Dear
Alan,
I
just loved the phrase…beginners,; is there anything else I wonder?? Smile Love
Je Kan
From:
Practitioner-Researcher [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Alan Rayner (BU)
Sent: 07 October 2009
16:43
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject:
Re: Would you mind suggesting?
Yes, I woke up this
morning with the thought that the simplest possible description of
inclusionality 'for beginners' is that it is a way of understanding
Nature based on the recognition that SPACE DOES NOT STOP AT BOUNDARIES. (you
can find this statement on the 'what is inclusionality' page at www.inclusionality.org).
Correspondingly
EVERYTHING IN NATURE IS AN EXAMPLE OF INCLUSIONALITY. All form is flow-form, [a variably
viscous dynamic (electromagnetic) configuration of space].
Or, as the poetic imagination of William Wordsworth put it: 'In
nature everything is DISTINCT, yet nothing DEFINED into absolute independent
singleness. Fungal mycelia and wound healing are especially evocative
illustrations of the natural flow form, but to single them out is liable to
give people the impression that 'inclusionality is a special case'. To my
mind, this is not so. Inclusionality is the general case (whereas RATION-ALITY
can only deal with PART-TRUTH [one-sided truth]).
Any theory that is
predicated on DEFINITION (the INTRANSIGENT assumption that space stops and
starts at discrete limits) will hence be profoundly UNREALISTIC. It will
impose false discontinuity (false dichotomy) on Nature, leading to a
pluralistic proliferation of mutually inconsistent concepts or 'part-truths',
ALL of which are ARTEFACTS. We may be able to SIMULATE or COMPUTE THE COURSE
of some
natural processes using these concepts - and their discontinuous
mathematical foundations - but we will not DEEPLY UNDERSTAND any of them.
And through this lack of understanding, we generate the grounds for
PSYCHOLOGICAL, SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE. We set the stage for
evolutionarily and environmentally unsustainable ways of life that involve
terrible human conflict and waste of our creative and loving potential, not
least as alluded to in the attached piece.
Please don't fall
into the trap of trying to explain or argue the case for inclusionality
rationalistically (in definitive terms) - that isn't possible. To 'get'
inclusionality and its implications requires a leap of the poetic imagination,
founded in a deep appreciation of the dynamics of natural flow-form.
I hope this helps.
I also hope you won't mind my sharing this correspondence with the
practitioner-researcher list, because I think it might help people recognise
the ENORMITY of what I think is at stake here. Inclusionality isn't an
academic language game for me. I think we URGENTLY need to STOP teaching
ourselves intransigence, which is the breeding ground for hatred of the kind
that was evident in a film I was watching last night about the Blitz of
Coventry and its repercussions: what on Earth could make anyone want to inflict such
suffering on their human companions, and derive gratification from doing
so?
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday,
October 07, 2009 6:31 AM
Subject: Re: Would you
mind suggesting?
Dear Alan,
Thank you for your prompt reply. I appreciate your
comments on the importance of continuity of space and content. Let us think
how I propose this concept into my cases of two inventions, Bio-chip and
Vitro repairation materia.
I wonder if there any items or any more content I
could add into my comparisons on Darwin's and Inclusionality
Evolutionary Theory?
I have illustrated two examples of Inclusionality, such
as the growth of Mycelia and the healing process of wounds. If
there is something else I may mention to enrich my literature
review?
Many thanks for your kind help
again.
2009/10/6 Alan Rayner (BU) <[log in to unmask]>
I think what you
are trying to do here is important, and there is some useful gathering
together of relevant literature.
However, I don't
think you have quite got to the key point, which is that organism and
environment are continuous, not discontinuous. Both competition and
co-operation assume that the organism can be treated as if it is a discrete
(isolated) entity, separable from its neighbourhood.
I'm attaching two
more relevant pieces of writhing (they can both be found in 'From Emptiness
to Openness).
I have just been
given the go-ahead to share the following links, containing excerpts from my
presentation in the Lecture Room of the Linnaean Society, Burlington House,
Piccadily, London (where Darwin and Wallace's paper on the 'Origin of
Species' was first presented in 1858), on 30 June this summer.
Please feel free
to circulate if appropriate.
1)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wORIPFa2sEk
4)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Db8OeyveFUY
----- Original
Message -----
Sent: Monday,
October 05, 2009 10:30 AM
Subject: Would you mind
suggesting?
Dear Alan,
How are you? Thank you for your
reply last time. It is very helpful.
I have reviewed the
Darwin Evolutionary and Inclsuionality perspecties on Biology and their
muation form in Economic Innovation theories.
Here I enclsoed with
the draft. Would you mind giving me some suggestions as I am not sure if I
got your perspective right? I used some comparisons in tables at the
bottom of the file which I would like to inviting you to suggest and
comment. I will work on the descrition later on, but I would like to
asking your opinions firstly.
Your inputs are most
appreciatd!
Kind
Regards,
John
Internal
Virus Database is out of date.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version:
8.5.374 / Virus Database: 270.12.69/2176 - Release Date: 06/14/09
17:54:00
