Link to some more etymology (hexagram 3)

[lightofdarkness]

Harmen,

what happened to the dodecagram work you were doing with LiSe and others? did you finish it? is it on a website?

Chris.

 

[lightofdarkness]

Martin,

consider 'contractive blending' - it covers the trigram of EARTH. It is not related to any sense. It comes in two flavours, one competive - absolute total darkness, one cooperative - the nurturing, the place to hide, of darkness. That darkness can be visual, auditory, olfactory, or 'mind' (in the specialist realm of emotions it is associated with FEAR as it is associated with devotion ;-))

All the IDM material does is map out, based on current work in neurosciences, the GENERIC template for all meaning across the species. The LOCAL will then focus on expression, on colours etc BUT will be influenced by the underlying 'determinism' of the template.

Understanding the template allows one to quickly understand specialist perspectives due to they being METAPHORS for the template - and that includes the IC ;-)

Chris.

 

[hmesker]

<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1>quote:</font>

what happened to the dodecagram work you were doing with LiSe and others? did you finish it? is it on a website?<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote>
It is a work in progress and lately not much has been done with it, as far as I can see. I myself have kept myself busy with other things (focussing is something I am hardly capable of but it is something I have learned to deal with), but it is still in a corner of my mind flashing its red light saying "don't forget me!". It is a matter of priority, as with a lot of things. What has been done can be found at LiSe's website.

HM

 

[heylise]

Have been adding 2 scanned hexagrams the past days. In the Yilin-list that is, not yet on my website. And they have to be revised.. anyone likes to do that???

It seems they are meant as the connection between the hexagram of the day, and a cast hexagram for the individual.

LiSe

 

[hmesker]

I'll give it a shot LiSe. Thanks.

HM

 

[martin]

Hi Chris,

Ah yes, I get it. IDM looks 'behind' fire, so to speak, and the quality behind it (expansive bounding) can also 'surface' in other ways, through sound for instance.
So although fire is a universal symbol, an archetypal image, it's still a specialization from the perspective of IDM, an expression. In this sense (not necessarily the cultural sense) it is 'local'.

IDM apparently looks behind archetypal images and also behind the archetypes themselves. It probes a more fundamental level.
In software terms, IDM is closer to machine language than Jungean psychology.
Pure C?

 

[lightofdarkness]

Hi Martin,

>
> Ah yes, I get it. IDM looks 'behind' fire, so to speak, and the
> quality behind it (expansive bounding) can also 'surface' in other
> ways, through sound for instance.

yes.

> So although fire is a universal symbol, an archetypal image, it's
> still a specialization from the perspective of IDM, an expression. In
> this sense (not necessarily the cultural sense) it is 'local'.
>

yes. Any SENSE is a specialisation. The focus is on the core differentiating/integrating qualities - 'language of the neuron' if you like. The neuron maps, through wavelengths, frequencies, and amplitudes, all of the DIFFERENT sense expressions to give a general sense of SAMENESS that allows for identification. e.g. Visual cortext neurons will adapt to recognising bars etc etc but that is a specialisation of the neuron as a universal. (this focus by the neuron on waves etc allows for information from different senses to be mapped to the one space through the creation of a superposition - and so ONE quality is shareable across all senses; emotions do this - in the neuron the perception of particle/wave duality is expressed through FM/AM dynamics - PULSE(discrete, XOR)/WAVE(continuum, AND) etc)

In our "AND" level of being so all senses are integrated but category identification is IMPLICIT, INTUITIVE, IMMEDIATE (and so, without refinement, approximate) - there is a need for a LABEL to 'finish off' the identification, and in that we move to the realm of XOR and so, for us, the final assertion of identity is a differentiating one, whereas for AND states it is an integrating one. (the goal appears to be the REFINEMENT of the AND state through details analysis of PARTS, but our consciousness gets off on the mediation process - we enjoy talking about 'nothing', we get off on the social buzz)

BEHIND all of these processes is the set of qualities derived from the 'language of the neuron' - as mapped in IDM. Our senses reflect the adaptation to that language (or that language to the senses to start with - vision associates with the dynamics of the eye with its focus on parafovea (edge detection, form, AND) vs fovea (details, XOR) and our brains adapted STRONGLY to vision. Basic 'whole' and 'part' dynamics preceded vision through the differentiations of smell and taste but vision gave us LONG RANGE communications. Audition then extended the XOR realm through it being even more precise than vision re communications but not necessarily so immediate in precision - a look can say what words cannot or should not! ;-)).

> IDM apparently looks behind archetypal images and also behind the
> archetypes themselves. It probes a more fundamental level.

yes.

> In software terms, IDM is closer to machine language than Jungean
> psychology.
> Pure C?

pretty much. FROM the blending, bonding, bounding, binding (and their composites) comes links to give us to the SPECIALIST archetypes of Jung, and others, that in themselves are GENERAL when compared to THEIR local manifestations.

The neurology is strongly hierarchic when it comes to labels etc, and so precision. As we build meaning so the 4Bs or their composites 'seed' the meaning and local associations then add colour etc.

As such, Jungean categories (or any others) start to specialise with spoken/written word but are considered 'archetypes' by those at more particular levels in the development of the hierarchy. It is like making a macro in Assembly language where we put together labels 'hard wired' in the form of microprogramming machine language instruction sets etc.

as such we have machine(microprogram) -> Assembly macros -> C or Cobol etc -> actual program for human interface etc. --- our intuition in designing TCP/IP protocol stacks or OSI etc reflects our recognition of hierarchy at work re communications. As such the 'bedrock' in the neuron is in its differentiating/integrating dynamics. We then move 'up' to the topsoil, the presentation level.

From this sort of intuitive understanding has emerged Object Oriented principles in analysis, design, programming, architecture etc., where inheritence plays a dominating role - from the GENERAL come PARTICULARS.

