Re: Yin/Yang (was: Re: virus: A "Confession" about "The Sign")

Brett Robertson (
Sat, 29 May 1999 20:08:36 -0500 (EST)

Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit

What I had meant to say is that objects become symbolized through hypothesis and theory; though, the symbols thereby lose their object nature-- becoming a means for fantasizing a reality which is not in line with the natural action of objects. Ultimately, this symbolization (when applied to survival) suggests that the individual might also negate his own objective existence for a fantasized reality.

Multiple fantasized realities cannot PRODUCE an objective truth.

Brett Lane Robertson
Indiana, USA
MindRecreation Metaphysical Assn.
BIO: ...........
Put your item up for auction! Bid on hot opportunities! Click HERE to view great deals!:

Content-Disposition: Inline
Content-Type: Message/RFC822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit

Received: from ( by; Sat, 29 May 1999 17:30:15
	-0700 (PDT)

Return-Path: <>
Received: from ( []) by (8.8.8/ms.graham.14Aug97)
	with ESMTP id RAA13905; Sat, 29 May 1999 17:30:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by (8.9.1/8.9.1) id
	SAA02786 for virus-outgoing; Sat, 29 May 1999 18:20:07 -0600
X-Sender: X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.1 Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 17:19:05 -0700
From: Dan Plante <>
Subject: Re: Yin/Yang (was: Re: virus: A "Confession" about "The Sign") In-Reply-To: <> References: <Dan Plante <> Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: <> Sender:
Precedence: bulk

At 04:27 PM 29/05/99 -0500, Brett wrote:

>Yes relationships create duality; though there is also an emergent ORDER
>(duality is acted out in shades of good and evil, HYPOTHETICALLY negates
>what is for a THEORETICAL reinstatement, resolves to zero sum, expresses
>objective reality according to a symbolic-only reality, and so results
>in fantasized "truths" and self/ other negation such that "subjective"
>truths are forced on others to "save" oneself from the consequences of
>this type of systems thinking). Order, on the other hand reveals logic
>and truth.

Your semantics can't make their way to my mind with this choice of syntax. I guess you missed my post about doing your ideas a disservice with inaccessible prosaics.

At any rate, if you mean you acknowledge the duality, but separate or dismiss the subjective component for some reason, then I have to disagree. These _particular_ relationships have a dualistic and _complimentary_ nature. That is, they complement each other to _produce_ the relationship. A photon wouldn't be a photon without its wave properties; the same goes for its particle properties.

For the same reason, you can't separate the subjective and objective. They _complement_ each other. Remember that the context of our "experience and analysis" is the human mind. The mind can never know objective reality directly, just approximate it through experience (the subjective component); but that very observation asserts that there is also an objective reality to subjectively experience and analyse.