Some changing lines don't make sense

[yly2pg1]

"IOW AND leads to XOR that can lead 'back' to AND, but an AND now in hybrid form
- containing the materialism of the Universe and the idealism of our consciousness.
This guarantees a movement towards increased universalisation "

So, the future mutan can be tagged as (X1,Y1), (X2,Y2) ...
where X is universal, Y is temporal and universal reality.
The number 1,2,3 ... is about the expire date?

 

[lightofdarkness]

> So, the future mutan can be tagged as (X1,Y1), (X2,Y2) ...
> where X is universal, Y is temporal and universal reality.
> The number 1,2,3 ... is about the expire date? [ mischief ]
>

interestingly, from a sociological perspective, as we move to increasing YANG so we move to the realm of EXCHANGE - aka METAL in five-phase. This focus on exchange is basically competitive (heaven) where even the love, a cooperative, is ultimately competitive (lake) (reflects the promotion of the ego as a universal, it is all 'me' etc - cloning gets into this!)

In this Exchange realm 'universals' rule, but they are now populating the LOCAL - IOW charisma rules and the economic system is capitalist. BUT, with the competition comes technology research, we are all out there buying the 'do it yourself' books etc - focusing on SELF actualisation. What the Science does is introduce more universals, that are immediately adopted since they represent 'best practice' and the competition DEMANDS you keep up with others and so COPY/implement the algorithms/formulas. What does this do? It makes the INSIDE SAME whilst the outside remains 'different'. IOW pepsi and coke are different and yet based on a universal - cola.

There is a interesting property of individuals taking on 'sameness' - phase transition (e.g. ice to water to steam). This get us into the concept of flocking behaviour, where individuals make personal distinctions, LOCAL distinctions/interactions, and a pattern develops across the whole group that is not sourced in any ONE. Now take that 'random' dynamic and get all the individuals to think the SAME.....

Jonestown did that. Heaven's Gate did that. Wako did that. Columbine did that. WE have to be REALLY careful here in that this realm is of fragmentation and 'emergence' that includes potential psychotic states.

psychosis // n. (pl. psychoses //)
a severe mental derangement, esp. when resulting in delusions and loss of contact with external reality.
[Greek psukhosis from psukhoo ?give life to? (as psyche1)]

IOW the XOR breaks free of the AND of the species - takes on a universal form (fundamentalism) and tries to assert its own context. The advantage of consciousness is its imagination where we can imagine contexts and adapt to them prior to experiencing them. The 'issue' is that this gives us the ability to imagine a whole world as if 'real'. Our books, our movies do this 'fantasy' very well, but also do it so well as people BELIEVE the fantasy; and so the imagined and the real 'mix' - what Robert Anton Wilson calls 'guerrilla ontology' takes over, where the mix of real and imagined is so good that it is seamless and we have to wrestle with ontological issues - what is the real "IS-ness"?

Chris.

 

[jeanystar]

<BLOCKQUOTE><HR SIZE=0><!-Quote-!><FONT SIZE=1>Quote:</FONT>

Actually, it is a space-temporal manifestation frozen by its observation and recording. Local, as shown in its present. Archetypical in the way our minds recognize, interpret and associate the image.<!-/Quote-!><HR SIZE=0></BLOCKQUOTE>

see the photo luis sent hilary, OPen Space, Winter Picture 12/19
local: unrepeatable ice formation

universal: monkey man shaman with huge headdress, protruding phallus and sly grin, slouching with his hands in his pockets, enjoying the debate

 

[pagan]

Lets call 1 or A a universal pattern
Lets call 0 or -A a universal substance

This universal substance can be molded into virtually anything. But it needs a pattern.

The complexity of the pattern will define its potential power and every other thing about it. In other words, the completeness of the pattern defines the utility of it and much more.

Lets say I am building a coffee table. I use universals in the form of numbers (measurements) angles, and I also apply elements (divisons in the nature of my raw material as wood, (boards) metal (nails and tools) etc.

So O (-A) is a universal in that it is just the available 'stuffness' of the universe (hydrogen atoms that can be transformed into anything on the table of elements, lets say).

and 1 (A) is the universal pattern that will animate, energize, infuse the 0 (-A) state to become meaningful, useful, real etc.

So here we are at the place where we mix two universals and arrive at the 'sprouting' up of all possibilities AS DEFINED BY THE INITIAL UNIVERSAL PATTERN which again, is 1 (A).

This universal pattern, also defines and limits by its own inherent nature, what all possibilities are. It defines ahead of time where there will be scarcity and where there will be overkill. It defines and generates its own power, initially in the form of archetypes, then as the four forces in physics and on up.

Lets say this universal pattern is the IC. Then it exists despite the earth, it exists in Plato's universal realm that is, as stated previously, a perfect state of equilibrium. It can't even be called static, it is best referred to as an 'akashic heaven'. There are an infinite amount of these heavens.

The 0 (-A) state is nothing but primeaval stuff. It has no meaning, form or purpose or quality until it is overlayed by a universal pattern. This universal pattern (1 or A) gives 0 or -A its identity, existence, quality, nature, purpose and every other thing that can be applied to it. Like a skeleton gives form to a blob of flesh, for example.

So when we talk about LOCAL, we aren't talking about 1,(A) and we are not talking about 0 (-A) we are talking about their interaction. The fusion of 0 and 1 brings forth a creation or existence where every part of it has its universal thread (strings to a primary archetype that it takes its form from) and a local expression that happens to be how that fusion operates in a local time/space setting.

So 0 (-a) can't stand alone. It doesn't exist at all without being infused with 1 (A).

When you talk about local expressions of anything, you are already far deeper into complexity than what merely 1, 0 or A, -A can be allowed to represent.

From then on you have a crossing over, a constant flipping where yin nature is expressed through yang and yang nature is expressed through yin. Very soon the complexity gets overwhelming.

So when we are looking at the IC as an oracle, we are limited in our ability to predict outcomes because of the vast complexity that is already present as soon as you have a live human in a real social reality. Yin and Yang have mixed zillions of times over already.

This is why I cling to the idea of finding the universal formula that underlies the IC rather than looking for the IC to be able to define authoritatively and comprehensively, the exact nature of an event or situation in my life. GOOD GRIEF!!!!

And this is why I return to the initial question of this thread. What is the universal pattern that makes sense out of the changing lines? I am sure most people can see a developmental progression from hexagram 1 to 2 to 3 ... 30 to 31 to 32 ... etc. It is really very logical and doesn't violate our common sense.

But the changing lines DO violate common sense again and again. What I am curious to know is this: despite their seeming incongruity to a linear path of progress, do they contain hidden formulas that, once understood, will help us understand why life never seems to progress in an orderly way? And why it seems that nature always takes us on a zig zag pattern to the realization of our hopes and wishes?
P.

 

[candid]

Ever witness a neat and tidy birth?
Do trees grow linear and symmetric branches and roots?
Ever witness an orderly storm?
Or an uncomplicated personal relationship?

Life is unruly and difficult, unlike a coffee table.

 

[dobro p]

(dobro puts his tea mug down on the coffee table).

So there.

 

[Sparhawk]

Ever the contrarian, Dobro... You don't place tea on a "coffee" table...

L

 

[lightofdarkness]

with consciousness and its focus on universals so death at child birth is reduced, and the whole thing more 'tidy' than is natural - but then our consciousness is focused on universals and so ideals.

Consciousness 'guides' tree development (hex 47 - make the roots go deep, FORCE adaptation to context OR willinging allow for the enclosure knowing that is happening)

Forcasting weather allows for avoiding 'messy' storms ;-)

Relationships are often based on issues of 'difference'. The do-it-yourself stuff can aid in that - the current situation is naturally fragmenting, XOR, which is an issue when you want to AND! ;-)

Our mania for universals is such based on avoiding the affects of time on us - genetic engineering etc focuses on delaying death. The makeup industry, hollywood, etc etc is focused on 'perpetual youth' etc. Delusions that can be fun until taken too seriously.

