Theos-Talk Archives (September 1995 Message tl00779)

>Your comment makes me think of something important about
>numerology that is not usually pointed out.
>
>We have to be careful of numerology. An important distinction
>that we don't always make is between numeric attributes of
>things and artificial constructs. Calling this year "1995" is
>an artificial construct, for instance, since we could just as
>well call it any other number. It has not been 1995 years since
>the start of the earth, nor since the start of time, just 1995
>years since the particular year that we wanted to call zero.
>
>Real numbers or attributes are like natural numbers, where we
>clearly see there are three oranges on the table before us,
>or the ratio of the circumference to the diameter of a circle.
>With numerology of names, if there is some actual, consistent
>relationship between the written letters and the sounds spoken
>in sounding the name, numbers might be applied to the name.
>On the other hand, if there are many ways of spelling a particular
>name, a name that sounds the same on the lips regardless of
>spelling, the written name is an artificial construct and the
>numbers do not particularly indicate something.
>

Oh, Eldon, but they do. We only have to have agreement and common usage of
such "artificial construct" for it to bring images to our mind. Our house
number will not change just because someone counted houses from the end of
the block. Our true number is the number upon it and the number everyone
uses when they address us. This is where our associations dwell.