The Yi is user-specific?

[dobro p]

An idea occurred to me. (Uh-oh...)

We talk here about the meaning of a hexagram or the meaning of a line, but I'm wondering to what extent the meaning of a hexagram or a line is user-specific. For instance, for me Hex 21 might mean X, cuz it always refers to situations where X is the issue, whereas for you Hex 21 might mean Y, with quite a different meaning from X, again cuz for you Hex 21 always refers to situations where Y is the issue.

You known, meanings in the Yi (or in any other literate medium) will always be somewhere on the continuum between completely individual/idiosyncratic and common/shared. But for something like the Yi, perhaps those individual meanings will play a larger part, for two reasons: first, the Yi deals in symbols and generalities, and these will ALWAYS translate into a variety of individual differences; second, people's personalities (and souls or essences, I believe) are different, and so the Yi will have a meaning that's as unique for each user as a drug is unique for each user. Alcohol strikes different people in different ways, right? Depending on their personality.

Whatcha think?

 

[soshin]

Totally with you.

As I happen to own quite a lot of translations of the Yi, the Yi even tailors his answers to be in tune with the first one regarding the relative distance from the desk where I throw the coins.

Because I am a lazy man, I would always go for the first take on the answer, which I get from the first translation I use. And the Yi knows me.

Sosh

 

[lightofreason]

Each of us, all X billion humans, could write an I Ching and each would contain the unique prose covering unique histories. BUT analysis of that prose will bring out underlying sameness across all of the differences since the METHODOLOGY of self-referencing yin/yang gives us universal forms (aka blend, bond, bound, bind etc). This is what IDM is all about, the template of meaning for all species-members.

The other term for the differences is 'small world' networks. Thus the regular network can be represented as trigrams as potentials:

000, 001, 010, 011, 100, 101, 110, 111

But exposure to local context will customise to give, for example,

000010, 001, 01, 0, []. [], 11011011, 11

Where the potential meaning spaces have been developed into actualisations using ad-hoc methods, and so we are 'gurus' in one are, novices in another.

By identifying the full spectrum we can identify what is missing or what is in excess and in so doing identity what is the 'best fit' small world for some local context.

Also note that the categorisations of personas uses the SAME method such that we can map trigrams/hexagrams to personas etc etc etc

Chris.

 

[magictortoise]

And the Yi knows me.

Spot on. I like how the Yi tailors its answer in advance to the translation closest to you.

Ken

 

[bruce_g]

An idea occurred to me. (Uh-oh...)

We talk here about the meaning of a hexagram or the meaning of a line, but I'm wondering to what extent the meaning of a hexagram or a line is user-specific. For instance, for me Hex 21 might mean X, cuz it always refers to situations where X is the issue, whereas for you Hex 21 might mean Y, with quite a different meaning from X, again cuz for you Hex 21 always refers to situations where Y is the issue.

You known, meanings in the Yi (or in any other literate medium) will always be somewhere on the continuum between completely individual/idiosyncratic and common/shared. But for something like the Yi, perhaps those individual meanings will play a larger part, for two reasons: first, the Yi deals in symbols and generalities, and these will ALWAYS translate into a variety of individual differences; second, people's personalities (and souls or essences, I believe) are different, and so the Yi will have a meaning that's as unique for each user as a drug is unique for each user. Alcohol strikes different people in different ways, right? Depending on their personality.

Whatcha think?

I think it's a very good question, but I'm not sure what the answer is. I think there's two pitfalls. One is to make the image and meaning too narrow, and the other is to make it too wide.

I think there's a difference between the Yi's usefulness as an oracle, councilor - whatever we want to call it - and the actual literally translated text. It seems that it's impossible to literally translate it to English, anyway, so it seems a lot is left up to individual interpretation.

I find myself sometimes disagreeing with my own statements about a given hexagram, because the circumstances to which I'm applying it changes. (I'm sure Chris could have a real field-day with that one.)

I read a lot of disagreements on meanings here, especially lately it seems; as though one point of view automatically negates another. It doesn't always, imo. For example, on Hilary's thread about the Yi symbol. Does a pot negate sun and moon, or vv? Does a chameleon negate a lizard/dragon? Only when someone writes it in stone. And yet does that mean that anything goes? I don't think it should. I think we should be careful of defining them to liberally or too rigidly.

 

[lightofreason]

...I think there's a difference between the Yi's usefulness as an oracle, councilor - whatever we want to call it - and the actual literally translated text. It seems that it's impossible to literally translate it to English, anyway, so it seems a lot is left up to individual interpretation.

I find myself sometimes disagreeing with my own statements about a given hexagram, because the circumstances to which I'm applying it changes. (I'm sure Chris could have a real field-day with that one.)

Once you understand the neural correlates of hexagrams, and so blend, bond, bound, bind etc, there is no need for any translation since these correlates form the SAMNESS across the local context differences of different cultures.

These universal forms cover 'all there is' and it is local context than then customises the universals to fit that context. That local context can be the size of a collective or your mind on tuesday last about 4pm.