 

[lightofdarkness]

The changing line 'issues' stem from seeing past the local system and into the universal system - we detect there is something 'more' going on that is not, or not clearly, presented in the 10th century BC perspective, a perspective that is overly AND oriented and mixed with rich, local referencing, metaphor to try and describe a universal!

The ICPlus approach is on not asking the IC questions, but on asking the user questions about 'THE' question. The questions are vague enough and reflect how our brains move from vague AND to crisp XOR, general to particular.

http://www.austarmetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/lofting/proact.html

This method ensures a closer fit to the 'best fit' hexagram for a situation BUT elicits some 'trust' in the user answering 'correctly'.

Chris.

 

[candid]

"Forcasting weather allows for avoiding 'messy' storms"

surely you jest!

 

[candid]

Fwiw, the more I read of this need for a perfect fit, the more I am convinced of its insufficiency.

Once during an arduous testing by a management screening/recruiting company, I was asked a series of problem solving questions. I had been schooled in a tightly systematic, formula based method of sales and management for years prior to this interview/test. My answers all fit together like a well organized matrix, and I was confident that the organization would be impressed. In their summery they quoted that my clinical approach was short-sighted and failed to deal with the real world, and with real people. Their exact words, in which they paraphrased my own approach, was, ?if only I get the system right, everything will fall into place and success will be achieved.? They then pointed out the shortcoming of my approach, steering me toward a more people-based approach. I wasn?t offered the position, but in the years and experiences which followed, I learned how off the mark I had been and how correct they had been. Perfect systems fail at the human (species) level. Empowering the individual through reinforcement of their own human potential is what creates champions, and champions are what creates a successful organization.

Perfect systems are fine for computers, but fall apart on the human (living) level. Perhaps, Chris, your desire to create the perfect system empowers your own sense of belief, and therefore that empowers you (16). But it is not the magic bullet or holy grail of the human spirit. If it was, it wouldn?t be so difficult for others to believe and follow. People will only follow that which they instinctively sense they can trust, and that will always be more than just a system. Even a perfect one.

 

[candid]

Why do those here continue to follow the way of I Ching? Is it only the beauty of its matrix? Or is it that your own potential becomes realized and your own spirit renewed, that you may become champion of yourself?

 

[pakua]

"And why it seems that nature always takes us on a zig zag pattern to the realization of our hopes and wishes? "

Every goal one has needs to take millions of variables into account. You have to satisfy many of these, and in the doing, sometimes it seems as if you're led here and there.

 

[candid]

One more observation, and not meant in a derogatory way. Chris believes that every hexagram and line is applicable in every moment. Which is a nice way of saying that there is no oracle or synchronistic value to the IC. Any reading you get is as valid as any other in the book at any given time. Pagan no longer uses IC as an oracle, choosing rather to rely on her past lessons to replay in her memory as words of wisdom and council for her present. (If I understand correctly.)

I believe these factors are relevant to both of their/your focus on the model of the IC, rather than the life therein. It?s no wonder there?s little agreement within this thread, as it relates to the greater importance.

 

[martin]

Many issues here ..
Personally, based on inner experience, I have come to the conclusion that life has an "irrational" core that even a mind the size of a galaxy cannot approach or comprehend.
We can experience this irrationality (and we do) but we can never figure it out.

From a science perspective this is probably no big deal because science is still very far away from the limit of what the thinking mind can figure out. We make a lot of the oddities that surface in quantum mechanics nowadays but - using a phrase of UG - I would say that QM has not even _seen_ the sugar cube, let alone tasted it.
So, within the limits of what is possible there is plenty of room for science to expand and it will probably continue to develop in the future. We will know and understand more and more, at least if we manage to avoid blowing up or flooding our planet.

But with the IC it is different. The IC is supposed to cover all aspects of life. If it indeed does that (it seems so) it must incorporate that which is essentially irrational.
If a neat, more or less exact formula (for the derivation of the meaning of the lines, for instance) could cover that which is essentially irrational it would be rational after all. Which it isn't.
Therefore I think that such a formula doesn't and cannot exist.
That doesn't imply that one should not try to find it, though.

 

[candid]

Martin,

"That doesn't imply that one should not try to find it, though."

No, it doesn't. I have admiration for those with the interest and aptitude to study such systems, and I don't feel that my way is really better. It's just my way, and that makes it better 'for me'.

 

[martin]

Yes, one should find and follow ones own weird. A fish that tries to fly across the Atlantic will probably not get very far. Neither will a bird that tries to swim across. Well, perhaps some ducks can do it.

 

[pagan]

Candid,
I guess I am confused as to the stance you take here. Are you saying; "never use a recipe when cooking food?", or "Never use the alphabet when making words and sounds?"

Why do you want to rip one thing away from the other? It is as if chaos is the only safe place for you. That is okay, but very difficult to sustain. I mean, you ARE using the alphbet to communicate here so your are a hypocrite in what you are saying.

The alphabet is a set of universal symbols. Poetry is one example of the many unique local expressions of these symbols. It isn't an either or proposition, they go hand in hand. I am frankly astounded at your attempt to pigeon-hole the study of universals into something so unrelated to your own everyday existence.

Regardless of how you use it, the IC IS a universal system that is applied to local space/time events. One can use the IC as an oracle, or look at it as a universal blueprint of creation and only study it on that level. One approach does not rule out the other, nor diminishes the other.

I use the ICHING as a medium for the Sage to communicate to me. This is an act of faith I can't explain or justify and I don't intend to try to. In some ways that is an oracle but more importantly it is about learning universal principles that guide my thinking. I feel enriched by this study.

The statement I made about one hexagram or line not being able to adequately assess a person's life situation or circumstance seems downright obvious to me. Using the IC to comprehensively explain your life is obviously suspect. No matter how comprehensively one hexagram, some changing lines, or two linked hexagrams serve to illustrate the overarching elements of a given specific situation, the extreme complexity of human life dictates that understanding cannot possibly be so one dimensional. I have in fact experimented with this. Friends have asked questions about me and vice versa. While the answers may have been good food for thought, they certainly didn't cover the spectrum of who I am or what the potential interrelationship between me and another person can be.

Every life situation is a multifaceted diamond with many angles from which to view it. Using the IC as an oracle can dangerously affect your full range of perception, even if it does well to point to key elements therein.

I have read many of your posts to people about how lines and hexagrams apply to given circumstances in their lives and I think you are very keen on understanding the nuances of the changing lines. I don't want to discount that value, but if others see some added function for the IC, I don't see why you need to put it down.
Especially since you are using it precisely in the way that you say you are not using it.
P.

 

[candid]

Pagan, I've never discounted one half for the other. If there was one point I've tried to make throughout this thread, it's that cognition sews together what is written with what lives. I don't embrace chaos, but neither do I embrace rigid structure. I agree, they work together.

My understanding, based on what I've read from your posts here and in other threads, is that you no longer use the Yi as an oracle. And you?ve made a point of stating that often. That's not a put-down, just an observation - one that would naturally create a different bias than if you used it as an oracle. Your approach to the work, as expressed throughout this thread, has been cleanly objective. And this is where we have differed, because I have maintained that understanding the IC is subjective as well as objective.

 

[brian]

Who, what, where, when, why, how...these are the words uttered by those who seek to be deceived.

 

[lightofdarkness]

Hi Candid,

>
> Fwiw, the more I read of this need for a perfect fit, the
> more I am convinced of its inaccuracy.
>

Not really. The focus is on being immortal and that is an exaggeration out of species-nature, a REACTIVE nature, into our consciousness-nature, a PROACTIVE nature.

The Western mindset is focused upon DELAY of death and as such that mindset is exaggerated, but in that exaggeration HAS delayed death for those within the mindset, the collectives. We now live to 70s/80s when old age used to be 30s/40s.

