What the shit is all of this?

[Manta Obscura]

Serious question: is the whole point just that discordia is nonsense, or is there something more to it?  I've been into the eastern religions for a while now, as well as the conspiracy/23 stuff, for a while now.  So, what's up with discordianism?

Sarcastic answer: Eastern religions concern themselves with unraveling the riddle of one hand clapping. Discordia concerns itself with tightening the knot of the concept of one hand fapping.

Egghead answer: Discordianism arose as a conscious attempt for a certain breed of person to break themselves and others out of conditioned, (self) destructive, narcissistic, painful, degrading, and self-defeating states of mind, seeing such states of mind as arising as the end-product of logic (the science of finding inner consistencies among concepts) applied against untested or unknowable - and therefore assumed - axioms. Discordia uses absurdity and "nonsense" as a way of breaking the links in the aforementioned states and allowing the user to transform his or her personal thoughtspace and affect their life with a scope of artistry that they feel brings greater wellness to themselves and others.

Example: Theo-logic told me, for the first two decades of my life, that I would burn in Hell unless I made my personality congruent with its proscription of a godly follower. Politico-logic told and continues to tell me that the world consists of bands of adversaries against my nation-tribe, and I must pick sub-tribes (political parties) and tune my spirits to love the accidental formulations of my nation-state (patriotism). Econo-logic tells me that I must work and toil and scrape a third of my waking hours every day until decrepitude, that consumption of pre-fabricated and pre-packaged sets of goods and information make up the whole of existence and purpose. As a result I, and some others like me, spent far too long feeling guilty, fearful, and stress-broken, before deciding to take an alternative path. Now I make dick jokes about the Holy Spirit, mail boxes of rocks to my Congressman, and plaster my office with felt-cutouts of Kirby.

All problems solved with Discordia? Hell no. The game's still crooked, but at least I have a better hand.

[omnihil]

I'm no pope, but I've read Principia Discordia once as a philosophy student, and then read it again recently when I was more into spirituality and magical phenomenon.  The book served as an excellent read when I was in both states of mind.  It has a light-hearted, yet powerful effect when read as a philosophy for ontological purposes.  And similarly it serves as an excellent guide to people exploring consciousness in both the psychedelic and magical/spiritual side of things.

A fundamental thing to focus on, is that there isn't really many fundamental things to focus on.  To say that there is something that is "Correct" and it is up to us to continually explain how correct it is, is insanity.  All we truly know, is that we are here trying to figure out why we're here.  We are simply parts of the Universe, and we are trying to discover the origins of the Universe, so therefore, one could say, that the Universe is trying to discover itself.  Thus, it may not be entirely absurd to say, that if you focus on discovering your true heart, rather than listening to everybody else as far as the "Correct" way to be, then maybe you're doing the Universe a favor.  This is, at least, the reason I perceive that most Discordians agree that Eris (Goddess of Chaos) is the ultimate law.  A law of lawlessness cannot be thrown.

[omnihil]

I'm no pope, but I've read Principia Discordia once as a philosophy student, and then read it again recently when I was more into spirituality and magical phenomenon.  The book served as an excellent read when I was in both states of mind.  It has a light-hearted, yet powerful effect when read as a philosophy for ontological purposes.  And similarly it serves as an excellent guide to people exploring consciousness in both the psychedelic and magical/spiritual side of things.

A fundamental thing to focus on, is that there isn't really many fundamental things to focus on.  To say that there is something that is "Correct" and it is up to us to continually explain how correct it is, is insanity.  All we truly know, is that we are here trying to figure out why we're here.  We are simply parts of the Universe, and we are trying to discover the origins of the Universe, so therefore, one could say, that the Universe is trying to discover itself.  Thus, it may not be entirely absurd to say, that if you focus on discovering your true heart, rather than listening to everybody else as far as the "Correct" way to be, then maybe you're doing the Universe a favor.  This is, at least, the reason I perceive that most Discordians agree that Eris (Goddess of Chaos) is the ultimate law.  A law of lawlessness cannot be thrown.

Also, don't let me tell you what this is about.  I was simply sharing a cup of coffee with you just then.  There are things beyond our comprehension, and when you're okay with that, it's a good start.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

This is, at least, the reason I perceive that most Discordians agree that Eris (Goddess of Chaos) is the ultimate law.

It was good of you to explain who Eris is, otherwise I might have been confused.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

There are things beyond our comprehension, and when you're okay with that, it's a good start.

Name one.

[maphdet]

This thread only brings one one thing to mind...once saw a sign, it read, "you bet your ass we're paranoid"

Sorry in advance if that doesn't help any to the Op, that's just my 2 cents, as some people™ say.

[LMNO]

There are things beyond our comprehension, and when you're okay with that, it's a good start.

Name one.

Well played, sir.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

There are things beyond our comprehension, and when you're okay with that, it's a good start.

Name one.

Well played, sir.

I've always hated that "There are things man wasn't meant to know" shit.  SCIENCE, JACKASSES! 

[Faust]

There are things beyond our comprehension, and when you're okay with that, it's a good start.

Name one.

Well played, sir.

I've always hated that "There are things man wasn't meant to know" shit.  SCIENCE, JACKASSES!

