Comments on: The Structure of Consciousness, Part One: Archetypes and Circuits http://druidjournal.net/2006/07/29/the-structure-of-consciousness-part-one-archetypes-and-circuits/ Guidance and Inspiration from Nature and the Ancient World. Thu, 28 Aug 2008 01:35:52 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Jeff Lilly http://druidjournal.net/2006/07/29/the-structure-of-consciousness-part-one-archetypes-and-circuits/#comment-75 Jeff Lilly Fri, 29 Sep 2006 10:05:27 +0000 http://druidjournal.net/2006/07/29/the-structure-of-consciousness-part-one-archetypes-and-circuits/#comment-75 You make good arguments. Let me throw a little more data into the mix. * It may be that fight vs. flight is the best analogy for the first circuit, but Wilson and Leary go a little more basic than that. They suggest that a positive imprint basically means GO_FORWARD and a negative one means GO_BACK -- the two basic thoughts of, say, a paramecium or a worm. "Fight" would be a subtype of GO_FORWARD, I suppose, and it's available as an option to animals that can handle that kind of advanced response. :-) Is it possible that "fight" is actually associated with the second circuit? I think this would fit in better with Wilson's model, but I don't know. I can recommened Wilson's "Prometheus Rising" without reservation if you want to get deeper into it (although it's quite irreverent and has graphic language -- just a warning ;-) ). * The primary reason I associated -/- with earth, -/+ with fire, +/- with water, and +/+ with air is because that is the association suggested, indirectly, by Wilson himself (who is a Capricorn!). In "Prometheus Rising", he pairs up the four settings with the four personality types recognized by the medieval Europeans: melancholic, choleric, phlegmatic, and sanguine, respectively. He does not associate each of these four "humours" with elements, but I happened to read elsewhere what the association was usually considered to be. Wikipedia's article on the "four humours" is a place you can read up on that, if you're not already familiar with it. * As for your being stubborn rather than submissive :-), I think Wilson would argue that, since you are not driven to dominate a social order, that counts as submissive. As you say, "submissive" is not at all a bad thing; it simply means that you are not instinctively driven to take over the group of mammals you are associated with (either by dominating the conversation, taking others resources, stealing away mating partners, etc.). I also seem to remember that the famed stubbornness of Taurus comes from a combination of earth + fixed; and in my experience, at least, the fixed signs are more stubborn than the earth signs. I haven't found Virgos to be stubborn at all. But Leos!... * You make some good points about the semantic time binding. The only thing I'm really attached to is the association with the three kinds of aspect found in all human languages (completed/perfective, ongoing/imperfective, non-associated/irrealis; in English, "I have walked", "I am walking", "I will/should/could/... walk"). That seems very suggestive to me of how people instinctively think about time. Every event you can talk about in any language has to be associated with one of those aspects. Doesn't that seem very basic? What do you think? * I'll see if I can dig up any info on breaking a sign into three parts. I know I read about that somewhere! * You're absolutely right about the 8 states corresponding to three binary options. But if I say any more there'd be no point in writing a blog entry about it! :-) You make good arguments. Let me throw a little more data into the mix.
* It may be that fight vs. flight is the best analogy for the first circuit, but Wilson and Leary go a little more basic than that. They suggest that a positive imprint basically means GO_FORWARD and a negative one means GO_BACK — the two basic thoughts of, say, a paramecium or a worm. “Fight” would be a subtype of GO_FORWARD, I suppose, and it’s available as an option to animals that can handle that kind of advanced response. :-) Is it possible that “fight” is actually associated with the second circuit? I think this would fit in better with Wilson’s model, but I don’t know. I can recommened Wilson’s “Prometheus Rising” without reservation if you want to get deeper into it (although it’s quite irreverent and has graphic language — just a warning ;-) ).
* The primary reason I associated -/- with earth, -/+ with fire, +/- with water, and +/+ with air is because that is the association suggested, indirectly, by Wilson himself (who is a Capricorn!). In “Prometheus Rising”, he pairs up the four settings with the four personality types recognized by the medieval Europeans: melancholic, choleric, phlegmatic, and sanguine, respectively. He does not associate each of these four “humours” with elements, but I happened to read elsewhere what the association was usually considered to be. Wikipedia’s article on the “four humours” is a place you can read up on that, if you’re not already familiar with it.
* As for your being stubborn rather than submissive :-), I think Wilson would argue that, since you are not driven to dominate a social order, that counts as submissive. As you say, “submissive” is not at all a bad thing; it simply means that you are not instinctively driven to take over the group of mammals you are associated with (either by dominating the conversation, taking others resources, stealing away mating partners, etc.). I also seem to remember that the famed stubbornness of Taurus comes from a combination of earth + fixed; and in my experience, at least, the fixed signs are more stubborn than the earth signs. I haven’t found Virgos to be stubborn at all. But Leos!…
* You make some good points about the semantic time binding. The only thing I’m really attached to is the association with the three kinds of aspect found in all human languages (completed/perfective, ongoing/imperfective, non-associated/irrealis; in English, “I have walked”, “I am walking”, “I will/should/could/… walk”). That seems very suggestive to me of how people instinctively think about time. Every event you can talk about in any language has to be associated with one of those aspects. Doesn’t that seem very basic? What do you think?
* I’ll see if I can dig up any info on breaking a sign into three parts. I know I read about that somewhere!
* You’re absolutely right about the 8 states corresponding to three binary options. But if I say any more there’d be no point in writing a blog entry about it! :-)

