Continued from "Crisis of Faith" (Divination)

elvis,
I have looked into your IDM material. We use some of the same words in regard to the form and structure of the I Ching , which often have essentialy different meanings to us. I understand your approach to divination, which I haven't tried yet. I have a different approach, which I won't try to describe. My view of the I Ching is different from yours and if I try to relate mine to yours as you have described it, at least some of the meanings we attach to words like "scale," "number," "sound," "consciousness" and "transformation" may be clearer.

In #27 you wrote:


2) ALL meaning across all members of the species is grounded at a
concrete level of single context interactions with the immediate environment
limited by the horizons of the sensory systems. FROM that level has
developed neural hierarchy that introduces the use of ABSTRACTIONS and
of the MANY languages (metaphors) derived over the gnerationios due to
IGNORANCE of the properties and methods of that concrete level of being.

The more specialisations focus on mapping reality so the more they take-on
the 'shape' of our filtering system - the neurology. As such all of these
perspectives are isomorphic and this is exploitable in such as the EIC
where we take meaning generation from emotions (fight/flight) and meaning
generation from I Ching (yang/yin) and translate one into the other through
the IDM template.

Neurology since the 1800's and until the last few years followed the so-
called "Neuron Doctrine." This is essentially cellular research. We have
come a long way since Ramon y Cajal recognized neurons communicate
by sending messages across a gulf of separation between a neuron's axon
and the dendrite of the next neuron in the circuit at a point called, the
synapse.

I think you are referencing in a partial way this old "neurology" and assuming
that "consciousness" is represented by what is observed in the brain's
neurons and suggesting that what you term "emotions(fight/flight)" express "
consciousness," as if that is the TOTAL consciousness, awareness, response and functioning of a human at a given moment. I don't think any serious neurologist today
would concur with this notion of consciousness, even the most reductionist
who has worked primarily with cellular models. Brain scans only present a narrow
slice of the body-mind picture. Brain scan interpretations fail to account for
energetic forces shaping the hard data. Empirical science may be highly accurate,
but only limited half-truths can be inferred from it.

The I Ching should not be reduced to a similar "flatland," and materialistic system limited to one
level of reality, called "concrete," and defined by an arbitrary assignment of meaning to names and numbers. It represents a multiverse of graded energies interacting within a structure that is constituted of different worlds or levels , each having a different space or dimension and time.

Neurologists, through more powerful technology are learning that
the glia communicate with and instruct ( in a language we don't
understand) all the neurons and when this communication doesn't function,
the ability to have sensations is lost . There are trillions more glia than
neurons in the brain. Neurons constitute 15% of the brain, the remaining
85% is analogous to the 96% so-called "dark matter" that makes up the
universe which we haven't yet been able to observe. The Hubble telescope
has been upgraded so we can scan the universe in infra-red and many
objects in space that were invisible have become visible. More powerful
microscopes have enabled the observation of the role of the glia in the
brain.

Through advances in technology ,scientists recently were able to
isolate single bacteria and observed they went crazy (like some people do)
because they hadn't other bacteria to work with: they became abnormal in
their behavior and potentially destructive had they been present - as some
appear to be at times - among other bacteria in an organism which support
the prevention of cancer cells. Microglia,classed as immune cells in the
brain, seem to be involved in the repair of damage to the brain. We don't
know how microglia diagnose damaged circuits in the brain. Discoveries
and revisions in DNA research - microbiology is a field I have worked in -
would take too many words to try to describe here. For those who have
read many of the comparisons between the DNA and the I Ching, I suggest
recent DNA research may be of interest .

Does this valuable research in modern science correlate with the I Ching
and what about "consciousness" ?

There has been much discussion about quantum entanglement, the
holographic multiverse , correlations of modern science with ancient
teachings and so on, but only a few,well, several hundred studies, that
seem to meet the criteria as verifiable. These have been widely ignored or
dismissed by most scientists, sometimes unfairly reviewed.

For those with some practical experience of energy work , modern science
can enhance their knowledge. There is no conflict , so speak, from looking
through a telescope and a microscope. One can observe what is visible
from a perspective that includes an awareness of phenomena that are not
"visible" .

Some clinics in Asia include both Western and Oriental medicine. Twenty-
five years ago, a friend went to China and became certified in Tui Na (a
branch of TCM) and worked in a clinic there for ten years. He told me they
had a cure rate for cancers above 90%, including many that would be
diagnosed as terminal in the West.

When I asked him why he hadn't started a clinic here - this was ten years
ago - he said he would need a million dollar war chest to deal with attacks
from the medical industry. He also became a Taoist priest and his
knowledge of the I Ching was profound and he applied it in his medical and
martial arts practices. (He was legally adopted as a son by a Chinese
lineage master who transmitted his full teaching to only two pupils.The other
was an Oriental.)

There are hundreds of chants,and also rituals and practices that relate to
the content of the I Ching, including using it as a means for divination.
I think its "ideas" can be approached and verified by individual energy
practice without knowledge of rituals,chants and so on. The human energy
anatomy is universal, and its relation to the cosmology of the I Ching is
similar to that found in other traditions. It is a "living system," and the
work is how to experience that in oneself and outside oneself. You may be
correct that number (and music) are aspects to be considered in reading
its "map." You note:
The more specialisations focus on mapping reality so the more they take-on
the 'shape' of our filtering system - the neurology.

Our nervous system (or systems) are more complex than you seem to
imply , and the mind's awareness and perception may include other
active "brains" than what is observable in the neurons of the brain. What is
observed in those neurons may be like a partial caricature of yesterday's
news to the mind and not felt as "emotions" or of interest or value to one's
conscious work for understanding or perhaps transformation ( as in qi gong, of jing
as blood, sexual fluids, and bone marrow into qi as meridians, filled with
flowing light and the qi transformed into shen as qualities heard
as tonal harmonies, and then into wu as silence ;then back down this
harmonic ladder again into matter, where molecules
dance to Cosmic Number-tones.)

Consider the I Ching represents as a whole a progressive, ascending/descending harmonic scale of inner light,sound and silence spiraling around a fundamental tone that can be experienced in the WHOLE body, not "mystically" or "mentally" . While it describes real life, mundane conditions and processes in time in symbolic language and hexagrams, these resonate with the whole on a larger scale. The hexagrams may not be perceived in terms of "words" but through an inner hearing that conveys meaning.
This does not agree with the process of "filtering" you write of as generating "meaning" on " a concrete level" that is isomorphic with the "meanings" generated by the I Ching . You assume that the creators of the I Ching were not knowledgeable of universal laws of scale as well as the structure of humans and knew how to work with them.

You wrote later (#54):

Since the IDM material covers what is 'in' our heads, so the alchemical elements of the I Ching are 'in our heads' - e.g. hexagram 41 where the 'decrease' covers distillation processes and the consequences of failed distillations. The Taoist focus on alchemy and the western focus both cover hierarchic activities of abstractions(metaphysical) from the concrete(physical) (moving UP the hierarchy) and concrete from abstract (moving down the hierarchy). ...
The focus of IDM is on origin of MEANING - in all of its forms, real or imagined - so it covers all perspectives, all instances of communicatable meaning where these all reflect classes of meanings present in our neurology.

I understand that you know the I Ching and Taoist texts and might quote correctly more from them to support your belief that this is "in our heads." And Western terms that correspond are often more objective,abstract and prescriptive (as with Pythagoras) than the Eastern, which often use "descriptive " language. They do have a common "meaning" as you suggest.

I don't agree that they are "in our heads" (or mystical) or that they can be really experienced or expressed "in words". And I think the makers of the I Ching and some Taoists and learners of other traditions, East and West transformed their bodies through practices involving mind and body , the whole being.

I was reading a recent paper given in China by Michael Winn on Eastern and Western science in which he makes a comparison that seems relevant here:
The subjectivity inherent in qi sciences is disguised in empirical science by the presence of an objective microscope, telescope, spectrometer or supercomputer. Material scientists pretend the presence of such instruments has removed their personal influence. But it does not remove them from designing both the experiment and the instrument, from their “soft” interpretation of the hard data, or from their personal energy field affecting the hard data itself.. It’s the classic “observer is never separate from the observed”.

This suggests Western science is entirely the product of a particular kind of imagination. Every technology ever invented first existed inside a human mind. When we “invent” something, we move it from inner mind space to outer space, and give it substance. Qi science works the same way, but in the opposite direction. Its methods are designed to absorb the larger invisible qi field and give it a more concrete inner reality in our body-mind. The point is that “imagination creates reality” in both sciences.

pantherpanther said:

Continued from "Crisis of Faith" (Divination)

<snip>
Neurology since the 1800's and until the last few years followed the so-
called "Neuron Doctrine." This is essentially cellular research. We have
come a long way since Ramon y Cajal recognized neurons communicate
by sending messages across a gulf of separation between a neuron's axon
and the dendrite of the next neuron in the circuit at a point called, the
synapse.

I think you are referencing in a partial way this old "neurology" and assuming
that "consciousness" is represented by what is observed in the brain's
neurons and suggesting that what you term "emotions(fight/flight)" express "
consciousness," as if that is the TOTAL consciousness, awareness, response and functioning of a human at a given moment.

Click to expand...

To make a point about IDM and the EIC:

The language of emotion precedes consciousness-as-we-know-it and covers non-digital forms of communication. The STRUCTURE of that language is empirically traceable to recursion of the fight/flight dichotomy where the interdigitations that result from such recursion are clearly identified across such as the brain's amygdala. For invasive studies on this see such as:

Gainotti, G., and Caltagirone, C., (eds) (1989) "Emotions and the Dual Brain" Springer-Verlag

The LANGUAGE of emotions serves to communicate intent with regard to how a life form deal with context - to assert one's own (take over the existing) or to fit-in with the existing. In other words a focus on the REPLACE/COEXIST dichotomy.

Replacement is competitive. Coexistence is cooperative. The characteristics of these distinctions reflect the more generic characteristics of differentiating (positive feedback, to push away and so stand out) and integrating (to pull together, blend-in).

Given the neurology alone, nothing else, the dynamics of our brains, and on down to the simple neuron, work off oscillations across the differentiating/integrating dichotomy (for a more specialist perspective consider this as FM/AM, PULSE vs WAVE, discrete vs continuum etc). Such oscillations, combined with an attention system that serves to encapsulate particulars in the background to something in the foreground take the simple oscillation across a dichotomy and applies it to the previous when we have a memory system available.

Thus if the oscillations are reflected as across 1/0 (where we use such to represent differentiating and integrating) then we have:

T1 - 1/0
T2 - 1/0
T3 - 1/0
etc etc

BUT with an attention system and a memory system we have:

T1 - 1/0
T2 - 1/0 applied to T1 gives us 11, 10, / 01, 00
T3 - 1/0 applied to T2 gives us 111, 110, 101, 100 / 011, 010, 001, 000
etc etc etc

In our brains, to generate such distinctions requires the XOR operator of logic and IT is implemented as two neurons, one feeding back on one of the inputs of the previous - in other words recursively.

Given the basic characteristics of differentiating and integrating we can identify qualitative differences across all of the classes identified and when done we find isomorphism across many disciplines and that includes the classes of numbers of mathematics as it does the classes of meaning used in the I Ching trigrams and hexagrams or in classes of consciousness or Astrology or Quantum Mechanics or socio-economic classifications. Note all of this from the basics of self-referencing in the neurology. IOW REGARDLESS of alternative perspectives we can achieve a lot from simple considerations of what the neurology and its senses can do.

The point here is that from a 'mindless' dynamic of recursion of differentiating/integrating comes classes of meaning fundamental to the realms of symbols and metaphors. Semiotically we have traced a path from neurology to theology without any reference to interpretations of others - all we have done is go back to first principles and reviewed the research data available and worked from there.

In this process we have discovered a phase transition present in recursion that turns a mechanistic process into an organic one where the classes of meaning churned out mechanistically 'suddenly' join up to form the foundations of a language and so an ability to self-reference.

This discovery applies to recursion and so to the I Ching in the form of recursion of yin/yang to generate the binary sequence (Fu Hsi focus and so emphasis on structure).

The transition from mechanistic perspectives to organic perspectives in the form of languages brings out the PURPOSE of language in that it serves to MEDIATE where stimulus/response fails in some way (usually because instincts/habits are GENERALS, they cover classes of behaviours, and as such cannot deal precisely with every instance)

The LANGUAGE development focus brings out an EMERGENT quality that associates with the nature of consciousness as an agent of mediation - when we don't need it we fall back on autopilot, on those instincts/habits.

