You can’t be rooted unless you’re free and you can’t be free unless you’re rooted L. Ingalls Wilder


Constructive Recollection

Finding Truth in Science, Justice and Journalism


Our two sources of morality and religion (Bergson 1932) coordinately reflect themselves, "here" in recollection and "now" in construction. The one, the environment/other/reality, consists of material space and immaterial time. The other interacts with it, the organism/self/belief, as what-is-sensed reflects itself in sensing, while knowing reflects itself in what-is-known.

Interaction between our sources is motivated by either power or truth. Power motivates politically within groups, as truth motivates ethically between groups. Truth matters, not power. It is found by looking for independent confirmation. The contents of space, or what-is-sensed (facts), and time, or what-is-known (ideas), thus reunite "here and now", in space-time.

If and when space and time reunite, so do temporalized space and spatialized time, or content-shaping-form in recollection and form-shaping-content in construction, called constructive recollection. Coordinated reflection between sources and independent confirmation within sources, maintain truth within-facts-between-ideas and within-people-between-groups.


1. Coordinated Reflection


Duality of origin (Bergson 1932) is Modern dualism, as opposed to Post-Modern monism. It is defined as "the division of something conceptually into two opposed or contrasted aspects, or the state of being so divided: a dualism between man and nature."1 The age of Modernism began 0 AD, when heaven was separated from earth, in Judeo-Christianity. Later, from the early 17th century on, it entered philosophical works, separating the phenoumenon or subject from the noumenon or object. Starting at the beginning of the 19th century, around the time of the French Revolution, Modernism was eclipsed by Post-Modernism and the noumenon was forgotten about, only to keep the phe-noumenon, which still lasts to this day as phenomenology. Facts or noumena are truth, not ideas or phenoumena, when these ideas are not independent, or when facts do not confirm them. Ideas categorically demanding their own realization using power and politics, railroad the facts.

The two sources reflect themselves in each other. The environment/other/reality reflects itself in the organism/self/belief as content-shaping-form or temporalizing space, in recollection. The organism/self/belief reflects itself in the environment/ other/reality as form-shaping-content or spatializing time, in construction. The one source's content, material substance, what-is-sensed or facts, moves from the periphery to the depth of being in material space, while the other source's content, immaterial substance, what-is-known or ideas, moves from the depth to the periphery of being in immaterial time. Space is compatible with spatialized time at the periphery-, as time is with temporalized space at the depth of being. Depth or radius is incommensurable with periphery or circumference, expressed by the infinite number of decimals in π (pi), the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter. Since the one cannot be reduced to the other, there have to be two sources of being.

The sensed environment/other/reality reflects itself in the sensing organism/self/belief as fact or as what-is-sensed. By sensing what-is-sensed, the source and its reflection, express themselves inwardly, as external normativity for the organism/self/belief, in recollection. Facts are content that shape form, a posteriori or after-the-fact, from the periphery to the depth of being "here", temporalizing space between environment and organism, other and self, or reality and belief.

The knowing organism/self/belief reflects itself in the known environment/other/reality as idea or what-is-known. By knowing what-is-known, the source and its reflection, express themselves outwardly, as internal normativity for the organism/self/belief, in construction. Ideas are content that are shaped by form, a priori or before-the-fact, from the depth to the periphery of being "now", spatializing time between environment and organism, other and self, or reality and belief.

Sources and their self-reflections interact in space-time, through behavior. The organism/self/belief is independent from the environment/other/reality, even though it is part of it. What-is-sensed is reflected inwardly, as what-is-known is reflected outwardly. What-is-sensed impresses itself unnoticeably, as what-is-known could express itself noticeably to the other. Behavior may therefore be described, explained and understood as the material basis for consciousness (De Weijze 1982).

When the sources of recollection and construction are not independent, there can be no need for their self-reflections. Coordinated reflection would then be no more than correspondence between sources, through behavior, and interaction would only be one's powerful reinforcement of the other. Dualism would not be needed, as one source ends up like the other, in Post-Modern dialectic monism. True independence would mean that one source cannot be reduced to the other.

Space and time, or (more precisely) "here" and "now", are separately recollected and constructed, and are being reunited into one "here and now" again. If possible, a source's reflection unites with the other source. Facts, what-is-sensed or the source of recollection, unite with ideas, what-is-known or the reflection of construction, in the environment/other/reality. Ideas, knowing or the source of construction, unite with sensing or the reflection of recollection, in the organism/self/belief.

The precise "here" or "now" between the two sources and their self-reflections, is where or when content (what-is-sensed or what-is-known) is picked up by form (sensing or knowing). Facts or what-is-sensed, are processed by temporalizing space "here" in behavior, and ideas or what-is-known are processed by spatializing time "now" in cognition. Since facts remain spatial in temporalized space and ideas remain temporal in spatialized time, facts and ideas stay dualistically independent.

Like objects in space-time, the organism/self/belief is shaped by-, and shaping, the environment/other/reality. Recollection and construction temporalize towards-, and spatialize away from depth. Space and time are processed separately, to be reunited by opposing sources and reflections. Contents separated for processing and comparing facts or what-is-sensed, recollected in material space, with ideas or what-is-known, constructed in immaterial time, are reunited "here and now".

