Some changing lines don't make sense

[candid]

Well, theoretically, heaven is circular, so the problem of linear change isn?t applicable to that dimension. But then neither is the I Ching. So we really haven't solved the problem.

 

[heylise]

I don?t know that much about temporary, eternal and such, but I know that the Yi is quite old. Venerable old sage or so. So when he tells me something, I don?t expect the line to make sense or not, I expect me to make sense of the line. I take it as it is and try to find its meaning.

I have one advantage, I don?t see any hexagram as positive or negative. A time of 47 is usually not as easy as a time of 35, of course. But then, living in the mountains is not as easy as living in the plains, but still many people prefer the mountains. There too you cannot say one is positive, and one negative.

So, about my advantage: every hexagram can be good or bad in a situation, it is up to the seeker what to make of it. I have twice as many hexagrams as those who split them in a good and a bad department. Hex. 11 can mean that you take things too easy, and miss the advantages that were lying on your path just like that. When I get 11, I don?t sit back and expect things to get ok all by themselves ? just because it is such a ?good? hexagram. On the contrary, I start looking around if there is something for free, which I might miss if I don?t pay attention.

I take your examples:

45.2-47 Protracting is auspicious. Without fault. True, then harvest using a Yue-sacrifice.
Work together, join others, be one of a group ? but never give up your own personality or potentialities. When one is with others there is always the dilemma how much to surrender and how much to stay oneself. Do not search for a middle road but do both. Be a member AND be yourself, social AND egoist. By the way: the most valuable members of a group are always those who stay true to themselves (who make their own connection with the gods).
Changes to 47, where ?a noble one incurs fate on fulfilling his aspiration?.

To be a member of a group like 45, ?uniforms?, has a lot to do with the amount of individuality one is prepared to give up. Giving up all means to be a dumb pawn, giving up nothing means not to be a member at all. And there 47 comes into play. And when you look at the fanyao, it makes even more sense:
47. 2: Hard pressed with food and drink. A cordon of Scarlet Sashes coming. Make use of the (ceremonial) presenting of offerings. A rectifying expedition will be a pitfall, not a fault.
Life is never perfect, there are always a lot of frustrating things, even in a good life. And there are always good things, even in a hard life. Live both sides, enjoy the good, accept the hard. Go a bit overboard in the good things to compensate for the lack in other area?s. Soften the hard things by thinking of the good ones.


40.5 5: The net-guiding rope of a noble one still leaves freedom. Auspicious. True to small men.
A free mind cannot be bound and does not bind others. But everyone will follow him of his own free will. In order to make others listen to you, honor them for what they are, and give them the freedom to be what they are.

Hex.40 is both about being free and leaving free, ?removing the horns?. Line 5 is the king, your conscious mind, the one who can lead and oversee. Living your own fate (see the noble one of 47) means to have a totally free mind, or else you will find only a small and unkind fate. A free mind will fulfill his aspirations despite anything, the positive side of 47, but a not-free one finds 47?s negative side. The fanyao:
47. 5: Nose cutting, foot cutting. Oppressed by Red Sashes. Then gently there is escape. Make use of offerings.
Your spirit needs freedom. Every man-made rule, fear, insecurity, lack of self-confidence, will diminish its charisma. People listen to a true and large mind, they shun narrowness. As soon as you let the world oppress you, the world will stop listening to you. Even your own body, which needs your guidance, will stop listening.


58.1 : Harmonious exchange, auspicious.
Inner contentment, not needing anything from outside, is the base of freedom. You find your power within yourself. Making a real good contact with others is only possible when this inner freedom exists.

Again about freedom and restriction... The fanyao:
47.1 The buttocks tied to a tree trunk. He enters a secluded valley. For three years he does not encounter anyone.
If you see your status as part of yourself, it is easy for anyone to hit you or make a fool of you - but actually you do it yourself. You live reactions: when they drag you down, obediently you let yourself be dragged down. Stick to your real Self, you will be safe and warm and nobody can hurt you.

LiSe
Book of Sun and Moon
www.anton-heyboer.org

 

[candid]

Pagan, thanks for this exchange. My own opinion is that no matter what conclusion you or I come to, what matters most is to stay open. It is my observation that when people believe they have the final, ultimate, conclusive answer, when everything fits neatly into a grand scheme, they become closed, intolerant and arrogant. So maybe it's a good thing that you haven't yet found the definitive answer you've sought.

 

[lightofdarkness]

Perhaps, rather than reading changing line comments, (6 of them), try reading line position perspectives - 64 per hexagram? IOW extract the 'genetic sequence' reflecting the univeral nature of each hexagram, to be 'coloured' by local context.

Pagan focused on 47 - so apply the XOR process of all hexagrams to 47, to derive its 'parts list' that contribute to its phenotype - its expression.

For example, if we do 27 XOR 47, we derive the analogy describing the 'mud' or 'clay' from which 47 is born, its skeletal form. That form is described by hexagram 10 (the enclosure in the form of the path one is on and being carefully watched)

Where does 47 get its nourishment, its 'water supply' - 48 XOR 47 gives us 001100 - 62. (issues of unconditional loyalty, but also as a 'con')

What does 47 look like, how does it present itself to the outside? 22 XOR 47 give us 01.

etc etc

whats more, you can zoom-in and derive the parts of the expression if you wanted to - as long as you maintain the link with the core context - 47

Chris.

 

[pagan]

I woke up this morning with this topic on my mind. You can kind of relate it to creating a website using html. Html is the language that 'commands' a certain look, color, position, shape, etc.; but you have to look at it from another window or frame or context to see what it really looks like.

You can look at the sheet music to an awesome song but that isn't the same as hearing the music played. And no two bands will play it identical even if they are using identical copies of sheets music.

Or, looking at a human being under a high power microscope, I lose the 'look' of the person and see the component parts that make the physiology look, feel and do as it does. I can look at an extremely complex run of genetic code, but that doesn't give me a visual photograph of the person.

If the IC defines natural law as it applies to a social body and individual units within that social body, then the program might look more like Chris's webpages, and the expression of those principles or laws, looks like real life. Even so, some will see the glass half full and others will see it half empty.

I have no doubt that the principles of the IC as they are spelled out in the hexagrams and changing lines are a complete template for life on earth.

What I still question is the validity of using the IC as an oracle, and especially the validity of changing lines pointing to a new hexagram that can be applied, no matter which way, to the situation--anymore so than any hexagram and any line can be applied to a given circumstance or situation.

In astrology, it is easy to understand why Aries is opposite of Libra, and square to Cancer, lets say. The nature of Aries is 'me first' and the nature of Libra is 'you first' but the nature of Cancer is survival of the clan first. These are three cardinal signs, doers, but they set their priorities differently.

It is not that easy with the IC. Many of the changing lines are counter-intuitive, regardless if you see the resulting hexagram as 'the future' or 'the context' or 'what can happen if you ignore the changing lines'. For example, 14 lines 2, 4 and 6 change into hexagram 36. Yes I can see where possessing too much of a thing valued by others will lead to a tyrant holding you in prison, or evil and injury. But I can also see how this much wealth can lead to the building of a great charitable effort, say hexagram 50 or 59.

Using Bradfords model, 14.2 =30, 30.4=22, 22.6=36. Hidden in this formula is the 30.4 promising that it will all come to naught in the end, so even though 22.6 looks auspicious, it is really a trap, a prison.

Using Chris' formula, of taking the 27ness of 47, or the 14ness of 47 or the 64ness of 47 is much more user-defined than an oracle. I might ask, how do I escape from this oppression? I take the 40ness (liberation) from 47 (oppression) and this gives me hexagram 8--look for union with a strong leader and/or wait for the right situation to present itself (by cutting off some avenues of escape-8.5). But I can also think of my own life and how I had to remove myself from an oppressive situation forcibly, like hexagram 21 might point to.

This, combined with the fact that the coins, tossed over a given length of time in the same way, will produce all hexagrams and changing lines somewhat evenly over the long haul, even if a certain hexagram or line may predominate in a short run.

My bottom line is that the IC is a superior template for understanding humans in a social context, and the IC is certainly a summary of every possible instance that can occur in human social settings. I can't tell you all how many hours I have spent trying to conjure a situation or circumstance in my head that isn't covered in the IC. There are none!

In a private discussion with Hillary, which she posted with my permission in one of her newsletters, Hillary pointed out that if you want to see hexagram 23, for example, in a positive light, (splitting apart to save yourself from evil lets say) then you are better directed to hexagram 40 or 49. She made me see that 23 is SUPPOSED to be negative, even if the ultimate result is positive. Without re posting that whole email, I will say that I became convinced, even if she didn't want me to, that the positive and negative connotations of each hexagram belong there for a good reason and shouldn't be glossed over. Hexagram 47 is exhaustion, oppression, depletion, and having no one to believe in you. Okay, that makes you artistic, fine, but it is still a negative AS IT IS.

To my way of thinking about it, all answers that the IC gives for a question can be forced to fit. My experience is that I have a guardian angel, the sage, who talks to me through the IC, even though it can't be proven, I don't care to try to prove it. But I am pretty sure that the way that changing lines lead to new hexagrams, with the possible exception of Bradford's model which I have not been able to test in depth, is too simplistic to reflect a dynamic super pattern in the universe that applies as 'an archetypal law'.

By archetypal law, I mean in the same way that Mars, in astrology, is the principle of aggression, conflict, and individualism, and will always be played out that way in a horoscope chart no matter how many aspects or what sign it is positioned in. If mars is retrograde, this agression is turned inward, or manifests in a covert way, but the nature of the archetype is always consistent, always that quality, even though that quality (Mars-ness) can't be empirically defined by any definition of words.
P.

 

[lightofdarkness]

Hi Pagan,

>
> You can look at the sheet music to an awesome song but that
> isn't the same as hearing the music played. And no two bands
> will play it identical even if they are using identical
> copies of sheets music.
>
> Or, looking at a human being under a high power microscope,
> I lose the 'look' of the person and see the component parts
> that make the physiology look, feel and do as it does. I can
> look at an extremely complex run of genetic code, but that
> doesn't give me a visual photograph of the person.
>


Sure, looking at genotype is one thing, seeing the phenotype, as brought out by the local context is another. BUT the geneotype has properties and methods that are universals and as such are expressed in any context in more or less the same manner (and genetic anomolies, wiring problems etc, are expressed the same in all contexts in that the context cannot influence - and so identifying a gene for 'brown hair' means that the expression will be partially 'known' prior to actually seeing it (and unless context, as in social dynamics, causes one to dye their hair blue! ;-))

if we have to wrestle with phenotypes, and so their universalisation in the form of labels, to understand things it will be 'fun' but lead us nowhere of depth in understanding (or else it takes 'forever'!)

Lets look at this from a social evolution perspective - go back in time to 10th century BC and there is no technology as we have it, no hygene compared to what we have; life is, if lucky, up to your 30s for most. Communications, due to the small village focus, is strongly tied to the local context such that to the next village one is obviously 'foreign' due to lack of including LOCAL references, history etc as sources of analogy to decribe things, sensations, the universe in general. This behaviour is a 'constant' with indigenous collectives (and so Australian Aborigines share traits with American Red Indians re relationship to, integration with, local environments etc)

This TIGHT integration of humans and local context, the strong dependency on that context, reflects an "AND" perspective - such that along come things like the I Ching and it is interpreted in an AND fashion, as a source of information on SEQUENCE, on CONNECTEDNESS and so on Time in its thermodynamic form, birth-death. All very organic BUT also 'vague' in the context of describing universals where the universals are covered-up by local colourings, variations etc (and being universals, are considered 'timeless')

The 'traditional' I Ching contains this STRONG bias to "AND" thinking, the focus on time, change, sequence; the focus on calendars, compasses and especially the focus on only 6 lines and they of the CHANGING type. There is no in-depth questioning of the content of things, their core STRUCTURE in that this issue at the time was left to 'god' etc; One's make-up was 'god-given' such that looking WITHIN was limited when compared to the parts analysis as WE know it today. (for example, in traditional perspectives there are more often only vague association of line positions to particular qualities, and only the individual lines are considered)

As we move into the 21st century AD so the increasing shift from AND to XOR is obvious and is reflected in Science and its perspectives - to break the whole into parts, CLEARLY identify those parts, and in doing so CLEARLY identify the STRUCTURE of the whole - and from THERE, THEN place that structure into contexts to elicit 'variations' in interpretations of the universal. (this shift is also reflected in social formations - extended families, and so extended dependencies, collapse into two adults, one child families - with a push for ever being 'universal' through genetic engineering a la clones etc and so 'idependence' dominates - 'freedom' rules - one adult and some test tubes will do!)

