Principia Discordia

Lets get a little metaphysical and overextend our metaphors, shall we?

I was reading Foucault again (a bad habit), this time on the subject of prisons and power relations, and it got me thinking.  For Foucault, a power relation only exists where there is intentionality, therefore in a social sphere.  Prison therefore, is an example of power at work, because the presence of guards, a "reform" system (that doesn't work), a criminal lawyer profession, a prison reform political lobby, a tough on crime lobby, a whole host of politicians, "scare" crime TV etc form a vast chain of interlinking strategies which form a social arrangement we call a prison, where the influence and domination of one group of people is forced upon another.

By contrast, consider a dungeon. A man chained up and left in a cell, forgotten by the world, unwatched, physically constricted and forgotten, but otherwise unmolested, is not caught up in a social power arrangement.  He is physically constricted, to be sure, but otherwise left alone.

Would it not be sensible to consider the Black Iron Dungeon a metaphor for our own physical limitations, our inability to hear beyond certain ranges, our cognitive defects, our lack of strength or whatever as this dungeon?  They are (as of now, at least) conditions we cannot help, they are built-in defects that we cannot overcome.

On the other hand, the Black Iron Prison, like its real life namesake, is that of a social arrangement.  There are factors at work, levels of power, of control, strategies that form the particulars of this prison. 

You see what I mean?  There is an element of power and social relations in the latter not present in the former, which call for different methods of analysis and consideration, concerning their effects and means to change this.  To change the dungeon may involve the utilization of technology, of genetic engineering or smart drugs or whatever, whereas to change the prison, it would involve strategy, social hacks, the utilization of emergence and application of control of options to affect outcomes.

I take you point, Cain.

So, are we saying we're in a prison inside a dungeon, or vice-versa?

Uh, its a particle and wave thing.  You know, quantum.

Anyway, that aside, it would be more like both.  One on level of analysis, that of biological/chemical/physical, its clearly a dungeon.  However, as soon as you turn from that to social questions, of notions such as "peer pressure" or "identity" or "law" or the like, its a prison.  And that effects how you rearrange your cell.

The BIP is

Quotefull of different forces, individual and corporate, struggling with one another. Sometimes there is cooperation towards shared goals. At other times there is open combat. The more powerful force may utterly destroy the weaker, or force it into subjugation, or it may itself be forced to compromise and reach a settlement with the weaker force in order to pursue other objectives, or out of exhaustion. Any settlement is inherently unstable: the forces will change, the same old forces will try again to gain the upper hand, but after such disturbances, new accommodations will be found. The net effect of all this gross struggle is the production of an ensemble of power relations whose strategies are those of enforcing the social settlement.

Therefore, the strategies used to rearrange it are different, but the barrier of entry is singificantly lowered when compared to the BID, because of the inherent nature of those qualities, making it harder to effect any change, but on the other hand increasing its permamency (for example, if you lost your eyes, or were bioengineered to see infrared vision) or putting greater reliance on technological methods (such as infrared goggles, or cameras with human/computer interfaces for vision).

I like the extension of the metaphor.  It might take a bit for me to make "dungeon" value-neutral, but if I could do it for BIP, I can probably do it for BID.

Teasing out the biological/social distinction may take some work.

I'll drop some quotes here, from the book that caused the spark of inspiration.

QuoteFoucault in fact stipulates that slavery is only not a power relation when slaves are "in chains" (EW3 342), since slaves who can walk around are in fact still caught up in a network of power relations, because they are not machines—there is still a possibility for resistance, which is to say a reversibility of the power relation; they are still subjects of power, not merely objects of control like farm machinery. Foucault is wrong about this specific example, though: enchainment is insufficient to remove power relations because it is insufficient to make it so that there are not several possibilities of action open to the enchained slave. A slave is by definition one who is required to perform certain tasks for a master, and the slave always has the physical possibility of refusing his or her master's orders. It is not the enchained slave who is not caught up in power, but the man chained up in a dungeon (as opposed to a modern penitentiary where one's every move is watched), forgotten, physically restricted but otherwise unmolested.

Quoteif someone wants me to do things, and I want other people to do things, these various potential
power relations will play against each other, tending towards some kind of integration, either through the elimination of certain power relations, or compromises in which they attain compatibility. This compatibility is itself strategic: an overall strategy emerges for the purpose of integrating various power relations. The people who are fed up with crime exercise their power on their rulers to do something about it, the rulers exercise power directly by hiring underlings and having them build and staff prisons, by passing laws that direct police and the judiciary, these people follow their orders and exercise power on criminals. The net effect of this is nothing less than the regular and continuing production of a class of delinquents. This might seem bizarre in that it exceeds, and indeed apparently contradicts, the motives of the agents involved, but in fact it is simply the way in which all the power relations have been integrated productively. This can be seen in the way that the production of delinquency in fact serves a number of purposes, such as the purpose of capital in dividing the working class and demonising a certain element as the cause of problems, which in fact ensures the very stable situation which produces this very criminal layer. This network, (relatively) stable though it is, contains any number of power relations in which the intent behind the power relation is not realised: prisoners often do not respond as warders try to get them to, for example. And this is a regular part of prison functioning, providing the occasion for the regular occurrences of brutality and disorder which perform roles in the formation of the kind of individuals who are produced by prisons, in the confirmation of the beliefs of wardens, the public, in innumerable ways, despite that no-one wants this. The system is only, as I say, relatively stable, however, which means that often enough effects are produced which do not abide by the settlement that the system represents. But even within the stability of the system, apparent disorder occurs which is in fact a regular part and effect of the strategies of power, which appears to be resistance, and which is resistance from the perspective of local power relations, but is not from the perspective of the grand strategies of power.

QuoteThe network of power relations and its strategies are emergent, regularly produced by the agents involved—although the now-familiar concept of emergence was not in Foucault's philosophical vocabulary. Emergent strategies of power loom large in Foucault's case studies of power, Discipline and Punish and The Will to Knowledge. In Discipline and Punish, Foucault claims that what he calls the "carceral system" functions regularly to produce a relatively stable effect, namely the existence of "delinquency"—in short, prisons function to demarcate and perpetuate a criminal class, who themselves play a certain social role. This is of course certainly not the intention of anyone who is involved in the carceral system, not the intention of government, of the guards, of the wardens, of the prisoners, but it is nonetheless the net effect. One of the most interesting and paradoxical parts of Foucault's thesis in Discipline and Punish is that one essential piece of this system is in fact the prison reform movement which condemns the prisons precisely for producing delinquency, since it buttresses the institution of the prison by calling for its improvement, whereas, as Foucault reveals, the prison is itself is as an institutional form inextricably bound-up with delinquency (DP 264–70). The intentions of those whose stated purpose is to eradicate delinquency are part of the logic of power which produces it, as are those of the policemen trying to eradicate crime. This is the aforementioned "tactical polyvalence," which is the condition of the coherent strategy with its contradictory elements, elements which speak against one another while strategically cohering, like prison reformers and prison guards.

QuoteThere is no knowledge without an apparatus of knowledge-production in which relations of power are invested, but there is also no apparatus invested by power relations which does not itself produce knowledge, discourse by which it understands and explains its own operation, which it uses to further its operation. In the modern prison, knowledges such as criminology and psychology form a condition of the prison's existence, and have the prison as a condition of their existence. Such discourses on the one hand are a necessary part of the prison's functioning, organising data necessary for the control of the prisoners (DP 126), and on the other perform specifically discursive functions, explaining the prison's function in terms of correcting criminal behaviour, thus justifying the prison to society at large, allowing the prison system to understand itself and even acting as a controlling discourse by which criminals come to understand their own behaviour, which then modifies said behaviour in regular ways (cf. DP 102–3).

Quote from: LMNO on December 26, 2008, 06:41:15 PM
I like the extension of the metaphor.  It might take a bit for me to make "dungeon" value-neutral, but if I could do it for BIP, I can probably do it for BID.

I, too, much like the extension of the metaphor!

People disagree on the concept (or definition) of 'values' but their disagreement usually lies on the object of the 'value' not on the idea of some (self-defined) concept of the object having value.

Ok I know that begs more explanation because I can barely understand it myself.  :?  Back to the old drawing board, as they say, & here goes.

People agree that there IS such a thing as 'values' however disagree on the object on which to paste this thing they call 'values'.  Throughout history the objects change, are transient, however the 'values' or the idea that this concept exists, doesn't fade away as the objects sometimes do.

A metaphysics based on 'values' becomes, essentially, a contradiction in terms or a logical absurdity even.  Like attempting to define randomness mathematically, the more you try, the less random it becomes.

& I really like this quote:

Quote& Cain quoted Foucalt:
It is not the enchained slave who is not caught up in power, but the man chained up in a dungeon (as opposed to a modern penitentiary where one's every move is watched), forgotten, physically restricted but otherwise unmolested.

I really do like the extension of this metaphor!

I think of it in terms of what I have observed in many academic circles (yes circles!) where you have to say things the way THEY say things & only then will they listen.  Nobody inside that circle will listen because you have been identified as someone OUTSIDE the circle, not necessarily because what you are saying may or may not have merit or make sense in some way.  Getting lost in the fog of words where something most definitely is lost & forgetting that these (self-perpetuating) circles exist as a (nearly physical) body of beliefs.  & not as a starting point for exploration.

& sometimes in order for you to get inside that circle, you have to give up trying to say what it is you first came to say.

A dudgeon indeed!

This metaphor extension is really thought-provoking, Cain.

Your mention of the dungeon made me instantly think of solitary confinement in modern prison systems, which I am guessing is the closest analogy that prison systems have to dungeons. Maybe there would be some value in expanding the BIP metaphor by adding the solitary confinement analogy as well, to show that within the same whole mental system (the prison as a whole unit, or our minds specifically), we run into the social prison systems which are our cells (that can be rearranged), while also encountering the solitary confinement of physical or mental limitations when we push the cell to its limits.

So the Prisoner rearranges their cell and attempts jailbreaks/cellbreaks, but can't leave the prison entirely. Periodically the Prisoner is "thrown into" solitary, as a reminder of the limitations that cannot be breached, despite the Prisoner's ability to alter their cell.

Am I on track, or way off base?

I'm still learning BIP.  Not thought on it in a while.

In my mind, I'd embedded the BIP in a desert.  The sandy kind, with nothing but hot and dry in practically every direction a dying man can walk.  The prison campus could, in this case, be the union of all possible (human) reality tunnels.  Everything that one can sense, believe, or imagine.  One's personal cell, assuming it remains unmolested most of the time, could be a better representation of a physical body.

With the desert metaphor, I got the phrase, "Break down every wall.  Die in the desert."

I suspect that in the minds of many people born from about the 1960s on, say the word "Dungeons" and they will think "and Dragons."

The historical context of "dungeon" implies someone, a single person, in charge of the dungeon.  Historically, prisons were very rare--it cost too much money to house and feed someone.  Usually the convicted were either fined, humiliated in public display--the rack, whippings, etc.--or, in serious offenses, maimed or even executed.  Dungeons were reserved for political/heretical prisoners, generally the elite of prisoners.

As for most of us, dungeon still implies the existance of a "Dungeon Master."  This person, like the historical dungeon master, has complete control.

Prison, on the other hand, includes the idea of escapes (which virtually never happened with dungeons), riots, social interaction, etc.  Prison also has the idea of parole, release, etc., done according to a set of procedures.  When I think dungeon, I think "you're there until the overseer/ruler is killed, changes his mind, or you die."

Dungeons are harder to break out of, no? Prisons rely upon people to keep people from escaping. The dungeon itself is supposed to be enough to keep the person from escaping.

On the note of a dungeon master, I'd try and extend the metaphor as a bridge. Bear with me, because this will end up coming out kind of awkward.

You are the dungeon master and the prisoner, and the prisoner part of you is in the black iron dungeon, while the dungeon master part of you is a prisoner in the BIP. The dungeon has certain physical limitations -- your experiences in the BID (like your physical limitations) make it difficult to escape (if your chain is too short, you can't make a shank, and if you aren't fed, you probably can't move around much anyway) but the dungeon master part of you, being in the relative freedom of the BIP, is held down by entirely different chains. His time is structured socially. He has to do this or that at whatever time, lunch at noon, laundry duty on tuesday, and he can't stay at the gym grounds after four. But yet, he's the one who determines the level of relative freedom of the prisoner of the BID. His social chains may prevent him from changing his physical chains.

Quote from: Enki-][ on February 04, 2009, 05:20:58 PM
You are the dungeon master and the prisoner (Partial Quote)

That's a great concept.  For more on this, see the 17-part British series The Prisoner.  (The star and creator, Patrick McGoohan who played Number Six, just passed away.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prisoner (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prisoner)

Yes, well congratulations on totally ignoring my explanation and making up your own fucking definitions, you pair of dipshits.

If you're going to riff on my terminlogy and not even bother to try and engage with the ideas I associated with them, start your own threads, and stop filling mine with bullshit.

Quote from: Cain on February 04, 2009, 05:43:02 PM
Yes, well congratulations on totally ignoring my explanation and making up your own fucking definitions, you pair of dipshits.

If you're going to riff on my terminlogy and not even bother to try and engage with the ideas I associated with them, start your own threads, and stop filling mine with bullshit.

Does that mean we aren't supposed to comment on people's posts other than the first post? If I broke a rule here, I apologize.

And my reply in #8 was specifically about your original post, Cain.  I was fascinated by what you posted, and responded.

Can I get off time out now?

I like this idea Cain, so if I read you correctly you're saying:

BiD = Physical/Reality limitations
BiP = Social Robot programming limitations

Thus one could break free of the programming... they could escape the BiP, but not the BiD.

Did I grok that or miss something?

Quote from: Cain on February 04, 2009, 05:43:02 PM
Yes, well congratulations on totally ignoring my explanation and making up your own fucking definitions, you pair of dipshits.

If you're going to riff on my terminlogy and not even bother to try and engage with the ideas I associated with them, start your own threads, and stop filling mine with bullshit.

I was attempting to refine the ideas you introduced. Specifically, the interplay between the BIP and the BID. The self is in both simultaneously, but they aren't seperate spheres. If the BIP is social and the BID is physical/biological, then each has a level of control and dependency on the other. Social constraints can prevent one from fixing body limitations, or actually actively limit the body (the stigma of abortion may cause one to go through pregnancy, or the 'glory of war' may cause someone to get their legs blown off), but can also encourage the modification of the body positively or discourage negative modification (an amputee may be convinced to use a better prosthesis because it looks more realistic, and social stigma may prevent someone from drilling a hole in their head or driving nails through their palms if they might otherwise be inclined for whatever reason). In the same way, your biological limitations modify your social limitations by modifying the social interactions that you engage in.

Quote from: Cain on February 04, 2009, 05:43:02 PM
Yes, well congratulations on totally ignoring my explanation and making up your own fucking definitions, you pair of dipshits.

If you're going to riff on my terminlogy and not even bother to try and engage with the ideas I associated with them, start your own threads, and stop filling mine with bullshit.

Who, me?

I did miss your second post the first time I read this thread, I suspect.  The particle/wave business.  I'd like to be able to put both into a single world (of sorts) so that I can examine them at the same time.

You know, make an evocative model, then interact with it.  Maybe it's the wrong approach, but my level of interest and dedication doesn't allow me to handle jargon at the level I handle metaphor at this time.

What I hear in this thread:
* We want to re-shape or expand BIP-space to talk about physical/sensory-sensual limitations AND about social/conceptualization limits.
* Cain suggests that we could represent the two worlds through different forms of imprisonment.
* I don't want to treat physical limitations as imprisonment--it implies a dungeon-builder, but that doesn't bother me much.
** I like the "desert" image more and more.  It's full of unuseable stuff, most of which we can't distinguish at all.  We die if we stay out there too long.
* I stopped paying attention for a while.

On further reflection, the physical-limitations aspect might want a distinctive name, such as the Desert Outpost.  I forgot to reference Borges's unsolveable labyrinth earlier--sorry about that:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two_Kings_and_the_Two_Labyrinths
http://the-labyrinth.blogspot.com/2004/06/two-labyrinths_26.html

So, to spur discussion and since Cain has provided us with such a good metaphor for discussing the physical/social differences...

Is the physical body a limitation?

First, we must examine this in the context of a given worldview.

If the person has a Transcendental/Spiritual view of existence, then they probably consider the physical body to be a very strong limitation. Most of these models of existence focus on Transcending the physical body after death, to experience the Real (Heaven, Elysium Fields,  Nirvana, Happy Hunting Grounds whatever).

If the person has a Materialistic/Atheistic view of existence, then the physical body isn't a limitation... it simply is. That is, we 'experience' things BECAUSE we have a physical body, not in spite of having a physical body.

Magical Practitioners or Animists might well state that there is no distinction between the Physical and everything else. Magic allows changes in the individuals existence... the physical, psychological, or perceptive nature of those changes is immaterial. The changes are measured by their usefulness to the magician, not by the category the magician perceives he's made a change in.

So, without trying to argue Wrong or Right or anything else... I am curious as to opinions on this line of thinking.

Is the physical body with its neurological system a limit or prison? If so, what is it limiting or imprisoning?

Obviously these are all metaphors, and Cain's specific comparison here is the idea of Social systems versus non-social systems which I find a very useful point to include in the concepts of the BiP. Please don't take this as asshole criticism, I'm just hoping to spawn more discussion.

In  Angel Tech, Antero has a small rant about philosophies that promote the hatred of one's body by creating a false dichotomy between  the physical and the spiritual, rather than considering it as a composite. Without our limited neurological system, would our experiences be less restrictive, or nonexistent?

If the dungeon is our physical body/neurology... what happens when 100 Knights show up to liberate King Richard the Lionhearted, and 'free' me from the dungeon at the same time?

I mean, liberation from a dungeon sounds good... liberation from my body and brain... maybe not so much.

The BIP can't be escaped from. Why should the BID be any easier? You can modify your BIP, but it's your thinking aspects (who are prisoners in the BIP) that hold the most control over the form of the BID. Right?

Quote from: Enki-][ on February 04, 2009, 09:12:27 PM
The BIP can't be escaped from.

Why not?

Quote
Why should the BID be any easier?

I don't think anyone is arguing that it would be easier, or even possible.

Maybe I'm phrasing myself wrong here.

If you extend or amputate your senses or capabilities, you use your mind to do so. In this way, social limitations and existing cultural programs can influence which senses and capabilites should be modified and in what ways. Becoming aware of one's presence in the BIP can allow one to 'escape' but escape never really ends, does it? No matter where you go, you run the risk of ending up back in the BIP and not even realizing. At the same time, jailbreaking the BIP allows you to attend to the limits of the BID in ways that would otherwise not be allowed, one way or another. Taboo is part of the BIP, but affects the BID. The same is true of certain "positive impulses"*, for instance encouraging promiscuity or self-flaggelation or playing with binoculars.

So, by modding the BIP you enable greater freedom in modding the BID, however, the BIP functions in many cases to prevent mods on the BID that would make modding the BIP easier, since this can cause instability in culture.

* By positive impulses, I mean things that one is encouraged to do one way or another by either an acceptance or rejection of imposed culture or values. This is to contrast negative impulses, which are things that one is encouraged not to do by the same factors.

Quote from: Enki-][ on February 04, 2009, 09:24:02 PM
Maybe I'm phrasing myself wrong here.

If you extend or amputate your senses or capabilities, you use your mind to do so. In this way, social limitations and existing cultural programs can influence which senses and capabilites should be modified and in what ways. Becoming aware of one's presence in the BIP can allow one to 'escape' but escape never really ends, does it? No matter where you go, you run the risk of ending up back in the BIP and not even realizing.

I agree with this, we can escape but recidivist rates for the BiP are astronomical ;-)

Quote
At the same time, jailbreaking the BIP allows you to attend to the limits of the BID in ways that would otherwise not be allowed, one way or another. Taboo is part of the BIP, but affects the BID. The same is true of certain "positive impulses"*, for instance encouraging promiscuity or self-flaggelation or playing with binoculars.

I disagree. Promiscuity, self-flaggelation and binoculars all modify our BiP (or GSP if we're currently on the lam). I don't see how those would change the physical constraints of the individual (the BiD).

Quote
So, by modding the BIP you enable greater freedom in modding the BID, however, the BIP functions in many cases to prevent mods on the BID that would make modding the BIP easier, since this can cause instability in culture.

maybe first we should get a common ground on how we're interpreting Cain's post. I took this as "BiP = Social/Psychological/Philosophical/Programming/Reality Tunnel/Reality Grid/etc." and "BiD = Physical limitations of humans".

How did you interpret it?

I interpreted it similarly, but I'm mostly riffing on the idea that the BID can be extended and modified through technology. Some technology that would otherwise change your physical limits (including both senses and actions) can not be utilized due to social, environmental, cultural, economic, or reality grid reasons. These would fall under the BIP. So we can say that the BIP determines the limits of the BID in some cases. Now, the distinction gets slightly murky, so I'll try to feign clarity by totally oversimplifying and saying that while the BID is physical limitations of the senses and actions, the BIP is mental limitations which affect the will to sense and the will to act. These are in a constant loop, however, the BID can be extended if and only if the BIP allows the BID to do things that will extend what the BID can do. In theory, one can jailbreak the BIP inside one's own head with no interaction with other people outside. The BID can only be modified -- made bigger or prettier or whatever -- and only if the BIP allows it. Once you jailbreak, not only do you remove the limitations in your thought, but by extension, you remove the limits in your will that would prevent you from modifying the BID in some particular ways.

Too many annoying metaphors

I think I'm gonna junk 'em all and just refer to me "self" and my "self-limitations".

Quote from: The Mormons Will Begin Arriving By Bus on February 04, 2009, 09:57:43 PM
Too many annoying metaphors

I think I'm gonna junk 'em all and just refer to me "self" and my "self-limitations".

YOU NO FUN!

Quote from: Enki-][ on February 04, 2009, 09:55:42 PM
I interpreted it similarly, but I'm mostly riffing on the idea that the BID can be extended and modified through technology. Some technology that would otherwise change your physical limits (including both senses and actions) can not be utilized due to social, environmental, cultural, economic, or reality grid reasons. These would fall under the BIP. So we can say that the BIP determines the limits of the BID in some cases. Now, the distinction gets slightly murky, so I'll try to feign clarity by totally oversimplifying and saying that while the BID is physical limitations of the senses and actions, the BIP is mental limitations which affect the will to sense and the will to act. These are in a constant loop, however, the BID can be extended if and only if the BIP allows the BID to do things that will extend what the BID can do. In theory, one can jailbreak the BIP inside one's own head with no interaction with other people outside. The BID can only be modified -- made bigger or prettier or whatever -- and only if the BIP allows it. Once you jailbreak, not only do you remove the limitations in your thought, but by extension, you remove the limits in your will that would prevent you from modifying the BID in some particular ways.

I think this is a good line of reasoning.

We can break out of the BiP, but always risk getting tossed back in the pokey if we aren't careful.
We can't break out of the BiD, but we can modify it ala Transhumanistic technology.

Hey Cain, what's your thoughts?

Quote from: Ratatosk on February 04, 2009, 09:35:42 PM

I disagree. Promiscuity, self-flaggelation and binoculars all modify our BiP (or GSP if we're currently on the lam). I don't see how those would change the physical constraints of the individual (the BiD).
...

maybe first we should get a common ground on how we're interpreting Cain's post. I took this as "BiP = Social/Psychological/Philosophical/Programming/Reality Tunnel/Reality Grid/etc." and "BiD = Physical limitations of humans".

How did you interpret it?

What? 

Why does GSP make you free?  You make you free.  GSP or no.

That's why I set my BIP in a desert.  There are probably oases, but you'll have a hell of a time finding them.

So... I spent a lot of time after I read it, going around the Black Iron Dungeon in my head. It seems to me that Cain is making a very useful distinction, here. But... I still notice a lot of discussion about escaping. I don't think that was Cain's point; unless I'm missing something very fundamental, he only ever said change. Change is most certainly possible, but escape from either the Black Iron Prison, or the Black Iron Dungeon, would necessity a transformation so radical as to no longer identify as human. So. Unless we're going the transhumanist route (which I, personally, think is about as useful as waiting for Judgement Day), there doesn't seem to be much use in talking about escape.

The BIP is constructed of the confines on our thinking; linguistic, cultural, societal, and so on. These are all elements that can be modified through certain practices. For instance, RAW suggested the use of E-Prime to try and negotiate around some linguistic issues. Cultural and societal limitations can be combated to some extent by being aware of them. To what extent these can be eliminated is debatable. But. The BIP is more than just these elements, the prison is what we use to take data, and focus it into something meaningful. The information that our body receives is reinterpreted, and this is how we gain knowledge of the world. When we do this, whilst we can try to be aware of the limitations imposed on us by our brain, we can never fully escape them. And it may not even be useful to do so. Show me an apple, and I want to know that it is an apple. I don't want to get the 'raw' data, and know its atomic weight, the amount of energy contained within it, and so on and so forth. Because of the way we perceive the world, we don't see it in terms of 'things'. We see it in terms of 'ideas about things'. And that, whilst being a limitation, can also be useful.

The BID, however, is what gives us the prison. The dungeon being the sensory aparati that make up the tools we use to gain the data that is interpreted by our BIP into meaningful information. Modification of the BIP can take place on a far more cerebral level. Modification of the BID must, by necessity, take place on a more physical level.

Essentially, the BIP is all about how we draw the map. By having a more accurate BIP, we can make better use of the information we are getting to build a more accurate map of the territory, to a level which will be useful. The BID, however, is the paper and ink in this analogy. It is all the information about the territory that we can draw upon. To get more of that, we need to make far more fundamental changes to what we are; rather than a mental transformation, this requires a physical one, being modified as Cain suggested.

So... essentially, because the entire aim here (to gain accurate knowledge of our position within reality) isn't bound up entirely in either the BIP or the BID, it may not be enough, depending on how accurately we want to match our ideas about reality to the reality itself, to focus on purely mental and societal programming. We need to be aware of the limitations of the body, and be prepared to combat those as well.


... That's what I took away from it, anyway.

Well said, uh... who the fuck are you, again?



I think the whole "jailbreak" side-trip comes from a badly-worded red herring in one of the early essays, and Rat's refusal to GET WITH THE PROGRAM.

Heh.

Quote from: Demolition_Squid on February 06, 2009, 09:13:01 PM
So... I spent a lot of time after I read it, going around the Black Iron Dungeon in my head. It seems to me that Cain is making a very useful distinction, here. But... I still notice a lot of discussion about escaping. I don't think that was Cain's point; unless I'm missing something very fundamental, he only ever said change. Change is most certainly possible, but escape from either the Black Iron Prison, or the Black Iron Dungeon, would necessity a transformation so radical as to no longer identify as human. So. Unless we're going the transhumanist route (which I, personally, think is about as useful as waiting for Judgement Day), there doesn't seem to be much use in talking about escape.

The BIP is constructed of the confines on our thinking; linguistic, cultural, societal, and so on. These are all elements that can be modified through certain practices. For instance, RAW suggested the use of E-Prime to try and negotiate around some linguistic issues. Cultural and societal limitations can be combated to some extent by being aware of them. To what extent these can be eliminated is debatable. But. The BIP is more than just these elements, the prison is what we use to take data, and focus it into something meaningful. The information that our body receives is reinterpreted, and this is how we gain knowledge of the world. When we do this, whilst we can try to be aware of the limitations imposed on us by our brain, we can never fully escape them. And it may not even be useful to do so. Show me an apple, and I want to know that it is an apple. I don't want to get the 'raw' data, and know its atomic weight, the amount of energy contained within it, and so on and so forth. Because of the way we perceive the world, we don't see it in terms of 'things'. We see it in terms of 'ideas about things'. And that, whilst being a limitation, can also be useful.

The BID, however, is what gives us the prison. The dungeon being the sensory aparati that make up the tools we use to gain the data that is interpreted by our BIP into meaningful information. Modification of the BIP can take place on a far more cerebral level. Modification of the BID must, by necessity, take place on a more physical level.

Essentially, the BIP is all about how we draw the map. By having a more accurate BIP, we can make better use of the information we are getting to build a more accurate map of the territory, to a level which will be useful. The BID, however, is the paper and ink in this analogy. It is all the information about the territory that we can draw upon. To get more of that, we need to make far more fundamental changes to what we are; rather than a mental transformation, this requires a physical one, being modified as Cain suggested.

So... essentially, because the entire aim here (to gain accurate knowledge of our position within reality) isn't bound up entirely in either the BIP or the BID, it may not be enough, depending on how accurately we want to match our ideas about reality to the reality itself, to focus on purely mental and societal programming. We need to be aware of the limitations of the body, and be prepared to combat those as well.


... That's what I took away from it, anyway.

Ay, yer late to the party here... we currently have a lovely debate over just these topics.

Quote
escape from either the Black Iron Prison, or the Black Iron Dungeon, would necessity a transformation so radical as to no longer identify as human

While some argue that the BiP is inescapable. I argue that it is a prison, only as long as we do not actively modify it. Once we begin to modify the reality we perceive... once we begin to metaprogram, re-imprint, apply consciousness modification... it is no longer a prison, for what prison allows you full control of your cell, your bars, your walls and the whole damned facility? There surely are limits to what we can perceive, limits put in place by biology and DNA... those, may be inescapable (ala the BiD). However, once we have control of our BiP, once we can modify our BiP, its no longer a prison, necessarily...

Thus is my contention.

Constraints and limits are not necessarily a prison. Some of the most freeing experiences a human can have involve constraints. If you climb to the top of Mt. Everest, you have to wear special clothes and masks and carry oxygen. Those are all constraints, but I wouldn't call the top of the world a prison. Those who get to see the bottom of the Marianas Trench, must do so in a tiny little cell... with only small windows to see through, constraints? Hell Yes. A Prison? Not by my estimation. The astronaut, the cosmonaut, the rich guy that paid for a trip into space... all of them had to deal with constraints, with restrictions, with limited visibility... but were they in prison? I say No.

Here we are, humans... who, as far as we can tell, must have human bodies to experience life. Until we find evidence otherwise, the ONLY WAY to experience the Greatest Adventure of All (existing and experiencing), we must have some constraints, just as the astronauts, argonauts and mountain climbers. We could choose to see those constraints as a Prison. Yet, if we're in control, if we can choose to modify our perception, if we can accept and reject constraints, based on their usefulness... then I argue we have escaped the Black Iron Prison. We always risk falling back into our old ways and being tossed back into the Prison, but for at least awhile, we can escape, I think.


EDIT: To come back to Cain's OP:

So Cain posits two kinds of 'constraints' the Prison, or a system of social constraints and a Dungeon, a system of constraints irrespective of other monkeys... ie a biological, neurological constraint.

Thus, 'transhumanists' would be aiming to break out of Cain's Dungeon... ie the biological constraints, not the Prison, that is, not the social constraints (though they are doing that as a side effect of their attempt to break out of the dungeon).

The human made and human enforced constraints are the ones that I see as mutable. That is we can 'escape' any social set of rules and replace it with different rules, or no rules at all. With no rules at all, we'll be pretty limited in what we can experience. Thus we accept more rules, in order to have more experiences.

the biological constraints, on the other hand... provide me with a conundrum. On the one hand, Cain makes good points with this Dungeon metaphor. Yet, on the other hand, I find the idea of "my biology=trap" seems too reminiscent of some body hating philosophies. "You're trapped in your sinful body", "You must transcend the mere physical", "The flesh is weak", "You got too many theatens".

If I look at this through a model wherein there is a spirit, or spiritual body, or energy body that exists outside of the physical... then perhaps this is true. Perhaps we are trapped in a physical body. Yet, if I don't consider the 'spirit' as separate from the body, then are these biological constraints a prison, or simply the necessary constraints to support my ability to experience life?

I concur fully that social, psychological and philosophical constraints that have been assimilated and imprinted into our reality can be a prison. People can get trapped in one perspective, or one small view of reality that they confuse for The Real Thing. It seems lie a great metaphor to say that they are seeing reality from a prison window with bars blocking out some bits.

However, once the individual has begun to reconstruct their prison at will. Once they abandon old reality concepts, in order to explore new ones... I no longer see them as trapped. Constrained, yes... but not trapped.

They could fall back into prison, they could get confused and think their new reality tunnel is THE REAL ONE. But, until that happens, the person doesn't seem imprisoned to me.

Quote from: lmnoWell said, uh... who the fuck are you, again?

Thanks! I'm Kai Wren. Been a long time since I was round these here parts, not that I contributed all that much when I was active  :lol:

Quote from: RatatoskAy, yer late to the party here... we currently have a lovely debate over just these topics.

Yup... I can see that. So I figured I'd join in. I hope that isn't a problem.

Quote from: Ratatosk
While some argue that the BiP is inescapable. I argue that it is a prison, only as long as we do not actively modify it. Once we begin to modify the reality we perceive... once we begin to metaprogram, re-imprint, apply consciousness modification... it is no longer a prison, for what prison allows you full control of your cell, your bars, your walls and the whole damned facility? There surely are limits to what we can perceive, limits put in place by biology and DNA... those, may be inescapable (ala the BiD). However, once we have control of our BiP, once we can modify our BiP, its no longer a prison, necessarily...

I think you might be getting too caught up in the word 'prison'. At least, for what I take the prison to represent in the metaphor. I reckon my best thought on this was around ... here. Somewhere.  http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=13944.0

The trouble with it is, when you begin to modify what reality your are perceiving, to use the analogy in my last bit of actual writing on the subject above, you are getting a new set of 'lenses' through which to view the world. A new set of parameters via which you are experiencing life. This does not remove the fact that there are still limitations. My concern would be that by doing this, there is the very real risk that one forgets the whole point of the metaphor to begin with. As you say, you might redecorate your cell entirely. You might make it incredibly comfortable. You might, in fact, no longer believe it to be a prison.

And at that point, to follow the metaphor to its conclusion, you forget that it is a limitation, you forget that these barriers and predisposed assumptions about the way the world works exist, and the very problem of bias and misinterpretation due to an overconfidence that what you are perceiving is the Really Real Reality that you like the best and so is the only one that matters, sneaks back in the back door. The point of the prison, for the most part, appears to be that one becomes so caught up in it, one forgets it exists. Modifying it to your tastes doesn't change that threat, it only means that you exist in a more comfortable one. Not even one, I would argue, innately superior to the one of someone who never did this to begin with.

Quote from: Ratatosk
Constraints and limits are not necessarily a prison. Some of the most freeing experiences a human can have involve constraints. If you climb to the top of Mt. Everest, you have to wear special clothes and masks and carry oxygen. Those are all constraints, but I wouldn't call the top of the world a prison. Those who get to see the bottom of the Marianas Trench, must do so in a tiny little cell... with only small windows to see through, constraints? Hell Yes. A Prison? Not by my estimation. The astronaut, the cosmonaut, the rich guy that paid for a trip into space... all of them had to deal with constraints, with restrictions, with limited visibility... but were they in prison? I say No.

Here we are, humans... who, as far as we can tell, must have human bodies to experience life. Until we find evidence otherwise, the ONLY WAY to experience the Greatest Adventure of All (existing and experiencing), we must have some constraints, just as the astronauts, argonauts and mountain climbers. We could choose to see those constraints as a Prison. Yet, if we're in control, if we can choose to modify our perception, if we can accept and reject constraints, based on their usefulness... then I argue we have escaped the Black Iron Prison. We always risk falling back into our old ways and being tossed back into the Prison, but for at least awhile, we can escape, I think.

I'm afraid, again, that from my perspective you are getting too caught up in the negative connotations of the word 'prison.' The prison can be the nicest one in all reality, capable of allowing you to see all sorts of amazing things outside of the normal human experience. It is still a prison.

The original message that I believed the Black Iron Prison- and I fully admit, this may have changed in the year or so I've been out of touch with the project- was trying to get across, was that there is an amazing temptation to generalize your experiences across all of human understanding. When you use a tool- such as robotic assistance to allow you to see the bottom of the ocean- this is not the same thing as experiencing the bottom of the ocean directly. The limitations of the tools are still there. This may be a POSITIVE thing, but it is still, inescapably, a factor which must be taken into consideration when attempting to generalize your experience to other creatures. For instance; to take an extreme here, 'When I saw the bottom of the ocean, it was so incredibly dark that I was blind without a light! Therefore, all creatures that exist at the bottom of the ocean must need a light, or they are blind.'

But, these are more Dungeon-esque issues than Prison ones. The Prison is more along the lines of generalizing experiences. For instance, the way a radical feminist who believes all men are potential rapists sees the world, even in every day life, when they are walking down the street and taking note of people who pass her by, would be a radically different world to my own. The things that they would be more likely to pick up on, the immediate connotations that they receive upon seeing certain modes of dress or body language, would all be vastly, completely alien to the same experience I would have on the same day at the same place at the same time, even if I happened to be inhabiting their particular 'dungeon' somehow. One can try to escape from that, and attempt to be aware of the various biases and ways that their mind works. But to escape the very way that a human mind works, which is, it seems to me, to draw on past experience to try and predict future experiences, is quite an incredible proposition. And no matter how much re-imprinting, mind alteration, or otherwise one does... the very effects of those techniques simply bring in another, new, set of biases, preconceived notions, and assumptions which must be taken into account.

Outside of the prison... there is just another prison. That was one of the images I always liked to try and explain that.

Quote from: RatatoskSo Cain posits two kinds of 'constraints' the Prison, or a system of social constraints and a Dungeon, a system of constraints irrespective of other monkeys... ie a biological, neurological constraint.

Thus, 'transhumanists' would be aiming to break out of Cain's Dungeon... ie the biological constraints, not the Prison, that is, not the social constraints (though they are doing that as a side effect of their attempt to break out of the dungeon).

Yes, true. Although I would argue that the biological and social constraints are linked. As Wilson points out, and this was the thing that actually got me into the whole concept all over again, seeing the world is not a purely physical activity. When we observe something, it is observed through a synthesis of our senses and our brain interpreting the raw data that is received.

Breaking out of the biological restraints necessitates an evolution of the Prison to encompass this new data; to use my lens metaphor, if the lens can't focus the light (if our minds can't interpret the data) then it is meaningless. Just raw noise, and likely discounted by the human brain.

Quote from: ratatoskThe human made and human enforced constraints are the ones that I see as mutable. That is we can 'escape' any social set of rules and replace it with different rules, or no rules at all. With no rules at all, we'll be pretty limited in what we can experience. Thus we accept more rules, in order to have more experiences.

To some degree, perhaps. It is possible, I believe, to train the mind to accept new limitations. To see the world in a way less influenced by the constraints of the prison. I do not believe it is even possible to see the world with no limitations. To do so one would need to find some way of removing the tools used to observe the world, and yet still have knowledge of it. If you can see how to do that... I'd be very interested, but it seems like an insolvable problem to me.

Quote from: Ratatoskthe biological constraints, on the other hand... provide me with a conundrum. On the one hand, Cain makes good points with this Dungeon metaphor. Yet, on the other hand, I find the idea of "my biology=trap" seems too reminiscent of some body hating philosophies. "You're trapped in your sinful body", "You must transcend the mere physical", "The flesh is weak", "You got too many theatens". If I look at this through a model wherein there is a spirit, or spiritual body, or energy body that exists outside of the physical... then perhaps this is true. Perhaps we are trapped in a physical body. Yet, if I don't consider the 'spirit' as separate from the body, then are these biological constraints a prison, or simply the necessary constraints to support my ability to experience life?

I concur fully that social, psychological and philosophical constraints that have been assimilated and imprinted into our reality can be a prison. People can get trapped in one perspective, or one small view of reality that they confuse for The Real Thing. It seems lie a great metaphor to say that they are seeing reality from a prison window with bars blocking out some bits.

However, once the individual has begun to reconstruct their prison at will. Once they abandon old reality concepts, in order to explore new ones... I no longer see them as trapped. Constrained, yes... but not trapped.

They could fall back into prison, they could get confused and think their new reality tunnel is THE REAL ONE. But, until that happens, the person doesn't seem imprisoned to me.

Whilst I think I understand what you are saying... I still believe you may be placing too much on this concept of the prison (and the dungeon) as negative things. The prison and the dungeon do not, in themselves, have a normative value. They are neither good, nor bad, they simply are.

The spiritual side to this is something that I have not ever really considered. But, I think, it is pretty irrelevant to the discussion as a whole. The imagery used is of a prison and a dungeon because a prison has a social aspect, and a dungeon does not. Both, also, are limitations; constraints on the people who inhabit them. That is the extent to which I take the metaphor to be a useful one.

After that point, if one takes it too far, you risk being caught up in the words we are using to discuss the phenomena, rather than discussing the phenomena itself. There is, if you like, a prison that needs to be broken out of to discuss the prison; and that is breaking down the various connotations attached to the words themselves, before discussing it.

This turned out to be a ton longer than I was expecting, and probably a bit repetitive in places, but, I hope I got my point across.

Quote from: Demolition_Squid on February 09, 2009, 06:03:52 PM
Yup... I can see that. So I figured I'd join in. I hope that isn't a problem.

Hell no ;-)

Quote

Quote from: Ratatosk
While some argue that the BiP is inescapable. I argue that it is a prison, only as long as we do not actively modify it. Once we begin to modify the reality we perceive... once we begin to metaprogram, re-imprint, apply consciousness modification... it is no longer a prison, for what prison allows you full control of your cell, your bars, your walls and the whole damned facility? There surely are limits to what we can perceive, limits put in place by biology and DNA... those, may be inescapable (ala the BiD). However, once we have control of our BiP, once we can modify our BiP, its no longer a prison, necessarily...

I think you might be getting too caught up in the word 'prison'. At least, for what I take the prison to represent in the metaphor. I reckon my best thought on this was around ... here. Somewhere.  http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=13944.0

It seems to me that many people go through existence with little or no thought as to the state of their Prison, their imprints, the influences and effects of the experiences in their lives. They, I think we can say are trapped... because we can posit a 'free' alternative. They can take control of their constraints and modify them as they Will. However, if we place all humans forever in a "prison" then I think we come very close to other systems that profess an eternal human state of damnation. I am far too optimistic to accept such a proposal (though I may be wrong to be so optimistic ;-) ).

I think your lenses provide a great metaphor, because they are not neurolinguistcly tied to existing concepts. When we hear the term 'Prison', our brain automatically has some association with what that word means. The term prison, includes the concept of "not Prison", yet if we consider the BiP to be the only and eternal state of humanity, then there is no OUT. If there is no OUT, then there is no Prison. We can use the term to just describe one aspect of one concept, but the term is already semantically associated with other assumption in our neurolinguistic system.

Consider the concepts usually implied with the term prison: There are guards, forcing you to do whatever, there are not really 'rights', the prisoner has no say in any aspect of their life... The prisoner has done something bad or wrong to find themselves there.... all of these terms are inextricably tied to the idea of 'Prison'. Yet these concepts, seem to me, a very dangerous line of thought if we apply them to the human condition.  It sounds like 'The Fall of Man' with less talking serpents and naked people.

Quote
The trouble with it is, when you begin to modify what reality your are perceiving, to use the analogy in my last bit of actual writing on the subject above, you are getting a new set of 'lenses' through which to view the world. A new set of parameters via which you are experiencing life. This does not remove the fact that there are still limitations. My concern would be that by doing this, there is the very real risk that one forgets the whole point of the metaphor to begin with. As you say, you might redecorate your cell entirely. You might make it incredibly comfortable. You might, in fact, no longer believe it to be a prison.

And herein lies the difference. I agree that we are getting a new 'set of lenses', new programs, parameters etc. And I agree that there are still limitations... but I consider those limitations to be constraints/limitations not 'prison', necessarily. A submarine may be a constraint, but its not a prison, is it?

And yes, there exists a risk that one might forget they are in prison. As I said, its always possible to end up back in the BiP. However, it seems like an inescapable prison might create a risk of pessimistic acceptance that one is trapped... "It doesn't matter if the curtains match the drapes... I'm in Prison!!!"

Quote
And at that point, to follow the metaphor to its conclusion, you forget that it is a limitation, you forget that these barriers and predisposed assumptions about the way the world works exist, and the very problem of bias and misinterpretation due to an overconfidence that what you are perceiving is the Really Real Reality that you like the best and so is the only one that matters, sneaks back in the back door. The point of the prison, for the most part, appears to be that one becomes so caught up in it, one forgets it exists. Modifying it to your tastes doesn't change that threat, it only means that you exist in a more comfortable one. Not even one, I would argue, innately superior to the one of someone who never did this to begin with.

Yes, but we have this risk no matter how we discuss the metaphor... we risk becoming complacent and say "I've changed my prison to look as I like it", or "I've escaped" or "I am a cabbage".  If one believes that they are forever trapped, then apathy or frustration could leave them as trapped (or worse) than before. If one believes that they escaped, then pride, apathy or comfort could trick them right back into the prison.

Quote

I'm afraid, again, that from my perspective you are getting too caught up in the negative connotations of the word 'prison.' The prison can be the nicest one in all reality, capable of allowing you to see all sorts of amazing things outside of the normal human experience. It is still a prison.

There are still constraints... I disagree that constraints = prison. Constraints can be part of a prison, but they are not the sole definition. Being held against your Will, having your Will denied all of these are implicit in the term prison.

Quote
The original message that I believed the Black Iron Prison- and I fully admit, this may have changed in the year or so I've been out of touch with the project- was trying to get across, was that there is an amazing temptation to generalize your experiences across all of human understanding. When you use a tool- such as robotic assistance to allow you to see the bottom of the ocean- this is not the same thing as experiencing the bottom of the ocean directly. The limitations of the tools are still there. This may be a POSITIVE thing, but it is still, inescapably, a factor which must be taken into consideration when attempting to generalize your experience to other creatures. For instance; to take an extreme here, 'When I saw the bottom of the ocean, it was so incredibly dark that I was blind without a light! Therefore, all creatures that exist at the bottom of the ocean must need a light, or they are blind.'

Well, that was sort of my point. We can never directly experience the bottom of the ocean or the top of Mt. Everest or Outer Space. The only way we can possibly experience these things is to choose to accept some constraints. Submarines, Space Ships, Oxygen Masks and Artic Clothing... are ALL constraints, they will ALL effect how a person experiences space/the ocean floor, the top of the world... BUT they aren't prisons... they provide the 'vehicle' from which we can explore. Just as our physical bodies, our neurological system provide the 'vehicle' from which we explore. That vehicle can be a prison, esp if the driver just sits on the side of the road for 70 years and then dies.

However, if the car driver drives...
then modifies it and flies,
then modifies it and dives,
then modifies it and modifies it
and modifies it till he dies

I think he's got something other than a prison.

Surely, if he were to spend the last 30 years orbiting the moon or sitting on the ocean floor... the vehicle would be a prison once again. But, if he doesn't stagnate... then I don't think its useful to call him trapped.

Quote
But, these are more Dungeon-esque issues than Prison ones. The Prison is more along the lines of generalizing experiences. For instance, the way a radical feminist who believes all men are potential rapists sees the world, even in every day life, when they are walking down the street and taking note of people who pass her by, would be a radically different world to my own. The things that they would be more likely to pick up on, the immediate connotations that they receive upon seeing certain modes of dress or body language, would all be vastly, completely alien to the same experience I would have on the same day at the same place at the same time, even if I happened to be inhabiting their particular 'dungeon' somehow. One can try to escape from that, and attempt to be aware of the various biases and ways that their mind works. But to escape the very way that a human mind works, which is, it seems to me, to draw on past experience to try and predict future experiences, is quite an incredible proposition. And no matter how much re-imprinting, mind alteration, or otherwise one does... the very effects of those techniques simply bring in another, new, set of biases, preconceived notions, and assumptions which must be taken into account.

I would disagree. The perception of dress and body language appear much more a part of someones Prison, rather than a dungeon. That is if I don't completely misunderstand where Cain was going with this. I would say the BiD might have much more to do with the physical limitations of the human body. That is, we are limited (no matter what imprints and beliefs we have) to some finite set of Information, ie the information that can be received and processed by the human neurological system. Like the Dungeon, ths isn't being guarded by a social agreement and people aren't being 'reformed'.... they are simply stuck with no recourse (unless Transhumanists are actually dead on).

Quote
Yes, true. Although I would argue that the biological and social constraints are linked. As Wilson points out, and this was the thing that actually got me into the whole concept all over again, seeing the world is not a purely physical activity. When we observe something, it is observed through a synthesis of our senses and our brain interpreting the raw data that is received.

Breaking out of the biological restraints necessitates an evolution of the Prison to encompass this new data; to use my lens metaphor, if the lens can't focus the light (if our minds can't interpret the data) then it is meaningless. Just raw noise, and likely discounted by the human brain.

Yes, I agree. Our physical and social constraints appear to be linked. Our social programming seems to often alter the processing of data from our sensory inputs. However, changes happen in the social programming, not the sensory input. So, if a girl is wearing a black miniskirt, its our imprints and social programming (BIP) that limit our perception to say "SLUT". Whereas our inability to see the infrared heat emanating from her body seems more a biological constraint ala BiD. We can escape the BiP and say "Girl in a miniskirt" instead of "Slut". Currently, we cannot tell our DNA to add a few extra rods and cones to cover the rest of the light frequencies in existence  :wink:

Quote

Quote from: ratatoskThe human made and human enforced constraints are the ones that I see as mutable. That is we can 'escape' any social set of rules and replace it with different rules, or no rules at all. With no rules at all, we'll be pretty limited in what we can experience. Thus we accept more rules, in order to have more experiences.

To some degree, perhaps. It is possible, I believe, to train the mind to accept new limitations. To see the world in a way less influenced by the constraints of the prison. I do not believe it is even possible to see the world with no limitations. To do so one would need to find some way of removing the tools used to observe the world, and yet still have knowledge of it. If you can see how to do that... I'd be very interested, but it seems like an insolvable problem to me.

Note what I said... not that we can escape all limitations... That is we can 'escape' any social set of rules and replace it with different rules, or no rules at all. With no rules at all, we'll be pretty limited in what we can experience

Quote
Whilst I think I understand what you are saying... I still believe you may be placing too much on this concept of the prison (and the dungeon) as negative things. The prison and the dungeon do not, in themselves, have a normative value. They are neither good, nor bad, they simply are.

Yet, many people, upon reading the BiP say "this is negative". That's because Prison, in the English language anyway, is distinctly and directly associated with negative things.

Telling someone that its not negative because they can choose the wallpaper and matching carpet for their cell... doesn't seem to balance that out IMO. It also (and IMO more importantly) minimizes the difference between the person who has no idea that they aren't in complete control of Really Real Reality and the person who is actively modifying their perception of reality.

And in a nutshell, that's the debate LMNO and I have been having for aeons ;-)

I have a story about this, perhaps I'll post it today :)

Quote from: RatatoskIt seems to me that many people go through existence with little or no thought as to the state of their Prison, their imprints, the influences and effects of the experiences in their lives. They, I think we can say are trapped... because we can posit a 'free' alternative. They can take control of their constraints and modify them as they Will. However, if we place all humans forever in a "prison" then I think we come very close to other systems that profess an eternal human state of damnation. I am far too optimistic to accept such a proposal (though I may be wrong to be so optimistic :wink: )

I can definitely agree with the first part of this. I suspect most people don't have the time or inclination to think about these sort of subjects. From personal experience, issues like this tend to draw glassy-eyed syndrome, even with students on my course (political science). One of my roommates is a biologist, and another a mathematician... attempting to discuss this (Hey! They asked!) just resulted in a lot of scratched heads and then a 'Yeah, lets watch TV.'

But. That said. My take on the prison is a lot less bleak than yours... to me, the Black Iron Prison needs to sound foreboding, and like a threat. At the time, it was being written with the intent that if someone read it, they should come away feeling like they have to take action right now. There was a lot of feeling around that we needed to get out and DO something.

See... this is the point at which the metaphor becomes useful, I think. Disregarding the 'common' connotations put on it, when I think of the Black Iron Prison, I think primarily:

It is constructed. (Thus the Black Iron.) Likewise, from these there is the impression of strength. This is not something that is broken easily.

Further... there are /other/ people involved in your Prison. Wardens and fellow inmates, if you like. People ARE actively working against you in breaking out. The media, social norms and conventions, all the underlying, niggling little prejudices which colour people due to their upbringing and background. There are politicians, advertisers, extremists, and all manner of other people who desperately want to reinforce the Prison. Because it is a hell of a lot easier for them to do their job if you never stop long enough to realize what sort of world you are being forced to accept as 'real'. Likewise. Those who don't stop and think, would be the inmates in this analogy. Those who do are the ones with you who do, and seek to break out.

The original literature had a lot of Jailbreak theme to it. I like that. To me, struggling against the authority placed over us- even one that doesn't really think it is an authority, is an innately uplifting and upbeat thing. But it needs to be seen as a struggle. And it is never easy. The fact is... even if one does break out of one prison, there is always going to be more tugging at your thoughts. So more to overcome. Nobody ever said this enlightenment schtick, if that is what we are really aiming for here (and I reckon there are worse things to call it) would be easy.

(I also think, in many ways, overcoming the fact that the Black Iron Prison sounds incredibly menacing serves as a good bit of mental practice. Remembering that it isn't like a 'real' prison, and going over the different levels on which it all works, and it can be seen, and so on and so forth... means that explaining the Black Iron Prison, is a lot like running up against the social norms and values which it represents.)

So... you might see it as depressing, but, I see an eternal human struggle to overcome enforced authority as a strongly uplifting image. Different ways to see the same thing, I guess.  :lol:

Quote from: RatatoskI would disagree. The perception of dress and body language appear much more a part of someones Prison, rather than a dungeon. That is if I don't completely misunderstand where Cain was going with this. I would say the BiD might have much more to do with the physical limitations of the human body. That is, we are limited (no matter what imprints and beliefs we have) to some finite set of Information, ie the information that can be received and processed by the human neurological system. Like the Dungeon, ths isn't being guarded by a social agreement and people aren't being 'reformed'.... they are simply stuck with no recourse (unless Transhumanists are actually dead on).

I think you misunderstood me here; I was saying that the various /physical/ examples being used (Spaceship, submarine, etc etc) are more akin to Dungeon issues than the social ones encountered in the prison. In many ways, the Dungeon seems easier to overcome because those methods are available to provide ways around it; we can use glasses, vehicles, and scientific instruments. So long as we don't forget that these are instruments, this is not a problem. The Prison is more insidious. It is about thought patterns, the way the mind works, and the various traps and tricks it falls into, as well as being the ways that the people around us attempt to subvert our way of thinking into one more suitable to their purposes. This is FAR more difficult to escape, even when one is conscious of it.

Quote from: Ratatosk
Note what I said... not that we can escape all limitations... That is we can 'escape' any social set of rules and replace it with different rules, or no rules at all. With no rules at all, we'll be pretty limited in what we can experience

Ooooh. I see. Limitations =/= Rules.

Hrm. You may be correct here. Though I'd be interested in seeing how you can destroy all rules to social interaction. Even being motivated entirely by self interest would be to accept the 'rules' of your own self interest. But. We do accept some basic rules for ongoing social interaction, you are correct.

Much like how a prison functions under certain routines and policies.

Quote from: Ratatosk
Yet, many people, upon reading the BiP say "this is negative". That's because Prison, in the English language anyway, is distinctly and directly associated with negative things.

Telling someone that its not negative because they can choose the wallpaper and matching carpet for their cell... doesn't seem to balance that out IMO. It also (and IMO more importantly) minimizes the difference between the person who has no idea that they aren't in complete control of Really Real Reality and the person who is actively modifying their perception of reality.

True. It IS a negative metaphor. It is, I believe, designed to be. It is far easier to rile people up to action if they feel that they are in a bad situation. Make people angry, or upset, and they are far more likely to feel a level of ... urgency, I suppose would be the best word for it. At the risk of sounding elitist (which, to some level, it just is.) If they are the sort of person who takes a look at everything that has been said, fully engages and understands it, and then says 'That is depressing, I may as well not bother to do anything about it.' They weren't the sort of person that the literature was intended to win over in the first place.

I'm not convinced on the latter point there, though. There is the world of difference in being a prisoner who goes on the routine of life every day, and the prisoner struggling for something better. The overall message was that, yeah, there is a prison outside the prison outside the prison... but, hell. I don't KNOW what sort of prison it is.

Won't it be fun finding out?

Quote from: Ratatosk
I have a story about this, perhaps I'll post it today :smile:

Please do! I'd enjoy reading it.

Also... for brevity, and because I rambled a bit at first, I didn't respond to each point on the construction of the 'Prison' metaphor individually. I think I covered everything above, though. I always worry I tend to ramble on and on in these sort of discussions.  :lol:

Good post :)

I think for me, there is a bit of a problem telling people that they can't escape prison... but they can struggle, if they'd like to. If you told a man in prison that you could guarantee 100% that he will never break out... never be free... would he still try? Perhaps, but it seems more likely, if he KNOWS that he cannot escape, he will in time decide it is better to be comfortable where he is, rather than hopelessly struggling for something that is (in this case, by definition) unachievable.

I posted my little "A Story In Five Parts" feel free to tear into it ;-)

Quote from: Cain on December 26, 2008, 05:26:15 PM
Lets get a little metaphysical and overextend our metaphors, shall we?

I was reading Foucault again (a bad habit), this time on the subject of prisons and power relations, and it got me thinking.  For Foucault, a power relation only exists where there is intentionality, therefore in a social sphere.  Prison therefore, is an example of power at work, because the presence of guards, a "reform" system (that doesn't work), a criminal lawyer profession, a prison reform political lobby, a tough on crime lobby, a whole host of politicians, "scare" crime TV etc form a vast chain of interlinking strategies which form a social arrangement we call a prison, where the influence and domination of one group of people is forced upon another.

By contrast, consider a dungeon. A man chained up and left in a cell, forgotten by the world, unwatched, physically constricted and forgotten, but otherwise unmolested, is not caught up in a social power arrangement.  He is physically constricted, to be sure, but otherwise left alone.

Would it not be sensible to consider the Black Iron Dungeon a metaphor for our own physical limitations, our inability to hear beyond certain ranges, our cognitive defects, our lack of strength or whatever as this dungeon?  They are (as of now, at least) conditions we cannot help, they are built-in defects that we cannot overcome.

On the other hand, the Black Iron Prison, like its real life namesake, is that of a social arrangement.  There are factors at work, levels of power, of control, strategies that form the particulars of this prison. 

You see what I mean?  There is an element of power and social relations in the latter not present in the former, which call for different methods of analysis and consideration, concerning their effects and means to change this.  To change the dungeon may involve the utilization of technology, of genetic engineering or smart drugs or whatever, whereas to change the prison, it would involve strategy, social hacks, the utilization of emergence and application of control of options to affect outcomes.

I would just like to say that this OP is a pretty damn good version of what I've been trying to explain for a while, and far more elaborate and specific.

I'm hung up on the terminology of the metaphor.

Not to deliberately provoke a hostile response, but the first thing this metaphor says to me is "Cartesian dualism."  Please don't hang me.  Here's the issue:  the Black Iron Dungeon is a metaphor for the body.  But a dungeon is a structure that the prisoner is trapped inside.  So who is the prisoner in this metaphor?  It seems like the prisoner is The Mind.

The Mind trapped inside The Body, which is the Black Iron Dungeon.  I'd like to get away from those kind of metaphors.  RAW uses the metaphor of a Robot to describe much the same thing.  The Robot consists of hardware and software.  This a metaphor of mind and body united.  I like that metaphor better.

The other problems I have with the terminology are pretty trivial and most aesthetic:

1) Prison and Dungeon are very similar concepts, and Foucalt's distinctions between the two are not conventional and require explanation to prevent confusion. 

2) If you combine the two metaphors of BIP and BID, you get: "The Black Iron Dungeon is trapped inside the Black Iron Prison."  That just sounds wrong, clumsy and inelegant. 

3) I agree with the comment that "Black Iron Dungeon" immediately calls to mind "Black Iron Dungeons and Dragons."  I could totally see Goodman Games releasing an adventure called "The Black Iron Dungeon."

The actual concept you are developing is interesting, and I find Erik's comments about binoculars and the like very engaging.  I just have no meaningful input at the moment.

I hate to admit it, but I agree with you about the "Black Iron Dungeon" terminology.

Fumbled onto F5 and killed my response.

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 16, 2009, 09:04:43 AM
I'm hung up on the terminology of the metaphor.

Not to deliberately provoke a hostile response, but the first thing this metaphor says to me is "Cartesian dualism."  Please don't hang me.  Here's the issue:  the Black Iron Dungeon is a metaphor for the body.  But a dungeon is a structure that the prisoner is trapped inside.  So who is the prisoner in this metaphor?  It seems like the prisoner is The Mind.

The dungeon isn't the body; the dungeon represents all possible minds.  The limits may be purely physical, but that doesn't mean you're ever using all the space.

I suggest putting a desert around the BIP, and calling liveable places Outposts, Oases, or Wellsprings.

I think I slightly mismatched from Cartesian dualism, there.

Quote
The Mind trapped inside The Body, which is the Black Iron Dungeon.  I'd like to get away from those kind of metaphors.  RAW uses the metaphor of a Robot to describe much the same thing.  The Robot consists of hardware and software.  This a metaphor of mind and body united.  I like that metaphor better.

The other problems I have with the terminology are pretty trivial and most aesthetic:

1) Prison and Dungeon are very similar concepts, and Foucalt's distinctions between the two are not conventional and require explanation to prevent confusion. 

2) If you combine the two metaphors of BIP and BID, you get: "The Black Iron Dungeon is trapped inside the Black Iron Prison."  That just sounds wrong, clumsy and inelegant.

BID determines possible BIPs.  Not the other way around, as I recall.

Quote
3) I agree with the comment that "Black Iron Dungeon" immediately calls to mind "Black Iron Dungeons and Dragons."  I could totally see Goodman Games releasing an adventure called "The Black Iron Dungeon."

The actual concept you are developing is interesting, and I find Erik's comments about binoculars and the like very engaging.  I just have no meaningful input at the moment.

Quote from: yhnmzw on February 16, 2009, 09:19:41 AM
The dungeon isn't the body; the dungeon represents all possible minds.  The limits may be purely physical, but that doesn't mean you're ever using all the space.

I suggest putting a desert around the BIP, and calling liveable places Outposts, Oases, or Wellsprings.

No offense dude, but I think you are talking about something VERY different than the idea Cain is developing.  Maybe you should start a thread about your ideas about the BIP.

Bleh. Cartesian dualism is based on the idea that mind and body are entirely separate. The BIP/BID dichotomy has never been stated to be quite so clean-cut. The BIP and the BID are related and interwoven. Obviously, the mind is in the body in our modern scientific viewpoint, but just as obviously, it is not indistinguishable from the body. If you trim your fingernails, there will be an effect on your mind, but you haven't modified your mind nearly as much as you've modified your body. If you hack off your hand, your body has been modified immediately, but your mind will still have to work pretty hard to adapt (and obviously your mind has some problems if you think hacking off your own hand is a fun thing to do). I think that the distinction we're making here is a valid one, and is useful despite probably seeming to skimmers to be mired in cartesian dualism. I suppose we can try to make it more clear that that's not what we're going for.

Quote from: Enki-][ on February 16, 2009, 11:39:31 AM
Bleh. Cartesian dualism is based on the idea that mind and body are entirely separate.

Yeah, I know.  My point is that in the real world a prisoner and a dungeon are completely separate.  So when you use a metaphor that equates the body with a dungeon and implictly equates you/Mind with the prisoner, then suddenly quite by accident your metaphor has drifted and is now Cartesian.

As you say, the separation between mind and body isn't supposed to be clear cut in the concept of the BID, but the separation between prisoner and dungeon IS clear cut, which is why it doesn't work so hot as a metaphor.  It is prone to metaphor drift, where the metaphor being used implies relationships that actually confuse the issue rather than clarifying it.

QuoteThe BIP/BID dichotomy has never been stated to be quite so clean-cut. The BIP and the BID are related and interwoven. Obviously, the mind is in the body in our modern scientific viewpoint, but just as obviously, it is not indistinguishable from the body. If you trim your fingernails, there will be an effect on your mind, but you haven't modified your mind nearly as much as you've modified your body. If you hack off your hand, your body has been modified immediately, but your mind will still have to work pretty hard to adapt (and obviously your mind has some problems if you think hacking off your own hand is a fun thing to do). I think that the distinction we're making here is a valid one, and is useful despite probably seeming to skimmers to be mired in cartesian dualism. I suppose we can try to make it more clear that that's not what we're going for.

Hmm.  Here's some other things to consider:

1) If Bob jumps out a shadow with a gun pointed at you, your body will begin reacting before you are consciously aware of what is happening.  By the time you begin to make a conscious choices in reaction to the situation, your body has already begun to release chemicals into your bloodtream that will affect your decision making processes.

2) Your decision making process will also probably change if Jane jumps out of you with her boobs exposed.  Again, by the time you begin to make a conscious choices in reaction to the situation, your body has already begun to release chemicals into your bloodtream that will affect your decision making processes.

3) If you eat a large turkey dinner, you will tend to decide to relax and take things easy afterwards due to chemicals in the turkey that make you sleepy.  That's turkey. Other foods, from chocolate to sugar to coffee, have mood altering effects.  Some people believe that the industrial revolution and the Enlightenment could not have happen were it not for the introduction of coffee to Europe.  And then there's Real Drugs.  From fly agaric to ecstasy there are a huge range of chemicals that completely alter brain function.

We tend to forget that when we say mind is emergent process of the body that it's a continuous process, always ongoing, always affected by changes in the body -- which can be brought on by a threat, a temptation, or even a slab of turkey.

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 16, 2009, 12:48:08 PM
Hmm.  Here's some other things to consider:

1) If Bob jumps out a shadow with a gun pointed at you, your body will begin reacting before you are consciously aware of what is happening.  By the time you begin to make a conscious choices in reaction to the situation, your body has already begun to release chemicals into your bloodtream that will affect your decision making processes.

2) Your decision making process will also probably change if Jane jumps out of you with her boobs exposed.  Again, by the time you begin to make a conscious choices in reaction to the situation, your body has already begun to release chemicals into your bloodtream that will affect your decision making processes.

3) If you eat a large turkey dinner, you will tend to decide to relax and take things easy afterwards due to chemicals in the turkey that make you sleepy.  That's turkey. Other foods, from chocolate to sugar to coffee, have mood altering effects.  Some people believe that the industrial revolution and the Enlightenment could not have happen were it not for the introduction of coffee to Europe.  And then there's Real Drugs.  From fly agaric to ecstasy there are a huge range of chemicals that completely alter brain function.

We tend to forget that when we say mind is emergent process of the body that it's a continuous process, always ongoing, always affected by changes in the body -- which can be brought on by a threat, a temptation, or even a slab of turkey.

All of these effects, including even most of the drug related ones will vary depending on the level of conscious control the user exerts over his own equipment, especially if the user has decided to prepare his equipment for these kinds of situations.

In teh extreme - someone jumps out with a gun - example you give, one would expect an average person to be overwhelmed with panic reactions, either freezing in the headlights or by running like hell. If, however, the gun is drawn against a subject who is trained and practised in techniques for disarming armed opponents, the chances are the huge burst of adrenaline and endorphins will have much less of an impact on the reaction which will be much more governed by will and muscle memory.

At the risk of sounding like Crowley - will is the factor that makes all the difference. The chemicals are there regardless, but whether or not they hold sway is a variable.

Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on February 16, 2009, 02:13:52 PM

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 16, 2009, 12:48:08 PM
Hmm.  Here's some other things to consider:

1) If Bob jumps out a shadow with a gun pointed at you, your body will begin reacting before you are consciously aware of what is happening.  By the time you begin to make a conscious choices in reaction to the situation, your body has already begun to release chemicals into your bloodtream that will affect your decision making processes.

2) Your decision making process will also probably change if Jane jumps out of you with her boobs exposed.  Again, by the time you begin to make a conscious choices in reaction to the situation, your body has already begun to release chemicals into your bloodtream that will affect your decision making processes.

3) If you eat a large turkey dinner, you will tend to decide to relax and take things easy afterwards due to chemicals in the turkey that make you sleepy.  That's turkey. Other foods, from chocolate to sugar to coffee, have mood altering effects.  Some people believe that the industrial revolution and the Enlightenment could not have happen were it not for the introduction of coffee to Europe.  And then there's Real Drugs.  From fly agaric to ecstasy there are a huge range of chemicals that completely alter brain function.

We tend to forget that when we say mind is emergent process of the body that it's a continuous process, always ongoing, always affected by changes in the body -- which can be brought on by a threat, a temptation, or even a slab of turkey.

All of these effects, including even most of the drug related ones will vary depending on the level of conscious control the user exerts over his own equipment, especially if the user has decided to prepare his equipment for these kinds of situations.

In teh extreme - someone jumps out with a gun - example you give, one would expect an average person to be overwhelmed with panic reactions, either freezing in the headlights or by running like hell. If, however, the gun is drawn against a subject who is trained and practised in techniques for disarming armed opponents, the chances are the huge burst of adrenaline and endorphins will have much less of an impact on the reaction which will be much more governed by will and muscle memory.

At the risk of sounding like Crowley - will is the factor that makes all the difference. The chemicals are there regardless, but whether or not they hold sway is a variable.

:mittens:

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 16, 2009, 09:04:43 AM

Not to deliberately provoke a hostile response, but the first thing this metaphor says to me is "Cartesian dualism."  Please don't hang me.  Here's the issue:  the Black Iron Dungeon is a metaphor for the body.  But a dungeon is a structure that the prisoner is trapped inside.  So who is the prisoner in this metaphor?  It seems like the prisoner is The Mind.

The Mind trapped inside The Body, which is the Black Iron Dungeon.  I'd like to get away from those kind of metaphors.  RAW uses the metaphor of a Robot to describe much the same thing.  The Robot consists of hardware and software.  This a metaphor of mind and body united.  I like that metaphor better.

A Model:

Let the Black Iron Dungeon stand for 'the physical limits to our external sensory capabilities".
Let the Black Iron Prison stand for "the imposed limits and interpretations of sensory input".

In this case, rather than a Cartesian Duality of Mind/Body... we're speaking entirely within the neurological chain.

Now, within the Black Iron Prison, perhaps we can say that there is a Warden  (RAW's Thinker) and the Guard (RAW's Prover). What the Warden believes about the Prison, the Guard enforces. The Warden can be bought, he can be influenced by 'outsiders', he can be tricked and fooled. The Prisoner then, is the Perceiver rather than the Mind OR Soul; the 'I' which perceives the output of the neurological system. The prisoner might be able to stage a breakout and pay off the warden, trick the warden etc.

As a separate metaphor, the Black Iron Dungeon has a single architect and Master: DNA. While it's possibly to remodel the dungeon (ala transhumanism), it is not really something you can escape. The Prisoner trapped inside is 'The Perceiver' just as with the Prison.

These both, I think, work as separate, but complementary models. I have yet to develop the GUIT, or Grand Unified Incarceration Theory. However, there are several notes in the margins which will probably explain it, once we figure out the maths.

I think it's just due to how I define and interpret the BIP metaphor, but the BID metaphor seems redundant to me.  My conception of BIP incorporates both the physical limits of our external sensory capabillities AND the imposed limits and interpretations of sensory input.  They're different kinds of bars.  OR, they are different ingredients that make the bars, etc. 

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 16, 2009, 04:01:28 PM
I think it's just due to how I define and interpret the BIP metaphor, but the BID metaphor seems redundant to me.  My conception of BIP incorporates both the physical limits of our external sensory capabillities AND the imposed limits and interpretations of sensory input.  They're different kinds of bars.  OR, they are different ingredients that make the bars, etc. 

I think that it can be used it a multitude of ways, depending on what we're discussing. We can describe the BiP as made up of limits (physical and psychological), or we can model them separately if we're talking about the difference between things we can effect and things we can't. Or we can just turn the whole damn prison into a vehicle and drive away, if we're modeling the importance of controlling how we perceive our limits.

Quote from: Cain on December 26, 2008, 06:26:52 PM
Uh, its a particle and wave thing.  You know, quantum.

Anyway, that aside, it would be more like both.  One on level of analysis, that of biological/chemical/physical, its clearly a dungeon.  However, as soon as you turn from that to social questions, of notions such as "peer pressure" or "identity" or "law" or the like, its a prison.  And that effects how you rearrange your cell.

The BIP is

Quotefull of different forces, individual and corporate, struggling with one another. Sometimes there is cooperation towards shared goals. At other times there is open combat. The more powerful force may utterly destroy the weaker, or force it into subjugation, or it may itself be forced to compromise and reach a settlement with the weaker force in order to pursue other objectives, or out of exhaustion. Any settlement is inherently unstable: the forces will change, the same old forces will try again to gain the upper hand, but after such disturbances, new accommodations will be found. The net effect of all this gross struggle is the production of an ensemble of power relations whose strategies are those of enforcing the social settlement.

Therefore, the strategies used to rearrange it are different, but the barrier of entry is singificantly lowered when compared to the BID, because of the inherent nature of those qualities, making it harder to effect any change, but on the other hand increasing its permamency (for example, if you lost your eyes, or were bioengineered to see infrared vision) or putting greater reliance on technological methods (such as infrared goggles, or cameras with human/computer interfaces for vision).

This is how I'm interpreting this, and by all means correct me if I'm off a bit:

The BIP = inter- and intrapersonal social limiters, influenced and confined by ...
The BID = physical/chemical barriers

Thus, the Dungeon term can be used to describe the overall physical confines of perception (IE human physiology), whereas the Prison term can be used to describe how one reacts within those physical confines. To expand these into Pent/DK's discussion, the Prison of, say, a police officer reacting to someone jumping out of an alley pointing a gun at them will be different from, say, a suburban homemaker or an inner-city gangmember. While their Dungeons will be inherently similar (with minor variations for chemical balances between individuals), their Prisons will be potentially vastly different.

What Pent would describe (attributing to Crowley) as will in this case we would term as the Prison, IE the ability of conditioning to impact how we react to the physical chemical reactions refered to by DK (termed as the Dungeon).

I rather like this expansion of the metaphor because it allows us to more easily separate the limitations caused by physiology (IE, the Dungeon limitations) from the ones caused by social constructs (IE, the Prison limitations). If we want to adopt this expanded metaphor, I'd suggest using Prison in place of Dungeon and using Cell in place of prison, thus changing the above definitions slightly to:

The BI Cell = inter- and intrapersonal social limiters, influenced and confined by ...
The BI Prison = physical/chemical barriers

I only suggest replacing Dungeon with Prison because we've already established the BIP metaphor as applying broadly to the entire limitation set, including physical, and we'd need to change how we've worded a bunch of other stuff. To me, the important distinction of Cell vs. Prison could just as easily be done with Cell vs. Dungeon, but we've already started Prison as our overarching metaphor.  Also, the term Dungeon has probably too much social baggage at this point compared to Prison to be as effective a contrast between the broader physical limitations and the specific social ones.

When one thinks of a prison, one most likely thinks of many kinds of cells (solitary, group holding, traditional 2-man, etc.) with varied structures encapsulating the same overarching purpose of confinement. While this is true to an extent of dungeon, it is more likely to be commonly associated with medieval torture chambers and holding cells, or applied to S&M, where the same sense loses some of its constrictive implications due to the artificiality of S&M restraints (both parties know the restraints can be removed at will but chose to ignore this) which thus limits its impact as metaphor in this case due to wanting that term's distinction to encapsulate the absolute physical limitations.

The more I think about this, the more I really like the Cell vs. Prison/Dungeon terminology. In the past one of our biggest issues when discussing this (and one immediately being alluded to by Pent and DK) is the necessity to differentiate between these two factors - physical and social limitations. It keeps the physical limits absolute (IE, the walls of the Prison system, even if expanded, still effectively prevent those within from existing beyond its boundaries) while still allowing for wide differentiation of social constructs, conditioning and limitations (group areas vs. solitary, and the social actions that would cause one to be placed in or seek out those limitations, IE, the social dynamics of the prison and how an individual relates within those dynamics).

It's not a perfect metaphor (not that any metaphor is perfect) on an individual level in that the distinction that the Prison as a whole is analogous to the individual as is the cell when the metaphor is looked at on the scale of a single sentient entity, an issue that has always been inherent in the earlier BIP metaphor. However, it does allow the metaphor to more readily expand beyond the scope of an individual, since groups also have the same differentiation of social/malleable limitations while still confined to specific overreaching physical/fixed limitations.

To help explain the metaphor on an individual level, relating consciousness as the cell within the Prison of the body, while theoretically implying separation between conciousness and physicality does not actually do so in relation to the Cell/Prison metaphor, because the cell is only one part of the larger Prison as a whole based on the definitions above. Consciousness is limited by what the mind is capable of perceiving using the body, the discussion of which led to the earlier BIP metaphor referenced in previous works. After having informally picked at this metaphor, the need for the Cell/Prison distinction (to help separate that which places absolute limitations from that which places maleable limitations) becomes more apparent, in order to reduce confusion in which types of limitations are being discussed.

Very interesting and useful distinction, Cain. Hopefully that's what you were shooting for  :mrgreen:

Quote from: Ratatosk on February 16, 2009, 03:56:18 PM

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 16, 2009, 09:04:43 AM

Not to deliberately provoke a hostile response, but the first thing this metaphor says to me is "Cartesian dualism."  Please don't hang me.  Here's the issue:  the Black Iron Dungeon is a metaphor for the body.  But a dungeon is a structure that the prisoner is trapped inside.  So who is the prisoner in this metaphor?  It seems like the prisoner is The Mind.

The Mind trapped inside The Body, which is the Black Iron Dungeon.  I'd like to get away from those kind of metaphors.  RAW uses the metaphor of a Robot to describe much the same thing.  The Robot consists of hardware and software.  This a metaphor of mind and body united.  I like that metaphor better.

A Model:

Let the Black Iron Dungeon stand for 'the physical limits to our external sensory capabilities".
Let the Black Iron Prison stand for "the imposed limits and interpretations of sensory input".

In this case, rather than a Cartesian Duality of Mind/Body... we're speaking entirely within the neurological chain.

Now, within the Black Iron Prison, perhaps we can say that there is a Warden  (RAW's Thinker) and the Guard (RAW's Prover). What the Warden believes about the Prison, the Guard enforces. The Warden can be bought, he can be influenced by 'outsiders', he can be tricked and fooled. The Prisoner then, is the Perceiver rather than the Mind OR Soul; the 'I' which perceives the output of the neurological system. The prisoner might be able to stage a breakout and pay off the warden, trick the warden etc.

As a separate metaphor, the Black Iron Dungeon has a single architect and Master: DNA. While it's possibly to remodel the dungeon (ala transhumanism), it is not really something you can escape. The Prisoner trapped inside is 'The Perceiver' just as with the Prison.

These both, I think, work as separate, but complementary models. I have yet to develop the GUIT, or Grand Unified Incarceration Theory. However, there are several notes in the margins which will probably explain it, once we figure out the maths.

:mittens:

Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on February 16, 2009, 02:13:52 PM1) If Bob jumps out a shadow with a gun pointed at you, your body will begin reacting before you are consciously aware of what is happening.  By the time you begin to make a conscious choices in reaction to the situation, your body has already begun to release chemicals into your bloodstream that will affect your decision making processes.

All of these effects, including even most of the drug related ones will vary depending on the level of conscious control the user exerts over his own equipment, especially if the user has decided to prepare his equipment for these kinds of situations.

In teh extreme - someone jumps out with a gun - example you give, one would expect an average person to be overwhelmed with panic reactions, either freezing in the headlights or by running like hell. If, however, the gun is drawn against a subject who is trained and practised in techniques for disarming armed opponents, the chances are the huge burst of adrenaline and endorphins will have much less of an impact on the reaction which will be much more governed by will and muscle memory.

At the risk of sounding like Crowley - will is the factor that makes all the difference. The chemicals are there regardless, but whether or not they hold sway is a variable.[/quote]

This thing about training is true,  I'm just not sure what will has to do with it.   Trained reactions are still not conscious actions, and everything I said holds true:  You'll begin reacting before you begin thinking.  The difference between a trained soldier and an average citizen is that the trained soldier has been trained to have a specific and helpful reaction to danger and the citizen could do just about anything.

I mean just because you pull a gun on a person and their untrained is no guarantee they will quail...they might grab the gun out of your hand like a total badass, and be just as surprised as you that they did it.

I had a friend (half Apache, half Norwegian, we called him the Apache Berserker) who was mugged at gun point in West Seattle.  The guy jumped out of a shadow with a gun, and my friends immediate reaction was to punch the gun.  He ended up getting shot in the knee.  His reaction to that was to grab the guy and beat him to a bloody pulp -- he fractured the dudes skull in 22 places.  He has no actual memory ofthe event.  He just remembers the guy jumping out of him, the rest he described as "just a big red mess."

This same guy,a few years earlier, had been walking through a park with a friend when they both got jumped.  He beat the crap out of the guys who jumped them, and in the course of the fight he grabbed his friend (who had tried to stop him from kicking the shit out a guy who had already went down) and body checked him into a tree.  The tree had a low broken branch, and his own friend ended up in the hospital.  Again, he remembers the event as "I just saw red and had no idea what was happening."

All of these were unconscious, untrained reactions to what was happening to him.  if you asked him "Would you hospitalize a friend of yours if he was backing you up in a fight?" he would say "Of course not!"  It's not something he would decide to do.

This is one of the reason I loathe Cartesian metaphors.  When we think in terms of "the rider on the horse" or "the driver of the vehicle" -- or even "the prisoner in the dungeon" -- we distance ourselves from the fact that often the horse is riding us, and the car is driving were it wants to go.  This is where the EGO gets chumped by instinct and reaction, and that part of us we think of as "I" turns out to be the part that isn't in charge.

That One Guy's post is great, but it also REALLY demonstrates why using the terms Dungeon and Prison at the same time to refer to different things is really confusing.

Whether you have had training or not the fact remains that, at some point, you decided to train. You reprogrammed the machine to react differently and, when push comes to shove, it does. Bingo - you've upgraded!

In less extreme, less automatic situations it's even easier. You can stop yourself from getting angry or panicked in situations just by realising the onset of the state and exercising control over it. With a bit of practice you're suddenly no longer throwing a hissy fit cos the bus driver shortchanged you or freaking out cos the vehicle you're driving is suddenly veering out of control and your body's best gameplan is to close it's eyes and curl up into a fetal position. Bingo - you've upgraded.

The more you train, the better you get at it. It's called "rising above", a trite and baggage laden expression I'll admit but no less useful as a personal metaphor, whatever the hell you want to believe you are.

At the risk of sounding like a cracked record - the important word here is "will" the more you develop the faculty the more it becomes a distilled form of "you", to all intents and purposes the pilot of your machine.

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 16, 2009, 04:01:28 PM
I think it's just due to how I define and interpret the BIP metaphor, but the BID metaphor seems redundant to me.  My conception of BIP incorporates both the physical limits of our external sensory capabillities AND the imposed limits and interpretations of sensory input.  They're different kinds of bars.  OR, they are different ingredients that make the bars, etc. 

this.

Quote from: RatatoskA Model:

Let the Black Iron Dungeon stand for 'the physical limits to our external sensory capabilities".
Let the Black Iron Prison stand for "the imposed limits and interpretations of sensory input".

In this case, rather than a Cartesian Duality of Mind/Body... we're speaking entirely within the neurological chain.

Now, within the Black Iron Prison, perhaps we can say that there is a Warden  (RAW's Thinker) and the Guard (RAW's Prover). What the Warden believes about the Prison, the Guard enforces. The Warden can be bought, he can be influenced by 'outsiders', he can be tricked and fooled. The Prisoner then, is the Perceiver rather than the Mind OR Soul; the 'I' which perceives the output of the neurological system. The prisoner might be able to stage a breakout and pay off the warden, trick the warden etc.

As a separate metaphor, the Black Iron Dungeon has a single architect and Master: DNA. While it's possibly to remodel the dungeon (ala transhumanism), it is not really something you can escape. The Prisoner trapped inside is 'The Perceiver' just as with the Prison.

These both, I think, work as separate, but complementary models. I have yet to develop the GUIT, or Grand Unified Incarceration Theory. However, there are several notes in the margins which will probably explain it, once we figure out the maths.

:mittens:

Quote from: Rev. What's-his-Name?I think it's just due to how I define and interpret the BIP metaphor, but the BID metaphor seems redundant to me.  My conception of BIP incorporates both the physical limits of our external sensory capabillities AND the imposed limits and interpretations of sensory input.  They're different kinds of bars.  OR, they are different ingredients that make the bars, etc.

How is there any utility in holding on to one definition as opposed to bringing in some nuance to split between the two very different concepts? The two elements are interconnected, but from where I am standing, it is far more useful to be able to have two different terms to describe the two different aspects of the interconnected whole, and thus make it easier to write on techniques related to one of the two areas, rather than relying on the one metaphor and losing that distinction far easier.

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 16, 2009, 07:51:39 PM
That One Guy's post is great, but it also REALLY demonstrates why using the terms Dungeon and Prison at the same time to refer to different things is really confusing.

I think that's something we've recognized since starting the BIP metaphor originally. Thus Cain's post to help start the discussion that there needs to be a more solid differentiation of the metaphor, into Dungeon vs. Prison as posited by Cain, and Cell vs. Prison as refined by me.

Originally, the BIP metaphor was used as a shorthand to encapsulate the various limitations placed on an individual's perceptions, by both social and physical means. The original BIP works came from this position. In the subsequent couple of years since, it's been refined and reexamined to the point where we're still defining important variables, such as in this topic where Cain introduced the need to differentiate between social constructs/limitations and physical ones.