What is the exact mass/energy and position of this particle Alex?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

There are things beyond our comprehension, and when you're okay with that, it's a good start.

Name one.

Well played, sir.

I've always hated that "There are things man wasn't meant to know" shit.  SCIENCE, JACKASSES!

What is the exact mass/energy and position of this particle Alex?

I didn't say there are things we aren't able to OBSERVE.  We KNOW that we can't observe both at the same time.

[Faust]

There are things beyond our comprehension, and when you're okay with that, it's a good start.

Name one.

Well played, sir.

I've always hated that "There are things man wasn't meant to know" shit.  SCIENCE, JACKASSES!

What is the exact mass/energy and position of this particle Alex?

I didn't say there are things we aren't able to OBSERVE.  We KNOW that we can't observe both at the same time.

That's true and even then we can put upper and lower limits on both of those to a reasonable limit.

And any time unknowns in science are identified people are immediately working on changing that.

[LMNO]

I was going in the direction of the "If we can't comprehend it, how can we comprehend that we can't comprehend it" rabbit hole, but yeah. 

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I was going in the direction of the "If we can't comprehend it, how can we comprehend that we can't comprehend it" rabbit hole, but yeah.

Fact is, the whole "WE HAVE LIMITS" is fucking weak, whether those limits are stated by religion or by nihilists.

[Cramulus]

We are simply parts of the Universe, and we are trying to discover the origins of the Universe, so therefore, one could say, that the Universe is trying to discover itself.  Thus, it may not be entirely absurd to say, that if you focus on discovering your true heart, rather than listening to everybody else as far as the "Correct" way to be, then maybe you're doing the Universe a favor.

I dig that

I like how it also that sleeping till noon and spending Sunday drinking beer and watching reruns IS THE UNIVERSE'S WILL.

There are things beyond our comprehension, and when you're okay with that, it's a good start.

Name one.

you will never really be able to comprehend the experience of death, not until its too late

We can know what the universe is like, what it consists of, how it works, but I'm not sure we'll ever know why. Even from a strictly materialist point of view, it still boggles my mind that if you put matter into a jar and shake for long enough, it eventually thinks it's a Self and begins comprehending things. Why is that? Even if we can understand evolution, the mechanisms of consciousness, the steps it took to arrive at sentience -- I can't shake that there's still something metaphysical and mysterious underpinning it.

And then there's subjectivity -- we can never really know what another human is thinking, what their experience is like, we are all (as True Detective put it) the sole residents of a locked room that nobody else will ever enter.



This is part of what the Principia points to as "Chaos" - the raw universe exists outside of our understanding. Knowledge is a map we draw of it so we can get a grip on it, but it's only a model. There is no universe source code where F=ma was declared.

Keeping this knowledge of my own ignorance tucked away in my front pocket is what keeps me fresh and able to reach towards things with the beginner's mind.

Don't get me wrong - I do think the universe operates on rational principals and a lot of its mechanisms can be observed empirically - but that's really only the beginning of knowledge. The particular model of truth we're using is bound to our subjectivity and our technology and processes and our little moment in history. The 'knowable universe' is an ideal, I don't think we'll ever actually solve the riddle and have it all figured out -- there will always be old knowledge which must be upset and a new frontier to research.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

you will never really be able to comprehend the experience of death, not until its too late

Sez you.  I'm not an atheist.  I think what happens is that when you get to heaven, everyone points and laughs at the manner of your death.  David Carradine, for example, is probably not enjoying the afterlife much.

We can know what the universe is like, what it consists of, how it works, but I'm not sure we'll ever know why. Even from a strictly materialist point of view, it still boggles my mind that if you put matter into a jar and shake for long enough, it eventually thinks it's a Self and begins comprehending things. Why is that? Even if we can understand evolution, the mechanisms of consciousness, the steps it took to arrive at sentience -- I can't shake that there's still something metaphysical and mysterious underpinning it.

I agree, to a point.  I am more than a (badly tuned and in need of maintenance) meat machine.

And then there's subjectivity -- we can never really know what another human is thinking, what their experience is like, we are all (as True Detective put it) the sole residents of a locked room that nobody else will ever enter.

Okay, I can see that.

This is part of what the Principia points to as "Chaos" - the raw universe exists outside of our understanding. Knowledge is a map we draw of it so we can get a grip on it, but it's only a model. There is no universe source code where F=ma was declared.

Now, I don't agree with that, even one bit.  Even leaving a supernatural influence out of the equation, the rules of the universe are pretty clear.  And though we don't know everything about it, there's no limit to how much we CAN figure out.

Keeping this knowledge of my own ignorance tucked away in my front pocket is what keeps me fresh and able to reach towards things with the beginner's mind.

Jesus & the Buddha had something to say about that.

Don't get me wrong - I do think the universe operates on rational principals

Optimist.

and a lot of its mechanisms can be observed empirically - but that's really only the beginning of knowledge. The particular model of truth we're using is bound to our subjectivity and our technology and processes and our little moment in history. The 'knowable universe' is an ideal, I don't think we'll ever actually solve the riddle and have it all figured out -- there will always be old knowledge which must be upset and a new frontier to research.

Sure...But again, that doesn't imply that there is knowledge we CAN'T learn.