The I-Ching roughly translates in English to the “Book of Change”
Apparently the ancient Chinese … long before Confucius … observed the ever changing aspects of their universe … for example the changing seasons, constellation movements in the sky above … plant life cycles and so on.
Their observations seem to have lead to inquiry … as to what … if any … impact did the changes they observed have on their daily lives … thus the birth of the I-Ching.
Some argue the I-Ching hints at the binary number system … apparently an important “system” for todays’ computers. Today when I hear 16 bit operating system … 32 bit … and 64 bit … I am reminded of the I-Ching … the numbers 8,16,32 and 64 are apparently significant in the book.
I just returned from a walk on the beach … we live near the ocean at the moment.
While walking along the beach I noticed an imprint in the sand … the imprint of a bird’s foot … don’t know what kind of bird … but some bird had walked the same area before me.
This tiny experience brought to mind the memory of a tidbit of information long forgotten.
I read somewhere … some time ago … an individual’s theory about how the Chinese pictorial written language got started.
This individual believed that some ancient ancient (4-5,000 years ago) Chinese sage observed the same thing I did this morning … an imprint of a birds foot in the sand.
This particular Chinese sage had incredibly keen insight … he understood that if people could identify the kind of bird who had passed simply from an imprint of their foot in the sand … people could transmit their individual thoughts … from one to one as well as one to many. Et voila! … the birth of the Chinese pictographs … what we call Chinese written language.
Some argue that one character … one pictograph … can tell a rather long and complicated story … akin to the Western axiom "a picture is worth a thousand words.
I also remember the insight Moreno penned in one of his posts somewhere … the see-saw effect of … life experience … to thought … back to life experience … back to thought and so on. Seems to me now that this particular post from Moreno is yet another exquisite explanation of the Chinese philosophical concept of Wu Wei ??
Seems my morning experience supports my perception of the I-Ching ???
There is always the option of doing the I-Ching rather than reading it. The whole question, ritual with yarrow stalks or coins or whatever, looking up the responses in the I-ching and then mulling this over. Over time one will have ended up reading much of it and getting it in a learning by doing way by osmosis through one’s own specific interests in the moment. How do I handle this situation at work? How can I communicate better with Y? What is going wrong in the relationship with my son right now? This creates a dynamic interplay between, yes the concrete and the abstract - the concrete in your life and the abstract processes described in the I-ching, though also concrete since there are concrete images and metaphors in the I-Ching. This avoids the disciplined and disconnected sitting down to read the I-Ching like it was a novel or a textbook.
An option.
Both the Hebrew, born out of the Sumerians, and the I Ching were attempts to codify all reality (numerology and symbology). Both were made into largely superstitious religions and magic spiritualism by the apes.
Mathmatics and physics come closer.
Of course, my own RM:Affectance Ontology is the only one that is completely true.
It’s comparing apples and bicycles, at least for me. The I-Ching can be viewed as eliciting knowledge rather than containing it, as a mind must struggle to reinterpret experiences (and running often stagnant narratives) through what one ends up with as a figure. Mathematics and physics and RM all act as containers. They are content focused, which is of course, not negative. But they are part of realist attempts to contain knowledge in symbols or text, which is a different process. biolinguagem.com/ling_cog_cu … taphor.pdf
A way to come at the difference is through Reddy’s interesting essay on the Conduit metaphor - the way we tend, in English, to think of language and what it does. This is not the only way to view/experience/use symbols.
I experience a bit of angst every time a hoopoe crosses my path … don’t know how I would handle numerous lookups in the I-Ching
Thanks as well for the language URL … seems really interesting … I’m anxious to finish reading it … after reading a few paragraphs the memory of one of the issues Confucius apparently struggled with came to mind “The Rectification of Names” I’m anxious to learn if there are any parallels.
[quote]
Moreno … a fascinating article … and I think I even get the ‘gist’ of what the author is attempting to communicate.
For me, it also helps to explain the “bumps in the road” I have experienced with some of your posts … as well as the more vivid clarity after several see-saw motions … post/response … post/response … and so on.
I also believe Confucius was attempting to identify and remedy the same issue(s) in his “Rectification of Names” thesis.
Since both attempts haven’t seen much success … in terms of attracting a massive following … perhaps the answer lies in a different direction.
In a feeble attempt to set the stage for my comments let me quote Robbin Williams,recently deceased … “BE KIND.for everyone you meet is fighting a battle you know nothing about.”
Perhaps 100% accurate/complete communication between 2 minds is impossible … sure the accuracy improves with iteration, body language and so on … yet in never seems to reach 100%.
The above comment suggests communication between 2 minds can not be achieved with the use of an intermediary … audio, visual or any other sense perception … or any combination/permutation of our sense perceptions. Albeit the accuracy does seem to improve with the combination/permutation scenario.
This leads me to think the only way to achieve 100% accurate/complete communication is with “mind meld” as suggested in one(or more) of the SW movies.
Seems the notion of telepathy continues to develop within the HIVE of human consciousness … maybe that’s the direction communication between people is headed ???
