Tuesday, 30 June 2015

{Dream: Idle in Church}[7th October 1983]

[Redbook2:304-305][19831007:1430b]{Dream: Idle in Church}[7th October 1983]

19831007.1430
[continued]

On Sunday morning (after a large late Indian takeaway*) I dreamt (among other things that I cannot remember) that I was in a Church and someone (my mother?) said that of course my father had had a Sufi master for many years. (This seems terribly unlikely now, but was a source of wonder then.) I found myself by the Altar handing up some things to someone who was putting them behind an upright – the Cross? – on the front of the Altar on which he stood. He, expressly or by implication, criticised me for not handing these articles up energetically enough.


*[Presumably, the night before....]
 
 
[PostedBlogger30062015]

Monday, 29 June 2015

{A Dream: The River North Tyne}[7th October 1983]

[Redbook2:304][19831007:1430]{A Dream: The River North Tyne}[7th October 1983]

19831007.1430

In a dream (after a heavy late supper) early this morning I found myself in a city square or Place which I knew – Trafalgar Square? – from the left side of which shrubbery was cleared away to reveal an unsuspected graveyard – filled with intricate black carvings, this time of devils, but with compassionate eyes. I think that there was a Church beyond. (If we assume for the sake of argument that I was facing North – ) I went to the 'North' side of the graveyard from the 'East' side where I had been (i.e. the 'West' side of the Square) but from there had to hurry up the now sloping way to the 'South' side on a series of earthquake-type shocks. As I reached the 'South' top of this slope I saw bulging fabric ahead – under classical columns? – and someone said that the River North Tyne was about to boil over**. There was a definite feeling that something big and elemental was about to happen.*


*See [Redbook3:]11-14: [Marginal sketch plan of an actual location omitted here.] <871223>.

**[On September 26, 1983, the nuclear early warning system of the Soviet Union twice reported the launch of American Minuteman intercontinental ballistic missiles from bases in the United States. These missile attack warnings were correctly identified as a false alarm by Stanislav Yevgrafovich Petrov, an officer of the Soviet Air Defence Forces. This decision is seen as having prevented an erroneous data for decision about retaliatory nuclear attack on the United States and its NATO allies, which would have likely resulted in nuclear war and the potential deaths of millions of people. Investigation of the satellite warning system later confirmed that the system had malfunctioned. (Edited from Wikipedia, '1983 Soviet nuclear false alarm incident'). See also [Redbook2:307-311][19831024:1000g]{Dream: The Peace of God [continued(5)]}, final footnote.]

[PostedBlogger29062015]

Sunday, 28 June 2015

{Sir, If an Argentinian plane....}[c9th September 1983]

[Redbook2:305A][19830909c]{Sir, If an Argentinian plane....}[c9th September 1983]


Sir,

If an Argentinian plane, having the appearance of a civilian aircraft, were to approach beyond the exclusion zone of the Falklands and refuse to obey or acknowledge all attempts made to divert it, as the Reverend Claude Riches postulates (September 9), might not the attitude of the British military authorities depend upon whether or not Argentina and Britain had agreed that hostilities had ceased?

Part of the shock caused by the destruction of the Korean airliner* arises from the fact that a nation** with which many in the West thought we were at peace has behaved as though we were at war.

Does it suggest something about our reaction to this that, of the six letters on this subject in The Times of 9/9/83, five end with question marks?


*[On September 1, 1983, Korean Air Lines Flight 007 was shot down by Soviet fighter jets over the Sea of Japan near Moneron Island just west of Sakhalin island, having strayed off-course over prohibited Soviet airspace. All 269 passengers and crew aboard were killed. (Edited from Wikipedia, '1983 Soviet nuclear false alarm incident')]

**[The Soviet Union]

[PostedBlogger28062015]

Saturday, 27 June 2015

{A Dream of the Holy City? [continued]}[26th August 1983]

[Redbook2:302-303][19830826:1045]{A Dream of the Holy City? [continued]}[26th August 1983]

19830826.1045
[continued]


I feel that one should disregard the Freudian connotations of a small, round moist hole in her* inner upper thigh; although sex undoubtedly serves as a symbol for deeper connections, I doubt whether the primary significance of this mark is sexual.**


*[See last previous section]

**{at least superficially}

[PostedBlogger27062015]

Friday, 26 June 2015

{A Dream of the Holy City?}[26th August 1983]

[Redbook2:302-303][19830826:1045]{A Dream of the Holy City?}[26th August 1983]

19830826.1045

Curiously, in a dream this morning some of the characters from yesterday morning* seem to have reappeared (It was preceded by a fairly confused sequence involving Tube trains at Victoria [Railway Station in London] coming to the surface for repairs via a spiral tunnel). I was in a city which I took to be in Israel. Youths were milling about; I was with a black-haired soldier who suddenly, against all pleas, raised his rifle and shot a youth with the straight, very fair hair which tends in my dream mind to get confused with [… and …], I believe. The youth fell down, to the great distress of those around.

Two of these, a young girl and a young boy, walked ahead of me and the soldier, up a hill path which curved round to the left out of sight. I remonstrated with the soldier over his actions, ending rather feebly with a disclaimer of authority. To my surprise, instead of speaking with the force of his military might he complimented me on the state of affairs in my Country in some way which I could not quite understand – thereby disarming me.

At the top [of the hill] we came into a house with two adjoining rooms off a lobby. The soldier asked me to fling open the door while he stood with rod [sic] raised; but inside, all we saw was a small part of a body (presumably female) leaping under bedclothes, with a hint of that extreme fairness of hair and/or skin. Outside, the soldier told the rest of us to wait in the room next door while he visited this person; I had the impression (remembering perhaps scenes in novels etc.) that he intended to have intercourse, probably sexual, with the person.

In the other room, the young girl sat on the bed and the young boy next to it. The girl showed me with pride a mark on her body – I think on her inner upper thigh – which was a small, round moist hole like an abscess; but I recognised it as a small bullet hole, identical to the hole in the cheek in the previous dream*, and I recognised her and her brother as the couple from that dream. She had in both dreams light brown hair; he may have had about him an impression of a silvery-grey colour, although not with any sense of disease or decay.

I felt it necessary to lock the door; but as I did so the soldier returned, and I had to unlock it again. He said words to the effect of: 'what are you three in here ....' I could not understand the last word, and suggested some possibilities; the possibility which occurred to me as most likely, although I did not mention it, was 'plotting'.

*

*[[Redbook2:300-301][19830826:0045]{A Dream of Missed Directions: Three Chapels and the White Hotel}[26th August 1983]]

[continues]

[PostedBlogger26062015]

Thursday, 25 June 2015

{A Dream of Missed Directions: Three Chapels and the White Hotel [continued]}[26th August 1983]

[Redbook2:301][19830826:0045b]{A Dream of Missed Directions: Three Chapels and the White Hotel [continued]}[26th August 1983]

19830826.0045
[continued]

A few days ago – actually some two weeks ago – I travelled to the Gallery in a mood of great peace, the [O] above me, as has only happened once before. The last time, at my destination, I unexpectedly met [B], and was reconciled to him – as I was expecting to be at some stage. This time I met a friend of [SX]'s, […], for whom we may do some work. This may be irrelevant; but he has been attending [the] S[chool of] E[conomic] S[cience] with [SX].

During the last few days the four principals and their relationship have been powerfully in my mind.



[PostedBlogger25062015]

Wednesday, 24 June 2015

{A Dream of Missed Directions: Three Chapels and the White Hotel}[26th August 1983]

[Redbook2:300-301][19830826:0045]{A Dream of Missed Directions: Three Chapels and the White Hotel}[26th August 1983]

19830826.0045

Sometimes, I dream in a fashion which seems significant but also, at first[,] confused; so my dream this morning develops meaning only now, when (perhaps) only the significant items remain.

Briefly,

{1} I walked in family company along a straight path;

{2} coming to a hedge/wall at right angles, the path turned right along it, and

{3} I recognised in the wall those three chapels or memorials of an earlier dream, but by concept rather than by architecture.

{4} In a Church-like building on the next corner – where the path turned back – I spoke to a young golden-haired girl, identified with both […] and […], who said something about lack of parental freedom ([…]) which surprised me because I thought she was married ([…]). I realised I had bare feet and, despite the fact that others had too, said I would go back to change. A voice like my father's said I should do as I wished. In an anti-chapel [sic] (but I thought we were in an ante-chapel) I saw a ceremony – a marriage?

{5} I set off across the fields, expecting to be walking parallel to the first path but in the opposite direction. I could see a road parallel on my right. In a field were sitting a (young) boy and a (young) girl. I asked them the way back to the (white) hotel – Earl's Court (which I could see in my mind's eye like a giant white barn). Accidentally I touched the boy on the lower leg; he got up and walked away. While asking her, I accidentally touched the girl on the lower leg(?); she turned on me a face of wretched sadness, in one cheek of which was a small (round) moist hole, like an abscess.*

Either then or on awaking, it occurred to me that I had misread the map: that I was continuing along the line of the second path, at right angles to the direction I thought I was taking.