However, the success of mediation has elicited a plethora of languages that set up a level of being NOT present in our species level natures of stimulus/response driven primates - we no longer let context push us, we push back.

The EIC work stems from the focus on what the neurology can give us, and it alone. Comparing what is possible in the EIC to what is possible in the traditional IC, the EIC is superior in its consistency, its testability, in assessing situations and giving a useful interpretation where consciousness then is the final arbiter on what is to be done, to stay as is (and so fit in) or to assert one's own context or to move on.

There is nothing here to stop you from following the traditional perspective, other than the FACT of the EIC consistently eliciting superior assessments of situations simply due to the language capabilities. There is nothing to stop one using the traditional perspective and extending such using the language capabilities but such does clearly demonstrate 'inconsistencies' in results since the language introduces a holistic perspective on hexagrams that include their beginning/ending/purpose and so on and the use of magical/random methods starts to bring out the flaws in such methods where the derived hexagram clearly does NOT 'fit' the situation as well as some other(s).

Those assessments, based on the questioning system, include the revelation of unconscious concerns that have been suppressed/repressed by consciousness where the EIC recognises the hierarchy of mental states where consciousness is more precise in assessments but also socially entrained and so open to blocking primary emotional assessments of situations where those emotions look out for No1 and no other.

IOW the neural hierarchy allows for multiple assessments of a situation and, where consciousness is not well trained or not fully developed, overwhelming emotional assessments can occur that can be hard to deal with until some narrative is generated to 'calm' them down.

Again, GIVEN THE NEUROLOGY, we can identify the emergence of consciousness from social interactions from birth to age two or so. Then comes refinement of that consciousness where the mix of genetics and local contexts combined with general education give us the individual, the unique form but still emergent from a CLASS of consciousness.

pantherpanther said:

I don't think any serious neurologist today
would concur with this notion of consciousness, even the most reductionist
who has worked primarily with cellular models. Brain scans only present a narrow
slice of the body-mind picture. Brain scan interpretations fail to account for
energetic forces shaping the hard data. Empirical science may be highly accurate,
but only limited half-truths can be inferred from it.

Click to expand...

That is your opinion. Not mine.

pantherpanther said:

The I Ching should not be reduced to a similar "flatland," and materialistic system limited to one
level of reality, called "concrete," and defined by an arbitrary assignment of meaning to names and numbers. It represents a multiverse of graded energies interacting within a structure that is constituted of different worlds or levels , each having a different space or dimension and time.

Click to expand...

GIVEN the neurology we can indentify a base level of being that is fully integrated with the immediate environment and drive by context pushing instincts. At that base level, recursive activities allow for development of classes of distinctions useful in interacting with that local context.

The issue here is that there is no ability to communicate OUTSIDE of the context. With the emergence of neural hierarchy and ABSTRACTION comes such an ability and it also covers the creation of specialist metaphors, such as the I Ching, for communicating about that context and other contexts.

For the IDM material, we recognise that that concrete level is still there - it is still the foundations of our being and neuron-dependent, sensory-system dependent life forms.
Given the LACK of abstraction so we can (a) identify the core classes of meanings present at that level and (b) map abstractions to those concrete classes. With this mapping we bring out the isomorphism present in all specialist perspectives and so allow us, for example, to map fight/flight to yang/yin etc.

pantherpanther said:

Neurologists, through more powerful technology are learning that
the glia communicate with and instruct ( in a language we don't
understand) all the neurons and when this communication doesn't function,
the ability to have sensations is lost .

Click to expand...

The glia cells work as a support system to enable management of sensory data etc but the IDM work shows, REGARDLESS OF SCALE, the same dynamics occur - the play of wholes (symmetries), parts (anti-symmetries), and mediations (asymmetries) and as such of differentiating (particulars), integrating (generals) and mediation across such (asymmetric dichotomies which are an energy-conserving form of trichotomy)

pantherpanther said:

There are trillions more glia than
neurons in the brain. Neurons constitute 15% of the brain, the remaining
85% is analogous to the 96% so-called "dark matter" that makes up the
universe which we haven't yet been able to observe.

Click to expand...

your getting carried away here, losing focus. The IDM focus is GIVEN THE NEUROLOGY what can it tell us, what can we do with it. The EIC is an example of what can be done IGNORING all past perspectives - just starting from first principles it is possible to create an I Ching that has superior operational characteristics to the traditional material. This focus comes straight from the make-up and dynamics of our brains and we know that doing damage to the brain leads to a LOT of issues and as such brings out the sensitivity of the neurology to information processing which is what meaning derivation and communication covers.

pantherpanther said:

The Hubble telescope
has been upgraded so we can scan the universe in infra-red and many
objects in space that were invisible have become visible. More powerful
microscopes have enabled the observation of the role of the glia in the
brain.

Click to expand...

So what? The IDM focus covers a pathway from neurology to metaphor creation where the particular metaphor under consideration is that of the EIC. As such IDM covers the development of meaning generation for our species (and other neuron-dependent species). The core patterns are as classes of differentiating and integrating. The stability of such is reflected in the etymology of the neuron where we can trace it back to sponge life some 600 million years ago.

The user of HORMONES reflects the dynamics of differentiating and integrating overall - e.g. GABA for integrating (to inhibit), Glutamate for differentiating (to excite) - this extended into dopamine, serotonin, adrenaline etc etc etc - same generic patterns across all scales.

pantherpanther said:

<snip>
For those who have read many of the comparisons between the DNA and the I Ching, I suggest recent DNA research may be of interest . Does this valuable research in modern science correlate with the I Ching?

Click to expand...

The tie of I Ching and DNA is in their shared usage of recursion in deriving classes of meaning. Simple. The BENEFITS of recursion are in the emergent properties present that allow for code sequences forming into genes etc and we have the SAME PATTERN identified in the EIC material - the play of genotype and phenotype.

the 'many comparisons' you speak off are mostly wild speculations based on no understanding whatsoever of what is going on in the context of recursion. For a diagram covering binary sequence generation and DNA generation using recursion see here

The essential feature is the ability of recursive actions to generate forms of languages - be it DNA or the EIC form.

pantherpanther said:

There has been much discussion about quantum entanglement, the
holographic multiverse , correlations of modern science with ancient
teachings and so on, but only a few,well, several hundred studies, that
seem to meet the criteria as verifiable. These have been widely ignored or
dismissed by most scientists, sometimes unfairly reviewed.

Click to expand...

The IDM material identifies quantum mechanics as just another metaphor and reveals the design of experiments based on recursion of dichotomies will, in certain circumstances, elicit results indicating 'wave/particle' duality. This is an ARTEFACT of the methodology and so not necessarily a fundamental of reality. See the page applying this specifically to the I Ching.

The XOR material reflects the property of SYMMETRY where 'all is connected' such that any interpretation of reality that is filtered through symmetry will reveal 'entanglement' but again, as a property of symmetry and so not necessarily a property of the universe 'as is'.

pantherpanther said:

You may be correct that number (and music) are aspects to be considered in reading
its "map." You note:
The more specialisations focus on mapping reality so the more they take-on
the 'shape' of our filtering system - the neurology.

Our nervous system (or systems) are more complex than you seem to
imply , and the mind's awareness and perception may include other
active "brains" than what is observable in the neurons of the brain.

Click to expand...

The XOR material alone introduces a level of complexity never previously imagined by researchers so I think the IDM model does fine in identifying neural complexities ;-) - the only other brain identified is in our gut area.

pantherpanther said:

Consider the I Ching represents as a whole a progressive, ascending/descending harmonic scale of inner light,sound and silence spiralling around a fundamental tone that can be experienced in the WHOLE body, not "mystically" or "mentally" .

Click to expand...

The I Ching is a language and can represent anything you like - basic categories to complex matrices of many scales operating in parallel. The issues for many is that the I Ching representations are in the form of 'mythic' thinking (images etc) rather than 'directed' thinking - the latter meaning thinking in words. The EIC exploits this by combining mythic with directed.

pantherpanther said:

<snip>
I understand that you know the I Ching and Taoist texts and might quote correctly more from them to support your belief that this is "in our heads." And Western terms that correspond are often more objective,abstract and prescriptive (as with Pythagoras) than the Eastern, which often use "descriptive " language. They do have a common "meaning" as you suggest.

