...life can be translucent

Menu

Similarities and differences of 51.2 and 38.1

nicky_p

visitor
Joined
Jan 14, 1971
Messages
368
Reaction score
1
Hiya,

What with a recent post in the friends area and the I Ching on the I Ching thread being at the point of 51.2 at the mo it's been swimming round my head a bit over the last couple of days.

A question of mine has lead me to be looking at 38.1 and the similarity struck me. I'm a little stuck on the differences though.

I was wondering if anyone had any insights please?

Thank you
Love
Nicky
xx
 
W

white_dog

Guest
Hi Nicky,

Good question. They are quite similar, aren?t they?

38.1 results from opposing views or opposing forces. Your joy (lake below) leaves, and your light or clarity (fire above) becomes dim. Do not worry over the loss of your joy, it will return on its own. Since Dui or lake incorporates the emotion of melancholy as well as joy, the loss brings sadness.

51.2 results from excitement or aroused emotions. Here the stimulus is that of competitiveness, with people, nature or with fate. Do not set out to prove yourself with force. It?s an argument you can not win. When the excitement passes, balanced perspective returns, the powerful urge (thunder) is reduced to proportion, and you ask yourself, what was that all about?

So, as I see it, the difference is largely an emotional one.
 
W

white_dog

Guest
Btw, they're both competitive, but thunder fighting thunder, or dragon fighting dragon, is more fierce than lake opposing fire. Two older brothers (or grown men) competing, compared to the middle and youngest sister (two younger women) arguing; which come to think of it, can also get pretty emotional! lol
 

nicky_p

visitor
Joined
Jan 14, 1971
Messages
368
Reaction score
1
I think I can see what you mean. Its like saying the same word but with a different emphasis? A slight nuance in meaning/emotion.

The only emotions I can think of with such a slight differential are righteous anger and indignant anger?

Is that the kind of difference you mean?
 
W

white_dog

Guest
For me, subjectively, 38.1 has felt sad rather than angry, whereas 51.2 felt angry. Just different forces behind the emotion. In either case, acting on the emotion is ill advised.
 

nicky_p

visitor
Joined
Jan 14, 1971
Messages
368
Reaction score
1
Yes, It's funny the first thing I thought of was poignancy or nostalgia but I couldn't see how that fit into both hexagrams.

So the emotions are entirely different for the different hexagrams not just a slight difference?

That also means I'm kind of starting to see hexagrams in lines if you get what I mean? Like they relate to 52? In order not to act on the emotion you need to still the mind. But I can't link them there logically - linewise.

Love
Nicky
xx
 
W

white_dog

Guest
I think the emotions are different, yes, and I think the driving force behind each is also different.

To be ultra simplistic (my favorite kind of reasoning!), the energy in 38 is a subtle and inward yin form of 51, which is all yang.

38.1
shame.gif

51.2
irked.gif


I'm not sure what you mean by "starting to see hexagrams in lines". Do you mean hexagram pairs? Or each line's position in the hexagram? Or do you mean trigram relationships?
 

lightofdarkness

visitor
Joined
Mar 16, 1970
Messages
1,025
Reaction score
1
ICPlus interpretations:

51.2 -
"[When sudden adversity robes one of one's wealth. Do not pursue it. It will come back.]" [Have faith(belief). This alone will help to restore things]

38.1 -
"Troubles will disappear. Losing one's strength, do not pursue it, it will return on it's own. Observing wicked people is not harmful."

wealth and strength associate in general with 'qi' or 'chi' so the focus is on 'losing' it but having faith on its return.

Lake associates with cooperative exchange in five-phase, Thunder with original production (as compared to wind's re-production or cultivation focus)

The five-phase perspective is covered in the Five-Phase IC analysis:

http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/icfive0.html

Chris.
 
W

white_dog

Guest
Chris, interesting. Was hoping you'd comment on this.

38.1 troubles
51.2 sudden adversity

yes!
 

lightofdarkness

visitor
Joined
Mar 16, 1970
Messages
1,025
Reaction score
1
you can add-in the analysis the general focus of line 1 in any hexagram with 24 and line 2 with 07. (or in the pairs of 24/44 and 07/13. Thus line 1 has flavours of come-back/move-away(be drawn away) as line 2 has flavours of order issues (rigid army vs 'loose' associations with likeminded))

Move to line pairs that form hexagrams and
lines 2 and 5 form into hex 29 and so a focus on containment/control issues in general are covered with these line. (stand alone, line 2 is to 07 as line 5 is to 08) - these issues come out in 51.2 (and in general 2 is a supervisor, 5 is the king - the focus then is on an 'army' approach or a court approach in maintaining order etc - thus the line 2 change of 51 is associated with pursuit as temptation of "hot pursuit" as compared to pursuit in "being drawn away" in line 1 of 38 (see below))

On the other hand, lines 1 and 6 form into hex 27 and so a focus on infrastructure issues (line 1 to 24, line 6 to 23) and these come out in 38.1 (and with that the line 1 focus on being drawn away and so go after 'something')

38 in general focuses on issues in dealing with 'opposition' through using reflection - let them see themselves in the mirror you present/hide behind and that can 'ease' the issues. (use XOR-ing to flesh out its properties).

Using the wave approach we can build 38 by adding qualities associated with the single yang line (in phase) hexagrams of:

24 + 07 + 16 + 23

If we map-in the 'yin' elements (out of phase) then we have a sum, a superposition, of:

24 + 07 + 10 + 16 + 14 + 23

Using the same approach, 51 is made up of 24 and 16 or its full form of 24 + 13 + 10 + 16 + 14 + 44

The wave approach is covered in:

http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/WaveInterpret.html

Changing lines focus on the middle of the transitions of pairs where the details are not available at this level of analysis, all we have is the binary dynamic of the line hexagram pairs (and so 24/44) - one needs to go to dodecagrams level for more details but that level is still not fleshed-out properly other than as single 'changing line' comments.

Chris.
 

nicky_p

visitor
Joined
Jan 14, 1971
Messages
368
Reaction score
1
Hi Bruce,

"I'm not sure what you mean by "starting to see hexagrams in lines". Do you mean hexagram pairs? Or each line's position in the hexagram? Or do you mean trigram relationships?"

I think what I'm talking about is what Chris has gone on to talk about? That you recieve a reading, say 38.1, 38 shows me the 'picture' of the situation with all the emotions attatched etc, the line gives me some advise on how to make the best of that situation. The 52 is how I'm seeing that I should carry out that advice. So, 38.1 says your horse has run off but don't chase it. In order that you still the emotions so as to be at this objective viewpoint you have to follow the advice of 52. Does that make sense? (LOL
spin.gif
)

Hi Chris,

I think I've understood some of what you're saying but there are a couple of bits that I have some questions on if you don't mind
wink.gif


line 1 - hex 24 - worker/raw (bottom, begin)
line 2 - hex 07 - supervisor
line 3 - hex 15 - local lord
line 4 - hex 16 - minister/adviser
line 5 - hex 08 - ruler/court
line 6 - hex 23 - sage/refined (top, end)

As I see it at the moment this links in for me with what Wilhelm talks about with the rulers of hexagrams etc. I think I can also understand what you're saying about the feeling of a hexagram in a line. The only question I have on this is whether you see this 'rule' as fitting to all hexagrams in exactly the same way. The reason I ask is that in Wilhelm for example the ruler for hex 8 say is described as '9 in the fifth place' whereas in hex 15 the ruler is described as '9 in the third place'. Is this similar to what you're talking about or have I gone off on a complete tangent?

The only other thing was that if I understand correctly this is a wave map for yang lines? Above you've 'mapped-in' the yin elements (10 + 14) but I couldn't find the discussion of this on your website? Was I looking in the wrong place?

Love
Nicky
xx
 

nicky_p

visitor
Joined
Jan 14, 1971
Messages
368
Reaction score
1
Hi Chris,

Just looking and the hexagrams that I've used for the examples are probably not the best as all the other lines are yin
blush.gif
Maybe a better one to look at is 3? Where the rulers are 9 at the beginning and 9 in the fifth - both yang lines.

Love
Nicky
xx
 

lightofdarkness

visitor
Joined
Mar 16, 1970
Messages
1,025
Reaction score
1
Hi Nicky,

(1) The ordering of:

line 1 - hex 24 - worker/raw (bottom, begin)
line 2 - hex 07 - supervisor
line 3 - hex 15 - local lord
line 4 - hex 16 - minister/adviser
line 5 - hex 08 - ruler/court
line 6 - hex 23 - sage/refined (top, end)

(I suppose this should be listed as line 1 at the bottom to line 6 at the top but the ordering down the page covers the flow of the sequence of events)

The ordering deals simply with the hierarchy present in hexagrams from bottom to top where to map it to familar terms I have used more traditional associations. There is no formal association with 'rulerships' etc.

(2) The wave patterns include the yin elements but as potentials or as dampened properties. Thus line 1 is mapped to hexagram 24 where all other lines are dampened. However, semantically, the full qualities of the line include the dampening of it as is done in the opposite of 44.

Thus the nature covered is of 24/44 but the focus is on 24 as the source of identification the actualisation of that line - the yangness. BY IMPLICATION, working with 'wave' perspectives, so the full wave is in the form of a sine wave with the positive amplitude associated with 24 and the negative amplitude associated with 44. (this does NOT relate to positive/negative attributes - BOTH 24 and 44 can be positive or negative depending on context)

The generic focus is of 24 being drawn in/back (includes returning to what one was drawn away from), 44 drawing away (to seduce, persuade etc).

Both can then be interpreted emotionally as positive or negative.

When we move to considering 44 it reflects the yangness of all lines active other than line 1 and so 44 is exaggerated, 24 dampened.

Thus 44 as 44 has a focus on FIVE yang lines, not one.

44 is reducable to a quality derived from summing 07, 15, 16, 08, 23. (all of the yang lines) and this is the summing activity, but we also need to cover the yin elements and contributors to identity through their suppression.

If you feel a little confused note that the IC is a language with 64 representitives of 'meaning' and so each of them does a lot of double duty! Thus CONTEXT grounds a hexagram, gives it local meaning. Thus 44 is used to describe 'dampened' qualities in a context of discussing 24, but it also has its own 'life' as a five-yang line representitive where it is the 'positive' wave form and 24 the dampened.

context - context - context ;-)

Chris.
 

nicky_p

visitor
Joined
Jan 14, 1971
Messages
368
Reaction score
1
Hi Chris,

I am a little confused but I don't think it's all down to you or the I Ching - it seems to be my natural state
spin.gif
Thanks for explaining. I think I've got to let some of it sink in
happy.gif


And yes, I think I understand when you say 'context - context - contex ;-)'

Thank you
Love
Nicky
xx
 

philippa

visitor
Joined
Mar 3, 1971
Messages
108
Reaction score
0
Hi Chris,

My head is spinning a little, too.

Though I'm beginning to see what you've been saying about using iching to describe itself, when you form a hexagram by summing three or more hexagrams, I have trouble keeping track all of them. Is there a way of "emphasize" a smaller subset of them ("context"??) just to get a more general picture?

Philippa
 

lightofdarkness

visitor
Joined
Mar 16, 1970
Messages
1,025
Reaction score
1
Lets focus on the basic perspective covered in http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/WaveInterpret.html where the focus is on a PULSE perspective where YANG is a 'pulse', and ACTUAL, and YIN is 'no pulse' as in a POTENTIAL. (our neurons communicate down their axon using PULSES, not WAVES where the waves are the accumulation of many pulses, in and out of phase due to coming from different sources, in the input areas (dendrites) of other neurons.)

In this pulse approach, each line of a hexagram is associated with a frequency (like a radio station frequency).

Working from the bottom up of a hexagram means we are moving from general to particular and so from vague to crisp, approximate to precise. In a wave format this means an increase in frequency of a wave where the more precision you want the more 'samples' you need per second. (and so high precision is more 'blue end' of the spectrum. The issue is that this is also highly sensitive to disruption and so it open to scattering easier than the lower frequencies - and this is why the sky is blue! And so the easiest line to change in a hexagram is the TOP one, the hardest is the BOTTOM one)

The increase in precision is done by doubling the frequency of each new line we create as we build the hexagram.

So -- the base line is given a frequency of 2 cycles per second (reflecting yin/yang), line 2 is twice that etc so we get frequencies of:

line 1 - 2cps
line 2 - 4
line 3 - 8
line 4 - 16
line 5 - 32
line 6 - 64

A unique wave is derived from summing these frequencies where a yang line is 'on' (pulse) and a yin line is 'off' (no pulse). As we add the 'on' lines we create a superposition of these lines in the form of a wave pattern based on the constructive/destructive interference of the individual waves.

Thus a focus on only line 1 being 'on' associates that line with a waveform we label as "hexagram 24".

Thus we have only six hexagrams that serve as the foundations of all of the rest where we focus only on the YANG lines, the YIN lines are off, they are POTENTIALS, not actualised.

If we take the wave that is line 1 (2cps) and add it to the wave that is line 6 (64cps) we will get a unique waveform that is labelled as 'hexagram 27". The constructive and destructive interference of the waves packed into the one space will elicit the waveform.

We note however that the 'space in between' line 1 and line 6 is not of 'nothing' it is of 'potentials' - the 'yin' element.

Thus hexagram 27 is '100001' and so summing of qualities of 24 (re-beginning, new, surprise, sudden etc etc) with the qualities of 23 (discernment, quality control applied to what one is devoted to and so the focus on seperating chaff from wheat, as the 'high priest' does in getting back to the 'true' faith - 23 in general is about issues of housekeeping)

The COMBINED characteristics of 24 and 23 give us the DERIVED characteristics of 27 where the focus is on (a) infrastructure, the 'new' and (b) quality control - and so being wary of what one puts into the 'new' infrastructure, the furnishings etc.

BUT, to give a WAVE interpretation as compared to a PULSE intepretation means we have to include the potentials as sources of meaning contributing to the 'whole' hexagram.

In a WAVE format we are dealing with positive/negative amplitudes (the sine wave but here in the form of a square wave where the square nature reflects the 'on/off' binary format) As the ON part of the hexagram is 24 + 23, so the OFF part of the wave is NOT-07 + NOT-15 + NOT-16 + NOT-08. IN this binary format of hexagrams the NOT-07 is only representable in the form of hexagram 13, the opposite of 07, as the NOT-15 is in the form of hexagram 10 etc.

SO - 27 is 23 + 24 BUT there will also be 'traits' that sum the whole into:

24 + 13 (NOT-07) + 10 (NOT-15) + 09 (NOT-16) + 14 (NOT-08) + 23

It is obviously 'easier' to just focus on the PULSE perspective - I find no real issue with 27 being the sum of characteristics of 24 and 23, they are rather 'obvious' when we analyse them as we did above. BUT the potentials still 'perculate' so to speak, they are not written off and being 'not there' and finer details will move us to a full wave perspective.

Thus we can interpret 27 as "24 + 23" (yang element, explicit) and 13 + 10 + 09 + 14 (yin element, hidden)

Once we have the unique waveform we can then use XOR to draw out properties (e.g. the 23-ness of 27 is 24, the 24-ness of 27 is 23 etc)

I would suggest, to familarise yourself with the approach, just focus on the PULSE format to start with - six building blocks in the form of the qualities of hexagrams 24, 07, 15, 16, 08, 23. The 'null' state is all lines are 0 and so reflective of 'potentials' and so hexagram 02.

I think hexagram 03 was mentioned before - this is made-up of yang lines 1 and 5 and so reflective of the summing of qualities of 24 and 08.

24 covers return or 'new' beginning, particular path etc and overall a focus on infrastructure issues as 08 has a focus on control issues. The local analogy for 03 is to 'sprouting', 'difficulty at the beginning'.

