Link to some more etymology (hexagram 3)

[martin]

Hi Chris,

More 011 for the 101 ..

'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'

I suspect that the family arrangement of trigrams (also) reflects an interpretation of yang/yin as more or less the same as male/female.
Female/male is a -1/+1 type dichotomy. This corresponds to the fact that 'female' is an independent quality, force or presence, it's not merely the absence of 'male'. The 'zero' is in the middle of the scale and it doesn't represent naught but rather a point or an area of balance or indifference.

The yin/yang dichotomy as it has come down to us from ancient times is really a mix of different dichotomies that are similar but not equal.
Some are more like 0/inf, others more like -1/+1, but it depends on context/interpretation. Light/heavy can be understood as 0/inf (light = absence of gravity or no weight) or -/+ (light as levitation, flying).
In dark/light dark can be only an absence of light (0/inf) or a metaphor for 'dark' influences and then it's more like -/+.

Apart from that we often convert 0/inf to -/+ by limiting the range of the scale and defining a relative 'zero' within that range.
So the fact that there is minimum temperature (zero Kelvin) is usually only of theoretical interest to us because we live far way from that minimum. We define our 'zero' depending on our purpose or interest. Water of 80 degrees Celsius is way above 'zero' (much too hot) for taking a bath but it is below 'zero' (too cold) when we want to boil an egg in it.

I suppose that the IDM interpretation of yin/yang is more like nothing/something, where yin is treated as an absence (of differentiation) and not or much less as an independent presence. This gives rise to 0/inf scales. Pure yin, the 'zero', is nothing, naught. Below that we cannot go.
True?

 

[lightofdarkness]

Hi Martin,

note that the development of male/female has its roots in the female - meitosis before meiosis ;-)

the female focus is on basic form and so structural elements that are repeating, sameness. The male focus is the introduction of high energy mediation, and so the XOR/competitive and so difference in expression (genetic diversity allows for differences in expression but retains core architecture; our brains get gender 'formatted' through hormones etc).

Symbolically, the archetypal is of forms that focus on replication through asexual or androgynous methods - light vs dark. The typal comes out of moving the dark next to the light and so a cooperative focus, and so diversity in replication; as such, the price of diversity has been the surrendering of immortality - and so the introduction of death.

Keep pushing and we go full circle where the male/female is now teamed and focused on immortality! ;-)

The 'mixing' of dichotomies we have inherited from the 'ancients' reflects the ad-hoc manner in their derivation. Through analysis of our neurology so now our maps can be 'better' - this every I Ching text can use XOR to expand on the nature of particular hexagram as defined by analogies to all of the others.

The question as to which focus to use, symmetric or asymmetric, is a matter of context deciding - IOW what ever fits 'best' ;-) In some circumstances the qualities focused upon will set the context, in other situations BOTH forms are usable and the external context will elicit the meaning. The point with universals is that they need a LOCAL context to give them 'meaning' - OR they develop in their own context - e.g. pure mathematics as compared to applied. There is an issue here where, if allowed to create one's "own little world", one can go a bit 'gaga' ;-)

you wrote:
>
> I suppose that the IDM interpretation of yin/yang is more like
> nothing/something, where yin is treated as an absence (of
> differentiation) and not or much less as an independent presence. This
> gives rise to 0/inf scales. Pure yin, the 'zero', is nothing, naught.
> Below that we cannot go.
> True?
>

yes and no. As we move towards the realm of POTENTIALS so we move towards the realm of our species-nature and so the unconscious/instincts-driving area of our being. We are not aware of this area and as such we get 'nothing' when we try to sense it - but we become aware of it when context pushes one of our primate buttons and we respond 'instinctively' and our consciousness is wondering what the hell is going on! "Why did I say/do THAT!?"

Science allows us to get an idea of what this realm is about, as does the I Ching in that it reflects this realm as 'mindless' species-nature processes. IOW 'mirroring', and so copying/reflecting/replicating, is an instinct and associates with the under-exaggerated properties of Lake (mirror neurons are in, for example, our left hemisphere and associate with mimicry - as we see in primate behaviour).

The exaggeration in consciousness of Lake gets us into the behaviours covered in lake-based hexagrams where these are no longer instincts, we introduce mediation dynamics and so details processing which allow for us to use mirroring to 'deal' with opposition (38), as we use mirroring socially in 'show business' relationships as well as in basic sexual reproduction to ensure copies of self (58)! ;-) - IOW we move from reactive to proactive.

Our consciousness is PARTS oriented, it appears to have emerged from the complexity in the neurology to parts processing - spectrum exchange, serial communications, DELAY.

