Mistaking Discordia for other things.

[McGrupp]

Having read Principia a few weeks ago and allowed it some time to stew a few things occurred to me. First is that figuring out what Discordia is or isn't is both really easy and really hard. When I'm sitting on the couch at night thinking my thoughts it's easy, but if you try to write down a statement about Discordia it immediately becomes incorrect in some way.

Attempting to pin down what Discordia is or isn't seems both futile and to be missing the point. However even if there is no right or wrong way to 'do' Discordianism it seems to me that there are probably several million stupid ways.

So here are a few things I've thought over the last week that I've since thought better of:

1. Viewing Discordianism as being destruction obsessed or an almost satanic reaction to our culture and species.
   
Basically my problem here was that I was failing to differentiate between disorder and destruction as well as ignoring the idea that disorder is not simply reserved for genocides and hurricanes but can be used to create. (Okay, cards on the table, I was thinking of Khorne from warhammer 40k. Dude, I know.)

2. Discordianism as being simply a branch of absurdism.

To be sure, the absurd plays a prominent role but I think that it deserves to be differentiated. It is easy to read about how everything is true and false and meaningful and meaningless and to then view it as some sort of nihilism or a fatalistic reaction to a cosmically unintelligible and indifferent universe. I think that a main point in Principia is to point out that there is meaning in the universe but it is not set in stone and that it is up to us to figure it out for ourselves.

3. I could have sworn I had a 3. but it escapes me now.

Anyhow I was curious if anyone else had thought the same thing or the opposite thing as the case may be.

[LMNO]

Discordia is a verb.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

None of the above, because all of the above are - at some level - attempts to shrink-wrap Discordia into something manageable and SAFE.

[Cain]

3 is possibly "Mistaking Discordianism for YOUR PET IDEOLOGICAL PREFERENCE (usually, but not always, anarchism)".

Which also falls under what TGRR said.

[insideout]

I have no particular qualifications, but it amuses me to answer, so herein lies the truth:
review the following Pages of the principia:
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/book/76.php
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/book/81.php

Then reread the whole thing.

Then read the Discordia Totalis and the Black Iron Prison, both linked here:
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,32486.0.html

If you haven't achieved clarity by that point, come back and ask again!

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

I don't understand the differentiation you're making in option 2.

[McGrupp]

Discordia is a verb.

Ah, I see. For some reason I thought it could be a noun as well.

I don't understand the differentiation you're making in option 2.

Having reread what I wrote I'm not sure I do either. I guess what I meant to say was that at first glance Discordianism seems to state that everything is true and false at the same time and there is no true underlying reality that humans can understand. Thinking about that I can see Discordianism as simply throwing hands up in the air and saying 'that everything is true and false and so nothing matters and I'll just sit here and drink beer and since there is no wrong way to be that means I'm right and we'll all wear special hats and pat ourselves on the back for having a philosophy that means we're always right no matter what we do.'

Having reread the above paragraph I'm not sure that helped clarify anymore than the first. Basically I found myself internally railing against the use of Discordianism as a cop out for thought and/or moral responsibility. Again, this was my first impression, which is very unfair and I have since changed my mind. Although there is a nagging feeling that there might be an inside joke 'emperor's new clothes' aspect to all of this.

I am however cautiously optimistic about the wearing of special hats.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I agree with you about being wary of using it for a cop-out, which is what many do.

It is not so much that everything is true and false at the same time as that nothing is absolutely true or absolutely false, though they may be so close as to be true or false for practical purposes.

Likewise, reality may or may not be objective (the territory), but how we experience it is subjective (the map) which is why, for the map to be at all useful, we first have to agree on how we will describe features of our experience (consensus).

Also, because how we experience reality is subjective, everything matters a great deal. To someone. I prefer to choose to care about things that affect a great number of people a great deal (humanism), rather than to choose to care about things that affect myself (hedonism).

I am not using anyone else's philosophy for this, it's just my take on things, so please, no one go rattling on about circuits and other occult shit.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Well said, Nigel. I tend to find the meaning wobbling between humanism and hedonism, personally. I think it has to do with my experiences growing up... Damned black iron bars.

[AFK]

Having read Principia a few weeks ago and allowed it some time to stew a few things occurred to me. First is that figuring out what Discordia is or isn't is both really easy and really hard. When I'm sitting on the couch at night thinking my thoughts it's easy, but if you try to write down a statement about Discordia it immediately becomes incorrect in some way.

Attempting to pin down what Discordia is or isn't seems both futile and to be missing the point. However even if there is no right or wrong way to 'do' Discordianism it seems to me that there are probably several million stupid ways.

So here are a few things I've thought over the last week that I've since thought better of:

1. Viewing Discordianism as being destruction obsessed or an almost satanic reaction to our culture and species.
   
Basically my problem here was that I was failing to differentiate between disorder and destruction as well as ignoring the idea that disorder is not simply reserved for genocides and hurricanes but can be used to create. (Okay, cards on the table, I was thinking of Khorne from warhammer 40k. Dude, I know.)

I think this is where the matrix is helpful.  You are basically talking about the difference between destructive disorder and creative disorder.  Freeform music is another good example of creative disorder. 


Yeah, trying to pin down Discordia is a pretty futile thing.  I personally tend to revolve around the basic idea of "A conclusion is simply where you stopped thinking", which funnily speaks to the very idea of trying to come up with a neat set of descriptors for this whole nutty set up. 

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Freeform music is another good example of creative disorder. 

No, Freeform music is a plot conceived by aspirin manufacturers.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Well said, Nigel. I tend to find the meaning wobbling between humanism and hedonism, personally. I think it has to do with my experiences growing up... Damned black iron bars.

Thanks, Rat. I think that the perspectives we come to Discordia from affect how we interpret it.

[LMNO]

I think this is where the matrix is helpful.  You are basically talking about the difference between destructive disorder and creative disorder. 

Because all my great ideas were in 2006-2008, I offer you The New Chart.

Perhaps that will help.

[AFK]

You know I was totally setting you up for that right?


RWHN,
Discordian Straight Man

[LMNO]

Oh, totally. And thanks. Took me a while to find.