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

1872Re: [sl] Chinese Dragons

Expand Messages
  • Mark Swaney
    Feb 1, 2001
      Terrie,

      I've been thinking about your post.

      Terrie Halprin wrote:

      > Hi Mark,
      >
      > I tried e-mailing to the list, again -but, evidently, at the moment there's
      > still some techn. difficulties -or, something like that. Anyway, I wanted
      > to send this along.
      >
      > Monday I tripped over some interesting philosophy that I had wanted to
      > relate. You know how there's been this long standing philosophical yearning
      > for understanding/articulating the "philosophical nature of existence" -the
      > prevailing view being that the nature of existence lies within our ability
      > to perceive it

      That's one view. The logical consequence of reducing existence to our ability
      to percieve it is that without ourselves, there is (or was) nothing. This seems

      to me to be contradiction of all our knowledge, since we are sure that at some
      point we did not exist, but at that time, we are equally sure that "something"
      did in fact, exist.

      > therefore existence =perception -or, visa-versa.

      The nature of reality is tied up with ourselves in that we are a part of what we

      percieve. The presumption, often unconsious, that we can seperate ourselves
      from the enviornment has been proven untrue, therefore there is actually no
      possibility of being able to know what a process, or object, or anything would
      have been had we not existed in the first place and wished to know it (or
      percieve it) in the second place. For this reason and others of a thermodynamic

      nature, knowledge itself is both a prime physical cause of reality, and an
      effect of it.

      > Well, I was
      > wondering, what if, really, perception, has an equal and opposite (a vital)
      > -what if that opposite is attention -isn't that beautiful! It's like
      > noticing the "art of life" or something.

      Attention is the willful exercise of perception, an aspect of the conscious
      mind, whereas it may be argued that perception is an aspect of the unconscious
      mind, as we often "percieve" - our sensory organs are operative - without being
      aware of it.

      > Anyway, the first thing I thought about relating was this body/mind/sound
      > rap I've been watching for awhile. I watch body/mind/sound cuz they are
      > "active participants" for us -receptive is nice, yes, and beautifully
      > important BUT active is active -and, so I kinda think that it is always well
      > worth paying "attention" to. (Ha!) Now, if: perception =mind, Attention
      > =body -what about sound -right? That's what I wondered... (and, [red,
      > yellow, blue] what color/combo. expresses it.) and then, it occurred to me
      > -sound is another menses -it's "flow" between the body and the mind.

      All physical existence is in flow, if for no other reason than the passage of
      time, which is the ultimate flow.

      > Of
      > couse!! Isn't that interesting. So, now, I'm wondering/looking into it
      > -how exactly does/can "sound menses" arrangements tie in/relate and effect
      > their environment. The moon/moon phases (water ways/flow) are, of course,
      > the first, important aspects/access that I wanna try to understand more
      > clearly.

      The often noted correlation between the number of days in a woman's cycle and
      the days in the Lunar cycle (28 each, right?) has never been explained
      physically that I know of. Has anyone ever read a physical, biological
      explanation for the length of the human cycle and does it have anything to do
      with the phases of the Moon?

      People of very ancient times also must have been aware of the coincidence,
      because the Moon has always been associated with the female, and (by default!)
      the Sun with the male. This may be crucially important. It may be the earliest

      reason to believe that moving objects in the sky affect human life on Earth. If

      the Moon can have such a powerful effect on the Ocean as to cause tides, and on
      the human body as to cause the reproductive cycle, then what can be the effects
      of the Planets? And if the way that the effect is made is numerical, and
      mathematical in nature (the 28 days) why not look for other numerical,
      mathematical relationships between the objects in the sky and life on the Earth?

      > And, actually, this reminds me of the "armonica" too -Anyway, I
      > think sound is naturally/magically related to the moon and the oceans
      > because it's another natural flow. Does that make sound red (in the grand
      > scheme of things)? I wonder -but, then I'm always wondering something...
      >
      > Best wishes,
      >
      > Terrie
      >
      > _________________________________________________________________
      > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
    • Show all 3 messages in this topic