Water

[lightofdarkness]

Martin, reading through these posts of yours I find not one 'point', other than comments of discrepancies that I show dont exist. You seem to be circling 'something' and I cant help if you do that.

I dont focus on WHY, I focus on HOW. So maybe there is an issue of communications - my perspective is more of an engineering perspective - "how can we use this" etc etc. - I dont reject the square root of minus 1 on moral grounds etc - from the engineering perspective if it repeatedly works, then use it.

Now, if you have issues with what I am asserting then YOU do the experiments to prove ME wrong; you go South, not me ;-) I have done the pencil and paper work and that includes predictions of expressions of hexagrams THROUGH contexts represented by other hexagrams - the use of XOR etc as a method to derive parts from complex patterns - as the brain does.

Included in that is the reference to the skeletal forms of hexagrams, their 27-ness. FROM that comes all else in the use of XOR-ing ALL hexagrams through each to develop finer understandings of these UNIVERSALS.

All the material to do so is on the websites. You could randomly select hexagrams and pair them with each other, compared to a set of hexagrams with their 27-ness pairs and ask 'which set appears to best fit the 27-ness hypothesis? - and you can do that for all hexagrams etc. I am not here to dream up experiments since I dont think they are necessary given the solid background of trigrams to neurology etc etc BUT if you want to do that then set up a website to do it - simple ;-)

Note that if you apply the same method, 27-ness, to the MBTI you get the same sort of results etc, all reflecting properties of the METHODOLOGY - recursion.

(see pages on MBTI and XOR - http://www.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/type.html)

Chris.

 

[lightofdarkness]

and 12?

and 39?

 

[lightofdarkness]

BTW for the MBTI the IDM mapping of INTXs is to thunder, ENTXs to fire:

* "ENTJs will usually rise to positions of responsibility and enjoy being executives."

* "ENTPs are good at innovative projects and can administer them well if dull routine is not involved. They usually are outstanding teachers, continuously devising new participative ways to make learning exciting for the students."

* "The INTP is the architect of a system and leaves it to others to be the builder and the applicator...They are, however, often excellent teachers, particularly for advanced students, although INTPs do not always enjoy much popularity, for they can be hard taskmasters."

* INTJs "can be outstanding in scientific research and also outstanding as executives who generate a plethora of implementations of ideas."

If we apply 27-ness to 51, the 'archetypal' INTP perspective, we get the skeletal form of 35 - issues of bringing 'something' into the light.

for XNTJ (hex 30) = skeletal format described by analogy to 62 (all of that 'lifting' of the 'troops' commitment, loyalty to the cause etc)

All of the categories in the MBTI map to IC categories and so map to the XOR material as well - so the same form of experiment can be done using personality mappings to validate or invalidate the generic property claimed - XOR-ing of categories will bring out all of the other categories expressed THROUGH each particular.

 

[candid]

IDM phobia

 

[martin]

Hi Chris,

Before anything else, please don't feel offended if my replies to your posts are sometimes short or don't deal with everything that you wrote in detail. I'm not a native English speaker and writing in English (reading is much easier) is a slow process for me. I often have to keep it short because I don't have enough time for longer and more detailed posts. That doesn't mean that I don't value what you write. I do.
Well, I will now read your posts and answer as soon as possible.

 

[martin]

Hi Candid!

 

[martin]

Hi Chris,

"So maybe there is an issue of communications"

Yes, I think so after reading through this thread. I believe that what I'm saying is obvious but you don't seem to get it and you probably believe the same..
Looks like one of those typical internet conversations to me, where a small misunderstanding grows and grows till nobody understands anymore what the hell anyone else is talking about.
May I say that the situation that we are in now reminds me of 39 and 12, regardless of how these hexagrams are interpreted?

Anyway, I suggest that we give it a rest for now and wait till the fog lifts. It nearly always does after a while.
Okay? See you later, alligator.

 

[martin]

Continued ..
"All the material to do so is on the websites. You could randomly select hexagrams and pair them with each other, compared to a set of hexagrams with their 27-ness pairs and ask 'which set appears to best fit the 27-ness hypothesis? - and you can do that for all hexagrams etc. I am not here to dream up experiments since I dont think they are necessary given the solid background of trigrams to neurology etc etc BUT if you want to do that then set up a website to do it - simple ;-)

I think the XOR method is difficult to test as it is rather subtle. Because of the noise/errors you would probably need hundreds of subjects to get significant results. And where to find hundreds who are able and willing to do it?
I would start with something easier, like the test that I proposed earlier. And then see where that leads me.
As to your proposal (which I take seriously, although I guess you didn't intend it that way ), I'm not in a position to do it now or in the near future. I haven't been able to do much at all lately because of my health. It's kind of hex 16 line 5. Later .. who knows.
But you are not interested?!