Mindsculpting: Eris loves you.

[shadowfurry23]

 Much of the practices of the numerous magick, religions, cult and self-help schools are designed to create within the self a belief that is useful - either to the believer or to the community promoting the belief.  While sometimes based in objective and measurable facts or supporting evidence, more generally these groups utilize something called faith which is to say a belief that is grounded in belief.  This curious process, not unlike pulling oneself up by one's own bootstraps, can be utilized by the Adept to effect positive change.

Know this: Belief is a powerful tool.  What we believe strongly affects how we perceive the world, and how we act in response to it.  It naturally follows that certain beliefs are useful for certain purposes - they confer a benefit that makes them worthwhile. 

Like many in this modern age, I have frequently described myself as "spiritual, but not religious."  By this I mean that I place value in certain intangibles - a generalized positive feeling for other beings, an appreciation of the complexity of the design of the world in which we live, a sense of connectedness to humanity and the universe as a whole - without wanting to be tied down to the structures of established religions that give those thoughts and feelings a more concrete form, mostly due to the perceived negatives that accompany those religions.

Nevertheless, having the ability to address one's spiritual needs in a more concrete way is one of the primary advantages of religion. Discordianism is, among other things, a tool for constructing structures and beliefs to this end.  What follows is the construction/deconstruction of a belief that I hold to be True.  I present it in the hope that it may be useful, and True, for you as well.

First, some basic points:

1. The universe loves you. This can be reasonably concluded from the fact that you exist at all. You have been given a gift: the opportunity to explore, to play, to grow and to be happy.

2. It is useful to feel loved.  Anyone who has ever been hugged by anyone ever knows the joy this brings. This is fairly straightforward.

3. It is more useful to be loved by a person than an abstract force.  'Your mom loves you' has a stronger meaning than 'someone loves you' and is easier to connect with and to feel.  Further, when you know your mother (for example) loves you, you also know she continues to even when she's not in your sight.

4. It is impossible to prove or disprove the existence of God, but it may be useful to assume it.

5. Defining God as a creator, a Prime Mover, that which is responsible for existence of the universe and as a general generative force, it is reasonable to view this force as female in character. Creativity and the generation of life is associated with mother/female and this is an appropriate connection for the human mind to grasp.

6. Merely by looking around oneself, it is relatively apparent that the driving forces of the world are those of change. 

  With these ideas in mind, it should be apparent that it is appropriate and useful to personify 'God' as Eris: She fits the bill really very nicely.  Making this attribution allows several associated philosophical extensions and explanations that fit well within the human mind and provide a good model with which to view the world, and delivers a number of benefits.

  Primarily: Eris loves you.  The ability to see and feel this can be a great and constant comfort.

Having a part in all creation, all things can be thought of as Eris' children and She their mother.  Like any good mother She doesn't play favourites and wants you to work stuff out for yourself; She wants you to better yourself and Think For Yourself.  Don't you want to make your Mother proud of you?  Of course you do.

Eris is like unto the mother that when confronted by a child saying "My brother keeps hitting me!" says "Well, make him stop."  The whole idea of answering prayers would be much like giving favour to the pleading child rather than the rest of the kids. No mom likes to be whined at either - prayer as a result is rarely effective and occasionally dangerous.  That isn't to say you shouldn't tell Her that you love her now and again, but there's no reason to belabor the point: your Mother knows you love Her as long as you say it now and again.

None of this is to say She is utterly benevolent- what mother doesn't fuck with her kids now and then?  Eris is a little weird and a little crazy after all - much like the universe.  But no matter how weird She gets, She still loves you.

It is useful to know that.

Standard disclaimers: This works pretty well for me, and that's all I can say for sure.  I am very aware it could be better written; I prefer a more Socratic dialog.  You mileage may vary.  Not available in all regions.  The management is not responsible for improper use, or for that matter for proper use.  Clean your room, eat your vegetables and remember to walk the damn dog so he doesn't shit on the carpet again.

Hail Eris.

[hooplala]

I mostly like it.  I can see how it would be helpful in situations which lead to depression or the like.

[shadowfurry23]

I mostly like it.  I can see how it would be helpful in situations which lead to depression or the like.

LOL is that something you say to Christian evangelicals too?  If not you should try, it would be good for lulz!

I think of it more as a general life-enhancement myself.  It neatly assembles several pieces of my psyche.

[hooplala]

I tend not to speak to evangelicals at all if I can help it, but I will try it.

Did it seem condescending?  I didn't intend it to this time.

[shadowfurry23]

I tend not to speak to evangelicals at all if I can help it, but I will try it.

Did it seem condescending?  I didn't intend it to this time.

  Nah, s'cool.

I'm hoping for more feedback tho'.  Also, my next task is to distill this down to a small pamphlet.

[Golden Applesauce]

I take issue with point #1.  Not that I disagree with it (because whether it's true or not irrelevant - that would be asking the wrong question) but that your justification for it is bogus.  It's OK to just assert things as axioms.

"Love" is pretty vague, but it seems to be something that is restricted only to intelligent creatures, or creatures with souls, depending on the belief system.  You don't argue that the universe falls into either category, so I can't see how you can make the claim that the universe is capable of love, much less actually loves you.

Ignoring that for a moment, I really, really hate riffs on the "Your birth is evidence that your purpose is necessary" line.  Really?  How so?  Parents have children they don't love all the time.  Frankenstein certainly didn't love his monster.  Why should the universe be any different?

This isn't to say that it might not be useful to believe that the universe loves you, but don't try to justify it with shitty logic.

Also point 6.  The driving force of the universe isn't change; the effect of the driving force in the universe is (very often) change.  Maximization of entropy is a good candidate for driving force, but that's neither here nor there.  You might state the the nature of the universe is change, or that change is the only constant, but change is a result, not a cause.

And neither is Eris the patron goddess of change.  She's the goddess of conflict and strife.  A eternally balanced unchanging civil war would be right up her alley.

I also have a hard time visualizing Eris as a mother figure.  If she sleeps with anyone, you know it would only be to cause jealousy in somebody else.  If Eris says a kind word to you, it would only be to make her other thousand starving children hate you for it.  If Eris gives you fruit, it's only because she knows it will eventually lead to your favorite city getting sacked.  As a mother, Eris would be at least as likely to just roll over onto you that help you find food.  (Not in the 'tough love' sense, but in the 'starving the baby' sense.)

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I honestly see Eris as an archetype who "loves us" in the same sense that a kid with a magnifying glass loves an anthill.

Not that it makes Eris evil... just not motherly, per se. But everyone can develop their own sense of Eris.

[Cain]

The Universe or deities having any sort of opinions on me scares the shit out of me.

Its like knowing the chief of operations at the CIA, or Osama Bin Laden, knows and takes a personal interest in your life.

[hooplala]

I believe Shadowfurry is speaking more about Hill and Thornley's revision of the deity of Eris, particularly when she tells the population:

I have come to tell you that you are free. Many ages ago, My consciousness left man, that he might develop himself. I return to find this development approaching completion, but hindered by fear and misunderstanding. You have built for yourselves psychic suits of armorm and clad in them, your vision is restricted, your movements are clumsy and painful, your skin is bruised, and your spirit is broiled in the sun. I am chaos. I am the substance from which your artists and scientists build rhythyms. I am the spirit with which your children and clowns laugh in happy anarchy. I am chaos. I am alive, and I tell you that you are free.

[Triple Zero]

the problem i have is with point 5:

> 5. Defining God as a creator, a Prime Mover, that which is responsible for existence of the universe and as a general generative force, it is reasonable to
> view this force as female in character. Creativity and the generation of life is associated with mother/female and this is an appropriate connection for the
> human mind to grasp.

in symbology i know, these are mostly male forces: the Prime Mover, generative force, creativity. the male force provides the stimulus and the primal movement, and then the female functions as a recepticle and guiding principle, giving Form and Function to the undirected force. "generation of life" happens when the energy bounces back and forth between the male and female principle, becoming a complex system of interlocking forces, neither male (stimulus) nor female (receptive).
and (imo!) "God" is neither of these, but the thing that allows* forces to interlock at all and it loves you in the sense that it allows* desire and pleasure (in the most abstract senses of the words) to exist, which allows* the interlocking forces to become a complex system in order to act upon this desire for pleasure. that's the loving thing.

*i say "allows", i could have said "causes", it's the same thing at that level.

this is my current idea though, next month it may probably be something different (like it was last month). Eris, however, is just a sort of metaphor to me.

[shadowfurry23]

I take issue with point #1.  Not that I disagree with it (because whether it's true or not irrelevant - that would be asking the wrong question) but that your justification for it is bogus.  It's OK to just assert things as axioms.

"Love" is pretty vague, but it seems to be something that is restricted only to intelligent creatures, or creatures with souls, depending on the belief system.  You don't argue that the universe falls into either category, so I can't see how you can make the claim that the universe is capable of love, much less actually loves you.

Ignoring that for a moment, I really, really hate riffs on the "Your birth is evidence that your purpose is necessary" line.  Really?  How so?  Parents have children they don't love all the time.  Frankenstein certainly didn't love his monster.  Why should the universe be any different?

This isn't to say that it might not be useful to believe that the universe loves you, but don't try to justify it with shitty logic.

LOL!  My justification is an axiom itself.  Are you trying to say that life isn't a gift?  Why do you say that exactly?  What is it, if not a gift?  The answer probably says more about you than about the universe.

Also, go back and read my first paragraph again.  You seem to have chosen a belief system wherein the universe is not capable of love and/or does not love you, for no particular reason.  I have chosen one where it is and does, for a reason.

You might consider not that I am wearing rose-coloured glasses, but perhaps that you are wearing shit-stained ones.

Also point 6.  The driving force of the universe isn't change; the effect of the driving force in the universe is (very often) change.  Maximization of entropy is a good candidate for driving force, but that's neither here nor there.  You might state the the nature of the universe is change, or that change is the only constant, but change is a result, not a cause.

  chicken/egg

And neither is Eris the patron goddess of change.  She's the goddess of conflict and strife.  A eternally balanced unchanging civil war would be right up her alley.

I also have a hard time visualizing Eris as a mother figure.  If she sleeps with anyone, you know it would only be to cause jealousy in somebody else.  If Eris says a kind word to you, it would only be to make her other thousand starving children hate you for it.  If Eris gives you fruit, it's only because she knows it will eventually lead to your favorite city getting sacked.  As a mother, Eris would be at least as likely to just roll over onto you that help you find food.  (Not in the 'tough love' sense, but in the 'starving the baby' sense.)

I'm not exactly sure where you're getting that from - certainly not from the book for which the site is named:

I am chaos. I am the substance from which your artists and scientists build rhythms. I am the spirit with which your children and clowns laugh in happy anarchy. I am chaos. I am alive, and I tell you that you are free.

Eris is whatever you want her to be.  It may be worth asking yourself why you want her to be an agent of strife and conflict rather than an agent of joyous chaos.

(edited for spelling and a minor content change.  it's early and i need caffeine.)

[shadowfurry23]

I honestly see Eris as an archetype who "loves us" in the same sense that a kid with a magnifying glass loves an anthill.

Not that it makes Eris evil... just not motherly, per se. But everyone can develop their own sense of Eris.

This seems to be a pervasive opinion on PD.com, and I find it sad and a little irritating really.  I blame the Subgenii, cynical motherfuckers that they are.

As stated above and by BAWHEED and I, it certainly isn't the view of Eris presented in the book for which this site is named.  It seems to borrow more from the classical Greek idea of Eris, but there's no good reason to choose that view over the other.

Are you perhaps a victim of indigestion?

This too is my problem with BIP - there's very little joy in it.  Hill and Thornley were clowns, pointing out the absurdity of life in a fun way, and that for me is a large part of the point of Discordianism.  "The Enlightened Take Things Lightly."  Cynicism is easy, and pervasive in our culture, and frankly I'm kinda sick of it.  It benefits no one - even the cynic who uses it as a shield is only admitting the crappiness of life and using their cynicism as a shield against it.

Ditch the shield, and instead take up the sword.

[shadowfurry23]

the problem i have is with point 5:

> 5. Defining God as a creator, a Prime Mover, that which is responsible for existence of the universe and as a general generative force, it is reasonable to
> view this force as female in character. Creativity and the generation of life is associated with mother/female and this is an appropriate connection for the
> human mind to grasp.

in symbology i know, these are mostly male forces: the Prime Mover, generative force, creativity. the male force provides the stimulus and the primal movement, and then the female functions as a recepticle and guiding principle, giving Form and Function to the undirected force. "generation of life" happens when the energy bounces back and forth between the male and female principle, becoming a complex system of interlocking forces, neither male (stimulus) nor female (receptive).
and (imo!) "God" is neither of these, but the thing that allows* forces to interlock at all and it loves you in the sense that it allows* desire and pleasure (in the most abstract senses of the words) to exist, which allows* the interlocking forces to become a complex system in order to act upon this desire for pleasure. that's the loving thing.

*i say "allows", i could have said "causes", it's the same thing at that level.

this is my current idea though, next month it may probably be something different (like it was last month). Eris, however, is just a sort of metaphor to me.

  Interesting.  Do you think it would carry more weight if I shifted that part to talk more about creation and generation as related to birth and symbols more solidly related to the female?  I don't want to get too trapped into that whole Earth Mother riff though, since people are used to rejecting that out of hand and out of habit as hippy-dippy crap.

[hooplala]

I honestly see Eris as an archetype who "loves us" in the same sense that a kid with a magnifying glass loves an anthill.

Not that it makes Eris evil... just not motherly, per se. But everyone can develop their own sense of Eris.

This seems to be a pervasive opinion on PD.com, and I find it sad and a little irritating really.  I blame the Subgenii, cynical motherfuckers that they are.

As stated above and by BAWHEED and I, it certainly isn't the view of Eris presented in the book for which this site is named.  It seems to borrow more from the classical Greek idea of Eris, but there's no good reason to choose that view over the other.

Are you perhaps a victim of indigestion?

This too is my problem with BIP - there's very little joy in it.  Hill and Thornley were clowns, pointing out the absurdity of life in a fun way, and that for me is a large part of the point of Discordianism.  "The Enlightened Take Things Lightly."  Cynicism is easy, and pervasive in our culture, and frankly I'm kinda sick of it.  It benefits no one - even the cynic who uses it as a shield is only admitting the crappiness of life and using their cynicism as a shield against it.

Ditch the shield, and instead take up the sword.

Don't get me wrong... I'm not all warm and snugly, I accept BOTH views of Eris as true.

One could just as easily make the argument that optimism benefits no one.  It's a matter of perspective.  Keep in mind the Sacred Chao, Shadowfurry... both are equally true, cynicism and optimism, and both are equally ridiculous.  If you favour one view you ignore the bigger picture, and to quote Bernard Jaffe: "You don't want to miss out on the big picture, do you?"

[Cramulus]

I appreciate this peek at your reality tunnel. Few people have well-formed axioms supporting their belief structures, so I applaud that. (note that I think they're kind of unnecessary, too, but very useful when you actually want to discuss them)


It's not for me though. I'm trying to break the habit of personifying the universe. My current conception of Eris treats her sort of like a meta-component of all ordered systems. I'm still building on that, and trying to figure out what that means and how to relate to it. But I'm not really shopping around for a god head right now.