From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 00:03:55 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 00:10:01 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W3578ACF0EBA1E8BF2AD95ADC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <935290.903.qm@web45816.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote: .hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma }
.ExternalClass .EC_hmmessage P {padding-right:0px;padding-left:0px;padding-bottom:0px;padding-top:0px;} .ExternalClass EC_BODY.hmmessage {font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;} I'm not sure you have to understand a hill or a spider or a waterfall to http://tinyurl.com/yqrk4v it
Alan [keeping with&in the BDresscOD
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/7acd4968/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 00:07:40 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 00:13:47 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712171456h11cfe7bam88206e6694b32c3a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <949950.18124.qm@web45808.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote: I: You have me in stitches of laughter. If I had an image the right size, I'd post that instead of the words. Or how about http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c9/Allisvanity.jpg/250px-Allisvanity.jpg ?
|-]
A
On Dec 17, 2007 5:53 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: "Separate' as in dotted line is fine and necessary. As in 'smashed', its destructive.
Tri that on you break fast eeg to mor row monin
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/0eae67df/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Tue Dec 18 00:07:49 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Tue Dec 18 00:13:57 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <935290.903.qm@web45816.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <BAY123-W3578ACF0EBA1E8BF2AD95ADC620@phx.gbl>
<935290.903.qm@web45816.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712171507u4c1412d3g25bcdae2e03f54c@mail.gmail.com>
I: Alan, hilarious! You're almost as good as Bach!
On Dec 17, 2007 6:03 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> *rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>* wrote:
>
>
>
> I'm not sure you have to understand a hill or a spider or a waterfall to
> http://tinyurl.com/yqrk4v it
>
>
> Alan [keeping with&in the BDresscOD
>
> ------------------------------
> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51734/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/da10dc03/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Tue Dec 18 00:10:44 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Tue Dec 18 00:16:51 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <949950.18124.qm@web45808.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c47283890712171456h11cfe7bam88206e6694b32c3a@mail.gmail.com>
<949950.18124.qm@web45808.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712171510o3588a706wbadcdcae932082cc@mail.gmail.com>
I: Imagine a child going into a tantrum demanding something she wants.
That's me, wanting to know how to make images small enough to post!
Please. For Christmas, maybe?
On Dec 17, 2007 6:07 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
>
> I: You have me in stitches of laughter. If I had an image the right
> size, I'd post that instead of the words. Or how about
> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c9/Allisvanity.jpg/250px-Allisvanity.jpg
> ?
>
> |-]
>
> A
>
>
> On Dec 17, 2007 5:53 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
> >
> > I: "Separate' as in dotted line is fine and necessary. As in
> > 'smashed', its destructive.
> >
> > Tri that on you break fast eeg to mor row monin
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> >
> > <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51734/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping>
> >
> >
> > <http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue>
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/29534011/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Tue Dec 18 00:01:26 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Tue Dec 18 00:23:45 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712171353j95c274bj9096a97ab64953bc@mail.gmail.com>
References: <016201c840e6$ded1b440$b5c16018@DL01>
<C38C3C99.FA94%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
<c47283890712171353j95c274bj9096a97ab64953bc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W122272852F4EBFA6007BDBDC620@phx.gbl>
what does imagination use to balance? (some ballast or other I soap pose)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 16:53:34 -0500From: irenedarcy@gmail.comTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderI: Every time you move you are creating explicate time-space. And imagination has its place when it's not out of balance.
On Dec 17, 2007 4:47 PM, Lynne Tolk < lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> wrote:
To be or not to be? Is there a choice? Is the question the problem? What about yes? (form is emptiness, emptiness is form; explicate is implicate is explicate?)
On 12/17/07 12:56 PM, "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
the old old thought occurs -- no us? -- RobMaybe. I've been using the idea of imagination, thought to think of the identity of things including us.I think I'm beginning to understand something like the idea of all this that is as unknown and thought equating with the imaged known, with the language or knowing system of imagination.It's a bit spooky to think that us is not. That is, the notness or non being must be addressed. The anxiety does not go away simply by acting and pretending it is not there. Maybe one way to avoid the anxiety of non being is to understand the idea that relative being is part of the whole of Being. dl http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message ----- From: rob mooney <mailto:rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:37 PMSubject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderThe thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there be no space? the old old thought occurs -- no us?
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:05:03 -0500if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um... breathThe thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there be no space? Maybe we could say that it is only a useful concept and use while being aware that it is limited.Would that be in the direction of unlimited experience? -- dl -- Irene
_________________________________________________________________
Fancy some celeb spotting?
https://www.celebmashup.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/ff5e75fa/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Tue Dec 18 00:04:48 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Tue Dec 18 00:23:47 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712171424t498a359eseb5f169a0cff1d9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <016201c840e6$ded1b440$b5c16018@DL01>
<C38C3C99.FA94%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
<c47283890712171353j95c274bj9096a97ab64953bc@mail.gmail.com>
<032601c840f9$22bf5ce0$b5c16018@DL01>
<c47283890712171408m42472b79m4768faa35cd06c40@mail.gmail.com>
<033501c840fa$2f16e390$b5c16018@DL01>
<c47283890712171424t498a359eseb5f169a0cff1d9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W8A2168CB62CCF34F213F2DC620@phx.gbl>
movement in accord with the time is a gift of self
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 17:24:21 -0500From: irenedarcy@gmail.comTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderI: I can't yet explain how it fits, but I know it does. Really, improvisation - which is instantaneous musical composition, be it jazz, classical, salsa, whatever -is a sinking into the moment to let the imagination work. Feeling, idea, motive, design, everything combines in the moment, to express the meaning as it unfolds. I've started out with an idea, thinking to take it in a particular direction, but as I hear what I'm doing, something else happens and my fingers follow it. Intellect gets out of the way. There's no way I could reproduce what I did.
On Dec 17, 2007 5:14 PM, Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
I: Without imagination there is no creativity.
Maybe, maybe not. What about spontaneous music, dance?
Language is an art, use to create MACRO scenarios, etc., from micro word/images. -- dl
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:08 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I: Without imagination there is no creativity.
On Dec 17, 2007 5:06 PM, Don Lay <donlay@knology.net > wrote:
Every time you move you are creating explicate time-space. And imagination has its place when it's not out of balance.
Language use is the use of word/images (db). Maybe what is out of balance is pretending otherwise and trying to use language without awareness that it is using imagination. -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I: Every time you move you are creating explicate time-space. And imagination has its place when it's not out of balance.
On Dec 17, 2007 4:47 PM, Lynne Tolk < lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> wrote:
To be or not to be? Is there a choice? Is the question the problem? What about yes? (form is emptiness, emptiness is form; explicate is implicate is explicate?)
On 12/17/07 12:56 PM, "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
the old old thought occurs -- no us? -- RobMaybe. I've been using the idea of imagination, thought to think of the identity of things including us.I think I'm beginning to understand something like the idea of all this that is as unknown and thought equating with the imaged known, with the language or knowing system of imagination.It's a bit spooky to think that us is not. That is, the notness or non being must be addressed. The anxiety does not go away simply by acting and pretending it is not there. Maybe one way to avoid the anxiety of non being is to understand the idea that relative being is part of the whole of Being. dl http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message ----- From: rob mooney <mailto:rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:37 PMSubject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderThe thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there be no space? the old old thought occurs -- no us?
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:05:03 -0500if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um... breathThe thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there be no space? Maybe we could say that it is only a useful concept and use while being aware that it is limited.Would that be in the direction of unlimited experience? -- dl -- Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue-- Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue-- Irene
_________________________________________________________________
Free games, great prizes - get gaming at Gamesbox.
http://www.searchgamesbox.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/2b907090/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Tue Dec 18 00:07:20 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Tue Dec 18 00:24:58 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712171446u3fc23e4bocf5d2e3dfeb91757@mail.gmail.com>
References: <016201c840e6$ded1b440$b5c16018@DL01>
<C38C3C99.FA94%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
<c47283890712171353j95c274bj9096a97ab64953bc@mail.gmail.com>
<032601c840f9$22bf5ce0$b5c16018@DL01>
<c47283890712171408m42472b79m4768faa35cd06c40@mail.gmail.com>
<033501c840fa$2f16e390$b5c16018@DL01>
<c47283890712171424t498a359eseb5f169a0cff1d9@mail.gmail.com>
<036701c840fc$fae05040$b5c16018@DL01>
<c47283890712171446u3fc23e4bocf5d2e3dfeb91757@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W12226F9DB0C718807B2926DC620@phx.gbl>
mind's eye-ear and heart
marvellous!
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 17:46:19 -0500From: irenedarcy@gmail.comTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderI: Wow, what a question, Don. Very thought provoking, and I need time to think about it.When you say 'notes', I think of black dots on white paper. And they make shapes. Melodic lines make shapes. Notes are only inaccurate symbols for sound, and music goes nowhere without its design, its architecture. It also hooks into the whole scenario going on in the composer's mind's eye-ear and heart. There are layers and layers of things enfolded here. We also develop what's called 'pre-hearing', meaning we hear the sounds in our mind's ear, and that sends our hands to the instrument to produce them. I guess that could qualify as auditory imagination. Then there's kinesthetic imagination. There's much more, but I need time.
On Dec 17, 2007 5:34 PM, Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
I tend to think of imagination as image use and as related to visual experience. However, I believe someone point out that db/thought does not limit the meaning of imagination to visual experience.
If that's the case, the maybe music experienced "on the inside" would function as imagination without images.
Would notes rhythm,etc, then function as do visual images comprising written language?
Do you think of notes, etc., as imagination or that notes, etc., occur in imagination? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I: I can't yet explain how it fits, but I know it does. Really, improvisation - which is instantaneous musical composition, be it jazz, classical, salsa, whatever -is a sinking into the moment to let the imagination work. Feeling, idea, motive, design, everything combines in the moment, to express the meaning as it unfolds. I've started out with an idea, thinking to take it in a particular direction, but as I hear what I'm doing, something else happens and my fingers follow it. Intellect gets out of the way. There's no way I could reproduce what I did.
On Dec 17, 2007 5:14 PM, Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
I: Without imagination there is no creativity.
Maybe, maybe not. What about spontaneous music, dance?
Language is an art, use to create MACRO scenarios, etc., from micro word/images. -- dl
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:08 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I: Without imagination there is no creativity.
On Dec 17, 2007 5:06 PM, Don Lay <donlay@knology.net > wrote:
Every time you move you are creating explicate time-space. And imagination has its place when it's not out of balance.
Language use is the use of word/images (db). Maybe what is out of balance is pretending otherwise and trying to use language without awareness that it is using imagination. -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I: Every time you move you are creating explicate time-space. And imagination has its place when it's not out of balance.
On Dec 17, 2007 4:47 PM, Lynne Tolk < lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> wrote:
To be or not to be? Is there a choice? Is the question the problem? What about yes? (form is emptiness, emptiness is form; explicate is implicate is explicate?)
On 12/17/07 12:56 PM, "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
the old old thought occurs -- no us? -- RobMaybe. I've been using the idea of imagination, thought to think of the identity of things including us.I think I'm beginning to understand something like the idea of all this that is as unknown and thought equating with the imaged known, with the language or knowing system of imagination.It's a bit spooky to think that us is not. That is, the notness or non being must be addressed. The anxiety does not go away simply by acting and pretending it is not there. Maybe one way to avoid the anxiety of non being is to understand the idea that relative being is part of the whole of Being. dl http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message ----- From: rob mooney <mailto:rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:37 PMSubject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderThe thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there be no space? the old old thought occurs -- no us?
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:05:03 -0500if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um... breathThe thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there be no space? Maybe we could say that it is only a useful concept and use while being aware that it is limited.Would that be in the direction of unlimited experience? -- dl -- Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue-- Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue-- Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogueinfo: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue-- Irene
_________________________________________________________________
Who's friends with who and co-starred in what?
http://www.searchgamesbox.com/celebrityseparation.shtml
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/fd558b0b/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Tue Dec 18 00:26:26 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Tue Dec 18 00:32:34 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W122272852F4EBFA6007BDBDC620@phx.gbl>
References: <016201c840e6$ded1b440$b5c16018@DL01>
<C38C3C99.FA94%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
<c47283890712171353j95c274bj9096a97ab64953bc@mail.gmail.com>
<BAY123-W122272852F4EBFA6007BDBDC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <c47283890712171526r2faedf46l96c1a16d7670c4e9@mail.gmail.com>
I: Penetrating question, Rob. I'll put it in my subconscious while I play.
On Dec 17, 2007 6:01 PM, rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> what does imagination use to balance? (some ballast or other I soap pose)
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 16:53:34 -0500
> From: irenedarcy@gmail.com
>
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
>
> I: Every time you move you are creating explicate time-space. And
> imagination has its place when it's not out of balance.
>
> On Dec 17, 2007 4:47 PM, Lynne Tolk < lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
> wrote:
>
> To be or not to be? Is there a choice? Is the question the problem?
> What about yes? (form is emptiness, emptiness is form; explicate is
> implicate is explicate?)
>
>
> On 12/17/07 12:56 PM, "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
>
> the old old thought occurs -- no us? -- Rob
>
> Maybe. I've been using the idea of *imagination*, thought to think of the
> *identity of things* including us.
>
> I think I'm beginning to understand something like the idea of *all this
> that is* as *unknown* and thought equating with the *imaged known*, with
> the language or *knowing system* of *imagination*.
>
> It's a bit spooky to think that us is not. That is, the *notness or non
> being* must be addressed. The anxiety does not go away simply by acting
> and pretending it is not there.
>
> Maybe one way to avoid the anxiety of non being is to understand the idea
> that *relative being is part of the whole of Being. * dl
>
>
> http://www.knology.net/~donlay/ <http://www.knology.net/%7Edonlay/>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* rob mooney <mailto:rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
> *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> *Sent:* Monday, December 17, 2007 2:37 PM
> *Subject:* RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
>
> The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there
> be *no* space?
>
> the old old thought occurs -- no us?
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> From: donlay@knology.net
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:05:03 -0500
>
> if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um...
> breath
>
> The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there
> be *no* space? Maybe we could say that it is only a *useful concept* and
> use while being aware that it is *limited*.
>
> Would that be in the direction of *unlimited experience*? -- dl
>
>
>
>
> <http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Irene
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Everything in one place. All new Windows Live!<http://www.windowslive.co.uk/get-live>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/03135df9/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 00:16:25 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 00:45:27 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Message-ID: <20071217.184239.3184.81.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Maybe the feeling that "life is not meaningful" comes from the thought
"life is not
meaningful." Where ever would that thought have "come from?" It would
definitely
have to be inclusive of a thought of "meaning" as separate from "life,"
wouldn't it?
And even the "within" thing separates them.
It looks like we just have to figure out [not] how to not take ANY of the
thoughts
seriously. No wait. the "how" will certainly get in the way of this (just
as the "figure out"
will).
-- funny
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:48:07 -0700 "Susan Clemons"
<Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net> writes:
I mean we all use the word mean, meaning, etc. A philosopher said that
the question of meaning is meaningful.
Are we all using some thing that we know not, neither stand under, over
or beside? dl
What if we don't do any of those things but simply live within it?
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 12:11 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I mean we all use the word mean, meaning, etc. A philosopher said that
the question of meaning is meaningful.
Are we all using some thingK that we know not, neither stand under, over
or beside?
Can it be acceptable that meaning is only somethingK manmade, and that
otherwise, everything including us is meaningless? Is there
meaninglessness?
Is the question of meaning itself meaningless?
I've been trying to give attention to the idea advanced by some thinkers
that the Greek logos has been interpreted as meaning. What might that
mean? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:15 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
What is meaning?
how do you mean?
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 09:15:59 -0500
Can one eat them, live off them (too---?)) -- Alan
Does the question of food, etc., imply that man, that we live by bread
alone?
Maybe what is important about QT is the idea of meaning. What is the
meaning?
What is meaning? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan E. DeBakey
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 9:07 AM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Tea?? Mio dio Al, what are you smoking, drinking, brewing? Like: Does
pouring (hot) water over (tea)leaves order - explicated ;-o
Al, I am into "real"-life stuff (examples), all that
(particle)theoretical talk gives me goose-bumps ;........}}
Can one eat them, live off them (too---?))
Alan
Alfred Landman <landmana@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi Rob Mooney. T.e.a.
AL.
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
there is asking and saying at any rate
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 14:14:42 -0700
I would say there is definitely mind. Although it might not be what you
and I would call mind.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Regina Bensch-Coe
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 1:57 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In the attached article, the author writes, ?in the 'implicate' order ere
is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind.? (Note: I am guessing
?ere? is a typo for ?there?.)
In the implicate order there is no space, time, causality, matter, or
mind. ?? Is this statement true?
Regina
??
Consciousness and sufism: A new paradigm for western scientists
R.A.Haag (331 West Colonial Highway, Hamilton, VA 20158, USA)
Scientists seeking to understand 'consciousness' appear to ignore
colleagues who say that the qualities ascribed to external reality only
dwell within us and that what we conceive of as 'reality' is enfolded in
human consciousness. Reality is a manifestation of our thoughts and not a
property of the external world, but involves our presence as conscious
observers. The universe achieves a concrete existence as a result of our
perceptions. Our concept of the reality created by our brain and senses
cause us not only to misunderstand consciousness, but render us unable
even to imagine what it might be.
Neuroscientists are just beginning to examine the misapprehensions of our
senses and how these lead us to act and think as though we have an
accurate understanding of consciousness. However we may perceive reality
in the waking state of consciousness, it is not the autonomous separate
'things' our senses behold. Pribram and Bohm's holographic analog for the
'implicate' order beyond our senses illustrates how reality is an
illusion. They argue that our minds not only enfold matter, but our
bodies and the entire material universe as well and that the cosmos,
matter, life, and consciousness itself are all projections of 'the ground
of all that is', in ways which scientists have yet to discover, though
Pribram speculates that the mystics may have discovered a way to see the
implicate order, by learning how to 'abrogate the brain's retrieval
systems and neuroelectrical codes.' Such scientific speculations
challenge many cherished concepts, including language itself, because in
the 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind.
Because human thought is a by-product of our brain and senses, it is ever
changing and limited and, thus, the Sufis say that the old
subject-verb-object paradigm is not a valid paradigm for scientists to
understand ultimate questions. Our sensory prison and language cause us
to live on the surface of things and to not be aware of absolute reality.
To understand consciousness, scientists must learn a totally different
paradigm. Instead of always trying to satisfy themselves by studying the
natural world, scientists must come to learn how to investigate inwardly.
They must stop equating sensory experiences with true knowledge, which
can be acquired only by directly cognizing infinite existence through
focusing attention and energy on a specific point in the heart to
activate a hitherto unsuspected capacity or 'knowing'. Knowing humanity
in all its hidden dimensions must be the fundamental principle for all
endeavors in science and religion. Sufism, the science of Self-knowledge,
is the tradition Pribram thought might exist to teach humanity how to
abrogate the brain to behold the implicate order.
The Sufis say that both true science and true religion are but reciprocal
stages of the same search for truth about existence itself. One focuses
on what we take to be the 'outer', the other on 'inner' reality, but
these are simply artificial boundaries created by our 'feeling' mind. To
know the unity underlying science and religion, the reality of existence,
requires a different paradigm--heart consciousness. And, Sufism is that
reality.
Source:
http://www.zynet.co.uk/imprint/Tucson/5.htm
05.02-- Abstract No:824
Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Everything in one place
All new Windows Live!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/8e8ecf9f/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 00:39:51 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 00:45:30 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
Message-ID: <20071217.184239.3184.83.ae.dropper@juno.com>
fullness pours out
and it all empties into white
the mounds of it - frozen overnight
worms throw up casts
in the fine snow, crystals,
up close you can see
the colors - LOOK
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:03:41 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
writes:
worms throw up casts
in the fine snow
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:40:52 -0800
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Pat, look at your letter below. Do you know why it has the message from
Symantec on it? This is something that keeps turning up on people's
e-mails, and it may be some kind of worm or virus.
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:09 AM, ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
This message has been processed by Symantec's AntiVirus Technology.
Unknown00000000.data was not scanned for viruses because too many nested
levels of files were found.
For more information on antivirus tips and technology, visit
http://ses.symantec.com/
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Date: December 17, 2007 11:09:47 AM PST
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
fullness pours out
and it all empties into white
the mounds of it - frozen overnight
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:23:27 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
writes:
fullness pours out
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:00:04 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
And it all empties into white.
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 13:43:40 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
writes:
Naming plays its oldest game.
Somehow out of reach it dances
nine dances to itself. Nine dances
all in couples made of three.
And if we do not leave our light
we will be eaten by it long
before it shines and dies again
so leave our light alone to be.
Run apple certainties under
the spout, what memories they
bind in cankered onion light
from lullabies of thunder.
And we are leaves as always,
fallen from the sunburn tree.
Till shame and calamine find us
shovelling blossom snow
Before the no, before the go,
before the be became, we will
become before the sun
has ever been born below.
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 08:12:20 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Naming plays games with itself.
Somewhere out of reach it dances
nine dances by itself
in "couples" made of three.
And if we do not leave our light
we will be eaten by it long
before it shines and dies again
so leave our light alone.
Run apple certainties under
the spout, what memories they
bind in cankered onion light
from lampshades worn as hats.
And we are leaves as always,
fallen from the sunburn tree.
Till shade and calamine find us
shovelling a foot of snow
before the plows
before the dogs....
before the rain and sleet
will come
before the sun
was even born
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 07:14:42 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
writes:
I: Word music Improvisation. Have a great day, everybody.
On Dec 16, 2007 4:13 AM, rob mooney < rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
Naming plays games with itself.
Somewhere out of reach it dances
nine dances by itself.
And if we do not leave our light
we will be eaten by it long
before it shines.
Run apple certainties under
the spout, what memories they
bind in cankered light.
And we are leaves as always,
fallen from the sunburn tree.
Till shade and calamine find us.
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 22:39:03 -0500
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
what? (Rob)
the naming plays with itself
somewhere out of reach
of the dance itself.
do our leaves
get eaten by light
before they fall?
we certainly have
to be careful of
skin cancer
and light!
previously,
it was sunburn.
we aren't leaves.
one size
doesn't fit all.
funni, rob, irene
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 01:48:56 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
writes:
what?
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 14:54:42 -0500
From: irenedarcy@gmail.com
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2
I: We certainly have to be careful of skin cancer and light!
Previously, it was sunburn. We aren't leaves. One size doesn't fit
all.
On Dec 14, 2007 2:51 PM, rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
do our leaves get eaten by light before they fall?
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 21:26:42 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
DIALOGUE DANCE
A dialogue circle of trees, dancing trees
we do not sit in chairs but we stand in the woods
with the light filtering through our autumn leaves
and we are dancing - our roots are our feet
and our millions of toes, dancing.
A wind comes and some of our leaves fall
from some of our fingers,
our million fingers, one for every dancing toe,
one explication for every implication
our roots hidden, unknown
but known constantly as that
which ever refuses naming
while the naming plays with itself
somewhere out of reach
of the dance itself.
-- funny
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:08:46 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com>
writes:
Don't you think though, that maybe a bit of both is even more useful?
Just so long as we don't turn the tree - or others - into objects that we
"understand" completely. Actually, as I think of it, there is more than
one way to understand understanding.
don
On Dec 13, 2007, at 1:10 AM, Alfred Landman wrote:
Hi Irene Darcy. If a brain wants to learn about trees, for instance,
thought could simply spend time with them in their natural habitat etc
(which is what many traditionally "primitive" people do). Breaking trees
into their cellular components and so forth enables genetic manipulation
of them, for instance, but this can't be said to "objectively" help one
get to know a tree better than simply spending time with them. In fact,
it does the precise opposite. This brain can never genuinely know a
living organism that you've instrumentalized and objectified like that.
AL
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
Subject: Space and Time (Don F)
From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 16:59:24 EDT
to: Bohm, Subject Space and Time
Dear Don, nice wisdom in your Sep.25 'Space & Time note. Yet:(your
quote):
>...<
Foucault was right: there is no such epoque as the present one. His, or
ours, does not matter. Past reflection does not match live experience.
WE are the experiencers, not memory. So: hold your enthusiasm.
Also: I was glad: A rare thing on this list a reference to David Bohm!
I find this unending exchange "about the list-filling" redundant. In my
(not so humble) opinion a list is like love: practice it, don't explain.
If it does not live up to your expectations, there are other lists to
choose from. Nobody can change BB or anybody else. Accept it or leave it.
To explain one's views ABOUT participating: nice, but keep it short. And
have mercy on the receiving parties: half a dozen posts per day per per-
son in exorbitant length, or sometimes 5 consecutive attachments is rude.
Who does not have the time to write short, should keep it. Length is
negligent.
And to the following exchange I have a plagiarism from Doug Bilodeau, an
acclaimed physicist from the JCS-list:(see below) - the 'exchange':
*
" >JPL:
>"Shout, shout, let it all out
>these are the things I can do without,
>come on, I'm talking to you, come on.." whereupon
" >>Wm:
>>Pssst... not so loud, I think the others are meditating.
William
*
Not so sure! I refer to my remark on a "no response" to a post:
"si tacent clamant": Dough B: corrected me: "or: si tacent dormiunt".
From: "Chris Hooley" < chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: Re: purpose of list
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:24:15 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello All,
I've heard nothing from the group for several days. So, I'm sending this
message to check for echo.
Regards
Chris
From: "Chris Hooley" <chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: inside out
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:19:50 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello Everyone,
I would share another thought that I found interesting.
The gastrointestinal track is actually "outside" the body in the sense
that
it's a long, open-ended tube. In the same way, "no-thing", which is (or
can be seen to be) at the center of every manifested form, is continuous,
contiguous to itself. It is "outside" the space/time form though when
seen
from within the form it appears to be isolated like droplets.
My intuition is that we can focus (reside *as* attention) either on the
form or on the un-form that borders it.
The experience of attending to the un-form in-between can't be fully
represented, even to ourselves, I think, but experimenting with this
viewing angle has been intriguing.
Received: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:21:50 +0100 (BST)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:19:21 +0100 (BST)
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer
"intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely
right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during
about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism
would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind.
Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on
with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that
it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to
get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt
that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you
forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess,
is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you
do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely
is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis
terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe
away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's
no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood
takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts
everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and
out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no
one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling
--
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our
common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal
error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day
I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am
speaking
to one of its authors!
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on
the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with
'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment
of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and
so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facilitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
--
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search
Charades!
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search
Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search
Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/4208eab6/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 00:03:43 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 00:45:32 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Message-ID: <20071217.184239.3184.80.ae.dropper@juno.com>
no me?
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:14 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com>
writes:
Should be me, no?
X
On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:37 AM, rob mooney wrote:
The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there
be no space?
the old old thought occurs -- no us?
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:05:03 -0500
if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um...
breath
The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there
be no space? Maybe we could say that it is only a useful concept and use
while being aware that it is limited.
Would that be in the direction of unlimited experience? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:09 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um...
breath
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:52:41 -0500
"is there space, time causality in the implicate order",
If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate order' I
think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be
explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are implicated). --
Jeff
Hi Jeff.
Does the question imply space or time by using the idea expressed by
"in"?
If so, does this imply the language we use is not adequate to address the
meaning of the question? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Webb
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 8:30 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Hi,
I would like to comment on the issue: is there space, time causality in
the implicate order.
If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate order' I
think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be
explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are implicated). So
the statement "in the implicate order (t)here in no space, time
causality, matter, or mind' seems to me to indicate that the maker of
this statement has completely misunderstood Bohms notion of the
implicate order.
I'm sure that others on this list will be able to add more details.
Jeff
>
> In the attached article, the author writes, ?in the
> 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality,
> matter, or mind.? (Note: I am guessing ?ere? is a typo for
> ?there?.)
>
> In the implicate order there is no space, time, causality,
> matter, or mind. ?? Is this statement true?
>
> Regina
>
>
> ??
>
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Everything in one place
All new Windows Live!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/57e7253b/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 00:22:45 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 00:45:43 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Message-ID: <20071217.184239.3184.82.ae.dropper@juno.com>
I have a friend who longs to be Casper the Ghost.
I can really get into the invisibility thing myself
but this "body" thing, I mean, how fabulously
funny is that?
-- funny
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:50:40 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
writes:
Baso said, "sometimes I make 'him' raise his eyebrows and blink,
sometimes I do not make 'him' raise his eyebrows and blink. Sometimes
raising the eyebrows and blinking is all right. Sometimes raising the
eyebrows and blinking is not all right. How about you?" Hearing these
words Yakusan was greatly enlightened and he bowed.
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:06:53 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to
say stuff I don't understand (rob)
That is because you know that they say stuff that they don't understand.
And that they have to in order to say anything at all.
-- funny
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:20:22 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
writes:
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting
and pretending the social identity?
I think so
and also maybe even when acting and pretending
I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to
say stuff I don't understand
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of my
pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores "
precede the experience of the identity processes being suspended, being
held in suspension?
If so, then maybe the meaning of "self aggrandizement flying out of my
pores " might be that identity has limited meaning.
Then what is the meaning of someone talking about "self aggrandizement
flying out of my pores "? Could it be to demonstrate meaning?
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting
and pretending the social identity?
Resonance anyone? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
When the identity movement is suspended, experience of being does not
cease.
Then, it becomes clear that ontic intelligence does not have to be
personalized as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with Weber.
Watching the identity movement (thought), awareness of the identity
thought may and does at times suspend the identity processes.
Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning that
identity processes are not needed, then that awareness suspends the
unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need occurs, then the
identity processes recur.
It appears that the I identity is not needed for identity suspension.
That's the way it seems to me, to this identity when the identity
processes are present.
Resonance anyone ..., all you outer identities "out there"? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search
Charades!
Messenger on the move. Text MSN to 63463 now!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/8dcfd070/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 00:41:14 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 00:45:47 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Message-ID: <20071217.184239.3184.84.ae.dropper@juno.com>
I know they don't but I don't know how I know.
-- funny
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:04:49 -0700 "Susan Clemons"
<Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net> writes:
How do you know?
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:01 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
yes. and breathing and sensing and meaning and joy take time and space
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:29:29 -0500
Time and space is used when language is used to talk about space and
time. Words evolved to accommodate the view that space and time are
useful. -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan E. DeBakey
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
USING time, space.... Please, Donlay, give us an example how Donlay
"uses" ... time?.... space?.... ;-)
Alan
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um...
breath
The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there
be no space? Maybe we could say that it is only a useful concept and use
while being aware that it is limited.
Would that be in the direction of unlimited experience? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:09 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um...
breath
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:52:41 -0500
"is there space, time causality in the implicate order",
If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate order' I
think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be
explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are implicated). --
Jeff
Hi Jeff.
Does the question imply space or time by using the idea expressed by
"in"?
If so, does this imply the language we use is not adequate to address the
meaning of the question? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Webb
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 8:30 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Hi,
I would like to comment on the issue: is there space, time causality in
the implicate order.
If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate order' I
think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be
explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are implicated). So
the statement "in the implicate order (t)here in no space, time
causality, matter, or mind' seems to me to indicate that the maker of
this statement has completely misunderstood Bohms notion of the
implicate order.
I'm sure that others on this list will be able to add more details.
Jeff
>
> In the attached article, the author writes, ?in the
> 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality,
> matter, or mind.? (Note: I am guessing ?ere? is a typo for
> ?there?.)
