Principia Discordia

Continued from the discussion here (http://"http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=21013.msg711414#msg711414").

I'm going to make some conjecture about the goals of the BIP, or at least the goals of its authors.  I'm almost certainly going to be wrong at least once about something, and I'm perfectly happy to have this happen and be corrected.

I'm also going to act like a bit of an erudite snob at points, and I don't want it to be mistaken for an affectation or, worse, Eris forbid, the consequence of an academic approach to this subject.  It is in fact a basic tenet of my character.

'k.

I suspect the BIP was written as a means of introducing non-Discordians to Discordianism, interesting them, and hopefully converting some.  It was also written in order to shake people up a little and get them thinking about their life situation.  I also think it was written as catharsis for its authors, who now have something I'd say only about half of all Discordians have, a publication on the web expressing their beliefs and frustrations, and something only about half a percent of all Discordians have, a nicely-formatted publication on the web.  Of the three goals, I think the second one was foremost in the minds of many of the authors as they were writing.

I'm going to do a critique by section, and try for some overall comments at the end.  The theme and, significantly, quality of each piece is too varied for me to do otherwise.

I'm kind of dreading this, but I'm going to start at the beginning.

• 1) Welcome To Prison
  
  I'm dreading it because I think the opening is one of the weakest parts of the BIP, and I don't like saying that.  It doesn't do anything for me as a critic interested in improving Discordian writing to start out by saying, "Well, okay, but, this sucks."  But if I'm going to do it, I might as well ignore all human compassion and forever alienate the author.  Welcome To Prison is trite.  It's a rehash of Plato's Cave, and there's nothing necessarily wrong with that (never been a fan, but it's a solid and time-tested metaphor for thinking for yourself schmucks), but it's Plato's Cave by a highschool goth rocker.
  
  And what's with all this call-and-response?  Is it effective?  Enjoyable?  Does it make the reader want to keep reading?  Is it going to entice you into turning the page?  Do you want to leap up and answer the writer's every question?  Or do you feel like Lassie?  Huh?  Do you, girl?  Huh?  Huh?
  
  Yeah, well, get yourself a treat.  Me, I feel like I'm getting hit in the face with a fucking condescention bat.  I'm not your fuckin' dog, and your evocative questions evoke nothing in me but UNMITIGATED RAGE.  The first time I read that page, I closed the BIP.  The second time I read the BIP, I skipped it.
  
  What I LIKE about this section: Like I said, Plato's Cave is a time-tested metaphor.  We've been using that shit for years.  If you're going to crib off've a Realist, you chose the fuckin' master.  I mean, I hate pretty much everything Plato stands for, and I still laugh at his jokes.
  
  I also like the sentiment.  I mean, once you get past the condescention bat, it's kind of... bic-in-the-air, you know?  Fuck yeah, imposed reality's a prison.  Preach it, bro'!  (or sis, whatever.  Goth rocking is available to all genders).
  
  So here's what I'd suggest for improving this section.  First, tone down, heavily, the call-response bits.  As an oratory tradition, it's great.  In text... not so much.  Corollary here: Don't put words in peoples' mouths.  People hate that.  (ha-ha.)  Seriously, though, it's obnoxious -- it makes the author come across as a total prick.  Same for calling the reader 'kid' (or 'kiddo').  Being diminutized by an unknown person tends to put people on edge, make them hostile to the message.  Once you've done that, if you do that, I might have more suggestions, but it's so heavy right now that I can hardly read past it to the meat of the stuff underneath.
  
  
• 2) The Two Man Con
  
  This is a much stronger piece because it's more subtle.  It draws out a situation to make the point.  Other than some minor editing issues, my major concern is that feels a little rushed to make its point (which is probably just because it wants to make said point in a single page).  I don't think it needs to be lengthened, the author might want to expand a bit on the fourth paragraph's point, the idea that the choices being offered are transactional and largely illusionary.
  
  Editing issues, btw, in paragraph number-dash-sentence number format: 4-3, extra comma: "of freedom, in order" should lose it.  4-6, capitalize Left to preserve style.  5-5, "without" should be "with."  5-5, write out number to preserve style.  8-1, "aren"t" should be "aren't."  Those are just the ones that interfered with the flow on the page... could make other suggestions, but those are the ones that leapt out at me.
  
  
• 3) Who Wrote This?
  
  It's kind of a "meh" piece.  It kinda made me feel like I was watching Forgetting Sarah Marshall (http://"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI4XLhY10VA") again.  But it's not a bad bit, exactly.  I just kind of turn the page.
  
  
• 4) What The Hell Are You Doing?
  
  I don't grok.  Why is there a foreward to the book after the introduction to the book?
  
  Okay, we get it.  This Is A Strange Book Of Things That Aren't Part Of The Establishment.  Isn't That So Indie.  Yes It Is.
  
  You could move it to the very front of the book, or kill it.  Either's an improvement.
  
  
• 5) What The Hell Are You Reading?
  
  Alright!  Now we're getting somewhere!
  
  We're this community... People need to think for themselves... yeah, it's... wait.  Didn't I read this before?  It kinda sounds ...almost just like the third essay, "Who Wrote This!"
  
  Okay, okay, it's not actually a flat rehash.  And to be honest, I like this one.  But I think it should be folded into Who Wrote This, rather than presented as a separate entry.  They're on the same subject from basically the same point of view.  Yeah, they're probably not by the same person, but there's nothing wrong with a little collab from time to time.
  
  
• 6) A Touch Of The Con
  
  *rubs head*  I'll come back to this later.
  
  
• 7) The Parable Of The Gong
  
  I'm old-school like 300 baud, and I've gotta admit, this appeals to me.  So my immediate question is: Why's it here?
  
  Whoa, lemme step that back a second.  This reads like a chunk of early Discordian zenarchy parable.  It doesn't seem to fit with the rest of the book.  I absolutely don't want it gone -- I'm just curious why it was chosen for inclusion.  If it was an editing choice for structural reasons, I definitely approve of the humorous touch at this point in the compilation.
  
  
• 8 ) Can You Feel It Coming?
  
  Alright, a touch of the Lassie-bat, but overall it's a solid piece.  It's like printing "BE SKEPTICAL OF THE SKEPTICS" on a page, but people will actually read it and may even 'get it.'  In a lot of ways, it's the strongest piece in the book.  I enjoyed the previous chapter more, but this one quickly and solidly provides a salient point.  It wouldn't stand on its own that well, but it fits nicely into and in many ways improves on the text surrounding it.  In the current stage of revision of the project, I'd call this the Sermon on Ethics and Love of the BIP...
  
  if it ended on the first page.  The second page is still strong, but it stops letting the reader draw their own conclusions and hands some to him.  (Him, because, in this case, it's me.)  They aren't bad conclusions (by which I of course mean I, personally, do not disagree much with them), but it's like putting someone on a rollercoaster, hauling them to the exciting top of a precipice!... and then letting them settle in for a fifteen minute El ride to the next stop.  Well, that was mildly pleasant!
  
  My advice would be to split this up into two actually separate essays, space apart in the book.
  
  
• 9) This Morning
  
  No comments for now.  Liked the essay.  Will edit later.

• 10) Jailbreaking For Idiots
  
  I'm gonna admit a bias against chanspeak right here, so you don't suspect it of me later and then I have to lie and say, "No, of course I'm a totally up-front and unbiased critic!  What good could I possibly be if I weren't?"  So my personal read stutters a bit at the owly and srs.
  
  But that aside, this one offers us Questions We Get To Answer For Ourselves!  Oh, happy, frumious day!  Calloo callay!  Right-o.  Okay, they do kind of lead a little, but overall it comes across as well-intentioned.  And yeah, it has the endemic problem of feeling a little philosophically immature, but again, it comes across okay.
  
  I'd question the need for the distracting pronoun/verb agreement.  I don't think you need it to make your points, and it's often better (yeah, even in Disco) to bring your reader along rather than shutting them out.  Which you do by conning them to make them believe that you think like they do (and that All Of Us Together think like the canon), so, yay hypocrisy, our old friend.  Up to you on that one.
  
  
• 11) Further Explorations
  
  I'm a bit perplexed here.  I've never heard Mr. Wizard sound so depressed before!
  
  Alright, it's a mostly-sensible introduction to the noumenal, kinda.  I think it's happy to be what it is, an edutainment piece, and so I'm going to leave it be for now.  If anyone wants a more in-depth criticism of this section, I'll revisit it... Bueller?  Bueller?  ...Yeah.
  
  
• 12) toxicity
  
  It's been said that free verse is prose for the lazy, and here I've gotta agree.
  
  I like that someone did something structurally different, and I find the format intriguing and accessible.  But there's no force.  It's a lounge song advocating bulimia.
  
  Why include it?  What's it bringing to the book?
  
  
• 13) Ego Sickness
  
  I'll come back to it, maybe.  It's alright.  I don't feel very qualified to criticize the section because I'm already so familiar with the point of view being expressed.  You'd get a much better critique from somebody who'd never heard the term 'meme' before.  I think one of their first questions, which is only answered sidelong in the essay, would be: "What's a meme?"
  
  
• 14) Something And Nothing, Truth And Lies
  
  I actually wrote section 15 before this one.  At this point I'm kind of worn out.  I like this section (especially the opening paragraph) but I think it needs to be tightened up.  The points about lies vs truth could be a little better-constructed (from both a mythological standpoint and from a literary one).
  
  
• 15) A Conclusion Is Simply Where You Stopped Thinking
  
  Like essay 8, this one starts out spiking my Rage-O-Meter with a Platonic dialogue in which my answers are pre-assumed, and if they differ from the script, well, too bad for me.
  
  Unlike that chapter, it doesn't fix it.  First, a foolproof thing *is* a thing designed for fools.  By definition.  Second, STOP TALKING AND SAY SOMETHING.  The thesis sentence for this essay is: "What's more important [than us conveying our vision to you] is... the ability and know-how to see the world and the universe for what they really are."  So tell me more about that.  I don't care about my Kindergarten cubbies, the fact that I'm stuck in Plato's cave has been THOROUGHLY DRILLED INTO MY HEAD BY THIS POINT, THANK YOU.  You don't have to re-introduce yourself, man!  Your whole book does that for you!  Give me something else.
  
  You want to talk about decision making -- that's awesome.  Tell me something about decision making.  What's a choice with non-finite options look like?  Or whatever.  I don't care, I'm just so fucking sick of introductions to the point.  You've stripped me of my illusions; I am nude before your ultimate reality.  Now can I please, please have a towel?
  
  
• 16) Siddhartha
  
  Not my favorite book by Hesse, but still, not something I'm going to challenge.
  
  Quote's appropriate to the book.  I kind of wonder at devoting an entire page to it this late in the piece, but hey.  Could be worse.
  
  
• 17) Page 23
  
  17-23, that's nice.
  
  Anyway, both the best and worse I can say about this bit is that it's cute.  It doesn't quite fit -- in fact (flips quickly through earlier chapters) I'm pretty sure there haven't been any messages at all about Eris (or Bob) in the book, so all this stuff about a goddess of chaos and whatnot seems out of the blue.  It sort of gives me the notion that this is a document put together by Discordians for Discordians, which I don't think is actually the intent.
  
  
• 18 ) An Interview With The Queen
  
  Nice summary of Illuminatus!.
  
  
• 19) The Death of Enlightenment
  
  Possibly entirely because this chapter offers its own ironic commentary, I like it.  However, that doesn't necessarily excuse it.  I think you could probably work Nietzsche in a little more (or, if you want to go high-brow, Voltaire).  This feels like the sort of segue a philosobiography offers in between making points, but there aren't strong points sandwiching it.
  
  
• 20) Rough Guide to Freedom
  
  This is a little bit alienating what with all the references to Bad Guys, but it offers some useful advice for the culturejammer.  The fact that I don't think any brand-new would-be jammer has ever taken it to heart doesn't mean it can't keep being offered.  Some people get smart faster than others, and other people keep chasing poor ol' Maxwell forever.  (Of course, you can guess where my sympathies lie.)
  
  And it goes downhill from here.
  
  
• 21) Life Without Fences
  
  Who are you preaching to?  I certainly don't buy a new car when the Johnsons do.  I don't own a car.  Not because I don't want to, but because I'm fuck-ass poor.  Who are you targeting here, middle-class suburbanites who, what, browse the web looking for philosophical commentary on their own lives?  Makes me think of army recruitment posters.  "A Demographic Of One."
  
  The entire chapter Misses The Point, although like all things that Miss The Point, it offers a lovely ironic commentary.  Go back to that cutesy picture in What The Hell Are You Reading and stare at it until your eyes fucking bleed.
  
  
• 22) Key
  
  Okay, the first issue is that the table of contents link doesn't lead to Key, it leads to Life Without Fences.
  
  But that's secondary.
  
  Look, you know what I remember?  I remember Anonymous.  It's not hard to -- it wasn't that long ago.  If you don't remember Anonymous, don't worry too much... they were some people who said some stuff, had a couple rallies, then got bored and sat back down.
  
  The only good thing this chapter has to say is "find the others."  The rest of it is FNORD.  Yeah, the patriotic anthem is just as FNORD as the gun in your face (http://imgur.com/DGEfA.jpg).  Why is this here?  I really don't think the intent was we're supposed to come away from the BIP on a nice feel-good high.  If we were, why even bother putting the damn thing together?  People who feel happy with Where They Are don't do anything about it.

This is fucking brillant.

I gotta say, this kid has NAILED it. I'm totally psyched that one of you fucks finally figured it out.

Thanks, LMNO!  And here I was, worried that you wouldn't like it.  I'm glad that insecurity was for nothing!

Hey, weren't you going to tell me about some kind of higher purpose you had?  I wouldn't want to miss out on anything.  After all, it's so hard to make friends here!  Everyone's so mean to me all the time!

this is very interesting but what i would really like to know is what are your views on Cartesian duality?

Higher purpose? I don't follow. What are you getting at?

Quote from: fomenter on June 07, 2009, 06:07:37 AM
this is very interesting but what i would really like to know is what are your views on Cartesian duality?

:lulz:

Quote from: fomenter on June 07, 2009, 06:07:37 AM
this is very interesting but what i would really like to know is what are your views on Cartesian duality?

Y'know, I did actually read the archives here.

So since I know exactly the meme you're referencing, I'm going to give you an honest answer to the question you're not asking!

Cartesian duality may actually be misnomer.  Descartes seperated the Mind and the Body, but he was never consistent in his treatment of the Spirit.  Sometimes it was part of the Mind, but other times he seemed to give it its own, separate status ontologically.  What would probably be more accurate is "Cartesian pluralism."

Of course, that's not really my view, it's just a synopsis.  See, I'm a pragmatist -- in the tradition of Dewey.  See, in Deweysian pragmatism, questions of substance ontology are viewed as kind of missing the point.  We're much more concerned with escaping mean ol' uncle Donald with our cousins, Hueysian epistemology and Louisian ethics.

What did I tell you? This guy has ANSWERS!

that one got a laugh from me..

Deweysian pragmatism: well I think we found new one

Quote from: fomenter on June 07, 2009, 06:18:28 AM
that one got a laugh from me..

Oh fucking thank you.  The place was starting to scare me.

Quote from: Nigel on June 07, 2009, 12:19:38 AM

If you want something done better, what do you think is more effective... telling people that they did it wrong, or doing it your own fucking self? Maybe outlining a project, announcing it, and trying to drum up some support?

Or do you prance in with "yer doin' it wrong, hurrrr" and expect people to take it as a serious critique? A critique of a past project that's no longer being worked on... what do you expect, people to rewrite it to your specifications?

Come on.

Quote from: Nigel on June 07, 2009, 06:33:36 AM

Quote from: Nigel on June 07, 2009, 12:19:38 AM

what do you expect?

I was asked to write a critique on the BIP after I suggested that it might not be a truly Discordian piece and offered some reasons why.  I'm doing it, not because I think people are going to suddenly rewrite the project -- or, hell, even read my criticism, I mean, there's a pipe dream for you -- but to establish myself on the board.  I'm an arrogant bastard, but I'm not just hot air.

Quote from: Arafelis on June 07, 2009, 06:28:30 AM

Quote from: fomenter on June 07, 2009, 06:18:28 AM
that one got a laugh from me..

Oh fucking thank you.  The place was starting to scare me.

if you have read the archives and you act like a really real discordian, and tell us how we are doing it wrong already knowing the the kind of response that gets, it smells of sociological experiments, and having read the archives i am sure you know how much we love those...

you have walked out on some thin ice, scared is a wise response to danger. don't sweat it some of the best posters here have gotten of to a  rough start if you are smart you can make it work for you..

Quotedon't sweat it some of the best posters here have gotten of to a  rough start if you are smart you can make it work for you..

I knew I was in for a rocky start, but I needed to know where I was.  There's a lot you can't get from reading archives.

I'm an underemployed 20-something ex-philosophy student.  If I wasn't on a mission, I wouldn't be a stereotype.

(http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/7417/318038647fb4cb277ed.jpg) (http://img211.imageshack.us/my.php?image=318038647fb4cb277ed.jpg)

yatto is winning this thread, so far.

Also its amusing to note all my parts were the ones which were well recieved, yet I mostly hate them and wanted to edit them out and replace them with something interesting.

Also, posts like this make me think perhaps we should write a history of the BIP, and stick it somewhere prominent and obvious, so people know what is going on.

timeline...

thats kinda bikaaaw duelism

Quote from: Arafelis on June 07, 2009, 06:59:33 AM

Quotedon't sweat it some of the best posters here have gotten of to a  rough start if you are smart you can make it work for you..

I knew I was in for a rocky start, but I needed to know where I was.  There's a lot you can't get from reading archives.

I'm an underemployed 20-something ex-philosophy student.  If I wasn't on a mission, I wouldn't be a stereotype.

:lulz: Explains everything.

Well, much to my surprise, I found the critique readable and possessing some decent arguments, even if I still don't necessarily agree.

My biggest critique of the critique is that it's not very timely, but you knew that already. My second critique of the critique is :asshat:.

Quote from: Arafelis on June 07, 2009, 06:28:30 AM

Quote from: fomenter on June 07, 2009, 06:18:28 AM
that one got a laugh from me..

Oh fucking thank you.  The place was starting to scare me.

The one thing you can be pretty certain of around here is that people are laughing.  The question is one of with or at.

Quote from: fomenter on June 07, 2009, 06:50:04 AM

Quote from: Arafelis on June 07, 2009, 06:28:30 AM

Quote from: fomenter on June 07, 2009, 06:18:28 AM
that one got a laugh from me..

Oh fucking thank you.  The place was starting to scare me.

if you have read the archives and you act like a really real discordian, and tell us how we are doing it wrong already knowing the the kind of response that gets, it smells of sociological experiments, and having read the archives i am sure you know how much we love those...

you have walked out on some thin ice, scared is a wise response to danger. don't sweat it some of the best posters here have gotten of to a  rough start if you are smart you can make it work for you..

We'll see about THAT.

Quote from: Arafelis on June 07, 2009, 06:59:33 AM
I'm an underemployed 20-something ex-philosophy student. 

Explains everything.

i am being nice (50 post nice) i am not putting any money on him succeeding, but no harm in encouraging him to try..

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 07, 2009, 06:14:19 PM

Quote from: Arafelis on June 07, 2009, 06:59:33 AM
I'm an underemployed 20-something ex-philosophy student.

Explains everything.

very much so

Countercritisisms:

1) This is actually my favorite part of the BIP.  For years i heard and accepted that *other* people were fucked up monkeys who can't see reality as it is.  This piece here is what finally forced me to accepted that *all* people are that way, including me.

I also don't really see it as the same as Plato's cave.  The metaphors are similar, but the point is entirely different.  Plato was talking people seeing shadows, imitations, of these fancy ideal forms, to him a chair is really a shadow of some mystic ideal chair.  In the BIP that chair is a shadow of what people think a chair is, that the platonic forms exist solely inside our head.

Also: I point out that Cain and I are also underemployed 20 something ex philosophy students.

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 07, 2009, 06:14:19 PM

Quote from: Arafelis on June 07, 2009, 06:59:33 AM
I'm an underemployed 20-something ex-philosophy student.

Explains everything.

Quote from: Nigel on June 07, 2009, 04:10:17 PM

Quote from: Arafelis on June 07, 2009, 06:59:33 AM

Quotedon't sweat it some of the best posters here have gotten of to a  rough start if you are smart you can make it work for you..

I knew I was in for a rocky start, but I needed to know where I was.  There's a lot you can't get from reading archives.

I'm an underemployed 20-something ex-philosophy student.  If I wasn't on a mission, I wouldn't be a stereotype.

:lulz: Explains everything.

aww you guys are so adorable.  you're like ickle hate-twins  :lulz:

Quote from: Requia on June 07, 2009, 06:19:59 PM
Countercritisisms:

1) This is actually my favorite part of the BIP.  For years i heard and accepted that *other* people were fucked up monkeys who can't see reality as it is.  This piece here is what finally forced me to accepted that *all* people are that way, including me.

I also don't really see it as the same as Plato's cave.  The metaphors are similar, but the point is entirely different.  Plato was talking people seeing shadows, imitations, of these fancy ideal forms, to him a chair is really a shadow of some mystic ideal chair.  In the BIP that chair is a shadow of what people think a chair is, that the platonic forms exist solely inside our head.

Also: I point out that Cain and I are also underemployed 20 something ex philosophy students.

Cain was a foreign relations student.  Not quite the same thing.

Also, you two didn't take any "special time" to sneer at everyone else on the site before stating your case.

Quote from: TSosBR! on June 07, 2009, 06:25:12 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 07, 2009, 06:14:19 PM

Quote from: Arafelis on June 07, 2009, 06:59:33 AM
I'm an underemployed 20-something ex-philosophy student.

Explains everything.

Quote from: Nigel on June 07, 2009, 04:10:17 PM

Quote from: Arafelis on June 07, 2009, 06:59:33 AM

Quotedon't sweat it some of the best posters here have gotten of to a  rough start if you are smart you can make it work for you..

I knew I was in for a rocky start, but I needed to know where I was.  There's a lot you can't get from reading archives.

I'm an underemployed 20-something ex-philosophy student.  If I wasn't on a mission, I wouldn't be a stereotype.

:lulz: Explains everything.

aww you guys are so adorable.  you're like ickle hate-twins  :lulz:

Wonder Twin Powers....ACTIVATE! 

FORM OF A HATE FILLED OLD MAN!

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 07, 2009, 06:43:41 PM

Cain was a foreign relations student.  Not quite the same thing.

Also, you two didn't take any "special time" to sneer at everyone else on the site before stating your case.

Pretty sure he did philosophy too.  Or maybe that just comes down to his default level of knowledge being terrifyingly high.

Quote from: Requia on June 07, 2009, 06:19:59 PM
Countercritisisms:

1) This is actually my favorite part of the BIP.  For years i heard and accepted that *other* people were fucked up monkeys who can't see reality as it is.  This piece here is what finally forced me to accepted that *all* people are that way, including me.

I can't argue with that and I wouldn't want to try.  My objection to this part is that based on what I know, it is a part that will make many people want to put down the book.  That's a dealbreaker, ladies.

One thing that I would accept if someone can show me that Welcome To Prison (specifically) is a good complement to the PD -- that is, that people who put down the PD are exactly the sort of people who do not put down BIP, and vice versa.  I don't believe this to be the case, but I'm willing to be wrong.  I'd want to hear some more testimonials, at least, of people (who weren't involved in BIP)s' first experiences reading Welcome To Prison and/or the PD.

QuoteI also don't really see it as the same as Plato's cave.  The metaphors are similar, but the point is entirely different.  Plato was talking people seeing shadows, imitations, of these fancy ideal forms, to him a chair is really a shadow of some mystic ideal chair.  In the BIP that chair is a shadow of what people think a chair is, that the platonic forms exist solely inside our head.

Plato's cave never directly referenced his Realism, which is part of why the metaphor is so timeless.  Platonic Realism (or Platonic Idealism, they both mean the same thing, weirdly) hasn't survived the ages.  The way I've experienced a lot of people encountering Plato's Cave is pretty much exactly the way the BIP comes across to me.  "You're stuck somewhere that you don't realize you're stuck in for a long time, because that's all you know.  Then you experience something that makes you think there's more out there.  All the sudden, you realize just how stuck you are."  The cave metaphor goes on, of course, but it's that opener that sticks with people, and that's what the BIP seems to be pushing as well.

QuoteAlso: I point out that Cain and I are also underemployed 20 something ex philosophy students.

Awesome!  What's your mission?

To stop being an underemployed ex philosophy student.

Plato's Realism has survived, in roughly the same sense a zombie has.  The academics have rejected it to an extent, but it's ingrained into the way mosbunal people think.  I have a suspicion that this predates Plato, and the whole thing is based off of people not being able to tell the difference between an object and the filters the brain uses for object recognition.

Quote from: Requia on June 07, 2009, 06:53:06 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 07, 2009, 06:43:41 PM

Cain was a foreign relations student.  Not quite the same thing.

Also, you two didn't take any "special time" to sneer at everyone else on the site before stating your case.

Pretty sure he did philosophy too.  Or maybe that just comes down to his default level of knowledge being terrifyingly high.

I did philosophy in my first year, yes, and two years previous to that as well.  And touched on Political Philosophy in my third year, for my Ideologies class.

Though to be honest in that year I learnt nothing new from the previous two, hence why I junked it for Classical studies.

Quote from: TSosBR! on June 07, 2009, 06:25:12 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 07, 2009, 06:14:19 PM

Quote from: Arafelis on June 07, 2009, 06:59:33 AM
I'm an underemployed 20-something ex-philosophy student.

Explains everything.

Quote from: Nigel on June 07, 2009, 04:10:17 PM

Quote from: Arafelis on June 07, 2009, 06:59:33 AM

Quotedon't sweat it some of the best posters here have gotten of to a  rough start if you are smart you can make it work for you..

I knew I was in for a rocky start, but I needed to know where I was.  There's a lot you can't get from reading archives.

I'm an underemployed 20-something ex-philosophy student.  If I wasn't on a mission, I wouldn't be a stereotype.

:lulz: Explains everything.

aww you guys are so adorable.  you're like ickle hate-twins  :lulz:

WONDER TWIN POWERS, ACTIVATE

SHAPE OF ICY BILE

Quote from: Requia on June 07, 2009, 07:54:22 PM
To stop being an underemployed ex philosophy student.

May I recommend... science?

Most terrorists studied science at University.

Therefore, it is a dangerous career choice.

Quote from: Nigel on June 07, 2009, 08:26:29 PM

Quote from: Requia on June 07, 2009, 07:54:22 PM
To stop being an underemployed ex philosophy student.

May I recommend... science?

I'm going to second this recommendation.  I think everyone interested in philosophy should be forced to take at least two years of math, one year of each major scientific discipline (or three in any single), and two years of computer science.  For their bachelor's.

Quote from: Cain on June 07, 2009, 08:27:11 PM
Most terrorists studied science at University.

Therefore, it is a dangerous career choice.

:lulz:

I'm also an underemployed ex physics student, thats not working out any better.

You could turn this into a playable game

http://dresdencodak.com/2006/12/03/dungeons-and-discourse/

So would we all have the Discordian prestige class?

Tempting actually, but I'm not taking on any new RPG design projects until i finish the d20 Modern rewrite.

Quote from: Requia on June 07, 2009, 08:38:26 PM
I'm also an underemployed ex physics student, thats not working out any better.

Yeah, I know a lot of unemployed physicists right now. Then again, an undergrad physics almost any kind of degree is pretty useless.

QuoteTempting actually, but I'm not taking on any new RPG design projects until i finish the d20 Modern rewrite.

Nice.  Share a link when you're done.  That was one of the most promising systems I've seen in a while.  You fixing up the crap skill system?

Quote from: Nigel on June 07, 2009, 09:13:43 PM

Quote from: Requia on June 07, 2009, 08:38:26 PM
I'm also an underemployed ex physics student, thats not working out any better.

Yeah, I know a lot of unemployed physicists right now. Then again, an undergrad physics almost any kind of degree is pretty useless.

And many Masters, as well.

Educational inflation

Yeah, I'm going for a PhD, no reason to half-ass it.

The only  thing I'm scared of, choosing the sciences, is getting stuck in dissertation limbo.

anyone should be able to do at this college... without you know any effort at all
http://www.pcci.edu/

:)

other then that

may I suggest



...drum roll...


Thunder Bay

Ya is anyone actually surprised there.

Did the last few chapters (16-22).  Don't really think the comic or cut-outs need critique.  May go back and do some of the ones I said I was going to go back to, depending on interest.  Otherwise trying to percolate and distill a rant into something readable.

Quote from: Arafelis on June 08, 2009, 03:20:59 AM
Did the last few chapters (16-22).  Don't really think the comic or cut-outs need critique.  May go back and do some of the ones I said I was going to go back to, depending on interest.  Otherwise trying to percolate and distill a rant into something readable.

no one cares

Arafelis, I appreciate the willingness to finish the critique in the face of yawns and snubs (lol).

Some of it I consider pretty good criticism, but I'm really not going to get into that.

What I would like to do is extend an offer for you to write something for our current publication, Intermittens.

I believe the current in-progress issues' topics are "Discordianism in Theory and Practice", "Operation Mindfuck", .... ummmmm.... there's a couple more. Dig into the first 2 pages of this (TFYS,S) subforum and you'll find the threads.

Quote from: Thurnez Isa on June 07, 2009, 10:12:08 PM
anyone should be able to do at this college... without you know any effort at all
http://www.pcci.edu/

:)

The closest thing to a PhD in any of the sciences they offer is a "Science Education" degree, and somehow I doubt that actually involves much science...

Quote from: Telarus on June 08, 2009, 06:12:41 AM
Arafelis, I appreciate the willingness to finish the critique in the face of yawns and snubs (lol).

Some of it I consider pretty good criticism, but I'm really not going to get into that.

What I would like to do is extend an offer for you to write something for our current publication, Intermittens.

I believe the current in-progress issues' topics are "Discordianism in Theory and Practice", "Operation Mindfuck", .... ummmmm.... there's a couple more. Dig into the first 2 pages of this (TFYS,S) subforum and you'll find the threads.

Come on, man, he's too lofty to offer his own prodigious original talent to some lowly publication like ours

what are you thinking?

Quote from: Thurnez Isa on June 07, 2009, 10:12:08 PM
anyone should be able to do at this college... without you know any effort at all
http://www.pcci.edu/

:)

It's a lot easier to just do this:  http://thunderwoodcollege.com/

Quote from: NigelCome on, man, he's too lofty to offer his own prodigious original talent to some lowly publication like ours

what are you thinking?

You're kidding, right?  Somebody offers me (as mentioned an underemployed ex-philosophy student -- with, which I will now add, a resume that might be improved by being a literal pile of shit) a chance to publish something that might even appear in print, on whatever subject I want, and receive attribution for it... and you think I'm going to turn them down?

That's not the kind of crazy I am, kiddo.

Quote from: Arafelis on June 08, 2009, 07:28:53 AM

Quote from: NigelCome on, man, he's too lofty to offer his own prodigious original talent to some lowly publication like ours

what are you thinking?

You're kidding, right?  Somebody offers me (as mentioned an underemployed ex-philosophy student -- with, which I will now add, a resume that might be improved by being a literal pile of shit) a chance to publish something that might even appear in print, on whatever subject I want, and receive attribution for it... and you think I'm going to turn them down?

That's not the kind of crazy I am, kiddo.

Then do it. Kiddo.

Hey, give me a little while to read the existing issues and think something up.  Fun as it is, the board hasn't quite hit #1 priority in my life yet.

Quote from: Nigel on June 08, 2009, 07:35:45 AM

Quote
That's not the kind of crazy I am, kiddo.

Then do it. Kiddo.

:lulz:

Sorry that still cracks me up. Kiddo.

(edit bbcode fail)

Should people in their mid-twenties refer to people in their late 30s/early 40s as "kiddo"?

I am unsure of this social rule.

Hi Arafelis!

I enjoyed reading your critique. I always enjoy hearing outside opinions on the book, and appreciate the detailed feedback.

the BIP pamphlet has had two editors, me and lmno.. (lmno deserves the lion's share of the credit) in both cases, we were merely compilers of essays which we felt supported our idea of the Black Iron Prison. These pieces were not written by a single writer. There was no central outline prior to their writing. So if the pamphlet lacks coherency, it is because it is a discordian stone soup composed of completely independent pieces.

in my opinion, If it provoked this thorough response from you, I think it accomplished our goals. Whether you liked it or not, (and it sounds to me like you did like it) I'm glad you came and told us about it


so far, the discordian writing process, in its full steam mode, involves a lot of editors and a lot of writers and a lot of cutting and pasting and fiddling until it works right. If you like this idea of the Black Iron Prison, and you don't think me or lmno really compiled a good selection, please write your own! We don't want to be the final word on it, you know? There are a few people right now who are writing their own version of the BIP. Like writing your own version of the PD, I think this is the discordian equivalent of building a lightsaber. So if you feel up for it - please one-up the current literature! Everybody wins if you do it well.



Biplane,

Lovecram

Quote from: Triple Zero on June 08, 2009, 01:14:28 PM

Quote from: Nigel on June 08, 2009, 07:35:45 AM

Quote
That's not the kind of crazy I am, kiddo.

Then do it. Kiddo.

:lulz:

Sorry that still cracks me up. Kiddo.

(edit bbcode fail)

I know; I think I kind of like it.

Quote from: Cain on June 08, 2009, 01:19:09 PM
Should people in their mid-twenties refer to people in their late 30s/early 40s as "kiddo"?

I am unsure of this social rule.

If it makes him feel good inside, I'm all for it.

By the same token I don't see why he should have any problems with us referring to him as "spanky"

After reading Arafelis' critique of the BIP I am thoroughly convinced he only read half of the Law of Fives.

And someone mentioned doing a history of the BIP and I know I've done that once or twice.  It used to be up on the first page of the wiki but seems to have been edited out as different revisions have been made.  I think the first couple of pages of the stickied thread "What Is This Section About" has a rough thumb-nail sketch of what it's been about. 

But what I think Arafelis is missing is that the BIP was really meant to be a crowbar.  To allow some light in without being a guiding light.  The point was the reader, if he or she so choosed, would find the guiding light on their own.  For example, he criticizes my piece "A Conclusion is Simply Where You Stopped Thinking" because I wasn't talking more about thinking for yourself. 

It would defeat the purpose of the piece if I were to start suggesting HOW one thinks for themself.  Because they are just leaving one goose chase for another.  I have a different set of lenses than does the reader. 

So the aim was to raise awareness and raze unawareness. 

Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on June 08, 2009, 02:32:26 PM
By the same token I don't see why he should have any problems with us referring to him as "spanky"

Ooooooh it's ON!  :lulz:

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on June 08, 2009, 02:56:34 PM

So the aim was to raise awareness and raze unawareness. 

:lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :lulz:

:mittens:

I'd say, for the most part, there was nothing wrong with the BIP.  It just doesn't do anything for me.

And there is a lot of talk about thinking for oneself, but what then?

Grow a pair and put some shit out there.  There's a whole lot of hand-waving and finger-wiggling going on, miming the outline of the invisible and magical door of independent thought.  Sometimes it seems like that's all there is going on.

And this problem isn't just with the BIP.  But this could make the BIP better...

Build something, that it may be torn down.  Let others sharpen their claws by tearing into ideas you put forth.

Quote from: Anton on June 10, 2009, 08:36:53 AM
I'd say, for the most part, there was nothing wrong with the BIP.  It just doesn't do anything for me.

And there is a lot of talk about thinking for oneself, but what then?

Um... maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but that seems to be sort of contradictory. It would be pointless for the BIP to say "Think for yourself, schmuck!" immediately followed with "now think about this." Then the reader would be all like "LOL, you're trying to tell me what to think right after telling me to think for myself! Fail!" and then they would find out who the authors were and poop on their heads.

Quote from: Anton on June 10, 2009, 08:36:53 AM
Grow a pair and put some shit out there.  There's a whole lot of hand-waving and finger-wiggling going on, miming the outline of the invisible and magical door of independent thought.  Sometimes it seems like that's all there is going on.

That's all the BIP needs to be. Going any further runs a very high risk of spoiling the whole point of independent thought. You can't guide someone through their own independent thinking; that doesn't make sense. What you can do is try and make them aware of the difference between thinking for themselves and allowing their thoughts to be directed.

And I think all the content on this forum since the BIP's publication constitutes growing a pair and putting shit out there. Intermittens and the forthcoming Et Cetera Discordia are both examples of shit being put out there. And they are wonderful shit, IMO.

Quote from: Anton on June 10, 2009, 08:36:53 AM
Build something, that it may be torn down.  Let others sharpen their claws by tearing into ideas you put forth.

Again, there's no reason to put it in the BIP. People are more likely to dismiss the whole thing as hypocrisy if it tries to include a shiny new worldview along with the original message.

Quote from: Anton on June 10, 2009, 08:36:53 AM
I'd say, for the most part, there was nothing wrong with the BIP.  It just doesn't do anything for me.

And there is a lot of talk about thinking for oneself, but what then?

When you read the BIP did you see the URLs for this site and POEE?

Now, put on your thinking cap and think, why would we have done that? 

Quote from: Anton on June 10, 2009, 08:36:53 AM
And there is a lot of talk about thinking for oneself, but what then?

:lulz:

I really hope the irony was intentional.

Quote from: Nigel on June 10, 2009, 05:12:36 PM

Quote from: Anton on June 10, 2009, 08:36:53 AM
And there is a lot of talk about thinking for oneself, but what then?

:lulz:

I really hope the irony was intentional.

news feed  - black iron prison critique "And there is a lot of talk about thinking for oneself, but what then?"

http://www.principiadiscordia.com/bip/28.php




"hey!" said Golden Rod. "This pamphlet is just a bunch of complaining! I mean, they've spotted a lot of problems but where are the solutions?"

Nopants scowled. "You're waiting for them to tell you the answers?" He guffawed. "And what makes you think you can trust them anyway?"

"Well I sure can't trust you," said Golden Rod.

Nopants smirked.

Quote from: Cainad on June 10, 2009, 11:55:28 AM
Um... maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but that seems to be sort of contradictory. It would be pointless for the BIP to say "Think for yourself, schmuck!" immediately followed with "now think about this." Then the reader would be all like "LOL, you're trying to tell me what to think right after telling me to think for myself! Fail!" and then they would find out who the authors were and poop on their heads.

Don't tell me you're afraid of a little head-poop.

QuoteThat's all the BIP needs to be. Going any further runs a very high risk of spoiling the whole point of independent thought.

I for one think it could use a few outrageous claims and spurious arguments.

Quote from: Anton on June 11, 2009, 08:52:58 AM

Quote from: Cainad on June 10, 2009, 11:55:28 AM
Um... maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but that seems to be sort of contradictory. It would be pointless for the BIP to say "Think for yourself, schmuck!" immediately followed with "now think about this." Then the reader would be all like "LOL, you're trying to tell me what to think right after telling me to think for myself! Fail!" and then they would find out who the authors were and poop on their heads.

Don't tell me you're afraid of a little head-poop.

I'm not the one at risk of having my head pooped on. But in any case, the BIP should be a catalyst for thoughtful introspection and discussion, not pooping. We have the forum for that.

Quote from: Anton on June 11, 2009, 08:52:58 AM

QuoteThat's all the BIP needs to be. Going any further runs a very high risk of spoiling the whole point of independent thought.

I for one think it could use a few outrageous claims and spurious arguments.

I suppose that, since it was originally known as PD '06, there's something to be said for putting in some silly, over-the-top claims. However, it really isn't the same as the PD by any means; it's not even analogous to it. The PD established the goofball religion flavor of Discordianism, and I don't think the BIP would gain anything by going that route. I think it's better for it to be relatively plain about its claims than to invite arguments with dummies who mistook the jokes for the actual message.

