I - The thumb represents the inner essence of man!

Lynn wrote:

Martijn (admin) wrote:But I would like to respond here first to a passage in your feedback to Sue (see above). Because, I see now that you associate your 'inner/outer' division for the palm directly with the elemental system... but I would like to remind you that you informed me earlier that you had actually adopted this vertical division only after you had noticed that it is commonly used elsewhere in the field of hand reading.
Did I misunderstood your earlier report?

I learnt it first in palmistry then it was confirmed when I studied 5-elements. Patti quoted Christopher on P6 of this discussion: “I see the thumb side as the 'outer' half of the hand and the little finger side as the 'inner' half of the hand.”

Hi Lynn, thanks for answering my question (interesting to hear that you already had this perception before your started studying the elemental system).

Regarding Chirstopher, good point! :

Christopoher wrote:... Taking the strength of the thumb as an indication of the control or influence you have over the world around you, so the thumb side of the hand was considered as the ‘external’ side of the hand. ...

I would be interested to hear from Chriistopher how he can explain this 'assumption' in terms of the elements, because I find it stricking that he has not 'ground' his association regarding the thumb & the outer world via the elemental principles! (At least, I am not aware of this yet... should I start reading his chapter about the primate hand???)

Because, now that I have become aware that in the elemental system fire and air are actually associated with 'public' (+ earth and water are associated with 'private') - see Dukes, page 48; I think it is pretty obvious that the thumb then gets associated with 'public' and 'private' for the first two phalanges but when the thenar is considered as a representing a part of the thumb (which is the case in Christopher's writing) then we can see how the thumb in terms of the 4 elements more gets associated with 'private' - beyond the first two phalanges only the tip of the thumb can get associated with 'public' (or the outer world)!

Correct?


And thus it appears to me as a violation of the elemental principles to simply associate the thumb with outer world... and actually when I think of how primates live I would associate that they are basically living their lives fully in the outer world - yes, sure, animals have 'inner conscious' but it is much more connected with the outer world than in humans. So, in human the individuality & 'private life' [which I associate with the radial side of the hand] is much more developed than in primates - which live much more in 'tribes' than us humans do.

The low 2d:4d digit ratio in primates is another illustration for that... since in the elemental system the long ring finger [fire] is associated with more 'public' behavior, while the long index finger [water] gets associated with more 'private' behavior.

So, regarding Christopher's comment... I could argue likewisely in the opposite directly that the short thumb in primates indicates that their inner life is far less developed in us humans - e.g. primates can not being able to compete with humans in terms of intelligence.

(The short thumb in Down syndrome also indicates how the length of the thumb can be roughly associated with intelligence.... which relate to the ability to learn, reason, understand, etc. ... though these people also often have a short pinky it is much harder to associate intelligence with this finger as primates typically have relatively long pinky fingers! So, I think the connection regarding intelligence is likely stronger for the thumb than for the pinky finger)


Therefore I perceive these considerations (based on a few fundamental facts) as another argument to question why there is any need to start using principles for the thumb that kind of 'violate' the basic principles of the elemental system (that I have described above)

Martijn (admin) wrote:

Lynn wrote:

Martijn (admin) wrote:But I would like to respond here first to a passage in your feedback to Sue (see above). Because, I see now that you associate your 'inner/outer' division for the palm directly with the elemental system... but I would like to remind you that you informed me earlier that you had actually adopted this vertical division only after you had noticed that it is commonly used elsewhere in the field of hand reading.
Did I misunderstood your earlier report?

I learnt it first in palmistry then it was confirmed when I studied 5-elements. Patti quoted Christopher on P6 of this discussion: “I see the thumb side as the 'outer' half of the hand and the little finger side as the 'inner' half of the hand.”

Hi Lynn, thanks for answering my question (interesting to hear that you already had this perception before your started studying the elemental system).

Regarding Chirstopher:

Christopoher wrote:... Taking the strength of the thumb as an indication of the control or influence you have over the world around you, so the thumb side of the hand was considered as the ‘external’ side of the hand. ...

I would be interested to hear from him how he can explain this 'assumption'!

