Be All You Can Be! As long as you pay for it...

[zackli]

I've started reading "the Black Iron Prison", and it has expressed an idea that I've heard countless times in books I've read that I should have paid for but didn't (more out of a lack of actual money to pay for it rather than any sense of rebellion). I realize I didn't have to pay for any of it, making the title ironic. Someone, somewhere, paid for it. Most of these books are guilty of the exact same pigeonholing that the BIP is guilty of, however. It claims that, paraphrasing, everyone is responsible for the mess we're in, blah blah blah BUT YOU CAN BE DIFFERENT.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not doubting the truth of any of the preceding claims. That would be absurd. The genre of book I'm referring to where this idea is found is "self-development"/"self help" (for men/women, respectively). There are some fairly disturbing statistics on the amount of money given to people with claims like this ($11 billion market size circa 2013)[1]. I'm not 100% on the veracity of that claim, and am simply saying that up front. How much it is isn't really as important past a certain point. Friends will talk to friends and people will download things *cough cough* and the important thing is that there are already a lot of people out there being "freed" from their black iron prison, albeit with a different name and a different metaphor. The question is, does this idea really lead to action or just a bunch of drones who know they're imprisoned?

Personally, I don't think the metaphor in the BIP was extended out far enough. Life itself is like a prison. No one we can ever know of asked if we wanted to be born beforehand. It's quite hilarious, in an absurd sort of way, that your existence was the decision of (hopefully) two people who had no information on the outcome of that decision and who would ultimately play a large part in whatever outcomes proceeded without having any information about what those outcomes would be. I can't think of any similar metaphors, but imagine yourself being one of the parents of Dyllyn Klebold or Eric Harris. Now, statistically, the odds of something like that happening are worse than winning the lottery (I think? I didn't calculate any odds and found it hard to calculate), but it is interesting (to me) to note how little attention is paid culturally to the future parents of children in 'Murika. There are no requirements to be a parent other than another person who chose you or you got drunk, yet in order to drive (which, compared to the scale another Columbine can have, is relatively harmless) you need to pass a stringent (as sarcastically as possible) written and performed test.


Shifting gears to a slightly different metaphor I probably didn't think of but came out of twisting some things with NLP was that everyone is stuck in a box that encompasses everything they are and everything that is important to them. Now, outside of this box is another box which contains everyone with similar ideas and similar important things, and without awareness that you are in that box, that box is all that there is. When you break out of your individual box, you are able to see other people who are in boxes and you are freed from your box, stuck in a bigger box that again becomes all that there is. This metaphor gives the user the illusion of superiority because the others haven't yet managed to see that they are in a box. As you progressively open up more boxes, you start to see fewer and fewer boxes and the box you're in progressively becomes bigger. After a certain point, it becomes seemingly impossible to even see any other people, let alone the end of your box. It also makes you wonder what the hell they're all doing, because they're all so "inferior" compared to you and what the big deal with all of their "petty" issues is. However, all you see are people in boxes. The people who reverted to going back into their boxes look exactly the same as those who have not yet broken out.

Combining the two metaphors from above makes it a little bit different from the BIP: everyone is trapped in a prison regardless of how independently they think. It is simply a bigger or smaller prison that you trap yourself in. In theory, so long as recognition that you are still in a box doesn't leave your awareness, you may be able to escape the illusion of superiority. The art of navigating the social world, then, would require moving into and out of smaller and bigger boxes as the situation called for it.

Basically, this thread is about the dangers in this idea of "freeing your mind" becoming simply another cultural movement that looks good on paper that doesn't pan out in reality. While overt racism (calling someone the n-word, for instance) may have largely been thwarted, there is another much more insidious form of racism quite aptly named "covert" racism which is either done while conscious but in a way that the individual can not be blamed for it (an employer firing a gay person for being gay, but saying that it was because they were a terrible employee for some reason), or without conscious intention in a way where they give the other person subtle body language differences that make the employee act differently and therefore come off in such a way that confirms an unlikable personality, bad worker, etc. Neither of those types of racism is limited to strictly that form, either; as long as each is done with the respective conscious/unconscious styles of thinking, it is considered that specific type of racism. While I don't ordinarily go to extreme lengths in citing things, because I have what appears to be a good memory for shit I'm interested in and don't really research them (sometimes leading to surprises when it isn't as I remembered), here is a link that, at the very least, gives a better description of the differences between the two than I did. [2]

Summed up, this is my "unboxed" brain looking at all of what appear to be boxed brains. I have some ideas about where this could head, but this is a lot of shit already written and interaction would be nice, but it is not COMPLETELY necessary; It wouldn't be the first time I've rambled on and on for pages.

PS: Please do not let any sense of superiority that seeps through in my authoritative claimsmaking put you off; any and all of these claims can be called out and any and all of the things that follow from the flawed logic, if deemed to be so, are then also called into question. I wouldn't go to the trouble of thinking this shit up and typing it if I didn't want input.

Sources cited:
[1] http://nymag.com/health/self-help/2013/schulz-self-searching/
[2] http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1751-9020.2007.00057.x/abstract

[trix]

I'll probably come back and respond more specifically to individual parts of that huge post, but for now I just wanted to say that I don't think you fully understand the BIP metaphor.

Have you finished the BIP?

The bars of your cell are made of the filters you perceive reality through, or rather the biases and conclusions you form as you go through life.  There more to it than this, but I'm just wondering what the boxing metaphor you invented has to do with the BIP?

The BIP, a lot like My Discordia, is about examining the conclusions and filters and biases that I take for granted and have trouble noticing, and removing and replacing and redecorating until I am aware of and comfortable in my cozy little cell.  A "jailbreak" is not really about escaping the prison, merely finding a cell more to your liking.  You cannot escape the BIP.

Also, in the many years since the BIP, many threads have been made advancing and discussing the ideas contained within.  A very lot of them.  Chances are, if you take the time to look many of them over, you will find yourself thinking about the BIP and related concepts on quite a different level than you currently are in your new-to-it stage.

[trix]

I just wanted to add something.

When I first read the BIP, I loved it.  I loved the perspective it put Discordia in, the modern, more developed, more immediately useful way of looking at things.

In the years since, my opinion towards it (and PD in general, for that matter) have significantly changed.

I still think the BIP is an excellent piece of Discordian work and a testament to the level of intelligence and quality that those involved can produce, but I have to say I think it missed one very important thing, something I think many of the members here also forget at times, and that is silliness.  Now, when I say silliness, I don't mean the faux-random wordplay bullshit the annoying pinealists like to post and this board is pretty much allergic to, but I mean Principia-style silliness of the Turkey-Curse variety.  Don't get me wrong, we have that here too for sure, but I think its value is under-appreciated a bit.  Maybe even a lot.

Horrormirth is all well and good and very relate-able given the world we live in, but I think the right kind of silliness is very important and included in the PD in spades because silliness combats elitism.  It takes the ability to show true humility, the ability to laugh at yourself, to be utterly and completely silly.  To me, that is what "consult your pineal gland" is about.

I mean, I hate to say it because I love this place, but this place can come off as awful elitist sometimes.  Maybe because there are so many of us still struggling to leave behind our own SGiTR complex?  Well I can't speak for others as I wouldn't know, only for me and I know I still have this problem.  I work on it by trying to remember to make myself laugh every day at a time when nobody is around simply by being so silly and stupid I embarrass myself even while alone.

Taking oneself too seriously leads to life becoming too serious to be fun, IMO.

[zackli]

I'll probably come back and respond more specifically to individual parts of that huge post, but for now I just wanted to say that I don't think you fully understand the BIP metaphor.

Have you finished the BIP?

The bars of your cell are made of the filters you perceive reality through, or rather the biases and conclusions you form as you go through life.  There more to it than this, but I'm just wondering what the boxing metaphor you invented has to do with the BIP?

Yea, I hadn't read the entire thing at the time I wrote the post... Another "discordian-esque" book I read characterized the world as a lunatic asylum, which is slightly more interesting/silly than a prison.

The BIP, a lot like My Discordia, is about examining the conclusions and filters and biases that I take for granted and have trouble noticing, and removing and replacing and redecorating until I am aware of and comfortable in my cozy little cell.  A "jailbreak" is not really about escaping the prison, merely finding a cell more to your liking.  You cannot escape the BIP.

Yup, I finished reading it after I read the post, and the next time I spend so much time making a post I'll definitely make sure I know what I'm talking about.

Also, in the many years since the BIP, many threads have been made advancing and discussing the ideas contained within.  A very lot of them.  Chances are, if you take the time to look many of them over, you will find yourself thinking about the BIP and related concepts on quite a different level than you currently are in your new-to-it stage.

Yes, I don't doubt my conceptualization of my conceptualizations will change. You're going to change one way or the other over time anyway, so you might as well change in ways that you decide.

[LMNO]

Trix, i know that at the time I was contributing to the BIP discussions, I was extremely allergic to the vast amount of Pinealism I saw both online and IRL (there are several Discordians in town, but most of them are decidedly not PD type people).  I'm not sure if the other contributers were feeling the same, but when it came to "re-writing" the Principia (the original name of the project was "PD 2006" or similar), only RWHN tried to tackle the "Nonsense as Salvation" section (and wouldn't stop harping on it ever since).

However, it should be noted that while the BIP is noticably lacking in nonesense, PD.com is packed with various forms of Absurdism, from the darkest of gallows humor to the fluffiest of fluff.  I mean, can you really find some deep, hidden Seriously Serious TRUTH™ by going through the "Safe For Work" thread, or the "Bitches Don't Know About My Tomahawk" meme? 

Don't answer that, of course you can, you're a Discordian.

[zackli]

I'm not sure if the other contributers were feeling the same, but when it came to "re-writing" the Principia (the original name of the project was "PD 2006" or similar), only RWHN tried to tackle the "Nonsense as Salvation" section (and wouldn't stop harping on it ever since).

I, personally, take most things seriously as long as they have nothing whatsoever to do with real life. Talk to me about philosophy or "ideas" and I'll have a lively discussion, but if you ever really tried to get to know me by starting with "How's the Weather?" I'd say fine and that would be the end of it. Most of my conversation in real life is just me pointing out ironies and funny scenarios I've thought of in my head that were inspired by something going on.

I mean, can you really find some deep, hidden Seriously Serious TRUTH™ by going through the "Safe For Work" thread, or the "Bitches Don't Know About My Tomahawk" meme?

Forgive me if I misread the Principia, but isn't there something in there about everything being true, false, meaningful and meaningless? And a commandment not to believe anything you read?

Don't answer that, of course you can, you're a Discordian.

[Banned User 1]

>Forgive me if I misread the Principia, but isn't there something in there about everything being true, false, meaningful and meaningless? And a commandment not to believe anything you read?


Take the sri syadasti thing in context with the philosophy presented by the sacred chao (all that stuff about grids, etc). Better yet would be to read Prometheus Rising and Quantum Psychology, and then go have a crack at making sense of the Principia's jokes.

The true/false/meaningless thing comes from a type of jainist non-dual logic system called anekantavda, wherein the whole sri syadasti spiel comes about because of interpretation, NOT the actual physical reality of things. (see the old jain myth of the blind men and the elephants).

Basically, we get to a point of all things being indeterminate (since fuck writing true/false/meaningless so many times) because we have limited faculties as human beings.

I can hear someone say something, but mishear it due to sound pollution, or misinterpret it because of prior conditioning...or any number of other things that cause me to interpret it in one fashion or another. Thus, in my mind, my "incorrect" understanding of what someone says is "true", and my following actions will be based on the assumption that my interpretation is true. However, to the original speaker, it is false, because I misheared it, thus, the other speaker will assume I'm acting irrationally, because I'm acting on "false" information. and of course, to two guys sitting halfway across the world, it's meaningless, because they couldn't hear the conversation to begin with (my example sucks...read the first couple chapters of Quantum Psychology...RAW gives a better example of this principle with his dialogue between dr.watzlavic[sp] and the receptionist at his new place of employ).

So, things can appear to be true/false/meaningless to an observer, but that's only from an observer's perspective.


Sorry if this whole spiel isn't exactly in context with what you're on about in your conversation with LMNO, but I've seen you default to sri syadasti a few times now, so I figured I'd give some words on that...

[zackli]

> Sorry if this whole spiel isn't exactly in context with what you're on about in your conversation with LMNO, but I've seen you default to sri syadasti a few times now, so I figured I'd give some words on that...

That's fine, and it's helpful. From the very same context with which you are attempting to describe to me, I was attempting to interpret it from a completely different context. I, however, enjoy the absurdity of believing everything to be true, false, meaningful and meaningless as it is very helpful in traversing the social landscape.

I've read self-"development"/"help" books with similar ideas, and while I see the truth in all of it (and indeed, the false, meaning and lack thereof), I prefer a flexibility in perspectives that such a philosophy does not quite cover as well as my current interpretation. I appreciate the insight as to the source of the idea.