Principia Discordia

Pathways and Shrapnel: An open-source study and exploration.

(http://www.blackironprison.com/images/9/95/Path.jpg)

Birth and Death are 100% Grade A Certainties (oh yeah taxes too, or so the saying goes). The only questions seem to be around matters of when and how. We know we emerge from our Mother, in some fashion, and then return to the Earth at some undetermined place and time. But we know it WILL happen.

We burst into the world at Point A, birth. Or sometimes we have to be pulled out depending on our level of infantile stubbornness. Immediately we set foot at the beginning of a Path. It is one of many Paths that eventually lead to Point B. At Point B we may exit in a brilliant flash of flame and sound. One of our vital life-sustaining mechanisms may crap out. Or perhaps someone will bring a bloody war to our land and we die in a house to house cleansing. Of course, it also might be something as unceremonious as having a heart-attack in the middle of a massive bowel movement. But hey, shit happens right?

In any event, we have before us a series of roads to take to get to Point B. Of course, as young infants we really don't have a clear concept of Point B, so it initially doesn't really inform our Path. Well, there are natural fight or flight responses like "Feed Me." But it's really focused more around infantile narcissm than it is any actual fear of starving to death. Indeed, as kiddos we see that damn Coyote fall off the cliff a zillion times and he keeps on breathing. So the worst that might happen to us is we turn into an accordion for a few seconds. As we grow, however, we establish more control and more responsibility for our own orienteering. At every step of the way (or maybe it's every other step, I'm not entirely sure. It would be quite a feat if anyone figured it out), it seems, there is a new turn that can be taken; left, right, left-right. Which do we choose? Why do we choose? Are we even aware of it?

Along the paths there is another phenomenon that is occuring. As we are walking our Paths, and deciding where to go (whether through instince, deliberate thought process, because someone told us so), we are subjected to, and subjecting others to, Shrapnel.

(http://www.blackironprison.com/images/thumb/8/8a/Shrapnel.jpg/458px-Shrapnel.jpg)

Shrapnel are the bits of experience, events, ideas, and so on that are flying around as we walk the Paths. It's as though there are roadside bombs that are in a continuous state of detination. For example, we walk along the path as a young child, and at a certain point, we are subjected to Religious Shrapnel. Whether or not to follow our parents' deities? Whether or not to NOT follow deities? Whether or not to follow a deity different from our family's? Whether or not I'll burn in hell if I don't eat the cracker? As we are approaching the age of 18, we experience Shrapnel from education and career. Guidance counselors are asking you if you want to attend the college fairs. Your Dad is asking you if you are going to that ivy-league college he did. Or perhaps your Mom runs a flower shop and is expecting you to take over. After all, it is called Me and My Daughter's Blooms. But do you really want to peddle flowers the rest of your life?

There are, of course many, many other examples of Shrapnel. Also. it is important to understand that we aren't passive bystanders in all of this. We too are part of the Shrapnel creating process. When we become parents we subject our children to expectations, wishes, and wants for their lives. (If all parents' wishes for their children actually came true, we'd be living in a world comprised solely of Doctors and Lawyers. You'd never be able to get onto a golf course.) As neighbors, we may be part of a collective attitude about how people's houses and yards should look. (Oh look, Sanderson is putting out another fucking Pink Flamingo. And gosh, it looks like it is fellating the Garden Gnome! Gasp!) As members of Political Party X, we put signs in our yard saying, vote for Rudy Obama. We are throwing out just as much as others are throwing at us.

Do not be disillusioned about Shrapnel. It isn't all bad. There is the Shrapnel of Art and Creativity. Walking by a park and seeing some folks drumming and creating music. (Drum Circles aren't just for hippies anymore.) The infective beat that is travelling across the air, that mandates that you move and groove. The lady down the road who is a brilliant artist, displaying her work at the local Sidewalk Art Exhibit. There is the Shrapnel of Happy Childlike Anarchy. Your little girl acting like a goon, and you can't help but to want to play along. Experiencing the joy in improvisational imagination and going with the flow. This is the sort of Shrapnel you WANT embedded in your flesh. For it too will inform your path. And besides, when you ARE strolling on your path, wouldn't it be more enjoyable if you were doing a little jig along the way, while whistling a fun little tune? Whistle while you walk. It seemed to do the trick for the Dwarvish 7.

So what to take away from this? Well, first off, make sure you read the other observations of Shrapnel. And then, take a few minutes and think about your path. Think about where you've been, who've you encountered, what you put in your mouth (ewww, you did that?), and how've you navigated life thus far. As you think of the different experiences you've had, think of what might have happened if you hadn't had those experiences. Caution: the point isn't to think about how you could re-write your life. That part's done, no good to dwell on it. But, how can you use this perspective going forward? What kind of mental armor can you obtain to shield you from that which may blow you off course? What kind of mechanisms can you construct to welcome in those things in this world which may benefit you? Or better yet, how can you have more bearing on your bearings?

Because seriously, you know Point B is coming soon. Why not make it one hell of a ride?


The preceding is one man's take.  Please to be expanding and contracting on this idea.  Relating to the subject matter, while we are all in this one place together, we've all come from different places.  This can work to our advantage as we work this stuff out.  

An excerpt from uncollated notes. It may ramble a bit, and I've yet to really figure out exactly where I'm going with this. (As I may have mentioned in another thread)
These are taken from a notepad full of Notes entitled 'The building blocks of bullshit'

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

We are products of time. Time is (fortunately) One-Way only, in this universe, at least for us. It stops everything happening at once, and it preserves SOME sense of mystery in the future.

Some of us can 'see' things happening before they happen, but this is generally a function of  experience- knowing that based on previous encounters with situations, we can predict, given enough parameters, that a similar situation may arise, solely on what we observe as a new event develops.

Given this,the capacity to predict outcomes, allied to the element of surprise, can allow us to deal with meeting new people, contemplating new ideas or crossing an unusually busy street, without it becoming everyday and mundane or frighteningly overwhelming.

The people we know have connections to us, of many types and combinations. It is often impossible to seperate a parents love from a their desire to raise an obedient, socially accepted child.

We all have a good childhood. We all have a bad childhood.

There is a comforting, yet limiting, factor in existing relationships with people and things. We usually know a true friend from a hostile enemy, yet we can often be hurt most by those we love, or we can receive the greatest charity from those we fear.

Time develops these relationships, and because they can (and do) limit us, they guide our lives from A to B. In a universe of seemingly random events, the smallest decision can have the greatest consequences.

Right Place/ Wrong Place at the Wrong Time/ Right Time, or any other combination. And often due to unforseen circumstances arising from the smallest decisions.

To begin to forge your OWN path from A to B, you must begin to take control of the connections in your relationships. There are many choices here, and none have guaranteed outcomes. You may decide to take a direct approach, bulldoze your way through limiting factors, and still end up on the scenic route, miles from 'civilisation'.

Ultimately, any effect you may undertake upon your journey will be limited by TIME, by developing relationships, by random elements. But still if you can identify these limitations, you have the advantage of knowing what you're looking at. And knowledge is power. Or knowledge is an appreciation of art....

I forget.

clarify:

so basically the 'shrapnel' model posits that we're under constant bombardment by shrapnel - bits of meaning and symbols exploded from other nearby points (such as religion, the media, all those things on your diagram). Exposure to these bits causes our path to change - sometimes towards it, sometimes away from it. We too are in a constant state of explosion, projecting shrapnel into others paths


is that what you're going for, Rev?

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 03, 2007, 02:39:40 PM
Point A and Point B are 100% certified Grade, er, A Certainties.  The only questions seem to be a matter of when and how. 

Interesting discourse, kind of an updated "War in Iraq" colored version of the discussion on Dharma and Karma.

I like the shrapnel (karma) concept, although I think I'd prefer to be a guided missle than a roadside IED. Having a rocket powered ass is way sexier than a couple of rusty old mortar shells stuffed up the back end of a VW van.

On the journey from point A to B ... what concept of those being the same place?

RWHN and Payne -- I really, really dig both of these posts.

The shrapnel thing as expounded by RWHN in the opener is kind of what I was getting at with my ripples thing a while back. What we do is not limited to our own bubble. We project things outward. Like the whole "a butterfly flapping its wings can start a monsoon in India" sort of concept, except a little less stretched. More of the thought that the actions you take are going to have equal and opposite reactions as kinetic energy is transferred through a system. We don't live in closed systems, so when I "shove," something is going to either "shove back" or "get shoved." Insert whatever you want to replace shove.

I think I like a mixture of shrapnel and ripples--because some things we do are more like ripples. For example, how I treat the people around me is less shrapnel but more of a constant outward ripple. Whereas when I hand off my novella to someone, as I'm going to do this afternoon, that's shrapnel. Or the post-it notes I leave with little messages in strange places, that's shrapnel. Someone who overhears me screaming obscenities/bizarre statements when I'm marauding through the streets is receiving shrapnel. Whereas my friend who is marauding alongside me is receiving more ripples, in that it's constant.

Does that make sense?

I think I'm diverging a little from where this started/was going. Sorry about that.

Payne, I really dig your response, and I want to say things directly to it, but I'm having a retardedly busy day at work (only a half day, yet I have tons of crap to do; wtf? :x ) so I will get to that later, I hope.

Quote from: Professor Cramulus on July 03, 2007, 04:07:10 PM
clarify:

so basically the 'shrapnel' model posits that we're under constant bombardment by shrapnel - bits of meaning and symbols exploded from other nearby points (such as religion, the media, all those things on your diagram). Exposure to these bits causes our path to change - sometimes towards it, sometimes away from it. We too are in a constant state of explosion, projecting shrapnel into others paths


is that what you're going for, Rev?

Partly yes.  Though for clarification I should point out to all that my diagram was never meant to be "it".  In other words, I fully recognize and expect there are things I've missed. 

Yes, I think we are constantly being subjected to micro and macro events that can alter where we go on our paths.  In some cases it may me one monumental event, say 9/11 for anyone who survived or was personally affected by that event.  It may have caused someone to start drinking.  It may have caused someone to stop drinking.  It may have helped someone find their religion, (which they may later foist upon someone else or not), it may have caused someone to lose their religion. 

The flip of that is all of the tiny "little things."  Perhaps consistent exposure to second-hand smoke leads to some sort of ailment.  Perhaps consistent exposure to Prescripton Drug ads desensetizes a teenager to the dangers of the drugs and so when he sees some pills at a party, he doesn't think twice before popping one. 

Again, I want to point out that I don't see Shrapnel, the continuous detinatoins being a negative, by definition.  I use Shrapnel because it conjures the images of little bits of "stuff" flying in various directions.  It iconifies how their can be different kinds of bits. 

So to make a long answer short, yes partly.  I'm still exploring this myself. 

Sometimes you open a can of worms.  And sometimes, you open a factory that produces cans of worms.

My question is, how do you distinguish between "shrapnel" and your own will?  Even the idea that this shrapnel has to potential to decide your journey, is shrapnel itself.  Payne's point about taking control of your connections is an important one; I think it's important to realize that at the end of the day, we're all on different paths that lead to the same destination, that the destination is already a given and so should be taken out of the equation as a consideration for which path to choose.

How you get there and when you get there is a function of a lot of things; according to Murphy's Law, it will be at the most inopportune moment, regardless of the choices you've made.  Perhaps it is for that reason that those who are prepared to die tend to live longer, on average.

This concept of constant bombardment by shrapnel is, I think, something most people have some awareness of.  Many people are afraid of going into uncharted intellectual territory so they don the full-body-armor of ignorance and piety; other people are so unaware of themselves that they actively seek lanmines because being pushed along by the inertia of others is their only form of locomotion.

This is also similar to an idea I've been tinkering with for a while which I hope to be able to write about soon.  It'll be interesting to see how this develops, anyway.

Quote from: Darth Cupcake on July 03, 2007, 04:31:28 PM
RWHN and Payne -- I really, really dig both of these posts.

The shrapnel thing as expounded by RWHN in the opener is kind of what I was getting at with my ripples thing a while back. What we do is not limited to our own bubble. We project things outward. Like the whole "a butterfly flapping its wings can start a monsoon in India" sort of concept, except a little less stretched. More of the thought that the actions you take are going to have equal and opposite reactions as kinetic energy is transferred through a system. We don't live in closed systems, so when I "shove," something is going to either "shove back" or "get shoved." Insert whatever you want to replace shove.

I think I like a mixture of shrapnel and ripples--because some things we do are more like ripples. For example, how I treat the people around me is less shrapnel but more of a constant outward ripple. Whereas when I hand off my novella to someone, as I'm going to do this afternoon, that's shrapnel. Or the post-it notes I leave with little messages in strange places, that's shrapnel. Someone who overhears me screaming obscenities/bizarre statements when I'm marauding through the streets is receiving shrapnel. Whereas my friend who is marauding alongside me is receiving more ripples, in that it's constant.

Does that make sense?

I think I'm diverging a little from where this started/was going. Sorry about that.

Payne, I really dig your response, and I want to say things directly to it, but I'm having a retardedly busy day at work (only a half day, yet I have tons of crap to do; wtf? :x ) so I will get to that later, I hope.

No, it's cool.  That's why I called it an open-source study.  I fully expected, and hoped, people would dive in and tag their takes onto it.  I'm just one dope looking at all of this and it's good to get more hands in the muck.  

The ripple thing makes sense too.  More fluid, signifying a more undulating consistent exposure to something.  And then perhaps an event is a bigger wave that knocks you off course.  Or perhaps knocks you on to a better course.  Anyway, I have more thoughts brewing about this stuff as I hinted at, but I'll knock it out in a separate post, though probably not today.  Anyway thanks for adding your take onto this and by all means have at it.  If it gets the juices flowing again I'm all for it.  

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 03, 2007, 05:46:07 PM

Partly yes.  Though for clarification I should point out to all that my diagram was never meant to be "it".  In other words, I fully recognize and expect there are things I've missed. 

Yes, I think we are constantly being subjected to micro and macro events that can alter where we go on our paths.  In some cases it may me one monumental event, say 9/11 for anyone who survived or was personally affected by that event.  It may have caused someone to start drinking.  It may have caused someone to stop drinking.  It may have helped someone find their religion, (which they may later foist upon someone else or not), it may have caused someone to lose their religion. 

The flip of that is all of the tiny "little things."  Perhaps consistent exposure to second-hand smoke leads to some sort of ailment.  Perhaps consistent exposure to Prescripton Drug ads desensetizes a teenager to the dangers of the drugs and so when he sees some pills at a party, he doesn't think twice before popping one. 

Again, I want to point out that I don't see Shrapnel, the continuous detinatoins being a negative, by definition.  I use Shrapnel because it conjures the images of little bits of "stuff" flying in various directions.  It iconifies how their can be different kinds of bits. 

So to make a long answer short, yes partly.  I'm still exploring this myself. 

I found that there are few alternatives at this time, besides shrapnel. As I said, I've made copious jottings of my own thoughts on the subject.

For a while, I was thinking of drawing paralells to the sun, which is basically a continuous explosion, which throws out various particles and waves. These are dangerous, but also necessary. Can't turn it into a snappy metaphor though...

seems that one person's shrapnel is another person's ripple.

RWHN - it's good that you're trying to open up a new front of discussion. the BIP metaphor seems to have reached a certain maturity as far as we can tell right now.

although i did wonder if 'shrapnel' is something that we throw between the bars from one cell to another. that is, interpersonally - though maybe it could happen internally also.

i need to mull this over some more, but i'm really pleased that we've got some new material to play around with.  :D

Quote from: Payne on July 03, 2007, 05:53:45 PM

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 03, 2007, 05:46:07 PM

Partly yes.  Though for clarification I should point out to all that my diagram was never meant to be "it".  In other words, I fully recognize and expect there are things I've missed. 

Yes, I think we are constantly being subjected to micro and macro events that can alter where we go on our paths.  In some cases it may me one monumental event, say 9/11 for anyone who survived or was personally affected by that event.  It may have caused someone to start drinking.  It may have caused someone to stop drinking.  It may have helped someone find their religion, (which they may later foist upon someone else or not), it may have caused someone to lose their religion. 

The flip of that is all of the tiny "little things."  Perhaps consistent exposure to second-hand smoke leads to some sort of ailment.  Perhaps consistent exposure to Prescripton Drug ads desensetizes a teenager to the dangers of the drugs and so when he sees some pills at a party, he doesn't think twice before popping one. 

Again, I want to point out that I don't see Shrapnel, the continuous detinatoins being a negative, by definition.  I use Shrapnel because it conjures the images of little bits of "stuff" flying in various directions.  It iconifies how their can be different kinds of bits. 

So to make a long answer short, yes partly.  I'm still exploring this myself. 

I found that there are few alternatives at this time, besides shrapnel. As I said, I've made copious jottings of my own thoughts on the subject.

For a while, I was thinking of drawing paralells to the sun, which is basically a continuous explosion, which throws out various particles and waves. These are dangerous, but also necessary. Can't turn it into a snappy metaphor though...

i'm intrigued.

Quote from: vexati0n on July 03, 2007, 05:49:20 PM
Sometimes you open a can of worms.  And sometimes, you open a factory that produces cans of worms.

My question is, how do you distinguish between "shrapnel" and your own will?  Even the idea that this shrapnel has to potential to decide your journey, is shrapnel itself.  Payne's point about taking control of your connections is an important one; I think it's important to realize that at the end of the day, we're all on different paths that lead to the same destination, that the destination is already a given and so should be taken out of the equation as a consideration for which path to choose.

Good points.  I was visualizing shrapnel as the thing that you are being subjected to.  But you are right, how one reacts to the stimuli could be considered "shrapnel" too.  Or perhaps, the personal and/or biochemical response is "shrapnel."?  And I absolutely agree with the last part, except, it seems there are so many who are so afraid of Point B that it does affect their paths.  Especially when it comes to religion, politics, things like that.  

QuoteThis concept of constant bombardment by shrapnel is, I think, something most people have some awareness of.  Many people are afraid of going into uncharted intellectual territory so they don the full-body-armor of ignorance and piety; other people are so unaware of themselves that they actively seek lanmines because being pushed along by the inertia of others is their only form of locomotion.

I agree.  I think most people are aware of different forces in nature, society, etc. that they are being subjected to.  But I wonder how many really understand how different decisions alters where they go in life?  Taken separately, things can seem insignificant.  But when you start lining choices and decisions up...but I suppose hindisight and watching from afar has unfair advantages.  

just trying to wrap my head around the idea--

I'm not sure how this model is useful. Are you basically just saying "shit happens"? or more accurately, "shit happens at you"?

To draw a parallel between Shrapnel and the BIP - the important thing would be realizing that all this shrapnel is influencing you and choosing which shrapnel to be influenced by.

For concreteness of metaphor, I'm not sure why every meme is a little exploding bit. In visualizing your above example, I picture a child running towards old age and death and explosions are going off all around him. These explosions are throwing out little churches and commercials and memories and bits of metal, causing him to duck and dodge and weave. He gets hit by a lot of them, and it changes how he runs.


It sounds like my relationship with my father (for example) is an important piece of shrapnel which then projects more shrapnel. --but it's not a singular event which could be likened to an explosion, it's more of an undercurrent which influences lots of things.

So then all of society is a series of explosions and constant chaos. And as we do anything we're sending more shrapnel out everywhere.


am I reading it right?

Quote from: Mangrove on July 03, 2007, 05:57:41 PM
seems that one person's shrapnel is another person's ripple.

RWHN - it's good that you're trying to open up a new front of discussion. the BIP metaphor seems to have reached a certain maturity as far as we can tell right now.

although i did wonder if 'shrapnel' is something that we throw between the bars from one cell to another. that is, interpersonally - though maybe it could happen internally also.

i need to mull this over some more, but i'm really pleased that we've got some new material to play around with.  :D

Yeah, I'm just trying to throw some shit on the wall and see what sticks and what stinks.  And you're right, we're all going to see this in a different way.  I'm sure we'll come up with something better and more appropriate than Shrapnel.  Maybe I watched too much A-team as a kid and that's why I'm visualizing it the way I am.  

One pitfall of the Shrapnel concept, from a visual perspective, that I'll own up to right away is that it implies that there is some sort of centralized locus from which things are exploding.  I realize that is troublesome for this metaphorical idea and I'm trying to think that one through.  

Quote from: Professor Cramulus on July 03, 2007, 06:03:51 PM
just trying to wrap my head around the idea--

I'm not sure how this model is useful. Are you basically just saying "shit happens"? or more accurately, "shit happens at you"?

To draw a parallel between Shrapnel and the BIP - the important thing would be realizing that all this shrapnel is influencing you and choosing which shrapnel to be influenced by.

For concreteness of metaphor, I'm not sure why every meme is a little exploding bit. In visualizing your above example, I picture a child running towards old age and death and explosions are going off all around him. These explosions are throwing out little churches and commercials and memories and bits of metal, causing him to duck and dodge and weave. He gets hit by a lot of them, and it changes how he runs.


It sounds like my relationship with my father (for example) is an important piece of shrapnel which then projects more shrapnel. --but it's not a singular event which could be likened to an explosion, it's more of an undercurrent which influences lots of things.

So then all of society is a series of explosions and constant chaos. And as we do anything we're sending more shrapnel out everywhere.


am I reading it right?

Eh, you're partly pointing out one of the problems with the model which I just revealed.  The explosion part.  Shrapnel suggests a central locus of explosion.  I recognize that this murks it up.  I need to work this through more. 

Another pitfall I can see with this is when does stuff stop being Shrapnel.  Isn't everything shrapnel? 

I guess I was thinking of the dynamic answer to the BIP.  The BIP is made up of bars and cells, surroundings.  It's a good metaphor and one I still like, but it seems like there is stuff that happens that affects those bars and how they are made up. 

That's whay I'm trying to explore.  It may well be that this Shrapnel idea is bunk.  At least, the way I am conceptualizing it.  I think Darth's idea of ripples is very pertinent. 

Another thing I'm trying to address with this exploration is the go-with-the-flow types, which I theorize to be a large portion of the populous.  People not realizing why they are on the paths that they are.  And never stopping to question or to check out the scenery or to check their orientation.  It's this kind of thing I'm delving into.  It may be that Shrapnel was not the best starting point. 

Again, working with scientific truisms, light is both a particle and a wave.



Shrapnel can be described as a momentary event, little pieces that fly into you, into your path, dictating to some extent what route you take through life. In the same way that you will be knocked off course if a ball hits when riding your bike. You may stay upright, continue your momentum, but it will still affect the direction you are going in.

Some impacts are harder than others, and will affect you more, some are entirely welcome, and will make you "stronger"

Sometimes, the effect of Shrapnel will be longer lasting (acting not as a 'particle' but as a 'wave' [not literally, just in the difference in two different properties displayed by one phenomenon]) it will entangle you in longer term effects lasting far beyond it's initial impact.

This could possibly be described in terms of a close relationship with someone. If a friend hit's you, it can be forgotten fairly quickly, if your spouse hits you, it can have far longer lasting repercussions. This can be attributed to the closeness of your relationship (your proximity to the origin of the shrapnel) or it could also be attributed to your own perception of the impact.

If you are affected in this way by enough of these impacts, you can find yourself tied up in knots. The effect is more than the sum of the impacts. Again, this can sometimes be a good thing, Replace the violence above with a softer example, perhaps an unexpected marriage proposal, and you may find yourself in an intensely close and rewarding relationship.

The language of this is not the important thing, it's the concept of varying degrees of impact, and of varying terms of effect.

Re: The centralised locus of explosion problems.

I think D Cups concept of ripples is possibly the best so far, but to make the most of it, you have to get fairly complex.

The only real example I can think of off the top of my head where things are flying around in different vectors and bouncing off eachother is in Brownian Motion. This gives you the idea of non-centralised movement of a great many things.

Re: Whether everthing is shrapnel.

So far, I would have to say yes, It's identifying it though, what can use, what should we avoid, what should we accept as neutral and inevitable?

Re: The origins of shrapnel (do we generate our own)

Of course we do! Thats why we have such a ready supply of tools at our disposal that we don't really understand, and hence why I'm quite enthusiastic for this.


For all of the above, I was discussing this with 000 earlier in IRC, and used a couple of his concepts in the above post. I think starting with "shrapnel" is a good idea, start small and work up.

Boy, and then it gets really hard to explain to others.  Maybe we need to stick with BIP afterall.   :D

Anyhoo, I gotta venture outdoors.  I'll mull this over some more and post my posits as they become available. 

Quote from: Professor Cramulus on July 03, 2007, 04:07:10 PM
clarify:

so basically the 'shrapnel' model posits that we're under constant bombardment by shrapnel - bits of meaning and symbols exploded from other nearby points (such as religion, the media, all those things on your diagram). Exposure to these bits causes our path to change - sometimes towards it, sometimes away from it. We too are in a constant state of explosion, projecting shrapnel into others paths


is that what you're going for, Rev?

If shrapnel = memes, then I'm on board.

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on July 03, 2007, 06:36:07 PM

Quote from: Professor Cramulus on July 03, 2007, 04:07:10 PM
clarify:

so basically the 'shrapnel' model posits that we're under constant bombardment by shrapnel - bits of meaning and symbols exploded from other nearby points (such as religion, the media, all those things on your diagram). Exposure to these bits causes our path to change - sometimes towards it, sometimes away from it. We too are in a constant state of explosion, projecting shrapnel into others paths


is that what you're going for, Rev?

If shrapnel = memes, then I'm on board.

Holla BMW, as you may be able to tell, I'm STILL riffing off the Physics/Philosophy thing ( I do never learn my lesson) anything you pick up on that I've screwed up Physics wise, please tell me!

This goes to anyone else versed in science also.

If not "Shrapnel," then:

Experience Radiation?
Point-B Lazors?
Deflection Interference? (+5 for sounding scientific)

Quote from: vexati0n on July 03, 2007, 06:45:06 PM
If not "Shrapnel," then:

Experience Radiation?
Point-B Lazors?
Deflection Interference? (+5 for sounding scientific)

Remember if you go over 21 points, you're busted...

None of those metaphors really stick for me though. Shrapnel will have to do until we have a more complete idea of this, and someone comes up with a clever, witty, creative alternative.

I think we need to dig up the point of origin on this metaphor.  I seem to remember an LHX thread where RWHN first laned on the idea.  It might help.

Quote from: Payne on July 03, 2007, 06:47:23 PM

Quote from: vexati0n on July 03, 2007, 06:45:06 PM
If not "Shrapnel," then:

Experience Radiation?
Point-B Lazors?
Deflection Interference? (+5 for sounding scientific)

Remember if you go over 21 points, you're busted...

None of those metaphors really stick for me though. Shrapnel will have to do until we have a more complete idea of this, and someone comes up with a clever, witty, creative alternative.

PAYNE: ALWAYS NAYSAYING.

srsly tho: i agree with you.

Quote from: vexati0n on July 03, 2007, 07:50:19 PM

Quote from: Payne on July 03, 2007, 06:47:23 PM

Quote from: vexati0n on July 03, 2007, 06:45:06 PM
If not "Shrapnel," then:

Experience Radiation?
Point-B Lazors?
Deflection Interference? (+5 for sounding scientific)

Remember if you go over 21 points, you're busted...

None of those metaphors really stick for me though. Shrapnel will have to do until we have a more complete idea of this, and someone comes up with a clever, witty, creative alternative.

PAYNE: ALWAYS TOOLBOXING!

srsly tho: i agree with you.

Fixx0red. But yeah, it's not so much naysaying, as you appreciate. Just I have put a bit of work into this previously. It's MAH BABY MISTAH!


....
....

I think shrapnel is a pretty good metaphor, except perhaps it's linear feel. That is, the shrapnel, sort of happens AT us from time period X to time period X+"time till shrapnel hits us". Yet, our experiences seem to be more interactive, I think. That is we affect our surrounding which in turn effects us (maybe like us stepping on an IED), however, that effect then becomes causes for further effects... almost like a room full of set mouse traps. Once you throw the ping pong ball in... everything goes nuts. I think RAW worded it as "interacting processes non-simultaneously apprehended" or a "causal feedback loop".

That seems to be the only real nit I can pick... nice metaphor!

Quote from: LMNO on July 03, 2007, 06:55:07 PM
I think we need to dig up the point of origin on this metaphor.  I seem to remember an LHX thread where RWHN first laned on the idea.  It might help.

Yeah, LHX talked about "shrapnel" first.  Hopefully he'll come by this thread and remember where it first came up.  

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 03, 2007, 08:48:39 PM

Quote from: LMNO on July 03, 2007, 06:55:07 PM
I think we need to dig up the point of origin on this metaphor.  I seem to remember an LHX thread where RWHN first laned on the idea.  It might help.

Yeah, LHX talked about "shrapnel" first.  Hopefully he'll come by this thread and remember where it first came up.  

If I catch him in IRC, I'll be sure to ask him.

I took a look earlier, but I couldn't find it, except in the BIP: renaming thread.

Quote from: Ratatosk on July 03, 2007, 08:47:08 PM
I think shrapnel is a pretty good metaphor, except perhaps it's linear feel. That is, the shrapnel, sort of happens AT us from time period X to time period X+"time till shrapnel hits us". Yet, our experiences seem to be more interactive, I think. That is we affect our surrounding which in turn effects us (maybe like us stepping on an IED), however, that effect then becomes causes for further effects... almost like a room full of set mouse traps. Once you throw the ping pong ball in... everything goes nuts. I think RAW worded it as "interacting processes non-simultaneously apprehended" or a "causal feedback loop".

That seems to be the only real nit I can pick... nice metaphor!

Well, the way I see it, while Shrapnel is coming at us from others and other things, we too are also creating or are part of creating the shrapnel for others.  A teacher is a good example.  The teacher him or herself has Shrapnel coming at him in his home life and professional life.  But, as a teacher, he is part of the education system which is exerting influence over children.  So yeah, it definitely is a give and take system.  

Why I think this metaphor is useful, and this is something I'll get to in my further chapters, is that being able to identify individual bits of shrapnel, and documenting their effects, can help one look at ways to target those influences that cause bad situations for people and society.  This kind of gets into the syndemics stuff I posted awhile back.  Because it is clear that multiple afflictions, whether on a personal or societal level, can be tied into common denominators.  But, I'm getting ahead of myself.  

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 03, 2007, 08:55:12 PM

Quote from: Ratatosk on July 03, 2007, 08:47:08 PM
I think shrapnel is a pretty good metaphor, except perhaps it's linear feel. That is, the shrapnel, sort of happens AT us from time period X to time period X+"time till shrapnel hits us". Yet, our experiences seem to be more interactive, I think. That is we affect our surrounding which in turn effects us (maybe like us stepping on an IED), however, that effect then becomes causes for further effects... almost like a room full of set mouse traps. Once you throw the ping pong ball in... everything goes nuts. I think RAW worded it as "interacting processes non-simultaneously apprehended" or a "causal feedback loop".

That seems to be the only real nit I can pick... nice metaphor!

Well, the way I see it, while Shrapnel is coming at us from others and other things, we too are also creating or are part of creating the shrapnel for others.  A teacher is a good example.  The teacher him or herself has Shrapnel coming at him in his home life and professional life.  But, as a teacher, he is part of the education system which is exerting influence over children.  So yeah, it definitely is a give and take system.  

Why I think this metaphor is useful, and this is something I'll get to in my further chapters, is that being able to identify individual bits of shrapnel, and documenting their effects, can help one look at ways to target those influences that cause bad situations for people and society.  This kind of gets into the syndemics stuff I posted awhile back.  Because it is clear that multiple afflictions, whether on a personal or societal level, can be tied into common denominators.  But, I'm getting ahead of myself.  

:mittens:

Maybe we should compare notes?

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 03, 2007, 08:55:12 PM

Quote from: Ratatosk on July 03, 2007, 08:47:08 PM
I think shrapnel is a pretty good metaphor, except perhaps it's linear feel. That is, the shrapnel, sort of happens AT us from time period X to time period X+"time till shrapnel hits us". Yet, our experiences seem to be more interactive, I think. That is we affect our surrounding which in turn effects us (maybe like us stepping on an IED), however, that effect then becomes causes for further effects... almost like a room full of set mouse traps. Once you throw the ping pong ball in... everything goes nuts. I think RAW worded it as "interacting processes non-simultaneously apprehended" or a "causal feedback loop".

That seems to be the only real nit I can pick... nice metaphor!

Well, the way I see it, while Shrapnel is coming at us from others and other things, we too are also creating or are part of creating the shrapnel for others.  A teacher is a good example.  The teacher him or herself has Shrapnel coming at him in his home life and professional life.  But, as a teacher, he is part of the education system which is exerting influence over children.  So yeah, it definitely is a give and take system. 

Why I think this metaphor is useful, and this is something I'll get to in my further chapters, is that being able to identify individual bits of shrapnel, and documenting their effects, can help one look at ways to target those influences that cause bad situations for people and society.  This kind of gets into the syndemics stuff I posted awhile back.  Because it is clear that multiple afflictions, whether on a personal or societal level, can be tied into common denominators.  But, I'm getting ahead of myself. 

This seems like good stuff! Maybe the trick is to start out with interacting processes->drill down to examining single bits of shrapnel (both headed at you and coming from you) then flying back out to impress that while we can order reality enough to examine a single "cause", we must keep in mind the constant and interacting whole...

I like this train of thought. Have you begun to consider presentation? (Do you see it as a philosophical treatise, or hidden in an allagory/myth/parable, or a conversation between different individuals (real, fictional, historical) or any other ideas?)

Quote from: Payne on July 03, 2007, 06:39:08 PM

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on July 03, 2007, 06:36:07 PM

Quote from: Professor Cramulus on July 03, 2007, 04:07:10 PM
clarify:

so basically the 'shrapnel' model posits that we're under constant bombardment by shrapnel - bits of meaning and symbols exploded from other nearby points (such as religion, the media, all those things on your diagram). Exposure to these bits causes our path to change - sometimes towards it, sometimes away from it. We too are in a constant state of explosion, projecting shrapnel into others paths


is that what you're going for, Rev?

If shrapnel = memes, then I'm on board.

Holla BMW, as you may be able to tell, I'm STILL riffing off the Physics/Philosophy thing ( I do never learn my lesson) anything you pick up on that I've screwed up Physics wise, please tell me!

This goes to anyone else versed in science also.

Ehh...if its physics, LMNO is a much better source of information. I was just adding my $0.02

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on July 03, 2007, 09:37:59 PM

Quote from: Payne on July 03, 2007, 06:39:08 PM

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on July 03, 2007, 06:36:07 PM

Quote from: Professor Cramulus on July 03, 2007, 04:07:10 PM
clarify:

so basically the 'shrapnel' model posits that we're under constant bombardment by shrapnel - bits of meaning and symbols exploded from other nearby points (such as religion, the media, all those things on your diagram). Exposure to these bits causes our path to change - sometimes towards it, sometimes away from it. We too are in a constant state of explosion, projecting shrapnel into others paths


is that what you're going for, Rev?

If shrapnel = memes, then I'm on board.

Holla BMW, as you may be able to tell, I'm STILL riffing off the Physics/Philosophy thing ( I do never learn my lesson) anything you pick up on that I've screwed up Physics wise, please tell me!

This goes to anyone else versed in science also.

Ehh...if its physics, LMNO is a much better source of information. I was just adding my $0.02

Righty. It's just cause I know you have a decent knowledge of scientific method, and you can point out if I'm being a fool....  8)

Quote from: Payne on July 03, 2007, 09:48:21 PM

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on July 03, 2007, 09:37:59 PM

Quote from: Payne on July 03, 2007, 06:39:08 PM

Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on July 03, 2007, 06:36:07 PM

Quote from: Professor Cramulus on July 03, 2007, 04:07:10 PM
clarify:

so basically the 'shrapnel' model posits that we're under constant bombardment by shrapnel - bits of meaning and symbols exploded from other nearby points (such as religion, the media, all those things on your diagram). Exposure to these bits causes our path to change - sometimes towards it, sometimes away from it. We too are in a constant state of explosion, projecting shrapnel into others paths


is that what you're going for, Rev?

If shrapnel = memes, then I'm on board.

Holla BMW, as you may be able to tell, I'm STILL riffing off the Physics/Philosophy thing ( I do never learn my lesson) anything you pick up on that I've screwed up Physics wise, please tell me!

This goes to anyone else versed in science also.

Ehh...if its physics, LMNO is a much better source of information. I was just adding my $0.02

Righty. It's just cause I know you have a decent knowledge of scientific method, and you can point out if I'm being a fool....  8)

ah, yeah that. That I can do, and have no problem doing.  8)

i am jonesing to jump in on this discussion

Quote from: LHX on July 04, 2007, 04:48:33 AM
i am jonesing to jump in on this discussion

Hey X! Not seen you for a while.

You'll find a lot of the material I'm posting in here was actually derived from those ideas I was working on for your site.

Dynamic Explosions?

We are bombarded with information daily. Some of this is good, some bad, most is ignored.

Where do the explosions originate? Everything and everyone. Every person, regardless of whether they interact with you or not, leave their own traces and influences on the fabric of life, affecting some people who affect others and so on. The effects are subject to diminishing returns, of course, but much like the 'Butterfly Effect', the results of small changes can never be adequately predicted.

The more 'power' a person has, the greater their influence, either local (such as the power a parent has over their child, which will manifest itself over a relatively small area, but still has signifigant impact on the child itself) or general (the effects of political decisions can have global consequencs, but don't tend to affect individuals as specifically).

As this is a continual process, we are bombarded from every angle at all times. We even do it ourselves, affecting those around us in the same way.

The bombardment can also be transmitted through various media, but effects are more varied. For some of us, we are less affected by media, and are more likely to dampen the impact by calling "Bull Shit!", other peoples lives can be entirely dictated by the next episode of a reality TV show.

My aim is to quantify some of these effects, and to define what differing conditions can have on these affects.

I would like to think that an understanding of this can provide a person with another weapon, or another shield.

My thoughts on the subject so far lead me to believe:

~that we need to take into account a persons own varied response to stimuli,

~that we need to look at grouping similar influences (either under a system like "the ages of man" or one of "origins/angles of impact"),

~the possibility of short- medium- and long-term after effects and

~unifying this concept, D Cups "ripple" model, and the "entanglement" model (sorry, I forget who started that one, was it 000?), all of which have merit, but seem to fall short of a simple method of conveying meaningful answers to these questions. Or even being simple.

yeah entanglement! i view it more like--as i explained Payne on IRC--some sort of cartoonish superglue. the kind that gets all over the floor and then the characters try to walk over it, but they get stuck and draw long strands of sticky glue like mozzarella and then try to get loose but in the process they fall over and stick to eachother and it all becomes a horrible mess and before you know it everybody is connected and entangled with eachother and there appear vast and intricate webs of long and short and thick and thin synapse-like strands pulling and pushing everybody everywhere on every movement they make.

---------

but apart from that, why are we discussing this at all? so we're looking for some sort of complicated metaphore for .. life, basically.

what does this have to do with discordianism, still?

it sounds to me more like some sort of generalized atheistic worldview of "everything affects everything" and that through life things and ideas and events affect you in a bigger or smaller way, depending on how much the factor resonates with your being, in the broadest sense of the word.

great.

but doesn't everybody who doesn't believe their life is being dictated by some sort of God already know this?

most importantly, i think

at what point do we stop thinking "holy shit i'm being bombarded by all this shrapnel all the time and it's totally nailing my reality grid", and start taking control ?

(http://www.thatsentertainmentonline.com/graphics/matrix_opt/neo_bullets.jpg)

Quote from: triple zero on July 05, 2007, 11:54:27 AM

at what point do we stop thinking "holy shit i'm being bombarded by all this shrapnel all the time and it's totally nailing my reality grid", and start taking control ?

Around the time we work out that most humans are weak, stupid, predictable and easily manipulated to our own advantage.

Then all you have to get over is whatever 'conscience' and 'morality' bullshit you're still carrying around from your cabbage days and you're good to go.

ah right

it should be us discordians standing on the sidelines firing the shrapnel at the cabbages

Quote from: triple zero on July 05, 2007, 11:54:27 AM
but apart from that, why are we discussing this at all? so we're looking for some sort of complicated metaphore for .. life, basically.

not necessarily.  Honestly, my first intention was to simply share things I've been thinking about and that I think do have some bearings on Discordianism and some of the stuff we've discussed in the past.  I'm not proposing that this should be the "next BIP", the next metaphor or anything.  I just simply wanted to discuss.  It seemed, and it had been commented by some, that this type of discussion had been lacking as of late.  So, this was my attempt at throwing something out to get it going again.  Whatever happens afterwards is whatever we want to have happen. 

Quotewhat does this have to do with discordianism, still?

I think it gets at some of the central tenets of Discordianism.  Awareness and Being Yourself being a couple of primary ones I'm thinking of.  I think being aware of what impacts is useful, at least it is to me.  I think it's along the same ideas of the BIP.  If you are aware that you have the freedom of movement from cell to cell, you then will have that awareness and ability to do so.  In what I'm talking about, if you are aware of the level of impact the Shrapnel, or whatever you want to call it, has on you, then you can brace yourself, buffer yourself and have more control over how you navigate your path.  Or, if it is something worthwhile, like art, music, athletics, to fully embrace it and let it enrich your life, to kind of pave the path in gold or something. 

Quoteit sounds to me more like some sort of generalized atheistic worldview of "everything affects everything" and that through life things and ideas and events affect you in a bigger or smaller way, depending on how much the factor resonates with your being, in the broadest sense of the word.

it maybe.  But sometimes I think it is worth to dig deeper then that general view and to examine some specifics.  For example, I have come to know many Christians as I've grown up.  I've known some who embrace their religion but in a way that doesn't isolate themselves from the rest of society.  They are able to integrate and still hold on to their beliefs.  I've also known some who are more isolationist from society.  They are so frightened and angry with the elements of society they deem to be unholy, they'd rather just go to church and not have anything to do with anyone else.  So I'm looking at this at a level of higher specificity beyond "everything affects everything". 

Quotebut doesn't everybody who doesn't believe their life is being dictated by some sort of God already know this?

in my experience, no.  But then again, the point of this discussion isn't to sermonize and preach to the vast populous.  At this point, it is simply a discussion. 

Quoteat what point do we stop thinking "holy shit i'm being bombarded by all this shrapnel all the time and it's totally nailing my reality grid", and start taking control ?

Good question.  There is certainly an element of willingness on the part of the individual.  Again, however, I want to point out that as I'm visualizing it, Shrapnel isn't inherently a negative.  There are also good elements that should be embraced that can enrich a person. 

Quote from: Ratatosk on July 03, 2007, 09:29:11 PM
This seems like good stuff! Maybe the trick is to start out with interacting processes->drill down to examining single bits of shrapnel (both headed at you and coming from you) then flying back out to impress that while we can order reality enough to examine a single "cause", we must keep in mind the constant and interacting whole...

I like this train of thought. Have you begun to consider presentation? (Do you see it as a philosophical treatise, or hidden in an allagory/myth/parable, or a conversation between different individuals (real, fictional, historical) or any other ideas?)

No, I really haven't considered any sort of presentation form.  If it is something that we as a collective tinker with and come up with something that would be cool.  If not I see it, at least my contributions, being kind of my "LMNO-PI" or "The City" if you will.  Something I'll continuously tinker with and add on to. 

Quote from: triple zero on July 05, 2007, 11:54:27 AM

it sounds to me more like some sort of generalized atheistic worldview of "everything affects everything" and that through life things and ideas and events affect you in a bigger or smaller way, depending on how much the factor resonates with your being, in the broadest sense of the word.

I'd have to say that this doesn't seem Atheisitic to me, but much more along the lines of eastern philosophies involving Dharma "The Path" and Karma "The ever difficult to nail down, universal bank account"

The traveling from A to B, the path set before us where the destination is all the same and the paths there are infinite is the Dharma of our lives, the spectrum or range of those infinite paths that are born into.  The hand that we are dealt to play with. The resulting decisions and paths create the multitude of spin-offs, karmic events, shapnels, ripples whatever you would like to call them.

So what I'm getting is kind of an updated metaphor for this same fundamental principle? A metaphor written in a militaristic framework? I suppose it could appeal to the over-militarised, modern population of the USA.  

I'd say it's as militaristic as the BIP was penal. 

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 05, 2007, 02:24:02 PM
I'd say it's as militaristic as the BIP was penal. 

With the recent discussion on language as a tool and a powerful one in consideration of building the desired framework of delivering a message, doesn't "shrapnel" tend to start the piece off on a negative conotation that you then have to spend energy in re-defining someone's immediate response to the word shrapnel?

Or is the intent to use the response of the reader to the idea of being hit with shrapnel as part of the mechanism for opening up the mental crack and letting the truth seep in?

Quote from: Forteetu on July 05, 2007, 02:42:14 PM

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 05, 2007, 02:24:02 PM
I'd say it's as militaristic as the BIP was penal. 

With the recent discussion on language as a tool and a powerful one in consideration of building the desired framework of delivering a message, doesn't "shrapnel" tend to start the piece off on a negative conotation that you then have to spend energy in re-defining someone's immediate response to the word shrapnel?

Or is the intent to use the response of the reader to the idea of being hit with shrapnel as part of the mechanism for opening up the mental crack and letting the truth seep in?

Shrapnel is not (as yet) a fully accepted metaphor or 'model' for what we are trying to express here.

See my post above, we still have to include in some way the concepts that both ripples and entanglement can offer us.

These are the early days, and we are still reaching around, to see what is useful to us, and what we can throw out.

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 05, 2007, 02:03:56 PM

Quote from: triple zero on July 05, 2007, 11:54:27 AM
but apart from that, why are we discussing this at all? so we're looking for some sort of complicated metaphore for .. life, basically.

not necessarily.  Honestly, my first intention was to simply share things I've been thinking about and that I think do have some bearings on Discordianism and some of the stuff we've discussed in the past.  I'm not proposing that this should be the "next BIP", the next metaphor or anything.  I just simply wanted to discuss.  It seemed, and it had been commented by some, that this type of discussion had been lacking as of late.  So, this was my attempt at throwing something out to get it going again.  Whatever happens afterwards is whatever we want to have happen. 

And I think it's got some good discussion going. It is interesting, at least in my mind, to observe the way people interact with each other and what they send out, be they ripples, shrapnel, nuclear explosions, or something else. I never get tired of people-watching and people-studying. This thread is, for me, a way to see how other people observe the environment. It's fun. It's like getting a little bit into people's heads where I can't normally get.

Quote

Quotewhat does this have to do with discordianism, still?

I think it gets at some of the central tenets of Discordianism.  Awareness and Being Yourself being a couple of primary ones I'm thinking of.  I think being aware of what impacts is useful, at least it is to me.  I think it's along the same ideas of the BIP.  If you are aware that you have the freedom of movement from cell to cell, you then will have that awareness and ability to do so.  In what I'm talking about, if you are aware of the level of impact the Shrapnel, or whatever you want to call it, has on you, then you can brace yourself, buffer yourself and have more control over how you navigate your path.  Or, if it is something worthwhile, like art, music, athletics, to fully embrace it and let it enrich your life, to kind of pave the path in gold or something. 

Bootleg bullet proof vests ITT 8)

I think you put it nicely and there is no more I need add to this. It's about being cognizant of your surroundings--questioning, adapting, etc, instead of just letting the world bombard you without your conscious consent. Rape of every kind is a no-no.

Quote

Quoteat what point do we stop thinking "holy shit i'm being bombarded by all this shrapnel all the time and it's totally nailing my reality grid", and start taking control ?

Good question.  There is certainly an element of willingness on the part of the individual.  Again, however, I want to point out that as I'm visualizing it, Shrapnel isn't inherently a negative.  There are also good elements that should be embraced that can enrich a person. 

Again, I think this hit the nail on the head.

We don't necessarily have to become full-time shrapnel-dodgers. It's just about being aware of it and being able to respond accordingly. If you KNOW that you receive thousands of puncture wounds daily, you will do your best to make sure that they don't get infected and kill you. And so by knowing about the shrapnel bombarding us, we can cut our losses--tend to the worst of the punctures, and let the harmless ones go. I don't know how to make this metaphor include beneficial puncture wounds. Shit. But there exists beneficial shrapnel, so we just let that stuff chill, once we've processed and accepted that it is beneficial. It is about conscious control of our intake.

As has been said, this is stuff that a lot of us probably already are aware of and do on a regular basis. However, having a nice discussion about it never hurt--you know, getting other people's view points and the suchlike--plus it gets the mental juices pumping. With this crazy group, you never know where a thread will go once you get it started!

Quote from: Forteetu on July 05, 2007, 02:42:14 PM

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 05, 2007, 02:24:02 PM
I'd say it's as militaristic as the BIP was penal. 

With the recent discussion on language as a tool and a powerful one in consideration of building the desired framework of delivering a message, doesn't "shrapnel" tend to start the piece off on a negative conotation that you then have to spend energy in re-defining someone's immediate response to the word shrapnel?

Or is the intent to use the response of the reader to the idea of being hit with shrapnel as part of the mechanism for opening up the mental crack and letting the truth seep in?

Perhaps, however, I think there is going to be a tendency to look more at problems anyway.  I think one idea is to demonstrate how these different bits affect one's life.  And as I've said from the beginning, it may be that "Shrapnel" is the wrong word to use.  At this point, I'm more interested in discussing the mechanisms than the label.  If we are going to have 3 pages of discussion on the label then I'm gonna put my hands up right now and move on to something else. 

Well, at this point there is nothing to read.  Right now, the idea is to discuss this stuff amongst ourselves, if it is desired to do so.  If we get to a point where we want to release something outside of our confines, then we can contemplate those issues.  In my mind that is putting the cart before the horse.  That is putting the cart in California and the horse in Maryland. 

Quote from: Payne on July 05, 2007, 02:48:53 PM

Quote from: Forteetu on July 05, 2007, 02:42:14 PM

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 05, 2007, 02:24:02 PM
I'd say it's as militaristic as the BIP was penal. 

With the recent discussion on language as a tool and a powerful one in consideration of building the desired framework of delivering a message, doesn't "shrapnel" tend to start the piece off on a negative conotation that you then have to spend energy in re-defining someone's immediate response to the word shrapnel?

Or is the intent to use the response of the reader to the idea of being hit with shrapnel as part of the mechanism for opening up the mental crack and letting the truth seep in?

Shrapnel is not (as yet) a fully accepted metaphor or 'model' for what we are trying to express here.

See my post above, we still have to include in some way the concepts that both ripples and entanglement can offer us.

These are the early days, and we are still reaching around, to see what is useful to us, and what we can throw out.

exactly.  it's just a discussion right now.  if it goes somewhere beyond that, great.  If not, no harm no foul. 

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 05, 2007, 02:03:56 PM
not necessarily.  Honestly, my first intention was to simply share things I've been thinking about and that I think do have some bearings on Discordianism and some of the stuff we've discussed in the past.  I'm not proposing that this should be the "next BIP", the next metaphor or anything.  I just simply wanted to discuss.  It seemed, and it had been commented by some, that this type of discussion had been lacking as of late.  So, this was my attempt at throwing something out to get it going again.  Whatever happens afterwards is whatever we want to have happen. 

well yeah i jumped a bit on it, sorry :)

but otoh, criticism is good!

------

i should probably explain a bit on the atheism remark .. cause that single word seems to have drawn no less than two comments :)
i didn't mean "atheist" as "non-christian", i just meant it that someone who beliefs his life is controlled by a god (say, Allah), possibly has some problems with this Shrapnel business.

at least, we seem to be all saying "the shrapnel is caused by the things people do and interact with eachother and the environments they create", so in a sense, we're all shooting at eachother constantly. but a theistic person would probably want at least a significant portion of that Shrapnel to be caused by divine intervention. which, i think we would all agree, is kinda stupid, and pretty much against the "taking control" concepts that are so inherent in discordianism.

so that's why i said "atheist".

hope that's a bit cleared up now.

------

QuoteShrapnel isn't inherently a negative

oh boy, here we go again  :roll:  :lol:

Quote from: triple zero on July 05, 2007, 03:16:51 PM
well yeah i jumped a bit on it, sorry :)

but otoh, criticism is good!

It's cool.  I just want to be clear with my intentions, which as this point, is purely to engage in a discussion and exploration.  Personally, I am logging it and may do something with it, but for the purposes of this forum I just want to see where this goes.  

Quote

QuoteShrapnel isn't inherently a negative

oh boy, here we go again  :roll:  :lol:

yeah I know.  Hopefully a more "positive" label will emerge.  

TV, Christianity, Batman, McDonalds, Hippies and Luv?

needs moar randoM!!

better place the boat in a sea of white noise and cabbages? :)

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 05, 2007, 03:24:17 PM

Quote

QuoteShrapnel isn't inherently a negative

oh boy, here we go again  :roll:  :lol:

yeah I know.  Hopefully a more "positive" label will emerge.  

THE COSMIC PILLOWFIGHT!!

"Discordia is a fluffy bunny, with rainbows and lollipops!"

Quote from: LMNO on July 05, 2007, 03:28:38 PM
"Discordia is a fluffy bunny, with rainbows and lollipops!"

Don't forget the unicorn farts.

Quote from: Professor Cramulus on July 05, 2007, 03:22:27 PM

(http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a95/discordman/pathways.jpg)
"First there was chaos, the vast immeasurable abyss, outrageous as a sea, dark, wasteful, and wild."

I've been thinking about this model/metaphor for a few days now and here's what's leaked out of my head.

• We are captains of small, single-person rafts, lost in the sea of primordial Chaos.
  Memes (all the shrapnel we've been talking about) float through the water.
• We move towards some and away from others. Sometimes we cast our nets and draw them up into the boat with us.
• The water is murky, and sometimes we think a meme is something but its actually something else. Like I'm looking for a meme called Truth but I keep pulling up mondos and in-jokes. Some other guy is looking for Spirituality and he casts out his net. He finds a bible and a Sunday service and it works out for him.
• We can see each other fishing, and the memes that guy's got in his boat might look tasty, so we go fish next to him.
• Sometimes even the memes we throw out end up floating around next to us for a while. Like charged particles, they repel or attract other fish. There's a whole memetic food chain - no, a whole conceptual ecosystem happening in the water involving big fish, small fish, chameleon-like squid, pollution, reefs, detritus, currents, flotsam, jetsam, and lots of shrapnel

Quote from: LMNO on July 05, 2007, 03:28:38 PM
"Discordia is a fluffy bunny, with rainbows and lollipops!"

Quote from: Darth Cupcake on July 05, 2007, 03:29:55 PM

Quote from: LMNO on July 05, 2007, 03:28:38 PM
"Discordia is a fluffy bunny, with rainbows and lollipops!"

Don't forget the unicorn farts.

to quote the great philosopher The Good Reverend Roger:

I WILL KILL A MOTHERFUCKER!!!

sorry.

RWHN,
in a bit of a mood today. 

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 05, 2007, 02:58:45 PM

Perhaps, however, I think there is going to be a tendency to look more at problems anyway.  I think one idea is to demonstrate how these different bits affect one's life.  And as I've said from the beginning, it may be that "Shrapnel" is the wrong word to use.  At this point, I'm more interested in discussing the mechanisms than the label.  If we are going to have 3 pages of discussion on the label then I'm gonna put my hands up right now and move on to something else. 

Well, at this point there is nothing to read.  Right now, the idea is to discuss this stuff amongst ourselves, if it is desired to do so.  If we get to a point where we want to release something outside of our confines, then we can contemplate those issues. 

I understand that this is all "early days" and a metaphor or premise that is just being kicked around. My only intent is to throw into the discussion, so I hope no is taking any of this personally.

I've got no intention on debating the use of a particular word. I am/was curious however if "shrapnel" was being used specifically becuase of the viceral reaction that could be induced in the reader.

Quote
In my mind that is putting the cart before the horse.  That is putting the cart in California and the horse in Maryland. 

Which direction you headed in?  ... its all a matter of circumstance

Quote from: Forteetu on July 05, 2007, 05:14:35 PM

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 05, 2007, 02:58:45 PM

Perhaps, however, I think there is going to be a tendency to look more at problems anyway.  I think one idea is to demonstrate how these different bits affect one's life.  And as I've said from the beginning, it may be that "Shrapnel" is the wrong word to use.  At this point, I'm more interested in discussing the mechanisms than the label.  If we are going to have 3 pages of discussion on the label then I'm gonna put my hands up right now and move on to something else. 

Well, at this point there is nothing to read.  Right now, the idea is to discuss this stuff amongst ourselves, if it is desired to do so.  If we get to a point where we want to release something outside of our confines, then we can contemplate those issues. 

I understand that this is all "early days" and a metaphor or premise that is just being kicked around. My only intent is to throw into the discussion, so I hope no is taking any of this personally.

Not at all.  I just want to be clear on where things are at this point and not get too far ahead in the game.  Please, throw in.  The more voices the better imo.

QuoteI've got no intention on debating the use of a particular word. I am/was curious however if "shrapnel" was being used specifically becuase of the viceral reaction that could be induced in the reader.

Well, LHX used the word first so I'm not 100% sure where he was coming from with it.  In my mind, however, I see it being appropriate mostly in a visual sense.  Have you read the Shrapnel thread yet?  It contains a visual I made a few weeks ago based on this idea.  That's where I'm coming from. 

Quote

Quote
In my mind that is putting the cart before the horse.  That is putting the cart in California and the horse in Maryland. 

Which direction you headed in?  ... its all a matter of circumstance

Oops, owned by the compass rose once again. 

2c:

I agree with RWHN that the name is less important than getting a better handle on the mechanics. Though I will say that I did like the original idea coming from 'shrapnel'.

To me, the memes seem more like particles of radiation - the sun in particular (for me, anyway) could provide a fantastic metaphoric model.

I was thinking today (yeah, first time in ages) about what it is we're doing that is

a) Discordian
b) Extending/revising the original PD.

The idea that struck me is that when the original PD was produced, the 'meme' metaphor did not exist. We do have it now and we can exploit that to our advantage. What we can do that the original PDers couldn't do, is elaborate in more detail on what constitutes our reality grids (BIP) and also what may cause them to undergo constant change (possible 'shrapnel'). Not only that, the emerging shrapnel concept (whatever it ends up being called) suggests multiple layers of interconnection and thus, the personal responsibilities & implications that arise from it.

Therefore - the BIP and other models were drawn from the PD but have the benefit of new information, fresh minds and changing times. Thus, I believe that we have added something new and are likely to continue to do so.

Something is bubbling in my brain.  I'm giving it some time to simmer & congeal.

Quote from: LMNO on July 10, 2007, 08:37:31 PM
Something is bubbling in my brain.  I'm giving it some time to simmer & congeal.

that might be an anyeurism.

or a good idea... :lol:

No real difference, actually.

please to be elaborating on your inspirational anyeurism...(if it's congealed enough yet).

No time right now.



Maybe tomorrow.

Also, I'll see if I can find my scribbled notes about the sun metaphor, and copy them to here.

Quote from: LMNO on July 10, 2007, 08:42:43 PM
No time right now.



Maybe tomorrow.

such a tease!

It's that "multiple layers of interconnectedness" that I was wanting to eventually get to.  But I'm loathe to end up simply re-writing the Butterfly Effect.  I've gotta hash it out some more. 

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 10, 2007, 08:47:52 PM
It's that "multiple layers of interconnectedness" that I was wanting to eventually get to.  But I'm loathe to end up simply re-writing the Butterfly Effect.  I've gotta hash it out some more. 

uhh just re-write it without Ashton Kutcher and it'll be fine.

Dude, where's my meme?

Quote from: The Retarded Mr Kutcher on July 10, 2007, 08:56:00 PM
Dude, where's my meme talent?

LMNO - did your idea congeal?

Not yet.  I'm having trouble figuring out what the hell I'm trying to say.


Something like:


~(BIP as verb, not a noun)

~Paths traveled in a desert.

~everyone walking a different one.

~Experiences/Expectations = IED

~Shrapnel = Bars of cell.



Something like that.

what does IED stand for?

www.justfuckinggoogleit.com



improvised explosive device, though

edit: what rwhn's going to say

militaristically it's Improvised Explosive Device, I believe. 

yeah, what KE said

Yeah, to keep with the "shrapnel" motif

hot damn


i gotta keep up to date with this shit


it took me about 2 hrs of searching to figure out wtf tl-dr meant


omg
lol
imo

We seem to be adopting a more symbol-based form of communication.

not that this is relevant to shrapnel, but i think that 'tl:dr' as a meme is only funny when it follows a short post. like this one.


tl:dr

(http://www.davezilla.com/images/todays-post.jpg)

It's log!  It's log!

It's big, it's heavy, it's wood!

 :mad:

It's a short post.

Work with me people. 

YUO FAIL.

Quote from: LMNO on July 13, 2007, 08:00:41 PM
It's log!  It's log!

It's big, it's heavy, it's wood!

It's log! It's log
It's than bad, it's good!

everyone needs a log...

i'm logging this thread.

(http://www.davezilla.com/images/todays-post.jpg)(http://www.davezilla.com/images/todays-post.jpg)(http://www.davezilla.com/images/todays-post.jpg)(http://www.davezilla.com/images/todays-post.jpg)

I don't know what barns you guys grew up in but those are clearly posts, not logs. 

Got to side with RWHN on this one. That's no log!

more seriously though,

i think payne had some suggestions along the lines of the sun and radiation, which is an idea i quite like.

the sun - it's our source of life & light. it radiates constantly. this is like the constant exposure we have to communication. (unless

you're a total hermit).

every now and then, the sun sends off bursts (coronal mass ejections) of quite ridiculous magnitudes. billions of tons of

particles spewed at the earth at mind numbing speeds.

fortunately, the earth's magnetic field keeps us safe, for the most part. if the coronal mass ejections are big enough, they can

actually shred great lumps off the magnetic field. a really huge blast can wreak havoc with electrical systems on earth, overloading

grids and causing mass blackouts.

we've established by now (through the BIP metaphor) about the boundaries of our perception, being a combination that is

biological and conceptual. now we're looking for a new way to understand and explain an influx/outflux of memes.

(at risk of going down that road but: "every man and every woman is a star"?)

or rather, we're all stars in our BIPs.

it's just about the sunlight that shines between the bars.

Thank you for the summation! I'd have got round to putting it more like that at some point. Maybe.

The above is what I was reaching for.

Quote from: Payne on July 13, 2007, 09:28:54 PM
Thank you for the summation! I'd have got round to putting it more like that at some point. Maybe.

The above is what I was reaching for.

you're welcome!  :D

to extend the analogy - just because yer dead, doesn't mean the radiation you gave off isn't still effecting people.


mangrove the radiation schismatic.

[Devils advocate]

The problem I found with this metaphor is it's too easy to extend it, sometimes.

Yes I agree with the longer than life term affects, but to this we can start to talk about the lifecycle of stars, gravitational effects, sun worship (either the ancient culture religious style, or the new cultures worship of bronzed bodies) and so on.

If this metaphor can be so wide ranging, is it that useful to us?

[/Devils advocate]

I'd normally say yes, but it would involve more work. I guess, though, that I'd be happier to work with a macro concept (the sun) as opposed to a micro one (like individual atoms)

Good point Payne. It could be that the metaphor is too wide.

Suggest compromise: Light bulb. Bigger than an atom, smaller than the sun.

And with that, we can also factor in more "unexpected events", like when you turn a light on in the middle of the night, and your eyee hurt while they adjust, we could use that metaphor for adjustment to new, uncomfortable concepts within communication.

Quote from: Payne on July 14, 2007, 06:10:05 PM
And with that, we can also factor in more "unexpected events", like when you turn a light on in the middle of the night, and your eyee hurt while they adjust, we could use that metaphor for adjustment to new, uncomfortable concepts within communication.

there you go. everyone's in a BIP and we all get a prison standard light bulb.

someone e-mail Laz and tell him that we're not so 'dark' now.

Nu-BIP: Stark, Not Dark.

Love it.

I had a nice MSP pic in the works last night. But then I had some bad news, so I abandoned in favour
of storming around the house and employing the word 'cunt' to spectacular effect.

PATHS

I have tried to work some perspective into the paths idea. I've split these perspectives into four 'orders' perhaps this may help to pinpoint where we are coming from as we discuss this further.


   1st order- A hypothetical perspective from a constant (such as time)

   2nd order- Perspective from the upper range of our living perceptions, some small detail of the causes of deviation, a 'bigger picture' of the 'Path'

   3rd order- Perspective from the lower range of our living perceptions, more detail detail of the causes of deviation, a better understanding of an individual 'Path'

   4th order- A hypothetical perspective that sees the causes in great detail, but little of the 'Path'

   
In the first order, we can view paths as going straight from point 'A' to point 'B'. We intellectually know that there are certain changes in the path, but by measuring it by constants, such as time, we see no deviations. We see very little detail, and this could be perhaps summarised as, using the time example, as an entire life being condensed into a Birth Date and a Death Date, with no further information.
   
In the second order, we can see detail a bit better, we have more information. This means we can analyse the path, and the causes of any deviation, but without further information we can learn little of the life of this person. Could be summarised as a brief biography of a person, charting signifigant events, or knowing of a friend of a friend.
   
In the third order, we can see much more detail, we can chart much more rapid changes in the path, to greater detail, and have a deeper understanding on the causes of path deviation. We can, in effect, observe this path all the time by living our own lives, and analysing it.
   
Generally we float somewhere in between orders two and three, creating a working balance between observing our life, and living it.
   
The fourth order is entirely hypothetical. I think it may be possible to analyse the causes of path deviation more directly from this level, but without reference points to specific paths.

   

As we rise through the levels, quantifying cause and effect becomes more difficult. The straight line of the first order becomes a tangled mess of intermingled paths by the height of order three. We may breach a barrier between order three and four where the complexity of the knot of paths makes it unfeasible to analyse them further, and focus instead on the causes of path deviation.
   
For the purposes of this discussion, I'm naming the 'Causes of Path Deviation' Shrapnel, as we have nothing else to really call it, as yet.
   
Questions: How important are these considerations of 'Paths'? Can we make something worthwhile from documenting these observations?
   
Well, I hope this is useful, in some fashion. Feel free to bend it around to fit into a more user friendly format, or to break it up and use as firewood as we ponder these deep questions. Coming soon: A deeper look at Shrapnel.

I'm seeing it like this:

1st Path: "ordinary" observation.
2nd Path: a "meta" observation of the path; "The Forest, not the Trees".
3rd Path: a "sub-meta" observation; "The Trees, not the Forest".
4th Path: a "meta-meta" observation; "This Forest, and the one over there, too".


Yes?

Well, I'd like to think of 2 and 3 as being more the 'ordinary' views, and 1 as being a splodge of green that you intellectuall know is a forest, but can't actually see.

But yes, if you prefer it that way, that works too.

Hey, your way works for me.

1:  What is this shit?
2:  Hey, it's a Forest.
3:  Looks like there's Trees in this Forest.
4:  Hey, there's another Forest over there.
5:  Profit!

 :lulz:


~~~Payne: Unsure whether you're making fun of me, but I laughed anyways.

I like this.  And it makes sense with what I was thinking.  And I think it is good to break it down like that.  I kind of see Level 4 as kind of taking it too far in away.  That is, it's a potential pitfall if you focus too much on the individual bits of shrapnel, and at every single step along the path, and then forget to zoom out and integrate it into the rest of what's going on.  In other words, Level 4 maybe kind of gets into a kind of Obsessive Compulsive view of the system. 

Which is why I pretty much left it at that.

I acknowledged it was there, (maybe), without actually investigating it too much.

Still a bit unsure as to how practical it is, but I feel more comfortable putting it into a framework.

I'm currently working on my 'shrapnel' post, which fits together with this one. I should have it up in about 12 hours or so.

No Payne, I'm not making fun of you.

I often try to boil things down as far as possible, make them sound glib, and see if they still make sense.  In this case, it still does.

Now, what to do with your model?

You should go more in depth with how to gain insight using it.

Right-o. I'm a paranoid motherfucker sometimes.

As for investigating the model, and attempting to make it a useful tool, I hope to cover some of that at least with the next Shrapnel post.

It will still need some more workafter that though, so'll I'll tentatively make plans for a third post as well.

I'm impressed that you plan at least 3 posts ahead.


I never have any fucking clue.

Well, I think thats because I've been doodling little notes for weeks now. I have enough material written down for three posts (well two and a half).

And I already planned out how to present them as well.

I think I might prefer to do it spontaneously, but I always feel like I'm on unsteady ground on this board.

BUMP.

Is anyone still wanting to do anything with this?

I seem to have been thinking about it a lot in my exile from the internets, but unfortunatly have yet to make it practical, or insightful.

Should I just dump this, and start work on something new?

Wow.  I forgot about this.  I'm gonna read this thread again.  Commentary after lunch.

What follows is a lengthy (and somewhat cynical) study into "shrapnel". I apologise if it's tl;dr, but it's been a while since I actually wrote anything of substance.


The BIP is not a static concept, and this is covered in all the literature and discussions that have been held about it. We carry our BIP with us from birth to death. While the BIP may evolve over time, it is never escaped, as such, so any visualisation of our lives as being journeys down "paths" should include the BIP metaphor (tried and tested as it is, it will make further investigation easier to breakdown and comprehend)

Paths are a broad, fairly general, description of the journey, and in a previous post, i postulated that a certain degree of detail Vs. "The Big Picture" would anyway be inherent in any further investigation. For the purposes of trying to actually find something usable, i've gone or a balance of detail with big picture.

Paths are fairly easy to understand, I think, and should simplify the process.

"Shrapnel" however, is a trcky concept, and hard to pin down. Is it communication? is it good or bad, or both?

The best I can really say, with the amount I've been thinking about it is that it, along with good old random chance, is what governs "Paths", specifically deviations from a straightforward, constant path.

What it is is really dependant on which way you are looking at path, from which perspective. As I said earlier, I'm going to try and approach this as a balance betwen detail and an over view, so it is probably best to examine the "shrapnel" idea from a basis of any intra/extra-BIP interaction, so therefore communication and relationships with anything from outside your own BIP. That would be any interaction originating from outside to inside or vice-versa. These interactions will influence choices and "directions" on the path.

A quick note about random chance, which Could influence you in the same way, this is often really dependant on your reaction to it as much as it is by the event itself, so is really covered in the BIP stuff already.

External stimuli can light the path before us, blind us to it, or cast a new light on the bars of our prison, causing us to re-evaluate them. They provide the framewok you can visualise the path in.

The whole "shrapnel" idea seems to have boiled down to the art of comunication and interpretation through the bars in our prisons, learning how to do both as effectively as possible, and learning the limitations of what we can do with both.  It's perhaps the ultimate expression of the idea "think for yourself", it lessens the need to communicate through multiple sets of bars and filters and/or makes the task of having to do so more defined.

Observable, concrete Reality, concepts are easier to communicate through bars and filters, as it's individually testable, and we know that certain things will always hold true for all of us. We are not going to suddenly over come gravity, or learn telepathy, and we can be relatively certain that with these solid concepts, very little loss of information will occur through interpretation.

Emotive and perceptual concepts are much harder to communicate effectively, as they will be affected much more by an individuals bars, i think because most bars are emotive and perceptual by nature. Interpretation of any given interaction based on these concepts will be skewed by multiple sets of bars.

With that, we can surmise we have REALITY, and juxtaposed over that, a more more personal emotive and perceptual reality. Some of the problems we have with this, and some other ideas, is that building more realities (metaphors, concepts, interpretation) over the second type of reality get you more and more removed from REALITY, making these metaphors/concepts/interpretations less testable, less communicatable and, ultimately, far less useful.

With this view of the "shrapnel" concept, we can see it is ultimately down to interpretation whether it is good or bad. Some people like to build bars to deflect some of the interactions, or to encouage others - due to interpretation. Some people will expend a lot of energy trying to tailor their communication AROUND other peoples bars, or go for an all out assault on them- due to interpreation.

Ultimately I guess all I could really say about this all is thatt hat great constant, time, will force you down your path, whether you deide to take a hand in where it leads you or not. So you can sit in your cell, isolated and enjoying the ride, or you can constantly consider your interactions, and ignore the scenery, or, finally, ind a balance betwen the two and try to make the best of both worlds.

Where has this led us ultimately? I think nowhere, But maybe someone out there will interpret something from this interaction and find something useful. I hope so.

bumped and re-read

bumped and OP re-edited