Okay spags, my insatiable urge to edit anything comprising of or resembling Enlgish has come to a head. ITT you will say what you would like to see in a new, revised and expanded edition of the BIP pamphlet, and I will put it together, at least as far as text (I can do layout pretty well, in total amateur terms - any more serious volunteers, Net?)
I will not be making the pamphlet all that much longer. I might add a few pieces, but the idea is to produce a more complete, more interesting work - not a fucking novel. (For my so-called novel, see that other thread.)
I might however try to edit the current content rather in-depth. LMNO suggested in the criticism thread that the pamphlet should emphasize that each and every one of us is just as fucked and bound as the next cabbage - other ideas of similar nature are welcome.
I think it might be a good idea to remember that its a metaphor and "each and every one of us is just as fucked and bound as the next cabbage" within that metaphor... but not necessarily in a real sense.
But that's all I'm gonna say, cause I've beat the dead horse too much already on this topic.
I'm still relatively new here. The corpse is still fresh, to my eyes. Would you mind at least rehashing the argument, briefly?
Well, as I've adeptly portrayed the past couple of days, I'm a behind the times, out-of-touch purist, so take the following for what it's worth: so my suggestion would be to take that energy you have and put it into Lollercaust instead. BIP is in 2 versions now, do we really need a 3rd?
I think at this point we need some outsider input. Dolores made some good comments, and surely our clarification of her points is something that should be addressed. I'd like to see more outsiders take a look at the pamphlet and engage in diaologue about it. We used to have a lot of BIP-centric discussion, then after v2.0, it sort of faded off a bit. Does the new version work? Is there stuff it's still missing? It's hard for us to see because we're SO familliar with it. (at least, I am)
I think the points it could use are
--some illustrations of different people's prison bars. For some people it's social, some personal, some political, some economic, some instinct, etc etc. A lot of people think the BIP pamphlet is a political tract. and it IS, but that's only one slice of the pie
--some more concrete definitions of the Machine and the Con, as those are two important metaphors we should probably
get to the point about
--an underscore of Think For Yourself Shmuck. As LMNO said:
Quote from: LMNO on June 18, 2008, 05:47:44 PM
1. We didn't offer solutions. Any blanket solution to an individual's problems other than "think for yourself, schmuck" would be riddled with oversimplifications and non-applicable ideas.
2. We didn't make it obvious that the pamphlet was also a mirror. Perhaps on a future edition, we should put "WE'RE IN PRISON, TOO" on the back cover, to fully acknowledge that we're not elitists that have found the solution and are pitying the masses, but that we have merely realized that we're in the same trap as everyone else.
Is it necessary to have a new version? I'm not sure.
Have you considered putting together a companion edition instead? Like a followup to the BIP? (PD08?)
Be aware that no matter how it goes, you're going to be doing most of the work yourself. Just the nature of things
around here. :p
RWHN, I hear you, but I think a little revision, editing and expansion would be nice, and I think the Lollercaust is a much bigger project than what I intend to do here.
Quote from: R.W.H.N? on June 18, 2008, 06:54:11 PM
Well, as I've adeptly portrayed the past couple of days, I'm a behind the times, out-of-touch purist, so take the following for what it's worth: so my suggestion would be to take that energy you have and put it into Lollercaust instead. BIP is in 2 versions now, do we really need a 3rd?
No yuo.
Truth be told, I was thinking that just adding an appendix consisting of parts of the discussions/critiques already existing in various threads, and perhaps adding some marginalia, would be just the thing.
I welcome a newer version. I'm a fan of the editing process, especially considering the way V1.0 got hacked together.
Quote from: Nigel on June 18, 2008, 07:12:14 PM
Truth be told, I was thinking that just adding an appendix consisting of parts of the discussions/critiques already existing in various threads, and perhaps adding some marginalia, would be just the thing.
Well for that sort of thing I suggest checking out this page of the BIP Wiki:
http://www.blackironprison.com/index.php?title=Literature (http://www.blackironprison.com/index.php?title=Literature)
The lower section contains subject matter from some of the discussions we had post-BIP. Now I think a lot of them are pretty much just copy-pasta, so you'd need to boil them down some, but at least you have a collection to start from and won't have to do a lot of thread archaeology.
Quote from: Verbatim on June 18, 2008, 06:53:05 PM
I'm still relatively new here. The corpse is still fresh, to my eyes. Would you mind at least rehashing the argument, briefly?
Well, for me, I find a heavy difference between the BIP that existed in some of the early essays and the BIP that has been widely discussed afterward.
In the BiP, there's a lot of talk about being trapped in your cell, and getting a chance at a jailbreak. This I find extremely useful and thoughtful.
Quote"Look around you. Look at these cold, black bars. The colorless ceiling. The hard ground. That's your universe. That's the world you're going to be living in for the rest of your life here in Prison. You're going to live out your life in quiet desperation. Or, not so quiet if you decide to take the rife/bell tower route. Either way, long or short, it'll feel the same. Dead, unchanging.
So, if you're interested, I'd like to invite you to a jailbreak... "
QuoteSo what's the point of this little lecture? Let me be honest, yeah it's a rare trait honesty. I want something from you, just like everybody else, I want your freedom.
I see that got you confused, not what you think mate. Your all chained up, shackled down and you probably don't even realize it. Cultural conditioning, it's a pain in the arse but we all go through it. We are taught to obey, to listen, to follow the party line. They throw us a couple of freedoms like scooby-snacks to make you toe the line.
I'm not asking for you to fight the system, not asking for you to join some crazy revolution, not even asking you to join a movement. I'm asking you to wake up, think for yourself. You see there are folks who have, folks who have realized what the hell is going on and learned to live their lives constantly questioning the status quo.
Now what do you say? I'm inviting you to a jailbreak mate, all you need is to provide your own lockpick, think you can do it?
Quote
What we have observed is that the more people are able to think for themselves, the less willing they become to exhaust themselves at someone else's command. An open-minded person is better able to see past the illusions that have this civilization headed toward what seems to be a fiery demise, and may even do something about it.
QuoteIf we all effect a change on our own paradigm (this DOES require some effort, being a bliss-ninny doesn't count), there WILL be an eventual overlap, at which point the large scale change which we have hoped to effect all along will be impossible to stop.
However, in later discussions the BiP has morphed into something permanent. The BiP IS what you WILL be TRAPPED in for LIFE and at best, you might be able to redecorate and change a few bars. For me, the two positions don't gel. Either we're trapped forever... in which case, we're wankers for bothering, and half the essays in the pamphlet make statements that are absurd... or this concept that the BiP IS Eternal, needs reworked.
Some seem to argue that since we have physical limitations to our sensory input and thus perception, we are forever trapped in the BiP... However, this seems to make as little sense to me, as those who argue that since we must obey the laws of physics, we have no free will. To me, personally, it seems that a useful metaphor has been stretched beyond its usefulness.
I think most people could be said to be born into a BiP, a very specific worldview, heavily influenced by their society, parents, religion, education and physical makeup. certianly it seems to fit, quite well, the reality I experienced as a kid.
But, for me... I think a jail break is entirely possible. I think it may be quite plausible that we can escape the BiP, we always risk returning to the BiP, maybe for short stays, or a life sentence... but I think we can escape, and if we're thoughtful, I think we can stay out of the BiP.
That doesn't mean I think we can reach some state where our perception is unlimited (though Huxley would argue just that). Rather, I think we can reach a point where we aren't imprisoned by our perception. Huxley used the metaphor of a wall, and having doors which we could go through the wall. PKD, in his original use of the BiP, portrayed it as a social system put in power by the powerful to control the masses... and it was a system, that if you could SEE it, you could escape it.
The BiP can be a very good metaphor for some aspects of the human experience, but its only a metaphor. It's useful to a point, but then I think we need to give it a pass. A Black Iron Prison may very easily and accurately describe the unthinking position of someone who accepts their beliefs as True, their perception as Reality and maintains an unquestioning obedience to the the signs that say "Please don't escape". However, I don't think its a good metaphor to use in explaining that we will always have limited perception. The very knowledge that your perception is limited, if applied, seem to be the PERFECT jailbreak. If you don't allow your perception to limit you, then they're no longer bars or walls... they're simply data collection equipment, that we understand to be limited.
I tried a little parable to fill it out some, but it was met with mixed reviews and other discussions we had around the same time sorta ended the same. Overall, I think that I perceive being trapped in Prison from birth to death, with the best possible outcome being a change to a bar here or there to be unnecessarily pessimistic and somewhat inaccurate in my personal life experience.
I say we break the BIP down into core concepts and select an article that best represents each concept, then mirror that with using LOLLERCAUST materials, and publish a Yin-Yang version.
The brief rebuttal to Rat is that even if you change your current reality filter* for another, a filter still exists. Except for signgular ineffable moments (orgasm, LSD peak, terror et al), you can't live without any filters at all.
The closest you can get is understanding that the cell is there, and that it is mutable.
*Or re-arrange your cell.
Quote from: LMNO on June 18, 2008, 07:36:34 PM
The brief rebuttal to Rat is that even if you change your current reality filter* for another, a filter still exists. Except for signgular ineffable moments (orgasm, LSD peak, terror et al), you can't live without any filters at all.
The closest you can get is understanding that the cell is there, and that it is mutable.
*Or re-arrange your cell.
And I disagree... the Prison isn't limited perception... but NOT UNDERSTANDING that you have limited perception. If you think that the world you see IS the world, then you're trapped. If however, you recognize that perception is perception and not reality.... if you accept that you don't SEE the Real World, if you no longer base your ideas and judgments on the world from within the BiP, then you're not in the BiP... to me. :lulz:
...and this is usually where we stop.
I say that while knowing you see the world with blinders is better than not knowing you have blinders on, it's still not the same as having no blinders on.
To me, Rat is describing being aware of the BIP and the cell one occupies within the BIP. And also, as I've stated in the past, I think some may take the "Prison" part of BIP too literally. Just because you can't transcend your humanity doesn't necessarily mean you are imprisoned and have a lack of freedom. It just means that you are human, and that try as you might, you can only get so far within the universe you occupy.
Quote from: LMNO on June 18, 2008, 07:58:59 PM
...and this is usually where we stop.
Ayup
Quote
I say that while knowing you see the world with blinders is better than not knowing you have blinders on, it's still not the same as having no blinders on.
blinders != prison.
Blinders provide limited input, but you can move your head and get other limited input. Further, you can act based on the information you have and on the knowledge that you "don't have ALL of the information". In a prison, you're trapped in the limited information sphere that you've created.
Blinders indicate limited perception, but not necessarily 0 freedom; Prison indicate no freedom... and limited perception.
:omg:
OSHIT!
THE METAPHOR IS OPEN TO INTERPRETATION, AND BECAUSE IT DEPENDS ON THE ASSOCIATION OF A PHYSICAL CONSTRUCT WITH MENTAL PHENOMENA THERE WILL NEVER BE A CONSENSUS UNTIL ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER GIVES UP AND DECIDES TO USE A DIFFERENT METAPHOR TO DESCRIBE THE PHENOMENON THEY ARE MORE CONCERNED WITH!
WE'RE DOOMED!
Quote from: Cainad on June 18, 2008, 08:56:30 PM
:omg:
OSHIT!
THE METAPHOR IS OPEN TO INTERPRETATION, AND BECAUSE IT DEPENDS ON THE ASSOCIATION OF A PHYSICAL CONSTRUCT WITH MENTAL PHENOMENA THERE WILL NEVER BE A CONSENSUS UNTIL ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER GIVES UP AND DECIDES TO USE A DIFFERENT METAPHOR TO DESCRIBE THE PHENOMENON THEY ARE MORE CONCERNED WITH!
WE'RE DOOMED!
ROFL, that's not what I'm saying...
I simply disagree that a single metaphor is useful in describing the worker drone bee that has no idea the world he sees isn't the world that IS and someone who groks that concept. Both are still bound by the laws of physics and the limitations of human perception... but calling that a prison seems absurd to me.
For me, the prison metaphor seems fantastic when referencing the concept of being trapped. Once you can change your perceptions at will though, it no longer seems like a trap to me.
But, I think its a difference in philosophy... I find the conclusion of the PD appropriate to what I'm trying to say:
QuoteTo this end, we propose that man develop his innate love for disorder, and play with The Goddess Eris. And know that it is a joyful play, and that thereby CAN BE REVOKED THE CURSE OF GREYFACE.
If you can master nonsense as well as you have already learned to master sense, then each will expose the other for what it is: absurdity. From that moment of illumination, a man begins to be free regardless of his surroundings. He becomes free to play order games and change them at will. He becomes free to play disorder games just for the hell of it. He becomes free to play neither or both. And as the master of his own games, he plays without fear, and therefore without frustration, and therefore with good will in his soul and love in his being.
If instead that conclusion had been "Even if you figure out what's going on, you'll be no more free than before..." I doubt I would ever have considered the philosophy further.
I spent 23 years in a BiP, where I am now has no resemblance to it whatsoever.
Quote from: Ratatosk on June 18, 2008, 09:44:05 PM
Quote from: Cainad on June 18, 2008, 08:56:30 PM
:omg:
OSHIT!
THE METAPHOR IS OPEN TO INTERPRETATION, AND BECAUSE IT DEPENDS ON THE ASSOCIATION OF A PHYSICAL CONSTRUCT WITH MENTAL PHENOMENA THERE WILL NEVER BE A CONSENSUS UNTIL ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER GIVES UP AND DECIDES TO USE A DIFFERENT METAPHOR TO DESCRIBE THE PHENOMENON THEY ARE MORE CONCERNED WITH!
WE'RE DOOMED!
ROFL, that's not what I'm saying...
No, it's what
I'm saying. I'm making fun of both of you.
Quote from: Cainad on June 18, 2008, 09:49:55 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on June 18, 2008, 09:44:05 PM
Quote from: Cainad on June 18, 2008, 08:56:30 PM
:omg:
OSHIT!
THE METAPHOR IS OPEN TO INTERPRETATION, AND BECAUSE IT DEPENDS ON THE ASSOCIATION OF A PHYSICAL CONSTRUCT WITH MENTAL PHENOMENA THERE WILL NEVER BE A CONSENSUS UNTIL ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER GIVES UP AND DECIDES TO USE A DIFFERENT METAPHOR TO DESCRIBE THE PHENOMENON THEY ARE MORE CONCERNED WITH!
WE'RE DOOMED!
ROFL, that's not what I'm saying...
No, it's what I'm saying. I'm making fun of both of you.
OH!
Well then, carry on... TITCM!
Could we say that the goal of the metaphor is to help people change their Black Iron Prison into a Golden Sphere of Possibility?
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on June 18, 2008, 10:33:51 PM
Could we say that the goal of the metaphor is to help people change their Black Iron Prison into a Golden Sphere of Possibility?
... or into a Green Pub of Experience, or a Blue Spaceship of Exploration, or a Red Whorehouse of Decadence or any and all of those things based on what they want they desire their reality to be at the time...
It's when they're not choosing what they want their life to be,
that they seem imprisoned to me.
:lulz: :lulz:
Quote from: Ratatosk on June 18, 2008, 11:06:50 PM
It's when they're not choosing what they want their life to be,
that they seem imprisoned to me.
:lulz: :lulz:
:mittens:
I'm thinking I will write a prologue to the pamphlet, in which this here discussion takes place in a bar, paraphrased to a degree, and abridged.
We all have our own definition.
I posted this a while back and still read it once in a while.
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=14380.0
Quote from: The Reverend Asshat on June 19, 2008, 12:29:44 AM
We all have our own definition.
I posted this a while back and still read it once in a while.
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=14380.0
I always rather liked that one.
Oh, and the constant striving for new metaphors for the construct most of us call the BIP began to bore me a long time ago. At the end of the day, it's going to be a label, and not 'the thing' itself. I'm sure you are aware of that already.
The search for an extra-BIP model of reality is a long, dark, lonely and laregly thankless task. I certainly didn't thank myself for the thought I put into the shrapnel project, specifically the parts that were supposed to link up to the BIP idea itself. It wasn't conclusive in any way, and worst of all it didn't fit.
We'll leave the meaninglessness of it all, the mental masturbation of such a project, to the side for now.
It's MY belief that whatever you want to call it, ultimately you will come back to the prison metaphor. Because as uncomfortable as the idea is to you, or how unfitting it seems that you break free.... into a prison, that's what makes sense.
If you want to break free from the cell, I can think of a lot worse places to break through to than something so cheerily called the GSP. It works for me, and it seems to work for a majority of people in here, and even some of our fans outside this forum. Because, ultimately, there is nothing outside the BIP.
Quote from: Payne on June 19, 2008, 12:33:26 AM
Quote from: The Reverend Asshat on June 19, 2008, 12:29:44 AM
We all have our own definition.
I posted this a while back and still read it once in a while.
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=14380.0
I always rather liked that one.
Thank you.
Quote from: Payne on June 19, 2008, 12:41:59 AM
Oh, and the constant striving for new metaphors for the construct most of us call the BIP began to bore me a long time ago. At the end of the day, it's going to be a label, and not 'the thing' itself. I'm sure you are aware of that already.
The search for an extra-BIP model of reality is a long, dark, lonely and laregly thankless task. I certainly didn't thank myself for the thought I put into the shrapnel project, specifically the parts that were supposed to link up to the BIP idea itself. It wasn't conclusive in any way, and worst of all it didn't fit.
We'll leave the meaninglessness of it all, the mental masturbation of such a project, to the side for now.
It's MY belief that whatever you want to call it, ultimately you will come back to the prison metaphor. Because as uncomfortable as the idea is to you, or how unfitting it seems that you break free.... into a prison, that's what makes sense.
If you want to break free from the cell, I can think of a lot worse places to break through to than something so cheerily called the GSP. It works for me, and it seems to work for a majority of people in here, and even some of our fans outside this forum. Because, ultimately, there is nothing outside the BIP.
Yes.
Quote from: Payne on June 19, 2008, 12:41:59 AM
Oh, and the constant striving for new metaphors for the construct most of us call the BIP began to bore me a long time ago. At the end of the day, it's going to be a label, and not 'the thing' itself. I'm sure you are aware of that already.
The search for an extra-BIP model of reality is a long, dark, lonely and laregly thankless task. I certainly didn't thank myself for the thought I put into the shrapnel project, specifically the parts that were supposed to link up to the BIP idea itself. It wasn't conclusive in any way, and worst of all it didn't fit.
We'll leave the meaninglessness of it all, the mental masturbation of such a project, to the side for now.
It's MY belief that whatever you want to call it, ultimately you will come back to the prison metaphor. Because as uncomfortable as the idea is to you, or how unfitting it seems that you break free.... into a prison, that's what makes sense.
If you want to break free from the cell, I can think of a lot worse places to break through to than something so cheerily called the GSP. It works for me, and it seems to work for a majority of people in here, and even some of our fans outside this forum. Because, ultimately, there is nothing outside the BIP.
TITCM
Quote from: Verbatim on June 18, 2008, 11:55:07 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on June 18, 2008, 11:06:50 PM
It's when they're not choosing what they want their life to be,
that they seem imprisoned to me.
:lulz: :lulz:
:mittens:
I'm thinking I will write a prologue to the pamphlet, in which this here discussion takes place in a bar, paraphrased to a degree, and abridged.
I love this idea!
Also, I like the idea of a whole bunch of short blurbs from people about how THEY perceive the BIP... what it means to them. The definitions would all be so interestingly different that I think it would help the reader go into reading the BIP with a very open mind in terms of interpreting each story.
Quote from: Payne on June 19, 2008, 12:41:59 AM
Because, ultimately, there is nothing outside the BIP.
Yep, and that's where I have to disagree. I prefer absurdism to nihilism. :wink:
Quote from: Ratatosk on June 19, 2008, 02:34:43 AM
Quote from: Payne on June 19, 2008, 12:41:59 AM
Because, ultimately, there is nothing outside the BIP.
Yep, and that's where I have to disagree. I prefer absurdism to nihilism. :wink:
Wonko the Sane from HHGTTG.
This is what this debate reminds me of.
Do you also live outside the asylum?
Quote from: Payne on June 19, 2008, 02:36:36 AM
Quote from: Ratatosk on June 19, 2008, 02:34:43 AM
Quote from: Payne on June 19, 2008, 12:41:59 AM
Because, ultimately, there is nothing outside the BIP.
Yep, and that's where I have to disagree. I prefer absurdism to nihilism. :wink:
Wonko the Sane from HHGTTG.
This is what this debate reminds me of.
Do you also live outside the asylum?
Heh, those little green winged angels freak me the fuck out...
So, if there's nothing outside of the BiP, then how exactly is it a prison?
Why should we bother changing the bars, if they won't expose us to something outside of our prison?
How do you know that there IS nothing outside the prison? Have you broken out?
I mean, to me it sounds like a bad trip.
Quote from: Ratatosk on June 19, 2008, 02:57:04 AM
Quote from: Payne on June 19, 2008, 02:36:36 AM
Quote from: Ratatosk on June 19, 2008, 02:34:43 AM
Quote from: Payne on June 19, 2008, 12:41:59 AM
Because, ultimately, there is nothing outside the BIP.
Yep, and that's where I have to disagree. I prefer absurdism to nihilism. :wink:
Wonko the Sane from HHGTTG.
This is what this debate reminds me of.
Do you also live outside the asylum?
Heh, those little green winged angels freak me the fuck out...
So, if there's nothing outside of the BiP, then how exactly is it a prison?
Why should we bother changing the bars, if they won't expose us to something outside of our prison?
How do you know that there IS nothing outside the prison? Have you broken out?
I mean, to me it sounds like a bad trip.
