I rarely ask about how the other person feels, but since I never got any feedback from this friend we broke up, he just pushed me away and didn't want to talk at all, I need some kind of response, so I asked Yi Jing for help.

I asked: how does this person feel about me?
I got 11 unchanging.

I guess he is at peace with situation, not bothered by this at all.

I also asked how I felt about him.
I got 38.3->14
Oh, this is sooo true! In one of the books i have, the line is explained as such: "Everything goes wrong. Whatever you do is blocked and reversed. Whatever you say is misunderstood. You are conspired against, reviled and denigrated. Just keep a grip on yourself. It will not last forever. The good fortune which will follow will be equal in degree to your present misfortune."

I don't know if any good fortune will follow but it is so true about the feelings described, I have nothing more to add, I couldn't have described better my self! I feel totally blocked, misunderstood, not heard, pushed away and humiliated.

I do find my inner strenght, as 14 suggests.

Then I asked how this person wants our relationship to develop?
I got 50.4.5.6->48

50.4 is abour weak caracther...maybe he feels he cannot handle me, I am too demanding for him. 50.4 changes into 18, so maybe he doesn't have the strenght to sort things out wit me, clean and heal them.

50.5 is confusing for me, I read the interpretations from different sources and one says that it is about keeping things to yourself, one about things being in the womb and ready to be born; I guess all is about inside. One books says that "you are shy about expressing love that you feel...and: you are generous only when approached". This is true, this person was open only if I approached him, he never came to me.

What does this mean? He wants to keep his feelings to himself? Or he wants a new life born and something new to happen? Hm...is there some affection for me? Does he care at all or is he completely indifferent?

50.6 is about success and things are shared - so maybe he wants to open againand share with me? He sees our connection in a broad sense, like maybe he can help me grow or something?

But I don't want this impersonal attitude...I wanted his friendship. Is there any from his side? or is he indifferent?

I know it is a bit silly to ask questions like this, but as I said, I had not feedback from him...it would help me to understand him better.
I would really need your input on this, thank you!

your asking too much - getting yourself into an anxiety loop! chill.

Try this and let us know what you get - this is about using your emotions to paint a picture of what THEY see - it can validate your conscious perspective as well as bring out 'issues'.

Tell us the situation you used to answer the questions and the results. Dont forget to press reset after each try.

http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/lofting/icplusEProact.html

To cover what it is all about see the preamble:

http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/EmotionalIC.html

Chris.

Hi, chris,

wow, this is quite something, this emotional I ching!
Okay, I tried and I got 43 not changing. I hope I understoof everything correctly.

So, 43 - I need to resolve this and break through?

I know that...but in my first post I just asked about his feelings about me, I would still like to know He never shared that with me so i hoped Yi jing could give some clarification.

For myself, I know that I need to find some resolution in me but it is hard.

Thanks for the hint.

moonrise said:

Hi, chris,

wow, this is quite something, this emotional I ching!
Okay, I tried and I got 43 not changing. I hope I understoof everything correctly.

So, 43 - I need to resolve this and break through?

Click to expand...

43 is a little bit more than that - it covers seeding. the planting of 'ideas' etc as it does the planting of image of self; to 'spread the word'. Thus your emotional state is interpreting the situation as you described it in general as a 43 situation.

It has a perseverence context in which operates a focus on intensity in expression. Overall we see cooperative exchange working in a competitive exchange context (heaven as base indicates presence of anger/singlemindedness/perseverence etc)

the 'correct' path through 43 is described by analogy to 40 - tension release through relaxing of structure by 'letting go'. You cannot seed things by being all tied up; too aggressive, too defencive.

It is possible that your heightened state forces a more 'rigid' thinking style and so the unchanging aspect - your answers were all EITHER/OR - definite, intense, focused, singleminded. Chill a little. Use the same method in a couple of hours to see if your emotion still 'feels' the same way about the situation.

moonrise said:

in my first post I just asked about his feelings about me, I would still like to know He never shared that with me so i hoped Yi jing could give some clarification.

Click to expand...

Put that as the situation. Ask your emotions, that pick up a lot of subliminal stuff, what THEIR interpretation of his LOOK/interactions with you - what did they sense expressed regularly in his face (especially eyes/mouth).

for facts/values use focused/vague (males are usually focused, its a property of their singlemindedness! - but this also gets into eye contact - be it avoided or exaggerated)

avoidance, be it by pushing others away or by pushing off others, is called positive feedback (assertion of one's own context etc) ; 'getting closer to' is called negative feedback (we keep correcting - this is covered in hex 18) - thus exaggeration of eye contact reflects a focus on 'getting closer to'. - there is a cooperative, sexual, focus present.

