From ae.dropper at juno.com Thu Dec 13 02:29:37 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Thu Dec 13 02:31:03 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] SELF, SOCIETY AND PROPRIOCEPTION - 2nd excerpt
Message-ID: <20071212.202938.2428.386.ae.dropper@juno.com>
SELF, SOCIETY, AND PROPRIOCEPTION
November 1989 Ojai, California
Lee Nichol: It is not unusual for people to spend an entire lifetime
carefully scrutinizing their personal inclinations and motivations, their
whole psychological make-up. But, somehow, even if one spends that much
time and that much energy, the mind seems to maintain its basic patterns,
without any fundamental change. The question is, is it possible that
after years of study and work in this area that a person could continue
to make fundamental mistakes with regard to observation?
David Bohm: Yes. You see the whole field is very deceptive. Things are
not what they appear to be. The structures are a lot different from what
they seem. For example, one of the basic assumptions that we make is that
one can look at the mind as if one were a separate observer, looking at
something different, as I, for example, can look at the chair and see
that my thought is one thing and the chair is another. The chair is
independent of my thought, and my thought can move independently of the
chair. We may make a similar assumption as we look at our own internal
processes, but this is not true. Our thought profoundly affects the
emotion and the whole state of the body, which in turn profoundly affects
thought in a cycle, a feedback loop that tends to build up. This is one
of the basic mistakes. If you thus start with a false assumption, your
whole enquiry may make things worse, and add more complications to those
already there. There are many such false assumptions that are operating
within our sociocultural context.
LN: If we make this assumption that we can look at the mind as separate
from the looker, and then add to that some approach aimed at bringing
about order or solving problems, it seems that, as you say, this only
compounds it.
DB: Yes, you see, if the assumption of separation of observer
and observed were correct (which it isn't), it would make sense to
project, to find out what is the problem and try to bring about some
desired result as a goal. In such an approach, which is suitable, for
example, in practical affairs, you may change your goal through further
insight, but the basic idea of having some kind of a goal to direct you
is always there. On the other hand, within the mind, this approach may be
totally out of place because there is no separation of the kind that has
been assumed, the goal you project is therefore fantasy, with arbitrary
features of certain ideas that you are simply trying to impose on top of
the confusion that's already there, about which you're actually doing
nothing.
LN: Would it be fair to say that until this particular issue is
quite thoroughly cleared up, any activity in the realm of
self-investigation could only lead to further confusion?
DB: Well it's very likely to. Maybe it could be helpful on a
certain level for people who are extremely disturbed. We can probably get
them past some of their disturbing fantasies with such investigation and
treatment (subject/object approach). But it cannot really get to the root
of the problem. In the long run it will add to it. This, I think, is one
of the key points that Krishnamurti made in all of his talking.
LN: So coming to terms with the dynamics of assuming an internal
separation is fundamental to real investigation. Now, it seems that part
of the difficulty is that we may read this or hear it, and in some way,
it seems quite clear. Then we assume !hat this is not really the issue;
that there is another more important issue or a series of more important
issues, and so we proceed to observe these other issues; but once again,
without having really cleared up this apparently simple and basic
question of how we look at ourselves.
2
DB: Yes, it's not so easy to clear it up, you see, because we're caught
up in it. One can say that one of the problems is, that we may have
insight into this issue on a certain level, but that then there is still
the problem of distraction. In this connection, I have a friend who was
studying young children. There has been a belief, based on the work of
Piaget, that children learn certain concepts, such as conservation of
water at a certain age. But my friend has shown that such learning has to
do with the function of distracting factors. If you can reduce the
distracting factors, they can learn it much earlier. And if you increase
the distracting factors, there may be delays. Or to put it differently,
attention is required to learn, and distracting factors may draw the
attention elsewhere. Similarly, at an intellectual level, you may see
fairly clearly, that the problem that we are talking about here is that
of the observer and the observed, but when the time comes to look in
another context, there are a lot of distracting factors. One of these is
the ability of the mind to create very powerful, vivid, convincing images
that are experienced as real, especially when they move very fast. Thus,
if we take a television set and there is a telephone bell ringing, when
we look into the image and see a telephone, we experience that telephone
ringing in the image though there is no telephone, nothing there except
spots of light. But on the other hand, if it doesn't look consistent, for
example, if nobody answers it, we may think it's the telephone in the
next room and experience it that way. So the way we experience depends on
attribution.
A basic property of thought is to attribute a quality or a property to
something. And then it's experienced as intrinsic to that thing, right?
So I suggest that once you have the assumption of the observer and the
observed, the mind can create an image of an observer looking at the
observed, as you could have in the television set. You could have some
man looking at something and you could say there's the observer, and
there's the observed -- but nothing is going on at all of that nature.
And similarly, in the mind, there will seem to be the observer and the
3
observed, and various little things indicating that combination. Thought
attributes the whole of the process to the observer who is looking at the
observed, and who says that thought comes out of the thinker. What
actually happens however is that thought creates the image of the
thinker, and then it attributes its origin to that image. Thought then
behaves as if it were being produced by a thinker, but in fact, thought
is producing an image which it calls the thinker and attributes itself to
that. The thinker and the thought, and the observed and the observer are
just different phases of one thing, one process. And therefore, as a
person is thinking, very often tacitly and implicitly without knowing
that he's thinking, all of this is attributed to a thinker, which gives
it great authority.
LN: You're suggesting that this separation is actually hidden.
DB: What is covered up is the true nature of the whole
process. Actually there is no real separation, but the assumed separation
is attributed to an image, and the resulting experience is regarded as
proof that there is a real separation. That is to say, the image is
experienced as if it were real, and that is taken as proof that the
assumption is correct. This is part of the way in which the real nature
of the process is covered up.
LN: But all of this that you're describing is generally an
unconscious process.
DB: Yes. We'll call it unconscious, implicit, tacit. The thought
behind it is implicit.
LN: If, by definition, this other process is implicit or
unconscious, it seems that it would take something more than conscious
thinking to reveal the actual dynamics. Perhaps that's the starting
point.
4
DB: Yes. You may say consciously and rationally and
logically this is what's the case, but if your whole feeling and whole
experience and sensation are telling you otherwise, you really can't be
deeply convinced by it, right?
LN: So there are two things going on. An intellectual
recognition that something may be operating in one way, but at the same
time, a deeper set of sensations and experiences apparently indicating
something very different.
DB: We wouldn't necessarily say deeper, but different. It is a
set of experiences that don't agree with your intellectual conclusions,
even though your intellectual conclusions are probably right; you've
probably had a real intellectual insight at that level. So we mustn't
decry the intellect or say it is never of any value in this context.
LN: Instead of viewing that contradiction that you've just
described as a further difficulty, is it possible that that
contradiction, properly attended to, could actually lead to a deeper
understanding of the whole process?
DB: Yes. You have to give attention to this contradiction ---
that's quite right. And the question, then, is how. For this whole
process of covering up and deception is going on. There's a constant
"show" being put on, implying that all this is real, and that the
intellectual stuff is not real. For example, the person may well say,
''I'm not an intellectual, that's just a lot of ideas. My real gut
feeling is that it's the other way." And, "I don't go in for this
intellectualism", so I ignore all that you say, right? What I wanted to
say is that this gut feeling is what is deceptive. There are true deep
feelings, you know, you may get all sorts of responses if somebody dies
that you're close to, or if you look at nature, seeing the beauty and so
on. But then I say there are also feelings which appear to be deep
feelings, but are not, because they are produced by thought.
5
LN: But they have all the attributes of such feelings.
DB: They don't have all or else we could never get out of it. But they
have enough attributes to get by, to be accepted by us as real. The point
is, now, to be able to see that this is what's going on. That we are
producing feelings out of thought. Everybody knows you can whip up
feelings by certain shouts and cries and clamors and marches and songs,
political rallies, etc. It's well known that feelings can in this way be
whipped up, essentially by actions directed by thought, so that such a
response need not be a surprise. What about this sort of feeling as
compared with deep feelings? At the moment that it is happening a person
might not be able to tell the difference. You have a crowd shouting and
screaming and a great leader in front of them shouting and screaming and
driving and urging them on, and so on. So that establishes the principle
that feelings can be produced artificially. But what I was talking about
is much more common than this. It doesn't require a demagogue or some
unusual set of shouts, screams, and cries to do it. Rather, one simply
has to notice that the meaning of a thought tends to be carried out in
terms of feelings all over the body.
(To be Continued)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071212/cf77673d/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Thu Dec 13 03:16:25 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Thu Dec 13 03:21:31 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] no name 3
Message-ID: <c47283890712121816o635f7b7auec69f2118e7720d@mail.gmail.com>
Found some fascinating ideas here. Will ask about them when I get all the
segments up.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Precedence: list
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely
right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking
to one of its authors!
Chris Hooley writes:
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facillitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
>
Anyhow, I just wanted to say that ... maybe the most important dialogue we
have is with ourselves in the end: a dialogue with life ... but ideally also
with death. But get back properly into touch occasionally and life can
seem, for a moment, immortal. (And it's usually only then that I'm ready to
even BEGIN to chat with anyone else ;-) Hearing from somebody who was told,
eleven years ago, that they had only 6 months to live gives me an enormous
belief in the human spirit. Don, I'm very glad to meet you! Hello! Yours
is an incredible story ...
Best, Barron
sent?
>{This letter was sent some days ago while the server for this list was
>down,. It got bounced back innumberable, finally with a 'fatal error'.
>Intentional death? Anyway, here it is again.}
>don this has just happened again, so I will try again -- perseverence
>furthers. the superior man crosses the great water, etc.}
>
>About eleven years ago I was diagnosed as having terminal cancer. I was
>given no more than six months to live and that was only if I submitted to=
>a course of chemotherapy which had a 50-50 chance of working. Without it,
my
>time would be much shorter. As you might guess this information upset me =
>no end. =
>
>
>So I chose to opt for another form of cure. I changed my diet, quit
>smoking, and took myself off to Mexico for some alternative treatment. I
>also began reading everything I could about how to help myself. In the
>course of this I began practicing visualization -- seeing my white blood
>cells as PacMen gobbling up the ghostly cancer cells, etc. With my wife's=
help and regular prompting I did the various exercises I had found and kept
>myself geared up to fight against the disease. But during the course of my
>battle I regularly kept succumbing to moments of deep exhaustion and
>despair. =
>
>
>I was in a lot of pain and felt extremely weak and during those moments I=
felt content to turn my face to the wall and to just forget about the whole
>damned thing. If I died, well, at least I would be out of my pain. Death
>didn't, during those moments, seem such a bad idea at all. But when I came
>out of those moods I was really upset with myself. I felt as though some
>inner demon was trying to take me over and kill me. So not only did I have
>to fight the cancer I had to fight this internal homicidal maniac who
>wanted me to die. I clothed him all kinds of Freudian/Jungian gear and his
>presence came to make a lot of sense to me. The problem was that in the
>state I was in I had no idea how to defeat him.
>
>Then, luckily, I met a man who was a skilled psychotherapist and
>hypnotherapist with a lot of experience of working with people who had life
>threatening illnesses. He told me about some work that had been done with=
>something called ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
>
>
>Anyway, we looked, in the light of this, at my experience of the internal=
homicidal maniac and I came to the realization that he was actually, just=
that phase of my own internal rhythm that wanted to get on with its repair
>work and wanted my conscious intentions out the way. My previous
>understanding, I saw, was a complete misunderstanding. I got hold of some=
references on ultradian rhythms and got an exellent book Ernest Lawrence
>Rossi, the guy who had done the original work, called "The Psychobiology =
>of Mind Body Healing" ( Norton 1986) which confirmed all that my friend had
=
said. =
>
>
>The point of all this is that it lifted a huge burden from my mind/body
>process. I was able to continue doing what I could to help the healing
>process but when I sensed those places in the cycle that called out for me
>to back off, I did. I think that this bit of information was every bit as=
important in saving my life as was the medical intervention. I was, as
>Chris suggests, in a place where, for the first time, I was able to relax=
>and know "that if we let go, we won't fall into death. We won't fall at
>all. In other words, the pushing that we might feel on our backs isn't
>anything external, it's the pressure created by us trying to get off
>center." =
>
It also seems to me that we can generalize from the above. (Dialogue has =
>to get in here somewhere.) It isn't a case of lying back, giggling and
giving
>in or even of life and death, but rather a realizing that we are part of =
>a creative cycle that will insist of playing itself out regardless of what
=
>we may want or think. However, the facility of each of us to participate is
>also a part of that process. It's not a question of exerting our will but
>more simply of learning to be alert to the necessities implicit in a larger
>field where our individual selves are only parts.
>
>
>Don
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Precedence: listI:
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely
right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking
to one of its authors!
Chris Hooley writes:
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facillitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
>
Anyhow, I just wanted to say that ... maybe the most important dialogue we
have is with ourselves in the end: a dialogue with life ... but ideally also
with death. But get back properly into touch occasionally and life can
seem, for a moment, immortal. (And it's usually only then that I'm ready to
even BEGIN to chat with anyone else ;-) Hearing from somebody who was told,
eleven years ago, that they had only 6 months to live gives me an enormous
belief in the human spirit. Don, I'm very glad to meet you! Hello! Yours
is an incredible story ...
Best, Barron
sent?
>{This letter was sent some days ago while the server for this list was
>down,. It got bounced back innumberable, finally with a 'fatal error'.
>Intentional death? Anyway, here it is again.}
>don this has just happened again, so I will try again -- perseverence
>furthers. the superior man crosses the great water, etc.}
>
>About eleven years ago I was diagnosed as having terminal cancer. I was
>given no more than six months to live and that was only if I submitted to=
>a course of chemotherapy which had a 50-50 chance of working. Without it,
my
>time would be much shorter. As you might guess this information upset me =
>no end. =
>
>
>So I chose to opt for another form of cure. I changed my diet, quit
>smoking, and took myself off to Mexico for some alternative treatment. I
>also began reading everything I could about how to help myself. In the
>course of this I began practicing visualization -- seeing my white blood
>cells as PacMen gobbling up the ghostly cancer cells, etc. With my wife's=
help and regular prompting I did the various exercises I had found and kept
>myself geared up to fight against the disease. But during the course of my
>battle I regularly kept succumbing to moments of deep exhaustion and
>despair. =
>
>
>I was in a lot of pain and felt extremely weak and during those moments I=
felt content to turn my face to the wall and to just forget about the whole
>damned thing. If I died, well, at least I would be out of my pain. Death
>didn't, during those moments, seem such a bad idea at all. But when I came
>out of those moods I was really upset with myself. I felt as though some
>inner demon was trying to take me over and kill me. So not only did I have
>to fight the cancer I had to fight this internal homicidal maniac who
>wanted me to die. I clothed him all kinds of Freudian/Jungian gear and his
>presence came to make a lot of sense to me. The problem was that in the
>state I was in I had no idea how to defeat him.
>
>Then, luckily, I met a man who was a skilled psychotherapist and
>hypnotherapist with a lot of experience of working with people who had life
>threatening illnesses. He told me about some work that had been done with=
>something called ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
>
>
>Anyway, we looked, in the light of this, at my experience of the internal=
homicidal maniac and I came to the realization that he was actually, just=
that phase of my own internal rhythm that wanted to get on with its repair
>work and wanted my conscious intentions out the way. My previous
>understanding, I saw, was a complete misunderstanding. I got hold of some=
references on ultradian rhythms and got an exellent book Ernest Lawrence
>Rossi, the guy who had done the original work, called "The Psychobiology =
>of Mind Body Healing" ( Norton 1986) which confirmed all that my friend had
=
said. =
>
>
>The point of all this is that it lifted a huge burden from my mind/body
>process. I was able to continue doing what I could to help the healing
>process but when I sensed those places in the cycle that called out for me
>to back off, I did. I think that this bit of information was every bit as=
important in saving my life as was the medical intervention. I was, as
>Chris suggests, in a place where, for the first time, I was able to relax=
>and know "that if we let go, we won't fall into death. We won't fall at
>all. In other words, the pushing that we might feel on our backs isn't
>anything external, it's the pressure created by us trying to get off
>center." =
>
It also seems to me that we can generalize from the above. (Dialogue has =
>to get in here somewhere.) It isn't a case of lying back, giggling and
giving
>in or even of life and death, but rather a realizing that we are part of =
>a creative cycle that will insist of playing itself out regardless of what
=
>we may want or think. However, the facility of each of us to participate is
>also a part of that process. It's not a question of exerting our will but
>more simply of learning to be alert to the necessities implicit in a larger
>field where our individual selves are only parts.
>
>
>Don
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071212/f4c5f934/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Thu Dec 13 04:20:29 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Thu Dec 13 04:25:35 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] That would be so great!
Message-ID: <c47283890712121920q3ad95842v59b40f74ed686c59@mail.gmail.com>
Is the offer still open, William?
Date: 17 Oct 97 16:42:29 +0200
Subject: Re: A big laugh
From: "William van den Heuvel" <heuvel@muc.de>
>
> Well, I think ... or perhaps it might be correct to
> say I "feel-think" that we ought to meet - the whole
> virtual group - in real life, face to face, and have
> a dialogue week some place round the globe.
>
> Sit in a circle - and talk. Give ourselves up to the
> collective, i.e "us."
>
> Australia could be nice - even Africa.
>
> Who's got the dough? Seriously,
>
> Matti
OK, let's do it. I can offer the place to meet: in my beautiful historic
vaulted cellar in the city center of Munich. It was built in the 15th
century and even survived the bombing raids in 1944 and 1945.
Faust
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071212/74e10ef3/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 04:31:41 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 04:36:46 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] That would be so great!
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712121920q3ad95842v59b40f74ed686c59@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20805.65789.qm@web45814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Doesn't hopp across the pond --puddle?-- hurt mother earth? But then, maybe we don't mind hurting Mom some more //+,}
That might be our ticket, I!
Alan
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
Is the offer still open, William?
Date: 17 Oct 97 16:42:29 +0200
Subject: Re: A big laugh
From: "William van den Heuvel" <heuvel@muc.de>
>
> Well, I think ... or perhaps it might be correct to
> say I "feel-think" that we ought to meet - the whole
> virtual group - in real life, face to face, and have
> a dialogue week some place round the globe.
>
> Sit in a circle - and talk. Give ourselves up to the
> collective, i.e "us."
>
> Australia could be nice - even Africa.
>
> Who's got the dough? Seriously,
>
> Matti
OK, let's do it. I can offer the place to meet: in my beautiful historic
vaulted cellar in the city center of Munich. It was built in the 15th
century and even survived the bombing raids in 1944 and 1945.
Faust
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071212/a460f4df/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 04:27:27 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 04:39:14 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] SELF, SOCIETY AND PROPRIOCEPTION - 2nd excerpt
In-Reply-To: <20071212.202938.2428.386.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <794170.21040.qm@web45808.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Funny, thanks a mill. Impressive.
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
SELF, SOCIETY, AND PROPRIOCEPTION
November 1989 Ojai, California
Lee Nichol: It is not unusual for people to spend an entire lifetime carefully scrutinizing their personal inclinations and motivations, their whole psychological make-up. But, somehow, even if one spends that much time and that much energy, the mind seems to maintain its basic patterns, without any fundamental change. The question is, is it possible that after years of study and work in this area that a person could continue to make fundamental mistakes with regard to observation?
David Bohm: Yes. You see the whole field is very deceptive. Things are not what they appear to be. The structures are a lot different from what they seem. For example, one of the basic assumptions that we make is that one can look at the mind as if one were a separate observer, looking at something different, as I, for example, can look at the chair and see that my thought is one thing and the chair is another. The chair is independent of my thought, and my thought can move independently of the chair. We may make a similar assumption as we look at our own internal processes, but this is not true. Our thought profoundly affects the emotion and the whole state of the body, which in turn profoundly affects thought in a cycle, a feedback loop that tends to build up. This is one of the basic mistakes. If you thus start with a false assumption, your whole enquiry may make things worse, and add more complications to those already there. There are many such false assumptions that
are operating within our sociocultural context.
LN: If we make this assumption that we can look at the mind as separate from the looker, and then add to that some approach aimed at bringing about order or solving problems, it seems that, as you say, this only compounds it.
DB: Yes, you see, if the assumption of separation of observer
and observed were correct (which it isn't), it would make sense to project, to find out what is the problem and try to bring about some desired result as a goal. In such an approach, which is suitable, for example, in practical affairs, you may change your goal through further insight, but the basic idea of having some kind of a goal to direct you is always there. On the other hand, within the mind, this approach may be totally out of place because there is no separation of the kind that has been assumed, the goal you project is therefore fantasy, with arbitrary features of certain ideas that you are simply trying to impose on top of the confusion that's already there, about which you're actually doing nothing.
LN: Would it be fair to say that until this particular issue is
quite thoroughly cleared up, any activity in the realm of self-investigation could only lead to further confusion?
DB: Well it's very likely to. Maybe it could be helpful on a
certain level for people who are extremely disturbed. We can probably get them past some of their disturbing fantasies with such investigation and treatment (subject/object approach). But it cannot really get to the root of the problem. In the long run it will add to it. This, I think, is one of the key points that Krishnamurti made in all of his talking.
LN: So coming to terms with the dynamics of assuming an internal separation is fundamental to real investigation. Now, it seems that part of the difficulty is that we may read this or hear it, and in some way, it seems quite clear. Then we assume !hat this is not really the issue; that there is another more important issue or a series of more important issues, and so we proceed to observe these other issues; but once again, without having really cleared up this apparently simple and basic question of how we look at ourselves.
2
DB: Yes, it's not so easy to clear it up, you see, because we're caught up in it. One can say that one of the problems is, that we may have insight into this issue on a certain level, but that then there is still the problem of distraction. In this connection, I have a friend who was studying young children. There has been a belief, based on the work of Piaget, that children learn certain concepts, such as conservation of water at a certain age. But my friend has shown that such learning has to do with the function of distracting factors. If you can reduce the distracting factors, they can learn it much earlier. And if you increase the distracting factors, there may be delays. Or to put it differently, attention is required to learn, and distracting factors may draw the attention elsewhere. Similarly, at an intellectual level, you may see fairly clearly, that the problem that we are talking about here is that of the observer and the observed, but when the time comes to look
in another context, there are a lot of distracting factors. One of these is the ability of the mind to create very powerful, vivid, convincing images that are experienced as real, especially when they move very fast. Thus, if we take a television set and there is a telephone bell ringing, when we look into the image and see a telephone, we experience that telephone ringing in the image though there is no telephone, nothing there except spots of light. But on the other hand, if it doesn't look consistent, for example, if nobody answers it, we may think it's the telephone in the next room and experience it that way. So the way we experience depends on attribution.
A basic property of thought is to attribute a quality or a property to something. And then it's experienced as intrinsic to that thing, right? So I suggest that once you have the assumption of the observer and the observed, the mind can create an image of an observer looking at the observed, as you could have in the television set. You could have some man looking at something and you could say there's the observer, and there's the observed -- but nothing is going on at all of that nature. And similarly, in the mind, there will seem to be the observer and the
3
observed, and various little things indicating that combination. Thought attributes the whole of the process to the observer who is looking at the observed, and who says that thought comes out of the thinker. What actually happens however is that thought creates the image of the thinker, and then it attributes its origin to that image. Thought then behaves as if it were being produced by a thinker, but in fact, thought is producing an image which it calls the thinker and attributes itself to that. The thinker and the thought, and the observed and the observer are just different phases of one thing, one process. And therefore, as a person is thinking, very often tacitly and implicitly without knowing that he's thinking, all of this is attributed to a thinker, which gives it great authority.
LN: You're suggesting that this separation is actually hidden.
DB: What is covered up is the true nature of the whole
process. Actually there is no real separation, but the assumed separation is attributed to an image, and the resulting experience is regarded as proof that there is a real separation. That is to say, the image is experienced as if it were real, and that is taken as proof that the assumption is correct. This is part of the way in which the real nature of the process is covered up.
LN: But all of this that you're describing is generally an
unconscious process.
DB: Yes. We'll call it unconscious, implicit, tacit. The thought
behind it is implicit.
LN: If, by definition, this other process is implicit or
unconscious, it seems that it would take something more than conscious thinking to reveal the actual dynamics. Perhaps that's the starting point.
4
DB: Yes. You may say consciously and rationally and
logically this is what's the case, but if your whole feeling and whole experience and sensation are telling you otherwise, you really can't be deeply convinced by it, right?
LN: So there are two things going on. An intellectual
recognition that something may be operating in one way, but at the same time, a deeper set of sensations and experiences apparently indicating something very different.
DB: We wouldn't necessarily say deeper, but different. It is a
set of experiences that don't agree with your intellectual conclusions, even though your intellectual conclusions are probably right; you've probably had a real intellectual insight at that level. So we mustn't decry the intellect or say it is never of any value in this context.
LN: Instead of viewing that contradiction that you've just
described as a further difficulty, is it possible that that contradiction, properly attended to, could actually lead to a deeper understanding of the whole process?
DB: Yes. You have to give attention to this contradiction ---
that's quite right. And the question, then, is how. For this whole process of covering up and deception is going on. There's a constant "show" being put on, implying that all this is real, and that the intellectual stuff is not real. For example, the person may well say, ''I'm not an intellectual, that's just a lot of ideas. My real gut feeling is that it's the other way." And, "I don't go in for this intellectualism", so I ignore all that you say, right? What I wanted to say is that this gut feeling is what is deceptive. There are true deep feelings, you know, you may get all sorts of responses if somebody dies that you're close to, or if you look at nature, seeing the beauty and so on. But then I say there are also feelings which appear to be deep feelings, but are not, because they are produced by thought.
5
LN: But they have all the attributes of such feelings.
DB: They don't have all or else we could never get out of it. But they have enough attributes to get by, to be accepted by us as real. The point is, now, to be able to see that this is what's going on. That we are producing feelings out of thought. Everybody knows you can whip up feelings by certain shouts and cries and clamors and marches and songs, political rallies, etc. It's well known that feelings can in this way be whipped up, essentially by actions directed by thought, so that such a response need not be a surprise. What about this sort of feeling as compared with deep feelings? At the moment that it is happening a person might not be able to tell the difference. You have a crowd shouting and screaming and a great leader in front of them shouting and screaming and driving and urging them on, and so on. So that establishes the principle that feelings can be produced artificially. But what I was talking about is much more common than this. It doesn't require a
demagogue or some unusual set of shouts, screams, and cries to do it. Rather, one simply has to notice that the meaning of a thought tends to be carried out in terms of feelings all over the body.
(To be Continued)
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071212/ba055a51/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 04:38:04 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 04:43:08 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Quote for the day
In-Reply-To: <20071212.134822.2428.374.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <404413.26602.qm@web45816.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Funny, you are a Mommy? Somehow you don't come across like that. 0-o
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Funny, pregnant question. Got any fitting answers, too }+o
Alan
Very nice. And good "timing" work. And reminiscent of earlier "pregnancies."
There's always "something more and something different" - in everything.
-- funny
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:57:31 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
It's all improv comedy. Just read carefully. You still won't catch them
all but let "this one" pass or you will miss the "next five." Explaining works
sometimes but not very often and not really, and only when timing remains the priority.
Timing is everything. And keep enough of the context to conveniently reread. LOTS can get missed in the first reading and even in the first few readings. And like they say about Driving in Massachusetts - Understanding is not a right; it is a privilege. But why am I telling you all of this.
Funny, pregnant question. Got any fitting answers, too }+o
Alan
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071212/075bc373/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 04:44:00 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 04:49:06 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Almost
In-Reply-To: <20071212.134822.2428.373.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <454190.59856.qm@web45804.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
I re-re-re-read that now, funny. Still no luck. Okay, no problem, will keep chewing on you. (My teeth are happy campers, well-fed by paste with fennel and propolis and myrrh and ;-8
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Expect no corrections. Beg not. Whatever you say is right.
Rereading is the only possible "corrector." And one might have to wait 10 years
for even that to work.
-- funny
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:54:27 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Funny, and I thought memory drives on fuel, like the rest of our bodies. And what you see as reps is just the daily commute. Please CORRECT me if I am wrong, Funny-))
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Memory thrives on repetition.
"Dave," by the way, has actually
worn out 3 metaphorical sofas.
-- funny
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 12:18:57 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> writes:
How did that get into Hopper Dropper?
Good memory though. Your TAS must be well tuned
don
On Dec 10, 2007, at 12:11 PM, ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Then there was that lunch with Germaine Greer.
-- funny
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 10:19:10 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> writes:
It actually refers to something I wrote mentioning Dennis Hopper, an old friend.
don
On Dec 10, 2007, at 9:57 AM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
The what, "hopper"? And where does that one come in here now? More scrolling to do for me? O-boy --gender!--, this list is a wild ride.
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
It's [the question] is in "the hopper." It seems a stretch but that's
not new. Connections LOVE to make themselves.
-- funny
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 09:16:14 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Almost time for eggs and ham. That's for certain. But does that count, too, Funny?
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
"We can seldom go erect. Almost every man we meet requires some civility, requires to be humored; -- he has some fame, some talent, some whim of religion or philanthropy in his head that is not to be questioned, and so spoils all conversation with him." -- Emerson
"Almost"
It's always the "almost" that promises faithfully the
alternative that delivers the tiniest exception that changes
e v e r y t h i n g.
-- funny
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071212/a725f213/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 04:50:37 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 04:55:44 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?
In-Reply-To: <20071212.134822.2428.369.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <975231.68280.qm@web45806.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Dreamy. I dying -|-- )
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
I died for it. But what's one funny tree among so many.
-- funny
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 07:01:50 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Jesus Christ Alfred, what are you talking about?? You haven't been doing a bit too much of that magic powder S of late, have you? Okay, back to reading some O tone Bohm. This Amazon produced on dialogue yesterday at our foot-steps. Hope not to many had to die for it. ;\/
Alan
Alfred Landman <landmana@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi Penelope Duby. We have with thought set forth a law of causality, the determining principle of which is set above all the conditions of the sensible world; we have it conceived how the will, as belonging to the intelligible world, is determinable, and therefore we have its subject, which is us, not merely conceived as belonging to a world of pure understanding, and in this respect unknown, which the critique of speculative reason enabled us to do, but also defined as regards his casuality by means of a law which cannot be reduced to any physical law of the sensible world; and therefore our knowledge is extended beyond the limits of that world - a pretension which the critique of the hope of meaning, life, declared to be futile in all speculation. AL
Penelope Duby <pennyduby@yahoo.com> wrote: Might i ask for some clarification of the site? Realizing that an online conversation is difficult, i wondered if there's a format i'm missing? The comments are very interesting, but given the difficulty to find and follow a thread, i'm wondering whether it's a choice to not use a hosting service or website based format or too expensive. I'm coming here from a political discussion area rumbleville.com that mentioned Bohm's dialogue, but can't manage the format to tease out the information. Thank you for your help. Penelope Duby
?There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar.?
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071212/72bf9b94/attachment.html
From landmana at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 10:10:29 2007
From: landmana at yahoo.com (Alfred Landman)
Date: Thu Dec 13 10:15:38 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712121105m13af7952h2d329e8514ef2732@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <286727.34373.qm@web57416.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Hi Irene Darcy. If a brain wants to learn about trees, for instance, thought could simply spend time with them in their natural habitat etc (which is what many traditionally "primitive" people do). Breaking trees into their cellular components and so forth enables genetic manipulation of them, for instance, but this can't be said to "objectively" help one get to know a tree better than simply spending time with them. In fact, it does the precise opposite. This brain can never genuinely know a living organism that you've instrumentalized and objectified like that. AL
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Space and Time (Don F)
From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 16:59:24 EDT
to: Bohm, Subject Space and Time
Dear Don, nice wisdom in your Sep.25 'Space & Time note. Yet:(your
quote):
>...<
Foucault was right: there is no such epoque as the present one. His, or
ours, does not matter. Past reflection does not match live experience.
WE are the experiencers, not memory. So: hold your enthusiasm.
Also: I was glad: A rare thing on this list a reference to David Bohm!
I find this unending exchange "about the list-filling" redundant. In my
(not so humble) opinion a list is like love: practice it, don't explain.
If it does not live up to your expectations, there are other lists to
choose from. Nobody can change BB or anybody else. Accept it or leave it.
To explain one's views ABOUT participating: nice, but keep it short. And
have mercy on the receiving parties: half a dozen posts per day per per-
son in exorbitant length, or sometimes 5 consecutive attachments is rude.
Who does not have the time to write short, should keep it. Length is
negligent.
And to the following exchange I have a plagiarism from Doug Bilodeau, an
acclaimed physicist from the JCS-list:(see below) - the 'exchange':
*
" >JPL:
>"Shout, shout, let it all out
>these are the things I can do without,
>come on, I'm talking to you, come on.." whereupon
" >>Wm:
>>Pssst... not so loud, I think the others are meditating.
William
*
Not so sure! I refer to my remark on a "no response" to a post:
"si tacent clamant": Dough B: corrected me: "or: si tacent dormiunt".
From: "Chris Hooley" < chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: Re: purpose of list
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:24:15 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello All,
I've heard nothing from the group for several days. So, I'm sending this
message to check for echo.
Regards
Chris
From: "Chris Hooley" <chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: inside out
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:19:50 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello Everyone,
I would share another thought that I found interesting.
The gastrointestinal track is actually "outside" the body in the sense that
it's a long, open-ended tube. In the same way, "no-thing", which is (or
can be seen to be) at the center of every manifested form, is continuous,
contiguous to itself. It is "outside" the space/time form though when seen
from within the form it appears to be isolated like droplets.
My intuition is that we can focus (reside *as* attention) either on the
form or on the un-form that borders it.
The experience of attending to the un-form in-between can't be fully
represented, even to ourselves, I think, but experimenting with this
viewing angle has been intriguing.
Received: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:21:50 +0100 (BST)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:19:21 +0100 (BST)
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking
to one of its authors!
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facilitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/26fd824d/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Thu Dec 13 12:18:36 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Thu Dec 13 12:23:46 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?
In-Reply-To: <112884.41144.qm@web45808.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <BAY123-W587CA6A549E4D5EA73CF8DC640@phx.gbl>
<112884.41144.qm@web45808.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W421100F51C521ABE0C192DDC660@phx.gbl>
have you nothing to say about 'we'? it is a big word to bandy about unexamined
-- we(e) rob
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 15:31:59 -0800From: a.debakey@yahoo.comSubject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Next we could get some into "them" ;-\
Alanrob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
tell me about 'we'? -- Alan 'n' me
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 12:35:56 -0800From: a.debakey@yahoo.comSubject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Zero point two-five would not do, Rob? :--9
Alanrob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
Hi Penelope,sometimes this place is more thready than others, when some topic entrains attention. other times it's just smart arses riffing and tweets twattin' about. If I follow half of what gets said I start to become concerned.Rob
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 04:06:05 -0800From: pennyduby@yahoo.comTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?
Might i ask for some clarification of the site? Realizing that an online conversation is difficult, i wondered if there's a format i'm missing? The comments are very interesting, but given the difficulty to find and follow a thread, i'm wondering whether it's a choice to not use a hosting service or website based format or too expensive. I'm coming here from a political discussion area rumbleville.com that mentioned Bohm's dialogue, but can't manage the format to tease out the information. Thank you for your help. Penelope Duby
?There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar.?
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
Everything in one place? All new Windows Live! info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades! info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
_________________________________________________________________
Fancy some celeb spotting?
https://www.celebmashup.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/09d84ab5/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 14:16:36 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 14:21:47 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2
In-Reply-To: <286727.34373.qm@web57416.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <420175.78011.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Hi Al, this time around I actually have a glue what you talking about, man. And yes, good idea, will go out later to the woods by the stream and get some fresh air and have a chat with those trees made out of thought -- 100% pure nature ;-'
But gotta finish here with Mom first -- or she with me ;--, deppending how you POV
Alan
Alfred Landman <landmana@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi Irene Darcy. If a brain wants to learn about trees, for instance, thought could simply spend time with them in their natural habitat etc (which is what many traditionally "primitive" people do). Breaking trees into their cellular components and so forth enables genetic manipulation of them, for instance, but this can't be said to "objectively" help one get to know a tree better than simply spending time with them. In fact, it does the precise opposite. This brain can never genuinely know a living organism that you've instrumentalized and objectified like that. AL
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Space and Time (Don F)
From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 16:59:24 EDT
to: Bohm, Subject Space and Time
Dear Don, nice wisdom in your Sep.25 'Space & Time note. Yet:(your
quote):
>...<
Foucault was right: there is no such epoque as the present one. His, or
ours, does not matter. Past reflection does not match live experience.
WE are the experiencers, not memory. So: hold your enthusiasm.
Also: I was glad: A rare thing on this list a reference to David Bohm!
I find this unending exchange "about the list-filling" redundant. In my
(not so humble) opinion a list is like love: practice it, don't explain.
If it does not live up to your expectations, there are other lists to
choose from. Nobody can change BB or anybody else. Accept it or leave it.
To explain one's views ABOUT participating: nice, but keep it short. And
have mercy on the receiving parties: half a dozen posts per day per per-
son in exorbitant length, or sometimes 5 consecutive attachments is rude.
Who does not have the time to write short, should keep it. Length is
negligent.
And to the following exchange I have a plagiarism from Doug Bilodeau, an
acclaimed physicist from the JCS-list:(see below) - the 'exchange':
*
" >JPL:
>"Shout, shout, let it all out
>these are the things I can do without,
>come on, I'm talking to you, come on.." whereupon
" >>Wm:
>>Pssst... not so loud, I think the others are meditating.
William
*
Not so sure! I refer to my remark on a "no response" to a post:
"si tacent clamant": Dough B: corrected me: "or: si tacent dormiunt".
From: "Chris Hooley" < chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: Re: purpose of list
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:24:15 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello All,
I've heard nothing from the group for several days. So, I'm sending this
message to check for echo.
Regards
Chris
From: "Chris Hooley" <chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: inside out
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:19:50 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello Everyone,
I would share another thought that I found interesting.
The gastrointestinal track is actually "outside" the body in the sense that
it's a long, open-ended tube. In the same way, "no-thing", which is (or
can be seen to be) at the center of every manifested form, is continuous,
contiguous to itself. It is "outside" the space/time form though when seen
from within the form it appears to be isolated like droplets.
My intuition is that we can focus (reside *as* attention) either on the
form or on the un-form that borders it.
The experience of attending to the un-form in-between can't be fully
represented, even to ourselves, I think, but experimenting with this
viewing angle has been intriguing.
Received: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:21:50 +0100 (BST)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:19:21 +0100 (BST)
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking
to one of its authors!
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facilitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/15527a6d/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 14:22:39 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 14:27:51 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W421100F51C521ABE0C192DDC660@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <894078.20209.qm@web45809.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Well, depends on which me you ask, Rob ][--}
But one could say, we, for a start, would be some Rob and some Alan -- no ;-?
That said, might not even need you for a we, you see, there is plenty of me-s right under my nose. Or maybe: Above. Or, more likely: Bot--h
Some Son Of A _____ (B, like blank)
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
.hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma } have you nothing to say about 'we'? it is a big word to bandy about unexamined
-- we(e) rob
---------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 15:31:59 -0800
From: a.debakey@yahoo.com
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Next we could get some into "them" ;-\
Alan
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
.ExternalClass .EC_hmmessage P {padding:0px;} .ExternalClass EC_body.hmmessage {font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;} tell me about 'we'?
-- Alan 'n' me
---------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 12:35:56 -0800
From: a.debakey@yahoo.com
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Zero point two-five would not do, Rob? :--9
Alan
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
.ExternalClass .EC_hmmessage P {padding:0px;} .ExternalClass EC_body.hmmessage {font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;} Hi Penelope,
sometimes this place is more thready than others, when some topic entrains attention. other times it's just smart arses riffing and tweets twattin' about. If I follow half of what gets said I start to become concerned.
Rob
---------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 04:06:05 -0800
From: pennyduby@yahoo.com
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?
Might i ask for some clarification of the site? Realizing that an online conversation is difficult, i wondered if there's a format i'm missing? The comments are very interesting, but given the difficulty to find and follow a thread, i'm wondering whether it's a choice to not use a hosting service or website based format or too expensive. I'm coming here from a political discussion area rumbleville.com that mentioned Bohm's dialogue, but can't manage the format to tease out the information. Thank you for your help. Penelope Duby
?There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar.?
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
---------------------------------
Everything in one place
All new Windows Live!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
---------------------------------
Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
---------------------------------
Everything in one place
All new Windows Live!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/e40c2610/attachment.html
From pennyduby at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 14:27:07 2007
From: pennyduby at yahoo.com (Penelope Duby)
Date: Thu Dec 13 14:32:18 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
Message-ID: <196946.65421.qm@web38305.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll unsubscribe.
?There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar.?
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/a2013f82/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 14:30:48 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 14:35:59 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <196946.65421.qm@web38305.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <76021.53216.qm@web45806.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Wait! What? This thing comes with an unsub-button, too ;>?
Alan
Penelope Duby <pennyduby@yahoo.com> wrote:
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll unsubscribe.
?There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar.?
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/83fce44f/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 14:26:37 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 14:38:29 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] no name 3
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712121816o635f7b7auec69f2118e7720d@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <693360.1637.qm@web45807.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Yes I! Let us relent not. The show* must must must go. On. Must ;=::
* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUeMVt3stAo
(All the making of Papa Tas, no?)
Alan
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
Found some fascinating ideas here. Will ask about them when I get all the segments up.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Precedence: list
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking
to one of its authors!
Chris Hooley writes:
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facillitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
>
Anyhow, I just wanted to say that ... maybe the most important dialogue we
have is with ourselves in the end: a dialogue with life ... but ideally also
with death. But get back properly into touch occasionally and life can
seem, for a moment, immortal. (And it's usually only then that I'm ready to
even BEGIN to chat with anyone else ;-) Hearing from somebody who was told,
eleven years ago, that they had only 6 months to live gives me an enormous
belief in the human spirit. Don, I'm very glad to meet you! Hello! Yours
is an incredible story ...
Best, Barron
sent?
>{This letter was sent some days ago while the server for this list was
>down,. It got bounced back innumberable, finally with a 'fatal error'.
>Intentional death? Anyway, here it is again.}
>don this has just happened again, so I will try again -- perseverence
>furthers. the superior man crosses the great water, etc.}
>
>About eleven years ago I was diagnosed as having terminal cancer. I was
>given no more than six months to live and that was only if I submitted to=
>a course of chemotherapy which had a 50-50 chance of working. Without it, my
>time would be much shorter. As you might guess this information upset me =
>no end. =
>
>
>So I chose to opt for another form of cure. I changed my diet, quit
>smoking, and took myself off to Mexico for some alternative treatment. I
>also began reading everything I could about how to help myself. In the
>course of this I began practicing visualization -- seeing my white blood
>cells as PacMen gobbling up the ghostly cancer cells, etc. With my wife's=
help and regular prompting I did the various exercises I had found and kept
>myself geared up to fight against the disease. But during the course of my
>battle I regularly kept succumbing to moments of deep exhaustion and
>despair. =
>
>
>I was in a lot of pain and felt extremely weak and during those moments I=
felt content to turn my face to the wall and to just forget about the whole
>damned thing. If I died, well, at least I would be out of my pain. Death
>didn't, during those moments, seem such a bad idea at all. But when I came
>out of those moods I was really upset with myself. I felt as though some
>inner demon was trying to take me over and kill me. So not only did I have
>to fight the cancer I had to fight this internal homicidal maniac who
>wanted me to die. I clothed him all kinds of Freudian/Jungian gear and his
>presence came to make a lot of sense to me. The problem was that in the
>state I was in I had no idea how to defeat him.
>
>Then, luckily, I met a man who was a skilled psychotherapist and
>hypnotherapist with a lot of experience of working with people who had life
>threatening illnesses. He told me about some work that had been done with=
>something called ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
>
>
>Anyway, we looked, in the light of this, at my experience of the internal=
homicidal maniac and I came to the realization that he was actually, just=
that phase of my own internal rhythm that wanted to get on with its repair
>work and wanted my conscious intentions out the way. My previous
>understanding, I saw, was a complete misunderstanding. I got hold of some=
references on ultradian rhythms and got an exellent book Ernest Lawrence
>Rossi, the guy who had done the original work, called "The Psychobiology =
>of Mind Body Healing" ( Norton 1986) which confirmed all that my friend had =
said. =
>
>
>The point of all this is that it lifted a huge burden from my mind/body
>process. I was able to continue doing what I could to help the healing
>process but when I sensed those places in the cycle that called out for me
>to back off, I did. I think that this bit of information was every bit as=
important in saving my life as was the medical intervention. I was, as
>Chris suggests, in a place where, for the first time, I was able to relax=
>and know "that if we let go, we won't fall into death. We won't fall at
>all. In other words, the pushing that we might feel on our backs isn't
>anything external, it's the pressure created by us trying to get off
>center." =
>
It also seems to me that we can generalize from the above. (Dialogue has =
>to get in here somewhere.) It isn't a case of lying back, giggling and giving
>in or even of life and death, but rather a realizing that we are part of =
>a creative cycle that will insist of playing itself out regardless of what =
>we may want or think. However, the facility of each of us to participate is
>also a part of that process. It's not a question of exerting our will but
>more simply of learning to be alert to the necessities implicit in a larger
>field where our individual selves are only parts.
>
>
>Don
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Precedence: listI:
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking
to one of its authors!
Chris Hooley writes:
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facillitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
>
Anyhow, I just wanted to say that ... maybe the most important dialogue we
have is with ourselves in the end: a dialogue with life ... but ideally also
with death. But get back properly into touch occasionally and life can
seem, for a moment, immortal. (And it's usually only then that I'm ready to
even BEGIN to chat with anyone else ;-) Hearing from somebody who was told,
eleven years ago, that they had only 6 months to live gives me an enormous
belief in the human spirit. Don, I'm very glad to meet you! Hello! Yours
is an incredible story ...
Best, Barron
sent?
>{This letter was sent some days ago while the server for this list was
>down,. It got bounced back innumberable, finally with a 'fatal error'.
>Intentional death? Anyway, here it is again.}
>don this has just happened again, so I will try again -- perseverence
>furthers. the superior man crosses the great water, etc.}
>
>About eleven years ago I was diagnosed as having terminal cancer. I was
>given no more than six months to live and that was only if I submitted to=
>a course of chemotherapy which had a 50-50 chance of working. Without it, my
>time would be much shorter. As you might guess this information upset me =
>no end. =
>
>
>So I chose to opt for another form of cure. I changed my diet, quit
>smoking, and took myself off to Mexico for some alternative treatment. I
>also began reading everything I could about how to help myself. In the
>course of this I began practicing visualization -- seeing my white blood
>cells as PacMen gobbling up the ghostly cancer cells, etc. With my wife's=
help and regular prompting I did the various exercises I had found and kept
>myself geared up to fight against the disease. But during the course of my
>battle I regularly kept succumbing to moments of deep exhaustion and
>despair. =
>
>
>I was in a lot of pain and felt extremely weak and during those moments I=
felt content to turn my face to the wall and to just forget about the whole
>damned thing. If I died, well, at least I would be out of my pain. Death
>didn't, during those moments, seem such a bad idea at all. But when I came
>out of those moods I was really upset with myself. I felt as though some
>inner demon was trying to take me over and kill me. So not only did I have
>to fight the cancer I had to fight this internal homicidal maniac who
>wanted me to die. I clothed him all kinds of Freudian/Jungian gear and his
>presence came to make a lot of sense to me. The problem was that in the
>state I was in I had no idea how to defeat him.
>
>Then, luckily, I met a man who was a skilled psychotherapist and
>hypnotherapist with a lot of experience of working with people who had life
>threatening illnesses. He told me about some work that had been done with=
>something called ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
>
>
>Anyway, we looked, in the light of this, at my experience of the internal=
homicidal maniac and I came to the realization that he was actually, just=
that phase of my own internal rhythm that wanted to get on with its repair
>work and wanted my conscious intentions out the way. My previous
>understanding, I saw, was a complete misunderstanding. I got hold of some=
references on ultradian rhythms and got an exellent book Ernest Lawrence
>Rossi, the guy who had done the original work, called "The Psychobiology =
>of Mind Body Healing" ( Norton 1986) which confirmed all that my friend had =
said. =
>
>
>The point of all this is that it lifted a huge burden from my mind/body
>process. I was able to continue doing what I could to help the healing
>process but when I sensed those places in the cycle that called out for me
>to back off, I did. I think that this bit of information was every bit as=
important in saving my life as was the medical intervention. I was, as
>Chris suggests, in a place where, for the first time, I was able to relax=
>and know "that if we let go, we won't fall into death. We won't fall at
>all. In other words, the pushing that we might feel on our backs isn't
>anything external, it's the pressure created by us trying to get off
>center." =
>
It also seems to me that we can generalize from the above. (Dialogue has =
>to get in here somewhere.) It isn't a case of lying back, giggling and giving
>in or even of life and death, but rather a realizing that we are part of =
>a creative cycle that will insist of playing itself out regardless of what =
>we may want or think. However, the facility of each of us to participate is
>also a part of that process. It's not a question of exerting our will but
>more simply of learning to be alert to the necessities implicit in a larger
>field where our individual selves are only parts.
>
>
>Don
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/b4b05c77/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 14:37:25 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 14:42:35 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <196946.65421.qm@web38305.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <452249.67809.qm@web45814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Forgot: Dreams. You (still) got dreams, Pene? What in haven are they (made) of? ,-'
Alan
Penelope Duby <pennyduby@yahoo.com> wrote:
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll unsubscribe.
?There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar.?
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/02462317/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Thu Dec 13 14:55:48 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Thu Dec 13 15:01:02 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?
References: <691927.13441.qm@web38302.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <007b01c83d8f$dde35520$b5c16018@DL01>
Penelope, it might be helpful to begin with the "welcome" from the list. It says, in part:
"It is intended as a place where we can inquire together into David Bohm's proposals regarding dialogue, the process of thought, wholeness and other aspects of his philosophical work. Our intention is to explore his theories, set them alongside other approaches and attempt to find out how we might proceed from where he left off.".
It follows that in order to "inquire together" into Bohm's proposals and philosophical work, one must have some familiarity with what he published.
Perhaps it also follows that participants must be able to use reason to address Bohm's work and philosophy. As a quantum theorist, Bohm was interested in and aware of very small amounts of what actually is. To do that, he went to the origin of reason in or as the Greek logos which they considered to be the structure of the universe.
As can be seen, dialogue derives from the Greek logos. Dialogue therefore implies the use of reason and rationality.
You interested in reason, rationality? -- dl
From: Penelope Duby
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 7:06 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?
Might i ask for some clarification of the site? Realizing that an online conversation is difficult, i wondered if there's a format i'm missing? The comments are very interesting, but given the difficulty to find and follow a thread, i'm wondering whether it's a choice to not use a hosting service or website based format or too expensive. I'm coming here from a political discussion area rumbleville.com that mentioned Bohm's dialogue, but can't manage the format to tease out the information. Thank you for your help. Penelope Duby
"There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar."
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/19625abd/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 14:33:14 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 15:05:08 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] no name 3
Message-ID: <23449.85379.qm@web45813.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
I just asked Mom what she wants from Santa this time around.
I bet you will not guess what she says ;-]:
Alan
"Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
Yes I! Let us relent not. The show* must must must go. On. Must ;=::
* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUeMVt3stAo
(All the making of Papa Tas, no?)
Alan
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
Found some fascinating ideas here. Will ask about them when I get all the segments up.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Precedence: list
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking
to one of its authors!
Chris Hooley writes:
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facillitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
>
Anyhow, I just wanted to say that ... maybe the most important dialogue we
have is with ourselves in the end: a dialogue with life ... but ideally also
with death. But get back properly into touch occasionally and life can
seem, for a moment, immortal. (And it's usually only then that I'm ready to
even BEGIN to chat with anyone else ;-) Hearing from somebody who was told,
eleven years ago, that they had only 6 months to live gives me an enormous
belief in the human spirit. Don, I'm very glad to meet you! Hello! Yours
is an incredible story ...
Best, Barron
sent?
>{This letter was sent some days ago while the server for this list was
>down,. It got bounced back innumberable, finally with a 'fatal error'.
>Intentional death? Anyway, here it is again.}
>don this has just happened again, so I will try again -- perseverence
>furthers. the superior man crosses the great water, etc.}
>
>About eleven years ago I was diagnosed as having terminal cancer. I was
>given no more than six months to live and that was only if I submitted to=
>a course of chemotherapy which had a 50-50 chance of working. Without it, my
>time would be much shorter. As you might guess this information upset me =
>no end. =
>
>
>So I chose to opt for another form of cure. I changed my diet, quit
>smoking, and took myself off to Mexico for some alternative treatment. I
>also began reading everything I could about how to help myself. In the
>course of this I began practicing visualization -- seeing my white blood
>cells as PacMen gobbling up the ghostly cancer cells, etc. With my wife's=
help and regular prompting I did the various exercises I had found and kept
>myself geared up to fight against the disease. But during the course of my
>battle I regularly kept succumbing to moments of deep exhaustion and
>despair. =
>
>
>I was in a lot of pain and felt extremely weak and during those moments I=
felt content to turn my face to the wall and to just forget about the whole
>damned thing. If I died, well, at least I would be out of my pain. Death
>didn't, during those moments, seem such a bad idea at all. But when I came
>out of those moods I was really upset with myself. I felt as though some
>inner demon was trying to take me over and kill me. So not only did I have
>to fight the cancer I had to fight this internal homicidal maniac who
>wanted me to die. I clothed him all kinds of Freudian/Jungian gear and his
>presence came to make a lot of sense to me. The problem was that in the
>state I was in I had no idea how to defeat him.
>
>Then, luckily, I met a man who was a skilled psychotherapist and
>hypnotherapist with a lot of experience of working with people who had life
>threatening illnesses. He told me about some work that had been done with=
>something called ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
>
>
>Anyway, we looked, in the light of this, at my experience of the internal=
homicidal maniac and I came to the realization that he was actually, just=
that phase of my own internal rhythm that wanted to get on with its repair
>work and wanted my conscious intentions out the way. My previous
>understanding, I saw, was a complete misunderstanding. I got hold of some=
references on ultradian rhythms and got an exellent book Ernest Lawrence
>Rossi, the guy who had done the original work, called "The Psychobiology =
>of Mind Body Healing" ( Norton 1986) which confirmed all that my friend had =
said. =
>
>
>The point of all this is that it lifted a huge burden from my mind/body
>process. I was able to continue doing what I could to help the healing
>process but when I sensed those places in the cycle that called out for me
>to back off, I did. I think that this bit of information was every bit as=
important in saving my life as was the medical intervention. I was, as
>Chris suggests, in a place where, for the first time, I was able to relax=
>and know "that if we let go, we won't fall into death. We won't fall at
>all. In other words, the pushing that we might feel on our backs isn't
>anything external, it's the pressure created by us trying to get off
>center." =
>
It also seems to me that we can generalize from the above. (Dialogue has =
>to get in here somewhere.) It isn't a case of lying back, giggling and giving
>in or even of life and death, but rather a realizing that we are part of =
>a creative cycle that will insist of playing itself out regardless of what =
>we may want or think. However, the facility of each of us to participate is
>also a part of that process. It's not a question of exerting our will but
>more simply of learning to be alert to the necessities implicit in a larger
>field where our individual selves are only parts.
>
>
>Don
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Precedence: listI:
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking
to one of its authors!
Chris Hooley writes:
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facillitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
>
Anyhow, I just wanted to say that ... maybe the most important dialogue we
have is with ourselves in the end: a dialogue with life ... but ideally also
with death. But get back properly into touch occasionally and life can
seem, for a moment, immortal. (And it's usually only then that I'm ready to
even BEGIN to chat with anyone else ;-) Hearing from somebody who was told,
eleven years ago, that they had only 6 months to live gives me an enormous
belief in the human spirit. Don, I'm very glad to meet you! Hello! Yours
is an incredible story ...
Best, Barron
sent?
>{This letter was sent some days ago while the server for this list was
>down,. It got bounced back innumberable, finally with a 'fatal error'.
>Intentional death? Anyway, here it is again.}
>don this has just happened again, so I will try again -- perseverence
>furthers. the superior man crosses the great water, etc.}
>
>About eleven years ago I was diagnosed as having terminal cancer. I was
>given no more than six months to live and that was only if I submitted to=
>a course of chemotherapy which had a 50-50 chance of working. Without it, my
>time would be much shorter. As you might guess this information upset me =
>no end. =
>
>
>So I chose to opt for another form of cure. I changed my diet, quit
>smoking, and took myself off to Mexico for some alternative treatment. I
>also began reading everything I could about how to help myself. In the
>course of this I began practicing visualization -- seeing my white blood
>cells as PacMen gobbling up the ghostly cancer cells, etc. With my wife's=
help and regular prompting I did the various exercises I had found and kept
>myself geared up to fight against the disease. But during the course of my
>battle I regularly kept succumbing to moments of deep exhaustion and
>despair. =
>
>
>I was in a lot of pain and felt extremely weak and during those moments I=
felt content to turn my face to the wall and to just forget about the whole
>damned thing. If I died, well, at least I would be out of my pain. Death
>didn't, during those moments, seem such a bad idea at all. But when I came
>out of those moods I was really upset with myself. I felt as though some
>inner demon was trying to take me over and kill me. So not only did I have
>to fight the cancer I had to fight this internal homicidal maniac who
>wanted me to die. I clothed him all kinds of Freudian/Jungian gear and his
>presence came to make a lot of sense to me. The problem was that in the
>state I was in I had no idea how to defeat him.
>
>Then, luckily, I met a man who was a skilled psychotherapist and
>hypnotherapist with a lot of experience of working with people who had life
>threatening illnesses. He told me about some work that had been done with=
>something called ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
>
>
>Anyway, we looked, in the light of this, at my experience of the internal=
homicidal maniac and I came to the realization that he was actually, just=
that phase of my own internal rhythm that wanted to get on with its repair
>work and wanted my conscious intentions out the way. My previous
>understanding, I saw, was a complete misunderstanding. I got hold of some=
references on ultradian rhythms and got an exellent book Ernest Lawrence
>Rossi, the guy who had done the original work, called "The Psychobiology =
>of Mind Body Healing" ( Norton 1986) which confirmed all that my friend had =
said. =
>
>
>The point of all this is that it lifted a huge burden from my mind/body
>process. I was able to continue doing what I could to help the healing
>process but when I sensed those places in the cycle that called out for me
>to back off, I did. I think that this bit of information was every bit as=
important in saving my life as was the medical intervention. I was, as
>Chris suggests, in a place where, for the first time, I was able to relax=
>and know "that if we let go, we won't fall into death. We won't fall at
>all. In other words, the pushing that we might feel on our backs isn't
>anything external, it's the pressure created by us trying to get off
>center." =
>
It also seems to me that we can generalize from the above. (Dialogue has =
>to get in here somewhere.) It isn't a case of lying back, giggling and giving
>in or even of life and death, but rather a realizing that we are part of =
>a creative cycle that will insist of playing itself out regardless of what =
>we may want or think. However, the facility of each of us to participate is
>also a part of that process. It's not a question of exerting our will but
>more simply of learning to be alert to the necessities implicit in a larger
>field where our individual selves are only parts.
>
>
>Don
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/390d8920/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Thu Dec 13 15:06:08 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Thu Dec 13 15:11:21 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
References: <196946.65421.qm@web38305.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <009401c83d91$4ef17b60$b5c16018@DL01>
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". -- Penelope
I can see how it might appear that way. Someone suggested reading Bohm's little book, On Dialogue. If you do not have it, you can find some excerpts from it at my website along with some other excerpts of his work regarding physics and philosophy.
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
My particular interest in Bohm regards what his work and philosophy means and especially how it relates to personal identity. -- dl
----- Original Message -----
From: Penelope Duby
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 8:27 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll unsubscribe.
"There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar."
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/e9b1dea2/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Thu Dec 13 15:14:12 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Thu Dec 13 15:19:24 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
References: <196946.65421.qm@web38305.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00b201c83d92$6f753150$b5c16018@DL01>
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". -- Penelope
There's been approximately 50-70 posts in the last few days. Are you suggesting that chatter is not dialogue?
Bohm writes about a "strange loop" or a feedback loop that occurs in the brain/mind movements which may be responsible for much human suffering as well as lead to the end of human life.
You have any thoughts about that? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Penelope Duby
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 8:27 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll unsubscribe.
"There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar."
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/f59f1efa/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Thu Dec 13 15:20:51 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Thu Dec 13 15:26:03 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
References: <196946.65421.qm@web38305.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00cb01c83d93$5d4c7dc0$b5c16018@DL01>
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". -- Penelope
I believe "communication" derives from the Latin and is interpreted as "common". If that means common to the whole, then acting and pretending personal identity might seem to ignore the idea that by definition, everything is part of the whole. -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Penelope Duby
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 8:27 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll unsubscribe.
"There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar."
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/71f77e67/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Thu Dec 13 15:42:21 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Thu Dec 13 15:47:32 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <196946.65421.qm@web38305.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <196946.65421.qm@web38305.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712130642p749b0be0tc69a087c5e06d389@mail.gmail.com>
I: Penny, we are NOT a closed circle, and dialogue can't exist without
communication. We aren't all as whacky as it may seem. As for Alan, he
just subscribed, too. So did Alfred. If you give us something to go on as
far as your interests in Bohm are concerned, I for one will try to address
them. So will df. Pat usually does, too.
On Dec 13, 2007 8:27 AM, Penelope Duby <pennyduby@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in
> communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll
> unsubscribe.
>
> "There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing
> them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden
> turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that
> moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading
> who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of
> losing forever everything that is familiar."
> Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51734/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/f6ed9d77/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Thu Dec 13 15:46:58 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Thu Dec 13 15:52:10 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <009401c83d91$4ef17b60$b5c16018@DL01>
References: <196946.65421.qm@web38305.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
<009401c83d91$4ef17b60$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <c47283890712130646t12640424q72b43462c74047e6@mail.gmail.com>
I: Go, Don! It's good to hear your voice again. Nice and clear, whether
or not it seems stuck.
On Dec 13, 2007 9:06 AM, Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
> Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in
> communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". -- Penelope
>
> I can see how it might appear that way. Someone suggested reading Bohm's
> little book, *On Dialogue*. If you do not have it, you can find some
> excerpts from it at my website along with some other excerpts of his work
> regarding physics and philosophy. http://www.knology.net/~donlay/<http://www.knology.net/%7Edonlay/>
>
> My particular interest in Bohm regards what his work and philosophy means
> and especially how it relates to *personal identity*. -- dl
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Penelope Duby <pennyduby@yahoo.com>
> *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> *Sent:* Thursday, December 13, 2007 8:27 AM
> *Subject:* [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
>
> Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in
> communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll
> unsubscribe.
>
> "There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing
> them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden
> turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that
> moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading
> who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of
> losing forever everything that is familiar."
> Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> <http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue>
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/7bb5e600/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Thu Dec 13 15:33:20 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Thu Dec 13 15:53:02 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Quote for the day
Message-ID: <20071213.095023.2428.388.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Oh the breadth of some "somehows."
-- funny
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 19:38:04 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey"
<a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Funny, you are a Mommy? Somehow you don't come across like that. 0-o
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Funny, pregnant question. Got any fitting answers, too }+o
Alan
Very nice. And good "timing" work. And reminiscent of earlier
"pregnancies."
There's always "something more and something different" - in everything.
-- funny
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:57:31 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey"
<a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
It's all improv comedy. Just read carefully. You still won't catch them
all but let "this one" pass or you will miss the "next five." Explaining
works
sometimes but not very often and not really, and only when timing remains
the priority.
Timing is everything. And keep enough of the context to conveniently
reread. LOTS can get missed in the first reading and even in the first
few readings. And like they say about Driving in Massachusetts -
Understanding is not a right; it is a privilege. But why am I telling you
all of this.
Funny, pregnant question. Got any fitting answers, too }+o
Alan
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it
now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/668080f2/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Thu Dec 13 16:00:21 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Thu Dec 13 16:03:07 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Almost
Message-ID: <20071213.100029.2428.390.ae.dropper@juno.com>
When you spit me out - you've got it.
-- funny
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 19:44:00 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey"
<a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
I re-re-re-read that now, funny. Still no luck. Okay, no problem, will
keep chewing on you. (My teeth are happy campers, well-fed by paste with
fennel and propolis and myrrh and ;-8
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Expect no corrections. Beg not. Whatever you say is right.
Rereading is the only possible "corrector." And one might have to wait 10
years
for even that to work.
-- funny
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:54:27 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey"
<a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Funny, and I thought memory drives on fuel, like the rest of our bodies.
And what you see as reps is just the daily commute. Please CORRECT me if
I am wrong, Funny-))
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Memory thrives on repetition.
"Dave," by the way, has actually
worn out 3 metaphorical sofas.
-- funny
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 12:18:57 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com>
writes:
How did that get into Hopper Dropper?
Good memory though. Your TAS must be well tuned
don
On Dec 10, 2007, at 12:11 PM, ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Then there was that lunch with Germaine Greer.
-- funny
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 10:19:10 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com>
writes:
It actually refers to something I wrote mentioning Dennis Hopper, an old
friend.
don
On Dec 10, 2007, at 9:57 AM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
The what, "hopper"? And where does that one come in here now? More
scrolling to do for me? O-boy --gender!--, this list is a wild ride.
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
It's [the question] is in "the hopper." It seems a stretch but that's
not new. Connections LOVE to make themselves.
-- funny
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 09:16:14 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey"
<a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Almost time for eggs and ham. That's for certain. But does that count,
too, Funny?
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
"We can seldom go erect. Almost every man we meet requires some civility,
requires to be humored; -- he has some fame, some talent, some whim of
religion or philanthropy in his head that is not to be questioned, and so
spoils all conversation with him." -- Emerson
"Almost"
It's always the "almost" that promises faithfully the
alternative that delivers the tiniest exception that changes
e v e r y t h i n g.
-- funny
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/5cf18a80/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Thu Dec 13 15:58:07 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Thu Dec 13 16:03:21 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2
In-Reply-To: <286727.34373.qm@web57416.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
References: <c47283890712121105m13af7952h2d329e8514ef2732@mail.gmail.com>
<286727.34373.qm@web57416.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712130658pc869b52ye6ebd7df3217f1e7@mail.gmail.com>
I: I absolutely agree, Alfred. That's why I'd like to find a way for BDers
to know each other better. A way to meet and spend some time together in
our natural habitats, or to approximate it as much as possible. And I'm not
defining cyberspace as 'natural'. One can manipulate words any way you
like.
Some say words manipulate us, but that's a two way street.
And trees, unlike people, can't run away from your spending time with them.
On Dec 13, 2007 4:10 AM, Alfred Landman <landmana@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi Irene Darcy. If a brain wants to learn about trees, for
> instance, thought could simply spend time with them in their natural habitat
> etc (which is what many traditionally "primitive" people do). Breaking
> trees into their cellular components and so forth enables genetic
> manipulation of them, for instance, but this can't be said to "objectively"
> help one get to know a tree better than simply spending time with them. In
> fact, it does the precise opposite. This brain can never genuinely know a
> living organism that you've instrumentalized and objectified like that. AL
>
> *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
>
> Subject: Space and Time (Don F)
>
> From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
> Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 16:59:24 EDT
>
>
> to: Bohm, Subject Space and Time
> Dear Don, nice wisdom in your Sep.25 'Space & Time note. Yet:(your
> quote):
> >...<
> Foucault was right: there is no such epoque as the present one. His, or
> ours, does not matter. Past reflection does not match live experience.
> WE are the experiencers, not memory. So: hold your enthusiasm.
>
> Also: I was glad: A rare thing on this list a reference to David Bohm!
>
> I find this unending exchange "about the list-filling" redundant. In my
> (not so humble) opinion a list is like love: practice it, don't explain.
> If it does not live up to your expectations, there are other lists to
> choose from. Nobody can change BB or anybody else. Accept it or leave it.
> To explain one's views ABOUT participating: nice, but keep it short. And
> have mercy on the receiving parties: half a dozen posts per day per per-
> son in exorbitant length, or sometimes 5 consecutive attachments is rude.
> Who does not have the time to write short, should keep it. Length is
> negligent.
> And to the following exchange I have a plagiarism from Doug Bilodeau, an
> acclaimed physicist from the JCS-list:(see below) - the 'exchange':
> *
> " >JPL:
> >"Shout, shout, let it all out
> >these are the things I can do without,
> >come on, I'm talking to you, come on.." whereupon
> " >>Wm:
> >>Pssst... not so loud, I think the others are meditating.
> William
> *
> Not so sure! I refer to my remark on a "no response" to a post:
> "si tacent clamant": Dough B: corrected me: "or: si tacent dormiunt".
>
> From: "Chris Hooley" < chooley@idnsi.net>
> Subject: Re: purpose of list
> Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:24:15 PDT
>
> To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
> Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
>
> Hello All,
>
> I've heard nothing from the group for several days. So, I'm sending this
> message to check for echo.
>
> Regards
> Chris
>
>
> From: "Chris Hooley" <chooley@idnsi.net>
> Subject: inside out
> Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:19:50 PDT
>
> To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
> Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
>
> Hello Everyone,
>
> I would share another thought that I found interesting.
>
> The gastrointestinal track is actually "outside" the body in the sense
> that
> it's a long, open-ended tube. In the same way, "no-thing", which is (or
> can be seen to be) at the center of every manifested form, is continuous,
> contiguous to itself. It is "outside" the space/time form though when
> seen
> from within the form it appears to be isolated like droplets.
>
> My intuition is that we can focus (reside *as* attention) either on the
> form or on the un-form that borders it.
>
> The experience of attending to the un-form in-between can't be fully
> represented, even to ourselves, I think, but experimenting with this
> viewing angle has been intriguing.
>
> Received: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:21:50 +0100 (BST)
> Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:19:21 +0100 (BST)
>
> From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
> Subject: Re:intentional dying
>
> Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
> kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
> dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
> 'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely
> right:
>
> > ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
> >cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
> >chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during
> about
> >twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
> >self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism
> would
> >try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind.
> Normally,
> >our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on
> with
> >our work. =
>
> I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
>
> sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to
> get
> back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
> with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you
> forget
> -- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
> rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
> *acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
> because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
> lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
>
> I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
> Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
> not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
> I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely
> is
> we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
> people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis
> terms
> -- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe
> away
> the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's
> no
> obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood
> takes.
> So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
> through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
> the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
> top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out
> a
> lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
> enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
> responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
> have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling
> --
> and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
> hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
> unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
>
> Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
> short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
> *me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our
> common
> humanity.
> I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
> note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
> (Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
> someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
> re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am
> speaking
> to one of its authors!
>
>
> >A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on
> the
> >one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
> >
> >The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
> >directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
> >universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
>
> Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
> lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment
> of
> birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and
> so
> no full living either. No?
>
> I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
> >
> >is dialogue about facilitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
> >
> >julia
>
>
>
> --
>
> <http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue>
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/d9219e0d/attachment.html
From lynne at lifedirectionscoach.com Thu Dec 13 16:23:36 2007
From: lynne at lifedirectionscoach.com (Lynne Tolk)
Date: Thu Dec 13 16:29:18 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <196946.65421.qm@web38305.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <C3869C88.F8BD%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
Hi Penelope,
It really does take some perseverance. You just came in with two others who
sparked a rather terse style, but it?s not always like that. Bohm said that
while a dialogue group should not have a goal (stifles creativity), it does
need a purpose, which he suggested was ?impersonal fellowship? which serves
as the glue to hold people. That takes time (probably especially online).
I?ve been here about a year and a half, & while I don?t always have time to
jump in, I do appreciate what can happen here.
Lynne
On 12/13/07 6:27 AM, "Penelope Duby" <pennyduby@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in
> communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll
> unsubscribe.
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/add90978/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Thu Dec 13 16:32:25 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Thu Dec 13 16:34:40 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2
Message-ID: <20071213.103226.2428.392.ae.dropper@juno.com>
And trees, unlike people, can't run away from your spending time with
them. (I)
Maybe that's why I've been so alone all these years.
All of the other funny's have run away from spending time with me.
Except for all these funny trees. Except they are not "trees" at all.
They are "funnies" too. Just not runny funnies.
-- funny
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 09:58:07 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
writes:
I: I absolutely agree, Alfred. That's why I'd like to find a way for
BDers to know each other better. A way to meet and spend some time
together in our natural habitats, or to approximate it as much as
possible. And I'm not defining cyberspace as 'natural'. One can
manipulate words any way you like.
Some say words manipulate us, but that's a two way street.
And trees, unlike people, can't run away from your spending time with
them.
On Dec 13, 2007 4:10 AM, Alfred Landman < landmana@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi Irene Darcy. If a brain wants to learn about trees, for instance,
thought could simply spend time with them in their natural habitat etc
(which is what many traditionally "primitive" people do). Breaking trees
into their cellular components and so forth enables genetic manipulation
of them, for instance, but this can't be said to "objectively" help one
get to know a tree better than simply spending time with them. In fact,
it does the precise opposite. This brain can never genuinely know a
living organism that you've instrumentalized and objectified like that.
AL
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
Subject: Space and Time (Don F)
From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 16:59:24 EDT
to: Bohm, Subject Space and Time
Dear Don, nice wisdom in your Sep.25 'Space & Time note. Yet:(your
quote):
>...<
Foucault was right: there is no such epoque as the present one. His, or
ours, does not matter. Past reflection does not match live experience.
WE are the experiencers, not memory. So: hold your enthusiasm.
Also: I was glad: A rare thing on this list a reference to David Bohm!
I find this unending exchange "about the list-filling" redundant. In my
(not so humble) opinion a list is like love: practice it, don't explain.
If it does not live up to your expectations, there are other lists to
choose from. Nobody can change BB or anybody else. Accept it or leave it.
To explain one's views ABOUT participating: nice, but keep it short. And
have mercy on the receiving parties: half a dozen posts per day per per-
son in exorbitant length, or sometimes 5 consecutive attachments is rude.
Who does not have the time to write short, should keep it. Length is
negligent.
And to the following exchange I have a plagiarism from Doug Bilodeau, an
acclaimed physicist from the JCS-list:(see below) - the 'exchange':
*
" >JPL:
>"Shout, shout, let it all out
>these are the things I can do without,
>come on, I'm talking to you, come on.." whereupon
" >>Wm:
>>Pssst... not so loud, I think the others are meditating.
William
*
Not so sure! I refer to my remark on a "no response" to a post:
"si tacent clamant": Dough B: corrected me: "or: si tacent dormiunt".
From: "Chris Hooley" < chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: Re: purpose of list
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:24:15 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello All,
I've heard nothing from the group for several days. So, I'm sending this
message to check for echo.
Regards
Chris
From: "Chris Hooley" <chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: inside out
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:19:50 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello Everyone,
I would share another thought that I found interesting.
The gastrointestinal track is actually "outside" the body in the sense
that
it's a long, open-ended tube. In the same way, "no-thing", which is (or
can be seen to be) at the center of every manifested form, is continuous,
contiguous to itself. It is "outside" the space/time form though when
seen
from within the form it appears to be isolated like droplets.
My intuition is that we can focus (reside *as* attention) either on the
form or on the un-form that borders it.
The experience of attending to the un-form in-between can't be fully
represented, even to ourselves, I think, but experimenting with this
viewing angle has been intriguing.
Received: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:21:50 +0100 (BST)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:19:21 +0100 (BST)
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer
"intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely
right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during
about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism
would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind.
Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on
with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that
it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to
get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt
that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you
forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess,
is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you
do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely
is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis
terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe
away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's
no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood
takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts
everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and
out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no
one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling
--
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our
common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal
error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day
I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am
speaking
to one of its authors!
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on
the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with
'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment
of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and
so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facilitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
--
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/db550972/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Thu Dec 13 16:40:17 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Thu Dec 13 16:42:44 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
Message-ID: <20071213.104022.2428.394.ae.dropper@juno.com>
No kind of content can prevent looking at function.
It's all good grist. Especially content that sparks objection.
-- funny
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:23:36 -0700 Lynne Tolk
<lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> writes:
Hi Penelope,
It really does take some perseverance. You just came in with two others
who sparked a rather terse style, but it?s not always like that. Bohm
said that while a dialogue group should not have a goal (stifles
creativity), it does need a purpose, which he suggested was ?impersonal
fellowship? which serves as the glue to hold people. That takes time
(probably especially online). I?ve been here about a year and a half, &
while I don?t always have time to jump in, I do appreciate what can
happen here.
Lynne
On 12/13/07 6:27 AM, "Penelope Duby" <pennyduby@yahoo.com> wrote:
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in
communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll
unsubscribe.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/b1d804ae/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 04:53:13 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 16:48:26 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language,
Map, and Email Identities
In-Reply-To: <20071212.134822.2428.370.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <577444.2166.qm@web45811.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Makes a lot of sense. Even more so for someone who is dead *=.
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Speaking of which (and much more interesting)
can you write of the new understanding of observer/observed? (funny)
I: Why is that more interesting than scientific discovery of brain plasticity?
More interesting than the stuff about clarity.
Something that is understood after its having been so
elusive for so long catches my interest in terms of how it might
be newly worded
-- funny
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:54:50 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com> writes:
Speaking of which (and much more interesting)
can you write of the new understanding of observer/observed?
I: Why is that more interesting than scientific discovery of brain plasticity?
On Dec 11, 2007 9:59 AM, <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
It's over. True tired is true rest. They are inseparable.
Whatever needed affirming is no longer there. It was never there.
Not substantially. It was static. Static affirming static.
Clarity is just that. Clarity.
It's only edge is its flowing
crystalline expression of itself
about itself. It's expression
is how it knows its beauty.
It's expression is its beauty.
Speaking of which (and much more interesting)
can you write of the new understanding of observer/observed?
-- funny
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 11:51:09 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com> writes:
I am really very tired of saying words that are hurtful to me.
I: Hello, Friend. Assuming that you are tired enough to want to do something about it, I share the following with you.
I am reading a book on brain plasticity - The Mind and the Brain: Neuroplasticity and the Power of mental Force by Jeffrey M. Schwartz, MD and Sharon Begley. I normally don't like psychiatrists et al, but I read their ideas so I won't be ignorant on the topics. This one has a couple of things I think are valuable. About him personally, he says that at 15, he was convinced that the inner working of the mind was the only mystery worth pursuing. He also is critical of much psychiatry. And amazingly, some of his writing reads like the 'excitation - inhibition' work we do in Eurhythmics. He also has a very clear chapter on The Quantum Brain, and has managed to explain 'observer & observed' so it makes sense to me. Actually, it's something I've always been aware of, and used. But the fancy words in books made it seem like something esoteric and unfamiliar.
Anyway, here is what I wanted to share with you. I have used variations of it myself, and it worked. It seems to me to incorporate and add something to the TAS process.
Refocusing - the essence of applying mindful awareness (our 'proprioception') is to recognize unwanted thoughts as soon as they arise and refocus attention. Start by acknowledging the thought's presence, then saying your own specific version of "that is a false message due to a jammed transmission in the brain". The author makes me laugh. He says "The brain's gonna do what the brain's gonna do, but you don't have to let it push you around." I agree.
In addition, affirmations also worked for me. I started with "Every day in every way, I'm getting better and better." Affirmations are the core of the Beautyway Ceremony from which the lines "Now I walk in Beauty" have been passed down as 'poetry'.
Hozhoon - hozhoon - hozhoon - hozhoon.
(The Navajo blessing from Beautyway said once for each of the four corners.)
On Dec 9, 2007 10:30 AM, < ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
Please continue when you get a moment (willam) (just an invitation - not a necessity - you've already been most helpful). Also Irene had written: "How does it work for you? Can we compare?"
There has come more clarity about the "layered suspension" thing. For those interested in detail, it took about 15 "layers" before the clarity came this time. (It has usually taken about 4 or 5). And it's all about clarity - "getting to" clarity.
The "absence of clarity" is "layered" as well. These are layers of evermore subtle and increasingly veiled defenses (untruths about self) which correspond with the layers of suspension. The subtlety at each level though - AT that level - breaks into obviousness. The obviousness is in the bodily sensations. There is a lack of clarity - like sensations of static. The initial satisfying feelings in the response evolve into a static sensation and a non satisfaction.
Incidentally, I have found that the only words that "hurt" me are the words that I say. The words that others say, are never hurtful. They are music. But that's another story. So it is these "words that I say" that interest me. I am really very tired of saying words that are hurtful to me.
It is very clear now that the words that I say that are even remotely [seeming] defensive [of a clearly untruthful self/world image] maintain confusion or lack of clarity in my system.
Thus, the "layered" suspension. Because the defenses are "layered" too. One comes right after another. They get VERY fancy AND, initially (as I said) quite satisfying and fleetingly pleasurable. Then the "pleasure" turns to a kind of sour sensation. The thing just FLOPS, upon suspension.
But the CLARITY, when it comes, comes with ..... well, clarity. There is no flopping or static. The whole body feels clear. These is no defensive wall anymore between "me" and the person[s] or group to whom the response is being written.
Incidentally, there is an awareness that the "response" is primarily a response from me to me - sort of "written on the wind." And that it is its own reward and complete satisfaction. It is perhaps like a quanta (if I understand such - complete in itself, a little piece of wholeness).
-- funny
On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 10:51:46 -0500 ae.dropper@juno.com writes:
Would you like to comment before i go further? You realize, of course, where this is leading up to. (wm)
Please continue. I have no idea where this is leading. Appreciative for all of it though.
-- funny
On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 11:49:45 +0100 (Westeurop?ische Normalzeit) "william" <w@david-bohm.net> writes:
I didn't mean coping with the sense of detachment. I meant how to cope with the tendency to suspend more and more; what you call "layered" suspension (resulting in a sense of "detachment" for lack of a better word). You see, at some point it starts getting a bit anti-social. When you are always suspending, people are not getting their expected responses anymore. Usually the reason for someone to say something or do something is to get a response. This is also the case when someone utters an insult, or attempt to hurt you: they usually do this because they are disappointed or angry; and they want a reaction that shows they have touched you. Now, if you are always in suspense mode then the attempted hurt doesn't work, because there is no reaction on your side. At first glance this is perhaps not a bad thing because it usually prevents the situation from escalating. However, there is another aspect to this, which is that the attempted hurt could be regarded as a
form of communication; they are trying to say something. If you don't respond, don't react (as a result of suspension) then you are effectively refusing to communicate on this level. You may be willing to communicate on a different level but that channel is not open both ways. The point is, you are denying communication on the channel on which it is invited.
So, what do you say to this? Because i am assuming it is not actually your intention to deny communication. You are probably in compassion mode, which however is not the channel open to whoever wants to touch you. Have you reached a point where you would consider suspending suspension, out of compassion, and give the person the feeling of having touched you? Would you like to comment before i go further? You realize, of course, where this is leading up to.
-------Original Message-------
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Date: 07.12.2007 21:00:44
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language,Map, and Email Identities
But more on this (perhaps based on the curious idea of "coping").
There are times when I experience what you might be calling "detachment" or something I might legitimately call "detachment." And there are many childhood memories of something I can call "detachment," especially when I was in school.
This "detachment' breaks off into two categories; one is entirely comfortable; the other is not.
The one that is not comfortable is a feeling of not belonging or not feeling like a participant.
How to cope? If it's in a dialogue circle it can be as simple as saying something. Anything.
But this experience is quite rare these days. And quite noticeable for its rarity. And there is a
preference these days to not say something to ease the discomfort but to just observe
what is going on beneath the discomfort.
-- funny
On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 13:06:26 -0500 ae.dropper@juno.com writes:
To identify with a concept of "detachment" it would have to be 'detachment' from a layer that is SO thin that it is viscerally all but indiscernible. Along with this, such "identity" requires imagining a "something" that actually does the "detaching." This is possible - this imagining. But it is clearly an isolated imagining and not a visceral experience.
I LOVE to "play the game." And with simultaneous "watching."
-- funny
On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 13:05:24 +0100 (Westeurop?ische Normalzeit) "william" <w@david-bohm.net> writes:
Ok, now i understand what you were saying. Thanks for the hint. Yes, i think you're right; that's my experience also. But i also noticed that I need to counteract a tendency of feeling detached from the rest of the world, like preferring to quietly watch the game from a distance instead of playing it. Is this tendency also the case with you, and if so how are you coping with this?
-------Original Message-------
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Date: 06.12.2007 17:34:58
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language,Map, and Email Identities
"The principle here is the same as that advanced by Rudolf Steiner when he advised teachers to prepare their lessons painstakingly and then be ready to sacrifice the prepared plan at the dictate of circumstances which may point to an entirely fresh approach to their material."
from: THE ART OF GOETHEAN CONVERSATION
This speaks to what I was saying - except "sacrifice the prepared plan " again and again.
The response gets more and more "whole" each time. It draws on more of what the group
is saying as a whole. And with a little experience one comes to see the "sacrifices"
[of the satisfactions] as "investments" in evermore surprising surprises. Or, one
could say that one is "spending" the satisfaction of the response on what further
"suspending" might yield in terms of an even more surprising response.
Simple suspension alone though has yielded
surprise from the start. It's just an amazing discovery
[the unfolding of this "layered" suspending] for someone really interested in "suspension."
Not recommending; just reporting.
-- funny
>"Suspension" just grows and grows. Where the surface fruits of "suspension" are
>appreciated, suspension through the strata begins to show its appeal. The fruits of
>suspension [of action, which includes speech, in relation to what is read or heard] are
>that something unknown surfaces as a possible response. Very satisfying to respond
>with these. But these too, can be suspended. It may take awhile to be able to do this
>because the little bit of satisfaction needs to be "invested." Very long story short, with
>each "reinvestment" something even more amazing surfaces.
>Eventually, there comes the curiosity about a kind of 'complete investment'. This is the
>logical conclusion of Bohm's brilliant but humble and simple proposal of "suspension'.
>Along the way of this, and relatively soon though, you will find yourself responding with
>things you have never heard of before. So the process is never not fun. And there is no
>rush for the "completion."
>-- funny
Is there anyone out there who can make sense out of this? I am sorry "funny" but to me it sounds as if you are drunk or crazy or demented. Or could you possibly be enlightened, or are you an unrecognized artist, or some brilliant genious ahead of his time, or what else could this be? Is there anyway this could be understood as something other than sheer nonsense? Or if you are talking from some higher intelligence could you please come down and try to explain it to this stupid chimpansee?
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071212/0b3f1965/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 17:03:49 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 17:26:37 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <009401c83d91$4ef17b60$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <625751.54455.qm@web45812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
PI, that is interesting too, Don. How would you approach that? How would you get a handle on it. Over here it looks like the weather. Moody. Very moody *"*''-----0,,0'
Alan
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". -- Penelope
My particular interest in Bohm regards what his work and philosophy means and especially how it relates to personal identity. -- dl
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/cb514f80/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 17:00:48 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 17:37:19 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Question?
In-Reply-To: <007b01c83d8f$dde35520$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <156799.56795.qm@web45816.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Oh yes. And very much so. Is there any ;-?
And if there is any, is there one?
One we can meet at, one that works? 00==8
Alan
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
You interested in reason, rationality? -- dl
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/009af2d7/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 17:47:42 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 17:52:56 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Quote for the day
In-Reply-To: <20071213.095023.2428.388.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <884684.80925.qm@web45816.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Funny, interesting, that one made it first. First on your list. List. I was wondering, while out, shoveling, if you had procreated in life, would you love the results, could you, as much as this. |-]
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Oh the breadth of some "somehows."
-- funny
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 19:38:04 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Funny, you are a Mommy? Somehow you don't come across like that. 0-o
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Funny, pregnant question. Got any fitting answers, too }+o
Alan
Very nice. And good "timing" work. And reminiscent of earlier "pregnancies."
There's always "something more and something different" - in everything.
-- funny
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:57:31 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
It's all improv comedy. Just read carefully. You still won't catch them
all but let "this one" pass or you will miss the "next five." Explaining works
sometimes but not very often and not really, and only when timing remains the priority.
Timing is everything. And keep enough of the context to conveniently reread. LOTS can get missed in the first reading and even in the first few readings. And like they say about Driving in Massachusetts - Understanding is not a right; it is a privilege. But why am I telling you all of this.
Funny, pregnant question. Got any fitting answers, too }+o
Alan
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/2ec1654f/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 17:52:50 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 17:58:04 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712130658pc869b52ye6ebd7df3217f1e7@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <234906.58086.qm@web45813.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Aren't trees mostly dead, I mean, dead matter ;-)
Talking about which: They say if you are childless you are as good as dead. Well, you know, scientist can be funny (too) ]-]]
Alan
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: I absolutely agree, Alfred. That's why I'd like to find a way for BDers to know each other better. A way to meet and spend some time together in our natural habitats, or to approximate it as much as possible. And I'm not defining cyberspace as 'natural'. One can manipulate words any way you like.
Some say words manipulate us, but that's a two way street.
And trees, unlike people, can't run away from your spending time with them.
On Dec 13, 2007 4:10 AM, Alfred Landman < landmana@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi Irene Darcy. If a brain wants to learn about trees, for instance, thought could simply spend time with them in their natural habitat etc (which is what many traditionally "primitive" people do). Breaking trees into their cellular components and so forth enables genetic manipulation of them, for instance, but this can't be said to "objectively" help one get to know a tree better than simply spending time with them. In fact, it does the precise opposite. This brain can never genuinely know a living organism that you've instrumentalized and objectified like that. AL
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
Subject: Space and Time (Don F)
From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 16:59:24 EDT
to: Bohm, Subject Space and Time
Dear Don, nice wisdom in your Sep.25 'Space & Time note. Yet:(your
quote):
>...<
Foucault was right: there is no such epoque as the present one. His, or
ours, does not matter. Past reflection does not match live experience.
WE are the experiencers, not memory. So: hold your enthusiasm.
Also: I was glad: A rare thing on this list a reference to David Bohm!
I find this unending exchange "about the list-filling" redundant. In my
(not so humble) opinion a list is like love: practice it, don't explain.
If it does not live up to your expectations, there are other lists to
choose from. Nobody can change BB or anybody else. Accept it or leave it.
To explain one's views ABOUT participating: nice, but keep it short. And
have mercy on the receiving parties: half a dozen posts per day per per-
son in exorbitant length, or sometimes 5 consecutive attachments is rude.
Who does not have the time to write short, should keep it. Length is
negligent.
And to the following exchange I have a plagiarism from Doug Bilodeau, an
acclaimed physicist from the JCS-list:(see below) - the 'exchange':
*
" >JPL:
>"Shout, shout, let it all out
>these are the things I can do without,
>come on, I'm talking to you, come on.." whereupon
" >>Wm:
>>Pssst... not so loud, I think the others are meditating.
William
*
Not so sure! I refer to my remark on a "no response" to a post:
"si tacent clamant": Dough B: corrected me: "or: si tacent dormiunt".
From: "Chris Hooley" < chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: Re: purpose of list
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:24:15 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello All,
I've heard nothing from the group for several days. So, I'm sending this
message to check for echo.
Regards
Chris
From: "Chris Hooley" <chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: inside out
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:19:50 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello Everyone,
I would share another thought that I found interesting.
The gastrointestinal track is actually "outside" the body in the sense that
it's a long, open-ended tube. In the same way, "no-thing", which is (or
can be seen to be) at the center of every manifested form, is continuous,
contiguous to itself. It is "outside" the space/time form though when seen
from within the form it appears to be isolated like droplets.
My intuition is that we can focus (reside *as* attention) either on the
form or on the un-form that borders it.
The experience of attending to the un-form in-between can't be fully
represented, even to ourselves, I think, but experimenting with this
viewing angle has been intriguing.
Received: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:21:50 +0100 (BST)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:19:21 +0100 (BST)
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking
to one of its authors!
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facilitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
--
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/e8337400/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 17:54:26 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 17:59:39 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <C3869C88.F8BD%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
Message-ID: <182467.11864.qm@web45814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
What makes you jump, then? Finally ;-)
Alan
Lynne Tolk <lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> wrote:
I?ve been here about a year and a half, & while I don?t always have time to jump in, I do appreciate what can happen here.
Lynne
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/56b68216/attachment.html
From lynne at lifedirectionscoach.com Thu Dec 13 18:00:00 2007
From: lynne at lifedirectionscoach.com (Lynne Tolk)
Date: Thu Dec 13 18:05:15 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <20071213.104022.2428.394.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <C386B320.F8C8%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
I have some ?teacher? genes. Some ?rescuer? too. I?ve just been reading
about the human longing for wholeness, connection ? sometimes at all costs.
I?m always having to let go of that attachment to outcomes.
Lynne
On 12/13/07 8:40 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
> No kind of content can prevent looking at function.
> It's all good grist. Especially content that sparks objection.
>
> -- funny
>
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:23:36 -0700 Lynne Tolk <lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
> writes:
>> Hi Penelope,
>> It really does take some perseverance. You just came in with two others who
>> sparked a rather terse style, but it?s not always like that. Bohm said that
>> while a dialogue group should not have a goal (stifles creativity), it does
>> need a purpose, which he suggested was ?impersonal fellowship? which serves
>> as the glue to hold people. That takes time (probably especially online).
>> I?ve been here about a year and a half, & while I don?t always have time to
>> jump in, I do appreciate what can happen here.
>> Lynne
>>
>> On 12/13/07 6:27 AM, "Penelope Duby" <pennyduby@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in
>> communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll
>> unsubscribe.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/9aebc6af/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 18:37:01 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 18:48:55 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <C386B320.F8C8%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
Message-ID: <360002.5761.qm@web45807.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Teach me ;-)
If you ;-}
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8owv5YjHfJA&feature=related
Alan
Lynne Tolk <lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> wrote:
I have some ?teacher? genes. Some ?rescuer? too. I?ve just been reading about the human longing for wholeness, connection ? sometimes at all costs. I?m always having to let go of that attachment to outcomes.
Lynne
On 12/13/07 8:40 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
No kind of content can prevent looking at function.
It's all good grist. Especially content that sparks objection.
-- funny
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:23:36 -0700 Lynne Tolk <lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> writes:
Hi Penelope,
It really does take some perseverance. You just came in with two others who sparked a rather terse style, but it?s not always like that. Bohm said that while a dialogue group should not have a goal (stifles creativity), it does need a purpose, which he suggested was ?impersonal fellowship? which serves as the glue to hold people. That takes time (probably especially online). I?ve been here about a year and a half, & while I don?t always have time to jump in, I do appreciate what can happen here.
Lynne
On 12/13/07 6:27 AM, "Penelope Duby" <pennyduby@yahoo.com> wrote:
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll unsubscribe.
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/6ab24337/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 17:57:04 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 19:02:17 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712130646t12640424q72b43462c74047e6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <629896.75416.qm@web45801.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Do we have a problem with(in) stuckness ||=?
Alan
Okay, Mom again. Why do mothers need so much? Attention? Later, gotta run :-))
Alan
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: Go, Don! It's good to hear your voice again. Nice and clear, whether or not it seems stuck.
On Dec 13, 2007 9:06 AM, Don Lay < donlay@knology.net> wrote:
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". -- Penelope
I can see how it might appear that way. Someone suggested reading Bohm's little book, On Dialogue. If you do not have it, you can find some excerpts from it at my website along with some other excerpts of his work regarding physics and philosophy. http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
My particular interest in Bohm regards what his work and philosophy means and especially how it relates to personal identity. -- dl
----- Original Message -----
From: Penelope Duby
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 8:27 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll unsubscribe.
"There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar."
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
---------------------------------
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/eb6e8bba/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Thu Dec 13 19:03:33 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Thu Dec 13 19:12:36 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
Message-ID: <20071213.131127.2428.414.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Penelope Duby, of the three new, um, individual subscribers,
you show the most promise. Or equal promise anyway.
Dare to ask me why I say that.
-- funny
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 05:27:07 -0800 (PST) Penelope Duby
<pennyduby@yahoo.com> writes:
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in
communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll
unsubscribe.
?There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams;
believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by
some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it.
For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along
a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new
challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar.?
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/43145075/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Thu Dec 13 19:06:08 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Thu Dec 13 19:12:38 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Quote for the day
Message-ID: <20071213.131127.2428.415.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Funny, interesting, that one made it first. First on your list. List.
(alan)
Sequence is a fascinating study. Sometimes clarity is immediate. No
suspense
necessary.
Hmm. Nice incidental. The only two options are suspense [suspension of
defense] and clarity. (funny)
I was wondering, while out, shoveling, if you had procreated in life,
would you love the results, could you, as much as this. |-] (alan)
GREAT question.
-- funny
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:47:42 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey"
<a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Funny, interesting, that one made it first. First on your list. List. I
was wondering, while out, shoveling, if you had procreated in life, would
you love the results, could you, as much as this. |-]
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Oh the breadth of some "somehows."
-- funny
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 19:38:04 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey"
<a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Funny, you are a Mommy? Somehow you don't come across like that. 0-o
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Funny, pregnant question. Got any fitting answers, too }+o
Alan
Very nice. And good "timing" work. And reminiscent of earlier
"pregnancies."
There's always "something more and something different" - in everything.
-- funny
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:57:31 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey"
<a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
It's all improv comedy. Just read carefully. You still won't catch them
all but let "this one" pass or you will miss the "next five." Explaining
works
sometimes but not very often and not really, and only when timing remains
the priority.
Timing is everything. And keep enough of the context to conveniently
reread. LOTS can get missed in the first reading and even in the first
few readings. And like they say about Driving in Massachusetts -
Understanding is not a right; it is a privilege. But why am I telling you
all of this.
Funny, pregnant question. Got any fitting answers, too }+o
Alan
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it
now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it
now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/0b82995f/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Thu Dec 13 18:59:44 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Thu Dec 13 19:12:40 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Almost
Message-ID: <20071213.131127.2428.413.ae.dropper@juno.com>
I: Good Grief, how gruesome, Pat.
Especially for horse lovers. (White Castle hamburgers
had a high percentage of horse meat in them).
-- funny
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 13:57:37 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
writes:
I: Good Grief, how gruesome, Pat.
On Dec 12, 2007 1:46 PM, <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
Two years from now there will be a terrible sponge shortage.
And people who have had surgery will be "mined" for sponges.
Those who have had many surgeries will be either wealthy
or in great danger, depending on their luck. Sponge "donation"
centers will open up in the back room of every dunkin donuts
and White Castle shop. Yes, White Castle is coming back.
-- funny
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 09:19:12 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey"
<a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Hey funny. I not kidding. You must be God. That was news from a few days
back. I sure will go nowhere. This is fun funny. Tell us more about the
future. Funny you rule.
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
I know. I gave you that information myself 3 or 4 years ago.
-- funny
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 03:33:31 -0800 (PST) Alfred Landman
<landmana@yahoo.com> writes:
Hi Ae.Dropper. Every year, in the United States about 1,500 people have
surgical objects accidentally left inside them after surgery, according
to medical studies. About two-thirds of the surgical objects left behind
are sponges. AL
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Then there was that lunch with Germaine Greer.
-- funny
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 10:19:10 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com>
writes:
It actually refers to something I wrote mentioning Dennis Hopper, an old
friend.
don
On Dec 10, 2007, at 9:57 AM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
The what, "hopper"? And where does that one come in here now? More
scrolling to do for me? O-boy --gender!--, this list is a wild ride.
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
It's [the question] is in "the hopper." It seems a stretch but that's
not new. Connections LOVE to make themselves.
-- funny
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 09:16:14 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey"
<a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Almost time for eggs and ham. That's for certain. But does that count,
too, Funny?
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
"We can seldom go erect. Almost every man we meet requires some civility,
requires to be humored; -- he has some fame, some talent, some whim of
religion or philanthropy in his head that is not to be questioned, and so
spoils all conversation with him." -- Emerson
"Almost"
It's always the "almost" that promises faithfully the
alternative that delivers the tiniest exception that changes
e v e r y t h i n g.
-- funny
info:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/3114a444/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Thu Dec 13 18:57:29 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Thu Dec 13 19:12:47 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] What is "true inquiry?"
Message-ID: <20071213.131127.2428.412.ae.dropper@juno.com>
"True inquiry" can be known in its non-result in relation to thought.
False inquiry into
thought will bring another thought - that is believed. "True inquiry
"ends" in action, now
unimpeded by a belief in a thought. True inquiry "ends" in a wholly
different kind of perceiving.
The process of inquiry is the process of checking the truth of a thought
[the truth of thought],
whatever the thought. This process will involve refinement of the thought
into its clearest form.
And when thought has 'found' its clearest form (its 'final' progenitor),
the thought
[belief; assumption] - the untruth of the thought will make its
appearance. And the
belief in its truth will make its disappearance.
"Truth" in this context means "what is."
So the inquiry might go "Is this thought really what is?"
-- funny
From ae.dropper at juno.com Thu Dec 13 18:56:18 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Thu Dec 13 19:12:49 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
Message-ID: <20071213.131127.2428.410.ae.dropper@juno.com>
"Impersonal Fellowship" [Koinnoia] as a "purpose" is a great one because
it resists image making of itself. But it cannot be set or imposed
because as "resistant" as it might be to image making, it is still quite
possible to "imagine" it. With such "imagination" set, the assumptions
underlying the image are "officially" made unavailable to inquiry.
But as they say "If it ain't broke don't fix it." And as I speak, I can
see that "Impersonal Fellowship" as a goal or purpose is quite far from
our general or shared imaginings. "Our" as relating to face to face as
well as list happenings.
So this is not meant to be taken as a "danger alert." (And yet it is).
-- funny
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:23:36 -0700 Lynne Tolk
<lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> writes:
Hi Penelope,
It really does take some perseverance. You just came in with two others
who sparked a rather terse style, but it?s not always like that. Bohm
said that while a dialogue group should not have a goal (stifles
creativity), it does need a purpose, which he suggested was ?impersonal
fellowship? which serves as the glue to hold people. That takes time
(probably especially online). I?ve been here about a year and a half, &
while I don?t always have time to jump in, I do appreciate what can
happen here.
Lynne
On 12/13/07 6:27 AM, "Penelope Duby" <pennyduby@yahoo.com> wrote:
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in
communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll
unsubscribe.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/ee6a94ed/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Thu Dec 13 18:56:42 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Thu Dec 13 19:12:50 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language,
Map, and Email Identities
Message-ID: <20071213.131127.2428.411.ae.dropper@juno.com>
I: My understanding of it didn't change. I simply realized that what I
had known all along, and what nobody had taught me to do, was what the
scientists were putting in their own language. Ever hear of the piece
"Rage Over a Lost Penny"? Mozart of Beethoven. I forget which.
Is it possible to synopsize Jeffery's words on observer/observed?
(funny)
I: In other words, for me, proprioception and a lot of stuff is a natural
process that 'thinkers' have clogged up unnecessarily with conscious
effort. And who knows, maybe that thought has made their brains rigid!
Maybe that's what TAS as culprit is all about.
-- And can you say more about this?
-- funny
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 13:55:16 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
writes:
I: My understanding of it didn't change. I simply realized that what I
had known all along, and what nobody had taught me to do, was what the
scientists were putting in their own language. Ever hear of the piece
"Rage Over a Lost Penny"? Mozart of Beethoven. I forget which.
In other words, for me, proprioception and a lot of stuff is a natural
process that 'thinkers' have clogged up unnecessarily with conscious
effort. And who knows, maybe that thought has made their brains rigid!
Maybe that's what TAS as culprit is all about.
On Dec 12, 2007 1:41 PM, <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
Speaking of which (and much more interesting)
can you write of the new understanding of observer/observed? (funny)
I: Why is that more interesting than scientific discovery of brain
plasticity?
More interesting than the stuff about clarity.
Something that is understood after its having been so
elusive for so long catches my interest in terms of how it might
be newly worded
-- funny
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:54:50 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
writes:
Speaking of which (and much more interesting)
can you write of the new understanding of observer/observed?
I: Why is that more interesting than scientific discovery of brain
plasticity?
On Dec 11, 2007 9:59 AM, <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
It's over. True tired is true rest. They are inseparable.
Whatever needed affirming is no longer there. It was never there.
Not substantially. It was static. Static affirming static.
Clarity is just that. Clarity.
It's only edge is its flowing
crystalline expression of itself
about itself. It's expression
is how it knows its beauty.
It's expression is its beauty.
Speaking of which (and much more interesting)
can you write of the new understanding of observer/observed?
-- funny
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 11:51:09 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
writes:
I am really very tired of saying words that are hurtful to me.
I: Hello, Friend. Assuming that you are tired enough to want to do
something about it, I share the following with you.
I am reading a book on brain plasticity - The Mind and the Brain:
Neuroplasticity and the Power of mental Force by Jeffrey M. Schwartz, MD
and Sharon Begley. I normally don't like psychiatrists et al, but I read
their ideas so I won't be ignorant on the topics. This one has a couple
of things I think are valuable. About him personally, he says that at
15, he was convinced that the inner working of the mind was the only
mystery worth pursuing. He also is critical of much psychiatry. And
amazingly, some of his writing reads like the 'excitation - inhibition'
work we do in Eurhythmics. He also has a very clear chapter on The
Quantum Brain, and has managed to explain 'observer & observed' so it
makes sense to me. Actually, it's something I've always been aware of,
and used. But the fancy words in books made it seem like something
esoteric and unfamiliar.
Anyway, here is what I wanted to share with you. I have used variations
of it myself, and it worked. It seems to me to incorporate and add
something to the TAS process.
Refocusing - the essence of applying mindful awareness (our
'proprioception') is to recognize unwanted thoughts as soon as they arise
and refocus attention. Start by acknowledging the thought's presence,
then saying your own specific version of "that is a false message due to
a jammed transmission in the brain". The author makes me laugh. He says
"The brain's gonna do what the brain's gonna do, but you don't have to
let it push you around." I agree.
In addition, affirmations also worked for me. I started with "Every day
in every way, I'm getting better and better." Affirmations are the core
of the Beautyway Ceremony from which the lines "Now I walk in Beauty"
have been passed down as 'poetry'.
Hozhoon - hozhoon - hozhoon - hozhoon.
(The Navajo blessing from Beautyway said once for each of the four
corners.)
On Dec 9, 2007 10:30 AM, < ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
Please continue when you get a moment (willam) (just an invitation - not
a necessity - you've already been most helpful). Also Irene had written:
"How does it work for you? Can we compare?"
There has come more clarity about the "layered suspension" thing. For
those interested in detail, it took about 15 "layers" before the clarity
came this time. (It has usually taken about 4 or 5). And it's all about
clarity - "getting to" clarity.
The "absence of clarity" is "layered" as well. These are layers of
evermore subtle and increasingly veiled defenses (untruths about self)
which correspond with the layers of suspension. The subtlety at each
level though - AT that level - breaks into obviousness. The obviousness
is in the bodily sensations. There is a lack of clarity - like sensations
of static. The initial satisfying feelings in the response evolve into a
static sensation and a non satisfaction.
Incidentally, I have found that the only words that "hurt" me are the
words that I say. The words that others say, are never hurtful. They are
music. But that's another story. So it is these "words that I say" that
interest me. I am really very tired of saying words that are hurtful to
me.
It is very clear now that the words that I say that are even remotely
[seeming] defensive [of a clearly untruthful self/world image] maintain
confusion or lack of clarity in my system.
Thus, the "layered" suspension. Because the defenses are "layered" too.
One comes right after another. They get VERY fancy AND, initially (as I
said) quite satisfying and fleetingly pleasurable. Then the "pleasure"
turns to a kind of sour sensation. The thing just FLOPS, upon suspension.
But the CLARITY, when it comes, comes with ..... well, clarity. There
is no flopping or static. The whole body feels clear. These is no
defensive wall anymore between "me" and the person[s] or group to whom
the response is being written.
Incidentally, there is an awareness that the "response" is primarily a
response from me to me - sort of "written on the wind." And that it is
its own reward and complete satisfaction. It is perhaps like a quanta (if
I understand such - complete in itself, a little piece of wholeness).
-- funny
On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 10:51:46 -0500 ae.dropper@juno.com writes:
Would you like to comment before i go further? You realize, of course,
where this is leading up to. (wm)
Please continue. I have no idea where this is leading. Appreciative for
all of it though.
-- funny
On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 11:49:45 +0100 (Westeurop?ische Normalzeit) "william"
<w@david-bohm.net> writes:
I didn't mean coping with the sense of detachment. I meant how to cope
with the tendency to suspend more and more; what you call "layered"
suspension (resulting in a sense of "detachment" for lack of a better
word). You see, at some point it starts getting a bit anti-social. When
you are always suspending, people are not getting their expected
responses anymore. Usually the reason for someone to say something or do
something is to get a response. This is also the case when someone utters
an insult, or attempt to hurt you: they usually do this because they are
disappointed or angry; and they want a reaction that shows they have
touched you. Now, if you are always in suspense mode then the attempted
hurt doesn't work, because there is no reaction on your side. At first
glance this is perhaps not a bad thing because it usually prevents the
situation from escalating. However, there is another aspect to this,
which is that the attempted hurt could be regarded as a form of
communication; they are trying to say something. If you don't respond,
don't react (as a result of suspension) then you are effectively refusing
to communicate on this level. You may be willing to communicate on a
different level but that channel is not open both ways. The point is, you
are denying communication on the channel on which it is invited.
So, what do you say to this? Because i am assuming it is not actually
your intention to deny communication. You are probably in compassion
mode, which however is not the channel open to whoever wants to touch
you. Have you reached a point where you would consider suspending
suspension, out of compassion, and give the person the feeling of having
touched you? Would you like to comment before i go further? You realize,
of course, where this is leading up to.
-------Original Message-------
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Date: 07.12.2007 21:00:44
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was:
Language,Map, and Email Identities
But more on this (perhaps based on the curious idea of "coping").
There are times when I experience what you might be calling "detachment"
or something I might legitimately call "detachment." And there are many
childhood memories of something I can call "detachment," especially when
I was in school.
This "detachment' breaks off into two categories; one is entirely
comfortable; the other is not.
The one that is not comfortable is a feeling of not belonging or not
feeling like a participant.
How to cope? If it's in a dialogue circle it can be as simple as saying
something. Anything.
But this experience is quite rare these days. And quite noticeable for
its rarity. And there is a
preference these days to not say something to ease the discomfort but to
just observe
what is going on beneath the discomfort.
-- funny
On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 13:06:26 -0500 ae.dropper@juno.com writes:
To identify with a concept of "detachment" it would have to be
'detachment' from a layer that is SO thin that it is viscerally all but
indiscernible. Along with this, such "identity" requires imagining a
"something" that actually does the "detaching." This is possible - this
imagining. But it is clearly an isolated imagining and not a visceral
experience.
I LOVE to "play the game." And with simultaneous "watching."
-- funny
On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 13:05:24 +0100 (Westeurop?ische Normalzeit) "william"
<w@david-bohm.net> writes:
Ok, now i understand what you were saying. Thanks for the hint. Yes, i
think you're right; that's my experience also. But i also noticed that I
need to counteract a tendency of feeling detached from the rest of the
world, like preferring to quietly watch the game from a distance instead
of playing it. Is this tendency also the case with you, and if so how are
you coping with this?
-------Original Message-------
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Date: 06.12.2007 17:34:58
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was:
Language,Map, and Email Identities
"The principle here is the same as that advanced by Rudolf Steiner when
he advised teachers to prepare their lessons painstakingly and then be
ready to sacrifice the prepared plan at the dictate of circumstances
which may point to an entirely fresh approach to their material."
from: THE ART OF GOETHEAN CONVERSATION
This speaks to what I was saying - except "sacrifice the prepared plan "
again and again.
The response gets more and more "whole" each time. It draws on more of
what the group
is saying as a whole. And with a little experience one comes to see the
"sacrifices"
[of the satisfactions] as "investments" in evermore surprising surprises.
Or, one
could say that one is "spending" the satisfaction of the response on what
further
"suspending" might yield in terms of an even more surprising response.
Simple suspension alone though has yielded
surprise from the start. It's just an amazing discovery
[the unfolding of this "layered" suspending] for someone really
interested in "suspension."
Not recommending; just reporting.
-- funny
>"Suspension" just grows and grows. Where the surface fruits of
"suspension" are
>appreciated, suspension through the strata begins to show its appeal.
The fruits of
>suspension [of action, which includes speech, in relation to what is
read or heard] are
>that something unknown surfaces as a possible response. Very satisfying
to respond
>with these. But these too, can be suspended. It may take awhile to be
able to do this
>because the little bit of satisfaction needs to be "invested." Very long
story short, with
>each "reinvestment" something even more amazing surfaces.
>Eventually, there comes the curiosity about a kind of 'complete
investment'. This is the
>logical conclusion of Bohm's brilliant but humble and simple proposal of
"suspension'.
>Along the way of this, and relatively soon though, you will find
yourself responding with
>things you have never heard of before. So the process is never not fun.
And there is no
>rush for the "completion."
>-- funny
Is there anyone out there who can make sense out of this? I am sorry
"funny" but to me it sounds as if you are drunk or crazy or demented. Or
could you possibly be enlightened, or are you an unrecognized artist, or
some brilliant genious ahead of his time, or what else could this be? Is
there anyway this could be understood as something other than sheer
nonsense? Or if you are talking from some higher intelligence could you
please come down and try to explain it to this stupid chimpansee?
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/9b33aff5/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Thu Dec 13 19:08:46 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Thu Dec 13 19:14:01 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2
In-Reply-To: <286727.34373.qm@web57416.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
References: <286727.34373.qm@web57416.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <25AC6162-BA38-4B83-AA29-FA47354C6A38@dc.rr.com>
Don't you think though, that maybe a bit of both is even more useful?
Just so long as we don't turn the tree - or others - into objects
that we "understand" completely. Actually, as I think of it, there is
more than one way to understand understanding.
don
On Dec 13, 2007, at 1:10 AM, Alfred Landman wrote:
> Hi Irene Darcy. If a brain wants to learn about trees, for
> instance, thought could simply spend time with them in their
> natural habitat etc (which is what many traditionally "primitive"
> people do). Breaking trees into their cellular components and so
> forth enables genetic manipulation of them, for instance, but this
> can't be said to "objectively" help one get to know a tree better
> than simply spending time with them. In fact, it does the precise
> opposite. This brain can never genuinely know a living organism
> that you've instrumentalized and objectified like that. AL
>
> Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
> Subject: Space and Time (Don F)
>
> From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
> Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 16:59:24 EDT
>
>
> to: Bohm, Subject Space and Time
> Dear Don, nice wisdom in your Sep.25 'Space & Time note. Yet:(your
> quote):
> >...<
> Foucault was right: there is no such epoque as the present one.
> His, or
> ours, does not matter. Past reflection does not match live experience.
> WE are the experiencers, not memory. So: hold your enthusiasm.
>
> Also: I was glad: A rare thing on this list a reference to David Bohm!
>
> I find this unending exchange "about the list-filling" redundant.
> In my
> (not so humble) opinion a list is like love: practice it, don't
> explain.
> If it does not live up to your expectations, there are other lists to
> choose from. Nobody can change BB or anybody else. Accept it or
> leave it.
> To explain one's views ABOUT participating: nice, but keep it
> short. And
> have mercy on the receiving parties: half a dozen posts per day per
> per-
> son in exorbitant length, or sometimes 5 consecutive attachments is
> rude.
> Who does not have the time to write short, should keep it. Length is
> negligent.
> And to the following exchange I have a plagiarism from Doug
> Bilodeau, an
> acclaimed physicist from the JCS-list:(see below) - the 'exchange':
> *
> " >JPL:
> >"Shout, shout, let it all out
> >these are the things I can do without,
> >come on, I'm talking to you, come on.." whereupon
> " >>Wm:
> >>Pssst... not so loud, I think the others are meditating.
> William
> *
> Not so sure! I refer to my remark on a "no response" to a post:
> "si tacent clamant": Dough B: corrected me: "or: si tacent dormiunt".
>
> From: "Chris Hooley" < chooley@idnsi.net>
> Subject: Re: purpose of list
> Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:24:15 PDT
>
> To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
> Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
>
> Hello All,
>
> I've heard nothing from the group for several days. So, I'm
> sending this
> message to check for echo.
>
> Regards
> Chris
>
>
> From: "Chris Hooley" <chooley@idnsi.net>
> Subject: inside out
> Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:19:50 PDT
>
> To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
> Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
>
> Hello Everyone,
>
> I would share another thought that I found interesting.
>
> The gastrointestinal track is actually "outside" the body in the
> sense that
> it's a long, open-ended tube. In the same way, "no-thing", which
> is (or
> can be seen to be) at the center of every manifested form, is
> continuous,
> contiguous to itself. It is "outside" the space/time form though
> when seen
> from within the form it appears to be isolated like droplets.
>
> My intuition is that we can focus (reside *as* attention) either on
> the
> form or on the un-form that borders it.
>
> The experience of attending to the un-form in-between can't be fully
> represented, even to ourselves, I think, but experimenting with this
> viewing angle has been intriguing.
>
> Received: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:21:50 +0100 (BST)
> Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:19:21 +0100 (BST)
>
> From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
> Subject: Re:intentional dying
>
> Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the
> *right
> kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer
> "intentional
> dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
> 'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems
> absolutely right:
>
> > ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
> >cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The
> neural
> >chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body,
> during about
> >twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
> >self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the
> organism would
> >try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind.
> Normally,
> >our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to
> get on with
> >our work. =
>
> I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself
> that it's
> sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply
> try to get
> back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no
> doubt that
> with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later
> you forget
> -- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately
> very
> rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I
> guess, is
> *acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps
> me,
> because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
> lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
>
> I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
> Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world
> you do
> not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work
> overtime." But
> I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth
> surely is
> we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits
> are NOT
> people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian
> analysis terms
> -- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can
> soothe away
> the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue.
> There's no
> obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the
> mood takes.
> So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world
> may go
> through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts
> everything
> the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis
> on a
> top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in
> and out a
> lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up
> the
> enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that
> no one
> responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe
> seems to
> have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is
> falling --
> and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
> hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
> unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
>
> Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle
> in one
> short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that --
> with
> *me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten --
> our common
> humanity.
> I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal
> error'
> note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding
> Meaning"
> (Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers"
> because
> someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the
> other day I
> re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am
> speaking
> to one of its authors!
>
>
> >A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm
> drifting: on the
> >one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
> >
> >The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
> >directly; "What could be a better experience than being the
> unfolding
> >universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
>
> Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with
> 'unlived
> lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the
> moment of
> birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper
> dying; and so
> no full living either. No?
>
> I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
> >
> >is dialogue about facilitating the intentional dying of the ego
> self?
> >
> >julia
>
>
>
> --
> Irene
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
> Try it now.
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/1cf0d25e/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Thu Dec 13 19:32:25 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Thu Dec 13 19:37:40 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <360002.5761.qm@web45807.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <360002.5761.qm@web45807.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1571F54A-25C0-48C5-95A8-9AD6E27CB2F5@dc.rr.com>
How do we get Nina Hagen to join this list? And Don Rickles for that
matter.
don
On Dec 13, 2007, at 9:37 AM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
> Teach me ;-)
> If you ;-}
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8owv5YjHfJA&feature=related
>
> Alan
>
> Lynne Tolk <lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> wrote:
> I have some ?teacher? genes. Some ?rescuer? too. I?ve just been
> reading about the human longing for wholeness, connection ?
> sometimes at all costs. I?m always having to let go of that
> attachment to outcomes.
>
> Lynne
>
> On 12/13/07 8:40 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com>
> wrote:
>
> No kind of content can prevent looking at function.
> It's all good grist. Especially content that sparks objection.
>
> -- funny
>
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:23:36 -0700 Lynne Tolk
> <lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> writes:
> Hi Penelope,
> It really does take some perseverance. You just came in with two
> others who sparked a rather terse style, but it?s not always like
> that. Bohm said that while a dialogue group should not have a goal
> (stifles creativity), it does need a purpose, which he suggested
> was ?impersonal fellowship? which serves as the glue to hold
> people. That takes time (probably especially online). I?ve been
> here about a year and a half, & while I don?t always have time to
> jump in, I do appreciate what can happen here.
> Lynne
>
> On 12/13/07 6:27 AM, "Penelope Duby" <pennyduby@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in
> communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop".
> I'll unsubscribe.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
> Try it now.
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/b75b7484/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 19:36:30 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 19:41:47 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <1571F54A-25C0-48C5-95A8-9AD6E27CB2F5@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <192409.68956.qm@web45811.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
They are on. Don. I think. At least ]-],]
Alan
donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
How do we get Nina Hagen to join this list? And Don Rickles for that matter.
don
On Dec 13, 2007, at 9:37 AM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
Teach me ;-)
If you ;-}
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8owv5YjHfJA&feature=related
Alan
Lynne Tolk <lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> wrote:
I have some ?teacher? genes. Some ?rescuer? too. I?ve just been reading about the human longing for wholeness, connection ? sometimes at all costs. I?m always having to let go of that attachment to outcomes.
Lynne
On 12/13/07 8:40 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
No kind of content can prevent looking at function.
It's all good grist. Especially content that sparks objection.
-- funny
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:23:36 -0700 Lynne Tolk <lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> writes:
Hi Penelope,
It really does take some perseverance. You just came in with two others who sparked a rather terse style, but it?s not always like that. Bohm said that while a dialogue group should not have a goal (stifles creativity), it does need a purpose, which he suggested was ?impersonal fellowship? which serves as the glue to hold people. That takes time (probably especially online). I?ve been here about a year and a half, & while I don?t always have time to jump in, I do appreciate what can happen here.
Lynne
On 12/13/07 6:27 AM, "Penelope Duby" <pennyduby@yahoo.com> wrote:
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll unsubscribe.
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/0ec57de4/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Thu Dec 13 19:41:32 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Thu Dec 13 19:46:47 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <20071213.131127.2428.410.ae.dropper@juno.com>
References: <20071213.131127.2428.410.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <7B3F1BB6-915F-4A3C-97F4-43E5EA6D7F32@dc.rr.com>
Back when our London group was still in full swing, a lot of us used
to go out for a pizza after the session. But one guy always demurred,
I finally asked why he didn't join us and he told me that it was
because Bohm had always made much of the idea of impersonal
fellowship and he thought he should keep it impersonal. This was a
take that I had never considered. But I persuaded him that personal
was okay and he started to come along.
Was that a mistake, do you think?
don
On Dec 13, 2007, at 9:56 AM, ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
> "Impersonal Fellowship" [Koinnoia] as a "purpose" is a great one
> because it resists image making of itself. But it cannot be set or
> imposed because as "resistant" as it might be to image making, it
> is still quite possible to "imagine" it. With such "imagination"
> set, the assumptions underlying the image are "officially" made
> unavailable to inquiry.
>
> But as they say "If it ain't broke don't fix it." And as I speak, I
> can see that "Impersonal Fellowship" as a goal or purpose is quite
> far from our general or shared imaginings. "Our" as relating to
> face to face as well as list happenings.
>
> So this is not meant to be taken as a "danger alert." (And yet it
> is).
>
> -- funny
>
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:23:36 -0700 Lynne Tolk
> <lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> writes:
> Hi Penelope,
> It really does take some perseverance. You just came in with two
> others who sparked a rather terse style, but it?s not always like
> that. Bohm said that while a dialogue group should not have a goal
> (stifles creativity), it does need a purpose, which he suggested
> was ?impersonal fellowship? which serves as the glue to hold
> people. That takes time (probably especially online). I?ve been
> here about a year and a half, & while I don?t always have time to
> jump in, I do appreciate what can happen here.
> Lynne
>
> On 12/13/07 6:27 AM, "Penelope Duby" <pennyduby@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in
> communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop".
> I'll unsubscribe.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/f000403d/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 19:43:12 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 19:48:25 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2
In-Reply-To: <25AC6162-BA38-4B83-AA29-FA47354C6A38@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <949978.32671.qm@web45812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Wait! More ways than not-understanding ;-,
Alan
donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
Actually, as I think of it, there is more than one way to understand understanding.
don
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/de7b943a/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 19:44:58 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 19:50:10 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <7B3F1BB6-915F-4A3C-97F4-43E5EA6D7F32@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <232077.43461.qm@web45816.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Was that a mistake, do you think?
Always pizza ;-??
Alan
donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
Back when our London group was still in full swing, a lot of us used to go out for a pizza after the session. But one guy always demurred, I finally asked why he didn't join us and he told me that it was because Bohm had always made much of the idea of impersonal fellowship and he thought he should keep it impersonal. This was a take that I had never considered. But I persuaded him that personal was okay and he started to come along.
Was that a mistake, do you think?
don
On Dec 13, 2007, at 9:56 AM, ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
"Impersonal Fellowship" [Koinnoia] as a "purpose" is a great one because it resists image making of itself. But it cannot be set or imposed because as "resistant" as it might be to image making, it is still quite possible to "imagine" it. With such "imagination" set, the assumptions underlying the image are "officially" made unavailable to inquiry.
But as they say "If it ain't broke don't fix it." And as I speak, I can see that "Impersonal Fellowship" as a goal or purpose is quite far from our general or shared imaginings. "Our" as relating to face to face as well as list happenings.
So this is not meant to be taken as a "danger alert." (And yet it is).
-- funny
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:23:36 -0700 Lynne Tolk <lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> writes:
Hi Penelope,
It really does take some perseverance. You just came in with two others who sparked a rather terse style, but it?s not always like that. Bohm said that while a dialogue group should not have a goal (stifles creativity), it does need a purpose, which he suggested was ?impersonal fellowship? which serves as the glue to hold people. That takes time (probably especially online). I?ve been here about a year and a half, & while I don?t always have time to jump in, I do appreciate what can happen here.
Lynne
On 12/13/07 6:27 AM, "Penelope Duby" <pennyduby@yahoo.com> wrote:
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll unsubscribe.
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/1fafe964/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 19:46:14 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 19:51:29 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Quote for the day
In-Reply-To: <20071213.131127.2428.415.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <69860.43461.qm@web45816.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
M O R E -GREAT answer ;=!!
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Funny, interesting, that one made it first. First on your list. List. (alan)
Sequence is a fascinating study. Sometimes clarity is immediate. No suspense
necessary.
Hmm. Nice incidental. The only two options are suspense [suspension of defense] and clarity. (funny)
I was wondering, while out, shoveling, if you had procreated in life, would you love the results, could you, as much as this. |-] (alan)
GREAT question.
-- funny
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:47:42 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Funny, interesting, that one made it first. First on your list. List. I was wondering, while out, shoveling, if you had procreated in life, would you love the results, could you, as much as this. |-]
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Oh the breadth of some "somehows."
-- funny
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 19:38:04 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Funny, you are a Mommy? Somehow you don't come across like that. 0-o
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Funny, pregnant question. Got any fitting answers, too }+o
Alan
Very nice. And good "timing" work. And reminiscent of earlier "pregnancies."
There's always "something more and something different" - in everything.
-- funny
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:57:31 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
It's all improv comedy. Just read carefully. You still won't catch them
all but let "this one" pass or you will miss the "next five." Explaining works
sometimes but not very often and not really, and only when timing remains the priority.
Timing is everything. And keep enough of the context to conveniently reread. LOTS can get missed in the first reading and even in the first few readings. And like they say about Driving in Massachusetts - Understanding is not a right; it is a privilege. But why am I telling you all of this.
Funny, pregnant question. Got any fitting answers, too }+o
Alan
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/791120b8/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 19:48:40 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 19:53:53 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <20071213.131127.2428.414.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <394576.58188.qm@web45815.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
How could I dare not to (dare) >->>
Alan
(Do I need to fill out an official form, too? Fillin? ;*1)
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Penelope Duby, of the three new, um, individual subscribers,
you show the most promise. Or equal promise anyway.
Dare to ask me why I say that.
-- funny
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 05:27:07 -0800 (PST) Penelope Duby <pennyduby@yahoo.com> writes:
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll unsubscribe.
?There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar.?
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/1d3284b7/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Thu Dec 13 19:50:52 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Thu Dec 13 19:56:06 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <394576.58188.qm@web45815.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <394576.58188.qm@web45815.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4EC3A151-55DB-4837-8C5C-451CC94FC621@dc.rr.com>
Gone, gone, gone.
Penelope Duby is gone.
don
On Dec 13, 2007, at 10:48 AM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
> How could I dare not to (dare) >->>
>
> Alan
>
> (Do I need to fill out an official form, too? Fillin? ;*1)
>
> ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
> Penelope Duby, of the three new, um, individual subscribers,
> you show the most promise. Or equal promise anyway.
> Dare to ask me why I say that.
>
> -- funny
>
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 05:27:07 -0800 (PST) Penelope Duby
> <pennyduby@yahoo.com> writes:
> Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in
> communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop".
> I'll unsubscribe.
>
> ?There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams;
> believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made
> possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you
> least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the
> fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear
> of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever
> everything that is familiar.?
> Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
>
> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
> Search.
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
> Try it now.
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/ebcc8b8d/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 19:51:36 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 19:56:50 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Almost
In-Reply-To: <20071213.131127.2428.413.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <456278.72714.qm@web45814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Wait, again! Are you saying that somebody who loves to eat horses is NOT a horse-lover (too) .-?
Alan
Ps: I have the gut feeling Mom would get along with you. Less sure about loving, tho '=,,
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
I: Good Grief, how gruesome, Pat.
Especially for horse lovers. (White Castle hamburgers
had a high percentage of horse meat in them).
-- funny
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 13:57:37 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com> writes:
I: Good Grief, how gruesome, Pat.
On Dec 12, 2007 1:46 PM, <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
Two years from now there will be a terrible sponge shortage.
And people who have had surgery will be "mined" for sponges.
Those who have had many surgeries will be either wealthy
or in great danger, depending on their luck. Sponge "donation"
centers will open up in the back room of every dunkin donuts
and White Castle shop. Yes, White Castle is coming back.
-- funny
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 09:19:12 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Hey funny. I not kidding. You must be God. That was news from a few days back. I sure will go nowhere. This is fun funny. Tell us more about the future. Funny you rule.
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
I know. I gave you that information myself 3 or 4 years ago.
-- funny
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 03:33:31 -0800 (PST) Alfred Landman <landmana@yahoo.com> writes:
Hi Ae.Dropper. Every year, in the United States about 1,500 people have surgical objects accidentally left inside them after surgery, according to medical studies. About two-thirds of the surgical objects left behind are sponges. AL
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Then there was that lunch with Germaine Greer.
-- funny
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 10:19:10 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> writes:
It actually refers to something I wrote mentioning Dennis Hopper, an old friend.
don
On Dec 10, 2007, at 9:57 AM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
The what, "hopper"? And where does that one come in here now? More scrolling to do for me? O-boy --gender!--, this list is a wild ride.
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
It's [the question] is in "the hopper." It seems a stretch but that's
not new. Connections LOVE to make themselves.
-- funny
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 09:16:14 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Almost time for eggs and ham. That's for certain. But does that count, too, Funny?
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
"We can seldom go erect. Almost every man we meet requires some civility, requires to be humored; -- he has some fame, some talent, some whim of religion or philanthropy in his head that is not to be questioned, and so spoils all conversation with him." -- Emerson
"Almost"
It's always the "almost" that promises faithfully the
alternative that delivers the tiniest exception that changes
e v e r y t h i n g.
-- funny
info:
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/12f6175a/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 19:52:47 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 19:58:00 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <4EC3A151-55DB-4837-8C5C-451CC94FC621@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <780698.70577.qm@web45806.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Goner? Bummr! ]-)
Alan
donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
Gone, gone, gone. Penelope Duby is gone. don
On Dec 13, 2007, at 10:48 AM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
How could I dare not to (dare) >->>
Alan
(Do I need to fill out an official form, too? Fillin? ;*1)
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Penelope Duby, of the three new, um, individual subscribers,
you show the most promise. Or equal promise anyway.
Dare to ask me why I say that.
-- funny
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 05:27:07 -0800 (PST) Penelope Duby <pennyduby@yahoo.com> writes:
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll unsubscribe.
?There are two things that prevent us from achieving our dreams; believing them to be impossible or seeing those dreams made possible by some sudden turn of the wheel of fortune, when you least expected it. For at that moment, all our fears surface, the fear of setting off along a road heading who knows where, the fear of a life full of new challenges, the fear of losing forever everything that is familiar.?
Paulo Coelho: The Devil and Miss Prym
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/67c1202e/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 19:56:45 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 20:01:58 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] What is "true inquiry?"
In-Reply-To: <20071213.131127.2428.412.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <939296.42384.qm@web45801.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Have a tree on me, funny!
Snowman
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
"True inquiry" can be known in its non-result in relation to thought.
False inquiry into
thought will bring another thought - that is believed. "True inquiry
"ends" in action, now
unimpeded by a belief in a thought. True inquiry "ends" in a wholly
different kind of perceiving.
The process of inquiry is the process of checking the truth of a thought
[the truth of thought],
whatever the thought. This process will involve refinement of the thought
into its clearest form.
And when thought has 'found' its clearest form (its 'final' progenitor),
the thought
[belief; assumption] - the untruth of the thought will make its
appearance. And the
belief in its truth will make its disappearance.
"Truth" in this context means "what is."
So the inquiry might go "Is this thought really what is?"
-- funny
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/7390dfae/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 20:00:01 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 20:05:15 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language,
Map, and Email Identities
In-Reply-To: <20071213.131127.2428.411.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <662977.82645.qm@web45804.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Funny, please, fill me in. How come some funnies are not, well, laugh: funny ;-?
Like I. No(t)funny, I.
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
I: In other words, for me, proprioception and a lot of stuff is a natural process that 'thinkers' have clogged up unnecessarily with conscious effort. And who knows, maybe that thought has made their brains....
Ps: Need a Plumber?
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/8fb4ea05/attachment.html
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Thu Dec 13 20:56:05 2007
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Thu Dec 13 21:01:22 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
References: <629896.75416.qm@web45801.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <013f01c83dc2$3378be80$ff76480c@HOME>
So did I rejoin the list just in time to have Peter show up again?
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan E. DeBakey
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 9:57 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
Do we have a problem with(in) stuckness ||=?
Alan
Okay, Mom again. Why do mothers need so much? Attention? Later, gotta run :-))
Alan
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: Go, Don! It's good to hear your voice again. Nice and clear, whether or not it seems stuck.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/25a066ec/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Thu Dec 13 21:28:59 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Thu Dec 13 21:34:15 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <013f01c83dc2$3378be80$ff76480c@HOME>
References: <629896.75416.qm@web45801.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
<013f01c83dc2$3378be80$ff76480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <E7E1B6B4-9A41-416C-8704-90BC1DDD549A@dc.rr.com>
Well, if it is Peter he's a much better natured one.
But I'm waiting for "mom" to sound off.
don
On Dec 13, 2007, at 11:56 AM, Susan Clemons wrote:
> So did I rejoin the list just in time to have Peter show up again?
>
> Susan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Alan E. DeBakey
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 9:57 AM
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
>
> Do we have a problem with(in) stuckness ||=?
>
> Alan
>
> Okay, Mom again. Why do mothers need so much? Attention? Later,
> gotta run :-))
>
> Alan
>
> Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
> I: Go, Don! It's good to hear your voice again. Nice and clear,
> whether or not it seems stuck.
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/232cc09a/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 21:59:36 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 22:10:34 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <E7E1B6B4-9A41-416C-8704-90BC1DDD549A@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <660067.96922.qm@web45812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Those are the words of a tree that has been around, long enough, deep enough, high enough, wide enough, light enough: to UNDERSTAND, that one --two too ;-]-- cannot make it --that "far"-- unless one dances, not against and not with, but IN the wind. Trees, that we are / / / - )
Alan
donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
Well, if it is Peter he's a much better natured one.
But I'm waiting for "mom" to sound off.
don
On Dec 13, 2007, at 11:56 AM, Susan Clemons wrote:
So did I rejoin the list just in time to have Peter show up again?
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan E. DeBakey
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 9:57 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
Do we have a problem with(in) stuckness ||=?
Alan
Okay, Mom again. Why do mothers need so much? Attention? Later, gotta run :-))
Alan
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: Go, Don! It's good to hear your voice again. Nice and clear, whether or not it seems stuck.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/11faf07f/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 21:55:29 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 22:10:36 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <013f01c83dc2$3378be80$ff76480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <848680.35461.qm@web45805.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Susan Clemons <Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net> wrote: So did I rejoin the list just in time to have Peter show up again?
Susan
Will ask. Mom. When she come back in. Which she does. Usually. But since I am God-not -- cannot forsure ;-)
Alan
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/e1af6341/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Thu Dec 13 22:10:51 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Thu Dec 13 22:16:08 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language,
Map, and Email Identities
In-Reply-To: <20071213.131127.2428.411.ae.dropper@juno.com>
References: <20071213.131127.2428.411.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712131310i16efbbd0wc31aea8555ba6cad@mail.gmail.com>
- And can you say more about this?
I: Have to live with it a little longer. Will also try the synopsis you
ask for. Will take a little while since I'm doing Don's noname, Bob's book,
and my improv.
But since you ask, I'll do what I can. As you know, it will come when it
will come. But as you also know, I keep my promises.
On Dec 13, 2007 12:56 PM, <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
> I: My understanding of it didn't change. I simply realized that what I
> had known all along, and what nobody had taught me to do, was what the
> scientists were putting in their own language. Ever hear of the piece "Rage
> Over a Lost Penny"? Mozart of Beethoven. I forget which.
>
> Is it possible to synopsize Jeffery's words on observer/observed?
> (funny)
>
> I: In other words, for me, proprioception and a lot of stuff is a natural
> process that 'thinkers' have clogged up unnecessarily with conscious
> effort. And who knows, maybe that thought has made their brains rigid!
> Maybe that's what TAS as culprit is all about.
>
> -- And can you say more about this?
>
> -- funny
>
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 13:55:16 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
> writes:
>
> I: My understanding of it didn't change. I simply realized that what I
> had known all along, and what nobody had taught me to do, was what the
> scientists were putting in their own language. Ever hear of the piece "Rage
> Over a Lost Penny"? Mozart of Beethoven. I forget which.
>
> In other words, for me, proprioception and a lot of stuff is a natural
> process that 'thinkers' have clogged up unnecessarily with conscious
> effort. And who knows, maybe that thought has made their brains rigid!
> Maybe that's what TAS as culprit is all about.
>
> On Dec 12, 2007 1:41 PM, <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > Speaking of which (and much more interesting)
> > can you write of the new understanding of observer/observed? (funny)
> >
> > I: Why is that more interesting than scientific discovery of brain
> > plasticity?
> >
> > More interesting than the stuff about clarity.
> >
> > Something that is understood after its having been so
> > elusive for so long catches my interest in terms of how it might
> > be newly worded
> >
> > -- funny
> >
> > On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:54:50 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
> > writes:
> >
> > Speaking of which (and much more interesting)
> > can you write of the new understanding of observer/observed?
> >
> > I: Why is that more interesting than scientific discovery of brain
> > plasticity?
> >
> >
> > On Dec 11, 2007 9:59 AM, <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
> >
> > > It's over. True tired is true rest. They are inseparable.
> > > Whatever needed affirming is no longer there. It was never there.
> > > Not substantially. It was static. Static affirming static.
> > >
> > > Clarity is just that. Clarity.
> > > It's only edge is its flowing
> > > crystalline expression of itself
> > > about itself. It's expression
> > > is how it knows its beauty.
> > > It's expression *is * its beauty*.*
> > >
> > > Speaking of which (and much more interesting)
> > > can you write of the new understanding of observer/observed?
> > >
> > > -- funny
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 11:51:09 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
> > > writes:
> > >
> > > I am really very tired of saying words that are hurtful to me.
> > >
> > > I: Hello, Friend. Assuming that you are tired enough to want to do
> > > something about it, I share the following with you.
> > >
> > > I am reading a book on brain plasticity - The Mind and the Brain:
> > > Neuroplasticity and the Power of mental Force by Jeffrey M. Schwartz, MD and
> > > Sharon Begley. I normally don't like psychiatrists et al, but I read their
> > > ideas so I won't be ignorant on the topics. This one has a couple of things
> > > I think are valuable. About him personally, he says that at 15, he was
> > > convinced that the inner working of the mind was the only mystery worth
> > > pursuing. He also is critical of much psychiatry. And amazingly, some of
> > > his writing reads like the 'excitation - inhibition' work we do in
> > > Eurhythmics. He also has a very clear chapter on The Quantum Brain, and has
> > > managed to explain 'observer & observed' so it makes sense to me. Actually,
> > > it's something I've always been aware of, and used. But the fancy words in
> > > books made it seem like something esoteric and unfamiliar.
> > >
> > > Anyway, here is what I wanted to share with you. I have used
> > > variations of it myself, and it worked. It seems to me to incorporate and
> > > add something to the TAS process.
> > >
> > > Refocusing - the essence of applying mindful awareness (our
> > > 'proprioception') is to recognize unwanted thoughts as soon as they arise
> > > and refocus attention. Start by acknowledging the thought's presence, then
> > > saying your own specific version of "that is a false message due to a jammed
> > > transmission in the brain". The author makes me laugh. He says "The
> > > brain's gonna do what the brain's gonna do, but you don't have to let it
> > > push you around." I agree.
> > >
> > > In addition, affirmations also worked for me. I started with "Every
> > > day in every way, I'm getting better and better." Affirmations are the core
> > > of the Beautyway Ceremony from which the lines "Now I walk in Beauty" have
> > > been passed down as 'poetry'.
> > >
> > > Hozhoon - hozhoon - hozhoon - hozhoon.
> > >
> > > (The Navajo blessing from Beautyway said once for each of the four
> > > corners.)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Dec 9, 2007 10:30 AM, < ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Please continue when you get a moment (willam) (just an invitation
> > > > - not a necessity - you've already been most helpful). Also Irene had
> > > > written: "How does it work for you? Can we compare?"
> > > >
> > > > There has come more clarity about the "layered suspension" thing.
> > > > For those interested in detail, it took about 15 "layers" before the clarity
> > > > came this time. (It has usually taken about 4 or 5). And it's all about
> > > > clarity - "getting to" clarity.
> > > >
> > > > The "absence of clarity" is "layered" as well. These are layers of
> > > > evermore subtle and increasingly veiled defenses (untruths about self) which
> > > > correspond with the layers of suspension. The subtlety at each level though
> > > > - AT that level - breaks into obviousness. The obviousness is in the bodily
> > > > sensations. There is a lack of clarity - like sensations of static. The
> > > > initial satisfying feelings in the response evolve into a static sensation
> > > > and a non satisfaction.
> > > >
> > > > Incidentally, I have found that the only words that "hurt" me are
> > > > the words that *I* say. The words that others say, are never
> > > > hurtful. They are music. But that's another story. So it is these "words
> > > > that *I* say" that interest me. I am really very tired of saying
> > > > words that are hurtful to me.
> > > >
> > > > It is very clear now that the words that I say that are even
> > > > remotely [seeming] defensive [of a clearly untruthful self/world image]
> > > > maintain confusion or lack of clarity in my system.
> > > >
> > > > Thus, the "layered" suspension. Because the defenses are "layered"
> > > > too. One comes right after another. They get VERY fancy AND, initially (as I
> > > > said) quite satisfying and fleetingly pleasurable. Then the "pleasure" turns
> > > > to a kind of sour sensation. The thing just FLOPS, upon suspension.
> > > >
> > > > But the CLARITY, when it comes, comes with ..... well, clarity.
> > > > There is no flopping or static. The whole body feels clear. These is no
> > > > defensive wall anymore between "me" and the person[s] or group to whom the
> > > > response is being written.
> > > >
> > > > Incidentally, there is an awareness that the "response" is primarily
> > > > a response from me to me - sort of "written on the wind." And that it is its
> > > > own reward and complete satisfaction. It is perhaps like a quanta (if I
> > > > understand such - complete in itself, a little piece of wholeness).
> > > >
> > > > -- funny
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 10:51:46 -0500 ae.dropper@juno.com writes:
> > > >
> > > > Would you like to comment before i go further? You realize, of
> > > > course, where this is leading up to. (wm)
> > > >
> > > > Please continue. I have no idea where this is leading. Appreciative
> > > > for all of it though.
> > > >
> > > > -- funny
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 11:49:45 +0100 (Westeurop?ische Normalzeit)
> > > > "william" <w@david-bohm.net> writes:
> > > >
> > > > I didn't mean coping with the sense of detachment. I meant how to
> > > > cope with the tendency to suspend more and more; what you call "layered"
> > > > suspension (resulting in a sense of "detachment" for lack of a better word).
> > > > You see, at some point it starts getting a bit anti-social. When you are
> > > > always suspending, people are not getting their expected responses anymore.
> > > > Usually the reason for someone to say something or do something is to get a
> > > > response. This is also the case when someone utters an insult, or attempt to
> > > > hurt you: they usually do this because they are disappointed or angry; and
> > > > they want a reaction that shows they have touched you. Now, if you are
> > > > always in suspense mode then the attempted hurt doesn't work, because there
> > > > is no reaction on your side. At first glance this is perhaps not a bad thing
> > > > because it usually prevents the situation from escalating. However, there
> > > > is another aspect to this, which is that the attempted hurt could be
> > > > regarded as a form of communication; they are trying to say something. If
> > > > you don't respond, don't react (as a result of suspension) then you are
> > > > effectively refusing to communicate on this level. You may be willing to
> > > > communicate on a different level but that channel is not open both ways. The
> > > > point is, you are denying communication on the channel on which it is
> > > > invited.
> > > > So, what do you say to this? Because i am assuming it is not
> > > > actually your intention to deny communication. You are probably in
> > > > compassion mode, which however is not the channel open to whoever wants to
> > > > touch you. Have you reached a point where you would consider suspending
> > > > suspension, out of compassion, and give the person the feeling of having
> > > > touched you? Would you like to comment before i go further? You realize, of
> > > > course, where this is leading up to.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > *-------Original Message-------*
> > > >
> > > > *From:* ae.dropper@juno.com
> > > > *Date:* 07.12.2007 21:00:44
> > > > *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > > > *Subject:* Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending -
> > > > was: Language,Map, and Email Identities
> > > >
> > > > But more on this (perhaps based on the curious idea of "coping").
> > > >
> > > > There are times when I experience what you might be calling
> > > > "detachment" or something I might legitimately call "detachment." And there
> > > > are many childhood memories of something I can call "detachment," especially
> > > > when I was in school.
> > > >
> > > > This "detachment' breaks off into two categories; one is entirely
> > > > comfortable; the other is not.
> > > > The one that is not comfortable is a feeling of not belonging or not
> > > > feeling like a participant.
> > > > How to cope? If it's in a dialogue circle it can be as simple as
> > > > saying something. Anything.
> > > > But this experience is quite rare these days. And quite noticeable
> > > > for its rarity. And there is a
> > > > preference these days to not say something to ease the discomfort
> > > > but to just observe
> > > > what is going on beneath the discomfort.
> > > >
> > > > -- funny
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 13:06:26 -0500 ae.dropper@juno.com writes:
> > > > To identify with a concept of "detachment" it would have to be
> > > > 'detachment' from a layer that is SO thin that it is viscerally all but
> > > > indiscernible. Along with this, such "identity" requires imagining a
> > > > "something" that actually *does* the "detaching." This is possible
> > > > - this imagining. But it is clearly an isolated imagining and not a visceral
> > > > experience.
> > > >
> > > > I LOVE to "play the game." And with simultaneous "watching."
> > > >
> > > > -- funny
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 13:05:24 +0100 (Westeurop?ische Normalzeit)
> > > > "william" <w@david-bohm.net> writes:
> > > > Ok, now i understand what you were saying. Thanks for the hint.
> > > > Yes, i think you're right; that's my experience also. But i also noticed
> > > > that I need to counteract a tendency of feeling detached from the rest of
> > > > the world, like preferring to quietly watch the game from a distance instead
> > > > of playing it. Is this tendency also the case with you, and if so how are
> > > > you coping with this?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > *-------Original Message-------*
> > > >
> > > > *From:* ae.dropper@juno.com
> > > > *Date:* 06.12.2007 17:34:58
> > > > *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > > > *Subject:* [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was:
> > > > Language,Map, and Email Identities
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "The principle here is the same as that advanced by Rudolf Steiner
> > > > when he advised teachers to prepare their lessons painstakingly and then be
> > > > ready to sacrifice the prepared plan at the dictate of circumstances which
> > > > may point to an *entirely fresh approach* to their material."
> > > >
> > > > from: THE ART OF GOETHEAN CONVERSATION
> > > >
> > > > This speaks to what I was saying - except "sacrifice the prepared
> > > > plan " again and again.
> > > >
> > > > The response gets more and more "whole" each time. It draws on more
> > > > of what the group
> > > >
> > > > is saying as a whole. And with a little experience one comes to see
> > > > the "sacrifices"
> > > >
> > > > [of the satisfactions] as "investments" in evermore surprising
> > > > surprises. Or, one
> > > >
> > > > could say that one is "*spending*" the satisfaction of the response
> > > > on what further
> > > >
> > > > "*suspending*" might yield in terms of an even more surprising
> > > > response.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Simple suspension alone though has yielded
> > > >
> > > > surprise from the start. It's just an amazing discovery
> > > >
> > > > [the unfolding of this "layered" suspending] for someone really
> > > > interested in "suspension."
> > > >
> > > > Not recommending; just reporting.
> > > >
> > > > -- funny
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >"Suspension" just grows and grows. Where the surface fruits of
> > > > "suspension" are
> > > > >appreciated, suspension through the strata begins to show its
> > > > appeal. The fruits of
> > > > >suspension [of action, which includes speech, in relation to what
> > > > is read or heard] are
> > > > >that something unknown surfaces as a possible response. Very
> > > > satisfying to respond
> > > > >with these. But these too, can be suspended. It may take awhile to
> > > > be able to do this
> > > > >because the little bit of satisfaction needs to be "invested." Very
> > > > long story short, with
> > > > >each "reinvestment" something even more amazing surfaces.
> > > > >Eventually, there comes the curiosity about a kind of 'complete
> > > > investment'. This is the
> > > > >logical conclusion of Bohm's brilliant but humble and simple
> > > > proposal of "suspension'.
> > > > >Along the way of this, and relatively soon though, you will find
> > > > yourself responding with
> > > > >things you have never heard of before. So the process is never not
> > > > fun. And there is no
> > > > >rush for the "completion."
> > > > >-- funny
> > > >
> > > > Is there anyone out there who can make sense out of this? I am sorry
> > > > "funny" but to me it sounds as if you are drunk or crazy or demented. Or
> > > > could you possibly be enlightened, or are you an unrecognized artist, or
> > > > some brilliant genious ahead of his time, or what else could this be? Is
> > > > there anyway this could be understood as something other than sheer
> > > > nonsense? Or if you are talking from some higher intelligence could you
> > > > please come down and try to explain it to this stupid chimpansee?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/816e1b11/attachment.html
From lynne at lifedirectionscoach.com Thu Dec 13 22:14:44 2007
From: lynne at lifedirectionscoach.com (Lynne Tolk)
Date: Thu Dec 13 22:20:01 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <182467.11864.qm@web45814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <C386EED4.F8E8%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
Not always sure. Generally, when time and interest coincide.
Lynne
On 12/13/07 9:54 AM, "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> What makes you jump, then? Finally ;-)
>
>
>
> Alan
>
> Lynne Tolk <lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> wrote:
>
>> I?ve been here about a year and a half, & while I don?t always have time to
>> jump in, I do appreciate what can happen here.
>> Lynne
>
>
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it
> now.
> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51733/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HD
> tDypao8Wcj9tAcJ >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/95142f16/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Thu Dec 13 22:20:57 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Thu Dec 13 22:26:15 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Almost
In-Reply-To: <20071213.131127.2428.413.ae.dropper@juno.com>
References: <20071213.131127.2428.413.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712131320p70a69dcaoac759574829055aa@mail.gmail.com>
*touch?*
On Dec 13, 2007 12:59 PM, <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
> I: Good Grief, how gruesome, Pat.
>
> Especially for horse lovers. (White Castle hamburgers
> had a high percentage of horse meat in them).
>
> -- funny
>
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 13:57:37 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
> writes:
>
> I: Good Grief, how gruesome, Pat.
>
> On Dec 12, 2007 1:46 PM, <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > Two years from now there will be a terrible sponge shortage.
> > And people who have had surgery will be "mined" for sponges.
> > Those who have had many surgeries will be either wealthy
> > or in great danger, depending on their luck. Sponge "donation"
> > centers will open up in the back room of every dunkin donuts
> > and White Castle shop. Yes, White Castle is coming back.
> >
> > -- funny
> >
> > On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 09:19:12 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <
> > a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
> >
> > Hey funny. I not kidding. You must be God. That was news from a few
> > days back. I sure will go nowhere. This is fun funny. Tell us more about the
> > future. Funny you rule.
> >
> > Alan
> >
> > *ae.dropper@juno.com* wrote:
> >
> > I know. I gave you that information myself 3 or 4 years ago.
> >
> > -- funny
> >
> > On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 03:33:31 -0800 (PST) Alfred Landman <
> > landmana@yahoo.com> writes:
> >
> > Hi Ae.Dropper. Every year, in the United States about 1,500 people have
> > surgical objects accidentally left inside them after surgery, according to
> > medical studies. About two-thirds of the surgical objects left behind are
> > sponges. AL
> >
> > *ae.dropper@juno.com* wrote:
> >
> > Then there was that lunch with Germaine Greer.
> >
> > -- funny
> >
> > On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 10:19:10 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com>
> > writes:
> >
> > It actually refers to something I wrote mentioning Dennis Hopper, an old
> > friend.
> >
> > don
> >
> > On Dec 10, 2007, at 9:57 AM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
> >
> > The what, "hopper"? And where does that one come in here now? More
> > scrolling to do for me? O-boy --gender!--, this list is a wild ride.
> >
> > Alan
> >
> > *ae.dropper@juno.com* wrote:
> >
> > It's [the question] is in "the hopper." It seems a stretch but that's
> > not new. Connections LOVE to make themselves.
> >
> > -- funny
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 09:16:14 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <
> > a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
> >
> > Almost time for eggs and ham. That's for certain. But does that count,
> > too, Funny?
> >
> > Alan
> >
> > *ae.dropper@juno.com* wrote:
> >
> > "We can seldom go erect. Almost every man we meet requires some
> > civility, requires to be humored; -- he has some fame, some talent, some
> > whim of religion or philanthropy in his head that is *not to be
> > questioned*, and so spoils all conversation with him." -- Emerson
> >
> > "Almost"
> >
> > It's always the "almost" that promises faithfully the
> > alternative that delivers the tiniest exception that changes
> > e v e r y t h i n g.
> >
> >
> > -- funny
> >
> > info: <http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue>
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> >
> > <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51734/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/4c52b1e4/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Thu Dec 13 22:23:44 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Thu Dec 13 22:28:26 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
Message-ID: <20071213.162709.2428.417.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Was that a mistake, do you think? (df)
The only mistake I ever make
Is the mistake of thinking
I've made a mistake.
-- funny
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:41:32 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com>
writes:
Back when our London group was still in full swing, a lot of us used to
go out for a pizza after the session. But one guy always demurred, I
finally asked why he didn't join us and he told me that it was because
Bohm had always made much of the idea of impersonal fellowship and he
thought he should keep it impersonal. This was a take that I had never
considered. But I persuaded him that personal was okay and he started to
come along.
Was that a mistake, do you think?
don
On Dec 13, 2007, at 9:56 AM, ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
"Impersonal Fellowship" [Koinnoia] as a "purpose" is a great one because
it resists image making of itself. But it cannot be set or imposed
because as "resistant" as it might be to image making, it is still quite
possible to "imagine" it. With such "imagination" set, the assumptions
underlying the image are "officially" made unavailable to inquiry.
But as they say "If it ain't broke don't fix it." And as I speak, I can
see that "Impersonal Fellowship" as a goal or purpose is quite far from
our general or shared imaginings. "Our" as relating to face to face as
well as list happenings.
So this is not meant to be taken as a "danger alert." (And yet it is).
-- funny
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:23:36 -0700 Lynne Tolk
<lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> writes:
Hi Penelope,
It really does take some perseverance. You just came in with two others
who sparked a rather terse style, but it?s not always like that. Bohm
said that while a dialogue group should not have a goal (stifles
creativity), it does need a purpose, which he suggested was ?impersonal
fellowship? which serves as the glue to hold people. That takes time
(probably especially online). I?ve been here about a year and a half, &
while I don?t always have time to jump in, I do appreciate what can
happen here.
Lynne
On 12/13/07 6:27 AM, "Penelope Duby" <pennyduby@yahoo.com> wrote:
Ok, I get it. Closed circle, no particular interest in
communication.............you guys are truly a " strange loop". I'll
unsubscribe.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/a74343a9/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Thu Dec 13 22:26:25 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Thu Dec 13 22:31:43 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2
In-Reply-To: <20071213.103226.2428.392.ae.dropper@juno.com>
References: <20071213.103226.2428.392.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712131326g20630599x4cabbd0e12cbaf44@mail.gmail.com>
They are "funnies" too. Just not runny funnies
I: So why are some funnies runny and some aren't?
On Dec 13, 2007 10:32 AM, <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
> And trees, unlike people, can't run away from your spending time with
> them. (I)
>
> Maybe *that's* why I've been so alone all these years.
> All of the other funny's have run away from spending time with me.
> Except for all these funny trees. Except they are not "trees" at all.
> They are "funnies" too. Just not runny funnies.
>
> -- funny
>
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 09:58:07 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
> writes:
>
> I: I absolutely agree, Alfred. That's why I'd like to find a way for
> BDers to know each other better. A way to meet and spend some time together
> in our natural habitats, or to approximate it as much as possible. And I'm
> not defining cyberspace as 'natural'. One can manipulate words any way you
> like.
> Some say words manipulate us, but that's a two way street.
>
> And trees, unlike people, can't run away from your spending time with
> them.
>
> On Dec 13, 2007 4:10 AM, Alfred Landman < landmana@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Irene Darcy. If a brain wants to learn about trees, for
> > instance, thought could simply spend time with them in their natural habitat
> > etc (which is what many traditionally "primitive" people do). Breaking
> > trees into their cellular components and so forth enables genetic
> > manipulation of them, for instance, but this can't be said to "objectively"
> > help one get to know a tree better than simply spending time with them. In
> > fact, it does the precise opposite. This brain can never genuinely know a
> > living organism that you've instrumentalized and objectified like that. AL
> >
> > *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
> >
> > Subject: Space and Time (Don F)
> >
> > From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
> > Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 16:59:24 EDT
> >
> >
> > to: Bohm, Subject Space and Time
> > Dear Don, nice wisdom in your Sep.25 'Space & Time note. Yet:(your
> > quote):
> > >...<
> > Foucault was right: there is no such epoque as the present one. His, or
> > ours, does not matter. Past reflection does not match live experience.
> > WE are the experiencers, not memory. So: hold your enthusiasm.
> >
> > Also: I was glad: A rare thing on this list a reference to David Bohm!
> >
> > I find this unending exchange "about the list-filling" redundant. In my
> > (not so humble) opinion a list is like love: practice it, don't explain.
> > If it does not live up to your expectations, there are other lists to
> > choose from. Nobody can change BB or anybody else. Accept it or leave
> > it.
> > To explain one's views ABOUT participating: nice, but keep it short. And
> > have mercy on the receiving parties: half a dozen posts per day per per-
> > son in exorbitant length, or sometimes 5 consecutive attachments is
> > rude.
> > Who does not have the time to write short, should keep it. Length is
> > negligent.
> > And to the following exchange I have a plagiarism from Doug Bilodeau, an
> > acclaimed physicist from the JCS-list:(see below) - the 'exchange':
> > *
> > " >JPL:
> > >"Shout, shout, let it all out
> > >these are the things I can do without,
> > >come on, I'm talking to you, come on.." whereupon
> > " >>Wm:
> > >>Pssst... not so loud, I think the others are meditating.
> > William
> > *
> > Not so sure! I refer to my remark on a "no response" to a post:
> > "si tacent clamant": Dough B: corrected me: "or: si tacent dormiunt".
> >
> > From: "Chris Hooley" < chooley@idnsi.net>
> > Subject: Re: purpose of list
> > Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:24:15 PDT
> >
> > To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
> > Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
> >
> > Hello All,
> >
> > I've heard nothing from the group for several days. So, I'm sending
> > this
> > message to check for echo.
> >
> > Regards
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > From: "Chris Hooley" <chooley@idnsi.net>
> > Subject: inside out
> > Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:19:50 PDT
> >
> > To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
> > Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
> >
> > Hello Everyone,
> >
> > I would share another thought that I found interesting.
> >
> > The gastrointestinal track is actually "outside" the body in the sense
> > that
> > it's a long, open-ended tube. In the same way, "no-thing", which is (or
> >
> > can be seen to be) at the center of every manifested form, is
> > continuous,
> > contiguous to itself. It is "outside" the space/time form though when
> > seen
> > from within the form it appears to be isolated like droplets.
> >
> > My intuition is that we can focus (reside *as* attention) either on the
> > form or on the un-form that borders it.
> >
> > The experience of attending to the un-form in-between can't be fully
> > represented, even to ourselves, I think, but experimenting with this
> > viewing angle has been intriguing.
> >
> > Received: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:21:50 +0100 (BST)
> > Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:19:21 +0100 (BST)
> >
> > From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
> > Subject: Re:intentional dying
> >
> > Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
> >
> > kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer
> > "intentional
> > dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
> > 'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely
> > right:
> >
> > > ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
> > >cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
> >
> > >chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during
> > about
> > >twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
> > >self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism
> > would
> > >try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind.
> > Normally,
> > >our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on
> > with
> > >our work. =
> >
> > I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that
> > it's
> > sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to
> > get
> > back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt
> > that
> > with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you
> > forget
> > -- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
> > rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess,
> > is
> > *acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
> > because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
> > lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
> >
> > I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
> > Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you
> > do
> > not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime."
> > But
> > I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth
> > surely is
> > we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are
> > NOT
> > people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis
> > terms
> > -- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe
> > away
> > the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's
> > no
> > obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood
> > takes.
> > So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may
> > go
> > through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts
> > everything
> > the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
> > top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and
> > out a
> > lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
> > enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no
> > one
> > responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems
> > to
> > have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is
> > falling --
> > and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
> > hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
> > unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
> >
> > Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
> > short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
> > *me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our
> > common
> > humanity.
> > I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal
> > error'
> > note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
> >
> > (Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
> > someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day
> > I
> > re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am
> > speaking
> > to one of its authors!
> >
> >
> > >A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on
> > the
> > >one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
> > >
> > >The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
> > >directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
> > >universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
> >
> > Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with
> > 'unlived
> > lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment
> > of
> > birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and
> > so
> > no full living either. No?
> >
> > I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
> > >
> > >is dialogue about facilitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
> > >
> > >julia
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > <http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue>
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Irene
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/d899c258/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 22:36:56 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 22:42:11 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <20071213.162709.2428.417.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <228389.14769.qm@web45812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote: Was that a mistake, do you think? (df)
The only mistake I ever make
Is the mistake of thinking
I've made a mistake.
-- funny
Hey, I like that ____ Come to think, might be-come a mistake --"later--. To thinkg. That. That way ;-)
Alan
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/691fb744/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 22:37:20 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 22:42:35 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language,
Map, and Email Identities
In-Reply-To: <662977.82645.qm@web45804.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <64741.58916.qm@web45811.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Talking about (not)funny: Want to hear --read-- something, funny:
You are visitor no. 2137225 = Alan ;-),
What is Mensa?
Mensa was founded in England in 1946 by Roland Berrill, a barrister, and Dr. Lance Ware, a scientist and lawyer. They had the idea of forming a society for bright people, the only qualification for membership of which was a high IQ. The original aims were, as they are today, to create a society that is non-political and free from all racial or religious distinctions. The society welcomes people from every walk of life whose IQ is in the top 2% of the population, with the objective of enjoying each other's company and participating in a wide range of social and cultural activities.
What are Mensa's goals?
Mensa has three stated purposes: to identify and foster human intelligence for the benefit of humanity, to encourage research in the nature, characteristics and uses of intelligence, and to promote stimulating intellectual and social opportunities for its members.
How many members does Mensa have?
Today there are some 100,000 Mensans in 100 countries throughout the world. There are active Mensa organizations in over 40 countries on every continent except Antarctica. Membership numbers are also available for specific National Groups.
What kind of people are Members of Mensa?
There is simply no one prevailing characteristic of Mensa members other than high IQ. There are Mensans for whom Mensa provides a sense of family, and others for whom it is a casual social activity. There have been many marriages made in Mensa, but for many people, it is simply a stimulating opportunity for the mind. Most Mensans have a good sense of humor, and they like to talk. And, usually, they have a lot to say.
Mensans range in age from 4 to 94, but most are between 20 and 60. In education they range from preschoolers to high school dropouts to people with multiple doctorates. There are Mensans on welfare and Mensans who are millionaires. As far as occupations, the range is staggering. Mensa has professors and truck drivers, scientists and firefighters, computer programmers and farmers, artists, military people, musicians, laborers, police officers, glassblowers--the diverse list goes on and on. There are famous Mensans and prize-winning Mensans, but there are many whose names you wouldn't know.
What does "Mensa" mean?
The word "Mensa" means "table" in Latin. The name stands for a round-table society, where race, color, creed, national origin, age, politics, educational or social background are irrelevant.
What opinions does Mensa have?
Mensa takes no stand on politics, religion or social issues. Mensa has members from so many different countries and cultures with differing points of view, that for Mensa to espouse a particular point of view would go against its role as a forum for all points of view. Of course, individual Mensa members often have strong opinions--and several of them. It is said that in a room with 12 Mensans you will find at least 13 differing opinions on any given subject.
How do I qualify for Mensa?
Membership in Mensa is open to persons who have attained a score within the upper two percent of the general population on an approved intelligence test that has been properly administered and supervised. There is no other qualification or disqualification for membership eligibility.
The term "IQ score" is widely used but poorly defined. There are a large number of tests with different scales. The result on one test of 132 can be the same as a score 148 on another test. Some intelligence tests don't use IQ scores at all. Mensa has set a percentile as cutoff to avoid this confusion. Candidates for membership in Mensa must achieve a score at or above the 98th percentile on a standard test of intelligence (a score that is greater than or equal to that achieved by 98 percent of the general population taking the test).
Generally, there are two ways to prove that you qualify for Mensa: either take the Mensa test, or submit a qualifying test score from another test. There are a large number of intelligence tests that are "approved". More information on whether a test you have taken is approved, as well as information on the procedure for taking the Mensa test, can be obtained from the nearest Mensa office. There are no on-line tests that can be used for admission to Mensa. Feel free to contact Mensa for specific details about eligibility.
Mensa has no other eligibility requirements other than IQ testing. However, many tests are not valid for people under the age of 16. You should contact the nearest Mensa office for more information.
How do I get proof of my previous test scores?
Contact the testing service that administered the test to you requesting that they send you a report showing your score. Include as much information as you can about yourself and regarding when and where you were tested. If you can't give an exact answer, an approximation is better than nothing. Many testing services charge a fee for sending reports; you should give the service a call before writing them.
If your school did testing, write to the school you attended, and ask for a CERTIFIED copy of your score. It must include your birth date, the name of the test, and a clearly defined number, i.e., IQ, or percentile rank nationally. Mensa does not accept achievement tests. The school seal must be stamped on the report.
For psychologist/agency testing, have the report sent on professional letterhead, with the psychologist's or agency's license or registration number. Mensa accepts tests given only by those people qualified to do testing privately in the area in which the examiner resides. Date of test, name of test, and full score must be given, and the report must be signed.
Any signature-guaranteed or notarized copy of any of the reports will be accepted, other non-verifiable copies may be rejected.
Is there a Mensa test?
If you've never taken an IQ test, or don't want to bother with getting official copies of your test scores, then Mensa can test you. You will be put in contact with the local testing coordinator who will tell you about specific testing dates and places.
In some countries, a pre-test is available which you can take in the privacy of your home. To find out whether such a test is available in your country, please see National Groups. When you've finished the pre-test, send it back to the address instructed. It will be scored, and you will be notified of the results. If your score is high enough, you'll be invited to take a qualifying supervised test. The pre-test is just for practice; you can't use it to qualify for Mensa even if you score at or above the 98th percentile. Taking a pre-test is not required for admission, however, many people take it simply for the challenge.
Feel free to contact Mensa for more information or to arrange testing. More specific information is also available about testing costs for any of the National Groups.
If you want to take a practice, on-line test, the Mensa Workout is an intelligence quiz in which you have half an hour to answer 30 questions. When you submit your answers, your test is instantly scored, and you can see how your score measures up. The answers to the questions are provided along with discussion of the answers. The Workout is not an IQ test, and can't be used for qualification to join Mensa.
You are visitor no. 2137225
"Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
Funny, please, fill me in. How come some funnies are not, well, laugh: funny ;-?
Like I. No(t)funny, I.
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
I: In other words, for me, proprioception and a lot of stuff is a natural process that 'thinkers' have clogged up unnecessarily with conscious effort. And who knows, maybe that thought has made their brains....
Ps: Need a Plumber?
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/752f1992/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 22:39:34 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 22:44:51 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Almost
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712131320p70a69dcaoac759574829055aa@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <162718.3595.qm@web45813.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
touch?
Is that some of that stuff(ing) that those french(fries) do. Too--?
Alan
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
touch?
On Dec 13, 2007 12:59 PM, <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
I: Good Grief, how gruesome, Pat.
Especially for horse lovers. (White Castle hamburgers
had a high percentage of horse meat in them).
-- funny
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 13:57:37 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com> writes:
I: Good Grief, how gruesome, Pat.
On Dec 12, 2007 1:46 PM, <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
Two years from now there will be a terrible sponge shortage.
And people who have had surgery will be "mined" for sponges.
Those who have had many surgeries will be either wealthy
or in great danger, depending on their luck. Sponge "donation"
centers will open up in the back room of every dunkin donuts
and White Castle shop. Yes, White Castle is coming back.
-- funny
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 09:19:12 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Hey funny. I not kidding. You must be God. That was news from a few days back. I sure will go nowhere. This is fun funny. Tell us more about the future. Funny you rule.
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
I know. I gave you that information myself 3 or 4 years ago.
-- funny
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 03:33:31 -0800 (PST) Alfred Landman <landmana@yahoo.com> writes:
Hi Ae.Dropper. Every year, in the United States about 1,500 people have surgical objects accidentally left inside them after surgery, according to medical studies. About two-thirds of the surgical objects left behind are sponges. AL
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Then there was that lunch with Germaine Greer.
-- funny
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 10:19:10 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> writes:
It actually refers to something I wrote mentioning Dennis Hopper, an old friend.
don
On Dec 10, 2007, at 9:57 AM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
The what, "hopper"? And where does that one come in here now? More scrolling to do for me? O-boy --gender!--, this list is a wild ride.
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
It's [the question] is in "the hopper." It seems a stretch but that's
not new. Connections LOVE to make themselves.
-- funny
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 09:16:14 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Almost time for eggs and ham. That's for certain. But does that count, too, Funny?
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
"We can seldom go erect. Almost every man we meet requires some civility, requires to be humored; -- he has some fame, some talent, some whim of religion or philanthropy in his head that is not to be questioned, and so spoils all conversation with him." -- Emerson
"Almost"
It's always the "almost" that promises faithfully the
alternative that delivers the tiniest exception that changes
e v e r y t h i n g.
-- funny
info:
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/9910bd3d/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 22:42:19 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 22:54:13 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Point taken
In-Reply-To: <C386EED4.F8E8%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
Message-ID: <325078.24738.qm@web45801.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Now, that did satisfy me not -- Susan, I need, I want, I yearn another horse, another horse, another ;-}}
Alan
Lynne Tolk <lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> wrote:
Not always sure. Generally, when time and interest coincide.
Lynne
On 12/13/07 9:54 AM, "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
What makes you jump, then? Finally ;-)
Alan
Lynne Tolk <lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> wrote:
I?ve been here about a year and a half, & while I don?t always have time to jump in, I do appreciate what can happen here.
Lynne
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51733/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ >
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/a5524548/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 22:54:33 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 22:59:48 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language,
Map, and Email Identities
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712131310i16efbbd0wc31aea8555ba6cad@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <720122.38544.qm@web45807.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote: . Will take a little while since I'm doing Don's noname, Bob's book, and my improv.
Hi I, report before you did that teaching you are your self (to) "improv". This did ring a bell not with me, so I to Mom it took, to ask. She came back with that she has no whisper either, but says that she does: to take it back to you, and ask. So, here I goes: How, in haven, does one TEACH one self how to IMPROV :""""))
Alan
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/46c3e772/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Thu Dec 13 23:06:25 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Thu Dec 13 23:11:42 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language,
Map, and Email Identities
In-Reply-To: <720122.38544.qm@web45807.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c47283890712131310i16efbbd0wc31aea8555ba6cad@mail.gmail.com>
<720122.38544.qm@web45807.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712131406g2ad5b158rfafe79ae54cfd975@mail.gmail.com>
I: That's when the observer and the observed work together.
On Dec 13, 2007 4:54 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
>
> . Will take a little while since I'm doing Don's noname, Bob's book, and
> my improv.
>
>
> Hi I, report before you did that teaching you are your self (to) "improv".
> This did ring a bell not with me, so I to Mom it took, to ask. She came
> back with that she has no whisper either, but says that she does: to take it
> back to you, and ask. So, here I goes: How, in haven, does one TEACH one
> self how to IMPROV :""""))
>
> Alan
>
> ------------------------------
> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51438/*http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/f1915d03/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Thu Dec 13 23:17:09 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Thu Dec 13 23:22:24 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Unfolding of "layered" suspending - was: Language,
Map, and Email Identities
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712131406g2ad5b158rfafe79ae54cfd975@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <816992.80670.qm@web45811.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Funny, thought "observer" = "observed" and v.v. 0--)
So no idea where that "to-gether" might spring from ;-)
But then, haven't read as many trees as you either ;-))
All right, over-due to chop down some more ;-///
Alan
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: That's when the observer and the observed work together.
On Dec 13, 2007 4:54 PM, Alan E. DeBakey < a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
. Will take a little while since I'm doing Don's noname, Bob's book, and my improv.
Hi I, report before you did that teaching you are your self (to) "improv". This did ring a bell not with me, so I to Mom it took, to ask. She came back with that she has no whisper either, but says that she does: to take it back to you, and ask. So, here I goes: How, in haven, does one TEACH one self how to IMPROV :""""))
Alan
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071213/6e53d9e4/attachment.html