modes of creating and fragmenting
creating and fragmenting: the fundamental polarity
note: the videos include much more than the text below, as I am actually delivering this content to a live “audience,” so I occasionally simplify, clarify, and elaborate the content.
Fragmenting, as in the sense of a physical object, is the dis-assembling or decomposing of a singular, composite system of organic
integrity into independent components. In social or interpersonal contexts, fragmenting is the discontinuing of a partnering or collaboration.
For instance, a single unified business may break into distinct operations that focus on particular activities, such as when branch offices go independent or disenfranchise. In a family, children may grow up and leave the household of their parents, with each young adult going their separate ways.
More relevant to many reading this now, in the fragmenting phase of life, social groups that previously co-existed peacefully may splinter into contempt and blame for each other, with the identification of some particular target of unquestionable blame- such as the isolated conspirators of a particular political grouping (“the terrorist religious fundamentalists” or “the imperialist Zionist elite”). As people become more irritable, belligerent, and antagonistic, they may become more and more fierce in their passionate calls to oppose their enemies, such as some alleged advocates of “divide and conquer.” Those who do not agree with their unquestionable calls for revolution (or fascism) may be labeled ignorant, idiotic or even psychopathic- perhaps due to be held indefinitely against their will in “gentle” concentration camps called “mental health” institutions, where those labeled politically incorrect and psychologically incorrect can be coercively pumped full of “medicinal” psychiatric inhibitors, of course “for their own good” allegedly.
One stark irony of the protests against “the enemy who would divide and conquer us” is that the devotees of vilification and antagonism are themselves the practitioners of divisiveness or fragmenting. The neo-cons blame Al Queda, then the reactionary patriots blame the neo-cons, but with relatively naked contempt for the ignorant masses, if not also fear. In the mode of fragmenting, the anonymous masses of “the melting pot” may reflexively withdraw into familiar stratifications, such as ethnic, religious or other ideological enclaves, as in tribalism or isolationism.
In the very early 1930s in the US, the politics of reactionary isolationism may have crippled the US economy which was already destabilizing (contracting). Thus, a perhaps minor crisis was made into a relatively catastrophic collapse lasting in to the late 1930s at least, setting the stage for a huge advance in the centralized federalist bureaucracy of entitlement socialism called “The New Deal.”
Of course, such a tendency to reflexive fragmenting isolationism is far from unique, and it’s consequences are not unpredictable. Many other obvious examples are available to the intellectually independent, even just from US history. Two more precedents that could be cited are the US Civil War and the American Revolutionary War being instances of large-scale fragmenting or rupturing. Both of these followed major economic downturns, similar to the organized violence of World War II, which is also notable for it’s unprecedented efficiency in destructiveness due to breakthrough technology, highlighted in the atomic bombing of Japan by the USA.
So, in contrast to fragmenting and the religion of blame and the politics of divisiveness, there is the function of creating. Creating is fundamentally responsive and responsible process, being that it develops with attention as in consciousness. The function and process of creating has an entirely distinct language from the language of divisiveness, animosity, accusation and shaming, which worships an ideal of evil or sin, an enemy, a great Satan or devil.
Materialism and money may be the great shame, or a scapegoat of terrorism or global imperialism or even a pandemic flu or perhaps homosexuality or some other perceived threat to cultural paradigms. Note that the language of creating in no way denies any particular development or theory, yet is marked by an openness which may occur for fundamentalists of all sorts as a betrayal of sacred principles, a criminal negligence in it’s lack of compulsion to obsess in self-righteous paranoia, to join the however gentle revolution urgently and without question.
Creating is positively and constructively focused. Creating is based on principles of responsibility, consent and gratitude rather than blame, entitlement and resentment.
Creating involves the deliberate use of language and a willingness to be flexible yet uncompromising, to sacrifice so-called obligations for commitment, for congruence with one’s own instinct, intuition and word. Creating does require ideological justifications or defenses or argument or anyone’s else agreement or permission.
Creating can be spontaneous and has the distinction of the presence of inspiration without attachment about obedience to a particular method. Creating is tolerant and respectful, bold without being proud, both simple and innocent. Creating is an act of generosity and love, rather than an act of desperate redemption to earn one’s way out of suffering or hell… or to preserve a fragile bridge to a distant heaven or utopia. Creating is the proverbial act of God, the action or activity or process of divine expression.
Creating is intuitively self-organizing rather than exhaustively modeled from a theoretical strategy, with exhaustive focus on the letter of any model, as in blind conformity, and neglect of the spirit or functionality. Creating does not require knowing all the details before proceeding. Creating allows for learning- even revels in it.
Creating is not rebellion or opposition to anything, especially not against fragmenting or divisiveness. Creating recognizes that those operating in the divisive mode “know not what they do.” Creating is not so much “forgiving” as marked by a total absence of condemnation (and guilt). Creating is a celebration of innocence, as distinct from a war against the latest threat.
Creating does not require serious problems to solve, but is playful and curious and relaxed, yet can be intensely focused and efficient because of the absence of tensions and repressions and conceptual denials, without lingering worries or rages of hatred of self or others. The mode of creating is the realm of heavenly peace and the rebirth of the God which has no concern for either personal glory nor the disapproval of others, which has no resentment for punishment and no entitlement to rewards and rights and privileges. The mode of creating is the seed from which all else arises, including any later fragmenting and divisiveness.
While those in the mode of divisiveness compete amongst themselves, those in the mode of creating partner with each other, perhaps even occasionally “converting” someone from the mode of divisiveness and struggle and suffering, if only ever so gently. Are you interested in exploring the mode of creating with others of similar spirit?
- Problems with Fragment lifecycle and onCreate being called on non existent fragment (stackoverflow.com)
- Fragment of a Credo (maverickphilosopher.typepad.com)
- Fragments, with the same menu, on the same layout cause duplicated menuitem (stackoverflow.com)
- Android Fragment lifecycle over orientation changes (stackoverflow.com)
- Using tabs inside a Fragment (not FragmentActivity) (stackoverflow.com)
- Military museum attracts visitors from across the border (travelnews.britishairways.com)
- ^UR- Cairo Geniza Targumic Fragment: MS (rosary2007.wordpress.com)
- What do you see if it was your ‘last look’? (areyouchanging.wordpress.com)
- FragmentTransaction in Portrait Mode Throws NullPointerException (stackoverflow.com)
- The Lunar Ranger: a New Long Read From the Atavist (blogs.discovermagazine.com)
- The Impact of Industrial Revolution to the Whole World (farouqarifin.wordpress.com)
- TV Has A Growing Reach Problem (adage.com)
- Fragment of a Sub(urban) Daydream (agnewpickens.com)
- Can’t Touch This – Part 4 (perfectlyfractured.wordpress.com)
- Fragments (annieb222.wordpress.com)
- Fox: UltraViolet is a ‘serious work in progress’ (techradar.com)
- Listening for the Absolute (sebastianennis.wordpress.com)
- The Wise Man, The Goddess And The Fragment (renaissanceforleaders.com)