Chris.
 

pakua

visitor
Joined
Aug 26, 1972
Messages
359
Reaction score
0
Chris,

" And so the easiest line to change in a hexagram is the TOP one, the hardest is the BOTTOM one) "

This seems counter-intuitive to me... if line 1 represents the beginning of a situation, isn't it easier to change than all the other lines, simply because one's path hasn't really fully formed yet?
 

lightofdarkness

visitor
Joined
Mar 16, 1970
Messages
1,025
Reaction score
1
9 times out of 10 one is already 'in' a situation before realising it - it is why people use these sorts of systems to aid in figuring out what is going on! ;-)

Even trying to back out of situation is not easy to do in that the context is already 'pushing' one's buttons. What the IC can give us is the GENERAL format of the context and from that we can determine where the context is going, the 'ideal' development of that context and so allow us to pre-empt things WITHIN that context.

Our SINGULAR nature allows us to 'walk away' from the context and in so doing into another context but our PARTICULAR nature, where context is pushing our primate buttons, can elicit instinctive, complex, behaviours that our consciousness can have a hard time dealing with - by the time it has figured out what is going on we are well into the situation and so more in need of clear identification of that sitution to 'fit in' the best we can.

The easiest action is to determine if one's commitment to the situation is locally unconditional or conditional - qualities associated with line 6 changes.

OTOH, a line 1 change will REALLY change things generally since you move from an overall 'yin' context to a 'yang' context (or visa versa) and that will affect all of the other line dynamics etc in the hexagram - whereas changing line 6 just switches between the TWO hexagrams derived from the original context (all lines are the same OTHER THAN the top line - e.g. 02,23 pair. manipulate line 6 and you oscillate within the overall context of devotion/trust in another/others that is unconditional (02) or conditional (23).

OTOH, change the bottom line in either and the whole perspective will change to issues covering the 24/27 pair where the core context is very 'different'. To do this, to FORCE a change of line 1 is not easy, it requires work when compared to the line 6 change.

Social dynamics will push buttons of our primate nature (instincts) and accumulated habits. We can experience this 'push' when we use emotions to assess a situation (and so my Emotional I Ching material). These dynamics work on our PARTICULAR nature and so can set us off on some path without being aware of it until it is too late or difficult to get away from.

The 'random' element is our SINGULAR nature, our unique consciousness, and it can allow us to 'break' an instinct/habit, to escape the 'button push'. BUT in doing so there can be social consequences and at most times it is better to 'ease out' of a situation and a line 6 change can do that easily, a line 1 is more difficult. (this gets into characteristics of hexagram 05 where some things need to 'run their course' and if you dont want to be involved you 'sit out' that process until the 'right' moment occurs where your talents 'best fit')

The other focus is on explicitly creating a hexagram where the first line is the hardest since it sets down in concrete a bias perspective that is excluding 32 other hexagrams from all future considerations.

by the time we get to the top line we are at the level of only excluding 1 other hexagram (e.g. the above mentioned differences of the 02/23 pair)

Thus determining what that first line should be requires some thought. ;-)

Thus the focus is on 'is the situation about facts or about values? the particular or the general? the precise or the approximate?'etc. This is general and sets the context for all that follows (and since context 'pushes' our buttons so there are big differences in a 'yin' context pushing or a 'yang' context pushing)

The top line, be it of a trigram or hexagram is more particular, more focused on 'you' and so easier to determine if one is instigating/responding or if one is being unconditional/conditional etc.

An essential feature of dealing with the line comments is that they are 'refinements' of the original hexagram quality. If this were NOT so then all hexagrams would have the same pair of line comments for line 1 (the yin comments for yin-based hexagrams and the yang comments for yang-based hexagrams). This is NOT the case, each comment is unique to the hexagram concerned indicating that the comments are made WITHIN the hexagram already manifesting itself.

We can interpret the line comments as the EXTENSION of the hexagram into a dodecagram where the first six lines are more so structural elements with no intrinsic 'meaning'.

line 12 REFINEMENT in meaning (particular)
line 11
line 10
line 09
line 08
line 07 REFINEMENT in meaning (general)
line 06 STRUCTURE focus
...
line 01 STRUCTURE focus

representationally, we can compress this into a six-line hexagram with 'changing line' comments where line 07 shares space with 01, 08 with 02, and so on.

As the traditional material indicates, the Duke of Chou comments came AFTER the hexagrams were formed and given GENERAL meaning. These particular comments were made WITHIN that general meaning. The GENERIC nature of the lines are reflected in the association of single-line hexagrams to the lines - thus line 1/7 has 'qualities' rooted in 24 for all hexagrams. XOR-ing 24 with a particular hexagram will bring out the 24-ness expressed THROUGH the particular hexagram, but this is not the same as 'changing line' dynamics in that with XOR we are getting the nature of the unchanging, the structural nature.

Chris.
 

nicky_p

visitor
Joined
Jan 14, 1971
Messages
368
Reaction score
1
Hi Chris,

I was wondering if you had any thoughts or saw any links between the wave approach and the emotional I Ching at all? In an 'emotions cause vibrations' kind of way?

Thanks
Love
Nicky
xx
 

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
29
Hi Chris,

Like Pakua, I also have doubts about your idea that the top line is the easiest to change.
A wheel that turns fast (top line) has more energy than a slow turning wheel (bottom line) and high frequency electromagnetic waves (again top line) have more energy than low frequency waves.
The energy of blue light is higher than the energy of red light.
This suggests that it is in fact the top line that is more difficult to change.

The socalled Rayleigh scattering that makes the sky look blue can be somewhat misleading here because although the photons are scattered (which suggests that there is something here that is easy to change, to disrupt) their energy doesn't change. There is no change or disruption of energy level in Rayleigh scattering. The energy level is stable as a rock, i.e. constant.
happy.gif


If I wanted to "prove" that - on the contrary - the top line is LESS easy to disrupt than the bottom line I could say that a wheel that turns fast (top line) is more stable than a wheel that turns slow (bottom line). We all know that, at least if we use a bike. When you bike too slow the thing becomes unstable. That has to do with angular momentum and bikes have big wheels because bigger wheels give more momentum and hence more stability.
But that line of reasoning is also misleading. When we talk about yin-yang and how easy it is to change things we are talking (I suppose) about changes in energy levels and not about how easy it is to turn a wheel (or a bike) to the left or the right. That's a different animal.

So what is it? Is the bottom line easier to change then? Subjectively I would say that it is indeed much easier to switch between 2 and 24 (bottom line change) than between 2 and 23 (top line change). 2 and 24 feel similar while 2 and 23 feel miles apart.
I'm not so sure about other hexagrams though. Is switching between 44 and 1 (bottom line) also easier than switching between 43 and 1 (top line)? Or is it more difficult? I don't know.

Could it be that it depends on the hexagram and that a theory that only considers line positions is too simple?
 

lightofdarkness

visitor
Joined
Mar 16, 1970
Messages
1,025
Reaction score
1
Hi Nicky, the structure of the questions in the Emotional IC are based on moving from general to particular and eliciting what the emotions are resonating with so it is all focused on 'vibrations', on 'resonance'.

The holistic, immediate, organic, nature of the emotion system has developed over a considerable timespan as a general communication method for many life forms (or more so evolved in some 'ancestor' that has then gone on to diversify into genus-species etc)

Our emotions are highly integrated with sensory harmonics - colours in vision, chords in audition etc such that reality, 'out there' as well as 'in here', is emotion-encoded and so will elicit resonance that gives us 'understanding'.

In the differentiation of reality our brain will use differentiation/integration dynamics to elicit patterns and, in the specialisation of emotions, these patterns are encoded emotionally.

The issue of course is that our emotions are primate-based and lack precise communications - that task has developed into the rational to control the emotions and our consciousness to use the spoken/written word to be more 'precise' in communications. It is important to understand that even syntax is a term represented as a FEELING and so issues of logic etc are mapped to feelings but not the wholistic, overpowering, form of feelings, more the partial but precise form (language is used to modulate communication of emotions/feelings etc and so take an immediate and cut it up into a sequence that is not so overwhelming and is more context-sensitive - this of course utilises delay in communication for the sake of being more precise)

Any specialisation we have is communicatable emotionally, and so in Mathematics we can experience beauty or uglyness etc in that the shared set of basic qualities of meaning allow for resonance. The issues then are in precision and its representation - the quantitative/qualitative dichotomy at work ;-)

Since our brains convert all information into patterns of wavelengths, frequencies, amplitudes, and waveforms, the wave model works well. (see - http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/wavedicho.html )

At the general level, since the core dichotomy is differentiating/integrating so all understanding stems from that and that includes object interpretations as well as relational interpretations of reality. That is why the Emotional IC works since the structure of emotions comes from the self-referencing of fight/flight dichotomy as does the structure of the I Ching from self-referencing of yang/yin dichotomy - same methodology, different languages, same qualities.

Note that the Emotional IC is focused on our primate emotions, what we share with many other life forms, rather than our derived emotions where they come from our sense of self.

The primate emotions are what are represented in hexagrams and so allow for 'resonance'. As such the resonance will pick up a general 'vibe' that can then be particularised, and so associated with a derived emotion; if you use the Emotional IC you will come across the situation of getting an un-identified emotional 'vibe' that, upon questioning will elicit a hexagram that your consciousness will "immediately" understand and 'fill in the dots' where the 'dots' are not what the emotions are resonating with, more so resonating with the basic 'field' in which the dots are present but not differentiated as yet - consciousness does that level of precise differentiation.

The issue of course is that what the emotions are resonating with is some form that is 'taboo' or 'not appropriate at this time'! The fact that the emotions are resonating and causing 'dicomfort' etc indicates that despite the taboo, the situation is present and needs to be delt with rather than rationalised away.

Chris.
 

lightofdarkness

visitor
Joined
Mar 16, 1970
Messages
1,025
Reaction score
1
Hi Martin,

I think you miss the point. The blueness is the manifestation of the scattering, it is an artefact. IN our brains such issues as ADD/ADHD reflect 'scattering' in our more precise frontal lobes where the precision focus reflects high spatial frequency dynamics (FM over AM) and so strong LOCAL signal but is prone to be easily distorted/blocked.

This gets into issues of purity where the more pure something is so the more it is open to a need for a stable context to avoid 'impurities' to maintain purity. Thus at times it is better to make something out of less pure materials to remove the sensitivity to context dynamics. In the brain the FM/AM dynamic covers these differences where AM is 'muddier' than FM but is long range and not so sensitive to local anomalies. As such, information from our senses to the neurology is more analogue, THEN comes discretisation in the form of conversion from wave to pulse formats. That conversion allows for the extraction of details and so improvement in clarity.

The analogy goes on to cover the 'purity in thought' of the sage, the top position, as compared to the vagueness in thought of the 'worker' in the bottom position. Thus as we move from general to particular we move from 'diffuseness' to 'clarity', from approximate to precise, but in that movement become more localised.

