The Discordian Menace

[Doktor Howl]

Anyone who believes that there are no facts, and that nothing can be true, should drive their car into a bridge abutment with no seatbelt.

The nature of the universe will instantly become completely clear, for a very brief period of time.

[The Great Pope of OUTSIDE]

Ah but I did read all of it.

Thus, we have the seven categories of knowledge which when taken separately lead to fallacy. But we can use these categories to ask questions about the object we investigate, giving us a large body of knowledge that we then want to unify. The task of this rational unification is done by the theory of Syadvada.

The theory of Syadvada holds that for any proposition, there are three main modes of assessment, namely, (1) A positive assertion, (2) A negative assertion, (3) Not describable. The Jaina prefix each of these expressions with the term "Syat", meaning approximately, "May be, possibly, in some sense", in order to consciously avoid an absolute position. Let us look at these modes of assessment, and their seven combinations, which are called the sapta bhangi (seven modes). These are the seven terms that make up the full name of the Apostle of Confusion.

        * syadasti - asserting that something "is", in some sense.

        * syatnasti - asserting that something "is not", in some sense.

        * syadasti nasti - asserting that something "is" and "is not", in some sense. This can usually be taken as occurring in linear time, i.e. "it is now, but soon it is not" or that some other change in context happens.

        * syadavaktavyah - asserting that, in some sense, it is indescribable, indeterminate, inexpressible, or meaningless. For example, the whole experience of eating an apple, from texture to taste to emotions generated cannot be totally described in human language. The closest you could come to it is to eat an apple yourself, but that experience would be different from some-one else eating an apple. Also stating that the stone is black, and not black _at the same time_.

        * syadastyavaktavya - asserting that it "is" in some sense, and that it "is indescribable, indeterminate, inexpressible, or meaningless" in some sense. For example stating that violence is indeed sinful under certain circumstances, but no positive statement of this type can be made for all times and under all circumstances.

        * syatnasti ca avaktavyasca - asserting that it "is not" in some sense, and that it "is indescribable, indeterminate, inexpressible, or meaningless" in some sense. For example, the stove I touch is not hot, but if it will be hot in an hour is indeterminable.

        * syadasti nasti ca avaktav-yasca - asserting that it "is" in some sense, that it "is not" in some sense, and that it "is indescribable, indeterminate, inexpressible, or meaningless" in some sense. For example, light behaves as a wave when measured with a certain instrument, light behaves as not a wave when measured by another instrument, but if you don't know what instrument was used the results are meaningless.

    All these seven modes can be expressed with regard to every proposition, from every category on Naya. The Jaina philosophers have applied them with reference to self, its eternality, non-eternality, identity and character. In fact this approach of Anekanta permeates almost every doctrine which is basic to Jaina philosophy.

I hope Sri Syadasti is pleased with the confusion that this post will ultimately generate, and I will conclude with the Sri Syadastina Mysteree Chant:

    A POEE MYSTEREE RITE - THE SRI SYADASTIAN CHANT
    Written, in some sense, by Mal-2

    Unlike a song, chants are not sung but chanted. This particular one is much enhanced by the use of a Leader to chant the Sanskrit alone, with all participants chanting the English. It also behooves one to be in a quiet frame of mind and to be sitting in a still position, perhaps The Buttercup Position. It also helps if one is absolutely zonked out of his gourd.

    RUB-A-DUB-DUB
    O! Hail Eris. Blessed St. Hung Mung.
    SYA-DASTI
    O! Hail Eris. Blessed St. Mo-jo.
    SYA-DAVAK-TAVYA
    O! Hail Eris. Blessed St. Zara-thud.
    SYA-DASTI SYA-NASTI
    O! Hail Eris. Blessed St. Elder Mal.
    SYA-DASTI KAVAK-TAV-YASKA
    O! Hail Eris. Blessed St. Gu-lik.
    SYA-DASTI, SYA-NASTI, SYA-DAVAK-TAV-YASKA
    O! Hail Eris. All Hail Dis-cord-ia.
    RUB-A-DUB-DUB

    It is then repeated indefinitely, or for the first two thousand miles, which ever comes first.


EDIT:: So, I was pretty tired after 6 hours of scanning through (sometimes very badly translated) Jaina texts, and forgot to list my sources (thanks, [info]mathiastck). Here, in NO PARTICULAR ORDER are the websites that I cobbled the above together from:
http://www.jaintirths.com/general/anek.htm (Theory of Anekantavada)
--
First Steps To Jainism Part-2:
http://www.jainworld.com/jainbooks/firstep-2/sspredication.htm (The Syadvada System of Predication, By J. B. S. Haldane)
http://www.jainworld.com/jainbooks/firstep-2/indianjaina-1-1.htm (The Indian-Jaina Dialectic of Syadvad in Relation to Probability I, By P.C. Mahalanobis)
--
http://www.hinduwebsite.com/jainism/naya.asp ( Jainism and the theory of stand points, by Jayaram V)
--
http://www.jainworld.com/jainbooks/arhat/plurrealsm.htm (THE PATH OF ARHAT, PLURALISTIC REALISM, by Justice T.U.Mehta)
--
http://www.jainstudy.org/jsc1.04-QfromS.htm (Selections From Acharya Umaswati's TATTVAARTH SUTRA)

This is all really interesting, and makes a lot of sense. I just wish there were words in English that described the same sense that are in the seven words listed above.

[von]

Ok...this whole thread is really about OP's psyche. OP bluntly admits that he cannot effectively tell a lie and thus is simply prompting for the community to discuss the nature of truth and falsehood so that he can fell good about himself while he commands a community to debate an argument which serves no purpose. Tl;dr, OP is mad because he can't lie (and thus acquire goods in a society where lying is a valuable skill) and therefore wants you all to discuss the nature of truth and lies in order to feel the gratification of having social strokes come his way...

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Who was the OP, anyway?

[LMNO]

Sig/Lys.

[Freckleback]

Ok...this whole thread is really about OP's psyche. OP bluntly admits that he cannot effectively tell a lie and thus is simply prompting for the community to discuss the nature of truth and falsehood so that he can fell good about himself while he commands a community to debate an argument which serves no purpose. Tl;dr, OP is mad because he can't lie (and thus acquire goods in a society where lying is a valuable skill) and therefore wants you all to discuss the nature of truth and lies in order to feel the gratification of having social strokes come his way...

necromatic internet psychology!

[Triple Zero]

Sig/Lys.

Was Vex, actually (I can see his email in his profile).

[LMNO]

Whoops.  My bad.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

What was the deal with Vex, anyway? I always liked him, but then it seemed like something went awry.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

What was the deal with Vex, anyway? I always liked him, but then it seemed like something went awry.

Dunno.

He had it out for me for years.  I can't remember what he was like before that, if he wasn't always like that.

He's in Phoenix, now, which I think is all the punishment he deserves.

[Dysfunctional Cunt]

What was the deal with Vex, anyway? I always liked him, but then it seemed like something went awry.

Dunno.

He had it out for me for years.  I can't remember what he was like before that, if he wasn't always like that.

He's in Phoenix, now, which I think is all the punishment he deserves.

They can run, but they can't hide?

[hooplala]

People who claim they can't lie are lying. 

So, yeah... pointless thread is pointless.

[Pinprop]

I am not so sure.  I mean, what you're saying sounds true, but I subscribe to the wisdom that if you can't explain something in words, you don't understand it.  Language may not be able to describe every idea imaginable, and what it does describe can never be conveyed completely by words alone, but words are still the best medium at our disposal for sharing some kind of truth, so it is kind of important that we say things that can be made sense of whenever possible.

I definitely think you can understand something without being able to explain it. Languages can be very bad at describing certain things, and I'm sure there are many people with English as a second language who would have no idea how to describe something in English, but could describe it perfectly well in their own language. One example would be emotions. English and German have very few words for describing emotions, and I often have a lot of trouble explaining them. It would take me ages to describe all the memories and experiences that contribute to the way I'm feeling, and even then you probably wouldn't get a very good understanding. Explaining in a reasonable amount of time usually sounds like some ridiculous haiku that makes not a lot of sense to most people (though not always). Maybe I'm just crap at describing emotions, but I don't think that means per se that I don't understand my feelings, or else everyone's understanding would correlate exactly to their oratory skills. And that sounds like bullshit. There are a lot of very intelligent people who are not incredibly great at speaking and writing.

Another example would be spiritual experiences. I can have some success explaining these, but it takes a very long time and I fuck up a lot and end up going around in circles. I'm sure that someone else could explain it better than me, but that doesn't necessary reflect superior understanding.
I think mystical experience is very unsuited to words in general, but English seems to be particularly bad at it. I've heard that Tibetan languages are much better at describing these things, containing many word-concepts that don't exist in English, and some that many Europeans would have a lot of trouble understanding. Therefore a Tibetan could describe certain things much better than we could, which probably means they have a better understanding of them because they come from a culture that recognizes these things. But I definitely don't think that is a rule. Someone else could have greater understanding, but have no way of communicating it, while someone with lesser understanding has better tools to communicate.

[Freeky]

What was the deal with Vex, anyway? I always liked him, but then it seemed like something went awry.

Didn't he go completely batshit shortly (4-6 months shortly) before CU did, had a couple of failed flounces, and then one last and final flounce?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

What was the deal with Vex, anyway? I always liked him, but then it seemed like something went awry.

Didn't he go completely batshit shortly (4-6 months shortly) before CU did, had a couple of failed flounces, and then one last and final flounce?

Yeah, he suddenly dumped on me & exploded.  I am like a walking piece of litmus paper, I swear to fucking God.