When we fold back to the species-nature position, so there is only the IMMEDIATE and so no awareness, things are just 'done' - stimulus/response. There is no access to this area other than through intuitions and fine training where we refine the instincts through details derived in consciousness, and in doing so start to operate 'smoothly' in any context - we no longer waste energy fighting the context, our skills allow us to adapt quickly, smoothly.

Our consciousness becomes AWARE of that smoothness, we can sit back and watch ourselves 'do our thing'!

The only issue with the 'species-nature' IC is a possible loss in resolution power - something that consciousness, with its focus on 'dot' precision helps us with.

Chris.

 

[yly2pg1]

Hi Chris,

From the point of IDM, how are you going to explain that the meaning of the Chinese character is terse?

 

[lightofdarkness]

I assume you mean my reference to 38:

"K'UEI : seperate, oppose; contrary, mutually exclusive; distant from, absent, remote; animosity, anger; astronomical or polar opposition; the end of an axis, 180 degrees apart.:"

In hexagram 38 we find that the adoption of a facade can ensure that one can follow their own path (which is here in direct opposition to 'out there') whilst appearing socially acceptable. Here a mirror is thrown-up such that those opposing see the individual as a reflection of themselves and the opposition diminishes. This is not a limitation imposed for development but more for survival. This can however lead to a degree of personal isolation; whereupon the mirror starts to work inwards (see line 6 comments below).

Contextually, we develop from a loosening of structure into intense self-reflection and opposition that we deal with by reflection.

In IDM terms, and so UNIVERSALLY, ANYTHING that fits "expansive bounding in a context of expansive bonding" fits the qualities of the hexagram.

This is interpretable as "from/with self-reflection comes a sense of direction, an ideology". Self-reflection is to be taken literally as well as figuratively.

Five-Phase Relationships : The trigram of Lake reflects Exchange (cooperative). The trigram of Fire reflects Distribution. Cooperative Exchange through Distribution is expressed as 'mirroring' - to deal with opposition one 'reflects' others and so they see you as if themselves.


38 is the goal of 56 (or 'how do I 38? - 56' How do I deal with oppositions, with mirroring? Remain loyal to your belief)

Line 1
"Troubles will disappear. Losing one's strength, do not pursue it, it will return on it's own. Observing wicked people is not harmful."
Line 2
"Meeting authority whilst approaching a public place is not harmful." [Full of potential?]
Line 3
"Despite having one's possessions taken and one's self physically injured, things eventually change."
Line 4
"In personal isolation, one unexpectedly meets and develops a friendship."
Line 5
"Troubles will disappear. One's kin cut through the surface. Where is the fault in doing this?"
Line 6
"In personal isolation, one's beliefs become corrupted. What one sees is not necessarily true. At first tempted to attack, one becomes aware of one's unjustified actions and stops. Tension is released as new possible alliances appear."

Genetics:

00 :: (02) : What is this hexagrams's potential form? :: 38
01 :: (24) : How does this hexagram 'start', express 'beginning'? :: 64
02 :: (07) : How does this hexagram express uniformity, establishment of? :: 21
03 :: (19) : How does this hexagram express approaching the 'high'; defer to the 'low'? :: 35
04 :: (15) : How does this hexagram level things out, keep words close to facts? :: 14
05 :: (36) : How does this hexagram protect its 'light' when not its time? :: 50
06 :: (46) : How does this hexagram become more entangled with something/someone? :: 30
07 :: (11) : How does this hexagram balance/harmonise, mediate? :: 56
08 :: (16) : How does this hexagram express foresight/planning? :: 41
09 :: (51) : How does this hexagram express surprise, enlightenment, shock? :: 4
10 :: (40) : How does this hexagram express tension release through relaxing structure? :: 27
11 :: (54) : How does this hexagram expend early energy, imaturity? :: 23
12 :: (62) : How does this hexagram express overacting to establish unconditional loyalty? :: 26
13 :: (55) : How does this hexagram deal with abundance/overflowing? :: 18
14 :: (32) : How does this hexagram express commitment? :: 22
15 :: (34) : How does this hexagram actively invigorate others? :: 52
16 :: (08) : How does this hexagram passively attract? :: 10
17 :: (03) : How does this hexagram 'sprout'? :: 6
18 :: (29) : How does this hexagram assert containment/control? :: 25
19 :: (60) : How does this hexagram standardise? :: 12
20 :: (39) : How does this hexagram obstruct, go against, stand up to, the flow? :: 1
21 :: (63) : How does this hexagram complete, 'get it right'? :: 44
22 :: (48) : Where does this hexagram get its nutrition, what sustains it, keeps it going? :: 13
23 :: (05) : How does this hexagram wait for opportunity to come? :: 33
24 :: (45) : How does this hexagram celebrate its 'faith'? :: 61
25 :: (17) : How does this hexagram find a faith? What is its faith? :: 59
26 :: (47) : How does this hexagram integrate with the context, be it by choice or otherwise? :: 42
27 :: (58) : How does this hexagram express itself intensely, self-reflect? :: 20
28 :: (31) : How does this hexagram 'woo', express restrained enticement? :: 9
29 :: (49) : How does this hexagram reveal, unmask? :: 57
30 :: (28) : How does this hexagram express excess, go beyond what is required? :: 37
31 :: (43) : How does this hexagram 'seed', spread the word? :: 53
32 :: (23) : How does this hexagram 'housekeep', clear chaff to bring out the wheat? :: 54
33 :: (27) : What is the basic, skelatal form of this hexagram, The mud from which it has emerged? :: 40
34 :: (04) : How does this hexagram learn social skills? :: 51
35 :: (41) : How does this hexagram achieve clarity, concentration, distillation? :: 16
36 :: (52) : How does this hexagram express blocking, discernment? :: 34
37 :: (22) : What does this hexagram look like, how does it present itself to the outside? :: 32
38 :: (18) : How does this hexagram correct corruption, express that correction? :: 55
39 :: (26) : How does this hexagram express 'holding firm' to traditions? :: 62
40 :: (35) : How does this hexagram bring something into the 'light'? :: 19
41 :: (21) : How does this hexagram resolve problems? :: 7
42 :: (64) : How does this hexagram remain 'open', mis-sequence? :: 24
43 :: (38) : How does this hexagram 'mirror', deal with opposition? :: 2
44 :: (56) : How does this hexagram demonstrate conditional loyalty; loyalty at a distance? :: 11
45 :: (30) : How does this hexagram express guidance/direction setting? :: 46
46 :: (50) : How does this hexagram express conversion of the raw to the cooked, transformation? :: 36
47 :: (14) : How does this hexagram manage from the centre? Direct operations? Push ideology? :: 15
48 :: (20) : How does this hexagram elicit admiration and so invigorate others passively? :: 58
49 :: (42) : How does this hexagram reflect augmentation? :: 47
50 :: (59) : How does this hexagram make things clear, dispell illusions? lift the fog? :: 17
51 :: (61) : How does this hexagram express empathy? yielding, soft core, hard exterior? :: 45
52 :: (53) : How does this hexagram express gradual development, maturity? :: 43
53 :: (37) : How does this hexagram reflect rigid structure as a form of tension release? :: 28
54 :: (57) : How does this hexagram cultivate and become influencial? :: 49
55 :: (09) : How does this hexagram express making small gains to be noticed? :: 31
56 :: (12) : How does this hexagram neutralise attacks on its core beliefs? :: 60
57 :: (25) : How does this hexagram stand up to say its piece, ignoring consequences, disentangle? :: 29
58 :: (06) : How does this hexagram compromise, meet half way? :: 3
59 :: (10) : How does this hexagram traverse a path carefully? :: 8
60 :: (33) : How does this hexagram draw-in its enemies, competitively entice? :: 5
61 :: (13) : How does this hexagram express association with the likeminded? :: 48
62 :: (44) : How does this hexagram persuade/seduce? :: 63
63 :: (01) : How does this hexagram express singlemindedness, competitiveness? :: 39


Chris.

 

[lightofdarkness]

BTW given the statement off my website re:

"38 is the goal of 56 (or 'how do I 38? - 56' How do I deal with oppositions, with mirroring? Remain loyal to your belief)"

means that if you remain loyal to your beliefs you will NATURALLY elicit opposition and to deal with that without causing conflict, and so be cooperative rather than competitive, you need to use mirroring.

Chris.

 

[lightofdarkness]

BTW BTW ...

for the goal perspective see:

http://www.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/binhex.html

 

[yly2pg1]

Hi Chris,

38?
Maybe, maybe not.

My question is, having gone so far with 4Bs, I am still a bit vague on how this 4Bs processes/chemistry(?) explain the terse-oriented meaning in the Chinese character. IOW, how you can put the AM/FM dichotomy plus AND/XOR brain dynamics (which underpins the 4Bs) to those people like me whose mother tongue is the Chinese language.

 

[yly2pg1]

Is it true by learning the Chinese language, one will develop certain propensity in their mindset? E.g. less precision/XOR, more approximation/AND.

 

[lightofdarkness]

Any 'tongue' is the LOCAL expression of universals where behind the potentially infinite local words are universal qualities.

LOCAL conditions will then 'skew' expressions and the mix of expressions, be they in words and script as in English etc or in words and symbols where we combine the 'immediate' with the 'delayed'.

The spoken word of Chinese dialects is 'free' of the written symbols (or traditionally so, pinyin tries to change that to bring out a more phonetics focus) so LOCAL precision is maintained but universal is dependent on vision - and vision is less precise than audition; as such any communications system that is more visual than auditory will lack precision but can compensate with its holistic, its immediate, form - IOW there is context-sensitivity and so a dependency that can be established across the collective.

IOW it may take me a BOOK to describe a waterfall that can be 'grasped' through a picture - but in that book will be details not necessarily covered in the picture.

The association on remaining "AND" oriented, as vision does, allows for a development of a perspective that is rooted in history, the family ties to the past etc. Furthermore, in long established collectives, so they can move from a 'waring states' period to a more cooperative perspective given time - and China as a nation has a more or less 2000 year history - same written form, different local dialects.

In the USA, only 200+ years old, it has its roots in the differentiating, the search for 'freedom'; the need to ESCAPE. Its traditional mindset has always been on a place to 'start again', to forget/rewrite the past, to DENY the past, change name, cut all ties - start again. DENY family/ancestors etc etc other than one's immediate 'kind'; IOW a focus on cutting, differentiating and in that focus be 'clear', 'just' etc etc

With that focus comes what develops from the cutting, and so creation of borders - complexity/chaos dynamics.

As such, the USA/Western mindset is more XOR oriented; high precision focus that is at times TOO high, idealist, to the extent that a fortune is spent on protecting one life within the collective and yet anyone outside of that collective is 'ignored' - does not exist and so their death is of no consequence (but if one american dies in some foreign country all hell breaks loose!)

With the XOR mentality comes an idealist, isolationist perspective, fragmentation, fundamentalism, will form. There is a focus on 'transcendence', on replacement, betterment, etc but only for those 'inside' the bounds of the collective. Outside all is exploited for the benefit of those immediately inside.

As China becomes increasingly powerful socioeconomically, if it loses its AND-ness then it becomes increasingly XOR-oriented. Marxism 'fitted' the AND nature but is not focused on replacing capitalism, its focus is on balancing-out capitalism ( a focus it shares with conservationists and interventionists) - Marx/Lenin where in fact IDEALISTS - their mindset was 'capitalist' overall withtheir focus on REPLACEMENT - that is not possible, you cannot replace exploitation, but you CAN balance it, neutralise its extremes and so PROTECT. IOW coexist with capitalism (small world networks studies validate this perspective and so validate YANG-YIN dynamics in the WHOLE that is T'ai Chi)

The issue is that, as a species, we need to maintain some degree of AND-ness; be a bit more pragmatic - the middle way with a slight learning to XOR just to keep things 'ticking over' ;-)

Through the IDM material I think we can gain a better perspective on AND/XOR dynamics overall, from individual to collective and so can see better where things can go, and either speed that up or delay it ;-)

The Japanese have an interesting language heritage where they mix Kana/Kanji, phonetics with images where the images came from China. The lack of tonal elements as we find in different dialects of Chinese is indicative of a more 'Western' mindset overall, more XOR, where CONTEXT is 'removed', universalised.

Note that the tonal forms in Chinese force consideration of context associations and so maintain that need to be wary of context. XOR is more into labels, and so universals, free of context, each character with four tones becomes four characters, clearly marked out and so no need for tonal modulations, no need of contextual considerations - the issue here is that that can have an affect on behaviour, no local colour can cut one off.

SO, to be born into a mindset that is more AND than XOR, or visa versa, will force 'biases' in perspectives. At least these days we are in positions to 'adjust' for those biases - be a touch more 'rational' but not too rational ;-)

AS such, the push by US capitalists to exploit China will force China to become increasingly competitive, precision oriented, and so develop an XOR mindset and so take-on the XOR mantle that includes 'assertion' of one's perspectives across as many as possible - IOW to assert the context rather than coexist with the existing!

There is the suggestion in all of this that, given the data we have, so we need to 'reconsider' our nature as a species, not as isolated collectives.

The current IDM/ICPlus work is still developing, still in need of refining - or perhaps thats just my XOR-oriented Western mind at work!? - but I think can aid in the 'reconsideration' task.

The overall dynamic in development IS Yin to Yang and then 'transcend' or 'collapse'. The collapses allow for stratification where people choose to not go on that rollercoaster again and so develop laterally!

Chris.

 

[yly2pg1]

The spoken word of Chinese dialects is 'free' of the written symbols (or traditionally so, pinyin tries to change that to bring out a more phonetics focus) so LOCAL precision is maintained but universal is dependent on vision - and vision is less precise than audition; as such any communications system that is more visual than auditory will lack precision but can compensate with its holistic, its immediate, form - IOW there is context-sensitivity and so a dependency that can be established across the collective.

So, should dialect be preserved at home?

 

[yly2pg1]

The issue is that, as a species, we need to maintain some degree of AND-ness; be a bit more pragmatic - the middle way with a slight learning to XOR just to keep things 'ticking over' ;-)

So, learning dialect could promote AND-ness and adaptability?

 

[yly2pg1]

Note that the tonal forms in Chinese force consideration of context associations
and so maintain that need to be wary of context.

What do you mean by "tonal"?
Phonetic? pinyin? or "difference in tone (sound)"?

If what you mean fall into any of these categories, I do not see that contribute to the DELAY in our brain dynamics. Really! I hope to hear more in this area if you have anything to add.

 

[yly2pg1]

Or do you mean that each character correspond to its own yin1?

In that case, i have to agree with you because you have to memorize the yin1 for each character.

 

[yly2pg1]

And, not only one has to remember the yin1, you have got to remember the character first. So, the real Kanji is a bit mujukashi!

 

[lightofdarkness]

yes - sound.

 

[lightofdarkness]

Interesting questions re dialect.

To me, dialect serves as an agent of AND-ness. Being a DIALECT it is not a 'difference' language and so is not a total break from the general language. This means that the dialect area remains part of the whole but is 'different' enough to also maintain its own identity. This reflects a focus on BONDING where each element in the bond is uniquely identifiable but behind that difference is a connection that cannot be cut without some 'residue' or 'issues' etc.

The universal WRITTEN format, using images rather than phonetics, allows for a common form of communication across the whole that can be customised locally through the association of local dialects of phonetics. As such you have two communication systems running in parallel - one for LOCAL, PRECISE, communications WITHIN groups, another is NON-LOCAL, approximate, communications ACROSS groups.

The establishment of one form of communication for ALL, and a phonetic and so strongly serialised, XOR format, will demand higher universal precision and so will FRAGMENT the whole more than what it is, more cuts are made, more borders created - bonds break to favour blends but the high precision focus will force specialisation to an extreme where the blend, the sense of universal WHOLE is applied LOCALLY. As such, over time, so the dialect forms into its own language and develops from there by importing other terms from foreign sources as well as deriving its own terms.

LOCAL dynamics, local adapt/adopt is fine but when applied globally can remove identity. The problem is that identity is a part of our being, our LOCAL nature, and as such globalisation can be felt as some form of de-identification LOCALLY. That can be interpreted as a competitive act and so develops 'us vs them' issues - more fragmentation.

I think the issues come down to recognising the threads of the LOCAL and the NON-LOCAL run in parallel and as such are not in competition, they need to be in cooperation, IOW differentiations aid in determinging aspects of both threads, both paths, and from there 'refine' and re-integrate these threads to make a 'smooth' path to develop on etc.

This gets us into issues of OSCILLATIONS of XOR/AND dynamics and their EXPRESSION as IOR. The I Ching maps this out in that, using the binary sequence, all of the hexagrams are parts expressed at the same time, where CONTEXT favours a particular sorting of hexagrams from best fit to worst fit. We can split this into two threads, YANG and LOCAL vs YIN and NON-LOCAL. As YANG is sorted explicitly, so it sorts YIN implicitly, and visa versa - IOW the threads make up a double helix-like pattern, each hexagram linked to some other on the other thread or strand (the spiral reflecting the movement through time - that said, the interpretation is more of a square spiral than 'round').

The I Ching, as a language, reflects the local dialect vs the global speech in that it allows for their representation as a chinese character does. There needs to be SOME form of LOCAL nature to elicit a sense of wholeness that has local colour - if there is only a universal nature expressed locally then it is superficial, stereotyping dominates etc in that a universal context will use the language of universals to communicate and as such will appear to be 'shallow'! - a bit like communicating using pure mathematics rather than applied, using universal hexagrams without local content.

The price of universalisation is this development of 'shallowness', there is no depth in that the depth comes in the local colours. (depth in universals is in the self-referencing and so increased specialisation that requires understanding of the internals of the universal to a point where it is no longer practical for most). The use of stereotyping is useful, keeps things 'simple' but also demands everyone thinks the same and so is very XOR in approach, you are type X or Y; Period. Forever. That is competitive more so than cooperative. It is also 'dismissive' and so can be 'alienating'.

A local LANGUAGE would be competitive when compared to a local DIALECT where in the latter the bonding element allows for some degree of cooperation present.

The BLEND/BOUND focus is XOR, the BOND/BIND focus more AND. Mapping out their combinations through the IC allows us to focus on the qualities that come out of the mixing. BONDING gives us discernment and intense expression/self-reflection. BINDING gives us cultivation and innovation. These are cooperative and so in SOCIAL dynamics need to be focused upon in mapping developments. IOW a DIALECT is bonding and cooperative, a 'new' language is part of the bounding/blending realm and so more competitive.

Our education systems maintain language IN GENERAL but we allow for local forms, creole-like languages to develop within each generation. Being creole-like they are not clear cut, they reflect more a 'dialect' but one that spans a generation, is TIME related, rather than a multi-generative collective speaking a dialect (and so WITHIN that collective can develop 'time' dialects ;-)).

I think some of the above answers your questions - but raise more! ;-)

Chris.

 

[yly2pg1]

The BLEND/BOUND focus is XOR, the BOND/BIND focus more AND.
Mapping out their combinations through the IC allows us to focus on the qualities
that come out of the mixing.

BONDING gives us discernment and intense expression/self-reflection.
BINDING gives us cultivation and innovation.

So, IDM in the Chinese character and grammar:

(1) Character (Kanji) is made up of BLENDING and BOUNDING processes.

(2) Ci2 (vocabulary) is made up of BONDING process

(3) A sentence is made up of BINDING processes.

 

[yly2pg1]

Hi Chris, something back to basic.
Pls comment:

BLEND = new Yang (?)
BOUND = old Yang (?)
BOND = old Yin (?)
BIND = new Yin (?)

Could you link them up with some of chemical bondings:

ionic
covalent
Van der Waals
Hydrogen
??

Could we form an analogy here with 4Bs?

 

[lightofdarkness]

> Hi Chris, something back to basic.
> Pls comment:
>
> BLEND = new Yang (?)
> BOUND = old Yang (?)
> BOND = old Yin (?)
> BIND = new Yin (?)
>

yes and no. The DERIVATION process is from a WHOLE as general (t'ai chi). Then comes a whole through differentiation (yang) vs a whole through integration (yin). Then comes WHOLE/PART and THEN comes the relationships (4). Using bits we have:

(1) WHOLE (0 - reflects potentials)
(2) integrating whole (0) / differentiating whole (1)
(3) integrating whole (00), integrating part (01) / differentiating part (10), differentiating whole (11)
(4) 000, 001, .... 110, 111

That said, it is possible to start from the relationships perspective where WHOLE translates to static relationships, PART to dynamic relationships and the objects dont come out until (4). Howeverm, given T'ai Chi is discrete, an 'object' ("with extension") extracted from that 'without extension' (Wu Chi) so the whole part relationships flow is followed:

0
0 / 1 [whole / whole]
00, 01 / 10, 11 [whole, part ...
000, 001, 010, 011 / 100, 101, 110, 111

the 'logic' is in what is comes out of each pair - IOW once you have whole/part, what comes out of the middle? all that can come out of the middle is 'something' that is discrete but not totally 'seperate' or 'removable' - IOW a BOND, a STATIC relationship. In the recursion that 'position' is shown to develop from the WHOLE not the PART such that BOND is an aspect of wholeness, a REPRESENTITIVE of wholeness - e.g. a marriage certificate represents the bond as 'eternal' but is not the real relationship of two blending to become, or trying to become, one. In mathematics BONDING relates to irrational numbers where those numbers reflect a sharing of space to elicit a form of some kind. BINDING is more a sharing of time (imaginary numbers)

Reviewing your chemisty associations:

(1) BOND/BIND: covalent bonds are IDM BONDING in that we share electrons and through that sharing assert identity that is 'robust' - 'forever' if allowed. Ionic bonds on the other hand are more BINDS in that they are easily split, as sodium and chlorine in salt when the salt is placed in water. As such these sorts of bonds are binds where we can undo the binds and lose nothing, each element keeps its identity - in bonding you can/will lose identity when the bond is broken. In human behaviour, binding is like a business contract and so spans TIME; bonding has its focus on sharing SPACE. In binding, when the contract is over the parties concerned go their seperate ways with no 'issues' since all has been layed down in the contract. In BONDING, as in a marriage, there are issues when a 'split' comes about if ever, the emotional elements are not covered in the marriage certificate other than "for better or for worse". In modern times, with the increase in ease in fragmentation, so we see 'pre-nuptial' agreements coming out! - there is 'business' before pleasure ;-) BIND before we BOND!

(2) BOUND: I would say that Van der Waals are closer to BOUND - they reflect dynamics across molecules but dont 'mix' - they can form a lattice-like structure but is dynamic and the 'cut' between the molecules reflect the 'boundary' condition for BOUNDING - with an expanding/contracting boundary dynamic so that can work through oscillations etc. but retain order and so distinctions - as molecules approach and withdraw from each other so they are reflecting the 'expand'/'contract' nature of bounding.

(3) BLEND: OTOH, Hydrogen bonding reflects more a BLEND focus - e.g. water molecules. There is a lot of energy required to break these sorts of bonds, where from a group of water molecules as 'one' we can extract each member - but still water. It is the polar focus, of positive vs negative, that reflects the core 'heaven-earth' dynamic if you like and so a focus on purity etc. Note that the change of liquid to vapour is a change of TRANSFORMATION, a property associated with blending (yang side, change core self) but there is also a sense of TRANSITION (change expression, retain core 'self' - 'yin' format)

 

[lightofdarkness]

To make the point re Van der Waals, the focus is on properties of ATTRACTION/REPULSION and so ACCEPTANCE/REJECTION - attributes of BOUNDING. (e.g. hex 22 focus etc)

The dynamics ensures there is always 'space' inbetween and as such a boundary.

attraction relates emotionally with being 'one of my gang' and so of acceptance/direction-setting/ideology etc but still 'discrete'. Rejection covers protecting 'my gang', keeping others 'out' or 'forced enclosure' to keep someone in (47). thus with rejection comes a focus on containment and control.

Chris.

 

[yly2pg1]

chemical bonding
It is important to understand that chemical bonding is almost never totally ionic or totally covalent. Chemical bonds will have some traits of each type of bond. Bond types are often expressed as a percentage of each type of bond.

How you further elaborate that in the BOND/BIND chemistry, say in human languages?

 

[lightofdarkness]

The mixing of the 4bs due to recursion ensures that we dont have 'pure' bonds, or more so the mixing outnumbers the 'pure' forms - as hexagrams reflect the mixing of yin/yang.

at the level of hexagrams, the pure binary sequence, the format is of eight octets, each with one 'pure' form and seven variations reflecting the mixing with all of the others - this is then extended into 4096, 16+million etc etc

For percentages reflected in the IC hexagrams, see http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond/index1.html

(or it might be index2 .... cannot recall of the top of my head!)

 

[yly2pg1]

So, if i learn a new character in Chinese, how the character is stored in my brain? A water++ molecules is twisted with certain orientation/spin?

If I have been getting used to the traditional way of I Ching, the Van der Waals effect of a cloud of brain water++ molecules will 'bound' me and impede the new way of exploring I Ching with IDM?

When i converse in Chinese, my brain atoms and molecules will have to take part in a series of electron sharing and transfer with frequency modulated to the specific water++ molecules (for the right kanji)?

 

[lightofdarkness]

wow - I got that link really wrong! ;-)

it should be:

http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond/tao1a.html

As for learning etc need a focus on memory processes.

If one has had exposure to the 'traditional' IC and strongly held it to be a universal rather than a part, a local expression of a universal, then there WILL be 'issues' in dealing with the IDM material. I Dont consider ICPlus as some sort of 'replacement' for the traditional IC - it is a universal and as such can add in appreciation of the IC - IOW it coexists with traditional, local, perspectives.

Conversation in one's "mother" tongue utilises different brain areas that when speaking a second language.

Add-in the differences in, say, Mandarin vs English, and you will get different dynamics.

see:

http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/doc_WTD002864.html

Note that a rich supply of universal labels is 'left brain' oriented due to the focus on discreteness, single context thinking, universals thinking.

The dependencies, the AND states in other languages, such as Chinese can elicit right as well as left.

From the IDM work, it is this focus on 'dot' precision in English that makes a difference in character overall (European languages would reflect the same sorts of biases although french/italian indicate difference to English/German etc)

Chris.

 

[yly2pg1]

So, can i say everytime i try to form a new sentence, my brain works as if forming a new fresh universal?

 

[lightofdarkness]

Not necessarily. The local context education system will come up with rules, grammars that guide local expressions in general. Thus the sentence/phrase structure of noun-verb-noun or noun-noun-verb etc acts as a universal WITHIN which we function (and the different combinations operate within the universal of differentiate/integrate - LOTS of hierarchy).

Innovative perspectives can act to unsettle the structure; adaptive perspectives will add some 'colour' and so a touch of difference but stay within the rules.

That said, in the more universals oriented collectives, with a focus on high precision, there is a focus on universal phrases - a common theme in the USA and other 'exchange' oriented collectives. Thus, out of a local moment can come a phrase that goes on to become a universal BUT only within the overall collectives that make up the socioeconomic system - IOW "I'll be back" comes from the "Terminator" movies such that exposure to those movies will seed the phrase and it gets embedded in the collective and as such expresses some of the collective's overall psyche. (IOW the whole phrase is a 'precise' expression in that it reflects so much in so little)

Given enough of these phrases, whole conversations can be made-up of linking these phrases together; as such originality in expression is limited - preference is to use the phrases of one's heroes/collective rather than of one's own making, sloganism develops, it is, after all, energy-conserving! Interestingly this reflects an increase in context dependence where the context is focused on universals.

The development of idioms etc gets into this but they can be subtle and 'deep' at times (the chinese focus on four-character idioms comes to mind, reflecting a challenge to get it into four characters) - OTOH the universal phrases, being universals, can come across as shallow.