Socially, the worker level is more conservative, more stable, than the sage level that can drift in and out of extreme abstractions - precise but not 'useful' in a day-to-day dynamic.

Thus we get into such precision differences as covered in the nurse/doctor dynamic. The nurses learn procedures and so their information chunk size is large. The doctor learns about anomalies and so the ability to interrupt a procedure, re-direct it etc - their information chunk size is small - more precise but also more disruptive (nurses can get stressed when a procedure is unnecessarily disrupted by some new intern! - the doctors soon learn to let the nurses 'get on with it' and only get involved when the procedure is not working properly. - as such there are more workers than sages ;-))

IOW the procedure level is LESS precise but more fitting with the 'mundane', day-to-day level of being/doing. The focus is thus on the benefits of 'autopilot', of instincts/habits training, of algorithms/formulas where context pushes those buttons and we move along integrated with that context and so conserving of energy. Instincts/habits are hard to break where it requires energy to do so, to lift to a level of finer distinction making, finer choices and so richer levels of mediation and so CHANGE.

The bottom two lines of a hexagram relate to the worker/supervisor dynamic where the second line regulates/controls the first line from the position of PARTICULARS as the worker is pushed by instincts/habits of the GENERAL.

As we move up so each line is a controller/regulator of the previous line and so reflecting the availability of more choices in conduct and so more scope for change but also more localisation - the regulation gives us more choices but focused on local freedom.

<snip>
>
> So what is it? Is the bottom line easier to change then? Subjectively
> I would say that it is indeed much easier to switch between 2 and 24
> (bottom line change) than between 2 and 23 (top line change). 2 and 24
> feel similar while 2 and 23 feel miles apart.

I think you need to work with the binary sequence more in that that sequence demonstrates the 'natural' recursion of yin/yang and so brings out natural relationships. The traditional ordering is DERIVED and so focuses on a particular, specialist, perspective that, if taken as if the 'natural', universal format, will distort perspectives.

The 02/23 relationship is a difference of only the top line and that difference is reflected in the unconditional/conditional dynamic. The 02/24 relationship is a full 'variations on a theme' difference whereas in 02/23 the GENERAL theme is shared, it is the LOCAL that is different (the top line dynamic).

Chris.
 

lightofdarkness

visitor
Joined
Mar 16, 1970
Messages
1,025
Reaction score
1
To work more with the precision issue - the path from base to top is a hierarchic path reflecting, from an information processing perspective, information "as a reduction of uncertainty through choice among alternatives". Thus as we add lines so we increase choices to apply to 'something' or 'somewhen'. This is a Shannon-esque perspective.

Gabor on the other hand (the discoverer of holographs) worked more on the minimum uncertainty, recognising that the bandwidth(high frequency)/time dichotomy has issues in that we can measure time OR frequency but not both simultaneously - there is a limit involved and it it isomorphic to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.

Dt Df >= 1/2

(D = delta, t = time, f = frequency)

Gabor derived the above as the concept of a "logon", DfDt = 1/2 - the elementary unit of information.

Thus Shannon uses the "bit" and a focus on the discrete, Gabor the "logon" and so maintaining some connectivity.

"Musical notation is an example of a logon-like system of communication that operates to inform the action of a musical [social] collective such as an orchestra, a band, or a choir. An individal "note" can be viewed as the analogue of a logon. It is composed of data "plotted" in a (written) musical score on the same two orthogonally-related dimensions as a logon; one dimension is frequency, varing oscillations of sound waves (energy vibrations) produced by the operation of a musical instrument; the second dimension is time, how long the note is to be played - its duration" p 78 "Anticipation of Order" Bradley, R., (1997 - in "world futures")

Since music is STRONGLY associated with emotions so the above reflects dynamics of emotions and we can replace references to music with references to emotions... so lets do that with the full text of Bradley's comments where references to music are replaced by references to emotions:

"Emotional notation is an example of logon-like system of communication that operates to inform the action of an emotional (social) collective such as a large crowd, a social group or tight family unit. An individual "emotion" can be viewed as the analogue of a logon. It is composed of data "plotted" in an emotional score on the same two orthogonally-related dimensions as a logon: one dimension is frequency, varying oscillations of emotional waves (energy vibrations) produced by the operation of an emotion-producing system; the second dimension is time, how long the expression is to be 'held' for - its duration. The pattern of energy expenditure by which the emotion is actualized is prescribed by the emotional score as a moment-by-moment sequence of operations on the emotion-producing system, for each emotion producer (person), specified both in frequency and in time. Moveover, the score for all emoters contains a spatial component as well: it also specifies which subset of emoters, in relation to the collective, is to express each moment.

Thus a composer's written emotional score represents a description of how the potential energy of a collective of emoters is translated into an expenditure of energy, differentiated for each individual on the dimensions of frequency and time-space, to actualise a given composition as "emotion"." re-working/wording of p78 of Bradley, R.T., "The Anticipation of Order in Biosocial Collectives" IN "world futures, Vol 49 pp65-88 1997

What is interesting about the use of the logon is that it comes with anticipation 'built in' and anticipation is a dominating feature of music and of emotion. Thus the 'bit' is too discrete, it lacks anticipation but in doing that is more precise in that it covers, allows for, the 'random'.

Chris.
 

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
29
I don't know Chris, it all sounds a bit scattered to me. ;)
You write that the worker level is "more conservative, more stable", but that is of course not true in general. It are often the upper levels that are more conservative and relatively immune to change.
The 6th line corresponds socially/culturally to ideology, religion, general outlook on life, moral guidelines, laws and so on. When it comes to change those are the hardest nuts to crack.

In science it is the same. Theories change slowly and when we move further "upward" (we will need 12 or even more lines to bring out the differences between various levels of abstraction) into general methodological principles, mathematics and so on, change is very slow.
We are doing science already for centuries in basically the same way and the core principles of mathematics are still the same as they were in ancient Greece. Carved in stone ..

I think the problem in your perspective is that it treats different scales or dimensions as one while they in fact don't correlate very well and sometimes not at all:

- more precise
- more abstract
- less instinctive
- easier to change
- ?

These are all different scales.
Instinct can be very precise, for example. And if the part of the brain that regulates my bodily functions was as imprecise as the general abstract nonsense that goes on in my frontal lobes I would have left this planet long ago!
happy.gif
 

lightofdarkness

visitor
Joined
Mar 16, 1970
Messages
1,025
Reaction score
1
> Posted by Martin (Martin) on Thursday, May 11, 2006 - 4:15 pm:
>
> I don't know Chris, it all sounds a bit scattered to me. ;)
> You write that the worker level is "more conservative, more stable",
> but that is of course not true in general.

It is absolutely true - the workers have to be motivated to take any actions - their nature is more reactive than proactive and it is that nature that is exploited. They focus on routine and that includes the routine of going to the Saturday sports match, the pub, their sex life etc etc etc

The focus here is on their PARTICULAR nature as members of a species. This nature dominates in that it allows for context to push buttons and so is a nature not prone to spontaneous actions other than when motivated, when 'released' by alcohol, drugs, or some charismatic motivator (or the loss by the football club!)

When we move into full blown consciousness and so the realm of the SINGULAR, the unique individual, it is the charismatic types that turn reactivity to proactivity. In that context so the 'top' lines influence, regulate/control those lines below. We can order this dynamic as:

Line 1 - environment
Line 2 - behaviour
Line 3 - capabilities
Line 4 - beliefs
Line 5 - identity
Line 6 - spirituality

Each line 'regulates' the one below such that a change in the top line can force drastic change in all of the others - but a change in the bottom does not. IOW the bottom line change is LESS destabilising than the TOP change - at best there is an interaction with the line immediately above but little else working 'upwards'.

HOWEVER, the top-down change is a LOCAL universal whereas a bottom-up change is more a UNIVERSAL universal - a change in environment can drastically change one's overall nature in the form of that environment pushing one's buttons as a PARTICULAR.

As such there are TWO threads at work, the particular individual vs the singular individual. The ordering of worker to sage covers the PARTICULAR in that it covers the social hierarchy. The ordering from environment to spirituality is more SINGULAR-focused.

In the hierarchy of development the PARTICULAR comes before the SINGULAR as the GENERAL comes before the PARTICULAR.

> It are often the upper
> levels that are more conservative and relatively immune to change.

.. you obviously haven?t experiences the inner dynamics of upper class structure! The in-fighting at 'court', the constant bickering etc as people try to either maintain or advance their position in a rigid hierarchy is loaded with change issues. The social dynamic is in the form of the aristocratic/egalitarian dichotomy that has been well-researched in sociology etc. The competitiveness is legendary and reflective of archetypal dynamics of constant battles in an eternal war; self-interest dominates and alliances are for the next battle and will quickly change after that battle in preparation for the future battle.

Capitalist environments DEMAND change, the competitiveness involved directly affects the workers etc where their conditions are destabilised by the 'whim' of management focused on maximising profits, minimising costs. In other words the change is not from the level of the worker, it is imposed from above and is often met with resistance; any break with routine will do that.

Change does not like 'balance'; the competitiveness is focused on unbalancing others and exploiting that to one's own benefit. This comes out in hex 12 ve hex 11 differences - one seeks to avoid change, to stick to one's belief (12) whereas the other focuses on being the mediator of change and so exploiting/controlling it (11).

As such, the only change sourced from within the worker collective will be in the form of some singular, charismatic, individual seeking 'transcendence', escape, where their abilities, be it as an originator of 'new' ideas or as a con artist, makes them stick out from the particular individuals that make-up the collective.

Academia is riddled with competitiveness, often extremely childish, as the 'publish or perish' focus dominates. As such there is no 'rest', the focus is on the 'new' discovery/insight etc as they all compete for grants. OTOH the worker goes to work, gets paid, goes home. Their productivity has been formalised by unions etc and as such their context is stable if a touch 'boring' ;-) This also goes for itinerant workers where their focus is often on getting enough money to stop working for a period and then going back to work. This develops into a routine that is 'stable' as a routine. LOCAL anomalies can occur but the general dynamic is constant.

Of current interest are the demands from management to de-regulate union dynamics so as to increase productivity and so make more profits. This has come not from the workers but from 'on high' where the dynamics of competition favours de-regulation, all out for themselves, work or die. The issue here is that from a 'human being' perspective, we do not NEED all of what is produced - much of it goes to waste. We are more in a position of maintaining current standards and bringing the rest of the planet 'on par' rather than increasing productivity and so instigating a severe 'crash' as we come up against the exhaustion of finite resources.

In small world dynamics the instigators of change are not egalitarian, they are aristocratic. They can motivate others to 'follow in their footsteps' and so the collective can fragment into 'we are with him/her' as to 'we are opposed to him/her' or 'we will copy and so exploit the attractiveness of him/her'.

