A fundamental distinction made by the human brain is that of ordinality from cardinality. Ordinality deals with
sequence, cardinality with size.
These distinctions are reflected in the I Ching through modes of interpretation of hexagrams where ordinality refers
to a path through a hexagram where the only difference is in the position of a line - before/after - , whereas
cardinality refers to a more qualitative emphasis with the distinctions of 'raw' and 'refined' and so an emphasis
on exageration, distortion. (this gets into topolgy etc) Consider the hexagram as a whole and that whole can vary
in colour expression or chord expression, sometimes it is loud and other times soft etc etc Note there is no need
for order here, no explicit causality.
When we combine the two distinctions, cardinality and ordinality, we deal with complex expressions such as the
development PATH from raw (base line of a hexagram) to refined (top line of a hexagram); we combine the 'horizontal'
with the 'vertical'; orthogonally-derived map making.
The particular path from raw to refined has a cardinality emphasis within an ordinality context but the ordinality
is WITHIN the hexagram, the emphasis is on the qualitative expressions of the hexagram in question; mathematically
we are dealing with a histogram and to do this we have to suspend time.
The 'other' path, the more contextually ordinal, is where we journey through a hexagram, holding properties of
it as constant, and experience all aspects of that hexagram when exposed to different contextual influences; thus
each step is exactly that, a step, no more, no less but the context then 'colours' things, distracts, tries to
guide, tries to control etc
Thus in cardinality we 'wallow' in the hexagram as a whole experiencing its colours etc In ordinality we move through
the hexagram. There are marked differences in these two methods.
As an example, cardinality is expressed in hexagram 1 by varying degrees of 'yangness'. We can in fact identify
a qualitative path where we identify yang as just 'too much', excess, raw, as covered in one of the expressions
of hexagram 28, and this path leads to hexagram 1 where yang is expressed in its most 'refined' form.
This cardinality path is just an ordering of qualitative differences from 'raw' to 'refined'. You could travel
it but there is no requirement for a particular order to be followed, we are dealing with simple expression.
We can identify the qualitative path for any hexagram through a simple process I have discovered where the qualitative
degrees of expression are described with aid of the other 63 hexagrams in the I Ching.
The method is described at my ddiamond website (http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond/index3.html
) The emphasis is on cardinality where the 'refined' (valued - priceless) comes out of the 'raw' (unvalued - worthless).
All hexagrams have 64+
expressions of their nature with the particular hexagram being the 'refined' expression and the other hexagrams
describing the less refine levels.
In the above example hexagram 28 is associated with the bottom line POSITION of hexagram 01. (See the full method
to get the idea). This bottom line position reflects raw, excessive uncultivated 'yangness'; this excess is captured
in the general expression of hexagram 28, Excess. (28 itself has 01 as its base line associate. 28 expressed in
a 'refined' format means to go beyond what is required, to do the extra mile, to make a difference that makes a
difference. At its raw level it too is 'too muc yang' expressed by 01 in its 'raw' state)
The distinction of the cardinal I Ching from the ordinal I Ching is a fundamental distinction often missed or more
so often confused through a lack of differentiating and re-intergrating the distinctions and their influences in
the I Ching. Thus Alchemy is reflected in cardinality via the conversion of lead into gold and in ordinality in
the steps required to do that; precise steps.
The other context material I use reflects the ordinality process. By this we particularise as does the brain, cardinal
is linked to more 'right brain' thinking and a qualitative emphasis and the GENERAL, ordinal is linked to more
'left brain' thinking and a quantitative emphasis and the PARTICULAR.
At the level of the particular the line POSITION used in cardinality is particularised into the LINE itself, changed
or unchanged. This distinction associates TWO hexagrams with the line, one manifesting external influences that
help to sustain the unchanging and the other external influences that helps to change the line.
Again we use hexagram 01 where the hexagram PAIR for the bottom line is 16 (unchange)/09 (change). What this 'says'
is that there is a path through a hexagram that if followed will allow the pathworker to experience all of the
nuances of the hexagram in question. This path comes from following the thread of hexagrams associated with *unchanging*
lines. This path contains ALL of the hexagrams in a specific order.
For hexagram 01 we need to start with a plan and a positive enthusiastic mental state. This is expressed in the
characteristics of hexagram 16.
For the full path through 01 see http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond/h01ln.html
We see in all of this the TWO methods of analysis where a qualitative emphasis favours a list of hexagrams that
aid in describing the degree of expression of a hexagram's cardinality in the form of quality.
The ordinality interpretation is more precise in that it gives you the exact path THROUGH a hexagram, the steps
required to 'grok' the whole archetype as well as warns you of possible distractions away from the path through
the hexagram.
Each path, the cardinal and the ordinal, is expressed in the form of a string of all of the hexagrams. These strings
are thus 64 hexagrams in length (and more if you more to the more precise moving lines within each hexagram --
IOW 4096 degrees of expression per hexagram!)
The 'easier' way is to recognise that the six lines represent waypoints or sample points of the full string and
as such we can work with them alone to start with.
Note in this how 'pure' cardinality has a sort of 'vertical' emphasis when compared to 'pure' ordinality that has
a sort of 'horizontal' emphasis. There is the suggestion here that the cardinal perspective contains randomness
within it; there is no explicitly perceived cause for an expression of quality. It is interesting in this context
that the cardinal perspective, from a neurological basis, shares the same brain space as the source of dreams.
Since the major premise is that the I Ching manifests all there is, how can I describe doubling of a hexagram?
By this I mean that the expontential process of moving from line to a pair to trigrams (3 dimensions, 8 expressions)
to hexagram (doubled trigram - 6 dimensions, 64 expressions) to doubled hexagrams (12 dimensions, 4096 expressions)
applied to a single meaning (e.g. 'yangness') reflects qualitative change; a distortion, exageration.
Starting with the 8 trigrams we can derive 8 hexagrams that capture the refinements of the orginal trigrams:
heaven - perseverence (devotion to self) becomes hexagram 1 - singlemindedness (total trust in self)
lake - self-reflection doubled becomes hexagram 58 - intensity
fire - guidance doubled becomes hexagram 30 - direction (an ideology to follow)
thunder - enlightenment doubled becomes hexagram 51 - awareness (or sudden awareness)
wind - cultivation doubled becomes hexagram 57 - influence (influencial)
water - containment doubled becomes hexagram 29 - control
mountain - self-restraint doubled becomes hexagram 52 - discernment
earth - devotion doubled becomes hexagram 02 - dualmindedness, trust (total trust in another)
Notice there is a process here from a more reactive stance to a more proactive stance.
We now take this refinement process and generalise it to hexagrams in the form of doubling, thus hexagram 01 is
doubled to a 12 line symbol that qualitatively is an improvement on hex 01 as hex 01 is an improvement of the trigram
Heaven. Thus the 12 line symbol is more dynamic, more proactive, than the 6 line symbol and we see this in the
traditional work where the fixed 12 line symbol is compressed into a dynamic 6 line symbol -- 12 dimensions are
reflected in a hexagram with changing lines applied.
What this 6 changing line model reflects, based on the fundamental premise that the I Ching reflects all there
is, is that all change to a particular hexagram is caused by the context which in itself is described by a hexagram.
Thus all change reflects the influence of one hexagram upon another; context upon text.
The text/context emphasis is reflected in a rigid hexagram as bottom trigram (context) within which functions the
top trigram (text) and that relationship is expressed as a whole (the hexagram). (there are variations on this
but for know we stick to the basics)
With the 12 line symbol so the bottom 6 lines reflect the context hexagram and the top 6 lines reflect the text
hexagram and the expression is in the form of the whole symbol. For convenience it is easier to use the top hexagram
as the symbol with the bottom hexagram expressing its influences in the form of changing lines in the top hexagram.
This is like seeing the bottom hexagram 'behind' the top hexagram rather than below it. (this is the mechanism
applied to the Fu Hsi arrangement (archetypal - rigid) which has over it the King Wen arrangement (typal - flexible))
We now return to doubling. If I double a hexagram then I am putting it into a interpretational format of text/context.
By doing this at the level of hexagrams I have moved into the realm of changing lines. Since all we have done is
double the same structure I cannot detect any changing lines since text and context are 'the same'. BUT this is
not exactly so since the doubling acts to REFINE the FULL expression of the symbol; we have changed expression
qualitatively.
