.jpg)
Please Log in to Vote.
2 out of 2 members found this useful.
Anomalies in zone 7?
Posted October 30th, 2009 by Darrell Moneyhon
While sharing observations and beliefs about phenomena suggesting a group-mind effect on another blog community (an experimental offshoot of Integral Life and Gaia), I clarified my suspicion that converging thoughts seemed more the result of mind reading and precognition. I was dreaming stuff that spontaneously emerged on the forum by other participants, with no communication in-between. Ken Wilber takes pains to differentiate social holons from individual holons, and warns (perhaps rightly so) about the problems of merely stacking social holons on top of individual holons. He goes on to say there is a "dominant monad" which governs the behavior of a physical organism's members (cells, muscles, bones, organs, fingers, hands, legs, etc.), whereas social holons have, instead, a "predominant mode of mutual resonance", they act via communication, rather than by command (such as an individual holon's nerve impulses directly commanding a response from its hand and/or finger). I stumbled onto a similar differentiation in a model called "The (social) Regulation Matrix". I postulated that a higher form of "governance" was from "automatic internal regulation" that used some orchestrating process (such as a network of good communication) to effect what I called "harmonic alignment". Harmonic alignment is in the ball park of Wilber's "predominant mode of mutual resonance". When effective communication is going on socially and culturally, then the group co-creates (autopoiesis means "self-making", and social autopoiesis means something like us making culture together, through our mutual participation - similar to my notion of harmonic alignment as a means to "govern" or "regulate" group behavior.). It is a more democratic and interdependent way of shaping the world. More primitive forms of regulating group behavior would be "controlled external regulation", in which you give commands, similar to an individual holon's nerve impulses, and the members obey as they must, "or else"!, and other proposed methods that fall somewhere in-between the optimal/advanced "automatic internal regulation" and the least-sustainable/primitive "controlled external regulation".
Back to my observations of evidence of mind reading or precognition during a team effort online, neither mind reading, nor precognition would be limited to the "predominant mode of mutual resonance" - at least not if we were (in this case, literally) dreaming things up together in the "tetra-arising" sort of way that Wilber describes the quads and zones as working together. If an energy field - a kind of "white space" of emerging co-consciousness - is, in fact, occuring as the online splinter group sets our minds on creating something together, then mere outward communication is not the only major causal factor behind that co-creating. If this is so, then "interior" and "exterior" is blurred (or bent), and Ken's assumption/arguement that there is no"Gaia over" (as opposed to Gaia only "in", which he does acknowledge) is challenged. An anomoly to his model would exist. If the spooky syncronycities observed in that social holon are mere coincidences from similar lines of thought that produce (even surprisingly) similar specific ideas, then no credible challenge to Wilber's argument exists here. If only a coincidence, then there is no anomoly to his proposed model or account.
If none of the above makes sense, don't worry. I wrote it extremely hastily, without much regard to writing well. This writing, as is, can act as a note to myself, rather than as a "predominant mode of mutual resonance". I might be able to word the ideas above in a more sensible, user-friendly, way later on. If you can, nonetheless, get the gist of what I am trying to articulate (something that is sensed in my head, and trying to become gradually codified), then great! And if so, please comment.
Darrell
- Please Login to Add Comments
- show all sub-comments
- Report Abuse
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Would this be a Gaia-over, or Holy Ghost, sort of Activity that is...
Posted October 30th, 2009 by Darrell Moneyhon in response to InterestingScott, Thanks for jumping in on such a strangely (overly abstractly) worded thesis. You are a brave soul! I am not a great thinker. I am mostly an intuiter who thinks, sometimes a lot! Please take my ideas with a grain of salt. But you do seem to get the gist of what I was trying to say. If such non-predominant modes of communication do, in fact, go on, would this suggest a higher order, a God-guided, sort of thing that could be helping in the mutual creative process?
I believe so, but I am a cultural creative who still holds many traditional views, and may be biased on this issue. I believe that even ordinary folks can have a transpersonal white space field that also has a teleological quality as though God is pulling us together toward co-creating a higher-consciousness reality. I harp on the profound nature of learning to "think like energy".
To, me, the metaphor of energy, which was discovered in flatland science (UR), can be used as a legitimate "secular translation of Christian (spiritual) knowledge (STOCK!, as in Christians taking stock in their religion!)", as a new modern myth way of saying "spirit". My interest is in how this way of thinking messes with static visual models like Ken's (although, to his credit, he does often say things that suggest a thinking like energy - things about evolution of stage-advance, and talk of unfolding now and again).
I have a friend whom I asked to make a computer image of a tree with trunks at the bottom and top, four branches (quad branches) in the middle, and another trunk at the top, with spaces at the bottom of the figure which reads "ground of being", and the space above the top trunk would read "sky of seeing". The tree image itself could be called "tree of freeing" (freeing the mind from the confusion of seemingly irreconcilable "branches" or perspectives - an "integral" device/vehicle).
I see the purer energy domains above and below the tree as being our truest nature. If we connect to our truest nature, then it can assist us in making sense of material realities as well, and can suggest more effective ways to live in that material reality (which, is in some sense, and illusion). This is certainly not new thought, but I think I am keeping my feet in energy (purer energy fields, etc.) a bit more than Wilber. I might be wrong. Have been, many times before! As I said earlier, I am more a "seer" than a thinker.
Darrell
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
hmm
Posted October 30th, 2009 by Scott Marshall in response to Would this be a Gaia-over, or Holy Ghost, sort of...Imagine not being able to distinguish the real cause from that without which the cause would not be able to act as a cause. It is what the majority appear to do, like people groping in the dark; they call it a cause, thus giving it a name that does not belong to it. That is why one man surrounds the earth with a vortex to make the heavens keep it in place, another makes the air support it like a wide lid. As for their capacity of being in the best place they could possibly be put, this they do not look for, nor do they believe it to have any divine force, but they believe that they will some time discover a stronger and more immortal Atlas to hold everything together more, and they do not believe that the truly good and 'binding' binds and holds them together.
—Plato, Phaedo, 99 BC
Many evolutionary spiritualists talk about a leading edge in human development. That development is in consciousness. I like your tree image, wondering if you could post it Darrell?
My thought on Gaia, or Holy Ghost, operating in a way to guide us I think is one of many interpretations of that kind of general organizing principle. I think Wilber calls it Eros.
-S
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Confusing the branch with the trunk? Going Nowhere, But Modulating.
Posted November 2nd, 2009 by Darrell Moneyhon in response to hmmDear Scott, The following Plato statement, "...from that without which the cause would not be able to act as a cause.". does that mean something like "confusing the branch of the tree with the trunk?" Thinking the branch is the "real cause", when, infact, it is a secondary expression, or vehicle, of the real cause? If the way energy is formated is accounts for more caused outcomes than does particular material circumstance, then to think that, say, "owning my own home makes me happy", is confusing the branch of the tree of happiness with the trunk.
The real cause of "being happy" is simply to "be happy". This is what I meant by a paper hung on my office wall at my place of employment prior to retirement. It simply read "Go there." The real cause of being happy is to simply go to the "happy place" in the mind, whether in the individual mind, or in some universal mind.
If the mind (as a glob of energy) learns to "go there", then outcomes will follow (like metal shavings attracted to a magnet), assuming the energy actually transmutted to the "place" (where "place" = format or frequency or quality) it thought it was going to. Of course I could think I went on vacation to Alaska, but if I am still sitting in my living room in Ohio, I will not have "gone there", and the outcome, my subsequent experiences, will be different than if I actually went to Alaska. This is a physical metaphor of a mental form of "going". Something "actual", or "given" (stable, something that can be counted on) is assumed in the case of "going there" mentally (and mind, at least in the only way we might measure or "know" it in an UR way, is energy - so "mental" is an energy event).
It is assumed that there is a certain frequency or other similar characteristic of the energy - a place on the electromagnetic spectrum, etc. But "place" need not be a place as in "simple location". The color blue might be the "place", or 3.8675 ohms (a made-up numerical reading), etc. "Going there" is not physical, but energy change. "Modulation" would be the more correct word. Perhaps I should have had the word "Modulate" on my office wall instead. It would avoid the equivocating of two different kinds of "going" and two different kinds of "there" or "place(s)".
Energy is not spatially formated. To "think like energy" means to learn to modulate the energy glob called the mind. As energy, the mind can "go" (modulate to, as in changing the frequency setting on a radio reciever or transmitter) to a different "setting" on whatever spectrum that energy can be stably (or somewhat stably) measured. That measurement - whether the electromagnetic spectrum, or some other scale - is the "space" and "realm" of energy.
But this, again, is not a literal "space" or "realm". Rather it is a dimension - yes, that would come closest to describing the "realm" of energy - a dimension (or perhaps "aspect", when describing how that dimension might intersect, interact, with the physical domain or dimension?). It is challenging to go from our familiar thinking habit of matter logic to a logic of energy dynmics and scales. Energy has settings, but perhaps no "location", as we tend to concieve the word "location". Only metaphorical "location", because the word location is a physical, space-bound, concept.
The transition from thinking like matter to thinking like energy will require a great deal of attention, discipline, and, well, energy! Even the word settings has the connotation of setting something on a table, etc. Then the thing set is "sitting there". An energy setting, however, would be a setting without a sitting!
As I said, challenging (the second proposed "core virtue", or quality/characteristic of an optimal citizen in an optimal community, per my book The Marketing of Virtue: Allsberg Rising ( Introduction
,Chapter 1). If our present online community is to meet the challenge of "learning to think like energy" then we will need many more such speculative conversations.
Darrell
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Yeah
Posted November 5th, 2009 by Scott Marshall in response to Confusing the branch with the trunk? Going Nowhere,...
Thinking like energy.
Yes. I will post soon a more elaborate response.
S
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Ok!
Posted November 10th, 2009 by Scott Marshall in response to YeahThinking like energy.
Energy conduit. Source with the trunk. Individual with the branch.
I think we begin to assimilate subtle energy in different bandwidths. I agree!
Putting the mind aside for being. Picking the mind back up for doing and interfacing.
All I got for now! I'll come back again to it!
-S
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Very helpful
Posted November 10th, 2009 by Darrell Moneyhon in response to Ok!Scott, that was very helpful to me, because of the simple way it was said. It said more with less. Perhaps I would say "getting beside or inside the mind for being" . No, I like the way you said it, meaning give priority to being. Being is a verb and mind a noun. Not too hard to see which one is more "like" energy. In general "thinking like energy" seems to be thinking like verbs, or at least in the same ballpark. Both energy-thinking and verb-thinking are more than mere mind sets (set as in a set of objects, a grouping), although they set (verb) the mind. Seems to me, they are more like musical key changes that change the way the music of living "sounds", and how the notes are in different relation to one another than before.
OK, you agree with some of the ideas. What if we now have a group delusion? Is it a useful one? Is it a new, or modern, myth worth keeping? Does it tune us productively? To me, those are the main questions we need to ask. Not so much "is it real" as does it offer us an advantage for living and being? Better a valuable metaphor than a rock solid fact, IMO.
Below is one idea for the book outline for Christians Thinking Like Energy. I had an earlier outline, but this one seems a bit more down to earth. However, I might incorporate some of the points or angles from the original outline. In particular, the original outline had a chapter talking about seeing the self as a flare (as a solar flare) or fountain that is emerging, unfolding from the Source (metaphoric "Sun"). The Sun/Source is energy, and the flare unfolds into the material plane, as though something hot cooling and crystalizing in the material world. But its source is energy, always unfolding from that "trunk".
I will draw the earlier visual image of a tree that emerges from the "ground of being", forms a trunk, divides into branches, and then converges again into a "sky of seeing". My oldest son has a scanner. I'll give the drawing to him tomorrow. He plans to email me the scanned image, and then I'll import it here. Sorry I am taking so long to follow through.
To me, visual images are sometimes a better way to think than with words. Words are so limiting, and often seem to contribute to thinking like matter. "Or" thinking instead of "and" thinking. A whole image can be here there and everwhere, as a gestalt, but a word seems to be a mere figure without a ground, and often connotes simple location as though it has to be this or that, but can't be both this and that.
Words and word-bound thought seem to be a bit more dicotomous or dualistic than images or visions. I think Wilber includes "vision logic" somewhere in his stages, on the intellect line of development? Practicing vision logic may be similar to thinking like energy, but I am not clear what "vision logic" means - only that it includes "vision", and that visions tend to unfold in the mind in a way that has more depth and overlapping characteristics than simple discursive word-thought.
Perhaps words are best used, as you said, to be put to the side, allowing the "trunk" of vision to direct them. I see a link between "whole-to-part" mind, and "energy(pre-emergent)-to-matter(emergent)". An emerging vision goes from a whole field sort of state (energy field) to a particularized form, or an "emergent". The "splitting" you talked about may be a go-between between the pre-emergent and the emergent. "Emerging" seems to fit the way energy would act as it comes into a form, or comes into the world.
Just some more random thoughts, or free associations. No "charge"(monetary costs) for these ideas! But hopefully they do charge your "battery" with new energy or insights.
When I originally posted this comment, I forgot to paste in the outline. Since then, I decided to include both proposed formats for the book. Which one do you like the best? Here they are:
Two Formats for Christians Thinking like Energy:
I. Doors to Knock on (thoughts which help access spirituality)
chapt. 1: "energy" in the context of functional philosophy
chapt. 2: Matches (between descriptions and/or metaphors of spirit, vs.
descriptions/characteristics of energy)
chapt. 3: Flares (model of unfolding selves)
chapt 4: Why God doesn't need to exist, and we don't need God to exist in order
to benefit from God.
1. Meaning of "exist" ("to stand out")
2. God is alive but doesn't exist
3. God rests in, and sometimes springs forth (the Holy Spirit)
4. God unfolds with (the Son)
5. God Watches Over, and Wraps Around (the Father)
6. Our reality is God's thoughts (not God)
7. How God's thoughts can be our thoughts, and how our thoughts can
be God's thoughts.
8. God, the Deep
9. God the Ideal
10. God the Whole.
11. When God the Deep, God the Ideal, and God the Whole align.
chapt. 5: The 5 laws of spiritual energy
II. Ways to Apply the Energy
chapt. 6: Removing the log (from our eyes) with a log: the use of the excellent
city log
chapt. 7: Mind experiments
chapt. 8: Christian Object Lesson Society
1. Object lesson in relation to the left and right brain experience
continuums: Left: indirect experience (conceptual), directed
experience, direct experience (vivid, concrete)
Right: direct experience (concrete), directed
experience, indirect experience
(metaphorical, abstract)
chapter 9: The Core Corps
chapter 10. Using the 5 spiritual principles to harness the 5 laws of spiritual
energy
chapter 11. The fruits of practicing the principles and of conducting the laws
chapt. 12: The radio, and self as component.
chapt. 13: Stay Tuned!
III. Be Ye Transformed (Assimilating "Thinking Like Energy"
Into One's Life)
chapt. 14. Meditation
chapt. 15. Love, a Verb
chapt. 16. Honing Your Energy Thoughts (Reading/Thinking/Philosophizing)
chapt. 17. Tracking your Successful Applications (a Log and Mind Experiment
Archive)
chapt. 18. Transformation Thanksgiving, Celebrating the New You
Alternate Format:
Intro: (Objectives of this book)
1.The Role of Thought (Functional Philosophy)
2. Taking STOCK (Secular Translations of Christian Knowledge)
Why translate?
3. Why "Energy" ?
a. has many of the qualities we associate with spirit (the example of taking on
the characteristics of a deceased loved-one, letting them "live on" in us)
b. is more acceptable to modern man, may help bridge what Wilber calls the
"Line/Level Fallacy" gap by easing social "repression" of spirit/religion.
c. may help open up our religious system to gain more insights, via a new
metaphor that may help us to see the underlying principles. "Fresh blood".
"Energize" our faith tradition. Ease "fixation".
d. It meets the criteria of Functional Philosophy - not just an arbitrary new
thought.
e. May help improve "business" by marketing our faith better, with a new and
improved product that draws in more spiritual service customers.
4. What would thinking like energy do for a person? What changes in behaviors
might it be expected to bring? What fruit? What "selling points" for this "new
and improved" product?
5. A Flare for (Christian) Living! Flares (model of unfolding selves)
6. Where on the Flare? Where on the flare do you relate to Christ from?
7. Thinking Like Energy and Grace
8. Thinking Like Energy and Prayer
9. Thinking Like Energy and Love.
10. Thinking Like Energy and Individual Transformation (Assimilation of
"Thinking like energy", or "spirituality" into one's life)
11. Thinking Like Energy and Social Transformation
12. Trading STOCK Publicly (example of "reaching" a self-proclaimed atheist).
13. Principles as Go-Betweens (between thinking like matter and thinking like
energy)
14. How to "Get There" from "Here".
15. Temptations in the Wilderness (obstacles to Thinking Like Energy, the
"press for practicality"
16. Ways to resist temptation. Number 1 strategy = transcend but include. Right
order - energy (pre-emergent) to matter (emergent) and whole to part.
Darrell
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
a marvelous outline
Posted November 11th, 2009 by Scott Marshall in response to Very helpfulI like the belief in Christianity of Transfiguration. How Jesus transcended and included death. I tend to think of it as one form of energy being transformed or transfigured into another form. Knowing that in physics you cannot create or destroy energy- it only changes forms.
Gives a whole new take on "not having enough energy" to do something. That energy is in a new form. The way the body and mind interprets change in energy is crucial. The pattern of "not enough" or "vicitim/victimizer" blankets over the landscape of our normalized condition.
-S
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Where there is a Way, There's a Will
Posted November 11th, 2009 by Darrell Moneyhon in response to a marvelous outlineScott, I really liked the way you said that. "changing forms". When I worked in a prison sex offender program, we kept emphasizing victim empathy and ownership of the offender's victimization of others. To me, it was a necessary, but insufficient intervention, perhaps at times even backfiring. Why? because trying to up the "will" of the offender to be motivated to work hard on learning to prevent a relapse of sexual offending could be meaningless, or even a form of guilt-provoking torture, to someone who needs to learn different "ways".
On occassion, I saw participant's "will" go up after new ways to control behavior were introduced. With a sensible strategy for preventing relapse, the participant could afford to have hope that he could change. Then he had a reason to invest in making the changes. The will to change got stronger after the way to change was seen. In fact, I ended up thinking that "Where there's a way, there's a will" was a bit more true than the old "Where there's a will, there's a way".
Both sayings are true. And I certainly did want my offender-students to care about others and to have remorse for thier wrongdoing. But much of it is in not seeing and understanding a new form of living. Many had inadequate or negative role models regarding coping behavior options and strategies, social/interpersonal behavior options and strategies, and regarding love in general.
If you don't know what love is, you can mimick it, and even convince yourself that you are doing it, but it is not love, or at least not a very effective "form" of love. Without understanding a higher form of love, you are utterly "dead" to love.
Victimizing others occurs even when we love, but among those who are "dead" to love, victimizing others runs rampant. It is not enough to motivate someone to reach into their heart and love more - to increase the will to love. They must see and feel the new forms that are a higher quality of "love".
This is one reason why I think that a model community in which citizens practice spiritual ways is needed. It is no longer enough to preach folks into loving their neigbors. We have to set up a culture that shows loving, wisdom, and other virtues, day in and day out. Without the transmission of the knowledge of the ways to live optimally, virtuously, then no amount of "will" will work!
Check out the Intro and first chapter of my book about forming such a model transfaith community that "grows", cultivates (or should I say "culture-vates"?) virtue: Introduction , Chapter 1.
Where there is a way for our nation and world, there will be a will to make the nation and world a truly better place. Thinking like energy or "spirit" seems to be part of the "way" that is needed. Creating a culture that shows us this way, is, IMO, our greatest opportunity, and most sacred duty.
Darrell
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Following through
Posted November 11th, 2009 by Scott Marshall in response to Where there is a Way, There's a WillThanks!
What are your thoughts about a "threshold" or some kind of membrane needed to be reached in order for important change to occur?
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Bell-ringing, harping
Posted November 12th, 2009 by Darrell Moneyhon in response to Following throughScott, I agree with your implication that enough momentum or "critical mass" may be needed to break through the membrane (even a drop of water has surface tension which helps hold it together in its current form) of stasis or the "status quo". But I also agree with Tolle and others that we can put out good vibes to act as a kind of internal and transpersonal "conveyor belt" (Wilber) of change/evolution. By metaphorically "ringing" out the spirit's "bell", we can contribute more than additively to the critical mass needed to break the membrane of staying put in the current form.
What we are talking about here, as an anomalie of the "dominant mode of discourse" which co-operates a social holon, is an inside-out sub-dominant mode of resonance (bell-ringing!) that "speaks" subconsciously to each holon member, or at least to some who are beginning to "shine" (as in the bible school song, "this little light of mine, I'm gonna let it shine!") inside-out, allowing for a possible integration inner emanations (shinings and ringings) with outer circumstances.
I think we are calling forth the critical mass, simply by positioning ourselves to "intend" (Wayne Dyer) it. In the book, I speculated that "intending" may be kind of "pre-being" - being something in an inner-core, pre-emergent way before you actually are it in an emerged, manifest, way.
I like the distinction of two main change agents of "light" (awareness or consciousness) and "heat" (feeling a pressure for the necessity to change). But this conversation is inspiring me to think of a third way - perhaps "ringing" or "spiritually transmitting" or "chiming" or "frequency-attracting" (electromagnetic bands of a feather flock together!?) .
This idea does resonate with an earlier idea about "children of the light". Was Christ referring to children of seeing objects clearly lit, so we can be aware of things? Or was he talking about children who themselves shine out a light that helps others and themselves "see" (via internal seeing or vision)? Or both, according to "Where on the Flare" you view Christ's messages from?
From the base of the "flare", or the trunk of the "tree" - nearer the Source ("nearer, my God, to thee") - the "light" is a super-fine energy within the darkness of opaque perception. It is an "inside-out" light. Perhaps more accurately, it is beyond the limited range or frequencies of normal egoistic consciousness. So, it could be said to be in the "ground of being" as well as above, or beyond, in the "sky of seeing".
Oops! I missed my chance to give a drawing of the "tree" to my oldest son. So, the scanned image will be slower to arrive than I planned. But be patient. It's coming.
Thank you so much for your astute interpretations and questions. They seem to be tuning my bell or harp or whatever "instrument" of peace that operates from near the inner core. What do the seriphims play? We have angels playing harps, in the watered-down popular mythology.
The next time I accuse my wife, Becky, of "harping" at me, she can take that as a compliment! In fact, I have practiced seeing her as my gift so much, that it is almost to that point. When she gripes at me, I hear her sweet femininity almost as much as the chalk-screeching, grating, sound of nagging. I see even her ugliness through the eyes of love. She is beautiful, and her voice is music to my ears.
Darrell
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Holy Holy Holy is the lord of hosts
Posted November 12th, 2009 by Scott Marshall in response to Bell-ringing, harping! and the whole earth is full of his glory!
- Please Login to Add Comments
- Report Abuse
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Yes, to the Image, and to the "Fore-given"
Posted November 1st, 2009 by Darrell Moneyhon in response to hmmScott, Yes, As soon as my friend either makes the image (I also described to him a figure 2 and 3 of the same concept ) or I borrow a scanner and draw and scan the image online, I will share it. Last night, a new "intimacy pyramid" image came to me while thinking upon waking up in the middle of the night. This image would be superimosed on the stages, with the point at the top, and the base at the lower stages.
The pyramid itself would consist of the quads, and would show how the distance between the quads would close as evolution (and "thinking like energy") occurs in the higher stages. Matter divides and causes multiplicity. This is the case at the lower stages. Whereas a kind of intimate understanding, or closeness, that the unity of an energy field sort of consciousness allows (seeing physical manifestation as a kind of illusion, or "God's dream") would make the division between the 4 quads, and 8 zones, less and less relevant as one "thinks like energy (or spirit)"toward the top of the stages.
"Integtation" kind of "trickles down" from spirit's (pure energy's) affinity toward unification. Integration, not unity, is the only salvation for matter-based beings or thought. When "thinking like matter", unity always ends up being a forced assimilation, fake, sort of thing. Only integration -true integration of differentiated parts - can unify matter. When thinking like matter, unity cannot trickle down.
Only when thinking like energy (an autopoisis, self-making cognition that is "like" energy fields - perhaps the firstfruit of the Tree of Life) can unity "trickle down" into integration at the material levels. Spirit jumps time and space, and is "fore-given" - it preforms (rather than performs) reality.
The "myth of the given" is replaced with the truth of the "fore-given" when one (or groups of beings) think like energy, apply that cognition, and then assimilate that line (or circle or field?) of thought into thier standing out, their "existance". No thing is "given", but a pre-thing is given, perhaps in what Deepok Chopra calls the realm of pure potentiality.
