Education, Pirsig, and Subject-Object splitting and non-splitting

Pirsig's views are close to emile's; i.e. Pirsig's 'Quality' is emile's 'Resonance'' (subject-object nonduality).

[Note: 'subject-object splitting' = 'duality', 'subject-object non-splitting' = 'nonduality']

Letting go of one's fixed identity is essential in order to avoid cultural mediating of one's relational inclusion in the world. it opens the way to experiencing one's 'natural Self' as a relational feature that is uniquely, situationally included in the transforming relational continuum.

this is where one's 'uniqueness' resides. pirsig wants to get rid of the 'thing-in-itself' identity of the 'motorcycle' so as to understand the motorcycle, and things in general, including himself and his students, in terms of pre-fixed-identity relational dynamics.

The exercise he gives to a student who gets a mental block when asked to write an essay on american history (it is too big and there is too much to it and she is overwhelmed by the magnitude and scope and doesn't know where to start), ... is one in which she must dissolve her voyeur centre.

He suggests that she comes at this from the experience of a brick in the front wall of the Opera House in Bozeman and she has a 'high Quality' experience and writes an excellent essay on history through the experience of the brick. The brick doesn't have to go out and scan what is going on in the country over all of space and time from newpaper reports etc, but history can be interpreted in the continuing now of the brick's experience, by the transformation of Bozeman and from who and what is passing through the street, where they are coming from and going to, how they are dressed etc. etc.

Essentially, Pirsig's approach in his search for meaning is to get the fixed ego-self 'out of the way' because it is the centre of cultural mediating. People who have a strong sense of 'who they are' impose this on their view of the world around them ["this frenchie food is no good. I want hamburgers and hotdogs like I get back home"].

Systems sciences pioneer Erich Jantsch, in 'Design for Evolution' made the same point by comparing 'Robinson Crusoe' and 'Suzanne de la Pacifique', the former castaway reworking his south pacific paradise to make it like his home back in Britain, and Suzanne, conversely, approaching her life as a castaway by entering into a relational synthesis with the new world she found herself in.

But people who undertake the collapsing of their ego can be viewed as 'crazy' and be put into mental hospitals [letting go of the ego has to be done carefully] as happened to Pirsig [they diagnosed him as a paranoid schizophrenic].

"Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, develops around Pirsig's exploration into the nature of "Quality" ... "it is an exploration of the underlying metaphysics of Western culture" ... "that challenges our subject-object view of reality". "Pirsig finds in "Quality" a special significance and common ground between Western and Eastern world views".
"Pirsig became greatly troubled by the existence of more than one workable hypothesis to explain a given phenomenon, and that the number of hypotheses appeared unlimited. He could not find any way to reduce the number of hypotheses—he became perplexed by the role and source of hypothesis generation within scientific practice. The question distracted him to the extent that he lost interest in his studies and failed to maintain good grades. Finally, he was expelled from the university."

there are similarities in emile's experience, and commonality in the view that all hypotheses are subjective and incomplete; i.e. there is no 'truth', as Nietzsche also points out. That is, there is no 'common truth', no 'objective reality'. Whether there is or not continues to be a divisive issue [one can see it play out in the Lone Raven - emile dialogue following the Confusing figureheads for fountainheads: Hierarchical leadership' article ].

What is 'true' is our unique personal experience which is unmediated by a load of rational analytical conceptualization, until we open our mouths and talk about it. As relational forms within a transforming relational continuum, we are a 'resonance' or as R.D. Laing puts it, a 'cosmic fetalizing' and when we are in touch with this, we are having a 'Quality experience' in Pirsig's terms. Of course, it is impossible to have this 'Quality experience' while we continue to carry the baggage of nationality, gender, political loyalties etc. etc.

Essentially, where Pirsig is coming from, is from suspending the common Western culture metaphysics of dualism, the assuming of a subject-object split. In the emile-Lone Raven dialogue, Lone Raven could not see his own dualism because it is like water to fish in Western culture. This blindness to dualism is common in Western culture [yes, it comes through 'education'] because, as Einstein, Poincare and others have pointed out, one can only see it from the nondualist vantage point. In Einstein's analogy, it is like standing on top of a mountain (nondualism, non-euclidian space) and seeing the apex of a foothill far below (dualism, euclidian space) that you had previously thought was the top of the mountain. That is, being constrained to a foothill view is like water to fish, you are blind to the limitations of this view, ... you 'stand on your own shoulders' and get to see where you were at. Goedel's theorem expresses the impossibility for logic to get you there. as Poincare points out;

“It is by logic we prove, it is by intuition that we invent. … Logic, therefore, remains barren unless fertilised by intuition.”- Henri Poincaré

The classic 'Flatland' by Edwin Abbott (1884) is also on this topic and Ernst Mach speaks of the same effect in terms of multiple manifoldness of Riemannian (non-Euclidian) space;

"it is possible to move out of a finite straight line, without passing the extremities, through the second dimension ; out of a finite closed surface through the third ; and, analogously, out of a finite closed space, without passing through the enclosing boundaries, through the fourth dimension." -- Ernst Mach, ‘The Science of Mechanics; a Critical and Historical Account of its Development’

Likewise, if you are within a linear space, it is like water to fish [you don't realize that you are 'constrained' to two dimensions] until you move into a curved surface and can see a straight line as a 'special case'. Likewise, if you move into a spatial volume, you can then see a curved surface as a special case, and if you can move into a fourth dimensional space, you can see three dimensional volumes as a special case of fourth dimensional space. This is where Pirsig's 'Quality experience' comes in; i.e. it corresponds to being 'one dimension beyond' three dimensional space.

If the atmospheric flow 'had eyes', it could 'see' the storm-cells (3D volumetric objects) that were developing within it. This is Schroedinger's point about 'the world is given only once' without the subject-object split; i.e. our natural experience is within the inhabitant-habitat nonduality where 'Atman = Brahman'. Instead of thinking of ourselves as a 3D volumetric cell with 'our own inputs and outputs' as inhabitant-habitat dualism would have it, which comes from a double error of grammar, we are capable of understanding ourselves as a verb, an 'inputting-outputting' [with any 'being', but with a floating identity as is the physical reality of a storm-cell in the transforming relational flow-continuum]. This is the worldview of indigenous aboriginals which naturally supports anarchy.

Pirsig got to this view 'the long, hard way' passing through western rationality, taking it to the limit and then going beyond. This earned him a stint in a mental hospital and a diagnosis of 'paranoid schizophrenic' (like John Nash, A Beautiful Mind), but Pirsig recognized that the 'Quality experience' mode was his natural mode and that the 3D being mode was culturally mediated and abstractly/rationally constrained worldview that we are all have access to [one needed take to long trip through rationality and then 'breaking through the imagined bounding limits of rationality and into the fourth dimension. We are all born with the capability of going there directly and cultural/educational mediating 'dumbs us down'. As F. David Peat observes;

“To the infant’s developing mind, topology comes before geometry. In general, deeper and more fundamental logical operations are developed earlier than more specific rules and applications. The history of mathematics, which is generally taken as a process of moving towards deeper and more general levels of thought, could also be thought of as a process of excavation which attempts to uncover the earliest operations of thought in infancy. According to this argument, the very first operations exist at a pre-conscious level [i.e. ‘pre-intellectualizing’ level in the conscious and intuitive infant] so that the more fundamental a logical operation happens to be, the earlier it was developed by the infant and the deeper it has become buried in the mind.” – F. David Peat, ‘Mathematics and the Language of Nature’

So, it seems to me that where you are going with 'autodidact' is where Pirsig and Peat are going, to the excavating of our natural prelingual [pre-culturally mediated natural self experience] which we are born with which has been buried under a bunch of culturated-semantic bullshit, and thus return to our unencumbered, natural 'Quality experience', or 'resonance'/'nondualist' experience.

continued from my response on pirsig is in the forum section

i am interested in seeing if we can come to some common terms on this topic of non-culturally mediated understanding. i realize there is a lot in common already.

also, i am coming around to seeing more clarity in using the word 'anarchy' and avoiding 'anarchist' and 'anarchism', ... as you seem to do and am wondering if it's for the same reason. that is, in order to be consistent with the modern physics view that 'relations are all there are', i feel i have to suspend using the term 'anarchist' [in any dependent way] because it gives the suggestion that 'anarchy' is something that is created by anarchists, when that is an inverted view of what is physically going on.

i will complete this comment in the forum topic.