How do I describe this expression of qualitative difference? How can I get across that this 'yangness' is qualitatively
different from other 'yangness'? It is easy at the trigram to hexagram levels but we are now moving into qualitatively
complex expressions of refinement and this is difficult when we are dealing with sameness (i.e. 'all yangness').
I could create a table of qualitative differences such that with the concept of heaven (yang) the trigram is heaven.0,
hexagram is heaven.1, doubled hexagram is heaven.2, quadrupled hexagram is heaven.3 and so on. In doing this we
realise that we are back with lines in that the lines of a hexagram reflect exactly these qualitative distinctions.
IOW the hexagram is scale invariant, it allows me to express qualitative distinctions through infinite dimensions!
(What is being reflected in all of this is are the cognitive processes behind Cantor's derivation of different
infinities with transfinite cardinal numbers; thus Cantor's alephs reflect qualitative differences within sameness;
different expressions of sameness i.e. of 'infinity')
We still have a problem in that identifying the different qualitative expressions as 'heaven.x' where x is equal
to or greater than 1 and less than 7, is not satisfactory.
We note that scale change can also be reflected numerically such that you have heaven.y:x, where y is the *octave*
in which x is expressed. Thus the bottom line of the base level hexagram, the static hexagram form originating
from stacking two trigrams, is represented as heaven.1:1. The base line in the dynamic hexagram is thus heaven.2:1
and so on. This can get too complex; too intense. We need more than this, we need to go WIDER.
Earlier in this article I introduced how each line POSITION as well as line itself is under the influence of hexagrams
(remember -- I Ching expresses all there is and so change is sourced in other hexagrams...). What this means is
that the qualitative distinctions made above can be described not by heaven.1 or heaven.2 but by the hexagrams
that influence the line positions. IOW we move to the use of analogy to help describe difference within sameness
since trying to describe difference within sameness within sameness can be too intense; we can do it mathematically
but that ends up in a set of symbols that many find a problem with understanding.
Using the particular example I gave above, the bottom line of hexagram 01 is the least qualitative and as such
reflects 'raw' states. To help describe this I used the line POSITION hexagram, hexagram 28, which has a qualitative
range of expressions, one of which is 'too full, too much yang, excessive'. (Derivation of line position hexagrams
is given at http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond/index3.html )
Each qualitative state within a hexagram is describable through the use of analogy with another hexagram. Thus
the qualitative element of the 1:1 position is 'like' 28. This is a GENERAL analogy to the line POSITION, NOT the
line details (as in broken/unbroken).
The line details are more concerned with change and as such have a pair of hexagrams that function from an ORDINAL
emphasis as in from this to that, change is in DIFFERENCE whereas above we have been dealing with change in SAMENESS;
with change in sameness we move vertically, in change in difference we move horizontally.
Horizontal movement is expressed in the transformation of a state from X to Y where Y is OUTSIDE of X. Thus changing
the bottom line of hexagram 01 moves us 'sideways' to hexagram 44; a symbol very DIFFERENT from 01.
From the line hexagram details this change is caused by the influence of hex 09. IOW yangness, singlemindedness,
in a context of making small gains is expressed as seduction, persuasion (out of cultivation comes singlemindedness).
What we have discovered here is an element of the I Ching that allows for clear, precise identification of the qualitative levels within a particular hexagram. This element enables the refinement of our interpretations of the hexagrams of the I Ching as well as point us in the direction of the same element manifest in other dichotomy-derived disciplines.
I here list the qualitative extremes for each hexagram. These extremes are the endpoints of the string of hexagrams
we use with any particular hexagram to help describe the qualitative differences in expression contained in the
individual lines and line groupings WITHIN that particular hexagram.
The example used so far has been in hexagram 01 where 01 expresses the REFINED format of yangness and the quality
string within 01 has 28 as the opposite pole, the other end of the string, where 28 is used to describe by analogy
the more 'gross' quality of too much yangness, excessive. This distinction is linked to the meaning associated
with the base line of 01.
Thus the following list focuses on the top line-bottom line qualitative relationships for a hexagram.
