Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [gthomas] Moments of Truth

Expand Messages
  • Jim Bauer
    ... From: joseph baxter To: gthomas@egroups.com Date: Sunday, October 01, 2000 3:13 AM Subject: [gthomas] Moments of
    Message 1 of 16 , Oct 1, 2000
      -----Original Message-----
      From: joseph baxter <joseph@...>
      To: gthomas@egroups.com <gthomas@egroups.com>
      Date: Sunday, October 01, 2000 3:13 AM
      Subject: [gthomas] Moments of Truth


      >At 03:12 PM 9/30/2000 , you wrote:
      >The thesis entertained here is that besides ordinary cause
      >& effect there is an "acausal connecting principle:" which he dubbed
      >"synchronicity". For example, he relates a crucial moment in a client's
      >therapy where she was relating a dream about a scarab beetle. At that point
      >one flew in the window & Jung asked if this was the insect of her dreams &
      >she said yes.
      >
      >Some years ago, on a Monday morning, the United States Supreme Court
      >announced a decision upholding a conviction where an involuntary confession
      >had been used against the accused at trial. It rocked the legal world with
      >a stark moment of truth. One of the oldest and tallest pillars of law had
      >been felled.
      >
      >3000 miles away in a northern California forest, on that same Monday
      >morning, one of the tallest trees in the world fell (in a
      >storm). According to newspaper reports the awesome tree seemed even larger
      >on the ground. Stories high at its base, it stretched for more than the
      >size of a football field.
      >
      >Jung's story seems to suggest that synchronicity can occur at a moment of
      >truth.

      If you are willing to actually accept synchronicity as real I suppose it
      could exist. The problem with synchronicity is that it is purportedly
      "acausal". It is very difficult to reject the laws of cause & effect which
      are required by science & the scientific method. As I said, the acid heads
      in my dorm were passing the book around. It may be true that you can
      perceive synchronicity. Another friend of mine used to get thoroughly
      descoobied on imported beer & put the Psychedelic Furs on his stereo & The
      Dukes of Hazzard on TV to look for synchronicity. With the brain in a
      severely perturbed state.it seems one could experience it but that doesn't
      prove it actually exists. It seems me to be a recapitulation of an
      ancestral state where cause & effect weren't clearly undestood by the
      perceiving system. This is also one of the biological determinants of the
      existence of religion.

      Jim Bauer
      >
      >Joe
      >
      >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >-------------------------------------------------
      >To post to gthomas, send email to gthomas@egroups.com
      >To unsubscribe, send a blank email to gthomas-unsubscribe@egroups.com
    • joseph baxter
      ... Jung called it acausal, but I don t see that as part of the necessary explanation. As you put it, it is difficult to reject cause and effect. So it could
      Message 2 of 16 , Oct 1, 2000
        At 09:31 AM 10/1/2000 , you wrote:

        >--
        >If you are willing to actually accept synchronicity as real I suppose it
        >could exist. The problem with synchronicity is that it is purportedly
        >"acausal". It is very difficult to reject the laws of cause & effect which
        >are required by science & the scientific method.

        Jung called it acausal, but I don't see that as part of the necessary
        explanation. As you put it, it is difficult to reject cause and effect. So
        it could be that two things happening at the same time are the effects of
        causes. By way of example only, one could argue that both efffects are
        sympathetic responses to something larger, as opposed to one being the
        cause of the other. I believe that Jung himself meant something like this.

        Joe


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Jeffrey Glen Jackson
        Regarding synchronicity, I work on compilers, which are computer programs that translate programming languages, such as FORTRAN or C or C++ into machine
        Message 3 of 16 , Oct 1, 2000
          Regarding synchronicity, I work on compilers, which are computer
          programs that translate programming languages, such as FORTRAN or
          C or C++ into machine language. These programs are themselves
          written in a programming language and so are used to compile themselves.
          (Sorry for the long technical explanation -- I'm getting to the point
          soon). Now, the C compiler is written in C. A new version is compiled
          with an old version of the compiler. Then we recompile it with the
          new version we just compiled. Then, we do it again, and make sure
          this third generation of compilations is identical to the second
          generation. The new compiler compiled with the old compiler should
          generate the same results as the new compiler compiled with
          itself. However, if the new compiler has a bug, it might generate
          incorrect code for some portion of itself, causing the new compiler
          compiled with itself to behave differently than the new compiler compiled
          with the old compiler. More often than is reasonable, the module it
          generates incorrect code for is the module that has the bug that
          caused the incorrect code to be generated in the first place. This
          happens so often its downright spooky.

          Jeff
          http://www.jeff-jackson.com
        • odell mcguire
          ... Joe/Jim Excuse me for butting in, but it seems to me this synchroneity business poses something of a dilemma for the historian. No one trying to do
          Message 4 of 16 , Oct 2, 2000
            joseph baxter wrote:

            > At 09:31 AM 10/1/2000 , you wrote:
            >
            > >--
            > >If you are willing to actually accept synchronicity as real I suppose it
            > >could exist. The problem with synchronicity is that it is purportedly
            > >"acausal". It is very difficult to reject the laws of cause & effect which
            > >are required by science & the scientific method.
            >
            > Jung called it acausal, but I don't see that as part of the necessary
            > explanation. As you put it, it is difficult to reject cause and effect. So
            > it could be that two things happening at the same time are the effects of
            > causes. By way of example only, one could argue that both efffects are
            > sympathetic responses to something larger, as opposed to one being the
            > cause of the other. I believe that Jung himself meant something like this.
            >
            > Joe

            Joe/Jim

            Excuse me for butting in, but it seems to me this 'synchroneity' business poses
            something of a dilemma for the historian. No one trying to do history from
            primary sources can accept the kind of seemingly meaningful coincidences being
            discussed without exhaustively eliminating all possibility of causal
            connection. If he does not hesitate to entertain the idea of simple coincidence
            he will never learn anything about his subject from his documents except what
            their writers want him to think.

            Coincidences happen. But some cannot be swallowed. I keep thinking of
            Jesus bar Ananias. According to Josephus (Jewish War.VI.300ff) this character
            was a peasant, a posessesed lunatic who, some four years before the war began,
            created an incident in the temple by repeating the words of his 'voices' at the
            Feast of Booths: "... a voice against Jerusalem and the temple (NAOS), a voice
            against bridegroom and bride, a voice against all the people" and carried these
            cries into the streets. "Woe to Jerusalem" he kept repeating. He was chastised
            first by 'leading citizens' and finally brought before the Roman governor and,
            when he refused to identify or defend himself, he was scourged 'to the bone.'
            Woe to Jerusalem.' he said. But he recovered and continued repeating his dire
            prophecies until he was finally killed by a ballista bolt during the last weeks
            of the siege in 70 AD.

            A total coincidence that a peasant named Jesus, thought to be crazy, speaking
            with the voice of a spirit, was involved in a temple incident, predicted the
            fall of city and temple before the war, was finally hauled before the Roman
            governor, refused to say who he was or defend himself, and was severely scourged
            -all a few months before Mark composed his tale--??? Some say so. But I smell
            fish, a barrelful. Else I am no historian.

            But I am nowhere near accepting as explanation the theory, currently being
            mentioned favorably by some on the Xtalk list, that Jesus, as Mark portrays him,
            was a Markan midrashic creation. (Partly based on an oral memory of Jesus
            Ananias.)

            What, then? The best I am able to come up with is that there *was* a lunatic
            Jesus Ananias who prophesied the destruction of the city, but probably after the
            siege began, and that he thereby got himself in somekind of trouble with the
            authorities and thus left a trace in the documents that Josephus worked with.
            (So far, an acceptable mass of coincidence; one can easily imagine kooks such
            as this in Jerusalem under siege and Jesus was a very common name; Josephus
            alone deals with some 20 Jesuses)

            But it was not enough by itself for a good Josephan story. (And they *were* all
            *very* good stories) By most accounts, I think, Josephus wrote 'War' in the
            80s. About 10 years after Mark wrote 2G. I suspect that Josephus had a copy of
            Mark's gospel in his library (or its predecessor PN), recognized the real
            parallels, and copied the rest to
            flesh out his story. If this is true, the real historical value of the Jesus
            Ananias 'coincidence mass' lies in the fact that Josephus had access to Mark
            before he wrote 'Antiquities' and the passages lying behind the Testimonium
            Flavianum. Etc. Etc.

            I love a mass coincidence in primary texts. As another Mark wrote about
            Historical Geology:

            "It yields such wholesale returns of conjecture out of a trifling investment
            of fact"
            From *Life on the Mississippi*
            --
            Best wishes, Odell

            Odell McGuire
            omcguire@...
            Prof. Geology Em., W&L
            Lexington, VA
          • Tom Ragland
            All that is being attempted is to abstract concepts and put them into a relational framework and intuitively deduce insights by the construction. This is the
            Message 5 of 16 , Oct 2, 2000
              All that is being attempted is to abstract concepts and put them into a
              relational framework and intuitively deduce insights by the construction.
              This is the basis for Kaballah (Quabalah, and other spellings), which is
              supposed to be the mystical tradition of Judaism going back to before the
              time of Jesus. Judaism sees three divisions in their tradition. The Bible
              (Old Testament, Torah and Prophets) is the physical set of rules and
              instructions for the physical molding to the covenant. The Talmud (which we
              in Christian tradition may think of the Church Fathers instead) is the
              mental reflection on the covenant, the logical arguments and conclusions.
              The Kaballah is the mystical gnosis, the direct intuitive link as reflected
              to the chosen by the archangel Metatron. There are countless books that
              show evidence of Kaballistic understanding in the writers of the books of
              Ezekiel and Isaiah, thus pushing the tradition back quite a distance. "For
              thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever and ever" ending to
              the Lord's Prayer is an obvious reference to Kaballah to anyone who has
              experienced the Tree of Life. All of this to say that Kaballah is a system
              of rearranging ideas according to themes and studying the relationships of
              these ideas at a level higher than that of rational logic. It is intuitive
              and inspirational and the Jews say that it is angels who guide the awakened
              insights that are received as if by intuition and an experience that cannot
              be put back into words. This is why the Kaballah is not a text but rather a
              drawing. The discussions about the deity in the ancient Gnostic texts prove
              that early Gnostic Christianity was Kaballistic. The "Self Begotten", the
              "Silent One", Christos, Logos, the Virgin Mother, the emanations and
              overflowings, the Sophia who wanted to know the Father and thus gave birth
              to the universe, the Zoe who is the etheric aura that sustains life--all
              relate back to the greatest treasure that Judaism has given to the world.
              It is all confusing contradictory words until placed in the organizational
              structure of the Kaballah. And then it all comes together, but in a way
              that you can't explain in just logical terms. But you can introduce someone
              to the Kaballah and have them come to the same realizations. Sort of a
              holistic reptilian primative understanding that dissipates in the light of
              the almighty logical ego trip. Heart over head once again. Seems to be a
              reoccuring theme of gnosis in general.


              On Fri, 29 Sep 2000 22:39:37 -0600, jbauer@... wrote:


              -----Original Message-----
              From: Andrew Smith <asmith@...>
              To: gthomas@egroups.com <gthomas@egroups.com>
              Date: Friday, September 29, 2000 6:18 PM
              Subject: [gthomas] Re: Saying 45


              >> I take this as another piece of internal
              >> evidence for the jigsaw puzzle theory, according to which the
              >reader
              >> is intended to rearrange parts of GoT - even to remove parts of it
              >-
              >> to form a different, more perfect, structure than appears at first.

              This sounds like the "Bible codes" which are so popular with
              Fundamentalists
              now. Just in case you're unsure what I mean, they do things like read
              every
              fifth word & then pretend some meaningful insight to what's really
              nonsense.
              The jigsaw puzzle is probably equally eroneous unless you can show how
              using
              Thomas this way actually produces any more coherent view of the whole. I
              think finding such "meaning" is probably of the same order as the meaning
              of
              dreams in the psychoanalysis game. Dennet used it in _Consciousness
              Explained_ (the title of which historian of science Bob Richards said
              should
              be followed by a question mark).

              Dennet uses it as an explanation of hallucination. The game consists of
              sending one of the party members as a dupe to leave the room while the
              remaider of the party concoct a dream for him to analyze. It is to be
              related to him by his asking the remainder yes-no questions When the dupe
              is gone the remainder agree that they will answer yes if the last letter
              of
              the last word is in the first half of the alphabet & no if otherwise. In
              short, the dupe concocts a dream out of the questions provided him. I'm
              afraid any attempt to break Thomas down into a code or jigsaw puzzle
              probably has you asking the same kind of questions & getting the same kind
              of answers.

              Jim Bauer
              >>
              >>
              >-------------------------------------------------
              >To post to gthomas, send email to gthomas@egroups.com
              >To unsubscribe, send a blank email to gthomas-unsubscribe@egroups.com


              -------------------------------------------------
              To post to gthomas, send email to gthomas@egroups.com
              To unsubscribe, send a blank email to gthomas-unsubscribe@egroups.com



              Tom Ragland --> tomragland@...
              http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/8219/centuries/





              _______________________________________________________
              Say Bye to Slow Internet!
              http://www.home.com/xinbox/signup.html
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.