I just read this article on Rick Warren's church (http://www.gladwell.com/2005/2005_09_12_a_warren.html) though the magic of Stumbleupon, and it got me thinking: how could we adopt the "small, personal group" model that has worked so well for evangelical Christians, Communists, and AA? One problem I'm seeing with the methods we're proposing is that they tend to focus on either mass action, or one on one mindfuckery, without much of the tight knit cells that seem to work so well.
With most decentralized movements/organizations, it seems like the small communal element is key to their success with spreading. The problem with that though, is adapting that model to antiauthoritarian, dogma-free ideology, seeing as most successful decentralized movements have a core set of dogma. The most obvious solution would be to keep the basic "think for yourself, schmuck" catma, but try to encourage small group action more, in whatever way we can. Another possible route is through shared experience, rather than shared dogma, but then the question is what experience could bring together similarly minded people? Past attempts (i.e. hippies in the 60's) used the psychedelic experience, but when smoking weed or dropping acid spread to where it was commonplace, the novelty wore off and it stopped bringing people together nearly as much.
It's also possible to strip Discordianism down to the barest of bare bones (much like how Warren stripped Christianity down to a simply interpreted, theologically light "Purpose Driven" format), and get Discordian franchises going. Rather than trying to sell it from business to consumer, go business to business, again, the way Warren has. But then there's the emphasis on "everybody's a pope" and "start your own damn religion" that's messed that approach up in the past. The very nature of the idea makes it impossible to get us to act on anything but an individual scale.
Yeah, so I read this over, and I figured it's probably a repost, and doesn't come up with any concrete ideas, but I figure this might start some discussion.
IMHO, whatever's working for evangelical Christians, Communists, and AA... isn't something we want. :eek:
This is an interesting thought.
Essentially, this is what Cabals are supposed to be about. They just aren't a very prominent part of our irreligion in any flavor of Discordianism I've ever met. They're like a thing people do but nobody takes as a real core ideology. I think I've seen several Caballed comrades here mention getting people in their cabal at first for the fun of O:MF, only to devilishly lure them into Discordia as a result. Maybe that's the way to go?
I am so completely anti-proselytization that the very idea of adopting Christian methodology for Discordia makes me want to burn everything.
To me, it sounds like "Here, let's gut everything you love about Discordianism and turn it into something that appeals to a wider audience".
I'll lend the PD to people I think might enjoy it. I might even give a brief shot at explaining *my* Discordia to people who ask. Otherwise, I think the fuckers should figure it out for themselves.
Nigel, I think you miss the point.
This has nothing to do with Christianity. This is about basic human dynamics - about a social fact that Christianity has capitalized on.
I just read The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell, where he expounds at length about how powerful small local groups (up to 150 people) are incredibly strong building blocks in any movement.
If we want to capitalize on the Rule of 150 (Gladwell's name for this phenomena) we obviously wouldn't make it about uniform belief like the evangelists do... That would be self-defeating. But focussing on the creation of active local cabals could be a winning strategy.
i have to disagree with Gundam and Nigel, in the sense that, just because Christianity does it, doesn't mean it's inherently a bad idea.
there can be other reasons why it's a bad idea though :)
anyway, first think i thought goes along with Verb, this is what Cabals (and other such loosely semi-organized groups) are supposed to be about.
only problem is, the only (two or three) people around here i got interested in discordia, won't really read/post on the board (too much, not enough time, etc -- they're right, actually)
and they're not really that interested in doing RL projects either. or they are considered too "risky", or it's "what's the point" (lulz+chaos should be enough for a start, right? get some practice first) or they come up with a way too elaborate plan that requires 10-20 people to do stuff which is never going to happen.
i wonder if they're actually interested per se, or whether it's because they're my good friends and therefore are interested in things i am enthousiastic about.. :)
Well, trying to get people to read literature and think differently is both futile and evangelical... But assembling a small fellowship of troublemakers should be possible for most of us, if we try hard enough. Philosophy isn't that important to everyone anyway, and spreading strife together will probably lead to an exchange of ideas anyhow.
But I see how no matter what, this could become yucky proselytizing.
I think you are missing my actual point, which is that I dislike proselytizing. This is a non-negotiable point; you cannot, in fact, disagree with me about whether I dislike proselytizing. it has nothing to do with Christianity itself and everything to do with my dislike of the dynamics described in the "small, personal group model that has worked so well for evangelical Christians, Communists, and AA?" concept.
Hey, I grew up in AA. My mom's an alcoholic It's great example of a group dynamic that I think is fucking sickening. Effective, yes... but sickening. It's herd mentality. I repels me.
YOU want to recruit people? Go ahead. If that's what Discordianism turns into, I'll move on... because IMO, that's what it's about anyway.
You're making no distinction between prosleytising and informing people of their options.
Oh, and thanks for the vote of confidence.
Discordians
no better than the AA, because they don't want to keep their cliquish in-joke to themselves?
Go fuck yourself.
Just thinking out loud here.
Cabals are a great idea as long as the core of them is to be individuals, not sheep.
Right now Discordianism is under the radar and frankly I like it that way. Too much open success means too much attention and this movement is in no way ready for that. We would be crushed and packed off to the camps so fast we wouldn't even realize it until after the fact.
The US would never allow it, especially now with the Patriot Act and other "laws" passed. We would be branded terrorists and treated accordingly. Martyrs seem to have doomed existences.
As I am sure Cain can attest to the more people who know the greater the chance of information leaks. Rather that follow the model in the OP I think the terrarist model of 'cells' would be more effective.
Or I'm just being paranoid and should STFU.
You're right about cabals - they're potentially the "small group that does it".
I think the trick is to encourage people to form cabals, and then DO stuff with them.
Once you've gone pranking with a group of people, you've forged a bond. If the group has enough energy, it will carry itself forward on its own motion, and everyone involved will get a hell of a ride.
A cabal is anything you want it to be, but it'd be cool to write up some texts which expand on this idea, of cabals formed from IRL friends, or internet friends, or one-time cabals that assemble for one purpose and then disperse...
Nigel, at no point did I call into question the fact that you hate proselytization, nor did I at any point suggest we should proselytize. I'm talking about the same thing Cram is talking about. Also the same thing that is meant by "nodes" in the netwar model of warfare. It's not about people's beliefs. I don't give a fuck what people believe. It's about action. And action seems to work much better with groups of 2 to 150 operating locally.
So calm the fuck down or GTFO.
The Great Googlie Mooglie Cabal has been around for about 6 years. It has about 25 members and we have engaged in lots of activities, from the SPIRCHUAL (Erisian Masses, Various rituals) to the FIZACAL (Bubble Pranking, Public Performances, Jaking, etc) and lots of other stuff that just randomly comes up.
Sometimes, I think it would be awesome if the dynamic that exists in our Cabal existed in the Discordian multiverse as well... but I don't think that's likely. A small Cabal of like minded individuals seems much less contentious than a wide array of various tribes of people that all happen to share some jokes and (perhaps for the best) thats what Discordianism seems to have become. There are tribes of Discordians that are Dada, there are tribes of Discordians that wear funny clothes and say silly things, there are Discordians that want to overthrow the *insert authority here*, there are Discordians that want to Wake Up The World with slogans and posters, there are SRSLY SRS Discordians that want to start churches and SRSLY UNSIRIUS Discordians that seek only the LULZ, wherever they come from.
The GGMC, for what its worth has a variety of views, but they are similar in their most simple form... this does not seem to be the case on a wider scale. Could you imagine the sort of proselytizing some of this forum would do? The jackbooted thugs of the Nazis would look like Mother Theresa! (LOL).
If Discordianism had some Universal Message that could change the world, then perhaps a mass preaching would be useful... but from my perspective, the best thing I've learned through the PD is that Salvation may come through Nonsense... but if so, it seems a very personal/individual sort of thing, and not necessarily for mass consumption.
And when men become free then mankind will be free.
Quote from: The Reverend Asshat on May 05, 2008, 01:38:15 PM
Martyrs seem to have doomed existences.
That's kind of the point of martyrs, really.
Quote from: Cain on May 05, 2008, 12:56:11 PM
You're making no distinction between prosleytising and informing people of their options.
Oh, and thanks for the vote of confidence.
Discordians
no better than the AA, because they don't want to keep their cliquish in-joke to themselves?
Go fuck yourself.
If someone I know seems interested, I'll loan them a copy of the PD, give them the URL here, or answer questions if they have any.
I have no objections to the spread of information.
What I, personally, object to is the idea of organizing Discordians in a way that is designed to further the spread of Discordianism; in my opinion, as soon as Discordianism adopts the viral spreading mechanism of other religions, it becomes just like them, in the ways that we can already see when we get pinealfnord23 newbies who never STARTED thinking for themselves but just parrot whatever the book says.
And that's my objection.
If what you want to do is recruit more Discordians, I consider that different from converting people to Discordianism. I am 100% opposed to actively seeking converts. I won't try to stop anyone from doing it, but I will state that I'm against it, and why I'm against it, and I won't participate in it.
Also, really, what Ratatosk said.
To do some parroting of my own, I read once something along the lines of, "Each enlightenment is only good one time, for the person who discovers it". In a way, I think that's really another way of phrasing "think for yourself, Schmuck". Either way, it really stuck with me, and I personally find it a great reminder that what seems profound and important to me may be meaningless for others, and that's ok.
Anyway, I think that if someone finds their own enlightenment in dissemination of information, that's great. On the other hand, if I find myself associated with a group who puts a lot of energy into spreading the word of Discordianism, I will probably not be comfortable with that, and will end the association.
After all, the only thing Seventh-Day Adventists are doing when they go door to door is "informing people of their options".
Quote from: Cain on May 05, 2008, 12:56:11 PM
Oh, and thanks for the vote of confidence.
Also, what the fuck is this "vote of confidence" bullshit? What are you trying to say, here? Am I supposed to blindly agree with what someone else says or wants JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE DISCORDIAN?
Please explain, I'm really interested.
Quote from: Nigel on May 05, 2008, 06:27:38 PM
Quote from: Cain on May 05, 2008, 12:56:11 PM
Oh, and thanks for the vote of confidence.
Also, what the fuck is this "vote of confidence" bullshit? What are you trying to say, here? Am I supposed to blindly agree with what someone else says or wants JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE DISCORDIAN?
Please explain, I'm really interested.
Yes, it's just like democracy, America, and the war on terrorism.
Anyone who isn't for [ideology] must clearly be against [ideology]. You godless commie traitor heathen mutant. The Computer will terminate you
and your clones.
I think it's possible to utilize the organizational power of small local groups without making it about conversions. It looks to me like the general strategy of, for instance, OMGASM, is to MF society at large and hope interesting people find PDCOM and other sites, or get interested in Discordianism. This seems so far a good strategy and I'm fucking awed at Colbertgasm's success. And I'm in no position to criticize this because (a) I've done practically nothing for the project and (b) if I have a better idea I'll go and start my own GASM or whatever. But just thinking along some more abstract lines now, what if the focus was instead on the local effect? What if the idea was to create small local groups?
Well, obviously OMGASM is about large-scale things because OMGASM is about harnessing the internet to bring more brains together and easily get lots of people who are far apart to do something that requires lots of people. So OMGASM is per necessity not the kind of project that will *create* small localized groups. But imagine if we magically each had a 5- or 23-person cabal (ha ha) and could plan GASMs around that assumption.
Yeah, "what if", it's a bullshit question and these are my feverish musings now. My only point, if I have one, is that small local groups are an extremely powerful thing, and that we shouldn't write them off just because the most successful examples happen to proselytize. You know what Gladwell's first example was in TTP? The rise in popularity of The Ya-Ya Sisterhood. That book spread like wildfire because of book clubs - not your model of evil proselytization. It spread because the author would tour the US giving readings and signing sessions, and she's an actress so apparently her readings were particularly charming. In each town, or almost each town, one woman or more of the few that attended these readings would be impressed enough to get her book club to read the book. Because of the book's particular appeal to a particularly broad range of book club demographics, the book clubs loved it and even grew because of it (or something) and somehow this turned the book into a massive bestseller and feature film. I don't remember how.
I should stop now, I'm rambling.
-Verb,
doesn't like being sick
A lot of my sentiment is in response to the original post"
Quote from: The Littlest Ubermensch on May 03, 2008, 06:35:40 AM
I just read this article on Rick Warren's church (http://www.gladwell.com/2005/2005_09_12_a_warren.html) though the magic of Stumbleupon, and it got me thinking: how could we adopt the "small, personal group" model that has worked so well for evangelical Christians, Communists, and AA?
Did you read the article? What struck me about it is that it seems to be about GROWTH. Spreading the word.
Quote
With most decentralized movements/organizations, it seems like the small communal element is key to their success with spreading.
Do you see what I'm responding to, and what I'm objecting to?
I think that the cabal system is great, especially because it IS so decentralized and unorganized and each cell is it's own entity, free to make its mission whatever they want. Networking is grand, too, and larger group projects... if I didn't think so I wouldn't be here.
The idea of tackling, as a group, a question like "how do we facilitate the spread of Discordianism", on the other hand, makes me deeply uncomfortable, to the point where I want to make my opinion about it clear up front. I won't participate. If other people do, I will probably mostly ignore it, as I have thus far mostly ignored other efforts to "recruit". If it becomes more pervasive than I'm comfortable with, I'll simply find something else to do with my time.
Just sayin'.
I don't see what the problem is here, exactly. Either you want to help out, or don't . . . Seems pretty simple.
Where did all the anger come from?
Quote from: Hoopla on May 05, 2008, 11:11:04 PM
I don't see what the problem is here, exactly. Either you want to help out, or don't . . . Seems pretty simple.
Where did all the anger come from?