>
> In the implicate order there is no space, time, causality,
> matter, or mind. ?? Is this statement true?
>
> Regina
>
>
> ??
>
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search
Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/ab573c32/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 00:02:48 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 00:45:48 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
Message-ID: <20071217.184239.3184.79.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Never heard of them till now.
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:40:52 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com>
writes:
Pat, look at your letter below. Do you know why it has the message from
Symantec on it? This is something that keeps turning up on people's
e-mails, and it may be some kind of worm or virus.
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:09 AM, ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
This message has been processed by Symantec's AntiVirus Technology.
Unknown00000000.data was not scanned for viruses because too many nested
levels of files were found.
For more information on antivirus tips and technology, visit
http://ses.symantec.com/
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Date: December 17, 2007 11:09:47 AM PST
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
fullness pours out
and it all empties into white
the mounds of it - frozen overnight
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:23:27 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
writes:
fullness pours out
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:00:04 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
And it all empties into white.
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 13:43:40 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
writes:
Naming plays its oldest game.
Somehow out of reach it dances
nine dances to itself. Nine dances
all in couples made of three.
And if we do not leave our light
we will be eaten by it long
before it shines and dies again
so leave our light alone to be.
Run apple certainties under
the spout, what memories they
bind in cankered onion light
from lullabies of thunder.
And we are leaves as always,
fallen from the sunburn tree.
Till shame and calamine find us
shovelling blossom snow
Before the no, before the go,
before the be became, we will
become before the sun
has ever been born below.
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 08:12:20 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Naming plays games with itself.
Somewhere out of reach it dances
nine dances by itself
in "couples" made of three.
And if we do not leave our light
we will be eaten by it long
before it shines and dies again
so leave our light alone.
Run apple certainties under
the spout, what memories they
bind in cankered onion light
from lampshades worn as hats.
And we are leaves as always,
fallen from the sunburn tree.
Till shade and calamine find us
shovelling a foot of snow
before the plows
before the dogs....
before the rain and sleet
will come
before the sun
was even born
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 07:14:42 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
writes:
I: Word music Improvisation. Have a great day, everybody.
On Dec 16, 2007 4:13 AM, rob mooney < rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
Naming plays games with itself.
Somewhere out of reach it dances
nine dances by itself.
And if we do not leave our light
we will be eaten by it long
before it shines.
Run apple certainties under
the spout, what memories they
bind in cankered light.
And we are leaves as always,
fallen from the sunburn tree.
Till shade and calamine find us.
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 22:39:03 -0500
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
what? (Rob)
the naming plays with itself
somewhere out of reach
of the dance itself.
do our leaves
get eaten by light
before they fall?
we certainly have
to be careful of
skin cancer
and light!
previously,
it was sunburn.
we aren't leaves.
one size
doesn't fit all.
funni, rob, irene
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 01:48:56 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
writes:
what?
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 14:54:42 -0500
From: irenedarcy@gmail.com
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2
I: We certainly have to be careful of skin cancer and light!
Previously, it was sunburn. We aren't leaves. One size doesn't fit
all.
On Dec 14, 2007 2:51 PM, rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
do our leaves get eaten by light before they fall?
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 21:26:42 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
DIALOGUE DANCE
A dialogue circle of trees, dancing trees
we do not sit in chairs but we stand in the woods
with the light filtering through our autumn leaves
and we are dancing - our roots are our feet
and our millions of toes, dancing.
A wind comes and some of our leaves fall
from some of our fingers,
our million fingers, one for every dancing toe,
one explication for every implication
our roots hidden, unknown
but known constantly as that
which ever refuses naming
while the naming plays with itself
somewhere out of reach
of the dance itself.
-- funny
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:08:46 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com>
writes:
Don't you think though, that maybe a bit of both is even more useful?
Just so long as we don't turn the tree - or others - into objects that we
"understand" completely. Actually, as I think of it, there is more than
one way to understand understanding.
don
On Dec 13, 2007, at 1:10 AM, Alfred Landman wrote:
Hi Irene Darcy. If a brain wants to learn about trees, for instance,
thought could simply spend time with them in their natural habitat etc
(which is what many traditionally "primitive" people do). Breaking trees
into their cellular components and so forth enables genetic manipulation
of them, for instance, but this can't be said to "objectively" help one
get to know a tree better than simply spending time with them. In fact,
it does the precise opposite. This brain can never genuinely know a
living organism that you've instrumentalized and objectified like that.
AL
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
Subject: Space and Time (Don F)
From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 16:59:24 EDT
to: Bohm, Subject Space and Time
Dear Don, nice wisdom in your Sep.25 'Space & Time note. Yet:(your
quote):
>...<
Foucault was right: there is no such epoque as the present one. His, or
ours, does not matter. Past reflection does not match live experience.
WE are the experiencers, not memory. So: hold your enthusiasm.
Also: I was glad: A rare thing on this list a reference to David Bohm!
I find this unending exchange "about the list-filling" redundant. In my
(not so humble) opinion a list is like love: practice it, don't explain.
If it does not live up to your expectations, there are other lists to
choose from. Nobody can change BB or anybody else. Accept it or leave it.
To explain one's views ABOUT participating: nice, but keep it short. And
have mercy on the receiving parties: half a dozen posts per day per per-
son in exorbitant length, or sometimes 5 consecutive attachments is rude.
Who does not have the time to write short, should keep it. Length is
negligent.
And to the following exchange I have a plagiarism from Doug Bilodeau, an
acclaimed physicist from the JCS-list:(see below) - the 'exchange':
*
" >JPL:
>"Shout, shout, let it all out
>these are the things I can do without,
>come on, I'm talking to you, come on.." whereupon
" >>Wm:
>>Pssst... not so loud, I think the others are meditating.
William
*
Not so sure! I refer to my remark on a "no response" to a post:
"si tacent clamant": Dough B: corrected me: "or: si tacent dormiunt".
From: "Chris Hooley" < chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: Re: purpose of list
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:24:15 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello All,
I've heard nothing from the group for several days. So, I'm sending this
message to check for echo.
Regards
Chris
From: "Chris Hooley" <chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: inside out
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:19:50 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello Everyone,
I would share another thought that I found interesting.
The gastrointestinal track is actually "outside" the body in the sense
that
it's a long, open-ended tube. In the same way, "no-thing", which is (or
can be seen to be) at the center of every manifested form, is continuous,
contiguous to itself. It is "outside" the space/time form though when
seen
from within the form it appears to be isolated like droplets.
My intuition is that we can focus (reside *as* attention) either on the
form or on the un-form that borders it.
The experience of attending to the un-form in-between can't be fully
represented, even to ourselves, I think, but experimenting with this
viewing angle has been intriguing.
Received: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:21:50 +0100 (BST)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:19:21 +0100 (BST)
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer
"intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely
right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during
about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism
would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind.
Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on
with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that
it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to
get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt
that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you
forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess,
is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you
do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely
is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis
terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe
away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's
no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood
takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts
everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and
out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no
one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling
--
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our
common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal
error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day
I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am
speaking
to one of its authors!
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on
the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with
'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment
of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and
so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facilitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
--
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search
Charades!
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search
Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search
Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/2f100681/attachment.html
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Tue Dec 18 01:18:08 2007
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Tue Dec 18 01:24:56 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <466461.42128.qm@web45814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><004501c840b7$594becc0$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W360C871E5B94A44C7CE328DC620@phx.gbl><00f901c840e0$9e4b5c10$b5c16018@DL01><00a401c840e5$c0be8920$f277480c@HOME><018001c840e7$9f7dbd60$b5c16018@DL01><014901c840e9$ebf72760$f277480c@HOME>
<BAY123-W32BBB589EBA7C32852E6B1DC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <019901c8410b$8ce34750$f277480c@HOME>
Does this question mean you have never read any of my posts?
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:37 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
anything to report, honey?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:17:54 -0700
Why not investigate that? -- dl
That seems like such a silly question to me dl. I've been investigating that for the last 30 years.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:01 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
What if we don't do any of those things but simply live within it? -- Susan
I like that idea! That's the idea of the Greek logos ... which meant reason, ratio, meaning ..., etc. Seems reasonable to me that Bohm like it also. Why not investigate that? -- dl
From: Susan Clemons
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:48 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I mean we all use the word mean, meaning, etc. A philosopher said that the question of meaning is meaningful.
Are we all using some thing that we know not, neither stand under, over or beside? dl
What if we don't do any of those things but simply live within it?
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 12:11 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I mean we all use the word mean, meaning, etc. A philosopher said that the question of meaning is meaningful.
Are we all using some thingK that we know not, neither stand under, over or beside?
Can it be acceptable that meaning is only somethingK manmade, and that otherwise, everything including us is meaningless? Is there meaninglessness?
Is the question of meaning itself meaningless?
I've been trying to give attention to the idea advanced by some thinkers that the Greek logos has been interpreted as meaning. What might that mean? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:15 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
What is meaning?
how do you mean?
------------------------------------------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 09:15:59 -0500
Can one eat them, live off them (too---?)) -- Alan
Does the question of food, etc., imply that man, that we live by bread alone?
Maybe what is important about QT is the idea of meaning. What is the meaning?
What is meaning? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan E. DeBakey
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 9:07 AM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Tea?? Mio dio Al, what are you smoking, drinking, brewing? Like: Does pouring (hot) water over (tea)leaves order - explicated ;-o
Al, I am into "real"-life stuff (examples), all that (particle)theoretical talk gives me goose-bumps ;........}}
Can one eat them, live off them (too---?))
Alan
Alfred Landman <landmana@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi Rob Mooney. T.e.a.
AL.
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
there is asking and saying at any rate
----------------------------------------------------------
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 14:14:42 -0700
I would say there is definitely mind. Although it might not be what you and I would call mind.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Regina Bensch-Coe
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 1:57 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In the attached article, the author writes, ?in the 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind.? (Note: I am guessing ?ere? is a typo for ?there?.)
In the implicate order there is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind. ?? Is this statement true?
Regina
??
Consciousness and sufism: A new paradigm for western scientists
R.A.Haag (331 West Colonial Highway, Hamilton, VA 20158, USA)
Scientists seeking to understand 'consciousness' appear to ignore colleagues who say that the qualities ascribed to external reality only dwell within us and that what we conceive of as 'reality' is enfolded in human consciousness. Reality is a manifestation of our thoughts and not a property of the external world, but involves our presence as conscious observers. The universe achieves a concrete existence as a result of our perceptions. Our concept of the reality created by our brain and senses cause us not only to misunderstand consciousness, but render us unable even to imagine what it might be.
Neuroscientists are just beginning to examine the misapprehensions of our senses and how these lead us to act and think as though we have an accurate understanding of consciousness. However we may perceive reality in the waking state of consciousness, it is not the autonomous separate 'things' our senses behold. Pribram and Bohm's holographic analog for the 'implicate' order beyond our senses illustrates how reality is an illusion. They argue that our minds not only enfold matter, but our bodies and the entire material universe as well and that the cosmos, matter, life, and consciousness itself are all projections of 'the ground of all that is', in ways which scientists have yet to discover, though Pribram speculates that the mystics may have discovered a way to see the implicate order, by learning how to 'abrogate the brain's retrieval systems and neuroelectrical codes.' Such scientific speculations challenge many cherished concepts, including language itself, because in the 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind.
Because human thought is a by-product of our brain and senses, it is ever changing and limited and, thus, the Sufis say that the old subject-verb-object paradigm is not a valid paradigm for scientists to understand ultimate questions. Our sensory prison and language cause us to live on the surface of things and to not be aware of absolute reality. To understand consciousness, scientists must learn a totally different paradigm. Instead of always trying to satisfy themselves by studying the natural world, scientists must come to learn how to investigate inwardly. They must stop equating sensory experiences with true knowledge, which can be acquired only by directly cognizing infinite existence through focusing attention and energy on a specific point in the heart to activate a hitherto unsuspected capacity or 'knowing'. Knowing humanity in all its hidden dimensions must be the fundamental principle for all endeavors in science and religion. Sufism, the science of Self-knowledge, is the tradition Pribram thought might exist to teach humanity how to abrogate the brain to behold the implicate order.
The Sufis say that both true science and true religion are but reciprocal stages of the same search for truth about existence itself. One focuses on what we take to be the 'outer', the other on 'inner' reality, but these are simply artificial boundaries created by our 'feeling' mind. To know the unity underlying science and religion, the reality of existence, requires a different paradigm--heart consciousness. And, Sufism is that reality.
Source:
http://www.zynet.co.uk/imprint/Tucson/5.htm
05.02-- Abstract No:824
------------------------------------------------------------
Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
----------------------------------------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
----------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Everything in one place? All new Windows Live!
--------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
----------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/7776c587/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 01:25:32 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 01:31:39 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <20071217.184239.3184.84.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <538774.40094.qm@web45805.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
funnydoesntweb@juno.com wrote: .hmmessage P { PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } BODY.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma } I know they don't but I don't know how I http://tinyurl.com/2rvjhd
--
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/252d82a8/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 01:26:56 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 01:33:04 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <019901c8410b$8ce34750$f277480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <853595.77218.qm@web45815.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Joy@worldnet.att.netwrote: .hmmessage P { PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } BODY.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma } Does this question mean you have never http://tinyurl.com/2pkwvv
any of my posts?
Susan
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/1fdd3f7e/attachment.html
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Tue Dec 18 01:28:10 2007
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Tue Dec 18 01:34:17 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <016201c840e6$ded1b440$b5c16018@DL01><C38C3C99.FA94%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com><c47283890712171353j95c274bj9096a97ab64953bc@mail.gmail.com><032601c840f9$22bf5ce0$b5c16018@DL01><c47283890712171408m42472b79m4768faa35cd06c40@mail.gmail.com><033501c840fa$2f16e390$b5c16018@DL01><c47283890712171424t498a359eseb5f169a0cff1d9@mail.gmail.com>
<036701c840fc$fae05040$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <023c01c8410c$deca6c00$f277480c@HOME>
dl, you can play imaginatively with music or with feelings for that matter. Imagination is definitely not limited to the visual.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I tend to think of imagination as image use and as related to visual experience. However, I believe someone point out that db/thought does not limit the meaning of imagination to visual experience.
If that's the case, the maybe music experienced "on the inside" would function as imagination without images.
Would notes rhythm,etc, then function as do visual images comprising written language?
Do you think of notes, etc., as imagination or that notes, etc., occur in imagination? -- dl
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/5ba38e6d/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 01:24:50 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 01:37:39 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712171510o3588a706wbadcdcae932082cc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <882175.31582.qm@web45807.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote: I: Imagine a child going into a tantrum demanding something she wants. That's me, wanting to know http://tinyurl.com/23o547
Please. For Christmas, maybe
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/09c8a624/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Tue Dec 18 01:41:09 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Tue Dec 18 01:47:18 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <882175.31582.qm@web45807.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c47283890712171510o3588a706wbadcdcae932082cc@mail.gmail.com>
<882175.31582.qm@web45807.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712171641y2ec41796od299cfcf973a43b1@mail.gmail.com>
I: Snow angel. How lovely.
On Dec 17, 2007 7:24 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
>
> I: Imagine a child going into a tantrum demanding something she wants.
> That's me, wanting to know *http://tinyurl.com/23o547*
> Please. For Christmas, maybe
>
> ------------------------------
> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51734/*http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/3d0e19a8/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 01:52:15 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 01:58:22 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712171641y2ec41796od299cfcf973a43b1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <58782.82899.qm@web45801.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote: I: Don Laying http://tinyurl.com/35olm2 How lovely.
(Top in strigKing disdance).
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/ae2dfb68/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Tue Dec 18 01:56:02 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Tue Dec 18 02:02:10 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <58782.82899.qm@web45801.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c47283890712171641y2ec41796od299cfcf973a43b1@mail.gmail.com>
<58782.82899.qm@web45801.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712171656x5f4d8dew38a2f8078b4fed92@mail.gmail.com>
I: Imag-ineg, sounds of applause.
On Dec 17, 2007 7:52 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
>
> I: Don Laying *http://tinyurl.com/35olm2* How lovely.
>
> (Top in strigKing disdance).
>
> ------------------------------
>
> <http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue>
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/fc90335d/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 02:22:32 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 02:28:44 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <016201c840e6$ded1b440$b5c16018@DL01><C38C3C99.FA94%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com><c47283890712171353j95c274bj9096a97ab64953bc@mail.gmail.com><035301c840fb$4d1463d0$b5c16018@DL01>
<c47283890712171432w7e5a633ej7673469675579782@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <03a501c84114$78c7a3c0$b5c16018@DL01>
ISmeaningfulTM to say the answer to these questions is yes, and to say that Bohm, talking about infinite subtlety and when he says it is as far "in there" inside the atom as it is "out there" through the universe substantiates the view I'm trying to learn how to explicate.
Where or what is the personal identity while being sensitive enough to "hear" the direction that amounts to improv?
Once again, my programming friend says there is no identity movement while writing code. If there was, he would be unable to write code because C++, he says, is not the language appropriate for the personal identity. That is, personal identity simply has no meaning in the Visual Basic or C++ language.
Are you aware of Irene's personal identity movement while doing improv? -- dl
\
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I: We're getting into the idea of Nada Brahma, now. And to say more, I'd have to go get my book.
It would have been more accurate to say one creates a time-space line when one moves, I think.
Why do all the good things happen at once? I'm working on Bach Goldberg. My Eurhythmics teacher is giving a three day workshop soon on what an improviser can learn from them, and I'm preparing for it. I would love to have heard Bach sit down and jam with Paquito d'Rivera; throw in Sidney Bechet for good measure on clarinet, and Eugene Ysaye on violin.
On Dec 17, 2007 5:22 PM, Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
I: Every time you move you are creating explicate time-space.
What about the idea that every time you move, you are using time and space?
Is there time and space absent homo-sappo, prior to homo-sappo? Perhaps more precisely, is there some actuality indicated by time and space that is prior to homo-sappo? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I: Every time you move you are creating explicate time-space. And imagination has its place when it's not out of balance.
On Dec 17, 2007 4:47 PM, Lynne Tolk < lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> wrote:
To be or not to be? Is there a choice? Is the question the problem? What about yes? (form is emptiness, emptiness is form; explicate is implicate is explicate?)
On 12/17/07 12:56 PM, "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
the old old thought occurs -- no us? -- Rob
Maybe. I've been using the idea of imagination, thought to think of the identity of things including us.
I think I'm beginning to understand something like the idea of all this that is as unknown and thought equating with the imaged known, with the language or knowing system of imagination.
It's a bit spooky to think that us is not. That is, the notness or non being must be addressed. The anxiety does not go away simply by acting and pretending it is not there.
Maybe one way to avoid the anxiety of non being is to understand the idea that relative being is part of the whole of Being. dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney <mailto:rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:37 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there be no space?
the old old thought occurs -- no us?
------------------------------------------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:05:03 -0500
if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um... breath
The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there be no space? Maybe we could say that it is only a useful concept and use while being aware that it is limited.
Would that be in the direction of unlimited experience? -- dl
--
Irene
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/684419c4/attachment-0001.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 02:34:04 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 02:40:04 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <016201c840e6$ded1b440$b5c16018@DL01><C38C3C99.FA94%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com><c47283890712171353j95c274bj9096a97ab64953bc@mail.gmail.com><032601c840f9$22bf5ce0$b5c16018@DL01><c47283890712171408m42472b79m4768faa35cd06c40@mail.gmail.com><033501c840fa$2f16e390$b5c16018@DL01><c47283890712171424t498a359eseb5f169a0cff1d9@mail.gmail.com><036701c840fc$fae05040$b5c16018@DL01>
<c47283890712171446u3fc23e4bocf5d2e3dfeb91757@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <03b401c84116$12fd8670$b5c16018@DL01>
There's much more, but I need time.
Yes. Perhaps what is needed is more time to give very careful attention to suspending the everyday pretense and to give careful attention to what actually is (if you agree that we must do much pretending every day).
Whatever or however a musician may participate in the essential creativity of Being, still if she puts it into writing, into words, she must use the common everyday SOS language which itself means acting and pretending the separated structure of the language.
And demonstrably, I believe, the SOS of language is inadequate (think Bohm 1951). Again, the SOS language, meaning a separated subject observing a separated object cannot adequately describe what the quantum theories say actually is. Period.
Does it?
That's how certain I am! I appreciate your careful attention to this. -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I: Wow, what a question, Don. Very thought provoking, and I need time to think about it.
When you say 'notes', I think of black dots on white paper. And they make shapes. Melodic lines make shapes. Notes are only inaccurate symbols for sound, and music goes nowhere without its design, its architecture. It also hooks into the whole scenario going on in the composer's mind's eye-ear and heart. There are layers and layers of things enfolded here.
We also develop what's called 'pre-hearing', meaning we hear the sounds in our mind's ear, and that sends our hands to the instrument to produce them.
I guess that could qualify as auditory imagination. Then there's kinesthetic imagination.
There's much more, but I need time.
On Dec 17, 2007 5:34 PM, Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
I tend to think of imagination as image use and as related to visual experience. However, I believe someone point out that db/thought does not limit the meaning of imagination to visual experience.
If that's the case, the maybe music experienced "on the inside" would function as imagination without images.
Would notes rhythm,etc, then function as do visual images comprising written language?
Do you think of notes, etc., as imagination or that notes, etc., occur in imagination? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I: I can't yet explain how it fits, but I know it does. Really, improvisation - which is instantaneous musical composition, be it jazz, classical, salsa, whatever -
is a sinking into the moment to let the imagination work. Feeling, idea, motive, design, everything combines in the moment, to express the meaning as it unfolds. I've started out with an idea, thinking to take it in a particular direction, but as I hear what I'm doing, something else happens and my fingers follow it. Intellect gets out of the way. There's no way I could reproduce what I did.
On Dec 17, 2007 5:14 PM, Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
I: Without imagination there is no creativity.
Maybe, maybe not. What about spontaneous music, dance?
Language is an art, use to create MACRO scenarios, etc., from micro word/images. -- dl
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:08 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I: Without imagination there is no creativity.
On Dec 17, 2007 5:06 PM, Don Lay <donlay@knology.net > wrote:
Every time you move you are creating explicate time-space. And imagination has its place when it's not out of balance.
Language use is the use of word/images (db). Maybe what is out of balance is pretending otherwise and trying to use language without awareness that it is using imagination. -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I: Every time you move you are creating explicate time-space. And imagination has its place when it's not out of balance.
On Dec 17, 2007 4:47 PM, Lynne Tolk < lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> wrote:
To be or not to be? Is there a choice? Is the question the problem? What about yes? (form is emptiness, emptiness is form; explicate is implicate is explicate?)
On 12/17/07 12:56 PM, "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
the old old thought occurs -- no us? -- Rob
Maybe. I've been using the idea of imagination, thought to think of the identity of things including us.
I think I'm beginning to understand something like the idea of all this that is as unknown and thought equating with the imaged known, with the language or knowing system of imagination.
It's a bit spooky to think that us is not. That is, the notness or non being must be addressed. The anxiety does not go away simply by acting and pretending it is not there.
Maybe one way to avoid the anxiety of non being is to understand the idea that relative being is part of the whole of Being. dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney <mailto:rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:37 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there be no space?
the old old thought occurs -- no us?
----------------------------------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:05:03 -0500
if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um... breath
The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there be no space? Maybe we could say that it is only a useful concept and use while being aware that it is limited.
Would that be in the direction of unlimited experience? -- dl
--
Irene
------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
----------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/bf94e0ea/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Tue Dec 18 02:51:42 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Tue Dec 18 02:57:51 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <03a501c84114$78c7a3c0$b5c16018@DL01>
References: <016201c840e6$ded1b440$b5c16018@DL01>
<C38C3C99.FA94%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
<c47283890712171353j95c274bj9096a97ab64953bc@mail.gmail.com>
<035301c840fb$4d1463d0$b5c16018@DL01>
<c47283890712171432w7e5a633ej7673469675579782@mail.gmail.com>
<03a501c84114$78c7a3c0$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <c47283890712171751j46871d8fr2b21c8d161bc54a8@mail.gmail.com>
Where or what is the *personal identity* while being sensitive enough to
"hear" the direction that amounts to improv?
I: If it's any help, imagine me as a giant ear with fingers. Once I went
into an altered state in performance, and my husband, an actor, said "That
was a coke head performance." Little did I know then, what he meant. When
the applause started, I was startled. Had no idea where I was. The first
thing that came to consciousness was my butt on the piano bench. Then the
rest, little by little.
On Dec 17, 2007 8:22 PM, Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
> IS*meaningful*TM to say the answer to these questions is yes, and to say
> that Bohm, talking about infinite subtlety and when he says it is as far "in
> there" inside the atom as it is "out there" through the universe
> substantiates the view I'm trying to learn how to explicate.
>
> Where or what is the *personal identity* while being sensitive enough to
> "hear" the direction that amounts to improv?
>
> Once again, my programming friend says there is *no identity movement*while writing code. If there was, he would be unable to write code because
> C++, he says, is not the language appropriate for the *personal identity*.
> That is, personal identity simply has no meaning in the Visual Basic or C++
> language.
>
> Are you aware of Irene's *personal identity* *movement* while doing
> improv? -- dl
>
>
> \ <http://www.knology.net/%7Edonlay/>
>
> *From:* Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
> *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> *Sent:* Monday, December 17, 2007 5:32 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
>
> I: We're getting into the idea of Nada Brahma, now. And to say more, I'd
> have to go get my book.
>
> It would have been more accurate to say one creates a time-space line when
> one moves, I think.
>
> Why do all the good things happen at once? I'm working on Bach Goldberg.
> My Eurhythmics teacher is giving a three day workshop soon on what an
> improviser can learn from them, and I'm preparing for it. I would love to
> have heard Bach sit down and jam with Paquito d'Rivera; throw in Sidney
> Bechet for good measure on clarinet, and Eugene Ysaye on violin.
>
> On Dec 17, 2007 5:22 PM, Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
>
> > I: Every time you move you are creating explicate time-space.
> >
> > What about the idea that *every time you move, you are using time and
> > space*?
> >
> > Is there time and space absent homo-sappo, prior to homo-sappo? Perhaps
> > more precisely, is there some *actuality* indicated by time and
> > space that is prior to homo-sappo? -- dl
> >
> > http://www.knology.net/~donlay/ <http://www.knology.net/%7Edonlay/>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > *From:* Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
> > *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > *Sent:* Monday, December 17, 2007 4:53 PM
> > *Subject:* Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
> >
> > I: Every time you move you are creating explicate time-space. And
> > imagination has its place when it's not out of balance.
> >
> > On Dec 17, 2007 4:47 PM, Lynne Tolk < lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > To be or not to be? Is there a choice? Is the question the problem?
> > > What about yes? (form is emptiness, emptiness is form; explicate is
> > > implicate is explicate?)
> > >
> > >
> > > On 12/17/07 12:56 PM, "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > the old old thought occurs -- no us? -- Rob
> > >
> > > Maybe. I've been using the idea of *imagination*, thought to think of
> > > the *identity of things* including us.
> > >
> > > I think I'm beginning to understand something like the idea of *all
> > > this that is* as *unknown* and thought equating with the *imaged known
> > > *, with the language or *knowing system* of *imagination*.
> > >
> > > It's a bit spooky to think that us is not. That is, the *notness or
> > > non being* must be addressed. The anxiety does not go away simply by
> > > acting and pretending it is not there.
> > >
> > > Maybe one way to avoid the anxiety of non being is to understand the
> > > idea that *relative being is part of the whole of Being. * dl
> > >
> > >
> > > http://www.knology.net/~donlay/ <http://www.knology.net/%7Edonlay/>
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > *From:* rob mooney <mailto:rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
> > > *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > > *Sent:* Monday, December 17, 2007 2:37 PM
> > > *Subject:* RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
> > >
> > > The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could
> > > there be *no* space?
> > >
> > > the old old thought occurs -- no us?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > > From: donlay@knology.net
> > > To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> > > Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
> > > Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:05:03 -0500
> > >
> > > if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um...
> > > breath
> > >
> > > The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could
> > > there be *no* space? Maybe we could say that it is only a *useful
> > > concept* and use while being aware that it is *limited*.
> > >
> > > Would that be in the direction of *unlimited experience*? -- dl
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > <http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Irene
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> >
> > <http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/6c3ae1f5/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Tue Dec 18 02:59:15 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Tue Dec 18 03:05:26 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W7B97CD182F3C04B886551DC620@phx.gbl>
References: <376217.5644.qm@web45812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
<013a01c840e3$24c34530$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W7B97CD182F3C04B886551DC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <382459E1-E035-43C4-94F6-8E81D22C36B8@dc.rr.com>
I was waiting for a "merry christmas" at at the end of this.
Dancer and Vixen
On Dec 17, 2007, at 12:01 PM, rob mooney wrote:
> yes. and breathing and sensing and meaning and joy take time and space
>
> From: donlay@knology.net
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:29:29 -0500
>
> Time and space is used when language is used to talk about space
> and time. Words evolved to accommodate the view that space and
> time are useful. -- dl
>
>
> http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Alan E. DeBakey
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
>
>
>
> USING time, space.... Please, Donlay, give us an example how Donlay
> "uses" ... time?.... space?.... ;-)
>
> Alan
>
> Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
> if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our...
> um... breath
>
> The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could
> there be no space? Maybe we could say that it is only a useful
> concept and use while being aware that it is limited.
>
> Would that be in the direction of unlimited experience? -- dl
>
>
>
> http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: rob mooney
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:09 PM
> Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
>
> if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our...
> um... breath
>
> From: donlay@knology.net
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:52:41 -0500
>
> "is there space, time causality in the implicate order",
>
> If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate
> order' I
> think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be
> explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are
> implicated). -- Jeff
>
> Hi Jeff.
>
> Does the question imply space or time by using the idea expressed
> by "in"?
>
> If so, does this imply the language we use is not adequate to
> address the meaning of the question? -- dl
>
>
> http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jeff Webb
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 8:30 AM
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like to comment on the issue: is there space, time
> causality in
> the implicate order.
>
> If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate
> order' I
> think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be
> explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are
> implicated). So
> the statement "in the implicate order (t)here in no space, time
> causality, matter, or mind' seems to me to indicate that the maker of
> this statement has completely misunderstood Bohms notion of the
> implicate order.
>
> I'm sure that others on this list will be able to add more details.
>
> Jeff
> >
> > In the attached article, the author writes, ?in the
> > 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality,
> > matter, or mind.? (Note: I am guessing ?ere? is a
> typo for
> > ?there?.)
> >
> > In the implicate order there is no space, time,
> causality,
> > matter, or mind. ?? Is this statement true?
> >
> > Regina
> >
> >
> > ??
> >
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search
> Charades!
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/2f099c0f/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Tue Dec 18 03:00:22 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Tue Dec 18 03:06:32 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W17D702155BD553E462636EDC620@phx.gbl>
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com><476679F0.60003@siit.tu.ac.th>
<003101c840b4$1a0909b0$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W316D168A86355AA8647C79DC620@phx.gbl>
<00e501c840df$bb92bda0$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W3205646DF39FCB075F9CE5DC620@phx.gbl>
<1F7DA20A-E59A-4220-978F-3AA284BBD26C@dc.rr.com>
<BAY123-W17D702155BD553E462636EDC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <8E62992E-CB4A-4FD0-B267-A050FBAE608A@dc.rr.com>
OR My Space.
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 12:04 PM, rob mooney wrote:
> why would I single you out Don?
>
> From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:14 -0800
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>
> Should be me, no?
> X
> On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:37 AM, rob mooney wrote:
>
> The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could
> there be no space?
>
> the old old thought occurs -- no us?
>
>
>
> From: donlay@knology.net
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:05:03 -0500
>
> if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our...
> um... breath
>
> The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could
> there be no space? Maybe we could say that it is only a useful
> concept and use while being aware that it is limited.
>
> Would that be in the direction of unlimited experience? -- dl
>
>
>
> http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: rob mooney
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:09 PM
> Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
>
> if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our...
> um... breath
>
> From: donlay@knology.net
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:52:41 -0500
>
> "is there space, time causality in the implicate order",
>
> If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate
> order' I
> think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be
> explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are
> implicated). -- Jeff
>
> Hi Jeff.
>
> Does the question imply space or time by using the idea expressed
> by "in"?
>
> If so, does this imply the language we use is not adequate to
> address the meaning of the question? -- dl
>
>
> http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jeff Webb
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 8:30 AM
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like to comment on the issue: is there space, time
> causality in
> the implicate order.
>
> If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate
> order' I
> think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be
> explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are
> implicated). So
> the statement "in the implicate order (t)here in no space, time
> causality, matter, or mind' seems to me to indicate that the maker of
> this statement has completely misunderstood Bohms notion of the
> implicate order.
>
> I'm sure that others on this list will be able to add more details.
>
> Jeff
> >
> > In the attached article, the author writes, ?in the
> > 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality,
> > matter, or mind.? (Note: I am guessing ?ere? is a
> typo for
> > ?there?.)
> >
> > In the implicate order there is no space, time,
> causality,
> > matter, or mind. ?? Is this statement true?
> >
> > Regina
> >
> >
> > ??
> >
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> Everything in one place? All new Windows Live!
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search
> Charades!
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/799e1780/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 03:08:43 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 03:14:43 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com><476679F0.60003@siit.tu.ac.th><007701c840c1$3c9f5580$b5c16018@DL01><009501c840c9$c9da9a10$b5c16018@DL01><00ae01c840cb$c07ac830$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W879FB36B103BA98E4068CDC620@phx.gbl><010801c840e1$de342e00$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W350E74A4BF40EED8D77188DC620@phx.gbl><0B6839C7-B24F-4F22-A7A3-2354F8D15B6B@dc.rr.com><BAY123-W378C54AF712FEB739B63DEDC620@phx.gbl>
<028201c840f2$bed78dc0$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W3578ACF0EBA1E8BF2AD95ADC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <040a01c8411a$ea307ae0$b5c16018@DL01>
And what is explicated by the poetry? explication. -- Rob
Is it sufficient to begin by saying that the everyday view of reality is not suggested in those poetic and somewhat flowing expressions of Pat and Rob, of funny and funny? And more, that those expressions, though perhaps romantic, need not be labeled romantic ... in the classical sense of romantic literature?
fullness pours out
and it all empties into white
the mounds of it - frozen overnight ... ae. dropper, 12 17 07.
What can this mean? Perhaps one way to begin addressing this is to say what it does not mean.
Certainly, it does not mean and does not describe or try to point to the everyday classical view of reality. Then, what remains? The non-classical view remains, i.e., the Romantic view and perhaps also the quantum view. I contend, the view explicated by db/thought remains.
What's that? I'm unsure exactly. I don't know, and I don't know anyone who does know.
However, it ISTM certain that the classical view that homo-sappo is the center of the universe as suggested by the Copenhagen (that homo-sappo consciousness is required for being to manifest itself) is untenable and can be sustained only by acting and pretending that the imagined SOCIAL identity is actual instead of imaginary. -- Something like that. -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:56 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
And what is explicated by the poetry? explication.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 16:21:09 -0500
I'm not sure you have to understand a hill or a spider or a waterfall to love it
On the view that understand means to stand under an articulated view, maybe we could appreciate a poetic explication even though that which is explicated might have no usual cultural meaning, no every day meaning.
Maybe the rhyme or cadence could be a bearer of meaning when word definitions, limitations cannot.
Maybe much of music is this way also, and also dance as art, perhaps even design in graphic art.
Then the question: what does music explicate (Irene), what does graphic and/or color design, dance, etc., explicate?
And what is explicated by the poetry created by Pat and Rob? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:42 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Don Patterson the English poet says that you can think of poems as something like a natural object, produced by us (or midwifed or something) out of our naturalness. I'm not sure you have to understand a hill or a spider or a waterfall to love it
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:31:21 -0800
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
I don't understand many of my favorite poems. I don't understand a lot of my favorite art.
But some part of me must. The conscious part, the ego, is not the whole thing. There is
more, always morel.
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:59 AM, rob mooney wrote:
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be meaningful? dl
I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Messenger on the move. Text MSN to 63463 now!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/4769762b/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Tue Dec 18 03:15:47 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Tue Dec 18 03:21:56 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W378C54AF712FEB739B63DEDC620@phx.gbl>
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com><476679F0.60003@siit.tu.ac.th><007701c840c1$3c9f5580$b5c16018@DL01><009501c840c9$c9da9a10$b5c16018@DL01><00ae01c840cb$c07ac830$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W879FB36B103BA98E4068CDC620@phx.gbl>
<010801c840e1$de342e00$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W350E74A4BF40EED8D77188DC620@phx.gbl>
<0B6839C7-B24F-4F22-A7A3-2354F8D15B6B@dc.rr.com>
<BAY123-W378C54AF712FEB739B63DEDC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <1DF60B92-466C-4F19-9BB7-3A8583D658AB@dc.rr.com>
But some part of you does. The question is: does looking for that
part spoil it all?
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 12:42 PM, rob mooney wrote:
> Don Patterson the English poet says that you can think of poems as
> something like a natural object, produced by us (or midwifed or
> something) out of our naturalness. I'm not sure you have to
> understand a hill or a spider or a waterfall to love it
>
> From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:31:21 -0800
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>
> I don't understand many of my favorite poems. I don't understand a
> lot of my favorite art.
> But some part of me must. The conscious part, the ego, is not the
> whole thing. There is
> more, always morel.
>
> don
>
> On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:59 AM, rob mooney wrote:
>
> dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning,
> be meaningful? dl
>
> I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
>
>
> She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/c5daa734/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 03:17:02 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 03:23:02 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com><BAY123-W350E74A4BF40EED8D77188DC620@phx.gbl><0B6839C7-B24F-4F22-A7A3-2354F8D15B6B@dc.rr.com><BAY123-W378C54AF712FEB739B63DEDC620@phx.gbl><028201c840f2$bed78dc0$b5c16018@DL01><02a501c840f3$cb33cf60$b5c16018@DL01><c47283890712171342x6a19139ci42b7849136ddb64a@mail.gmail.com><02e001c840f7$8d84f5a0$b5c16018@DL01><c47283890712171407p748d5e11r48b27cbbc6940e76@mail.gmail.com><037601c840fd$b8583070$b5c16018@DL01>
<c47283890712171449s7554264ei79a76775b647b52b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <044601c8411c$13eedc90$b5c16018@DL01>
But you DO see the necessity for personal identity, or else you wouldn't talk about the bank.
It is Bohm that says identity is not necessity. Maybe what's needed is to see the difference between self-identity and personal-identity.
Is it not striking that people refuse to see, to address this that Bohm addresses? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
I: "Separate' as in dotted line is fine and necessary. As in 'smashed', its destructive. But you DO see the necessity for personal identity, or else you wouldn't talk about the bank. So I'll stop bugging you about that.
On Dec 17, 2007 5:39 PM, Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
Or separate personas from each other.
Except that persona images are intended to be seen, used as separate. Without separation, the idea of the mask would lose meaning wouldn't it?
Sartre and Genet pointed out, cr 1950s, that personal self means one self separated from other selves.
Without that meaning, you could go to the bank and get my money, could you not?
What's wrong with using the idea of separation as relative non being as suggested by Aristotle? -- dl
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Maybe it's a very serious error to hold any one view above the whole. -- dl
I: Yes, yes, yes. Or separate personas from each other. Maybe it works to use counterpoint as a metaphor.
On Dec 17, 2007 4:55 PM, Don Lay < donlay@knology.net> wrote:
I: Don, maybe they all compliment each other. There are art forms that use them all simultaneously.
Yes, I suppose that's the case. Maybe it is all needed, all useful.
It might be ultimately important that, just as we say spoken/written language is necessarily limited because of word/image/definition, all art forms are limited venues for explicating this that is.
Maybe it's a very serious error to hold any one view above the whole. -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:42 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
I: Don, maybe they all compliment each other. There are art forms that use them all simultaneously.
On Dec 17, 2007 4:28 PM, Don Lay < donlay@knology.net> wrote:
And what is explicated by the poetry created by Pat and Rob? -- dl
Maybe what is explicated is noetic and ineffable. Is that possible?
Perhaps if we say explicate means to explain, we can say that cadence, rhythm, measured light and dark, dance, music, etc., explain the mysteriousness of Being much better than defined word/images. Maybe this is part of what is meant by db/thought. -- dl
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:21 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
I'm not sure you have to understand a hill or a spider or a waterfall to love it
On the view that understand means to stand under an articulated view, maybe we could appreciate a poetic explication even though that which is explicated might have no usual cultural meaning, no every day meaning.
Maybe the rhyme or cadence could be a bearer of meaning when word definitions, limitations cannot.
Maybe much of music is this way also, and also dance as art, perhaps even design in graphic art.
Then the question: what does music explicate (Irene), what does graphic and/or color design, dance, etc., explicate?
And what is explicated by the poetry created by Pat and Rob? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:42 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Don Patterson the English poet says that you can think of poems as something like a natural object, produced by us (or midwifed or something) out of our naturalness. I'm not sure you have to understand a hill or a spider or a waterfall to love it
--------------------------------------------------------------
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:31:21 -0800
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
I don't understand many of my favorite poems. I don't understand a lot of my favorite art.
But some part of me must. The conscious part, the ego, is not the whole thing. There is
more, always morel.
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:59 AM, rob mooney wrote:
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be meaningful? dl
I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/aa7af21f/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Tue Dec 18 03:17:16 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Tue Dec 18 03:23:25 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <028201c840f2$bed78dc0$b5c16018@DL01>
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com><476679F0.60003@siit.tu.ac.th><007701c840c1$3c9f5580$b5c16018@DL01><009501c840c9$c9da9a10$b5c16018@DL01><00ae01c840cb$c07ac830$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W879FB36B103BA98E4068CDC620@phx.gbl><010801c840e1$de342e00$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W350E74A4BF40EED8D77188DC620@phx.gbl>
<0B6839C7-B24F-4F22-A7A3-2354F8D15B6B@dc.rr.com>
<BAY123-W378C54AF712FEB739B63DEDC620@phx.gbl>
<028201c840f2$bed78dc0$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <DC320204-5FAA-48B5-8B7E-7DBF1F14EEC0@dc.rr.com>
See what I mean?
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 1:21 PM, Don Lay wrote:
> I'm not sure you have to understand a hill or a spider or a
> waterfall to love it
> On the view that understand means to stand under an articulated
> view, maybe we could appreciate a poetic explication even though
> that which is explicated might have no usual cultural meaning, no
> every day meaning.
>
> Maybe the rhyme or cadence could be a bearer of meaning when word
> definitions, limitations cannot.
> Maybe much of music is this way also, and also dance as art,
> perhaps even design in graphic art.
>
> Then the question: what does music explicate (Irene), what does
> graphic and/or color design, dance, etc., explicate?
>
> And what is explicated by the poetry created by Pat and Rob? -- dl
>
>
> http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: rob mooney
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:42 PM
> Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
>
> Don Patterson the English poet says that you can think of poems as
> something like a natural object, produced by us (or midwifed or
> something) out of our naturalness. I'm not sure you have to
> understand a hill or a spider or a waterfall to love it
>
> From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:31:21 -0800
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
>
> I don't understand many of my favorite poems. I don't understand a
> lot of my favorite art.
> But some part of me must. The conscious part, the ego, is not the
> whole thing. There is
> more, always morel.
>
> don
>
> On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:59 AM, rob mooney wrote:
>
> dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning,
> be meaningful? dl
>
> I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
>
>
> She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/322099b6/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 03:20:20 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 03:26:21 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
References: <20071217.184239.3184.83.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <046e01c8411c$89d449e0$b5c16018@DL01>
Thank you. I love it. -- dl
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 6:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
fullness pours out
and it all empties into white
the mounds of it - frozen overnight
worms throw up casts
in the fine snow, crystals,
up close you can see
the colors - LOOK
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:03:41 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> writes:
worms throw up casts
in the fine snow
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:40:52 -0800
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Pat, look at your letter below. Do you know why it has the message from Symantec on it? This is something that keeps turning up on people's e-mails, and it may be some kind of worm or virus.
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:09 AM, ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
This message has been processed by Symantec's AntiVirus Technology.
Unknown00000000.data was not scanned for viruses because too many nested levels of files were found.
For more information on antivirus tips and technology, visit
http://ses.symantec.com/
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Date: December 17, 2007 11:09:47 AM PST
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
fullness pours out
and it all empties into white
the mounds of it - frozen overnight
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:23:27 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> writes:
fullness pours out
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:00:04 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
And it all empties into white.
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 13:43:40 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> writes:
Naming plays its oldest game.
Somehow out of reach it dances
nine dances to itself. Nine dances
all in couples made of three.
And if we do not leave our light
we will be eaten by it long
before it shines and dies again
so leave our light alone to be.
Run apple certainties under
the spout, what memories they
bind in cankered onion light
from lullabies of thunder.
And we are leaves as always,
fallen from the sunburn tree.
Till shame and calamine find us
shovelling blossom snow
Before the no, before the go,
before the be became, we will
become before the sun
has ever been born below.
----------------------------------------------------------------
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 08:12:20 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Naming plays games with itself.
Somewhere out of reach it dances
nine dances by itself
in "couples" made of three.
And if we do not leave our light
we will be eaten by it long
before it shines and dies again
so leave our light alone.
Run apple certainties under
the spout, what memories they
bind in cankered onion light
from lampshades worn as hats.
And we are leaves as always,
fallen from the sunburn tree.
Till shade and calamine find us
shovelling a foot of snow
before the plows
before the dogs....
before the rain and sleet
will come
before the sun
was even born
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 07:14:42 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com> writes:
I: Word music Improvisation. Have a great day, everybody.
On Dec 16, 2007 4:13 AM, rob mooney < rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
Naming plays games with itself.
Somewhere out of reach it dances
nine dances by itself.
And if we do not leave our light
we will be eaten by it long
before it shines.
Run apple certainties under
the spout, what memories they
bind in cankered light.
And we are leaves as always,
fallen from the sunburn tree.
Till shade and calamine find us.
----------------------------------------------------------
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 22:39:03 -0500
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
what? (Rob)
the naming plays with itself
somewhere out of reach
of the dance itself.
do our leaves
get eaten by light
before they fall?
we certainly have
to be careful of
skin cancer
and light!
previously,
it was sunburn.
we aren't leaves.
one size
doesn't fit all.
funni, rob, irene
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 01:48:56 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> writes:
what?
------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 14:54:42 -0500
From: irenedarcy@gmail.com
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2
I: We certainly have to be careful of skin cancer and light! Previously, it was sunburn. We aren't leaves. One size doesn't fit all.
On Dec 14, 2007 2:51 PM, rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
do our leaves get eaten by light before they fall?
--------------------------------------------------
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 21:26:42 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
DIALOGUE DANCE
A dialogue circle of trees, dancing trees
we do not sit in chairs but we stand in the woods
with the light filtering through our autumn leaves
and we are dancing - our roots are our feet
and our millions of toes, dancing.
A wind comes and some of our leaves fall
from some of our fingers,
our million fingers, one for every dancing toe,
one explication for every implication
our roots hidden, unknown
but known constantly as that
which ever refuses naming
while the naming plays with itself
somewhere out of reach
of the dance itself.
-- funny
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:08:46 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> writes:
Don't you think though, that maybe a bit of both is even more useful? Just so long as we don't turn the tree - or others - into objects that we "understand" completely. Actually, as I think of it, there is more than one way to understand understanding.
don
On Dec 13, 2007, at 1:10 AM, Alfred Landman wrote:
Hi Irene Darcy. If a brain wants to learn about trees, for instance, thought could simply spend time with them in their natural habitat etc (which is what many traditionally "primitive" people do). Breaking trees into their cellular components and so forth enables genetic manipulation of them, for instance, but this can't be said to "objectively" help one get to know a tree better than simply spending time with them. In fact, it does the precise opposite. This brain can never genuinely know a living organism that you've instrumentalized and objectified like that. AL
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
Subject: Space and Time (Don F)
From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 16:59:24 EDT
to: Bohm, Subject Space and Time
Dear Don, nice wisdom in your Sep.25 'Space & Time note. Yet:(your
quote):
>...<
Foucault was right: there is no such epoque as the present one. His, or
ours, does not matter. Past reflection does not match live experience.
WE are the experiencers, not memory. So: hold your enthusiasm.
Also: I was glad: A rare thing on this list a reference to David Bohm!
I find this unending exchange "about the list-filling" redundant. In my
(not so humble) opinion a list is like love: practice it, don't explain.
If it does not live up to your expectations, there are other lists to
choose from. Nobody can change BB or anybody else. Accept it or leave it.
To explain one's views ABOUT participating: nice, but keep it short. And
have mercy on the receiving parties: half a dozen posts per day per per-
son in exorbitant length, or sometimes 5 consecutive attachments is rude.
Who does not have the time to write short, should keep it. Length is
negligent.
And to the following exchange I have a plagiarism from Doug Bilodeau, an
acclaimed physicist from the JCS-list:(see below) - the 'exchange':
*
" >JPL:
>"Shout, shout, let it all out
>these are the things I can do without,
>come on, I'm talking to you, come on.." whereupon
" >>Wm:
>>Pssst... not so loud, I think the others are meditating.
William
*
Not so sure! I refer to my remark on a "no response" to a post:
"si tacent clamant": Dough B: corrected me: "or: si tacent dormiunt".
From: "Chris Hooley" < chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: Re: purpose of list
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:24:15 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello All,
I've heard nothing from the group for several days. So, I'm sending this
message to check for echo.
Regards
Chris
From: "Chris Hooley" <chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: inside out
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:19:50 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello Everyone,
I would share another thought that I found interesting.
The gastrointestinal track is actually "outside" the body in the sense that
it's a long, open-ended tube. In the same way, "no-thing", which is (or
can be seen to be) at the center of every manifested form, is continuous,
contiguous to itself. It is "outside" the space/time form though when seen
from within the form it appears to be isolated like droplets.
My intuition is that we can focus (reside *as* attention) either on the
form or on the un-form that borders it.
The experience of attending to the un-form in-between can't be fully
represented, even to ourselves, I think, but experimenting with this
viewing angle has been intriguing.
Received: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:21:50 +0100 (BST)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:19:21 +0100 (BST)
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking
to one of its authors!
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facilitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
--
------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
------------------------------------------------------------------
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/746f8ac2/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 03:32:58 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 03:38:56 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <20071217.184239.3184.76.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <047d01c8411e$4db76cb0$b5c16018@DL01>
BLUE
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:52 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Words evolved to accommodate the view that space and time are useful. -- dl
What is the process of the separation necessary for "using?"
dl: Remember this is difficult to deal with. Maybe the idea is that most people use the idea of use and of using something. Maybe the proceses are the identity processes. -- ??
What is "space?" (Bohm says it's "full" not "empty").
dl: Maybe it is something to question instead of acting and pretending.
What is "time?" Do words evolve after time?
dl: Maybe time is best understood as difference or somethingK describing or relating to sequential events.
Does time evolve after words? dl: Time is a word!
Does "after" "come" "before" words. dl: We are using words, (images, says Bohm).
When does "before" come?
When does "when" come?
dl: Since we must agree that all the above words or language is words and language, perhaps it is necessary to address language and speciffically in context address what the language and words do ... "in there".
Perhaps this is the chief sifnificance of db/thought. -- dl
-- funny
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:29:29 -0500 "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> writes:
Time and space is used when language is used to talk about space and time. Words evolved to accommodate the view that space and time are useful. -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan E. DeBakey
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
USING time, space.... Please, Donlay, give us an example how Donlay "uses" ... time?.... space?.... ;-)
Alan
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um... breath
The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there be no space? Maybe we could say that it is only a useful concept and use while being aware that it is limited.
Would that be in the direction of unlimited experience? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:09 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um... breath
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:52:41 -0500
"is there space, time causality in the implicate order",
If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate order' I
think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be
explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are implicated). -- Jeff
Hi Jeff.
Does the question imply space or time by using the idea expressed by "in"?
If so, does this imply the language we use is not adequate to address the meaning of the question? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Webb
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 8:30 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Hi,
I would like to comment on the issue: is there space, time causality in
the implicate order.
If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate order' I
think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be
explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are implicated). So
the statement "in the implicate order (t)here in no space, time
causality, matter, or mind' seems to me to indicate that the maker of
this statement has completely misunderstood Bohms notion of the
implicate order.
I'm sure that others on this list will be able to add more details.
Jeff
>
> In the attached article, the author writes, "in the
> 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality,
> matter, or mind." (Note: I am guessing "ere" is a typo for
> "there".)
>
> In the implicate order there is no space, time, causality,
> matter, or mind. -- Is this statement true?
>
> Regina
>
>
> --
>
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
----------------------------------------------------------------------
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/a2bbb9e8/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 03:34:38 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 03:40:49 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
References: <20071217.184239.3184.75.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <049101c8411e$8ef6ea70$b5c16018@DL01>
This seems a pretty good way to say it.
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
The thing about acting and pretending is that it is characteristics and characters that
are acted and pretended without an awareness that this is not "who" and/or "what" we are.
When there is this awareness [and there is quite a range of such awareness; it can tend to develop
over a long period] the acting and pretending can [and will] easily continue but now without its
making a mess by exclusively running the show [running the show unintelligently]. This
"awareness" is a kind of "pipeline" that feeds air and light into the costume,
allowing the seams to stretch and turning the fine weave of its fabric
into more light than thread.
-- funny
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:20:21 -0500 "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> writes:
Rob: I think so and also maybe even when acting and pretending
dl: Maybe so. Thought, however, presents the idea that what we act and pretend is the known, the repeated, but there is always the new, maybe New Being that is experienced as not the same old known roles, etc.
Rob: I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to say stuff I don't understand
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be meaningful? dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:20 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
I think so
and also maybe even when acting and pretending
I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to say stuff I don't understand
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of my pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " precede the experience of the identity processes being suspended, being held in suspension?
If so, then maybe the meaning of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " might be that identity has limited meaning.
Then what is the meaning of someone talking about "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores "? Could it be to demonstrate meaning?
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
Resonance anyone? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
When the identity movement is suspended, experience of being does not cease.
Then, it becomes clear that ontic intelligence does not have to be personalized as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with Weber.
Watching the identity movement (thought), awareness of the identity thought may and does at times suspend the identity processes.
Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning that identity processes are not needed, then that awareness suspends the unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need occurs, then the identity processes recur.
It appears that the I identity is not needed for identity suspension. That's the way it seems to me, to this identity when the identity processes are present.
Resonance anyone ..., all you outer identities "out there"? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/663ea997/attachment.html
From nlivolsi at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 03:39:48 2007
From: nlivolsi at yahoo.com (Nicholas LiVolsi)
Date: Tue Dec 18 03:45:58 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W879FB36B103BA98E4068CDC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <886184.34690.qm@web35515.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Response: 9:32nyc - 12/17/07
What's up???
How do we know when to ask a Grail Question?
How do we know what a Grail Quesion is, to begin with.
So, Let's start here:
Grail Question Knowledge:
1) Never ASUME, but ask a Question? As soon as you enter an environment that consists of you and two more wonderful, physical-selves. (You can say...; "Hey, what's Up???
or Ques cu se??? or Que passa???, Well, Mexico, is one of those French, exceptions.
If you know what I mean. or Do you not??? Mind Twister, home sister; or Nos das roviza, I forgot the rest, das pa don ya, supa sev va, hey where the hell am I? Now that's a question.
Right? Well, at least that's a question.
Oh, Holy Grail.
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
.hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma } Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
I think so
and also maybe even when acting and pretending
I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to say stuff I don't understand
---------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of my pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " precede the experience of the identity processes being suspended, being held in suspension?
If so, then maybe the meaning of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " might be that identity has limited meaning.
Then what is the meaning of someone talking about "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores "? Could it be to demonstrate meaning?
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
Resonance anyone? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
When the identity movement is suspended, experience of being does not cease.
Then, it becomes clear that ontic intelligence does not have to be personalized as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with Weber.
Watching the identity movement (thought), awareness of the identity thought may and does at times suspend the identity processes.
Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning that identity processes are not needed, then that awareness suspends the unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need occurs, then the identity processes recur.
It appears that the I identity is not needed for identity suspension. That's the way it seems to me, to this identity when the identity processes are present.
Resonance anyone ..., all you outer identities "out there"? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/6c0f0927/attachment.html
From nlivolsi at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 03:41:08 2007
From: nlivolsi at yahoo.com (Nicholas LiVolsi)
Date: Tue Dec 18 03:47:16 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W104512BFF7C98E81C74120DC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <673933.50950.qm@web35513.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Now U tok'n!!!, Oh, K can U cccc???
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote: .hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma } yum one o them nice big hadrons fricasseed on a bed of wild causality double yum
---------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 06:07:42 -0800
From: a.debakey@yahoo.com
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Tea?? Mio dio Al, what are you smoking, drinking, brewing? Like: Does pouring (hot) water over (tea)leaves order - explicated ;-o
Al, I am into "real"-life stuff (examples), all that (particle)theoretical talk gives me goose-bumps ;........}}
Can one eat them, live off them (too---?))
Alan
Alfred Landman <landmana@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi Rob Mooney. T.e.a.
AL.
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
.ExternalClass .EC_hmmessage P {padding:0px;} .ExternalClass EC_body.hmmessage {font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;} there is asking and saying at any rate
---------------------------------
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 14:14:42 -0700
.ExternalClass .EC_hmmessage P {padding-right:0px;padding-left:0px;padding-bottom:0px;padding-top:0px;} .ExternalClass EC_BODY.hmmessage {font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;} I would say there is definitely mind. Although it might not be what you and I would call mind.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Regina Bensch-Coe
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 1:57 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In the attached article, the author writes, ?in the 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind.? (Note: I am guessing ?ere? is a typo for ?there?.)
In the implicate order there is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind. ?? Is this statement true?
Regina
??
Consciousness and sufism: A new paradigm for western scientists
R.A.Haag (331 West Colonial Highway, Hamilton, VA 20158, USA)
Scientists seeking to understand 'consciousness' appear to ignore colleagues who say that the qualities ascribed to external reality only dwell within us and that what we conceive of as 'reality' is enfolded in human consciousness. Reality is a manifestation of our thoughts and not a property of the external world, but involves our presence as conscious observers. The universe achieves a concrete existence as a result of our perceptions. Our concept of the reality created by our brain and senses cause us not only to misunderstand consciousness, but render us unable even to imagine what it might be.
Neuroscientists are just beginning to examine the misapprehensions of our senses and how these lead us to act and think as though we have an accurate understanding of consciousness. However we may perceive reality in the waking state of consciousness, it is not the autonomous separate 'things' our senses behold. Pribram and Bohm's holographic analog for the 'implicate' order beyond our senses illustrates how reality is an illusion. They argue that our minds not only enfold matter, but our bodies and the entire material universe as well and that the cosmos, matter, life, and consciousness itself are all projections of 'the ground of all that is', in ways which scientists have yet to discover, though Pribram speculates that the mystics may have discovered a way to see the implicate order, by learning how to 'abrogate the brain's retrieval systems and neuroelectrical codes.' Such scientific speculations challenge many cherished concepts, including language itself, because in
the 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind.
Because human thought is a by-product of our brain and senses, it is ever changing and limited and, thus, the Sufis say that the old subject-verb-object paradigm is not a valid paradigm for scientists to understand ultimate questions. Our sensory prison and language cause us to live on the surface of things and to not be aware of absolute reality. To understand consciousness, scientists must learn a totally different paradigm. Instead of always trying to satisfy themselves by studying the natural world, scientists must come to learn how to investigate inwardly. They must stop equating sensory experiences with true knowledge, which can be acquired only by directly cognizing infinite existence through focusing attention and energy on a specific point in the heart to activate a hitherto unsuspected capacity or 'knowing'. Knowing humanity in all its hidden dimensions must be the fundamental principle for all endeavors in science and religion. Sufism, the science of
Self-knowledge, is the tradition Pribram thought might exist to teach humanity how to abrogate the brain to behold the implicate order.
The Sufis say that both true science and true religion are but reciprocal stages of the same search for truth about existence itself. One focuses on what we take to be the 'outer', the other on 'inner' reality, but these are simply artificial boundaries created by our 'feeling' mind. To know the unity underlying science and religion, the reality of existence, requires a different paradigm--heart consciousness. And, Sufism is that reality.
Source:
http://www.zynet.co.uk/imprint/Tucson/5.htm
05.02-- Abstract No:824
---------------------------------
Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
---------------------------------
Messenger on the move
Text MSN to 63463 now!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/51adbe6e/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 03:45:27 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 03:51:27 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <20071217.184239.3184.74.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <04a001c84120$0be27ad0$b5c16018@DL01>
BLUE, BLUE, blue.
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:12 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Is meaning meaningful non - conceptually?
dl: I don't just exactly know (I confess loving this kind of language, partly because it reminds me of what's his name that wrote the Bushwacked Piano, Ninety Two in the Shade and also the screen play for Misouri Breaks ... Thomas McGuane) (I confess also to being at least slightly inebriated)..
Is the necessary "otherwise" to 'meaning as manmade' "meaningless? Or meaninglessness?
What is it that makes "meaning" seem necessary?
dl: Maybe it is the idea of meaninglessness. It seems hightly significant and important that the Greeklogos has been translated, interpreted, as meaning!!! !!!!
If dia logos means through meaning instead of dl:just throught talking, then DB DIALOGUE has an altogether different significance -- don't you agree? -- dl
-- funny
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:11:23 -0500 "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> writes:
I mean we all use the word mean, meaning, etc. A philosopher said that the question of meaning is meaningful.
Are we all using some thingK that we know not, neither stand under, over or beside?
Can it be acceptable that meaning is only somethingK manmade, and that otherwise, everything including us is meaningless? Is there meaninglessness?
Is the question of meaning itself meaningless?
I've been trying to give attention to the idea advanced by some thinkers that the Greek logos has been interpreted as meaning. What might that mean? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:15 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
What is meaning?
how do you mean?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 09:15:59 -0500
Can one eat them, live off them (too---?)) -- Alan
Does the question of food, etc., imply that man, that we live by bread alone?
Maybe what is important about QT is the idea of meaning. What is the meaning?
What is meaning? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan E. DeBakey
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 9:07 AM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Tea?? Mio dio Al, what are you smoking, drinking, brewing? Like: Does pouring (hot) water over (tea)leaves order - explicated ;-o
Al, I am into "real"-life stuff (examples), all that (particle)theoretical talk gives me goose-bumps ;........}}
Can one eat them, live off them (too---?))
