Much the same way you implant "not mine, I swear!" into your neighbor's wife's ovum, Our Lady of Discordtm has implanted divine words of wisdom within the pages of the Principia Discordia. I've decided to start a project that seeks to perform the abortion.
If you'd like to play with synchronicity and inseminate meaning into the fertile womb of triviality, feel free to join in. I encourage you to use whatever techniques and tools are at your disposal. Everything from good ol' fashion Gematria to the Equidistant Letter Sequence method is up for grabs... not to mention recreational drugs.
I will share (and you should too) the various programs/scripts I write along the way. Let's face it, I'm lazy. I'm not skipping letters myself!
I suggest the following for inspiration:
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isopsephia
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gematria
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_numerals
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_alphabet#Letter_names (use Ancient Greek correspondences)
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midrash
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_code
* http://www.hoax-slayer.com/cathedral-spaceman-carving.shtml
Quote from: JohNyx on January 27, 2010, 01:13:08 AM
Please, explain what you mean.
I guess "abortion" doesn't always translate so readily to "midrash." You start with a section of the Principia Discordia and derive alternate meanings from the text by applying various methodologies. Sometimes people convert words to numbers and then back again. The new word is associated with the old word and provides "insight" on what the text "really means." So, for example you start with "foo," you then somehow derive "bar," then concluding that "foo" was an alcoholic. Or perhaps something like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_code#Equidistant_Letter_Sequence_method (see SAFETY)
Quote from: phi on January 27, 2010, 01:26:34 AM
I guess "abortion" doesn't always translate so readily to "midrash."
:lulz:
I really am not sure what the rest of the thread is about but that made me laugh.
Quote from: JohNyx on January 27, 2010, 02:05:41 AM
I personally find more interesting as a method, them language tools that you type a phrase into them, and it spits back to you the same phrase, but translated back and forth from different languages; which gives to some broken engrish and syntax modifications that can be "insightful".
I posted on that not too far back... Translamancy: http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=23626.0
I could totally incorporate that.
Quote from: JohNyx on January 27, 2010, 02:05:41 AM
The ELS system seems to be based on the assumption that "holy scripture" has hidden meaningful messages.
It's as meaningful as anything else. Apophenia. I love it.
Quote from: Burns on January 27, 2010, 02:09:28 AM
Quote from: phi on January 27, 2010, 01:26:34 AM
I guess "abortion" doesn't always translate so readily to "midrash."
:lulz:
I really am not sure what the rest of the thread is about but that made me laugh.
Your name is Burnz.
burnz = βυρνζ = 112. 112CE is the year Pliny the Younger died. This means you are his reincarnation.
:magick:
Why don't we just make shit up, and vaguely connect it to the original text after the fact?
LMNO
-SSOOKN Law Of Fives co-ordinator.
Quote from: phi on January 27, 2010, 02:59:22 AM
Your name is Burnz.
burnz = βυρνζ = 112. 112CE is the year Pliny the Younger died. This means you are his reincarnation.
Um... no.
LMNO's idea is much better, much more fun, and funnier. Beat that.
Don't forget, he's the man who wrote about the esoteric significance of Inky Pinky Ponky.
I've always been fairly proud of that one.
Especially when the prophecies actually came true.
I liked it a lot, but I will admit that I didn't start adding to the collection plate until the prophesies came true.
Quote from: LMNO on January 27, 2010, 01:42:51 PM
Why don't we just make shit up, and vaguely connect it to the original text after the fact?
LMNO
-SSOOKN Law Of Fives co-ordinator.
That's essentially what this all is. But I find it amusing to pretend like it's not. I'll do Translamancy (http://"http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=23626.0") on a few passages and see how cool that is and then post back.
I thought this topic was going to explain that, after 50 posts, you have the right to parlay.
HAHA! Srsly pwnage. Bonus points if you can use traditional scripture enhancing techniques to prove the principia is EVIL. :fnord:
Then we can sell the idea to Dan Brown fans and eat up the lulz :lulz:
Forget the PD, find Discordian 'scripture' in other stuff:
Quote
There was found a text which held within it great eristic secrets, disguised as a popular song by the great Discordian Esoterics "They Might Be Giants".
I'm going down to Cowtown
The cow's a friend to me
Lives beneath the ocean and that's where I will be
Beneath the waves, the waves
And that's where I will be
I'm gonna see the cow beneath the sea
Here in the first verse, we are told that we are entering the realm of Eris herself, The Void, or 'Chao'Town. Obviously, the writer feels kinship with her sacred symbol, since "The 'Chao's a friend to me."
Now what of the next lines? If you examine the cover of the Great Principia Discordia, you will find that the Sacred Chao is centered beneath the title, placing the "Chao" beneath the 'c' in Principia and the 'c' in Discordia.
The yellow Roosevelt Avenue leaf overturned
The ardor of arboreality is an adventure we have spurned, we've spurned
A new leaf overturned
It's a new leaf overturned
First, we have a fantastic example a Discordian statement. Words hidden in words, "The Yellow Rose" "Roosevelt Avenue" and "A new leaf overturned" are mashed into a single sentence, hidden between the actual words written. A wise reminder to never believe what we read (In this case what we hear and what we read are different).
The Ardor of Arboreality, of course refers to the "Love of A bor(ing) reality" something which is spurned by the Discordian, who prefers overturning new leaves and exploring different realities.
We yearn to swim for home, but our only home is bone
How sleepless is the egg knowing that which throws the stone
Foresees the bone, the bone
Our only home is bone
Our only home is bone
This verse contains two seperate esoteric messages:
First, we see that the writer sees his life as "egg" to "bone" or birth to death. There is no escaping this, for our only home (our final home) is 'bone' or death.
Of course, there is also the idea of creation, for bone can refer to the bone of Osris. Osris, of course was killed and reborn, killed and reborn again (though this time without his bone). The egg would obviously refer to the Great Mother Isis. Thus we have the story of constant rebirth and life, couched in words that speak of the unavoidable end of our lives. For all is Chaos and all is Absurdity.
Ratatosk, Squirrel of Discord
&
Sjaantze, Harbringer of Distraction
(Copypasta from aeons ago)
When you can do that to the latest Taylor Swift single, you will have progressed to the next level.
This weekend I will attempt a Jacques Derrida style deconstruction of the PD.
It will be convoluted, and you will suffer brainhurt.
Quote from: LMNO on January 27, 2010, 08:43:58 PM
When you can do that to the latest Taylor Swift single, you will have progressed to the next level.
Who?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 27, 2010, 08:51:26 PM
Quote from: LMNO on January 27, 2010, 08:43:58 PM
When you can do that to the latest Taylor Swift single, you will have progressed to the next level.
Who?
The newest teen sensation, does watered-down pop/'country' songs, etc etc.
Quote from: LMNO on January 27, 2010, 08:43:58 PM
When you can do that to the latest Taylor Swift single, you will have progressed to the next level.
I thought I might try that until I read the lyrics of a few of her songs....
FUCK YOU LMNO.... GODDAMNIT!!!!!
I can't unread that level of shit, you know.
Quote from: LMNO on January 27, 2010, 08:52:37 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 27, 2010, 08:51:26 PM
Quote from: LMNO on January 27, 2010, 08:43:58 PM
When you can do that to the latest Taylor Swift single, you will have progressed to the next level.
Who?
The newest teen sensation, does watered-down pop/'country' songs, etc etc.
:crankey:
That sort of shit makes Buck Owen and Hank puke in their coffins.
Quote from: Ratatosk on January 27, 2010, 08:56:53 PM
Quote from: LMNO on January 27, 2010, 08:43:58 PM
When you can do that to the latest Taylor Swift single, you will have progressed to the next level.
I thought I might try that until I read the lyrics of a few of her songs....
FUCK YOU LMNO.... GODDAMNIT!!!!!
I can't unread that level of shit, you know.
NOT GONNA LOOK
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 27, 2010, 09:06:13 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on January 27, 2010, 08:56:53 PM
Quote from: LMNO on January 27, 2010, 08:43:58 PM
When you can do that to the latest Taylor Swift single, you will have progressed to the next level.
I thought I might try that until I read the lyrics of a few of her songs....
FUCK YOU LMNO.... GODDAMNIT!!!!!
I can't unread that level of shit, you know.
NOT GONNA LOOK
Good call, I could FEEL my IQ dropping.
Holy fuck fucking shit... http://translationparty.com/#6248921
I don't have time to tare apart this now... It's too brilliant. And I think I noted some Enochian in there.