Because, now that I know that in the elemental system fire and air are actually associated with 'public' (+ earth and water are associated with 'private') - see Dukes, page 48; I think it is pretty obvious that the thumb then gets associated with 'public' and 'private' for the first two phalanges but when the thenar is considered as a representing a part of the thumb (which is the case in Christopher's writing) then we can see how the thumb in terms of the 4 elements more gets associated with 'private' - beyond the first two phalanges only the tip of the thumb can get associated with 'public' (or the outer world)!

Correct?

Martijn (admin) wrote:However, I had to start talking about fingers leaning radial in order to make the point that in the elemental system there is no vertical division for the fingers regarding 'inner vs. outer'.

Martijn (admin) wrote:And Lynn... while writing this post I now also have found a passage in Dukes work which CLEARLY descrbes why you also should NEVER have adopted the 'classic' approach regarding the palm, because Dukes writes on page 48 for the four element quadrants:

"Now you have found the four elemental quadrants of this hand. The elements, and their Chinese terms are as follows: Fire (Huo); Earth (Ti); Air (Feng); Water (Shui). Fire and Air are masculine, active and public in import (yang)[/u]. Earth and water are feminine, passive and private in import (Yin)."

...................

Martijn (admin) wrote:

Sucom wrote:"Its limitations and contradictions are blaring in this discussion and in that sense I find this discussion very valuable."

I'm glad I'm not alone with my thoughts here. I so agree with you Patti. When I saw fireworks in Martijn's post I must be honest and say that my eyebrows raised a little higher than normal

Sue, if you read my response to Patti (which I have just posted) ... then I expect that will probably be able recognize that my analysis does make sense.

And if not, you are very welcome to specify your thoughts.


(I hope you'll understand that I don't get any wiser from your 'raised eyebrows' ... nor your report that you are 'shocked'... because the fireworks only served to underline the content of that post of mine)

Lynn wrote:

Martijn (admin) wrote:However, I had to start talking about fingers leaning radial in order to make the point that in the elemental system there is no vertical division for the fingers regarding 'inner vs. outer'.

See my previous post.

Martijn (admin) wrote:And Lynn... while writing this post I now also have found a passage in Dukes work which CLEARLY descrbes why you also should NEVER have adopted the 'classic' approach regarding the palm, because Dukes writes on page 48 for the four element quadrants:

"Now you have found the four elemental quadrants of this hand. The elements, and their Chinese terms are as follows: Fire (Huo); Earth (Ti); Air (Feng); Water (Shui). Fire and Air are masculine, active and public in import (yang)[/u]. Earth and water are feminine, passive and private in import (Yin)."

...................

Martijn, when I notice that you have made a mistake, I mention it.
When you notice that I have made a mistake I get it pointed out to me by PM titled "Big mistake!", and then emphasised here in big bold writing underlined . Then you celebrate by letting off some fireworks. You tell me I should NEVER have adopted the 'classic' approach and that I should now reconsider your association for earth with 'outer world' and air with the 'inner world'

Is there anything else you'd like me to do? Maybe I should stand on a platform so that people can throw tomatoes at me whilst shouting YAY Lynn made a mistake! WOOHOO!


My big mistake was that, out of all the books and all the stuff I was taught about the elements, I forgot those two words from page 48 of a book I read 16 years ago, 'public' and 'private'. As far as I know that is the only time those two words occur in any of the literature I have describing "Fire and air = public" and "Earth and water = private".

I'm going to have my dinner, but to quote Arnie..."I'll be back"

Lynn, I get your point regarding how I highlighted your mistake... but please consider my position: I got kind of accused of 'projecting' my ideas and I have like felt like bananas flying around my ears every time I even started mentioning the word 'contradiction', etc.

And during this discussion I have asked you quite a few times to explain things regarding the many contradictions that I spotted.. but now I recognize how your association (regarding air with 'inner') often put me on the wrong track.

For example, after Patti quoted from Christopher's Cyber Cafe post (where he described water as an 'internal element')... I started question how we can understand the elements in terms of 'inner and outer', but then you e.g. responded that such connection could only be made when things are seen certain perspectives.

But now I see that you were actually struggling with your own perceptions Lynn!

Because the fundamentals of the 4 elements regarding 'inner' and 'outer' are actually CRYSTAL CLEAR... and I was just lucky that I have spotted Dukes comment.

( This discussion would have evolved mure more efficiently if we had spotted Dukes fundamental guideline much earlier in this discussion, because it relates to the core of our discussions!)


Lynn, I hope you recognize that this is not just a minor element... because I am now 100% confident that Johnny's vocabulary directly origins from Dukes & Christopher's writings (including the inconsistentencies in their works that I have tried to describe!).

By the way, regarding associated with 'public'... I spotted that in Johnny's first book the chapter about the ring finger is word 'public' is mentioned quite a few times - so there is the first confirmation; but on page 53 he also uses the word in the perspective of the pinky finger: 'public speakers'.


By the way, do you now recognize as well how this concerns actually one of the THE key-principles used by Dukes & Fincham regarding how they describe the palmar air quadrant... and the palmar water quadrant?


PS. Anyway, if it helps... I am willing to apologize for my 'public' ( ) fireworks.

(It was basically an expression of my own relief that I had spotted this basic-info - especially after being told/suggested.that things would probably have much been easier for me to understand if I had taken an elemental hand reading course..... ... but now it more looks like that if I or you had started reading Dukes quadrants chapter from A to Z that would actually have been sufficient to solve many problems in this discussion - including the issue reqarding Johnny's word choice, which I now consider as permanently solved!!!).

Lynn wrote:

Martijn (admin) wrote:However, I had to start talking about fingers leaning radial in order to make the point that in the elemental system there is no vertical division for the fingers regarding 'inner vs. outer'.

See my previous post.
..

Lynn, do you recognize now as well that as air is linked with 'public' and earth with 'private'... it does not make much sense to associate the radial palm with 'outer', because the basic elemental principles for the elements actually show a HORIZONTAL division: the UPPER 2 quadrants of the palm are associated with 'public' (= 'outer').

Simples!


And this perfectly makes sense in the perspective that 'spread fingers' are linked with the outer world because the pinky and idex finger 'point away' from the rest of the hand; because in a way we can also say that according this principle it also makes sense to associate the fingers as phyisical expressions that point away from the palm (= body). And thus one can also argue that fingers are more 'outer' than 'inner', and the palm itself is more 'inner' than 'outer', etc.


PS. I could add that the two external phalanges of the thumb also do not support your association regarding radial palm with 'outer'... because it is composed of an 'inner' (2nd phalange) and an 'outer' (1st phalange).

And I could even point out that the radial palm is actually 'surrounded' by 3 hand zones of which the elements are associated with 'inner': the earth finger, the water finger, and the 2nd phalange of the thumb!

Sucom wrote:

Martijn (admin) wrote:

Sucom wrote:"Its limitations and contradictions are blaring in this discussion and in that sense I find this discussion very valuable."

I'm glad I'm not alone with my thoughts here. I so agree with you Patti. When I saw fireworks in Martijn's post I must be honest and say that my eyebrows raised a little higher than normal

Sue, if you read my response to Patti (which I have just posted) ... then I expect that will probably be able recognize that my analysis does make sense.

And if not, you are very welcome to specify your thoughts.


(I hope you'll understand that I don't get any wiser from your 'raised eyebrows' ... nor your report that you are 'shocked'... because the fireworks only served to underline the content of that post of mine)

My raised eyebrows were created as a result of surprise rather than shock. I did search for an emoticon to represent my slightly raised eyebrows but couldn't find one. The shock emoticon was the closest I could find to describe my look of surprise that you were celebrating your conclusions so far. At this point, I cannot share in your celebration because I don't agree with your conclusions. I think I was surprised that you are happy with your conclusions so far, when for me at least, they seem far from complete.

Patti wrote:

Martijn (admin) wrote:

From reading through this a second time it seems that your main attempt here is to try to map out a way to read hands that excludes empathy. Empathy allows a person to take all the associations, the connecting dots and try them on like a multi-dimensional cloak and 'experience' the wholeness or holistic, energic, ever pulsing, ever vibrating essence. This can not be done with quadrants or the concept of 2 private and 1 public as having real meaning. Nor can it be done with 5 elements alone. Empathy is what makes a good actor as they can become the personality they are protraying.

P.S.

When I started to post - I got a notice saying another post had been posting so I'll add my response here.

Why are you using Christopher's terminology for dominant and non-dominant hands to support quadrants?

Patti wrote:The top example is from Judith Hipskind and the middle one is from Elizabeth Brenner with the bottom graphic from Nathaniel Altman. You can find similar divisions in the work of Sasha Fenton and Malcolm Wright, and Lori Reid.

I have selected these because some were part of my initial learning and the others are specifically selected because they support my viewpoint and give accuracy in readings.










If you read from Eugene Scheimann, M.D.'s book "A Doctor's Guide to Better Health Through Palmistry" in the chapter on the thumb, you will see his views are different than Dukes, Fincham and Jones.

In another chapter you'll see his wide spread fingers for example relate to being non-conventional. His definition of a held-in thumb is the introvert, but the outwardly held thumb is not. Showing he recognized how the condition and positioning shifts the energy from outward to inward.

Patti wrote:I don't see the reference now. Somewhere that Christopher referred to the vertical half of the hand and you used it to support your view for a quadrant.

I notice that you use Benham frequently in your graphic, but Benham refers to the left and right hands for the inner and outer selves and describes the mounts independently rather than in quarters.

In fact, I don't think Benham divided the individual hands into halves or quarters at all. At the beginning of Chapter II, he describes how he sees the elements as combined to create the driving force in humans. He does not apply the elements in an isolated method, but in combination instead.

He says:

"In whatever way the compressed energy or driving power is generated, it is made available only by combining a large number of primary elements and forces. Thus with steam, water is necessary, a boiler to hold it, fire to heat the water, a place in which to burn the fire, and fuel with which to build it. All other driving forces are in the same way made up from distinct and separate elements which, combined, will produce their particular kind of power."

Patti wrote:If you are in agreement with Judith Hipskind then I would be in agreement with you and I'm guessing to some degree so would Sue and Lynn (outside of the elements)

But so far you have argued against us and against Hipskind's quadrants.

Sucom wrote:

Patti – I notice you have posted while I was writing this. I wouldn’t use the word ‘retreat’. It’s not a retreat to step back. Perhaps I have used the wrong word. I should instead have said, ‘step away’. I don’t think any one of us can or should attempt to alter someone else’s truth. And we can’t live by someone else’s truth, we can only live by our own truth. We must be open, always, but never abandon our own truth or what rings true in order to take on someone else’s truth. It just doesn’t work this way. Especially after watching The Language of the Divine Matrix again this morning on youtube where Gregg Braden tells us that we are participators in the world, rather than observers, each creating our own reality. I'm happy with my own truth, it works well for me, but I wouldn't wish to try to force it on another. We each draw to us those of like mind. And I'm more than happy for it to be this way.

I hope I’ve made my thoughts clear.

Patti wrote:I see the word conscious on the radial side, but I still see the word "inner" for radial and "outer" for ulnar. That is the main disagreement.

Aha... of course!

After I had described the quadrants via the works of Dukes, Fincham & Spier I should have no longer included any 'radial vs. ulnar' division in my picture... because that would lead to the 'contradictions' that I have pointed out to earlier in this discussion!

So, I have now cut-off the upper zone of the picture... and I have included Judith Hipskind's name in the chart for the quadrants (her name is only featured for the upper quadrants because of a lack of space to add more details for the lower quadrants!).

Now I think the 2nd major 'obstacle' in this discussion has been solved... because I think Judith hipskind's quadrant approach is a clear signal that one should stop thinking in terms of the 'classic' ulnar- vs. radial division, because of the quadrants!

Thanks Patti!

Patti wrote:...

If you read from Eugene Scheimann, M.D.'s book "A Doctor's Guide to Better Health Through Palmistry" in the chapter on the thumb, you will see his views are different than Dukes, Fincham and Jones.

In another chapter you'll see his wide spread fingers for example relate to being non-conventional. His definition of a held-in thumb is the introvert, but the outwardly held thumb is not. Showing he recognized how the condition and positioning shifts the energy from outward to inward.

Martijn (admin) wrote:

Patti wrote:I see the word conscious on the radial side, but I still see the word "inner" for radial and "outer" for ulnar. That is the main disagreement.

Aha... of course!

After I had described the quadrants via the works of Dukes, Fincham & Spier I should have no longer included any 'radial vs. ulnar' division in my picture... because that would lead to the 'contradictions' that I have pointed out to earlier in this discussion!

