'''Kaip lygtimis išgyvename veiksmus +1, +2, +3?'''

Visuose puslapiuose žodį "veiksnys" pakeisti žodžiu "veiksmas". Veiksmų išdavas vadinti vyksniais. Yra taip pat žodis vyksmas.

'''Veiksmai ir lygtys'''

Veiksmas +3
* Veiksmas +3 gali būti išreikštas nežinojimo žinojimu - tai aprėpimas dviejų atvaizdų, taip pat žinojimo nežinojimu - tai algoritmo įjungimas ir išjungimas.

Veiksmas +2
* Įsivaizduoju, blogą vaiką ir gerą vaiką perpina veiksmas +2.
* Veiksmas +2, tai kaip metų laikai, jų ratas: Dievas žiema, būtis pavasaris, žinojimas vasara, nežinojimas ruduo.

[[Išgyvenimo apytaka]], [[Padalinimų ratas]], [[Ir Vienas]], [[Ir Du]], [[Ir Trys]], [[Ir Keturi]], [[Meilė]], [[Suvokimo lygmenys]], [[Vaisingos prielaidos]], [[Veikla]], [[Širdis]], [[Neapibrėžtumas]], [[Amžinas gyvenimas]], [[Christopher Langan]]

===Operational summary - Conceiving God - Wishes===

We can derive all the structures by considering how we conceive God. We conceive God as a structure: Everything, Anything, Something or Nothing. Yet again, the structure of God is everything, and so we relate two structures. In doing so, we consider what everything wishes for:

* God as Everything = EverythingWishesForNothing = self-sufficient
* God as Anything = EverythingWishesForSomething = certain
* God as Something = EverythingWishesForAnything = calm
* God as Nothing = EverythingWishesForEverything = loving

We circumscribe God, and express our circumscription as an imbalance that everything wishes to address. This opens up frameworks that express our situation, in that it allows for us as those who '''do not wish for'''.

In this way, we may also consider God, through everything, as reaching out ever further. We may think of this outreach as operations which take us from everything back to everything. Wishing allows us to consider God both as wisher and what he wishes for, so that we can be both together with God and separate from him, and thus can relate with him. We identify God as the one who wishes, and thus progressively with Everything, Anything, Something and Nothing. Respectively, we have him wish for nothing, something, anything and everything. This reflects the growth in our conception of God. We relate:

* '''Operation +0''' Everything Everything is the anchor concept by which we can work with absolutes. Think about: EverythingWishesForNothing. ''Consider the role of truth''
* '''[[IrVienas |Operation +1]]''' Everything and Anything God ever goes beyond himself, yielding the Divisions of everything. The first three make for completeness, yet the operation continues. The division of everything is the relationship between everything and anything, the whole perspective and the partial perspective. Think about: EverythingWishesForSomething and Understanding. ''Consider the role of required concept''
* '''[[IrDu |Operation +2]]''' Everything and Something, Anything and Something. God allows for an outlook different than his own. ''Understand, coming to understand, understood'' is extended and reinterpreted as ''Understanding, coming to understand, not understanding, not coming to understand''. The operation +2 says that structure channels activity, and activity evokes structure. This means that we have structure arise from nonstructure (digital), and activity arise from nonactivity (analogue). Now we have two outlooks, we can step in and step out. We have Representations (relating something and everything - a view on the whole) and Topologies (relating something and anything - a view to the part). Compare with Christopher Alexander's PrinciplesOfLife, try to consider them as relating anything and something. Think about: EverythingWishesForAnything and [[self-understanding]]. ''Consider the role of same and different''
* '''[[IrTrys |Operation +3]]''' Something and Nothing, Anything and Nothing, Everything and Nothing. Now we have the three-cycle and so can consider slack. The three Languages (Argumentation, Verbalization, Narration) arise as relationships with nothing (by something, anything and everything). How does factoring come into play? We then reintepret this all in terms of PrimaryStructures and injections. Identify evertyhing with nothing yields the InversionEffect. Think about: EverythingWishesForEverything and SharedUnderstanding and GoodUnderstanding. ''Consider the role of necessary, actual and possible''

'''An Idea to Rethink'''

''The following idea that understanding is a base level does not make sense because it is the operation +1 that generates the divisions that participate in understanding, +2 for self-understanding and +3 for shared understanding. Perhaps the base level is good understanding. This would then also organize the levels more sensibly, so that the base level would have operation +0 and the nullsome.''

I think that they describe the level of awareness in understanding. They relate different LevelsOfUnderstanding with regard to the base level of Understanding.

* +0 from Understanding to Understanding
* +1 from Understanding to Self-understanding
* +2 from Understanding to SharedUnderstanding
* +3 from Understanding to GoodUnderstanding

In this sense, understanding is the experience of a division of everything, and this experience may be at any of four levels of awareness, from fully unconscious to fully conscious. In this sense, each of the Factors is a map from Understanding as a whole, a base level, to Understanding as any perspective within a new whole, within a higher level of understanding.

Kaip veiksmas +2 tampa veiksmu +3? Kaip stebėjimas tampa sąmoningumu? Kaip pereinama iš nuorodų (indeksų) į sąmoningumą? Pajungus išjungus nuorodas. Įsijungimas-atsitraukimas - step in and out.

[[Išgyvenimo apytaka]], [[Padalinimų ratas]], [[Ir Vienas]], [[Ir Du]], [[Ir Trys]], [[Ir Keturi]], [[Meilė]], [[Suvokimo lygmenys]], [[Vaisingos prielaidos]], [[Veikla]], [[Širdis]], [[Neapibrėžtumas]], [[Amžinas gyvenimas]].

Pasąmonė, sąmonė, sąmoningumas
* Pasąmonė plėtoja tinklą, sąmonė plėtoją medį, sąmoningumas plėtoja seką. Pertvarkymai juos sieja, gerbia tarp jų esantį tarpą. Padalinimai (ketverybė, penkerybė, šešerybė, septynerybė) grindžia tarpą. Jį taipogi išsako šešios atjautos.
* Pasąmonė yra tinklas, sąmonė medis, juos sąmoningumas sieja seka, susiuvantis siūlas. Dorumas yra teisingas sąmonės išlankstymas.
* Paklusimas ugdo pasąmonę (o gal sąmoningumą?), tikėjimas ugdo sąmonę, rūpėjimas ugdo sąmoningumą.

* Pasąmonė mato 4 lygmenis, sąmonė 6 lygmenų poras, o sąmoningumas 24 raiškas.

