the FAR scale

Can Actual, False and Real apply to culture and nature? Here are some considerations.


False Culture: any set of artifacts or objects perspected by persons to be features of individual identity. Conflating the genetic with the cultural, or aesthetics with morality. The engagement of accessorizing the self.

Actual Culture: The engagement with/in normative patterns mutually recognized as expedient means of relating.

Real Culture: higher actual + the entire preconscious milieu of our rich embedded-ness, accessed in radical presence, ‘not knowing’, ‘not doing’.

False Nature: 1p exclusive identification with/as body and/or environment. The behaviors and systemic perpetuations which follow from that enactive stance.

Actual Nature: autopoietic appropriations of body and environment whereby functional fittings serve extrinsic values, purposefully adequate cognitive reflection of body and environment. The behaviors and systemic initiatives, or perpetuations, which follow from that enactive stance.

Real Nature: both body and environment as enacted at the thresholds of manifestation. The behaviors and systemic initiatives which follow from that enactive stance.

Also, I imagine this “F.A.R.” scale along a gradient of subject/object discretion. False being the furthest polarized, Actual, in an equilibrium of partial reductions, and Real, in a unitive dynamism.

Another gradient in the FAR scale might be a privileging of exterior zones (2,4,6,8) diminishing with the operations of False through Real, while the same gradient advances beyond such tracts of flatland by successive recognitions of interiority.


[excerpted from   http://riffraft.wordpress.com/  ]