The competitiveness of the aristocratic is costly and so there are demands put on the egalitarian part of the collective (taxation etc). These demands bring the aristocratic down to earth as it does lift the lot of the egalitarians. This reaches a state where the egalitarians move into the competitive context of the aristocratic and in doing so fragment - we see the emergence of lots of little 'aristocrats' - the emergence of the bourgeois ;-)

With this dynamic so there is an increase on developing self-regulation, autonomy, and so more fragmentation into little 'collectives' (corporations etc) and so more competitiveness and with that more change.

The average species-member, as a particular, is happy to 'graze', live their local life, no interest in changing the world to their perspectives (as happens in the more 'charismatic' types of our species) just in living locally, peacefully.

If the creation of laws, and so the focus on regulation/control be it in legel or moral forms, were universal rather than local, by now we would not need the amount of regulation coming out of our legislation systems since all would have been covered - but they are not. The law is under perpetual review as old, 'outdated' laws are repealed etc.

If religion was as 'stabilising' as you believe, we would not be having the issues we have re the especially monadic faiths of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. These dynamics are attempts to force change and come with a focus on power. OTOH personal SPIRITUALITY is a different ball game and is covered more in Buddhism-Zen, Taoism, Sufism, Qabalah, and basic Christian mysticism. THESE spiritualist activities operate in the realm of the SINGULAR rather than PARTICULAR.

> The 6th line corresponds socially/culturally to ideology, religion,
> general outlook on life, moral guidelines, laws and so on. When it
> comes to change those are the hardest nuts to crack.
>
> In science it is the same. Theories change slowly and when we move
> further "upward" (we will need 12 or even more lines to bring out the
> differences between various levels of abstraction) into general
> methodological principles, mathematics and so on, change is very slow.
>

Firstly, scientists are more 'particular/general' focused rather than singular and so more 'grounded' in facts than in personal whim. There are more Marxist/Humanist scientists than there are capitalist scientists, more egalitarians than aristocrats. Their competitiveness is present but in delay in the form of peer reviewed papers etc but in the distributions of temperaments in the USA they fit into the 30% of the population that is opposed by the other 70% of the more 'now' oriented.

Secondly, the focus on theories is also a focus on foundations, on universal algorithms/formulas synonymous with instincts/habits formation and so a link to the GENERAL rather than particular/singular.

Thus Science deals more with:

Line 1 - environment
Line 2 - behaviour
Line 3 - capabilities

Where these form context in which particulars/singulars can work and these fall into the realm of hard to change when compared to personal 'whim' ;-)

> We are doing science already for centuries in basically the same way
> and the core principles of mathematics are still the same as they were
> in ancient Greece. Carved in stone ..
>
> I think the problem in your perspective is that it treats different
> scales or dimensions as one while they in fact don't correlate very
> well and sometimes not at all:
>
> - more precise
> - more abstract
> - less instinctive
> - easier to change
> - ?
>
> These are all different scales.
> Instinct can be very precise, for example.

Not as when in tandem with mediation dynamics, feedback loops and so frontal lobe precision where THAT activity then REFINES existing instincts/habits beyond their species-nature.

> And if the part of the
> brain that regulates my bodily functions was as imprecise as the
> general abstract nonsense that goes on in my frontal lobes I would
> have left this planet long ago!
>

You have - this isn?t Kansas you know.

If we see the IC as a language so ANY hierarchy can be over-laid the IC as a whole or each hexagram (and so is scale-invarient). SOCIAL position maps to worker-sage, PERSONAL position, as in nature, maps to environment-spirituality. SAME generic categories but different contexts. (note the subtle association of worker-enviroment, sage-spirituality. The former association maps to environment 'pushing' the worker's instincts. The latter association maps to the pusher being 'within'.

Chris.
 

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
29
"the workers have to be motivated to take any actions"

That is probably true in general but my question was how easy it is to change things on different levels (line positions) from the outside. How much energy and effort is needed?

When we move up through the lines frequency is rising (in your model) and so is energy.
The higher the energy of a system the more energy (or force) you need to change it.
On the other hand, the effect of such a system on other systems and the ability and "drive" to change them also increases.
So what you get when humans move up the lines is more and more impetus and ability to change the environment and others and less and less desire (and ability?) to changing oneself. ;)

But I think you are also saying that, in other words. So we probably agree?

You could also look at it in terms of personal identity (I think that's what you do when you use the word singular?). Personal identity is analogous to energy in physics, higher energy systems have more "identity" of their own and "blue" fotons have so much of it that they simply bounce off air molecules when they collide with them. They change direction but their identity is preserved.

Identity becomes more and more an issue when we move to the higher lines but competition seems to be most fierce on levels 3 and 4. The same for personal whims. Levels 3 and 4 are typically the ego and ego-clash levels.
Above that things become relatively peaceful, perhaps because on those levels people start to feel more secure in their personal identities. There is less need to prove themselves or to show off. Some there have perhaps "made it" as kings or sages while others feel that they have become too old for the nonsense. Whatever. ;)

As to religion, yes, I would say that it often is a stabilizing factor. If it is indeed "line 6". But not everything that passes for religion or even spirituality is line 6 of course. Most of it is not.
Even the pope of the catholic church who is supposed be a supersage (line 7? ;)) has only become pope after a competition that probably involves cliques and a lot of dirty politics. Line 4?
And people who blow themselves up in the name of their religion, what is that, line 3?
 

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