Temporalized space at the depth of recollection's source and reflection, is commensurable with, and could therefore unite with, time at the depth of construction's source and reflection, through cognition. Spatialized time at the periphery of construction's source and reflection, is commensurable with, and could therefore unite with, space at the periphery of recollection's source and reflection, through behavior. New facts maintain behavior, while new ideas maintain cognition.


In recollection, space temporalizes from "here", at the peripheries of the source (what-is-sensed) and its reflection (sensing), to their depths. In construction, time spatializes from the depths of the source (knowing) and its reflection (what-is-known), to "now" at their peripheries. Temporalized space fuses with actual time at the depths, and spatialized time fuses with actual space at the peripheries, if and when fusion conditions are right, between one source and the other's reflection.

The environment/other/reality is not sensed and known in itself by the organism/self/belief (Kant's "Ding an sich"). Thus, from the periphery to the depths, temporalization of space or sensing what-is-sensed in recollection and spatialization of time or knowing what-is-known in construction is a matter of trust, expectation, presumption, prediction, belief and intent. Actually, this is true for both sources. What can only be sensed, is not known, like what can only be known, is not sensed.

Materially recollected facts and immaterially constructed ideas, differentiate multiple facets and aspects, each of which is shaped "here and now", belonging to the same content (fact or idea) in spite of their differentiation. Content shapes form differentiatedly in recollection, while form shapes content differentiatedly in construction, across all facets and aspects. Form and content of facts and true ideas must stay united, to prevent sociosis (Van den Berg 1956) and dissociation disorder.

figure 4


The "here" and "now" expand between the sources and their reflections: "now, from here to there" and "here, from now to then". "Here and now", in duality of origin and around π, temporalizing space from the environment/other/reality interacts with spatializing time from the organism/self/belief. Content shapes form in recollection while form shapes content in construction, contributing to one functional structure or cultural history (Bergson 1922, Dooyeweerd 1935, Sanders 1976).

Recollecting what-is-sensed happens after-the-fact by temporalizing space, as constructing what-is-known happens before-the-fact (as an idea) by spatializing time. From the periphery to the depth and from the depth to the periphery of being, form recollects- and constructs content, that we believe will fit our world intuitively yet precisely, until we realize our dream or we realize our mistake. Thus content shapes form, while form shapes content, at every level of cultural history.

Form recollecting- and constructing content is cognition. Content-shaping-form or content-shaped-by-form, is behavior. Behavior can be autonomous in spontaneous gestures and living expressions (Shotter 2011). However, behavior can easily group-polarize (Moscovici and Zavalloni 1969, Meertens 2007) and cause dissociation (Dell and O'Neill 2009), as we know from 'social' happenings like riots and hooliganism. Truth and ethics should prevent power and politics to wreak any havoc.

What is "here and now", is organized from "there and then" by a priori ideas (before-the-fact), if construction is in line with recollection, or by a posteriori facts (after-the-fact), if construction is NOT in line with recollection. Post-Modernism or belief in one source orders society or cultural history in line with a power-distanced hierarchy (Mulder 1973). Modernism or belief in two sources uses the one source to verify or falsify the other, preferring truth and ethics over power and politics.

2. Independent Confirmation


When ideas are false, they cannot guide behavior. Therefore they need independent confirmation from the facts, both as negative falsification for their validity, and as positive verification for their reliability. Construction must then be prior-, or a priori (before-the-fact), to a posteriori (after-the-fact) recollection, to have recollection independently confirm any constructed idea, to maintain truth. If and when sensing what-is-sensed independently confirms knowing what-is-known, sensing can also process what-is-known instead of only what-is-sensed, while knowing can also process what-is-sensed instead of only what-is-known, because form (sensing and knowing) and content (what-is-sensed and what-is-known) are the same in space-time, although the one is material (facts) and the other is immaterial (ideas). This swap guarantees that the organism/self/belief (form or sensing and knowing) and the environment/other/reality (content or what-is-sensed and what-is-known) maintain truth within-facts-between-ideas, and ethics within-people-between-groups, when they interact.

Independent confirmation needs dualism, duality of origin or two sources instead of only one. At 0.AD, Judeo-Christianity turned dualistic. Descartes entered dualism into philosophy around 1644.AD. One source, the environment/other/reality, independently confirms the other source, the organism/self/belief, if and when it possibly can in everyday life, indicating truth, as truth found its way in science, justice and journalism through the ages. Philosophical Modernism is dualistic, as opposed to Post-Modernism. Kant highlighted it, enabling Hegel to hijack it, around 1800, and turn dualism back into monism, as in Pre-Modernism. Kant's Copernican Revolution in philosophy maintained that man produced space and time by himself, as basic categories of his cognition. Hegel therefore conveniently discredited the object or the facts, which Kant had called the "noumenon" (literally "that which is unnamed") and kept the other source, the subject or the ideas, called the "phenoumenon", as in phenomenology. Truth detected by independent confirmation, no longer mattered to Post-Modern collectivism, socialism and communism. However, internally- and externally produced space and time can and do co-exist.