It is impossible to prove either way that there is anything outside the paradigm of the BIP, would perhaps be a better way to put it. If we start constructing concepts entirely on faith, then we are no better than any organised religion. We're no better off either.
Why bother changing the bars? Because that's all we can do. That's what we have to work with. We can appeal to a "higher power" (something from outside the BIP) to help change things more to our liking, but ultimately, it's down to us to do the changing. We can control the bars, to some degree, because we understand them, to some degree. We cannot understand anything outside the BIP because the limits of that concept are the limits of human perception. And not being in control is the ultimate abrogation of freedom.
You don't break out of the BIP, technically, because we cannot expand our perceptions beyond it's limits. We CAN break out of our little cells though. Or at the very least make them more comfortable. It is the understanding of the limits of what we can do, not an imposed limit, that I strive for. I don't dream of walking outside in the "free air" or whatever you can think of as being outside the BIP. I dream of understanding my limits, and maximising them.
It's not about imprisonment, it's about empowerment. It's not about bumming people out with dark, nihilistic philosophy. It's about showing them the toolkit we have made, and telling them that they can use it as they wish to make their world a better place.
So I disagree that it's a bad trip, I think it's a realistic and achievable method of choosing your own trip.
Quote from: Payne on June 19, 2008, 03:14:31 AM
Quote from: Ratatosk on June 19, 2008, 02:57:04 AM
Quote from: Payne on June 19, 2008, 02:36:36 AM
Quote from: Ratatosk on June 19, 2008, 02:34:43 AM
Quote from: Payne on June 19, 2008, 12:41:59 AM
Because, ultimately, there is nothing outside the BIP.
Yep, and that's where I have to disagree. I prefer absurdism to nihilism. :wink:
Wonko the Sane from HHGTTG.
This is what this debate reminds me of.
Do you also live outside the asylum?
Heh, those little green winged angels freak me the fuck out...
So, if there's nothing outside of the BiP, then how exactly is it a prison?
Why should we bother changing the bars, if they won't expose us to something outside of our prison?
How do you know that there IS nothing outside the prison? Have you broken out?
I mean, to me it sounds like a bad trip.
It is impossible to prove either way that there is anything outside the paradigm of the BIP, would perhaps be a better way to put it. If we start constructing concepts entirely on faith, then we are no better than any organised religion. We're no better off either.
Why bother changing the bars? Because that's all we can do. That's what we have to work with. We can appeal to a "higher power" (something from outside the BIP) to help change things more to our liking, but ultimately, it's down to us to do the changing. We can control the bars, to some degree, because we understand them, to some degree. We cannot understand anything outside the BIP because the limits of that concept are the limits of human perception. And not being in control is the ultimate abrogation of freedom.
You don't break out of the BIP, technically, because we cannot expand our perceptions beyond it's limits. We CAN break out of our little cells though. Or at the very least make them more comfortable. It is the understanding of the limits of what we can do, not an imposed limit, that I strive for. I don't dream of walking outside in the "free air" or whatever you can think of as being outside the BIP. I dream of understanding my limits, and maximising them.
It's not about imprisonment, it's about empowerment. It's not about bumming people out with dark, nihilistic philosophy. It's about showing them the toolkit we have made, and telling them that they can use it as they wish to make their world a better place.
So I disagree that it's a bad trip, I think it's a realistic and achievable method of choosing your own trip.
Well, there we have it... a brief wrap up for Verbatim on this old dead horse. :)
Oh and I found my old post I mentioned before: http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=15805.0 (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=15805.0)
Until next time Payne... ;-)
Quote from: Ratatosk on June 19, 2008, 03:22:18 AM
Well, there we have it... a brief wrap up for Verbatim on this old dead horse. :)
Oh and I found my old post I mentioned before: http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=15805.0 (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=15805.0)
Until next time Payne... ;-)
A pleasure, as always.
I like to think of the BIP as a little cell in a big prison. At some point you can realize that you're free to just open the door and leave your cell, kick out the warden, and then rename the penitentiary whatever the fuck you want to, and rule over your own little kingdom. You're still technically in a jail, only it's your jail, and it had better listen to whatever you have to say or there will be consequences. After that, the problem is more with interior decorating - you're free to live in whatever you want. (or not, if you like the idea of eternal oblivion.)
I agree with that the BIP needs a rewrite. If I can get off my ass I'll long enough I'll make a Golden Applesauce edit too.
Quote from: Golden Applesauce on June 19, 2008, 04:24:37 AM
I like to think of the BIP as a little cell in a big prison. At some point you can realize that you're free to just open the door and leave your cell, kick out the warden, and then rename the penitentiary whatever the fuck you want to, and rule over your own little kingdom. You're still technically in a jail, only it's your jail, and it had better listen to whatever you have to say or there will be consequences. After that, the problem is more with interior decorating - you're free to live in whatever you want. (or not, if you like the idea of eternal oblivion.)
I agree with that the BIP needs a rewrite. If I can get off my ass I'll long enough I'll make a Golden Applesauce edit too.
I think I tried a metaphor like that, sort of Be Your Own Warden kinda thing... not bad :)
Quote from: Verbatim on June 18, 2008, 06:27:03 PM
Okay spags, my insatiable urge to edit anything comprising of or resembling Enlgish has come to a head. ITT you will say what you would like to see in a new, revised and expanded edition of the BIP pamphlet, and I will put it together, at least as far as text (I can do layout pretty well, in total amateur terms - any more serious volunteers, Net?)
I will not be making the pamphlet all that much longer. I might add a few pieces, but the idea is to produce a more complete, more interesting work - not a fucking novel. (For my so-called novel, see that other thread.)
I might however try to edit the current content rather in-depth. LMNO suggested in the criticism thread that the pamphlet should emphasize that each and every one of us is just as fucked and bound as the next cabbage - other ideas of similar nature are welcome.
I can help you fine tune the layout file so everything prints as you intended, but I'm currently absorbed in too many paying and nonpaying projects at the moment to take on the entire thing.
I like the metaphor that the BIP cannot be escaped, only changed. Being able to 'change the cell' at will might be equivilent to freedom, but if we *stop* self anylizing we just end up with a new set of preconceptions.
Like I said, it's all a matter of what phenomenon you choose to apply the metaphor to. Let us ignore for a moment the "optimistic" versus the "pessimistic" interpretation, because that's just another Bar (whether you like the "happy-happy-joy-joy" or "if angels could see into my soul they would die" attitude is your own stinking prejudice, and has no bearing on Reality).
On one hand, we have the notion that the BIP is the state of unawareness about our mental limitations. This is the correct interpretation.
On the other hand, we have the notion that the bars of the BIP are our mental limitations, and the aforementioned state of unawareness is simply a byproduct of being in the "cell" one's whole life and thus being unaware of it. This is also the correct interpretation.
The first correct interpretation suggests a "cell" that the reader breaks out of once they grasp the concept of the inescapable mental limitations presented in the second correct interpretation. The second correct interpretation suggests a "cell" that cannot be broken out of at all because of biological limitations, and merely becoming aware of this version of the "cell" is equivalent to escaping the "cell" of unawareness suggested in the first correct interpretation.
This spag concludes that the metaphor is equally applicable to both schools of thought, and is inherently limited unless we want to fight over which way to interpret it. This ambiguity and confusion makes the metaphor fantastically, excellently Discordian.
I think most of the additional material in my edit will be from this thread. This discussion can give a lot of perspective to the pamphlet.
I think what would help the BIP metaphor is to tie in the discussion about Paths.
I say that because ultimately, I believe, it's the paths that we choose in life that are the bar changers, and therefore, that which allows us to move from cell to cell.
The first step is as outlined by LMNO in his opening piece of the BIP pamphlet. Until you are aware of how your biology, environment, and past experiences shape you, you have less power over where you are going because you aren't seeing the whole picture. You aren't seeing where maybe some aspect of your biology, one of your bars, is causing you to behave or live in a certain fashion.
So, once your cell comes into focus, once you recognize you are where you are, you can then navigate as appropriate. As you navigate, you can reconstruct some of your bars, or perhaps tear some down and replace them with new ones. For example, you recognize that you've essentially been a lazy person all of your life, and have just sort of coasted along. With recognition of that, one can become more concerted and focused in their day to day behavior. This can open new doors, as one who is motivated tends to be able to easier achieve goals and aspirations.
You will still have limits. Our biology can only take us so far. We can only tap into our minds to a certain point. There are laws of physics that we cannot overcome. We have limits in what we can perceive at one time and over a lifetime.
As I've discussed in the past, I essentially see two boundaries. There is the boundary of Reality, but of course since we can't perceive all of Reality, there's really no way to determine the shape and scope of that boundary. The other boundary is that which is comprised of our human limitations. The aforementioned biology, mental capacities, perception capacities, etc. It is absolute that we cannot transcend our humanity. (If it ever turns out that we can, then everything we've known up until that point has been a sham anyway)
This, to me, it the Prison. But it isn't a restrictive Prison, per se. It's restrictive in the sense that we cannot pierce the boundary, but there is really nothing in our human faculties that would allow us to get past the boundary. That's just the way it is. HOWEVER, we still have Freedom. We have the Freedom of moving within the confines of our humanity. I think the issue we've discussed is that some, by their actions and behavior, limit their Sphere of Possibility (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=15863.msg503267#msg503267) to a tiny ball. But if they become aware of their bars, their cells, their individual humanity, they would discover that their self-imposed boundary is movable. Their Sphere of Possibility can be expanded as they navigate in the new directions that are now apparent to them. Again, they can only push the boundaries so far, but the more aware they are, the more willing they are to explore new paths, the farther they will be able to push out those boundaries, and expand their Sphere of Possibilities.
*phew* Yeah, so that's what I think about all of this.
I like where this is going. I think our personal BIP is always at a crossroad and the path is one limitless intersection after another. Our decisions will determine whether we go left, right, straight or even backwards. Our decisions also determine the size, shape and comfort of our own cell/prison. One thing I believe is certain, to keep our cell static and unchanging would require incredible effort and work.
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=13269.0
For anyone who hasn't read through some of the ideas we bounced around a few months back about paths.
Some good stuff in there.
Cainad, I like how you frame the dabate, and how you capture both inside it.
Payne, I haven't given up on the shrapnel idea, I'm still trying to get it into focus and fit a good metaphor.
Quote from: Cainad on June 19, 2008, 05:46:35 AM
Like I said, it's all a matter of what phenomenon you choose to apply the metaphor to. Let us ignore for a moment the "optimistic" versus the "pessimistic" interpretation, because that's just another Bar (whether you like the "happy-happy-joy-joy" or "if angels could see into my soul they would die" attitude is your own stinking prejudice, and has no bearing on Reality).
On one hand, we have the notion that the BIP is the state of unawareness about our mental limitations. This is the correct interpretation.
On the other hand, we have the notion that the bars of the BIP are our mental limitations, and the aforementioned state of unawareness is simply a byproduct of being in the "cell" one's whole life and thus being unaware of it. This is also the correct interpretation.
The first correct interpretation suggests a "cell" that the reader breaks out of once they grasp the concept of the inescapable mental limitations presented in the second correct interpretation. The second correct interpretation suggests a "cell" that cannot be broken out of at all because of biological limitations, and merely becoming aware of this version of the "cell" is equivalent to escaping the "cell" of unawareness suggested in the first correct interpretation.
This spag concludes that the metaphor is equally applicable to both schools of thought, and is inherently limited unless we want to fight over which way to interpret it. This ambiguity and confusion makes the metaphor fantastically, excellently Discordian.
Wait a moment, I think you may have struck something there!!
I think you may be quite correct... we've been discussing two different prisons, the prison of the mind and the prison of biology.
I guess I just didn't see the biology as a prison, but more like a vehicle... sure the space ship is limiting, but it let's me explore the vast possibilities of Outer Space, sure the deep sea submersible is confining, but it allows me to explore the Unexplored trenches in reality... Not interfacing directly, to me, hasn't clicked as a simile to a prison, but I think your view may easily explain the confusion in metaphors.
w00t Cainad!
Yay to Cainad! Now we can all STFU, myself most of all!
"Like a briiiidge ooover troubled waaaters...."
(http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/images/butterfly_bridge.jpg)
Quote from: LMNO on June 19, 2008, 04:46:43 PM
Yay to Cainad! Now we can all STFU, myself most of all!
"Like a briiiidge ooover troubled waaaters...."
(http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/images/butterfly_bridge.jpg)
Pfffft, I doubt there is a post cool enough to make PD.com Spags ever STFU ;-)
Maybe not, but I can try. It got a reference to a Simon & Garfunkle song though, so I consider it a victory.
Truth be told, the Elvis version was the one going through my head.
:argh!:
Quote from: Cainad on June 19, 2008, 05:46:35 AM
Like I said, it's all a matter of what phenomenon you choose to apply the metaphor to. Let us ignore for a moment the "optimistic" versus the "pessimistic" interpretation, because that's just another Bar (whether you like the "happy-happy-joy-joy" or "if angels could see into my soul they would die" attitude is your own stinking prejudice, and has no bearing on Reality).
On one hand, we have the notion that the BIP is the state of unawareness about our mental limitations. This is the correct interpretation.
On the other hand, we have the notion that the bars of the BIP are our mental limitations, and the aforementioned state of unawareness is simply a byproduct of being in the "cell" one's whole life and thus being unaware of it. This is also the correct interpretation.
The first correct interpretation suggests a "cell" that the reader breaks out of once they grasp the concept of the inescapable mental limitations presented in the second correct interpretation. The second correct interpretation suggests a "cell" that cannot be broken out of at all because of biological limitations, and merely becoming aware of this version of the "cell" is equivalent to escaping the "cell" of unawareness suggested in the first correct interpretation.
This spag concludes that the metaphor is equally applicable to both schools of thought, and is inherently limited unless we want to fight over which way to interpret it. This ambiguity and confusion makes the metaphor fantastically, excellently Discordian.
I am yoinking
about halfmost of this post for the appendix (as part of an introduction to said appendix, for the time being.) That okay by you?
Quote from: Cainad on June 19, 2008, 05:46:35 AM
Like I said, it's all a matter of what phenomenon you choose to apply the metaphor to. Let us ignore for a moment the "optimistic" versus the "pessimistic" interpretation, because that's just another Bar (whether you like the "happy-happy-joy-joy" or "if angels could see into my soul they would die" attitude is your own stinking prejudice, and has no bearing on Reality).
On one hand, we have the notion that the BIP is the state of unawareness about our mental limitations. This is the correct interpretation.
On the other hand, we have the notion that the bars of the BIP are our mental limitations, and the aforementioned state of unawareness is simply a byproduct of being in the "cell" one's whole life and thus being unaware of it. This is also the correct interpretation.
The first correct interpretation suggests a "cell" that the reader breaks out of once they grasp the concept of the inescapable mental limitations presented in the second correct interpretation. The second correct interpretation suggests a "cell" that cannot be broken out of at all because of biological limitations, and merely becoming aware of this version of the "cell" is equivalent to escaping the "cell" of unawareness suggested in the first correct interpretation.
This spag concludes that the metaphor is equally applicable to both schools of thought, and is inherently limited unless we want to fight over which way to interpret it. This ambiguity and confusion makes the metaphor fantastically, excellently Discordian.
I award you MITTENS AND KITTENS for this, Cainad! :mittens: (http://rottenryan.com/images/kittens.jpg)
In fact, (http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0899194265.01._SCTZZZZZZZ_.jpg)
:x
KITTEHS
:x
Quick, before Roger kills them!
Quote from: Verbatim on June 21, 2008, 11:00:25 AM
I am yoinking about halfmost of this post for the appendix (as part of an introduction to said appendix, for the time being.) That okay by you?
DO IT.
I would make one small correction, in that just being aware of the limitations is not enough, you must also take them into account.
Also:
:mittens:
So someone who fully comprehends the extent of his/her limitations but decides they like their life like it is is not free? I'd call someone like that free (and stupid.)
I want my pieces from the original ripped, as they are rubbish writing and I can do much better. Any of my old rants are up for use.
which pieces, precisely? (keep in mind I have no idea who wrote almost anything in the original.)
Quote from: Requiem on June 22, 2008, 12:49:41 AM
I would make one small correction, in that just being aware of the limitations is not enough, you must also take them into account.
Also:
:mittens:
Absolutely maybe! :wink:
I think that point is a really useful thing to remember. We can have the knowledge that our perception is limited, but its real value seems to lie in using that knowledge as an 'unknown variable' in making decisions.
Reality = (What You Know + What You Don't Know) * What You Haven't Even Considered
fnord :wink:
Quote from: Verbatim on June 22, 2008, 01:42:42 PM
which pieces, precisely? (keep in mind I have no idea who wrote almost anything in the original.)
I'll have to check again. The previous editors probably know (Cram or LMNO).
I might write something on the Black Swan, and maybe something scientific as well. When I was a psych student, I got a lot of good books on cognitive fallacies and the like, and have added to the list since then.
Only read the first page, then thought of this.
There are 2 BIPs. One is formed by your ideas about your senses, and can be escaped. The other is formed by physical limitations of your senses, and can never be escaped, only expanded. I'll call this one the Thick Concrete Box.The TCB surrounds the BIP. The TCB can be changed, you can create an infra-red camera, a radar system, a radiotelescope, an electron microscope, etc. You can use technology to expand it, but due to the uncertainty principle, among other things, you can never fully escape it. You can't even see outside it, merely chip away at the sides a bit at a time.
Every individual can (and we generally think should) break out of their BIP. But it is the job of inventors and scientists to chip away at the walls of the TCB.
I think I would also like to either re-write my contribution, or swap it for a different piece. Mine was the "A Conclusion is simply where you stopped thinking" piece. I forget what page it's on. Anyhow, give me a day or two and I will supply you with either a re-write or a different piece that attacks approximately the same subject matter.
Okay. Go wild, it doesn't necessarily have to directly approximate the old one.
I don't know how much I can possibly help, but I would like to help you with this. I feel more attached to the BIP than the PD, because it made sense, it made things click in a way that the PD didn't. It's more real, in a way, than the PD. As such, I'd like to make a contribution to it, even if it's just spell-checking or some other technical thing like that.
Quote from: Reverend Whats His Name on June 18, 2008, 06:54:11 PM
BIP is in 2 versions now, do we really need a 3rd?
This quote is from the first page of the thread, but I wanted to say something about it. IMO, the answer is yes. I think that the more editions there are, the better. It shows that this idea, this concept is constantly evolving. And that should be partly the point, shouldn't it? If there was only one edition, or two editions, and it stopped there, then that says that we're done with the idea. Not that we're done using it, but that we can't develop it anymore and there's nothing more to say about it. And I think once the BIP gets to that point, it won't be that much longer after that that it becomes like the PD: good for a joke, good to get started with, but otherwise not all that important (I think I'm phrasing that wrong. I was thinking of the people here who haven't even read the PD, but are involved in their own prisonbreaks. Maybe. I'm not sure). But, as this thread shows, we're years away from that situation.
Also, it was a joy to read this thread. It clarified some things for me that I wasn't quite sure about. Or maybe that I was even unaware that I needed clarifying. And I got to see what other people's BIPs looked like. I agree with what Nigel said on Page 3; that you should include snipppets of how some people view their BIP. One of the reasons I came to this forum was because I wasn't sure what to do next (still am not really clear on that). I read the BIP and I thought, "Now, what? How do I go about changing my BIP?" That's something that the BIP doesn't really address, I thought. Maybe it's not supposed to but... I learn best when someone demonstrates something for me. If I could read or discuss with people how they made their prisonbreak, or what they're doing to break out, I think it would help me to make my own escape. Or maybe I'm just too used to having someone guide me; maybe that is one of my bars that I need to break or thin.
In conclusion, I'm not entirely sure what this post was about, other than the first part. Not sure that it's even completely coherent. Hope one of you, at least, can make some sense of it.
I think it's safe to say a lot of us know just how you feel.
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on July 10, 2008, 04:05:12 AM
I think it's safe to say a lot of us know just how you feel.
About what (P2 or P3)? Or were you talking about all of it?
I was mostly speaking to the exciting level of uncertainty you experience when contemplating this stuff.
see also: the Art of Memetics (http://www.scribd.com/doc/2564638/The-Art-Of-Memetics), starting on the bottom of page 140
I don't think (nor do I believe anyone else here thinks) that you can ever have made a prisonbreak. It's more a way of life, in a sense, than a single event. (But it's not really a way of life.) That's why it's kind of difficult to "demonstrate".
Anyway, thanks for the offer but I think I've got spellchecking covered. If you're very good at layout, I can use your assistance later on. I'll keep your offer in mind, if I need something else I'll let you know.
Quote from: Verbatim on July 10, 2008, 07:18:58 AM
I don't think (nor do I believe anyone else here thinks) that you can ever have made a prisonbreak. It's more a way of life, in a sense, than a single event. (But it's not really a way of life.) That's why it's kind of difficult to "demonstrate".
Anyway, thanks for the offer but I think I've got spellchecking covered. If you're very good at layout, I can use your assistance later on. I'll keep your offer in mind, if I need something else I'll let you know.
I believe Ratatosk views the BIP as something escapable. At least, it sometimes appears that he believes the BIP is no longer a prison once Reconstruction becomes an accessible option.
Quote from: LMNO on July 10, 2008, 06:00:04 PM
Quote from: Verbatim on July 10, 2008, 07:18:58 AM
I don't think (nor do I believe anyone else here thinks) that you can ever have made a prisonbreak. It's more a way of life, in a sense, than a single event. (But it's not really a way of life.) That's why it's kind of difficult to "demonstrate".
Anyway, thanks for the offer but I think I've got spellchecking covered. If you're very good at layout, I can use your assistance later on. I'll keep your offer in mind, if I need something else I'll let you know.
I believe Ratatosk views the BIP as something escapable. At least, it sometimes appears that he believes the BIP is no longer a prison once Reconstruction becomes an accessible option.
BRavo, my dear LMNO, you captured my most prominent thoughts on the BiP succicently and ePrimishly!
:noodledance:
You're wrong, of course, but I'm trying not to hold that against you.
Didn't I already cover this shit?
Quote from: Cainad on June 19, 2008, 05:46:35 AM
Like I said, it's all a matter of what phenomenon you choose to apply the metaphor to. Let us ignore for a moment the "optimistic" versus the "pessimistic" interpretation, because that's just another Bar (whether you like the "happy-happy-joy-joy" or "if angels could see into my soul they would die" attitude is your own stinking prejudice, and has no bearing on Reality).
On one hand, we have the notion that the BIP is the state of unawareness about our mental limitations. This is the correct interpretation.
On the other hand, we have the notion that the bars of the BIP are our mental limitations, and the aforementioned state of unawareness is simply a byproduct of being in the "cell" one's whole life and thus being unaware of it. This is also the correct interpretation.
The first correct interpretation suggests a "cell" that the reader breaks out of once they grasp the concept of the inescapable mental limitations presented in the second correct interpretation. The second correct interpretation suggests a "cell" that cannot be broken out of at all because of biological limitations, and merely becoming aware of this version of the "cell" is equivalent to escaping the "cell" of unawareness suggested in the first correct interpretation.
This spag concludes that the metaphor is equally applicable to both schools of thought, and is inherently limited unless we want to fight over which way to interpret it. This ambiguity and confusion makes the metaphor fantastically, excellently Discordian.
Quote from: Cainad on July 10, 2008, 06:25:13 PM
Didn't I already cover this shit?
Quote from: Cainad on June 19, 2008, 05:46:35 AM
Like I said, it's all a matter of what phenomenon you choose to apply the metaphor to. Let us ignore for a moment the "optimistic" versus the "pessimistic" interpretation, because that's just another Bar (whether you like the "happy-happy-joy-joy" or "if angels could see into my soul they would die" attitude is your own stinking prejudice, and has no bearing on Reality).
On one hand, we have the notion that the BIP is the state of unawareness about our mental limitations. This is the correct interpretation.
On the other hand, we have the notion that the bars of the BIP are our mental limitations, and the aforementioned state of unawareness is simply a byproduct of being in the "cell" one's whole life and thus being unaware of it. This is also the correct interpretation.
The first correct interpretation suggests a "cell" that the reader breaks out of once they grasp the concept of the inescapable mental limitations presented in the second correct interpretation. The second correct interpretation suggests a "cell" that cannot be broken out of at all because of biological limitations, and merely becoming aware of this version of the "cell" is equivalent to escaping the "cell" of unawareness suggested in the first correct interpretation.
This spag concludes that the metaphor is equally applicable to both schools of thought, and is inherently limited unless we want to fight over which way to interpret it. This ambiguity and confusion makes the metaphor fantastically, excellently Discordian.
Cainad, you have NO chance of ever having the last word where LMNO and Ratatosk are concerned.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v711/Marburger/STFU/stfuMONKEY.jpg)
Well, balls. I guess that means my ideas and thoughts are worthless in this regard, and I should just stfu and let the monkeys duke it out in their cage for all eternity. :cry:
It's nice to know some things never change.
No.
That's the worst thing that can happen in regards to this stuff. There should never be a goal of everyone coming to the exact same conclusions about this material. Sure, it is useful to orbit some generally similar subset of ideas and defintions and such. But that we have different takes is a good thing. That's why our pamphlets, etc., only work with multiple authors contributing. Because we will never provide THE answer. But, instead, it's a nice buffet of ideas. So never STFU.
Quote from: Reverend Whats His Name on July 11, 2008, 01:00:52 PM
No.
That's the worst thing that can happen in regards to this stuff. There should never be a goal of everyone coming to the exact same conclusions about this material. Sure, it is useful to orbit some generally similar subset of ideas and defintions and such. But that we have different takes is a good thing. That's why our pamphlets, etc., only work with multiple authors contributing. Because we will never provide THE answer. But, instead, it's a nice buffet of ideas. So never STFU.
TITCM
Also
STFU FOREVER! :argh!:
Quote from: Reverend Whats His Name on July 11, 2008, 01:00:52 PM
No.
That's the worst thing that can happen in regards to this stuff. There should never be a goal of everyone coming to the exact same conclusions about this material. Sure, it is useful to orbit some generally similar subset of ideas and defintions and such. But that we have different takes is a good thing. That's why our pamphlets, etc., only work with multiple authors contributing. Because we will never provide THE answer. But, instead, it's a nice buffet of ideas. So never STFU.
Okay. But LMNO and Rat aren't orbiting around a similar subset of ideas. They're orbiting completely different solar systems that happen to have the same name, and then demanding to know why their star charts don't match.
Quote from: Cainad on July 11, 2008, 01:23:53 PM
Quote from: Reverend Whats His Name on July 11, 2008, 01:00:52 PM
No.
That's the worst thing that can happen in regards to this stuff. There should never be a goal of everyone coming to the exact same conclusions about this material. Sure, it is useful to orbit some generally similar subset of ideas and defintions and such. But that we have different takes is a good thing. That's why our pamphlets, etc., only work with multiple authors contributing. Because we will never provide THE answer. But, instead, it's a nice buffet of ideas. So never STFU.
Okay. But LMNO and Rat aren't orbiting around a similar subset of ideas. They're orbiting completely different solar systems that happen to have the same name, and then demanding to know why their star charts don't match.
You'll note that it's generally in good humour, however.
It's not an argument, it's a debate.
Yeah, but (and I don't mean any disrespect by this) I think Rat is something of an exception to the rule. But I think a useful one. We need someone with a perspective that is considerably different because it will keep others re-examining the issues.
Still the important bit is to not STFU. The more voices the better. Speaking for myself, I appreciate the different viewpoints even though I might not always comment on them. (That's because I'm a lazy SOB sometimes)
Thanks guys.
This is me not STFU-ing:
LMNO's and Ratatosk's viewpoints are irreconcilable, because they aren't debating the same issue. As far as I can tell, they're both correct from their own standpoints. You know how "mass" and "weight" are usually synonymous in chemistry, but have very different meanings in physics? This particular BIP debate is like listening to a chemist and a physicist argue the definitions and appropriate uses of these terms without ever realizing that they are working in different fields. These fields are in some ways related, but far from identical.
LMNO's use of the term BIP refers to the physiological and psychological barrier that prevents us from absorbing and processing all the information around us in equal measure. This BIP can be rearranged, but never completely escaped, because "escape" from these limits would essentially be equivalent to omniscience, even divinity. With sufficient control over the psychological aspect of this prison, we can greatly expand the opportunities and information available to us.
Ratatosk's use of the term BIP can be thought of as a literary, perhaps even poetic, derivative of the version of the BIP described by LMNO. This 'secondary' BIP is the state of unawareness of the 'primary' BIP (if anyone's feelings are hurt by the use of the terms 'primary' and 'secondary', as if they were an indication of their respective value or worth, shut up and quit thinking like a monkey). If we are not aware of our own ignorance and the things that are limiting us, we cannot begin to rearrange the Cell of the 'primary' BIP. The 'secondary' BIP is relatively easy to break free from; it simply requires an acknowledgment that the 'primary' BIP exists and can be changed to some extent.
I have no idea what happened here.... I was just saying that LMNO captured that complex discussion in his brief statement:
Quote from: LMNO on July 10, 2008, 06:00:04 PM
I believe Ratatosk views the BIP as something escapable. At least, it sometimes appears that he believes the BIP is no longer a prison once Reconstruction becomes an accessible option.
I think both you and LMNO are saying the same thing, though LMNO might still be seeing 'the BiP' rather than 'a BiP'.
However, I have something in the works which might reconcile these two disperate BiP, a Grand Unified Theory of Black Iron Prisons, perhaps... Or just more nonsense, depending on how you look at it.
I propose a metaphorical olive branch by introducing another metaphor:
Rat's idea that awareness (or lack thereof) of the changability of your bars is a key component in "escape" could be considered "solitary confinement".
That is, if you aren't even aware that you're in prison, you're completely fucked; trapped in a dark hole of a singular limited perception.
When you get out of solitary confinement, and can see how you can chape your cell to your own needs, it's almost like an escape.
My work here is done.
:mittens: by the dozen. I will now have to work this new metaphor into the pamphlet.
Does anyone know offhand which essays Cain did not want in future edits of BiP?
The metaphor for me is a good one. I like it a lot but, having said that, it is only useful when one is imprisoned. I believe it's possible to escape from the state described by the BIP, 'jailbreak' as the saying goes. From that point on a new model is required because the BIP has served it's purpose and doesn't really offer a way to progress. It's still useful as a reminder that, at any point, you could slip up, forget what you've learned and end up back 'in jail'
I know we've been over this before re: the negative connotations of the phrase 'prison' but I really think the BIP would be best served as part of a .... erm .... duology (okay I give in, what the fuck is the correct term for a series of two books?)
From my point of view, anyway, other than some weird philanthropic mission to help others escape (not really my style) there is no real way to progress, it's almost like it's saying "Hey! Congratulations, you broke out" and I'm like, "so now what?"
I think there are a few of us here who have broken out. Anyone have any thoughts on what to do next, or does the BIP just end with "they all lived happily ever after, in jail"?
And before you all start jumping down my throat, I know I'm still trapped by the mechanism described by the BIP. The very fact that I am aware of this is the escape of which I speak. Not true release from bondage but enough of a release to make the prison behave like a whole different animal.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 11, 2008, 08:44:55 PM
From my point of view, anyway, other than some weird philanthropic mission to help others escape (not really my style) there is no real way to progress, it's almost like it's saying "Hey! Congratulations, you broke out" and I'm like, "so now what?"
My answer to this is contained in the following parable:
QuoteBung Fu the Fool stood buck naked before the monk Nopants. Eventually, Nopants looked up over his morning newspaper. Surprised to see a peen at eye level before him, he spit coffee everywhere.
"Somehow," said the monk, who himself was naked from the waist down, "I was not prepared for that."
"Good morning Wise Master Nopants!" said Bung Fu cheerfully. "I did what you advised: I Let Go of everything so I could learn to swim on my own."
"That's bullshit," said Nopants, pointing at bung-fu with a spoon. "You're just parading around naked because you think it'll somehow enlighten you."
"But master, that's what you do!" cried Bung Fu, embarassed.
"No," said Nopants. "I do it for me. You're doing like me. You haven't let go of anything. You just grabbed my shrapnel and made it your own."
Bung Fu thought about this. "Mise Waster Nopants, what am I supposed to do after I let go? I can't just let go of everything, that's not a good survival strategy."
"You're right," said Nopants. "But it's not really about letting go. It's about being able to let go. It's about realizing that all that stuff you're carrying around is mostly dead weight. So learn to live without that dross."
"And then what?"
Nopants leaned forward as if he was about to whisper a lesson or a great secret. Bung Fu leaned in, eager for instruction. Nopants reached out and slapped right in the goddamn monkey face.
"Think for yourself, shmuck!"
To clarify: I'm not really sitting in a tizzy wondering what to do next. I just feel things could be taken further. Exploring the world outside, so to speak.
It's already been done but seems to have stagnated some time around the 1950's and rehashed and rewritten ad nauseum, ever since. I can't help thinking there's a better way to do it than invoking that dreaded 'M' word.
I think Pent and I are thinking in similar directions.
I have some stuff in draft being poked at by other people, once I'm sure its clear and useful I'll post it. Until then, I'll leave you with this:
QuoteFrom my point of view, anyway, other than some weird philanthropic mission to help others escape (not really my style) there is no real way to progress, it's almost like it's saying "Hey! Congratulations, you broke out" and I'm like, "so now what?
So now, you get to explore. You get to order things and disorder them without being required to think that one or the other is Right or Wrong. You get to embrace the limitations that our physical neurological system has as safety controls to keep us from being overrun with new data, or you get to curse the limitations that restrict you from utter freedom. They can be your vehicle or your prison... but now, as opposed to before, YOU GET TO DECIDE.
i think that's the distinction between the BIP and the GSP - one is passive and the other active. it's like the difference between being a passenger and being the driver.
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 11, 2008, 10:22:03 PM
I think Pent and I are thinking in similar directions.
I have some stuff in draft being poked at by other people, once I'm sure its clear and useful I'll post it. Until then, I'll leave you with this:
QuoteFrom my point of view, anyway, other than some weird philanthropic mission to help others escape (not really my style) there is no real way to progress, it's almost like it's saying "Hey! Congratulations, you broke out" and I'm like, "so now what?
So now, you get to explore. You get to order things and disorder them without being required to think that one or the other is Right or Wrong. You get to embrace the limitations that our physical neurological system has as safety controls to keep us from being overrun with new data, or you get to curse the limitations that restrict you from utter freedom. They can be your vehicle or your prison... but now, as opposed to before, YOU GET TO DECIDE.
Quote from: vexati0n on July 11, 2008, 10:30:54 PM
i think that's the distinction between the BIP and the GSP - one is passive and the other active. it's like the difference between being a passenger and being the driver.
So we're on the same page at least. Anyone ready to start on a sequel?
The BIP is how to get your bearings, how to read the map, how to not eat the menu.
I can't help thinking it's been done now. Maybe the way forward is to publish the menu. I been cooking up a storm for the last 10 years or more but I'm not so full of myself I don't think there's dishes out there I've yet to savour. If only I had a map that showed me where all the good restaurants are. :D
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 11, 2008, 06:44:31 PM
Does anyone know offhand which essays Cain did not want in future edits of BiP?
Whichever ones were the ones that were originally put in.
I want to replace them, one with an essay on cognitive biases, another with an essay on politics and bars.
Quote from: Cain on July 16, 2008, 08:29:55 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on July 11, 2008, 06:44:31 PM
Does anyone know offhand which essays Cain did not want in future edits of BiP?
Whichever ones were the ones that were originally put in.
I want to replace them, one with an essay on cognitive biases, another with an essay on politics and bars.
Ok... I have no idea which 'were' yours since there's no attribution :(
Ditto.
Also, I am very happy to see you post again, Cain. :)
I won't be doing any editing in the next two weeks (nor have I done in the past week or two) because I'm too busy with the conference I'm involved in putting up. In August I will resume my labor.