I don't agree that they are "in our heads" (or mystical) or that they can be really experienced or expressed "in words".

Click to expand...

The IDM/EIC material recognises, and exploits, the differences between mythic and directed thinking. The EIC questions exploit the mythic to then translate into another form of mythic (IC images) and then translate such into directed forms (words).

The IDM focus is GIVEN the neurology, what can we generate without any references to 'alternative' schemes; is there a clear indication that there is something 'missing'? The identified phase transition in recursion, and manifest in the EIC as the language element of the I Ching, introduces a new level of understanding but still keeps us in the neuroscience 'box' and supplies us with a useful mechanism in extracting fine details of material where such a mechanism has NOT been identified in the more traditional, alternative, perspectives you have mentioned.

elvis,
You wrote:
The language of emotion precedes consciousness-as-we-know-it and
covers non-digital forms of communication. The STRUCTURE of that
language is empirically traceable to recursion of the fight/flight dichotomy
where the interdigitations that result from such recursion are clearly
identified across such as the brain's amygdala.

In reality, thoughts precede emotions. Thoughts that are allowed in - we can
choose - can become emotions and so on. Thinking is a different process .You
believe some wrong theories.

You may recall that in my first post I began with the observation that you do
not understand scale, by which I meant levels of consciousness. You still
don't get what I meant, or, put another way, I am referring to the science of
consciousness expressed for thousands of years in traditional teachings
and in contemporary language. You have never experienced and verified what
levels of conscious means to us. That is possible, but nothing is learned
without serious and intelligent effort. It is not enough to study the theory
and then not verify it. I noted we have used many of the same words but given
them different meanings and "scale" perhaps tops the list.

Your ideas and work are based on a different understanding of nature and
consciousness than mine. I understand that, having worked in hard science and
known people who think the way you do, that is, believe in materialistc ideas
similar to yours. Some learn to grow beyond their bias.

A friend writes in this regard, "We will prosper, no less than the ancients,
by following the leads suggested by close observation providing we do so without
a cherished outcome. The skills and attainments of reductionist technology combined
with the observational insights of a wholistic vision which has proven itself across
time, can produce a synergy whose gifts must be greater than those achieved by
either world view alone."
- Stephan A Schwartz

(I posted his essay Therapeutic Intent And The Art of Observation on Divination)

To understand what consciousness is, a key idea is "observation."
Observation is the door to understanding consciousness.

In your comment on mine you show your mistaken view of what
it means to observe in a conscious way,that is, including the observer.
You may imagine that observations that exlude the observer are objective
and then proceed to theorize from them. This is the way scientific
research is done in principle: a researcher does not believe that what he
observes is real. He can design experiments to test his observations and
perhaps develop a theory which works in practice. But every accepted
theory in science is subject to revision or replacement by new theories.
The same principle applies with the science of consciousness.There are
relative levels of understanding , subject to verification and refinement.


Originally Posted by pantherpanther:
The I Ching should not be reduced to a similar "flatland," and materialistic
system limited to one level of reality, called "concrete," and defined by an
arbitrary assignment of meaning to names and numbers. It represents a
multiverse of graded energies interacting within a structure that is constituted
of different worlds or levels , each having a different space or dimension and
time.

GIVEN the neurology we can indentify a base level of being that is fully
integrated with the immediate environment and drive by context pushing
instincts. At that base level, recursive activities allow for development of
classes of distinctions useful in interacting with that local context.

The issue here is that there is no ability to communicate OUTSIDE of the
context. With the emergence of neural hierarchy and ABSTRACTION
comes such an ability and it also covers the creation of specialist
metaphors, such as the I Ching, for communicating about that context and
other contexts.

This is theoretical nonsense, founded on partial knowledge of neurology and
consciousness and a theory relating it to the I Ching that hasn't been shown valid.

The I Ching is based on a cosmology that includes Heaven, Earth and
Man and how the levels relate and interact. The metaphors and numbers
indicate the working of a wide spectrum of energies which may be experienced
in different states of consciousness. The metaphors and numbers have no
reality in themselves. Think of them as guides and catalysts. To play with the
notion that neurology generates "meaning" is fantasy, just as it is
to think that the I Ching's "meaning" can be limited to words and rumbers.
The I Ching describes what is visible and invisible.

