From a.debakey at yahoo.com Mon Dec 17 00:16:06 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Mon Dec 17 00:22:02 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] SELF, SOCIETY AND PROPRIOCEPTION
In-Reply-To: <20071216.090913.3184.47.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <617185.48182.qm@web45815.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
funny doesn't web.
Funny, on 2ndought, no problem. Look: ?PNG IHDR X O
?'5 sRGB ??
? ??IDATx^??g??????]????????,????7??` 0
g???!qC????%j???
n,?K.?C.?????]????????]????y??Dq8???B??7? ?c????9G???gzz?d?????????????????#G???9??x???\Eu???-?@d???????>?D??}?w??N???2 ??????5?nU?
??q???j??;?????b?o???M?P??k?BOo?P?G?;?-?????q??­??????z?^?????????\.?b?o~???
?S?d?????>}?N??nw4=u???~?W?????r???????T??z??T(???b??R??6kC?,W+??j??3?f?P­????? Z??t8?g?:?
_*Wt?]?R?Y??U?????????6???­4?F?Y??7j???????l?X?Yl6?W??B? V?M&K?Z??????r?-?J???????p?@|g?_???????r*h?Y?c8???g??O{???????~??H????x?TXx??????_I??9[G?ny??f4??;o}????gO\6?????_?Nz??W?/???????o?+?????? ??a­???9??t?????g z?;KZ??V^]]?z? ???<BKK???'7??W?FG?:Z?^o????_??S?|w???6???|???{??????????[?ih?wVj????35[??30?(U??Z­Z*?j???a???|V???T?L&?Z?­5??_??6?%>? 2?|
Q?M???RL?Z%^?F?Y?c
?4Z
/????????3?/~=<?7?|?R????l?'??c?9?w?I???Y/??VR]??V??%??[?5Tj' ??\?/?+????bY?|?G?
?????%?y????????.??-??R???c? ??????'8y!_
????*???p9??<?\,?H?M+;
??O­?TS?G???+??Ri?u?$?3
?q?!???B?`0???x??
]>?g??h?^|????8|????<?x???7???g8?9?????w??l:?
???x?????|?q ­+?y???ho???O?????j?Y?9?z­1?5???6_4w?}?TZU­3?o???W??%?????A~$?q???HDYo??G??F?~~?f??8z? gFJZu??v??{??g??~u?????? ,U?
b?X,7+?\.'f?h?T?<??j?S???d?F"n??n?EC{?zC?Q?k
6??!b?xX???p??F?e????YP??f?=_,?*???P?TZ[??\????f??{?\??~????3?x4tw9d?i???^­??Y?b?????j?L?Y?5z????Xr?J,??Y
??11!?
u­???<{]e.???#?6?????O?zt?vwo????^??? ?<
b???FOO????????? ???+?r?? ;?<??Y???u;>??gk??C???????l?'O?LMM??????????U???)??????????­?,?/?Z[}~??? ???Z???sH<VX?Td?Yrg??? ?Y??d< ?Y?l???1??n?gJ.Z-??|[­ZMf>_??O?yvvvX???????1G????????N????|
Y|??etO??G??2?z?????????\6??>?s3??s
???`Gg?Xp?­?R?j?? 8'F??{???V??h?????s?j?n5U??d<????????R?X???f??c?p??` ?Vam??VQ?l?O????nmm???O'C?;<??@?;2?;
?????@0??4?
???ih??i?I????F??{???X$?L???j???????n4??:c?P????fC??????gu?6??bCV*?Z?X????|­?)f?|Z???u?F9?KDT???j??­F???&?Kk?6??l???????????b?T?8l??F­????wC??J????
?>????? ?????f
?8~?r!??Y}Z=??Kg<~_je?br8?G7?
???F???k??6????????'>????w[??l~ci??????E?t<?@?7???x,???9?e ("???Vo ?y??t??f???m???R6??
M??-??f}??­f?j?9?`? ?Y\Yk??,f?O4Z????]?f k?ZG*7E?K
?P??K
bCd???R??g?,?$? _?f]j?_?Tz?Aod??:???V?????q?Z??N???? ???'??F-$??Q­PA??r?>??????"??z??c A????????~s?
?9=
'???(???k??B?6YY??B)??PME?T­??
&??I?(7??'???^
a?)
??r,?S???*\??|G>W??m2t&#? ????????? r&?F?????S???????q?Q?
6???h???????
?mm>?_???k ?]VC!?????5????????X=?P?m??????!???????C~q?b?Te
??
T?U????????????Je???????h_??jv?\O?>????}??Zsucsnn?X?????2?YF?`.#??,??lh??R?R?`[06N???v??H?tg[kWG???c0yL??)?? R???????????
?a6?l­Z[D
a??|ds{??h$?J?y?pc}=O4k????Tk5??XS5??z,jC????z???6T
?c?$C?V*HE?g1Q?LY?PL??=??Xg ??d??o??????)????
u??t<z???q??g??????}?^???????y?'q??D??rg2Y.?x"#???????D2??s???F??????<-­.?G??bd?C????????????????H??OB??? ?c??r?JC?ciX /? 3????
?(??r;9??#H
m?h?|w???c?HM!w
?x,|Lp???=25>?"|?? ??J??????R??
Zu(
?t??­??­?
??{????F?5?/??&???hj.?N??
??T?T­?j?\Io?YLZ??\.??
?????d????d??.??????m9????ba!?={???s!k
??o
B!i?r???
??yt???????2?? ??fj?*&?'???i2X?V? ??M???P>?????9??TW?u?73YX?*U??k?k??._n??
??ks8?????aS?I??B$???b?7??r+? ? ?6?W??jq?"?????????+ ?mf?^]???I??G?
?#????Z?q???B,????=2j?T
???;0j?y?zk??s?M?DJ?SW??zY?v??????,?E?H?????]m.x??b,???W?Z??jR5??n??W/#???x,??t:CY?????V?V?gs?T?^­????e­Uo
?r%???4h????NW ??^*v???9?KG?1­???>P?
[??A? ?+%v???e?8"?W????\??C?
?d9?g????m?c?3R???JwP??xK(3??JC??i???~S8K?????p?+????%?I?n?b?i?Hg+??????
\]*B?
?O?U????s?'???? ??H,%E???5m6;?
?.p???;?h?# ???4U>??2?F+?'V???f??4??-??=?u?T{?_(q­??b?{???a?0 ??­!??.Z?p?|[???y?_??)?V??n???c??,?j????f?6??????????/.??f[U?t?y
#???eC?fs??????)l\o??
/??&????;??-f?x??n???? ????F?z?k?/??????6?uf ??J?b H%???G?K+z?????\?????Lv?' ??G????k&??a?? ae4?d??5x??9???????9l)???%?i???O?)$??\-??&cOk ????.?0L?-??U?%???-??k??N?A???xTZ??b?????­z?Bc;??Q?­?r ?_.?,?R.?
?x??*:??p:?y???8?­-???|#?Noml???h?????
C???5?KowwoW??????'N?d??Wp73????*nbyue
­V(f??????.?-?D??x???><6?=??Lj??fS????v*z
4?X??????)??????>{???????,_??? ??????<$?W?
BA0? l?"??%?(?
Z
?W?'yIA!.??.M9#b?c?\?x?????­?(???~?????8i?T?9??h=????????????\?u??{[[???Z???u8?v??`?%??????
?>
??N ??23? ?~pgq~???'??rg?* :r???????Tx?,????3? & ?p?3?8r?????E??n}{{?????Y_]?Ec]
??Q?m­?F­?-?????f??V-W?EM?Q.???R.??l??4d<)er­???m?`?????h6!???KF?? |DR
A????,F?????????????X???z+RBHL
??9T??
???-)?Z}???' ????B???b??g5[??B??^????#^????? ???s?C}??N.]?N????X??<?p???;O]??v]
???{&??upZ?D?Rk?????F?lnf7?? }???+?f?????+??(????"???v1?qn????h??S??^?V?:?????l+??_,??2???v??) ?r???????????a]c?u
?]W?5??ZE?!<
(?!?
^rT??­I­&???2
?r ??jW0:!????T:E?
:??:?^???8A5:?_??C??'????X??4???Bm??kF/???M????S??%?m
?q?
*L\??u??t???@?-(/|?O>_TPVC?\C'?H?,?
???W??1&???4U??? L57?????T???V ]???K??o
????]+J?[?R?'?Rx?:?0 ?lU?4B?s?O&???;s??%?*?+,v??}T???­??v7?V? ?=I?s? ????
???%R?? ????<?Q,????
­­ J&???K??R>?
??e?H?­?­|!??3[?X???b~? ;y??<???­????? ?T??{???d2?H&j??6?VkH?W??aZtZ??????p9??:?L)? NC,??E?I762
??g?>]??@(?p`?3t(<d???
?| ??cHa??0??6??8??u???Z??L??zK:_)???\??4??:???FF?t??w????,n??e5zl?????????
9n?^??
????8{d??Q?x\#Ch?l?`??r????????
?e???}?=_}?e­R:{????_???LMN2??l???????l?t:????W?V[?Z{zz???????x???~.?????????h?$?v??1????w?WV?g?` f
?P????[?X?­??????????t?n?;[>?S?V?G&????g??\?E?H??
?EH~??'?G&??b??j<ya??0??
??
?+#&??A??+?i?j_y?<3?G?;?&B?????$fw??dH???I:?????l?{JM}W?Fo?K?3
;?????????L~hh??t?lf????{
?0???'Ofg??
N??t:??<????A?;w?s ?????c?XU<3??E??????z????]??`?8? &?J???6d ?p&?4?EB?2\7?N?_????r)? ??:Mcy??????yW?=
?U< 3????1?? 4?|O$b?Q6?
YSk?`xUf?­l|!
?',|fL?(PQD"??Tbf??\???ID>???6??.?l?b]-? ?ZMX?<??????;???G?<??:bh????
=??jN?iTz?=z?????S?G?'R??s?????????W?0j???Jv?? cG':{??NLxZ?X­?Me*
?,??^X??Ct????b>???q?Y? )?B??
?=?[?Z?1???<?)*?k???0?@?^??
­?????`? ???? $l7[px? lV?-?K?????BX8C?r???????@.KGM????&%5
?04%E?|??PiR?)???i?`?????I</?9V??}?R?
?y?V?
qK??F'|?&x#????
*By????u??? wB? ?S?kF?Z?^?
)+~?{T?2?N\W­b?aH??q[yf
\j?C??N??????8?? ?T??????_????8Si=???}?(Fz?%nW??:?b??7???be ??
???D?????'W??Z?Yu<?6???0???t,???yt ??P??RI????YV?6????? P???c????~7????? ??oo?E"7?]#?? d??u??tx?v}}?8?????v???<?a<???@P???_?w9
?????????v8 ?Q?^??j??S?D??<hs?????? ??UU?Y=??d??h$???,???Vj}
?_1??,s??W?0e? ??P$Y)d
j???P???R???4s??R?4_t:??W2K?n??u??????.???ms???VM
?
K'S???j??????????L"?4'???6????F???hK?K^??G>q?????wyF\???v
???????\63>:?j?XZ???m?????@ET???Q???t?[?­???
= ???dI D?/?
?????d??#5?9??*?-j?L?? S?Io???? M`?V??n? ??d ??)?'?/??gsY???H??/q?x^!x??W????)???C?? `
???[r5?y?*/??? ?*?j??|?,*gum?????D??u?3sZ{??Y?hU??L?R`???|qgc??9?=0?3Y??lE???,???????b
? ??l6_+ ?>*?Z[Z{:?-FcM??
w?{?\????
G" ?~? ?m???$l!N.C??D????}T5<,
?????tY?[xt6????%``&??l&b??­-`?B6?G?B?K ????????????:????f2~?? u?????>???"?-B?qdL?t??
rb5j??FmS???OF?D?MH6???E?ZpZL_}??G?o?v?
B6?#?)"??
?3"&?L??????l?m?{????NC?)?"?B??:\?
QX/??F??oK­,?t6???Dd??g???z<.U?s??T????i?:??2?^f? <??? i?:?H?5??l2?1#???SgS ???o <k?=0??????P<? h?eai?.?'??_???&3?J? KU|???????????H'???@X@;F???x?E$#ND?????:?P>???;Ap?????OJ!???????XX?m<?%j'?(???W?0?2? ?E?E?Oxj?? >#?E(
?oA?W?h$ #^?V?m(??x
???|?t_t???
?x??W??Y?|E`d??lPl+1?b??H
???#!?<Z?K?y t?*?h??BJ~??X+zn????G?3
d?on
???M ?0p2X?????!<?A????d0??;?????#??5??Ts???wf???Y[^YX?&YZ???i5w?x?F????? v3???3?.L
;?e?8?o"?`6?????-VF!_x???-?????rz?N K??
B
I? QR/?| |????`=kk???1a76???\<Y__e?u????F??qb? $4
??p?Q??D?@?0J?O??U(rdN^!h0?S.?T*?n?!??)?W??,h?? ??|??? ??GT8B???­WA;??V1<??@???d0??Zu??ei???Unuqu-
??
.
2??F­+?s??m???
???­??t?XU5[=???{??9|k??B??p??|
?n???­-|????????0c'?
????26?? ?n
F6??? *ntl?gd??g????`Lf?kh?
P*?F?:?J@?.`?Jk0???s??}?
m?5??????? ?_??v: ?????_}?Wa?;;;?C
;X?7TP?
?,me?%)Ov???3?(r'r??C
pfv?????bF?jgffp9[?A?_??e2???w?0M`???'??uN]?[­?="8h?:????b+??
_kw?L*? ?
t&?x?&pk?PF?%?)H ???.???][[c­r J??????(???P??n?????$
?&?"?Zv????9
?]??|??%e??F??P??1pQ?7?u????`??Q?:??c?H86Y?X??T*???????
C{???@K??b?9?>/r?f?+??y?s@?Bl?h?j?)???c\??
?[I ??m????? ­??[?R$?Tg?fs?V??f6??D*? ?2???????????'J:????G?????ES[??w?
?????&??qS=?r??????Z? ???'?EmF??­={l???????'?J0P?L??X* ??B????????X ???? ???????x|cg??g?$SjKsb?h??W??
N ?????????hh
?????????`??Xu:a;K ??a??
a_ ?Py)?v_??#)?[Q9B??#~ ?\???D:?? ?????C?w?h? HKl^?w???>???H S2?V4z
#?gDq z?/b??Y:?B=
?(
???#(?H%?'??%Y????????31??E??pf????B<??S?3`????l??gdp>T?5?%!e??R?@
97??STuj?V?"-S???M???Xx?" ??;*m ????B*1D??
3H>???jH?m??S?^??A????vv?????_?"W??z?~:5>?M?8Un??`g[?K??nu??????;? ?????~?q:l&????&?b{{???6????1?:??????{?N????????;?i ????{'
wvv?@\??h??
?BN
??I?u?
???????Ne!2?*?J?"X?^?;v?RL
??i??zq
9???a???e??C???+y???u?R???n1]?Pap?????k?x??????t?p?a?' ??P|3????f?V? ?? ;?t* O?1??w?? ??^(?­?N$?1XM?????Z4?7?N?????W?Z??????M??8??$
??
????X?y?xWG??_|?"
???>u?
? ? ????j??~8].?Kp?!*[­??????@?g?)??s?f??!?<???GA?c??d????\n?????? D??(a\4???B?V^?3.ZCF??"{X?N;46
?O?&r?????????t">!@??E??5,??M??C 2S>?O?&r????
?????t
?svv???3h8??L??u?vWv?W???;??? '??n?\+ ??6?c3q????; ?|"???S?-???)^??????z$4>>??E?^?ywee?'
F?1w?/?????,%??{A? ­?Vc >Yd ???
E?v?????????j????Y??????
$­?? ?? e??"?$ kE?2c??GG???=
_4C-\,q?76Vy?g[Q??h<?????Z? ??jy??????5?????9nh?Z?
?"?
??? ???z!?? ?`yv?#??o/*:?
/?v??l???|?!a?L?P??9????O ???otz-s???
}?d.???V@J???^Av?|?????_??w?v?|%?*?BN ­
u
6M­??@=#C?\?`?gK
??
?Z?
??\>c#;?l????E????~--.h? t?x"?`j???%???
?????f9{?????aHz?;?
?b?????W?(T??^??1?,??Zh>?R(?+??BGI?JJm??0z???"?!j??A?J?#???!t????FG
?­??
??
?????U?V?S<B?
W??"?&=?u_?)???g?@?7&7X?.?A??u??U???:u???32??????j??I??S`
IBa??U?^L?:`.???)??q??#?????
*????(Iy!??N|q0??L?U?UFF??
c#K???9?
3 ?_<)?"+??-??|a??­???
?%??5}????h ?y?G?2Xl­???|.???)??Ui4#??????z??+j|ph? ?O?=>u??C?'?:s???L77?a (?????`??Ofmm{qyvD?yt???6????&w???66:?a????+?N??[???r?,???x ?B0`??N? ?p?qV?U?????? ??h?}?M??_??F???*?
??????f?y?????????Q)?8???-
'?
?
?????H???n???????
?[?z???
?? ????
t?
??u[?^?w????????G?/_z???S'O???[??
b???J40 ??+?! ?7???{ ?1?????????~??it?1???e?a?{?.?4?????Enj?B???D?}<_????? ?? s??????8q?$:??6????^G?3??J??1?
??????? ??????o??m??Y????F?d
`
?;?H??;
s*n[?;?nOe?#?R??1?????????3?By?? ?{??;|??]??}?}?T?;???O~???????{ |?Q????#??#??dlgm.?V
?
??u???????nT?',/?J
???y}????y??????!}?? xt?? ????"?,::=???
<bfq???EbQVW{[;???`???35kd?m­­????v????H?k?8??B? '??????}?????G?}??I???? O? ?L?vR!WW??????''-$???`???W??
??b<:-????
>?? I?/?4??k?5:??Q?w8??g????????$?S?T??5?D?(?[=?9ll6d??]?~/Y7???c????R.p?J??S????f?????A?k????????????)? ???????+??YO?n?}p?Y??i??=??????IX???2????Y?
???HT
c
??p?ub!),QAE?Vj??L2???? ?
??f%?e!???/??4t?????L?R? ?v????g?_?????kD??0 ?g?????
" '?"?v??@?3????6m?I?(@1??b=(?pR???KG?g?E??$H*
(T??$TD?";f? ?
?Z??#­p'X?"4??G?????C?mM"N­????4&T Sk? I+???n????UR? ??-???v????? ? *?? EK R?????w?t
x? ?P??!8??E???????No?,F???? ?*?MrXY`P??*cYmlj????????l?*O??­?4???jl???%J?T?*U??P?M ?????,[??t/?????
$?(1?
?? ??8h
??&?}???=????S?yv?jd?????u)?v8\?????????????tts{i???????_z?v
??P?(???? :??Ne ???n??m???+$? ????v??#\?L?D?d8\?d
_O?????9??4X??B??7<?mm?z|??{??????Y?Z???kQ,u?????
VA;&?Q??x?7? ??0%??9?j$??o??x???N
^?"?
?W`????3??+????^m?@5lX? %????nT?iiK?%
:????n->MlL???Z?????????r?X????J??????????1?+]­A?????
sv)?N
c????­
??????s
O >{????O?<x??oh???m??F_??? ??????????r??}­A?6:f??"????^.
??bW?}??????0??z?!??b?
?Ny????????K?e?C??
??._{OSU??Z
N?? ?9?????s??E????(A??&+Q?w???{???U"?~?gq?9??D??S???????|???????t?S?
?p??G???T ??C?b??V?<? ?7T?%U??
?na?z{???H3M?s&????I­n???{;?O??;?????
???
. ?A???} v?;D
??<509?-0C[-?KrV ?5?%???fAQQ`x
hx????R??o??'?3/bQX?}???E?)v
lYV:rg{c???c2;G?U?,?X??l?>&?/?? ??6?,?5qD?S.??kw;????D8??x?F????
?G|?x{? f???s8??Gx?????^b?y sx?xC????R'????
??b?Z?s?E?k?5?%???n+?7?<???xd????%4
?&W,H?MlR???;? ?1??aib?H,[?s?Y?6p@?M?~u?^#?p?????????T?
???Z1??_??5K???b$???_?>y
????*?E)8?e??%??8\Da? rP??? v???c ????f?2????`k??????& ??2??]}:?8 ??f?????????+??:?M??
?Ld.?}'? o)?K?(?X??b`??w??W???<H?~??????>~?x????@&pB?5J?P!:J?o??(O???
?<'?^??@?7? P??????????
J?PA[5"=??????j????K+??;???.?8?+=|?+
OV??? _?~x T???N?W?? ?`??
?h(A??Z???cz5?|??? \T?S??"?+?O?+<?2q??p??
(?C-=x?2.?]??V?GU???????/~? ?'T v??W^????~????{?­7???fXz?o?????^????w?-.?????­?_/ $Medt~?i??K?}}??
?????2Y???.K?P???f*Q??????#6????????????­?G??n?e?A2b?[?D^?????z???-??`)p.a32?x*[????!?ae??O#???7????U&M???:
1~5YL?I?_"????/??$?*O???pL??x(?3?xK??p?{z???­
j­??.????}
??p
IT '.?l &?????}? ?????<???3?D??iT???
????T????:s??????L*
????mds +? ??????w3R"????b ???c?L*?9??kk?|Bk2P?D??C???EZ? ?[???S|??'pB?J?L?8?[????????????
???dvb? @B???? ??8??%S%?? ? K?:u Ti;?.??948????
B???E???????E?4??#? >B?
?p??/F?{?T????B??^?j}??u?E$??\c??^(??­???r??J??
`.?????d????????????F??p 8???V?<AY?­1??1[x? ?<?s?E?B???3?nq?D,>2< ?`??.?0KJr????F?#<H?Eu?? h??>? 77?P?GN
'????H8?? ???>z?4[]???b6???OE???^???Eu?d???J
??T8?? ?8??rc??"?[.??<?*?s?D??Z???o???g]??T~=?????V??&?Lm??\??????/?????~???\
2^?????6?r<?C??p?R ?????r?Y?G?$Q??(?"?$a???B???{c?z=>
t??M
AP????~??!??Dn? ?????Xn?|.Mlx|l??S???@?"1 ?d:???$v?? "0H?h2T$??)?b?I????>?KA##OR?("c???P??????jI*ir???bEI ? Je??DQ???DC??
(T)???X?R
?7?;1i??@????????@?f~?m"V? X??????\W??"<|4?vq?????})??8?QA? ?5f??+h?,???t?
\
~?:W?r
?#?tH?b?
?;??:?D??T?m%?G??T?PG0?D?
?#?EB&?Fv???????V?UX?????gg? ???j?.??2??P* ??R??Hkg;a?P8???r??9????????? .??@????n8??????$????nC???XX??v?jKp??W???­?c?#???????w???
|?x? N??????x_g;p???vk0???????E???&????l??}?cG?f??
??g,1U?) ???? s!I?r???r,
2???T$???f??H?< ??Z$?H??K??2? E?tp?????E? ??b?B???Q?R???5?|?g?'")nH}.??s ?j?????k?$??d­Zw?<
S&?M??aHy???
??Q??;z{gf???$???>y?????{??GH?^??­?u?n?Q?4?ttl??????{oo'
?A?|??9?@a??0??*B­X??k?(PK2??.? {??D`@#?d???`b??????3?G2=T>?Xe??H ?PQub??
? ??0??h?h@\En
6??O% ?????sc?Y!<?~?>????b??? ?8????
>?;??5??D?H??$1.?V???>KV>?­?v???x*F5?]LT??????H4? pf)??=?rM ??''???'N?i????}?????#??????F?s?L- ?b?tRe??&?J?
?2?Hr9??L
??]]?G&?P?q????"?3:??{???Y?,
?
??,)|???{??????c??p???*?
?????+?T???? Z?????p7L?"?
rH?l??0>????O
;
??<lD(*?QX?"Iy?#??f?@??g x??<%?P$?Q??w???i)R
??1??T2????e????????x?<????&W{?????[X}
?:{;{??'q?#???????'(.J
?\??'{???(?IX?&
??y??,?Vt0N?(w* ?F9???Bu?? f?? O??C??|????6Rz[????U
T?w
7??$?B?:+?W????%%$ s?d K????
?2B*'???w
]#?? ?w??
'cl?M|Q???#"pm??B??/oL? f?POI?)?H?? _??R??????L?P
????S?%???#???"5?B?;_?9yQ??~????J
?@??D?
??NO;???<X?}?>???w?U???U?|.
9oI.0w??d ?nS?A??????/
???h?>??2??P???????l^?????=????}i utu?^z????_??mh????7
?>?O ?r???<???_|?????­o?RE?r}c?=4>}??MM i??r>???{?9
No??? ?
????
e????oh??e:??S'I???r :???SC???>s?d???d?l???n????#?/?t???+?.?T?mC?k?'}????PAV???MX? ?0??)%_\???nz
B_*?> ?Hi?!??/8+???zc~??*p%?#??r??c???
c???????????ff?g}?bfe!?!?e776x??`???*? ?'????l??RYr??&@??D$nln???y??????q
??G?R???O%bO??????6???/\0?-???q?A ?? ?
kP????K??1?,???? ?j4(3?SxE?bC*?r;?6?<? ?Y)?????
o ??????$???n????z??%L D???H ?R#H2.???
???w"B???,???m????!p??^?????9Q8?Q?????<?/?????Jmf?).I{6??DAg??qBx?0?9Y^?????l???6p?{???z??j?H?5?{Kk+???­?? ?$??/?
?
kX??TKd??}?qDI???sr??2?;??p?EXU)? ? [??J???K???.???I??b41?VW??? ?0???l??????????J$?%aR?R
?8;?G?6????_}??/?O??????y??i?????d?@?????b??h
5?@K? ?R???hR??_???? B??R?
USe??????+a?c? Z?Q????5???!&!??????g k????Ec>???????
??-??E??­??????=}m?S*c?e6 ???
6????&?K
?^???=V ?DG?0?J
(?????$Q???
? D??@(?{??b?K?????????r?tt??O????[[??O]??Zo???P??????4???:?CXq?)??/?oRUjk??jO? R+
?G?
????y????2C/???zW?TS4%BFQ?"?O???????????
?;?s???(?*\~Q??(Y?2o???VWS??RIK/O???????????U+?|Im??J??G- ??&?+
YJy?A? ???w?#[???V?,]???k??vg_O&??&m???3?s{?8*???AgV?Q,BQ??B??IYP@????B?S+???~?j8D@T?:Ea? ??*?
?>fj?????K/_???[^?p?
?Xr?????f"???
?PX?O? ?????_????-?W?^8?? ?nnl>??r;
_??Pj??^+bPMLL?t?W=r??e? sgG??
~67w???>??&?*t?2I0??,j????Z{{??????????x?p? ???S??­???eFC?L&? ?~R?# P?G?
??I"???? !d
^P??
??7?Q??W:#k ~
????I?????,O????"f??
S?????<z:Km=E?Rr???}??????????F?#nCkk? ??? {q ??Fc"??t?? E?5???pI?'??w???
????_y??w???g33???p?J$(?? _!??­?]??d?9????Q+?:v> ? ???
..?w??B?
#?Q?????^?U?I J??
\NI?K??? .
^d??;?wS)??C?b??h????????X??????1tH?h?h??K????e??[?{&?N?R???.?1:1?
h%???? ^?????*??
?H?????????mu?<0?K4>KJol??????u?>?{?p?#J? ?C? ??Ohl?K??
?p????VWa'O
?
?
??f%vu]??K<B??????X,;?1?!J???+1?B?I???p????L?nP??$;
??/???c]n?­???+??R???IX|ewg?j8P?0vX??^??{?PK h????????isz????Da[|???O???/J????:?5 B ?????? ??J??Y&3?(?o?Q<?b`??????U??9M???n
­??y????? ?4?zE=?????:12??????)???+????h?S??????­????Q'|,? J?
?? S?-?% n (7(? s5??????(??,o<W???*?2@????V_?????^?Q$?????c???????-??? r?YT"?iY??!???Zf2KZd???K"?$????g(p???r??X?u
?h??? 6???
@??o?_?I*'??J??2??8?a?u?Q)?'?????B? *?5?([?d#kGq?X]??+? ??EQ)?? E<H;T>Jr????W??-^<???/???q ?{??Z?[[?h?:{?O????~t????Y??wS?
j\??????Hh?:mf?N%??CJc?
z??? #?$?ttz?????UMV?<??]B?0 V?K#?009???a???????y t.??,????w~?????<F??????6???T???,?b
?'?? rX?8?Z?+T??<?|n??'x??????[????z????=<5q??w??0??­??????????­?GO?B?k_|?
{?­?'G?L
a!tvu? ?q{|?R!????{???P????????'3??
#?6,A
??C? ??G??Lme??Bx???l?
"
G?
?O~??e=RQ Z)???c???"?YnR? 8??#??T~??R{?bf? ?'?? ?kj????)?Nhk? KG??J??J[? ???o???? ?w??(?T?? ?????#Q*ddh
..
i? p?????u?T????{z? ?HX\Y~???!R??1?F??L?h???P???1?'I??????????[&RHE?O?TNg??bt3??? $ ."H?2=?
[???s????q{ ??^leyi??_????k?V?x?&?4?$5?#
?"? ?M???????)?7?T???n??
?973c?????]??l=?s_e5??2V??a?y?????x?YyB?
,???5????C ?H?'Og????V??2??????EJ;?])xm?)??w3?L ??nCQ???!J???B?%x?~????($?????*????? ???{?N??????X4
?&??B?*.-.*>??T$?k<}?Lww?!??NW>?? o??v??R???>z?(?C?d???rPe)?l?3'N ???!j?6?f
? KQ??->8:Y#???G0V?e??U?%??{???6??\.?? ? A`?.?9~? b??H?0?_dc?Q???o?'LgR??"???:?9;?M?;?5??????7^? /??k37`?
?{?p??u=? ?????NB?]??M??X\?s??a?P?-@?+n
?P?K@?
??4Y%?
I&7$%H??p?a?
?g??)Q?????????
???#_S??h8,??O??"O??????P?f?x??a:??*?B?XV???????PQ ??2?M?'?/C?R?I?&0R??+=(x/?7?]?IC[?????????RT??C-?
-j?? P\?mM??9%D$u???+x????%?.??KQxhH?7?
x????z:?[?&?{??D????KO ????Gbv=????O?/?r????
?JoW????gr??????@??
?w??*\??}_P??`???n
A%??YU?C?T?.??j????]?5?p-??! X????SG????W??????? ;~??|??U(??9SGOML ?u`?"
??N?K?N?~??($?cG?????e????o^?52?"?\??E+????p?@?????G }???PK??????????????t???:?X?S?'I????F?????????n<?h=????\??!
?+# ???R???%jI?L??"?Zr ?!?Q?????? ??
b/U?$FpNrs_???IM???cV??A?]?5??`?0?{;{T??"6 =(?V???/z
???z<?
??:a??A???d??? W1 ??????
'Q????s??????<?!?????w??
o????8? ?????N?????
r???`????@??\ ??G ?$DEw ??
?$??*????&??G??jv(B
0?h?F???????????M?????f??S+:?0????6?,3????????5GS;y|?
U?
?EmA????????
??? ?F????Z?i??x??n?>?w?Zen?F??%??&?? ? ;q??Dk?k???nlcc???D??X???s[-N??0K2??k?tn???
<m?P6?[?
?????\?
?I?;{?,!?%?d??7
?????? ?ef???Q?
???AT??'?Z?F??lM?????S??=??'?L_?u?X#S???G??????&??M???$E?????Vf?WW??? =???1??,5?u???a???On~???zn?:d?t?<Y.??A??d?? $h[D?5f?????6 ?V5?Es"????????o?Q%?Z\y>?????DbI?T?U? ,??j-???????????^???k????+?lVw2'Z???' a??E?Z????+T[}?XI?
*z?h
???? ?p??S-V`????
???!6!1T??
?E;??
l???{?b??o?????(@gS?5? "?Z
t???.B???@ ?????!???
??B? ??R3(i????(R5Y?
??"??R{S??R5? IE(myy'R]????"??????B??&E?}N?P
W4?R???bU?????/qU
?? T?QT?&&?p?(?????1?T?m???rvi?Qhs??? gN??-?? ??/=~????V67?w???vC? a#|?~???>????????p??JN?H%?TEe?}E(?Y?j????qa????????X?Jc??*"*?????&??2g???8??ry?????????
???g?N???^?[????'?I????>#????(????j?VjTl?636??rd?,??;
?
E3???p????Z?? ?????}???cS?_:?3???V?????????????/??tWO?y?]???S(e?{?N???z??O?c
yIWr?????zr????c+?M?!??
?T?7lAO:??%;T?+p<)?
???"?Et?
???????I??HD?(???J????,sB"?e????+?&??^#??9?C$ B?ixl u???G>? ??X.&^????;^y?u? }??Vo??9uv}????????ikq1H??a~?i?,z}??z?E!q????D8SJE
? ??&???eH&??????>q??s?]??h?N?s{g??7?wv???
}??_??j??<v?HO.????M?q?SB?] 5( ???????????Fh???#??­?oW???7_??V???z?2?????|q?zh?*?
?????Pt???&}*?=xx???d?z?jb?LW?^[??wJ ?
?}????}?T????eV p?W????L????O*?c4"SDG?T??? ???
??s3$?
??o ??q???{?k?|???
??????Q??V?h?;'?b#?m??????w???e#????^??3O????K?r? ??Z???????*?cz??oD#?{{?R??O?8>1?(T7?V????}?{?u?M?D??O?,??????bk????
????? ?RN
]?llZ­?H?gaa?A-???? ?r
y#???:@3?AD_.?%z?_???U
u???-?????????5?????q?????O??6?V|7O'??/?}9??.????K? 6?le+?_?z????#????T???X???p???? c?????>"Fh?F???+?|cTis???z???? Z?^???m?6?_8~6w????????F???/??{|o??-??:4?m?R??G?????
`?"{?WQX????b4P j?C,(p?~G-|??w?O?SD?`f?? P?(?)Pa?
??CWL?n
?!
I?>I^?$?<d????????*|r
?Cx??-???(9?*U[??rN??
~
??x?|?
Lz? N ?A?%??`?X#??*??ATpEx??^B??????L3>Q)??oTr??
{T D?TVU????7??­??r???~?v????8w????????_?8???^dK?-?­??????????=?????v?
W?<~x?????{????y??S.X0???????x???)??????
0-'9?????&T"aJ?????Z??:f*?????6X]XY??R&??????7?~?????o?????/
Z{???????6=]?Z?{}?)a
????Sg v??????J/>_a?
v7?????????­?-`???k??
}????hl???M?@??:m*??f??lS????zz? b?j???I??=5v{g?????????g?[{?? ???????o?S?P?;m?Wz3e??Z?n;?S&;?R6H?6?/?v1?R&???????????%Mv kO&R??`,?*?f;?m@2????DjD E?&N?>
!
0?2"???t
???
?X???b???
S?.08-6??e???F??&0?? ??D
?JR???? ??Z???|??q?x??`_$^?v?????q?y???O?ZY]?2N??
?wG?
M]Q????5???V?????5?h?>S?0?.b^?g6??v? ?=R???u????M$!?\p?5??e?+
_fg
U?E?h?lm??lW?
MV??5????v?
?x?
Q|Ue??:?U????B4?5?dF?@G_???0?,?l?Ndq?r?"?.?a(?c5Y??{??.?|98?'?9|??????~?????/hD'??IHZ??5$rh0+D??x
???????N??>~??
??P?????m?'N
#f ???
??? ???????MF??????0?:d??Y$F? ?
???at?G?MQ-??6u?(p???@ <"i?I]P,D
?! ??S????o{s??'Q??&X3T?a?=[^
??8s?,?)?+N_?????Xho{????U?5?J? ?RR?x,??C??~+q?$w???G??g |??u>(P~ ?IEw??RJAbe+}?'V
#?,?=???dE??T??? T?#-?????mm??vq??z??????G :­v??(1dHV >?w?????N­l
?p?H?b??n?Jq?*?rE??>i??????TBO??r?&??v?2?- 4 ????, ?3u??h????.-[?f*:, ?%??????")?%???Jb?????L??d?a%y??uh)#N%?)_?^??L????????$4?B?y?TB
??? ????W^L?8
?
W
??TxMJp??3=(R\???D4?R?R???g??d ?J??;A
?w?W???"mC
K|L?|?V? M???Fq?%h??k?{;? ?M? A
?B'&?R????J?
??c??????(q????P$??N=L?N??9??X ??6?? 2?Sm?.?+a??`??#??????
J\]?|?h?H?Q:X?R??R?QYT?>??? (v?(­T-?T #???R8
?s??W^?t?????gB??z????F/\:75u??k?mG?0?b[?[[s??Vwg??_?x?­lG??(fb?R????vMk??v?=T?o?z????&?^GU?,?KN??j?Dh~avso7?#r????/]??­???a?}???)?C??6)y[???? 1??]?jU?@?Q4??f??I??J?r??p??? 4 3K
Q?(?
?8?F??``#3???2{Ja??I???",<ZtQ????????>? ?}F?~1mbquD6T?????"????U{G1TT/? f"? ???????e h??nl????xok?gx????F~p??d???<s???_?&??0h(???? 7?
??]?kC?????Wy??Pt?
??0?A?xX?_?R??S??QI??????
!???AZ5? ?k
?*??@#
???HWOd7? ??0??pz.L??P ?????h???e?2?,????B??????fl7??????~?<? ????.- ???:e?;??<
?7e@Xv{??P?2Q?
Ih??x
z"???G??O???9ex??Y??
???l!??C~vG!Vw2??x2???????F ?m'?%)????u?/?F??+?}?6?E???QJ???w?????_#?8>| ??4j??F?6?<????"?My
< L-h??????xyg????????9k?Xa*Zz?"??@_??G?VY?????f?\ GeIm? ?????(`??????%+?????-2?%?r??!?UJ?0?D?E4??[??2?5?(a*?w!Y+J?I?U?P%????1?&?{?;???????W85??9?DJ?W?(??H???sA?PR?T\??@$??? ? u"?(?$cR??J v'xl?@K@`;j???????C??}??%?? A???%l?l&GR7?j?T???????p???;[Z ??g?[Kj?????_?[X?4J?[????????T0???/??)??x
B?0??<'??^(??U??u)?5E%Y???A?bx?
ySB?*
*`? ????h??b???LZS?????r?n??Y??B????AX?o
??+BY???l/???*???@0
??*wu?=z?pd ???uee?hw
?}~d????z?? >?0A> ?? !?N vy?N*s?wt{m??
????*%N????kh????(?Ytx??}??*\T?@?I???}f?Y?v?)??}??
?x?#???o?????{?<?|v????7???'??21?2???r?w??_t??g?????R5?n??|??????_Cz??s???e3i?&&??z?-?}?lq??c ??S],
????&vvN?y)???????c??i?g???M???/??!
???????D??%Y??
??????????c???{:?u?p??5 ? ????dWB?b?E@??'A?7@? G?
???b?? ?0x9lR?6PD*?b?dS??=
?\??
If e??\?uDQt??V
???x%
)?7
p$?Sf
x
????*Yc"????j?$9?T1QSt` ??jq??f'? @{G{?}?)`Cu?o@????ftt?O"?
,j?@H ????2P???????rY??C$4u?1Dz? ?p??$???H?a?A???E?*?UQ>S??2u???5?P`?K??"TAi*
?#0ye'?U??>?>?? ?vr
]??0K,??? D?}???[}-,?
?g??????K/1{?\
??j??t7?a{ww~i??
b?6??57D!m?%???Q????]!Q­?on?????Q?5?}?+?f??/q??Jn
??#?X8
??T~rQ??; f??a?N?<??Zo{??????
{twg???|???C?Q?????F??0????;???n*M?=q ?8? ??W­1?)_.SI
a???Z?~?}B?O?????@??~dp??'~??_2R?? W`?vtv?,????????&??9???&????mn­?/??)?a ??JY4?"s??? $?0\ ?HC??I%WK?f6
?%?F??P?:???S??J?J??%Qv}i?? ??7??7]^y D????? ?
P;,Pn ?K)&?(N???i?y?r?j­|?w
?/j?{?N?|\?<
??3?R??le????'?b,66GG?q?`?
??_?p??3????5??m­?S?|O???
?jYT?%
%?b??)?
?8t??"?o????7?m????PB?
??d???%??
?????EP_?????&r?
?U8??i%3??
y?'???h??$??lMI???NE!%a_L?A?
???H/P??~
>?Tt???Pf? ????'; +?t????????T!???Y??????p4??????~????S?p?6?w?V?LM??????)?Au????;????
??#?<??4??)(wF ?0?>?X|?(???? J?z98 )lAM?X9­???
G?????`?????­??_y??t}??_??????f{????}?­??
??}'?z}=?|??xl? ???}???v?[????­?{z?T?
U?z???Xri/e?v?h??H??
@??U???6????
?:N??g7?/=??3??? ?RT1?#R??
|????eL:???|?
???y?gD:?~W_/?~ke?&??q?????~F?,).????8f????g?h`??$??9???d????H]G??N8+=E?0L????&??? ­&????9NQTDt?(t ?#??=x&?<?
?y2????? ? lA??z?k
J?Z????7@"???z5?!8sU????*?!?4u????6????????;w~?? ??u?.???k7?P???TX|???[[{??????????H2x(???
Z%???=?_B???% ?<#Qs?"jt?<.?0?j?"=???K]ai1 {!??k)/??HI?g?IH???v4J???^1 ???(~>?,?c?o??:
?7W???^???????h:Y 4??D F5?
:???>????T?eR?//??pq?+? ]^?}>??_X\??????">?Cix?N@?cB??')???p
r?G??R>]^?}>??_X\??????
? ??d ????Phpp0??7vvw?{p??l ?
,D??????K?/<{?xmq???L???
? b{m???ZLF???'???6(
P?8??
??ab-"??aO???????q?I???[???i"??F? ?29*
t???
??A??]KuAr\?[?L6j ?h??Lxg?Gb??z?4????$)??? ?P??*
@?0?D?LA{D Y?HE? ImC??dSI?
?E??-
??;?)??T?????L???oW@$??? 0iMF??$P8??
Q?-??d?????????B?m@??vuS????h2???i???A?D ?g?z??_@?4???B??0???k_~???l? y???.??????o?b?^?????r
p\?'B*(Bc
#W??d???O???Ij#?9p@ ????o?m?) `? tD"???E?"????tP??P­
??`??L q dw(?N????Vd7#?????+??_1qD?8?????/??
z?
_Ti`??yx???R/????"<xG????H??z?'O??z??[p"?]???o0??I|tr???3??.0?W_
??? zp? ???Ep?b??? o?5zR??c(?+?????&?f????????j& ??
T? Sx??R?@C??3/??,) ?????????@?J?XZY???+????yv? ?? ??*
z-? ?x?????`????}=????}??V??
:1?S???????LN??­o?$?Ck??O b;??W\????.g???:FG??????B???????
?'?6??k???68??5?
>1
lzltl}?
!$>T?(?s/?<???????Po&'f
?b??m?c"d???Y-x("???
3??
?pj;?R DR.?L????E??Z
x??s??qO???
??B?"?^?:??%?;?$?? & ?E2<<?jA??? ??`??A&?=?sv??Y???=CDcks??=????!????Re?????po?????F^???I<V?Y]?V??;
?4f?=&?J[+??x!???????./?????r???? ??/4
z??]?*O?????C???)?s????"?HQ?h??????I? (.
/6??8^]_??2?*?"? ????(B??????![`??I? ?G?e$??d?q??vu<}?ps}?p =u???????&?8?,?L?~??[?Z??"???
.
%?%?}???x_???X? ?? ]/F&?Ao0 ???G?:??s? ? J/?QP4_$?@???=??­?LNOq?[??F??????*??f??p`.???9a??????`????O? j??]z?bW{ ?
+??(?????
q??z@jg?"d??m
?+??*??P$??Pu2?h?L%?ZZ|>/@???7?W???????}??L???$`D$??g]? /z 2?E?D?????"BkD^??l???
?3In?(?,?p?B?jL?
???????xb?t??p?R??
??J??X$??­M??`C*??N?? U??(7*???????
??­???????
v?7X??qr]???k???Z???6??k??J4?Zw'&&?lZ
?I
a??????+?`?*X???\I?????@????Od?1??l?i)zK(
?B
??U&?? 1????*??RC? 5O?#b?,2????P??JEq???G??Q$nc???BF%f??{?O??dP?E?V??#????(?)8?X`?G????? ???????E???x???
?W??T?"E^y ?P?r???380H`
?ga???[w??O?X ??1?i~B?
???7?S???zleV@&??}???.}?=]FG.4? D#??X$??si?????
t??%
A???PPHh"?
? ??c%?!??t?(h?}???k[?km]]"? 4?D?o#?1???1??l?`O/?m??ju???9?}?????$???????????D<ZF[7ES??,????! ????x????$?????? \???
y??H??3???L???'?_:s??3+?vK?8??E?C{?nd??)\??o??4?9???$ ??????'? ?zTLQ?qD7?uM??
??
y???(;?&?0???~vHndK??@? ?B|QPd?:?z?as9??j??????0?D??2 jE????%?zow&tn ???W/?vf????%E~??_<z???
H#??????|????????????w?Gw?­­m???H??v?>??H? ki%?e??w??v=?}F??K/??7?e?9b???b???V??(=????8??R?L$ 7? of?x?
?<!?Ir ?
iCQ$?m7?????4/DA?T7S?? ?&???????f?c? M?B????D????
? ?7?f?>E?S???1??
?>
w?w?:{*?&I??2??`2??g3????\AN??JKVQ,V?pB?+??? Y%24(QJ)?mQ=?? ? )~c{gy}?P???z
>x?
f r
y"'
J????Q?QP[S???wC??
?g???9??????|u?? ???K??EsCb???l????*m?????O&(???n???j?<?y?+lU???]/?J?&=y?<
= ?I$???
ODbJ=H?8~?8a?
???L??z?i? ???P(?H?,E?2?_? ?8SQ!???? =e??8? !?K?m5????­?????l?­/???R?S????6??C0kYI87pQ??[,?#?+? )?j­5?1??f??,?
????? "??">??
??Sj??@?_??`?­?'????u???V???UQ?E??T???R?=6!K???????AH@_?h<????????hPL???>???> C>r;?
??[7?E?:0TF`?&?"M^6??? ??????^?????????c??=$?z
$??p­??'?
?????;?{?n?o??A?:??F??h*???b ???_??? G??`?T~2{B?????????/??U?/??0???x?/(Ba
(????k?X????0(?r????O??:
Ck???L?/??ly~????\?n??vP
???.??v????n?~??8???A?.x??K?Ow{wO?????;?N-­?????#,???????.<[?+$?+?eE ?? ???+???fq8???????1d??>{?4p?L???h:_vxZ??6??U??_???
+Hg?????ZZ??f[`4_?:????F ??3[?????E'R?? g??ok?%l? ?d?_??/
??lo??z?p\^????K??M(}????x?p1?&?`d?c???Yp??~/N??$*?t????x?d:? fw9hR?wI?f? ??"?`|1K??????
y???8?????q
?? Rm
?zI?7{??????? ?q
Yq.EEda??k????
0?`#???????v??*?????Z\X`F?
?.9D???zslt??@??s???Vq???|????????? ?0?2?daey???I8?,xj?"???zZ?
}}?+kK?mkoi??
H$3?h?@O????=?C's?.????:
3?2+-?jU? n ?2?++???­,? ????Q?c?<,Y:?Ze?iQK?T??r??/([?M?M&c? ?? ??\UjY­­?
?? =-(.w??-:c? ? ??????6@3 ????^k?m_?XAf??7?7| ?????,M^i???K]$?=?`?_?L??je?;?
V?i$L$?fX??p)5?EB1$q*?????jx/?????u?fxh???=%?T???Vg|p?^??@ ??r ?h?????F?C?}C?#??n?)+kg
??U&????n
????Jn???F?X?$?T>???? ?ew??$??~??????7?FO?d?????sJmD?#}C?L?­???#?} ,? ? )??Z??B???(WD???G????w?b
jT"@??"5?(`??????P?????!?P??Y???a?iR??;H f??A?q?U??g?H5?PE(?? ????F DM­?S?
?? ??????^?
j"4????RE????d?0b?­8?\v???q3IX??2??(.
?\??\F(???? ?B?+-G???oK. ;n~cydr\ c
????[??{??????m?G@~???W??&N?V9<???Pa???(?-|?W]?????{???T'${?=?Xd+32<(??o(Q????+T j
p8?Y????PG????GE#?????D?9??S?k?`?nJ?4?O?
??k?Q?????F%r.???Y?/*? Q??
??[???6??s??ml???fRYHr???2,??W?
??8w?(?i??6(???? ??????????????????
??r8?.,????I?:????hHC?????Z ??X?&
e??8?2??? [y?+#?C?n6??1?nz$>?Se????sT?f???Q??nuA?hh1)@_A?????e??
h??l???
|?????lEo/[??????{
?j:??????=F?L???R????+???6G?????;?7??Y????hu;?V?p(??X????c?zpSE­1?S$H?t?a????G?=|???? ?G2????_\?cu0?xB?O?M????2???J?????^{?
????0???bqk[??{??? ?e? ?????340z|???X?? ???} ?!?
?A???rdr???e??Z???????
???<)$IE???7x???j?­?
z???­??????hsk
??­?N?ww????;?;???=N?????n?vx??Qm??[???,r???u??U
?R????aO?>-????/@??
8?(?|??gH?H?R??b?lno????ex???d$~??q<ZJx?$??>.l"??iE?????W
?? ^O?d??09s!?????j???/??fGw??Y? ????R?N???????????
??y"l0!Y? ?vB"+\&#?j??E???\z?????gO h
~?H^??DU­om??-G?|~???l??:??J?B?i?
????J?I
C?+7???7n??q??????s??\???>o??? >?ZZ????>_X??qt?=?????=[k+
~_?????>:4I 'x?­
??~??[?????????g??v???g,t??L ;u??W>?r?????????l
B?N
?G\?!??hu
????????i8T??p?b??.?b)??N?&???b?????z?A 'q?@$@gw?CtYY?U??(?%?Q????.?E% XQ?T%D `???2Y?LRt??R? xJ
?Y?`?6?f??z??+d ?hL?F??B?%qP$u?}?????s???ZHs?xE??TZ­z-?Ii?G]???b'??ks7Kuc]K>e)??x??T?M? ??Z[{??a??p??&?x?[K8?1{????^~???m??u?j?6??/tt??
.??V?j?i???W??i ??
?
{i?C?J?,?& @ h+??
(k???i"???0 ??PK????_??5 ????WL?? ?6G?$?? ??Pn?V<???4??:?`c?9wK?#zj?G?I~? NS#??R1??????h$/\sr ??+%
????_4-W?XPJ
?*????N?A??"?|g 1 ????c?=E???+XJ?­???:?o/j??)???f%?tMMv??W/t??]Y-?o?b????g??????4??X?????HO{6?{?W???v??P??ziz???oCK??dljb???m_?????f? gE??UK?:??Yju??? ??)?R??????? f?>?W?G19t~X_??o}=Ej?
?7???D
S???|?Y????g# ??IK4 ??g??%???S???
*? -I
Z?i? m?7????_?????????;?G?G;?U??
?????/~?E??xj/??[
??d2?j!???????2??????????w??????P????C??>??
=}??ipf?e??E­Pp ?C? )?E?L?????c??y??????????'???_?­w?^;?aJ??^???v?D?????t????%?2?o?T???1?@?K+??n-???uab$?#?­???J?Co?ksX????p$????v_\\???/?­?^??22???3??K?????B.^? ??G[:z? Z??v? ??Sv?$?sg/??v?,???G?}?[?{#c???k[K?????bhu??LQ}*
?p[?u?S?0.???4???GGhN?d??8L­? ?wb1­???X?6CM???(?
? @?oll?S(?F?S?^?t?)?5 <??M:??e?
??????$E*?{:???
??Q?#?nSO?aCO
???O?NT??&??J?s?;H1?????M?R?L??8?????m?p?R D:
?????" ?+???s??????"?F??m`Kf????!???2:T?&??a{x????????^???k?????Na:?9{??w?z
Vs??E.???M??L?t??R%???????0}???EXQ???.C?b?j ???????Y` ??.PCH????b?Q}??Mr--???xxx??,R3V??+????$)=Yq ?L
F6??Ot????A?Q??X)p??`#?
?QP???/???
???22$???HD??U?3D-?d?{afe?????? ??4m?!???45????&?%W????@???0-??
F[??0?2????6????j??z??3?[??}?
??j?9??!??\?J?????P]~??}t??7?x??w?:?????? ???~???<Y?LY????HDQ>?|.??)??????y?? h?\H??%
??kI?)qH??G????E?$?':? ??K????>t+??\I ?2????&???%?N?e?
*??F?yqd???e?S??S!??|M???[?
??Bq?Fw?j?'???+?M??????Z2?z????
J?6???S?r???:???????ki??
Z;? qRdkg?b?y[?b??>?yd???
>oK_?N????? ??.B??? ? ;D?J?@@<???N???~???J0?I????
?Ae"??{???N??&? d?2
?iE
?f?@?5 ?G???s?a3@??
n??o?????R??3g_
=?J?*?Zf?? ???L
??
?????\????????4??B?f???????????????Z\???Q??????C.{??E2?2t:kP?n6 ?(
?????S?<
????"???%???????­utr???n??V?<7??[???z8??_ ??????
R#??:??(I??x???Pr???~?clb|br?????
?!??????o}
f
?j&??????????????'Q??N~???qdj?t?th??`?+?]`6?H??YR2??A%b?0??/??~:@qir6??QO">=`?`@?8&M+?@F??,??????-?~??????)Q? ~???[?o?M?D
;~??^>? j&??????????????'Q??N~???qdj?t?th??` ?+
?]`6?H??YR2??A%b?0??/??~:@qir6??QO?? x? $???F$?/\F?N?MNH?=?
????b??#?zi?H??? }Lz??????? X?? ?_p-y??!k?s?G??)??an?? !P G.A6?B$
H?'?a?
?? ??b?*?sE
b?Jv?t?Q??
?4<??d??0???c">0@??`1Y?M??m~J.<~?s?78??/???????:??V??d^ZY???????dSQ????|??O>??d??0???c@ ?F?J<!F?Zn?$O????(?v?:n8=o???O?H??)z?+K?-?"?E`"%?j? ;? ?Fr$??????9?]?? ?K??w?C?0`p?Tc??d&?G???1??0??b?D??Y?????]?:?I ?-_?P9???@?H?
­??? ]?? ??qD??n?
?l]?L?? ??)jd??6?M?T:
??j?F?????C?-?2?z?&?~??7i0???W.\?P???5Xl?T?v???~H???6?[??6?'??$?r??%????5C??H^??v?%h;/??p??NRhY?%QD??
??R2???? I*?DTt{???
<T???O????w?q6?M?????.T?@
4?P??T??^????]>??? >
|x?*?/????3?y?????C??L?????zJkE??????2?uvR_ c }????X????_???Q4???m??6`Z?????9?O?Gn\??? d?p??? W?
*?
8?l*??? ?" ??3? ?>? q????A7???Kk???F/?]??#­JM???????? ;PvQ CY?u< ??`~?w~'?+??e<?y4i&?DV??­K?I?x?f?n? C????Lf??D?????????????
??s?bK?S?$???E­r?<'S???????92>I?2???93H?V?????:] ? ?????_|???????'?h?>2
?p??­T­J? ?#>?O??(P??UM??Tf?<}????g?]?rU??_t?<?????{?Ka?r??+??qa???Z?A??M?xV?(-/?_???)j??
P???X???sB?DX???'??n?'*<b?????F;?`?VW??????7?oP?z|l????SSGh??????@T??fI`?GC.2f?????![H)A<*???S,??20?Yh???H?????J?38J"*????tx ? <
???? ??NT
X? ?$L ???????}??I? ??kES?T????}?d??5??q3?;?>,? ?X?Q???H?? TQ?A??"???%e#?
???A#??1D#
?
y???????
S\UV?eat?9_b? ?r?Ka?5?%?V????p??????XH!7?k#??t~?T??<w??q,n?j-:?\?????>???????G????@?d?C??#n`n~?v?4q?z?????&R)???[`???,)?(?W?>a&
:?0?1????H???? H??H?.uw??}???L*??0|?????|>??
6????????.
-F|HnS?
?[???3V??
?i??L0-A????"?r
mId?1?2 ?Y#/G ???I???/??
????n?R?????1???C">? ??= ?6,??j?????jI???;@????R???Z?d?k0l??????????B?j?Z??`????l??TH?
?qt?&?a ??;??4!N?%?????iP???@?? ??????X)s?u
j?5?B???"rJ?%t? ]v%?)?A??C[DjP?H?[?AB????:???r??
nm?~??5?8P
?}/o?4T??b?>???<?????;?|?
GqVgL"%?C??"?????-???a?????
???w???%N??P?~<??????O?}X?T$)[]?}-jA?????Df
=?629?%U?m?W????v???_??4lm ???jo??"x??
?a8 ??
???- ;D?i?b?'????39??D
l 5`??S?_??g?BA>??`3!2 ?Q?p??{???I?[yq??????{?4
} o?(?^P??v????,?E??
????­?zD?+???O????6;?pf??/7??????b*Z??
^?? ?;u?$?k?o??&?????g??}???V?ly????r????Wc????L1?E\??^?????B2Y#8{??,?yr?????d??????????i?H??J?X
?
{?:??;q?$CJ? J*??81MB???????d???e???
0!& T?|??Et??[?????\?p????{z?p[?­??????I?S8 ???DJf2 ??L?z*}??????????_q?D{Q??W?H
~??k?? Jm@??~????0a[d&?4?!,? ?p???G?z?6?????????P?y
???A??_Y_??<,
????:w?<?Uk???f
L1?XT???H8?D?B-???O
;z??>???LgJN ? ?)?D??-;??*?
?vw???:????3?\?????Bfu)?g?????R/
S?
I?@??,V???+X?W?}/­B??????@"??|J??????i?????
?}u??k????L??Ie?;??????[??????{hWv??i?ZTXo???p? X? 3
d _S@??=X?H)?
??
?}???R?}B? ??}_|?9??????A????%F j(????G?+?_=~??????[?d???.?4#???e$80???
?
m[v*
?
??????D??[,??5ht??cp?m????,C????!E?,?-[M?1?H?48$H(?2K?Y??5 UMf
?R??V?S?H?? 2?( ?_Wg?@_OlssXN6e7??????0?p??b??!,?b6?????????.?
??ECO?f??=???;????[|?9????\Fcd}?32&??C?O*xF??C?#??CT?E???\???ZP?
?0Q?VEx?e?%??Cr
'a?????
(????
(BEi)?K?H?j<??EM?w?<?5?@???E????E?;??Z}???? ??W?$???K?
???GO~??~?M???8?I?2{1?h?
?8Z??6V????#??????@u,??^????`???
??/??sR?b/???/?.???t????R4????<8y?????
79??????A??RmBI???c??+
?#????G??#t:=(B??B?
?????????/??}+\Q}??a??@???A?B?+M­??%V":?Y­???m]8}????<s?R?n?[?????????W????_???wn_?????Nutv=y:w?????3Q????1?R??? M?n_???D9_h?O??t?p; Y$U??4?j?B??V?I?
nsx???????!yk?}?}????????{[Q??yZ?????
? ^
?|y?+Z???C?a?#U ???b?
?&
?T(??0[A???
?i?n?m?#­c?0????[??|??[YB?!c??<?
P?KK??sjj
??
????G????N?1???'p
O?8?)??????W?IfQ?&z??~|???????(??
?B???gL1} ??Q??????W????8??g?!]????J????Yy??
?1?????;@1?P
???S????K??Ln\?(XTH
???UGqRh
cR????????I??+??h?%????B??u?>XR?????P}R?????W???~0???? :??:?N?/"???
E'?z
) ?? ?1 fp=v?Q?O?S?Eoq[G?6Gdc???????t­EouY?d??
??O?:##?
?4?????????A??u0?;w? ?Y????)??v??q\?XgWS(h Zy?47?G?1?3&?0d ?1?B?d?,??8??AZ??% E.??~
?????)??????????db"?AE ?
f-??Mh2???MHF?o? ?8W??? ?`~?d?<ha?Qf?B?6)"??;????Qu?$)- ^|X???R??L4 ???!??N??????f{0H7%????={??????F??????i
?<z???|d?%?:02????H,<06Z???W??$u?5#
m???h8??&??N????????? ?)N??5??????­dT????0?? ??h ?U?
?u?tu{U?3?%R?D???8????/bH_<??Ro?/??-/???????I??Z????}q?1.:A?3????C?*??????C?y88
q????}
c?n???.??s???/ ???r<???b????:????????(T???n??gbl??pj"P?^C?????_1j?L??+???r{?cN??{? ????y??????z????<w??t???? ???????Uj???????t???Y?? ??-?,
h?I S?????/?7??
v?(r]??? q??yL?jP ??A`fI?WT?????Q?
%?E?(?Q?Q?$?>????{???? ?????????F4t??I????????#C?J???O3?????????7????V????_?B `????.]?|????????c
?a???Q?ydl??Xhc????? ???@[??????????nG{{o_/v?e-# ??]?a??w???V?????>y??|
] ?{?}
???????o+??
???e4?U?? Fh?JPild<?? ?????5*=? 9w?l&???????
y???T?9?B?? ?%Z644H?HpN?'N
?h???OL@?<q?$??????}??u?T?X,???>??/_~???j8N??r??` ????????B???50H?W( ??'???U?.???-??r~???DFB?;?n??,tXpu???J????Y-</??k?>????hh?_nIt9LTs?D?nuyE`h:???<?LF?f?`:???W????b??F??8*??i?+C?/???+???]?=B?K??
`??Cp???@????4??{(???`?
???)?}?.> ????60??P_!?m??f?y8
?yzlzdx??­?G&?|?k[k?????F .?????????3@?Oi??O??L??????P?q? ?=????z??G?????????>y?
??B?&I!???"C3????
J???u? ??E??$?}?~?????<@v ?=P2 ??/@o ?g????Xq?\?? ???hM?&?"????A????B??n,??Cu(]v????Tx?$y]).???%?
??D
? ?;e???i;(b?????[C==?h ??M
IE#W?|???C??W???C:{?­sff????[W?bm?????.?{wcscM/??T?BGk?b{a????dFeu??O ??6{Zmm???'??6FF?s?/?+?????4???t??]>?LcEz
??A
?
E
????@??????c{??W?T`?? ?:????J?`??_?g?????x??~x? ???r(
\?
P_??
???>???q9?{??l.?m<{???4?3?G9c
??)????y?V?K$???MU???U?????E7C[ {[???O?db?##c??=??L@dx????T"??-?
?? ?F?????????i "[????\z8????8<s??n?;u&? ?R\I??PQl]<?Qg??!H<?{ Eh2Y?O?-??V'?@J?????M?????TJ??$ ???
2?#?(B?!????b-??T??????7?yw??[?^
?ho?$A?J?d?@???
^?I?|?? ?????k?H??????????=???h????'?]?;?????@?????OE?V????O???H??Z&???@­8??a?
=u???
9??_?
?6??.-?Qk??w?a2h?F&????0:yrkki{?i­i??4O?73=}4????'?:???Q?q/j?6U??D????^??????o???????78??{?;?.fR???E~?Q????????fDa??????n?\?n??????a?:??? /? ,?,???????|GBMD? f?[O4PT??=??q??????o?;
?:P?? EEF????(?65
?B?????N+????t6
?????i??$V?k??C?!
?AK
?2yqai<6:
????S???Z???!?T??Uq???:
??: ????#?;m[??&?
S?9
?"z? ?
?)k?H'C???'????a??%?T?"??N??2???
?8 ?H?)fUE??V ?C>?? y9??xz?~?7????*A??????A{????????h?u>=} Y?LE??=M?=?ED?<(???B R?y#???O??????Y??
?$?v
?lg???e?>p@? ??F???]#C?>K??=N?diy?<-?????E??y:??r???w???J?
?Z?????PT?*EI]h??#|s?&???F
'?j
W?a?!???RMH??q?????;?+??Oi??5h???K$????g??J?? "???xhculd?mLN????}=??N?%@$JK++?"z?HPx?df 6A"??JJ??h5<???nm.???x~kg???G?^~??????MzUh???'????
???T??m=z??a???D>E%F?????nZ???;/*?
_%L*qv)QmV6?Zj89,?C??^hC/???1??{A????L????\??W?????(5???d??+?E? +?-??L?o??­|??<? _?v???D2? _?<O|w?|2?@V a?N/????????0
?7m????????
? ???'?NQ??? G&? ??$?9]?T"`p??????C?D0???u??u
?<?z{?x?uE?
]s+?f?Kc??vyo?????GlN??????Z??^l^o+?*XqT ?!^Q?Vk0????5?????naq??cC?#? ?!? a
V????m?????
???<R9,r??X #{ e??FP
n?? ? ????ko?
?]L?R??????Kk??F???:???(M?Oy???>g??????{?J5?T???????xi3
?????n?8~d?~????w?? ???{(XJ????????x96???'??????­
=s???????>z??+?????s
?? ????@o+?+[?H???????W?o4??=Be??:;???y??]
5?
??????????D?P?n?kr?????????
?6??????????????`yyqb???:A9???p????8????@????Q Q??#?G?Ri
A@???I2H??q?09/??
u^???5$??D? ??\?DR??mP??D?????@???4?
???a?E?P???D{ d????5?b?????#?
rk??ej?????+?????>?@f=`?SL?b#t<?g????kp
?9?? K!#?/hb????]????)) X?S??Eu?X?fy?|??+?? Y??T?R???Rt? g? `?H|Z2""?C-6 b???F3=??=?????e=?j?MA2????Cc??­?? k?C#?????e
>M???MwS????1i?T????­[?t#5?(?#?s6 }!O? ?}?Djmc?TB?.~????S??w?????Ax????S?dG????QOa??????????^?????????[?6?6F"(
??5???=J???jR??z????T?P?
bp??:U??i?[Car<
?
? ?Qb????,????????pQ?Ot^Q?d?,?XDQ%????Q???}????7?J?? ????V)lf?;o?U?w????O???f?l??u:(?s?;?????w????_??W?????Zm????{?? ?t????V? ?? 3O? ??l???????_? ????
?
J???????d?%??????G?? ???????cl??n????
i???k?????@5"XM??X/?6i???Y{5??P2?)i?????2tE??3?"????_??????Q?P?u?\<??J'
?>?]?TW*??)????jA"??
?_)? ?$?J??­4?e?|e2?|
+?S
|???????piQ??????B?­?"??Vc?????????.0O?0
L{#?6?????'< ? p4U??<???
jm?n?n%Q??j:Y???_?d1%???????24?V?^gw?lG????q?jx?W
?
??????h?j2<? Q<?????{s??? g?:z?C?@oUe???v??z{???y???'???G??bYE1O??
????Z*P???Y ??Z>YB
S??o3?­?>xkk?mw ??<0?z/????J?b???]???'<@?­?~! `0??? ?­?1?_|@4?P<G?O????bR??~$T?????d]?;Q6???)73????,d?UM???????VZ???M??? *z????i??>46Ni??????????????????N?kes??????t?t??t^:w???UchdK???o????
p???L??????­?
>
?????{?_????Of????????N
?U?TO>??[?N?:?
?D?????}?UH=?D??????l???z??4?2???uS?w???S??????? ???\?J[???Spw!14???
??????8\? YT???$????.?????hi?!?H[?T6C
N??t6q??Y??OM[??n,?7[??A???V??o&8}7?
??im?n?v??[?u?
x~i?????=
????????? 0?P
?]gth?
?= 0
#????z,?????&???3???????????????%?&??^wkw???&J
?R_???kG??N?9???%c????'????8?l_[?Z]?
c?Yh[?G???O?8m??D?(g'!?};]**Y?D:
??2?????GT*??
??;??%
p???&?????????1?o???9 ??k???
?.=[]2?­4????:??m-4>@z`a?
5? =y???A&?R??( ?pD???;?!??p?!W?9??E??ol??(;???$<v?\??ey????­­?k?>?%~?????_?$gQ*??I??y??-?0?B?<??c????XP.h;?? 9?Ed?/?v??S
p#
D?~St9Wp!r?a?pZ??>AZ??q~???=#K?j?~??m>t??)xK?8?<q?w|?O???{??O?*???O?
9????[???gA`?,,\??? ?5???P?$??X=?c"S*W??/?,????~??????4?t?-?????
­­?]??'?_P???dQ?+ C?Q6@? ,?? ?
??????i?+?uSb???j?fm&????g7??m??:??????]???]?S???????????
.B?????D??? ?\b? O~}
?e?+J????;?W???? ??\??c
""?9?l %?y??????????
[;??Me?­????k1????i'_^
-D?2?YW5?Q???­???[??z??Z4&?^&????: ???Q???;wE?}*?????? 6
??#????}-??X(??:?i?$?m">??­??m???`????@@(?KD?yr??????_xZ??B­????ph3?7?Yi?fQi??P,??L?????????>??:?i?$?m` RF *?A??????%?'?P?J
?????8J???:??r ?A%v????J??B?k?
D5%??S?R|+??)?+?c?K;????????????~?g
??7???CI
?l??|????????????\<? ???w?????{???????X2>Nv ??MdZ??\2?????????????R????fF?u??????k?TS???G?????4?z??uu­?bsC?!????Zu~e??f1#1?D> %m??:q???o?
A??~wo?2??:M{?3?n??????~ld+??1W??B??k??Hw??mh????Sh???/?>}???m?!?????iE???B????????P!1?i? C+ (x??D?DT???TVy>???????o??7??
????>???x?M?- ???
I??KR,PU?il?J?@??l?2?h'?????I??????????1?????
^nN 9i???7(BW?W}????2{??CZ???X?`??r?-??6`)s:H?V%?
????p?)??~N?????u/
?!?KFn?<?)R'?xF??????AQZ??n(_Wj`?R?|
?#F[(^Y[????b'?/?~??19??}t_Cc???Q? ??\Zp??+? 8*??l6G?)??uttR?????s?T???x???????: ???*???3!? ??????????
9OBm+9??bLa???T???y??,?Q?a0????]?[,?v???z?#;K?T?R?U-,S:? G?tD??????P... n so on.... guss yu gt te pixtr
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
funny doesn't web.
-- funny
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 05:51:54 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
o _ _ _ k
http://tinyurl.com/232orj
f _ _ _ i
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
A piece of writing to end all reading.
-- funny
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 05:33:33 -0800 (PST) "Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> writes:
Here is a description of the strangest organism I ever had. It was
inspired by the idea of women doing leg lifts in a roman
chair. Extreme exertion. Now add cold, electricity and fear...
Scene. Mountains. After a few hours of hiking to well over twelve
thousand feet, cross country, (from Big Pine, Fifth Lake to Jigsaw
pass eastside, Sierra Neveda), the sky getting darker and darker as
vast thunderheads roil over the high remote pass that over looks
Bishop Pass just at mid-day. Cold wind blowing. Hadn't seen anybody
for hours---been up and hiking since early morning. Place looks like
some desolate scene in Prometheus Bound, in the Caucasus. Here is
the view looking back at the descent: Look::
I stop to figure out how to descend. The cliff at the edge is steep,
and just barely angled back enough to carefully pick my way down third
class about seven hundred of feet of various gullies with scree to a high
plateau and Bishop pass below with the regular trail to Dusy
Basin. The veiw is spectacular, wind rushing up the face.
Very scary. I am standing at the pass looking down. Wind blowing,
darkness at noon. Suddenly all my skin is tingling, crawling like I
was afraid, or something. Weird electric things are dancing around my
balls and pubic hair. I can't stand it, and open my pants to pee or
something. I try peeing. Nothing. My penis seems to be crawling around
on its own, semi-hard. I realize I am having an organism and a wad of
cum splats out on the rocks.
Never seen that before. Now I am really freaked out. All my hair is
standing on end and ant-like electric charges are crawling all over
me. I finally figure it out. I am in a extreme electrically charged
area, and lightening is going to strike here. The potentials are
building up. I am right in the middle of an electric storm.
God almighty. I just slide down the first fifty feet into the steep
gully, almost straight down into a series of corners and drops. I
can't get down one section, so I lower my backpack on a nylon cord,
and climb down. I am scrambling to get down lower. I am cowering near
the gully face when a gigantic explosion hits about five hundred feet
below and a hundred yards out from my wet, cold stance. The light is
so bright, I can see the bolt as an electric purple after image
with my eyes open. I jump in a complete panic and scream. Gotta get
down. Then I find a place that is more secure, less exposed and I pull
out an ensolite pad and sit on it, and try to relax. I can't relax. I
try to light a cigarette and it just crumbles in my shaking fingers. I
am quivering like an animal about to be slaughtered. The smell of
ozone is extreme, like cooked relays.
I can't sit still, so I try to get down slowly,... Another smaller
bolt cuts loose like a mortar exploding below, leaving a smoking spot
on wet rocks. Several more strikes below, with long standing
branches. More steam and ozone, more jumping and screaming, more
creepy crawly feelings. More icy rain and hale that I barely feel.
Finally get off the steep cliff and race to a low ravine. The worst of
the storm is over. In the distance some other hikers are standing
around a small fire drying off and chatting. (Long before prohibitions
against wood fires, early seventies)
Never been more scared in my entire life, or scared for so long. It
must have more than two or three hours of terror. When I finally look
at my watch, it is well after three. The day is over, as if it never
happened.
And oof again.
--funny
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
No time (a thought, too) to pursue this now. Bigger fish to fry, smaller shoes to fill. AL
And another foot[s] of snow.
-- funny
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 21:24:09 -0800 (PST) Alfred Landman <landmana@yahoo.com> writes:
Hi Don Lay. Venezuelan Interior Minister Pedro Carreno was momentarily at a loss for words when a journalist interrupted his speech and asked if it was not contradictory to criticize capitalism while wearing Gucci shoes and a tie made by Parisian luxury goods maker Louis Vuitton. Thought can BE funny. Thought can DO funny things (incl "funnies"). Zum bei-spiel, spiel being (doing) "play": Take, for example, Pedro -- one Predro. That is ("one") thought right there. Then Carreno, "another". Minister is a thought, too. So is venezuelan. Many thought, folks, many, munch. I, another yet, wants to focus on this, tho: The throught for one Pedro to do revolution AND to do luxury goods at the same time. Now, this is A thought..... No time (a thought, too) to pursue this now. Bigger fish to fry, smaller shoes to fill. AL
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
Is it necessity that a POV be identified?
Is it necessity that POV be personified? Is there such a thing as a POV without identity? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan E. DeBakey
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 7:37 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] SELF, SOCIETY AND PROPRIOCEPTION
It is (a bit) like with those tricki POVs:
The more you can get (keep!) up (& down!!), the wilder the "ride" (trip)
http://tinyurl.com/yqo3k3
-- funny
donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
Well you had me fooled. Talk about acting and pretending.
don
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?
donald factor <DFACTOR@dc.rr.com> wrote:
Terrific! My sentiments eggsactly.
don
On Dec 15, 2007, at 12:39 PM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/v/6gmP4nk0EOE
---------------------------------
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.
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.
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
---------------------------------
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/20071216/136138ca/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Mon Dec 17 00:38:37 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Mon Dec 17 00:44:32 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] SELF, SOCIETY AND PROPRIOCEPTION
In-Reply-To: <617185.48182.qm@web45815.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <631198.34361.qm@web45801.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
funny doesn't http://www.themeatrix1.com/meatrix.swf ?
A, Horse(Meat)Lover
__>
---------------------------------
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/20071216/af1a6c51/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 02:13:27 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 02:19:21 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <BLU109-W40FE06935818AAAA01465FB7610@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <003801c8404a$07f4f230$b5c16018@DL01>
The universe achieves a concrete existence as a result of our perceptions. -- Regina quote
On the view that exist means to stand out, we say that concrete existence stands out in "our" awareness and in "our thought".
Might this suggest a feedback loop driven by endorphin-like pleasure? -- dl
From: Regina Bensch-Coe
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 3:57 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
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't get caught with egg on your face. Play Chicktionary! Check it out!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/20071216/c3eb4f15/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 02:33:15 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 02:39:04 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <BLU109-W40FE06935818AAAA01465FB7610@phx.gbl>
<003801c8404a$07f4f230$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <004701c8404c$cbc55ae0$b5c16018@DL01>
Does this suggest anything about the Copenhagen Theory ... that might have motivated Bohm to seriously question the nature of self and begin making radical suggestions or proposals regarding identity?
What might those people have been standing under that made them speak of a homo-sapo's consciousness collapsing wave functions? -- dl
The universe achieves a concrete existence as a result of our perceptions. -- Regina quote
On the view that exist means to stand out, we say that concrete existence stands out in "our" awareness and in "our thought".
Might this suggest a feedback loop driven by endorphin-like pleasure? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 8:13 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
The universe achieves a concrete existence as a result of our perceptions. -- Regina quote
On the view that exist means to stand out, we say that concrete existence stands out in "our" awareness and in "our thought".
Might this suggest a feedback loop driven by endorphin-like pleasure? -- dl
From: Regina Bensch-Coe
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 3:57 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't get caught with egg on your face. Play Chicktionary! Check it out!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/20071216/8623361c/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 02:42:56 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 02:48:45 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <BLU109-W40FE06935818AAAA01465FB7610@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <005601c8404e$26286f30$b5c16018@DL01>
In the implicate order there is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind. ?? Is this statement true? -- Regina
If we consider implicate/explicate order as proposed as a view for exploration, the idea of true/false might not arise. Rather, what questions does the I/O Order answer, what problems of thought does it solve?
Similarly, what questions and problems, etc., are addressed by Sufism? Maybe the anxiety regarding homo-sappo's personal existence are addressed by Sufism.
Maybe the same is true of re Buddhism. But, what's the trade-off? Does it come down to who's willing to sit around all day saying ohmmmmm, etc., i.e., surrendering self for the nothingness pleasure of having no anxiety about death and dying, etc? - dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Regina Bensch-Coe
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 3:57 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
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't get caught with egg on your face. Play Chicktionary! Check it out!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/20071216/e55f117b/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 02:48:41 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 02:54:31 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <BLU109-W40FE06935818AAAA01465FB7610@phx.gbl>
<005601c8404e$26286f30$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <007701c8404e$f3c1cbd0$b5c16018@DL01>
A few drunks, after closing the local tavern, stopped by Ben Johnson's house one night, threw pebbles against a second story window until Johnson woke and raised the window.
"Hey Ben", they cried. "Tell us a pun."
"A pun", he asked? "A-pun what subject?"
(Or was it Samuel?) -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 8:42 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In the implicate order there is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind. ?? Is this statement true? -- Regina
If we consider implicate/explicate order as proposed as a view for exploration, the idea of true/false might not arise. Rather, what questions does the I/O Order answer, what problems of thought does it solve?
Similarly, what questions and problems, etc., are addressed by Sufism? Maybe the anxiety regarding homo-sappo's personal existence are addressed by Sufism.
Maybe the same is true of re Buddhism. But, what's the trade-off? Does it come down to who's willing to sit around all day saying ohmmmmm, etc., i.e., surrendering self for the nothingness pleasure of having no anxiety about death and dying, etc? - dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Regina Bensch-Coe
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 3:57 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't get caught with egg on your face. Play Chicktionary! Check it out!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/20071216/96bfe155/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Mon Dec 17 03:11:36 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Mon Dec 17 03:17:34 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] I.... Order
In-Reply-To: <005601c8404e$26286f30$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <9033.40284.qm@web45810.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
....come down to who's willing to sit around all day saying ohmmmmm, etc., ...