For the second question was he more focused on "what was/is/will be" or on "what could have been/is not/could be"

did he come across as being reactive(responding to your instigations) or proactive(instigating things)

Set these as the first three questions and REPLICATE them for the second three - this will give a general represention of what the emotions sensed.

The Emotional IC questions are examples - in other words one can create one's own as long as they are ordered in hierarchic manner - general (facts/values) to particular (I being proactive/reactive) and temporal from spacial (what could be comes after facts/values)

BTW - note the questions must always be GENERAL, VAGUE - we use them as coat hangers for the emotions to then hang their particulars.

Chris.

"I asked: how does this person feel about me?
I got 11 unchanging."

Hex 11 He is at peace with himself.
The small departs (you)
The great approaches (freedom, peace of mind, life)
The man bides his time within the laws of nature.

"I also asked how I felt about him.
I got 38.3->14"

Hex 38.3 Your feelings are being hindered and checked, you believe that you are being dishonoured by him.

Hex 14 You see him as a possession, he belongs solely to you.

"Then I asked how this person wants our relationship to develop?
I got 50.4.5.6->48"

Hex 50.4 The relationship is broken.

Hex 50.5 He now has other friends who help him.

Hex 50.6 He is quiet and reserved, like a sage.

Hex 48 He is the well, he is feeding your thoughts (imagings) but he cannot be moved by you. People come and go but he remains the same he does not change his mind. Your rope is too short thats why you can't reach him and the bucket is broken (the relationship) so you again can't find the nourishment that you so desire.

Hi,

I didn't fully understand the thing about emotions but I will see more into it.

Willowfox, yes, I think he is at peace and he trusts in laws of life.
I felt ashamed a lot, however I don't see him as my possession at all, not to even mention that he belongs to me solely. This is way off track, must say. But I do see him as a great treasure in my life.

it is sure though, that I cannot reach him and he is not moved by me at all.

Thank you for your thoughts!

"however I don't see him as my possession at all, not to even mention that he belongs to me solely. This is way off track, must say. But I do see him as a great treasure in my life."

Hex 14 Great possession/great treasure. I believe the words mean much the same thing, don't you.

No, I disagree. Treasure is that you value and cherish someone/something, that you are aware of the worth and quality but it doesn't necessarily apply that you think it belongs to you.

"Treasure is that you value and cherish someone/something, that you are aware of the worth and quality but it doesn't necessarily apply that you think it belongs to you."

Yes and certain people cherish their possessions, are aware of their worth and quality. Treasure has always belonged to the finder, just watch those old pirate movies to see what I mean.

willowfox said:

"however I don't see him as my possession at all, not to even mention that he belongs to me solely. This is way off track, must say. But I do see him as a great treasure in my life."

Hex 14 Great possession/great treasure. I believe the words mean much the same thing, don't you.

Click to expand...

this comment of yours willow is silly - you remind me of a fundamentalist christian, gun in one hand, bible in the other, and distorting things left right and centre. Your fanatic sticking to Wilhelm word-for-word is admirable in its devotion, sad in its delusion (as in Wilhelm is past its best-before/use-by date)

I am not saying this 'out of nowhere' - I have been reading your 'interpretations' for some time and find their insistance on being 'correct' an issue where in many situations you dont seem be too 'context sensitive' - you dont allow the person to consider your prose, more so you seem to force yours down their throats, blitzkreig style, as if they cannot assess a situation at all. They may be 'lost' but the fact that they come to the IC and recognise there is 'something' gives them some credit re being able to think for themselves and so consider alternatives rather than being given none.

Given the empirical studies to date, determinism is GENERAL. free-will is PARTICULAR or more so SINGULAR. Since each of us operates out of space not sharable with anyone else other than through emotion etc so our singular space is personal and so there is choice present and so the offerings of others is just that, an offering someone may not have considered in their ruminations but now available for them to consider and 'collapse the wave function'.

We can 'insist' on the general and even the particular to some degree but not the singular - which is what you repeatedly try to do - is that how you run your own life? Are you that fearful of recognising choice? so focused on making your own decisions their decisions and so compensate by forcing perspectives on others - being so fatalist?

IMHO Willow, if somone came to me and said "I intend to ask Willow to interpret" I would suggest they go elsewhere. It is not your knowledge that is the issue (although it comes across as a bit 10th century BC and so in need of upgrade) it is the passion involved - as if you need to offload your suffering onto others but to a level where it has become habit to you - you no longer know why, the reason is 'gone'. You no longer question, you just have fundamentalist, distorted, faith.