]]> By: Adam http://druidjournal.net/2006/07/29/the-structure-of-consciousness-part-one-archetypes-and-circuits/#comment-74 Adam Thu, 28 Sep 2006 23:31:42 +0000 http://druidjournal.net/2006/07/29/the-structure-of-consciousness-part-one-archetypes-and-circuits/#comment-74 Moon = Virgo. As with anybody's moon sign, that pretty much sums up my public self... To be honest, I had only skimmed through Structure of Consiousness II... Not sure why, though, since I love looking at figures and patterns. Looking at it now, though, would have definitely saved me some time in writing my last few responses. ;) There are a couple of things that I'd like to clear up real quick... I'm looking at the first circuit as the fight-or-flight instinct, not whether a person feels the world is safety or suffering... The question is, is it better to get your licks in now and not worry about it, or wait until the other person tires themselves out? Either choice is just a risky, in the end, but which is a person pre-disposed to? I'm putting fight-or-flight as the first circuit, because it is the most basic choice we can make, and all vertebrates, as well as many invertebrates, also have that instinct. I think that we both agree that the second circuit deal with whether a person is dominant or submissive... again, the world needs both types of people for society to function, and neither is a bad decision. By that figuring, I would aruge that Taurus is not natively - - -, or passive, submissive, and past-based. Neither is Virgo - - 0, passive, submissive, and present based... While I agree that I'm as passive as a rock, I do have to argue that I'm no more submissive than a stone wall, especially with my sun and moon both being earth signs. ;) Maybe I can be broken, but I'll make a lot of noise when I fall. :) Looking at what I understand of the differences between cardinal, fixed, and mutable, it makes more sense to me that the cardinal signs are more representative of the present, rather than the future; especially looking at Aries, the eternal child. A fixed aspect tends to either be fixed in a specific time, slipping back, or fixed outside of the movement of time (which gives rise to the Taurean stubbornness, since he's only working in his own time, and eventually everybody will catch up to him, or the Aquarian timelessness, which is pretty freaky in just how accurate it really is compared to how far into the future the Aquarian looks), and mutable aspects tend to be able to connect two times together, as can be seen with the Sagitarius, and their ability to always be right at the point of everything. Cardinal = in time, Fixed = out of time, Mutable = within many times. At least, if I had to put the aspects together with the 3rd circuit, that's how I would categorize them. I would also argue that Air is not + +... except that you're an Air sign yourself, so would love to have as many plusses next to your sign as possible... ;) I think that a more fitting description of the stereotypical Air would be active, submissive (+ -); or as you put it, phlegmatic. You're slow to anger (submissive), but you know how to win right away (active). If we throw in Gemini's mutable aspect, I would say that you can easilly connect to several different concepts of time, rather than your wife's Aquarian tendancy to connect to one time at a time, even if that time happens to be twenty years in the future. ;) Please let me know if I'm wrong, I'm only working off of half-baked ideas here, and I'm just testing the theories. With Earth and Air assigned, that leaves Fire and Water. This may just be my high esteem of my wife talking, but it seems to me that Fire should be + +, since Fire is neither passive, nor submissive, and Water, being the polar opposite of Fire, would be - - (just as Earth, - +, is the polar opposite of Air, + -) Of course, I'm just talking about the concepts behind the elements, not the actual implementation, or any person in real life. The word for a person who's sign is Taurus is Taurean, so Taureans would be the plural form... I also realize that it would be extremely difficult to get any sort of study to back up my theory on each sign having three different aspects, especially since a person's moon sign would make a short interview impossible to determine a person's actual sun sign trait, not to mention the various other planets casting their influence. It's just an idea to play around with and be observant of... I just found myself around a large number of Taureans a few years back, and was able to make some observations that I haven't been able to confirm or deny yet. I also agree that the 1st and 2nd circuits aren't off while a person is faced with a decision, but it's my nature as a computer guy to see binary as being always only on or off, so if a person isn't faced with a choice, the circuits aren't being used, hence a trinary representation when a person isn't thinking. Just semantic hair splitting that I should have ignored in the first place... ;) As for the 4th circuit having eight states... that sounds like it could be three binary circuits that are very closely related, if we want to follow the same pattern as before. Then again, that's just me looking at the number 8 and seeing the computer representation. ;) Moon = Virgo. As with anybody’s moon sign, that pretty much sums up my public self…

