Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - H

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 166
General Earwa / Re: Inri Sejenus
« on: Today at 05:56:08 pm »
Not false.

In-text Inrithism believes Sejenus ascended to the Nail from the Juterum (sp?) in Shimeh while, I believe, TTT Glossary suggests that he actually ascended somewhere in ruined Kyudea. Neither debate the ascension.

Of course there is no clear idea what "ascension" even means though.

I think the parallel is meant to be sort of direct to Jesus.  That is, a "prophet" who's "existence" and "essence" are necessarily confounded within the dual context of history and religious interpretation.

General Earwa / Re: Cants of Compulsion
« on: Today at 05:51:42 pm »
Well, perhaps in a way, the Cant of Compulsion speaks to Bakker's appeal to Earwa being based partly on Essentialism, that is that essence (i.e. something like a soul) precedes existence (that is, your body).  In this way of "Before Determining the After" then changing the "essence" changes the existence.  This of course is necessarily confounded by the question of what is a soul but in any case, seems to lead to the same place.

Apologies but I'm gonna need a review of Hegel and his relation to the Bakkerverse...

Well, at base level, where we arrived at in my "Souls" thread is sort of a bad take on actual Hegel.  I too though really need to brush up more on his actual philosophy myself.

Similarly, we've reach the end of Bakker's planned storyline with the rise of the No-God - which may be the end of Fate on Earwa.

Well, since I've taken a likening to Bakker via Hegel (in Heidegger's language), I don't think it's far fetched to entertain the posibility that the "trilogy" (that is, PoN, tAE and TNG) are akin to Hegel's thesis, antithesis, synthesis.  Which, Hegel actuallyed never used those terms, rather, concrete, abstract, absolute (not a coincidence in my mind).

So, I don't think we are at the end, rather we are at the inflection point here.  What is the synthesis?  A partly meaningful world?  I don't think the thrid part is simply the enumeration of the No-God's "victory" rather it would be something like Mimara's genesis into the vessel of synthesis.

My wife found this on Facebook last night.  A context free spoiler guide for episode 2:

General Misc. / Re: Quotes
« on: April 22, 2019, 10:16:58 pm »
It is the most advanced industrial society which feels most directly threatened by the rebellion, because it is here that the social necessity of repression and alienation, of servitude and heteronomy is most transparently unnecessary, and unproductive in terms of human progress. Therefore the cruelty and violence mobilized in the struggle against the threat, therefore the monotonous regularity with which the people are made familiar with, and accustomed to inhuman attitudes and behavior-to wholesale killing as patriotic act.

Herbert Marcuse - The Individual in the Great Society

Well, hot damn Herbert, tell us how you really feel...

Yeah I think so...Bakker always said the World conspires and is a character. Some ancient Greeks - IIRC following Aristotle - thought of final causes as inherent to the nature of entities/objects in the world. That is, in a micro-sense, the Final Cause of all things determining their Material, Formal, and Efficient Causes of the animals/objects/persons.

In a macro-sense it could be that the Final Cause of Earwa is the "salvation history" of the Bakkerverse, that just as the World sets the ends of all within its embrace God set a Final Cause for the World itself. Aristotle, IIRC, thought of the Prime Mover as the Perfection/Good to which all mortal things moved toward. So then in turn the Final Cause of Earwa is the axis on which the rest of the Inside (at the least) may turn.

Realization of Earwa-as-Axis-Mundi may be how the Progenitors of the Inchoroi ended up finding Earwa. It might be possible to use machine learning or some other pattern recognition process to fill in the missing causal vector. You cannot trace final causes in the usual scientific way of determining interest-relative causation. or so I suspect, but you can potentially map the influence of Final Causes and then subsequently use that as the basis of the compass to find the Promised Land...or maybe that's all BS...

I don't know if Bakker thought of all this in quite these terms, but I do suspect he went back to the Ancient Greeks and at the least the European Idealists for his metaphysics.

Well, in a way, Final Cause, as much as we really don't think of it as such, is the "main cause."  Think about it in terms of making something.  Like, the Final Cause of a chair is the whole reason a chair exists.  Final Cause is "almost" a way that "future" dictates that "past."  Rather, it is the conditioning of the imagined future onto the present which then dictates the progression of past to present and then so then future.

Watching these last 2 episodes was sad. They are actually trying this time and I enjoyed those 2 episodes but it's beyond redemption at this point. The damage have already been done and isn't fixable. And on top of that all, I can't blame the showrunners for anything, they didn't know GRRM will retire after A Dance With Dragons, when they signed on this.

Well, it kind of is their fault, because they could have done a better job than writing this crap.  But they'd rather churn out the "expected" ending rather than try to do something novel.  So, now we just get cliche episode after cliche episode, with scenes lifted from Disney movies and dialogue not far off from it.  Oh and lots of "jokes" about balls...

General Misc. / Re: [TV Spoilers] Game of Thrones (S7)
« on: April 22, 2019, 09:07:55 pm »
So, taken from somewhere else, someone said this that has me thinking about where the show is actually going:

The Night's King is the personification of death.  Humans cannot live forever, ergo The Night's King Cannot Be Killed.

The Last Hero was a diplomat, not a warrior.  He negotiated a truce.

