Inclusionality encourages us to engage space and boundaries differently so that we might grow beyond the assumptions that material is isolated from presence. Nemetics is an inclusional manner of thinking that helps us engage the inner and outer contents which shape the context / relationship (nStrings) of our lives.
Inclusionality first steers our attention to where there is any sense of separation, and such observations trigger psychological, social and/or environmental damage. Nemetics see ‘inclusionality’ as offering us a way to engage evolutionary processes differently, with less competition and more co-creation via dialogue with the sentience in our environment.
Instead of looking to identify "either-or" relationships, we develop "both-and" relationships, that nurture both the inside and outside. The creative spirit is kindled in our sense of space as being inseparable from time and matter/energy. All is rippling as the frequencies of various waves interweave our bodies with every neme we notice.
This dynamic process of attention is fueled by cascades of emotion and cognition that ripple through everything we chose to notice, engage, mull, or exchange, moment by moment.
We too see boundaries as "manifestations of information" which couple inner context with outer environment, as expression of nemes. What we think of as "authentic constraints," are like permeable boundaries which may nourish the generative expression of nemes throughout all whorls of sentience.
Nemetical insights gleaned from the sources below.
Nemetical insights gleaned from the sources below.
A new public forum and website was launched at www.inclusional-research.org on 1st October 2007, aimed at understanding and growing beyond the mental block that gets in the way of human understanding. Most fundamentally, this mental block is the core premise of objective rationality, which assumes that material can be isolated from immaterial presence, such that an absolute demarcation can be made between the insides and outsides of discrete, fully definable objects (‘matter’ and ‘space’). This assumption leads to deep paradox, does not make sense of our everyday human experience and is not supported by contemporary scientific evidence implicit in quantum mechanics, relativity and non-linear theory. Nonetheless it remains deeply entrenched in our thinking and systems of governance, giving rise to profound conflict and corresponding psychological, social and environmental damage. It makes an ‘exception’ of the individual from the environment, and so views evolution as a competitive and selective process in which ‘favoured races are preserved in the struggle for life’. What has been called ‘inclusionality’ offers a way of transforming our understanding of all kinds of evolutionary processes by means of natural inclusion , the co-creative, fluid-dynamic transformation of all through all in receptive spatial context.
Inclusionality involves understanding Nature, and our human place in Nature, primarily as fluid and dynamical, not fixed and static. This entails envisaging ‘space’ as an endless and everywhere present (i.e. ‘non-local’) ‘pool’ of receptive influence. Its dynamic relational flow-forms arise as local spheres of non-local influence.
An Inclusional Principle and Logic thereby emerges. This can be expressed ecologically as follows. Content is contextual: the inhabitant is a dynamic inclusion of the habitat, not an exception from it, as objective rationality would have us make believe. Content simultaneously forms from and gives expression to the receptive spatial pool that it fluid dynamically includes and is included in; the inhabitant transforms the habitat and vice versa as inseparable but distinguishable (discernible) aspects of one including the other, nested over all scales from microcosm to cosmos.. Inclusional flow entails the local-non-local logic of ‘somewhere as a dynamic inclusion of everywhere’, not solely the local logic of discrete, opposing objects.
In other words, material presence is a dynamic inclusion of immaterial presence and vice versa and so we are always wrong to use a subject together with an action verb to imply that the subject causes something to happen.
The definitive logic of objective rationality - where space is regarded paradoxically and exclusively both as a three-dimensional container of isolated ‘objects’ and as passive ‘background material absence’ - is hence transformed into a dynamic relational logic where all evolves co-creatively through all. Inclusionality subsumes and reforms the singular rationalistic ideas that represent evolution as the consequence of individual adaptation and selective struggle for existence, and Humans, God, Time and Numbers as domineering abstractions from Nature. Our thinking, language, mathematics, science, art, theology, management and educational systems thereby deepen from what breeds opposition, hegemony, waste and conflict to what brings mutual understanding, diversity, sustainability and co-creative relationship.
via Inclusional Research
Inclusionality theory is a radical new approach that considers an understanding of the relationships between contents and contexts to be fundamental to understanding living systems. It contrasts most strongly with the Cartesian/Newtonian model, as it takes a systemic view, but also contrasts with the holistic notion of the absence of distinguishing boundaries. Inclusionality does have some aspects in common with the views of authors such as Goodwin and Capra (Goodwin, 1997; Capra, 1996, 2003 ) who both recognise the systemic significance of communicative dialogue and relationships between organisms and their environments. In contrast to inclusionality however, they often these relationship in terms of “feedback”, which effectively splits space and time across a divisive boundary. Unlike many conventional views, which are based on binary, or dualistic logic, the Inclusional view is based on ternary logic. Instead of looking to identify either-or relationships, an inclusional view permits things to be both-and. Not black or white, but both black and white; not inside or outside, but both inside and outside. This novel perspective therefore represents a significant shift from conventional dualistic thinking.
Core to inclusionality is an understanding of the significance of space and its inseparability both from time and matter/energy. In other models, space is often either disregarded, eliminated, or seen merely as something that separates objects from their environments: in effect an “absence” of “presence”. In inclusional thinking however, space is highly significant as an inductive “presence of absence”, which permeates within, around, and through every thing, living or otherwise. It implicitly connects us with our environments, and with other beings within these environments. To illustrate: we might think that we are physically separated and distinct from this page that we are reading. However no matter is entirely solid, so both we and the page comprise molecules that are surrounded by and contain spaces; our skin may seem like a impenetrable barrier yet it is not, we have pores that allow gases to pass through, and the cells themselves are surrounded by “intercellular spaces”. So, the space that surrounds our bodies is also connected with the space inside them, and also inside every object around us. Space connects us with everything else. It is everywhere, literally.
This shared nature of space means that we share a common medium with everything else around us. Space is this medium, in effect the ultimate fluid that pervades and communicates and so gives fluidity to all. When an object moves to fill a space, the space displaces reciprocally to accept it, and vice versa in a Universal application of Archimedes’ Principle. But actually the space was already there from the beginning! Hence, the inclusional relationship between space and object is a bit like Terry Pratchett’s observation on the speed of light:
“Light thinks it travels faster than anything but it is wrong. No matter how fast light travels it finds the darkness has always got there first, and is waiting for it.”
In inclusionality therefore, space is considered to have a reciprocal relationship with energy-matter. It is the communicative “presence of absence” or super-conductor (because it has zero resistance) that connects the insides and the outsides of “things”, because it inhabits both at the same time.
Looked at from this perspective, the limitations of discretist and positivist views that seek to clearly define objects from their contexts, become clear. If space permeates through systems, connecting insides with outsides, it is simply not possible to sever that which is inside of something from that which is not. To return to an earlier metaphor, if one were to try to use imaginary scissors to separate an “object” from its context, one would have arbitrarily to divide the space along some imaginary line. And of course by doing this, one destroys one of the key features of the system – the implicit, and (often) invisible communication between the object’s inner context and its outer context, or environment.
In Inclusional thinking, as they are in complexity theory, boundaries are key. Inclusional boundaries, like the boundaries in complexity theory are not finite linear entities. But unlike in complexity theory, where boundaries are viewed as specific locations where important phenomena occur, in inclusionality, boundaries are primarily considered to be manifestations of information both distinguishing and coupling inner contexts (contents) with outer environments. Importantly, inclusional boundaries are both permeable and dynamic. They are continual reflections of the reciprocity between inner and outer spaces, which in any real system is also dynamic.
Inclusionality also has implications for the way we understand communication. As far as people are concerned, an Inclusional view of communication could relate to our dialogue, and to our actions with regards to other people, beings and environments. The same principles apply here as in other areas of inclusionality. Namely, a new view of space, an understanding of the reciprocal and fluid relationship between inner and outer contexts, and a need to recognise that permeable, dynamic boundaries are all-important.
Psychology is not alone in its struggle with conceptualizing the dynamic relationship between space and individual or collective identity. This general epistemological issue haunts biology where it has a specific focus in evolutionary arguments. It arises because of the incompatibility between definitive logical systems of 'contradiction or unity', which can only apply to inert material systems, and natural evolutionary processes of cumulative energetic transformation. This incompatibility makes any attempt to apply definitive logic to evolutionary change unrealistic and paradoxical. It is important to recognise, because discrete perceptions of self and group, based on the supposition that any distinguishable identity can be completely cut free, as an 'independent singleness', from the space it inescapably includes and is included in, are a profound but unnecessary source of psychological, social and environmental conflict. These perceptions underlie Darwin's definition of 'natural selection' as 'the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life'. They result in precedence being given to striving for homogeneous supremacy, through the competitive suppression of others, instead of seeking sustainable, co-creative evolutionary relationship in spatially and temporally heterogeneous communities. Here, I show how 'natural inclusion', a new, post-dialectic understanding of evolutionary process, becomes possible through recognising space as a limitless, indivisible, receptive (non-resistive) 'intangible presence' vital for movement and communication, not as empty distance between one tangible thing and another. The fluid boundary logic of natural inclusion as the co-creative, fluid dynamic transformation of all through all in receptive spatial context, allows all form to be understood as flow-form, distinctive but dynamically continuous, not singularly discrete. This simple move from regarding space and boundaries as sources of discontinuity and discrete definition to sources of continuity and dynamic distinction correspondingly enables self-identity to be understood as a dynamic inclusion of neighbourhood, through the inclusion of space throughout and beyond all natural figural forms as configurations of energy. Fully to appreciate and communicate the significance of this move, it is necessary to widen the linguistic, mathematical and imaginative remit of conventional scientific argument and explication so as to include more poetic, fluid and artistic forms of expression.