I think that with an increase in overall universalisation so 'subtle' idioms lose their use - are marginalised in favour of the more 'efficient' universal forms where "efficency" is in NOT having to think - it is all 'in your face' such that subtle elements dissapear.

The dynamics of brain oscillations is across a dimension mapping the KNOWN (differentiated) from the UNKNOWN (integrating bias, or more so the undifferentiated). When dealing with the unknown or vague/approximate there is a focus on LOCAL context to try and see any links that can aid in converting the unknown to the known, and so yin to yang, implicit to explicit etc etc. As things become increasingly KNOWN, and so labelled, the feedback loop encourages more 'knowing' to take place until all is labelled! - IOW as we move from yin to yang so each new context is increasingly yang oriented but considered to be yin in the context of the future!

The more experiences of the KNOWN so the more 'universal' it becomes - if I detect something 'everywhere' then it is considered a universal. This moves us into the realm of instincts/habits where we will habituate to sameness, over-differentiate differences. As such our instincts are 'universals' in that they become hard-coded and so are supposed to fit into whatever context I am exposed to. BUT if my context is 'limited' then from WITHIN my perspective these instincts are universals, but seen from the OUTSIDE they are 'local' ;-)

In our development the idea is to have as many experiences as possible in youth and so develop 'good' habits/instincts covering a wide range of possibilities. When we get old, and so lots of neurons die, the habits/instincts keep us going such that the ROUTINE is acceptable and easily delt with - OTOH novelty can be 'upsetting'. To avoid too much novelty it is 'adviced' to have as many experiences possible in youth/middle age and so in old age the 'routine' is wide in scope ;-)

 

[yly2pg1]

As we grow older, we tend to lose memory. So, people like me will forget some or more written characters though most of the time I may still remember the tone of the character. So, most Chinese will have problem to write some/more Chinese characters after several years of not writing the Chinese character (but still able to read the Chinese newspaper and converse in Chinese).

Is it the work of the ROUTINE?

 

[yly2pg1]

And, when we learn a character, is it hard-coded or embedded in our brain? How our brain store it and how can we gain access to it?

Or the more we use the character, the more universals are created, the easier we access the data?

 

[lightofdarkness]

In general, from the neurological level, the more a pattern of some form is repeated, the stronger recognition of that pattern becomes.

In the neuron, in its input areas, a 'bush'-like structure labeled as the dendrites, instincts/habits are encoded in the form of 'spines' that develop in the dendrites - these are like filters and a such allow context to PUSH a life form - events happen BEFORE our consciousness is aware of them in that our consciousness is not 'immediate', our speciesness is.

As data coming in to the neuron (or net etc - neurons will synchronise to fire as if a neuron! - IOW the whole group reflects itself at a high scale as if a single neuron) so it is filtered by instincts/habits. This filtering will affect the firing of the neuron as will inhibiting/exciting links to other neurons/neural networks.

Once you memorise something so it is linked to the context in which you memorised it initially and then universalised.

What this does is show us what are called 'state-specific memories' - memories only recallable when you are in the same state (context) as you were when you first experienced them.

Another form of memory is called 'flashbulb' memory - it is universal, e.g. where were you on sept 11 2001? or where were you when JFK was shot, or when John Lennon was shot etc etc etc - these memories are recallable in ANY context.

Our brains will increase bandwidth dramatically in extreme states and so encode 'unusual' events strongly.

Examinations for med students are strongly into memorisation to ensure that regardless of local context the doctor can work efficiently - offering at least a base level, efficient service... and so in med school exams if you get something wrong you lose marks rather than not get any!

(some consider med school as "here is a phonebook - memorise it".)

For diagrams on neuron dynamics etc see:

http://www.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/neuron1.png
http://www.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/neuron2.png
http://www.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/neuron3.png
http://www.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/Neuron.png

Chris.

 

[martin]

Hi Chris,

A have a question about the universality of IDM.
As far as I see IDM always starts with ONE dichotomy which is then refined recursively. Depending on the original dichotomy we get different languages (the meanings of the 'words' differ) but all those languages are structurally the same, isomorph.

So far so good, IDM can be called 'universal' in the sense that it covers all languages or categorical systems that are based on one dichotomy.
But what about 'mixed' languages that are based on two or more (relatively) independent dichotomies? IDM can only be said to cover them if we assume that all dichotomies reduce to one on some fundamental level of the mind or the nervous system.
That is a very strong assumption ...

The traditional hexagram language of the IC looks somewhat 'mixed' to me.
The lines all vary between yin and yang but in different 'fields', as if they represent more or less independent dichotomies that are not or not completely reducable to one.