The terms of the pact are up for renewal and the Night's King will withdraw when satisfactory terms on a new compromise are met.  [finite mortal life being, metaphorically, the compromise between immortality and death].

Violence is destructive.  People who fight amongst people [over the throne] are doomed [and the iron throne, metaphor for self destruction as it is, why do you think its made of swords that literally cut and draw blood from the people who sit on it? along with it]

People who reject individual ambition and prioritize the team sport of survival [i.e. Jon kneeling for the greater good] will be spared and carry humanity on.  Those who prefer to win the Game Of Thrones (i.e. Cersei) will be utterly annihilated.

I think this is the the most cogent analysis I've seen of this.

I'd guess that the implication here would then be, perhaps, that Bran sacrifices himself to "negotiate" with the Night King, Jon is spared somehow in giving up any further ambition.  Dany nearly is killed, until she realizes that ambition to tyranny is akin to death, and then the Night King and company go south, and kill Cersei and smash King Landing along with the Iron Throne, the "root" of the evil at hand.  The Night King is satiated again, tyranny averted, they all go back to Locke's "state of nature" minus perverse "human ambition" to get in the way.

I like it, because it's the kind of simplistic philosophy this show is likely aiming for...

Furthermore, I think Bran's cryptic statement, seemingly foreshadowing one(or both of their deaths) might foreshadow instead  that the paradigm, the sot of dialetic of Life:Death, Tyranny:Liberty does not end.  One does not kill Death itself, it brokers an "easy peace" of sorts.

There is no "after" there is only something like the Hegelian "concrete, abstract, absolute" (that is thesis, antithesis, synthesis) of Being/Nonbeing->Becoming.

Perhaps this is exactly the point of the White Walkers, in a sense, a check on human "arrogance" and "excess."  You know, just like Death itself is, no matter how powerful (or moral, or just, of kind, or whatever) you are, you still die eventually.  "Thanatos" (that is, the "death drive itself, embodied) rears it's head.  Except here, it's personified, as if a character.

Philosophy & Science / Re: Another galaxy without dark matter
« on: April 18, 2019, 06:33:22 pm »
Something appears to be there, but that doesn't mean it is.

At some point, everything comes from nothing ;) , especially forces (see, centripetal force ), but I'm not good enough at physics to explain that statement :P. Just because it can been seen, felt, and measured, doesn't mean it "exists" or "is real", apparently.

Well, it certainly seems as if something is there and it seems that what "it" is would be what we call Dark Matter/Energy.  However, that is only assuming that things work how we assume they do, or as they appear to.

Recall, Newtonian equations seemed to explain gravitation, until we realized they didn't really, only from one inertial perspective.  So, something akin to that might be the case here.  We figure that the "seemingly missing" force must be from "something" and so infer that this something is Dark Matter/Energy.  It could be the case that we simply are not "using the right perspective" or that our method of calculation is just missing something.

Philosophy & Science / Re: Another galaxy without dark matter
« on: April 18, 2019, 05:20:12 pm »
Dark matter and Dark Energy are just words for "unknown shit we dont understand and know next to nothing about".

Yeah, but we know it's there ... gives me the creepy crawlies  ;D

Well, to be my usual pedantic self, we really don't "know" it exists, but we infer that it seems it simply must exist....

So to me it sounds like:
Final Cause says Future Events that have not yet happened actually cause Present/Past Events.

Which to me is basically pure Fate, without freewill. You can't change events because they are set in stone by the final outcome.

I don't think that's how Earwa works, but some combination of Efficient and Final Cause. (this ignoring the fact of course that its a book, and Bakker is the final cause lol).

Oh I agree it's some kind of combination. The characters can eat, shit, fuck as they please and [so on] as the Bios allows so long as the decisions concerning the No God's resurrection come to pass.

Well, doesn't Final Cause essentially supersede?

In fact, is this not what a "narrative" essentially is?  (Maybe?)

The Unholy Consult / Re: "Kellhus is dead, but not done."
« on: April 16, 2019, 07:36:40 pm »
He claims to have avoided the postmodernist pitfalls a la Gene Wolfe, BFK, but I'm never sure.

The Wolfe only prepares those pitfalls, it is the reader who stumbles!

It is the reader who stumbles.

What is the supposed this supposed "post-Modern pitfall" that Wolfe allegedly falls into? 

Genuinely wondering,
Anonymous Armchair Philosopher

General Misc. / Re: Board Games and Miniatures
« on: April 12, 2019, 09:06:12 pm »
Well, finally sort of got around to doing something...

So, here is something of a "color study" on a Necron (well, half of one)

Philosophy & Science / Re: Black Hole Sun: On the Materialist Sublime
« on: April 11, 2019, 01:20:12 pm »
I took this as experiencing experiments is akin to experiencing art. If this is the point, it explains the usage of artistic verbiage. But I could be wrong, maybe the author is saying quantum is "performing".

Well, there is someone of a "scientific sentiment" that exists, that it's possible that quantum things only "do" certain things (or "exist at all") when we look at them (measure them).  I don't know enough of the mathematical structures of such a thing, but I think that is the idea, that in this sort of way, observance is productive of phenomena.  Kant would like that, I think.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 166