You've all heard me talk about the Dread God Finagle ("If anything
can go wrong, it
will.") and his Mad Prophet Murphy ("If there are two ways of doing things, and one of those ways will obviously lead to disaster, someone
will do it that way."), but there's another being that we need to consider: Crazy Eddie.
First described by Jerry Pournelle in
The Mote in God's Eye, Crazy Eddie can be described as a person who does precisely the most damaging action possible, with the best of motives. Not terrorism or outright sabotage, but rather an hideously inappropriate response to the problem at hand. An example given by Pournelle follows:
QuoteSay there's a city that's gotten so big that all efforts of everyone have to be directed towards importing food and sanitation. There are no resources left for anything else, and all man hours are required to keep the city alive. Crazy Eddie chooses this moment to lead a strike of garbage workers, demanding better working conditions.
We've all met Crazy Eddie, of course. Note that he is different from Finagle, who says the universe will do the worst possible thing...But he's also related, as Finagle says also that "perversity tends to a maximum". He's also different from Murphy, who says that people will find disasterous methods of doing the
right thing for the occasion.
So the heirarchy would run:
Level 1: Eris. She runs all this shit. Includes duties other than dealing with Finagle, but not relevant to this discussion.
Level 2: Finagle. Higher level description of idiocy and bad luck.
Level 3. Murphy (people will do the correct
thing, but fuck it up) and Crazy Eddie (people will do horribly incorrect things with nothing but good intentions, succeeding brilliantly in a way that guarantees disaster.).
Thoughts?
What is the relationship between Crazy Eddie and the bureaucratic ethos that process must be followed? I.e is the Crazy Eddie head of a union who notes that the prerequisites for strike are already there - and doesn't have the stomach to not strike, or is he a random guy with a sudden flash of inspiration?
Quote from: Captain Utopia on February 21, 2011, 06:49:05 PM
What is the relationship between Crazy Eddie and the bureaucratic ethos that process must be followed? I.e is the Crazy Eddie head of a union who notes that the prerequisites for strike are already there - and doesn't have the stomach to not strike, or is he a random guy with a sudden flash of inspiration?
It's the second one. The world is full of cowards, but while divinely inspired idiots are also pretty thick on the ground, they are a different issue.
Examples -
Finagle's 1st law, "If anything CAN go wrong, it WILL go wrong.":
1. The Big Blue Crane disaster (maximum lift, maximum winds, eventually the factors will fall in place just right, and the fucking thing goes over.)
2. The Titanic disaster (Shitty steel, ice cube tray compartmentalization, no life boat drills, one fucking iceberg in just the right spot, spotted and reacted to at exactly the WRONG moment.)
Finagle's 2d law, "Perversity tends to a maximum." (meaning people will MOST OFTEN act against their own interests):
1. Working class teabaggers demanding a 23% consumption tax to make things easier on the mega-rich.
2. Conservative women decrying abortion even in cases when the mother's life is in danger.
Murphy's Law, "If there are two ways to do something, and one way will lead to disaster, someone will do it that way.":
1. The Challenger disaster. If the booster was shipped by barge, no o-ring and inherent weakness in the booster. If shipped by rail, it has to be shipped in two pieces, requiring the o-ring/weakness. They shipped by rail.
2. The NRC's decision on Yucca Mountain. Let's see...Drop the shit down a borehole, or put it in barrels in an aquifer on a fault line? Guess which one they decided on?
Crazy Eddie:
1. Arizona is strapped for cash. The obvious thing to do is write a shitload of bad legislation that will lose in court, after a hundred million or so in court costs.
2. The PTL in the 80s. Every preacher involved was a pervert, but Jimmy Swaggart decided to try to take out his chief ratings-rivals by exposing their excesses (Gormann and Bakker), bringing media attention on all of them, while he continued visiting a prostitute, and trying to get her 12 year old daughter involved...Leading to HIS being outed on TV. This actually worked out for him (blubbering apology on TV ---> revenues up 300%), but that was due to an heroic effort by Swaggart's PR geek, not Swaggart's actions...And even then, the long run effect was the end of the PTL's political power.
My name is Cramulus and I support this addition to the Pantheon.
+1
Quote from: Cramulus on February 21, 2011, 07:20:13 PM
My name is Cramulus and I support this addition to the Pantheon.
As do I.
This should be remembered and brought up again the next time we put together a Discordian publication.
Poisoning/destroying a major metropolitan area's water supply would be caused by whom?
Quote from: Canis latrans eques on February 21, 2011, 11:31:28 PM
Poisoning/destroying a major metropolitan area's water supply would be caused by whom?
Depends on the situation. Was it intentional, caused by stupidity, or as an unintentional side effect of a process?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 22, 2011, 12:18:44 AM
Quote from: Canis latrans eques on February 21, 2011, 11:31:28 PM
Poisoning/destroying a major metropolitan area's water supply would be caused by whom?
Depends on the situation. Was it intentional, caused by stupidity, or as an unintentional side effect of a process?
Intentional, so as to drastically reduce a local population and thus reduce their impact on a larger region.
Quote from: Canis latrans eques on February 22, 2011, 12:26:53 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 22, 2011, 12:18:44 AM
Quote from: Canis latrans eques on February 21, 2011, 11:31:28 PM
Poisoning/destroying a major metropolitan area's water supply would be caused by whom?
Depends on the situation. Was it intentional, caused by stupidity, or as an unintentional side effect of a process?
Intentional, so as to drastically reduce a local population and thus reduce their impact on a larger region.
Oh, that's what we call a "psychotic".