Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id BAA01773 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sat, 22 Jul 2000 01:18:26 +0100 From: "Chris Lofting" <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: Was Freud a Minivan or S.U.V. Kind of Guy? Israel and Palestine. Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 10:33:45 +1000 Message-ID: <LPBBICPHCJJBPJGHGMCICEIACHAA.ddiamond@ozemail.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D310174594A@inchna.stir.ac.uk> Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
> Of Vincent Campbell
> Sent: Saturday, 22 July 2000 12:51
> To: 'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'
> Subject: RE: Was Freud a Minivan or S.U.V. Kind of Guy? Israel and
> Palestine.
>
>
> Just one more comment, and then I'll let it lie.
>
> I'm not a neuro-scientist, so I can't really comment on that
> aspect of your
> claims, but I'd be incredibly surprised to find that neuroscience
> in any way
> supports the notion that if we switch one I-ching symbol for
> another we can
> explain or solve problems in the Middle-East.
You see, you miss the point totally. You are stuck at the level of
expression and so incapable of seeing BEHIND the I ching symbol. What does
it REPRESENT? It represents a neurologically determined general pattern of
meaning. The I Ching is a metaphor, as are all other forms of expression.
Metaphor for what? A metaphor for describing the interactions of objects
and relationships and how, given a particular starting point, you can
generally determine where things will go, how things will move.
In the I Ching symbolisms that I gave, the line represented a particular
attitude, a particular element of a dichotomy.
When your brain analyses data it will do so from a general-to-a-specific or
the reverse. The line patterns represent dichotomies and they are LAYERED in
that the base line serves as context within which the next line functions.
These TWO lines in turn become the context for the next line; it is like the
strata we see in the earth, bedrock leading to top soil.
When we create three dimensional models we start with the X-axis, one
dimension, and that is given a value of >0 or <0, positive/negative. We then
add the Y-axis and move to two dimensions but this Y axis is deerived WITHIN
THE CONTEXT SET BY THE X-axis. We continue to do this layering each
dichotomy and so creating meaning. The insistence on these dimensions being
orthogonal is to ensure we get maximum 'difference' to ensure we get a
'good' map. Thus the use of dichotomies such as similar/difference or
positive/negative etc help to ensure this.
The questions I proposed and answered are in a specific order to map this
behaviour, moving from a general to a specific, and the I Ching SYMBOLISM is
extremely useful in capturing the patterns that come from this sort of
process.
The particular questions are general questions that I have been able to come
up with after a lot of study on how we process data and capture/create
meaning. you can vary the expression but not the overall form.
By answering the questions you create the symbols and you will find BEHIND
those symbols sets of meaning that are properties of the METHOD of analysis
and as such reflect the general way in which we think. That is why people
see so much in esoteric systems since the systems themselves are founded on
the use of recursive dichotomisation that is expressed by layering seemingly
'different' dichotomies.
>
> If it were that simple, then why not offer your services to the Camp David
> negotiations? They certainly seem to need some help, and I'm sure they'd
> appreciate it.
I am sure they would but most dont get the idea at the moment, e.g. you. :-)
It IS 'that simple' but that is the problem in that to recognise this sort
of simplicity does require a bit of a paradimg shift :-) My problem is that
I an not qualified, I am a university drop-out (half way through 2nd year).
I got bored, started getting absent fails etc since I was getting more out
of my own work as well as working in the computer industry, took to
computers like a duck takes to water. Dropped out of Uni, took a 6 month IT
course. Worked for a few companies until I got to the 'top' and then became
a mercenary; gives me time to do my thinking etc. :-) Been doing that for
over 23 years. Prior to that I was a professional musician (Rock. Jazz -
60s - far out man!)
THe problem is that these days to present what I have done requires some
sort of evidence that I have done the basics; people dont except experience
anymore, or 'natural' abilities. Pity. On the IQ scale I am around the 98th
percentile (in potentials) but performance is only at the 85th -- two+
standard deviations off. At that level that is a 'big' difference. That
comes from by AD(H)D that is unmedicated since I stopped smoking 60+ a
day -- the nicotine actually kept me together :-)
My daugher has ADD, same aptitude ratings (98th/87th). Thus I can get
distracted a bit and I can write in a way that shows the distractions, I can
'jump' a bit or become too intense.
The feedback I get from knowing what the problem is is VERY useful and so
that helps a lot. Being 'smart' also helps in that I can do ok without the
medication. not 'perfect' but ok :-)
All of this material should have been completed YEARS ago and it requires a
lot more fleshing-out but let be assure you this is no joke. We are dealing
with SERIOUS stuff.
>
> If you feel that this system explains life the universe and everything for
> you, then fine, I wish you well.
>
I have no idea about life, the universe, everything, only about HOW we go
about making it meaningful. The validity of our maps is based on the
feedback we get; for the flat earthers their ideas worked for a while until
the evidence got too strong.
We are animals, but unlike all of the other lifeforms that we share this
planet with, we have a highly developed internal world, full of rich
expressions and much difference, BUT there is behind all of that a SAMENESS
and that is what most have failed to see or failed to try and understand
more.
> Vincent
>
> (By the way, just a small bit of advice regarding your presentation of
> arguments- putting words in capital letters doesn't make them more
> persuasive).
Emphasis Vincent, basic emphasis. If I could put them in bold or italics or
underline them I would but most people still communicate in text mode, text
mode is the BEDROCK for email and so sticking to that mode ensures that all
can read the email (there are some who still use lynx etc.) If something
comes to be in graphics mode (HTML etc) and I wish to reply I will do so in
text mode. Habit I guess :-)
Best,
Chris.
------------------
Chris Lofting
websites:
http://www.eisa.net.au/~lofting
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jul 22 2000 - 01:22:16 BST