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

Constructive Recollection Philosophy Application

Finding Truth in Science, Justice and Journalism

 

Ron de Weijze - Jan. 2016

Free University, Amsterdam

 

 

Two social systems confront each other in our daily lives, making us feel awkward and unable to choose. The one motivates politically to avoid power or reach for it, while the other motivates ethically to seek truth or avoid falsity, ourselves. These two systems developed in philosophical Modernism and Post-Modernism, or dualism and monism. Stresses between them, stem from the one's disguise as the other, entangling relations within-people-between-groups, and even more, relations within-facts-between-ideas. Constructive Recollection aims to untangle these relations, for the sake of truth and innocence.

Keywords: modern philosophy, postmodernism, Kant, Hegel, dualism, monism, power, politics, truth, ethics, form, content, sensing, knowing, causality, teleology, sociology, psychology, organism, self, belief, environment, other, reality, methodology, imminent dialectics, Bergson, Sanders

 

 

When philosophical Modernism was described most articulately, Post-Modernism was just around the corner. Modernism was dualistic, while Post-Modernism is monistic, reducing the two sources of our lives to just one. The impact of this new view has been, and continues to be, enormous. We fail to notice that, since the exact date of this transition is missing or represented at different moments according to different disciplines such as art, architecture, Roman-Catholicism or philo- sophy1. It seems that at the beginning of the French Revolution (1789), when Kant finished the best work on modern phi- losophy (Rohlf 2010), Post-Modernism took over Modernism, willfully misinterpreting Kant's work, reducing it to monism.

Our two sources coordinately reflect (1) themselves, "here" in recollection and "now" in construction. The one is material space and immaterial time, which the other interacts with, as what-is-sensed reflects in sensing and knowing reflects in what-is-known. The interaction is motivated by power or truth. Power motivates politically within groups, while truth motivates ethically between groups. Truth matters, while power should not. Independent confirmation (2) detects Truth. The contents of space and time, or spatialized time and temporalized space, reunite "here and now", as content-shaping- form in recollection and form-shaping-content in construction, therefore being called here, constructive recollection (3).

 

1. Coordinated Reflection

    

The two sources of life, or duality of origin (Bergson 1932), comprise 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."2 The age of Modernism began AD 0, when heaven was separated from earth, at the Cross, in Judeo-Christianity. From the mid 17th century, it entered philosophy, separating the phenoumenon or sub- ject from the noumenon or object. From the early 19th century, around the time of the French Revolution, the noumenon was 'lost'. Modernism was effectively cut in half by Post-Modernism. Only the phe-noumenon was kept, which is now phenomenology. Facts or noumena are truth itself and not ideas or phenomena, when these ideas are not independent, or when facts do not confirm them. Ideas categorically demanding their own realization by power and politics, railroad the facts, convenient only for those who order society into a dominant/submitting power-distancing hierarchy (Mulder 1973).

Our two sources reflect themselves in each other. The sensed environment/other/reality (source1) reflects itself in the sensing organism/self/belief (reflection1 in source2), while the knowing organism/self/belief (source2) reflects itself in the known environment/other/reality (reflection2 in source1). Sources are what-is-sensed and knowing, space and time, or matter and energy. Reflections of sources are not sources themselves. Space has three dimensions (sphere), while time has one dimension (radius). Space is compatible with spatialized time at the periphery, while time is compatible with tempo- ralized space at the depth. Space and time are separate, because the ratio between the sphere's circumference and its radius is π (pi), which has an infinite number of decimal spaces. Therefore, there are two sources of being. Continuously, spatial content is temporalized from the periphery to the depth of the sphere, while temporal content is spatialized from the depth to the periphery. Space transforms into time and time into space, through those spheres. One source reflects itself in the other, as the other's aim, of content-shaping-form by temporalizing space and of form-shaping-content by spatializing time.

Normativity is external in recollection and internal in construction. The sensed environment/other/reality reflects itself in the sensing organism/self/belief as fact or as what-is-sensed. The source and its reflection express themselves inwardly, by external normativity. Facts are content-shaping-form, a posteriori or after-the-fact, from the periphery to the depth of being, temporalizing space. The knowing organism/self/belief reflects itself in the known environment/other/reality as idea or what-is-known. The source and its reflection express themselves outwardly, by internal normativity. Ideas are content-shaped-by-form, a priori or before-the-fact, from the depth to the periphery of being, spatializing time.

Sources and their self-reflections interact through behavior. The organism/self/belief is independent from the environment/ other/reality, even while being part of it. What-is-sensed is reflected inwardly, from the periphery of the sphere, and what- is-known is reflected outwardly, from the depth of the sphere. What-is-sensed impresses itself unnoticeably to the other, as what-is-known expresses itself noticeably or not. Behavior is the material basis for consciousness (De Weijze 1982).

If the sources of recollection and construction are not independent, there is no need for the sources' self-reflections. Coordinated reflection would then be no more than a certain degree of correspondence between sources, through behavior, and interaction would only be one's reinforcement of the other. Dualism would not be needed, as one source ends up like the other, in Post-Modern monism. However, independence means that one source cannot be reduced to the other.

Sources and their self-reflections always share particular points in space or time at the peripheries of their spheres, where they touch, "here" in recollection (sensing what-is-sensed) and "now" in construction (knowing what-is-known). When these points change their relative positions in space-time, a flat surface or field unfolds in our experience or cultural history. This is a horizon of all "heres" and "nows". "Here" and "now" are always naturally connected, except where or when we are processing their contents, temporalizing space of what-is-sensed (facts) and spatializing time of what-is-known (ideas).

Content is what-is-sensed and what-is-known or facts and ideas, springing "here" in space that is to be temporalized, and deposited "now" in time that has been spatialized, as we process it. Content always correspond to itself, "across the horizon", and it does not necessarily correspond to the opposite content although it should, to stay on track of truth. It shapes form in one source and reflection, recollecting, while form shapes content in the opposite source and reflection, constructing. It then travels from one source to the other and back again, through the source's reflections", if and when truth between one source and the opposite source's reflection is sought. Content generated "here" and "now" is kept "there" and "then".

Space and time, or "here" and "now", are separately recollected and constructed, to reunite as "here and now". If possible, the self-reflection of one source coincides with the other source. The source of recollection, which is the content of space, what-is-sensed or facts, coincides with the self-reflection of the source of construction, the content of time, what- is-known or ideas, in the environment/other/reality, while the source of construction, which is the form of time or know- ing, coincides with the self-reflection of the source of recollection, the form of space or sensing, in the organism/self/belief.

Content (what-is-sensed or what-is- known) is picked up "here" in recollection and deposited "now"  in con- struction by form (sensing or knowing), between sources and their self-reflections. What-is-sensed or facts are processed by space being temporalized or content-shaping-form, "here" in behavior, that is steering cognition, as what-is- known or ideas are processed by time being spatialized or form-shaping-content, "now" in cognition, that is steering behavior.

Just 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, processed separately, reunite by opposing sources and reflections. Contents separated for processing, may coincide, as facts or what-is-sensed, recollected from material space, and ideas or what-is-known, constructed from immaterial time, reuniting "here and now".

Temporalized space at the depth of the source and of its reflection in recollection, may be compatible with time at the depth of the source and of its reflection in construction, through cognition, and coincide with it. Spatialized time at the periphery of the source and of its reflection in construction, may be compatible with space at the periphery of the source and of its reflection in recollection, through behavior, and coincide with it. Thus cognition and behavior reunite space and time.

The "here" and "now" are always naturally connected, therefore our sources, what-is-sensed and knowing, are always con- nected as well. Therefore, the sources' self-reflections, sensing and what-is-known, are set free. Recollection (sensing what-is-sensed) and construction (knowing what-is-known) are separate, looking for "theres" and "thens" to coincide and reunite "there and then" plus "here and now" by naturally or culturally reinforced conditioning, in behavior and cognition.

    

Sensing what-is-sensed in recollection and knowing what-is-known in construction, are independent even when the sources, what-is-sensed and knowing, lockstep "here and now". Their reflections, sensing and what-is-known, roam free, to recollect facts and construct ideas, and may do so only sub- or supraliminally, at the peripheries of the spheres, not knowing what-is-sensed and not sensing what-is-known. This free roaming is to recollect and construct content that will coincide with the other side. It will reach the next stable stage, between recollection and construction, for its contents.

What-is-sensed must be known and what-is-known must be sensed. Therefore, the sensed environment/other/reality (sour- ce1) makes the sensing organism/self/belief (reflection1) circle around it, while the knowing organism/self/belief (source2) makes the known environment/other/reality (reflection2) circle around it. One reflection recollects facts and the other constructs ideas. Salient for reflections is what is trusted, expected, presumed, predicted, believed or intended, as natural- ly-, or else reinforced, conditioned reflexes. Content-shapes-form and form-shapes-content, or facts-shape-ideas and ideas-shape-facts, at the peripheries of both sources and reflections, through behavior, where facts "here" are related to facts "there", by truth or power, and cognition, as ideas "now" are related to ideas "then", by logic, chronology and/or association.

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 coincides with real time at the depths, while spatialized time coincides with real space at the peripheries. Then, the "here" and the "now" are reunited into one "here and now" again, between both sources and both other source's reflections, like they were before their separation for dual processing.

The organism/self/belief cannot sense or know the environment/other/reality in itself (Kant's "Ding an sich"). What can on- ly be sensed, cannot be known, like what can only be known, cannot be sensed. Sources and reflections condition content, from the periphery to the depths, sensing what-is-sensed (recollection) temporalizes space and knowing what-is- known (construction) spatializes time. Conditioned content is trusted, expected, presumed, predicted, believed and intended.

Materially recollected facts and immaterially constructed ideas, shaped "here and now", differentiate multiple facts and ideas, belonging to the same next stage. Content shapes form in recollection, while form shapes content in construc- tion, across as many "heres" and "nows" as are implied by the content (fact and/or idea). As long as the two types of content do not coincide, they need to develop and wait their turn, to prevent sociosis (Van den Berg 1956) and dissociation disorder.

figure 4

    

In duality of origin and around π, "now, from here to there" and "here, from now to then" become possible at the next stage of processing. Content picked up "here" in recollection and deposited "now" in construction, accumulates when "there" becomes the new "here" and "then" the new "now", expanding the orientation from the highest stage. Interaction between the two sources and their opposite's self-reflections, temporalizes space from their peripheries and spatializes time from their depths, as content-shaping-form in recollection and form-shaping-content in construction. One functional structure (or form) of space-time content or cultural history emerges (Kant 1781, Bergson 1922, Dooyeweerd 1935, Sanders 1976).

The environment/other/reality is sensed through object-orientation, and known through multi-perspectivism, by the orga- nism/self/belief. Facts or what-is-sensed in sensing and ideas or what-is-known in knowing, transition from "there and then" to "here and now" for processing. Contents shape forms after-the-fact and are shaped by forms before-the-fact. Shaping is to functionally structure social belief or social reality, by either natural- or reinforced conditioning.

Recollecting what-is-sensed happens after-the-fact by temporalizing space, from the periphery to the depth of being, as constructing what-is-known happens before-the-fact (as an idea) by spatializing time, from the depth to the periphery of being. Social interaction uses form to shape content and content to shape form. 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.

Content-shaping-form in recollection followed by form-shaping-content in construction, is cognition. Form-shaping-content in construction followed by content-shaping-form in recollection, is behavior. Behavior could be autonomous in spontaneous gestures and living expressions (Shotter 2011). However, then it may spin out of control and group-polarize (Moscovici and Zavalloni 1969, Meertens 2007) into socioses and dissociation disorders (Dell and O'Neill 2009). Only truth and ethics can prevent or heal the consequences of the abuse of power and politics, disguised as truth and ethics.

What is "here and now" was organized "there and then", from a priori ideas (before-the-fact), if construction was predicta- bly in line with recollection, or from a posteriori facts (after-the-fact), if construction was unpredictably not in line. Power and politics change facts within-groups-between-people, while truth and ethics leave facts intact within-people-between-groups. Ideas should be independently confirmed by other ideas or by the facts. Post-Modernism or belief in one source (monism), orders society or cultural history in line with a power-distancing hierarchy of power and politics. Modernism or belief in two sources (dualism), uses one source to verify or falsify the other one, looking for truth and ethics.

Sensing synthesizes what-is-sensed "here" by temporalizing space in recollection. Knowing analyzes what-is-known "now" by spatializing time in construction. Spatial content is temporalized into temporal form and finally immaterialized through cognition, while temporal form is spatialized into spatial content and finally materialized through behavior. New levels of functional structure or layers of personal culture and history are added to space-time or culture-history in general.

2. Independent Confirmation

    

False ideas cannot guide behavior. Therefore they need independent confirmation from the facts, both as negative falsifi- cation for validity, and as positive verification for 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 and 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, as knowing can also process what-is-sensed instead of only what-is-known, since 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). The organism/self/belief (form or sensing and knowing) and the envi- ronment/other/reality (content or what-is-sensed and what-is-known) interact to maintain truth. The swap of contents guarantees that truth shall be maintained within-facts-between-ideas, and ethics within-people-between-groups.

Independent confirmation needs dualism, duality of origin or two sources instead of only one, to have the one source positi- vely verify and negatively falsify the other. At 0 AD, Judeo-Christianity turned dualistic by separating heaven from earth. 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, like 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 one source left, the subject or the ideas, called the "phenoume- non", as in phenomenology. Truth detected by independent confirmation, no longer mattered to Post-Modern col- lectivism, socialism and communism. Yet, internally- and externally produced space and time are different substances.

From the periphery to the depth of being, space or facts temporalize by content-shaping-form, in recollection, while from the depth to the periphery of being, time or ideas spatialize by form-shaping-content, in construction. Ideas or content-sha- ped-by-form may be positively verified at the periphery-, to determine their reliability, and negatively falsified at the depth to determine their validity, by facts or content-shaping-form, looking for independent rational-, emotional- and/or compas- sionate confirmation. Sources and their opposite's reflections reunite space and time, what-is-sensed and what-is- known or facts and ideas, which coincide through behavior at the periphery and through cognition at the depth.

Both in the environment/other/reality and in the organism/self/belief, what-is-sensed and what-is-known are compared in duality of origin, by looking for independent confirmation in positive verification at the peripheries, to establish reliability, and negative falsification at the depths, to establish validity. Once it is found, it is looked after. Recollection and construc- tion are independent streams of content, shaping form in the one and being shaped by form in the other, by temporalizing space and spatializing time. When contents are compared (facts and ideas), recollection and construction develop from behavior, at the peripheries of sources and reflections. That is from where facts are recollected and towards where ideas are constructed, by their forms, which then disappear into the depths of cognition, in the organism/self/belief.

What-is-sensed must be known and what-is-known must be sensed. Knowing turns what-is-sensed into what-is-rea- lized. What-is-known-what-is-sensed, which it then actually is, can be sensed again, turning it into what-is-valued. What- is-sensed-what-is-known-what-is-sensed, which it has become by then, can finally be known again, turning it into what-is-reacted. Sensing, realizing, valuing and reacting are material behaviors of the organism/self/belief, reflecting the environ- ment/other/reality or the first source reflecting itself in the second. Sensing turns what-is-known into what-is-intuited. What-is-sensed-what-is-known, which it then actually is, can be known again, turning it into what-is-tried. What-is-known-what-is-sensed-what-is-known, which it has become by then, can finally be sensed again, turning it into what-is-acted. Knowing, intuiting, trying and acting are immaterial cognitions of the organism/self/belief, reflecting themselves in the environment/other/reality or the second source reflecting itself in the first. Thus, form and content develop in lockstep.

Content in recollection is a fact or what-is-sensed, while content in construction is an idea or what-is-known. Contents may independently confirm each other, so that their forms, sensing and knowing, now can also process the other content. In recollection contents coincide 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 swap to create new forms and contents, including the old. These may coincide 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.

