Consciousness and the Paranormal — Part 6

[smcder]

Your post motivates me to read Gebser (no small project). Amazon has The Ever-Present Origin and some interesting discussions in the customer reviews and comments/discussions following some of them. Here's one of those comments that also motivates me:

"Viridian says:

I am inclined to agree with Ebert about Wilber in particular, although Tarnas cannot be compared with either Wilber or Gebser.
The really bottom line is that there is no substitute in the writings of culture and consciousness, the philosophy of consciousness or an exploration of the nuances of the psychology of consciousness than Jean Gebser. He stands alone. These other writers may nip at his ankles, but that is all they can do. Gebser very clearly also stands beyond Jung and yet he is not a post-Jungian either.

His clarity of vision was sculpted in pre-war Europe and honed during his constant movement during WWII to avoid the Nazis (he was Swiss); his acute senses that Western civilization was both breaking down in its deficient structures of consciousness, while at the same time there was an emerging aperspectival vision (seen in early Picassos for example) that heralded a new stage or structure of consciousness he termed the integral.

At the same time it has to be stated categorically that his integral consciousness is not equivalent with Wilber's "integral". To get to appreciate this you need to read and get a grip on Gebser's thought. Once you get into it, it is captivating: magical, mythical and absorbing of the mental mind as well. One may even arrive at the "diaphanous" state, something Gebser wove his perambulations on consciousness ever towards- the magnet and lure of the genuinely integral."

Amazon.com: John David Ebert's review of The Ever-Present Origin, Part One: Foundat...

helpful ...

At the same time it has to be stated categorically that his integral consciousness is not equivalent with Wilber's "integral".

I wondered what his relationship was to Wilber, I've never been able to get into Wilber, although I understand Wilber is now undergoing a re-evaluation and receiving some academic attention.

 

[Constance]

helpful ...

At the same time it has to be stated categorically that his integral consciousness is not equivalent with Wilber's "integral".

I wondered what his relationship was to Wilber, I've never been able to get into Wilber, although I understand Wilber is now undergoing a re-evaluation and receiving some academic attention.

I'd heard of Gebser about a decade ago and intended to read him, but I haven't followed through yet. I've tried to read Wilbur (his most recent book laying out his extensive categorical system) but couldn't stay with it. Gebser seems to be a much more significant and productive thinker than Wilbur. Are there sections of Gebser's books available online? Part 1 of The Ever-Present Origin is 642 pp. long and available at amazon. The second volume does not seem to be available.

 

[Constance]

I've lost track of what C/M stands for? Consciousness/Mind?

Yes, I decided to use the abbreviation a bit ago in some long posts I was writing. Consciousness and mind in my opinion need to be thought together, consciousness providing the access to the world that enables thinking about the world.

 

[Constance]

This paper might be helpful in obtaining an introductory understanding of Gebser's thought:

". . .Overall, Gebser describes four mutations, or evolutional surges, of consciousness that have occurred in the history of man. These mutations are not just changes of perspective, they are not simple paradigm shifts (although the word simple may seem inappropriate at this point); rather they are fundamentally different ways of experiencing reality. These four mutations reflect five separate eras of development that are not distinct and isolated from one another but are, instead, interconnected such that all previous stages are found in subsequent ones. Each of these stages is associated with a dimensionality, beginning with the geometric origin of zero and progressing to the fourth, the transition which we are experiencing at this time. Gebser identifies these five phases as the Archaic, Magical, Mythical, Mental, and Integral stages respectively.

Another key element of Gebser's theory encompasses two fundamental concepts: latency and transparency. The former deals with what is concealed; as Gebser describes it, latency is the demonstrable presence of the future.[3] In this manner the seeds of all subsequent phases of evolution are contained in the current one. It is on the basis of this aspect that integration takes place. The second term transparency deals with what is revealed. According to Gebser, transparency (diaphaneity) is the form of manifestation (epiphany) of the spiritual.[4] This is perhaps the most important statement he makes. The origin, the source from which all springs, is a spiritual one, and all phases of consciousness evolution are a testimony to the ever less latent and ever more transparent spirituality that is inherent in all that is. Without a recognition of this fundamental and pivotal idea, Gebser cannot be understood and we will not be able to understand ourselves. It is not just an intellectual development that is being described in his theory, rather it is the ever more apparent manifestation of the spiritual that underlies and supports the concept of evolution itself. And finally, one further element must be mentioned. The manifestation of these structures occurs in a quantum-like, discontinuous leap, not in a slowly developing and changing framework as is postulated for Darwinian evolutionary theory, for example. There are overlaps in these structures in as far as different peoples and cultures may be manifesting different structures at the same time, but a clear development can be recognized and it is to be expected that all cultures will eventually go through the same process.