10th century *AD* material, where Taoism dominated and the Wu Chi -> T'ai Chi -> yin/yang dynamic was clearly mapped, started to show the emergence of 'Scientific' thinking, of a focus on XOR-ness. BUT, the "AND" nature of the IC still maintained its 'integrated with local context' perspective and its use to predict sequence, to focus on a dialectical perspective. (as Marshall shows in his book, the integration of individual with context ment that the only way to describe the universals in the IC was through analogy to local events; and so an overall integrating perspective, and a very 'local' expression of the IC universal - IOW covered up with local history etc)

In development of the species, Western perspectives developed quickly with the introduction of arabic numbering etc and so a focus on XOR-ing, differentiating, cutting the whole, discretisation - something very NOT-AND! Chinese Science also developed but it still lacked the XOR-mania of the West (focused today in continuing perspectives in Chinese communities on foundations of "AND" re approach to family, ancestors etc - also reflected in Buddhism etc where reincarnation etc stresses the point of connectedness across 'death' into the next life. In the West the focus is on discretisation and so only one life)

From Western perspectives on XOR-ness so has come the refinements in technology etc where we are not talking to each other across a village hall, but across the planet that has now become that 'village hall'.

With the refinements in technology, refinements in CLEAR understanding of what is BEHIND things, so we have entered what used to be the realm of religion; we now QUESTION and in so doing our faith shifts, becomes more and more centered 'in here' rather than 'out there' - YIN gives way to YANG. That focus reflects an overall drive to ESCAPE context dependence, to learn universals and so be autonomous - we can slot in to any context, anywhere in the Universe, and adapt immediately - no homesickness etc etc in that now, given our toolkits/skillsets etc, so 'where ever [we] hang [our] hat is home'.

What we witness here is the 'mindless' drive of development to becoming increasingly skilled, universal, and THEN either (a) take over the context, overlay it with one's own, or (b) adapt very quickly to the existing. This is a PROACTIVE approach, centered in consciousness as compared to the more REACTIVE approach, centered in speciesness. IOW at the level of the 'primitive' the focus is on PROTECTION. At the level of the 'sophisticated' the focus is on EXPLOITATION.

Ultimately, in this development of our conscious species, we have questioned our own being and so have developed such disciplines as neurosciences, cognitive science, psychology, sociology etc. FROM that work has come an understanding of our brains and so our minds and in that understanding we see the shift from 'primitive' AND perspectives to 'primitive' XOR to 'sophisticated' XOR perspectives and on into the integration of XOR-AND into a level of 'full spectrum' thinking - call it "IOR" (inclusive OR where XOR and AND fall within that definition)

To take the I Ching in its traditional format is to see it as "AND" oriented and in doing so, IMHO, in these times, doing the I Ching a diservice in that it REFLECTS 'us'. In that reflection will be ALL of us and so an XOR/AND dynamic used to derive UNIVERSALS that can then (a) create their own contexts to develop, or (b) adapt to existing contexts, gain some local 'colour'.

As such, in understand the UNIVERSAL so all else follows and then we focus on the LOCAL; and with that understanding of the universal comes a far deeper understanding of what we are dealing with in the IC as well as a deeper understanding of causality (AND) as well as structure (XOR).

The traditional perspectives got as close as they could to these perspectives a al such compass patterns as Fu Hsi (Structure) vs King Wen (process), but the focus on 6 lines, on lunar and solar calendars etc (and so 6 line
'steps' etc) reflected the dominating influence of AND thinking WITHOUT having gone through an 'in depth' XOR phase - a phase that I think IDM takes it through. The ancient material, when it gets into details moves into extreme metaphor that, if there is no universal to reference, can take some time to decode; WITH a universal so that time is reduced and/or not needed in that the modern format covers details of the universal clearly.

It is the understanding of recursion, and so what our brains do, that gives us access to structure (XOR) but also to AND-ness *WITHIN*. Understanding how 'in here' reflects 'out there' moves is into understanding the PART nature of our consciousness - the mediating nature, the hierarchy involved such that a 'whole' hexagram at one level is in fact a part of a whole expressed in the form of a sequence of ALL hexagrams.

Given this sequence perspective so probability processes do not derive ONE, they derive ALL and LOCAL context sorts that into 'bestfit/worstfit' orderings and our selective, high energy-attracted, consciousness will 'zoom-in' on what is supposed to be the 'bestfit'. (This leads into the questioning system ICPlus uses)

Our XOR/AND nature is well demonstrated. That nature, through evolutuion, reflects the internalisation of basic properties/methods of the Universe. Our maps reflect our use of these properties/methods applied to 'out there'. IOW universals such as the I Ching, Mathematics, MBTI etc REFLECT 'out there' THROUGH 'in here' projected onto 'out there'.

(we can see this development 'up' the brain - internalisation of 'space' (reptillian, territorial), internalisation of 'time' (mammallian, learning ability), internalisation of characteristics of evolution (neomammallian brain, we push context as it pushes us))

In 'traditional' perspectives, the overally "AND" oriented, so there is a sense of 'fate' included, part of the dependency focus overall. With consciousness we are in a position to delay or speedup, or even possibly bypass, 'inevitables', but to do that we need to know all we can about what we are dealing with, and so an XOR perspective is required to 'complete' things (together with RE-integrating XOR/AND).

Given the 'extremes' of XOR/AND, we cannot go back to primitive "AND", nore do we want to keep going too much into "XOR" since that leads to what in sociological terms we would label 'psychosis' (the mania of cutting can become a 'disease' as such). The path is therefore out of the middle - and so reflecting 'recursion' and the realm of mediation and so of consciousness as mediator and so of CHOICE .... IOW the emotional moves forward into the realm of the rational without losing touch with the emotional; and we avoid the mania through use of an "AND" property with a 'touch' of "XOR" - discernment (mountain).