So, I have now cut-off the upper zone of the picture... and I have included Judith Hipskind's name in the chart for the quadrants (her name is only featured for the upper quadrants because of a lack of space to add more details for the lower quadrants!).

Now I think the 2nd major 'obstacle' in this discussion has been solved... because I think Judith hipskind's quadrant approach is a clear signal that one should stop thinking in terms of the 'classic' ulnar- vs. radial division, because of the quadrants!

Thanks Patti!

Sucom wrote:

Martijn (admin) wrote:

Patti wrote:I see the word conscious on the radial side, but I still see the word "inner" for radial and "outer" for ulnar. That is the main disagreement.

Aha... of course!

After I had described the quadrants via the works of Dukes, Fincham & Spier I should have no longer included any 'radial vs. ulnar' division in my picture... because that would lead to the 'contradictions' that I have pointed out to earlier in this discussion!

So, I have now cut-off the upper zone of the picture... and I have included Judith Hipskind's name in the chart for the quadrants (her name is only featured for the upper quadrants because of a lack of space to add more details for the lower quadrants!).

Now I think the 2nd major 'obstacle' in this discussion has been solved... because I think Judith hipskind's quadrant approach is a clear signal that one should stop thinking in terms of the 'classic' ulnar- vs. radial division, because of the quadrants!

Thanks Patti!

Ahhhhh, I'm liking it more!

Martijn (admin) wrote:

Patti wrote:...

If you read from Eugene Scheimann, M.D.'s book "A Doctor's Guide to Better Health Through Palmistry" in the chapter on the thumb, you will see his views are different than Dukes, Fincham and Jones.

In another chapter you'll see his wide spread fingers for example relate to being non-conventional. His definition of a held-in thumb is the introvert, but the outwardly held thumb is not. Showing he recognized how the condition and positioning shifts the energy from outward to inward.

Patti, please specify... because I can not find any chapter of the thumb in Eugene Scheimann's book. Please specify the page (+ maybe you can also please your point?).

Martijn (admin) wrote:

Patti wrote:I see the word conscious on the radial side, but I still see the word "inner" for radial and "outer" for ulnar. That is the main disagreement.

Aha... of course!

After I had described the quadrants via the works of Dukes, Fincham & Spier I should have no longer included any 'radial vs. ulnar' division in my picture... because that would lead to the 'contradictions' that I have pointed out to earlier in this discussion!

So, I have now cut-off the upper zone of the picture... and I have included Judith Hipskind's name in the chart for the quadrants (her name is only featured for the upper quadrants because of a lack of space to add more details for the lower quadrants!).

Now I think the 2nd major 'obstacle' in this discussion has been solved... because I think Judith hipskind's quadrant approach is a clear signal that one should stop thinking in terms of the 'classic' ulnar- vs. radial division, because of the quadrants!

Thanks Patti!

Martijn (admin) wrote:
One more problem solved:

Since the index finger is related to issues linked with oestrogen and the ring finger with issues linked with testosterone (Manning's major 2d:4d digit ratio findings)... then there can be not much doubt about whether which of those two fingers is linked with the mother and which finger is linked with the father.

Manning's findings appear to point out that the index finger is linked with the mother (+ typical female talents & problems e.g.: language related talents, empathy, neuroticism, schizophrenia, etc.) and the index finger links with father (+ typical male talents & problems e.g.: visuo-spatial talents, musical ability, aggression control problems, autism, etc.).

And thus... it appears that Holtzman's work includes some 'doubtfull' elements regarding how he perceives the index- and ring finger.

Because, while Holtzman links the 'Persona' (= taken from the psychoanalytic vocabulary) with the index finger... La Roux & Fincham have linked the 'Persona' with the ring finger, and Birla has linked 'Persona' with the sun line, and Spier has linked the 'Persona' with the fate line.

And because Holtzman also has incorrectly associated the ring finger pinky with 'the inner image of self & 'hidden syndromes' (he does not make any connection with communication)... I think I have already described multiple arguments to reject Holtzman's approach for the ring finger and to adopt La Roux's approach (knowing that Richard Unger also connects 'Persona' with the ring finger - one of Richards advanced students has informed me recently about this!).

In the new picture below the consequences of this evaluation have been processed!