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 ... 175
1
General Misc. / Re: D&D module "inspired" by PON?
« on: September 16, 2019, 02:11:22 pm »
Don't forget that Eärwa was inspired, itself, as a D&D campaign setting that Bakker ran year and years ago.  It was then fashioned into a stand alone world.

2
General Misc. / Re: What are you watching?
« on: September 12, 2019, 03:58:09 pm »
The wings are never treated as magic, though. It's just a physical curiosity as far as everyone in the show is concerned, nothing more. Even considering fae fly, but absolutely should not be able to (which is never brought up).

So, we ended up watching the show.

I was both disappointed and pleased.  Some of the dialogue felt a bit "wooden" and awkward.  I felt like when they engaged the world-building, the setting was interesting, but sometimes just seemed to not bother.  I think the show has promise, it was entertaining, hopefully they can take a step up on a few things for season 2.

3
General Earwa / Re: What is the Eärwan Soul?
« on: September 12, 2019, 12:51:30 pm »
As I am still working my way through Sci's recommendation of The Pythagorean World I kind of stumbled across something that my typical loose associations put together.

The follow quote has had me wonder:

Quote
“A code lies buried in the ebb and flow of life on this World. The more deaths, the brighter this code burns, the more Ark can read ...”

What does "code" mean, in this context?  Are we to take it in a modern technological sense?  As in, computer code?  Does think make Eärwa something akin to a simulation?  A sort of Matrix-like "illusion?"  If not, what does this "code" refer to?

Well, in passing, I came across a chance use of it by Jean Baudrillard.  So, I did a bit more digging and I think that his use is the more likely to be akin to the one in use in the above quote.  To give an idea of Baudrillard's use:

Quote
The code is a system of ‘manipulation’, ‘neutralisation’ and assimilation which ‘aims towards absolute social control’ (UD, 98). Though this is never achieved, the code constitutes ‘the fundamental, decisive form of social control – more so even than acquiescence to ideological norms’ (CPS, 68). This is because the code operates, fundamentally, at a preconscious level. For Baudrillard, ‘the code itself is nothing other than a genetic, generative cell’ (SED, 58). The term code is used interchangeably with ‘the structural law of value’, that is as a feature of the third order of simulacra dominated by simulation (SED, 50). The code then is the grid or ‘generative core’ from which social signification is produced or simulated. The medium of the code is the abstracted sign; torn from symbolic relations, drained of all ambivalence and intensity, the sign becomes a ‘dead’ unit of information.

What are we to make of that rather abstract statement?  Well, for me, I think the key is the "structural law of value" which I think is a "way in" to Eärwa.  At first, I drew a blank on how to align this with anything in this thread, or with Eärwa.  But then it dawned on me, that the "structural law of value" could be the basic description of the Cubit and then it all made sense.

The Cubit is the code, which patterns life and gives Eärwa is "law of value."  That is, it's structure of "meaning."  So, in each death, where the spirit or Soul comes up against the "measure" of the Cubit, is where the Cubit "burns bright" and the Sarcophagus, whatever it is and whatever it does, can render this "code" out, then somehow formalize it's negation.  That is likely "how" the No-God averts damnation, by somehow "subverting" the rendering of the soul with the code, that is, the reconciliation of spirit with the Cubit.

It's not perfect and it's not the mechanism itself, but I think it is what the process is based off of, at least loosely.

4
The No-God / Re: Moenghus, King-of-Tribes & Aspect-Emperor
« on: September 10, 2019, 06:26:49 pm »
I think one "issue" though is that the Empire, as it stood in TAE, was a sort of assemblage of very disparate parts.  Some parts might have the "internal" reasons for staying united, but others, especially those directly cowed, beaten, or threatened into submission and more importantly, into unity.  So, minus Kellhus' personal sway, via manipulation and sort of "cult of personality" I don't think there is an Empire as such.

Could it be that he would try to "consolidate" something like a fusion of the old Nansur Empire and the Sylvendi territory for a "regional state" to oppose what is left of the Fanim and Zeum itself.  Anything more than that is likely well beyond "readymade" for him to return and take.  I think it's likely that even if Kayutas was to return, a "full" Three Seas Empire is well beyond something ready at hand.  It would need to be taken, for the most part, all over again.  As something that took Kellhus himself 20 years to do and even then, hanging in a tenuous equilibrium, is well beyond what even Kayutas and Serwa could likely do in a shorter amount of time (which is what I imagine TNG will play out across).

It's interesting to think about, but I think pragmatically, only Kellhus' overwhelming power was what gave a pan-Three Sea empire any feasibility.

5
Philosophy & Science / Re: Dementia Made a New Man Out of My Dad
« on: September 09, 2019, 12:38:42 pm »
I'm curious - can you elaborate on how you see Sartre's "radical freedom" as being akin to the Dunyain idea of a self-moving soul...assuming that I've read you right and that is what you're seeing...

That is an interesting parallel, although it was not the first thing on my mind.

Essentially, "radical freedom" is a sort of idea that advocates that any choice or decision is exactly that, a choice.  So, even if you were to choose to not choose, that is a choice and one you made.  Essentially, to me, I think it comes down to the idea that, since we can, through consciousness, consider the negation of what we might do, we can always choose to simply not do anything or do something else.  So, in this sense, were we to consciously consider everything, we are, in that way, "radically free" to choose what we would do.

So, really, I think you highlight a good point, that to be "Self-moving" and to be "radically free" are nearly the same thing.  What "Self-moving" seems to imply, at least to me, is that what moves one is contained wholly within the Self.  That is, moved wholly internally.  This is pretty much the "end-game" to what radical freedom is espousing.  That is, to be "free" from any external "cause" and instead, relocate "cause" to the Self.  So, to be "Self-moving" would then to be as "radically free" as possible.

And, in the end, I think that takes you pretty near to what Bakker's "Absolute" is.  But that is another level more abstract I think, or at least I'd need to think more clearly on how to draw those lines.

6
Philosophy & Science / Re: Dementia Made a New Man Out of My Dad
« on: September 06, 2019, 06:00:35 pm »
My wife's grandmother has dementia and it's honestly crossed my mind before, in thinking about the relationship between behavior and whatever is memory, along with whatever the notion of the Self is and what that means Identity actually is.  Not to mention the sort of "parallels" in thinking about this in terms of what immortality does to Nonmen in Bakker-verse.

In my typical way, I put together all sorts of loose associations here, but it does have me think about a sort of idea like Sartre's notion of "radical freedom," Rosenberg's (and other's) notion that behavior (and thought itself) is a form of conditioning, and then what memory is really doing in all that.

Makes me wonder if the Self, if what we consider Identity, is not just the conditioning effect of memory or one based on memory.  That then, our "radical freedom" is really neither radical, nor free, but rather is the conditioned response to external stimuli given an internal state.  But, then to come back around, I do think we are capable of doing things to which we are not conditioned, specifically because we are not conditioned to them.  There we return back to a sort of notion of "radical freedom" but in the form of a sort of determinate negation.  That is, we consider the conditioned response, then condition the opposite, the unconditioned response and perform it.  In this way, we could think of the Identity as the "collection" of normative conditioned responses.  But, as humans, we are capable of performing the "deliberate" reversal, so the speak, and act directly contrary, so in a manner, we can "recondition" on the fly.  Memory is the functional "log" of this conditioning, so, if one loses the accounting of it, one enters the place, possibly, nearest to Sartre's actual "radical freedom."  Except, not exactly, because as dementia patients show, it does not eradicate all memory.  They can still walk, talk, and so on, for the most part.  So, in that way, it does not expunge all conditioning, it somehow seems to suppress some forms of it....

I think now I am rambling quite a bit, as I am sure vastly smarter people have considered this and it's likely nonsense.

7
General Misc. / Re: What are you watching?
« on: September 03, 2019, 03:19:44 pm »
Some nudity and violence, but primarily its just a mystery set in a fantasy crossroads town with fantasy immigrants in TotallyNotEngland. The fantasy parts of it are not overdone, primarily costumes with wings and horns.

Typical love interest story and some action sequences interspersed with the primary case-solving police guy plot. Its not high stress/anxiety murder mystery either - enough to make it fun and to make you want to watch the next episode, but not so much that you feel exhausted watching it.

Not sure if any of those things will help or hurt your case lol.

She was actually into the trailer, until that faerie thing sprouted wings, then it was "too fantasy."  If it's subdued fantasy though, I'll have a case, maybe.

8
The Unholy Consult / Re: Big question about the consult's intentions.
« on: September 03, 2019, 03:15:59 pm »
Yeah million/billion of Inchoroi with fully functioning scifi tech would have outmatched Earwa. Their reluctance to not blow up the world in pursuit of eden would have given the Nonmen a fighting chance with the first few battles, but I imagine that at some point they'd have either figured out how to safely graft magic usage, or made magic using weapon's races to kill the locals. If that didn't work, I think "fuck it, the trees will grow back, engage orbital bombardment" would have settled things. I mean, they planned to live there forever... Which is plenty of time to regrow some mountains post kinetic or laser based weapons bombardments.

Yeah, there is no "proof" but I think Ark, alive, is the Progenitors or at least, heir to Progenitor-class knowledge.  As such, Ark likely contained the sum-total generational, cultural knowledge that was off the charts comparatively.  If it wasn't the Progenitors themselves, I imagine it was still an AI of massive power.  Of course though, like anything else, that didn't make it incapable of failure.  In fact, might have even made it more prone to it's own condition of death, in reality.

Still, I think fully functioning, it could have reverse engineered the Nonmen from scratch, devised manners and ways to undo them that were vast more subtle and effective than anything that later was scraped up from the bottom the barrel.  Really, since the Inchoroi were just heavily indoctrinated, brain-washed, conditioned foot soldiers, it's really no wonder that asking them to reassess the entirety of the operation on their own, when they were made, from the get go, to be "ideally" conditioned for murder and not much more...

9
General Misc. / Re: What are you watching?
« on: September 03, 2019, 02:59:15 pm »
Carnival Row is pretty good. Most of the way through, still trying to guess whodunit.

Maybe i just like the actresses irish accents though... Whatever. Its worth the watch, politically some obvious tie-ins to both modern and historical times regarding race and immigration.

Yeah, might give that a go, my wife kind of categorically vetoed it, but I will watch the first episode and maybe I can convince her to try it out.

10
General Earwa / Re: What is the Eärwan Soul?
« on: September 03, 2019, 02:57:16 pm »
Someone mentioned this excerpt from Jane McDonnell’s The Pythagorean World in the comments of the Conscious Entities blog, and it fits in with some of the Monadology stuff we've talked about:

Hmm, that is interesting.  Might need to hunt down that book.

I'd need to apply a lot more thought, but off the bat, I like the idea about "subjective time."  That is, it seems plausible to me that time is only subjective.  In the same sense that the article you recently linked, that spacetime is only a sort of conceptual and mathematical model of what we experience, not an actual "real" construct in the objective world.

In this sense, it rectifies why the God-of-gods would shatter itself, because the completeness of eternity is not complete, since it lacks the subjective experience of finitute.  So, with the experience of everything comes a failure to experience everything.  With being eternal, comes with the failure to experience eternality or the eternal itself.

In fact, experience itself, likely, is related to time which is related to the experience of subjectivity itself...

11
The Unholy Consult / Re: Big question about the consult's intentions.
« on: September 03, 2019, 12:27:36 pm »
(Sorry to copy and paste -  I’ve not quite fathomed the functionality of the site on a mobile yet)

Yeah, on mobile things don't run great, when I have to be on my phone, I just force it to the desktop site in Chrome.

I’m inclined to agree. Once you’ve got the shoddy lawnmower to start, it can still go like a dream.

Pretty harrowing to consider what befell the other worlds, when a fully-functioning Ark arrived in orbit and a fully populated Holy Swarm descended.

I'd imagine it as pretty close to industrialized death.  Just with vastly more suffering and over-the-top violence.  I actually think that if Ark didn't crash and die (or die and crash), Earwa would have been very much doomed from the get go.  It's only that the Inchoroi are left to try to run the operation that it fails so spectacularly. 

12
General Misc. / Re: What are you watching?
« on: September 03, 2019, 12:10:24 pm »
My wife wasn't too interesting in watching Amazons The Boys, but I decided to check it out.  It's a good show, well worth watching, even if it is not exactly perfect.  It is also rather different than the comics and, even though I am only about 25 issues in, the show is really rather "better" than the comics to me.

If you want something that I guess could be taken as a "realistic" or "gritty" look at superheros, I'd probably like the show.

13
The Unholy Consult / Re: Big question about the consult's intentions.
« on: August 29, 2019, 09:54:12 pm »
Cracking stuff!
I wonder if the destruction of the Canted Horn (I’ve always struggled to visualise that) and what seems to read as the gutting of the Upright Horn (Kellus/Ajokli stamping, which I read as causing the collapse on Skuthula and Serwa) has an adverse effect on the efficacy of the NG... meh, it’s strangely tempting to try and guess, despite the futility.

I don't think so.  That is, not any more than the crashed, dead/dying Ark already did/does.

I'd imagine that the fully functioning Ark engaging the No-God apparatus though, would have been very different though.  But once the Sarcophagus is in "manual boot mode" by the Consult millenia later, I think the functionality of Ark is vastly divorced from that of the No-God.

14
The Unholy Consult / Re: Big question about the consult's intentions.
« on: August 29, 2019, 05:30:11 pm »
I was sort of adding together and dividing by two so I’m open to being wrong, especially since I can’t show my working (I’m working and posting during cigarette breaks).
 I think someone mentioned upthread that the horns were referred to as the oars, and with Bakker’s quote that the ‘oar rattled to life’ or some such it felt like the upright horn roaring could have been that. I’m relying on memory so I’m prepared to be wrong ☺️
I’m just glad I’ve finally posted something. I’ve been lurking so long it’s nice to actually get into things, even superficially. The knowledge and penetration displayed on the board as a whole is both hugely gratifying (I’d have given up on the series without all your collective insight) but also fairly intimidating to join.
A massive thanks to you all for keeping the fire burning!

Oh, ok.  Yeah, I mean the Glossary explicitly states that the Horns are the Oars:

Quote
Horns of Golgotterath—One of many epithets given to the two Oars of Ark, the portions of the Incû-Holoinas remaining exposed.
.

And, you should not really be too enamoured by our collective wisdom, haha.  We are often quite deluded and incorrect individually.  It's only all together we might have a clue...

15
The Unholy Consult / Re: Big question about the consult's intentions.
« on: August 29, 2019, 02:57:40 pm »
Regarding Bakkers ‘Oar’ reference, I had assumed that to be the Upright Horn, as it hums and makes an enormous racket, which to me signified System Resumption.

I searched the entire series and I could not find a reference to an "oar" in relation to the Ark.  So, I'm genuinely unsure what people are trying to construe that as.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 175