Author Topic: The Emergent Conspiracy  (Read 15541 times)

Cramulus

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 131979
    • View Profile
    • Cramul.us
Re: The Emergent Conspiracy
« Reply #15 on: October 28, 2008, 04:52:15 pm »
furthermore, I think we'll see more of our energy come through the cracks created by false dualities. Like more Discordians will show up as the battle between Christianity and Atheism intensifies, leaving many religious-moderates and agnostics in the cold.

and THAT'S how I think the Flying Spaghetti Monster will enter the Discordian pantheon.

Manta Obscura

  • Ranked #1 Catholic Atheist by Good Morning, America
  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 8104
  • There are no spoons in this spork-centric society.
    • View Profile
Re: The Emergent Conspiracy
« Reply #16 on: October 28, 2008, 05:07:13 pm »
If all these movements are tributaries to the same stream, over time, we'll see memeplexes which combine all these elements. Just like how you can now learn about Eris by watching Nickelodeon, I think we'll soon see another irreligion which combines situationism, discordia, pastafarianism, and all that jazz into a NEW framework which encourages people to ding-dong-ditch doors of perception and culture.

The thought occurs to me that if new irreligions and other "alternate mainstream" mind structures begin popping up, it might be equally as likely for complementary "orthodox structures" to pop up as well.

For instance, as we see with a lot of new posters to the PD, people can take even the most spontaneous irreligions/mind structures and codify them into something static and dogmatic, reusing cliches and forming mantras out of what should be passing conversations. It's happening with some of the younger generations of Discordians, and it seems to be happening with other worldviews and mind structures as well. For instance, for every new group promoting radical liberal or New Age Christianity, there seems to be a fundamentalist group that pops up as well. For every logic-minded adherence to science-as-a-tool, you'll find one or two "Science [capital S] is the only religion!" folks. Across many (I won't say all, because there are probably a plethora of fields that are still not divided into the duality) fields, there seems to be a trend for the new ideas to develop and take hold of an individualized, creative spirit, only to be dogmatized - or sometimes reacted against - to form other subsets of groups that try to preserve "tradition."

I'm not trying to comment on this idea one way or the other; just making an observation. I suspect that if the memetic sources converge to create new irreligions, the old irreligions will do two things:

1) One subset will preserve the original spirit of the irreligion. In the case of Discordianism: spontaneity, creativity, self-determination/liberation, etc.
2) Another subset or subsets will arise which reuse old cliches, ideas, and mantras. In Discordianism: the little toe-rags that talk about "True Discordians (capital T and D)" and spout off Hill and Thornley's crap.

I don't think it's necessarily a 1:1 ratio between 1 and 2, but there does seem to be an emergent trend of orthodoxy that spreads in a similar memetic/viral fashion as the emergence of irreligious thought.
Everything I wish for myself, I wish for you also.

Bebek Sincap Ratatosk

  • Probably
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 8974
    • View Profile
Re: The Emergent Conspiracy
« Reply #17 on: October 28, 2008, 05:08:18 pm »
furthermore, I think we'll see more of our energy come through the cracks created by false dualities. Like more Discordians will show up as the battle between Christianity and Atheism intensifies, leaving many religious-moderates and agnostics in the cold.

and THAT'S how I think the Flying Spaghetti Monster will enter the Discordian pantheon.


THIS^

Which is why I changed my mind on Discordianism being more useful now than ever. The 60's seem to have spawned a lot of bullshit, but the dogmas of the hippy/newage bullshit was mostly internal, they weren't out trying to force recruitment for or against. Now, with the rise of a more dogmatic and evangelical movement, both on the side of Christianity and Atheism... a non-dogmatic alternative is desperately needed.

- I don't see race. I just see cars going around in a circle.

"Back in my day, crazy meant something. Now everyone is crazy" - Charlie Manson

LMNO

  • Lubricated and Rabid Lungfish of Impending Sexdoom™
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 87704
  • Internet Fuckweasel of Haunted Pork Dimensions.
    • View Profile
    • Earfatigue Productions: When it has to sound like you give a shit.
Re: The Emergent Conspiracy
« Reply #18 on: October 28, 2008, 05:09:07 pm »
If all these movements are tributaries to the same stream, over time, we'll see memeplexes which combine all these elements. Just like how you can now learn about Eris by watching Nickelodeon, I think we'll soon see another irreligion which combines situationism, discordia, pastafarianism, and all that jazz into a NEW framework which encourages people to ding-dong-ditch doors of perception and culture.

The thought occurs to me that if new irreligions and other "alternate mainstream" mind structures begin popping up, it might be equally as likely for complementary "orthodox structures" to pop up as well.

For instance, as we see with a lot of new posters to the PD, people can take even the most spontaneous irreligions/mind structures and codify them into something static and dogmatic, reusing cliches and forming mantras out of what should be passing conversations. It's happening with some of the younger generations of Discordians, and it seems to be happening with other worldviews and mind structures as well. For instance, for every new group promoting radical liberal or New Age Christianity, there seems to be a fundamentalist group that pops up as well. For every logic-minded adherence to science-as-a-tool, you'll find one or two "Science [capital S] is the only religion!" folks. Across many (I won't say all, because there are probably a plethora of fields that are still not divided into the duality) fields, there seems to be a trend for the new ideas to develop and take hold of an individualized, creative spirit, only to be dogmatized - or sometimes reacted against - to form other subsets of groups that try to preserve "tradition."

I'm not trying to comment on this idea one way or the other; just making an observation. I suspect that if the memetic sources converge to create new irreligions, the old irreligions will do two things:

1) One subset will preserve the original spirit of the irreligion. In the case of Discordianism: spontaneity, creativity, self-determination/liberation, etc.
2) Another subset or subsets will arise which reuse old cliches, ideas, and mantras. In Discordianism: the little toe-rags that talk about "True Discordians (capital T and D)" and spout off Hill and Thornley's crap.

I don't think it's necessarily a 1:1 ratio between 1 and 2, but there does seem to be an emergent trend of orthodoxy that spreads in a similar memetic/viral fashion as the emergence of irreligious thought.

INCREASE OF DISORDER = IMPOSITION OF ORDER.



PD wins again.

Manta Obscura

  • Ranked #1 Catholic Atheist by Good Morning, America
  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 8104
  • There are no spoons in this spork-centric society.
    • View Profile
Re: The Emergent Conspiracy
« Reply #19 on: October 28, 2008, 05:12:41 pm »
If all these movements are tributaries to the same stream, over time, we'll see memeplexes which combine all these elements. Just like how you can now learn about Eris by watching Nickelodeon, I think we'll soon see another irreligion which combines situationism, discordia, pastafarianism, and all that jazz into a NEW framework which encourages people to ding-dong-ditch doors of perception and culture.

The thought occurs to me that if new irreligions and other "alternate mainstream" mind structures begin popping up, it might be equally as likely for complementary "orthodox structures" to pop up as well.

For instance, as we see with a lot of new posters to the PD, people can take even the most spontaneous irreligions/mind structures and codify them into something static and dogmatic, reusing cliches and forming mantras out of what should be passing conversations. It's happening with some of the younger generations of Discordians, and it seems to be happening with other worldviews and mind structures as well. For instance, for every new group promoting radical liberal or New Age Christianity, there seems to be a fundamentalist group that pops up as well. For every logic-minded adherence to science-as-a-tool, you'll find one or two "Science [capital S] is the only religion!" folks. Across many (I won't say all, because there are probably a plethora of fields that are still not divided into the duality) fields, there seems to be a trend for the new ideas to develop and take hold of an individualized, creative spirit, only to be dogmatized - or sometimes reacted against - to form other subsets of groups that try to preserve "tradition."

I'm not trying to comment on this idea one way or the other; just making an observation. I suspect that if the memetic sources converge to create new irreligions, the old irreligions will do two things:

1) One subset will preserve the original spirit of the irreligion. In the case of Discordianism: spontaneity, creativity, self-determination/liberation, etc.
2) Another subset or subsets will arise which reuse old cliches, ideas, and mantras. In Discordianism: the little toe-rags that talk about "True Discordians (capital T and D)" and spout off Hill and Thornley's crap.

I don't think it's necessarily a 1:1 ratio between 1 and 2, but there does seem to be an emergent trend of orthodoxy that spreads in a similar memetic/viral fashion as the emergence of irreligious thought.

INCREASE OF DISORDER = IMPOSITION OF ORDER.



PD wins again.

 :)

I always say things longhand, it seems. Now I feel like a jackass for not thinking to just quote the PD. Although, perhaps the context helped to flesh things out.

Thanks for simplifying, LMNO.
Everything I wish for myself, I wish for you also.

the last yatto

  • really did
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 65629
  • Weeeeeeeeee
    • View Profile
Re: The Emergent Conspiracy
« Reply #20 on: November 02, 2008, 02:42:20 am »
What really worries me is Bobbies mixing it up with the neo-pagans and its starting to become "Bob" = god.
WHEN THEY DAMN WELL KNOW that God is an alien and the other is a mere salesmen.

wasn't there some principle about not being able to tell a real religion from some parody.
Look, asshole:  Your 'incomprehensible' act, your word-salad, your pinealism...It BORES ME.  I've been incomprehensible for so long, I TEACH IT TO MBA CANDIDATES.  So if you simply MUST talk about your pineal gland or happy children dancing in the wildflowers, go talk to Roger, because he digs that kind of shit

Manta Obscura

  • Ranked #1 Catholic Atheist by Good Morning, America
  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 8104
  • There are no spoons in this spork-centric society.
    • View Profile
Re: The Emergent Conspiracy
« Reply #21 on: November 03, 2008, 02:04:22 pm »

wasn't there some principle about not being able to tell a real religion from some parody.

Nope.
Everything I wish for myself, I wish for you also.

Golden Applesauce

  • Token Apologist
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 22325
  • Where does this text go?
    • View Profile
Re: The Emergent Conspiracy
« Reply #22 on: November 03, 2008, 02:46:40 pm »
I'm not trying to comment on this idea one way or the other; just making an observation. I suspect that if the memetic sources converge to create new irreligions, the old irreligions will do two things:

1) One subset will preserve the original spirit of the irreligion. In the case of Discordianism: spontaneity, creativity, self-determination/liberation, etc.
2) Another subset or subsets will preserve the original spirit of the irreligion. In the case of Discordianism: Law of Fives, 23, Eris, Hill and Thornley's crap, lots of drugs, etc.

Fix'd.

People have this idea that they need to 'preserve the original' with things a lot. Y'know, We need to go back to the original spirit of the Bible/Buddha's Teachings/scientific inquiry/capitalism etc.  I'd rather make a new spirit, and have it be based on all the lessons learned in the past, rather than trying to recreate a (probably fictional) golden age.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2008, 02:49:46 pm by GA »
Q: How regularly do you hire 8th graders?
A: We have hired a number of FORMER 8th graders.

Adios

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 96724
    • View Profile
Re: The Emergent Conspiracy
« Reply #23 on: November 03, 2008, 02:57:49 pm »
I'm not trying to comment on this idea one way or the other; just making an observation. I suspect that if the memetic sources converge to create new irreligions, the old irreligions will do two things:

1) One subset will preserve the original spirit of the irreligion. In the case of Discordianism: spontaneity, creativity, self-determination/liberation, etc.
2) Another subset or subsets will preserve the original spirit of the irreligion. In the case of Discordianism: Law of Fives, 23, Eris, Hill and Thornley's crap, lots of drugs, etc.

Fix'd.

People have this idea that they need to 'preserve the original' with things a lot. Y'know, We need to go back to the original spirit of the Bible/Buddha's Teachings/scientific inquiry/capitalism etc.  I'd rather make a new spirit, and have it be based on all the lessons learned in the past, rather than trying to recreate a (probably fictional) golden age.


The original was merely an opening of the door. It's up to us to build the interior.

Golden Applesauce

  • Token Apologist
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 22325
  • Where does this text go?
    • View Profile
Re: The Emergent Conspiracy
« Reply #24 on: November 03, 2008, 03:00:05 pm »
I'm not trying to comment on this idea one way or the other; just making an observation. I suspect that if the memetic sources converge to create new irreligions, the old irreligions will do two things:

1) One subset will preserve the original spirit of the irreligion. In the case of Discordianism: spontaneity, creativity, self-determination/liberation, etc.
2) Another subset or subsets will preserve the original spirit of the irreligion. In the case of Discordianism: Law of Fives, 23, Eris, Hill and Thornley's crap, lots of drugs, etc.

Fix'd.

People have this idea that they need to 'preserve the original' with things a lot. Y'know, We need to go back to the original spirit of the Bible/Buddha's Teachings/scientific inquiry/capitalism etc.  I'd rather make a new spirit, and have it be based on all the lessons learned in the past, rather than trying to recreate a (probably fictional) golden age.


The original was merely an opening of the door. It's up to us to build the interior.

I reject the notion that those who came before us had some unique ability to open doors.  You can build your own doorframe, it's really not that hard.  Be your own guru.
Q: How regularly do you hire 8th graders?
A: We have hired a number of FORMER 8th graders.

Manta Obscura

  • Ranked #1 Catholic Atheist by Good Morning, America
  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 8104
  • There are no spoons in this spork-centric society.
    • View Profile
Re: The Emergent Conspiracy
« Reply #25 on: November 03, 2008, 03:17:49 pm »

People have this idea that they need to 'preserve the original' with things a lot. Y'know, We need to go back to the original spirit of the Bible/Buddha's Teachings/scientific inquiry/capitalism etc.  I'd rather make a new spirit, and have it be based on all the lessons learned in the past, rather than trying to recreate a (probably fictional) golden age.

I hadn't intended or meant to imply any recreation of a golden age, nor any return to the doctrine of a previous era. Instead, I meant exactly what I said: that the "original spirit" of Discordianism was one of creativity, self-determination and liberation. Those practitioners used certain memetic devices to express those three internalized ideals and, in so doing, did "make a new spirit" for their age.

When I talked about the divide which would likely arise, I was referring to the likelihood of a second group which would allow those three virtues to stagnate because they would be caught up with the tools used to express them: the memetic devices. In effect, the "original spirit," by which I am simply referring to the three aforementioned virtues, would be sacrificed to create a new and fundamentalist ideology that reuses the tools of the previous practitioners but which, unfortunately, does not travel towards the same ideals of self-liberation. Ergo, when you expressed your preference for making "a new spirit, and have it be based on all the lessons learned in the past, rather than trying to recreate a (probably fictional) golden age," you were not saying anything contradictory to my conception of the (A) subset of the irreligion. Rather, your preference is a preference for the continuation of the ideals of dynamism which I attributed to the first, non-fundamental subset of Discordianism. In contradistinction to this, the second subset creates a religion/irreligion dedicated to internalized ideals which are far different from the spirit of the original, and so is not a "preservation of the original spirit of the irreligion."

So:

I'm not trying to comment on this idea one way or the other; just making an observation. I suspect that if the memetic sources converge to create new irreligions, the old irreligions will do two things:

1) One subset will preserve the original spirit of the irreligion. In the case of Discordianism: spontaneity, creativity, self-determination/liberation, etc.
2) Another subset or subsets will preserve the original spirit of the irreligion. In the case of Discordianism: Law of Fives, 23, Eris, Hill and Thornley's crap, lots of drugs, etc.

Fix'd.

People have this idea that they need to 'preserve the original' with things a lot. Y'know, We need to go back to the original spirit of the Bible/Buddha's Teachings/scientific inquiry/capitalism etc.  I'd rather make a new spirit, and have it be based on all the lessons learned in the past, rather than trying to recreate a (probably fictional) golden age.

Broken.
Everything I wish for myself, I wish for you also.

Adios

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 96724
    • View Profile
Re: The Emergent Conspiracy
« Reply #26 on: November 03, 2008, 04:09:55 pm »
I'm not trying to comment on this idea one way or the other; just making an observation. I suspect that if the memetic sources converge to create new irreligions, the old irreligions will do two things:

1) One subset will preserve the original spirit of the irreligion. In the case of Discordianism: spontaneity, creativity, self-determination/liberation, etc.
2) Another subset or subsets will preserve the original spirit of the irreligion. In the case of Discordianism: Law of Fives, 23, Eris, Hill and Thornley's crap, lots of drugs, etc.

Fix'd.

People have this idea that they need to 'preserve the original' with things a lot. Y'know, We need to go back to the original spirit of the Bible/Buddha's Teachings/scientific inquiry/capitalism etc.  I'd rather make a new spirit, and have it be based on all the lessons learned in the past, rather than trying to recreate a (probably fictional) golden age.


The original was merely an opening of the door. It's up to us to build the interior.

I reject the notion that those who came before us had some unique ability to open doors.  You can build your own doorframe, it's really not that hard.  Be your own guru.

I never implied they had unique abilities, just that they opened that door.

Bebek Sincap Ratatosk

  • Probably
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 8974
    • View Profile
Re: The Emergent Conspiracy
« Reply #27 on: November 03, 2008, 04:33:15 pm »
What?

Golden Age of Discordianism?

NOW IS THE GOLDEN AGE.

Look around. At the beginning of the 60's there were Discordians, maybe 10, 20, maybe even 50. By the end of the 60's we'd gotten up to maybe a couple hundred people that had read the PD...

The mid-70's brought RAW and a bigger bullhorn to shout bullshit through. So the numbers grew, somewhat. The subgeniuses formed separately and the two converged into a decent rivalry, but overall, the numbers of both groups (as far as we ca tell) were small. According to RAW, in a discussion about Discordianism, even through the 80's mosbunal Discordians tended to be neo-pagans that included Eris as a joke/metaphor/reminder not to be serious... whatever. Only a few crazy ass motherfuckers, like Bob and Omar, actually called themselves Erisian or Discordian, primarily.

Now, look at this board and other Discordian forums... even the pineal ones. This is Discordianism Becoming, be it through new memes or old memes, through creative independent thinking or through laughing at the jokes of other people. Now is The Age of Eris, not then, then was the seed planting, now is the first harvest!

In the mid-80's, even in the early 90's, what religious discussion groups would seriously include Discordianism as a valid system? How many more such groups are in existence today?

In the mid-80's, how many people had heard of Discordianism? How many have today?

We're just getting up a head of steam, going back doesn't get us to a golden age, it gets us to the train station we just left!

I have a greater hope for Discordianism, than some either or dichotomy between those that are "Doing it Right" and those that are "Doing It Wrong". The fact that they are Doing It, however they think best, is as close to right as I think we'll get.

"Like What You Like, Enjoy What You Enjoy and Don't Take Crap From Anyone" - Guns and Dope Party motto

If they like Fnording 23's and OMGZLOLO5's, then so be it. If they like the BiP and all of our philosophical wanking here, then so be it.

The original spirit of Discordianism, in my opinion, has a lot more to do with how you play with your own head... than with how other people play with theirs.
- I don't see race. I just see cars going around in a circle.

"Back in my day, crazy meant something. Now everyone is crazy" - Charlie Manson

Cramulus

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 131979
    • View Profile
    • Cramul.us
Re: The Emergent Conspiracy
« Reply #28 on: November 03, 2008, 08:06:52 pm »
:mittens:

Manta Obscura

  • Ranked #1 Catholic Atheist by Good Morning, America
  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 8104
  • There are no spoons in this spork-centric society.
    • View Profile
Re: The Emergent Conspiracy
« Reply #29 on: November 03, 2008, 08:45:06 pm »
What?

Golden Age of Discordianism?

NOW IS THE GOLDEN AGE.

Look around. At the beginning of the 60's there were Discordians, maybe 10, 20, maybe even 50. By the end of the 60's we'd gotten up to maybe a couple hundred people that had read the PD...

The mid-70's brought RAW and a bigger bullhorn to shout bullshit through. So the numbers grew, somewhat. The subgeniuses formed separately and the two converged into a decent rivalry, but overall, the numbers of both groups (as far as we ca tell) were small. According to RAW, in a discussion about Discordianism, even through the 80's mosbunal Discordians tended to be neo-pagans that included Eris as a joke/metaphor/reminder not to be serious... whatever. Only a few crazy ass motherfuckers, like Bob and Omar, actually called themselves Erisian or Discordian, primarily.

Now, look at this board and other Discordian forums... even the pineal ones. This is Discordianism Becoming, be it through new memes or old memes, through creative independent thinking or through laughing at the jokes of other people. Now is The Age of Eris, not then, then was the seed planting, now is the first harvest!

In the mid-80's, even in the early 90's, what religious discussion groups would seriously include Discordianism as a valid system? How many more such groups are in existence today?

In the mid-80's, how many people had heard of Discordianism? How many have today?

We're just getting up a head of steam, going back doesn't get us to a golden age, it gets us to the train station we just left!

I have a greater hope for Discordianism, than some either or dichotomy between those that are "Doing it Right" and those that are "Doing It Wrong". The fact that they are Doing It, however they think best, is as close to right as I think we'll get.

"Like What You Like, Enjoy What You Enjoy and Don't Take Crap From Anyone" - Guns and Dope Party motto

If they like Fnording 23's and OMGZLOLO5's, then so be it. If they like the BiP and all of our philosophical wanking here, then so be it.

The original spirit of Discordianism, in my opinion, has a lot more to do with how you play with your own head... than with how other people play with theirs.

This is beautiful, Rat. However, for the purposes of making a more universal quote that I can apply to my journal of quotes, I think I'll make a small change to one of your lines:

"Doing It Right," in my opinion, has a lot more to do with how you play with your own head... than with how other people play with theirs.

*Added to my corkboard*
Everything I wish for myself, I wish for you also.