Ok, this thread is being ignored, no problem, no hurt feelings, I like talking to myself anyways, so here goes another winner ...

Rocky Horror Picture Show/Frankenfurter, "Don't dream it, be it"

Quote from: profgrape on May 29, 2018, 05:40:55 pm

Or Dream-Kellhus teaches him the Metagnosis?  But is this even possible?  As far as we know, only Kellhus, Serwa and Saccarees have successfully cast a Metagnostic Cant -- a Dunyain prodigy, a half-Dunyain prodigy and a human prodigy.  Akka's an accomplished sorcerer in his own right (a War Cant master or something) so maybe he could grasp the Metagnosis if he has the right teacher?

That's why it would be a deus ex machina, it doesn't seem like it'd be possible.

Dream Kellhus would probably be the best option in this hypothetical situation.

Or the right motivation ... TNG on your tail may well spark the creative juices and next thing you know you're back in TTS. Kellhus figured it out facing down 3 Cishaurim.

I love quotes. Love the quotes before each chapter in PON and Dune. Love them from all walks and times. So I'm starting a thread to collect cool quotes.

Here is an actual expert in the field of intelligence weighing in on the Klein/Harris/Murray matter. Richard Haier is referenced in the Harris blog post upstream, and this was Haier's offered contribution to Vox that was rejected.
http://quillette.com/2017/06/11/no-voice-vox-sense-nonsense-discussing-iq-race/

Fair enough, I can accept I misunderstand any/all of this conversation. My point is that those who engage in same, though not necessarily a racist pursuit ( so I'm disagreeing with TL here, motive does matter ), the foundation of the exercise is flawed, so why bother. If you want to map the brain, cool! But making connections/relationships on something too abstract to be true as is IQ is a waste of time and dumb's us down. I scored a 128 on a written IQ test and a 166 on a verbal one ( apparently I got a complex math question correct in my head and that screwed the results big time ). What they think they're seeing could well be a result of oppression ( the fuck you factor, if you will - fuck you, I'm not taking your stupid test because you're a piece of shit who doesn't like me, so why help you ) - groups under-performing as self proving theorem.

Allow me a little room here and I'll tackle this from another angle. Let's say IQ is a real something that has meaning. Let's say genetics has something to do with it. Let's say genetically across groups, it varies. Ok - then what? The person with the highest IQ could still be non-white as these are averages. Also, there's nothing to do about it. All that matters is everyone is treated equally under the law, everyone has the right to pursue their life within reasonably accepted cost to others ( liberty ). Performing well in life is too wide angle to mean anything as most of those who "perform well" "made it" by networking with those with capital better than others and not really contributing much of anything. All of this is a mistake, regardless of intention. This has the odor of humans prioritizing what they think evolution can teach us to improve our lives - Harris should know better, he's being inconsistent as he has argued against Petersen for this very thing. Regardless of how we think our behavior and society are anthropological, that should not influence how we decide to live our lives.

If this is wrong, go ahead and correct me, but if it's true, then he IS racist, by definition, since this view is not supported by genetic science.

Well, ok, you're defining in the sense of concrete - if I killed someone, then I'm a killer by definition, even if it was completely unintended ( like I accidentally bumped into someone and they fell off the roof of a building - so I would disagree and blame gravity as the killer, not me ). By definition, someone positing differences in race beyond skin pigmentation is racist. But what we really mean by racist is treating/judging people differently based on pigmentation. Someone researching differences in race is not racism. Harris and Murray are simply incorrect in their conclusions ( well, really everything imho - even their thought to embark on such research ) and are not "racists" in the regard they're coming to the table with ill intent ( well, they could be, of course, I can't read their minds - but from these taped discussions, I simply find them lost, not "bad" people ).

I think the phenomena of IQ has derailed polite society for far too long now. It's a distraction at all levels of consideration. What makes a person outnumbers the number of atoms that make up the planet Earth, so this "IQ" is an odd preoccupation as it is a single thread of focus from the exa-trillion threads that make the human consciousness. So much about our intellect is still mystery, we're not even scratching the surface, barely voyeurs really. Simplistically put, we can be "smarter" today than tomorrow and yet smarter still the next day than today. IQ is combobulation (yes, I know, not a word, but you get me ) ... like a focus on the differences in traffic intersections. I simply see 2 people who went to hell with themselves over the irrelevant and of course anything they would conclude would be false - so they needlessly exposed themselves to ridicule as anyone will indulging in the exercise of IQ. Doesn't make them racists/bad actors ( but they could be ), but simply misguided. They're in good company, quite the ruckus over IQ. I find those suffering the demands of determining the number of possible shades of the color green to be on a more worthwhile path.

I enjoy listening to Harris, he's put a lot of elbow grease into his research and expression. But, he is light on formal education into the areas he discusses - which is good, we don't need a PHD in an area to have an opinion, but it is important to know his background for a full understanding of what he is, what he wants to be and what he says. Simply put, he's an impressive layman, not an "expert". But I do like him and feel he's made some cool contributions to the popular consciousness. I agree, nothing he's said is racist and kudos for him not getting weak in the knees like so many do when they're "called out" just by talking about different peoples/cultures ( for a while there, I was afraid to say the word black in any context ). We haven't kicked around Harris much in this forum, but Petersen has been popular. Would be fun to know what connections between Harris and Bakker you see.

Bakker is who he is and it appears he is void of interest beyond his writing, his blog and some post interviews after a release of one of his books. He does seem interested in PON being produced as a tv series or movie(s), but nobody has taking the plunge for it just yet - I'm hoping the slowly disappearing GoT tv show will yield more interest to "fill the void" as I think an episodic tv series of PON would be awesome.

Quote from:  TLEILAXU

But how does Mimara become a Christ figure when the God is blinded? I interpret the scene where she lets go of her chorae as her abandoning her destiny as a prophetess.

I read that scene as letting go of the chorae to save her hide.... I didn't see it as her loosing her prophetess status. Akka was her only escape and Akka can't fly with a chorae. She still has The Judging Eye.

During my initial read, I was confused by that scene as it's written ( imho ) as TL explains, but it was working when it could see TNG through the illusion. So either it stopped working when the winds started blowing or it still works - and likely MSJ's explanation is correct and transitioned into hauling ass mode. I still like my idea that it's a "plant" that will provide vulnerability/access to TNG, but alas, doesn't seem credible ( just cool! ).

http://www.theimaginativeconservative.org/2015/06/guide-dystopian-literature-12.html

Small typo: He references "Frank Knight", he means "Frank Miller" - writer of The Dark Knight. The first 2 Nolan Batman movies were based on Miller's interpretation.

At their best, dystopias allow us—through the faculty of imagination—to see not only inhumanity, but the motives behind inhumanity. They allow us to understand, analyze, and warn the world of nightmares, deaths, grit, ideologies, and fundamentalisms. Through their own horrors, they might very well allow us to hold off the abyss for another generation or more.

I agree with the above and brought similar up before here in TSA - that these kinds of stories are not predictive as much as they are preventative. Since we're conscious of losing our liberties, we won't lose them - it's when we're not aware of losing them is when we're in trouble.