Space Cannot Be Cut—Why Self-Identity Naturally Includes Neighbourhood

Regular Article

Abstract

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.

Keywords

Abstract logic Boundaries Energy flow Inclusionality Intangibility Natural inclusion Natural logic Neighbourhood Rationality Self-identity Space 

References

  1. Adler Collins, J. (2007). Developing an inclusional pedagogy of the unique: How do I clarify, live and explain my educational influences in my learning as I pedagogise my healing nurse curriculum in a Japanese University? PhD Thesis, University of Bath. Retrieved 30 July 2010 from http://www.actionresearch.net/jekan.shtml.
  2. Ainsworth, A. M., & Rayner, A. D. M. (1986). Responses of living hyphae associated with self and non-self fusions in the Basidiomycete Phanerochaete velutina. Journal of General Microbiology, 132, 191–201.Google Scholar
  3. Barabási, A.-L. (2002). Linked: The new science of networks. Perseus Publishing.Google Scholar
  4. Bateson, G. (2000). Steps to an ecology of mind: Collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution, and epistemology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General system theory: Foundations, development, applications. New York: George Braziller.Google Scholar
  6. Cairns, H. C., & Harney, B. Y. (2004). Dark Sparklers. Merimbula: H.C.Cairns.Google Scholar
  7. Claxton, G. (2006). The wayward mind. London: Abacus.Google Scholar
  8. Damasio, A. (2000). The feeling of what happens: Body, emotion and the making of consciousness. London: Vintage.Google Scholar
  9. Darwin, C. (1859). On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. Bromley: Down.Google Scholar
  10. Dawkins, R. (1989). The selfish gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press. New Edition.Google Scholar
  11. Dawkins, R. (1995). River out of Eden: A Darwinian view of life. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  12. Dowson, C. G., Rayner, A. D. M., & Boddy, L. (1986). Outgrowth patterns of mycelial cord-forming basidiomycetes from and between woody resource units in soil. Journal of General Microbiology, 132, 203–211.Google Scholar
  13. Einstein, A. (1954). Relativity. University Paper Back, London: Methuen & Co, p. 138.Google Scholar
  14. Elstrup, O. (2009). The ways of humans: modelling the fundamentals of psychology and social relations. Integrative Psychological and Behavioural Science, 43, 267–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Elstrup, O. (2010). The ways of humans: the emergence of sense and common sense through language production. Integrative Psychological and Behavioural Science, 44, 82–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gabriel, Y. (2002). Essai: on paragrammatic uses of organizational theory—a provocation. Organization Studies, 23, 133–151.Google Scholar
  17. Harding, D. E. (2000). On having no head—Zen and the rediscovery of the obvious. London: The Shollond Trust.Google Scholar
  18. Heelas, P., & Lock, A. (1981). Indigenous psychologies: The anthropology of the self. London: Academic.Google Scholar
  19. Hyde, L. (2006). The gift—how the creative spirit transforms the world. Edinburgh: Canongate Books.Google Scholar
  20. Koestler, A. (1976). The ghost in the machine. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
  21. Lewis, C. S. (1942). The screwtape letters. London: Geoffrey Bles.Google Scholar
  22. McGilchrist, I. (2009). The master and his emissary: The divided brain and the making of the Western World. Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Naidoo, M. (2005). I am because we are (A never ending story). The emergence of a living theory of inclusional and responsive practice. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Bath. Retrieved 30 July 2010 from http://www.actionresearch.net/naidoo.shtml
  24. Neuman, Y. (2010). Empathy: from mind-reading to reading of a distant text. Integrative Psychological and Behavioural Science. doi:10.1007/s12124-010-9118-7.Google Scholar
  25. Petroski, H. (2005). Technology and the humanities. American Scientist, 93, 305.Google Scholar
  26. Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy (p. 381). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  27. Rayner, A. D. M. (1997). Degrees of freedom—Living in dynamic boundaries. London: Imperial College Press.Google Scholar
  28. Rayner, A. D. M. (1998). Fountains of the forest—the interconnectedness between trees and fungi. Mycological Research, 102, 1441–1449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rayner, A. D. M. (2004). Inclusionality and the role of place, space and dynamic boundaries in evolutionary processes. Philosophica, 73, 51–70.Google Scholar
  30. Rayner, A. D. M. (2006). Natural inclusion: How to evolve good neighbourhood. Available from http://www.inclusional-research.org/naturalinclusion.php
  31. Rayner, A. D. M. (2008a). Natural communion: Poems and paintings about our human inclusion in the evolutionary flow of place-time. Available from http://www.inclusional-research.org/furtherreading/naturalcommunion.pdf
  32. Rayner, A. D. M. (2008b). From emptiness to openness: How Inclusional awareness transforms abstract pride and prejudice into natural sense and sensibility. Available from http://www.inclusional-research.org/furtherreading/inclusionalessays.pdf
  33. Rayner, A. D. M. (2010a). Sustainability of the fitting—bringing the philosophical principles of natural inclusion into the educational enrichment of our human neighbourhood. http://www.bestthinking.com
  34. Rayner, A. D. M. (2010b). Essay: life, love and suffering—from demanding human rights to appreciating human needs. Action Learning and Action Research Journal, 16, 97–104.Google Scholar
  35. Rayner, A. D. M. (2010c). Inclusionality and sustainability—attuning with the currency of natural energy flow and how this contrasts with abstract economic rationality. Environmental Economics, 1, 98–108.Google Scholar
  36. Rayner, A. D. M. (2010d). Needfulness, neediness and needlessness. www.bestthinking.com.
  37. Rayner, A. D. M. (2011). NaturesScope: Unlocking our natural empathy and creativity—an inspiring new way of relating to our natural origins and one another through natural inclusion. O Books (in press).Google Scholar
  38. Rayner, A. D. M., & Jarvilehto, T. (2008). From dichotomy to inclusionality: a transformational understanding of organism-environment relationships and the evolution of human consciousness. Transfigural Mathematics, 1(2), 67–82.Google Scholar
  39. Rayner, A. D. M., & Tattersall, P. (2010). From field theories to pool theory: the inclusional basis of natural physicality. Available from www.bestthinking.com.
  40. Rayner, A. D. M., Coates, D., Ainsworth, A. M., Adams, T. J. H., Williams, E. N. D., & Todd, N. K. (1984). The biological consequences of the individualistic mycelium. In D. H. Jennings & A. D. M. Rayner (Eds.), The ecology and physiology of the fungal mycelium (pp. 509–540). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Rayner, A. D. M., Watkins, Z. R., & Beeching, J. R. (1999). Self-integration—an emerging concept from the fungal mycelium. In N. A. R. Gow & G. M. Gadd (Eds.), The Fungal Colony (pp. 1–24). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sampson, E. (1988). Indigenous psychologies of the individual and their role in personal and societal functioning. The American Psychologist, 43, 15–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sampson, E. (2000). Reinterpreting individualism and collectivism: their religious roots and monologic versus dialogic person-other relationship. The American Psychologist, 55, 1425–1432.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Shakunle, L. O. (1994). Spiral geometry. The principles (with discourse). Berlin: Hitit Verlag.Google Scholar
  45. Shakunle, L. O., & Rayner, A. D. M. (2007). Superchannel of zero spirals. Journal of Transfigural Mathematics, 1(63–64), 104–105.Google Scholar
  46. Shakunle, L. O., & Rayner, A. D. M. (2008). Superchannel—Inside and beyond superstring: the natural inclusion of one in all—III. Transfigural Mathematics, 1(3), 9–55. 59–69.Google Scholar
  47. Shakunle, L. O., & Rayner, A. D. M. (2009). Transfigural foundations for a new physics of natural diversity—the variable inclusion of gravitational space in electromagnetic flow-form. Journal of Transfigural Mathematics, 1(2), 109–122.Google Scholar
  48. Smith, B. (1997). Boundaries: an essay in Mereotopology. In L. Hahn (Ed.), The philosophy of Roderick Chisholm (pp. 534–561). La Salle: Open Court.Google Scholar
  49. Taylor, S. (2005). The fall. Winchester: O Books.Google Scholar
  50. Tesson, K. J. A. (2006). Dynamic networks: an interdisciplinary study of network organization in biological and human organizations. PhD Thesis, University of Bath.Google Scholar
  51. Tuyl, G. V. (2009). From Engineer To Co-Creative Catalyst: An Inclusional And Transformational Journey. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Bath. Retrieved 27 July 2010 from http://www.actionresearch.net/living/gvt.shtml
  52. Valsiner, J. (2009). Baldwin’s quest: a universal logic of development. In J. W. Clegg (Ed.), The observation of human systems—Lessons from the history of anti-reductionist empirical psychology (pp. 45–82). New Brunswick: Transaction.Google Scholar
  53. Walker, E. M. (2003). The confusion of dreams between selves and the other: non-linear continuities in the social dreaming experience. In W. G. Lawrence (Ed.), Experiences in social dreaming (pp. 215–227). London: Karnac Books.Google Scholar
  54. Whitehead, J., & McNiff, J. (2006). Action research living theory. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  55. Whitehead, J., & Rayner, A. (2010). From dialectics to inclusionality—a naturally inclusive approach to educational accountability. http://www.bestthinking.com.
  56. Wilber, K. (1996). A brief history of everything. Boston: Shambhala.Google Scholar
  57. Wilson, E. O. (1998). Consilience—The unity of knowledge. London: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
  58. Wimsatt, W. K., & Beardsley, M. C. (1946). The intentional fallacy. Sewanee Review, 54, 468–488.Google Scholar
  59. Winnicott, D. W. (1965). Maturational processes and the facilitating environment. London: Hogarth.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biology and BiochemistryUniversity of BathBathUK

Personalised recommendations