Tricking the yi by feigning a question

[jarvisamye]

I have been testing the Yi at times to see if I could embody the mindset of a different person asking a fake question and get a relevant answer. The latest:

Fake Question - pretending to be a basketball player
"My arms are skinny but I don't have enough time to lift before the game. Any tips on prepping for it?"
7.1,6

So, pretty relevant. The follow up:

"If I can ask you fake questions, why would I trust you?"
64.1

What's the point if I can taint the sample so easily? I can come up with reasons why using the Yi is still a good idea but I don't want to assume anything in life. I don't want to assume that this tool is the most useful divination tool out there if I'm actually just misunderstanding what it's doing as reflecting a bit of my thoughts back to me. It has certainly been helpful at times, but I starting using the Yi for outward direction not inward reflection. It's good to have the reflection, but I find I get that from contemplation pretty easily.

I have no one in my life who I would in any way trust to direct me, I grew up in a cult.

 

[jayne743]

As with anything in life, meeting a new group of people, entering a new relationship or workplace, we have a choice in how much or too little we express about ourselves. We also can choose how much we trust others. For me, the one requirement to get a helpful answer from any oracle, person, or experience is sincerity and truth. To me, it all starts there. So, of course, if I am not sincere or present when I divine, I end up confused.

64 days. "When you are not yet across, you may hesitate on the verge of transition, trying to tell if it's safe to commit yourself. It's time to use skills like a wise fox."

Possibly, because you've grown up in a cult, you are naturally and rightly wary of believing what others say, especially from anyone or anything that resembles guidance and "authoritative" knowledge.

It might be time to leave the oracle, and the need to believe in anything, to go on a journey to find a sense of inner authority using your own skills (like a wise fox). Your sincere actions in the world will be your greatest guide, as will your mistakes.

 

[Trojina]

I'm not sure if this belongs here or in Exploring Divination as I don't think you are asking for help with a reading but wanting to discuss a more general point about the nature of the I Ching.

Let me know if you do actually want help with a reading otherwise I think this thread would work better in Exploring Divination.

There's lots of ideas there about what Yi is, none of which I share. It is not a 'tool' since we use tools to operate things and we don't operate Yi.

It's about communication. If you ask me to pretend in a conversation I might if that's what we decided would be fun or educational or something, same with Yi I guess. I'd never ask fake questions or questions 'just for fun' but some people do. Hilary uses questions about fairy tale characters in her beginners course as practice. It has nothing to do with 'tricking Yi' the idea of that is absurd, you can't 'trick' Yi but also you are not required to have any particular attitude towards nor trust it really. It's not there to make your decisions for you that's your job.

Your view is completely alien to me since you are viewing Yi not as a source of wisdom or living intelligence but something you operate and test.

It's good to have the reflection, but I find I get that from contemplation pretty easily.

It isn't just reflection but more besides. But many people do seem to consult where they'd be better off just stopping to think for 5 minutes in a normal rational way so if it seems to you there is more to be gained by contemplation then contemplate and don't consult Yi.

You aren't required to trust Yi - consulting as if you had to would not be a good thing. You can ask without needing to trust and also you are always free to consider the answer and ignore it. Yi doesn't demand obedience.

Also I didn't think 7.1.6 was particularly relevant to your question anyway. How did you think it was?

You didn't trick Yi it just cooperated with you in generosity, if you think your answer meant something that is. Of course you can't trick Yi, if you could that would make you wiser than it so why would you bother consulting at all.

 

[jarvisamye]

Trojina can you move it to the exploring divination section.

First, what you're saying about a tool makes zero sense to me. I said the Yi *is* the tool, so by your definition of tool, we would then ask "So what's it operating?" I'm not trying to operate the Yi, I'm looking at it from the pov of the Yi is effecting the human.


Second, no way would I ever define a tool as something that "operates" something. What like a stick shift in a car? Maybe, but tool is a broad concept about some thing manipulating another, usually with some connotation that it "fixes" or "helps" a broken or unhelped situation. Focusing on "tool" as a high concept is splitting hairs and distracting from the more important point of the Yi being a "method" (please, can we not attack "method" too, I'm just using a different word that still applies) of divination.

So then I'm just asking,
If it functions like a mirror, like the moon of our psyche,

We should not treat it like a sun.
And I think people do treat it as the source of something.

 

[Trojina]

First, what you're saying about a tool makes zero sense to me. I said the Yi *is* the tool, so by your definition of tool, we would then ask "So what's it operating?" I'm not trying to operate the Yi, I'm looking at it from the pov of the Yi is effecting the human.

