the meaning of the single lines.

[robibiro]

hi dear all
i still have not understand in the iching the meaning of the lines.

each single line, in an hexagram, has a specific meaning. when each of this line is moving, we go to read that meaning.

does that meaning applies only when they are movable, or are those comments for each single line valid within the interpretation of the hexagram itself?

 

[fkegan]

The line judgments generally are marked as being about moving lines such as 6 in the first place or 9 in the first place, etc.

They are part of interpreting an Oracle of the I Ching. When a line is moving it both has its special commentary and also changes the Oracle hexagram as it changes.

Many other perspectives are available for more advanced interpretation of Oracles, but that at least is a beginning.

Good Luck,

Frank

 

[elvis]

hi dear all
i still have not understand in the iching the meaning of the lines.

each single line, in an hexagram, has a specific meaning. when each of this line is moving, we go to read that meaning.

does that meaning applies only when they are movable, or are those comments for each single line valid within the interpretation of the hexagram itself?

The structure of the hexagram allows for two forms of interpretation -- one favouring SEQUENCE and one favouring a scale of MAGNITUDES.

SEQUENCE covers a temporal bias from 'beginning' to 'ending'. The only difference as such is the temporal steps, each line is of equal value as such.

MAGNITUDES covers qualitative differences from the general to the particular, raw to the refined. Thus each line is NOT the same, there are qualitative differences such as brought out in:

Line - assocation
1 - worker
2 - supervisor
3 - local lord
4 - minister
5 - ruler
6 - sage

You can make up all sorts of hierarchies but the overall focus is on the movement from general (1) to particular (6). raw to refined etc.

We can also map each line to a particular hexagram where such reflects the nature of the line POSITION. Thus line position 1 covers 'beginnings/cycle return' etc and reflects the qualities of hexagram 24.

1 - 24
2 - 07
3 - 15
4 - 16
5 - 08
6 - 23

We can sum these lines to gives descriptions of other hexagrams made up of more lines - e.g. the characteristics of hex 27 covers hex 24 + hex 23 (lines 1 and 6) or the characteristics of hex 29 covers hex 07 + hex 08 (lines 2 and 5).

A 'moving' line reflects a change in a context represented by hexagram A into a context represented by hexagram B. We can interpret this as B being a response to the influence of A.

The forms of possible interpretations cover either reading the changing lines path from bottom to top and so covers a sequence, or just consider the resulting hexagram as reflecting a change in magnitude, emotional meaning where the interpretation is parallel rather than serial.

The traditional material line comments indicate that they were written POST the generation of the hexagram and as such are customised to each hexagram. OTOH the creation of the lines bottom up reflect line creation meanings FREE of the resulting hexagram meaning. By this I mean that line 1 for ALL hexagrams covers a sense of beginning/new etc etc and as such retains that meaning regardless of the resulting hexagram.

Line relations cover a diagram approach of interpretation where we look at line PAIRS to interpret meanings. Thus we have such as:

1-2
3-4
5-6

1-3
2-5
3-6

1-6
2-5
3-4

We can interpret hexagrams as wholes or as two trigrams or as three digrams.

Finally, there is the line POSITION interpretations. The position focus colours each as either yin or yang with the ideal form representative of hexagram 63 (the focus on 'correct sequence' or 'completion')

Line - nature
1 - yang
2 - yin
3 - yang
4 - yin
5 - yang
6 - yin

This leads into the meanings of line values being 'correct' (yang in yang, yin in yin) or 'incorrect' (yang in yin, yin in yang) - e.g. hexagrams with a yin line 1 have their line 1 position in an 'incorrect' state.

There are of course CONTEXT differences applicable where EACH hexagram sets a context of line POSITIONS then open to interpretations given such a filter. E.g. if we use hexagram 01 as our line position map then all line positions are 'yang' any any yin is 'incorrect'.

There is a lot more but I think the above should give you an idea of line meanings etc.

 

[robibiro]

sorry but i did not understand this part:
"We can also map each line to a particular hexagram where such reflects the nature of the line POSITION. Thus line position 1 covers 'beginnings/cycle return' etc and reflects the qualities of hexagram 24.

1 - 24
2 - 07
3 - 15
4 - 16
5 - 08
6 - 23

We can sum these lines to gives descriptions of other hexagrams made up of more lines - e.g. the characteristics of hex 27 covers hex 24 + hex 23 (lines 1 and 6) or the characteristics of hex 29 covers hex 07 + hex 08 (lines 2 and 5).
"

could you please give me some pratical example using one hex?
thanks a lot!

 

[elvis]

http://www.emotionaliching.com/myweb/WaveInterpret.html

 

[fkegan]

Hi Robibiro,

Elvis (alias Chris Lofting) is explaining his own unique view of the I Ching that ignores most reasonable scholarship. The hexagrams in his list are merely those with one Yang line in that place and the other 5 open Yin places.

The other hexagrams are made up of "adding" two of these single Yang line hexagrams to yield hexagrams of two Yang lines and 4 Yin lines.

How this relates to the meaning of the hexagrams is only relevant to those who believe the I Ching hexagrams are simply a binary counter and any operations of binary math reveal its ultimate meaning. As noted in Elvis' signature you would need to read his website to find his views, the rest of us find them peculiar based upon our scholarship and personal views (to which Chris replies with angry personal attacks to prove himself).

Frank

 

[elvis]

Hi Robibiro,

Elvis (alias Chris Lofting) is explaining his own unique view of the I Ching that ignores most reasonable scholarship. The hexagrams in his list are merely those with one Yang line in that place and the other 5 open Yin places.

The other hexagrams are made up of "adding" two of these single Yang line hexagrams to yield hexagrams of two Yang lines and 4 Yin lines.

How this relates to the meaning of the hexagrams is only relevant to those who believe the I Ching hexagrams are simply a binary counter and any operations of binary math reveal its ultimate meaning. As noted in Elvis' signature you would need to read his website to find his views, the rest of us find them peculiar based upon our scholarship and personal views (to which Chris replies with angry personal attacks to prove himself).

Frank

Hilary as been complaining about your style of prose re personal attacks Frank (and not just against me) but since you choose to ignore her it becomes obvious that such association of "scholarship" and "Frank-Kegan" is an oxymoron.

 

[bradford]

does that meaning applies only when they are movable, or are those comments for each single line valid within the interpretation of the hexagram itself?

To keep it simple, the changing lines (yao ci) come into play only when they are 6's and 9's, not when they are 7's and 8's. Changing lines are like stepping stones between the original hexagram (ben gua) and the resultant hexagram (zhi gua).

 

[fkegan]

Hilary as been complaining about your style of prose re personal attacks Frank (and not just against me) but since you choose to ignore her it becomes obvious that such association of "scholarship" and "Frank-Kegan" is an oxymoron.

Hi Elvis,

Thank you for your expression of yourself. I intended no personal attack, just a statement that your views are your own and others disagree. Your response speaks for itself.

But as an aside on the subject of scholarship could you enlighten us all with a recital of your formal education and background in mathematics, I Ching and neurology. From my studies in those fields I am unable to connect your remarks to what the academics call scholarship...

Frank

 

[elvis]

I Ching - 1967 to present (both traditional and other; see coverage in such as the early years reference list http://www.emotionaliching.com/myweb/irefs.html ) that's 43 years experience.

Professional Musician 1966 - 1977 (included recordings, tours, most of Asia, Europe etc and covers good understanding of the 'play' of sensory harmonics and elicitation of emotional responses)

IT - 1978 to present (systems analyst, business analyst, programmer etc etc etc in real time systems (telco/stock markets/software houses etc)) - 33 years experience. Started off at Uni and switched to corporate training (Control Data) - I got to work quicker and learnt more than the basic IT uni BSc course ( I was head programmer in 6 months after being taken on as a trainee and as such succeeded over the more academic-grounded trainees - took to it like a duck takes to water)

Neurology - 1984 to present (All part of AI focus on meaning generation see more recent coverage in such as:

http://www.emotionaliching.com/myweb/dencerefs.html
http://www.emotionaliching.com/myweb/formrefs.html
http://www.emotionaliching.com/myweb/neurorefs.html
http://www.emotionaliching.com/myweb/brefs.html

)

last academic focused lecture I gave on the specifics of such was at the Australian National University in 1997 - prior to formalising things into IDM (the ddiamond website went live in 1995). Also had to drop out of an MSc course (Computer Science focus) at Canberra University due to getting job offers here is Sydney - academically I am thus a drop-out in that I have no need for such formal qualifications - I am good at what I do and am recognised and, when I work, am payed well for such ;-) - common trait in corporate IT environments.

SO - based on perusal of your, perhaps over-educated, background I am WAY ahead of you in the context of understanding basic information derivation and communication in the species, and in neuron-dependent life forms in general - and that includes a depth of knowledge of how the I Ching etc works that exceeds your 'traditionalist' perspective. You really do need to read some more Frank, LOTS of references lists above for your to work your way through and so perhaps guide you in moving from 10th century BC perspectives into the 21st century AD.

oh, and if you like, I can play 'references at 10 paces' ANYTIME dude! - I DO know my stuff.

 

[fkegan]

Hi Elvis,

I thank you for your response.

Have you ever worked with anyone else or solely on your own in various fields of music and computers or reading articles?

Do you consider anyone who completes their degrees over educated or just those who don't agree with you?

oh, and if you like, I can play 'references at 10 paces' ANYTIME dude! - I DO know my stuff.

I have heard others refer to reading lots and lots of articles, even claiming that is somehow important. My model is more my professor of ancient Indian Buddhism, Sanskrit and the Pali Canon who knew his field so totally he could respond to a reference in a book with the original text, the history through at least 5 languages, the philology involved, as well as the original published source of a particular translation term and why it missed the mark originally and in subsequent literature.

Sitting at the feet of major mentors, I believe is an essential part of the process of learning to subject one's own ideas to rigorous discipline and empirical verification as well as learning what excellence in one or more fields is truly all about.

There are advantages to working with others clearly more knowledgeable than ourselves and earning their respect for our own work. But then there is also a vast literature one can peruse on one's own and fit into our own context to your heart's content rejecting all else.

Different strokes for different folks. Personally I prefer Jean Piaget, William of Ockham and Pythagoras to anything and everything done with relay switches, transistors or microchips.But then I prefer the eternal to the trendy technology of the day whether clockworks, telephones or computers (or other metaphors for the universe or the mind).

Again thank you for explaining your background. Let us agree to disagree what is involved in getting others to agree we know our stuff.

Frank

 

[elvis]

Hi Elvis,

I thank you for your response.

Have you ever worked with anyone else or solely on your own in various fields of music and computers or reading articles?

You are obviously unaware of the team work required in IT and in music. As for the IDM research I have 'supporters' and we have discussion groups etc.

Do you consider anyone who completes their degrees over educated or just those who don't agree with you?

Specialist degrees (Master upwards) reflect over education in the demands to reflect current dogma such that originality is restricted to some specific point in some specific discipline such that no one outside of that discipline (or even university department) understands what is going on. As such even PhD work is adaptive at best, or any innovative element is so specialised as to be meaningless in application.

Issues emerge where those with such qualifications somehow imagine that the qualification extends outside of their specialisation - as if the qualification magically gives them some difference in how they put out the garbage in relation to others not so qualified (but still capable of putting out the garbage!)

Thus the formal academic environment is too symmetric and hierarchic in its nature (and the politics of such I am well aware of due to experiences with my ex who is a professor in a school of medicine, as is my cousin who is a professor in a school of government)

Innovation comes from the periphery where the constraints of symmetric perspectives are limited, conformity not demanded, freedom of thought available. THAT said, I would still insist that all of those in those areas get a course in basic logic and so transcend the species focus on symmetric thinking and move into the realm of asymmetric thinking.

As I pointed out to Hilary, there are also issues with being over-educated to a degree of developing directed thinking and marginalising mythic thinking - as such the focus on words etc, all very precise etc, can alienate direct sensory experience as we have in mythic thinking. The BENEFITS of directed thinking cover precision in language development etc but can also lose sight of material in mythic thinking not considered before - as the EIC language work demonstrates.

With the focus on WHY over HOW comes a movement from the physical to the metaphysical and that is fine up to a point where the increasing existentialist perspective ignores our species nature and in doing so marginalises aspects of our self that contribute to our whole being (which the metaphysical tries to escape!)

Sitting at the feet of major mentors, I believe is an essential part of the process of learning to subject one's own ideas to rigorous discipline and empirical verification as well as learning what excellence in one or more fields is truly all about.

This reflects a symmetric, focus, a focus on SAMENESS, and so ADAPTIVE learning, not innovative development grounded in being DIFFERENT and so on the outside from the start. In modern music teams and IT teams the recognition of difference overrides sameness - the DEMANDS are to be different, unique, non-conforming and so introduce new perspectives to THEN become the grounds for the sort of person you describe above - followers/mimics of the original idea makers - set trends rather than follow trends.

The IDM material is original and as such can 'stress' those grounded in some symmetry-grounded dogma but then it covers the whole dynamic of making and breaking symmetries and to the more symmetry-minded that can be an issue unless they have some training in being able to adapt to change.

Different strokes for different folks. Personally I prefer Jean Piaget, William of Ockham and Pythagoras to anything and everything done with relay switches, transistors or microchips.But then I prefer the eternal to the trendy technology of the day whether clockworks, telephones or computers (or other metaphors for the universe or the mind).

You obviously don't understand IDM since its ground is in neurology and so the biological and into the psychological/sociological. As such it covers the foundations of meaning that sourced the thinking of Piaget, Ockham , and Pythagoras where such thinking was PARTIAL due to a lack of knowledge of the full spectrum of meaning derivation as covered in the IDM material where it focus is on an upper ontology:

"Upper Ontology : An upper ontology is limited to concepts that are
meta, generic, abstract and philosophical, and therefore are general
enough to address (at a high level) a broad range of domain areas.
Concepts specific to given domains will not be included; however, this
standard will provide a structure and a set of general concepts upon
which domain ontologies (e.g. medical, financial, engineering, etc.)
could be constructed.”

perseverence furthers.

 

[Lilly-La]

Read Second Book of Wilhelm

does that meaning applies only when they are movable, or are those comments for each single line valid within the interpretation of the hexagram itself?

Hi robibiro,
if you own Richard Wilhelms book you can read the chapters right in the middle of that book. (In fact Wilhelms book consists of 3 books.) You´ll find a lot of information referring to lines and places in this second book.

As bradford already stated, you read the text of the original first Hex you casted, only the text of the moving line and the text of the resulting hex. Only the movin gline is important in terms of forecasting.

The significance of a line depends on the place it resides. A hex consists of strong place (1 [bottomline], 3, 5) and soft places (2,4,6). A strong line on a strong place is considered to be correct.. same with soft lines on soft places.

If you cast hex 44 with moving bottom line 1(count 6) .. that means:
read text of hex 44 and text of line 1. keep in mind first place is a strong place and a strong line is rather fortunate. First line changes from a soft line into a strong line. Then read text of hex 1.

There is some more to say about lines and places.. but others are better in english and might help you.

Personally i deeply believe that everybody has his/her own very individual grasp on/for the Yi. Two people will never see the same picture. To me there is nothing like the absolutely correct way using the Yi. You may not know anything about lines and places, inner/outer hexes.. and still read the images and have an idea... still the Yi is rooted somewhere historically and isn´t this the place to start? you may end up in binary sequences or in drawing chinese letters... up to you.. though for someone who likes exploring the Yi it is not the worst to start with reading a little bit about the original history (orig. text)? Am i wrong?

 

[Sparhawk]

Chris, curious about that work on Space/Time still unpublished. Can you share more about it?

 

[fkegan]

Hi Lilly,

I would agree with you that each person finds their own relationship to the Yi Oracle and that study of Wilhelm is a good way to begin. In general the whole of the first hexagram, the individual moving lines and the whole of the resultant hexagram is the basis of divination.

The specific details of interpretation, such as Yang lines in odd-numbered places, Yin lines in even ones or other aspects of technical analysis, may or may not be relevant to your particular Oracle. This is an advanced topic subject to differing opinions.

I would suggest starting with clarity in phrasing your question. Remember divination answers what you NEED to know at that point. Cast your oracle and establish your own relationship with the I Ching and the rest will follow through your own unique path.

Hi Elvis,

Again I thank you for your exposition of your perspective.

I take it from your remarks that we agree that at least a Bachelor's degree is an important and universal part of one's education. What was your major and year of graduation?

I am delighted to hear you have supporters and discussion groups of your views. In terms of your education with the I Ching, what brought you to start your study in the late 60's--did you cast oracles for your own personal questions? And what led you away from divination to recast the I Ching in terms of binary dichotomy?

I do not agree with IDM, whether that is a result of my errors or yours I make no comment. My interest in nerve cells back in the day dealt with the theoretical biophysical issues of the nerve cell wall, the Na+/K+ ion balance and the complexities of the control of nerve firings by interactions between the atoms of the cell wall and the addition, subtraction and other relations of the input of other cell firings. Also how it isn't just the binary firing/not firing but the rhythms of background firings and specific nerve transmissions that receive their meaning from the context within which they are received by nerve cell structures in the brain.

However returning to this thread, about the meaning of single lines, could you explain:

We can also map each line to a particular hexagram where such reflects the nature of the line POSITION. Thus line position 1 covers 'beginnings/cycle return' etc and reflects the qualities of hexagram 24....

6 - 23

how hex 23 expresses the qualities of the Sage rather then the final line of hexagram matrix, highlighting The Next... as in the use of sharp blades to cut down the growing crop, destroying its plant life and starting the next process of harvesting grain?

Frank

 

[elvis]

Chris, curious about that work on Space/Time still unpublished. Can you share more about it?

Covered basic material that sourced the IDM material - older references etc ;-) covers information processing , metabolic rates, measurement theory and QM issues, different cultural patterns in experiencing (later developed into directed vs mythic etc) and on into space, time, and space-time considerations (later developed into scale differences etc and the sameness of position-momentum at the micro and space-time at the macro etc )

 

[elvis]

Hi Elvis,

Again I thank you for your exposition of your perspective.

I take it from your remarks that we agree that at least a Bachelor's degree is an important and universal part of one's education. What was your major and year of graduation?

go back and read again, I started a BSc but moved to corporate course grounded in intense focus on programming technology etc - better than the computer science course at uni and got me into the market a lot quicker and with better skills then the average graduate.

I am delighted to hear you have supporters and discussion groups of your views. In terms of your education with the I Ching, what brought you to start your study in the late 60's--did you cast oracles for your own personal questions?

it was like the 60s man!

And what led you away from divination to recast the I Ching in terms of binary dichotomy?

(1) I have a natural ability in dealing with logic and a focus on science over other perspectives. (2) the EIC does NOT cover 'binary', it covers the use of such as REPRESENTATION of three forms of 'dichotomy' then recursed - the traditional format of Aristotle (A/NOT-A, anti-symmetric - difference in sameness), the symmetric form (sameness as equivalence rather than equality), and the asymmetric form where such is more so a compressed form of trichotomy (and so the presence of mediation) and covers the extraction of a spectrum from a whole, a parts list as such (and is the ground for the EIC language capabilities that allow us to get a hexagram's spectrum)

I do not agree with IDM, whether that is a result of my errors or yours I make no comment. My interest in nerve cells back in the day dealt with the theoretical biophysical issues of the nerve cell wall, the Na+/K+ ion balance and the complexities of the control of nerve firings by interactions between the atoms of the cell wall and the addition, subtraction and other relations of the input of other cell firings.

fun.

Also how it isn't just the binary firing/not firing but the rhythms of background firings and specific nerve transmissions that receive their meaning from the context within which they are received by nerve cell structures in the brain.

For good coverage of the different scales of rhythms etc I recommend:

Buzsaki, G.,(2006)"Rhythms of the Brain" OUP

The dynamics of brain/nerve oscillations bring out a common ground for information processing spanning ALL SCALES of the neurology. Differences are in the increase in bandwidth and an identified phase transition in the recursive processes at work (implementation of XOR in the neurology DEMANDS recursive activity) - thus we find that the formation of collectives of neurons (nuclei) cover the synchronisation of the elements into the whole responding as if a single neuron - and so same patterns of differentiating/integrating.

[

However returning to this thread, about the meaning of single lines, could you explain:
how hex 23 expresses the qualities of the Sage rather then the final line of hexagram matrix, highlighting The Next...

The overall focus of 23 is on preparing for the next cycle/gateway. As such it covers qualitative differences of 'housekeeping' - be it the simple act of such or the more proactive behaviour of pruning or the more extreme focus of a the high priest/priestess (sage) reducing things to their essential and so 'correct' perspectives (and so the sense in some texts of this being the last bastion of order etc) - this includes symmetrisation etc and so finding of 'wholeness', wisdom etc but a lack in 'new' innovations ;-)

In the IDM realm we have a context of contractive blending (wholeness achieved by drawing something IN) within which is operating a text of contractive bonding (sharing of space with another/others 'in here') - this makes 23 read "with devotion to another/others comes discernment (quality control)" OR "with fear comes grief"

The universal form is colourless and so allows for positive or negative interpretations, emotional colourings, depending on context - thus the seasonal ending element covers the total collapse of such as it does the intentional pruning of such to prepare for the next cycle. This focus thus includes such considerations as the passage through some gateway, as a sage dies and ''transcends" or "transforms" (comes back in another form)

IF we use the EIC language element then 23 has its skeletal form described by the generic properties of 24 and so a grounding in cyclic behaviour. The PURPOSE of 23 is describable by analogy to the generic properties of 37 where such covers the use of rigid structure to maintain order (and so the pruning focus overall).

http://www.emotionaliching.com/lofting/bx100000.html

 

[fkegan]

Hi Elvis,

Again I thank you for your statement of your views. Your comments speak for themselves.

I do not find them persuasive or even logical but each to their own.

Have you spent 4 decades studying the I Ching without any divination of the Oracle? Interesting.

Didn't quite catch how hex 23 expresses the nature of line 6 as the sage as its essence rather than just an incidental of all the other associations you find.

I notice that you tend to answer questions by repeating your text rather than making actual logical arguments on point. Interesting perspective.

Frank

 

[elvis]

Hi Elvis,

Again I thank you for your statement of your views. Your comments speak for themselves.

I do not find them persuasive or even logical but each to their own.

Have you spent 4 decades studying the I Ching without any divination of the Oracle? Interesting.

I have not said that - my work in the I C has covered the divination focus (with statistical analysis of results as compared to the EIC method) as it has the philosophical focus etc.

Didn't quite catch how hex 23 expresses the nature of line 6 as the sage as its essence rather than just an incidental of all the other associations you find.

I notice that you tend to answer questions by repeating your text rather than making actual logical arguments on point. Interesting perspective.

Frank

You obviously don't like following links. The ground for the particular material is covered in a link I supplied before in this thread covering the wave form of interpretation.

This format comes out of analysis of how the brain processes information and can work off 'bits' or 'holons'. The dynamic allows for the observation of 'wave/particle' duality where such is more an artifact of our methodology in processing information and we can confuse such with our models of reality - as we see in QM experiments etc. - IOW ALL of our metaphors will contain wave/pulse forms of interpretation due to the methodology our brain used in general in meaning derivation.

 

[fkegan]

Hi Elvis,

Yes, I don't just follow links. In discussion one is expected to make a logical reply rather than just demand a re-reading of prior materials. It is the quality of your live responses that interests others to look at the rest of your work.

However, returning to this thread and the notion of the meaning of single lines of I Ching Oracles. Let me suggest you give a live example of your Emotional I Ching technique upon the question of your own Oracle of hex 1.7 that you posted in my two natural number challenge. It is an exotic oracle, though not technically a single moving line, they all move as a unit and have a single section of commentary for this oracle. In my perspective I have found it a fascinating description of you--which is the context or Oracle question of the technique. What is you analysis of your personal oracle of hex 1.7?

Frank

 

[elvis]

Hi Elvis,

Yes, I don't just follow links. In discussion one is expected to make a logical reply rather than just demand a re-reading of prior materials. It is the quality of your live responses that interests others to look at the rest of your work.

This is the internet Frank - linkage of material is standard and allows for a lot of material to be linked together rather than repeatedly dumped on lists! - follow the link Frank. Read it. Think.

However, returning to this thread and the notion of the meaning of single lines of I Ching Oracles. Let me suggest you give a live example of your Emotional I Ching technique upon the question of your own Oracle of hex 1.7 that you posted in my two natural number challenge.

1.7?

All I did was give you 1 and 2 and an interpretation of that change - you OTOH favoured the 'traditional' perspective covered in Wilhelm referring to the additional comments on full change for hex 1. My interpretation was fine but you had to ignore it to promote your traditionalist agenda that is off base.

 

[fkegan]

Hi Elvis,

My suggestion was that you give an example of your technique of Emotional I Ching by showing how you would interpret an I Ching Oracle of hex 1.7 or hex 1 with moving lines to hexagram 2. Don't you have an entire system of questions to be asked and interpretations to those answers?

Frank

 

[elvis]

Its on the 'net Frank - have a play, page down to the questions section on the home page - http://www.emotionaliching.com

The change would represent an unstable state, grounded in uncertainties where what were facts/what is/proactive for inner and outer appear to be changing.

 

[fkegan]

Hi Elvis,

The idea was for you to show an example of your answering your own questions in terms of yourself. As I suspected you aren't capable of that. Since it was my challenge and the technique is part of my arrangement with the Oracle Spirit tomorrow I will explain to you what your Oracle says about who you are and why you can't face divination with an open mind.

By the way, I also was introduced to the I Ching by science classmates of mine in the late '60's.None of us had any problem invoking the Oracle while still doing our science or felt any need to run away and hide in technical mumbo-jumbo. It was the '60's, dude and everything was possible and explored both academically and personally in college then.

Of course we also managed to do major creative innovation in our fields as well as finish our degrees and earn respect from science faculty for our creativity and scientific excellence. It is all possible and makes an excellent basis for independent work beyond that level. Not being able to even finish any set of courses also speaks for itself.

Frank

 

[elvis]

Hi Elvis,

The idea was for you to show an example of your answering your own questions in terms of yourself. As I suspected you aren't capable of that.

? I have done that before but not for a result of 01 to 02 which covers a situation of full actualisation converting to nothing but potentials - each question answered reflects an issue of uncertainty in assessment -what was apparently yang is no more etc.

If we focus on the persona mapping of the EIC then I map to hex 51 (grounding in facts - your prose indicated a preference for values and there are problems if one puts values ahead of facts, as covered in the IC itself, 2 over 1 64 over 63, 12 over 11 etc etc)

Of course we also managed to do major creative innovation in our fields as well as finish our degrees and earn respect from science faculty for our creativity and scientific excellence.

You mean your conforming to current dogma as taught in education systems - follow what you are told and all will be fine?! That is so reflective of symmetric thinking Frank - as is the seeking of awards for doing such. Any encouragement to 'ask questions' is all done WITHIN the symmetric whole of the social construct and so creativity is not innovative, at best adaptive - IOW you aint no 'original thinker' Frank - but you appear to prefer that, to copy the 'masters' , to churn out pages and pages of analysis of other thinking, not your own. This limits development Frank - but if you prefer such a position, to be in a stable, secure, context thats fine - like being in Kansas - but in the context of understanding the dynamics of difference/sameness we are not in Kansas Frank.

 

[fkegan]

Hi Chris L/Elvis,

Having answered you on the other thread and preferring to let your knee jerk rejection/misunderstanding/projection of the originality of my thinking pass down the drain, let me try to deal with the almost reasonable though dead wrong part of your remarks that can be construed as part of "the meaning of single lines":

I have done that before but not for a result of 01 to 02 which covers a situation of full actualisation converting to nothing but potentials - each question answered reflects an issue of uncertainty in assessment -what was apparently yang is no more etc.

Ch'ien (the gua of all Yang lines) is not actualization but process while K'un (the gua of all Yin line places) is not potential but Planet Earth elevations which does result in the physics of gravitational potential energy but also with the quite concrete manifestation and actualization of topography and its power to control so much of what is experienced as geography.

So applied to yourself as your Oracle answer to explain and introduce yourself you are saying you are all about uncertainty in self-assessment--what was apparently yang (clear focus) is no more? No, Chris, that is too harsh on yourself.

The Oracle hex 1.7 is about hexagram One the Creative or Sunshine as active agent of the process energizing everything in general. Then the paragraph 1.7 or ALL 9's about the Flock of Dragons without heads--raw process in general which could if combined with the gentle devotion of the Earth bring good fortune and make a positive difference in the world. Or not --just exhausting in empty fire-breathing through the pores (since without any head) and tending toward scorched earth and nihilism. And then the whole judgment and image of hexagram two with its positive qualities and its more negative implications as a hexagram of emptiness or nothingness or mere background.

Frank

 

[elvis]

All the above comments indicate Frank are how stuck you are in your cage. A 1 to 2 transition covers an assessment of a high energy context where all is actualised with a response to such of total passivity (all as potentials or 'dead') - you can interpret that as 'lying low' as the situation does its thing, or even as death (the darkness of 2 not as a source of nurturing but as absolute darkness from which there is no escape).

The light of 01 is both positive and negative, as is the darkness of 02, such that consideration of the hexagrams as CLASSES of meanings needs to cover such. It is LOCAL CONTEXT that then biases perceptions, consciousness at work. Implicit in this is that the traditional material contains biases and as such is a particular POV of the universals of the IC - IOW the interpretations are taken as of instances not of classes and then confused with being classes - this is metonymy at work, a natural product of brain function that one must be wary of. You need to step out of your cage Frank.

How are you going with the language element of the EIC? Understand 1-ness or 14-ness or 27-ness yet? You need to step out of your cage Frank.

 

[fkegan]

Hi Elvis,

There's a language element to your work yet you reject the whole Chinese language I Ching? You are building binary dichotomy alternatives to the numbers or hexagrams (have you sorted out the difference yet?) but you reject all of Pythagoras?

Are you aware that you alter the content of your arguments in each post? That explains why you cite heaps of your references all together, you apparently only notice some piece of your text that might be relevant expecting folks to find that nugget in your stuff and not notice the other things that contradict them. Have you ever considered attempting to get your theories and perspectives into a single, consistent perspective? Or is that too much of a cage for your free spirit?

By the way 1-ness is called Unity or the Monad which is unique. Tried using a dice cube for insight?


Frank

 

[elvis]

Hi Elvis,

There's a language element to your work yet you reject the whole Chinese language I Ching? You are building binary dichotomy alternatives to the numbers or hexagrams (have you sorted out the difference yet?) but you reject all of Pythagoras?

I go where the neurology work takes me Frank - and that means a focus on meaning generation at levels 'beneath' those of the Chinese language or Pythagoras' numeric mysticism.

The language element of the EIC covers the emergence of such from basic neural activities leading into 'mythic' thinking and so universals then open to emotional colouring and all before the written/spoken WORD.

Logic operators in our brains PRECEDE language capabilities and as such work top-down to ENABLE the development of languages or more so grammars then employed/developed ad-hoc in different cultures (where lack of information of how the brain works led to lots of ad-hoc developments of communications)

References covering such can be found in http://www.emotionaliching.com/myweb/brefs.html

Are you aware that you alter the content of your arguments in each post? That explains why you cite heaps of your references all together, you apparently only notice some piece of your text that might be relevant expecting folks to find that nugget in your stuff and not notice the other things that contradict them. Have you ever considered attempting to get your theories and perspectives into a single, consistent perspective? Or is that too much of a cage for your free spirit?

EIC book is out. IDM book is on the way Frank. They cover CLASSES of meanings and so instances can vary but still be WITHIN the bounds of a class. As such I can give umpteen different interpretations of hexagram 34 but all covering instances of the CLASS of meanings and so consistent at that level if seemingly varied at the instance level (a variability that is guaranteed due to the focus on instances and so unique differences, not sameness)

By the way 1-ness is called Unity or the Monad which is unique.

Good try Frank but FAIL. 1-ness is how a context represented holistically by a hexagram will EXPRESS the qualities covered in hexagram 1 where those qualities are PARTS of the WHOLE. You use XOR to identify that expression.

The EIC covers such with analogy to a musical note placed in a key (and so open to modification to be played in that key) or the differences between genotype and phenotype Frank.

The derivation of the hexagrams from recursion lead into a state where the set of meanings become self-referencing and as such we can get each hexagram to be described by analogy to all of the others when seen as WHOLE/PART relationships (which is an ASYMMETRIC dichotomy Frank, aka a compressed form of TRICHOTOMY where the third arm covers mediation at work)

Tried using a dice cube for insight?

Ever read "The Dice Man" Frank?

 

[fkegan]

Hi Elvis,

Ever read "The Dice Man" Frank?

I read it back in the day (even bought a copy I still have on my bookshelf now). A friend of mine was quite taken by the book and since I cast the Yi Oracle thought it relevant. Did you notice it was a parody of '60's New Age stuff and the use of astrology and Yi Oracles as observed and misunderstood by the author-- a journalist of the day?

More importantly-- Did you notice the fatal flaw in the author's thesis? The Dice Man is required at each opportunity for a choice to create his own 12 alternatives to take and must then do whichever of those he rolls. This is an incredibly time consuming and difficult operation to undertake every time he meets someone or interacts with them. It is also a total misunderstanding of what folks are doing in divination or horoscopy. When did you read The Dice Man and how is it affecting your still today?

Is Dice Man important in your views in Emotional I Ching?
If that is the source of your original impression of the I Ching then the following comments on your post may help you recover your footing:

I go where the neurology work takes me Frank - and that means a focus on meaning generation at levels 'beneath' those of the Chinese language or Pythagoras' numeric mysticism.

What makes neuroscience theory the source of "meaning generation" rather than Pythagorean number patterns or Yi gua? I suspect if you did original research in the generation of meaning from the identical rhythms nerve firings to all areas of the brain you would find nothing in current neuroscience that can make that leap from data to meaning without coding or language or mathematics as 'special' template.

EIC book is out. IDM book is on the way Frank.

the Ph.D. degree is the place for Piled Higher and Deeper. Do you expect to knock both Wilhelm and Proust into a cocked hat when you full text is published?

You use XOR to identify that expression.

No way! the XOR logical function that compares two bits to create a third where only difference is noted as 1 and similarly becomes 0. It is not inherent to any binary system such as Leibniz 18th century notion of the Yi hexagrams. It is only a means to use a computer to generate a third hexagram from any two hexagrams. Applied to a Yi Oracle it merely returns the moving lines in a Yin line matrix--trivially true.

Remember XOR is part of Boolean logic and "In 1938, Claude Shannon showed how electric circuits with relays were a model for Boolean logic. This fact soon proved enormously consequential with the emergence of the electronic computer."

That is computer science at the level of the Brainiac toy with its relays, wires, nuts and bolts that kids could assemble to play Tic-Tac-Toe.

Your neurology make you think that computer analysis of moving lines through XOR is the Philosophers' Stone? Brain patterns are capable of far more sophistication than just recognizing differences in input. Have you really hitched your wagon to one fleeting logical operator as the Rosetta Stone of Meaning?

Overall, I think we have made a breakthrough here and come closer to uncovering the root of your misunderstanding.