IMHO - not good. I strongly think you need to change approach - there is no need to be so 'jaring'.

MY perspective is 21st century AD and so I can be 'jaring', it is all 'new' and against traditional 'rules', but even then I give interpretations that allow for the person to make the final assessment; you dont. to you it is all determined down to the second but basic evidence indicates that that perspective is 'distorted' to the point of being dishonest, intelectually, even emotionally, corrupt. snap out of it - from my perspective you do the IC harm through your activities where you try to retain a 10th century BC perspective at such a fundamentalist level as to be laugherable.

To maintain that style of interpretation as yours, as your personal perspective on reality in general, is fine, it is your singular nature, but it is a nature exclusive of choices and so 'limiting' any other reciever of such interpretations where you exploit whatever you can to assert you over the other, to 'win', to 'replace' and dont recognise the nature of coexisting. Sad stuff. Unnecessary stuff. DO you promote your self locally? Consider yourself the local oracle or something, are you a charismatic?

An issue with being charismatic is that you can be open to self-delusion, get too pumped up and enter the realm of hubris - too much yang (and that regardless of what is inbetween your legs, more so what is inbetween your ears)

I am sure you and others will find fault with me as well, and thats fine, but I say all of the above since I think it needs to be said - IMHO you go just a little too far. If no-one says it one can get too cocky, and we dont what that do we!? -- but then what i have written is politically 'incorrect' and so I am guilty of thought crime - time for the thought police to come with their 'balance' sticks ;-)

Chris.

"you remind me of a fundamentalist christian, gun in one hand, bible in the other"

Gun yes, star charts yes, bible no way (wrong religion).

"Your fanatic sticking to Wilhelm word-for-word is admirable in its devotion, sad in its delusion "

Rather incorrect, I do consult others.

"you dont allow the person to consider your prose, more so you seem to force yours down their throats, blitzkreig style"

Okay, a bit heavy sometimes but I know you love it.

"but not the singular - which is what you repeatedly try to do - is that how you run your own life? "

I suppose I must, never really noticed before.

"so focused on making your own decisions "

Yes, have to control the masses.

"It is not your knowledge that is the issue (although it comes across as a bit 10th century BC and so in need of upgrade)"

Have to change my name to Thoth.

"as if you need to offload your suffering onto others"

Suffering? It those damn piles again, they certainly get me down. So I release my frustration on you lot.

" You no longer question, you just have fundamentalist, distorted, faith."

Faith in the future.

"DO you promote your self locally? Consider yourself the local oracle or something, are you a charismatic?

An issue with being charismatic is that you can be open to self-delusion, get too pumped up and enter the realm of hubris"

Yes and no to the first bit, and I suppose full of **** to the second bit.

"and that regardless of what is inbetween your legs, more so what is inbetween your ears)"

First, you ain't getting between my legs, and second, I am hard headed, hammerhead.

"I am sure you and others will find fault with me as well, and thats fine, but I say all of the above since I think it needs to be said "

I doubt if others will find fault with what you have said about me because a whole bunch of people here don't like me anyway. As for me, you have never offended me before so I take what you have to say and will store it in my secret chamber. If it needs to be said then proclaim it, just like a christian fundamentalist from the 19C.

"but then what i have written is politically 'incorrect' and so I am guilty of thought crime - time for the thought police to come with their 'balance' sticks"

Ha! I am always saying something that is politically incorrect here, and the thought police come after me with stun guns, locked and loaded.

Anyway, thanks for the talk.

willowfox said:

"
Okay, a bit heavy sometimes but I know you love it.

Click to expand...

No - It disgusts me. It disgusts me to know that you will entangle yourself with any one seeking an interpretation and you will devour them in your drive to satisfy your ego. You have no concern for their emotional state, totally oblivious to the possible consequences of your actions. In formal psychotherapy there are moral, ethical responsibiities - you show none other than a focus on promotion/satisfaction of your own ego. You come across as if you are openly suckering others, the spider to the fly, exploiting the IC and anything else to practice your evil.

In the realm of the singular the only 'science' is that of freedom, and so of ethics/morality. It is this focus on the IC that generates the positive/negative interpretations of symbols that have no such nature. As such, enquiries from the singular cover issues of ethics etc and so 'what should I do', it is right/wrong etc and so a guidance perspective. Your prose more often removes the consideration, there is no 'advice' there is mostly fundamentalist, deterministic drival and all presented in a manner that lacks any true, empathic, concern for the questioner. As such, you come across as dishonest, counterfeit.

shame on you willow, shame.

lord of darkness

willowfox said:

"you remind me of a fundamentalist christian, gun in one hand, bible in the other"

Gun yes, star charts yes,

Click to expand...

and there is your error - charts, algorithms. formulas come frome the realm of the particular-general. But what you are dealing with is the realm of the singular - the realm of unique consciousness and so 'beyond compare' - the uniquess is not in any book/chart since it is built from personal interactions with the local context.