From the periphery to the depth of being, space is temporalized as content shapes form in recollection, while from the depth to the periphery, time is spatialized as form shapes content in construction. Ideas or content-shaped-by-form may be positively verified at the periphery of being to determine their reliability, and negatively falsified at the depth to determine their validity, by facts or content-shaping-form. Sources and their (opposite's) reflections reunite space, what-is-sensed or facts, and time, what-is-known or ideas, thereby turning ideas into facts through behavior at the periphery of being, while turning facts into ideas through cognition at the depth of being. From a continuous stream of facts and ideas, construction is turned into recollection through behavior, while recollection is turned into construction through cognition.

Both sources and both of their self-reflections, have periphery and depth. Sources and reflections from their dual opposites unite, if and when the one's content independently confirms the other's. Sources themselves or their self-reflections cannot unite, therefore content travels from one united source and reflection to the other. Sensing what-is-sensed and knowing what-is-known, or sources (what-is-sensed, knowing) and reflections (sensing, what-is-known), flare up and down from π or "here and now" at the periphery, towards- and from the depths of being. Between these two forms (sensing, knowing) and two contents (what-is-sensed or fact, what-is-known or idea), functional structure is found, if and when independent confirmation happens. The other source and reflection are content for the one form, as the one source and reflection are content for the other form. Content shapes form and form shapes content, from one stage to the next, until form can process content continuously, in (externalized) social interaction, the last stage including all previous stages leading up to it.

"The subject goes into the world and loses himself, or he goes into himself and loses the world" (Hegel 1807). Internally normative construction looks for independent confirmation from externally normative recollection, as negative falsification for the validity-, and positive verification for the reliability of ideas. If and when these are found, then spatial content, after it has shaped form, internalizes as time at the depth of being, through cognition, while temporal content, after it is shaped by form, externalizes as space at the periphery, through behavior. Thus, externally normative content, or the environment/ other/reality, independently confirms internally normative content, or the organism/self/belief, in a rational, emotional and/or compassionate way. External normativity can dominate and submit internal normativity, extrinsically motivating "less equal animals" (Orwell 1945) to lose themselves in a power-distanced hierarchy, forgetting about intrinsic motivation.

Content in recollection is what-is-sensed or a fact, while content in construction is what-is-known or an idea. Contents may independently confirm each other, so that their forms, sensing and knowing, can now also process the other content. In recollection contents fuse into knowing what-is-sensed or realization, and in construction into sensing what-is-known or intuition. This is the first stage of independent confirmation, which lifts the slumbering "noumenon" out of subliminal awareness, while pulling the slumbering "phenoumenon" from supraliminal awareness. What-is-known and what-is-sensed have swapped to create new forms and contents which still include the old. These may fuse and swap again, creating new forms and contents in their turn. Realizing what-is-realized and intuiting what-is-intuited could create valuing what-is-valued and trying what-is-tried, which do prepare reacting what-is-reacted and acting what-is-acted, for social interaction.

From the periphery to the depths of being, each stage of independent confirmation adds new content to be processed. The organism/self/belief, which is form, then grows more aware of the environment/other/reality, which is content. At every stage, the contents of recollection and construction renew, although the old content is included and therefore still present. Thus content is shaping form in recollection, while form is shaping content in construction. Content-shaping-form and form-shaping-content then turn into form continuously processing current content, at the definitive stage of independent confirmation between current contents. Reaction independently confirms action, if and when it does, in social belief or in social reality, once externalized, making it noticeable to the environment/other/reality, through behavior. Independent confirmation happens for both sources in two stages, processing contents in four stages, since they must include each other.

As content shapes form or space temporalizes, and form shapes content or time spatializes, in each of the two sources and their (opposite's) reflections, independent rational-, emotional- and/or compassionate confirmation, between forms (sensing and knowing) in time or cognition and between contents (what-is-sensed or facts and what-is-known or ideas) in space or behavior, extends both forms and contents, internally in four stages and externally in one. Independent confirmation enables forms or contents to swap and shape new content or form at a higher stage. Sensing what-is-sensed and knowing what-is-known swap and turn into knowing what-is-sensed (realize what-is-realized) on the recollective side and sensing what-is-known (intuit what-is-intuited) on the constructive side. Similarly, realizing what-is-realized and intuiting what-is-intuited shape intuiting what-is-realized (valuing what-is-valued) and realizing what-is-intuited (trying what-is-tried). Similarly, valuing what-is-valued and trying what-is-tried shape trying what-is-valued (react what-is-reacted) and valuing what-is-tried (act what-is-acted). All this happens internally for all forms and contents, in cognition and unnoticeable behavior. When reacting what-is-reacted and acting what-is-acted independently confirm each other, then reacting what-is-acted in response to the other and acting what-is-reacted in response to the self, start external interaction.

When content travels, from one source and other-reflection to the next, action calls for reaction between them as reaction calls for action within them. Current content is prepared for traveling, within each source and other-reflection, before it travels between them. Preparation takes place in four stages of independent confirmation to make sure that belief is real by positive verification and negative falsification. At the final stage, reaction independently confirms action, and action is externalized in behavior to be noticeable for the other. The other then reacts in response, implicating his own preparations of similar kind, if and when he detects truth by independent confirmation between them. The other then feels confirmed in his independence. Content shapes form in recollection and is shaped by form in construction, within the one and the other simultaneously. Form shapes action in construction, while reaction shapes form in the other's recollection, as content.


