News:

PD.com: You're safer in New Bedford.

Main Menu

Discordianism and the Mathematical Mind

Started by LHX, May 10, 2007, 03:59:20 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

LHX

its funny how on paper these logical cats can point out the existence of elements such as chaos in the universe
yet
it proves difficult to manifest this understanding in everyday life

for the longest time it seemed to me that a published book in a bookstore had some significance
as tho the contents of the book were some how reaching out to, and impacting a audience

only over the last few years have i come around to the understanding that the reach of a particular syllable-word-phrase-sentence-idea is limited in comparison to these over-riding themes that we are all raised with in this society

a tip-of-the-hat acknowledgement of chaos does not seem to be enough to counter-attack the formative-year-experience of being raised to chase money by any means necessary

or defense mechanisms of those touched with a strain of social awkwardness
or those bitten by the desire for the limelight that comes along with winning awards in elementary school for track meets or math contests or essay writing

"did you get the highest mark?"



all these observations of chaos - they get washed down the drain

we can make the observation
but
then we want to take credit for it or do something impossible with it


perhaps 'easier said than done' could be the theme of this discourse - but i have a hunch it goes deeper than that


over the last couple of years i have had opportunity to build with yall here and observe where exactly these chaotic elements exist

how they manifest in the universe we are experiencing


the unpredictability within each individual person
the things that are not possible to determine:
A) how much pressure a person can handle
B) how they will react when that threshold has been breached

sure there are trends - these may be particular to a demographic or geographic location
but
there is no way to tell with any accuracy what a particular circumstance will turn a man into



the more one looks for these instances of chaos and inconsistency - the more they become clear as day

my favorite topic of all time - the flaws of communication - are also testament to this

misunderstandings -

the way you can deliver a message with a intent and have it interpreted with a intent other than the one with which you delivered it


the worst crime to commit is accusing somebody of something that they did not do

- there are no winners in a situation like that




observe the situation of a logical mind getting frustrated at his inability to explain chaos to a audience

he gets mad at his audience
or
begins to question his own ability

meanwhile - the whole time - the elements he was trying to discuss were at play ruining the discussion

perhaps his motives were in the wrong place
perhaps the room was too hot
perhaps the same words he was using would have worked the next day



shit aint easy


its better to be lucky than good
but its best to be good and lucky

the Luck Plane is no joke
ask a SubGenius
neat hell

P3nT4gR4m


I'm up to my arse in Brexit Numpties, but I want more.  Target-rich environments are the new sexy.
Not actually a meat product.
Ass-Kicking & Foot-Stomping Ancient Master of SHIT FUCK FUCK FUCK
Awful and Bent Behemothic Results of Last Night's Painful Squat.
High Altitude Haggis-Filled Sex Bucket From Beyond Time and Space.
Internet Monkey Person of Filthy and Immoral Pygmy-Porn Wart Contagion
Octomom Auxillary Heat Exchanger Repairman
walking the fine line line between genius and batshit fucking crazy

"computation is a pattern in the spacetime arrangement of particles, and it's not the particles but the pattern that really matters! Matter doesn't matter." -- Max Tegmark

LMNO

It's a tough sell, because scientists are finding "rules" for chaos.  That's what chaos theory is about.  Not how to deal with chaos, but finding rules of motion for seemingly chaotic events.


So, a scientist explaining chaos is much different than an Erisan.  In fact, I think a layman would understand the Erisian view before the scientific.

However, I also think a layperson would be incredibly tough to convince that embracing Disorder to achieve Chaotic balance is a positive thing.

LHX

i guess in a way - we are observing the chaotic elements in 'rules'

the opposite of trying to apply rules to chaos


in terms of embracing disorder - perhaps the balance is that you have to embrace order just as much?
neat hell

LMNO

Well, yeah-- the original point of the PD being that Humans have been leaning towards Order for too long, so going ballistic with disorder is just a way of balancing the scales.


Also, we're running into problems again with the word "Chaos".  A scientist would see it as seemingly unpredictable motion, like a trail of cigarette smoke.  And they're trying to find rules of motion for it.

We, on the other hand, are taking the word "Chaos" in a much larger, almost metaphysical sense, and grafting it onto the Human Condition.

LHX

it seems like acknowledging and accepting the presence of unpredictable motion is a lot like submitting to the will of Allah


isnt there a bit of a trend for the most dedicated and intense scientists to eventually jump on the spiritual path?
neat hell

AFK

Quote from: LMNO on May 10, 2007, 04:17:55 PM
Well, yeah-- the original point of the PD being that Humans have been leaning towards Order for too long, so going ballistic with disorder is just a way of balancing the scales.


Also, we're running into problems again with the word "Chaos".  A scientist would see it as seemingly unpredictable motion, like a trail of cigarette smoke.  And they're trying to find rules of motion for it.

We, on the other hand, are taking the word "Chaos" in a much larger, almost metaphysical sense, and grafting it onto the Human Condition.

Which is kind of ironic because as you point out, a layman would probably better understand the Erisian concept of "chaos" vs. a scientific approach.  Yet, the same layman would probably tend to think of "chaos" in terms more closely aligned with the scientific definition(s).  

It would seem the biggest victory we could ever hope to acheive is to somehow, once-in-for-all get everyone on the same page when it comes to using the term "chaos".  Because as soon as you mention chaos, and one joe thinks x and another thinks y, you're already defeated before you begin.  
Cynicism is a blank check for failure.

LMNO

What's worse, I have found through experience that even when you specifically define and set out your meaning of "chaos", they ignore it, and keep going with their own definition.

LHX

neat hell

LMNO

But it doesn't deal with motion, per se.

It usually seems we deal with the chaos of the character, the chaos of human interaction with itself, its environment, and with others.  That's a kind of chaos that cannot be mathematically defined.

Well, maybe with game theory and probabilities, but not hard, fast numbers.

LHX

could it be that these chaotic elements of human interaction have their basis in the chaotic elements of mathematics?


hard fast numbers can be seen as a fallacy or inconsistency in and of themselves
neat hell

LMNO

In a word:   No.



Not until neurobiology and socioanthropology invents ways to numerize the process.

Cain

Quote from: LMNO on May 10, 2007, 04:45:39 PM
But it doesn't deal with motion, per se.

It usually seems we deal with the chaos of the character, the chaos of human interaction with itself, its environment, and with others.  That's a kind of chaos that cannot be mathematically defined.

Well, maybe with game theory and probabilities, but not hard, fast numbers.

Which is precisely why it fascinates me so much more than science.  Because its socially constructed rules, at best, and thus can be overturned with different starting axioms.

LMNO

yeah, me too.

By the way, I just got slammed at work, but remind me of the epiphany I had today that links teaching and education with Eris and Discordia, as they both bring confusion and self-doubt to a merehume.

Cramulus

Quote from: LHX on May 10, 2007, 05:47:21 PM
could it be that these chaotic elements of human interaction have their basis in the chaotic elements of mathematics?


hard fast numbers can be seen as a fallacy or inconsistency in and of themselves

yeah I don't think so. Math and numbers are man-made.

Of course the thing about fractals is that things up close look just like things far away. If you understand how monkeys mate, you basically understand how humans mate. The patterns found in real life are also found in mathematics, but I don't think one arose from the other.