You can’t be rooted unless you’re free and you can’t be free unless you’re rootedL. Ingalls Wilder
Constructive Recollection Philosophy
Finding Truth in Science, Justice and Journalism
Our two sources of morality and religion (Bergson 1932) coordinately reflectthemselves, "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
The environment/other/reality reflects itself in the organism/self/belief as sensibility (Kant 1781) or what-is-sensed, in sensing. By sensing what-is-sensed, the source and its reflection in recollection, express themselves inwardly, from the periphery- to the depth of being, in space. Facts move in from "there" to "here" and move out from "here" to "there", where content shapes form by temporalizing space, between environment and organism, other and self, or reality and belief.
The organism/self/belief reflects itself in the environment/other/reality as understanding (op.cit.) or knowing, in what-is-known. By knowing what-is-known, the source and its reflection in construction, express themselves outwardly, from the depth- to the periphery of being, in time. Ideas move in from "then" to "now" and move out again from "now" to "then", when form shapes content by spatializing time, between environment and organism, other and self, or reality and belief.
What makes knowing and what-is-known immaterial, is that ideas are not facts. The "now" is the fact, or even the missing fact, in between ideas, which are antecedent and consequent. Both sources and their reflections recollect and construct, in duration or time. Recollection temporalizes space from the periphery to the depths, while construction spatializes time from the depths to the periphery. They grow apart for all types of content, although they are "here and now" to begin with.
Space and time, or, more precisely, "here" and "now", are separately recollected and constructed, and are being reunited into one "here and now" again. The one's source fuses with the other's reflection. The source of recollection, facts, or what-is-sensed, needs to fuse with the reflection of construction, ideas or what-is-known, in the environment/other/reality, while the source of construction, knowing, needs to fuse with the reflection of recollection, or sensing, in the organism/self/belief.
The precise "here" or "now" between each of 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) for processing. Therefore what-is-sensed is processed by temporalizing space "here" and what-is-known is processed by spatializing time "now". Temporalized space is not the same as time and spatialized time is not the same as space, yet they are compatible enough to falsify or be verified.
Just like gravity in spacetime, recollection and construction temporalize towards- and spatialize away from what bends, such as the depth of being. Space and time are processed separately, to be reunited by the fusion of one source and the other source's reflection, if possible. The synthesis reunites what was separated for reasons of processing and for comparison "here and now", between the contents of material space, what-is-sensed or facts, and immaterial time, what-is-known or ideas.
In recollection, space temporalizes from "here" at the peripheries of what-is-sensed (source) and sensing (reflection), to their depths, while in construction, time spatializes from the depths of knowing (source) and what-is-known (reflection), to "now" at their peripheries. Temporalized space fuses with real time at the depths of being, while spatialized time fuses with real space at the peripheries of being, 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", which belong to the same content (fact or idea) in spite of their differentiation. Content shapes form differentiatedly in recollection, as 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.
"Here" and "now" expand between the sources and their reflections: "now, from here to there", in all directions, and "here, from now to then", in the past and future. "Here and now", spatialized time from the environment/other/reality interacts with temporalized space from the organism/self/belief, in "duality of origin". Content shapes form in recollection and form shapes content in construction, as functional structures or cultural history (Bergson 1922, Dooyeweerd 1935, Sanders 1976).
Recollecting what-is-sensed happens "after the fact" by temporalizing space, while constructing what-is-known happens "before the fact" by spatializing time, as an idea. From the periphery to the depth-, and from the depth to the periphery of being, our form recollects and constructs content, we believe will fit our world intuitively yet precisely, until we realize our dream or we realize our mistake. This is how form is shaped to process content, at different levels of functional structure.
As bread and water may turn into tea and cakes, space and time may turn into culture and history, by the organism/self/belief, interacting with the environment/other/reality. Patterns are material in space or culture and immaterial in time or history. Space reflects itself as cultural recollection, while history reflects itself as temporal construction. The pattern of cultural history is ordered by power in a power-distanced hierarchy (Mulder 1973) or truth in a constructive recollection.
Material facts from "there" in the past, reflect themselves towards "there" in the future, while immaterial ideas from "then" in the future reflect themselves towards "then" in the past. Material and immaterial structures have their own compelling physical or metaphysical logic in their own sources, the sensed environment/other/reality and the knowing organism/self/belief. Their other-reflections on the same side of time do or do not (yet) fit in, which presents a challenge or a solution.
2. Independent Confirmation
From the periphery to the depths of being, content shapes form in recollection, while in reverse, from the depths to the periphery, form shapes content in construction. Content-shaping-form may falsify content-shaped-by-form at the depth of being, and verify it at the periphery. Negative falsification and positive verification are different kinds of independent confirmation, determining the validity and reliability of content. Under these conditions, sources and the other sources' reflections have to fuse as sensing and knowing, or temporal contents, in cognition at the depths of being and as what-is-sensed (fact) and what-is-known (idea), or spatial contents, in behavior at the periphery of being. Form shaping content is the cultural history of the organism/self/belief, while form-shaped-by-content may or may not confirm it. Content shaping form is the cultural history of the environment/other/reality, while content-shaped-by-form may or may not confirm it.
Independent confirmation requires dualism, duality of origin or two sources, instead of one. Judeo-Christianity became dual at 0 AD. Philosophy followed around 1644, by Descartes' methodology. The one source, the environment/other/reality, independently confirms the other source, the organism/self/belief, if and when it can. Independent confirmation indicates truth, in everyday life as it does in science, justice and journalism. Philosophical Modernism is dualistic, as opposed to Post-Modernism. It was highlighted by Kant, just before it was hijacked by Hegel, around 1800. The latter turned dualism back to monism. He 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" which is now phenomenology. Truth detected by independent confirmation did no longer matter for Post-Modern collectivism, socialism and communism.
The subliminal "noumenon" cannot be known because it can only be sensed. The supraliminal "phenoumenon" cannot be sensed because it can only be known. Independent confirmation of knowing what-is-known by sensing what-is-sensed, lifts the "noumenon" from subliminal awareness and pulls the "phenoumenon" from supraliminal awareness. Then knowing what-is-sensed (or, by definition, realize what-is-realized) and sensing what-is-known (or, by definition, intuit what-is-intuited) emerge in awareness. Forms (sensing and knowing) or contents (what-is-sensed and what-is-known) could be swapped and each content was processed by another form, shaping new forms and new contents at a higher stage. Similarly, intuiting what-is-realized (value what-is-valued) and realizing what-is-intuited (try what-is-tried) emerge in awareness, while trying what-is-valued (react what-is-reacted) and valuing what-is-tried (act what-is-acted) prepare us for interaction.
Both sources and both of their self-reflections, have periphery and depth. Sources and reflections from their dual opposites fuse, if and when the one's content independently confirms the other's. Sources themselves or their self-reflections cannot fuse. Content thus travels from one source/reflection to the other, and back. Towards the periphery, what-is-known travels and deposits content into what-is-sensed, where it moves on towards the depths of the other source or reflection. What-is-sensed and what-is-known therefore alternate carrying the same contents as it renews. In a cycle of four phases and four stages, content fuses with contents from the other side and expands. The other contents is included and new content always encompasses old content. Thus, what-is-reacted, including what-is-valued, including what-is-realized, including what-is-sensed, travels parallel to what-is-acted, including what-is-tried, including what-is-intuited, including what-is-known.
Internally normative construction looks for independent confirmation from externally normative recollection, as negative falsification for validity and positive verification for reliability. If and when this happens, then spatial content, after it has shaped form, is temporalized at the depth of being, through cognition, while temporal content, after it was shaped by form, is spatialized at the periphery, through behavior. Social interaction is unlike imminent dialectics. Externally normative content from the environment/other/reality, independently confirms internally normative content from the organism/self/belief in a way that is rational, emotional and/or compassionate. Alternatively "the subject goes into the world and loses himself, or he goes into himself and loses the world" (Hegel 1807). True equality is much unlike a hierarchy of equality, in which some animals are "more equal" than others (Orwell 1945), to dominate and submit lesser equals in the pecking order.
In processing, space temporalizes by content shaping form, as what-is-sensed shapes sensing, from the periphery to the depth of being (recollection), while time spatializes by form shaping content, as knowing shapes what-is-known, from the depth to the periphery (construction). Fusion of temporalizing space and spatializing time creates new content and new form, at different stages. Old form and old content are always included. Thus sources and their self-reflections continuously reinvent themselves, until they externalize themselves in social reality, reacting in response to the other's action and acting in response to their own reaction, in the final stage of independent confirmation for the current content, rationally, emotionally or compassionately, through spontaneous gestures and living expressions (Shotter 2011). Internally, fusion is a direct consequence of independent confirmation, while externally, it is strengthening the other in his or her independence.
Social interaction is the one impacting the other, between sources, by letting him sense, realize, value and react what-is-sensed, -realized, -valued and -reacted, within himself. If and when what-is-sensed independently confirmed what-is- known and what-is-realized independently confirmed what-is-intuited and what-is-valued independently confirmed what- is-tried, then what-is-acted will include all of the above, to impact the one in return, in response to the other's affected self.
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.
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: http://www.crpa.co/#sthash.hUwqPmhs.dpuf
3. Constructive Recollection
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 to reacting in recollection and from knowing to acting 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 into relations within-people-between-groups or within-facts-between-ideas. Otherwise, dissociation disorders (Dell and O'Neill 2009) might entail sociosis, group-polarization, extremism and possibly terrorism (Moscovici and Zavalloni 1969, Meertens 2007).
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). One source's external self-reflection has been internalized by the other to establish different levels of independent confirmation. The next level is social, 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 at this level, 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. Thus the war between philosophical Modernism and Post-Modernism unfolds in everyday life, for two centuries.
3a. 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 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.
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 internalize external content or facts and externalize internal content or ideas. 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 internalization and externalization 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, thus making content shape form and form shape content, to and from the highest possible stage of independent confirmation, being social interaction, unless social interaction itself, reliably finds independent confirmation between Self and Significant Other. If and when the other's reflected content-shaped-form cannot falsify one's original form, it is validated and may be adopted by the Self. Self and reflected Other then never need to separate anymore.
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 content shaping form in recollection and form shaping content in construction, plus independent confirmation which internalized the other's reflection of form validly by negative falsification in cognition at the depth of being, and externalized one's reflection of content reliably by positive verification in behavior at the periphery, for all possible interaction between Self and Other in the past, present and future.
Apparently, the sources and their self-reflections can- and do find each other, coordinately reflecting and independently confirming, between people most directly. The one senses what-is-sensed by the other, as the other knows what-is-known by the one. So the one is the source of sensing while the other is the source of knowing, being each other's self-reflections of what-is-sensed and what-is-known. Thus the Significant Other must be more important than the one to him- or herself.
What-is-sensed, -realized, -valued and reacted from the other, independently confirming what-is-known, -intuited, -tried and -acted towards the other, makes one want to help the other be more him- or herself than he or she is, at the moment. The other may have the same intentions, even when the contents are different or more attuned to another background. The facts are never violated by differing ideas and the people are never violated by differing groups, between Significant Others.
Of course one can "help" another be more him- or herself by internalism, favoritism, nepotism, cronyism or sycophantism, using fear of dependent rejection and longing for dependent confirmation. It mimics independent confirmation and may deceive us into believing it is indeed. However, when it is not the real thing (independent confirmation), then the feedback for intrinsic- and extrinsic motivation (if any) will be misplaced and cannot be fruitful, to sustain itself, by its own system.
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 four 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 two 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.
b. Social Reality
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 indicates the need for solidarity, safety and security, not necessarily 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.
Philosophical Modernism is dualistic, acknowledging the external- and the internal source (noumenon and phenoumenon), while Post-Modernism only recognizes pheno(u)menology, ignoring the noumenon. Social interaction is therefore believed to be either dualistically interactive between two sources, or monistically and imminently dialectic within a single source. In time, social reality should independently confirm either Post-Modernism or Modernism, as philosophy or social belief.
Power and politics motivate extrinsically, within-groups-between-people, as truth and ethics motivate intrinsically, within-people-between-groups. Extrinsic motivation is either externally normative or internally normative, as one dominates and the other submits. Intrinsic motivation is both externally normative and internally normative, for the one to independently confirm the other and untangle the more complex relations within-people-between-groups and within-facts-between-ideas.
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.
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.
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.
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 our thesis.
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.
Ideas determine truth and/or power, as truth and/or power determine facts. Truth is exclusive in constructive recollection, consisting of coordinated reflection between sources and independent confirmation within sources. Content shapes form in recollection, as form shapes content in construction, until form continuously processes current content. Power could be drunk and wreak havoc. Truth in social interaction, however, is a naturally differentiating cycle of phases, stages and states.
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. (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". transnationalterrorism.eu/tekst/publications/Hofstadgroep.pdf
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.
Niebuhr, R. (1937). "Serenity Prayer”. London: YWCA.
Orwell, G. (1945). "Animal Farm". London: Martin Secker & Warburg.