...life can be translucent

Menu

An etymology of Qian.15

L

lightofreason

Guest
hmesker said:
You are (deliberately?) taking my remark out of its original context. You said


And that's a prejudice.
I did not say this - it is a quote from you. Dont you read what you write?! you wrote that in reply to something I said, and then repeated it when capturing the quote - I then responded by writing you were being silly etc. Please Harmen, if you want to discuss things then dont put your words into my mouth and then wander off into some diatribe about what I said!!

hmesker said:
But when you correlate these qualities with the trigrams you do so by their traditional accepted names and meanings, as found in the Ten Wings.
No. The correlation is done by cognitive analysis - the meanings generated regardless of the names. Following on from the analysis, in my own interpretations of the IC I include (a) Wilhelm's names (b) my gerund form of translation (c) the Eranos set of associations. The FACT that the traditional interpretations 'fit' with the qualities derived from brain dynamics shows the origins of the traditional interpretations in a brain, not from 'outside' of that brain.

Wilhelm or Eranos or Legge or even chinese translations do not cover issues of 02 as total darkness or the positive aspects of 47 etc etc They does not cover the neurologically-determined forms of interpretations of cooperative/competitive forms - and so 02 is (a) total negation, total darkess as it is (b) a womb.

There is nothing covering the generation of pairs from recursion or quartets or octets etc - (see my original material circa 1995 covering all of this - http://members.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond ) - all due to a failure to understand the methodology used in deriving the IC.

Wilhelm nor anybody else has covered the 'natural' sequence of the IC as I have in depth (go to one of my hexagrams, go through the two pages of material that could be extended into short book per hexagram! - click in the hexagram image top left to toggle between the pages - http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/table.html )

Some past researchers HAVE mapped out the binary form but never analysed it as an example of self-referencing and so containing properties and methods of such a process.

hmesker said:
The same goes for the hexagrams and their names. Your material, however, would to a certain extent not fit the Mawangdui Yijing,
it does ;-) The generic qualities of the hexagrams hold. LOCAL context will add variations, elements of 'unique' perspectives but the focus is on the universals that seed those variations.

hmesker said:
or the Chujian Yijing, because they apply different names with likely different meanings. Yet these are also Yijings.
You seem to miss the dynamics of evolution where what is the 'best fit' is what survives the longest. The variations on the IC you offer are just that, variations, LOCAL differences. The success of the IC is based on resonance in understanding since it 'fits' easily with our brain dynamics. LOCAL variations will exist, there are MANY orders that reflect Logics of Relationships in the IC (the examples given in http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/icmatrix.html )

For example, this matrix covers the qualities of 23/43 where each pair reflects those qualities. (X is to Y as 23 is to 43 - and so 23 is to 02 as 23 is to 43, 01 is to 43 as 23 is to 43, 18 is to 46 as 23 is to 43 etc etc)

23 02 20 08 35 16 12 45
52 15 53 39 56 62 33 31
04 07 59 29 64 40 06 47
18 46 57 48 50 32 44 28
27 24 42 03 21 51 25 17
22 36 37 63 30 55 13 49
41 19 61 60 38 54 10 58
26 11 09 05 14 34 01 43

.. and then there is all of the XOR material....

hmesker said:
Everywhere on your site you apply the traditional, accepted meanings of the hexagrams as known from the received Yijing. If the received version were replaced by another version, you would have a problem. Those who use the Yi as an oracle would not have that problem.
no. ANY replacement would be in representations/words and so expressions, what is being EXPRESSED will be constant. Blending, Bonding, Bounding, Binding. Hard-coded into our brains; ONE set of generic qualities, MANY sets of labels.

hmesker said:
The fact that it is not covered in the traditional material does not mean that the ancient Chinese 'missed' it. Every manuscript is a reflection of its time. The basic associations of the trigrams (which you apply so abundantly on your site) are derived from the Ten Wings.
No. The basic associations exist a feelings hard-coded into your brain. THEN comes the LOCAL CONTEXT associations, often done in an ad hoc manner since the 'ancients' did not have access to the 'full picture' that we do re category formation and use by the neurology.

hmesker said:
Only about 1000 years later this was expanded to long lists of categorized associations which we still use today. This does not mean that these later associations were 'missed' by the writers of the Ten Wings. There just was no need and/or use for it at that time.
Everybody can expand on the material of the Yi. But every expansion is most likely an expansion of the traditional Yi with its traditional associations from a subjective point of view. Without this foundation you have nothing to build on. Therefore I think we should first study this foundation, instead of making up fancy theories.
The foundation is in our species, not in the ancient chinese. THEIR perspective is the application of universals to a LOCAL CONTEXT and so will take-on a local 'colouring'. Your focus is, as such, limiting, in that you are trying to detect the foundations of something in a local context when those foundations are in fact in a universal context - our neurology that seeds our meanings, our expressions.

Chris.
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
jesed said:
Now, this is a total nonsense (maybe I should say a "Nonsense Plus"?)

Etymology is not about qualities of a six-line figure; but about words.
(1) it is tracing the history of expressions - words stand for something, as do hexagrams, they BOTH are indicators of feelings that are 'meaningful'.

(2) if this is the case for you, etymology is about words, and ancient chinese is about ideograms/pictograms and NOT words then there is no etymology possible!

The supplied definition covers:

1. That branch of philological science which treats of the
history of words, tracing out their origin, primitive
significance, and changes of form and meaning.

2. That part of grammar which relates to the changes in the
form of the words in a language; inflection.

Words are REPRESENTATIONS of 'something' and what is represented will seed the associated words - note the reference to "changes of form or meaning". IOW there is a core focus on MEANING and hexagrams serve the same purpose as words as do numbers - they represent some ratio, some relationship of some form.

Chris.
 
J

jesed

Guest
Cris

1.- Words can be expresed in several diferent way: oraly, picturely, abstractly. In every of this cases, they remain words.

When you say "ancient chinese is about ideograms/pictograms and NOT words then there is no etymology possible" you add a mayor nonsese to defend your first nonsense. You mix the word with the way that word is expressed

2.- Ideogram and pictogram is diferent ways of express words. You seems to believe thay are the same. But, as Lindsay pointed out in previous discussion, there are diferent resultant if you try to make an etimology of the words that names the hexagrams if you think they are pictograms than if you think they are ideograms.


3.- An hexagram can indicate feelings; and when this is the case, your emotional IC is very useful; but hexagram also can indicate "things" that are not feelings. Just one obvious Example: an hexagram can indicate calendaric references. (You can review the forum, and look that when I had write calendaric references, people return to say that those dates was accurate. And, of course, a date is not a feeling)

So, if you think that the six-line form portray a meaning of something represented, the point (from a linguistic point of view) is if that six-line form is a word.

Example: a "mandala" portray some meanings; but I had never hear that anybody says a mandala is a word (and made etimology of a mandala).

Another example, clearest. If I view a map of Asia, there I have a picture that portray meaning for me... but that is not a word (even if the map can have words within, like the names of the countries)
 
J

jesed

Guest
lightofreason said:
there is a core focus on MEANING and hexagrams serve the same purpose as words as do numbers - they represent some ratio, some relationship of some form.
I agree that a six-line form represent some ratio, as well as words and numbers.

But, in the same way that a number is not a word, an hexagram (as a six-line form) is not a word. In the same way etimology is about words and not about numbers; etimology is about words and not about six-line form. All (words, number and six-line forms) have the purpose to express meaning, but they are not the same.

And etimology is about words, only

Best wishes
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
jesed said:
Cris

1.- Words can be expresed in several diferent way: oraly, picturely, abstractly. In every of this cases, they remain words.
no. a word is a word. You can represent what IT represents in pictures etc - the word is a representation of meaning and we translate that meaning into any sense form where some will work well, others wont. I think there is confusion here of associating map with territory and/or precision issues.

The representations of meaning in hexagrams is through qualities associated with the line structure/image as well as with the ideogram/pictogram/'borrowed form' etc. The issue with Chinese is that the word form, the sequence of sounds, differs from the character form where the latter is universal within China and the former is local (Madarin vs Cantonese etc)

These are all metaphors, carriers of the meaning, and as such we can swap one form for the other but in that swapping can 'add' a local nuance attributed to the sense - and so a specialist aspect, BUT the translation of analogue to digital, and so sensory representational systems into digital form, works to elicit a representation of the sense, not the sense. Thus a word, a sequence of characters is a serial form of representation of analogue information where we add 'colour', sensor harmonics, using emotion. We try to use the word to elicit sensory 'resonance' and it is emotions that allow that to happen (no emotions and it is all 'robotic' in form - so harmonics to play with)

The word 'ONE' is a representation, as is '1' - I can express what they represent in other forms but to express the word itself without reference to its context is metaphysical gobbldygook.

As for calendars etc in the IC, the hexagrams are used to represent distinctions of past/present/future and the number of lines can be used to reflect a lunar year etc but all of this is dependent on feelings and that includes the sense of position, of syntax (the feeling is in fact sourced in our left hemisphere and on down through hippocampus etc to cover issues of territorial mapping)

The sense of 'truth' as such is syntax-related, the focus on a FEELING of correctness, being in the right place/time, so it is easy see how calendars can be exctracted from the IC and with those calendars the FEELINGS of position, of correctness.

The DETAIL is in the sense of ordinality (as compared to cardinality) used in the calendars - 23rd, 4th etc etc but the FEELING correctness, as is 'in today the 23rd?' is very much present.

Chris.
 

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
5
jesed said:
Maybe I don't understand you well, maybe your quote is out of context, but ...are you saying that etymology is a "pseudospiritual dream"?... wow

I feel sorry for those people devoted to linguistics and etymology, they use to think that etymology is some kind of Science. Poor guys.

And, since you are asking Togan to leave this forum to go into others, because he doesn't agree with your idea about not stay with the etimological discussion but go into more general meaning discussion, this mean that you are becoming the local guru around here?

I see now that the word 'you' in my 'if you don't want to be disturbed in your pseudospiritual dream' could be misunderstood as referring to Toganm.
Of course that was not my intention, I don't even know Toganm very well, so I also don't know if he likes pseudospiritual dreams (I do sometimes :)).

I also didn't mean to ask Toganm to leave this forum. I used the word 'you' in the sense of 'we', including myself.
If we want posts that stay strictly on topic we can go to other forums with a stricter moderation.

And no, I don't see etymology as a pseudospiritual dream, not at all. I was talking in general about the rather suffocating atmosphere that I sense in some 'spiritual' forums, where any form of going against the grain is considered not done.
Sorry for the misunderstandings!

As to the function of local guru, I'm not available Jesed, and not only because it pays badly. :D
 

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
5
lightofreason said:
Wilhelm or Eranos or Legge or even chinese translations do not cover issues of 02 as total darkness or the positive aspects of 47 etc etc They does not cover the neurologically-determined forms of interpretations of cooperative/competitive forms - and so 02 is (a) total negation, total darkess as it is (b) a womb.
Significant differences between your interpretations and those of the ancients can also indicate that your theory of 'neurological determination' has shortcomings and needs revision.
But you never seem to consider that possibility.

You label yourself as an intuitive thinker (NT in MBTI) and your work is indeed a typical product of intuitive thinking.
You impose your theories on the facts - including the facts that come out of research in neuroscience - and bend them in such a way that they confirm your theories.
Meanwhile you lose contact with reality and build a closed system that is impossible to refute. You can always talk the crooked straight.
And that is what you do all the time.
 
B

bruce_g

Guest
Hi Chris,

I have no problem with 2 as total darkness or a womb, and yet I have no knowledge of XOR. How is that possible? Might it be that this thing you call “universal” is perceived in a different way, on a different level or frequency than your own? This is a consistent theme in how I perceive your posts, that, you lay exclusive claims to ideas (such as: Universal) that many others either already have learned or intuitively feel or know. But because you have a system of interacting definitions, you perceive that you have done other than reinventing the wheel. That wheel has been around long before man. The etymology is written on mountain, water, thunder, lake, fire and air. Somehow, man got born into it, and then had the insane idea that he created it.
 
J

jesed

Guest
lightofreason said:
no. a word is a word.... the word is a representation of meaning ...The word 'ONE' is a representation, as is '1'
So, are you saying that "1" is a word, like "ONE"?... I cann't go further in that case, is useless

lightofreason said:
As for calendars etc in the IC, the hexagrams are used to represent distinctions of past/present/future and the number of lines can be used to reflect a lunar year etc but all of this is dependent on feelings
If I say: "you will receive the letter in a X or Y day" (Zeldicac case), the fact that he recieved or not doesn't depend on her feelings neither in my feelings (she wouldn't say I feel like I'm receiving the letter), she actually recieved the letter, taht is a fact; the day when she received is a X or a Y day or not, that doesn't depends on her feelings (I feel like today is a Tiger day).

Actually, you said in that case, that I cann't really say "You would receive the letter in x or y day"; and recogniced that at least the IC Plus is not useful to that kind of use.

So, how can the fact that she ACTUALLY recieved the letter on one of the days I mentioned depends on her feelings?
 

Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom

Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).

Top