The fact that the original terms posited by Cain in the OP didn't quite fit led me to my clarifications and refinements. The fact that this topic was started to address those terms is the more important overreaching point, and is why I almost immediately proposed the alternate terminology - I wanted to address the original point (the need for a separation in discussion of physical and social limitations as two distinct types or sets of limitations) rather than waste time arguing over terminology. Since we can easily alter our terminology as long as we all agree on our definitions, I sought to address that issue first in order to help the topic move to the meat of Cain's idea, which it seems to be doing as we start to try to classify real-world situations into the metaphor with the newly recognized need to differentiate between physical and social limitations.

Quote from: Dirtytime on February 16, 2009, 08:12:05 PM

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 16, 2009, 04:01:28 PM
I think it's just due to how I define and interpret the BIP metaphor, but the BID metaphor seems redundant to me.  My conception of BIP incorporates both the physical limits of our external sensory capabillities AND the imposed limits and interpretations of sensory input.  They're different kinds of bars.  OR, they are different ingredients that make the bars, etc. 

this.

That's why I proposed my terminology, and why I like the underlying concept of the need to differentiate the Prison from the Cell. A prison can be many different shapes and sizes (the Prison of, say, a dolphin would be different from the prison of a human for example), but the Cell can only define itself in relation to the larger shape of the prison - IE, the cell cannot exist beyond the limitations of the prison, or, one cannot perceive that which is beyond the body's ability to perceive.

This still keeps the broader Prison referred to by RWHN and Dirtytime, in that the Prison itself encompases the full scope of limitations (and is why I proposed the Cell vs. Prison terminology). The social limitations I referred to as Cell are an important but still secondary refinement of the broader limitations placed by physical realities.

I see this thread as a way to differentiate aspects of the broader BIP. When one wants to discuss solely the social limitations (or some of the Bars as RWHN's model would refer to them), the Cell vs. Prison model becomes more useful. When one wants to discuss the broader aspect of limitations as a whole (including both physical and social limitations), the BIP model can continue.

The original BIP stuff concentrated on discussing the broader aspect, and in the course of the next couple of years has led increasingly to confusion when talking about specific aspects of the BIP. The Bars metaphor was the one originally used to describe these, but that metaphor doesn't differentiate physical bars from social bars, something that later discussion felt the need to differentiate. On further consideration, I'd actually change my terms a bit to differentiate between the broader BIP and the purely physical limitations refered to as Prison in my post above. Prison walls works for me, so I'll go with that.

Going forward, I'd be inclined to use the following terms:

BIP - the broad concept that we are limited by a series of physical and social limitations in how we perceive and interact with ourselves and others.
Cells or Bars - the social limitations we place within the broader framework of the BIP
Prison Walls - the physical limitations that serve as further limiters for the Cells within the broader BIP

So - the BIP would then exist of two aspects: the Walls that define the shape of the prison as a whole (and thus the physical limiters) and the Bars or Cells used to compartmentalize the space within those walls (the social limiters). Still not a perfect metaphor by any means, but it makes it a bit clearer as to what specifically is being defined and discussed at any one time.

Yeah, I think I'm just on a very different page then a lot of you in regards to the BIP metaphor.  I see 3 levels of structure, but defined a bit differently.  You have bars -> cells -> prison/walls

The bars represent aspects of your life that define your perception of your reality and/or surroundings.  All the stuff that affects how you are at any moment in time.  So it is biology, your environment, etc.  The cell represents the set of bars that are exerting influence on you, in how you behave and in how you perceive the world.  LMNO in his piece in the BIP talks about if you want freedom, you just turn around.  This illustrating the idea that when you become aware of these influences, you then have some power to change your surroundings.  You can move to a different cell with some different bars.  So, if you hate your job, you find a new job.  You move to a cell that has some of the same bars, but this new cell has new bars pertaining to a career change. 

The prison, made up of the prison walls, represents the edge of experience.  It is amorphous because while we may think at any one time we've experienced all that we can experience, if we feel around, we find more territory to be explored, more cells to occupy, more bars that can be changed. 

You obviously can never go beyond the edge of experience because, well, we're human afterall with perception limitations.  So biology is important in describing the limitations of experience, but it also informs us on a lower, day-to-day level, thus why it needs to be factored into the cells as bars. 

So this is why I don't really get the Dungeon thing because I don't understand where it would fit in the model I just described.   

I'm kinda with WHN on this one. As far as splitting the metaphor goes it's neat and it makes perfect sense but as a working model I tend to prefer to group those aspects together as one unit-effect.

I don't see any bad coming of dividing it up tho, so you have my permission to do so if you so desire, just make sure you clean up any mess.

For me, tho, I'd change the terms. Prison and dungeon are the same thing in my mind. I guess I'd think of it more in terms of "prison" and "sentence" or something along those lines.

I agree Pent and RWHN - the Cell/Walls/BIP distinction is only really a subset of the broader BIP metaphor, not really a replacement. It's just a way to differentiate the bars in RWHN's interpretation, rather than a whole new class of bars being introduced.

Me, I rather like the Cell/Wall/BIP subset as it tends to give higher priority to the physical limitations of perception and its impact on the social constructs within those limits, but it's really just a refinement of your interpretation rather than a replacement. Which interpretation is used would depend on what's being discussed. When talking about the broader sense of limitations on perception, the BIP metaphor works in either case. When the need arises to differentiate between the absolute and the changeable, the Cell/Wall/BIP model makes things a little less confusing in that circumstance as it offers a shorthand way to describe the different types of bars without having to throw around a lot of extra verbiage or use the same term to describe two different things.

I'm having trouble following your line of thinking Pent.  Your tone indicates you are contradicting me, but I don't see any contradictions.

Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on February 16, 2009, 07:55:20 PMWhether you have had training or not the fact remains that, at some point, you decided to train.

I can't make any sense of that sentence.  If you have not had training, then how can it be a fact that you decided to train?

QuoteYou reprogrammed the machine to react differently and, when push comes to shove, it does. Bingo - you've upgraded!

But you are the machine.  This statement would make more sense if you said: "You've reprogrammed yourself to react differently and, when push comes to shove, you do. Bingo - you've upgraded!"  You see how easy it is to avoid the unnecessary allusions to duality?  

QuoteIn less extreme, less automatic situations it's even easier. You can stop yourself from getting angry or panicked in situations just by realising the onset of the state and exercising control over it. With a bit of practice you're suddenly no longer throwing a hissy fit cos the bus driver shortchanged you or freaking out cos the vehicle you're driving is suddenly veering out of control and your body's best gameplan is to close it's eyes and curl up into a fetal position. Bingo - you've upgraded.

Or flipping out because someone said he's smarter than you, or didn't show you the respect you expected.  snerk.

QuoteThe more you train, the better you get at it. It's called "rising above", a trite and baggage laden expression I'll admit but no less useful as a personal metaphor, whatever the hell you want to believe you are.

I like your upgrading metaphor.  Less trite, less baggage ridden, more likely to be literally true.  Like when I got glasses when I was 13, I upgraded my hardware in a very literal sense.

QuoteAt the risk of sounding like a cracked record - the important word here is "will" the more you develop the faculty the more it becomes a distilled form of "you", to all intents and purposes the pilot of your machine.

Whut? Your grammar is confusing me.  Did you mean for their to be a period after "will?"

Also, dude, seriously.  Pilot of the machine?  You are the machine.  You are not your ego.  You are more than your ego.  The ego loves to think that it and it alone is "you," but it's control over you is far less certain and absolute than it believes.

He's not contradicting you. He is simply disagreeing with your sentiment that you are contradicting Cain in any way.

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 16, 2009, 10:20:22 PM
I'm having trouble following your line of thinking Pent.  Your tone indicates you are contradicting me, but I don't see any contradictions.

Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on February 16, 2009, 07:55:20 PMWhether you have had training or not the fact remains that, at some point, you decided to train.

I can't make any sense of that sentence.  If you have not had training, then how can it be a fact that you decided to train?

Ah but the training requires Will... not Will at the time of attack... but Will at the time of Practice and Training.

Quote

QuoteYou reprogrammed the machine to react differently and, when push comes to shove, it does. Bingo - you've upgraded!

But you are the machine.  This statement would make more sense if you said: "You've reprogrammed yourself to react differently and, when push comes to shove, you do. Bingo - you've upgraded!"  You see how easy it is to avoid the unnecessary allusions to duality?  

Well, in the case of martial skill... there is something of a duality (though I think you're a bit hung up on the concept). When you train in a martial skill, there is the self which acts and responds to attacks etc. However, this constant training invokes 'muscle memory', so that, when the shit hits the fan, the brain is not saying 'parry' 'parry' 'thrust'. The body is acting as it was programmed to. (We can even watch the brain lag behind if we've got the right equipment).

To fool ourselves into thinking that 'we' are not our bodies seems like a bad idea. To deny that our bodies and mind can be considered independently for some applications seems like a useful model...  :fnord:

QuoteIn less extreme, less automatic situations it's even easier. You can stop yourself from getting angry or panicked in situations just by realising the onset of the state and exercising control over it. With a bit of practice you're suddenly no longer throwing a hissy fit cos the bus driver shortchanged you or freaking out cos the vehicle you're driving is suddenly veering out of control and your body's best gameplan is to close it's eyes and curl up into a fetal position. Bingo - you've upgraded.

Or flipping out because someone said he's smarter than you, or didn't show you the respect you expected.  snerk.

QuoteThe more you train, the better you get at it. It's called "rising above", a trite and baggage laden expression I'll admit but no less useful as a personal metaphor, whatever the hell you want to believe you are.

I like your upgrading metaphor.  Less trite, less baggage ridden, more likely to be literally true.  Like when I got glasses when I was 13, I upgraded my hardware in a very literal sense.
[/quote]

I'd argue that you didn't upgrade your hardware, as much as find a workaround for faulty hardware...

Quote

QuoteAt the risk of sounding like a cracked record - the important word here is "will" the more you develop the faculty the more it becomes a distilled form of "you", to all intents and purposes the pilot of your machine.

Whut? Your grammar is confusing me.  Did you mean for their to be a period after "will?"

Also, dude, seriously.  Pilot of the machine?  You are the machine.  You are not your ego.  You are more than your ego.  The ego loves to think that it and it alone is "you," but it's control over you is far less certain and absolute than it believes.

I think you may be stuck with only a single model for human consciousness, I'm not sure that's such a great idea...

Quote from: Enki-][ on February 16, 2009, 10:26:13 PM
He's not contradicting you. He is simply disagreeing with your sentiment that you are contradicting Cain in any way.

...but I'm not contradicting Cain.  If you are correct, he's disagreeing with a sentiment I don't hold.  My point is that the metaphor Cain is using has flaws that can potentially distort people's understanding of the issues Cain raises, introducing unnecessary confusion.  I'm not actually addressing Cain's issues, but the metaphor implicit in the terminology he is using to discuss those issues.

A metaphor is a map, right?  It's a map of an idea that helps us to understand the idea.  But maps are dangerous, because they necessarily simplify the territory.  The map is not the territory, yeah?  By simplifying the territory the map distorts the territory.  So what I'm talking about is the way the metaphor is distorting the territory.  I'm not suggesting that Cain change the territory, I'm suggesting he change the map.

The metaphor of the Black Iron Prison makes sense, because there actually is a real separation between the individual-qua-individual and the reality-qua-simulacra that the BIP signifies, one can overcome (escape) the reality-qua-simulacra, and existing inside the reality-qua-simulacra is unpleasant and limits one's potential.

So because the simulacra is not inherent to the individual, but rather something that is built up around them as they develop and "learn" to "understand" the world, the metaphor of the prisoner (individual-qua-individual) sentenced to prison (reality-qua-simulacra) by society (literally society) is apt.  The metaphor can even be extended -- if you escape prison, most people will believe you belong there and should go back.  Sometimes, if your refuse to go back, they'll kill you.  That's true whether you're talking about the Black Iron Prison or Attica.

Where the metaphor breaks down is a creative point which actually makes the metaphor more powerful:  Unlike "real" prison, the walls of the Black Iron Prison are illusory, and tearing them apart is as easy as recognizing them.  If you've just told someone they are a prisoner, then it's Good News that escape is not only possible, but actually pretty easy. (Of course, then you have to warn them about Chapel perilous, which is like yanking the carpet out from under someone's feet right after helping them up).

The metaphor of a person in a dungeon to describe the limitations imposed by physical existence is not so apt.  First there's that problem that Foucalt's distinction between prisons and dungeons is pretty arbitrary and dependent on heaps of qualifiers.   It's not really a dungeon, it's a dungeon that nobody built,nobody maintains, and which apparently has no wardens coming into to feed the prisoners.  It's true that Black Iron Dungeon that Nobody Built, Nobody Maintains, and has No Wardens, Guards or Records is a fucking mouthful, but without those qualifiers, a dungeon pretty much is a prison.

For example dictionary.com defines a dungeon as "a strong, dark prison or cell, usually underground, as in a medieval castle." and "A dark, often underground chamber or cell used to confine prisoners." and "A close, dark prison, common?, under ground, as if the lower apartments of the donjon or keep of a castle, these being used as prisons."  It's hard to escape the conflation of the two ideas, since they broadly refer to the same concept (a place to imprison people).

The same elements of the prisoner-prison relationship that make prison an apt metaphor for reality-qua-simulacra make it a lousy metaphor for the limitations of reality-qua-reality. 

Unlike the simulacra, reality-qua-reality is inherent to the individual, not something that is built up around them as they develop and "learn" to "understand" the world.  It is the world.  There is no separation between the individual and reality-qua-reality because they exist on a continuum.  The dividing line between reality-qua-reality and the individual is entirely arbitrary.

Unlike the simulacra, one cannot escape reality-qua-reality.  To recognize that the worship of God as a paternalistic figure that one must be obsequious towards is a form of conditioning to inculcate obedience to paternalistic authority figures is recognize that a wall of the prison.  Once recognized, one only needs the courage to step through the wall to the other side.  Then you are that much closer to escaping reality-qua-simulacra (of course, you're also that much closer to entering Chapel Perilous).

Recognizing that the walls of reality are actually only a cloud of electrons, protons and neutrons and that everything is primarily composed of empty space changes your understanding of the reality, but you still can't walk through the wall. There is no escaping from reality.

Finally, living in reality-qua-reality is not inherently unpleasant.  Through a combination of paying attention, applying accurate models in efficient ways, freeing oneself from attachments, and developing a positive attitude one can have a VERY positive and enjoyable experience of reality.  There's really no way to make the Black Iron Prison, the reality of the simulacra, an enjoyable experience because it's an inherently self-denying trip.

That's why I don't think the prisoner in the dungeon metaphor is apt.  It doesn't accurately capture the relationship of the individual to the limitations of reality-qua-reality.

Nice, Tosk.

The training/breakthrough/action metaphor crops up in the mythologies as "First it is a mountain (we look at it from the base, it seems a series of steps and assents), then it isn't a mountain (the act of climbing does not include an internal narrative, we see from the windy peak and the mountain disappears, wrapped up in the POV), then it is a mountain again (we have Named the technique, we can drop the terrible peak down upon those that strive to hurt us)."

Quote from: That One Guy on February 16, 2009, 08:55:12 PM

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 16, 2009, 07:51:39 PM
That One Guy's post is great, but it also REALLY demonstrates why using the terms Dungeon and Prison at the same time to refer to different things is really confusing.

I think that's something we've recognized since starting the BIP metaphor originally. Thus Cain's post to help start the discussion that there needs to be a more solid differentiation of the metaphor, into Dungeon vs. Prison as posited by Cain, and Cell vs. Prison as refined by me.

How about Prisoner vs. Prison?

"Cell" bugs me because cells can't escape from prisons, and it just seems weird to set up a metaphor where you can escape the prison but not your cell.  And, of course, it still has the damn Cartesian relationship built in, with the invitation to see oneself as a prisoner (mind) in the cell (body).

The more thoroughly we eradicate Cartesian metaphors from Discordian thought the more thoroughly we can repudiate Otherkin.  If Discordianism cannot repudiate Otherkinism, then Discordianism is broken.  AND we'll have Discordian Elves.   And I fucking hate Discordian Elves.  And if we use a "you're trapped forever in your cell" metaphor then you'll end up with someone claiming they are REALLY a dragon trapped in a human shaped cell.

Gag.

Prisoner vs Prison is a cool metaphor because when one escapes the Prison one is an Escaped Convict, a good analogy for how the world will treat you.  And you can't escape the prisoner.  That doesn't even make sense, so it doesn't beg the metaphor drift.

You CAN'T escape the prison.  The prison represents all that we can experience as humans.  Humans, because of the limitations of their brain, among other things, can only actually gain experience from a certain percentage of the larger universe or Reality.  As such, it is physically and mentally impossible for us to ever escape the prison.  That's why the cells are important.  We can't escape the prison but we can move from one cell to another. 

As RWHN said, the BIP is, in itself, inescapable in either definition set.

The ambiguity or confusion of the RWHN model in relation to the "jailbreak" concept is why Cain started this topic - to help establish terms to differentiate between that which CAN be changed vs. that which CAN'T. In the RWHN model, the fact that there are some bars of the BIP that cannot be changed because they represent the absolute physical/physiological limits is one of the underlying assumptions. When one refers to a "jailbreak" in that model by "just turning around", IE altering the order of those bars that are changeable, one is not leaving the BIP, but only rearranging the bars of the BIP, effectively "breaking out" from the previous configuration of bars into a new configuration, one that can hopefully be continuously rearranged at will.

This is, admittedly, not necessarily intuitive, and if one doesn't realize the assumed variables of the earlier model, it leads to a need for a differentiation between those bars that can be changed (the Cell in my terminology) and those bars that cannot be changed (the Prison Walls or Outer Walls in my terminology). Thus Cain starting this thread, and my refining of terms.

To take the Otherkin example, a person with that suffers from that mindstate would be described as follows:

Using RWHN's terminology, the person has arranged the bars of their human-limited BIP into a configuration that they perceive as an inaccurate representation of their experiences in relation to those human-limiting bars (IE that of human physiology) and thus construct those bars they are able to change (IE, the social constructs) in such a way that it reinforces their perception of being in the wrong BIP. It does not change the fact that they are a human-limited BIP (they're not elves or dragons or whatever, no matter how much surgery they might do to themselves - that's just more reinforcement of the incorrect perception of the BIP). In order to shift away from this perception, they have to reorient themselves in relation to the unchangeable bars (IE, recognize that they are, in fact, human and restructure their other, changeable bars accordingly).

To look at it in my terminology, the person has created a Cell within the human-limited BIP that is configured in such a  way as to give a false impression of the Cell's relation to the Walls that shape the BIP (IE, they have convinced themselves, despite physical evidence, that their BIP, while human, is not the "correct" BIP against the empirical evidence as it is their ONLY BIP). The Cell can be escaped from in that they can move out from the confines of one Cell into another Cell that does not conflict with the overall structure of the Walls within the BIP (IE, they realize they're actually human, not something else and change their social relationships and limitations accordingly). The BIP itself is inescapable, but the Cell used to relate within that larger framework is maleable, escapable, changeable.

In both models an individual is, at one and the same time, confined in both the Cell/bars as a whole AND in the BIP as a whole. One can change the Cell/some of the bars, but not change the prison as a whole (the BIP) as it is the embodiment of the absolute limits and thus contains artificial limits (the Cell/some of the bars) based on and constricted by those absolutes.

Again, it's not a perfect metaphor, but it's pretty decent in its overview when trying to relate these concepts of physical and social limitations to others.

If that's the case, I'm damned glad to be a prisoner? I mean, without being stuck in Prison, I apparently would have no experiences whatsoever... I'd be a collection of various chemical compounds, unable to process any external stimuli.

YAY PRISON

:|

Quote from: Ratatosk on February 17, 2009, 02:49:11 PM
If that's the case, I'm damned glad to be a prisoner? I mean, without being stuck in Prison, I apparently would have no experiences whatsoever... I'd be a collection of various chemical compounds, unable to process any external stimuli.

YAY PRISON

:|

Maybe there is a Black Iron Primordial Soup.   :lol:

Quote from: Ratatosk on February 17, 2009, 02:49:11 PM
If that's the case, I'm damned glad to be a prisoner? I mean, without being stuck in Prison, I apparently would have no experiences whatsoever... I'd be a collection of various chemical compounds, unable to process any external stimuli.

YAY PRISON

:|

I don't suppose you caught the latest ep of BSG the other night?

Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on February 17, 2009, 03:22:21 PM

Quote from: Ratatosk on February 17, 2009, 02:49:11 PM
If that's the case, I'm damned glad to be a prisoner? I mean, without being stuck in Prison, I apparently would have no experiences whatsoever... I'd be a collection of various chemical compounds, unable to process any external stimuli.

YAY PRISON

:|

I don't suppose you caught the latest ep of BSG the other night?

I dunno what BSG is...

:mittens: to RWHN and That One Guy. I now have what I need to answer n00b questions about the BIP in a suitably Zenarchistic Guru fashion.

a) When they ask about their Cell, I can spin lovely words about social conditioning, Reality Grids, the Thinker and the Prover, etc, etc.

b) when they ask about the walls of the over-arching Prison, I get to hit them with a stick.

:mrgreen:

Quote from: Telarus on February 17, 2009, 06:11:35 PM
:mittens: to WEHN and That One Guy. I now have what I need to answer n00b questions about the BIP in a suitably Zenarchistic Guru fashion.

a) When they ask about their Cell, I can spin lovely words about social conditioning, Reality Grids, the Thinker and the Prover, etc, etc.

b) when they ask about the walls of the over-arching Prison, I get to hit them with a stick.

:mrgreen:

It's win-win, really  8)

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 17, 2009, 12:06:10 PMYou CAN'T escape the prison.

Sure you can.  I do it all the time.  I have a guest pass.

QuoteThe prison represents all that we can experience as humans.  Humans, because of the limitations of their brain, among other things, can only actually gain experience from a certain percentage of the larger universe or Reality.  As such, it is physically and mentally impossible for us to ever escape the prison.  That's why the cells are important.  We can't escape the prison but we can move from one cell to another. 

You seem to have completely misunderstood the concept of the Black Iron Prison.

The Prison does not represent "all that we can experience as humans."  That would make it a useless metaphor.   The Prison metaphor represents the socially constructed simulacra of reality that limits our experience of reality.

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 17, 2009, 06:41:10 PM

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 17, 2009, 12:06:10 PMYou CAN'T escape the prison.

Sure you can.  I do it all the time.  I have a guest pass.

No, to escape the Prison would be to escape humanity.  Or are you now claiming that not only are you the smartest but you are also immortal? 

Quote

QuoteThe prison represents all that we can experience as humans.  Humans, because of the limitations of their brain, among other things, can only actually gain experience from a certain percentage of the larger universe or Reality.  As such, it is physically and mentally impossible for us to ever escape the prison.  That's why the cells are important.  We can't escape the prison but we can move from one cell to another. 

You seem to have completely misunderstood the concept of the Black Iron Prison.

The Prison does not represent "all that we can experience as humans."  That would make it a useless metaphor.   The Prison metaphor represents the socially constructed simulacra of reality that limits our experience of reality.

I think you have a different concept of the BIP.  Perhaps yours is more closely aligned with Dick, from whom we borrowed the label.  But the model we constructed is different than his and I suggest you might want to read up on some of the older threads in this subforum so that you have a clearer understanding of what the PD.COM model of BIP represents. 

Quote from: Ratatosk on February 17, 2009, 05:05:08 PM

Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on February 17, 2009, 03:22:21 PM

Quote from: Ratatosk on February 17, 2009, 02:49:11 PM
If that's the case, I'm damned glad to be a prisoner? I mean, without being stuck in Prison, I apparently would have no experiences whatsoever... I'd be a collection of various chemical compounds, unable to process any external stimuli.

YAY PRISON

:|

I don't suppose you caught the latest ep of BSG the other night?

I dunno what BSG is...

WAYSA!!!  :argh!:

BattleStar Galactica. Reason I asked is because there was a brilliant conversation between two of the characters that was so BIP-themed it could have been ripped off. If you can be arsed looking for the torrent s04ep15 is what you're after. around 21 mins in.

I think we defined our terms adequately in the previous posts in this thread and in other places in this forum and site. If you choose to ignore those definitions it will prevent useful communication and discussion in relation to the metaphor we are using.

If you use different terms or definitions from those outlined above, or feel the metaphor is inaccurate based on the definitions listed in prior posts (which I've included again below), then by all means define your terms or base your arguments on the definitions commonly agreed upon in this thread. I'd be interested in hearing it. Otherwise I await discussion of this topic in relation to the definitions I've used above:

Quote
BIP - the broad concept that we are limited by a series of physical and social limitations in how we perceive and interact with ourselves and others.
Cells or Bars - the social limitations we place within the broader framework of the BIP
Prison Walls - the physical limitations that serve as further limiters for the Cells within the broader BIP

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 17, 2009, 06:41:10 PM

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 17, 2009, 12:06:10 PMYou CAN'T escape the prison.

Sure you can.  I do it all the time.  I have a guest pass.

QuoteThe prison represents all that we can experience as humans.  Humans, because of the limitations of their brain, among other things, can only actually gain experience from a certain percentage of the larger universe or Reality.  As such, it is physically and mentally impossible for us to ever escape the prison.  That's why the cells are important.  We can't escape the prison but we can move from one cell to another. 

You seem to have completely misunderstood the concept of the Black Iron Prison.

The Prison does not represent "all that we can experience as humans."  That would make it a useless metaphor.   The Prison metaphor represents the socially constructed simulacra of reality that limits our experience of reality.

DK:  We wrote the damn thing.  I have a feeling if anyone should know what the metaphor represents, it would be us.

Our perceptions are limited by our physical bodies.

Our perceptions are further limited by our thought structures.

These limitations are what make up the Black Iron Prison.

You can change some of the thought structures, and you can use technology to help overcome some of the physical limitations, but you can't escape the Prison.

This (http://www.blackironprison.com/index.php?title=Bare_Minimum_BIP_%28a_SSOOKN_product%29) might help as a quick 'n' dirty summary.

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 17, 2009, 06:41:10 PM
You seem to have completely misunderstood the concept of the Black Iron Prison.

\
:hashishim:

Quote from: That One Guy on February 17, 2009, 07:06:20 PM
I think we defined our terms adequately in the previous posts in this thread and in other places in this forum and site. If you choose to ignore those definitions it will prevent useful communication and discussion in relation to the metaphor we are using.

If you use different terms or definitions from those outlined above, or feel the metaphor is inaccurate based on the definitions listed in prior posts (which I've included again below), then by all means define your terms or base your arguments on the definitions commonly agreed upon in this thread. I'd be interested in hearing it. Otherwise I await discussion of this topic in relation to the definitions I've used above:

Quote
BIP - the broad concept that we are limited by a series of physical and social limitations in how we perceive and interact with ourselves and others.
Cells or Bars - the social limitations we place within the broader framework of the BIP
Prison Walls - the physical limitations that serve as further limiters for the Cells within the broader BIP

DK, I grok the issues you have with the metaphor, I share many of them.

However, in the context that TOG and others are using it, the prison is inescapable... because it IS the human neurological system.

Let's not muddle our models... the BiP is whatever it is defined as. If you define the Prison as escapable social controls, then what does your map model physical limitation as?

Myself, I find that the BiP as modeled by many people here to have a number of flaws. So I have a different model... but that's not what the BiP IS (even if ToG and others think they know)... its just some semantic BS that is tied to variations on similar concepts in our brains.

Now hold on...


Rat, I know you don't like the way we put together the BIP metaphor.  But rather than redefine it, you've decided to build another metaphor that works better for you... the submarine, I think you call it.

When we argue about "jailbreak" and "escaping", you don't try to redefine our metaphor... or at least you don't tell us that our definitions are "wrong".

If DK doesn't like our concept, that's fine.  But at least he should understand our concept before rejecting it.

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 17, 2009, 06:48:15 PMI think you have a different concept of the BIP.  Perhaps yours is more closely aligned with Dick, from whom we borrowed the label.  But the model we constructed is different than his and I suggest you might want to read up on some of the older threads in this subforum so that you have a clearer understanding of what the PD.COM model of BIP represents.

You mean Phillip K. Dick?  Dick's concept of the Black Iron Prison is pure metaphysical wankery.  He was referring to a distortion in time and space that began with the destruction of the Temple of Solomon and ended with the bombing of Hiroshima. His supposition was that all the history between the two points was illusory.  My friend Chuck actually subscribes to this belief.  Or he says he does.  You can never tell with him.

My model is more closely aligned with Robert Anton Wilson's model -- he borrowed the label from Dick, you all borrowed it from him.  It seems like you have attempted to build on RAW's model, but it also seems like you have expanded his idea in a way that totally busts the metaphor.  I'm not sure if this is just you, RWHN, or if its the collective you (pd.com).   Because Ratatosk and Cain both seem to be skewing towards RAW's model.

In RAW's model, the term Black Iron Prison works as a metaphor because the thing he is referring to as the BIP has common elements with a real prison.  Those common elements are:

1) Society puts you there.
2) You can escape.
3) It necessarily sucks being there.

You appear to be using the term Black Iron Prison to refer to a thing that:

1) Society does not put you in.
2) You cannot escape from.
3) It does not necessarily suck being there.

This begs the question "How is the Black Iron Prison like a prison at all?"  The thing you are describing could be represented in metaphor by any structure subdivided into chambers.  A cavern, a mansion, a honeycomb.  There doesn't seem to be anything specifically prison-like about the thing you are describing.

And of course, the whole point of the Black Iron Prison metaphor is to set-up the Jailbreak metaphor.  So by redefining the Black Iron Prison as inescapable by changing what the metaphor refers to from socially constructed simulacra to reality-as-it-is actually ends up mitigating the usefulness of the metaphor to inspire real action.  It ends up becoming omphaloskepsis.

Quote from: LMNO on February 17, 2009, 07:56:50 PM
Now hold on...


Rat, I know you don't like the way we put together the BIP metaphor.  But rather than redefine it, you've decided to build another metaphor that works better for you... the submarine, I think you call it.

When we argue about "jailbreak" and "escaping", you don't try to redefine our metaphor... or at least you don't tell us that our definitions are "wrong".

If DK doesn't like our concept, that's fine.  But at least he should understand our concept before rejecting it.

I agree. I'm not sure what the hold on is for..

Quote from: Ratatosk on February 17, 2009, 07:49:11 PMDK, I grok the issues you have with the metaphor, I share many of them.

However, in the context that TOG and others are using it, the prison is inescapable... because it IS the human neurological system.

Let's not muddle our models... the BiP is whatever it is defined as.

I find that very strange, since they are acting like they invented the model.  But Robert Anton Wilson invented it.  And he was most certainly not referring to the human neurological system as the Black Iron Prison, that's almost a total inversion of what he was referring to.  Talk about muddling models!  I can see why Cain is seeking alternative metaphors (The Black Iron Dungeon).

QuoteIf you define the Prison as escapable social controls, then what does your map model physical limitation as?

Earlier I discussed the Prisoner as a potential metaphor (map), but I generally don't feel a need to have all of my maps work with all my other maps.  I like the Domesticated Primate model, and the Broken Robots model.  And yes,I know I am a total RAW fanboy.

QuoteMyself, I find that the BiP as modeled by many people here to have a number of flaws. So I have a different model... but that's not what the BiP IS (even if ToG and others think they know)... its just some semantic BS that is tied to variations on similar concepts in our brains.

In the future when I refer to the Black Iron Prison I will try to distinguish between RAW's version, which I find a very workable metaphor (as I've illustrated in my previous posts in this thread), and the Alternative Black Iron Prison.

Can someone link me to RAW's version? I have many of his books, and I haven't ever come across him using the phrase Black Iron Prison.

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 17, 2009, 08:01:08 PM
You mean Phillip K. Dick?  Dick's concept of the Black Iron Prison is pure metaphysical wankery.  

No.  


I have made it clear from the very beginning that I ripped off PKD's phrase and applied it to the "Discordia Revisited" project we worked on in 2006.

It would appear that you might not have have had access to all the available literature developed since then.

Please go here and do some reading: http://www.blackironprison.com/index .  We'll be here when you get back.

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 17, 2009, 08:13:50 PM

Quote from: Ratatosk on February 17, 2009, 07:49:11 PMDK, I grok the issues you have with the metaphor, I share many of them.

However, in the context that TOG and others are using it, the prison is inescapable... because it IS the human neurological system.

Let's not muddle our models... the BiP is whatever it is defined as.

I find that very strange, since they are acting like they invented the model.  But Robert Anton Wilson invented it.  And he was most certainly not referring to the human neurological system as the Black Iron Prison, that's almost a total inversion of what he was referring to.  Talk about muddling models!  I can see why Cain is seeking alternative metaphors (The Black Iron Dungeon).

Well, personally I agree and that's why I promote a different model. However, for whatever reason, sombunal of the site members feel that an inescapable prison most closely models the reality they have experienced. Thus you and I may prefer other models that use similar semantic terms, but that doesn't mean, necessarily that they misunderstand their model... just that you and I tend to see other models as more compelling. No?

Also, I don't think Uncle Bob invented the BiP metaphor.

Quote

QuoteIf you define the Prison as escapable social controls, then what does your map model physical limitation as?

Earlier I discussed the Prisoner as a potential metaphor (map), but I generally don't feel a need to have all of my maps work with all my other maps.  I like the Domesticated Primate model, and the Broken Robots model.  And yes,I know I am a total RAW fanboy.

I love Uncle Bob and I dig his metaphors and books.. and some here might consider me a fanboy (but having seen what the old man did to 'fans' and 'disciples' I try to hide it ;-) )

Quote

QuoteMyself, I find that the BiP as modeled by many people here to have a number of flaws. So I have a different model... but that's not what the BiP IS (even if ToG and others think they know)... its just some semantic BS that is tied to variations on similar concepts in our brains.

In the future when I refer to the Black Iron Prison I will try to distinguish between RAW's version, which I find a very workable metaphor (as I've illustrated in my previous posts in this thread), and the Alternative Black Iron Prison.

That would probably clear up a lot of the arguing

I went through a similar experience when I showed up here and said "WTF?"... I just thought you could benefit from my experience

Quote from: Enki-][ on February 17, 2009, 08:16:28 PM
Can someone link me to RAW's version? I have many of his books, and I haven't ever come across him using the phrase Black Iron Prison.

Yeah, I thought maybe I had forgotten something there... I don't remember Bob ever using that term. But then I often read RAW stoned (as proscribed by the Magus himself)... it makes sense that way ;-)

Quote from: LMNO on February 17, 2009, 08:17:02 PM

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 17, 2009, 08:01:08 PM
You mean Phillip K. Dick?  Dick's concept of the Black Iron Prison is pure metaphysical wankery.  

No.

What do you mean "No?"  What are you saying no to?  It would appear you are saying "No,  Dick's concept of the Black Iron Prison is not pure metaphysical wankery."  But the rest of your comments don't support this point.  

QuoteI have made it clear from the very beginning that I ripped off PKD's phrase and applied it to the "Discordia Revisited" project we worked on in 2006.

Congratulations, that makes you the second person associated with Discordianism to do that.

Quote from: Enki-][ on February 17, 2009, 08:16:28 PM
Can someone link me to RAW's version? I have many of his books, and I haven't ever come across him using the phrase Black Iron Prison.

I'm not sure which book it is specifically, having read the majority of them in one stretch ten years ago, but I just called Chuck and he seems to think that RAW discusses it in-depth in either Coincidance or The New Inquistion.  I'm thinking it's more likely the latter, since TNI is really all about the limitations of reality tunnels.

Alright, I don't really care to read the last few pages, because I have a bone to pick.

The Black Iron Prison does NOT have Cartesian Dualism built into it. The mind and body are not separated into Prisoner (mind) and Prison Cell (body), because a huge component of the prison cell is the mind itself. I would personally go so far as to say that the mental component of the prison cell is the one many of us are most interested in.

The beliefs and thought patterns we don't (or won't) question are as much a part of the cell as our physical limitations. The only difference is that we have a pretty strong say in whether or not we will allow those "bars" to exist, or what form they will take.

Furthermore, it is very strongly implied that our personalities and interactions with the world around us depend heavily on how we are able to perceive the world though the bars. So it is pretty clear that the mind (soul, self, ego, whatever the fuck) is intrinsically connected to the physical body (which also forms part of the Cell), not a separate entity.

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 17, 2009, 08:01:08 PM
You appear to be using the term Black Iron Prison to refer to a thing that:

1) Society does not put you in.
2) You cannot escape from.
3) It does not necessarily suck being there.

1) Society in part, informs where you are in the Prison.  What cell you occupy.  Another informant would be the physiological.  Our existence depends heavily upon nature AND nurture. 
2) No, you cannot escape it because you cannot escape your biology.  You cannot escape your human limitations.  That's why the "prison" part of the metaphor is important.  Not because of some dark connotations, but because it denotes the fact that you cannot transcend the limitations inherent in being a part of the human race.  HOWEVER, the caveat is that the Prison walls are amorphous.  Just when we think we've discovered all we can discover, we feel along and find that at some points, the walls go back further than we had anticipated.  There is more territory to explore, more paths to take.
3) Correct.  It might suck, it might not.  It depends on your outlook and how you react to the bars in your cell.  But, you have the freedom of movement to explore more of the Prison if you don't like where you are.  Find another cell, explore more of the territory. 

Quote from: Cainad on February 17, 2009, 08:42:52 PM
Alright, I don't really care to read the last few pages, because I have a bone to pick.

The Black Iron Prison does NOT have Cartesian Dualism built into it. The mind and body are not separated into Prisoner (mind) and Prison Cell (body), because a huge component of the prison cell is the mind itself. I would personally go so far as to say that the mental component of the prison cell is the one many of us are most interested in.

You're so not actually listening to what I'm saying.

I know that the concept of the Alt. Black Iron Prison (the territory) is not Cartesian in nature.  The problem is that the metaphor of a prison and the metaphor of a prison cell both imply a prisoner, and thus introduce Cartesianism.

The Cartesianism isn't in the territory, it's in the map of the territory.

QuoteFurthermore, it is very strongly implied that our personalities and interactions with the world around us depend heavily on how we are able to perceive the world though the bars. So it is pretty clear that the mind (soul, self, ego, whatever the fuck) is intrinsically connected to the physical body (which also forms part of the Cell), not a separate entity.

And the metaphor implies the exact opposite.

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 17, 2009, 08:40:27 PM
I'm not sure which book it is specifically, having read the majority of them in one stretch ten years ago, but I just called Chuck and he seems to think that RAW discusses it in-depth in either Coincidance or The New Inquistion.  I'm thinking it's more likely the latter, since TNI is really all about the limitations of reality tunnels.

That would make sense, since those two are ones I haven't read. I'll see what I can do about managing to find and grab those.

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 17, 2009, 08:52:24 PM

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 17, 2009, 08:01:08 PM
You appear to be using the term Black Iron Prison to refer to a thing that:

1) Society does not put you in.
2) You cannot escape from.
3) It does not necessarily suck being there.

1) Society in part, informs where you are in the Prison.  What cell you occupy.  Another informant would be the physiological.  Our existence depends heavily upon nature AND nurture. 
2) No, you cannot escape it because you cannot escape your biology.  You cannot escape your human limitations.  That's why the "prison" part of the metaphor is important.  Not because of some dark connotations, but because it denotes the fact that you cannot transcend the limitations inherent in being a part of the human race.  HOWEVER, the caveat is that the Prison walls are amorphous.  Just when we think we've discovered all we can discover, we feel along and find that at some points, the walls go back further than we had anticipated.  There is more territory to explore, more paths to take.
3) Correct.  It might suck, it might not.  It depends on your outlook and how you react to the bars in your cell.  But, you have the freedom of movement to explore more of the Prison if you don't like where you are.  Find another cell, explore more of the territory.

So you're using the metaphor of a prison to describe something that is nothing at all like a prison.

Like this statement doesn't make sense to me: "No, you cannot escape it because you cannot escape your biology.  You cannot escape your human limitations.  That's why the "prison" part of the metaphor is important."

The prison part of the metaphor doesn't seem important, it seems misleading.  You can escape prison.  That's a fundamental part of my understanding of prisons, and I suspect most people's understanding of prisons.   They are escapable.

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 17, 2009, 08:59:12 PM

Quote from: Cainad on February 17, 2009, 08:42:52 PM
Alright, I don't really care to read the last few pages, because I have a bone to pick.

The Black Iron Prison does NOT have Cartesian Dualism built into it. The mind and body are not separated into Prisoner (mind) and Prison Cell (body), because a huge component of the prison cell is the mind itself. I would personally go so far as to say that the mental component of the prison cell is the one many of us are most interested in.

You're so not actually listening to what I'm saying.

I know that the concept of the Alt. Black Iron Prison (the territory) is not Cartesian in nature.  The problem is that the metaphor of a prison and the metaphor of a prison cell both imply a prisoner, and thus introduce Cartesianism.

The Cartesianism isn't in the territory, it's in the map of the territory.

Sorry, who's not listening?

QuoteThe mind and body are not separated into Prisoner (mind) and Prison Cell (body), because a huge component of the prison cell is the mind itself.

Sure, there's a prisoner and a prison. However, they are NOT metaphors for mind and body, or at least not exclusively. The prisoner may be representative of the mind, but a major part of the prison itself is also representative of the mind.

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 17, 2009, 08:59:12 PM

QuoteFurthermore, it is very strongly implied that our personalities and interactions with the world around us depend heavily on how we are able to perceive the world though the bars. So it is pretty clear that the mind (soul, self, ego, whatever the fuck) is intrinsically connected to the physical body (which also forms part of the Cell), not a separate entity.

And the metaphor implies the exact opposite.

If you want to take the name of it literally, which is not how it's intended.

The actual metaphor, if you're willing to take it beyond the immediate assumption that Prisoner=Mind and Prison=Body, clearly suggests that our minds are directly tied to both physical and self-imposed psychological limits.

DK, just to clarify, "no" was in reference to your assumption that we were referring to the PKD BIP.

So, who was the other Discordian to steal it?

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 16, 2009, 07:41:49 PMThis is one of the reason I loathe Cartesian metaphors.  When we think in terms of "the rider on the horse" or "the driver of the vehicle" -- or even "the prisoner in the dungeon" -- we distance ourselves from the fact that often the horse is riding us, and the car is driving were it wants to go.  This is where the EGO gets chumped by instinct and reaction, and that part of us we think of as "I" turns out to be the part that isn't in charge.

I agree with this.  Cartesian metaphors just aren't a peeve to me.

The problem with metaphors is that any metaphor can be taken too far.  While it feels natural for me to view my neural correlates of consciousness as a driver with the rest of my body being a vehicle, I can easily see where the metaphor breaks down.  Every time I react before I have a chance to think, I know that my NCC is not totally in charge.  Every time I catch myself just going through the motions without really thinking about what I'm doing, I know that my NCC is not totally in charge.  Every time I react emotionally, I know that my NCC is not totally in charge.

I even don't believe that it's possible to ever act solely on conscious processes.  By the time my NCC gets around to assessing a situation, the decision-making process has already been biased by input from my lizard-brain in the form of a shift in the balance of my brain chemistry.  The best that I can do is recognize this for what it is, and attempt to correct for it if necessary.

None of this means that Cartesian metaphors are useless.  It only means that like all metaphors, there are situations where they can be useful, and other situations where they are not useful.

I think your example of the rider on the horse is a little closer to reality than the standard idea of Cartesian duality, IF the horse is wild and you don't really control it.  The horse has a mind of its own, and the best you can do is pull really hard on the reigns and hope it moves in the direction you want it to.

Of course, this is way off topic, because as Cainad said, BIP is not a Cartesian metaphor.

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 17, 2009, 09:07:48 PM

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 17, 2009, 08:52:24 PM

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 17, 2009, 08:01:08 PM
You appear to be using the term Black Iron Prison to refer to a thing that:

1) Society does not put you in.
2) You cannot escape from.
3) It does not necessarily suck being there.

1) Society in part, informs where you are in the Prison.  What cell you occupy.  Another informant would be the physiological.  Our existence depends heavily upon nature AND nurture. 
2) No, you cannot escape it because you cannot escape your biology.  You cannot escape your human limitations.  That's why the "prison" part of the metaphor is important.  Not because of some dark connotations, but because it denotes the fact that you cannot transcend the limitations inherent in being a part of the human race.  HOWEVER, the caveat is that the Prison walls are amorphous.  Just when we think we've discovered all we can discover, we feel along and find that at some points, the walls go back further than we had anticipated.  There is more territory to explore, more paths to take.
3) Correct.  It might suck, it might not.  It depends on your outlook and how you react to the bars in your cell.  But, you have the freedom of movement to explore more of the Prison if you don't like where you are.  Find another cell, explore more of the territory.

So you're using the metaphor of a prison to describe something that is nothing at all like a prison.

Like this statement doesn't make sense to me: "No, you cannot escape it because you cannot escape your biology.  You cannot escape your human limitations.  That's why the "prison" part of the metaphor is important."

The prison part of the metaphor doesn't seem important, it seems misleading.  You can escape prison.  That's a fundamental part of my understanding of prisons, and I suspect most people's understanding of prisons.   They are escapable.

Some prisons are escapable, those poorly maintained and poorly staffed.  I think it is pretty clear the intent of the metaphor is to be based upon the intended function and structure of a prison.  It IS a metaphor after all.  Not literal.  

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 17, 2009, 09:07:48 PMYou can escape prison.  That's a fundamental part of my understanding of prisons, and I suspect most people's understanding of prisons.   They are escapable.

It's not a fundamental part of my understanding of prisons. Prisons may be escapable, but they aren't SUPPOSED to be escapable. That sort of defeats the point of having a prison, if they are designed with the intent of making something that is possible to escape from but simply challenging. I mean, sure, you'll never make a prison that's 100% inescapable, but designing it to be escapable is like designing a computer with the 'feature' of violently exploding every time a program seg faults: it's not nice, and it's not useful, and while certainly sometimes some computers may eventually violently explode during a seg fault some time in the future, to assume this will always be the case while designing such a machine is to change it from an occasional event to a predictable but highly common one.

I don't think the BIP is modeled after a 'real', physical prison. I think the BIP is modeled after the concept of a prison *as a prison is intended*.

Plus, with the BIP, it's rather confusing what it is to 'escape' -- some people say you can't escape but can only remodel, and some people say you can escape but you end up getting stuck back in whenever you stop paying attention. Either way, both situations correspond to the same thing. The BIP is a pretty good model for opening one's mind, bugs and all, and if I come up with a better one I'll let you guys know.

there are many qualities of a physical prison that our metaphorical prison does not possess. Like being federally funded, and functioning as an arm of the judicial system. I think focusing on the similarities between a real-life prison and our nervous systems is a red herring - no metaphor is meant to be totally comprehensive.


To me, (and I know I'm repeating what's been said to some extent) a lot of the prison metaphor speaks to the limitations and constraints on our free will (that elusive chimera!). The word "Free Will" carries this connotation that "you can do anything you want." Yes, but it's the "anything you want" that's the tricky part. For example, I could murder my boss, but it's not an option I'm capable of pursuing - I simply don't have the motivation. Understanding that there are such constraints on my decision making processes gives me a sort of power which I didn't have when I wasn't aware of it. This gives me some more maneuverability within the prison, but I still can't get outside of certain constraints.

The prison metaphor underscores that there are certain things that are completely outside of my abilities. (and I don't mean physical restrictions, like obviously I can't fly or whatever) No matter how hard I flex my free will, I just can't bring myself to punch my girlfriend in the face, fuck my mom, or buy a pick-up truck.

I also use the prison metaphor to speak about certain elements of my day-to-day reality which become imprisoning despite the fact that I selected them. I live in the ghetto - but yo, I'm the one that picked my apartment. I watch the Colbert Report every goddamn night, mostly out of habit. These are constraints on my behavior. They're constraints I put there, and theoretically ones I can control. But only if I really want to, and that's the rub.



oops ran out of time, gotta catch a train!  :p

Personally, based on my experiences and current level of knowledge and ignorance; I think that there are several issues with the BiP as a model and I find it somewhat annoying that anytime someone brings those issue up its responded to with "You don't understand". If multiple people say "Wow, this doesn't seem to depict the territory very well..." then there might be some issues with the map.

I think DK has made some extremely well thought out comments in this thread.

I SEE DISCUSSION OF HOW THE PRISON IS OR IS NOT ESCAPABLE.


I ALREADY SOLVED THAT FOR YOU.


PUT THE PRISON IN A DESERT.


IT EVEN IMPROVES THE METAPHOR.

the BIP  has always been a bit contentious around here and i haven't spent much time commenting on it. my first impression was its dark and the metaphor is clunky. my opinion of it hasn't changed in spite of a lot of valiant effort on the part of those working on it.

i have put in no effort so this may be easier for me to say, but why not scrap it and start over? there has been talk of using a vehicle metaphor that seems to work well in the model agnostic model. that car won't float that boat won't fly you can change the vehicle to suite the territory you travel but there are limitations inherent to all vehicles and no travel at all  is possible without a vehicle.

it might be the best choice to move on, it will create new projects and new work to revamp old ones but i think the successes of the BIP and the enthusiasm it generated might indicate this is a worthwhile direction to go in....   

The BIP is only one metaphor of many, and it's not by any means the only one that applies to this set of circumstances. This board has used it as a starting point - and it's obviously effective at that as it generates such a high level of discussion and creativity concerning both its meaning and its applicability. It has adapted over time so far and will continue to adapt as this thread shows. The perception of how accurate a given metaphor is is a personal thing. The BIP metaphor we're fleshing out here is one of many, and one that seems to resonate with many people on this board. That doesn't mean any other personal perception of it is wrong - it just makes it less applicable or more applicable to a given individual.

If anyone has an alternate metaphor, by all means share - write it up, start a thread discussing it and lets get going! People have certainly done it before around here and hopefully will continue to do so.  The BIP metaphor just has a head-start in the discussion, since it's been kicked around for a couple of years now. That doesn't implicitly make it better or worse, just more collectively fleshed out and defined. If another metaphor has the same kind of resonance, hopefully we can be talking about both if not many more as well in a couple more years  :mrgreen:

Quote from: That One Guy on February 18, 2009, 12:03:31 AM
The BIP is only one metaphor of many, and it's not by any means the only one that applies to this set of circumstances. This board has used it as a starting point - and it's obviously effective at that as it generates such a high level of discussion and creativity concerning both its meaning and its applicability. It has adapted over time so far and will continue to adapt as this thread shows. The perception of how accurate a given metaphor is is a personal thing. The BIP metaphor we're fleshing out here is one of many, and one that seems to resonate with many people on this board. That doesn't mean any other personal perception of it is wrong - it just makes it less applicable or more applicable to a given individual.

If anyone has an alternate metaphor, by all means share - write it up, start a thread discussing it and lets get going! People have certainly done it before around here and hopefully will continue to do so.  The BIP metaphor just has a head-start in the discussion, since it's been kicked around for a couple of years now. That doesn't implicitly make it better or worse, just more collectively fleshed out and defined. If another metaphor has the same kind of resonance, hopefully we can be talking about both if not many more as well in a couple more years  :mrgreen:

I would hesitate to give up on the BIP metaphor if it can be made to work. Becoming "the tired old discordians" that have to endlessly explain the metaphor to every one that stumbles across it, i think would be a bad thing. I also would not give up on it if it is still generating a lot of enthusiasm and creativity.

for new and more flexible ones i threw out the vehicle as an example  because it has come up in the BIP discussions a few times, it is not my idea and 
i don't have it fully fleshed out in my mind so starting a thread on it i will leave to the originator...

i did propose an erector-set prison idea at one point, the advantage being it can be reconfigured, it gives a game toy aspect to the metaphor and still keeps the prison "limitations" part. the downside which i also pointed out at the time is that only old farts know what an erector set is... probably a big part of the reason the idea didn't catch on..i did think it helped with making the metaphor both more upbeat and self explanatory...

Quote from: Cainad on February 17, 2009, 09:09:36 PM
Sorry, who's not listening?

You are not listening to what I'm saying at all.  Your responses are complete non-sequitors.  You (and LHNO) seem to be operating on an Understand-Agree fallacy. You think because I don't agree with your position I don't understand it.  That's not the case.

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 17, 2009, 08:59:12 PMAnd the metaphor implies the exact opposite.

If you want to take the name of it literally, which is not how it's intended.

The actual metaphor, if you're willing to take it beyond the immediate assumption that Prisoner=Mind and Prison=Body, clearly suggests that our minds are directly tied to both physical and self-imposed psychological limits.[/quote]

The metaphor implies the exact opposite if you take it as a metaphor.

No offense, but you seem to not understand the point of a metaphor.  A metaphor is supposed to help us understand a more difficult concept.  A metaphor assumes common knowledge of the thing being used as a metaphor.  It uses the metaphor as a map to the more complicated territory.  More to the point, it uses the immediate assumptions that the metaphor evokes to help you understand the territory -- it uses the familiar to explain the unfamiliar.

But all of the immediate assumptions one makes about a prison -- that society puts you there, that it is unpleasant, that you can escape, that there are guards and wardens, that there are other inmates, that people will try to put you back in if they realize you've escaped, etc. -- turn out to be false.

It seems to me that I have to understand the territory very well in order to understand the map.  That's ass-backwards!  Yet this is exactly what is implied by LMNO's request to read everything first.  He seems to be saying 'The map will make sense once you understand the territory.'  But if I understand the territory, what need do I have for the map?  The map is supposed to be helping me understand the territory.

Quote from: yhnmzw on February 17, 2009, 10:30:54 PM
I SEE DISCUSSION OF HOW THE PRISON IS OR IS NOT ESCAPABLE.

I ALREADY SOLVED THAT FOR YOU.

PUT THE PRISON IN A DESERT.

IT EVEN IMPROVES THE METAPHOR.

Actually it doesn't improve the metaphor, nor is it accurate.

You want a metaphor for what is outside the Black Iron Prison?  The Christians have a great one:  The Garden of Eden.  Tolstoy's The Kingdom of God is Within You (http://www.kingdomnow.org/withinyou.html) explores this idea in great detail.  Too Christiany for your tastes?  Then I suggest reading Hakim Bey's TAZ: Temporary Autonomous Zone (http://www.hermetic.com/bey/taz_cont.html).  Maybe outside the Prison is the Pirate Utopia.

A desert is a poor metaphor, because the only meaningful reason to even discuss the Black Iron Prison is to encourage other people (or yourself) to attempt a jail break.  If I tell you the only thing outside the prison is a desert, is that going to inspire you to make a break for it?  Or is the takeaway message going to be "Out of the frying pan, into the fire."

Quote from: Ratatosk on February 17, 2009, 10:23:04 PMPersonally, based on my experiences and current level of knowledge and ignorance; I think that there are several issues with the BiP as a model and I find it somewhat annoying that anytime someone brings those issue up its responded to with "You don't understand". If multiple people say "Wow, this doesn't seem to depict the territory very well..." then there might be some issues with the map.

Exactly.

QuoteI think DK has made some extremely well thought out comments in this thread.

Thank you.

History is repeating itself a bit, so I'm gonna put on my archive archaeologist hat for a second:

(http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb163/wompcabal/avatar/archive_archaeologistavatar.jpg)

SO...

this isn't the first time we've discussed all this jazz.

Here's LMNO's thread "renaming challenge" (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=11833.0)

Quote from: LMNO on March 07, 2007, 06:02:16 PM
Ok, the fact that "Black Iron Prison" is a PKD ripoff has come up a few times, so I hereby announce a challenge:


Please come up with a new name for the BIP metaphor.  Hopefully, one that can still use the original essays with only minor edits.



Go.

and the Compromise/Collaboration thread... (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=11934.msg371526#msg371526)

Quote from: LMNO on March 16, 2007, 05:32:54 PM
Ok, it has pretty much been agreed upon that we will never all agree upon the use of BIP as a name or metaphor.  Some like it, some don't.

However, I don't hear anyone saying anything against the contents of what the metaphor stands for.

So, as I posted before, but got buried, here's what we do.

If you don't like the BIP metaphor, write your own metaphor.  That's right, write an essay on what you thing best captures what we're trying to say.  Whether it's the Golden Sphere of Opportunity, The Dream in a Dream, or Happy Funtime Dachau, write it down.

Then, we'll gather all those together, and put out a pdf called "7 Ideas of One Thing", or however many essays we get.  I'm already writing a new BIP essay.



Ok, get to it.  Put money where your mouths are.

There's some good discussion in both of those threads!

---

Quote from: fomenter asshat on February 18, 2009, 12:45:52 AM
I would hesitate to give up on the BIP metaphor if it can be made to work.

:a2m:

---

I'm not going to go thread mining to dig up a citation, but history has shown that:

-every so often, argumentitive people point at a few aesthetic weaknesses with this one particular metaphor we're talking about.
-with slightly more frequency, people are really excited about it. Many people report that it's been helpful in conceptualizing how to rearrange their lives to their taste
-if we're lucky, this attention spins into a flurry of new ideas or progress.
-more often, it results in sort of trailing off while someone tries to figure out how to reinvent the wheel. To my memory there have been three or four people who were working on a new edition of the BIP pamphlet and sort of trailed off. I suspect because they're trying to compromise between all the good and bad stuff that's being said, and crystalize it into something readable. Harder than it sounds!

this idea, of self-liberation from self-imposed limits, is nothing new. People have been writing about it for zillions of years. All we claim any ownership of is the particular packaging of the metaphor, and the many many documents we've written trying to describe it. We disagree about nearly everything else, but ultimately, that's healthy for the ecosystem of ideas.

IMHO the coolest thing about the BIP memeplex (in which I'm including shrapnel, The Machine, all that other made-up jargon stuff we like talking about) it that it's truly community property. So I would be hesitant to declare it "dead" or say that it "doesn't work" -- because it's doing it's job, maybe in more ways than are apparent on the surface.

Quote from: Phineas Poxwattle on February 18, 2009, 01:22:46 AM

Quote from: fomenter asshat on February 18, 2009, 12:45:52 AM
I would hesitate to give up on the BIP metaphor if it can be made to work.

my bad on that one, especially since it works for me in some respects  :argh!: i think i failed to properly connect it to the idea that followed, trying to say, made to work better, in that it doesn't need to be explained as much as some of the above posts would suggest or as often as the topic coming up would suggest..


both of which may not happen as often over all, my view of the reactions are limited..

DK, I'm confused.

If I were to state that I knew everything about the ideas behind Plato's Republic, even though I never read it, you'd claim I was an idiot. And if I started rambling on about a tangent that had nothing to do with Plato, you'd probably suggest I read the guy before moving on.

So I find it odd that you've come to a conclusion about our BIP idea, without even actually reading our ideas on it.

From what I recall from my college philosophy courses, it took pages and pages of set-up to come to a simple concluding sentence. Why are you so unwilling to put in a similar effort here, especially when we have posted a simple link to the available writings?

Quote from: Phineas Poxwattle on February 17, 2009, 09:58:07 PMthere are many qualities of a physical prison that our metaphorical prison does not possess. Like being federally funded, and functioning as an arm of the judicial system. I think focusing on the similarities between a real-life prison and our nervous systems is a red herring - no metaphor is meant to be totally comprehensive.

True, but a metaphor is meant to be at least minimally comprehensive, and the strength/utility of a metaphor is directly proportional to the number of points of similarity between the metaphor and the concept explained by the metaphor.  

If there are no similarities at all, then what is the point of using a metaphor at all?  How does it help to understand territory if the map has no relationship to the territory?

Here's the question:  What does the metaphor of prison do to help explain the concept that the Alt. Black Iron Prison model refers to that any other structure wouldn't do?

Why is prison a better metaphor for the concept referred to than any other?

For example, the metaphor of prison and cell could be replaced with a metaphor of mansion and room, or cave system and cavern (drawing a conceptual link to Plato's Allegory of the Cave).

Why shouldn't it be replaced?  Why is the metaphor of prison and cell more accurate than the metaphor of mansion and room?

QuoteTo me, (and I know I'm repeating what's been said to some extent) a lot of the prison metaphor speaks to the limitations and constraints on our free will (that elusive chimera!). The word "Free Will" carries this connotation that "you can do anything you want." Yes, but it's the "anything you want" that's the tricky part. For example, I could murder my boss, but it's not an option I'm capable of pursuing - I simply don't have the motivation. Understanding that there are such constraints on my decision making processes gives me a sort of power which I didn't have when I wasn't aware of it. This gives me some more maneuverability within the prison, but I still can't get outside of certain constraints.

Your example doesn't seem to support your argument.

Murdering your boss is an option you are capable of pursuing.  That you don't have a motive to kill your boss is not a limitation (re: this post (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=19772.msg662486#msg662486) on limitations for expanded discussion of this point).  You just don't want to do it.

Not wanting to do something is not the same thing as not being capable of doing something.  This is an attitudinal limitation, so it's a false limitation.  You just need to shift your attitude.  Snort PCP and spend twenty minutes pacing in darkness dwelling on every single annoying habit you boss has, and you can generate the motivation to kill him.

Not that you should do that.  I can't endorse killing people just to prove you can.

QuoteThe prison metaphor underscores that there are certain things that are completely outside of my abilities. (and I don't mean physical restrictions, like obviously I can't fly or whatever) No matter how hard I flex my free will, I just can't bring myself to punch my girlfriend in the face, fuck my mom, or buy a pick-up truck.

Those are all false limitations.  You can totally bring yourself to do those things.  It would just take a lot of work, and you can't see any purpose to doing that work.  Neither can I.

QuoteI also use the prison metaphor to speak about certain elements of my day-to-day reality which become imprisoning despite the fact that I selected them. I live in the ghetto - but yo, I'm the one that picked my apartment. I watch the Colbert Report every goddamn night, mostly out of habit. These are constraints on my behavior. They're constraints I put there, and theoretically ones I can control. But only if I really want to, and that's the rub.

It seems to me you're using the prison metaphor to justify putting up with things you don't like.  Constraints you put on your own behavior are not actually constraints.

http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=19810.0

Be useful and flamecritique this.

that stuff you said, like "Those are all false limitations.  You can totally bring yourself to do those things.  It would just take a lot of work, and you can't see any purpose to doing that work." is precisely what I'm talking about with the black iron prison metaphor. Constaints you set for yourself are real constraints until you realize they are trapping you in some way and decide to change them.

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 18, 2009, 02:24:46 AM
If there are no similarities at all, then what is the point of using a metaphor at all?  How does it help to understand territory if the map has no relationship to the territory?

I disagree with that, that there's no similarities between a prison and the "escape the traps you set for yourself" notion. I think it works. It's not a perfect fit, but I feel it describes the shape of the thing pretty well.

QuoteHere's the question:  What does the metaphor of prison do to help explain the concept that the Alt. Black Iron Prison model refers to that any other structure wouldn't do?

yeah, I wonder about that. I've written on that, here (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/intermittens/InterMittens_01.23_loRes.pdf) (page 12) is my take on the metaphor. I don't claim to have the best description of the self-liberation idea, but it works for my life.

DK, please compare your idea of "false limitation" with the RAW and Leary 8-circuit structure. I'd like to see how you delineate behaviors.

Quote from: LMNO on February 18, 2009, 02:17:04 AM
DK, I'm confused.

Okay.  I will try to unconfuse you.  Bear with me.

QuoteIf I were to state that I knew everything about the ideas behind Plato's Republic, even though I never read it, you'd claim I was an idiot. And if I started rambling on about a tangent that had nothing to do with Plato, you'd probably suggest I read the guy before moving on.

Yes.  This is not an accurate analogy however, because I'm not claiming that I know everything about the ideas behind Black Iron Prison.  I'm not claiming that at all, and I don't think I'm "rambling on about a tangent that had nothing to do with" Black Iron Prison.  Neither does Ratatosk, which you might want to take into consideration.  

Also, and don't take this the wrong way, but I have read Black Iron Prison and the ideas presented there are pretty familiar.  It's also not that hard to figure out what you guys are getting on about from your comments.

I don't have to know anything about your concepts to recognize that my assumptions about prisons -- which I think are pretty commonplace, conventional assumptions -- are not helping me understand them.  In fact, the LESS I know about your ideas, the easier it is to notice that the prison metaphor is confusing the issue rather than illuminating it.

QuoteSo I find it odd that you've come to a conclusion about our BIP idea, without even actually reading our ideas on it.

I find it odd that you think I've come to a conclusion about your BIP idea, when so far I've been exclusively discussing the relationship of the metaphor of a prison to the idea you are using the metaphor to explicate.

QuoteFrom what I recall from my college philosophy courses, it took pages and pages of set-up to come to a simple concluding sentence. Why are you so unwilling to put in a similar effort here, especially when we have posted a simple link to the available writings?

You are completely misunderstanding my criticism.

Ok, how many people have misunderstood Plato's Cave because they "know about caves" rather than reading the text?

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 18, 2009, 01:19:52 AM

Quote from: yhnmzw on February 17, 2009, 10:30:54 PM
I SEE DISCUSSION OF HOW THE PRISON IS OR IS NOT ESCAPABLE.

I ALREADY SOLVED THAT FOR YOU.

PUT THE PRISON IN A DESERT.

IT EVEN IMPROVES THE METAPHOR.

Actually it doesn't improve the metaphor, nor is it accurate.

You want a metaphor for what is outside the Black Iron Prison?  The Christians have a great one:  The Garden of Eden.  Tolstoy's The Kingdom of God is Within You (http://www.kingdomnow.org/withinyou.html) explores this idea in great detail.  Too Christiany for your tastes?  Then I suggest reading Hakim Bey's TAZ: Temporary Autonomous Zone (http://www.hermetic.com/bey/taz_cont.html).  Maybe outside the Prison is the Pirate Utopia.

A desert is a poor metaphor, because the only meaningful reason to even discuss the Black Iron Prison is to encourage other people (or yourself) to attempt a jail break.  If I tell you the only thing outside the prison is a desert, is that going to inspire you to make a break for it?  Or is the takeaway message going to be "Out of the frying pan, into the fire."

http://www.blackironprison.com/index.php?title=Bare_Minimum_BIP_%28a_SSOOKN_product%29
See 7 (b), its corrollary, and 8.  I was surprised at first too, but doing a "Jail Break" seem to mean breaking the jail, in the sense of "to pieces."  And then re-assembling said pieces into new shapes.

Also, in the Desert, you face yourself.  You might even forget your name.  I elsewhere suggested there were oases.  Stop pretending you're an expert.

Actually, you don't need a metaphor to what's outside the BIP.

There's a precise answer: the entire, unfiltered, non-categorized, unfiltered Chaos of the Universe.

Of course, you'd know this if you, you know, read the material.

Quote from: LMNO on February 18, 2009, 02:41:31 AM
DK, please compare your idea of "false limitation" with the RAW and Leary 8-circuit structure. I'd like to see how you delineate behaviors.

Maybe later.  I already want to write that essay on the point of the Principia you requested earlier, and I'll only accept so much homework.  :)

[/quote]

Quote from: LMNO on February 18, 2009, 02:47:52 AMOk, how many people have misunderstood Plato's Cave because they "know about caves" rather than reading the text?

Nobody, but Plato's Cave doesn't challenge one's assumptions about caves.  It uses those assumptions to strengthen its own argument.  That's one of the reasons its such a famous metaphor.  It's very powerful.

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 18, 2009, 04:16:09 AM

Quote from: LMNO on February 18, 2009, 02:47:52 AMOk, how many people have misunderstood Plato's Cave because they "know about caves" rather than reading the text?

Nobody, but Plato's Cave doesn't challenge one's assumptions about caves.  It uses those assumptions to strengthen its own argument.  That's one of the reasons its such a famous metaphor.  It's very powerful.

:spittake:

Quote from: Cainad on February 18, 2009, 06:00:13 AM

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 18, 2009, 04:16:09 AM

Quote from: LMNO on February 18, 2009, 02:47:52 AMOk, how many people have misunderstood Plato's Cave because they "know about caves" rather than reading the text?

Nobody, but Plato's Cave doesn't challenge one's assumptions about caves.  It uses those assumptions to strengthen its own argument.  That's one of the reasons its such a famous metaphor.  It's very powerful.

:spittake:

I'll bet money you can't find one.  That meets my definition of nobody.

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 18, 2009, 06:13:10 AM
I'll bet money you can't find one.  That meets my definition of nobody.

http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=4486.msg165212#msg165212

Do never test the search function. It is wise and terrible.

The other thing to remember with the BIP is that it isn't a model in isolation.  It isn't a model that explains everything.  The Shrapnel model we developed works in concert with the BIP.  And I think helps strengthen it.  The BIP is the landscape.  Shrapnel describes how we move along that landscape.  We have our surroundings, we have the bars that impact who we are and how we are, but it's the Shrapnel that impacts how we react and where we go. 

The concept I've articulated regarding the BIP, Shrapnel, and Paths all work pretty well to me.  I think, together, they do a good job of illustrating the how's and why's of our existence in the time allotted to us.  I also know these concepts have been brewing for quite a well and have a mountain of material behind them.

I don't see much point in discussing these concepts with someone who refuses to become familiar with the background of these ideas, because I think that materials IS very important.  The BIP that we've defined is way more than just the pamphlet.  The pamphlet was just a glint of the model we constructed.  So anyway, I understand some of you are uncomfortable with it, and I encourage you to search for whatever makes more sense to you. 

Quote from: Cainad on February 18, 2009, 06:17:34 AM

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 18, 2009, 06:13:10 AMI'll bet money you can't find one.  That meets my definition of nobody.

http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=4486.msg165212#msg165212

Do never test the search function. It is wise and terrible.

I was starring at that for the longest time, trying to figure out why you posted it, and I looked back a few posts and realized we're talking right passed each other.

When LMNO said "Ok, how many people have misunderstood Plato's Cave because they 'know about caves' rather than reading the text?" I didn't catch his meaning.

He meant "How many people have deluded themselves into thinking they understand the Allegory of the Cave because they know about caves, even though they haven't read the book."

I thought he meant "How many people have failed to understand the Allergory of the Cave after reading it because their knowledge of caves caused them to misunderstand what Plato was communicating."

LMNO seems to be convinced I have not read Black Iron Prison: Discordia Revisted, but I've read it three times now (just again this night), and I still think the book just "doesn't get it."  But that's because that book is not where I was first exposed to the metaphor of the Black Iron Prison.  That would be RAW, I'm also certain its in The New Inquistion.

So the Alt. BIP (that's yours, as it is chronologically later in development) is fighting it out with the RAW BIP in my head.  And the thing I keep noticing is that the use of a prison as a metaphor makes great sense in RAW BIP model, and very little in the Alt. BIP.

I think your confusion stems from the fact that for us, the BIP is an ongoing process.  The original pamphlet was hastily thrown together because we were caught up in an exciting idea.  The wiki is the crucible where we refine, clarify, and expand on the idea.

So, because you haven't followed our advice, you're basically trying to critique the New Testament after only reading 1 Thessalonians.

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 17, 2009, 09:07:48 PM
So you're using the metaphor of a cave to describe something that is nothing at all like a cave.

The cave part of the metaphor doesn't seem important, it seems misleading.  You can turn around in a cave, look at the fire, grab the ideal object, and run out.  That's a fundamental part of my understanding of caves, and I suspect most people's understanding of caves.  

Just so you see where I was going with that.

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 18, 2009, 01:05:52 PM

Quote from: Cainad on February 18, 2009, 06:17:34 AM

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 18, 2009, 06:13:10 AMI'll bet money you can't find one.  That meets my definition of nobody.

http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=4486.msg165212#msg165212

Do never test the search function. It is wise and terrible.

I was starring at that for the longest time, trying to figure out why you posted it, and I looked back a few posts and realized we're talking right passed each other.

When LMNO said "Ok, how many people have misunderstood Plato's Cave because they 'know about caves' rather than reading the text?" I didn't catch his meaning.

He meant "How many people have deluded themselves into thinking they understand the Allegory of the Cave because they know about caves, even though they haven't read the book."

I thought he meant "How many people have failed to understand the Allergory of the Cave after reading it because their knowledge of caves caused them to misunderstand what Plato was communicating."

LMNO seems to be convinced I have not read Black Iron Prison: Discordia Revisted, but I've read it three times now (just again this night), and I still think the book just "doesn't get it."  But that's because that book is not where I was first exposed to the metaphor of the Black Iron Prison.  That would be RAW, I'm also certain its in The New Inquistion.

So the Alt. BIP (that's yours, as it is chronologically later in development) is fighting it out with the RAW BIP in my head.  And the thing I keep noticing is that the use of a prison as a metaphor makes great sense in RAW BIP model, and very little in the Alt. BIP.

LMNO just said it, but I will reiterate.

You need to get it through your thick skull that The Black Iron Prison: Discordia Revisited is not the sole piece of material devoted to our BIP model.  There are many, many threads that built up to it and that have built onto it.  Go to the wiki  www.blackironprison.com  Go to the library where you will see many pieces related to and building on the BIP metaphor. 

We've also built other models that feed into the BIP model.  The Shrapnel concept is one.  Paths is another.  What you are doing is tantamount to critiquing the entirety of the Star War universe after just watching "A New Hope".  Honestly, you would make a very poor anthropologist. 

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 18, 2009, 01:05:52 PM
So the Alt. BIP (that's yours, as it is chronologically later in development) is fighting it out with the RAW BIP in my head.  And the thing I keep noticing is that the use of a prison as a metaphor makes great sense in RAW BIP model, and very little in the Alt. BIP.

Your problem.

It's certainly not mine.

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 18, 2009, 01:39:50 PM

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 18, 2009, 01:05:52 PM

Quote from: Cainad on February 18, 2009, 06:17:34 AM

Quote from: Dead Kennedy on February 18, 2009, 06:13:10 AMI'll bet money you can't find one.  That meets my definition of nobody.

http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=4486.msg165212#msg165212

Do never test the search function. It is wise and terrible.

I was starring at that for the longest time, trying to figure out why you posted it, and I looked back a few posts and realized we're talking right passed each other.

When LMNO said "Ok, how many people have misunderstood Plato's Cave because they 'know about caves' rather than reading the text?" I didn't catch his meaning.

He meant "How many people have deluded themselves into thinking they understand the Allegory of the Cave because they know about caves, even though they haven't read the book."

I thought he meant "How many people have failed to understand the Allergory of the Cave after reading it because their knowledge of caves caused them to misunderstand what Plato was communicating."

LMNO seems to be convinced I have not read Black Iron Prison: Discordia Revisted, but I've read it three times now (just again this night), and I still think the book just "doesn't get it."  But that's because that book is not where I was first exposed to the metaphor of the Black Iron Prison.  That would be RAW, I'm also certain its in The New Inquistion.

So the Alt. BIP (that's yours, as it is chronologically later in development) is fighting it out with the RAW BIP in my head.  And the thing I keep noticing is that the use of a prison as a metaphor makes great sense in RAW BIP model, and very little in the Alt. BIP.

LMNO just said it, but I will reiterate.

You need to get it through your thick skull that The Black Iron Prison: Discordia Revisited is not the sole piece of material devoted to our BIP model.  There are many, many threads that built up to it and that have built onto it.  Go to the wiki  www.blackironprison.com  Go to the library where you will see many pieces related to and building on the BIP metaphor. 

We've also built other models that feed into the BIP model.  The Shrapnel concept is one.  Paths is another.  What you are doing is tantamount to critiquing the entirety of the Star War universe after just watching "A New Hope".  Honestly, you would make a very poor anthropologist. 

Is the 'rut' model still popular?

I think the "rut" model came up during one of my vacations from PD.COM, so I'm not the best person to comment on that. 

Would that be similar to the billiard table with peaks and valleys?

Quote from: LMNO on February 18, 2009, 02:13:08 PM
Would that be similar to the billiard table with peaks and valleys?

But self-perpetuating. The idea of a rut is that it's a path that you are more likely to follow the more you follow it.

While we certianly do have several different metaphors which all have valueable sutff to say.... I don't think that they mollify or negate the issues DK pointed to with the BiP. That is, we've expanded into different models, but the BiP model still seems pretty... loose(?)...

I put out a call several weeks ago, perhaps I shall do it again.

We cannot justifiably say "You only read what we published, how can you think you're capable of understanding it?" If it requires that someone go diving into reams of messages on a forum to grok a metaphor... then something seems terribly awry. I would LOVE to help put together the compainion work "Golden Sphere of Possibility" however, to do that,

I NEED ESSAYS.

In the forums we have a lot of 'Work In Progress' stuff, Ruts/Slopes, Shrapnel, Vehicles, Lego Blocks, Deserts etc... but almost all of them begin with a rough essay, which has many comments and critiques and modifications. IF the authors of those pieces would like to submit a current version that reflects the metaphor as they currently have it developed, I'll do all the layout work etc. IF the BiP were tied with an equally available companion book which showed all these other great models, I think people like DK would have a far better chance of seeing what we're up to, without relying on one small model that really only has some applicability to some aspects of the concepts we're playing with.

So I'll make a new GSP thread and again ask for submissions.  :fnord:

Quote from: Ratatosk on February 18, 2009, 03:51:43 PM
We cannot justifiably say "You only read what we published, how can you think you're capable of understanding it?" If it requires that someone go diving into reams of messages on a forum to grok a metaphor... then something seems terribly awry. I would LOVE to help put together the compainion work "Golden Sphere of Possibility" however, to do that,

Sure we can.  Because the BIP pamphlet was never meant to be the "bible" of the BIP metaphor.  It was a collection of essays circling around the ideas.  Or at least, that's how I remember it, others can correct me if I'm off base with that.  We had 2 other projects in the planning stages.  The original plan was to be producing products in a somewhat similar fashion as what we're doing with Intermittens now. 

Now, that said, I also think your idea of a collection of the other memes/models, is a decent idea. 

But the BIP metaphor really did grow beyond what was put in the pamphlet.  Maybe there should be a disclaimer added to the pamphlet that directs people to the wiki so they know there is more to the BIP canon then what was put in the pamphlet. 

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 18, 2009, 04:01:18 PM

Quote from: Ratatosk on February 18, 2009, 03:51:43 PM
We cannot justifiably say "You only read what we published, how can you think you're capable of understanding it?" If it requires that someone go diving into reams of messages on a forum to grok a metaphor... then something seems terribly awry. I would LOVE to help put together the compainion work "Golden Sphere of Possibility" however, to do that,

Sure we can.  Because the BIP pamphlet was never meant to be the "bible" of the BIP metaphor.  It was a collection of essays circling around the ideas.  Or at least, that's how I remember it, others can correct me if I'm off base with that.  We had 2 other projects in the planning stages.  The original plan was to be producing products in a somewhat similar fashion as what we're doing with Intermittens now. 

Well, sure we can expect that... but it seems rather unrealistic. There is a published thing, which, in and of itself says nothing like "This is an incomplete work, please go dig up threads on PD to actually understand our current views"... It's just published with a beginning and an end... and stuff in the middle.

It looks feels and acts like a completed work.... I don't think its unreasonable for the reader to assume its a completed work.

Well, no it isn't unreasonable. 

But I don't think it is unreasonable that when said reader shows up that we direct them to the supporting material and then said reader reads that material. 

Willful ignorance won't help the discussions at all. 

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 18, 2009, 04:34:38 PM
Well, no it isn't unreasonable. 

But I don't think it is unreasonable that when said reader shows up that we direct them to the supporting material and then said reader reads that material. 

Willful ignorance won't help the discussions at all. 

Well yes, that also is true.

enki and i are bouncing around the lego model, its still very green but with lots of GSP potential i will attempt a submission but i think the idea needs to be more fully developed before its in a usable shape.

Quote from: fomenter on February 18, 2009, 05:32:48 PM
enki and i are bouncing around the lego model, its still very green but with lots of GSP potential i will attempt a submission but i think the idea needs to be more fully developed before its in a usable shape.

I agree...

GET THE FUCK BACK TO WORK YOU SPAG! WHY ARE YOU POSTING HERE INSTEAD OF FIXING THAT METAPHOR?


:lulz:

Why is it green?  It should be purple.  Obviously everyone's concept of LEGOs has them being purple, not green.  Come on!

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 18, 2009, 05:47:08 PM
Why is it green?  It should be purple.  Obviously everyone's concept of LEGOs has them being purple, not green.  Come on!

the metaphor is green (wet behind the ears) the legos are obviously purple or


:?

But the thread says it is the Green LEGO Prison.

So, you must like be talking about the Alt. Green LEGO Prison, which has the LEGOs being purple. 

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 18, 2009, 05:47:08 PM
Why is it green?  It should be purple.  Obviously everyone's concept of LEGOs has them being purple, not green.  Come on!

Also, LEGO implies that you're going to spend ten minutes at a time digging through the box for that one piece you saw a billion times but can't find now that you actually need it.

WHY DOES YOUR METAPHOR NOT ACCOUNT FOR THIS? :argh!:

I used the colour green because it is sometimes said to represent growth. Also, when you pronounce GLP you get "GULP"

Btw, "MODEL FUCKING AGNOSTICISM" is a really awesome double-entendre.

Quote from: Cainad on February 18, 2009, 05:52:36 PM

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 18, 2009, 05:47:08 PM
Why is it green?  It should be purple.  Obviously everyone's concept of LEGOs has them being purple, not green.  Come on!

Also, LEGO implies that you're going to spend ten minutes at a time digging through the box for that one piece you saw a billion times but can't find now that you actually need it.

WHY DOES YOUR METAPHOR NOT ACCOUNT FOR THIS? :argh!:

You mean that you have the entirety of the Principia booklet and the BIP booklet memorized?

If you're going to use green to imply growth, that implies that the LEGO blocks themselves are growing, which totally doesn't happen. Your metaphor is mired in Cartesian BUTTSLOLism!
  \
:goatse:



:wink:

Quote from: Enki-][ on February 18, 2009, 05:54:46 PM

Quote from: Cainad on February 18, 2009, 05:52:36 PM

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 18, 2009, 05:47:08 PM
Why is it green?  It should be purple.  Obviously everyone's concept of LEGOs has them being purple, not green.  Come on!

Also, LEGO implies that you're going to spend ten minutes at a time digging through the box for that one piece you saw a billion times but can't find now that you actually need it.

WHY DOES YOUR METAPHOR NOT ACCOUNT FOR THIS? :argh!:

You mean that you have the entirety of the Principia booklet and the BIP booklet memorized?

:lulz:

Maybe you should consider using Lincoln Logs. 

Quote from: Cainad on February 18, 2009, 05:52:36 PM

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 18, 2009, 05:47:08 PM
Why is it green?  It should be purple.  Obviously everyone's concept of LEGOs has them being purple, not green.  Come on!

Also, LEGO implies that you're going to spend ten minutes at a time digging through the box for that one piece you saw a billion times but can't find now that you actually need it.

WHY DOES YOUR METAPHOR NOT ACCOUNT FOR THIS? :argh!:

cainad = DK  :lulz:

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 18, 2009, 06:01:44 PM
Maybe you should consider using Lincoln Logs. 

Lincoln logs cannot be programmed in a very rough approximation of pre-ansi C, nor do they have 2k of onboard memory. Obviously, they will not be enough for everyone.

IF I CAN'T EXTEND THE METAPHOR TO ACCOUNT FOR EVERY SINGLE FUCKING REAL-LIFE ASPECT OF IT, I'LL SHIT MY PANTS AND ALSO IT MEANS I'M SMARTER THAN ALL OF YOU FUCKS


Wow, I can see why DK does this; it's fun. I'm going to stop before I get addicted.

Quote from: fomenter on February 18, 2009, 05:49:09 PM

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 18, 2009, 05:47:08 PM
Why is it green?  It should be purple.  Obviously everyone's concept of LEGOs has them being purple, not green.  Come on!

the metaphor is green (wet behind the ears) the legos are obviously purple or


:?

*Rat falls over dead from the LOL*

 :lulz:
"buttslolipsism" - the official philosophical framework of 2009

Quote from: Phineas Poxwattle on February 18, 2009, 06:21:09 PM
:lulz:
"buttslolipsism" - the official philosophical framework of 2009

:mittens: :mittens: :mittens: :mittens: :mittens:

(http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/Smileys/default/roglol.gif)

Bump.

Thread cleaned.  I am uncertain if DK's remaining posts count as contributing content (the ones I moved did not).

Input requested from posters in this thread.

It looks clean enough to me.

I keep accidentally reading the subject as "The Black Iron Lung".

Quote from: Cainad on February 18, 2009, 06:07:06 PM
IF I CAN'T EXTEND THE METAPHOR TO ACCOUNT FOR EVERY SINGLE FUCKING REAL-LIFE ASPECT OF IT, I'LL SHIT MY PANTS AND ALSO IT MEANS I'M SMARTER THAN ALL OF YOU FUCKS


Wow, I can see why DK does this; it's fun. I'm going to stop before I get addicted.

Don't give up the addiction. Share it for the benefit of people on other websites.  :mrgreen:

Quote from: Nigel on February 24, 2009, 04:07:19 AM
It looks clean enough to me.

I keep accidentally reading the subject as "The Black Iron Lung".

Re: The Black Iron LUNGEON vs the Black Iron LUNCHEON

fixed.

Quote from: Nigel on February 24, 2009, 04:07:19 AM
It looks clean enough to me.

I keep accidentally reading the subject as "The Black Iron Lung".

Consider this yoinked.

Quote from: Cainad on March 01, 2009, 06:24:12 PM

Quote from: Nigel on February 24, 2009, 04:07:19 AM
It looks clean enough to me.

I keep accidentally reading the subject as "The Black Iron Lung".

Consider this yoinked.

:)

Bump

I'd be pissed at the bump if this little gem hadn't come up with it:

Quote from: Phineas T. Poxwattle on February 18, 2009, 06:21:09 PM
:lulz:
"buttslolipsism" - the official philosophical framework of 2009

Quote from: Cainad on September 29, 2010, 10:05:52 PM
I'd be pissed at the bump if this little gem hadn't come up with it:

Quote from: Phineas T. Poxwattle on February 18, 2009, 06:21:09 PM
:lulz:
"buttslolipsism" - the official philosophical framework of 2009

:lulz: