Let's see, where was I?
Oh yes. Out at sea and not quite ready for the jazz swing.
But I did have a "direct perception:"
Waves!
They come in peaks and troughs.
Without the peaks and troughs there are no waves.
And without troughs there are no peaks, and without peaks, no troughs.
This is analogy for our selves and others we regard and relate to as selves.
We have a Subject aspect and an Object aspect.
I may address you, Doron with full attention and openness. Then you are The One, your subjectivity in primary focus. The objectivity is there, in that you are still an individual to me.
In such encounter I'm not placing you in a spatial-temporal location.
Instead you illuminate all my locations.
Or I may talk about you to others, in which you are regarded as primarily an object among others. I locate you somewhere and somewhen in my universe of objects. But even here, unless I’m an outright sociopath, I regard you as a person, rather than an object of my use.
This is the locality and non-locality of our personal encounters.
We don't usually grant this kind of differentiation to inanimate objects.
But an open focus of attention on any feature of our perception can bring to it a numinous, transcendent, and even personal quality.
(In my shameful, "tree hugging" days, I'd find a personal encounter with trees I meditated upon, almost as if they had dyads.
Well, it's not practical to regard the ordinary objects around you as subjects.
But we do see a virtue in being in a humane relationship with our environment.
So here's part of what I gather your Organic Mathematics intends to grant.
Traditional Mathematics has the reputation of stripping subjective being from everything it calculates, from old growth forests to individual persons. And leaves us nothing but stats on a graph.
What if there were a way of math that included in the calculation the subjective aspect, so that we didn't dehumanize ourselves?
OK, OM doesn't seem to go that far. And perhaps that's not a burden of expectation to place upon it.
Its cognitive focus is on "Local/Non-Local Linkage" specifically manifested in "Redundancy/Uncertainty."
Nevertheless the intent of the linkage of Redundancy and Uncertainty does seem to approach the desired kind of regard.
Uncertainty means an element can be regarded as merely another particular of a class or type. One is not seen except as an instance of a race, religion, nationality, or economic class.
Redundancy means one is seen as The One.
So then the partitioning of Organic Numbers to some extent represents the Subjective/Objective potentials of a new kind of mathematical interaction and calculation with respect to others and our environment.
Right?
I know there's the organism Whole/Parts thing. I'll get to that later.
So here's the really big question:
If one uses the Organic Numbers to calculate, rather than the traditional serial methods (and I'm not at all clear yet on how that is done.),
Will he or she in the very act be cognizant of the others involved in the calculation as being more than just traditional mathematical objects?
I mean, say we have an Organic Number algorithm.
(Is there such a thing?)
When I calculate with it, will I of necessity be in a 'non-local" mind?
Or is it that algorithms and calculations are only after the mind has gone serial (Uncertainty), but still remembers that it first considered parallel (Redundancy)?
By far.