How Many 'Alters' Per 'Organism'?

[Lou Gold]

I'm happy to leave the math to you.

You really shouldn't be. People tend to be god awful trusting and naive about math.

What if the Subject in possession of math turns out to be Saruman? Or final stage of Frodo, but without Gollum to bite off his ring digit?

How do you, or anybody, suggest to share math in a responsible way, better way than the current old math of arcane monk latin of axiomatic set theory? In a way that works as medicine instead of poison?

I dunno. Math is not in my skill set. Hope you, as a good shaman, find the way.

[Cleric K]

To describe it in a relative way as going from higher to lower, and then from lower to higher, ultimately seems a moot point, if this process can't be precluded, and where any given stage-specific alter happens to be in this process is integral to the process. Somehow, what they all share in common seems paramount over some relative descriptor of its place and purpose.

It's not a moo point if it is up to us to keep ourselves integral to the process. The commonness is paramount, yes, but we can guide our own activity precisely if we understand our relative position.

It is easy/tempting to consider our perspective as a leaf carried on the Cosmic Stream. Then it's true that all we need to do is realize our commonness with the void/whole/etc. and just trust the Strange Attractor. But our experience shows that there are different strange attractors and we should comprehend how we stand in relation to them then choose our direction consciously.

Yup! Clearly, one can be blinded by the light as easily as lost in the dark. The challenge is always, balance or right amount. Bucky's lingo was surely more better. Even in Judeo-Christian hierarchical archetypology, the Archangel holds the 'dark one' at right distance, in balance without slaying him. It is the conquesting, colonizing, superior thinking ones who believe they can defeat/deny the dreaded who make things worse than they need to be. Good working relationship with the Source involves appreciating (seeing full value) in all that flows from It. "There's a season for all under heaven." Conqueror beware.

And this is why we need to know our relative position. If we are in the place of some Creator and we are laying down the principles of the universe, it would be meaningful to think in the above lines. And we can truly feel the truthfulness of the above - yes, from the perspective of Cosmic Source/Void it's all about rhythmical alterations between the Cosmic Feminine and Cosmic Masculine (happy holiday to all representatives of the Great Mother). But we can find our path toward balance only if we have the full picture.

Here's an analogy. Let's imagine the balance as a seesaw. Let's further imagine that this seesaw is on one end of a much larger seesaw. Both can be on one end of an even bigger seesaw and so on. This is a limited analogy because just like any fractal analogy, it presents things as too rigid branching structure. Nevertheless, it can serve as an illustration for the following: if we are conscious only of our seesaw, even if we balance it perfectly, this doesn't at all tell us what our position is in relation to the larger. The bigger is a higher order seesaw, our oscillations are within its context and we need higher order consciousness in order to perceive that everything we do in our normal state is carried on these higher order oscillations.

The above analogy illustrates why someone who seems to act one-sidedly may be actually striving to work for balancing of a higher order imbalance. And conversely, if we perfectly balance our perceptible seesaw (for example the self/no-self seesaw) and just rest peacefully, believing that we've accomplished our Cosmic duty, we're simply being blissfully ignorant of the higher order imbalances that must be addressed.

That we are living within higher order imbalances is quite clear if we simply look with unprejudiced eye. It's quite obvious that the balance of dark and light is something that must be balanced on a much higher level. Just a look around shows that there's way more darkness than light. We should really strive "one-sidedly" toward the light if we want to restore the higher order seesaws. If we really believe that it's all about balancing the perceptible seesaws we arrive at multitude of nonsensical ideas. For example: it's discriminatory/one-sided to be healthy - we should have equal parts health and sickness. It's one-sided to strive for truth - we need balance between truth and lies. It's one sided to seek wisdom - we need balance between wisdom and stupidity. It's one sided to strive for peace - we need balance between peace and war. We need balance between clean air and pollution. We need balance between love and hatred. Balance between honest work and crime. The list can go on and on. We don't even need higher knowledge to perceive the logical fallacy here. It's just healthy common sense (of course things get nowhere if it's believed that healthy common sense is one-sided and some irrationality must be added to balance it out).

[SanteriSatama]

Math is not in my skill set.

That self-image and conditioned image of math as too complex and difficult is the very problem. The relational, natural and inherently evolutionary approach based on more-less relation seeks to tie math with simplicity of 'all our relations' / Mitakuye Oyasin, which certainly is not beyond your skills. For equity and decentralized peer-to-peer anarchy to keep on spreading and evolving, we can't be ruled by monk Latin math of academic wizards, it needs to be much more comprehensible and communicable than the current anathema, so that we don't get fooled and oppressed and alienated and commodified by it as easily as now. We need to be liberated from the rule of dishonest and authoritarian math, without throwing out the baby with the wash water, as it can have also it's side of medicine and blessings.

As for calling me a shaman, thanks and no thanks. I made a commitment long time ago out of my love and freedom, and goal orientation comes with the what-ever-it-takes aspect of what-ever-works. I've had a small taste of the traditional tribal role, but that's not my gig in this life, and I humbly and respectfully refuse.

[Soul_of_Shu]

Cleric wrote: It is easy/tempting to consider our perspective as a leaf carried on the Cosmic Stream. Then it's true that all we need to do is realize our commonness with the void/whole/etc. and just trust the Strange Attractor. But our experience shows that there are different strange attractors and we should comprehend how we stand in relation to them then choose our direction consciously.

Yes, this is where we continue to perhaps have a different view. I take it that once a given stage has served its integral function, and one is ripe for the next stage, then one intuitively is attracted in that direction, and undertakes whatever work may be involved with that transition, and resistance is futile, no more than the caterpillar can resist spinning its chrysalis. And if one is not ripe for that transition, then any work in that regard will simply be of no interest or attraction.

[Lou Gold]

Math is not in my skill set.

We need to be liberated from the rule of dishonest and authoritarian math, without throwing out the baby with the wash water, as it can have also it's side of medicine and blessings.

I made a commitment long time ago out of my love and freedom, and goal orientation comes with the what-ever-it-takes aspect of what-ever-works.

I also could never fit with the tribal role of shaman but I do consider "the what-ever-it-takes aspect of what-ever-works" as shamanic.

I'm all for liberation. Just never figured out how to do the math intuitively. Thankfully, after 40 plus years of absence, song, dance and painting came into my personal pallet as a result of Daime. I had to clear away a lot of cultural toxicity and permit myself to be a kid rather than the adult I was trained to be.

[SanteriSatama]

Just never figured out how to do the math intuitively.

As Wittgenstein discussed mathematics, rule following is big part of the social and linguistic aspect of it. Rigorous sticking with definitions and their implications is the ethical and esthetic value of mathematics, but that contains also a slippery slope towards authoritarian rule following in the political sense. Foundational level is a free game. My father and his father were mathematician, my older son is now studying computer science in uni and younger is in high school specialized in math, so there's a bloodline.

I suspect you might be familiar with the flow of geometry that is common during psychadelic experiences etc, and often called 'snake' in various mythologies. In it's vastness, it's the intuitive side of math in its full glory. Especially on foundational level, getting some less vast intuitions even with even a glimmer of hope of trying to put in comprehensible language, and then trying to find language to express those is a long process. Translator's background helps a lot in that process, perhaps much more than formal education in mathematics.

I remember many years ago waking up one morning and feeling that Hermes was inside me, and then dancing. Some time after that, my more specific math intuiting started also in form of a sort of a dance, trying to bodily express and gesticulate some sort of 3+1 iteration of dimensionality. Only later I found out that there's also a famous and thorny math problem called Goldbach conjecture / 3+1 problem which haunted me for quite a while.

So, what you just told and showed intuitively, you have a good idea of how to do math intuitively. Embodying spiritual, vague pre-linguistic intuitions in the geometry of dance is a very natural way to do that. The metacognitive aspect of translating creative intuitions into clear language and thought can require some hard work and dedication.

[Brad Walker]

A remarkable aspect of DID is that subjects split "in software" with no apparent damage to "hardware", unlike split brains.

[AshvinP]

To describe it in a relative way as going from higher to lower, and then from lower to higher, ultimately seems a moot point, if this process can't be precluded, and where any given stage-specific alter happens to be in this process is integral to the process. Somehow, what they all share in common seems paramount over some relative descriptor of its place and purpose.

It's not a moo point if it is up to us to keep ourselves integral to the process. The commonness is paramount, yes, but we can guide our own activity precisely if we understand our relative position.

It is easy/tempting to consider our perspective as a leaf carried on the Cosmic Stream. Then it's true that all we need to do is realize our commonness with the void/whole/etc. and just trust the Strange Attractor. But our experience shows that there are different strange attractors and we should comprehend how we stand in relation to them then choose our direction consciously.

Yup! Clearly, one can be blinded by the light as easily as lost in the dark. The challenge is always, balance or right amount. Bucky's lingo was surely more better. Even in Judeo-Christian hierarchical archetypology, the Archangel holds the 'dark one' at right distance, in balance without slaying him. It is the conquesting, colonizing, superior thinking ones who believe they can defeat/deny the dreaded who make things worse than they need to be. Good working relationship with the Source involves appreciating (seeing full value) in all that flows from It. "There's a season for all under heaven." Conqueror beware.

And this is why we need to know our relative position. If we are in the place of some Creator and we are laying down the principles of the universe, it would be meaningful to think in the above lines. And we can truly feel the truthfulness of the above - yes, from the perspective of Cosmic Source/Void it's all about rhythmical alterations between the Cosmic Feminine and Cosmic Masculine (happy holiday to all representatives of the Great Mother). But we can find our path toward balance only if we have the full picture.

Here's an analogy. Let's imagine the balance as a seesaw. Let's further imagine that this seesaw is on one end of a much larger seesaw. Both can be on one end of an even bigger seesaw and so on. This is a limited analogy because just like any fractal analogy, it presents things as too rigid branching structure. Nevertheless, it can serve as an illustration for the following: if we are conscious only of our seesaw, even if we balance it perfectly, this doesn't at all tell us what our position is in relation to the larger. The bigger is a higher order seesaw, our oscillations are within its context and we need higher order consciousness in order to perceive that everything we do in our normal state is carried on these higher order oscillations.

The above analogy illustrates why someone who seems to act one-sidedly may be actually striving to work for balancing of a higher order imbalance. And conversely, if we perfectly balance our perceptible seesaw (for example the self/no-self seesaw) and just rest peacefully, believing that we've accomplished our Cosmic duty, we're simply being blissfully ignorant of the higher order imbalances that must be addressed.

That we are living within higher order imbalances is quite clear if we simply look with unprejudiced eye. It's quite obvious that the balance of dark and light is something that must be balanced on a much higher level. Just a look around shows that there's way more darkness than light. We should really strive "one-sidedly" toward the light if we want to restore the higher order seesaws. If we really believe that it's all about balancing the perceptible seesaws we arrive at multitude of nonsensical ideas. For example: it's discriminatory/one-sided to be healthy - we should have equal parts health and sickness. It's one-sided to strive for truth - we need balance between truth and lies. It's one sided to seek wisdom - we need balance between wisdom and stupidity. It's one sided to strive for peace - we need balance between peace and war. We need balance between clean air and pollution. We need balance between love and hatred. Balance between honest work and crime. The list can go on and on. We don't even need higher knowledge to perceive the logical fallacy here. It's just healthy common sense (of course things get nowhere if it's believed that healthy common sense is one-sided and some irrationality must be added to balance it out).

Reading that was like eating a juicy medium-rare steak with a side of decadent chocolate cake, true food for the soul Now only if I could balance out my gluttony with bulimia

[Lou Gold]

Just never figured out how to do the math intuitively.

As Wittgenstein discussed mathematics, rule following is big part of the social and linguistic aspect of it. Rigorous sticking with definitions and their implications is the ethical and esthetic value of mathematics, but that contains also a slippery slope towards authoritarian rule following in the political sense. Foundational level is a free game. My father and his father were mathematician, my older son is now studying computer science in uni and younger is in high school specialized in math, so there's a bloodline.

I suspect you might be familiar with the flow of geometry that is common during psychadelic experiences etc, and often called 'snake' in various mythologies. In it's vastness, it's the intuitive side of math in its full glory. Especially on foundational level, getting some less vast intuitions even with even a glimmer of hope of trying to put in comprehensible language, and then trying to find language to express those is a long process. Translator's background helps a lot in that process, perhaps much more than formal education in mathematics.

I remember many years ago waking up one morning and feeling that Hermes was inside me, and then dancing. Some time after that, my more specific math intuiting started also in form of a sort of a dance, trying to bodily express and gesticulate some sort of 3+1 iteration of dimensionality. Only later I found out that there's also a famous and thorny math problem called Goldbach conjecture / 3+1 problem which haunted me for quite a while.

So, what you just told and showed intuitively, you have a good idea of how to do math intuitively. Embodying spiritual, vague pre-linguistic intuitions in the geometry of dance is a very natural way to do that. The metacognitive aspect of translating creative intuitions into clear language and thought can require some hard work and dedication.

With appreciation and respect for your intentions and skills, I confess that I don't grok what you are talking about above. OTOH, somewhere in your recent forum comments you mentioned entering into a special darkness during an aya vision. I know that space and loved your description but I can't locate your comment. Can you help me find it? Thanks.

[SanteriSatama]

With appreciation and respect for your intentions and skills, I confess that I don't grok what you are talking about.

"Song, dance and painting" are basic ways of intuiting and embodying math. As is also breathing. KISS.