To be honest, I had only skimmed through Structure of Consiousness II… Not sure why, though, since I love looking at figures and patterns. Looking at it now, though, would have definitely saved me some time in writing my last few responses. ;)

There are a couple of things that I’d like to clear up real quick… I’m looking at the first circuit as the fight-or-flight instinct, not whether a person feels the world is safety or suffering… The question is, is it better to get your licks in now and not worry about it, or wait until the other person tires themselves out? Either choice is just a risky, in the end, but which is a person pre-disposed to? I’m putting fight-or-flight as the first circuit, because it is the most basic choice we can make, and all vertebrates, as well as many invertebrates, also have that instinct.

I think that we both agree that the second circuit deal with whether a person is dominant or submissive… again, the world needs both types of people for society to function, and neither is a bad decision.

By that figuring, I would aruge that Taurus is not natively - - -, or passive, submissive, and past-based. Neither is Virgo - - 0, passive, submissive, and present based… While I agree that I’m as passive as a rock, I do have to argue that I’m no more submissive than a stone wall, especially with my sun and moon both being earth signs. ;) Maybe I can be broken, but I’ll make a lot of noise when I fall. :)

Looking at what I understand of the differences between cardinal, fixed, and mutable, it makes more sense to me that the cardinal signs are more representative of the present, rather than the future; especially looking at Aries, the eternal child. A fixed aspect tends to either be fixed in a specific time, slipping back, or fixed outside of the movement of time (which gives rise to the Taurean stubbornness, since he’s only working in his own time, and eventually everybody will catch up to him, or the Aquarian timelessness, which is pretty freaky in just how accurate it really is compared to how far into the future the Aquarian looks), and mutable aspects tend to be able to connect two times together, as can be seen with the Sagitarius, and their ability to always be right at the point of everything. Cardinal = in time, Fixed = out of time, Mutable = within many times. At least, if I had to put the aspects together with the 3rd circuit, that’s how I would categorize them.

I would also argue that Air is not + +… except that you’re an Air sign yourself, so would love to have as many plusses next to your sign as possible… ;) I think that a more fitting description of the stereotypical Air would be active, submissive (+ -); or as you put it, phlegmatic. You’re slow to anger (submissive), but you know how to win right away (active). If we throw in Gemini’s mutable aspect, I would say that you can easilly connect to several different concepts of time, rather than your wife’s Aquarian tendancy to connect to one time at a time, even if that time happens to be twenty years in the future. ;) Please let me know if I’m wrong, I’m only working off of half-baked ideas here, and I’m just testing the theories.

With Earth and Air assigned, that leaves Fire and Water. This may just be my high esteem of my wife talking, but it seems to me that Fire should be + +, since Fire is neither passive, nor submissive, and Water, being the polar opposite of Fire, would be - - (just as Earth, - +, is the polar opposite of Air, + -)

Of course, I’m just talking about the concepts behind the elements, not the actual implementation, or any person in real life.

The word for a person who’s sign is Taurus is Taurean, so Taureans would be the plural form… I also realize that it would be extremely difficult to get any sort of study to back up my theory on each sign having three different aspects, especially since a person’s moon sign would make a short interview impossible to determine a person’s actual sun sign trait, not to mention the various other planets casting their influence. It’s just an idea to play around with and be observant of… I just found myself around a large number of Taureans a few years back, and was able to make some observations that I haven’t been able to confirm or deny yet.

I also agree that the 1st and 2nd circuits aren’t off while a person is faced with a decision, but it’s my nature as a computer guy to see binary as being always only on or off, so if a person isn’t faced with a choice, the circuits aren’t being used, hence a trinary representation when a person isn’t thinking. Just semantic hair splitting that I should have ignored in the first place… ;)

As for the 4th circuit having eight states… that sounds like it could be three binary circuits that are very closely related, if we want to follow the same pattern as before. Then again, that’s just me looking at the number 8 and seeing the computer representation. ;)