Consciousness makes universals LOCAL through the use of labels to communicate - and so the more precise we get so the more we start to stereotype our communications! - this is a 'problem' of course in that we lose context-sensitivity where that sensitivity is required to COMPLETE the 'whole', to ground it in the moment, to give it that local richness. That said, being unaware of the unconscious processes so our imagination takes over at the conscious level and that can cause 'issues' ;-) By understanding the full spectrum of our communication methods, and so derivation of meaning, we an aid in dealing with some of those 'issues' ;-)

The 'Species I Ching' reflects the sourcing of the trigrams/hexagrams/dodecagrams at the level of the 4Bs. LOCAL context then brings out the local experience; but consciousness can distort this in that we talk too much, use universals, rather than stop the monkey mind and focus on fully 'blending in' with the context.

As such, the Li/fire trigram expresses a GENERIC, universal, quality that the LOCAL will then ground. The best analogy in that grounding has been to the attributes of fire but the *core* focus is on the expanding boundary (or more so the focus on outwards rather than of inwards, where we find the trigram of water and a contracting boundary. The boundary reflects such notions as 'them' from 'us', of being 'in my gang' or on being 'rejected' etc, of PARTS, the rational numbers etc, of cutting - ALL of the fire and water associated hexagrams will bring out these boundary issues)

When we TALK about the IDM focus in the IC, so we have to use the IC language etc in that IDM can be too 'generic' to understand at times! ;-)

Chris.

 

[yly2pg1]

Hi all,

"From this sort of intuitive understanding has emerged Object Oriented principles in analysis, design, programming, architecture etc., where inheritence plays a dominating role - from the GENERAL come PARTICULARS."

I spend few weeks to think over the application of IDM in Chinese character, i think it may be true that the Chinese character is developed along this object oriented principle.

The hint is in the traditional method of using the Chinese dictionary, number of bi3_hua4

(BTW, the notion that the Chinese character is developed by I Ching has prevailed for quite some time)

 

[yly2pg1]

bi3 hua4 refers to the stroke in a character. So, one-bi3 hua4 is one-stroke.

The basic building block of the Chinese character is in the one-stroke \ one-bi3 hua4. However due to different orientation of the stroke (or in Science we coin as spin), we can further differentiate one-bi3 hua4 into 4 spins or 8 spins.

The combination of these 8-spins (of one-bi3 hua4) gives rise to the formation of more complicated two-bi3 hua4 subcharacter/characters.

The process continues from two-bi3 hua4 to three, four and the rest. And these processes could be traced (i believe) in a binary tree.

 

[lightofdarkness]

> The basic building block of the Chinese character is in the one-stroke
> \ one-bi3 hua4. However due to different orientation of the stroke
> (or in Science we coin as spin), we can further differentiate one-bi3
> hua4 into 4 spins or 8 spins.
>

And so we enter the realm of the compass.


> The combination of these 8-spins (of one-bi3 hua4) gives rise to the
> formation of more complicated two-bi3 hua4 subcharacter/characters.
>

Compass WITHIN compass WITHIN compass. ;-)

From that can come radicals that give a generic indicator of meaning.

You may find of interest my page that touches on two forms of this compass format - see http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond/onemany.html - one format being 'competitive' with equal distance between each node, the other more cooperative where we move into pairs etc.

Perhaps the invention of the compass reflects the generic mindset overall.

 

[yly2pg1]

BTW let's not mix up the Yi text with the development of the Chinese character, it may be of different ge2 ju2. Else, it is another situation of 47.

 

[yly2pg1]

Examples of bi3_hua4 as a building block.

bi3_hua4

bi3_hua4_pdf

 

[yly2pg1]

Compass within compass, that is the meaning of ge2 ju2!

 

[yly2pg1]

I learned the word portmanteau in this forum.

Just wonder if the term synonymous with object oriented principle in the context of the Chinese etymology?

 

[lightofdarkness]

BLENDING words to make a new word can be extended into blending images etc to make a new one - as such the new 'object' inherits means from two other objects.

Thus a bit is made up of BInary and digiT; its meaning inherits the properties of BINARY and that of a DIGIT.

In Chinese, the use of radicals with a phonetic reflects a blending of meanings, and especially so in symbols made-up of many other symbols that are radicals in their own right. (and so the person radical with the tree radical expresses resting - but is the phonetic form a mix of person and tree?)

The issue is in the phonetic expression in English etc - I dont know how that pans out in written chinese vs spoken.

Overall there is a link to a superposition that contains both meanings such that we can extract one or the other depending on context. However there is also the third form of a label that contains both meanings in its expression and so not context-sensitive.

 

[yly2pg1]

How about the Chinese grammar?

As far as i can recollect, during my 10 years formal education in Chinese class, hardly i'd had to touch on the topics in grammar. Not like the English lessons, which i'd have to spin

and sweat with the lots of grammar. And still very much confused with the English grammar until today!

Any comments on that?

 

[yly2pg1]

My question may sounds a bit weird, but i believe i am targeting the right audience.

Chris, this is how i read your points from the perspective of the Chinese etymology.

(1) primitive character + 1st radical = 1st hybrid character
(the meaning of the character is context sensitive to 1st radical)

(2) 1st hybrid character + 2nd radical = 2nd hybrid character
(the meaning of the 1st hybrid character is context sensitive to 2nd radical)

... continues if there is 3rd or 4th radicals

 

[yly2pg1]

So, when come to the construction of a sentence,

(1)a character will bond with one (or more) character(s) to form a new ci2(word) (superposition of both meaning).

(2) Two or more ci2 (words) join to form a sentence, together with a verb.

(3) In English, every sentence must has a verb (or verb to be). The verb in a Chinese sentence is a character, most of the time?

 

[yly2pg1]

So how could I apply

-bond
-bind
-bound
-blend

in the Chinese language, from a character to ci2(word) down to a sentence?

Is the Chinese Grammar a kind of chemistry make up of 4b?

 

[lightofdarkness]

I am not that familar with (Mandarin) Chinese grammar other than understanding that it is simpler than English! (and so we can use one symbol to 'colour' a sentence as referencing the past ("le" after the verb) as compared to another about the future ("jiang" before the verb)).

The use of "bu" means no verb change as we have in English when dealing with negation.

"to be" in Chinese is one form - "shi" - to cover all of the differences we find in English - IOW the English is making finer distinctions and so being more universal; lots of labels! ;-)

IOW English is more universal in its 'drive' to label everything - there are a lot formally defined verbs ... indicating a movement away from context sensitivity to 'complete' the meaning - this would come with a focus on precision where even the written form is phonetic and so reinforcing the discreteness focus and so the 'dot' precision.

Japanese COMBINE both phonetic and ideographic representations into their kana/kanji form of representations.

Written Chinese is a universal when compared to the tonal differences etc across the dialects of spoken Chinese such that we see the universal/local dynamic applicable to a particular collective - the Chinese.

The blend, bond, bound, bind can be formed into relationships of blend/bound with objects, bond/bind with relationships - so that distinction should allow for some form of developing taxonomy.

This gets complex when you add more recursion and out pops the gerund etc (which the IC can be called - the book of ings!)

If you look at the symbol for hex 47, it is a tree enclosed. At the IDM level the focus is on expansive bonding (lake) WITHIN a context of contractive bounding (water).

there is an association of BONDING and TREE in the context of family tree, and so replication etc etc and the bounding focus is on the fence - so there is 'something' here relating the 4Bs to the ideograms qualitatively - not to just the hexagram images.

you could go back through ancient Chinese and build some database of terms that 'reflect' the 4bs....or more so the 8 - there is a need for the universals to be GROUNDED to work properly - and so contract/expand, negative/positive etc to be included. E.g. in 47 the BOND is expanding, as a trees roots are, they go deep and seek out nutrient - fence that in and you force the roots to integrate with the context by going deep.

the focus on the term 'CLINGING' for fire reflects the BOUNDARY focus but also the dependency involved where the boundary is not passive, we use it actively (e.g. 22 facading etc)

Since all specialisations will create their own languages based on differentiating/integrating (and so re-label that into nouns/verbs) so the 4b will go along for the ride, but local anomolies will emerge and redundancy come out through re-labels etc.

If we trace the 4Bs to neurology then we move past the language of the ego and move into the realm of the psyche and on into the self - and so the language of emotions etc. where we find the 4bs as feelings.

The issue with the LOCAL is the focus on specialisation and so redundancy that can make things difficult; MANY words will point back to the ONE quality where CONTEXT will be the source of difference -the source of what makes those words 'different' - and that includes a lack of awareness that a word exists to describe 'something' and so the invention of a 'new' word etc.

This focus is a bit like Chinese characters where the radical used to serve as a sort of context 'marker' to make things different LOCALLY.

The 'ad hoc' manner of development favours high redundancy and only in recent times has there been a formal focus on 'modernisation' through limiting redundancy (but in that process can 'cut' context links that would be of interest historically etc)

In the IC this redundancy is reversed in that the ONE universal symbol takes on many local meanings, whereas in spoken words so many words map to ONE meaning. - this gets into the development of more words for more precision about the one 'form'.

For English there are a number of tools available for study ("Weka" comes to mind, out of the University of Ortago, New Zealand)

The stringing of hexagrams into sequences is do-able to say 'something', but the focus has been more holistic, the image elicits all of the feelings etc. and XOR-ing other images with it extract more details but again 'holistically'. That is the advantage of the template in that it covers serial and parallel from the position of generating meaning through 'resonance'.

As such, if asked what a day I had I can reply '28' and you 'resonate' with that hexagram meaning to 'get' the feeling of my day! ;-)

As such, the IC is a language but rich in use of analogy/metaphor/simile due to the restricted 'character' set - 64 hexagrams to map 'all there is'.

English or Mathematics etc are more 'precise' languages but the precision is in the details, not necessarily in anything 'new' outside of the box.

IOW the increase in bandwidth with more differentiations does not necessarily mean more meaning OUTSIDE of what has been differentiated (IOW the 'emergence' is of increasingly '
worthless' meanings - of no long term value).

Note in all of this the ad hoc manner in which our languages etc have developed - where NOW we are starting to uncover what those languages are TRYIN G to say - does that lead to some new language? more 'efficient'? more 'universal'? possible ;-) IOW we are moving back down the Tower of Babel to the realm of the ONE language shared across the species!

Chris.

 

[lightofdarkness]

The movement from immediate, holistic, communications to delayed, parts-oriented, is a movement from AM to FM processing, analogue-to-digital conversion. An intermediate form is acquiring a spectrum to derive a parts list of the communication and use that spectrum as something we can overlay modulations to 'enhance' meanings.

Our emotions are STRONGLY sensitive to sensory harmonics so the link is from 4bs as patterns of diff/inte to 4bs as more well defined emotions and their 'transmission'. As we have become increasingly specialist, use of phonetics to communicate, so the sounds are used as metaphors, carriers of the emotion, and so carriers of the 4bs.

As serial communications has taken over, so the focus is on nouns and verbs - but we know that the general purpose, the universality, of the 4bs and hexagrams etc allows for LOCAL CONTEXT to determine whether a meaning is to be object oriented or relationships oriented.... with English etc trying to avoid that dependence through labelling everything!

We can map the 4bs to the IC.
We can map the 4bs to emotions and so can map emotions to the IC (as 4bs x 2).

The spoken/written word is used as a source of modulation, we use the sound spectrum, with which to transmit those emotions.

MEANING is in the RESONANCE created by a communication and as such is in the FEELINGS elicited; I can create my own language but in that creation I will unconscously use feelings/emotions in that language - the unique words will point to those species-nature qualities.

As such, words are like stones that are thrown into a pool and the wave patterns are the meaning (this gets into cymatics where frequency applied to a surface over which I have sprinkled sand will elicit a pattern in that sand. Now imagine all neurons as grains of sand - noting that the realm of neurons is all about processing frequencies, wavelengths, amplitudes.)

IOW, through spectrum exchange, we can map what the words are trying to communicate as a sequence rather than as a whole.

As we do with the hexagrams, so LOCAL CONTEXT will then ground the universal of the 4bs etc.

This dynamic from species-nature to consciousness-nature and back to species-nature allows for our PARTS oriented, DELAY oriented, SERIAL oriented, consciousness to derive 'fine detail' and so refine instincts.

As such, the QUALITIES of each hexagram etc remain constant, it is the RESOLUTION of details that adds richeness etc.

What IDM does is show how the qualities of the hexagrams etc are 'hard coded' in us as a species - and for that matter, hard coded in all neuron-dependent life forms to varying degrees of resolution - IOW we work at the level of telescopes, others at the level of binoculars, others at the level of naked-eye.

The core patterns are constant but as we go for mroe details so more patterns emerge.

You do not need telescopic perspectives all of the time, but they help in understanding what is behind naked-eye perspectives and so add 'confidence' to naked-eye communications ;-)

Chris.

 

[yly2pg1]

Do you know Feng Shui's compass?

Is Feng Shui compass a kind a "one to many" i{indicator} of something?

I ask you this because the Feng Shui compass incorporate the time scale via a system derived from the celestial chart. Ba gua / 5-elements / directions are "superimposed" onto the derived time scale.

 

[yly2pg1]

So Chris,

Say given you a chance to go back the period pre the Tower of Babel, what kind of compass you are going to construct with the 4Bs?

 

[lightofdarkness]

I am aware of it as I am aware of 5-phase etc mapping to eights ;-)

The different orderings around the compass reflect different modes of interpretations - using IC trigrams so Fu Hsi is structural, King Wen is procedural - where in the latter the only difference from a five-phase mapping is on taking mountain and putting it at the 'end' - to reflect the focus on a 'gateway' to the next level (mountain being associated with EARTH category in five-phase, conditional filtering for the more 'Western' perspective.)

That area of process still needs to be fleshed-out in the context of CHOICE - Martin's "AND" process is fine but I think also appears 'automatic', 'inevitable' and as such excludes 'us' as an active, a PROactive, participant. With consciousness comes choice so that needs to be looked at in that we can DELAY or SPEED UP events through the use of consciousness (or even locally, bypass them).

My structural perspective focuses on the ordering of five-phase etc into levels of energy and so starts with earth/mountain etc and ends with lake/heaven - thus reflecting the energy levels required for each category.

OTHO the temporal starts with thunder (wood, raw production) etc to water (internal distribution, aka consumption)

My focus currently is getting as much milage out of XOR-ing before moving on to AND-ing - IOW to map all of the PARTS (and so methods of extracting them) and see where that then takes us.

Moving to AND takes us into TWO realms, the vague, holistic, organic, AND of 'pattern matching' and so no SEQUENCE vs the rigid, clear, partials, AND of a link from A to B and no where else.

IOW "AND" applied to integrating many into one, vs "AND" sequencing many into one - the integration focus is transformed from a SEMANTIC perspective to an increasingly concentrated form we label as 'syntax'.

This also gets us into issues of traditional vs modern perspectives on line patterns - the traditional interprets 6 steps only, not 64 - IOW the lines are interpreted in strict linear form as we do 1,2,3,4.. And such I cannot express 1,3,5 at once, it will not make sense if the ordering is rigid sequence, a simple temporal pattern where the lines are 'equal' steps.

Move to 64 and we move to representations of time, not 1:1 correspondences, such that 1 and 6 make sense in they map to line time 33 out of a possible 63 (0 to 63) - the 6 lines reflect the compression of 64 states into 6 etc.

Overall, the focus is on establishing a solid framework, mapping the properties and methods of basic recursion of yin/yang etc to a high degree and then review the extensions (e.g. Feng Shui categories etc)

Chris.

 

[lightofdarkness]

The structural compass is reflected in Fu Hsi's format where we take the binary sequence and fold it in an S pattern 'around' the circle.

This convertion of the linear format maintains blend to blend as 'opposites', and so light vs dark etc.

When we fold it by bringing one end around to the other we move from a competitive perspective to a cooperative perspective - now blend and blend are next to each other forming the male/female pair and the BIND pair is now the 'opposite'.

This gets us into social issues of fighting to maintain the status quo, traditions etc vs the 'new'.

In this second form of compass so we form into PAIRS and so 'distort' the original format where the distance from each element to the others was constant - reflects the archetypal realm, the many battles in an eternal war - all are gods, replication is through asexual or androgynous means. All are out for themselves such that any alliences are for one battle and changed for the next.

These two compass patterns (or a linear vs a circle) reflect the YANG/YIN dynamics at work in categorising.

Chris.

 

[martin]

IDM, structure, process ...
I don't know if this is relevant but it seems to me that yang and yin 'deal with' space and time in opposite ways:

Yang: expands and differentiates in time, contracts and integrates in space
Yin: expands and differentiates in space, contracts and integrates in time

So yang is to space what yin is to time and the other way around.

Take the trigram 101, for instance. Expansive bounding in IDM. Expansive in space? Probably. Then it is the opposite - contractive - in time. When time contracts now is intensified, colors become brighter, and so on. This is covered by the fire symbolism.

Compared to animal consciousness, human consciousness is more yang. Humans have a fine grained awareness and understanding of time sequences, processes, causal relations and so on. This enables them to learn from the past, to predict, make plans, understand how processes work, invent and use tools and develop sophisticated sequential languages (and music).
The downside of this is that we seem to lose contact with the 'now'.

The awareness of animals is perhaps (at least) as 'crisp' as ours but it mainly operates in space. Yin. Differentiation in time, which seems to require a more complex neurology, is much less developed. Animals have as far as we know only a vague notion of past/future, especially long term (history), and dealing with processes is for the most part automatized, unconscious, instinctive.
The upside of this is that their now awareness is probably much brighter than ours.

If there is something in this idea then consciousness (awareness) is related to differentiation and XOR but not to yang. Yin also XORs. It XORs in space.

 

[lightofdarkness]

Hi Martin,

interesting points/questions ... some comments ....

> Posted by Martin (Martin) on Friday, March 11, 2005 - 9:37 pm:
>
> IDM, structure, process ...
> I don't know if this is relevant but it seems to me that yang and yin
> 'deal with' space and time in opposite ways:
>
> Yang: expands and differentiates in time, contracts and integrates in
> space
> Yin: expands and differentiates in space, contracts and integrates in
> time
>
> So yang is to space what yin is to time and the other way around.
>

Note that there are TWO forms of dichotomy - one is symmetric (+1/-1) the other asymmetric (0/infinity)
The symmetric favours 'sine wave' perspectives, the asymmetric favours 'pulse' perspectives. The symmetric is dominated by local structure and difference out of sameness. The asymmetric is more into global structure and so sameness across differences.

The asymmetric is more 'us' in general (AND), the symmetric more 'us' in particular (XOR). The asymmetric is related to spectral mappings, energy levels, and so local to universal, general/vague to particular/crisp mappings. The symmetric is more parts oriented WITHIN a level of a hierarchy. IOW the differences are in the positive/negative of a common form - this takes us into guassian, normal distribution mappings where the core elements are consider the same (1/1) and the focus is on differences that are aspectual (+/-). This latter view seems to be the one you are using above re space vs time.

Yin/yang mappings cover BOTH forms of dichotomy so one needs to be wary on interpretation without understanding the TYPE of dichotomy being used.

In GENERAL our brains focus on WHAT/WHERE aka differentiating/integrating and so a asymmetric form of dichotomy. In that format the differentiated are PARTS extracted from the WHOLE that is the integrated. As such, YANG comes out of YIN - it is an EXAGGERATION of YIN. Zoom-in and we can have WHAT/WHAT or WHERE/WHERE dichotomies and so symmetric.

When we interpret the realm of YIN as the species-nature realm, the realm of instincts and so of POTENTIALS, then YANG is the realm of ACTUALS where context 'pushes' for a particular instinct, a response, to stimulus. That extraction of the instinct is in the form of ENERGY.

If the realm of YIN is our species-nature realm then it comes with an integrated perspective re time and space in that there is no distinction, no actual, only potentials, LOCAL context is what matters. When we add energy to actualise a PARTICULAR from this GENERAL so with that particular comes its own experience of time. Why? Because there is a reciprocal relationship of energy/time such that speeding you up will slow down your subjective experience of time to a point where it can appear to stop! (with the energising so we are also universalising by 'lifting' the 'thing' over all else)

This distortion feeds into our models in that the distortion allows for the sense of, the concept of, 'eternity'. We see this dramatically in the expressions of children where their burn rate is high such that what is a day to us can be days to them! The high burn rate reflects a focus on high information processing as they develop - and that physiological processing will affect their thinking.

As such, the realm of pure yang included in it notions of the eternal and a focus on immortality, be it in thinking or in goal-seeking. It is that sense of immortality that introduces risk taking ;-) (... and an overall drive to maintain that sense, to achieve it - as we find in the more 'yang' oriented collectives with their focus on perpetual youth etc through fashion, pharmaceuticals, and genetic engineering - the BATTLE (competitiveness) is against DEATH rather than recognising and so delaying death and accepting aging (and so being cooperative) ;-))

The high energy focus in yang also introduces hierarchy, and so the semantic become concentrated to a level where all meaning is sourced in one's position in the hierarchy - it all becomes a focus on syntax; power games rule, even in the realm of replication.

With the focus on syntax comes a focus on SEQUENCE but this is not time 'as is', it is time 'as interpreted' - time is made mechanistic, partial, and free of its thermodynamic nature where the arrow of time is STRONG ;-)

Perspectives that come out of the XOR realm come out of a realm focused on clear identification and so on the STATIC, not the dynamic. IOW any dynamism is mechanistic in focus, not organic.

Zoom-in on the mechanistic and we get into the realm of competition and so of opposites as compared to complements. We see this dynamic in such areas as mappings of characteristics of fundamental particles where the ROOT is in the fermion/boson dynamic that is an ASYMMETRIC dichotomy where a PAIR of fermions emerges from a POOL of bosons (that themselves can be cooled into a Bose-Einstein Condensate - pure 'AND', a superposition format ;-))

The PAIR of fermions are OPPOSITE in charge such that as they emerge so they fly apart - if they again meet so they convert back to bosons - as a flash ;-) We see there the SYMMETIC nature of the fermions, electron(-)/positron(+).

Thus I think you can see how our thinking is reflected in our models, what we 'discover' through the FILTER that is our neurology and its differences between expression (differentiating bias) vs bedrock (integrating bias).

Of recent interest is the identification of fermions behaving in BEC-like manner. THAT reflects the recursive development where as we label bosons as particles when they are focused more on the space inbetween objects, so we find objects behaving as if out of the middle! - Recall my diagram of recursion where I make the point that we use the HORIZONTAL as a source of meaning derived from the VERTICAL (http://www.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/btree.gif - IOW inherent in the recursion is the mixing of the elements 'ideally' where the expression will be controlled by local context.

So, from this PARTICULAR, specialist, perspective we see the general dynamics of symmetric/asymmetric dichotomies and so their reflection in the I Ching interpretations.

(Note that the SAME interpretations re fermions/bosons are applicable to RNA/DNA so we are seeing something 'fundamental' at work here, a universal pattern tracable to the beginnings of the Universe - as covered in http://www.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/symmetry.html)

> Take the trigram 101, for instance. Expansive bounding in IDM.
> Expansive in space? Probably.

anywhere. We impose the filters on all perceptions.

> Then it is the opposite - contractive -
> in time. When time contracts now is intensified, colors become
> brighter, and so on. This is covered by the fire symbolism.
>

;-) sort of. The intensity in energy levels in focusing will speed up internal integrations and so make things more 'positive' if you like. As such, focusing on the binary IC sequence, we see we are moving into the realm of high energy expenditure and so heading towards 'light' bigtime. The YANG base line sets the context as more light oriented than dark. hex 35 is fire over earth and covers bringing something out of darkness and into the light (and so 'progress')

Move up in the labels hierarchy and we have a sense of direction, an ideology (guiding light) in the context of devotion to another/others.

Thus in the above notions of space/time there is the relationship of energy/time, reflecting bandwidth/time.

> Compared to animal consciousness, human consciousness is more yang.

OUR current consciousness is so, for sure. We are still learning ;-)

The tiny zebra fish works the SAME as we do re hemisphere dynamics on KNOWN/UNKNOWN mappings. The difference is in the resolution skills, the PRECISION, and the use of labels, universalisation, combined with 24/7 consciousness rather than 'snippets' of awareness (seconds, minutes, hours).

Thus yangness is reflected in handedness etc etc where the dominating hemisphere, the one associated with high precision, and so XOR, controls limb use etc etc, reflecting universalisation and so a surrender of context-sensitivity for the precision of universalisation.

The success of universalisation has been due to the over-use of the XOR function and with that has come consciousness as an agent of mediation of 'mindless' stimulus/response.

The issues are in the PARTS focus that has created its own little world of labels! This realm is the realm of transcendence but also of psychosis.

> Humans have a fine grained awareness and understanding of time
> sequences, processes, causal relations and so on. This enables them to
> learn from the past, to predict, make plans, understand how processes
> work, invent and use tools and develop sophisticated sequential
> languages (and music).
> The downside of this is that we seem to lose contact with the 'now'.
>

I think the reverse - we overexaggate NOW and so lose contact with the past, our history, and the 'now' of our primate, our species, nature. The species/Taoist/Zen 'NOW' is not centered within the individual, and so XORed, it is AND oriented where the moment is all around you as well as in you. That connection includes history and so now is all past and future as one through the associations to what could be, could have been etc. as well as what was/is/could be. (the latter comes out of XOR so overall we are dealing with an IOR version of 'now'!)

In the brain, as we process information so we appear to 'frame' it into 200ms slices (I think it is the hippocampus that does this) - IOW we are cutting the 'whole' to deal with it. Without that cut there is no notion of past/now/future, or else it is 'vague', more AM than FM, multi context compared to single context. (Note that as we move 'up' the spine and into the brain so we move from high cycles brain waves to low - we 'slow' things down to deal with them)

This cutting is linked to styles of mapping, vectoring or way-pointing, with the latter being less precise, more LOCAL context oriented - vectoring being more focused on use of universals (sun, moon, stars etc). That mapping appears to be associated with territorial dynamics - basic 'me' vs 'not me' processing - and those dynamics go WAY back in that we share them with fish etc etc.

This NOW/Past-Future dichotomy reflects the bandwidth/time dynamic. We use division of labour etc (be it through specialist neurons or specialist people) to increase bandwidth and so understand something 'NOW'. If we cannot do this then we convert back to using TIME, past/future to resolve the issue. (as we see happen in sensory paradox processing where we oscillate across the seemingly two objects sharing the one space)

Increased fragementation of the species into 'conscious individuals' means an increase on an EXCHANGE focus (five-phase METAL focus) - and our technology is used to aid in increasing bandwidth, BUT with all of that comes an increasingly competitive perspective - "AND" social links get broken, extended families collapse etc., to give way to highly concentrated fundamentalist perspectives where family is strong within the group but the isolationism of the group to all others elicits 'issues', and the social dynamics within the fundamentalism distort socialisations and so introduce 'extreme' perspectives re education, service etc., as all is focused on the differentiated 'one' ;-)

> The awareness of animals is perhaps (at least) as 'crisp' as ours but
> it mainly operates in space. Yin. Differentiation in time, which seems
> to require a more complex neurology, is much less developed. Animals
> have as far as we know only a vague notion of past/future, especially
> long term (history), and dealing with processes is for the most part
> automatized, unconscious, instinctive.
> The upside if this is that their now awareness is probably much
> brighter than ours.
>

It is the development of memory systems that gets into issues of how far 'back' we go. See the IDM page on "Dimension of Precision" where summing of past context frames (irrespective of frame size, be it milliseconds or millenia) generates a pattern, a spiral format, reflecting development - a summary:

Thus, from the mindless, no memory we have 'moments' as:

...1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,

Use the LAST frame of context to affect the current and we have:

...1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,... - beginning of an awareness of sequence, cause-effect etc

Use the last TWO frames and we get:

...1,2,3,5,8,13,21,... - the fibonacci sequence. Allows for structural development with minimum energy use over time.

Keep doing this to eventually include ALL frames back to the 'beginning' and we get:

...1,2,4,8,16,32,64,.... - the binary sequence

The 'spiral' that develops from the fib level onwards, with its general circle form, changes into an SQUARE spiral by the time we focus on the binary sequence level - and so XOR oriented comes out.

IOW 'developed' systems will show development of binary processes, high energy XOR focus. Change scales and we find this at the level of RNA/DNA coding. Transcending this position takes one into the realm of complexity/chaos dynamics and so thwe realm of emergence (and so the competitive, high energy mediation dynamics is 'creatative').

Re "AND" consciousness, the overall individual consciousness focus is on MEDIATION skills. The 'mindless' mediation levels are in developments that span billions of years as compared to our mindful mediations that span decades, years, weeks! ;-)

What is of note is that our XOR thinking is one step REMOVED from the reality to which our species-nature has adapted. When all of our experiments/ideas etc come out of the XOR, without recognising the AND, so we come up with 'paradox' and so 'wave/particle' dualities etc.

As PRIMATES so our natural realm is the "AND" - driven by instincts and very limited differentiating to allow for some 'parts' processing, some tool use and reasoning, but NO improvement in life style etc, no drive to 'REPLACE' universally.

Our XOR-dominated, mediation oriented, consciousness is thus an exaggeration of our primate nature and indicates its 'mutant' form in that it allows for domination of context, replacement of context with one's own.

If we look at the zoology, there appears to be instincts of PROTECTION that have been exaggerated to allow for individualisation etc. and so EXPLOITATION where those instincts serve as a source for our sense of the spiritual. IOW there is a 'vague' sense of 'connectedness' that can become individualised to what we see in our primate cousins. From there on we move 'away' from integrating with the planet, we have moved to trying to take it over without consideration of the consequences of that act.

Chris.

 

[martin]

Hi Chris,

I see now that I was a bit yinny

in my last post when I used the word 'animal'. I meant somewhat 'higher' animals, not primitive organisms that have only a very limited capacity to differentiate.
Dogs, cats, apes, horses and the like. Perhaps some fishes and insects can be included - don't know exactly where to draw the line - but I'm far away from the 'zero', the bottom line where there is no differentiation at all.
So I stay within a limited phylogenetic range and that means that yin/yang is indeed more like -1/+1 and not 0/infinite, as you said. It's not symmetrical, though, because I link it with the asymmetrical space/time dichotomy.
This link is speculative and open to debate, of course, but perhaps it makes more sense to you within this limited range.
I cannot be very precise (!) at the moment but the basic idea is that I would like to 'disentangle' these dichotomies:

more aware - less aware
more yang - more yin
more differentiation - less differentiation

Regarding the last two, the proposal is: yin also differentiates and no less than yang, but in another domain (space).
That would imply that the two dichotomies are more or less independent, at least within the limited range that I mentioned earlier.

If that makes sense remains to be seen ..

There is yet another yinny thing (does this ever end?) that might cause confusion. I label (based on the 8th wing, iirc) the trigrams 000, 011, 101 and 110 (the 'mother' and the 3 'sisters') as yin and the others as yang. IDM apparently follows the other convention that labels the trigrams according to the bottom line: 000, 011, 010 and 001 are (more) yin, the others are (more) yang.
For instance, I see 101 as yin (or more yin than yang), so I think of it as contractive (in time, I would say). But in IDM 101 is more yang and hence it expands ...

 

[lightofdarkness]

Hi Martin,

you wrote:
> So I stay within a limited phylogenetic range and that means that
> yin/yang is indeed more like -1/+1 and not 0/infinite, as you said.
> It's not symmetrical, though, because I link it with the asymmetrical
> space/time dichotomy.

The asymmetric dichotomy elicits hierarchy where each LEVEL in the hierarchy is 1:1 and the whole hierarchy reflects MANY TO ONE. The higher up the hierarchy so the more energy is required so the more time is marginalised into a mechanistic form, or even no form other than the sense of the 'eternal'. This is useful in identifying universals, statics, but can distort one's perception of the 'big picture' where we have to include time in its thermodynamic, arrow-of-time, focus.

> This link is speculative and open to debate, of course, but perhaps it
> makes more sense to you within this limited range.
> I cannot be very precise (!) at the moment but the basic idea is that
> I would like to 'disentangle' these dichotomies:
>
> more aware - less aware
> more yang - more yin
> more differentiation - less differentiation
>
> Regarding the last two, the proposal is: yin also differentiates and
> no less than yang, but in another domain (space).

We cannot escape the PAIR nature other than bring out the focus on PRECISION. The BIASES of brain dynamics, the asymmetry, reflects the integration of the PAIR of a dichotomy where the differentiation of that pair is orthogonal to the derivation of the qualities. In recursion the 'vertical' movement of derivation has a beginning but no end. We use the HORIZONTAL, the rows, as our sources of 'meaning'. In this format so all come in PAIRS. Thus 01 is more differentiating, 43 is more integrating and both work in a differentiating context.

IOW our meaning categories are derived, secondary - just as the notion of frequency is secondary. BUT, working WITHIN that box so it all appears primary.

As such the differentiating 'dot' of yang is at the level of PARTS; when in the realm of integrating so the 'dot' size is of the whole. Using the flocking metaphor, each bird is an individual and so 'dot' precision. Each bird deals with the IMMEDIATE context, and so makes LOCAL distinctions. The SUM of that activity is reflected in the behaviour of the flock overall and differentiation is now at the size of the flock, not the individual.

This 'flock' differentiation is 'diffuse', 'general' when compared to the 'individual' differentiation and as such contains all POTENTIAL expressions. From the perspective of PARTS, of individuals, so the attention is more on the flock and its INTEGRATING dynamics of BETWEEN rather than on WITHIN.

