name\u2019 forms in the pictures, using language and grammar to psychologically impute to the name-instantiated \u2018things-in-themselves\u2019 powers of sourcing actions and developments.<\/p>\n A\u00a0picture<\/em>\u00a0held us captive. And we could not get outside it, for it lay in our language and language seemed to repeat it to us inexorably. \u2013<\/strong>-Wittgenstein<\/p>\n These \u2018pictures\u2019 of what is going on out there, are innately capable of capturing what we are included in, in the manner of a \u2018boil-in-flow\u2019 wherein ‘everything is in flux’ (Heraclitus).\u00a0 But these pictures do hold clues to the dynamics of the transforming relational continuum in which we are included relational forms.\u00a0 Approaches to gleaning an understanding of our inclusion in a transforming relational continuum include (A) \u2018The surprise version of the game of Twenty Questions\u2019 suggested in modern physics by Geoffrey Chew and John Wheeler and by (B) Nietzsche\u2019s omni-perspectival viewing and by (C) Wittgenstein\u2019s \u2018ladder\u2019 approach; all methods aimed at conditioning the mind for understanding that is purely relational, even if it is using language-based \u2018things-in-themselves\u2019 to develop the webs of relations [i.e. the \u2018coherencies\u2019 that form from relational interference of multiple perspectives transcend the \u2018sum of the individual picture based impressions\u2019 by delivering holographic understanding].<\/p>\n <\/p>\n -A-<\/strong> [Geoffrey Chew]: \u201cwhen you formulate a question, you have to have some basic concepts that you are accepting in order to formulate the question. But in the bootstrap approach, where the whole system represents a network of relationships without any firm foundation, the description of our subject can be begun at a great variety of different places. There isn\u2019t any clear starting point. And the way our theory has developed in the last few years, we quite typically don\u2019t know what questions to ask. We use consistency as the guide, and each increase in the consistency suggests something that is incomplete, but it rarely takes the form of a well-defined question. We are going beyond the whole question\u00adand\u00adanswer framework.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n .<\/strong><\/p>\n -B-<\/em><\/strong> There is only a perspectival seeing, only a perspectival \u2018knowing\u2019; the more affects we are able to put into words about a thing, the more eyes, various eyes we are able to use for the same thing, the more complete will be our \u2018concept\u2019 of the thing, our \u2018objectivity\u2019.\u2013 Nietzsche<\/em><\/p>\n .<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n -C-<\/em><\/strong> 6.54 My propositions are elucidatory in this way: he who understands me finally recognizes them as senseless, when he has climbed out through them, on them, over them. (He must so to speak throw away the ladder, after he has climbed up on it.)<\/em><\/p>\n He must surmount these propositions; then he sees the world rightly.<\/em><\/p>\n 7.0 Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.<\/em><\/p>\n (Wittgenstein\u2019s final two propositions in \u2018Tractatus Logico Philosophicus)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n These above three understandings point to the deficiency of the Western Culture \u2018Invented Reality\u2019 based on the binary abstraction of the life-and-death of\u2018beings\u2019 notional \u2018things-in-themselves\u2019 notionally equipped with the powers of sourcing actions and developments.<\/p>\n These archaic Western culture concepts (psychosis inducing mis-understandings of reality) persist due to the \u2018complex\u2019 (complexity theory) concept of \u2018lock-in\u2019 due to \u2018high switching costs\u2019.\u00a0 That is, the abstract (unsupported by experiential reality) assumptions of the existence of \u2018independent beings\u2019 with the powers of sourcing actions and developments leads to the Western culture Invented Reality wherein individuals are rewarded and esteemed by the Western social collective on the basis of their having \u2018authored\u2019 (sourced) valuable actions and developments, yet there is no such thing as \u2018local authoring (sourcing) of actions and developments in the real relational world of our actual experience.\u00a0 The abstract concept of \u2018beings\u2019 with the powers of \u2018sourcing\u2019 actions and developments comes from language and grammar, and it is on this basis that Western Invented Reality<\/em><\/strong> is constructed and lodged in the collective Western culture psyche.<\/p>\n \u2018Lock-in\u2019 with \u2018high switching costs\u2019 is a well-known \u2018nonlinear dynamic\u2019 which explains why Western culture adherents are having a hard time \u2018moving on\u2019 in the wake of the \u2018de-bunking\u2019 of the Western culture \u2018Invented Reality\u2019. \u00a0\u00a0It is clear that those who believe they are the personal source (sorcerers) of their positive fortunes are going to want to keep the \u2018Invented Reality\u2019 as it is, since society credits them with being \u2018special beings\u2019; \u2018exceptional performers\u2019 who \u2018contribute more than most\u2019 to the welfare of society in general.\u00a0 This is all Western language-and-grammar hatched abstraction that is not found in cultures such as the indigenous aboriginal cultures where \u2018mitakuye oyasin\u2019 (everything is related).