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 - LuciferX

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 ... 145
16
Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Post-Irony (& The New Sincerity)
« on: March 12, 2017, 06:03:38 am »
Not sure what definition of "strife" you used to generate that banal pile of douchebaggery, but the one I generally use is the one that has the same etymological root as "strive", giving it connotations of working toward something of value.
:lulz:
I get the strive thing, only that the etymology conflicts with common usage of the English word /strife/. I'm all for root meanings, just not for pointless conflict.  For example, "working toward something of value", I like, given that the value I'd be working for would also lend significance to the present act.

17
Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Post-Irony (& The New Sincerity)
« on: March 12, 2017, 03:46:23 am »
Strife serves the individual because it represents the inverted impression of work being done.  Without it's character of resistance, there would not b anything against which to cast our efforts:  purchase-less work, or, action without traction.  If this seems backwards, that's because it is, therefore, strife.

I can engage the world meaningfully without saying that it only runs on friction, noise and histrionics.   It's not work for the sake of distraction that I want.  It's a sense of relevant engagement that I'm looking for.

An image that comes to mind is Jean Claude van Dam, to illustrate what is wrong with strife.  He actually had very fluid kinetics from his dance training.  Putting that to work for martial-arts flix though meant that he was going to have to appear tougher than a ballerina.  So, to appease the gods of kayfabe, he's always flexing and holding all this tension to make him seem, well, more formidable.  This then informs the nether regions of what we think a confrontational stance looks like.  In actuality however, all that flexing is a waste of energy and motility that only serves the spectacle of combat at the expense of actually providing a lasting fighting strategy.

I'm so Discordian that I regect the limitations of strife, favoring a Daoist interpretation of it instead.  Otherwise it's just cognitive dissonance for the sake of cognitive dissonance.

18
Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Post-Irony (& The New Sincerity)
« on: March 10, 2017, 11:47:04 pm »

Let me invoke Camus [...]
[H]is conclusion is that even if the universe is bereft of inherent meaning, meaning can be created.

Camus said: let's not make our lives about the emptiness. Let's fill it with something worth living for.


I think maybe that's the guts of what we're talking about



I also enjoyed M.M. Ponty's articulation of meaning-giving as having both centrifugal and centripetal polarities.  Problem there is how to understand the relevance-relation of meaningful differences.  Usually instantiated as subject/object, self/world, individual/society; they are always and only understood in the shadow of empty things.  Then also my meaning-giving becomes empty, a simulation/simulacra.  So the question is, how do things go from zero to one?

I don't go camping nearly as often as I should, a fact evinced on my last trip by the food and clothing I thought would be adequate.  Cold and hunger not registering, I rose to look at the moon a tad too quickly and had the strangest head-rush.  Practically fainting (probably the off oranges) I suddenly found myself in a Berkeleyesque staged-version of the campsite.  Similar yet entirely different, it was like the space had been Disneyfied to look like the ride Pirates of the Caribbean.  Anyhow, that was also all I had.

What I mean is that I knew something was different, but I had nothing upon which to base that comparison.  I was in some kind of a fugue state, like a short circuit, with no determinate access to my particular sense of self.  It was like I had jumped into a different time-line, or slipped into a crack between worlds (words...). Capacity to clearly identify things and people substituted with fuzzy facades.  Point being, even as the world slipped away, the past vaporized, self dismantled, there was not also a dissolution of meaning or importance.  To the contrary, the "realness" of that state was entirely inescapable, the moment was unpostponable.

So I suppose what I'm getting at is that just because we give something meaning, which may or not be inherent, this does not make the sense of meaning any less relevant.  It is an entirely too permissive universe that humbly calls for us to accept that it provides the ground of possibility for our interrelation with it to be meaningfully nurtured, or not.

19
Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Post-Irony (& The New Sincerity)
« on: March 10, 2017, 06:54:27 am »
The thing is that I find the (profound) implications of irony ecstatically liberating.  Pure nihilism is that I believe sincerely in the complete emptiness of all things, which outstrips me with wet, slippery and entirely overflowing nothingness.  Yes, irony is the captain of my ship, I say, tripping over my fins.

20
Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Post-Irony (& The New Sincerity)
« on: March 09, 2017, 11:08:14 pm »
Something about how irony used to be, is that it would creep up on me.  Like some kind of unassuming ju-jitsu master that you would pretend to brush off, only to find that her legs are firmly wrapped around your neck, and you're going down.  I'm thinking Nabokov.  It's a calculated sequence of demolitions by shaped charges.  Instead now, with the chans, it's like irony just for irony's sake (look:  irony! ()).  It's a reactive bar-brawl where the principal of subversion stops at the quasi literal "up-endinding" of whatever (as long as it's not me...). Boring, pointless. The recognition of irony in itself is not a point of self-determination that can serve personal identity.  That last point seems lost on most who seek refuge in it, and then they choke.  slippery subject, irony is.



(would like to post better, more considerate responses, but time constraints only permit this.  Still very much enjoying the little time I can spend in here)

21
Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Post-Irony
« on: March 08, 2017, 10:52:22 pm »
I'm jumping in here a little un-prepared, but who cares.  Fucking irony, yeah, I agree with DFW.  I also think his movement toward "new sincerity" struck me as being somewhat inauthentic and rehabilitated.  This is probably the result of my own different projections on the nature of "recovery" interfering with themselves.  This is not to detract from my rejection of irony, rather to indicate the insidious way that it infects us with its weakness. 

If it does serve as a tool for deconstruction, strong enough to dismantle even Itself, then what the fuck is it's business bolstering ego's and shielding fragments of self?  If irony were presented with it's own groundlessness, it would run off like a hysterical child screaming into the abyss.

If irony does indicate an absence, at least it can be full of a "positive-indeterminate"?

Now off to read what all this new sincerity clap-trap is about :lulz:

22
Literate Chaotic / Re: Unofficial What are you Reading Thread?
« on: February 25, 2017, 03:14:34 am »
Nothing fantastic to report.  I was looking forward to Foggs Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do, reading it however failed to provide traction.  Maybe cause not fully committed to read (skimming), or the fact that it was written in '02 makes approach feel dated w.r.t. current applications of said technology.  Blah.

23
Literate Chaotic / Re: ITT: Original Story Ideas
« on: February 23, 2017, 09:00:42 pm »
Two screenwriters working on different productions meet in a preliminary hearing for a lawsuit, after investors at a test screening noticed that the dialogue in both films was identical (and that, upon looking, the shooting scripts were also identical). The lawsuit was settled out of court & neither film ever got theatrical release or distribution as part of the deal, and the screenwriters hit it off, fell in love, and got married -- their connection cemented by the idea that they were fated to be with each other by the bond of having written identical 120 page screenplays, down to the letter. However, years later, after one of them dies, the other  (while searching through his estate) comes upon his draft -- and sees that the similarity with her own is only marginal (i.e., by that draft, they would have been 'twin movies' but not even character names are the same). Tracking down the final shooting draft, she sees that it differs significantly from both. She contacts her old boss and investigates up the chain, to find that the same esteemed script doctor was assigned to both pictures, and that it seems that he had replaced both scripts with one of his own. However, looking over various complaints, she found evidence to believe that it wasn't his own at all, and that instead he had, for years, been stockpiling good but unproduced screenplays and occasionally using them as 'rewrites' for similar films when he didn't have time to rewrite properly, and without crediting the original author -- and that this accounts for his legendary ability to perform many major rewrites simultaneously.
I like.  Borges meet PKD.

24
Propaganda Depository / Re: Sympathy and Nazis
« on: February 20, 2017, 10:05:59 pm »
Tldr;  something about morals and punching Nazis, might as well help them back right into the propeller of the ride that got them here.  In my limited experience with fascist states from late 20th century Europe, not only are the practitioners simply useful imbeciles, they are also frightened little cowards.  They rely on the false sense of strength derived from their fabricated unity.  Ergo the fascist bundle of blunt, brittle little sticks.  Catch one of them by themselves and it's a very different story.  Their erosion started before they ever even banded together.  Apart from only punching them, which might incidentally embolden them together under something slightly more tangilble than their bigoted principles, the trick I think is to have them implode.

See, with all those extremely intolerant judgemental racists, most of them are only less than a couple of degrees removed from what they proclaim to hate.  The black-eye subsides, and can always serve as a badge of honor.  The fact that their mom's is Jewish, their dad's gay or their brother's black, well, that eats them inside-out:  starting with the weakness that allowed this to happen in the first place.

Just two cents.

25
Circus fucking bread and wine.

26
Aneristic Illusions / Re: White Nationalist/Neo-Nazi Recruitment Rally
« on: February 11, 2017, 10:44:04 am »
The Slave of a Slave
    Is a Fascist

27
Nay, nuke the den of iniquity from whence any invidious comparison to Discordia hast now or ever been made.

28
Literate Chaotic / Re: ITT: Original Story Ideas
« on: February 11, 2017, 10:02:41 am »
Man attempting to actualize virtual world embroiled in attempted double ending sale for property development of Raymond Chandlers Requiem for a Dream

29
Currently overwhelmed by kayfabe leaking in to personal domain - really appreciate thread notwithstanding recent reticence.

30
Literate Chaotic / Re: ITT: Original Story Ideas
« on: February 09, 2017, 11:50:41 pm »
Scientists discover a hormone that tracks with willpower. In silicon valley, the poor sell their willpower (extracted, with large needles, from a part of their brainstem) to wealthy developers, who become addicted. Those who have sold their willpower to the clinics are sometimes found passed out from hunger in the middle of supermarkets. (A willpower high somewhat resembles a cocaine or amphetamine high in the sense that it involves manic energy and sustained effort; the difference is that those high on willpower seek out tasks that involve making large numbers of decisions.)  Later, a bioengineering lab figures out how to synthesize the stuff, and mortality rates skyrocket as type-a personalities mainline it and overdose.

Was just now thinking of Cronenbergs's Secret Weapons and "meta-adrenaline".  Instead of an actual compound the "meta" element indicates how the adrenaline is elicited from the prescribed environment and particular situations into which subjects are injected.  The situations are contrived to instatiate a set of trigger sequences, repeatedly and in a controlled environment.  Once firmly encoded and reinforced, triggers can be translated onto external environments. Once activated, subjects will "independently" seek out firing them in sequence.  Sort of like targeted search results, on a grand scale.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 ... 145