>>This is the core of the professionalistic model without the
>>shaman and this is where modern society finds itself today.
I used an old illustration I had drawn in relation to the id and ego of
an emeshed or co-dependent male/female partnership. The idea--in
relation to shamen--was that the male/female balance within the shaman
was not an enmeshed one. I am attaching the reworked graphics for you
to look at if you desire further explanation to:
http://www.tctc.com/~unameit/shamego.jpg
Brett
At 02:28 PM 8/17/97 -0400, you wrote:
>>Are you the shaman?
>I don't know.
>Yes.
>No.
>(No.)
>(Yes.)
>I have been actively engaged against him. Therefore, yes.
>He remains immaterial. Therefore, no.
>I don't know.
> Wade T. Smith
ps..if I understand the process you are describing above (something
like; it is one way/it is the other way/ it is either or both/ it is
neither..."something else"), then the process you are using is the
shamanic "medicine wheel"--balancing each thought in relation to a
complementary thought (which can be graphed in 4 quadrants) so that the
'sum' (the 5th, or central, position) is transcendent.