The movement out of the middle includes understanding the 'attraction' of prediction systems to "AND" societies and the understanding of cause-effect dynamics stemming from XOR research where there ARE 'inevitables' but to understand them requires XOR/AND understanding, not all AND nore all XOR.

These are 'new' times for all of us, and that includes the IC itself in its UNIVERSAL format (a la ICPlus perspectives derived from IDM) such that 'change' for those dedicated to the traditional material may find things 'difficult' to deal with at first, but that change is inevitable in that it opens up the IC to allow for its full spectrum expression.

Chris.

 

[jerryd]

I will reply to all who are posting here on this thread with a tendency to agree with Helysie. Her statement of reading a change line not having to make a clear statement of sense seems reasonable and that it needs to be left to the one making the interpertation. Now why?

As a consumate Novice {reading with understanding from text} I find all information will stress the need to balance everything with the knowledge there are no absolutes and changes are what we can and must expect.
The changes will depend upon how our ideals are identified by our psyche and what our needs are and how are we to meet them.

We all possess Yang and Yin tendencies and there will vary in strength dependent upon our cultural and psychological makeup. Neither of which we have much control.
Our roll is to identify and be aware of the limits of our own personality and to balance these in our search for our interpertation of changes.

If a change line is read as a negative, it may well be a benefit to the overall reading taken in context, there for becomming a positive. Or the opposit may be true of the same line in a different context.

How objective is the reader of ones own question?
How objective is the questioner when the question is placed into the Yi's realm?
How Can one expect a definative answer to a personal question when the question depends totally on how the querent decides to respond?

In my case it is often easy to forget for every answer to every question a negative may be balanced by a positive and the positive can be found to have a negative aspect!

When I feel like I have found the definitive answer I know there is always a dark side or a light side to be found also. What it boils down to for me is the Yi opens up a base for me to compare and evaluate the advantage or disadvantage of a given problem and to make a educated decision on what is in front of me, it is a tool not a way of life. it is not the end of seeking wisdom but a step toward knowledge and will be my knowledge applied to my situation not the situation applied to my knowledge.

It always comes down to applying a physics of knowing for every action there will be a reaction, not necessarly an equal or opposit one but a reaction.

 

[yly2pg1]

Hi all,

Any comments?

<TABLE BORDER=1><TR><TD></TD><TD></TD><TD> </TD></TR><TR><TD>Trigram</TD><TD>Hexagram</TD><TD> </TD></TR><TR><TD>Heaven</TD><TD>Heaven</TD><TD>pure spirit </TD></TR><TR><TD>Heaven</TD><TD>Man</TD><TD>human side of spirit - organize, lead </TD></TR><TR><TD>Man</TD><TD>Earth</TD><TD>reality of man - motivation, choices, decision </TD></TR><TR><TD>Man</TD><TD>Heaven</TD><TD>spirit of man - emotion, thought, evaluation </TD></TR><TR><TD>Earth</TD><TD>Man</TD><TD>human reality </TD></TR><TR><TD>Earth</TD><TD>Earth</TD><TD>pure reality </TD></TR><TR><TD> </TD></TR><TR><TD> </TD></TR><TR><TD>XOR</TD><TD>XOR</TD><TD>pure spirit </TD></TR><TR><TD>XOR</TD><TD>AM</TD><TD>human side of spirit - organize, lead </TD></TR><TR><TD>AM</TD><TD>AND</TD><TD>reality of man - motivation, choices, decision </TD></TR><TR><TD>AM</TD><TD>XOR</TD><TD>spirit of man - emotion, thought, evaluation </TD></TR><TR><TD>AND</TD><TD>AM</TD><TD>human reality </TD></TR><TR><TD>AND</TD><TD>AND</TD><TD>pure reality </TD></TR><TR><TD> </TD></TR><TR><TD>AM - agent of mediation</TD><TD></TD><TD> </TD></TR><TR><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>

 

[lightofdarkness]

If you follow the development of lines, so we move:

yin/yang

yin+yin, yin+yang/yang+yin, yang+yang

In this process so the diagram states reflect interactions of HEAVEN/EARTH. Consciousness, and so MEDIATION does not come out until level 3 - the trigrams. We can extend this to interpretations of change where the derived hexagram, its changing lines, in fact reflects OUR insertion into the 'middle' of a HEAVEN/EARTH relationship, where CONTEXT will FORCE change into the 'preferred' response to the stimulus - and so WE will 'change' if we stay around long enough in a context - there appears to be a mapping of this by swapping trigrams in a hexagram - given a hexagram of trigrams A/B, so B/A is the 'context' that prefers A/B as response.

In DNA/RNA codons the focus is on di-grams, no mediation elements encoded, and so a HEAVEN/EARTH focus.

Thus ACC, a codon for an amino acid, is made up of three digrams. Change scale and the 'middle' codon, the first 'C', becomes the agent of mediation.

How does that pan out? no idea.

If the path of development is general to particular than we have AND out of which comes XOR. Put us in the middle, as you have above, and out pops the AM.

The role of the AM is to take the pool of meanings extracted from the AND by the XOR and SELECT the 'best fit' to 'complete' the AND - resolve the 'issue' with a suitable, best fit, response.

IOW, once a solution is found, so AM dissapears (or is 'supposed' to).

The AND realm as such covers the full spectrum of stimulus/response, the realm of instincts/habits. If there is an 'issue' then the XOR comes out of the middle to give all possible choices. This is reflected in sensory paradox processing (see examples in http://www.austarmetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/paradox.html)

In limited/non-conscious beings so the 'choice' is by chance - you see this in animals in a situation where they try out all of the possibles 'randomly' - and so we see 'out of context' behaviours where ANYTHING is tried to escape, to resolve, the situation.

As for the spiritual, it appears to come out in its exaggerated form through the XOR function - where it is exaggerated by consciousness and as such allows for 'lateral' development of consciousness; rather than sink back into the AND realm, consciousness retains its position and develops its own context - reflecting its focus on dealing with universals.

IOW *individual* consciousness, and so 'spirituality', is a product of XOR of 'something' - the vague sense of connectedness that comes out of social life forms and serves to PROTECT. It then gets exploited through consciousness.

Since emotions reflect a language pre symbolisms, so it is initially an 'AND' realm property that is extended into XOR through anger/sex etc dynamics. SUCCESS of that, success of being competitive, means favouring of development in that area - which is what we see in XOR dynmaics.

Move further back and the focus overall pre emotions is on context relationships - adapt-to or take-over. And so THAT becomes "AND" and emotions reflect exaggerations and so "XOR" states.

IOW what is XOR for one level, is AND for another and visa versa.

Chris.

 

[lightofdarkness]

An addendum --

TRIADIC perspectives are useful but have a tendency to impose intentful mediation as a part of that perspective. Reality suggests otherwise - once mediation is done so the mediation dissapears - and we see this in Mathematics where number systems 'beyond' the real contain mediation elements that are removed once the 'right number' is found, the 'real' number.

Note that the time span of mediation is 'unknown' in general, it could span milliseconds, or centuries etc. The IC allows for the encoding of mediation but as a variable form - other systems try to make it 'rigid'. These systems reflect mapping of CONSCIOUSNESS and as such CAN reflect reality but OUR reality (or that of other mediating life forms). THE reality appears to be more energy conserving, dyadic, yin/yang.

Chris.

 

[martin]

Okay, but now just suppose, as the more idealistic philosophies hold, that consciousness is indeed primary or fundamental, i.e. not caused by anything else. Would that make a difference for IDM?
Do we need another system - perhaps more triadic -if we assume that consciousness exists 'from the very beginning' and that it is not sourced in human or other brains? (one possibility would be that it uses our brains somehow, like we use a computer)
I don't intend to get into a debate about religious or other believes here. Just suppose ..

 

[pagan]

Hi Martin,
Here is how I see it: Without a doubt I hold consciousness as primary and fundamental. But it doesn't interfere with what Chis is saying, because in Chris's models, as I interpret them, the kind of consciousness that comes from the third level, where yin and yang interact, or where there is oscillations between both sides of the brain etc. is the "I think therefore I am" notion or defintion of consciousness.

The 'primary consciousness' that I think you speak of is not what Chris refers to as consciousness. Primary consciousness is something that Chris doesn't believe exists or else is agnostic about. But the notion of primary consciousness is universal among all world religions and is more like what is often called 'pure Being' which is experienced as the 'witness' behind our thoughts and actions.

This field of pure unbounded 'source' doesn't itself have any attributes, but is nevertheless, the source of all existence, the source of archetype, the source of thought, the source of matter. Many call it God, some call it creative intelligence, some call it the Tao. Even though it has no qualities, it can still be experienced.

Chris's model is designed to explain only human thought-consciousness that is born out of the brain's functions of perception and analysis. From Chris's point of view, notions of God and an original state of Pure unbounded consicousness is a diversion created by the mind out of some kind of need for notions of the eternal.

But if you skip over that point of view, then where it comes to a review of how the brain processes thoughts, ideas, concepts and how it initiates action, Chris's models are very useful. They can be inset into a model that includes consciosuness as primary even though Chris himself doesn't endorse that notion.

P.

 

[martin]

Yes, I understand what you are saying, Pagan. Apparently IDM is biologically oriented and not necessarily concerned with what may go 'beyond' that. The same could be said of Jung's perspective. His archetypes are biological and differ from the ideas/forms of Plato that are supposed to exist in a 'higher' realm.
But I don't know if it's possible to keep the different types or levels of consciousness altogether separated.
If what I call 'my' consciousness is only partly biological then I would expect that it 'does' things that a purely biological perspective cannot explain.
And I believe that it does that all the time.
Is that just me?

 

[candid]

Does it take thinking to know Brahman? Seriously.

Good grief, Charlie Brown.

 

[candid]

Pagan, I think that 47, in this case, exhausts itself. How can it then be believed? With Chris, I think it comes from pure 16. But what do I know? I'm just 4-ness. But hey, it's all species-ness.

A mountain is a clump of dirt. How big or small is completely relative to a dung beetle.

 

[pagan]

Hi Martin, Candid
I see it more as a continuum, and through my own experience I feel quite sure that I have a biology that is dispensible. I also have a mental body and an emotional body that are both also dispensible. That leaves us with the soul that encases our god-spirit which ultimately is also dispensible. Then it is all God and Brahman goes back to sleep for some length of aeons until he wakes back up and does the whole dance again. Thats the best view of life I've seen so far.

As the nervous system becomes more and more refined, so it is capable of perception at the subtler levels of reality. Our subtle bodies can't be proven by the scientific method, and it is only through experience that we ultimately know these finer states of existence.

But, before the topic is totally exhausted, I just want to point again to the reason that I brought the subject up--I was looking for universal principles. For example, 58 line 1 ALWAYS points to 47. Whenever a situation has its stance, so to speak, in the 'field' of 58 line 1, 47 will either be the outcome, the context, or the result if you ignore 58 line 1, or whatever--but some cosmic relationship must exist always for it to qualify as a valid metaphysical science (rather than an interesting philosophical discourse).

And what I want to say is I still don't feel comfortable with what I see. 58 line 1 is a very specific instance that is not replicated anywhere else (in hexagram or line) in the IC. Some may share similarities, but 58 line 1 is its own unique archetype. Therefore, since it points to 47, then if we look at universal principles, there is something cosmically tied to 58 line 1 that looks like 47. This doesn't require flesh and blood examples, it is only based on using the IC as a paradigm for reality, as in Plato's numinous world.

I am still not satisfied with what I have found. I do not have this trouble with Astrology or the Tarot because each archetype can hold any relationship to any other archetype in both of those metaphysical disciplines while still be intimately connected to its place in the numerical ordering of the discipline.

But if the ICHING changing lines point to some universal truth that ties, for example, 22 line 6 to 36, I have failed to see the why of it. If this is a universal truth that is as yet hidden to our present day collective evolution, I am very enthusiastic about uncovering that truth and applying it in all my affairs!!!
P.

 

[candid]

Pagan, well you certainly are tenacious. I hope you experience the revelations you are searching for.

BTW, Brahman is impersonal, while Brahma is the personal manifestation of the impersonal. I think the world is created and destroyed with each breath, with each day and night, and with each birth and death. I'm not sure what you mean by dispensable. Dissolvable, maybe?

I don't think there is a reason, per se. A natural phenomenon, yes. Plato would likely disagree, as would all heaven-based religions.

 

[candid]

Oh, and I include all that is considered spiritual and metaphysical with natural phenomenon. How could something be which isn't?

 

[martin]

Hi Pagan,

I think I have said it before: there is a strong irrational element in the Yi. It seems that the authors used not one but different systems to derive meaning and switched between systems in a highly unsystematic way.

So if you are looking for a sound metaphysical system behind the Yi - I'm not sure that it is there. I suspect that these Yi authors were on the whole (with a few exceptions) a disorderly bunch of artists and rebels, probably drunk most of the time. If they could see the solemn faces of some of the readers of their book they would ROTFL.
Not that it is not a good book, it is a very good book, a work of genius.
But it is a work of art, not of science.

Me thinks ..

 

[martin]

Makes me wonder - is art not always local, even if it reflects the universal 'beautiful' of Plato?

I mean, if you have a painting or a sculpture and you remove the 'local' from it, what is left?
I don't think that you can sell what is left to a museum for $100000. Or can you?

 

[martin]

Hmm, before anyone else comes up with it:

 

[lightofdarkness]

Hi Martin, Pagan, et al

The IDM template covers the set of qualities we use to describe reality but from a base level of sensory systems and 'neuron-dependent' life forms. IOW it covers what we can describe and that includes consciousness as originating or consciousness as derived; and the IC, being a derivative of this basic realm of meaning, can do the same thing - IOW IDM, IC, MBTI, Mathematics etc are universals and so TOOLS for model making that then needs 'validation' through experience. IOW the template gives us the 'full spectrum' as a universal and our experiences then 'colour' that universal, personalise it, such that some areas are brightly coloured, other areas still in their 'archetypal' form. (and so a CONTEXT can push buttons in each of us that have never been pushed in the past - and all of sudden our instinctual behaviour is 'child-like' and our minds are asking "WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON?!".)

Thus the template as a universal is like Mathematics, where 'pure' mathematics is only meaningful WITHIN the discipline of Mathematics - it creates its own context. The USE of Mathematics is in applying it to a particular context; thus '2' becomes '2 of something'. IOW you filter the context through Mathematics to generate mathematical representations of that context. In the IC we do the same thing - we can sit and "XOR" or "AND" hexagrams forever, but without a context, without a question, those processes are meaningless outside of 'pure hexagram manipulations'. Thus the IDM focus on identifying XOR/AND dynamics in the brain as PART/WHOLE interactions led to the identification of the 'genetic code' of hexagrams through applying XOR - we use XOR, amongst possible other things (issues of precision), to extract parts.

Thus we can have 'pure I Ching' and 'applied I Ching' where the former is a focus on universals, archetypes that lack colouring (and so can be interpreted as positive or negative depending on context) and the latter gets into local interpretations, colourings, history etc. ICPlus as such is focused on fleshing-out all of the properties and methods of pure IC that can then be used to add more clarity, colour, more structural depth, to applied I Ching.

ICPlus stems from IDM where its focus is on 'pure thought/meaning', universals, that can then either (A) make their own context to give finer details or (B) be applied to a particular context to 'bring out' aspects, colours etc. That is why the IDM material is so 'vague', it is all blending, bonding, bounding, and binding. Labels are then required to link the universals to a particular context.

Anything outside of the scope of basic meaning will be interpreted from that base and in doing so we will 'see' oscillations in that what is outside cannot be pinned-down to any 'one'. The oscillation reflects the surrendering of maximum bandwidth, and so a NOW perspective, for the use of time, and so a 'future' perspective. We can experience this locally through examples of sensory paradox - as covered in my paradox page.

What the IDM/IC shows us is that the WHOLE covers all expressions, all hexagrams, where context then sorts that list into bestfit/worstfit (a probabilities mapping - which is what our brains do; but very high precision). This is EXPLICIT, the IMPLICIT element is in consciousness itself - it is like XOR/AND dynamics that is encapsulated in an IOR whole.

Given the above, we THEN have to look at the research re development of our VERY conscious species vs all of the rest. To do this we have to cover all neuron-dependent life forms, not just us. In that covering we find that 'awareness' is not on/off, it is gradual, in snippets, and as such lasts for seconds to hours and is related to exaggerations of energy with good memory systems etc - IOW moments requiring transcending instincts/habits, and so we enter the realm of mediation. That mediation is helped through external memory - i.e. books, videos etc etc

Reptiles dont handle mediation too well - they are more instincts-driven such that any 'mediation' situation is more expressing all possible instincts at once where by chance one works. This reflects the increase in bandwidth through recruitment of the whole neural system to deal with a situation where that recruitment is controlled out of the soma areas of neurons - IOW the middle position of dendrites-soma-axon, what delays firing etc to allow for 'more time'.

The other 'middle' is the synaptic gaps where hormone dynamics (neurotransmitters/neuromodulators) add 'highs' and 'lows' to expression. It is this area that gives us mania as it does depression. As such, dendrites-axon reflect stimulus/response whereas soma and synaptic gap move us into mediation/representation dynamics - note that the instincts are encoded into the dendrites and so POST synaptic gap - IOW the follow-on from a mediation position. Under 'normal' circumstances there is no mediation, it is all instincts; the only 'delay' is the natural one used to allow for recovery after firing.

Mammals start to deal with mediation actively, but the 'best' ones require more complex neurology and so an association of more complexity elicits more delay elicits better choices elicits habituation to 'better choices' and so more use of that delay function (or more so, those life forms that have that delay ability survive and reproduce - with that survival comes 'refinements' that include increased complexity to 'maximise' the successful processes)

In 'lower' primates we start to see 24/7 awareness, memory feedback links up to allow for long term storage and recall. Things like handedness are still context-sensitive and so 50/50 split (usually) but as we move into OUR realm so the XOR function takes over big-time in that from the holistic, immediate, realm of our species-nature, of our instincts/habits, we move into the partial, delayed, realm of our consciousness-nature. Here we use RICH language, high precision focus, but SERIAL in form. This focus on UNIVERSALS (labels, handedness etc) means we introduce biases in such areas as limb use etc. in that the part with the XOR focus, due to its high precision, details focus, will 'rule'.

No rich language, no high-precision consciousness. Jung's perspective was on EGO-PSYCHE-SELF where the SELF is our whole being, psyche is the first emergence of 'something', but it communicates visually, emotionally, non-verbally. EGO is our individual consciousness where the center of things is very much 'in here', very 'precise' but in serial, we use the serial to BUILD the parallel; we break down the whole into parts, a spectrum, and then use that to communicate through spectrum exchange. (and so ego dominates our thinking styles such that, despite it being PARTS oriented, we treat it as whole and in doing so marginalise the rest)

Note the development path here, overall, from AND to XOR. In new-born infants the AND parts of the brain, our species-nature parts, are more developed than the XOR. Sensory differentiations start to occur and so XOR develops. Once the spoken/written word starts to take over so the XOR parts take over. This is instinctive but we CAN do something about it re learning "AND"-like languages to complement the XOR (e.g. left hemisphere stroke patients cannot talk but some can sing! How come? What they can sing are nursery rhymes they learn in kindegarten, but as WHOLES - all parts 'anded' together by the rhythm. If you stop a patient half way through the song and ask them to start from where they were stopped, they cant do it. They MUST start from the beginning since they did not differentiate the song when an infant, it was learnt as a whole, by rote. Knowing this, we could teach a basic 'holistic' language to kids such that later on, when they start to get strokes as adults and lose the high precision parts of their brains for a while, they can still communicate)

So.... we can trace development of *individual* consciousness from 'mindless' mediation processes to the ever increasing mindful mediation processes. We can trace a vague set of protection oriented instincts ,the focus on to avoid being eaten by some other life form, as in (A) each sensation is potentially 'meaningful',(B) all sensations are potentially linked together, to their exaggeration by consciousness (where we drop the 'potentially' and assert these as UNIVERSALS) and so the emergence of a sense of the 'spiritual'. (Note that with XOR comes fragmentation. With fragmentation comes borders. With border we let loose what live on them - complexity/chaos, and so 'emergence'. Fundamentalism develops, focus on self-autonomy etc etc AND a sense of 'transcendence' in that this is also the realm of phase transitions once all the parts start to 'think the same')

We can trace the development of individual consciousness from the dynamics of a social life form - our ape-ness ;-) With that we can identify the POTENTIAL for a vague 'group oriented' awareness in that the distribution is across the group, not concentrated within the individual. - Jung got into this re the 'collective' unconscious but that more linked to Psyche than Self, and so unconscious but still mediating with intent - at the realm of our instincts there is no mediation, it is all stimulus/response.

At the moment it takes us about 7 to 9 months to create consciousness, and a further 12 to 20 years to train it. Through understanding XOR/AND dynamics, and so the generic qualities we use to communicate, as covered in IDM, so we can reduce the training time ;-)

IDM covers what is POSSIBLE given understanding of our sensory systems. It shows us the possible 'root' of our 'need' to argue, where A/NOT-A dynamics allows for situations where is appears as if A and NOT-A are expressed in the same time/space - and that means we 'instinctively' oscillate to 'resolve' the situation - this is very wrapped-up in our sense of personal identity etc (see the paradox page) and so issues of XOR identifications in an irreducable, "AND", state.

EACH hexagram of the I Ching is representative of a possible state of consciousness - the hexagram can dominate a context, be a universal and so assert itself as the context and with that assertion reflect its individuality. The MBTI mappings show us this where we can associate hexagrams with personas (http://www.austarmetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/MBTIX.htm)

IOW the WHOLE of the IC reflects the WHOLE that is "consciousness" where consciousness is a SPECIALISATION of our species-nature. In that species-nature, the social element can form from 'flocking behaviour' where out of 'random' processes come patterns that are 'useful' and given 'meaning' and there are levels of consciousness from snippets to 'vague but continuous' to our high precision 'IS-ness' focus. (we can trace the roots of Mathematics back to a sensory container allowing in 'noise'. The bouncing around of the 'noise' will elicit a pattern called the Sierpinski gasket. That pattern is the foundations of the binomal theorem (and so contains the IC yin/yang dynamics) and is also the source of such formal definitions as integers! -- where the RECURSIVE nature of the pattern was used by Peano to derive integers from recursion of the empty set - IOW out of 'noise' mixed with containment comes structure and 'us')

To map out consciousness from a STRUCTURAL perspective, the best we can do is cover the dynamic from POTENTIALS to ACTUALS, such that the 000000 realm is of POTENTIALS, and that includes consciousness as a potential but without any 'intent' to start with. Add energy, YANG-ness, and the potentials become actuals and so the EXPRESSION of all of the possible types of consciousness.

To focus on consciousness from a SEQUENCE perspective, the possible "issue" with Martin's pure "AND" mapping is re any mediation perspective, IOW DELAY elements that allow for CHOICES in the dynamic in that that perspective is needed to map SEQUENCE of consciousness. Thus the pure ANDness is more of HEAVEN/EARTH dynamics where impermanence dominates and so nothing is held constant. With consciousness comes a seeking of 'eternity', of immortality. That sense is derived from high energy dynamics, XOR-ing, where time is distorted due to the reciprocal relationship of energy/time - it is our sense of bandwidth/time, of NOW/Past-Future, where our consciousness is creating its own reality, a hybrid reality, of 'out there' and 'in here'.

Chris.

 

[candid]

local or archetype?

 

[Sparhawk]

Neither... That's a lightning bolt! (or a sperm gone haywire...)

L

 

[Sparhawk]

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.

L

 

[lightofdarkness]

local, be it lightening or flame. archetypal when you focus on what is behind it - you QUESTION.

An artist sees a rainbow. The moment, immediate. Something NOT repeatable. LOCAL. (but capturable in painting, picture etc)

A scientist sees sunlight reflected off water particles currently at an angle of X degrees to the Sun and causing scattering of light into light harmonics - colours. IOW something repeatable. UNIVERSAL.

The artistic is fine but allows for misinterpretations (a la seeing lightening from a 'primitive' perspective - "it is some god-like manifestation of imense power!"). Given the science, we understand it and can exploit it, protect against etc etc IOW become proactive besides being reactive.

The words and comments of hexagram 25, in its LOCAL form are not the archetypal form of 25 where we focus on what is behind it - we apply XOR WITHIN 25 etc. to give us the full spectrum, its rainbow elements - its 'blue-ness', its 'green-ness' etc. LOCAL terms will usually not cover this degree of detail in that it is detail from the universal position where particular biases will not favour the full expression of the universal.

Chris.

 

[pagan]

Repeatable is being linked to universal. And non repeatable linked to local.

Local is time/space dependant
universal is eternal or timeless value.

Local always has an x nature (stemming from an archetypal root) and a y nature that is a time/space reality that reflects that archetype in the physical world. The y nature is a specific local unique temporal expression of the x nature (archetypal nature) which is permanent.

x nature is universal only
y nature is both temporal and universal.

P.

 

[lightofdarkness]

Hi Pagan,

>
> Repeatable is being linked to universal. And non repeatable
> linked to local.
>

Yes. Each moment is unique. Unrepeatable (but memorable, especially through film, radio, etc - and Virtual Reality systems aim to try and make moments 'repeatable'! ;-))

> Local is time/space dependant
> universal is eternal or timeless value.
>

Yes. Our species-nature is integrated with the environment, equilibrium in a thermodynamic universe - and so energy conserving, WELL aware of birth-death and so the inevitability of death etc. TIME is a BIG issue since it is the agent of death. BUT this is a 'vague' realm when compared to what our consciousness-nature can do - come up with universals and so 'refine' our prediction skills etc.

That nature is high energy expending, literally, as you interact, so your experience of subjective time will be distorted due to the variations in energy usage by the physiology. That dynamic can create a sense, an image, of the 'eternal' - as we focus on universals, on STATIC, ideal, forms, so our physiology supports us by marginalising time experience - to such a degree that we will ignore thermodynamics and imagine time as stoppable and even reversible.

This is a PARTS perspective. We DELAY things by focusing energy to increase bandwidth to give us something "NOW". IOW, there is no "NOW" other than what we create through energy expenditure; there is only 'perpetual dynamics' - Martin's pure AND state if you like where there is no 'constant' context in the dynamics he is mapping.

> Local always has an x nature (stemming from an archetypal
> root) and a y nature that is a time/space reality that
> reflects that archetype in the physical world. The y nature
> is a specific local unique temporal expression of the x
> nature (archetypal nature) which is permanent.
>
> x nature is universal only
> y nature is both temporal and universal.
>

Yes - there is a feedback system involved. Our consciousness is focused on creating universals - and uses universals to do that - WORDS are universals, all labels are universals; your name is a 'universal' in that it is used in ALL contexts UNLESS you create a different name for each context, and so the universal is localised, it is universal in only that context! ;-)

The more a label is used the more it is encoded into parts of our brain as a universal - gets into issues of memory - short term to long term - and context. A STRONG memory (called flash bulb) will always be there. Other ones are context-sensitive (state-specific memory) but in YOUR physiological state (e.g. drunk etc).

From an evolution development, the focus is on survival ANYWHERE and so on identifying, habituating, universals - these are akin to GENES. CONTEXT then elicits the PHENOTYPE, the expression, and the success of that expression perpetuates the use of that gene and so refines its universality (and we can 'refine' its parts as well as its whole). 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 - YIN to YANG - and that is covered in the Small World Network research (see history section in my draft http://www.austarmetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/Vague.pdf)

Our species-nature is instincts-driven and out of conscious awareness - it is too 'fast' for us. Our neurology slows down data from 80Mhz (gamma range) to 12+Mhz (beta/alpha) (day to day thinking in the brain) and on down to 1Mhz (deep sleep)

Our consciousness reflects the 'transcendence' of our species-nature, we overlay the context of the planet with the products of our consciousness - we assert the context rather than integrate with the existing (and so Earth suffers!). The 'original' process was limit expending energy to resolve issues and then fall back to the 'rest' state - our species-nature.

The SUCCESS of that has meant the focus on universals and their assertions but including the perpetuation of consciousness, we have created a world dependent on mediation - if we cannot find something, we create something!

The development of the realm of YANG and so universals reflects the drive of evolution - the yangness forces us to differentiate and then reintegrate in the form of habits and so become 'autonomous', able to fit in to any context in the Universe quickly and then 'add local colour' or assert the context using one's skills.

Thus by understanding the 'full spectrum' of the I Ching, its universal form, so we refine our skills in adapting to, interpreting, reality - BUT it is important to recognise the need for RE-Integration of consciousness and speciesness - the attraction of 'transcendence' can be an issue when consciousness is very much dependent on speciesness; psyche is not free from soma.

Chris.

 

[yly2pg1]

"Our consciousness is focused on creating universals - and uses universals to do that - WORDS are universals, all labels are universals; your name is a 'universal' in that it is used in ALL contexts UNLESS you create a different name for each context, and so the universal is localised, it is universal in only that context!"

Yes, just come back from a presentation about RFID. They are using the binary search for labels just like the binary tree in IDM or I Ching.

 

[yly2pg1]

"But if the ICHING changing lines point to some universal truth that ties, for example, 22 line 6 to 36,
I have failed to see the why of it. If this is a universal truth that is as yet hidden to our present day collective evolution,..."


Binary Tree Diagram:

binary_tree

Few patterns could be observed from the binary tree diagram in I Ching.
I managed to see two.

Sharing same space, conditional/unconditional

22.6->36
(A -A A -A -A A) to (A -A A -A -A -A)

36.6->22
(A -A A -A -A -A) to (A -A A -A -A A)

Both 22 and 36 sharing the same space.
The 22 is conditional, 36 unconditional.


Mirror Image in Binary Tree diagram

22 is mirror image to 47

A -A A -A -A A II -A A -A A A -A

=>The preferred response in the context of 47 is 36?


36 is mirror image to 6

A -A A -A -A -A II -A A -A A A A

=>The preferred response in the context of 6 is 36?


2 is mirror image to 1

-A -A -A -A -A -A II A A A A A A

=>Like the expression of moon (on earth) when responding to the sun,
the 6 changing lines in 2 is a reflection of moon phases thru out a lunar month.
(1-ness in 2?)