Organized Discordianism

[tyrannosaurus vex]

Good idea? Bad idea? Terrible idea?

Do you think that popular culture evolving to form a more disposable, short-sighted, self-interested society should alter the way Discordians think of themselves?

Does "sticking apart" have two words, or only "apart?"

If society is defined by the way everyone is increasingly isolated from one another, should Discordians continue to isolate themselves too, with the idea that this is somehow different just because it was different 50 years ago?

If the function of Discordianism is, ultimately, to put a check on the public's pervasive acceptance of the Status Quo, are we doing our jobs by allowing ourselves to become typical of the Status Quo mentality?

What about organizing do we fear? Are we afraid that we will become stuck in dogma and meaningless ritual? Are we afraid of owing our allegience to something greater than ourselves? Or is it simply too much work to create a cohesive community that can be depended upon?

The Principia Discordia is still entertaining; but is it still true? It exposes a lot about the way the Human mind works, but its solution is to chop the attention span into tiny pieces barely able to form a coherent thought before being broadsided by a different idea. Do you think that the way modern pop culture does the exact same thing is immunizing people to the effect of traditional Discordian thinking? If so, how do we adapt?

Should we adapt? Or should we be just another minor subculture, eventually commoditized, pasteurized, and consumed? Is Discordia unnecessary in a world filled with so much chaos and uncertainty?

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Good idea? Bad idea? Terrible idea?

Do you think that popular culture evolving to form a more disposable, short-sighted, self-interested society should alter the way Discordians think of themselves?

No. Discordians should think of themselves as they think most useful. It shouldn't matter what the rest of the people are doing. TFY,S!

Does "sticking apart" have two words, or only "apart?"

Two words, intentionally an oxymoron. I think the intent was to stress the individual nature of Discordian thought, to impress upon the poor reader that they shouldn't run out and try to make a 'real' church with Dogma. However, I don't think it was meant that Discordians should never interact or work together on shared goals. After all, RAW, Mal-2 and Omar worked together (along with a whole litany of other old school Erisians).

If society is defined by the way everyone is increasingly isolated from one another, should Discordians continue to isolate themselves too, with the idea that this is somehow different just because it was different 50 years ago?

Again, I don't think Discordians should define their behavior on the behavior of society. They should define their behavior on their perceptions, desires and wants. IE if they want to hang together then they should and no written oxymoron should stand in their way.

If the function of Discordianism is, ultimately, to put a check on the public's pervasive acceptance of the Status Quo, are we doing our jobs by allowing ourselves to become typical of the Status Quo mentality?

I don't think that is the ultimate function of Discordianism. I think its a admirable goal which many Discordians hold... its a goal that is certainly compatible with Discordian philosophy; but I find (at least in my opinion) that Discordianism is much more about putting a check on the individual Discordian's acceptance of the narrative that their social group sold them. If the individual changes, then by extension their signals will change and may influence others, however I don't think that is the primary function.

If we use the loaded term "enlightenment" just because its a easy label to stick here. I would say that Discordianism primarily focuses on individual's enlightening themselves and then changing their behaviors in a way that may provide a hook through which someone else will enlighten themselves. IE Mal-2 and Omar "enlighten" themselves, they interact with Bob, Bob enlightens himself leading to prolific writings which lots of people read, SOME of those people enlighten themselves, some become pinealists, fnordians Bobites (maybe they confuse reading about enlightened ideas and actually having enlightened ideas?)and some just throw the book away and go about their lives.

What about organizing do we fear? Are we afraid that we will become stuck in dogma and meaningless ritual? Are we afraid of owing our allegience to something greater than ourselves? Or is it simply too much work to create a cohesive community that can be depended upon?

All of the above. An organized Discordia would have to have some sort of standard and "You're Doin It Wrong" would be a part of that standard. Further, if there is an organized group with organized decisions, organized ideas/standards/beliefs/traditions etc then are the individuals truly TFY,S!?

The Principia Discordia is still entertaining; but is it still true?

It was never true... only true in some sense (sorry couldn't resist)

It exposes a lot about the way the Human mind works, but its solution is to chop the attention span into tiny pieces barely able to form a coherent thought before being broadsided by a different idea. Do you think that the way modern pop culture does the exact same thing is immunizing people to the effect of traditional Discordian thinking? If so, how do we adapt?

A very good question. The quick change slapdash nature was a style that emphasized the content, today its the normal way people get content and there does seem to be some loss of 'punch' in the result. Excellent point that I don't have an answer for... After all, the reverse (long/deep/detailed discussions) are likely to be tl;dr in much of our society. If short communication is blasé and long communication is ignored, we're left with precious little ground.

Should we adapt? Or should we be just another minor subculture, eventually commoditized, pasteurized, and consumed? Is Discordia unnecessary in a world filled with so much chaos and uncertainty?

Maybe Eris has just become more active now that she's been invoked. The world is more discordant, chaotic, confusing than ever before. Perhaps The Joshua Norton Cabal was her Harbinger.

(IE, the rise of chaos has been going on for some time, if Omar and Mal noticed it before the masses, maybe they were just ahead of the game....)

I mean, hell, I sat through a Corporate training seminar that everyone in my company had to go through and it was focused on what I would consider Discordian philosophy (or at least RAW philosophy). Stuff like reality tunnels, perception vs reality, how your attitude, beliefs, presumptions color your perceptions, coming to conclusions based on immediately available data, rather than seeking other data. Hell, they even had an exercise where people placed their teammates on a chart that was eerily similar to Leary's First Circuit/Second Circuit quadrants.  

I think, for me personally I prefer Interactive Discordian processes, rather than organized Discordians.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I think Discordians should form whatever groups and associations they feel like, and shift or dissolve them when the time for them is over. Or not. My own interpretation of Deiscordianism, though, is that one of its foundations is that of pointing out one of the major flaws of other religions; that people join them because they feel a need to be part of something larger than themselves.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

Good idea? Bad idea? Terrible idea?

Do you think that popular culture evolving to form a more disposable, short-sighted, self-interested society should alter the way Discordians think of themselves?

No. Discordians should think of themselves as they think most useful. It shouldn't matter what the rest of the people are doing. TFY,S!

Does "sticking apart" have two words, or only "apart?"

Two words, intentionally an oxymoron. I think the intent was to stress the individual nature of Discordian thought, to impress upon the poor reader that they shouldn't run out and try to make a 'real' church with Dogma. However, I don't think it was meant that Discordians should never interact or work together on shared goals. After all, RAW, Mal-2 and Omar worked together (along with a whole litany of other old school Erisians).

If society is defined by the way everyone is increasingly isolated from one another, should Discordians continue to isolate themselves too, with the idea that this is somehow different just because it was different 50 years ago?

Again, I don't think Discordians should define their behavior on the behavior of society. They should define their behavior on their perceptions, desires and wants. IE if they want to hang together then they should and no written oxymoron should stand in their way.

I don't mean to say we should define ourselves or determine what we do or how we think based on the mainstream, really, although I see how it looks that way. I'm approaching the idea of Discordianism as something different, something that -- whether on an individual or group level -- gnaws at the loose ends of the mainstream social narrative. It's never been about being directly opposite to the mainstream, but it is about a function in society where Discordianism asks questions about what's going on, what's generally believed to be true, and what's taken for granted. So the things we ask questions about will naturally change, as conditions change, but what we're doing stays the same.

If the function of Discordianism is, ultimately, to put a check on the public's pervasive acceptance of the Status Quo, are we doing our jobs by allowing ourselves to become typical of the Status Quo mentality?

I don't think that is the ultimate function of Discordianism. I think its a admirable goal which many Discordians hold... its a goal that is certainly compatible with Discordian philosophy; but I find (at least in my opinion) that Discordianism is much more about putting a check on the individual Discordian's acceptance of the narrative that their social group sold them. If the individual changes, then by extension their signals will change and may influence others, however I don't think that is the primary function.

If we use the loaded term "enlightenment" just because its a easy label to stick here. I would say that Discordianism primarily focuses on individual's enlightening themselves and then changing their behaviors in a way that may provide a hook through which someone else will enlighten themselves. IE Mal-2 and Omar "enlighten" themselves, they interact with Bob, Bob enlightens himself leading to prolific writings which lots of people read, SOME of those people enlighten themselves, some become pinealists, fnordians Bobites (maybe they confuse reading about enlightened ideas and actually having enlightened ideas?)and some just throw the book away and go about their lives.[/quote]

Like I said above, I think the "individual" and "group" function of Discordianism is mostly interchangeable. What it does to a hundred people, it has done to each of them individually.

What about organizing do we fear? Are we afraid that we will become stuck in dogma and meaningless ritual? Are we afraid of owing our allegience to something greater than ourselves? Or is it simply too much work to create a cohesive community that can be depended upon?

All of the above. An organized Discordia would have to have some sort of standard and "You're Doin It Wrong" would be a part of that standard. Further, if there is an organized group with organized decisions, organized ideas/standards/beliefs/traditions etc then are the individuals truly TFY,S!?

The Principia Discordia is still entertaining; but is it still true?

It was never true... only true in some sense (sorry couldn't resist)[/quote]

Well, "organized discordianism" would hardly resemble a dogmatic religion if it was Discordianism at all. What I mean isn't to formalize a set of behaviors/beliefs, or canonize scripture, or any bullshit like that. I mean working together on purpose for specific goals. Like GASM, mainly. The OP was basically a question for people who reject the "dogmatism" that might form under formal/organized Discordianism, by dogmatically adhering to the "Discordians by definition are individualists with no need for group action" thing, for no reason other than tradition.

It exposes a lot about the way the Human mind works, but its solution is to chop the attention span into tiny pieces barely able to form a coherent thought before being broadsided by a different idea. Do you think that the way modern pop culture does the exact same thing is immunizing people to the effect of traditional Discordian thinking? If so, how do we adapt?

A very good question. The quick change slapdash nature was a style that emphasized the content, today its the normal way people get content and there does seem to be some loss of 'punch' in the result. Excellent point that I don't have an answer for... After all, the reverse (long/deep/detailed discussions) are likely to be tl;dr in much of our society. If short communication is blasé and long communication is ignored, we're left with precious little ground.

Should we adapt? Or should we be just another minor subculture, eventually commoditized, pasteurized, and consumed? Is Discordia unnecessary in a world filled with so much chaos and uncertainty?

Maybe Eris has just become more active now that she's been invoked. The world is more discordant, chaotic, confusing than ever before. Perhaps The Joshua Norton Cabal was her Harbinger.

(IE, the rise of chaos has been going on for some time, if Omar and Mal noticed it before the masses, maybe they were just ahead of the game....)

I mean, hell, I sat through a Corporate training seminar that everyone in my company had to go through and it was focused on what I would consider Discordian philosophy (or at least RAW philosophy). Stuff like reality tunnels, perception vs reality, how your attitude, beliefs, presumptions color your perceptions, coming to conclusions based on immediately available data, rather than seeking other data. Hell, they even had an exercise where people placed their teammates on a chart that was eerily similar to Leary's First Circuit/Second Circuit quadrants.  

I think, for me personally I prefer Interactive Discordian processes, rather than organized Discordians.

I pretty much agree. It isn't that I'd like to see a Roman Catholic Discordia or anything, only that it would be nice to know that Discordianism could become a cohesive, coherent, self-aware network of individuals, rather than just a casual association of barely-affiliated people who have a vague alignment of philosophy. And if society itself is fractious and chaotic as a way to control people, forming a more tangible Disorganization might give more people a way to break out of that system of subjugation.

It isn't about becoming a singular or hierarchical organization, but about continuing to offer people a break from the Machine. 50 years ago, that was accomplished by interrupting people's death grip on seriousness -- people no longer have a death grip on much of anything at all, but they're no less controlled now than they were then. They are still slaves; but now they are slaves to short attention spans and information overload instead of to dull, monotonous lives and sensory deprivation.

In some ways, Eris has won, I guess. But only on the surface. There's still a very determined system underneath the superficial layer of Discord, still a Machine that is churning away, grinding people up, and being generally awful. And I can't decide what Discordianism is for you, but for me, it includes throwing a monkey wrench into that machine - the problem is, the traditional Discordian monkey wrench keeps bouncing off people who are already expecting the unexpected because they've been conditioned to.

[Telarus]

Good Stuff ITT. I think we need a model to hang some concepts on. I propose cybernetic-network (as opposed to a corporate style structure), a division between Players and Audience (a dynamic set of categories that may resemble the Clergy/Lay-practitioners split), and a few core Named mastermind-groups (membership and/or Named positions are transitory) that drive focus.

Kinda like the Illuminati charts in the PD.