… a fascinating object to study.  

It is 4 things, all symmetrically related to each other, forming a complete structure.  

We can pick any 4 things which are symmetrically related to each other and associate those with the apexes of the shape.  
Take for example the mapping:  (1) thought, (2) feeling, (3) will, and (4) what happens … which mapping models the human predicament.

It is interesting to note in this mapping that any point in the same space is either inside the structure of the tetrahedron or outside of it.  That too models the human predicament.  Inside is the private personal and subjective life experience, qualia and soul, of a specific human being … outside is that of her which is public and shared with others.   Hence in our model we can say that the tetrahedron represents an specific individual human being. 

So any point in the space with the tetrahedron could be considered a happening, or an event.  We could call such a point an experience of that person.  If the point is outside of the tetrahedron, then it would be  considered public and accessable or shareable by other people … whereas if the point is inside the tetrahedron it is considered private to that person, not shareable by others.   

newWhen we use these kinds of models which just represent other things (but are not those things), we must be cognizant of those features of the model which are analogous and which features are not.   In this case the feature of the tetrahedron where each of its apexes  are related to each other apex – is analogous  to the fact that each of the elements of the human predicament (thought, feeling, action, and what happens) are related to each other. 

There is another feature that is analogous:  the tetrahedron encloses space.   So each and every point in a 3 dimensional space which contains the figure is either inside the figure or outside the figure.  If each point represents an event which actually happens,  then we can read off the model that some events are inside a particular human, and some are not.   If the event is within a particular human, then it can be called her experience.  Now notice the position of each point relative to the vertices – each point is closer to some than to another.   This is analogous to each event has more or less component of though, feeling, or action … and tha works whether the point is inside or outside the figure.  The vertexes are used as 3 dimensional coordinates – but the coordinates are use quite differently inside the figure than they are used outside.  ← this last feature of the model is a fertile area for inventing (or finding) some mathematics that can explain coordinate systems who’s vertexes describe components both inside and outside a figure. 

Notice a big aspect of the human predicament is yet to be talked about by its name, “ego”.   However, If we make some assumptions about the human predicament, we can find ego in our model.    This does not mean that we must accept those assumptions … it just means the model represents those assumptions.  If we cannot assept those assumptions, then of course we need to pick another model.  

The assumption that the model can represent is that ego is only that which separates  what is inside a particular human from that which is outside of her.   It is like a membrane.   In this model it is the surface of a tetrahedron.   It is that which separates events (experiences) which are inside,  from those which are outside. 



  1. tetrahedron
  2. thought
  3. feeling
  4. will
  5. happens
  6. structure
  7. modeling
  8. mind map
  9. TetModel
  10. world


Seth says
Mark de Los Angeles 2016-05-10 07:10:41 [item 20911#51917]
Then too there are 5-point objects (sets) whose faces are 3-point triads :
see http://icybermind.net/Pgeo/Five%20Point%20Set-fbi.html 
Seth 2016-05-10 07:28:04 [item 20911#51918]

thumbs up … i was thinking of that too … 1, 2, 3, 4 just begs to go to 5 smug.  

the problem is that 4 space does not permit that to happen equilaterally laughing

so that graphically the human mind is won’t to comply crying
Mark de Los Angeles 2016-05-10 07:33:51 [item 20911#51919]
Yep – you limit your mind! I had an error in mine corrected here:  http://icybermind.net/Pgeo/Five%20Point%20SetXX.html smug
You had to project, imagine, etc all the stuff you associated with your reality to map it to a tetrahedron. The motion of the points & associations work just as well as yours in 3-space.
Seth 2016-05-10 07:48:15 [item 20911#51920]

Yes much better thumbs up

Your 5-point structure does work the same as my 3-point one in that each vertex is related to each other vertex.  The lines work … so as a mettograph network it does totally work.   What i can not see in my mind is the symmetry.   And what i cannot see in my mind is what is inside and what is outside.  Can you?
What would the new point be in the sequence:  thought, feeling, will, what happens ???
Mark de Los Angeles 2016-05-10 07:55:56 [item 20911#51921]
Thought, Feeling & Will are a triad. The 4th point you put in the mix is your own munge. Consciousness is a nice one. Context is nice. Sphere is an awesome one if you look here .  If you are just material bound you don’t need any of it.  See dark energy & dark matter for what behaves as science (or not) for cosmology.
Seth 2016-05-10 08:17:59 [item 20911#51924]
Well thought, feeling, will, and happens are just as very much a quatrane as the tridad that got stuck in your mind.  

Context can be read from my map as any points present in some particular now.  So that is there as a different aspect already.   I would need to think about what in my map would represent consciousness.  Maybe the 5th point as you suggest … i don’t know … the cartographer’s art comes to fore here.

As you may remember, i do not separate material from spiritual, as do you.  That is just something for you to keep in mind and not judge were we to talk to one another and not just fight. 

Sphere is a great new thing to put in the picture.  Me, i like moving from a personal sphere to a collective one … from individual to society.   This tetrahedron re-emerged this morning from the turbulence of that. 
Mark de Los Angeles 2016-05-10 08:33:44 [item 20911#51925]
Me, i like moving from a personal sphere to a collective one … & there are many more above that & below that… keep looking!cool
yep there are thumbs up

but why should i look now ?… my opus and its Kontext is just about this drama here and that is all that is on this  stage.  Now if an elephant should wander into my play … well, me i am quite sure i will love to make it my friend laughing

Seth says
then too there is the relationship of representation.  Can one sphere represent another?   Do our politicians  represent their constituents in Washington?  Does a name represent the thing named in a mind? 

Suppose an individual person is one sphere … and the collective of many of them together another, then can we setup a relationship between those spheres, where the one represents the other.   In that sense then what i expereince inside my being, could represents what is happening in society … or visa versa … what is happening in society could represent what i experience inside my being. 

Mark de LA says
Mark de Los Angeles 2016-05-10 09:22:12 [item 20911#51931]
No matter how much you munge & label & rear-up your already, always Me(I) the diagrams won’t show or reveal who is actually looking at the diagram. smug  Pisser! – eh?
Seth 2016-05-10 09:41:29 [item 20911#51932]
i don’t know what you are really saying.   a tetrahedron can be a map that  represents an individual person’s predicament.  such a person can behold the map.  Does a map show the person looking at the map?  I have never seen such a map … it would be kind of like a mirror i guess.  quite a strange requirement you seem to have thrown into the mix.   not a pisser to me … just not the story that i am telling.   maybe you could tell it instead.  
Maybe there are just holes in your representations: ponderinglaughing

Seth says
Anyway … thinking about what we call “ego” ...

i have identified ego as the sufrace of the tetrahedron model.  I described that more compeletly today in the new part of the body of this thought.  However the tetrahedron model represents the ego of the human predicament only if we make the assumption that it is merely a membrane, that which separates what is inside from what is outside.   I do not think that Steiner or GW or Crowley or other “spiritual leaders” would accept that assumption, but I think Alan Watts might.  I rather think that the spriitual assumption about ego is that it is a thing in itself requireing another space … as it were another dimension to contain it.  In that model  is not merely that which separates.   So believing the spiritual assumptions require us to come with dual spaces with closed figures in each, or something like that,  should we want to make a truly representative mind map.   Since i do not even believe in those spritual assumptions, i will leave such a map to others. 

Mark de LA says
Mapping existence onto an n-dimensional object is both fascinating & subject to confusion & error. Any object can be used from the familiar globe for the Earth or complex UML diagrams for computer software. The art is subject to the artist. I still like the following quote for which I emphasize what is appropriate to the mapping process:
P.2693 84-5-4-28-14-3-MON (26/1/16 ago or 26.13 yrs from this writing)
".... The question of illative force is controversial in some minds.  In our book every Ultimate Particle has Consciousness, a Category concomitant with others such as Unity, Extension, Persistence, Motion i.e. each UP has an Ego, whose function is JUDGEMENT, which is expressed as a "statement" or "equation" properly quantified & qualified.  Note that not the statement but its MEANING is what FORCES you to assent, i.e., if you are a reasonable person.  Speech & Reasoning are equivalent: See what I mean when I say "Look Jane see Dick" - two levels. "
It is not the map nor the language used to describe your correspondences which gives birth to assention or illative forece, but your meaning & how that meaning comes across.  A word soup/salad rarely works; especially for me.  Just because you draw a map doesn’t prove any relationship. (except perhaps to you)
Here are 2 things I found recently in the Internet:

Seth says
interesting, you start off by wisely saying …. “Mapping existence onto an n-dimensional object is both fascinating & subject to confusion & error. Any object can be used from the familiar globe for the Earth or complex UML diagrams for computer software. The art is subject to the artist.” …. which is exactly the same attitude i have to this kind of thingking thumbs up.

Then you proceed south from there to graphically piss on the art. 

It would be more interesting if you advanced the art by picking a figure that would incorporate RS’s spiritual assumptions about ego.   Then, shucks, we could read off different aspects of our experience from the different models and see which better match our acutal experience.  