Well you've skipped most of the points I have made including the request that you show us why you think this

Fake Question - pretending to be a basketball player
"My arms are skinny but I don't have enough time to lift before the game. Any tips on prepping for it?"
7.1,6

So, pretty relevant. The follow up:

So tell us how do you find it so relevant? What do you think it's saying.


I do not see Yi as a tool as I have said a tool is something we operate in order to gain certain consequences we desire. I do not operate Yi in order to achieve a result or goal I already have in mind like when I use a hammer, which is a tool, to knock a nail into the wall.

Some people do see Yi as a tool, it's not as if we are talking about facts here it is a matter of opinion. But from your initial post you clearly have come to the baseless conclusion that you can manipulate Yi, and 'trick' it........because you got 7.1.6 to a pretend question. So, the thrust of your first post is that you believe you can manipulate it (though are unable to say how the reading fitted your question) and your belief that you can manipulate it appears to disapoint you.

Second, no way would I ever define a tool as something that "operates" something. What like a stick shift in a car? Maybe, but tool is a broad concept about some thing manipulating another, usually with some connotation that it "fixes" or "helps" a broken or unhelped situation. Focusing on "tool" as a high concept is splitting hairs and distracting from the more important point of the Yi being a "method" (please, can we not attack "method" too, I'm just using a different word that still applies) of divination.

I don't think it's splitting hairs since it's pretty central to your whole orientation to Yi. You think you can 'trick' it - look at your first post that is what you said. If you think you can trick it then you think you can manipulate it like a tool. Indeed you come to the conclusion you have operated it with your fake question. You believe you have outsmarted the oracle where if anything the oracle kindly co-operated with the game. Well, that's if it did.....you didn't write in the relating hexagram so ..... what do you make of the relating hexagram as part of your answer to your fake question?

If you post a thread saying how you are trying to trick Yi and how disappointed you are that you think you can trick it as then what is the point then you can expect replies that analyze your position. Engaging with your position is not an 'attack' it's an analysis. Perhaps you could clarify what you actually wanted or hoped to get from posting this thread? I would have thought it was some kind of discussion but you haven't picked up on any discussion points as yet.

So then I'm just asking,
If it functions like a mirror, like the moon of our psyche,

Someone might have the opinion it is just/only a mirror. In that case we can assume they have such an extremely limited experience of divining with Yi they know no better OR they have such a rigid concept of what Yi can be they will allow nothing but the mirror model in to their consciousness. Anyone consulting Yi for any length of time knows that whilst at times it can be a mirror it certainly cannot be limited to that function only. If it was only a mirror we wouldn't get answers that wake us up, change our minds, predict events beyond us, make us aware of factors we may not have thought of.

We should not treat it like a sun.
And I think people do treat it as the source of something.

This is going to sound rude but I can't think a polite way to say this but how would you know how 'we' should treat Yi when you are 'testing' Yi through fake questions and believe you have outsmarted it? You don't 'taint the sample' as you put as it is not a sample it's a communication as this is a communication.

It's a pretty odd kind of measuring - you ask a fake question and as you think the Oracle has understood and answered you dismiss the oracle.....what was it meant to do? What answer would have satisfied you for the fake question? You wanted an answer you didn't understand? But did you understand this answer ? You determined that if Yi answered your question it 'tainted the sample'. Sorry I find this completely nuts. Maybe others can help.

If you want a genuine communication be genuine. Yet here when you weren't genuine you were still answered according to you so the Oracle must be limitless in patience...you were answered but took that as proof of Yi being untrustworthy.


There is no trust required anyway. If you ask someone for advice you don't have to trust them you can just hear them and make your own mind up.

 

[dobro p]

"I have been testing the Yi at times to see if I could embody the mindset of a different person asking a fake question and get a relevant answer."

You can't trick the Yi. If you think you can, and if you think you can embody the mindset of a different person, you're tricking yourself. Ask the Yi a question on your own behalf - who's asking the question? You are. Okay, now ask the Yi a question while pretending to be somebody else. Who's asking the question? You are.


"What's the point if I can taint the sample so easily?"

What's the point of using the Yi if you're going to mess with it? Rubbish in, rubbish out.

"I can come up with reasons why using the Yi is still a good idea"

What reasons are those?

"... but I don't want to assume anything in life."

Good idea.

"I don't want to assume that this tool is the most useful divination tool out there if I'm actually just misunderstanding what it's doing as reflecting a bit of my thoughts back to me."

You don't have to assume anything. Does the Yi work for you? If yes, then use it. If no, then don't.

"It has certainly been helpful at times"

If it's been helpful, it's been helpful. What's wrong with that? If it's been helpful, go with it. Why mess around?

"...but I starting using the Yi for outward direction"

That's one way to use it.

"... not inward reflection."

That's another way to use it.

"It's good to have the reflection, but I find I get that from contemplation pretty easily."

Well, if you don't need it for inward reflection, then don't use the Yi for inward reflection.

"I have no one in my life who I would in any way trust to direct me, I grew up in a cult."

You need a measure of trust in your own mind, in the depth of your own mind, in order to use the Yi. I trust the Yi more than I trust people around me, more than I trust myself. Of course, even if you trust the Yi, there's still the challenge of understanding what it says to you sometimes lol.

 

[surnevs]

I have been testing the Yi at times to see if I could embody the mindset of a different person asking a fake question and get a relevant answer. The latest:

Fake Question - pretending to be a basketball player
"My arms are skinny but I don't have enough time to lift before the game. Any tips on prepping for it?"
7.1,6

So, pretty relevant. The follow up:

"If I can ask you fake questions, why would I trust you?"
64.1

What's the point if I can taint the sample so easily? I can come up with reasons why using the Yi is still a good idea but I don't want to assume anything in life. I don't want to assume that this tool is the most useful divination tool out there if I'm actually just misunderstanding what it's doing as reflecting a bit of my thoughts back to me. It has certainly been helpful at times, but I starting using the Yi for outward direction not inward reflection. It's good to have the reflection, but I find I get that from contemplation pretty easily.

I have no one in my life who I would in any way trust to direct me, I grew up in a cult.

".................. - because: when this decision has been made throwing the coins, the difference between gambling with our situation / our life / ourselves and to establish contact with our deeper layers of consciousness / our ancestors / the Spirits will be present. ................"

pg. 9

 

[rosada]

Define what is fake and what is real…

 

[IrfanK]

I remember reading about some militant atheist shouting out some blasphemy in Hyde Park in the Victorian era and then looking around triumphantly saying "There! He didn't strike me down with lightening! That PROVES he doesn't exist!"

If you make up the rules for how the I Ching should behave and then when the I Ching doesn't follow your rules, that doesn't prove anything about the I Ching, either.

 

[Liselle]

I wonder if it would help to try some real readings and see what happens? Maybe cast an open daily reading for a while: "Guidance for today?" or "What should I be aware of today?" or something. The short time frame makes it easier to spot things and watch it play out. Or questions like "Advice for this meeting/conversation?" - something concrete.

Give it a good try, though. Even people who are convinced the I Ching is real don't understand some of their readings, especially not instantly.

 

[Trojina]

I wonder if it would help to try some real readings and see what happens?

Reading her first post she has already done that.

It has certainly been helpful at times, but I starting using the Yi for outward direction not inward reflection. It's good to have the reflection, but I find I get that from contemplation pretty easily.

From that I deduce she has asked real questions already.

Also

Give it a good try, though. Even people who are convinced the I Ching is real don't understand some of their readings, especially not instantly.

But she isn't saying she doesn't understand readings. The point is, if you read the first post, that she is saying she doesn't understand the cast about skinny arms and that is the basis of her notion that Yi is easily duped

 

[Trojina]

Fake Question - pretending to be a basketball player
"My arms are skinny but I don't have enough time to lift before the game. Any tips on prepping for it?"
7.1,6

So, pretty relevant.

I'm still waiting to hear what Yi said about prepping for the game with skinny arms. I mean this is the answer that apparently means the 'sample is tainted'

What's the point if I can taint the sample so easily?

So if you had skinny arms and you didn't have time to lift to make the arms stronger what could Yi possibly say as advice for that? What alternative would there be for strengthening the arms through exercise? Apparently Yi has told you how in 7.1.6>41. This reading could be of interest to any basketball players who have skinny arms and no time to lift. What does it say to you? The thing is your theory about Yi being easily duped is totally based on this answer so it would help if there were an actual interpretation from you whereby you find it 'pretty relevant' to the plight of the skinny armed basketball player.

Also I'm curious as to how a skinny armed person bypasses lifting if they can do 7.1.6>41.

 

[surnevs]

 

[Trojina]

I don't know what the 'wow' face emoji or the tick are meant to indicate so that communication has failed.

 

[surnevs]

I don't know what the 'wow' face emoji or the tick are meant to indicate so that communication has failed.

I've followed this thread and found your response overall OK or fitting.

Fake or Real is like Fake can be real in times where Real can't be Fake and back again.
Real can be Fake in times where Fake can't be Real and so on.