I don't, and I said so. Then some people were all "you're missing the point" and I was all "no, this is my point".
I think what you are interpreting as anger is what I interpret as an expression of discomfort.
Quote from: Nigel on May 05, 2008, 10:53:05 PM
A lot of my sentiment is in response to the original post"
Quote from: The Littlest Ubermensch on May 03, 2008, 06:35:40 AM
I just read this article on Rick Warren's church (http://www.gladwell.com/2005/2005_09_12_a_warren.html) though the magic of Stumbleupon, and it got me thinking: how could we adopt the "small, personal group" model that has worked so well for evangelical Christians, Communists, and AA?
Did you read the article? What struck me about it is that it seems to be about GROWTH. Spreading the word.
Quote
With most decentralized movements/organizations, it seems like the small communal element is key to their success with spreading.
Do you see what I'm responding to, and what I'm objecting to?
I think that the cabal system is great, especially because it IS so decentralized and unorganized and each cell is it's own entity, free to make its mission whatever they want. Networking is grand, too, and larger group projects... if I didn't think so I wouldn't be here.
The idea of tackling, as a group, a question like "how do we facilitate the spread of Discordianism", on the other hand, makes me deeply uncomfortable, to the point where I want to make my opinion about it clear up front. I won't participate. If other people do, I will probably mostly ignore it, as I have thus far mostly ignored other efforts to "recruit". If it becomes more pervasive than I'm comfortable with, I'll simply find something else to do with my time.
Just sayin'.
I think the issue here is less about "spreading the word", and more about how to reach the right people...you know, the ones that are Discordian at heart, but just haven't heard of it yet.
OTOH, I get the sense that some people are uncomfortable with the idea of there being an actual group of Discordians, because then it becomes something else they don't fit in with/belong to. My impression is that many people that catch on to the Discordian mindset/belief system have never "fit in", and it's a source of discomfort and occasional anger/frustration.
OTOOH, If there isn't at least some growth, then this whole thing will die out like the Shakers. Cabals seem to be the most useful method, and technically speaking, fit the "small communal" paradigm.
But who here is even part of a cabal? How does one start one or find one?
Quote from: Nigel on May 05, 2008, 10:53:05 PM
A lot of my sentiment is in response to the original post"
Quote from: The Littlest Ubermensch on May 03, 2008, 06:35:40 AM
I just read this article on Rick Warren's church (http://www.gladwell.com/2005/2005_09_12_a_warren.html) though the magic of Stumbleupon, and it got me thinking: how could we adopt the "small, personal group" model that has worked so well for evangelical Christians, Communists, and AA?
Did you read the article? What struck me about it is that it seems to be about GROWTH. Spreading the word.
Did you? Of course it was about growth, but the point was pointing out the effectiveness of that model of growth, not just "spreading the word"
Quote
Quote
With most decentralized movements/organizations, it seems like the small communal element is key to their success with spreading.
Do you see what I'm responding to, and what I'm objecting to?
I think that the cabal system is great, especially because it IS so decentralized and unorganized and each cell is it's own entity, free to make its mission whatever they want. Networking is grand, too, and larger group projects... if I didn't think so I wouldn't be here.
The idea of tackling, as a group, a question like "how do we facilitate the spread of Discordianism", on the other hand, makes me deeply uncomfortable, to the point where I want to make my opinion about it clear up front. I won't participate. If other people do, I will probably mostly ignore it, as I have thus far mostly ignored other efforts to "recruit". If it becomes more pervasive than I'm comfortable with, I'll simply find something else to do with my time.
Just sayin'.
I'm not sure what the big deal here is at all. I understand that there's nothing wrong with not liking the potential for proselytization, but it seems like we're wasting potential if we don't try to get the good ideas we have to spread.
Quote from: Guan Yin on May 06, 2008, 01:39:26 AM
I think the issue here is less about "spreading the word", and more about how to reach the right people...you know, the ones that are Discordian at heart, but just haven't heard of it yet.
OTOH, I get the sense that some people are uncomfortable with the idea of there being an actual group of Discordians, because then it becomes something else they don't fit in with/belong to. My impression is that many people that catch on to the Discordian mindset/belief system have never "fit in", and it's a source of discomfort and occasional anger/frustration.
OTOOH, If there isn't at least some growth, then this whole thing will die out like the Shakers. Cabals seem to be the most useful method, and technically speaking, fit the "small communal" paradigm.
But who here is even part of a cabal? How does one start one or find one?
great points.
I'm a member of a number of cabals.