Alan
Alfred Landman <landmana@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi Rob Mooney. T.e.a.
AL.
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
there is asking and saying at any rate
----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 14:14:42 -0700
I would say there is definitely mind. Although it might not be what you and I would call mind.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Regina Bensch-Coe
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 1:57 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In the attached article, the author writes, "in the 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind." (Note: I am guessing "ere" is a typo for "there".)
In the implicate order there is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind. -- Is this statement true?
Regina
--
Consciousness and sufism: A new paradigm for western scientists
R.A.Haag (331 West Colonial Highway, Hamilton, VA 20158, USA)
Scientists seeking to understand 'consciousness' appear to ignore colleagues who say that the qualities ascribed to external reality only dwell within us and that what we conceive of as 'reality' is enfolded in human consciousness. Reality is a manifestation of our thoughts and not a property of the external world, but involves our presence as conscious observers. The universe achieves a concrete existence as a result of our perceptions. Our concept of the reality created by our brain and senses cause us not only to misunderstand consciousness, but render us unable even to imagine what it might be.
Neuroscientists are just beginning to examine the misapprehensions of our senses and how these lead us to act and think as though we have an accurate understanding of consciousness. However we may perceive reality in the waking state of consciousness, it is not the autonomous separate 'things' our senses behold. Pribram and Bohm's holographic analog for the 'implicate' order beyond our senses illustrates how reality is an illusion. They argue that our minds not only enfold matter, but our bodies and the entire material universe as well and that the cosmos, matter, life, and consciousness itself are all projections of 'the ground of all that is', in ways which scientists have yet to discover, though Pribram speculates that the mystics may have discovered a way to see the implicate order, by learning how to 'abrogate the brain's retrieval systems and neuroelectrical codes.' Such scientific speculations challenge many cherished concepts, including language itself, because in the 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind.
Because human thought is a by-product of our brain and senses, it is ever changing and limited and, thus, the Sufis say that the old subject-verb-object paradigm is not a valid paradigm for scientists to understand ultimate questions. Our sensory prison and language cause us to live on the surface of things and to not be aware of absolute reality. To understand consciousness, scientists must learn a totally different paradigm. Instead of always trying to satisfy themselves by studying the natural world, scientists must come to learn how to investigate inwardly. They must stop equating sensory experiences with true knowledge, which can be acquired only by directly cognizing infinite existence through focusing attention and energy on a specific point in the heart to activate a hitherto unsuspected capacity or 'knowing'. Knowing humanity in all its hidden dimensions must be the fundamental principle for all endeavors in science and religion. Sufism, the science of Self-knowledge, is the tradition Pribram thought might exist to teach humanity how to abrogate the brain to behold the implicate order.
The Sufis say that both true science and true religion are but reciprocal stages of the same search for truth about existence itself. One focuses on what we take to be the 'outer', the other on 'inner' reality, but these are simply artificial boundaries created by our 'feeling' mind. To know the unity underlying science and religion, the reality of existence, requires a different paradigm--heart consciousness. And, Sufism is that reality.
Source:
http://www.zynet.co.uk/imprint/Tucson/5.htm
05.02-- Abstract No:824
------------------------------------------------------------------
Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everything in one place. All new Windows Live!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/fea38a60/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 03:53:31 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 03:59:30 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <016201c840e6$ded1b440$b5c16018@DL01><C38C3C99.FA94%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com><c47283890712171353j95c274bj9096a97ab64953bc@mail.gmail.com><032601c840f9$22bf5ce0$b5c16018@DL01><c47283890712171408m42472b79m4768faa35cd06c40@mail.gmail.com><033501c840fa$2f16e390$b5c16018@DL01><c47283890712171424t498a359eseb5f169a0cff1d9@mail.gmail.com><036701c840fc$fae05040$b5c16018@DL01>
<023c01c8410c$deca6c00$f277480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <04be01c84121$2cb9a7f0$b5c16018@DL01>
Thanks Susan.
That's something for me to look at because I've invested so much via working with images. -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Susan Clemons
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
dl, you can play imaginatively with music or with feelings for that matter. Imagination is definitely not limited to the visual.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I tend to think of imagination as image use and as related to visual experience. However, I believe someone point out that db/thought does not limit the meaning of imagination to visual experience.
If that's the case, the maybe music experienced "on the inside" would function as imagination without images.
Would notes rhythm,etc, then function as do visual images comprising written language?
Do you think of notes, etc., as imagination or that notes, etc., occur in imagination? -- dl
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/ee3fa60f/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 04:04:15 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 04:10:24 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <886184.34690.qm@web35515.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <353217.35050.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Whazz upp?
S.L.O.P.E.
;-?
alaNavajoWhite=#ffdead
NavajoWhite #FFDEAD
Nicholas LiVolsi <nlivolsi@yahoo.com> wrote:
Response: 9:32nyc - 12/17/07
What's up???
How do we know when to ask a Grail Question?
How do we know what a Grail Quesion is, to begin with.
So, Let's start here:
Grail Question Knowledge:
1) Never ASUME, but ask a Question? As soon as you enter an environment that consists of you and two more wonderful, physical-selves. (You can say...; "Hey, what's Up???
or Ques cu se??? or Que passa???, Well, Mexico, is one of those French, exceptions.
If you know what I mean. or Do you not??? Mind Twister, home sister; or Nos das roviza, I forgot the rest, das pa don ya, supa sev va, hey where the hell am I? Now that's a question.
Right? Well, at least that's a question.
Oh, Holy Grail.
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
.hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma } Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
I think so
and also maybe even when acting and pretending
I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to say stuff I don't understand
---------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of my pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " precede the experience of the identity processes being suspended, being held in suspension?
If so, then maybe the meaning of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " might be that identity has limited meaning.
Then what is the meaning of someone talking about "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores "? Could it be to demonstrate meaning?
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
Resonance anyone? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
When the identity movement is suspended, experience of being does not cease.
Then, it becomes clear that ontic intelligence does not have to be personalized as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with Weber.
Watching the identity movement (thought), awareness of the identity thought may and does at times suspend the identity processes.
Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning that identity processes are not needed, then that awareness suspends the unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need occurs, then the identity processes recur.
It appears that the I identity is not needed for identity suspension. That's the way it seems to me, to this identity when the identity processes are present.
Resonance anyone ..., all you outer identities "out there"? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/8a5b17b0/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 03:59:37 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 04:12:27 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <04a001c84120$0be27ad0$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <612384.33398.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
BLUE, BLUE, blueish
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote: .hmmessage P { PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } BODY.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma } BLUE, BLUE, blue.
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/7846ea04/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 04:10:12 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 04:16:14 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <016201c840e6$ded1b440$b5c16018@DL01><C38C3C99.FA94%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com><c47283890712171353j95c274bj9096a97ab64953bc@mail.gmail.com><035301c840fb$4d1463d0$b5c16018@DL01><c47283890712171432w7e5a633ej7673469675579782@mail.gmail.com><03a501c84114$78c7a3c0$b5c16018@DL01>
<c47283890712171751j46871d8fr2b21c8d161bc54a8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <050f01c84123$813cb7c0$b5c16018@DL01>
blue
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 8:51 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Where or what is the personal identity while being sensitive enough to "hear" the direction that amounts to improv?
I: If it's any help, imagine me as a giant ear with fingers. Once I went into an altered state in performance, and my husband, an actor, said "That was a coke head performance." Little did I know then, what he meant. When the applause started, I was startled. Had no idea where I was. [ highlights added]
dl: How was it -- how is it or what is it like not knowing "where I was"?
"Where I am or was", etc, directs attention to the classical view. However, there is no evidence whatsoever that the classical view is all that is.
I have the non local experience very often, very often. But it is not because of coke or drugs.
Rather, it is because of the experience of the implied actuality that is prior to and the ground of the explicated reality, everyday reality.
The first thing that came to consciousness was my butt on the piano bench.
dl: First things first! -- dl
Then the rest, little by little.
On Dec 17, 2007 8:22 PM, Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
ISmeaningfulTM to say the answer to these questions is yes, and to say that Bohm, talking about infinite subtlety and when he says it is as far "in there" inside the atom as it is "out there" through the universe substantiates the view I'm trying to learn how to explicate.
Where or what is the personal identity while being sensitive enough to "hear" the direction that amounts to improv?
Once again, my programming friend says there is no identity movement while writing code. If there was, he would be unable to write code because C++, he says, is not the language appropriate for the personal identity. That is, personal identity simply has no meaning in the Visual Basic or C++ language.
Are you aware of Irene's personal identity movement while doing improv? -- dl
\
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I: We're getting into the idea of Nada Brahma, now. And to say more, I'd have to go get my book.
It would have been more accurate to say one creates a time-space line when one moves, I think.
Why do all the good things happen at once? I'm working on Bach Goldberg. My Eurhythmics teacher is giving a three day workshop soon on what an improviser can learn from them, and I'm preparing for it. I would love to have heard Bach sit down and jam with Paquito d'Rivera; throw in Sidney Bechet for good measure on clarinet, and Eugene Ysaye on violin.
On Dec 17, 2007 5:22 PM, Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
I: Every time you move you are creating explicate time-space.
What about the idea that every time you move, you are using time and space?
Is there time and space absent homo-sappo, prior to homo-sappo? Perhaps more precisely, is there some actuality indicated by time and space that is prior to homo-sappo? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I: Every time you move you are creating explicate time-space. And imagination has its place when it's not out of balance.
On Dec 17, 2007 4:47 PM, Lynne Tolk < lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com> wrote:
To be or not to be? Is there a choice? Is the question the problem? What about yes? (form is emptiness, emptiness is form; explicate is implicate is explicate?)
On 12/17/07 12:56 PM, "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
the old old thought occurs -- no us? -- Rob
Maybe. I've been using the idea of imagination, thought to think of the identity of things including us.
I think I'm beginning to understand something like the idea of all this that is as unknown and thought equating with the imaged known, with the language or knowing system of imagination.
It's a bit spooky to think that us is not. That is, the notness or non being must be addressed. The anxiety does not go away simply by acting and pretending it is not there.
Maybe one way to avoid the anxiety of non being is to understand the idea that relative being is part of the whole of Being. dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney <mailto:rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:37 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there be no space?
the old old thought occurs -- no us?
--------------------------------------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:05:03 -0500
if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um... breath
The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there be no space? Maybe we could say that it is only a useful concept and use while being aware that it is limited.
Would that be in the direction of unlimited experience? -- dl
--
Irene
----------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/53dafa3a/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 04:11:29 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 04:17:28 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com><476679F0.60003@siit.tu.ac.th><007701c840c1$3c9f5580$b5c16018@DL01><009501c840c9$c9da9a10$b5c16018@DL01><00ae01c840cb$c07ac830$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W879FB36B103BA98E4068CDC620@phx.gbl><010801c840e1$de342e00$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W350E74A4BF40EED8D77188DC620@phx.gbl><0B6839C7-B24F-4F22-A7A3-2354F8D15B6B@dc.rr.com><BAY123-W378C54AF712FEB739B63DEDC620@phx.gbl><028201c840f2$bed78dc0$b5c16018@DL01>
<DC320204-5FAA-48B5-8B7E-7DBF1F14EEC0@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <053701c84123$af39f110$b5c16018@DL01>
No.
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 9:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
See what I mean?
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 1:21 PM, Don Lay wrote:
I'm not sure you have to understand a hill or a spider or a waterfall to love it
On the view that understand means to stand under an articulated view, maybe we could appreciate a poetic explication even though that which is explicated might have no usual cultural meaning, no every day meaning.
Maybe the rhyme or cadence could be a bearer of meaning when word definitions, limitations cannot.
Maybe much of music is this way also, and also dance as art, perhaps even design in graphic art.
Then the question: what does music explicate (Irene), what does graphic and/or color design, dance, etc., explicate?
And what is explicated by the poetry created by Pat and Rob? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:42 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Don Patterson the English poet says that you can think of poems as something like a natural object, produced by us (or midwifed or something) out of our naturalness. I'm not sure you have to understand a hill or a spider or a waterfall to love it
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:31:21 -0800
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
I don't understand many of my favorite poems. I don't understand a lot of my favorite art.
But some part of me must. The conscious part, the ego, is not the whole thing. There is
more, always morel.
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:59 AM, rob mooney wrote:
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be meaningful? dl
I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/f6fb3273/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 04:14:19 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 04:20:29 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <049101c8411e$8ef6ea70$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <161087.98751.qm@web45811.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Howould a "ugly good" one look
Like
:-}
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
.hmmessage P { PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } BODY.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma } This seems a pretty good way to say it.
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/ac12a6f0/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 04:17:32 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 04:23:32 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
References: <353217.35050.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <055501c84124$87a0ce70$b5c16018@DL01>
In Viet Nam they were called slopes ... slope heads, in other wars they were called, variously, white-eyes, boors, nips, crowdts, jerrys ... who knows what all.
It's easier to kill them when they're not seen as fellow humans. -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan E. DeBakey
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 10:04 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Whazz upp?
S.L.O.P.E.
;-?
alaNavajoWhite=#ffdead
NavajoWhite #FFDEAD
Nicholas LiVolsi <nlivolsi@yahoo.com> wrote:
Response: 9:32nyc - 12/17/07
What's up???
How do we know when to ask a Grail Question?
How do we know what a Grail Quesion is, to begin with.
So, Let's start here:
Grail Question Knowledge:
1) Never ASUME, but ask a Question? As soon as you enter an environment that consists of you and two more wonderful, physical-selves. (You can say...; "Hey, what's Up???
or Ques cu se??? or Que passa???, Well, Mexico, is one of those French, exceptions.
If you know what I mean. or Do you not??? Mind Twister, home sister; or Nos das roviza, I forgot the rest, das pa don ya, supa sev va, hey where the hell am I? Now that's a question.
Right? Well, at least that's a question.
Oh, Holy Grail.
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
I think so
and also maybe even when acting and pretending
I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to say stuff I don't understand
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of my pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " precede the experience of the identity processes being suspended, being held in suspension?
If so, then maybe the meaning of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " might be that identity has limited meaning.
Then what is the meaning of someone talking about "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores "? Could it be to demonstrate meaning?
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
Resonance anyone? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
When the identity movement is suspended, experience of being does not cease.
Then, it becomes clear that ontic intelligence does not have to be personalized as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with Weber.
Watching the identity movement (thought), awareness of the identity thought may and does at times suspend the identity processes.
Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning that identity processes are not needed, then that awareness suspends the unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need occurs, then the identity processes recur.
It appears that the I identity is not needed for identity suspension. That's the way it seems to me, to this identity when the identity processes are present.
Resonance anyone ..., all you outer identities "out there"? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/a6fd6ff1/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 04:18:15 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 04:24:25 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <053701c84123$af39f110$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <347759.54239.qm@web45806.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Yes.
I would say: That it means somethinkg if someboind says "no" in re-action to someboind saying "see what i mean"
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
No.
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 9:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
See what I mean?
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 1:21 PM, Don Lay wrote:
I'm not sure you have to understand a hill or a spider or a waterfall to love it
On the view that understand means to stand under an articulated view, maybe we could appreciate a poetic explication even though that which is explicated might have no usual cultural meaning, no every day meaning.
Maybe the rhyme or cadence could be a bearer of meaning when word definitions, limitations cannot.
Maybe much of music is this way also, and also dance as art, perhaps even design in graphic art.
Then the question: what does music explicate (Irene), what does graphic and/or color design, dance, etc., explicate?
And what is explicated by the poetry created by Pat and Rob? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:42 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Don Patterson the English poet says that you can think of poems as something like a natural object, produced by us (or midwifed or something) out of our naturalness. I'm not sure you have to understand a hill or a spider or a waterfall to love it
---------------------------------
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:31:21 -0800
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
I don't understand many of my favorite poems. I don't understand a lot of my favorite art. But some part of me must. The conscious part, the ego, is not the whole thing. There is
more, always morel.
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:59 AM, rob mooney wrote:
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be meaningful? dl
I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
---------------------------------
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/546395a6/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 04:21:21 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 04:27:32 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <055501c84124$87a0ce70$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <811386.50517.qm@web45814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
It's easier to kill them when they're not seen as fellow humans. -- dl
mmmmm, tasti, now wee might be on to some thinkg, mr lay
now we "are cookin w gas":
nameli:
when does a human animals 'become' {get SEEN, IMAGINED}
as "human"... more so: "human fellow"
by, well, a(nother) human animal
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
In Viet Nam they were called slopes ... slope heads, in other wars they were called, variously, white-eyes, boors, nips, crowdts, jerrys ... who knows what all.
It's easier to kill them when they're not seen as fellow humans. -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan E. DeBakey
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 10:04 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Whazz upp?
S.L.O.P.E.
;-?
alaNavajoWhite=#ffdead
NavajoWhite #FFDEAD
Nicholas LiVolsi <nlivolsi@yahoo.com> wrote:
Response: 9:32nyc - 12/17/07
What's up???
How do we know when to ask a Grail Question?
How do we know what a Grail Quesion is, to begin with.
So, Let's start here:
Grail Question Knowledge:
1) Never ASUME, but ask a Question? As soon as you enter an environment that consists of you and two more wonderful, physical-selves. (You can say...; "Hey, what's Up???
or Ques cu se??? or Que passa???, Well, Mexico, is one of those French, exceptions.
If you know what I mean. or Do you not??? Mind Twister, home sister; or Nos das roviza, I forgot the rest, das pa don ya, supa sev va, hey where the hell am I? Now that's a question.
Right? Well, at least that's a question.
Oh, Holy Grail.
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
.hmmessage P { PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } BODY.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma } Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
I think so
and also maybe even when acting and pretending
I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to say stuff I don't understand
---------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of my pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " precede the experience of the identity processes being suspended, being held in suspension?
If so, then maybe the meaning of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " might be that identity has limited meaning.
Then what is the meaning of someone talking about "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores "? Could it be to demonstrate meaning?
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
Resonance anyone? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
When the identity movement is suspended, experience of being does not cease.
Then, it becomes clear that ontic intelligence does not have to be personalized as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with Weber.
Watching the identity movement (thought), awareness of the identity thought may and does at times suspend the identity processes.
Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning that identity processes are not needed, then that awareness suspends the unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need occurs, then the identity processes recur.
It appears that the I identity is not needed for identity suspension. That's the way it seems to me, to this identity when the identity processes are present.
Resonance anyone ..., all you outer identities "out there"? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/c541145d/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 04:27:02 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 04:33:04 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <016201c840e6$ded1b440$b5c16018@DL01><C38C3C99.FA94%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com><c47283890712171353j95c274bj9096a97ab64953bc@mail.gmail.com><032601c840f9$22bf5ce0$b5c16018@DL01><c47283890712171408m42472b79m4768faa35cd06c40@mail.gmail.com><033501c840fa$2f16e390$b5c16018@DL01><c47283890712171424t498a359eseb5f169a0cff1d9@mail.gmail.com><036701c840fc$fae05040$b5c16018@DL01>
<023c01c8410c$deca6c00$f277480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <056e01c84125$db625870$b5c16018@DL01>
Susan ... and all, I'm intrigued by this.
What can imagination mean if not the use of visual experience? How is it possible to image music without reference to visual experience?
Irene has mentioned notes as images ... perhaps upon a staff. (That's my imagination of notes -- but that's the visual experience.) Is it not?
I tend to think of an image as something drawn with pencil, brush or even with the a toe in the sand. Whatever, it seems not possible to use the idea of imagination without referencing visual experience.
NO?
Thanks for attention to this. -- dl
From: Susan Clemons
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
dl, you can play imaginatively with music or with feelings for that matter. Imagination is definitely not limited to the visual.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I tend to think of imagination as image use and as related to visual experience. However, I believe someone point out that db/thought does not limit the meaning of imagination to visual experience.
If that's the case, the maybe music experienced "on the inside" would function as imagination without images.
Would notes rhythm,etc, then function as do visual images comprising written language?
Do you think of notes, etc., as imagination or that notes, etc., occur in imagination? -- dl
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/a802ccca/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 04:28:46 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 04:34:46 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
References: <347759.54239.qm@web45806.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <057d01c84126$19728f40$b5c16018@DL01>
I would say: That it means somethinkg if someboind says "no" in re-action to someboind saying "see what i mean"
This is like a private language and I have no idea of the meaning or even if it is meaningful. -- dl
From: Alan E. DeBakey
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 10:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Yes.
I would say: That it means somethinkg if someboind says "no" in re-action to someboind saying "see what i mean"
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
No.
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 9:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
See what I mean?
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 1:21 PM, Don Lay wrote:
I'm not sure you have to understand a hill or a spider or a waterfall to love it
On the view that understand means to stand under an articulated view, maybe we could appreciate a poetic explication even though that which is explicated might have no usual cultural meaning, no every day meaning.
Maybe the rhyme or cadence could be a bearer of meaning when word definitions, limitations cannot.
Maybe much of music is this way also, and also dance as art, perhaps even design in graphic art.
Then the question: what does music explicate (Irene), what does graphic and/or color design, dance, etc., explicate?
And what is explicated by the poetry created by Pat and Rob? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:42 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Don Patterson the English poet says that you can think of poems as something like a natural object, produced by us (or midwifed or something) out of our naturalness. I'm not sure you have to understand a hill or a spider or a waterfall to love it
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:31:21 -0800
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
I don't understand many of my favorite poems. I don't understand a lot of my favorite art.
But some part of me must. The conscious part, the ego, is not the whole thing. There is
more, always morel.
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:59 AM, rob mooney wrote:
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be meaningful? dl
I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/28a22943/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 04:39:36 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 04:45:39 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <20071217.130534.3184.55.ae.dropper@juno.com>
<BAY123-W398E522D93BBD8B68BABADC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <05c301c84127$9cf15210$b5c16018@DL01>
Maybe so. -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:45 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
beautiful words just complicate or simplify themselves, or both or neither, the meaning explicates itself out of the patterns and relationships and images in the vowel and consonant music. just like real life. just like me you us.
when words sing themselves they are awareness.
--understandy
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:05:32 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
there is asking and saying at any rate 9rob0 (that looks funnynice)
there is that
but the implicate may 'be'
that which is more than that
or less than that
or both
or neither
The "implicate" may "include" all of the below - space, time, causality, matter, or mind. or not [not when they are exclusively explicit - but then they never are - but then nothing ever is exclusively anything].
Earlier I wrote a very satisfying essay type response to Regina's question. Then it self deleted. This, an even greater satisfaction because the important thing about the concept/theory of the implicate order is the seeing from it - from the bottomless ground of 'it'. The only real satisfaction is in this simple seeing.
From 'here' the conceptual Implicate/Explicate can be seen as two sides of an ever spinning coin. "Implicate order" is a concept that attempts to speak of nothing and everything and nothing in between. (The 'in between' is reserved for the explicate on its own - but - it is never "on its own" - it is only felt to be).
But beautiful words ALWAYS complicate things. UNLESS - they have effectively thrust awareness back to itself, "back to" the seeing of/from the truth (the implication of beauty), from which the beauty (explication of truth) emerges.
This "seeing" is constant but unacknowledged. What is acknowledged is explicate as exclusive.
-- funny
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 22:17:58 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> writes:
there is asking and saying at any rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 14:14:42 -0700
I would say there is definitely mind. Although it might not be what you and I would call mind.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Regina Bensch-Coe
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 1:57 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In the attached article, the author writes, ?in the 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind.? (Note: I am guessing ?ere? is a typo for ?there?.)
In the implicate order there is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind. ?? Is this statement true?
Regina
??
Consciousness and sufism: A new paradigm for western scientists
R.A.Haag (331 West Colonial Highway, Hamilton, VA 20158, USA)
Scientists seeking to understand 'consciousness' appear to ignore colleagues who say that the qualities ascribed to external reality only dwell within us and that what we conceive of as 'reality' is enfolded in human consciousness. Reality is a manifestation of our thoughts and not a property of the external world, but involves our presence as conscious observers. The universe achieves a concrete existence as a result of our perceptions. Our concept of the reality created by our brain and senses cause us not only to misunderstand consciousness, but render us unable even to imagine what it might be.
Neuroscientists are just beginning to examine the misapprehensions of our senses and how these lead us to act and think as though we have an accurate understanding of consciousness. However we may perceive reality in the waking state of consciousness, it is not the autonomous separate 'things' our senses behold. Pribram and Bohm's holographic analog for the 'implicate' order beyond our senses illustrates how reality is an illusion. They argue that our minds not only enfold matter, but our bodies and the entire material universe as well and that the cosmos, matter, life, and consciousness itself are all projections of 'the ground of all that is', in ways which scientists have yet to discover, though Pribram speculates that the mystics may have discovered a way to see the implicate order, by learning how to 'abrogate the brain's retrieval systems and neuroelectrical codes.' Such scientific speculations challenge many cherished concepts, including language itself, because in the 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind.
Because human thought is a by-product of our brain and senses, it is ever changing and limited and, thus, the Sufis say that the old subject-verb-object paradigm is not a valid paradigm for scientists to understand ultimate questions. Our sensory prison and language cause us to live on the surface of things and to not be aware of absolute reality. To understand consciousness, scientists must learn a totally different paradigm. Instead of always trying to satisfy themselves by studying the natural world, scientists must come to learn how to investigate inwardly. They must stop equating sensory experiences with true knowledge, which can be acquired only by directly cognizing infinite existence through focusing attention and energy on a specific point in the heart to activate a hitherto unsuspected capacity or 'knowing'. Knowing humanity in all its hidden dimensions must be the fundamental principle for all endeavors in science and religion. Sufism, the science of Self-knowledge, is the tradition Pribram thought might exist to teach humanity how to abrogate the brain to behold the implicate order.
The Sufis say that both true science and true religion are but reciprocal stages of the same search for truth about existence itself. One focuses on what we take to be the 'outer', the other on 'inner' reality, but these are simply artificial boundaries created by our 'feeling' mind. To know the unity underlying science and religion, the reality of existence, requires a different paradigm--heart consciousness. And, Sufism is that reality.
Source:
http://www.zynet.co.uk/imprint/Tucson/5.htm
05.02-- Abstract No:824
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everything in one place? All new Windows Live!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/ea2326ca/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 04:40:29 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 04:46:40 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
References: <20071217.140956.3184.60.ae.dropper@juno.com>
<BAY123-W182ADC54592543B1ED5C44DC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <05e601c84127$c1ea8000$b5c16018@DL01>
That's a fact.
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:39 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
I see it black
on my screen
but I know
there is no
black in
transmitted
light
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:09:47 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
fullness pours out
and it all empties into white
the mounds of it - frozen overnight
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:23:27 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> writes:
fullness pours out
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:00:04 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
And it all empties into white.
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 13:43:40 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> writes:
Naming plays its oldest game.
Somehow out of reach it dances
nine dances to itself. Nine dances
all in couples made of three.
And if we do not leave our light
we will be eaten by it long
before it shines and dies again
so leave our light alone to be.
Run apple certainties under
the spout, what memories they
bind in cankered onion light
from lullabies of thunder.
And we are leaves as always,
fallen from the sunburn tree.
Till shame and calamine find us
shovelling blossom snow
Before the no, before the go,
before the be became, we will
become before the sun
has ever been born below.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 08:12:20 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Naming plays games with itself.
Somewhere out of reach it dances
nine dances by itself
in "couples" made of three.
And if we do not leave our light
we will be eaten by it long
before it shines and dies again
so leave our light alone.
Run apple certainties under
the spout, what memories they
bind in cankered onion light
from lampshades worn as hats.
And we are leaves as always,
fallen from the sunburn tree.
Till shade and calamine find us
shovelling a foot of snow
before the plows
before the dogs....
before the rain and sleet
will come
before the sun
was even born
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 07:14:42 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com> writes:
I: Word music Improvisation. Have a great day, everybody.
On Dec 16, 2007 4:13 AM, rob mooney < rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
Naming plays games with itself.
Somewhere out of reach it dances
nine dances by itself.
And if we do not leave our light
we will be eaten by it long
before it shines.
Run apple certainties under
the spout, what memories they
bind in cankered light.
And we are leaves as always,
fallen from the sunburn tree.
Till shade and calamine find us.
--------------------------------------------------------------
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 22:39:03 -0500
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
what? (Rob)
the naming plays with itself
somewhere out of reach
of the dance itself.
do our leaves
get eaten by light
before they fall?
we certainly have
to be careful of
skin cancer
and light!
previously,
it was sunburn.
we aren't leaves.
one size
doesn't fit all.
funni, rob, irene
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 01:48:56 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> writes:
what?
----------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 14:54:42 -0500
From: irenedarcy@gmail.com
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2
I: We certainly have to be careful of skin cancer and light! Previously, it was sunburn. We aren't leaves. One size doesn't fit all.
On Dec 14, 2007 2:51 PM, rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
do our leaves get eaten by light before they fall?
------------------------------------------------------
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 21:26:42 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
DIALOGUE DANCE
A dialogue circle of trees, dancing trees
we do not sit in chairs but we stand in the woods
with the light filtering through our autumn leaves
and we are dancing - our roots are our feet
and our millions of toes, dancing.
A wind comes and some of our leaves fall
from some of our fingers,
our million fingers, one for every dancing toe,
one explication for every implication
our roots hidden, unknown
but known constantly as that
which ever refuses naming
while the naming plays with itself
somewhere out of reach
of the dance itself.
-- funny
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:08:46 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> writes:
Don't you think though, that maybe a bit of both is even more useful? Just so long as we don't turn the tree - or others - into objects that we "understand" completely. Actually, as I think of it, there is more than one way to understand understanding.
don
On Dec 13, 2007, at 1:10 AM, Alfred Landman wrote:
Hi Irene Darcy. If a brain wants to learn about trees, for instance, thought could simply spend time with them in their natural habitat etc (which is what many traditionally "primitive" people do). Breaking trees into their cellular components and so forth enables genetic manipulation of them, for instance, but this can't be said to "objectively" help one get to know a tree better than simply spending time with them. In fact, it does the precise opposite. This brain can never genuinely know a living organism that you've instrumentalized and objectified like that. AL
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
Subject: Space and Time (Don F)
From: ami_kes@juno.com (John A MIKES)
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 16:59:24 EDT
to: Bohm, Subject Space and Time
Dear Don, nice wisdom in your Sep.25 'Space & Time note. Yet:(your
quote):
>...<
Foucault was right: there is no such epoque as the present one. His, or
ours, does not matter. Past reflection does not match live experience.
WE are the experiencers, not memory. So: hold your enthusiasm.
Also: I was glad: A rare thing on this list a reference to David Bohm!
I find this unending exchange "about the list-filling" redundant. In my
(not so humble) opinion a list is like love: practice it, don't explain.
If it does not live up to your expectations, there are other lists to
choose from. Nobody can change BB or anybody else. Accept it or leave it.
To explain one's views ABOUT participating: nice, but keep it short. And
have mercy on the receiving parties: half a dozen posts per day per per-
son in exorbitant length, or sometimes 5 consecutive attachments is rude.
Who does not have the time to write short, should keep it. Length is
negligent.
And to the following exchange I have a plagiarism from Doug Bilodeau, an
acclaimed physicist from the JCS-list:(see below) - the 'exchange':
*
" >JPL:
>"Shout, shout, let it all out
>these are the things I can do without,
>come on, I'm talking to you, come on.." whereupon
" >>Wm:
>>Pssst... not so loud, I think the others are meditating.
William
*
Not so sure! I refer to my remark on a "no response" to a post:
"si tacent clamant": Dough B: corrected me: "or: si tacent dormiunt".
From: "Chris Hooley" < chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: Re: purpose of list
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:24:15 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello All,
I've heard nothing from the group for several days. So, I'm sending this
message to check for echo.
Regards
Chris
From: "Chris Hooley" <chooley@idnsi.net>
Subject: inside out
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:19:50 PDT
To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk
Hello Everyone,
I would share another thought that I found interesting.
The gastrointestinal track is actually "outside" the body in the sense that
it's a long, open-ended tube. In the same way, "no-thing", which is (or
can be seen to be) at the center of every manifested form, is continuous,
contiguous to itself. It is "outside" the space/time form though when seen
from within the form it appears to be isolated like droplets.
My intuition is that we can focus (reside *as* attention) either on the
form or on the un-form that borders it.
The experience of attending to the un-form in-between can't be fully
represented, even to ourselves, I think, but experimenting with this
viewing angle has been intriguing.
Received: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:21:50 +0100 (BST)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 11:19:21 +0100 (BST)
From: maximus@dircon.co.uk (Barron Burrow)
Subject: Re:intentional dying
Extraordinary and moving message you sent us, Don ... Full of the *right
kind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentional
dying" *feels* like the right way to go. And what you say about
'death-rebirth' through finding the right life-rhythms seems absolutely right:
> ultradian rhythms. These involved 90 minute to 2 hour
>cycles during which the body would, as it were, shift gears. The neural
>chemistry changes, hemispheric dominance shifts and the body, during about
>twenty minutes of each cycle, does its best to get into a quiet,
>self-repair mode. As he put it, the unconscious parts of the organism would
>try to go to work without the interference of the conscious mind. Normally,
>our culture has trained us to override these cycles in order to get on with
>our work. =
I think there is great truth in this last remark. I find myself that it's
sometimes the hardest thing to just ignore the world, and simply try to get
back into touch with one's own internal rhythms; but there's no doubt that
with practice you can get better at it. However, sooner or later you forget
-- and have to learn the inexplicable and difficult (but ultimately very
rewarding) process all over again. What's difficult about it, I guess, is
*acceptance* of dying -- "intentional dying" ... Bimodal-psa. helps me,
because it puts me in touch with the deepest source of my own 'unlived
lines' (but there are clearly many ways to get back 'in touch').
I wldn't overdo it, on the email. I understand very well what Matti
Vaittenen means when he says, today, " " ... but in a virtual world you do
not get your hands dirty, you do not sweat; you just work overtime." But
I've decided it's okay to just fade in and out. Because the truth surely is
we are as much talking to ourselves as to each other: binary bits are NOT
people ... On the other hand, I think of the Net in Kleinian analysis terms
-- as a kind of substitute 'container'. Just as the mother can soothe away
the infant's "nameless dread" so too can this kind of dialogue. There's no
obligation to post even weekly -- just fade in and out when the mood takes.
So, sorry to see you go, Matti -- but in the end I think the world may go
through a phase transition, led by the Net, that gradually puts everything
the right way round again, and dethrones the present over-emphasis on a
top-down culture that *separates* mind and body. So I may fade in and out a
lot, but I'm staying with it. Gustava (?) in S. America brought up the
enormous problem of world over-population recently; I felt bad that no one
responded. It's a diabolical problem -- but one which in Europe seems to
have been largely overcome (e.g. Spain and Russia's population is falling --
and most other nations in Europe are not being over-populated
hand-over-fist). Catholic ideology on birth-control seems hopelessly
unrealistic, and the worst effects seem to be in S. America.
Don has summed up an incredible eleven years of his life-struggle in one
short email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with
*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our common
humanity.
I can see the irony of having yr message bounced back with a 'fatal error'
note :-) On my kitchen table, Don, is a copy of "The Unfolding Meaning"
(Routledge, 1987) (it's odd your saying "perseverance furthers" because
someone in Australia recently said the same thing)( -- and the other day I
re-read yr Introduction, rather neat, I thought. And now here I am speaking
to one of its authors!
>A couple of feelings guide me, acting as warnings that I'm drifting: on the
>one side is the "hope of winning", and on the other is "self pity."
>
>The affirmations that I'm using aren't self strenghtening, at least
>directly; "What could be a better experience than being the unfolding
>universe? Having given up, I can relax! Etc."
Unfolding meaning, yes, but also knowing how to get in touch with 'unlived
lines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment of
birth, for instance. Because without that there is no proper dying; and so
no full living either. No?
I think Julia has hit on something important when she says:
>
>is dialogue about facilitating the intentional dying of the ego self?
>
>julia
--
--------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--
Irene
----------------------------------------------------------------------
She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Messenger on the move. Text MSN to 63463 now!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/946c5997/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 04:41:53 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 04:47:52 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <BAY123-W1482CC41A85C6690D782D9DC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <05f001c84127$ee383490$b5c16018@DL01>
You logic is impeccable Don. -- Rob
Thanks! I feel complimented. -- dl
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:56 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
You logic is impeccable Don.
Questions: was there any meaning before we were here? will there be any when we have gone? what does a spider mean? an icicle? a smallish and rather faded hadron?
- - the Sun in Clun is a fair to middlin' pub
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:11:23 -0500
I mean we all use the word mean, meaning, etc. A philosopher said that the question of meaning is meaningful.
Are we all using some thingK that we know not, neither stand under, over or beside?
Can it be acceptable that meaning is only somethingK manmade, and that otherwise, everything including us is meaningless? Is there meaninglessness?
Is the question of meaning itself meaningless?
I've been trying to give attention to the idea advanced by some thinkers that the Greek logos has been interpreted as meaning. What might that mean? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:15 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
What is meaning?
how do you mean?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 09:15:59 -0500
Can one eat them, live off them (too---?)) -- Alan
Does the question of food, etc., imply that man, that we live by bread alone?
Maybe what is important about QT is the idea of meaning. What is the meaning?
What is meaning? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan E. DeBakey
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 9:07 AM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Tea?? Mio dio Al, what are you smoking, drinking, brewing? Like: Does pouring (hot) water over (tea)leaves order - explicated ;-o
Al, I am into "real"-life stuff (examples), all that (particle)theoretical talk gives me goose-bumps ;........}}
Can one eat them, live off them (too---?))
Alan
Alfred Landman <landmana@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi Rob Mooney. T.e.a.
AL.
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
there is asking and saying at any rate
----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 14:14:42 -0700
I would say there is definitely mind. Although it might not be what you and I would call mind.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Regina Bensch-Coe
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 1:57 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In the attached article, the author writes, ?in the 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind.? (Note: I am guessing ?ere? is a typo for ?there?.)
In the implicate order there is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind. ?? Is this statement true?
Regina
??
Consciousness and sufism: A new paradigm for western scientists
R.A.Haag (331 West Colonial Highway, Hamilton, VA 20158, USA)
Scientists seeking to understand 'consciousness' appear to ignore colleagues who say that the qualities ascribed to external reality only dwell within us and that what we conceive of as 'reality' is enfolded in human consciousness. Reality is a manifestation of our thoughts and not a property of the external world, but involves our presence as conscious observers. The universe achieves a concrete existence as a result of our perceptions. Our concept of the reality created by our brain and senses cause us not only to misunderstand consciousness, but render us unable even to imagine what it might be.
Neuroscientists are just beginning to examine the misapprehensions of our senses and how these lead us to act and think as though we have an accurate understanding of consciousness. However we may perceive reality in the waking state of consciousness, it is not the autonomous separate 'things' our senses behold. Pribram and Bohm's holographic analog for the 'implicate' order beyond our senses illustrates how reality is an illusion. They argue that our minds not only enfold matter, but our bodies and the entire material universe as well and that the cosmos, matter, life, and consciousness itself are all projections of 'the ground of all that is', in ways which scientists have yet to discover, though Pribram speculates that the mystics may have discovered a way to see the implicate order, by learning how to 'abrogate the brain's retrieval systems and neuroelectrical codes.' Such scientific speculations challenge many cherished concepts, including language itself, because in the 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind.
Because human thought is a by-product of our brain and senses, it is ever changing and limited and, thus, the Sufis say that the old subject-verb-object paradigm is not a valid paradigm for scientists to understand ultimate questions. Our sensory prison and language cause us to live on the surface of things and to not be aware of absolute reality. To understand consciousness, scientists must learn a totally different paradigm. Instead of always trying to satisfy themselves by studying the natural world, scientists must come to learn how to investigate inwardly. They must stop equating sensory experiences with true knowledge, which can be acquired only by directly cognizing infinite existence through focusing attention and energy on a specific point in the heart to activate a hitherto unsuspected capacity or 'knowing'. Knowing humanity in all its hidden dimensions must be the fundamental principle for all endeavors in science and religion. Sufism, the science of Self-knowledge, is the tradition Pribram thought might exist to teach humanity how to abrogate the brain to behold the implicate order.
The Sufis say that both true science and true religion are but reciprocal stages of the same search for truth about existence itself. One focuses on what we take to be the 'outer', the other on 'inner' reality, but these are simply artificial boundaries created by our 'feeling' mind. To know the unity underlying science and religion, the reality of existence, requires a different paradigm--heart consciousness. And, Sufism is that reality.
Source:
http://www.zynet.co.uk/imprint/Tucson/5.htm
05.02-- Abstract No:824
------------------------------------------------------------------
Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everything in one place? All new Windows Live!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/47eee51b/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 04:57:20 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 05:03:21 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <BAY123-W1482CC41A85C6690D782D9DC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <060701c8412a$16cd14f0$b5c16018@DL01>
Questions: was there any meaning before we were here? will there be any when we have gone? -- Rob
If we look at what is called evolution, we do not doubt that fucking ape-like folk hung around high up in trees so that tigers and lions couldn't eat them I'd say that was meaningful.
Actually, I'd say it was meaningful, full of meaning, that a huge slug of shit was slung off during an explosion of a star such that the Earth occurred and then is slung around in circles around it's origin, the sun. What does it mean?
Maybe it has something to do with gravity, with what physicists call fundamental forces -- I don't believe they mean the imagined, personal force, whatever that might be). I'd say that real force has nothing to do with high society, low society or with personal identity shit of any kind.
Will there be any [meaning] when we have gone?
Is it certain that we are going somewhere? Is there another place other than the Universe that we live in? No! This is it! Whatever this is, this is it!
Maybe the question should be, What is this? -- dl
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:56 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
You logic is impeccable Don.
Questions: was there any meaning before we were here? will there be any when we have gone? what does a spider mean? an icicle? a smallish and rather faded hadron?
- - the Sun in Clun is a fair to middlin' pub
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:11:23 -0500
I mean we all use the word mean, meaning, etc. A philosopher said that the question of meaning is meaningful.
Are we all using some thingK that we know not, neither stand under, over or beside?
Can it be acceptable that meaning is only somethingK manmade, and that otherwise, everything including us is meaningless? Is there meaninglessness?
Is the question of meaning itself meaningless?
I've been trying to give attention to the idea advanced by some thinkers that the Greek logos has been interpreted as meaning. What might that mean? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:15 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
What is meaning?
how do you mean?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 09:15:59 -0500
Can one eat them, live off them (too---?)) -- Alan
Does the question of food, etc., imply that man, that we live by bread alone?
Maybe what is important about QT is the idea of meaning. What is the meaning?
What is meaning? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan E. DeBakey
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 9:07 AM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Tea?? Mio dio Al, what are you smoking, drinking, brewing? Like: Does pouring (hot) water over (tea)leaves order - explicated ;-o
Al, I am into "real"-life stuff (examples), all that (particle)theoretical talk gives me goose-bumps ;........}}
Can one eat them, live off them (too---?))
Alan
Alfred Landman <landmana@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi Rob Mooney. T.e.a.
AL.
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
there is asking and saying at any rate
----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 14:14:42 -0700
I would say there is definitely mind. Although it might not be what you and I would call mind.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Regina Bensch-Coe
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 1:57 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In the attached article, the author writes, ?in the 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind.? (Note: I am guessing ?ere? is a typo for ?there?.)
In the implicate order there is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind. ?? Is this statement true?
Regina
??
Consciousness and sufism: A new paradigm for western scientists
R.A.Haag (331 West Colonial Highway, Hamilton, VA 20158, USA)
Scientists seeking to understand 'consciousness' appear to ignore colleagues who say that the qualities ascribed to external reality only dwell within us and that what we conceive of as 'reality' is enfolded in human consciousness. Reality is a manifestation of our thoughts and not a property of the external world, but involves our presence as conscious observers. The universe achieves a concrete existence as a result of our perceptions. Our concept of the reality created by our brain and senses cause us not only to misunderstand consciousness, but render us unable even to imagine what it might be.
Neuroscientists are just beginning to examine the misapprehensions of our senses and how these lead us to act and think as though we have an accurate understanding of consciousness. However we may perceive reality in the waking state of consciousness, it is not the autonomous separate 'things' our senses behold. Pribram and Bohm's holographic analog for the 'implicate' order beyond our senses illustrates how reality is an illusion. They argue that our minds not only enfold matter, but our bodies and the entire material universe as well and that the cosmos, matter, life, and consciousness itself are all projections of 'the ground of all that is', in ways which scientists have yet to discover, though Pribram speculates that the mystics may have discovered a way to see the implicate order, by learning how to 'abrogate the brain's retrieval systems and neuroelectrical codes.' Such scientific speculations challenge many cherished concepts, including language itself, because in the 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind.
Because human thought is a by-product of our brain and senses, it is ever changing and limited and, thus, the Sufis say that the old subject-verb-object paradigm is not a valid paradigm for scientists to understand ultimate questions. Our sensory prison and language cause us to live on the surface of things and to not be aware of absolute reality. To understand consciousness, scientists must learn a totally different paradigm. Instead of always trying to satisfy themselves by studying the natural world, scientists must come to learn how to investigate inwardly. They must stop equating sensory experiences with true knowledge, which can be acquired only by directly cognizing infinite existence through focusing attention and energy on a specific point in the heart to activate a hitherto unsuspected capacity or 'knowing'. Knowing humanity in all its hidden dimensions must be the fundamental principle for all endeavors in science and religion. Sufism, the science of Self-knowledge, is the tradition Pribram thought might exist to teach humanity how to abrogate the brain to behold the implicate order.
The Sufis say that both true science and true religion are but reciprocal stages of the same search for truth about existence itself. One focuses on what we take to be the 'outer', the other on 'inner' reality, but these are simply artificial boundaries created by our 'feeling' mind. To know the unity underlying science and religion, the reality of existence, requires a different paradigm--heart consciousness. And, Sufism is that reality.
Source:
http://www.zynet.co.uk/imprint/Tucson/5.htm
05.02-- Abstract No:824
------------------------------------------------------------------
Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everything in one place? All new Windows Live!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/e91e7a4b/attachment.html
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Tue Dec 18 04:57:46 2007
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Tue Dec 18 05:03:57 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <016201c840e6$ded1b440$b5c16018@DL01><C38C3C99.FA94%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com><c47283890712171353j95c274bj9096a97ab64953bc@mail.gmail.com><032601c840f9$22bf5ce0$b5c16018@DL01><c47283890712171408m42472b79m4768faa35cd06c40@mail.gmail.com><033501c840fa$2f16e390$b5c16018@DL01><c47283890712171424t498a359eseb5f169a0cff1d9@mail.gmail.com><036701c840fc$fae05040$b5c16018@DL01><023c01c8410c$deca6c00$f277480c@HOME>
<056e01c84125$db625870$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <03a801c8412a$26ae05f0$f277480c@HOME>
You take this word too literally dl. I didn't have the slightest idea of how to use images with my imagination until I was an adult. My imagination was always with feelings. I don't "see" music, sometimes I don't even think I hear music, I feel it. Close your eyes and imagine that you can hear a bird singing somewhere outside. You can hear it but you can't see it and you don't know what kind of bird it is. Just listen to it sing and feel the song in your body. I learned to play the piano as a kid. But when I play, I don't see notes, I feel the music in my body. The notes on the pages mostly just seem to get in the way of playing. Trying to read the notes kept me from learning how to play for a very long time.
The meaning is the experience you have.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 8:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Susan ... and all, I'm intrigued by this.
What can imagination mean if not the use of visual experience? How is it possible to image music without reference to visual experience?
Irene has mentioned notes as images ... perhaps upon a staff. (That's my imagination of notes -- but that's the visual experience.) Is it not?
I tend to think of an image as something drawn with pencil, brush or even with the a toe in the sand. Whatever, it seems not possible to use the idea of imagination without referencing visual experience.
NO?
Thanks for attention to this. -- dl
From: Susan Clemons
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
dl, you can play imaginatively with music or with feelings for that matter. Imagination is definitely not limited to the visual.
Susan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/6574b4e4/attachment.html
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Tue Dec 18 05:01:28 2007
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Tue Dec 18 05:07:37 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
References: <347759.54239.qm@web45806.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
<057d01c84126$19728f40$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <03b701c8412a$ab187dc0$f277480c@HOME>
The meaning is not in the words dl. The meaning is in the experience you create inside yourself through using your imagination. Different ways of using your imagination creates different experiences. But the meaning is still in the experience. Words are just symbols for experience.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 8:28 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
I would say: That it means somethinkg if someboind says "no" in re-action to someboind saying "see what i mean"
This is like a private language and I have no idea of the meaning or even if it is meaningful. -- dl
From: Alan E. DeBakey
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 10:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Yes.
I would say: That it means somethinkg if someboind says "no" in re-action to someboind saying "see what i mean"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/2e4ab09b/attachment.html
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Tue Dec 18 05:04:52 2007
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Tue Dec 18 05:11:02 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <BAY123-W1482CC41A85C6690D782D9DC620@phx.gbl>
<060701c8412a$16cd14f0$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <03e101c8412b$24db4c50$f277480c@HOME>
Is there another place other than the Universe that we live in? No! This is it! Whatever this is, this is it!
-- dl
How do you know? Are you really that certain this is it?
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 8:57 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Questions: was there any meaning before we were here? will there be any when we have gone? -- Rob
If we look at what is called evolution, we do not doubt that fucking ape-like folk hung around high up in trees so that tigers and lions couldn't eat them I'd say that was meaningful.
Actually, I'd say it was meaningful, full of meaning, that a huge slug of shit was slung off during an explosion of a star such that the Earth occurred and then is slung around in circles around it's origin, the sun. What does it mean?
Maybe it has something to do with gravity, with what physicists call fundamental forces -- I don't believe they mean the imagined, personal force, whatever that might be). I'd say that real force has nothing to do with high society, low society or with personal identity shit of any kind.
Will there be any [meaning] when we have gone?
Is it certain that we are going somewhere? Is there another place other than the Universe that we live in? No! This is it! Whatever this is, this is it!
Maybe the question should be, What is this? -- dl
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/25c96178/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 05:06:58 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 05:12:59 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com><476679F0.60003@siit.tu.ac.th><007701c840c1$3c9f5580$b5c16018@DL01><009501c840c9$c9da9a10$b5c16018@DL01><00ae01c840cb$c07ac830$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W879FB36B103BA98E4068CDC620@phx.gbl>
<010801c840e1$de342e00$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W350E74A4BF40EED8D77188DC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <062001c8412b$6f5f12c0$b5c16018@DL01>
I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things. -- Rob
Me too! I believe it is ultimately important!
DB says that nothing can be without meaning. Of course, the question ... What is meaning? !!
I believe folk wisdom holds that meaning is what is meant to be, and maybe this means what is intended.
Thus, we say the whole of Being is whatever IT intends to be ... or what it is intending.
What's that?
Look around. Feel it, listen to it, taste it ... etc. This is it, whatever IT IS, this is it simply because there is no other actuality. Is there? -- dl
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:59 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be meaningful? dl
I think this is important. not just poems. many meaningful things.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:20:21 -0500
Rob: I think so and also maybe even when acting and pretending
dl: Maybe so. Thought, however, presents the idea that what we act and pretend is the known, the repeated, but there is always the new, maybe New Being that is experienced as not the same old known roles, etc.
Rob: I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to say stuff I don't understand
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be meaningful? dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:20 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
I think so
and also maybe even when acting and pretending
I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to say stuff I don't understand
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of my pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " precede the experience of the identity processes being suspended, being held in suspension?
If so, then maybe the meaning of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " might be that identity has limited meaning.
Then what is the meaning of someone talking about "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores "? Could it be to demonstrate meaning?
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
Resonance anyone? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
When the identity movement is suspended, experience of being does not cease.
Then, it becomes clear that ontic intelligence does not have to be personalized as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with Weber.
Watching the identity movement (thought), awareness of the identity thought may and does at times suspend the identity processes.
Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning that identity processes are not needed, then that awareness suspends the unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need occurs, then the identity processes recur.
It appears that the I identity is not needed for identity suspension. That's the way it seems to me, to this identity when the identity processes are present.
Resonance anyone ..., all you outer identities "out there"? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Messenger on the move. Text MSN to 63463 now!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/cb933b88/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 05:09:54 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 05:15:54 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <016201c840e6$ded1b440$b5c16018@DL01><C38C3C99.FA94%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com><c47283890712171353j95c274bj9096a97ab64953bc@mail.gmail.com><032601c840f9$22bf5ce0$b5c16018@DL01><c47283890712171408m42472b79m4768faa35cd06c40@mail.gmail.com><033501c840fa$2f16e390$b5c16018@DL01><c47283890712171424t498a359eseb5f169a0cff1d9@mail.gmail.com><036701c840fc$fae05040$b5c16018@DL01><023c01c8410c$deca6c00$f277480c@HOME><056e01c84125$db625870$b5c16018@DL01>
<03a801c8412a$26ae05f0$f277480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <062f01c8412b$d8764d50$b5c16018@DL01>
You take this word too literally dl. -- Susan
So you say. -- dl
From: Susan Clemons
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 10:57 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
You take this word too literally dl. I didn't have the slightest idea of how to use images with my imagination until I was an adult. My imagination was always with feelings. I don't "see" music, sometimes I don't even think I hear music, I feel it. Close your eyes and imagine that you can hear a bird singing somewhere outside. You can hear it but you can't see it and you don't know what kind of bird it is. Just listen to it sing and feel the song in your body. I learned to play the piano as a kid. But when I play, I don't see notes, I feel the music in my body. The notes on the pages mostly just seem to get in the way of playing. Trying to read the notes kept me from learning how to play for a very long time.
The meaning is the experience you have.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 8:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Susan ... and all, I'm intrigued by this.
What can imagination mean if not the use of visual experience? How is it possible to image music without reference to visual experience?
Irene has mentioned notes as images ... perhaps upon a staff. (That's my imagination of notes -- but that's the visual experience.) Is it not?
I tend to think of an image as something drawn with pencil, brush or even with the a toe in the sand. Whatever, it seems not possible to use the idea of imagination without referencing visual experience.
NO?
Thanks for attention to this. -- dl
From: Susan Clemons
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
dl, you can play imaginatively with music or with feelings for that matter. Imagination is definitely not limited to the visual.
Susan
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/d4ce5c41/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 05:19:57 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 05:26:06 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
References: <347759.54239.qm@web45806.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><057d01c84126$19728f40$b5c16018@DL01>
<03b701c8412a$ab187dc0$f277480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <063e01c8412d$3fe587c0$b5c16018@DL01>
Susan: The meaning is not in the words dl. The meaning is in the experience you create inside yourself through using your imagination.
dl: Sounds like imaginary meaning. What is the origin of the imagined meaning?
I believe Bohm indicates there's some kind of problem with the personal identity. I find his views persuasive.
Susan, when the you-word is used, is there an image that comes with it?
Do you believe I am what you imagine when you use the you-word? Do you believe I am an image?
Are you just an image that you or someone has of you? -- dl
From: Susan Clemons
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:01 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
The meaning is not in the words dl. The meaning is in the experience you create inside yourself through using your imagination. Different ways of using your imagination creates different experiences. But the meaning is still in the experience. Words are just symbols for experience.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 8:28 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
I would say: That it means somethinkg if someboind says "no" in re-action to someboind saying "see what i mean"
This is like a private language and I have no idea of the meaning or even if it is meaningful. -- dl
From: Alan E. DeBakey
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 10:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Yes.
I would say: That it means somethinkg if someboind says "no" in re-action to someboind saying "see what i mean"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/c9d12763/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 05:37:16 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 05:43:15 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <BAY123-W1482CC41A85C6690D782D9DC620@phx.gbl><060701c8412a$16cd14f0$b5c16018@DL01>
<03e101c8412b$24db4c50$f277480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <065601c8412f$aaceb140$b5c16018@DL01>
Susan: How do you know?
dl: Maybe it is more coherent to ask what actually is instead of acting and pretending the actuality of the mask of persona.
Susan: Are you really that certain this is it?
dl: Bohm indicates there's something as "poisonous as cyanide" about this personal identity ... the ego.
He doesn't mean it is poison as hemlock is poison. He means it is destructive to the user when used as if the imagination is actuality. Maybe we should say it is destructive to act and pretend the image we have of someone is identical to what they actually are.
It is not! The idea of them being an image seems to be based on the idea of a separated observer observing a separated observed thingK. But, that is not what actually is. -- dl
From: Susan Clemons
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Is there another place other than the Universe that we live in? No! This is it! Whatever this is, this is it!
-- dl
How do you know? Are you really that certain this is it?
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 8:57 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Questions: was there any meaning before we were here? will there be any when we have gone? -- Rob
If we look at what is called evolution, we do not doubt that fucking ape-like folk hung around high up in trees so that tigers and lions couldn't eat them I'd say that was meaningful.
Actually, I'd say it was meaningful, full of meaning, that a huge slug of shit was slung off during an explosion of a star such that the Earth occurred and then is slung around in circles around it's origin, the sun. What does it mean?
Maybe it has something to do with gravity, with what physicists call fundamental forces -- I don't believe they mean the imagined, personal force, whatever that might be). I'd say that real force has nothing to do with high society, low society or with personal identity shit of any kind.
Will there be any [meaning] when we have gone?
Is it certain that we are going somewhere? Is there another place other than the Universe that we live in? No! This is it! Whatever this is, this is it!
Maybe the question should be, What is this? -- dl
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/aa0cbabe/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 05:48:06 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 05:54:05 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <BAY123-W1482CC41A85C6690D782D9DC620@phx.gbl><060701c8412a$16cd14f0$b5c16018@DL01>
<03e101c8412b$24db4c50$f277480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <066301c84131$2e2e7a60$b5c16018@DL01>
Susan: How do you know?
Susan, the uni of universe means ONE. If one means one and this here universe is it, there cannot be another universe. Can there be?
Susan: Are you really that certain this is it?
dl: Let us reason together. The Greek dialogue means through or by way of reason, ratio, meaning. If uni means ONE, then is it possible for there to be another universe? -- dl
From: Susan Clemons
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Is there another place other than the Universe that we live in? No! This is it! Whatever this is, this is it!
-- dl
How do you know? Are you really that certain this is it?
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 8:57 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Questions: was there any meaning before we were here? will there be any when we have gone? -- Rob
If we look at what is called evolution, we do not doubt that fucking ape-like folk hung around high up in trees so that tigers and lions couldn't eat them I'd say that was meaningful.
Actually, I'd say it was meaningful, full of meaning, that a huge slug of shit was slung off during an explosion of a star such that the Earth occurred and then is slung around in circles around it's origin, the sun. What does it mean?
Maybe it has something to do with gravity, with what physicists call fundamental forces -- I don't believe they mean the imagined, personal force, whatever that might be). I'd say that real force has nothing to do with high society, low society or with personal identity shit of any kind.
Will there be any [meaning] when we have gone?
Is it certain that we are going somewhere? Is there another place other than the Universe that we live in? No! This is it! Whatever this is, this is it!
Maybe the question should be, What is this? -- dl
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/b279c271/attachment.html
From landmana at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 07:13:02 2007
From: landmana at yahoo.com (Alfred Landman)
Date: Tue Dec 18 07:19:14 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <886184.34690.qm@web35515.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <910422.76156.qm@web57407.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Hi Nicholas LiVolsi. Ladies! Gentlemen! Today the store remains closed. Visit us again tomorrow. Thank you for your patronage. AL
Nicholas LiVolsi <nlivolsi@yahoo.com> wrote: Response: 9:32nyc - 12/17/07
What's up???
How do we know when to ask a Grail Question?
How do we know what a Grail Quesion is, to begin with.
So, Let's start here:
Grail Question Knowledge:
1) Never ASUME, but ask a Question? As soon as you enter an environment that consists of you and two more wonderful, physical-selves. (You can say...; "Hey, what's Up???
or Ques cu se??? or Que passa???, Well, Mexico, is one of those French, exceptions.
If you know what I mean. or Do you not??? Mind Twister, home sister; or Nos das roviza, I forgot the rest, das pa don ya, supa sev va, hey where the hell am I? Now that's a question.
Right? Well, at least that's a question.
Oh, Holy Grail.
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
.hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma } Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
I think so
and also maybe even when acting and pretending
I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to say stuff I don't understand
---------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of my pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " precede the experience of the identity processes being suspended, being held in suspension?
If so, then maybe the meaning of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " might be that identity has limited meaning.
Then what is the meaning of someone talking about "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores "? Could it be to demonstrate meaning?
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
Resonance anyone? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
When the identity movement is suspended, experience of being does not cease.
Then, it becomes clear that ontic intelligence does not have to be personalized as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with Weber.
Watching the identity movement (thought), awareness of the identity thought may and does at times suspend the identity processes.
Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning that identity processes are not needed, then that awareness suspends the unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need occurs, then the identity processes recur.
It appears that the I identity is not needed for identity suspension. That's the way it seems to me, to this identity when the identity processes are present.
Resonance anyone ..., all you outer identities "out there"? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/72dccad6/attachment.html
From nlivolsi at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 07:34:13 2007
From: nlivolsi at yahoo.com (Nicholas LiVolsi)
Date: Tue Dec 18 07:40:24 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <910422.76156.qm@web57407.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <372433.80076.qm@web35506.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Al, that is very lame.
Whaaaat??? do you mean visit us tomorrow, thank u for you P , AL???
What'sssss UP with AL???
Alfred Landman <landmana@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi Nicholas LiVolsi. Ladies! Gentlemen! Today the store remains closed. Visit us again tomorrow. Thank you for your patronage. AL
Nicholas LiVolsi <nlivolsi@yahoo.com> wrote: Response: 9:32nyc - 12/17/07
What's up???
How do we know when to ask a Grail Question?
How do we know what a Grail Quesion is, to begin with.
So, Let's start here:
Grail Question Knowledge:
1) Never ASUME, but ask a Question? As soon as you enter an environment that consists of you and two more wonderful, physical-selves. (You can say...; "Hey, what's Up???
or Ques cu se??? or Que passa???, Well, Mexico, is one of those French, exceptions.
If you know what I mean. or Do you not??? Mind Twister, home sister; or Nos das roviza, I forgot the rest, das pa don ya, supa sev va, hey where the hell am I? Now that's a question.
Right? Well, at least that's a question.
Oh, Holy Grail.
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
.hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma } Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
I think so
and also maybe even when acting and pretending
I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to say stuff I don't understand
---------------------------------
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of my pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " precede the experience of the identity processes being suspended, being held in suspension?
If so, then maybe the meaning of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores " might be that identity has limited meaning.
Then what is the meaning of someone talking about "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores "? Could it be to demonstrate meaning?
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting and pretending the social identity?
Resonance anyone? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
When the identity movement is suspended, experience of being does not cease.
Then, it becomes clear that ontic intelligence does not have to be personalized as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with Weber.
Watching the identity movement (thought), awareness of the identity thought may and does at times suspend the identity processes.
Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning that identity processes are not needed, then that awareness suspends the unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need occurs, then the identity processes recur.
It appears that the I identity is not needed for identity suspension. That's the way it seems to me, to this identity when the identity processes are present.
Resonance anyone ..., all you outer identities "out there"? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/e5f1c4f4/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Tue Dec 18 08:40:00 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Tue Dec 18 08:46:14 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemeaning
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712171351g6655180ch91ac32860126fbc0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c47283890712171340x10769b1fs129bc1a4d4eeb8d5@mail.gmail.com>
<343884.93656.qm@web45810.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
<c47283890712171351g6655180ch91ac32860126fbc0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CD443F00-22F0-4B8E-84C9-B17918083C29@dc.rr.com>
On Dec 17, 2007, at 1:51 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
> I: Uh oh. Watch out. Zoe got in trouble with her images; they
> became a little riskay.
> I want to know how to shrink images to the size allowable on this
> list. I PROMISE to use discretion.
PLease do.That is, use discretion.. In this context here and now we
are treading on what might become very hot water, and i would hate to
see history repeat itself once again.
It is easy to shrink images. If you have photoshop go to image/size
and shrink the picture to the size you want. Then save it as a jpeg.
If you don't have photoshop then get graphic converter. This is a
shareware program for Mac that lets you convert graphics in all sort
so ways. Just go to image/ size and make it what you want then save
it as a jpeg. it will tell you its size in kbytes or megabytes. Keep
it at the low end of kilobytes and you will probably be okay. But
remember, Bohm's primary concern was about language, about the
virtual impossibility of people, especially groups of people, talking
together about thihngs that really mattered to them. That was where
he felt the problem lies. We can dance together an sing together, and
we can appreciate each others pictures. But when we want to go a
little deeper we need language and that's where the trouble starts.
Pictures, music, movement are far less likely to lead to
controversies that cause fragmentation. And recall how the idea of a
graphic online dialogue didn't really work, mainly because it didn't
allow anything to develop much beyond the initial show-and-tell
sharing which tended to become a game of showing how clever the
sender was and howsome of them they could use pictures to put others
down.
don
>
>
> On Dec 17, 2007 4:46 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> How kind (of youus) not to http://tinyurl.com/2rw772 rules, for a
> brake ;-))
>
> Ps: to "do" (dobe?)...... howhat??
>
> A.L.A.N.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/615fe516/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Tue Dec 18 08:41:46 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Tue Dec 18 08:47:58 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <02e001c840f7$8d84f5a0$b5c16018@DL01>
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com><009501c840c9$c9da9a10$b5c16018@DL01><00ae01c840cb$c07ac830$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W879FB36B103BA98E4068CDC620@phx.gbl><010801c840e1$de342e00$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W350E74A4BF40EED8D77188DC620@phx.gbl><0B6839C7-B24F-4F22-A7A3-2354F8D15B6B@dc.rr.com><BAY123-W378C54AF712FEB739B63DEDC620@phx.gbl><028201c840f2$bed78dc0$b5c16018@DL01><02a501c840f3$cb33cf60$b5c16018@DL01>
<c47283890712171342x6a19139ci42b7849136ddb64a@mail.gmail.com>
<02e001c840f7$8d84f5a0$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <A275999A-A3B9-4508-BD5F-085AF9940758@dc.rr.com>
On Dec 17, 2007, at 1:55 PM, Don Lay wrote:
> Maybe it's a very serious error to hold any one view above the
> whole. -- dl
If I get your meaning here, I agree completely. But we do have a long
way yet to go in the process we have started here.
don
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/de381afb/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Tue Dec 18 08:44:13 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Tue Dec 18 08:50:26 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <02f901c840f8$75a6ec80$b5c16018@DL01>
References: <C38C3C99.FA94%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
<02f901c840f8$75a6ec80$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <2440B650-2C93-4392-804B-01EBBB296F7D@dc.rr.com>
On Dec 17, 2007, at 2:01 PM, Don Lay wrote:
> Ohmmmmmmmmmmm Hummmmmmmmmmmmmm, NomioHooooooooooo. :)
But the real initiates chant:
Boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooohm
and repeat it 108 times a day.
\X
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/5a77ebde/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Tue Dec 18 08:47:13 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Tue Dec 18 08:53:27 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <20071217.184239.3184.74.ae.dropper@juno.com>
References: <20071217.184239.3184.74.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <08CEABF1-1723-45D6-ABCA-00FA7BF42E67@dc.rr.com>
On Dec 17, 2007, at 2:12 PM, ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
> Is meaning meaningful non - conceptually?
>
> Is the necessary "otherwise" to 'meaning as manmade' "meaningless?
> Or meaninglessness?
>
> What is it that makes "meaning" seem necessary?
>
> -- funny
The nervous system - from the tip of the toes to the top of the brain.
don
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/f7c099ff/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Tue Dec 18 08:48:42 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Tue Dec 18 08:54:55 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <033501c840fa$2f16e390$b5c16018@DL01>
References: <016201c840e6$ded1b440$b5c16018@DL01><C38C3C99.FA94%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com><c47283890712171353j95c274bj9096a97ab64953bc@mail.gmail.com><032601c840f9$22bf5ce0$b5c16018@DL01>
<c47283890712171408m42472b79m4768faa35cd06c40@mail.gmail.com>
<033501c840fa$2f16e390$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <853C7186-80B7-4840-B19D-F59809433072@dc.rr.com>
On Dec 17, 2007, at 2:14 PM, Don Lay wrote:
> I: Without imagination there is no creativity.
> Maybe, maybe not. What about spontaneous music, dance?
>
> Language is an art, use to create MACRO scenarios, etc., from micro
> word/images. -- dl
>
>
No, language is an art. And art does the using. It is not used. If
art is used it is no longer art.
don
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/97c6695e/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Tue Dec 18 08:55:59 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Tue Dec 18 09:02:11 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712171424t498a359eseb5f169a0cff1d9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <016201c840e6$ded1b440$b5c16018@DL01>
<C38C3C99.FA94%lynne@lifedirectionscoach.com>
<c47283890712171353j95c274bj9096a97ab64953bc@mail.gmail.com>
<032601c840f9$22bf5ce0$b5c16018@DL01>
<c47283890712171408m42472b79m4768faa35cd06c40@mail.gmail.com>
<033501c840fa$2f16e390$b5c16018@DL01>
<c47283890712171424t498a359eseb5f169a0cff1d9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8F4D7C8C-54D2-42E7-AB97-3130CE8BF9D1@dc.rr.com>
On Dec 17, 2007, at 2:24 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
> I: I can't yet explain how it fits, but I know it does. Really,
> improvisation - which is instantaneous musical composition, be it
> jazz, classical, salsa, whatever -
> is a sinking into the moment to let the imagination work. Feeling,
> idea, motive, design, everything combines in the moment, to
> express the meaning as it unfolds. I've started out with an idea,
> thinking to take it in a particular direction, but as I hear what
> I'm doing, something else happens and my fingers follow it.
> Intellect gets out of the way. There's no way I could reproduce
> what I did.
And isn't that what we always do, when we are not trying to
accomplish some preconceived end product? When I write a post to this
list I am improvising, in just the same way that a composer
improvises and then makes choices as to what gets saved. The art is
in the improvisation. I used to hang out with a bunch of young actors
who met regularly to do improv.. That is, someone would suggest a
scene or a situation and others would assume the roles and make it up
as they went along. Insights were plentiful. Sometimes it was very
funny and sometimes it was profound. And sometimes it was awful, so
we tried aqain. I don't understand the idea of teaching or learning
how to improvise.
don
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/5ddac621/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Tue Dec 18 09:12:33 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Tue Dec 18 09:18:47 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712171656x5f4d8dew38a2f8078b4fed92@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c47283890712171641y2ec41796od299cfcf973a43b1@mail.gmail.com>
<58782.82899.qm@web45801.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
<c47283890712171656x5f4d8dew38a2f8078b4fed92@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3EBA7B2B-7C02-41C3-9D28-91A5E9AC2957@dc.rr.com>
Irene, for god's sake just look at the links and go to tinyurl.com.
You can make all you want
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 4:56 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
> I: Imag-ineg, sounds of applause.
>
> On Dec 17, 2007 7:52 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
>
> Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
> I: Don Laying http://tinyurl.com/35olm2 How lovely.
>
> (Top in strigKing
> disdance).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Irene
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/103fd07a/attachment.html
From jeff at siit.tu.ac.th Tue Dec 18 10:28:57 2007
From: jeff at siit.tu.ac.th (Jeff Webb)
Date: Tue Dec 18 10:36:09 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <003101c840b4$1a0909b0$b5c16018@DL01>
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <476679F0.60003@siit.tu.ac.th>
<003101c840b4$1a0909b0$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <476792D9.5070705@siit.tu.ac.th>
Don Lay wrote:
> "is there space, time causality in the implicate order",
>
> If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate order' I
> think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be
> explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are implicated).
> -- Jeff
>
> Hi Jeff.
>
> Does the question imply space or time by using the idea expressed by "in"?
>
> If so, does this imply the language we use is not adequate to address
> the meaning of the question? -- dl
>
Yes I suppose the question does imply space or time through the word "in".
However, the question "Is the language we use not adequate to address
the meaning in the question?" I have more difficulty with, because it is
not easy to see what meaning is implied beyond the words, after all the
question itself is expressed in these, possibly inadequate, words.
It seems to me that Bohm was trying to go beyond the word "in" in this
context, when he introduced the notion of the implicate order. In his
language space and time are enfolded into the implicate order, he did
not say that space and time are simply "in" the implicate order. It is
this, I think that he was trying to go beyond. For example he said that
the implicate order is a new order in physics that may be necessary to
understand quantum theory more deeply than the prevalent cartesian order
(in which reality is analysed into points whose positions can be
represented by coordinates - in this order "in", such as in "in" a box
works well).
Jeff
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Tue Dec 18 11:54:06 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Tue Dec 18 12:00:23 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <3EBA7B2B-7C02-41C3-9D28-91A5E9AC2957@dc.rr.com>
References: <c47283890712171641y2ec41796od299cfcf973a43b1@mail.gmail.com>
<58782.82899.qm@web45801.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
<c47283890712171656x5f4d8dew38a2f8078b4fed92@mail.gmail.com>
<3EBA7B2B-7C02-41C3-9D28-91A5E9AC2957@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712180254p28adcaa4g1210cae07554d261@mail.gmail.com>
I: Gosh, don't you guys ever sleep? You'll made so much noise, you woke me
up an hour ago!
Thanks, Don. When Zoe was here, I had gone to the tinyurl site, and it made
no sense, so I was hoping for personal instruction. But I just checked out
the link below. It may be easier.
You don't have to worry about me and discretion. I'm more worried about
Alan. He wasn't subscribed during the Zoe era, so he may not know what
we're referring to. Of course, you're going all the way back to the pk era
when he first started OD. I wasn't on board then, but so far, the way Alan
is using images makes more sense to me than his words.
Maybe a group discussion of how we can explore the use of images in
relationship to what Bohm says about them would be a good idea. Then group
feedback to see how it's working, what we've discovered, and how we can do
it better. dl should be happy; we'll need to take ratio into account to
achieve balance! I'll try to find some time to do quotes on it, but maybe
Pat will, too. I've got a busy day in the street ahead of me. Both my oven
and my microwave died on me, so I've got to replace one of them today.
On Dec 18, 2007 3:12 AM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
> Irene, for god's sake just look at the links and go to tinyurl.com. You
> can make all you want
> don
>
> On Dec 17, 2007, at 4:56 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
>
> I: Imag-ineg, sounds of applause.
>
> On Dec 17, 2007 7:52 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > *Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
> >
> > I: Don Laying * http://tinyurl.com/35olm2* How lovely.
> >
> > (Top in strigKing disdance).
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > <http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue>
> >
> >
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/21887cc9/attachment.html
From w at david-bohm.net Tue Dec 18 12:10:10 2007
From: w at david-bohm.net (william)
Date: Tue Dec 18 12:16:32 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <476792D9.5070705@siit.tu.ac.th>
Message-ID: <4767AA92.000007.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
>It seems to me that Bohm was trying to go beyond the word "in" in this
>context, when he introduced the notion of the implicate order. In his
>language space and time are enfolded into the implicate order, he did
>not say that space and time are simply "in" the implicate order. It is
>this, I think that he was trying to go beyond. For example he said that
>the implicate order is a new order in physics that may be necessary to
>understand quantum theory more deeply than the prevalent cartesian order
>(in which reality is analysed into points whose positions can be
>represented by coordinates - in this order "in", such as in "in" a box
>works well).
>
>Jeff
Perhaps another way to look at it would be to assume that the implicate is a
complex order out of which space and time unfold as a form of simplification
Physicists like to think in terms of "fields" or "dimensions". For instance,
if we say that the implicate order has an undefined multiplicity of
dimensions" then from this multiplicity we could extract three of them; and
the result would be a 3-dimensional world. This is what we experience as
space" and what is also known as the Cartesian order. If we extract a fourth
"dimension" then we get what we experience as "spacetime", which already
goes beyond the Cartesian order.
So the multiplicity is at least four, but the question is how many more
dimensions" are there? How much more could we extract from the multiplicity?
There are occasional signs of what we call "non-local" events, suggesting
there could be a fifth "dimension" beyond our 4-dimensional spacetime
experience. I know Bohm was working on this but i don't know how far he got
with it. At the moment, this 5-dimensional non-locallity thing still appears
to be very much in an early stage of development.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/b7b91755/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Tue Dec 18 12:32:34 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Tue Dec 18 12:38:48 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <4767AA92.000007.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
References: <476792D9.5070705@siit.tu.ac.th>
<4767AA92.000007.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
Message-ID: <c47283890712180332t69033563t9a51d94ed71c3e57@mail.gmail.com>
the question is how many more "dimensions" are there?
I: Perhaps there are so many it's impossible to count them. An infinite
number. Maybe it just depends on process.
On Dec 18, 2007 6:10 AM, william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote:
> >It seems to me that Bohm was trying to go beyond the word "in" in this
> >context, when he introduced the notion of the implicate order. In his
> >language space and time are enfolded into the implicate order, he did
> >not say that space and time are simply "in" the implicate order. It is
> >this, I think that he was trying to go beyond. For example he said that
> >the implicate order is a new order in physics that may be necessary to
> >understand quantum theory more deeply than the prevalent cartesian order
> >(in which reality is analysed into points whose positions can be
> >represented by coordinates - in this order "in", such as in "in" a box
> >works well).
> >
> >Jeff
>
> Perhaps another way to look at it would be to assume that the implicate is
> a complex order out of which space and time unfold as a form of
> simplification.
> Physicists like to think in terms of "fields" or "dimensions". For
> instance, if we say that the implicate order has an undefined multiplicity
> of "dimensions" then from this multiplicity we could extract three of
> them; and the result would be a 3-dimensional world. This is what we
> experience as "space" and what is also known as the Cartesian order. If we
> extract a fourth "dimension" then we get what we experience as "spacetime",
> which already goes beyond the Cartesian order.
> So the multiplicity is at least four, but the question is how many more
> "dimensions" are there? How much more could we extract from the
> multiplicity? There are occasional signs of what we call "non-local" events,
> suggesting there could be a fifth "dimension" beyond our 4-dimensional
> spacetime experience. I know Bohm was working on this but i don't know how
> far he got with it. At the moment, this 5-dimensional non-locallity thing
> still appears to be very much in an early stage of development.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue>
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/2144247d/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 12:33:30 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 12:39:47 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712180254p28adcaa4g1210cae07554d261@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <928571.24503.qm@web45802.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
http://thinkg.net/logo/1.html
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: Gosh, don't you guys ever sleep? You'll made so much noise, you woke me up an hour ago!
Thanks, Don. When Zoe was here, I had gone to the tinyurl site, and it made no sense, so I was hoping for personal instruction. But I just checked out the link below. It may be easier.
You don't have to worry about me and discretion. I'm more worried about Alan. He wasn't subscribed during the Zoe era, so he may not know what we're referring to. Of course, you're going all the way back to the pk era when he first started OD. I wasn't on board then, but so far, the way Alan is using images makes more sense to me than his words.
Maybe a group discussion of how we can explore the use of images in relationship to what Bohm says about them would be a good idea. Then group feedback to see how it's working, what we've discovered, and how we can do it better. dl should be happy; we'll need to take ratio into account to achieve balance! I'll try to find some time to do quotes on it, but maybe Pat will, too. I've got a busy day in the street ahead of me. Both my oven and my microwave died on me, so I've got to replace one of them today.
On Dec 18, 2007 3:12 AM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
Irene, for god's sake just look at the links and go to tinyurl.com. You can make all you want
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 4:56 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
I: Imag-ineg, sounds of applause.
On Dec 17, 2007 7:52 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com > wrote:
Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: Don Laying http://tinyurl.com/35olm2 How lovely.
(Top in strigKing disdance).
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/f6a4bcc2/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 12:39:10 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 12:45:23 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712180332t69033563t9a51d94ed71c3e57@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <763424.16852.qm@web45813.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
http://thinkg.net/logo/1.jpg
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
the question is how many more "dimensions" are there?
I: Perhaps there are so many it's impossible to count them. An infinite number. Maybe it just depends on process.
On Dec 18, 2007 6:10 AM, william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote:
>It seems to me that Bohm was trying to go beyond the word "in" in this
>context, when he introduced the notion of the implicate order. In his
>language space and time are enfolded into the implicate order, he did
>not say that space and time are simply "in" the implicate order. It is
>this, I think that he was trying to go beyond. For example he said that
>the implicate order is a new order in physics that may be necessary to
>understand quantum theory more deeply than the prevalent cartesian order
>(in which reality is analysed into points whose positions can be
>represented by coordinates - in this order "in", such as in "in" a box
>works well).
>
>Jeff
Perhaps another way to look at it would be to assume that the implicate is a complex order out of which space and time unfold as a form of simplification.
Physicists like to think in terms of "fields" or "dimensions". For instance, if we say that the implicate order has an undefined multiplicity of "dimensions" then from this multiplicity we could extract three of them; and the result would be a 3-dimensional world. This is what we experience as "space" and what is also known as the Cartesian order. If we extract a fourth "dimension" then we get what we experience as "spacetime", which already goes beyond the Cartesian order.
So the multiplicity is at least four, but the question is how many more "dimensions" are there? How much more could we extract from the multiplicity? There are occasional signs of what we call "non-local" events, suggesting there could be a fifth "dimension" beyond our 4-dimensional spacetime experience. I know Bohm was working on this but i don't know how far he got with it. At the moment, this 5-dimensional non-locallity thing still appears to be very much in an early stage of development.
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/970d2b5a/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Tue Dec 18 12:40:14 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Tue Dec 18 12:46:29 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <928571.24503.qm@web45802.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c47283890712180254p28adcaa4g1210cae07554d261@mail.gmail.com>
<928571.24503.qm@web45802.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712180340p7ddf094agdf04097adb2b191e@mail.gmail.com>
I: HEL - LO!
On Dec 18, 2007 6:33 AM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://thinkg.net/logo/1.html
>
>
>
>
> *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
>
> I: Gosh, don't you guys ever sleep? You'll made so much noise, you woke
> me up an hour ago!
> Thanks, Don. When Zoe was here, I had gone to the tinyurl site, and it
> made no sense, so I was hoping for personal instruction. But I just checked
> out the link below. It may be easier.
> You don't have to worry about me and discretion. I'm more worried about
> Alan. He wasn't subscribed during the Zoe era, so he may not know what
> we're referring to. Of course, you're going all the way back to the pk era
> when he first started OD. I wasn't on board then, but so far, the way Alan
> is using images makes more sense to me than his words.
> Maybe a group discussion of how we can explore the use of images in
> relationship to what Bohm says about them would be a good idea. Then group
> feedback to see how it's working, what we've discovered, and how we can do
> it better. dl should be happy; we'll need to take ratio into account to
> achieve balance! I'll try to find some time to do quotes on it, but maybe
> Pat will, too. I've got a busy day in the street ahead of me. Both my oven
> and my microwave died on me, so I've got to replace one of them today.
>
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 3:12 AM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > Irene, for god's sake just look at the links and go to tinyurl.com. You
> > can make all you want
> > don
> >
> > On Dec 17, 2007, at 4:56 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
> >
> > I: Imag-ineg, sounds of applause.
> >
> > On Dec 17, 2007 7:52 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > *Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
> > >
> > > I: Don Laying *http://tinyurl.com/35olm2* How lovely.
> > >
> > > (Top in strigKing
> > > disdance).
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > > <http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
> <http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue>
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/7e18f768/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 12:47:24 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 12:53:38 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <4767AA92.000007.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
Message-ID: <757254.20802.qm@web45813.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote: v\:* {behavior:url (#default#vml);} v\:* { BEHAVIOR: url (#default#vml) } >It seems to me that Bohm was trying to go beyond the word "in" in this
>context, when he http://tinyurl.com/yrrlej the notion of the implicate order. In his
>language space and time are enfolded into the implicate order, he did
>not say that space and time are simply "in" the implicate order. It is
>this, I think that he was trying to go beyond. For example he said that
>the implicate order is a new order in physics that may be necessary to
>understand quantum theory more deeply than the prevalent cartesian order
>(in which reality is analysed into points whose positions can be
>represented by coordinates - in this order "in", such as in "in" a box
>works well).
>
>Jeff
Perhaps another way to look at it would be to assume that the implicate is a complex order out of which space and time unfold as a form of simplification.
Physicists like to think in terms of "fields" or "dimensions". For instance, if we say that the implicate order has an undefined multiplicity of "dimensions" then from this multiplicity we could extract three of them; and the result would be a 3-dimensional world. This is what we experience as "space" and what is also known as the Cartesian order. If we extract a fourth "dimension" then we get what we experience as "spacetime", which already goes beyond the Cartesian order.
So the multiplicity is at least four, but the question is how many more "dimensions" are there? How much more could we extract from the multiplicity? There are occasional signs of what we call "non-local" events, suggesting there could be a fifth "dimension" beyond our 4-dimensional spacetime experience. I know Bohm was working on this but i don't know how far he got with it. At the moment, this 5-dimensional non-locallity thing still appears to be very much in an early stage of development.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/93bbf2d7/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 14:25:23 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 14:31:35 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <476679F0.60003@siit.tu.ac.th><003101c840b4$1a0909b0$b5c16018@DL01>
<476792D9.5070705@siit.tu.ac.th>
Message-ID: <004f01c84179$74486950$b5c16018@DL01>
Good points. -- dl
From: Jeff Webb
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 4:28 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Don Lay wrote:
> "is there space, time causality in the implicate order",
>
> If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate order' I
> think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be
> explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are implicated).
> -- Jeff
>
> Hi Jeff.
>
> Does the question imply space or time by using the idea expressed by "in"?
>
> If so, does this imply the language we use is not adequate to address
> the meaning of the question? -- dl
>
Yes I suppose the question does imply space or time through the word "in".
However, the question "Is the language we use not adequate to address
the meaning in the question?" I have more difficulty with, because it is
not easy to see what meaning is implied beyond the words, after all the
question itself is expressed in these, possibly inadequate, words.
It seems to me that Bohm was trying to go beyond the word "in" in this
context, when he introduced the notion of the implicate order. In his
language space and time are enfolded into the implicate order, he did
not say that space and time are simply "in" the implicate order. It is
this, I think that he was trying to go beyond. For example he said that
the implicate order is a new order in physics that may be necessary to
understand quantum theory more deeply than the prevalent cartesian order
(in which reality is analysed into points whose positions can be
represented by coordinates - in this order "in", such as in "in" a box
works well).
Jeff
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/a78163b5/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 14:49:52 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 14:56:07 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <004f01c84179$74486950$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <790563.38258.qm@web45809.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote: Good points. -- dl
http://thinkg.net/logo/3.html
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/f21fe717/attachment.html
From w at david-bohm.net Tue Dec 18 15:12:53 2007
From: w at david-bohm.net (william)
Date: Tue Dec 18 15:19:08 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
References: <c47283890712180254p28adcaa4g1210cae07554d261@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4767D564.000009.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
>I: ...When Zoe was here, I had gone to the tinyurl site, and it
>made no sense, so I was hoping for personal instruction. But
>I just checked out the link below. It may be easier.
>You don't have to worry about me and discretion. I'm more worried
>about Alan. He wasn't subscribed during the Zoe era, so he may
>not know what we're referring to.
Irene, don't you realize that "Alan" and "Zoe" are the same person (Peter
Krauss)?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/e5abad03/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 15:21:52 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 15:28:00 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Language as Pollution
References: <c47283890712171340x10769b1fs129bc1a4d4eeb8d5@mail.gmail.com><343884.93656.qm@web45810.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><c47283890712171351g6655180ch91ac32860126fbc0@mail.gmail.com>
<CD443F00-22F0-4B8E-84C9-B17918083C29@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <00cc01c84181$564358e0$b5c16018@DL01>
[was Our poemeaning]
Bohm's primary concern was about language, about the virtual impossibility of people, especially groups of people, talking together about thihngs that really mattered to them. That was where he felt the problem lies. We can dance together an sing together, and we can appreciate each others pictures. But when we want to go a little deeper we need language and that's where the trouble starts. -- df
This seems very important and also very hard to give attention. One reason is that language becomes reflexive and mechanical and occurs without much, if any, attention.
It seems difficult to focus on "what the words do 'in there' ", focus on function.
Part of the problem seems to be that word use is image use in the sense that "words are images" and to work well, images must be shared. That people must use identical or similar imagery for words.
Doesn't the idea of word/image/identity begin with Plato? -- dl
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 2:40 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemeaning
On Dec 17, 2007, at 1:51 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
I: Uh oh. Watch out. Zoe got in trouble with her images; they became a little riskay.
I want to know how to shrink images to the size allowable on this list. I PROMISE to use discretion.
PLease do.That is, use discretion.. In this context here and now we are treading on what might become very hot water, and i would hate to see history repeat itself once again.
It is easy to shrink images. If you have photoshop go to image/size and shrink the picture to the size you want. Then save it as a jpeg. If you don't have photoshop then get graphic converter. This is a shareware program for Mac that lets you convert graphics in all sort so ways. Just go to image/ size and make it what you want then save it as a jpeg. it will tell you its size in kbytes or megabytes. Keep it at the low end of kilobytes and you will probably be okay. But remember, Bohm's primary concern was about language, about the virtual impossibility of people, especially groups of people, talking together about thihngs that really mattered to them. That was where he felt the problem lies. We can dance together an sing together, and we can appreciate each others pictures. But when we want to go a little deeper we need language and that's where the trouble starts. Pictures, music, movement are far less likely to lead to controversies that cause fragmentation. And recall how the idea of a graphic online dialogue didn't really work, mainly because it didn't allow anything to develop much beyond the initial show-and-tell sharing which tended to become a game of showing how clever the sender was and howsome of them they could use pictures to put others down.
don
On Dec 17, 2007 4:46 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
How kind (of youus) not to http://tinyurl.com/2rw772 rules, for a brake ;-))
Ps: to "do" (dobe?)...... howhat??
A.L.A.N.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/4483cdcc/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 16:30:06 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 16:33:20 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] test
Message-ID: <20071218.103013.3184.94.ae.dropper@juno.com>
just a test (to see if I can get through now - bounced off yesterday on a
technicality - back now in terms of receiving). Incidentally, about the
picture talk. I don't open urls at all. (a relief that keeps on giving -
time that is). Doesn't matter. Just for your info.
-- funny
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Tue Dec 18 17:21:18 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Tue Dec 18 17:27:35 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <4767D564.000009.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
References: <c47283890712180254p28adcaa4g1210cae07554d261@mail.gmail.com>
<4767D564.000009.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
Message-ID: <c47283890712180821u25e7b555occ9d49198a38ffb9@mail.gmail.com>
I: Are you SURE? How do you know?
On Dec 18, 2007 9:12 AM, william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote:
> >I: ...When Zoe was here, I had gone to the tinyurl site, and it
> >made no sense, so I was hoping for personal instruction. But
> >I just checked out the link below. It may be easier.
> >You don't have to worry about me and discretion. I'm more worried
> >about Alan. He wasn't subscribed during the Zoe era, so he may
> >not know what we're referring to.
>
> Irene, don't you realize that "Alan" and "Zoe" are the same person (Peter
> Krauss)?
>
> **
>
>
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/e9fb26c0/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 17:44:04 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 17:50:21 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] ..... as Pollution
In-Reply-To: <00cc01c84181$564358e0$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <151143.27038.qm@web45807.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
What exACTlie is (does) "pollution"
aaaa nnnn dddd:
(even 'better'):
What not?
http://tinyurl.com/2j37kq
Don Lay, can s'he be: examplemantory?
Alan
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
[was Our poemeaning]
Bohm's primary concern was about language, about the virtual impossibility of people, especially groups of people, talking together about thihngs that really mattered to them. That was where he felt the problem lies. We can dance together an sing together, and we can appreciate each others pictures. But when we want to go a little deeper we need language and that's where the trouble starts. -- df
This seems very important and also very hard to give attention. One reason is that language becomes reflexive and mechanical and occurs without much, if any, attention.
It seems difficult to focus on "what the words do 'in there' ", focus on function.
Part of the problem seems to be that word use is image use in the sense that "words are images" and to work well, images must be shared. That people must use identical or similar imagery for words.
Doesn't the idea of word/image/identity begin with Plato? -- dl
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 2:40 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemeaning
On Dec 17, 2007, at 1:51 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
I: Uh oh. Watch out. Zoe got in trouble with her images; they became a little riskay.
I want to know how to shrink images to the size allowable on this list. I PROMISE to use discretion.
PLease do.That is, use discretion.. In this context here and now we are treading on what might become very hot water, and i would hate to see history repeat itself once again.
It is easy to shrink images. If you have photoshop go to image/size and shrink the picture to the size you want. Then save it as a jpeg. If you don't have photoshop then get graphic converter. This is a shareware program for Mac that lets you convert graphics in all sort so ways. Just go to image/ size and make it what you want then save it as a jpeg. it will tell you its size in kbytes or megabytes. Keep it at the low end of kilobytes and you will probably be okay. But remember, Bohm's primary concern was about language, about the virtual impossibility of people, especially groups of people, talking together about thihngs that really mattered to them. That was where he felt the problem lies. We can dance together an sing together, and we can appreciate each others pictures. But when we want to go a little deeper we need language and that's where the trouble starts. Pictures, music, movement are far less likely to lead to controversies that cause fragmentation. And
recall how the idea of a graphic online dialogue didn't really work, mainly because it didn't allow anything to develop much beyond the initial show-and-tell sharing which tended to become a game of showing how clever the sender was and howsome of them they could use pictures to put others down.
don
On Dec 17, 2007 4:46 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
How kind (of youus) not to http://tinyurl.com/2rw772 rules, for a brake ;-))
Ps: to "do" (dobe?)...... howhat??
A.L.A.N.
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/e660042d/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 17:50:23 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 17:56:38 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] TesT ing ing ing
In-Reply-To: <20071218.103013.3184.94.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <403580.54568.qm@web45810.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Funny, what a beausty. T'here the nnnnnecessity aroses to "clarify"
just a test (to see if I can get through http://tinyurl.com/2yx8td now - bounced off yesterday on atechnicality - back now in terms of receiving). Incidentally, about the
picture talk. I don't open http://tinyurl.com/2htevg urls at all. (a relief that keeps on giving -
time that is). Doesn't matter. Just for your info. funnydoesntweb@juno.com
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/00cb9287/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 17:54:45 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 18:01:02 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712180821u25e7b555occ9d49198a38ffb9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <276185.30463.qm@web45807.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
(How) do you want
To (K)now ;-0
Alan
"I got* you, under my http://tinyurl.com/2a6yrv ...."
*Gut?
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: Are you SURE? How do you know?
On Dec 18, 2007 9:12 AM, william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote:
>I: ...When Zoe was here, I had gone to the tinyurl site, and it
>made no sense, so I was hoping for personal instruction. But
>I just checked out the link below. It may be easier.
>You don't have to worry about me and discretion. I'm more worried
>about Alan. He wasn't subscribed during the Zoe era, so he may
>not know what we're referring to.
Irene, don't you realize that "Alan" and "Zoe" are the same person (Peter Krauss)?
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/59fb2d68/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 18:12:35 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 18:18:56 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] test
References: <20071218.103013.3184.94.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <011201c84199$3024f7f0$b5c16018@DL01>
Incidentally, about the picture talk. I don't open urls at all. -- finny
I tried a few, but have never understood the point.
The relationship of words and images seems far more interesting regarding db/thought, and especially regarding what the words do "in there".
Although we learn to say that words are or stand for images, but are there actually images "in there"? Maybe something else is going on. -- dl
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 10:30 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] test
just a test (to see if I can get through now - bounced off yesterday on a
technicality - back now in terms of receiving). Incidentally, about the
picture talk. I don't open urls at all. (a relief that keeps on giving -
time that is). Doesn't matter. Just for your info.
-- funny
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/648accdb/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 18:23:40 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 18:36:38 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] (still)test(ing)
In-Reply-To: <011201c84199$3024f7f0$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <162406.98941.qm@web45815.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
'N how does it l@@k like when Donlay "understands" a-point, or, for that matter, any thinkg (else)
;-:
A
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
I tried a few [idemages], but have never understood the point.
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/d92de614/attachment.html
From w at david-bohm.net Tue Dec 18 18:31:40 2007
From: w at david-bohm.net (william)
Date: Tue Dec 18 18:37:56 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
References: <c47283890712180821u25e7b555occ9d49198a38ffb9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <476803FC.00000D.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
No, i am not 100% sure but it is a very strong suspicion based on writing
style and behaviour. If it is not Peter then it is an intellectual clone.
Also, don't forget, "Alan" put up the SELF, SOCIETY AND PROPRIOCEPTION paper
on his website (thinkg.net). This is the article that Pat had scanned and
put out on our list. Only Peter Krau? could have done that since he is the
owner of thinkg.net, so he effectively gave away his cover up.
But even if "Alan" is not Peter Krau?, it doesn't really matter; a troll is
a troll whatever its name.
On Dec 15, 2007, at 2:28 PM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
Cheers funni, n kiip it comin.... this here just a qucki:
http://thinkg.net/david_bohm/self_society_proprioception.html
"Gotta" run, ovr to the bigg bois to plai wth, and (un)do som serius wrk.
Ala n
Ps: Let me know if you like so see some changes (colors, fonts, sizes.... -
realli just a draft)
Pss: When did you publish the others xerpts?
-------Original Message-------
From: Irene Darcy
Date: 18.12.2007 17:21:23
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
I: Are you SURE? How do you know?
On Dec 18, 2007 9:12 AM, william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote:
>I: ...When Zoe was here, I had gone to the tinyurl site, and it
>made no sense, so I was hoping for personal instruction. But
>I just checked out the link below. It may be easier.
>You don't have to worry about me and discretion. I'm more worried
>about Alan. He wasn't subscribed during the Zoe era, so he may
>not know what we're referring to.
Irene, don't you realize that "Alan" and "Zoe" are the same person (Peter
Krauss)?
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/e0b717ef/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 18:34:43 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 18:41:02 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <476803FC.00000D.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
Message-ID: <211043.81084.qm@web45809.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Hi William, I agree, whole&heartitly ;_}
But, please, say: What is that, a "troll"??
Dunkescheen
Aan
william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote:
v\:* {behavior:url (#default#vml);} v\:* { BEHAVIOR: url (#default#vml) } No, i am not 100% sure but it is a very strong suspicion based on writing style and behaviour. If it is not Peter then it is an intellectual clone.
Also, don't forget, "Alan" put up the SELF, SOCIETY AND PROPRIOCEPTION paper on his website (thinkg.net). This is the article that Pat had scanned and put out on our list. Only Peter Krau? could have done that since he is the owner of thinkg.net, so he effectively gave away his cover up.
But even if "Alan" is not Peter Krau?, it doesn't really matter; a troll is a troll whatever its name.
On Dec 15, 2007, at 2:28 PM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
Cheers funni, n kiip it comin.... this here just a qucki:
http://thinkg.net/david_bohm/self_society_proprioception.html
"Gotta" run, ovr to the bigg bois to plai wth, and (un)do som serius wrk.
Ala n
Ps: Let me know if you like so see some changes (colors, fonts, sizes.... - realli just a draft)
Pss: When did you publish the others xerpts?
-------Original Message-------
From: Irene Darcy
Date: 18.12.2007 17:21:23
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
I: Are you SURE? How do you know?
On Dec 18, 2007 9:12 AM, william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote:
>I: ...When Zoe was here, I had gone to the tinyurl site, and it
>made no sense, so I was hoping for personal instruction. But
>I just checked out the link below. It may be easier.
>You don't have to worry about me and discretion. I'm more worried
>about Alan. He wasn't subscribed during the Zoe era, so he may
>not know what we're referring to.
Irene, don't you realize that "Alan" and "Zoe" are the same person (Peter Krauss)?
--
Irene
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/334dd9cc/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 19:04:55 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:14:09 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Message-ID: <20071218.131023.3184.133.ae.dropper@juno.com>
No label, no boot.
-- funny
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 09:34:43 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey"
<a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Hi William, I agree, whole&heartitly ;_}
But, please, say: What is that, a "troll"??
Dunkescheen
Aan
william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote:
No, i am not 100% sure but it is a very strong suspicion based on writing
style and behaviour. If it is not Peter then it is an intellectual clone.
Also, don't forget, "Alan" put up the SELF, SOCIETY AND PROPRIOCEPTION
paper on his website (thinkg.net). This is the article that Pat had
scanned and put out on our list. Only Peter Krau? could have done that
since he is the owner of thinkg.net, so he effectively gave away his
cover up.
But even if "Alan" is not Peter Krau?, it doesn't really matter; a troll
is a troll whatever its name.
On Dec 15, 2007, at 2:28 PM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
Cheers funni, n kiip it comin.... this here just a qucki:
http://thinkg.net/david_bohm/self_society_proprioception.html
"Gotta" run, ovr to the bigg bois to plai wth, and (un)do som serius wrk.
Ala n
Ps: Let me know if you like so see some changes (colors, fonts, sizes....
- realli just a draft)
Pss: When did you publish the others xerpts?
-------Original Message-------
From: Irene Darcy
Date: 18.12.2007 17:21:23
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
I: Are you SURE? How do you know?
On Dec 18, 2007 9:12 AM, william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote:
>I: ...When Zoe was here, I had gone to the tinyurl site, and it
>made no sense, so I was hoping for personal instruction. But
>I just checked out the link below. It may be easier.
>You don't have to worry about me and discretion. I'm more worried
>about Alan. He wasn't subscribed during the Zoe era, so he may
>not know what we're referring to.
Irene, don't you realize that "Alan" and "Zoe" are the same person (Peter
Krauss)?
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/27f14d75/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 16:45:06 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:14:12 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Message-ID: <20071218.131023.3184.126.ae.dropper@juno.com>
no us
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:37:07 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
writes:
The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there
be no space?
the old old thought occurs -- no us?
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:05:03 -0500
if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um...
breath
The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there
be no space? Maybe we could say that it is only a useful concept and use
while being aware that it is limited.
Would that be in the direction of unlimited experience? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:09 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um...
breath
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:52:41 -0500
"is there space, time causality in the implicate order",
If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate order' I
think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be
explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are implicated). --
Jeff
Hi Jeff.
Does the question imply space or time by using the idea expressed by
"in"?
If so, does this imply the language we use is not adequate to address the
meaning of the question? -- dl
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/6edcae7b/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 16:37:06 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:14:13 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Message-ID: <20071218.131023.3184.122.ae.dropper@juno.com>
I have a friend who longs to be Casper the Ghost.
I can really get into the invisibility thing myself
but this "body" thing, I mean, how fabulously
funny is that?
-- funny
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:50:40 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
writes:
Baso said, "sometimes I make 'him' raise his eyebrows and blink,
sometimes I do not make 'him' raise his eyebrows and blink. Sometimes
raising the eyebrows and blinking is all right. Sometimes raising the
eyebrows and blinking is not all right. How about you?" Hearing these
words Yakusan was greatly enlightened and he bowed.
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:06:53 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to
say stuff I don't understand (rob)
That is because you know that they say stuff that they don't understand.
And that they have to in order to say anything at all.
-- funny
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/0cfc5da4/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 16:45:54 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:14:17 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Message-ID: <20071218.131023.3184.127.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Words evolved to accommodate the view that space and time are useful. --
dl
What is the process of the separation necessary for "using?"
What is "space?" (Bohm says it's "full" not "empty").
What is "time?" Do words evolve after time?
Does time evolve after words?
Does "after" "come" "before" words.
When does "before" come?
When does "when" come?
-- funny
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:29:29 -0500 "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> writes:
Time and space is used when language is used to talk about space and
time. Words evolved to accommodate the view that space and time are
useful. -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan E. DeBakey
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
USING time, space.... Please, Donlay, give us an example how Donlay
"uses" ... time?.... space?.... ;-)
Alan
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um...
breath
The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there
be no space? Maybe we could say that it is only a useful concept and use
while being aware that it is limited.
Would that be in the direction of unlimited experience? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:09 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um...
breath
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:52:41 -0500
"is there space, time causality in the implicate order",
If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate order' I
think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be
explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are implicated). --
Jeff
Hi Jeff.
Does the question imply space or time by using the idea expressed by
"in"?
If so, does this imply the language we use is not adequate to address the
meaning of the question? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Webb
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 8:30 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Hi,
I would like to comment on the issue: is there space, time causality in
the implicate order.
If one reads something like Bohm's "wholeness and the implicate order' I
think that it is fairly clear that things like space and time can be
explicated out of the implicate order (in which they are implicated). So
the statement "in the implicate order (t)here in no space, time
causality, matter, or mind' seems to me to indicate that the maker of
this statement has completely misunderstood Bohms notion of the
implicate order.
I'm sure that others on this list will be able to add more details.
Jeff
>
> In the attached article, the author writes, ?in the
> 'implicate' order ere is no space, time, causality,
> matter, or mind.? (Note: I am guessing ?ere? is a typo for
> ?there?.)
>
> In the implicate order there is no space, time, causality,
> matter, or mind. ?? Is this statement true?
>
> Regina
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/9a2eada9/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 16:51:55 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:14:19 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Message-ID: <20071218.131023.3184.129.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Is meaning meaningful non - conceptually?
Is the necessary "otherwise" to 'meaning as manmade' "meaningless? Or
meaninglessness?
What is it that makes "meaning" seem necessary?
-- funny
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:11:23 -0500 "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> writes:
I mean we all use the word mean, meaning, etc. A philosopher said that
the question of meaning is meaningful.
Are we all using some thingK that we know not, neither stand under, over
or beside?
Can it be acceptable that meaning is only somethingK manmade, and that
otherwise, everything including us is meaningless? Is there
meaninglessness?
Is the question of meaning itself meaningless?
I've been trying to give attention to the idea advanced by some thinkers
that the Greek logos has been interpreted as meaning. What might that
mean? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:15 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
What is meaning?
how do you mean?
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 09:15:59 -0500
Can one eat them, live off them (too---?)) -- Alan
Does the question of food, etc., imply that man, that we live by bread
alone?
Maybe what is important about QT is the idea of meaning. What is the
meaning?
What is meaning? -- dl
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/9fdc03dd/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 16:49:29 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:14:21 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Message-ID: <20071218.131023.3184.128.ae.dropper@juno.com>
The thing about acting and pretending is that it is characteristics and
characters that
are acted and pretended without an awareness that this is not "who"
and/or "what" we are.
When there is this awareness [and there is quite a range of such
awareness; it can tend to develop
over a long period] the acting and pretending can [and will] easily
continue but now without its
making a mess by {trying to} exclusively running the show [running the
show unintelligently]. This
"awareness" is a kind of "pipeline" that feeds air and light into the
costume,
allowing the seams to stretch and relax and loosening the tight weave of
its
fabric into more light than thread.
-- funny
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:20:21 -0500 "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> writes:
Rob: I think so and also maybe even when acting and pretending
dl: Maybe so. Thought, however, presents the idea that what we act and
pretend is the known, the repeated, but there is always the new, maybe
New Being that is experienced as not the same old known roles, etc.
Rob: I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is
allowed to say stuff I don't understand
dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning, be
meaningful? dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:20 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting
and pretending the social identity?
I think so
and also maybe even when acting and pretending
I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is allowed to
say stuff I don't understand
From: donlay@knology.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of my
pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores "
precede the experience of the identity processes being suspended, being
held in suspension?
If so, then maybe the meaning of "self aggrandizement flying out of my
pores " might be that identity has limited meaning.
Then what is the meaning of someone talking about "self aggrandizement
flying out of my pores "? Could it be to demonstrate meaning?
Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not acting
and pretending the social identity?
Resonance anyone? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
When the identity movement is suspended, experience of being does not
cease.
Then, it becomes clear that ontic intelligence does not have to be
personalized as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with Weber.
Watching the identity movement (thought), awareness of the identity
thought may and does at times suspend the identity processes.
Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning that
identity processes are not needed, then that awareness suspends the
unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need occurs, then the
identity processes recur.
It appears that the I identity is not needed for identity suspension.
That's the way it seems to me, to this identity when the identity
processes are present.
Resonance anyone ..., all you outer identities "out there"? -- dl
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/ce18e3ae/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 17:00:38 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:14:23 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Language as Pollution
Message-ID: <20071218.131023.3184.130.ae.dropper@juno.com>
It seems difficult to focus on "what the words do 'in there' ", focus on
function. (dl)
Where there is focus on function, on "what the words do in there" (which
is what distinguished bohm dialogue from everyday group talk) there is a
perceiving of [the movement of] thought rather than a perceiving with
thought.
--funny
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 09:21:52 -0500 "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net> writes:
[was Our poemeaning]
Bohm's primary concern was about language, about the virtual
impossibility of people, especially groups of people, talking together
about thihngs that really mattered to them. That was where he felt the
problem lies. We can dance together an sing together, and we can
appreciate each others pictures. But when we want to go a little deeper
we need language and that's where the trouble starts. -- df
This seems very important and also very hard to give attention. One
reason is that language becomes reflexive and mechanical and occurs
without much, if any, attention.
It seems difficult to focus on "what the words do 'in there' ", focus on
function.
Part of the problem seems to be that word use is image use in the sense
that "words are images" and to work well, images must be shared. That
people must use identical or similar imagery for words.
Doesn't the idea of word/image/identity begin with Plato? -- dl
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 2:40 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemeaning
On Dec 17, 2007, at 1:51 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
I: Uh oh. Watch out. Zoe got in trouble with her images; they became a
little riskay.
I want to know how to shrink images to the size allowable on this list.
I PROMISE to use discretion.
PLease do.That is, use discretion.. In this context here and now we are
treading on what might become very hot water, and i would hate to see
history repeat itself once again.
It is easy to shrink images. If you have photoshop go to image/size and
shrink the picture to the size you want. Then save it as a jpeg. If you
don't have photoshop then get graphic converter. This is a shareware
program for Mac that lets you convert graphics in all sort so ways. Just
go to image/ size and make it what you want then save it as a jpeg. it
will tell you its size in kbytes or megabytes. Keep it at the low end of
kilobytes and you will probably be okay. But remember, Bohm's primary
concern was about language, about the virtual impossibility of people,
especially groups of people, talking together about thihngs that really
mattered to them. That was where he felt the problem lies. We can dance
together an sing together, and we can appreciate each others pictures.
But when we want to go a little deeper we need language and that's where
the trouble starts. Pictures, music, movement are far less likely to lead
to controversies that cause fragmentation. And recall how the idea of a
graphic online dialogue didn't really work, mainly because it didn't
allow anything to develop much beyond the initial show-and-tell sharing
which tended to become a game of showing how clever the sender was and
howsome of them they could use pictures to put others down.
don
On Dec 17, 2007 4:46 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
How kind (of youus) not to http://tinyurl.com/2rw772 rules, for a brake
;-))
Ps: to "do" (dobe?)...... howhat??
A.L.A.N.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/76d854b7/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 16:41:29 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:14:24 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Message-ID: <20071218.131023.3184.123.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Maybe the feeling that "life is not meaningful" comes from the thought
"life is not
meaningful." Where ever would that thought have "come from?" It would
definitely
have to be inclusive of a thought of "meaning" as separate from "life,"
wouldn't it?
And even the "within" thing separates them.
It looks like we just have to figure out [oops] how to not take ANY of
the thoughts
as realities. No wait. the "how" [more thoughts] will certainly get in
the way of this (just as the "figure out" [more thoughts] will).
-- funny
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:48:07 -0700 "Susan Clemons"
<Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net> writes:
I mean we all use the word mean, meaning, etc. A philosopher said that
the question of meaning is meaningful.
Are we all using some thing that we know not, neither stand under, over
or beside? dl
What if we don't do any of those things but simply live within it?
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 12:11 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I mean we all use the word mean, meaning, etc. A philosopher said that
the question of meaning is meaningful.
Are we all using some thingK that we know not, neither stand under, over
or beside?
Can it be acceptable that meaning is only somethingK manmade, and that
otherwise, everything including us is meaningless? Is there
meaninglessness?
Is the question of meaning itself meaningless?
I've been trying to give attention to the idea advanced by some thinkers
that the Greek logos has been interpreted as meaning. What might that
mean? -- dl
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/1662aa01/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 18:59:27 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:14:29 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Message-ID: <20071218.131023.3184.132.ae.dropper@juno.com>
You can tell by that conspicuous birthmark on the
left side of his brain.
-- funny
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 11:21:18 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
writes:
I: Are you SURE? How do you know?
On Dec 18, 2007 9:12 AM, william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote:
>I: ...When Zoe was here, I had gone to the tinyurl site, and it
>made no sense, so I was hoping for personal instruction. But
>I just checked out the link below. It may be easier.
>You don't have to worry about me and discretion. I'm more worried
>about Alan. He wasn't subscribed during the Zoe era, so he may
>not know what we're referring to.
Irene, don't you realize that "Alan" and "Zoe" are the same person (Peter
Krauss)?
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/0a7e772e/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 16:42:49 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:14:31 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Message-ID: <20071218.131023.3184.124.ae.dropper@juno.com>
no me?
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:14 -0800 donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com>
writes:
Should be me, no?
X
On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:37 AM, rob mooney wrote:
The thought occurs -- since we all use time, space, etc., how could there
be no space?
the old old thought occurs -- no us?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/3db26b79/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 16:34:05 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:14:32 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our Poem
Message-ID: <20071218.131023.3184.121.ae.dropper@juno.com>
fullness pours out
and it all empties into white
the mounds of it - frozen overnight
worms throw up casts
in the fine snow, crystals,
up close you can see
the colors - LOOK
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:03:41 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
writes:
worms throw up casts
in the fine snow
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.com
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:40:52 -0800
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Pat, look at your letter below. Do you know why it has the message from
Symantec on it? This is something that keeps turning up on people's
e-mails, and it may be some kind of worm or virus.
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:09 AM, ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
This message has been processed by Symantec's AntiVirus Technology.
Unknown00000000.data was not scanned for viruses because too many nested
levels of files were found.
For more information on antivirus tips and technology, visit
http://ses.symantec.com/
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Date: December 17, 2007 11:09:47 AM PST
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
fullness pours out
and it all empties into white
the mounds of it - frozen overnight
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:23:27 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
writes:
fullness pours out
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:00:04 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
And it all empties into white.
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 13:43:40 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
writes:
Naming plays its oldest game.
Somehow out of reach it dances
nine dances to itself. Nine dances
all in couples made of three.
And if we do not leave our light
we will be eaten by it long
before it shines and dies again
so leave our light alone to be.
Run apple certainties under
the spout, what memories they
bind in cankered onion light
from lullabies of thunder.
And we are leaves as always,
fallen from the sunburn tree.
Till shame and calamine find us
shovelling blossom snow
Before the no, before the go,
before the be became, we will
become before the sun
has ever been born below.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/4f944fa8/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 19:10:20 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:14:34 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] send 17th
Message-ID: <20071218.131023.3184.134.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Don Lay, can you send me all of the e-mails from the 17th (Monday)? No
need to send them separately; just select all and send the batch as a
batch. If you can't do that easily let me know on the list and maybe
someone can. (Have never been able to access the archives - even with
easy internet access - which is only occasional.).
-- funny
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 16:44:00 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:14:35 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our Poem
Message-ID: <20071218.131023.3184.125.ae.dropper@juno.com>
What I see
it does not seem
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:39:07 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
writes:
I see it black
on my screen
but I know
there is no
black in
transmitted
light
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:09:47 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
fullness pours out
and it all empties into white
the mounds of it - frozen overnight
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:23:27 +0000 rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
writes:
fullness pours out
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:00:04 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
And it all empties into white.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/03e933a8/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Tue Dec 18 19:26:30 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:28:29 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] walmarting
Message-ID: <20071218.132633.3184.135.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Walmart has a policy that it has used frequently which is to open 2 (and
even sometimes 3) stores in a small locality. Then when they have
successfully captured all of the business attention of that locality they
close the second (and third) store[s].
-- funny
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 19:22:49 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:29:13 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] send 17th
In-Reply-To: <20071218.131023.3184.134.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <304709.88517.qm@web45805.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Funny, (not)dying to be
"Left"
Out&
Over&
Out
http://www.parentscanada.com/uploads/schoolhead.jpg
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Don Lay, can you send me all of the e-mails from the 17th (Monday)? No
need to send them separately; just select all and send the batch as a
batch. If you can't do that easily let me know on the list and maybe
someone can. (Have never been able to access the archives - even with
easy internet access - which is only occasional.).
-- funny
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/42b42a54/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 19:25:24 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:31:42 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <20071218.131023.3184.132.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <961993.79382.qm@web45803.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Funny, sweetie: http://tinyurl.com/ynrou4
;-)))
Alan
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
You can tell by that conspicuous birthmark on the
left side of his brain.
-- funny
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 11:21:18 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com> writes:
I: Are you SURE? How do you know?
On Dec 18, 2007 9:12 AM, william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote:
>I: ...When Zoe was here, I had gone to the tinyurl site, and it
>made no sense, so I was hoping for personal instruction. But
>I just checked out the link below. It may be easier.
>You don't have to worry about me and discretion. I'm more worried
>about Alan. He wasn't subscribed during the Zoe era, so he may
>not know what we're referring to.
Irene, don't you realize that "Alan" and "Zoe" are the same person (Peter Krauss)?
--
Irene
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/6ceabc71/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 19:28:07 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:34:23 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <20071218.131023.3184.133.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <588362.19119.qm@web45806.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
iwebnut@juno.com wrote: No label, no http://tinyurl.com/yvfdop
-- funny
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/78ab5953/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Tue Dec 18 19:38:52 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:45:10 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712180254p28adcaa4g1210cae07554d261@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c47283890712171641y2ec41796od299cfcf973a43b1@mail.gmail.com>
<58782.82899.qm@web45801.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
<c47283890712171656x5f4d8dew38a2f8078b4fed92@mail.gmail.com>
<3EBA7B2B-7C02-41C3-9D28-91A5E9AC2957@dc.rr.com>
<c47283890712180254p28adcaa4g1210cae07554d261@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8A27D1E9-1FCB-4EC4-9DF4-0B9E2E7E4451@dc.rr.com>
Irene, I am surprised. Have you really not spotted who Alan is? He
has revealed his identity a number of times already. I think Susan
was the first to spot it almost immediately he came on line. It took
me a while longer. So far I have no complaint. What he has been doing
here, along with Rob and Pat, seems to have opened some doors to a
looser approach to it all and I like that. I did, by the way, Google
Alan but found nobody.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 2:54 AM, Irene Darcy wrote:
> I: Gosh, don't you guys ever sleep? You'll made so much noise,
> you woke me up an hour ago!
> Thanks, Don. When Zoe was here, I had gone to the tinyurl site,
> and it made no sense, so I was hoping for personal instruction.
> But I just checked out the link below. It may be easier.
> You don't have to worry about me and discretion. I'm more worried
> about Alan. He wasn't subscribed during the Zoe era, so he may not
> know what we're referring to. Of course, you're going all the way
> back to the pk era when he first started OD. I wasn't on board
> then, but so far, the way Alan is using images makes more sense to
> me than his words.
> Maybe a group discussion of how we can explore the use of images in
> relationship to what Bohm says about them would be a good idea.
> Then group feedback to see how it's working, what we've discovered,
> and how we can do it better. dl should be happy; we'll need to
> take ratio into account to achieve balance! I'll try to find some
> time to do quotes on it, but maybe Pat will, too. I've got a busy
> day in the street ahead of me. Both my oven and my microwave died
> on me, so I've got to replace one of them today.
>
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 3:12 AM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
> Irene, for god's sake just look at the links and go to tinyurl.com.
> You can make all you want
>
> don
>
> On Dec 17, 2007, at 4:56 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
>
>> I: Imag-ineg, sounds of applause.
>>
>> On Dec 17, 2007 7:52 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I: Don Laying http://tinyurl.com/35olm2 How lovely.
>>
>> (Top in strigKing
>> disdance).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/d44af1ee/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 19:32:18 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:45:14 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] walmarting
In-Reply-To: <20071218.132633.3184.135.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <512878.73851.qm@web45811.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Whoever said http://tinyurl.com/2t28dn can't buy
happiness simply didn't know
where to go
s hopping ;--)
A'man
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
Walmart has a policy that it has used frequently which is to open 2 (and
even sometimes 3) stores in a small locality. Then when they have
successfully captured all of the business attention of that locality they
close the second (and third) store[s].
-- funny
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/2282c96f/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 19:44:09 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:50:27 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <8A27D1E9-1FCB-4EC4-9DF4-0B9E2E7E4451@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <740164.16450.qm@web45810.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
But but but, Don!
http://tinyurl.com/2feoyl
::--@
Onealan
donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
Irene, I am surprised. Have you really not spotted who Alan is? He has revealed his identity a number of times already. I think Susan was the first to spot it almost immediately he came on line. It took me a while longer. So far I have no complaint. What he has been doing here, along with Rob and Pat, seems to have opened some doors to a looser approach to it all and I like that. I did, by the way, Google Alan but found nobody.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 2:54 AM, Irene Darcy wrote:
I: Gosh, don't you guys ever sleep? You'll made so much noise, you woke me up an hour ago!
Thanks, Don. When Zoe was here, I had gone to the tinyurl site, and it made no sense, so I was hoping for personal instruction. But I just checked out the link below. It may be easier.
You don't have to worry about me and discretion. I'm more worried about Alan. He wasn't subscribed during the Zoe era, so he may not know what we're referring to. Of course, you're going all the way back to the pk era when he first started OD. I wasn't on board then, but so far, the way Alan is using images makes more sense to me than his words.
Maybe a group discussion of how we can explore the use of images in relationship to what Bohm says about them would be a good idea. Then group feedback to see how it's working, what we've discovered, and how we can do it better. dl should be happy; we'll need to take ratio into account to achieve balance! I'll try to find some time to do quotes on it, but maybe Pat will, too. I've got a busy day in the street ahead of me. Both my oven and my microwave died on me, so I've got to replace one of them today.
On Dec 18, 2007 3:12 AM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
Irene, for god's sake just look at the links and go to tinyurl.com. You can make all you want
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 4:56 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
I: Imag-ineg, sounds of applause.
On Dec 17, 2007 7:52 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com > wrote:
Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: Don Laying http://tinyurl.com/35olm2 How lovely.
(Top in strigKing disdance).
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/901859b0/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Tue Dec 18 19:45:19 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Tue Dec 18 19:51:38 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Language as Pollution
In-Reply-To: <00cc01c84181$564358e0$b5c16018@DL01>
References: <c47283890712171340x10769b1fs129bc1a4d4eeb8d5@mail.gmail.com><343884.93656.qm@web45810.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><c47283890712171351g6655180ch91ac32860126fbc0@mail.gmail.com>
<CD443F00-22F0-4B8E-84C9-B17918083C29@dc.rr.com>
<00cc01c84181$564358e0$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <2ED2DD1E-A0CD-4C01-9970-19E0E04DEE37@dc.rr.com>
On Dec 18, 2007, at 6:21 AM, Don Lay wrote:
> Part of the problem seems to be that word use is image use in the
> sense that "words are images" and to work well,images must be
> shared. That people must use identical or similar imagery for words.
So what do your words above do? Did you ever wonder why there are so
many different languages? Why didn't evolution produce a single
language.
>
> Doesn't the idea of word/image/identity begin with Plato? -- dl
I have no idea. So far as I know word/image/ identity began with the
first use of language to communicate something from one person to
another.
don
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/18ef8ba4/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Tue Dec 18 19:54:25 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Tue Dec 18 20:00:44 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <20071218.131023.3184.128.ae.dropper@juno.com>
References: <20071218.131023.3184.128.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <B19D6596-CFFF-4D55-B3D0-BCCC592B7580@dc.rr.com>
I think that almost every aspect of everybody's personality has been
gathered from others - partly through genetics but mostly through
social interaction dating from infancy. Whoever and whateve an
individual is,he or she, is a composite of his or her environmental
influences, albeit a unique mix.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 7:49 AM, ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
> The thing about acting and pretending is that it is characteristics
> and characters that
> are acted and pretended without an awareness that this is not "who"
> and/or "what" we are.
> When there is this awareness [and there is quite a range of such
> awareness; it can tend to develop
> over a long period] the acting and pretending can [and will] easily
> continue but now without its
> making a mess by {trying to} exclusively running the show [running
> the show unintelligently]. This
> "awareness" is a kind of "pipeline" that feeds air and light into
> the costume,
> allowing the seams to stretch and relax and loosening the tight
> weave of its
> fabric into more light than thread.
>
> -- funny
>
>
> On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:20:21 -0500 "Don Lay" <donlay@knology.net>
> writes:
> Rob: I think so and also maybe even when acting and pretending
>
> dl: Maybe so. Thought, however, presents the idea that what we
> act and pretend is the known, the repeated, but there is always the
> new, maybe New Being that is experienced as not the same old known
> roles, etc.
>
> Rob: I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is
> allowed to say stuff I don't understand
>
> dl: Surely a poem need not be understood in order to have meaning,
> be meaningful? dl
>
> http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: rob mooney
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:20 PM
> Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
>
> Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not
> acting and pretending the social identity?
>
> I think so
> and also maybe even when acting and pretending
>
> I also have no idea what Pat meant but I know that a poet is
> allowed to say stuff I don't understand
>
>
> From: donlay@knology.net
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:02 -0500
>
> I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement flying out of
> my pores from the morning readings. -- Funny
>
> Does the experience of "self aggrandizement flying out of my pores
> " precede the experience of the identity processes being suspended,
> being held in suspension?
>
> If so, then maybe the meaning of "self aggrandizement flying out of
> my pores " might be that identity has limited meaning.
>
> Then what is the meaning of someone talking about "self
> aggrandizement flying out of my pores "? Could it be to
> demonstrate meaning?
>
> Could it be that one more participates in this that is when not
> acting and pretending the social identity?
>
> Resonance anyone? -- dl
>
>
> http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Don Lay
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:27 AM
> Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
>
> When the identity movement is suspended, experience of being does
> not cease.
>
> Then, it becomes clear that ontic intelligence does not have to be
> personalized as Bohm indicates, I believe in the interview with Weber.
>
> Watching the identity movement (thought), awareness of the identity
> thought may and does at times suspend the identity processes.
>
> Maybe we should say when awareness clearly presents the reasoning
> that identity processes are not needed, then that awareness
> suspends the unneeded processes. Later, when awareness of need
> occurs, then the identity processes recur.
>
> It appears that the I identity is not needed for identity
> suspension. That's the way it seems to me, to this identity when
> the identity processes are present.
>
> Resonance anyone ..., all you outer identities "out there"? -- dl
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/10c35337/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Tue Dec 18 20:02:43 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Tue Dec 18 20:09:03 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <211043.81084.qm@web45809.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <211043.81084.qm@web45809.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <E2465893-9760-4B88-8FD4-C158A21A75C5@dc.rr.com>
?
On Dec 18, 2007, at 9:34 AM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
> Hi William, I agree, whole&heartitly ;_}
>
> But, please, say: What is that, a "troll"??
>
> Dunkescheen
>
> Aan
>
> william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote:
> No, i am not 100% sure but it is a very strong suspicion based on
> writing style and behaviour. If it is not Peter then it is an
> intellectual clone.
>
> Also, don't forget, "Alan" put up the SELF, SOCIETY AND
> PROPRIOCEPTION paper on his website (thinkg.net). This is the
> article that Pat had scanned and put out on our list. Only Peter
> Krau? could have done that since he is the owner of thinkg.net, so
> he effectively gave away his cover up.
>
> But even if "Alan" is not Peter Krau?, it doesn't really matter; a
> troll is a troll whatever its name.
>
>
>
> On Dec 15, 2007, at 2:28 PM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
>
> Cheers funni, n kiip it comin.... this here just a qucki:
> http://thinkg.net/david_bohm/self_society_proprioception.html
> "Gotta" run, ovr to the bigg bois to plai wth, and (un)do som
> serius wrk.
> Ala n
> Ps: Let me know if you like so see some changes (colors, fonts,
> sizes.... - realli just a draft)
> Pss: When did you publish the others xerpts?
>
> -------Original Message-------
>
> From: Irene Darcy
> Date: 18.12.2007 17:21:23
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
>
> I: Are you SURE? How do you know?
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 9:12 AM, william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote:
> >I: ...When Zoe was here, I had gone to the tinyurl site, and it
> >made no sense, so I was hoping for personal instruction. But
> >I just checked out the link below. It may be easier.
> >You don't have to worry about me and discretion. I'm more worried
> >about Alan. He wasn't subscribed during the Zoe era, so he may
> >not know what we're referring to.
>
> Irene, don't you realize that "Alan" and "Zoe" are the same person
> (Peter Krauss)?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Irene
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
> Search.
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
Skipped content of type multipart/related
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Tue Dec 18 20:09:41 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Tue Dec 18 20:16:00 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <740164.16450.qm@web45810.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <740164.16450.qm@web45810.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <F4B4CD6F-1C83-44BA-86E7-BAAB44D9548C@dc.rr.com>
http://images.google.com/images?
imgsz=icon&svnum=10&um=1&hl=en&safe=off&q=%22alan+deBakey%
22&btnG=Search+Images
On Dec 18, 2007, at 10:44 AM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
> But but but, Don!
>
> http://tinyurl.com/2feoyl
>
> ::--@
>
> Onealan
>
>
>
> donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
> Irene, I am surprised. Have you really not spotted who Alan is? He
> has revealed his identity a number of times already. I think Susan
> was the first to spot it almost immediately he came on line. It
> took me a while longer. So far I have no complaint. What he has
> been doing here, along with Rob and Pat, seems to have opened some
> doors to a looser approach to it all and I like that. I did, by
> the way, Google Alan but found nobody.
>
> don
>
> On Dec 18, 2007, at 2:54 AM, Irene Darcy wrote:
>
>> I: Gosh, don't you guys ever sleep? You'll made so much noise,
>> you woke me up an hour ago!
>> Thanks, Don. When Zoe was here, I had gone to the tinyurl site,
>> and it made no sense, so I was hoping for personal instruction.
>> But I just checked out the link below. It may be easier.
>> You don't have to worry about me and discretion. I'm more worried
>> about Alan. He wasn't subscribed during the Zoe era, so he may
>> not know what we're referring to. Of course, you're going all the
>> way back to the pk era when he first started OD. I wasn't on
>> board then, but so far, the way Alan is using images makes more
>> sense to me than his words.
>> Maybe a group discussion of how we can explore the use of images
>> in relationship to what Bohm says about them would be a good
>> idea. Then group feedback to see how it's working, what we've
>> discovered, and how we can do it better. dl should be happy;
>> we'll need to take ratio into account to achieve balance! I'll
>> try to find some time to do quotes on it, but maybe Pat will,
>> too. I've got a busy day in the street ahead of me. Both my oven
>> and my microwave died on me, so I've got to replace one of them
>> today.
>>
>>
>> On Dec 18, 2007 3:12 AM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
>> Irene, for god's sake just look at the links and go to
>> tinyurl.com. You can make all you want
>>
>> don
>>
>> On Dec 17, 2007, at 4:56 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
>>
>>> I: Imag-ineg, sounds of applause.
>>>
>>> On Dec 17, 2007 7:52 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I: Don Laying http://tinyurl.com/35olm2 How lovely.
>>>
>>> (Top in strigKing
>>> disdance).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
> Search.
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/34376a0d/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 20:11:41 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 20:17:59 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <E2465893-9760-4B88-8FD4-C158A21A75C5@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <949045.88226.qm@web45808.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Funny, THAT sure looks like THIS http://tinyurl.com/yqsouv, Don ;-}}
What in hellheaven happened? What "gave" ?
Just a change of hair,do?
''''''----)
Humanimalan
donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
???
On Dec 18, 2007, at 9:34 AM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
> Hi William, I agree, whole&heartitly ;_}
>
> But, please, say: What is that, a "troll"??
>
> Dunkescheen
>
> Aan
>
> william wrote:
> No, i am not 100% sure but it is a very strong suspicion based on
> writing style and behaviour. If it is not Peter then it is an
> intellectual clone.
>
> Also, don't forget, "Alan" put up the SELF, SOCIETY AND
> PROPRIOCEPTION paper on his website (thinkg.net). This is the
> article that Pat had scanned and put out on our list. Only Peter
> Krau?? could have done that since he is the owner of thinkg.net, so
> he effectively gave away his cover up.
>
> But even if "Alan" is not Peter Krau??, it doesn't really matter; a
> troll is a troll whatever its name.
>
>
>
> On Dec 15, 2007, at 2:28 PM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
>
> Cheers funni, n kiip it comin.... this here just a qucki:
> http://thinkg.net/david_bohm/self_society_proprioception.html
> "Gotta" run, ovr to the bigg bois to plai wth, and (un)do som
> serius wrk.
> Ala n
> Ps: Let me know if you like so see some changes (colors, fonts,
> sizes.... - realli just a draft)
> Pss: When did you publish the others xerpts?
>
> -------Original Message-------
>
> From: Irene Darcy
> Date: 18.12.2007 17:21:23
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
>
> I: Are you SURE? How do you know?
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 9:12 AM, william wrote:
> >I: ...When Zoe was here, I had gone to the tinyurl site, and it
> >made no sense, so I was hoping for personal instruction. But
> >I just checked out the link below. It may be easier.
> >You don't have to worry about me and discretion. I'm more worried
> >about Alan. He wasn't subscribed during the Zoe era, so he may
> >not know what we're referring to.
>
> Irene, don't you realize that "Alan" and "Zoe" are the same person
> (Peter Krauss)?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Irene
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
> Search.
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/ccac7b2f/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 20:16:06 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Tue Dec 18 20:22:24 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <F4B4CD6F-1C83-44BA-86E7-BAAB44D9548C@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <647893.2820.qm@web45816.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Imagination, young man! Ein-Bild-ungs-Kraft!!
http://216.239.59.104/search?hl=en&q=%22alan+deBakey%22&btnG=Google+Search
Post-scriptum:
In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the 2 already dis-played*.
If you like, you can repeat the search with the omitted results included.
Post-scriptum II:
Godogooglord: l@@k, fellow-dia-loggers: there is *LAY in PLAYED (too).... no that 's an i-opnr, no ;->>>>
Kind {german for: child} A
donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
http://images.google.com/images?imgsz=icon&svnum=10&um=1&hl=en&safe=off&q=%22alan+deBakey%22&btnG=Search+Images
On Dec 18, 2007, at 10:44 AM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
But but but, Don!
http://tinyurl.com/2feoyl
::--@
Onealan
donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
Irene, I am surprised. Have you really not spotted who Alan is? He has revealed his identity a number of times already. I think Susan was the first to spot it almost immediately he came on line. It took me a while longer. So far I have no complaint. What he has been doing here, along with Rob and Pat, seems to have opened some doors to a looser approach to it all and I like that. I did, by the way, Google Alan but found nobody.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 2:54 AM, Irene Darcy wrote:
I: Gosh, don't you guys ever sleep? You'll made so much noise, you woke me up an hour ago!
Thanks, Don. When Zoe was here, I had gone to the tinyurl site, and it made no sense, so I was hoping for personal instruction. But I just checked out the link below. It may be easier.
You don't have to worry about me and discretion. I'm more worried about Alan. He wasn't subscribed during the Zoe era, so he may not know what we're referring to. Of course, you're going all the way back to the pk era when he first started OD. I wasn't on board then, but so far, the way Alan is using images makes more sense to me than his words.
Maybe a group discussion of how we can explore the use of images in relationship to what Bohm says about them would be a good idea. Then group feedback to see how it's working, what we've discovered, and how we can do it better. dl should be happy; we'll need to take ratio into account to achieve balance! I'll try to find some time to do quotes on it, but maybe Pat will, too. I've got a busy day in the street ahead of me. Both my oven and my microwave died on me, so I've got to replace one of them today.
On Dec 18, 2007 3:12 AM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
Irene, for god's sake just look at the links and go to tinyurl.com. You can make all you want
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 4:56 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
I: Imag-ineg, sounds of applause.
On Dec 17, 2007 7:52 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com > wrote:
Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: Don Laying http://tinyurl.com/35olm2 How lovely.
(Top in strigKing disdance).
---------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/3908d619/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Tue Dec 18 20:25:53 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Tue Dec 18 20:32:13 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <647893.2820.qm@web45816.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <647893.2820.qm@web45816.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <644282B0-AF77-4D11-8CA7-7C51FDAC7B94@dc.rr.com>
The two hits were for Gary Alan deBakey not Alan E. deBaky,
There is a surgeon called deBakey. MIght he have performed the lobotomy?
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 11:16 AM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
> Imagination, young man! Ein-Bild-ungs-Kraft!!
>
> http://216.239.59.104/search?hl=en&q=%22alan+deBakey%22&btnG=Google
> +Search
>
> Post-scriptum:
>
> In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted
> some entries very similar to the 2 already dis-played*.
> If you like, you can repeat the search with the omitted results
> included.
> Post-scriptum II:
>
> Godogooglord: l@@k, fellow-dia-loggers: there is *LAY in PLAYED
> (too).... no that 's an i-opnr, no ;->>>>
>
> Kind {german for: child} A
>
>
> donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
> http://images.google.com/images?
> imgsz=icon&svnum=10&um=1&hl=en&safe=off&q=%22alan+deBakey%
> 22&btnG=Search+Images
>
>
> On Dec 18, 2007, at 10:44 AM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
>
>> But but but, Don!
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/2feoyl
>>
>> ::--@
>>
>> Onealan
>>
>>
>>
>> donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
>> Irene, I am surprised. Have you really not spotted who Alan is? He
>> has revealed his identity a number of times already. I think Susan
>> was the first to spot it almost immediately he came on line. It
>> took me a while longer. So far I have no complaint. What he has
>> been doing here, along with Rob and Pat, seems to have opened some
>> doors to a looser approach to it all and I like that. I did, by
>> the way, Google Alan but found nobody.
>>
>> don
>>
>> On Dec 18, 2007, at 2:54 AM, Irene Darcy wrote:
>>
>>> I: Gosh, don't you guys ever sleep? You'll made so much noise,
>>> you woke me up an hour ago!
>>> Thanks, Don. When Zoe was here, I had gone to the tinyurl site,
>>> and it made no sense, so I was hoping for personal instruction.
>>> But I just checked out the link below. It may be easier.
>>> You don't have to worry about me and discretion. I'm more
>>> worried about Alan. He wasn't subscribed during the Zoe era, so
>>> he may not know what we're referring to. Of course, you're going
>>> all the way back to the pk era when he first started OD. I
>>> wasn't on board then, but so far, the way Alan is using images
>>> makes more sense to me than his words.
>>> Maybe a group discussion of how we can explore the use of images
>>> in relationship to what Bohm says about them would be a good
>>> idea. Then group feedback to see how it's working, what we've
>>> discovered, and how we can do it better. dl should be happy;
>>> we'll need to take ratio into account to achieve balance! I'll
>>> try to find some time to do quotes on it, but maybe Pat will,
>>> too. I've got a busy day in the street ahead of me. Both my
>>> oven and my microwave died on me, so I've got to replace one of
>>> them today.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 18, 2007 3:12 AM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
>>> Irene, for god's sake just look at the links and go to
>>> tinyurl.com. You can make all you want
>>>
>>> don
>>>
>>> On Dec 17, 2007, at 4:56 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
>>>
>>>> I: Imag-ineg, sounds of applause.
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 17, 2007 7:52 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Irene Darcy < irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I: Don Laying http://tinyurl.com/35olm2 How lovely.
>>>>
>>>> (Top in strigKing
>>>> disdance).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>
>>
>> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>>
>>
>> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
>> Search.
>>
>> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
> Search.
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/a31bebcc/attachment.html
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Tue Dec 18 20:47:54 2007
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Tue Dec 18 20:54:13 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
References: <c47283890712180254p28adcaa4g1210cae07554d261@mail.gmail.com><4767D564.000009.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
<c47283890712180821u25e7b555occ9d49198a38ffb9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00c401c841ae$e27f07f0$fb76480c@HOME>
Because he said so.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Irene Darcy
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 9:21 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
I: Are you SURE? How do you know?
On Dec 18, 2007 9:12 AM, william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote:
>I: ...When Zoe was here, I had gone to the tinyurl site, and it
>made no sense, so I was hoping for personal instruction. But
>I just checked out the link below. It may be easier.
>You don't have to worry about me and discretion. I'm more worried
>about Alan. He wasn't subscribed during the Zoe era, so he may
>not know what we're referring to.
Irene, don't you realize that "Alan" and "Zoe" are the same person (Peter Krauss)?
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/9806cb7b/attachment.html
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Tue Dec 18 20:53:26 2007
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Tue Dec 18 20:59:44 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
References: <c47283890712171641y2ec41796od299cfcf973a43b1@mail.gmail.com><58782.82899.qm@web45801.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><c47283890712171656x5f4d8dew38a2f8078b4fed92@mail.gmail.com><3EBA7B2B-7C02-41C3-9D28-91A5E9AC2957@dc.rr.com><c47283890712180254p28adcaa4g1210cae07554d261@mail.gmail.com>
<8A27D1E9-1FCB-4EC4-9DF4-0B9E2E7E4451@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <014501c841af$a828fd80$fb76480c@HOME>
I for one will not keep participating if this is the style that dialogue is going to take.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 11:38 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Irene, I am surprised. Have you really not spotted who Alan is? He has revealed his identity a number of times already. I think Susan was the first to spot it almost immediately he came on line. It took me a while longer. So far I have no complaint. What he has been doing here, along with Rob and Pat, seems to have opened some doors to a looser approach to it all and I like that. I did, by the way, Google Alan but found nobody.
don
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/ed5b853e/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Tue Dec 18 21:19:52 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Tue Dec 18 21:26:11 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <014501c841af$a828fd80$fb76480c@HOME>
References: <c47283890712171641y2ec41796od299cfcf973a43b1@mail.gmail.com><58782.82899.qm@web45801.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><c47283890712171656x5f4d8dew38a2f8078b4fed92@mail.gmail.com><3EBA7B2B-7C02-41C3-9D28-91A5E9AC2957@dc.rr.com><c47283890712180254p28adcaa4g1210cae07554d261@mail.gmail.com>
<8A27D1E9-1FCB-4EC4-9DF4-0B9E2E7E4451@dc.rr.com>
<014501c841af$a828fd80$fb76480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <B1711B96-47F7-451A-A50C-1CD15EABCFDB@dc.rr.com>
As the man said, judge not lest ye be judged:-)
I'd stick with it. At least I would be unhappy if you left. So often
you say stuff that I would have said, so it saves me the trouble. And
anyway some gems have emerged out of the flood of stuff, say between
Alan(peter) and Rob and Pat' that actually seem to have added a kind
of freshness and/or looseness to the flow. It is a counter to DonL's
inexhaustible seriousness or earnestness. Recall that dialogue was
not meant to be primarily about content so much as about the nature
of the flow or process, its blocks and pathways. And anyway, a lot
of the huge batch of recent posts are mercifully brief.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Susan Clemons wrote:
> I for one will not keep participating if this is the style that
> dialogue is going to take.
>
> Susan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: donald factor
> To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 11:38 AM
> Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
>
> Irene, I am surprised. Have you really not spotted who Alan is? He
> has revealed his identity a number of times already. I think Susan
> was the first to spot it almost immediately he came on line. It
> took me a while longer. So far I have no complaint. What he has
> been doing here, along with Rob and Pat, seems to have opened some
> doors to a looser approach to it all and I like that. I did, by
> the way, Google Alan but found nobody.
>
> don
>
>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/6955c482/attachment.html
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Tue Dec 18 21:27:45 2007
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Tue Dec 18 21:34:05 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
References: <c47283890712171641y2ec41796od299cfcf973a43b1@mail.gmail.com><58782.82899.qm@web45801.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><c47283890712171656x5f4d8dew38a2f8078b4fed92@mail.gmail.com><3EBA7B2B-7C02-41C3-9D28-91A5E9AC2957@dc.rr.com><c47283890712180254p28adcaa4g1210cae07554d261@mail.gmail.com><8A27D1E9-1FCB-4EC4-9DF4-0B9E2E7E4451@dc.rr.com><014501c841af$a828fd80$fb76480c@HOME>
<B1711B96-47F7-451A-A50C-1CD15EABCFDB@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <019101c841b4$738f50b0$fb76480c@HOME>
Maybe so, but I don't join a group so I can spend the majority of my time deleting posts. If there's anything worth reading in there it doesn't seem to be worth the time to search it out. I mostly just sit and hit delete. I really don't care about "looseness", I would like to have a discussion about beliefs and the positive aspects of self. I keep coming back to the group hoping there will be some kind of change but in all the years it's been here it seems to stay pretty much the same. Like I said, if this is all the people of the list want dialogue to be then I would rather not participate. I may simply change my profile to "no mail" so that I can check back in once in a while, but this same old nonsense of Peter and dl dominating the group seems hardly worth the trouble to read.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
As the man said, judge not lest ye be judged:-)
I'd stick with it. At least I would be unhappy if you left. So often you say stuff that I would have said, so it saves me the trouble. And anyway some gems have emerged out of the flood of stuff, say between Alan(peter) and Rob and Pat' that actually seem to have added a kind of freshness and/or looseness to the flow. It is a counter to DonL's inexhaustible seriousness or earnestness. Recall that dialogue was not meant to be primarily about content so much as about the nature of the flow or process, its blocks and pathways. And anyway, a lot of the huge batch of recent posts are mercifully brief.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Susan Clemons wrote:
I for one will not keep participating if this is the style that dialogue is going to take.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 11:38 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Irene, I am surprised. Have you really not spotted who Alan is? He has revealed his identity a number of times already. I think Susan was the first to spot it almost immediately he came on line. It took me a while longer. So far I have no complaint. What he has been doing here, along with Rob and Pat, seems to have opened some doors to a looser approach to it all and I like that. I did, by the way, Google Alan but found nobody.
don
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/630e3f0a/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Tue Dec 18 21:41:28 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Tue Dec 18 21:47:35 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] send 17th
References: <20071218.131023.3184.134.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <022a01c841b6$5d553e20$b5c16018@DL01>
They're on the way as of 3:40pm. There's quite a bunch so let me know if there's a problem and I'll send them in smaller bunches. -- Don Lay
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 1:10 PM
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] send 17th
Don Lay, can you send me all of the e-mails from the 17th (Monday)? No
need to send them separately; just select all and send the batch as a
batch. If you can't do that easily let me know on the list and maybe
someone can. (Have never been able to access the archives - even with
easy internet access - which is only occasional.).
-- funny
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/e4027239/attachment.html
From w at david-bohm.net Tue Dec 18 23:17:24 2007
From: w at david-bohm.net (william)
Date: Tue Dec 18 23:23:45 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
References: <019101c841b4$738f50b0$fb76480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <476846F4.000011.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
We could consider setting up a second bohm dialogue list; one with a
different style. Would you, Susan, be willing to moderate such a new list?
-------Original Message-------
From: Susan Clemons
Date: 18.12.2007 21:27:51
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Maybe so, but I don't join a group so I can spend the majority of my time
deleting posts. If there's anything worth reading in there it doesn't seem
to be worth the time to search it out. I mostly just sit and hit delete. I
really don't care about "looseness", I would like to have a discussion about
beliefs and the positive aspects of self. I keep coming back to the group
hoping there will be some kind of change but in all the years it's been here
it seems to stay pretty much the same. Like I said, if this is all the
people of the list want dialogue to be then I would rather not participate.
I may simply change my profile to "no mail" so that I can check back in once
in a while, but this same old nonsense of Peter and dl dominating the group
seems hardly worth the trouble to read.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
As the man said, judge not lest ye be judged:-)
I'd stick with it. At least I would be unhappy if you left. So often you say
stuff that I would have said, so it saves me the trouble. And anyway some
gems have emerged out of the flood of stuff, say between Alan(peter) and Rob
and Pat' that actually seem to have added a kind of freshness and/or
looseness to the flow. It is a counter to DonL's inexhaustible seriousness
or earnestness. Recall that dialogue was not meant to be primarily about
content so much as about the nature of the flow or process, its blocks and
pathways. And anyway, a lot of the huge batch of recent posts are
mercifully brief.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Susan Clemons wrote:
I for one will not keep participating if this is the style that dialogue is
going to take.
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: donald factor
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 11:38 AM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Irene, I am surprised. Have you really not spotted who Alan is? He has
revealed his identity a number of times already. I think Susan was the first
to spot it almost immediately he came on line. It took me a while longer. So
far I have no complaint. What he has been doing here, along with Rob and Pat
seems to have opened some doors to a looser approach to it all and I like
that. I did, by the way, Google Alan but found nobody.
don
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/e228ae02/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Tue Dec 18 23:49:06 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Tue Dec 18 23:55:26 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and Improvisation
In-Reply-To: <20739337-5807-446A-A370-DA2686551E14@dc.rr.com>
References: <c47283890712160453q5d0112b2kdaed11b0a2da9398@mail.gmail.com>
<20739337-5807-446A-A370-DA2686551E14@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712181449w322ba692ia82cb86c21c3a93c@mail.gmail.com>
It is usually called doodling.
I: Just curious, Don. Where did you get that piece of information?
On Dec 16, 2007 2:36 PM, donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
>
> When I think of improvisation, I think of the collective improvisation
> central to jazz, based on the chord and rhythm progressions of a particular
> song that the group has begun playing. I think of it as a musical dialogue.
> Individual improvisation is something else. From what little I know about
> classical improvisation it is simply composing at the piano or other
> instrument, inventing variations on a pre-existing piece of music or making
> up a cadenza or such and not writing it down. It is a very different
> category from jazz improvisation in which each improvised section can never
> be repeated. Almost anyone who plays an instrument can and does improvise in
> this sense. It is usually called doodling. I am not much of a pianist, but
> many times, just for fun, I have played around at the piano in this way, and
> occasionally have come up with stuff that sounded pretty good. Anyway, to
> me, all improvisation is based on some pre-existing score or theme.butwhat impresses me most is that jazz musicians seem to be able to do it
> together aaaand to come up with something fresh and new each time they take
> off on the same piece. That it, the good ones can do it. I have yet to hear
> of collective classical improvisation. But maybe you could point me to some.
> don
>
> don
>
> On Dec 16, 2007, at 4:53 AM, Irene Darcy wrote:
>
> DF's last post on this topic yesterday contained so many enfolded, implied
> - most likely unintentionally - assumptions, that to answer him, it would
> take the kind of in depth work a music historian and musicologist could turn
> into a doctoral dissertation. However, for starters, see
>
> http://en.wikipedia.Sorg/wiki/Musical_improvisation<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_improvisation>
>
> It compares jazz and classical improvisation traditions.
>
> The invention of the printing press, and the cultural assumptions of
> European society had a great deal to do with relegating the genius of the
> likes of Bach to the category of the disrespect it has-had for oral
> tradition.
>
> In the Wiki article, Eric Barnhill is mentioned. He is a fellow
> Dalcrozian, and studied with my Dalcroze teacher. He has his own website
> with original audio samples. Not mentioned is David Darling, cellist, and
> his organization Music for People whose purpose is to bring improvisation in
> all musical genres back to the people. Music for People can also be
> Googled. His workshops are attended by many, and are presented world wide.
> Neither is mentioned Paul Winter, currently in residence at St john the
> Divine here in NYC. I've attended many beautiful improvisation concerts of
> his. He is in a stylistic category of his own. And a recent acquaintance
> of mine whose name I'd have to go pull up whose ensemble, The Mad Coyote (I
> think it's called) can be Googled and who performs in various venues. Just
> recently here in the Village.
> Classical musicians are rising up in revolt!
>
> In closing, let me say that I have been working on this for many years.
> Have done a lot of research, and have studied a great many 'methods', both
> jazz and classical, and some Indian. As I teach myself, I'm putting together
> my own 'method' that integrates what I consider to be the best of jazz and
> classical approaches, and intend to include Salsa, if I live that long!
>
> --
> Irene
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
--
Irene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/b482d90d/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Tue Dec 18 23:52:08 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Tue Dec 18 23:58:29 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <476803FC.00000D.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
References: <c47283890712180821u25e7b555occ9d49198a38ffb9@mail.gmail.com>
<476803FC.00000D.03588@VAIO-584793128F>
Message-ID: <c47283890712181452t2ba9d4c1r7b932fd58d40e584@mail.gmail.com>
a troll is a troll whatever its name
I: Yup. Just like the rose.
On Dec 18, 2007 12:31 PM, william <w@david-bohm.net> wrote:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/0f73199b/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Tue Dec 18 23:56:51 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Wed Dec 19 00:03:12 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and Improvisation
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712181449w322ba692ia82cb86c21c3a93c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c47283890712160453q5d0112b2kdaed11b0a2da9398@mail.gmail.com>
<20739337-5807-446A-A370-DA2686551E14@dc.rr.com>
<c47283890712181449w322ba692ia82cb86c21c3a93c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <186138A9-AA0B-405F-B17F-22C74B9A4A4D@dc.rr.com>
From some musician friends, years ago.
don
On Dec 18, 2007, at 2:49 PM, Irene Darcy wrote:
> It is usually called doodling.
>
> I: Just curious, Don. Where did you get that piece of information?
>
> On Dec 16, 2007 2:36 PM, donald factor < DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
>
> When I think of improvisation, I think of the collective
> improvisation central to jazz, based on the chord and rhythm
> progressions of a particular song that the group has begun playing.
> I think of it as a musical dialogue. Individual improvisation is
> something else. From what little I know about classical
> improvisation it is simply composing at the piano or other
> instrument, inventing variations on a pre-existing piece of music
> or making up a cadenza or such and not writing it down. It is a
> very different category from jazz improvisation in which each
> improvised section can never be repeated. Almost anyone who plays
> an instrument can and does improvise in this sense. It is usually
> called doodling. I am not much of a pianist, but many times, just
> for fun, I have played around at the piano in this way, and
> occasionally have come up with stuff that sounded pretty good.
> Anyway, to me, all improvisation is based on some pre-existing
> score or theme.but what impresses me most is that jazz musicians
> seem to be able to do it together aaaand to come up with something
> fresh and new each time they take off on the same piece. That it,
> the good ones can do it. I have yet to hear of collective classical
> improvisation. But maybe you could point me to some.
>
> don
>
> don
>
> On Dec 16, 2007, at 4:53 AM, Irene Darcy wrote:
>
>> DF's last post on this topic yesterday contained so many enfolded,
>> implied - most likely unintentionally - assumptions, that to
>> answer him, it would take the kind of in depth work a music
>> historian and musicologist could turn into a doctoral
>> dissertation. However, for starters, see
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.Sorg/wiki/Musical_improvisation
>>
>>
>> It compares jazz and classical improvisation traditions.
>>
>> The invention of the printing press, and the cultural assumptions
>> of European society had a great deal to do with relegating the
>> genius of the likes of Bach to the category of the disrespect it
>> has-had for oral tradition.
>>
>> In the Wiki article, Eric Barnhill is mentioned. He is a fellow
>> Dalcrozian, and studied with my Dalcroze teacher. He has his own
>> website with original audio samples. Not mentioned is David
>> Darling, cellist, and his organization Music for People whose
>> purpose is to bring improvisation in all musical genres back to
>> the people. Music for People can also be Googled. His workshops
>> are attended by many, and are presented world wide. Neither is
>> mentioned Paul Winter, currently in residence at St john the
>> Divine here in NYC. I've attended many beautiful improvisation
>> concerts of his. He is in a stylistic category of his own. And a
>> recent acquaintance of mine whose name I'd have to go pull up
>> whose ensemble, The Mad Coyote (I think it's called) can be
>> Googled and who performs in various venues. Just recently here in
>> the Village.
>> Classical musicians are rising up in revolt!
>>
>> In closing, let me say that I have been working on this for many
>> years. Have done a lot of research, and have studied a great many
>> 'methods', both jazz and classical, and some Indian. As I teach
>> myself, I'm putting together my own 'method' that integrates what
>> I consider to be the best of jazz and classical approaches, and
>> intend to include Salsa, if I live that long!
>>
>> --
>> Irene
>>
>> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
>
>
>
>
> --
> Irene
>
> info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071218/9b80f5dd/attachment.html