[here is the completion]

As you know, since you referred me to the epigenetic research of Eva Jablonka, 'genetic expression' is a 'follower, not a leader'. In other words, epigenetic influence inductively actualizes genetic expression. A relational need/deficiency develops which inductively actualizes and orchestrates a mutually supportive relational social dynamic [aka 'anarchy']

If we observe this 'anarchy' phenomenon, we see multiple individuals participating in it. the mistake is to see these people acting as 'things-in-themselves' with behaviours that are directed by their own internal rational plans and purpose directed objectives. instead, they are pulled together because they are all responding to a perceived 'need' and it is this 'need' that is pulling them into this mutual support mode where their mutual supportive actions are forming spontaneously as orchestrated by the continually unfolding relational situation.

their actions are the 'genetic expression' and the need that is inductively actualizing their mutually supportive actions is the 'epigenetic influence'. if the child falls into the ice-fishing hole and is about to be towed under by the currents beneath the ice, the actions of the people converging from all directions [genetic expression] is the 'follower' while the inductive actualizing [epigenetic] influence is the 'leader'.

similarly, the relational influence of gravity in the concave valley [epigenetic influence, the leader] inductively actualizes and orchestrates runoff water into rivulets and rivulets into streams and streams into rivers [genetic expression, the follower]. 'anarchy' is where a need felt by many at the same time inductively actualizes and orchestrates participant mutual support actions.

in that sense, we are all naturally born 'anarchists' [it is not a separate category of person]. wage labour and capitalism have meanwhile made 'anarchy' the exception rather than the rule.

In Pirsig's ZATAOMM, there is a passage where he conceives of the motorcycle as the 'genetic expression' of inductive actualizing influences, where everything is need-orchestrated and brought into confluent connection, the 'motorcycle' being the result. manuals that describe the motorcycle in terms of its parts and what they do does not give one a Quality understanding of the motorcycle. likewise, anarchy can't be described in terms of 'anarchists' and what they do.

To repeat my deep sixed comment, anarchy as I see it is simply existential relational activity before position. The anarch is a behavioral archetypal embodiment of anarchy and the anarchic. It can also be a new post hyphenated way of saying stirnerian individualist anarchist.

it seems that we have a lot of understanding that is 'in common'. meanwhile, some of the terms you use presumably pack in a lot of meaning for you; e.g. 'stirnerian individualist' and 'existential relational' which totally eludes me.

my own base is coming from evolution as also emerson and nietzsche and schroedinger; i.e. as in a continual becoming where there are no fixed identity things-in-themselves, only relational features in a transforming relational continuum. the individual, in this case, is nondual as in Atman=Brahman; a nonduality, as in a storm-cell in the flow, an agent of transformation that is included in the flow, the means by which the flow or the 'all' is transforming. this is the same view as indigenous peoples and bohm made this connection in discovering how Algonkian languages convey relativity and QM understandings.

anarchy is a relational dynamic that does not depend on local, material, humans-as-things-in-themselves. starting in the domain of 'field' which in the Lamarckian view is the 'exciter of things' (material forms; i.e. the material aspect of relations features within the field), we have a 'felt need' that inductively actualizes and orchestrates mutually supportive relational activity and this epigenetically induced activity is 'anarchy'. the source of 'anarchy' lies in the non-local, non-visible, non-material 'field' realm.

i don't know how to get to 'stirnerian individualist' without the mediating role of 'evolution' wherein the individual is a non-fixed-identity relational form inductively actualized by the flow it is included in, as in the Lamarckian view of evolution where you have 'field' [epigenetic influence] that is 'exciting' 'genetic expression'; i.e. where the gathering forms are 'appearances' within the flow-field, as Schroedinger says. of course, the nondualist form-in-flow individual cannot be fully understood by starting with our ocular and tactile senses which observe the local aspect of the form-in-flow which might be called the 'existential aspect'. this other influence that is coming from the 'all' of the transforming relational continuum, that is unfolding and enfolding into itself, is inherently non-local, non-visible and non-material while our observations coming from our ocular and tactile sensing are local, visible and material.

i am not saying anything that departs from the understanding of the individual self that comes from indigenous aboriginal belief traditions, which involves relational topologies available to infants, as F. David Peat points out in 'the language of nature'.

since we are led to 'much the same place' [much the same systemic understanding] using different fundamental or near-fundamental conceptual bases, is it possible to find a 'mediating semantics' to bridge the semantic gap? [to resolve my not having a ready-made 'meaning package' for 'stirnerian individual' and 'existential relational activity before position'?]

I usually mean it as a definitional differentiator from other forms of egoism or individualism which tend to be western substance based as opposed to void, i.e the creative nothing.

By before position as well as solution I mean in their formalized elective and proposed forms.

The thing about Stirner is that if one has attained by critical analysis and an empirical and unique perception of inter-relational social dynamics, ( and it is a mystery as to how the experiential meanderings of intellectual musings and cognitive directions direct one to this psychological peak and have imbued the essential character of the unique individuated being with a God-like quality), but having this self-awareness of ones place in the holistic realm of existentialist beingness, one can open any page of Stirner's masterpiece and have his words and thoughts resonating with ones own. Maybe some are born this way, and the masses are forever fated to suffer their sheepish habits and gire and gimble in the wake of the dualistic maelstrom.

The thing about Stirner is that if one has attained by critical analysis and an empirical and unique perception of inter-relational social dynamics, ( and it is a mystery as to how the experiential meanderings of intellectual musings and cognitive directions direct one to this psychological peak and have imbued the essential character of the unique individuated being with a God-like quality), but having this self-awareness of ones place in the holistic realm of existentialist beingness, one can open any page of Stirner's masterpiece and have his words and thoughts resonating with ones own. Maybe some are born this way, and the masses are forever fated to suffer their sheepish habits and gire and gimble in the wake of the dualistic maelstrom.

read stirner and, if you are lucky, you will assimilate an understanding that gives you a unique way of understanding his prose. if you crack the code, you can glean a stirnerian understanding from each and every page of his works, that will be unavailable to you, reading the same page, prior to 'cracking the code'.

Ok, i can buy that, because it is evident to me that the Nietzschean code is similarly crackable, but that's what i mean by trying to come up with a semantic bridge. the code in nietzsche's case is the renunciation of 'being'. his writing embodies his anti-being and anti-purpose assumptions, which, being foundational to his worldview, provides a critically important fulcrum for interpreting each and every Nietzschean page, and extracting from it 'his intended meaning'. e.g Nietzsche does not believe in the 'existence of matter' and thus he does not believe in 'thing-in-itselfness'. He says this explicitly in 'Twilight of the Idols' and in his correspondence with Gast on the view of Boscovich who he puts on the same level of psycho-social innovator as Copernicus.

You can then understand Nietzsche's view, that purpose and teleology do not exist in physical reality, and are semantically invented to compensate for the implicit removal, in our noun-and-verb semantic reality constructions, of a real physical influence, epigenetic agency, that is inherent in the matter-less transforming relational continuum called 'nature'.

I can see the same sort of matterlessness in Stirner as in Nietzsche, but i do not read or hear in the words of 'Stirner' citers in this forum, any 'bridging comments'. Stirner's words reek of nonduality as do Nietzsche's; E.g. Stirner says;

Ich setze Mich nicht voraus, weil Ich Mich jeden Augenblick überhaupt erst setze oder schaffe, und nur dadurch Ich bin, dass Ich nicht vorausgesetzt, sondern gesetzt bin, und wiederum nur in dem Moment gesetzt, wo ich mich setze, d.h. Ich bin Schöpfer un Geschöpf in Einem.
I do not presuppose myself, because I am every moment just positing or creating myself, and am I only by being not presupposed but posited, and ... only in the moment when I posit myself; that is, I am creator and creature in one." -- Stirner

Now, what is anyone to think of this, other than 'nonduality' where the flow is the creator of the storm-cell and the flow and storm-cell are a non-duality, as in Nietzsche's philosophy, and as in Schroedinger's philosophy, as well. As Schroedinger says in his classic 'What is Life?';

"... it is daring to give to this conclusion the simple wording that it requires. In Christian terminology, to say; 'Hence I am God Almighty' sounds both blasphemous and lunatic. ... In itself, the insight is not new. The earliest records to my knowledge date back some 2,500 years or more. From the early, great Upanishads the recognition ATHMAN = BRAHMAN (the personal self equals the omnipresent, all-comprehending eternal self) was in Indian thought considered, far from being blasphemous, to represent the quintessence of deepest insight into the happenings of the world. The strivings of all the scholars of Vedanta was, after having learnt to pronounce with their lips, really to assimilate in their minds this grandest of all thoughts."
-- Schroedinger, 'What is Life?'

Is this not the same understanding as in Stirner's words; " I am creator and creature in one."

After the Buddhist has meditated on 'make me one with everything', he gets to understand himself as the 'flow' [habitat] that is creating a plethora of storm-cells [inhabitants]; i.e. to understand these things as one, as a nonduality.

is this not, as well, the most fundamental commonality in the views of nietzsche and stirner (and schroedinger)?

Yes, codes as foundations to Weltanschauung. In my case I would never accept a god breathing down my neck giving me instructions, this is a subjective call, drawing heavily from a fun-loving dialogue with the empirical existential world I live in. It just so happens I and a few others on this site including yourself have this perception. The quote you included is significant to translating the code to a non-dualist interpretations of a universal.
"I do not presuppose myself, because I am every moment just positing or creating myself, and am I only by being not presupposed but posited, and ... only in the moment when I posit myself; that is, I am creator and creature in one." -- Stirner

because most people in this forum, and in western society, think of a person as a 'thing-in-itself with its own built-in 'genetic agency'.

"I am creator and creature in one" dispels the notion of a fixed identity.

but it would be useful to find some common code for 'organisation', the relation between 'the one and the many'.

in my studies of 'exceptionally performing teams', each team and each individual could be described as 'creator and creation in one'. the consciousness of this possibility where team and members are in a condition of continuous becoming allows participants and team to let their 'identity float' and so drop out of the common mode of 'the team' seen as a machine with fixed parts and persisting goals and objectives. instead, they work together with a diverse multiplicity of teams, letting their development and actions be inductively actualized by the relational dynamics they are situationally included in.

this is the same 'bootstrap' symmetry seen in relativity and quantum mechanics, wherein 'it takes a whole community of teams to raise a team'. the bootstrap principle is also seen in Lamarckian evolution wherein 'epigenetic influence is inductively actualizing genetic expression', and it is seen in actual real-life evolution of microbial communities;

“It is normally assumed that the recombination of genes generates innovation and that this innovation is then judged as useful or not through natural selection. Genetic information presumably serves as a blueprint that controls the features of organisms and their communities. However, studies of bacterial associations in continuous culture suggest that innovation also flows in the reverse direction, from the structure of the community to the structure of the nucleic acid. In this situation, it may be the structure and architecture of the community that serves the initial blueprint.” — ‘Cultivation of Microbial Consortia and Communities by Douglas E. Caldwell, Gideon M. Wolfaardt, Darren R. Korber, Subramanian Karthikeyan, John R. Lawrence, and Daniel K. Brannan, Manual of Environmental Microbiology

the argument here is that 'teams' in nature are 'creators and creation in one'; i.e. they are continually bootstrapping one another, as consistent with the basic mutual interdependent pervading nature;

“[In nature]… “the individual parts reciprocally determine one another.” … “The properties of one mass always include relations to other masses,” … “Every single body of the Universe stands in some definite relations with every other body in the Universe.” Therefore, no object can “be regarded as wholly isolated.” And even in the simplest case, “the neglecting of the rest of the world is impossible.” – Ernst Mach

the dynamic here is one of continuing innovative evolution without ever reaching some fixed end result, which would become, if it happened, a kind of degenerate, boring case. this seems to accord with stirner's definition of 'union of egoists';

"The union of egoists ceases to be one under specific conditions "the party ceases to be a union at the same moment at which it makes certain principles binding and wants to have them assured against attacks; but this moment is the very birth-act of the party. As party it is already a born society, a dead union, an idea that has become fixed. "

stirner doesn't abide by fixed 'sacred structures', that would be "uninteresting"

""Egoism, as Stirner uses it, is not opposed to love nor to thought; it is no enemy of the sweet life of love, nor of devotion and sacrifice; it is no enemy of intimate warmth, but it is also no enemy of critique, nor of socialism, nor, in short, of any actual interest. It doesn’t exclude any interest. It is directed against only disinterestedness and the uninteresting; not against love, but against sacred love, not against thought, but against sacred thought, not against socialists, but against sacred socialists, etc. The “exclusiveness” of the egoist, which some want to pass off as isolation, separation, loneliness, is on the contrary full participation in the interesting by — exclusion of the uninteresting." -- Stirner (speaking in the third person)

to me, this corresponds also to Poincare's comparison of intuition and logic, noting that intuition is for 'inventing' and logic is for proving. one could say that intuition is epigenetic induction and logic is genetic structure. the genetic structure is 'barren' without being legitimized by epigenetic induction. authoritarian logical structures are 'barren' of the intuition that originally engendered them. i can prove to you, with logic backed up by experiment, that DDT kills mosquitoes. but Goedel's theorem says that all such logical structures are incomplete, this side of infinity. intuition informs me of the incompleteness of this logical structure but there is nothing in the logical structure that can inform it as to its incompleteness; i.e. a logical structure 'is what it is' and nothing more.

"“The propositions of logic are tautologies (6.1), and hence say nothing (6.11). Any attempt to give content to logical propositions is misguided. That they are true shows itself in their structure, and this structure helps us to understand the formal properties of language and the world (6.12). We cannot express anything by means of logical propositions.” — Wittgenstein

people in authoritarian structures are comfortable with "if it was good enough for my grandfather it is good enough for me"; i.e. 'it works', but there is no questioning of the 'externalities' it may be generating due to its 'incompleteness'. we can keep spraying DDT and it may keep killing mosquitoes, but is that 'the whole story'? EVIDENTLY NOT! for soon everything else will start dying, including us.

My point is that we need a general code for 'teams' as well as for the 'individual', and as I see it, both Nietzsche and Stirner see teams in terms of Lamarckian evolution aka 'bootstrapping' wherein the relational dynamics of team are inductively actualizing the development of the team members, as also in Caldwell et al's findings on the evolution of microbial communities.

In a bootstrapped team, the unfolding situational particulars are continually inductively actualizing, orchestrating and reshaping the development and actions of the participants; i.e. epigenetic influence is inductively actualizing creative potentials to give rise to 'genetic expression'. this is the creator-creation nonduality that both Stirner and Nietsche build into their respective 'uebermenschen' and it is 'self-similar' in the case of the 'uebergruppen'; i.e. the identity floats within the epigenetic (situational) field of influence that is continually inductively actualizing the 'generative structure' or 'workings' of the 'gruppenmitglieder' (as in caldwell's findings on evolution).

if we could find some 'common code' here for the 'uebergruppen' or Union of Egoists, this could add to clarity.

for me, this english word 'egoist' is a bad choice for translating "der Einzige" because most people see 'ego' as pride in 'who one is' in a fixed BEING sense; i.e. I am proud "TO BE" an American, ... I am proud "TO BE" of the male gender, ... I am proud "TO BE" of white anglo-saxon protestant racial, ethnic, religious inheritance. ... I am proud "TO BE" a successful real-estate agent, ... I am proud "TO BE" a descendant of George Washington and Marie Antoinette.

i.e. 'der Einzige', as both creator and created in one, is anything but a fixed being who is proud of 'who he is' in terms of a final product determined by history and by his end-result oriented self-development efforts; ... "I dreamt of becoming a successful doctor like my dad from the time I was a small child and finally, after many years of hard work, I have 'arrived' at my desired destination and can bask in the respect and affluence such a good and noble position merits".

the curious aspect of this approach which puts destination-orientation into an unnatural primacy over situational induction [harmonious voyage cultivating] is that it is 'all genetics' and 'no epigenetics', all intention-driven without 'situational inductive actualizing'.

i think that this is what stirner intended by 'uninteresting', because when one is destination oriented, one is no longer in the white water turbulence of the unfolding present, letting it inductively develop one's creative potentials from the outside-in [epigenetically]. the purely genetically directed destination-oriented development is a kind of OCD mode of living which would be 'uninteresting' in both Stirner's and Nietzsche's [amor fati] books.

From my observations of and dealings with the common herd, all I could hope for would be something akin to an influenza immunization shot at an early age to all newborns on the planet to prevent infection by the prevailing Weltanschauung dominating the earth at the moment. Whether this antidote could impact upon the innate instinctual aggressive tendencies is still unknown. In the meantime I shall concentrate on ensuring that my immediate loved ones are surrounded by aesthetically harmonious and creative potentialities,,,,,,,,,

certainly western colonization continues to have the planet in its controlling grasp so there are lots of 'entrapped' people with worldviews that don't affirm the aggressive tendencies of the dominating culture. i don't believe that buddhists in thailand and indigenous peoples in the amazon, chiapas and other places get infused with 'aggressive tendencies'.

'instinct' is like 'purpose', a concept invented to fix up the logic of first assuming each 'newborn' is a 'thing-in-itself'. the term 'purpose' is to explain what animates an independent thing-in-itself, and the term 'instinct' is to explain how a newborn thing-in-itself knows how to do stuff like 'suckle', hold their breath when submerged under water, sense rhythms etc., ... since it has not had the time to be taught these things.

in the Lamarckian view of evolution, the creator (field) and created (matter) are one [a field-matter nonduality]. also, in plant ecosystems, the complex eco-relationships seem to be known in advance. this is no problem so long as we acknowledge that relations are primary and 'things' develop within relational niches as in 'bootstrapping'. there is no need to explain why 'newborns' know a lot of stuff at birth because relations are the source of 'things', and not vice versa; i.e. 'material things are 'appearances'. the storm-cell is a relational form in the transforming relational plenum. it is 'variations in the relational structure of space' and not a thing-in-itself. likewise the human child.

the aggressive tendencies are infused by culture and language [language is the purveyor of culture].

Although I may be completely wrong in my assumptions I expect a blind loyalty from you, and you could at least leave the criticism of my comments to the trolls on this site. I am always loyal to you,,,,,,,,

loyalty of the 'my buddy's ideas right or wrong' type leads to herd building and normalization of behaviour based on nothing other than concensus.

you have an exceptional intuitive understanding base. therefore you have plenty of grounding to support continuing growth without collapse of the whole system through a 'local point of failure'. intuition is 'fault tolerant' but aristotelian logic is fault-intolerant and entire logical structures can collapse if from a single point of failure, like a 'perfect crime' that fails to address one tiny, simple unaccounted for element, that is usually in the form of a simple, unstated assumption that 'fails to hold true'.

like the poor husband who wants to buy his much loved wife a nice anniversary present and the poor wife who likewise wants to buy her much loved husband a nice anniversary present, who decide to sell their last valuables to do so. he sells his silver pocket watch that his dear old grandfather gave him to buy her silver combs for her long, beautiful hair and she sells her long beautiful hair to buy him a silver chain for his pocket watch that he has never been able to afford. the logical structures collapse but the caring that was the deeper source of the logic, the 'creative nothingness', becomes all the more apparent as the deeper, intuitive 'uebersource' of the logic. As Poincare says; 'logic is barren unless fertilized by intuition'.

i will restart this comment on a wider text alley under the title 'loyalty and logic'.

No please don't restart this comment on a wider text alley, I have understood your argument and accept my flaw. If you DO start another tome, I shall appeal to thecollective to have it removed!

Can't really disagree on this one. Quality, resonance, pre symbolic are what becoming the creative nothing is all about for me.

Education is a major hindrance and I see the disownment and refusal of education as of primary importance for a radical anarchic 21st century. It's the one thing that hasn't really been pursued beyond a few radical educators here and their who-good as they try to be-still retain the inherent problems of Ed and don't really have a process of unleashing pure uninhibited childhood creation something that Stirner always saw as the model mode of the unique one. Throw in Nietzsche's 3rd metamorphosis(the child) and you have the entire point of a radical orientation against history civilization and leviathan. Education is one the THE primary pillars of enslaved belief and behavior and it's no accident that it was of primary important to Max Stirner.

You get a glimpse in the Sugatta Mitra video that I've posted numerous times, but I'm convinced that this is the end game for even a shot at any kind of general insurrection. Everything else has failed in regards to proles and Stockholmed adult pupils. Let's try the untried and become the creative nothing.

... when we use 'education' in the culture-mediated sense.

culture-mediated education is a toxin that is driving us nuts, literally. it is the source of the so-called 'invisible plague', the rise of schizophrenia and 'bipolar disorder' in our Western culture dominated global society, in spite of the growth of pharmaceuticals to zombie us out as a defense against the materialist madness called 'Western society'.

it is no coincidence that Pirsig was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia while struggling with 'Quality', nor that the people in mental hospitals are a great source of 'art brut' or 'outsider' art that is not co-opted and contaminated by culture.

Pirsig went through the same self-educating enlightenment as Mach and Nietzsche, the discovery of 'creative nothingness' [the inductive, relational actualizing influence of 'field'] as the prima (non-)materia. This is expressed by Nietzsche with reference to this same enlightening passage [understanding creative nothingness aka the epigenetic, relational 'field' influence, as the primal, inductive actualizing influence] that Boscovich went through;

"If anything whatsoever is well-refuted, it is the presumption of "matter": and indeed not by an idealist but rather by a mathematician- by Boscovich. He and Copernicus are both the greatest opponents of appearances: Since him, there is widespread relief that, there is no longer matter. He has thought atomic theory to its conclusion." ... "When I reflect upon my own philosophical genealogy, I feel kinship to the antiteleological, i.e. spinozistic, movement of our time, yet with the difference that, I also consider "purpose" and "will" in us an error; and as well, to the mechanistic movement [ ... ], yet with the difference that, I do not believe in "matter" and consider Boscovich one of the great turning points like Copernicus

Nietzsche elaborates on the capture of our understanding, thanks to noun-and-verb language-and-grammar, by 'appearances' and the ocular and tactile senses, in 'Beyond Good and Evil' so that we accept 'exposition' [what material forms do] as if it were 'explanation' as 'science' pretends it to be (see 12 - 14); e.g;

"As regards materialistic atomism, it is one of the best refuted theories that have been advanced, and in Europe there is now perhaps no one in the learned world so unscholarly as to attach serious signification to it [sigh, over-optimism here, on Nietzsche's part], except for convenient everyday use (as an abbreviation of the means of expression) — thanks chiefly to the Pole Boscovich: he and the Pole Copernicus have hitherto been the greatest and most successful opponents of ocular evidence. For whilst Copernicus has persuaded us to believe, contrary to all the senses, that the earth does not stand fast, Boscovich has taught us to abjure the belief in the last thing that "stood fast" of the earth — the belief in "substance," in "matter," in the earth-residuum, and particle-atom: it is the greatest triumph over the senses that has hitherto been gained on earth. One must, however, go still further, and also declare war, relentless war to the knife, against the "atomistic requirements" which still lead a dangerous after-life in places where no one suspects them, like the more celebrated "metaphysical requirements": one must also above all give the finishing stroke to that other and more portentous atomism which Christianity has taught best and longest, the soul atomism."

The rejection of the physical reality of matter, which masquerades in the Western cultural mindset, as the primal substrate of the world, together with its necessary cohort, 'force', is common Pirsig and Nietzsche and also to Sugata Mitra (Ph.D physicist). In all three of these inquiring minds, it has come to the fore that 'relations' are in a natural primacy over 'material things';

"Starting with molecular orbital computation in the 1970s, he discovered that the structure of organic molecules determine their function more than the constituent atoms" -- Newcastle University bio of Professor Sugata Mitra

Mitra's notion that children have the capacities to educate themselves is on target and recall's F. David Peat's observations on 'the language of nature';

“To the infant’s developing mind, topology comes before geometry. In general, deeper and more fundamental logical operations are developed earlier than more specific rules and applications. The history of mathematics, which is generally taken as a process of moving towards deeper and more general levels of thought, could also be thought of as a process of excavation which attempts to uncover the earliest operations of thought in infancy. According to this argument, the very first operations exist at a pre-conscious level [i.e. ‘pre-intellectualizing’ level in the conscious and intuitive infant] so that the more fundamental a logical operation happens to be, the earlier it was developed by the infant and the deeper it has become buried in the mind.” – F. David Peat, ‘Mathematics and the Language of Nature’

Some conclusions;

1. Western culture, through education and particularly through 'science' is dumbing us down, by orienting to 'appearances' based on ocular and tactile sensing. Meanwhile, 'field' or 'creative nothingness' or 'epigenetic influence' is the 'mother of appearance' aka 'matter' and 'material dynamics'.

2. Science is, as Mach has pointed out, is a 'thought-economical way of arranging our ocular and tactile observations. Newton acknowledges this in his Principia, giving two 'warnings', the first in his 'Author's prologue' and a second in his summarizing Scholium; e.g. Newton says;

“… and the planets and comets will constantly pursue their revolutions in orbits given in kind and position, according to the laws above explained ; but though these bodies may, indeed, persevere in their orbits by the mere laws of gravity, yet they could by no means have at first derived the regular position of the orbits themselves from those laws. . . . This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being. And if the fixed stars are the centres of other like systems, these, being formed by the like wise counsel, must be all subject to the dominion of One.” — Newton, Scholium in the ‘Principia’

This statement of 'what is missing' if of general importance since 'what is missing' is the primal 'organizing influence' in the universe; i.e. the 'epigenetic influence' or 'field' or 'creative nothingness' that is inductively actualizing the gathering and regathering of material forms available to our ocular and tactile sensing 'observations'.

Nietzsche points out, two centuries later, that only a handful of people 'get it'; i.e. In 'Beyond Good and Evil' (see 12 - 14), he says;

"It is perhaps just dawning on five or six minds that natural philosophy is only a world-exposition and world-arrangement (according to us, if I may say so!) and not a world-explanation; but in so far as it is based on belief in the senses, it is regarded as more, and for a long time to come must be regarded as more — namely, as an explanation."

In other words, 'science' [mainstream/newtonian] and its laws and principles, are nothing more than a thought-economical means of arranging our observations. It is all about arranging 'appearances' without explaining the origins of organization; i.e. without mention of 'epigenetic influence' or 'creative nothingness' (inductive actualizing field).

Newton says;

though these bodies may, indeed, persevere in their orbits by the mere laws of gravity, yet they could by no means have at first derived the regular position of the orbits themselves from those laws"

and Mitra similarly 'discovers';

[Mitra] discovered that the [relational] structure of organic molecules determine their function more than the constituent atoms"

So, how do we summarize this. What Pirsig said about motorcycles was akin to what Rumi says about wine glasses, if you break them apart into 'pieces', that's not what they are;

" There’s an old rule that drunks have to argue
and get into fights.
The lover is just as bad. He falls down a hole.
But down in that hole he finds something shining,
worth more than any amount of money or power.
Last night the moon came
dropping its clothes in the street.
I took it as a sign to start singing.
Falling up into the bowl of sky.
The bowl brakes. Everywhere is falling everywhere.
Nothing else to do.
Here’s the new rule: break the wineglass.
And fall toward the glassblower’s breath."

We can break the wineglass down into parts (base, stem, bowl) and we can break the motorcycle down into parts, wheels, engine, steering, saddle, but we can't understand the essence of a thing by analyzing its parts. It's like doing an autopsy on a human and defining each part and what its purpose is, as if the organism can be understood by its 'internals' without reference to its situation within a mutually dependent relational ecosystem structure.

Pirsig's 'Zen of Motorcycle Maintenance' transcends the analytical parts-make-the-whole mode of understanding [i.e. the 'scientific' or 'rational' or 'analytical' mode of understanding] and goes all the way to the source that lies upstream of the engineers material substance to 'the glassblower's breath', to the need or creative nothingness that inductively actualized its development. As Lao Tsu observes, the usefulness of the clay vessel lies in its bowl-shaped emptiness that accommodates material that comes into it and departs from it.

People who have undergone psychosis, like Pirsig, understand this better than most. They are the 'miner's canaries' of Western society who sense the loss of the divine, the cultural purging of the divine, the denial of the creative nothingness or epigenetic influence aka relational field influence that inductively actualizes genetic expression. Their deprivation, by the culture, of access to the divine is the source of their psychosis. The non-creative nothingness, the Euclidian void of science, emptied of the divine creative nothingness immanent in nature, by the culture, must break its despiritualizing silence, even if through hallucinatory voices and images.

Of course, if the 'creative nothingness' was not purged from the relational social dynamic by the culture, there would be no need on the part of the individual sensitive to such deprivation, to manufacture her own replacement/supplement by way of hallucination.

Western culture is the source of mental disorders. They don't occur 'in the natural wild'. As Raymond Cochrane's research in the UK shows;

"Research by Cochrane ['The Social Origins of Mental Illness'] and Sashidharan shows that the incidence of schizophrenia in non-native born blacks in the U.K. is 3-5 times higher than native born blacks. As these researchers point out, this effect cannot be due to genetic difference or other sources within the individual. Their point is that a science that studies ‘mental illness’ is not going to explain what is going on in this case, a study of mental health would instead be required. That is, 'spiritual stress/distress' may be inductively actualized by epigenetic influence immanent within the relational social dynamic so that exploring internal parts for malfunction may falsely attribute the distress to effects RESULTING from the epigenetically induced distress, concealing the real root source; i.e. the relational social dynamic of the culture in which the individual is an included participant.

“From the outset it will be clear that most of the research in this field has followed the conventional epidemiological or medical paradigm by focusing on mental ill health as the dependent variable. It is, therefore, not surprising that there is a lack of empirically grounded research on mental well-being or the psychological resilience and survival of minority groups in this country” — R. Cochrane (University of Birmingham) and S. P. Sashidharan (North Birmingham Mental Health Trust) in ‘Mental Health and Ethnic Minorities’.

Pirsig didn't get caught as some people have, who live near mountains and when they find their motorcycle (or other vehicle) engines stalling, not starting well, the plugs fouling etc., taking them back down the mountain and tearing down the engine in their garages to find the problem and repair it, not realizing that what they are dealing with is an 'epigenetic syndrome'. That, the relational environment is the inductive actualizing source of the problem. If you are starved of essential nutrients (air pressure, oxygen) at 14,000 feet so that your infusing of gas is too high relative to the pressure and oxygen available to combust it, you are not going to find the problem by probing "what is wrong with the engine" back down at 5,000 feet.

In a personal discussion I had with a woman in a psychiatric hospital, Patty, who had tried to commit suicide six times [she had just come out of a two-week coma on her sixth attempt] she laughed about how, each time, they had pronounced her 'cured' of her mental illness and depression, because, as she said, the environment in the hospital, in the inmate society, was very empathic and caring because everyone in there had had the common experience of psychosis and being institutionalized by a society that is pathologically terrified of people with psychosis. So, sure, she was 'cured,' meaning that she was found fit for operation in such empathic society, but when she went back out into the 'society-at-large', people found her, in her words; "not smart enough, not bright enough, not rich enough" to fit in, and she would be alienated and have to rejoin the homeless community, people she loved, but would find that existence 'too constraining' and would attempt suicide again.

Ok, maybe there is a length limit on forum comments, so I should bring this comment to a close.

Acknowledgement of 'creative nothingness' as a primal animating influence is what Western society is 'missing' and Western education is what keeps the blindfolds on us. I tend to capture this in the Lamarckian terms of;

Epigenetic influence inductively actualizes genetic expression.

What Western education teaches us is;

"Genetic expression is causally determined by the genetic agency of local, material 'things-in-themselves'"

This spook-driven view of Western science/education is dismissed by Nietzsche who points out that it comes from a 'double error of grammar' which reduces relational dynamics to 'material objects (nouns) and their genetic agency (verbs).

"“Our judgement has us conclude that every change must have an author”;–but this conclusion is already mythology: it separates that which effects from the effecting. If I say “lightning flashes,” I have posited the flash once as an activity and a second time as a subject, and thus added to the event a being that is not one with the event but is rather fixed, “is” and does not “become.”–To regard an event as an “effecting,” and this as being, that is the double error, or interpretation, of which we are guilty.” – Nietzsche, ‘Will to Power’, 531

Patty, like Pirsig's motorcycle, 'broke down under ambient stress' (a high stress unempathic rat race environment, or the nurturant starved (for an engine) high elevation), and then Western science removed them from the high ambient stress conditions, ignoring the existence, even, of such epigenetic influence, and proceeded to probe the internals of Patty and the motorcycle in an unstressed ambiance, convinced that the problem that showed up in Patty, and in the motorcycle, was due to a malfunction in their 'internal machinery'.

Likewise, the authoritarian control structures of the Euro-American colonizing powers condition global relational social dynamics in a manner that puts relational tensional stress on the colonized indigenous peoples, and when disturbances erupt through them [are inductively actualized by such stressful empigenetic influence], the search is on for an internal source such as a Saddam or an ISIS. The solution will then be seen in terms of 'chopping out' the alleged 'source' [since Western culture and its science and education semantically infuses this erroneous 'operative reality' into the minds of the populace].

"Doctors first began manipulating the brain to calm patients in the late 1880s, when the Swiss physician Gottlieb Burkhardt removed parts of the cortex of the brains of patients with auditory hallucinations and other symptoms of schizophrenia, noting that it made them calm (although one patient died and another committed suicide after the procedure), according to Encyclopaedia Britannica.
The Portuguese neurologist António Egas Moniz is credited with inventing the lobotomy in 1935, for which he shared the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine in 1949 (later, a movement was started to revoke the prize, unsuccessfully).
Yale neuroscientist John Fulton and his colleague Carlyle Jacobsen had performed lobotomy-like procedures on chimpanzees in 1935. Moniz and his colleague Almeida Lima performed the first human experiments later that year. The frontal lobes were targeted because of their association with behavior and personality.
Moniz reported the treatment as a success for patients with conditions such as depression, schizophrenia, panic disorder and mania, according to an article published in 2011 in the Journal of Neurosurgery. But the operations had severe side effects, including increased temperature, vomiting, bladder and bowel incontinence and eye problems, as well apathy, lethargy, and abnormal sensations of hunger, among others. The medical community was initially critical of the procedure, but nevertheless, physicians started using it in countries around the world."

All of this is about restoring the machinery to 'culture-defined normality', a normality specification that is applied to the 'independent units' within the relational social dynamic, even though Mitra, Pirsig, Nietzsche, Mach, and others have determined that the relational structure of organisation is in a natural precedence over the 'things' included in the structure; i.e. the ecosystem is a complex of epigenetic influence that inductively actualizes the material forms, the latter being available as 'appearances' to our ocular and tactile sensing based observations.

How, then, did Pirsig get his 'Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance' (an attack on Western culture and education) published? He almost didn't.

"In an epilogue Robert M. Pirsig wrote a decade later to a paperback edition of the book, he recounts its history (reveals, for instance, that 121 editors had turned down the manuscript) and, throwing aside any claim to modesty, refers to the book as a "culture-bearing" one -- a breakthrough of sorts for thousands of readers who were ready, indeed, for what amounted to a philosophical foray masquerading as a motorcyle trip taken by Phaedrus, the narrator, and his son Chris.
... Pirsig's experience, for instance, as a patient in a mental hospital, a time in his life when others called him crazy, even gave him shock treatment. In both his books he reminds us, as R.D. Laing once did, that psychiatry, at its worst (here in America as well as the Soviet Union) can be an agent of normative social and cultural power -- a means of ostracizing, reprimanding, punishing with pills and confinement (or worse: electric shock treatment and even, in earlier times, lobotomy) any and all who fail to think or act as various conventions dictate."

Finally, for this comment, anyway, ... I would affirm your critique of 'education' [the culture-mediated kind] and raise you twice; applying the same critique to 'noun-and-verb language-and-grammar' and to 'psychiatry',

The implied shift from dualism to nondualism corresponds to the acknowledging of epigenetic influence, as in 'epigenetic influence inductively actualizes genetic expression', as the primal source of cosmic animation. This may be the most general expression of the critique of Western culture; i.e. its rejecting of the natural primacy of epigenetic influence over genetic agency [Western science instead assumes the 'reality' of genetic agency, writing out of the script, 'epigenetic inductively actualizing influence'].

This is also where Lamarckism [epigenetic inductively actualized evolution] headbutts with Darwinism [genetic agency driven evolution].

I understand your enthusiasm about the Suggata Mitra approach to education as a way to escape from our cultural lock-in, but cooptation of youth by adulthood seems to present a major obstacle. In fact, in my own conversation with an indigenous traditionalist, 95 percent of indigenous aboriginals have been co-opted out of their traditions by simply speaking noun-and-verb languages. I would therefore give the kids a double challenge in their self-educating; i.e. to develop a 'language of nature' (relational language) as part of their self-educating. self-educating with a dependence on Indo-European language doesn't go far enough.

* * *

In all honesty I don't think you should even put education in quotation marks or imply there is a positive way to marry it to anarchy. I think you should view education like work as something to be disowned and debunked. Just as labor should be differentiated from work, learning should be differentiated from education.

To your point about cooptation, it's certainly a constant threat to be weary of. When I talk about inspiring the kids to lose the chains I'm talking about the lightest of sparks to let the child wild fire take it from there. Recuperation is something could well happen just as it as happened to the proles but as I have said, children and adolescence remain the great untried. Perhaps the 21st century could change this.

Interestingly enough there was a post in the old anti-politics board by a guy by the name of Wild Youth who talked about this. The other critical but supportive poster was Makhno(known as fake Makhno) who brought up the contradictions of trying to set into motion uncontrollable adolescent/child individuals. The points he raised were good and represent an inherent paradox in the project that I am advocating. I still think it should be tried though as subtly as non reared as possible. Even if this radical approach fails at least it would have been something never tried before.

my view is that the problem lies in noun-and-verb language which has us understand the world in dualist terms of 'things-in-themselves' that reside and operate within a space that is separate from things, whereas the physical reality of our actual experience is of inclusion within a transforming relational continuum, as affirmed by modern physics, where things are 'variations in the structure of relational space' [schroedinger].

as for 'education' in terms of parents helping children to 'get a good start', as with mother bears and her cubs, yes, that must be 'situational learning' and it must be the lightest spark.

what suggata mitra demonstrates is that children have their own learning capacity which goes unactualized because we are paving over top of it with our own fossilized cultural knowledge base. the children, given only the lightest spark, show that they can actualize their own inherent intuitive understanding which is purely relational in its essence. there is plenty of relational insight in nature, that the bear-cub can pick up on, or the indigenous aboriginal child who is sparked by relational language so that she is not forced to dissect everything down, dualistically, to 'lookup tables' of 'things-in-themselves' and 'that things do'.

but, as nietzsche says, people are coopted [we coopt ourselves and our children] into confusing the dualist construction of the way the world works, for 'reality', just by using noun-and-verb language constructs over and over again. this is where 'the bewitchment of understanding by language' occurs, by using a dualist language. they start believing that they are 'doers-of-deeds', that nations are 'doers of deeds' and that corporations are doers of deeds.

Thus they are mesmerized by the notion that we must all work together to 'get things done' so that we no longer accept we are included in the relational flow, having become convinced, by their own language use, that they are separate and apart from nature, as in Genesis 1:28, and life is all about improving the habitat to make it more livable for us superior forms of life.

That is, mesmerization by noun-and-verb language leads people to fall out of touch with the relational dynamics of nature and start reifying relational forms as 'things-in-themselves' [artefacts of noun-and-verb language] and holding these 'independent things-in-themselves' responsible for 'their own' jumpstart actions and accomplishments and applying moral judgement to such semantic reality constructions and issuing 'rewards' and 'punishments' on this basis.

this is what's wrong with 'education' conveyed with a noun-and-verb language, which does not even arise with the relational light spark techniques of mother and cub, and/or with parent and child employing an inherently light-sparking relational language.

suggata mitra has only demonstrated half of what needs to be demonstrated [that children have learning potentials that never see the light of day because we pave over top of them with our noun-and-verb, scientific and rational 'force-feeding of 'education'']. The second half has already been demonstrated by nietzsche, whorf, bohm and others; i.e. the bewitching of understanding that we inflict on ourselves through our use of dualist noun-and-verb language-and-grammar that reduces the relational dynamics of nature to abstract, idealized terms of 'things-and-themselves' and 'what these things do' as if in an 'empty and non-participating world/space'.

yes, our efforts to liberate the natural learning capacities of youth is a way out of the rising incoherence we are currently generating, but infusing them with noun-and-verb language is planting the seeds of their cooptation back into the same incoherence generating trap that we have fallen into.

I would not call maternal or paternal prepping for the broad power process of life(particularly the terrestrial power process) education. Education is beyond quotes or parentheses bad, it's righ up there with work as something to be despised down to its core definition.

You get no disagreement from me on noun verb mediation, it's something that requires a profound detournment if that is even possible. Going away from compulsory curriculated learning(which is what education is at the bare minimum) is just as important though.

to the formulating of an 'operative reality' that inductively or strategically orchestrates and shapes individual and collective behaviours.

only in a noun-and-verb language does the concept of cause-effect or 'doer-deed' arise. this concept of full-and-sole responsibility for one's actions is the basis of moral judgement and notions like 'the elimination of evil' in place of the relational language notion of the resolving of relational tensions. i.e. noun-and-verb language leads one to believe that the 9/11 terrorists, and 'rebels' in general, are fully and solely responsible for their actions and results, which, being nasty and evil, will suggest that the problem will be resolved by eliminating these evil people.

relational languages would allow that 'rebellion' is inductively actualized by relational tensions as arise from Euro-American colonizers conditioning the global commons and making it unpleasant for the colonized indigenous peoples of the Middle East and elsewhere. relational language based views leads to negotiations to reduce relational tensions and not simply to 'the elimination of evil'.

noun-and-verb language makes it possible to designate people, groups, nations as 'independently-existing things-in-themselves that are fully and solely responsible for their own 'good' or 'evil' actions.

education teaches people to discriminate between 'who are the good ones and who are the evil ones'.

the biggest downside potentials come from noun-and-verb language because it leads to 'incoherence' [Bohm] wherein those who see themselves as 'good' believe that in order to improve 'goodness' in the world, one must eliminate 'evil'. the concept that powerful influences can cultivate relational tensions that induce 'pushback' is a non-starter in the noun-and-verb doer-deed world where 'jumpstart' behaviours are 'all she wrote'.

