The movement from general to particular, when moving from a perspective of integration dominance to a perspective of differentiation dominance, reflects the fact that we are moving along a dimension of precision where the high energy 'dot' precise nature of the binary perspective of differentiation is complemented at the 'other pole' by the more conserving of energy, 'field' precise nature of integration. This dimension reflects that of covering the path from the UNARY to the BINARY. As we shall see, reference to the realm of the unary is meaningless in that there are no distinctions possible - all is 'one' but an implicit 'one'.
We find that the first point of distinction making is when we introduce 'memory' in the form of reference to a past context. The initial reference is to the previous context and we can derive a sense of the temporal, or sequence, in the form of '1,2,3,4...' but this fails to demonstrate patterns of development that are useful. It is in fact the next level of context-reference that patterns emerges, where we consider the previous two context frames. These patterns seemingly reflecting the influences of the 'golden ratio' and as such the fibonacci sequence rather than the binary sequence where this pattern reflects the 'perfect fit' of integration and differentiation processes - the perfect 'balance' that ensures development and yet conservation of energy in doing so.
This precision dimension allows us to start an analysis of reality from any point on that dimension and as such focus upon a set of patterns as being 'meaningful' to the exclusion, or at least subordination, of all other patterns. Thus starting at the point associated with the fibonacci sequence, all 'meaningful' patterns will reflect the fibonacci sequence and the ratio of the 'golden mean' - 1:1.618. Thus we identify a development pattern shared by galaxies as well as flowers.
If we wish, we can extend our analysis and yet stay within a particular perspective without moving along the dimension. We do this by using such concepts as hyperbolic development where the set of basic qualities derived using the particular precision perspective is recruited to serve as a source of analogies to 'flesh out' each quality within the original set; as such we move 'vertically' in development through the use of self-referencing - the advantage is we 'stay in the box', the disadvantage is the inevitable need for 'fresh blood' as the perspective can become too 'esoteric', too complex, too sterile, and so in need of a change of perspective.
If we move along the dimension, (see below diagram) and so become more differentiating in perspective, we reach the other pole that reflects patterns sourced in the binary sequence and so a ratio of 1:2. In all of these different patterns the associated number sequences reflect numbers that represent the degree of integration WITHIN a pattern - thus the higher numbers of the fibonacci sequence, when in pairs that form the 'golden ratio' relationship, represent the degree of turn, the 'tightness', in the spirals we see in these patterns.
These perceptions of various patterns of 'meaning' seem to have their roots in
the consideration of how much data from the past we need to recruit to aid us in development - i.e the feedback
from memories, from past contexts. If I have no memory then I work off instincts, genetics, and so each 'moment'
of time is as such, a moment. We can symbolise this moment-to-moment development as a sequence of 1s representing
each moment:
baseline perspective : 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1,..... (you could also use a wave format reflecting an integrating
perspective but I am using differentation to make my point!)
If we move to being able to consider the immediate past in focusing on development then a little bit of energy
'lifts' us from the baseline and we end-up with a sense of 'time' - the recognition of this ability to note the
past is captured through the use of summing the past with the present, we move through the above baseline adding
the past to the present. This gives us the basic sequence of:
first degree of awareness: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8,.....
The BENEFIT to a lifeform that can do this allows for evolution and that includes increasing of energy available
to 'lift'. IF I can now consider the past TWO moments then I get this:
second degree of awareness: 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21,.....
This is the mentioned fibonacci sequence and it is reflected in growth patterns from the scale of microtubules
in the neuron to spiral galaxies. A property of this sequence is that it is the 'best fit' for differentiation
and integration processes - it allows for a degree of development that is also conserving in energy usage and also
elicits a sense of 'meaning' in that the patterns act to elicit a sense of being 'pleasing' to our species. There
is nothing 'mystical' about these patterns in that they reflect the natural, 'mindless', consequences of growth
dynamics.
If you keep repeating this process of recruiting more and more context frames to aid in development you get to
the level of recruiting ALL frames back to the 'beginning'; your focus moves from a balance of integration/differentiation,
and so a more approximates perspective, to exaggerations and a more differentiating perspective. This process will
give you the following sequence:
nth degree of awareness: 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128....
This is a binary sequence (or approaching one in that further degrees just refine the sequence)
The numbers reflect precision as in bit representations of, for example, colours etc thus a 32-bit system is not
as precise as a 128-bit system. In the fibonacci patterns the numbers are reflected geometrically as a tightening
of the spiral and as such a pulling 'in' to the center and so the 'point'. At the binary level so the 'gentle'
spiral of the fibonacci level becomes 'sharp' where branching occurs out of the middle of the rigid A/NOT-A assertions
we find in the realm of the binary.
Thus not only is there precision in the increasing degree of awareness, but there is also precision WITHIN the
degree reflected in the zooming-in on the 'point' the 'fact', the 'bit'.
Now comes the 'fun'. EACH of these degrees of awareness set the context for perceptions such that the patterns
associated with each degree are deemed the manifestations of 'truth', of deep 'meaning' and as such a lifeform
developed within the precision context will be attracted to those patterns more so than all others. Subordinate
patterns are also 'meaningful' but considered not as precise as the current, EITHER/OR, patterns that come out
of the realm of the binary.
Genetic diversity can determine the degree of energy usage, of metabolic rates, optimum functions etc, in a lifeform
such that a lifeform can 'prefer' a level and with that determine what patterns in reality 'resonate' the best.
Overall, there is a 'zig-zag' pattern in approaching high precision where each point serves as the ground for a
perspective that develops 'vertically' to a degree where the need emerges, a demand emerges, for a change in perspective
to allow for new insights where the complexity present blocks all continuing work and so we 'add a dimension' and
so move 'up' the general dimension of precision.
The benefit of high energy function has been our domination of this planet (note that going BEYOND the binary is
possible - it takes us into the realm of complexity/chaos, a realm of transcendence etc). The PRICE of this precision
is in not recognising that it comes with distortions and requires high maintenance.
Thus our ignoring of lower precision levels reflects our being OVER precise in that there are development patterns
in the Universe that function at the fibonacci level (and for that matter lower reflected in the arrow of time
a la 1,2,3,4....) and are so ingrained, so adapted to the Universe that there is no other choice in development.
Analysis of the methodology we use in general as a species identifies the differentiation process as the ability
to focus and 'lift' something out of the everyday for analysis and then RETURN that something to the everyday BUT
the return is more to a hybrid everyday, a combination of 'as is' reality and 'as interpreted' reality - a 'species
reality' which contains such properties as that of the 'eternal' (see below), a property that has certainly influenced
our development as a species since from that property stems the notion of the 'spiritual'.
The precision possible through the use of differentiations is down to the level of the 'dot', the ONE. The precision
possible through the use of integrations is down to the level of no less than TWO OR some form of probability list
and so a focus on a ratio.
The brain processes integrations differently than differentiations such that, when we deal with negation we focus
on an integration, to NOT something I must have something to NOT! IOW there is an integration required more so
than when I express the something. We can see these differences in PET/fMRI/rCBF scans of the brain as it processes
negation( and that includes the searching for a past context to be introduced to convert, to REPLACE, a negative
with a positive. This reflects the dynamics of 1:MANY processing that services the level of expression that is 1:1)
An issue develops in the use of binary thinking in acquiring information in that the YES/NO format is interpreted
as 1:1 BUT in reality is more 1:2 (or 1:many). The representation of the negation element is distorted in that
we make note of the EXPRESSION in a context of binary thinking which is a POSITIVE, single context assertion of
"NO", rather than recognise the VARIABLE nature of negation, its qualitative differences that have a
RANGE when compared to the 'dot' precision represented in the expression of "YES". (recall the previous
mentioned concepts of analytical negation and dialectical
negation).
In fact the variable nature of negation is reflected in the degrees of awareness identified above, all values LESS
than the binary reflect sources of negation FOR the binary. The statistics graphs etc used to represent binary
thinking will encode negation in the same manner as it encodes the assertion of "YES" - the graphs reflect
1:1 thinking but that is NOT what reality deals with, it is more 1:many such that the information reflected in
binary perspectives idealise the 'many' into 'one'. (the solution to this seems to be in the use of log scales
and that takes us into fibonacci patterns, or more so questions such as "IF YES then tick, otherwise do this
little multiple choice covering the range of negations")
Of special note is what can happen when we reach this binary perspective and attempt to 'go beyond' through putting in additional energy than that of the 1:2 representation - we can do this by, for example, using memories of 'like' events to 'enhance' the perspective of the current event; in other words we EXAGGERATE. This process takes us BEYOND 1:2 and into the realm of emergence and complexity/chaos (as demonstrated by such works as that of Verhulst and Mandelbrot). This 'going beyond' indicates the high energy position of a perspective as being the point of 'transcendence' - although in extremely diffuse, low energy areas (e.g. low value fibonacci sequence) there is the suggestion that 'transcendence' may take thousands of years or perhaps not at all - transcendence just remains as 'potentials' that are never actualised due to the lack of energy.
Of note is that the development of 'dot' precision leads to the ultimate in precision, the dropping of all references to a context - we seek the 'purest' of form. The brain cannot operate without context and as such recruits whatever is under analysis as the supplier of context and so our 'dot' precision moves into the realm of self-referencing. Note there seems to be a link in precision processing to our models of reality in the form of the methods of interpretations of Physics etc - e.g. Quantum Mechanics vs Relativity - where the more 'dot' precision of audition emerges out of the more 'field' precision of vision and as such leads to issues regarding uniting different models into a Theory of Everything (TOE).
However, there are also issues regarding high precision in that the context forces misinterpretations or misleading labeling of a category as we find, for example, in precision issues in the MBTI® where there is evidence of distortion in that the high precision of the typology interprets persona types that are more integrating, or more balanced in differentiation/integration processes and so more focused on fitting-in to a context (the transformation function) rather than replacing the context (transcendence function), as types that 'seek' identity and so are at odds with the more universal categorisations that come with the typology.
As such, the high precision of the typology focus is identifying the individual 'for ever' and as such works from the individual always asserting their given type rather than allowing the context to bring-out aspects of their persona that allow one to 'fit in' quickly; there is no need to take-over the context, to replace it, but more so to integrate with the context and so balance-out.
Of major interest here is that in the human brain, as we get more and more 'dot' precise so we enter a realm of probabilities as we attempt to identify the expression of 'something' in the dynamics of the Universe. These probabilities are extremely precise and in fact reflect the 'TENSOR' perspective mentioned later as being a consequence of our zooming-in to a quality represented in binary form. Thus we find that the precise identification of 'something' comes with being able to identify a set of possible expressions all waiting for a context to 'set them off' but also representative of the development of the 'something' over time.