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, October 7, 2012

The individualized life turns science against its self.

I'm not a young woman, nor a middle aged female, I'm an old lady, I hope. I read a lot, old books and newly published books that surprisingly sometimes  say the same thing. Reading a certain page in  Ouspenkys' Tertium Organun for instance recently merged seamlessly with a chapter in The Bond by Lynn McTaggart, a recent book. The subject was language, biology, DNA and the possibility that the environment and personal  experiences alter ones DNA. But naturally that formed  the inference that science doesn't establish stable information. Even scientific studies that had been accepted truths changed into being false when more information was revealed.

 I read somewhere that every life forms (or should form) a 'story'.  The 'story' that's formed as I have lived my life, is that as an individual my experiences do accomplish something. I used to wonder if my  seeing something or being present made a difference anywhere, if just being an observer changed anything. In 1989 I read a newstory that had been published in 1932 about the gamma ray experiments to be made by Arthur H. Compton.  That was the year I was born, and the front page article mentioned that the 'new discoveries' of quantum physics implied that human thought, human activities and motives were involved at that level.That was 80 years ago.
 I know that what I saw and observed in my unique life that formed my 'story' was revealed to me, it was  received by me as inner content that emerged from the physical world but which merged and joined with content that was already present in my mind, thought and other content that was not visible until it met its exact match, creating  'coincidences' that generated new contexts and meanings to 'events', in my past and 'now', a point that is not fixed.
 It seems logical to assume the 'new physics' was about information itself, and the body is information, every event is potential information, every circumstance is potential information. The Bond by Ms. Taggart as I understand it opens that territory. Some mechanisms of mind that are not under my will must be active to reveal new-to-me information.

The entire  story  gave me evidence that  what I saw and thought, even the more private thoughts and events that I never told anyone about, are stored in a data base, with my names on it. I don't know the 'address' but it is  known to some intelligence other than mine. (Emanuel Swedenborg's experiences and his complicated writings as well as Robert Monroe's are evidence that the mind can operate independently from an individuals 'will and intentionality' and the body.)  

There's an old riddle about liars and truth tellers who live together in a certain city. I read it somewhere when I was a very young girl. The only rule in this city is that liars are compelled to lie and truth tellers are equally compelled to say what is true. What question can a visitor ask of any citizen in this city that will reveal whether one is doing business with a liar or truth teller? At the time I didn't spend any time trying to think of a question.

One day in the mid 1990's that riddle came to  mind at work, when my supervisor was talking about some changes in our workplace that to put it bluntly, were based on my hearing words that could be interpreted in two   contexts. The corporate goal was announced: to become lean and to become a world class corporation. Somehow the 'lean' in this context automatically added 'and mean'. They intended to become lean and mean. But that was also in the business context we were beginning to experience. They intended to become a 'third  world class' corporation because the focus was changed from building products to earn money, to raising the price of stock. Outsourcing had not begun but news stories about reducing the number of employees produced positive and immediate increases  in the stock market. High ranking executives earned bonuses for performance while jobs were eliminated.

 That changed as time  passed. That's when outsourcing really began,  Sending  work to Mexico forced the blanket shop to be closed and my boss boasted that was going to save millions because their wages for a week were less than our daily wages. "Third world class" corporation was a natural association to form then. We had a long strike during the Thanksgiving/Christmas season and the theme was that the corporation was already a 'third world class' corporation'.

 Increasing shareholder value was the new principle.Value and principle are words that sound the same but they have different meanings.

My mind of course produced those associations because I've heard and read the term  'lean and mean' often enough that lean always brings 'mean' up from my memory. That's how my mind works. A clue  to what I'm trying to define, which is about how my mind worked then,  is that the word  'value' applies to both  'principle/principal' and that somehow the new plan to become  'lean' almost automatically formed an association in the mind with 'mean'  automatically. "The  company is going to get leaner." (and meaner)  The new plan was creating 'value/money'.

I had read a book,  The Value Creator and there learned that a Japanese teacher, Tsuneseboro Matsuro  Machiguici believed education should join value creation to work and education. But also that learning to love to work and love to learn should be the goal of the schools in any nation. An individual that had not read that book and been affected by it would not form the same associations, probably.

What question can be asked that reveals whether I'm connecting to a liar or to a truth teller? I couldn't think of one question and a supervisor I told the riddle to couldn't either. He plagued me for several days to tell me the answer but I would not. Then one day he triumphantly told me it was so simple, all I had to do was ask if  2 added to 2 was 5 or something similar.  The liar would have to say yes because he had to lie. The truth teller would have to say no. It seemed so simple.


 

No comments: