From DStulberg at msw-law.com  Sat Oct 14 00:02:03 2006
From: DStulberg at msw-law.com (Dorothy Stulberg)
Date: Sun Oct 15 00:58:52 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Direction dia-logos (resent)
Message-ID: <0D25D6CD52646E4B992A5CAED007D1695CFEC9@msw2k.msw.local>

Prissy PhD sounds like a real assumption and generalization that needs
some thoughtful consideration.   
Working on being present in the "now" is worth while.  I know when I
"strive" I lose the moment--it is so easy to do during a trial or even
during a deposition or even when trying to understand the position of a
client.  I can tell when I lose my "self" but often can't stop.  I think
it is possible to be in the now even when striving if it is an honest
striving. D.

-----Original Message-----
From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Regina
Bensch-Coe
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 9:17 AM
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Direction dia-logos (resent)

We unfold and enfold simultaneously. There is nothing else. (pat)

To have moments of this awareness of "unfolding and enfolding
simultaneously" is to live in the "Now," to be fully present, to not
grasp or seek anything. When I am striving, I am in a reflex-mode, in a
non-proprioception state, and the sense of "unfolding and enfolding
simultaneously" is so easily forgotten.

Regina


>From: ae.dropper@juno.com
>Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Direction dia-logos  (resent)
>Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 08:46:31 -0400
>
>There's the old, old idea of being logos directed.  Two millennia ago, 
>wise men were said to be logos directed.  Perhaps PROCESS THOUGHT is a 
>way to understand that -- not the kind of process philosophy that would

>require a prissy PhD to explain -- just everyday knocking around sense.
>The idea is that many,many processes must obtain  before  you can  bat 
>an eye lash, before you can know that you are.  (don L)
>
>We unfold and enfold simultaneously. There is nothing else. The
"process"
>part (regarding self)
>is hidden from the "outer" senses but not from the "inner" senses.  
>This is a "self - aware movement. It is like musical "movement [where, 
>incidentally, the "outer"
>senses do perceive the
>simultaneity" of unfoldment / enfoldment].   (pat)
>
>
>When it became law that everyone must "have a personal identity", 
>somehow we stopped being wise and started acting  and pretending to be 
>the image associated with the personal identity.  That  is, we ignore 
>the processes
>  that we are, by which we interact with the WHOLE and  act and pretend

>that we are identical with the optical image, the photo image.
>
>Giving careful attention to universal  processes, logos, perhaps we can

>begin to investigate and perhaps somehow identify with those processes 
>that actually identify what we are instead of just what the imagery 
>suggests.
>
>Reason-ance? -- Don Lay
>
>Yes. There seem to be such identity phases or moments - if it could be 
>called that - a sense that 'what I am is process or in process'. But it

>seems that even this kind of identification is not necessary - except 
>probably as a means of attempting to think and speak of what is 
>happening now in relation to what was happening when identity was with 
>images.
>
>pat


>_______________________________________________
>info:
>www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
>dialogue facilitator:
>facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
>Administrator of the mailing list:
>admin@david-bohm.net
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>


_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________


From DStulberg at msw-law.com  Sat Oct 14 00:05:43 2006
From: DStulberg at msw-law.com (Dorothy Stulberg)
Date: Sun Oct 15 01:02:25 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
Message-ID: <0D25D6CD52646E4B992A5CAED007D1695CFECA@msw2k.msw.local>

is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary
definitions?  D.

________________________________

From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
Arizmendi
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 7:59 AM
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)



Could it  possibly mean that words have  temporary and arbitrary
definitions?

My research yesterday on improvisation definitely bears this out.  Will
elaborate more when I've sorted out my notes, and have more to take and
incorporate today at CCNY.  

Preliminary findings are that by the application of Bohm ideas and
principles, we will forge a new path.

Hurray!  k


On 10/13/06 8:44 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:



	I'm in! Let's work with it.
	 
	pat
	 
	On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:23:15 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
writes:
	

		
		 
		 
		What does it  mean that the Greek   logos has been
interpreted as  meaning reason? as meaning Ratio? as  meaning meaning?
What is the meaning?   
		
		 
		 
		Could it  possibly mean that words have  temporary and
arbitrary definitions?  What would happen if we decided,  for  just an
experiment, to use the idea that logos  means meaning?
		
		 
		 
		Then perhaps we could seriously consider dialogue  as
dia meaning or in terms of dia meaning.  -- Don  L 
		 
		 
		 
		 
		 
		 
		 
		

			
			----- Original Message ----- 
			 
			From:  Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com 
			 
			To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org  
			 
			Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:05  AM
			 
			Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject:  reason-ance,
logos-ance
			 
			
			 
			
			Rodger __Lead the way Don. Tell us about
Reason-ance, logos-ance,  ratio-ance. _R
			.
			.
			From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
			Subject: Re: Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] music
& assumptions
			To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
			.
			.
			It  seems to me that so long as we continue
talking about the persona instead of  instead of the processes, we
continue to pollute  experience.   Reason-ance, logos-ance, ratio-ance?
-- Don L
			

	
	
________________________________

	_______________________________________________
	info:
	www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
	
	post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
	
	dialogue facilitator:
	facilitator@david-bohm.net
	
	Administrator of the mailing list:
	admin@david-bohm.net
	
	_______________________________________________
	
	
	



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061013/81b8d27d/attachment.html
From DStulberg at msw-law.com  Sat Oct 14 00:15:57 2006
From: DStulberg at msw-law.com (Dorothy Stulberg)
Date: Sun Oct 15 01:12:40 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
Message-ID: <0D25D6CD52646E4B992A5CAED007D1695CFECB@msw2k.msw.local>

It's funny.  Today a client and I met with the opposite side.  She told
me I am too nice and don't have the inutition of how bad the other
people are.  She has an intuition, according to her, of who is being
honest and who is a "good" person.  
I thought about that on the two hour drive back from the meeting.  
I have fought that kind of intuition, if I ever had it.  I don't want to
begin with the idea someone is cheating or evil (Bush aside--he has
given so many examples it is beyond intuition.)  The idea of Bohm and of
collaborative learning has directed me to avoid deciding what kind of
person a person is.  Rather look at the actions and talk about them and
try to understand the grounding of the other one.
I'm rattling as usual.  This has been a very demanding day.  D.
 


________________________________

From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
Arizmendi
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:10 AM
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition


Morning, Rodger -

Thanks for the "heart" reference.

As for "intuition" - are you referring to these definitions?

in*tu*i*tion n
1.    the state of being aware of or knowing something without having to
discover or perceive it, or the ability to do this
2.    something known or believed instinctively, without actual evidence
for it
3.    immediate knowledge of something

Encarta(r) World English Dictionary (c) 1999 Microsoft Corporation. All
rights reserved. Developed for Microsoft by Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.

I get hunches (see the book "Blink"), but I don't consider that
knowledge.  And when I get a hunch, possibly a variation on the idea of
"theory", I don't consider that knowledge in the sense of scientific
fact.  It is definitely something I investigate further.  

Also, I'm curious about the subtext of this particular question.  I'm
sensing a little abrasiveness below the surface.  Hope I'm wrong.

Best, k


On 10/13/06 6:53 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com"
<Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com> wrote:



	Rodger __Intuition. Are you asking about intuition because you
have no personal experience of intuition? 
	
	Like photographic memory, intuition does not scientifically
exist.  In science, photographic memory exists only by other names,
according to the era you search for it;  Eidetic-memory is a present
favorite, while Epidetectorial memory was a previous.
	
	While intuition may not exist, there are many related areas
which do -- telekinetic, telepathic, etc.
	
	And in fact I do consider the unique neural cell process in the
human heart to be part the component of conscience. The trouble is,
people always want -knowing- defined according to the brain.
	
	To know more about neural cells of the heart: -Basic & Clinical
Neurocardiology, J.A. Armour, J.L. Ardell- describes the heart from a
purely medical standpoint. _R
	. 
	.
	Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 09:34:00 -0400
	From: Kathryn Arizmendi <tangykatt@earthlink.net>
	Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: No right brain?
	To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
	.
	Did you and the scientist you worked with define intuition?
	
	Where can I find scientific information on "the hearts own
complex neuronal
	processing and memory capabilities."
	
	What do you mean by "heart"?  For a while, I thought you meant
my heart
	inside my body pumping blood, but I don't think so now.
	.
	.
	
________________________________

	_______________________________________________
	info:
	www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
	
	post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
	
	dialogue facilitator:
	facilitator@david-bohm.net
	
	Administrator of the mailing list:
	admin@david-bohm.net
	
	_______________________________________________
	
	
	



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061013/420569c8/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 04:36:39 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 05:35:06 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
In-Reply-To: <0D25D6CD52646E4B992A5CAED007D1695CFECB@msw2k.msw.local>
Message-ID: <C155C577.37E8%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

 Rather look at the actions and talk about them and try to understand the
grounding of the other one.
I'm rattling as usual.  This has been a very demanding day.  D.

Hello D ? I don?t remember meeting you, but I agree with your first and last
sentences.  Have a restful night.  k


On 10/13/06 6:15 PM, "Dorothy Stulberg" <DStulberg@msw-law.com> wrote:

> It's funny.  Today a client and I met with the opposite side.  She told me I
> am too nice and don't have the inutition of how bad the other people are.  She
> has an intuition, according to her, of who is being honest and who is a "good"
> person.  
> I thought about that on the two hour drive back from the meeting.
> I have fought that kind of intuition, if I ever had it.  I don't want to begin
> with the idea someone is cheating or evil (Bush aside--he has given so many
> examples it is beyond intuition.)  The idea of Bohm and of collaborative
> learning has directed me to avoid deciding what kind of person a person is.
> Rather look at the actions and talk about them and try to understand the
> grounding of the other one.
> I'm rattling as usual.  This has been a very demanding day.  D.
>  
> 
> 
> From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
> [mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn Arizmendi
> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:10 AM
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
> 
> Morning, Rodger -
> 
> Thanks for the ?heart? reference.
> 
> As for ?intuition? - are you referring to these definitions?
> 
> in?tu?i?tion n
> 1.    the state of being aware of or knowing something without having to
> discover or perceive it, or the ability to do this
> 2.    something known or believed instinctively, without actual evidence for
> it
> 3.    immediate knowledge of something
> 
> Encarta? World English Dictionary ? 1999 Microsoft Corporation. All rights
> reserved. Developed for Microsoft by Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.
> 
> I get hunches (see the book ?Blink?), but I don?t consider that knowledge.
> And when I get a hunch, possibly a variation on the idea of ?theory?, I don?t
> consider that knowledge in the sense of scientific fact.  It is definitely
> something I investigate further.
> 
> Also, I?m curious about the subtext of this particular question.  I?m sensing
> a little abrasiveness below the surface.  Hope I?m wrong.
> 
> Best, k
> 
> 
> On 10/13/06 6:53 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com" <Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> Rodger __Intuition. Are you asking about intuition  because you have no
>> personal experience of intuition?
>> 
>> Like  photographic memory, intuition does not scientifically exist.  In
>> science, photographic memory exists only by other names, according to the era
>> you search for it;  Eidetic-memory is a present favorite, while
>> Epidetectorial memory was a previous.
>> 
>> While intuition may not exist,  there are many related areas which do --
>> telekinetic, telepathic,  etc.
>> 
>> And in fact I do consider the unique neural cell process in the  human heart
>> to be part the component of conscience. The trouble is, people  always want
>> -knowing- defined according to the brain.
>> 
>> To know more  about neural cells of the heart: -Basic & Clinical
>> Neurocardiology, J.A.  Armour, J.L. Ardell- describes the heart from a purely
>> medical standpoint.  _R
>> . 
>> .
>> Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 09:34:00 -0400
>> From:  Kathryn Arizmendi <tangykatt@earthlink.net>
>> Subject: Re:  [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: No right brain?
>> To:  <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
>> .
>> Did you and the scientist you  worked with define intuition?
>> 
>> Where can I find scientific information  on ?the hearts own complex neuronal
>> processing and memory  capabilities.?
>> 
>> What do you mean by ?heart??  For a while, I  thought you meant my heart
>> inside my body pumping blood, but I don?t think  so now.
>> .
>> .
>>  
>> 
>>  _______________________________________________
>> info:
>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>> 
>> post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>> 
>> dialogue  facilitator:
>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>> 
>> Administrator of the mailing  list:
>> admin@david-bohm.net
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061013/a002a19b/attachment.html
From donlay at gte.net  Sat Oct 14 04:41:37 2006
From: donlay at gte.net (Don Lay)
Date: Sun Oct 15 05:39:54 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
References: <0D25D6CD52646E4B992A5CAED007D1695CFECA@msw2k.msw.local>
Message-ID: <002d01c6ef3a$45700a30$a503a8c0@your0548c161e1>

Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary definitions? -- D.
 
What about meaning?  It seems easy to see that definitions are arbitrary.  Is it easy to see that meaning is not, that there is something ultimate about meaning.  For example, dark clouds mean rain.  Thick bark on the North side of a tree may mean a cold winter is on the way.

Is the meaning of dark clouds as ultimate as is energy and matter?  Is the meaning of heavier bark on the North side of a tree as fundamental, as ultimate as matter and energy?

Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark? 

What is human experience is as meaningful as storm clouds or thicker bark prior to  severe winter}? -- Don L




  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Dorothy Stulberg 
  To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
  Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:05 PM
  Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


  is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary definitions?  D.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org [mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn Arizmendi
  Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 7:59 AM
  To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
  Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)



  Could it  possibly mean that words have  temporary and arbitrary definitions?

  My research yesterday on improvisation definitely bears this out.  Will elaborate more when I've sorted out my notes, and have more to take and incorporate today at CCNY.  

  Preliminary findings are that by the application of Bohm ideas and principles, we will forge a new path.

  Hurray!  k


  On 10/13/06 8:44 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:


    I'm in! Let's work with it.
     
    pat
     
    On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:23:15 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:


       
       
      What does it  mean that the Greek   logos has been interpreted as  meaning reason? as meaning Ratio? as  meaning meaning?  What is the meaning?   

       
       
      Could it  possibly mean that words have  temporary and arbitrary definitions?  What would happen if we decided,  for  just an experiment, to use the idea that logos  means meaning?

       
       
      Then perhaps we could seriously consider dialogue  as dia meaning or in terms of dia meaning.  -- Don  L 
       
       
       
       
       
       
       


        ----- Original Message ----- 
         
        From:  Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com 
         
        To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org  
         
        Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:05  AM
         
        Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject:  reason-ance, logos-ance
         

         

        Rodger __Lead the way Don. Tell us about Reason-ance, logos-ance,  ratio-ance. _R
        .
        .
        From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
        Subject: Re: Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] music & assumptions
        To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
        .
        .
        It  seems to me that so long as we continue talking about the persona instead of  instead of the processes, we continue to pollute  experience.   Reason-ance, logos-ance, ratio-ance? -- Don L



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    _______________________________________________
    info:
    www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

    post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

    dialogue facilitator:
    facilitator@david-bohm.net

    Administrator of the mailing list:
    admin@david-bohm.net

    _______________________________________________







------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  info:
  www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

  post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

  dialogue facilitator:
  facilitator@david-bohm.net

  Administrator of the mailing list:
  admin@david-bohm.net

  _______________________________________________


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061013/5b410585/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 04:42:37 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 05:40:54 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Direction dia-logos (resent)
In-Reply-To: <0D25D6CD52646E4B992A5CAED007D1695CFEC9@msw2k.msw.local>
Message-ID: <C155C6DD.37EA%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

Prissy PhD sounds like a real assumption and generalization that needs
some thoughtful consideration.

Sorry, don't get the "Prissy PhD" stuff.


I can tell when I lose my "self" but often can't stop.  I think
it is possible to be in the now even when striving if it is an honest
striving. D.

I agree with this one, but am too tired to elaborate.

G'night.     k


On 10/13/06 6:02 PM, "Dorothy Stulberg" <DStulberg@msw-law.com> wrote:

> Prissy PhD sounds like a real assumption and generalization that needs
> some thoughtful consideration.
> Working on being present in the "now" is worth while.  I know when I
> "strive" I lose the moment--it is so easy to do during a trial or even
> during a deposition or even when trying to understand the position of a
> client.  I can tell when I lose my "self" but often can't stop.  I think
> it is possible to be in the now even when striving if it is an honest
> striving. D.


From franis_franis at juno.com  Sat Oct 14 07:04:58 2006
From: franis_franis at juno.com (Franis Engel)
Date: Sun Oct 15 08:06:11 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
Message-ID: <20061013.220458.1588.0.franis_franis@juno.com>

Yes, Dorothy! 
Whenever someone declares a similar conviction to me I have a question
that I trot out for them:  - 
when is a gut feeling an intuition - 
and when is it a prejudice? 
How would you tell the difference between those two?

I once had to write morals to imaginary fables for a performance art
event. "Hesitate to assign a malicious motive when imaginative
explanations will work." 
Ahhh, gotta cut that idea down to come out a little more simply. 
Any suggestions? (pat you're good at these sorts of things...)
Maybe from the opposite point of view, coming from the other side, where
someone else makes a snap judgment about you, and then you are forced to
understand and forgive their paranoia.
"Hesitate to assign malice to mere stupidity"?

I think that intuition in me is a feeling that perhaps something else is
happening other than what I assummed was going on. So then I look for it
- and I've learned to not only look for negative paranoia.

Also have a fairly reliable process for self-protection of avoiding
accidents intuitively. I discovered this in myself after a few accidents
happened that I'd "known" were going to happen. I didn't know enough to
know how to interpret the intuitive warning - until I got a little wiser.
Now I recognize them with much more certainty enough to scare others into
taking my advice in those situations.

- Franis

On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 18:15:57 -0400 "Dorothy Stulberg"
<DStulberg@msw-law.com> writes:
> It's funny.  Today a client and I met with the opposite side.  She 
> told
> me I am too nice and don't have the inutition of how bad the other
> people are.  She has an intuition, according to her, of who is being
> honest and who is a "good" person.  
> I thought about that on the two hour drive back from the meeting.  
> I have fought that kind of intuition, if I ever had it.  I don't 
> want to
> begin with the idea someone is cheating or evil (Bush aside--he has
> given so many examples it is beyond intuition.)  The idea of Bohm 
> and of
> collaborative learning has directed me to avoid deciding what kind 
> of
> person a person is.  Rather look at the actions and talk about them 
> and
> try to understand the grounding of the other one.
> I'm rattling as usual.  This has been a very demanding day.  D.
>  
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
> [mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
> Arizmendi
> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:10 AM
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
> 
> 
> Morning, Rodger -
> 
> Thanks for the "heart" reference.
> 
> As for "intuition" - are you referring to these definitions?
> 
> in*tu*i*tion n
> 1.    the state of being aware of or knowing something without 
> having to
> discover or perceive it, or the ability to do this
> 2.    something known or believed instinctively, without actual 
> evidence
> for it
> 3.    immediate knowledge of something
> 
> Encarta(r) World English Dictionary (c) 1999 Microsoft Corporation. 
> All
> rights reserved. Developed for Microsoft by Bloomsbury Publishing 
> Plc.
> 
> I get hunches (see the book "Blink"), but I don't consider that
> knowledge.  And when I get a hunch, possibly a variation on the idea 
> of
> "theory", I don't consider that knowledge in the sense of scientific
> fact.  It is definitely something I investigate further.  
> 
> Also, I'm curious about the subtext of this particular question.  
> I'm
> sensing a little abrasiveness below the surface.  Hope I'm wrong.
> 
> Best, k
> 
> 
> On 10/13/06 6:53 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com"
> <Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 	Rodger __Intuition. Are you asking about intuition because 
> you
> have no personal experience of intuition? 
> 	
> 	Like photographic memory, intuition does not scientifically
> exist.  In science, photographic memory exists only by other names,
> according to the era you search for it;  Eidetic-memory is a present
> favorite, while Epidetectorial memory was a previous.
> 	
> 	While intuition may not exist, there are many related areas
> which do -- telekinetic, telepathic, etc.
> 	
> 	And in fact I do consider the unique neural cell process in 
> the
> human heart to be part the component of conscience. The trouble is,
> people always want -knowing- defined according to the brain.
> 	
> 	To know more about neural cells of the heart: -Basic & 
> Clinical
> Neurocardiology, J.A. Armour, J.L. Ardell- describes the heart from 
> a
> purely medical standpoint. _R
> 	. 
> 	.
> 	Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 09:34:00 -0400
> 	From: Kathryn Arizmendi <tangykatt@earthlink.net>
> 	Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: No right brain?
> 	To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
> 	.
> 	Did you and the scientist you worked with define intuition?
> 	
> 	Where can I find scientific information on "the hearts own
> complex neuronal
> 	processing and memory capabilities."
> 	
> 	What do you mean by "heart"?  For a while, I thought you 
> meant
> my heart
> 	inside my body pumping blood, but I don't think so now.
> 	.
> 	.
> 	
> ________________________________
> 
> 	_______________________________________________
> 	info:
> 	www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 	
> 	post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 	
> 	dialogue facilitator:
> 	facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 	
> 	Administrator of the mailing list:
> 	admin@david-bohm.net
> 	
> 	_______________________________________________
> 	
> 	
> 	
> 
> 
> 

From donlay at gte.net  Sat Oct 14 13:51:54 2006
From: donlay at gte.net (Don Lay)
Date: Sun Oct 15 14:50:16 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Direction dia-logos (resent)
References: <C155C6DD.37EA%tangykatt@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <001f01c6ef87$254ec320$a503a8c0@your0548c161e1>


Dorothy:   Prissy PhD sounds like a real assumption and generalization that 
needs some thoughtful consideration.

Kathryn:   Sorry, don't get the "Prissy PhD" stuff.

 Apologies to those holding advanced degrees.  Locally we have laughed at 
the "prissy interpretation" of the Copenhagen interpretation of qm, namely 
that consciousness collapses the wave function, but it "must be the 
consciousness of someone holding a PhD in physics" (Jim al Khaleli's book on 
qm).  We have called that the 'prissy interpretation' of qm.  Again, 
apology. -- Don L


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kathryn Arizmendi" <tangykatt@earthlink.net>
To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 10:42 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Direction dia-logos (resent)


> Prissy PhD sounds like a real assumption and generalization that needs
> some thoughtful consideration.
>
> Sorry, don't get the "Prissy PhD" stuff.
>
>
> I can tell when I lose my "self" but often can't stop.  I think
> it is possible to be in the now even when striving if it is an honest
> striving. D.
>
> I agree with this one, but am too tired to elaborate.
>
> G'night.     k
>
>
> On 10/13/06 6:02 PM, "Dorothy Stulberg" <DStulberg@msw-law.com> wrote:
>
>> Prissy PhD sounds like a real assumption and generalization that needs
>> some thoughtful consideration.
>> Working on being present in the "now" is worth while.  I know when I
>> "strive" I lose the moment--it is so easy to do during a trial or even
>> during a deposition or even when trying to understand the position of a
>> client.  I can tell when I lose my "self" but often can't stop.  I think
>> it is possible to be in the now even when striving if it is an honest
>> striving. D.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> 

From Rodger.Hyodo at dialogos.com  Sat Oct 14 13:37:40 2006
From: Rodger.Hyodo at dialogos.com (Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com)
Date: Sun Oct 15 15:03:27 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] LOGOS-Intuition
In-Reply-To: <20061015100002.5D73423C37@web.internal.van-den-heuvel.org>
Message-ID: <OF325D7C89.D567238D-ON85257207.003B51B3-85257207.003FDFAB@dialogos.com>







Rodger __I think that the experience & expression of improv, its unfolding/
enfolding meaning, is intuitive. How do you know what music to play without
sheets, scores, or song compositions  predetermined between the musicians?

Of course some styles improv have predetermined boundaries for the music --
thats not what the improve to which I refer.

Similarly, when composing/creating an original piece of music;  Does the
composer reason the piece into existance or does the composer TUNE IN to an
inspiration they are receiving of a music they hear within a space of INNER
LISTENING -- receiving.

There intuitive integrity refuses to pass off  a technical rearrangement of
works by other composer -- as their own ORIGINAL piece/ inspiration.

Even if no other listener recognized the lack of originality in the
rearrangement -- the composer themself KNOWS when their piece is TRUE to
what they HEARD WITHIN THEMSELVES and thus were inspired to create.

What is interesting to me about logos & inspiration, is the way this
dialogue gave rise to the two topics at the same juncture in time.  And how
the relationship between Logos and Intuition is what takes ones experience
of MEANING beyond the proceeds of reason. _R
.
.
From: Kathryn Arizmendi <tangykatt@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Direction dia-logos  (resent)
To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
.
We unfold and enfold simultaneously.  (pat)
This is improv, too. k
.
.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/c6c0294f/attachment.html
From Rodger.Hyodo at dialogos.com  Sat Oct 14 14:25:09 2006
From: Rodger.Hyodo at dialogos.com (Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com)
Date: Sun Oct 15 15:23:37 2006
Subject: Subject: RE: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
In-Reply-To: <20061015100002.5D73423C37@web.internal.van-den-heuvel.org>
Message-ID: <OF93FBD590.7F9D530E-ON85257207.004024F3-85257207.004438BD@dialogos.com>







Rodger __ Hi Dorothy, welcome back!!
I think intuition is often confused with language in a sense that different
character-types speak/ recognize vocal intonations specific to each
character-type.  Generally.

With the exception of circumstances composed of deception -- therefore not
best for telling the truth in -- I find if I DO NOT LIE, I can HEAR more
distinctly when others do not lie. Conversely,  the more often I lie, the
more difficult it is to HEAR when others tell the truth.

Or, at least HEAR an indication of the semantic-truth the other person
believes they are telling = language.

I have also found that if I am not BEING TRUSTWORTHY, then I will find it
impossible to know who/ what/ when to TRUST.

Which brings me back to language: To include my awareness of thought &
collaberative learning in my daily interactions, I need to discern how I
use that language of awareness.

Go easy on yourself. If you try to introduce that language as if it were a
universal rule to people who are unfamiliar with it, and expect that they
should somehow recognize the subtlety of it -- the results might become a
bit frustrating.  _R
.
From: "Dorothy Stulberg" <DStulberg@msw-law.com>
Subject: RE: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>

She has an intuition, according to her, of who is being
honest and who is a "good" person.  D.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/c14209d8/attachment.html
From Rodger.Hyodo at dialogos.com  Sat Oct 14 14:32:31 2006
From: Rodger.Hyodo at dialogos.com (Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com)
Date: Sun Oct 15 15:30:59 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
In-Reply-To: <20061015100002.5D73423C37@web.internal.van-den-heuvel.org>
Message-ID: <OF77CED40A.38B634E8-ON85257207.0044BE22-85257207.0044E551@dialogos.com>







Rodger __What is interesting to me about logos & inspiration, is the way
this dialogue gave rise to the two topics at the same juncture in time.
And how the relationship between Logos and Intuition is what takes ones
experience of MEANING beyond the proceeds of reason. _R
.
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:41:37 -0400
From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
.
.
Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as
meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark?
What is human experience is as meaningful as storm clouds or thicker bark
prior to  severe winter}? -- Don L
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/b8795941/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 15:14:20 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 16:12:51 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] LOGOS-Intuition
In-Reply-To: <OF325D7C89.D567238D-ON85257207.003B51B3-85257207.003FDFAB@dialogos.com>
Message-ID: <C1565AEC.37F3%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

Rodger __I think that the experience & expression of improv, its unfolding/
enfolding meaning, is intuitive. How do you know what music to play without
sheets, scores, or song compositions  predetermined between the musicians?

Similarly, when composing/creating an original piece of music;  Does the
composer reason the piece into existance or does the composer TUNE IN to an
inspiration they are receiving of a music they hear within a space of INNER
LISTENING -- receiving.

Morning, Rodger - 

For paragraph #1 ? We undergo rigorous training that enables us to do this
in both through composed and improvised music.  On Creativity p, 71 speaks
of reactive thought  ?reactive thought is necessary because without it we
would have to reflect on every step...it is an essential side or aspect of
thought as a whole...unless there is an opportunity for reflective thought
to respond beyond the framework of such a mechanical mode of operation, etc,
etc.  Musicians say ?I do or don?t have such and such a thing ?under my
fingers??.  Sometimes it?s called ?having it on automatic?.   One of the
skills ear training puts on automatic is something called ?inner hearing? -
what you call ?inner listening?.  As we improvise, in essence, we take
dictation from what we hear, because we have the training that allows us to
do this.  Taking dictation is also part of musical training.  As is musical
design and architecture.  Anyway, that, and many other things go into the
training.  Once these abilities/skills are on automatic, my experience is
that what I feel and think turns to sound in my head which flows out my
fingers into the keys.  Somewhere, Bohm mentioned that music expresses
emotion.  Absolutely ? or in the case of someone like Debussy, it paints a
musical picture.  Ex - ?Footprints in the Snow?, ?What the West Wind Saw?,
?La Mer?.  Bartok ? Out of Doors Suite.  Kinesthesia also plays a part.
Stravinsky talks about sitting down to improvise, and finding his fingers
lead him to a different place than where his reasoning or conscious choice
was headed.  On a much less sophisticated level, I have had the same
experience. 

#2 ? reason, genius and inspiration play their parts in composed as well as
improvised music.  If you look at an analysis of Beethoven?s Fifth Symphony,
and get a good verbal explanation of it that includes the role of motif and
its development, it may clarify what I?m talking about.  Or an explanation
and diagram of one of Bach?s fugues.  Such strategies are available to the
musician.  

Finally, shared knowledge of enfolded structures allows us to play together
without predetermining choices.  It requires a lot of training, practice,
and experience, but that?s how it works.  There is no fragmentation between
reason and inspiration.  They work together at a very deep level.

I tried to explain this from Jerry Coker?s jazz pov some time back.  Maybe
together with what I just wrote, it will make more sense.  But it may also
be that one has to actually experience this to truly get a handle on it.

Best, k


On 10/14/06 7:37 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com" <Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com>
wrote:

> Rodger __I think that the experience & expression of improv, its unfolding/
> enfolding meaning, is intuitive. How do you know what music to play without
> sheets, scores, or song compositions  predetermined between the musicians?
> 
> Of course some styles improv have predetermined boundaries for the music --
> thats not what the improve to which I refer.
> 
> Similarly, when composing/creating an original piece of music;  Does the
> composer reason the piece into existance or does the composer TUNE IN to an
> inspiration they are receiving of a music they hear within a space of INNER
> LISTENING -- receiving.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/e3d298db/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 15:15:23 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 16:13:46 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
In-Reply-To: <OF77CED40A.38B634E8-ON85257207.0044BE22-85257207.0044E551@dialogos.com>
Message-ID: <C1565B2B.37F4%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

Yes!   k


On 10/14/06 8:32 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com" <Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com>
wrote:

> Rodger __What is interesting to me about logos & inspiration, is the way this
> dialogue gave rise to the two topics at the same juncture in time.  And how
> the relationship between Logos and Intuition is what takes ones experience of
> MEANING beyond the proceeds of reason. _R
> .
> Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:41:37 -0400
> From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
> To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
> .
> .
> Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as
> meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark?
> What is human experience is as meaningful as storm clouds or thicker bark
> prior to  severe winter}? -- Don L
> 
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/77d7925b/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 15:21:34 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 16:19:57 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
In-Reply-To: <20061013.220458.1588.0.franis_franis@juno.com>
Message-ID: <C1565C9E.37F6%tangykatt@earthlink.net>




On 10/14/06 1:04 AM, "Franis Engel" <franis_franis@juno.com> wrote:

> From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
>> [mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
>> Arizmendi


Hi Franis - could you please tell me why the heading says "On Behalf of..."?

Also why another post says "resent" with my name?

I've never seen this before, and I'm not sure I want someone to have the
power to send things on my behalf unless I know about it!  What's it all
about?  Thanks, k


From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 15:40:53 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 16:39:21 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
In-Reply-To: <OF77CED40A.38B634E8-ON85257207.0044BE22-85257207.0044E551@dialogos.com>
Message-ID: <C1566125.37F8%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

I spent the last two days researching improvisation practices and their
history in European music.  I am not a poet, but I was so fed up, the words
below had almost completely written themselves by the time the bus got me
home.  I offer it as another pov in the discussion we are having.


DIALOG 
 
1,006 years of life measured in semi breves, breves,
metrics, scales ? and in the length of a single breath
bound inside the covers of books, living in the basements of libraries.
 
Laughter, llanto, cante jondo codified, labelled ?ornaments?;
told by an ?authority? how loud and how long to scream-sob-murmur-and
whisper ?I love you?.
 
La music es el alma del pueblo y el alma es inmortal!
 
No, Music, the soul of the people, is fragmented, dissected, ordered ?in
good taste? by psychiatrists, politicians, clergymen, heads of state, and
musicologists ? all well meaning ? as far as they can see.  How far is that?
 
Improvisation is verboten ? it?s too spontaneous!  It means freedom.  Not
freedom ? anarchy!  Then where would be be?
 
Can you prepare for an improv session?  Yes, but you have to strip your
layers down to below flesh and bone, expose the beating heart, throw away
the precise measurements, the dynamic markings in musical scores, and the
?tasteful execution? of ?ornaments?. And above all, plug your ears and eyes
up to the theorist-authorities.  And FEEL!  Put that in your instrument and
play and sing and dance it.
 
Can the natural order manifest again?  I don?t know.  We think theories and
speculations and culturally conditioned prejudices is truth, and have no
idea that?s what we think.
 
Then I come home and reread:
 
We unfold and enfold simultaneously. There is nothing else. The "process"
part (regarding self)  is hidden from the "outer" senses but not from the
"inner" senses.  This is a "self ? aware movement. It is like musical
"movement [where, incidentally, the "outer" senses do perceive the
simultaneity" of unfoldment / enfoldment].   (pat)
 
I turn to the keyboard.



On 10/14/06 8:32 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com" <Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com>
wrote:

> Rodger __What is interesting to me about logos & inspiration, is the way this
> dialogue gave rise to the two topics at the same juncture in time.  And how
> the relationship between Logos and Intuition is what takes ones experience of
> MEANING beyond the proceeds of reason. _R
> .
> Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:41:37 -0400
> From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
> To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
> .
> .
> Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as
> meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark?
> What is human experience is as meaningful as storm clouds or thicker bark
> prior to  severe winter}? -- Don L
> 
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/588197a4/attachment.html
From donlay at gte.net  Sat Oct 14 15:48:16 2006
From: donlay at gte.net (Don Lay)
Date: Sun Oct 15 16:46:43 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
References: <C1565B2B.37F4%tangykatt@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <005601c6ef97$668a7d10$a503a8c0@your0548c161e1>

Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)Kathryn, then don't we say that 'ultimate experience' is what the Parmenides/Heracllitus called logos -- rather than the imaginary personal identity experience?  The idea I'm working on is that the personal identity experience derives from or occurs with the use of words that direct awareness to the personal identity ... without awareness that it is being done.   -- Don L


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Kathryn Arizmendi 
  To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
  Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:15 AM
  Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


  Yes!   k


  On 10/14/06 8:32 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com" <Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com> wrote:


    Rodger __What is interesting to me about logos & inspiration, is the way this dialogue gave rise to the two topics at the same juncture in time.  And how the relationship between Logos and Intuition is what takes ones experience of MEANING beyond the proceeds of reason. _R
    .
    Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:41:37 -0400
    From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
    Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
    To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
    .
    .
    Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark? 
    What is human experience is as meaningful as storm clouds or thicker bark prior to  severe winter}? -- Don L

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    _______________________________________________
    info:
    www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

    post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

    dialogue facilitator:
    facilitator@david-bohm.net

    Administrator of the mailing list:
    admin@david-bohm.net

    _______________________________________________







------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  info:
  www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

  post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

  dialogue facilitator:
  facilitator@david-bohm.net

  Administrator of the mailing list:
  admin@david-bohm.net

  _______________________________________________


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/14bae993/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 15:53:35 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 16:52:04 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Direction dia-logos (resent)
In-Reply-To: <001f01c6ef87$254ec320$a503a8c0@your0548c161e1>
Message-ID: <C156641F.37FA%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

No offense taken.  After my bout with "authorities" on improvisation in the
library yesterday, plus your explanation, I found myself chuckling.  k


On 10/14/06 7:51 AM, "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> wrote:

> 
> Dorothy:   Prissy PhD sounds like a real assumption and generalization that
> needs some thoughtful consideration.
> 
> Kathryn:   Sorry, don't get the "Prissy PhD" stuff.
> 
>  Apologies to those holding advanced degrees.  Locally we have laughed at
> the "prissy interpretation" of the Copenhagen interpretation of qm, namely
> that consciousness collapses the wave function, but it "must be the
> consciousness of someone holding a PhD in physics" (Jim al Khaleli's book on
> qm).  We have called that the 'prissy interpretation' of qm.  Again,
> apology. -- Don L
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kathryn Arizmendi" <tangykatt@earthlink.net>
> To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 10:42 PM
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Direction dia-logos (resent)
> 
> 
>> Prissy PhD sounds like a real assumption and generalization that needs
>> some thoughtful consideration.
>> 
>> Sorry, don't get the "Prissy PhD" stuff.
>> 
>> 
>> I can tell when I lose my "self" but often can't stop.  I think
>> it is possible to be in the now even when striving if it is an honest
>> striving. D.
>> 
>> I agree with this one, but am too tired to elaborate.
>> 
>> G'night.     k
>> 
>> 
>> On 10/13/06 6:02 PM, "Dorothy Stulberg" <DStulberg@msw-law.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Prissy PhD sounds like a real assumption and generalization that needs
>>> some thoughtful consideration.
>>> Working on being present in the "now" is worth while.  I know when I
>>> "strive" I lose the moment--it is so easy to do during a trial or even
>>> during a deposition or even when trying to understand the position of a
>>> client.  I can tell when I lose my "self" but often can't stop.  I think
>>> it is possible to be in the now even when striving if it is an honest
>>> striving. D.
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> info:
>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>> 
>> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>> 
>> dialogue facilitator:
>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>> 
>> Administrator of the mailing list:
>> admin@david-bohm.net
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 


From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 15:58:53 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 16:57:18 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
In-Reply-To: <005601c6ef97$668a7d10$a503a8c0@your0548c161e1>
Message-ID: <C156655E.37FC%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

Gotta think about that one.  But off the top of my head, do you feel they
could be related?  k


On 10/14/06 9:48 AM, "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> wrote:

> Kathryn, then don't we say that 'ultimate experience' is what the
> Parmenides/Heracllitus called logos -- rather than the imaginary personal
> identity experience?  The idea I'm working on is that the personal identity
> experience derives from or occurs with the use of words that direct awareness
> to the personal identity ... without awareness that it is being done.   -- Don
> L
>  
>  
>>  
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>  
>> From:  Kathryn  Arizmendi <mailto:tangykatt@earthlink.net>
>>  
>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>  
>> Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:15  AM
>>  
>> Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue]  reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
>>  
>> 
>> Yes!   k
>> 
>> 
>> On 10/14/06 8:32 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com" <Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>  
>>> Rodger __What is interesting to me about logos &  inspiration, is the way
>>> this dialogue gave rise to the two topics at the  same juncture in time.
>>> And how the relationship between Logos and  Intuition is what takes ones
>>> experience of MEANING beyond the proceeds of  reason. _R
>>> .
>>> Date: Fri, 13 Oct  2006 22:41:37 -0400
>>> From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
>>> Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
>>> To:  <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
>>> .
>>> .
>>> Is there some kind of  experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as
>>> meaningful as dark clouds  and thick bark?
>>> What is human experience is as meaningful as storm  clouds or thicker bark
>>> prior to  severe winter}? -- Don  L
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  _______________________________________________
>>> info:
>>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>> 
>>> post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>> 
>>> dialogue  facilitator:
>>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>> 
>>> Administrator of the  mailing  list:
>>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> info:
>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>> 
>> post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>> 
>> dialogue  facilitator:
>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>> 
>> Administrator of the mailing  list:
>> admin@david-bohm.net
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/611b0df2/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 15:59:36 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 16:58:00 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
In-Reply-To: <005601c6ef97$668a7d10$a503a8c0@your0548c161e1>
Message-ID: <C1566588.37FD%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

Is there an ?ultimate experience??


On 10/14/06 9:48 AM, "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> wrote:

> Kathryn, then don't we say that 'ultimate experience' is what the
> Parmenides/Heracllitus called logos -- rather than the imaginary personal
> identity experience?  The idea I'm working on is that the personal identity
> experience derives from or occurs with the use of words that direct awareness
> to the personal identity ... without awareness that it is being done.   -- Don
> L
>  
>  
>>  
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>  
>> From:  Kathryn  Arizmendi <mailto:tangykatt@earthlink.net>
>>  
>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>  
>> Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:15  AM
>>  
>> Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue]  reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
>>  
>> 
>> Yes!   k
>> 
>> 
>> On 10/14/06 8:32 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com" <Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>  
>>> Rodger __What is interesting to me about logos &  inspiration, is the way
>>> this dialogue gave rise to the two topics at the  same juncture in time.
>>> And how the relationship between Logos and  Intuition is what takes ones
>>> experience of MEANING beyond the proceeds of  reason. _R
>>> .
>>> Date: Fri, 13 Oct  2006 22:41:37 -0400
>>> From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
>>> Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
>>> To:  <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
>>> .
>>> .
>>> Is there some kind of  experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as
>>> meaningful as dark clouds  and thick bark?
>>> What is human experience is as meaningful as storm  clouds or thicker bark
>>> prior to  severe winter}? -- Don  L
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  _______________________________________________
>>> info:
>>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>> 
>>> post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>> 
>>> dialogue  facilitator:
>>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>> 
>>> Administrator of the  mailing  list:
>>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> info:
>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>> 
>> post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>> 
>> dialogue  facilitator:
>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>> 
>> Administrator of the mailing  list:
>> admin@david-bohm.net
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/b4ec9758/attachment.html
From donlay at gte.net  Sat Oct 14 16:18:00 2006
From: donlay at gte.net (Don Lay)
Date: Sun Oct 15 17:16:49 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
References: <C156655E.37FC%tangykatt@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <001501c6ef9b$8e2d2350$a503a8c0@your0548c161e1>

Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)Assuming you mean, are meaning and reason related --.  Yes.  They both derive from the Greek jjword logos (as does dia-logue).  That is, Heraclitus' juse of the word, logos, has been interpreted as both reason and meaning.  That says they're related,  doesn't it?

Also, Bohm says they're related, doesn't he?

Further, in Parmenides/Heraclitus there is no separation.  Even thought, thinking is the same as being --  persona is not needed for thinking.  I'm understanding 'being' to mean 'the WHOLE'.

Given this then, wouldn't we say the source of creativity, improv, is being itself? 

  --  Don L



  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Kathryn Arizmendi 
  To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
  Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:58 AM
  Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


  Gotta think about that one.  But off the top of my head, do you feel they could be related?  k


  On 10/14/06 9:48 AM, "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> wrote:


    Kathryn, then don't we say that 'ultimate experience' is what the Parmenides/Heracllitus called logos -- rather than the imaginary personal identity experience?  The idea I'm working on is that the personal identity experience derives from or occurs with the use of words that direct awareness to the personal identity ... without awareness that it is being done.   -- Don L

     


      ----- Original Message ----- 
       
      From:  Kathryn  Arizmendi <mailto:tangykatt@earthlink.net>  
       
      To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org  
       
      Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:15  AM
       
      Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue]  reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
       

      Yes!   k


      On 10/14/06 8:32 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com" <Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com>  wrote:

       

        Rodger __What is interesting to me about logos &  inspiration, is the way this dialogue gave rise to the two topics at the  same juncture in time.  And how the relationship between Logos and  Intuition is what takes ones experience of MEANING beyond the proceeds of  reason. _R
        .
        Date: Fri, 13 Oct  2006 22:41:37 -0400
        From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
        Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
        To:  <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
        .
        .
        Is there some kind of  experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as meaningful as dark clouds  and thick bark? 
        What is human experience is as meaningful as storm  clouds or thicker bark prior to  severe winter}? -- Don  L


------------------------------------------------------------------------
        _______________________________________________
        info:
        www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

        post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

        dialogue  facilitator:
        facilitator@david-bohm.net

        Administrator of the  mailing  list:
        admin@david-bohm.net

        _______________________________________________






       

--------------------------------------------------------------------------


      _______________________________________________
      info:
      www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

      post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

      dialogue  facilitator:
      facilitator@david-bohm.net

      Administrator of the mailing  list:
      admin@david-bohm.net

      _______________________________________________





----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    _______________________________________________
    info:
    www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

    post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

    dialogue facilitator:
    facilitator@david-bohm.net

    Administrator of the mailing list:
    admin@david-bohm.net

    _______________________________________________







------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  info:
  www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

  post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

  dialogue facilitator:
  facilitator@david-bohm.net

  Administrator of the mailing list:
  admin@david-bohm.net

  _______________________________________________


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/2ff066b4/attachment.html
From donlay at gte.net  Sat Oct 14 16:20:56 2006
From: donlay at gte.net (Don Lay)
Date: Sun Oct 15 17:19:20 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
References: <C1566588.37FD%tangykatt@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <002401c6ef9b$f7125160$a503a8c0@your0548c161e1>

Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)Ultimate is defined as foundation and aim or end.  Thus, isn't the experience of 'being' ultimate in that being is the foundation of all experience as well as the aim and intention of all experience? -- Don L
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Kathryn Arizmendi 
  To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
  Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:59 AM
  Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


  Is there an "ultimate experience"?


  On 10/14/06 9:48 AM, "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> wrote:


    Kathryn, then don't we say that 'ultimate experience' is what the Parmenides/Heracllitus called logos -- rather than the imaginary personal identity experience?  The idea I'm working on is that the personal identity experience derives from or occurs with the use of words that direct awareness to the personal identity ... without awareness that it is being done.   -- Don L

     


      ----- Original Message ----- 
       
      From:  Kathryn  Arizmendi <mailto:tangykatt@earthlink.net>  
       
      To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org  
       
      Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:15  AM
       
      Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue]  reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
       

      Yes!   k


      On 10/14/06 8:32 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com" <Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com>  wrote:

       

        Rodger __What is interesting to me about logos &  inspiration, is the way this dialogue gave rise to the two topics at the  same juncture in time.  And how the relationship between Logos and  Intuition is what takes ones experience of MEANING beyond the proceeds of  reason. _R
        .
        Date: Fri, 13 Oct  2006 22:41:37 -0400
        From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
        Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
        To:  <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
        .
        .
        Is there some kind of  experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as meaningful as dark clouds  and thick bark? 
        What is human experience is as meaningful as storm  clouds or thicker bark prior to  severe winter}? -- Don  L


------------------------------------------------------------------------
        _______________________________________________
        info:
        www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

        post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

        dialogue  facilitator:
        facilitator@david-bohm.net

        Administrator of the  mailing  list:
        admin@david-bohm.net

        _______________________________________________






       

--------------------------------------------------------------------------


      _______________________________________________
      info:
      www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

      post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

      dialogue  facilitator:
      facilitator@david-bohm.net

      Administrator of the mailing  list:
      admin@david-bohm.net

      _______________________________________________





----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    _______________________________________________
    info:
    www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

    post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

    dialogue facilitator:
    facilitator@david-bohm.net

    Administrator of the mailing list:
    admin@david-bohm.net

    _______________________________________________







------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  info:
  www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

  post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

  dialogue facilitator:
  facilitator@david-bohm.net

  Administrator of the mailing list:
  admin@david-bohm.net

  _______________________________________________


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/b15e603c/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com  Sat Oct 14 16:28:20 2006
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Sun Oct 15 17:28:02 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
Message-ID: <20061014.102821.3988.54.ae.dropper@juno.com>

When I look at Meaning as a member of the Matter, Energy, Meaning
"Trinity,"
a very meaningful interpretation in relation to Ultimacy comes easily.
Energy is the first "member" from which Matter [second "member"] proceeds
and Meaning [as the third "member"] "reunites" Energy and Matter. They
are one. The "two" are one. Energy IS Matter. [Einstein was a mystic,
no?]  And, the "three" are one. Energy IS Matter IS Meaning. This is
quite meaningful as well. 

This generalization of all this translates immediately 
to an experience of ultimacy.

This also translates into a general "meaning of life."
And here again, meaning also works well as identical
with my sense of "logos" (as in dia-logos).

Interestingly though, here (in this trinity) "logos" becomes
the third person [member] of the trinity where in the Roman version
"logos" is the "second person {member]."

pat



On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:41:37 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary
definitions? -- D.
 
What about meaning?  It seems easy to see that definitions are arbitrary.
 Is it easy to see that meaning is not, that there is something ultimate
about meaning.  For example, dark clouds mean rain.  Thick bark on the
North side of a tree may mean a cold winter is on the way.

Is the meaning of dark clouds as ultimate as is energy and matter?  Is
the meaning of heavier bark on the North side of a tree as fundamental,
as ultimate as matter and energy?

Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as
meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark? 

What is human experience is as meaningful as storm clouds or thicker bark
prior to  severe winter}? -- Don L




----- Original Message ----- 
From: Dorothy Stulberg 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:05 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary
definitions?  D.




From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
Arizmendi
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 7:59 AM
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)



Could it  possibly mean that words have  temporary and arbitrary
definitions?

My research yesterday on improvisation definitely bears this out.  Will
elaborate more when I?ve sorted out my notes, and have more to take and
incorporate today at CCNY.  

Preliminary findings are that by the application of Bohm ideas and
principles, we will forge a new path.

Hurray!  k


On 10/13/06 8:44 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:


I'm in! Let's work with it.
 
pat
 
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:23:15 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:


 
 
What does it  mean that the Greek   logos has been interpreted as 
meaning reason? as meaning Ratio? as  meaning meaning?  What is the
meaning?   

 
 
Could it  possibly mean that words have  temporary and arbitrary
definitions?  What would happen if we decided,  for  just an experiment,
to use the idea that logos  means meaning?

 
 
Then perhaps we could seriously consider dialogue  as dia meaning or in
terms of dia meaning.  -- Don  L 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


----- Original Message ----- 
 
From:  Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com 
 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org  
 
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:05  AM
 
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject:  reason-ance, logos-ance
 

 

Rodger __Lead the way Don. Tell us about Reason-ance, logos-ance, 
ratio-ance. _R
.
.
From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
Subject: Re: Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] music & assumptions
To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
.
.
It  seems to me that so long as we continue talking about the persona
instead of  instead of the processes, we continue to pollute  experience.
  Reason-ance, logos-ance, ratio-ance? -- Don L




_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________








_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/ab3a25bf/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 16:30:10 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 17:28:37 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
In-Reply-To: <002401c6ef9b$f7125160$a503a8c0@your0548c161e1>
Message-ID: <C1566CB2.3800%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

This is a new definition of ?ultimate? for me.  I will have to consider its
implications and get back to you.  k


On 10/14/06 10:20 AM, "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> wrote:

> Ultimate is defined as foundation and aim or end.  Thus, isn't the experience
> of 'being' ultimate in that being is the foundation of all experience as well
> as the aim and intention of all experience? -- Don L
>>  
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>  
>> From:  Kathryn  Arizmendi <mailto:tangykatt@earthlink.net>
>>  
>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>  
>> Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:59  AM
>>  
>> Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue]  reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
>>  
>> 
>> Is there an ?ultimate experience??
>> 
>> 
>> On  10/14/06 9:48 AM, "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>  wrote:
>> 
>>  
>>> Kathryn, then  don't we say that 'ultimate experience' is what the
>>> Parmenides/Heracllitus  called logos -- rather than the imaginary personal
>>> identity  experience?  The idea I'm working on is that the personal
>>> identity experience derives from or occurs with the use of words  that
>>> direct awareness to the personal identity ... without awareness that  it is
>>> being done.   -- Don L
>>> 
>>>  
>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>  
>>>> From:  Kathryn  Arizmendi <mailto:tangykatt@earthlink.net>
>>>>  
>>>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>>  
>>>> Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:15   AM
>>>>  
>>>> Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue]   reason-ance, logos-ance
>>>> (resent)
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> Yes!    k
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 10/14/06 8:32 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com"
>>>> <Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com>   wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>> Rodger __What is interesting to me  about logos &  inspiration, is the way
>>>>> this dialogue gave rise  to the two topics at the  same juncture in time.
>>>>> And how the  relationship between Logos and  Intuition is what takes ones
>>>>> experience of MEANING beyond the proceeds of  reason.  _R
>>>>> .
>>>>> Date: Fri, 13  Oct  2006 22:41:37 -0400
>>>>> From: "Don Lay"  <donlay@gte.net>
>>>>> Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue]  reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
>>>>> To:   <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
>>>>> .
>>>>> .
>>>>> Is there some  kind of  experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as
>>>>> meaningful as dark clouds  and thick bark?
>>>>> What is human  experience is as meaningful as storm  clouds or thicker
>>>>> bark prior  to  severe winter}? -- Don  L
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>> info:
>>>>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>>>> 
>>>>> post   to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>>>> 
>>>>> dialogue   facilitator:
>>>>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>>>> 
>>>>> Administrator of  the  mailing   list:
>>>>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> info:
>>>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>>> 
>>>> post   to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>>> 
>>>> dialogue   facilitator:
>>>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>>> 
>>>> Administrator of  the mailing   list:
>>>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  _______________________________________________
>>> info:
>>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>> 
>>> post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>> 
>>> dialogue  facilitator:
>>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>> 
>>> Administrator of the  mailing  list:
>>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> info:
>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>> 
>> post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>> 
>> dialogue  facilitator:
>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>> 
>> Administrator of the mailing  list:
>> admin@david-bohm.net
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/f35f8499/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 16:53:31 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 17:51:59 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
In-Reply-To: <20061014.102821.3988.54.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <C156722B.3803%tangykatt@earthlink.net>




On 10/14/06 10:28 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:

> This generalization of all this translates immediately
> to an experience of ultimacy.
> 
> I?m with you up to the point of ?ultimacy?.  Do you mean it as ?most perfect
> underlying reality??  k


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/d0397c61/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com  Sat Oct 14 17:09:16 2006
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Sun Oct 15 18:08:30 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
Message-ID: <20061014.110924.3988.58.ae.dropper@juno.com>

The coherence and creativity in the dialoguing of recent days
seems quite unusual.

pat                 
From ae.dropper at juno.com  Sat Oct 14 16:50:41 2006
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Sun Oct 15 18:08:31 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
Message-ID: <20061014.110924.3988.56.ae.dropper@juno.com>

Also why another post says "resent" with my name? (k)

The "re-sent's" were a part of the "testing" I was doing
yesterday. Since you responded to one of my posts with this
in the subject line, it remained in the subject line.

pat
From ae.dropper at juno.com  Sat Oct 14 17:06:34 2006
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Sun Oct 15 18:08:34 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
Message-ID: <20061014.110924.3988.57.ae.dropper@juno.com>

Interesting here, that old cliche "The means are the end." 
How about "The  meanings  are the end." 

pat

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:20:56 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
Ultimate is defined as foundation and aim or end.  Thus, isn't the
experience of 'being' ultimate in that being is the foundation of all
experience as well as the aim and intention of all experience? -- Don L
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Kathryn Arizmendi 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:59 AM
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance
(resent)


Is there an ?ultimate experience??


On 10/14/06 9:48 AM, "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> wrote:


Kathryn, then don't we say that 'ultimate experience' is what the
Parmenides/Heracllitus called logos -- rather than the imaginary personal
identity experience?  The idea I'm working on is that the personal
identity experience derives from or occurs with the use of words that
direct awareness to the personal identity ... without awareness that it
is being done.   -- Don L

 


----- Original Message ----- 
 
From:  Kathryn  Arizmendi <mailto:tangykatt@earthlink.net>  
 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org  
 
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:15  AM
 
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue]  reason-ance, logos-ance
(resent)
 

Yes!   k


On 10/14/06 8:32 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com"
<Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com>  wrote:

 

Rodger __What is interesting to me about logos &  inspiration, is the way
this dialogue gave rise to the two topics at the  same juncture in time. 
And how the relationship between Logos and  Intuition is what takes ones
experience of MEANING beyond the proceeds of  reason. _R
.
Date: Fri, 13 Oct  2006 22:41:37 -0400
From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
To:  <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
.
.
Is there some kind of  experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as
meaningful as dark clouds  and thick bark? 
What is human experience is as meaningful as storm  clouds or thicker
bark prior to  severe winter}? -- Don  L



_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue  facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the  mailing  list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________






 




_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue  facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing  list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________






_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________








_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/78235f61/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 17:17:05 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 18:15:30 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
In-Reply-To: <20061014.110924.3988.56.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <C15677B1.3807%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

ok.  thanks.  k


On 10/14/06 10:50 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:

> Also why another post says "resent" with my name? (k)
> 
> The "re-sent's" were a part of the "testing" I was doing
> yesterday. Since you responded to one of my posts with this
> in the subject line, it remained in the subject line.
> 
> pat
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 


From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 17:18:20 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 18:16:45 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
In-Reply-To: <20061014.110924.3988.58.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <C15677FC.3808%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

Again, consonant with my sense of beauty, Pat.  I hope everyone is enjoying
it as much as I.   k


On 10/14/06 11:09 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:

> The coherence and creativity in the dialoguing of recent days
> seems quite unusual.
> 
> pat              
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 


From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 17:19:32 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 18:17:58 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
In-Reply-To: <20061014.110924.3988.57.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <C1567844.3809%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

Touche!


On 10/14/06 11:06 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:

> Interesting here, that old cliche "The means are the end."
> How about "The  meanings  are the end."
>  
> pat
>  
> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:20:56 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
>>  
>> Ultimate is defined as foundation and  aim or end.  Thus, isn't the
>> experience of 'being' ultimate  in that being is the foundation of all
>> experience as well as the  aim and intention of all experience? -- Don  L
>>  
>>>  
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>  
>>> From:  Kathryn Arizmendi <mailto:tangykatt@earthlink.net>
>>>  
>>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>  
>>> Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:59  AM
>>>  
>>> Subject: Re: Subject: Re:  [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Is there an ?ultimate experience??
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On  10/14/06 9:48 AM, "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>  wrote:
>>> 
>>>  
>>>> Kathryn, then  don't we say that 'ultimate experience' is what the
>>>> Parmenides/Heracllitus  called logos -- rather than the imaginary personal
>>>> identity  experience?  The idea I'm working on is that the personal
>>>> identity experience derives from or occurs with the use of words  that
>>>> direct awareness to the personal identity ... without awareness  that it is
>>>> being done.   -- Don L
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>  
>>>>> From:  Kathryn  Arizmendi <mailto:tangykatt@earthlink.net>
>>>>>  
>>>>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>>>  
>>>>> Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:15   AM
>>>>>  
>>>>> Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue]   reason-ance, logos-ance
>>>>> (resent)
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> Yes!    k
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 10/14/06 8:32 AM,  "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com"
>>>>> <Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com>   wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>> Rodger __What is interesting to me  about logos &  inspiration, is the
>>>>>> way this dialogue gave  rise to the two topics at the  same juncture in
>>>>>> time.  And  how the relationship between Logos and  Intuition is what
>>>>>> takes  ones experience of MEANING beyond the proceeds of  reason.  _R
>>>>>> .
>>>>>> Date: Fri, 13  Oct  2006 22:41:37 -0400
>>>>>> From: "Don Lay"  <donlay@gte.net>
>>>>>> Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue]  reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
>>>>>> To:   <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
>>>>>> .
>>>>>> .
>>>>>> Is there some  kind of  experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as
>>>>>> meaningful as dark clouds  and thick bark?
>>>>>> What is human  experience is as meaningful as storm  clouds or thicker
>>>>>> bark  prior to  severe winter}? -- Don   L
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>>> info:
>>>>>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> post   to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> dialogue   facilitator:
>>>>>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Administrator  of the  mailing   list:
>>>>>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> info:
>>>>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>>>> 
>>>>> post   to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>>>> 
>>>>> dialogue   facilitator:
>>>>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>>>> 
>>>>> Administrator of  the mailing   list:
>>>>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>> info:
>>>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>>> 
>>>> post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>>> 
>>>> dialogue  facilitator:
>>>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>>> 
>>>> Administrator of the  mailing  list:
>>>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> info:
>>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>> 
>>> post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>> 
>>> dialogue  facilitator:
>>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>> 
>>> Administrator of the  mailing  list:
>>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 
>>> 
>>  
>>  
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/a468a99e/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com  Sat Oct 14 17:22:50 2006
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Sun Oct 15 18:23:05 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
Message-ID: <20061014.112431.3988.60.ae.dropper@juno.com>

This generalization of all this translates immediately 
to an experience of ultimacy.

I?m with you up to the point of ?ultimacy?.  Do you mean it as ?most
perfect underlying reality??  k
Have to look at the context to see what I may have meant (so I re-pasted
it below), but I have no problem with ?most perfect underlying reality.?

What I said had referred to don L's "there is something ultimate about
meaning."

pat



On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:53:31 -0400 Kathryn Arizmendi
<tangykatt@earthlink.net> writes:

On 10/14/06 10:28 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:

This generalization of all this translates immediately 
to an experience of ultimacy.

I?m with you up to the point of ?ultimacy?.  Do you mean it as ?most
perfect underlying reality??  k

When I look at Meaning as a member of the Matter, Energy, Meaning
"Trinity," a very meaningful interpretation in relation to Ultimacy comes
easily. Energy is the first "member" from which Matter [second "member"]
proceeds and Meaning [as the third "member"] "reunites" Energy and
Matter. They are one. The "two" are one. Energy IS Matter. [Einstein was
a mystic, no?]  And, the "three" are one. Energy IS Matter IS Meaning.
This is quite meaningful as well. 

This generalization of all this translates immediately 
to an experience of ultimacy.

This also translates into a general "meaning of life."
And here again, meaning also works well as identical
with my sense of "logos" (as in dia-logos).

Interestingly though, here (in this trinity) "logos" becomes
the third person [member] of the trinity where in the Roman version
"logos" is the "second person {member]."

pat

On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:41:37 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary
definitions? -- D.
 
What about meaning?  It seems easy to see that definitions are arbitrary.
 Is it easy to see that meaning is not, that there is something ultimate
about meaning.  For example, dark clouds mean rain.  Thick bark on the
North side of a tree may mean a cold winter is on the way.

Is the meaning of dark clouds as ultimate as is energy and matter?  Is
the meaning of heavier bark on the North side of a tree as fundamental,
as ultimate as matter and energy?

Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as
meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark? 

What is human experience is as meaningful as storm clouds or thicker bark
prior to  severe winter}? -- Don L

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Dorothy Stulberg 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:05 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary
definitions?  D.




From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
Arizmendi
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 7:59 AM
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)



Could it  possibly mean that words have  temporary and arbitrary
definitions?

My research yesterday on improvisation definitely bears this out.  Will
elaborate more when I?ve sorted out my notes, and have more to take and
incorporate today at CCNY.  

Preliminary findings are that by the application of Bohm ideas and
principles, we will forge a new path.

Hurray!  k


On 10/13/06 8:44 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:


I'm in! Let's work with it.
 
pat
 
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:23:15 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:

 
What does it  mean that the Greek   logos has been interpreted as 
meaning reason? as meaning Ratio? as  meaning meaning?  What is the
meaning?    
 
Could it  possibly mean that words have  temporary and arbitrary
definitions?  What would happen if we decided,  for  just an experiment,
to use the idea that logos  means meaning? 
 
Then perhaps we could seriously consider dialogue  as dia meaning or in
terms of dia meaning.  -- Don  L 
 
----- Original Message ----- 
 
From:  Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com 
 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org  
 
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:05  AM
 
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: reason-ance, logos-ance
  

Rodger __Lead the way Don. Tell us about Reason-ance, logos-ance, 
ratio-ance. _R
..
From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
Subject: Re: Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] music & assumptions
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
..
It  seems to me that so long as we continue talking about the persona
instead of  instead of the processes, we continue to pollute  experience.
  Reason-ance, logos-ance, ratio-ance? -- Don L
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/446198fe/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 17:32:26 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 18:30:54 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
In-Reply-To: <20061014.112431.3988.60.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <C1567B4A.380C%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

Time out ? I thinking!  k


On 10/14/06 11:22 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:

>> 
>>  
>>  
>> What  I said had referred to don L's "there is  something ultimate about
>> meaning."


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/2db087dd/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 17:43:03 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 18:41:30 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
In-Reply-To: <20061014.112431.3988.60.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <C1567DC7.380E%tangykatt@earthlink.net>


OK ? in the sense of ?most perfect underlying reality?, it works for me.  In
the sense of ?final?, it doesn?t.  I don?t think it?s likely, or even
possible to get to ?final?.

He also says:

Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap that  is as ultimate and as
meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark?

I would reply birth, death, life, and all things unknown aka the rhythm of
being ? in the parameters of the above definition.   k


On 10/14/06 11:22 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:

>>  
>> This  generalization of all this translates immediately
>> to an experience of  ultimacy.
>> 
>> I?m with you up to the point of ?ultimacy?.  Do you mean  it as ?most perfect
>> underlying reality??  k
>>  
>> Have  to look at the context to see what I may have meant (so I re-pasted it
>> below),  but I have no problem with ?most perfect underlying  reality.?
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> What  I said had referred to don L's "there is  something ultimate about
>> meaning."
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> pat
>>  
>>  
>>  
>  
>  
> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:53:31 -0400 Kathryn Arizmendi <tangykatt@earthlink.net>
> writes:
>>  
>> 
>> On 10/14/06 10:28 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com"  <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
>  
> This  generalization of all this translates immediately
> to an experience of  ultimacy.
> 
> I?m with you up to the point of ?ultimacy?.  Do you mean  it as ?most perfect
> underlying reality??  k
>  
>  
> When I look at Meaning as a member of the Matter, Energy, Meaning  "Trinity,"
> a very meaningful interpretation in relation to Ultimacy comes  easily. Energy
> is the first "member" from which Matter [second "member"]  proceeds and
> Meaning [as the third "member"] "reunites" Energy and Matter.  They are one.
> The "two" are one. Energy IS Matter. [Einstein was a mystic,  no?]  And, the
> "three" are one. Energy IS Matter IS Meaning. This is  quite meaningful as
> well. 
>  
>  
>  
> This generalization of all this translates immediately
>  
> to an experience of ultimacy.
>  
>  
>  
> This also translates into a general "meaning of life."
>  
> And here again, meaning also works well as identical
>  
> with my sense of "logos" (as in dia-logos).
>  
>  
>  
> Interestingly though, here (in this trinity) "logos" becomes
>  
> the third person [member] of the trinity where in the Roman  version
>  
> "logos" is the "second person {member]."
>  
>  
>  
> pat
>  
>  
>  
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:41:37 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
>  
>>  
>>  
>> is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary  definitions?
>> -- D.
>>  
>>  
>> What about meaning?  It seems easy to see  that definitions are arbitrary.
>> Is it easy to see that meaning is not,  that there is something ultimate
>> about  meaning.  For example, dark clouds mean  rain.  Thick bark on the
>> North side of a tree may  mean a cold winter is on the way.
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> Is the meaning of  dark clouds as ultimate as is energy and matter?  Is the
>> meaning of heavier bark on the North side of a  tree as fundamental, as
>> ultimate as matter and energy?
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap  that is as ultimate and as
>> meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark?
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> What is human experience is as meaningful as  storm clouds or thicker bark
>> prior to  severe winter}? -- Don  L
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>>  
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>  
>>> From:  Dorothy  Stulberg <mailto:DStulberg@msw-law.com>
>>>  
>>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>  
>>> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:05  PM
>>>  
>>> Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue]  reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary  definitions?
>>> D.
>>> 
>>>  
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
>>> [mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
>>> Arizmendi
>>> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 7:59 AM
>>> To:  bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>> Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Could it  possibly mean that  words have  temporary and arbitrary
>>> definitions?
>>> 
>>> My research  yesterday on improvisation definitely bears this out.  Will
>>> elaborate  more when I?ve sorted out my notes, and have more to take and
>>> incorporate  today at CCNY.
>>> 
>>> Preliminary findings are that by the  application of Bohm ideas and
>>> principles, we will forge a new  path.
>>> 
>>> Hurray!  k
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 10/13/06 8:44 AM,  "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com>  wrote:
>>> 
>>>  
>>>> I'm in! Let's work with  it.
>>>>  
>>>> pat
>>>>  
>>>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:23:15 -0400  "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>> What does it  mean that the Greek    logos has been interpreted as
>>>>> meaning  reason? as meaning Ratio? as  meaning  meaning?  What is the
>>>>> meaning?    
>>>>>  
>>>>> Could it  possibly mean that words have   temporary and arbitrary
>>>>> definitions?  What would happen if  we decided,  for  just an experiment,
>>>>> to use the idea that  logos  means meaning?
>>>>>  
>>>>> Then perhaps we could seriously consider dialogue  as  dia meaning or in
>>>>> terms of dia meaning.  -- Don   L
>>>>>  
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>  
>>>>> From:  Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com
>>>>>  
>>>>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>>>  
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:05   AM
>>>>>  
>>>>> Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject:  reason-ance, logos-ance
>>>>>   
>>>>> 
>>>>> Rodger __Lead the way  Don. Tell us about Reason-ance, logos-ance,
>>>>> ratio-ance.  _R
>>>>> ..
>>>>> From: "Don  Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
>>>>> Subject: Re: Subject:  Re:  [Bohm_Dialogue] music & assumptions
>>>>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>>> ..
>>>>> It   seems to me that so long as we continue talking about the  persona
>>>>> instead of  instead of the processes, we continue to  pollute  experience.
>>>>> Reason-ance, logos-ance,  ratio-ance? -- Don L
>>>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/dda61434/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 17:57:45 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 18:56:13 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
In-Reply-To: <20061014.102821.3988.54.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <C1568139.3810%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

In music, we have what Mathieu calls ?Three Chord Music?.  The tonic as
monad, which oddly enough, was (in overtone structure) begat in the overtone
series by the Subdominant aka fourth tone of the scale (a folded over
structure of overtones), and the Dominant, the fifth tone.  The Tonic is
balance and hozhoon, the Subdominant is aptly called ?ma? in Indian (not
American) theory and is Yin, the Dominant is ?Pa? - the most aggressive,
dissonant, and Yang of the scale tones.  That progression I < IV < V > I is
the basis of all music, and enfolded into the scale.

I?ve tucked that plus your ?Trinity? into my body-mind computer, to see what
connections may be there.  Dialog would be welcome and appreciated on that
topic.    k


On 10/14/06 10:28 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:

> When I look at Meaning as a member of the Matter, Energy, Meaning "Trinity,"
> a very meaningful interpretation in relation to Ultimacy comes easily. Energy
> is the first "member" from which Matter [second "member"] proceeds and Meaning
> [as the third "member"] "reunites" Energy and Matter. They are one. The "two"
> are one. Energy IS Matter. [Einstein was a mystic, no?]  And, the "three" are
> one. Energy IS Matter IS Meaning. This is quite meaningful as well.
>  
> This generalization of all this translates immediately
> to an experience of ultimacy.
>  
> This also translates into a general "meaning of life."
> And here again, meaning also works well as identical
> with my sense of "logos" (as in dia-logos).
>  
> Interestingly though, here (in this trinity) "logos" becomes
> the third person [member] of the trinity where in the Roman version
> "logos" is the "second person {member]."
>  
> pat
>  
>  
>  
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:41:37 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
>>  
>>  
>> is there any question that words have temporary and  arbitrary definitions?
>> -- D.
>>  
>>  
>> What about meaning?  It seems easy to see  that definitions are arbitrary.
>> Is it easy to see that meaning is not,  that there is something ultimate
>> about  meaning.  For example, dark clouds mean  rain.  Thick bark on the
>> North side of a tree may  mean a cold winter is on the way.
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> Is the meaning of dark  clouds as ultimate as is energy and matter?  Is the
>> meaning of heavier bark on the North side of a tree  as fundamental, as
>> ultimate as matter and energy?
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap that  is as ultimate and as
>> meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark?
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> What is human experience is as meaningful as  storm clouds or thicker bark
>> prior to  severe winter}? -- Don  L
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>>  
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>  
>>> From:  Dorothy  Stulberg <mailto:DStulberg@msw-law.com>
>>>  
>>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>  
>>> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:05  PM
>>>  
>>> Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue]  reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> is there any question that words have temporary and  arbitrary definitions?
>>> D.
>>> 
>>>  
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
>>> [mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
>>> Arizmendi
>>> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 7:59 AM
>>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>> Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Could it  possibly mean that  words have  temporary and arbitrary
>>> definitions?
>>> 
>>> My research  yesterday on improvisation definitely bears this out.  Will
>>> elaborate  more when I?ve sorted out my notes, and have more to take and
>>> incorporate  today at CCNY.
>>> 
>>> Preliminary findings are that by the  application of Bohm ideas and
>>> principles, we will forge a new  path.
>>> 
>>> Hurray!  k
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 10/13/06 8:44 AM,  "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com>  wrote:
>>> 
>>>  
>>>> I'm in! Let's work with  it.
>>>>  
>>>> pat
>>>>  
>>>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:23:15 -0400 "Don  Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>> What does it  mean that the Greek    logos has been interpreted as
>>>>> meaning  reason? as meaning Ratio? as  meaning  meaning?  What is the
>>>>> meaning?    
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>> Could it  possibly mean that words have  temporary  and arbitrary
>>>>> definitions?  What would happen if we decided,   for  just an experiment,
>>>>> to use the idea that logos   means meaning?
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>> Then perhaps we could seriously consider dialogue  as  dia meaning or in
>>>>> terms of dia meaning.  -- Don   L
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> From:  Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:05   AM
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject:   reason-ance, logos-ance
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Rodger  __Lead the way Don. Tell us about Reason-ance, logos-ance,
>>>>>> ratio-ance. _R
>>>>>> .
>>>>>> .
>>>>>> From: "Don  Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: Subject:  Re:  [Bohm_Dialogue] music & assumptions
>>>>>> To:  <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
>>>>>> .
>>>>>> .
>>>>>> It  seems to me  that so long as we continue talking about the persona
>>>>>> instead of   instead of the processes, we continue to pollute
>>>>>> experience.   Reason-ance, logos-ance, ratio-ance? --  Don L
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>> info:
>>>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>>> 
>>>> post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>>> 
>>>> dialogue  facilitator:
>>>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>>> 
>>>> Administrator of the  mailing  list:
>>>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> info:
>>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>> 
>>> post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>>> 
>>> dialogue  facilitator:
>>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>>> 
>>> Administrator of the  mailing  list:
>>> admin@david-bohm.net
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 
>>> 
>>  
>>  
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/d83a4bb7/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com  Sat Oct 14 17:59:17 2006
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Sun Oct 15 18:58:50 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
Message-ID: <20061014.115931.3988.62.ae.dropper@juno.com>

The beauty of this (of "ultimacy" as "finality") is 
that within the "original" question was this [context below] query: 
"Could it  possibly mean that words have   
temporary and arbitrary definitions?" 

Is there a sense of "ultimacy" that doesn't
intend "finality." 

As I ask, a sense comes of "ultimacy" as "the
ongoing and absolute absence of "finality."

(I am in love with the "aliveness" of words).

pat

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 11:43:03 -0400 Kathryn Arizmendi
<tangykatt@earthlink.net> writes:

OK ? in the sense of ?most perfect underlying reality?, it works for me. 
In the sense of ?final?, it doesn?t.  I don?t think it?s likely, or even
possible to get to ?final?. 

He also says:

Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap that  is as ultimate and as
meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark? 

I would reply birth, death, life, and all things unknown aka the rhythm
of being ? in the parameters of the above definition.   k


On 10/14/06 11:22 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:



This  generalization of all this translates immediately 
to an experience of  ultimacy.

I?m with you up to the point of ?ultimacy?.  Do you mean  it as ?most
perfect underlying reality??  k
 
Have  to look at the context to see what I may have meant (so I re-pasted
it below),  but I have no problem with ?most perfect underlying 
reality.?
 
 
 
What  I said had referred to don L's "there is  something ultimate about 
meaning."
 
 
 
pat
 
 
 


 
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:53:31 -0400 Kathryn Arizmendi
<tangykatt@earthlink.net> writes:



On 10/14/06 10:28 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com"  <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:


This  generalization of all this translates immediately 
to an experience of  ultimacy.

I?m with you up to the point of ?ultimacy?.  Do you mean  it as ?most
perfect underlying reality??  k
 
 
When I look at Meaning as a member of the Matter, Energy, Meaning 
"Trinity," a very meaningful interpretation in relation to Ultimacy comes
 easily. Energy is the first "member" from which Matter [second "member"]
 proceeds and Meaning [as the third "member"] "reunites" Energy and
Matter.  They are one. The "two" are one. Energy IS Matter. [Einstein was
a mystic,  no?]  And, the "three" are one. Energy IS Matter IS Meaning.
This is  quite meaningful as well. 
 
 
 
This generalization of all this translates immediately 
 
to an experience of ultimacy.
 
 
 
This also translates into a general "meaning of life."
 
And here again, meaning also works well as identical
 
with my sense of "logos" (as in dia-logos).
 
 
 
Interestingly though, here (in this trinity) "logos" becomes
 
the third person [member] of the trinity where in the Roman  version
 
"logos" is the "second person {member]."
 
 
 
pat
 
 
 
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:41:37 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
 


 
is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary 
definitions? -- D.
 
 
What about meaning?  It seems easy to see  that definitions are
arbitrary.  Is it easy to see that meaning is not,  that there is
something ultimate about  meaning.  For example, dark clouds mean  rain. 
Thick bark on the North side of a tree may  mean a cold winter is on the
way.
 
 
 
Is the meaning of  dark clouds as ultimate as is energy and matter?  Is
the  meaning of heavier bark on the North side of a  tree as fundamental,
as ultimate as matter and energy?
 
 
 
Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap  that is as ultimate and as
meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark?  
 
 
 
What is human experience is as meaningful as  storm clouds or thicker
bark prior to  severe winter}? -- Don  L
 
 
 


----- Original Message ----- 
 
From:  Dorothy  Stulberg <mailto:DStulberg@msw-law.com>  
 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org  
 
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:05  PM
 
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue]  reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
 

 
is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary 
definitions?  D.

 
 


From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org 
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn 
Arizmendi
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 7:59 AM
To:  bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)

 

Could it  possibly mean that  words have  temporary and arbitrary
definitions?

My research  yesterday on improvisation definitely bears this out.  Will
elaborate  more when I?ve sorted out my notes, and have more to take and
incorporate  today at CCNY.  

Preliminary findings are that by the  application of Bohm ideas and
principles, we will forge a new  path.

Hurray!  k


On 10/13/06 8:44 AM,  "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com>  wrote:

 

I'm in! Let's work with  it.
 
pat
 
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:23:15 -0400  "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
 


What does it  mean that the Greek    logos has been interpreted as 
meaning  reason? as meaning Ratio? as  meaning  meaning?  What is the 
meaning?    
 
Could it  possibly mean that words have   temporary and arbitrary
definitions?  What would happen if  we decided,  for  just an experiment,
to use the idea that  logos  means meaning? 
 
Then perhaps we could seriously consider dialogue  as  dia meaning or in
terms of dia meaning.  -- Don   L 
 
----- Original Message -----  
 
From:  Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com  
 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org   
 
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:05   AM
 
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject:  reason-ance, logos-ance
  

Rodger __Lead the way  Don. Tell us about Reason-ance, logos-ance, 
ratio-ance.  _R
..
From: "Don  Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
Subject: Re: Subject:  Re:  [Bohm_Dialogue] music & assumptions
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
..
It   seems to me that so long as we continue talking about the  persona
instead of  instead of the processes, we continue to  pollute 
experience.   Reason-ance, logos-ance,  ratio-ance? -- Don L
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/9a909560/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 18:11:56 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 19:10:21 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
In-Reply-To: <20061014.115931.3988.62.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <C156848C.3813%tangykatt@earthlink.net>




On 10/14/06 11:59 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:

What about

> "the
> ongoing and absolute absence of "finality."
> 
> as the rhythm of being i.e. the cycle of change that encompasses birth, life,
> death, and possibly being recycled ? certainly the excitement and thrill of
> responding in the moment to the unexpected, hitherto unknown aka
> improvisation.     ?
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/f866c4d6/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 18:46:45 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 19:45:11 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] imperfect cadences
Message-ID: <C1568CB5.3816%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

Hello-o-o-o-o-o-

Where?d everybody go?  I?m dangling on an imperfect cadence!  k
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/967c8eba/attachment.html
From DStulberg at msw-law.com  Sat Oct 14 19:47:20 2006
From: DStulberg at msw-law.com (Dorothy Stulberg)
Date: Sun Oct 15 20:44:12 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] LOGOS-Intuition
Message-ID: <0D25D6CD52646E4B992A5CAED007D1695CFEDC@msw2k.msw.local>

I "think" this article is relevant to all the talk about improv and
music and mind.  The whole article is worth reading. see source below.
Neuroscience is a predominantly left-brained activity. This is a good
thing, as the logical, analytical gaze of the left-brained has revealed
much of what we know about the three-pound wet blob that lives in our
heads and directs our lives. But as brain imagery becomes commonplace,
perhaps it was inevitable that the right-brained among us would take on
the brain as an artistic subject. In fact, as moist agar is to a
bacterial colony, the dark, ephemeral, and hidden nature of the brain
may be the ideal environment for artistic inspiration to thrive. And
thrive it has, to the point where brain art could almost be considered a
genre. 

Images of the brain have the power to shape the way we understand the
mind and consciousness itself, according to Suzanne Anker, Chair of the
Fine Arts Department at the School for Visual Arts in New York City, and
co-curator of the recent exhibit "Neuroculture: Visual Art and the
Brain" at the Westport Arts Center. "We make images, and images make
us," she said. 

Co-curated with Giovanni Frazzetto, a Branco Weiss Fellow and molecular
biologist, "Neuroculture" addressed three related themes: the landscape
of the brain as mapped by imaging technology; conceptualized images of
mind and consciousness; and pharmacological enhancement of the
neurochemical self. 

Full article: http://tinyurl.com/yfq3wj
<BLOCKED::http://tinyurl.com/yfq3wj>   Right-click here to download
pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlook prevented automatic
download of this picture from the
Internet.
<BLOCKED::http://lists.ideaedit.org/db/18580/110525/1.gif> 


________________________________

From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
Arizmendi
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 8:14 AM
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] LOGOS-Intuition


Rodger __I think that the experience & expression of improv, its
unfolding/ enfolding meaning, is intuitive. How do you know what music
to play without sheets, scores, or song compositions  predetermined
between the musicians? 

Similarly, when composing/creating an original piece of music;  Does the
composer reason the piece into existance or does the composer TUNE IN to
an inspiration they are receiving of a music they hear within a space of
INNER LISTENING -- receiving. 

Morning, Rodger - 

For paragraph #1 - We undergo rigorous training that enables us to do
this in both through composed and improvised music.  On Creativity p, 71
speaks of reactive thought  "reactive thought is necessary because
without it we would have to reflect on every step...it is an essential
side or aspect of thought as a whole...unless there is an opportunity
for reflective thought to respond beyond the framework of such a
mechanical mode of operation, etc, etc.  Musicians say "I do or don't
have such and such a thing 'under my fingers'".  Sometimes it's called
"having it on automatic".   One of the skills ear training puts on
automatic is something called "inner hearing" - what you call "inner
listening".  As we improvise, in essence, we take dictation from what we
hear, because we have the training that allows us to do this.  Taking
dictation is also part of musical training.  As is musical design and
architecture.  Anyway, that, and many other things go into the training.
Once these abilities/skills are on automatic, my experience is that what
I feel and think turns to sound in my head which flows out my fingers
into the keys.  Somewhere, Bohm mentioned that music expresses emotion.
Absolutely - or in the case of someone like Debussy, it paints a musical
picture.  Ex - "Footprints in the Snow", "What the West Wind Saw", "La
Mer".  Bartok - Out of Doors Suite.  Kinesthesia also plays a part.
Stravinsky talks about sitting down to improvise, and finding his
fingers lead him to a different place than where his reasoning or
conscious choice was headed.  On a much less sophisticated level, I have
had the same experience. 

#2 - reason, genius and inspiration play their parts in composed as well
as improvised music.  If you look at an analysis of Beethoven's Fifth
Symphony, and get a good verbal explanation of it that includes the role
of motif and its development, it may clarify what I'm talking about.  Or
an explanation and diagram of one of Bach's fugues.  Such strategies are
available to the musician.  

Finally, shared knowledge of enfolded structures allows us to play
together without predetermining choices.  It requires a lot of training,
practice, and experience, but that's how it works.  There is no
fragmentation between reason and inspiration.  They work together at a
very deep level.

I tried to explain this from Jerry Coker's jazz pov some time back.
Maybe together with what I just wrote, it will make more sense.  But it
may also be that one has to actually experience this to truly get a
handle on it.

Best, k


On 10/14/06 7:37 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com"
<Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com> wrote:



	Rodger __I think that the experience & expression of improv, its
unfolding/ enfolding meaning, is intuitive. How do you know what music
to play without sheets, scores, or song compositions  predetermined
between the musicians? 
	
	Of course some styles improv have predetermined boundaries for
the music -- thats not what the improve to which I refer.
	
	Similarly, when composing/creating an original piece of music;
Does the composer reason the piece into existance or does the composer
TUNE IN to an inspiration they are receiving of a music they hear within
a space of INNER LISTENING -- receiving. 
	



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/d7ea94ba/attachment.html
From DStulberg at msw-law.com  Sat Oct 14 19:53:03 2006
From: DStulberg at msw-law.com (Dorothy Stulberg)
Date: Sun Oct 15 20:49:54 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
Message-ID: <0D25D6CD52646E4B992A5CAED007D1695CFEDD@msw2k.msw.local>

speaking of meeting with others, Don Lay knocked on our door last night
and he was exactly as I thought he would be--delightful.  He even looked
like I imagined him.  He and my husband and I had a great evening. I
hope we get to see him again before he leaves the area. 
It really is possible to get to know someone over this quite impersonal
means but the in-person is the best.  D.

________________________________

From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
Arizmendi
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 9:37 PM
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition


Rather look at the actions and talk about them and try to understand the
grounding of the other one.
I'm rattling as usual.  This has been a very demanding day.  D.

Hello D - I don't remember meeting you, but I agree with your first and
last sentences.  Have a restful night.  k


On 10/13/06 6:15 PM, "Dorothy Stulberg" <DStulberg@msw-law.com> wrote:



	It's funny.  Today a client and I met with the opposite side.
She told me I am too nice and don't have the inutition of how bad the
other people are.  She has an intuition, according to her, of who is
being honest and who is a "good" person.  
	I thought about that on the two hour drive back from the
meeting.  
	I have fought that kind of intuition, if I ever had it.  I don't
want to begin with the idea someone is cheating or evil (Bush aside--he
has given so many examples it is beyond intuition.)  The idea of Bohm
and of collaborative learning has directed me to avoid deciding what
kind of person a person is.  Rather look at the actions and talk about
them and try to understand the grounding of the other one.
	I'm rattling as usual.  This has been a very demanding day.  D.
	
	
	
________________________________

	From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
Arizmendi
	Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:10 AM
	To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
	Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
	
	Morning, Rodger -
	
	Thanks for the "heart" reference.
	
	As for "intuition" - are you referring to these definitions?
	
	in*tu*i*tion n
	1.    the state of being aware of or knowing something without
having to discover or perceive it, or the ability to do this
	2.    something known or believed instinctively, without actual
evidence for it
	3.    immediate knowledge of something
	
	Encarta(r) World English Dictionary (c) 1999 Microsoft
Corporation. All rights reserved. Developed for Microsoft by Bloomsbury
Publishing Plc.
	
	I get hunches (see the book "Blink"), but I don't consider that
knowledge.  And when I get a hunch, possibly a variation on the idea of
"theory", I don't consider that knowledge in the sense of scientific
fact.  It is definitely something I investigate further.  
	
	Also, I'm curious about the subtext of this particular question.
I'm sensing a little abrasiveness below the surface.  Hope I'm wrong.
	
	Best, k
	
	
	On 10/13/06 6:53 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com"
<Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com> wrote:
	
	

		Rodger __Intuition. Are you asking about intuition
because you have no personal experience of intuition? 
		
		Like  photographic memory, intuition does not
scientifically exist.  In  science, photographic memory exists only by
other names, according to the era  you search for it;  Eidetic-memory is
a present favorite, while  Epidetectorial memory was a previous.
		
		While intuition may not exist,  there are many related
areas which do -- telekinetic, telepathic,  etc.
		
		And in fact I do consider the unique neural cell process
in the  human heart to be part the component of conscience. The trouble
is, people  always want -knowing- defined according to the brain.
		
		To know more  about neural cells of the heart: -Basic &
Clinical Neurocardiology, J.A.  Armour, J.L. Ardell- describes the heart
from a purely medical standpoint.  _R
		. 
		.
		Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 09:34:00 -0400
		From:  Kathryn Arizmendi <tangykatt@earthlink.net>
		Subject: Re:  [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: No right brain?
		To:  <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
		.
		Did you and the scientist you  worked with define
intuition?
		
		Where can I find scientific information  on "the hearts
own complex neuronal
		processing and memory  capabilities."
		
		What do you mean by "heart"?  For a while, I  thought
you meant my heart
		inside my body pumping blood, but I don't think  so now.
		.
		.
		
		
________________________________

		_______________________________________________
		info:
		www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
		
		post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
		
		dialogue  facilitator:
		facilitator@david-bohm.net
		
		Administrator of the mailing  list:
		admin@david-bohm.net
		
		_______________________________________________
		
		
		

	
	
	
________________________________

	_______________________________________________
	info:
	www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
	
	post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
	
	dialogue facilitator:
	facilitator@david-bohm.net
	
	Administrator of the mailing list:
	admin@david-bohm.net
	
	_______________________________________________
	
	
	



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/a5c23d3d/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 19:55:16 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 20:53:47 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] LOGOS-Intuition
In-Reply-To: <0D25D6CD52646E4B992A5CAED007D1695CFEDC@msw2k.msw.local>
Message-ID: <C1569CC4.381C%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

Please ? why is this ?On Behalf Of? and come from ?bounces??  It makes me
uneasy ? as though I?m on the brink of identity theft!  I emailed the source
itself ? no reply, and I made the query this morning during chat.  No reply
to anything further than what ?resent?, a totally different context, meant
from Dorothy.
Since it appears on your posts, I direct my question to you.

Thank you, Kathryn Arizmendi


On 10/14/06 1:47 PM, "Dorothy Stulberg" <DStulberg@msw-law.com> wrote:

> 
> From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
> [mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn Arizmendi


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/ef91531d/attachment.html
From DStulberg at msw-law.com  Sat Oct 14 19:59:05 2006
From: DStulberg at msw-law.com (Dorothy Stulberg)
Date: Sun Oct 15 20:55:56 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
Message-ID: <0D25D6CD52646E4B992A5CAED007D1695CFEDE@msw2k.msw.local>

I take back the word "arbitrary".  and maybe the word temporary.  and
maybe even definitions.  How to say that words are nothing unless
considered within the environment within which they are used--and by
whom and to whom they are spoken. D.

________________________________

From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Don Lay
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 9:42 PM
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary
definitions? -- D.
 
What about meaning?  It seems easy to see that definitions are
arbitrary.  Is it easy to see that meaning is not, that there is
something ultimate about meaning.  For example, dark clouds mean rain.
Thick bark on the North side of a tree may mean a cold winter is on the
way.
 
Is the meaning of dark clouds as ultimate as is energy and matter?  Is
the meaning of heavier bark on the North side of a tree as fundamental,
as ultimate as matter and energy?
 
Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as
meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark? 
 
What is human experience is as meaningful as storm clouds or thicker
bark prior to  severe winter}? -- Don L
 
 
 
 

	----- Original Message ----- 
	From: Dorothy Stulberg <mailto:DStulberg@msw-law.com>  
	To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
	Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:05 PM
	Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
	
	
	is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary
definitions?  D.

________________________________

	From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
Arizmendi
	Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 7:59 AM
	To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
	Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
	
	
	
	Could it  possibly mean that words have  temporary and arbitrary
definitions?
	
	My research yesterday on improvisation definitely bears this
out.  Will elaborate more when I've sorted out my notes, and have more
to take and incorporate today at CCNY.  
	
	Preliminary findings are that by the application of Bohm ideas
and principles, we will forge a new path.
	
	Hurray!  k
	
	
	On 10/13/06 8:44 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com>
wrote:
	
	

		I'm in! Let's work with it.
		 
		pat
		 
		On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:23:15 -0400 "Don Lay"
<donlay@gte.net> writes:
		

			
			 
			 
			What does it  mean that the Greek   logos has
been interpreted as  meaning reason? as meaning Ratio? as  meaning
meaning?  What is the meaning?   
			
			 
			 
			Could it  possibly mean that words have
temporary and arbitrary definitions?  What would happen if we decided,
for  just an experiment, to use the idea that logos  means meaning?
			
			 
			 
			Then perhaps we could seriously consider
dialogue  as dia meaning or in terms of dia meaning.  -- Don  L 
			 
			 
			 
			 
			 
			 
			 
			

				
				----- Original Message ----- 
				 
				From:  Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com 
				 
				To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org  
				 
				Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:05
AM
				 
				Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject:
reason-ance, logos-ance
				 
				
				 
				
				Rodger __Lead the way Don. Tell us about
Reason-ance, logos-ance,  ratio-ance. _R
				.
				.
				From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
				Subject: Re: Subject:  Re:
[Bohm_Dialogue] music & assumptions
				To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
				.
				.
				It  seems to me that so long as we
continue talking about the persona instead of  instead of the processes,
we continue to pollute  experience.   Reason-ance, logos-ance,
ratio-ance? -- Don L
				

		
		
________________________________

		_______________________________________________
		info:
		www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
		
		post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
		
		dialogue facilitator:
		facilitator@david-bohm.net
		
		Administrator of the mailing list:
		admin@david-bohm.net
		
		_______________________________________________
		
		
		

	
	

	
________________________________


	

	_______________________________________________
	info:
	www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
	
	post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
	
	dialogue facilitator:
	facilitator@david-bohm.net
	
	Administrator of the mailing list:
	admin@david-bohm.net
	
	_______________________________________________
	
	
	

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/e99016a8/attachment.html
From DStulberg at msw-law.com  Sat Oct 14 20:06:31 2006
From: DStulberg at msw-law.com (Dorothy Stulberg)
Date: Sun Oct 15 21:03:23 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] LOGOS-Intuition
Message-ID: <0D25D6CD52646E4B992A5CAED007D1695CFEDF@msw2k.msw.local>

Kathryn I have no idea why something appears  on my post and not on
others.  What are "bounces"? I never look at that I guess, just the
message and who it comes from.  I'm guilty of attaching a response that
has nothing or little to do with the subject.  That's because I haven't
figured out how to send a brand new subject.  I don't remember "resent"
except that somehow, if I remember right, you thought it was connected
to you and you didn't like that as you had never used that word (I may
have made that up). Dorothy 

________________________________

From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
Arizmendi
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 12:55 PM
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] LOGOS-Intuition


Please - why is this "On Behalf Of" and come from "bounces"?  It makes
me uneasy - as though I'm on the brink of identity theft!  I emailed the
source itself - no reply, and I made the query this morning during chat.
No reply to anything further than what "resent", a totally different
context, meant from Dorothy.
Since it appears on your posts, I direct my question to you.

Thank you, Kathryn Arizmendi


On 10/14/06 1:47 PM, "Dorothy Stulberg" <DStulberg@msw-law.com> wrote:



	
	From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
Arizmendi
	



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/47da6e01/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 20:19:15 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 21:17:43 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] LOGOS-Intuition
In-Reply-To: <0D25D6CD52646E4B992A5CAED007D1695CFEDF@msw2k.msw.local>
Message-ID: <C156A263.3822%tangykatt@earthlink.net>




On 10/14/06 2:06 PM, "Dorothy Stulberg" <DStulberg@msw-law.com> wrote:

> you didn't like that as you had never used that word (I may have made that
> up). Dorothy
> 
> Yes, that wasn?t what I said.  That word appeared on Pat?s emails, not yours,
> and she/he explained why.
> 
> ?Bounces? are usually when you?re ?bounced? off the list.  ?Sent on behalf of?
> seems to be when someone else is empowered to send things in your name, I
> discovered when I researched this as best I could last night.
> 
> I have several different email addresses in my book so that all the messages
> from Bohm can get through the spam blocker.  The one below is one of those
> addresses, plus it appears in the heading of the emails from you.
> 
> : bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
> [mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
> 
> At first, I thought I had a computer problem, just as Pat had.  But I?m doing
> fine.  Now, all sorts of possibilities are playing in my head.  As Bohm says,
> the differences really stand out.  Since you don?t know, and none of my other
> queries have been answered, plus I definitely know I?m not making this up, I?m
> really beginning to wonder what this is all about.
> 
> Totally different topic ? thanks for the brainart article.  I?m going to
> follow up on some of the sources in my area.  Best, k


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/9f2afea0/attachment.html
From DStulberg at msw-law.com  Sat Oct 14 20:28:03 2006
From: DStulberg at msw-law.com (Dorothy Stulberg)
Date: Sun Oct 15 21:24:59 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
Message-ID: <0D25D6CD52646E4B992A5CAED007D1695CFEE1@msw2k.msw.local>

I'm in love with the aliveness of words too.  I just couldn't think of
the way to say it like you did.
If you all can't tell, I'm at work and instead of doing what I should be
doing, I'm having fun reading all the old and new messages and
responding off the top of  my head. 
Thanks to Kathryn for responding. D.

________________________________

From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of
ae.dropper@juno.com
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 10:59 AM
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


The beauty of this (of "ultimacy" as "finality") is 
that within the "original" question was this [context below] query: 
"Could it  possibly mean that words have   
temporary and arbitrary definitions?" 
 
Is there a sense of "ultimacy" that doesn't
intend "finality." 
 
As I ask, a sense comes of "ultimacy" as "the
ongoing and absolute absence of "finality."
 
(I am in love with the "aliveness" of words).
 
pat
 
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 11:43:03 -0400 Kathryn Arizmendi
<tangykatt@earthlink.net> writes:


	OK - in the sense of "most perfect underlying reality", it works
for me.  In the sense of "final", it doesn't.  I don't think it's
likely, or even possible to get to "final". 
	
	He also says:
	
	Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap that  is as
ultimate and as meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark? 
	
	I would reply birth, death, life, and all things unknown aka the
rhythm of being - in the parameters of the above definition.   k
	
	
	On 10/14/06 11:22 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com"
<ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
	
	

			
			This  generalization of all this translates
immediately 
			to an experience of  ultimacy.
			
			I'm with you up to the point of "ultimacy".  Do
you mean  it as "most perfect underlying reality"?  k
			 
			Have  to look at the context to see what I may
have meant (so I re-pasted it below),  but I have no problem with "most
perfect underlying  reality."
			 
			 
			 
			What  I said had referred to don L's "there is
something ultimate about  meaning."
			 
			 
			 
			pat
			 
			 
			 
			

		
		 
		On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:53:31 -0400 Kathryn Arizmendi
<tangykatt@earthlink.net> writes:
		

			
			
			On 10/14/06 10:28 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com"
<ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
			

		
		This  generalization of all this translates immediately 
		to an experience of  ultimacy.
		
		I'm with you up to the point of "ultimacy".  Do you mean
it as "most perfect underlying reality"?  k
		 
		 
		When I look at Meaning as a member of the Matter,
Energy, Meaning  "Trinity," a very meaningful interpretation in relation
to Ultimacy comes  easily. Energy is the first "member" from which
Matter [second "member"]  proceeds and Meaning [as the third "member"]
"reunites" Energy and Matter.  They are one. The "two" are one. Energy
IS Matter. [Einstein was a mystic,  no?]  And, the "three" are one.
Energy IS Matter IS Meaning. This is  quite meaningful as well. 
		 
		 
		 
		This generalization of all this translates immediately 
		 
		to an experience of ultimacy.
		 
		 
		 
		This also translates into a general "meaning of life."
		 
		And here again, meaning also works well as identical
		 
		with my sense of "logos" (as in dia-logos).
		 
		 
		 
		Interestingly though, here (in this trinity) "logos"
becomes
		 
		the third person [member] of the trinity where in the
Roman  version
		 
		"logos" is the "second person {member]."
		 
		 
		 
		pat
		 
		 
		 
		On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:41:37 -0400 "Don Lay"
<donlay@gte.net> writes:
		 
		

			
			 
			is there any question that words have temporary
and arbitrary  definitions? -- D.
			 
			 
			What about meaning?  It seems easy to see  that
definitions are arbitrary.  Is it easy to see that meaning is not,  that
there is something ultimate about  meaning.  For example, dark clouds
mean  rain.  Thick bark on the North side of a tree may  mean a cold
winter is on the way.
			 
			 
			 
			Is the meaning of  dark clouds as ultimate as is
energy and matter?  Is the  meaning of heavier bark on the North side of
a  tree as fundamental, as ultimate as matter and energy?
			 
			 
			 
			Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap
that is as ultimate and as meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark?  
			 
			 
			 
			What is human experience is as meaningful as
storm clouds or thicker bark prior to  severe winter}? -- Don  L
			 
			 
			 
			

				
				----- Original Message ----- 
				 
				From:  Dorothy  Stulberg
<mailto:DStulberg@msw-law.com> <mailto:DStulberg@msw-law.com>   
				 
				To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org  
				 
				Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:05  PM
				 
				Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue]
reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
				 
				
				 
				is there any question that words have
temporary and arbitrary  definitions?  D.
				
				 
				 
				
________________________________

				From:
bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
Arizmendi
				Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 7:59 AM
				To:  bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
				Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue]
reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
				
				 
				
				Could it  possibly mean that  words have
temporary and arbitrary definitions?
				
				My research  yesterday on improvisation
definitely bears this out.  Will elaborate  more when I've sorted out my
notes, and have more to take and incorporate  today at CCNY.  
				
				Preliminary findings are that by the
application of Bohm ideas and principles, we will forge a new  path.
				
				Hurray!  k
				
				
				On 10/13/06 8:44 AM,
"ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com>  wrote:
				
				 
				

				I'm in! Let's work with  it.
				 
				pat
				 
				On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:23:15 -0400  "Don
Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
				 
				

				
				What does it  mean that the Greek
logos has been interpreted as  meaning  reason? as meaning Ratio? as
meaning  meaning?  What is the  meaning?    
				 
				Could it  possibly mean that words have
temporary and arbitrary definitions?  What would happen if  we decided,
for  just an experiment, to use the idea that  logos  means meaning? 
				 
				Then perhaps we could seriously consider
dialogue  as  dia meaning or in terms of dia meaning.  -- Don   L 
				 
				----- Original Message -----  
				 
				From:  Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com  
				 
				To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org   
				 
				Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:05
AM
				 
				Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject:
reason-ance, logos-ance
				  
				
				Rodger __Lead the way  Don. Tell us
about Reason-ance, logos-ance,  ratio-ance.  _R
				..
				From: "Don  Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
				Subject: Re: Subject:  Re:
[Bohm_Dialogue] music & assumptions
				To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
				..
				It   seems to me that so long as we
continue talking about the  persona instead of  instead of the
processes, we continue to  pollute  experience.   Reason-ance,
logos-ance,  ratio-ance? -- Don L
				

				
				

		
		
________________________________


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/eda19f25/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 20:31:48 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 21:30:18 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
In-Reply-To: <0D25D6CD52646E4B992A5CAED007D1695CFEE1@msw2k.msw.local>
Message-ID: <C156A554.3827%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

We?re both doing the same thing.  I?m working on Ping Pong Cadences and
staying open to dialog at the same time.  Back to Cadences!  best, k


On 10/14/06 2:28 PM, "Dorothy Stulberg" <DStulberg@msw-law.com> wrote:

> I'm in love with the aliveness of words too.  I just couldn't think of the way
> to say it like you did.
> If you all can't tell, I'm at work and instead of doing what I should be
> doing, I'm having fun reading all the old and new messages and responding off
> the top of  my head.
> Thanks to Kathryn for responding. D.
> 
> 
> From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
> [mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of ae.dropper@juno.com
> Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 10:59 AM
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
> 
> The beauty of this (of "ultimacy" as "finality") is
> that within the "original" question was this [context below] query:
> "Could it  possibly mean that words have
> temporary and arbitrary definitions?"
>  
> Is there a sense of "ultimacy" that doesn't
> intend "finality."
>  
> As I ask, a sense comes of "ultimacy" as "the
> ongoing and absolute absence of "finality."
>  
> (I am in love with the "aliveness" of words).
>  
> pat
>  
> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 11:43:03 -0400 Kathryn Arizmendi <tangykatt@earthlink.net>
> writes:
>>  
>> 
>> OK ? in the sense of ?most perfect underlying reality?, it works for  me.  In
>> the sense of ?final?, it doesn?t.  I don?t think it?s  likely, or even
>> possible to get to ?final?.
>> 
>> He also says:
>> 
>> Is  there some kind of experience in homo-sap that  is as ultimate and as
>> meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark?
>> 
>> I would reply birth, death,  life, and all things unknown aka the rhythm of
>> being ? in the parameters of  the above definition.   k
>> 
>> 
>> On 10/14/06 11:22 AM,  "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com>  wrote:
>> 
>  
>>  
>>> 
>>> This  generalization of all this  translates immediately
>>> to an experience of  ultimacy.
>>> 
>>> I?m  with you up to the point of ?ultimacy?.  Do you mean  it as  ?most
>>> perfect underlying reality??  k
>>>  
>>> Have  to look  at the context to see what I may have meant (so I re-pasted
>>> it below),   but I have no problem with ?most perfect underlying   reality.?
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> What  I said had  referred to don L's "there is  something ultimate about
>>> meaning."
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> pat
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>> 
>>  
>> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:53:31 -0400  Kathryn Arizmendi
>> <tangykatt@earthlink.net> writes:
>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 10/14/06 10:28 AM,  "ae.dropper@juno.com"  <ae.dropper@juno.com>  wrote:
>> 
>> This   generalization of all this translates immediately
>> to an experience  of  ultimacy.
>> 
>> I?m with you up to the point of ?ultimacy?.   Do you mean  it as ?most
>> perfect underlying reality??   k
>>  
>>  
>> When I look at Meaning as a member of the  Matter, Energy, Meaning
>> "Trinity," a very meaningful  interpretation in relation to Ultimacy comes
>> easily. Energy is the  first "member" from which Matter [second "member"]
>> proceeds and  Meaning [as the third "member"] "reunites" Energy and Matter.
>> They are  one. The "two" are one. Energy IS Matter. [Einstein was a mystic,
>> no?]   And, the "three" are one. Energy IS Matter IS Meaning. This is   quite
>> meaningful as well.
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> This  generalization of all this translates immediately
>>  
>> to an  experience of ultimacy.
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> This also  translates into a general "meaning of life."
>>  
>> And here again,  meaning also works well as identical
>>  
>> with my sense of "logos"  (as in dia-logos).
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> Interestingly though,  here (in this trinity) "logos" becomes
>>  
>> the third person  [member] of the trinity where in the Roman   version
>>  
>> "logos" is the "second person  {member]."
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> pat
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> On  Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:41:37 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>  writes:
>>  
>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> is there any question that words  have temporary and arbitrary  definitions?
>>> --  D.
>>>  
>>>  
>>> What about meaning?  It seems easy to see   that definitions are arbitrary.
>>> Is it easy to see that meaning  is not,  that there is something ultimate
>>> about   meaning.  For example, dark clouds mean   rain.  Thick bark on the
>>> North side of a tree may   mean a cold winter is on the  way.
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> Is the meaning of   dark clouds as ultimate as is energy and matter?  Is the
>>> meaning of heavier bark on the North side of a   tree as fundamental, as
>>> ultimate as matter and  energy?
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> Is there some kind of experience  in homo-sap  that is as ultimate and as
>>> meaningful as dark clouds and  thick bark?
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> What is human  experience is as meaningful as  storm clouds or thicker bark
>>> prior to   severe winter}? -- Don   L
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>  
>>>> From:  Dorothy  Stulberg <mailto:DStulberg@msw-law.com>
>>>>  
>>>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>>  
>>>> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:05   PM
>>>>  
>>>> Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue]   reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> is  there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary
>>>> definitions?  D.
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
>>>> [mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org]  On Behalf Of Kathryn
>>>> Arizmendi
>>>> Sent: Friday,  October 13, 2006 7:59 AM
>>>> To:   bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>> Subject:  Re:  [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance  (resent)
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> Could it  possibly mean that   words have  temporary and arbitrary
>>>> definitions?
>>>> 
>>>> My  research  yesterday on improvisation definitely bears this out.   Will
>>>> elaborate  more when I?ve sorted out my notes, and have  more to take and
>>>> incorporate  today at CCNY.
>>>> 
>>>> Preliminary findings are that by the  application of  Bohm ideas and
>>>> principles, we will forge a new   path.
>>>> 
>>>> Hurray!  k
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 10/13/06 8:44 AM,   "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com>   wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>> I'm in! Let's work with   it.
>>>>>  
>>>>> pat
>>>>>  
>>>>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:23:15  -0400  "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>  writes:
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> What does it  mean that the Greek     logos has been interpreted as
>>>>>> meaning  reason? as meaning Ratio? as   meaning  meaning?  What is the
>>>>>> meaning?    
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> Could it   possibly mean that words have   temporary and  arbitrary
>>>>>> definitions?  What would happen if  we decided,   for  just an
>>>>>> experiment, to use the idea that   logos  means meaning?
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> Then  perhaps we could seriously consider dialogue  as   dia meaning or
>>>>>> in terms of dia meaning.  -- Don    L
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> From:  Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006  9:05   AM
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue]  Subject:  reason-ance, logos-ance
>>>>>>   
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Rodger  __Lead the way  Don. Tell us about Reason-ance, logos-ance,
>>>>>> ratio-ance.  _R
>>>>>> ..
>>>>>> From: "Don  Lay"  <donlay@gte.net>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: Subject:  Re:   [Bohm_Dialogue] music & assumptions
>>>>>> To:  bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>>>> ..
>>>>>> It   seems to me  that so long as we continue talking about the  persona
>>>>>> instead  of  instead of the processes, we continue to  pollute
>>>>>> experience.   Reason-ance, logos-ance,   ratio-ance? -- Don L
>>>>> 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/9e4f6bba/attachment.html
From DStulberg at msw-law.com  Sat Oct 14 20:34:52 2006
From: DStulberg at msw-law.com (Dorothy Stulberg)
Date: Sun Oct 15 21:31:44 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
Message-ID: <0D25D6CD52646E4B992A5CAED007D1695CFEE2@msw2k.msw.local>

okay.. what are ping pong cadences. D.

________________________________

From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
Arizmendi
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 1:32 PM
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


We're both doing the same thing.  I'm working on Ping Pong Cadences and
staying open to dialog at the same time.  Back to Cadences!  best, k


On 10/14/06 2:28 PM, "Dorothy Stulberg" <DStulberg@msw-law.com> wrote:



	I'm in love with the aliveness of words too.  I just couldn't
think of the way to say it like you did.
	If you all can't tell, I'm at work and instead of doing what I
should be doing, I'm having fun reading all the old and new messages and
responding off the top of  my head. 
	Thanks to Kathryn for responding. D.
	
	
________________________________

	From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of
ae.dropper@juno.com
	Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 10:59 AM
	To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
	Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
	
	The beauty of this (of "ultimacy" as "finality") is 
	that within the "original" question was this [context below]
query: 
	"Could it  possibly mean that words have   
	temporary and arbitrary definitions?" 
	 
	Is there a sense of "ultimacy" that doesn't
	intend "finality." 
	 
	As I ask, a sense comes of "ultimacy" as "the
	ongoing and absolute absence of "finality."
	
	(I am in love with the "aliveness" of words).
	 
	pat
	 
	On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 11:43:03 -0400 Kathryn Arizmendi
<tangykatt@earthlink.net> writes:
	

		
		
		OK - in the sense of "most perfect underlying reality",
it works for  me.  In the sense of "final", it doesn't.  I don't think
it's  likely, or even possible to get to "final". 
		
		He also says:
		
		Is  there some kind of experience in homo-sap that  is
as ultimate and as  meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark? 
		
		I would reply birth, death,  life, and all things
unknown aka the rhythm of being - in the parameters of  the above
definition.   k
		
		
		On 10/14/06 11:22 AM,  "ae.dropper@juno.com"
<ae.dropper@juno.com>  wrote:
		
		

	
	

		
		

			
			This  generalization of all this  translates
immediately 
			to an experience of  ultimacy.
			
			I'm  with you up to the point of "ultimacy".  Do
you mean  it as  "most perfect underlying reality"?  k
			 
			Have  to look  at the context to see what I may
have meant (so I re-pasted it below),   but I have no problem with "most
perfect underlying   reality."
			 
			 
			 
			What  I said had  referred to don L's "there is
something ultimate about   meaning."
			 
			 
			 
			pat
			 
			 
			 
			

		
		 
		On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:53:31 -0400  Kathryn Arizmendi
<tangykatt@earthlink.net> writes:
		 
		

			
			
			On 10/14/06 10:28 AM,  "ae.dropper@juno.com"
<ae.dropper@juno.com>  wrote:
			

		
		This   generalization of all this translates immediately

		to an experience  of  ultimacy.
		
		I'm with you up to the point of "ultimacy".   Do you
mean  it as "most perfect underlying reality"?   k
		 
		 
		When I look at Meaning as a member of the  Matter,
Energy, Meaning  "Trinity," a very meaningful  interpretation in
relation to Ultimacy comes  easily. Energy is the  first "member" from
which Matter [second "member"]  proceeds and  Meaning [as the third
"member"] "reunites" Energy and Matter.  They are  one. The "two" are
one. Energy IS Matter. [Einstein was a mystic,  no?]   And, the "three"
are one. Energy IS Matter IS Meaning. This is   quite meaningful as
well. 
		 
		 
		 
		This  generalization of all this translates immediately 
		 
		to an  experience of ultimacy.
		 
		 
		 
		This also  translates into a general "meaning of life."
		 
		And here again,  meaning also works well as identical
		 
		with my sense of "logos"  (as in dia-logos).
		 
		 
		 
		Interestingly though,  here (in this trinity) "logos"
becomes
		 
		the third person  [member] of the trinity where in the
Roman   version
		 
		"logos" is the "second person  {member]."
		 
		 
		 
		pat
		 
		 
		 
		On  Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:41:37 -0400 "Don Lay"
<donlay@gte.net>  writes:
		 
		 
		

			
			 
			is there any question that words  have temporary
and arbitrary  definitions? --  D.
			 
			 
			What about meaning?  It seems easy to see   that
definitions are arbitrary.  Is it easy to see that meaning  is not,
that there is something ultimate about   meaning.  For example, dark
clouds mean   rain.  Thick bark on the North side of a tree may   mean a
cold winter is on the  way.
			 
			 
			 
			Is the meaning of   dark clouds as ultimate as
is energy and matter?  Is the   meaning of heavier bark on the North
side of a   tree as fundamental, as ultimate as matter and  energy?
			 
			 
			 
			Is there some kind of experience  in homo-sap
that is as ultimate and as meaningful as dark clouds and  thick bark?  
			 
			 
			 
			What is human  experience is as meaningful as
storm clouds or thicker bark prior to   severe winter}? -- Don   L
			 
			 
			 
			 
			

				
				----- Original Message -----  
				 
				From:  Dorothy  Stulberg
<mailto:DStulberg@msw-law.com> <mailto:DStulberg@msw-law.com>    
				 
				To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org   
				 
				Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:05   PM
				 
				Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue]
reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
				 
				
				 
				is  there any question that words have
temporary and arbitrary   definitions?  D.
				
				 
				 
				 
				
________________________________

				From:
bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org]  On Behalf Of Kathryn
Arizmendi
				Sent: Friday,  October 13, 2006 7:59 AM
				To:   bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
				Subject:  Re:  [Bohm_Dialogue]
reason-ance, logos-ance  (resent)
				
				 
				
				Could it  possibly mean that   words
have  temporary and arbitrary definitions?
				
				My  research  yesterday on improvisation
definitely bears this out.   Will elaborate  more when I've sorted out
my notes, and have  more to take and incorporate  today at CCNY.   
				
				Preliminary findings are that by the
application of  Bohm ideas and principles, we will forge a new   path.
				
				Hurray!  k
				
				
				On 10/13/06 8:44 AM,
"ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com>   wrote:
				
				 
				 
				

				I'm in! Let's work with   it.
				 
				pat
				 
				On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:23:15  -0400
"Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>  writes:
				 
				 
				

				
				What does it  mean that the Greek
logos has been interpreted as   meaning  reason? as meaning Ratio? as
meaning  meaning?  What is the   meaning?    
				 
				Could it   possibly mean that words have
temporary and  arbitrary definitions?  What would happen if  we decided,
for  just an experiment, to use the idea that   logos  means meaning? 
				 
				Then  perhaps we could seriously
consider dialogue  as   dia meaning or in terms of dia meaning.  -- Don
L 
				 
				----- Original Message -----   
				 
				From:  Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com   
				 
				To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org    
				 
				Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006  9:05
AM
				 
				Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue]  Subject:
reason-ance, logos-ance
				  
				
				Rodger  __Lead the way  Don. Tell us
about Reason-ance, logos-ance,   ratio-ance.  _R
				..
				From: "Don  Lay"  <donlay@gte.net>
				Subject: Re: Subject:  Re:
[Bohm_Dialogue] music & assumptions
				To:  bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
				..
				It   seems to me  that so long as we
continue talking about the  persona instead  of  instead of the
processes, we continue to  pollute   experience.   Reason-ance,
logos-ance,   ratio-ance? -- Don L
				

				
				

		
		 
		
________________________________



	
	
________________________________

	_______________________________________________
	info:
	www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
	
	post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
	
	dialogue facilitator:
	facilitator@david-bohm.net
	
	Administrator of the mailing list:
	admin@david-bohm.net
	
	_______________________________________________
	
	
	



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/2a862b8d/attachment.html
From tubakari at yahoo.com  Sat Oct 14 20:46:50 2006
From: tubakari at yahoo.com (Karilen Mays)
Date: Sun Oct 15 21:45:15 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
Message-ID: <20061014184650.35217.qmail@web52915.mail.yahoo.com>

Im pretty sure it only happens when you send a message and it has to do with the fact that this is a listserv. So when we reply it goes to the listserv instead of a person.This may not be exactly right, but it isn't anything to worry about. Ive seen it tons of times, kathryn.
 
kari
 

 
----- Original Message ----
From: Kathryn Arizmendi <tangykatt@earthlink.net>
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 6:21:34 AM
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition


On 10/14/06 1:04 AM, "Franis Engel" <franis_franis@juno.com> wrote:

> From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
>> [mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
>> Arizmendi


Hi Franis - could you please tell me why the heading says "On Behalf of..."?

Also why another post says "resent" with my name?

I've never seen this before, and I'm not sure I want someone to have the
power to send things on my behalf unless I know about it!  What's it all
about?  Thanks, k


_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/6f4cbf23/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 20:48:52 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 21:47:22 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
In-Reply-To: <0D25D6CD52646E4B992A5CAED007D1695CFEE2@msw2k.msw.local>
Message-ID: <C156A954.382C%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

A chain of chords (music vocabulary = progression) that sets up
complimentary energies on both sides of a central point of rest.  Common
musical name ? the I < IV < V > I progression.  It?s a basic structure of
all music.  I wrote something about that this morning in one of my posts.
When I clean out the email tonight, I?ll resend it.  It was to Pat ? the
logos trinity applied to the balanced & yin & yang energies as they?re
expressed in music.  The ping pong imagery is because music bounces back and
forth among these energies manifested in various structures.  Hearing and
playing this in all keys, and improvising on it is basic music vocabulary
for musicians.

I?ve been multitasking all morning, and I?m running out of energy.  Gonna
regroup now.  I?ll find that email and send it along tonight.

Best, k

PS  My last paragraph is a word equivalent of a musical Period-Phrase with
its punctuation, the Half Cadence, and at the end, the Perfect Authentic
Cadence.





On 10/14/06 2:34 PM, "Dorothy Stulberg" <DStulberg@msw-law.com> wrote:

> okay.. what are ping pong cadences. D.
> 
> 
> From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
> [mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn Arizmendi
> Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 1:32 PM
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
> 
> We?re both doing the same thing.  I?m working on Ping Pong Cadences and
> staying open to dialog at the same time.  Back to Cadences!  best, k
> 
> 
> On 10/14/06 2:28 PM, "Dorothy Stulberg" <DStulberg@msw-law.com> wrote:
> 
>> I'm in love with the aliveness of words too.  I just couldn't  think of the
>> way to say it like you did.
>> If you all can't tell, I'm at work  and instead of doing what I should be
>> doing, I'm having fun reading all the  old and new messages and responding
>> off the top of  my head.
>> Thanks  to Kathryn for responding. D.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
>> [mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org]  On Behalf Of
>> ae.dropper@juno.com
>> Sent: Saturday, October 14,  2006 10:59 AM
>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>> Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
>> 
>> The beauty of this (of "ultimacy"  as "finality") is
>> that within the "original" question was this  [context below] query:
>> "Could it  possibly mean that words have
>> temporary and arbitrary definitions?"
>>  
>> Is there a  sense of "ultimacy" that doesn't
>> intend "finality."
>>  
>> As I ask,  a sense comes of "ultimacy" as "the
>> ongoing and absolute absence  of "finality."
>> 
>> (I am in love with the "aliveness" of  words).
>>  
>> pat
>>  
>> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 11:43:03 -0400  Kathryn Arizmendi
>> <tangykatt@earthlink.net> writes:
>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> OK ? in the sense of ?most perfect  underlying reality?, it works for  me.
>>> In the sense of ?final?,  it doesn?t.  I don?t think it?s  likely, or even
>>> possible to get  to ?final?.
>>> 
>>> He also says:
>>> 
>>> Is  there some kind of  experience in homo-sap that  is as ultimate and as
>>> meaningful as  dark clouds and thick bark?
>>> 
>>> I would reply birth, death,  life,  and all things unknown aka the rhythm of
>>> being ? in the parameters of   the above definition.   k
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 10/14/06 11:22 AM,   "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com>   wrote:
>>> 
>> 
>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> This  generalization of all this   translates immediately
>>>> to an experience of   ultimacy.
>>>> 
>>>> I?m  with you up to the point of ?ultimacy?.   Do you mean  it as  ?most
>>>> perfect underlying reality??   k
>>>>  
>>>> Have  to look  at the context to see what I  may have meant (so I re-pasted
>>>> it below),   but I have no  problem with ?most perfect underlying
>>>> reality.?
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> What  I said  had  referred to don L's "there is  something  ultimate about
>>>> meaning."
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> pat
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:53:31  -0400  Kathryn Arizmendi
>>> <tangykatt@earthlink.net>  writes:
>>>  
>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 10/14/06 10:28 AM,   "ae.dropper@juno.com"  <ae.dropper@juno.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> This    generalization of all this translates immediately
>>> to an  experience  of  ultimacy.
>>> 
>>> I?m with you up to the point of  ?ultimacy?.   Do you mean  it as ?most
>>> perfect underlying  reality??   k
>>>  
>>>  
>>> When I look at Meaning as a  member of the  Matter, Energy, Meaning
>>> "Trinity," a very  meaningful  interpretation in relation to Ultimacy comes
>>> easily.  Energy is the  first "member" from which Matter [second "member"]
>>> proceeds and  Meaning [as the third "member"] "reunites" Energy  and Matter.
>>> They are  one. The "two" are one. Energy IS Matter.  [Einstein was a mystic,
>>> no?]   And, the "three" are one.  Energy IS Matter IS Meaning. This is
>>> quite meaningful as well.
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> This  generalization of all this  translates immediately
>>>  
>>> to an  experience of  ultimacy.
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> This also  translates into a  general "meaning of life."
>>>  
>>> And here again,  meaning also  works well as identical
>>>  
>>> with my sense of "logos"  (as in  dia-logos).
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> Interestingly though,   here (in this trinity) "logos" becomes
>>>  
>>> the third person   [member] of the trinity where in the Roman    version
>>>  
>>> "logos" is the "second person   {member]."
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> pat
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> On   Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:41:37 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>   writes:
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> is there any question that  words  have temporary and arbitrary
>>>> definitions? --   D.
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> What about meaning?  It seems easy to  see   that definitions are
>>>> arbitrary.  Is it easy to see  that meaning  is not,  that there is
>>>> something  ultimate about   meaning.  For example, dark  clouds mean
>>>> rain.  Thick bark on the North  side of a tree may   mean a cold winter is
>>>> on the   way.
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> Is the meaning  of   dark clouds as ultimate as is energy and matter?  Is
>>>> the   meaning of heavier bark on the North side of  a   tree as
>>>> fundamental, as ultimate as matter and   energy?
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> Is there some kind of  experience  in homo-sap  that is as ultimate and as
>>>> meaningful  as dark clouds and  thick bark?
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> What is human  experience is  as meaningful as  storm clouds or thicker
>>>> bark prior to    severe winter}? -- Don    L
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>  
>>>>> From:  Dorothy  Stulberg <mailto:DStulberg@msw-law.com>
>>>>>  
>>>>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>>>  
>>>>> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:05    PM
>>>>>  
>>>>> Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue]    reason-ance, logos-ance  (resent)
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> is  there any question that  words have temporary and arbitrary
>>>>> definitions?   D.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>>  From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
>>>>> [mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org]   On Behalf Of Kathryn
>>>>> Arizmendi
>>>>> Sent:  Friday,  October 13, 2006 7:59 AM
>>>>> To:    bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>>> Subject:  Re:   [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance   (resent)
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> Could it  possibly mean that    words have  temporary and arbitrary
>>>>> definitions?
>>>>> 
>>>>> My  research  yesterday on improvisation  definitely bears this out.
>>>>> Will elaborate  more when  I?ve sorted out my notes, and have  more to
>>>>> take and incorporate   today at CCNY.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Preliminary findings are that  by the  application of  Bohm ideas and
>>>>> principles, we will  forge a new   path.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hurray!  k
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On  10/13/06 8:44 AM,   "ae.dropper@juno.com"  <ae.dropper@juno.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>> I'm in! Let's work with    it.
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> pat
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2006  18:23:15  -0400  "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
>>>>>> writes:
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> What does it  mean that  the Greek     logos has been  interpreted as
>>>>>>> meaning  reason? as meaning  Ratio? as   meaning  meaning?   What is the
>>>>>>> meaning?   
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> Could it   possibly mean  that words have   temporary and  arbitrary
>>>>>>> definitions?  What would happen if  we decided,    for  just an
>>>>>>> experiment, to use the idea that    logos  means meaning?
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> Then  perhaps we could seriously consider  dialogue  as   dia meaning or
>>>>>>> in terms of dia  meaning.  -- Don    L
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> From:   Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> To:  bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 11,  2006  9:05   AM
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> Subject:  [Bohm_Dialogue]  Subject:  reason-ance,  logos-ance
>>>>>>>   
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Rodger  __Lead the way   Don. Tell us about Reason-ance, logos-ance,
>>>>>>> ratio-ance.  _R
>>>>>>> ..
>>>>>>> From: "Don  Lay"   <donlay@gte.net>
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Subject:  Re:    [Bohm_Dialogue] music & assumptions
>>>>>>> To:   bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>>>>>> ..
>>>>>>> It   seems to  me  that so long as we continue talking about the
>>>>>>> persona  instead  of  instead of the processes, we continue to   pollute
>>>>>>> experience.   Reason-ance,  logos-ance,   ratio-ance? -- Don  L
>>>>>> 
>>> 
>>>  
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  _______________________________________________
>> info:
>> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>> 
>> post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>> 
>> dialogue  facilitator:
>> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>> 
>> Administrator of the mailing  list:
>> admin@david-bohm.net
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/baccc405/attachment.html
From tubakari at yahoo.com  Sat Oct 14 20:49:36 2006
From: tubakari at yahoo.com (Karilen Mays)
Date: Sun Oct 15 21:48:01 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
Message-ID: <20061014184936.36829.qmail@web52908.mail.yahoo.com>

ive barely been able to follw this because this talk of ultimate experience is strange...what is not ultimate experience? is it just the point of view that differs? what is non ultimate?

kari



----- Original Message ----
From: Don Lay <donlay@gte.net>
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 6:48:16 AM
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


Kathryn, then don't we say that 'ultimate experience' is what the Parmenides/Heracllitus called logos -- rather than the imaginary personal identity experience?  The idea I'm working on is that the personal identity experience derives from or occurs with the use of words that direct awareness to the personal identity ... without awareness that it is being done.   -- Don L

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/7ae8b295/attachment.html
From tangykatt at earthlink.net  Sat Oct 14 20:50:23 2006
From: tangykatt at earthlink.net (Kathryn Arizmendi)
Date: Sun Oct 15 21:48:50 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
In-Reply-To: <20061014184650.35217.qmail@web52915.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <C156A9AF.382D%tangykatt@earthlink.net>

Thanks, Kari ? the thing is, it doesn?t happen on all my messages.  That?s
why I noticed it.  k


On 10/14/06 2:46 PM, "Karilen Mays" <tubakari@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Im pretty sure it only happens when you send a message and it has to do with
> the fact that this is a listserv. So when we reply it goes to the listserv
> instead of a person.This may not be exactly right, but it isn't anything to
> worry about. Ive seen it tons of times, kathryn.
>  
> kari
>  
> 
>  
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Kathryn Arizmendi <tangykatt@earthlink.net>
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 6:21:34 AM
> Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
> 
> On 10/14/06 1:04 AM, "Franis Engel" <franis_franis@juno.com> wrote:
> 
>> > From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
>>> >> [mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
>>> >> Arizmendi
> 
> 
> Hi Franis - could you please tell me why the heading says "On Behalf of..."?
> 
> Also why another post says "resent" with my name?
> 
> I've never seen this before, and I'm not sure I want someone to have the
> power to send things on my behalf unless I know about it!  What's it all
> about?  Thanks, k
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/5cf05754/attachment.html
From tubakari at yahoo.com  Sat Oct 14 20:53:19 2006
From: tubakari at yahoo.com (Karilen Mays)
Date: Sun Oct 15 21:51:44 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
Message-ID: <20061014185319.79660.qmail@web52905.mail.yahoo.com>

what is Being not the source of? haha

kari
 
----- Original Message ----
From: Don Lay <donlay@gte.net>
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 7:18:00 AM
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


Assuming you mean, are meaning and reason related --.  Yes.  They both derive from the Greek jjword logos (as does dia-logue).  That is, Heraclitus' juse of the word, logos, has been interpreted as both reason and meaning.  That says they're related,  doesn't it?
 
Also, Bohm says they're related, doesn't he?
 
Further, in Parmenides/Heraclitus there is no separation.  Even thought, thinking is the same as being --  persona is not needed for thinking.  I'm understanding 'being' to mean 'the WHOLE'.
 
Given this then, wouldn't we say the source of creativity, improv, is being itself? 
 
  --  Don L
 
 
 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Kathryn Arizmendi 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:58 AM
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


Gotta think about that one.  But off the top of my head, do you feel they could be related?  k


On 10/14/06 9:48 AM, "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> wrote:


Kathryn, then don't we say that 'ultimate experience' is what the Parmenides/Heracllitus called logos -- rather than the imaginary personal identity experience?  The idea I'm working on is that the personal identity experience derives from or occurs with the use of words that direct awareness to the personal identity ... without awareness that it is being done.   -- Don L

 


----- Original Message ----- 
 
From:  Kathryn  Arizmendi <mailto:tangykatt@earthlink.net>  
 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org  
 
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:15  AM
 
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue]  reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
 

Yes!   k


On 10/14/06 8:32 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com" <Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com>  wrote:

 

Rodger __What is interesting to me about logos &  inspiration, is the way this dialogue gave rise to the two topics at the  same juncture in time.  And how the relationship between Logos and  Intuition is what takes ones experience of MEANING beyond the proceeds of  reason. _R
.
Date: Fri, 13 Oct  2006 22:41:37 -0400
From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
To:  <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
.
.
Is there some kind of  experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as meaningful as dark clouds  and thick bark? 
What is human experience is as meaningful as storm  clouds or thicker bark prior to  severe winter}? -- Don  L



_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue  facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the  mailing  list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________






 




_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue  facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing  list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________






_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________








_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/a321887b/attachment.html
From tubakari at yahoo.com  Sat Oct 14 20:55:44 2006
From: tubakari at yahoo.com (Karilen Mays)
Date: Sun Oct 15 21:54:08 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
Message-ID: <20061014185544.36574.qmail@web52913.mail.yahoo.com>

I wouldnt even say the experience of "being" is ultimate...only that being encompasses all that is, but there is no end to that, so how can it be ultimate in the sense of an end?

if ultimate is an all encompassing flow of Life, then yeah being is ultimate.
kari
----- Original Message ----
From: Don Lay <donlay@gte.net>
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 7:20:56 AM
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


Ultimate is defined as foundation and aim or end.  Thus, isn't the experience of 'being' ultimate in that being is the foundation of all experience as well as the aim and intention of all experience? -- Don L
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Kathryn Arizmendi 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:59 AM
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


Is there an ?ultimate experience??


On 10/14/06 9:48 AM, "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> wrote:


Kathryn, then don't we say that 'ultimate experience' is what the Parmenides/Heracllitus called logos -- rather than the imaginary personal identity experience?  The idea I'm working on is that the personal identity experience derives from or occurs with the use of words that direct awareness to the personal identity ... without awareness that it is being done.   -- Don L

 


----- Original Message ----- 
 
From:  Kathryn  Arizmendi <mailto:tangykatt@earthlink.net>  
 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org  
 
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:15  AM
 
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue]  reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
 

Yes!   k


On 10/14/06 8:32 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com" <Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com>  wrote:

 

Rodger __What is interesting to me about logos &  inspiration, is the way this dialogue gave rise to the two topics at the  same juncture in time.  And how the relationship between Logos and  Intuition is what takes ones experience of MEANING beyond the proceeds of  reason. _R
.
Date: Fri, 13 Oct  2006 22:41:37 -0400
From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
To:  <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
.
.
Is there some kind of  experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as meaningful as dark clouds  and thick bark? 
What is human experience is as meaningful as storm  clouds or thicker bark prior to  severe winter}? -- Don  L



_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue  facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the  mailing  list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________






 




_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue  facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing  list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________






_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________








_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/54142cd7/attachment.html
From tubakari at yahoo.com  Sat Oct 14 20:58:32 2006
From: tubakari at yahoo.com (Karilen Mays)
Date: Sun Oct 15 21:56:56 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
Message-ID: <20061014185832.81056.qmail@web52905.mail.yahoo.com>

right. so with meaning we dissect matter and energy which were never separate in the first place. due to various factos including being born in an age of rationalism, we have to use meaning to help us see that Spirit/Energy and matter are not separate and never have been...? how does THAT make you feel? it makes me beam and feel very expansive and alive.

kari
 
----- Original Message ----
From: "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com>
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 7:28:20 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


When I look at Meaning as a member of the Matter, Energy, Meaning "Trinity,"
a very meaningful interpretation in relation to Ultimacy comes easily. Energy is the first "member" from which Matter [second "member"] proceeds and Meaning [as the third "member"] "reunites" Energy and Matter. They are one. The "two" are one. Energy IS Matter. [Einstein was a mystic, no?]  And, the "three" are one. Energy IS Matter IS Meaning. This is quite meaningful as well. 
 
This generalization of all this translates immediately 
to an experience of ultimacy.
 
This also translates into a general "meaning of life."
And here again, meaning also works well as identical
with my sense of "logos" (as in dia-logos).
 
Interestingly though, here (in this trinity) "logos" becomes
the third person [member] of the trinity where in the Roman version
"logos" is the "second person {member]."
 
pat
 
 
 
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:41:37 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary definitions? -- D.
 
What about meaning?  It seems easy to see that definitions are arbitrary.  Is it easy to see that meaning is not, that there is something ultimate about meaning.  For example, dark clouds mean rain.  Thick bark on the North side of a tree may mean a cold winter is on the way.
 
Is the meaning of dark clouds as ultimate as is energy and matter?  Is the meaning of heavier bark on the North side of a tree as fundamental, as ultimate as matter and energy?
 
Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark? 
 
What is human experience is as meaningful as storm clouds or thicker bark prior to  severe winter}? -- Don L
 
 
 
 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Dorothy Stulberg 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:05 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary definitions?  D.




From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org [mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn Arizmendi
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 7:59 AM
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)



Could it  possibly mean that words have  temporary and arbitrary definitions?

My research yesterday on improvisation definitely bears this out.  Will elaborate more when I?ve sorted out my notes, and have more to take and incorporate today at CCNY.  

Preliminary findings are that by the application of Bohm ideas and principles, we will forge a new path.

Hurray!  k


On 10/13/06 8:44 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:


I'm in! Let's work with it.
 
pat
 
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:23:15 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:


 
 
What does it  mean that the Greek   logos has been interpreted as  meaning reason? as meaning Ratio? as  meaning meaning?  What is the meaning?   

 
 
Could it  possibly mean that words have  temporary and arbitrary definitions?  What would happen if we decided,  for  just an experiment, to use the idea that logos  means meaning?

 
 
Then perhaps we could seriously consider dialogue  as dia meaning or in terms of dia meaning.  -- Don  L 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


----- Original Message ----- 
 
From:  Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com 
 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org  
 
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:05  AM
 
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject:  reason-ance, logos-ance
 

 

Rodger __Lead the way Don. Tell us about Reason-ance, logos-ance,  ratio-ance. _R
.
.
From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
Subject: Re: Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] music & assumptions
To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
.
.
It  seems to me that so long as we continue talking about the persona instead of  instead of the processes, we continue to pollute  experience.   Reason-ance, logos-ance, ratio-ance? -- Don L




_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________








_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________



 
_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/40104fed/attachment.html
From tubakari at yahoo.com  Sat Oct 14 21:01:38 2006
From: tubakari at yahoo.com (Karilen Mays)
Date: Sun Oct 15 22:00:02 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
Message-ID: <20061014190138.29019.qmail@web52907.mail.yahoo.com>

hey i like your interpretation of ultimacy, kathryn!
 
most perfect underlying reality... that is ever present and pervades every limited abstraction we perceive including ourselves?!
 
kari

----- Original Message ----
From: Kathryn Arizmendi <tangykatt@earthlink.net>
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 7:53:31 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)




On 10/14/06 10:28 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:


This generalization of all this translates immediately 
to an experience of ultimacy.

I?m with you up to the point of ?ultimacy?.  Do you mean it as ?most perfect underlying reality??  k



_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/42b844b7/attachment.html
From tubakari at yahoo.com  Sat Oct 14 21:03:13 2006
From: tubakari at yahoo.com (Karilen Mays)
Date: Sun Oct 15 22:01:38 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
Message-ID: <20061014190313.73210.qmail@web52903.mail.yahoo.com>

how about 

meaning is
and 
there is 
no end

kari


----- Original Message ----
From: "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com>
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 8:06:34 AM
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


Interesting here, that old cliche "The means are the end." 
How about "The  meanings  are the end." 
 
pat
 
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:20:56 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
Ultimate is defined as foundation and aim or end.  Thus, isn't the experience of 'being' ultimate in that being is the foundation of all experience as well as the aim and intention of all experience? -- Don L
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Kathryn Arizmendi 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:59 AM
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


Is there an ?ultimate experience??


On 10/14/06 9:48 AM, "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> wrote:


Kathryn, then don't we say that 'ultimate experience' is what the Parmenides/Heracllitus called logos -- rather than the imaginary personal identity experience?  The idea I'm working on is that the personal identity experience derives from or occurs with the use of words that direct awareness to the personal identity ... without awareness that it is being done.   -- Don L

 


----- Original Message ----- 
 
From:  Kathryn  Arizmendi <mailto:tangykatt@earthlink.net>  
 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org  
 
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:15  AM
 
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue]  reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
 

Yes!   k


On 10/14/06 8:32 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com" <Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com>  wrote:

 

Rodger __What is interesting to me about logos &  inspiration, is the way this dialogue gave rise to the two topics at the  same juncture in time.  And how the relationship between Logos and  Intuition is what takes ones experience of MEANING beyond the proceeds of  reason. _R
.
Date: Fri, 13 Oct  2006 22:41:37 -0400
From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
To:  <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
.
.
Is there some kind of  experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as meaningful as dark clouds  and thick bark? 
What is human experience is as meaningful as storm  clouds or thicker bark prior to  severe winter}? -- Don  L



_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue  facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the  mailing  list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________






 




_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue  facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing  list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________






_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________








_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________



 
_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/70ad5d11/attachment.html
From tubakari at yahoo.com  Sat Oct 14 21:06:21 2006
From: tubakari at yahoo.com (Karilen Mays)
Date: Sun Oct 15 22:04:45 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] imperfect cadences
Message-ID: <20061014190621.42359.qmail@web52915.mail.yahoo.com>

just enjoy dangling on imperfect cadences! :)
kari
----- Original Message ----
From: Kathryn Arizmendi <tangykatt@earthlink.net>
To: "bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org" <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:46:45 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] imperfect cadences

Hello-o-o-o-o-o-

Where?d everybody go?  I?m dangling on an imperfect cadence!  k 
_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/6e3b6ee1/attachment.html
From tubakari at yahoo.com  Sat Oct 14 21:08:17 2006
From: tubakari at yahoo.com (Karilen Mays)
Date: Sun Oct 15 22:06:43 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
Message-ID: <20061014190817.21659.qmail@web52914.mail.yahoo.com>

that's awesome dorothy! i hope i can eventually have the pleasure of meeting some of you!
thanks for sharing!
kari



----- Original Message ----
From: Dorothy Stulberg <DStulberg@msw-law.com>
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 10:53:03 AM
Subject: RE: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition


speaking of meeting with others, Don Lay knocked on our door last night and he was exactly as I thought he would be--delightful.  He even looked like I imagined him.  He and my husband and I had a great evening. I hope we get to see him again before he leaves the area. 
It really is possible to get to know someone over this quite impersonal means but the in-person is the best.  D.




From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org [mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn Arizmendi
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 9:37 PM
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition


Rather look at the actions and talk about them and try to understand the grounding of the other one.
I'm rattling as usual.  This has been a very demanding day.  D.

Hello D ? I don?t remember meeting you, but I agree with your first and last sentences.  Have a restful night.  k


On 10/13/06 6:15 PM, "Dorothy Stulberg" <DStulberg@msw-law.com> wrote:


It's funny.  Today a client and I met with the opposite side.  She told me I am too nice and don't have the inutition of how bad the other people are.  She has an intuition, according to her, of who is being honest and who is a "good" person.  
I thought about that on the two hour drive back from the meeting.  
I have fought that kind of intuition, if I ever had it.  I don't want to begin with the idea someone is cheating or evil (Bush aside--he has given so many examples it is beyond intuition.)  The idea of Bohm and of collaborative learning has directed me to avoid deciding what kind of person a person is.  Rather look at the actions and talk about them and try to understand the grounding of the other one.
I'm rattling as usual.  This has been a very demanding day.  D.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/22575546/attachment.html
From franis_franis at juno.com  Sat Oct 14 21:02:08 2006
From: franis_franis at juno.com (Franis Engel)
Date: Sun Oct 15 22:14:07 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] resent
Message-ID: <20061014.121042.1588.1.franis_franis@juno.com>

I believe it's what happens automatically in the system when the message
bounces for whatever reason and it gets re-sent and goes through the
second or third time the systems has re-sent it. 
no resentment or misrepresentation implied ;o)   - Franis

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 09:21:34 -0400 Kathryn Arizmendi
<tangykatt@earthlink.net> writes:
> 
> 
> 
> On 10/14/06 1:04 AM, "Franis Engel" <franis_franis@juno.com> wrote:
> 
> > From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
> >> [mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of 
> Kathryn
> >> Arizmendi
> 
> 
> Hi Franis - could you please tell me why the heading says "On Behalf 
> of..."?
> 
> Also why another post says "resent" with my name?
> 
> I've never seen this before, and I'm not sure I want someone to have 
> the
> power to send things on my behalf unless I know about it!  What's it 
> all
> about?  Thanks, k
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 
> 

From franis_franis at juno.com  Sat Oct 14 21:10:42 2006
From: franis_franis at juno.com (Franis Engel)
Date: Sun Oct 15 22:14:12 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance
Message-ID: <20061014.121042.1588.2.franis_franis@juno.com>

Cool that DonL and Dorothy got to meet in person!
DonL, to take your idea somewhere... How can people get past the
programming of culture that they are a separate individuality and why
would they want to do that? 

I find the once you have an identity, it's easier to give it up. That's
the value of it, IMHO. 

Whereas, if you are just there in the undifferentiated state of not
having an identity, my actions and experience of the world is all so
undefined and amorphous that I cannot know what actions are influencing
what results. Things just happen and there is no ability to tell the
cause and effect so there is no way to quiet myself. 

So identity to me is defining your own sense of what effects are your
responsibility and what belongs to others. 

Once a person has been "programmed" by their culture to have an identity,
people can sort of quiet their actions and gain the ability to put action
aside and find out what they do that has a result and what does not.  

There are many ways of doing this - you can use a way of directing
attention and manifesting this (formerly merged and unidentified)
expression of themselves by using an action, a medium, an expression, or
any action taken to the level of artistic expression. You can listen to
the culture's definition of individuality - you can go on walk-about.

I'm thinking that not having so much of an identity is much more common
than you imagine and that you're holding it up to be something valuable
that it is not - it's just what it is, undifferentiated.

The feeling of being a couple or having sex is a human experience that
has a sort of loss of personalhood and an experience of merging;
sometimes the meshing of mother and child or family in general, people
could experience a merging and a lack of personal identity in that common
situation. In many other cultures other than the one we're in, people are
not so driven to discover their individuality, their cause and effect on
others and the world and they aren't concerned about it. 

Identity is a control issue. Courts define identity so they can take away
these "granted advantages" (of a driver's license, for instance.) Now a
judge/court will suspend your license for punishments that are completely
unrelated to your ability to drive a car safely, for instance. This way
authorities have power over you to get you to give them money and behave
correctly as defined by societal law. Of course, it still doesn't work,
it just makes more people further out of control of their lives.

Franis

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 09:48:16 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
> Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance 
> (resent)Kathryn, then don't we say that 'ultimate experience' is 
> what the Parmenides/Heracllitus called logos -- rather than the 
> imaginary personal identity experience?  The idea I'm working on is 
> that the personal identity experience derives from or occurs with 
> the use of words that direct awareness to the personal identity ... 
> without awareness that it is being done.   -- Don L
> 
> 
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: Kathryn Arizmendi 
>   To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
>   Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:15 AM
>   Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance 
> (resent)
> 
> 
>   Yes!   k
> 
> 
>   On 10/14/06 8:32 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com" 
> <Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>     Rodger __What is interesting to me about logos & inspiration, is 
> the way this dialogue gave rise to the two topics at the same 
> juncture in time.  And how the relationship between Logos and 
> Intuition is what takes ones experience of MEANING beyond the 
> proceeds of reason. _R
>     .
>     Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:41:37 -0400
>     From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
>     Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
>     To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
>     .
>     .
>     Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate 
> and as meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark? 
>     What is human experience is as meaningful as storm clouds or 
> thicker bark prior to  severe winter}? -- Don L
> 
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
>     _______________________________________________
>     info:
>     www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
>     post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
>     dialogue facilitator:
>     facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
>     Administrator of the mailing list:
>     admin@david-bohm.net
> 
>     _______________________________________________
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
> 
> 
>   _______________________________________________
>   info:
>   www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
>   post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
>   dialogue facilitator:
>   facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
>   Administrator of the mailing list:
>   admin@david-bohm.net
> 
>   _______________________________________________
> 
> 

From donlay at gte.net  Sat Oct 14 21:30:42 2006
From: donlay at gte.net (Don Lay)
Date: Sun Oct 15 22:29:15 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
References: <C1567DC7.380E%tangykatt@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <003c01c6efc7$3ce48f20$a503a8c0@your0548c161e1>

Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)I would reply birth, death, life, and all things unknown aka the rhythm of being - in the parameters of the above definition.   k

Makes sense to me, ... except that maybe we should say that what actually is cannot be known and any attribution suggests knowing which may be like a contradiction, maybe the contradiction that religions get into.  Don L

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Kathryn Arizmendi 
  To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
  Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 11:43 AM
  Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)



  OK - in the sense of "most perfect underlying reality", it works for me.  In the sense of "final", it doesn't.  I don't think it's likely, or even possible to get to "final". 

  He also says:

  Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap that  is as ultimate and as meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark? 

  I would reply birth, death, life, and all things unknown aka the rhythm of being - in the parameters of the above definition.   k


  On 10/14/06 11:22 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:



      This  generalization of all this translates immediately 
      to an experience of  ultimacy.

      I'm with you up to the point of "ultimacy".  Do you mean  it as "most perfect underlying reality"?  k
       
      Have  to look at the context to see what I may have meant (so I re-pasted it below),  but I have no problem with "most perfect underlying  reality."
       
       
       
      What  I said had referred to don L's "there is  something ultimate about  meaning."
       
       
       
      pat
       
       
       


     
    On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:53:31 -0400 Kathryn Arizmendi <tangykatt@earthlink.net> writes:



      On 10/14/06 10:28 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com"  <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:


    This  generalization of all this translates immediately 
    to an experience of  ultimacy.

    I'm with you up to the point of "ultimacy".  Do you mean  it as "most perfect underlying reality"?  k
     
     
    When I look at Meaning as a member of the Matter, Energy, Meaning  "Trinity," a very meaningful interpretation in relation to Ultimacy comes  easily. Energy is the first "member" from which Matter [second "member"]  proceeds and Meaning [as the third "member"] "reunites" Energy and Matter.  They are one. The "two" are one. Energy IS Matter. [Einstein was a mystic,  no?]  And, the "three" are one. Energy IS Matter IS Meaning. This is  quite meaningful as well. 
     
     
     
    This generalization of all this translates immediately 
     
    to an experience of ultimacy.
     
     
     
    This also translates into a general "meaning of life."
     
    And here again, meaning also works well as identical
     
    with my sense of "logos" (as in dia-logos).
     
     
     
    Interestingly though, here (in this trinity) "logos" becomes
     
    the third person [member] of the trinity where in the Roman  version
     
    "logos" is the "second person {member]."
     
     
     
    pat
     
     
     
    On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:41:37 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
     


       
      is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary  definitions? -- D.
       
       
      What about meaning?  It seems easy to see  that definitions are arbitrary.  Is it easy to see that meaning is not,  that there is something ultimate about  meaning.  For example, dark clouds mean  rain.  Thick bark on the North side of a tree may  mean a cold winter is on the way.
       
       
       
      Is the meaning of  dark clouds as ultimate as is energy and matter?  Is the  meaning of heavier bark on the North side of a  tree as fundamental, as ultimate as matter and energy?
       
       
       
      Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap  that is as ultimate and as meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark?  
       
       
       
      What is human experience is as meaningful as  storm clouds or thicker bark prior to  severe winter}? -- Don  L
       
       
       


        ----- Original Message ----- 
         
        From:  Dorothy  Stulberg <mailto:DStulberg@msw-law.com>  
         
        To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org  
         
        Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:05  PM
         
        Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue]  reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
         

         
        is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary  definitions?  D.

         
         

------------------------------------------------------------------------
        From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org  [mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn  Arizmendi
        Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 7:59 AM
        To:  bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
        Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)

         

        Could it  possibly mean that  words have  temporary and arbitrary definitions?

        My research  yesterday on improvisation definitely bears this out.  Will elaborate  more when I've sorted out my notes, and have more to take and incorporate  today at CCNY.  

        Preliminary findings are that by the  application of Bohm ideas and principles, we will forge a new  path.

        Hurray!  k


        On 10/13/06 8:44 AM,  "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com>  wrote:

         

          I'm in! Let's work with  it.
           
          pat
           
          On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:23:15 -0400  "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
           


            What does it  mean that the Greek    logos has been interpreted as  meaning  reason? as meaning Ratio? as  meaning  meaning?  What is the  meaning?    
             
            Could it  possibly mean that words have   temporary and arbitrary definitions?  What would happen if  we decided,  for  just an experiment, to use the idea that  logos  means meaning? 
             
            Then perhaps we could seriously consider dialogue  as  dia meaning or in terms of dia meaning.  -- Don   L 
             
            ----- Original Message -----  
             
            From:  Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com  
             
            To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org   
             
            Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:05   AM
             
            Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject:  reason-ance, logos-ance
              

            Rodger __Lead the way  Don. Tell us about Reason-ance, logos-ance,  ratio-ance.  _R
            ..
            From: "Don  Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
            Subject: Re: Subject:  Re:  [Bohm_Dialogue] music & assumptions
            To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
            ..
            It   seems to me that so long as we continue talking about the  persona instead of  instead of the processes, we continue to  pollute  experience.   Reason-ance, logos-ance,  ratio-ance? -- Don L





----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    _______________________________________________
    info:
    www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

    post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

    dialogue facilitator:
    facilitator@david-bohm.net

    Administrator of the mailing list:
    admin@david-bohm.net

    _______________________________________________







------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  info:
  www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

  post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

  dialogue facilitator:
  facilitator@david-bohm.net

  Administrator of the mailing list:
  admin@david-bohm.net

  _______________________________________________


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/65f15a40/attachment.html
From donlay at gte.net  Sat Oct 14 21:43:24 2006
From: donlay at gte.net (Don Lay)
Date: Sun Oct 15 22:42:18 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
References: <20061014185319.79660.qmail@web52905.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <012201c6efc9$03979ad0$a503a8c0@your0548c161e1>

what is Being not the source of?  -- Kari

Many people use a line of thought indicating the imaginary as other than what is actually real, maybe like being it-self.  Then, if I would tell you a tall tale, something not actually true, maybe we should say the source was the imagination instead of Being.  Of course, everything, even imagination is part of the whole of Being so ... maybe we say the method is real but the meaning would not be because the meaning as intention was to deceive -- Maybe.

I got a new laptop for this trip and have much problem with the strange new keyboard.--Don L

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Karilen Mays 
  To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
  Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 2:53 PM
  Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


  what is Being not the source of? haha

  kari
   
    ----- Original Message ----
    From: Don Lay <donlay@gte.net>
    To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
    Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 7:18:00 AM
    Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


  Assuming you mean, are meaning and reason related --.  Yes.  They both derive from the Greek jjword logos (as does dia-logue).  That is, Heraclitus' juse of the word, logos, has been interpreted as both reason and meaning.  That says they're related,  doesn't it?

  Also, Bohm says they're related, doesn't he?

  Further, in Parmenides/Heraclitus there is no separation.  Even thought, thinking is the same as being --  persona is not needed for thinking.  I'm understanding 'being' to mean 'the WHOLE'.

  Given this then, wouldn't we say the source of creativity, improv, is being itself? 

    --  Don L



    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Kathryn Arizmendi 
    To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
    Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:58 AM
    Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


    Gotta think about that one.  But off the top of my head, do you feel they could be related?  k


    On 10/14/06 9:48 AM, "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> wrote:


      Kathryn, then don't we say that 'ultimate experience' is what the Parmenides/Heracllitus called logos -- rather than the imaginary personal identity experience?  The idea I'm working on is that the personal identity experience derives from or occurs with the use of words that direct awareness to the personal identity ... without awareness that it is being done.   -- Don L

       


        ----- Original Message ----- 
         
        From:  Kathryn  Arizmendi <mailto:tangykatt@earthlink.net>  
         
        To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org  
         
        Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:15  AM
         
        Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue]  reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
         

        Yes!   k


        On 10/14/06 8:32 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com" <Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com>  wrote:

         

          Rodger __What is interesting to me about logos &  inspiration, is the way this dialogue gave rise to the two topics at the  same juncture in time.  And how the relationship between Logos and  Intuition is what takes ones experience of MEANING beyond the proceeds of  reason. _R
          .
          Date: Fri, 13 Oct  2006 22:41:37 -0400
          From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
          Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
          To:  <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
          .
          .
          Is there some kind of  experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as meaningful as dark clouds  and thick bark? 
          What is human experience is as meaningful as storm  clouds or thicker bark prior to  severe winter}? -- Don  L


----------------------------------------------------------------------
          _______________________________________________
          info:
          www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

          post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

          dialogue  facilitator:
          facilitator@david-bohm.net

          Administrator of the  mailing  list:
          admin@david-bohm.net

          _______________________________________________






         

------------------------------------------------------------------------


        _______________________________________________
        info:
        www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

        post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

        dialogue  facilitator:
        facilitator@david-bohm.net

        Administrator of the mailing  list:
        admin@david-bohm.net

        _______________________________________________





--------------------------------------------------------------------------
      _______________________________________________
      info:
      www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

      post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

      dialogue facilitator:
      facilitator@david-bohm.net

      Administrator of the mailing list:
      admin@david-bohm.net

      _______________________________________________







    _______________________________________________
    info:
    www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

    post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

    dialogue facilitator:
    facilitator@david-bohm.net

    Administrator of the mailing list:
    admin@david-bohm.net

    _______________________________________________



  _______________________________________________
  info:
  www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

  post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

  dialogue facilitator:
  facilitator@david-bohm.net

  Administrator of the mailing list:
  admin@david-bohm.net

  _______________________________________________






------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  info:
  www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

  post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

  dialogue facilitator:
  facilitator@david-bohm.net

  Administrator of the mailing list:
  admin@david-bohm.net

  _______________________________________________


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/6baad853/attachment.html
From donlay at gte.net  Sat Oct 14 21:48:56 2006
From: donlay at gte.net (Don Lay)
Date: Sun Oct 15 22:52:36 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
References: <20061014185544.36574.qmail@web52913.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <014201c6efca$4bc0da00$a503a8c0@your0548c161e1>

End does not just mean ceasation.  It also means aim, intention.  So, saying that Being is ultimate, the intentive meaning is the funda of fundamental and also the aim, intention in the sense that Being intends itself.  Incidently, we also intend being, don't we?  

Parmenides says that all words spoken are about being (INSTEAD OF NON BEING).  -- Don L

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Karilen Mays 
  To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
  Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 2:55 PM
  Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


  I wouldnt even say the experience of "being" is ultimate...only that being encompasses all that is, but there is no end to that, so how can it be ultimate in the sense of an end?

  if ultimate is an all encompassing flow of Life, then yeah being is ultimate.

  kari

  ----- Original Message ----
  From: Don Lay <donlay@gte.net>
  To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
  Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 7:20:56 AM
  Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


  Ultimate is defined as foundation and aim or end.  Thus, isn't the experience of 'being' ultimate in that being is the foundation of all experience as well as the aim and intention of all experience? -- Don L
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Kathryn Arizmendi 
    To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
    Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:59 AM
    Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


    Is there an ?ultimate experience??


    On 10/14/06 9:48 AM, "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> wrote:


      Kathryn, then don't we say that 'ultimate experience' is what the Parmenides/Heracllitus called logos -- rather than the imaginary personal identity experience?  The idea I'm working on is that the personal identity experience derives from or occurs with the use of words that direct awareness to the personal identity ... without awareness that it is being done.   -- Don L

       


        ----- Original Message ----- 
         
        From:  Kathryn  Arizmendi <mailto:tangykatt@earthlink.net>  
         
        To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org  
         
        Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:15  AM
         
        Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue]  reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
         

        Yes!   k


        On 10/14/06 8:32 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com" <Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com>  wrote:

         

          Rodger __What is interesting to me about logos &  inspiration, is the way this dialogue gave rise to the two topics at the  same juncture in time.  And how the relationship between Logos and  Intuition is what takes ones experience of MEANING beyond the proceeds of  reason. _R
          .
          Date: Fri, 13 Oct  2006 22:41:37 -0400
          From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
          Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
          To:  <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
          .
          .
          Is there some kind of  experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as meaningful as dark clouds  and thick bark? 
          What is human experience is as meaningful as storm  clouds or thicker bark prior to  severe winter}? -- Don  L


----------------------------------------------------------------------
          _______________________________________________
          info:
          www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

          post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

          dialogue  facilitator:
          facilitator@david-bohm.net

          Administrator of the  mailing  list:
          admin@david-bohm.net

          _______________________________________________






         

------------------------------------------------------------------------


        _______________________________________________
        info:
        www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

        post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

        dialogue  facilitator:
        facilitator@david-bohm.net

        Administrator of the mailing  list:
        admin@david-bohm.net

        _______________________________________________





--------------------------------------------------------------------------
      _______________________________________________
      info:
      www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

      post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

      dialogue facilitator:
      facilitator@david-bohm.net

      Administrator of the mailing list:
      admin@david-bohm.net

      _______________________________________________







    _______________________________________________
    info:
    www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

    post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

    dialogue facilitator:
    facilitator@david-bohm.net

    Administrator of the mailing list:
    admin@david-bohm.net

    _______________________________________________



  _______________________________________________
  info:
  www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

  post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

  dialogue facilitator:
  facilitator@david-bohm.net

  Administrator of the mailing list:
  admin@david-bohm.net

  _______________________________________________






------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  info:
  www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

  post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

  dialogue facilitator:
  facilitator@david-bohm.net

  Administrator of the mailing list:
  admin@david-bohm.net

  _______________________________________________


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/ad206f39/attachment.html
From zoechuzero at yahoo.com  Sat Oct 14 22:59:50 2006
From: zoechuzero at yahoo.com (Zoe Chu)
Date: Sun Oct 15 23:58:18 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Re: Bohm_Dialogue Digest, Vol 20, Issue 15
In-Reply-To: <20061015100002.5D73423C37@web.internal.van-den-heuvel.org>
Message-ID: <20061014205950.92955.qmail@web55003.mail.re4.yahoo.com>

Hi  - I received a message from Kirsten saying that she was kicked out of this group by its "owner" (Don Factor?). Is that the case? If so, is that in the advertised "spirit of Bohm-Dialogue"? I am rejecting the idea (as well as the effort) that any voice should be silenced, no matter what it says - especially in a forum that claims to be about dialogue. At worst you just skip certain mails; big deal. Or what is the big deal of "the owner" feeling Kirsten, or whoever, needs to be thown out --- Zoe

bohm_dialogue-request@david-bohm.org wrote:  Send Bohm_Dialogue mailing list submissions to
bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
bohm_dialogue-request@david-bohm.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
bohm_dialogue-owner@david-bohm.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Bohm_Dialogue digest..."


Today's Topics:

1. Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
(Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com)
2. Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
(Kathryn Arizmendi)
3. test (ae.dropper@juno.com)
4. Re: test (Kathryn Arizmendi)
5. reason-ance, logos-ance (resent) (ae.dropper@juno.com)
6. Experience dia-logos (resent) (ae.dropper@juno.com)
7. Direction dia-logos (resent) (ae.dropper@juno.com)
8. Re: reason-ance, logos-ance (resent) (Kathryn Arizmendi)
9. test (re-sent) (ae.dropper@juno.com)
10. Re: Experience dia logos (Owen Thomas)
11. Re: test (re-sent) (Kathryn Arizmendi)
12. Re: Direction dia-logos (resent) (Kathryn Arizmendi)
13. RE: Direction dia-logos (resent) (Regina Bensch-Coe)
14. Re: Direction dia-logos (resent) (Kathryn Arizmendi)
15. RE: Direction dia-logos (resent) (Dorothy Stulberg)
16. RE: reason-ance, logos-ance (resent) (Dorothy Stulberg)
17. RE: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
(Dorothy Stulberg)
18. Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
(Kathryn Arizmendi)
19. Re: reason-ance, logos-ance (resent) (Don Lay)
20. Re: Direction dia-logos (resent) (Kathryn Arizmendi)
21. Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition (Franis Engel)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 06:53:52 -0400
From: Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Message-ID:


Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"








Rodger __Intuition. Are you asking about intuition because you have no
personal experience of intuition?

Like photographic memory, intuition does not scientifically exist. In
science, photographic memory exists only by other names, according to the
era you search for it; Eidetic-memory is a present favorite, while
Epidetectorial memory was a previous.

While intuition may not exist, there are many related areas which do --
telekinetic, telepathic, etc.

And in fact I do consider the unique neural cell process in the human heart
to be part the component of conscience. The trouble is, people always want
-knowing- defined according to the brain.

To know more about neural cells of the heart: -Basic & Clinical
Neurocardiology, J.A. Armour, J.L. Ardell- describes the heart from a
purely medical standpoint. _R
.
.
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 09:34:00 -0400
From: Kathryn Arizmendi 
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: No right brain?
To: 
.
Did you and the scientist you worked with define intuition?

Where can I find scientific information on ?the hearts own complex neuronal
processing and memory capabilities.?

What do you mean by ?heart?? For a while, I thought you meant my heart
inside my body pumping blood, but I don?t think so now.
.
.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061013/6a2a0e9a/attachment-0001.html

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 07:10:00 -0400
From: Kathryn Arizmendi 
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: intuition
To: 
Message-ID: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Morning, Rodger -

Thanks for the ?heart? reference.

As for ?intuition? - are you referring to these definitions?

in?tu?i?tion n
1. the state of being aware of or knowing something without having to
discover or perceive it, or the ability to do this
2. something known or believed instinctively, without actual evidence for
it
3. immediate knowledge of something

Encarta? World English Dictionary ? 1999 Microsoft Corporation. All rights
reserved. Developed for Microsoft by Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.

I get hunches (see the book ?Blink?), but I don?t consider that knowledge.
And when I get a hunch, possibly a variation on the idea of ?theory?, I
don?t consider that knowledge in the sense of scientific fact. It is
definitely something I investigate further.

Also, I?m curious about the subtext of this particular question. I?m
sensing a little abrasiveness below the surface. Hope I?m wrong.

Best, k


On 10/13/06 6:53 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com" 
wrote:

> Rodger __Intuition. Are you asking about intuition because you have no
> personal experience of intuition?
> 
> Like photographic memory, intuition does not scientifically exist. In
> science, photographic memory exists only by other names, according to the era
> you search for it; Eidetic-memory is a present favorite, while Epidetectorial
> memory was a previous.
> 
> While intuition may not exist, there are many related areas which do --
> telekinetic, telepathic, etc.
> 
> And in fact I do consider the unique neural cell process in the human heart to
> be part the component of conscience. The trouble is, people always want
> -knowing- defined according to the brain.
> 
> To know more about neural cells of the heart: -Basic & Clinical
> Neurocardiology, J.A. Armour, J.L. Ardell- describes the heart from a purely
> medical standpoint. _R
> . 
> .
> Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 09:34:00 -0400
> From: Kathryn Arizmendi 
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: No right brain?
> To: 
> .
> Did you and the scientist you worked with define intuition?
> 
> Where can I find scientific information on ?the hearts own complex neuronal
> processing and memory capabilities.?
> 
> What do you mean by ?heart?? For a while, I thought you meant my heart
> inside my body pumping blood, but I don?t think so now.
> .
> .
> 
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061013/07ab7807/attachment-0001.html

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 08:25:51 -0400
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] test
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Message-ID: <20061013.082551.3988.28.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

test


------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 08:37:06 -0400
From: Kathryn Arizmendi 
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] test
To: 
Message-ID: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

Good morning. Is your computer acting up? You got through, if that's the
case.

k


On 10/13/06 8:25 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" wrote:

> test
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 




------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 08:44:49 -0400
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Message-ID: <20061013.084640.3988.33.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

I'm in! Let's work with it.

pat

On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:23:15 -0400 "Don Lay" writes:

What does it mean that the Greek logos has been interpreted as meaning
reason? as meaning Ratio? as meaning meaning? What is the meaning? 

Could it possibly mean that words have temporary and arbitrary
definitions? What would happen if we decided, for just an experiment,
to use the idea that logos means meaning?

Then perhaps we could seriously consider dialogue as dia meaning or in
terms of dia meaning. -- Don L 



----- Original Message ----- 
From: Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:05 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: reason-ance, logos-ance


Rodger __Lead the way Don. Tell us about Reason-ance, logos-ance,
ratio-ance. _R
.
.
From: "Don Lay" 
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] music & assumptions
To: 
.
.
It seems to me that so long as we continue talking about the persona
instead of instead of the processes, we continue to pollute experience. 
Reason-ance, logos-ance, ratio-ance? -- Don L
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061013/55929dbc/attachment-0001.html

------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 08:45:45 -0400
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Experience dia-logos (resent)
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Message-ID: <20061013.084640.3988.34.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Perhaps it is possible, by way of process-thinking, to actually
experience those processes that determine what we actually are. The
idea is that if/when we know what we are, we might feel much less anxious
and afraid,much less depressed, etc. (don L)

This is my experience. It is the replay and fixations of psychological
thought that depress. (pat)

The Greek word,logos, has been interpreted as meaning. Maybe they means
that what actually or really is somehow meant to be. There is a folk
saying,"It was meant to be." (don L)

How could anything be other, in any given moment, than "what is meant to
be?" (pat)

Also, there's the idea that there is something, some kind of reality
quite other than homo sap social reality, some kind of actuality that has
nothing to do with man's social identity as a mask, persona. (don L)

This is much more than an idea. This can be known, realized. It cannot
be "pinned down" though and nothing can be "pinned down" within it. 
(pat)

Is it imaginable? How can it be imagine, how could an image form of that
which is over and against and entirely prior to homo sap? Could it be
something like pure energy ... maybe the power by which particles, waves,
atoms, molecules occur? (Reason-ance? -- Don L)

Words "about" it, just as images "about" it, are expressions of it and
are applicable
only in quite 'momentary' ways, applicable only to the intention of the
moment from 
which they come.

pat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061013/1e2397cb/attachment-0001.html

------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 08:46:31 -0400
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Direction dia-logos (resent)
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Message-ID: <20061013.084640.3988.35.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

There's the old, old idea of being logos directed. Two millennia ago, 
wise men were said to be logos directed. Perhaps PROCESS THOUGHT is a
way to understand that -- not the kind of process philosophy that would
require a prissy PhD to explain -- just everyday knocking around sense. 
The idea is that many,many processes must obtain before you can bat an
eye lash, before you can know that you are. (don L)

We unfold and enfold simultaneously. There is nothing else. The "process"
part (regarding self) 
is hidden from the "outer" senses but not from the "inner" senses. This
is a "self - aware
movement. It is like musical "movement [where, incidentally, the "outer"
senses do perceive the
simultaneity" of unfoldment / enfoldment]. (pat)


When it became law that everyone must "have a personal identity", somehow
we stopped being wise and started acting and pretending to be the image
associated with the personal identity. That is, we ignore the processes
that we are, by which we interact with the WHOLE and act and pretend
that we are identical with the optical image, the photo image.

Giving careful attention to universal processes, logos, perhaps we can
begin to investigate and perhaps somehow identify with those processes
that actually identify what we are instead of just what the imagery
suggests.

Reason-ance? -- Don Lay

Yes. There seem to be such identity phases or moments - if it could be
called that - 
a sense that 'what I am is process or in process'. But it seems that even
this kind
of identification is not necessary - except probably as a means of
attempting to
think and speak of what is happening now in relation to what was
happening when 
identity was with images.

pat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061013/9cb750ec/attachment-0001.html

------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 08:59:07 -0400
From: Kathryn Arizmendi 
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
To: 
Message-ID: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"


Could it possibly mean that words have temporary and arbitrary
definitions?

My research yesterday on improvisation definitely bears this out. Will
elaborate more when I?ve sorted out my notes, and have more to take and
incorporate today at CCNY.

Preliminary findings are that by the application of Bohm ideas and
principles, we will forge a new path.

Hurray! k


On 10/13/06 8:44 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" wrote:

> I'm in! Let's work with it.
> 
> pat
> 
> On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:23:15 -0400 "Don Lay" writes:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> What does it mean that the Greek logos has been interpreted as meaning
>> reason? as meaning Ratio? as meaning meaning? What is the meaning?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Could it possibly mean that words have temporary and arbitrary definitions?
>> What would happen if we decided, for just an experiment, to use the idea
>> that logos means meaning?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Then perhaps we could seriously consider dialogue as dia meaning or in terms
>> of dia meaning. -- Don L
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> 
>>> From: Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com
>>> 
>>> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>>> 
>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:05 AM
>>> 
>>> Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject: reason-ance, logos-ance
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Rodger __Lead the way Don. Tell us about Reason-ance, logos-ance,
>>> ratio-ance. _R
>>> .
>>> .
>>> From: "Don Lay" 
>>> Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] music & assumptions
>>> To: 
>>> .
>>> .
>>> It seems to me that so long as we continue talking about the persona
>>> instead of instead of the processes, we continue to pollute experience.
>>> Reason-ance, logos-ance, ratio-ance? -- Don L
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
> 
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
> 
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
> 
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061013/abb2e69e/attachment-0001.html

------------------------------

Message: 9
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 09:06:23 -0400
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] test (re-sent)
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Message-ID: <20061013.090624.3988.36.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Good Morning Kathryn, computer seems find but I got 3 messages this
morning from "the administrator" that my last 3 messages had been
"bounced" from the list. Glad this one got through! I will try to resend
them.

pat


Good morning. Is your computer acting up? You got through, if that's
the
case.

k


On 10/13/06 8:25 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" wrote:

> test


------------------------------

Message: 10
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 07:17:40 -0600
From: "Owen Thomas" 
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Experience dia logos
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Message-ID:
<1dde854d0610130617s4af8ce8ek1d43285c0b7f1aa3@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Donl,
Your insight leads to the meetings here in Mexico where we learn to release
EGO to sense that there is something more, the group thought of Unity in
Diversity.

As you suspect "Also, there's the idea that there is something, some kind
of reality quite other than *homo sap social* reality, some kind of
actuality that has nothing to do with man's social identity as a *mask,
persona*" it is not homo (ego) sap.but a group listening and thinking
together.

On 10/12/06, Don Lay wrote:
>
> Perhaps it is possible, by way of process-thinking, to actually
> experience those processes that determine what we actually are. The idea
> is that if/when we know what we are, we might feel much less anxious and
> afraid,much less depressed, etc.
>
> The Greek word,*logos*, has been interpreted as *meaning*. Maybe *they*means that
> *what actually or really is* somehow *meant to be*. There is a folk
> saying,"*It was meant to be*."
>
> Also, there's the idea that there is something, some kind of reality
> quite other than *homo sap social* reality, some kind of actuality that
> has nothing to do with man's social identity as a *mask, persona*.
>
> Is it *imaginable*? How can it be *imagine**, how could an **image* form
> of that which is *over and against* and entirely prior to homo sap? Could
> it be something like pure energy ... maybe the power by which particles,
> waves, atoms, molecules occur?
>
> Reason-ance? -- Don L
>
> _______________________________________________
> info:
> www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net
>
> dialogue facilitator:
> facilitator@david-bohm.net
>
> Administrator of the mailing list:
> admin@david-bohm.net
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
We are connected

Owen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061013/845ee2fe/attachment-0001.html

------------------------------

Message: 11
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 09:18:50 -0400
From: Kathryn Arizmendi 
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] test (re-sent)
To: 
Message-ID: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

Mine was acting up a couple of days back, too. Not the same problem, but
frustrating. There seem to be standard messages to computer owners that
indicate a problem without being accurate about its true nature. I'm
upgrading to high speed. I think that was the problem. Maybe you can figure
out what happened, and find a way to steer clear of it, too. Suerte!, k


On 10/13/06 9:06 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" wrote:

> Good Morning Kathryn, computer seems find but I got 3 messages this
> morning from "the administrator" that my last 3 messages had been
> "bounced" from the list. Glad this one got through! I will try to resend
> them.
> 
> pat
> 
> 
> Good morning. Is your computer acting up? You got through, if that's

=== message truncated ===

 		
---------------------------------
 All-new Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/ab8d5c48/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com  Sat Oct 14 20:31:16 2006
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Mon Oct 16 02:13:45 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] LOGOS-Intuition
Message-ID: <20061014.191429.3988.67.ae.dropper@juno.com>

I told the list yesterday that 3 of my posts were "bounced" so I re-sent
thm with "Re-sent" in the subject line. Then William [administrator]
helped me figure out
why my posts were "bounced" [offline]. This has nothing to do with "on
behalf of." Don't know anything about that.

pat


On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 14:06:31 -0400 "Dorothy Stulberg"
<DStulberg@msw-law.com> writes:
Kathryn I have no idea why something appears  on my post and not on
others.  What are "bounces"? I never look at that I guess, just the
message and who it comes from.  I'm guilty of attaching a response that
has nothing or little to do with the subject.  That's because I haven't
figured out how to send a brand new subject.  I don't remember "resent"
except that somehow, if I remember right, you thought it was connected to
you and you didn't like that as you had never used that word (I may have
made that up). Dorothy 




From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
Arizmendi
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 12:55 PM
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] LOGOS-Intuition


Please – why is this “On Behalf Of” and come from “bounces”?  It makes me
uneasy – as though I’m on the brink of identity theft!  I emailed the
source itself – no reply, and I made the query this morning during chat. 
No reply to anything further than what “resent”, a totally different
context, meant from Dorothy.
Since it appears on your posts, I direct my question to you.

Thank you, Kathryn Arizmendi


On 10/14/06 1:47 PM, "Dorothy Stulberg" <DStulberg@msw-law.com> wrote:



From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
Arizmendi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/89e34297/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com  Sat Oct 14 20:36:47 2006
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Mon Oct 16 02:13:47 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] imperfect cadences
Message-ID: <20061014.191429.3988.68.ae.dropper@juno.com>

Sometimes there is silence. Sometimes for days, weeks. Probably not
anymore with our numbers up now.

Different too is that I am using my "Bohm Good" and "Bohm Respond" both
at once lately (a few days) and the number of posts going into those
files is MUCH higher than ever.

Can usually only get back to a small percentage of the posts in the "Bohm
Respond" file.

pat

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 12:46:45 -0400 Kathryn Arizmendi
<tangykatt@earthlink.net> writes:
Hello-o-o-o-o-o-

Where?d everybody go?  I?m dangling on an imperfect cadence!  k 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/6a9aaa42/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com  Sat Oct 14 20:26:47 2006
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Mon Oct 16 02:13:49 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
Message-ID: <20061014.191429.3988.66.ae.dropper@juno.com>

How to say that words are nothing unless considered within the
environment within which they are used--and by whom and to whom they are
spoken. D.

"Context Dependent?"

pat

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 13:59:05 -0400 "Dorothy Stulberg"
<DStulberg@msw-law.com> writes:
I take back the word "arbitrary".  and maybe the word temporary.  and
maybe even definitions.  How to say that words are nothing unless
considered within the environment within which they are used--and by whom
and to whom they are spoken. D.




From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Don Lay
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 9:42 PM
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary
definitions? -- D.
 
What about meaning?  It seems easy to see that definitions are arbitrary.
 Is it easy to see that meaning is not, that there is something ultimate
about meaning.  For example, dark clouds mean rain.  Thick bark on the
North side of a tree may mean a cold winter is on the way.
 
Is the meaning of dark clouds as ultimate as is energy and matter?  Is
the meaning of heavier bark on the North side of a tree as fundamental,
as ultimate as matter and energy?
 
Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as
meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark? 
 
What is human experience is as meaningful as storm clouds or thicker bark
prior to  severe winter}? -- Don L
 
 
 
 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Dorothy Stulberg 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:05 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary
definitions?  D.




From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org
[mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn
Arizmendi
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 7:59 AM
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)



Could it  possibly mean that words have  temporary and arbitrary
definitions?

My research yesterday on improvisation definitely bears this out.  Will
elaborate more when I’ve sorted out my notes, and have more to take and
incorporate today at CCNY.  

Preliminary findings are that by the application of Bohm ideas and
principles, we will forge a new path.

Hurray!  k


On 10/13/06 8:44 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:


I'm in! Let's work with it.
 
pat
 
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:23:15 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:


 
 
What does it  mean that the Greek   logos has been interpreted as 
meaning reason? as meaning Ratio? as  meaning meaning?  What is the
meaning?   

 
 
Could it  possibly mean that words have  temporary and arbitrary
definitions?  What would happen if we decided,  for  just an experiment,
to use the idea that logos  means meaning?

 
 
Then perhaps we could seriously consider dialogue  as dia meaning or in
terms of dia meaning.  -- Don  L 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


----- Original Message ----- 
 
From:  Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com 
 
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org  
 
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:05  AM
 
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject:  reason-ance, logos-ance
 

 

Rodger __Lead the way Don. Tell us about Reason-ance, logos-ance, 
ratio-ance. _R
.
.
From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
Subject: Re: Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] music & assumptions
To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
.
.
It  seems to me that so long as we continue talking about the persona
instead of  instead of the processes, we continue to pollute  experience.
  Reason-ance, logos-ance, ratio-ance? -- Don L




_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________








_______________________________________________
info:
www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

dialogue facilitator:
facilitator@david-bohm.net

Administrator of the mailing list:
admin@david-bohm.net

_______________________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/939d8d48/attachment.html
From donlay at gte.net  Sat Oct 14 21:52:35 2006
From: donlay at gte.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Oct 16 04:15:08 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
References: <20061014185832.81056.qmail@web52905.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000101c6eff7$8aa3d0b0$a503a8c0@your0548c161e1>

Makes me beam also. -- dbl
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Karilen Mays 
  To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
  Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 2:58 PM
  Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


  right. so with meaning we dissect matter and energy which were never separate in the first place. due to various factos including being born in an age of rationalism, we have to use meaning to help us see that Spirit/Energy and matter are not separate and never have been...? how does THAT make you feel? it makes me beam and feel very expansive and alive.

  kari
   
    ----- Original Message ----
    From: "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com>
    To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
    Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 7:28:20 AM
    Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


  When I look at Meaning as a member of the Matter, Energy, Meaning "Trinity,"
  a very meaningful interpretation in relation to Ultimacy comes easily. Energy is the first "member" from which Matter [second "member"] proceeds and Meaning [as the third "member"] "reunites" Energy and Matter. They are one. The "two" are one. Energy IS Matter. [Einstein was a mystic, no?]  And, the "three" are one. Energy IS Matter IS Meaning. This is quite meaningful as well. 

  This generalization of all this translates immediately 
  to an experience of ultimacy.

  This also translates into a general "meaning of life."
  And here again, meaning also works well as identical
  with my sense of "logos" (as in dia-logos).

  Interestingly though, here (in this trinity) "logos" becomes
  the third person [member] of the trinity where in the Roman version
  "logos" is the "second person {member]."

  pat



  On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:41:37 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
    is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary definitions? -- D.
     
    What about meaning?  It seems easy to see that definitions are arbitrary.  Is it easy to see that meaning is not, that there is something ultimate about meaning.  For example, dark clouds mean rain.  Thick bark on the North side of a tree may mean a cold winter is on the way.

    Is the meaning of dark clouds as ultimate as is energy and matter?  Is the meaning of heavier bark on the North side of a tree as fundamental, as ultimate as matter and energy?

    Is there some kind of experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as meaningful as dark clouds and thick bark? 

    What is human experience is as meaningful as storm clouds or thicker bark prior to  severe winter}? -- Don L




      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Dorothy Stulberg 
      To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
      Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:05 PM
      Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


      is there any question that words have temporary and arbitrary definitions?  D.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
      From: bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org [mailto:bohm_dialogue-bounces@david-bohm.org] On Behalf Of Kathryn Arizmendi
      Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 7:59 AM
      To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
      Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)



      Could it  possibly mean that words have  temporary and arbitrary definitions?

      My research yesterday on improvisation definitely bears this out.  Will elaborate more when I?ve sorted out my notes, and have more to take and incorporate today at CCNY.  

      Preliminary findings are that by the application of Bohm ideas and principles, we will forge a new path.

      Hurray!  k


      On 10/13/06 8:44 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:


        I'm in! Let's work with it.
         
        pat
         
        On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:23:15 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:


           
           
          What does it  mean that the Greek   logos has been interpreted as  meaning reason? as meaning Ratio? as  meaning meaning?  What is the meaning?   

           
           
          Could it  possibly mean that words have  temporary and arbitrary definitions?  What would happen if we decided,  for  just an experiment, to use the idea that logos  means meaning?

           
           
          Then perhaps we could seriously consider dialogue  as dia meaning or in terms of dia meaning.  -- Don  L 
           
           
           
           
           
           
           


            ----- Original Message ----- 
             
            From:  Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com 
             
            To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org  
             
            Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:05  AM
             
            Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Subject:  reason-ance, logos-ance
             

             

            Rodger __Lead the way Don. Tell us about Reason-ance, logos-ance,  ratio-ance. _R
            .
            .
            From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
            Subject: Re: Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] music & assumptions
            To: <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
            .
            .
            It  seems to me that so long as we continue talking about the persona instead of  instead of the processes, we continue to pollute  experience.   Reason-ance, logos-ance, ratio-ance? -- Don L



------------------------------------------------------------------------
        _______________________________________________
        info:
        www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

        post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

        dialogue facilitator:
        facilitator@david-bohm.net

        Administrator of the mailing list:
        admin@david-bohm.net

        _______________________________________________







      _______________________________________________
      info:
      www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

      post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

      dialogue facilitator:
      facilitator@david-bohm.net

      Administrator of the mailing list:
      admin@david-bohm.net

      _______________________________________________




  _______________________________________________
  info:
  www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

  post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

  dialogue facilitator:
  facilitator@david-bohm.net

  Administrator of the mailing list:
  admin@david-bohm.net

  _______________________________________________






------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  info:
  www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

  post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

  dialogue facilitator:
  facilitator@david-bohm.net

  Administrator of the mailing list:
  admin@david-bohm.net

  _______________________________________________


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/eb5b08a8/attachment.html
From donlay at gte.net  Sat Oct 14 21:54:55 2006
From: donlay at gte.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Oct 16 04:15:10 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
References: <20061014190138.29019.qmail@web52907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000301c6eff7$8b0ca4a0$a503a8c0@your0548c161e1>

Something ultimate perhaps about the idea that the underlying reality, whatever it is -- is just exactly whatefvfer it is and cannot be otherwise.  What is said of being, however, seems to be very different. -- dbl
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Karilen Mays 
  To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
  Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 3:01 PM
  Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


  hey i like your interpretation of ultimacy, kathryn!
   
    most perfect underlying reality... that is ever present and pervades every limited abstraction we perceive including ourselves?!

    kari

  ----- Original Message ----
  From: Kathryn Arizmendi <tangykatt@earthlink.net>
  To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
  Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 7:53:31 AM
  Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)




  On 10/14/06 10:28 AM, "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:


    This generalization of all this translates immediately 
    to an experience of ultimacy.

    I?m with you up to the point of ?ultimacy?.  Do you mean it as ?most perfect underlying reality??  k



  _______________________________________________
  info:
  www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

  post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

  dialogue facilitator:
  facilitator@david-bohm.net

  Administrator of the mailing list:
  admin@david-bohm.net

  _______________________________________________






------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  info:
  www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

  post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

  dialogue facilitator:
  facilitator@david-bohm.net

  Administrator of the mailing list:
  admin@david-bohm.net

  _______________________________________________


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/b3ee3dd6/attachment.html
From donlay at gte.net  Sat Oct 14 21:58:07 2006
From: donlay at gte.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Oct 16 04:15:11 2006
Subject: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
References: <20061014190313.73210.qmail@web52903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000401c6eff7$8b439320$a503a8c0@your0548c161e1>

Yes!  Don F says somewhere, Being is meaning, and meaning is Being -- something like that.  I'll try and find that and repost it -- because it makes me FEEL good to say it.  Bohm says that words create FEELS, and these words come with wonderful FEELS.-- DBL


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Karilen Mays 
  To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
  Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 3:03 PM
  Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


  how about 

  meaning is
  and 
  there is 
  no end

  kari


  ----- Original Message ----
  From: "ae.dropper@juno.com" <ae.dropper@juno.com>
  To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
  Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 8:06:34 AM
  Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


  Interesting here, that old cliche "The means are the end." 
  How about "The  meanings  are the end." 

  pat

  On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:20:56 -0400 "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> writes:
    Ultimate is defined as foundation and aim or end.  Thus, isn't the experience of 'being' ultimate in that being is the foundation of all experience as well as the aim and intention of all experience? -- Don L
      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Kathryn Arizmendi 
      To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
      Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:59 AM
      Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)


      Is there an ?ultimate experience??


      On 10/14/06 9:48 AM, "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net> wrote:


        Kathryn, then don't we say that 'ultimate experience' is what the Parmenides/Heracllitus called logos -- rather than the imaginary personal identity experience?  The idea I'm working on is that the personal identity experience derives from or occurs with the use of words that direct awareness to the personal identity ... without awareness that it is being done.   -- Don L

         


          ----- Original Message ----- 
           
          From:  Kathryn  Arizmendi <mailto:tangykatt@earthlink.net>  
           
          To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org  
           
          Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:15  AM
           
          Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue]  reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
           

          Yes!   k


          On 10/14/06 8:32 AM, "Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com" <Rodger.Hyodo@dialogos.com>  wrote:

           

            Rodger __What is interesting to me about logos &  inspiration, is the way this dialogue gave rise to the two topics at the  same juncture in time.  And how the relationship between Logos and  Intuition is what takes ones experience of MEANING beyond the proceeds of  reason. _R
            .
            Date: Fri, 13 Oct  2006 22:41:37 -0400
            From: "Don Lay" <donlay@gte.net>
            Subject:  Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] reason-ance, logos-ance (resent)
            To:  <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
            .
            .
            Is there some kind of  experience in homo-sap that is as ultimate and as meaningful as dark clouds  and thick bark? 
            What is human experience is as meaningful as storm  clouds or thicker bark prior to  severe winter}? -- Don  L


--------------------------------------------------------------------
            _______________________________________________
            info:
            www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

            post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

            dialogue  facilitator:
            facilitator@david-bohm.net

            Administrator of the  mailing  list:
            admin@david-bohm.net

            _______________________________________________






           

----------------------------------------------------------------------


          _______________________________________________
          info:
          www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

          post  to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

          dialogue  facilitator:
          facilitator@david-bohm.net

          Administrator of the mailing  list:
          admin@david-bohm.net

          _______________________________________________





------------------------------------------------------------------------
        _______________________________________________
        info:
        www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

        post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

        dialogue facilitator:
        facilitator@david-bohm.net

        Administrator of the mailing list:
        admin@david-bohm.net

        _______________________________________________







      _______________________________________________
      info:
      www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

      post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

      dialogue facilitator:
      facilitator@david-bohm.net

      Administrator of the mailing list:
      admin@david-bohm.net

      _______________________________________________




  _______________________________________________
  info:
  www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

  post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

  dialogue facilitator:
  facilitator@david-bohm.net

  Administrator of the mailing list:
  admin@david-bohm.net

  _______________________________________________






------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  info:
  www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

  post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

  dialogue facilitator:
  facilitator@david-bohm.net

  Administrator of the mailing list:
  admin@david-bohm.net

  _______________________________________________


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/d396eb6c/attachment.html
From donlay at gte.net  Sat Oct 14 22:00:20 2006
From: donlay at gte.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Oct 16 04:15:12 2006
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] imperfect cadences
References: <20061014190621.42359.qmail@web52915.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000501c6eff7$8f150d80$a503a8c0@your0548c161e1>

Me too.  Also, I appreciate those who can see this and say it. --dbl


----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Karilen Mays 
  To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org 
  Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 3:06 PM
  Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] imperfect cadences


  just enjoy dangling on imperfect cadences! :)
  kari
  ----- Original Message ----
  From: Kathryn Arizmendi <tangykatt@earthlink.net>
  To: "bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org" <bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org>
  Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 9:46:45 AM
  Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] imperfect cadences

  Hello-o-o-o-o-o-

  Where?d everybody go?  I?m dangling on an imperfect cadence!  k 
  _______________________________________________
  info:
  www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

  post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

  dialogue facilitator:
  facilitator@david-bohm.net

  Administrator of the mailing list:
  admin@david-bohm.net

  _______________________________________________






------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  info:
  www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue

  post to: dialogue@david-bohm.net

  dialogue facilitator:
  facilitator@david-bohm.net

  Administrator of the mailing list:
  admin@david-bohm.net

  _______________________________________________


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20061014/0d0f3000/attachment.html