Principia Discordia

Principia Discordia => Literate Chaotic => Topic started by: QueenThera on December 17, 2014, 09:43:41 AM

Title: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: QueenThera on December 17, 2014, 09:43:41 AM
I have a couple "big ideas" bubbling in my head. One of them concerns a future with uplifted animals, including my favorite creations, the ingeniopods. Their code is derived from several species of cephalopod, but primarily squid. It was found expedient to build off their pseudo-spine, two tentacles, and so on to create a species that can communicate with us.

I am trying to build their culture, and well, I think they'd have to build it from scratch. In a world where most religions center on humans, I suspect Lovecraft would thrill with its transgressive nature, its non-human centricity, and Cthulhu's star power.

What would their Necronomicon look like? What would their pantheon? What are their practices, if civilized?
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: LMNO on December 17, 2014, 12:11:26 PM
Reminds me of the Scrid.

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v711/Marburger/STFU/scrid-stfu.jpg) (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/Marburger/media/STFU/scrid-stfu.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: hooplala on December 17, 2014, 12:13:55 PM
Aren't all cultures essentially built from scratch?
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 17, 2014, 12:53:32 PM
I would look up the study on octopus intelligence to start with, personally.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: QueenThera on December 17, 2014, 04:23:12 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on December 17, 2014, 12:11:26 PM
Reminds me of the Scrid.

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v711/Marburger/STFU/scrid-stfu.jpg) (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/Marburger/media/STFU/scrid-stfu.jpg.html)
What is that? Google keeps insisting it means Scribd. Is it one of the Discordian demons?
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: QueenThera on December 17, 2014, 04:31:07 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on December 17, 2014, 12:13:55 PM
Aren't all cultures essentially built from scratch?
Yes. But I think the fun part is in exploring how the ingeniopods have to deal.

Based on conversations I've had discussing this concept before, I'm assuming that the ingeniopods are designed to engage in underwater construction (and potentially combat, but my Martian-Earth interstellar war is another topic entirely). They're told to behave as rational as possible, and have no real history to fall back on when they've become emancipated.

So, I'm assuming they take on Lovecraft's mythos as their version of Satanism. The setting, tentatively, has humanity going militantly atheist/humanist under some form of fascism. In response, many of the ingeniopods adopted the Necronomicon as their holy text, and probably engage in irrational "magicks".

I'm taking some inspiration for this from the webcomic Freefall. It interests me how an intelligent uplift species goes about keeping their head down until they can be genetically viable, and their attempts to find an identity.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Doktor Howl on December 17, 2014, 04:38:14 PM
Quote from: BrotherPrickle on December 17, 2014, 04:23:12 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on December 17, 2014, 12:11:26 PM
Reminds me of the Scrid.

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v711/Marburger/STFU/scrid-stfu.jpg) (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/Marburger/media/STFU/scrid-stfu.jpg.html)
What is that? Google keeps insisting it means Scribd. Is it one of the Discordian demons?

Worse.  The Scrid is a bartender.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: LMNO on December 17, 2014, 04:41:33 PM
Quote from: BrotherPrickle on December 17, 2014, 04:31:07 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on December 17, 2014, 12:13:55 PM
Aren't all cultures essentially built from scratch?
Yes. But I think the fun part is in exploring how the ingeniopods have to deal.

Based on conversations I've had discussing this concept before, I'm assuming that the ingeniopods are designed to engage in underwater construction (and potentially combat, but my Martian-Earth interstellar war is another topic entirely). They're told to behave as rational as possible, and have no real history to fall back on when they've become emancipated.

So, I'm assuming they take on Lovecraft's mythos as their version of Satanism. The setting, tentatively, has humanity going militantly atheist/humanist under some form of fascism. In response, many of the ingeniopods adopted the Necronomicon as their holy text, and probably engage in irrational "magicks".

I'm taking some inspiration for this from the webcomic Freefall. It interests me how an intelligent uplift species goes about keeping their head down until they can be genetically viable, and their attempts to find an identity.

Wait.  It's sounding like the only reason they're choosing the Cthulu mythos is because one or two of them are said to have tentacles.  That's hardly a reason for intelligent squid to adopt a group of stories written by a two-legger, and especialy if they've more or less been cultivated towards rational thought.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: LMNO on December 17, 2014, 04:51:52 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on December 17, 2014, 04:38:14 PM
Quote from: BrotherPrickle on December 17, 2014, 04:23:12 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on December 17, 2014, 12:11:26 PM
Reminds me of the Scrid.

[/IMG]scrid[/img]
What is that? Google keeps insisting it means Scribd. Is it one of the Discordian demons?

Worse.  The Scrid is a bartender.

I remember him fondly. (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?action=search2)

He's also the logo for Earfatigue Productions.

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/v/t1.0-9/247601_481069001911041_149388706_n.png?oh=e2b72de86048f1975cbffb073f7ea0ca&oe=5503E08F&__gda__=1425991873_81c68879ac2c6ec38eb4f41306dcdd59)
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: hooplala on December 17, 2014, 04:54:46 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on December 17, 2014, 04:41:33 PM
Quote from: BrotherPrickle on December 17, 2014, 04:31:07 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on December 17, 2014, 12:13:55 PM
Aren't all cultures essentially built from scratch?
Yes. But I think the fun part is in exploring how the ingeniopods have to deal.

Based on conversations I've had discussing this concept before, I'm assuming that the ingeniopods are designed to engage in underwater construction (and potentially combat, but my Martian-Earth interstellar war is another topic entirely). They're told to behave as rational as possible, and have no real history to fall back on when they've become emancipated.

So, I'm assuming they take on Lovecraft's mythos as their version of Satanism. The setting, tentatively, has humanity going militantly atheist/humanist under some form of fascism. In response, many of the ingeniopods adopted the Necronomicon as their holy text, and probably engage in irrational "magicks".

I'm taking some inspiration for this from the webcomic Freefall. It interests me how an intelligent uplift species goes about keeping their head down until they can be genetically viable, and their attempts to find an identity.

Wait.  It's sounding like the only reason they're choosing the Cthulu mythos is because one or two of them are said to have tentacles.  That's hardly a reason for intelligent squid to adopt a group of stories written by a two-legger, and especialy if they've more or less been cultivated towards rational thought.

I was going to say something similar. 

People often conflate Cthulhu with cephalopods, but he is only ever described as resembling said creatures.  Those things on his face are described as "feelers", if memory serves, not tentacles.

And who is telling them to behave as rationally as possible?  And who are they emancipated from?  It's difficult to give opinions on what feels like 20% of the details.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: QueenThera on December 17, 2014, 07:06:29 PM
These are good objections. I'd be lying if I said Cthulhu's resemblance wasn't the initial reason.

What they're rebelling against is not quite decided in my head. I have an end condition though of an interstellar empire known as the Gaian Alliance, which consists of multiple sapient species, humans predominant among them.

I think the initial conditions in which the ingeniopods are born is a world closer to our own, but where there has already been a failed attempt at an uplifted species: pigs, who had been liberated from a company and "allowed" to go extinct. A government is behind the development of the uplifted squids, via something like DARPA, and they expect repayment for their spending. So, there's quite a few cards stacked against them being independent intelligent beings already, apart from being water-based and a preference for communication via chromatophore bitmaps. In the turmoil which leads to them being granted equal rights, a scientific-minded party uses the cause of sapient rights to allow them to dominate. Admittedly, justifying this takeover is fuzzy for me still, since I am far from a political expert.

Now, as for Cthulhu, Dagon, Shub-Niggurath, Azathoth, and others as their deities, I do have a justification. Squid in the wild die soon after reproduction, on purpose. When uplifted by humans, ingeniopods were made to be capable of multiple reproductive events without dying. But there's still an instinct down deep in their heritage to have sex and die. It has become a twisted impulse that mashes together a desire for murder/suicide with sex. So, I envision the dark sexuality of the creatures in Lovecraft would resonate, and they'd engage in worship and rituals involving them to hold back these instincts.

They would have their own cultural arts, though, don't get me wrong. I imagine Rubik's Cube-style sculptures and use of senses we don't have, for instance. A lot of emphasis on the tactile and of many axes of symmetry. But religiously, it'd be hard to make up how your people came to be when it's been thoroughly recorded and documented. Hence why I imagine they'd borrow Lovecraft.

It also helps that people brought it up as a joke about what they resemble.

Does this sound like utter bullshit still?
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: LMNO on December 17, 2014, 07:12:11 PM
Sorry, have to cut in again -- "dark sexuality"?

Apart from Roger, I'm not sure "mind-gibbering voids of infinite terror" is that much of a turn on.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Doktor Howl on December 17, 2014, 07:16:06 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on December 17, 2014, 07:12:11 PM
Sorry, have to cut in again -- "dark sexuality"?

Apart from Roger, I'm not sure "mind-gibbering voids of infinite terror" is that much of a turn on.

There go my nipples again.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: QueenThera on December 17, 2014, 07:54:29 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on December 17, 2014, 07:12:11 PM
Sorry, have to cut in again -- "dark sexuality"?

Apart from Roger, I'm not sure "mind-gibbering voids of infinite terror" is that much of a turn on.
Well... Shub-Niggurath of a Thousand Young, the Deep One hybrids, Arthur Jermyn, Yog-Sothoth's twins... There's quite a few fucked up sex implications, I'd argue.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 17, 2014, 08:04:12 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on December 17, 2014, 07:12:11 PM
Sorry, have to cut in again -- "dark sexuality"?

Apart from Roger, I'm not sure "mind-gibbering voids of infinite terror" is that much of a turn on.

I'm right here.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: hooplala on December 17, 2014, 08:29:51 PM
Quote from: BrotherPrickle on December 17, 2014, 07:06:29 PM
These are good objections. I'd be lying if I said Cthulhu's resemblance wasn't the initial reason.

What they're rebelling against is not quite decided in my head. I have an end condition though of an interstellar empire known as the Gaian Alliance, which consists of multiple sapient species, humans predominant among them.

I think the initial conditions in which the ingeniopods are born is a world closer to our own, but where there has already been a failed attempt at an uplifted species: pigs, who had been liberated from a company and "allowed" to go extinct. A government is behind the development of the uplifted squids, via something like DARPA, and they expect repayment for their spending. So, there's quite a few cards stacked against them being independent intelligent beings already, apart from being water-based and a preference for communication via chromatophore bitmaps. In the turmoil which leads to them being granted equal rights, a scientific-minded party uses the cause of sapient rights to allow them to dominate. Admittedly, justifying this takeover is fuzzy for me still, since I am far from a political expert.

Now, as for Cthulhu, Dagon, Shub-Niggurath, Azathoth, and others as their deities, I do have a justification. Squid in the wild die soon after reproduction, on purpose. When uplifted by humans, ingeniopods were made to be capable of multiple reproductive events without dying. But there's still an instinct down deep in their heritage to have sex and die. It has become a twisted impulse that mashes together a desire for murder/suicide with sex. So, I envision the dark sexuality of the creatures in Lovecraft would resonate, and they'd engage in worship and rituals involving them to hold back these instincts.

They would have their own cultural arts, though, don't get me wrong. I imagine Rubik's Cube-style sculptures and use of senses we don't have, for instance. A lot of emphasis on the tactile and of many axes of symmetry. But religiously, it'd be hard to make up how your people came to be when it's been thoroughly recorded and documented. Hence why I imagine they'd borrow Lovecraft.

It also helps that people brought it up as a joke about what they resemble.

Does this sound like utter bullshit still?

To be honest, it sounds like you know exactly what you want and don't need any assistance at all.

I suppose it's fully possible someone as sexually repressed as Lovecraft was would force his sexual ideas into strange places. Those examples are more appropriate than I expected.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: QueenThera on December 17, 2014, 09:00:15 PM
I was hoping for advice on what a written Necronomicon looks like, and whether sigils would be a lousy thing for squids to use... But eh, maybe that can be left to the first draft.

Thanks for saying I make sense.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: LMNO on December 18, 2014, 01:58:56 AM
There are PDFs of several versions around, if you're interested.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Chelagoras The Boulder on December 18, 2014, 04:22:08 AM
I actually really like this concept. I've been kinda brewing on an idea similar to this, where its a million or so years after the extinction of humans and several of the smarter animals (pigs, Dolphins, apes, certain birds, elephants and also squids, which are way smarter than i thought at first) "step up" evolution-wise, and the setting would deal with how these different sentient species relate to one another and how those different evolutionary paths affect that relationship. What Would Pig people be like? Do they get along with Dog people? why or why not? How would they see the world differently because the occupy different branches of the evolutionary tree?
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Chelagoras The Boulder on December 18, 2014, 04:32:36 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on December 17, 2014, 07:16:06 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on December 17, 2014, 07:12:11 PM
Sorry, have to cut in again -- "dark sexuality"?

Apart from Roger, I'm not sure "mind-gibbering voids of infinite terror" is that much of a turn on.

There go my nipples again.
I would actually love to see a sexualized squid lady just for the purposes of the following scene:

our band of heroes has been caught by the bad guys and placed in a jail cell
Adventurer #1: well gents, we seem to have been locked in a windowless cell and the only escape seems to be a small grate with iron bars too thick to fit through. Plans?

Sexy, Graceful Love Interest Squid Lady: Are the spaces between the bars wider than my exotic and shapely beak?

Adventurer#2: They seem to be.
Squid Lady: Excellent! I'll be right back with help, dont you worry! *begins sliding her entire adult form through the bars of the grate, ungulatingly, and with a number of moist sliding noises*

A#1: OH GOD SICK!
A#2: Fuck, please stop doing that, that's awful!
A#3: Oh sweet merciful Christ, i forget that you don't have bones!"
A#4: *pukes*

-end scene-
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 02:03:04 PM
Quote from: EL MAESTRO! on December 18, 2014, 04:32:36 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on December 17, 2014, 07:16:06 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on December 17, 2014, 07:12:11 PM
Sorry, have to cut in again -- "dark sexuality"?

Apart from Roger, I'm not sure "mind-gibbering voids of infinite terror" is that much of a turn on.

There go my nipples again.
I would actually love to see a sexualized squid lady just for the purposes of the following scene:

our band of heroes has been caught by the bad guys and placed in a jail cell
Adventurer #1: well gents, we seem to have been locked in a windowless cell and the only escape seems to be a small grate with iron bars too thick to fit through. Plans?

Sexy, Graceful Love Interest Squid Lady: Are the spaces between the bars wider than my exotic and shapely beak?

Adventurer#2: They seem to be.
Squid Lady: Excellent! I'll be right back with help, dont you worry! *begins sliding her entire adult form through the bars of the grate, ungulatingly, and with a number of moist sliding noises*

A#1: OH GOD SICK!
A#2: Fuck, please stop doing that, that's awful!
A#3: Oh sweet merciful Christ, i forget that you don't have bones!"
A#4: *pukes*

-end scene-

Given that this is already a thing hxxp://knowyourmeme.com/memes/subcultures/monster-girls [NSFW], I don't know how much "ewww gross" reaction you'd get out of your audience.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: LMNO on December 18, 2014, 02:13:43 PM
(http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/879/509/cf9.png)








I'll be in my bunk.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Doktor Howl on December 18, 2014, 02:15:23 PM
GET YOUR FUCKING ANIME OUT OF MY GREEK MYTHOLOGY!

WE HATES WEEABOOS!  WE HATES THEM FOREVER!
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 02:18:21 PM
(http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130602180816/monstergirlencyclopedia/images/f/f7/Slime_Old.jpg)
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Doktor Howl on December 18, 2014, 02:21:31 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 02:18:21 PM
(http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130602180816/monstergirlencyclopedia/images/f/f7/Slime_Old.jpg)

I can't read the text on that, but I get the picture.

SORRY, LOSERS.  EVEN IF THERE WERE HOT MONSTERS IN THE SEA, THEY WOULDN'T DATE YOU EITHER.

Fucking freaks.  It's not their weird wiring that offends me, it's the idea of making up anime-style child-women to spank it to, because they cannot and will not actually talk to a living human being.

They are the people of the smashed chromosome, and they will never breed.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 02:25:41 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on December 18, 2014, 02:21:31 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 02:18:21 PM
(http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130602180816/monstergirlencyclopedia/images/f/f7/Slime_Old.jpg)

I can't read the text on that, but I get the picture.

SORRY, LOSERS.  EVEN IF THERE WERE HOT MONSTERS IN THE SEA, THEY WOULDN'T DATE YOU EITHER.

Fucking freaks.  It's not their weird wiring that offends me, it's the idea of making up anime-style child-women to spank it to, because they cannot and will not actually talk to a living human being.

They are the people of the smashed chromosome, and they will never breed.

If I'm gonna use all this brainpower making up something to fap to, what's the point in wasting it on something that actually exists?
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Doktor Howl on December 18, 2014, 02:33:28 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 02:25:41 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on December 18, 2014, 02:21:31 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 02:18:21 PM
(http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130602180816/monstergirlencyclopedia/images/f/f7/Slime_Old.jpg)

I can't read the text on that, but I get the picture.

SORRY, LOSERS.  EVEN IF THERE WERE HOT MONSTERS IN THE SEA, THEY WOULDN'T DATE YOU EITHER.

Fucking freaks.  It's not their weird wiring that offends me, it's the idea of making up anime-style child-women to spank it to, because they cannot and will not actually talk to a living human being.

They are the people of the smashed chromosome, and they will never breed.

If I'm gonna use all this brainpower making up something to fap to, what's the point in wasting it on something that actually exists?

And while we're at it, let's set some seriously unrealistic expectations, so on the off chance that someone IS interested, the weeaboo ISN'T.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Demolition Squid on December 18, 2014, 02:34:56 PM
Necronomicons!

I thought I'd drop an endorsement for http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/0738706272/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1418916999&sr=8-1&pi=AC_SX110_SY165 if you want to see a really good one. Lessons learned for writing good occult gibberish:

It is written as a diary of sorts, with an unreliable narrator who may be trying to get potential competitors killed. This is far more engaging than the usual dry tome.

It has diagrams! They are probably not diagrams you actually want to use!

It is amusing to break off the narrative to spend a few paragraphs mocking the source of secret wisdom you've just exposed.

I don't know how much is useful for an alien version, but my suggestion would be to come up with a very clear mindset for the being writing it, and most importantly WHY they are writing it. Everything else flows from that- but it is worth remembering that a reason more exciting than 'to share knowledge' will probably make for a more engaging and entertaining read.

But mostly I wanted to link Tyson's Necronomicon because it is really, really good. And has barely anything to do with squidfucking.

We Demolition Squids are prudish about such things.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Junkenstein on December 18, 2014, 02:38:40 PM
Has everyone started drinking anti-freeze?
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 02:41:35 PM
Quote from: BrotherPrickle on December 17, 2014, 07:06:29 PM
Squid in the wild die soon after reproduction, on purpose. When uplifted by humans, ingeniopods were made to be capable of multiple reproductive events without dying. But there's still an instinct down deep in their heritage to have sex and die. It has become a twisted impulse that mashes together a desire for murder/suicide with sex. So, I envision the dark sexuality of the creatures in Lovecraft would resonate, and they'd engage in worship and rituals involving them to hold back these instincts.

Wait a minute...

What squid species die after reproduction in a pre-planned way? Most squid have short lifespans, so they only get one or two cracks at mating seasons, but I think you've got octopuses on the brain here (specifically the giant pacific octopus).
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Doktor Howl on December 18, 2014, 02:50:19 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on December 18, 2014, 02:38:40 PM
Has everyone started drinking anti-freeze?

What?
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 02:54:24 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on December 18, 2014, 02:38:40 PM
Has everyone started drinking anti-freeze?

HOW ELSE ARE WE GOING TO SURVIVE THE WINTER?
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Doktor Howl on December 18, 2014, 03:00:03 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 02:54:24 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on December 18, 2014, 02:38:40 PM
Has everyone started drinking anti-freeze?

HOW ELSE ARE WE GOING TO SURVIVE THE WINTER?

"Winter"?  Tell me more of this strange menace.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Demolition Squid on December 18, 2014, 03:11:09 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 02:41:35 PM
Quote from: BrotherPrickle on December 17, 2014, 07:06:29 PM
Squid in the wild die soon after reproduction, on purpose. When uplifted by humans, ingeniopods were made to be capable of multiple reproductive events without dying. But there's still an instinct down deep in their heritage to have sex and die. It has become a twisted impulse that mashes together a desire for murder/suicide with sex. So, I envision the dark sexuality of the creatures in Lovecraft would resonate, and they'd engage in worship and rituals involving them to hold back these instincts.

Wait a minute...

What squid species die after reproduction in a pre-planned way? Most squid have short lifespans, so they only get one or two cracks at mating seasons, but I think you've got octopuses on the brain here (specifically the giant pacific octopus).

Well. I did say we were prudish about such things, but very well.

Architeuthis explodius, or more commonly, the demolition squid, is known for its tendency to interweave complex displays of explosions into its behavior. Whilst this grants it an obvious advantage in hunting, and assists it in claiming territory in the London sewers where it is most commonly encountered, it does make the mating habits of the species both difficult to observe and highly dangerous for members of the species, observers, and the structural integrity of nearby buildings.

Quite why the demolition squid feels compelled to hunt out unexploded bombs and incorporate them into its mating ritual is a subject hotly contested by scholars of the species. It is believed that it may have come about during the blitz, when several of the species were caught with their pants down during a raid, and the sudden introduction of several tons of explosive force leant a certain 'kick' to proceedings. Now, it seems that mating rights are accorded only to the pair who can accumulate the most 'bang'. Thus the popular slang in artillery units throughout the world, who refer to shelling as 'stirring up the squids' or 'spreading the ink'.

The most convincing argument for the behavior, however, is that it helps to keep territorial conflicts to a minimum. Following the presentation of the largest collection of shells (or 'banging beaks' as they are known in the squid's own community), the lesser squids retreat to their lairs, and detonate their explosives alone. Without the cushioning material of a second squid (and the impact-absorbing 'fluids' excreted during the mating), this results in large sections of London being opened up for new territorial claims. As the squids can't afford the rent in high class areas, and it keeps the property developers in regular business, nobody minds too much. Well, not anyone important anyway.

AND NOW YOU KNOW.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Eater of Clowns on December 18, 2014, 03:14:18 PM
Quote from: Demolition Squid on December 18, 2014, 03:11:09 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 02:41:35 PM
Quote from: BrotherPrickle on December 17, 2014, 07:06:29 PM
Squid in the wild die soon after reproduction, on purpose. When uplifted by humans, ingeniopods were made to be capable of multiple reproductive events without dying. But there's still an instinct down deep in their heritage to have sex and die. It has become a twisted impulse that mashes together a desire for murder/suicide with sex. So, I envision the dark sexuality of the creatures in Lovecraft would resonate, and they'd engage in worship and rituals involving them to hold back these instincts.

Wait a minute...

What squid species die after reproduction in a pre-planned way? Most squid have short lifespans, so they only get one or two cracks at mating seasons, but I think you've got octopuses on the brain here (specifically the giant pacific octopus).

Well. I did say we were prudish about such things, but very well.

Architeuthis explodius, or more commonly, the demolition squid, is known for its tendency to interweave complex displays of explosions into its behavior. Whilst this grants it an obvious advantage in hunting, and assists it in claiming territory in the London sewers where it is most commonly encountered, it does make the mating habits of the species both difficult to observe and highly dangerous for members of the species, observers, and the structural integrity of nearby buildings.

Quite why the demolition squid feels compelled to hunt out unexploded bombs and incorporate them into its mating ritual is a subject hotly contested by scholars of the species. It is believed that it may have come about during the blitz, when several of the species were caught with their pants down during a raid, and the sudden introduction of several tons of explosive force leant a certain 'kick' to proceedings. Now, it seems that mating rites are allotted only to the pair who can accumulate the most 'bang'. Thus the popular slang in artillery units throughout the world, who refer to shelling as 'stirring up the squids' or 'spreading the ink'.

The most convincing argument for the behavior, however, is that it helps to keep territorial conflicts to a minimum. Following the presentation of the largest collection of shells (or 'banging beaks' as they are known in the squid's own community), the lesser squids retreat to their lairs, and detonate the explosives alone. Without the cushioning force of a second squid (and the impact absorbing 'fluids' excreted during the mating), this results in large sections of London being owned up for new territorial claims. As the squids can't afford the rent in high class areas, and it keeps the property developers in regular business, nobody minds too much. Well, not anyone important anyway.

AND NOW YOU KNOW.

:potd:
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: LMNO on December 18, 2014, 03:17:24 PM
That's it.  Shut down the thread.

DemoSquid wins today's internet.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 03:18:59 PM
but, but... I just wrote out a big thing about the Frost Giants :(
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Demolition Squid on December 18, 2014, 03:23:01 PM
:thanks:

And when I'm not on my phone I'll fix all those spelling errors :oops:
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: LMNO on December 18, 2014, 03:40:12 PM
You did that on your phone?
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Demolition Squid on December 18, 2014, 03:44:45 PM
I get bored at work.

So bored.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: QueenThera on December 18, 2014, 03:59:41 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 02:41:35 PM
Quote from: BrotherPrickle on December 17, 2014, 07:06:29 PM
Squid in the wild die soon after reproduction, on purpose. When uplifted by humans, ingeniopods were made to be capable of multiple reproductive events without dying. But there's still an instinct down deep in their heritage to have sex and die. It has become a twisted impulse that mashes together a desire for murder/suicide with sex. So, I envision the dark sexuality of the creatures in Lovecraft would resonate, and they'd engage in worship and rituals involving them to hold back these instincts.

Wait a minute...

What squid species die after reproduction in a pre-planned way? Most squid have short lifespans, so they only get one or two cracks at mating seasons, but I think you've got octopuses on the brain here (specifically the giant pacific octopus).
Maybe I am thinking of octopi. I recall reading that some cephalopod can't even be forced to eat after successful mating. But eh, ingeniopods are a mix of cuttlefish, octopi, and squid all together. I just think of them as squid since their structure is based on a squid's.

And agreed, I also get bored at work. And am on my phone as well.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 04:09:16 PM
Quote from: BrotherPrickle on December 18, 2014, 03:59:41 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 02:41:35 PM
Quote from: BrotherPrickle on December 17, 2014, 07:06:29 PM
Squid in the wild die soon after reproduction, on purpose. When uplifted by humans, ingeniopods were made to be capable of multiple reproductive events without dying. But there's still an instinct down deep in their heritage to have sex and die. It has become a twisted impulse that mashes together a desire for murder/suicide with sex. So, I envision the dark sexuality of the creatures in Lovecraft would resonate, and they'd engage in worship and rituals involving them to hold back these instincts.

Wait a minute...

What squid species die after reproduction in a pre-planned way? Most squid have short lifespans, so they only get one or two cracks at mating seasons, but I think you've got octopuses on the brain here (specifically the giant pacific octopus).
Maybe I am thinking of octopi. I recall reading that some cephalopod can't even be forced to eat after successful mating. But eh, ingeniopods are a mix of cuttlefish, octopi, and squid all together. I just think of them as squid since their structure is based on a squid's.

And agreed, I also get bored at work. And am on my phone as well.

Okay, if you are happy with what you have and don't want feedback on it, that's fine (but I don't get why you asked for it). Otherwise, I would stop RIGHT NOW and actually do some research into Cephalopod behavior before you go any further, because you clearly have done fuckall thus far. Cephalopod behavior and sexuality is fascinating stuff, and not just from a fap material standpoint. Giant pacific octopus mothers starve themselves to death protecting their brood, warding off predators and gently stirring the water to bring in fresh oxygen for their babies even as they are dying. That's not sexy murder/suicide, that's the hardest of the hardcore mommy martyr/post-partum depression. Cuttlefish males disguise themselves as females to fuck previously claimed ladies right under the noses of the bigger males "defending" them. Giant squid shoot tentacles full of sperm at anything that looks like it might be another giant squid.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: LMNO on December 18, 2014, 04:11:58 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 04:09:16 PM
Giant squid shoot tentacles full of sperm at anything that looks like it might be another giant squid.

This is better known as "Saturday Night".
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 04:20:28 PM
ELBOW SQUID https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJV5mH3YY70

Also this site is good but dated: http://cephalove.southernfriedscience.com/
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Doktor Howl on December 18, 2014, 04:48:19 PM
Quote from: Demolition Squid on December 18, 2014, 03:11:09 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 02:41:35 PM
Quote from: BrotherPrickle on December 17, 2014, 07:06:29 PM
Squid in the wild die soon after reproduction, on purpose. When uplifted by humans, ingeniopods were made to be capable of multiple reproductive events without dying. But there's still an instinct down deep in their heritage to have sex and die. It has become a twisted impulse that mashes together a desire for murder/suicide with sex. So, I envision the dark sexuality of the creatures in Lovecraft would resonate, and they'd engage in worship and rituals involving them to hold back these instincts.

Wait a minute...

What squid species die after reproduction in a pre-planned way? Most squid have short lifespans, so they only get one or two cracks at mating seasons, but I think you've got octopuses on the brain here (specifically the giant pacific octopus).

Well. I did say we were prudish about such things, but very well.

Architeuthis explodius, or more commonly, the demolition squid, is known for its tendency to interweave complex displays of explosions into its behavior. Whilst this grants it an obvious advantage in hunting, and assists it in claiming territory in the London sewers where it is most commonly encountered, it does make the mating habits of the species both difficult to observe and highly dangerous for members of the species, observers, and the structural integrity of nearby buildings.

Quite why the demolition squid feels compelled to hunt out unexploded bombs and incorporate them into its mating ritual is a subject hotly contested by scholars of the species. It is believed that it may have come about during the blitz, when several of the species were caught with their pants down during a raid, and the sudden introduction of several tons of explosive force leant a certain 'kick' to proceedings. Now, it seems that mating rights are accorded only to the pair who can accumulate the most 'bang'. Thus the popular slang in artillery units throughout the world, who refer to shelling as 'stirring up the squids' or 'spreading the ink'.

The most convincing argument for the behavior, however, is that it helps to keep territorial conflicts to a minimum. Following the presentation of the largest collection of shells (or 'banging beaks' as they are known in the squid's own community), the lesser squids retreat to their lairs, and detonate their explosives alone. Without the cushioning material of a second squid (and the impact-absorbing 'fluids' excreted during the mating), this results in large sections of London being opened up for new territorial claims. As the squids can't afford the rent in high class areas, and it keeps the property developers in regular business, nobody minds too much. Well, not anyone important anyway.

AND NOW YOU KNOW.

:lulz:  WOW
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: QueenThera on December 18, 2014, 05:03:13 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 04:09:16 PM
Quote from: BrotherPrickle on December 18, 2014, 03:59:41 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 02:41:35 PM
Quote from: BrotherPrickle on December 17, 2014, 07:06:29 PM
Squid in the wild die soon after reproduction, on purpose. When uplifted by humans, ingeniopods were made to be capable of multiple reproductive events without dying. But there's still an instinct down deep in their heritage to have sex and die. It has become a twisted impulse that mashes together a desire for murder/suicide with sex. So, I envision the dark sexuality of the creatures in Lovecraft would resonate, and they'd engage in worship and rituals involving them to hold back these instincts.

Wait a minute...

What squid species die after reproduction in a pre-planned way? Most squid have short lifespans, so they only get one or two cracks at mating seasons, but I think you've got octopuses on the brain here (specifically the giant pacific octopus).
Maybe I am thinking of octopi. I recall reading that some cephalopod can't even be forced to eat after successful mating. But eh, ingeniopods are a mix of cuttlefish, octopi, and squid all together. I just think of them as squid since their structure is based on a squid's.

And agreed, I also get bored at work. And am on my phone as well.

Okay, if you are happy with what you have and don't want feedback on it, that's fine (but I don't get why you asked for it). Otherwise, I would stop RIGHT NOW and actually do some research into Cephalopod behavior before you go any further, because you clearly have done fuckall thus far. Cephalopod behavior and sexuality is fascinating stuff, and not just from a fap material standpoint. Giant pacific octopus mothers starve themselves to death protecting their brood, warding off predators and gently stirring the water to bring in fresh oxygen for their babies even as they are dying. That's not sexy murder/suicide, that's the hardest of the hardcore mommy martyr/post-partum depression. Cuttlefish males disguise themselves as females to fuck previously claimed ladies right under the noses of the bigger males "defending" them. Giant squid shoot tentacles full of sperm at anything that looks like it might be another giant squid.
That's more than fair. A deeper look at squids would probably be very beneficial, especially since the oxygen stirring is news to me. Sorry if I sounded done: it's not really done until the metaphorical ink dries on the virtual page of the story.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Doktor Howl on December 18, 2014, 05:35:28 PM
(https://scontent-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/v/t1.0-9/10857999_10154999023180026_8776077660101589182_n.jpg?oh=d1b0974d3d32a5c5038c3cb59932fbf6&oe=55442914)
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: LMNO on December 18, 2014, 05:52:34 PM
 :batman:
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 18, 2014, 09:23:15 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on December 18, 2014, 05:52:34 PM
:batman:

You're like two pages too late for that...
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: LMNO on December 18, 2014, 10:25:52 PM
Yeah, but I just remembered we had that...
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 19, 2014, 12:02:13 AM
Watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAYcAEnq0vc

corrected a few misconceptions I had (not just the giant pacific octopus that does the starve to death mommy thing) and it's got subtitles so you can watch without volume if you need to.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on December 22, 2014, 04:24:37 PM
Quote from: BrotherPrickle on December 17, 2014, 07:06:29 PM
Now, as for Cthulhu, Dagon, Shub-Niggurath, Azathoth, and others as their deities, I do have a justification. Squid in the wild die soon after reproduction, on purpose. When uplifted by humans, ingeniopods were made to be capable of multiple reproductive events without dying. But there's still an instinct down deep in their heritage to have sex and die. It has become a twisted impulse that mashes together a desire for murder/suicide with sex.


That sounds like it would resonate more closely with Slaanesh, the cthulhu-mythos inspired elven deity of sadomasochism from Warhammer 40,000
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Demolition Squid on December 22, 2014, 04:32:41 PM
I absolutely adore a lot of Lovecraft's stuff... but.

The problem with lifting familiar names wholesale is that they immediately color your work towards parody. These days, the Cthulhu Mythos has been so heavily co-opted by the geek culture that they don't inspire any of the original sense of the unknown. They can't; everyone knows what these names mean in the fantasy/sci-fi/horror space. You're basically importing a whole bunch of baggage wholesale, so either you spend an inordinate amount of time explaining how your Cthulhu is different, or you accept the preconceptions your audience will likely bring with it. Mostly, these will be comedic - which is fine if that's what you're going for, but can hurt your tone if it isn't.

I'd suggest just using different names to bypass the issue completely. Its a little ironic, but pretty much the only way to invoke Lovecraftian ideas, these days, is pretty much to ignore all the existing Mythos and craft your own.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: LMNO on December 22, 2014, 04:42:57 PM
This is a good point. Plus, if you create your own pantheon, you can cherry pick the parts you like (tentacle sexdeath), and leave out what you don't (alien cone time-traveling librarians of Yith; racism).
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Demolition Squid on December 22, 2014, 05:41:27 PM
What you got against cones, LMNO?  :sad:
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: LMNO on December 22, 2014, 05:48:45 PM
I like cones.  Frost Heaves has a song about the Yith, called "Cones".

But cones are not squid, and so do not fit into the proposed mythos.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Demolition Squid on December 22, 2014, 05:52:50 PM
Ah, that's fair.

I thought you were saying the idea of time-travelling cone-aliens who joyride on alien species for the lulz was inherently ridiculous or something.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Doktor Howl on December 22, 2014, 05:56:46 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on December 22, 2014, 05:48:45 PM
I like cones.  Frost Heaves has a song about the Yith, called "Cones".

But cones are not squid, and so do not fit into the proposed mythos.

Patently untrue.  One of the Cthulu stories has Yuth underwater at Bimini.  The buildings are conical, and a tentacle grabs the professor and drags him to his doom.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: LMNO on December 22, 2014, 06:31:34 PM
A cone with a tentacle?  Rubbish.



Damn you for knowing more about that than I!
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Doktor Howl on December 22, 2014, 06:55:07 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on December 22, 2014, 06:31:34 PM
A cone with a tentacle?  Rubbish.



Damn you for knowing more about that than I!

What can I say?   I am a Lovecraft freak.  Yes, his style may be busy and somewhat boring.  Yes, he tends to wimp out and call the thing at the end of the story "indescribable".  Yes, his characters are utterly unbelievable in any context.  Yes, his heroes are all gigantic wimps. But...But...FUCK YOU.  That's what.  I READ WHAT I WANT.

Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: LMNO on December 22, 2014, 07:01:19 PM
Incidentally, this is the song "Cones" by the Frost Heaves. (http://www.reverbnation.com/thefrostheaves/song/7905317-cones)
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Doktor Howl on December 22, 2014, 07:04:10 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on December 22, 2014, 07:01:19 PM
Incidentally, this is the song "Cones" by the Frost Heaves. (http://www.reverbnation.com/thefrostheaves/song/7905317-cones)

Will hit it up as soon as possible.  Which means tomorrow after work.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: LMNO on December 22, 2014, 07:29:09 PM
You may have it already.  It's on our first CD.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Doktor Howl on December 22, 2014, 07:39:42 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on December 22, 2014, 07:29:09 PM
You may have it already.  It's on our first CD.

Then I have it.

I don't really look at sleeves.  I just jam CDs in and then drive badly.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: LMNO on December 22, 2014, 07:42:44 PM
It's the one with the soaring, half-time epic chorus, "It's a message from a cone/that was left so long ago/no one knows, where it goes".
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Demolition Squid on December 22, 2014, 08:28:58 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on December 22, 2014, 07:01:19 PM
Incidentally, this is the song "Cones" by the Frost Heaves. (http://www.reverbnation.com/thefrostheaves/song/7905317-cones)

I thought I'd heard your first album, but apparently not! This is freaking awesome!

Will definitely see some sharing in the near future. :mittens:
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 22, 2014, 09:21:40 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on December 22, 2014, 07:01:19 PM
Incidentally, this is the song "Cones" by the Frost Heaves. (http://www.reverbnation.com/thefrostheaves/song/7905317-cones)

Perhaps needless to say, this song makes me a bit moist.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: LMNO on December 22, 2014, 09:57:14 PM
 :lulz::1fap:
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: S on December 24, 2014, 02:57:14 AM
Cephalopods lack proprioception entirely, if I'm not mistaken. Behaviorally, it's very interesting.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 24, 2014, 04:31:49 AM
Quote from: S on December 24, 2014, 02:57:14 AM
Cephalopods lack proprioception entirely, if I'm not mistaken. Behaviorally, it's very interesting.

:cn:
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Eater of Clowns on December 24, 2014, 04:38:48 AM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 24, 2014, 04:31:49 AM
Quote from: S on December 24, 2014, 02:57:14 AM
Cephalopods lack proprioception entirely, if I'm not mistaken. Behaviorally, it's very interesting.

:cn:

QG is right.

I'm going to need your sources on that being interesting.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 04:51:42 PM
Quote from: S on December 24, 2014, 02:57:14 AM
Cephalopods lack proprioception entirely, if I'm not mistaken. Behaviorally, it's very interesting.

You are not only mistaken, but you are so very mistaken that I am wondering if you know what proprioception means.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Don Coyote on December 24, 2014, 08:12:42 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 04:51:42 PM
Quote from: S on December 24, 2014, 02:57:14 AM
Cephalopods lack proprioception entirely, if I'm not mistaken. Behaviorally, it's very interesting.

You are not only mistaken, but you are so very mistaken that I am wondering if you know what proprioception means.

That wouldn't even make sense for an animal to lack proprioception, especially one with a multitude of limbs.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 08:56:44 PM
Quote from: Don Coyote on December 24, 2014, 08:12:42 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 04:51:42 PM
Quote from: S on December 24, 2014, 02:57:14 AM
Cephalopods lack proprioception entirely, if I'm not mistaken. Behaviorally, it's very interesting.

You are not only mistaken, but you are so very mistaken that I am wondering if you know what proprioception means.

That wouldn't even make sense for an animal to lack proprioception, especially one with a multitude of limbs.

It's kind of a hilarious thought, though. :lol: But yeah, I don't think any animals lack proprioception, even flatworms. It's kind of a necessary element for that whole having-a-body-that-moves thing.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: QueenThera on December 24, 2014, 09:01:26 PM
Sorry for not replying for a while. Busy with Christmas and other wild trains of thought! I do plan to watch that video, and discuss things. But first...

Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 08:56:44 PM
Quote from: Don Coyote on December 24, 2014, 08:12:42 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 04:51:42 PM
Quote from: S on December 24, 2014, 02:57:14 AM
Cephalopods lack proprioception entirely, if I'm not mistaken. Behaviorally, it's very interesting.

You are not only mistaken, but you are so very mistaken that I am wondering if you know what proprioception means.

That wouldn't even make sense for an animal to lack proprioception, especially one with a multitude of limbs.

It's kind of a hilarious thought, though. :lol: But yeah, I don't think any animals lack proprioception, even flatworms. It's kind of a necessary element for that whole having-a-body-that-moves thing.
Cephalopods might not all be the same, but it is true that octopi have poor proprioception. In fact, there's a few interesting articles floating around about how their tentacles have minds of their own.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octopus#Senses My citation, for what it's worth.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: QueenThera on December 24, 2014, 09:05:36 PM
Quote from: Demolition Squid on December 22, 2014, 04:32:41 PM
I absolutely adore a lot of Lovecraft's stuff... but.

The problem with lifting familiar names wholesale is that they immediately color your work towards parody. These days, the Cthulhu Mythos has been so heavily co-opted by the geek culture that they don't inspire any of the original sense of the unknown. They can't; everyone knows what these names mean in the fantasy/sci-fi/horror space. You're basically importing a whole bunch of baggage wholesale, so either you spend an inordinate amount of time explaining how your Cthulhu is different, or you accept the preconceptions your audience will likely bring with it. Mostly, these will be comedic - which is fine if that's what you're going for, but can hurt your tone if it isn't.

I'd suggest just using different names to bypass the issue completely. Its a little ironic, but pretty much the only way to invoke Lovecraftian ideas, these days, is pretty much to ignore all the existing Mythos and craft your own.
That would be sensible advice for a Lovecraft story, yes. I'll use it eventually, since eldritch horror does interest me a little.

But I am using Cthulhu Mythos for the ingeniopods because it IS part of the culture. I'm not trying to replicate the setting that Cthulhu and friends are from. Humanity in the story had Lovecraft write his stories, and the same geek culture. It would probably be weird if they tried to create knockoff gods while the humans are aware of the origin.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: QueenThera on December 24, 2014, 09:06:55 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on December 22, 2014, 04:42:57 PM
This is a good point. Plus, if you create your own pantheon, you can cherry pick the parts you like (tentacle sexdeath), and leave out what you don't (alien cone time-traveling librarians of Yith; racism).
...I like the Great Race of Yith, though.

http://www.tor.com/stories/2014/05/the-litany-of-earth-ruthanna-emrys

This story in particular managed to make them pretty cool for me.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on December 27, 2014, 11:01:45 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 04:51:42 PM
Quote from: S on December 24, 2014, 02:57:14 AM
Cephalopods lack proprioception entirely, if I'm not mistaken. Behaviorally, it's very interesting.

You are not only mistaken, but you are so very mistaken that I am wondering if you know what proprioception means.

It's possible they're taking wikipedia's article on proprioception overly literally where it states that the proprioceptors responsible for it are located in joints and in "skeletal striated muscles". If taken completely literally this would imply that a squid has little or no proprioception since a squid's skeleton has only one "bone" - and therefore no joints - and the muscles in its tentacles/arms aren't attached to it.

EDIT:
Also, regarding the Great Race of Yith, if I recall correctly the cones were only one of many forms that the Great Race had taken during its long existence.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 27, 2014, 11:22:13 PM
Quote from: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on December 27, 2014, 11:01:45 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 04:51:42 PM
Quote from: S on December 24, 2014, 02:57:14 AM
Cephalopods lack proprioception entirely, if I'm not mistaken. Behaviorally, it's very interesting.

You are not only mistaken, but you are so very mistaken that I am wondering if you know what proprioception means.

It's possible they're taking wikipedia's article on proprioception overly literally where it states that the proprioceptors responsible for it are located in joints and in "skeletal striated muscles". If taken completely literally this would imply that a squid has little or no proprioception since a squid's skeleton has only one "bone" - and therefore no joints - and the muscles in its tentacles/arms aren't attached to it.

Good point, I edited it to clarify that the article is talking specifically about proprioception mechanisms in humans.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 28, 2014, 12:13:48 AM
Nigel, you know from neurology things. What's your opinion on the multiple seats of consciousness thing? Most of my neurology stuff has been filtered through Oliver Sachs or Michio Kaku, and Kaku's not even a neurology guy so I'm betting I have some things wrong.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 28, 2014, 12:54:13 AM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 28, 2014, 12:13:48 AM
Nigel, you know from neurology things. What's your opinion on the multiple seats of consciousness thing? Most of my neurology stuff has been filtered through Oliver Sachs or Michio Kaku, and Kaku's not even a neurology guy so I'm betting I have some things wrong.

Hmm, I've read some Sacks and I'm not really sure what you're talking about. From what I know so far it seems as if consciousness is a very complicated affair that involves our entire bodies to varying degrees, and is also remarkably resilient in that parts of our brains and bodies can be destroyed and we will still retain it.

I think that there are important processing regions that contribute specific elements to our consciousness.

I have no idea whether that answers your question but if it doesn't I'd be glad to try again.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 28, 2014, 01:52:45 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 28, 2014, 12:54:13 AM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 28, 2014, 12:13:48 AM
Nigel, you know from neurology things. What's your opinion on the multiple seats of consciousness thing? Most of my neurology stuff has been filtered through Oliver Sachs or Michio Kaku, and Kaku's not even a neurology guy so I'm betting I have some things wrong.

Hmm, I've read some Sacks and I'm not really sure what you're talking about. From what I know so far it seems as if consciousness is a very complicated affair that involves our entire bodies to varying degrees, and is also remarkably resilient in that parts of our brains and bodies can be destroyed and we will still retain it.

I think that there are important processing regions that contribute specific elements to our consciousness.

I have no idea whether that answers your question but if it doesn't I'd be glad to try again.

I wasn't so much thinking about anything Sacks had written in regards to that question, just explaining I've only gone through more "popular" science channels for this one.

Kaku was pretty big on the idea of two seats of consciousness in his book The Future of the Mind, relying on a lot of the split brain patient data that's out there. I'm sure you've seen or heard of some of the experiments, show one eye one thing and the other something else and watch the left brain try to explain why the right brain is doing something crazy. Kaku is (or was at the time or writing) in love with his theory that the brain makes up a bunch of possible future scenarios and dumps them all to the "CEO" of the mind (the seat of consciousness) that evaluates the possible scenarios and makes decisions based on that data. The left seat of consciousness is the one that does the talking and what we perceive as "ourself," the logical analytical bit that makes up excuses for what we do and the right seat is all the feels and pessimism.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 28, 2014, 02:38:34 AM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 28, 2014, 01:52:45 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 28, 2014, 12:54:13 AM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 28, 2014, 12:13:48 AM
Nigel, you know from neurology things. What's your opinion on the multiple seats of consciousness thing? Most of my neurology stuff has been filtered through Oliver Sachs or Michio Kaku, and Kaku's not even a neurology guy so I'm betting I have some things wrong.

Hmm, I've read some Sacks and I'm not really sure what you're talking about. From what I know so far it seems as if consciousness is a very complicated affair that involves our entire bodies to varying degrees, and is also remarkably resilient in that parts of our brains and bodies can be destroyed and we will still retain it.

I think that there are important processing regions that contribute specific elements to our consciousness.

I have no idea whether that answers your question but if it doesn't I'd be glad to try again.

I wasn't so much thinking about anything Sacks had written in regards to that question, just explaining I've only gone through more "popular" science channels for this one.

Kaku was pretty big on the idea of two seats of consciousness in his book The Future of the Mind, relying on a lot of the split brain patient data that's out there. I'm sure you've seen or heard of some of the experiments, show one eye one thing and the other something else and watch the left brain try to explain why the right brain is doing something crazy. Kaku is (or was at the time or writing) in love with his theory that the brain makes up a bunch of possible future scenarios and dumps them all to the "CEO" of the mind (the seat of consciousness) that evaluates the possible scenarios and makes decisions based on that data. The left seat of consciousness is the one that does the talking and what we perceive as "ourself," the logical analytical bit that makes up excuses for what we do and the right seat is all the feels and pessimism.

Ahh. Yes, I'm familiar with those experiments. The brain has a lot of built-in redundancies, and in some ways it really is like we each consist of two conjoined brains. I think I'm having some trouble with the "seat of consciousness" phrasing, because it makes it sound like a robot with a driver's seat, in which sits a separate conscious being that controls it, and it's not quite like that. The entire brain works in unison with the entire rest of the body to make up our knowledge of "I". Parts can be lost, and sense of self retained, although it's valid to ask whether it's truly the same self. There is no one location in the brain that could be called "the seat of consciousness", and both hemispheres work together to create the sense of "I", so as charming as the idea is -- and indeed each hemisphere has a slightly different self-concept -- to think that we are two discrete consciousnesses inhabiting a single body, it's nonetheless a bit of a poetic fancy IMO.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 28, 2014, 02:47:39 AM
The whole right brain vs. left brain thing is also way more complicated than people used to think it was, too, to the point of being essentially a fallacy. For example, in somewhere around 90% of people spoken language is generated in an area of the left frontal cortex called "Broca's area", and language is understood in an area of the left temporal cortex called "Wernicke's area". And then you have some for whom they are generated in the right hemisphere, and some in whom they are shared across both hemispheres. In most cases, however, all information is shared across both hemispheres almost simultaneously so that it can be integrated.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 28, 2014, 05:15:13 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 28, 2014, 02:38:34 AM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 28, 2014, 01:52:45 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 28, 2014, 12:54:13 AM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 28, 2014, 12:13:48 AM
Nigel, you know from neurology things. What's your opinion on the multiple seats of consciousness thing? Most of my neurology stuff has been filtered through Oliver Sachs or Michio Kaku, and Kaku's not even a neurology guy so I'm betting I have some things wrong.

Hmm, I've read some Sacks and I'm not really sure what you're talking about. From what I know so far it seems as if consciousness is a very complicated affair that involves our entire bodies to varying degrees, and is also remarkably resilient in that parts of our brains and bodies can be destroyed and we will still retain it.

I think that there are important processing regions that contribute specific elements to our consciousness.

I have no idea whether that answers your question but if it doesn't I'd be glad to try again.

I wasn't so much thinking about anything Sacks had written in regards to that question, just explaining I've only gone through more "popular" science channels for this one.

Kaku was pretty big on the idea of two seats of consciousness in his book The Future of the Mind, relying on a lot of the split brain patient data that's out there. I'm sure you've seen or heard of some of the experiments, show one eye one thing and the other something else and watch the left brain try to explain why the right brain is doing something crazy. Kaku is (or was at the time or writing) in love with his theory that the brain makes up a bunch of possible future scenarios and dumps them all to the "CEO" of the mind (the seat of consciousness) that evaluates the possible scenarios and makes decisions based on that data. The left seat of consciousness is the one that does the talking and what we perceive as "ourself," the logical analytical bit that makes up excuses for what we do and the right seat is all the feels and pessimism.

Ahh. Yes, I'm familiar with those experiments. The brain has a lot of built-in redundancies, and in some ways it really is like we each consist of two conjoined brains. I think I'm having some trouble with the "seat of consciousness" phrasing, because it makes it sound like a robot with a driver's seat, in which sits a separate conscious being that controls it, and it's not quite like that. The entire brain works in unison with the entire rest of the body to make up our knowledge of "I". Parts can be lost, and sense of self retained, although it's valid to ask whether it's truly the same self. There is no one location in the brain that could be called "the seat of consciousness", and both hemispheres work together to create the sense of "I", so as charming as the idea is -- and indeed each hemisphere has a slightly different self-concept -- to think that we are two discrete consciousnesses inhabiting a single body, it's nonetheless a bit of a poetic fancy IMO.

This is why I ask before I open my mouth and make an enormous ass of myself. The structure he pointed to as the "CEO" was the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 28, 2014, 05:59:43 AM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 28, 2014, 05:15:13 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 28, 2014, 02:38:34 AM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 28, 2014, 01:52:45 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 28, 2014, 12:54:13 AM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 28, 2014, 12:13:48 AM
Nigel, you know from neurology things. What's your opinion on the multiple seats of consciousness thing? Most of my neurology stuff has been filtered through Oliver Sachs or Michio Kaku, and Kaku's not even a neurology guy so I'm betting I have some things wrong.

Hmm, I've read some Sacks and I'm not really sure what you're talking about. From what I know so far it seems as if consciousness is a very complicated affair that involves our entire bodies to varying degrees, and is also remarkably resilient in that parts of our brains and bodies can be destroyed and we will still retain it.

I think that there are important processing regions that contribute specific elements to our consciousness.

I have no idea whether that answers your question but if it doesn't I'd be glad to try again.

I wasn't so much thinking about anything Sacks had written in regards to that question, just explaining I've only gone through more "popular" science channels for this one.

Kaku was pretty big on the idea of two seats of consciousness in his book The Future of the Mind, relying on a lot of the split brain patient data that's out there. I'm sure you've seen or heard of some of the experiments, show one eye one thing and the other something else and watch the left brain try to explain why the right brain is doing something crazy. Kaku is (or was at the time or writing) in love with his theory that the brain makes up a bunch of possible future scenarios and dumps them all to the "CEO" of the mind (the seat of consciousness) that evaluates the possible scenarios and makes decisions based on that data. The left seat of consciousness is the one that does the talking and what we perceive as "ourself," the logical analytical bit that makes up excuses for what we do and the right seat is all the feels and pessimism.

Ahh. Yes, I'm familiar with those experiments. The brain has a lot of built-in redundancies, and in some ways it really is like we each consist of two conjoined brains. I think I'm having some trouble with the "seat of consciousness" phrasing, because it makes it sound like a robot with a driver's seat, in which sits a separate conscious being that controls it, and it's not quite like that. The entire brain works in unison with the entire rest of the body to make up our knowledge of "I". Parts can be lost, and sense of self retained, although it's valid to ask whether it's truly the same self. There is no one location in the brain that could be called "the seat of consciousness", and both hemispheres work together to create the sense of "I", so as charming as the idea is -- and indeed each hemisphere has a slightly different self-concept -- to think that we are two discrete consciousnesses inhabiting a single body, it's nonetheless a bit of a poetic fancy IMO.

This is why I ask before I open my mouth and make an enormous ass of myself. The structure he pointed to as the "CEO" was the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex.

That is where most of our consequence modeling and impulse control takes place, so I think it's accurate to say that it's a major major decision making area, much as the thalamus is the major "switchboard". However, that paints an incomplete picture because amygdala, part of what is commonly thought of as "old" or "lizard" brain area, is critical to decision-making in ways that the analytical computer of the forebrain can't seem to take over. People with amygdala damage or deficiency tend to be very bad decision-makers when it comes to interactions with society and other people.

The prefrontal cortex helps us with foresight, predictions, and overriding immediate gratification ie. impulse control, but ultimately there's a lot more of the brain involved in terms of decision-making than just the prefrontal cortex. The brain is just not that compartmentalized.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: S on December 28, 2014, 08:21:49 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 24, 2014, 04:31:49 AM
Quote from: S on December 24, 2014, 02:57:14 AM
Cephalopods lack proprioception entirely, if I'm not mistaken. Behaviorally, it's very interesting.

:cn:

M. J. Wells (1964). Tactile Discrimination of Surface Curvature and Shape by the Octopus Journal of Experimental Biology, 41, 433-445

And please allow me to amend my statement: I find it very interesting.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 28, 2014, 09:38:50 PM
Quote from: S on December 28, 2014, 08:21:49 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 24, 2014, 04:31:49 AM
Quote from: S on December 24, 2014, 02:57:14 AM
Cephalopods lack proprioception entirely, if I'm not mistaken. Behaviorally, it's very interesting.

:cn:

M. J. Wells (1964). Tactile Discrimination of Surface Curvature and Shape by the Octopus Journal of Experimental Biology, 41, 433-445

And please allow me to amend my statement: I find it very interesting.

Ah, I think I see your misunderstanding; the paper states that they don't appear to use proprioception in learning.

QuoteIn such creatures proprioceptive inputs giving details of bodily position
probably never penetrate to levels of the central nervous system concerned with
learned responses.

QuoteAttempts have been made
to train octopuses to distinguish between objects differing in weight, and these have
failed despite the fact that octopuses obviously compensate for the weight of things that
they handle. Muscle tension is increased to take the load, but the animals appear to be
quite unable to learn to recognize this as indicating a property of the object lifted
(Wells 1961a).

QuoteCephalopods, like vertebrates, evidently enjoy two mechanosensory
systems, one related exclusively to the local adjustment of muscle tension, the
other, superficial in origin, more immediately concerned with the animal's relations
to its external environment, signalling information to the highest parts of the brain,
where it can play a part in learned processes (see Pringle, 1963).
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: S on December 29, 2014, 09:06:21 AM
That seems very similar to "did not learn to discriminate between two different proprioceptive inputs in this test." It might have been because of their reliance on that really cool mechanoreceptor that apparently operates off sucker deformation, but if a creature cannot learn to discriminate between two sensory inputs can it be said to have that sense?

I absolutely accept that I've probably misread this entire thing but that was the exact process I followed to get to where I got.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 30, 2014, 03:03:41 AM
Quote from: S on December 29, 2014, 09:06:21 AM
That seems very similar to "did not learn to discriminate between two different proprioceptive inputs in this test." It might have been because of their reliance on that really cool mechanoreceptor that apparently operates off sucker deformation, but if a creature cannot learn to discriminate between two sensory inputs can it be said to have that sense?

I absolutely accept that I've probably misread this entire thing but that was the exact process I followed to get to where I got.

You are confusing the process of cognitively processing sensation inputs with responding to sensation inputs. If you touch a hot stove and jerk away before you understand what happened, does the sensation that caused you to jerk away actually happen in the milliseconds between the reflexive response and the cognitive response?

It is fairly certain that flatworms have no cognitive reasoning and cannot learn at all, but they nonetheless have senses and can orient themselves according to relevant sensory inputs.

Sensation precedes, and indeed is necessary for, thought.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 30, 2014, 03:16:50 AM
In the case of octopodes, they have a lot of decentralized processing, and each limb has a huge number of neurons that allow them to function fairly independently of the octopus' cognitive processing. Think of it as a little like the human enteric system; it chugs along with relatively little input from our prefrontal cortex. It will even keep on doing its thing if Command Central up in the neocortex is quite dead. We can feel a lot of what it's doing, but we can't tell it what, at least not using our brains.

As with other animals, a sense of the relative location and position of the body in space, and the amount of exerted force necessary to move or to pick up objects such as food, is essential for survival and without it, it is profoundly unlikely for an individual animal to survive, let alone a species.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: QueenThera on December 30, 2014, 03:34:26 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 30, 2014, 03:03:41 AM
Quote from: S on December 29, 2014, 09:06:21 AM
That seems very similar to "did not learn to discriminate between two different proprioceptive inputs in this test." It might have been because of their reliance on that really cool mechanoreceptor that apparently operates off sucker deformation, but if a creature cannot learn to discriminate between two sensory inputs can it be said to have that sense?

I absolutely accept that I've probably misread this entire thing but that was the exact process I followed to get to where I got.

You are confusing the process of cognitively processing sensation inputs with responding to sensation inputs. If you touch a hot stove and jerk away before you understand what happened, does the sensation that caused you to jerk away actually happen in the milliseconds between the reflexive response and the cognitive response?

It is fairly certain that flatworms have no cognitive reasoning and cannot learn at all, but they nonetheless have senses and can orient themselves according to relevant sensory inputs.

Sensation precedes, and indeed is necessary for, thought.
It would be interesting to explore sapient squids feeling untethered (can't think of the proper word for the mind/body disconnect) from their limbs. Certainly they can manipulate objects with them, but there's a lot more unconscious processing occurring.

Imagine being able to truthfully say "I didn't mean to grab your ass. It just happened."
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 30, 2014, 06:00:12 AM
Quote from: BrotherPrickle on December 30, 2014, 03:34:26 AM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 30, 2014, 03:03:41 AM
Quote from: S on December 29, 2014, 09:06:21 AM
That seems very similar to "did not learn to discriminate between two different proprioceptive inputs in this test." It might have been because of their reliance on that really cool mechanoreceptor that apparently operates off sucker deformation, but if a creature cannot learn to discriminate between two sensory inputs can it be said to have that sense?

I absolutely accept that I've probably misread this entire thing but that was the exact process I followed to get to where I got.

You are confusing the process of cognitively processing sensation inputs with responding to sensation inputs. If you touch a hot stove and jerk away before you understand what happened, does the sensation that caused you to jerk away actually happen in the milliseconds between the reflexive response and the cognitive response?

It is fairly certain that flatworms have no cognitive reasoning and cannot learn at all, but they nonetheless have senses and can orient themselves according to relevant sensory inputs.

Sensation precedes, and indeed is necessary for, thought.
It would be interesting to explore sapient squids feeling untethered (can't think of the proper word for the mind/body disconnect) from their limbs. Certainly they can manipulate objects with them, but there's a lot more unconscious processing occurring.

Imagine being able to truthfully say "I didn't mean to grab your ass. It just happened."

It's probably pretty unlikely that any species can achieve higher cognitive function without an accompanying level of conscious impulse inhibition.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 30, 2014, 06:06:52 AM
Also, not to venture into the land of pedantry, but that isn't how the processing works. The arms process problems that are extremely regular and vital to daily function, like grabbing food and delivering it to the mouth. So you might be looking at a hypothetical situation more like "Sorry I jammed your kid into my beak, it just happened". Which is why cognitive-level inhibitions of that kind of function would be critical for development of a complex intelligent society.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Chelagoras The Boulder on December 30, 2014, 07:51:05 AM
Tho that plus the "gross squeezing through holes"thing would make for a pretty unique species, setting-wise
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 30, 2014, 06:41:17 PM
Related to earlier in the discussion: http://wtfevolution.tumblr.com/post/78013475943/oh-what-a-cute-little-mouse-its-not-a
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 30, 2014, 08:17:29 PM
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on December 30, 2014, 06:41:17 PM
Related to earlier in the discussion: http://wtfevolution.tumblr.com/post/78013475943/oh-what-a-cute-little-mouse-its-not-a

:lulz: I think I posted a link to a documentary on these things a while back. They get super nasty toward the end, just tottering tattered rape zombie marsupials.
Title: Re: Lovecraft for Squids: Scifi Religion Creation
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 31, 2014, 06:20:19 AM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on December 22, 2014, 07:42:44 PM
It's the one with the soaring, half-time epic chorus, "It's a message from a cone/that was left so long ago/no one knows, where it goes".

This line keeps making me chuckle.