Both sources and both self-reflections, have periphery and depth. Sources coincide with reflections from their opposites, if and when the one's content independently confirms the other's. Sources or the sources' self-reflections cannot coincide with each other, therefore content travels from one source coinciding with the opposite source's reflection, to the other, by coordinated reflection (1). Sensing what-is-sensed and knowing what-is-known, or sources (what-is-sensed plus knowing) and reflections (sensing plus what-is-known), impress themselves causally from the outside-in and express them- selves teleologically from the inside-out, from π or the "here and now" at the periphery, towards the depth. Between the two forms (sensing, knowing) and two contents (what-is-sensed or fact, what-is-known or idea), functional structure builds if and when independent confirmation happens. The other source and reflection provide content for one form, while the one source and reflection provide content for the other. Content-shapes-form and form-shapes-content, from one stage to the next, until processing is a continuous flow in social interaction, as behavior turns social belief into social reality.

Sensing and knowing are the forms of our two sources and their opposite's self-reflections. Continuous streams of what-is-sensed and what-is-known, are the contents which these forms are processing, being shaped by them and shaping them in return, as incoming, externally normative facts, and outgoing, internally normative ideas. The four forms are always present in their own locations, while the presence of the contents in four modes (facts and ideas on both sides), depends on the interaction between the sources, in coordinated reflection, with- or without independent confirmation within them, between incoming and outgoing contents. Self-reflections recollect facts and construct ideas which will then diffe- rentiate. Sub-liminal noumena and supra-liminal phenoumena shape into engaged reactions, in response to others' actions, and actions in response to own reactions, through four stages. For that to happen, they must independently confirm each other and swap contents between forms. Otherwise the revelation will halt and the streams of content will no longer flow.

By stages of independent confirmation, facts develop in recollection from sensing what-is-sensed to reacting what-is-reac- ted, if and when facts positively verify ideas, whereas ideas develop in construction from knowing what-is-known to acting what-is-acted, if and when facts negatively falsify ideas. Independent confirmation should reliably coincide con- structed ideas with facts, through behavior, and validly coincide recollected facts with ideas, through cognition.

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, spatial con- tent, after shaping form, internalizes as time at the depth of being, through cognition, while temporal content, after being shaped by form, externalizes as space at the periphery, through behavior. Internal normativity dominates and submits ex- ternal normativity. Some people then are "less equal than others" (Orwell 1945) and lose themselves in a power-distancing hierarchy, as in "the subject goes into the world and loses himself, or he goes into himself and loses the world" (Hegel 1807). Truth and ethics motivate intrinsically in dualism, whereas power and politics motivate extrinsically in monism.

From facts and ideas to reacting and acting, each stage of independent confirmation adds new content to be processed. The organism/self/belief or form, grows more aware of content from the environment/other/reality. At every stage, the contents of recollection and construction renew, while 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 which is 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 each source in two stages, processing contents in four stages, since they must include each other.

As space temporalizes and content shapes form, while time spatializes and form shapes content, independent confirmation extends both forms and contents. This happens in each of the two sources and their opposite's reflections, if and when the one coincides with the other, internally in four stages. The independent confirmation is rational, emotional and/or compassionate, 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. The final stage of independent confirmation may be externalized. Each time, content is swapped so that the two kinds form a new one. New content shapes new form in recollection, from what-is-sensed to what-is-realized, to what-is-valued and to what-is-reacted, while new form shapes new content in con- struction, from what-is-known to what-is-intuited, to what-is-tried and to what-is-acted. The final stage is reacting what- is-acted and acting what-is-reacted, which can be externalized from cognition or social belief into behavior or social reality.

When content travels, by self-reflection, from one source plus coincided other-reflection to the other, at the end stage of independent confirmation, action calls for reaction between them through behavior, and reaction calls for action within them through cognition. Preparing to externalize from cognition into behavior, or social belief into social reality, took place in four stages of independent confirmation, ensuring that belief was real, by positive verification (reliability) and negative falsification (validity). At that stage for the current content, reaction and action independently confirm each other, reacting what-is-acted in response to the other and acting what-is-reacted in response to the self. One's independent rational-, emotional- and/or compassionate confirmation of the other strengthens the other's independence to do the same.

    

To confirm another strengthens independence, while independence is a necessary prerequisite to confirm another. - See more at: http://www.crpa.co/#sthash.hUwqPmhs.dpuf

figure 8

    

   

3. Constructive Recollection

    

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). Relations within-groups-between-people can or cannot naturally translate into relations within-people-between-groups without entangle- ments, potentially frustrating people's social identity (3c), by power and politics or dialectics, disguised as truth and ethics. Functional structuring takes place in one direction, through a command structure, in unilateral monism, or in two direc- tions, through dialogue, exchange or interaction, in bilateral dualism. Personal relations are not necessarily compromised, within either system, although they easily are, between systems. Monism is then in a position to "beat" dualism quite readily.


3a. Social Interaction

Groups are formed and society is ordered, either by the extrinsic motivation of power and politics, in monism, or by the intrinsic motivation of truth and ethics, in dualism. Intrinsic motivation to independently confirm (Significant) others by freedom of choice, which is (forward) paid or offered, is against one's own interests, ethically or altruistically accounted for. Extrinsic motivation to escape dependent rejection of oneself by dependently confirming friends (cronyism) and/or in- dependently rejecting enemies (prejudice), creates a power-distanced hierarchy of "more equal animals", by group-polari- zing mimetic desire (Girard 1961). This structure is needed for ideas to categorically demand their own realization. There- fore intrinsic motivation is altruistic at a personal level, while extrinsic motivation is egoistic at a collective level.