But given, it is. Not not given. It is a gift that is given. Recieving (with a receptive mode, Aurthur Diekman) the gift allows us to more effectively co-create a well-integrated reality.
Darrell
- Please Login to Add Comments
- Report Abuse
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
That's What (I think) I'm Talking About!
Posted November 11th, 2009 by Darrell Moneyhon in response to InterestingDear Scott, This that you said above, is, upon re-reading, what I think I am getting at in this post. This that you said is the crux of the "matter" (or energy) that seems to be an anomalie to the normal mode of comunication which, according to Wilber, distinguished a social holon from an individual (physical) holon, and which discounted the one-body idea of Gaia:
"Our subtle bodies also interface with each other in a variety of fashions (some more fashionable than others...). The imprint of information onto and residing with the subtle body can have an impact upon the interpreter of that data combined with their language."
In Integral Life Practice, "subtle body" is treated as an UR thing. Communication by overlap of "subtle bodies" is not the "predominant mode of mutual resonance" of human communication, whether by verbalisms, writing, or body language. Subtle body overlap is a process which bypasses the "predominant mode of mutual resonance". Such an overlap or effect would be an anomalie to the parameters to Ken's model. The UR quad is not supposed to jump willy nilly into the LR quad (where zone 7 is).
Also, to the extent that we think the "subtle body" is really the "dreaming mind", then there is also a willy nilly jump between the UL and the UR quads. Mind-reading does not fit the AQAL model as it is currently defined.
It would fit with a modified AQAL model that allows for a continuous unfolding of pure energy into physical manifestation. The unfolding of energy would have aspects which are both below and above the limited range of "physical manifestation" of said energy. The "stuff" occuring above or below the realm of manifestation addressed by the AQAL map would have every opportunity to bypass the quads and zones.
Quads and zones only apply to the narrow realm of reality from which they were derived. They were the child of the best of the best of "thinking like matter", and are very useful when it comes to "matters of matter". But the map simply won't work in the quantum-like energy realm beneath or beyond the manifestation of matter. To "think like energy" is to use the energy or "spirit" view as way to guide and liberate the mind.
Tell me if my reasoning falls short here, and if so, where it is flawed. This is hard to sort out. I think it is because we have been thinking like matter for so long, that we inadvertently slip its ways into our attempts to think beyond matter.
This, perhaps, is what Ken did also. Notwithstanding the usefulness of his ideas to help us get on the same page of knowing and enacting. I am not saying the AQAL model is wrong, but that there is a greater "territory" for which it is not a suitable map. Even Wilber himself warned us that the "map is not the territory".
Darrell
- Please Login to Add Comments
- Report Abuse
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Hi Darrell
Posted October 30th, 2009 by Brendan LaChanceVery interesting indeed. If there is indeed an anamoly, you might want to check out this article by Oleg Linetsky. He proposes a different understanding of holons which I think is intriguing. He says some things that might relate to what you are saying here. Here is part of it that may be of particular interest:
"After one of the definitions, enlightenment is elimination of all leads of ignorance concerning Reality. But Reality appears to us in relative and absolute aspects! Moreover, an embodied being as we found out, possesses 4 tools of cognition. Thus it is possible to consider enlightenment as a result of ignorance elimination through any of the quadrants!
The most widely-spread today is the realization in the UL quadrant through non-duality comprehension. But there is no way this comprehension could bring an enlightened one closer to the playing or at least harmonious life in relative Reality. Such enlightened possess no any siddhas. Why would then Dzogchen and Mahamudra (Chagchen) master the 72000 Nadis for "complete realization" - body dissolution into the light stream? It seems this way the realization of the UR quadrant is being attained. At some certain period such realization is accompanied by emergent siddhi like clairvoyance, teleportation, leaving the body and other rare abilities of the body.
Recalling Gautama Buddha, Seraphim Sorovsky and some other mystics of various traditions were able to understand the language of animals and just a quick glance was enough for them to comprehend the problems of individuals, we can conclude that comprehension ability (an ability of mutual resonance or simply a love) of the LL quadrant also makes some special direction to be cognized. Its ultimate realization can be considered as absolute bodhicitta, or unconditional compassion beyond the conceptual mind - ultimate love. Only having learned to understand other sentient beings at all levels from body to the Spirit we can fully compassionate and love them. The possibility of direct transmission from guru to disciple exists only due to the LL quadrant. Sufi way of total love and acceptance also exploits realization through the LL quadrant.
Finally, we have to remember there is the LR quadrant which is being known not directly, but by means of the conceptual mind. Immediate enlightenment is not possible to be attained to in the LR as it itself is the base of ignorance and delusion concerning the nature of Reality. But the LR is a part of Reality and thus it's cognizable. It can't be realized by direct perception but various stories about mediation, by conceptual mind resonance, run through the whole history of the humankind. We can recall for example Tilopa who got directions from daikini, and the very Mahamudra teaching was transmitted to him from Buddha Vajradhara. Vasugupta got the Shiva-sutra teaching from Shiva appeared before him. The new age teachings were granted to Alice Bailey and Elena Blavatsky by appeared gurus. Edgar Kasey whose predictions were 95% accurate talked about the guides enabling Akashi Chronicles access to him. St.John the Divine, Isaiah, Mohammed, Moses ... Prophets existed over the whole human history and all they received the information from some essences but not from enlightenment in meditation. Thousands of people testify to the facts of contacts and communication with raised teachers and channeling cases with different kinds of essences. They all cannot be wrong for 100% either! For now AQAL completely ignores those phenomena shifting them all to pre/post fallacy."
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Keys and Windows
Posted November 2nd, 2009 by Darrell Moneyhon in response to Hi DarrellDear Brendan, Your statement as follows looked like a pivitol (between "thinking like matter" and "thinking like energy") point: "At some certain period such realization is accompanied by emergent siddhi like clairvoyance, teleportation, leaving the body and other rare abilities of the body." If such a mind over matter (transcedant mastery, "trickle down control", not dominance) effect actually happens, as I suspect it to have happened in the splinter group blog community, then there must be a window between UL and UR "realities". Energy (and all its various dynamic characteristics), found by UR "science", seems to offer such a "window". Imagine a wire connecting the UR branch (in my tree of freeing image described in a comment above) with the UL branch. "Thinking like energy" would be that wire, and it would conduct information and skills from the UR, material object, realm to the realm of mind, Mind, or "consciousness", and visa versa (from UL to UR). The advantage of having a theoretical way of explaining "mind over matter" is that, as I said in a song, Naked on the Shore (naked on the shore), we only "see what we know...".
Without a conceptual frame of reference to support the empirical evidence of "mind over matter", then selling folks on the idea of the real effects of "thinking like energy" will not be "seen" or heard. Rather, those who persist at thinking like matter, will find reasons to invalidate/refute the miracles or anomolies. I once did, until precognitive and telepathic, or claravoyant, experiences of sufficient specificity, convinced me otherwise (that there must be another dimension at play in the "reality" system). One of the earlier experiences came after my wife was talking on the phone to my parent-in-laws prior to our visit with them the next day. To the best of all party's subsequent account/memory, there was no mention during the phone conversation of my wife's mom or dad's concern about the family dog. We found out later that they feared that the family pet may have cancer, as they noticed a tumor. Again, no mention was made to my wife about thier concern during the phone conversation.
That night, I had a dream of family members standing over "Kris", a female German Shepherd, and applying attention to a tumor and were somehow addressing it, tending to it. I told my wife about the dream. When we arrived at the homeplace, she asked her parents if Kris was OK. They said it was strange she would ask that question, and proceeded to tell of thier scare that Kris might have cancer. Since the time of the phone conversation with my wife, however, they were relieved to have found out that the "tumor" they were concerned about turned out to be a severe flea infestation.
During that same weekend, either the same day of our arrival, or the next day, I was recruited to help holding Kris into a galvanized tub while my father-in-law lathered in the medicated shampoo. As I was looking down at the dog and her affected area, I noticed how closely it matched the visual qualities of the dream I had the night before. I felt I had seen it before I saw it! Was this a picking up of my in-laws thoughts, or was it a premonition? I have had several other specific dreamed premonitions that would not lend themselves to being explained as mind-reading.
Many other similar experiences convinced me over time that there is an interaction of "spiritual" forces and physical reality". See my IL bio for a resume of other mystical experiences which "blew my mind" over the course of my life so far. The empirical evidence came first for me, and accumulated enough that I had to consider the conceptual frame which might accomodate to the evidence later. "Thinking like energy" is the frame of reference for me that seems to allow for the previously "unallowable". I believe I was more or less forced up the elevator to a higher "floor"(stage) of understanding. Although, I suppose I could have simply ignored the evidence, and remained on the "thinking like matter" floor.
Darrell
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Hi Darrell!
Posted November 5th, 2009 by Brendan LaChance in response to Keys and WindowsI'm much more interested in your response than this reply will convey. (I'm short on time at the moment...)
But I just wanted to get back to you and say I checked out all of your experiences on your profile and what you have posted here and I find it all very intriguing. Needless to say, if you have anything else you find interesting from that article I linked you to, I would be very interested in hearing it. Oh, and just to clear it up, I didn't write that quote in my post.
Anyways, when I have a bit more time I will give you a more complete response.
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
I'll Read
Posted November 6th, 2009 by Darrell Moneyhon in response to Hi Darrell!Brendan, Take your time. I still need to read the article! I glanced at it earlier, and it looks good, but now I need to shift from the one mouth to the two ears (or eyes!) and take in the article you referenced.
Darrell
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Best I Can Do
Posted November 9th, 2009 by Darrell Moneyhon in response to I'll ReadBrendan, I did try to tackle the article you suggested, but my head is not "thinky" enough now to get much out of it. I do sense that his reference to the saying "the whole is greater than the sum of its parts" is a link to what we are speculating about here. The metaperspective of there being "parts" in the first place seems as arbitrary as blind assumptions of momism or unqualified/unexamined "unity". To say the individual holon has these parts seems to be a confusing of the map with the territory. Who says the territory has four parts? The wholeness of the thing/organism may not conform to our limited ways or perspectives of seeing it. Can we expect the individual to have four parts as a kind of courtesy to us?! Since we see the organism that way, it kindly takes on the 4 parts?! It would make more sense to say that there is a wholeness to the organism that defies part-ness. Part-ness occurs when we think like matter. "Thinking like matter" is a metaperspective of the quadrants and zones. In terms of qualities or characteristics, energy comes closer to transcending part-hood. When you turn on a light in a dark room, just exactly where are its parts? It is all over the area of the glowing. Its parts are either intechangable, interwoven, or transpositional - the glow is everywhere and anywhere, and nowhere (in particular) at all. Its whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
I once speculated a law of wholeness when it comes to what I called "spiritual energy". Below is a link from my my book (The Marketing of Virtue: Allsberg Rising) about a model community that discerns and uses "spiritual principles" in order to help them "grow virtue" together: The 5 core virtues (or characteristics) of an optimal community were stated first in the book. Then each of those characteristics were re-stated as "spiritual principles", and finally as "laws of spiritual energy".
The latter view is what the guest speaker, Todd, shared in the following link. The first "law" pertains to the wholeness premise here, or the "whole is greater than the sum of its parts". Matter-based thought seems to force a whole thing into parts, as though it were made up of seperate things. While seeing it as only one thing may not be defensible, seeing it as more than one thing appears to be just as indefensible.
The law of wholeness seems to make more sense (or perhaps only makes sense) when one "thinks like energy". And "thinking like energy" seems as valid a metaperspective as "thinking like matter". In fact, its seems to solve certain enigmas that thinking like matter cannot. Enigmas such as seeing into the future or being more than one place at one time, or mind over matter. There seems to be a connection between what postmetaphysical thinkers call "the myth of the given" and what I am calling "thinking like matter".
Here is the link that shows someone postulating about some of the ways or characteristics of energy. If these "laws" are correct, then they would also be ways that a person can use his or her mind, or perhaps they were no more than projections of that mind in the first place, and mind just happened to match the characteristics of the "object" called energy. : . 5 Laws of Spiritual Energy
Like I said, I am not very organized, analytic, or left brain, in my thinking right now, so I hope some of the above "rational associations" (perhaps not to the level of "logic", but somewhat rational nonetheless) make some sense to a mind processing things more logically than I am able to do at this time.
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Yeah
Posted November 10th, 2009 by Brendan LaChance in response to Best I Can DoI think you basically get his point. What he is basically saying (in my understanding) is that it is not possible to postulate the 4 quadrants as something simply existing (myth of the given) because what the quadrants actually are is four essential mental level perspectives humans take to organize and perceive reality.
