Re: I - The thumb represents the inner essence of man!

Patti Tue Mar 12, 2013 7:04 pm

Martijn (admin) wrote:

PS. Again, my earlier post was a like-wise observation... not anything of a word-game at all! It would be much more pleasant for me to see you asking questions regarding what I have described instead of seeing you jumping into such insinuative suggestions (which I recognize to be just another example of you tend to battle with your own associations).

Actually I think you and Liz taught some of us early on how to detect Barnum quite well.
Christopher was right when he said that nothing has any 'meaning' at all.

Spier, Dukes & Gettings (among many others) have written in their books about how this subject cannot be understood by the mind alone but has to be grasped in a non-physical, not mental way. I sort of thought that that was what you were attempting to achieve when you presented the rainbow. So, I'll directly ask.... was that so... did you almost grasp this from a non-intellectual perspective?

**Martijn (admin)** Tue Mar 12, 2013 7:22 pm

Patti wrote:
Martijn (admin) wrote:

Patti, I am wondering... I am not sure: did you actually ever agree about anyting at all regarding what I have written in this topic?

Yes, when you said that Earth energy was more Yin.

<edit>
which inspired me to do this:

I don't use elements in the palms in the way the 5E system does. The only 'new' thing to this chart in my way of thinking is adding elements to the quadrants. This is how they would work best in how I read hands.

Patti... I can hardly recognize that as an expression of any authentic attempt for finding an agreement about anything at all.

Because as a matter of fact, you are only refering to an undisputed principle (earth = Yin - Patti, nobody has questioned that at all!!!)... just to claim validity for your own chart.

I can only recognize this as an attempt of disprove my point that you disagreed with about anything that I have written.

By the way, I perceive this as a rather autistic/childish way to disprove my point; it appears that you do not have any serious intend to find an agreement about anything at all - though it could also be the result of a competitive nature (that has gotten out of control).

Patti Tue Mar 12, 2013 7:35 pm

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Patti wrote:
Martijn (admin) wrote:

Patti, I am wondering... I am not sure: did you actually ever agree about anyting at all regarding what I have written in this topic?

Yes, when you said that Earth energy was more Yin.

<edit>
which inspired me to do this:

I don't use elements in the palms in the way the 5E system does. The only 'new' thing to this chart in my way of thinking is adding elements to the quadrants. This is how they would work best in how I read hands.

Patti... I can hardly recognize that as an expression of any authentic attempt for finding an agreement about anything at all.

Because as a matter of fact, you are only refering to an undisputed principle (earth = Yin - Patti, nobody has questioned that at all!!!)... just to claim validity for your own chart.

I can only recognize this as an attempt of disprove my point that you disagreed with about anything that I have written.

By the way, I perceive this as a rather autistic/childish way to disprove my point; it appears that you do not have any serious intend to find an agreement about anything at all - though it could also be the result of a competitive nature (that has gotten out of control).

I don't agree with your information because I see it as inaccurate.

**Martijn (admin)** Tue Mar 12, 2013 7:43 pm

Patti wrote:
Martijn (admin) wrote:

PS. Again, my earlier post was a like-wise observation... not anything of a word-game at all! It would be much more pleasant for me to see you asking questions regarding what I have described instead of seeing you jumping into such insinuative suggestions (which I recognize to be just another example of you tend to battle with your own associations).

Actually I think you and Liz taught some of us early on how to detect Barnum quite well.
Christopher was right when he said that nothing has any 'meaning' at all.

Spier, Dukes & Gettings (among many others) have written in their books about how this subject cannot be understood by the mind alone but has to be grasped in a non-physical, not mental way. I sort of thought that that was what you were attempting to achieve when you presented the rainbow. So, I'll directly ask.... was that so... did you almost grasp this from a non-intellectual perspective?

Sorry Patti, I am not going to answer your question - because I think it is not related to what we are discussing here.

(My rainbow example was meant to illustrate how the world appears to us as phenomena inside us - which relates to the Yin aspect associated with earth)

Patti Tue Mar 12, 2013 7:49 pm

Charlotte Wolff:
I - The thumb represents the inner essence of man! - Page 35 Charlo11

Fred Gettings:

I - The thumb represents the inner essence of man! - Page 35 Gettin13

Julius Spier:

I - The thumb represents the inner essence of man! - Page 35 Spiers10

I share these views.

**Martijn (admin)** Tue Mar 12, 2013 7:54 pm

Patti wrote:
Martijn (admin) wrote:

(I recognize general ideas for the full hands as a mantra-like concepts that by principle can have no value for the purpose of reading hands at all - simply because in the perspective of reading hands we actually study the details of the hand relative to each other, so in my view is meaningless to use such mantra-like concepts).

This is gibberish!

Right, first I describe and explain why I perceive your words as a 'mantra'... and then in response you simply describe my words as 'gibberish' - without any explanation at all.

Cheap + easy (but not effective, nor constructive, nor very smart).

**Lynn** Tue Mar 12, 2013 7:57 pm

Martijn (admin) wrote: Lynn, in my previous post you can read how I observe that you kind of got yourself into this trouble

what trouble? I wasn't aware that I was in any trouble!

after adopting Patti's first words in this topic, Patti described her principle as follows:

"In reality the entire hand is an outer expression of the inner self."

You think I had "adopted" Patti's 'principle', when it is saying the same thing that I wrote in an online article in 2005:
"Hand analysis, or chirology, involves looking at all aspects of the hand - handshape, skin texture, flexibility, size and shape of fingers and thumbs, nails, knuckles, fingerprints, and the patterns, lines and markings on the palm. By analysing and interpreting these features, the reader can put it all together like a jigsaw and build up a picture of the individual."
I know you like quoting from wiki - Individuality (or selfhood) is the state or quality of being an individual.
So you can see that I agreed with Patti long before this discussion!

I don't see how you can deny that "In reality the entire hand is an outer expression of the inner self." when you are in the business of hand analysis. You know we look at all aspects of the hand to understand the person. The hand is an outward expression of the inner person.

Because after adopting Patti's principle... it become meaningless to also use this principle for the thumb in the specific perspective of a comparison with the other aspects of the hand - because that principle can be used for those other parts of the hand as well! (That's why I reject such general principles for the full hand)

So, even though you sometimes refered to the thumb as related to the inner self... your adoption of Patti's principle for the full hand made such reference almost meaningless.

I didn't exactly say that the thumb is related to the inner self. I said things like "I also agree with Gettings that the thumb represents how we put our inner self out into the external world."

we hardly discussed the part where the associates the inner world with the thumb

.
Now you are quoting words I didn't say!

And therefore, I understood that you claim that you have used the principle at the start of this discussion... but the context show that you actually never used it in a likewise manner compared to how I described my position in the perspective of von Mangoldt's quote!

I used the words active, and asserting our inner self out to the world. When you posted Mangold's words, they appear to be saying the same thing that me, Patti & others have said. I didn't know that you had interpreted Mangold's words in a different way to the way Patti, Manfred and myself interpret them.

Because my sense for logics tells me that... if one is really aware that the nature of the thumb itself represents how the inner worlds gets expressed to the outer world... then one can not also accept the principle that the full hand is an expression of the inner world to the outer world!

This description for the thumb would no longer be the result of an understanding of the thumb itself... because then it actually became a part of a more general principle used for the full hand!

"the entire hand is an outer expression of the inner self."
"the thumb represents how the inner worlds gets expressed to the outer world"

is not a contradiction.

"the entire hand is an outer expression of the inner self."
But then we have to break it down into its component parts to analyse them individually and collectively.

eg the headline shows how we think, the heartline shows our emotional needs, the thumb represents how we translate all this (inner) energy out into the world.

So, looking back... I think Lynn's confusion directly became manifest in her description of the principle that she is using for the thumb and the fact that she didn't mind to accept your more general principle as well!

Martijn, I'm NOT confused!

PS re your post

even though Manfred said that you wrote: "Lynn wrote: "The tumb side is the active self-assertion, how we express our inner world to the outer....", you actually never wrote those words at all!!!

on page 53 you wrote

Hi Lynn.......First of all, yes I am aware that you have described that you perceive the thumb to shows how we assert our inner world to the outer world.

**Martijn (admin)** Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:09 pm

Lynn wrote:
Martijn (admin) wrote: Lynn, in my previous post you can read how I observe that you kind of got yourself into this trouble

what trouble? I wasn't aware that I was in any trouble!
...

Lynn, you don't remember your expression of confusion reported in your first post?
And your troubles after discovering that you can not identify with Johnn's innovative-vocabulary at all + finding out that you had forgotten Dukes principles for the quadrants? (Ok, regarding this last point... it tooks us a few weeks before you identified that there was actually a mistake in his summary on page 48 - Thumbs up!

)

Rethoric questions only of course - I am sure that you remember... but only to remind you about the most troublesome issues for you in this topic. Wink

**Martijn (admin)** Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:16 pm

Lynn wrote:...
after adopting Patti's first words in this topic, Patti described her principle as follows:

"In reality the entire hand is an outer expression of the inner self."

You think I had "adopted" Patti's 'principle', when it is saying the same thing that I wrote in an online article in 2005:
"Hand analysis, or chirology, involves looking at all aspects of the hand - handshape, skin texture, flexibility, size and shape of fingers and thumbs, nails, knuckles, fingerprints, and the patterns, lines and markings on the palm. By analysing and interpreting these features, the reader can put it all together like a jigsaw and build up a picture of the individual."

I know you like quoting from wiki - Individuality (or selfhood) is the state or quality of being an individual.

So you can see that I agreed with Patti long before this discussion!
...

Sorry Lynn, in your 2005-quote I do not find any reference to how these words relate to the issue that we are discussing here.

Can you please point out why you think that your 2005 words express what Patti described?

(I see recognize no reference in your words at all regarding how the hand relates to inner nor outer - by the way, I can fully support your 2005 words, but you appear to assume that I would not agree with your words???)

**Martijn (admin)** Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:53 pm

Lynn wrote:...
I don't see how you can deny that "In reality the entire hand is an outer expression of the inner self." when you are in the business of hand analysis. You know we look at all aspects of the hand to understand the person. The hand is an outward expression of the inner person.
...

My objection regarding this discussion is that such a statement can only have philosophic value. But it's not helpful to use it in the perspective of a discussion regarding how the individual parts of the hand relate to each other.

Because in essence this whole discussion can probably be deduced to the chosen perspectives. When one is using such a general statement as a starting point in this discussion... this kind of suggests (implicates) that there are no parts of the hand that relate more to our inner world than other parts of the hand.

Simple logics for me!

(Do you understand my point? If a principle is used for the full hand... then it becomes troublesome to specify later that the reversed principle might actually be applicable to some parts of the hand!)

Lynn, in your first post yourself that you were actualy surprized to see how I associate the thumb more with the inner world... and later it became more obvious that you have been using the reversed principle: radial side = outer world, ulnar side = inner world (you described that you had adopted this principle even before you started studying the elemental system).

So, what I am saying is that the classical principle (radial side = outer, ulnar side = inner world), becomes troublesome when one is also using the principle: full hand = expression of inner world to outer world... because that actually suggests: radial side = inner + outer, ulnar side = inner + outer!

Logics again.

That is why I think it is important that the concepts used in different perspectives should not get mixed.

I can only hope that you have no trouble to recognize the significance of this principle of mine.

PS. By the way, I realize that when 'inner' and 'outer' are not defined very well... then it could become a rather abstract excercise to consider the consquences of these logics. But if you would ask me to describe the consequences... then I would point out that the use of conflicting principles (for example by using: 'radial = outer' plus 'radial = inner + outer') can easily induce phenoma related to the 'Barnum-effect', etc.

Patti Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:59 pm

Lynn wrote:
OK, so none of the above is 'fact', it is just one way of looking at the thumb.
However I like the bit about ether bringing together the other four elements as a whole, as I believe the thumb has the effect of integrating the rest of the hand and that the thumb is the final expression of all this combined energy out into the world. If you have a weak thumb, you can't easily express the qualities of the rest of the hand out into the world.

and

Lynn wrote:I am really confused about your labelling of ulna - outer world = subconscious and radial - inner world = conscious. The thumb being associated with the inner world is new to me. (apart from it being a means to express our inner world to the outside world).

I know there's an old saying "The eyes are a window to the soul". I can't remember who first said "The hands are a window to the soul.", was it Benham?... (I know he said "hands are the servant of the brain").... which goes along with what Patti said "In reality the entire hand is an outer expression of the inner self."

Lynn was very clear in her very first post about her viewpoint. She has been consistent throughout this discussion. In all of our discussions and reading the same hands on line since I've come to know her in 1999, we have both shared the same general view of the 2 divisions of the hands that leads to the 4 quadrants.

She is also clear (and simply polite) in her use of the term *confusion* (in my opinion). What I read that to say is something like "Labeling of the ulna/unconscious side of the hand as outward, or outer world, energy is new to me and I'm confused as to why someone of your knowledge and supposed experience would say such a conflicting thing." But, Lynn is less outwardly aggressive than I am, but more self-assertive than I had originally thought. Wink

**Martijn (admin)** Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:00 pm

Lynn wrote:...
we hardly discussed the part where the associates the inner world with the thumb
.
Now you are quoting words I didn't say!
...

No Lynn, I was not quoting you at all (I described my own observation that we hardly discussed that part of your first post).

Patti Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:07 pm

I - The thumb represents the inner essence of man! - Page 35 Cube10

The inner/outer, active/passive (etal) is not 2D. Maybe that's why you are confused when people try to describe how the upper ulnar portion can be Active or Conscious but at the same time be in a Private or Inner World Zone.

First see them as 2 different fields (1 field ranging from inner to outer) plus (1 field ranging from conscious to subconscious) and then compose them into each other.

**Lynn** Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:08 pm

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Lynn wrote:...
after adopting Patti's first words in this topic, Patti described her principle as follows:

"In reality the entire hand is an outer expression of the inner self."

You think I had "adopted" Patti's 'principle', when it is saying the same thing that I wrote in an online article in 2005:
"Hand analysis, or chirology, involves looking at all aspects of the hand - handshape, skin texture, flexibility, size and shape of fingers and thumbs, nails, knuckles, fingerprints, and the patterns, lines and markings on the palm. By analysing and interpreting these features, the reader can put it all together like a jigsaw and build up a picture of the individual."

I know you like quoting from wiki - Individuality (or selfhood) is the state or quality of being an individual.

So you can see that I agreed with Patti long before this discussion!
...

Sorry Lynn, in your 2005-quote I do not find any reference to how these words relate to the issue that we are discussing here.

Can you please point out why you think that your 2005 words express what Patti described?

(I see recognize no reference in your words at all regarding how the hand relates to inner nor outer - by the way, I can fully support your 2005 words, but you appear to assume that I would not agree with your words???)

Patti's words - "In reality the entire hand is an outer expression of the inner self."

my words "all aspects of the hand" - (ie the entire hand)
"handshape, skin texture, flexibility, size and shape of fingers and thumbs, nails, knuckles, fingerprints, and the patterns, lines and markings on the palm." - all observable aspects, (ie the outer expression)
"of the individual" - of the inner self

**Lynn** Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:12 pm

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Lynn wrote:...
we hardly discussed the part where the associates the inner world with the thumb
.
Now you are quoting words I didn't say!
...

No Lynn, I was not quoting you at all (I described my own observation that we hardly discussed that part of your first post).

but I didn't associate the inner world with the thumb. I said
"The thumb being associated with the inner world is new to me. (apart from it being a means to express our inner world to the outside world)."

**Martijn (admin)** Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:17 pm

Lynn wrote:
Martijn_admin wrote:...

This description for the thumb would no longer be the result of an understanding of the thumb itself... because then it actually became a part of a more general principle used for the full hand!
"the entire hand is an outer expression of the inner self."
"the thumb represents how the inner worlds gets expressed to the outer world"

is not a contradiction.

Yes, formally that is true... I should have added there that the contraction becomes manifest explicit when considering the ulnar part of the hand!

In the perspective of this discussion my point becomes more explicit when I use:

"the entire hand is an outer expression of the inner self." (= Patti's principle)
"the thumb represents outer world (= radial side of the hand)" (= part 1 of your classic principle)
"the pinky represent inner world (= ulnar side of the hand)." (= part 2 of your classic principle)

Etc.

**Lynn** Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:24 pm

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Lynn wrote:
Martijn_admin wrote:...

This description for the thumb would no longer be the result of an understanding of the thumb itself... because then it actually became a part of a more general principle used for the full hand!
"the entire hand is an outer expression of the inner self."
"the thumb represents how the inner worlds gets expressed to the outer world"

is not a contradiction.

Yes, formally that is true... I should have added there that the contraction becomes manifest explicit when considering the ulnar part of the hand!

In the perspective of this discussion my point becomes more explicit when I use:

"the entire hand is an outer expression of the inner self." (= Patti's principle)
"the thumb represents outer world (= radial side of the hand)" (= part 1 of your classic principle)
"the pinky represent inner world (= ulnar side of the hand)." (= part 2 of your classic principle)

Etc.

I'm quite sure I've never said "the thumb represents outer world." I've said
"the thumb represents how the inner worlds gets expressed to the outer world"
it is not the same thing.

**Martijn (admin)** Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:29 pm

Lynn wrote:
Martijn (admin) wrote:
Lynn wrote:...
we hardly discussed the part where the associates the inner world with the thumb
.
Now you are quoting words I didn't say!
...

No Lynn, I was not quoting you at all (I described my own observation that we hardly discussed that part of your first post).

but I didn't associate the inner world with the thumb. I said
"The thumb being associated with the inner world is new to me. (apart from it being a means to express our inner world to the outside world)."

I used that sentence from your first post to show how you link the thumb with the inner world; yes, I am fully aware that in that sentence you only make an indirect connection between the thumb and the inner world.

But if you would now interpreate your own words as like that there is no connection between the thumb and the inner world at all... then this would sort of proof that you interpretate von Mangoldt's words very differently than I do.

PS. Let me try to explain my point once again by putting it like this:

Lynn, if you have an idea in your mind (= inner world)... and then write it down a piece of paper (= outer world), wouldn't it make more sense to acknowledge that the idea on the piece of paper is a direct reflection of your inner world?

( lol!

)

**Martijn (admin)** Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:34 pm

Lynn wrote:
Martijn (admin) wrote:
Lynn wrote:
Martijn_admin wrote:...

This description for the thumb would no longer be the result of an understanding of the thumb itself... because then it actually became a part of a more general principle used for the full hand!
"the entire hand is an outer expression of the inner self."
"the thumb represents how the inner worlds gets expressed to the outer world"

is not a contradiction.

Yes, formally that is true... I should have added there that the contraction becomes manifest explicit when considering the ulnar part of the hand!

In the perspective of this discussion my point becomes more explicit when I use:

"the entire hand is an outer expression of the inner self." (= Patti's principle)
"the thumb represents outer world (= radial side of the hand)" (= part 1 of your classic principle)
"the pinky represent inner world (= ulnar side of the hand)." (= part 2 of your classic principle)

Etc.
I'm quite sure I've never said "the thumb represents outer world." I've said
"the thumb represents how the inner worlds gets expressed to the outer world"
it is not the same thing.

Lynn, I am not quoting you there!

(Only trying to illustrate how the contradiction is resulting form combining Patti's principle with the principle: radial side = outer, ulnar side = inner)

**Martijn (admin)** Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:38 pm

Lynn wrote:
Martijn (admin) wrote:
Lynn wrote:...
we hardly discussed the part where the associates the inner world with the thumb
.
Now you are quoting words I didn't say!
...

No Lynn, I was not quoting you at all (I described my own observation that we hardly discussed that part of your first post).

but I didn't associate the inner world with the thumb. I said
"The thumb being associated with the inner world is new to me. (apart from it being a means to express our inner world to the outside world)."

