:lulz:
how about that what do you think the correct formula of energy is?
forget it energie =a mixture of ying and yang
energy is one the one side you put energy into it and other the other side you chill
if you want to be successful in dating ugly girls you gotta flash them you gotta scare them they gotta scream i don't know with what and then you gotta relax
every girl that is fascinated by you or your intelligence and somehow weird looking guy is going to come if you wait on that
This is what not to post as an introduction.
This is five sentences of suction and failure.
Here endeth the lesson
Quote from: DaMan on April 23, 2007, 05:07:20 PM
:lulz:
how about that what do you think the correct formula of energy is?
forget it energie =a mixture of ying and yang
energy is one the one side you put energy into it and other the other side you chill
if you want to be successful in dating ugly girls you gotta flash them you gotta scare them they gotta scream i don't know with what and then you gotta relax
every girl that is fascinated by you or your intelligence and somehow weird looking guy is going to come if you wait on that
what
I feel this post was both enlightening and filled with merit.
Moved to Apple Talk
Now that this is in Apple Talk,
I agree with the OP.
Energy equals the mass times the speed of light (squared).
In case you were wondering.
Energy = Tentacle ^2
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on April 23, 2007, 05:12:56 PM
Quote from: DaMan on April 23, 2007, 05:07:20 PM
:lulz:
how about that what do you think the correct formula of energy is?
forget it energie =a mixture of ying and yang
energy is one the one side you put energy into it and other the other side you chill
if you want to be successful in dating ugly girls you gotta flash them you gotta scare them they gotta scream i don't know with what and then you gotta relax
every girl that is fascinated by you or your intelligence and somehow weird looking guy is going to come if you wait on that
what
Well, if you put energy in one side and get chill out the other this person is clearly talking about air conditioners.
To the OP:
Are you trying to sell us air conditioners?
[Keanu]
Whoa! I was like, in the Prison one minute and then, I totally ended up in Apple Talk. Bogus dude!
[/Keanu]
Well, I don't need to learn anything anymore. Dis fread = solves ALL
[bill and ted]
YO! Devil dude! Two little guys! Stoned!
[/bill and ted]
I felt the pain in the OP. All I can say now is "HWHUT?!"
Fundamental flaw in The Matrix*:
Evil robots enslave humans with a computer generated 'reality'.
The humans are basically used as batteries.
If the evil robots were so damn clever as to completely crack the neural code of the human brain why weren't they smart enough to solve their own energy crisis?
*That is, ignoring the unoriginal plot culled from other sources, the wooden acting, the style over substance school of film making and the fact that there wasn't really enough content for 3 movies but hey, it's the era of franchise cinema, so why not?
Quote from: Mangrove on April 23, 2007, 06:14:19 PM
Fundamental flaw in The Matrix*:
Evil robots enslave humans with a computer generated 'reality'.
The humans are basically used as batteries.
If the evil robots were so damn clever as to completely crack the neural code of the human brain why weren't they smart enough to solve their own energy crisis?
*That is, ignoring the unoriginal plot culled from other sources, the wooden acting, the style over substance school of film making and the fact that there wasn't really enough content for 3 movies but hey, it's the era of franchise cinema, so why not?
They did it for the lulz.
Quote from: Payne on April 23, 2007, 06:15:40 PM
Quote from: Mangrove on April 23, 2007, 06:14:19 PM
Fundamental flaw in The Matrix*:
Evil robots enslave humans with a computer generated 'reality'.
The humans are basically used as batteries.
If the evil robots were so damn clever as to completely crack the neural code of the human brain why weren't they smart enough to solve their own energy crisis?
*That is, ignoring the unoriginal plot culled from other sources, the wooden acting, the style over substance school of film making and the fact that there wasn't really enough content for 3 movies but hey, it's the era of franchise cinema, so why not?
They did it for the lulz.
the robots or the people who made the movie?
Quote from: Mangrove on April 23, 2007, 06:14:19 PM
Fundamental flaw in The Matrix*:
Evil robots enslave humans with a computer generated 'reality'.
The humans are basically used as batteries.
If the evil robots were so damn clever as to completely crack the neural code of the human brain why weren't they smart enough to solve their own energy crisis?
*That is, ignoring the unoriginal plot culled from other sources, the wooden acting, the style over substance school of film making and the fact that there wasn't really enough content for 3 movies but hey, it's the era of franchise cinema, so why not?
Or, breed humans with ancephaly.
While the wachowski bros. are a good source of lulzyness, I don't think they themselves do anything for anything except money (In THIS God we Trust).
I mean the robots, who would otherwise have been very bored.
the matrix = gnosticism with microchips.
OH NOES!!11 TEH ROBOTZ MADE AN EVIL WORLD OF ILLUSION!!
IT'S OK!! WE CAN EAT PILLS AND USE KUNG-FU!
Does it make me a pariah that I've not seen any of the Matrices?
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on April 23, 2007, 06:26:23 PM
Does it make me a pariah that I've not seen any of the Matrices?
no, just makes you someone who didn't waste a lot of money.
i saw the first one and thought "hmm...ok."
i saw the second one and hated it. my friend stood up at the end and yelled 'YOU BASTARDS' at the screen when the credits rolled.
didn't get fooled a 3rd time.
Well, I more than made up for it with the LOTR trilogy. All three movies together, I think I visited the theatre a good 15 or so times. Yeah, I know.
RWHN - don't worry about it.
I was merely threadjacking because of sheer inanity of the original post.
Quote from: Mangrove on April 23, 2007, 06:23:54 PM
the matrix = gnosticism with microchips.
OH NOES!!11 TEH ROBOTZ MADE AN EVIL WORLD OF ILLUSION!!
IT'S OK!! WE CAN EAT PILLS AND USE KUNG-FU!
:potd:
Quote from: Mangrove on April 23, 2007, 06:23:54 PM
the matrix = gnosticism with microchips.
OH NOES!!11 TEH ROBOTZ MADE AN EVIL WORLD OF ILLUSION!!
IT'S OK!! WE CAN EAT PILLS AND USE KUNG-FU!
Bear in mind that 99.9% of the audience were unaware of the very possibility of this projected reality. People are much easier to headfuck, face to face, now that we have the matrix itself and several other memes to expand on.
zomg teh matrix r so philosopophi....paedlo....uh....deep and stuff! Liek my Philosophy 101 Class! :D
Quote from: LMNO on April 23, 2007, 06:21:03 PM
Quote from: Mangrove on April 23, 2007, 06:14:19 PM
Fundamental flaw in The Matrix*:
Evil robots enslave humans with a computer generated 'reality'.
The humans are basically used as batteries.
If the evil robots were so damn clever as to completely crack the neural code of the human brain why weren't they smart enough to solve their own energy crisis?
*That is, ignoring the unoriginal plot culled from other sources, the wooden acting, the style over substance school of film making and the fact that there wasn't really enough content for 3 movies but hey, it's the era of franchise cinema, so why not?
