Will oil price reverse downward trend by 2014/12/31

[jzy369]

Dear Friends:

After reading all of your questions and answers for a while, and contribute my perspective of IC text, I am encouraged to ask my first question to this board.

My question is "Will the global oil price reverse its downward trend by 2014/12/31?"

Since I asked about a trend, I asked for direction of multi-day averages, not just a single price point. So the true result shall be revealed maybe after 2015/1/5. If the trend is reversed, it is "good".

I got 30-4,5-37. The convention I used is 30-5 primary as primary interpretation, supplemented by 37-4.

30-5: New leadership emerges and followers are expecting enlightenment and better future. Being the leader, subject shall exhibit great sympathy for those who had suffered and sacrificed to reach today’s status, and be very careful on each word and action in front of followers. With good wishes from the followers, road ahead shall lead to auspiciousness.

37-4: After implemented previous three objectives, moving forward, subject shall find family to be enriched morally and materially, this increasing wealth certainly represents great auspiciousness.

Does this result also mean a "yes" in your book?

If this turns out not to be true, I would be interested to discuss with all of you maybe on how to adjust my questions/conventions, or maybe IC literal definition is not suitable for such emotionally-driven market ups and downs. Your comments and suggestions are welcome.

 

[Tohpol]

My question is "Will the global oil price reverse its downward trend by 2014/12/31?"

Since I asked about a trend, I asked for direction of multi-day averages, not just a single price point. So the true result shall be revealed maybe after 2015/1/5. If the trend is reversed, it is "good".

30-4.5-37.

There's always the possibility that the price of oil will rise again in the short term i.e. in 2015 but I think it's highly unlikely given a host of conflicting economic and geopolitical factors.

H.30 is pretty appropriate answer given that it is concerned with "fuel" in this case the material version.

Line 4: suggests there is a slight possibility of a small rise in price but only a temporary one before it drops back or continues to fall again for 2015 which will likely accompany the next stock market plunge. In other words, enthusiasm is misplaced.

Line 5: A dramatic change is afoot but it is accompanied by suffering. Yet, there is good fortune in this loss/suffering since it may lead to renewal in unexpected ways.

H.37 is the background representing the economic "unit" of cooperation that is needed but obviously lacking.

Either way, in my view, this doesn't point to a renewal of oil, the petro-dollar nor the economic framework upon which it is based.

 

[sooo]

Are you saying if the downward trend in gas prices is reversed, that is good? If so, then you must be asking strictly for your own selfish gains as an investor in petro. But if that's not what you're asking and saying, please correct me.

 

[jzy369]

The reason I say "good" is that I have to define a "good" for IC answer. Personally I benefit more by having lower oil prices here in US, and most of my investments are in non-oil and many can benefit from lower oil.

I had another reason for "good" because I don't want to see Russia or other smaller producer country experience economic collapse. That is not good for the global stability from several aspects.

I really appreciate your interpretation here, as you also incorporated many other related factors. I found IC application in this area the answer seem to come back with more than what I was asking and considering, because the question is related to many other fators. In another word, how to structure a question is very critical in consulting IC. I have to think and digest this...

 

[Tohpol]

The reason I say "good" is that I have to define a "good" for IC answer. Personally I benefit more by having lower oil prices here in US, and most of my investments are in non-oil and many can benefit from lower oil.

I had another reason for "good" because I don't want to see Russia or other smaller producer country experience economic collapse. That is not good for the global stability from several aspects.

I really appreciate your interpretation here, as you also incorporated many other related factors. I found IC application in this area the answer seem to come back with more than what I was asking and considering, because the question is related to many other fators. In another word, how to structure a question is very critical in consulting IC. I have to think and digest this...

Yes, I agree. I certainly don't want to see Russia collapse economically - especially given the recent events which have led to these current crises - nor any other countries around the world. I fear however, that the West has much more to fear on that account.

You're right about the structuring of questions on global issues too. I think it's even more important to word them as accurately as possible since there is such a confluence of possibilities. When it is more personal, the Yi seems to be on surer ground, perhaps because there is more of a "grooved" relationship? I don't know.

Thanks for an interesting reading.

 

[sooo]

Thank you for clarifying, somewhat. As far as I know, the Yi's answers are always "good", in that they are impartial and accurate. If Yi's answer was to be interpreted as a sustaining downward trend in oil prices, could it be said that Yi had answered badly?

However, this drives home my earlier points about good and bad being almost entirely relative. With the US's oil production constituting 1% of its GNP, our reliance upon importing the black gold has hurt our economy, effecting prices of goods across the board, thus being bad news for every US household's economy. That includes soaring food costs, clothing costs, health care costs, virtually everything with a price tag has soared, resulting in closing businesses, layoffs, cutbacks, and dying retail and resale markets. From the US perspective, we could use a little relief at the pump, as OPEC nations battle it out amongst themselves in a more competitive marketplace, which is how a democracy is supposed to operate. So the questions remain: good for whom, and bad for whom? I do not believe the Yi weighs in on such matters.

I'm inclined to view these kinds of questions reflecting back upon the one asking the question, in a more personal manner.

In that light, 37 would imply attention toward ones own family, clinging to and caring for ones own household, and as a father, looking after those in his care (lines 4 and 5).

Of course, Jzy, your readings are your own business and we can ask Yi whatever we choose to, but this is in response to your invitation for comments and suggestions.

 

[jzy369]

sooo:

You may have raised a key point which I may have overlooked before in consulting IC. IC text is full of "auspiciousess", "misfortunes", "undesirable results", "no regrets". It is these kind of "subjective" verses that lead me to believe we should define what is a desired, or "good" outcome prior to asking a question. Otherwise when I ask the question of oil price trend I would not know it is auspicious from what perspective.

So in your view, should the people raising the question hold a view of "good" and "bad" prior to asking a question? Or should the question just bypass these judgement statement altogether? If we bypass them, how do we treat the answers that contain "auspiciousness" and "misfortunes?" Thanks in advance.

 

[sooo]

sooo:

You may have raised a key point which I may have overlooked before in consulting IC. IC text is full of "auspiciousess", "misfortunes", "undesirable results", "no regrets". It is these kind of "subjective" verses that lead me to believe we should define what is a desired, or "good" outcome prior to asking a question. Otherwise when I ask the question of oil price trend I would not know it is auspicious from what perspective.

So in your view, should the people raising the question hold a view of "good" and "bad" prior to asking a question? Or should the question just bypass these judgement statement altogether? If we bypass them, how do we treat the answers that contain "auspiciousness" and "misfortunes?" Thanks in advance.

Well, I'm not in a position to say what people should or should not do when forming their questions, but I can speak to what I personally find to be more and less productive.

I don't recall using the words good or bad in my questions. It's not part of my objective thinking process, though subjectively it can be a different story! I just expect the Yi to be objective. While it's often advised to avoid yes or no questions, I occasionally do use those words, BUT expecting additional information, through which I can make those choices myself.

If I'm looking for a more global answer, which I rarely do, I'll ask "what does such-and-such look like?" Again, seeking an objective overview. The same when helping me arrive at a philosophical perspective, or a very personal question, which is sort of indissolubly united with personal philosophy.

I'm seeking a direction. I have learned to take grandiose words like auspicious with a grain of salt, a flavoring of favor, or if you will, a flavoring of unfavorable. If there's one thing I've learned it's that my frame of mind can change in a heartbeat, and fortune can turn to misfortune simultaneously, and vice verse. One second the King is introducing me to The Western Mountain, and the next, I lose the strong man - and vice verse. Some things happen because the time makes them happen, but most things happen between my ears, and that changes everything. That's why I take all change lines received into equal consideration. There's this, but it's conditional upon that, or else you get the other. I'm not much of a black or white thinker.

I can't change the world. I can't change my neighbor. I can only change and manage myself and the direction I choose to move toward. Yi, above all else (to me), is a psycho-cybernetic navigation aid, and the majority of its answers are conditional.

 

[sooo]

Fwiw, and not based on the Yi, I think world petrol pricing will be fluctuating beyond 2015, based on an ever-changing combination of sourcing - i.e. the Keystone Pipeline between Canada and the US (talk about a game changer!) - and the world's fossil fuel dependency. Throughout even this desert landscape, electricity generating windmills are popping up everywhere, and solar power is becoming a common source of heating air and water. This property is currently operating on 70% solar energy, and projected to be nearly 100% within two years. Electric autos will become commonplace as technology improves to deliver the power and torque needed to move bigger and heavier vehicles at faster speeds. Countries that rely too heavily on their oil exportation will need to diversify to stay alive. Is that good or bad? Depends on what each country decides to do with the resources they have. The folks that have been pushing for green energy and fighting man-made global warming and ozone depletion and are now getting what they wanted, are now crying over declining petroleum demand and sagging economies. Can't have it both ways. Humans have made it this far by being innovative and resourceful; that remains our hope, if we are to continue as a human race on this earth.

 

[jzy369]

sooo and topal:

Thank you for the useful posts. My biggest take-away from this thread so far is how to structure my questions and conditions wisely when asking Yi, so Yi can be more productive for more people.

Another of my original intention to ask about oil price was the factor of "fear". So one of my hypothesis was that Yi can be effective in providing "highest probability outcome under rational circumstances", but may be less sure when lots of emotions (such as public fears in this case) are involved. But from your comments so far, my hypothesis may play less role than the question structure and objective conditions.

Maybe I will move this discussion into "Exploring divination" section.

 

[sooo]

Jzy, I think your original question was quite clear enough. I think you asked what you wanted to know. Unless you were trying to evoke certain emotions in others, I don't think emotions enter into your question or Yi's answer, but neither do I think the Yi answered in same spirit as your question. In my experience, that's not uncommon. I think we have to sometimes readjust our thinking to meet Yi's answer in a productive way.

I appreciate your politeness, but I'm as yet unsure of your motives, since they seem to change throughout the course of this thread. I'm not sure these things are clear enough to you either. Factor of fear, highest probability outcome under rational circumstances, so Yi can be more productive for more people, world events being good or bad, etc. Shouldn't your concern be being the center of your home, caring for your own household? That's what your change lines seem to clearly indicate. I'm just uncertain of exactly where you're coming from in all of this. Asking questions concerning international economics, and of course politics is involved in that; you may succeed in stirring up some emotions, or study various reactions to your question, but that doesn't seem like the intended purpose of the oracle, to me.

What I want to know is, are the AZ Cardinals going to the Superbowl this year? But I'm willing to wait it out to find out for myself. After all, not knowing is what makes the sport interesting and exciting. Go Cardinals! Lot of powerful emotions surrounding the outcome. How can I possibly expect Yi to provide an objective answer to such as question? Perhaps it could, but I seriously doubt it would. It would probably tell me to go feed the horses and clean up the cow pen.

 

[jzy369]

sooo:

Oh my goodness, we are on the crash path. I actually used IC to read a Seahawk victory against Eagles. Yes, I am the Seahawks fan. But I do not plan to use IC to read this weekend's clash for the same reason you mentioned, making it more fun (even though a pass to Superbowl is at stake). I did not use IC for niner's game last weekend either.

My intention is indeed more multi-layers and I was probably ambitious than most of the questions posted here. For example, I also intentionally designed the question to ask for average trend instead of jsut the oil price. Coming from a engineering background, and having studied some Quantum mechanics back in college, I am approaching IC knowledge in a very logical, "scientific" way. So far, learning had benefitted my life greatly. My "ambition" is to develop a set of systematic, scientifically acceptable ways to use IC productively for more people. With the help of internet, for the past few years, I have arduously translated every single Chinese text verse in IC into English, referencing to multiple Eastern and Western resources, and came up with my own set of consolidated, logical, useful interpretations for me.

There are a lot of not-yet-understood, or misunderstood issues in this universe. If better accepted by more people, and with accuracy optimized (such as adequate formulation of questions), IC could help guide human race to solve these issues in the right direction, beyond maybe just my own family lives (which I use extensively). This is worthy of a life-long pursuit.

 

[Tohpol]

Would you be willing to share some of those translations/interpretations at some point? I'm always very interested to see new interpretative "systems" in this context.

 

[jzy369]

Yes, I will be glad to share what I have. In return, I wish to receive your feedback. For example, if you feel certain implications on certain verse is missing, please let me know. I also suspect that current IC limitation is highly productive under certain application scenarios, but not yet all (for example, human health). So I also wish to hear your feedback on limiation of using just finite interpretation texts.

One disclaimer I want to say is that I have o intention to promote my text. The benefit I can receive from having a robust IC methodology far out-weight nominal gains from publishing or reading. Any contribution to the text or system improvement I will write down the credit due, as I believe collective wisdom can be very powerful.

You can write me to a Google address I just created: iching.xxi@gmail.com and I will send you my pdf document. Thanks in advance.

 

[jzy369]

Dear Friends:

Today is 12/31 here in US. At the market close, Oil price certainly had not reverse the downward trend. It holds at this low level at best.

Topal's interpretation is certainly more accurate than mine. Our difference is the convention we used for the interpretation, where Topal considers 30-4 and I did not. When I read many of the personal issue readings on this board, I found the convention I used was generally slightly more pertinent. But in this reading on this question, my convention seems to be inferior.

Also, sooo raised the good point: what is "auspiciousness" in this question anyway? Auspicious to whom? To the Russians? Or to me who just drove 900 miles on $60 of gas?

So, different reading conventions exist because they all work well one time or another. Questions without clear definition of "auspiciousness" (good versus bad) can lead to less useful reading. Your opinions and thoughts are welcome.