Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
Elvis/C. Lofting's use of zero/1 as his I Ching digits, is not new or anything but just plain ignorant. The Yi is based upon a symbolic unit number (like the dots on dice or in the Pythagorean eidos) and uses the digits 2 and 3 to build the hexagrams. Totally different world view and number philosophy. Like most of his work, he slips easily from I Ching into his own low level computer programming understanding as fixed ideas for his dogma. In either the philosophy of belief systems or math or Chinese philosophy his work is total crap!
Frank
Hmmm..I think there's been enought drinking wine in confidence and now people are risking getting their heads wet ..
rosada.
The philosophy of dichotomy has no null content, it is just one set of principles in contrast to another. Yin is never zero.
Frank
I think you're right.....
Hmmm..I think there's been enough drinking wine in confidence and now people are risking getting their heads wet ..
rosada.
Hi Elvis,
When you start out denying common ground there is nowhere to go. I read your sources to see that they were phony. You ask to test me in your terms? That assumes you have some valid objective content. I have already engaged you at least twice and you FAILED to be able to answer my simple question of your material. That is all the answer you get until you demonstrate any understanding.
P.S. I just realized you seem to be using the Australian Aboriginal battle style of taunt and boast.
So, why not we join together to each do equivalent work. You post what you mean by YOU mean by hex 27-ness with its supporting documentation and I will indicate in detail how your premises do not logically connect to your conclusions.
The X-ness material is covered in the EIC website...
...
Here is an example from April 2005 easily found in the archives:
http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/friends/showthread.php?t=2073&highlight=27-ness
Hey, I even have a cartoon from way back then (when I had a little time for them...) when we were talking about the 63rdness of hexagrams.
Personally, I find that XORing hexagrams is a useful tool in interpretation.
Hi Elvis,
Can you make a logical argument about how your system or perspective explains hexagram 64, the set of 6 lines that are Yin in the odd-numbered places and Yang in the even? Mine finds just that fact of the line pattern sufficient explanation of its meaning.
The making of assessments of situations using recursive means allows for different perspectives grounded in some recursed dichotomy - e.g. yang/yin or fight/flight.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DichotomyA dichotomy is any splitting of a whole into exactly two non-overlapping parts.
In other words, it is a partition of a whole (or a set) into two parts (subsets) that are:
* mutually exclusive: nothing can belong simultaneously to both parts, and
* jointly exhaustive: everything must belong to one part or the other.
Nicholas Blurton Jones - 1974 - Psychology - 400 pages
For example, in agonistic interactions, pre-school children frequently adopt a beating posture in which the hand is raised as if preparing for a blow as ...
books.google.com/books?isbn=0521098556...
Hi Elvis,
Let's go line by line. There is no connection between yang/yin or fight/flight and the definition of dichotomy. Check out Wikipedia whose definition you cite as one of your many references:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dichotomy
Let me go through it a bit so everyone may understand. Yin and Yang are very much overlapping concepts. What is Yin in one context becomes Yang in another, they naturally evolve into each other (cf. moving lines) and thus they NEVER form a dichotomy.
The connection you presume with the computer binary dichotomy of zero/one has NO Place At All in I Ching studies...
Fight/Flight is also not a dichotomy either. They are related and connected responses. For example a dog may bare its teeth an growl in a fight reaction, which can then erode into a tentative flight stance and then return to either barking as a fight ploy or actual flight as a final gambit.
In children the standard gesture of intimidation is the beating posture which can be a prelude to either a defensive or aggressive move.
Hi Elvis,
Sorry, you are just lapsing back into your tired routine of double talk and unlimited repetition. You clearly have no idea what the term dichotomy means, nor can you relate in any logical way to philosophical discussion. Try it again from first principles. The zero/one dichotomy of computer binary computation has no relationship to the I Ching.
Getting Hired When You Don't Have a College Degree
From AOL ---Filed under: Interview Tips, Job Searching Tips, No Degree Required Print Article
Posted Mar 15th 2010 5:54AM
Share8
By Barbara Safani
I listened in on a recruiter panel recently where an HR person from a Fortune 500 company admitted that he added a Bachelor's degree to the list of requirements for all his job postings because it was an easy way to screen out candidates.
He didn't try to make the case that the degree is a key predictor of success in corporate jobs, an argument you often hear. He was honest in saying that the requirement was just a way to winnow out candidates in a competitive job market.
He's not alone in this practice and it presents a challenge for job seekers who lack the crucial piece of parchment.
So, can you show any evidence or discussion of your views of Yang and Yin within the received knowledge of the Confucian view of those concepts and other commentary?
If not, doesn't your view require the qualifying label: Does not relate to the I Ching as known or experienced by anyone other source other than Chris Lofting
BTW note that the LANGUAGE nature identified in IDM/EIC applies to the traditional perspective and as such indicates the presence of such going un-noticed in the official, formal, traditional texts (and so covering the formal imperial edition etc) for 3000+ years. IOW it has taken that long for a scientific analysis to occur and bring out properties of recursion grounded in the binary sequence - as such the traditional sequence has been a 'con', a form of 'smoke screen', a part presented as if a whole, an instance presented as if a class, that has drawn attention away from considering the natural dynamics of recursion and what it covers. The nature of X-ness as such is a major revelation in understanding the play of mechanistic vs organic recursion in general and getting the IC to describe itself in particular.
So, can you show any evidence or discussion of your views of Yang and Yin within the received knowledge of the Confucian view of those concepts and other commentary?
Certainly not. The EIC covers what we can get out of understanding brain dynamics, there is no focus on traditional ancient Chinese perspectives. In other words we go back to first principles and see where that takes us. What we find is it takes us to the same place but with better understanding of what we are dealing with. The ancient Chinese point of view has the problem of being -- ancient, with no reference to 3000+ years of research into neuroscience, psychology, anthropology etc etc. The question then is what do we get if we make such references?
Unfortunately, those of us, such as myself who have been conversant with BOTH modern neuroscience and its roots in theoretical biophysics AND binary number as an aspect of mathematics of the entire range of number base systems find your level of understanding woefully deficient.
Computers nowadays are considered hexadecimal based.
I thank you for your clear and positive confession that your work has no semantic content or useful meaning for understanding the I Ching.
Hi Chris,
You seem to lack any understanding of the notion of number bases and how that limits the philosophy involved. Any binary math system (or hexadecimal representation) is NOT an independent reality. It is just our common decimal math reduced to just one digit (and the modern Zero) for ease of mechanical technologies of calculation.
So, let us move on. You insist that just because the calendar reads 2010 CE that automatically things are newer or more modern or advanced beyond prior calendar dates. Have you any evidence of that?
Other than you are living now and seem to lack any awareness of prior philosophy or more sophisticated understanding,
have you any evidence that your work is anything new, special or better than any other computer programmer or gamer?
You mention often neuroscience and brain function, but only manage some details of computer programming in the actual workings of your system.
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).