Or, breed humans with ancephaly.
Yeah, its not like the majority of the cerebrum has to work to continue living, as long as the metabolic processes work.
Quote from: SillyCybin on April 23, 2007, 08:38:03 PMBear in mind that 99.9% of the audience were unaware of the very possibility of this projected reality. People are much easier to headfuck, face to face, now that we have the matrix itself and several other memes to expand on.
yeah, srsly guys.
sure the "battery plot" was nonsense, and surely the second and third episodes were obsolete as fuck, but this movie has made more people aware of this "possibility" (and -sort-of-in-a-way- the limitations of their senses) than any BIP pamphlet we put out so far.
so it was wrapped in a thick layer of juicy sci-fi, kung-fu and cool shades, but as Silly says, it's still a useful hooking meme. just about any time i try to explain somebody what we're trying to get at with this BIP thing (yea, still working on recruiting peoples), i find myself being able to cut a large corner by simple mentioning "kinda like the matrix" somewhere along the lines, it helps you skip the whole "what if your senses weren't really real / butterfly dreaming of a man dreaming of a butterfly" kind of stuff, that would have been a whole lot more tedious to explain before it became part of our whole "cultural knowledge" before '95.
The problem is, now the concept is either "just a movie you ripped off", or else people say, "Oh yeah, I saw that movie, I get it," and then they dismiss you.
At which point the clawhammer comes out.
not clawhammer, barstool.
it's not that hard to point out that the movie is sci-fi. it's only part of the movie you're referencing, if they start about that, you may have brought it up wrong, i was talking about explaining how your senses are the only thing that gets you input from the "outside reality", which you can illustrate with "for all we know we might be in some sort of Matrix".
they should get what you're saying by then. if they think you're talking about robots and sentient computer programs, they're probably not being really serious, kidding with you and you're wasting your time because they're not in the mindset to really listen anyway.
the other option is that they think you're talking about the "your mind only makes it real" (morpheus) and the "there is no spoon" bullshit, which offers a perfect opportunity for explaining them about the barstool experiment, making it a win/win situation, cause it enables you to show that both ends of the spectrum are wrong and truth is (at it's usual place) in the middle.
Not barstool, clawhammer.
Essentially, they are trying to barstool you, saying, "so what i see is only a projection in my mind. So what? I can still clobber you with this projection of a barstool."
You (we) are in the unenviable position of trying to explain why this idea is important, practical, and pragmatic.
I think we need to revisit the barstool metaphor. Some of us might not be using it accurately.
Quote from: LMNO on April 24, 2007, 03:02:17 PMNot barstool, clawhammer.
and a clawhammer is in this case different from a barstool how?
QuoteEssentially, they are trying to barstool you, saying, "so what i see is only a projection in my mind. So what? I can still clobber you with this projection of a barstool."
You (we) are in the unenviable position of trying to explain why this idea is important, practical, and pragmatic.
um i thought we were talking about people who'd go "yea i saw that movie" but got all the wrong conclusions from it?
all i was trying to say, is you can use the phrase "just like in the matrix" to explain the philosophical thought-experiment of having all your experiences artificially fed to you, and you not being able to tell the difference. without 95% of all people having seen "the Matrix", you would be stuck for 5 minutes trying to paint imagery of some hypothetical machine that could record sensations visual hearing feeling everything etc etc, and now you can skip that whole bit and simply say "like one of those neckplugs from the Matrix" or whatever.
it's just that the concept of fully-immersive Virtual Reality (like in the Matrix) is now added to our cultural knowledge. which means that, if you want to talk about it, you can just reference this concept, instead of having to explain it all.
before 1995, if you wanted to talk about it, only a few cyberpunk geeks would understand you right away and for others you'd have to explain it. and sometimes that's a lot of explaining.
QuoteI think we need to revisit the barstool metaphor. Some of us might not be using it accurately.
i usually stick to the version you wrote, btw :)
[cause it's about the only one in the Barstool-thread that's just the simple plain barstool-story]
but if you think i got the wrong idea about it, please to correct me.
I'll start a new thread.
Whole deal with matrix bashing is intellectual snobbery. Put quite simply a lot of people say "it's beneath me"
fine and dandy but it's above the vast majority of biological matter on this planet. Either you want this homo sapiens crap to evolve, in which case the film is a damned good eye opener (think sesame street for ages 30 and up) or you wish the bastards would just die out, in which case you're a fucking nazi and just haven't realised it yet.
Ask yourself this - what would you rather your kids were doing - watching Mel Gibson's Thrashing of the christ or The Matrix?
Now get this into your thick, highbrow skull - next to people like us the vast majority of the human race are "the kids"
Quote from: SillyCybin on April 24, 2007, 03:22:04 PM
Ask yourself this - what would you rather your kids were doing - watching Mel Gibson's Thrashing of the christ or The Matrix?
Neither. I'd rather my kid turned off the tube and went out to figure out the world using their own images and imagination, not someone else's.
Silly, the entire premise is a centuries old philisophical debate.
And "The Matrix" movies don't offer a solution, or even a way forward. It says this:
"What if your entire reality was an illusion? Guess what? It is! Now go fight mechanical squid!"
PKD movies are much more interesting. They say:
"What if your entire reality was an illusion? It might be. What are you gonna do now, sucker?"
I hold that the latter is more educational than the former.
1) A centuries old philosophical debate that no one had heard of before the movie came out
2) I'm sure if you put enough great minds together you could come up with a movie that would explain absolutely everything you needed to explain, to absolutely everyone and bring about global enlightenment. Or maybe not.
3) Matrix was highly popular and introduced a centuries old philosophical debate into the collective psyche, overnight, more successfully than centuries of philosophers ever managed.
And you want to quibble about the ending? In terms of small steps the matrix was quite a big one.
The matrix dismissed the question. It turned the philisophical debate into an "alternate reality" adventure, and into a dualistic reality.
At no point did a character say, "so, how do i know that this "existence as a Duracell" is actually what's going on?"
Hell, even Total Recall, for all it's explosions and pace-shitting, had the final line of the movie questioning whether or not it was real. The Matrix never did. And that came nine years earlier.
I still maintain it delivered the meme. Conclusions aren't necessary. Story, plot, character development - irrelevant. Action, pace and special effects eye candy - absolutely necessary - the only way to maintain primitive monkey attention span. There are now millions and millions of people who's primitive minds have a frame of reference to question reality in a way they simply couldn't before.
And it's working. I've spoken to people who have brought it up in conversation. People whom I'm pretty certain wouldn't have gotten there on their own.
My whole issue with intellectual snobbery in this instance is that some people would throw the baby out with the bathwater. "Make them read some Descartes instead" Sounds great until you take into account the fact the majority of these monkeys can't read words with more than two syllables and stuggle to understand even those.
Compare the box if you don't believe me - films like bladerunner and total recall aren't in the same ballpark as the matrix, most of those audiences (by demographic) would prolly have gotten the ideas already.
compare qty of people educated by TR and Bladerunner to qty of people educated by matrix (by educated I mean - took on board a fundamental metaphysical concept)
My bet is Matrix will turn out to be vastly more educational, in the sense that it actually educated.
Quote from: SillyCybin on April 24, 2007, 04:02:34 PM
There are now millions and millions of people who's primitive minds have a frame of reference to question reality in a way they simply couldn't before.
Please tell me this was a purposeful exageration.
i want to agree with SC.
but we're dealing with humans here.
it's an eye-opening movie if you're the kind of person who's looking for that sort of thing. but then, if you're that kind of person, you'll find it somewhere. if you're not, you'll just look at all the dazzling effects and then go home and wank until SpiderMan 3 comes out. and then you'll do it again, etc.
<lavey>
people in general are morons who barely deserve to survive.
</lavey>
Released Movie Name 1st Weekend US Gross Worldwide Gross Budget
3/31/1999 The Matrix $27,788,331 $171,479,930 $456,500,000 $65,000,000
Number is how many people understood the concept, minus how many understood before they saw the movie. I'm guessing millions and millions. (conservative estimate)
Quote from: vexati0n on April 24, 2007, 04:07:29 PM
<lavey>
people in general are morons who barely deserve to survive.
</lavey>
:mittens: you got me there :lulz:
Quote from: LMNO on April 24, 2007, 03:27:14 PM
Silly, the entire premise is a centuries old philisophical debate.
Troof! Kafka did this meme well, as did Asimov.
But I still think SC has a point.
Also, let's not forget that the philisophical premise is bullshit.
Yes, the sensations we percieve are not direct experience.
Yes, it is entirely possible that all of this is an illusion.
Yes, this could mean that all of the intricate physics we have derived from scientific experimentation could be bogus.
BUT SO FUCKING WHAT? DOES KNOWING THAT WHAT I CONSIDER REALITY TO BE MIGHT BE ENTIRELY FALSE HELP ME IN SURVIVING ON THIS BACKWARDS MUDBALL FILLED WITH PSYCHOPATHIC MONKEYS?
No.
It doesn't.
Because there is no red pill anywhere.
Quote from: vexati0n on April 24, 2007, 04:07:29 PM
i want to agree with SC.
but we're dealing with humans here.
it's an eye-opening movie if you're the kind of person who's looking for that sort of thing. but then, if you're that kind of person, you'll find it somewhere. if you're not, you'll just look at all the dazzling effects and then go home and wank until SpiderMan 3 comes out. and then you'll do it again, etc.
<lavey>
people in general are morons who barely deserve to survive.
</lavey>
Pretty much troof for the majority of those who saw the movie, imho.
Quote from: LMNO on April 24, 2007, 04:13:22 PM
Also, let's not forget that the philisophical premise is bullshit.
Yes, the sensations we percieve are not direct experience.
Yes, it is entirely possible that all of this is an illusion.
Yes, this could mean that all of the intricate physics we have derived from scientific experimentation could be bogus.
BUT SO FUCKING WHAT? DOES KNOWING THAT WHAT I CONSIDER REALITY TO BE MIGHT BE ENTIRELY FALSE HELP ME IN SURVIVING ON THIS BACKWARDS MUDBALL FILLED WITH PSYCHOPATHIC MONKEYS?
No.
It doesn't.
Because there is no red pill anywhere.
Eh, but the red pill issue is a, well, red herring. Sometimes it's enough to be aware...the solution may not be reachable, may not EXIST even (defeatism ftl), but still. Going that much further out of oblivion is sometimes just enough.
I think so too, but while millions might have bought into the concept, I don't think too many of them will be predisposed to listen to our arguments about OUR views on reality.
But hey, however weak it is, and even if it only works on a tiny percentage of the audience, its still another reference point we didn't have before! We didn't even have to pay $65M for it.
Quote from: Payne on April 24, 2007, 04:16:31 PM
I think so too, but while millions might have bought into the concept, I don't think too many of them will be predisposed to listen to our arguments about OUR views on reality.
But hey, however weak it is, and even if it only works on a tiny percentage of the audience, its still another reference point we didn't have before! We didn't even have to pay $65M for it.
Not unless we get a distribution deal. I think this may be a sort of quality vs. quantity argument. The Matrix addresses quantity as far as reaching people and your more scholarly, intellectual literature addresses quality. If you could somehow split the difference you'd be gold. But, how the fuck does one do that?
Yeah sure the Matrix isn't at the leading edge of philosophy, but what did you expect from a summer blockbuster?
Also, the Matrix II in part addressed my hot-button discussion, the idea of Free Will vs Determinism. Though I thought it was pretty campy, I liked the symbolism, references, and ideas they tried to get into.
A few things I really dug--
- the name of the hero's ship was the Logos. The implication is that Reason is the tool which will help us sort out all these sticky modern issues.
- the captain of the Vigilant's name was Soren, which I took to represent Soren Kierkegaard. Kierkegaard talks about one's responsibility to do what one thinks is right even if it seems stupid or wrong or dangerous, which is one of the central themes of the movies.
- The venture to meet the merovingian (sp? - you know, the french dude) was every descent into the underworld found in classic mythology.
- I like post-human robot vs human stories in general
there were some other things I liked, but they don't come to mind.
I find that a lot of people dis on the matrix because it tried to be deep and wasn't. But again, I think they're missing the point. If the Wachowskis made an action movie about philosophical discussions which would intrigue intellectuals, I doubt the mainstream crowd would go see it (see: waking life, which despite its merits I'm sure supposedly well-read people felt was too philosophy 101 as well).
Conclusion: if you liked where the Matrix was going but wish it did a better job of it, read The Invisibles.
Quote from: DaMan on April 23, 2007, 05:07:20 PM
:lulz:
how about that what do you think the correct formula of energy is?
forget it energie =a mixture of ying and yang
energy is one the one side you put energy into it and other the other side you chill
if you want to be successful in dating ugly girls you gotta flash them you gotta scare them they gotta scream i don't know with what and then you gotta relax
every girl that is fascinated by you or your intelligence and somehow weird looking guy is going to come if you wait on that
what
Yes ultimately I would have to agree with that assessment, it depends on who we actually want to waken up. It seems to me that bringin more people into this discussion is something that is much better done face to face.
On that individual basis, we can use the Matrix meme for some, the denser literature for others and so forth. Unfortunately, I feel that it would be damn near impossible to combine the two (as you've already stated RWHN) without it being a huge dose of fail.
As a handle for one on one conversation with someone though, I think it's handy to have the Matrix, though obviously, you couldn't rely on that alone.
Quote from: Jenne on April 24, 2007, 04:15:19 PM
Quote from: LMNO on April 24, 2007, 04:13:22 PM
Also, let's not forget that the philisophical premise is bullshit.
Yes, the sensations we percieve are not direct experience.
Yes, it is entirely possible that all of this is an illusion.
Yes, this could mean that all of the intricate physics we have derived from scientific experimentation could be bogus.
BUT SO FUCKING WHAT? DOES KNOWING THAT WHAT I CONSIDER REALITY TO BE MIGHT BE ENTIRELY FALSE HELP ME IN SURVIVING ON THIS BACKWARDS MUDBALL FILLED WITH PSYCHOPATHIC MONKEYS?
No.
It doesn't.
Because there is no red pill anywhere.
Eh, but the red pill issue is a, well, red herring. Sometimes it's enough to be aware...the solution may not be reachable, may not EXIST even (defeatism ftl), but still. Going that much further out of oblivion is sometimes just enough.
But the hypothesis itself is unprovable, which means that it is essentially meaningless. The only answer to this questions is, as a famous writer once said, "If we agree that life is more than a dream, that our consciousness dwells in a universe that includes things other than itself, then what is the nature of those things?"
Simply put, the only way out is a leap of faith, and an exploration of what
can be understood. "Brain in a jar" hypotheses are the intellectual equivalent of "God/Satan did it."
Quote from: LMNO on April 24, 2007, 04:27:10 PM
But the hypothesis itself is unprovable, which means that it is essentially meaningless. The only answer to this questions is, as a famous writer once said, "If we agree that life is more than a dream, that our consciousness dwells in a universe that includes things other than itself, then what is the nature of those things?"
Simply put, the only way out is a leap of faith, and an exploration of what can be understood. "Brain in a jar" hypotheses are the intellectual equivalent of "God/Satan did it."
It's not meaningless if the discussion that it evokes has merit.
I don't think that I'm a brain in a jar, but the thought processes used to examine that hypothesis lead to a healthy dose of self-examination and skepticism.
It has merit as long as you don't get lost in the discussion. Something that depending on your perspective has happened here on occassion.
Quote from: Payne on April 24, 2007, 04:26:13 PM
As a handle for one on one conversation with someone though, I think it's handy to have the Matrix, though obviously, you couldn't rely on that alone.
That's where I rest my case. Matrix - massive plus. Gives a useful meme to describe complicated metaphysic. This is the most any film, work of art or ideological movement will ever accomplish.
There is no single act or work of man that will enlighten anyone and pursuing such a ludicrous ideal is doomed to failure. If you don't believe me, fine, go write another bible, see if I (or anyone else) cares
Quote from: LMNO on April 24, 2007, 04:27:10 PM
But the hypothesis itself is unprovable, which means that it is essentially meaningless. The only answer to this questions is, as a famous writer once said, "If we agree that life is more than a dream, that our consciousness dwells in a universe that includes things other than itself, then what is the nature of those things?"
Simply put, the only way out is a leap of faith, and an exploration of what can be understood. "Brain in a jar" hypotheses are the intellectual equivalent of "God/Satan did it."
The point is not always to make a theory or an idea provable. Ideas can be infinite in scope in order to just open up that hatch and get the motor running. Why ruin a good enough (like that modifier?) meme just because it's not backed up with things you KNOW?
And when the fuck did that even MATTER? The thing is, most science fictional themes are what-if at best. But they also tap into the deepest, darkest parts of our psychologies. That makes them golden (or pyrite at least) and therefore useful.
Mental exercise is NOT something you get from most people believe you me. It's hard to believe hanging out here, but most just look at the Matrix as a nice little story with cool effects. The utility of this type of movie is exactly what has been pointed out: exposure to ideas that wouldn't necessarily be there before...a shortcut as you will for people who are movitvated to shake others up out of their everyday type of existences.
Besides...even the "God/Satan did it" has its uses.
But at that point, you're just in a race to see who can get to the top of Mount Cleverest first.
I fully admit that I'm incredibly guilty of this, but if all you're doing is debating the worth or validity of an unprovable theory, aren't you basically mutually masturbating each other?
Quote from: LMNO on April 24, 2007, 04:39:08 PM
But at that point, you're just in a race to see who can get to the top of Mount Cleverest first.
I fully admit that I'm incredibly guilty of this, but if all you're doing is debating the worth or validity of an unprovable theory, aren't you basically mutually masturbating each other?
I'm asking what is the problem with mental stimulation in the first place? I thought that was the main point. Why else read fiction?
000 was talking about using the Matrix as a shorthand to explain BIP principles.
I feel that the Matrix doesn't do this.
Then Silly called me an intellectual snob.
It sort of went downhill from there.
You are right in a big way, looking back to where this started. With the Matrix being such a recognisable mass-culture meme, there is a definate problem with people having the kneejerk reaction to ignore/laugh at you. Like you were a guy that called yourself a Jedi or walked around in Star Trek uniforms speaking Klingon.
However, isn't it feasible that in trying to kick off a thought process you could say "well you know that idea in the Matrix, how we're all living in an artificially generated world? Well how about we talk about ...."
Actually I agree with you the more I write this post. I think that the people who caught onto that part of the Matrix were probably predisposed to anyway, and wouldn't need that kind of coaching to catch on to the rest of our ideas.
~~~Payne: joining LMNO in intellectual snobbery
Perhaps...but even still, why not use something if it does the job more widely. Are you saying you wouldn't want the people who'd be caught through a faulty (quote/unquote) meme such as The Matrix?
You have to be careful with that kind of logic, I think.
Hold on.
I would welcome someone who came in here, saying, "Hey, I just saw the Matrix, and man! that was 5 kinds of mind-blowing awesome!"
Because then, we could all show them what mind-blowing awesome really is.
Quote from: LMNO on April 24, 2007, 04:39:08 PM
But at that point, you're just in a race to see who can get to the top of Mount Cleverest first.
I fully admit that I'm incredibly guilty of this, but if all you're doing is debating the worth or validity of an unprovable theory, aren't you basically mutually masturbating each other?
You saying there is anything more? Evar?
Think about it - you 'liberate' some poor soul from BIP - what then? They were already using their biology, the real stuff, now they've opened their mind. The only place to go is intellectual. Isn't 'intellectual' the antidote to bip? It is for me - my intellect is the only thing that makes it all bearable (well that and the odd blowjob)
Well, you do have a point. It's not so much that I wouldn't want them, it's just that I feel that the people who weren't already caught by the meme themselves, without input from us, would be less likely to accept it. Meaning that a more effective "opening salvo" meme should be sought out for these people.
If they've already caught the meme, then we shouldn't need to repeat it, and another, more advanced meme can be handed to them.
However, I realise that that is a very rocky road to go down as well, as it would seem to encourage some form of predjudice.
Putting it in my own context, I could see the basic premise of the movie as being, fundamentally, a prison of perception. With the obvious parallel in the B.I.P. However, I am also aware of how much bullshit and sensationalism was included in the movies, not to mention the Messianic story prevalant in the last two movies, and feel that that extra baggage could well have turned me off of reading the B.I.P.
However someone I know very well, with a great deal of respect for and would love to see posting here would consider me some kind of bizzarre matrix groupie if I even attempted to include in a conversation I hoped to be about the B.I.P. and reference to the Matrix.
Quote from: SillyCybin on April 24, 2007, 05:05:26 PM
You saying there is anything more? Evar?
Think about it - you 'liberate' some poor soul from BIP - what then? They were already using their biology, the real stuff, now they've opened their mind. The only place to go is intellectual. Isn't 'intellectual' the antidote to bip? It is for me - my intellect is the only thing that makes it all bearable (well that and the odd blowjob)
First, please recall there is no escape/liberation.
Second, the point, as I see it, isn't to spend your time jerking off. The point of it is to make
real-world changes to your life and you mentality, and how you interact with your reality.
You can't escape your prison, but you
can change how it affects you. And doing that changes how you affect reality.
Then comes the somatic feedback loop.
What, you thought this was all just mental hopscotch?
ITT = The Path of Illumination
But srsly, I was gonna say what LMNO just did...how many people started searching beyond their Bars
tm after they saw this movie.
Quote from: SillyCybin on April 24, 2007, 05:05:26 PM
Quote from: LMNO on April 24, 2007, 04:39:08 PM
But at that point, you're just in a race to see who can get to the top of Mount Cleverest first.
I fully admit that I'm incredibly guilty of this, but if all you're doing is debating the worth or validity of an unprovable theory, aren't you basically mutually masturbating each other?
You saying there is anything more? Evar?
Think about it - you 'liberate' some poor soul from BIP - what then? They were already using their biology, the real stuff, now they've opened their mind. The only place to go is intellectual. Isn't 'intellectual' the antidote to bip? It is for me - my intellect is the only thing that makes it all bearable (well that and the odd blowjob)
What about people who are too slow or too busy to trouble themselves with all this? This is when God/Satan theory comes in handy...
Quote from: LMNO on April 24, 2007, 04:59:57 PM
Hold on.
I would welcome someone who came in here, saying, "Hey, I just saw the Matrix, and man! that was 5 kinds of mind-blowing awesome!"
Because then, we could all show them what mind-blowing awesome really is.
It's all stepping stones, innit? Growing up as I did there ware shitloads of really 'quantum leap' kinda events in my life. Books, movies, conversations, songs...
You traverse these one at a time (pupil is ready teacher appears) There's absolutely no point in trying to explain weighty existentialist topics to someone who doesn't doesn't understand really basic stuff like how to tie their shoelaces. So you teach the shoelace thing first.
I never said any movie could bring about samadhi but, by the same token, until you learn to tie shoelaces it prolly aint gonna happen for ya either. Given this angle could you possibly reassess the function that this movie potentially serves to the people who are just at the point of being ready to understand the illusion of the senses? Think more 'tip over the edge' than 'spelling it out'. Think of things that seem dumb now but, if you hadn't been exposed to them round about when you were, it'd taken a lot longer to get to where you are now.
Quote from: LMNO on April 24, 2007, 05:10:34 PM
What, you thought this was all just mental hopscotch?
It is for me. When I had exhausted all other avenues of interest mental hopscotch was what came next. Consciousness is the only realm left for me to explore. It's also the least explored realm in terms of overall humanity . I know as much about the physical realm as I care to know. Not to take away anything from the people who are still exploring it. Scientific advancement, outer space... Lots of good shit and I enjoy my PS3 and healthy sex life as much as the next guy but it's my mind where I'm constantly discovering new and exciting ways to experience my manifestation.
I Chris Columbussed my own brain - sailed clear off the edge :lulz:
Christopher Columbus = discoverer of territory millions already knew existed (from The Simpsons)
I'm with LMNO. The Matrix is nothing more than another symptom of the Spectacle, and of Judeo-Christian (Platonic) thinking. The fact is, we already live in a society that takes it for granted that there are transcendent realities and values. Its the whole basis of Platonic metaphysics and the "greatest slander" against the earth that Nietzsche wrote so passionately about.
The question itself leads back to a sense of passivity and the converse question (what if this is the only reality) is never asked. Imagery detatches from everyday life and becomes a form of amusement, or entertainment for the masses. The logical conclusion becomes not to live life, but to observe it, to be part of the audience instead of being up on the stage.
I'd add more, but I had to go out and so am still figuring out my piece for Aftermath.
However, one final piece: much of the Matrix story was stolen directly from the Ong's Hat papers. Whats more interesting is that the papers actually did a far better job in coming to conclusions and also overcoming the problems of Platonic metaphysics (namely because they never denied this world as real - but read the papers for more).
^
|
|
|
One of these days, I'm gonna post something as well-written as this.
LMNO
-giving Cain a handjob under the table.
Um, thats a banana in my pocket....
That's a relief. I was wondering why that baboon was sniffing your crotch.
just for the record, I've kind of lost track of what this is all about.
I
think that at this stage we're talking about whether or not
the Matrix is a good meme to build upon for BIP purposes?
Quote from: Cain on April 24, 2007, 05:25:16 PM
I'm with LMNO. The Matrix is nothing more than another symptom of the Spectacle, and of Judeo-Christian (Platonic) thinking. The fact is, we already live in a society that takes it for granted that there are transcendent realities and values. Its the whole basis of Platonic metaphysics and the "greatest slander" against the earth that Nietzsche wrote so passionately about.
I disagree. I don't think average Joe spends
any time pondering what's outside of his perceptual prison. The closest most people get to lateral thinking about transcendence is arguing about religion. And that's usually rather simple. If you discount anything that's a "symptom of Judeo-Christian / platonic thinking" then I'm not sure what you could hold up as a good road sign.
QuoteThe question itself leads back to a sense of passivity and the converse question (what if this is the only reality) is never asked. Imagery detatches from everyday life and becomes a form of amusement, or entertainment for the masses. The logical conclusion becomes not to live life, but to observe it, to be part of the audience instead of being up on the stage.
I think the "what if this is the only reality" question was kind of outside the scope of the movie. But I suspect you weren't talking about the Matrix there. sorry, just trying to follow along
QuoteHowever, one final piece: much of the Matrix story was stolen directly from the Ong's Hat papers. Whats more interesting is that the papers actually did a far better job in coming to conclusions and also overcoming the problems of Platonic metaphysics (namely because they never denied this world as real - but read the papers for more).
That's cool, hadn't heard of Ong's Hat. Wikipedia's entry wasn't terribly revealing - can you post or link to elaboration?
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on April 24, 2007, 07:15:14 PMI disagree. I don't think average Joe spends any time pondering what's outside of his perceptual prison.
I agree. However, society is overwhelmingly still Judeo-Christian, on an implicit level. Therein lies the problem.
QuoteThe closest most people get to lateral thinking about transcendence is arguing about religion. And that's usually rather simple. If you discount anything that's a "symptom of Judeo-Christian / platonic thinking" then I'm not sure what you could hold up as a good road sign.
One that doesn't attach non-existent meanings and purpose to things that have none. "Existence precedes essence" is a good one, though certainly once I've had a real nights sleep I can probably do better.
QuoteI think the "what if this is the only reality" question was kind of outside the scope of the movie. But I suspect you weren't talking about the Matrix there. sorry, just trying to follow along
Indeed, it wasn't. Again, that is, to me, part of the problem. That this world is less real, less perfect etc than another imagined world is essentially giving people carte blanche to slander everything that is human, denying it in the name of "higher goals".
QuoteThat's cool, hadn't heard of Ong's Hat. Wikipedia's entry wasn't terribly revealing - can you post or link to elaboration?
www.incunabula.org The main catalogue should do the trick.
Quote from: LMNO on April 24, 2007, 05:40:34 PM
That's a relief. I was wondering why that baboon was sniffing your crotch.
Actually, it's an orangutan:
(http://www.utdallas.edu/~asimpson/resources/pic/or2003/DSC00071.JPG)
(And actually, that's my husband in the picture. Portland Zoo, July 2003.)
Quote from: DJRubberducky on April 24, 2007, 08:28:44 PM
(http://www.utdallas.edu/~asimpson/resources/pic/or2003/DSC00071.JPG)
(And actually, that's my husband in the picture. Portland Zoo, July 2003.)
Who's the fellow wearing the jeans tho?
Cybin,
Can nevar resist
Quote from: SillyCybin on April 24, 2007, 04:32:54 PMQuote from: Payne on April 24, 2007, 04:26:13 PM
As a handle for one on one conversation with someone though, I think it's handy to have the Matrix, though obviously, you couldn't rely on that alone.
That's where I rest my case. Matrix - massive plus. Gives a useful meme to describe complicated metaphysic. This is the most any film, work of art or ideological movement will ever accomplish.
exactly. this is what i was tyring to say. no more no less.
Quote000 was talking about using the Matrix as a shorthand to explain BIP principles.
I feel that the Matrix doesn't do this.
as Payne said, you can't rely on that alone. it just
partly serves as a useful shorthand for
part of the story. you cannot explain all of the BIP ideas with the Matrix (that wouldn't work, because some points of the BIP simply aren't in there), and you need to leave bits of the movie out (because they're bullshit or don't help with bringing the point across, or even oppose it).
but
certain parts of the movie can serve as a useful illustration to
certain parts of the BIP principles.
that's all i wanted to say.
i hope i cleared it up with that. it wasn't much i was trying to say :)
Of course, certain parts of nearly everything can elucidate certain points of nearly everything else, depending how vague and specific you want to get. And if you have to remove much of it from the context, then I would question its overall utility.
It seems that the process of explaining exactly which points of the movie to hold onto, and which to reject, would take about as long, or even longer, than explaining the BIP points themselves.
okay.
in my experience, it has been a useful shorthand for explaining people this kind of stuff. and as far as i could tell they were able to visualize from a few pointers and the phrase "kind of like in the matrix" the concept of "fully immersive VR, appearing so real, you wouldn't even realize it wasn't" without confusing it with robotic squid, kung fu, red pills, blue pills and most of them didn't even bring the "your mind only makes it real/there is no spoon/what if we could hack reality just like neo" dreams into it.
but perhaps i only pick the "easy" crowd.
matrix takes the point you'd like to make and turns it into a fucked up twisted trip into solipsism when mixed with the feeble mental framework and emotional instability that you'll find in close to 99.3% of the populace.
therefore, matrix=fail.
or, at least when I talk about snapping out of the bullshit world you're living in, I am not telling them EVERYTHING IS FAKE AND YUO ARE CARDBOARD SO MAKE LIKE SCISSORS AND CUT IT OUT ALREADY.
no.
I mean, the bullshit world they live in is the arbitrary social order superimposed on the physical world you're actually in (which is quite real, just ask anybody who jumped out of the WTC). That social order is the bullshit, and "dropping out" or "waking up" is not a fundamental change in the way you perceive your reality, as the uninitiated might expect if you were coming at them from the Matrix angle.
It's like the first time i smoked pot. I kept waiting for all the flashy colors and shit you see on TV when somebody smokes pot, and when I found out the 'head change' was just a mushy feeling more like being in the depths of a bad flu than that, it was anticlimactic.
:mittens:
QuoteIt's like the first time i smoked pot. I kept waiting for all the flashy colors and shit you see on TV when somebody smokes pot, and when I found out the 'head change' was just a mushy feeling more like being in the depths of a bad flu than that, it was anticlimactic.
:potd:
LMNO
-still gets high sometimes, however.
You can imagine my surprise the first time I tripped on shrooms. Especially considering I'd taken them a few times before I actually tripped out on em. :lulz:
Were you surprised because it didn't look like this?
(http://www.albany.net/~genxtv/puf3.gif)
(http://www.boingboing.net/Picture%205-7.jpg)
Or because it did?
Thats how all South American TV looks like, even the fucking period dramas and thrillers. Its how the streets look too, after taking Ayahuasca.
Heh, how'd that work out for you?
Not that great. Having the shits while in a desert, and while backpacking in general are not that fantastic.
I've always wondered - how do you pronounce "Ayahuasca"?
If you care to talk about it, I'd be very interested in hearing more about all that
ah jah wa ska
I'm still not sure. They used the nickname, La Purga (meaning: "you're gonna have the shits bad, boyo"). I was going to cover it in my Peru series in Literate Chaotic, but I will say one thing, don't believe the hype. No deep spiritual experiences, no visions of the future or anything like that at all.
Well, like LSD, don't you have to be mentally prepped for it?
Yeah. The shamans and like do a lot of ceremonies, dancing around and chanting and stuff while it takes effect, IIRC. And actually have the beliefs to shape the ideas more. Being an agnostic like I am, I'm pretty much not going to interpret anything without a degree of doubt, making a self-sustaining loop feeding off my belief impossible.
Quote from: Cain on April 27, 2007, 06:36:12 PM
Yeah. The shamans and like do a lot of ceremonies, dancing around and chanting and stuff while it takes effect, IIRC. And actually have the beliefs to shape the ideas more. Being an agnostic like I am, I'm pretty much not going to interpret anything without a degree of doubt, making a self-sustaining loop feeding off my belief impossible.
So do the shamans have deep spiritual experiences, visions of the future, that sort of stuff?
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on April 27, 2007, 06:40:32 PM
Quote from: Cain on April 27, 2007, 06:36:12 PM
Yeah. The shamans and like do a lot of ceremonies, dancing around and chanting and stuff while it takes effect, IIRC. And actually have the beliefs to shape the ideas more. Being an agnostic like I am, I'm pretty much not going to interpret anything without a degree of doubt, making a self-sustaining loop feeding off my belief impossible.
So do the shamans have deep spiritual experiences, visions of the future, that sort of stuff?
Apparently. Santo Daime was founded after a vision using it. And other people have had spiritual experiences of a sort similar to some LSD users.
Quote from: Cain on April 27, 2007, 06:02:00 PM
I'm still not sure. They used the nickname, La Purga (meaning: "you're gonna have the shits bad, boyo"). I was going to cover it in my Peru series in Literate Chaotic, but I will say one thing, don't believe the hype. No deep spiritual experiences, no visions of the future or anything like that at all.
This just shows once again that a large portion of what you percieve depends upon what you believe.
Oh, I thought I saw a UFO that night too. But it was near Nazca, and there are a lot of bad pilots around there, supplementing their living off tourists by "other means", shall we say?
Quote from: Cain on April 27, 2007, 06:46:45 PM
Oh, I thought I saw a UFO that night too. But it was near Nazca, and there are a lot of bad pilots around there, supplementing their living off tourists by "other means", shall we say?
Ah yeah, abduction and probing. Supplemented my income like that for a while.
:lol:
Quote from: LMNO on April 27, 2007, 06:31:10 PM
Well, like LSD, don't you have to be mentally prepped for it?
Surely acid is much funnier if you're not?
It depends.
What if you prepped yourself for 100% pure LAIL?
I guess the question is academic anyroad. Whether you're psyched up or not, that first trip is prolly gonna catch you unawares :lulz:
Quote from: SillyCybin on April 27, 2007, 11:14:15 PM
I guess the question is academic anyroad. Whether you're psyched up or not, that first trip is prolly gonna catch you unawares :lulz:
fact: my first trip was boring. but it wasn't shitty acid, because it was also my friend's first trip and he:
> Vanished from the living room sometime between 10pm and 3am
> Got swallowed by a tree
> Got spat out on a football field at the other end of town
> Was picked up by the police at the Post Office around 4am while dumping out garbage cans and catching the contents on fire
I put the moon in my stomach for a split-second. Took me like 10 minutes to get it there.
Quote from: rzasthole on April 28, 2007, 05:41:19 PM
I put the moon in my stomach for a split-second. Took me like 10 minutes to get it there.
This is the correct acid story :mittens:
www.johnhorgan.org
Check out 'rational mysticism'.
Really interesting book, lots of discussion of DMT, Ayahuasca, 'mystical states' (so called) from a scientific perspective with a wide range of opinions. Might be useful to people with BIP thoughts. Definitely more useful than watching the friggin' Matrix again.
Actually, the Matrix can work. But only if you apply it specifically, to culture, as a phenomenon. And they were beaten to the punch thirty five years ago, by Debord and Vangiem. And it took three films to make that point.
Once again, PKD pwns all.
Quote from: SillyCybin on April 27, 2007, 08:24:51 PM
Quote from: LMNO on April 27, 2007, 06:31:10 PM
Well, like LSD, don't you have to be mentally prepped for it?
Surely acid is much funnier if you're not?
I wasn't mentally prepped and I was fine when I did it. I was much younger, but I imagine what sort of person you are is a factor too.
Quote from: Mangrove on April 30, 2007, 04:18:56 PM
www.johnhorgan.org
Check out 'rational mysticism'.
Really interesting book, lots of discussion of DMT, Ayahuasca, 'mystical states' (so called) from a scientific perspective with a wide range of opinions. Might be useful to people with BIP thoughts. Definitely more useful than watching the friggin' Matrix again.
He shares the exact same name of my Terrorism Studies professor.
Quote from: Ten Ton Mantis on April 30, 2007, 04:54:15 PM
Quote from: SillyCybin on April 27, 2007, 08:24:51 PM
Quote from: LMNO on April 27, 2007, 06:31:10 PM
Well, like LSD, don't you have to be mentally prepped for it?
Surely acid is much funnier if you're not?
I wasn't mentally prepped and I was fine when I did it. I was much younger, but I imagine what sort of person you are is a factor too.
I've just started 'DMT The Spirit Molecule' by Rick Strassman. In relation to taking psychedelics, he talks about 'Set', 'Setting' and 'the drug itself'.
Basically: Set is 'you', setting is the context or situation in which you take the drug, including the people you're hanging out with and then obviously, the effects of whatever it is you're taking. He feels that the outcome of any trip is a mixture of the above.
He gives examples along the lines that, if you're taking LSD as part of a controlled lab experiment, do you feel different than someone who is taking it in a crappy apartment? If you think LSD is only good for treating psychotics, you may feel differently about it to someone who believes it's useful for accessing spiritual states.
If you are an LSD researcher, are you a 'scientist' or a 'shaman'? etc.
Mang: please cross reference with Dr Leary's "MindsSet, Setting and Dosage" instructions from early in the day.
Leary was a smart guy, before he became famous.
Quote from: LMNO on April 30, 2007, 05:09:17 PM
Mang: please cross reference with Dr Leary's "MindsSet, Setting and Dosage" instructions from early in the day.
Leary was a smart guy, before he became famous.
will do.
rick strassman kind of blames leary for the sudden demise in psychedelic research in 1970.
Quote from: Mangrove on April 30, 2007, 05:05:15 PM
I've just started 'DMT The Spirit Molecule' by Rick Strassman. In relation to taking psychedelics, he talks about 'Set', 'Setting' and 'the drug itself'.
Basically: Set is 'you', setting is the context or situation in which you take the drug, including the people you're hanging out with and then obviously, the effects of whatever it is you're taking. He feels that the outcome of any trip is a mixture of the above.
He gives examples along the lines that, if you're taking LSD as part of a controlled lab experiment, do you feel different than someone who is taking it in a crappy apartment? If you think LSD is only good for treating psychotics, you may feel differently about it to someone who believes it's useful for accessing spiritual states.
If you are an LSD researcher, are you a 'scientist' or a 'shaman'? etc.
Give us a book report on The Spirit Molecule when you're done.
I was always fascinated by the subjective nature of drug experience. Like some people use LSD and psychedelics as a gateway to self discovery. Others use it to giggle at silly things for six hours at a time. Some people can have sex while tripping, some cannot. I find that even the length of the trip is heavily influenced by social context and expectations. (it's hard to tell when you're finally
down, you know?)
I get frustrated because I have one friend, who used to trip quite often, and is insistent that its delusional idolatry to think about a drug trip as a path to illumination. Well sure man, that's true for
you.
The scientist / shaman question is a good one. I think that scientists and shamans have similar societal roles, (creating a framework for reality, sort of) so I guess it depends on which societal sect they're participating in.
Prof Cram - i think you would like the horgan book.
the postmodernist's take on psychedelics is: 'you're not experiencing god....you're just experiencing a drug'.
ok...when i'm done with the DMT book, i'll give an overview.
Quote from: Mangrove on April 30, 2007, 05:16:28 PM
Quote from: LMNO on April 30, 2007, 05:09:17 PM
Mang: please cross reference with Dr Leary's "MindsSet, Setting and Dosage" instructions from early in the day.
Leary was a smart guy, before he became famous.
will do.
rick strassman kind of blames leary for the sudden demise in psychedelic research in 1970.
Well, he
sort of did, but he was kind of railroaded when he testified before congress about LSD. He said that it should be regulated by medical professionals as a prescription drug/treatment, but it was blown out of proportion as him saying it was dangerous.
And then he sort of went off the rails with Alan Watts and Ken Kesey.
Quote from: LMNO on April 30, 2007, 05:22:38 PM
Quote from: Mangrove on April 30, 2007, 05:16:28 PM
Quote from: LMNO on April 30, 2007, 05:09:17 PM
Mang: please cross reference with Dr Leary's "MindsSet, Setting and Dosage" instructions from early in the day.
Leary was a smart guy, before he became famous.
will do.
rick strassman kind of blames leary for the sudden demise in psychedelic research in 1970.
Well, he sort of did, but he was kind of railroaded when he testified before congress about LSD. He said that it should be regulated by medical professionals as a prescription drug/treatment, but it was blown out of proportion as him saying it was dangerous.
And then he sort of went off the rails with Alan Watts and Ken Kesey.
gotcha. strassman said that psychedelic research (esp. DMT) underwent a rapid and warped evolution that went:
Hey, this is an extraordinary insight into consciousness ----> Oohh Groovy trips, man ---> OMG LSD WILL KILL US ALL ----> Banninated (1970) ----> Bye Bye Research.
Yeah, that's how I learned the history, too.
i'm finally reading up on psychedelics, having ignored it for years.
Wait until you get to the bit where you read the people's narratives about their experiences, there's some pretty awesome stories in there. I also like his theory about a release of DMT in the brain as an explaination for UFO abduction experiences.
Quote from: cyberus on April 30, 2007, 06:40:34 PM
Wait until you get to the bit where you read the people's narratives about their experiences, there's some pretty awesome stories in there. I also like his theory about a release of DMT in the brain as an explaination for UFO abduction experiences.
I'd always seen sleep paralysis as the suggestion for that. Having suffered it myself once, I can totally understand why people would think of abduction after it.
Quote from: Cain on April 30, 2007, 06:44:18 PM
Quote from: cyberus on April 30, 2007, 06:40:34 PM
Wait until you get to the bit where you read the people's narratives about their experiences, there's some pretty awesome stories in there. I also like his theory about a release of DMT in the brain as an explaination for UFO abduction experiences.
I'd always seen sleep paralysis as the suggestion for that. Having suffered it myself once, I can totally understand why people would think of abduction after it.
Yeah, sleep paralysis is no fun. Happened to me once as well, along with a hypnogogic hallucination. I was frozen in my bed, and there was a very sinister looking vitorian era dressed man, with a gigantic tophat standing over me. I still get gooseflesh thinking about it.
Strassman has a whole chapter of that book devoted to people's stories about their DMT experience being a (literal) trip to meet super-intelligent beings. Sometimes experiments were performed, sometimes knowledge was shared, but all the stories had a similar description of the events, and they were akin to the generic UFO abduction story.
Bump.
I know there was some recent discussion in links about this again, and I found this link, which I thought was quite interesting and made a number of good points. I'll split the links discussion into here, if any of you want me to.
http://www.ubishops.ca/baudrillardstudies/vol1_2/genosko.htm
The salient points of the discussion:
They took the hypothesis of the virtual for an irrefutable fact and transformed it into a visible phantasm. But it is precisely that we can no longer employ categories of the real in order to discuss the characteristics of the virtual.
There have been other films that treat the growing indistinction between the real and the virtual: The Truman Show, Minority Report, or even Mulholland Drive, the masterpiece of David Lynch. The Matrix,Äôs value is chiefly as a synthesis of all that. But there the set-up is cruder and does not truly evoke the problem....
The most embarrassing part of the film is that the new problem posed by simulation is confused with its classical, Platonic treatment....
What we have invented, in order to support this suffering, is a simulated real, which henceforth supplants the real and is its final solution, a virtual universe from which everything dangerous and negative has been expelled. And The Matrix is undeniably part of that. Everything belonging to the order of dream, utopia and phantasm is given expression, ,Äúrealized.,Äù
What is notable about Matrix Reloaded is the absence of a glimmer of irony that would allow viewers to turn this gigantic special effect on its head. There is no sequence which would be the punctum about which Roland Barthes wrote, this striking mark that brings you face-to-face with a true image.
The Matrix paints the picture of a monopolistic superpower, like we see today, and then collaborates in its refraction. Basically, its dissemination on a world scale is complicit with the film itself. On this point it is worth recalling Marshall McLuhan: the medium is the message. The message of The Matrix is its own diffusion by an uncontrollable and proliferating contamination.
That is exactly what makes our times so oppressive. The system produces a negativity in trompe-l,Äôoeil, which is integrated into products of the spectacle just as obsolescence is built into industrial products. It is the most efficient way of incorporating all genuine alternatives. There are no longer external Omega points or any antagonistic means available in order to analyze the world; there is nothing more than a fascinated adhesion. One must understand, however, that the more a system nears perfection, the more it approaches the total accident.
Fuckin' philosophers...
Good points all around, though.
My favorite quote on the link in Cain's post above:
Nouvel Observateur: It is rather shocking to see that, henceforth, all American marketing successes, from The Matrix to Madonna,Äôs new album, are presented as critiques of the system which massively promotes them.
It just speaks to the irony of mass marketing and how the hypocrisy reeks when an inconoclastic movement is borne of and promoted by the very system that produced it.
Quote from: Cain on May 17, 2007, 05:00:41 PMWhat is notable about Matrix Reloaded is the absence of a glimmer of irony that would allow viewers to turn this gigantic special effect on its head. There is no sequence which would be the punctum about which Roland Barthes wrote, this striking mark that brings you face-to-face with a true image.
i don't get it, what should this glimmer of irony have been?
also: HOLY THESAURUS BATMAN THOSE ARE A LOT OF BIG WORDS
I believe the preferred irony would be the discovery that no, actually, the flying around in spaceships and being robotic batteries was the false existence. Possibly a metaphor for religion?
The matrix is real....It is Zion that is the illusion.
oh and
Hook yourself up to the Matrix.
from teh hosrie's mouth:
http://www.rickstrassman.com/
Quote from: DaMan on April 23, 2007, 05:07:20 PM
:lulz:
how about that what do you think the correct formula of energy is?
forget it energie =a mixture of ying and yang
energy is one the one side you put energy into it and other the other side you chill
if you want to be successful in dating ugly girls you gotta flash them you gotta scare them they gotta scream i don't know with what and then you gotta relax
every girl that is fascinated by you or your intelligence and somehow weird looking guy is going to come if you wait on that
This is the Kind of Shit We Have to Put Up With Department.