We see these differences in drug use - amphetamines elicit integration WITHIN and so a strong sense of PERSONAL identity and so differentiation. The more serotinin-influencing drugs (ecstacy etc) focus more on integrating BETWEEN - a 'connectedness' with the context as compared to take over of the context (assertion of one's own)

IOW the 'dot' size is limited to being 'crisp' and centered in the individual as to being 'vague', centered in the group. Runner's high (aka 'god in the head' syndrome) reflects the influences of serotonin uptake shutdown such that the flood of the hormone elicits an "I have a relationship with god" effect. For amphetamines the focus is more on "I AM god".

Thus the 'dot' size for the individual is 'competitive' to the outside, strongly integrated 'within'; the 'dot' size for the group is 'cooperative' - its focus is less tight within, more focused on between.

> That would imply that the two dichotomies are more or less
> independent, at least within the limited range that I mentioned
> earlier.
>

If our species nature is representitive as 000000 then in that state, or more so what is just before it where there is no distinction, and so no differentiation, all is instincts driven - pure PUSH (as in context pushes instincts etc). 'Awareness' requires energy in that it seems to be sourced in mediation dynamics and so an increasing ability to PULL, to make choices. The differences are in association of awareness with its intent - social benefit (yin thread) or individual benefit (yang thread).

The STRUCTURAL format is in the binary sequence of hexagrams from 000000, 000001, .... to 111110, 111111 - where the boundary of awareness moves from one including 'out there' (as in family, land etc devotion to others) to a concentrated form 'in here' (devotion to self). This is all mapped in the binary tree example of recursion diagram. IOW the EXPANDING nature of 111111 is derived from the CONTRACTING of identity, from a focus on BETWEEN to one on WITHIN - more so the undifferentiated block to the differentiated (covered in Lao Tsu, #28)

The TEMPORAL format is more an oscillation of base-line dynamics. Take the binary sequence and rotate each hexagram in that sequence. Thus we get orderings of 000000, 100000, ... to ... 011111, 111111. This sequnce is in fact the result of XOR-ing all hexagrams with 01 or 02 and then sorting them in order of change, from base line to top (63 states).

As we move through time so our brains oscillate and so change context each moment, yin-yang-yin-yang. CONSCIOUSNESS can then VARY that timing and so we get different sequences (as covered in http://www.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/icmatrix.html)

This oscillation spans milliseconds but is also reflected in spanning millenia and so 'ages' - all reflecting yin-into-yang, yang-into-yin - enantiodromia at work.


> If that makes sense remains to be seen ..
>
> There is yet another yinny thing (does this ever end?) that might
> cause confusion. I label (based on the 8th wing, iirc) the trigrams
> 000, 011, 101 and 110 (the 'mother' and the 3 'sisters') as yin and
> the others as yang. IDM apparently follows the other convention that
> labels the trigrams according to the bottom line: 000, 011, 010 and
> 001 are (more) yin, the others are (more) yang.
> For instance, I see 101 as yin (or more yin than yang), so I think of
> it as contractive (in time, I would say). But in IDM 101 is more yang
> and hence it expands ...
>
>

The IDM approach is fundamentally on the recursion of yin/yang reflecting the recursion of differentiating/integrating. That process leads 'naturally' to the binary sequence as covered in the ICPlus material. That sequence is the 'ground', the general format, the STRUCTURAL format (Fu Hsi). All else is derived from that format where LOCAL CONTEXT will then elicit differences in interpretations - we try out variations, we play with the parts, and see what they get (as we do in Mathematics once we have derived a universal, we use induction to get 'more') ;-)

The yin/yang labels you attribute to the trigrams reflect a particular CONTEXT of 'family'. or more so what that represents in general where family is associated with HISTORY and so the TEMPORAL; in the binary sequence, where we start with lines, not trigrams, note that the derivation process is from the bottom line, the GENERAL, to the top line, the PARTICULAR. This adds qualitative differences to the trigrams re their position in the hexagram; and so mountain in 'lower' is stoppage/blocked, whereas mountain in 'higher' position elicits discernment - the 'refinement' being in the use of the stoppage/block to one's benefit, we move from being reactive to being proactive.

The family categories make no such distinctions and as such reflect the EXCLUSION of the general-to-particular notion 'vertically', for a focus that is horizontal (mother-eldest-middle-youngest) reflecting the temporal (oldest to youngest).

IOW the family focus is TEMPORAL, the natural focus is STRUCTURAL. IOW what is 'different' in the family focus is on links BETWEEN ("AND-ness") whereas the focus on structure is on WITHIN ("XOR-ness"). Any hierarchy in the family focus is rooted solely in AGE, that is all. The structural focus is on ENERGY more than TIME such that the 'youngest' could end up at the top of the hierarchy due to talent etc and in so doing be supported, 'served', by the rest of the family. In the temporal, even if talented, dominating etc, the ORDER must be respected. Overall, the integrating focus BETWEEN can act as a restraint on 'unbridled' development ;-)

Note in 37 the focus on tension release from rigid structure. The temporal focus in family forces a hierarchy that is RIGID, there is no possibility of changing the relationships and that is enforced with the notion of 'husband being husband, first daughter being first daughter' etc etc where in this sort of context, with everything in the right place, that structure elicits tension release, there is no competition ;-)

Chris.

 

[lightofdarkness]

Just to add some fuel to the fire ...

The XOR/AND dynamic shows us a focus on ROTATIONS - IOW if you derive a sequence using XOR, ROTATE that sequence and you get an AND pattern 'up' a hexagram rather than across. If deriving from AND, do the same to get an XOR mapping etc.

Move to the hexagrams and the raw-to-refined focus is from bottom to top (also considered as 'beginning' to 'ending'). In the family focus the oldest precedes the youngest and as such reflects reading the hexagram top to bottom - IOW we ROTATE the hexagram to get the 'temporal' pattern from oldest to youngest (and so read it in reverse to get the future .... as mentioned somewhere in the old texts ;-))

Chris.