Ever tried bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbohm, Donlay? Might (un)do the trick-truck-stuck ;-)
Alan
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 } In the implicate order there is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind. ?? Is this statement true? -- Regina
If we consider implicate/explicate order as proposed as a view for exploration, the idea of true/false might not arise. Rather, what questions does the I/O Order answer, what problems of thought does it solve?
Similarly, what questions and problems, etc., are addressed by Sufism? Maybe the anxiety regarding homo-sappo's personal existence are addressed by Sufism.
Maybe the same is true of re Buddhism. But, what's the trade-off? Does it come down to who's willing to sit around all day saying ohmmmmm, etc., i.e., surrendering self for the nothingness pleasure of having no anxiety about death and dying, etc? - dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Regina Bensch-Coe
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 3:57 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
---------------------------------
Don't get caught with egg on your face. Play Chicktionary! Check it out!
---------------------------------
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/20071216/94f73ff0/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Mon Dec 17 03:14:56 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Mon Dec 17 03:20:52 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Iorder
In-Reply-To: <9033.40284.qm@web45810.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <626724.40762.qm@web45812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Talking about dobeing some think for a loooooooong ti-i-i-i-i-i-me:
"a.debakey" <a.debakey@...> wrote:
>
> John, off the grid for 30? Good Lord, what "grid"? And, gooder,
> how "off"? Alan
>
History (this is combination of several that I have written)
In 1968, after finishing a degree in Anthropology, while fishing on a causeway
in Biscayne
Bay looking at the Miami skyline, I had the realization that civilization as we
know it could
not endure. Although a seemingly highly adaptable and flexible animal, I
believed then
and now that civilization took away too much of our humanity by both removing us
from
other life forms and stuffing us into pockets with too many of our own kind. At
that point
I started a quest to go "back to the land" which took me to Mexico, Oregon,
Hawaii,
Ozarks and finally Minnesota. During that time, Limits to Growth came out
reinforcing my
assumptions from a resource point of view. Further reading reinforced it from
an
ecological and environmental point of view. Then I studied energy, ran the
first low
income weatherization program in Minnesota, developed, installed and had dealers
for a
solar hot air panel and was active in the Minnesota renewable energy scene.
I lived off the grid for 30 years in Minnesota. (I was born and raised in
Florida and didn't
see snow until I was 18 in the USAF) The first 10 years were without electricity
because I
personally think nuclear waste is no legacy to leave the future. The next 20 my
electricity
came from sun and wind. The solar panels were the main source for me. Although
I love
the esthetics of wind generators turning in the wind, I prefer solar because of
longevity
and no maintenance. I cooked with wood and heated with wood and yes, I know
wood is
a problem but I used as little as possible, well dried with the best stoves.
For the first ten years I pumped all my water. Visitors were told they could
use as much as
they wished, they only had to pump their own. It is amazing how fast they
conserved when
it was both their responsibility and their labor.
I got my psychology degree and license using kerosene lamps. I cooked with wood
(a 1935
copper clad wood cook stove) and heated with wood (a stove I built). Then I got
both wind
power (a story in itself) and solar panels. I lived on less than a kilowatt hour
a day for the
next 20 plus years. During the 70s, I manufactured a solar hot air panel and
installed
many 1000 square feet. Was involved in state and federal renewable activities.
After 1983,
I began using my degree and was in private practice as licensed psychologist for
the next
years until 2003.
In 2003 was diagnosed with lung cancer and given a few weeks to live. Survived
radiation
and chemo and am doing fabulously. I sold my land in central Minnesota and moved
with
my partner to a lake home she owned. There I set up a 3kWh grid-tie system. We
recently
are buying a piece of land near by that we are beginning to develop a two acre
orchard. We
put our first trees in this fall. This will be a slow but sure process. We did
all the fencing.
We reconditioned the little home on the place and will use it as a retreat
later. Just had a
well put in that will drip irrigate the orchard. I am using a pump jack so that
I can set it up
with a 12volt 1/2 hp motor run by solar panels like I had at my other place. We
will also
capture water coming off the small barn on the place that has a salt box roof.
The water
will go into a reservoir. I have lined up an old fire truck pumper as the
possible reservoir.
I plan to build an ice house for block ice cut off the lake next summer. Will
use modern
materials for insulation.
I understand that many feel despair when faced with the various peaks and
challenges of
the future. It really is a challenge. Here is a synopsis of the talk I gave at
the RelayForLife:
The theme is hope. To me Hope is Doing.
I am a back to the land hippie from the 60s. During treatment for the cancer, I
was
splitting wood because I needed to cook and heat. Those of you who have been
through
treatment and those of you who have been with us as we have gone through
treatment
know how tough and debilitating it can be. My neighbors did do most of it but I
still
needed to do some.
For me, hope is not words all though the kind ones and the prayers are welcome.
Hope is
not statistics.
Hope is doing. It is doing the things you have to, for me like splitting wood.
And it is
doing the things that arise in you and really are doing you. First, for me it
was talking to
kids all around Minnesota about not smoking. Now it is putting in an organic
orchard for
future food for people. This isn't heroics it is living.
And I will add again. It is a great adventure.
John Weber
NM
"Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
....come down to who's willing to sit around all day saying ohmmmmm, etc., ...
Ever tried bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbohm, Donlay? Might (un)do the trick-truck-stuck ;-)
Alan
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 } In the implicate order there is no space, time, causality, matter, or mind. ?? Is this statement true? -- Regina
If we consider implicate/explicate order as proposed as a view for exploration, the idea of true/false might not arise. Rather, what questions does the I/O Order answer, what problems of thought does it solve?
Similarly, what questions and problems, etc., are addressed by Sufism? Maybe the anxiety regarding homo-sappo's personal existence are addressed by Sufism.
Maybe the same is true of re Buddhism. But, what's the trade-off? Does it come down to who's willing to sit around all day saying ohmmmmm, etc., i.e., surrendering self for the nothingness pleasure of having no anxiety about death and dying, etc? - dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Regina Bensch-Coe
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 3:57 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
---------------------------------
Don't get caught with egg on your face. Play Chicktionary! Check it out!
---------------------------------
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
---------------------------------
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/20071216/7f3c7705/attachment.html
From landmana at yahoo.com Mon Dec 17 11:40:59 2007
From: landmana at yahoo.com (Alfred Landman)
Date: Mon Dec 17 11:47:00 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W2028A87A3370F0B33650FBDC610@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Hi Rob Mooney. T.e.a.
AL.
rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
.hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } 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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/7d34a520/attachment.html
From jeff at siit.tu.ac.th Mon Dec 17 14:30:24 2007
From: jeff at siit.tu.ac.th (Jeff Webb)
Date: Mon Dec 17 14:37:18 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <476679F0.60003@siit.tu.ac.th>
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
>
>
> ??
>
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 14:52:41 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 14:58:40 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
<476679F0.60003@siit.tu.ac.th>
Message-ID: <003101c840b4$1a0909b0$b5c16018@DL01>
"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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/1a977479/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Mon Dec 17 15:07:42 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Mon Dec 17 15:13:45 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <466461.42128.qm@web45814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
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:
.hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } 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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/cc0e6a7f/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Mon Dec 17 15:14:30 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Mon Dec 17 15:20:34 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] SELF, SOCIETY AND PROPRIOCEPTION
In-Reply-To: <631198.34361.qm@web45801.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <771229.22794.qm@web45812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
One re-action 's this:
> http://www.themeatrix1.com/meatrix.swf
And, 'funnily', commically, strangely enough,
he picks up from the clip I just sent with this:
[...] This has been one of the happiest
circumstances of life on this planet. It seem that
mankind has been fortunate, largely because the earth
has been so bounteous. There has been plenty to eat,
delightful climates for the most parts, lots of material
for clothing and shelter, lots of offspring. The result
has been that man seems to have been permitted by
natural bounty to live largely in a world of playful
fantasy. Whole societies have been able to persist with
central beliefs that bore little relation to reality.
About the only time a culture has had to pay has been in
the encounters with conquerors superior in numbers,
weapons and immunity to certain diseases."
Somehow this feels a wee like travelling in time starring at
Bohm's symbols, set in papery stone almost .25
century ago-went-gone.
Carrol
"Alan E. DeBakey" <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote:
funny doesn't http://www.themeatrix1.com/meatrix.swf ?
A, Horse(Meat)Lover
---------------------------------
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/f4a756d0/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 15:15:59 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 15:21:54 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <466461.42128.qm@web45814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <004501c840b7$594becc0$b5c16018@DL01>
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/5472647b/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 16:26:46 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 16:32:44 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
<476679F0.60003@siit.tu.ac.th>
Message-ID: <007701c840c1$3c9f5580$b5c16018@DL01>
is there space, time causality in the implicate order. --
One view might be that when space, time causality become manifest -- then that is the explicate and by definition, the explicate is not the implicate.
Someone said that Aristotle uses the idea of potential to address the problem of being/non being -- that non being is in being as potential.
Then would Aristotelian thought say the properties of the explicate such as space, time causality are "in" the implicate as potential. -- 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/d3685962/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Mon Dec 17 16:42:41 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Mon Dec 17 16:48:45 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and Improvisation
In-Reply-To: <20071216.090526.3184.45.ae.dropper@juno.com>
References: <20071216.090526.3184.45.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712170742q3fda9871xb24868c516676876@mail.gmail.com>
I: What's your point, Pat?
On Dec 16, 2007 9:05 AM, <ae.dropper@juno.com> wrote:
> I can feel those final grains of self aggrandizement
> flying out of my pores from the morning readings..
>
> But alas - never say final.
> "Final" is only the beginning
> of the next layer of subtlety
> of these glorifications of me.
>
> -- funny
>
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 07:53:53 -0500 "Irene Darcy" <irenedarcy@gmail.com>
> writes:
>
> 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.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
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/5b38f357/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 17:27:50 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 17:34:01 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>
Message-ID: <009501c840c9$c9da9a10$b5c16018@DL01>
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/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/141f2a94/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 17:42:02 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 17:47:57 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>
Message-ID: <00ae01c840cb$c07ac830$b5c16018@DL01>
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/6e9efa5c/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Mon Dec 17 18:16:59 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Mon Dec 17 18:23:04 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <004501c840b7$594becc0$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <471460.66472.qm@web45814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Did this thought ever occur to Donlay: That ("WHAT IS MEANING????") he sounds like an infant fumbling for some Mother/Tit ;-)
Well, there is little-to-no-doubt what "meaning" is (DOES) on this end of the pipe/line: I am having it for lunch 'as-we-speak'. You should see it! Delicious! And all organic, so it says ;-)
Of course: you could taste it too, if you could ;;--}}
Alan
Don Lay <donlay@knology.net> wrote:
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:
.hmmessage P { PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } 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.
---------------------------------
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/20071217/261ca571/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Mon Dec 17 18:19:04 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Mon Dec 17 18:25:08 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Assumptions and Improvisation
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712170742q3fda9871xb24868c516676876@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <879941.31397.qm@web45816.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
's that "i'm-pro-vised" :-?
Alan
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: What's your point, Pat?
---------------------------------
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/20071217/8b56e1ce/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Mon Dec 17 19:01:11 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Mon Dec 17 19:07:18 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <466461.42128.qm@web45814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <466461.42128.qm@web45814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <579EC188-6F18-47E9-B6A4-26964457DF8C@dc.rr.com>
On Dec 17, 2007, at 6:07 AM, Alan E. DeBakey wrote:
> 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
Live off goose bumps? Dunno, never tried them,
don
>
>
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/22073f8f/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Mon Dec 17 19:00:04 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Mon Dec 17 19:07:56 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
Message-ID: <20071217.130534.3184.54.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!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/d8a35fe9/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Mon Dec 17 19:05:32 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Mon Dec 17 19:07:58 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Message-ID: <20071217.130534.3184.55.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!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/7550f984/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 19:06:47 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 19:12:53 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
References: <BAY123-W2028A87A3370F0B33650FBDC610@phx.gbl>
<439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W99D4CB36BE1E4EB20DCA3DC620@phx.gbl>
TEA
Tactical Engineering & Analysis, Inc.
TEA
Tactical Espionage Action (game)
TEA
Targeted Enforcement Area (police warning radar)
TEA
Teachers Experiencing Antarctica and the Arctic
TEA
Technical Engineering Authority
TEA
Technical Exchange Agreement
TEA
Technicien en Entretien d'A?ronefs
TEA
Technology Exchange Agreement
TEA
Technology for Enabling Awareness
TEA
Telephone Extension Alert
TEA
Television Equipment Associates (Brewster, NY)
TEA
Temperate East Asia
TEA
Ten Eyck Associates
TEA
Terminal Education Age
TEA
Tetraethylammonium
TEA
Texas Education Agency
TEA
Texas Electronics Association (Fort Worth, TX)
TEA
The Electronic Alveary (word search program)
TEA
Themed Entertainment Association
TEA
Thromboendarterectomy
TEA
Ticket Entry Automation
TEA
Timing Error Avoidance
TEA
Tiny Encryption Algorithm (developed by David Wheeler and Roger Needham at the Computer Laboratory of Cambridge University)
TEA
Tirupur Exports Association (India)
TEA
Toronto Entomologists' Association
TEA
Toronto Environmental Alliance
TEA
Torque Equilibrium Attitude
TEA
Training Effectiveness Analysis
TEA
Training Employment Advice Shop
TEA
Transient Effect Area
TEA
Transitional Employment Assistance (State of Arkansas)
TEA
Transportability Engineering Analysis
TEA
Transportation Engineering Agency
TEA
Transportation Engineering Agreement
TEA
Transportation Enhancement Activities (Canada)
TEA
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century
TEA
Transversely Excited Atmosphere
TEA
Triethanolamine
TEA
Triethyl Aluminum
TEA
Triethylamine
TEA
Twin Engine Aircraft
TEA
Twinsburg Education Association (Twinsburg, Ohio)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 02:40:59 -0800From: landmana@yahoo.comSubject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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 scientistsR.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.htm05.02-- 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.
_________________________________________________________________
Get Hotmail on your mobile, text MSN to 63463!
http://mobile.uk.msn.com/pc/mail.aspx
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/64c73d2e/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 19:09:06 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 19:15:11 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: <BAY123-W316D168A86355AA8647C79DC620@phx.gbl>
if there is no space time tea cake etc aren't we wasting our... um... breath
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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
_________________________________________________________________
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/20071217/3a6f447a/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 19:13:44 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 19:19:49 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Message-ID: <BAY123-W104512BFF7C98E81C74120DC620@phx.gbl>
yum one o them nice big hadrons fricasseed on a bed of wild causality double yum
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 06:07:42 -0800From: a.debakey@yahoo.comSubject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderTo: 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---?))
AlanAlfred 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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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 scientistsR.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.htm05.02-- 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.
_________________________________________________________________
Telly addicts unite!
http://www.searchgamesbox.com/tvtown.shtml
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/7f10ffd8/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 19:15:32 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 19:21:37 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <004501c840b7$594becc0$b5c16018@DL01>
References: <466461.42128.qm@web45814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
<004501c840b7$594becc0$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W360C871E5B94A44C7CE328DC620@phx.gbl>
What is meaning?
how do you mean?
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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---?))
AlanAlfred 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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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 scientistsR.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.htm05.02-- 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
_________________________________________________________________
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/20071217/686c65dd/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 19:20:22 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 19:26:26 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <00ae01c840cb$c07ac830$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>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W879FB36B103BA98E4068CDC620@phx.gbl>
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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity MovementDate: 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
_________________________________________________________________
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/20071217/64a3a328/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 19:23:27 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 19:29:32 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
In-Reply-To: <20071217.130534.3184.54.ae.dropper@juno.com>
References: <20071217.130534.3184.54.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W16A36327326A280FFDD721DC620@phx.gbl>
fullness pours out
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:00:04 -0500Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemFrom: 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 dancesnine 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.orgDate: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 08:12:20 -0500Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemFrom: ae.dropper@juno.com
Naming plays games with itself.Somewhere out of reach it dancesnine 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 dancesnine 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.orgDate: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 22:39:03 -0500
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
what? (Rob)
the naming plays with itselfsomewhere 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 -0500From: irenedarcy@gmail.comTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2I: 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.orgDate: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 21:26:42 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2From: ae.dropper@juno.com
DIALOGUE DANCEA dialogue circle of trees, dancing treeswe do not sit in chairs but we stand in the woodswith the light filtering through our autumn leavesand we are dancing - our roots are our feet and our millions of toes, dancing.A wind comes and some of our leaves fallfrom some of our fingers, our million fingers, one for every dancing toe,one explication for every implicationour roots hidden, unknown but known constantly as thatwhich ever refuses namingwhile the naming plays with itselfsomewhere 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 TimeDear Don, nice wisdom in your Sep.25 'Space & Time note. Yet:(yourquote):>...<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. Andhave 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 isnegligent.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 listDate: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:24:15 PDTTo: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.ukHello All,I've heard nothing from the group for several days. So, I'm sending this message to check for echo. Regards ChrisFrom: "Chris Hooley" <chooley@idnsi.net>Subject: inside outDate: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:19:50 PDT To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.ukReply-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 thatit'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 seenfrom 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 fullyrepresented, 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 *rightkind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentionaldying" *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 getback 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 veryrewarding) 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 'unlivedlines' (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 donot 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 NOTpeople ... 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 noobligation 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 everythingthe 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 theenormous 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 oneshort email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our commonhumanity.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" becausesomeone 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 'unlivedlines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment ofbirth, 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!
_________________________________________________________________
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/20071217/7ee80ab3/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 19:45:35 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 19:51:41 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <20071217.130534.3184.55.ae.dropper@juno.com>
References: <20071217.130534.3184.55.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W398E522D93BBD8B68BABADC620@phx.gbl>
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.orgDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:05:32 -0500Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderFrom: 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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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 scientistsR.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.htm05.02-- Abstract No:824
Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!
_________________________________________________________________
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/20071217/0581cc73/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 19:46:49 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 19:52:54 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W99D4CB36BE1E4EB20DCA3DC620@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY123-W2028A87A3370F0B33650FBDC610@phx.gbl>
<439325.58372.qm@web57411.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
<BAY123-W99D4CB36BE1E4EB20DCA3DC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W36B8C9B033151B6ACD96EFDC620@phx.gbl>
it's quite interesting that these acronyms all look like TEAT now rather than TEA. Hmmmmm...
From: rob.mooney@hotmail.co.ukTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:06:47 +0000
TEA
Tactical Engineering & Analysis, Inc.
TEA
Tactical Espionage Action (game)
TEA
Targeted Enforcement Area (police warning radar)
TEA
Teachers Experiencing Antarctica and the Arctic
TEA
Technical Engineering Authority
TEA
Technical Exchange Agreement
TEA
Technicien en Entretien d'A?ronefs
TEA
Technology Exchange Agreement
TEA
Technology for Enabling Awareness
TEA
Telephone Extension Alert
TEA
Television Equipment Associates (Brewster, NY)
TEA
Temperate East Asia
TEA
Ten Eyck Associates
TEA
Terminal Education Age
TEA
Tetraethylammonium
TEA
Texas Education Agency
TEA
Texas Electronics Association (Fort Worth, TX)
TEA
The Electronic Alveary (word search program)
TEA
Themed Entertainment Association
TEA
Thromboendarterectomy
TEA
Ticket Entry Automation
TEA
Timing Error Avoidance
TEA
Tiny Encryption Algorithm (developed by David Wheeler and Roger Needham at the Computer Laboratory of Cambridge University)
TEA
Tirupur Exports Association (India)
TEA
Toronto Entomologists' Association
TEA
Toronto Environmental Alliance
TEA
Torque Equilibrium Attitude
TEA
Training Effectiveness Analysis
TEA
Training Employment Advice Shop
TEA
Transient Effect Area
TEA
Transitional Employment Assistance (State of Arkansas)
TEA
Transportability Engineering Analysis
TEA
Transportation Engineering Agency
TEA
Transportation Engineering Agreement
TEA
Transportation Enhancement Activities (Canada)
TEA
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century
TEA
Transversely Excited Atmosphere
TEA
Triethanolamine
TEA
Triethyl Aluminum
TEA
Triethylamine
TEA
Twin Engine Aircraft
TEA
Twinsburg Education Association (Twinsburg, Ohio)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 02:40:59 -0800From: landmana@yahoo.comSubject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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 scientistsR.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.htm05.02-- 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.
Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!
_________________________________________________________________
Telly addicts unite!
http://www.searchgamesbox.com/tvtown.shtml
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/5de2c9a6/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 20:05:03 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 20:11:07 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>
<BAY123-W316D168A86355AA8647C79DC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <00e501c840df$bb92bda0$b5c16018@DL01>
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/e8e71795/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Mon Dec 17 20:06:53 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Mon Dec 17 20:11:48 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
Message-ID: <20071217.140956.3184.59.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!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/4765a68b/attachment.html
From ae.dropper at juno.com Mon Dec 17 20:09:47 2007
From: ae.dropper at juno.com (ae.dropper@juno.com)
Date: Mon Dec 17 20:11:50 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
Message-ID: <20071217.140956.3184.60.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!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/846b7e2a/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Mon Dec 17 20:09:14 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Mon Dec 17 20:15:19 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <00e501c840df$bb92bda0$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <376217.5644.qm@web45812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
USING time, space.... Please, Donlay, give us an example how Donlay "uses" ... time?.... space?.... ;-)
Alan
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 } 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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/3f8f3490/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 20:11:23 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 20:17:21 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <466461.42128.qm@web45814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><004501c840b7$594becc0$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W360C871E5B94A44C7CE328DC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <00f901c840e0$9e4b5c10$b5c16018@DL01>
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/a8e7c0db/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 20:20:21 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 20:26:21 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>
Message-ID: <010801c840e1$de342e00$b5c16018@DL01>
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/d1b50b06/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 20:25:29 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 20:31:24 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <20071217.130534.3184.55.ae.dropper@juno.com>
<BAY123-W398E522D93BBD8B68BABADC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <011c01c840e2$95ac9040$b5c16018@DL01>
Such as this seems meaningful ..., meaningfully enjoyable. Surely we don't say the element of joy must be defined, limited and line-earized in order for joy to be experienced.
Still perhaps, the question: what is the meaning?
Maybe the meaning is to relax and enjoy. --dl
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/e1e55d68/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 20:29:29 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 20:35:26 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <376217.5644.qm@web45812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <013a01c840e3$24c34530$b5c16018@DL01>
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/8713dcb4/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Mon Dec 17 20:33:55 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Mon Dec 17 20:40:00 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <011c01c840e2$95ac9040$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <121756.22405.qm@web45808.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Mmmmmmmaybe: Aaaaaaaa(nother) whird ;-))
You (dont)kno, oneofthose .... thinkgs ;-((
Alan
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 } Such as this seems meaningful ..., meaningfully enjoyable. Surely we don't say the element of joy must be defined, limited and line-earized in order for joy to be experienced.
Still perhaps, the question: what is the meaning?
Maybe the meaning is to relax and enjoy. --dl
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
.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;} 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
.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!
---------------------------------
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
---------------------------------
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/20071217/69a57438/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Mon Dec 17 20:35:22 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Mon Dec 17 20:41:27 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order, Take II
In-Reply-To: <121756.22405.qm@web45808.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <355691.18377.qm@web45812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Still perhaps, the question: what is the meaning?
Mmmmmmmaybe: Aaaaaaaa(nother) whird ;-))
You (dont)kno, oneofthose .... thinkgs ;-((
Alan
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 } Such as this seems meaningful ..., meaningfully enjoyable. Surely we don't say the element of joy must be defined, limited and line-earized in order for joy to be experienced.
Still perhaps, the question: what is the meaning?
Maybe the meaning is to relax and enjoy. --dl
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
.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;} 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
.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!
---------------------------------
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
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
info: www.david-bohm.org/mailman/listinfo/bohm_dialogue
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/49ed9c5a/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 20:37:07 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 20:43:13 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <00e501c840df$bb92bda0$b5c16018@DL01>
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>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W3205646DF39FCB075F9CE5DC620@phx.gbl>
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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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
_________________________________________________________________
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/20071217/17c5f328/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 20:39:07 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 20:45:12 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
In-Reply-To: <20071217.140956.3184.60.ae.dropper@juno.com>
References: <20071217.140956.3184.60.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W182ADC54592543B1ED5C44DC620@phx.gbl>
I see it black
on my screen
but I know
there is no
black in
transmitted
light
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:09:47 -0500Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemFrom: 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.orgDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:00:04 -0500Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemFrom: 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 dancesnine 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.orgDate: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 08:12:20 -0500Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemFrom: ae.dropper@juno.com
Naming plays games with itself.Somewhere out of reach it dancesnine 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 dancesnine 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.orgDate: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 22:39:03 -0500
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
what? (Rob)
the naming plays with itselfsomewhere 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 -0500From: irenedarcy@gmail.comTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2I: 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.orgDate: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 21:26:42 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2From: ae.dropper@juno.com
DIALOGUE DANCEA dialogue circle of trees, dancing treeswe do not sit in chairs but we stand in the woodswith the light filtering through our autumn leavesand we are dancing - our roots are our feet and our millions of toes, dancing.A wind comes and some of our leaves fallfrom some of our fingers, our million fingers, one for every dancing toe,one explication for every implicationour roots hidden, unknown but known constantly as thatwhich ever refuses namingwhile the naming plays with itselfsomewhere 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 TimeDear Don, nice wisdom in your Sep.25 'Space & Time note. Yet:(yourquote):>...<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. Andhave 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 isnegligent.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 listDate: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:24:15 PDTTo: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.ukHello All,I've heard nothing from the group for several days. So, I'm sending this message to check for echo. Regards ChrisFrom: "Chris Hooley" <chooley@idnsi.net>Subject: inside outDate: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:19:50 PDT To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.ukReply-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 thatit'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 seenfrom 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 fullyrepresented, 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 *rightkind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentionaldying" *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 getback 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 veryrewarding) 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 'unlivedlines' (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 donot 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 NOTpeople ... 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 noobligation 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 everythingthe 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 theenormous 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 oneshort email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our commonhumanity.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" becausesomeone 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 'unlivedlines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment ofbirth, 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!
_________________________________________________________________
Telly addicts unite!
http://www.searchgamesbox.com/tvtown.shtml
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/9d17fc4c/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Mon Dec 17 20:40:52 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Mon Dec 17 20:47:05 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
In-Reply-To: <20071217.140956.3184.60.ae.dropper@juno.com>
References: <20071217.140956.3184.60.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <F4AD112C-440D-4BAB-A433-2EA704DD84A3@dc.rr.com>
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/20071217/91544506/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Mon Dec 17 20:42:14 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Mon Dec 17 20:48:21 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W3205646DF39FCB075F9CE5DC620@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>
Message-ID: <1F7DA20A-E59A-4220-978F-3AA284BBD26C@dc.rr.com>
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/20071217/0172b848/attachment.html
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Mon Dec 17 20:48:07 2007
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Mon Dec 17 20:54:19 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>
Message-ID: <00a401c840e5$c0be8920$f277480c@HOME>
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/d39afebe/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 20:50:40 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 20:56:45 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <20071217.140956.3184.59.ae.dropper@juno.com>
References: <20071217.140956.3184.59.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W196BB753C8C746778FEE2BDC620@phx.gbl>
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.orgDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:06:53 -0500Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity MovementFrom: 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 soand 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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity MovementDate: 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!
_________________________________________________________________
Telly addicts unite!
http://www.searchgamesbox.com/tvtown.shtml
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/881ff4b9/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 20:56:10 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:02:07 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><BAY123-W316D168A86355AA8647C79DC620@phx.gbl>
<00e501c840df$bb92bda0$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W3205646DF39FCB075F9CE5DC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <016201c840e6$ded1b440$b5c16018@DL01>
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
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.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/a188416e/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 20:56:16 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:02:21 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Message-ID: <BAY123-W1482CC41A85C6690D782D9DC620@phx.gbl>
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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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---?))
AlanAlfred 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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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 scientistsR.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.htm05.02-- 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
_________________________________________________________________
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/ff00b25d/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 20:59:07 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:05:13 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <010801c840e1$de342e00$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>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W350E74A4BF40EED8D77188DC620@phx.gbl>
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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity MovementDate: 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 soand 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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity MovementDate: 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
_________________________________________________________________
Telly addicts unite!
http://www.searchgamesbox.com/tvtown.shtml
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/8112200c/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 21:00:18 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:06:25 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <011c01c840e2$95ac9040$b5c16018@DL01>
References: <20071217.130534.3184.55.ae.dropper@juno.com>
<BAY123-W398E522D93BBD8B68BABADC620@phx.gbl>
<011c01c840e2$95ac9040$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W856D6162DB76684D63B4BDC620@phx.gbl>
i'm with you Don
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:25:29 -0500
Such as this seems meaningful ..., meaningfully enjoyable. Surely we don't say the element of joy must be defined, limited and line-earized in order for joy to be experienced.
Still perhaps, the question: what is the meaning?
Maybe the meaning is to relax and enjoy. --dl
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.orgDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:05:32 -0500Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderFrom: 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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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 scientistsR.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.htm05.02-- 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
_________________________________________________________________
Get Hotmail on your mobile, text MSN to 63463!
http://mobile.uk.msn.com/pc/mail.aspx
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/a0514734/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 21:01:33 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:07:31 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>
Message-ID: <018001c840e7$9f7dbd60$b5c16018@DL01>
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/846c725a/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 21:01:26 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:07:33 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <013a01c840e3$24c34530$b5c16018@DL01>
References: <376217.5644.qm@web45812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
<013a01c840e3$24c34530$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W7B97CD182F3C04B886551DC620@phx.gbl>
yes. and breathing and sensing and meaning and joy take time and space
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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?.... ;-)
AlanDon 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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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_dialogueinfo: 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
_________________________________________________________________
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/a2d0c1eb/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 21:03:41 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:09:48 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
In-Reply-To: <F4AD112C-440D-4BAB-A433-2EA704DD84A3@dc.rr.com>
References: <20071217.140956.3184.60.ae.dropper@juno.com>
<F4AD112C-440D-4BAB-A433-2EA704DD84A3@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W217E3FF232C2E2605531F8DC620@phx.gbl>
worms throw up casts
in the fine snow
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.comSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:40:52 -0800To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgPat, 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.orgDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:00:04 -0500Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemFrom: 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 dancesnine 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.orgDate: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 08:12:20 -0500Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemFrom: ae.dropper@juno.com
Naming plays games with itself.Somewhere out of reach it dancesnine 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 dancesnine 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.orgDate: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 22:39:03 -0500
From: ae.dropper@juno.com
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poem
what? (Rob)
the naming plays with itselfsomewhere 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 -0500From: irenedarcy@gmail.comTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2I: 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.orgDate: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 21:26:42 -0500
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] noname 2From: ae.dropper@juno.com
DIALOGUE DANCEA dialogue circle of trees, dancing treeswe do not sit in chairs but we stand in the woodswith the light filtering through our autumn leavesand we are dancing - our roots are our feet and our millions of toes, dancing.A wind comes and some of our leaves fallfrom some of our fingers, our million fingers, one for every dancing toe,one explication for every implicationour roots hidden, unknown but known constantly as thatwhich ever refuses namingwhile the naming plays with itselfsomewhere 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 TimeDear Don, nice wisdom in your Sep.25 'Space & Time note. Yet:(yourquote):>...<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. Andhave 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 isnegligent.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 listDate: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:24:15 PDTTo: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.uk Reply-To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.ukHello All,I've heard nothing from the group for several days. So, I'm sending this message to check for echo. Regards ChrisFrom: "Chris Hooley" <chooley@idnsi.net>Subject: inside outDate: Fri, 03 Oct 97 18:19:50 PDT To: bohm_dialogue@rome.cis.plym.ac.ukReply-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 thatit'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 seenfrom 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 fullyrepresented, 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 *rightkind* of fight, too, I felt. For the struggle against cancer "intentionaldying" *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 getback 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 veryrewarding) 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 'unlivedlines' (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 donot 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 NOTpeople ... 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 noobligation 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 everythingthe 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 theenormous 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 oneshort email message, and I feel grateful that he has shared that -- with*me*. It reminds me of something that is so easily forgotten -- our commonhumanity.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" becausesomeone 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 'unlivedlines' -- parts of oneself one had last been in touch with at the moment ofbirth, 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
_________________________________________________________________
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/fb4caed2/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 21:04:25 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:10:30 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <1F7DA20A-E59A-4220-978F-3AA284BBD26C@dc.rr.com>
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>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W17D702155BD553E462636EDC620@phx.gbl>
why would I single you out Don?
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.comSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:42:14 -0800To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgShould 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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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
_________________________________________________________________
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/20071217/43d5eb52/attachment.html
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Mon Dec 17 21:04:49 2007
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:10:57 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <376217.5644.qm@web45812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><013a01c840e3$24c34530$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W7B97CD182F3C04B886551DC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <010501c840e8$150d4280$f277480c@HOME>
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/20071217/75ae81d3/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 21:07:16 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:13:23 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <016201c840e6$ded1b440$b5c16018@DL01>
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>
<016201c840e6$ded1b440$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W57C782A2469B6EBC6401EDC620@phx.gbl>
DL: The anxiety does not go away simply by acting and pretending it is not there.
rob: maybe there is no acting and pretending either
From: donlay@knology.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:56:10 -0500
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
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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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
_________________________________________________________________
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/20071217/6420bf18/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 21:10:34 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:16:39 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <010501c840e8$150d4280$f277480c@HOME>
References: <376217.5644.qm@web45812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><013a01c840e3$24c34530$b5c16018@DL01>
<BAY123-W7B97CD182F3C04B886551DC620@phx.gbl>
<010501c840e8$150d4280$f277480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W116D4BFEF7DC0B450F95A5DC620@phx.gbl>
I don't know (Know don't I). there is no one to know and nothing to know.
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:04:49 -0700
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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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?.... ;-)
AlanDon 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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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_dialogueinfo: 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
_________________________________________________________________
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/20071217/6f0ae39e/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 21:11:53 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:17:49 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <376217.5644.qm@web45812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><013a01c840e3$24c34530$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W7B97CD182F3C04B886551DC620@phx.gbl>
<010501c840e8$150d4280$f277480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <01d201c840e9$11306100$b5c16018@DL01>
Maybe we say we know because we use the Western idea of knowing as saying which is based on the idea of knowing as participating in. The logic is that it cannot be said or put into language if it is not first participated in.
The idea of knowing by participation logically precedes knowing as saying, the SOS LANGUAGE. -- dl
From: Susan Clemons
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
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
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/20071217/178667da/attachment.html
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Mon Dec 17 21:17:54 2007
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:24:11 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>
Message-ID: <014901c840e9$ebf72760$f277480c@HOME>
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/54d2c9d4/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 21:22:32 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:28:31 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <376217.5644.qm@web45812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><013a01c840e3$24c34530$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W7B97CD182F3C04B886551DC620@phx.gbl>
<010501c840e8$150d4280$f277480c@HOME>
<BAY123-W116D4BFEF7DC0B450F95A5DC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <020001c840ea$8dfcf7b0$b5c16018@DL01>
If we go to the beginning of Western Civilization as does db/thought, then we say knowing means saying. If it is not known, it cannot be said. That's the logic used by teachers in the West to determine whether or not a student gets a passing grade.
The saying/knowing is based on the idea that the student first participates in the being of that or this that is, without which he cannot know/say. First is Being (singular, the whole) and then there are sounds, words, images that stand for beings ( the plural).
What's wrong with this reasoning? -- dl
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:10 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I don't know (Know don't I). there is no one to know and nothing to know.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:04:49 -0700
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
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/20071217/0aae17d6/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 21:25:29 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:31:31 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>
Message-ID: <020f01c840ea$f93abbc0$b5c16018@DL01>
I had not noticed. Sorry. dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Susan Clemons
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
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
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/bc6b88be/attachment-0001.html
From Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net Mon Dec 17 21:26:31 2007
From: Susan.Joy at worldnet.att.net (Susan Clemons)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:32:45 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <376217.5644.qm@web45812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><013a01c840e3$24c34530$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W7B97CD182F3C04B886551DC620@phx.gbl><010501c840e8$150d4280$f277480c@HOME><BAY123-W116D4BFEF7DC0B450F95A5DC620@phx.gbl>
<020001c840ea$8dfcf7b0$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <015d01c840eb$2015a200$f277480c@HOME>
What about the things that are known that can not be said?
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:22 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
If we go to the beginning of Western Civilization as does db/thought, then we say knowing means saying. If it is not known, it cannot be said. That's the logic used by teachers in the West to determine whether or not a student gets a passing grade.
The saying/knowing is based on the idea that the student first participates in the being of that or this that is, without which he cannot know/say. First is Being (singular, the whole) and then there are sounds, words, images that stand for beings ( the plural).
What's wrong with this reasoning? -- dl
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:10 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I don't know (Know don't I). there is no one to know and nothing to know.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:04:49 -0700
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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/f6d1147e/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Mon Dec 17 21:28:38 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:34:47 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W1482CC41A85C6690D782D9DC620@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY123-W1482CC41A85C6690D782D9DC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <98CE1F27-F362-43C7-87CC-4B36F9186B08@dc.rr.com>
Homocentrism!! The meaning for the spider is not for us,nor is the
meaning for the hadron.
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:56 AM, rob mooney wrote:
> 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/20071217/8c2d33b4/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 21:31:21 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:37:22 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
References: <376217.5644.qm@web45812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><013a01c840e3$24c34530$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W7B97CD182F3C04B886551DC620@phx.gbl><010501c840e8$150d4280$f277480c@HOME><BAY123-W116D4BFEF7DC0B450F95A5DC620@phx.gbl><020001c840ea$8dfcf7b0$b5c16018@DL01>
<015d01c840eb$2015a200$f277480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <021e01c840eb$cb6204f0$b5c16018@DL01>
What about the things that are known that can not be said? -- Susan
Maybe when we know that, we know what is important. Maybe knowing that is the essence of Spiritual experience. ?? -- dl
http://www.knology.net/~donlay/
----- Original Message -----
From: Susan Clemons
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
What about the things that are known that can not be said?
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:22 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
If we go to the beginning of Western Civilization as does db/thought, then we say knowing means saying. If it is not known, it cannot be said. That's the logic used by teachers in the West to determine whether or not a student gets a passing grade.
The saying/knowing is based on the idea that the student first participates in the being of that or this that is, without which he cannot know/say. First is Being (singular, the whole) and then there are sounds, words, images that stand for beings ( the plural).
What's wrong with this reasoning? -- dl
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:10 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I don't know (Know don't I). there is no one to know and nothing to know.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.net
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:04:49 -0700
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
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/a9da4457/attachment.html
From DFACTOR at dc.rr.com Mon Dec 17 21:31:21 2007
From: DFACTOR at dc.rr.com (donald factor)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:37:27 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W350E74A4BF40EED8D77188DC620@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>
Message-ID: <0B6839C7-B24F-4F22-A7A3-2354F8D15B6B@dc.rr.com>
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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/c5431bd6/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 21:37:31 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:43:37 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <014901c840e9$ebf72760$f277480c@HOME>
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>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W32BBB589EBA7C32852E6B1DC620@phx.gbl>
anything to report, honey?
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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---?))
AlanAlfred 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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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 scientistsR.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.htm05.02-- 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
_________________________________________________________________
Get Hotmail on your mobile, text MSN to 63463!
http://mobile.uk.msn.com/pc/mail.aspx
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/6f4a710b/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 21:38:17 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:44:23 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <015d01c840eb$2015a200$f277480c@HOME>
References: <376217.5644.qm@web45812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><013a01c840e3$24c34530$b5c16018@DL01><BAY123-W7B97CD182F3C04B886551DC620@phx.gbl><010501c840e8$150d4280$f277480c@HOME><BAY123-W116D4BFEF7DC0B450F95A5DC620@phx.gbl>
<020001c840ea$8dfcf7b0$b5c16018@DL01>
<015d01c840eb$2015a200$f277480c@HOME>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W32EABEB79A0AC7531AC85DDC620@phx.gbl>
and the said that are said but cannot be known
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:26:31 -0700
What about the things that are known that can not be said?
Susan
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Lay
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:22 PM
Subject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
If we go to the beginning of Western Civilization as does db/thought, then we say knowing means saying. If it is not known, it cannot be said. That's the logic used by teachers in the West to determine whether or not a student gets a passing grade.
The saying/knowing is based on the idea that the student first participates in the being of that or this that is, without which he cannot know/say. First is Being (singular, the whole) and then there are sounds, words, images that stand for beings ( the plural).
What's wrong with this reasoning? -- dl
From: rob mooney
To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:10 PM
Subject: RE: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
I don't know (Know don't I). there is no one to know and nothing to know.
From: Susan.Joy@worldnet.att.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:04:49 -0700
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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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?.... ;-)
AlanDon 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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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_dialogueinfo: 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
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
_________________________________________________________________
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/20071217/00366021/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 21:39:28 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:45:34 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate Order
In-Reply-To: <98CE1F27-F362-43C7-87CC-4B36F9186B08@dc.rr.com>
References: <BAY123-W1482CC41A85C6690D782D9DC620@phx.gbl>
<98CE1F27-F362-43C7-87CC-4B36F9186B08@dc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W29FE2C310456DDAB451611DC620@phx.gbl>
I bow before you wisdom Don F. maybe no meaning is for us.
From: DFACTOR@dc.rr.comSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:28:38 -0800To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgHomocentrism!! The meaning for the spider is not for us,nor is the meaning for the hadron.
don
On Dec 17, 2007, at 11:56 AM, rob mooney wrote:
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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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---?))
AlanAlfred 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.netTo: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Implicate OrderDate: 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 scientistsR.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.htm05.02-- 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
_________________________________________________________________
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/20071217/0864902f/attachment.html
From rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk Mon Dec 17 21:42:09 2007
From: rob.mooney at hotmail.co.uk (rob mooney)
Date: Mon Dec 17 21:48:14 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <0B6839C7-B24F-4F22-A7A3-2354F8D15B6B@dc.rr.com>
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>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W378C54AF712FEB739B63DEDC620@phx.gbl>
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.comSubject: Re: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity MovementDate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:31:21 -0800To: bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.orgI 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.
_________________________________________________________________
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/20071217/189e5d75/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Mon Dec 17 22:15:18 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Mon Dec 17 22:21:24 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemeaning
In-Reply-To: <20071217.140956.3184.60.ae.dropper@juno.com>
Message-ID: <684110.52104.qm@web45805.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
ae.dropper@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 } fullness pours out
and l@@k http://tinyurl.com/2eptww
the mounds Layed meaning
- froze'n'chosn overnight
---------------------------------
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/20071217/028255f1/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 22:21:09 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 22:27:11 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>
Message-ID: <028201c840f2$bed78dc0$b5c16018@DL01>
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/2402d8fc/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Mon Dec 17 22:22:58 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Mon Dec 17 22:29:03 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W378C54AF712FEB739B63DEDC620@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <885978.34959.qm@web45802.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 } Don Patterson the English poet says that you can purchase it at any of the auto supply stores for about the same price as, or, that you can talk about the menopause and it is not the taboo subject that it used to be. They are actually enjoying looking at the foolishness of what happens to women throughout the menopause. These hot flushes where they have to run out and stand in the freezing cold," she laughs, "and the central heating is turned off and the rest of the family are freezing. I am getting a great buzz in watching these women laughing."
Rob, what ;---?)
Alan
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/51b9e87e/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Mon Dec 17 22:24:19 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Mon Dec 17 22:30:28 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemeaning
In-Reply-To: <684110.52104.qm@web45805.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <20071217.140956.3184.60.ae.dropper@juno.com>
<684110.52104.qm@web45805.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712171324o5d1389dcy269e7f8d1a94aae1@mail.gmail.com>
I: Yeo, Alan -= how'd you do that? I mean make it the right size. Love
it! Missed it! I tried to make the music sign for 'pause' work, and
couldn't. Sometimes an image is worth a thousand words!
On Dec 17, 2007 4:15 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> *ae.dropper@juno.com* wrote:
>
> fullness pours out
> and l@@k *http://tinyurl.com/2eptww*
> the mounds Layed meaning
> - froze'n'chosn overnight
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> <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/c61a5603/attachment.html
From donlay at knology.net Mon Dec 17 22:28:34 2007
From: donlay at knology.net (Don Lay)
Date: Mon Dec 17 22:34:38 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>
Message-ID: <02a501c840f3$cb33cf60$b5c16018@DL01>
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/20071217/34c0f5f8/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Mon Dec 17 22:34:34 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Mon Dec 17 22:40:41 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemeaning
In-Reply-To: <c47283890712171324o5d1389dcy269e7f8d1a94aae1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <909673.87860.qm@web45810.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
I (can you) show me an idemage that is NOT? ("worth 1000w ....." ?)
http://tinyurl.com/2sngbt ;_-_}
Alan
Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com> wrote:
I: Yeo, Alan -= how'd you do that? I mean make it the right size. Love it! Missed it! I tried to make the music sign for 'pause' work, and couldn't. Sometimes an image is worth a thousand words!
On Dec 17, 2007 4:15 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
ae.dropper@juno.com wrote: fullness pours out
and l@@k http://tinyurl.com/2eptww
the mounds Layed meaning
- froze'n'chosn overnight
---------------------------------
--
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/20071217/0f2442e8/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Mon Dec 17 22:40:22 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Mon Dec 17 22:46:30 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Our poemeaning
In-Reply-To: <909673.87860.qm@web45810.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c47283890712171324o5d1389dcy269e7f8d1a94aae1@mail.gmail.com>
<909673.87860.qm@web45810.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c47283890712171340x10769b1fs129bc1a4d4eeb8d5@mail.gmail.com>
I: LOVE it! But how did you you it? I want to do it, too. They're
permitted here as long as they are the right size.
On Dec 17, 2007 4:34 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I (can you) show me an idemage that is NOT? ("*worth 1000w* ....." ?)
>
> http://tinyurl.com/2sngbt ;_-_}
>
> Alan
>
>
> *Irene Darcy <irenedarcy@gmail.com>* wrote:
>
> I: Yeo, Alan -= how'd you do that? I mean make it the right size. Love
> it! Missed it! I tried to make the music sign for 'pause' work, and
> couldn't. Sometimes an image is worth a thousand words!
>
> On Dec 17, 2007 4:15 PM, Alan E. DeBakey <a.debakey@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > *ae.dropper@juno.com* wrote:
> >
> > fullness pours out
> > and l@@k *http://tinyurl.com/2eptww*
> > the mounds Layed meaning
> > - froze'n'chosn overnight
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.david-bohm.org/mailman/private/bohm_dialogue/attachments/20071217/06f0380d/attachment.html
From a.debakey at yahoo.com Mon Dec 17 22:41:41 2007
From: a.debakey at yahoo.com (Alan E. DeBakey)
Date: Mon Dec 17 22:47:47 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <028201c840f2$bed78dc0$b5c16018@DL01>
Message-ID: <410824.72843.qm@web45808.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
And what is explicated by the poetry created by Pat and Rob?
Hey Lay-Man, know: This 's a piec'o'cak:
http://tinyurl.com/2xle7y
.... that un&kind of thinkg soup, of soupi thinkg
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 } 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
---------------------------------
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/20071217/15bbe3e5/attachment.html
From irenedarcy at gmail.com Mon Dec 17 22:42:08 2007
From: irenedarcy at gmail.com (Irene Darcy)
Date: Mon Dec 17 22:48:15 2007
Subject: [Bohm_Dialogue] Suspension of Identity Movement
In-Reply-To: <02a501c840f3$cb33cf60$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>
Message-ID: <c47283890712171342x6a19139ci42b7849136ddb64a@mail.gmail.com>
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 <donlay@knology.net>
>
> *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/ <http://www.knology.net/%7Edonlay/>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* rob mooney <rob.mooney@hotmail.co.uk>
> *To:* bohm_dialogue@david-bohm.org
> *Sent:* Monday, December 17, 2007