Much of the practices of the numerous magick, religions, cult and self-help schools are designed to create within the self a belief that is useful - either to the believer or to the community promoting the belief. While sometimes based in objective and measurable facts or supporting evidence, more generally these groups utilize something called faith which is to say a belief that is grounded in belief. This curious process, not unlike pulling oneself up by one's own bootstraps, can be utilized by the Adept to effect positive change.
Know this: Belief is a powerful tool. What we believe strongly affects how we perceive the world, and how we act in response to it. It naturally follows that certain beliefs are useful for certain purposes - they confer a benefit that makes them worthwhile.
Like many in this modern age, I have frequently described myself as "spiritual, but not religious." By this I mean that I place value in certain intangibles - a generalized positive feeling for other beings, an appreciation of the complexity of the design of the world in which we live, a sense of connectedness to humanity and the universe as a whole - without wanting to be tied down to the structures of established religions that give those thoughts and feelings a more concrete form, mostly due to the perceived negatives that accompany those religions.
Nevertheless, having the ability to address one's spiritual needs in a more concrete way is one of the primary advantages of religion. Discordianism is, among other things, a tool for constructing structures and beliefs to this end. What follows is the construction/deconstruction of a belief that I hold to be True. I present it in the hope that it may be useful, and True, for you as well.
First, some basic points:
1. The universe loves you. This can be reasonably concluded from the fact that you exist at all. You have been given a gift: the opportunity to explore, to play, to grow and to be happy.
2. It is useful to feel loved. Anyone who has ever been hugged by anyone ever knows the joy this brings. This is fairly straightforward.
3. It is more useful to be loved by a person than an abstract force. 'Your mom loves you' has a stronger meaning than 'someone loves you' and is easier to connect with and to feel. Further, when you know your mother (for example) loves you, you also know she continues to even when she's not in your sight.
4. It is impossible to prove or disprove the existence of God, but it may be useful to assume it.
5. Defining God as a creator, a Prime Mover, that which is responsible for existence of the universe and as a general generative force, it is reasonable to view this force as female in character. Creativity and the generation of life is associated with mother/female and this is an appropriate connection for the human mind to grasp.
6. Merely by looking around oneself, it is relatively apparent that the driving forces of the world are those of change.
With these ideas in mind, it should be apparent that it is appropriate and useful to personify 'God' as Eris: She fits the bill really very nicely. Making this attribution allows several associated philosophical extensions and explanations that fit well within the human mind and provide a good model with which to view the world, and delivers a number of benefits.
Primarily: Eris loves you. The ability to see and feel this can be a great and constant comfort.
Having a part in all creation, all things can be thought of as Eris' children and She their mother. Like any good mother She doesn't play favourites and wants you to work stuff out for yourself; She wants you to better yourself and Think For Yourself. Don't you want to make your Mother proud of you? Of course you do.
Eris is like unto the mother that when confronted by a child saying "My brother keeps hitting me!" says "Well, make him stop." The whole idea of answering prayers would be much like giving favour to the pleading child rather than the rest of the kids. No mom likes to be whined at either - prayer as a result is rarely effective and occasionally dangerous. That isn't to say you shouldn't tell Her that you love her now and again, but there's no reason to belabor the point: your Mother knows you love Her as long as you say it now and again.
None of this is to say She is utterly benevolent- what mother doesn't fuck with her kids now and then? Eris is a little weird and a little crazy after all - much like the universe. But no matter how weird She gets, She still loves you.
It is useful to know that.
Standard disclaimers: This works pretty well for me, and that's all I can say for sure. I am very aware it could be better written; I prefer a more Socratic dialog. You mileage may vary. Not available in all regions. The management is not responsible for improper use, or for that matter for proper use. Clean your room, eat your vegetables and remember to walk the damn dog so he doesn't shit on the carpet again.
Hail Eris.
I mostly like it. I can see how it would be helpful in situations which lead to depression or the like.
Quote from: BAWHEED on November 27, 2008, 10:02:19 PM
I mostly like it. I can see how it would be helpful in situations which lead to depression or the like.
LOL is that something you say to Christian evangelicals too? If not you should try, it would be good for lulz!
I think of it more as a general life-enhancement myself. It neatly assembles several pieces of my psyche.
I tend not to speak to evangelicals at all if I can help it, but I will try it.
Did it seem condescending? I didn't intend it to this time.
Quote from: BAWHEED on November 28, 2008, 12:14:03 AM
I tend not to speak to evangelicals at all if I can help it, but I will try it.
Did it seem condescending? I didn't intend it to this time.
Nah, s'cool.
I'm hoping for more feedback tho'. Also, my next task is to distill this down to a small pamphlet.
I take issue with point #1. Not that I disagree with it (because whether it's true or not irrelevant - that would be asking the wrong question) but that your justification for it is bogus. It's OK to just assert things as axioms.
"Love" is pretty vague, but it seems to be something that is restricted only to intelligent creatures, or creatures with souls, depending on the belief system. You don't argue that the universe falls into either category, so I can't see how you can make the claim that the universe is capable of love, much less actually loves you.
Ignoring that for a moment, I really, really hate riffs on the "Your birth is evidence that your purpose is necessary" line. Really? How so? Parents have children they don't love all the time. Frankenstein certainly didn't love his monster. Why should the universe be any different?
This isn't to say that it might not be useful to believe that the universe loves you, but don't try to justify it with shitty logic.
Also point 6. The driving force of the universe isn't change; the effect of the driving force in the universe is (very often) change. Maximization of entropy is a good candidate for driving force, but that's neither here nor there. You might state the the nature of the universe is change, or that change is the only constant, but change is a result, not a cause.
And neither is Eris the patron goddess of change. She's the goddess of conflict and strife. A eternally balanced unchanging civil war would be right up her alley.
I also have a hard time visualizing Eris as a mother figure. If she sleeps with anyone, you know it would only be to cause jealousy in somebody else. If Eris says a kind word to you, it would only be to make her other thousand starving children hate you for it. If Eris gives you fruit, it's only because she knows it will eventually lead to your favorite city getting sacked. As a mother, Eris would be at least as likely to just roll over onto you that help you find food. (Not in the 'tough love' sense, but in the 'starving the baby' sense.)
I honestly see Eris as an archetype who "loves us" in the same sense that a kid with a magnifying glass loves an anthill.
Not that it makes Eris evil... just not motherly, per se. But everyone can develop their own sense of Eris.
The Universe or deities having any sort of opinions on me scares the shit out of me.
Its like knowing the chief of operations at the CIA, or Osama Bin Laden, knows and takes a personal interest in your life.
I believe Shadowfurry is speaking more about Hill and Thornley's revision of the deity of Eris, particularly when she tells the population:
Quote from: ErisI have come to tell you that you are free. Many ages ago, My consciousness left man, that he might develop himself. I return to find this development approaching completion, but hindered by fear and misunderstanding. You have built for yourselves psychic suits of armorm and clad in them, your vision is restricted, your movements are clumsy and painful, your skin is bruised, and your spirit is broiled in the sun. I am chaos. I am the substance from which your artists and scientists build rhythyms. I am the spirit with which your children and clowns laugh in happy anarchy. I am chaos. I am alive, and I tell you that you are free.
the problem i have is with point 5:
> 5. Defining God as a creator, a Prime Mover, that which is responsible for existence of the universe and as a general generative force, it is reasonable to
> view this force as female in character. Creativity and the generation of life is associated with mother/female and this is an appropriate connection for the
> human mind to grasp.
in symbology i know, these are mostly male forces: the Prime Mover, generative force, creativity. the male force provides the stimulus and the primal movement, and then the female functions as a recepticle and guiding principle, giving Form and Function to the undirected force. "generation of life" happens when the energy bounces back and forth between the male and female principle, becoming a complex system of interlocking forces, neither male (stimulus) nor female (receptive).
and (imo!) "God" is neither of these, but the thing that allows* forces to interlock at all and it loves you in the sense that it allows* desire and pleasure (in the most abstract senses of the words) to exist, which allows* the interlocking forces to become a complex system in order to act upon this desire for pleasure. that's the loving thing.
*i say "allows", i could have said "causes", it's the same thing at that level.
this is my current idea though, next month it may probably be something different (like it was last month). Eris, however, is just a sort of metaphor to me.
Quote from: GA on November 28, 2008, 05:12:27 AM
I take issue with point #1. Not that I disagree with it (because whether it's true or not irrelevant - that would be asking the wrong question) but that your justification for it is bogus. It's OK to just assert things as axioms.
"Love" is pretty vague, but it seems to be something that is restricted only to intelligent creatures, or creatures with souls, depending on the belief system. You don't argue that the universe falls into either category, so I can't see how you can make the claim that the universe is capable of love, much less actually loves you.
Ignoring that for a moment, I really, really hate riffs on the "Your birth is evidence that your purpose is necessary" line. Really? How so? Parents have children they don't love all the time. Frankenstein certainly didn't love his monster. Why should the universe be any different?
This isn't to say that it might not be useful to believe that the universe loves you, but don't try to justify it with shitty logic.
LOL! My justification is an axiom itself. Are you trying to say that life isn't a gift? Why do you say that exactly? What is it, if not a gift? The answer probably says more about you than about the universe.
Also, go back and read my first paragraph again. You seem to have chosen a belief system wherein the universe is not capable of love and/or does not love you, for no particular reason. I have chosen one where it is and does, for a reason.
You might consider not that I am wearing rose-coloured glasses, but perhaps that you are wearing shit-stained ones.
Quote from: GA on November 28, 2008, 05:12:27 AM
Also point 6. The driving force of the universe isn't change; the effect of the driving force in the universe is (very often) change. Maximization of entropy is a good candidate for driving force, but that's neither here nor there. You might state the the nature of the universe is change, or that change is the only constant, but change is a result, not a cause.
chicken/egg
Quote from: GA on November 28, 2008, 05:12:27 AM
And neither is Eris the patron goddess of change. She's the goddess of conflict and strife. A eternally balanced unchanging civil war would be right up her alley.
I also have a hard time visualizing Eris as a mother figure. If she sleeps with anyone, you know it would only be to cause jealousy in somebody else. If Eris says a kind word to you, it would only be to make her other thousand starving children hate you for it. If Eris gives you fruit, it's only because she knows it will eventually lead to your favorite city getting sacked. As a mother, Eris would be at least as likely to just roll over onto you that help you find food. (Not in the 'tough love' sense, but in the 'starving the baby' sense.)
I'm not exactly sure where you're getting that from - certainly not from the book for which the site is named:
I am chaos. I am the substance from which your artists and scientists build rhythms. I am the spirit with which your children and clowns laugh in happy anarchy. I am chaos. I am alive, and I tell you that you are free. Eris is whatever you want her to be. It may be worth asking yourself why you want her to be an agent of strife and conflict rather than an agent of joyous chaos.
(edited for spelling and a minor content change. it's early and i need caffeine.)
Quote from: Nigel on November 28, 2008, 09:11:19 AM
I honestly see Eris as an archetype who "loves us" in the same sense that a kid with a magnifying glass loves an anthill.
Not that it makes Eris evil... just not motherly, per se. But everyone can develop their own sense of Eris.
This seems to be a pervasive opinion on PD.com, and I find it sad and a little irritating really. I blame the Subgenii, cynical motherfuckers that they are.
As stated above and by BAWHEED and I, it certainly isn't the view of Eris presented in the book for which this site is named. It seems to borrow more from the classical Greek idea of Eris, but there's no good reason to choose that view over the other.
Are you perhaps a victim of indigestion?
This too is my problem with BIP - there's very little joy in it. Hill and Thornley were clowns, pointing out the absurdity of life in a fun way, and that for me is a large part of the point of Discordianism. "The Enlightened Take Things Lightly." Cynicism is easy, and pervasive in our culture, and frankly I'm kinda sick of it. It benefits no one - even the cynic who uses it as a shield is only admitting the crappiness of life and using their cynicism as a shield against it.
Ditch the shield, and instead take up the sword.
Quote from: Triple Zero on November 28, 2008, 01:41:11 PM
the problem i have is with point 5:
> 5. Defining God as a creator, a Prime Mover, that which is responsible for existence of the universe and as a general generative force, it is reasonable to
> view this force as female in character. Creativity and the generation of life is associated with mother/female and this is an appropriate connection for the
> human mind to grasp.
in symbology i know, these are mostly male forces: the Prime Mover, generative force, creativity. the male force provides the stimulus and the primal movement, and then the female functions as a recepticle and guiding principle, giving Form and Function to the undirected force. "generation of life" happens when the energy bounces back and forth between the male and female principle, becoming a complex system of interlocking forces, neither male (stimulus) nor female (receptive).
and (imo!) "God" is neither of these, but the thing that allows* forces to interlock at all and it loves you in the sense that it allows* desire and pleasure (in the most abstract senses of the words) to exist, which allows* the interlocking forces to become a complex system in order to act upon this desire for pleasure. that's the loving thing.
*i say "allows", i could have said "causes", it's the same thing at that level.
this is my current idea though, next month it may probably be something different (like it was last month). Eris, however, is just a sort of metaphor to me.
Interesting. Do you think it would carry more weight if I shifted that part to talk more about creation and generation as related to birth and symbols more solidly related to the female? I don't want to get too trapped into that whole Earth Mother riff though, since people are used to rejecting that out of hand and out of habit as hippy-dippy crap.
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 02:02:43 PM
Quote from: Nigel on November 28, 2008, 09:11:19 AM
I honestly see Eris as an archetype who "loves us" in the same sense that a kid with a magnifying glass loves an anthill.
Not that it makes Eris evil... just not motherly, per se. But everyone can develop their own sense of Eris.
This seems to be a pervasive opinion on PD.com, and I find it sad and a little irritating really. I blame the Subgenii, cynical motherfuckers that they are.
As stated above and by BAWHEED and I, it certainly isn't the view of Eris presented in the book for which this site is named. It seems to borrow more from the classical Greek idea of Eris, but there's no good reason to choose that view over the other.
Are you perhaps a victim of indigestion?
This too is my problem with BIP - there's very little joy in it. Hill and Thornley were clowns, pointing out the absurdity of life in a fun way, and that for me is a large part of the point of Discordianism. "The Enlightened Take Things Lightly." Cynicism is easy, and pervasive in our culture, and frankly I'm kinda sick of it. It benefits no one - even the cynic who uses it as a shield is only admitting the crappiness of life and using their cynicism as a shield against it.
Ditch the shield, and instead take up the sword.
Don't get me wrong... I'm not all warm and snugly, I accept BOTH views of Eris as true.
One could just as easily make the argument that optimism benefits no one. It's a matter of perspective. Keep in mind the Sacred Chao, Shadowfurry... both are equally true, cynicism and optimism, and both are equally ridiculous. If you favour one view you ignore the bigger picture, and to quote Bernard Jaffe: "You don't want to miss out on the big picture, do you?"
I appreciate this peek at your reality tunnel. Few people have well-formed axioms supporting their belief structures, so I applaud that. (note that I think they're kind of unnecessary, too, but very useful when you actually want to discuss them)
It's not for me though. I'm trying to break the habit of personifying the universe. My current conception of Eris treats her sort of like a meta-component of all ordered systems. I'm still building on that, and trying to figure out what that means and how to relate to it. But I'm not really shopping around for a god head right now.
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 02:02:43 PM
As stated above and by BAWHEED and I, it certainly isn't the view of Eris presented in the book for which this site is named. It seems to borrow more from the classical Greek idea of Eris, but there's no good reason to choose that view over the other.
Are you perhaps a victim of indigestion?
This too is my problem with BIP - there's very little joy in it. Hill and Thornley were clowns, pointing out the absurdity of life in a fun way, and that for me is a large part of the point of Discordianism. "The Enlightened Take Things Lightly." Cynicism is easy, and pervasive in our culture, and frankly I'm kinda sick of it. It benefits no one - even the cynic who uses it as a shield is only admitting the crappiness of life and using their cynicism as a shield against it.
Ditch the shield, and instead take up the sword.
Oh, I see. The problem is our view of Eris (insomuch as I can speak for the other members of the forum or indeed claim we share a common conception which in all likelihood we do not) is
badwrong. We should adhere to your vision of Eris because it is doubleplus good, even though as you yourself admit, "there is no good reason to choose [one] view over another".
Well if there is no good reason, why choose it?
Perhaps some of us prefer our view of Eris? I came to Discordianism via my interest in Greek mythology and worldview. I know enough about the Greek social and religious views of the time to converse with academics who specialize in the period. I know historically that my viewpoint has more validity than other interpretations and I prefer a harsh truth to a comforting lie.
The Universe is struggle and conflict, generated by independent agents with flawed understandings of their world and especially those inhabit it. Change is the only Universal constant, and those who deny it will get smashed upon the jagged rocks of History, or else stagnate into irrelevance on the shore. But if you know the waves are coming, and something of the sea, you can ride the crest instead.
I laugh because the world is both tragedy and comedy, for someone with perspective.
What you are suggesting is sticking your head in the sand with a pacifier and soothing balms about how the Universe works. Well if the Universe loves me so fucking much, why am I £20,000 in debt and unemployed for the last 6 months? Could it be, in fact, that such beliefs are little more than pallitatives for those who have reached a certain level of comfort and satisfaction in life and wish to wall themselves off from the harsh existence of others, should it affect their mood too much and spoil their feelings of contentment? I don't know, but its certainly one explanation, and
sounds plausible.
Your "sword" is only another shield, that of ignorance. I stare my life in the face, without crutches, and weather it, because I know the struggle to survive improves, and that which does not kill me makes me stronger (or leaves me crippled, but lets save
that argument for another time). I have an acute sense of black humour, the sort that only people who live on the edge of ruin truly appreciate. Maybe its not a humour to your liking, but it certainly exists, and I have laughed harder in the past year than at any other time in my life. The jokes are funnier and the humour more acute, with this kind of lifestyle.
Incidentally, the argument "well it was like that in TEH BOOK" wont hold much water here.
You are certainly free to live the way you choose, and how you see most fit. But I don't see why the rest of us should have to put up with your complaining that we are badwrong cynical Discordians. Because if you really want to down that road, the above is only a taster of what is to come.
Not to mention dogma is so 2004, and it smells no better coming from a beatnik tract than it does anywhere else.
Quote from: Cain on November 28, 2008, 11:44:53 AM
The Universe or deities having any sort of opinions on me scares the shit out of me.
Its like knowing the chief of operations at the CIA, or Osama Bin Laden, knows and takes a personal interest in your life.
I feel the need to point out that your second sentence there implies a pretty bleak worldview. The entire point of the exercise is get away from that. What does it benefit you, to hold that view? I'm too old to cling to a view of the world as my enemy. It's tiresome, and no goddamn fun.
Pull the wool over your own eyes - put perhaps choose the soft wool dyed pretty colours and knit into something nifty, not that crap-encrusted wool shammy you found in the garage.
Quote from: BAWHEED on November 28, 2008, 02:35:37 PM
One could just as easily make the argument that optimism benefits no one. It's a matter of perspective. Keep in mind the Sacred Chao, Shadowfurry... both are equally true, cynicism and optimism, and both are equally ridiculous. If you favour one view you ignore the bigger picture, and to quote Bernard Jaffe: "You don't want to miss out on the big picture, do you?"
Actually, my point is that optimism benefits
me. Don't get me wrong, I'm not stupidly optimistic, and I do enjoy cynicism - it can be pretty damn funny, the Book of the Subgenius is fair evidence of that. But too frequently it seems that I see people that let it dominate their worldview and I just find that depressing, and really just not all that fun. I understand that some people dig on that, and if that's their trip and they enjoy it more power to them. I've found it doesn't work for me though.
I'm probably not as cynical as I seem on the forum, except when I am... however, I come here mostly to blow off steam about things that piss me off. Which I can see would make some people believe I am a cranky son of a bitch all the time. If something thrills me I more or less keep it to myself, or share with my close friends and family. Not sure why that is, but I would assume its at least somewhat similar with a lot of others on here... Don't assume this is the entire picture.
Quote from: Cain on November 28, 2008, 02:43:35 PM
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 02:02:43 PM
As stated above and by BAWHEED and I, it certainly isn't the view of Eris presented in the book for which this site is named. It seems to borrow more from the classical Greek idea of Eris, but there's no good reason to choose that view over the other.
Are you perhaps a victim of indigestion?
This too is my problem with BIP - there's very little joy in it. Hill and Thornley were clowns, pointing out the absurdity of life in a fun way, and that for me is a large part of the point of Discordianism. "The Enlightened Take Things Lightly." Cynicism is easy, and pervasive in our culture, and frankly I'm kinda sick of it. It benefits no one - even the cynic who uses it as a shield is only admitting the crappiness of life and using their cynicism as a shield against it.
Ditch the shield, and instead take up the sword.
Oh, I see. The problem is our view of Eris (insomuch as I can speak for the other members of the forum or indeed claim we share a common conception which in all likelihood we do not) is badwrong. We should adhere to your vision of Eris because it is doubleplus good, even though as you yourself admit, "there is no good reason to choose [one] view over another".
Well if there is no good reason, why choose it?
Perhaps some of us prefer our view of Eris? I came to Discordianism via my interest in Greek mythology and worldview. I know enough about the Greek social and religious views of the time to converse with academics who specialize in the period. I know historically that my viewpoint has more validity than other interpretations and I prefer a harsh truth to a comforting lie.
The Universe is struggle and conflict, generated by independent agents with flawed understandings of their world and especially those inhabit it. Change is the only Universal constant, and those who deny it will get smashed upon the jagged rocks of History, or else stagnate into irrelevance on the shore. But if you know the waves are coming, and something of the sea, you can ride the crest instead.
I laugh because the world is both tragedy and comedy, for someone with perspective.
What you are suggesting is sticking your head in the sand with a pacifier and soothing balms about how the Universe works. Well if the Universe loves me so fucking much, why am I £20,000 in debt and unemployed for the last 6 months? Could it be, in fact, that such beliefs are little more than pallitatives for those who have reached a certain level of comfort and satisfaction in life and wish to wall themselves off from the harsh existence of others, should it affect their mood too much and spoil their feelings of contentment? I don't know, but its certainly one explanation, and sounds plausible.
Your "sword" is only another shield, that of ignorance. I stare my life in the face, without crutches, and weather it, because I know the struggle to survive improves, and that which does not kill me makes me stronger (or leaves me crippled, but lets save that argument for another time). I have an acute sense of black humour, the sort that only people who live on the edge of ruin truly appreciate. Maybe its not a humour to your liking, but it certainly exists, and I have laughed harder in the past year than at any other time in my life. The jokes are funnier and the humour more acute, with this kind of lifestyle.
Incidentally, the argument "well it was like that in TEH BOOK" wont hold much water here.
You are certainly free to live the way you choose, and how you see most fit. But I don't see why the rest of us should have to put up with your complaining that we are badwrong cynical Discordians. Because if you really want to down that road, the above is only a taster of what is to come.
Wow, pretty defensive there Cain.
I'm not telling you how to live your life, just telling you how I choose to live mine, and suggesting that it might be beneficial to try it. By doing so I'm also trying to make you question your assumptions about the world.
I find a significant hilarity that you are giving more credit to the Greek conception of Eris than the one in the PD, and claim that your viewpoint "has more historical validity". :lulz: Who the fuck cares? The interpretations of some long-dead storytellers about a goddess are
more valid than the inspirations and interpretations of some more recent ones? Their version is the truth, and mine a comforting lie? REALLY?
Like many, you confuse optimism with blindness, and say that I wish to 'wall myself off from existence' - I find this simply tragic, and nothing could be further from the truth. You're screaming at me "THE WORLD SUCKS YOU KNOW! IT DOES! YOU KNOW IT DOES!" and all I can do is shake my head sadly. If you want to say the world sucks, go ahead, but don't expect me to buy it - that's just your opinion. What I'm asking you is, what good does it do you to have that opinion? If another opinion would do you more good, why not hold that one instead?
My shit job is ass - it was meant to be temporary and here I am more than a year later still doing the fucking thing, the pay is terrible and my search for a new job has been depressing to say the least. I'm barely staying afloat and money is a source of massive stress. My son is autistic, and will probably never communicate with me on the level I wish he would. My wife and I are having significant relationship issues, and yeah, it fucking sucks. I could be cynical and down about it and work to make it better, or I could be optimistic and hopeful about it and work to make it better. I'm not hiding from anything, despite your fervent desire to believe that I am because it reinforces your worldview. Fuck that.
Dude, I don't think you're badwrong, and I don't think THE BOOK
has to be the Truth - but it can be. Why the hell not?
To simplify:
Q:
Quote from: Cain on November 28, 2008, 02:43:35 PM
Well if there is no good reason, why choose it?
A: For the lulz.
Sorry, who is trying to universalize their argument here?
Oh, thats right, its you.
I'm saying people should be free to believe what I want, and this is what I prefer. You're the one going around suggesting (in a passive-aggressive manner) that people who don't believe what you do are bleak, depressive and wrong.
Oh, and you have the audacity to put words in my mouth and tell me what I am thinking. Incorrectly, I might add, though anyone with any sort of reading comprehension already knows that.
Maybe you should learn how to have a proper argument before you hit the "submit" button. Or just make shit up and get ridiculed for it, its your choice.
:popcorn:
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 02:56:00 PM
But too frequently it seems that I see people that let it dominate their worldview and I just find that depressing, and really just not all that fun.
Hey.
Why do I give a damn what depresses you? I didn't realize my purpose here was to fulfill your emotional desires.
Why do you want people to act only as you like, SF23?
Quote from: Cain on November 28, 2008, 03:51:58 PM
Sorry, who is trying to universalize their argument here?
Oh, thats right, its you.
I'm saying people should be free to believe what I want, and this is what I prefer. You're the one going around suggesting (in a passive-aggressive manner) that people who don't believe what you do are bleak, depressive and wrong.
Oh, and you have the audacity to put words in my mouth and tell me what I am thinking. Incorrectly, I might add, though anyone with any sort of reading comprehension already knows that.
Maybe you should learn how to have a proper argument before you hit the "submit" button. Or just make shit up and get ridiculed for it, its your choice.
Nah, I'm saying that I think your worldview is wrong
for me. I'm genuinely unsure why you think I'm trying to force anything on you - all I'm doing is offering. To be fair my initial response to you was somewhat harsh, and I apologize for that, particularly if you felt I was putting words in your mouth. As I said before above, if it works for you, awesome, go for it.
Quote from: Cain on November 28, 2008, 03:55:26 PM
Why do I give a damn what depresses you? I didn't realize my purpose here was to fulfill your emotional desires.
Well, now you know. :lulz:
Quote from: Cain on November 28, 2008, 03:51:58 PM
Why do you want people to act only as you like, SF23?
I don't want everyone to act only like me - that'd be boring. I think its a fun act though, so I'm presenting people with a tool to use. If you find it useful, great. If you don't, that's fine too. Whatever floats your boat.
(edited to remove a duplicate word - dammit i still need to make some tea)
I wasn't the one who came out batting with insulting remarks about another person's worldview. In fact, my first comment aside, I decided to ignore this thread precisely because its not my sort of thing. That was, until you started preaching about cynical Discordians to Nigel and GA.
Here is a little lesson for you: you can believe whatever crazy shit you want about the Universe. No, really, go ahead. Its no skin off my nose. But I value having an effect on the world, and that means implicitly understanding how it works, down to the smallest detail. And you can believe the Universe loves you and that Eris just has a bad repuation...but we both know that doesn't tally up to anything objective. The more you remove yourself from an understanding of the world grounded in facts, the less effective your actions are, and the more you open yourself up to other sorts of ungrounded beliefs. Sure, they may be "useful" in that they cause you certain emotional states or bring about a sense of contentment. But they're not much good beyond that.
Of course, if you have no interest in having any sort of effect on your world, then that too is fine. Again, your choice. However I like to be active and engaged, and that means knowing the sort of things which are entirely and absolutely incompatible with your worldview. And so, I reject it.
Quote from: Cain on November 28, 2008, 04:34:33 PM
I wasn't the one who came out batting with insulting remarks about another person's worldview. In fact, my first comment aside, I decided to ignore this thread precisely because its not my sort of thing. That was, until you started preaching about cynical Discordians to Nigel and GA.
Here is a little lesson for you: you can believe whatever crazy shit you want about the Universe. No, really, go ahead. Its no skin off my nose. But I value having an effect on the world, and that means implicitly understanding how it works, down to the smallest detail. And you can believe the Universe loves you and that Eris just has a bad repuation...but we both know that doesn't tally up to anything objective. The more you remove yourself from an understanding of the world grounded in facts, the less effective your actions are, and the more you open yourself up to other sorts of ungrounded beliefs. Sure, they may be "useful" in that they cause you certain emotional states or bring about a sense of contentment. But they're not much good beyond that.
Of course, if you have no interest in having any sort of effect on your world, then that too is fine. Again, your choice. However I like to be active and engaged, and that means knowing the sort of things which are entirely and absolutely incompatible with your worldview. And so, I reject it.
Ah, now we're getting to the meat of it.
I am unsure how the belief I laid out is incompatible with being active or engaged - in fact I tend to think the opposite. I never stated or claimed that it added up to anything objective, only that it is useful to me (and potentially others, which is my motivation for posting it here). A sense of contentment was part of the point.
However, contentment != complacency.
Which things that I laid out are you thinking are incompatible with being active and engaged? It's an important point, and I'd appreciate elucidation on it.
(edited for spelling, again. goddamn it the preview button is there for a reason. sigh)
No, you're misreading me again. I said if you have no interest in being effective that is your issue. If you hold fundamentally false beliefs about the world, then you will not be effective in what you set out to achieve, unless your actions are relating to your own perception and delusions. Your worldview is not incompatible with action, it is incompatible with actually achieving goals beyond the ones mentioned above.
Quote from: Cain on November 28, 2008, 04:51:07 PM
No, you're misreading me again. I said if you have no interest in being effective that is your issue. If you hold fundamentally false beliefs about the world, then you will not be effective in what you set out to achieve, unless your actions are relating to your own perception and delusions. Your worldview is not incompatible with action, it is incompatible with actually achieving goals beyond the ones mentioned above.
Hm.
a) What belief did I detail that was fundamentally false?
b) Why are the beliefs I laid out incompatible with with achieving goals beyond the ones mentioned above?
Quote from: BAWHEED on November 28, 2008, 03:52:52 PM
:popcorn:
Heh. I expected to be challenged when I posted this, heck that was part of the reason I posted it. I'm rather enjoying the give and take with Cain and hope that he is too.
As am I.
1. I have no problem with Discordians that want to see Eris as a bitch. The Greeks certainly seemed to have perceived her that way.
2. The Discordian Society as laid out in the PD claims that the "Greeks got It wrong", thus I have no problem with Discordians that want to see Eris as more of a Freedom Loving Prankster, Mal-2 and Omar certianly seem to have seen her that way.
That one knows ancient Greek mythology may be immaterial to "Discordianism", since Discordianism was initially based on Recent American Mythology, not Ancient Greek Mythology. It may provide additional insights to the individual's perceptions about Discordianism, but those insights may not necessary be useful for everyone.
It seems to me that perceiving Eris as either a happy hippy OR a bitch requires a subjective interpretation on the part of the Discordian. After all, one can point to the ancients and say "They said Eris sucked", or one can point to the PD and say "They said Eris didn't suck". To hold that either the ancient Greeks OR Mal and Omar have a better claim on Eris' personality seems like a silly argument since the Lovely Lady of Limbo probably doesn't exist in an objective sense (No offense Eris, I believe in you... :tinfoilhat: ).
