Techno Will Save Your Soul

[The Good Reverend Roger]

no shit!

go figure.

No shit.

Goodnight, funnyman!

[Triple Zero]

 Sometimes I get the feeling a lot of people have yet to listen to actual rave music. Too much crap is being pushed blablablablah

don't worry man

i like electronic music (wouldn't call it "rave" nowadays, that's really the stuff they did 10 years ago with Eat Static or when the Prodigy was still being original) and, seeing the "what are you listening to?" thread, a lot of others do as well.

i visit the occasional goa, drumnbass, electro or (hell yeah) breakcore parties. i can find myself a bit in your ideas and personally have kind of wondered among the same lines myself as well.
mostly for me such a party is a good reason to get a few hours of heavy workout [really, should do that more often hehe]

i think you could find the most people who will "dig" what you say on goa-parties. lots of hippies there, some of them perhaps actually recognizing dance-induced gnosis when they feel it, and if they do drugs it will more often be pot and shrooms than xtc coke and speed. though that may be just the scene over here, ymmv

Edit, PS i like happyhardcore. but only the ones i know from i was young. bite me

[The Commander]

Then comes the parts where someone says "But if you do this, karma will kick into overdrive and (some desirable or undesirable outcome) will happen." Once the idea of Karma is accepted, a person who claims authority on the non apparent consequences of your actions can say that anything he/she doesn't like will result in a huge Karmic backlash, and the person listening is thrown into the "If I don't believe, they may be wrong and I'll have lived a full life, but it's also possible that they're right and I'll be damned for an eternity" problem. Suddenly an enforcement of the caste system like in India occurs, as the priests claim the poor were there because of their past fuckups, you'll be poor if you aren't "good" as well (which involves not helping the poor), and that the rulers had already proven themselves to be wonderful people in past lives. It's all the same BS.

Although I must admit, if plans for the karmic obtaining of pie were availible, I'd jump at the opportunity to blindly swallow dogma for the greater good of pie.

Ok.  I have no idea what you are saying.

Please explain it to me like I am a 4 yo because your ubermensch logic has me confused.

But I can say what I was saying about Karma has nothing to do with spiritual or metaphysical concepts.  It is grounded into reality and the consequences of ones decisions in the here and now, not in the afterlife or another life.

There is also no greater good than pie.

The Commander
DIA

[The Commander]

Karma is merely a way to impress upon people that their actions have consequences.  

I refute this.

Ken Lay died in his sleep this morning, having not served a single day in prison.

Owned.

It's not about making the "right" decision, or even the decision that causes the least harm to everyone, it is about accepting responsibility for the consequences that your decisions have.

EVERY decision has consequences.  Those consequences are not always good or bad.  The consequences in return on a specific individual are not always readily apparent, but regardless, the consequences still exist.

Cause =Effect.  Isn't that a law of physics or something?

The effect I find most desirable is that which involves sex or pie, or both.

The Commander
DIA

[The Littlest Ubermensch]

Ok.  I have no idea what you are saying.

Please explain it to me like I am a 4 yo because your ubermensch logic has me confused.

But I can say what I was saying about Karma has nothing to do with spiritual or metaphysical concepts.  It is grounded into reality and the consequences of ones decisions in the here and now, not in the afterlife or another life.

There is also no greater good than pie.

The Commander
DIA

I'm pretty sure the Hindu/Buddhist idea of karma is exactly the idea that your screwups and accomplishments will follow you into the next life and determine how things work in it, but even without reincarnation, the idea of karma is subject to abuse.
For example:
1. You believe in karma.
2. Nothing can be known with complete certainty.
3. You cannot know the entire consequences of your actions, in a butterfly effect kind of way.
4. I say that I have insider knowledge of the karmic consequences of certain actions of yours, and claim this is because of some spiritual revelation.
5. You believe at least to a small extent in the existence of spiritual revelation.
6. I say that if you eat pie, your face will be torn off by tigers.
7. There is no way of knowing if I am telling the truth.
8. You therefore must choose between eating pie with potential consequences of a tiger mauling, or not eating pie with near certainty of avoiding said tiger mauling.
9. You are a rational person.
10. Pie is not as important as not being mauled.
11. Therefore you choose not to eat pie to resist mauling, if there is enough supposed credibility in what I say (and not much is necessary.)

In that scenario, an effective banning of pie has taken place assuming I was charismatic enough to have a little credibility.
While that scenario is extreme, that sort of thing is completely possible and has occurred. Usually the person declaring karmic knowledge would find some way to make his claims impossible to prove or deny, either by saying "Oh, it'll come around in your next life" or "Sometimes mercy is granted upon you, but you also don't know when [higher power/nature/universal law] won't be so easy on you" most popularly.

By doing this, any rule that a charismatic few want to put on everyone else can be put into place under the pretenses of karma.

Though now that I think about it, I might choose pie over the fate of my tiger mauled face. *thoughtful face*

[The Littlest Ubermensch]

[quote="The Commander]Cause =Effect.  Isn't that a law of physics or something?
[/quote]

I don't place much stock in physics. It has a tendency to keep being very wrong. Examples of ideas that flew in the face of old physics/mathematics: Non-Euclidean geometry, Theory of Relativity, Theory of Gravity, fractal dimensions, 4th dimensional theories, Quantum theory, the idea of atoms not being solid, and so on.

I adamantly stand that cause and effect relationships are as fictional as the Reagan administration and the assassination of John F. Kennedy.

[Felix]

Physics makes mistakes, yes.

And unscientific things don't?

[Triple Zero]

how did fractal dimensions fly in the face of anything?
also, what do they have to do with physics?

[The Littlest Ubermensch]

Physics makes mistakes, yes.

And unscientific things don't?

Of course not. I just don't like physics because it's much less fun than unscientific things.

[The Littlest Ubermensch]

how did fractal dimensions fly in the face of anything?
also, what do they have to do with physics?

(I did add mathematics to the description of revolutionary things, just saying, so it doesn't necessarily have to do with physics.)

Hmm, I suppose I spoke too quickly. I shouldn't have included that, though it was a revolutionary concept and defied the Euclidean "One dimensional, two dimensional, three dimensional" categorizing system. Thanks for pointing out that example of dumbassery though.

[Triple Zero]

ah ok didn't spot the mathematics mentioning .. though still imo fractal dimension isn't really something that hit anybody in the face, more like a new more general definition of dimension .. what really kicked math in the face previous century was goedels incompleteness theorem, imo.

truly, reading that one (in Goedel Escher Bach) was one of the biggest mindfucks i ever read - i can recommend it to anyone not afraid of a littlebit of abstract math, logic and proof stuff. at least, it blew my mind and changed my life in a number of ways

[The Littlest Ubermensch]

ah ok didn't spot the mathematics mentioning .. though still imo fractal dimension isn't really something that hit anybody in the face, more like a new more general definition of dimension .. what really kicked math in the face previous century was goedels incompleteness theorem, imo.

truly, reading that one (in Goedel Escher Bach) was one of the biggest mindfucks i ever read - i can recommend it to anyone not afraid of a littlebit of abstract math, logic and proof stuff. at least, it blew my mind and changed my life in a number of ways

Hmm...Goedel eh? I seem to remember that section in Michio Kaku's Hyperspace(yeah I know, it's not exactly a textbook, but it's all a kid like me is going to obtain and mildly understand). Something to do with space curvature? Or am I remembering something completely different?

[Felix]

Physics makes mistakes, yes.

And unscientific things don't?

Of course not. I just don't like physics because it's much less fun than unscientific things.

Aha.  I see.

Sometimes I think I'm easily amused.  Too long of an attention span, sort of thing.

This is not an invidious post.

[Triple Zero]

Hmm...Goedel eh? I seem to remember that section in Michio Kaku's Hyperspace(yeah I know, it's not exactly a textbook, but it's all a kid like me is going to obtain and mildly understand). Something to do with space curvature? Or am I remembering something completely different?

something completely different

actually Kurt G??del, but i was too lazy to look up the umlauts again.

in short (i almost have to say here "warning plot spoiler" ), it's a bit about the ephimedes paradox, a version of which basically says "this sentence is false". your basic paradox.
what goedel does is, he builds up a formal math system according to very simple axioms and logical rules. he just lays down the very basics for number theory. has been done a long time before (goedel did his proof in 1931), been used first to prove simple things like "2+3=5" (would have been a nice thing for Winston to know in room 101 heh) or "there is no highest prime number", using a method called "proof by construction", meaning that the construction of a sentence/statement is also its proof. Goedel figured out a trick to have a formal statement say something about itself and constructed a statement that stated "this statement is not true", thereby pretty much kicking mathematics in the shins, blowing it up from its foundations, etc.
in the end, Goedels conclusion was something like, either a formal system is not 'strong' enough to be complete (meaning it's pretty useless), or if it is strong enough it will be possible to build a 'Goedel Sentence', meaning you can blow it up from the foundation and it's incomplete as well. that's why it's called "goedels incompleteness theorem". (i probably cut a few mathematic fundamentalistic corners here and there, don't shoot me)

oh there wikipedia sez this:
In 1931, G??del published his famous incompleteness theorems in "?úber formal unentscheidbare S?§tze der Principia Mathematica und verwandter Systeme." In that article, he proved that for any computable axiomatic system that is powerful enough to describe arithmetic on the natural numbers, then:
- The system cannot be both consistent and complete. (This is generally known as the incompleteness theorem.)
- The consistency of the axioms cannot be proved within the system.

and in the end Goedel died of starvation caused by paranoia.

also, he always wore black all the time.

ahaha i like this guy .. wikipedia sez: G??del had a most distinguished coach for his citizenship exam: Albert Einstein, who had earlier earned his own citizenship, but knowing of G??del's unpredictable behavior, was concerned that his friend might somehow behave erratically during the exam. Einstein accompanied G??del to the hearing. To everyone's consternation, G??del suddenly informed the presiding judge that he had discovered a way in which a dictatorship could be legally installed in the United States. ^_^

[The Littlest Ubermensch]

in short (i almost have to say here "warning plot spoiler" ), it's a bit about the ephimedes paradox, a version of which basically says "this sentence is false". your basic paradox.
what goedel does is, he builds up a formal math system according to very simple axioms and logical rules. he just lays down the very basics for number theory. has been done a long time before (goedel did his proof in 1931), been used first to prove simple things like "2+3=5" (would have been a nice thing for Winston to know in room 101 heh) or "there is no highest prime number", using a method called "proof by construction", meaning that the construction of a sentence/statement is also its proof. Goedel figured out a trick to have a formal statement say something about itself and constructed a statement that stated "this statement is not true", thereby pretty much kicking mathematics in the shins, blowing it up from its foundations, etc.
in the end, Goedels conclusion was something like, either a formal system is not 'strong' enough to be complete (meaning it's pretty useless), or if it is strong enough it will be possible to build a 'Goedel Sentence', meaning you can blow it up from the foundation and it's incomplete as well. that's why it's called "goedels incompleteness theorem". (i probably cut a few mathematic fundamentalistic corners here and there, don't shoot me)

oh there wikipedia sez this:
In 1931, G??del published his famous incompleteness theorems in "?úber formal unentscheidbare S?§tze der Principia Mathematica und verwandter Systeme." In that article, he proved that for any computable axiomatic system that is powerful enough to describe arithmetic on the natural numbers, then:
- The system cannot be both consistent and complete. (This is generally known as the incompleteness theorem.)
- The consistency of the axioms cannot be proved within the system.

and in the end Goedel died of starvation caused by paranoia.

also, he always wore black all the time.

ahaha i like this guy .. wikipedia sez: G??del had a most distinguished coach for his citizenship exam: Albert Einstein, who had earlier earned his own citizenship, but knowing of G??del's unpredictable behavior, was concerned that his friend might somehow behave erratically during the exam. Einstein accompanied G??del to the hearing. To everyone's consternation, G??del suddenly informed the presiding judge that he had discovered a way in which a dictatorship could be legally installed in the United States. ^_^

I dig it. Godel proved that math can never be entirely right. The dude deserves a special place in my pantheon of crazy geniuses.