1. As of now, the fact that I am a Discordian does not mean I will respect any oddball beliefs you have. Apparently, that respect has been entirely one way, so now I intend to shit my diseased and parasite-infested feces all over the next filthy hippie that tries to tell me what a KAOS MAGICKIAN he is, etc. Fuck off, I don't want to hear it.
2. The fact that I am a Discordian does not imply that I am a hippie who will put up with each and every hippie, freak, and new age loser that comes down the pike. I hate you all, and I wish that you would all - as a species - die. So don't get all butthurt when I laugh at your eccentricities.
3. Not every viewpoint of the world and it's workings is valid. Mine is. Yours isn't, at least until it agrees SOMEWHAT with the actual workings of the real, physical universe. Are we clear?
4. If you can't tell the difference between "having an open mind" and "believing everything you are told", then you're too fucking stupid to live. Drink Drano, please.
5. Yeah, I just laughed at your "religion". Deal with it, Moonbeam.
Its not as pervasive as you think, its just when you see it, you cant look away and it clouds the other shit.
This forum (to me) is still about sweet beautiful soul crushingly brutal honesty, and cutting through the crap.
Quote from: Faust on April 21, 2008, 02:34:59 AM
Its not as pervasive as you think, its just when you see it, you cant look away and it clouds the other shit.
This forum (to me) is still about sweet beautiful soul crushingly brutal honesty, and cutting through the crap.
This is mostly about something that's happening at POEE, but it seems to be creeping into PD as well.
Fucking primitives, beating on hollow logs and hiding in caves because, well, it's easier than learning math, right? Never mind that this is EXACTLY what the CoN
wants you to do. When you're out "casting sigils", you aren't accomplishing ANYTHING, but you THINK you are, and that makes the powers that be HAPPIER THAN SHIT. And, goddammit, it is so stupid that it is fucking PAINFUL to even WATCH.
Jackasses. I hope they all get terminal fucking syphilis.
LEARNING MATH?
FUCKS NO
ID RATHER BE A STUPID MONKEY THEN EVER HAVE TO LEARN MATH
Quote from: noodlefred on April 21, 2008, 02:43:16 AM
LEARNING MATH?
FUCKS NO
ID RATHER BE A STUPID MONKEY THEN EVER HAVE TO LEARN MATH
MATH IS HARD! TEE HEE!
\
(http://marketing.blogs.ie.edu/archives/barbie340x300.jpg)
Roger, tell whoever shit in your Wheaties that I owe them a drink.
Quote from: hunter s.durden on April 21, 2008, 02:45:53 AM
Roger, tell whoever shit in your Wheaties that I owe them a drink.
Oh, your day is coming, wiseass.
It's just a matter of time.
TGRR,
Will kill EVERY motherfucker.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:45:38 AM
Quote from: noodlefred on April 21, 2008, 02:43:16 AM
LEARNING MATH?
FUCKS NO
ID RATHER BE A STUPID MONKEY THEN EVER HAVE TO LEARN MATH
MATH IS HARD! TEE HEE!
\
(http://marketing.blogs.ie.edu/archives/barbie340x300.jpg)
FUCK YOUUUU
srsly not everone gets math
doesnt mean i believe in fucking magidihqqqkal flying sparkly ponies
I FART SUNSHINE AND HUGS
AND DANCING COOKIES
AND I AM HERE TO SOLVE
ALL YR EXISTENTIAL CRISES
\
:hosrie:
super fucking valid worldview ITT
Quote from: noodlefred on April 21, 2008, 02:48:46 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:45:38 AM
Quote from: noodlefred on April 21, 2008, 02:43:16 AM
LEARNING MATH?
FUCKS NO
ID RATHER BE A STUPID MONKEY THEN EVER HAVE TO LEARN MATH
MATH IS HARD! TEE HEE!
\
(http://marketing.blogs.ie.edu/archives/barbie340x300.jpg)
FUCK YOUUUU
srsly not everone gets math
doesnt mean i believe in fucking magidihqqqkal flying sparkly ponies
Math isn't easy for anyone. You get it by having it pounded through the thick parts of your skull, not unlike the Dirty Boys on Grant Road will fuck a football as a form of initiation.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:28:52 AM
1. As of now, the fact that I am a Discordian does mean I will respect any oddball beliefs you have. Apparently, that respect has been entirely one way, so now I intend to shit my diseased and parasite-infested feces all over the next filthy hippie that tries to tell me what a KAOS MAGICKIAN he is, etc. Fuck off, I don't want to hear it.
2. The fact that I am a Discordian does not imply that I am a hippie who will put up with each and every hippie, freak, and new age loser that comes down the pike. I hate you all, and I wish that you would all - as a species - die. So don't get all butthurt when I laugh at your eccentricities.
3. Not every viewpoint of the world and it's workings is valid. Mine is. Yours isn't, at least until it agrees SOMEWHAT with the actual workings of the real, physical universe. Are we clear?
4. If you can't tell the difference between "having an open mind" and "believing everything you are told", then you're too fucking stupid to live. Drink Drano, please.
5. Yeah, I just laughed at your "religion". Deal with it, Moonbeam.
RAH!
I CAN FEEL THE TREE SPIRITS...
AND LEVITATE..
AND LOOK A MYSTICAL NUMBER....
/
/
:hosrie:
Quote from: Darth Cupcake on April 21, 2008, 02:50:59 AM
I FART SUNSHINE AND HUGS
AND DANCING COOKIES
AND I AM HERE TO SOLVE
ALL YR EXISTENTIAL CRISES
\
:hosrie:
super fucking valid worldview ITT
UNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNG!
\
(http://galatea.stetson.edu/~bcampbel/images/uploads/cash.jpg)
i learned as much as is necessary for what i want to do in life, how does that make me a retarded hippie?
Quote from: noodlefred on April 21, 2008, 02:54:10 AM
i learned as much as is necessary for what i want to do in life, how does that make me a retarded hippie?
No. A retarded hippie wouldn't have learned ANY, and would have explained why NONE was needed.
Or worse.
Some of the fuckers LEARN math, but then try to snowjob OTHERS into believing that the math says things it doesn't. Then they fucking run off and write books like
The Tao of Physics, The Dancing Wu Li Masters, and
Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. And it's people like this that should be hauled though a thresher.
WELL U KNOA WUT?
IM GOONNA GO MADJIQUE MYSELF OUTTA THE RULES OF GRAVITY
SO THERE
Quote from: noodlefred on April 21, 2008, 03:00:35 AM
WELL U KNOA WUT?
IM GOONNA GO MADJIQUE MYSELF OUTTA THE RULES OF GRAVITY
SO THERE
Can I have your stereo?
Quote from: noodlefred on April 21, 2008, 03:00:35 AM
WELL U KNOA WUT?
IM GOONNA GO MADJIQUE MYSELF OUTTA THE RULES OF GRAVITY
SO THERE
Your divining rods didn't help with the brackets, did they?
AIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
\
:hosrie:
So...about that stereo...
Quote from: hunter s.durden on April 21, 2008, 03:02:06 AM
Quote from: noodlefred on April 21, 2008, 03:00:35 AM
WELL U KNOA WUT?
IM GOONNA GO MADJIQUE MYSELF OUTTA THE RULES OF GRAVITY
SO THERE
Your divining rods didn't help with the brackets, did they?
SUCK MY NON-EXISTENT COCK HUNTER
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 03:04:09 AM
So...about that stereo...
I DONT HAVE A STERO I LESTEN TO THE TREES AND THE UNIVERS SINNNGGGGG TO MY SOULLLL
Quote from: noodlefred on April 21, 2008, 03:05:05 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 03:04:09 AM
So...about that stereo...
I DONT HAVE A STERO I LESTEN TO THE TREES AND THE UNIVERS SINNNGGGGG TO MY SOULLLL
Okay, now you owe me a monitor. This one has coffee all over it.
I DONT HAVE MONITOR I WATCH INTERNETS IN FOREST POOLS :sad:
:lulz:
Quote from: noodlefred on April 21, 2008, 03:07:47 AM
I DONT HAVE MONITOR I WATCH INTERNETS IN FOREST POOLS :sad:
:mittens:
Quote from: noodlefred on April 21, 2008, 03:00:35 AM
WELL U KNOA WUT?
IM GOONNA GO MADJIQUE MYSELF OUTTA THE RULES OF GRAVITY
SO THERE
Your avie kicks ass, btw.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:28:52 AM
1. As of now, the fact that I am a Discordian does mean I will respect any oddball beliefs you have. Apparently, that respect has been entirely one way, so now I intend to shit my diseased and parasite-infested feces all over the next filthy hippie that tries to tell me what a KAOS MAGICKIAN he is, etc. Fuck off, I don't want to hear it.
2. The fact that I am a Discordian does not imply that I am a hippie who will put up with each and every hippie, freak, and new age loser that comes down the pike. I hate you all, and I wish that you would all - as a species - die. So don't get all butthurt when I laugh at your eccentricities.
3. Not every viewpoint of the world and it's workings is valid. Mine is. Yours isn't, at least until it agrees SOMEWHAT with the actual workings of the real, physical universe. Are we clear?
4. If you can't tell the difference between "having an open mind" and "believing everything you are told", then you're too fucking stupid to live. Drink Drano, please.
5. Yeah, I just laughed at your "religion". Deal with it, Moonbeam.
Wait wait wait...I thought you were a Subgenius? That is to say, I didn't think they were mutually exclusive per se, but I thought that is what you primarily id'd as...just asking b/c you're the only Subgenius I knew of.
Quote from: Jenne on April 21, 2008, 04:54:03 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:28:52 AM
1. As of now, the fact that I am a Discordian does mean I will respect any oddball beliefs you have. Apparently, that respect has been entirely one way, so now I intend to shit my diseased and parasite-infested feces all over the next filthy hippie that tries to tell me what a KAOS MAGICKIAN he is, etc. Fuck off, I don't want to hear it.
2. The fact that I am a Discordian does not imply that I am a hippie who will put up with each and every hippie, freak, and new age loser that comes down the pike. I hate you all, and I wish that you would all - as a species - die. So don't get all butthurt when I laugh at your eccentricities.
3. Not every viewpoint of the world and it's workings is valid. Mine is. Yours isn't, at least until it agrees SOMEWHAT with the actual workings of the real, physical universe. Are we clear?
4. If you can't tell the difference between "having an open mind" and "believing everything you are told", then you're too fucking stupid to live. Drink Drano, please.
5. Yeah, I just laughed at your "religion". Deal with it, Moonbeam.
Wait wait wait...I thought you were a Subgenius? That is to say, I didn't think they were mutually exclusive per se, but I thought that is what you primarily id'd as...just asking b/c you're the only Subgenius I knew of.
Both. The Discordians are too fucking silly without "Bob", but the CotSG is now full of self-important, tragically hip old geezers who could use a poke in the tookus.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:56:23 AM
Quote from: noodlefred on April 21, 2008, 02:54:10 AM
i learned as much as is necessary for what i want to do in life, how does that make me a retarded hippie?
No. A retarded hippie wouldn't have learned ANY, and would have explained why NONE was needed.
Or worse.
Some of the fuckers LEARN math, but then try to snowjob OTHERS into believing that the math says things it doesn't. Then they fucking run off and write books like The Tao of Physics, The Dancing Wu Li Masters, and Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. And it's people like this that should be hauled though a thresher.
I haven't read the first two, but where's the bad math in Zen and Motorcycles?
Ok. I was just wondering. I think I'm too slow and unmotivated to be CotSG. Not that that is a requirement of the Discordians, but *scratches head* that makes sense atm.
Things could change.
And yeah, fuck hippies. I'm tired of their bullshit whineyass'd attitude.
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on April 21, 2008, 04:57:26 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:56:23 AM
Quote from: noodlefred on April 21, 2008, 02:54:10 AM
i learned as much as is necessary for what i want to do in life, how does that make me a retarded hippie?
No. A retarded hippie wouldn't have learned ANY, and would have explained why NONE was needed.
Or worse.
Some of the fuckers LEARN math, but then try to snowjob OTHERS into believing that the math says things it doesn't. Then they fucking run off and write books like The Tao of Physics, The Dancing Wu Li Masters, and Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. And it's people like this that should be hauled though a thresher.
I haven't read the first two, but where's the bad math in Zen and Motorcycles?
Sorry, did I say it had bad math in it? I meant to say it was full of mushy-headed bullshit and FAIL.
The other two are books on Physics that don't actually contain any physics...because why put physics in, when you can just shove in some sloppy pseudo-Eastern "philosophy".
Quote from: Jenne on April 21, 2008, 04:57:35 AM
I think I'm too slow and unmotivated to be CotSG.
Um.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 05:06:57 AM
Quote from: Jenne on April 21, 2008, 04:57:35 AM
I think I'm too slow and unmotivated to be CotSG.
Um.
WUT? :lulz:
No I'm srs here. I'm sort of on ultimate auto-pilot with all of this.
Jenne, I think you just got upgraded to SubGenius Grand Arbiter of Philosophy-Related SLACK.
Cool.
*really an armchair philosopher of LOLWUT* but it's all coo
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:38:52 AM
Quote from: Faust on April 21, 2008, 02:34:59 AM
Its not as pervasive as you think, its just when you see it, you cant look away and it clouds the other shit.
This forum (to me) is still about sweet beautiful soul crushingly brutal honesty, and cutting through the crap.
This is mostly about something that's happening at POEE, but it seems to be creeping into PD as well.
Fucking primitives, beating on hollow logs and hiding in caves because, well, it's easier than learning math, right? Never mind that this is EXACTLY what the CoN wants you to do. When you're out "casting sigils", you aren't accomplishing ANYTHING, but you THINK you are, and that makes the powers that be HAPPIER THAN SHIT. And, goddammit, it is so stupid that it is fucking PAINFUL to even WATCH.
Jackasses. I hope they all get terminal fucking syphilis.
Roger, it seems like your suggesting Chaos magick is about manipulation of "external reality", is that correct? It seems to me to be more useful in application and study if it is understood as taking a more active role in psychologically altering your impressions of the world you experience. That's what I get from Crowley, and as far as I can tell from Grant Morrison. I'm still in fairly early stages of experimentation, so I can't get particularly controversial, but that is the way I'm approaching it. As audacious as it might sound, familiarity with the Tarot symbology has allowed me to tap into modes of intuition that, at the very least, strike me as peculiar coincidences (or if you like, synchronicities). If it's just my imagination, it's certainly interesting, so I continue to experiment. Did I see you mentioned mystical experimentation of your own earlier in your life, or am I imagining things remembered? I enjoy vivid dreams. Lucid dreams, I relish. Induced alter states of consciousness have been illuminating. I love AHA! states, which is the same reason I'm captivated by physics, and I think quantum mechanics has proven it exceedingly difficult to eliminate the observer in the equation. Systems like Crowley's magick and sufism, qabbalah, and various other forms of reimprinting are aimed at tweaking the observer element in the software. This of course affects the world out there, as you and it are completely interfaced.
I mean, I guess I'm just interested why you've concluded it's shit.
I've suggested this to Roger before. And the reply was along the lines of "if it is psychological, then why not just call it self-directed psychotherapy and attempt to learn about psychology and concepts from that discipline, instead of dressing it up as bullshit?"
Which seems sensible enough to me, and is something I have tended to agree with anyway, because of my own background in Psychology. Appropriated hard physics and mythical terms and conflating them is worse than using social science terms because it gives the false illusion of certainty and evidence, and almost any student of the social sciences will tell you evidence is hard to come by, if not impossible and half the time you're dealing with ideologues pretending to be reasonable people who are describing their own internal imagery as the actuality of the world....just like most people who talk about magic, actually.
I have no problem with sociology and psychology, as terms. NLP has some problems, but even that I can let slide. Memes may be more problematical, but I'm willing to give them a shot as well, because they may be a useful description of subrational sociology than few people have explored or studied yet. But if you're going to appropriate nonsense and crap in order to buffer up a feeling of self-important mysticism, thats intellectually dishonest and misleading.
Quote from: Cain on April 21, 2008, 05:50:03 AM
But if you're going to appropriate nonsense and crap in order to buffer up a feeling of self-important mysticism, thats intellectually dishonest and misleading.
I don't think I'm doing that, but I'm a little too silly (<--
edit) to write a respectable reply, considering I'm not sure I understand your post yet.
I'll be back. :lol:
Quote from: daruko on April 21, 2008, 05:58:54 AM
Quote from: Cain on April 21, 2008, 05:50:03 AM
But if you're going to appropriate nonsense and crap in order to buffer up a feeling of self-important mysticism, thats intellectually dishonest and misleading.
I don't think I'm doing that
Well, it is generally accepted that things such as "Tarot symbology" and "altered mental states" are the on-ramp to the Highway of Bullshit.
Quote from: daruko on April 21, 2008, 05:58:54 AM
but I'm a little too high to write a respectable reply, considering I'm not sure I understand your post yet.
DISCREDITED
yeah and losing one's ego is the best ego trip out there. but then who am i to judge a fool persisting in a folly.
Much of the terminology of chaos magick has been appropriated from Thomas Kuhn and A.O. Spare. The former is a philosophical viewpoint of the sciences and the latter is mystical hogwash. The conflation of the two is dishonest
Many people who talk about magic use terms like "power", "force" "quantumn" "indeterminate" "Uncertainy theory" and the like with absolutely no relation to anything actually posited in the sciences in question.
The clue should have been in the description of chaos magick as a postmodern belief system. Has anyone here actually read Postmodernists of any sort trying to deal with the hard sciences? Its bullshit, all the way down. The Sokal Affair should have shamed everyone who bought into that philisophical hogwash in even the slightest way, but apparently not so. Just like Social Text, chaos magickians apparently have no problem with ripping ideas from the coolest in things in the sciences without actually having a clue about them at all, and then proceeding to horribly abuse the terms beyond all meaning, while thinking "its science, so its all proven".
If you want to use science to explain what you are doing, use science. If you want to use bullshit, prepared to be laughed at. If you don't know why it works or how, just admit it instead of thinking you can fool everyone (this is not directed at anyone here, but in general). It's really very simple.