In my opinion, it's OK to test the I Ching today. Contrary to back in the antique where it could mean deathly punishment to doubt about it - in ancient China at least. (taken as a general view on idealogic risks taking opinion against authorities), we are freely allowed to do so, I mean.
By testing it we will get an Idea about our relation to it individually. But the problem here may very well be if our individual connection to it can serve objectively to such a test.
Please don't ask me for a proper solution here.
But to me personally, it will be found as a counterpoint towards the serious need for advice [possibly given by the I Ching] to make tests at all.

 

[Trojina]

I'd think every time we ask anything it's a kind of test especially with an oracle as obtuse as Yi is. So over time one feels out/decides if one wants to go on or not.

By testing it we will get an Idea about our relation to it individually.

Well every time we ask it anything we get an idea about our relation to it individually. This isn't called 'testing' it's called 'consulting the I Ching' and then leaving it open to decide if we want to go on doing it or not based on what we get out of it.

 

[dobro p]

I don't know what the 'wow' face emoji or the tick are meant to indicate so that communication has failed.

(Dobro turns on his interpretation device...) The tick means 'correct' probably.

 

[surnevs]

I was reacting spontaneously on postings, with no special agreement but just signalling my presence.
My take on Testing the I Ching with to example fake questions is more complicated than for me to express in brief answers I know. I can see thou that it could be a way to have a chat with I Ching and hopefully learn this old master better to know, asking to example questions that we beforehand know the outcome of etc. etc.

 

[Liselle]

Reading her first post she has already done that.


From that I deduce she has asked real questions already.

Also

But she isn't saying she doesn't understand readings. The point is, if you read the first post, that she is saying she doesn't understand the cast about skinny arms and that is the basis of her notion that Yi is easily duped

I see your point. I think I probably don't understand this thread and should have stayed out of it.

-----
(Added - Trojina, just to be clear the rest of this is general babble and not a response to you specifically)

Re: basketball question...I imagine it might mean that lifting weights right before a game won't help your skinny arms anyway and will just make them tired which is counterproductive (7.1), and what a person would really need is more comprehensive and long-term arm strength building (7.6). But I know precious little about basketball or weightlifting.

I think it's kind of an indirect answer because there is nothing one can do to prepare for a game if the problem is weak arms and the game is happening shortly. I mean, get enough sleep the night before, eat a good breakfast and so on is good general advice but will have no effect on skinny arms specifically and that was the problem presented. So Yi answered by saying well at least don't tire your arms out, and overall (6th line) you need a bigger, better plan, not a small, last-minute one.


Yi can easily give a sensible answer to a hypothetical situation, I don't see how it's invalidated just because the querent herself isn't a basketball player. The reading makes sense on its own terms (I think).

I'd also like to know what Jarvis thinks it meant.

 

[Trojina]

(Dobro turns on his interpretation device...) The tick means 'correct' probably.

Yes a tick means 'correct' in context of a teacher marking a child's work. Here....well...

Liselle the point is here what Jarvis makes of it since his or her claim that she has tricked Yi rests on her interpretation of this answer. A conclusion was drawn on the basis of this answer, that is my point in asking her. Doesn't matter what you, I or anyone else's interpretation of that cast is since the entire point is how Jarvis sees this as tricking Yi.

But I see you weren't just addressing me

 

[rosada]

How to prep for the upcoming basketball game when you never got around to lifting weights and now have skinny arms?
7.1.6 - 41.

I see these hexagrams as the I Ching advising the best way to prepare is to prepare yourself psychologically. That is, prepare to be sitting on the bench this game.

7.1
The army must set out in proper order. (Only the best players should be put in key positions)
If the order is not good misfortune threatens. (If the kid with the skinny arms gets put in the game instead of a better player, misfortune threatens.)
7.6
The great prince issues commands. (The coach has the final say.)
Inferior people should not be employed. (Kids with skinny arms should not be put in the game.)

41.
The superior man controls his anger and restrains his instincts. (Suck it up)

 

[Trojina]

Yi can easily give a sensible answer to a hypothetical situation, I don't see how it's invalidated just because the querent herself isn't a basketball player. The reading makes sense on its own terms (I think).

I can't tell here whether you have missed the point or not. The querent did not find the cast invalid, she found it fitted the question. But as the question was a fake one she was disappointed that she got an actual answer (she thought) and so believed she had tricked Yi. I guess you could just reread the first post rather than me rehash it.

 

[rosada]

If I can ask you a fake question, why should I trust you? 64.1 - 38.

64.
The superior man is careful in the differentiation of (real and fake) so each finds its proper place.
64.1
The young fox gets his tail in the water. Humiliating. (You don’t feel you have a firm grasp yet of what it is on how the I Ching works and you don’t want to trust and then get burned - or be lost at sea. humiliated, - or in this case, drown.)