Lynn, I think your confusing regarding the title of this topic (which you reported in your first post) directly resulted from your use of (classic) principle: 'radial = outer world, ulnar = inner world'; because the thumb is at the radial side... which you therefore associate with outer because of the (classic) principle - while the title of this topic says; thumb = inner.

Correct?

Patti Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:42 pm

Martijn (admin) wrote:

Lynn, if you have an idea in your mind (= inner world)... and then write it down a piece of paper (= outer world), wouldn't it make more sense to acknowledge that the idea on the piece of paper is a direct reflection of your inner world?

( )

Made manifest by wrapping her index and thumb around the material pencil and writing on the material paper. The idea came from the ulnar side of the hand (traveled to and fro via the head line etc) and out the radial side into the outer material world. How one expresses their inner self into the outer world.

**Lynn** Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:43 pm

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Lynn wrote:
Martijn (admin) wrote: Lynn, in my previous post you can read how I observe that you kind of got yourself into this trouble

what trouble? I wasn't aware that I was in any trouble!
...

1) Lynn, you don't remember your expression of confusion reported in your first post?
2) And your troubles after discovering that you can not identify with Johnn's innovative-vocabulary at all
3)+ finding out that you had forgotten Dukes principles for the quadrants? (Ok, regarding this last point... it tooks us a few weeks before you identified that there was actually a mistake in his summary on page 48 - )

Rethoric questions only of course - I am sure that you remember... but only to remind you about the most troublesome issues for you in this topic.

1) Ah, that confusion!

I am really confused about your labelling of ulna - outer world = subconscious and radial - inner world = conscious.

what I meant was "I disagree with your labelling ....."
Even after all this discussion it is still a mystery to me why you associate ulna with outer world and radial with inner world, and I still don't agree with it.
2) I can identify with most of Johnny's innovative vocabulary, apart from a couple of words on the quadrants.
3) Oh yeah, I forgot a word or two in a book that I read 15 years ago. tch,silly me Oh...nooo!

Just because I disagree with some of the things you/Johnny/Dukes said, I don't see it as me being confused or in trouble.

Patti Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:44 pm

But... did the idea originate inwardly? Perhaps she saw something with her eyes in the outer world that she was inspired to write about.

**Martijn (admin)** Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:52 pm

Lynn wrote:
Patti's words - "In reality the entire hand is an outer expression of the inner self."

my words "all aspects of the hand" - (ie the entire hand)
"handshape, skin texture, flexibility, size and shape of fingers and thumbs, nails, knuckles, fingerprints, and the patterns, lines and markings on the palm." - all observable aspects, (ie the outer expression)
"of the individual" - of the inner self

Well Lynn, thanks for explaining your association regarding that quote - now I can understand your association.

(Though I could add... that in my perception the word 'individual' does not refer to the inner world at all - for example: the word 'person' is a likewise and very precise synonym... which reminds us of the word 'persona' that actually more relates to the position of a person in the social perspective of the outer world)

Patti Tue Mar 12, 2013 10:03 pm

In Ronelle Coburn's book "Destiny at Your Fingertips" page 58 she says:

"Thumbs represent the foundational supportive building blocks of your life - and your ability to make a solid foundation for your life - starting with your own body and need for emotional and psychological nurturance. They extend out to the physical support of your body (food, shelter, and clothing), a process that requires money of some sort in most places in the world today. When you have one of the thumb purposes, you have the higher potential to be particularly good at creating the different types of supportive results necessary to live a successful life - on that goes beyond grappling with issues of bare survival into a life of true thriving."

Page 175:

"Those with one of the Mercury purposes are meant to span the worlds of inner communications and outer communications. Diving deep into yourself and listening to what your inner voice says, then communicating it in some way with the outer world, or listening very closely to someone or to the world around you, and then reflecting back by communicating about it so others can see some version of the truth for themselves is what those with these Life Purposes have as their high potential. The building of relationships, both interpersonal (between people) and intrapersonal (within oneself) is what communicators do best."

I think it's common understanding that the whole hand is viewed as the inner self expressed outwardly. For example:

Moshe Zwang "Palm Therapy" page 18

"The Hand - An Expressor of the Mind/Brain in Scientific Palmistry"

Sponsored content