What are noteworthy in this list are the patterns of fours with the emphasis on their numbering -- reflecting a
pattern within the traditional sequence that suggests a more qualitative bias behind that particular 'ordering';
the ordinal aspects are thus based on quality (vertical emphasis, even to the point of pairs being rotated vertically)
unlike the binary sequence that has a rigid structural
development (horizontal emphasis).
In the list below the '<---' seperator symbolises a string made-up of 64 hexagrams ordered along qualitative
distinctions used to describe the different degrees of qualitative expression in a particular hexagram; thus each
hexagram has a unique string attached.
Refined expression (top line) is like the hexagram itself --- Raw expression (bottom line) is like a raw form of
...
refined <--- raw
---------------
01 <--- 28 too much yang, excessive
02 <--- 27 too little yang, hungering
03 <--- 20 admiring, setting/being an example to follow
04 <--- 19 approaching (the 'high')/deferring to (the 'low')
05 <--- 57 cultivating, becoming influencial
06 <--- 58 self-reflecting, intensity in expression
07 <--- 41 concentrating (literal and metaphoric)
08 <--- 42 augmenting, rise above
09 <--- 48 foundation setting
10 <--- 47 forced enclosure
11 <--- 18 correcting/re-establish 'order'
12 <--- 17 believing/following
13 <--- 31 wooing, intense but friendly persuasion
14 <--- 32 commitment, dedicated
15 <--- 22 facading
16 <--- 21 formalising, rulings, problem solving
17 <--- 12 neutralising (attacks against ones beliefs)
18 <--- 11 harmonising, balancing
19 <--- 04 masking, socialisation of the young, teaching the young (deference)
20 <--- 03 sprouting, difficult beginnings
21 <--- 16 foresight, planning, enthusiasm in the process of...
22 <--- 15 modesty, to level things out, set a level field
23 <--- 24 returning to the beginning, returning back to the 'correct' path
24 <--- 23 pruning, to cut back to the fundamentals, the roots
25 <--- 45 congregating, to express one's beliefs as a group distinct from others
26 <--- 46 to move up, to become more entangled
27 <--- 02 devotion, fill up by drawing someone/something in
28 <--- 01 singlemindedness, to pour out
29 <--- 61 sympathise, to yield, give way, soft center
30 <--- 62 formalise, to exagerate an ideology/path
31 <--- 13 form associations with others
32 <--- 14 direct, leadership
33 <--- 49 to unmask, to reveal what is behind, revolt
34 <--- 50 to transform
35 <--- 51 enlightement, awareness, newness
36 <--- 52 self-restraint, discernment
37 <--- 39 obstructions
38 <--- 40 relaxed structuring
39 <--- 37 rigid structuring, family/clan
40 <--- 38 oppositions, reflect a social image to bypass..
41 <--- 07 uniformity
42 <--- 08 unity
43 <--- 44 persuasion, seduction
44 <--- 43 seeding, spread the word, resoluteness
45 <--- 25 disentanglement, express one's opinion regardless of consequence
46 <--- 26 holding firm
47 <--- 10 tread a path (fenced in)
48 <--- 09 make small gains (set foundations to stand upon)
49 <--- 33 structured withdrawal, trickary, to draw the enemy in prior to reveal
50 <--- 34 invigorate, impress
51 <--- 35 progressing
52 <--- 36 uncompromising
53 <--- 63 correct sequence (ord), seek closure (card), instant gratification
54 <--- 64 incorrect sequence (ord), seek to remain open (card), delayed gratification
55 <--- 56 loyalty
56 <--- 55 abundance
57 <--- 05 waiting, as in 'for the right moment' as well as waiting ON others, serving one's dues.
58 <--- 06 compromising 'precisely' (half way and no more)
59 <--- 60 standarising
60 <--- 59 dispelling illusions, make things clear to all
61 <--- 29 containment, control
62 <--- 30 guidance, a sense of direction (an ideology)
63 <--- 53 gradual progress, developing, maturing
64 <--- 54 immaturing
The distinctions of cardinal and ordinal are very strong within the brain with definite biases in processing --
ordinal is more 'left' and cardinal more 'right'. Ordinal is more quantitative and cardinal more qualitative. Our
brain then oscillates when processing data across the zones that reflect the ordinal/cardinal distinctions. This
oscillation reflects the 'disturbance' of the 'still mind' and the active process of restoring balance.
There are perspectives in the cardinal that lack any reference to metrics -- distance (lengths etc) - this shows
a bias in the cardinal to topology where the generality means that doughnut and coffeecup are 'the same', elements
of the same topological set. The emphasis in topology is distortions and the space in-between objects; relational
space free of ordinality; a qualitative
bias, thus ordinality in the realm of cardinality includes the 'random' as a fundamental; linkage across objects
is arbitrary at first but a qualitative precision can develop; intuition.
In the I Ching, for each line, digram, trigram, hexagram, changing-line hexagram, there are degrees of expressed
quality, of cardinality. (Note that ordinality and cardinality are fundamentals to our neurology and from that
emerges the distinctions of yin, yang, tao, t'ai chi etc. See the draft diagram http://www.eisa.net.au/~lofting/neuron1.gif
)
Ordinality IS related to archetypal considerations, structure. Cardinality is more into mixing, the typal, and
so variations on a theme (IOW distortions). The archetypal emphasis in ordinality comes out of EXPRESSION and so
hides a lot of goings on that lead to a context that can support the development of that emphasis (see comments
below on Fu Hsi origin - there is plenty of evidence to suggest a more matriarchial development pre the emergence
of patriarchy but this is always linked to the 'hidden', the implicit. Since expression is so 'in your face' it
contains within it a degree of apparent 'primacy' -- neurologically the part of the brain related to this 'primacy'
is the last to know - or so Neuroscientist Michael Gazzaniga asserts. This part of the brain IS the root of all
explicit interpretations and is where we work out of when we set a context to interpret out of - i.e. The I Ching.
- but there is a lot of pre-processing going on).
In cardinality, and in particular the concept of sets, if we have a set of all elements with quality X.0, call
this set A, then the next set with quality X.1, call this set B, is mathematically expressed as A^2, in that it
is exponentiation that acts to change cardinality of sets.
From a hexagram perspective the sequence of cardinality is expressed as a binary number and each line represents
a power (exponentiation) of 2.
line 1 2^1 = 2
line 2 2^2 = 4
line 3 2^3 = 8
line 4 2^4 = 16
line 5 2^5 = 32
line 6 2^6 = 64
2^0 (1) is manifest in T'ai Chi out of which yin/yang distinctions have emerged.
Thus the concept of cardinality is built-in to the lines and this reflects the qualitative emphasis in a trigram,
hexagram etc. Thus for any system of interpretation, the total qualitative expression possible is determined by
the cardinal value of the set's power set, the power set being the set of all sub-sets.
What is implied here is that sub-sets made-up of lines (e.g. {1,4,5}) express a quality of the hexagram and we
exagerate this set to bring out a particular aspect. Since it is difficult to describe an exagerated sameness within
sameness (i.e. the degrees of yangness in hex 01) we use analogy through use of the other elements in the power
set; in the I Ching's case, other hexagrams (or more so the set of lines mapped to the set of hexagrams as 'whole'
meanings).
IOW a particular degree of expression of yangness is LIKE hex X or hex Y etc. In mathamatics this is not required,
we do not need to say '4 is like 2 but a 2 that is qualitatively doubled', but in the spoken/written word we use
analogies to flesh-out the at times too intense, too concentrated meanings we often express through numbers.
In a six line binary system there are 64 possible expressions or sub-sets of the whole set called "I Ching".
When we add changing lines there are 4096 possible sub-sets and so on.
Since we take the I Ching as our root context and so to manifest 'all there is', each of the contained sub-sets
reflect a quality of a hexagram that, when described by analogy, is tied to some other hexagram. Thus in hexagram
01, the sub-set {1} [line position 1] forms an analogy with hexagram 28; the sub-set {1,3,5} {line positions 1,3,5}
forms an analogy with hexagram 40.
(for a full list of hexagram 01 line positions see the "Position Context" column in the list at the bottom
of http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond/hl01.html )
Note that the cardinality emphasis resolves the line change 'problem' in that from an ordinality perspective multiple
changing lines poses a problem and all methods to date to 'deal' with this problem are a little clumsy, requiring
reading of each line change data and even then there is an intuitive sense of 'something not precise'.
In cardinality we are always talking qualitative expression and that allows for multiple changing lines to be delt
with easily in that the total change is tied to an analogy to a specific hexagram for the line POSITION(S) and
to one of a PAIR of hexagrams for the line(s) UNCHANGE/CHANGE.
Thus the Duke of Chou's line comments reflect a rigid ordinality emphasis with little or no consideration of multiple
changing lines since in ordinality more than a single changing line is not seen as possible; UNLESS you recognise
a sequence of 64 steps through a hexagram rather than 6; the 6 acts a waypoint markers, snapshots, samples, associated
with the full path of 64 OR the six lines manifest 6 qualities either expressed or not , IOW there is NO ordinality
explicitly present; ordinality was imposed as part of the process (!) of refining prediction, of attempts to be
more 'precise' and so more discrete biased.
In the Ordinal I Ching you DO see (a) comparisons of what line comes BEFORE or AFTER a particular line and (b)
comparisons to the nature of the line POSITION that goes to identifying a line as 'correct' or not; IOW a local
foreground/background comparison where traditionally the line position's quality is expressed in the format associated
with hexagram 63, thus all yang lines in position 1 are 'correct', all yin lines in position 2 are 'correct' and
so on; the emphasis being on foreground/background sameness as being 'correct' combined with the overall qualitative
character of 63 - correct sequencing (ordinal) or closure; completeness (cardinal). (there is nothing to stop you
using EVERY hexagram as this background marker and so re-interprete the whole I Ching 64 times based on the foreground/background
distinction
applied to line/line-position mappings).
In the Ordinal I Ching all emphasis is LOCAL, qualitative interpretations come later in I Ching texts where we
start to extend line relationships (e.g. 2 and 5 etc) This relational bias emphasises a shift away from ordinality
towards cardinality.
When we accept the presence of cardinality then things change in that each hexagram has a range of 64 possible
qualitative expressions (refinable to 4096 if we wish). Thus we see cardinality and ordinality combined in the
one form (as we see in finite mathematics).
Even though the derivation of the hexagram is often based on ordinality, the final emphasis is on cardinality -
a quality - and some have even suggested that the hexagrams came first - 'as is' with no associated ordinal method
of derivation. The whole concept of an archetypal, Fu Hsi, perspective emerged AFTER the 'raw' I Ching came into
being. Thus the formalisation of the I Ching, the 'logicalisation', came once the general, 'rough' I Ching had
established itself as a divining system. This seems to be the case in all disciplines where initial processes
are based on trial and error as the general is localised. This localisation in turn acts as a feedback system and
the general becomes 'refined' and so on.. feedback processes all the way until a qualitative judgement gets us
to 'stop'. This feedback process reflects the use of the metonymy/metaphor dichotomy.
With all of this in mind, let us consider the basic qualitative distinctions (as in a hexagram linked by analogy
to a base line of another hexagram we are focusing upon) in the hexagrams that reflect the 8 trigrams doubled,
and at the same time emphasise their family associations:
Hexagram 01, father, has base line analogy to hexagram 28 where the emphasis is on too much yang, excess.
Hexagram 02, mother, has base line analogy to hexagram 27, where the emphasis is on too little yang, hungering
Hexagram 29, middle son, has base line analogy to hexagram 61, where the emphasis is on softening, yielding, soft
core with hard exterior
Hexagram 30, middle daughter, has base line analogy to hexagram 62, where the emphasis is on maintaining an ideology
by exageration of traditions, method of interpretation etc
Hexagram 51, eldest son, has base line analogy to hexagram 35, where the emphasis is on progress
Hexagram 57, eldest daughter, has base line analogy to hexagram 05, where the emphasis is on service and biding
one's time (calculated waiting)
Hexagram 52, youngest son, has base line analogy to hexagram 36, where the emphasis is on uncompromising
Hexagram 58, youngest daughter, has base line analogy to hexagram 06, where the emphasis is on compromising
By the time we 'get' to line 5, the qualitative analogies are:
Hexagram 01 - line 5 analogy to hexagram 34, where the emphasis in on inspiration
Hexagram 02 - line 5 analogy to hexagram 20, where the emphasis is on admiration
Hexagram 29 - line 5 analogy to hexagram 04, where the emphasis is on masking, socialisation
Hexagram 30 - line 5 analogy to hexagram 49, where the emphasis is on revelation, unmasking
Hexagram 51 - line 5 analogy to hexagram 25, where the emphasis is on disentanglement, saying one's piece without
consideration of consequence.
Hexagram 52 - line 5 analogy to hexagram 39, where the emphasis is on dealing with obstacles by bypassing them
Hexagram 57 - line 5 analogy is to hexagram 46, where the emphasis is on further entanglement, getting more involved
Hexagram 58 - line 5 analogy is to hexagram 38, where the emphasis is on dealing with opposition by reflection
(they see themselves in you or more so the 'mirror' you put up as a facade)
By the time we get to line 6 so we see the 'pure' expression of the hexagram in its most refined format and so
the hexagram describes itself; becomes self-referencing; we have returned to sameness describing sameness having
used difference to describe sameness.
Since the MBTI & Keirsey Temperament Sorter are
reflected in my blend, bond, bound, bind template,
and the I Ching is also reflected in that template, then the MBTI is reflected in the I Ching.
The limitation of the MBTI is that it sticks to only four dichotomies and so is limited to 2^4 expressions (the
dichotomies are sense/intuite, feel/think, perceive/judge, extravert/introvert.) However, due to the feedback processing
embedded in the template so we can apply the same techniques we use on the I Ching to the first three dichotomies
of the MBTI with the fourth one manfesting itself through implications (the introvert/extravert dichotomy).
The trigram (hexagram) mappings are:
heaven - artisans (01)
lake - players (58)
fire - organisers (30)
thunder - engineers (51)
wind - monitors (CEO, auditors etc) (57)
water - conservators/protectors (umpires etc) (29)
mountain - mentors (52)
earth - advocates (disciples) (02)
Note that these mappings come from a cognitive analysis of the method our species uses to make maps; you cannot
map ACROSS disciplines using each discipline's logic; logic is functional WITHIN a discipline and so is LOCAL,
when applied non-locally it has problems (especially when dealing with cardinality issues where the emphasis is
on distortions)
Recognising the cardinality bias, and using the base line analogies developed above for the I Ching so:
An artisan (hex 01) in early development can be too 'yang', too rough, to excessive (Hex 28).
A player (hex 58) in early development can be too compromising (hex 06).
An organiser in early development can be too biased to revelation, nconsiderate when peeling things back to look
beneath the skin.
An engineer in early development can be too over emphasising progress
A monitor in early development can be too calculating, too serving
A conservator in early development can be too sensitive, too yielding
A mentor in early development can be too rigid, too uncompromising
A disciple in early development can be too 'hungering', too ready to follow/believe anything.
By the time we get to the equivalent, qualitatively more refined, level of line 5 in the I Ching so:
A well developed artisan (hex 01) serves as an inspiration to others (hex 34) (this is a position more refined
than line 1 and the hex 28 analogy. The implication being that artisans can inspire others but are not that good
when it comes to going beyond what is required to help others (this trait being the refined format of 28)).
A well developed player (hex 58) is efficent at reflecting others (hex 38) (Players are linked to actors, entertainers
etc all of which are successful when they reflect the audience expectations without reflecting themselves -- and
actors are also very self-reflective besides being self-reflecting)
A well developed organiser is efficient at revelation, unmasking, demonstrating order within.
A well developed engineer is efficient at disentanglment (untangling problems)
A well developed monitor is efficient at entanglment - getting involved
A well developed conservator is efficient at socialisation
A well developed mentor is efficent at dealing with obstacles
A well developed advocate/disciple is efficient at expressing admiration
Thus for each persona type there is a string of qualities expressed in ORDER from 'raw' to 'refined'.
We see here that with the aid of the I Ching and an emphasis on the cardinal/ordinal dichotomy we can establish
a method of persona analysis tied directly to the I Ching through the use of the blend, bond, bound, bind template
that reflects the underlying invarient set of feelings from which we derive meaning -- all sourced in the general
neurological processes in our brain and mappable to the simple operations of the neuron.