I find myself repeating that you don't understand the principle of scale. And
returning to what you wrote, "...there is no ability to communicate OUTSIDE
of the context. With the emergence of neural hierarchy and ABSTRACTION comes
such an ability and it also covers the creation of specialist metaphors, such as the
I Ching, for communicating about that context and other contexts."

What I already noted from Michael Winn from his November lecture in
China, is relevant here:

The subjectivity inherent in qi sciences is disguised in empirical science by
the presence of an objective microscope, telescope, spectrometer or
supercomputer. Material scientists pretend the presence of such
instruments has removed their personal influence. But it does not remove
them from designing both the experiment and the instrument, from their
“soft” interpretation of the hard data, or from their personal energy field
affecting the hard data itself.. It’s the classic “observer is never separate
from the observed”.

This suggests Western science is entirely the product of a particular kind of
imagination. Every technology ever invented first existed inside a human
mind. When we “invent” something, we move it from inner mind space to
outer space, and give it substance. Qi science works the same way, but in
the opposite direction. Its methods are designed to absorb the larger
invisible qi field and give it a more concrete inner reality in our body-mind.
The point is that “imagination creates reality” in both sciences.

pantherpanther said:

elvis,
You wrote:
The language of emotion precedes consciousness-as-we-know-it and
covers non-digital forms of communication. The STRUCTURE of that
language is empirically traceable to recursion of the fight/flight dichotomy
where the interdigitations that result from such recursion are clearly
identified across such as the brain's amygdala.

In reality, thoughts precede emotions. Thoughts that are allowed in - we can
choose - can become emotions and so on. Thinking is a different process .You
believe some wrong theories.

Click to expand...

There is no NEED for such a hypothesis and the neurological evidence supports the dynamics of evolution from the general and mindless to the particular and mindful. There is no scope for consciousness to be originating for in this universe, if it were, it would be considered insane.

As I have said, GIVEN the neurology the EIC focuses on what can be done with such and the classes of meanings derived supersede ANY previous concepts, including vague references to 'levels of consciousness' - the fact is the IDM work clearly IDENTIFIES all of the POSSIBLE levels of consciousness given the neurology - and in fine detail as well and so all open to scientific investigation (as in repeatability, falsifiability etc and so from a classical perspective as compared to a romantic perspective)

Obviously you have not gone through the IDM material and thought about what is covered - maybe it is too vague for you, but then it does cover a 'language of the vague' that we all share as neuron-dependent life forms.

At the level of hexagrams we have 64 classes of consciousness with each describable in fine detail through, in principle, infinite application of the I Ching language element.

We can move to 4096 if you like, and each of those describable by the I Ching language of 4096 terms and so on. The fact is that the 64 classes are 'good enough' and far exceed the limitations of current typologies covering classes of consciousness (e.g. MBTI. HBDI etc etc etc)

The focus is on meaning GENERATION, how it is derived and then used (mostly through eliciting resonance). Thus the focus applies to the 'real' and the 'imagined' with heuristics determining what works and what does not (but the IDM work DOES identify the presence of a class of "purpose" in the form of a quality mapped to hexagram 63)

Given the template, ANY concept of understandable by application of that concept - even such as 'consciousness' or 'levels of consciousness' and so on. We cannot escape our sensory systems and the neurology and the fact is there is no NEED to do so - (unless one does not like oneself!)

As for theories of science, ALL theories of science will use the ONE set of meanings derived at the neurological/sensory levels where such is necessary to communicate such.

Each of these specialist perspectives will operate from a perspective that is naive of HOW we derive meaning and so unaware of the FULL spectrum of possibles. This is akin to someone viewing the universe through the filter of a particular trigram's perspective - a part taken as if a whole. Such is a property of symmetrisation and as such covers the LOSS in precision from such a perspective.

As for qi sciences, they are grounded in the SAME template identified for Western perspectives simply due to the fact that we are ALL neuron-dependent life forms as species members. At the full spectrum level of meaning all specialist perspectives (and so Western, Eastern, and all else) are covered.

See my five-phase I Ching pages and read the refinements in the free, pdf, introduction section of the EIC book.