Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Cramulus

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 ... 778
There's something about this image I find very pleasing

 natural and synthetic,
     modern and vintage
beautiful composition

that was a great song! cool video too

in the original story, Peter Pan kills them

Nothing seems real anymore

You say that, in part, because nobody's cracked you in the head with a barstool yet

but in part, yeah

you know,
we try to work through that together,

but anybody who leaves the island
never comes back

Aneristic Illusions / Re: General Trump hilarity free-for-all thread
« on: March 24, 2017, 11:34:15 pm »
...and to hear the lamentations of Paul Ryan.

Literate Chaotic / Re: Unofficial What are you Reading Thread?
« on: March 24, 2017, 03:21:29 pm »
Yeah KSR is the standard bearer for hard-sci fi today.  He thinks of sci-fi writers as modern shamans - the people whose imagination really does become the reality of tomorrow.

The real-life Flag of Mars is actually a reference to his martian terraforming trilogy - red mars, blue mars, green mars.

I'm meaning to read 2312, if I ever get through all the nonfic that's on the top of the pile. It was good?

Literate Chaotic / Re: Unofficial What are you Reading Thread?
« on: March 24, 2017, 02:33:31 pm »
The best book I read last year was Aurora by Kim Stanley Robinson.

Kim Stanley Robinson writes hard-sci-fi. In the tradition of Arthur C Clark, he wants to explore the question, "If we <went to another planet>, what would it actually be like?" His books contain no science-fantasy: there is no faster than light travel. There are no anthropomorphic aliens. The universe is what it is.

Aurora follows the journey of a generation ship on its way to Tau Ceti, a journey that will span multiple centuries. The book is told from the POV of the ship's AI. This is a clever device, as it allows the narrative to comment on a lot of stuff happening on the ship while still focusing on a few characters. In the beginning of the book, the AI doesn't really know how to tell a narrative story, so the writing is a little clumsy. At some point, its told to research literature and educate itself - and after that point, it starts using metaphors and more poetic language. The writing style shifts subtly as the book goes on - this is a tiny detail but it helps the whole thing come to life.

The book doesn't really have an antagonist - it's part of the Man Vs Nature sci-fi tradition where a lot of the book is spent troubleshooting the various unanticipated and INTERESTING problems that come up on a multiple-century space flight. Like for example, you've basically created an island ecosystem. And in the real world, that accelerates evolution. Humans aren't reproducing fast enough to experience this, but the microorganisms we coexist with - stomach bacteria, etc - reproduce on a much faster schedule. After centuries, they start to fall out of symbiosis. What the hell do you do about that?

The ship is really imaginative. On a journey this long, they need a ship which creates its own oxygen, food, etc. So they try to create, essentially, a mini-earth. The ship has a bunch of giant spinning cylinders, each one is analogous to an earth biome. So there's a desert biome, a taiga biome, an evergreen forest biome, etc... Within these biomes there are 2-3 villages where people live off the land. There is also an assumption that "wilderness" plays an important role in the ecosystem, even though we still don't really understand it, so there are parts of this world which are off limits. This means that every so often, somebody gets killed by a pack of wild wolves. On a space ship.

I don't want to spoil too much - but it was definitely the most imaginative and engrossing book I read in 2016. Highly recommended.

Here's a video of Robinson talking about the book: (with mild spoilers, about the same level as this post)

RPG Ghetto / Re: Unified Vidya Games thread
« on: March 24, 2017, 02:07:45 pm »
How's Ingress these days? I haven't touched it since a year post beta. Are they still releasing those awful-acting-and-writing plot videos? those are something else

RPG Ghetto / Re: Unified Vidya Games thread
« on: March 24, 2017, 01:20:19 pm »

I found this super weird game for PS4 called Everything. I was hooked in because the game features narration by Alan Watts.

The game's kind of hard to describe. This is more of a zen-experience sandbox than a traditional game. It's about Being, and becoming different things. It reminds me a lot of Sagan's line that we are the universe trying to know itself.

You start off as some kind of animal - I started as an Elk. Your options are kind of limited. You can wander around, and if you see other Elks, you can press circle to "join" with them. Then "you" aren't just one elk, but as many as are in the group. You can form groups, or break groups. When beings are in a group, you can make them dance, and sometimes that leads to reproduction.

You can also ascend or descend into other scales of beings. If you're standing next to a blade of grass, you can become that blade of grass. From the grass's perspective, you'll be able to see tiny stones, ants, worms, etc.. you can shrink down and become them. If you go down far enough you will become pollen, dust, smaller leads you to DNA, bacteria, atoms, going deeper still leads you to a world which is just geometric patterns. Keep going down and you start to see galaxies--you've looped around to the top of a different cosmos.

Most of the gameplay is explorative. It has a kind of pokemon-feel where everything you become gets added to your collection, and it tells you "You've been 41% of all trees". So there's this urge to Be everything in the universe, to taste everything and try it out. There are also little icons that appear in the world sometimes - when you touch one, you unlock a snippet from an Alan Watts talk.

It's a really weird game. Relaxing. Not anything I expected.


Or Kill Me / Re: You're not conscious
« on: March 23, 2017, 08:54:36 pm »
I'd like to take a sec to touch some of my own skepticism and uncertainty:

There's all this talk about the "centers" - mental, emotional, physical... Each center is an "apparatus" or "mind" that dictates certain functions.

A lot of people have chopped up the centers into various subparts. One system tells you that each center has its own intellect, emotion, and movement. Another system will tell you that the physical center (more often called the "moving center") has three parts: motor, instinct, and sex.  Et cetera.

I think this is kinda dodgy and hard to verify, especially since the centers are all working at the same time. If I want a healthy sandwich, is that intellect? emotion? body? a mix of all three, right? so how are these categories useful?

The self is a funhouse mirror - if you go looking into your own mental processes through the lens that there are two centers, God and the Devil, you will be able to recognize your thoughts and behaviors as either belonging to God or the Devil. What you seek so shall you find. So how can any of these divisions be "real"?


What I think is key here is that we're trying to figure out where our thoughts come from.

And through doing that, we're trying to develop something outside of those forces, which can moderate it.

I used to think of emotions as these more or less automatic processes that get in our way. I saw the rational, logical mind is the real self we have to listen to. After all, of all the centers, the intellect seems the most under our control. So isn't that the self?

But this line of self-observation illuminated to me the ways that my intellect is also mechanical, that it has its own needs which are sometimes in conflict with other parts of me. And if I focus on intellect, I become unbalanced. The consciousness we're working on is something outside of the intellect, something that can moderate it or make room for it as needed by the harmonious, combined self.

Or Kill Me / Re: You're not conscious
« on: March 23, 2017, 08:34:53 pm »

Yeah the language here is tricky, since we’re talking about hyper-subjective internal experiences. I’m thankful that this thread hasn’t gotten too mired in definitions. I’ve intentionally shifted between terms like Consciousness, Mindfulness, Self-Awareness and Self-Remembering, even though they are not technically interchangeable, and none of those are 100% accurate to what we’re talking about.

The way that I’m discussing consciousness here, it’s something aspirational - a clear state of mind that we can achieve through self-observation and intentional effort. The little sparks we get from time to time are the tip of the iceberg.

If most of your thoughts and behaviors are mechanical, there’s a level of selfhood that you’re missing out on. The consciousness I am pointing at is a path to build a “real self”.

Some people call this the development of the “soul”. I’ve avoided talking about the soul, because that word comes with a lot of baggage. But it’s worth mentioning: in this scheme, people aren’t born with a “soul” (whatever that may be). One can develop a “soul” over a long period of time through conscious labor and intentional suffering. But we’re in deep metaphor country here. Let’s not worry too hard about metaphysical stuff like that - for now, let’s stick to the practical.

Or Kill Me / Re: You're not conscious
« on: March 23, 2017, 06:39:45 pm »
Great questions! really good stuff to chew on - apologies in advance if my response is a little scattered

Consciousness is isn't just awareness or attention, but those are involved. We don't have really precise language to discuss this fuzzy internal stuff, so it's really good to clarify like you've done.

and by the way, I just want to restate, I'm not an authority on this. I'm a student too, your conclusions might be just as good as mine. We're learning together.

Thinking about these ways of measuring consciousness makes me wonder if we are missing the point of consciousness.

At this stage, we're just trying to develop a finer awareness of our own consciousness. Since we're right in the middle of a stream of thoughts, consciousness is invisible to us until we learn to look at it (we aren't usually aware of our own consciousness, just like fish aren't aware of water). It's also like, if you're trying to improve your running speed, you need to measure yourself. You need benchmarks. Without either, you can never know if you're improving. Consciousness is such a nebulous term, the measurements I presented are a way to process it in more digestible bites.

(and I want to acknowledge: consciousness is "wiggly", hard to define. We have to trap it using nets of words, reality grids per the PD, but we shouldn't get fooled by them. Related reading from Alan Watts, will be very familiar to Discordians: )

You can see that your level of consciousness varies throughout the day. Sometimes your consciousness is high, sometimes it's low. Think about how your capabilities are different in these two states. It's really hard to realize your potential, to lead a fulfilling life, when your consciousness is low and your habitual mind calls the shots. A lot of the time, when you need to be making conscious decisions, you're making automatic, habitual decisions.

Like you said, just being 100% aware of everything at all times isn't actually helpful, it's chaos. The goal is not to replace all mechanical actions with intentional ones. You need your mechanical mind! But you shouldn't let it have too much power either.

Another way of stating the "point"

When you examine your own consciousness, you'll probably notice that a lot of your behavior appears automatically, mechanically, as a response to some internal state. We have all these sub-selves inside of us, and they all want different things. Our ultimate behavior emerges from conflict between these forces. One part of me is hungry and wants to go out to eat, another part of me wants to read a book--whichever of these signals is "louder" automatically gets control of the body. (unless you're conscious of what's happening)

A lot of the selves inside of you want basic, shallow, ego-driven things. We easily become slaves to these patterns and habits. That keeps us at a low level of energy, low potential, low quality of life. Many of the selves have become prison bars. That's the black iron prison.

Through self reflection and consciousness, by fighting against your habits, you can make intentional changes. You can escape the cell for a little while. You can "think for yourself, shmuck!"

Yes, one purpose of this exercise is to increase consciousness in general.

But I think there are some overlapping ideas that are less advantageous to conflate with consciousness.  I will say awareness is one because there are moments where you can be aware of multiple things at once, but it is only distracting for you to do so.  So is consciousness only focusing on what is important as opposed to whatever else we could be aware of?  In that sense, the measurement of depth creates ambiguity because it is measured by "how much" rather than "how little."

If the point is to be aware of as much as possible, I don't think that is helpful.  I would make the analogy of stretching and flexing a muscle.  A muscle can't be stretched and flexed at the same time.  I would say a balance is necessary between broad awareness and focus.

Right! But similarly, if you're aiming to build muscle, you need to work it. A workout isn't 50% flexing and 50% stretching, most of it is working at the thing you're trying to improve.

We are really bad at focusing our attention for any length of time. We are really bad at noticing what's going on inside of us. Both of those are necessary to make conscious decisions. The split attention exercise is kinda like a workout aimed at building those muscles.

There is another answer in the literature, but I am still making up my mind about it, so take this with a grain of salt and decide for yourself.

Some people say that the distractions you suffer are from the different "centers" (physical, emotional, intellectual, whatever) conflicting with each other. From that perspective, the "work" of consciousness is an attempt to get your centers to work together and coexist harmoniously. That's why the split attention exercise is important, it is like a survey of the factors influencing your behavior. Your ignorance of these factors empowers them, keeps you in an unconscious fog.

In that fog, your fears and weaknesses and laziness have a huge power over your life.

When we measure length [of consciousness], I again wonder what is the point?  Is there a purpose to staying in any one place for longer than there is a purpose?

When you're focusing your energy and attention on something, you don't want to suddenly start thinking about potato chips. 

You don't want your decsion subverted by your own desire for potato chips. If we learn how this distraction takes place, and the factors which create it, we gain a small degree of control over it...

The point here is to practice fighting against the mechanical, habitual mind. We're so easily distracted. If you've ever meditated, you've seen it: we are really bad at focusing our attention for any length of time. That focus can be developed. It's an important tool in mastering our Will.

Consciousness isn't an end.

Consciousness is a means to becoming less mediocre, less trapped by fear and doubt and habits that keep us from being fulfilled.

Literate Chaotic / Re: Unofficial What are you Reading Thread?
« on: March 23, 2017, 04:39:15 am »

that's a really good review

welcome back
             TO REALITY


if you're going to post your life story to STRANGERS
we're not strangers ANYMORE

Hi Tart

we would load our trebuches with crates of highly taxed tea

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 ... 778