unenlightenedAugust 06, 2021 at 06:38#5760370 likes
As a rule, @Banno's game goes nowhere, and is unsatisfying, unlike mathematics, and dysfunctional, unlike natural language.
One might therefore suspect that natural language is not entirely rule based or totally arbitrary, but based on ; natural principles - hence the name. At the least that these things are already governed by human needs and purposes that establish -shall we say?- ground rules.
The game presupposes language, and relies on pre-established 'turns'. I think the philosophy of turns has some depth to it and might even be worth a thread of its own.
[quote=W. B. Yeats]Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity. [/quote]
Turns with no centre to hold them - that is Banno's game. The opposite of the development of the order of language, it illustrates the collapse of language.
We're clearly playing the Soctratic rules, wherin "Mornington Crescent cannot be reached prior to passing through ten stations... or their essential forms..."
Oh... and Aldgate East.
Jack CumminsAugust 06, 2021 at 09:18#5760690 likes
Jack CumminsAugust 06, 2021 at 10:19#5760790 likes
Reply to emancipate
We all make the rules together. My bear, Russell, who is tall and thin, unlike most fat teddies, says , Hello,' but I am about to go out for the day, so my rule for now, is try to have fun and be surreal. But, I am not that keen on games apart from scrabble.
No member can post a new rule until all members of the forum have posted. This rule is only invalid on dates with uneven numbers that contain the letter G in their name.
This is why it is so hard for life to self-assemble into novels and metaphysics. No cooperation. No cooperation at all.
Now if your life depended upon following the rules and your nociceptors were wired into this game, such that everyone had some skin in it, maybe you'd all show Banno a bit more respect. Or go absolutely mad.
All rules shall compete for the power to enact and expedite themselves.
:scream: In what way is it strange? Why did you not post a rule? :smile:
Jack CumminsAugust 20, 2021 at 20:22#5821360 likes
Reply to Sir2u
I am sure that most times can be seen as strange, even though I think that ours are particularly strange. As for posting, I saw the earlier message from @Banno saying not to post, and that seemed a contradiction outrightly, and, before I read your reply, it had the effect of making me wish to write something. But, I am confused and don't know if he will see this kind of interaction as useless or useful for whatever he is trying to achieve.
Jack CumminsAugust 20, 2021 at 23:20#5822120 likes
Reply to Banno
Rules may exist in order to be broken. They are guidelines but rigid adherence to rules may undermine the principles behind them. Therefore, I refuse to adhere to the rules of your game.
Jack CumminsAugust 20, 2021 at 23:29#5822150 likes
Reply to Banno
We are probably entrenched in layers and layers of rules and even the most disobedient people are obeying some kind of rhetoric of rules. Even writing sentences involves following of certain rules. In order to go beyond rules entirely, we might need to go beyond the spectrum of human meanings entirely.
Reply to unenlightened
This from the fellow who came up with the best response to any of my posts, and the funniest line ever posted on an internet forum: "Conchiousness explained..."
This is a very strange thread but, perhaps, it meets the strangeness of the times in which we live.
Not descriptive? :chin:
OK. If you say so. :smirk:
Jack CumminsAugust 21, 2021 at 15:08#5824980 likes
Reply to Sir2u
Your words puzzle me. Perhaps we should have a rule of writing invisible words, words which are not spoken and images which vanish, leaving no marks.
Perhaps we should have a rule of writing invisible words, words which are not spoken and images which vanish, leaving no marks.
The purpose of this thread is to write the rules, not propose that someone else should write them.
State your rule. If oth rs agr mayb it will be a epted. :wink:
Jack CumminsAugust 21, 2021 at 20:14#5825550 likes
Reply to Sir2u
My rule is to go beyond the dictionary definitions of words and look at the subtext of written rules rather than the literal words individually. There may be hidden narratives and rhetoric behind what is being stated.
My rule is to go beyond the dictionary definitions of words and look at the subtext of written rules rather than the literal words individually. There may be hidden narratives and rhetoric behind what is being stated.
I don't see much subtext there, maybe you could point it out for us.
Jack CumminsAugust 24, 2021 at 05:57#5836600 likes
Reply to Sir2u
Perhaps, I am looking for meanings which aren't there. In saying this, I am probably wondering if some underlying purpose of the game is going to be revealed by @Banno, but it may be that everything is as it is, at face value, and nothing more. So, my next rule is that each person should write at least 50 words in their post.
Seventeen persons have lost their life because of the failed emergence (and utility) of this game.
You maybe thinking this is absurd and impossible. It is. The people are not real but imaginary.
They died in an imaginary flash flood, possibly due to imaginary climate change.
Supposedly, if you follow the rules, ideally, less imaginary people will die.
But how will you save those yet to die because of the failure of this non-game. How could a failed game cause such pretend devastation? How does one establish the failed game as a cause of these imaginary death?
By pretending that the effect is real and searching for the mechanism by which a failure to help the game emerge takes lives (lives that ought to have been saved).
The secret to giving the game life is to inspire the will to create it. But who has the will and strength to collaborate? Who has the passion?
A better question would be, who has the total lack of morality needed to deny the creation of the game by not participating?
It's a double-bind now. You can't not play, even though in spirit no one ought to be forced to play (says some wannabe optional rule). To opt out is to opt in.
As Pauly Sartre said, 'We're condemned to play the game.' C'est la vie
Rule 67879777 On the Subject of Toilet Paper Etiquette
All toilet paper rolls on a dispenser should have their paper ends face outwards toward the user, not towards the wall. All users should adjust toilet paper rolls that are improperly mounted in the correct direction if they notice.
(Failure to follow this rule will result in a quantity of point demerits as outlined in the yet to be created social credit system. However, it is unlikely that there is any just mechanism by which such judgement of merit/demerit can be made on the basis of following or failing to follow such a rule).
Around 10 or so years ago, I participated often in the philosophy forums. At the time, you had a quote, something to the gist of, “seek to interpret someone as optimally as you can as to influence agreement.” It was absolutely not that. I was wondering as it has pondered me for the last decade… do you have it written down somewhere? Do you know what I’m referring to?
Sorry to fail at your game. I just couldn’t message you and at this point it’s become important to me to find the original phrasing… if you’d be so kind.
Thanks — don’t even remember what my old username was
We make maximum sense of the words and thoughts of others when we interpret in a way that optimises agreement.
StupidIdiotSeptember 23, 2021 at 06:44#5991440 likes
Reply to Banno my lord. To think I’ve wondered at this when you were that accessible all this time… thank you so much. You have no idea what it means to me.
Comments (50)
https://www.google.com/search?q=recursion&oq=recursion&aqs=chrome..69i57j46i512j0i512j46i199i465i512j0i512l6.1743j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Here is mine:
https://encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php?title=Distribution_of_prime_numbers
One might therefore suspect that natural language is not entirely rule based or totally arbitrary, but based on ; natural principles - hence the name. At the least that these things are already governed by human needs and purposes that establish -shall we say?- ground rules.
The game presupposes language, and relies on pre-established 'turns'. I think the philosophy of turns has some depth to it and might even be worth a thread of its own.
[quote=W. B. Yeats]Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity. [/quote]
Turns with no centre to hold them - that is Banno's game. The opposite of the development of the order of language, it illustrates the collapse of language.
We're clearly playing the Soctratic rules, wherin "Mornington Crescent cannot be reached prior to passing through ten stations... or their essential forms..."
Oh... and Aldgate East.
Do we have to use objective standards of measurements of time, or can we play once we 'feel' one hundred years old?
We all make the rules together. My bear, Russell, who is tall and thin, unlike most fat teddies, says , Hello,' but I am about to go out for the day, so my rule for now, is try to have fun and be surreal. But, I am not that keen on games apart from scrabble.
:up:
Now if your life depended upon following the rules and your nociceptors were wired into this game, such that everyone had some skin in it, maybe you'd all show Banno a bit more respect. Or go absolutely mad.
All rules shall compete for the power to enact and expedite themselves.
1. All rules following this rule must be numbered.
Some very negative thinking going on there. :gasp: How can you expect this thread to prosper without posts?
Do not post rules that will have negative affects on the development of the thread.
This is a very strange thread but, perhaps, it meets the strangeness of the times in which we live.
:scream: In what way is it strange? Why did you not post a rule? :smile:
I am sure that most times can be seen as strange, even though I think that ours are particularly strange. As for posting, I saw the earlier message from @Banno saying not to post, and that seemed a contradiction outrightly, and, before I read your reply, it had the effect of making me wish to write something. But, I am confused and don't know if he will see this kind of interaction as useless or useful for whatever he is trying to achieve.
Quoting Sir2u
That was a rule.
Rules may exist in order to be broken. They are guidelines but rigid adherence to rules may undermine the principles behind them. Therefore, I refuse to adhere to the rules of your game.
Quoting Banno
Quoting Jack Cummins
...and yet clearly you did.
We are probably entrenched in layers and layers of rules and even the most disobedient people are obeying some kind of rhetoric of rules. Even writing sentences involves following of certain rules. In order to go beyond rules entirely, we might need to go beyond the spectrum of human meanings entirely.
How can a descriptive sentence be a proscriptive rule?
Quoting Jack Cummins
Well, errr. Maybe other [s]people[/s] beings have a different way of thinking. :worry:
It wasn't descriptive.
This from the fellow who came up with the best response to any of my posts, and the funniest line ever posted on an internet forum: "Conchiousness explained..."
I hope his humour has not left him.
Hence: Keep playing.
Not descriptive? :chin:
OK. If you say so. :smirk:
Your words puzzle me. Perhaps we should have a rule of writing invisible words, words which are not spoken and images which vanish, leaving no marks.
Could I recommend a good dictionary, it might makes things clearer.
Quoting Jack Cummins
The purpose of this thread is to write the rules, not propose that someone else should write them.
State your rule. If oth rs agr mayb it will be a epted. :wink:
My rule is to go beyond the dictionary definitions of words and look at the subtext of written rules rather than the literal words individually. There may be hidden narratives and rhetoric behind what is being stated.
Yer think?
Quoting Banno
I don't see much subtext there, maybe you could point it out for us.
Perhaps, I am looking for meanings which aren't there. In saying this, I am probably wondering if some underlying purpose of the game is going to be revealed by @Banno, but it may be that everything is as it is, at face value, and nothing more. So, my next rule is that each person should write at least 50 words in their post.
All Banno wants to do is set the rules before we play the game, or is it to make a game of setting the rules. :worry:
You maybe thinking this is absurd and impossible. It is. The people are not real but imaginary.
They died in an imaginary flash flood, possibly due to imaginary climate change.
Supposedly, if you follow the rules, ideally, less imaginary people will die.
But how will you save those yet to die because of the failure of this non-game. How could a failed game cause such pretend devastation? How does one establish the failed game as a cause of these imaginary death?
By pretending that the effect is real and searching for the mechanism by which a failure to help the game emerge takes lives (lives that ought to have been saved).
The secret to giving the game life is to inspire the will to create it. But who has the will and strength to collaborate? Who has the passion?
Could that be paraphrased as "take the bloody game seriously or piss off"?
Yes indeed the purpose of the game is not the game itself but the journey we take in its creation, or some other bullshit like that.
Quoting Nils Loc
A better question would be, who has the total lack of morality needed to deny the creation of the game by not participating?
A bit harsh. No one knows what it means to "take the game seriously" since the rules won't stick.
So we have a strange paradoxical thing on our hands: a non-game game free for all.
Quoting Sir2u
It's a double-bind now. You can't not play, even though in spirit no one ought to be forced to play (says some wannabe optional rule). To opt out is to opt in.
As Pauly Sartre said, 'We're condemned to play the game.' C'est la vie
There shall be no discussion of philosophical topics in this thread.
All toilet paper rolls on a dispenser should have their paper ends face outwards toward the user, not towards the wall. All users should adjust toilet paper rolls that are improperly mounted in the correct direction if they notice.
(Failure to follow this rule will result in a quantity of point demerits as outlined in the yet to be created social credit system. However, it is unlikely that there is any just mechanism by which such judgement of merit/demerit can be made on the basis of following or failing to follow such a rule).
Part 2
recycling of all paper product is highly recommended.
Always use a franger when touching a drop bear.
Never go unprepared into the never never.
Fossicking in Tasmania requires a permit.
Roo pouches are for Joeys only.
Around 10 or so years ago, I participated often in the philosophy forums. At the time, you had a quote, something to the gist of, “seek to interpret someone as optimally as you can as to influence agreement.” It was absolutely not that. I was wondering as it has pondered me for the last decade… do you have it written down somewhere? Do you know what I’m referring to?
Sorry to fail at your game. I just couldn’t message you and at this point it’s become important to me to find the original phrasing… if you’d be so kind.
Thanks — don’t even remember what my old username was
Fringes, not mullets.