Thought Club

[The Wizard Joseph]

Rule number one

You do not think about Thought Club.

Rule number two

YOU DO NOT THINK ABOUT THOUGHT CLUB!!

There may be more rules like this, but see rules one and two.

Welcome to Thought Club.

[Cramulus]

 

Seventh rule: Thoughts will go on as long as they have to.

And the eighth and final rule: If this is your first night at Thought Club, you have to think.

[LMNO]

I am Jack's pre-frontal cortex.

[rong]

I think his name was robert paulson

[Cramulus]

I think therefore I am robert paulson

fixed that for ya

[The Wizard Joseph]

Seventh rule: Thoughts will go on as long as they have to.

And the eighth and final rule: If this is your first night at Thought Club, you have to think.

You know I was just posting a paradox as a ha ha at first, but I said fuck it and wrote a set of somewhat more complex rules loosely based upon Those Other Rules.

[The Wizard Joseph]

Rules of Thought Club

1 You do not think about Thought Club.

2 YOU DO NOT THINK ABOUT THOUGHT CLUB!

3 There are no winners in Thought Club, just a bunch of losers thinking as hard as they can. It is by no means such a silly thing as structured debate. If someone explicitly concedes or tacitly concedes by not replying within 2 days, shitting the bed entirely by spitting word salad (poetry is ok but must be meaningfully coherent), any provable plagiarism, brazen copypasta of what has already been said in a thought, and/or resorting to ad hominem statements that are not both supported by observation within the chain of the thought and also creative in expression the thought is over. Continuing to reply is unnecessary, against these rules, and the thinker who so concedes effectively has the last word in their admission of total defeat. Once a thought chain has ended it must not be replied to by anyone at all, even to "bump" it for amusement. It is finished.

4 Only two thinkers may reply in a chain of thought and only one such chain may be active at a time until one of the thinkers effectively concedes.

5 Paradoxical or irrational but coherent statements and other such ontological tomfoolery is allowed, but if it results in any kind of infinite recursion entrapping either or both thinkers or effectively obliterates all meaning the thought is over, you asshole. Both thinkers have effectively been forced to concede if the paradox cannot be resolved in one reply.

6 No kibitzing. Thinkers not involved in the active chain of reply may not reply to it or post words intended to be directly relevant to it. Ideally uninvolved thinkers will not post words at all. Feel free to wordlessly post emotes so you can thusly hoot and holler incoherently in encouragement or wince at a thinker getting that ass beat, but do not post it in reply to the active chain of thought. If necessary these rules may be reposted not more frequently than once per page as a reminder of this. Continuing disruptive posts will be split to the "Unlimited Garbage From The Wizard Joseph" thread, they are his now, and the last point in the active chain reposted as needed.

7 Thoughts will go on as long as they have to.

8 If this is your first night at Thought Club, you have to think.

[The Wizard Joseph]

I have a thought for Cramulus.

As I understand it you are actively engaged in spiritual practices with the intention to "raise the consciousness of the universe by raising your own" or somesuch thing.

I say that if the universe is at all conscious to even the slightest degree, including your own "consciousness" as such, then it is by a matter of sheer scale vastly MORE conscious than you could ever be in your wildest possible dream if you dedicated your entire mortal existence exclusively to having wild dreams, and so it's a sort of hubris bordering on madness to even try.

If the universe is in fact not conscious at all, including by extension yourself, then you are rather like the corpse of Dr. Frankenstein trying to vivify the whole universe with no apparatus but your mind, such as it is. It would thus seem that the seat of intention in your whole damn spiritual praxis is mad as fish grease off its meds.

Though this may rightly be seen as an attack against your paradigm please understand that I seek in part to prevent you from either giving up such useful practices in disgust when you cannot ultimately attain your intention, or falling into a very dangerous delusion of your "success" in such an apparently paradoxical endeavor.

[Doktor Howl]

I have a thought for Cramulus.

As I understand it you are actively engaged in spiritual practices with the intention to "raise the consciousness of the universe by raising your own" or somesuch thing.

I say that if the universe is at all conscious to even the slightest degree, including your own "consciousness" as such, then it is by a matter of sheer scale vastly MORE conscious than you could ever be in your wildest possible dream if you dedicated your entire mortal existence exclusively to having wild dreams, and so it's a sort of hubris bordering on madness to even try.

If the universe is in fact not conscious at all, including by extension yourself, then you are rather like the corpse of Dr. Frankenstein trying to vivify the whole universe with no apparatus but your mind, such as it is. It would thus seem that the seat of intention in your whole damn spiritual praxis is mad as fish grease off its meds.

Though this may rightly be seen as an attack against your paradigm please understand that I seek in part to prevent you from either giving up such useful practices in disgust when you cannot ultimately attain your intention, or falling into a very dangerous delusion of your "success" in such an apparently paradoxical endeavor.

Fucking universe is defective any damn way.  If I had my way, we'd just chuck it and start over.

Sometimes you just have to throw away the entire cosmos.

[The Johnny]

Is this a variant of "The Game"?

Cause you all just lost it right this second. 

[minuspace]

PRAISED BE THE NON-ENDING THOUGHT CLUB!

[The Wizard Joseph]

I have a thought for Cramulus.

As I understand it you are actively engaged in spiritual practices with the intention to "raise the consciousness of the universe by raising your own" or somesuch thing.

I say that if the universe is at all conscious to even the slightest degree, including your own "consciousness" as such, then it is by a matter of sheer scale vastly MORE conscious than you could ever be in your wildest possible dream if you dedicated your entire mortal existence exclusively to having wild dreams, and so it's a sort of hubris bordering on madness to even try.

If the universe is in fact not conscious at all, including by extension yourself, then you are rather like the corpse of Dr. Frankenstein trying to vivify the whole universe with no apparatus but your mind, such as it is. It would thus seem that the seat of intention in your whole damn spiritual praxis is mad as fish grease off its meds.

Though this may rightly be seen as an attack against your paradigm please understand that I seek in part to prevent you from either giving up such useful practices in disgust when you cannot ultimately attain your intention, or falling into a very dangerous delusion of your "success" in such an apparently paradoxical endeavor.

Fucking universe is defective any damn way.  If I had my way, we'd just chuck it and start over.

Sometimes you just have to throw away the entire cosmos.

I mean I addressed the thought to Cramulus, but I guess by the rules this thought is you and me now!

Thing is I agree that the damn universe could be called defective or at least extremely noncomforming compared to what could theoretically be. For fucksake just look at all of the black holes! Every singular one is an exercise in practical absurdity. Because the singularity is quite literally infinitely smaller than a Planck length you can quite rightly say that between the inside edge of the event horizon and the singularity there is an infinite amount of available space. So much space in fact that it could easily contain an infinite number of things the size of the percievable universe. Zeno's paradox of the arrow is a matter of standing physical law! What kind of Creator would just leave some shit like that in the workmanship! It's embarrassing.

[Cramulus]

I have a thought for Cramulus.

As I understand it you are actively engaged in spiritual practices with the intention to "raise the consciousness of the universe by raising your own" or somesuch thing.

I say that if the universe is at all conscious to even the slightest degree, including your own "consciousness" as such, then it is by a matter of sheer scale vastly MORE conscious than you could ever be in your wildest possible dream if you dedicated your entire mortal existence exclusively to having wild dreams, and so it's a sort of hubris bordering on madness to even try.

why attempt to do anything?

the world is so big, and we're so small

To do anything but roll over and accept the cards you've been dealt, the situation you're in, the person you've become -- that's madness


every artist, every activist, every seeker -- they are all attempting to move a needle that weighs as much as the whole world

two needles, really -- one that's inside of them has to move first,
and if they can do that, it can apply leverage to the big external needle

If the universe is in fact not conscious at all, including by extension yourself, then you are rather like the corpse of Dr. Frankenstein trying to vivify the whole universe with no apparatus but your mind, such as it is. It would thus seem that the seat of intention in your whole damn spiritual praxis is mad as fish grease off its meds.

first and foremost, I'm just trying to be a real person - that is, not just an empty vessel, or a parrot, that just repeats whatever sharpnel I absorbed from my environment this year. Someone with agency, who can make decisions, and not just kneejerk reactions.

And that's what most situations need, right?

so that's the praxis

[The Wizard Joseph]

I have a thought for Cramulus.

As I understand it you are actively engaged in spiritual practices with the intention to "raise the consciousness of the universe by raising your own" or somesuch thing.

I say that if the universe is at all conscious to even the slightest degree, including your own "consciousness" as such, then it is by a matter of sheer scale vastly MORE conscious than you could ever be in your wildest possible dream if you dedicated your entire mortal existence exclusively to having wild dreams, and so it's a sort of hubris bordering on madness to even try.

why attempt to do anything?

the world is so big, and we're so small

To do anything but roll over and accept the cards you've been dealt, the situation you're in, the person you've become -- that's madness


every artist, every activist, every seeker -- they are all attempting to move a needle that weighs as much as the whole world

two needles, really -- one that's inside of them has to move first,
and if they can do that, it can apply leverage to the big external needle

If the universe is in fact not conscious at all, including by extension yourself, then you are rather like the corpse of Dr. Frankenstein trying to vivify the whole universe with no apparatus but your mind, such as it is. It would thus seem that the seat of intention in your whole damn spiritual praxis is mad as fish grease off its meds.

first and foremost, I'm just trying to be a real person - that is, not just an empty vessel, or a parrot, that just repeats whatever sharpnel I absorbed from my environment this year. Someone with agency, who can make decisions, and not just kneejerk reactions.

And that's what most situations need, right?

so that's the praxis

That's a good response. Were this not Thought Club I would be quite contented by it and conced, but contentment is not the point here, and so I have a couple questions because something there tasted sweet in my mouth, but has my stomach a bit bitter so to speak.

To do anything but roll over and accept the cards you've been dealt, the situation you're in, the person you've become -- that's madness

I presume from what I think I know of you that this is a typo or misstatement. You are otherwise advocating for this mad complacency in such things. Am I wrong?

Consider the statement pared down a bit and restated.

Accept the cards you've been dealt, the situation that you're in, the person you've become, and then act upon them.

No "rolling over" is inherent in any of those things. They are a necessary first step to lucid action when restated as such with a meaningful imperative instead of calling such things madness.

I totally agree about your observation on artists or anyone seeking some form of agency in the world.

first and foremost, I'm just trying to be a real person - that is, not just an empty vessel, or a parrot, that just repeats whatever sharpnel I absorbed from my environment this year. Someone with agency, who can make decisions, and not just kneejerk reactions.

Why are you trying to be what you objectively already are? You are already a real person. Are you seeking to become "more real"? Are those not on your cognitive and spiritual level these "empty parrots" you seem to fear being? If not all people can be said to be such then at what point are they endowed beyond that somehow? They are EXACTLY as real as you are if anyone can be said to be so. Is this not the same essential derision behind the common vernacular "sheeple"?

Cramulus I must now make an observation of mine that you may not like. Please understand that I am by no means trying to hurt you, but this may sting a bit.

You seem to be trying to save yourself. I strongly suspect that this is a vestigial remnant of the Christianity I believe you once said you used to hold. Absent a separate saviour figure you have seemingly taken the burden of this saving upon yourself needlessly. I am thoroughly enmeshed in the same paradigm in many ways, and so I sympathize deeply.

I tell you plainly that there is nothing to save, just people and things in yourself and the world to act upon as wisely as you can AND NO MORE.

Another great mind, and I DO think you have a great mind capable of great things, that made this kind of error of comfort was Nietzsche. In positing an overman all he really did was deconstruct the messiah complex and replace it with a vague outline of something that would "save" or at least "rightfully replace" this wretched thing he saw in humanity. He went to some length to demolish the popular saviours and in not stopping there posited a saviour. He just cleared the temple of all idols and set up his own in their stead, as is so very painfully commonplace.

There are no such things as saviours, and nothing that needs such a thing.
The moment that you accept this you will perhaps be able to rest, recflect, and act with much greater peace and clarity.

[LMNO]