I started the JELLO Brothers of America
the Fairfield Cabal of the Nauseous Chicken
the Pirate Action League
the OBNOXIOUS JERK CABAL
the Adam Weishaupt Society
and of course, the Wrath of MS Paint Cabal (or WOMP)
and also a bunch of silly forum avatar cabals like the Ugly Old Woman cabal and the Full House cabal.
I guess I would consider the ASS (http://www.blackironprison.com/index.php/ASS)es a sort of cabal. Or any KSC that participates in OMGASM
My complete dedication and loyalty to the Full House Cabal is greater than my loyalty to many of the others.
many of them were formed from IRL people I know, who got obsessed with an idea, and did lots of projects based on it.
I know an oddly high number of Discordians IRL though, so my results may be irregular.
I'm part of a couple of cabals.
Listen, if what you have in mind doesn't actually push the boundaries of my comfort zone, I might participate. My first impression was that it was about spreading Discordianism, which pushes my personal boundaries for proselytizing. If it's not about that, but working more effectively with each other... I guess I might be interested in participating.
I think your concerns are legit, Nigel.
Adam Gorightly (Thornley's biographer) thought that they wanted to engineer the meme in a way that keeps it from generating fanatics. "Convictions cause convicts" and all that.
I'm sure we're all on the same page here. We want to get the word out, but we don't wanna brainwash people.
As it's said on the BIP wiki site:
"The basic math is that the more frequently people develop their critical thinking skills, the better it is for everybody involved."
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on May 06, 2008, 02:51:54 AM
We want to get the word out, but we don't wanna brainwash people.
Speak for yourself Cram, I'm currently brainwashing the entire city into thinking for themselves with a technology called FORCEFREE™.
People never see it coming because it utilizes qualia-based subliminals augmented by level four Design Human Engineering™ and the latest strategies in NLP™ holography. This is currently being integrated into OPB broadcasts and the Oregonian newspaper by an elite team of mentally disabled operatives. You see the hypnotic data is converted into a holographic waveform and digitally enmeshed into the radio transmissions and prepress RIPs.
This anti-herd instinct you see in Nigel is due to earlier imperfections in the neurobiological basis of brainwashing theory. She was our first guinea pig. There have been some side effects, such as excessive paranoia and fascination with cones but they have been corrected in subsequent developments of FORCEFREE™.
FORCEFREE™: Washing Brains Into Autonomy
You heard it here first folks. The press release doesn't occur for another week.
Quote from: Nigel on May 05, 2008, 06:27:38 PM
Quote from: Cain on May 05, 2008, 12:56:11 PM
Oh, and thanks for the vote of confidence.
Also, what the fuck is this "vote of confidence" bullshit? What are you trying to say, here? Am I supposed to blindly agree with what someone else says or wants JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE DISCORDIAN?
Please explain, I'm really interested.
Well according to you, if we dont keep Discordianism a cliquey in-joke, we're no better than any other sort of religious fundamentalists.
Which is to say, everyone on this forum who has ever talked about getting the idea of Discordianism out there. This subforum was originally called the Black Iron Prison, which was the name of a piece of work that came out of a project to try and update and increase interest in Discordianism.
So according to you, LMNO, RWHM, myself, Cramulus, LHX etc are no better than the retards at the AA.
And you expect me to be civil to you after that insult? Fuck off Nigel, you owe most people on here who aren't interested in having their own version of the kewl kidz club an apology.
Quote from: Nigel on May 05, 2008, 06:24:35 PM
Also, really, what Ratatosk said.
To do some parroting of my own, I read once something along the lines of, "Each enlightenment is only good one time, for the person who discovers it". In a way, I think that's really another way of phrasing "think for yourself, Schmuck". Either way, it really stuck with me, and I personally find it a great reminder that what seems profound and important to me may be meaningless for others, and that's ok.
Anyway, I think that if someone finds their own enlightenment in dissemination of information, that's great. On the other hand, if I find myself associated with a group who puts a lot of energy into spreading the word of Discordianism, I will probably not be comfortable with that, and will end the association.
After all, the only thing Seventh-Day Adventists are doing when they go door to door is "informing people of their options".
No they're not.
Thats bullshit and you know it.
Because anyone with half a brain knows Seventh Day Adventists exist. They know they're there, and that what they may not be sure of what they believe, that they can find out easily.
CLUEPHONE RINGING: most people have never even heard of Discordianism!
Shocking, I know. But since Discordians are so geographically disparate and so unknown, a campaign to let people know that Discordianism actually exists might actually draw the interest of people who want to know more.
OH MA LAWD! IS DAT SUM BRAINWASHING?
Your bullshit comparisons don't hold up, because you're comparing radical different groups and ideas. The average person does not know what a Discordian is, and does not know what they believe. In such a situation, letting people know Discordianism exists is nothing like what other religious groups do, and find the implication of such an insult.
I think what we have here is a classic case of Mysticism vs Congregationalism.
HAVE YOU PEOPLE FORGOTTEN THE LESSON OF THE GRIDS?
Uh oh.
::ducks for cover::
Quote from: Cain on May 06, 2008, 04:56:17 PM
Quote from: Nigel on May 05, 2008, 06:24:35 PM
Also, really, what Ratatosk said.
To do some parroting of my own, I read once something along the lines of, "Each enlightenment is only good one time, for the person who discovers it". In a way, I think that's really another way of phrasing "think for yourself, Schmuck". Either way, it really stuck with me, and I personally find it a great reminder that what seems profound and important to me may be meaningless for others, and that's ok.
Anyway, I think that if someone finds their own enlightenment in dissemination of information, that's great. On the other hand, if I find myself associated with a group who puts a lot of energy into spreading the word of Discordianism, I will probably not be comfortable with that, and will end the association.
After all, the only thing Seventh-Day Adventists are doing when they go door to door is "informing people of their options".
No they're not.
Thats bullshit and you know it.
Because anyone with half a brain knows Seventh Day Adventists exist. They know they're there, and that what they may not be sure of what they believe, that they can find out easily.
CLUEPHONE RINGING: most people have never even heard of Discordianism!
Shocking, I know. But since Discordians are so geographically disparate and so unknown, a campaign to let people know that Discordianism actually exists might actually draw the interest of people who want to know more.
OH MA LAWD! IS DAT SUM BRAINWASHING?
Your bullshit comparisons don't hold up, because you're comparing radical different groups and ideas. The average person does not know what a Discordian is, and does not know what they believe. In such a situation, letting people know Discordianism exists is nothing like what other religious groups do, and find the implication of such an insult.
I think Cain has a good point here. We may underestimate just how "fringe" Discordianism really is.
Quote from: Nigel on May 05, 2008, 06:27:38 PM
Quote from: Cain on May 05, 2008, 12:56:11 PM
Oh, and thanks for the vote of confidence.
Also, what the fuck is this "vote of confidence" bullshit? What are you trying to say, here? Am I supposed to blindly agree with what someone else says or wants JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE DISCORDIAN?
Please explain, I'm really interested.
No, no, that rule only applies to discordian
art.
Also, if your discordia isn't pushing your comfort zone, WAYSA?
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on May 06, 2008, 02:51:54 AM
I think your concerns are legit, Nigel.
Adam Gorightly (Thornley's biographer) thought that they wanted to engineer the meme in a way that keeps it from generating fanatics. "Convictions cause convicts" and all that.
I'm sure we're all on the same page here. We want to get the word out, but we don't wanna brainwash people.
As it's said on the BIP wiki site:
"The basic math is that the more frequently people develop their critical thinking skills, the better it is for everybody involved."
Thanks, Cram, I'm relieved that I wasn't speaking complete gibberish.
Quote from: Cain on May 06, 2008, 04:44:14 PM
Quote from: Nigel on May 05, 2008, 06:27:38 PM
Quote from: Cain on May 05, 2008, 12:56:11 PM
Oh, and thanks for the vote of confidence.
Also, what the fuck is this "vote of confidence" bullshit? What are you trying to say, here? Am I supposed to blindly agree with what someone else says or wants JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE DISCORDIAN?
Please explain, I'm really interested.
Well according to you, if we dont keep Discordianism a cliquey in-joke, we're no better than any other sort of religious fundamentalists.
Which is to say, everyone on this forum who has ever talked about getting the idea of Discordianism out there. This subforum was originally called the Black Iron Prison, which was the name of a piece of work that came out of a project to try and update and increase interest in Discordianism.
So according to you, LMNO, RWHM, myself, Cramulus, LHX etc are no better than the retards at the AA.
And you expect me to be civil to you after that insult? Fuck off Nigel, you owe most people on here who aren't interested in having their own version of the kewl kidz club an apology.
Oh, please.
I am not talking about keeping it an in-joke. I am talking about the difference between proselytising and indoctrination, and creating and distributing interesting and useful information.
I am absolutely not interested in/excited about "spreading the word" of Discordia as if it were some kind of Universal Truth. I don't believe that it IS a Universal Truth, and in fact I think that as soon as we start treating it like one it loses what truth is has.
You can take that as an accusation that everyone here has been, so far, trying to ram their perception of Truth down other people's throats, or you can take it as a personal reticence in getting involved in anything that looks as if it might start doing do.
Quote from: Cain on May 06, 2008, 04:56:17 PM
Quote from: Nigel on May 05, 2008, 06:24:35 PM
Also, really, what Ratatosk said.
To do some parroting of my own, I read once something along the lines of, "Each enlightenment is only good one time, for the person who discovers it". In a way, I think that's really another way of phrasing "think for yourself, Schmuck". Either way, it really stuck with me, and I personally find it a great reminder that what seems profound and important to me may be meaningless for others, and that's ok.
Anyway, I think that if someone finds their own enlightenment in dissemination of information, that's great. On the other hand, if I find myself associated with a group who puts a lot of energy into spreading the word of Discordianism, I will probably not be comfortable with that, and will end the association.
After all, the only thing Seventh-Day Adventists are doing when they go door to door is "informing people of their options".
No they're not.
Thats bullshit and you know it.
Because anyone with half a brain knows Seventh Day Adventists exist. They know they're there, and that what they may not be sure of what they believe, that they can find out easily.
CLUEPHONE RINGING: most people have never even heard of Discordianism!
Shocking, I know. But since Discordians are so geographically disparate and so unknown, a campaign to let people know that Discordianism actually exists might actually draw the interest of people who want to know more.
OH MA LAWD! IS DAT SUM BRAINWASHING?
Your bullshit comparisons don't hold up, because you're comparing radical different groups and ideas. The average person does not know what a Discordian is, and does not know what they believe. In such a situation, letting people know Discordianism exists is nothing like what other religious groups do, and find the implication of such an insult.
Jesus, you sound like a fucking fanatic.
As if people can't think for themselves without reading the Pricipia? As if people NEED "Discordianism" as we know it to be free, whole, interesting individuals?
Check this out: IT'S JUST A FUCKING CLUB.
Fuck you too, dipshit.
Quote from: Netaungrot on May 06, 2008, 11:27:02 PM
Quote from: Nigel on May 05, 2008, 06:27:38 PM
Quote from: Cain on May 05, 2008, 12:56:11 PM
Oh, and thanks for the vote of confidence.
Also, what the fuck is this "vote of confidence" bullshit? What are you trying to say, here? Am I supposed to blindly agree with what someone else says or wants JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE DISCORDIAN?
Please explain, I'm really interested.
No, no, that rule only applies to discordian art.
Also, if your discordia isn't pushing your comfort zone, WAYSA?
I like to push my comfort zone in ways that haven't already been tapped out by every other major religion on earth, thanks anyway.
Quote from: Nigel on May 07, 2008, 06:32:22 AM
Quote from: Netaungrot on May 06, 2008, 11:27:02 PM
Quote from: Nigel on May 05, 2008, 06:27:38 PM
Quote from: Cain on May 05, 2008, 12:56:11 PM
Oh, and thanks for the vote of confidence.
Also, what the fuck is this "vote of confidence" bullshit? What are you trying to say, here? Am I supposed to blindly agree with what someone else says or wants JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE DISCORDIAN?
Please explain, I'm really interested.
No, no, that rule only applies to discordian art.
Also, if your discordia isn't pushing your comfort zone, WAYSA?
I like to push my comfort zone in ways that haven't already been tapped out by every other major religion on earth, thanks anyway.
OMG THE MANA WAS
TAPPED!!!1
\
(http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/4950/discombobulatedghostle6.gif)
/
I ATTACK WITH SHIVAN DRAGON!!
So did major religions tap out symbolism in paintings too?
Did major religions tap out informing people about the nature of a group?
How about assembling in a group for their intellectual and spiritual growth?
What DIDN'T major religions "tap out"?
I think you made some really nasty assumptions about Cain, by the way.
Where the hell did you get the idea he was advocating spreading "universal truths" and all of this garbage?
Nigel:
If discordianism works for you, if it has helped you, then maybe there are other people who could benefit too. Maybe those people have never even heard of discordianism. So what's so bad about putting out information that just lets them know there's something out here that they might want to use?
For all your talk about Discordianism being highly individualized (and no better inherently than an individual Discordian), you're doing a good job of pigeonholing and defining it. So what if you're not interested? If you're not interested, then don't bother with this thread. Pretty simple.
As for myself, I like Discordianism not because it is a "religion" that has "saved" me or any such fucking nonsense, but because it's fun and it's one of the few distractions that have a purpose. And it has helped me learn how to take Very Serious Things... less seriously. And save myself some graying hair. And I am interested in presenting that possibility to other people who might also benefit. It isn't about "indoctrination," it's about bringing up possibilities that so many people are so obviously missing.
I'm not really an elitist, so I don't buy into this "if they don't figure it out for themselves then fuck 'em" bullshit. I think if you can help somebody, and if you feel like doing it, then there's no harm. And it can be fun anyway.
Hey JERKS:
All I said is that I'm not down with proselytizing. You have a problem with that?
