Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
autumn said:...Other people find a materialist perspective to be too contrived, and remain open to the possibility of unknown, personal signficiance in divination.
autumn said:You have two choices- rationalize this- and trust your reason- that in fact this could not have happened and in fact your subconscious mind truly did know the answer- or consider that something both meaningful and purposeful is creating the answer outside of one's own consciousness.
pauku said:If I understand Chris's theory correctly, you create that answer automatically because of how the brain is wired, and in fact the whole system is created automatically because of how the brain is wired.
pakua said:Chris,
"Try the Emotional IC in these situations "
As mentioned before, I can't use those questions... I don't trust the conscious mind.
pakua said:People seem to love seeing patterns everywhere, and where none exist they make them up.
autumn said:This is my response: "Can something meaningless (random number generation) create and communicate specific meaning? No. Therefore..."
If you divine, and you believe you've received an "answer", there are two choices- either the answer was generated by your brain or it was NOT generated by your brain.
autumn said:If you pick up the telephone, same two choices. When you hear someone ask you if you'd like to have your carpets cleaned, either your brain is reacting to a stimulus from another sentient being, or it is NOT. (If it is NOT, then you are hallucinating).
autumn said:The question is this- if I ask the I-ching what is going to happen,
autumn said:and I receive an an answer I understand,
autumn said:and believe I have pre-knowledge of the event- and in fact I am correct- was my "pre- knowledge" experience elicited through focusing on the general idea of a hexagram and creating the "best fit" with my specific situation, (Chris and Freud), or did I know things I could not have known subconsciously?
autumn said:It's quite simple to test the question. You simply ask many questions about things that you cannot know the answers to, and see how accurate you are.
chris said:No. The things you ask about have structures determined by your sensory systems such that you already know a lot about them in general, the issues are in the particulars, the details and the establishing of a relationship with the context
chris said:No. More issues of feedback here in that you could mis-hear 'carpets' for 'armpits' and interpret the call differently, call in the police etc etc and all based on misinterpretation of what you brain is saying and what the stimulus is about.
chris said:what happens when you recieve and answer you dont understand?
I sense a bit of projected shame. Embrace that inner child. Healthy integration of the early childhood developmental stage should result in a balance of skepticism and open-mindedness, not disdain of openness, and not cynically labelling openness with labels designed to imply inferior, anti-intellectual thinking .chris said:- a bit of anthropomorphism going on?
Thanks for jogging my memory. There have been at least two questions- one more philosophical- the other very mundane- that were asked by one person here, and then independently by others- that had identical and near-identical hexagram results. It was really interesting. I understand it's very easily reasoned away by you,of course, and that's ok. But it's interesting to me so I'm posting it.chris said:I can ask "Is there a God" and ALL hexagrams of the IC will give me an set covering all POSSIBLE answers to that question.
martin said:Yes, but we also love to deny the existence of such patterns and the idea that what happens is on the whole random and meaningless can be very attractive sometimes.
I think, if we see an omen in everything that happens, that is illusion.
But the opposite, the belief that it is all 'coincidence' is also an illusion.
The truth - or reality - is somewhere in the middle?
Where this 'somewhere' is - today it's here, tomorrow it's there.
It seems that my 'middle' is always changing.
pakua said:Maybe we don't even need the question, just make the cast??
pauka said:I'm saying the third choice is that you make up the answer. It does not come from the subconscious mind, it either comes from creative thinking, or it comes from the hard-wiring of the brain ie you don't have a choice. Don't you think that's possible?
pakua said:""The great French molecular biologist and Nobel Prize winner, Francois Jacob, believes "the human brain is hardwired for order." We find chaos or disorder frightening")
pakua said:...Maybe we don't even need the question, just make the cast???
autumn said:Thanks for jogging my memory. There have been at least two questions- one more philosophical- the other very mundane- that were asked by one person here, and then independently by others- that had identical and near-identical hexagram results. It was really interesting. I understand it's very easily reasoned away by you,of course, and that's ok. But it's interesting to me so I'm posting it.
pakua said:Why are you saying they are the same, outside of the obvious that they all originate from inside?
autumn said:Yes, that's why- but that's pretty profound. Why would anyone ask a question of coins? What meaning is there in the resulting symbol? According to Chris, all symbols are equally potentially meaningful, and the brain (through a combination of conscious creativity and subconscious assignment of meaning) resolves inherent anxiety by perceiving an answer to the question in the symbol.
If that is true, then why ask predictive questions, or questions about unknoweable answers?
autumn said:The only reason why anyone would ask a question like that and fantasize an answer would be because they are choosing to employ projetive analysis, a technique pioneered by Freud. They think perhaps their brain is smarter than consciousness.
autumn said:But if that's all your doing, why use random coin tosses?
autumn said:What I am saying is that explanation is insufficient for me, because I believe it is highly unlikely that the brain (as we understand it) is capable of predicting the future or knowing information about world events or others' inner states.
autumn said:I believe it is more likely that the perception of being a separate brain that does not know certain things is illusory, and that we are tapping an interconnected source of real knowledge- not fantasy.
autumn said:I believe it is more likely that the perception of being a separate brain that does not know certain things is illusory, and that we are tapping an interconnected source of real knowledge- not fantasy.
bruce_g said:Over-knowing, that’s an interesting idea, which sounds a bit like over-eating or over-indulging in general.
As I get older I am often humorously struck at how simple ideas are made to sound so complicated and hard to grasp. Oh, I do it too. I love playing with ideas, pulling them here and there.
autumn said:If I see a really hot guy sitting across the room and I ask the I-ching, “am I going to marry that really hot guy sitting there?”-
sparhawk said:Hmmmm, must be me you are eyeballing... Then, why ask?? Where is the sense of adventure; the fluttering sensation of a fling? And no, I cannot marry you, sorry...
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).