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

Sunday, February 6, 2011

Starting with a point in the center.

This is an interesting image, it begins with one whole and a point in it's center, successively divided by one line, then 3 lines to form a triangle, 4 lines make a square, five point star, etc. Every number except 2 lines has been used to create a form on a flat image of a circle. Circles have been a generator of thought on many levels in mathematics but less commonly in psychology as the 'ego'. Where is the center of 'me', or am "I" the whole and the dividing into parts creates a confusion at times ( purposefully it seems to me) of what is reality? But a circle is  flat.
I used to wonder how a sphere could be drawn, how would the lines on this image appear on/in a sphere?  The question formed after I'd  read Flatland by Abbott then by chance, (that's where I can see purpose is at work in my life)  Sphereland by Dionys Burger, then  read as though some foresight other than mine had arranged the sequence The Persian King Allegory by Charles Hinton. Thought about 'dimensions' and 'points of view'  within me, in my mind grew slowly, evolving when I became aware of different  thought than was normal for me, but there were changes in how things  looked and sounded outside my body too.  
I just watched a news video that showed how the first real 3 dimensional image of our sun had been made. It also proved the sun is round.
I thought I'd discovered the 'moebius twist point' until by accident I saw a mathematical equation for it. This YouTube video comes close to illustrating it but not how I became aware of it, bit of information by bit of information over a span of several decades. 
 Hinton's book, Scientific Romances is not about surfaces but about interiors of a king's mind, after he is led across an abyss into an isolated land. He has to figure out how to motivate creatures that lay about listlessly, and he decides they must require feeling more pleasure than pain so he absorbs a measure of their pain himself. That difference creates activity and a busy civilization, but as time passes the amount of pain the king absorbs becomes unbearable so he has to leave them, inert again and he is led away by the being that led him into isolation. Do I have a similar need, to feel more pleasure than pain?

I remember something that happened at about the same time I read The Persian King. It was a foxglove bloom in my yard  that had the shape of a nautilus shell, the  familiar chryslys  form;  the form so often associated with the Fibonacci sequence, 1,1,2,3,5,8... and certain ideas in quantum physics. That shape is a circle opened up, this foxglove had a door in it!
 This was an unusual foxglove plant, it was thought provoking too, in fact it generated thought that I would not have experienced ever, except in my experiences with this foxglove and its progeny after 1989 until this year, 2013. As I looked at it "I" began to think about it's 'spirituality', i.e.,  it's attributes, characteristics, qualities, etc and the strange fact that it is both life saving and death dealing. A lot of thought was produced when I noticed how unusual it was. Every stalk had a different kind of bloom at the top. I'd never seen anything like it but every year it  has re-produced and foxgloves aren't supposed to do that.  Until 1995 I'd always had a plant that produced round blooms on the top of each stalk;  I thought of them as a mandala flower.  Then as a result of thinking about 'dimensions' and how a sphere really can't be drawn, somehow that impossibility caused me to think my center could be anyplace at any time in one of the layers I couldn't see in my mind. What if my 'soul's eye'  looked out at the world from different locations in my mind? (I  had become convinced there is a soul eye , after reading that Goethe mentioned he saw not with the eye of the body but the eye of the soul).
What if "I" was looking within my mind, and seeing from it at the same time, but sensing purposefulness  behind even the distress and discomfort at times, where motivation didn't just happen? What ever is 'me' now,  its not always a center point in a Cartesian like three dimensional space, with 'ego' in one place, it can be moved anywhere without any awareness of crossing from one 'part' to another. I hope this makes sense?  I  began to wonder whether all the different problems I had with people in my life, and with situations that caused me a lot of inner turmoil happened because I didn't understand the value of unpleasant situations and thoughts.  
 If other people are like me, it takes something really unusual to cause me to think about thinking, and what produces it. Thinking about the kind of thinking that was produced (or generated) by objects or situations has evolved from a point where my 'eye' was like the center point on a circle, when every thing was 'flat'. The sphere within 'me' extends back into history and very certainly into the future at times. What if I'd merely glanced at the strange (to me) book,  Flatland, then Sphereland and passed them. Or ignored the strange title of Charles Hinton's Scientific Romances, seeminlgy unrelated? 
There are quite a few images of my foxgloves from1989 to last summer.