Quote from: Nigel on May 07, 2008, 09:13:00 AM
Hey JERKS:
All I said is that I'm not down with proselytizing. You have a problem with that?
That would have been fine had that been all you actually said.
To steal an idea from Illuminatus -- I think it's true that there are some people who are "neophilic" and the vast majority who are "neophobic".
Sometimes Discordianism is called a "joke religion". Personally I disagree, but there is one nugget of truth -- I think that, on being exposed to Discordianism for the first time, a person either "gets it" or doesn't. If you have to explain it, there's never going to understand it.
So as a pragmatic matter, I think proselytizing is useless. Exposing people to Discordianism is useful, but anything beyond that is useless and IMHO distasteful.
Having read through it a few times, I present to you my tl;dr written-on-no-sleep summary of wtf is going on in this thread, because excessive ridiculousness is taking away from the OP and I think it deserves some consideration. Skip if it's too long (which it probably is).. you know the drill.
TLU read an article, brought it here, and raises a good point. A lot of us have expressed interest in sharing Discordian ideas with like-minded people, but lack an effective way to do so. The article suggests that, among other things, organizations that have successfully gotten their message--whatever that message may be--out there have done so by forming smaller sub-groups of up to 150 people or so. Is TLU suggesting that we go door to door like Jehovah's Witnesses? No. Discordianism is not an organized religion like the one featured in the article, and as far as I can tell, nobody is looking for it to be like that. Nevertheless, the point of the thread is to hopefully get some gears turning and ideas flowing.
Some people aren't comfortable utilizing methods that are church-approved and church-used. This is fair, yet doesn't seem to be what TLU is advocating without further explanation (to avoid, I'd think, the misunderstanding that he supports employing methods used by zealous Christian groups to spread Discordian beliefs). As Verbatim points out, these small groups seem to be very similar to the various cabals that many of us are part of. Nigel finds the idea of pushing beliefs and/or values onto others to be distasteful, a sentiment which is legitimate and I think shared by most, but could perhaps have been expressed a bit less aggressively. Others interpret the article/OP differently and suggest that sharing strategies with religious organizations does not automatically mean throwing copies of the PD out at passersby on street corners.
Big wave of miscommunication.. moving on...
Discussion moves back to the cabals and how to make them most effective. Ratatosk explains how the Best-Named Cabal Ever! functions for him and the 25-or-so other members. More angry words.. Verbatim pulls focus back to the original topic and suggests that the construct (little groups) not be overlooked merely because of its current method of implementation (..which is to say, don't ditch it just because churches think it's a good idea). Nigel clarifies her feelings on the matter--cabal, good; group-wide spreading of Discordianism, bad--and Hoopla raises what strikes me as a valid question. Question could stand to be brought over to a similarly blown-out-of-proportion thread... but that's not the point.
The Artist Formerly Known as Roo makes a good point regarding reaching out to people. If we reach out to the right people (and interpret that however you will), maybe it won't seems so much like recruitment. Nigel's concerns prompt Cram to issue a fair reminder: whatever you do and however you do it, fanatics are no good. If you can help it, don't let them happen. Cain also points out that it would be an oversight to evaluate the doings of a large religious organization and those of Discordianism on the same scale; one is a widely recognized and accepted sect of Christianity, while few have heard of--let alone understand--the other.
I think the bottom line is that this is a worthwhile discussion focused on, well, discussion. If the idea of leaping into action worries you, take a deep breath; no one is running out to start shoving BIP pamphlets into mailboxes. The point is thought. Ideas. If you're opposed to that.. maybe it's time to move onto a different thread. My apologies if I appear to be targeting any particular person, or if this ends up leading to *gasp* moar drama. Just wanted to clarify, if only for myself, what's going on here. Overkill? Yeah.. probably. Oh well.
Quote from: Gundam Agriculture on May 07, 2008, 12:44:03 PMSo as a pragmatic matter, I think proselytizing is useless. Exposing people to Discordianism is useful, but anything beyond that is useless and IMHO distasteful.
I was under the impression that 'exposing' was all anyone was ever suggesting?
Plus, it sounds dirtier.
Yes, Eris likes it when you expose people to her :evil:
:cry: Lies!
Quote from: Anonymously Evil on May 07, 2008, 12:50:24 PM
H Is TLU suggesting that we go door to door like Jehovah's Witnesses? No.
FUCK
:cry:
you guys are no fun
Hey Nigel, I'll debate you when you actually respond to what I say and not whatever little dialogue you have running on in your head.
:lulz:
Reminder: no-one else ITT ever mentioned prosleytising, until Nigel imagined it belonged here. Or "universal truth" or telling people what to think.