Incidentally, it is meaning that has force … not the words that are clobbered together to refer to it.   On that you, and I,  and GW agree yes.   There is meaning to me behind the predicament and its comparison  to the tetrahedron model ← trust me on that, i do not lie.  I tried as best i could to represent that meaning by my words on this thought and my comments to you.  If they appear as word-soup to you, then you simply do not grock how they represent that meaning.   Pissing in that soup before you slupr it in your mouth will not make it taste any better – nor for that matter will it endear you to the chef. 

Seth says
Mark de Los Angeles 2016-05-12 10:38:29 [item 20911#51960]
The meter pegged on this one: => There is meaning to me behind the predicament and its comparison  to the tetrahedron model ← trust me on that, i do not lie. 
If there was meaning to it you would not need to make such a statement.  Sorry, didn’t piss on anything. You can organize anything in your mind in any way you want – just don’t expect it to traverse the void between yours & mine. 
Seth 2016-05-12 10:52:35 [item 20911#51961]
You say, “If there was meaning to it you would not need to make such a statement”   … er, that does not follow logically at all.   It has meaning to me.   The problem is that you do not gorck that meaning from my words.  And no, i do not expect that they neccessarly would “traverse the void between my mind and yours”  ← obviously not.  That is not something that i am entirely responsible for … you yourself would need to decode and digest them in your current context.  That is obviously not something that i can do for you, regardless of how carefully i choose my words.   Actually, given our habitual history on things like this, i do not even expect that you have the stomach to digest my words and extract their meaning to you.   But pissing on them – notice the bullshit meter you largley posted – certainly will not put a context in your mind that will help such a digestion.  

You could of corse as questions … intentions willing … that is how word soup can start to represent thought food.   You choce, of course, not mine.  I’ve done my part as chef of this peculiar thought.
Mark de Los Angeles 2016-05-12 11:01:36 [item 20911#51962]
Why do you have to state “I do not lie” to yourself? It carries no illative force over here. laughing  Yep your mungeful disclarity is all my fault. Probably for reading it in the first place. thumbs down  If you want to communicate or be understood the best thing to do is not act haughty & piss them off … maybe try that with N & get farther. Clue → he has a hard time polishing things for sale & loses interest after the “juice” is gone.  If something shows up as true or useful I will hail it as such otherwise the BS meter tells me don’t waste my time on it. 
i did not state it to myself .…. i told you.  You see i am taking you at your word … you say my words don’t mean anything .… how do i know whether you think i am just writing them as an exercise to cleverly combine words behind which there is no meaning.   People do that after all … especially politicians.   Well i am informing you that is not the case here.   Accept that and move on.

And there is no fault to be parseled out here at all.   The process of communication requires the cooperation of both the speaker and the listener.   Who cares which is at fault.   But we do have protocols … long developed in our culture … to converge on successful communication… one is to ask questions and have them honestly answered … others are not to break the fallacies … and there are many more.   None of them can be used if both parties are not willing ... or are more interested in the ego transactions rather than honestly transmitting meaning from one mine to another.

Cooperatively participate in the process … or go have fun somwhere else.  But please don’t clutter the thought with that which turns it into shit. 


Seth says
Mark de Los Angeles 2016-05-12 11:15:16 [item 20911#51965]
Arrogance will get you everything you attract & want.  Enjoy the glow! thumbs up
Seth 2016-05-12 11:18:30 [item 20911#51966]
i don’t understand how i am being “aggorant”.   Can you explain?
Mark de Los Angeles 2016-05-12 11:24:27 [item 20911#51967]

But please don’t clutter the thought with that which turns it into shit. 

arrogance has some of the properties in other words here in the power thesaurus →   arrogance 
← this is an example of you clittering this thought with shit

I called that to your attention.   That is not aggorant of me.  Rather it is just me informing you of how i interpert what you are saying here. 

Now maybe i have misinterpreted your bullshit meter’s relationship to this train of though.   If so how does it fit in with the tetrahedron model or any other art that comes closer to modeling our human predicament?


Seth says
Mark de Los Angeles 2016-05-12 09:57:43 [item 20911#51957]
Here is a twisty-turny möbius moving target to map to:
Animated Photocoolponderingrose
i think a mobius strip and even a dynamice changing one does come close to representing our perdicament.   i just don’t know how to interpert the two sided single side figure … maybe inside and outside of our being … what do you think?  But does the inside of our being fold over to be the outside of our being … and visa versa.   Certainly there is feedback between the two.  But does feedback twist around like that … er i don’t think so … that model does not work for me.

Seth says
Yes certainly the naming (or correlation) of the 4th point of my #TetModel is, as you put it,  “my moung” … just exactly as is the “triad” : thought, feeling, and will.   I chose #world just because i can map any psychological change to those 4 … and tangibly know what i am doing.   i can then twist the model around and look at other aspects of the geometry and then see if the psychology matches.   That method of thinking is actually very useful … it uncovers possibilities that otherwise might not be recognized.  It has been used to great advantage in all fields of science, psychology, and even spiritual science. 

To see consciousness in the model i would need to animate it into a 4th dimension … i do not think i can do it in 3. 

Mark de LA says
Mapping & correspondences & tzu & the equivalence of forms – is all intellectualization or abstract.
Good for counting if counting is useful to understanding or enables a brain to factor rather than hold a lot of stuff in the mind at once. A challenge does exist at the holistic boundary confusing something useful in analysis as any particular proof or truth & ignoring that grocking the whole of anything is what we meet in life.

See Also

  1. Thought Psychology 101 - A Model with 755 viewings related by tag "TetModel".
  2. Thought Copy of - TetModel Pallet with 631 viewings related by tag "TetModel".
  3. Thought Reflected Tetrahedron with 527 viewings related by tag "tetmodel".
  4. Thought Moving from 2 to 3 dimensions with 522 viewings related by tag "Feeling".
  5. Thought Here is with 432 viewings related by tag "feeling".
  6. Thought Being, cause, experience & Change with 381 viewings related by tag "thought".
  7. Thought Thought, Feeling, and Will with 378 viewings related by tag "feeling".
  8. Thought train of thought (wallaby) in progress ... with 260 viewings related by tag "TetModel".
  9. Thought New TetModel of Psychology with 242 viewings related by tag "TetModel".
  10. Thought The Future Supervens on the Past with 234 viewings related by tag "will".
  11. Thought New Instance of TetModel with 210 viewings related by tag "TetModel".
  12. Thought Teasing out the "will" with 188 viewings related by tag "will".
  13. Thought Pure will is what makes plants grow with 173 viewings related by tag "will".
  14. Thought The Behavior Sequences with 167 viewings related by tag "TetModel".
  15. Thought Tet Model Pallet with 150 viewings related by tag "TetModel".
  16. Thought The ego bubble plane with 150 viewings related by tag "TetModel".
  17. Thought Contemplation: what is my ego? with 140 viewings related by tag "feeling".
  18. Thought TetModel of Feedback with 138 viewings related by tag "TetModel".
  19. Thought A thought causing an action with 111 viewings related by tag "thought".
  20. Thought Triangulating ... with 111 viewings related by tag "feeling".
  21. Thought Why my trains of thought break ... with 103 viewings related by tag "thought".
  22. Thought #iSwim with 86 viewings related by tag "feeling".
  23. Thought Value of Thought & Story with 52 viewings related by tag "thought".
  24. Thought Another instance of psychological interaction with 49 viewings related by tag "TetModel".
  25. Thought breathing as a method to effect will with 21 viewings related by tag "will".
  26. Thought Do things happen for a reason? ... with 21 viewings related by tag "thought".
  27. Thought Genesis: what happens so well that it happens again ... with 17 viewings related by tag "happens".
  28. Thought The World As Person with 15 viewings related by tag "world".
  29. Thought Doing ... with 13 viewings related by tag "will".
  30. Thought Where does memory come from? with 11 viewings related by tag "mind map".
  31. Thought Act or React with 7 viewings related by tag "will".
  32. Thought A drawing of NOWs in my life with 6 viewings related by tag "feeling".
  33. Thought The Question is Still Alive! with 5 viewings related by tag "will".
  34. Thought Action and Story with 5 viewings related by tag "thought".
  35. Thought Will of Consciousness with 3 viewings related by tag "will".
  36. Thought I go with what happens with 2 viewings related by tag "happens".
  37. Thought about: Brainwashing 1A - Gore et. al. - comment 15617 with 2 viewings related by tag "happens".
  38. Thought Stuff to ponder with 2 viewings related by tag "happens".
  39. Thought Schrodinger's Cat with 2 viewings related by tag "happens".
  40. Thought Tree Of Life with 1 viewings related by tag "mind map".
  41. Thought about: if i were asked what is fbi? with 1 viewings related by tag "thought".
  42. Thought Dialectics with 1 viewings related by tag "happens".
  43. Thought Train of Will in the Stream of Consciousness with 1 viewings related by tag "will".
  44. Thought What are public thoughts? with 0 viewings related by tag "thought".
  45. Thought Silent Thought with 0 viewings related by tag "thought".
  46. Thought How to change context: with 0 viewings related by tag "will".
  47. Thought about: Human and Cosmic Thought By Rudolf Steiner with 0 viewings related by tag "mind map".
  48. Thought Getting from I to We with 0 viewings related by tag "feeling".
  49. Thought Community Organizing & Power with 0 viewings related by tag "will".
  50. Thought Social Media Space Agnostic Comments Demo with 0 viewings related by tag "thought".