Given the IDM material, expressed in the archives as the "Species I Ching", we can all right our own I Ching but will find in comparisions the sameness beneath all of the differences.

Using the template we can map in the XOR work that allows us to use the I Ching to describe it self. Without the template all becomes 'ad hoc' such that undeveloped aspects cannot contribute to meaning.

Thus, the generic qualities of hexagram 23 'control' the top line of hexagrams. The differences in expression of that control are in (a) the 64 differences in the traditional material and (b) the many many differences present on this and other lists re the top line of some hexagram.

the template covers the particular/general. Consciousness covers the singular and so unique.

Chris.

 

[RindaR]

An idea occurred to me. (Uh-oh...)

We talk here about the meaning of a hexagram or the meaning of a line, but I'm wondering to what extent the meaning of a hexagram or a line is user-specific.

<snip>

Alcohol strikes different people in different ways, right? Depending on their personality.

Whatcha think?

Alcohol is a disinhibitor - our brains have a system that generates impulses - an accelerator if you will, and a system that inhibits them - like brakes. When one drinks alcohol, the brakes are affected first, so whatever a person is holding back comes out. As blood alcohol level increases more and more systems in the brain are affected until unconsciousness ensues. So - alcohol affects all people the same way, and the expression of those effects are dependent on the personality during the early stages of what is medically called toxicity....

...what Dobro said...

....except perhaps Yi's effect on our cognition and our affect moves us in the other direction?

Rinda

 

[lienshan]

An idea occurred to me. (Uh-oh...)

We talk here about the meaning of a hexagram or the meaning of a line, but I'm wondering to what extent the meaning of a hexagram or a line is user-specific. For instance, for me Hex 21 might mean X, cuz it always refers to situations where X is the issue, whereas for you Hex 21 might mean Y, with quite a different meaning from X, again cuz for you Hex 21 always refers to situations where Y is the issue.

21 Shih Ho is to me like riding a race horse. When near finish you have to make your horse bite the strap in his mouth
to keep up the speed and whip him to say, that now it's time to concentrate and move on to win the race.

Maybe this meaning of the hexagram is neither X nor Y but Z?

 

[bruce_g]

21 Shih Ho is to me like riding a race horse. When near finish you have to make your horse bite the strap in his mouth
to keep up the speed and whip him to say, that now it's time to concentrate and move on to win the race.

Maybe this meaning of the hexagram is neither X nor Y but Z?

Good example, but it sounds like X, Y and Z to me.

Like LiSe's 21-shaman, it can muster nearly supernatural ability.

 

[peacecat]

I'm wondering to what extent the meaning of a hexagram or a line is user-specific. For instance, for me Hex 21 might mean X, cuz it always refers to situations where X is the issue, whereas for you Hex 21 might mean Y, with quite a different meaning from X, again cuz for you Hex 21 always refers to situations where Y is the issue.

I think it is user specific but even there the meaning of a hexagram or line is not static. Hex 21 might have meant X for you a year ago but now has morphed into Y (or Z). Both externals and internals change. But that fits with it being user specific. The Yijing seems to adapt to the individual and the individual seems to adapt to the Yijing, it's a reciprocal relationship. That is, if you're perseverant...

Kate

 

[lienshan]

I think it is user specific but even there the meaning of a hexagram or line is not static. Hex 21 might have meant X for you a year ago but now has morphed into Y (or Z).

When making an extra effort to hang on, then it hurts, and all of us, shamans or not, bite our teeth together.
This common human behaviour is to me static pictured by hexagram 21 Shih Ho, while my view at the energies
of the trigrams Fire and Thunder is not static and changes all the time depending on the actual situation.

Jacques

 

[ewald]

This makes me think of the thread Answer reviseted, about the guy that bought a boat after consulting the Wilhelm's version of the Yi. Het got 30.0, and decided to buy, which in my view is a totally reasonable decision, if Wilhelm's text would have been trustworthy.

He regretted the purchase, though. According to other translations (including mine), it wouldn't have been such a good idea to buy.

So, apparently the Yi doesn't always adapt to the translation you are using.

Actually, I have been checking out situations and corresponding readings on this forum (with the hexagram index) to see whether particular translations fitted with what seemed to have happened. I've found lots of times that it didn't with the translation the querant appeared to have been using, and that a different translation of my own did actually fit.

 

[bruce_g]

Am very inclined to agree, Ewald. When I look back at some of the important (to me) choices I've made back in the 60's and 70's, based on my interpretation of Wilhelm, it is very plain to see that many of my conclusions were way off base. And not mine only. A friend and projects partner who also consulted using Wilhelm, also sent us and our projects out into never-never-land. We weren't always completely off the mark, but sometimes off enough that we would have been better off not consulting at all, and just going with our good sense.

 

[getojack]

Actually, I have been checking out situations and corresponding readings on this forum (with the hexagram index) to see whether particular translations fitted with what seemed to have happened. I've found lots of times that it didn't with the translation the querant appeared to have been using, and that a different translation of my own did actually fit.

Does the reading adapt to the translation or does the translation adapt to the reader? I think it's both. In psychological experiments, it's a well known fact that the result of the experiment is, in a large part, dependent upon the experimenter's expectation of the outcome.

This "experimenter bias" is the reason why double-blind experiments are usually performed, in which neither the subject nor the experimenter knows the purpose of the experiment. Only the researcher knows, and he/she doesn't take part in the study, but only designs the experiment and hands it off to others to do the actual research.

What you are describing, ewald, is called a "post-hoc" assumption and is experimentally invalid.

 

[bruce_g]

When making an extra effort to hang on, then it hurts, and all of us, shamans or not, bite our teeth together.
This common human behaviour is to me static pictured by hexagram 21 Shih Ho, while my view at the energies
of the trigrams Fire and Thunder is not static and changes all the time depending on the actual situation.

Jacques

Perhaps it is static because your view of it is static? There's nothing common about the shaman (in us) to bite through seemingly impossible obstructions - as though they didn't exist.

 

[bruce_g]

What you are describing, ewald, is called a "post-hoc" assumption and is experimentally invalid.

Does this mean nothing can be learned through retrospection?

 

[getojack]

Does this mean nothing can be learned through retrospection?

From one or two cases, you can't make general statements (scientifically speaking). Post-hoc research is sometimes performed with large samples, but the results aren't conclusive.

 

[lienshan]

Perhaps it is static because your view of it is static? There's nothing common about the shaman (in us) to bite through seemingly impossible obstructions - as though they didn't exist.

I'm a dane and danes "bite their teeth together" when it hurts. It's a part of our behaviour and a common phrase in our language. That's why the hexagram 21 Shih Ho is a piece of cake to me, while e.g. hexagram 52 Kên is extreme difficult to understand, because danes don't behave this chinese way.

 

[bruce_g]

From one or two cases, you can't make general statements (scientifically speaking). Post-hoc research is sometimes performed with large samples, but the results aren't conclusive.

Are we talking exact science (other than Chris)?

I dunno, Jack; if we won't learn from our mistakes or the mistakes of others, what are we doing with our nose in the Yijing?

 

[bruce_g]

I'm a dane and danes "bite their teeth together" when it hurts. It's a part of our behaviour and a common phrase in our language. That's why the hexagram 21 Shih Ho is a piece of cake to me, while e.g. hexagram 52 Kên is extreme difficult to understand, because danes don't behave this chinese way.

I can dig that. Or maybe, I can bite into that?

 

[getojack]

Are we talking exact science (other than Chris)?

I dunno, Jack; if we won't learn from our mistakes or the mistakes of others, what are we doing with our nose in the Yijing?

Divining the future, of course.

 

[ewald]

Divining the future, of course.

Is that an evasion of Bruce's remark?

 

[getojack]

Is that an evasion of Bruce's remark?

Not at all. Ewald and Bruce, do you play pool? According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, if you hit a billiard ball at the same angle with the same force 100 times in a row and it always moves in the same direction, you still cannot predict with certainty that it won't move in a different direction the next time. In other words, each moment in time is unique and unpredictable.

 

[ewald]

This "experimenter bias" is the reason why double-blind experiments are usually performed, in which neither the subject nor the experimenter knows the purpose of the experiment. Only the researcher knows, and he/she doesn't take part in the study, but only designs the experiment and hands it off to others to do the actual research.

What you are describing, ewald, is called a "post-hoc" assumption and is experimentally invalid.

So, you seem to assume that only through rigorous and strict scientific research truth can be found.

 

[ewald]

From one or two cases, you can't make general statements (scientifically speaking). Post-hoc research is sometimes performed with large samples, but the results aren't conclusive.

Are you assuming that I'm drawing conclusions on the basis of one or two cases?

 

[getojack]

Absolutely not. Only through divining the nature of your place in the universe can the truth be found.

 

[bruce_g]

Not at all. Ewald and Bruce, do you play pool? According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, if you hit a billiard ball at the same angle with the same force 100 times in a row and it always moves in the same direction, you still cannot predict with certainty that it won't move in a different direction the next time. In other words, each moment in time is unique and unpredictable.

Interesting factoid, fair enough.

What of hex 26, where the noble makes use of stored knowledge of past deeds, in order to develop?

 

[getojack]

Are you assuming that I'm drawing conclusions on the basis of one or two cases?

It doesn't matter if you draw conclusions based on one or two cases or 1000 cases... scientifically speaking, it's still a post-hoc conclusion.

 

[getojack]

Interesting factoid, fair enough.

What of hex 26, where the noble makes use of stored knowledge of past deeds, in order to develop?

Yes, knowledge is a tool for development. But knowledge doesn't lead to wisdom.

 

[hollis]

Absolutely not. Only through divining the nature of your place in the universe can the truth be found.

Great nature of my place Geto! But what gets me is the IChing in the IChing. Does that ever happen to anyone here? Ah well. It's just a step, they say.