Your perspective refuses to recognise the uniqueness of the individual.

What you obviously fail to comprehend is the differences between our particular nature and our singular nature. books/charts etc can apply to the particular in the form of one being a member of a specialist collective (e.g. 'warrior' class) and the influences are to the class - the individual is not recognised as such.

But the questions asked of the IC, in the majority of cases, and to which you respond, come out of the singular nature. Your failure to deal with this, your attempt to impose universals on a local context without customisation, makes your perspective smack of neurosis and attempts to infect others with the same.

shame wilow, shame.

more darkness, more lord.

What's the matter milord, did you look too deep into wf's eyes?
Passive tranference perhaps?

"No - It disgusts me. It disgusts me to know that you will entangle yourself with any one seeking an interpretation and you will devour them in your drive to satisfy your ego. You have no concern for their emotional state, totally oblivious to the possible consequences of your actions."

Wow, what's the story, you got one of those famous Aussie blue bottles up your backside or something?

"Your perspective refuses to recognise the uniqueness of the individual."

Right, I now read for whole countries. Next the galaxy!

Lord of wisdom.

Thoth

"No - It disgusts me. It disgusts me to know that you will entangle yourself with any one seeking an interpretation"

Sorry father I forgot to tell you that I'm a whore.

Thoth

martin said:

What's the matter milord, did you look too deep into wf's eyes?
Passive tranference perhaps?

Click to expand...

Dont be so dismissive grasshopper, this is serious stuff.

if you read through willow's prose since the beginning on this list there is an emergent vibe there that is 'not nice'. Note in recent replies to this discussion the grandiousness - a trait of character neurosis in that, as I said, you cannot apply universals locally without customisation unless the universal and context are the same (and so a universal in its own context is a universal as well as local!)

What WIllow covers is called 'super-determinism' and as such is against change since all is predicted, even the act of 'change' is predicted, the breakfast you had this morning (or no breakfast) is predicted(or all part of 'gods' plan etc). If you know your psyche then you are aware of such a perspective being a defence mechanism for some deep troubles.

If all was 'super determined' then there is no context selection for consciousness as an agent of mediation since there are no "choices"! AS such there is an attraction here to Thantos.

The development of consciousness suggests otherwise, there ARE choices at the local level, the unique level, where those choices act as 'mutations' for the development of the species as a whole as well as the individual. In other words the dichotomy at work is Eros/Thantos. From a therapy perspective the vibe is slightly biased to Eros (cooperative dynamic, negative feedback focus on 'getting closer to').

Overall in Willow's prose there is a darkness there that CAN 'passively transfer' to those involved in the interpretations and from a therapeutic perspective that is not good. This DOES get into issues of projection/transference/counter-transference and so issues of empathy, 'mirror neurons' etc. - we can also see the roots of 'posession' etc(recall Freud refusing to read Nietche since he thought it could influence his thinking unconsciously. The fact being that they both work in a context of POWER)

If we work from the level of the general-particular, statistical perspectives allow for prediction of events but at a collective level. Move to individuals, all 'free' thinking, and you move to issues of ethics, morality, and so right/wrong (the 'Science of Freedom') and so on into the realm of psychotherapy etc and THAT requires careful consideration of guidance, what is being said, the manner in which it is said, the possible consequences of such, and the active participation of the questioner. Otherwise it is all a power trip - and thats fine outside of therapy but when people ask for help/guidance in interpretations the 'power trip' path is not good and as such the exploitation of those seeking help for the sake of one's power trip is evil and dark (looking at this from the position of the singular, ethics/morals, perspective ;-) - from the general perspective it is all blend, bond, bound, bind, differentiating/integrating with some local circadian rhythms thrown in for 'fun' - but the singular transcends that 'context push' and as such demands more thought, more consideration of the manner in which an interpretation is made/presented and that includes consideration of the emotional content of the questioner. As a psychologist you should know this - if not then go back to Mathematics ;-)

Lol, yes, I do go back and forth between math and psy, if I need a holiday from the one I go to the other.
It's perfect.

But, sorry, I didn't mean to be dismissive. I felt, though, that your earlier posts were a bit, how shall I say it, heavy?
I mean, for example: "You come across as if you are openly suckering others, the spider to the fly, exploiting the IC and anything else to practice your evil."
Heavy, isn't it? At least 5 G, I would say.

And you can express yourself rather absolutist too (this is how it is, period!) so {psy on} ... are you projecting something on wf perhaps? {psy off}

{reboot}
{crash!}
Hmm, I think I need to go to bed. See ya tomorrow!

martin said:

Lol, yes, I do go back and forth between math and psy, if I need a holiday from the one I go to the other.
It's perfect.

But, sorry, I didn't mean to be dismissive. I felt, though, that your earlier posts were a bit, how shall I say it, heavy?

Click to expand...

damn right.

martin said:

I mean, for example: "You come across as if you are openly suckering others, the spider to the fly, exploiting the IC and anything else to practice your evil."
Heavy, isn't it? At least 5 G, I would say.

Click to expand...

that lite! damn I had better get heavier.

martin said:

And you can express yourself rather absolutist too (this is how it is, period!)

Click to expand...

In the realm of the particular-general - yes, but not in the realm of the singular - I always leave the core to the questioner to choose what they feel 'fits'. Thats what the Emotional IC does, it lets your emotions give their interpretation and so we remain at aill times within the context of the questioner.

When I do give an interpretation it is with the questioner in mind and formatted to give them some involvement in the process - they are not seperated from what is going on and have choices to make, and that covers the choice of not doing anything or sticking to the traditional perspective.

Willow's methodology appears to reflect a mental state that contains darkness. That state seeds all interpretations and as such imposes that darkness on questioners where it has nothing to do with the question/questioner.

martin said:

so {psy on} ... are you projecting something on wf perhaps? {psy off}

Click to expand...

unfortunately no. There IS evil present. The fact that choice is possible in dealing with this is not recognised in super-determinism and so it will continue - Willow cannot change and so the actions need to be noted. Perhaps a Surgeon-General notice on his/her style of interpretations/comments ;-) (warning - there be demons here...)

Posted by lightofanyreason;

" Willow cannot change and so the actions need to be noted. Perhaps a Surgeon-General notice on his/her style of interpretations/comments ;-) (warning - there be demons here...)"

Damn, I thought I was strange but this lightofanyreason guy is in the twilight zone.

I wouldn't take this too twilightly, Willowfox. Because ..
I see, I see, I see ... that in exactly 7 days, 7 hours and 7 minutes from now you will meet the surgeon-general in a shabby pub in the twilight zone ..
And it will be love at first sight, and at second sight and - behold! - at third!
And you will live happily ever after, and your children and their children and theirs and ... will cover the face of the earth!

This is what I see! Oh Adam! Oh Eve!

willowfox said:

Wow, what's the story, you got one of those famous Aussie blue bottles up your backside or something?

Click to expand...

Well now, that one is intriguing. What the heck is that about "Aussie blue bottles", "backsides" and such? Ahem, Willow, I think you are way kinkier than I ever expected... LOL!

L

lightofreason said:

In other words the dichotomy at work is Eros/Thantos.

Click to expand...

Screw the dichotomy! Can we get rid of Thantos and keep Eros? He seems to be a fun loving party animal...

L

"Aussie blue bottles"

Many parts of Australia are inundated with large pesky flies that creep all over one's face trying to get moisture. Remember seeing those silly Aussie hats with corks dangling off them, flies.

As lightofanyreason seems to talk out of his backside most of the time, I just thought a large fly had got in there, causing him to swoon and have halucinations, such as seeing me as a demon, or perhaps as one of the Sumerian Evil Dead.

willowfox said:

As lightofanyreason seems to talk out of his backside most of the time, I just thought a large fly had got in there, causing him to swoon and have halucinations, such as seeing me as a demon, or perhaps as one of the Sumerian Evil Dead.

Click to expand...

Ah... Got you... Now, don't be silly, you know Chris doesn't really believe in Evil, Demons and such, right?? (Right, Chris? Chris? ... C?... Back me up man before I start having second thoughts! )

L

Luis! No Thanatos, now really! You dont want to move Jenseits des Lustprinzips?

martin said:

Luis! No Thanatos, now really! You dont want to move Jenseits des Lustprinzips?

Click to expand...

Hell no!!! Life's too short and that Thanatos guy always seems to have the last word, anyway. Let's keep partying with the Eros fellow until the other shows up.

L

An anonymous tipster sent me a picture of Willow. Wow!



L

This is what biroco says of "lackofanyreason",

"King Wen sequence cracked! – So claims Chris Lofting on this webpage. It will take more than obfuscating waffle, however. Lofting has further webpages devoted to the Yi in a semiotics context. They are mostly unpalatable tripe."

Well that proves that I am not alone in thinking that "lackofanyreason" talks ot of his backside.

Evil Dead 2