31
GASM Command / Re: GASM: Reply To All
« on: November 04, 2010, 01:23:24 am »
This is awesome, and I am definitely in.
News:
I live in the Promised Land, except the Chosen People are all trying to get out.
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.
32
Or Kill Me / Re: Your version of Disordia is as perfectly valid as mine.
« on: November 04, 2010, 01:17:23 am »Everyone's Discordia is equally valid.
Just like everyone's art is equally art.
I disagree with this, especially the second line. Things can be judged on their own terms even without a universal standard. Furthermore, we cannot simply throw away our values in the name of warm fuzzy shit. At least, I can't.
This doesn't mean we should silence dissent, or shit on it, but that we should carefully clarify our positions and encourage others to do the same.
I'm starting a movement to sneer at amateur Discordians. We'll have a gallery opening on the 23rd.
I'm also starting a Neo-Surrealist Neo-Discordian movement to sneer at the public and the "professional Discordians" at the same time. We'll have a gallery opening on
SHUT THE FUCK UP AND SIT THE FUCK DOWN. HAVE YOU READ THE ELECTION RESULTS?!?! HOLY SHIT, THE HORROMIRTH WILL CONSUME THE NATION IN EPILEPTIC FITS OF ANTI-MASTURBATION AND PROTEST RALLY BURNINGS OF EFFIGIES OF POPULAR COMEDIANS/ILLUMINATI.
I believe that clarifies things nicely. Have fun.
33
RPG Ghetto / Re: Mutants and Mastermins anyone?
« on: November 04, 2010, 12:25:45 am »
Never played M&M but would like to get in on this.
34
Apple Zone / Re: Religious Knowledge Survey
« on: November 04, 2010, 12:21:03 am »
100%.
Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God is pretty vivid. As for the god portrayed therein, kind of a dick.
Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God is pretty vivid. As for the god portrayed therein, kind of a dick.
35
Or Kill Me / Re: Your version of Disordia is as perfectly valid as mine.
« on: November 04, 2010, 12:12:18 am »Everyone's Discordia is equally valid.
Just like everyone's art is equally art.
I disagree with this, especially the second line. Things can be judged on their own terms even without a universal standard. Furthermore, we cannot simply throw away our values in the name of warm fuzzy shit. At least, I can't.
This doesn't mean we should silence dissent, or shit on it, but that we should carefully clarify our positions and encourage others to do the same.
36
Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Fractal Cult
« on: November 01, 2010, 11:15:14 pm »
OSHI-! Morphisms!
37
Aneristic Illusions / Re: How to Make a Slave
« on: October 31, 2010, 10:01:19 pm »
You can never undo learned patterns, you can only teach new patterns and hope they will be stronger than the old ones.
39
Aneristic Illusions / Re: How to Make a Slave
« on: October 31, 2010, 03:34:00 pm »
That makes me sick. It's also a dangerous game to play.
40
Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Fractal Cult
« on: October 31, 2010, 03:27:43 pm »Okay, just checking. In that case, I really like this. I am in love with metalanguage and metadescriptions that can carry over from one thing to another--in fact, it is the key to the way I learn--synthesizing and analogizing. For a musician, dancer and martial artist, this is pure gold.If this is to be taken as reality rather than a way of thinking, it strikes me as sweet, delicious bullshit. The kind you know you should stop eating but you can't.
I think we are only capable of describing models. I don't think anybody is presenting this as a really for real true description of the universe - more of a thought experiment so far.
Quote
QuoteI have desperately wanted and tried to believe in a Jungian or Campbellian universal motif, but it's seemed wrong from any approach outside wishful thinking. Not only are archetypes ill-defined, they are supposed to be ineffable.
models cannot be true or false, they can only have degrees of usefulness.
While models can and will
Quote
In this case I do think they are useful in that we can learn something about humanity, and ourselves, by examining the patterns which recur in nearly every culture.For William Blake via Northrop Frye, humanity is a single being which has fallen and forgotten itself. The highest aim is the remembrance of the identity of the great and primordial man, and to be a visionary who sees the unfallen world of wholeness. But, I'm wandering a bit afield.
Do you see any incompatibility between archetypes and an almost mathematical similarity?
Quote
QuoteFor same-level and interlevel pattern similarity, I would use the terms 'tesselation' and 'homology', respectively. Homology is the term we used in History of Chinese Religion class to describe the notion of the link between the microcosm and the macrocosm--e.g., between the health of the emperor and the wellbeing of the state. Tesselation refers to a shape that can fill a space with copies of itself all placed side-by-side. While that in and of itself does not require or directly suggest reproduction, I like the idea that certain shapes create a negative space patterned after themselves.
good notes... I wrote the bullet points in the above post before I saw this.. I think you're onto something with the homology. This calls for more research on my part.
Tesselation is definitely a nod in the right direction but I think it also implies uniformity, which does not sit well with complexity.
Quote
ahh it turns out tessellation does not imply uniformity. my bad, I was thinking too hard about those escherian lizards
Even so, perhaps it is better to speak of people, situations, beliefs, things, etc. as having tesselational properties. A particular instantiation of interest is interpersonal dynamics. In a two-person interaction pattern there are two roles. We learn our role by participation, and the other person's role by observation. Obviously you will not become the same person as the other person, but once a pattern is established, we often try to (or inadvertently do, as dynamics function as attractors) recreate said pattern in other interactions. This is how, to use a trite example, abusees can become abusers.
41
Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Fractal Cult
« on: October 31, 2010, 02:52:41 pm »
If this is to be taken as reality rather than a way of thinking, it strikes me as sweet, delicious bullshit. The kind you know you should stop eating but you can't.
I have desperately wanted and tried to believe in a Jungian or Campbellian universal motif, but it's seemed wrong from any approach outside wishful thinking. Not only are archetypes ill-defined, they are supposed to be ineffable. However, there is one handling of the monomyth I find immensely satisfying, and that is William Blake's, at least as it is explained by Northrop Frye in Fearful Symmetry.
There is something profoundly appealing about this extreme poly-tiered "as above, so below and a little below that" systematicity, but I wonder what metaphysical assumptions it demands. It allows the feeling that the universe has an order about it that science for all its mechanistic conceptions cannot bestow or recognize, but is that worthwhile in and of itself?
Dingo is right on the money with this...
I will add only that there is value in the ability to draw analogies between processes existing on different levels or in different senses, regardless of the reality or unreality of similarity. I am not prepared to throw down with the metaphysical fractal realist, but having a larger analogical vocabulary is definitely a good thing.
For same-level and interlevel pattern similarity, I would use the terms 'tesselation' and 'homology', respectively. Homology is the term we used in History of Chinese Religion class to describe the notion of the link between the microcosm and the macrocosm--e.g., between the health of the emperor and the wellbeing of the state. Tesselation refers to a shape that can fill a space with copies of itself all placed side-by-side. While that in and of itself does not require or directly suggest reproduction, I like the idea that certain shapes create a negative space patterned after themselves.
The dance along the artery,
the circulation of the lymph,
are figured in the drift of stars.
--T.S. Eliot, Four Quartets
I have desperately wanted and tried to believe in a Jungian or Campbellian universal motif, but it's seemed wrong from any approach outside wishful thinking. Not only are archetypes ill-defined, they are supposed to be ineffable. However, there is one handling of the monomyth I find immensely satisfying, and that is William Blake's, at least as it is explained by Northrop Frye in Fearful Symmetry.
There is something profoundly appealing about this extreme poly-tiered "as above, so below and a little below that" systematicity, but I wonder what metaphysical assumptions it demands. It allows the feeling that the universe has an order about it that science for all its mechanistic conceptions cannot bestow or recognize, but is that worthwhile in and of itself?
Dingo is right on the money with this...
Probably one of the points that needs clarification is are you trying to say that...
It's useful to think that were exist in these kind of fractals (in the Discordian-Bokonist sense that we can construct and develop our own sense of reality by consciously developing our own beliefs (Probably Cain's Discordianism and Perfect Nihilism is the type of thing i'm getting at.))
OR
We indeed DO live in these kinds of fractals. That there is objective value in examining the reactions of individuals in situations and applying these patterns to countries, in the same way that a scientist can experiment on a mouse to learn about humans.
I will add only that there is value in the ability to draw analogies between processes existing on different levels or in different senses, regardless of the reality or unreality of similarity. I am not prepared to throw down with the metaphysical fractal realist, but having a larger analogical vocabulary is definitely a good thing.
Quote from: Crams
I'm starting to think about fractal cult language and terminology -- and I'll need some help with this
1-----I need a word which describes a pattern which occurs multiple times at the same level of magnification - such as sarah palin and christina o'donnel.
2-----And I need a word which describes the similarity between a pattern at one level and a pattern at another level - such as the relationship between one's circulatory system and the economy
For same-level and interlevel pattern similarity, I would use the terms 'tesselation' and 'homology', respectively. Homology is the term we used in History of Chinese Religion class to describe the notion of the link between the microcosm and the macrocosm--e.g., between the health of the emperor and the wellbeing of the state. Tesselation refers to a shape that can fill a space with copies of itself all placed side-by-side. While that in and of itself does not require or directly suggest reproduction, I like the idea that certain shapes create a negative space patterned after themselves.
The dance along the artery,
the circulation of the lymph,
are figured in the drift of stars.
--T.S. Eliot, Four Quartets
42
Techmology and Scientism / Re: Oh My Godblock
« on: October 29, 2010, 08:54:17 pm »
It's great that it exists, and terrible that people actually want to use it.
43
Apple Zone / Re: So I was googling orgasm...
« on: October 26, 2010, 11:03:09 pm »
There's a very specific sensation I'm trying to pin down how to generate, which is one of the main motivations for putting all this stuff together in one place. I also just want to know the overall shape of what I've learned, and see whether looking at all of it at once yields any new discoveries.
I will think about making it available if it turns out to be useful.
I will think about making it available if it turns out to be useful.
44
Apple Zone / Re: So I was googling orgasm...
« on: October 26, 2010, 05:22:24 am »What's the back story on why you were googling "orgasm"?
I have begun compiling a handbook of erotic techniques and (relevant) ideas about the nervous system on an experiential level. This is largely through experimentation but I also try to research the subject. I wanted to see if anything interesting would appear in the search results.