It would seem, then, that we are dealing with a kind of historical description of a linearly unfolding schema, but this would be a grave misinterpretation of his thesis and it does injustice to his approach. At first blush it would appear that Gebser is approaching his subject as we would expect any historian to proceed, but it must be emphasized that Gebser's approach is quite deductive. We are presented at the very beginning with the model; later we are taken step-by-step through the 'evidence' which he believes supports the claim. Consequently, we find a number of historical, archaeological, and philological arguments presented that are not necessarily in keeping with generally agreed-upon theories in these disciplines. At times, these appear quite creative but this is most often a result of reading Gebser in a strictly intellectual and analytical manner. This is not to say that he should be approached uncritically, for he should be, yet the text itself is not a logical argumentation as one would expect to find, let us say, in a philosophical treatise. In accordance with his own model, he attempts to make of his book an example of the type of thinking one would encounter in the Integral structure of consciousness. It is not reasoned in a linear manner; in fact, the book would probably have been better suited to a hypertextual presentation. It would be some years, however, before this form of document would be developed so we are forced to deal with a non-traditional approach to a broader than usual subject that has been forced into a well-known and familiar medium: the book. Failure to recognize this idiosyncrasy can cause the reader untold difficulties from the beginning. . . ."

AN OVERVIEW OF THE WORK OF JEAN GEBSER

 

[Constance]

A further extract:

"Eteology

It is the comprehensiveness of this term that has brought us to choose it as the prime means of describing Gebser's approach. The new structure of consciousness to which we are transitioning demands new means, new processes, and new methods. It should be repeated that this ushering in of the new in no way indicates or dictates a discarding of what has come before, far from it. We must keep in mind that it is the activity and presence of the past that distinguishes Gebser's approach from others. Supercession does not mean invalidating; replacement in this context intimates an intensification rather than a nullification. Nevertheless, the inevitability of this transition should be recognized as well. This particular term best illustrates this new way of understanding. Eteology is then a new form of statement. But it should be noted:

We are speaking advisedly of "forms of statement" here and not of forms of representation. Only our concept of "time" is a representational form, bound -- like all forms of representation -- to space. The search for a new form of representation would give rise to the error of establishing a new philosopheme at the very moment that philosophy of an individual stamp is over. What is necessary today to turn the tide of our situation are not new philosophemes like the phenomenological, ontological, or existential, but eteologemes.

Eteology must replace philosophy just as philosophy once replaced the myths. In the eteologemes, the eteon or being-in-truth comes to veracity or statement of truth, and the "wares" or guards verity and conveys the "verition" which arises from the a-waring and imparting of truth. Eteology, then, is neither a mere ontology, that is, theory of being, nor is it a theory of existence. The dualistic question of being versus non-being which is commensurate only with the mental structure is superseded by eteology, together with the secularized question as to being, whose content -- or more exactly whose vacuity -- is nothing more than existence.

Every eteologeme is a "verition," and as such is valid only when it allows origin to become transparent in the present. To do this it must be formulated in such a way as to be free of ego, and this means not just free of subject but also free of object; only then does it sustain the verity of the whole. This has nothing to do with representation; only in philosophical thought can the world be represented; for the integral perception of truth, the world is pure statement, and thus "verition."[31]

 

[Constance]

 

[smcder]

I'd heard of Gebser about a decade ago and intended to read him, but I haven't followed through yet. I've tried to read Wilbur (his most recent book laying out his extensive categorical system) but couldn't stay with it. Gebser seems to be a much more significant and productive thinker than Wilbur. Are there sections of Gebser's books available online? Part 1 of The Ever-Present Origin is 642 pp. long and available at amazon. The second volume does not seem to be available.

So far I've only found short sections ... Ill post what Ive found tomorrow.

 

[smcder]

From Poetry to Kulturphilosophie


From Poetry toKulturphilosophie

A Philosophical Biography of Jean Gebser with Critical Translations

"From a grammatical detail in Rilke’s poetry, Gebser intuits an entire shift in western ontology. Importantly, this “method“ of opening the most delicate of details up to their broadest philosophical implications would come to characterise Gebser’s later work. Similar grammatical examples are adduced from contemporary Spanish, French and German poetry: e.g. Jorge Guillén, Paul Valéry, Franz Kafka and Georg Trakl. [55] In all these instances, Gebser sees the breaking of perspective through the use of the adjective. This is contrasted against traditional usage (e.g., for Homer, for whom the adjective is a ‘purely ornamental epithet’, which ‘scarcely influences the precisely limited value of the substantive’). [56] ‘What happens here is that the adjective now accentuates the relationship between the objects and actively emerges as if it was oriented in all directions’. [57]"

 

[smcder]

In this respect it is imperative to emphasise that many of Gebser’s ideas were cultivated not merely through books but through living contact with actual poets, writers, artists, scholars, scientists and mystics. His personal engagement with specific works of poetry, art and literature was thus very intimate. In his approach to such matters, the presence of the ‘Mediterannean temperament’ that he acquired in Spain is unmistakable."

...


"It was in Ascona that Gebser entered the Eranoscircle, the group of scholars surrounding Carl Gustav Jung, who met each year amidst the spectacular alpine surrounds of Lake Maggiore to attend the infamous conferences organised by Olga Fröbe-Kapteyn, the founder of Eranos. Here, leading phenomenologists and historians of religion, comparative mythologists, classicists as well as psychologists and scientists, would come together in a spirit of open interdisciplinarity. From the early 1930s through to the 1950s in particular, luminaries such as Mircea Eliade, Henry Corbin, Gershom Scholem, Adolf Portmann, Karl Kerenyi, D. T. Suzuki and of course Carl Jung, would present some of their most significant works here."

 

[smcder]

There was a particular connection to Portmann:

"Gebser repeatedly references Portmann’s work to support the emergence of aperspectival consciousness in the life sciences, while Portmann himself, who presented his morphological approach to biology for many years at Eranos,"

Portmann was influential in the field of biosemiotics:

"Biosemiotics (from the Greekbios meaning "life" and semeion meaning "sign") is a growing field of semiotics and biology that studies the production and interpretation of signs and codes in the biological realm.

Biosemiotics attempts to integrate the findings of biology and semiotics and proposes a paradigmatic shift in the scientific view of life, demonstrating that semiosis (sign process, including meaning and interpretation) is one of its immanent and intrinsic features. The term "biosemiotic" was first used by Friedrich S. Rothschild in 1962, but Thomas Sebeok and Thure von Uexküllhave implemented the term and field.[2] The field, which challenges normative views of biology, is generally divided between theoretical and applied biosemiotics"

 

[smcder]

A good overview of integral theory and theorists:

A General Introduction to Integral Theory and Comprehensive Mapmaking

 

[smcder]

A General Introduction to Integral Theory and Comprehensive Mapmaking

Woodhouse is the wildcard in this theoretical equation. What I mean is that he is the one theorist presented here who is, to my knowledge, not discussed nor mentioned by Wilber or any of the other integral thinkers. If Woodhouse is acknowledged it is only in passing. Despite his acute, well researched, and generally excellent writing,

• I feel that the reason for this is because he seriously considers and is willing to discuss such fringe phenomena as UFOs, alien abduction experiences, and channeled information claims without immediately dismissing or marginalizing them.

Such willingness, unfortunately, keeps him out-of-the-loop so to speak for without this quality it wouldn't be hard to imaging his work being a bit more popular.[72] Woodhouse's excellent and fascinating book Paradigm Wars: Worldviews for a New Age, is in my estimation, just as holistic and integral of an approach as is the works of Beck, Wilber, and Gebser. Woodhouse represents a kind of litmus test for how far integral studies is willing to go. I include his work here because he, like the above theorists, proposes a major shift in consciousness on the horizon and also because he does so with just as much of a critical eye and a penchant for comprehensive mapmaking despite his relatively unconventional views.
Paradigm Wars is an example of how to critically evaluate trends, influences, fields of study, and paradigms of the modern and the postmodern world without maligning or unnecessarily marginalizing streams of influence considered "unverifiable" by traditional standards. When it comes to the nature and style of Woodhouse's work he has this to say about it:
Paradigm Wars aims, accordingly, for what might be described as the less rigorous end of academic scholarship and the more discerning New Age/New Paradigm readership of popular culture. It can serve both as a textbook for college courses and as companion reading for personal exploration. This middle ground represents a huge market that university presses and trade publishers tend to overlook, because their sights usually are set respectively on the upper end of intellectual respectability and the mid-to-lower end of popular culture.[73]

 

[smcder]

A General Introduction to Integral Theory and Comprehensive Mapmaking
Mark Woodhouse

"Woodhouse sees that the pace of change in our cultural worldspace is quickening and seems to be shifting in ever more complex and difficult to adjust-to ways:

• What is happening?

There are plenty of sociological explanations. Here are some examples. For one, our values may not be keeping up with the pace of technological change. Then again, cultural relativism is rampant; any behavior is OK, so long as one claims the appropriate legal or moral right. Or it may be observed that the media is simply giving us more information than we can meaningfully assimilate.

Then, too, people's very life-styles are being threatened by massive trends seemingly beyond their control. Congress appears unable to come to grips with major issues, especially those relating to the economy. We are being conditioned to blame others when things don't go our way. Living without a sense of rootedness causes deep anxieties, thereby causing us to invent cosmic meaning for our lives even if they have little basis in fact. And it's not surprising that, faced with massive despair and little hope, people turn to drugs . . .

• However, according to psychological and sociological perspectives, there is nothing metaphysically significant about this time of great change.

Nothing is going on behind the scenes, so to speak . . .

There is some truth to virtually all of the above explanations. However, the question is whether they go far enough, whether they really get to the heart of the matter. I don't think they do.

I believe that something quite metaphysically significant is transpiring behind the scenes.

Behind what we can see, I think, are energetic shifts on a global scale that we cannot see. I call this process "accelerated interdimensional integration." This is a speculative concept, but one which provides a needed supplement to the literature of crises and change.
Woodhouse goes on to outline certain key features of this accelerated process. These key attributes reflect a proclivity towards an understanding of reality as energy and includes the idea that our dimension is being infused with increasing amounts of higher and faster vibrations of energy thereby pushing old paradigms and pathologies to the surface in an effort to "purge" whilst at the same time making more room for a "fourth-dimensional awareness."

Finally, Woodhouse believes that, within the next ten or so years, society will increasingly split into two distinct sides represented by a bell curve. On one side is the rising culture and the other is the dying culture. On this last idea Woodhouse says:
This divergence of rising and decaying cultures is only a transitional picture. After a suitable period of time, the Rising Culture will be represented by a single curve. The shift will be relatively complete. And we shall see things and do things we never thought likely or possible,

• especially in the areas of health, education, and relationships.

Occupying a new perspective within the Great Chain inevitably extends the limits of the possible.

Woodhouse's ideas are unlike Wilber's, Gebser's and Beck's in that he is less concerned with problem of proof and the rigid academic view it represents. Although his conclusions are both highly personalized and, to an extent, highly biased they are also highly objective. They are based upon careful consideration of the available alternatives and proclivities toward subjective interpretation much in the same way that the other three are. Mark Woodhouse is as guilty as any other writer or theorist in that he cannot escape his subjective truth. However, he, like Wilber, Gebser, and Beck, proposes his ideas with wisdom, intelligence, meticulous research and an inspiring vision of what the future, our future, holds."
smcder I'm fascinated that the integral vision include the Perennial Philosophy and the Great Chain of Being ... tying it in with some of the earliest discussions we had on the C&P and grounding it in some of the earliest philosophical thinking.

 

[smcder]

Magnificent!

Blurry - this is taken from my window at the back of the house ... deer are about 75 yards or so away.

 

[Constance]

From Poetry to Kulturphilosophie : A Philosophical Biography of Jean Gebser with Critical Translations

"From a grammatical detail in Rilke’s poetry, Gebser intuits an entire shift in western ontology. Importantly, this “method“ of opening the most delicate of details up to their broadest philosophical implications would come to characterise Gebser’s later work. Similar grammatical examples are adduced from contemporary Spanish, French and German poetry: e.g. Jorge Guillén, Paul Valéry, Franz Kafka and Georg Trakl. [55] In all these instances, Gebser sees the breaking of perspective through the use of the adjective. This is contrasted against traditional usage (e.g., for Homer, for whom the adjective is a ‘purely ornamental epithet’, which ‘scarcely influences the precisely limited value of the substantive’). [56] ‘What happens here is that the adjective now accentuates the relationship between the objects and actively emerges as if it was oriented in all directions’. [57]"

This is an excellent introduction to Gebser's thought. Thank you so much for finding it. I did now know that Gebser was himself a poet. These lines quoted as an epigraph at the beginning of the paper are extremely fitting; Rilke's poetry inflenced Heidegger as well as Gebser:

"Is he native to this realm? No,
His wide nature grew out of both worlds.
They more adeptly bend the willow’s branches
who have experience of the willow’s roots."


The opening paragraph of the paper is an intriguing introduction to the historical and cultural scope of Gebser's learning and the depth of his thinking. I'm halfway through the paper, which is exquisitely well written and enlightening, and I'm drawn into Gebser's thought:


"P O E T , P H E N O M E N O L O G I S T , P H I L O S O P H E R — and yet something more —Gebser’s key insight was that as consciousness mutates toward its innate integrality, it drastically restructures human ontology and with it civilisation as a whole. Five hundred years before Christ, the fundamental mode of reality-perception mutated from mythos to logos through the agency of figures such as Socrates, Siddharta, and Lao Tzu. For Gebser, we are on the cusp of a new mutation, presaged by figures such as Rainer Maria Rilke, who in Gebser’s view passed through “things” into the integral, transparent lucidity “behind” things, thus breaking through to a new, aperspectival perception of reality. Not only do we stand amidst the final death-throes of the deficient, declining mental-rational ontology, which atomises culture and consciousness day by day, we also stand on the threshold of a new consciousness that is capable of crystallising human ontology into a concrete, spiritual integrum."

He seems presciently to have identified the breakdown of the contemporary form/stage of human consciousness that we recognize in our time and I think he has pointed in the direction in which we must make progress (in his view, will ultimately make progress) if our species is to survive. I hope he was correct in his predictions that we will. One of the most important of his insights into the successive stages of consciousness in our species is his recognition that all of the former stages of consciousness remain vital and valuable in us.

 

[Constance]

Here is another paper on Gebser written by the author of the one I linked just above:

Rendering Darkness and Light Present
Jean Gebser and the Principle of Diaphany

Aaron Cheak
:
Extract: ". . . The emphasis on diaphany (transparency) arises for Gebser from the perception that the nature of origin (Ursprung) is neither a primordial light nor a primordial darkness but a Diaphainon—that which ‘renders darkness as well as brightness transparent or diaphanous’. [1] Diaphany, for Gebser, is a matrix for the rational structures of consciousness (wakeful logos and light) as well as the pre-rational structures of consciousness (myth, dream, darkness). Like the Upanishadic concept of Turiya (the ‘fourth’ consciousness that lies at the root of all sleeping, dreaming, and waking) diaphany enables a deep openness to the archaic and nocturnal modes of being—the underworld and the unconscious—as equally as it does the light of day. In a letter to Georg Feuerstein, Gebser writes:

'I have never brought the ‘dark’ quality of the archaic consciousness into connection with a darkness of Origin. The archaic consciousness is only dark insofar as it ‘lies’ before the sleep-consciousness; Origin itself is transparent, unbound to darkness or brightness, which are simply attributes of manifestation.' [2]

The word diaphany, like the word phenomenology, is based on the Greek verb phainomai (φαινομαι, ‘to appear, shine’). Whereas phenomenology is the study of pure appearances as they manifest to consciousness, diaphany is concerned with that which appears or shines through phenomena (dia, ‘through’, + phainomai). Gebser refers to it variously as the Durchscheinende (the ‘shining-through’), as durchsichtig (‘transparent’, ‘see-through’, ‘invisible’), and as hindurchscheint (transluminated). Rather than delineating a ‘world-view’ (Weltanschauung) diaphany is, more specifically, a ‘view through the world’ (Welt-durch-anschauung). [3]

Now, the view through the world reveals the roots of the world. It is not simply the ability to see through material things as if they were made of glass. Rather, it is the ability to ‘render present everything “behind” and “before” the world’, and through this, ‘to render present our own origin’. [4] What shines through (dia, durch) is no less than origin itself—the primordial leap (Ur-Sprung) made present through diaphanous perception. Significantly, such a mode of perception does not neglect the phenomenal world. It fathoms it. As Paul Klee remarks: ‘Nature is not at the surface but in the depths. Colours are an expression of this depth at the surface. They surge up from the roots of the world’. [5]

In a similar vein, this study seeks to explore the idea of diaphany not by examining Gebser’s philosophical articulation of it—its surface—but by looking at the vital experiences that underpinned it—its depths. Rather than a purely conceptual approach, which risks mere abstraction, I have chosen to explore the principle of diaphany through Gebser’s life experiences, through his poetic perceptions, and in particular, through his relationship to the work of Rainer Maria Rilke. To do this, there is perhaps no better starting point than the lightning-like flash of inspiration that, according to Gebser himself, seeded his entire life’s work . . . . ."

Rendering Darkness and Light Present

 

[Constance]

This looks like a book that will be of interest to us in this current stream we're following. The link below goes to the amazon Kindle sample.

The Radiance of Being: Understanding the Grand Integral Vision; Living the Integral Life
by Allan Combs

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/155778812X/?tag=rockoids-20

 

[smcder]

One of the most important of his insights into the successive stages of consciousness in our species is his recognition that all of the former stages of consciousness remain vital and valuable in us.

- YES

I've spent a day looking for Gebser's work - first sources, I couldn't find much even in German that were available on the web

YouTube has a couple of radio lectures he gave. I wanted to try reading some of the original in German - I should be able to get Ever Present Origins by ILL in German and English - I submitted the paperwork here at the library today

I did find a master's thesis from 2011 (in German) and it mentioned a 2003 PhD paper (which is also online) that set the ground for a re-evaluation of Gebser. However, the 2011 paper says such a re-evaluation is in its infancy and faces the same obstacles to acceptance that Gebser did in his lifetime.

Otherwise, there seems to be a fair amount of activity - in terms of associations and societies and second source wise around Gebser and the other integral philosophers. Wilber too has some academic interest ... but it seems a bit fringe for mainstream to tackle.

I also found a couple of poems in the German original, by Gebser. If I have time, I'll try to post something like a literal translation to give a feel for the German - if not the rhyme, rhythm, etc

Es will vieles werden

Wir gehen immer verloren,
wenn uns das Denken befällt,
und werden wiedergeboren,
wenn wir uns ahnend der Welt
anvertrauen,
und treiben wie die Wolken im hellen Wind,
denn alle Grenzen, die bleiben,
sind ferner als Himmel sind.

Und es will vieles werden,
aber wir greifen es kaum.
Wie lange sind wir der Erden
Ängstliche noch im Traum,
Fragwürdige noch wie lange,
da alles sich schon besinnt,
da das, was einstens so bange,
schon klarer vorüberrinnt?
Daß uns ein Sanftes geschähe,
wenn uns der Himmel berührt,
wenn seine atmende Nähe
uns ganz zum Hiersein verführt

 

[smcder]

Mark Woodhouse Paradigm Wars

Mark Woodhouse is on the border...he has some interesting Comments on his site.

He is discussed in one of the articles weve posted on the Integral vision.

Gebsers thinking on the living and the dead comes in here too.

 

[smcder]

Death always seemed close for Gebser. When he was around two, his beloved sister Ilse, who was a year older than him, died. At the age of six, he disappeared one day whilst hunting for Easter eggs. He was found later that evening sitting at his sister’s grave, speaking ‘very earnestly with the dead’. [9]Gebser recalls that while his sister was“here” for only a short time, during that time she was never entirely here. Like him, she was from “someplace else”. There was an ‘otherworldliness’ (Unhiesigkeit) about her. [10] ‘This Unhiesigkeit I have in common with her’, Gebser remarks. ‘In any event, I remained in life; but always, as it were, with only one foot’. [11] Gebser intimates that his sister’s death brought about an awareness of the ever-presence of the dead within the integral structure of life. That is to say, Ilse’s death lead Gebser beyond the pervasive dualistic structures of western cosmology in which the dead and the living are fundamentally disconnected presences. Rather, for Gebser, not only do the dead always accompany us, we are intimately connected to them; they can help or harm us just as we can help or harm them.