Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
'lo all, and a low bow,
I'm wondering what anybody has to say about symmetry and asymmetry as attributes of Yin and Yang.
My own confusion comes from my outline of an understanding of group-theory and the scientific definition of symmetry as those parts of something which survive a given instance of change.
Given this definition, symmetry is a passive principle, the odd remainder so to speak (or, is it even?) Change is the active principle, and so it is easily identified with yang.
But the ultimate, ever-changing context of the universe is formless, and therefore asymmetric; and similarly, yang defines the individual in relation to this yin contextual precedence - every identifiable 'thing' is bisected, polar, balanced by its opposite number; in this instance, yang feels to me to be the symmetrical, structural principle.
It is enough to drive a Durer to melancholy madness.
What think you?
Thanks,
Justin
'lo all, and a low bow,
I'm wondering what anybody has to say about symmetry and asymmetry as attributes of Yin and Yang.
My own confusion comes from my outline of an understanding of group-theory and the scientific definition of symmetry as those parts of something which survive a given instance of change.
Given this definition, symmetry is a passive principle, the odd remainder so to speak (or, is it even?) Change is the active principle, and so it is easily identified with yang.
But the ultimate, ever-changing context of the universe is formless, and therefore asymmetric; and similarly, yang defines the individual in relation to this yin contextual precedence - every identifiable 'thing' is bisected, polar, balanced by its opposite number; in this instance, yang feels to me to be the symmetrical, structural principle.
'lo all, and a low bow,
I'm wondering what anybody has to say about symmetry and asymmetry as attributes of Yin and Yang.
My own confusion comes from my outline of an understanding of group-theory and the scientific definition of symmetry as those parts of something which survive a given instance of change.
Given this definition, symmetry is a passive principle, the odd remainder so to speak (or, is it even?) Change is the active principle, and so it is easily identified with yang.
But the ultimate, ever-changing context of the universe is formless, and therefore asymmetric; and similarly, yang defines the individual in relation to this yin contextual precedence - every identifiable 'thing' is bisected, polar, balanced by its opposite number; in this instance, yang feels to me to be the symmetrical, structural principle.
It is enough to drive a Durer to melancholy madness.
What think you?
Thanks,
Justin
Straight, square, great.
Without purpose,
Yet nothing remains unfurthered.
The symbol of heaven is the circle, and that of earth is the square. Thus squareness is a primary quality of the earth. On the other hand, movement in a straight line, as well as magnitude, is a primary quality of the Creative (1). But all square things have their origin in a straight line and in turn form solid bodies. In mathematics, when we discriminate between lines, planes and solids, we find that rectangular planes result from straight lines, and cubic magnitudes from rectangular planes. The Receptive (2) accommodates itself to the qualities of the Creative (1) and makes them its own. Thus a square develops out of a straight line and a cube out of a square. This is compliance with the laws of the Creative (1); nothing is taken away, nothing added. Therefore the Receptive (2) has no need of a special purpose of its own, nor of any effort" yet everything turns out as it should.
Nature creates all beings without erring: this is its foursquareness. It tolerates all creatures equally: this is its greatness. Therefore it attains what's right for all without artifice or special intentions. Man achieves the height of wisdom when all that he does is as self-evident as what nature does.
here's another idea . . could it be that Yi's 64 hexagrams break down the present moment just like a kaleidoscope breaks down an object? at each question we read our place in this refracted analysis, being in symmetry with some parts, in asymmetry with others and in a balance that is always about to change . .
As Solun said, it's hard to separate which force each time operates to name it as such . . it's interesting though to make the question just like throwing the ball and seeing what comes out of it . .
Hi justin,
ever see pictures of the Mandelbrot set? (don't know if I spelled that right) Look into it if you have the chance.
It goes on for infinity.
Principles, particularly polemic ones, like active/passive, symmetric/asymmetric ... etc. are useful in a defintional sense and are very temporal, two dimensional.
The universe is dynamic, and so are all of the principles, depending on how you see and apply them.
I see as much motion and activity in the supposed static of symmetry as in asymmetry. Symmetry itself radiates. This is certainly dynamic. Just look at a mandala and how it's used in meditation.
Yin and yang exist within each other. We are talking about infiinity here, the symbol for which is like a three dimensional yin/yang. A floating circle.
The question about symmetry is more about orientation. Are you looking at a line from the side, or staring down the center of it as a point?! Relativity has it's place in the universe. yes, there are standard forms and processes in our world, but everything must retain a certain elasticity if it is to endure.
I have found it difficult to see yang means this, yin means that. Well, it does and it doesn't - because they eventually become one another!
And in life there is no perfect symmetry. What about the crab who has one huge claw and one small one?
It's possible that asymmetry is just a weird-angle snapshot in time. But what's the difference? Life is so varied, there could be similarly asymmetric others out there somewhere. Symmetry!
uneatable fruit
( . . . )
Addressing your question was part of what exists in the moment
I think asymmetry is one part of the creative process - the tendency being toward individuation, which tendency leads us toward unification eventually, and on and on ...
asymmetry is to symmetry as imagination is to logic - or vice versa.
human logic is an abstraction of some greater (human or other) consciousness that could logically exist - and in experiencing that, we go out, beyond, within - direction is a question of the type of energy and a matter of perspective, orientation
How to produce and contain the energy necessary to seek "individuation" except through facing and working with the ever-present resistance to it in myself? - pantherpanther
change is an occasion implicit in the time. the workings of our own soul or mind is a mystery in terms of what we choose. it's based on the past, but also on DNA and whatever 'energy or force' has set the soul in motion from the beginning to it's accorded purpose.
fatalism and free will are difficult to discuss. they are also dependent on the personality.
we go from physics to chemistry to the physics of chemistry and the chemistry of physics, the creation of matter, which came first , the chicken or the egg. god doesn't exist without his woman. and so on. they are not two. or they are. but they are to us, eternal.
I found an old name for god, it had seven sexes! or not! here on earth, ours has two generally. and the patterns of creation are generated between them as from the beginning, or wherever. we choose.
anyway, i am having trouble with my keyboard functions, they aren't working here so well for some reason.
How to produce and contain the energy necessary to seek "individuation" except through facing and working with the ever-present resistance to it in myself?
“The No is to make the Yes remembered. No and Yes have to become more inseparable – one without the other is not profitable. … Yes without No – the angel without the devil – is impotence. … If it were not so it would not lead you to something. It would be romance – fallacious."
-Jane Heap
yes, but you didn't understand my answer. so sorry. ):
I will summarize: Surrender.
Don't focus on your perceived resistance - it is a figment of unnecessary imaginings. If you focus on struggling, you are engaging in something that will only consume energy. Change happens at the appointed time.
cheers p
you could also ask the yi ching your question. Tell us what 'your' answer is, in shared readings maybe? that might be interesting. but I find the yi, the more we absorb some of it's wisdom, can becom part of our character, and we intuit well.
We become what we pay for: no pain, no gain. No change. Efforts are rewarded according to their quality and persistence.
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).