\u00a0 However, because it has become a common belief in Western culture \u2018Invented Reality\u2019, those who have been enjoying elevated social status and special privileges on that basis, supported by others that \u2018are working on getting themselves into that elevated status, \u2026 are not likely to help bring in a new understanding \u2018framework\u2019 that does away with the notional inventing of \u2018beings with the notional powers of sourcing actions and developments\u2019.\u00a0 It is \u2018human nature\u2019 that this new relational framework of reality will have trouble getting endorsement by a social collective whose acculturated behaviours have been shaped by the pursuit of achieving privileges and admiration on the basis of common cultural perception of humans as name-instantiated things-in-themselves with powers of sorcery of actions and developments. \u00a0\u00a0Henri Laborit speaks for many Western culture non-believers on this problem of \u2018lock-in\u2019 with \u2018high switching costs\u2019;<\/p>\n We\u2019 who explore such topics, cannot easily share them because (a) they do not fit into the typical dinner conversation format of our present culture, since to express them takes a lot of relational connections that can\u2019t fit into a rapid-fire repartee, and (b) because the humanism \u00a0implicit in trying to share them is not seen as \u201ca humanism of real worth\u201d since it undermines, besmirches or topples the esteemed icons, pillars of society, founding fathers, and celebrities of the culture-in-place.<\/em><\/p>\n \u00a0 <\/em>\u2013 Henri Laborit, \u2018La Nouvelle Grille\u2019<\/em><\/p>\n Closing Note:<\/p>\n It all comes back to the proposition in the title<\/p>\n Western Culture Belief in the Binary of Life and Death is Psychosis Inducing.<\/strong><\/p>\n Western culture is \u2018stuck\u2019 where it is for two principle reasons; (1) From the \u2018lock-in\u2019 by \u2018high switching costs\u2019, as described in the last few paragraphs, and by the misleading concept of the \u2018nature-nurture\u2019 dichotomy.\u00a0 The nature-nurture dichotomy is like a false lead as Western culture adherents search for the source of social dysfunction that is, meanwhile, coming from the belief in a language-and-grammar based Invented Reality.\u00a0 The nature-nurture distraction has been compared, in Gulliver\u2019s Travels (Jonathan Swift) to a social collective that became angrily divided over the question of whether a boiled egg should be opened from the pointy end of the rounded end.<\/p>\n This manifests in Western culture as the conservative \u2013 liberal dichotomy.\u00a0 It is delusional in that both of the opposing options in the dichotomy are based on the assumed existence of \u2018beings\u2019 with powers of sourcing actions and developments, an abstraction that comes from language that is unsupported by modern physics.\u00a0 It is akin to a division arising among people on the basis of whether the \u2018boil\u2019 sources \u2018flow\u2019 or the \u2018flow\u2019 is sourcing the \u2018boil\u2019.\u00a0 In physical reality, there is only the \u2018appearance\u2019 of two things that is abstractly concretized in the psyche by assigning \u2018names\u2019 that differentiate between the two different \u2018appearances\u2019, as in the case of \u2018inhabitant\u2019 and \u2018habitat\u2019.\u00a0 There is the \u2018appearance\u2019 of two separate things, which would be only a \u2018distinguishing\u2019 without noun and verb language to concretize it, but in using our language based intellection (in precedence over our natural relational experience) as has become the Western culture \u2018intellection-first, experience-second\u2019 habit, we accept this binary splitting as having a foundational role in our \u2018operative reality\u2019 (our language-based Invented Reality).<\/p>\n By the same token, \u2018Life\u2019 and \u2018Death\u2019 as binary opposites applicable to notional \u2018things-in-themselves\u2019 are the product of Western language and grammar that are given a foundational role in Western culture \u2018Invented Reality\u2019.\u00a0 This splitting apart of the \u2018part\u2019 and \u2018whole\u2019 is often challenged within Western culture; e.g.<\/p>\n \u201cGod is that whole of which we consider ourselves to be a part\u201d \u2013 Tolstoy<\/em><\/p>\n However, even though it remains the foundational understanding of modern physics, indigenous aboriginal cultures, Taoism\/Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta, it is has not made that much of an inroad into Western culture because of the huge \u2018lock-in-with-high-switching-costs\u2019 therein. Influence over changes in Western culture understanding has been predominately in the hands of those deriving disproportionate influence on the basis of persisting common acculturated belief in Invented Reality<\/em><\/strong>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Author’s Prologue: Dear Reader; Imagine for a moment that you have been born and raised in the indigenous aboriginal culture.\u00a0 You know that you ‘understand reality differently’ than a Western culture acculturated person.\u00a0 But you also know that modern physics has shown your ‘relational understanding’ to be very much in accord with modern physics.\u00a0 […]<\/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-3533","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\/3533","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=3533"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3533\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3542,"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3533\/revisions\/3542"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3533"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3533"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodshare.org\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3533"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}