[A small, rough diagram is included here in the manuscript; it may be scanned and inserted in the typescript at a later stage.]

*[See next entry but one: [Redbook2:302-303][19830826:1045]{A Dream of the Holy City?}[26th August 1983]]

[continues]

[PostedBlogger24062015]

Tuesday, 23 June 2015

{Quantum Muddle [continued(5)]}[7th August 1983]

[Redbook2:299][19830807:0900]{Quantum Muddle [continued(5)]}[7th August 1983]

19830807.0900

I have read a little further*, and it seems that I may have been incorrect in thinking that mathematics or science denies the potential validity of an event which science cannot experimentally verify: one of the problems seems to be that an individual electron can be recorded but not predicted; the other is that its position and its momentum cannot both be established at once (that is an older problem, surely: analogous to calculus?). All I can say is that the presentation in English is ambiguous. However, the argument on the previous pages** is still interesting, although it needs reorganising. It has by now been so much amended that it may not represent anything very much.


*[Presumably as in [Redbook2:296-297][19830806:2330b]{Quantum Muddle}[6th August 1983], first footnote]

**[Presumably the last four previous entries above.]


[PostedBlogger23062015]

Monday, 22 June 2015

{Quantum Muddle [continued(4)]}[6th August 1983]

[Redbook2:298-299][19830806:2330e]{Quantum Muddle [continued(4)]}[6th August 1983]

19830806.2330
[continued]

This* is how Science has validated Mathematics in the eyes of Science. But Mathematics seems to be formally admitting for the first time (?) that this is how Science validates Mathematics in the mind of Mathematics: i.e that Mathematics, however harmoniously correct, may be wrong as a statement of material reality. If that is so, it may be wrong in this statement as in any other: this being an attempt to see the mind of the Mathematician through the mind of the Scientist, and not vice-versa.

(This, finished and read through at 1 a.m., certainly needs rethinking and probably rewriting to turn it from record to expression(?).)**


*[See last 3 previous entries.]

**What on earth does all this mean? <870812>

[continues]

[PostedBlogger22062015]

Sunday, 21 June 2015

{Quantum Muddle [continued(3)]}[6th August 1983]

[Redbook2:298][19830806:2330d]{Quantum Muddle [continued(3)]}[6th August 1983]

19830806.2330
[continued]

Put more plainly*, mathematics seems to be a framework in the Mind of men, describing certain interactions between the material world and that mind (I think that was what I was going to write this morning** – something about mathematics being the place where the rules of nature meet the realm of mind, e.g. in music) – but we have no evidence to lead us to suppose that the harmonious patterns of mathematics in our minds precisely parallel the nature of the material world except exactly insofar as they have and do, according to non-mathematical evidence such as Scientific experiment.

Mathematics uses its own perceptions of harmony to inform Science that, if Science cannot observe a precise material future in advance (i.e. cannot predict precisely a future event), the precise material future cannot exist materially in advance. In this particular case Mathematics (presumably) is taken to predict the non-existence of the future which it says does not exist because Science cannot predict it.
But the statement can be taken as a general statement without reference to any particular event. The implication of either case is that if Mathematics ever does predict a precise material future, and Science cannot observe it, the future still does not exist precisely in advance – or else Mathematics has no need of Science, which is precisely what one would expect Mathematics to say but is the opposite of what is being said by implication by Scientists in their interpretation of this Mathematics.


*[See last previous entry]

**[See [Redbook2:294-295][19830806.2330]{A Dream of Progression}[6th August 1983] -- final paragraph.]

[continues]

[PostedBlogger21062015]

Saturday, 20 June 2015

{Quantum Muddle [continued]}[6th August 1983]

[Redbook2:297][19830806:2330c]{Quantum Muddle [continued]}[6th August 1983]

19830806.2330
[continued]

Aha, the quantum physicist says, but these* are subjective experiences (the mystic might deny that) whereas our world view emerges from the precision of mathematics (– a language of which I have only the most basic rudiments – although I am struggling onwards).

But what is mathematics? Surely it is a form of expression which develops within the minds of certain Men, satisfying a sense of precise harmony within those minds, and validated in scientific terms so far by its ability to predict the material event correctly in the sense that the event could be verified scientifically. This is the only objective, external or scientific proof that mathematics has ever (so far as I know) been subjected to by Men. (There is a paradox lurking here somewhere, but I am not sure that I am going to be able to sniff it out!)

Now mathematics, having been accepted as** valid because it has provided a valid description of aspects of reality before Science validated those aspects of reality experimentally, turns round and says that, so far as mathematics is concerned, the reality which it predicted need not have necessarily existed independently of the way Science verified them experimentally.*** For purely mathematical reasons, contrary to Science's own fundamental philosophy, mathematics makes a present to Science of its own supremacy – its faith in itself – in defining reality – but in doing so, cuts away the foundation of its own ability to make such a prediction or ruling affecting the material world.


*[See last previous entry]
 
**(scientifically?)

*** {Does it?}

[continues]

[PostedBlogger20062015]

Friday, 19 June 2015

{Quantum Muddle}[6th August 1983]

[Redbook2:296-299][19830806:2330b]{Quantum Muddle}[6th August 1983]

19830806.2330
[continued]

It is perhaps time for a layman's report on his half-baked view of the quantum approach. Clearly the quantum physicist would turn round and say: 'Yes, of course, you are an old-style classical determinist (and an ignorant one at that)' – but that does not answer the questions.

Einstein seems to have started the trend which he would not follow through[,] by saying that Time is what you measure by clocks: if the identical clock runs faster, time runs faster where it is. But is it? '“No phenomenon is a phenomenon until it is an observed phenomenon.”' 'Not only must human experimenters give up ever knowing when a particular atom is going to radiate or a particular nucleus undergo radioactive decay, but these events are unknown even in the perfect mind of God.'*

It seems the summit of conceit to limit what exists to Man can possibly measure**. The God mentioned is the Physicists' God – 'the God of the physicists is the cosmic order' – the Immanent or Universal aspect of God. This God of Materiality might well be unable to predict the reality – in fact, must be unable to predict it all, one suspects, if the Universe is to have internal consistency – but the reality may still exist.

It is exactly the 'random' and uncertain distribution of individual particles of that material reality that would enable the Transcendent or Total aspect of God, who would operate 'outside' the material Universe, to affect the outcome of material events within it without contravening its internal 'laws'. It is this aspect of God, 'mystics' believe, who is known deep within their essential beings, beyond materiality, as the ultimate Reality – and so can influence Men's minds directly.


*(Pagels, 'The Cosmic Code'.)

**(cf. Nietsche, God is Dead, and Superman?)

[continues]

[PostedBlogger19062015]

Thursday, 18 June 2015

{A Dream of Progression}[6th August 1983]

[Redbook2:294-295][19830806:2330]{A Dream of Progression}[6th August 1983]

19830806.2330

Yesterday morning I dreamt with (inter alia) these elements from my memories:

{1} Trying to discover from the lists, at [St. Q's]* on the first day of term, which dormitory I was in, and finding to my dismay that I was in the largest dormitory: not the Great Space, I argued with another there, but a similar name;

a conversation on the lawn in front of the house there;

{2} clinging precariously to the outside of a double-decker bus from the School, which swayed and careered along the [C] track towards the main road: I said this was stupid and, when the driver persisted, I got off (this recalling** an incident in the TA when*** I did precisely that from a Land Rover, realising too late that I had thus disgraced myself);

{3} Walking back from this incident to the […] junction, encountering a dangerous group of former T.A.**** contemporaries who (after heckling?) gave me a letter to take to – another of their number whose face I could (and can) picture but whose name I could not remember;

{4} followed by one of the T.A. down that track I branched right into the field and was trapped in a small bare room by him, for interrogation??*****;

{5} walking alone down the Hanging Field, I passed through the gate at the bottom to see, just up the hill on the track******, a giant of a man whom I also thought I recognised from the T.A., but of a different nature: steadier, and more perceptive: he said words to the effect of: “I realise now why you are so … (defensive? suspicious?) when at every step you have been (kicked in the teeth?). Here ' (holding out his hand): 'Shake.' – with great misgiving I forced myself to turn the few paces up the hill and shake his great hand: and turned away, with him watching me steadily (?), to walk down round the [sharp] Bend towards home.


This dream, which seemed a jumble at first, now seems capable of logical and consistent interpretation in line with that last incident, although it is not sensitive towards my vanity.

I had intended to write this this morning, with a shorter piece; but the other has left that part of my mind, together with all idea of it, so that I can no longer consciously recall it, and must hope that in due course it will come up again. There is the moral again: Do Not Delay!


*[First boarding school, aged 8 to 13]

**– in the dream? or later? – <930117>

***through sheer obstinacy <930117>

****[Territorial Army and Volunteer Reserve]

*****This was near where I had hoped to build a house; and exactly where my father put his caravan (about now?) and later built his house. <871213>

******[i.e. the same track which had been left in {4}, but further on down the hill towards home]


[PostedBlogger18062015]

Wednesday, 17 June 2015

{Creative Education [continued]}[3rd August 1983]

[Redbook2:292-293][19830803:1230]{Creative Education [continued]}[3rd August 1983]

19830803.1230
[continued]

The underlying assumption here* is that knowledge and the information/structure of the Universe are 'simple' in the number of assumptions (not necessarily in their comprehensibility) at the fundamental level, and 'complex' in the number of assumptions (though possibly easier to grasp if one accepts the assumptions) at the applied or 'superficial' level.

School teaching (in my experience) starts {at} a level of relative complexity of assumptions, or superficiality, and proceeds to even more superficial** levels before returning to fundamental principles. This may bar many students before they reach their natural stage: students who, if they had started at the pure level, could have constructed their own (and understood others') levels of practice far more easily than they were able to when ordered to accept the assumptions without knowledge of purer principles.***


*[See last previous entry]

**(i.e. complex, presumably) <930117>

***I think it would be a mistake, here, to confuse 'creative' with 'artistic'.... <870812>


[PostedBlogger17062015]

Tuesday, 16 June 2015

{Creative Education}[3rd August 1983]

[Redbook2:292-293][19830803:1230]{Creative Education}[3rd August 1983]

19830803.1230

The creative person, by nature bound always to question the habits and assumptions of his and others' World-view, always finds it difficult to accept the school-teacher's high level of implied assumptions – not least because many teachers refuse to admit that there are any implied assumptions in their teaching.

One implication of this is that creative and non-creative children should be taught separate subjects (or 'sectors') and at separate 'levels' or 'depths' of knowledge. Creative children should be taught at a deep or 'pure' level, sectors whose assumptions are fundamentally inherent in the human mind and/or are easily identifiable in practice. Non-creative children should be taught at a practical or 'applied' level, and may be taught sectors whose assumptions are more numerous and more arbitrary (if these must be taught).

[continues]

[PostedBlogger16062015]

Monday, 15 June 2015

{The Creativity Scale [continued (4)][-- Art]}[28th July 1983]

[Redbook2:291][19830728:0930d]{The Creativity Scale [continued (4)][-- Art]}[28th July 1983]

19830728.0930
[continued]

Art – Art is the end where the individual's purpose becomes crucial. Here the Seeker after Truth may use Creativity to the full, measuring only against perception of Inner Truth (whatever that is dependent on)* for his token of “success”. Precisely because of the 'subjectivity' of this perception the Artist often turns – may feel forced to turn – to his colleagues and others for confirmation of his success, which leads to a situation not wholly different from that of the Lawyer.

So we see that in these few examples**, the representation might be something like this.

[There follows a diagram, which might be scanned and inserted at a later date, showing a horizontal dashed line or axis labelled “Line of received truth” along which is written in order from the left end: “Law”, “Accountancy”, “Commerce?”, “Technology”, “etc.,”***, “Science”, “Art”, “Religion?”; and from the left end of which rises, at an angle of approximately 16 degrees to the horizontal line, a solid line labelled “Line of perceived truth” along which is written in order rising from the left end: “Contemporary (or 'Peer') Truth”, “Physical Truth”, “Inner Spiritual Truth”.]


*[cf. Last previous entry]

**[See also last three previous entries.]

***[Slightly lower than, and overlapping, the words on each side.]


[PostedBlogger15062015]

Sunday, 14 June 2015

{The Creativity Scale [continued (3)][-- Science and Technology]}[28th July 1983]

[Redbook2:291][19830728:0930c]{The Creativity Scale [continued (3)][-- Science and Technology]}[28th July 1983]

19830728.0930
[continued]

Science and Technology (including Construction) provide opportunities for Creativity independent (we believe) of what others believe – success is dependent instead upon the Truth of the physical world (whatever that is dependent upon). It is therefore distressing to see how much reputations in academic life depend upon papers vetted by colleagues, presumably a reflection of the proportion of non-creative and routine work done.


[continues]

[PostedBlogger14062015]