From a perceptual sense... from a metaphorical sense... Chaos seems neither happy and hippy nor vindictive and bitchy. It simply exists. That we humans call this chaotic incident good or that chaotic incident bad speaks far more to our perception of the event, than the personality of a concept. Chaos isn't vindictive, since it doesn't have a brain... it isn't a hippy because it can't smell like Patchouli. Chaos is neither the horror that the Greeks saw, nor the absolute freedom that some Pinealists see.
That being said, I personally pay far more attention to the Eris of modern myth, than the Eris of ancient myth... but I don't ignore either of them.
im sitting reading this amusing thread with my daughter on my lap. and we're playing and then i read and it's just an all around silly time. what allows me to really enjoy this moment, with my daughter, is knowing deep down that life isn't always like this. sometimes its amazing (like now) sometimes it harsh and full of strife (like last week) but its because i perceive Eris, strife in this way it allows me to appreciate this moment right now. it might even bring a tear to my eye if i wasn't already smiling like an idiot. i see no reason to emphasize optimisim because both happy times and bad times make each other. and this is it.
Quote from: Burns on November 28, 2008, 05:14:04 PM
im sitting reading this amusing thread with my daughter on my lap. and we're playing and then i read and it's just an all around silly time. what allows me to really enjoy this moment, with my daughter, is knowing deep down that life isn't always like this. sometimes its amazing (like now) sometimes it harsh and full of strife (like last week) but its because i perceive Eris, strife in this way it allows me to appreciate this moment right now. it might even bring a tear to my eye if i wasn't already smiling like an idiot. i see no reason to emphasize optimisim because both happy times and bad times make each other. and this is it.
:mittens:
Also, you raise an interesting point re: optimism. It occurs to me that optimism isn't essential to the core belief I tried to express. I'll have to ponder that.
Quote from: Cain on November 28, 2008, 11:44:53 AM
The Universe or deities having any sort of opinions on me scares the shit out of me.
Its like knowing the chief of operations at the CIA, or Osama Bin Laden, knows and takes a personal interest in your life.
TITCM
Perhaps, though, there is a reason to stress optimism. After all, I'd much rather have an optimist around when trying to figure out some particularly difficult problem, than a pessimist. Finding a solution seems easier to me, if the people I'm with are actively proposing ideas, rather than pointing out all the terrible things that might happen with anything I recommend.
I find this seems true in the reality I play in at work... enterprise credit card encryption, across multiple systems from SAP to AS400 to zSeries Mainframe etc etc etc would not have been possible if my team had been pessimists. We hit brick wall after brick wall and it was due to optimism, I think, that we succeeded. When we faced some insane problem, almost everyone on the team had some ideas about how it might get fixed. The few naysayers, that constantly wanted to pull the plug because it was just too hard/risky/technically infeasible were sidelined. The end result, when the Payment Card Industry came knocking to do an audit... we were told that we were way ahead of our peers in our compliance and our technical solutions... and a number of the pessimists no longer work here.
Optimism has its pitfalls... there seems little value in wide eyed wonder at the Emerald City, if its only green because of the glasses we're wearing. Without optimism, though, solutions to problems could be hard to come by.
A pessimist may offer two solutions (or none), if those fail, the pessimist isn't surprised and tends to close the book. An optimist may offer fifty solutions, twenty of which would require human nature to be fundamentally different than it, ten of which would require perpetual motion or the overthrow of the laws of physics... and finally, ten options that are worth trying.
But, that's eight options MORE than the pessimist came up with.
Quote from: Ratatosk on November 28, 2008, 05:43:37 PM
Perhaps, though, there is a reason to stress optimism. After all, I'd much rather have an optimist around when trying to figure out some particularly difficult problem, than a pessimist. Finding a solution seems easier to me, if the people I'm with are actively proposing ideas, rather than pointing out all the terrible things that might happen with anything I recommend.
I find this seems true in the reality I play in at work... enterprise credit card encryption, across multiple systems from SAP to AS400 to zSeries Mainframe etc etc etc would not have been possible if my team had been pessimists. We hit brick wall after brick wall and it was due to optimism, I think, that we succeeded. When we faced some insane problem, almost everyone on the team had some ideas about how it might get fixed. The few naysayers, that constantly wanted to pull the plug because it was just too hard/risky/technically infeasible were sidelined. The end result, when the Payment Card Industry came knocking to do an audit... we were told that we were way ahead of our peers in our compliance and our technical solutions... and a number of the pessimists no longer work here.
Optimism has its pitfalls... there seems little value in wide eyed wonder at the Emerald City, if its only green because of the glasses we're wearing. Without optimism, though, solutions to problems could be hard to come by.
An pessimist may offer two solutions (or none), if those fail, the pessimist isn't surprised and tends to close the book. An optimist may offer fifty solutions, twenty of which would require human nature to be fundamentally different than it, ten of which would require perpetual motion or the overthrow of the laws of physics... and finally, ten options that are worth trying.
But, that's eight options MORE than the pessimist came up with.
I like you.
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 02:02:43 PM
Quote from: Nigel on November 28, 2008, 09:11:19 AM
I honestly see Eris as an archetype who "loves us" in the same sense that a kid with a magnifying glass loves an anthill.
Not that it makes Eris evil... just not motherly, per se. But everyone can develop their own sense of Eris.
This seems to be a pervasive opinion on PD.com, and I find it sad and a little irritating really. I blame the Subgenii, cynical motherfuckers that they are.
As stated above and by BAWHEED and I, it certainly isn't the view of Eris presented in the book for which this site is named. It seems to borrow more from the classical Greek idea of Eris, but there's no good reason to choose that view over the other.
Are you perhaps a victim of indigestion?
This too is my problem with BIP - there's very little joy in it. Hill and Thornley were clowns, pointing out the absurdity of life in a fun way, and that for me is a large part of the point of Discordianism. "The Enlightened Take Things Lightly." Cynicism is easy, and pervasive in our culture, and frankly I'm kinda sick of it. It benefits no one - even the cynic who uses it as a shield is only admitting the crappiness of life and using their cynicism as a shield against it.
Ditch the shield, and instead take up the sword.
Why are you so convinced that your dogma is better than mine?
I LOVE the image of Eris as a kid with a magnifying glass. You want a momma, I want a mischievous, dangerous troublemaker.
You seem to be saying you want us all to be and want the same things... like you're looking for a sort of homogeneity that, frankly, has no place in MY Discordia.
Without Hodge, Podge is imbalanced, right? MY Eris is leaving a flaming bag of poop on YOUR Eris' doorstep, ringing the bell, and running away right now.
Don't tell me how to be Discordian. There are thousands of pinealist neo-flower-children who will gladly embrace your vision of Eris. There's really no reason for you to heckle the fifteen or so people who don't. You want something? Do it. Leave me the fuck out of it.
Quote from: Nigel on November 28, 2008, 06:04:13 PM
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 02:02:43 PM
Quote from: Nigel on November 28, 2008, 09:11:19 AM
I honestly see Eris as an archetype who "loves us" in the same sense that a kid with a magnifying glass loves an anthill.
Not that it makes Eris evil... just not motherly, per se. But everyone can develop their own sense of Eris.
This seems to be a pervasive opinion on PD.com, and I find it sad and a little irritating really. I blame the Subgenii, cynical motherfuckers that they are.
As stated above and by BAWHEED and I, it certainly isn't the view of Eris presented in the book for which this site is named. It seems to borrow more from the classical Greek idea of Eris, but there's no good reason to choose that view over the other.
Are you perhaps a victim of indigestion?
This too is my problem with BIP - there's very little joy in it. Hill and Thornley were clowns, pointing out the absurdity of life in a fun way, and that for me is a large part of the point of Discordianism. "The Enlightened Take Things Lightly." Cynicism is easy, and pervasive in our culture, and frankly I'm kinda sick of it. It benefits no one - even the cynic who uses it as a shield is only admitting the crappiness of life and using their cynicism as a shield against it.
Ditch the shield, and instead take up the sword.
Why are you so convinced that your dogma is better than mine?
I LOVE the image of Eris as a kid with a magnifying glass. You want a momma, I want a mischievous, dangerous troublemaker.
You seem to be saying you want us all to be and want the same things... like you're looking for a sort of homogeneity that, frankly, has no place in MY Discordia.
Without Hodge, Podge is imbalanced, right? MY Eris is leaving a flaming bag of poop on YOUR Eris' doorstep, ringing the bell, and running away right now.
Don't tell me how to be Discordian. There are thousands of pinealist neo-flower-children who will gladly embrace your vision of Eris. There's really no reason for you to heckle the fifteen or so people who don't. You want something? Do it. Leave me the fuck out of it.
I'm not even sure those two versions of Eris are different. Eris of the Greeks wasn't a kid with a Magnifying Glass... but Eris of the PD, might be. Eris of the Greeks wasn't a Mommy, nor a person you wanted to love you... Eris of the PD might be.
The only flaw I see in either of the positions is to think that Eris IS one OR the other. Chaos, Discord and Confusion sometimes bring positive effects, sometimes negative ones... but hardly ever only one of those.
To claim that Eris IS one or the other, seems akin to claiming that fire IS good OR bad.
The wisest thing written in the PD... "This book is a mirror..."
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 01:51:41 PM
Quote from: GA on November 28, 2008, 05:12:27 AM
I take issue with point #1. Not that I disagree with it (because whether it's true or not irrelevant - that would be asking the wrong question) but that your justification for it is bogus. It's OK to just assert things as axioms.
"Love" is pretty vague, but it seems to be something that is restricted only to intelligent creatures, or creatures with souls, depending on the belief system. You don't argue that the universe falls into either category, so I can't see how you can make the claim that the universe is capable of love, much less actually loves you.
Ignoring that for a moment, I really, really hate riffs on the "Your birth is evidence that your purpose is necessary" line. Really? How so? Parents have children they don't love all the time. Frankenstein certainly didn't love his monster. Why should the universe be any different?
This isn't to say that it might not be useful to believe that the universe loves you, but don't try to justify it with shitty logic.
LOL! My justification is an axiom itself. Are you trying to say that life isn't a gift? Why do you say that exactly? What is it, if not a gift? The answer probably says more about you than about the universe.
Also, go back and read my first paragraph again. You seem to have chosen a belief system wherein the universe is not capable of love and/or does not love you, for no particular reason. I have chosen one where it is and does, for a reason.
Justifications can't be axioms. That's the whole POINT of an axiom - they don't need to be justified. You just assert them. I'd have no problem with #1 if you just said "The universe loves you."
I'm not saying that life isn't a gift. I'm saying that receiving a gift doesn't imply receiving love. Has everyone who has ever given you a present truly loved you? Have you never given a present to someone just because it was expected of you? The conclusion does not follow.
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 01:51:41 PM
You might consider not that I am wearing rose-coloured glasses, but perhaps that you are wearing shit-stained ones.
IT'S A CONDITION, OKAY? STOP BEING SO FASCIST, YOU WITH YOUR 20/20 VISION AND LACK OF OCULAR DIARRHEA!
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 01:51:41 PM
Quote from: GA on November 28, 2008, 05:12:27 AM
Also point 6. The driving force of the universe isn't change; the effect of the driving force in the universe is (very often) change. Maximization of entropy is a good candidate for driving force, but that's neither here nor there. You might state the the nature of the universe is change, or that change is the only constant, but change is a result, not a cause.
chicken/egg
I drop a rock from a height. It falls to the ground. Is the driving force here gravitational attraction, or is it rocks on the ground?
And with regards to this whole Eris thing... if you want a mother figure just make up a mother figure. Don't repurpose the goddess whose only notable role was starting a decades long war because she didn't get invited to a party. People died, Shadow. Women and children were raped and murdered and dragged from behind chariots and had their fields salted because she
didn't get invited to a party. Don't go redefining our words and names to fit something you like.
Why not? Hill and Thornley did.
Quote from: BAWHEED on November 28, 2008, 06:27:11 PM
Why not? Hill and Thornley did.
They need to get their act together as well. Pope GA's Lexical Inquisition will not look fondly on those who abuse my language.
:lol:
QuoteAnd with regards to this whole Eris thing... if you want a mother figure just make up a mother figure. Don't repurpose the goddess whose only notable role was starting a decades long war because she didn't get invited to a party. People died, Shadow. Women and children were raped and murdered and dragged from behind chariots and had their fields salted because she didn't get invited to a party. Don't go redefining our words and names to fit something you like.
Are you sure?
A decades long war began because the Goddess Aphrodite was so vain that She was willing to cause war in order to have a mere mortal declare her to be the fairest.
Women and Children were raped and murdered because Hera, Athena and Aphrodite were SO vacuous and self-centered that they were unwilling to allow one of the others to be given an honor without a fight. The Trojan war persisted, because Paris took the wife of another man, a woman who had no love for him, except a false mask of love, as cast by a bitch of a Goddess.
Eris, our beloved hag, our hurricane with a nice cinnamon scented wind, our personification of Chaos NEVER causes the horrors of war, she never causes the terrible things that happen... she causes Chaos, Discord and Confusion. Others use that Chaos, Discord and Confusion to benefit themselves, sometimes leading to terrible consequences.
Who is the fairest one at a Wedding?
Who is the most beautiful one at a Wedding?
Who is the Prettiest One at a Wedding?
Who was the apple for?
Eris might have a great time watching the horrors that man inflicts upon himself, but to blame her as the cause... may be only true in some sense. After all... if they didn't like doing it, you'd think they would stop.
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 03:43:07 PM
I'm not telling you how to live your life, just telling you how I choose to live mine, and suggesting that it might be beneficial to try it. By doing so I'm also trying to make you question your assumptions about the world.
... every time someone explains how their view of the world is different, you trot out a line like "shit-stained glasses" or "crap-encrusted shammy" for their view. That's not open-minded, it's not respectful, and it's certainly not questioning YOUR assumptions about the world. If you want to help other people question their own prison bars, you need to first understand how to do it for yourself. There is a reason for the BIP: it's a single work, not a comprehensive catalog of Discordianism. There is a reason it says that you can also imagine it as a Golden Sphere of Possibility; because both approaches are valid. You can even do them at the same time. Even so, it doesn't have to represent YOUR Discordia; hell, I haven't even read the whole thing.
What you're doing is proselytizing. There are a ton of threads where people are challenging assumptions, and you're not participating in them. Instead, you're here, telling everyone who doesn't see the world the way you do that they're doin' it wrong.
You're also making a LOT of assumptions about what people's perception of Eris means in terms of their cynicism. I'm an incurable optimist, but I don't see Eris as a benevolent mother-figure. I don't look to a maternal Eris for comfort. I just don't need to. For me, she makes more sense as a mischievous agent of strife, both positive and negative, than as a milky nurturer.
Quote from: Ratatosk on November 28, 2008, 06:12:22 PM
Quote from: Nigel on November 28, 2008, 06:04:13 PM
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 02:02:43 PM
Quote from: Nigel on November 28, 2008, 09:11:19 AM
I honestly see Eris as an archetype who "loves us" in the same sense that a kid with a magnifying glass loves an anthill.
Not that it makes Eris evil... just not motherly, per se. But everyone can develop their own sense of Eris.
This seems to be a pervasive opinion on PD.com, and I find it sad and a little irritating really. I blame the Subgenii, cynical motherfuckers that they are.
As stated above and by BAWHEED and I, it certainly isn't the view of Eris presented in the book for which this site is named. It seems to borrow more from the classical Greek idea of Eris, but there's no good reason to choose that view over the other.
Are you perhaps a victim of indigestion?
This too is my problem with BIP - there's very little joy in it. Hill and Thornley were clowns, pointing out the absurdity of life in a fun way, and that for me is a large part of the point of Discordianism. "The Enlightened Take Things Lightly." Cynicism is easy, and pervasive in our culture, and frankly I'm kinda sick of it. It benefits no one - even the cynic who uses it as a shield is only admitting the crappiness of life and using their cynicism as a shield against it.
Ditch the shield, and instead take up the sword.
Why are you so convinced that your dogma is better than mine?
I LOVE the image of Eris as a kid with a magnifying glass. You want a momma, I want a mischievous, dangerous troublemaker.
You seem to be saying you want us all to be and want the same things... like you're looking for a sort of homogeneity that, frankly, has no place in MY Discordia.
Without Hodge, Podge is imbalanced, right? MY Eris is leaving a flaming bag of poop on YOUR Eris' doorstep, ringing the bell, and running away right now.
Don't tell me how to be Discordian. There are thousands of pinealist neo-flower-children who will gladly embrace your vision of Eris. There's really no reason for you to heckle the fifteen or so people who don't. You want something? Do it. Leave me the fuck out of it.
I'm not even sure those two versions of Eris are different. Eris of the Greeks wasn't a kid with a Magnifying Glass... but Eris of the PD, might be. Eris of the Greeks wasn't a Mommy, nor a person you wanted to love you... Eris of the PD might be.
The only flaw I see in either of the positions is to think that Eris IS one OR the other. Chaos, Discord and Confusion sometimes bring positive effects, sometimes negative ones... but hardly ever only one of those.
To claim that Eris IS one or the other, seems akin to claiming that fire IS good OR bad.
The wisest thing written in the PD... "This book is a mirror..."
Actually, I was positing that both are valid. Re-read my post. There is no physical Eris goddess-entity, and the simultaneous holding of a multiplicity of perceptions of Eris doesn't invalidate any of them. It's not an either-or... YOUR Eris can be all of them, if that floats your boat.
What I'm objecting to is the "YOUR Eris is negative! YOUR Eris is unnecessary! YOUR Eris is reflective of a pessimistic worldview! There is no reason to choose YOUR Eris, but there is a reason to choose MY Eris!" attitude that he's responding with to people who see differently from him.
Quote from: Nigel on November 28, 2008, 06:45:40 PM
Actually, I was positing that both are valid. Re-read my post. There is no physical Eris goddess-entity, and the simultaneous holding of a multiplicity of perceptions of Eris doesn't invalidate any of them. It's not an either-or... YOUR Eris can be all of them, if that floats your boat.
What I'm objecting to is the "YOUR Eris is negative! YOUR Eris is unnecessary! YOUR Eris is reflective of a pessimistic worldview! There is no reason to choose YOUR Eris, but there is a reason to choose MY Eris!" attitude that he's responding with to people who see differently from him.
Yes... I was agreeing with you.
It seems to me that people see the Eris that they want to see. If they are generally optimistic people, they have an optimistic view of Eris, if they are generally pessimistic people, they tend to see her in a darker light (ergo the mirror comment).
It seems insane to me to attribute Good/Evil/Optimistic/Pessimistic to Eris, or to uncover the metaphor... It seems insane to me to attribute Good/Evil/Optimistic/Pessimistic to Chaos/Discord/Black Swans.
The optimism, pessimism, the strife or the cooperation seems, almost always, to depend on the Erisian, not Eris... and I think I've already stated my opinion on the value of an more optimistic outlook.
Quote from: Nigel on November 28, 2008, 06:04:13 PM
Why are you so convinced that your dogma is better than mine?
I'm not.
Part of my purpose in this thread though is to defend my position, and I am attempting to challenge yours as well. I'm sorry if that's coming off as antagonistic - to a degree it is a limitation of the internets tho, nuance gets lost.
Quote from: Nigel on November 28, 2008, 06:04:13 PM
I LOVE the image of Eris as a kid with a magnifying glass. You want a momma, I want a mischievous, dangerous troublemaker.
Cool, that's kick-ass.
My concern is that the more tender side of Eris is getting lost though - I see more Hodge than Podge on the PD boards. I think that's a pity. It's not fucking critical though, I'm just stirring up shit about it.
Quote from: Nigel on November 28, 2008, 06:04:13 PM
You seem to be saying you want us all to be and want the same things... like you're looking for a sort of homogeneity that, frankly, has no place in MY Discordia.
Without Hodge, Podge is imbalanced, right? MY Eris is leaving a flaming bag of poop on YOUR Eris' doorstep, ringing the bell, and running away right now.
Don't tell me how to be Discordian. There are thousands of pinealist neo-flower-children who will gladly embrace your vision of Eris. There's really no reason for you to heckle the fifteen or so people who don't. You want something? Do it. Leave me the fuck out of it.
I'm uncertain why everyone thinks I'm trying to
enforce dogma here; I'm offering an interpretation and yeah, I'm challenging yours as a result. I have stated several times that this is my trip, and it might work for you and it might not - I don't know how that's getting lost.
I fail to see how defending my interpretation is heckling.
As for leaving you the fuck out of it, if you want to be left out of it don't post in the thread, hon. Easy-peasy.
I really have the utmost respect for (nearly) everyone here, and have no intention to offend. Y'all are taking this pretty seriously, which was a little unexpected actually.
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 06:59:44 PM
I really have the utmost respect for (nearly) everyone here, and have no intention to offend. Y'all are taking this pretty seriously, which was a little unexpected actually.
It happens when this topic arises.
Everyone loves their dogmas... even us. :lulz:
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 06:59:44 PM
I'm not.
Part of my purpose in this thread though is to defend my position, and I am attempting to challenge yours as well. I'm sorry if that's coming off as antagonistic - to a degree it is a limitation of the internets tho, nuance gets lost.
Then why are you using such antagonistic, disrespectful verbiage for other people's views of Discordia?
Quote
Cool, that's kick-ass.
My concern is that the more tender side of Eris is getting lost though - I see more Hodge than Podge on the PD boards. I think that's a pity. It's not fucking critical though, I'm just stirring up shit about it.
This is just one place. You want it to be more lighthearted? Post something funny, happy, warm, fuzzy, and sweet. This thread, particularly the way you've responded to people like me and GA, is more of what you're complaining about.
Also, pessimism is not Hodge, and optimism is not Podge. Both can be either-or.
Quote
I'm uncertain why everyone thinks I'm trying to enforce dogma here; I'm offering an interpretation and yeah, I'm challenging yours as a result. I have stated several times that this is my trip, and it might work for you and it might not - I don't know how that's getting lost.
I fail to see how defending my interpretation is heckling.
Because you're not "defending" your interpretation... you're attacking other people's interpretations when they explain how theirs differ.
Quote
As for leaving you the fuck out of it, if you want to be left out of it don't post in the thread, hon. Easy-peasy.
I really have the utmost respect for (nearly) everyone here, and have no intention to offend. Y'all are taking this pretty seriously, which was a little unexpected actually.
I mean don't try to demean me into following your dogma, baby doll. Also, you don't have any idea how seriously anyone here is taking this. Do you realize that?
From your posts, you seem to be taking it very seriously, yourself. Are you?
QuoteAlso, pessimism is not Hodge, and optimism is not Podge. Both can be either-or.
This is a very good motorcycle. In fact, we can stretch this much further.
We can be Optimistic Discordians without necessarily being PINEALIST HIPPIES (though often those two things get conflated).
We can be Pessimistic Discordians without necessarily being Greyfaced Hunchbrains (though often those two things get conflated).
I personally, tend to be an optimist discordian, I think.
Quote from: GA on November 28, 2008, 06:21:11 PM
Justifications can't be axioms. That's the whole POINT of an axiom - they don't need to be justified. You just assert them. I'd have no problem with #1 if you just said "The universe loves you."
I'm not saying that life isn't a gift. I'm saying that receiving a gift doesn't imply receiving love. Has everyone who has ever given you a present truly loved you? Have you never given a present to someone just because it was expected of you? The conclusion does not follow.
The conclusion doesn't
have to follow, certainly. As I said, I've
chosen to believe it is so. Nothing says you have to.
As for axioms not being justifications, you'll note in the OP I suggested that faith is a belief based on a belief. Semantics aside, is it unreasonable to have suggested what I did? I obviously don't think so, but your objection suggests I could have stated it better.
Quote from: GA on November 28, 2008, 06:21:11 PM
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 01:51:41 PM
You might consider not that I am wearing rose-coloured glasses, but perhaps that you are wearing shit-stained ones.
IT'S A CONDITION, OKAY? STOP BEING SO FASCIST, YOU WITH YOUR 20/20 VISION AND LACK OF OCULAR DIARRHEA!
LOL, did I not include enough conditionals in there for you? "Might consider" and "perhaps" weren't enough? Should I have added "possibly maybe in some senses but not necessarily so don't take it so damn personal if you don't think so"? Would that have been sufficient?
Quote from: GA on November 28, 2008, 06:21:11 PM
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 01:51:41 PM
Quote from: GA on November 28, 2008, 05:12:27 AM
Also point 6. The driving force of the universe isn't change; the effect of the driving force in the universe is (very often) change. Maximization of entropy is a good candidate for driving force, but that's neither here nor there. You might state the the nature of the universe is change, or that change is the only constant, but change is a result, not a cause.
chicken/egg
I drop a rock from a height. It falls to the ground. Is the driving force here gravitational attraction, or is it rocks on the ground?
I'm not getting a good feel for your argument I must confess. You seem to be arguing in terms of Science whereas I'm arguing in more loosey-goosey spiritual sense.
Quote from: GA on November 28, 2008, 06:21:11 PM
And with regards to this whole Eris thing... if you want a mother figure just make up a mother figure. Don't repurpose the goddess whose only notable role was starting a decades long war because she didn't get invited to a party. People died, Shadow. Women and children were raped and murdered and dragged from behind chariots and had their fields salted because she didn't get invited to a party. Don't go redefining our words and names to fit something you like.
LOL now who's telling who how to be a Discordian?
Quote from: Nigel on November 28, 2008, 07:11:16 PM
Then why are you using such antagonistic, disrespectful verbiage for other people's views of Discordia?
It's a debate tactic that is apparently coming off poorly. My apologies.
Quote from: Nigel on November 28, 2008, 07:11:16 PM
Because you're not "defending" your interpretation... you're attacking other people's interpretations when they explain how theirs differ.
Hm. I'm trying to challenge people certainly, but my hope is really to entertain and make people think. I'm not trying to get anyone's back up about it - well, I was pretty rude to Cain I suppose but I did try to apologize. I'll have to go back and look at what I've posted, try to use it as a learning experience to express myself more clearly.
Quote from: Nigel on November 28, 2008, 07:11:16 PM
I mean don't try to demean me into following your dogma, baby doll. Also, you don't have any idea how seriously anyone here is taking this. Do you realize that?
Well, if you think I'm trying to demean you, I'm not. I'm just making suggestions and asking questions. Apparantly I'm being pretty fucking rude about it, to judge by the replies I'm getting. :sad:
Quote from: Nigel on November 28, 2008, 07:11:16 PM
From your posts, you seem to be taking it very seriously, yourself. Are you?
Shit no! I'm passionate about it certainly, but I'm laughing my ass off here. I find this whole thing enormously entertaining. Taking my religion seriously is against my religion. :D
Quote from: Ratatosk on November 28, 2008, 06:53:11 PM
It seems to me that people see the Eris that they want to see. If they are generally optimistic people, they have an optimistic view of Eris, if they are generally pessimistic people, they tend to see her in a darker light (ergo the mirror comment).
It seems insane to me to attribute Good/Evil/Optimistic/Pessimistic to Eris, or to uncover the metaphor... It seems insane to me to attribute Good/Evil/Optimistic/Pessimistic to Chaos/Discord/Black Swans.
The optimism, pessimism, the strife or the cooperation seems, almost always, to depend on the Erisian, not Eris... and I think I've already stated my opinion on the value of an more optimistic outlook.
I disagree with your assessment of our views of Eris being a mirror for ourselves. How we view the universe is not necessarily, or even usually, a mirror of ourselves. As I posted elsewhere:
Quote from: Nigel on November 19, 2008, 09:47:10 PM
A couple years later for some reason I re-read it, and my perspective shifted and all of a sudden it all clicked into place and made perfect, absurd sense. It was kind of dumb because the world is kind of dumb, and for some reason when you realize that all acts are no more or less absurd than all other acts, and accept that the shit just plain doesn't make sense, it DOES make sense. On some fundamental level reality is self-contradictory, and that's OK. :The opposite is also true:.
So that's the basis of my Eris. That's where she comes from.
Here is another story that may help explain my Eris:
One day about seven years ago, I was driving home from work. It was evening, late summer, absolutely gorgeous out with the sunlight sliding from golden to plum as the sun set. The leaves on the trees were just starting to yellow. It was the hardest time I've ever gone through in my life: A man I had fallen in love with, hard, had recently broken my heart and moved to Chigaco. My husband had left me a little over a year earlier, with a two-year-old and a six-month-old baby. I had the kids six days a week, but was paying my ex child support due to an "error" in the divorce paperwork, wherein my ex had calculated child support as if he had full legal and halftime physical custody. I'd just hired a lawyer to file for an adjustment to our parenting plan/child support, and my ex was being vindictive. I was getting up at horrorshow-thirty to drive the kids to their babysitter before work, working a full nine hour day, and then picking them up after, going home, making dinner, putting them to bed. I paid the babysitter $400/month, my ex $265/month, and the house I was renting and trying to buy was $700/month. My piece of shit 1977 Plymouth Arrow leaked fluids like an open wound, stalled out at every full stop, the passenger door flew open every time I took a sharp left, and the muffler had rusted through some time before. Problem was, I only made $12 an hour.
So I was feeling kind of sorry for myself. Actually, I was severely suicidally depressed, on tranquilizers most of the time, and the only thing that kept me going was my children.
And then, as I rounded a corner and my passenger door flew open, I had an epiphany; things could get, arbitrarily, infinitely worse at any moment with no warning. My home could burn down, my children could die, I could become catastrophically ill and unable to keep my house or care for my kids.
And then the world was beautiful again, and I relearned how to be happy.
Rat, my Eris is perhaps a reflection of some part of me, but for the most part my Eris is a reflection of the arbitrary universe I see around me, sometimes beautiful and sometimes devastating, and it is up to me to be the comforting, stable mother-nurturer. I don't need an external one.
I would tend to suspect that people are more likely to see Eris as the complement to ourselves, rather than a mirror of ourselves.
But Nigel, how can you be happy when your view of the Universe is so nasty and negative? Don't you know human minds are just like machines and thus must internally reflect their external outlook in every way?
Shadow, if you say LOL again I'm going to reach right through my ISP and apply large blunt instruments to your nasal cavity. It's the internet equivalent to giggling in the middle of every sentence, and it makes you sound like a sixth grade girl.
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 07:20:47 PM
Quote from: GA on November 28, 2008, 06:21:11 PM
Justifications can't be axioms. That's the whole POINT of an axiom - they don't need to be justified. You just assert them. I'd have no problem with #1 if you just said "The universe loves you."
I'm not saying that life isn't a gift. I'm saying that receiving a gift doesn't imply receiving love. Has everyone who has ever given you a present truly loved you? Have you never given a present to someone just because it was expected of you? The conclusion does not follow.
The conclusion doesn't have to follow, certainly. As I said, I've chosen to believe it is so. Nothing says you have to.
As for axioms not being justifications, you'll note in the OP I suggested that faith is a belief based on a belief. Semantics aside, is it unreasonable to have suggested what I did? I obviously don't think so, but your objection suggests I could have stated it better.
I agree with faith being belief based on belief. The core of your statement, that the universe loves you, is eminently reasonable to hold as a belief. My only objection was that in your statement, which we agree is really a belief based on a belief, you attempted to make "the universe loves you" a necessary conclusion to "you exist." I think what you meant is: I have chosen, for my own reasons, to believe that the universe loves me. What you actually said (in statement #1) was: "Objectively, we can tell that the universe loves you. This follows from the fact that you exist."
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 07:20:47 PM
Quote from: GA on November 28, 2008, 06:21:11 PM
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 01:51:41 PM
You might consider not that I am wearing rose-coloured glasses, but perhaps that you are wearing shit-stained ones.
IT'S A CONDITION, OKAY? STOP BEING SO FASCIST, YOU WITH YOUR 20/20 VISION AND LACK OF OCULAR DIARRHEA!
LOL, did I not include enough conditionals in there for you? "Might consider" and "perhaps" weren't enough? Should I have added "possibly maybe in some senses but not necessarily so don't take it so damn personal if you don't think so"? Would that have been sufficient?
In-joke, sorry. See IANAR's excellent thread, "Why is the Internet So Fucking Fascist?" for explanation.
In general, when someone types something in all-caps, they're usually being sarcastic. Especially if the mention ocular diarrhea.
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 07:20:47 PM
Quote from: GA on November 28, 2008, 06:21:11 PM
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 01:51:41 PM
Quote from: GA on November 28, 2008, 05:12:27 AM
Also point 6. The driving force of the universe isn't change; the effect of the driving force in the universe is (very often) change. Maximization of entropy is a good candidate for driving force, but that's neither here nor there. You might state the the nature of the universe is change, or that change is the only constant, but change is a result, not a cause.
chicken/egg
I drop a rock from a height. It falls to the ground. Is the driving force here gravitational attraction, or is it rocks on the ground?
I'm not getting a good feel for your argument I must confess. You seem to be arguing in terms of Science whereas I'm arguing in more loosey-goosey spiritual sense.
For me, the word "force" carries associations of free-body diagrams and whatnot, so that example was the first to come to my head. I'm not arguing in terms of Science (pleeease don't capitalize that word unless you're intending to say that I'm one of those pan-rationalist Darwin-kissing fundie atheist goons,) that's just the kind of example I came up with. (And really, is dropping a rock really all that scientific?)
Maybe here's a better example:
Brother says something mean to Sister, and Sister becomes upset. (I think) that you are saying that the 'driving force' here would be the change in Sister's emotions from not-upset to upset, when quite clearly there is a force that changed her emotional state. Here I think the driving force might be, say, a combination of Brother's need for dominance causing him to say something mean, and Sister's need for acceptance causing her to feel upset by what Brother said. Her upset state (which would include "having recently shifted from being happy to upset) could in turn cause something else. But the change in states, in and of itself, did not cause anything. The after state would cause different things than the before state, and the transition state could cause something, but I don't think that change is the driving force. Change is the effect of the force.
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 07:20:47 PM
Quote from: GA on November 28, 2008, 06:21:11 PM
And with regards to this whole Eris thing... if you want a mother figure just make up a mother figure. Don't repurpose the goddess whose only notable role was starting a decades long war because she didn't get invited to a party. People died, Shadow. Women and children were raped and murdered and dragged from behind chariots and had their fields salted because she didn't get invited to a party. Don't go redefining our words and names to fit something you like.
LOL now who's telling who how to be a Discordian?
I'm not telling you how to be a Discordian, I'm telling you how to talk. When I say Eris meaning "she what turns brother against brother for shits and giggles" and you hear Eris meaning "loving cosmic mother figure" then there is a problem there. Naturally, since I'm the Pope, rather than reaching an agreement or compromise, I declare myself to be right, and that you have to come up with another word/name to mean what you have hitherto been using Eris to mean.
Quote from: Cain on November 28, 2008, 08:16:27 PM
But Nigel, how can you be happy when your view of the Universe is so nasty and negative? Don't you know human minds are just like machines and thus must internally reflect their external outlook in every way?
:lulz:
Quote from: GA on November 28, 2008, 08:17:30 PM
Shadow, if you say LOL again I'm going to reach right through my ISP and apply large blunt instruments to your nasal cavity. It's the internet equivalent to giggling in the middle of every sentence, and it makes you sound like a sixth grade girl.
YES! It also reads as pure contempt, in the context of a disagreement.
Quote from: Ratatosk on November 28, 2008, 06:34:05 PM
QuoteAnd with regards to this whole Eris thing... if you want a mother figure just make up a mother figure. Don't repurpose the goddess whose only notable role was starting a decades long war because she didn't get invited to a party. People died, Shadow. Women and children were raped and murdered and dragged from behind chariots and had their fields salted because she didn't get invited to a party. Don't go redefining our words and names to fit something you like.
Are you sure?
A decades long war began because the Goddess Aphrodite was so vain that She was willing to cause war in order to have a mere mortal declare her to be the fairest.
Women and Children were raped and murdered because Hera, Athena and Aphrodite were SO vacuous and self-centered that they were unwilling to allow one of the others to be given an honor without a fight. The Trojan war persisted, because Paris took the wife of another man, a woman who had no love for him, except a false mask of love, as cast by a bitch of a Goddess.
Eris, our beloved hag, our hurricane with a nice cinnamon scented wind, our personification of Chaos NEVER causes the horrors of war, she never causes the terrible things that happen... she causes Chaos, Discord and Confusion. Others use that Chaos, Discord and Confusion to benefit themselves, sometimes leading to terrible consequences.
Who is the fairest one at a Wedding?
Who is the most beautiful one at a Wedding?
Who is the Prettiest One at a Wedding?
Who was the apple for?
Eris might have a great time watching the horrors that man inflicts upon himself, but to blame her as the cause... may be only true in some sense. After all... if they didn't like doing it, you'd think they would stop.
This is valid.
Eris-the-anthropomorphic-diety certainly only played one role in the Trojan War - the Gods could have just raffled off the apple, Paris could have not been retarded, etc.
But Strife-the-domain-of-Eris did dominate the entire war. When people are clawing each others' eyes out over citrus fruits and sex, you can't say that that's anything other than Strife with a capital S.
In that sense Eris, as the personification of Strife, is responsible for the war and the bad feelings all around.
You could say that Greed was the cause of the war, or that Greed was blameless, and it was just people acting greedily that caused all the problems. I just don't feel that a distinction is necessary.
Technically, the Olympians are meant to be able to see the future.
Alternative motives were present. However, unlike in more enlightened times, the Achaeans apparently did not understand the concept of assassination, Odysseus aside. Of course, the Apple of Discord and the Judgement of Paris were not included in most versions of the Trojan War, such as the Iliad.
In some senses, I'd like to imagine Eris tossing that apple until we dumbasses learn NOT to waste energy going after it...
...after all, as the ancient Greeks pointed out, there is destructive strive AND constructive strife, and as long as humanity chooses to expend its resources on destructive strife, that will be the face of Eris.
Makes sense to me, as a symbol.
Of course, I do not necessarily agree with the not learning to go after it part. I think Mikhail Bakunin was onto something when he said "the urge for destruction is also a creative urge." Sometimes the best way to make something new is to smash something that already exists and put it together in another way. Preferably that would be done knowingly, but it need not be.
Quote from: Nigel on November 28, 2008, 08:07:08 PM
Rat, my Eris is perhaps a reflection of some part of me, but for the most part my Eris is a reflection of the arbitrary universe I see around me, sometimes beautiful and sometimes devastating, and it is up to me to be the comforting, stable mother-nurturer. I don't need an external one.
I would tend to suspect that people are more likely to see Eris as the complement to ourselves, rather than a mirror of ourselves.
Maybe... though your descriptions of how you perceive reality, seem a lot like your descriptions of how you tend to perceive Eris... or at least I seem to find a lot of similarities. Same for most Discordians I know, and that was the point I guess I was trying to make.
Some Discordians seem to see the world of humanity as something on the cusp of a Singularity or Revolution or Evolution or Renaissance... and those Discordians, more often than not, see Eris in an almost entirely positive light.
Others seem to consider the world of humankind on the verge of some terrible collapse and humanity as a fetid pool of wasted potential... and they often tend to focus on a darker interpretation of Eris.
Some people seem to fly through life with explosions happening left and right and they do good just to serpentine through the shrapnel, except on the rare occasion where something wonderful pops up as a temporary shield to hide behind... and those people often tend to see Eris as neither good nor evil (since she's likely throwing shrapnel at you... and providing you the alley to hide in for a brief respite).
From my perspective, based soley on what I know about you from this forum... you seem to embrace an Eris somewhat like the third option... and you seem to perceive reality in a manner similar to that as well... I could be wrong.
Certainly there are 100000000023 other ways that one might perceive reality and Eris, I just listed a few as examples.
The BiP, Reality Grids, Filters... they make the whole Universe a big mirror. Eris, due to her distinct lack of defined dogmatic structure, seems especially prone to this.
Quote from: Cain on November 28, 2008, 08:47:39 PM
Makes sense to me, as a symbol.
Of course, I do not necessarily agree with the not learning to go after it part. I think Mikhail Bakunin was onto something when he said "the urge for destruction is also a creative urge." Sometimes the best way to make something new is to smash something that already exists and put it together in another way. Preferably that would be done knowingly, but it need not be.
I think that's a necessary part of moving forward. Probably not healthy on a daily basis, though.
Quote from: Cain on November 28, 2008, 08:47:39 PM
Makes sense to me, as a symbol.
Of course, I do not necessarily agree with the not learning to go after it part. I think Mikhail Bakunin was onto something when he said "the urge for destruction is also a creative urge." Sometimes the best way to make something new is to smash something that already exists and put it together in another way. Preferably that would be done knowingly, but it need not be.
You do have a point there. The destructive strife is sometimes necessary.
But most of the time, warfare is not, and that's such a driving force in our world.
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 02:02:43 PM
This too is my problem with BIP - there's very little joy in it. Hill and Thornley were clowns, pointing out the absurdity of life in a fun way, and that for me is a large part of the point of Discordianism. "The Enlightened Take Things Lightly." Cynicism is easy, and pervasive in our culture, and frankly I'm kinda sick of it. It benefits no one - even the cynic who uses it as a shield is only admitting the crappiness of life and using their cynicism as a shield against it.
Ditch the shield, and instead take up the sword.
just an aside: that is probably the most common critique about the BIP. The model still works though. if i understand it correctly, the text is an attempt for self-awareness. to expose the limitations of perceptions and i feel it's more effective to create a stir than to pat on the back. buddhists recognise suffering as a peliminary to change. and i'm just imagining here but i wonder how many people turn to chirst while having a fulfillilng life. LMNO presents and alternative metaphor called the Golden Sphere of Possibility and i'm of the opinion that both BIP AND GSP need to go together.
...please to carry on with rest of thread...
Quote from: Ratatosk on November 28, 2008, 08:49:04 PM
Maybe... though your descriptions of how you perceive reality, seem a lot like your descriptions of how you tend to perceive Eris... or at least I seem to find a lot of similarities. Same for most Discordians I know, and that was the point I guess I was trying to make.
Quote
Some people seem to fly through life with explosions happening left and right and they do good just to serpentine through the shrapnel, except on the rare occasion where something wonderful pops up as a temporary shield to hide behind... and those people often tend to see Eris as neither good nor evil (since she's likely throwing shrapnel at you... and providing you the alley to hide in for a brief respite).
From my perspective, based soley on what I know about you from this forum... you seem to embrace an Eris somewhat like the third option... and you seem to perceive reality in a manner similar to that as well... I could be wrong.
Yes, that is basically what I was saying.
I'd like to see the Golden Sphere of Possibility actually finished, as a companion booklet to the BIP.
Any singular interpretation is flawed and incomplete. However, so long as one interpretation is being popular and widely held, a counter-interpretation should necessarily exist, to question the former to the extent that its adherents question it themselves.
From that, a multiplication of forms and interpretations are possible. But so long as the former position of belief (the unreconstituted PD view) is in a monopoly position, due to bizzare reason of desiring authority (fear of doing it wrong) and keeping that position by denigrating all others (despite two attempts by the PD authors to undermine their own legitimacy), then any attempts at widespread diffusion of those multiple interpretations is impossible, and will be shoved to the margins by those holding the centre.
Quote from: Cain on November 28, 2008, 09:29:06 PM
Any singular interpretation is flawed and incomplete. However, so long as one interpretation is being popular and widely held, a counter-interpretation should necessarily exist, to question the former to the extent that its adherents question it themselves.
From that, a multiplication of forms and interpretations are possible. But so long as the former position of belief (the unreconstituted PD view) is in a monopoly position, due to bizzare reason of desiring authority (fear of doing it wrong) and keeping that position by denigrating all others (despite two attempts by the PD authors to undermine their own legitimacy), then any attempts at widespread diffusion of those multiple interpretations is impossible, and will be shoved to the margins by those holding the centre.
I agree with everything you said here, in at least some sense (for example, I think the monoploy of belief, has more to do with internet chatter than any sort of statement about Discordians as a whole).
However, with everything else, I think you make great points. So then IF we have a monopolistic interpretation "Eris IS Hippy" and we want to create a counter argument... based on your first statement... wouldn't the better counter-argument be "Any
singular interpretation is flawed and incomplete" rather than "Eris IS Bitch" (which seems to be the most popular alternate currently) or "Eris IS_____" (which will suffice for the less popular versions)?
Please note, so that there is no misunderstanding, I am not accusing you personally of any view good bad or indifferent... I think you made a good point and I am asking you as one person to another, on the basis of that point. :)
I think a potential counter-hegemonic argument is the best way to proceed. A multiplicity of counterarguments may be too easy to dismiss as being incoherent or weak, and thus easily ignored. The primary need is to break the monopoly of interpretation, and I believe this would do it most effectively. My hope would be it would gain enough critical mass to break down this monopoly in a thesis-antithesis-synthesis manner which would effectively open up the breadth of interpretation considered viable. Instead of the synthesis being a reconciliation of the opposing views (which in my opinion would be impossible, or near enough to) it would be a coalition under the single banner which would dissolve once the primary interpretation's strangehold was broken, opening up the field entirely.
In theory.
I don't know... I guess its because of my exposure to the American political system that I would expect more of a pendulum action than any sort of reconciliation.
I'll have to think on that.
It could go that way. However I don't think it would, since even the introduction of another interpretation would be a radical shock to the system. Often, in the early days of a post-system shakeup you get the most innovation and creation.
Eris was a Republican.
I had her down as the Constitution Party type myself.
Quote from: GA on November 28, 2008, 10:12:32 PM
Eris was a Republican.
You mean the old-school kind? Like Nixon?
Eris?
Definitely the Know-Nothing Party :lulz:
She told me she was a member of the All Night Party.
Quote from: BAWHEED on November 28, 2008, 10:19:44 PM
She told me she was a member of the All Night Party.
Also the Electric Kool Aid Party.
But I hear they were all secretly Communists.
Quote from: Nigel on November 28, 2008, 08:27:42 PM
Quote from: GA on November 28, 2008, 08:17:30 PM
Shadow, if you say LOL again I'm going to reach right through my ISP and apply large blunt instruments to your nasal cavity. It's the internet equivalent to giggling in the middle of every sentence, and it makes you sound like a sixth grade girl.
YES! It also reads as pure contempt, in the context of a disagreement.
Noted for future reference. Interestingly among people I chat/email with, it is usually taken as more of an "It's all cool" kinda indicator.
I gots to make dinner & such but I'll try to return later to address some of the new points. Briefly though @GA: thanks for the extended response, it was appreciated. @Cain: I'm still very curious to hear what you thought I was saying that was untrue, and why the structure I laid out is incompatible with higher purposes.
Thank you all for commenting though. Very illuminating.
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 11:18:05 PM
Quote from: Nigel on November 28, 2008, 08:27:42 PM
Quote from: GA on November 28, 2008, 08:17:30 PM
Shadow, if you say LOL again I'm going to reach right through my ISP and apply large blunt instruments to your nasal cavity. It's the internet equivalent to giggling in the middle of every sentence, and it makes you sound like a sixth grade girl.
YES! It also reads as pure contempt, in the context of a disagreement.
Noted for future reference. Interestingly among people I chat/email with, it is usually taken as more of an "It's all cool" kinda indicator.
... do you do it in the middle of insulting their views? Because that's the "context" part of the equation...
Quote from: Nigel on November 28, 2008, 11:22:42 PM
Quote from: shadowfurry23 on November 28, 2008, 11:18:05 PM
Quote from: Nigel on November 28, 2008, 08:27:42 PM
Quote from: GA on November 28, 2008, 08:17:30 PM
Shadow, if you say LOL again I'm going to reach right through my ISP and apply large blunt instruments to your nasal cavity. It's the internet equivalent to giggling in the middle of every sentence, and it makes you sound like a sixth grade girl.
YES! It also reads as pure contempt, in the context of a disagreement.
Noted for future reference. Interestingly among people I chat/email with, it is usually taken as more of an "It's all cool" kinda indicator.
... do you do it in the middle of insulting their views? Because that's the "context" part of the equation...
Well, yes, especially so. It is meant to indicate the question asked in a playful manner, not as an insult at all.
Reading back now, I see that I myself derailed the thread rather early by implying that there was some sort of problem with viewing Eris as strife personified. Had I been more careful about it I could have done more to suggest that Eris-as-strife is perfectly fine, but a loving Eris as creation/creativity personified is perfectly compatible with that as well. Instead I seem to have left the impression that the latter was the only, or at least the inherently superior, view.
This seems to have resulted largely from attacking cynicism as a worldview, though perhaps those I prodded were more offended that I framed them exclusively as cynics rather than anything else. This I think was Cain's primary complaint, though my response to him (and the passion of it) derived largely from his contention that I was "burying my head in the sand", which really doesn't follow from my initial statements. The fact that he concluded it suggests that I need to clarify my statements in such a way as to avoid that conclusion. I am still keen to talk with him more about it so I can determine how that happened, though I have found that it is a common assumption made when someone talks about looking at things in a positive or optimistic manner, as I somewhat vehemently expressed.
I still think it's a pity to view Eris *only* as strife, but I'm not going to say you're wrong to do so. I am still quite interested in the more positive, growth promoting on-your-side version of Eris and I feel a significant amount of the strength (and longevity) of the PD comes from that source. Again, my mistake (ok,
one of my mistakes) was to imply that the two were incompatible.
In any case I'm not unhappy with the conversation that it spawned, in particular those stories of how Eris is viewed in all your lives (I especially enjoyed your story Nigel).
Discordianism is a swiss-army knife, a tool that can be used for a wide variety of purposes, though I would argue that Think For Yourself remains the primary one. I guess I was curious why few people choose to use the corkscrew.
Very compelling thoughts expressed here.
The other day I was at my son's school. One of his classes has been working on a project where they take photos of molecules under an electron microscope & then (using a certain software, forget which) they make these photos 3 dimensional. They also color. It was fascinating. There's a whole website dedicated to displaying these 3D color representations of molecules.
It made me think.
When I studied these things in school, we observed molecules under microscope & saw them in 3 dimensions. We were also taught in lectures & by reading in textbooks that these things have a 3 dimensional 'presence.'
How much more effective tho? when you can observe & manipulate the 3 dimensions? To me, this represents a leap in learning with many applications. Being able to 'see' & to manipulate something in 3D & not just being told it exists in 3D.
'Seeing' Principia Discordia as being 1 way or another is as if you were seeing in 2D. The map for the territory? A book or a piece of art or music is not the thing it represents. The mind or spirit or spark or whatever other word is necessary to bring the 'thing' into existence, to make it 3 (or maybe even 4 or 5) dimensional. Everything that 'is' exists in time as well as space.
Depending upon what it is you wish to do, it may be useful to think of it as being 1 way or the other.
Anyway, I think of all of these things as having more than 1 dimension. Positing a literal 1 way or another way, to me, would only succeed in defining it out of any possible existence. Which, to me, is not the point of trying to understand something.
Being playful with these ideas? Little kids seem to have this concept down pat. Being literal when it serves & being playful when it serves. Eris as Goddess seems to embody this idea as well. Symbol? Metaphor? Allegorical device? Or maybe la Deus ex machine?
(bitw, 1 of the many reasons I appreciate coming here is because people express themselves so well. Their words show they have considered these ideas quite deeply & are adept in expressing them. Sometimes I feel I get too caught up in my own inner world & it helps to hear other perspectives.) Thanks & Respect.
Quote from: Ratatosk on November 28, 2008, 06:34:05 PM
QuoteAnd with regards to this whole Eris thing... if you want a mother figure just make up a mother figure. Don't repurpose the goddess whose only notable role was starting a decades long war because she didn't get invited to a party. People died, Shadow. Women and children were raped and murdered and dragged from behind chariots and had their fields salted because she didn't get invited to a party. Don't go redefining our words and names to fit something you like.
Are you sure?
A decades long war began because the Goddess Aphrodite was so vain that She was willing to cause war in order to have a mere mortal declare her to be the fairest.
Women and Children were raped and murdered because Hera, Athena and Aphrodite were SO vacuous and self-centered that they were unwilling to allow one of the others to be given an honor without a fight. The Trojan war persisted, because Paris took the wife of another man, a woman who had no love for him, except a false mask of love, as cast by a bitch of a Goddess.
Eris, our beloved hag, our hurricane with a nice cinnamon scented wind, our personification of Chaos NEVER causes the horrors of war, she never causes the terrible things that happen... she causes Chaos, Discord and Confusion. Others use that Chaos, Discord and Confusion to benefit themselves, sometimes leading to terrible consequences.
Who is the fairest one at a Wedding?
Who is the most beautiful one at a Wedding?
Who is the Prettiest One at a Wedding?
Who was the apple for?
Eris might have a great time watching the horrors that man inflicts upon himself, but to blame her as the cause... may be only true in some sense. After all... if they didn't like doing it, you'd think they would stop.
Eris fought in the war as Enyo, along side her brother Ares, IIRC.
Just sayin.
LOL, ERIS.