Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
In a post on his blog, in his description of the second edition of his book, The Laws of Change, Jack Balkin says the following:
"One would think it obvious-- although many people still seem to believe otherwise-- that you cannot predict the future by flipping coins or counting yarrow stalks. On the other hand, by asking questions of the book and coming to understand its philosophy over many years, you can get to know yourself better and gain some wisdom in the process."
Tiger
Hi Elvis
Are you Chris Lofting with a better outfit?
Hi Elvis
Are you Chris Lofting with a better outfit?
Anyway. One of the myths in modernism is to value local/subjective as meaningless. Please move from the XX century to the XXI
No, I don't ignore that distinction. Just pointing to the fact that the relevance/irrelevance of local/subjective is the border between modernism (XIX-XX century)/posmodernism(XX-XXI century).You ignore to make the distinctions between classes and instances.
Your Class and Instance analysis is very well stated (and makes me think about programming in Java or C++--but that is another thread).He has it almost right - we can in fact 'predict' events through understanding the CLASS of event that is occurring... Using the feature of the I Ching being a language and so able to even describe itself, I can extract details from that representation that include the indication of the completion/purpose of that event if it is allowed to develop without interruption/distraction etc.
Hi Tiger,
I don't have any views on what you're touching upon here, but I just noticed a - probably unexpected- 'slip of the hand' in your title . . 'fixed or static'? . . have you answered yourself already perhaps?
:bows:
Thanks for the kind note on the photos...I will change out the galleries for other photos as time permits. Most of my work is candid shots of people, but not everyone cares for that. Most people do like flowers.Hi Tiger,
I don't have any views on what you're touching upon here, but I just noticed a - probably unexpected- 'slip of the hand' in your title . . 'fixed or static'? . . have you answered yourself already perhaps?
(great photos btw . .)
:bows:
I understand there are sophisticated counter arguments to that. It may be simply that you have to choose which story you believe in, and generally I like to believe that the future is malleable.
So from that, I come up against my belief that the I Ching works as tool for understanding the present, and possibly predicting the future. If Yi works, then perhaps the future is fixed, and so I am in conundrum.
But mostly I wanted to see what others think, rather than talk anyone into seeing it my way or settling the matter.
Tiger
No, I don't ignore that distinction. Just pointing to the fact that the relevance/irrelevance of local/subjective is the border between modernism (XIX-XX century)/posmodernism(XX-XXI century).
Life is more than mathematic theories and abstractions
Your Class and Instance analysis is very well stated (and makes me think about programming in Java or C++--but that is another thread).
I think I agree with, but haven't managed to formulate clearly for myself, your idea about the understanding of the Class leading, with the help of the Language of Yi, to knowing the Results. I am not sure about the unpredictability of the Instance; after all, every question, ultimately, is about an Instance. I am trying to think about this
But I am also fascinated by the possible contradiction that by describing the Class, and relating it to the reading, we are describing the expected outcome for the Class, but only if an exogenous variable does not come along and upset our system.
Let's say that Rita loves Dexter and is unsure of the depth of Dexter's feeling. Rita thinks about this deeply, and asks Yi a question about Dexter and Rita's relationship. "Will Dexter and I stay together?" Is that a specific Instance, or a Class question?. I think according to your analysis, it would be an Instance. But Rita is a good diviner and she may understand the language used and perhaps it is a useful question.
Now Lila comes along, who distracts Dexter's attention and nearly ruins their relationship. Should Yi's original reading have foreseen this, that Dexter had enough depth of feelings to stay in love with Rita under current conditions, but perhaps not for an unexpected event like Lila?
It is probably like the wave/particle duality in physics. Sometimes it is clear that light acts and can be described in waves, and other times it is very clear that there are individual light particles (photons), with lives of their own. In physics, they are not agreed on a reason or explanation for this, but the phenomenon is undeniable.I didn't mean that deep down you believe it is fixed, I was thinking of how, in your question, the insistence of the fixed came up thru an unexpected slip . .
I too think that if one thing seems static (or, rather, constant) that should be the fact that things change, but this is a contradiction in itself, a paradox . . so how do we go on from there?
It is probably like the wave/particle duality in physics. Sometimes it is clear that light acts and can be described in waves, and other times it is very clear that there are individual light particles (photons), with lives of their own. In physics, they are not agreed on a reason or explanation for this, but the phenomenon is undeniable.
So I guess the malleable future is also fixed, and the static future is full of changes.
Tiger
Chris,.
IOW the EIC focus is on unconscious activities that can aid consciousness as they can be suppressed by consciousness - and we can pick up that sort of stuff (see the example in the EIC FAQ - http://www.emotionaliching.com/faq.html )
One of the myths in modernism is to value local/subjective as meaningless. Please move from the XX century to the XXI
This really is THE question to end all questions. Does God exist? Easy one, Sure. Life after Death? You bet.
But, Determinism v Indeterminism??! It goes something like this:
Either, everything happens to us happen for a REASON (i.e. fixed future).
Or, there is RANDOMNESS to our existence. (i.e. open ended future) .
I have come to believe that likely BOTH are at play and that we humans, in our temporal state, are inherently incapable of understanding how it works at the moment. Nor are we meant to.
Furthermore, the fact that it is an either/or question question is a hint that the question is flawed to begin with.
As for the Yi predicting your future. Well, as I understand it, the i Ching is not meant to be used for fortune telling, but rather, as a barometer to read the current situation in question.
That said, it has let me know a few times in no uncertain terms the outcome of an even beforehand.
I think a better question, rather than "Does X love me?", would be"What would the consequences be from beginning a relationship with X?"
or "What sort of match would X and I make?"
IMHO, if it is meant to happen, it probably will.
I think you may have contradicted yourself, unless I'm misunderstanding you. You say that the I Ching should be used to read the current situation rather than fortune telling. Then you say that rather than asking "Does X love me" [current situation], it's better to ask "What would the consequences be from beginning a relationship with X?" or "what soft of match would x and I make" [fortune telling]
Yes, well perhaps I am just playing semantics here, but I think there is a SLIGHT difference between asking, for example;
a. "Will X happen?" (Predicting the future)
and
b)"What would the possible consequences be if X happened" (A reading of probability)
One demands an answer, the other asks conditions surrounding one probable outcome. The former is more ego driven and rigid than the latter, in my opinion. I find my readings to be much more useful when my questions aren't so structured.
whether the I Ching can and should be used for straightforward fortune telling
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).