To confirm another strengthens independence, while independence is a necessary prerequisite to confirm another. - See more at:

figure 8



3. Constructive Recollection


While coordinated reflection (1) appears in both worlds, one from Post-Modernism, imminently dialectic monism or power & politics, and the other from Modernism, social interactive dualism or truth & ethics, independent confirmation (2) only appears in the latter. Monism may look like dualism, since it is dialectic, however its basic assumption is that we are all one group, and subgroups or individuals only compete for dominance while submitting others (Hegel 1807, Marx 1859, Nietzsche 1901). Instead of one source, dualism has two, which interact to stay on track of truth and not to gain dominance and submission over "less equal" others. Living in the one world or the other, may be a consequence of our upbringing, however we are confronted with how social order is achieved not in our world. Post-Modern power and politics may also look a lot like, and be presented as, truth and ethics, which they are definitely not, as seen from the world which it opposes.

Coordinated reflection between- and independent confirmation within sources, or the environment/other/reality and the organism/self/belief, functionally structure social interaction (3a) and constitute social reality (3b). The one source's external self-reflection is internalized as social identity (3c) by the other, to establish levels of independent confirmation. The next level is interactive, "reacting what-is-acted" in response to the other and "acting what-is-reacted" in response to the self. If and when independent confirmation happens, it may be materialized through behavior. Interaction is motivated either extrinsically by power and politics, reinforced by media, marketing and externally induced self-fulfilling prophecy, or intrinsically by truth and ethics, expressed by independent rational-, emotional- and/or compassionate confirmation from the other. A philosophical war between Modernism and Post-Modernism unfolded, for over two centuries, in everyday life.

3a. Social Interaction

If in one system, social interaction is motivated by power and politics, while in another, by truth and ethics, then social interaction between the systems is awkward and threatening, at least to the one having no fear of dependent rejection as its guiding principle, since independent confirmation has taken that place. Apart from understanding and explaining how social interaction works in the latter, it should be extended to how it feels between the two, from the latter's standpoint. As the one system apparently does not process sensing what-is-sensed in temporalizing space and knowing what-is-known in spatializing time separately like the other, there can only be "criticism" at the group level, which is avoiding dependent rejection by cronyism towards the friend who has all the power and holds all political cards, and prejudice towards the enemy who is in no position to offer anything anyway. The other system is critical in a way that properly represents what Kant meant by critique and not how Hegel and Marx re-explained it, in being intrinsically motivated to find truth and ethics if and when the a priori understanding or knowing what-is-known in spatializing time, is independently confirmed by a posteriori sensibility or sensing what-is-sensed in temporalizing space, critical by rationality, emotion or compassion.

When systems may be analyzed using the same terms in different ways, they are likely to produce unexpected feelings as they run into each other, which may be at any time and any (public) space. Interaction between other and self rather than environment/other/reality and organism/self/belief, turns phenoumenal re-presentation of the Other and the Self into a noumenal presentation, which is noticeable to the real other. There is no need for behavioral contagion, by what may be called spontaneous gestures and living expressions within-groups-between-people, which ultimately can be no more than reinforced conditionings by power and politics. Coordinated reflection between other and self as well as independent confirmation within the self, can be hidden or be made noticeable and shared, through cognition with or without behavior, when cognition is understood to be hidden behavior, noticeable only to the self and not to the other, in social interaction.

Finding truth within us, may be as important as finding truth between us. Within us, recollection independently confirms construction, normally unnoticeable to others. Between us, the other's recollection independently confirms the one's construction, normally noticeable to others. Within us, what-is-known is proved true or false by what-is-sensed, whereas between us, the one's independent rational-, emotional- and/or compassionate confirmation for the other indicates truth. The one's independence confirms the other's independence, needed for his or her self-affirmation. This is social interaction, or one's reaction in response to the other's action and his action in response to his own reaction. Action and reaction at the final stage of independent confirmation that is unnoticeable to the other, then becomes noticeable. The Post-Modern alternative is one telling another what to think, say and do, sanctioned through his group membership acknowledgement.

Groups are formed and society is ordered by truth and ethics or power and politics. Intrinsic motivation to independently confirm (significant) others, by (forward) paying and earning, or offering and accepting, freedom of choice, can be against one's own interests. Extrinsic motivation to escape dependent rejection by dependently confirming friends (cronyism) and independently rejecting enemies (prejudice), creates a power-distanced hierarchy of more or less mimetically equal animals.

Within people, recollection goes before construction, while between people, construction goes before recollection. It is a small cycle of social interaction which grows larger for current content, while new currents emerge. At face value, it seems only an interaction between two independent individuals reacting in response to the other and then acting in response to their own reaction. However, these reactions are content shaping form and actions are form shaping content, in stages of independent confirmation, if and when it happens, within- and between them. Reaction starts from sensing and action starts from knowing. Then, sensing is known, within them, while knowing is sensed, between them. This is the first stage of realizing and intuiting. The next is realizing what-is-intuited (valuing) within them, and intuiting what-is-realized (trying) between them. Finally, trying what-is-valued is reacting within them, while valuing what-is-tried is acting between them.

