6 - Interpretation of Lower Stages

Obviously one cannot provide an intellectually coherent interpretation of an early stage of development from the perspective of that stage (as cognitive development would not yet be sufficiently developed).

However there is an important vertical (and indeed diagonal) complementary interaction as between "lower" and "higher" stages.

Thus if one is to provide an adequate intellectual interpretation of an "early" stage, then it requires the understanding of the corresponding "later" stage.

Therefore to do justice to L1 (the mythic) we require the interpretation of H1 (the subtle). Thus the mature understanding of the complementary dynamics of H1 reflects the corresponding confused dynamics of L1.

Likewise to do justice to L2 (the magic) we require the interpretation of H2 (causal). Finally to do justice to L3 (archaic) we require the corresponding interpretation of H3 (nondual).

Now interestingly the middle of the middle levels (L0,H0) is complementary with itself, i.e. L0 is H0. Therefore the middle level interprets itself (with no complementarity involved).

However it is thereby seriously flawed to use such an interpretation of the middle levels e.g. vision-logic, to interpret any other level of development ("higher" or "lower").

As ultimately all levels are relatively discrete and yet dynamically continuous with other levels, it requires the interpretations of the radial levels to provide a sufficiently adequate perspective that properly interpret all stages.