Mindsculpting: Eris loves you.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

1. I have no problem with Discordians that want to see Eris as a bitch. The Greeks certainly seemed to have perceived her that way.

2. The Discordian Society as laid out in the PD claims that the "Greeks got It wrong", thus I have no problem with Discordians that want to see Eris as more of a Freedom Loving Prankster, Mal-2 and Omar certianly seem to have seen her that way.

That one knows ancient Greek mythology may be immaterial to "Discordianism", since Discordianism was initially based on Recent American Mythology, not Ancient Greek Mythology. It may provide additional insights to the individual's perceptions about Discordianism, but those insights may not necessary be useful for everyone.

It seems to me that perceiving Eris as either a happy hippy OR a bitch requires a subjective interpretation on the part of the Discordian. After all, one can point to the ancients and say "They said Eris sucked", or one can point to the PD and say "They said Eris didn't suck". To hold that either the ancient Greeks OR Mal and Omar have a better claim on Eris' personality seems like a silly argument since the Lovely Lady of Limbo probably doesn't exist in an objective sense (No offense Eris, I believe in you...   ).

From a perceptual sense... from a metaphorical sense... Chaos seems neither happy and hippy nor vindictive and bitchy. It simply exists. That we humans call this chaotic incident good or that chaotic incident bad speaks far more to our perception of the event, than the personality of a concept. Chaos isn't vindictive, since it doesn't have a brain... it isn't a hippy because it can't smell like Patchouli. Chaos is neither the horror that the Greeks saw, nor the absolute freedom that some Pinealists see.

That being said, I personally pay far more attention to the Eris of modern myth, than the Eris of ancient myth... but I don't ignore either of them.

[Bu🤠ns]

im sitting reading this amusing thread with my daughter on my lap. and we're playing and then i read and it's just an all around silly time.  what allows me to really enjoy this moment, with my daughter, is knowing deep down that life isn't always like this.  sometimes its amazing (like now) sometimes it harsh and full of strife (like last week) but its because i perceive Eris, strife in this way it allows me to appreciate this moment right now.  it might even bring a tear to my eye if i wasn't already smiling like an idiot.  i see no reason to emphasize optimisim because both happy times and bad times make each other.  and this is it.

[shadowfurry23]

im sitting reading this amusing thread with my daughter on my lap. and we're playing and then i read and it's just an all around silly time.  what allows me to really enjoy this moment, with my daughter, is knowing deep down that life isn't always like this.  sometimes its amazing (like now) sometimes it harsh and full of strife (like last week) but its because i perceive Eris, strife in this way it allows me to appreciate this moment right now.  it might even bring a tear to my eye if i wasn't already smiling like an idiot.  i see no reason to emphasize optimisim because both happy times and bad times make each other.  and this is it.

Also, you raise an interesting point re: optimism.  It occurs to me that optimism isn't essential to the core belief I tried to express.  I'll have to ponder that.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

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.

TITCM

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Perhaps, though, there is a reason to stress optimism. After all, I'd much rather have an optimist around when trying to figure out some particularly difficult problem, than a pessimist. Finding a solution seems easier to me, if the people I'm with are actively proposing ideas, rather than pointing out all the terrible things that might happen with anything I recommend.

I find this seems true in the reality I play in at work... enterprise credit card encryption, across multiple systems from SAP to AS400 to zSeries Mainframe etc etc etc would not have been possible if my team had been pessimists. We hit brick wall after brick wall and it was due to optimism, I think, that we succeeded. When we faced some insane problem, almost everyone on the team had some ideas about how it might get fixed. The few naysayers, that constantly wanted to pull the plug because it was just too hard/risky/technically infeasible were sidelined. The end result, when the Payment Card Industry came knocking to do an audit... we were told that we were way ahead of our peers in our compliance and our technical solutions... and a number of the pessimists no longer work here.

Optimism has its pitfalls... there seems little value in wide eyed wonder at the Emerald City, if its only green because of the glasses we're wearing. Without optimism, though, solutions to problems could be hard to come by.

A pessimist may offer two solutions (or none), if those fail, the pessimist isn't surprised and tends to close the book. An optimist may offer fifty solutions, twenty of which would require human nature to be fundamentally different than it, ten of which would require perpetual motion or the overthrow of the laws of physics... and finally, ten options that are worth trying.

But, that's eight options MORE than the pessimist came up with.

[shadowfurry23]

Perhaps, though, there is a reason to stress optimism. After all, I'd much rather have an optimist around when trying to figure out some particularly difficult problem, than a pessimist. Finding a solution seems easier to me, if the people I'm with are actively proposing ideas, rather than pointing out all the terrible things that might happen with anything I recommend.

I find this seems true in the reality I play in at work... enterprise credit card encryption, across multiple systems from SAP to AS400 to zSeries Mainframe etc etc etc would not have been possible if my team had been pessimists. We hit brick wall after brick wall and it was due to optimism, I think, that we succeeded. When we faced some insane problem, almost everyone on the team had some ideas about how it might get fixed. The few naysayers, that constantly wanted to pull the plug because it was just too hard/risky/technically infeasible were sidelined. The end result, when the Payment Card Industry came knocking to do an audit... we were told that we were way ahead of our peers in our compliance and our technical solutions... and a number of the pessimists no longer work here.

Optimism has its pitfalls... there seems little value in wide eyed wonder at the Emerald City, if its only green because of the glasses we're wearing. Without optimism, though, solutions to problems could be hard to come by.

An pessimist may offer two solutions (or none), if those fail, the pessimist isn't surprised and tends to close the book. An optimist may offer fifty solutions, twenty of which would require human nature to be fundamentally different than it, ten of which would require perpetual motion or the overthrow of the laws of physics... and finally, ten options that are worth trying.

But, that's eight options MORE than the pessimist came up with.

I like you.

[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.

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.

Why are you so convinced that your dogma is better than mine?

I LOVE the image of Eris as a kid with a magnifying glass. You want a momma, I want a mischievous, dangerous troublemaker.

You seem to be saying you want us all to be and want the same things... like you're looking for a sort of homogeneity that, frankly, has no place in MY Discordia.

Without Hodge, Podge is imbalanced, right? MY Eris is leaving a flaming bag of poop on YOUR Eris' doorstep, ringing the bell, and running away right now.

Don't tell me how to be Discordian. There are thousands of pinealist neo-flower-children who will gladly embrace your vision of Eris. There's really no reason for you to heckle the fifteen or so people who don't. You want something? Do it. Leave me the fuck out of it.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

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.

Why are you so convinced that your dogma is better than mine?

I LOVE the image of Eris as a kid with a magnifying glass. You want a momma, I want a mischievous, dangerous troublemaker.

You seem to be saying you want us all to be and want the same things... like you're looking for a sort of homogeneity that, frankly, has no place in MY Discordia.

Without Hodge, Podge is imbalanced, right? MY Eris is leaving a flaming bag of poop on YOUR Eris' doorstep, ringing the bell, and running away right now.

Don't tell me how to be Discordian. There are thousands of pinealist neo-flower-children who will gladly embrace your vision of Eris. There's really no reason for you to heckle the fifteen or so people who don't. You want something? Do it. Leave me the fuck out of it.

I'm not even sure those two versions of Eris are different. Eris of the Greeks wasn't a kid with a Magnifying Glass... but Eris of the PD, might be. Eris of the Greeks wasn't a Mommy, nor a person you wanted to love you... Eris of the PD might be.

The only flaw I see in either of the positions is to think that Eris IS one OR the other. Chaos, Discord and Confusion sometimes bring positive effects, sometimes negative ones... but hardly ever only one of those.

To claim that Eris IS one or the other, seems akin to claiming that fire IS good OR bad.

The wisest thing written in the PD... "This book is a mirror..."

[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.

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.

Justifications can't be axioms.  That's the whole POINT of an axiom - they don't need to be justified.  You just assert them.  I'd have no problem with #1 if you just said "The universe loves you."

I'm not saying that life isn't a gift.  I'm saying that receiving a gift doesn't imply receiving love.  Has everyone who has ever given you a present truly loved you?  Have you never given a present to someone just because it was expected of you?  The conclusion does not follow.

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

IT'S A CONDITION, OKAY?  STOP BEING SO FASCIST, YOU WITH YOUR 20/20 VISION AND LACK OF OCULAR DIARRHEA!

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

I drop a rock from a height.  It falls to the ground.  Is the driving force here gravitational attraction, or is it rocks on the ground?



And with regards to this whole Eris thing... if you want a mother figure just make up a mother figure.  Don't repurpose the goddess whose only notable role was starting a decades long war because she didn't get invited to a party.  People died, Shadow.  Women and children were raped and murdered and dragged from behind chariots and had their fields salted because she didn't get invited to a party.  Don't go redefining our words and names to fit something you like.

[hooplala]

Why not?  Hill and Thornley did.

[Golden Applesauce]

Why not?  Hill and Thornley did.

They need to get their act together as well.  Pope GA's Lexical Inquisition will not look fondly on those who abuse my language.

[hooplala]

 

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

And with regards to this whole Eris thing... if you want a mother figure just make up a mother figure.  Don't repurpose the goddess whose only notable role was starting a decades long war because she didn't get invited to a party.  People died, Shadow.  Women and children were raped and murdered and dragged from behind chariots and had their fields salted because she didn't get invited to a party.  Don't go redefining our words and names to fit something you like.

Are you sure?

A decades long war began because the Goddess Aphrodite was so vain that She was willing to cause war in order to have a mere mortal declare her to be the fairest.

Women and Children were raped and murdered because Hera, Athena and Aphrodite were SO vacuous and self-centered that they were unwilling to allow one of the others to be given an honor without a fight. The Trojan war persisted, because Paris took the wife of another man, a woman who had no love for him, except a false mask of love, as cast by a bitch of a Goddess.

Eris, our beloved hag, our hurricane with a nice cinnamon scented wind, our personification of Chaos NEVER causes the horrors of war, she never causes the terrible things that happen... she causes Chaos, Discord and Confusion. Others use that Chaos, Discord and Confusion to benefit themselves, sometimes leading to terrible consequences.

Who is the fairest one at a Wedding?
Who is the most beautiful one at a Wedding?
Who is the Prettiest One at a Wedding?

Who was the apple for?

Eris might have a great time watching the horrors that man inflicts upon himself, but to blame her as the cause... may be only true in some sense. After all... if they didn't like doing it, you'd think they would stop.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

  I'm not telling you how to live your life, just telling you how I choose to live mine, and suggesting that it might be beneficial to try it.  By doing so I'm also trying to make you question your assumptions about the world.

... every time someone explains how their view of the world is different, you trot out a line like "shit-stained glasses" or "crap-encrusted shammy" for their view. That's not open-minded, it's not respectful, and it's certainly not questioning YOUR assumptions about the world. If you want to help other people question their own prison bars, you need to first understand how to do it for yourself. There is a reason for the BIP: it's a single work, not a comprehensive catalog of Discordianism. There is a reason it says that you can also imagine it as a Golden Sphere of Possibility; because both approaches are valid. You can even do them at the same time. Even so, it doesn't have to represent YOUR Discordia; hell, I haven't even read the whole thing.

What you're doing is proselytizing. There are a ton of threads where people are challenging assumptions, and you're not participating in them. Instead, you're here, telling everyone who doesn't see the world the way you do that they're doin' it wrong.

You're also making a LOT of assumptions about what people's perception of Eris means in terms of their cynicism. I'm an incurable optimist, but I don't see Eris as a benevolent mother-figure. I don't look to a maternal Eris for comfort. I just don't need to. For me, she makes more sense as a mischievous agent of strife, both positive and negative, than as a milky nurturer.

[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.

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.

Why are you so convinced that your dogma is better than mine?

I LOVE the image of Eris as a kid with a magnifying glass. You want a momma, I want a mischievous, dangerous troublemaker.

You seem to be saying you want us all to be and want the same things... like you're looking for a sort of homogeneity that, frankly, has no place in MY Discordia.

Without Hodge, Podge is imbalanced, right? MY Eris is leaving a flaming bag of poop on YOUR Eris' doorstep, ringing the bell, and running away right now.

Don't tell me how to be Discordian. There are thousands of pinealist neo-flower-children who will gladly embrace your vision of Eris. There's really no reason for you to heckle the fifteen or so people who don't. You want something? Do it. Leave me the fuck out of it.

I'm not even sure those two versions of Eris are different. Eris of the Greeks wasn't a kid with a Magnifying Glass... but Eris of the PD, might be. Eris of the Greeks wasn't a Mommy, nor a person you wanted to love you... Eris of the PD might be.

The only flaw I see in either of the positions is to think that Eris IS one OR the other. Chaos, Discord and Confusion sometimes bring positive effects, sometimes negative ones... but hardly ever only one of those.

To claim that Eris IS one or the other, seems akin to claiming that fire IS good OR bad.

The wisest thing written in the PD... "This book is a mirror..."

Actually, I was positing that both are valid. Re-read my post. There is no physical Eris goddess-entity, and the simultaneous holding of a multiplicity of perceptions of Eris doesn't invalidate any of them. It's not an either-or... YOUR Eris can be all of them, if that floats your boat.

What I'm objecting to is the "YOUR Eris is negative! YOUR Eris is unnecessary! YOUR Eris is reflective of a pessimistic worldview! There is no reason to choose YOUR Eris, but there is a reason to choose MY Eris!" attitude that he's responding with to people who see differently from him.