38.
Amid all fellowship the superior man retains his individuality. (You aren’t required to trust the I Ching. Test it. See if it works for you. Make up your own mind.)

 

[Liselle]

I can't tell here whether you have missed the point or not. The querent did not find the cast invalid, she found it fitted the question. But as the question was a fake one she was disappointed that she got an actual answer (she thought) and so believed she had tricked Yi. I guess you could just reread the first post rather than me rehash it.

Oh...aha...

No, I didn't get that at all, that (maybe, pending confirmation from Jarvis), Jarvis didn't expect an actual answer. And when he got one, he thought that proves Yi doesn't know what's going on, doesn't know what's real and what isn't, therefore can't be trusted.

I actually can sort of see that point...see it but not agree with it.

I think Yi knows the difference, I just think Yi's willing to go along with hypothetical exercises. People do things like that, too, have hypothetical discussions with each other. I could even see a coach or health teacher using that exact example to teach kids about exercise.

But thanks for straightening me out, Trojina.

 

[moss elk]

If "Importuning" gives no information,
(As described in hex 4, and personally experienced by many, m.e. included)

How much useful information does the querent assume they will get with a complete lack of seriousness?
Who is the fooler and who is fooled?

Yes, it is an Assumption that those 'fake' readings were relevant to *anything*.

........................................................................................................................
Yi comprehension is very much about pattern recognition (Within the text and the subject of the inquiry)

But here is a cognitive pitfall to consider with pattern recognition:
Apophenia,
the tendency to perceive meaningful connections between unrelated things. The term was coined by psychiatrist Klaus Conrad in his 1958 publication on the beginning stages of schizophrenia. He defined it as "unmotivated seeing of connections [accompanied by] a specific feeling of abnormal meaningfulness".

An artist (I can't recall the name) once put a series of paintings on exhibit in a gallery.
When anyone stood before a painting, a piece of music was played.
The majority of observers remarked something to the effect of
'wow, it is amazing how well the music and painting go together!'

Fun fact:
The artist made no conscious or meaningful choice of the music to each painting,
Yet the audience saw meaning where there was none.

 

[surnevs]

I do think that in the following quote there is a hint toward the legitimacy of even testing the I Ching:

"53. The Yi is a book which should not be let slip from the mind. Its method (of teaching) is marked by the frequent changing (of its lines). They change and move without staying (in one place), flowing about into any one of the six places of the hexagram. They ascend and descend, ever inconstant. The strong and the weak lines change places, so that an invariable and compendious rule cannot be derived from them;—it must vary as their changes indicate.
54. The goings forth and comings in (of the lines) are according to rule and measure. (People) learn from them in external and internal affairs to stand in awe.
55. (The book), moreover, makes plain the nature of anxieties and calamities, and the causes of them. Though (its students) have neither master nor guardian, it is as if their parents drew near to them.
56. Beginning with taking note of its explanations, we reason out the principles to which they point. We thus find out that it does supply a constant and standard rule. But if there be not the Proper men (to carry this out), the course cannot be pursued without them."
James Legge, Appendice III, sect. 2, ch. 8 (Online)

 

[rosada]

After watching a video of an interview with a woman who had survived a mass shooting I started thinking about this thread and the question, What makes a thing real? The woman in the interview described how at first when she saw the shooter aim his gun she couldn’t understand what was happening. She said it seemed like it was a prop gun and she was watching a play. Then she said something that I thought was absolutely amazing: She said the thing that made it real for her was her heart suddenly pounding wildly in her chest. In other words, it was her emotional response to the situation that made it real for her. I wonder if there is a message for us here along the lines that our emotional response to a situation is what makes anything real, and thus the importance of staying calm and carrying on.

 

[dobro p]

Things are real enough without emotion, but they lack depth, they lack juice.

 

[moss elk]

What makes a thing real?

What makes a thing real is that it is not dependent upon our Beliefs or Thoughts or Feelings or Wishes.

It also withstands scrutiny
and is still there if we blink.


jarvisamye, you may completely bypass the trust issue by sticking exclusively to what we sometimes call 'weather report' or daily readings. (What is up today?)
That way, you will not have to 'submit' your will to anything. Readings can then be calmly considered as an element of your experience.

Just a suggestion.

 

[surnevs]

"........................ here along the lines that our emotional response to a situation is what makes anything real................" (#27)

I'm not a farmer and have never experienced what I've heard from many sources over time, namely that when cattle are driven to slaughter, they are terrified - long before they get a chance to know what will happen.
Emotional response? Sixth sense? or do they hear the specific noise from those cattle which already see what is going to happen to them?