Brings about statements such as "the great Pope John Paul II, one of the two galaxies one 1,1,2 22222 is one single social group, one in one single report"
I didn't read much of your original post nor do I have any clue what this OP is about
But . . .
I DO HAVE A HELPFUL HELPFUL HINT
QuoteOur Lady of Discordtm
™=Alt+0153
A Literary Deconstruction of the PD, undertaken with direction and funding from the Dr Tran Institute of Kicking Your Ass (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FO0kRE5OTZI).
What religious narrative in this present day, teaches us such lessons in fabulous morality as the Principia Discordia? Does any other belief system teach that uncertainty and ambiguity trump order and discipline? Or that order and discpline themselves contain an a priori possibility of the state of uncertainty coming into play?
This discourse of order and disorder, from where does it arise, this formidable tradition that includes Lao Tzu, Heraclitus, Nietzsche, Artaud, Dali, Duchamp, Tazara and Deleuze? Does Discordianism truly belong to this august, if mutuable geneology?
From the outset, the introduction to the Principia introduces ambiguity, foreshadowing Barthe's Death of the Author. The nature of the author of the tract is purposefully concealed and denied, in an attempt to escape the tyranny of subjectivity, pinning the blame instead of a vast number of culprits, perhaps to show the futility of subjectivity as a starting point for a critique. Yet the authors are nonetheless identified, so does this not make a mockery of their post-structuralist stance?
Not necessarily. For the claimed authors are in fact fictional constructs themselves, as we well know. Furthermore, their approach to their work is detatched, almost bemused by their own interests and obsessions. The irreducibly textual nature of the work is thus reaffirmed, and the simplistic, postivistic attempts to criticize the Principia with simplified versions of its own arguments are easily dismissed.
The apparent eccentricities of the text, such as Wilson's claims about the time-travelling anthropologist, are often dismissed as harmless as whimsical diversions on the part of a critic who required some form of 'creative' escape from the exigencies of high-powered theory. This attitude, typical of Anglo-American criticism, draws a firm line between the discipline of thinking about chaos and the activity of writing which that discipline is supposed to renounce or ignore in its own performance. Criticism as 'answerable style' (in Geoffrey Hartman's phrase) is an idea that cuts right across the deep-grained assumptions of academic discourse. It is, as I shall argue, one of the most unsettling and radical departures of Discordian thought. A properly attentive reading of Wilson brings out the extent to which critical concepts are ceaselessly transformed or undone by the activity of self-conscious writing. His subversive tactics come down to an inordinate fondness for paradox disguising a commitment to order and method.
The interview of Malacypse the Younger by the Greater Poop illustrates not only the need to draw boundaries between meta-fictional philosophical discourses, but also to transgress these boundaries when the cease to have utility for the reader. This boundary was always subject to periodic raids and incursions by the more adventurous Proto-Discordians, especially those poets and novelists among them who felt uneasy with a discipline that drove a doctrinal wedge between the two kinds of writing. The issue was more than a matter of critical technique. What the orthodox Proto-Discordians sought in the language of poetry was a structure somehow transcending human reason and ultimately pointing to a religious sense of values. Thus the autonomic-reflexivity of poetry became not merely an issue in aesthetics but a testing-point of faith in relation to human reason. Behind the Proto-Discordian rhetoric of irony and paradox is a whole metaphysics of language, where poetic and religious claims to truth are bound up together. At the same time there were those who assented in principle to this discipline of thought but found it in practice hard, if not impossible, to live with.
The Greater Poop reporter like Barthes, asserts the critic's freedom to exploit a style that actively transforms and questions the nature of interpretative thought. In itself this marks a decisive break with the scrupulous decorum of critical language maintained in the Situatioist's wake. This is to argue that theory, in so far as it is valid at all, is strictly a matter of placing some orderly construction upon the 'immediate' data of perception. Barthes and Malaclypse totally reject this careful policing of the bounds between literature and theory. Where the post-Situationist's proposed a disciplined or educating movement of thought from perception to principle, they discovered an endlessly fascinating conflict, the 'scene' of which is the text itself in its alternating aspects of knowledge and pleasurable fantasy.
===================
I can do this all day long, you know.
That is a wonderful skill to have.
:aaa::1fap:
Can I repost that Cain?
Quote from: Hoopla on February 02, 2010, 09:59:58 PM
Can I repost that Cain?
Sorry, didn't see this before. Yes, of course.
Quote from: Cain on January 30, 2010, 03:42:15 PM
A Literary Deconstruction of the PD, undertaken with direction and funding from the Dr Tran Institute of Kicking Your Ass (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FO0kRE5OTZI).
What religious narrative in this present day, teaches us such lessons in fabulous morality as the Principia Discordia? Does any other belief system teach that uncertainty and ambiguity trump order and discipline? Or that order and discpline themselves contain an a priori possibility of the state of uncertainty coming into play?
This discourse of order and disorder, from where does it arise, this formidable tradition that includes Lao Tzu, Heraclitus, Nietzsche, Artaud, Dali, Duchamp, Tazara and Deleuze? Does Discordianism truly belong to this august, if mutuable geneology?
From the outset, the introduction to the Principia introduces ambiguity, foreshadowing Barthe's Death of the Author. The nature of the author of the tract is purposefully concealed and denied, in an attempt to escape the tyranny of subjectivity, pinning the blame instead of a vast number of culprits, perhaps to show the futility of subjectivity as a starting point for a critique. Yet the authors are nonetheless identified, so does this not make a mockery of their post-structuralist stance?
Not necessarily. For the claimed authors are in fact fictional constructs themselves, as we well know. Furthermore, their approach to their work is detatched, almost bemused by their own interests and obsessions. The irreducibly textual nature of the work is thus reaffirmed, and the simplistic, postivistic attempts to criticize the Principia with simplified versions of its own arguments are easily dismissed.
The apparent eccentricities of the text, such as Wilson's claims about the time-travelling anthropologist, are often dismissed as harmless as whimsical diversions on the part of a critic who required some form of ‘creative’ escape from the exigencies of high-powered theory. This attitude, typical of Anglo-American criticism, draws a firm line between the discipline of thinking about chaos and the activity of writing which that discipline is supposed to renounce or ignore in its own performance. Criticism as ‘answerable style’ (in Geoffrey Hartman’s phrase) is an idea that cuts right across the deep-grained assumptions of academic discourse. It is, as I shall argue, one of the most unsettling and radical departures of Discordian thought. A properly attentive reading of Wilson brings out the extent to which critical concepts are ceaselessly transformed or undone by the activity of self-conscious writing. His subversive tactics come down to an inordinate fondness for paradox disguising a commitment to order and method.
The interview of Malacypse the Younger by the Greater Poop illustrates not only the need to draw boundaries between meta-fictional philosophical discourses, but also to transgress these boundaries when the cease to have utility for the reader. This boundary was always subject to periodic raids and incursions by the more adventurous Proto-Discordians, especially those poets and novelists among them who felt uneasy with a discipline that drove a doctrinal wedge between the two kinds of writing. The issue was more than a matter of critical technique. What the orthodox Proto-Discordians sought in the language of poetry was a structure somehow transcending human reason and ultimately pointing to a religious sense of values. Thus the autonomic-reflexivity of poetry became not merely an issue in aesthetics but a testing-point of faith in relation to human reason. Behind the Proto-Discordian rhetoric of irony and paradox is a whole metaphysics of language, where poetic and religious claims to truth are bound up together. At the same time there were those who assented in principle to this discipline of thought but found it in practice hard, if not impossible, to live with.
The Greater Poop reporter like Barthes, asserts the critic’s freedom to exploit a style that actively transforms and questions the nature of interpretative thought. In itself this marks a decisive break with the scrupulous decorum of critical language maintained in the Situatioist's wake. This is to argue that theory, in so far as it is valid at all, is strictly a matter of placing some orderly construction upon the ‘immediate’ data of perception. Barthes and Malaclypse totally reject this careful policing of the bounds between literature and theory. Where the post-Situationist's proposed a disciplined or educating movement of thought from perception to principle, they discovered an endlessly fascinating conflict, the ‘scene’ of which is the text itself in its alternating aspects of knowledge and pleasurable fantasy.
===================
I can do this all day long, you know.
(http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb163/wompcabal/forum/INTERMITTENSNOMINATION.png)
and also 23ae
Just added it.
nice!
(http://www.postkiwi.com/images/2007/9/deconstruction.jpg)
Quote from: Cramulus on February 04, 2010, 04:24:51 PM
nice!
(http://www.postkiwi.com/images/2007/9/deconstruction.jpg)
Gasp! Are you suggesting that we should re-interpret Jesus as a deep-cover Discordian?