That's the problem I have with Bach flower remedies. I've tried their stuff and it works they way it's supposed to, but I wish they wouldn't make up magical stores as to why they work.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 05:05:12 AM
I haven't read the first two, but where's the bad math in Zen and Motorcycles?
Sorry, did I say it had bad math in it? I meant to say it was full of mushy-headed bullshit and FAIL.
[/quote]
i liked it. i read it twice, even. there's not many books i read more than once.
though i agree i liked the story itself better than the philosophical ideas in it.
the only thing i still got and use from it is the example of the difference between the couple buying an expensive BMW motorcycle because they're afraid of fixing it and the main character having a normal motorcycle but fixing and caring for it as if it were his own baby.
the bits about the "Church of Reason" weren't too bad either, but have been done a lot better in other writings, indeed.
the "Quality" bullshit was carried on a bit too far, but that makes sense because it drove the guy crazy in the end.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:28:52 AM
1. As of now, the fact that I am a Discordian does mean I will respect any oddball beliefs you have. Apparently, that respect has been entirely one way, so now I intend to shit my diseased and parasite-infested feces all over the next filthy hippie that tries to tell me what a KAOS MAGICKIAN he is, etc. Fuck off, I don't want to hear it.
2. The fact that I am a Discordian does not imply that I am a hippie who will put up with each and every hippie, freak, and new age loser that comes down the pike. I hate you all, and I wish that you would all - as a species - die. So don't get all butthurt when I laugh at your eccentricities.
3. Not every viewpoint of the world and it's workings is valid. Mine is. Yours isn't, at least until it agrees SOMEWHAT with the actual workings of the real, physical universe. Are we clear?
4. If you can't tell the difference between "having an open mind" and "believing everything you are told", then you're too fucking stupid to live. Drink Drano, please.
5. Yeah, I just laughed at your "religion". Deal with it, Moonbeam.
Does this discredit my love of voodoo dolls?
I do so love sticking pins in the eyes.
:hosrie: :hosrie: :hosrie:
Quote from: triple zero on April 21, 2008, 11:45:15 AM
i liked it. i read it twice, even. there's not many books i read more than once.
though i agree i liked the story itself better than the philosophical ideas in it.
the only thing i still got and use from it is the example of the difference between the couple buying an expensive BMW motorcycle because they're afraid of fixing it and the main character having a normal motorcycle but fixing and caring for it as if it were his own baby.
the bits about the "Church of Reason" weren't too bad either, but have been done a lot better in other writings, indeed.
the "Quality" bullshit was carried on a bit too far, but that makes sense because it drove the guy crazy in the end.
I dug
Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenence too. To be honest, it had a large impact on my creative works. The relevant idea being that Quality is a balance between the aesthetic and the rational. There's very little Zen or eastern philosophy (or Motorcycle Maintenence) in it, it's just talking about how even if your idea is good, you still have to make it
sound good and
look good.
And if your idea just
feels good, you fail unless it has some
substance too.
Quality is my mantra, man. If you're gonna do something, do it
right.
the main reason I say this is 'cause I think that Pirsig (the author) would agree with Roger - that mystic-mumbo-jumbo and feel-theory crystal-fondling is useless unless you're grounded in the rational world and are capable of cutting out the bullshit.
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on April 21, 2008, 03:02:05 PM
the main reason I say this is 'cause I think that Pirsig (the author) would agree with Roger - that mystic-mumbo-jumbo and feel-theory crystal-fondling is useless unless you're grounded in the rational world and are capable of cutting out the bullshit.
Good compression of the ideas in this thread. TITCzenM
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on April 21, 2008, 03:02:05 PMThe relevant idea being that Quality is a balance between the aesthetic and the rational. There's very little Zen or eastern philosophy (or Motorcycle Maintenence) in it, it's just talking about how even if your idea is good, you still have to make it sound good and look good.
And if your idea just feels good, you fail unless it has some substance too.
Quality is my mantra, man. If you're gonna do something, do it right.
hm, right, balance between the aethetic (emotional/"romantic") and rational ("classic") -- that one struck me as well, but mostly because it came to me at a time when i really needed it and i was really into exploring this bisection of things.
Quality .. myeah. i feel it's a hangup, frankly. if you get hung up on doing something right, it's often better to do it anyway, but badly than to not do it at all.
and about cutting the bullshit--been doing that since ever. sometimes you get into a dead-end street, though, and have to back up a bit.
I think that the new age bullshit was useful in some sense... that is, it certianly broke up the monotony of monotheistic bullshit and made a lot of people question their Christian credentials. It provided a different paradigm for people to perceive their world through. In Christianity you have a paradigm based on the dying god archetype and the concept of Original Sin. This sort of paradigm often leads to crappy views of self, inane attempts at self-sacrifice/martyrdom and an overall feeling of being screwed from birth.
The new age/neo-pagan baloney gave people a different system to examine the world through... unfortunately, like most other systems (including Discordianism and Sub Geniuses), many of the people in the system are human and have a strong tendency to confuse the map and the territory. When I look at Crowley's writings, or Carroll's or Phil Hine etc., their discussions seem to clearly state "This is a map. We are using memes and semantics to discuss things that are hard to put into words." Sadly, many of their students and very many of the other new age authors/leaders don't get that concept. I see nothing inherently wrong with people using whatever models and metaphors they want even stealing concepts from physics or science, as long as they can still wrap their head around the concept that its still just a model and its still only true in some sense.
One only needs visit spots like dot pagan snark or non fluffy pagans on LJ to see the insanity that the movement seems mired in.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:28:52 AM
1. As of now, the fact that I am a Discordian does mean I will respect any oddball beliefs you have. Apparently, that respect has been entirely one way, so now I intend to shit my diseased and parasite-infested feces all over the next filthy hippie that tries to tell me what a KAOS MAGICKIAN he is, etc. Fuck off, I don't want to hear it.
2. The fact that I am a Discordian does not imply that I am a hippie who will put up with each and every hippie, freak, and new age loser that comes down the pike. I hate you all, and I wish that you would all - as a species - die. So don't get all butthurt when I laugh at your eccentricities.
3. Not every viewpoint of the world and it's workings is valid. Mine is. Yours isn't, at least until it agrees SOMEWHAT with the actual workings of the real, physical universe. Are we clear?
4. If you can't tell the difference between "having an open mind" and "believing everything you are told", then you're too fucking stupid to live. Drink Drano, please.
5. Yeah, I just laughed at your "religion". Deal with it, Moonbeam.
Umn correct me if I'm wrong, but did you mean "1. As of now, the fact that I am a Discordian does
not mean I will respect any oddball beliefs you have. "?
And uh... welcome to discordia Rog... :kiss:
Quote from: Cain on April 21, 2008, 05:50:03 AM
"if it is psychological, then why not just call it self-directed psychotherapy and attempt to learn about psychology and concepts from that discipline, instead of dressing it up as bullshit?"
Which seems sensible enough to me, and is something I have tended to agree with anyway, because of my own background in Psychology. Appropriated hard physics and mythical terms and conflating them is worse than using social science terms because it gives the false illusion of certainty and evidence, and almost any student of the social sciences will tell you evidence is hard to come by, if not impossible and half the time you're dealing with ideologues pretending to be reasonable people who are describing their own internal imagery as the actuality of the world....just like most people who talk about magic, actually.
I have no problem with sociology and psychology, as terms. NLP has some problems, but even that I can let slide. Memes may be more problematical, but I'm willing to give them a shot as well, because they may be a useful description of subrational sociology than few people have explored or studied yet. But if you're going to appropriate nonsense and crap in order to buffer up a feeling of self-important mysticism, thats intellectually dishonest and misleading.
I think many people do consider it self-directed psychotherapy, in some sense, but that is a very broad and general term. "chaos magick" refers to a particular set of psychological algorithms, in the sense that it is what it is... I don't think someone practicing Crowleyan magick would call that Chaos magick, so there's a definite distinction. Crowley's system is a particular map, and Jewish Kabbalists have very different ideas about the Kabbalah. I would argue that both systems could be considered self-directed psychotherapy. To tell the truth, I am much more annoyed by the need to make something sound "academic" by dressing it up with psychological terms. Why not use some goofy mystical word like "divination", so that you don't easily forget you are playing a game? I've fallen into the reductionist trap before, so I don't mind using words like "magick", to remind me where I'm at. Over the years, I grow more or less affectionate for which terms I use. I've never referred to myself as a chaos magician, for the record, although I am somewhat interested in it's applications. I'm far too lazy to learn the Qabbalah in depth, but I have studied it, to gain a better understanding of Crowley's ideas.
Quote from: Ratatosk on April 21, 2008, 04:34:35 PM
...as long as they can still wrap their head around the concept that its still just a model and its still only true in some sense.
In Magick: In Theory and Practice, Crowley states that he used the invocation of the the Holy Guardian Angel, because it was so damned absurd, only a fool would take it seriously. Take it seriously, as in confusing it for the territory.
Also, while it's important to maintain skepticism, I think RAW made some good points on the benefits of suspending disbelief DURING the experiment (not always), and then recording the results skeptically. When the skeptic reads the Tarot, all he sees are vague broad concepts and cliche symbols and archetypes... but when I approach the Tarot as a mystic, or as a child might, I can react intuitively to the symbols, especially as I become more familiar with them. Despite whether the reading produces seemingly positive results or not, I don't need to bullshit myself that I'm manipulating supernatural forces.
I do think imprinting any system of archetypes is going to effect the direction of one's perceptions, and if anything it's an exercise in brainstorming. I have done Tarot readings for simple things like finding shit I lose around the house, and had multiple successes.
By the way, I've been dying to recommend Alejandro Jodorowski's "Holy Mountain" and/or "El Topo" to anyone who might be interested in a "mystical" sort of movie. They seem pretty discordian-like too... there is a town in El Topo where half the people in the town run around with signs depicting the eye in the pyramid symbol. They brand it on criminals, and use it as a religious symbol, where the religion consists of playing russian roulette (only the sinners get shot, of course).
Quote from: daruko on April 21, 2008, 05:15:26 PM
Quote from: Cain on April 21, 2008, 05:50:03 AM
"if it is psychological, then why not just call it self-directed psychotherapy and attempt to learn about psychology and concepts from that discipline, instead of dressing it up as bullshit?"
Which seems sensible enough to me, and is something I have tended to agree with anyway, because of my own background in Psychology. Appropriated hard physics and mythical terms and conflating them is worse than using social science terms because it gives the false illusion of certainty and evidence, and almost any student of the social sciences will tell you evidence is hard to come by, if not impossible and half the time you're dealing with ideologues pretending to be reasonable people who are describing their own internal imagery as the actuality of the world....just like most people who talk about magic, actually.
I have no problem with sociology and psychology, as terms. NLP has some problems, but even that I can let slide. Memes may be more problematical, but I'm willing to give them a shot as well, because they may be a useful description of subrational sociology than few people have explored or studied yet. But if you're going to appropriate nonsense and crap in order to buffer up a feeling of self-important mysticism, thats intellectually dishonest and misleading.
I think many people do consider it self-directed psychotherapy, in some sense, but that is a very broad and general term. "chaos magick" refers to a particular set of psychological algorithms, in the sense that it is what it is... I don't think someone practicing Crowleyan magick would call that Chaos magick, so there's a definite distinction. Crowley's system is a particular map, and Jewish Kabbalists have very different ideas about the Kabbalah. I would argue that both systems could be considered self-directed psychotherapy. To tell the truth, I am much more annoyed by the need to make something sound "academic" by dressing it up with psychological terms. Why not use some goofy mystical word like "divination", so that you don't easily forget you are playing a game. I've fallen into the reductionist trap before, so I don't mind using words like "magick", to remind me where I'm at. Over the years, I grow more or less affectionate for which terms I use. I've never referred to myself as a chaos magician, for the record, although I am somewhat interested in it's applications. I'm far too lazy to learn the Qabbalah in depth, but I have studied it, to gain a better understanding of Crowley's ideas.
Quote from: Ratatosk on April 21, 2008, 04:34:35 PM
...as long as they can still wrap their head around the concept that its still just a model and its still only true in some sense.
In Magick: In Theory and Practice, Crowley states that he used the invocation of the the Holy Guardian Angel, because it was so damned absurd, only a fool would take it seriously. Take it seriously, as in confusing it for the territory.
Also, while it's important to maintain skepticism, I think RAW made some good points on the benefits of suspending disbelief DURING the experiment (not always), and then recording the results skeptically. When the skeptic reads the Tarot, all he sees are vague broad concepts and cliche symbols and archetypes... but when I approach the Tarot as a mystic, or as a child might, I can react intuitively to the symbols, especially as I become more familiar with them. Despite whether the reading produces seemingly positive results or not, I don't need to bullshit myself that I'm manipulating supernatural forces.
I do think imprinting any system of archetypes is going to effect the direction of one's perceptions, and if anything it's an exercise in brainstorming. I have done Tarot readings for simple things like finding shit I lose around the house, and had multiple successes.
By the way, I've been dying to recommend Alejandro Jodorowski's "Holy Mountain" and/or "El Topo" to anyone who might be interested in a "mystical" sort of movie. They seem pretty discordian-like too... there is a town in El Topo where half the people in the town run around with signs depicting the eye in the pyramid symbol. They brand it on criminals, and use it as a religious symbol, where the religion consists of playing russian roulette (only the sinners get shot, of course).
Nicely stated Daruko!
Pretty much what Daruko said.
I don't know shit about "Chaos Magick", but the path I took to get here started with being raised by an ex-Mormon mother who rebelled by absorbing everything she could of my father's Native culture and religion, mixing it with witchcraft and atheism, then handing it down to me with liberal doses of pow-wows and a "your ancestors believed" approach to teaching which left me forced to rebel by getting therapy and experimenting with Christianity. Eventually I started studying witchcraft again, which led me to Discordianism.
I've found that the various methods for altering my perspective and perception, including hours of talking to psychiatrists and psychologists, have been interesting and effective. Call it what you want to.
Ironically, science tried some shit with me and it made me worse :|
Quote from: daruko on April 21, 2008, 05:21:44 AM
Roger, it seems like your suggesting Chaos magick is about manipulation of "external reality", is that correct? It seems to me to be more useful in application and study if it is understood as taking a more active role in psychologically altering your impressions of the world you experience.
Then why not call it "self-examination" or "meditation", both of which are valid practices?
And what's with the fucking "sigils", then?
It is a
steaming
pile
of
horseshit.
Quote from: Hoopla on April 21, 2008, 12:29:06 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:28:52 AM
1. As of now, the fact that I am a Discordian does mean I will respect any oddball beliefs you have. Apparently, that respect has been entirely one way, so now I intend to shit my diseased and parasite-infested feces all over the next filthy hippie that tries to tell me what a KAOS MAGICKIAN he is, etc. Fuck off, I don't want to hear it.
2. The fact that I am a Discordian does not imply that I am a hippie who will put up with each and every hippie, freak, and new age loser that comes down the pike. I hate you all, and I wish that you would all - as a species - die. So don't get all butthurt when I laugh at your eccentricities.
3. Not every viewpoint of the world and it's workings is valid. Mine is. Yours isn't, at least until it agrees SOMEWHAT with the actual workings of the real, physical universe. Are we clear?
4. If you can't tell the difference between "having an open mind" and "believing everything you are told", then you're too fucking stupid to live. Drink Drano, please.
5. Yeah, I just laughed at your "religion". Deal with it, Moonbeam.
Does this discredit my love of voodoo dolls?
I do so love sticking pins in the eyes.
The only valid magic is practiced in Salazor, as you well know. And unless your voodoo dolls are 5-6 feet tall and inflatable, THEY DON'T APPLY!
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on April 21, 2008, 03:02:05 PM
Quality is my mantra, man. If you're gonna do something, do it right.
On the other hand, the highest and most sacred sin in the CotSG is "selling shoddy goods, just for the hell of it."
Quote from: Ratatosk on April 21, 2008, 04:34:35 PM
The new age/neo-pagan baloney gave people a different system to examine the world through... unfortunately, like most other systems (including Discordianism and Sub Geniuses), many of the people in the system are human and have a strong tendency to confuse the map and the territory.
Silence your blasphemy, sir. Even though the CotSG may be full of asshats, we have something the other religions don't have...an
excuse. The
best excuse.
Quote from: Lysergic on April 21, 2008, 04:44:31 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:28:52 AM
1. As of now, the fact that I am a Discordian does mean I will respect any oddball beliefs you have. Apparently, that respect has been entirely one way, so now I intend to shit my diseased and parasite-infested feces all over the next filthy hippie that tries to tell me what a KAOS MAGICKIAN he is, etc. Fuck off, I don't want to hear it.
2. The fact that I am a Discordian does not imply that I am a hippie who will put up with each and every hippie, freak, and new age loser that comes down the pike. I hate you all, and I wish that you would all - as a species - die. So don't get all butthurt when I laugh at your eccentricities.
3. Not every viewpoint of the world and it's workings is valid. Mine is. Yours isn't, at least until it agrees SOMEWHAT with the actual workings of the real, physical universe. Are we clear?
4. If you can't tell the difference between "having an open mind" and "believing everything you are told", then you're too fucking stupid to live. Drink Drano, please.
5. Yeah, I just laughed at your "religion". Deal with it, Moonbeam.
Umn correct me if I'm wrong, but did you mean "1. As of now, the fact that I am a Discordian does not mean I will respect any oddball beliefs you have. "?
And uh... welcome to discordia Rog... :kiss:
SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP UNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNG!
Quote from: daruko on April 21, 2008, 05:15:26 PM
but when I approach the Tarot as a mystic,
THUD.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 11:48:37 PM
Quote from: daruko on April 21, 2008, 05:21:44 AM
Roger, it seems like your suggesting Chaos magick is about manipulation of "external reality", is that correct? It seems to me to be more useful in application and study if it is understood as taking a more active role in psychologically altering your impressions of the world you experience.
Then why not call it "self-examination" or "meditation", both of which are valid practices?
And what's with the fucking "sigils", then?
It is a
steaming
pile
of
horseshit.
Look Roger, if you haven't shoved a lavender scented candle up your ass, lit it, and wished really hard for something that was likely to happen anyway, you can't comment on madgjicks.
