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

**Sucom** Sat Feb 23, 2013 6:00 pm

There is one other thing I would like to point out.

In your efforts to create a firm basis supporting the use of hand reading in a modern world, I actually believe this discussion is doing more harm than good. Let me tell you why.

Throughout this discussion there has been much argument about whether 'this' means 'that' or 'that' means 'this'. To the average person, this must surely appear as continual contradictions in palmistry as a whole. One person believes this, another person believes that........ It appears that there is disagreement in hand reading interpretations across the board, when in actual fact, much of the disagreement appears to centre around contradictions found within the 'elemental' system, which I have spoken more about in my previous post. This argument about which part of the hand is water, which is air, which is fire and so on.........Patti mentioned Benham's views of a blending of the elements within the hand and this has been completely disregarded. Or appears to have been disregarded.

I have to ask myself - where are the contradictions? Are they in hand reading as a whole, or are they in the elemental system?

I throw these thoughts out for consideration so please feel free to respond as you wish.

Patti Sat Feb 23, 2013 6:19 pm

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Patti 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!

I whole heartedly disagree that one should stop thinking in ulnar and radial i.e. vertical division, and just work with quadrants. In my opinion, to do an accurate reading, you have to understand separately the vertical divisions and the horizontal divisions and then just like everything else in the hand...you combine these into the quadrants.

Patti, I hope you recognize that I made this recommendation in the perspective of the developments in this discussion.

What I meant to say it that the use of any vertical division should have lower priority than the use of quadrants... simply because the quadrants are actually the result of combining a vertcal + a horizontal division! For this reason the quadrant are specified for the 4 corners of the hand - while in any vertical division... the horizontal division is missing!

By the way, I think this observation is gets fully confirmed by your visual chart example from the work of Hipskind - who have explained visually where the 4 quadrant origin from (just like is explained in the work of Dukes).

Hmmm... you're still putting the cart before the horse. Yes - when you look at the vertical division, you are not looking at the horizontal and when you look at horizontal you are not looking at vertical and then you do see the 4 sections.

You have come the closest to grasping something in this post. i.e. 4 corners.

Judith Hipskind's book was used when I took the palmistry course at the University of Cincinnati in 1981. I had Elizabeth Daniel Squires book since the late 60's. These two books would have been my earliest foundation for learning the basics. From there most of what I know is from doing readings and learning directly from the hands.

That said, I don't see any conflict between Hipskind's, Brenner's and Altman's charts. In fact, Altman's is closer to being accurate as it shows the mid zones in both the horizontal and the vertical as the areas where one fades to the other. The palmistry zone called the Plain of Mars has always been highlighted as separate from the mounts. It has been referred to in palmistry books at the 'melting pot' area. It's condition tells a lot about the current state of energy in a person and relates to all zones surrounding it.

By the way, I'm not bothered with synonyms - because once you start interpreting, it's a wordless process of feeling an essence as you apply and combine the layers - from there the reader uses the best vocabulary they have to express what they are summing up and the listener needs some level of understanding to comprehend the reading in their own way of interpreting the words told to them.

Patti Sat Feb 23, 2013 6:48 pm

Sucom wrote:
What I meant to say it that the use of any vertical division should have lower priority than the use of quadrants... simply because the quadrants are actually the result of combining a vertcal + a horizontal division! For this reason the quadrant are specified for the 4 corners of the hand - while in any vertical division... the horizontal division is missing!

By the way, I think this observation is gets fully confirmed by your visual chart example from the work of Hipskind - who have explained visually where the 4 quadrant origin from (just like is explained in the work of Dukes).

Darn, just when I thought there was some improvement going on........

I'm with Patti all the way on this for several reasons.
1. I wholeheartedly disagree with taking everything that has ever been written about hand reading and replacing it with just ONE system, ie. the elemental system. This is FAR TOO LIMITING!
2. Every single aspect of the hands tells its own story. Bringing everything together in this way is FAR TOO LIMITING.
3. Make the vertical divisions of the palm and give them less priority over the quadrants??????? What????????
4. I don't base my hand reading on the elemental system. In fact, out of all the palmistry authors ever known, the number of those using the elemental system must be MINUTE in comparison.
5. I didn't realise until yesterday that you, also, Martijn, were attempting to create a chart based on the elemental system. Now I am reminded of the cybercafe, which I actually decided to leave because it tended to revolve far too much around just ONE system, based on what was, actually, a rather small handful of hand readers who had followed learnt with this man Dukes. A quick check on the internet does not offer a particularly encouraging feeling about Dukes, who is even classed as a liar on one page! If I recall, everyone turned their back on him! As it turned out, Duke's system was very different from any of the systems I had built my knowledge on and therefore I felt it was not for me.
6. While the elemental system may likely reach similar conclusions regarding the interpretation of various features of the hands, the method for reaching those conclusions is very different for a huge number of other hand readers who don't use the system, including myself.

Psychology is very young in relation to existence. The elemental system is also very young in relation to existence. Palmistry, on the other hand, is ancient in comparison and there is much to be learnt there without throwing out many of the theories that have existed over the years and bundling them up into what I see as limited elemental boxes.

Even considering the index finger as being water is not conclusive for me. This is just one aspect of the Jupiter finger, in my view and doesn't even allow for any blending of elements whatsoever. This just cannot be the case and I simply cannot accept it at this time.

Thoughts?

We share a lot of common viewpoints. I think we always have, but I moved toward the science and developmental aspect and you were into the spiritual side. I found the science avenue leads back to the spiritual and I see you have, with your interest in Gregg Braden's work found that the spiritual leads back to math and science - as one and the same.

**Martijn (admin)** Sat Feb 23, 2013 7:04 pm

Sucom wrote:
What I meant to say it that the use of any vertical division should have lower priority than the use of quadrants... simply because the quadrants are actually the result of combining a vertcal + a horizontal division! For this reason the quadrant are specified for the 4 corners of the hand - while in any vertical division... the horizontal division is missing!

By the way, I think this observation is gets fully confirmed by your visual chart example from the work of Hipskind - who have explained visually where the 4 quadrant origin from (just like is explained in the work of Dukes).

Darn, just when I thought there was some improvement going on........

I'm with Patti all the way on this for several reasons.
1. I wholeheartedly disagree with taking everything that has ever been written about hand reading and replacing it with just ONE system, ie. the elemental system. This is FAR TOO LIMITING!
...

Sue... why do you think that I am creating a chart based on the elemental system?

( lol!

I would loved to have seen Lynn's face when she reads your suggestion... because I expect Lynn will be totally surprised to see you make this - incorrect - conclusion!)

In my description regarding the quadrants versus a vertical division I have refered to Judith Hipkinds' quadrant-approach... who is - as far as I know - not using the elemental system at all!

wave

**Sucom** Sat Feb 23, 2013 7:07 pm

We share a lot of common viewpoints. I think we always have, but I moved toward the science and developmental aspect and you were into the spiritual side. I found the science avenue leads back to the spiritual and I see you have, with your interest in Gregg Braden's work found that the spiritual leads back to math and science - as one and the same.

Yes, it's all the same existence. Basically, I'm putting an argument across to myself! I have to laugh really. There is so much to learn and discover. Life - it's just so........ scratch

Patti Sat Feb 23, 2013 7:12 pm

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Sucom wrote:
What I meant to say it that the use of any vertical division should have lower priority than the use of quadrants... simply because the quadrants are actually the result of combining a vertcal + a horizontal division! For this reason the quadrant are specified for the 4 corners of the hand - while in any vertical division... the horizontal division is missing!

By the way, I think this observation is gets fully confirmed by your visual chart example from the work of Hipskind - who have explained visually where the 4 quadrant origin from (just like is explained in the work of Dukes).

Darn, just when I thought there was some improvement going on........

I'm with Patti all the way on this for several reasons.
1. I wholeheartedly disagree with taking everything that has ever been written about hand reading and replacing it with just ONE system, ie. the elemental system. This is FAR TOO LIMITING!
...

Sue... why do you think that I am creating a chart based on the elemental system?

( I would loved to have seen Lynn's face when she reads your suggestion... because I expect Lynn will be totally surprised to see you make this - incorrect - conclusion!)

In my description regarding the quadrants versus a vertical division I have refered to Judith Hipkinds' quadrant-approach... who is - as far as I know - not using the elemental system at all!

So you intensely 'beat the heck' out of Lynn, pulling from her everything she could probably give you from her knowledge and experience about the 5E system, while you shaped, formed and gathered author's viewpoints (primarily elementally minded from the start) to support your own agenda ---- to in the end claim it has nothing to do with elements and more to do with Hipskind (which I pointed out if you were using her system we would be in agreement, but we haven't been).

You may have filled the chart with your list of descriptive adjectives, but the person who shaped your chart is Lynn and her name isn't on there.... why.... oh... I guess it's because in spite of having written more words on palmistry in her life than most palmists that ever existed (and I probably come in second) - it doesn't count because trees did not die for the paper making process to form a book.

**Sucom** Sat Feb 23, 2013 7:16 pm

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Sucom wrote:
What I meant to say it that the use of any vertical division should have lower priority than the use of quadrants... simply because the quadrants are actually the result of combining a vertcal + a horizontal division! For this reason the quadrant are specified for the 4 corners of the hand - while in any vertical division... the horizontal division is missing!

By the way, I think this observation is gets fully confirmed by your visual chart example from the work of Hipskind - who have explained visually where the 4 quadrant origin from (just like is explained in the work of Dukes).

Darn, just when I thought there was some improvement going on........

I'm with Patti all the way on this for several reasons.
1. I wholeheartedly disagree with taking everything that has ever been written about hand reading and replacing it with just ONE system, ie. the elemental system. This is FAR TOO LIMITING!
...

Sue... why do you think that I am creating a chart based on the elemental system?

( I would loved to have seen Lynn's face when she reads your suggestion... because I expect Lynn will be totally surprised to see you make this - incorrect - conclusion!)

In my description regarding the quadrants versus a vertical division I have refered to Judith Hipkinds' quadrant-approach... who is - as far as I know - not using the elemental system at all!