Quote from: Cainad on June 11, 2009, 11:35:05 AM
I'm not the one at risk of having my head pooped on.

Head-poop by proxy, then.

QuoteBut in any case, the BIP should be a catalyst for thoughtful introspection and discussion, not pooping. We have the forum for that.

So, you don't consider pooping a valid and integral component of thoughtful reflection?

QuoteI suppose that, since it was originally known as PD '06, there's something to be said for putting in some silly, over-the-top claims. However, it really isn't the same as the PD by any means; it's not even analogous to it. The PD established the goofball religion flavor of Discordianism, and I don't think the BIP would gain anything by going that route. I think it's better for it to be relatively plain about its claims than to invite arguments with dummies who mistook the jokes for the actual message.

So the primary goal of the project is/was accessibility, to reach as many people as possible?  Fair.  But I'm thinking most of the people who come here already have some familiarity with Discordianism.

Quote from: Anton on June 11, 2009, 03:52:38 PM

QuoteI suppose that, since it was originally known as PD '06, there's something to be said for putting in some silly, over-the-top claims. However, it really isn't the same as the PD by any means; it's not even analogous to it. The PD established the goofball religion flavor of Discordianism, and I don't think the BIP would gain anything by going that route. I think it's better for it to be relatively plain about its claims than to invite arguments with dummies who mistook the jokes for the actual message.

So the primary goal of the project is/was accessibility, to reach as many people as possible?  Fair.  But I'm thinking most of the people who come here already have some familiarity with Discordianism.

In my mind, no.  (anyone else who was involved feel free to correct me if I go astray)  What you describe would essentially be "preaching to the choir".  That wasn't the aim.  The aim was to grow the choir, not just with other Discordians who weren't at PD.COM, but also people who don't know Discordianism.  I don't feel like the goal was so much to literally spread Discordianism, but more to spread the ideas held by Discordianism. 

So we wanted to spread the "Think For Yourself" meme, not because it was a good Discordian meme.  But, because it was a good meme, that happened to be Discordian.  In my view, it is less important whether or not one ends up literally self-identifying as a Discordian after they read the BIP and whatever else we turn them onto.  It is more important to get more people to understand all of the influences around them that they've been blind to.  Because when you can tap into and turn on that awareness, more possibilities open up.  The map you were using was giving you limited movement on only a small part of the territory. 

The "Primary Goal", when it was first proposed, was born out of a general tone of the board that the PD was "out of date":  It was a 50-year-old book written by a bunch of hippies with 5 (or so) good ideas, and dressed up in jokes that either aren't relevant, aren't funny, or that we've heard umpteen times.

So, a few of us proposed a board contest, to "re-write the PD" in modern terms, as the current roster of PD members saw Discordia.

As you can probably tell, the general attitude at this board at the time was Gallows Humor, Trolling, Science, Politics, and Mockery*.

So, there were a lot of essays written.  One of them made a reference to the PKD phrase "Black Iron Prison", and it stuck.  I took a large chuck of those essays, and threw them together in Microsoft Word.  Someone else grabbed it, added a couple of graphics, and turned it into a PDF.  The rest kind of snowballed.


So, in answer to your question, the BIP was created to remake Discordia in the PD.com 2006 Image.  





















*This is only a partial list.  What the PD "was" can be found in the '06 archives.

Yes! A different 'holy book' by a different Cabal.

Quote from: Anton on June 11, 2009, 03:52:38 PM

QuoteBut in any case, the BIP should be a catalyst for thoughtful introspection and discussion, not pooping. We have the forum for that.

So, you don't consider pooping a valid and integral component of thoughtful reflection?

It's 1 part thoughtful and 3 parts emotional*. So, no, not really. There are times when it's very appropriate, and other times where it doesn't result in anything but a bunch of foul moods.





*obviously, I totally made that up and it is not up for discussion

Quote from: Anton on June 11, 2009, 08:52:58 AM

Quote from: Cainad on June 10, 2009, 11:55:28 AM
Um... maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but that seems to be sort of contradictory. It would be pointless for the BIP to say "Think for yourself, schmuck!" immediately followed with "now think about this." Then the reader would be all like "LOL, you're trying to tell me what to think right after telling me to think for myself! Fail!" and then they would find out who the authors were and poop on their heads.

Don't tell me you're afraid of a little head-poop.

QuoteThat's all the BIP needs to be. Going any further runs a very high risk of spoiling the whole point of independent thought.

I for one think it could use a few outrageous claims and spurious arguments.

Wouldn't your argument carry more weight if you wrote a contributary peice?

Hawk,
thinking for himself ITT.

Quote from: Cainad on June 12, 2009, 03:23:53 PM
[pooping is] 1 part thoughtful and 3 parts emotional*. So, no, not really. There are times when it's very appropriate, and other times where it doesn't result in anything but a bunch of foul moods.

While that is true, I guess what I'm trying to say here is that pooping is like nuclear weapons: It's not about using it, it's about having it.
In my book, a willingness to poop on anything constitutes a valuable kind of open-mindedness.

Quote*obviously, I totally made that up and it is not up for discussion

Oh, shit.  Should I have been using asterisks this whole time?  I guess that explains a lot.*

*from the Book of Anton Who Is Not Actually Named Anton, ch. 2, v. 1

Quote from: Hawk on June 13, 2009, 06:01:29 PM
Wouldn't your argument carry more weight if you wrote a contributary peice?

Possibly.  But I don't really care.  Besides, as it is written in the Book of Anton Who Is Not Actually Named Anton, "If you should feel like cobbling together my quotations into a proper document entitled the Book of Anton Who Is Not Actually Named Anton, then I certainly won't get in your way as long as I reap the profits."*

*ibid., ch. 1, v. 2

QuoteHawk,
thinking for himself ITT.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.  Cute.

 :kingmeh: