Gvildenu

Bendrystė

Andrius

Įvadas E9F5FC

Juodraštis? FFFFFF

Užrašai FCFCFC

Klausimai FFFFC0

Gvildenimai CAE7FA

Pavyzdžiai? F6EEF6

Šaltiniai? EFCFE1

Duomenys? FFE6E6

Išsiaiškinimai D8F1D8

Pratimai? FF9999

Dievas man? FFECC0

Pavaizdavimai? E6E6FF

Istorija AAAAAA

Asmeniškai? BA9696

Mieli dalyviai! Visa mano kūryba ir kartu visi šie puslapiai yra visuomenės turtas, kuriuo visi kviečiami laisvai naudotis, dalintis, visaip perkurti. - Andrius

Įranga

redaguoti

Mintys.Atvaizdai istorija

Paslėpti nežymius pakeitimus - Rodyti galutinio teksto pakeitimus

2018 rugsėjo 15 d., 15:43 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeistos 38-41 eilutės iš
į:
* Paskiri atvaizdai reiškiasi Dievo šokyje, teigiamais ir neigiamais įsakymais, tačiau jie suvokiami, kaip atvaizdai, kurie vienijami, tiktai gyvenimo lygtimi ir pasirinkimų malūnu.
* Representations: scopes and keeping separate may be understood in terms of representation.
* Nedviprasmybės.
Pakeistos 129-130 eilutės iš
į:
* 4 apimtys išsako požiūrių lygtis, 2 sutarimus išsako malonė ir teisybė
Pridėtos 147-148 eilutės:
* Niekas turi vidinę sandarą, tuo tarpu viskas, betkas, kažkas jos neturi.
Pridėtos 281-284 eilutės:

Malonė ir teisybė
* Pasirinkimas tarp malonės ir teisybės yra išsakytas sandarų, požiūrių tačiau jame grindžiamas skirtumas tarp šilumos ir šalčio.
* Teisybė vaizduoja sandarumą, malonė vaizduoja nesandarumą.
2018 rugsėjo 12 d., 12:56 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeistos 3-4 eilutės iš
Žr. [[Apimtys]], [[Antrinės sandaros]], [[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]], [[Trejybė]], [[Padalinimai]], [[Ir du]], [[Žemėlapynas]], [[Dievo šokio išdavos]] taip pat: FourAddOne, Observer, ObservationalPlane, Scopes, WaysOfModeling, EverythingVAnything, PropertiesVRepresentations, ConstructiveHypotheses, Everything, Anything, Slack, Representations, Empathy, Spirit, BeginningVEnd, LoveVLife, Other, SelfVOther
į:
Žr. [[Apimtys]], [[Antrinės sandaros]], [[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]], [[Trejybė]], [[Padalinimai]], [[Ir du]], [[Žemėlapynas]], [[Dievo šokio išdavos]] taip pat: FourAddOne, Observer, ObservationalPlane, Scopes, WaysOfModeling, EverythingVAnything, PropertiesVRepresentations, ConstructiveHypotheses, Everything, Anything, Slack, Representations, Empathy, Spirit, BeginningVEnd, LoveVLife, Other, SelfVOther, GodVHuman, SevenAddOne, PositiveVNegative, LoveVLife.
Pakeistos 284-285 eilutės iš
'''Visko, laisvumo ir betko atvaizdai'''
į:
'''Kas yra pradžia? Kas yra pabaiga?

* Pradžia (didėjantis laisvumas) ir pabaiga (mažėjantis laisvumas) yra du
atvaizdai. Kiti keturi atvaizdai nusako jų santykį (dvasios ir sandaros).
* Dievas yra pradžia. Žmogus yra pabaiga. (O gal Dvasia yra pabaiga?)
* Meilė yra pradžia. Jos veikla mylėti. Gyvenimas yra pabaiga. Jo veikla būti mylimam.
* Pradžia yra, kad yra kitas. Pabaiga yra, kad kito nėra.


The question is important because the Foursome considers the distance from the End, and so this is the basis for Self-understanding - who is living through that?

Is there a necessary confusion as to which is the end - human or spirit? In the beginning there is no confusion because it is agreed that there is an other - and all (four) possibilities may be considered. Towards the end there is a confusion - who is the other? And the crisis occurs when there is a mapping between these two systems - Which is the other - God or human - and what does that mean? I think it means that human is the Other, but as lesser than God.

Dievo Sūnus (Jėzus Kristus) yra pradžia ir pabaiga. [[http://www.ebible.org/bible/web/Rev.htm | Revelations 1:8]] I am the Alpha and the Omega
''says the Lord God,'' who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.

The beginning and the end may be considered as representations of slack, in which case they do not degenerate, but become specified. Those representations result from considering ''beginning'' and ''end'' as not equals. If we consider them as equals, then we have Spirit and Structure, which yield another four representations: SpiritVStructure.

Structurally,
* The beginning takes the threesome to occur at the beginning, and then additional perspectives may be generated by ever going beyond it. These additional perspectives are understood as nulls that give the outlook of a {{human}}. These nulls are taken as experience from within structure so that we can go infinitely ever deeper into structure.
* The end takes the threesome to occur at the end, so that additional perspectives are generated through shifts in perspective that move it onward. These additional perspectives are understood as nulls that give the outlook of {{God}}. These nulls are taken as experience from beyond structure so there are only finitely many levels available.

[+Visko, laisvumo ir betko atvaizdai+]
Pridėtos 506-513 eilutės:

''2005.03.21 {{A}}: Kaip suvokti ketverybės, penkerybės, šešerybės, septynerybės atvaizdus, kuo jie skiriasi tarpusavyje ir nuo kitų keturių? {{D}}: Tai yra sandaros išgyvenimai, tad jau turi būti sandara ir taškas už jos ar joje. {{A}}: O kiti keturi atvaizdai? {{D}}: Tai yra sandaros nustatymo lygmenys kurių reikia, kad būtų ką išgyventi. {{A}}: Tad atvaizdai yra išgyvenimo sąlygos? {{D}}: Taip, kartu su aplinkomis - tai visumos ir dalių išgyvenimas.''

''2005.03.19 {{A}}: Koks ryšys tarp pradžios, pabaigos ir suvokimo? {{D}}: Jei nori suprasti mane, būk su manimi pradžioje, o jei suprasti tave, tai reikia būti su tavimi pabaigoje. {{A}}: O kitas? {{D}}: Kitas yra tai per kurį gyvena dvasia. {{A}}: O požiūris? {{D}}: Tai ir yra kitas.''

''2005.03.12 {{A}}: Kaip suprasti, kas yra pabaiga? {{D}}: Pabaiga yra tai į ką tu gali įsijausti po visko. Tai yra sandara kuri yra tavo dvasios namai ir ją atspindi. {{A}}: Tad kok jos ryšys su mumis? {{D}}: Jūs esate ta dvasia išgyvenanti pabaigą. {{A}}: Ir koks jos ryšys su pradžia? {{D}}: Tai sandaros ir dvasios ryšiai - jūsų ir mano. {{A}}: Kokia tavo sandara ir dvasia? {{D}}: Mano dvasia tai aš, o mano sandara viskas. {{A}}: Kokia mūsų dvasia ir sandara? {{D}}: Jūsų sandara yra gyvenimas ir kartu amžinas gyvenimas (žiūrint kaip žiūrite) o jūsų dvasia esate patys.''

>><<
2018 rugsėjo 12 d., 12:03 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeista 3 eilutė iš:
Žr. [[Antrinės sandaros]], [[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]], [[Trejybė]], [[Padalinimai]], [[Ir du]], [[Žemėlapynas]], [[Dievo šokio išdavos]] taip pat: FourAddOne, Observer, ObservationalPlane, Scopes, WaysOfModeling, EverythingVAnything, PropertiesVRepresentations, ConstructiveHypotheses, Everything, Anything, Slack, Representations, Empathy, Spirit, BeginningVEnd, LoveVLife, Other, SelfVOther
į:
Žr. [[Apimtys]], [[Antrinės sandaros]], [[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]], [[Trejybė]], [[Padalinimai]], [[Ir du]], [[Žemėlapynas]], [[Dievo šokio išdavos]] taip pat: FourAddOne, Observer, ObservationalPlane, Scopes, WaysOfModeling, EverythingVAnything, PropertiesVRepresentations, ConstructiveHypotheses, Everything, Anything, Slack, Representations, Empathy, Spirit, BeginningVEnd, LoveVLife, Other, SelfVOther
2018 rugsėjo 12 d., 11:52 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeistos 89-90 eilutės iš
į:
* Four Representations express the role (as Equals) that one has with one's Self. See SpiritVStructure. Two Representations express the role (as Unequals) that one has with one's Other. See BeginningVEnd.
Pakeistos 114-115 eilutės iš
[+Viskas, betkas, kažkas, niekas+]
į:
[+Keturios apimtys: Viskas, betkas, kažkas, niekas+]
Pridėtos 142-167 eilutės:

Four Representations are given by the relationship between Self and Other as different Scopes for GoingBeyondOneself:
* out of Self Everything
* out of Self and into Other Anything
* out of Other and into Self Something
* out of Other Nothing

Or we may say that self is Structure and other is Perspective so that we have, as activity:
* Spirit goes out of structure - yielding Everything
* Structure goes out of structure and into perspective - yielding Anything
* Representation goes out of perspective and into structure - yielding Something
* Unity goes out of perspective - yielding Nothing
Explore here the relationship with the levels of understanding, and the kinds of love. For example, structure going out of structure is self-understanding.

* spirit and unity are Unbounded
* structure and representation are Bounded
* spirit and structure are Open
* representation and unity are Closed

The Foursome is given by the difference from the end:
* The difference between will (onesome) and God's will (nullsome) is everything
* The difference between choice (twosome) and good will (nullsome) is anything
* The difference between anything (threesome) and wisdom (nullsome) is something
* The difference between life (foursome) and eternal life (nullsome) is nothing

It seems the four representations express the distance between two concepts as given by the difference between the concept and the sum. So, for example, first the difference is everything, as in the case of the will. Ultimately, the difference is nothing.
2018 rugsėjo 08 d., 12:53 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pridėtos 125-126 eilutės:

Iš pradžių nesiskiria žinojimas ir nežinojimas - juos skiria niekas. Toliau išsiskiria, ką žinome ir nežinome, atsiranda kažkas. Toliau išsiskiria paskiras žinovas ir bendrasis žinovas, atsiranda betkas. Toliau išsiskiria santykiai tarp paskiro ir bendrojo žinovų, tų santykių asimetriškumas, atsiranda viskas.
2018 rugsėjo 08 d., 12:51 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeistos 3-4 eilutės iš
Žr. [[Antrinės sandaros]], [[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]], [[Trejybė]], [[Padalinimai]], taip pat: FourAddOne, Observer, ObservationalPlane, Scopes, WaysOfModeling, EverythingVAnything, PropertiesVRepresentations, ConstructiveHypotheses, Everything, Anything, Slack, Representations, Empathy, Spirit, Structure, Representations, BeginningVEnd, Understanding, LoveVLife, Other, SelfVOther
į:
Žr. [[Antrinės sandaros]], [[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]], [[Trejybė]], [[Padalinimai]], [[Ir du]], [[Žemėlapynas]], [[Dievo šokio išdavos]] taip pat: FourAddOne, Observer, ObservationalPlane, Scopes, WaysOfModeling, EverythingVAnything, PropertiesVRepresentations, ConstructiveHypotheses, Everything, Anything, Slack, Representations, Empathy, Spirit, BeginningVEnd, LoveVLife, Other, SelfVOther
Ištrintos 113-114 eilutės:

See also: Understanding, GoodUnderstanding, Structure, RecurringStructure, PairsOfConcepts.
2018 rugsėjo 08 d., 12:45 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeistos 5-6 eilutės iš
'''Kaip atvaizdai kyla savarankiškam Dievui išgyvenant lūkesčius?'''
į:
'''Kaip apibrėžti atvaizdus?'''
* Kaip atvaizdai kyla savarankiškam Dievui išgyvenant lūkesčius?
2018 rugsėjo 08 d., 12:43 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pridėtos 1-2 eilutės:
>>bgcolor=#E9F5FC<<
---------------
Pridėtos 4-7 eilutės:

'''Kaip atvaizdai kyla savarankiškam Dievui išgyvenant lūkesčius?'''
--------------
>><<
2017 spalio 14 d., 13:03 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pridėtos 411-416 eilutės:

>>bgcolor=#EEEEEE<<

'''Apimtys'''

If you are doing something, then doing nothing is a singularity.
2017 sausio 03 d., 22:38 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pridėtos 52-53 eilutės:

Keturi (padalinimo) atvaizdai kartu paimti išsako meilę, jų vieningumą. Du (padalinimo) atvaizdai kartu paimti išsako tobulumą, jų vieningumą.
2016 gruodžio 25 d., 21:55 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeista 9 eilutė iš:
Yra šeši atvaizdai. Jie susiję su žinojimu, tad su veiksmu +2: Klausimas, Atsakymas, Viskas, Betkas, Kažkas, Niekas. Šeši atvaizdai yra būtent Betko atvaizdai. Tuo tarpu padalinimai yra Visko padalinimai.
į:
Yra šeši atvaizdai. Jie susiję su žinojimu, tad su veiksmu +2: Klausimas, Atsakymas, Viskas, Betkas, Kažkas, Niekas. Šeši atvaizdai yra būtent Betko atvaizdai. Tuo tarpu padalinimai yra Visko padalinimai. O aplinkybės yra Kažko aplinkybės.
2016 gruodžio 25 d., 21:55 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeista 9 eilutė iš:
Yra šeši atvaizdai. Jie susiję su žinojimu, tad su veiksmu +2: Klausimas, Atsakymas, Viskas, Betkas, Kažkas, Niekas.
į:
Yra šeši atvaizdai. Jie susiję su žinojimu, tad su veiksmu +2: Klausimas, Atsakymas, Viskas, Betkas, Kažkas, Niekas. Šeši atvaizdai yra būtent Betko atvaizdai. Tuo tarpu padalinimai yra Visko padalinimai.
2016 vasario 09 d., 22:21 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pridėtos 225-226 eilutės:

Klausimas (step out), atsakymas (step in), viskas - lygiagrečiai.
2016 vasario 09 d., 13:30 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Ištrintos 120-121 eilutės:
Panašiai, kaip kad pašalinus visus daiktus, visus kūnus liktų laikas ir erdvė, kaip Kantas pastebėjo. Bendrai, padalinimai 4-7 išsako pasitraukimus (-4,-3,-2,-1). Septynerybė: Kito pasitraukimas, Šešerybė: Tavo pasitraukimas, Penkerybė: Mano pasitraukimas, Ketverybė: Dievo pasitraukimas.
Pridėtos 217-218 eilutės:

Panašiai, kaip kad pašalinus visus daiktus, visus kūnus liktų laikas ir erdvė, kaip Kantas pastebėjo. Bendrai, padalinimai 4-7 išsako pasitraukimus (-4,-3,-2,-1). Septynerybė: Kito pasitraukimas, Šešerybė: Tavo pasitraukimas, Penkerybė: Mano pasitraukimas, Ketverybė: Dievo pasitraukimas.
2016 vasario 09 d., 13:29 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pridėtos 120-121 eilutės:

Panašiai, kaip kad pašalinus visus daiktus, visus kūnus liktų laikas ir erdvė, kaip Kantas pastebėjo. Bendrai, padalinimai 4-7 išsako pasitraukimus (-4,-3,-2,-1). Septynerybė: Kito pasitraukimas, Šešerybė: Tavo pasitraukimas, Penkerybė: Mano pasitraukimas, Ketverybė: Dievo pasitraukimas.
2016 vasario 06 d., 15:27 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pridėta 27 eilutė:
* Šeši atvaizdai išsako išėjimą už savęs. Keturi padalinimų atvaizdai išsako išėjimo už savęs pakopas: nieko, kažko, betko ir visko. O du padalinimų atvaizdai išsako žinojimą: pasitraukimą (atsitokėjimą) ir prisišaukimą (įsijungimą).
2016 vasario 06 d., 13:09 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeista 9 eilutė iš:
Yra šeši atvaizdai. Jie susiję su žinojimu: Klausimas, Atsakymas, Viskas, Betkas, Kažkas, Niekas.
į:
Yra šeši atvaizdai. Jie susiję su žinojimu, tad su veiksmu +2: Klausimas, Atsakymas, Viskas, Betkas, Kažkas, Niekas.
2016 vasario 06 d., 13:09 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pridėtos 9-10 eilutės:
Yra šeši atvaizdai. Jie susiję su žinojimu: Klausimas, Atsakymas, Viskas, Betkas, Kažkas, Niekas.
Ištrintos 45-46 eilutės:
The Foursome, Fivesome, Sixsome and Sevensome have two Representations: one in terms of an '''observer''', and another in terms of an ObservationalPlane; in terms of the observed and in terms of the observer.
Pridėtos 118-119 eilutės:
Four Representations express the role (as Equals) that one has with one's Self. See SpiritVStructure.
Pakeistos 169-170 eilutės iš
I am trying to understand this better. Here are some thoughts:
į:
'''Dvasios ir sandaros santykis'''
Ištrinta 180 eilutė:
Pridėtos 210-211 eilutės:
The Foursome, Fivesome, Sixsome and Sevensome have two Representations: one in terms of an '''observer''', and another in terms of an ObservationalPlane; in terms of the observed and in terms of the observer.
Pridėtos 224-225 eilutės:

Two Representations express the role (as Unequals) that one has with one's Other. See BeginningVEnd.
2016 vasario 03 d., 14:02 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pridėta 70 eilutė:
* Du atvaizdai išskiria Dievo klausimą ir žmogaus atsakymą; šitą priėmus kaip žinojimo santykį, klausimas naujai suvokiamas, kaip visko žinojimas, atsakymas, kaip nieko žinojimas, ir taip pat žinojime atsiranda naujas, atitinkamas išskyrimas tarp bendro betko ir paskiro kažko. Tad du atvaizdai yra pirm žinojimo ir jį grindžia, o keturi atvaizdai yra po žinojimo ir išsako kas jį grindžia ir ką jisai grindžia.
2016 vasario 03 d., 11:48 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeistos 194-195 eilutės iš
See also: Self-understanding, SharedUnderstanding, Activity, RecurringActivity.
į:
See also: Self-understanding, SharedUnderstanding, Activity, RecurringActivity, BeginningVEnd, SelfVOther, SpiritVStructure.
Pridėtos 198-201 eilutės:
Žinojimas, tai kaip kvėpavimas - dvasią įtrauki ir išpūti (ar atvirkščiai).

Žmogaus laisvė (mažėjantis laisvumas) ir Dievo meilė (didėjantis laisvumas) yra išvirkštinės sąvokos, kuriose priešingai reiškiasi dėmesys.
Pridėta 215 eilutė:
Didėjantis ir mažėjantis laisvumas
Pakeistos 221-226 eilutės iš
This is to love (increasing slack) (Godly)(Beginning) and to be loved (decreasing slack) (heart)(humanly)(End).

To love is to step forwards to meet the one going beyond themselves. To be loved is to go beyond oneself to coincide with another.

Susiję su: BeginningVEnd, SelfVOther, SpiritVStructure.
į:
Mylintis ir mylimas:
* This is to love
(increasing slack) (Godly)(Beginning) and to be loved (decreasing slack) (heart)(humanly)(End).
* To love is to step forwards to meet the one going beyond themselves. To be loved is to go beyond oneself to coincide with another.
* These two stances are two outlooks in going beyond ourselves. One is that of loving (standing apart from oneself) and the other is of being loved (standing on one's own). And the four levels of knowledge are four scopes where the lover and the loved may coincide.
* Note: to be loved and then to love - which is to say, to go beyond oneself, coincide with one who has stepped forward, and then to turn around so as to step forward - to love - oneself - this is to allow for a coinciding of views - and a parallel view as with eternal life. Hence understanding is in the turning around, this returning to the beginning. And here that beginning is at the heart. So the movement seems to be: go beyond oneself, coincide with the one who steps forward to meet you, and then turn around to face the one you went beyond
.
Ištrintos 230-231 eilutės:
These two stances are two outlooks in going beyond ourselves. One is that of loving (standing apart from oneself) and the other is of being loved (standing on one's own). And the four levels of knowledge are four scopes where the lover and the loved may coincide.
Ištrintos 236-239 eilutės:
----

Note: to be loved and then to love - which is to say, to go beyond oneself, coincide with one who has stepped forward, and then to turn around so as to step forward - to love - oneself - this is to allow for a coinciding of views - and a parallel view as with eternal life. Hence understanding is in the turning around, this returning to the beginning. And here that beginning is at the heart. So the movement seems to be: go beyond oneself, coincide with the one who steps forward to meet you, and then turn around to face the one you went beyond.
Pakeistos 341-359 eilutės iš
* 6) we are suffering =
we have trials, but everything is self-sufficient, lacks nothing.

* 5) we are loving =
we have trials, but everything is certain, things are just as it
wishes.

* 4) we are relying =
we have trials, but everything is calm, all that happens is good.

* 3) we are believing =
we have expectations, but everything is certain, things are just as
it wishes.

* 2) we are in suspense =
we have expectations, but everything is self-sufficient, lacks nothing

* 1) we are engaging =
we have doubts, but everything is self-sufficient, lacks nothing
į:
* 6) we are suffering = we have trials, but everything is self-sufficient, lacks nothing.
* 5) we are loving = we have trials, but everything is certain, things are just as it wishes.
* 4) we are relying = we have trials, but everything is calm, all that happens is good.
* 3) we are believing = we have expectations, but everything is certain, things are just as it wishes.
* 2) we are in suspense = we have expectations, but everything is self-sufficient, lacks nothing
* 1) we are engaging = we have doubts, but everything is self-sufficient, lacks nothing
2016 sausio 30 d., 12:31 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pridėtos 201-202 eilutės:

Ketverybė, penkerybė, šešerybė, septynerybė yra bendruomeninės sandaros. Jos išsako bendruomenės tikrovę.
2016 sausio 27 d., 13:02 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeistos 102-103 eilutės iš
'''Viskas, betkas, kažkas, niekas'''
į:
[+Viskas, betkas, kažkas, niekas+]
Pakeistos 192-193 eilutės iš
'''Didėjantis ir mažėjantis laisvumas'''
į:
[+Didėjantis ir mažėjantis laisvumas+]
Pakeistos 198-207 eilutės iš
They express the roles that Unequals play with each other - hence the role that one may have with one's Other.
į:
They express the roles that Unequals play with each other - hence the role that one may have with one's Other.

We can at once look at the other divisions that have two representations, and I think that there is a difference between the subjective ones, and the objective ones.

* foursome: perspective object
* fivesome: time space
* sixsome: emotion /God/ cognition /man/
* sevensome: increasing slack decreasing slack

So, more broadly, living through emotional resolution is subjective, as God through us, and living through cognitive resolution is objective, as human through us. And here God is what is unbounded, and human is what is bounded.
2015 birželio 29 d., 21:42 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pridėtos 411-412 eilutės:

http://www.filosofija.info/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/funkcijos-600x375.png
2015 birželio 29 d., 21:41 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pridėtos 401-410 eilutės:

>>bgcolor=#ECD9EC<<

Romano Jakobsono komunikacinio akto ir komunikacijos funkcijų modelis ([[http://www.filosofija.info/kultura/tonalinis-balansas-kaip-naratyvu-analizes-priemone/ | Tomo Venclovos paskaitoje]]).
* Adresantas: ekspresyvinė funkcija
* Adresatas: impresyvinė funkcija
* Kontaktas: fatinė funkcija
* Kodas: metalingvistinė funkcija
* Komunikatas: poetinė funkcija
* Kontekstas: referencinė funkcija
2015 birželio 13 d., 18:45 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pridėtos 387-394 eilutės:

1999.08.18: I asked God which questions I should think over so as to understand why good will makes way for good heart. He responded:
* What captures attention and guides it? mažėjantis laisvumas
* What drops down upon reality and bounces away in random paths? didėjantis laisvumas
* What is wound in one direction, and lives through spinning in the opposite direction? prasmingas - kodėl
* What falls as rain day and night until there sprout and grow plants that will bear fruit? pastovus - kaip
* What like a ray reflects off of society and does not return? betarpiškas - koks
* What by its turning (in the direction of winding) commands our attention and then slips away to the side? tiesus - ar
2015 birželio 07 d., 22:21 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 75-78 eilutės iš
į:
* Gali būti: 2 + (2x2)
* Combinations of spirit and structure consider them as Equals and lett them manifest themselves as Unequals in four ways, yielding four representations (wishes). They are unequal in terms of the distance between themselves, from everything (spirit to spirit) to nothing (structure to structure). Beginning (Forward) and End (Backwards) consider spirit and structure as unequals, but manifest them as equals
* Four representations may express structure from a '''positive''' perspective, of what is, what is constructive. Two representations may express structures from the '''negative''' perspective, which is to say, from what is '''not'''.
Pakeistos 115-116 eilutės iš
į:
* Relationships relevant in the operation +3 and +0: together, separate, together and separate, separation of together and separate.
Pakeistos 131-132 eilutės iš
'''Why'''
į:
Kodėl
Pakeistos 135-138 eilutės iš
* be - do - thin

'''How'''
į:
* be - do - think
Kaip
Pakeistos 141-143 eilutės iš

'''What'''
į:
Koks
Pakeistos 146-148 eilutės iš

'''Whether'''
į:
Ar
Ištrintos 161-166 eilutės:
This also relates to the levels of knowledge, the LevelsOfUnderstanding, the LevelsOfConsciousness.

They may also relate to the relationships relevant in the operation +3 and +0: together, separate, together and separate, separation of together and separate.

These four representations may express structure from a '''positive''' perspective, of what is, what is constructive.
Pridėtos 177-191 eilutės:
Four Representations are given by the relationship between Spirit and Structure:

* SpiritToSpirit - out of Other
* SpiritToStructure - out of Other and into Self
* StructureToSpirit - out of Self and into Other
* StructureToStructure - out of Self

These are the levels of structure that are necessary for us to experience structure. In that sense they are related to the LevelsOfUnderstanding. We start with the widest and immerse ourselves into narrower scopes.

These may be thought of as the RepresentationsOfEverything, in which case they do not degenerate, but are specified (I need to check on the order):
* ''spirit to spirit'' is EverythingWishesForEverything
* ''spirit to structure'' is EverythingWishesForAnything
* ''structure to spirit'' is EverythingWishesForSomething
* ''structure to structure'' is EverythingWishesForNothing
Pakeistos 200-205 eilutės iš
Increasing slack is spirit gives way to structure. This is the case of God, who goes beyond himself into structure. Here spirit and structure are in parallel, they are kept separate. As they grow independent, the slack increases. Spirit opens up more and more slack for structure until it is possible to have an independent heart. With increasing slack, we have the perspective of the '''actor''', of that which is loved - life. This is the slack of '''non-structure'''.

Decreasing slack is structure gives way to spirit. This is the case of the heart, which finds itself within structure and then looks for God. Here spirit and structure are taken together, and they grow dependent, and slack decreases. Ultimately, the two collapse back into spirit. With decreasing slack, we have the perspective of the '''surroundings''', of that which loves. This is the slack of '''non-activity'''.

(See Self-understanding). These two representations may express structures from the '''negative''' perspective, which is to say, from what is '''not
'''.
į:
* Increasing slack is spirit gives way to structure. This is the case of God, who goes beyond himself into structure. Here spirit and structure are in parallel, they are kept separate. As they grow independent, the slack increases. Spirit opens up more and more slack for structure until it is possible to have an independent heart. With increasing slack, we have the perspective of the '''actor''', of that which is loved - life. This is the slack of '''non-structure'''.
* Decreasing slack is structure gives way to spirit. This is the case of the heart, which finds itself within structure and then looks for God. Here spirit and structure are taken together, and they grow dependent, and slack decreases. Ultimately, the two collapse back into spirit. With decreasing slack, we have the perspective of the '''surroundings''', of that which loves. This is the slack of '''non-activity'''.
Ištrintos 264-287 eilutės:
Four Representations are given by the relationship between Spirit and Structure:

* SpiritToSpirit - out of Other
* SpiritToStructure - out of Other and into Self
* StructureToSpirit - out of Self and into Other
* StructureToStructure - out of Self

These are the levels of structure that are necessary for us to experience structure. In that sense they are related to the LevelsOfUnderstanding. We start with the widest and immerse ourselves into narrower scopes.

These may be thought of as the RepresentationsOfEverything, in which case they do not degenerate, but are specified:

* ''spirit to spirit'' is EverythingWishesForEverything
* ''spirit to structure'' is EverythingWishesForAnything
* ''structure to spirit'' is EverythingWishesForSomething
* ''structure to structure'' is EverythingWishesForNothing

''(I need to check on the order of the above).''

These representations result from considering ''spirit'' and ''structure'' as Equals and letting them manifest themselves as Unequals in four ways, yielding four representations (wishes). They are unequal in terms of the distance between themselves, from everything (spirit to spirit) to nothing (structure to structure).

Alternatively, we may consider them as unequals, and let them manifest themselves equals, in which case we have two representations (scopes):Beginning and End, see: BeginningVEnd.

They accord with the LevelsOfUnderstanding.
Ištrintos 275-278 eilutės:
Attach:understanding.gif

Attach:conjunctions.gif
Ištrintos 279-280 eilutės:
Attach:representationsofanything.gif
Ištrintos 285-286 eilutės:
Attach:representationsofanything.gif
Pakeistos 307-309 eilutės iš
Many of the details are in my notes at
http://www.ms.lt/en/andrius/understanding/understanding.html
į:
Pakeistos 388-392 eilutės iš
į:
Attach:representationsofanything.gif

Attach:understanding.gif

Attach:conjunctions.gif
2015 birželio 07 d., 21:22 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pridėtos 17-18 eilutės:
* Santykiai tarp dvasios (pasikartojančios veiklos) ir sandaros.
* Santykiai tarp savęs ir kito.
Pridėtos 90-98 eilutės:
Yra būdai, kaip širdies dvigubas požiūris išplečia pasaulio viengubą požiūrį. I went through the six issues, and fixed each one, and considered how the double perspective became a single perspective as I went from the Heart's answer to the associated counterquestion, to the World's answer. For two of the criteria, the single perspective arises as a limiting case of the double perspective.
* Spread. When I spread, then over the course of a given interval, there are some things that I will not come upon because they fall outside of the interval (perhaps we have already come upon them, perhaps we would only come upon them much later). But there are other things that I can never come upon regardless of the interval. A double perspective distinguishes what I cannot come upon from what I will not come upon. If the interval is extended in every way, then this extension has, as its limiting case, a single perspective in which ultimately everything either flows into me or not.
* Cleave. When I cleave away from myself, there are some things that are no longer part of me. But there are other things that were never a part of me. A double perspective distinguishes what was once a part of me from what was never a part of me. If I cleave further and further out, then the limiting case is a single perspective in which I am tracing out the boundaries of what belongs to me and what does not.
For four of the criteria
* Extend. When a function is extended, then the extended function is in agreement with the original function wherever they are both defined. A double perspective considers the two functions separately and distinguishes the matter of where the functions are defined from whether their values agree where they are both defined. A single perspective, however, treats one function as an extension of the other, and focuses on where one is defined, but not the other.
* Induce. I judge steps relative to each other, but I take them absolutely. A double perspective distinguishes the calculation I make from the decision, with all of its consequences, that I live through. A single perspective is resigned to the view that what we decide does not keep up with what we live through.
* Accept. I select what I will accept based on what I have already accepted. A double perspective distinguishes what I have already accepted from what I will receive. A single perspective identifies the two, and concludes that there is a basis for accepting and rejecting.
* Apply. We demand that a rule apply to all situations. A double perspective distinguishes whether the rule holds for situations where it was meant to apply, from whether it holds for other situations as well. A single perspective does not distinguish between the two, and simply looks for possibilities where the rule no longer holds.
Pakeistos 260-271 eilutės iš
'''Dvasios ir sandaros santykis'''


'''Note: I have rethought this as Activity V Structure and am describing this in the page on Representations.'''

----

''I am rethinking this
- the structure for the four representations - as the relationship SelfVOther between Self and Other.''

----
į:
--------------
Ištrintos 418-433 eilutės:

'''Požiūrių suvedimas'''

'''representations'''

I went through the six issues, and fixed each one, and considered how the double perspective became a single perspective as I went from the Heart's answer to the associated counterquestion, to the World's answer. For two of the criteria, the single perspective arises as a limiting case of the double perspective.

* Spread When I spread, then over the course of a given interval, there are some things that I will not come upon because they fall outside of the interval (perhaps we have already come upon them, perhaps we would only come upon them much later). But there are other things that I can never come upon regardless of the interval. A double perspective distinguishes what I cannot come upon from what I will not come upon. If the interval is extended in every way, then this extension has, as its limiting case, a single perspective in which ultimately everything either flows into me or not.
* Cleave When I cleave away from myself, there are some things that are no longer part of me. But there are other things that were never a part of me. A double perspective distinguishes what was once a part of me from what was never a part of me. If I cleave further and further out, then the limiting case is a single perspective in which I am tracing out the boundaries of what belongs to me and what does not.

For four of the criteria

* Extend When a function is extended, then the extended function is in agreement with the original function wherever they are both defined. A double perspective considers the two functions separately and distinguishes the matter of where the functions are defined from whether their values agree where they are both defined. A single perspective, however, treats one function as an extension of the other, and focuses on where one is defined, but not the other.
* Induce I judge steps relative to each other, but I take them absolutely. A double perspective distinguishes the calculation I make from the decision, with all of its consequences, that I live through. A single perspective is resigned to the view that what we decide does not keep up with what we live through.
* Accept I select what I will accept based on what I have already accepted. A double perspective distinguishes what I have already accepted from what I will receive. A single perspective identifies the two, and concludes that there is a basis for accepting and rejecting.
* Apply We demand that a rule apply to all situations. A double perspective distinguishes whether the rule holds for situations where it was meant to apply, from whether it holds for other situations as well. A single perspective does not distinguish between the two, and simply looks for possibilities where the rule no longer holds.
2015 birželio 07 d., 21:04 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
2015 birželio 07 d., 19:09 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 1-2 eilutės iš
Žr. [[Antrinės sandaros]], [[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]], [[Trejybė]], [[Padalinimai]], taip pat: FourAddOne, Observer, ObservationalPlane, Scopes, WaysOfModeling, EverythingVAnything, PropertiesVRepresentations, ConstructiveHypotheses, Everything, Anything, Slack, Representations, Empathy
į:
Žr. [[Antrinės sandaros]], [[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]], [[Trejybė]], [[Padalinimai]], taip pat: FourAddOne, Observer, ObservationalPlane, Scopes, WaysOfModeling, EverythingVAnything, PropertiesVRepresentations, ConstructiveHypotheses, Everything, Anything, Slack, Representations, Empathy, Spirit, Structure, Representations, BeginningVEnd, Understanding, LoveVLife, Other, SelfVOther
Pridėtos 102-105 eilutės:
Viskas, betkas, kažkas, niekas yra:
* Apimtys
* Kiek širdis išeina už savęs.
Pakeistos 114-115 eilutės iš
These representations express the extent to which the heart go beyond itself: Everything, Anything, Something, Nothing. These are Scopes.
į:
I will work here to flesh out these representations based on what I know about the representations of the Nullsome, Onesome, Twosome, Threesome. There are four levels: why - how - what - whether (or is it +3, +2, +1, +0).

'''Why'''

* significant
* no external context
* free will - fate
* be - do - thin

'''How'''

* constant
* simplest algorithm - accepts all things
* outside - inside
* one - all - many

'''What'''

* direct
* no internal structure
* theory - practice
* object - process - subject

'''Whether'''

* true
* required concept
* same - different
* necessary - actual - possible
Ištrintos 145-146 eilutės:
Ištrintos 246-247 eilutės:
The representations (divided 4:2) are somehow related to the Gradations (divided 3:3).
Pakeistos 252-255 eilutės iš
See also: Spirit, Structure, Representations, BeginningVEnd, Understanding, LoveVLife, Other, SelfVOther

----
į:
Ištrintos 284-313 eilutės:
I will work here to flesh out these representations based on what I know about the representations of the Nullsome, Onesome, Twosome, Threesome. There are four levels: why - how - what - whether (or is it +3, +2, +1, +0).

'''Why'''

* significant
* no external context
* free will - fate
* be - do - thin

'''How'''

* constant
* simplest algorithm - accepts all things
* outside - inside
* one - all - many

'''What'''

* direct
* no internal structure
* theory - practice
* object - process - subject

'''Whether'''

* true
* required concept
* same - different
* necessary - actual - possible
Pakeistos 296-298 eilutės iš
http://www.ms.lt/en/andrius/understanding/diagrams/understanding.gif

http://www.ms.lt/en/andrius/understanding/diagrams/conjunctions.gif
į:
Attach:understanding.gif

Attach:conjunctions.gif
2015 birželio 07 d., 19:04 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pridėtos 17-18 eilutės:
* Išgyvenimų rūšys.
* Ženklų savybės.
2015 birželio 07 d., 19:04 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 1-2 eilutės iš
Žr. [[Antrinės sandaros]], [[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]], [[Trejybė]], [[Padalinimai]], taip pat: FourAddOne, Observer, ObservationalPlane, Scopes, WaysOfModeling, EverythingVAnything, PropertiesVRepresentations, ConstructiveHypotheses
į:
Žr. [[Antrinės sandaros]], [[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]], [[Trejybė]], [[Padalinimai]], taip pat: FourAddOne, Observer, ObservationalPlane, Scopes, WaysOfModeling, EverythingVAnything, PropertiesVRepresentations, ConstructiveHypotheses, Everything, Anything, Slack, Representations, Empathy
Pakeista 13 eilutė iš:
* Betko atvaizdai (4+2), tuo pačiu visko arba laisvumo atvaizdai.
į:
* Betko atvaizdai (4+2), pasirinkimai, tuo pačiu visko atvaizdai (troškimai) arba laisvumo atvaizdai (tapatumai).
Pridėta 17 eilutė:
* Nedviprasmybės. (Dievas yra daugiaprasmiškas.)
Pakeistos 305-310 eilutės iš
[[Netroškimai]] Žr.taip pat Everything, Anything, Slack, Representations, Empathy

Šešios nedviprasmybės yra pasirinkimai, antrinės sandaros, betko atvaizdai.

Dievas yra daugiaprasmiškas.
į:
[[Netroškimai]]
Pakeistos 315-316 eilutės iš
http://www.ms.lt/en/andrius/understanding/diagrams/representationsofanything.gif
į:
Attach:representationsofanything.gif
Pakeista 319 eilutė iš:
Andrius: [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/livingbytruth/message/318 June 14, 2003]
į:
[[http://groups.yahoo.com/group/livingbytruth/message/318 | June 14, 2003]]
2015 birželio 07 d., 18:57 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 13-14 eilutės iš
* Betko atvaizdai, tuo pačiu visko arba laisvumo atvaizdai.
* Laipsnyno lygmenys.
į:
* Betko atvaizdai (4+2), tuo pačiu visko arba laisvumo atvaizdai.
* Neigiami įsakymai, teigiamų įsakymų lygmenų poros. (4 2)
* Laipsnyno (3+3)
lygmenys.
2015 birželio 07 d., 17:15 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pridėta 96 eilutė:
* Gyvenimo lygtis: tiesa, sąvoka, žvilgsnis, požiūris.
2015 birželio 07 d., 17:12 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Ištrinta 83 eilutė:
Pakeista 91 eilutė iš:
* Gyvenimo lygties lygmenimis: dvasia, sandara, atvaizdai, vieningumas.
į:
* Gyvenimo lygties lygmenimis: dvasia (atskirtas nuo savęs viskuo), sandara (betkuo), atvaizdai (kažkuo), vieningumas (niekuo). Taip kad Dievas užeina už savęs, už visko. Ir meilė yra vieningumas. Dvasia išsako vienumo pagrindus, kaip Tėvas ir Sūnus yra viena. Tai yra atvaizdai, vidiniai (troškimai) ir išoriniai (tapatumai). O juos vienija jų vieningumas. Vieningumui įvedama papildoma apimtis - niekas.
Pakeistos 95-96 eilutės iš
į:
* Meilės jauduliai: liūdnas (vienas su niekuo), nustebęs (vienas su kažkuo), sujaudintas (vienas su betkuo), laimingas (vienas su visais).
Ištrintos 104-115 eilutės:
Ketverybės požiūriai:
* kodėl - žinoti viską
* kaip - žinoti betką
* koks - žinoti kažką
* ar - žinoti nieką

Jauduliai, meilė:
* laimingas - vienas su visais
* sujaudintas - vienas su betkuo
* nustebęs - vienas su kažkuo
* nuliūdęs - vienas su niekuo
Pakeistos 109-114 eilutės iš
* Unity: separated from oneself by Nothing
* Representation: separated from oneself by Something
* Structure: separated from oneself by Anything
* Spirit: separated from oneself by Everything

(This helps make clear why Love is a unity and God is a spirit).
į:
2015 birželio 07 d., 17:05 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pridėtos 92-94 eilutės:
* Gyvenimo lygties lygmenimis: dvasia, sandara, atvaizdai, vieningumas.
* Troškimais: savarankiškas (trokšta nieko), užtikrintas (kažko), ramus (betko), mylintis (visko).
* Ketverybės požiūriais: ar (žino nieką), koks (žino kažką), kaip (žino betką), kodėl (žino viską).
2015 birželio 07 d., 17:03 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pridėtos 61-62 eilutės:
Note that the Observed is not a representation. This is because the observed is that Whole upon which a representation is providing an angle. In this sense, the observed is Everything, and the observer is Something.
Ištrintos 69-72 eilutės:
Note that the Observed is not a representation. This is because the observed is that Whole upon which a representation is providing an angle. In this sense, the observed is Everything, and the observer is Something.

===Alternate accounts of the 6 representations===
Pakeistos 89-92 eilutės iš
Viskas, betkas, kažkas, niekas yra semiotinis kvadratas, septynerybės kampai.
į:
Viską, betką, kažką, nieką galima sieti su įvairiomis sandaromis.
* Asmenimis: Dievas, Aš, Tu, Kitas.
* Suvokimo lygmenimis: suvokimas, savęs suvokimas, bendras suvokimas, susikalbėjimas.
* Semiotiniu kvadratu, septynerybės kampais
.
2015 birželio 07 d., 16:53 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pridėtos 50-51 eilutės:
The six representations do not form a DivisionOfEverything because they overlap. Instead, they may be thought of as the union of two divisions of everything: the Twosome and the Foursome.
Pakeista 61 eilutė iš:
2 + 4 atvaizdai:
į:
4 + 2 atvaizdai:
Pakeistos 65-67 eilutės iš
į:
* To stand on one's own is to stand apart from oneself in four different ways (separated by everything, anything, something, nothing). To stand apart from oneself is to stand on one's own in two different ways (with increasing slack or with decreasing slack)
* Four representations express the ''concept'' and two representations express the ''conceiver'' (conceiver and conceiving), that is, standing by its own and in relationship with itself.
Ištrintos 68-74 eilutės:

Note also that the six representations do not form a DivisionOfEverything because they overlap. Instead, they may be thought of as the union of two divisions of everything: the Twosome and the Foursome.

* To stand on one's own is to stand apart from oneself in four different ways (separated by everything, anything, something, nothing)
* To stand apart from oneself is to stand on one's own in two different ways (with increasing slack or with decreasing slack)

Perhaps four representations express the ''concept'' and two representations express the ''conceiver'' (conceiver and conceiving), that is, standing by its own and in relationship with itself.
2015 birželio 07 d., 16:50 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 59-61 eilutės iš
The first two are the representations for the Foursome, Fivesome, Sixsome, Sevensome, and they arise when the observer is distinct from the observational plane. We may think of them as external representations, which is to say, external views upon the whole.

The other four are the representations of the Nullsome, Onesome, Twosome, Threesome, and they are the scopes of access that the observational plane provides the observer, respectively: all perspectives, any perspective, a perspective, no perspective. They are internal representations, internal views upon the whole.
į:
2 + 4 atvaizdai:
* 4 nulybės, vienybės, dvejybės
, trejybės atvaizdai ir 2 ketverybės, penkerybės, šešerybės, septynerybės atvaizdai
* 4 vidiniai atvaizdai (žvilgsniai į visumą) ir 2 išoriniai atvaizdi (žvilgsniai į visumą)
* 4 yra apimtys, kuriuos pažinimo laukas parūpina pažinovui (visi požiūriai, betkoks požiūris, kažkuris požiūris, joks požiūris), 2 iškyla kada pažinovas skiriasi nuo pažinimo lauko
2015 birželio 07 d., 16:35 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 9-10 eilutės iš
'''Atvaizdas yra:'''
į:
'''Atvaizdai yra:'''

* Būdai, kampai, kaip įsivaizduoti, aprėpti visko padalinimą.
* Filtrai, kriterijai, kuriais ne viskas priimama, taip paneigiant visko savybę, jog viskas priima visa ką.
* Betko atvaizdai, tuo pačiu visko arba laisvumo atvaizdai.
* Laipsnyno lygmenys.
* Santykiai tarp visumos ir požiūrio, tarp visko ir kažko.
* Suvokimai, kaip išeinama už savęs.
* Asmenų lygmuo išsakantis Tave.
Ištrintos 18-19 eilutės:
* A relationship between a Perspective and a Whole, which is to say, between Something and Everything.
* A particular angle by which we are able to approach and conceive of a DivisionOfEverything
Ištrinta 20 eilutė:
* A criteria, which is to say, a filter upon Everything. We know that everything accepts all things (this is one of the PropertiesOfEverything and is a RepresentationsOfTheOnesome). Even so, we can filter everything. Thus a representation negates this representation of the onesome.
2015 birželio 07 d., 16:16 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pridėtos 96-97 eilutės:

Taip kad visko atvaizdai yra: viskas, betkas, kažkas, niekas. Viskas yra pats sau atvaizdas.
2015 birželio 07 d., 16:06 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 40-41 eilutės iš
* * = 4x2 išminties atvaizdai: gera valia
į:
* 8 = 4x2 išminties atvaizdai: gera valia
Pakeistos 70-71 eilutės iš
Here is another, perhaps related account:
į:
Galima atvaizdus (ir aplinkybes) išreikšti veiksmu [[IrDu|+2]], su sandara ir pasikartojančiu veiksmu:
Pakeistos 78-79 eilutės iš
where I mean:
į:
kur:
Pakeistos 84-89 eilutės iš
This is to say that the representations (and also the Topologies are intimately related to the operation [AddTwo +2].

* Four of the representations serve to conceive the first four divisions: Nullsome, Onesome, Twosome, Threesome. As such they are representations of Everything (expressed by the Onesome) and of God (expressed by the Nullsome). They express the roles of Equals that they play with each other - hence the role that one may have with one's Self. See also: Understanding, GoodUnderstanding, Structure, RecurringStructure, PairsOfConcepts.
* Two of the representations serve to conceive the second four divisions: Foursome, Fivesome, Sixsome, Sevensome. As such they are representations of Slack (expressed as the Sevensome). They express the roles that Unequals play with each other - hence the role that one may have with one's Other. See also: Self-understanding, SharedUnderstanding, Activity, RecurringActivity.
į:
Pridėtos 87-88 eilutės:
See also: Understanding, GoodUnderstanding, Structure, RecurringStructure, PairsOfConcepts.
Pridėtos 91-96 eilutės:
* Dievas - nulybė, jos atvaizdai
* Viskas - vienybė, jos atvaizdai
* Troškimai - dvejybė, jos atvaizdai
* Meilė - trejybė, jos atvaizdai
Representations of Everything (expressed by the Onesome) and of God (expressed by the Nullsome). They express the roles of Equals that they play with each other - hence the role that one may have with one's Self.
Pridėtos 151-152 eilutės:
See also: Self-understanding, SharedUnderstanding, Activity, RecurringActivity.
Pridėtos 154-155 eilutės:

They express the roles that Unequals play with each other - hence the role that one may have with one's Other.
2015 birželio 07 d., 16:00 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 37-40 eilutės iš
* visko atvaizdai: troškimai
* laisvumo atvaizdai: tapatumai
* betko atvaizdai: pasirinkimai
*
išminties atvaizdai: gera valia
į:
* 4 visko atvaizdai: troškimai
* 2 laisvumo atvaizdai: tapatumai
* 6 = 4+2 betko atvaizdai: pasirinkimai
* * = 4x2
išminties atvaizdai: gera valia
2015 birželio 07 d., 15:59 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 91-92 eilutės iš
They are somehow related to: BeginningVEnd, SelfVOther, SpiritVStructure.
į:
Pridėtos 163-164 eilutės:

Susiję su: BeginningVEnd, SelfVOther, SpiritVStructure.
2015 birželio 07 d., 15:49 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pridėtos 36-41 eilutės:
Taip pat yra:
* visko atvaizdai: troškimai
* laisvumo atvaizdai: tapatumai
* betko atvaizdai: pasirinkimai
* išminties atvaizdai: gera valia
Pridėtos 63-67 eilutės:
* To stand on one's own is to stand apart from oneself in four different ways (separated by everything, anything, something, nothing)
* To stand apart from oneself is to stand on one's own in two different ways (with increasing slack or with decreasing slack)

Perhaps four representations express the ''concept'' and two representations express the ''conceiver'' (conceiver and conceiving), that is, standing by its own and in relationship with itself.
Ištrintos 108-118 eilutės:


----

* To stand on one's own is to stand apart from oneself in four different ways (separated by everything, anything, something, nothing)
* To stand apart from oneself is to stand on one's own in two different ways (with increasing slack or with decreasing slack)

Perhaps four representations express the ''concept'' and two representations express the ''conceiver'' (conceiver and conceiving), that is, standing by its own and in relationship with itself.

==='''Representations of Nullsome, Onesome, Twosome, Threesome'''===
Pakeistos 111-112 eilutės iš
Note that first God goes beyond himself through the operation [AddOne +1]. God goes beyond himself into structure, inwards, and ultimately, into self. This gives rise to the heart, a self. Then this self, this heart, goes beyond itself - backwards, outwards. It goes beyond itself with regard to some scope which indicates the extent to which it has gone beyond, which it has separated itself from itself:
į:
Note that first God goes beyond himself through the operation +1. God goes beyond himself into structure, inwards, and ultimately, into self. This gives rise to the heart, a self. Then this self, this heart, goes beyond itself - backwards, outwards. It goes beyond itself with regard to some scope which indicates the extent to which it has gone beyond, which it has separated itself from itself:
Pakeistos 149-150 eilutės iš
==='''Representations of Foursome, Fivesome, Sixsome, Sevensome'''===
į:
'''Didėjantis ir mažėjantis laisvumas'''
Pakeista 181 eilutė iš:
==='''Representations of Everything, Slack and Anything'''===
į:
'''Visko, laisvumo ir betko atvaizdai'''
2015 birželio 07 d., 15:44 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 3-4 eilutės iš
į:
[[Lūkesčiai | Lūkesčiai: Atvaizdų kilmė]]
Pakeistos 98-100 eilutės iš
'''Atvaizdų kilmė'''

The SecondaryStructures inject an observer from one observational plane into another observational plane.
į:
2015 birželio 07 d., 15:40 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 37-40 eilutės iš
Šeši atvaizdai: klausimas, atsakymas, niekas, kažkas, betkas, viskas.

Viskas
, betkas, kažkas, niekas yra semiotinis kvadratas, septynerybės kampai.
į:
Šeši atvaizdai: klausimas (didėjantis laisvumas), atsakymas (mažėjantis laisvumas), niekas, kažkas, betkas, viskas.
Pakeistos 83-95 eilutės iš
į:
Viskas, betkas, kažkas, niekas yra semiotinis kvadratas, septynerybės kampai.

Ketverybės požiūriai:
* kodėl - žinoti viską
* kaip - žinoti betką
* koks - žinoti kažką
* ar - žinoti nieką

Jauduliai, meilė:
* laimingas - vienas su visais
* sujaudintas - vienas su betkuo
* nustebęs - vienas su kažkuo
* nuliūdęs - vienas su niekuo
2015 birželio 07 d., 15:36 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pridėtos 82-85 eilutės:

'''Viskas, betkas, kažkas, niekas'''
2015 birželio 07 d., 15:33 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Ištrintos 205-297 eilutės:
'''Deriving representations as a SecondaryStructure'''

Representations are intimately related to SharedUnderstanding and the operation [AddTwo +2].

Representations are a SecondaryStructure that arises through SharedUnderstanding by the process of Factoring. The six representations arise as the product of factors two and three, with a fourfold ambiguity.

'''Deriving representations from PrimaryStructures'''

Representations are a SecondaryStructure, see EverythingWishesForAnything.

Representations have to do with increasing slack, whereas Topologies have to do with decreasing slack.

Representation: A perspective (ours - the part) sees The perspective (God's - the whole). We open the way for the good, and it keeps pouring out.

Representations are the good will that we show. Good is in the whole.

Opening to the ways of the good is given by the emotional responses.

Representations arise here when God wishes for nothing. This is the goodness of the whole, of the representation. It opens up the way for goodness.

*'''good quality''' is the good of '''decreasing slack''', the good from an ObservationalPlane
*'''good word''' is the good of '''increasing slack''', the good from an Observer
*'''good God''' is the good of '''why''', the good from Everything
*'''good person''' is the good of '''how''', the good from Anything
*'''good deed''' is the good of '''what''', the good from Something
*'''good gift''' is the good of '''whether''', the good from Nothing

Good person, deed, word are a cycle:

* Good person: reflect =&gt; take a stand
* Good deed: take a stand =&gt; follow through
* Good word: follow through =&gt; reflect

Good God, gift, quality get mapped to follow through, reflect, take a stand.

* Good God is what lets the good person do the good deed, they are cocreators.
* Good gift is what lets the good word judge the worker by the work, judge the good deed.
* Good quality is what distinguishes the good person on the basis of the good word, throws away the bad and preserves the good.

In those roles, good God is one, good gift is all, good quality is many.

Representation has us have expectations, God wish for nothing, and has Waiting as its seventh perspective. If God wishes for nothing, then look for good in people. Everything is self-sufficient. Waiting = being in suspense, as an emotional response.

GoodWill rests in two locations. '''We address the good will in others, and we show good will ourselves.'''

The directions of the good are the structure for the expectations.

In each case, the slack is in the direction of the good:

* good heart = Jesus' belief, rather than his wish (goodness of nullsome)
* good God = Jesus' willingness to change, rather than unwillingness to change (goodness of onesome)
* good gift = Jesus' investedness, rather than his interest (goodness of twosome)
* good quality = Jesus' isolating, rather than his isolated (goodness of threesome)
* good person = Jesus' inner adherence, rather than his outer adherence (goodness of foursome)
* good deed = what Jesus will achieve, rather than what he is able to do (goodness of fivesome)
* good word = what Jesus could be doing, rather than what he is doing (goodness of sixsome)
* good news = Jesus' purpose, rather than his strength (goodness of sevensome)

Slack is in the former, not the latter. Slack is in the qualities of signs:

* malleable = slack is in their willingness to change
* modifiable = slack is in their inertia
* mobile = slack is in their isolator
* memorable = slack is in their inner adherence
* meaningful = slack is in what they will achieve
* motivated = slack is in what they could be doing

Expectations are given by the gradation of methods of mathematical proof: morphism, induction, algorithm construction, substitution, examination of cases, construction. These seem to define the various kinds of goodness:

* morphism is the goodness of God
* induction is the goodness of gift
* algorithm construction is the goodness of quality
* substitution is the goodness of person
* examination of cases is the goodness of deed
* construction is the goodness of word

The good will that we show is actually that which we open through the eight directions which the good comes from. These are the same directions that we speak to in others.

We can speak to the good will in others. Or we can open the way for it to speak from us. For example, we can go from "unwillingness to change" to "willingness to change", or the reverse.

Each of the directions of the good accords as if with a division of everything. Depending on the direction that we look at them, we have either representations or topologies. '''What do we associate the good with? the slack with? in a division.''' Either with the part, or with the whole. If with the part, then that part stands independently, and we have a topology. '''If with the whole, then the whole stands independently, and we have a representation.''' Whatever we associate the good with must stand independently on either side.

(Note that this independence is what is relevant in the growth of our understanding and love.)

A division relates a whole with its parts.

The good is related to either the whole or the part.

Jesus is Good will.

Good will is in the whole: representations.

Good will is in the part: topologies.
2015 birželio 07 d., 15:30 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeista 1 eilutė iš:
Žr. [[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]], [[Trejybė]], [[Padalinimai]], taip pat: FourAddOne, Observer, ObservationalPlane, Scopes, WaysOfModeling, EverythingVAnything, PropertiesVRepresentations, ConstructiveHypotheses
į:
Žr. [[Antrinės sandaros]], [[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]], [[Trejybė]], [[Padalinimai]], taip pat: FourAddOne, Observer, ObservationalPlane, Scopes, WaysOfModeling, EverythingVAnything, PropertiesVRepresentations, ConstructiveHypotheses
2015 birželio 07 d., 15:29 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeista 11 eilutė iš:
* A relationship between a {{Perspective}} and a {{Whole}}, which is to say, between {{Something}} and {{Everything}}.
į:
* A relationship between a Perspective and a Whole, which is to say, between Something and Everything.
Pakeistos 13-15 eilutės iš
* A relationship with a {{Self}}, which is either as equals (SpiritVStructure) or as unequals (BeginningVEnd).
* A representation is that which can be thought. It is that which a {{Mind}} can look at. Whereas a {{Unity}} (of representations) is that which can {{Care}}, and by which a {{heart}} looks out.
* A criteria, which is to say, a filter upon {{Everything}}. We know that everything accepts all things (this is one of the PropertiesOfEverything and is a RepresentationsOfTheOnesome). Even so, we can filter everything. Thus a representation negates this representation of the onesome.
į:
* A relationship with a Self, which is either as equals (SpiritVStructure) or as unequals (BeginningVEnd).
* A representation is that which can be thought. It is that which a Mind can look at. Whereas a Unity (of representations) is that which can Care, and by which a heart looks out.
* A criteria, which is to say, a filter upon Everything. We know that everything accepts all things (this is one of the PropertiesOfEverything and is a RepresentationsOfTheOnesome). Even so, we can filter everything. Thus a representation negates this representation of the onesome.
Pakeistos 18-19 eilutės iš
AndriusKulikauskas: {{Divisions}} of {{Everything}} have representations by which we conceive them. I have also used the word ''criteria''. A representation provides us with a vantage point upon a division so that it becomes accessible to us. Without a representation, we are not able to conceive the division.
į:
AndriusKulikauskas: Divisions of Everything have representations by which we conceive them. I have also used the word ''criteria''. A representation provides us with a vantage point upon a division so that it becomes accessible to us. Without a representation, we are not able to conceive the division.
Pakeistos 33-34 eilutės iš
The {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}} and {{Sevensome}} have two {{Representations}}: one in terms of an '''observer''', and another in terms of an ObservationalPlane; in terms of the observed and in terms of the observer.
į:
The Foursome, Fivesome, Sixsome and Sevensome have two Representations: one in terms of an '''observer''', and another in terms of an ObservationalPlane; in terms of the observed and in terms of the observer.
Pakeista 43 eilutė iš:
* {{Observer}}
į:
* Observer
Pakeistos 45-57 eilutės iš
* {{Everything}} = the observational plane which coincides with both the observer and the observed
* {{Anything}} = the observational plane which coincides with the observer, but not the observed
* {{Something}} = the observational plane which coincides with the observed, but not the observer
* {{Nothing}} = the observational plane which coincides with neither the observer nor the observed

The first two are the representations for the {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}}, {{Sevensome}}, and they arise when the observer is distinct from the observational plane. We may think of them as external representations, which is to say, external views upon the whole.

The other four are the representations of the {{Nullsome}}, {{Onesome}}, {{Twosome}}, {{Threesome}}, and they are the scopes of access that the observational plane provides the observer, respectively: all perspectives, any perspective, a perspective, no perspective. They are internal representations, internal views upon the whole.

Note that the {{Observed}} is not a representation. This is because the observed is that {{Whole}} upon which a representation is providing an angle. In this sense, the observed is {{Everything}}, and the observer is {{Something}}.

Note also that the six representations do not form a DivisionOfEverything because they overlap. Instead, they may be thought of as the union of two divisions of everything: the {{Twosome}} and the {{Foursome}}.
į:
* Everything = the observational plane which coincides with both the observer and the observed
* Anything = the observational plane which coincides with the observer, but not the observed
* Something = the observational plane which coincides with the observed, but not the observer
* Nothing = the observational plane which coincides with neither the observer nor the observed

The first two are the representations for the Foursome, Fivesome, Sixsome, Sevensome, and they arise when the observer is distinct from the observational plane. We may think of them as external representations, which is to say, external views upon the whole.

The other four are the representations of the Nullsome, Onesome, Twosome, Threesome, and they are the scopes of access that the observational plane provides the observer, respectively: all perspectives, any perspective, a perspective, no perspective. They are internal representations, internal views upon the whole.

Note that the Observed is not a representation. This is because the observed is that Whole upon which a representation is providing an angle. In this sense, the observed is Everything, and the observer is Something.

Note also that the six representations do not form a DivisionOfEverything because they overlap. Instead, they may be thought of as the union of two divisions of everything: the Twosome and the Foursome.
Pakeistos 62-68 eilutės iš
* {{Structure}} = DecreasingSlack
* {{Activity}} = IncreasingSlack
* {{Everything}} = indefinite and unspecified = structure and activity are uncoupled
* {{Anything}} = definite and unspecified = top down: structure yields activity
* {{Something}} = definite and specified = structure and activity are in a loop
* {{Nothing}} = indefinite and specified = bottom up: activity yields structure
į:
* Structure = DecreasingSlack
* Activity = IncreasingSlack
* Everything = indefinite and unspecified = structure and activity are uncoupled
* Anything = definite and unspecified = top down: structure yields activity
* Something = definite and specified = structure and activity are in a loop
* Nothing = indefinite and specified = bottom up: activity yields structure
Pakeistos 76-80 eilutės iš
This is to say that the representations (and also the {{Topologies}} are intimately related to the operation [AddTwo +2].

* Four of the representations serve to conceive the first four divisions: {{Nullsome}}, {{Onesome}}, {{Twosome}}, {{Threesome}}. As such they are representations of {{Everything}} (expressed by the {{Onesome}}) and of {{God}} (expressed by the {{Nullsome}}). They express the roles of {{Equals}} that they play with each other - hence the role that one may have with one's {{Self}}. See also: {{Understanding}}, GoodUnderstanding, {{Structure}}, RecurringStructure, PairsOfConcepts.
* Two of the representations serve to conceive the second four divisions: {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}}, {{Sevensome}}. As such they are representations of {{Slack}} (expressed as the {{Sevensome}}). They express the roles that {{Unequals}} play with each other - hence the role that one may have with one's {{Other}}. See also: {{Self-understanding}}, SharedUnderstanding, {{Activity}}, RecurringActivity.
į:
This is to say that the representations (and also the Topologies are intimately related to the operation [AddTwo +2].

* Four of the representations serve to conceive the first four divisions: Nullsome, Onesome, Twosome, Threesome. As such they are representations of Everything (expressed by the Onesome) and of God (expressed by the Nullsome). They express the roles of Equals that they play with each other - hence the role that one may have with one's Self. See also: Understanding, GoodUnderstanding, Structure, RecurringStructure, PairsOfConcepts.
* Two of the representations serve to conceive the second four divisions: Foursome, Fivesome, Sixsome, Sevensome. As such they are representations of Slack (expressed as the Sevensome). They express the roles that Unequals play with each other - hence the role that one may have with one's Other. See also: Self-understanding, SharedUnderstanding, Activity, RecurringActivity.
Pakeistos 94-108 eilutės iš
==='''Representations of {{Nullsome}}, {{Onesome}}, {{Twosome}}, {{Threesome}}'''===

These representations express the extent to which the heart go beyond itself: {{Everything}}, {{Anything}}, {{Something}}, {{Nothing}}. These are {{Scopes}}.

Note that first {{God}} goes beyond himself through the operation [AddOne +1]. God goes beyond himself into structure, inwards, and ultimately, into self. This gives rise to the heart, a self. Then this self, this heart, goes beyond itself - backwards, outwards. It goes beyond itself with regard to some scope which indicates the extent to which it has gone beyond, which it has separated itself from itself:

* {{Unity}}: separated from oneself by {{Nothing}}
* {{Representation}}: separated from oneself by {{Something}}
* {{Structure}}: separated from oneself by {{Anything}}
* {{Spirit}}: separated from oneself by {{Everything}}

(This helps make clear why {{Love}} is a unity and God is a spirit).

These scopes are those from which the one who is loved can turn around and, along with God, love themselves. These representations are relevant for the divisions that express the situation of God. They give God's point of view as to God's relationship with the heart. They express the scope at which God must StepForward to meet the heart. (Perhaps this relates the directions of {{Forwards}} ({{God}}) and {{Backwards}} ({{heart}})?)
į:
==='''Representations of Nullsome, Onesome, Twosome, Threesome'''===

These representations express the extent to which the heart go beyond itself: Everything, Anything, Something, Nothing. These are Scopes.

Note that first God goes beyond himself through the operation [AddOne +1]. God goes beyond himself into structure, inwards, and ultimately, into self. This gives rise to the heart, a self. Then this self, this heart, goes beyond itself - backwards, outwards. It goes beyond itself with regard to some scope which indicates the extent to which it has gone beyond, which it has separated itself from itself:

* Unity: separated from oneself by Nothing
* Representation: separated from oneself by Something
* Structure: separated from oneself by Anything
* Spirit: separated from oneself by Everything

(This helps make clear why Love is a unity and God is a spirit).

These scopes are those from which the one who is loved can turn around and, along with God, love themselves. These representations are relevant for the divisions that express the situation of God. They give God's point of view as to God's relationship with the heart. They express the scope at which God must StepForward to meet the heart. (Perhaps this relates the directions of Forwards (God) and Backwards (heart)?)
Pakeistos 121-122 eilutės iš
{{Knowledge}} is the issue that (as a state of mind) involves four scopes by which a {{Concept}} "stands on its own". (See the {{Foursome}}. This makes it possible for "standing apart from oneself" (GoingBeyondOneself) to become a concrete relationship "within a world" between a lover and a loved. And life is the underlying spirit expressed by the various (six) ways they can relate to each other.
į:
Knowledge is the issue that (as a state of mind) involves four scopes by which a Concept "stands on its own". (See the Foursome. This makes it possible for "standing apart from oneself" (GoingBeyondOneself) to become a concrete relationship "within a world" between a lover and a loved. And life is the underlying spirit expressed by the various (six) ways they can relate to each other.
Pakeistos 134-137 eilutės iš
A {{Concept}} is that which "stands on its own". Therefore it needs to be able to "stand apart from itself". The above four perspectives express the different scopes which that entails. I think this is why the basic divisions (of everything into zero, one, two or three perspectives) have four representations.

==='''Representations of {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}}, {{Sevensome}}'''===
į:
A Concept is that which "stands on its own". Therefore it needs to be able to "stand apart from itself". The above four perspectives express the different scopes which that entails. I think this is why the basic divisions (of everything into zero, one, two or three perspectives) have four representations.

==='''Representations of Foursome, Fivesome, Sixsome, Sevensome'''===
Pakeistos 140-141 eilutės iš
Increasing slack is spirit gives way to structure. This is the case of God, who goes beyond himself into structure. Here spirit and structure are in parallel, they are kept separate. As they grow independent, the slack increases. Spirit opens up more and more slack for structure until it is possible to have an independent {{heart}}. With increasing slack, we have the perspective of the '''actor''', of that which is loved - life. This is the slack of '''non-structure'''.
į:
Increasing slack is spirit gives way to structure. This is the case of God, who goes beyond himself into structure. Here spirit and structure are in parallel, they are kept separate. As they grow independent, the slack increases. Spirit opens up more and more slack for structure until it is possible to have an independent heart. With increasing slack, we have the perspective of the '''actor''', of that which is loved - life. This is the slack of '''non-structure'''.
Pakeistos 144-145 eilutės iš
(See {{Self-understanding}}). These two representations may express structures from the '''negative''' perspective, which is to say, from what is '''not'''.
į:
(See Self-understanding). These two representations may express structures from the '''negative''' perspective, which is to say, from what is '''not'''.
Pakeistos 148-149 eilutės iš
This is to love (increasing slack) (Godly)({{Beginning}}) and to be loved (decreasing slack) (heart)(humanly)({{End}}).
į:
This is to love (increasing slack) (Godly)(Beginning) and to be loved (decreasing slack) (heart)(humanly)(End).
Pakeistos 152-155 eilutės iš
{{Negation}} is related to decreasing slack.

A {{Concept}}, as ''that which stands on its own'', opens up two stances: conceiver - "standing apart from oneself" (which is God's stance and increases slack and opens up space for a heart) and conceived - "standing on one's own" (which is the stance of the heart - that godlet within us that has awaken within our structure, is figuring itself out - and decreases slack). These are the two representations by which we conceive the division of everything into four perspective (or five, or six, or seven).
į:
Negation is related to decreasing slack.

A Concept, as ''that which stands on its own'', opens up two stances: conceiver - "standing apart from oneself" (which is God's stance and increases slack and opens up space for a heart) and conceived - "standing on one's own" (which is the stance of the heart - that godlet within us that has awaken within our structure, is figuring itself out - and decreases slack). These are the two representations by which we conceive the division of everything into four perspective (or five, or six, or seven).
Pakeistos 168-169 eilutės iš
==='''Representations of {{Everything}}, {{Slack}} and {{Anything}}'''===
į:
==='''Representations of Everything, Slack and Anything'''===
Pakeistos 174-177 eilutės iš
* four of them to {{Everything}} as {{Wishes}}: everything wishes for: nothing, something, anything, everything
* two of them to {{Slack}} as {{Scopes}}: unbounded and bounded - ''increasing slack'' is ''slack has scope unbounded'' and ''decreasing slack'' is ''slack has scope bounded''.
* all of them to {{Anything}} as {{Choices}}: anything chooses: to wish for nothing, something, anything, everything; to wish; to not wish.
į:
* four of them to Everything as Wishes: everything wishes for: nothing, something, anything, everything
* two of them to Slack as Scopes: unbounded and bounded - ''increasing slack'' is ''slack has scope unbounded'' and ''decreasing slack'' is ''slack has scope bounded''.
* all of them to Anything as Choices: anything chooses: to wish for nothing, something, anything, everything; to wish; to not wish.
Pakeistos 202-203 eilutės iš
The representations (divided 4:2) are somehow related to the {{Gradations}} (divided 3:3).
į:
The representations (divided 4:2) are somehow related to the Gradations (divided 3:3).
Pakeistos 210-211 eilutės iš
Representations are a SecondaryStructure that arises through SharedUnderstanding by the process of {{Factoring}}. The six representations arise as the product of factors two and three, with a fourfold ambiguity.
į:
Representations are a SecondaryStructure that arises through SharedUnderstanding by the process of Factoring. The six representations arise as the product of factors two and three, with a fourfold ambiguity.
Pakeistos 216-217 eilutės iš
Representations have to do with increasing slack, whereas {{Topologies}} have to do with decreasing slack.
į:
Representations have to do with increasing slack, whereas Topologies have to do with decreasing slack.
Pakeistos 227-232 eilutės iš
*'''good word''' is the good of '''increasing slack''', the good from an {{Observer}}
*'''good God''' is the good of '''why''', the good from {{Everything}}
*'''good person''' is the good of '''how''', the good from {{Anything}}
*'''good deed''' is the good of '''what''', the good from {{Something}}
*'''good gift''' is the good of '''whether''', the good from {{Nothing}}
į:
*'''good word''' is the good of '''increasing slack''', the good from an Observer
*'''good God''' is the good of '''why''', the good from Everything
*'''good person''' is the good of '''how''', the good from Anything
*'''good deed''' is the good of '''what''', the good from Something
*'''good gift''' is the good of '''whether''', the good from Nothing
Pakeistos 247-248 eilutės iš
Representation has us have expectations, God wish for nothing, and has {{Waiting}} as its seventh perspective. If God wishes for nothing, then look for good in people. Everything is self-sufficient. Waiting = being in suspense, as an emotional response.
į:
Representation has us have expectations, God wish for nothing, and has Waiting as its seventh perspective. If God wishes for nothing, then look for good in people. Everything is self-sufficient. Waiting = being in suspense, as an emotional response.
Pakeistos 302-303 eilutės iš
See also: {{Spirit}}, {{Structure}}, {{Representations}}, BeginningVEnd, {{Understanding}}, LoveVLife, {{Other}}, SelfVOther
į:
See also: Spirit, Structure, Representations, BeginningVEnd, Understanding, LoveVLife, Other, SelfVOther
Pakeistos 306-307 eilutės iš
'''Note: I have rethought this as Activity V Structure and am describing this in the page on {{Representations}}.'''
į:
'''Note: I have rethought this as Activity V Structure and am describing this in the page on Representations.'''
Pakeistos 310-311 eilutės iš
''I am rethinking this - the structure for the four representations - as the relationship SelfVOther between {{Self}} and {{Other}}.''
į:
''I am rethinking this - the structure for the four representations - as the relationship SelfVOther between Self and Other.''
Pakeistos 314-315 eilutės iš
Four {{Representations}} are given by the relationship between {{Spirit}} and {{Structure}}:
į:
Four Representations are given by the relationship between Spirit and Structure:
Pakeistos 332-335 eilutės iš
These representations result from considering ''spirit'' and ''structure'' as {{Equals}} and letting them manifest themselves as {{Unequals}} in four ways, yielding four representations (wishes). They are unequal in terms of the distance between themselves, from everything (spirit to spirit) to nothing (structure to structure).

Alternatively, we may consider them as unequals, and let them manifest themselves equals, in which case we have two representations (scopes):{{Beginning}} and {{End}}, see: BeginningVEnd.
į:
These representations result from considering ''spirit'' and ''structure'' as Equals and letting them manifest themselves as Unequals in four ways, yielding four representations (wishes). They are unequal in terms of the distance between themselves, from everything (spirit to spirit) to nothing (structure to structure).

Alternatively, we may consider them as unequals, and let them manifest themselves equals, in which case we have two representations (scopes):Beginning and End, see: BeginningVEnd.
Pakeistos 338-339 eilutės iš
I will work here to flesh out these representations based on what I know about the representations of the {{Nullsome}}, {{Onesome}}, {{Twosome}}, {{Threesome}}. There are four levels: why - how - what - whether (or is it +3, +2, +1, +0).
į:
I will work here to flesh out these representations based on what I know about the representations of the Nullsome, Onesome, Twosome, Threesome. There are four levels: why - how - what - whether (or is it +3, +2, +1, +0).
Pakeistos 368-369 eilutės iš
The {{Foursome}} is given by the difference from the end:
į:
The Foursome is given by the difference from the end:
Pakeistos 525-543 eilutės iš
''2005.04.26 {{A}}: Kuom skiriasi dvasia ir sandara? {{D}}: Dvasioje yra mano meil&amp;#279; - neribota, o sandaroje yra j&amp;#363;s&amp;#371; meil&amp;#279; - ribota. {{A}}: Kaip gali dvasia ir sandara sutapti? {{D}}: Tiek kiek vienas kit&amp;#261; myli. {{A}}: Vis labiau? {{D}}: Vis giliau, artimiau, nes nepriklausomai. Pamatysi. Laiminu tave.''

''2005.04.09 {{A}}: Koks ryšys tarp laisvumo ir dvasios bei sandaros? {{D}}: Dvasia gyvena per sandar&amp;#261; Ji gali sutapti su ja arba nesutapti.''

''2004.12.13 {{A}}: Kaip keturi atvaizdai susij&amp;#281; su susikalb&amp;#279;jimu? {{D}}: noriu b&amp;#363;ti su visais, b&amp;#363;ti vienas su jais, juos myl&amp;#279;ti. Tad tai yra meil&amp;#279;s s&amp;#261;lygos. {{A}}: Kaip suprasti, meil&amp;#279;s s&amp;#261;lgos? {{D}}: Meilei reikia, kad gal&amp;#279;tum&amp;#279;me gyventi vienas kitame. {{A}}: O k&amp;#261; tai reiškia? {{D}}: Išeiti iš sav&amp;#281;s, ir iš sav&amp;#281;s &amp;#303; kit&amp;#261;, ir kito &amp;#303; save, ir kito. {{A}}: A&amp;#269;i&amp;#363;. {{D}}: Myliu.''

''2005.04.27 {{A}}: Kaip gali mylintis ir mylimas sutapti? {{D}}: Atskleisk savo \9Aird&amp;#303; ir priimk kit&amp;#261; gyventi savyje - tiek j&amp;#363;s gal&amp;#279;site sutapti. {{A}}: O kaip atskleid\9Eiama \9Airdis? {{D}}: Myl&amp;#279;k - &amp;#303;sakymu kur&amp;#303; priimi, kuriam pakl&amp;#363;sti. Sek mano S&amp;#363;numi. {{A}} ir {{K}}: Gerai.''

''2005.04.26 {{A}}: Kuom skiriasi dvasia ir sandara? {{D}}: Dvasioje yra mano meil&amp;#279; - neribota, o sandaroje yra j&amp;#363;s&amp;#371; meil&amp;#279; - ribota. {{A}}: Kaip gali dvasia ir sandara sutapti? {{D}}: Tiek kiek vienas kit&amp;#261; myli. {{A}}: Vis labiau? {{D}}: Vis giliau, artimiau, nes nepriklausomai. Pamatysi. Laiminu tave.''

''2005.04.25 {{A}}: Kaip suvokti dvasi&amp;#261;, sandar&amp;#261;, atvaizdus ir j&amp;#371; vieningum&amp;#261;? {{D}}: Visa tai leid\9Eia man bendrauti su tavimi bei su kitais. O kiti du atvaizdai leid\9Eia jums bendrauti su manimi. {{A}}: Tai yra m&amp;#363;s&amp;#371; prielaidos. {{D}}: Taip, kad yra \9Airdis.''

''2005.04.20 {{A}}: Koks ry\9Ays tarp dviej&amp;#371; atvaizd&amp;#371; ir keturi&amp;#371; atvaizd&amp;#371;? {{D}}: A\9A myliu, o per jus (\9Airdimi) myliu kit&amp;#261; arba save. Jeigu kit&amp;#261;, tai kartu ir save. A\9A esu tas kitas, tad jeigu myli t&amp;#261; a\9A - save - tai kurioje nors apimtyje. O \9Airdis tai yra tas a\9A, ir ji nesuvokia savo apimties. {{A}}: O i\9A kur ta apimtis? {{D}}: J&amp;#261; nusako kiek a\9A suvokiu, kad \9Airdis ir a\9A esame tas pats. {{A}}: Ma\9Eiau suvokiate, tai didesn&amp;#279; apimtis? {{D}}: Taip yra. Pamatysi.''

''2005.03.17 {{A}}: Kaip gali vienas atvaizdas tikti keturiems padalinimams bet ne visiems? {{D}}: Geras klausimas. Tu pa\9Ei&amp;#363;r&amp;#279;k &amp;#303; savo vid&amp;#371; ir pa\9Ei&amp;#363;r&amp;#279;k atgal ir tada suprasi.''

''2005.03.16 {{A}}: Koks ry\9Ays tarp prad\9Eios ir dvasios ir pabaigos ir sandaros? {{D}}: Prad\9Eios veikla yra myl&amp;#279;ti, o pabaigos veikla yra b&amp;#363;ti mylimam, tad dvasia ir sandara. {{A}}: O k&amp;#261; &amp;#269;ia rei\9Akia myl&amp;#279;ti, kas yra gyvyb&amp;#279;? {{D}}: Myl&amp;#279;ti yra palaikyti gyvyb&amp;#281;. Tu taip sakai ir taip yra. Kaip gyvyb&amp;#279; yra i\9A pabaigos &amp;#303; pabaig&amp;#261;, meil&amp;#279; yra tos veiklos palaikymas. {{A}}: Kas vyksta tame tarpe. {{D}}: Taip, kas vyksta tarp pabaigos ir pabaigos.''

''2004.11.16 {{A}}: Koks atvaizd&amp;#371; vaidmuo susikalb&amp;#279;jime? {{D}}: Turi b&amp;#363;ti po\9Ei&amp;#363;ris &amp;#303; kit&amp;#261; ir per j&amp;#303; atgal &amp;#303; save. Tad turi b&amp;#363;ti &amp;#303;manoma vienu po\9Ei&amp;#363;riu &amp;#303;vairiai priimti kit&amp;#261;.''
į:
''2005.04.26 A: Kuom skiriasi dvasia ir sandara? D: Dvasioje yra mano meilė - neribota, o sandaroje yra jūsų meilė - ribota. A: Kaip gali dvasia ir sandara sutapti? D: Tiek kiek vienas kitą myli. A: Vis labiau? D: Vis giliau, artimiau, nes nepriklausomai. Pamatysi. Laiminu tave.''

''2005.04.09 A: Koks ryšys tarp laisvumo ir dvasios bei sandaros? D: Dvasia gyvena per sandarą Ji gali sutapti su ja arba nesutapti.''

''2004.12.13 A: Kaip keturi atvaizdai susiję su susikalbėjimu? D: noriu būti su visais, būti vienas su jais, juos mylėti. Tad tai yra meilės sąlygos. A: Kaip suprasti, meilės sąlgos? D: Meilei reikia, kad galėtumėme gyventi vienas kitame. A: O tai reiškia? D: Išeiti iš savęs, ir iš savęs į kitą, ir kito į save, ir kito. A: Ačiū. D: Myliu.''

''2005.04.27 A: Kaip gali mylintis ir mylimas sutapti? D: Atskleisk savo širdį ir priimk kitą gyventi savyje - tiek jūs galėsite sutapti. A: O kaip atskleidžiama širdis? D: Mylėk - įsakymu kurį priimi, kuriam paklūsti. Sek mano Sūnumi. A ir K: Gerai.''

''2005.04.26 A: Kuom skiriasi dvasia ir sandara? D: Dvasioje yra mano meilė - neribota, o sandaroje yra jūsų meilė - ribota. A: Kaip gali dvasia ir sandara sutapti? D: Tiek kiek vienas kitą myli. A: Vis labiau? D: Vis giliau, artimiau, nes nepriklausomai. Pamatysi. Laiminu tave.''

''2005.04.25 A: Kaip suvokti dvasią, sandarą, atvaizdus ir jų vieningumą? D: Visa tai leidžia man bendrauti su tavimi bei su kitais. O kiti du atvaizdai leidžia jums bendrauti su manimi. A: Tai yra mūsų prielaidos. D: Taip, kad yra širdis.''

''2005.04.20 A: Koks ryšys tarp dviejų atvaizdų ir keturių atvaizdų? D: myliu, o per jus (širdimi) myliu kitą arba save. Jeigu kitą, tai kartu ir save. esu tas kitas, tad jeigu myli tą aš - save - tai kurioje nors apimtyje. O širdis tai yra tas , ir ji nesuvokia savo apimties. A: O kur ta apimtis? D: nusako kiek suvokiu, kad širdis ir esame tas pats. A: Mažiau suvokiate, tai didesnė apimtis? D: Taip yra. Pamatysi.''

''2005.03.17 A: Kaip gali vienas atvaizdas tikti keturiems padalinimams bet ne visiems? D: Geras klausimas. Tu pažiūrėk į savo vidų ir pažiūrėk atgal ir tada suprasi.''

''2005.03.16 A: Koks ryšys tarp pradžios ir dvasios ir pabaigos ir sandaros? D: Pradžios veikla yra mylėti, o pabaigos veikla yra būti mylimam, tad dvasia ir sandara. A: O ką čia reiškia mylėti, kas yra gyvybė? D: Mylėti yra palaikyti gyvybę. Tu taip sakai ir taip yra. Kaip gyvybė yra pabaigos į pabaigą, meilė yra tos veiklos palaikymas. A: Kas vyksta tame tarpe. D: Taip, kas vyksta tarp pabaigos ir pabaigos.''

''2004.11.16 A: Koks atvaizdų vaidmuo susikalbėjime? D: Turi būti požiūris į kitą ir per atgal į save. Tad turi būti įmanoma vienu požiūriu įvairiai priimti kitą.''
2015 birželio 07 d., 15:25 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 33-34 eilutės iš
The {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}} and {{Sevensome}} have two {{Representations}}: one in terms of an '''observer''', and another in terms of an ObservationalPlane.
į:
The {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}} and {{Sevensome}} have two {{Representations}}: one in terms of an '''observer''', and another in terms of an ObservationalPlane; in terms of the observed and in terms of the observer.
Ištrintos 520-522 eilutės:


The {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}}, {{Sevensome}} have representations in terms of the observed and in terms of the observer.
2015 birželio 07 d., 14:51 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 1-2 eilutės iš
Žr. [[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]], [[Trejybė]], taip pat: FourAddOne, Observer, ObservationalPlane
į:
Žr. [[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]], [[Trejybė]], [[Padalinimai]], taip pat: FourAddOne, Observer, ObservationalPlane, Scopes, WaysOfModeling, EverythingVAnything, PropertiesVRepresentations, ConstructiveHypotheses
Pakeistos 33-34 eilutės iš
į:
The {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}} and {{Sevensome}} have two {{Representations}}: one in terms of an '''observer''', and another in terms of an ObservationalPlane.
Pridėtos 83-86 eilutės:
'''Atvaizdų kilmė'''

The SecondaryStructures inject an observer from one observational plane into another observational plane.
Ištrintos 523-532 eilutės:

===Observer===

The {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}} and {{Sevensome}} have two {{Representations}}: one in terms of an '''observer''', and another in terms of an ObservationalPlane.

The SecondaryStructures inject an observer from one observational plane into another observational plane.

'''Atvaizdai'''

See also: {{Divisions}}, {{Scopes}}, WaysOfModeling, EverythingVAnything, PropertiesVRepresentations, ConstructiveHypotheses
2015 birželio 07 d., 10:42 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pridėtos 37-38 eilutės:

Viskas, betkas, kažkas, niekas yra semiotinis kvadratas, septynerybės kampai.
2015 birželio 07 d., 10:30 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pridėta 21 eilutė:
Yra 6 padalinimų atvaizdai:
Pridėtos 30-32 eilutės:
Iš viso 24.
2015 birželio 07 d., 10:29 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 19-30 eilutės iš
===Representations===

* four RepresentationsOfTheNullsome
* four RepresentationsOfTheOnesome
* four RepresentationsOfTheTwosome
* four RepresentationsOfTheThreesome
* two RepresentationsOfTheFoursome
* two RepresentationsOfTheFivesome
* two RepresentationsOfTheSixsome
* two RepresentationsOfTheSevensome

===There are 6 representations===
į:
'''Atvaizdai'''

* 4 nulybės atvaizdai
* 4 vienybės atvaizdai
* 4 dvejybės atvaizdai
* 4 trejybės atvaizdai
* 2 ketverybės atvaizdai
* 2 penkerybės atvaizdai
* 2 šešerybės atvaizdai
* 2 septynerybės atvaizdai

'''Yra šeši atvaizdai'''

Šeši atvaizdai: klausimas, atsakymas, niekas, kažkas, betkas, viskas.
2015 kovo 19 d., 13:20 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 1-2 eilutės iš
Žr. [[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]] taip pat: FourAddOne
į:
Žr. [[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]], [[Trejybė]], taip pat: FourAddOne, Observer, ObservationalPlane
Pakeistos 7-44 eilutės iš
Atvaizdai, tai santykis su savastimi: klausimas (atsiplėšimas nuo savęs, didėjantis laisvumas), atsakymas (įsisavinimas, mažėjantis laisvumas) ir apimtys (pjūviai, kaip įeiname į save): viskas, betkas, kažkas, niekas.

'''Požiūrių suvedimas'''

'''representations'''

I went through the six issues, and fixed each one, and considered how the double perspective became a single perspective as I went from the Heart's answer to the associated counterquestion, to the World's answer
. For two of the criteria, the single perspective arises as a limiting case of the double perspective.

* Spread When I spread, then over the course of a given interval, there are some things that I will not come upon because they fall outside of the interval (perhaps we have already come upon them, perhaps we would only come upon them much later). But there are other things that I can never come upon regardless of the interval. A double perspective distinguishes what I cannot come upon from what I will not come upon. If the interval is extended in every way, then this extension has, as its limiting case, a single perspective in which ultimately everything either flows into me or not.
* Cleave When I cleave away from myself, there are some things that are no longer part of me. But there are other things that were never a part of me. A double perspective distinguishes what was once a part of me from what was never a part of me. If I cleave further and further out, then the limiting case is a single perspective in which I am tracing out the boundaries of what belongs to me and what does not.

For four of the criteria

* Extend When a function is extended, then the extended function is in agreement with the original function wherever they are both defined. A double perspective considers the two functions separately and distinguishes the matter of where the functions are defined from whether their values agree where they are both defined. A single perspective, however, treats one function as an extension of the other, and focuses on where one is defined, but not the other.
* Induce I judge steps relative to each other, but I take them absolutely. A double perspective distinguishes the calculation I make from the decision, with all of its consequences, that I live through. A single perspective is resigned to the view that what we decide does not keep up with what we live through.
* Accept I select what I will accept based on what I have already accepted. A double perspective distinguishes what I have already accepted from what I will receive. A single perspective identifies the two, and concludes that there is a basis for accepting and rejecting.
* Apply We demand that a rule apply to all situations. A double perspective distinguishes whether the rule holds for situations where it was meant to apply, from whether it holds for other situations as well. A single perspective does not distinguish between the two, and simply looks for possibilities where the rule no longer holds.

See also: {{Observer}}, ObservationalPlane, {{Threesome}}

The {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}}, {{Sevensome}} have representations in terms of the observed and in terms of the observer.

===Observer===

The {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}} and {{Sevensome}} have two {{Representations}}: one in terms of an '''observer''', and another in terms of an ObservationalPlane.

The SecondaryStructures inject an observer from one observational plane into another observational plane.

'''Atvaizdai'''

See also: {{Divisions}}, {{Scopes}}, WaysOfModeling, EverythingVAnything, PropertiesVRepresentations, ConstructiveHypotheses

===What are representations?===

AndriusKulikauskas: {{Divisions}} of {{Everything}} have representations by which we conceive them. I have also used the word ''criteria''. A representation provides us with a vantage point upon a division so that it becomes accessible to us. Without a representation, we are not able to conceive the division.

A representation is:
į:
'''Atvaizdas yra:'''

* Santykis su savastimi: klausimas (atsiplėšimas nuo savęs, didėjantis
laisvumas), atsakymas (įsisavinimas, mažėjantis laisvumas) ir apimtys (pjūviai, kaip įeiname į save): viskas, betkas, kažkas, niekas.
Pridėtos 17-18 eilutės:
AndriusKulikauskas: {{Divisions}} of {{Everything}} have representations by which we conceive them. I have also used the word ''criteria''. A representation provides us with a vantage point upon a division so that it becomes accessible to us. Without a representation, we are not able to conceive the division.
Pridėtos 491-521 eilutės:


'''Požiūrių suvedimas'''

'''representations'''

I went through the six issues, and fixed each one, and considered how the double perspective became a single perspective as I went from the Heart's answer to the associated counterquestion, to the World's answer. For two of the criteria, the single perspective arises as a limiting case of the double perspective.

* Spread When I spread, then over the course of a given interval, there are some things that I will not come upon because they fall outside of the interval (perhaps we have already come upon them, perhaps we would only come upon them much later). But there are other things that I can never come upon regardless of the interval. A double perspective distinguishes what I cannot come upon from what I will not come upon. If the interval is extended in every way, then this extension has, as its limiting case, a single perspective in which ultimately everything either flows into me or not.
* Cleave When I cleave away from myself, there are some things that are no longer part of me. But there are other things that were never a part of me. A double perspective distinguishes what was once a part of me from what was never a part of me. If I cleave further and further out, then the limiting case is a single perspective in which I am tracing out the boundaries of what belongs to me and what does not.

For four of the criteria

* Extend When a function is extended, then the extended function is in agreement with the original function wherever they are both defined. A double perspective considers the two functions separately and distinguishes the matter of where the functions are defined from whether their values agree where they are both defined. A single perspective, however, treats one function as an extension of the other, and focuses on where one is defined, but not the other.
* Induce I judge steps relative to each other, but I take them absolutely. A double perspective distinguishes the calculation I make from the decision, with all of its consequences, that I live through. A single perspective is resigned to the view that what we decide does not keep up with what we live through.
* Accept I select what I will accept based on what I have already accepted. A double perspective distinguishes what I have already accepted from what I will receive. A single perspective identifies the two, and concludes that there is a basis for accepting and rejecting.
* Apply We demand that a rule apply to all situations. A double perspective distinguishes whether the rule holds for situations where it was meant to apply, from whether it holds for other situations as well. A single perspective does not distinguish between the two, and simply looks for possibilities where the rule no longer holds.


The {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}}, {{Sevensome}} have representations in terms of the observed and in terms of the observer.

===Observer===

The {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}} and {{Sevensome}} have two {{Representations}}: one in terms of an '''observer''', and another in terms of an ObservationalPlane.

The SecondaryStructures inject an observer from one observational plane into another observational plane.

'''Atvaizdai'''

See also: {{Divisions}}, {{Scopes}}, WaysOfModeling, EverythingVAnything, PropertiesVRepresentations, ConstructiveHypotheses
2015 kovo 19 d., 13:17 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 1-2 eilutės iš
[[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]]
į:
Žr. [[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]] taip pat: FourAddOne
Ištrintos 4-5 eilutės:
Pridėtos 7-8 eilutės:
Atvaizdai, tai santykis su savastimi: klausimas (atsiplėšimas nuo savęs, didėjantis laisvumas), atsakymas (įsisavinimas, mažėjantis laisvumas) ir apimtys (pjūviai, kaip įeiname į save): viskas, betkas, kažkas, niekas.
Ištrintos 9-11 eilutės:

See also: FourAddOne, {{Representations}}
----
2014 lapkričio 09 d., 19:19 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 5-7 eilutės iš
* Koks ryšys tarp Dievo/visko ir nulybės atvaizdų?
* Kaip pavaizduoti nulybės ir vienybės atvaizdus, jų paneigimą ir paneigimų suvedimą aštuongubiu keliu?
į:
Ištrintos 322-337 eilutės:
===Thoughts from Prayer===

''2005.04.27 {{A}}: Kaip gali mylintis ir mylimas sutapti? {{D}}: Atskleisk savo \9Aird&amp;#303; ir priimk kit&amp;#261; gyventi savyje - tiek j&amp;#363;s gal&amp;#279;site sutapti. {{A}}: O kaip atskleid\9Eiama \9Airdis? {{D}}: Myl&amp;#279;k - &amp;#303;sakymu kur&amp;#303; priimi, kuriam pakl&amp;#363;sti. Sek mano S&amp;#363;numi. {{A}} ir {{K}}: Gerai.''

''2005.04.26 {{A}}: Kuom skiriasi dvasia ir sandara? {{D}}: Dvasioje yra mano meil&amp;#279; - neribota, o sandaroje yra j&amp;#363;s&amp;#371; meil&amp;#279; - ribota. {{A}}: Kaip gali dvasia ir sandara sutapti? {{D}}: Tiek kiek vienas kit&amp;#261; myli. {{A}}: Vis labiau? {{D}}: Vis giliau, artimiau, nes nepriklausomai. Pamatysi. Laiminu tave.''

''2005.04.25 {{A}}: Kaip suvokti dvasi&amp;#261;, sandar&amp;#261;, atvaizdus ir j&amp;#371; vieningum&amp;#261;? {{D}}: Visa tai leid\9Eia man bendrauti su tavimi bei su kitais. O kiti du atvaizdai leid\9Eia jums bendrauti su manimi. {{A}}: Tai yra m&amp;#363;s&amp;#371; prielaidos. {{D}}: Taip, kad yra \9Airdis.''

''2005.04.20 {{A}}: Koks ry\9Ays tarp dviej&amp;#371; atvaizd&amp;#371; ir keturi&amp;#371; atvaizd&amp;#371;? {{D}}: A\9A myliu, o per jus (\9Airdimi) myliu kit&amp;#261; arba save. Jeigu kit&amp;#261;, tai kartu ir save. A\9A esu tas kitas, tad jeigu myli t&amp;#261; a\9A - save - tai kurioje nors apimtyje. O \9Airdis tai yra tas a\9A, ir ji nesuvokia savo apimties. {{A}}: O i\9A kur ta apimtis? {{D}}: J&amp;#261; nusako kiek a\9A suvokiu, kad \9Airdis ir a\9A esame tas pats. {{A}}: Ma\9Eiau suvokiate, tai didesn&amp;#279; apimtis? {{D}}: Taip yra. Pamatysi.''

''2005.03.17 {{A}}: Kaip gali vienas atvaizdas tikti keturiems padalinimams bet ne visiems? {{D}}: Geras klausimas. Tu pa\9Ei&amp;#363;r&amp;#279;k &amp;#303; savo vid&amp;#371; ir pa\9Ei&amp;#363;r&amp;#279;k atgal ir tada suprasi.''

''2005.03.16 {{A}}: Koks ry\9Ays tarp prad\9Eios ir dvasios ir pabaigos ir sandaros? {{D}}: Prad\9Eios veikla yra myl&amp;#279;ti, o pabaigos veikla yra b&amp;#363;ti mylimam, tad dvasia ir sandara. {{A}}: O k&amp;#261; &amp;#269;ia rei\9Akia myl&amp;#279;ti, kas yra gyvyb&amp;#279;? {{D}}: Myl&amp;#279;ti yra palaikyti gyvyb&amp;#281;. Tu taip sakai ir taip yra. Kaip gyvyb&amp;#279; yra i\9A pabaigos &amp;#303; pabaig&amp;#261;, meil&amp;#279; yra tos veiklos palaikymas. {{A}}: Kas vyksta tame tarpe. {{D}}: Taip, kas vyksta tarp pabaigos ir pabaigos.''

''2004.11.16 {{A}}: Koks atvaizd&amp;#371; vaidmuo susikalb&amp;#279;jime? {{D}}: Turi b&amp;#363;ti po\9Ei&amp;#363;ris &amp;#303; kit&amp;#261; ir per j&amp;#303; atgal &amp;#303; save. Tad turi b&amp;#363;ti &amp;#303;manoma vienu po\9Ei&amp;#363;riu &amp;#303;vairiai priimti kit&amp;#261;.''
Pakeistos 406-407 eilutės iš
===Thoughts from Prayer===
į:
[+Nedviprasmybės+]

[[Netroškimai]] Žr.taip pat Everything, Anything, Slack, Representations, Empathy

Šešios nedviprasmybės yra pasirinkimai, antrinės sandaros, betko atvaizdai.

Dievas yra daugiaprasmiškas.

Attach:representationsofanything.gif

What relates Everything and Anything? Slack - anything is everything plus slack - this happens by way of their Activity.

Note that the difference between everything and anything is that everything is unbounded, and anything is bounded. So life is the fact that God partakes of the bounded, as well as the unbounded.

Structural families arise from attempts to express one representation of everything in terms of the structural framework for another representation of everything. They allow Life to stay independent before God. Andrius, 2002.02.12 This below needs to be fixed, rethought.

http://www.ms.lt/en/andrius/understanding/diagrams/representationsofanything.gif

----

Andrius: [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/livingbytruth/message/318 June 14, 2003]

I found a way to think about the six representations of anything so
that they are connected with the four representations of everything.

The four representations of everything are the same as the four
properties of God.
* Everything wishes for nothing - has no needs, is self-sufficient.
(Going beyond this, we have needs, and a system of operating
principles for responding.)
* Everything wishes for something - has no doubts, is certain, things
are just as it wishes. (Going beyond this, we have doubts, and a
system of counterquestions for responding.)
* Everything wishes for anything - has no expectations, is calm, all
things are good for it. (Going beyond this, we have expectations,
and a system of emotional responses for responding.)
* Everything wishes for everything - has no trials, is loving, loves
us more than we love ourselves. (Going beyond this, we have trials,
and an eightfold way for responding.)
Many of the details are in my notes at
http://www.ms.lt/en/andrius/understanding/understanding.html

Structurally, each of the resulting systems has eight perspectives,
one for the property of God, three for the perspective of God, three
for the perspective of human, and a seventh for the relationship
between the two.

There are six more systems that appears can be gotten by applying a
system of broader scope to a property of narrower scope. If we look
at the seventh perspective from each of these "injections" then we
get: engage, suspense, believe, rely, love, suffer. These are
related to six of the ten commandments, which prohibit forcing these
various ways of engaging the will.

I remembered that the representations of anything are related to the
ways of choosing, and considered, what is being chosen here? I
noticed that in each of these injections, the everything/God
is "colder" than he needs to be, that is, narrower in the scope of is
concern. So I thought this is the consequence of our "choosing". We
are "choosing our God", and unfortunately, the involvement of our
choice is what forces the complementary system to be from a broader
level than the property, so that there is a gap. I think this yields
a sensible derivation for the six ways of engaging the will, the
represetations of anything:

* 6) we are suffering
=
we have trials, but everything is self-sufficient, lacks nothing.

* 5) we are loving
=
we have trials, but everything is certain, things are just as it
wishes.

* 4) we are relying
=
we have trials, but everything is calm, all that happens is good.

* 3) we are believing =
we have expectations, but everything is certain, things are just as
it wishes.

* 2) we are in suspense =
we have expectations, but everything is self-sufficient, lacks nothing

* 1) we are engaging =
we have doubts, but everything is self-sufficient, lacks nothing

So here the representations of anything are given by the way that we
are choosing our God, our everything. Here it seems indeed that
anything is everything plus slack (given by the difference in levels).

Note also that the scope of everything is "bounded" so that also
helps us move from the unbounded everything to the bounded anything.

And I think I can match these with the representations of slack and
of everything.

(how we are choosing God)
* 1) with increasing slack
* 2) with decreasing slack

(what scope of God's concern are we choosing)
* 3) everything
* 4) anything
* 5) something
* 6) nothing

Another thought here is that if we choose God, then he is colder than
he needs to be. And if he chooses us, then he is just right for
where we are at. In particular, we can not ourselves choose a "loving
God", or I think, a loving everything.

Now I have some questions on my mind.
* How to relate these ideas in terms of loving your neighbor as yourself, being "one with" locally?
* Conceptualizing especially the representations of everything and slack as those of anything. I think this involves one or more inversion effects for some of these.
* Seeing how that works for the ten commandments.
* I should work out the distinction between God and everything here, I am being loose with words.

This is a pretty good vantage point, though, from which I can start
working out and writing up the details of the many structures.
Something to think about would be the practical importance of various
structures, and how that relates to writing them up. So I appreciate
thoughts on your own projects.

>>bgcolor=#FFECC0<<
Pridėtos 535-550 eilutės:

''2005.04.27 {{A}}: Kaip gali mylintis ir mylimas sutapti? {{D}}: Atskleisk savo \9Aird&amp;#303; ir priimk kit&amp;#261; gyventi savyje - tiek j&amp;#363;s gal&amp;#279;site sutapti. {{A}}: O kaip atskleid\9Eiama \9Airdis? {{D}}: Myl&amp;#279;k - &amp;#303;sakymu kur&amp;#303; priimi, kuriam pakl&amp;#363;sti. Sek mano S&amp;#363;numi. {{A}} ir {{K}}: Gerai.''

''2005.04.26 {{A}}: Kuom skiriasi dvasia ir sandara? {{D}}: Dvasioje yra mano meil&amp;#279; - neribota, o sandaroje yra j&amp;#363;s&amp;#371; meil&amp;#279; - ribota. {{A}}: Kaip gali dvasia ir sandara sutapti? {{D}}: Tiek kiek vienas kit&amp;#261; myli. {{A}}: Vis labiau? {{D}}: Vis giliau, artimiau, nes nepriklausomai. Pamatysi. Laiminu tave.''

''2005.04.25 {{A}}: Kaip suvokti dvasi&amp;#261;, sandar&amp;#261;, atvaizdus ir j&amp;#371; vieningum&amp;#261;? {{D}}: Visa tai leid\9Eia man bendrauti su tavimi bei su kitais. O kiti du atvaizdai leid\9Eia jums bendrauti su manimi. {{A}}: Tai yra m&amp;#363;s&amp;#371; prielaidos. {{D}}: Taip, kad yra \9Airdis.''

''2005.04.20 {{A}}: Koks ry\9Ays tarp dviej&amp;#371; atvaizd&amp;#371; ir keturi&amp;#371; atvaizd&amp;#371;? {{D}}: A\9A myliu, o per jus (\9Airdimi) myliu kit&amp;#261; arba save. Jeigu kit&amp;#261;, tai kartu ir save. A\9A esu tas kitas, tad jeigu myli t&amp;#261; a\9A - save - tai kurioje nors apimtyje. O \9Airdis tai yra tas a\9A, ir ji nesuvokia savo apimties. {{A}}: O i\9A kur ta apimtis? {{D}}: J&amp;#261; nusako kiek a\9A suvokiu, kad \9Airdis ir a\9A esame tas pats. {{A}}: Ma\9Eiau suvokiate, tai didesn&amp;#279; apimtis? {{D}}: Taip yra. Pamatysi.''

''2005.03.17 {{A}}: Kaip gali vienas atvaizdas tikti keturiems padalinimams bet ne visiems? {{D}}: Geras klausimas. Tu pa\9Ei&amp;#363;r&amp;#279;k &amp;#303; savo vid&amp;#371; ir pa\9Ei&amp;#363;r&amp;#279;k atgal ir tada suprasi.''

''2005.03.16 {{A}}: Koks ry\9Ays tarp prad\9Eios ir dvasios ir pabaigos ir sandaros? {{D}}: Prad\9Eios veikla yra myl&amp;#279;ti, o pabaigos veikla yra b&amp;#363;ti mylimam, tad dvasia ir sandara. {{A}}: O k&amp;#261; &amp;#269;ia rei\9Akia myl&amp;#279;ti, kas yra gyvyb&amp;#279;? {{D}}: Myl&amp;#279;ti yra palaikyti gyvyb&amp;#281;. Tu taip sakai ir taip yra. Kaip gyvyb&amp;#279; yra i\9A pabaigos &amp;#303; pabaig&amp;#261;, meil&amp;#279; yra tos veiklos palaikymas. {{A}}: Kas vyksta tame tarpe. {{D}}: Taip, kas vyksta tarp pabaigos ir pabaigos.''

''2004.11.16 {{A}}: Koks atvaizd&amp;#371; vaidmuo susikalb&amp;#279;jime? {{D}}: Turi b&amp;#363;ti po\9Ei&amp;#363;ris &amp;#303; kit&amp;#261; ir per j&amp;#303; atgal &amp;#303; save. Tad turi b&amp;#363;ti &amp;#303;manoma vienu po\9Ei&amp;#363;riu &amp;#303;vairiai priimti kit&amp;#261;.''

>><<
2014 birželio 09 d., 19:25 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 338-429 eilutės iš
''2004.11.16 {{A}}: Koks atvaizd&amp;#371; vaidmuo susikalb&amp;#279;jime? {{D}}: Turi b&amp;#363;ti po\9Ei&amp;#363;ris &amp;#303; kit&amp;#261; ir per j&amp;#303; atgal &amp;#303; save. Tad turi b&amp;#363;ti &amp;#303;manoma vienu po\9Ei&amp;#363;riu &amp;#303;vairiai priimti kit&amp;#261;.''
į:
''2004.11.16 {{A}}: Koks atvaizd&amp;#371; vaidmuo susikalb&amp;#279;jime? {{D}}: Turi b&amp;#363;ti po\9Ei&amp;#363;ris &amp;#303; kit&amp;#261; ir per j&amp;#303; atgal &amp;#303; save. Tad turi b&amp;#363;ti &amp;#303;manoma vienu po\9Ei&amp;#363;riu &amp;#303;vairiai priimti kit&amp;#261;.''

'''Dvasios ir sandaros santykis'''

See also: {{Spirit}}, {{Structure}}, {{Representations}}, BeginningVEnd, {{Understanding}}, LoveVLife, {{Other}}, SelfVOther

----

'''Note: I have rethought this as Activity V Structure and am describing this in the page on {{Representations}}.'''

----

''I am rethinking this - the structure for the four representations - as the relationship SelfVOther between {{Self}} and {{Other}}.''

----

Four {{Representations}} are given by the relationship between {{Spirit}} and {{Structure}}:

* SpiritToSpirit - out of Other
* SpiritToStructure - out of Other and into Self
* StructureToSpirit - out of Self and into Other
* StructureToStructure - out of Self

These are the levels of structure that are necessary for us to experience structure. In that sense they are related to the LevelsOfUnderstanding. We start with the widest and immerse ourselves into narrower scopes.

These may be thought of as the RepresentationsOfEverything, in which case they do not degenerate, but are specified:

* ''spirit to spirit'' is EverythingWishesForEverything
* ''spirit to structure'' is EverythingWishesForAnything
* ''structure to spirit'' is EverythingWishesForSomething
* ''structure to structure'' is EverythingWishesForNothing

''(I need to check on the order of the above).''

These representations result from considering ''spirit'' and ''structure'' as {{Equals}} and letting them manifest themselves as {{Unequals}} in four ways, yielding four representations (wishes). They are unequal in terms of the distance between themselves, from everything (spirit to spirit) to nothing (structure to structure).

Alternatively, we may consider them as unequals, and let them manifest themselves equals, in which case we have two representations (scopes):{{Beginning}} and {{End}}, see: BeginningVEnd.

They accord with the LevelsOfUnderstanding.

I will work here to flesh out these representations based on what I know about the representations of the {{Nullsome}}, {{Onesome}}, {{Twosome}}, {{Threesome}}. There are four levels: why - how - what - whether (or is it +3, +2, +1, +0).

'''Why'''

* significant
* no external context
* free will - fate
* be - do - thin

'''How'''

* constant
* simplest algorithm - accepts all things
* outside - inside
* one - all - many

'''What'''

* direct
* no internal structure
* theory - practice
* object - process - subject

'''Whether'''

* true
* required concept
* same - different
* necessary - actual - possible

The {{Foursome}} is given by the difference from the end:

* The difference between will (onesome) and God's will (nullsome) is everything
* The difference between choice (twosome) and good will (nullsome) is anything
* The difference between anything (threesome) and wisdom (nullsome) is something
* The difference between life (foursome) and eternal life (nullsome) is nothing

It seems the four representations express the distance between two concepts as given by the difference between the concept and the sum. So, for example, first the difference is everything, as in the case of the will. Ultimately, the difference is nothing.

''It seems that '' to '' means going beyond and also '' being with.

http://www.ms.lt/en/andrius/understanding/diagrams/understanding.gif

http://www.ms.lt/en/andrius/understanding/diagrams/conjunctions.gif

===Thoughts from Prayer===

''2005.04.26 {{A}}: Kuom skiriasi dvasia ir sandara? {{D}}: Dvasioje yra mano meil&amp;#279; - neribota, o sandaroje yra j&amp;#363;s&amp;#371; meil&amp;#279; - ribota. {{A}}: Kaip gali dvasia ir sandara sutapti? {{D}}: Tiek kiek vienas kit&amp;#261; myli. {{A}}: Vis labiau? {{D}}: Vis giliau, artimiau, nes nepriklausomai. Pamatysi. Laiminu tave.''

''2005.04.09 {{A}}: Koks ryšys tarp laisvumo ir dvasios bei sandaros? {{D}}: Dvasia gyvena per sandar&amp;#261; Ji gali sutapti su ja arba nesutapti.''

''2004.12.13 {{A}}: Kaip keturi atvaizdai susij&amp;#281; su susikalb&amp;#279;jimu? {{D}}: Aš noriu b&amp;#363;ti su visais, b&amp;#363;ti vienas su jais, juos myl&amp;#279;ti. Tad tai yra meil&amp;#279;s s&amp;#261;lygos. {{A}}: Kaip suprasti, meil&amp;#279;s s&amp;#261;lgos? {{D}}: Meilei reikia, kad gal&amp;#279;tum&amp;#279;me gyventi vienas kitame. {{A}}: O k&amp;#261; tai reiškia? {{D}}: Išeiti iš sav&amp;#281;s, ir iš sav&amp;#281;s &amp;#303; kit&amp;#261;, ir iš kito &amp;#303; save, ir iš kito. {{A}}: A&amp;#269;i&amp;#363;. {{D}}: Myliu
.''
2014 birželio 08 d., 06:53 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 37-338 eilutės iš
The SecondaryStructures inject an observer from one observational plane into another observational plane.
į:
The SecondaryStructures inject an observer from one observational plane into another observational plane.

'''Atvaizdai'''

See also: {{Divisions}}, {{Scopes}}, WaysOfModeling, EverythingVAnything, PropertiesVRepresentations, ConstructiveHypotheses

===What are representations?===

AndriusKulikauskas: {{Divisions}} of {{Everything}} have representations by which we conceive them. I have also used the word ''criteria''. A representation provides us with a vantage point upon a division so that it becomes accessible to us. Without a representation, we are not able to conceive the division.

A representation is:

* A relationship between a {{Perspective}} and a {{Whole}}, which is to say, between {{Something}} and {{Everything}}.
* A particular angle by which we are able to approach and conceive of a DivisionOfEverything
* A relationship with a {{Self}}, which is either as equals (SpiritVStructure) or as unequals (BeginningVEnd).
* A representation is that which can be thought. It is that which a {{Mind}} can look at. Whereas a {{Unity}} (of representations) is that which can {{Care}}, and by which a {{heart}} looks out.
* A criteria, which is to say, a filter upon {{Everything}}. We know that everything accepts all things (this is one of the PropertiesOfEverything and is a RepresentationsOfTheOnesome). Even so, we can filter everything. Thus a representation negates this representation of the onesome.
* A ConstructiveHypothesis that contributes either a positive or a negative perspective.

===Representations===

* four RepresentationsOfTheNullsome
* four RepresentationsOfTheOnesome
* four RepresentationsOfTheTwosome
* four RepresentationsOfTheThreesome
* two RepresentationsOfTheFoursome
* two RepresentationsOfTheFivesome
* two RepresentationsOfTheSixsome
* two RepresentationsOfTheSevensome

===There are 6 representations===

I have always had trouble coherently formulating the six representations. And yet, from the divisions, and many other structural points, there seem to be definitely six. Perhaps this is the best way to think of them:

* {{Observer}}
* ObservationalPlane
* {{Everything}} = the observational plane which coincides with both the observer and the observed
* {{Anything}} = the observational plane which coincides with the observer, but not the observed
* {{Something}} = the observational plane which coincides with the observed, but not the observer
* {{Nothing}} = the observational plane which coincides with neither the observer nor the observed

The first two are the representations for the {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}}, {{Sevensome}}, and they arise when the observer is distinct from the observational plane. We may think of them as external representations, which is to say, external views upon the whole.

The other four are the representations of the {{Nullsome}}, {{Onesome}}, {{Twosome}}, {{Threesome}}, and they are the scopes of access that the observational plane provides the observer, respectively: all perspectives, any perspective, a perspective, no perspective. They are internal representations, internal views upon the whole.

Note that the {{Observed}} is not a representation. This is because the observed is that {{Whole}} upon which a representation is providing an angle. In this sense, the observed is {{Everything}}, and the observer is {{Something}}.

Note also that the six representations do not form a DivisionOfEverything because they overlap. Instead, they may be thought of as the union of two divisions of everything: the {{Twosome}} and the {{Foursome}}.

===Alternate accounts of the 6 representations===

Here is another, perhaps related account:

* {{Structure}} = DecreasingSlack
* {{Activity}} = IncreasingSlack
* {{Everything}} = indefinite and unspecified = structure and activity are uncoupled
* {{Anything}} = definite and unspecified = top down: structure yields activity
* {{Something}} = definite and specified = structure and activity are in a loop
* {{Nothing}} = indefinite and specified = bottom up: activity yields structure

where I mean:

* definite = structure channels activity
* indefinite = not definite
* specified = activity evokes structure
* unspecified = not specified

This is to say that the representations (and also the {{Topologies}} are intimately related to the operation [AddTwo +2].

* Four of the representations serve to conceive the first four divisions: {{Nullsome}}, {{Onesome}}, {{Twosome}}, {{Threesome}}. As such they are representations of {{Everything}} (expressed by the {{Onesome}}) and of {{God}} (expressed by the {{Nullsome}}). They express the roles of {{Equals}} that they play with each other - hence the role that one may have with one's {{Self}}. See also: {{Understanding}}, GoodUnderstanding, {{Structure}}, RecurringStructure, PairsOfConcepts.
* Two of the representations serve to conceive the second four divisions: {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}}, {{Sevensome}}. As such they are representations of {{Slack}} (expressed as the {{Sevensome}}). They express the roles that {{Unequals}} play with each other - hence the role that one may have with one's {{Other}}. See also: {{Self-understanding}}, SharedUnderstanding, {{Activity}}, RecurringActivity.

They are somehow related to: BeginningVEnd, SelfVOther, SpiritVStructure.

----

* To stand on one's own is to stand apart from oneself in four different ways (separated by everything, anything, something, nothing)
* To stand apart from oneself is to stand on one's own in two different ways (with increasing slack or with decreasing slack)

Perhaps four representations express the ''concept'' and two representations express the ''conceiver'' (conceiver and conceiving), that is, standing by its own and in relationship with itself.

==='''Representations of {{Nullsome}}, {{Onesome}}, {{Twosome}}, {{Threesome}}'''===

These representations express the extent to which the heart go beyond itself: {{Everything}}, {{Anything}}, {{Something}}, {{Nothing}}. These are {{Scopes}}.

Note that first {{God}} goes beyond himself through the operation [AddOne +1]. God goes beyond himself into structure, inwards, and ultimately, into self. This gives rise to the heart, a self. Then this self, this heart, goes beyond itself - backwards, outwards. It goes beyond itself with regard to some scope which indicates the extent to which it has gone beyond, which it has separated itself from itself:

* {{Unity}}: separated from oneself by {{Nothing}}
* {{Representation}}: separated from oneself by {{Something}}
* {{Structure}}: separated from oneself by {{Anything}}
* {{Spirit}}: separated from oneself by {{Everything}}

(This helps make clear why {{Love}} is a unity and God is a spirit).

These scopes are those from which the one who is loved can turn around and, along with God, love themselves. These representations are relevant for the divisions that express the situation of God. They give God's point of view as to God's relationship with the heart. They express the scope at which God must StepForward to meet the heart. (Perhaps this relates the directions of {{Forwards}} ({{God}}) and {{Backwards}} ({{heart}})?)

These are scopes where God and heart coincide. These are the scopes for life.

This is (but in what sense?) the coinciding of what loves and what is loved.

The coinciding is perhaps ever more deeper and reflects the distance that separates the intended and actual target of the love. Which is to say, what separates the life supported and the life lived. And this depth is given perhaps by the back and forth reflection, looking into each other's eyes, until the separation is nothing.

This also relates to the levels of knowledge, the LevelsOfUnderstanding, the LevelsOfConsciousness.

They may also relate to the relationships relevant in the operation +3 and +0: together, separate, together and separate, separation of together and separate.

These four representations may express structure from a '''positive''' perspective, of what is, what is constructive.

{{Knowledge}} is the issue that (as a state of mind) involves four scopes by which a {{Concept}} "stands on its own". (See the {{Foursome}}. This makes it possible for "standing apart from oneself" (GoingBeyondOneself) to become a concrete relationship "within a world" between a lover and a loved. And life is the underlying spirit expressed by the various (six) ways they can relate to each other.

I suppose that these four scopes are the perspectives for something to be a "concept", be "known" or "knowable", be self-standing, and serve as a relationship for that which conceives and that which is conceived.

I am trying to understand this better. Here are some thoughts:

I think that the key issue here is "understanding" as the ability to hold concepts separate. In particular, a "concept" holds together in itself its "spirit" and its "structure" (its self within which it (the spirit) finds itself). "Understanding" the concept is to separate the two.

* The spirit is of its own. It may realize itself. (This is the perspective Why, a knowledge of Everything. The spirit is separated from itself (its structure) by everything.)
* The spirit goes beyond itself from the unscoped into the scoped. In this way it generates structure. The spirit and structure are considered separately. (This is the perspective How, a knowledge of Anything. The spirit is separated from itself (its structure) by anything.)
* The spirit and structure are considered together. The structure is a limit on the spirit. (This is the perspective What, a knowledge of Something. The spirit is separated from itself (its structure) by something.)
* The structure is of its own. It is an open space which may frame and evoke a spirit. (This is the perspective Whether, a knowledge of Nothing. The spirit is separated from itself (its structure) by nothing.)

A {{Concept}} is that which "stands on its own". Therefore it needs to be able to "stand apart from itself". The above four perspectives express the different scopes which that entails. I think this is why the basic divisions (of everything into zero, one, two or three perspectives) have four representations.

==='''Representations of {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}}, {{Sevensome}}'''===

These are given by IncreasingSlack and DecreasingSlack. These representations are relevant for the divisions that express the situation of the heart. They give the heart's point of view as to the differing outlooks of God and heart. (Analyze the pairs of representations)

Increasing slack is spirit gives way to structure. This is the case of God, who goes beyond himself into structure. Here spirit and structure are in parallel, they are kept separate. As they grow independent, the slack increases. Spirit opens up more and more slack for structure until it is possible to have an independent {{heart}}. With increasing slack, we have the perspective of the '''actor''', of that which is loved - life. This is the slack of '''non-structure'''.

Decreasing slack is structure gives way to spirit. This is the case of the heart, which finds itself within structure and then looks for God. Here spirit and structure are taken together, and they grow dependent, and slack decreases. Ultimately, the two collapse back into spirit. With decreasing slack, we have the perspective of the '''surroundings''', of that which loves. This is the slack of '''non-activity'''.

(See {{Self-understanding}}). These two representations may express structures from the '''negative''' perspective, which is to say, from what is '''not'''.

A preference for decreasing slack is bad, and a preference for increasing slack is good - God's perspective is preferable to the heart's perspective.

This is to love (increasing slack) (Godly)({{Beginning}}) and to be loved (decreasing slack) (heart)(humanly)({{End}}).

To love is to step forwards to meet the one going beyond themselves. To be loved is to go beyond oneself to coincide with another.

{{Negation}} is related to decreasing slack.

A {{Concept}}, as ''that which stands on its own'', opens up two stances: conceiver - "standing apart from oneself" (which is God's stance and increases slack and opens up space for a heart) and conceived - "standing on one's own" (which is the stance of the heart - that godlet within us that has awaken within our structure, is figuring itself out - and decreases slack). These are the two representations by which we conceive the division of everything into four perspective (or five, or six, or seven).

These two stances are two outlooks in going beyond ourselves. One is that of loving (standing apart from oneself) and the other is of being loved (standing on one's own). And the four levels of knowledge are four scopes where the lover and the loved may coincide.

Love is the support of life, it is the reaching out to coincide with the loved one who is going beyond themselves. Just as God is the spirit of everything, and everything is the structure of God, so we may say that life is the spirit of anything, and anything is the structure of life. In order for us to engage anything, it must be, in every sense, a self-standing system, with the implications as above. So, for example, if we engage a mushroom, then it is as a system - either a local nub - or part of a being that may stretch across an acre of a forest. Life (and alive) are defined for a self-standing system (and that says a lot about life). In particular, we may think of anything as everything plus slack. Or, considering that slack is the structure of good, and good is the spirit of slack, we may say that life is the goodness of God. (Yet eternal life is understanding the goodness of God - keeping those two concepts separate).

Anything is like everything in that it is self-standing, and yet also anything stands apart from itself - it is both "in a world" and "unto itself". So anything has six representations in all - the four representations which everything contributes as a "self-standing" concept - and the two representations which slack contributes (increasing slack and decreasing slack). One of the things that I am studying is how to relate these four and two with the six. But in particular, we may think of the six as the ways of moving from one of the four levels out into another one of them - there are six such pairs - they are concrete ways of going beyond ourselves - "within a world".

I've found it very helpful to read "The Timeless Way of Building" by Christopher Alexander, an architect who considers, "What does it mean to say that a building is alive?" And by "alive" he means this very important "quality without a name" for which "alive" is really just a metaphor from biology. I agree with him that it's this spiritual idea of "life" that is more interesting to us than the purely biological one which we seize upon but only as a metaphor. And he writes profoundly of different words that help us get across that concept but never express it adequately: alive, whole, comfortable, free, exact, egoless, eternal. And clearly there is an eighth, "", which is to say, the nameless, what I might call "zero activity". Perhaps this is the ability to skip a beat so as to be in harmony with another system. And perhaps biological life is what I would call "zero structure", which is to say, the structure of redundancy that allows for that harmony, so that a "positive command DO" can coincide with a "negative command DO NOT".

----

Note: to be loved and then to love - which is to say, to go beyond oneself, coincide with one who has stepped forward, and then to turn around so as to step forward - to love - oneself - this is to allow for a coinciding of views - and a parallel view as with eternal life. Hence understanding is in the turning around, this returning to the beginning. And here that beginning is at the heart. So the movement seems to be: go beyond oneself, coincide with the one who steps forward to meet you, and then turn around to face the one you went beyond.

==='''Representations of {{Everything}}, {{Slack}} and {{Anything}}'''===

I think that there are special scopes for the representations which do not degenerate (they maintain the same potency) but become restricted to a scope.

Representations may be applied (without losing generality):

* four of them to {{Everything}} as {{Wishes}}: everything wishes for: nothing, something, anything, everything
* two of them to {{Slack}} as {{Scopes}}: unbounded and bounded - ''increasing slack'' is ''slack has scope unbounded'' and ''decreasing slack'' is ''slack has scope bounded''.
* all of them to {{Anything}} as {{Choices}}: anything chooses: to wish for nothing, something, anything, everything; to wish; to not wish.

''Note: I need to document the following and, in particular, order them correctly''

They are also the choices (these are the RepresentationsOfAnything), the criteria:

* choosing Yes
* choosing Not No,
* choosing Not Yes
* choosing No
* choosing to not choose
* choosing to choose

They are also given by the four RepresentationsOfEverything together with the two RepresentationsOfSlack:

* being one with everything
* being one with anything
* being one with something
* being one with nothing
* increasing slack
* decreasing slack

Here the representations of everything define the scope, the domain, with regard to which slack can be increasing or decreasing.

'''Other structures'''

The representations (divided 4:2) are somehow related to the {{Gradations}} (divided 3:3).

Note: Representations are at the level of how (as a negation of a representation of the nullsome). And unity of representations is a going beyond itself that relates internal and external views - think of that in terms of God and human.

'''Deriving representations as a SecondaryStructure'''

Representations are intimately related to SharedUnderstanding and the operation [AddTwo +2].

Representations are a SecondaryStructure that arises through SharedUnderstanding by the process of {{Factoring}}. The six representations arise as the product of factors two and three, with a fourfold ambiguity.

'''Deriving representations from PrimaryStructures'''

Representations are a SecondaryStructure, see EverythingWishesForAnything.

Representations have to do with increasing slack, whereas {{Topologies}} have to do with decreasing slack.

Representation: A perspective (ours - the part) sees The perspective (God's - the whole). We open the way for the good, and it keeps pouring out.

Representations are the good will that we show. Good is in the whole.

Opening to the ways of the good is given by the emotional responses.

Representations arise here when God wishes for nothing. This is the goodness of the whole, of the representation. It opens up the way for goodness.

*'''good quality''' is the good of '''decreasing slack''', the good from an ObservationalPlane
*'''good word''' is the good of '''increasing slack''', the good from an {{Observer}}
*'''good God''' is the good of '''why''', the good from {{Everything}}
*'''good person''' is the good of '''how''', the good from {{Anything}}
*'''good deed''' is the good of '''what''', the good from {{Something}}
*'''good gift''' is the good of '''whether''', the good from {{Nothing}}

Good person, deed, word are a cycle:

* Good person: reflect =&gt; take a stand
* Good deed: take a stand =&gt; follow through
* Good word: follow through =&gt; reflect

Good God, gift, quality get mapped to follow through, reflect, take a stand.

* Good God is what lets the good person do the good deed, they are cocreators.
* Good gift is what lets the good word judge the worker by the work, judge the good deed.
* Good quality is what distinguishes the good person on the basis of the good word, throws away the bad and preserves the good.

In those roles, good God is one, good gift is all, good quality is many.

Representation has us have expectations, God wish for nothing, and has {{Waiting}} as its seventh perspective. If God wishes for nothing, then look for good in people. Everything is self-sufficient. Waiting = being in suspense, as an emotional response.

GoodWill rests in two locations. '''We address the good will in others, and we show good will ourselves.'''

The directions of the good are the structure for the expectations.

In each case, the slack is in the direction of the good:

* good heart = Jesus' belief, rather than his wish (goodness of nullsome)
* good God = Jesus' willingness to change, rather than unwillingness to change (goodness of onesome)
* good gift = Jesus' investedness, rather than his interest (goodness of twosome)
* good quality = Jesus' isolating, rather than his isolated (goodness of threesome)
* good person = Jesus' inner adherence, rather than his outer adherence (goodness of foursome)
* good deed = what Jesus will achieve, rather than what he is able to do (goodness of fivesome)
* good word = what Jesus could be doing, rather than what he is doing (goodness of sixsome)
* good news = Jesus' purpose, rather than his strength (goodness of sevensome)

Slack is in the former, not the latter. Slack is in the qualities of signs:

* malleable = slack is in their willingness to change
* modifiable = slack is in their inertia
* mobile = slack is in their isolator
* memorable = slack is in their inner adherence
* meaningful = slack is in what they will achieve
* motivated = slack is in what they could be doing

Expectations are given by the gradation of methods of mathematical proof: morphism, induction, algorithm construction, substitution, examination of cases, construction. These seem to define the various kinds of goodness:

* morphism is the goodness of God
* induction is the goodness of gift
* algorithm construction is the goodness of quality
* substitution is the goodness of person
* examination of cases is the goodness of deed
* construction is the goodness of word

The good will that we show is actually that which we open through the eight directions which the good comes from. These are the same directions that we speak to in others.

We can speak to the good will in others. Or we can open the way for it to speak from us. For example, we can go from "unwillingness to change" to "willingness to change", or the reverse.

Each of the directions of the good accords as if with a division of everything. Depending on the direction that we look at them, we have either representations or topologies. '''What do we associate the good with? the slack with? in a division.''' Either with the part, or with the whole. If with the part, then that part stands independently, and we have a topology. '''If with the whole, then the whole stands independently, and we have a representation.''' Whatever we associate the good with must stand independently on either side.

(Note that this independence is what is relevant in the growth of our understanding and love.)

A division relates a whole with its parts.

The good is related to either the whole or the part.

Jesus is Good will.

Good will is in the whole: representations.

Good will is in the part: topologies.

===Thoughts from Prayer===

''2005.04.27 {{A}}: Kaip gali mylintis ir mylimas sutapti? {{D}}: Atskleisk savo \9Aird&amp;#303; ir priimk kit&amp;#261; gyventi savyje - tiek j&amp;#363;s gal&amp;#279;site sutapti. {{A}}: O kaip atskleid\9Eiama \9Airdis? {{D}}: Myl&amp;#279;k - &amp;#303;sakymu kur&amp;#303; priimi, kuriam pakl&amp;#363;sti. Sek mano S&amp;#363;numi. {{A}} ir {{K}}: Gerai.''

''2005.04.26 {{A}}: Kuom skiriasi dvasia ir sandara? {{D}}: Dvasioje yra mano meil&amp;#279; - neribota, o sandaroje yra j&amp;#363;s&amp;#371; meil&amp;#279; - ribota. {{A}}: Kaip gali dvasia ir sandara sutapti? {{D}}: Tiek kiek vienas kit&amp;#261; myli. {{A}}: Vis labiau? {{D}}: Vis giliau, artimiau, nes nepriklausomai. Pamatysi. Laiminu tave.''

''2005.04.25 {{A}}: Kaip suvokti dvasi&amp;#261;, sandar&amp;#261;, atvaizdus ir j&amp;#371; vieningum&amp;#261;? {{D}}: Visa tai leid\9Eia man bendrauti su tavimi bei su kitais. O kiti du atvaizdai leid\9Eia jums bendrauti su manimi. {{A}}: Tai yra m&amp;#363;s&amp;#371; prielaidos. {{D}}: Taip, kad yra \9Airdis.''

''2005.04.20 {{A}}: Koks ry\9Ays tarp dviej&amp;#371; atvaizd&amp;#371; ir keturi&amp;#371; atvaizd&amp;#371;? {{D}}: A\9A myliu, o per jus (\9Airdimi) myliu kit&amp;#261; arba save. Jeigu kit&amp;#261;, tai kartu ir save. A\9A esu tas kitas, tad jeigu myli t&amp;#261; a\9A - save - tai kurioje nors apimtyje. O \9Airdis tai yra tas a\9A, ir ji nesuvokia savo apimties. {{A}}: O i\9A kur ta apimtis? {{D}}: J&amp;#261; nusako kiek a\9A suvokiu, kad \9Airdis ir a\9A esame tas pats. {{A}}: Ma\9Eiau suvokiate, tai didesn&amp;#279; apimtis? {{D}}: Taip yra. Pamatysi.''

''2005.03.17 {{A}}: Kaip gali vienas atvaizdas tikti keturiems padalinimams bet ne visiems? {{D}}: Geras klausimas. Tu pa\9Ei&amp;#363;r&amp;#279;k &amp;#303; savo vid&amp;#371; ir pa\9Ei&amp;#363;r&amp;#279;k atgal ir tada suprasi.''

''2005.03.16 {{A}}: Koks ry\9Ays tarp prad\9Eios ir dvasios ir pabaigos ir sandaros? {{D}}: Prad\9Eios veikla yra myl&amp;#279;ti, o pabaigos veikla yra b&amp;#363;ti mylimam, tad dvasia ir sandara. {{A}}: O k&amp;#261; &amp;#269;ia rei\9Akia myl&amp;#279;ti, kas yra gyvyb&amp;#279;? {{D}}: Myl&amp;#279;ti yra palaikyti gyvyb&amp;#281;. Tu taip sakai ir taip yra. Kaip gyvyb&amp;#279; yra i\9A pabaigos &amp;#303; pabaig&amp;#261;, meil&amp;#279; yra tos veiklos palaikymas. {{A}}: Kas vyksta tame tarpe. {{D}}: Taip, kas vyksta tarp pabaigos ir pabaigos.''

''2004.11.16 {{A}}: Koks atvaizd&amp;#371; vaidmuo susikalb&amp;#279;jime? {{D}}: Turi b&amp;#363;ti po\9Ei&amp;#363;ris &amp;#303; kit&amp;#261; ir per j&amp;#303; atgal &amp;#303; save. Tad turi b&amp;#363;ti &amp;#303;manoma vienu po\9Ei&amp;#363;riu &amp;#303;vairiai priimti kit&amp;#261;.''
2014 birželio 06 d., 12:06 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 31-37 eilutės iš
The {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}}, {{Sevensome}} have representations in terms of the observed and in terms of the observer.
į:
The {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}}, {{Sevensome}} have representations in terms of the observed and in terms of the observer.

===Observer===

The {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}} and {{Sevensome}} have two {{Representations}}: one in terms of an '''observer''', and another in terms of an ObservationalPlane.

The SecondaryStructures inject an observer from one observational plane into another observational plane
.
2014 birželio 06 d., 12:05 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 27-31 eilutės iš
* Apply We demand that a rule apply to all situations. A double perspective distinguishes whether the rule holds for situations where it was meant to apply, from whether it holds for other situations as well. A single perspective does not distinguish between the two, and simply looks for possibilities where the rule no longer holds.
į:
* Apply We demand that a rule apply to all situations. A double perspective distinguishes whether the rule holds for situations where it was meant to apply, from whether it holds for other situations as well. A single perspective does not distinguish between the two, and simply looks for possibilities where the rule no longer holds.

See also: {{Observer}}, ObservationalPlane, {{Threesome}}

The {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}}, {{Sevensome}} have representations in terms of the observed and in terms of the observer
.
2014 birželio 05 d., 13:07 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 8-27 eilutės iš
>><<
į:
>><<

'''Požiūrių suvedimas'''

See also: FourAddOne, {{Representations}}
----

'''representations'''

I went through the six issues, and fixed each one, and considered how the double perspective became a single perspective as I went from the Heart's answer to the associated counterquestion, to the World's answer. For two of the criteria, the single perspective arises as a limiting case of the double perspective.

* Spread When I spread, then over the course of a given interval, there are some things that I will not come upon because they fall outside of the interval (perhaps we have already come upon them, perhaps we would only come upon them much later). But there are other things that I can never come upon regardless of the interval. A double perspective distinguishes what I cannot come upon from what I will not come upon. If the interval is extended in every way, then this extension has, as its limiting case, a single perspective in which ultimately everything either flows into me or not.
* Cleave When I cleave away from myself, there are some things that are no longer part of me. But there are other things that were never a part of me. A double perspective distinguishes what was once a part of me from what was never a part of me. If I cleave further and further out, then the limiting case is a single perspective in which I am tracing out the boundaries of what belongs to me and what does not.

For four of the criteria

* Extend When a function is extended, then the extended function is in agreement with the original function wherever they are both defined. A double perspective considers the two functions separately and distinguishes the matter of where the functions are defined from whether their values agree where they are both defined. A single perspective, however, treats one function as an extension of the other, and focuses on where one is defined, but not the other.
* Induce I judge steps relative to each other, but I take them absolutely. A double perspective distinguishes the calculation I make from the decision, with all of its consequences, that I live through. A single perspective is resigned to the view that what we decide does not keep up with what we live through.
* Accept I select what I will accept based on what I have already accepted. A double perspective distinguishes what I have already accepted from what I will receive. A single perspective identifies the two, and concludes that there is a basis for accepting and rejecting.
* Apply We demand that a rule apply to all situations. A double perspective distinguishes whether the rule holds for situations where it was meant to apply, from whether it holds for other situations as well. A single perspective does not distinguish between the two, and simply looks for possibilities where the rule no longer holds.
2014 vasario 03 d., 16:18 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pakeistos 1-8 eilutės iš
[[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]]
į:
[[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]]

>>bgcolor=#FFFFC0<<

* Koks ryšys tarp Dievo/visko ir nulybės atvaizdų?
* Kaip pavaizduoti nulybės ir vienybės atvaizdus, jų paneigimą ir paneigimų suvedimą aštuongubiu keliu?

>><<
2013 gruodžio 26 d., 10:21 atliko Andrius Kulikauskas -
Pridėta 1 eilutė:
[[Sistemų nagrinėjimas]]

Atvaizdai


Naujausi pakeitimai


Puslapis paskutinį kartą pakeistas 2018 rugsėjo 15 d., 15:43