...life can be translucent

Menu

Shen shu?

C

candid

Guest
Chris, I think I'd just accept it if I was convinced it was true.

For the species, I don't know.. will have to think about it more.
 
C

candid

Guest
Chris, just as I don?t buy into your theories 100%, neither do I buy into what I?m about to copy here. They just represent two sides of the same coin.

I believe that imagination is stronger than knowledge.
That myth is more potent than history.
That dreams are more powerful than facts.
That hope triumphs over experience.
That laughter is the only cure for grief.
And I believe that love is stronger than death.

~ Robert Fulghum

Of course I can't prove any of the above is true other than by subjective experience. It doesn't make it any less true or effective, and field studies have proven its reliable - just like Yi.

Imagine just for a moment it is true.

But, if indeed your assertions are absolutely correct, I hope I can someday have the analytical mind to sort it out as you have done.

Candid
 

chrislofting

(deceased)
Joined
Nov 19, 1971
Messages
394
Reaction score
3
Candid,

You wrote:
>
> Chris, just as I don?t buy into your theories 100%, neither
> do I buy into what I?m about to copy here. They just
> represent two sides of the same coin.
>
> I believe that imagination is stronger than knowledge.
> That myth is more potent than history.
> That dreams are more powerful than facts.
> That hope triumphs over experience.
> That laughter is the only cure for grief.
> And I believe that love is stronger than death.
>
> ~ Robert Fulghum
>

these are thoughts stemming from consciousness and from idealism and from a lack of knowledge about the roots of such concepts ;-) the text shows a sharp distinction between what IS vs what COULD BE. The focus overall is on transcendence (see the IDM material on the Transcendence function - or the 'lite' essay - http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/ideal.html )

To analyse the above (using an IDM perspective as filter):

Imagination is related to consciousness in that our consciousness allows us to train our instincts/habits, to refine them, to deal with potential contexts as well as actual contexts through the use of imagination. The KNOWLEDGE of this FACT can aid in the use of, the management of, imagination ;-) IOW it is the dance of imagination and knowledge that works best with context determining 'strength'.

Myth, being myth, is nebulous and as such elicits a sense of mystery and overloaded metaphor where it is in need of decoding as we instinctively find that attractive, we like to solve problems in that problem solving is one of our main features. History is history, when well documented it is 'fact' more than speculations. Speculations come out in the interpretation of the 'facts'. As such, myth would come across as more 'potent' in that it tickles our sense of possibilities. A myth as such can develop from summing elements of history, history->legend->myth.

Dreams reflect integration processes often at work without precise differentations of what is possible and what is not. As such dreams reflect the ability to make associations 'out of context' in that the single context perspective is more 'left brained' and if that part is asleep so REM sleep dominates (the right is 'awake'). Issues can develop where the dream is at odds with reality (the facts) such that psychosis can emerge but the dreamtime has been a source of rich symbolisms/signs etc.

For example, in primitive tribes such as Australian aborigines the 'Dream time' was a time of the use of rich metaphor and so approximations to communicate. The local context focus through the management of the land etc was made into stories easy to teach and remember. Thus such 'dreamtime' stories as the stealing of the 'firestick', where it is stolen by the raven and the hawk and the dove and the lizard and the scorpion etc reflects issues, scientific issues, of land management.

The associations of animal to land reflects issues of overpopulations of that land such that it needs to be culled by the use of fire. Thus the story means when you SEE the raven then there are too many of them, there is an excess and so nature is 'out of balance' and the land to which the raven 'belongs' (e.g. high ridgeland areas) needs to be burnt - and that is reflected in the concept of the raven 'stealing' the firestick.

Getting back to your quote - the use of the term 'hope' is unfortunate and reflects a passive bent to the writer - the term should be anticipation, same general meaning where the difference in expression is between being proactive (anticipation) and being reactive (hope). Again note the overall focus on what is possible than what is.

the laughter/grief dichotomy is expressed in the relationship of mountain(grief)/lake(laughter) see my page on the roots of emotions - http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/emote.html

The love/death relationships reflects aspects of the relationship of lake (love) and heaven (anger). BOTH deal with replacement, love is more cooperative, anger more competitive. Love is more integrating, anger more differentiating.

Note here the link in the trigrams. Grief/Laughter reflect mountain/lake, love/death get murky in that the relationship is more love/anger (lake/heaven) but the grief aspect of mountain, its association to loss, to depression, to sadness, elicits the sense of a relationship of love/death whereas that relationship should be more to life/death ;-)

In emotions the core relationships of 'same generic source' are:

anger/love (heaven/lake)
acceptance/surprise (fire/thunder)
anticipation/disgust(reject) (wind/water)
sadness/fear (mountain/earth)

The opposites are:

anger/fear (heaven/earth)
love/sadness (lake/mountain)
acceptance/rejection (fire/water)
surprise/anticipation (thunder/wind)

> Of course I can't prove any of the above is true

but I can based on understanding the dynamics of brain function and the focus on WHAT IS as compared to WHAT COULD BE - a dynamic sharply expressed by the author (if, IMHO, some 'slackness' in precision of associations ;-)) - IOW understanding the underlying dynamics of the brain at the species level we can flesh-out concepts better. That is what IDM is about, it allows you to quickly pick-up the general gist of something in that it identifies the core patterns operating in the unconscious that the expressions, the words, are trying to communicate. The GENERALITY of IDM means it acts as an aid and as such we can use the I Ching for particulars but IDM to flesh-out the I Ching ;-)

The abstract to IDM is:

By identifying the basic methodology used by the brain in the process of deriving meaning, of identifying something of significance or of potential significance, akin to Gregory Bateson's "difference that makes a difference", we can identify the properties and methods within that methodology that go to giving the species its ability to identify and re-identify and as such we can map-out the basic set of universal categories used in the identification process. From this general perspective we can go on and refine the more particular categorisation systems used in different collectives since those categorisation systems all serve as metaphors for the general categorisation process that is shared across our species as well as across all neuron-dependent species. Furthermore, besides giving us insights to our general species nature, so we gain insights into the implementation of a sense of meaning for AI systems.

Chris.
 

davidl

visitor
Joined
Oct 31, 1971
Messages
120
Reaction score
0
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed."
Einstein
 

trauts

visitor
Joined
Sep 30, 2016
Messages
7
Reaction score
7
Has anyone found an accurate way to use the brush stroke counting method for shenshu? Steve Moore tried to explain it but I am counfused by the number 20 as opposed to the number 10. With 10 he says to take the number 1 but when it is 15 you use the number 5. So what do you do with 20, do you take 0 or 2? Stuart Oring
 

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

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

Top