Finding truth within us, may be as important as finding truth between us. In social belief, within us, recollection in- dependently confirms construction, which is normally unnoticeable to others, while between us, the other's recollection independently confirms the one's construction. Therefore within us, what-is-known is proved to be true or false by what- is-sensed, whereas between us, the one's independent rational-, emotional- and/or compassionate confirmation for the other is proven true, indicating truth, or not (yet). In social reality, the one's independence possibly confirms the other's independence, needed by the other to maintain his or her independent strength. This likely is social interaction in social reality (not just in social belief), or one's reaction in response to the other's action and his action in response to his own reaction, made noticeable. Action and reaction at the last stage of independent confirmation for current content, unnotice- able to the other, then become noticeable. The monistic, Post-Modern alternative would be to dominate and submit, tell- ing the other what to think, say and do, without his or her consent, sanctioned by a group membership acknowledgement.

Sensing what-is-sensed and knowing what-is-known happen simultaneously. The idea (before-the-fact) is or is not inde- pendently confirmed by the fact (or after-the-fact). Forms swap contents, if and when independent confirmation happens between them, giving rise to realizing what-is-realized (knowing what-is-sensed) and intuiting what-is-intuited (sensing what-is-known), plus the next three stages, emerging in exactly the same way. Through all four stages, what-is-sensed and what-is-known alternate both in recollection and in construction. Content passes within- and between sources and their self-reflections through four forms, transported by coordinated reflection and proven true by independent confirmation. Exchangeability of contents then aligns them into continuous flows, which may turn into social interaction.

Within people, recollection goes before construction, while between people, construction goes before recollec- tion. It is a socially interactive cycle, in social belief and social reality, which grows larger for current content, when new currents of content emerge. It may seem only an interaction between two independent individuals reacting in response to the other and then acting in response to their own reaction. Yet, these reactions are content-shaping-form in recollection and actions are form-shaping-content in construction, at stages of independent confirmation, if and when it may happen, within- and between them. Reaction starts from sensing and action starts from knowing. Then, sensing is known (reali- zing), within them, while knowing is sensed (intuiting), between them, at the first stage. Next is realizing what-is-intuited (valuing) within them, and intuiting what-is-realized (trying) between them. Next, trying what-is-valued is reacting within them, and valuing what-is-tried is acting between them. Finally, for the current content, reacting what-is-acted by the other and acting what-is-reacted by the self, completes the cycle, before externalizing it from social belief into social reality.

Sources internalize external content or facts and externalize internal content or ideas. One's reaction in response to the other's action and action in response to one's own reaction, may happen only cognitively, even if internalization and exter- nalization did happen. Social interaction, may happen only in social belief and not yet in social reality. Social belief then masks intentions by not yet showing them in behavior, either in truth and ethics, out of uncertainty that independent rational-, emotional- and/or compassionate confirmation did not happen yet, or in power and politics, to manipulate others.

Sources feed content to form, making facts shape form in recollection and form shape ideas in construction, to the highest stage of independent confirmation, which is social interaction. In social interaction, social behavior may find indepen- dent confirmation all by itself, between Self and Significant Other. It maintains itself in spontaneous gestures and li- ving expressions and not being caused by mimetic desire. Facts in recollection do not need to positively verify and negati- vely falsify ideas in construction, as interaction then already is operational, externally in social reality, validly and reliably.

Sources and their opposite's self-reflections are able to find each other directly, by coordinated reflection and independent confirmation. Then the One is the source of knowing while the Significant Other is the source of sensing, as each Signifi- cant Other's self-reflections of their sources' content. The One senses what-is-sensed by the Significant Other, while the Significant Other knows what-is-known by the One. Sensing what-is-sensed by the Significant Other and know- ing what-is-known by the One, are the One's knowing what-is-sensed by the Significant Other, and the Significant Other's sensing what-is-known by the One. The One's Significant Other then may be more important than One to him- or herSelf.

Between the Significant Other and the Self, in recollection, content shapes form about- and for the Self, or the organism/self/belief. If and when content is found to be true, form shapes it in return, and (coordinately) reflects the Significant Other as source. In construction, form shapes content about- and for the Significant Other, or the environment/other/reality. If and when content is found to be true, form shapes it in return, and (coordinately) reflects the Self as source. Therefore, between Self and Significant Other, reflections are Other-reflections, instead of Self-reflections, for both sources

What-is-sensed, -realized, -valued and -reacted from the other, in recollection may independently confirm what-is-known, -intuited, -tried and -acted towards the other in construction. If and when independent confirmation does happen, it lifts the Significant Other above his or her potential Self. The same may happen in the other direction. Facts cannot be violated by different ideas and people cannot be violated by different groups, after they become One's Significant Other.

Pair-bonding between Self and Significant Other for each is coordinated other-reflection without the need for independent confirmation, since that is already evident: the other can do no wrong. The Self-reflection of the other source, the Signifi- cant Other, is replaced by the Other-reflection of the Other, by the One. Since the Other-reflection is Self-produced, the need to find independent confirmation between contents, is waived. Significance which should be proven by inde- pendent confirmation, is inherent and indisputable, while questions of dependency and rejection are not raised.

Independent rational-, emotional- and/or (com)passionate confirmation between Self and Significant Other is sa- meness 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 not necessary, since truth was already found. Being someone's Significant Other is the greatest independent confirmation or Truth the Self could aspire to.

In social interaction, content travels between sources. Through coordinated self-reflection, if and when content is inde- pendently confirmed as the other's self-reflection, it starts traveling. Recollection and construction are alternating sequen- ces, of sensing or knowing what-is-sensed or what-is-known, realizing or intuiting what-is-realized or what-is-intuited, and valuing or trying what-is-valued or what-is-tried. Each layer or stage adds reliability to behavior (reacting what-is-reacted) and validity to cognition (acting what-is-acted), to which recollection of facts and construction of ideas, do evolve.

The environment/other/reality and the organism/self/belief coordinately reflect themselves, to bring content to the other source, while the other's self-reflection is to be independently confirmed by the source itself. Constructive recollection of facts, internalized as functional structure in recollection, happens in cognition at the depths-, and of ideas, externalized as functional structure in construction, happens in behavior at the periphery. Sources having independently confirmed each other's self-reflections, recollect and construct content, by their own- and the other's self-reflection's forms.

Content-shaping-form in recollection, internalizes or assimilates (Piaget 1936) it in cognition, after negative falsification by independent rational-, emotional- and/or compassionate confirmation of the person-in-him/herself who we know and do not sense (phenoumenon) - not replacing form. It is a recollected idea, as opposed to a constructed fact. The latter is form-shaping-content in construction, externalizing or accommodating (id) it in behavior after positive verification by independent confirmation from the thing-in-itself that we sense and do not know (noumenon) - adding to current content. 

Facts involve both sources or people socially interacting, while ideas do not necessarily do so. What the organism/ self/belief knows-intuits-tries-acts as an idea before the fact, is what he senses-realizes-values-reacts about the environ- ment/other/reality as a fact, after the fact, if and when the idea was independently confirmed by the fact. Social interaction is to provide independent confirmation rationally, emotionally and/or compassionately. Ideas also involve people socially interacting, however not until after these ideas were consciously decided to be externalized into noticeable, social behavior.

Both sources and their self-reflections are 4 forms, processing-, and being processed by, 2 functional structures or streams of content led by form, overlapping each other. Facts and ideas or what-is-sensed and what-is- known alternate as one continuously repeating socially interactive cycle. Social belief precedes social reality, as construction before-the-fact, which must be independently confirmed by recollection after-the-fact, in each of the 8 states in each interactive cycle. Since in half of the interactive cycle the one intends and in the other half the other, externalization has to have taken place.

Coordinated reflection and independent confirmation between environment/other/reality and organism/self/belief come together in one form or functional structure. This is constructive recollection, differentiating and integrating 4 phases, 4 stages and 8 states, changing simultaneously. Social reality is the content of this form, continuously processed in social interaction, from fact and idea or what-is-sensed and what-is-known, to what-is-reacted and what-is-acted, to stay on track of truth, detected by independent confirmation, through duality of origin, which is born into us, to conduct our lives.

Form processes content, until new form processes new content, of which the old form then has become a part. From sen- sing what-is-sensed to reacting what-is-reacted in recollection and from knowing what-is-known to acting what-is-acted in construction, all consist of form (sensing, reacting, knowing, acting) and content (what-is-sensed, what-is-reacted, what-is-known, what-is-acted). Interaction between acting and reacting implies 4 stages both in recollection and in construction. The 4 stages of independent confirmation needed for action and reaction or interaction, correspond to the 4 states per phase. Social interaction takes place across 8 states, in 4 phases of each 4 states and each phase 1 state apart from the next.


3b. Social Reality

Monism is either external- or internal normativity in a hierarchical, power-distanced society, letting the one dia- lectically dominate and submit another, in the closed morality and static religion of power and politics. Extrinsic, political motivation within-groups-between-people, may cause dissociation and sociosis between either organism and envi- ronment, self and other or belief and reality. All group-members conservatively submit by confirmation bias and dependent confirmation of "more equal" friends (cronyism), as one dominates others top-down, or else all group-members progressi- vely dominate by independence bias and independent rejection of enemies (prejudice), as one submits to others bottom-up.

Within-ideas-between-facts there can be no independent confirmation, because it is the idea that relates the facts as it sees fit, without the need for validity by negative falsification or reliability by positive verification. This is phenomenology's pre- rogative. Still, relations within-ideas-between-facts naturally translate into relations within-facts-between-ideas, which must be valid and reliable or facts will be incompatible, because different ideas (re-)use them differently.

One adapts and loses oneself, or one does not adapt and loses the world, Hegel claimed. In a monistic world within-groups-between-people, this is true, because criticism is directed outwardly, protecting a central dogma which can never be ques- tioned. In a dualistic world within-people-between-groups, central assumptions may always be called into question, to stay on track of truth, by seeking independent confirmation between external- and internal normativity or what-is-sensed and what-is-known. In dualism, one may adapt without losing oneself, or one may be independent without isolation.

Coordinated reflection enables the other source's self-reflection to coincide with the source itself, if and when facts inde- pendently confirm ideas. Coinciding then leads from sensing what-is-sensed to reacting what-is-reacted in recollection and from knowing what-is-known to acting what-is-acted, concurrently in construction. Both within- and between sources, constructive recollection happens as content shapes form by recollecting facts, while form shapes content by constructing 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 naturally translate or reduce to relations within-people-between-groups or with- in-facts-between-ideas. Else, dissociation lets power replace truth by changing the facts and has ideas follow them.

In dualism, the one recollects the other's constructed self-reflection and so does the other regarding the one, keep- ing external- and internal normativity balanced. Nobody is "more equal" than any other. Content is sent from the one to the other, and received in return, as long as it fulfills the criterion of truth, detected by independent rational-, emotional and/or compassionate confirmation. A hierarchy with a centrally dominant- or submissive figure, will never be missed. "Al- ways behave in such a way, that the maxim of your will could always count as a general law at the same time" (Kant 1788).