Quote from: Netaungrot on April 21, 2008, 11:56:48 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 11:48:37 PM
Quote from: daruko on April 21, 2008, 05:21:44 AM
Roger, it seems like your suggesting Chaos magick is about manipulation of "external reality", is that correct? It seems to me to be more useful in application and study if it is understood as taking a more active role in psychologically altering your impressions of the world you experience.
Then why not call it "self-examination" or "meditation", both of which are valid practices?
And what's with the fucking "sigils", then?
It is a
steaming
pile
of
horseshit.
Look Roger, if you haven't shoved a lavender scented candle up your ass, lit it, and wished really hard for something that was likely to happen anyway, you can't comment on madgjicks.
Well, fuck. I was using a blowtorch.
TGRR,
Carbon steel rectum.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 11:54:18 PM
Quote from: Lysergic on April 21, 2008, 04:44:31 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:28:52 AM
1. As of now, the fact that I am a Discordian does mean I will respect any oddball beliefs you have. Apparently, that respect has been entirely one way, so now I intend to shit my diseased and parasite-infested feces all over the next filthy hippie that tries to tell me what a KAOS MAGICKIAN he is, etc. Fuck off, I don't want to hear it.
2. The fact that I am a Discordian does not imply that I am a hippie who will put up with each and every hippie, freak, and new age loser that comes down the pike. I hate you all, and I wish that you would all - as a species - die. So don't get all butthurt when I laugh at your eccentricities.
3. Not every viewpoint of the world and it's workings is valid. Mine is. Yours isn't, at least until it agrees SOMEWHAT with the actual workings of the real, physical universe. Are we clear?
4. If you can't tell the difference between "having an open mind" and "believing everything you are told", then you're too fucking stupid to live. Drink Drano, please.
5. Yeah, I just laughed at your "religion". Deal with it, Moonbeam.
Umn correct me if I'm wrong, but did you mean "1. As of now, the fact that I am a Discordian does not mean I will respect any oddball beliefs you have. "?
And uh... welcome to discordia Rog... :kiss:
SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP UNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNG!
So does that mean I'm wrong and you will respect the oddball beliefs that I have? :?
I'm not trying to get a rise out of you, I want to fucking know it was a typo or not... sorry for trying to make sure I'm understanding you correctly here.
Ah fuck it, I'm asking stupid questions again, aren't I?
Wow! You fags are still here? Maybe you should get off your ass and put some thought into something meaningful instead of a stupid kiddie message board. You're all pawns in the game of life, no matter how much you think about it. You're still retarded no matter how big your words are. You're still missing the point.
There is still time to accept Jesus Christ, he is the only one that can fill the enormous void in your life. He is the definite answer you've been wasting your life looking for. He will save your soul and ease your mind. I too am a mere, flawed mortal. I can only hope others would try to reach me in times of need. This might be your last chance to save your eternity.
"psychological algorhithms"?
What the fuck are you babbling about?
I understand the purpose for using archetypes and symbology to trigger the subconcious, and I understand using ritual to change brainstate, but...
What you are doing all of this for seems to be the main issue here.
Fine; you summoned the Holy Guardian Angel thoughtform, and shifted your conciousness. Now what?
Now we're going to go get drunk together.
Cain,
mahadquikcal, for the lulz
Quote from: LMNO on April 22, 2008, 03:47:01 PM
"psychological algorhithms"?
What the fuck are you babbling about?
You know what I meant.
Quote from: LMNO on April 22, 2008, 03:47:01 PM
I understand the purpose for using archetypes and symbology to trigger the subconcious, and I understand using ritual to change brainstate, but...
What you are doing all of this for seems to be the main issue here.
Exploring, what else?
Quote from: LMNO on April 22, 2008, 03:47:01 PM
Fine; you summoned the Holy Guardian Angel thoughtform, and shifted your conciousness. Now what?
Um... THAT way! -points toward horizon-
I mean, I'm not trying to sell magick to anyone. I just put in my two cents about why I don't think it's horseshit, and wondered aloud whether Roger has explored "mystical" things without that perspective that it's hocus pocus. It seems to me that a lot of people on both sides of the fence, who either believe/disbelieve in it strongly, are jumping ahead of the game. I'm still playing in the sandbox, and I have been for some time. I've had experiences which I skeptically call hallucinations, or self-induced "visions" if I'm in the mood. Many of these CAN be correlated to real world phenomena, and I have several models I use to understand them. I've experienced uncanny coincidences, AFTER I intended to, and this sort of thing had happened BEFORE I read RAW, so imagine my elation when reading Cosmic Trigger (for those who have). I mean, I don't want to go into "my magickal diary" or anything (i don't have such a thing), but I think there are plenty of methods outside the laboratory to understand the world, and I'm very sorry but I can't do this rant justice right now. It's sloppy and poor.. it needs editing and better thinking out, but the first edit was worse, and I have to get back to work... I'll try and say more later, if it still seems appropriate.
All in all, I don't think it really matters if I'm the only person on the planet with interest in magickal systems. To each his own.
Quote from: daruko on April 22, 2008, 04:04:21 PM
Quote from: LMNO on April 22, 2008, 03:47:01 PM
"psychological algorhithms"?
What the fuck are you babbling about?
You know what I meant.
Actually, no. There's quite a few syllables there, but the content appears to be lacking.
Quote from: Cain on April 22, 2008, 03:51:47 PM
Now we're going to go get drunk together.
Cain,
mahadquikcal, for the lulz
I am a level 20 booze shaman.
Quote from: Darth Cupcake on April 22, 2008, 05:16:00 PM
Quote from: Cain on April 22, 2008, 03:51:47 PM
Now we're going to go get drunk together.
Cain,
mahadquikcal, for the lulz
I am a level 20 booze shaman.
I'm a level 9 student.
I get +8 to all fortitude saves caused by alcohol. I can also cast Summon Greater Essay IV and Charm University Administration Officials 3 times a day.
I'm a level 13 slashfic perv. Everything I own is either sticky or encrusted.
I really shouldn't have even posted today... Quitting smoking makes thinking very difficult. I'm freaking out, so I'm thinking I'll probably lurk for the next few.
I'm a level 45 destroyer of sewing machines and a level 30 booze shaman. I out drank my friend Saturday night when he complained about the tequila burning and 3 shots later I still hadn't felt anything so I gave up.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 11:48:37 PM
Quote from: daruko on April 21, 2008, 05:21:44 AM
Roger, it seems like your suggesting Chaos magick is about manipulation of "external reality", is that correct? It seems to me to be more useful in application and study if it is understood as taking a more active role in psychologically altering your impressions of the world you experience.
Then why not call it "self-examination" or "meditation", both of which are valid practices?
The Map is not the territory. Chaos Magic is a map. Why not call a City Street map "City Streets"?
Quote
And what's with the fucking "sigils", then?
Props. Tools. Toys. In CM, sigils are designed specifically to implant ideas into the subconscious of the practitioner. That's it.
Let's say that I don't like the shape of my cell in the BiP. In the CM model, I could create a sigil which represents what I want to change in my cell. Let's say that I want to modify how I tend to respond when a salesman is trying high pressure sales tactics. I would create a sigil that evoked the modification in my mind... maybe a sigil that shows bent iron bars, or one made from letters of a statement or whatever works for the prop dept. in the persons head.
Next we place ourselves in a state of mind that is receptive... here we could use madjickel terms since its a madjickal map... or we can say a meditative state, or a highly excited psychological state (depending on what the person is trying to do). Now we meditate on the sigil, while using "ritual" to distract the conscious mind. The sigil (which your brain has created as a symbol of what you want to change) can then be embedded into the subconscious mind.
Thats it. It's a psychological prop, no more or less steaming than any other psychological prop... its possible that the psychological modifications could be done with no props... but that seems far more difficult for most people, than having a system with props that they feel comfortable using.
Of course, plenty of idiots confuse props for crutches.
Quote
It is a
steaming
pile
of
horseshit.
NO YUO
I'm a level 37 uh wtf is this thread about again?
Roger, booze, and pagans I think.
Quote from: Lysergic on April 22, 2008, 08:47:26 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 11:54:18 PM
Quote from: Lysergic on April 21, 2008, 04:44:31 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:28:52 AM
1. As of now, the fact that I am a Discordian does mean I will respect any oddball beliefs you have. Apparently, that respect has been entirely one way, so now I intend to shit my diseased and parasite-infested feces all over the next filthy hippie that tries to tell me what a KAOS MAGICKIAN he is, etc. Fuck off, I don't want to hear it.
2. The fact that I am a Discordian does not imply that I am a hippie who will put up with each and every hippie, freak, and new age loser that comes down the pike. I hate you all, and I wish that you would all - as a species - die. So don't get all butthurt when I laugh at your eccentricities.
3. Not every viewpoint of the world and it's workings is valid. Mine is. Yours isn't, at least until it agrees SOMEWHAT with the actual workings of the real, physical universe. Are we clear?
4. If you can't tell the difference between "having an open mind" and "believing everything you are told", then you're too fucking stupid to live. Drink Drano, please.
5. Yeah, I just laughed at your "religion". Deal with it, Moonbeam.
Umn correct me if I'm wrong, but did you mean "1. As of now, the fact that I am a Discordian does not mean I will respect any oddball beliefs you have. "?
And uh... welcome to discordia Rog... :kiss:
SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP UNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNG!
So does that mean I'm wrong and you will respect the oddball beliefs that I have? :?
I'm not trying to get a rise out of you, I want to fucking know it was a typo or not... sorry for trying to make sure I'm understanding you correctly here.
Ah fuck it, I'm asking stupid questions again, aren't I?
Was a typo. Sorry, my hate gland has been jammed for days.
Quote from: Ratatosk on April 22, 2008, 05:59:48 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 11:48:37 PM
Quote from: daruko on April 21, 2008, 05:21:44 AM
Roger, it seems like your suggesting Chaos magick is about manipulation of "external reality", is that correct? It seems to me to be more useful in application and study if it is understood as taking a more active role in psychologically altering your impressions of the world you experience.
Then why not call it "self-examination" or "meditation", both of which are valid practices?
The Map is not the territory. Chaos Magic is a map. Why not call a City Street map "City Streets"?
Quote
And what's with the fucking "sigils", then?
Props. Tools. Toys. In CM, sigils are designed specifically to implant ideas into the subconscious of the practitioner. That's it.
Let's say that I don't like the shape of my cell in the BiP. In the CM model, I could create a sigil which represents what I want to change in my cell. Let's say that I want to modify how I tend to respond when a salesman is trying high pressure sales tactics. I would create a sigil that evoked the modification in my mind... maybe a sigil that shows bent iron bars, or one made from letters of a statement or whatever works for the prop dept. in the persons head.
Next we place ourselves in a state of mind that is receptive... here we could use madjickel terms since its a madjickal map... or we can say a meditative state, or a highly excited psychological state (depending on what the person is trying to do). Now we meditate on the sigil, while using "ritual" to distract the conscious mind. The sigil (which your brain has created as a symbol of what you want to change) can then be embedded into the subconscious mind.
Thats it. It's a psychological prop, no more or less steaming than any other psychological prop... its possible that the psychological modifications could be done with no props... but that seems far more difficult for most people, than having a system with props that they feel comfortable using.
Of course, plenty of idiots confuse props for crutches.
Quote
It is a
steaming
pile
of
horseshit.
NO YUO
Blarg. It's chintzy self-hypnosis.
I use Ambassador Klok Kaos Magik to win friends and influence people.
I just jack off into a bottle of
(http://www.aquamaestro.com/productsnew/saratoga3.jpg)
(http://onondagacyclingclub.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/saratoga_springwater_logo.png)
and poof! Enlightenment!
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on April 23, 2008, 12:09:09 AM
I use Ambassador Klok Kaos Magik to win friends and influence people.
I just jack off into a bottle of
(http://www.aquamaestro.com/productsnew/saratoga3.jpg)
(http://onondagacyclingclub.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/saratoga_springwater_logo.png)
and poof! Enlightenment!
:mittens:
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 22, 2008, 11:32:57 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on April 22, 2008, 05:59:48 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 11:48:37 PM
Quote from: daruko on April 21, 2008, 05:21:44 AM
Roger, it seems like your suggesting Chaos magick is about manipulation of "external reality", is that correct? It seems to me to be more useful in application and study if it is understood as taking a more active role in psychologically altering your impressions of the world you experience.
Then why not call it "self-examination" or "meditation", both of which are valid practices?
The Map is not the territory. Chaos Magic is a map. Why not call a City Street map "City Streets"?
Quote
And what's with the fucking "sigils", then?
Props. Tools. Toys. In CM, sigils are designed specifically to implant ideas into the subconscious of the practitioner. That's it.
Let's say that I don't like the shape of my cell in the BiP. In the CM model, I could create a sigil which represents what I want to change in my cell. Let's say that I want to modify how I tend to respond when a salesman is trying high pressure sales tactics. I would create a sigil that evoked the modification in my mind... maybe a sigil that shows bent iron bars, or one made from letters of a statement or whatever works for the prop dept. in the persons head.
Next we place ourselves in a state of mind that is receptive... here we could use madjickel terms since its a madjickal map... or we can say a meditative state, or a highly excited psychological state (depending on what the person is trying to do). Now we meditate on the sigil, while using "ritual" to distract the conscious mind. The sigil (which your brain has created as a symbol of what you want to change) can then be embedded into the subconscious mind.
Thats it. It's a psychological prop, no more or less steaming than any other psychological prop... its possible that the psychological modifications could be done with no props... but that seems far more difficult for most people, than having a system with props that they feel comfortable using.
Of course, plenty of idiots confuse props for crutches.
Quote
It is a
steaming
pile
of
horseshit.
NO YUO
Blarg. It's chintzy self-hypnosis.
FUCK YOU. MY MOM DIED FROM CHINTZY SELF-HYPNOSIS!!!
(Also, quit eating the fucking Menu, Spag.)
Its the same issue with chaos magick as it is with most 'alternative therapy', then. There's some stuff there that does work, but people are reluctant to throw out the bullshit surrounding it. Probably because it looks much less stable as a prop if you think about it in rational terms.
For instance, homeopathy (or however you spell it, the idea that diluting stuff to ridiculous levels helps it heal you) is patently bullshit. But if you suspend your disbelief a little, and trick yourself into thinking it can work, you can feel better when sick (the key there is feel, ofc). In this case, saying 'k I'm going to drink a glass of water to trick myself into thinking I'm better' probably wont have the same effect, as tricking yourself is the treatment.
Of course, the problem with not stripping away the bullshit is when you forget that it is bullshit, and you get people trying to treat terminal illness with what is essentially a glass of water. So if you dont believe in your 'magickal' cures/sigils/superpowers enough, obviously they will not work for you. Believe too much, and you're in danger of believing you can manipulate the outside world with your bullshit, which can have amusing reprecussions when the universe ignores your magick.
So I guess the key is finding a balance, as well as occasional self-checking. Or I could be talking through my ass again (its my superpower, after all)
Some people are helped by 'psychic surgery' while many are not. What's the story there? Just placebo effect?
I find it funny when someone is healed by something strange and the response comes "It was just psychosomatic." Wait - "JUST"? If it works, it works . . . it's more of a side issue as to why something works, to some degree.
I think the main problem is that these types of solutions are very unreliable.
As far as I know. people who are 'helped' by psychic surgery often die soon afterwards because some charlatan made them believe they were better and involved them in a very exciting ceremony which gave them a dump of endorphins, thus killing some of the pain of their underlying condition, but not what was actually causing it.
Or if the disease being 'cured' is only temporary anyway....well thats a no-brainer. The person who has it may not even know that its a temporary illness, but I bet the 'healer' does.
That's a good point.
I wonder if anyone has ever tried to do a somewhat objective study? I'm thinking any study which has been done is probably heavily on one side or the other...
There have been good studies into placebos recently that suggest you don't even need to believe in what you are doing, but just go through the 'ritual' of taking the medecine....but that involved depression, IIRC, and so was very subjective and non-fatal. I'll see if JSTOR has any papers.
Of course, there are many success anecdotes. The problem is, who gets more attention, the person who recovered 'naturally' or the person who recovered naturally, while attributing it to 'crystal healing' or some such rot. The lesson of the law of 5s is useful when looking at this kind of thing.
For a sample, at one point it was a minor news item that 80% (or some high %age, I forget) of iraqui fighter pilots children were male. Some people started concocting 'reasons' for that, instead of saying 'wait, why are we looking at iraqui fighter pilots? Oh yeah, because there is a strange sample (out of the millions of other possible samples)'.
Sometimes, you just need to think whether 'unreliable' means 'you pretty much only hear the success stories'.
Also, about studies you might want to look up a professor of medicine by the name of Edzard Ernst. He tries to investigate many of the more common 'alternative treatments'.
EDIT: I remember seeing something about that study Cain, the initial speculation seemed to be that perhaps the placebo effect is subconcious, although many people are reserving judgement until more reliable data comes out.
I used to run clinical trials for pharmeceutical research. At the place where I worked, we ran trials in the winter for treatment of Seasonal Affective Disorder. We also had some studies on Depression.
My boss' comment on SAD patients was "I don't think it's an actual disorder so much as a personality type that loves to complain." If the only criteria for judgement of this was their research folders, this hypothesis would be supported - the SAD patients, in general, complained much more than the people who were clinically depressed. Furthermore, the criteria for SAD was vague, permissive... there were probably a number of people in the study who didn't quite have SAD, technically speaking. But still - their condition seemed to improve in both groups - those getting the study medication and those getting placebo. Maybe placebo is the cure for any psychosomatic illness. food for thought.
(PS: I do believe that SAD is "real", but I think a lot of people that claim to have it don't actually know what they're talking about)
Placebos are proven to work, so long as there isn't actually anything wrong with the person.
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on April 30, 2008, 08:35:01 PM
I used to run clinical trials for pharmeceutical research. At the place where I worked, we ran trials in the winter for treatment of Seasonal Affective Disorder. We also had some studies on Depression.
My boss' comment on SAD patients was "I don't think it's an actual disorder so much as a personality type that loves to complain." If the only criteria for judgement of this was their research folders, this hypothesis would be supported - the SAD patients, in general, complained much more than the people who were clinically depressed. Furthermore, the criteria for SAD was vague, permissive... there were probably a number of people in the study who didn't quite have SAD, technically speaking. But still - their condition seemed to improve in both groups - those getting the study medication and those getting placebo. Maybe placebo is the cure for any psychosomatic illness. food for thought.
(PS: I do believe that SAD is "real", but I think a lot of people that claim to have it don't actually know what they're talking about)
Probably the same people who have "Chronic Fatigue Syndrome".
Yep, sugar pills are the #1 cure for imaginary illnesses. On a related note, it may interest some of you to know of a branded placebo called, with wonderful imagination, obecalp. Yes, you can now buy 'pharmaceutical grade' imaginary cures off the internet.
Whoever invented that is a genius.
Now I want a bottle of it.
I need some Obecalp for my acute onset discordianism.
http://www.placebostore.com/obecalp-chewable-tablets.html knock yourselves out.
Apparently lies sell well.
*guffaw*
Quote from: Felix on April 30, 2008, 09:05:27 PM
Apparently lies sell well.
*guffaw*
Yes they do, indeed! See, for example, well ... all of recorded history :mrgreen:
Whatever I believe masturbation cures all ills.
Quote from: Ratatosk on April 30, 2008, 02:54:22 PM
(Also, quit eating the fucking Menu, Spag.)
Tasty.
But the cold, hard truth is that magic is bullshit, no matter how much you roll around in it.
Quote from: Hoopla on April 30, 2008, 08:26:19 PMI wonder if anyone has ever tried to do a somewhat objective study? I'm thinking any study which has been done is probably heavily on one side or the other...
my university does studies on acupuncture.
it seems to work really, except they dont know how :)
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 30, 2008, 11:25:22 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on April 30, 2008, 02:54:22 PM
(Also, quit eating the fucking Menu, Spag.)
Tasty.
But the cold, hard truth is that magic is bullshit, no matter how much you roll around in it.
Magic as Superpowerz... yes, I agree... Magic as a model, a system of self-pyshcotherapy etc... then I think you're wrong.
Quote from: Ratatosk on May 01, 2008, 01:38:38 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 30, 2008, 11:25:22 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on April 30, 2008, 02:54:22 PM
(Also, quit eating the fucking Menu, Spag.)
Tasty.
But the cold, hard truth is that magic is bullshit, no matter how much you roll around in it.
Magic as Superpowerz... yes, I agree... Magic as a model, a system of self-pyshcotherapy etc... then I think you're wrong.
Well, if you just run around making up definitions for words to sound like a mystic, then who am I to stop you?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on May 01, 2008, 02:33:58 AM
Quote from: Ratatosk on May 01, 2008, 01:38:38 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 30, 2008, 11:25:22 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on April 30, 2008, 02:54:22 PM
(Also, quit eating the fucking Menu, Spag.)
Tasty.
But the cold, hard truth is that magic is bullshit, no matter how much you roll around in it.
Magic as Superpowerz... yes, I agree... Magic as a model, a system of self-pyshcotherapy etc... then I think you're wrong.
Well, if you just run around making up definitions for words to sound like a mystic, then who am I to stop you?
The Good Reverend Roger.
Quote from: keeper entropic on May 01, 2008, 02:44:19 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on May 01, 2008, 02:33:58 AM
Quote from: Ratatosk on May 01, 2008, 01:38:38 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 30, 2008, 11:25:22 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on April 30, 2008, 02:54:22 PM
(Also, quit eating the fucking Menu, Spag.)
Tasty.
But the cold, hard truth is that magic is bullshit, no matter how much you roll around in it.
Magic as Superpowerz... yes, I agree... Magic as a model, a system of self-pyshcotherapy etc... then I think you're wrong.
Well, if you just run around making up definitions for words to sound like a mystic, then who am I to stop you?
The Good Reverend Roger.
Point.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on May 01, 2008, 02:33:58 AM
Quote from: Ratatosk on May 01, 2008, 01:38:38 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 30, 2008, 11:25:22 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on April 30, 2008, 02:54:22 PM
(Also, quit eating the fucking Menu, Spag.)
Tasty.
But the cold, hard truth is that magic is bullshit, no matter how much you roll around in it.
Magic as Superpowerz... yes, I agree... Magic as a model, a system of self-pyshcotherapy etc... then I think you're wrong.
Well, if you just run around making up definitions for words to sound like a mystic, then who am I to stop you?
That seems like a very convicted belief. Hell, I think EVEN superpowerz are POSSIBLE somewhere in the universe(s).
I agree with what Rat has said, but beyond the "psychotherapeutic effects" (boy, are we diluting enough?), I have also experienced things from "self-psychotherapy sessions" which correlated with "objective" phenomena in convincings ways (and of course you shouldn't believe/disbelieve this). But for me, there is more than one interpretation for "queer phenomena", just as there is more than one interpretation of what is "scientific" and what is "pseudo-science". Everyone draws these lines differently. Could be real? Could be illusion? Could be coincidence, of course. The most skeptical interpretations are duly noted, but I don't choose one model and believe it strongly, simply because I do not KNOW something in it's entirety, or simply because it seems more phenomenal than anything that "should" be.
But what's the quote? I suppose it's a meme. I've heard different versions of it... 'I have no use for those who believe the limits of the possible"; something like that, but the jist of the idea was that those who maintain strong certainty of impossibilities, are unable to see new possibilities. I think there's validity in that. I think human beings have shown and are showing in ever more surprising ways that the limits of the possible are boundless, or at the very least humiliating in comparison with our beliefs about it, at this time or that.
I don't know your experience or your complete classifications for things "bogus mystical" and things rational, but I'd guess there are a few "mystical" suprises out there you haven't been exposed to.
Call me naive, but I doubt it'd do much good. :D
ADD: for the reductionist: the Many-Worlds/Multiverse interpretation of Quantum Mechanics suggests to some that logical and physical "possibilities" in one universe are "actualities" in another universe... of course this is not only an oversimplification, but also partly false, because the logical is handled a bit differently in the model I'm mentioning, but we've come a long way from Shor's Algorithm in a very short time.... There are many other models that implicate extraordinary reinterpretations of what's "possible". It's "possible" you could disappear into an "extreme black hole", from Stephen Hawking's POV. Do you believe in "extreme black holes", or is that horse shit? I don't know enough about them to shout "horse shit!" or "not horse shit!", to tell the truth.
where is BMW when yo need him
(we also need that guy smashing his head against the wall smiley)
ok daruko give me ONE "mystical" suprise
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on May 01, 2008, 03:10:33 AM
where is BMW when yo need him
(we also need that guy smashing his head against the wall smiley)
ok daruko give me ONE "mystical" suprise
1) the planets do not orbit in circular patterns, centered around the earth :lulz:
That ain't mystical; that's just a bunch o' balls floatin' around. :argh!:
And I get enough of that on public transportation.
Quote from: daruko on May 01, 2008, 03:24:51 AM
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on May 01, 2008, 03:10:33 AM
where is BMW when yo need him
(we also need that guy smashing his head against the wall smiley)
ok daruko give me ONE "mystical" suprise
1) the planets do not orbit in circular patterns, centered around the earth :lulz:
I actually did make a scientific response then deleated it
for this
.....
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNG!
“I think I can safely say that nobody understands Quantum Mechanics” Richard Feynman
i have to say I hate people that bring up QM for what ever bullshit belief they happen to believe in
very few ppl understand QM and those who do readily admit they don't understand QM
if some of the theories of QM turn out to hold up against experiment, that does in NO way mean there is some "mystical" plane of existence
To me it seems like a bounch of hippies using science to justify their stoner ideas
Quote from: daruko on May 01, 2008, 03:06:31 AM
That seems like a very convicted belief. Hell, I think EVEN superpowerz are POSSIBLE somewhere in the universe(s).
No. They're fucking not.
TGRR,
Knows physics, chemistry, etc are NOT fucking LOCAL EFFECTS. DAMN.
Quote from: daruko on May 01, 2008, 03:24:51 AM
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on May 01, 2008, 03:10:33 AM
where is BMW when yo need him
(we also need that guy smashing his head against the wall smiley)
ok daruko give me ONE "mystical" suprise
1) the planets do not orbit in circular patterns, centered around the earth :lulz:
No, they orbit in perfectly straight lines around the sun.
Every 1st year physics student knows that, retard.
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on May 01, 2008, 03:10:33 AM
where is BMW when yo need him
BMW is dead and gone. He imploded into the fluff he always despised.
Who the BMW account is now, I don't know and I don't care to know. Whoever the fuck it is, it ain't the titan that BMW was.
Quote from: daruko on May 01, 2008, 03:06:31 AM
ADD: for the reductionist: the Many-Worlds/Multiverse interpretation of Quantum Mechanics suggests to some that logical and physical "possibilities" in one universe are "actualities" in another universe... of course this is not only an oversimplification, but also partly false, because the logical is handled a bit differently in the model I'm mentioning, but we've come a long way from Shor's Algorithm in a very short time.... There are many other models that implicate extraordinary reinterpretations of what's "possible". It's "possible" you could disappear into an "extreme black hole", from Stephen Hawking's POV. Do you believe in "extreme black holes", or is that horse shit? I don't know enough about them to shout "horse shit!" or "not horse shit!", to tell the truth.
Horseshit.
You wouldn't know the Wheeler interpretation if it bit you on your arse.
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on May 01, 2008, 04:09:16 AM
"I think I can safely say that nobody understands Quantum Mechanics" Richard Feynman
i have to say I hate people that bring up QM for what ever bullshit belief they happen to believe in
very few ppl understand QM and those who do readily admit they don't understand QM
if some of the theories of QM turn out to hold up against experiment, that does in NO way mean there is some "mystical" plane of existence
To me it seems like a bounch of hippies using science to justify their stoner ideas
From what I understand about QM (admittedly very little) there seems to be a lot of evidence that things get very wonky at the sub-quantum level... since the macroverse is made up of the microverse it would seem to make sense (at least to me) that things may sometimes be wonky in the macroverse as well. Since humans have such a limited understanding of the sub-quantum level it makes sense why these weird things happen and yet we cannot explain them, predict them, or -seemingly- control them. And, admittedly, they don't seem to occur very often... at least not to single individuals. Who knows what kind of wackiness we might be able to witness if we could be everywhere on this world at once?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on May 01, 2008, 04:17:24 AM
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on May 01, 2008, 03:10:33 AM
where is BMW when yo need him
BMW is dead and gone. He imploded into the fluff he always despised.
Who the BMW account is now, I don't know and I don't care to know. Whoever the fuck it is, it ain't the titan that BMW was.
WHA? When did this happen?
but hoopla
it wouldnt make it mystical
either something exists or doesn't
and i would say 99 percent of all claims made by the mystical have NO evidence to support them
sorry if i seem that im ranting
but ive been on a metephysics board for a bit
cause i was asked to by some friends to keep it active... but i was also asked not to pretipate in any of the "serious" discussions... as well as not give anyone on this board the link.. so dont even ask... and the unsubstantiated bullshit is driving me insane
:sad:
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on May 01, 2008, 04:24:20 AM
but hoopla
it wouldnt make it mystical
either something exists or doesn't
and i would say 99 percent of all claims made by the mystical have NO evidence to support them
A) Mystical is a subjective term.
B) Maybe.
C) Probably true. But, 99% isn't 100%. And - lack of evidence doesn't necessarily mean something doesn't exist.
mystical usualy applies something supernatural
if you mean the definition being crypic or unintelligible then say crypic
by using mystical you automatically imply (at least to a large segment) something supernatural - and supernatural doesnt really exist if you think of it.. either something exists and is natural or it doesn't
its kind of like involking god in a sentence when you dont mean what the flying superman who created us from clay
oh I hate sermantics
now if you talking about the world of imagination and self-exploration then I kind of agree with you
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on May 01, 2008, 04:15:48 AM
Quote from: daruko on May 01, 2008, 03:24:51 AM
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on May 01, 2008, 03:10:33 AM
where is BMW when yo need him
(we also need that guy smashing his head against the wall smiley)
ok daruko give me ONE "mystical" suprise
1) the planets do not orbit in circular patterns, centered around the earth :lulz:
No, they orbit in perfectly straight lines around the sun.
Every 1st year physics student knows that, retard.
and they are kept in orbit by Leprechaun farts
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on May 01, 2008, 04:42:26 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on May 01, 2008, 04:15:48 AM
Quote from: daruko on May 01, 2008, 03:24:51 AM
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on May 01, 2008, 03:10:33 AM
where is BMW when yo need him
(we also need that guy smashing his head against the wall smiley)
ok daruko give me ONE "mystical" suprise
1) the planets do not orbit in circular patterns, centered around the earth :lulz:
No, they orbit in perfectly straight lines around the sun.
Every 1st year physics student knows that, retard.
and they are kept in orbit by Leprechaun farts
I was being serious.
Nothing pisses me off more than mushy-headed bullshit and pseudoscience.
Well, almost nothing. There was that time I got my tongue stuck in the printer. That was worse.
if thats the case when your done with goldlike productions i could get some links
:roll:
but not the site im on
im bound by promises
what do you mean by "perfectly straight lines?" I feel confused by this... :?
Quote from: Hoopla on May 01, 2008, 04:19:44 AM
From what I understand about QM (admittedly very little) there seems to be a lot of evidence that things get very wonky at the sub-quantum level... since the macroverse is made up of the microverse it would seem to make sense (at least to me) that things may sometimes be wonky in the macroverse as well. Since humans have such a limited understanding of the sub-quantum level it makes sense why these weird things happen and yet we cannot explain them, predict them, or -seemingly- control them. And, admittedly, they don't seem to occur very often... at least not to single individuals. Who knows what kind of wackiness we might be able to witness if we could be everywhere on this world at once?
Atm, at least, scientists use the word 'decoherence' to explain the relationship between quantum and classical phsyics (your macroverse and microverse). Basically, it means you dont see the 'strange' quantum effects outside of sub-atomic particles. It was what Schrodinger was trying to point out with his 'cat in a box' thought experiment, before some spags decided the cat would really be half-alive and half-dead. That lead to all kinds of inanity about things not existing until they are 'observed', btw.
But yeah, quantum seems to have become a byword for quirky or bullshit 'science', joining such classics as 'magnetic' and 'tachyon'. Of course, the purveyors of such crap are usually trying to sell you something. For instance, magnetic water! http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/tw/magneticwater.htm
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on May 01, 2008, 04:18:26 AMHorseshit.
You wouldn't know the Wheeler interpretation if it bit you on your arse.
exactly. i asked some of my (physics and astronomy graduated) friends about whether there is
any use for knowing
anything about QM if you're not doing physics or astronomy PhD research and/or working at a particle accelerator lab or something.
they thought long and hard.
and said, no.
i asked them about the people that think they know QM but do not do research or whatever with it and the weird conclusions and ideas they might get from it.
very quickly they agreed we should teach people Newtonian physics is all there's at, NOTHING TO SEE HERE PEOPLE MOVE ALONG, "that quantum stuff? hah! you actually BELIEVED that? c'mon for serious? particles popping in and out of existence randomly? hah, joke's on YOU!"
You'll say that until a bowling ball falls out of the sky onto you.
Quote from: Hoopla on May 01, 2008, 12:25:18 PM
You'll say that until a bowling ball falls out of the sky onto you.
actually, no.
in a universe where bowling balls fall out of the sky, i think i'm entitled to say and continue saying anything i damn well please, considering it's not going to happen.
1) LMNO is going to see this thread now and spend hours carefully typing out scientific answers on quantumn mechanics now. Think of poor LMNO.
2) Am I going to have upload all my quantumn physics e-books again? Seriously? Goddamnit.
Quote from: triple zero on May 01, 2008, 12:54:05 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on May 01, 2008, 12:25:18 PM
You'll say that until a bowling ball falls out of the sky onto you.
actually, no.
in a universe where bowling balls fall out of the sky, i think i'm entitled to say and continue saying anything i damn well please, considering it's not going to happen.
Don't say I didn't warn you.
BVH
-reads Fort, and is well aware crazy shit happens
Quote from: Cain on May 01, 2008, 01:13:02 PM
1) LMNO is going to see this thread now and spend hours carefully typing out scientific answers on quantumn mechanics now. Think of poor LMNO.
2) Am I going to have upload all my quantumn physics e-books again? Seriously? Goddamnit.
1) Actually, I think I've finally gotten to the point where I treat anyone who uses "quantum" to explain anything other than events occuring at a sub-particle level as the kind of person who thinks Discworld is real.
2) FOR GREAT JUSTICE!
Quote from: Hoopla on May 01, 2008, 01:23:40 PM
Quote from: triple zero on May 01, 2008, 12:54:05 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on May 01, 2008, 12:25:18 PM
You'll say that until a bowling ball falls out of the sky onto you.
actually, no.
in a universe where bowling balls fall out of the sky, i think i'm entitled to say and continue saying anything i damn well please, considering it's not going to happen.
Don't say I didn't warn you.
BVH
-reads Fort, and is well aware crazy shit happens
But the great thing about Fort was that he never tried to
explain it using extended metaphors, or science.
Quote from: LMNO on May 01, 2008, 02:02:18 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on May 01, 2008, 01:23:40 PM
Quote from: triple zero on May 01, 2008, 12:54:05 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on May 01, 2008, 12:25:18 PM
You'll say that until a bowling ball falls out of the sky onto you.
actually, no.
in a universe where bowling balls fall out of the sky, i think i'm entitled to say and continue saying anything i damn well please, considering it's not going to happen.
Don't say I didn't warn you.
BVH
-reads Fort, and is well aware crazy shit happens
But the great thing about Fort was that he never tried to explain it using extended metaphors, or science.
This is true. And, I admitted at the beginning I know very little about QM... so, I'm not attempting to sound like an authority.
But from the limited amount I know about QM, it seems that the quirkiness of the subquantum level
may be on the road to explaining bizarre occurances such as the one I used as an example.
I'm not saying it DOES, but it might eventually if people don't automatically shut off their minds at the very mention of the notion.
Quote from: Hoopla on May 01, 2008, 02:08:25 PM
Quote from: LMNO on May 01, 2008, 02:02:18 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on May 01, 2008, 01:23:40 PM
Quote from: triple zero on May 01, 2008, 12:54:05 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on May 01, 2008, 12:25:18 PM
You'll say that until a bowling ball falls out of the sky onto you.
actually, no.
in a universe where bowling balls fall out of the sky, i think i'm entitled to say and continue saying anything i damn well please, considering it's not going to happen.
Don't say I didn't warn you.
BVH
-reads Fort, and is well aware crazy shit happens
But the great thing about Fort was that he never tried to explain it using extended metaphors, or science.
This is true. And, I admitted at the beginning I know very little about QM... so, I'm not attempting to sound like an authority.
But from the limited amount I know about QM, it seems that the quirkiness of the subquantum level may be on the road to explaining bizarre occurances such as the one I used as an example.
I'm not saying it DOES, but it might eventually if people don't automatically shut off their minds at the very mention of the notion.
Sadly, from what we currently know about QM, it doesn't, for a variety of reasons. If you think about it, while the premise, "incredibly weird things happen when they get very, very small" is true, it is
only true when things are very, very small,
by definition.
If you want to hear about the math, let me know.
No, I trust you... you know much more about it than I ever will.
Maybe its better we don't know why the weird shit happens.
I agree; if we know why, then we'll try and control it.
And profit from it... NEVAR forget the PROFIT.
one way it was explained to me in a very basic way
maybe LMNO can help is
elementary particles are probabilistic but as they make larger atoms probabilities converge on either 0 or a 100 percent and becomes deterministic and Einstein's realitivity takes over
and
ah
yah
I like donuts
http://www.mediafire.com/?g3th92ynv29
36 MB of Quantumn goodness.
Quote from: Hoopla on May 01, 2008, 02:25:58 PM
No, I trust you... you know much more about it than I ever will.
Maybe its better we don't know why the weird shit happens.
Think for yourself, Schmuck!
Quote from: Naughty NasturtiumsThat ain't mystical; that's just a bunch o' balls floatin' around.
And I get enough of that on public transportation.
I think everyone missed the point here. The notion that the planet's followed elliptical orbits around the sun was once a "mystical" notion of blasphemous pseudo-science. Until Galileo...[Galileo's championing of Copernicanism was controversial within his lifetime. The geocentric view had been dominant since the time of Aristotle, and the controversy engendered by Galileo's opposition to this view resulted in the Catholic Church's prohibiting the advocacy of heliocentrism as potentially factual, because that theory had no decisive proof...] Of course, heliocentrism wasn't correct either, but if you're not eating the menu, talking about what is FACT and non-FACT, then it's easy for this ever-present obstacle of science not to impede you.
60% of physics research today is viewed as pseudo-science. Some of it is, and much of it isn't. I recommend John Lilly's Belief's Unlimited self-hypnosis technique, before any further declarations of REAL science are made. Also, 95% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
Quote from: Thurnez Isa"I think I can safely say that nobody understands Quantum Mechanics" Richard Feynman
i have to say I hate people that bring up QM for what ever bullshit belief they happen to believe in
very few ppl understand QM and those who do readily admit they don't understand QM
if some of the theories of QM turn out to hold up against experiment, that does in NO way mean there is some "mystical" plane of existence
To me it seems like a bounch of hippies using science to justify their stoner ideas
Feynman was right. I bring up QM because I'm a physics student, and there are models that relate to the discussion. I hate how taboo it has become to invoke scientific explanation, except under the guise of outdated Newtonian views about "THE objective reality". There are many reference points, and all science is theory.
Quote from: TGRRYou wouldn't know the Wheeler interpretation if it bit you on your arse.
I know the Everett-Wheeler interpretation. Or rather, I have some understanding. Anyway, let's keep this simple and understandable. The Wiki summary will put this into a better field of view, perhaps.
The many-worlds interpretation or MWI (also known as relative state formulation, theory of the universal wavefunction, parallel universes, many-universes interpretation or many worlds), is an interpretation of quantum mechanics. Many-worlds denies the objective reality of wavefunction collapse. Many-worlds then explains the subjective appearance of wavefunction collapse with the mechanism of quantum decoherence. Consequently, many-worlds claims this resolves all the "paradoxes" of quantum theory since every possible outcome to every event defines or exists in its own "history" or "world". In layman's terms, this means that there are an infinite number of universes and that everything that could possibly happen in our universe (but doesn't) does happen in another.
Proponents argue that MWI reconciles how we can perceive non-deterministic events (such as the random decay of a radioactive atom) with the deterministic equations of quantum physics. Prior to many worlds this had been viewed as a single "world-line". Many-worlds rather views it as a many-branched tree where every possible branch of history is realised.
The relative state formulation is due to Hugh Everett[1] who formulated it in 1957. Later, this formulation was popularised and renamed many worlds by Bryce Seligman DeWitt in the 1960s and '70s.[2][3][4][5] The decoherence approach to interpreting quantum theory has been further explored and developed[6][7][8] becoming quite popular, taken as a class overall. MWI is one of many Multiverse hypotheses in physics and philosophy. It is currently considered a mainstream interpretation along with the other decoherence interpretations and the Copenhagen interpretation.
The many worlds interpretation offers the possibility of deriving the probability interpretation of quantum mechanics from other assumptions. In fact, this was first done by Everett and DeWitt in the 1950's, but the old argument was criticized on philosophical grounds. In a September 2007 conference[9] David Wallace reports on a proof by Deutsch and himself of the Born Rule starting from Everettian assumptions[10] and this has been reported in the press as support for parallel universes.[11][12]Also, there have plenty of experiments.... Just how DO you perform 10 to the 500th power operations within a few seconds and not have a very big problem on your hands?
Need elaboration on the experiment to which I'm referring?
Quote from: Thurnez Isaeither something exists or doesn't
"We don't know anything about 'being' and 'non-being'" -RAW
Quote from: Thurnez Isaand i would say 99 percent of all claims made by the mystical have NO evidence to support them
See above comment about statistics.
Quote from: Thurnez Isaby using mystical you automatically imply (at least to a large segment) something supernatural - and supernatural doesnt really exist if you think of it.. either something exists and is natural or it doesn't
its kind of like involking god in a sentence when you dont mean what the flying superman who created us from clay
oh I hate sermantics
now if you talking about the world of imagination and self-exploration then I kind of agree with you
Imply to you. As I understand it, Mysticism is a very useful word.
Another easy Wiki:
Mysticism (from the Greek μυστικός – mystikos- 'seeing with the eyes closed, an initiate of the Eleusinian Mysteries; μυστήρια – mysteria meaning "initiation"[1]) is the pursuit of achieving communion, identity with, or conscious awareness of ultimate reality, divinity, spiritual truth, or God[head] through direct experience, intuition, or insight.I like to think of it as subjective science. Oh shit! Every experiment yields results affected by the observer.
The line between science and mysticism can be thin. Currently reading: Aldous Huxley and The Mysticism of Science. Mm mm good.
Quote from: TGRRNothing pisses me off more than mushy-headed bullshit and pseudoscience.
Well, almost nothing. There was that time I got my tongue stuck in the printer. That was worse.
Mm hm. You sound like Freud talking to Jung.
Quote from: Oedipus ComplexAtm, at least, scientists use the word 'decoherence' to explain the relationship between quantum and classical phsyics (your macroverse and microverse). Basically, it means you dont see the 'strange' quantum effects outside of sub-atomic particles. It was what Schrodinger was trying to point out with his 'cat in a box' thought experiment, before some spags decided the cat would really be half-alive and half-dead. That lead to all kinds of inanity about things not existing until they are 'observed', btw.
I don't think you have Schrodinger anymore than Schrodinger had it himself.
You need to get up to date. Who was quoting Feynman, btw?
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/This_quantum_world/Feynman_route (http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/This_quantum_world/Feynman_route)
Quantum and Classical Physics and our models of macroworlds and microworlds are just models. Subatomic events affect the macroworld all the time. This is well-accepted. What ISN'T well-accepted, is the ability for our current models to accurately EXPLAIN the effects.
Quote from: Oedipus ComplexBut yeah, quantum seems to have become a byword for quirky or bullshit 'science', joining such classics as 'magnetic' and 'tachyon'. Of course, the purveyors of such crap are usually trying to sell you something. For instance, magnetic water! http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/tw/magneticwater.htm
Alert: Limpballs tactic in use.
Please steer clear of the lasers.
Quote from: Triple Zerovery quickly they agreed we should teach people Newtonian physics is all there's at, NOTHING TO SEE HERE PEOPLE MOVE ALONG, "that quantum stuff? hah! you actually BELIEVED that? c'mon for serious? particles popping in and out of existence randomly? hah, joke's on YOU!"
well, I guess it's my turn now.
UNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNG!
Quote from: LMNO1) Actually, I think I've finally gotten to the point where I treat anyone who uses "quantum" to explain anything other than events occuring at a sub-particle level as the kind of person who thinks Discworld is real.
Yes, I've heard this before. No explanations allowed. QM = math. Mm hm.
Quote from: LMNOBut the great thing about Fort was that he never tried to explain it using extended metaphors, or science.
See above.
Quote from: HooplaI'm not saying it DOES, but it might eventually if people don't automatically shut off their minds at the very mention of the notion.
Seems to me they shut off their minds at the very mention of QM.
Quote from: LMNOSadly, from what we currently know about QM, it doesn't, for a variety of reasons. If you think about it, while the premise, "incredibly weird things happen when they get very, very small" is true, it is only true when things are very, very small, by definition.
Incredibly weird things are perfectly
natural, and happen all the time, all over the place. What "we" currently know about QM, has nothing to do with your beliefs.
"First there is a mountain, then there is no mountain, then there is."Quote from: Thurnezelementary particles are probabilistic but as they make larger atoms probabilities converge on either 0 or a 100 percent and becomes deterministic and Einstein's realitivity takes over
No, we have algorithms for that. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer)
All this being said, my understanding of Quantum Mechanics is as limited as the next guy. I'm just offering up alternate models to the declarations about REAL and UNREAL made here.
Sorry for the long post, but you guys post so FAST!
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on May 01, 2008, 02:33:58 AM
Quote from: Ratatosk on May 01, 2008, 01:38:38 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 30, 2008, 11:25:22 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on April 30, 2008, 02:54:22 PM
(Also, quit eating the fucking Menu, Spag.)
Tasty.
But the cold, hard truth is that magic is bullshit, no matter how much you roll around in it.
Magic as Superpowerz... yes, I agree... Magic as a model, a system of self-pyshcotherapy etc... then I think you're wrong.
Well, if you just run around making up definitions for words to sound like a mystic, then who am I to stop you?
I didn't make up that definition, Crowley considered it psychological, Regardie, in The Middle Pillar, makes a very clear statement that magic is a form of psychotherapy, Austin Osman Spare, Peter Carroll, Phil Hine, Lon Milo Duquette and even Starhawk (about as fluffy as I've read) all discuss magic in terms of modifying consciousness, psychotherapy and mental programming. There's some pretty strong evidence that the Kabbalists and Alchemists of the Middle Ages also saw it as something other than superpowerz... but found the metaphors a safe way of discussing their ideas and experiences.
You can base your view of magic on the Wanna Blessed-be's, or on Disney... and I will admit that in metaphor, menu, meme, model and myth, Magic does appear as Nonsense. However, the metaphors, the menu, the memes, the models and they myths aren't the point of magic... or at least not magic as discussed by the individuals listed above.
So, you can think want you wish, and in some sense you'll be right... if you look over the menu, it probably won't look like something useful to eat. If you never try the food that's on the menu though, I can't really think much of your meal review.
Durk, The problem here is that you're using the concept of "maybe" as attached to a concept to cover far more territory than the concept currently allows.
Saying "maybe quantum effects occur in the macro world" has approximately the same amount of information as saying, "maybe God did it."
You can back both statements up with a whole lot of gobbledygook, but in the end they both rapidly approach meaninglessness.
You want to impress me? Cite an example of an event that defies our current state of understanding of macro events, and then explain it thoroughly using quantum theory. And don't use "maybe".
Quote from: LMNO on May 01, 2008, 04:01:07 PM
Durk, The problem here is that you're using the concept of "maybe" as attached to a concept to cover far more territory than the concept currently allows.
Saying "maybe quantum effects occur in the macro world" has approximately the same amount of information as saying, "maybe God did it."
You can back both statements up with a whole lot of gobbledygook, but in the end they both rapidly approach meaninglessness.
You want to impress me? Cite an example of an event that defies our current state of understanding of macro events, and then explain it thoroughly using quantum theory. And don't use "maybe".
This seems like the correct motorcycle to me.
I find QM/QP/etc useful to philosophy, in that comparing Newtonian Physics and QM provide us with an example of multiple models... QM particularly, seems like a great example of how interpretations of 'reality' are truly interpretations of models, based on observations... not reality.
Light can be modeled as a wave or a particle... that doesn't mean it IS a wave or particle, only that we can make models, based on observations... which may contradict each other. The same can be said for our model of the atom, which went from a bubble, to a little solar system thingy, to a central nucleus with electrons popping in and out around the central nucleus.
We don't KNOW that's what's happening, we just made a bunch of observations, did some math and said "Look we can model it like this". Not only does it not mean that electrons Really Really disappear and reappear in some mystical fashion, but it certainly doesn't mean that such a model is also TRUE for things in the really real macro-reality which we hang out in most of the time.
QM is math and physics, not philosophy... but it can be a useful philosophical tool.
Quote from: daruko on May 01, 2008, 03:20:26 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on May 01, 2008, 02:25:58 PM
No, I trust you... you know much more about it than I ever will.
Maybe its better we don't know why the weird shit happens.
Think for yourself, Schmuck!
You're RIGHT! I SHOULD pretend I know more than I do, and talk a lot of shit, rather than admit that someone else knows more about a subject than I do!
I forgot all about what thinking for myself meant!
THANKS DARUKO!
\
:spag:
Proper use of the Kermit emote, ITT.
Quote from: Hoopla on May 01, 2008, 04:22:33 PM
Quote from: daruko on May 01, 2008, 03:20:26 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on May 01, 2008, 02:25:58 PM
No, I trust you... you know much more about it than I ever will.
Maybe its better we don't know why the weird shit happens.
Think for yourself, Schmuck!
You're RIGHT! I SHOULD pretend I know more than I do, and talk a lot of shit, rather than admit that someone else knows more about a subject than I do!
I forgot all about what thinking for myself meant!
THANKS DARUKO!
\
:spag:
Just like the "powers that be" KNOW more than we do, and we should TRUST them to always know best. Uh huh. What I'm suggesting is that you don't KNOW they're right, and you don't KNOW they're wrong, so just STOP KNOWING and START THINKING.
OK.
If anyone has any question about Quantum Physics, please ask me, I KNOW EVERYTHING!
Part of critical thinking also involving the assesment of how reliable a source is in transmitting accurate data. If a source appears to have the data to back up their knowledge (as LMNO has shown before) why not trust them on the subject in question? Unless you can present data showing his interpretation of events is incorrect....?
OMG I WENT TO A DOCTOR WHEN I WAS ILL ONCE, I MUST BE A MINDLESS SHEEP!
Quote from: daruko on May 01, 2008, 03:45:12 PM
“First there is a mountain, then there is no mountain, then there is.”
no thats just one of your drugged out hazes
srsly lay off the pot
OMG-I-JUST-SOLVED-THE-GRAND-UNIFYING-THEORY-USING-A-ZEN-KOAN!
Quote from: Hoopla on May 01, 2008, 04:30:10 PM
OK.
If anyone has any question about Quantum Physics, please ask me, I KNOW EVERYTHING!
WHY CANT A PULL A GENERAL STUBBLEBINE III AND WALk THROUGH WALLS?
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on May 01, 2008, 04:37:40 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on May 01, 2008, 04:30:10 PM
OK.
If anyone has any question about Quantum Physics, please ask me, I KNOW EVERYTHING!
WHY CANT A PULL A GENERAL STUBBLEBINE III AND WALk THROUGH WALLS?
Because you're too fat.
DOES THE UNIVERSE DISAPPEAR WHEN I CLOSE MY EYES?
Quote from: daruko on May 01, 2008, 03:45:12 PM
and all science is theory
TI has been trying to prove that stupid theory of gravity wrong for years
Quote from: LMNO on May 01, 2008, 04:40:15 PM
DOES THE UNIVERSE DISAPPEAR WHEN I CLOSE MY EYES?
No, but it IS laughing at you.
reviewing this thread I realize what big jerks we are
:sad:
srsly daruko and rat nothing against you two hey
:)
Quote from: Hoopla on May 01, 2008, 04:42:10 PM
Quote from: LMNO on May 01, 2008, 04:40:15 PM
DOES THE UNIVERSE DISAPPEAR WHEN I CLOSE MY EYES?
No, but it IS laughing at you.
:cry:
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on May 01, 2008, 04:41:15 PM
Quote from: daruko on May 01, 2008, 03:45:12 PM
and all science is theory
TI has been trying to prove that stupid theory of gravity wrong for years
Holy fuck, I missed that one.
Of course, evolution is "just theory" as well...
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on May 01, 2008, 04:42:20 PM
reviewing this thread I realize what big jerks we are
:sad:
srsly daruko and rat nothing against you two hey
:)
I think Daruko understands not to take us too seriously by now, and Rat gave up caring LONG ago...
Quote from: Hoopla on May 01, 2008, 04:46:51 PM
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on May 01, 2008, 04:42:20 PM
reviewing this thread I realize what big jerks we are
:sad:
srsly daruko and rat nothing against you two hey
:)
I think Daruko understands not to take us too seriously by now, and Rat gave up caring LONG ago...
LOLi
Quote from: Cain on May 01, 2008, 04:33:21 PM
Part of critical thinking also involving the assesment of how reliable a source is in transmitting accurate data. If a source appears to have the data to back up their knowledge (as LMNO has shown before) why not trust them on the subject in question? Unless you can present data showing his interpretation of events is incorrect....?
OMG I WENT TO A DOCTOR WHEN I WAS ILL ONCE, I MUST BE A MINDLESS SHEEP!
Okay, well keep it in context... At least here in this thread, LMNO has done very little transmitting of accurate data. Only statement of what is FACT.
Also, LMNO, didn't you say you were a computer science major? Why not physics, since you're such an expert?
Quote from: LMNOSaying "maybe quantum effects occur in the macro world" has approximately the same amount of information as saying, "maybe God did it."
It has a lot more information than saying, "I haven't seen it, therefore it CAN NOT exist."
You haven't paid the slightest attention to the Feynman shit I linked, or provided any comment on very legitimite research going on in Oxford and several other parts of the world, in which we are performing computations that defy adequate explanation. The Everett-Wheeler Interpretation is the best model I know currently to explain the superposition and eigenstates utilized for non-explicitly calculated functions.
"if the universe we see around us is all there is, where are quantum computations performed?" - David Deutsch
And if you can sufficiently answer THIS question, you should also forward your answers to Oxford. They'd appreciate the help, I'm sure.
QuoteI find QM/QP/etc useful to philosophy, in that comparing Newtonian Physics and QM provide us with an example of multiple models... QM particularly, seems like a great example of how interpretations of 'reality' are truly interpretations of models, based on observations... not reality.
Precisely. Some models provide deeper explanation than others, however, and a few here seem to believe that Quantum Physics REALLY IS all there is to it for the microworld, and Classical Physics REALLY IS all there is to the macroworld. It's preposterous, and I hate to be redundant, but it's eating the menu, for sure. All I've suggested is 1)Magick is, in some sense, accurately described as self-psychotherapy AND POSSIBLY MORE and 2)All Possibilities MAY exist
I've already summed it up with the different renditions of "Those who do the impossible never believe the impossible."
I'm much less convinced I KNOW what I'm talking about, then I am that these strong assertions to what IS and IS NOT 100% fact are completely naive.
And you said it all right here:
Quote from: RatatoskIf you never try the food that's on the menu though, I can't really think much of your meal review.
Quote from: Hoopla on May 01, 2008, 04:46:51 PM
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on May 01, 2008, 04:42:20 PM
reviewing this thread I realize what big jerks we are
:sad:
srsly daruko and rat nothing against you two hey
:)
I think Daruko understands not to take us too seriously by now, and Rat gave up caring LONG ago...
Actually, thanks for the reminder. I still forget.
Quote from: daruko on May 01, 2008, 05:10:01 PM
we are performing computations that defy adequate explanation.
You forgot to carry the 2.
Quote from: daruko on May 01, 2008, 05:10:01 PM
2)All Possibilities MAY exist
this made me laugh first at you then I got to thinking
:lulz:
you think there is a world out there where TGRR is not angry, where Noodles is not awesome, or where Suu is not mired in Geekdom
such a place is too horrible to even imagine
:eek:
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on May 01, 2008, 05:17:07 PM
Quote from: daruko on May 01, 2008, 05:10:01 PM
2)All Possibilities MAY exist
this made me laugh for at you then I got to thinking
:lulz:
you think there is a world out there where TGRR is not angry, where Noodles is not awesome, or where Suu is not mired in Geekdom
such a place is too horrible to even imagine
:eek:
lol I think there
could be, yep.
It seems that there are individuals that eat the menu, then go off and say how absolutely wonderful the menu is and encourage everyone to eat it. This seems true if the menu is religion, philosophy, science or Discordianism (which may or may not fit in any of those categories). Of course, its these idiots that ruin the whole discussion of the restaurant, for the rest of us. If a n00b says FNORD, its easy to assume that they're eating the menu... though they may not be. If someone says Magic, its easy to assume that they try to fly or throw fire from their belly. If someone says QM/QP/Qanything, its easy to assume that they're making the same argument that "What The Bleep Do We Know?" made (OHH, teh MADJICKS IS EXPLAINED BY TEH QUANTUMS!!!) rather than anything else.
Yet, there are plenty of useful ways to reference FNORD, that don't equate to eating the menu. There are discussions of magic that don't say "OHHH IT ARE TEH REALLY REALY SUPERPOWERZ!!!"...
Eating the menu can cut both ways. Some may eat it and say "Yummy", some may eat it and say "Yuchhy", some may look into the resturant and see a few people eating the menu and decide that 'menu' must be the only dish served there...
None of the three seem, to me, to be thinking for themselves.
When I left the JW's, I was under the belief that Magic was Real, because Magic was the demons using their power to mislead people from God. I figured that if I practiced Magic, and the demons showed up, then at least I could prove the supernatural to myself in some manner. Oh, did I try. I invoked Godforms, ones (in fact) that were considered the very worst of the worst in JW symbolic terms, The Beast and the Harlot (well, Sjaantze did the Harlot bit). JW's hold that the Whore of Babylon and the Beast (as discussed in Revelations), are THE enemies of God's People. And I had an experience... probably the most spiritual experience I have ever had. I was somewhere else and something else, during that ritual. IN fact, since that ritual, I have noticed strong changes in my personality.
However, thanks the Goddess, after coming out of that ritual and trance... since I was studying Crowley and Regardie and Wilson etc... I didn't confuse my experience with reality. I had tasted the meal and it was 5 Star, Gourmet, Iron Chef stuff.
Since then I have engaged in Magic whenever I think it would be a useful tool. I don't believe that I really, real for real invoke Eris or Therion or any of the others. However, I do think, that (at least) I am creating a interface, or a egrigore, or something to poke around in my own brain. Maybe when I see visions where Eris speaks to me, it is just my subconscious making clear what I should already know, or helping me adjust my personality to what I want it to be... or I suppose it could be some sort of Intelligence outside of me, aliens, Gods, whatever... I don't KNOW what is happening for sure in ritual, but I can say that I have observed that it does seem to be an effective tool for modifying self (maybe more, but I don't feel qualified to speak to it).
When one has eaten the meal...
Obvious menu eaters are Obvious. :lulz:
TITCM
Ok, Durk, honestly:
So, you have a handful of equations that only make sense in the EW model. Great. This in no way indicates that it has any isomorphism to experiential reality. Self-contained models are self-contained.
QuoteIt has a lot more information than saying, "I haven't seen it, therefore it CAN NOT exist."
Um. No. The words you're putting in my mouth are demostrably false. The fact it can be provably false yeilds information.
Saying "maybe _______ ", offering no adequate explanation, is meaningless.
In short, I'm not saying that quantum effects 100% cannot occur in the macro world, I'm saying that our current model posits it cannot, and so far you haven't given any evidence to the contrary, apart from "maybe".
Oh, and what Rat just said seems to run counter to your own statements. Just saying.
Quote from: Ratatosk on May 01, 2008, 05:30:54 PM
Since then I have engaged in Magic whenever I think it would be a useful tool. I don't believe that I really, real for real invoke Eris or Therion or any of the others. However, I do think, that (at least) I am creating a interface, or a egrigore, or something to poke around in my own brain. Maybe when I see visions where Eris speaks to me, it is just my subconscious making clear what I should already know, or helping me adjust my personality to what I want it to be... or I suppose it could be some sort of Intelligence outside of me, aliens, Gods, whatever... I don't KNOW what is happening for sure in ritual, but I can say that I have observed that it does seem to be an effective tool for modifying self (maybe more, but I don't feel qualified to speak to it).
been there
done that
actually have little problem with it, as stated before
but definately not for me
1: no evidence of any sort of outside intelligence
2: I dont know what you use the term magic... kind of like when Einstien used God to describe self examination... your leaving youself open for criticism... and i dont know why you would need ritual to do it...
Quote from: LMNO on May 01, 2008, 05:39:51 PM
In short, I'm not saying that quantum effects 100% cannot occur in the macro world, I'm saying that our current model posits it cannot, and so far you haven't given any evidence to the contrary, apart from "maybe".
there probably will be a day when peer reviewed experiments can be done.. to a point were results can be preticted and outcomes examined
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on May 01, 2008, 05:45:51 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on May 01, 2008, 05:30:54 PM
Since then I have engaged in Magic whenever I think it would be a useful tool. I don't believe that I really, real for real invoke Eris or Therion or any of the others. However, I do think, that (at least) I am creating a interface, or a egrigore, or something to poke around in my own brain. Maybe when I see visions where Eris speaks to me, it is just my subconscious making clear what I should already know, or helping me adjust my personality to what I want it to be... or I suppose it could be some sort of Intelligence outside of me, aliens, Gods, whatever... I don't KNOW what is happening for sure in ritual, but I can say that I have observed that it does seem to be an effective tool for modifying self (maybe more, but I don't feel qualified to speak to it).
been there
done that
actually have little problem with it, as stated before
but definately not for me
1: no evidence of any sort of outside intelligence
2: I dont know what you use the term magic... kind of like when Einstien used God to describe self examination... your leaving youself open for criticism... and i dont know why you would need ritual to do it...
LEt us say that you are trapped in a Black Iron Prison... perhaps there are guards placed outside your BiP which controls what enters and what leaves. They examine everything closely. Now, let us say that you want to escape your BiP (or modify or whatever)... now you don't NEED a cake to change your BiP... but a Cake may be the most useful way for a file to be smuggled in past the guards.
Magic is the Cake, holding a file that can help you break the bars of your BiP.
Maybe some people live in low security BiP's and don't need the cake... maybe their guards are dead, paid off or never hired in the first place.
Maybe some people think that they can sit inside their BiP and change it simply by thought or digging with a spoon, or their fingers... and maybe they can.
For me, some things appear to require a file and getting a file past the guards, sometimes might require cake.
As for opening myself up to criticism... criticism from whom? The words of the foolish and the words of the wise are not far apart in Discordian eyes.
Quote from: LMNO on May 01, 2008, 05:39:51 PM
Oh, and what Rat just said seems to run counter to your own statements. Just saying.
I must be having semantic problems then. I offered you the EW model, because suggests "All possibilities exist"... these equations HAVE yielded experiential results. See Deutsch's question above. 10
500 atoms... where are they?
If you refute the EW model, then you have a problem, because there's only room for roughly 10
80 atoms in the "observed" universe. That's an astronomical difference.
Regardless, this is just A MODEL, and there are some issues with it. If you look at it long enough, you'll notice a Popper-ian flavor to it (critical rationalism), with a few typical reductionist limitations.. I don't know the answers. I theorize, which is all anyone can do, no matter how certain they are that they have the "facts".
I think I'm pretty on par with Rat on the magick thing, because I have a similar background and a similar take on magick. RAW talked about it constantly, and it has to do with not being so damn certain of yourself, for starters. Instead of picking the BEST model, and asserting all other models are false, realizing that many models are true in some sense, false in some sense, and meaningless in some sense, allows you to be honest when talking about what you OBSERVED, and what that observible really IS (or rather you inability to KNOW this part).
I'm curious as to whether Ratatosk thinks I'm contradicting his last post.
Quote from: daruko on May 01, 2008, 06:08:34 PM
Quote from: LMNO on May 01, 2008, 05:39:51 PM
Oh, and what Rat just said seems to run counter to your own statements. Just saying.
I must be having semantic problems then. I offered you the EW model, because suggests "All possibilities exist"... these equations HAVE yielded experiential results. See Deutsch's question above. 10500 atoms... where are they?
If you refute the EW model, then you have a problem, because there's only room for roughly 1080 atoms in the "observed" universe. That's an astronomical difference.
Regardless, this is just A MODEL, and there are some issues with it. If you look at it long enough, you'll notice a Popper-ian flavor to it (critical rationalism), with a few typical reductionist limitations.. I don't know the answers. I theorize, which is all anyone can do, no matter how certain they are that they have the "facts".
I think I'm pretty on par with Rat on the magick thing, because I have a similar background and a similar take on magick. RAW talked about it constantly, and it has to do with not being so damn certain of yourself, for starters. Instead of picking the BEST model, and asserting all other models are false, realizing that many models are true in some sense, false in some sense, and meaningless in some sense, allows you to be honest when talking about what you OBSERVED, and what that observible really IS.
I'm curious as to whether Ratatosk thinks I'm contradicting his last post.
Not necessarily... I think taken in combination with the comments directly above, we seem in line. Your first couple posts did appear to me to put some more weight on QM than I personally do (as a possible explanation, rather than a curious model) but to me, that may just be a degree or two of Maybe off... You think Maybe Yes, I think Maybe No, but its still Maybe and that's how I personally prefer to see it.
Quote from: Ratatosk on May 01, 2008, 06:15:26 PM
Quote from: daruko on May 01, 2008, 06:08:34 PM
Quote from: LMNO on May 01, 2008, 05:39:51 PM
Oh, and what Rat just said seems to run counter to your own statements. Just saying.
I must be having semantic problems then. I offered you the EW model, because suggests "All possibilities exist"... these equations HAVE yielded experiential results. See Deutsch's question above. 10500 atoms... where are they?
If you refute the EW model, then you have a problem, because there's only room for roughly 1080 atoms in the "observed" universe. That's an astronomical difference.
Regardless, this is just A MODEL, and there are some issues with it. If you look at it long enough, you'll notice a Popper-ian flavor to it (critical rationalism), with a few typical reductionist limitations.. I don't know the answers. I theorize, which is all anyone can do, no matter how certain they are that they have the "facts".
I think I'm pretty on par with Rat on the magick thing, because I have a similar background and a similar take on magick. RAW talked about it constantly, and it has to do with not being so damn certain of yourself, for starters. Instead of picking the BEST model, and asserting all other models are false, realizing that many models are true in some sense, false in some sense, and meaningless in some sense, allows you to be honest when talking about what you OBSERVED, and what that observible really IS.
I'm curious as to whether Ratatosk thinks I'm contradicting his last post.
Not necessarily... I think taken in combination with the comments directly above, we seem in line. Your first couple posts did appear to me to put some more weight on QM than I personally do (as a possible explanation, rather than a curious model) but to me, that may just be a degree or two of Maybe off... You think Maybe Yes, I think Maybe No, but its still Maybe and that's how I personally prefer to see it.
Agreed.
Quote from: daruko on May 01, 2008, 06:08:34 PM
I think I'm pretty on par with Rat on the magick thing, because I have a similar background and a similar take on magick. RAW talked about it constantly, and it has to do with not being so damn certain of yourself, for starters. Instead of picking the BEST model, and asserting all other models are false, realizing that many models are true in some sense, false in some sense, and meaningless in some sense, allows you to be honest when talking about what you OBSERVED, and what that observible really IS (or rather you inability to KNOW this part).
I tried reading RAW once, cause i did like his interviews I saw.. but it got too stupid so I stoped
Rat said that magic is a psychological event, for him.
You seem to be saying that because of EW, magic causes inexplicable things to happen in the macro world.
I'm saying that you haven't adequately conflated the quantum and the macro, you're just saying "maybe".
Well... Please look over all these statements:
Maybe quantum causes macro effects that seem magical.
Maybe Jesus causes macro effects that seem magical.
Maybe TGRR causes macro effects that seem magical.
Maybe my pet cat causes macro effects that seem magical.
Maybe George W Bush causes macro effects that seem magical.
Maybe Dark Matter causes macro effects that seem magical.
While we're at it:
Maybe quantum physics is wrong, and Newtonian physics explains everything.
Maybe mass doesn't actually cause space-time to warp.
Maybe Intelligent Design is true.
Maybe the sun won't rise tomorrow.
Maybe 104 will eventually not have to pay for sex.
Maybe saying "maybe" still puts things in an either/or state.
What's more, the EW model doesn't mean anything is possible. It means that all possible things occur. It does not say that the laws of physics can be broken. It does not, for example, say that in some universe, my fingertips spontaneously begin spewing molten lava. It does not mean you can violate the laws of thermodynamics.
but my fingertips spontaneously spew molten lava
does that mean theres something wrong with me
:?
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on May 01, 2008, 06:30:26 PM
but my fingertips spontaneously spew molten lava
does that mean theres something wrong with me
:?
If you're a magma mephit, no.
It's pretty elementary math that when something has a probability of 1 it happens.
Actually, that brings up an interesting point:
Durk, what do you know about Maybe Logic?
I got into a similar argument last night at the bar.
A guy was trying to refute my statement using his awesome philosophy powers.
The statement: What is, is.
Quote from: LMNO on May 01, 2008, 06:26:35 PM
Rat said that magic is a psychological event, for him.
You seem to be saying that because of EW, magic causes inexplicable things to happen in the macro world.
......
What's more, the EW model doesn't mean anything is possible. It means that all possible things occur. It does not say that the laws of physics can be broken. It does not, for example, say that in some universe, my fingertips spontaneously begin spewing molten lava. It does not mean you can violate the laws of thermodynamics.
It seems like Rat is suggesting it COULD be more, the same as I have. For all intensive purposes, yes, psychological. But there are other POSSIBLE interpretations, and there's no reason to have only one, because none of your interpretations will be the whole truth.
I think the second line there COULD be true. I also think macro world is never really understood, only modeled.
And I have to correct you here... the EW model does suggest that anything physically possible occurs, but something your missing is that what's physically possible is relative to your reference point. Or rather,
that is an implication of the theory. That what's physically possible in one universe (reference point), may not be possible in another, and vice versa.
I can elaborate further, but don't have the time here.
But we are existing in this universe.
You know, the one where an object is pulled towards the groung at 32 m/s/s
That's just for our planet.
See, I can be a corrective dick too!
OSNAP!
:lulz:
:argh!:
Quote from: LMNO on May 01, 2008, 06:50:31 PM
But we are existing in this universe.
You know, the one where an object is pulled towards the groung at 32 m/s/s
Now, let me be clear that I don't subscribe to the EW interpretation as THE truth. No way. It's just another map.
It's a good point your making, and I think there's an interesting response for it. I may not have time to go into it today though, got a crapload of stuff piled on me at work... I'll return with more.
Quote from: LMNO on May 01, 2008, 06:50:31 PM
But we are existing in this universe.
You know, the one where an object is pulled towards the groung at 32 m/s/s
9.8 m/s
2, even.
i think it's 32 feet/s
2?
Quote from: hunter s.durden on May 01, 2008, 06:47:36 PM
I got into a similar argument last night at the bar.
A guy was trying to refute my statement using his awesome philosophy powers.
The statement: What is, is.
What was his refutation?
I'm not sure. I refuted his refutation by not pay attention.
Something about how things can change.
Quote from: hunter s.durden on May 02, 2008, 01:26:21 AM
I'm not sure. I refuted his refutation by not pay attention.
Something about how things can change.
Im kind of disappointed in you
i thought by now you would be wearing his skins
Quote from: triple zero on May 01, 2008, 10:09:52 PM
Quote from: LMNO on May 01, 2008, 06:50:31 PM
But we are existing in this universe.
You know, the one where an object is pulled towards the groung at 32 m/s/s
9.8 m/s2, even.
i think it's 32 feet/s2?
Quite right, although its 9.81 m/s
2That 0.01 make one hell of a difference. Trust me on that one
Quote from: hunter s.durden on May 02, 2008, 01:26:21 AM
I'm not sure. I refuted his refutation by not pay attention.
Something about how things can change.
I'm disappointed that a barstool was not involved.
:barstool:
It wasn't quite a barstool situation.
Usually at the bar I use the barstool argument for football, not philosophy.
Quote from: Micro-Ice on May 02, 2008, 01:33:23 AM
Quote from: triple zero on May 01, 2008, 10:09:52 PM
Quote from: LMNO on May 01, 2008, 06:50:31 PM
But we are existing in this universe.
You know, the one where an object is pulled towards the groung at 32 m/s/s
9.8 m/s2, even.
i think it's 32 feet/s2?
Quite right, although its 9.81 m/s2
That 0.01 make one hell of a difference. Trust me on that one
It depends on your elevation.
YOU TOO ARE RONG HAHAHA
Gah, this thread moves too fast!
To Daruko - so you maintain that the correct result of the cat in the box experiment is that the cat is both alive and dead, with the correct result arrived at by considering the quantum state of each particle of the cat?
As I understand it, the point of the thought experiment was that macro objects do not display the strange behavior that can sometimes be seen in quantum environments. For instance, I have yet to hear of sticks that display quantum entanglement. Yes, my quantum knowledge is probably out of date. Its a personal interest, I dont publish peer-reviewed papers.
And yes, the point of models is to simplify the world. If they were exact, we would just be able to understand the universe itself instead of the model.
Also, saying things could be true is not disprovable, but also doesnt mean much. Last-thursdayism could be true, but it doesnt help us understand the universe. Or whatever this thread is about now.
Also, many-universes? I've never seen another. Isnt that the result of some people taking the 'sum of paths' method literally? (or whatever the name is, where you calculate what is going to happen by considering everything that could possibly happen and going for the path of least resistance). Of course it COULD be true, but until we find some way of looking at other universes (where would you start? Especially if they can have any physical properties), it doesnt really mean much.
Quote from: daruko on May 01, 2008, 03:45:12 PM
Alert: Limpballs tactic in use. Please steer clear of the lasers.
Well fuck me. Nobody told me this was a serious thread.
Quote from: President Bush on May 02, 2008, 08:50:58 AM
Wow! You fags are still here? Maybe you should get off your ass and put some thought into something meaningful instead of a stupid kiddie message board. You're all pawns in the game of life, no matter how much you think about it. You're still retarded no matter how big your words are. You're still missing the point.
There is still time to accept Jesus Christ, he is the only one that can fill the enormous void in your life. He is the definite answer you've been wasting your life looking for. He will save your soul and ease your mind. I too am a mere, flawed mortal. I can only hope others would try to reach me in times of need. This might be your last chance to save your eternity.
You retarded, wheelcahir stricken, pathetic, hippie slaves can't stop me! Bow down to your master! HaHaHa! :mrgreen: :D :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :D
I have achieved enlightenment! Accepting Jesus as my sugar-daddy really did fill a hole!
Quote from: Golden Applesauce on May 02, 2008, 03:22:41 AM
Quote from: Micro-Ice on May 02, 2008, 01:33:23 AM
Quote from: triple zero on May 01, 2008, 10:09:52 PM
Quote from: LMNO on May 01, 2008, 06:50:31 PM
But we are existing in this universe.
You know, the one where an object is pulled towards the groung at 32 m/s/s
9.8 m/s2, even.
i think it's 32 feet/s2?
Quite right, although its 9.81 m/s2
That 0.01 make one hell of a difference. Trust me on that one
It depends on your elevation.
YOU TOO ARE RONG HAHAHA
and proximity to the equator (i think).
which is why i cited the gravitational acceleration only in one significant decimal. if i had said 9.80 i'd have been wrong, but 9.8 is quite correct and does not give you a flawed idea of the accuracy of your calculations. because yes, if 0.01 will make one hell of a difference, better take that elevation into account as well.
Quote from: hunter s.durden on May 02, 2008, 01:26:21 AM
I'm not sure. I refuted his refutation by not pay attention.
Something about how things can change.
You mean, like, the arrow in mid-flight argument?
So you guys are doing a lot of physics calculation in your spare time?
Quote from: Hoopla on May 02, 2008, 12:30:35 PM
Quote from: hunter s.durden on May 02, 2008, 01:26:21 AM
I'm not sure. I refuted his refutation by not pay attention.
Something about how things can change.
You mean, like, the arrow in mid-flight argument?
I don't know that argument. I don't get mixed up with pretentious philosowads. I've got beers to drink, lives to ruin.
Hoopla, you mean Zeno's paradox?
Philosophy is good for mindfucking people, but they have to be half smart in the first place (smart enough to follow the argument, but stupid enough to fall for it). This does not include philosophy students, because the first thing a smart philosophy student learns is that other courses are more highly valued in the market, and easier to complete, and so anyone left doing the course is stupid.
Every philosophy student I have met seems to be taught that it's more important to stuff your sentences with as many cool philosophy terms and obscure philosopher names as possible, especially at the expense of practical meaning.
Pretty much. University seminars for art courses are usually too short and infrequent to sharpen anyone's argumentative and critical thinking abilities, and the required reading for Philosophy tends to be insanely high (though cheap, because all the books copyright's have expired). So you either try to learn properly, and have a nervous breakdown, or learn to skim read and spout bullshit, and get a 1:1 and 3 years worth of debt.
Quote from: Cain on May 02, 2008, 02:06:08 PM
Hoopla, you mean Zeno's paradox?
Yes, I love using it at parties.
I demand you stop posting at once, until I can write decent response. :evilmad:
Quote from: Hoopla on May 02, 2008, 02:14:03 PM
Quote from: Cain on May 02, 2008, 02:06:08 PM
Hoopla, you mean Zeno's paradox?
Yes, I love using it at parties.
Yeah, its not bad. Alot of the old Greek ones make good party tricks because, well, they were mostly invented for them. The intelligensia of the time would get together, get incredibly drunk and try to show each other up with annoying metaphysical and logical paradoxes. And then Plato ruined it all.
Quote from: daruko on May 02, 2008, 02:19:31 PM
I demand you stop posting at once, until I can write decent response. :evilmad:
:barstool:
Quote from: daruko on May 02, 2008, 02:19:31 PM
I demand you stop posting at once, until I can write decent response. :evilmad:
No. You gotta move fast, here at the ol' PD.com.
Quote from: Cain on May 02, 2008, 02:22:13 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on May 02, 2008, 02:14:03 PM
Quote from: Cain on May 02, 2008, 02:06:08 PM
Hoopla, you mean Zeno's paradox?
Yes, I love using it at parties.
Yeah, its not bad. Alot of the old Greek ones make good party tricks because, well, they were mostly invented for them. The intelligensia of the time would get together, get incredibly drunk and try to show each other up with annoying metaphysical and logical paradoxes. And then Plato ruined it all.
He's like the guy in college who never got laid.
j/k obviously
EDIT: I'll be posting as soon as I can think...extreme workload and stress right now. Have fun!
Quote from: Golden Applesauce on May 02, 2008, 03:22:41 AM
Quote from: Micro-Ice on May 02, 2008, 01:33:23 AM
Quote from: triple zero on May 01, 2008, 10:09:52 PM
Quote from: LMNO on May 01, 2008, 06:50:31 PM
But we are existing in this universe.
You know, the one where an object is pulled towards the groung at 32 m/s/s
9.8 m/s2, even.
i think it's 32 feet/s2?
Touche
Quite right, although its 9.81 m/s2
That 0.01 make one hell of a difference. Trust me on that one
It depends on your elevation.
YOU TOO ARE RONG HAHAHA
Quote from: Hoopla on May 02, 2008, 02:26:38 PM
Quote from: Cain on May 02, 2008, 02:22:13 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on May 02, 2008, 02:14:03 PM
Quote from: Cain on May 02, 2008, 02:06:08 PM
Hoopla, you mean Zeno's paradox?
Yes, I love using it at parties.
Yeah, its not bad. Alot of the old Greek ones make good party tricks because, well, they were mostly invented for them. The intelligensia of the time would get together, get incredibly drunk and try to show each other up with annoying metaphysical and logical paradoxes. And then Plato ruined it all.
He's like the guy in college who never got laid.
Plato is that guy who never even made it to the kitchen at parties.
Giving Plato a wedgie, ITT.
I DON'T THINK YOU GUYS SHOULD BE SMOKING THAT...
\
(http://www.stenudd.com/myth/greek/images/plato.jpg)
SHUT THE FUCK UP, SPAG!
\
(http://www.thereisaway.us/images/GreekChorus.jpg)
Oh STFU, Plato. Srsly
\
(http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~rxv/demcha/heraclitus.jpg)
I don't think that the EW model paints a picture of universes seperated by impassible barriers, but rather a larger interactive whole. Quantum interference is explained in this framework as a result of this more complex structure, in which information is processed across an non-objectively measurable spectrum. First of all, this is a hell of a lot better explanation than "nonlocality", and it has the additional benefit of actually producing a whole new field; namely, Quantum Computation. If you disagree, please explain where the "superposited" operations are being performed in "spacetime", when factoring with some of the more refined versions of Shor's Algorithm on a Quantum Computer.
MWI posits: Time does not flow. Other times are just special cases of other universes. Our Newtonian and Quantum models are obviously well off from accurately describing the universe. Most existing physical theories suggest reality IS a spacetime. From the Many Worlds model, reality is a multiverse, and physical theories can at best provide good approximations.
Although time is not a "sequence of moments" in this framework, and it does not flow, our intuitions about it's properties can still be applied broadly. We can indeed measure causes and effects, the future is open, the past fixed, and possibilities do become actualities. The idea is that we exist in multiple versions of each 'moment'. We are not directly aware of these copies, but can observe the physical laws that link information through different universes. If we suppose that the moment of which we are aware is the only real one, we fall into solipsism, and thus, the MWI suggests all moments are PHYSICALLY real, as well as the whole multiverse.
I don't have a profoundly deep understanding of this model, but it suggests to me, that we have an empirical method for exploring the universe beyond the limitations of a static four-dimensional entity, and that the physical "laws" of modern day spacetime physics, as commonly known, are much more flexible than we might think. We find this out more and more everyday. Through a process of impedence, we can make light faster than light... an information trick. If it's physically "improbable", but physically "possible", perhaps what we are really saying (in this framework) is that there are less "instances" of the event in the multiverse. I'm not too sure about that last statement, but it's interesting, I think.
"The conversion, relative to any observer, of possibilities into actualities- of an open future into a fixed past - also makes sense in this framework. Consider [a coin-tossing experiment]. Before the coin toss, the future is open from the point of view of an observer, in the sense that it is still possible that either outcome, 'heads' or 'tails', will be observed by that observer. From that observer's point of view both outcomes are possibilities, even though objectively they are both actualities. After the coin has settled, the copies of the observer have differentiated into two groups. Each observer has observed, and remembers, only one outcome of the coin toss. Thus the outcome, once it is in the "past" of any observer, has become single-valued and actual for every copy of the observer, even though from the multiverse point of view it is just as two-valued as ever." - David Deutsch, Centre for Quantum Computation, Clarendon Laboratory, Oxford
I just don't have the time to put more into this explanation... I've already put it off for several days though, so I wanted to put something up. I hope I didn't mutilate it too terribly.
QuoteI don't think that the EW model paints a picture of universes seperated by impassible barriers, but rather a larger interactive whole.
[citation needed]
1. How exactly are you suggesting these universes are interacting?
2. Could you provide a citation that suggests some universes have developed physical laws that are contrary to our present universe, and how that is possible?
Quote from: LMNO on May 06, 2008, 03:17:54 PM
QuoteI don't think that the EW model paints a picture of universes seperated by impassible barriers, but rather a larger interactive whole.
[citation needed]
1. How exactly are you suggesting these universes are interacting?
2. Could you provide a citation that suggests some universes have developed physical laws that are contrary to our present universe, and how that is possible?
I will answer both questions as soon as I have time, and I do have citations for you.... just want to restate quickly what I said earlier... this is a REDUCTIONIST model.
So naturally, there are limitations, but there are still interesting answers within the framework for both of your questions.
Here's a few resources of interest:
Quantum Theory of Probability and Decisions
http://xxx.lanl.gov/ftp/quant-ph/papers/9906/9906015.pdf (http://xxx.lanl.gov/ftp/quant-ph/papers/9906/9906015.pdf)
Structure of the Multiverse
http://xxx.lanl.gov/ftp/quant-ph/papers/0104/0104033.pdf (http://xxx.lanl.gov/ftp/quant-ph/papers/0104/0104033.pdf)
DeWitt, B.S. and Graham, N. 1973 in The Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum
Mechanics 183-186 (Princeton University Press)
Everett, H. 1957 Rev. Mod. Phys. 29 3 454-462
Everettian Rationality: defending Deutsch's approach to probability in the Everett Interpretation, by David Wallace
http://xxx.lanl.gov/PS_cache/quant-ph/pdf/0303/0303050v2.pdf (http://xxx.lanl.gov/PS_cache/quant-ph/pdf/0303/0303050v2.pdf)
You know, this might sound strange, but I actually don't have time to read all that, unless you want to put this thread on hold for a couple of months.
Quote from: LMNO on May 06, 2008, 04:44:07 PM
You know, this might sound strange, but I actually don't have time to read all that, unless you want to put this thread on hold for a couple of months.
Just discussing aren't we? Take all the time you need, or don't. I'm very short on time lately too, and like I said, I don't totally understand the implications of the theory anyway, but it's very interesting. The first one there (Quantum Theory of Probability and Decisions) isn't all that long, and if you skim through the really complicated shit, you'll still get a rough idea, I think.
I'd be very interested in hearing your criticisms, upon digesting any of this material.
EDIT: I'll try and throw something together to answer the questions you had in simple terms, sometime in the future... near or far, i can not say. :D
Listen the fuck up, because I only spew Hideous Troofs ONCE:
Quantum mechanics is just God CHEATING to balance the books. If he hadn't slacked off on day 7, then maybe "tunneling" wouldn't be NECESSARY for conservation of energy to work.
This is what you get for hiring Angry Mountain Gods.
STAND UP FOR YOURSELF! Don't let any of your electons tunnel! Get your friends to do the same!
TGRR,
Giving vengeful dieties what-for since the Johnson Administration.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on May 06, 2008, 11:50:27 PM
Listen the fuck up, because I only spew Hideous Troofs ONCE:
Quantum mechanics is just God CHEATING to balance the books. If he hadn't slacked off on day 7, then maybe "tunneling" wouldn't be NECESSARY for conservation of energy to work.
This is what you get for hiring Angry Mountain Gods.
STAND UP FOR YOURSELF! Don't let any of your electons tunnel! Get your friends to do the same!
TGRR,
Giving vengeful dieties what-for since the Johnson Administration.
:| not one of your better posts
Daruko, you're a vicious failure when it comes to comedy.
Quote from: daruko on May 06, 2008, 11:55:13 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on May 06, 2008, 11:50:27 PM
Listen the fuck up, because I only spew Hideous Troofs ONCE:
Quantum mechanics is just God CHEATING to balance the books. If he hadn't slacked off on day 7, then maybe "tunneling" wouldn't be NECESSARY for conservation of energy to work.
This is what you get for hiring Angry Mountain Gods.
STAND UP FOR YOURSELF! Don't let any of your electons tunnel! Get your friends to do the same!
TGRR,
Giving vengeful dieties what-for since the Johnson Administration.
:| not one of your better posts
And your opinion means WHAT, exactly? :lulz:
Eat a dick, Sparky. What you think has amazingly little impact on ANYTHING, and nothing whatsoever as far as I am concerned.
I mean, seriously, why did you even post that? Because you want Big Daddy TGRR to shit on your head some more?
Okay!
Quote from: hunter s.durden on May 06, 2008, 11:56:45 PM
Daruko, you're a vicious failure when it comes to comedy.
But he makes a GREAT hacky-sack! And he obviously LIKES it.
He's like a Schmoo!
Friend dont let friends experience quantum decoherence.
if shit hating on me makes you feel better about your tl;dr post, then by all means
Quote from: hunter s.durden on May 06, 2008, 11:56:45 PM
Daruko, you're a vicious failure when it comes to comedy.
inspiring others to laugh via text, you bet i am
but i wasn't attempting humor, so i fail to see the relevance
Quote from: Cain on May 06, 2008, 11:59:16 PM
Friend dont let friends experience quantum decoherence.
now
that's funny
Quote from: daruko on May 07, 2008, 12:08:05 AM
if shit hating on me makes you feel better about your tl;dr post, then by all means
Quote from: hunter s.durden on May 06, 2008, 11:56:45 PM
Daruko, you're a vicious failure when it comes to comedy.
inspiring others to laugh via text, you bet i am
but i wasn't attempting humor, so i fail to see the relevance
Quote from: Cain on May 06, 2008, 11:59:16 PM
Friend dont let friends experience quantum decoherence.
now that's funny
Half a paragraph is TL?
:lulz:
Mommy raised you via the teevee, didn't she, junior?
:lulz:
See, that's the problem with dickheads like you.
Quote from: daruko on May 07, 2008, 12:08:05 AM
Quote from: hunter s.durden on May 06, 2008, 11:56:45 PM
Daruko, you're a vicious failure when it comes to comedy.
inspiring others to laugh via text, you bet i am
but i wasn't attempting humor, so i fail to see the relevance
I'm saying that you're not one I look to to say what is and isn't funny, since you suck at humor.
Everything you think is funny, I think is lame, and ... anyway...
HAY FRED, R U STILL HEAR????????????????????////
Quote from: hunter s.durden on May 07, 2008, 12:13:19 AM
Quote from: daruko on May 07, 2008, 12:08:05 AM
Quote from: hunter s.durden on May 06, 2008, 11:56:45 PM
Daruko, you're a vicious failure when it comes to comedy.
inspiring others to laugh via text, you bet i am
but i wasn't attempting humor, so i fail to see the relevance
I'm saying that you're not one I look to to say what is and isn't funny, since you suck at humor.
Everything you think is funny, I think is lame, and ... anyway...
HAY FRED, R U STILL HEAR????????????????????////
Well, Daruko is funny.
Just not in the way he intends.
Quote from: hunter s.durden
I'm saying that you're not one I look to to say what is and isn't funny, since you suck at humor.
well i see what you were saying now, anyway
Quote from: daruko on May 07, 2008, 12:20:04 AM
Quote from: hunter s.durden
I'm saying that you're not one I look to to say what is and isn't funny, since you suck at humor.
well i see what you were saying now, anyway
Who cares?
Quote from: daruko on May 07, 2008, 12:08:05 AM
but i wasn't attempting humor, so i fail to see the relevance
Quite right. You were picking a fight...out of your weight, I might add.
HUNTER: You feel like doing the Judge Mills Lane thing? :lulz:
Quote from: Cain on May 07, 2008, 12:22:43 AM
Quote from: hunter s.durden on May 07, 2008, 12:13:19 AM
Everything you think is funny, I think is lame
:sad:
:lulz: :lulz:
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on May 07, 2008, 12:22:33 AM
Quote from: daruko on May 07, 2008, 12:08:05 AM
but i wasn't attempting humor, so i fail to see the relevance
Quite right. You were picking a fight...out of your weight, I might add.
HUNTER: You feel like doing the Judge Mills Lane thing? :lulz:
I can't sanction this fight, Daruko stuff his gloves with fail today.
Quote from: hunter s.durden on May 07, 2008, 12:25:26 AM
Quote from: Cain on May 07, 2008, 12:22:43 AM
Quote from: hunter s.durden on May 07, 2008, 12:13:19 AM
Everything you think is funny, I think is lame
:sad:
:lulz: :lulz:
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on May 07, 2008, 12:22:33 AM
Quote from: daruko on May 07, 2008, 12:08:05 AM
but i wasn't attempting humor, so i fail to see the relevance
Quite right. You were picking a fight...out of your weight, I might add.
HUNTER: You feel like doing the Judge Mills Lane thing? :lulz:
I can't sanction this fight, Daruko stuff his gloves with fail today.
That's alright...I've handicapped myself. I'm trolling the bejesus out of GLP on another tab, at the same time.
I mean, it's not like the dimwit requires my full attention, right? :lulz:
roger spreads his hateshit gimmick all over the place
invokes my name repeatedly and furthermore redundantly
and then posts some stupid cliche rant in the middle of a decent discussion
that wasn't even remotely funny
i'm sorry, but in such circumstance, i'm gonna point it out
i've no interest in picking fights
roger PICKS the fight
he LIVES to pick fights
roger will do his thing
until he burns off frustration with his shitty post
and my pointing it out
and maybe actually attains funny in this thread
and i haven't much else to say on that topic except that
hopefully it's more entertaining than what he's been coming up with so far
oh and roger, i still haven't heard you're interpretation of wheeler
i've been waiting for you to rip me a new asshole, but nothing coming
just this old "eat a dick" and "who cares" script
Quote from: daruko on May 07, 2008, 12:38:20 AM
i've no interest in picking fights
Then why do it?
Quote from: daruko on May 07, 2008, 12:38:20 AM
roger spreads his hateshit gimmick all over the place
And?
Quote from: daruko on May 07, 2008, 12:38:20 AM
invokes my name repeatedly and furthermore redundantly
and then posts some stupid cliche rant in the middle of a decent discussion
that wasn't even remotely funny
And?
Quote from: daruko on May 07, 2008, 12:38:20 AM
i'm sorry, but in such circumstance, i'm gonna point it out
i've no interest in picking fights
:lulz:
Quote from: daruko on May 07, 2008, 12:38:20 AM
roger PICKS the fight
LOOK WHAT ROGER
MADE YOU DO!
Quote from: daruko on May 07, 2008, 12:38:20 AM
he LIVES to pick fights
And?
Quote from: daruko on May 07, 2008, 12:38:20 AM
roger will do his thing
until he burns off frustration with his shitty post
and my pointing it out
No, I'm going to do it forever. Won't this be fun?
Quote from: daruko on May 07, 2008, 12:38:20 AM
and maybe actually attains funny in this thread
Not necessary.
Quote from: daruko on May 07, 2008, 12:38:20 AM
and i haven't much else to say on that topic except that
hopefully it's more entertaining than what he's been coming up with so far
Well, *I'M* entertained. :lulz:
*YOU* don't matter. You are here for my amusement.
Quote from: daruko on May 07, 2008, 12:38:20 AM
oh and roger, i still haven't heard you're interpretation of wheeler
i've been waiting for you to rip me a new asshole, but nothing coming
just this old "eat a dick" and "who cares" script
It's all you rate. I mean, what's the point of having a real discussion with a dumbass like you? You've read the appendix to
Illuminatus, and now you're a physics genius, right?
No, I think instead that I will fuck with you non-stop, because that's what you
want.
TGRR,
Is community-minded, that way.
Quote from: hunter s.durden on May 07, 2008, 12:41:15 AM
Quote from: daruko on May 07, 2008, 12:38:20 AM
i've no interest in picking fights
Then why do it?
Because I wounded his inner child.
Or because I threaten his meager grip on his own machismo.
Or because he's an idiot.
Hell, maybe all of the above.
Quote from: TGRRNo, I think instead that I will fuck with you non-stop, because that's what you want.
very thoughtful
but firstput it in your butt
thensuck it spag
becauseyou know you wanna
:a2m:
Quote from: daruko on May 07, 2008, 01:01:16 AM
I AM A WHINY LITTLE GIRL. PLUS, I GOT ALL THE PHYSICS I'LL EVER NEED OUT OF THE BACK OF A ROBERT ANTON WILSON NOVEL!
Since we're changing peoples' text, and all. :lulz:
you know roger
as much as i hate hippie new age RAW bullshit
he was keeping it to one thread making it easy to ignore
oh wait
this was your thread??
oh shit daruko
sorry
your on your own...
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on May 07, 2008, 01:47:42 AM
you know roger
as much as i hate hippie new age RAW bullshit
he was keeping it to one thread making it easy to ignore
oh wait
this was your thread??
oh shit daruko
sorry
your on your own...
Yep.
TGRR,
Will only shit on him for 6 months or so. Maybe.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on May 06, 2008, 11:50:27 PM
Listen the fuck up, because I only spew Hideous Troofs ONCE:
Quantum mechanics is just God CHEATING to balance the books. If he hadn't slacked off on day 7, then maybe "tunneling" wouldn't be NECESSARY for conservation of energy to work.
This is what you get for hiring Angry Mountain Gods.
STAND UP FOR YOURSELF! Don't let any of your electons tunnel! Get your friends to do the same!
TGRR,
Giving vengeful dieties what-for since the Johnson Administration.
My theory is that God may have supplied the resources for creating the universe, but that engineer that actually designed it was Satan. That's why God shakes his fist and says "One-a these days, Satan. One-a these days... POW! ZOOM! Right in teh lake of fire!" but, of course, not until the end of the world.
God doesn't actually understand how the universe works, so he has to keep Satan around for tech support.
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on May 07, 2008, 03:39:10 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on May 06, 2008, 11:50:27 PM
Listen the fuck up, because I only spew Hideous Troofs ONCE:
Quantum mechanics is just God CHEATING to balance the books. If he hadn't slacked off on day 7, then maybe "tunneling" wouldn't be NECESSARY for conservation of energy to work.
This is what you get for hiring Angry Mountain Gods.
STAND UP FOR YOURSELF! Don't let any of your electons tunnel! Get your friends to do the same!
TGRR,
Giving vengeful dieties what-for since the Johnson Administration.
My theory is that God may have supplied the resources for creating the universe, but that engineer that actually designed it was Satan. That's why God shakes his fist and says "One-a these days, Satan. One-a these days... POW! ZOOM! Right in teh lake of fire!" but, of course, not until the end of the world.
God doesn't actually understand how the universe works, so he has to keep Satan around for tech support.
That kind of explains every tech geek I ever met.
Daruko, please stop trying to dock with Roger.
Quote from: Cain on May 02, 2008, 02:31:30 PM
Plato is that guy who never even made it to the kitchen at parties.
:mittens:
I call Bullshit. The first bit of this thread was nothing more than Roger being a Cosmic Schmuck and ranting about something of which he apparently has little or no knowledge or experience. It turned into a discussion that was at least interesting and still on topic. Daruko made useful posts (even though I might disagree with his leanings there) and in return, Roger comes back with, let us all admit, a slight piece of laem.
As far as I can tell, in this thread, Daruko only mistake was thinking that we are allowed to comment on LAEM whenever it happens, even if Roger happens to be the recipient and suddenly he's asking for it and ruining Roger's thread...
Emperor Norton on a Shit Stick! I was having a good time in this thread and Roger made it RUINT!
BY GODDESS! I WILL KILL A MOTHERFUCKER!
:popcorn:
Quote from: Ratatosk on May 07, 2008, 04:08:16 PM
I was having a good time in this thread and Roger made it RUINT!
But you suck at the funny as well, invalidating your opinion.
Quote from: hunter s.durden on May 07, 2008, 09:25:47 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on May 07, 2008, 04:08:16 PM
I was having a good time in this thread and Roger made it RUINT!
But you suck at the funny as well, invalidating your opinion.
Fair enough.
Quote from: hunter s.durden on May 07, 2008, 09:25:47 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on May 07, 2008, 04:08:16 PM
I was having a good time in this thread and Roger made it RUINT!
But you suck at the funny as well, invalidating your opinion.
That's pretty much the litmus test for truth around here. Unfunny people probably don't have the Right Ideas.
Quote from: Ratatosk on May 07, 2008, 04:08:16 PM
I call Bullshit. The first bit of this thread was nothing more than Roger being a Cosmic Schmuck and ranting about something of which he apparently has little or no knowledge or experience.
And?
Quote from: revidc on May 07, 2008, 04:38:53 PM
The CHurch Of Applied Psyonetiks would like to cordially invite TGRR to join our ranks.
We will in this case, make an exemption and not ask for $£$£$'s.
We feel that all the hate you have shit into the electronic aether, is far more valuable than mere $£$£$'s.
We don't think you'll accept our offer, being a man of "Bob" and all, but as you pointed out in this thread, the CotSG is getting on a bit . . . and we only do 'tragically hip' on every second Tuesday.
If you'd like to take us up on our offer, we'll send over the electronic info pack for you. Just ignore the second one.
Its designed to appeal to 'moonbeam' types and ex-wiccans and the such.
You'd probably go
'HGNNNNNNNN!' or 'wut?'
:mrgreen:
. . . and we could do with some WMD grade hate.
SIGN ME UP, CAP'N! I'M UP FOR
ANY PROGRAM!
Quote from: revidc on May 08, 2008, 04:14:00 AM
Fuckin A Yehaw!
If you could PM me an email addy Rev, I'll pass over the information.
Woo!
8)
This calls for a Psyonetiks: As Approved By The Good Rev. Roger bloodstained bullet hole ridden T-shirt. . .
It may not be today though as I'm damnable knackered and totally out of coffee.
Sent.
Would you like a sermon or three?
Quote from: revidc on May 08, 2008, 05:28:40 AM
Hell yes.
We are rather light on sermons round here.
Heavy on advertising and psychobabble.
Short on sermons.
:D
I was gonna do it as and advertisement, actually.
We'll show Stang who the REAL money-grubbing bastards are!
With the addition of TGRR in its ranks, Psyonetiks has just seen it's very own ++SMUG levels increase exponentially.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v711/Marburger/Psyonetiks.jpg)
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:53:42 AM
Quote from: Darth Cupcake on April 21, 2008, 02:50:59 AM
I FART SUNSHINE AND HUGS
AND DANCING COOKIES
AND I AM HERE TO SOLVE
ALL YR EXISTENTIAL CRISES
\
:hosrie:
super fucking valid worldview ITT
UNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNG!
\
(http://galatea.stetson.edu/~bcampbel/images/uploads/cash.jpg)
have this t-shirt it rocks, and it is nice to see that TGRR has not changed in the almost 2 years since i have checked this forum...
Quote from: Nikoli Volkoff on May 08, 2008, 11:29:50 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:53:42 AM
Quote from: Darth Cupcake on April 21, 2008, 02:50:59 AM
I FART SUNSHINE AND HUGS
AND DANCING COOKIES
AND I AM HERE TO SOLVE
ALL YR EXISTENTIAL CRISES
\
:hosrie:
super fucking valid worldview ITT
UNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNG!
\
(http://galatea.stetson.edu/~bcampbel/images/uploads/cash.jpg)
have this t-shirt it rocks, and it is nice to see that TGRR has not changed in the almost 2 years since i have checked this forum...
I have a 6th sense, and it's HATE.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:53:42 AM
Quote from: Darth Cupcake on April 21, 2008, 02:50:59 AM
I FART SUNSHINE AND HUGS
AND DANCING COOKIES
AND I AM HERE TO SOLVE
ALL YR EXISTENTIAL CRISES
\
:hosrie:
super fucking valid worldview ITT
UNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNG!
\
(http://galatea.stetson.edu/~bcampbel/images/uploads/cash.jpg)
I love this pic.
I gots a T-Shirt of that.
Quote from: LMNO on October 02, 2009, 08:45:27 PM
I gots a T-Shirt of that.
I had a huge poster of it, but my daughter stole it and put it in her room.
She thinks Johnny Cash was the second coming of Jesus.
Smart kid.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on October 02, 2009, 08:43:38 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:53:42 AM
Quote from: Darth Cupcake on April 21, 2008, 02:50:59 AM
I FART SUNSHINE AND HUGS
AND DANCING COOKIES
AND I AM HERE TO SOLVE
ALL YR EXISTENTIAL CRISES
\
:hosrie:
super fucking valid worldview ITT
UNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNG!
\
(http://galatea.stetson.edu/~bcampbel/images/uploads/cash.jpg)
I love this pic.
And I love farting sunshine and hugs and dancing cookies.
Some things never change.
Just now the cookies are laced with arsenic.
Quote from: Ratatosk on May 07, 2008, 04:08:16 PM
I call Bullshit. The first bit of this thread was nothing more than Roger being a Cosmic Schmuck and ranting about something of which he apparently has little or no knowledge or experience. It turned into a discussion that was at least interesting and still on topic. Daruko made useful posts (even though I might disagree with his leanings there) and in return, Roger comes back with, let us all admit, a slight piece of laem.
As far as I can tell, in this thread, Daruko only mistake was thinking that we are allowed to comment on LAEM whenever it happens, even if Roger happens to be the recipient and suddenly he's asking for it and ruining Roger's thread...
Emperor Norton on a Shit Stick! I was having a good time in this thread and Roger made it RUINT!
BY GODDESS! I WILL KILL A MOTHERFUCKER!
Heh, paging through my book of grudges...
(I kid... :lulz:)
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:38:52 AM
Quote from: Faust on April 21, 2008, 02:34:59 AM
Its not as pervasive as you think, its just when you see it, you cant look away and it clouds the other shit.
This forum (to me) is still about sweet beautiful soul crushingly brutal honesty, and cutting through the crap.
This is mostly about something that's happening at POEE, but it seems to be creeping into PD as well.
Fucking primitives, beating on hollow logs and hiding in caves because, well, it's easier than learning math, right? Never mind that this is EXACTLY what the CoN wants you to do. When you're out "casting sigils", you aren't accomplishing ANYTHING, but you THINK you are, and that makes the powers that be HAPPIER THAN SHIT. And, goddammit, it is so stupid that it is fucking PAINFUL to even WATCH.
Jackasses. I hope they all get terminal fucking syphilis.
Whoa. How did I lose that kind of rage?
Quote from: Doktor Howl on October 26, 2010, 08:42:34 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:38:52 AM
Quote from: Faust on April 21, 2008, 02:34:59 AM
Its not as pervasive as you think, its just when you see it, you cant look away and it clouds the other shit.
This forum (to me) is still about sweet beautiful soul crushingly brutal honesty, and cutting through the crap.
This is mostly about something that's happening at POEE, but it seems to be creeping into PD as well.
Fucking primitives, beating on hollow logs and hiding in caves because, well, it's easier than learning math, right? Never mind that this is EXACTLY what the CoN wants you to do. When you're out "casting sigils", you aren't accomplishing ANYTHING, but you THINK you are, and that makes the powers that be HAPPIER THAN SHIT. And, goddammit, it is so stupid that it is fucking PAINFUL to even WATCH.
Jackasses. I hope they all get terminal fucking syphilis.
Whoa. How did I lose that kind of rage?
Because you had hopes of trying to change the world, and were ragey at the people who you saw as actively trying to defeat you?
Quote from: Mistress Freeky, HRN on October 26, 2010, 08:45:03 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on October 26, 2010, 08:42:34 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 21, 2008, 02:38:52 AM
Quote from: Faust on April 21, 2008, 02:34:59 AM
Its not as pervasive as you think, its just when you see it, you cant look away and it clouds the other shit.
This forum (to me) is still about sweet beautiful soul crushingly brutal honesty, and cutting through the crap.
This is mostly about something that's happening at POEE, but it seems to be creeping into PD as well.
Fucking primitives, beating on hollow logs and hiding in caves because, well, it's easier than learning math, right? Never mind that this is EXACTLY what the CoN wants you to do. When you're out "casting sigils", you aren't accomplishing ANYTHING, but you THINK you are, and that makes the powers that be HAPPIER THAN SHIT. And, goddammit, it is so stupid that it is fucking PAINFUL to even WATCH.
Jackasses. I hope they all get terminal fucking syphilis.
Whoa. How did I lose that kind of rage?
Because you had hopes of trying to change the world, and were ragey at the people who you saw as actively trying to defeat you?
Probably. I'm more hate-oriented, now. The rage comes and goes.
Probably better for my blood pressure.
Probably you're right.
Bump for use at TDS. :lulz: