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 ... 130
1
The Unholy Consult / Re: The Celmomian Prophecy
« on: December 14, 2017, 08:55:46 pm »
Could be that the true legacy of the Celmomian Prophesy was that it lead Seswatha to do the whole thing with the Heart and the Dreams. Only in the absence of those things would Kellhus showing up to the Three Seas have been more underwhelming...

Eh, but even then, Kellhus is still Kellhus. Even if he was thrown in prison with Cnaiur - well Moenghus Sr. did fine without the benefit of his name so it would have probably shaken out similarly regardless. These 'what if' scenario's get confusing quick.

Sure but lets not forget that Moe Sr. failed.  If Kellhus does not gain the Gnosis, then his power is greatly diminished and he probably fails too.  It was really only through the overwhelming power he gains from the Meta-Gnosis can he actually conquer the whole Three Seas, which is what makes the Ordeal possible.

2
The Unholy Consult / Re: The Celmomian Prophecy
« on: December 14, 2017, 04:50:22 pm »
I can see where your coming from. But, I think people confuse the four horns of Ajokli, with the four horns on the crown Gilgoal wears. Plus, as I said earlier, Gilgoal took Celmommas as Yatwer took Sorweel, as a faithful adherent to the God, Gilgoal.

Well, Quint actually pointed out on Facebook that we really don't have any explanation of what Gilgaöl looks like.  At best we get told that the Nansur saw a 4 horned shadow of Cnaiür and this meant he was possessed by Gilgaöl, i.e. War.  However, consider that it is just as likely that Cnaiür is possessed by Ajokli, i.e. Hate.

We do get a cryptic mention in TWP, chapter 5, to "Gilgaöl, One-Eyed War" and the vision that Celmomas sees actually has two eyes.  Not much to draw though, since we have nothing to corroborate either side.  However, do consider though, Celmomas admits to surprise that Gilgaöl would still favor him: "Gilgaöl, War, come to claim him … Come to save, despite everything."  Consider though, in asking Seswatha to forgive him he belies the strained relationship between then, and so that who actually appears to Celmomas could be Ajokli, "rewarding" Celmomas for his hatred of Seswatha...

3
The Unholy Consult / Re: The Celmomian Prophecy
« on: December 14, 2017, 01:07:17 pm »
seeing as to how his soul is at the "heart" of the No-God.
Metaphysical ramifications of which are not at all clear.

Most definitely unclear to say the least.  I mean, Kellhus being able to appear to Celmommas doesn't make sense, but neither does NC is my only point.  We can argue which is more probable, but in the end both things are obviously "outside the norm."

K. Here's how I look at it. Gods can see all of time, yet can't see the NO-God (NC&Kel). But, the do see Kellhus and blame him for the end of the world because he is central to it all. Its like during the 1st Apocalypse when the Gods blamed it all on men and their wars. They had no clue that the TNG and his Tekne weapons were apart of it. Same deal, methinks.

I don't disagree with any of that, generally.  My only point was that we don't really know how the Prophecy came to be, if it was somehow NC or somehow Kellhus, or somehow maybe even Ajokli.  It's all bound up in some really unintuitive time shenanigans.

4
The Unholy Consult / Re: The Celmomian Prophecy
« on: December 14, 2017, 12:01:56 pm »
This all presumes that it really was Nau-Cayuti who appears to Celmommas.  Akka's vision gives us the perspective that perhaps it was not though and was Kellhus somehow creating his own prophecy.  Admittedly that doesn't make much sense, but neither does Nau-Cayuti being able to appear to Celmommas, seeing as to how his soul is at the "heart" of the No-God.

5
The Crabikiad / Re: What's the story!?
« on: December 01, 2017, 12:41:50 pm »
I meant that they're not going to care about the heavens if they know that they're damned anyway. So, they wouldn't mind if the entire system is scrapped. That is, IF they're aware that they won't go to the heavens no matter what they do.

I thought that the Consult was trying to destroy "meaning."

Well, yes they are trying to end "meaning," but I am admittedly using meaning in two different ways which is confusing (even to me).

In another thread, I wrote:

"What the death of meaning gets at is not a death of human consciousness, or of human society (for the most part), it's the death of what we would call "Higher Meaning" in modern parlance.  This presumes that "Lower Meaning" is actually not meaningful, which you can agree or disagree with, but in Eärwa this is presumed to be true.  Let me operationalize what the difference between these are.  Let's take an example:

Aurang rapes and murders thousands and then dies.  "Higher meaning" has Aurang's soul damned.  "Lower meaning" has Aurang remembered as a bad guy (ok, really bad guy).  Without the soul, there is no conveyance of meaning beyond death.  So, if Higher Meaning is gone, so is the accounting for what Aurang did; lower meaning might write what down what he did (for example), but that will only be an account of what he did.

So, when the No-God sunders Eärwa from the Outside, whatever happens loses any eternal quality.  It loses any eternal consequence and so loses any eternal meaning.  Everything is transient and pointless, except in the mundane terrestrial sense of meat begetting more meat.  You were a righteous and pious person?  Doesn't matter, you die and there is nothing.  You were a callous and capricious person?  Doesn't matter you die and there is nothing.

The "question" then is, what divides Humans from Sranc, at that point?  Supply your own answer, at this point.  Do humans, absent of "consequence" regress to such a "primal" state?  Do they strive to (re)create that higher meaning?"

So, it really isn't "Meaning" that the Consult seeks to destroy, but rather what we might call "Higher Meaning."  Unfortunately, I lack the vocabulary to disentangle the word meaning from itself, which ends up being confusing.  So, the loss of what Sorweel experiences is actually meaningful for both the Consult (it's what they don't want) and the rest of the world (what they do want).

(I actually don't think we disagree on anything, it's just a confusing thing to talk about.)

6
The Crabikiad / Re: What's the story!?
« on: November 30, 2017, 12:14:57 pm »
Quote
His death section with Yatwer calling him to her realm was beautiful and integral to the story, to what we lose when Meaning dies.

It won't mean anything to those who are damned.

I don't quite follow what you mean here, Dora.  The end of the meaning that Sorweel experiences, is actually most "meaningful" for those who are damned.  That's the whole reason the Consult embarked on the path of Apocalypse.

7
General Misc. / Re: What's your favorite kind of pie?
« on: November 27, 2017, 09:59:35 pm »
The smell of pumpkin makes me nearly gag.  Seriously.  It's bad.

8
The Unholy Consult / Re: Unnecessary Capitalisation
« on: November 27, 2017, 09:17:04 pm »
Other weird words stand out - I think there's a thread. But for me, specifically, the word akimbo appears more than once describing the orientation of Kellhus' severed heads, or Kellhus himself. I don't think I've ever encountered that word, and to see it used several times was really jarring.

I am used to seeing that as meaning "with a hand on the hip" so it was odd to me because I didn't know it meant anything else.

9
General Misc. / Re: Back from my unintended hiatus
« on: November 22, 2017, 11:15:53 am »
What was your master thesis about?

It was about non-coeliac gluten sensitivity and coeliac disease in a sample of Portuguese patients. Sorry I didn't mention it in the main post, I mentioned it on the chat yesterday but didn't think anyone (else) would be interested in the details here. :)

Well, our kids have some combination of those two things, so, we might be interested around here,  8)

10
Well, the No-God does several things and possibly through something of the same mechanism(s).

...

The "question" then is, what divides Humans from Sranc, at that point?  Supply your own answer, at this point.  Do humans, absent of "consequence" regress to such a "primal" state?  Do they strive to (re)create that higher meaning?

H, this has to be the most cogent explanation of TNG I've read/thought about so far - very well done, thank you!

The question though, is that really what the series is?  I mean, it seems most likely.  I think that might be what Bakker meant when he said there were "two ways it could go."  Or maybe I am just pulling things out of my ass...

11
I liked how Sagan dealt with communication in Contact. Otherwise, while there are a number of hypotheses, obviously, it's easy to think that communication/recognition between species would be impossible.

I suppose that would make an interesting thread, in and of itself.

Don't forget, more recently, Arrival and the issue of communication presented there, as it relates to a fundamentally different ways of conceptualizing language and time.

12
The No-God / Re: Your mission, should you choose to accept!
« on: November 21, 2017, 12:45:09 pm »
I would want to see the consequences of the closing off of the Outside resulting in the death of meaning, leading to a loss of consciousness and self-awareness in human beings.

Bolivar, your deadpan is too strong.  However, this is a quick summary of my thoughts on what a "death of meaning" might be.

13
On your first statement, profgrape and others have brought up that it seems the No-God's purpose is less about extermination specifically and more about "reading the code of souls" or whatever. I understand less than others seem to but there might to be something to it.

Well, the No-God does several things and possibly through something of the same mechanism(s).

One, the No-God stops the Cycle of Souls and so, is the Death of Birth (for souled creatures).  Two, the No-God somehow communicates with soulless Tekne creations (or unifies, or possibly supplants their will).  Three, the No-God is a soul cipher, somehow decoding something from each's passing that is key in permanently closing off the Outside permanently.

In reality, one and two are just means to three though.  Three is the whole purpose, once a population 144k is achieved, the code can become active and presumably function three gives way to a "fourth function" that is the actual sealing of the world once the code has been found and the population is at the proper threshold.

What the death of meaning gets at is not a death of human consciousness, or of human society (for the most part), it's the death of what we would call "Higher Meaning" in modern parlance.  This presumes that "Lower Meaning" is actually not meaningful, which you can agree or disagree with, but in Eärwa this is presumed to be true.  Let me operationalize what the difference between these are.  Let's take an example:

Aurang rapes and murders thousands and then dies.  "Higher meaning" has Aurang's soul damned.  "Lower meaning" has Aurang remembered as a bad guy (ok, really bad guy).  Without the soul, there is no conveyance of meaning beyond death.  So, if Higher Meaning is gone, so is the accounting for what Aurang did; lower meaning might write what down what he did (for example), but that will only be an account of what he did.

So, when the No-God sunders Eärwa from the Outside, whatever happens loses any eternal quality.  It loses any eternal consequence and so loses any eternal meaning.  Everything is transient and pointless, except in the mundane terrestrial sense of meat begetting more meat.  You were a righteous and pious person?  Doesn't matter, you die and there is nothing.  You were a callous and capricious person?  Doesn't matter you die and there is nothing.

The "question" then is, what divides Humans from Sranc, at that point?  Supply your own answer, at this point.  Do humans, absent of "consequence" regress to such a "primal" state?  Do they strive to (re)create that higher meaning? 

14
Philosophy & Science / Re: What do you believe?
« on: November 16, 2017, 06:32:11 pm »
I believe I have a lot to do and very little time to get it all done.

15
The Unholy Consult / Re: Who actually liked TUC?
« on: November 10, 2017, 04:07:52 pm »
You guys are right, your points are valid - they just didn't "ruin" the story for me.

Well, I don't mean to imply it ruined the story for me.  But I do think it could have been better in some places.  However there were legitimately places where it is Bakker's best writing, hands down.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 130