Open morality and dynamic religion, in truth and ethics, guarantee that relations remain untangled. Relations with- in-groups-between-people and within-ideas-between-facts, naturally translate into relations within-people-between-groups and within-facts-between-ideas, entangle when the same facts are reused in different ideas, relating them differently and creating meaningful networks for them which are incompatible or incommensurable. To cope with entanglements, constraints or conflicts of interest, socioses are called for in communities, with dissociation disorders, like derealization and depersonalization, as a consequence, in the independent individual members of these communities (Dell and O'Neill 2009).

In monism, interaction is motivated by power and politics, within-groups-between-people, while in dualism, it is motivated by truth and ethics, within-people-between-groups. Behavior at the periphery of the sources and their self-reflections, reliable for new recollection, and cognition at the depths of the sources, valid for new construction, coordi- nately reflect the dominant and submitting other, in monism, or else another whose independence is confirmed, in dualism.

While coordinated reflection [1] appears in both worlds (the one created by Post-Modern, imminently dialectic monism or power & politics, and the other by Modern, interactive dualism or truth & ethics), independent confirmation [2] only matters to the latter. Monism may look like dualism, since it is dialectic, yet its basic assumption is that we are all one group within which subgroups or individuals only compete for dominance while submitting others (Hegel 1807, Marx 1859, Nietzsche 1901). Dualism, on the contrary, has two sources, instead of one, which interact to stay on track of truth and not to gain dominance over-, and submit "less equal" others. Living in the one world or the other, is the outcome of our upbringing. Since we live on the same planet, we are confronted everyday, with a completely different social order.

Accidentally or not, cultural revolutions are associated with important changes in philosophical outlook. For example, the French Revolution and the takeover of philosophical Modernism by Post-Modernism, both happened around 1789. Dualism became monism. During the Cultural Revolution of 1968 the same thing happened, when dualism had more or less restored itself. Hegel and Marx took out the object or noumenon from Kant's capitalization of Modernism (Rohlf 2010) and dualism, keeping only the subject or phe-noumenon and not the truly critical criterion, so that facts could more easily be changed instead of being left intact, to accommodate power and politics, not truth and ethics. Ironically, dualism needs the object to independently confirm the subject, critically determining reliability and validity, while monism calls itself "the critical mo- vement", without the objectivity requirement. Therefore, power and politics are easily disguised as truth and ethics.

Contrary to claims often made, morality and religion in philosophical Modernism are open and dynamic, while in Post-Mo- dernism they are closed and static (Bergson 1932). Within-ideas-between-facts, relations may all be trusted, expected, presumed, predicted, believed and intended to be true. However, when they do not translate, as they naturally should, into relations within-facts-between-ideas, then Post-Modernism's imminent dialectic proves itself closed, static and untrue. Power and politics are often disguised as truth and ethics, whereas, by their nature, the reverse is never possible.

Both power and truth predict the future, therefore both politics and ethics are accountable. However, power and politics accommodate themselves, while truth and ethics accommodate others. Truth is detected by independent confirmation in natural conditions, whereas the will to power (Nietzsche 1901) is imposed by reinforced conditions in politics, media and marketing. When power does not match truth, facts do not matter, as they are simply changed, instead of the ideas by falsi- fication. Power and politics, disguised as truth and ethics, make us look away from innocence that is defenseless.

Monism and dualism must live side by side. The possibility of dependent rejection by the threat of excommunication or homelessness, indicates a need for solidarity, safety and security, never minding the facts, which motivates extrinsically or politically, within-groups-between-people, by the monism of closed morality and static religion. Independent rational-, emotional- and/or compassionate confirmation on the other hand, detects factual truth of ideas, if and when found, which motivates intrinsically or ethically, within-people-between-groups, by the dualism of open morality and dynamic religion.

Social interaction between systems is awkward and threatening. The one is extrinsically motivated by the power and politics of dependent rejection, which people try to avoid, while the other is intrinsically motivated by the truth and ethics of independent confirmation, which people are looking for. Avoiding dependent rejection happens through dependent con- firmation of friends (cronyism) and independent rejection of enemies (prejudice), which are one-directionally normative actions to create a power-distanced hierarchy or pyramid to order or control society. It is dialecticism through which parents, leaders and conquerors dominate and submit children, followers and the conquered without their consent. It is one-directional monism requesting obedience to dogma which can never be questioned. Finding independent confirmation in this kind of social order is nearly impossible. Independent rational-, emotional- and/or compassionate confirmation, to stay on track of truth, is obstructed as it was when Post-Modern monism hijacked Modern dualism, two hundred years ago.

 

3c. Social Identity

Critical case studies should exemplify the paradigm of philosophical Modernism and how it runs into the intolerance of Post-Modernism. Coordinated reflection and independent confirmation within-facts-between-ideas and/or within-people-between-groups, maintain truth and ethics as much as they can. Looking for-, finding- and looking after the truth were always essential to science, justice and journalism, if not religion. Philosophical Modernism and its dualism, were hijacked by  Post-Modernism and its monism, during the French Revolution of 1789 and again by the Cultural Revolution of 1968. Facts are manipulated by power and politics, that would be kept intact by truth and ethics, tormenting those who needed the truth they always defended since innocence is defenseless3. It creates dissociative identity disorders.

