(http://www.gliffy.com/pubdoc/1238439/L.jpg)
Question: What exactly is exploding?
Let me know if I've taken the metaphor too far.
I don't know. I'm playing with this shrapnel idea. The idea of things coming at you from different directions, angles, etc. Maybe the explosion isn't necessary.
I was thinking sort of like a roadside bomb on your path to thinking for yourself.
that makes sense. Of course I envisioned the same complaint with "bombs" and "shrapnel" as with "Black" and "prison" so I had to put an asterisk on there. Being the paranoid cynic that I am.
I liked the turn of phrase you used.
Well, as I read through this all,, the sense that I had was that some of these things are concepts that you (or others) throw out from themselves, as if they were the explosion. Other concepts intrude themselves on you, shrapnel from others explosions.
For example if someone was a Sexual/American Dreamist/Attention Whore (be known) they would be throwing these concepts out, like shards of a total concept of themselves (which only they can know)
But they would also be hit by shrapnel by those who were throwing out the concepts of Religion/Belonging/Family, which were "exploded out" by people who consider these values to be the most important parts of their own total concept.
Shrapnel is a good name for it IMO, but perhaps if we consider it as a perspective of a continual explosion of each and every one of us, at all times, pulling and pushing, impacting and re-acting, we can think of a bigger picture of what it means.
For the record this was all me. And these were concepts that jumped out at me. I kept asking myself the question, "What is it that's coming at me?" I thought of it in terms of things that affect how I think, behave, etc. I put the disclaimer and bit at the bottom because I know it's not all encompassing. I know there are things that I didn't think of that would be obvious to someone else. And you're right, the perspective should be that it is a continual explosion. There's probably a better way to visualize this so I'm definitely open to suggestions.
I think the key is the ricochet effect, shrapnel causes other explosions, it's a fkin chain reaction meme cloud, all banging off each other and nobody escapes unscathed.
I think the explosion in the center should be one's perspective, and all the shrapnel should be imploding towards it.
Well, part of my view on it is that it should be both exploding and imploding, the arrow pointing both ways.
To demonstrate the shrapnel we receive and the shrapnel we create.
Where shrapnel=concept or facet of identity, at least.
It aslo picks up on SC's post about it being a chain reaction of a sort.
I think of this in terms of the sun which is continual nuclear activity, made possible by the mass and composition of that particular star. It's one fuckin HUGE chain reaction, and it's been occuring for millions of years.
In our more social construst, the mass of people and the different concepts we find most important (our composition, if you will) are feuling a similar chain reaction, though our end product isn't light and heat, and is more undefineable, I can see certain paralells in this comparison.
The shrapnel we create is bullshit, the shrapnel hitting us is all the objects in the OP.
also it is worth exploring the notion of being HIT by shrapnel in a place where there is a bunch of things blowing up
-- not getting hit directly by the explosion - but catching a shard of debris in your guts
you dont directly cause the malaise of others - but they take it out on everybody
Well the shrapnel hitting us is bullshit. These are social urges for the most part (the concepts in the OP), and are individual urges writ large.
Where is the dividing line between bullshit and shrapnel?
How many people need to espouse a particular philosophy before it stops being individual bullshit and becomes a societal urge (what we are terming shrapnel, just now)?
This has already been attempted to quantify in recent days, thanks to LHX's efforts, but we haven't really come up with any real definitive answer, because ultimately, we have to make that decision on our own, as free thinkers.
The cabbages only need to hear one "cool" person espouse a particular facet of individual bullshit for it to become shrapnel, for us (generally, I have to admit) it has to pass a number of tests, passing our scrutiny intellectually.
I should point out it was not my intent that the bits of shrapnel be interpreted solely in a negative or deleterious fashion. That's why I added the disclaimer. Because one could argue how some of these aspects can have positive impacts on how one chooses and then walks their path. Education being the first that comes to mind. Using myself as an example, if it wasn't for the education I wouldn't be where I am today. Education exposed me to skills and impacted traits so that I could do the job I am doing today in the capacity I'm performing it. The idea of getting an education and how it could impact my path was also a positive influence. By that same token, sure, it could be a negative. An overbearing parent (The Family bit of shrapnel) could strong-arm a child into college to strengthen the image of the family name. The kid gets into something he really doesn't want to and thus gets lost for a duration of time to be determined.
So anyway, yeah there's good and bad with this.
i was thinking of shrapnel sort of as the response to the 'it doesnt involve me' mentality
sure everything may seem sweet for the time being
and sure people may not directly cause any of the foul shit going on
but
theres no telling when shit gets set off and people find themself caught in the crossfire
that shit stings like a motherfucker
i find it less acceptable to get dented by other peoples bullshit than to get caught outside in a rainstorm
and by bullshit - i mean other peoples decision making process resulting in (unnecessary) negative repercussions
this whole thing is along the lines 'if you dont come to america, america will come to YUO' mentality
id love to not be discussing these things
but the landscape suggests that these things need to be taken care of
unless people enjoy getting unnecessarily dismembered for no apparent reason
We need flak jackets for when we're riding our motorcycles,
The Flak Iron Prison.
The best armor is contempt for things like that.
contempt
hmm
interesting
contempt for what exactly?
having been made vulnerable in the first place?
or for being killed inadvertently by our own species?
Situational contempt. It's always more contemptible if you look at the situation you're in right now.
Contempt for shrapnel would seem the best blanket statement though.
yes
i can get on board with that
actually
i like it
Let the joyous news be spread
the wicked bullshit at last is dead.
quick reference -
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=11402.0 -- 'the best map'
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=11953.0 -- 'posters here have something in common'
Quote from: LMNO on June 05, 2007, 07:07:38 PMQuestion: What exactly is exploding?
Let me know if I've taken the metaphor too far.
[SSOOKN mode]
1. kether -> what exactly is - exploding
(leading to)2. chokmah -> explosion
(leading to)3. binah -> shrapnel + BIP
(leading to)4. chesed -> what are you going to do with/about it, ideas
(leading to)5. geburah -> HIMEOBS FOR GREAT JUSTICE (among other things)
[/SSOOKN]
Hit me (5) if you think i oughta shut up with that kblh stuff
Are you just using it as a structural element, or can you actually relate some of the other aspects? The only one I could really see is Kether, and even that I have doubts on.
Not enough coffee yet. This is making my head all swishy and stuff.
Quote from: LMNO on June 06, 2007, 01:12:55 PM
Are you just using it as a structural element, or can you actually relate some of the other aspects? The only one I could really see is Kether, and even that I have doubts on.
it was mostly the explosion (unguided force) in 2 followed by the rigidness in 3 that prompted me to it.
on the other hand it's such a structual element because this is a type of pattern seems to occur everywhere. maybe it's my own law of fives :)
Relate it to the pentacle, and see if you can make the points connect in any sort of meaningful way.
mmmyeah maybe get back on subject instead, and skip the occult correspondences (which i'm not that good at anyway)
so let's see, SHRAPNEL
first, some trigger happens, like a human coming into existence, gaining consciousness, or perhaps a society of human beings getting together and start doing all kinds of creative stuff, just to see what happens. some things don't work, some thing do work, the whole mess starts gaining momentum, spinning around itself, faster and faster while the things that don't work stand still and it's only a matter of time before the one smashes into the other and all bits fly off in all directions (SHRAPNEL!) hitting people and other elements of the system in their guts (or more appropriate parts, like bureaucratic logistics and waiting lists) and then people think they just need to screw the things that don't move (work) tighter so they won't fly off next time around, but in the end that means the things that do move (the creative spinning bits) will get jammed.
but the shrapnel. these are the side-effects of doing your thing. or their thing. it's like debris that you cannot avoid because people everywhere are doing their thing. but it works both ways, on the one hand the grays are getting in your way, and on the other you are in the way of the grays.
that's my thoughts on the subject so far.
Shrapnel - You're sitting in your favourite spot, chilling out and watching the sun go down when all of a sudden you:
a) Suddenly realise that you are being bombarded by millions of really stupid memes, some of which are affecting you quite deeply.
b) Catch a stray bullet in the nads from a nearby gangfight/legitimate imperial invasion
c) Are burned at the stake for having a beard
Quote from: SillyCybin on June 06, 2007, 04:20:49 PM
Shrapnel - You're sitting in your favourite spot, chilling out and watching the sun go down when all of a sudden you:
a) Suddenly realise that you are being bombarded by millions of really stupid memes, some of which are affecting you quite deeply.
b) Catch a stray bullet in the nads from a nearby gangfight/legitimate imperial invasion
c) Are burned at the stake for having a beard
11/10
I need to think about this and come back to this later...needs more brain-churny.
Actions never take place inside a vaccum. Interconnected, multilayered systems lie on top of each other, inteconnecting only otherwise tangenitally related objects.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systems_theory
Of course, the Holy Grail of Systems Theory is the interconnected central node that is the nexus point for the majority (possibly plurality) of the systems necessary for daily life.
Because, as soon as it was discovered, every resource in the world would be expended to capture, defend and control access to it.
then i would guess this central node does not necessarily really need to exist?
Nope.
:mrgreen:
Although, as more and more systems become interconnected, its existence will become more likely and plausible. Because people never think ahead. They never create contingencies, or see the advantages in a decentralized network. Instead, they route everything through one or two areas because its initially low cost (fault of Anglo-American capitalism, look for immediate high returns) and keeps it under the control of a small elite.
Such a problem could be avoided if the infrastructure were planned in such a way that nodes were so numerous that any collapse of a single, high load node could be compensated for. But that would involve a level of trust and power being imparted on a large number of people. And lets face it, even in liberal democracies, the political and economic leadership are loathe to trust anyone outside of a very select circle.
what you describe here sounds very much like the idea with which the Internet was set up.
if a node gets disabled, it routes around it, pretty much automatically.
Exactly. This sort of thinking was pioneered on cybernetic theory, but is quite applicable to the society/information/material resources analysis too. I used a lot of this stuff in my papers about securing oil lines from terrorist attacks.
but you're saying that because of the way human society works, things are getting more complex, more interconnected, and therefore bigger and bigger / more important / more connected nodes will appear?
do you have any hints and/or ideas on what these nodes would look like, on a practical level?
Yes, basically.
And they will be a number of different things. It depends what you are analyzing. For example, geo-straegically speaking, nodes are sometimes called "choke points". An example is the Straits of Malacca. Whoever holds the Straits in a SE Asian war will have control of what ships pass through.
In the oil industry, the main nodes can be divided between installations and personnel. If a refinery is reliant on a single electric power source, thats a huge node. If there is only a single bridge leading into the port where the oil is exported from, thats a node. On the human side, if the style of leadership is necessary on a lot of top level interfence in decision making, the people involved in that are large nodes.
In fact, generally speaking, the more interconnected an individual is with numerous different networks, the more valuable a node they are. Someone like Carlos the Jackal made such a dangerous terrorist not because of his rather extensive skills or depth of his psychopathy, but because he was plugged into so many terrorist and similar social networks, and could call upon a host of allies regardless of if he was in the Sudan or Paris.
Naturally, the flip side is if you identify the nodes, you can often demolish a network very easily. Its a more modern and scientific method of the old saying "strike the shepard and the sheep will scatter".
The explosion could come from land mines we seem to continously step on as we walk the road.