'''Trijų veiksmų reikšmė Dievo ir žmogaus tyrimų santykiai'''

* aštuongubu keliu, nulybės ir vienybės atvaizdų neigimu

[+Pasąmonė, sąmonė, sąmoningumas+]

Noriu suprasti veiksmus ir ypač veiksmą +3. Mąstau:
* kaip veikia pilnatvę?
* veiksmo santykis su suvokiančiojo, suvokimo, suvoktojo
* santykį tarp mylinčio ir mylimojo
* santykį tarp Dievo ir širdies
* meilės ir suvokimo vaidmenis, ir kaip dalis to, mylimojo nepriklausomybė
* suvokimo lygmenų ir sąmoningumo lygmenų
* vaisingas prielaidas ir atvaizdus - gal tai tas pats dalykas?
* savęs suvokimą ir bendrą suvokimą
* dvasią, sandarą, atvaizdus, vieningumą
* įsisavinimą
* skaidymą ir įtraukimą
* aštuongubą kelią, nulybės ir vienybės atvaizdų neigimą
* sieti veiksmus, skaidymo sandų veiklą bei sandarą

* Padalinimai veiksmu +1 auga kaip simpleksai, židiniui tampa nariu. Ir kryžminiai daugiašoniai auga veiksmu +2. Kas auga veiksmu +3? Ar galima hiperkubus kaip puoselėjančius skirtingas puses kartu su riba? Kaip su koordinačių sistema?

[[Veiksmai]] Veiksmai išreiškia pasąmonę, sąmonę, sąmoningumą. Kaip lygtimis išgyvename veiksmus +1, +2, +3?

* Esmė yra Tėvas - Dievo valia
* Atvaizdai yra Sūnus - gera valia
* Sandara yra Dvasia - išmintis
Tad su kuo susieti Dvasią, Sūnų ir Tėvą? Ar suklydau tvirtindamas:
* 1) Dvasia pasąmonė
* 2) Sūnus sąmonė
* 3) Tėvas sąmoningumas

'''Trijų veiksmų reikšmės'''

[[Žmogus]] susideda iš trijų skirtingų balsų: pasąmonės, sąmonės, sąmoningumo. Žmogus pilnąja prasme tėra šių trijų balsų vieningumu, jų sutelktumu. Sutelkimo vienetas yra išgyvenimas. Tad žmogus, kaip bendras asmuo, yra išgyvenimas. Jisai kaip toks gali būtų bet kurio žmogaus suprastas. Kiekvienas gali su juo susitapatinti. O žmogus, kaip paskira asmenybė, susideda iš savo išgyvenimų visumos.

'''Žmogaus tribalsiškumas'''

* Sąmoningumas juos sieja?\

* Kiekvienas žmogaus balsas turi savo Dievą: pasąmonė - Tėvą, sąmonė - Sūnų, sąmoningumas - Dvasią. Ir kiekvienu atveju tai yra tas pats Dievas. Balsų atskyrimas reikalauja Dievų suderinimo.

** Ir kaip su suvokimu?

Iš pasąmonės į samonę, ir iš sąmonės į pasąmonę

[[Išgyvenimo apytaka]], [[Padalinimų ratas]], [[Ir Vienas]], [[Ir Du]], [[Ir Trys]], [[Ir Keturi]], [[Meilė]], [[Suvokimo lygmenys]], [[Vaisingos prielaidos]], [[Veikla]], [[Širdis]], [[Pradžia]], [[Amžinas gyvenimas]].

[[Išgyvenimo apytaka]], [[Padalinimų ratas]], [[Ir Vienas]], [[Ir Du]], [[Ir Trys]], [[Ir Keturi]], [[Meilė]], [[Suvokimo lygmenys]]. Taip pat: Heart, ConstructiveHypotheses, Activity, Beginning, EternalLife.

http://www.ms.lt/en/andrius/diagrams/operations.jpg

Šie trys veiksmai prilygsta neaiškumo trejybės reikšmėms. Jas išsako trejybės ratu.
---------------------

The operations acts on divisions, yielding Equations. The operation acts on the Beginning, the original wholeness of the division. It places this wholeness within the structure of a mapping X->Y where the wholeness is identified with one of the three parts of the mapping: X, Y or ->. It helps to think of the wholeness as the Nullsome, but generally, it might be a perspective in the Onesome or any Division.

'''Žiūrėjimas atgal (į Dievą) ir pirmyn (su Dievu)'''

Sąsajos su pradžia ir pabaiga, su žiūrėjimu pirmyn ir atgal.
* +1 prideda naują pabaigą
* +2 pabaiga žvelgia atgal į save 0+2=2, 1+2=3, 2+2=4, 3+2=5, 4+2=6, 5+2=7, 6+2=0, 7+2=1.
* +3 introduces the 8 cycle of divisions, it is a cyclic operation 0+3=3, 1+3=4, 2+3=5, 3+3=6, 4+3=7, 5+3=0, 6+3=1, 7+3=2.

These are perhaps fundamental to SharedUnderstanding. They may be the entities that are factored 2 x 3 x 4. The factoring may have us think of them in pieces. Each piece is a mapping from the onesome (as a whole) to the onesome (as a perspective). Perhaps the ambiguities are as follows:

* We have a twofold ambiguity (and Topologies) if we presume there is a direction, but we don't know which it is, either Forwards or Backwards, from which we are interpreting the operation (either from the initial division (Beginning) reaching out, or from the final division (End) going back to the roots). This ambiguity is given by the equation [OneAddOne 1+1=2]. This is the outlook of the end, looking backwards in terms of two representations of the division to which it is returning, namely, beginning and end. This is the ambiguity between God and human when it is not clear who is the originator for a shift in perspective - God or human?
* We have a threefold ambiguity (and Divisions) if we presume there is an operation, a relationship between Beginning and End, but we don't know what it is, either [AddOne +1], [AddTwo +2] or [AddThree +3]. This ambiguity is given by the equation [OneAddTwo 1+2=3]. This is the outlook of the relationship between beginning and end.
* We have a fourfold ambiguity (and Representations) if we presume that each division has its own state, but we don't know what it is, yielding: (beginning or end) to (beginning or end). These are four LevelsOfUnderstanding. This ambiguity is given by the equation [OneAddThree 1+3=4]. This is the outlook of the beginning, looking forwards in terms of four representations of the division which it is reaching out from, constructively presuming that relationship.

I think that these presumptions are the ConstructiveHypotheses. The Factoring then makes sense as a split of determiniteness and ambiguity as part of such a presumption and the engagement of an other. I should also think of them in terms of the heart and the inversion effect.

Apparently, we should attribute the forwards direction when operations act on divisions with four representations: Nullsome, Onesome, Twosome, Threesome. And we should attribute the backwards direction when operations act on divisions with two representations: Foursome, Fivesome, Sixsome, Sevensome. And these presumably also list out the levels of understanding. But I should look into this when I know more.

Dievui yra tik vienybė vietoj nulybės, tad jis neapeina ratu. Dievui vienybė yra klausimas, ar Dievas yra būtinas? Dievas septynerybe nebūtinas, jisai ilsisi.

[+Veiksmai+]

Veiksmai mus veda iš vieno padalinimo į kitą. Juos apibrėžia jų poveikis nulybei. Jie veikia cikliškai. Jie prideda 1, 2, 3 arba 0 požiūrius:

Pasąmonė, sąmonė, sąmoningumas
* Kaip pasąmonė, sąmonė ir sąmoningumas dalyvauja apibrėžime?
* Kaip pasąmonė, sąmonė ir sąmoningumas apibrėžia Mane, kas Aš esu?

* Rūšiuoti ir palyginti įvairiausius būdus ką ir kaip mąstome pasąmone (vaizdais), sąmone (kalba) ir sąmoningumu.
* Kaip pasąmonė, samonė ir sąmoningumas išreiškia savastį trejybės atvaizdu: daiktas, eiga, asmuo?

* Kaip pasąmonė, sąmonė, sąmoningumas vienas kitą išgyvena?
* Kaip pasąmonė, sąmonė, ir sąmoningumas išreiškia savęs suvokimą, bendrą suvokimą, ir susikalbėjimą?

* Kaip visko keturias savybes išsako lygtis 1+2=3, o Dievo keturias savybes išsako lygtis 0+2=2 ?

I was interested in relating these to TheBeginning and TheEnd, looking forwards and backwards.
* +1 adds a new end 0+1=1, 1+1=2, 2+1=3, 3+1=4, 4+1=5, 5+1=6, 6+1=7, 7+1=0.
* +2 looks back at oneself (by way of the end) 0+2=2, 1+2=3, 2+2=4, 3+2=5, 4+2=6, 5+2=7, 6+2=0, 7+2=1.

Pavyzdžiui: Dievas, viskas - Dievo sandara, troškimai - Dievo savybės, meilė - Dievo esmė. Įdomu, kad Dievo troškimai į labiausiai išsiskleidusį troškimą, meilę. O visko savybės susiveda į visas savybes turintį viską, mažiausiai savybių turi niekas.

*+1 ''going beyond oneself'' ''Structure: (Perspective: )'' First there is going beyond oneself from the unbounded into the bounded, ever adding an additional comprehensive perspective that reinterprets all the others.
*+2 ''shift in perspective'' ''Activity: (ShiftInPerspective: )'' Then there is a three-cycle which, in parallel, goes beyond by shifting from perspective to perspective.
*+3 ''recurring activity'' ''RecurringActivity: (Slack: )'' (generalized shift in perspective) Next, this three-cycle starts to cover old ground - here what is new is the recurring shift, the ''recurring activity''. This recurring activity is now localized in the shift (without the nodes, which are ever new). So we have a ''general shift''.
*+0 ''unity of origin'' ''RecurringStructure: (Everything: )'' (generalized perspective) - collapse of framework. Finally, there is unity in that the recurring activity can align itself around that which goes beyond.

[+Trijų veiksmų pobūdis+]

'''Žmogaus trinariškumas'''

Žmogus susideda iš trijų skirtingų balsų: pasąmonės, sąmonės, sąmoningumo. Žmogus pilnąja prasme tėra šių trijų balsų vieningumu, jų sutelktumu. Sutelkimo vienetas yra išgyvenimas. Tad žmogus, kaip bendras asmuo, yra išgyvenimas. Jisai kaip toks gali būtų bet kurio žmogaus suprastas. Kiekvienas gali su juo susitapatinti. O žmogus, kaip paskira asmenybė, susideda iš savo išgyvenimų visumos.

Trys veiksmai [[Ir Vienas|+1]], [[Ir Du|+2]], [[Ir Trys|+3]] mūsų protus veda iš vieno padalinimo į kitą. Yra aštuoni padalinimai, tad iš viso 24 lygtys. Šios lygtys išsako [[visaregis | visaregį]].

Each level engenders more structure, until the final layer has it collapse.

* their action on Wholeness
* that action's relationship to that which understands, that which is understanding, and that which is by them both understood.
* the relationship between the one who loves and the one who is loved
* the relationship GodVHeart between God and heart
* the role of Love and Understanding, and as part of that, the Independence of the one we love
* the LevelsOfUnderstanding and the LevelsOfConsciousness
* the ConstructiveHypotheses and the Representations, perhaps they are one and the same
* the nature of Self-understanding and SharedUnderstanding
* the role of Spirit, Structure, Representations, Unity
* Internalization
* Factoring and Embedding
* negations of the representations of the Nullsome and of the Onesome, and the EightfoldWay
* Relate Operations and Activity and Structure for the Factors.

** Kaip Dievo trejybės išsakytas suvokimas grindžia aukštesnius suvokimo lygmenis?
* Kaip suprasti pasąmonę kaip pasitraukimą ir sąmonę kaip atsiradimą?
* Ką reiškia sąmoningai mokytis iš nesąmoningo (automatų) mokymosi?
* Kaip suprasti pasąmonę kai ją kažkas traukia, tarsi užpildant tuštumą, o taip pat ją atstumia, nes tai neatitinka lūkesčių? Ar tai pasąmonės aidai?
* Dvejonės išsprendžia sąmonės santykį su pasąmone. O ką sprendžia lūkesčiai, poreikiai, vertybės?
* Kaip sąmonės keturios vienumo sampratos susijusios su pasąmonės keturiomis sąmoningėjimo pakopomis? Ar jos šešeriopai porojamos?
* Išmąstyti, kaip aštuonerybė, aštuongubas kelias, šešerybė sieja trejybę (nežinojimą, sąmonę) ir ketverybę (žinojimą, pasąmonę) ir kaip tai grindžia dorovę?

* '''[[add zero |Operation +0]]''' Everything Everything is the anchor concept by which we can work with absolutes. Think about: EverythingWishesForNothing. ''Consider the role of truth''
* '''[[add one |Operation +1]]''' Everything and Anything God ever goes beyond himself, yielding the Divisions of everything. The first three make for completeness, yet the operation continues. The division of everything is the relationship between everything and anything, the whole perspective and the partial perspective. Think about: EverythingWishesForSomething and Understanding. ''Consider the role of required concept''
* '''[[add two |Operation +2]]''' Everything and Something, Anything and Something. God allows for an outlook different than his own. ''Understand, coming to understand, understood'' is extended and reinterpreted as ''Understanding, coming to understand, not understanding, not coming to understand''. The operation +2 says that structure channels activity, and activity evokes structure. This means that we have structure arise from nonstructure (digital), and activity arise from nonactivity (analogue). Now we have two outlooks, we can step in and step out. We have Representations (relating something and everything - a view on the whole) and Topologies (relating something and anything - a view to the part). Compare with Christopher Alexander's PrinciplesOfLife, try to consider them as relating anything and something. Think about: EverythingWishesForAnything and [[self-understanding]]. ''Consider the role of same and different''
* '''[[add three |Operation +3]]''' Something and Nothing, Anything and Nothing, Everything and Nothing. Now we have the three-cycle and so can consider slack. The three Languages (Argumentation, Verbalization, Narration) arise as relationships with nothing (by something, anything and everything). How does factoring come into play? We then reintepret this all in terms of PrimaryStructures and injections. Identify evertyhing with nothing yields the InversionEffect. Think about: EverythingWishesForEverything and SharedUnderstanding and GoodUnderstanding. ''Consider the role of necessary, actual and possible''

[[Išgyvenimo apytaka]], [[Padalinimų ratas]], [[Ir Vienas]], [[Ir Du]], [[Ir Trys]], [[Ir Keturi]], [[Meilė]], [[Suvokimo lygmenys]]. Taip pat: SharedUnderstanding, Heart, ConstructiveHypotheses, Activity, Factors, Beginning, EternalLife, LevelsOfUnderstanding.

[[Išgyvenimo apytaka]], [[Padalinimų ratas]], [[Ir Vienas]], [[Ir Du]], [[Ir Trys]], [[Meilė]]. Taip pat: SharedUnderstanding, Heart, ConstructiveHypotheses, Activity, Factors, Beginning, EternalLife, LevelsOfUnderstanding.

'''Veiksmai sieja apytakos'''

[[Ir Vienas]], [[Ir Du]], [[Ir Trys]], [[Meilė]]. Taip pat: SharedUnderstanding, Heart, ConstructiveHypotheses, Activity, Factors, Beginning, EternalLife, LevelsOfUnderstanding.

Žr. [[Ir Vienas]], [[Ir Du]], [[Ir Trys]], [[Meilė]]. Taip pat: SharedUnderstanding, Heart, ConstructiveHypotheses, Activity, Factors, Beginning, EternalLife, LevelsOfUnderstanding.

-----------
'''Veiksmai'''

The operations are what move us from one Division of everything to another. They are defined in terms of their impact on the Nullsome. They subsequently work cyclically, adding 1, 2, 3 or 0 perspectives:

* ''[AddOne +1]'' adds Perspective - one perspective - GodsView - yielding Structure and Understanding
* ''[AddTwo +2]'' adds ShiftInPerspective - two perspectives - first humansView, then GodsView of that - yielding Activity and Self-understanding
* ''[AddThree +3]'' adds Slack - three perspectives - first GodView, then humansView of that, then GodsView of that - yielding Interplay, RecurringActivity and SharedUnderstanding
* ''[AddNone +0]'' adds no perspectives - (adding four perspectives is perhaps equivalent to adding no perspectives) - yielding RecurringStructure and GoodUnderstanding

* We have a twofold ambiguity (and {{Topologies}}) if we presume there is a direction, but we don't know which it is, either {{Forwards}} or {{Backwards}}, from which we are interpreting the operation (either from the initial division ({{Beginning}}) reaching out, or from the final division ({{End}}) going back to the roots). This ambiguity is given by the equation [OneAddOne 1+1=2]. This is the outlook of the end, looking backwards in terms of two representations of the division to which it is returning, namely, beginning and end. This is the ambiguity between God and human when it is not clear who is the originator for a shift in perspective - God or human?
* We have a threefold ambiguity (and {{Divisions}}) if we presume there is an operation, a relationship between {{Beginning}} and {{End}}, but we don't know what it is, either [AddOne +1], [AddTwo +2] or [AddThree +3]. This ambiguity is given by the equation [OneAddTwo 1+2=3]. This is the outlook of the relationship between beginning and end.
* We have a fourfold ambiguity (and {{Representations}}) if we presume that each division has its own state, but we don't know what it is, yielding: (beginning or end) to (beginning or end). These are four LevelsOfUnderstanding. This ambiguity is given by the equation [OneAddThree 1+3=4]. This is the outlook of the beginning, looking forwards in terms of four representations of the division which it is reaching out from, constructively presuming that relationship.

I think that these presumptions are the ConstructiveHypotheses. The {{Factoring}} then makes sense as a split of determiniteness and ambiguity as part of such a presumption and the engagement of an other. I should also think of them in terms of the {{heart}} and the inversion effect.

Apparently, we should attribute the forwards direction when operations act on divisions with four representations: {{Nullsome}}, {{Onesome}}, {{Twosome}}, {{Threesome}}. And we should attribute the backwards direction when operations act on divisions with two representations: {{Foursome}}, {{Fivesome}}, {{Sixsome}}, {{Sevensome}}. And these presumably also list out the levels of understanding. But I should look into this when I know more.

The operations are what move us from one {{Division}} of everything to another. They are defined in terms of their impact on the {{Nullsome}}. They subsequently work cyclically, adding 1, 2, 3 or 0 perspectives:

* ''[AddOne +1]'' adds {{Perspective}} - one perspective - GodsView - yielding {{Structure}} and {{Understanding}}
* ''[AddTwo +2]'' adds ShiftInPerspective - two perspectives - first humansView, then GodsView of that - yielding {{Activity}} and {{Self-understanding}}
* ''[AddThree +3]'' adds {{Slack}} - three perspectives - first GodView, then humansView of that, then GodsView of that - yielding {{Interplay}}, RecurringActivity and SharedUnderstanding

The operations acts on divisions, yielding {{Equations}}. The operation acts on the {{Beginning}}, the original wholeness of the division. It places this wholeness within the structure of a mapping X->Y where the wholeness is identified with one of the three parts of the mapping: X, Y or ->. It helps to think of the wholeness as the {{Nullsome}}, but generally, it might be a perspective in the {{Onesome}} or any {{Division}}.
* For +1, the wholeness is the perspective in the {{Division}} that is the unity of all the others. It is the X. It is the original unity X that is interpreted as a perspective equal to the others and, through such interpretation ->, opens up a new unity Y of that equality.

Older idea: For +2, the wholeness is associated with the final shift in perspective (that leads to the comprehensive perspective). This final shift is reinterpreted as a perspective (the {{End}}) that is defined with regard to an external ground (the {{Beginning}}). For +3, the wholeness should be given by what these two share.

An operation (and its {{Activity}}) is characterized by the number of tracks along which it goes around the {{Threesome}}. For example, ''going beyond oneself'' goes around once. ''Engaging'' goes around twice - the quality goes around - and so does that which has the quality.

Each operation is EternalLife - return to the {{Beginning}} - but through a given number of steps:
* ''[AddOne +1]'' goes ever to the {{Beginning}}
* ''[AddTwo +2]'' goes to the {{End}} and then to the {{Beginning}}
* ''[AddThree +3]'' goes to the {{End}}, the {{Middle}} and the {{Beginning}}
* ''[AddNull +0]'' makes for the {{Beginning}}

===Operational summary - Conceiving God - {{Wishes}}===

We can derive all the structures by considering how we conceive God. We conceive God as a structure: {{Everything}}, {{Anything}}, {{Something}} or {{Nothing}}. Yet again, the structure of God is everything, and so we relate two structures. In doing so, we consider what everything wishes for:

* God as {{Everything}} = EverythingWishesForNothing = self-sufficient
* God as {{Anything}} = EverythingWishesForSomething = certain
* God as {{Something}} = EverythingWishesForAnything = calm
* God as {{Nothing}} = EverythingWishesForEverything = loving

In this way, we may also consider God, through everything, as reaching out ever further. We may think of this outreach as operations which take us from everything back to everything. Wishing allows us to consider God both as wisher and what he wishes for, so that we can be both together with God and separate from him, and thus can relate with him. We identify {{God}} as the one who wishes, and thus progressively with {{Everything}}, {{Anything}}, {{Something}} and {{Nothing}}. Respectively, we have him wish for nothing, something, anything and everything. This reflects the growth in our conception of God. We relate:

* '''[[add zero |Operation +0]]''' {{Everything}} Everything is the anchor concept by which we can work with absolutes. Think about: EverythingWishesForNothing. ''Consider the role of truth''
* '''[[add one |Operation +1]]''' {{Everything}} and {{Anything}} God ever goes beyond himself, yielding the {{Divisions}} of everything. The first three make for completeness, yet the operation continues. The division of everything is the relationship between everything and anything, the whole perspective and the partial perspective. Think about: EverythingWishesForSomething and {{Understanding}}. ''Consider the role of required concept''
* '''[[add two |Operation +2]]''' {{Everything}} and {{Something}}, {{Anything}} and {{Something}}. God allows for an outlook different than his own. ''Understand, coming to understand, understood'' is extended and reinterpreted as ''Understanding, coming to understand, not understanding, not coming to understand''. The operation +2 says that structure channels activity, and activity evokes structure. This means that we have structure arise from nonstructure (digital), and activity arise from nonactivity (analogue). Now we have two outlooks, we can step in and step out. We have {{Representations}} (relating something and everything - a view on the whole) and {{Topologies}} (relating something and anything - a view to the part). Compare with Christopher Alexander's PrinciplesOfLife, try to consider them as relating anything and something. Think about: EverythingWishesForAnything and [[self-understanding]]. ''Consider the role of same and different''
* '''[[add three |Operation +3]]''' {{Something}} and {{Nothing}}, {{Anything}} and {{Nothing}}, {{Everything}} and {{Nothing}}. Now we have the three-cycle and so can consider slack. The three {{Languages}} ({{Argumentation}}, {{Verbalization}}, {{Narration}}) arise as relationships with nothing (by something, anything and everything). How does factoring come into play? We then reintepret this all in terms of PrimaryStructures and injections. Identify evertyhing with nothing yields the InversionEffect. Think about: EverythingWishesForEverything and SharedUnderstanding and GoodUnderstanding. ''Consider the role of necessary, actual and possible''

* +0 from Understanding}} to Understanding
* +1 from Understanding}} to Self-understanding
* +2 from Understanding}} to SharedUnderstanding
* +3 from Understanding}} to GoodUnderstanding

God goes beyond himself, out of the unbounded and into the bounded, thus generating {{Everything}}.

{{God}} is of himself. What is there for God do?

{{Andrius}}: I think there is nothing wrong with this reasoning. I think it is in fact the truth.

Trys veiksmai išsako +1 sandarą, +2 savybes, +3 esmę. Pavyzdžiui: Dievas, viskas - Dievo sandara, troškimai - Dievo savybės, meilė - Dievo esmė. Įdomu, kad Dievo troškimai į labiausiai išsiskleidusį troškimą, meilę. O visko savybės susiveda į visas savybes turintį viską, mažiausiai savybių turi niekas. Visko keturias savybes turėtų išsakyti lygtis 1+2=3, o Dievo keturias savybes turėtų išsakyti lygtis 0+2=2.

Trys veiksmai išsako +1 sandarą, +2 savybes, +3 esmę. Pavyzdžiui: Dievas, viskas - Dievo sandara, troškimai - Dievo savybės, meilė - Dievo esmė. Įdomu, kad Dievo troškimai į labiausiai išsiskleidusį troškimą, meilę. O visko savybės susiveda į visas savybes turintį viską, mažiausiai savybių turi niekas.

--------------
'''Lygtys'''

-----------
'''Veiksmai'''

The operations are what move us from one {{Division}} of everything to another. They are defined in terms of their impact on the {{Nullsome}}. They subsequently work cyclically, adding 1, 2, 3 or 0 perspectives:

* ''[AddOne +1]'' adds {{Perspective}} - one perspective - GodsView - yielding {{Structure}} and {{Understanding}}
* ''[AddTwo +2]'' adds ShiftInPerspective - two perspectives - first humansView, then GodsView of that - yielding {{Activity}} and {{Self-understanding}}
* ''[AddThree +3]'' adds {{Slack}} - three perspectives - first GodView, then humansView of that, then GodsView of that - yielding {{Interplay}}, RecurringActivity and SharedUnderstanding
* ''[AddNone +0]'' adds no perspectives - (adding four perspectives is perhaps equivalent to adding no perspectives) - yielding RecurringStructure and GoodUnderstanding

http://www.ms.lt/en/andrius/diagrams/operations.jpg

The operations acts on divisions, yielding {{Equations}}. The operation acts on the {{Beginning}}, the original wholeness of the division. It places this wholeness within the structure of a mapping X->Y where the wholeness is identified with one of the three parts of the mapping: X, Y or ->. It helps to think of the wholeness as the {{Nullsome}}, but generally, it might be a perspective in the {{Onesome}} or any {{Division}}.
* For +1, the wholeness is the perspective in the {{Division}} that is the unity of all the others. It is the X. It is the original unity X that is interpreted as a perspective equal to the others and, through such interpretation ->, opens up a new unity Y of that equality.
* For +2, this same wholeness is understood as ->, a shift in activity. It is the structure evoked by the arisal of activity, that activity - equal interpretation - which gave rise to that structure, that new unity. This is a move from X = equal interpretation of the same (whence there is no activity, nothing to interpret!) to Y = equal interpretation of the different (whence there is activity).
* For +3, this same wholeness is understood as Y. What does that mean? It should be what is understood, what is common to understands and understanding.

Older idea: For +2, the wholeness is associated with the final shift in perspective (that leads to the comprehensive perspective). This final shift is reinterpreted as a perspective (the {{End}}) that is defined with regard to an external ground (the {{Beginning}}). For +3, the wholeness should be given by what these two share.

An operation (and its {{Activity}}) is characterized by the number of tracks along which it goes around the {{Threesome}}. For example, ''going beyond oneself'' goes around once. ''Engaging'' goes around twice - the quality goes around - and so does that which has the quality.

Each operation is EternalLife - return to the {{Beginning}} - but through a given number of steps:
* ''[AddOne +1]'' goes ever to the {{Beginning}}
* ''[AddTwo +2]'' goes to the {{End}} and then to the {{Beginning}}
* ''[AddThree +3]'' goes to the {{End}}, the {{Middle}} and the {{Beginning}}
* ''[AddNull +0]'' makes for the {{Beginning}}

I that the operations express {{God}}'s relationships:
* the operation +1 expresses his relationship with himself
* the operation +2 expresses his relationship with the {{heart}}
* the operation +3 expresses his relationship within the HolyTrinity
and in each case this is based on GoingBeyondOneself

'''Apžvalga veiksmais'''

===Operational summary - Conceiving God - {{Wishes}}===

We can derive all the structures by considering how we conceive God. We conceive God as a structure: {{Everything}}, {{Anything}}, {{Something}} or {{Nothing}}. Yet again, the structure of God is everything, and so we relate two structures. In doing so, we consider what everything wishes for:

* God as {{Everything}} = EverythingWishesForNothing = self-sufficient
* God as {{Anything}} = EverythingWishesForSomething = certain
* God as {{Something}} = EverythingWishesForAnything = calm
* God as {{Nothing}} = EverythingWishesForEverything = loving

We circumscribe God, and express our circumscription as an imbalance that everything wishes to address. This opens up frameworks that express our situation, in that it allows for us as those who '''do not wish for'''.

In this way, we may also consider God, through everything, as reaching out ever further. We may think of this outreach as operations which take us from everything back to everything. Wishing allows us to consider God both as wisher and what he wishes for, so that we can be both together with God and separate from him, and thus can relate with him. We identify {{God}} as the one who wishes, and thus progressively with {{Everything}}, {{Anything}}, {{Something}} and {{Nothing}}. Respectively, we have him wish for nothing, something, anything and everything. This reflects the growth in our conception of God. We relate:

'''[[add zero |Operation +0]]''' {{Everything}} Everything is the anchor concept by which we can work with absolutes. Think about: EverythingWishesForNothing. ''Consider the role of truth''

'''[[add one |Operation +1]]''' {{Everything}} and {{Anything}} God ever goes beyond himself, yielding the {{Divisions}} of everything. The first three make for completeness, yet the operation continues. The division of everything is the relationship between everything and anything, the whole perspective and the partial perspective. Think about: EverythingWishesForSomething and {{Understanding}}. ''Consider the role of required concept''

'''[[add two |Operation +2]]''' {{Everything}} and {{Something}}, {{Anything}} and {{Something}}. God allows for an outlook different than his own. ''Understand, coming to understand, understood'' is extended and reinterpreted as ''Understanding, coming to understand, not understanding, not coming to understand''. The operation +2 says that structure channels activity, and activity evokes structure. This means that we have structure arise from nonstructure (digital), and activity arise from nonactivity (analogue). Now we have two outlooks, we can step in and step out. We have {{Representations}} (relating something and everything - a view on the whole) and {{Topologies}} (relating something and anything - a view to the part). Compare with Christopher Alexander's PrinciplesOfLife, try to consider them as relating anything and something. Think about: EverythingWishesForAnything and [[self-understanding]]. ''Consider the role of same and different''

'''[[add three |Operation +3]]''' {{Something}} and {{Nothing}}, {{Anything}} and {{Nothing}}, {{Everything}} and {{Nothing}}. Now we have the three-cycle and so can consider slack. The three {{Languages}} ({{Argumentation}}, {{Verbalization}}, {{Narration}}) arise as relationships with nothing (by something, anything and everything). How does factoring come into play? We then reintepret this all in terms of PrimaryStructures and injections. Identify evertyhing with nothing yields the InversionEffect. Think about: EverythingWishesForEverything and SharedUnderstanding and GoodUnderstanding. ''Consider the role of necessary, actual and possible''

'''An Idea to Rethink'''

''The following idea that understanding is a base level does not make sense because it is the operation +1 that generates the divisions that participate in understanding, +2 for self-understanding and +3 for shared understanding. Perhaps the base level is good understanding. This would then also organize the levels more sensibly, so that the base level would have operation +0 and the nullsome.''

I think that they describe the level of awareness in understanding. They relate different LevelsOfUnderstanding with regard to the base level of Understanding.

* +0 from Understanding}} to Understanding
* +1 from Understanding}} to Self-understanding
* +2 from Understanding}} to SharedUnderstanding
* +3 from Understanding}} to GoodUnderstanding

In this sense, understanding is the experience of a division of everything, and this experience may be at any of four levels of awareness, from fully unconscious to fully conscious. In this sense, each of the Factors is a map from Understanding as a whole, a base level, to Understanding as any perspective within a new whole, within a higher level of understanding.

--------------

'''Laiškas Christopher Langan'''

Žr. [[Ir Vienas]], [[Ir Du]], [[Ir Trys]], [[Meilė]]. Taip pat: SharedUnderstanding, Heart, ConstructiveHypotheses.

===From a letter that I wrote to ChristopherLangan===

started going through your introduction
http://www.megafoundation.org/CTMU/Articles/IntroCTMU.htm
which I'm finding to be a good place to start.

"all things are the same" (as with fate).
http://www.openleader.com/index.php/GlossaryOfStructure/Twosome

through, and reflect":
http://www.openleader.com/index.php/GlossaryOfStructure/Threesome

Žr. [[Ir Vienas]], [[Ir Du]], [[Ir Trys]], [[Meilė]]. Taip pat: {{Operations}}, {{Equations}}, SharedUnderstanding, {{heart}}, ConstructiveHypotheses

Dievui yra tik vienybė vietoj nulybės, tad jis neapeina ratu. Dievui vienybė yra klausimas, ar Dievas yra būtinas? Dievas septynerybe nebūtinas, jisai ilsisi.

There are 24 equations that result from the 3 {{Operations}} ([AddOne +1], [AddTwo +2], [AddThree +3]) acting on the eight {{Divisions}} of {{Everything}}.

[AddOne +1] adds a new end [NullAddOne 0+1=1], [OneAddOne 1+1=2], [TwoAddOne 2+1=3], [ThreeAddOne 3+1=4], [FourAddOne 4+1=5], [FiveAddOne 5+1=6], [SixAddOne 6+1=7], [SevenAddOne 7+1=0].

[AddTwo +2] looks back at oneself (by way of the end) [NullAddTwo 0+2=2], [OneAddTwo 1+2=3], [TwoAddTwo 2+2=4], [ThreeAddTwo 3+2=5], [FourAddTwo 4+2=6], [FiveAddTwo 5+2=7], [SixAddTwo 6+2=0], [SevenAddTwo 7+2=1].

[AddThree +3] introduces the 8 cycle of divisions, it is a cyclic operation [NullAddThree 0+3=3], [OneAddThree 1+3=4], [TwoAddThree 2+3=5], [ThreeAddThree 3+3=6], [FourAddThree 4+3=7], [FiveAddThree 5+3=0], [SixAddThree 6+3=1], [SevenAddThree 7+3=2].

--------

'''Veiksmai'''

===What is an operation?===

'''Note: I have made progress relating the operation to the SecondaryStructures'''

There seem to be four operations: [AddZero +0], [AddOne +1], [AddTwo +2], [AddThree +3] that map DivisionsOfEverything onto divisions.

In particular, I think that consciousness is expressed by the operation [PlusThree +3].

I'm currently interested in relating these to TheBeginning and TheEnd.

+1 adds a new end [NullAddOne 0+1=1], [OneAddOne 1+1=2], [TwoAddOne 2+1=3], [ThreeAddOne 3+1=4], [FourAddOne 4+1=5], [FiveAddOne 5+1=6], [SixAddOne 6+1=7], [SevenAddOne 7+1=0].

+2 looks back at oneself (by way of the end) [NullAddTwo 0+2=2], [OneAddTwo 1+2=3], [TwoAddTwo 2+2=4], [ThreeAddTwo 3+2=5], [FourAddTwo 4+2=6], [FiveAddTwo 5+2=7], [SixAddTwo 6+2=0], [SevenAddTwo 7+2=1].

+3 introduces the 8 cycle of divisions, it is a cyclic operation [NullAddThree 0+3=3], [OneAddThree 1+3=4], [TwoAddThree 2+3=5], [ThreeAddThree 3+3=6], [FourAddThree 4+3=7], [FiveAddThree 5+3=0], [SixAddThree 6+3=1], [SevenAddThree 7+3=2].

Tai 24 = 3 x 8 lygtys.

------------

Žr. [[Ir Vienas]], [[Ir Du]], [[Ir Trys]]. Taip pat: {{Operations}}, {{Equations}}, SharedUnderstanding, {{heart}}, ConstructiveHypotheses

===Discussion===

{{Andrius}}: Benoit, see: {{Love}}

Dievui yra tik vienybė vietoj nulybės, tad jis neapeina ratu. Dievui vienybė yra klausimas, ar Dievas yra būtinas?

'''[[add three |Operation +3]]''' {{Something}} and {{Nothing}}, {{Anything}} and {{Nothing}}, {{Everything}} and {{Nothing}}. Now we have the three-cycle and so can consider slack. The three {{Languages}} ({{Argumentation}}, {{Verbalization}}, {{Narration}}) arise as relationships with nothing (by something, anything and everything). How does factoring come into play? We then reintepret this all in terms of PrimaryStructures and injections. Identify evertyhing with nothing yields the InversionEffect. Think about: EverythingWishesForEverything and SharedUnderstanding and GoodUnderstanding. ''Consider the role of necessary, actual and possible''

and in each case this is based on GoingBeyondOneself

Sarunas Raudys http://www.science.mii.lt/mii/raudys/

''The four living creatures said,'' Amen! ''The elders fell down and worshiped.''

Attach:operations.jpg

Žr. [[Aprašas]], [[Užduotys]], [[Sumanymai]], [[DievoProtas20120401]], [[Lietuvių spauda]], [[Švietimas Čikagoje]]

* http://www.selflearners.net/Business/NextSteps

----------

[+++Sumanymai Ateičiai+++]

* Noriu kurti savišvietos drobes, sulaukti rėmėjų
* Noriu bendrauti su žmonėmis lauke, paišyti jų išgyvenimus

[+Kalendorius+]

* [[http://chicago.metromix.com/events | Chicago Metromix renginiai]]
* [[http://chicago.metromix.com/stories/106-chicago-festival-guide | Čikagos festivalių sąrašas]]
* [[http://unscene.com/navigator/events/2/all/all/1/10 | Unscene renginiai]]

* Gegužės 9 d.: International Arts Group, Mariana, 4161 N Damen ?
* Gegužės 12 d., šeštadienį, 10-4, Collect-o-Rama, nemokoma, Pulaski Park Fieldhouse, 1419 West Blackhawk Street, tarp Division ir North, 1400 N
* '''Gegužės 16 d., trečiadienį, 9:30, prisistatymas maisto šalpai''' ... prieš tai išsiaiškinti, kas atsitiko, kodėl kviečia į Cottage Grove
* '''Gegužės 17 d., ketvirtadienį, 1:00-3:00 mano paraiškos aptarimas'''
* Gegužės 18-20 d., Comics
* Gegužės mėnuo: Awesome Foundation
* Collect-o-rama

[+Pažintys+]
* Dara Epison, U of C, program coordinator for university and community arts collaborations, Artistic interventions at Prairie and 55th.
* Gray Center for Art and Inquiry, David Levin, Director; dlevin AT uchicago.edu, Leslie Buxban Danzing, program curator; - rašyti paraišką
* Faheem Majeed, former director, SSCAC
* Scott Alexander, CTU, Associate Professor of Islam, Director, Catholic-Muslim Studies Program scalexan AT ctu .edu
* Intuit - submissions AT art.org siusti 2-3 paveikslus ir menininko biografija
* Dan Bassill, mentoring-tutoring
* Taylor Castle, Studio 101 vadovas, fotografas taylor AT http://www.taylorcastle.com
* Cultural Center - Cynthia Quick cynthia.quick ir Fabiola Ramirez fabi.ramirez AT explorechicago.org
* CTU: Eileen Crowley, Liturgy, Communications
* CTU: Antonio Sison asison AT ctu.edu, Theology, Film, World Cinema
* Chicago Theological Seminary, Bo-Myung Seo, Associate Professor of Theology and Cultural Criticism, bseo AT ctschicago.org
* U of C meno centras - Jessica Stockhodder, chair, skulptore; Geof Oppenheimer, civic values
* Experimental Station (773) 241-6044
* Hyde Park Art Center, Allison Quinn, Director of Exhibitions, aquinn AT hydeparkart.org
* Muzikantai: Ben Lamar (AACM), Douglas R Ewart (AACM), bambooewart AT aol

Mąstau kur rengti kitas parodas. Ieškoti ryšio su kitais tikėjimais:
* [[http://www.firstuchicago.org | Unitarian Universalist church]]
* [[http://www.hpkifc.org/ | The Hyde Park and Kenwood Interfaith Council]]
* [[http://www.theinterfaithunion.org | The Interfaith Union]]
* [[http://www.ifyc.org | Interfaith Youth Core]]
* Elaine Moragne, jos atrium


* Jaunimo centre, kuruoja Laima Apanavičienė
* Užupio Galeroje, kuruoja Dina Čiuladė
* [[http://www.yollocalli.org | Yollocalli]], kuruoja Whitney Ross
* [[http://africanfestivalchicago.com/pavillions/fine-arts-pavilion/ | African Festival of the Arts]]
* Intuit
* Pilsen galerijoje, kuri man patinka
* bažnyčiose
* festivaliuose
* seminarijose
* galerijose
* Pispala
* [[http://www.firsttrinitychicago.org | First Trinity Lutheran Church]], pastor Tom Gaulke

-------------------

[+Vaidyba+]

[[http://possibilityplayhouse.com/Home_Page.html | The Possibility Playhouse]]

[++Išreklamuoti++]

[+Čikagoje+]
* [[http://www.chicagotribune.com/about/chi-newspaperemail,0,3525235.htmlstory | Chicago Tribune]], Sun-Times - Darryl Halliday
* [[http://www.meetup.com/IFRAA-Chicago/members/21445041/ | Doug Lasch]], Chicago Interfaith Forum on Religion, Art and Architecture
* Bronzeville:
* Čikagos meno kritikai:
* Čikagos menininkai:
* http://chicagoartmagazine.com/2010/07/visual-art-links-2010/
* Intuit, Luma - Heaven and Hell
Parasiau
* [[http://classifieds.chicagoreader.com/chicago/southside-art-show-gods-mind-and-the-republic-of-uzhupis/ViewAd?oid=3776994 | Chicago Reader]]
* [[http://www.chicagoartistsresource.org/dance/node/40161 | Chicago Artists Resource]]
* @kellymreaves, kr AT http://www.gapersblock.com
* [[http://www.chicagodefender.com/articles.sec-34-1-our-culture.html | Defender]], I wrote to Earl Calloway
* http://www.thisiscolossal.com/contact/ nusiųsti darbų submissions@
* [[http://chicagoartmagazine.com/about/ | Chicago Art Map]]
* [[http://alphaomegaarts.blogspot.com/p/about-us.html | Alpha Omega Arts]], Luther Goins in Chicago
* Imagine Englewood
* Windy Citizen
* http://timeoutchicago.com/arts-culture

* [[http://www.explorechicago.org/city/en/supporting_narrative/events___special_events/special_events/mose/chicago_neighborhood.html | Festivaliai]]

[+Paramos šaltiniai+]

* [[http://www.miraslist.com | Mira's List]]
* [[http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/dca/provdrs/grants/svcs/svc1.html | Neighborhood Arts Program]], balandžio mėn. 18d. įteikti
* [[http://awesomechicago.org | Chicago Awesome Foundation]], kiekvieno mėnesio gale
* [[http://www.chicagoartistsresource.org/music/node/176/weblinks/chicago | Parama menams Čikagoje]]
* [[http://www.chicagoartistsresource.org/music/node/38060 | Community Arts Assistance Program]], iki sausio 30d.
* [[http://www.arts.illinois.gov/grants-programs/funding-programs/quickstart | QuickStart $1,000 mokyklose]]
* [[http://www.chicagoartistsresource.org/music/node/37592 | Seabury Foundation - Social and Cultural Opportunity]], birželio 15d., Imagine Englewood if...
* [[http://sites.target.com/site/en/company/page.jsp?contentId=WCMP04-031819 | Target - Art and Culture in School]], balandžio 30d., mokyklose
* [[http://www.chicagoartistsresource.org/music/node/5784 | Sara Lee Foundation - Diversity through highly visible Cultural Programs]]
* [[http://blackrockarts.blogspot.com/2011/11/apply-for-grant-from-black-rock-arts.html | Black Rock Art]], interaktyvus visuomeninis menas, gruodžio mėn. 1 d.

[+Englewood+]

* Englewood Portal
* [[http://timeoutchicago.com/arts-culture/14742201/can-englewood-be-saved | Asiaha Butler]], Media-N-Motion
* Mark Harris, Englewood Film Festival
* http://mrsenglewood.blogspot.com
* West Englewood library, Englewood library
* Derrick Rose
* Englewood Jazz Festival
* [[http://www.cpag.net/home/artistbios/barnes.html | Rahmann Barnes]]
* RAGE
* SafeStart
* Center for Nonviolence Prevention
* google "Englewood Nonprofits"


[+Plačiau+]

* Twitter

[+Menininkai, su kuriais reikėtų susipažinti+]

* Caravaggio, Kandinsky, Monet, Frank Stella [[http://www.columbia.edu/itc/architecture/ockman/pdfs/week2/stella.pdf | Working Space]], Alice Neel, Robert Rauschenberg, Hairy Who
* parašyti [[http://www.ski.org/CWTyler_lab/CWTyler/Art%20Investigations/C20th_Space/C20thSpace.html | The Concept of Space in Twentieth Century Art, Christopher W. Tyler and Amy Ione]]
* [[http://www.industryoftheordinary.com | Industry of the Ordinary]]