I tend to agree with what you say here. But I don’t see our communication as problematic for this reason: I learn about why I think the things I do. I learn how I assume things or miss things. I get a sense of the other person’s paradigm and then, usually, I try to work with that.
It is very hard for two minds to instantly meet, via language (and here without body language, tone of voice, shared context and concrete stuff. IOW no surprise that we write past each other or disagree perhaps unnecessarily.
All I can do is present my reactions and then see what this elicits. I have already been surprised by you - ah, so that’s why he thinks that, there is merit in that kind of experience. I also know now more about how you see the world. In the beginning it seemed that you liked the Eastern way and wanted it integrated more in the West and that there was resistance. At that level of abstraction, I couldn’t even know if I disagreed. Despite your resistance to the post I made with some suggestions about how to bring your expertise here rather than just generalizing, as far as I can see you do more of sharing your experiences and moving from the concrete to the abstract and back. Not that I think you did this because I suggested it. But it did seem like you dropped some of your battle with ‘us’ and revealed your own mind more.
I see no way around this feisty dance except via psychic phenomena, which I do believe in.
Moreno … I don’t want to get all ‘mushy’ … yet … I don’t mind acknowledging … publicly … some mushy sentiments are flowing through my being after reading your post.
I am pleasantly surprised we’ve achieved whatever level of ‘bonding’ we seem to have at the moment with our only communication device being ‘marks’ on a screen … seems credible to suggest some psychic stuff has been in play as well … at least from time to time.
Reading Reddy’s article was a watershed moment for me and I want to share my interpretation of his recommendation … “For problem setting, not problem solving is the crucial process”
I attempted to understand my perception of the conflict … with ILP members in general and you in particular … from Reddy’s perspective. Here’s what I came up with:
I have spent the better part of the last 10 years in China. I arrived in China as a “product” of Western thought/culture/religion. However, not being educated in Western philosophy, I had no serious entrenchment/investment in Western philosophy/thought. As well, my personal experiences(overall) with western culture in general had left a bad taste of sorts in my mouth.
During the past 10 years I’ve become increasingly interested in near ancient and far ancient Chinese culture/history and philosophy. Stated simply … the taste is pleasant to me … seems the more I digest … the stronger my appetite for more.
ILP users are very well educated in Western philosophy/thought … with some … as you mentioned having a respectable level of education and experience in Eastern thought as well.
An intense and dedicated investment of time and effort … in any discipline … seems to carry with it a serious emotional entrenchment/attachment.
I quoted Sādhaka Mātra in one of my posts … “wherein most humans, entrenched in present professions, they are loathe to quit, are equally loathe to invest.” Seems to be a somewhat natural and expected result.
Therein lies the ‘conflict’.
When I arrived here I breathed a sigh of relief. All my frustration … disappointment … and so on evaporated.
I had also decided earlier today the best thing I could do would be to return to my ‘cave’ IOW … stop posting on ILP. After reading your last post I’m not so sure anymore.
For me it is not a question of East vs. West. I was raised in the West, then was attracted to anything that seemed different to authorities here, which included entering Eastern religons for a while and I have lived in the East. Call it rebellion, or integration or exploration, those metaphors would all have some truth. I currently have a philosophy that has some elements from both Western and Eastern traditions, but is fairly critical of both, and this includes much of the philosophy of both. So I have little invested in defending Western Philosophy from Eastern philosophy.
I am glad you got something out of Reddy. To me a part of it that is interesting is that the language we use about language and communication fits the way we think about communication. Since it is mainly through the conduit metaphor, we take for granted that model of communication. It is biased and problematic as Reddy shows.
So one way you could frame the question would be to see what metaphors of reality you see in the East, that might be more correct than Western ones, or at least balancing. Even Noosphere comes from a Westerner, a Catholic priest no less.
Or you could skip what I say and see if you can articulate what you see western philosophers as defending. What models?
And you did realize that I brought up Reddy in relation to James remarks on the I-Ching as a defense of the I-Ching?
Moreno … the content in your post is so rich … you touch on many … plagiarizing your words … "incredibly complex and
mysterious topics".
I’ll share my gut reactions …
Reminds me … again … of one of St Augustine’s thoughts … "Lord, you provide the pricks that move us in the direction
you want us to go"
Lord knows, in my lifetime, there have been many many ‘pricks’ that have pushed me in a direction I would otherwise
not have gone.
OK … yet it would seem naive to believe there hasn’t been an East/West dichotomy of sorts … in all spheres of life …
since time immemorial … perhaps akin to the good/evil dichotomy and so on and so on. I haven’t been trying to
exacerbate any such dichotomy … quite the contrary … I want to spend the little energy I have nurturing a "unity’ … an
integration.
I have no friends in China … or in the West for that matter … my Chinese wife being the only exception. The language
issue is not the underlying reason for this circumstance in my life. I have long harbored an aversion to social interaction … of any type. Long ago I concluded that all or at least … all in my experience … social interaction operated in an empty shell … no worthwhile content. (My perception … therefore my reality)
Having said that I will share two situations where I have recently ‘bonded’ … to a degree … with another human being.
A middle aged Chinese woman who lives in our community. She was born deaf and has not learned the official form
of sign language … not that it would make any difference in my case. She communicates in grunts and rudimentary sign
language. Yet we are comfortable … almost enjoy … communicating with each other. Other neighbors who happen to
witness our communication efforts don’t have a positive look on their face … rather a look of disgust. Go figure eh!
The second instance involves a Chinese woman in her mid eighties. A few years ago we were compelled to find
temporary accommodation while decorations in our new apartment were being completed. When you buy a
condo/apartment in China all you get is cement walls. My Chinese wife found cheap accommodation … an older …
typically Chinese peasant row house … with kang and all IOW no indoor washroom facilities. My wife is frugal to a fault
… again typical Chinese peasant behaviour since time immemorial. We paid the equivalent of $20 a month in rent. This
temporary living space turned out to be a rich experience. I found myself immersed … to a degree … in typical Chinese
culture. The kang is similar in function to the elevated sleeping platform the Inuit(Eskimos) used in their igloos. I spent a
year or so living in the Canadian arctic … providing many more “eye-opening” experiences.
I digress … back to my example of “communication”
Our neighbour in this row house was the elderly woman I referred to earlier. She was/is very likely a certified
schizophrenic. For several weeks I would patiently listen to her rants … never understood a word … even my wife
understood very little … she was speaking in her local dialect. I would nod my head in agreement and look as lovingly as
I could directly into her eyes. Over the two months we lived next door to each other we developed a “bond” of sorts.
Incidentally, she lived in squalor … much like a dog in a cage … her family … I assume … would regularly throw her
some food. So sad a situation!!
A few weeks ago my wife and I decided to see if she was still alive … this question popped into our independent minds
almost simultaneously. As we approached the place where she was living a few years earlier … on our electric scooter …
I noticed an elderly woman sitting on a stool in the street … her back to us as we approached. I suggested to my wife
that she ask this elderly woman if the ‘crazy’ woman was still alive. IOW I perceived this elderly woman to be someone
simply reflecting what so many elderly people do in China … sit in a public place … probably their only means of social
interaction. Yup! … this woman who I had just perceived to be a normal elderly Chinese woman was the ‘crazy’ woman
… behaving normally. Go figure eh! She didn’t remember us … not important. The experience was priceless.
A Jesuit no less! … long the enemies of the Roman Catholic Church. He was an anthropologist/geologist by profession
and spent more than 20 years of his adult life in China. Hmmm!
Reminds me of another not so well known Jesuit … Matteo Ricci … who is credited by many as the individual who
“opened the doors to China” … to the West … culture/thought/history/commerce et al. His advice to his successors
apparently was something to the effect … now that the door is open … tread softly. Advice that seemed to be followed
for a century or so and subsequently avoided like the plague. If communication from beyond the grave is more than
legend … Matteo Ricci has been one of my “coaches” for the past several years.
I’m not sure if the following comments address your suggestion or not … in any event they seem worth sharing.
Your words “concrete” and “abstract” as well as the see-saw motion you suggested … from concrete to abstract … back
to concrete and so on … have been swimming around in my head for the past few days.
I see Lao Tzu as an “abstract thinker” and I see Confucius as a “concrete thinker”.
Yet I see no independent/separate division of the two in Chinese life since time immemorial … they are two halves of a
whole.
Now let me go to one of the myths we read about involving the Hebrew known as Solomon. His well known suggestion
to cut an infant in half and share the results with the two women who claimed to be her mother.
If we cut a loaf of bread in half we have lost nothing … even the crumbs on the cutting board still retain their value.
I have long used the imagery suggested in these two situations to contemplate the correctness of what is known as
separation of church and state in Western culture/society.
I didn’t miss it I chalked it up to psychic participation in our e-exchanges.
What I meant was that I am not defending the WEst against the East. I pick and chose and am an adherent of neither. Like as an analogy, if I am rooting for some third party in an election, it does not mean I am a republican since I am critical of what a democrat says. I may well be critical of the republican in the next minute.
Perhaps that third party has some facets of its platform that resemble the East and other that Resemble the west and others that come from marginalized ideas.
Both East and WEstern thought have tended to mean NOT indigenous. The whole animist, shamanic tradition, which you find all over the place, has tended to be dominated by and wiped out in both the East and West. This is just one example. Some of my beliefs follow shamanic ones. This makes me neither EAstern nor Western. There are not just two options out there, in general or on many issues.
I know I generalize wildly … and in doing so I run the risk of overlooking some important details.
It’s just me … being me … been this way a long time … perhaps all my life … don’t wanna change
OTH … I’m enjoying trying to respond to your suggestion … concrete experience … to emerging thought(s) … back to concrete experience. i’ve done this in the past … but I lacked discipline
For example, I observed some fresh mounds of cow muffins on a remote country road in France back in 2004. One of the emerging thoughts was “collective unconscious to collective conscious to collective intention/will”. I realize the emerging thought did not owe its’ genesis solely to the mounds of cow muffins on the dirt road … yet … the sight of the mounds of cow muffins seemed to give birth to a thought that had been gestating in my mind for some time already.
Seems the more unusual the experience … the more unusual the emerging thought(s)
