News:

TESTAMONIAL:  "I was still a bit rattled by the spectacular devastation."

Main Menu

3 Dimensional thinking.

Started by Adios, June 12, 2007, 07:05:15 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

LMNO

For example, in the 60's the Weathermen wanted to bring down the State.  But they grew into such a symbol, one could argue the State benefitted by being able to point to a group and generate the proper amount of Fear in the masses.


LMNO
-has a feeling he might be wrong about that, but fuck it.

Cain

Something like that, yeah.

I was personally thinking Marx.  He thought capitalist society was heading for a revolution if it didn't rerform, and wanted one.  But reading his writings gave clues as to what the industry leaders could do to retain control and long terms profits, by indulging in minor reform.

Jenne

I think 3D might even be too constricting...in order to plough through layers, you need the time module as well...place things in their order so you can weed out and separate what's what and where and when it went to.  It's not enough to just see the layers but to also place them within an extra dimension, that of time.

Maybe this ties into the whole: he who doesn't learn history is doomed to repeat it...I don't know.  But somehow the 3d dimension is still too limiting.

This is just my initial thoughts here.

Adios

Quote from: Jenne on June 12, 2007, 06:51:37 PM
I think 3D might even be too constricting...in order to plough through layers, you need the time module as well...place things in their order so you can weed out and separate what's what and where and when it went to.  It's not enough to just see the layers but to also place them within an extra dimension, that of time.

Maybe this ties into the whole: he who doesn't learn history is doomed to repeat it...I don't know.  But somehow the 3d dimension is still too limiting.

This is just my initial thoughts here.

A 'Free Radical' thought there.

Jenne

Ah, and Free Radical...I think that particular phrase has much potential...even though I personally tend to think our thoughts are always anchored somewhere...they really have no choice but to have some sort of weight anchoring them down otherwise they pertain to not much at all, to be quite honest.

Adios

And that is the trick, to break away from the ingrained.

Darth Cupcake

Quote from: Jenne on June 12, 2007, 07:05:57 PM
Ah, and Free Radical...I think that particular phrase has much potential...even though I personally tend to think our thoughts are always anchored somewhere...they really have no choice but to have some sort of weight anchoring them down otherwise they pertain to not much at all, to be quite honest.

Well it's true that our thoughts will always be weighed down somewhere/anchored by something. It's part of the cultural and personal baggage we all carry.

However, we can make leaps and bounds in overcoming these weights by keeping them in the back of our mind so that when we approach any situation we are remembering the filter of bias that we're viewing it through. We can't necessarily detach ourselves from our biases, but by being conscious of them, we can seek to minimize how much we are affected by them.

It's nothing if not a challenge to try to put things into place in one's own worldview without then LIMITING them to said worldview.
Be the trouble you want to see in the world.

Jenne

Ha, holy shit.  I just looked up free radicals in wiki.  Interesting stuff.  I learned about chemistry so long ago...I needed a brush-up.

So the molecular, chemical free radicals are subject to chemical processes and combustion because of their highly reactive nature.  That is very usable as an attribute in the BIP.

Also, the biological aspect is also interesting:  radicals are necessary to kill bacteria, by using our granucellular neutrophils (this, by the way, is the thing my husband's blood has been lacking this whole time, the ability to destroy bacteria through the use of neutrophils--he just didn't have many left over from the auto-immune process his body decided to "freely" engage in).

The above biological process reminds me of when you have the sludge of society's impingements upon your freedoms, your idiosyncracies...even online communities ilke this one.  Engaging your immune system's responses to these things can mean destroying the bit of thinking you have that prevents you from unenslaved thinking/thought processes.

Of course, too much of this can cause a cancer--a mutation that makes you go the OTHER way...because even though too much of a good thing is better than not enough, it's still, welll, too much.

Iron Sulfide

i posted essencially the same response to the EB&G thread:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_radical
electron transport chain.

[formerly had a snippet-snippet]
damn you jenne. i was just gunna post that. instead...

the images of a molecule w/ a  free-radical are neat, too...they inspire
scenes of a jail break.
Ya' stupid Yank.

Jenne

Quote from: Darth Cupcake on June 12, 2007, 07:10:53 PM
Quote from: Jenne on June 12, 2007, 07:05:57 PM
Ah, and Free Radical...I think that particular phrase has much potential...even though I personally tend to think our thoughts are always anchored somewhere...they really have no choice but to have some sort of weight anchoring them down otherwise they pertain to not much at all, to be quite honest.

Well it's true that our thoughts will always be weighed down somewhere/anchored by something. It's part of the cultural and personal baggage we all carry.

However, we can make leaps and bounds in overcoming these weights by keeping them in the back of our mind so that when we approach any situation we are remembering the filter of bias that we're viewing it through. We can't necessarily detach ourselves from our biases, but by being conscious of them, we can seek to minimize how much we are affected by them.

It's nothing if not a challenge to try to put things into place in one's own worldview without then LIMITING them to said worldview.

There's limits, and then there's anchors...and I doubt you can be wholly free of them and still exist within your current paradigm.  The acceptance of this and seeing where true weightlessness would lead you is to me another removal of one of those bars.

Again, think of the mutation concept as I defined it above.  How much use is a Ted Kazinksy vs. those fucks who got arrested for their Cartoon Network prank on Boston last year?

Jenne

Quote from: Prater Festwo on June 12, 2007, 07:17:50 PM
i posted essencially the same response to the EB&G thread:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_radical
electron transport chain.

[formerly had a snippet-snippet]
damn you jenne. i was just gunna post that. instead...

the images of a molecule w/ a  free-radical are neat, too...they inspire
scenes of a jail break.

:lol:  Well, I'd say I'm sorry...but I wasn't practicing on my crystal ball atm.  ;)

Jenne

By the way:  "Free Radical Thought" can be subject to a better chemical process than just simple reactionary or combustionary responses, by the way.  And, in fact, an organized effort like the BIP here on PD is a good example of this.

The Free Radical molecule is also able to bond with a lot of different USEFUL molecules making it into something more stable and the conjoined effort of the newer chemical can do great and wonderful things.

Iron Sulfide

that's close enough to an apology
Ya' stupid Yank.

Adios

Great foundational work. Now let's expand the thought. To do this:

6.  Free Radicals:  A Free Radical (named after the chemical term) is that Discordian who constantly shifts from form to form.  Note that having a "Phage day" when you are normally a Wilde does not make you a Free Radical...the shift has to be fluid, constant.  The greatest Discordian Saints, and the vilest rogue Discordians, are usually Free Radicals.

Also as a human condition review history. The people who have wrought great change, the ones outside the lines who have opened an entire new chain of thought or action, ie; MLK. People willing to act on thoughts and accept the consequences of such action.

Jenne

Sometimes, however, Free Radicals (the molecules) have NO CHOICE but to adopt a new chemical form when put next to certain other elements.  They are set up from the beginning with the structure they already have.

...any thoughts on THAT?