That just opens it up to trans-mental or higher mental (thinking like energy) perspectives that dissolve the boundaries of these four essential mental perspectives. But I think he is suggesting that if these 4 perspective all do exist on the mental level, then we have to transcend all 4 of those perspectives. That is then where that quote I posted for you gets into this. Might there be an UL transcendence (emptiness) and then integration (non-dual)? Might there be correspondents in the other essential perspectives? Would thinking like energy correspond to transcendence of the UR mental level perspective? Well that is put roughly, but I think the point is clear enough.
So anyways, forgetting all of that, I am very interested in anything you have to say about thinking like energy. I give you permission to come tell me in my sleep if you know how to do that...lol joking and not joking...
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Yes, an no
Posted November 11th, 2009 by Darrell Moneyhon in response to YeahTo your questions, "Might there be an UL transcendence (emptiness) and then integration (non-dual)? Might there be correspondents in the other essential perspectives? Would thinking like energy correspond to transcendence of the UR mental level perspective?" , my answer is probably the same as yours, and the author of the article (forgot his name): yes.
If we are right, what usefulness does this insight offer us? A reason or "rationale" (faith cue, or faith crutch) to invest in the idea of being spiritual? If so, which of the 4 meanings of spirituality? All of them? :
From Wilber's book, Integral Spirituality: (page 100)
... If you analyze the way tht people use the word "spirutual" - both scholars and lay people alike- you will find at least 4 major meantings given to that word. Although individuals themselves do not use these technical terms, it is apparent that "spiritual" is being used to mean: 1) the highest levels in any of the lines; 2) a separate line itself; 3) an extrordinary peak experience or state; 4) a particular attitude. My point is all of those are legitimate uses (and I think all of them point to actual realities), but we absolutely MUST identify which of those we mean, or the conversation goes nowhere fast, with the added burden that one thinks ground has actually ben covered. In may entire life, I personally have never heard more poeople utter more words with less meaning. "
Regarding astral projection or other subtle body skills, sorry, the answer is "no". As far as I know, I don't have the skill currently to do that. I can pray about it, and see what happens. I believe that, for me, prayer is a way of letting go of my matter-dependency, and that it opens me up to the "other side" (to energy and spirit). After prayer and meditation, and a "spiritual" attitude (meaning #4), I have seemed to have more prophetic dreams and more "night school" lessons about spiritual truths and skills.
There needs to be some sort of willingness to go into that mode. This is the true flip side to my comment to Scott above, in which I tout the wisdom of "Where there's a way, there's a will". Perhaps both ("Where there's a will, there's a way", and "Where there's a way, there's a will") are at play when it comes to going "there", to the energy-predominant mode, or to the "other side", or to the astral plane between this side and the other side.
Darrell
- Please Login to Add Comments
- Report Abuse
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Appreciation
Posted November 1st, 2009 by Darrell Moneyhon in response to Hi DarrellBrendon, I really appreciate (with thanks, and, hopefully will appreciate in value) what you shared above. I freeze-framed at the following statement, as it resonated highly with some of my randomly-shared thoughts in other conversations here at IL over the past few months: Thus it is possible to consider enlightenment as a result of ignorance elimination through any of the quadrants!
I have maintained that if you choose, say the path of thinking, and do it full bore, that eventually, thinking will transcend itself, outgrow itself, into an energy-like, non-dual, understanding. If you are a "thinking" type, go ahead. Don't appologize for using your gift of thinking. A kind of fractal complexity of thought will eventually pull in "spiritual" (pure energy or energy field-like) ways of thinking that are more and more "transrational".
The thinking may appear cluttered and fragmented (such as in postmodern relativism), but that path will outgrow its own limitations in time. Integration will happen. Unless you stop thinking, or think in a half-assed manner, rather than "sincere" thought. The Taoist's notion of "sincere thought" will reveal its own illusions, and will eventually stand naked before the thinker.
I know "thinking" is more a type than a quad/perspective, but in our times, it seems associated with the rational scientist in the UR or LR quads. And look what flatland science fooled around and stumbled upon - quantum soup! This one path and door is not the only way to the core of reality, but it is one legitimate way.
Perhaps all the quads do, as you suggest, have windows to the other quads. I also believe the windows become increasingly easy to find as we stage-advance. The higher stages can "think like energy" more and more, and begin to transcend duality and high resistance thought.
Once, a voice told me upon awakening "We don't chase our own thoughts in here"! This is a state of having thoughts, but not clinging to them. Allowing them to simply be and then return to the formless field from which new "pre-forming" thoughts can emerge. The voice suggested a much more faithful way to use the mind, than I am accostomed to using. Trust the "giveness" of the thoughts enough to no longer need to cling to them. Learn to think more "creationitively".
I will read the link, and the rest of your comment later, and will return with more impressions and comments. Thank you for participating here. It is fun, challenging, and it helps me, as you say, weed out my ignorance (ever so gradually!). Say the word honesty as "hone"-esty, and there you have it!
Darrell
- Please Login to Add Comments
- Report Abuse
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Savoring, Bypasses
Posted November 11th, 2009 by Darrell Moneyhon in response to Hi DarrellDear Brendan, I took time to thoroughly read and savor your original comment, and it was very, very, good. You show evidence of all kinds of quad crossings, or bypasses, which are all anomalies to the model. The only way I can make sense of these anomalies is to see an energy-unfolding process below/within or above the manifested domains that the perspectives view.
The quads are spatial, dependent upon matter staying in its "place". But if matter or particles are arising out of some sort of energy field, a quantum soup, then transfers of energy and information can happen below (or above) the quads, no longer explainable by those physically expressed sub-operations. Each of the quads and zones may be best viewed as being "manifestations", rather than as solid "things".
The postmetaphysical idea of zones of enactment is, in fact, a verb-like view of the spatially-depicted quads and zones. A zone of enactment, or a "tetra-arising" does sound like the old idea of "manifestation". Bypass between the quads would be a function of a purer or higher (higher frequency) "power" which we as physical beings somehow have access to. To me, this sounds like "spirit", and "spirit" acts a lot like energy acts in the UR quad. This is why I think energy is a Western Window (to the divine, or to the "divined", as in divining water with a stick). The science of energy is a both a divine window (glimpse) and a divinition that bypasses the limits of the UR quad and connects it to other quads, such as the UL and LL and LR. The unfolding energy flare or fountain is the only model that would seem to accomodate the anomalies that you and I have pointed out.
Darrell
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Yeah again
Posted November 11th, 2009 by Brendan LaChance in response to Savoring, BypassesI definitely agree with what you are saying here.
My specific interest is this: I think it might be true that we have basically 4 perspectives on the mental level. I also buy that there could be 4 (major) "paths" to transcendence, corrseponding to those four. Ideally, we would work for all four.
But I do think that if you can transcend any of the four perspectives, that whatever is beyond it is not limited by the divisions of the 4 perspectives nearly as rigidly. I.E., if you transcend your UL perspective, I think it links in directly with all the other perspectives. In other words, these aren't, on the trans-mental level seperate, at least not in the way they are seperate in the mind.
So my curiousity is how and if we can use transcendence of one perspective to aid in transcendence of the others. I think this is already implicit any form of Integral Life Practice. I guess my question for you Darrell is how and if you think thinking like energy can help with the transcendence of the other 3 mental perspectives.
I guess my current thought about thinking like energy is that it certainly seems powerful and useful for its energetics and action, but thinking like energy doesn't seem like it necessarily gives understanding in an UL kind of sense and simply having or feeling energy is not the same as experiencing that energy as love (LL). But I think the activation of that energy and then the contemplation of that energy that has been enacted can be beneficial for these left quadrant perspectives.
Now that I reread this post, it all seems really obvious and like I am just restating the basics of integral theory but I'll still post it for you I suppose.
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
You have me thinking ...
Posted November 12th, 2009 by Darrell Moneyhon in response to Yeah againand that is good. Perhaps I am in-between zones 1 and 2 with this idea of "thinking like energy". Why would I say that? Because I have developed a myth of my ex-counselling/therapy clients learning to relax and "walk around" thier own mind, and to investigate its contents fresh, with a greater clarity than when they were merely thinking the thoughts and bound to the interior dimension of "mind". I was prompting them, often with words to the above effect ("walk around", etc.) to theraputically disociate or astrally project (?).
You probably saw in my crazy bio that when Timothy Leary died, I knew it clarivoyantly (or so I think!). The message was the lyric from the Moody Blues song "Legend of a Mind", the passage I repeatedly heard in my head was "Timothy Leary's dead. No, no, no, he's outside, looking in." This is what I prompted (and I believe, on occassion, effectively achieved) for my clients.
Another personal, accidental "mind experiment" was the time I was very angry toward my wife, but saw myself from about 10-20 feet above myself, as though "from a distance" (the song). This imagined (or real, if you buy into the subtle body stuff, and I guess I do) spatial splitting literally and figuratively changed my perspective, and I transcended-but-included my anger with and understanding of love and of a freedom to no longer hold onto the anger.
This is not as "outside" as zone 2 "stage" conceptions, but it is still "out of my (our) mind (s)! In the normal sense, it is truly "crazy", but it is also a spiritual (or at least "mystical") healing skill of some sort. I would also look into the soul of my clients, and it seemed to have theraputic value as well.
Concerning you subtle challenge or dare (can I visit you in your dreams?), I might have soften my "no" a bit. I recalled a time that I connected with someone who was sharing a meaningful idea or story. He was a stranger that I happened to meet at a mini-conference. But he moved me in a way that I felt I connected with him. That night, I dreamed of a hand that wadded up a paper wad, and then I saw a fire.
The next day of the three-day conference, I told him my dream, and he nearly fell out of his seat. He had not told me, but he had a longstanding coping technique of writing a problem or conflict on a piece of paper, wadding it up, and throwing it into a fire, or burning it. He and I were both convinced that, via the "connected" or meaninful feeling state, I had gained access to his inner mind, had "read" his mind.
OK. So I set my mind to your task by prayer. Asking for help from God to do this task. As I drifted into sleep last night, my first few images were the following: I saw light-colored (white, or light pink) thin plywood scroll-sawed and somehow implied to be part of a shelf or something like it. The sawed edges were exposed brown wood.
Next, I saw a plain brown paper bag, grocery bag size - a grocery bag.
Then I sensed the idea of "sister", as though it signified something meaningful.
Some other images appeared but I lost attention, kind of intentionally giving more wieght to the first round of images. I don't even recall some of the other images.
Image one is suspect, because it matched the qualities of a wooden facade on a new building under construction in my local town. But day residue doesn't alway nullify a deeper, alternate, meaning or signification.
Image two: I have no memory of seeing a bag or thinking of one in the preceeding day. I have no clue why that particular, mundane, image. I suppose it could be my mind's suggestion that I simplify things, "brown bag it", travel lighter in my thinking (I was running a bit hot and sluggish with thought yesterday - thinking a bit too "hard").
Image/idea three: no clue at this point. Possibilty that it was a thought from 2 or 3 days ago from hearing that a friend of the family is having twins that are both female (she is still only 2-3 months into the pregnancy) and there was some talk about what would it have been like if we had had girls instead of boys, etc. This could have triggered me to think "What if I had had a sister", I suppose. Dreams can be "caused" by so many things!
Let me know if any of these ring true to anything in your mind or life! Consider this a wierd science mutual "mind experiment"!
Darrell
- Please Login to Add Comments
- Report Abuse
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Interesting
Posted October 30th, 2009 by Scott MarshallIndeed!
"predominant mode of mutual resonance", or "Predominant mode of discourse."
In a blogosphere like this one, a predominant mode of mutual resonance can and does occur. This reminds me of how when groups of women get together, they will all begin to menstruate in the same cycle. Exciting!
I also suggest that our word choice will elicit a response in a person with the text and subtext playing a role in the meaning making. So as KW points out that words are signifiers and the concepts etc. that are understood are the signified, this further points to mutuality. This is dialogical discussion.
Our subtle bodies also interface with each other in a variety of fashions (some more fashionable than others...). The imprint of information onto and residing with the subtle body can have an impact upon the interpreter of that data combined with their language. Someone can talk out of both sides of their mouth. Someone's walk matches their talk. And so on.
Further, a co-created artifact can emerge from mutual resonance. That artifact can be in the form of a project, social movement, painting, book, etc.
This artifact would have the imprint of the individuals who create it. The same goes for a single individual.
-S