Our world is both a fact that consists of countless smaller facts, and an idea that consists of countless smaller ideas. Facts and ideas fit into the categories of realization and intuition, if and when they independently confirm each other. Realizations and intuitions fit into the categories of evaluation and trial, which fit into those of reactions and actions, again under those circumstances. Relations between facts or between ideas are installed by power, politically motivated within-groups-between-people, or by truth, ethically motivated within-people-between-groups. Relations within-facts-between-ideas entangle by their logical translation from relations within-ideas-between-facts, as politics and media adapt them each to their own liking, seeking power, while ethics leave them intact, seeking truth, since innocence is defenseless.

Social identity is most clear and distinct in personal behavior and cognition. Content reliably shapes form in recollection, as form validly shapes content in construction, if and when independent rational-, emotional- and/or compassionate confirma- tion happens at every stage, between recollection in response to the Other and construction in response to the Self. Shaping form and content is kept internal by social belief, although it is must be externalized into social reality, to be noti- ceable. Behavior is internalized into cognition, when it was recollected by the Self, and the Other now negatively falsifies it, as cognition is externalized into behavior, when it was constructed by the Self, and the Other now positively verifies it.

Ideas stem from beliefs and facts stem from reality. Within beliefs, facts are related simply by logic, chronology or associ- ation, likely not without prejudice against enemies and/or cronyism towards friends to avoid dependent rejection by power and politics, while in reality, ideas are related by truth or power. To disentangle relations within-facts-between-ideas, entanglements must be found across different ideas or groups, applying power and politics, that reuse the same 'linking-pin' fact or person. Loyalty is dishonesty, whereas honesty is disloyalty, however disloyalty to a negative is a positive.

The attention economy, like the financial economy, is about supply and demand. Obviously people can pay attention to one thing at a time only and there is just a limited amount of time in a day or a lifetime. It is economical or wise, not to have facts entangled by incompatible ideas. In Post-Modernism, the incompatibility of imminent dialectics or power and politics, that do not care about the truth, caring instead only about (more) power, caught up in politics, actually never stops.

Intrinsic motivation within-people-between-groups can eventually beat extrinsic motivation within-groups-between-people, since minority influence may be strong when consistent over long periods of time and not dividing the majority’s attention (Moscovici 1974). Relations may be entangled by closed and static ideas in power and politics, reusing the same facts without being transparent about their central assumptions or prejudices to each other. Then those facts or people relying on these relations, are strong enough to untangle themselves, if they do not dissociate from the ideas or groups.

Although facts may relate many ideas and ideas may relate many facts, still they remain facts (noumena) or ideas (phe- noumena). The organism/self/belief constructs relations within-ideas-between-facts, as the environment/other/reality recol- lects relations within-facts-between-ideas. What-is-sensed, what-is-realized, what-is-valued and what-is-reacted, are facts relating ideas in recollection. What-is-known, what-is-intuited, what-is-tried and what-is-acted, are ideas relating facts in construction. Between stages, content-shaping-form in recollection relates many facts at a lower stage to one at a higher stage, as form-shaping-content in construction relates one idea at a higher stage to many at a lower stage.

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 and 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 firm rules to resolve this. Facts or people should first independently confirm the ideas or groups they will possibly join.

Within-facts-between-ideas, there is power or truth. The fact is us, human beings, in between others, following the organism in the environment. The idea is the self or the other, with its egoisms or altruisms. There must be two ideas at least, one about the organism/self/belief itself, and one about the environment/other/reality itself and how these two interact socially. Either truth or power prevails in, and motivates these interactions, when power does not disguise as truth.

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, motivated by power and politics, no criticism and only a priori "truth" is allowed, remaining dogmatically untouched. When groups are open and dy- namic, motivated by truth and ethics, nothing is true until it was independently confirmed, within-people-between-groups. Social reality and social belief untangle within-facts-between-ideas by the application of constructive recollection.

    

  

   

  

Philosophy Application

     

figure 14

   

Conclusion

Two social systems confront each other in our daily lives, making us feel awkward and unable to choose. The one motivates politically to avoid power or reach for it, while the other motivates ethically to seek truth or avoid falsity, ourselves. These two systems developed in philosophical Modernism and Post-Modernism, or dualism and monism. Stresses between them, stem from the one's disguise as the other, entangling relations within-people-between-groups, and even more, relations within-facts-between-ideas. Constructive Recollection aims to untangle these relations, for the sake of truth and innocence.

    

References

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hegel, G.W.F. (1807). "Phänomenologie des Geistes". Bamberg und Würzburg: J.A. Goebhardt.

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

Kant, I. (1783). "Prolegomena". Riga: J.F. Hartknoch.

Kant, I. (1788). "Kritik der praktischen Vernunft". Riga: J.F. Hartknoch.

Kant, I. (1793). "Kritik der Urteilskraft". Berlin: Bey F. T. Lagarde.

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

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

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

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. (1882). "Die fröhliche Wissenschaft". Leipzig: Verlag von E. W. Fritzsch.

Nietzsche, F. (1901). "Der Wille zur Macht”. Leipzig: C. G. Naumann.

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

Piaget, J. (1936). "La naissance de l'intelligence chez l'enfant". Neuchâtel: Delachaux et Niestlé.

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

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. (2011). "Draft: ‘Spontaneous Responsiveness, Chiasmic Relations, And Consciousness – Inside the Realm of Living Expression’", johnshotter.com.

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

 

 

1encyclopedia Britannica

2dictionary Oxford's

3website TormentedInHiding

  also on Academia

  

       

 
 
Send Feedback
E-mail: ron.de.weijze@crpa.co