in relational language, kim jong un's north korean regime is 'pushing back' against the oppression of Euro-American colonizers who want to control what goes on around the globe. in noun-and-verb language, they can be seen as an 'evil threat' that must somehow be eliminated and there is no recognition that the root source of the problem comes from Euro-American colonization [intuitively, yes it is there, but literally, in noun-and-verb language, it is not].

adversaries with relational languages will naturally pursue restorative justice when they have bloodied each other enough, while adversaries with noun-and-verb language are liable to go for mutual annihilation [the good eliminating the evil, in both cases, since inductive influence associated with relational tensions is not even on the noun-and-verb user's radar screen].

there is the experiment with chimpanzees where the chimpanzees were sprayed with ice-water every time they touched a distinctive red ladder placed in their cage. the chimps quickly learned to police one another so that there would be no climbing by anyone on that ladder. there was soon no longer any need to spray the ice-water since their mutual policing was so effective. When newcomers joined the group, they were quickly trained not to touch the red ladder, and when the entire group was replaced, one after the other, with new residents who had never even experienced the spraying of ice-water in association with touching the red ladder, the entirely new group continued to police themselves so that they did not climb on the red ladder. learning ‘correct behaviour’ was by way of revelation of what the group held to be ‘correct behaviour’.

i.e. when everyone is loyal to the group logic, no-one is questioning the originating assumptions that underpin the logic and herd behaviour is the result.

check this one out for the herd behaviour known as free market capitalism;

“God, when he gave the world in common to all mankind, commanded man, … to subdue the earth; i.e., improve it for the benefit of life, and therein lay out something upon it that was his own, his labour. He that in obedience to this commandment of God, subdued, tilled and sowed any part of it, thereby annexed to it something that was his property, which another had no title to, nor could without injury take from him” – John Locke, 1690.

remember when europeans came to turtle island and 'made america great'. that is total bullshit. america made them great (they who were called the refuse of europe). give them a hundred acres of fertile land and they would improve it by chopping down crops that nature kept pushing up over and over again and taking them to the market and getting paid as if they had produced them. they should have to pay for them, not get paid for them.

when nietzsche agreed with boscovich that matter does not exist (field is the only physically real force) he also rejected the logic that matter is the source of gravity. every time someone tells you that there is a local creative point source of influence, like purpose or instinct, it is bullshit. the ad hoc notion of force in newtonian science is bullshit, newton acknowledged this but people buy into things because everyone else has bought into it.

humans do not 'improve the land', they are included in it and dependent upon it. epigenetic influence is inductively actualizing crop growth and human growth, humans are not 'producing crops'. if someone 'gave you' a thousand acres of the common land that we all depend upon, and all you had to do was to keep clearcutting patches and selling the timber in the free market, how could anyone say that you were improving the land?

as an indigenous friend says (he learned from his fullblood grandmother who raised him), 'there are plenty fish in the river. leave them there'. so we are going to say that the person who takes more fish than he needs and sells them in the free market is one of those guys 'who makes america great'? do we see improvements to the land coming from the interior of men, like we see the influence of gravity coming from the interior of matter? this is inverted to the physical reality of our actual experience wherein 'epigenetic influence inductively actualizes genetic expression such as 'crop growth'. the crops don't grow themselves nor does the so-called 'owner' improve the land by making the crops grow.

loyalty to concensus logic is barren without the fertility of intuition taking its natural precedence over it.

Would thecollective remove this comment from emile, loyalty is a sheepish and ignorant relational quality and we don't want to know about it!!! I am an existentialist nihilist!

loyalty is another word like 'altruism' and 'purpose' which only crops up when one assumes a human is an independently-existing thing-in-itself. in that case, we need words for such behaviours as describe how the single individual relates to another and/or a collective, whereas, in a relational worldview, relations are the basis of things, rather than vice versa, so there is no need to invent words that describe different faculties individuals have for relating to other individuals.

love is a relational word which is not like 'loyalty' and altruism, the latter describing one's inside-outward intention-driven behaviour; e.g. love is a relational influence that is in a natural precedence over things (lovers). love is not a rational intentional behaviour, it is an epigenetic influence that is inductively actualizing genetic expression.

that's my point about the general problem with words that imply local jumpstart influence. organising influences in nature do not derive from the purposeful actions of collections of local material things-in-themselves. the influence of gravity does not derive from matter. to speak of 'the earth's gravitational field' is an error of grammar. that there is a distortion of the gravity field associated with material bodies such as earth in no way implies that the material is the source of the gravity field.

as for 'existentialist nihilist', labels signify categories of things unless the label is 'the unique one'. categories do not exist in a relational world. how many of you are there in the category existentialist nihilist?

You two idiots deserve each other

It doesn't matter what you think or believe in, even if you suddenly became a Marxist or even a Nazi I would acknowledge your unique attributes and not criticize you in public. Have you ever asked yourself why you have no real friends on this site? It's because you push people away,,,,,,even an existentialist nihilist has more friends than you do emile.....There's only one like me......

i am not trying to 'put you down' by that remark, or any other of my remarks. i am just curious when people who see themselves as 'one of a kind' label themselves according to category memberships like 'existentialist' and 'nihilist'.

categories always imply the existence of 'pluralities of things-in-themselves' which is impossible in a relational world [i.e. in a transforming relational continuum where 'everything is in flux' as in the Heraclitean worldview].

e.g. if anarchy is a relational dynamic, there is no need to assume the existence of 'anarchists'. the fact that a person is capable of fornication does not mean that we have to call them 'fornicateurs'. if anarchy is the natural way, we don't need to label people with it, just like we don't need to label people for their propensity to go through bouts of influenza or colds, but yet we label people who go through bouts of schizophrenia, 'schizophrenics'. this is because we see the dynamic in question as being sourced from the inside rather than from the outside.

If you believe that existentialism and nihilism come from inside of you, then you are portraying yourself as a 'thing-in-itself' [an independently-existing binary 'is' rather than 'is not' 'being'], as is the general case when we manufacture categories.

there's another category called 'one of us', and this refers to the 'insider' groups that form in most 'watering holes' or 'discussion forums'. these insider groups tend to hold narrow views and they tend to discourage those who don't hold those narrow views from continuing participation.

many of those who have participated in Anews, who have had views similar to my own (to ours); i.e. who question basic assumptions, have not felt 'welcome' in this Anews forum, have found it abusive and not conducive to open discussion and have moved on. this winnowing out of others with similar views to ours makes 'us' appear 'more anomalous'. in fact, the degree to which we are anomalous in Anews is evidently due to our 'NOT getting the message' and NOT moving on, in spite of a torrent of abuse, than to any inherent anomalousness of our views. We 'stand out' more in the manner of three blacks in a KKK rally.

there are many philosophical discussion groups where nondualist ideas would not be anomalous at all, but, like nietzsche, i am more interested in how the basic assumptions of Western civilization are fucked, how coming to grips with that shatters our belief traditions [transvaluation of all values] and how that impacts our relations with one another and the world. That suggests to me that I am participating in an appropriate group which just happens to be dominated at the moment by narrow-minded views and intolerance. This can change. In fact, it is possible to see change, not by open admission but by patterns of backing off certain entrenched ideas and bit-by-bit assimilating of positions that were formerly resisted.

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Enter the code without spaces.