...life can be translucent

Menu

I fooled the iching with the two computers riddle.Darn!

joezoe

visitor
Joined
May 24, 2008
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
Hi!I tried an experiment I have been up all night querying the I ching using random .org number generator.It seemed to give me all the right answers all night throwing away an answer every so often for fear of anomaly's in the static.
But Since random noise cant be trusted in my mind just the same as random thinking and interference that might might go through ones head cant be trusted or one would not be sound I felt I needed to test the integrity of answers based on random noise filtered through the parameter cover of the king wen sequence.
What interested me about this in the first place is that king wen sequence is proportioned like a wave maybe a time wave and it may have been supposedly designed to comprehensively pattern over chaotic noise in time.
The way I set it up was from 1 to 384 lines I chose yang for possible yes and yin for probable no and I was getting uncanny results,but then I asked it the two computer riddle and it just crushed my enthusiasm for the old random auger.
The two computer riddle I asked it was If the random number generator combined with the I ching were one of two computers one who always told the truth and one who always lied would the other computer tell me that this terminal lies?It said NO!4th line of 61."Zhong Fu"Inner most sincerity-fourth six The moon is nearly full.A pair of horses,lost one.No Fault.
I Find it poignant the subject is truthfullness and the yao text refers to a pair of horses one being lost sort of like saying a pair of computers one false or out or whatever lost.But it said yin probable no.Can anyone help me to refine this query,or instruct me in a more sound method of utilizing the ching?
 
Last edited:

joezoe

visitor
Joined
May 24, 2008
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
Probably better to go with correctness or incorrectness of the position of the line rather then if its yin or yang.Any thoughts?
 

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
0
Perhaps the Yi was kidding? It knew that the answer to the riddle is "yes" but it imitated the computer that always lies and so it said "no"? :D

I find the answer 61.4 amazing. I wouldn't know any other line that reflects the question so well.
But although this answer seems to indicate that the Yi understood the question, I wonder if the Yi really understood.
I'm not sure, but I think that consciousness on the level of an oracle (dreamlike more or less) can have problems with logical constructs.
And lying, does that exist on that level?

So, maybe your method is okay, but the Yi was either joking or didn't understand the question.

Don't know if (in)correctness works better ..
 

joezoe

visitor
Joined
May 24, 2008
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
Perhaps the Yi was kidding? It knew that the answer to the riddle is "yes" but it imitated the computer that always lies and so it said "no"? :D

I find the answer 61.4 amazing. I wouldn't know any other line that reflects the question so well.
But although this answer seems to indicate that the Yi understood the question, I wonder if the Yi really understood.
I'm not sure, but I think that consciousness on the level of an oracle (dreamlike more or less) can have problems with logical constructs.
And lying, does that exist on that level?

So, maybe your method is okay, but the Yi was either joking or didn't understand the question.

Don't know if (in)correctness works better ..
I can see that point.
Also the line says yes if I considered the correctness of its position as a positive or negative.
 
Last edited:

joezoe

visitor
Joined
May 24, 2008
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
I went out and bought that little 20 questions capsule.I got the newer smarter one.And I had some one think of three things and put them in envelopes so I couldn't see them, as targets .I wasn't able to get get the ching/random numbers to answer the 20 questions about the targets to come up with a correct guess by the 20 questions computer.The closest I came though was to make yin line in the correct position no yang lines in the correct position yes yin lines in the incorrect position sometimes and yang lines in the incorrect position unknown.I'm still looking for a way.The Thing has endured for five thousand years as a revered divination manual,I can not believe that its totally worthless in this respect, I mean something has to give or else what are we talking about here?
 

ginnie

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
4,342
Reaction score
12
Pure Content

Maybe the Yi is not going along with the rule of yin meaning "probably no." I think its answer to you is pure content and it means this: "You have approached this question of telling the truth and lying with tremendous concentration, and you have really accomplished something." The Blofeld translation says about 61.4: "The straying of the horses signifies rising above those of our own kind." The Yi is saying that with this project, you have transcended the limitations of your background. This is a big compliment from the I Ching to you. I do believe it understood your question completely. Line 61.4 means those completely responsible for truthfulness and sincerity.

A very long time ago I bought an I Ching book containing a certain chart. The chart was supposed to tell me exactly when something would happen. My question could be: "When should I take this trip to visit my family?" The author of the book asserted that if I threw the coins, the chart would tell me, according to my hexagram, when I should take that trip. However, never once did the I Ching answer that way. The I Ching always answered the content. For example, if I were thinking of visiting my family, I might get a hexagram telling me something about my family.

In other words, the Yi completely disregarded this other construct, the chart someone had drawn up.

I think the Yi gives you the same answer it gives me. It is very impartial. It will make amazing and incomprehensible adjustments in order to answer the question. I don't know how to put this into words, exactly, but I think the Yi is telling us the thing we most need to hear, the hidden thing, that thing we ourselves cannot see.

I am not knowledgeable about mathematics, so I cannot say anything about that part of your question. I was most interested in your saying that "the King Wen sequence was proportioned like a wave." Maybe it's a wave meant to wash out of your mind the interference usually there, as we all have a lot of internal noise. Sometimes when I get my hexagram and spend time with the I Ching, just thinking about the answer I was given, it is exactly like my mind is being washed clean by a big, beneficial wave . . . :)
 

joezoe

visitor
Joined
May 24, 2008
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
Your right.obviously its not going along that way.But I'm not through developing my own methods yet by a long shot.The thing about I Ching Is I feel Like it is not good to expose it's secrets or one might insult it's modesty.So I come in here and tell people what doesn't work so I have something to talk about.lol
 

ginnie

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
4,342
Reaction score
12
Secrets

I'm not sure what you mean by the I Ching's secrets. It operates by divine law, in which there are no secrets, only miracles. As for secrets, only human beings have them, and there is nothing special about human secrets. The secrets of human beings are all pretty much the same.

Maybe you mean the mathematical secrets of the I Ching. I don't know if the I Ching would feel embarrassed by having some of its secrets shown, if people in general could benefit by your doing so. After all, King Wen and other Chinese scholars devoted their lives to producing diagrams, and many have found these arrays of ordering principles very helpful to their understanding . . . I'm not aware that the I Ching objected to their activities of revealing its secrets . . .

I would pose that question directly to the I Ching, actually.
 

joezoe

visitor
Joined
May 24, 2008
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
I'm not sure what you mean by the I Ching's secrets. It operates by divine law, in which there are no secrets, only miracles. As for secrets, only human beings have them, and there is nothing special about human secrets. The secrets of human beings are all pretty much the same.

Maybe you mean the mathematical secrets of the I Ching. I don't know if the I Ching would feel embarrassed by having some of its secrets shown, if people in general could benefit by your doing so. After all, King Wen and other Chinese scholars devoted their lives to producing diagrams, and many have found these arrays of ordering principles very helpful to their understanding . . . I'm not aware that the I Ching objected to their activities of revealing its secrets . . .

I would pose that question directly to the I Ching, actually.
I don't know it seems to leave people with a cheap feeling sometimes,like getting drunk and talking to much.I try to avoid both.:footinmouth: Billy Joel starts singing you had to be a biiig shot diiiiint ya,and then you have perform 12 labors to reconcile yourself to the gods.
 
Last edited:

ginnie

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
4,342
Reaction score
12
Two Lakes

Yes, and in my case, the words seemed to come back at me, and I'd worry about every sentence I had dared to speak out loud. It is definitely better not to become full of words.

Sometimes there can be a refreshing type of communication, that doesn't feel like some form of torture. That is represented by Hexagram 58. The image is of two lakes replenishing each other.

But in the long run words are not very important. I studied the I Ching on my own for more than a decade. Actually, I don't remember how long I've been studying the I Ching. There is no reason why you would ever have to share your private thoughts on the I Ching with anyone. You might benefit a lot from reading the posts of other people, though. I know that I have.
 

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