]]> By: Jeff Lilly http://druidjournal.net/2006/07/29/the-structure-of-consciousness-part-one-archetypes-and-circuits/#comment-73 Jeff Lilly Thu, 28 Sep 2006 19:48:37 +0000 http://druidjournal.net/2006/07/29/the-structure-of-consciousness-part-one-archetypes-and-circuits/#comment-73 No worries, Adam. Lots of neat stuff here! I remember reading somewhere that it has been noticed before that each of the signs are divided into three parts of ten degrees each, each part having its own character. I have not looked at that in detail, primarily because if you have, say, two Tauruses (Tauri?) that are very different in character, there could be any number of explanations for that -- positions of the planets, the placement of the houses, progressions, etc. It seemed to me that a difference in character between two Tauruses would be much more likely caused by having different moons, or different ascendants, than anything else. For example, my father and I are both Geminis; I was born in May, he in late June. We are vastly different people; neither of us fits the Gemini stereotype particularly well. He has Saturn sitting right on his sun, and I don't. Is the difference between us due to the Saturn, or the different birthdays? It seems to me you'd have to look at a huge number of examples to get a good answer there. You did read "The Structure of Consciousness II: Astrology", right? I suggested the trinary nature of the 3rd circuit there. I'm not sure I agree that the 1st and 2nd circuits can have "off" positions. Wilson and Leary concieve of these circuits as being very, very basic, quite subconscious. We're talking about IMPRINTS on the circuits, like a baby animal imprinting on a mother figure -- the default way of acting. If the default is "off", then when the circuit should be activated, it doesn't. This would mean death at the first circuit level, and autism at the second circuit level. You can see this in children before their circuits activate. The first circuit is on immediately. The second circuit activates around age 2-3, when the child starts to participate in society, and recognize others as beings like themselves. If the 2nd circuit had an "off" setting for an adult, it would really be like autism. The third circuit activates around age 6-7, when the child begins to really grasp the concept of time. If an adult had the third circuit off, it would result in severe retardation. Understand that I'm just reporting Wilson and Leary's theory here. You're free to disagree with them, of course! :-) In the system I suggest, Taurus is --f, meaning (1) negative on the 1st circuit (tending to instinctively believe that the world is hostile / dangerous / unsupportive), (2) negative on the 2nd circuit (tending to instinctively allow others to dominate), and (3) fixed on the third circuit (tending to be focused on the past, i.e. using the past in particular to make decisions and influence mental models). Leo, meanwhile, would be -+f -- almost identical with Taurus, but dominant instead of submissive. Note that the fixed nature of Aquarius, say, is not a problem. The Aquarian may be a very original thinker, but still focus on past experience when formulating thought. Many Aquarians I have known (and I do love them -- my wife is one) are quite attached to past thoughts, especially their own. :-) Something to consider is that these circuits may not correspond to sun signs. For example, astrology may be bunk. One must keep an open mind... :-) Or, possibly, the circuits may correspond to some other aspect of astrology. My experience suggests that these circuits may actually correspond more closely to the MOON sign. For example, even though I'm a Gemini, I'm pretty solidly phlegmatic, which should be a water sign. But -- surprise! -- I have a Pisces moon. Where is your moon? :-) Through studying the Tarot, I'm beginning to think that the 4th circuit may have a rather large number of possible imprints -- maybe as many as 8. I'll be posting on that soon. As for lining up the planets and the signs -- did you read my "On Pluto"? :-) By the way, I want to thank you for all the effort you put into your comments, and your great insights. It's always wonderful to see another point of view. No worries, Adam. Lots of neat stuff here!
I remember reading somewhere that it has been noticed before that each of the signs are divided into three parts of ten degrees each, each part having its own character. I have not looked at that in detail, primarily because if you have, say, two Tauruses (Tauri?) that are very different in character, there could be any number of explanations for that — positions of the planets, the placement of the houses, progressions, etc. It seemed to me that a difference in character between two Tauruses would be much more likely caused by having different moons, or different ascendants, than anything else. For example, my father and I are both Geminis; I was born in May, he in late June. We are vastly different people; neither of us fits the Gemini stereotype particularly well. He has Saturn sitting right on his sun, and I don’t. Is the difference between us due to the Saturn, or the different birthdays? It seems to me you’d have to look at a huge number of examples to get a good answer there.
You did read “The Structure of Consciousness II: Astrology”, right? I suggested the trinary nature of the 3rd circuit there. I’m not sure I agree that the 1st and 2nd circuits can have “off” positions. Wilson and Leary concieve of these circuits as being very, very basic, quite subconscious. We’re talking about IMPRINTS on the circuits, like a baby animal imprinting on a mother figure — the default way of acting. If the default is “off”, then when the circuit should be activated, it doesn’t. This would mean death at the first circuit level, and autism at the second circuit level.
You can see this in children before their circuits activate. The first circuit is on immediately. The second circuit activates around age 2-3, when the child starts to participate in society, and recognize others as beings like themselves. If the 2nd circuit had an “off” setting for an adult, it would really be like autism. The third circuit activates around age 6-7, when the child begins to really grasp the concept of time. If an adult had the third circuit off, it would result in severe retardation.
Understand that I’m just reporting Wilson and Leary’s theory here. You’re free to disagree with them, of course! :-)
In the system I suggest, Taurus is –f, meaning (1) negative on the 1st circuit (tending to instinctively believe that the world is hostile / dangerous / unsupportive), (2) negative on the 2nd circuit (tending to instinctively allow others to dominate), and (3) fixed on the third circuit (tending to be focused on the past, i.e. using the past in particular to make decisions and influence mental models). Leo, meanwhile, would be -+f — almost identical with Taurus, but dominant instead of submissive.
Note that the fixed nature of Aquarius, say, is not a problem. The Aquarian may be a very original thinker, but still focus on past experience when formulating thought. Many Aquarians I have known (and I do love them — my wife is one) are quite attached to past thoughts, especially their own. :-)
Something to consider is that these circuits may not correspond to sun signs. For example, astrology may be bunk. One must keep an open mind… :-) Or, possibly, the circuits may correspond to some other aspect of astrology. My experience suggests that these circuits may actually correspond more closely to the MOON sign. For example, even though I’m a Gemini, I’m pretty solidly phlegmatic, which should be a water sign. But — surprise! — I have a Pisces moon. Where is your moon? :-)
Through studying the Tarot, I’m beginning to think that the 4th circuit may have a rather large number of possible imprints — maybe as many as 8. I’ll be posting on that soon.
As for lining up the planets and the signs — did you read my “On Pluto”? :-)
By the way, I want to thank you for all the effort you put into your comments, and your great insights. It’s always wonderful to see another point of view.

]]>