Sources externalize internal content or ideas and internalize external content or facts. Social interaction, or one's reaction in response to the other's action and action in response to one's own reaction, may happen only in social belief and not yet in social reality, even when externalization and internalization did happen. Social belief then still masks true intentions, out of uncertainty or for manipulative reasons. Uncertainty is lifted when more recollection does happen, for proper construction.

Sources feed content to form, making form shape content and content shape form, from- and to the highest stage of independent confirmation, social interaction, unless social behavior, all by itself, reliably finds independent confirmation between Self and Significant Other. A relationship reverses a posteriori recollection and a priori construction that wards off its falsification attempts and seeks its verification, because independent confirmation is in the relationship itself, already.

Independent rational-, emotional- and/or passionate confirmation between Self and Significant Other, means sameness in spite of independence and difference in spite of confirmation. When the environment/other/reality is the Significant Other and the organism/self/belief is the Self, then independent confirmation is no longer necessary, since truth has already been found. Being someone's Significant Other in itself is the greatest independent confirmation or Truth the Self may aspire to.

Pair-bonding between Self and Significant Other is coordinated reflection by form shaping content in construction and content shaping form in recollection, plus independent confirmation which externalized one's reflection of form reliably by positive verification in behavior at the periphery, and internalized the other's reflection of content validly by negative falsification in cognition at the depth of being, for all interaction between Self and Other in the past, present and future.

Sources and their opposite's self-reflections do find each other, by coordinated reflection and independent confirmation between people, most directly. The one knows what-is-known by the other, as the other senses what-is-sensed by the one. Apparently the one is the source of knowing while the other is the source of sensing, being each other's self-reflections of their sources' content. Thus the Significant Other must for that content be more important than the one to him- or herself.

Form shapes content for- and of the Significant Other and the environment/other/reality. If it is true, that content shapes that particular form in return. Also, if it is true, that content (coordinately) reflects the Self, who is the source of that form. Content shapes form for- and of the Self and the organism/self/belief. If it is true, that form shapes that particular content in return. Also, if it is true, that form (coordinately) reflects the Significant Other who is the source of that content.

What-is-sensed, -realized, -valued and reacted in recollection from the other, independently confirming what-is-known, -intuited, -tried and -acted in construction towards the other, is lifting the other above his or her current self. The same may happen in the other direction, even when contents are different or more attuned to another background. The facts will never be violated by differing ideas and the people are never violated by differing groups, between Significant Others.

Lifting the other above him- or herself by truth and ethics is not doing so by power and politics, although it could improve his or her living conditions. It would happen through prejudice against enemies of the own group and cronyism for friends of the own group and it could be framed as truth and ethics or as a care project. This is where the two systems, monism and dualism, get deeply confused, mainly by calling what is different by the same name or what is the same by different names.

The environment/other/reality and the organism/self/belief coordinately reflect themselves, to independently confirm each other's self-reflection, for constructive recollection of facts, internalized after recollection, in cognition at the depths of being, and ideas, externalized after construction, in behavior at the periphery of being. Sources interact in four phases of a social cycle, continuously reacting in response to the other's acting (1+3) and acting in response to their own reacting (2+4).

By stages of independent confirmation, facts develop in behavior from sensing what-is-sensed to reacting what-is-reacted, if and when facts positively verify ideas, while ideas develop in cognition from knowing what-is-known to acting what-is-acted, if and when facts negatively falsify ideas. Independent confirmation should reliably turn constructed ideas into facts to-be-recollected through behavior and should validly turn recollected facts into ideas to-be-constructed through cognition.

Forms in both sources process content "here and now", at the highest possible stage, which is ultimately social interaction in four phases. Every phase consists of four states and every next phase moves one state forward. Each state participates in all four phases, whether it has just started, just finished or in between. Four states cycle through one phase and four phases cycle through one interaction. Higher stages necessarily include the lower ones yet lower stages not necessarily higher ones.

Content shaping form in recollection, internalized in cognition after negative falsification, is a recollected idea, adding to-, yet never replacing, authentic or unshaped form of the person-in-itself, who we know and do not sense (phenoumenon). Form shaping content in construction, externalized in behavior after positive verification, is a constructed fact, adding to-, yet never replacing, authentic or unshaped content of the thing-in-itself, which we sense and do not know (noumenon). 

Social interaction is a back- and forth between sources. Every action and reaction may be seen as an alternating sequence of sensing and knowing what-is-sensed and what-is-known, realizing and intuiting what-is-realized and what-is-intuited or valuing and trying what-is-valued and what-is-tried. Each of these layers or stages adds reliability to behavior and validity to cognition, for more sensibility towards-, and better understanding of, organism/self/belief and environment/other/reality.

When 4 states in each of 4 phases of the social interactive cycle overlap 3 states with the next phase, 2 states with the next and 1 state with the last, it takes 2 cycles to return to the first of 8 states in total, including the noumenon (sensing-what-is-sensed) and the phenoumenon (knowing-what-is-known). States of social belief are: the subliminal noumenon, trust, expectation, presumption, prediction, belief, intention and the supraliminal phenoumenon, prepared for social reality.

In social interaction, the other's fact, whether it is created by power or by truth, is the one's idea, if he wants his belief to represent reality. Then the one's idea, in response, leads to the one's fact, or social belief externalized into social reality, again, created by power or by truth. Next the reverse in interaction makes the one's fact the other's idea, if he wants to be just as realistic. Finally his response is to turn his idea into his fact. That is how the phases of social interaction keep cycling.

Facts involve both people who are socially interacting. Ideas do not necessarily involve them both. What the organism/self/belief knows-intuits-tries-acts as an idea, is what he senses-realizes-values-reacts about the environment/other/reality as a fact, if and when it has been independently confirmed. Social interaction is to provide independent confirmation rationally, emotionally or compassionately. Ideas may achieve the status of facts and involve both people socially interacting as well.

3b. Social Reality

Normativity is external or internal in a hierarchical, power-distanced society, making people dialectically dominate and submit others. Extrinsic motivation by power and politics, within-groups-between-people, causes dissociation between organism and environment, self and other or belief and reality. All conservatively submit by confirmation bias or cronyism, as one dominates top-down, while all progressively dominate by independence bias or prejudice, as one submits bottom-up.

Contrary to claims often made, morality and religion are not closed and static in philosophical Modernism, nor are they open and dynamic in Post-Modernism (Bergson 1932). Within-ideas-between-facts, relations may all be trusted, expected, presumed, predicted, believed and intended as they are. Still, when they cannot be translated, as they automatically are anyway, into relations within-facts-between-ideas, then Post-Modern imminent dialectics is closed and static, all by itself.

Independent rational-, emotional- and/or compassionate confirmation indicates factual truth of ideas. Dependent rejection by the threat of excommunication or homelessness, on the contrary, indicates a need for solidarity, safety and security, not minding factual truth. Intrinsic motivation within-people-between-groups promotes liberty of open morality and dynamic religion, while extrinsic motivation within-groups-between-people promotes dogma of closed morality and static religion.

Both power and truth predict what happens, therefore both politics and ethics are accountable. Yet, power and politics are only self-interested, while truth and ethics are not selective. Truth is detected by independent confirmation, while power is strengthened by reinforced conditioning in politics, media and marketing. When power is not comforted by truth, it changes facts instead of ideas. Power and politics may look like truth and ethics, even when their worlds are incompatible.

Open morality and dynamic religion make sure that relations within-groups-between-people and within-ideas-between-facts, do not get entangled when they (automatically) translate into relations within-people-between-groups and within-facts-between-ideas. These entanglements and complexities call for socioses at the sociological level and for dissociation disorders such as derealization and depersonalization, at the psychological level (Dell and O'Neill 2009), waiting to happen.

Truth and ethics may be replaced easily by power and politics, if that is what the spivs want, which became clear when Post-Modernism took over from Modernism in early 1800s philosophy and especially in the 1960s, apparently to deflect a new World War. Even science, justice and journalism were affected and the abuse of trust and safety particularly in these secluded realms shocked people to the core, when it shifted from truth to power, in the way the ideas determined the facts.

Within-ideas-between-facts there can be no independent confirmation, because it is the idea that links the facts as it sees fit, without the need for validity by negative falsification or reliability by positive verification. This is what phenomenology claims. However relations within-ideas-between-facts automatically translate into relations within-facts-between-ideas, which have to be valid and reliable or the facts will be incompatible, even within themselves, between all of their aspects.

Coordinated reflection enabled sources to fuse with the other source's reflection, if and when their contents confirmed each other independently. Fusion led from sensing what-is-sensed to reacting what-is-reacted in recollection and from knowing what-is-known to acting what-is-acted in construction. Both within- and between sources, constructive recollection happens when content shapes form in recollection of facts, while form shapes content in construction of ideas. Interaction between sources is motivated by power or truth. Power motivates politically within groups as truth motivates ethically between groups. When truth is maintained, relations within-groups-between-people or within-ideas-between-facts, do not entangle when they automatically translate or reduce to relations within-people-between-groups or within-facts-between-ideas. Otherwise, dissociation disorders might entail sociosis, group-polarization, extremism and possibly even terrorism.

3c. Social Identity

The attention economy, like the financial economy, is also about supply and demand. Obviously people can pay attention to one thing at a time only and there is only a limited amount of time in a day or a lifetime. Then it is economical or wise, not to have facts entangled by contentious ideas which do not care about the truth and instead only care about (more) power, never minding the facts, unless people are interested in imminent dialectics and synthesizing the antithesis into their thesis.

Social identity is most clear and distinct in personal behavior and cognition. Behavior is both internal and external, while cognition is only internal. Internally, content shapes form in recollection and form shapes content in construction, if and when independent rational-, emotional- and/or compassionate confirmation happens between them at every stage except the final one, between action in response to Self and reaction in response to Other. This may be kept internal, however it is intended to be externalized, in social reality, noticeable to the other. Cognition is externalized into behavior, when the other negatively falsifies it and positively verifies it, as perceived by the one. Behavior is internalized into cognition to see whether or not positive verification and negative falsification could happen; if not, it does not enter recollection beyond that (initial) level. Else, the fact or what-is-sensed and the idea or what-is-known continue processing or being processed.

Critical case studies should exemplify the current paradigm. Coordinated reflection and independent confirmation within-facts-between-ideas or within-people-between-groups, maintain truth and ethics, especially in science, justice and journalism. At the latest eclipse of philosophical Modernism by Post-Modernism in recent history, these realms have not remained secluded and did give in to the fad. The problem is that the worlds or systems are so different and do not account for the other, that their being so close together, hurts and leads to extremism, in everything we do, say and think. Since striving for domination and submission is in the blood of the one, while it is not in that of the other, it inherently dismisses the other as well. This has tormented those who were, and still are, looking for truth, in their desperate need to survive the disorientation, dissociation disorders and socioses caused by imminent dialectics since the May 1968 Cultural Revolution2.

Intrinsic motivation within-people-between-groups could beat extrinsic motivation within-groups-between-people in the end, since minority influence may be strong when consistent over long periods of time and not dividing the majority’s attention (Moscovici 1974). If relations are entangled by closed and static ideas reusing the same facts without opening up about their central assumptions to each other, then facts may still be strong enough to untangle themselves, if consistent.

Ideas stem from beliefs and facts stem from reality. Within beliefs, facts are related simply by logic, chronology or association, as in reality, ideas are related by either truth or power. To disentangle relations within-facts-between-ideas they may be reduced, from actions and reactions to what-is-sensed and what-is-known or their building-block facts and ideas, to grasp the linking-pin function between ideas, forced to be con-fused or be loyal to one idea, not the other or both.

Facts and ideas may increase, however they remain facts and ideas, no matter how big or small. Relations within-ideas-between-facts are constructed by the organism/self/belief, while relations within-facts-between-ideas are recollected by the environment/other/reality. What-is-sensed, what-is-realized, what-is-valued and what-is-reacted are facts, and are relations between ideas. What-is-known, what-is-intuited, what-is-tried and what-is-acted are ideas, and are relations between facts.

When ideas are incoherent, uncoordinated or aim for separate targets, within-facts-between-ideas, then input- and output-conditions for these facts may wreak havoc or halt in deadlock. The same is true for relations within-people-between-groups, when groups are incoherent, uncoordinated or aim for separate targets. People may call for "strong leaders" or unified rules to resolve this, however all facts or people should independently confirm every new idea or group beforehand.

Relations within-ideas-between-facts are constructed within-groups-between-people, in social belief and maybe in social reality. These relations are logical, chronological or associative. When groups are closed and static, no criticism and only a priori "truth" is allowed, remaining dogmatically untouched. When groups are open and dynamic, within-people-between-groups, social reality and social belief untangle within-facts-between-ideas, by the application of constructive recollection.





Philosophy Application


figure 14



Truth and ethics have two sources (dualism), looking for-, finding- and looking after independent confirmation from- and for each other. Each source needs the other's self-reflection, when they interact, motivated by truth within-facts-between-ideas, and ethics within-people-between-groups. Imminent dialectics only have one source (monism), avoiding dependent rejection by independent rejection of enemies and dependent confirmation of friends. Dialectics are motivated by power within-ideas-between-facts, and politics within-groups-between-people. Whereas dualism reduces to space and time separately, monism only reduces to unified space-time. Constructive recollection assumes that as man and nature interact, space and time can only be separately processed, to find truth and reunite, through independent rational-, emotional- and/or compassionate confirmation. Otherwise, incommensurability, polarization and dissociation, between environment and organism, self and other and/or reality and belief, will be increasingly difficult to recover from, personally and socially.



Berg, J.H. van den (1956). "Metabletica of leer der veranderingen. Beginselen van een historische psychologie". Nijkerk: Callenbach.

Bergson, H. (1903). "Matière et Mémoire". Paris: Félix Alcan.

Bergson, H. (1907). "La Pensée et le Mouvant". New York: The Citadel Press.

Bergson, H. (1910). "Time and Free Will: An Essay on the Immediate Data of Consciousness". Montana: Kessinger Publishing Company.

Bergson, H. (1911a). "Creative Evolution". New York: Henry Holt and Company.

Bergson, H. (1911b). "The Perception of Change". Oxford: Clarendon.

Bergson, H. (1922). "Durée et Simultanéité". Paris: Félix Alcan.

Bergson, H. (1932). "The Two Sources of Morality And Religion". London: Macmillan and Company Limited.

Bergson, H. (1946). "The Creative Mind: An Introduction to Metaphysics". New York: Citadel Press.

Boekestijn, C. (1978). "De psychologie van relaties tussen groepen". In: Jaspars, J.M.F.; Vlist, R. v.d. "Sociale Psychologie in Nederland". Meppel: Boom.

Campbell, D.T.; Stanley J.C. (1963). "Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research". Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Dawkins, R. (1976). "The Selfish Gene". New York City: Oxford University Press.

Deleuze, G. (1991). "Bergsonism". New York: Zone Books.

Dell, P.F.;  O'Neil, J.A. (2009). "Dissociation And The Dissociative Disorders: DSM-V and Beyond". New York: Routledge: 750.

Derrida, J. (1992). "Force of Law”. In: D. Cornell, M. Rosenfeld, and D. G. Carlson "Deconstruction and the Possibility of Justice". New York: Routledge.

Descartes, R. (1644). "The Principles of Philosophy".

Dooyeweerd, H. (1935-36). "The Philosophy of the Law-Idea". Amsterdam: H.J. Paris.

Duijker, H.C.J. (1980). "Psychopolis". Deventer: Van Loghum Slaterus.

Festinger, L. (1957). "A theory of cognitive dissonance." Evanston: Row, Peterson & Co.

Gendlin, E.T. (1997). "A Process Model". New York: The Focusing Institute.

Gilens, M.; Page, B.I. (2014). "Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens". Cambridge: Perspectives on Politics.

Girard, R. (1961). "Mensonge romantique et vérité romanesque". Paris: Grasset. 

Gould, S.J. (1989). "Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History". New York: W. W. Norton & Co.

Groot, A.D. de (1966). "Methodology. Foundations of inference and research in the behavioral sciences". The Hague-Paris: Mouton & Co.

Hegel, G.W.F. (1807). "Phänomenologie des Geistes”. Bamberg und Würzburg: Joseph Anton Goebhardt.

Hegel, G.W.F. (1830). "Enzyklopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften Pt. I". Von eigener Hand.

Kant, I. (1781). "Kritik der reinen Vernunft". Riga: J.F. Hartknoch.

Kant, I. (1793). "Kritik der Urteilskraft". Berlin und Libau: Lagarde und Friederich.

Lawlor, L.; Moulard, V. (2004). "Henri Bergson". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Lewin, K. ; (1945). "The Research Center for Group Dynamics at Massachusetts Institute of Technology". Sociometry 8 (2): 126–136.

Meertens, R.W. (1980). "Groepspolarisatie". Deventer: Van Loghum Slaterus.

Meertens, R.W. (2007). "The Hofstadgroep".

Marx, K. (1859). "Zur Kritik der Politischen Ökonomie". Berlin: Verlag von Franz Dunder.

Marx, K. (1867). "Das Kapital". Berlin: Verlag von Otto Meisner.

Moscovici, S.; Zavalloni, M. (1969). "The group as a polarizer of attitudes". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 12 (2): 125–135.

Moscovici, S.; Nemeth, C. (1974). "Social psychology: Classic and contemporary integrations". Oxford: Rand McNally.

Mulder, M.;  Veen, P.;  Rodenburg, C.;  Frenken, J.;  Tielens, H. (1973). "The power distance reduction hypothesis on a level of reality". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 9 (2): 87–96.

Nietzsche, F. (1901). "Der Wille zur Macht. Versuch einer Umwerthung aller Werthe (Studien und Fragmente)". Leipzig: C. G. Naumann

Orwell, G. (1945). "Animal Farm". London: Martin Secker & Warburg.

Ouweneel, W.J. (1984). "Psychologie”. Amsterdam: Buijten & Schipperheijn.

Popper, K. (1935). "Logik der Forschung". Vienna: Julius Springer Verlag.

Redding, P. (2010). "Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Rohlf, M. (2010). “Immanuel Kant”. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Rorty, R. (1979). "Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature". Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Rotter, J.B. (1954). "Social learning and clinical psychology". New York: Prentice-Hall.

Sanders, C. (1972). "De behavioristische revolutie in de psychologie". Deventer: Van Loghum Slaterus.

Sanders, C.; Eisenga, L.K.A.; Van Rappard, J.F.H. (1976). "Inleiding in de grondslagen van de Psychologie". Deventer: Van Loghum Slaterus.

Sanders, C.; Rappard, J.F.H. van (1982). "Tussen Ontwerp En Werkelijkheid". Amsterdam: Boom Meppel.

Shotter, J. (1984). "Social Accountability and Selfhood". Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Shotter, J. (2005). "Moving on by backing away". In G. Yancy, "Narrative Identities: Psychologists Engaged In Self-construction". London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Shotter, J. (2011). "Draft: ‘Spontaneous Responsiveness, Chiasmic Relations, And Consciousness – Inside The Realm Of Living Expression’",

Simon, H.A. (1971), "Designing Organizations for an Information-Rich World". In: Martin Greenberger, "Computers, Communication, and the Public Interest". Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins Press.

Turner, M. (1968). "Psychology and the Philosophy of Science". New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Weijze, R.C. de (1982). "Het gedrag als de materiele basis voor het bewustzijn en bewustzijn als oriëntatie op het gedrag". PDF

Wit, H.F. de (1991). "Contemplative Psychology". Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press.

Wittgenstein, L.J.J. (1922). "Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus." Annalen der Naturphilosophie, 14

Žižek, S. (2012). "Less Than Nothing: Hegel and the Shadow of Dialectical Materialism". London: Verso.


1Oxford Dictionaries

2Website TormentedInHiding





Send Feedback