I suggest reading the earliest posts first

What is the relationship of the experience of synchronicities?

What is the relationship of the experience of synchronicities to the 'rational'? That question has been answered:

"Accompanying the more profound occurrences of synchronicity (is) a dawning intuition, sometimes described as having the character of a spiritual awakening, that the individual herself or himself not only is embedded in a larger ground of meaning and purpose, but also in some sense (is) a focus of it."
Richard Tarnas Cosmos and Psyche

The above quotation is embedded in 492 pages + 50 pages of endnotes, etc, little bitty print, not many pictures in the book.

"There is another world, but it is 'in' this one." Paul Eluard, Morris Berman, The Reenchantment of the World"

"Here again the dialectic that runs through the whole development of the mythical-religious consciousness stands out with particular sharpness....It is a fundmantal trait in mythical thinking that where ever it posits a definite relation between two members it transforms this relation into an identity. An attempted synthesis leads here necessarily to a coincidence, an immediate concrescence of the elements that were to be linked. " Ernst Cassirer, page 250, The Philosophy of symbolic Forms, Vol 2.

Concrescence is a term coined by Alfred North Whitehead
to show the process of jointly forming an actual entity that was without form, but about to manifest itself ...

"I saw not with the eye of the body, but the eye of the soul." Goethe; Theodore Reik's Fragment of a Great Confession

In discovering the other world, the hidden world, a very strange kind of conversation can be experienced but it's not the typical 'voice' that speaks in that other world. It's created artificially! It uses whatever is available to the individual, the specific individual.

This quotation is from War In Heaven by Charles Williams.

"When Mr. Batesby had spoken that morning it had seemed as if two streams of things: actual events and his own meditations had flowed gently together; as if not he but Life were solving the problem in the natural process of the world. He reminded himself now that such a simplicity was unlikely; explanations did not lucidly arise from mere accidents and present themselves as all but an ordered whole."
Read only the words in Bold-red. and that's the best example I can give of the process of 'abstraction' from embeddedness. This is an excellent description of synchronization as a life process. One's own meditations and actual events flow together and a new 'voice' speaks through this natural process.

Its an individualizing experience in every day life that has been named various names throughout history. C. G. Jung named it individuation, Emanuel Swedenborg had accurately identifed it as regeneration, a process that includes a life review.
An individuation process is not commonly recognized because its such a unique personalized life experience of one's own body and mind. You may be as surprised as I was to have to learn that the 'irrational' is what can't be scientifically validated because it's unique, ultra personal experiences that happen over a life span and science requires repeatability.
So the irrational is what ever isn't rational because science excludes personal analysis, the process requires repeatability. In fact the irrational is a wholeness of experience in that it includes the rational when the individuation process operates in a life or in lives. An individuation process is not commonly understood yet but I became aware of the process and the pattern without knowing about it myself!
How it creates a 'voice' and a conversation is the most personalizing life experience that can be experienced if it's recognized, because the form of its 'speech' is difficult to be discerned. Order emerges from chaos, literally over a span of time that may be decades in a life. It's speech is created artificially, the 'voice' aspect is created by a process of abstractions from every day life content. The bibliography at the end of a technical non-fictional book is in my opinion the result of that process of abstractions, its basically invisible to the author.
When quantum physics was 'discovered' that was a message that 'said': "The physical world is derived from another world" and: " there are no causes in the physical world, only effects." (Emanuel Swedenborg had already written that fact and other important details about the process of life, regeneration was his name for it, that he believed prepared a person for life after death.) One attribute of its speech is symbolic but literalness is also part of how the' voice' is created by a process literally of 'abstractions' , highlighted by the mind from every day life content, by a special function of mind that creates a 'second under lying context' automatically, with an extra 'sense'. The term 'second underlying context' was my own definition but a local Jungian psycyhiatrist told me it was an excellent term. Swedenborg's term, 'double thought' is appropriate too.

Only last year I saw an old movie (Blade Runner) and the process of 'abstraction' caused me to hear a remark made in it about 'tears lost in rain' with that 'extra meaningful sense' that I've noticed myself in my mind. It has helped me describe the undescribable invisibility of such events that occur, embedded in every day life until the 'extra sense' abstracts and highlights them. The 'jokes' that cause you to laugh most heartily are the simplest example I can give now. Television situation comedies in our time are popular from this mechanism's operations but that's just one of 'its' attributes.

There is a kind of rational logic inherent to the process, not Aristolean, or linear, because 'it' uses personal memories and experiences as the content of the process. But that's a fact that had to be recognized over a span of time when 'it' created in my life a consistent synchronization between inner content that was new to me, certain memories from my past and everything, every thing, outside my body.
The process itself was almost overwhelming for a few years until it was a new kind of 'normal', but not yet invisible. What's new eventually becomes normal but whatever is normal gets to be invisible eventually, its ever presence has made it invisible.

The process as I had to figure out myself, operates 'in' every day events. I believe it is a special sense that unites (synchronizes is the best word to use) the body and brain with what's outside the body, history and Time itself with the flow of what I believe is the 'ongoing endeavor of Time'. It may be a function of the unconsciousness itself to create the process of individuation, from the depths of mind but I'm not sure about that. But let me emphasize that I had to discover all, every 'bit of information' myself and notice how it was created from mechanisms of mind that alter 'thought' and the direction of attention. The most difficult to discover was that there is a kind of 'prompter within'. It created a new relationship with every day life events gradually.'

" The medium is the message." The extension in Time of an idea can be 'like' a signal, in my opinion.

The process of individuation is virtually unknown but I have experienced that the 'transcendental function' is in charge, it's building a future event: The Future. Sometimes long strings of events have to happen, widely spaced in time so that the personal 'meaning and context' can in some situations only be given decades later. I've had several events, separated by even decades happen, then a 'closing event ' completes the string and then an inner display retrieves them and assembles them in a flash of a second as 'insight'. Only then suddenly, it's obvious that part of me in the past somehow 'knew' the future.

I wouldn't abandon 'string theory' which F. David Peat wrote is an 'interactive force'. He did not write about or mention a process of individuation. I will have to describe in detail why I believe Sigmund Freud's 'discovery' of psychoanalysis was his experience of this individuation process and Carl G. Jung's much deeper experience was the result of recognizing the effects of the same pattern.

What ever "it" is that energizes my body in that 'kind' of event, which often happens as an ordinary situation, it's not always 'numinous' (feelable at the moment) or even unusual. It's 'feelable' when a creative 'function' of the unconscious mind that is not unconscious its self., 'highlights' the event or the memory of an event. I know it never sleeps, I've had more than acceptable evidence of that fact. That's where its possible to see evidence of foresight, when I see what happened when I was 'moved' by that function in certain specific events and finally realized I'd been alone when many of them happened.

The depths of mind is where an unsleeping part of me (and probably everyone else) is at work. Nothing materially changes but 'associations and understanding'. Its nearly impossible to detect that there's a vast space between upper regions of mind and the most remote regions of mind that produces content that is thankfully strangely visible. It uses symbols that the individual 'knows' or can recognize.

My main symbol is the moebius band in all it's forms. An impulse caused me to make my first one in 1941 when I was 9 years old. The same impulse caused me to discover its 'secret', it's hidden forms that day after I'd made the band with a 180 degree turn. "Cut around it lengthwise." was a thought and I cut it once lengthwise, surprised at the result. The thought words repeated : "Cut around it lengthwise." so I obeyed again. The result was two bands separated but joined in a knot that didn't look like it could be undone. The two bands were joined but separated. The impulse has caused me to look over my shoulder at just the right moment, in the right location and what it brings to my attention is ALWAYS a surprise, sometimes its a real shock, perfectly timed.

It's connected to a part of 'me' that knows where I am, what's in front of me, where I've been and 'it' knows my most private thought. That part evidently knows the future, it has foresight and 'it' or whatever it's connected to uses a different language than our words. But it's within me, looking through my eyes, and I'm not unusual.

The four world balloon was created from an impulse to do something irrational.

About the image of 4 balloons?

I had an impulse to create my own image to represent (re-present) of the four worlds that William Blake's Tree of Life allegory had brought to my mind. I described what I wanted to a young man in a craft store and he thought it was impossible to do what I had in mind. Yet he did it without too much trouble then he made one for himself.

Search This Blog

Saturday, October 29, 2011

The 'Transcendent' functions in every day life

I've recently become more convinced that the 'transcendent function' itself is what creates so much disharmony everywhere and every when. That's because 'it' (the function itself) individualizes a persons' experiences to such a degree  over a long span of time as to seem impossible to a scientific oriented mindset. Its my experience that the symptoms of certain mental 'disorders' can be understood as attributes of the individuation process. I've never heard 'voices' myself, I've experienced thought that I didn't 'will', and speech that was spontanteous, but as I found out over a   length of time came from depths of mind below consciousness and my  and other's intents.

Its also possible that the ordinary individual, having no knowledge of such a process, can experience a sense of being the focus of some malignant attention from an 'other'. The 'other' can perhaps be a spouse,  a neighbor, the FBI, or some material world real persecutor. I've experienced several people who went into a different personality, a few somewhat returned to normal, just somewhat.
 A sprinkling of unusual events may open the door to the hidden world that lays 'hidden' behind a barrier that is language itself, that's how 'it' began to come to my attention. P. D. Ouspensky wrote that a person does not always recognize something new when it happens or one hears about it.  I discovered that myself , in a location where 'new things' happened in my own mind and thought,  between age 2-1/2 and my present age which is  almost 80 years and I didn't notice them myself. They were brought to my attention in an unusual method. I'm sure Emanuel Swedenborg named this 'method' as 'remains installed early in life in states of innocence' for use later in the process he named 'regeneration'. Regeneration is a good word to choose.
The first was an image of what I was looking at when I was 2-1/2 years old, which was 'fixed in my memory' complete in every detail, like a super photograph, because even a thought that occurred into my mind was part of that image. That was the unsuspected 'new' thing as I found out  decades later. That 'scene' then repeated during my life for no reason I could ever see, flashing into my mind extremely rapidly.  Eventuallly I wondered why that 'scene' flashed into my mind. That was a small degree of curiosity and attention but not enough to cause me to focus  on that re-occurring memory for more than a few seconds.

The scene, which I've mentioned before but will describe briefly again:  I was laying on a bed, directly overhead was a bare light bulb suspended from the rafter, it was not a ceiling in a house; that was the visual part. The audible part was that I heard wind coming through the cracks, I knew my new baby sister was laying on the same bed but her body was not in the scene. A thought occurred: "I am in a cold place." I never mentioned this to anyone else until one day in 1989 when I found the old one car garage my parents had rented in 1934, the day before it was to be torn down. My husband told me I could not possibly remember anything so young, but he got out of the car and talked to an old woman sitting on the porch  of the house next to the weather beaten garage. She verified everything. I took pictures and asked if I could have some engraved panels in the door. She told me to take whatever I wanted because the next day the garage was to be bulldozed away.
A different kind of scene was super-photographed when I was about 9 years old when a Sunday school teacher told her version of the birth of Jesus. I listened to her tell about how the messiah had been expected for so long but 'when it came it did not come as it was expected to come'. I remember thinking that the messiah was not an 'it', she should have said 'he', not it. The internal conversation about the messiah not being an 'it' re-occured for decades before my curiosity was somewhat 'turned on'. Only then  I wondered why that memory flashed into my mind.  I had never mentioned that memory to any one.
Only one 'event' cannot be enough to convince anyone else of the validity of a 'process in every day life' that is in fact a complete separation of an individual from the mass of individuals and an interface with that individual takes place.   A few somewhat similar events happened before I was a  teen ager, each different in content but similar in the unexplainable re-occurrance of the event into my mind. I didn't recognize them until I was in my 60's as having been installed early in life for later use, to make me understand that foresight or apparent foresight other than my own was obvious. At this point I believe there's an explanation in our biological connections to what's outside the body, and history as it's been described, for this 'apparent foresight'. Also it was obvious that my thought was as retrievable as the memory of the physical component of the moment.  I didn't recognize a description of similar re-occuring events in his life when I read it the first time, in A New Model Of The Universe by P. D. Ouspensky.

I've read a lot since 1983, when I first came into contact with ideas in psychiatry other than what I  had gleaned from the fictions that were my main reading material. I avoided non-fictions unless required in school or at work because they were  very boring. They didn't produce any  effect or comprehension. I had noticed that about myself when I did read One, Two Three, Infinity by George Gamow after my new husband read it in 1955.  Every word was easy  to read  but I didn't understand what the book was about. That was a small degree of self observation but I didn't think of it as 'self knowledge' then.
The two pages in the picture below are from The Bridge of San Luis Rey  by Thornton Wilder in which an abbess mentions a 'secret' and from Childhood's End by Arthur C. Clarke in which an alien tells a man about an 'abyss' across which 'few....unaided have ever found it.' There's a kind of literalness in these two abstractions from two different books. The title of the chapter, Perhaps An Intention, is perhaps important, and is in my opinion, it really is important information about 'it'.

No comments: