Ego Sickness
(http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a95/discordman/bin/Caravaggio_Narcissus_sm.jpg)
You know how a virus works? It goes into a cell and changes the code so that the cell only produces more virii. In a way the virus steals the cell's identity, making it a part of a viral system.
If you ask me, the worst phase of being sick is when you've been sick for so long you forget what it's like to be well. In a way, you've lost a bit of yourself and become the virus.
People catch and spread memes like viruses. They're contageous, self-replicating little buggers. Like any virus, their goal is to spread themselves, to become a large, healthy, self-sustaining colony. We have to be careful how we handle memes because at a certain point its difficult to tell the difference between when we're using the memes and when the memes are using us.
This is not to say that memes are harmful diseases. But some of them can be if you get infected, infested, obsessed and invested.
One of the most pervasive and prevalent memes in this modern world is the meme called
I Am. We live in an overpopulated era, floating in a sea of interchangable people. In this ocean our biggest life perserver is a sense of individuality - the notion that each and every one of us is unique, distinct. One wants to say "I am not the crowd. I am not the group. I am not just another cog in the machine."
We jump through personal hoops to distinguish ourselves from the others. We customize our identities so as to retain a sense of self, a buoy bobbing in the tide of the collective.
But this ego meme can become a disease. In moderation, it helps us understand ourselves. In excess, we define ourselves. In time, these definitions become rigid, inflexible.
Consider, for example, the "C student". In his attempt to understand himself, he internalizes "
I am a C student." Armed with that identity he has no drive to do better. He accepts "who he is".
Or consider the average voter. He identifies with a political party and probably agrees with them about many things. The party tells him which sides of any given issues to support - no need to think for oneself there!
It can be a sickness.
The Machine, of course, is programmed to capitalize on this sickness. There are a variety of memes available to customize your identity. What color iPod do you want? Which TV shows are YOUR TV shows? What brand of cologne smells like YOU?
I am not suggesting that people abandon their sense of self. But I do think that people get addicted to self-definition and it leads to inflexibility.
Quote from: Journey to Ixtlan, Carlos Castenada
(Don Juan speaking to Castaneda) "Your father knows everything about you", he said. "So he has you all figured out. He knows who you are and what you do, and there is no power on earth that can make him change his mind about you". Don Juan said that everybody that knew me had an idea about me, and that I kept feeding the idea with everything I did. "Don't you see ?", he asked dramatically. "You must renew your personal history by telling your parents, your relatives, and your friends everything you do. On the other hand, if you have no personal history, no explanations are needed; nobody is angry or disillusioned with your acts. And above all no one pins you down with their thoughts.".
(...) "But that's absurd", I protested. "Why shouldn't people know me ? What's wrong with that ?"; "What's wrong is that once they know you, you are an affair taken for granted and from that moment on you won't be able to break the tie of their thoughts. I personally like the ultimate freedom of being unknown. No one knows me with steadfast certainty, the way people know you, for instance". "But that would be lying". "I'm not concerned with lies or truths", he said severely. "Lies are lies only if you have personal history".
Quote from: Don Juan, speaking to Castaneda"You see", he went on, "we only have two alternatives; we either take everything for sure and real, or we don't. If we follow the first, we end up bored to death with ourselves and with the world. If we follow the second and erase personal history, we create a fog around us, a very exciting and mysterious state in which nobody knows where the rabbit will pop out, not even ourselves."
We,Äôre hand in hand in Aftermath
the age of what will be
Horizon smoke is rising
from the wreckage that is We
And in the smoke what shapes will form?
What phantoms will we make?
For we are made of form and formula
but also dross mistake
-from Hand in Hand in Aftermath
I like this.
Does the "I am not" meme have to be inextricably linked to the "I am" though? And where do you think conflicting identities come into it? For example, "I am an enviromentaly concious person, but I am not willing to get taxed to fuck for it, so I'll vote Republican" (a common train of thought, I understand).
If the conflict between these identities is not resolved so that they can both be true, at least for that individual, where does this leave us?
Personally, I think that the more unresolved conflicting identities a person has, the more likely they are to question things, if only because they won't have answers handed to them. The fewer the conflicts, the more likely the individual is to duck his/her head and conform to a "social norm".
Well, that's just a bit of sparking in my brain, from running up against your article, and is probably a bit off track. Stemming mostly from my association of Ego and Identity.
Destroy ego!
Very important.
After destruction ego is rebuilt as a vehicle.
Before destruction you are a passenger.
HERE SIR I GOT YUO THESE MITTENS :mittens:
For the "I am" meme, people do lock themselves into these preconceived notions, just as they lock other people into them. Like in those quotes. I'm currently standing by while the relationship of two of my good friends falls apart. Part of the reason it's going all to hell is because of what one of the people identifies as their "I AM" and "NOW I am" versus how they see the other person as "they are." (Did that make sense? I think it did.) Even between two people who have been very close for a very long time, we still run into the trappings of people being stuck in this preconceived "i am/he is/she is" sort of situation without considering the possibility of flux. In my mind, that is the worst part of the "I am" meme: it tends to become incredibly concrete and modifying it can become an impossibly daunting task.
As for group identity vs. individuality--we want to be unique, but we also want to have a place to fit in. Humans are social, herd animals, as it were. So they all collect into their groups and set rules about how to have acceptance/belonging. So people want to make sure that they ascribe to those rules and that "I am [insert group trend here.]"
The "I am NOT" seems to come in more when peope want to differentiate themselves from something negative. Such as "I am NOT a racist/scientologist/pedo/etc!" It's once again group identity, but this time in the negative. You want to make sure no one mistakes you for ONE OF THEM.
The problem with "I am" is that it is so binary and so concrete, as already discussed. Try telling someone "I'm sort of ____" and you'll find that the "sort of" or "sometimes" or what-have-you tends to disappear and you become concretely _____. I do not consider myself aligned with any political party, yet it's impossible to try to have a discussion about politics with anyone without this coming up and the other person insisting on subscribing me to a party. We resort to "am/am not" because it makes things easier to organize and think about. Thus, it must be a simple yes/no binary, and it must be incredibly concrete. By making it constant, it becomes easier to work with.
People should not be constant. Not that constant, not that binary.
Quote from: Darth Cupcake on June 07, 2007, 04:16:42 PM
HERE SIR I GOT YUO THESE MITTENS :mittens:
For the "I am" meme, people do lock themselves into these preconceived notions, just as they lock other people into them. Like in those quotes. I'm currently standing by while the relationship of two of my good friends falls apart. Part of the reason it's going all to hell is because of what one of the people identifies as their "I AM" and "NOW I am" versus how they see the other person as "they are." (Did that make sense? I think it did.) Even between two people who have been very close for a very long time, we still run into the trappings of people being stuck in this preconceived "i am/he is/she is" sort of situation without considering the possibility of flux. In my mind, that is the worst part of the "I am" meme: it tends to become incredibly concrete and modifying it can become an impossibly daunting task.
As for group identity vs. individuality--we want to be unique, but we also want to have a place to fit in. Humans are social, herd animals, as it were. So they all collect into their groups and set rules about how to have acceptance/belonging. So people want to make sure that they ascribe to those rules and that "I am [insert group trend here.]"
The "I am NOT" seems to come in more when peope want to differentiate themselves from something negative. Such as "I am NOT a racist/scientologist/pedo/etc!" It's once again group identity, but this time in the negative. You want to make sure no one mistakes you for ONE OF THEM.
The problem with "I am" is that it is so binary and so concrete, as already discussed. Try telling someone "I'm sort of ____" and you'll find that the "sort of" or "sometimes" or what-have-you tends to disappear and you become concretely _____. I do not consider myself aligned with any political party, yet it's impossible to try to have a discussion about politics with anyone without this coming up and the other person insisting on subscribing me to a party. We resort to "am/am not" because it makes things easier to organize and think about. Thus, it must be a simple yes/no binary, and it must be incredibly concrete. By making it constant, it becomes easier to work with.
People should not be constant. Not that constant, not that binary.
Loaded with ugly memes :lulz:
http://mihd.net/v2jf3u Poker without Cards
http://mihd.net/vo7fi8 The Selfish Meme
Touche, Cybin, touche.
-DC
pwned :p
Quote from: SillyCybin on June 07, 2007, 04:14:49 PM
Destroy ego!
Very important.
After destruction ego is rebuilt as a vehicle.
Before destruction you are a passenger.
11/10
the pride of the "I am's" is the thing I find hardest when conversing with people. All people have it to an extent, but its intolerable in some. Its what has ruined gamers.
I saw it summed up here best in the random news banner: "please stop trying to convince us how interesting you are" or something to that effect.
as to identifying yourself through different aspects both physically(car etc) and intellectual masturbation(I am, I am, I AM), it is necessary to a degree I think, *I am* incapable of rationalizing anything any more so I primarily go off instinct, for those who would make the rules of civilization, very clear but flexible "I am's" and "we are" is needed, but that might be wrong, it might cut through some moral ambiguity that comes of where the line is drawn in the sand.
Didn't Jung say something about depression being a product of being too high up in your own abstractions?
I think it ties in, but you'd have to think about it to see how...
When I first read the OP, I had a hard time coming to terms with what the problem was with the inflexibility of the notion of self. I think it actually, in essence, goes beyond the notion of self and is instead the inflexibility that is the problem. Lack of pragmatism, lack of ability to see beyond what you've predefined or what has already been defined for you is the real beartrap, I believe.
Sense of self is inborn and then reworked within the system you live with as a child, then as an adult. Not many people know they have a choice to change this when they are old enough to do so. And some have it changed without knowing what really happened--they instead see the bottom falling out of their known-universe and cavil.
Humans, I've come to believe, are truly flexible by nature. But we still cling to what's familiar in order to preserve that flexibility. Constant motion and change are only endurable as long as you can accept the constancy of the motion, if that makes any sense. It's why we label things, find systematic and programmatic answers for what confuses us, and why answers are always sought, no matter how unimportant the question.
When the self is at question, there are so many parts to the self, I think sometimes we forsake one part or many parts in order to preserve the part that seems to bring the most benefit. I know I divide parts of me for different people, and it's rare I'm the whole for any one person. For that reason alone I know I am fairly flexible in the main, and why I can get a lot done or many different things done with smaller effort.
Maybe flexibility is something that is better suited to certain personalities/types of people than others. In fact, I'd posit there are whole societies that solidify their "collective" by devaluing the sense of flexibility in ego/sense of self. Be the same, and see yourself as the same. I don't think my own subculture does this, even though they do impress upon you to take up whatever is the flavor of the day in pop-psych and endgoals, elsewise you are a "loser"...
Mittens, I think I can dig it if I follow correctly.
...yeah, it reads like so much bullshit, don't it? :lol:
As an example of inflexibility of self, please look at what has happened to Paris Hilton.
Talk about a paradigm change. She's in jail, for real, and she simply can't adapt & handle it. She's on the verge of complete mental breakdown.
It's awesome.
Yeah...I sorta had my rantup about that on Sunday in the open bar...
Quote from: LMNO on June 11, 2007, 01:24:26 PM
As an example of inflexibility of self, please look at what has happened to Paris Hilton.
Talk about a paradigm change. She's in jail, for real, and she simply can't adapt & handle it. She's on the verge of complete mental breakdown.
It's awesome.
Thats what happens when you create a permament worldview, without the ability for change within the system.
Thats why belief in chaos is important, to me. Its the constant variable within any calculation that remins you that you may not be totally right. Its a coping mechanism that works, because it forces it bearer to re-examine their ideas and adapt to change.
The chaos meme? Worth thinking about. It could be our poison meme that we were looking for (SillyCybin knows what I mean).
"Every statement contains falsehood" - Crowley
If there was some way to illustrate this 'fact' then reality would fall to pieces for a lot of people.
Quote from: SillyCybin on June 12, 2007, 01:48:30 PM
"Every statement contains falsehood" - Crowley
If there was some way to illustrate this 'fact' then reality would fall to pieces for a lot of people.
Reverse that. Reality falling to pieces for people tends to illustrate that fact. Sometimes, at least. Not always.
At the risk of sounding like an emo kid, in the past three months, huge quantities of my reality have fallen apart. I think that's what made me so particularly receptive to the PD and BIP when Cram first linked them to me. (On the other hand, it's also given me a lot of rage and a tendency to be more of an emo kid than I'd like to be. :oops: ) So long as something is outside of someone's worldview (mine had been, I will admit, horrifically narrow, and probably still is), they can't accept it until their worldview changes. So reality needs to start fraying slightly first.
Actually, nix that, it could definitely easily go both ways. But my point still stands, I think.
That's sort of how I see the one-sentence meme-bombs and the idea of leaving stickers, pamphlets, etc around in public places for people to see: poking little needle holes into others' realities. Poke enough holes, or poke at a point of structural weakness, and the thing will start to fall apart. And then... voila. Beautiful.
Happens to a lot of people. I actually liked the feeling, though. Trick is keeping the momentum going.
Its also a lot easier to do it to someone up close and whose own methods of thinking you already know, in comparison to relative strangers. Which is, to a degree, why I keep trying to tweak O:MF as a concept and bring in other useful theories to help close that gap. Its nowhere near complete, yet.
Quote from: Cain on June 12, 2007, 03:16:58 PM
Happens to a lot of people. I actually liked the feeling, though. Trick is keeping the momentum going.
agreed
and I think the trick there is to convince yourself your a neophile and not a neophobe.
A real-life example-- I just moved to Yonkers. My current living situation is significantly more annoying and expensive than my previous one. I've been stressing out about this for a while now. The most relieving thing I've heard was advice from my mom - "why are you so anxious about all this? Moving is
exciting! Fresh start! New place! It's gonna be fun!"
she's totally right, too.
As far as Chaos as the Poison Meme--
I like it.
(http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a95/discordman/bin/FWYKAC.jpg)
Nice graphic.
For me, its travel that keeps me on my feet. I always learn the language of the country I visit, without fail. And language of course, not only frames our thoughts, but actually in some ways dictates them. Then, if you are learning the language, you invariably pick up the cultural baggage that goes along with it. Along with the general fun of living from day to day, never quite sure where your next meal or where you will sleep next.
Of course, the meme needs work, to a degree. There are already a lot of ideas that may innoculate against this meme. But its a start.
Cain: you're definitely right about the momentum issue. My problem is maintaining the momentum, but transforming what I've got into positive momentum as well. Because right now I've got the "being dunked in a freezing lake" sensation. Which is brilliant, for a little while. Then I start to get metaphorical hypothermia and it's not such a brilliant situation anymore. So, to keep pushing my metaphor more than necessary, what I need to do is figure out a way to jump out of the lake and run around. Keep my blood pumping and myself active, rather than just curling up under a blanket and going to sleep till I forget the whole bout of unpleasantness. It's a fine line to walk, at least for me right now, between just becoming angry and embittered vs. transforming the experience into positive momentum.
However, I feel like it's something that will get easier with time. Till eventually I am dunking myself in freezing lakes on purpose. It's just a matter of learning how to take that experience and utilize it. Which is something I like about these forums, particular O:MF, Or Kill Me, and the BIP. Good shit in here.
You're spot on with language, too. I wish I had enough money/time to travel more; I get really excited about seeing new places and learning new languages. This past fall was pretty much my first time out of the US (I don't count spending two days at a pre-packaged resort in the Carribean as a meaningful experience :p ) and it's like a damn drug. It's interesting how much cultural baggage, as you put it, I picked up from living in Paris, even if only for four months.
God damn I need to travel more.
Cram: I am digging that graphic.
Only in chaos is there order
Only in order is there chaos
don't you mean Disorder instead of Chaos?
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on June 12, 2007, 03:51:32 PM
don't you mean Disorder instead of Chaos?
was a spin off from 'even in chaos there is order'
Doesn't sound so snappy if you use 'disorder' just seems like an obvious oxymoron. This is not intended for people who would be able to draw the distinction anyroad. Cabbage thinks chaos = disorder innit
You can't escape from ego. Trying to destroy ego is the biggest egoism.
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on June 07, 2007, 03:42:52 PM
Ego Sickness
(http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a95/discordman/bin/Caravaggio_Narcissus_sm.jpg)
You know how a virus works? It goes into a cell and changes the code so that the cell only produces more virii. In a way the virus steals the cell's identity, making it a part of a viral system.
But this ego meme can become a disease. In moderation, it helps us understand ourselves. In excess, we define ourselves. In time, these definitions become rigid, inflexible.
RUBBISH!
You'll never get ANYWHERE, with a shrivelled up, human-sized ego.
bonus points for using the caravaggio pic, though.
A game, perhaps? An internet meme (like those lame 20 question things)?
Something Along the lines of:
--------------
WHOOOO are YOOOOU? (with picture of the Caterpillar on the 'shroom with the Hooka)
Children often ask the annoying question "Why?" and for every answer you give, they ask again "Why?"... Yet, perhaps asking why isn't a bad thing. As adults, maybe we don't consider why we do the things we do, or why we are where we are. So as a challenge, as a moment of childhood clarity, you have been challenged to answer the question "Why?"
To begin, write an "I am" statement which you feel describes a key part of who you are. Maybe "I am an artist", "I am a hacker", "I am a Christian", "I am an atheist", then you must ask yourself "Why?" and provide an answer, follow the answer with another "Why?" and the why, with another answer. Do this so that you have a total of twenty-three answers and then post it in your blog/journal.
--------------
The Internet meme is a pathetic, yet popular filler for blogs, but if we can use such a transport for a more insidious meme, then perhaps there is some value. The above is just a concept, but hopefully you get the idea.... getting people to question their self-identification seems to have some potential. Maybe we could release a series of these, where we are more specific about the first question...
An 'I Am' statement that describes your physical being.
An 'I Am' statement that describes your social life.
An 'I Am' statement that describes your philosophical beliefs
An 'I Am; statement that describes your ...
Also, perhaps we could create one called "Right Where You Are Now", and ask the question "Why are you where you are now, this minute?" (I remember this as similar to a meditation trick RAW talked about. )
Thoughts?
(http://www.guntheranderson.com/costuming/alice/caterpillar-disney-2.jpg)
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 10, 2007, 05:57:24 PM
A game, perhaps? An internet meme (like those lame 20 question things)?
Something Along the lines of:
--------------
WHOOOO are YOOOOU? (with picture of the Caterpillar on the 'shroom with the Hooka)
Children often ask the annoying question "Why?" and for every answer you give, they ask again "Why?"... Yet, perhaps asking why isn't a bad thing. As adults, maybe we don't consider why we do the things we do, or why we are where we are. So as a challenge, as a moment of childhood clarity, you have been challenged to answer the question "Why?"
To begin, write an "I am" statement which you feel describes a key part of who you are. Maybe "I am an artist", "I am a hacker", "I am a Christian", "I am an atheist", then you must ask yourself "Why?" and provide an answer, follow the answer with another "Why?" and the why, with another answer. Do this so that you have a total of twenty-three answers and then post it in your blog/journal.
--------------
The Internet meme is a pathetic, yet popular filler for blogs, but if we can use such a transport for a more insidious meme, then perhaps there is some value. The above is just a concept, but hopefully you get the idea.... getting people to question their self-identification seems to have some potential. Maybe we could release a series of these, where we are more specific about the first question...
An 'I Am' statement that describes your physical being.
An 'I Am' statement that describes your social life.
An 'I Am' statement that describes your philosophical beliefs
An 'I Am; statement that describes your ...
Also, perhaps we could create one called "Right Where You Are Now", and ask the question "Why are you where you are now, this minute?" (I remember this as similar to a meditation trick RAW talked about. )
Thoughts?
Goes along with the "Those who don't question their beliefs shouldnt have any" meme. All sounds good really. When it come down to it though, people start to get defensive when you start questioning their beliefs. Gotta break it to them easy. The people I talk to always tend to have the "it's what I've always done" or "because my parents did it" response.
A good site for the christian cabbages would be www.godisimaginary.com
Check it out.
so, i like the term Ego Sickness.
i assume you're using the classical term EGO and not the colloquial "egotistical" variety.
my beef: the vantage point is still an Us Them dichotomy.
maybe Ego, in and of itself (the asat, the capitol I, the self), is not bad.
you kind of addressed that, and i think were perhaps trying to imply that.
but perhaps it's more of a sickness of the ego, versus sickness from the ego.
dig?
a lad that says "i am a student" isn't really that bad.
but then the teacher gives him a grade of "C", and he's off to the market.
now he's infected with the notion that he is a "C" instead of a "Medium Grade Work In Progress," which we all know to be the implication of that grade.
(or a flat out lack of effort, or some such)..
but what i'm saying is the student doesn't impose the "C" mentality on himself,
nor does his Ego do it. the grade is assigned by the teacher. the grading system is mprescribed by standardization, tradition, the LAW, etc. which were all imposed by some collective, or another. (read= the exact opposite of an 'I')
now that i'm done being an asshat...nice article.
(http://img14.imgspot.com/u/07/190/13/alice15a.gif)
PF --
I mostly agree. The problem is, I think, when the student internalizes the "C" assigned to him by the teacher, thus taking the C from an external label and transforming it into an actual facet of himself and will not break away from it.
Quote from: Darth Cupcake on July 10, 2007, 07:06:48 PM
PF --
I mostly agree. The problem is, I think, when the student internalizes the "C" assigned to him by the teacher, thus taking the C from an external label and transforming it into an actual facet of himself and will not break away from it.
Not to mention others who may reinforce it. Say a parent, or parents. A "C" can be a positive learning experience if handled correctly. It can also be a horrible bad-wrong detriment if hammered into a kids heart.
It depends on the kid for sure, but it also depends on the kids support, if he has any. A good parent and a good teacher will work as a team, with the student, to find solutions, that don't stomp the ego. It's sad how deficient those teams are in the society at large.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on July 10, 2007, 07:11:57 PM
Quote from: Darth Cupcake on July 10, 2007, 07:06:48 PM
PF --
I mostly agree. The problem is, I think, when the student internalizes the "C" assigned to him by the teacher, thus taking the C from an external label and transforming it into an actual facet of himself and will not break away from it.
Not to mention others who may reinforce it. Say a parent, or parents. A "C" can be a positive learning experience if handled correctly. It can also be a horrible bad-wrong detriment if hammered into a kids heart.
It depends on the kid for sure, but it also depends on the kids support, if he has any. A good parent and a good teacher will work as a team, with the student, to find solutions, that don't stomp the ego. It's sad how deficient those teams are in the society at large.
I have nothing to add to this. I think you are quite right.
What's sick is that some parents think that it's actually a good parenting method. Thinking their going to guilt their kid into better grades.
And there's some that do genuinely see a C as a failure, no matter what reason might be behind it. Some people have very bizarre priorities.
I don't want to sound like a bleeding heart idealogue, but I see a trend in some kids and families of not teaching responsibility and the importance of self-responsibility, and this can affect ego. You may have heard the stats on the news yesterday and today that a study has found less then 50% of 16 to 18 year olds will be getting or looking for a summertime job this year. There were many factors cited in the study but one of them was families with more disposible income and more income that they can devote to college tuitions. In other words, kids aren't needing to save up for college expenses, themselves.
In one sense this is good news, less financial burden on the kid. On the other hand I think it takes away a good experience. Looking back, I see the summer job as less about making money and more about learning responsibility. About putting in a good day's work. About effort equaling result.
I think that is an important quality to have. To know that one can use their two hands and their brains to do what it takes to allow them to survive, on their own, without a safety net.
Kids need to understand that you can't go through life solely on cruise control.
Families have so much disposable income that they can pay for college tuition AND the spending habits of a teenager? :eek: They should share the damn wealth!
My mother made the grievous mistake of telling me, at age 14, that I could have any car I wanted so long as I bought it myself. Same went for clothes I wanted to wear, or hair dye. So I got a job.
In short order she had a daughter wearing ridiculous clothes with blue hair driving a fairly well modified sports car. Interestingly enough, she also had a heart attack. :lol:
In all seriousness, my job kept me sane through high school. Any kid who isn't applying for a job because mommy and daddy can support them are missing the point--if you get a job, not only do you not need mommy and daddy anymore, but you are given a certain liberty to tell them to shove it and make your own decisions. A lot of these decisions will probably be bad, but having the responsibility for one's own decisions kicks fucking ass. Making mistakes sucks, but it's so much nicer to know that you don't have to make them again in the future, because you're the one in control. You can actually LEARN from fuck ups, instead of just having to cruise along accepting the shit that gets handed to you because HEY it's easier this way.
Mommy and daddy should be expecting their little princesses to get their hands dirty eventually, no matter how much disposable income they have. I don't want to wake up in twenty years to discover that the world is full of even bigger retards and mental cripples and emotional children than it already is, just because no one could be bothered to work before the age of 30.
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 10, 2007, 05:57:24 PM
A game, perhaps? An internet meme (like those lame 20 question things)?
Something Along the lines of:
--------------
WHOOOO are YOOOOU? (with picture of the Caterpillar on the 'shroom with the Hooka)
Children often ask the annoying question "Why?" and for every answer you give, they ask again "Why?"... Yet, perhaps asking why isn't a bad thing. As adults, maybe we don't consider why we do the things we do, or why we are where we are. So as a challenge, as a moment of childhood clarity, you have been challenged to answer the question "Why?"
To begin, write an "I am" statement which you feel describes a key part of who you are. Maybe "I am an artist", "I am a hacker", "I am a Christian", "I am an atheist", then you must ask yourself "Why?" and provide an answer, follow the answer with another "Why?" and the why, with another answer. Do this so that you have a total of twenty-three answers and then post it in your blog/journal.
--------------
The Internet meme is a pathetic, yet popular filler for blogs, but if we can use such a transport for a more insidious meme, then perhaps there is some value. The above is just a concept, but hopefully you get the idea.... getting people to question their self-identification seems to have some potential. Maybe we could release a series of these, where we are more specific about the first question...
An 'I Am' statement that describes your physical being.
An 'I Am' statement that describes your social life.
An 'I Am' statement that describes your philosophical beliefs
An 'I Am; statement that describes your ...
Also, perhaps we could create one called "Right Where You Are Now", and ask the question "Why are you where you are now, this minute?" (I remember this as similar to a meditation trick RAW talked about. )
Thoughts?
Okay, trying it out...
Quote1. I am a long haired guy. Why?
2. I started growing my hair out in 7th grade. Why?
3. I wanted to stand out and be different from others. Why?
4. I was worried that I'd grow up and be an interchangable cog. why?
5. At the time, I was a C student, and the average height and weight for my age. Why was I a C student?
6. I just couldn't muster up the energy to care enough to get As. Seemed like a waste of time. Why?
7. All the A students were boring snobs. I was as smart as them but didn't get along with them. I had a lot of difficulty following directions. Why?
8. I've always thought that weird was cool. Why?
9. Perhaps because Gonzo was always my favorite muppet. Why?
10. I liked that he was always up to something funny which you'd never expect. Why?
11. It seemed funnier than say, Fozzie, who was telling straight jokes. Gonzo had an aura of chaos around him because he was uncategorizable and unpredictable. The humor wasn't about the punchline, it was about the situation. Why did I find that cool?
12. As a kid I was always saying really random unexpected stuff which occasionally got a lot of laughs. Why?
13. I guess I got more of a reward for being different than I got for being like everyone else. Why?
14. I was a first-born in a family of three kids, so I was always out adventuring, being in front, marking the path. Why?
15. My younger brothers always seemed to follow my example. Even when they were being really original, I kind of feel it was the same KIND of originality that I was displaying. Why?
16. I enjoyed seeing them interested in the same stuff I was interested in.
17. So I could have someone else to talk to about it. Like when I started playing D&D (in like 5th grade), I tried to teach my younger brother about it so I'd have someone to play with. Why?
18. perhaps to rub it in his face that I was better than him. why?
19. Because it made me so mad when people would praise him for something that I came up with or discovered! They should be paying attention to me! Why?
20. Because I was the first born kid and lurved the attention. Why?
21. Because when my younger brother was born, my mom had to divide attention between the two of us. I got a lot more extroverted once I had to work for attention. Why?
22. Because she was busy taking care of the baby. Why?
23. 'cause!
That was difficult! Around question 11 it got kind of interesting. Then by question 16 I was going in circles. I feel like I'd be missing the point if the causal chains trailed away from myself, so the instructions should probably clarify that.
I've brought people to tears by asking "Why?" over and over again. I don't know how I direct the questioning that it has such a profound effect, or how I could write it down as a set of instructions, but I'll think about it.
so if you identify with yourself as "i am" this or that in relationship you find yourself needing that person to reassure those conditions that have been labeled as your identity. consider how often potential relationships fail because one person isn't holding up to the model the other has placed. its not really fair and its seems to happen all the time. by not identifying, a person offers up a space for the other to be .. whatever they wish. . its just that YOU don't have to fall for their own identity models. this space of awareness might place a person in any relationship to not have to worry about playing his or her role. once you stop judging the other person as a fixed idenity, the other person doesn't have to justify where he or she is standing. its about giving them a chance to be free of roles. by not standing in a fixed position you're essentially giving the other an opportunity to stand without boundaries and you can actually relate to each other as humans.
for instance, i'm a server and i want to develop a good rapport with my guest. but as long as i'm identifying as "server" and the guest is identifing as "guest" the relationship is cold and businesslike. but say i start talking about my job and how it's been 'soo slow lately' or i say something that allows the person to break out of that idenity as being a guest and relate to me as a fellow human then we're standing on common ground.
and i get a bigger tip too :D
The I AM meme is sticky. Other memes touch it, and if they are chemically compatible, they form bonds. Some of these bonds decay over time, and some simply detach because they no longer fit the identity. Picture the kid who thinks he's "too big" to watch cartoons. Optimus Prime is floating down the memestream away from him, waving goodbye nostalgically.
There is a large complex of memes - a whole memeplex - attached to your I AM meme. Its chemistry is complicated, and it brushes against nearly every meme you encounter. In a way, your I AM meme licks everything, seeing how it tastes.
When you have Ego Sickness, every meme you encounter must be evaluated - will it be assimilated into the hive? or will we reject it forever?
(http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a95/discordman/bin/The_I_Am_Meme.jpg)
thought experiment:
In the above diagram, the I AM meme has an open spot. Let's visualize a political affiliation going there. Based on the chemistry of this slice of memeplex, what political memes do you think are most likely to form bonds?
(http://departments.oxy.edu/chemistry/testing/metalcomplex.gif)
revamp of last chart:
(http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a95/discordman/bin/The_I_Am_Meme2.jpg)
Quote from: Darth Cupcake on July 10, 2007, 07:38:59 PM
And there's some that do genuinely see a C as a failure, no matter what reason might be behind it. Some people have very bizarre priorities.
One of my friends back in High School (about 14/15 years old) got a "C" on his report card. First and only "C" he had ever received ... a week later he blew his chest open with his father's .357 mag
dumb fucker
There is no accounting for how people perceive the world around them
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on July 11, 2007, 12:20:51 AM
thought experiment:
In the above diagram, the I AM meme has an open spot. Let's visualize a political affiliation going there. Based on the chemistry of this slice of memeplex, what political memes do you think are most likely to form bonds?
Well, the "likes shooting guns" memetic particle that's already attached would probably repel the current US Liberal political meme. It could be attracted to a republican meme, but phish concerts might repel it, depending on how many memes that flaot around in phish concerts the person has attracted or attached to (getting stoned, tripping, anti-authority, anti-authoritarian (not the same thing)) I think a look at any religious memes might have an influence here. Maybe Libertarian, but that might depend on their existing social memes (do they feel as though they have a responsibility toward society, or do they feel that they must be self-reliant?) Maybe some form of anarchist might fit as well (anarcho-communism, collectivism, etc.)
It's interesting how complex this can get.
It gets complicated, but it DOES seem that there is a simple 'mechanism' that drives it.
Quote from: Payne on July 11, 2007, 03:12:54 PM
It gets complicated, but it DOES seem that there is a simple 'mechanism' that drives it.
Well, I think it's like RAW's description of it as "Causal feedback loops" and "interacting processes". The basic mechanism may be simple, but it deals with so many variables that mapping it can become complex (predicting which memes will stick may require knowing which memes are currently stuck there and how they effect the individual).
We don't know if a carbon atom will stick to a given molecule, unless we know the composition of the molecule. Maybe its similar?
large networks of non-linear yet simple interacting elements often produce emergent or at least very complex behaviour.
do you guys think the diagram in my last post is effective at conceptualizing this?
I wrestled a lot with how to visualize a memetic system
and almost cramped my brain trying to remember anything about high school chemistry :p
Quote from: triple zero on July 11, 2007, 05:33:05 PM
large networks of non-linear yet simple interacting elements often produce emergent or at least very complex behaviour.
Precisely! However, to understand the behavior (or to modify the behavior to fit requirements) we must understand the interacting elements.... my engineering mentor used to make us do this sort of thing with "black boxes". We would examine the input to a system, the output from the system and figure out what was going on inside. Sometimes it was possible, sometimes it was not possible (without some access to the components). I think that our meme analogy here may be like that in some sense. We can look at the actions of an individual and make guesses about the memes that they have attached to them... however the more memes we KNOW that they hold, the more likely it is we can figure out which memes will likely be attracted.
This concept could open up a pretty interesting model for marketing and targeting ads. Imagine a sort of demographics based on molecular meme structures rather than age and disposible income. Perhaps we could customize memes to be attracted to specific meme clusters. If that's possible then we could try to develop viral payloads that would play off of existing memes that the person would likely have. If we got really insane, we could develop multi-part meme bombs wherein bits of the bomb were hidden in seperate memes that we considered likely to attract one another... with the payload being within a composite of multiple memes.
But that's just crazy! ;-)
PS -I liked the molecular model Prof. maybe we could add + / - to show attraction and repulsion between memes?
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on July 11, 2007, 05:40:59 PM
do you guys think the diagram in my last post is effective at conceptualizing this?
I wrestled a lot with how to visualize a memetic system
and almost cramped my brain trying to remember anything about high school chemistry :p
I liked it. It was pretty.
To continue with my thought about attract/repel memes and modeling them...
It seems that the best way to start would be to find a way to assess the average human and which memes they hold. Maybe some sort of survey to determine any tendency for specific memes to attract or repel. Some might be easy:
IF religious_meme = Fundamentalist Christian
THEN pro_choice_meme = ~repel
IF religious_meme = Progressive Christian
THEN pro_choice_meme = flat (unknown, will depend on other memes?)
IF religious_meme = null
THEN pro_choice_meme = ~attract
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 11, 2007, 06:53:43 PM
To continue with my thought about attract/repel memes and modeling them...
It seems that the best way to start would be to find a way to assess the average human and which memes they hold. Maybe some sort of survey to determine any tendency for specific memes to attract or repel. Some might be easy:
IF religious_meme = Fundamentalist Christian
THEN pro_choice_meme = ~repel
IF religious_meme = Progressive Christian
THEN pro_choice_meme = flat (unknown, will depend on other memes?)
IF religious_meme = null
THEN pro_choice_meme = ~attract
I think a lot of this work may have already been accomplished in one way or another. Personality typing tests, like the ones given to law enforcement candidates or other "high risk" jobs. These tests go WAY beyond the demographic types of age, race, religion, blah .... they look at motivators, detractors, likely responses, etc, etc ... I had to take a few of these tests before during some jobs.
Usually about 2000 or 3000 fill in the bubble questions with lots of repeats and rewordings of the same questions. I still thought it was pretty easy to work around, the intent of the test questions became fairly apparent when looked at in groups. But then this is also the same series of interviews where I beat the polygraph (anyone can, they are actually quite easy).
Leary helped develop some of these tests. You know, the one he then took after being arrested and being sent to lock up? He purposefully put himself in that non-rebellious, follow orders category so they'd lock him in low-security .... and then he hopped the wall.
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 11, 2007, 06:53:43 PM
To continue with my thought about attract/repel memes and modeling them...
It seems that the best way to start would be to find a way to assess the average human and which memes they hold. Maybe some sort of survey to determine any tendency for specific memes to attract or repel. Some might be easy:
IF religious_meme = Fundamentalist Christian
THEN pro_choice_meme = ~repel
IF religious_meme = Progressive Christian
THEN pro_choice_meme = flat (unknown, will depend on other memes?)
IF religious_meme = null
THEN pro_choice_meme = ~attract
well, i remember listening to a...ahem..particualr podcast where someone was discussing how our political structure that if our views are entirely moderate that depending on who we talk to, we're forced to side on the extreme of what they disagree with. (did i say that right?). so how would the chaos variable fit into this. the if/then structure seems to push a particular view to one side or the other depending on the circumstance. is there a variable that one can include...perhaps the "maybe logic" or the "eris" variable? i'm assuming here that if someone tries to have a fixed structured world that at some point an apple comes along and destroys that fixed view.
Quote from: burnstoupee on July 12, 2007, 04:15:16 AM
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 11, 2007, 06:53:43 PM
To continue with my thought about attract/repel memes and modeling them...
It seems that the best way to start would be to find a way to assess the average human and which memes they hold. Maybe some sort of survey to determine any tendency for specific memes to attract or repel. Some might be easy:
IF religious_meme = Fundamentalist Christian
THEN pro_choice_meme = ~repel
IF religious_meme = Progressive Christian
THEN pro_choice_meme = flat (unknown, will depend on other memes?)
IF religious_meme = null
THEN pro_choice_meme = ~attract
well, i remember listening to a...ahem..particualr podcast where someone was discussing how our political structure that if our views are entirely moderate that depending on who we talk to, we're forced to side on the extreme of what they disagree with. (did i say that right?). so how would the chaos variable fit into this. the if/then structure seems to push a particular view to one side or the other depending on the circumstance. is there a variable that one can include...perhaps the "maybe logic" or the "eris" variable? i'm assuming here that if someone tries to have a fixed structured world that at some point an apple comes along and destroys that fixed view.
Oh quite possibly... my example was of a single interaction among (insert big number) memes. IN any sort of model one would have to create smoething much more complex... and even then a golden apple might make the whole calculation null and void.
In this instance, I'm thinking more of examining what memes, or groups of memes tend to be attractive or repellent. The ~ was meant to represent "about" or "maybe".. So If a person is known to have a particular religious meme, their reaction to some memes may be similar (mosbunall?).
Besides... podcasts are full of liars, cheats and know nothings.
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 12, 2007, 06:46:20 AM
Quote from: burnstoupee on July 12, 2007, 04:15:16 AM
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 11, 2007, 06:53:43 PM
To continue with my thought about attract/repel memes and modeling them...
It seems that the best way to start would be to find a way to assess the average human and which memes they hold. Maybe some sort of survey to determine any tendency for specific memes to attract or repel. Some might be easy:
IF religious_meme = Fundamentalist Christian
THEN pro_choice_meme = ~repel
IF religious_meme = Progressive Christian
THEN pro_choice_meme = flat (unknown, will depend on other memes?)
IF religious_meme = null
THEN pro_choice_meme = ~attract
well, i remember listening to a...ahem..particualr podcast where someone was discussing how our political structure that if our views are entirely moderate that depending on who we talk to, we're forced to side on the extreme of what they disagree with. (did i say that right?). so how would the chaos variable fit into this. the if/then structure seems to push a particular view to one side or the other depending on the circumstance. is there a variable that one can include...perhaps the "maybe logic" or the "eris" variable? i'm assuming here that if someone tries to have a fixed structured world that at some point an apple comes along and destroys that fixed view.
Oh quite possibly... my example was of a single interaction among (insert big number) memes. IN any sort of model one would have to create smoething much more complex... and even then a golden apple might make the whole calculation null and void.
In this instance, I'm thinking more of examining what memes, or groups of memes tend to be attractive or repellent. The ~ was meant to represent "about" or "maybe".. So If a person is known to have a particular religious meme, their reaction to some memes may be similar (mosbunall?).
Besides... podcasts are full of liars, cheats and know nothings.
HA! okay. nice. i see what you're getting at. gonna think about it for a bit.
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 11, 2007, 05:45:36 PM
This concept could open up a pretty interesting model for marketing and targeting ads. Imagine a sort of demographics based on molecular meme structures rather than age and disposible income. Perhaps we could customize memes to be attracted to specific meme clusters. If that's possible then we could try to develop viral payloads that would play off of existing memes that the person would likely have. If we got really insane, we could develop multi-part meme bombs wherein bits of the bomb were hidden in seperate memes that we considered likely to attract one another... with the payload being within a composite of multiple memes.
actually i'm pretty sure this has already been done.
marketing and advertisement are master-grade university studies these days.
it would probably be most efficient to just look up some scientific papers describing this sort of behaviour/techniques/things than to try and reinvent the wheel ourselves.
it probably has some ties with Cain's "opensource warfare" and that guerilla-typepad blog thing he has linked in the past (but you two are new guys so probably missed those things, use the forum search function)
but there's probably still a lot of new things to be researched in this area. like what if you combine the more mathematical-theoretical Systems Theory with social studies in memeplexes.
it would require
1) reading up about the social studies and marketing/ad studies
2) reading up about systems theory
3) conducting long and time-consuming surveys in order to collect test-data to test the system theory models on realworld data
would make for a nice PhD or master's thesis, i'd say.
Perhaps it,Äôs not so mechanistic, depending more on prior conditioning. Someone who was not desperately needy, confused, lonely and afraid would be an unlikely victim of the Christian Fundamentalist meme - more like seeds than viruses, needing exactly the right kind of conditions to take root, an organic system rather than a rigid, electronic one might be an interesting model.
Besides, the idea doesn,Äôt generally instil itself in each person in exactly the same way even if, for example, a group of people were all exposed to the same sermon ,Äì each would understand and receive it tailored slightly to his own needs, depending on his requirements. Ideas evolve as they spread, they diversify and specialise in the same manner as creatures evolve. Like an ordinary river fish which has evolutionary descendants in subterranean lakes, in isolated rock-pools, and in the sea.
Quote from: BumWurst on July 13, 2007, 04:49:15 PM
Perhaps it,Äôs not so mechanistic, depending more on prior conditioning. Someone who was not desperately needy, confused, lonely and afraid would be an unlikely victim of the Christian Fundamentalist meme - more like seeds than viruses, needing exactly the right kind of conditions to take root, an organic system rather than a rigid, electronic one might be an interesting model.
Besides, the idea doesn,Äôt generally instil itself in each person in exactly the same way even if, for example, a group of people were all exposed to the same sermon ,Äì each would understand and receive it tailored slightly to his own needs, depending on his requirements. Ideas evolve as they spread, they diversify and specialise in the same manner as creatures evolve. Like an ordinary river fish which has evolutionary descendants in subterranean lakes, in isolated rock-pools, and in the sea.
I agree... I think if we were to use the memetic model (it's just a model), then we would say that each person had their own set of memes and each of those memes would be attractive or repellent of other memes (like a Christian Fundamentalist meme). That is, if 5 people heard a sermon, they would each have pre-existing memes which would attract or repel the memes in the sermon. If more memes attracted, rather than repelled, then the meme may attach, if more of their existing memes repel, then the meme may have a much more difficult time attaching.
The seed model might be useful to flesh out as well, so that we don't get stuck with a single model.
Quote from: BumWurst on July 13, 2007, 04:49:15 PM
Perhaps it,Äôs not so mechanistic, depending more on prior conditioning. Someone who was not desperately needy, confused, lonely and afraid would be an unlikely victim of the Christian Fundamentalist meme - more like seeds than viruses, needing exactly the right kind of conditions to take root, an organic system rather than a rigid, electronic one might be an interesting model.
Besides, the idea doesn,Äôt generally instil itself in each person in exactly the same way even if, for example, a group of people were all exposed to the same sermon ,Äì each would understand and receive it tailored slightly to his own needs, depending on his requirements. Ideas evolve as they spread, they diversify and specialise in the same manner as creatures evolve. Like an ordinary river fish which has evolutionary descendants in subterranean lakes, in isolated rock-pools, and in the sea.
Meme-Bomb idea:
"You are a Dead Limb in the Tree of Life."
or similar. feel free to tweak it.
Bump
lest we forget.
wow, this is an oldie. Thanks for the bump.
i was dealing with a very stubborn family member the other day and he was so caught in his role that it reminded me of the "i am" meme.
Heh, I was just about to bump this as well, having just read through it from page 1.
Good Stuff! I need to finish reading The Art of Memetics =P
is it too soon to bump this again?