{Cardinals and Diagonals, Position and Movement}[4th August 1990]

[Redbook7:187][19900804:1125b]{Cardinals and Diagonals, Position and Movement}[4th August 1990]

19900804.1125

[continued]

I am curious about the relationship between the 4 cardinal and the 4 diagonal degrees of the C[ircles] A[nalysis &] S[ynthesis] ‘circle’, in one respect. I have thought for some time that the diagonals tend to represent movement and the cardinals position, in relation to each other (not in any absolute sense, so far as I know). I know from experience that the cardinals are at least as strongly represented on the O[uter] C[ircle] as the diagonals, and vice versa* on the I[nner] C[ircle].**

The first attribution *** above, however, tends to contradict the second, if (as I have assumed), the O[uter] C[ircle] tends to be associated with change or movement and the I[nner] C[ircle] with position. So perhaps the last assumption is incorrect in an ‘inner’ sense: certainly although I can map outward change and decay on the O[uter] C[ircle] for myself, I was more aware[,] at the time[,] of stagnation; whereas now I am distinctly aware of rapid and fundamental changes.

Then again, against this, the pattern of circle creation (Pascal’s ∆****/doubling) would suggest that cardinals would be more noticeable on the I[nner] C[ircle] then [on] the O[uter] C[ircle].# This is not so far the case at all.

*{(sic....)}

**(I’m sure I resolved once not to use abbreviations....)

***[in the first para]

****[Triangle!]

#{Not necessarily}

[PostedBlogger07082021]