Hi Martijn
I'm sorry but I won't be deterred by your telling me I'm incorrect or by your lol!

. It's water off a ducks back to me. As I said, we each live our own truth, that's the only way it ever can be. I put arguments forward in order to clear them up. I have always done this and I believe I always will. It's my way of seeking the truth. I have to look at ALL angles.

What I have suggested in my post are possibilities of how this thread might come across. You may think it comes across one way, but from my standpoint it may come across a completely different way. That's the beauty of perception. Who is right and who is wrong? Whose reality is right? Whose reality is wrong? Everyone's reality is 'correct' in a world full of possibilities.

I'm sure you can do a psychological analysis of the message in your post with the skills you possess. I already have and you are bound to be so much better at it than me - my knowledge of psychology is fairly small, but not so small that I cannot perceive why you immediately tell me I'm incorrect; why you suggest you have back up from Lynn and why you choose the LOL emoticon.

But no matter, it's not a problem. My thoughts still stand so if you have the inclination, I am hopeful for your thoughts. Smile

**Martijn (admin)** Sat Feb 23, 2013 7:26 pm

Sucom wrote:...
2. Every single aspect of the hands tells its own story. Bringing everything together in this way is FAR TOO LIMITING.
3. Make the vertical divisions of the palm and give them less priority over the quadrants??????? What????????
4. I don't base my hand reading on the elemental system. In fact, out of all the palmistry authors ever known, the number of those using the elemental system must be MINUTE in comparison.
5. I didn't realise until yesterday that you, also, Martijn, were attempting to create a chart based on the elemental system. Now I am reminded of the cybercafe, which I actually decided to leave because it tended to revolve far too much around just ONE system, based on what was, actually, a rather small handful of hand readers who had followed learnt with this man Dukes. A quick check on the internet does not offer a particularly encouraging feeling about Dukes, who is even classed as a liar on one page! If I recall, everyone turned their back on him! As it turned out, Duke's system was very different from any of the systems I had built my knowledge on and therefore I felt it was not for me.
6. While the elemental system may likely reach similar conclusions regarding the interpretation of various features of the hands, the method for reaching those conclusions is very different for a huge number of other hand readers who don't use the system, including myself.

Psychology is very young in relation to existence. The elemental system is also very young in relation to existence. Palmistry, on the other hand, is ancient in comparison and there is much to be learnt there without throwing out many of the theories that have existed over the years and bundling them up into what I see as limited elemental boxes.

Even considering the index finger as being water is not conclusive for me. This is just one aspect of the Jupiter finger, in my view and doesn't even allow for any blending of elements whatsoever. This just cannot be the case and I simply cannot accept it at this time.

Thoughts?

Sue, in my chart the index finger does not get connected with water... so why do you make this point in the perspective of my chart??? confused

I have not even mentioned the word 'water' in my chart! And the key-words in my picture for 2 fingers + all 3 thumb phalanges can not be traced back to 'elemental authors'!

So your words suggest to me that you probably misread/misunderstood some things.

Please, you are very welcome to specify you problem regarding the key-words that are featured in my chart... because I think you are jumping into conclusions that are not based on my chart (or incorrect perceptions regarding the process that has resulted in this chart).

PS. Regarding your comments about the Cyber Cafe... I am not aware of the process that you described regarding the elemental system. I have the impression that the elemental system has so far been picked up by only a couple of people who have participated in the discussions at various forums during the past 10-15 years. Yes, it was founded by one of the elemental student (Hidde) but in those days our discussions where already focussed on fundamental issues... and I think that the elemental system never became the main stream perspective in the Cyber Cafe: we had so many other things on our minds that we not related to any kind of system at all!

**Martijn (admin)** Sat Feb 23, 2013 7:45 pm

Patti wrote:
Martijn (admin) wrote:
Sucom wrote:
What I meant to say it that the use of any vertical division should have lower priority than the use of quadrants... simply because the quadrants are actually the result of combining a vertcal + a horizontal division! For this reason the quadrant are specified for the 4 corners of the hand - while in any vertical division... the horizontal division is missing!

By the way, I think this observation is gets fully confirmed by your visual chart example from the work of Hipskind - who have explained visually where the 4 quadrant origin from (just like is explained in the work of Dukes).

Darn, just when I thought there was some improvement going on........

I'm with Patti all the way on this for several reasons.
1. I wholeheartedly disagree with taking everything that has ever been written about hand reading and replacing it with just ONE system, ie. the elemental system. This is FAR TOO LIMITING!
...

Sue... why do you think that I am creating a chart based on the elemental system?

( I would loved to have seen Lynn's face when she reads your suggestion... because I expect Lynn will be totally surprised to see you make this - incorrect - conclusion!)

In my description regarding the quadrants versus a vertical division I have refered to Judith Hipkinds' quadrant-approach... who is - as far as I know - not using the elemental system at all!

So you intensely 'beat the heck' out of Lynn, pulling from her everything she could probably give you from her knowledge and experience about the 5E system, while you shaped, formed and gathered author's viewpoints (primarily elementally minded from the start) to support your own agenda ---- to in the end claim it has nothing to do with elements and more to do with Hipskind (which I pointed out if you were using her system we would be in agreement, but we haven't been).

You may have filled the chart with your list of descriptive adjectives, but the person who shaped your chart is Lynn and her name isn't on there.... why.... oh... I guess it's because in spite of having written more words on palmistry in her life than most palmists that ever existed (and I probably come in second) - it doesn't count because trees did not die for the paper making process to form a book.

Patti... I don't understand what you are talking about??? confused

It looks like you are accussing me of "... shaping author's viewpoints...", while my chart only includes key-words directly copied from the works of the authors that I have listed for those key-words!

(With the exception of only 1 exception single word... which was not even mentioned in any post inside of this discussion).

So, you are welcome to explain where your conclusions orgins from... but I don't see any connection with my chart. Do you? scratch

PS. Many of my posts were focussed on discussing the fundamentals of the elemental system, but I can't help it that it took us quite a long time before discovering that Dukes had actually quite well defined the 4 elments in terms of 'public' and 'private'... which actually turned out to be the missing pieces regarding Johnny's word choice!

So I think your perception that I have "... 'beat the heck' out of Lynn" has no ground at all, and I hope that Lynn will be able to understand my relief after I found the missing pieces that made us able to finish the part of our long discussion about how to percieve the elements in terms of 'inner' and 'outer', etc.

Patti Sat Feb 23, 2013 8:01 pm

http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/home

The above link leads to a fascinating page that points out various 'logical fallacies'. It was shared with me by a friend to help me deal with discussions such as these. It was an eyeopener.

Martijn,
I think you have commited quite a few in this discussion.
Strawman
False Cause
Special Pleading
Personal Incredulity
Burden of Proof
Bandwagon
Appeal to Authority
Composition/Division
Black-or-white
Begging-the-question
The Texas Sharpshooter

Although I'm positive your response will be to put the burden of proof back to me... my response is the proof is right here in this thread. Let's see if anyone in the membership who has followed this discussion comes forward to point out otherwise to any of the items in my list.

**Sucom** Sat Feb 23, 2013 8:08 pm

Hi Martijn

Well, it is certainly true that your chart doesn’t specifically mention water, but it does mention mirror finger, as suggested by Johnny Fincham, who I believe regards this as the water finger. While I actually like his interpretations of the index finger, he does reach his conclusions through the elemental system, ( I believe?) so your mention of Fincham makes you ……um, guilty by association. Remember, I’m throwing in arguments of possibilities here as to how your conclusions may be ‘appearing’. This is how I search for truth, by examining every possibility. I’m not saying it is my final truth, or my complete truth, it is just a possibility, based on how your conclusions may be perceived.

Also, you have referred to Dukes quite often in recent posts. I didn’t realise you took his work so seriously. I was quite surprised actually. But this caused me to remember back to the cybercafé, something I haven’t done for quite some time but I do recall opting out of that group because it was heavily biased towards elemental hand reading, and at times, really quite unfriendly to anyone who didn’t follow that system. I’m not usually quite so honest and direct in my posts as this (I’m usually far more diplomatic), but now that you have asked me, feel I should tell the truth about what I honestly believe. My thoughts may be right about the group or they may be wrong. This doesn’t really matter at the end of the day, because they were ‘my’ thoughts, and ‘my’ feelings, and those thoughts and feelings, being my own perceived truth, means that as long as I believed them, they created ‘my’ reality at the time, rightly or wrongly from anyone else’s perspective.
Having said this, I don’t recall you, personally, as being biased towards the elemental system at the café and this could be why I felt some surprise at your conclusions in this thread regarding Dukes.

I was beginning to prefer your chart more recently because it did not seem quite so biased, but looking again, I still see a fair amount of bias towards the elemental system; not to mention that perhaps the vast majority of this topic has consisted of discussion about the elemental system. You then topped this off with conclusions based on Dukes methods! In my book, that’s coming pretty darn close to the elemental system. I’m not too knowledgeable of Judith Hipskind’s work. Didn’t she write about knuckles? I picked up that book in a book shop once, and then put it down again really very quickly. You could say that I perhaps didn’t give her a chance but I’m prepared to change my view if there is any possibility that I should have looked further into it. At the time it seemed a little revolutionary for my liking.

I do realise that you are doing your very best in this topic and don’t really wish to stir it up with all kinds of complications. My intent is not to stir, more to find the truth, so I do apologise if my words come across a little …. Can’t think of a word right now…….but you know what I mean.

What a discussion! Phew! Smile

**Martijn (admin)** Sat Feb 23, 2013 8:22 pm

The picture below presents a pre-view of the next step to be featured in my chart (which I have pre-announced a few days ago):

I - The thumb represents the inner essence of man! - Page 19 Thumb-34

**Sucom** Sat Feb 23, 2013 8:27 pm

There's just one thought I have had about this. You asked me what I thought was wrong with the chart you have prepared so far. And my thought is this: It's not so much one specific thing about this chart, I think it is more a problem at a fundamental level.

I see reading someone's hand as a little bit of this, modified by a little bit of that, with a combination of a little bit of something else and then adapting yet something else.......Details, combinations - an infinite number.

As I see it, creating one single chart and trying to find keywords that are likely to combine all these details is almost an impossible task. To do so could possibly mean having to leave out certain details that could cause those details to be forgotten and lost. I see this as a limitation.

I think this is my biggest problem so far. I don't have a problem with elemental hand reading as such, but would not wish to be limited to that system ONLY. Do you see what I'm saying?

Can we, should we, attempt to limit the infinite variety of possibilities and interpretations to just a small chart? Is this possible?

Patti Sat Feb 23, 2013 8:56 pm

Patti wrote:http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/home

The above link leads to a fascinating page that points out various 'logical fallacies'. It was shared with me by a friend to help me deal with discussions such as these. It was an eyeopener.

Martijn,
I think you have commited quite a few in this discussion.
Strawman - selecting aspects of a person's feedback and ignoring others - using this to discount another's entire thought.

False Cause - showing the appearance of agreement between authors when there may not be any by selecting agenda oriented keywords.

Special Pleading - Starting a topic with the appearance of creating something based on not using particular methods, such as philosophical viewpoints, and then gradually moving the goal posts. Appearing to attempt to build a chart supported by 5E principles and when finding contradictions moved the goal posts again - but when questioned denied this was happening right before our very eyes.

Personal Incredulity - because something was not understood or could not be comprehended by one person, it was therefore not useful and maybe not valid.

Burden of Proof - Rather than supporting one's own argument continuously turning it back on the other to prove other wise (you with Lynn).

Bandwagon - Jone, Fincham & Dukes

Appeal to Authority - books

Composition/Division - using concepts developed based on dividing 4 sections of an area into 4 elements and then assuming that this can be applied directly to the hand and just simply be functional without any evidence that the applied defintions have any meaning or accuracy at all.

Black-or-white - inner and outer

Begging-the-question - inner/outer

The Texas Sharpshooter - "Cherry-picking data clusters to suit an argument, or finding a pattern to fit a presumption."

Although I'm positive your response will be to put the burden of proof back to me... my response is the proof is right here in this thread. Let's see if anyone in the membership who has followed this discussion comes forward to point out otherwise to any of the items in my list.

Just to be fair. flower

**Martijn (admin)** Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:06 pm

Sucom wrote:Hi Martijn

Well, it is certainly true that your chart doesn’t specifically mention water, but it does mention mirror finger, as suggested by Johnny Fincham, who I believe regards this as the water finger. While I actually like his interpretations of the index finger, he does reach his conclusions through the elemental system, ( I believe?) so your mention of Fincham makes you ……um, guilty by association. Remember, I’m throwing in arguments of possibilities here as to how your conclusions may be ‘appearing’. This is how I search for truth, by examining every possibility. I’m not saying it is my final truth, or my complete truth, it is just a possibility, based on how your conclusions may be perceived.

Also, you have referred to Dukes quite often in recent posts. I didn’t realise you took his work so seriously. I was quite surprised actually. But this caused me to remember back to the cybercafé, something I haven’t done for quite some time but I do recall opting out of that group because it was heavily biased towards elemental hand reading, and at times, really quite unfriendly to anyone who didn’t follow that system. I’m not usually quite so honest and direct in my posts as this (I’m usually far more diplomatic), but now that you have asked me, feel I should tell the truth about what I honestly believe. My thoughts may be right about the group or they may be wrong. This doesn’t really matter at the end of the day, because they were ‘my’ thoughts, and ‘my’ feelings, and those thoughts and feelings, being my own perceived truth, means that as long as I believed them, they created ‘my’ reality at the time, rightly or wrongly from anyone else’s perspective.
Having said this, I don’t recall you, personally, as being biased towards the elemental system at the café and this could be why I felt some surprise at your conclusions in this thread regarding Dukes.

I was beginning to prefer your chart more recently because it did not seem quite so biased, but looking again, I still see a fair amount of bias towards the elemental system; not to mention that perhaps the vast majority of this topic has consisted of discussion about the elemental system. You then topped this off with conclusions based on Dukes methods! In my book, that’s coming pretty darn close to the elemental system. I’m not too knowledgeable of Judith Hipskind’s work. Didn’t she write about knuckles? I picked up that book in a book shop once, and then put it down again really very quickly. You could say that I perhaps didn’t give her a chance but I’m prepared to change my view if there is any possibility that I should have looked further into it. At the time it seemed a little revolutionary for my liking.

I do realise that you are doing your very best in this topic and don’t really wish to stir it up with all kinds of complications. My intent is not to stir, more to find the truth, so I do apologise if my words come across a little …. Can’t think of a word right now…….but you know what I mean.

What a discussion! Phew!

Sue, no need to apologize at all!

By the way, your 'logic' above suggests that ... even when I had presented a chart with a 100 authors then you could still have found me "guilty by association" only because because of listing some names???

Sue, the truth is... every member of this forum is very welcome to bring up hand reading elements presented by authors that are not (yet) featured in my chart!

So, I am acutally still waiting for the moment that you start giving specific input in order to inform me what you problem regarding the content of my chart really is.

But actually... in your posed your have let me 'raise my eyebrows' ( Wink

) because you just described: "Well, it is certainly true that your chart doesn’t specifically mention water, but it does mention mirror finger..." confused

Sue, the word 'mirror finger' is not included in my chart either... and is has never been! Very Happy

(At the bottom of my introduction post for this topic I have featured all previous versions of my chart, see HERE)

Anyway, feel free to continue sharing your 'feelings' and perceptions... but I hope that you will also be able to add some input that is actually related to the content of the books that you are aware of. Because so far if appears that you are in the middle of a proces to 'sort things out' about how this discussion has developed so far... but I am surprized to make you see statements (& assumptions) regarding my picture that are not confirmed by the content of the picture!

For example: my picture includes 16 (well-known) authors of which only 4 authors can be associated with the 'elemental system', and for all phalanges of the thumb + the little finger + the middle finger I have not refered to the elemental authors at all.... and I could add that by fact none of the 13 series of key-words is solely based on the works of 'elemental authors'.

These are all facts that contradict your... current perception! (By the way, your honesty is actually very helpfull here... because it helps me understand that your shared feelings & perceptions should at this stage not be taken as permanent conclusions Thumbs up!

)

However, Sue... I am still wondering: what made you think that my picture is all focused on the elemental system?

(Maybe the input by another member made you think so? confused

)

NOTICE: I have read your latest comment before I post this... and while you have started talking about some kind of 'fundamental level', you still did not specify anything to a specific word in my chart - and you also didn't mention any specific topic or issue that you think is missing in my chart. (You only talked about the name + element that Fincham is using for the index finger in his books... but both words ['mirror finger' & 'water finger'] are not in my chart, and I also never even considered to include those words in my chart!)

**Martijn (admin)** Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:18 pm

Sucom wrote:There's just one thought I have had about this. You asked me what I thought was wrong with the chart you have prepared so far. And my thought is this: It's not so much one specific thing about this chart, I think it is more a problem at a fundamental level.

I see reading someone's hand as a little bit of this, modified by a little bit of that, with a combination of a little bit of something else and then adapting yet something else.......Details, combinations - an infinite number.

As I see it, creating one single chart and trying to find keywords that are likely to combine all these details is almost an impossible task. To do so could possibly mean having to leave out certain details that could cause those details to be forgotten and lost. I see this as a limitation.

I think this is my biggest problem so far. I don't have a problem with elemental hand reading as such, but would not wish to be limited to that system ONLY. Do you see what I'm saying?

Can we, should we, attempt to limit the infinite variety of possibilities and interpretations to just a small chart? Is this possible?

Sue... you talk about 'limits' (of the elemental system), but you still have not specified anyting regarding my chart. Because, even though it includes references to the works of 4 elemental authors, I am not proposing the elemental system above any other hand reading system at all.

Maybe it would be helpful to share a few names of the palmistry authors in general that you find most appealing... and maybe you are able to specify why you like them?

Because then I can make an evaluation of whether the works of your authors might have something essential in common that is not featured yet in my chart. Any specification could become helpful here for me to understand where your concern really origins from.

By the way, what do you think of the 'table' featured in my pre-view picture?
Does it help you understand a bit where this project of mine is going?

Thanks!

**Martijn (admin)** Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:34 pm

Sucom wrote:
Martijn (admin) wrote:
Sucom wrote:
What I meant to say it that the use of any vertical division should have lower priority than the use of quadrants... simply because the quadrants are actually the result of combining a vertcal + a horizontal division! For this reason the quadrant are specified for the 4 corners of the hand - while in any vertical division... the horizontal division is missing!

By the way, I think this observation is gets fully confirmed by your visual chart example from the work of Hipskind - who have explained visually where the 4 quadrant origin from (just like is explained in the work of Dukes).

Darn, just when I thought there was some improvement going on........

I'm with Patti all the way on this for several reasons.
1. I wholeheartedly disagree with taking everything that has ever been written about hand reading and replacing it with just ONE system, ie. the elemental system. This is FAR TOO LIMITING!
...

Sue... why do you think that I am creating a chart based on the elemental system?

( I would loved to have seen Lynn's face when she reads your suggestion... because I expect Lynn will be totally surprised to see you make this - incorrect - conclusion!)

In my description regarding the quadrants versus a vertical division I have refered to Judith Hipkinds' quadrant-approach... who is - as far as I know - not using the elemental system at all!

Hi Martijn
I'm sorry but I won't be deterred by your telling me I'm incorrect or by your . It's water off a ducks back to me. As I said, we each live our own truth, that's the only way it ever can be. I put arguments forward in order to clear them up. I have always done this and I believe I always will. It's my way of seeking the truth. I have to look at ALL angles.

What I have suggested in my post are possibilities of how this thread might come across. You may think it comes across one way, but from my standpoint it may come across a completely different way. That's the beauty of perception. Who is right and who is wrong? Whose reality is right? Whose reality is wrong? Everyone's reality is 'correct' in a world full of possibilities.

I'm sure you can do a psychological analysis of the message in your post with the skills you possess. I already have and you are bound to be so much better at it than me - my knowledge of psychology is fairly small, but not so small that I cannot perceive why you immediately tell me I'm incorrect; why you suggest you have back up from Lynn and why you choose the LOL emoticon.

But no matter, it's not a problem. My thoughts still stand so if you have the inclination, I am hopeful for your thoughts.

Sue, the reason why I used the 'LOL' emoticon after you started wondering whether I might have some kind of hidden agenda regarding the elemental system... I can inform you that in an earlier phase of this discussion Lynn & Patti had likewise thoughts - though not as specified as yours.

But I can assure you... that at some phase Lynn hardly recognized any similarities between her perceptions about the elemental system and my chart, so I am sure that she did not find my chart representative for the elemental system at all - even though I had already adopted some key-words taken from Fincham's work!

I hope you can now better understand why I got amused by your... 'worrries' (?)

wave

**Sucom** Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:57 pm

Ok, I will become more specific. I was intending to be working on getting my web site back up tonight, but that seems to be going by the board. Lol. Oh well, always a sucker for a hefty discussion. Darn my air hands! (Yes, I do refer to elements)

By the way, your 'logic' above suggests that ... even when I had presented a chart with a 100 authors then you could still have found me "guilty by association" only because because of listing some names???

Yes

(I'm playing Smile

)

My first problem is right at the top of the chart where it says public and active/outer world. This goes against just about everything I have read. This is not because I necessarily disagree with the consequent interpretations of this area. My problem is related to the idea that this area is public and outer. My reasoning for this is that shrewdness, quick wit, perception, intimacy, inner creativity are not necessarily public and outer. But as I have mentioned in previous posts, there needs to be a better definition of what is actually meant by public, active, and outer world. Where does inner creativity begin and end. Where does it originate from and where does it lead. Yes, it’s true that vanity plays its part but I believe there is more to this area than your chart presupposes. This I find limiting.

I really do wish that you would better describe your understanding of inner and outer.
To be continued....

**Sucom** Sat Feb 23, 2013 10:06 pm

Sue, the reason why I used the 'LOL' emoticon after you started wondering whether I might have some kind of hidden agenda regarding the elemental system... I can inform you that in an earlier phase of this discussion Lynn & Patti had likewise thoughts - though not as specified as yours.

But I can assure you... that at some phase Lynn hardly recognized any similarities between her perceptions about the elemental system and my chart, so I am sure that she did not find my chart representative for the elemental system at all - even though I had already adopted some key-words taken from Fincham's work!

I hope you can now better understand why I got amused by your... 'worrries' (?)

Forums are notorious for misunderstandings. It makes one realise how important body language and tone of voice are. I have no problems regarding this.

**Lynn** Sat Feb 23, 2013 10:09 pm

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

I notice there has been further discussion about this but as far as I read, Martijn didn't know what Patti was talking about and Patti couldn't find the quote.
It's here, and I had the same question as Patti.

Patti, after I found Dukes description for the elements on page 48:

- fire & air = masculine, active and public in import
- earth & water = feminine, passive and private in import

I can also add that Christopher connects the words 'active' and 'passive' with the following key-words (copied from page 36 in his 'Studies for Intermediate Diploma'):

- passive (hand) gets associated with e.g.: subconscious, inner, hidden, subjective self, private self & private life
- active (hand) with e.g.: conscious, outer, visible, objective self, public image, wordly life

**Martijn (admin)** Sat Feb 23, 2013 10:52 pm

Lynn wrote:
Patti wrote:Why are you using Christopher's terminology for dominant and non-dominant hands to support quadrants?
I notice there has been further discussion about this but as far as I read, Martijn didn't know what Patti was talking about and Patti couldn't find the quote.
It's here, and I had the same question as Patti.

Patti, after I found Dukes description for the elements on page 48:

- fire & air = masculine, active and public in import
- earth & water = feminine, passive and private in import

I can also add that Christopher connects the words 'active' and 'passive' with the following key-words (copied from page 36 in his 'Studies for Intermediate Diploma'):

- passive (hand) gets associated with e.g.: subconscious, inner, hidden, subjective self, private self & private life
- active (hand) with e.g.: conscious, outer, visible, objective self, public image, wordly life

Hi Lynn,

I refered to Christopher's list of key-words with the purpose to explain the origins of Dukes' key-words for the quadrants that I have included in my picture.

So, I only refered to Christopher's work in order to illustrate that there is also a larger perspective where those key-words (used by Dukes for the quadrants) get connected as well!

Simples!

wave

**Sucom** Sat Feb 23, 2013 10:55 pm

Another problem I have is, where is inner creativity within this chart? Where is the area of the hand which connects to the artist painting quietly in his studio? Where is the area of the hand which connects to the musician, lost in the absorbing sound of his music? Most pianists agree that playing the piano is a vparticularly solitary life style. And even though a person may perform as a result of their talent, not all of them do so willingly. Some do, I grant you, but not all. And also, the language of a musician is a very special language that tends to be very personal to that player. There is no mask involved here. No public stage, no strutting their stuff. Just quietly engaged and absorbed in their hobbies and when you talk to them about their talents, you see a light shine from their eyes. Where is this in the chart?

Also, where is the area in the chart which allows for the intuitive, the caring person who is always happy to be available to listen quietly to your problems? Would this be a public stage? Or the person who spends hours meditating? Where is this in the chart? Would these aspects of the nature be associated with the public, active, outer self?

**Lynn** Sat Feb 23, 2013 11:05 pm

To continue where I left off last night. I was going to add some quotes but didn't have time to post anything else till now ...... and I see I have a lot to catch up on!

OK Martijn I take your explanation about the fireworks being to celebrate some new understanding of yours, rather than celebrating the fact that I forgot 2 words 'public' and 'private' (that I read 16 years ago)!

Fire and Air are masculine, active and public in import (yang).
Earth and water are feminine, passive and private in import (Yin).

Please be aware that I had forgotten those words because (as far as I am aware) they were never used again by anyone with regard to air being public.
so, no I do not

recognize now as well that as air is linked with 'public'

because Dukes mentioned it once does not make it a fact nor does it make it a basic principle of 5 element handreading, despite your comment

Now Patti... if Lynn had been aware of all the basic concepts used by Dukes & Christopher in the elemental system, I think she should have been able to understand the origins of Johnny's vocubulary immidiately!

Where does Christopher ever mention air being public? Never as far as I am aware! I think I have far more awareness of the basic principles than you have shown so far Martijn. (sorry if you feel bananas flying round your ears again).

Numerous times in my notes from Christopher's course I have:

Earth and Water are feminine, receptive, placid, - Yin (edit 'placid' is sometimes replaced with 'passive')
Fire and Air are masculine, creative, active – Yang

no mention of public/private.

Whilst I forgot those words from years ago, you seem to have forgotten some words from much more recently!
Such as Christopher's comment that I re-posted

“I see the thumb side as the 'outer' half of the hand and the little finger side as the 'inner' half of the hand.”

Somewhere in this discussion I talked about earth and fire (body and actions) being more 'outer' and water and air (emotions and thoughts) being more 'inner'.
I have found a quote to prove to you that I wasn't talking off the top of my head.
It might also go some way to answer your question about Christopher's quote above

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!

Lr Intermediate course lesson 1. & similar quote on P74 Studies for the Intermediate Diploma (C. Jones).
Earth and fire quadrants are on the thumb - outer, conscious, radial side. Body and actions are the most obvious (outward) thing about a person, whereas what they are feeling and thinking are more hidden, inner things so water and air quadrants are on the inner, subconscious, ulna side of the hand.

Earth and fire are the more outwardly directed elements.
Water and air are inwardly orientated

You comment that

I recognize how your association (regarding air with 'inner') often put me on the wrong track.

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.

Are they still as crystal clear now? Do you disregard the other quotes above?
(edit) Do you still think I should now reconsider your association for earth with 'outer world' and air with the 'inner world' ?(/edit)

Here's another quote
Dukes/Cigman “Practical Cheirology”
“Air is a symbol of the world which is invisible or hidden from view” “The air world is the world of thought”

Does 'hidden' sound the same as 'public? Are our thoughts always public?

I think you've now deleted 'inner and outer' sides of the hand from your diagram? But one more quote, showing how inner & outer were seen in C.Soc.
C.Soc journal vol 349/1 C.Abrams.
The direction of opening of the radial loop goes from thumb (external) side of the hand towards the ulna (internal) side of the hand.

**Sucom** Sat Feb 23, 2013 11:06 pm

So basically, while I do agree with Johnny's interpretatons to a 'large' extent, I am tempted to believe that he is only offering those aspects of the personality which he tends to identify with, or which he has experence of. And of course, this is understandable, what we see around us has to be based on our own perception, there is no other way to be.

What I see in your chart is largely based on Johnny's understanding of the four areas of the hands. The inner keywords you have applied all relate to Johnny's own understanding. Correct me if I have read the wrong chart here - you have changed it several times so I'm not always certain that I'm looking at the most recent one.

Another point I would raise here is that each of the four areas is including the complete quarter of the palm, while the traits assocated with them tend to relate mostly to the finger interpretations rather than the interpretatons found in the lines. For example, is a mercury line assocated with the public, outer self. What about the health line?

**Lynn** Sat Feb 23, 2013 11:31 pm

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.

So much to reply to on this thread! But I just wanted to pick up on this one. Despite the fact that I am sooo sorry that you two don't share my passion for the 5-element system Sue & Patti, you don't need it anyway, you both have such good experience & ways of describing hands without the need for elemental language. I am not in the business of trying to 'convert' anyone to the 5-element system, but I would just like to say that it DOES make sense.
The apparent 'contradictions' are often due to misunderstanding of how it all works, starting from basic principles and working thru the zillions of possible combinations of how the elements interact and the roles they play in the various parts of the hand (tho I think you both have some understanding of that!). I assure you there are no limitations to 5 elements, when you consider that everything in the world can be described as some combination of the 5 elements, there is no limit!. I feel like I have let the 5-element system down by my apparent inability to explain and describe it all (short air finger, short headline!).... but that would be impossible in a forum even if I had the inclination to do it! Anyway, thanks for your interest in this system over the years!

Sponsored content