outside the square

A. G. Maisey · 26th January 2008, 05:21 AM

Here is a link that will take you to a story about UFO's & etc.

Nothing at all to do with keris.

Or is it?

http://www.newsweek.com/id/96014

David · 26th January 2008, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Here is a link that will take you to a story about UFO's & etc.

Nothing at all to do with keris.

Or is it?

http://www.newsweek.com/id/96014

Actually i agree with you Alan. This article could have a great deal to do with keris...or not.

What i find humorous, and perhaps a bit annoying about the article is that it doesn't seem to accept the possibility for one moment that the "real" explanation for these sightings might have been an actual alien visitation.
Interestingly enough, i think it might be harder for people of faith to accept the alien visitation explanation than people of science, as in most faiths extra-terrestrial live (especial one with superior technology to us humans) would stand against many religious domgas and belief systems.

tunggulametung · 26th January 2008, 06:38 PM

Something that we cannot proove (so far?) that they are exist, and on the other hand we cannot prove that they are not exist, just like mystic or spirit. I guess there is a term of seeing is believing.

"there are things known and things unknown" - James Douglas Morrison

A. G. Maisey · 26th January 2008, 08:19 PM

I didn't post this to try to start a discussion on whether aliens and UFO's exist or not, nor to explore the philosophy of the concept that seeing is believing.

I posted it because I thought that perhaps some of us may like to give some thought to the way in which the human mind works, especially the communal human mind.

Seeing something can certainly lead to belief in something.

In about 1987 or 1988 I was in Solo when it was hit by an incredible wind storm. All over Solo and through to the south coast there was ernormous damage done by the wind, followed by torrential rain. The following morning thousands of people from outlaying districts had converged on the kraton.
After a few days, when everything had settled down I made it my business to find and speak with some of the people who had assembled at the kraton. I asked how they had known that they needed to go to the kraton. Who had told them to go? Had they seen neighbours going so they went too? Why had they gone? Was there previous experience guiding them? I was invariably told by all the people I talked with that each person had acted independently:- they just knew that they had to assemble at the kraton. They were not quite sure why they had to go, but they had to go. Nobody told them, some people that I spoke with lived in houses that were isolated from neighbours, as soon as they knew they had to go, they immediately left home and started to make their way to the kraton. They joined with others along the way, but their action to leave home and go was an individual action.
Many of the people living within and near the kraton had seen a presence that was Nyai Loro Kidul. I spoke to three of these people, and there was no doubt at all in my mind that they did see a glowing green light like a ball of green fire with a long tail that circled the outside of the kraton walls above head height. How did they know it was Nyai Loro Kidul? They just knew. Did somebody tell them it was Nyai Loro Kidul, or had they ever heard or seen something like this before? No, they just knew.

I'm not offering any explanations here. I'm not supporting any beliefs or denying any beliefs. All I'm doing is telling a story that is a part of my personal experience.

Have another look at the UFO story and separate the elements of the story from aliens, UFO's and etc, and focus on that part of the story that deals with the functioning of the human mind. Then think about that.Having thought, then apply those thoughts to what we think we might understand about keris belief.

David · 26th January 2008, 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

I didn't post this to try to start a discussion on whether aliens and UFO's exist or not, nor to explore the philosophy of the concept that seeing is believing.
I posted it because I thought that perhaps some of us may like to give some thought to the way in which the human mind works, especially the communal human mind.

Alan, i think you misunderstood my response. I realize your purpose in your posting, but how the established mind-set views the phenomenon of UFO reports and their seeming need to come up with any other answer then the one where the aliens actually exist is just as telling and applicable to the discussion of how we look at the keris.

A. G. Maisey · 26th January 2008, 11:08 PM

Possibly.

As I said:- consideration of the workings of the human mind. That encompasses not only communal consciousness, but belief systems and the substitution of perceived logic for faith.

tunggulametung · 27th January 2008, 07:15 AM

As for myself, I favour the wise Tat Twam Asi teaching to (try to) understand the concept of the universe, including in keris believe; but I'm sorry I know nothing about human mind and how it works in communal field, for my simple life its too abstract to be understood

But thank you Alan, for sharing the story and thoughts

fearn · 27th January 2008, 03:47 PM

Hi Alan,

I appreciate the article. I've seen UFOs: it's very simple, really. They were distant moving lights in the sky. Almost certainly they were planes or satellites, possibly a meteor or two. Since I didn't have binoculars at the time, I lacked any way of determining what they were. Hence they remain UFOs (unidentified flying objects). I've also had the experience of looking up and seeing odd white birds flying high up in the sky, then looking up a few seconds later and having trouble finding them. Angels? The souls of the recently departed? Or simply seagulls or other white birds, flying high up in air that's just hazy enough to hide them? I favor the last, but since I didn't have any binoculars with me when I've seen them, so I can't say.

Thing is, I'm a working scientist, and I used to work on some very, very common microscopic soil organisms that are difficult to identify. When I was learning to work with these things, my teacher told me that one sign of a good researcher was to be honest about what could and could not be identified. In his opinion, the sign of mediocre research was that every single organism was given a scientific name. He'd rarely seen a sample where every thing could be identified, and that had made him suspicious about people who claimed otherwise, unless he knew them and their skill levels.

That said, I'd be very surprised if UFOs were aliens from another star. There are two reasons why:

1. Distance. Star Trek has really messed up our idea of how far apart stars are. Basically, if the distance from the earth to the sun was a centimeter, the nearest known star (proxima centaurii) is roughly 2.67 kilometers away. For comparison, Voyager 1 has taken 30 years to travel roughly a bit over two meters of that distance. Most of that distance is deep space, which is not empty, but full of really dangerous radiation (cosmic rays) that we can't easily shield against.

In other words, it's a long way to go, and it's a really hostile environment to live in. Doesn't mean that they didn't come here, said hypothetical aliens would have to have a very cheap form of totally unknown technology to do it. Why really cheap? Look at the things UFOs do. They cruise over areas. They mutilate cattle. They kidnap people on isolated roads in rural areas and probe them. Even if they were conducting scientific experiments, their experimental design is stupid, by our standards. Considering how little they'd learn from what they're reported to do, all I have to say is that UFO travel has to be really cheap for them to do such foolish things.

2. Biology. Life has been on Earth for over two billion years, and the Earth has had something approaching a breathable atmosphere for over 400 million years (although oxygen levels have fluctuated substantially over that time). That's a *long* time, and if aliens can travel here and live here (without getting eaten alive by our microbes), it's amazing that we have no fossils of alien cities, no alien life-forms that don't follow known DNA forms, etc. Admittedly, scientists are only starting to look for alien microorganisms in the soil, but the telling point is that, if aliens came here, they've had hundreds of millions of years to explore, settle, and take over, and yet, they've left no known trace of themselves. Considering what we'd do if we got to an alien planet (i.e. settle it, name it New Earth, build cities, raise crops, and transform the place), this is a really, really odd record.

Based on these two points, the simplest explanations for UFOs are earthbound: planes, hallucinations, mystical experiences, hoaxes, and the like.

As for spirits in a keris? We definitely haven't established that we're all talking the same thing when we use the word "spirit," or "soul," or whatever. Since we are probably discussing a mishmash of experiences and beliefs using a common and imperfect set of terms, it's amazing that we can have a reasonable discussion about it at all. It's a testament to the people on this list that we can.

F

David · 27th January 2008, 06:15 PM

Fearn, as Alan previously stated, i do not want to see this thread turn into a debate about the existence or origin of UFOs. I could very easily create a valid point-by-point argument to yours but i think that it would take us off the track of the purpose for this forum. Contact me via PM if you want to go there.

fearn · 27th January 2008, 07:49 PM

Hi David,

I agree about UFOs, and the only point I really care about in the previous post is people's willingness to say "I don't know" when confronted with something they don't understand, whether it's UFOs, spiritually endowed keris, or whatever.

The trap to avoid is becoming what Nassim Talib calls an "empty suit," an "expert" who sound wonderfully convincing in explaining things, but who actually doesn't know what he (or she) is talking about in any demonstrable way.

With regard to UFOs, none of us particularly knows what we're talking about, so the debate would go over better at a pub than over the internet (and David, if you're ever in the LA area, PM me and we can have that debate in an appropriate locale). With regard to keris, I know very little about them, so mostly I read the posts. I'm not certainly not an expert.

What I do hope is that the people who post here continue to fill their suits well.

F

A. G. Maisey · 27th January 2008, 08:21 PM

I'm beginning to feel really sorry that I started this thread.

When I read the article I saw so much in it, put in such a clear and simple and straightforward way, that was directly able to be related to keris belief that I thought other people with a keris interest would immediately grasp the implications of the way in which the human mind and the human experience can create images and experiences that are totally real in a particular time and place, but removed from that time and place and put into either a cultural vacuum , or into a negatively charged culture, will yield either no image or experience, or a different image or experience.

My thought was that we would all benefit from a little bit of quite consideration of the workings of the human mind against the background of our own particular culture and society, and this consideration could lead to a better, or perhaps only different, understanding of much that is associated with keris culture.

Looks like I was wrong. I apologise for wasting everybody's time.

However, I too have seen UFO's, and I am prepared to agree with anybody that UFO's and aliens really do exist, or alternatively that they really do not exist, and I can mount a convincing argument either way. But its just not a subject that interests me very much.

Emanuel · 27th January 2008, 09:09 PM

Hello,

I enjoyed the spychological analyses in the article. I thought the idea about changes in the Earth's magnetic field making people see UFO's a bit odd. As a random effect it may also have made them see purple pigs dancing on the street, but that doesn't seem to happen.

The bit about the university professor seeing lights in the sky at night and immediately thinking about UFO's in an interesting one. I guess that just as he was conditionned to think "UFO", so the people in Solo were conditioned to think "Nyai Loro Kidul" when they saw a thunderbolt strike a spire of the kraton. They congregated at the kraton in a time of seeming danger, just as folks in Europe would go to the local church or cathedral. People are conditionned to do this in time of crisis or extreme anxiety.

The Solo man may KNOW that when he heard a rustling noise in the house and then he tripped and hit his head, that the keris did it out of anger or as a sign, obviously. The westerner guest will KNOW that the wind moved the beads in the window, the man got spooked and he tripped on the kids' toys, also obviously. Both are right and neither can prove the other wrong. The Texan businessman KNOWS that the UFO was a mile long travelling 300x faster than his Cessna - his experience, his scale, his perception and manner of thinking.

Certain dynamic lighting conditions could make a serpentine keris blade appear to be moving. A man's eyes show him the naga blade coming to life. How can someone that wasn't present or that witnessed different lighting conditions dissuade him from his belief?
If all of these keris cases are publicised as much as the UFO sightings are, then it's not hard to understand why an entire culture may believe in the power of keris. As obvious as it is to a Texan that UFO's exist (or don't exist), so it is to a Solonese man that his keris is (or is not) magical.

That's what I got from your comparison, Alan.
Regards,
Emanuel

David · 27th January 2008, 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

I'm beginning to feel really sorry that I started this thread.

When I read the article I saw so much in it, put in such a clear and simple and straightforward way, that was directly able to be related to keris belief that I thought other people with a keris interest would immediately grasp the implications of the way in which the human mind and the human experience can create images and experiences that are totally real in a particular time and place, but removed from that time and place and put into either a cultural vacuum , or into a negatively charged culture, will yield either no image or experience, or a different image or experience.

My thought was that we would all benefit from a little bit of quite consideration of the workings of the human mind against the background of our own particular culture and society, and this consideration could lead to a better, or perhaps only different, understanding of much that is associated with keris culture.

Looks like I was wrong. I apologise for wasting everybody's time.

However, I too have seen UFO's, and I am prepared to agree with anybody that UFO's and aliens really do exist, or alternatively that they really do not exist, and I can mount a convincing argument either way. But its just not a subject that interests me very much.

Alan, you have no need to apologize and i don't think you have wasted anyone's time. But i also think you are wrong if you think we just don't "get" what you were on about, even if the subject stills seems a bit too focussed on UFOs themselves. I think most of us at least understand what you were pointing to if we are not totally in agreement with your points.

fearn · 27th January 2008, 10:40 PM

While I generally avoid "me too" posts, Alan, I agree with David's points. It was worth posting the article.

For the purposes of this forum, perhaps we need a fuzzy image that could be an Unidentified Flying Keris to center the discussion properly. Or maybe not...

F

David · 27th January 2008, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fearn

With regard to UFOs, none of us particularly knows what we're talking about, so the debate would go over better at a pub than over the internet (and David, if you're ever in the LA area, PM me and we can have that debate in an appropriate locale).

BTW Fearn, who's picking up the first round...

A. G. Maisey · 28th January 2008, 12:03 AM

Yes David, I did think that you, and the other people who have commented did not get quite the same message from this article that I got.

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe everybody understands exactly the same things from it, but because we are writing, rather than talking, the clarity of understanding is not shining through.

I have not yet, and probably will not, take a position on the content of this article. I have no intention of getting involved in trying to explain anything from my perspective, nor of trying to defend any point of view. The article is very clearly written, and I think it speaks for itself. All I really want is for other people to read it sufficiently diligently to understand the information that it carries. Then perhaps to apply that information to what we know of keris beliefs and the cultural and societal fabric of Jawa. Even the mention of the effects of magnetic stimulation and the noisy environment has a place in these considerations. It should be understood that noise in this context does not refer to noise measured in decibels, but rather noise measured in the intensity of feedback from population density and interaction, or possibly as a synonym of "distraction". What is clear is that the author is not talking about a heavy metal band.

The point of my initial post was to try to get people to apply information from an unrelated subject to the subject of keris culture and belief. The intent was to encourage abstract analytical thought. I had hoped that after the time it would take this process to reach fruition, perhaps we might have had a few original and/or interesting ideas floated on some matters to do with the keris and its culture and society.

For myself, I'm still digesting what I read in that article, and right at the moment I still need a lot more time before I can put some order into my ideas.Leads from the article also need time to be investigated.

fearn · 28th January 2008, 03:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David

BTW Fearn, who's picking up the first round...

Oh, I will, unless you're into expensive tequila or single malt. I'm a beer type.

Cheers,

F

26th January 2008, 05:21 AM	#1
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,781	outside the square Here is a link that will take you to a story about UFO's & etc. Nothing at all to do with keris. Or is it? http://www.newsweek.com/id/96014

26th January 2008, 06:38 PM	#3
tunggulametung Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 238	Something that we cannot proove (so far?) that they are exist, and on the other hand we cannot prove that they are not exist, just like mystic or spirit. I guess there is a term of seeing is believing. "there are things known and things unknown" - James Douglas Morrison

26th January 2008, 08:19 PM	#4
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,781	I didn't post this to try to start a discussion on whether aliens and UFO's exist or not, nor to explore the philosophy of the concept that seeing is believing. I posted it because I thought that perhaps some of us may like to give some thought to the way in which the human mind works, especially the communal human mind. Seeing something can certainly lead to belief in something. In about 1987 or 1988 I was in Solo when it was hit by an incredible wind storm. All over Solo and through to the south coast there was ernormous damage done by the wind, followed by torrential rain. The following morning thousands of people from outlaying districts had converged on the kraton. After a few days, when everything had settled down I made it my business to find and speak with some of the people who had assembled at the kraton. I asked how they had known that they needed to go to the kraton. Who had told them to go? Had they seen neighbours going so they went too? Why had they gone? Was there previous experience guiding them? I was invariably told by all the people I talked with that each person had acted independently:- they just knew that they had to assemble at the kraton. They were not quite sure why they had to go, but they had to go. Nobody told them, some people that I spoke with lived in houses that were isolated from neighbours, as soon as they knew they had to go, they immediately left home and started to make their way to the kraton. They joined with others along the way, but their action to leave home and go was an individual action. Many of the people living within and near the kraton had seen a presence that was Nyai Loro Kidul. I spoke to three of these people, and there was no doubt at all in my mind that they did see a glowing green light like a ball of green fire with a long tail that circled the outside of the kraton walls above head height. How did they know it was Nyai Loro Kidul? They just knew. Did somebody tell them it was Nyai Loro Kidul, or had they ever heard or seen something like this before? No, they just knew. I'm not offering any explanations here. I'm not supporting any beliefs or denying any beliefs. All I'm doing is telling a story that is a part of my personal experience. Have another look at the UFO story and separate the elements of the story from aliens, UFO's and etc, and focus on that part of the story that deals with the functioning of the human mind. Then think about that.Having thought, then apply those thoughts to what we think we might understand about keris belief.

26th January 2008, 11:08 PM	#6
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,781	Possibly. As I said:- consideration of the workings of the human mind. That encompasses not only communal consciousness, but belief systems and the substitution of perceived logic for faith.

27th January 2008, 07:15 AM	#7
tunggulametung Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 238	As for myself, I favour the wise Tat Twam Asi teaching to (try to) understand the concept of the universe, including in keris believe; but I'm sorry I know nothing about human mind and how it works in communal field, for my simple life its too abstract to be understood But thank you Alan, for sharing the story and thoughts

27th January 2008, 03:47 PM	#8
fearn Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,247	Hi Alan, I appreciate the article. I've seen UFOs: it's very simple, really. They were distant moving lights in the sky. Almost certainly they were planes or satellites, possibly a meteor or two. Since I didn't have binoculars at the time, I lacked any way of determining what they were. Hence they remain UFOs (unidentified flying objects). I've also had the experience of looking up and seeing odd white birds flying high up in the sky, then looking up a few seconds later and having trouble finding them. Angels? The souls of the recently departed? Or simply seagulls or other white birds, flying high up in air that's just hazy enough to hide them? I favor the last, but since I didn't have any binoculars with me when I've seen them, so I can't say. Thing is, I'm a working scientist, and I used to work on some very, very common microscopic soil organisms that are difficult to identify. When I was learning to work with these things, my teacher told me that one sign of a good researcher was to be honest about what could and could not be identified. In his opinion, the sign of mediocre research was that every single organism was given a scientific name. He'd rarely seen a sample where every thing could be identified, and that had made him suspicious about people who claimed otherwise, unless he knew them and their skill levels. That said, I'd be very surprised if UFOs were aliens from another star. There are two reasons why: 1. Distance. Star Trek has really messed up our idea of how far apart stars are. Basically, if the distance from the earth to the sun was a centimeter, the nearest known star (proxima centaurii) is roughly 2.67 kilometers away. For comparison, Voyager 1 has taken 30 years to travel roughly a bit over two meters of that distance. Most of that distance is deep space, which is not empty, but full of really dangerous radiation (cosmic rays) that we can't easily shield against. In other words, it's a long way to go, and it's a really hostile environment to live in. Doesn't mean that they didn't come here, said hypothetical aliens would have to have a very cheap form of totally unknown technology to do it. Why really cheap? Look at the things UFOs do. They cruise over areas. They mutilate cattle. They kidnap people on isolated roads in rural areas and probe them. Even if they were conducting scientific experiments, their experimental design is stupid, by our standards. Considering how little they'd learn from what they're reported to do, all I have to say is that UFO travel has to be really cheap for them to do such foolish things. 2. Biology. Life has been on Earth for over two billion years, and the Earth has had something approaching a breathable atmosphere for over 400 million years (although oxygen levels have fluctuated substantially over that time). That's a long time, and if aliens can travel here and live here (without getting eaten alive by our microbes), it's amazing that we have no fossils of alien cities, no alien life-forms that don't follow known DNA forms, etc. Admittedly, scientists are only starting to look for alien microorganisms in the soil, but the telling point is that, if aliens came here, they've had hundreds of millions of years to explore, settle, and take over, and yet, they've left no known trace of themselves. Considering what we'd do if we got to an alien planet (i.e. settle it, name it New Earth, build cities, raise crops, and transform the place), this is a really, really odd record. Based on these two points, the simplest explanations for UFOs are earthbound: planes, hallucinations, mystical experiences, hoaxes, and the like. As for spirits in a keris? We definitely haven't established that we're all talking the same thing when we use the word "spirit," or "soul," or whatever. Since we are probably discussing a mishmash of experiences and beliefs using a common and imperfect set of terms, it's amazing that we can have a reasonable discussion about it at all. It's a testament to the people on this list that we can. F

27th January 2008, 06:15 PM	#9
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,061	Fearn, as Alan previously stated, i do not want to see this thread turn into a debate about the existence or origin of UFOs. I could very easily create a valid point-by-point argument to yours but i think that it would take us off the track of the purpose for this forum. Contact me via PM if you want to go there.

27th January 2008, 07:49 PM	#10
fearn Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,247	Hi David, I agree about UFOs, and the only point I really care about in the previous post is people's willingness to say "I don't know" when confronted with something they don't understand, whether it's UFOs, spiritually endowed keris, or whatever. The trap to avoid is becoming what Nassim Talib calls an "empty suit," an "expert" who sound wonderfully convincing in explaining things, but who actually doesn't know what he (or she) is talking about in any demonstrable way. With regard to UFOs, none of us particularly knows what we're talking about, so the debate would go over better at a pub than over the internet (and David, if you're ever in the LA area, PM me and we can have that debate in an appropriate locale). With regard to keris, I know very little about them, so mostly I read the posts. I'm not certainly not an expert. What I do hope is that the people who post here continue to fill their suits well. F

27th January 2008, 08:21 PM	#11
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,781	I'm beginning to feel really sorry that I started this thread. When I read the article I saw so much in it, put in such a clear and simple and straightforward way, that was directly able to be related to keris belief that I thought other people with a keris interest would immediately grasp the implications of the way in which the human mind and the human experience can create images and experiences that are totally real in a particular time and place, but removed from that time and place and put into either a cultural vacuum , or into a negatively charged culture, will yield either no image or experience, or a different image or experience. My thought was that we would all benefit from a little bit of quite consideration of the workings of the human mind against the background of our own particular culture and society, and this consideration could lead to a better, or perhaps only different, understanding of much that is associated with keris culture. Looks like I was wrong. I apologise for wasting everybody's time. However, I too have seen UFO's, and I am prepared to agree with anybody that UFO's and aliens really do exist, or alternatively that they really do not exist, and I can mount a convincing argument either way. But its just not a subject that interests me very much.

27th January 2008, 09:09 PM	#12
Emanuel Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,242	Hello, I enjoyed the spychological analyses in the article. I thought the idea about changes in the Earth's magnetic field making people see UFO's a bit odd. As a random effect it may also have made them see purple pigs dancing on the street, but that doesn't seem to happen. The bit about the university professor seeing lights in the sky at night and immediately thinking about UFO's in an interesting one. I guess that just as he was conditionned to think "UFO", so the people in Solo were conditioned to think "Nyai Loro Kidul" when they saw a thunderbolt strike a spire of the kraton. They congregated at the kraton in a time of seeming danger, just as folks in Europe would go to the local church or cathedral. People are conditionned to do this in time of crisis or extreme anxiety. The Solo man may KNOW that when he heard a rustling noise in the house and then he tripped and hit his head, that the keris did it out of anger or as a sign, obviously. The westerner guest will KNOW that the wind moved the beads in the window, the man got spooked and he tripped on the kids' toys, also obviously. Both are right and neither can prove the other wrong. The Texan businessman KNOWS that the UFO was a mile long travelling 300x faster than his Cessna - his experience, his scale, his perception and manner of thinking. Certain dynamic lighting conditions could make a serpentine keris blade appear to be moving. A man's eyes show him the naga blade coming to life. How can someone that wasn't present or that witnessed different lighting conditions dissuade him from his belief? If all of these keris cases are publicised as much as the UFO sightings are, then it's not hard to understand why an entire culture may believe in the power of keris. As obvious as it is to a Texan that UFO's exist (or don't exist), so it is to a Solonese man that his keris is (or is not) magical. That's what I got from your comparison, Alan. Regards, Emanuel

27th January 2008, 10:40 PM	#14
fearn Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,247	While I generally avoid "me too" posts, Alan, I agree with David's points. It was worth posting the article. For the purposes of this forum, perhaps we need a fuzzy image that could be an Unidentified Flying Keris to center the discussion properly. Or maybe not... F

28th January 2008, 12:03 AM	#16
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,781	Yes David, I did think that you, and the other people who have commented did not get quite the same message from this article that I got. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe everybody understands exactly the same things from it, but because we are writing, rather than talking, the clarity of understanding is not shining through. I have not yet, and probably will not, take a position on the content of this article. I have no intention of getting involved in trying to explain anything from my perspective, nor of trying to defend any point of view. The article is very clearly written, and I think it speaks for itself. All I really want is for other people to read it sufficiently diligently to understand the information that it carries. Then perhaps to apply that information to what we know of keris beliefs and the cultural and societal fabric of Jawa. Even the mention of the effects of magnetic stimulation and the noisy environment has a place in these considerations. It should be understood that noise in this context does not refer to noise measured in decibels, but rather noise measured in the intensity of feedback from population density and interaction, or possibly as a synonym of "distraction". What is clear is that the author is not talking about a heavy metal band. The point of my initial post was to try to get people to apply information from an unrelated subject to the subject of keris culture and belief. The intent was to encourage abstract analytical thought. I had hoped that after the time it would take this process to reach fruition, perhaps we might have had a few original and/or interesting ideas floated on some matters to do with the keris and its culture and society. For myself, I'm still digesting what I read in that article, and right at the moment I still need a lot more time before I can put some order into my ideas.Leads from the article also need time to be investigated.