The differentiation bias, the drive to XOR, means a focus on clarity to each - such that each will, given the chance, create their own language to ensure 'clarity'! - each generation in fact does that, comes up with some creole-type language, but the education systems ensure one language spans all generations - in general ;-)

The issue with idealism is that its focus on universals can make the idealist collective appear 'shallow', surface structure is all that matters due to the focus on expression of the universal as a universal. "Pepsi" is a universal, "Coke" is a universal but all they are 'within' is carbonated water, sugar, cola flavouring etc.

Hollywood represents universals in the form of 'stars' etc where the EXTERNAL focus allows for the superficial to be held 'within' - how one LOOKS or SOUNDS is all that matters; being a 'talking head' is all that matters.

The focus on 'perfection' is a focus on survival through exploitation - in the enneagram this maps to type 3 - the realm of heroes and villians, charismatics etc - both get their 15 minutes of fame. The 9 categories in the enneagram map to 8 psychological categories and 1 more of a sociological category - type 3.

In our ape states, so 'alpha' males and females 'rule'. You think that that has dissapeared? No. The instincts are still there - the difference is that strength is no longer physical, it is strength of mind that must also be taken into consideration. Our consciousness will EXAGGERATE the instincts etc such that we 'transcend' our ape-states in many areas, but in doing so try to 'break free' of them - no way.

If you read through my prose you will find repeated references to issues of consciousness eliciting a mechanistic perspective, it be PARTS oriented, as compared to out speciesness that is organic in perspective. The advantage of consciousness is in precision of mapping. The disadvantage is that it gets-off on the 'precision' at the cost of wholeness; it has marginalised the species-nature since it is attracted to the 'bright lights'. OVERALL there is thus a need for discernment.

>
> Perfect systems are fine for computers, but fall apart on
> the human (living) level. Perhaps, Chris, your desire to
> create the perfect system empowers your own sense of belief,
> and therefore that empowers you (16).

I do nothing of the sort. The IDM material is simply there to emphasise the source of meaning in our SPECIES-NATURE and how that source 'seeds' the EXPRESSIONS of our consciousness. IOW the IDM work covers the BEDROCK of meaning, prior to the expression at the level of topsoil. This bedrock is, as such, a universal, but it is recognisable as such, we understand its 'vagueness' even if it has depth - we always deal with 'blending, bonding, bounding, binding', or their compounds, no matter what the level. SPECIALISATIONS then add 'colour' - such as the 'traditional' I Ching etc.

There is no 'perfection' here in that the focus is on the GENERAL, the language of the VAGUE. FROM that level come all of the ontologies, the I Ching, MBTI, Mathematics, humanities, sciences etc etc and KNOWING that allows for refinement of those specialisations, as well as re-integration of those systems into our species-nature through recognition that they are all metaphors.

LOCAL dynamics reflect adaptations of universals to particular contexts and as such is 'messy' - our senses reflect 'ideal forms' but with distortions due to their being products of 'mindless' growth dynamics; our sense of smell maps to a tetrahedron due to the four GENERAL qualities that DIFFERENTIATE themselves, maximise their distance from each other but all WITHIN the integrate whole of the sense. That maximisation ensures a tetrahedron architecture. LOCAL context will then accentuate some parts over others - and so our sense of smell 'meaning space' is IN GENERAL a tetrahedron, but in PARTICULAR is covered with distortions, spikes etc on the 'surfaces' of the shape etc.

We have come out of the 'mud' to make things 'clear'. In that seeking of clarity so we EXAGGERATE that clarity into ideals. PRIOR to the development of Science, our seeking of the 'reason why' was left to our vivid imaginations. WITH Science so we achieve more 'clarity' - but it is there as a TOOL; we still play in the 'mud' of social dynamics - its fun! ;-)

IDM asserts that for each specialisation, no matter how 'precise' it gets, it will always experience a sense of 'incompleteness' due to that specialisation cutting itself off from the AND realm. IOW to be 'complete' means applying the universal to the local, to a context to add some 'colour'.

The prices of XOR is in mis-interpretation of our experiments in Physics etc (see http://www.austarmetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/species.html) where the source of DESIGN is in our XOR consciousness that is alientated from our AND species-nature; that nature is not taken into consideration and so our imagination takes over! ;-)

Basic IDM stuff ;-)

The INTENT of IDM is to serve as:

(1) a 'species 101' course about how we as a species derive meaning IN GENERAL and so how all specialisations will reflect the underlying qualities hard-coded into us as a species. This makes learning specialisations quicker in that one can make some assumptions about what is being represented by that specialisation - patterns of differentiating/integrating.

(2) as a SEED to aid AI systems to develop a sense of 'meaning'.

IDM as such is not a system, it is ABOUT systems. It covers all we can ever know given our senses and our representation of what those senses pick-up - patterns of differentiating/integrating. If there is anything outside of these patterns, or we have not differentiated enough, that something, its 'meaning', will oscillate, appear as paradox - as covered in the paradox page (http://www.austarmetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/paradox.html) - it reflects changing lines where there is a lack of detail, of IS-ness, and so an oscillation across yin/yang at the level of hexagrams that could be identified if we went deeper - into dodecagrams etc.

To understand the WHOLE, the AND state of the unconscious, one needs to do some XOR-ing and then re-integrate. ;-) Persona will determine the scope one is prepared to cover in this process. Understanding the RANGE of personas, the Structure of Personality, will allow one to maximise that scope.

Chris.

 

[lightofdarkness]

Hi Candid,

>
> One more observation, and not meant in a derogatory way.
> Chris believes that every hexagram and line is applicable in
> every moment. Which is a nice way of saying that there is no
> oracle or synchronistic value to the IC.


No. you distort the point a little. The WHOLE of the IC is applicable to EACH moment - AS A UNIVERSAL. I have repeatedly stated that the LOCAL context will then DISTORT the sequence of hexagrams into a bestfit/worstfit ordering. That is how it can work, that is how it can elicit 'meaning'. Using 'random' methods will give you a hexagram that you consider to be the 'best fit' - and there is a chance that it is - and that experience, without knowing what is going on in the 'big picture' will elicit a sense of 'synchronicity'. And this will happen for all hexagrams close to the 'best fit' (e.g. first 10 will elicit varying degrees of synchronicity)

Since all of the IC hexagrams represent the WHOLE, and as such, in that context, are PARTS, so ALL PARTS are applicable to the moment, ALL parts will elicit 'meaning'.

The ICPlus question system focuses on exploiting this 'resonance' of IC and brain structure to ensure a regular elicitation of the 'best fit' but in doing so trusts the user's unconscious as well as conscious in answering the questions 'correctly'.

Since you and the IC are 'one', and so it represents you as well as the context, any interaction will elicit 'resonance' in some form. That is why you MUST have a question to use the IC, to LOCALISE it and 'fit' with your localised attention. This is how the IC CAN 'predict' states etc.

As a SPECIES member so CONTEXT will 'push your buttons' but in such a way that your MIND has no idea what is going on. This gets into the Taoist story of the rain maker. A village recruited a rain maker. When he arrived he was given a place to live and immediatly went there and that was it.... for days/weeks (depends on who is telling the story! ;-)) THEN came the rain. The village was very happy etc but on villager asked why the delay? The rain maker replied that he need to get into the 'Tao' of the area - iow the context - before he could do his stuff. He recognised that 'context pushes' and to to his stuff, is 'universal' stuff as a 'rain maker', he needed to integrate with the context, let it 'push' buttons and so guide in dealing with this local situation - IOW he had to SYNCHRONISE with the context.

When you and the context are 'one', all sorts of 'coincidences' can occur ;-) --- it is like me going to bookshops. If I get into a 'bookshop' mode I will (a) be selective in what shops I visit and so (b) think of other likeminded people as a part of the associations and (c) make a good chance that the 'likemindedness' will mean bumping into one of those people -"Oh Hi!, I was just thinking about you...."

A LOT of this is done UNCONSCIOUSLY where you can put yourself in a context that will elicit coincidences etc and your consciousness will have no idea what is going on! Your consciousness is PARTS oriented, it is NOT the whole. The integration of consciousness with speciesness gives you the whole but the IMMEDIATE nature of that whole is out of conscious awareness, things are made aware AFTER the event etc.


> Any reading you get
> is as valid as any other in the book at any given time.

No. LOCAL CONTEXT WILL SORT THE HEXAGRAMS INTO BESTFIT/WORSTFIT. IOW ALL 64 hexagrams apply but are skewed by local context.
You are confusing the UNIVERSAL with the LOCAL - it is the same as confusing 2 with 2-of-something.

The oracular nature of the IC goes back to ancient times where 'gods' ruled without question. We can now figure out what is in fact going on but that still does not link us with our unconscious - the IC allows for that link. The resonance of our being and the IC, the common ground as shown through IDM, means there IS a place for the 'oracular' perspective in that it gives us access from our consciousness to that part of ourselves integrated with, being pushed by, the context - our species-nature.

Chris.

 

[jerryd]

Chris; you reference your IDM method as a 101 course! If it is there is an indication of no pre-knowledge needed for admission. Are you thinking of re-classifying it to perhaps a higher level? say 401 with some hard fast knowledge of computer programming and physics and Yi before one attempts to get a grip on what you are trying to put across here? And who are the ones you teach and do they actually have a good knowkedge of you methods? and what are their backgrounds? I truely would like to know?
I am not at odds with any of this it is just beyond my simplistic understanding which I am not ashamed of just confused beyond any real intrest to read furthur.

 

[lightofdarkness]

Martin,

Jung's focus on the irrational was on sensing and intuiting and those are properties of our species-nature, our organic nature and ARE reflected in the IC since their roots are in differentiating/integrating ;-)

The rational takes us into the realm of feelings (emotions etc) and thinking (rational). This forms an asymmetric dichotomy where emotions pre-date thinking (back brain predates frontal lobes ;-)) - as we move into the emotional/rational we discretise, XOR takes over from AND.

The IC covers all of this since it is a metaphor for all of this - patterns of differentiating/integrating sourced in the neurology. That neurology has adapted to context and as such REFLECTS the traits of context - differentiating/integrating. It is that 'resonance' that allows us maps to be so good.... and we have not finished mapping! ;-) We use discovered universals to aid in that mapping - such as the 'universal' IC.

Chris.

 

[lightofdarkness]

Hi Jerryd,

My focus, being a more tertiary 'type' of thinker, is on first year uni (101 stuff) - just prior to specialisation but having some life experiences that can be used for reference/examples (the IC 'says' you need to be about 50 to 'get it' - due to the need to have had the experiences to get the 'feel'. IDM says that is not necessary due to understanding what is BEHIND the IC - we can start younger! ;-))

Someone with primary or secondary school focus could 'chunk down' the material to fit those grades - I am not an educator/teacher etc. and will start-off a talk etc assuming some previous knowledge! ;-)

It is possible to 'teach' IDM without reference to IC or mathematics or MBTI. The association to emotions could be useful in that that covers experiences all have from infant up and as such something 'concrete' to link with.

Chris.

 

[candid]

Chris, I still read what you say (in less words) as: we find the meaning we want/need/seek, regardless of what hexgram comes up. This is the same bouncing ball that we played with some 3 or more years ago.

How can you say "not really" to what I state as my belief?

Candid: Chris believes that every hexagram and line is applicable in every moment.

Chris: The WHOLE of the IC is applicable to EACH moment - AS A UNIVERSAL.

A bit of splitting hairs, me thinks. If the whole book applies as UNIVERSAL, then so would any particular part apply as UNIVERSAL as well.

 

[martin]

Hi Chris,

Ah yes, but when I used the term 'irrational' I was not referring to the Jungean functions sensation and intuition. I was referring to what could be called an 'irrational something' i.e. an object that the thinking mind cannot figure out.
What we perceive through sensation or intuition doesn't need to be irrational in this sense. The thinking mind might still be able to comprehend it.

What I'm talking about or rather pointing to is not something that can be understood as (for instance) chaos or paradox, it's much more "irrational" than that. The mind can simply get no hold on it.
This means that no model/theory can really "cover" it. To a certain extent it is possible to label it, give it a name, perhaps locate it more or less accurately on a map, but that doesn't correspond to any real understanding. It's like representing the city of New York by a dot on the map of the US. Okay, then we know where it is, but what is it, what goes on inside that dot?
Sorry, said the computer, access denied!

 

[lightofdarkness]

Hi Candid,

no splitting of hairs - an ESSENTIAL difference - as the difference between '2' and '2 of something'. Do NOT associate the traditional IC with being a universal - it isnt, the traditional IC is a LOCAL, a SPECIALISATION of a SPECIALISATION - a DERIVATIVE if you like. It is tied to SPECIFIC TIME, unlike the universal that is 'timeless'.

At the level of the universal so hexagram 2 represents 'contractive blend in a context of contractive blending' - aka wholeness thorough integration. Thats it. (see my thread on the Species I Ching on this site)

LOCAL context then adds colour as in:

(1) total darkness, total negation, suck you in, no escape, black hole where not even light 'comes back' - there is nothing to reflect, all is absorbed. etc etc - FEAR
(2) total nurturing, total integrating of someone/something and so dedication, devotion to that someone/something - DEVOTION TO ANOTHER/OTHERS.

These are, from a LOCAL meaning perspective 'different' to the universal form. The IDM perspective fleshes out the full spectrum of the universal and so allows us to apply it in finer detail, and from that work we uncover the 'generic code' of hexagrams re their expressions.

Recall that hex 27 deals with the skeletal form of 'something'. In its IDM, universal, nature it is "contractive bonding in a context of expansive binding'" - aka static relationships in a context of dynamic relationships with a base on differentiating. - IOW sharing space IN time with others. space deals with structure as time deals with process - and so the 'form' of something through time gets into structural development in need of 'filling' - as time will give it the opportunity to do.

SHARING of SPACE contractively, drawing 'in', means there is some degree of 'choice' involved and that makes it conditional, quality control is present. That is the positive perspective. The negative is in competitive sharing of space - as in 'splitting apart' interpretations where the mountain symbol is the last relic of structure prior to total collapse into the 'nothing'.

SHARING of TIME means a focus on begin-end in the form of 'immediate' understanding vs 'delayed' understanding. The former brings something into the light 'suddenly', a birth etc the latter cultivates over time. Thunder vs Wind.

A CONTEXT of 'sudden' time sharing, a focus on the 'new', is reflected in the universal of 'expansive binding' - this 'new' is something I put on, build upon, but is not 'me', I bind it to 'me'. In this context is a sharing of INTERNAL space where that space is of a BONDING nature and as such touches on invarience through time, time is of no consequence, part of what I share is 'stuck' to me as I am stuck it/them.

This translates to quality control, discernment, operating in a context of 'new' beginnings - skeletal forms, the clay being turned into structure - and so the concept of 'hungering' - a newbie in need of filling and so representing the skeletal form of 'something'.

You should be able to see in the above the transformation from 'raw' to 'refined', from 'univeral' to 'local' - from univeral IC to local IC.

ONE of those details in the universal, when mapped to the local in the form of persona identifications, is in the persona type that is ADAPTIVE in form - does not like labels, sees potentials and local contexts and so freely adapts to the existing; a shape shifter, externals reflect adaptation, internals reflect ONE nature as core.

At the other end is the type that ASSERTS context, gets the context to adapt to them (and so reflects their taking over of the context). In this process so labels abound, all has to be clearly identified 'forever' and so as a universal- but now LOCALLY in that the context is being universalised, globalised - sound familiar? ;-)

Chris.

 

[jerryd]

Chris. I have a world of life experience 60 + years of it. I also have a better than average education. You failed to tell me who your students are and if thay understand it (IDM) at any level?

 

[pagan]

Chris wrote:
"...and there is a chance that it is - and that experience, without knowing what is going on in the 'big picture' will elicit a sense of 'synchronicity'. And this will happen for all hexagrams close to the 'best fit' (e.g. first 10 will elicit varying degrees of synchronicity)...."

Whew, that is so critical to see.
P.