This site is supported by Nobility Studios.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

The Fabulous World of Pnatodragon

29 posts in this topic

Posted

The world view and ideas expressed by Dragon derive from a world-view, or metaphysics, that she has developed over the past 20 or so years, and which is still an ongoing effort.

In a nutshell (might be a bit of a coconut at present, but I’m trying for almond!):

Life is a dream, or, in modern terminology, a virtual reality. (This idea goes back to the earliest of times, is found among so-called primitive peoples. Rene Descartes tried it out but couldn’t get it to work.)

People exist as ‘souls’ which are immortal. When the soul ‘dreams’ it has a life. Or, in modern terms, it’s like playing a video-game: the soul ‘plays’ in a video-game in which it has a ‘presence’, or ‘avatar’. Death is a ‘Game Over’, but the soul does not die any more than the player in the video-game. Only that avatar ceases to exist.

But a video-game needs someone to write the game as well as people to play it. The minimum number of participants is one writer and one player. For those familiar with the ‘Dungeons and Dragons’ type of games, the roles of Dungeon Master and Player pretty well show the roles of the two participants.

Thus people are the players, and each of us exists in a one-to-one symbiotic relationship with another, much larger being. I have called it the ‘Quew’ (pronounced Queue.).

As in video games there has to be some communication between the person and the Quew. In real life there has to be a LOT of communication, because it is the Quew’s job to monitor the person’s progress and help him/her along, answer questions, FULFILL DREAMS, guide, teach, monitor health and well-being etc etc. The Quew writes the ‘scenarios’ of the person’s life, but it is the person who sets the goals. The life-plan arranged by the Quew is designed to get a person to where they want to go, to the fulfilment of their dreams – yes, I’m not blind to the fact that at this point most people would object that the system does not seem to be working too well at the moment – I’m coming to that!

As I said, there needs to be communication between person and Quew, and that works through dreams. The dreams that you see in your mind come FROM the Quew, and the dreams that your mind creates are sent TO the Quew. Unfortunately the system has broken down. People have gone silent. They no longer dream and cannot interpret dreams. Also, they no longer tell the truth – to the Quew, that is. They have become corrupted. More precisely, what has gone wrong is that people have discovered POWER, and power is essentially a drug which is addictive and, as with any drug, it’s downhill from then on.

And it’s not just those at the top. It’s everybody; it’s the child that cries because it wants attention; it’s the musician that dreams of becoming a ‘star’;….. it is EVERYBODY.

This is actually good news because this is the simple diagnosis for ALL the problems that beset our world. Solve the addiction problem and we all become happy, healthy bunnies living out our lives in fulfilment of our dreams. And it’s an individual thing. It’s not a ‘save the world’ thing, it’s a ‘save yourself’ thing. In other words, if everyone saves themselves then the rest will follow. Also, as an individual, if you put yourself to rights you will be a happy, healthy bunny who can deal with the world no matter what state it is in. And more, by becoming happy and healthy you ARE actually doing your bit for the world as well and helping it on the way to recovery.

As I said above, communication with the Quew is via dreams. But life is a dream, and that means that life itself, and everything in it, is interpretable just like dreams. So one can communicate with the Quew by interpreting signs and portents, oracle cards, pin-in-a-book, tea leaves in the bottom of a cup, or any other way you can think of – yes, and the world is full of tricksters and charlatans who make pretence.

Where does this leave the world of science? Is it all a BIG MISTAKE, or a LIE? No. Science is not LITERALLY true, but it is metaphorically true. The Cosmos is not a dead thing governed by mechanistic laws, as science believes. Although the order of the ‘cosmos’ is not mathematical, that does not mean there is no order. Existence is ordered by MEANING: That is why everything is interpretable, and that includes science.

You can understand it like this: The language of science is mathematics, and what science is actually doing is describing and telling the story of the cosmos in the language of maths, whereas older belief systems, religions such as Christianity and Hinduism, described and told the story of the cosmos in languages such as Aramaic and Sanskrit. So the scientific description of the origins and evolution of the cosmos is just a myth, like the myths of ancient Greece, or the Bible stories and so on, and can be interpreted in just the same way i.e. you interpret them just like any other dream. And then what it tells you is what is going on in the minds of scientists -- bit of an ‘oh dear’ here!!! (And see that Freud – he REALLY should not have published his dreams – oh dear, oh dear, oh dear!!!)

So how did I tumble to all this?

I was pursuing an interest in the work of Carl Jung and was playing with collages, ‘mandalas’ and the interpretation of dreams. I had a breakthrough with dreams when I had one dream that was so crystal clear that I did not have to think about it, I just instantly understood. That was very encouraging and so I slogged (played) away and made more progress.

After a while I could not help but notice that what was going on seemed suspiciously like a conversation. For example, the dreams seemed to be giving me advice and talking about things I could not know about, and they obligingly took on the task of trying to teach me how to interpret dreams – like in a child’s primer, I might get, say, 5 short dreams, in one night, each with one image. One of these I would be able to understand and it would give me the key to the others, which likely would just be five ways of saying the same thing. Well, if it was a conversation there had to be someone at the other end!

After that I have been working under the guidance/assistance of the Quew. The Quew does not just tell you things though. You have to think it out for yourself. What it does give you is ‘food for thought’ and guidance etc. This is a world where it is ABILITY that is important, not knowledge. (And EVERYONE has, or can have, the ability to do it. A healthy person’s mind grows and develops new abilities all the time.)

---having said that it should be obvious that I would not want anyone to just ‘believe’ what I say, nor to give up their own current beliefs. But if I spark an interest then you need to find out for yourself – ask your Quew. You need to ask a question of some sort. A health question would be good. For example, one of us (see PS below) experienced problems with her hip, such that it basically stiffened up and stopped working. She was concerned that the joint might be faulty and require surgical intervention. Shortly thereafter she had a dream which showed an image of a perfectly working hip joint. She took this to mean that there was, in fact, nothing wrong with the joint, a fact which was born out in time. (The problem was in fact tension caused by stress and it has been cured.) So, choose a health concern and formulate a question then wait for an answer. It will not necessarily come in a dream. It may be that someone you happen to meet will say something relevant, or you might notice something in a book which is relevant – the answer can come from anywhere.

What I am describing is a very optimistic world view. For one thing, it suggests that (Voltaire not withstanding) we live in the ‘best of all POSSIBLE worlds’; it’s just that what is possible for drug addicts is very limited, and people who are on ‘power’ will fight and be susceptible to diseases and so on and so on. But, just come off the drugs and ……well, what IS possible?

Also, the fact that one has mucked up one’s existence is no cause for sorrow – at least, not after one has been ‘cured’. At the beginning of Anna Karenina Tolstoy writes something like this: all happy families are the same, but each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way. This is true, and that means that the fact that our world is an unhappy one at the moment means that it is also unique, and that uniqueness will never be lost. Nothing will be lost, and when the world is put to rights, it will be a unique and very exotic place compared to worlds that have never been ‘sick’ or corrupt.

P.S. In case anyone is curious, Dragon is a girl Dragon, and she talks with an accent not unlike that of the actor John Hannah. Also Dragon (aka pantodragon) is actually two people who have been working on this together from the start. No-one else has been involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

TEAL_DEER_by_kunika.jpg

Brief version:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

:loco:

Edited by DaveT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The world view and ideas expressed by Dragon derive from a world-view, or metaphysics, that she has developed over the past 20 or so years, and which is still an ongoing effort.

In a nutshell (might be a bit of a coconut at present, but I’m trying for almond!):

Life is a dream, or, in modern terminology, a virtual reality. (This idea goes back to the earliest of times, is found among so-called primitive peoples. Rene Descartes tried it out but couldn’t get it to work.)

People exist as ‘souls’ which are immortal. When the soul ‘dreams’ it has a life. Or, in modern terms, it’s like playing a video-game: the soul ‘plays’ in a video-game in which it has a ‘presence’, or ‘avatar’. Death is a ‘Game Over’, but the soul does not die any more than the player in the video-game. Only that avatar ceases to exist.

But a video-game needs someone to write the game as well as people to play it. The minimum number of participants is one writer and one player. For those familiar with the ‘Dungeons and Dragons’ type of games, the roles of Dungeon Master and Player pretty well show the roles of the two participants.

Thus people are the players, and each of us exists in a one-to-one symbiotic relationship with another, much larger being. I have called it the ‘Quew’ (pronounced Queue.).

This could well make a nice piece of fiction.

The question, though, is, since you believe it is true and not fiction, why should anyone believe it is true? Where is your evidence? How did you go about verifying this belief? Why should we take it to be anything more than a fanciful story?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If Dragon actually believes in the OP, then it is a set of beliefs whose contingency he ignores, and treats as his final vocabulary.

However, he will only discover with serious study that he has been operating within someone else's final vocabulary, that he has not created his own set of beliefs.

It seems Dragon is better off contextualizing the past that led to the historical contingent set of beliefs, so the past that defines them will be created by Dragon, rather than create him.

When Dragon discovers the gifts of Irony, he will no longer allow his contingent set of beliefs to solidify into some final vocabulary, a metaphysical position. Perhaps the OP contains kernels of irony unbeknownst to Dragon himself. :mrgreen:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Dragon, it seems as if you’ve had some experience with dreaming. But in my experience, dreaming is a bit more complicated than the way you’ve presented it here.

First, dreaming is a state of hyper-suggestibility, similar, in some ways, to hypnosis, and what used to be called hysteria. Second, the dreaming mind is almost entirely cut off from the outside world; it has only itself to draw from, and exhibits a strong self-confirming bias (as does, for that matter, the waking mind). You bring your expectations with you when you dream, and it seems that many of these expectations are expectations about dreaming.

What this amounts to is that, over time, your dreams will conform to your theory of dreams. A person in psychotherapy, if they hadn't given much thought to dreams in the past, will probably ‘adopt’ the theory of their therapist. Similarly, even if your dreams aren’t full of alchemical imagery before reading Carl Jung, there is a good chance they’re going to be afterwards, with or without your conscious approval. Dreams are capable of incorporating just about any means of carrying symbolic weight—mathematical, linguistic, cultural, and, not least, mystical.

While it’s possible to interpret this as getting closer to an essential truth, or establishing communication with an entity of some kind—and, judging by accounts of people who not only record their dreams but regularly attempt to interpret them, this is almost certain to occur to a person sooner or later—being convincing is, by itself, no argument. This doesn’t necessarily mean that Jung is wrong, or that you’re wrong, but if you’ve come here with convictions to share with us and no better reason for us to be convinced than the fact that you were—well, why should we be?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

This could well make a nice piece of fiction.

The question, though, is, since you believe it is true and not fiction, why should anyone believe it is true? Where is your evidence? How did you go about verifying this belief? Why should we take it to be anything more than a fanciful story?

I refer you to this paragraph in the OP:

---having said that it should be obvious that I would not want anyone to just ‘believe’ what I say, nor to give up their own current beliefs. But if I spark an interest then you need to find out for yourself – ask your Quew. You need to ask a question of some sort. A health question would be good. For example, one of us (see PS below) experienced problems with her hip, such that it basically stiffened up and stopped working. She was concerned that the joint might be faulty and require surgical intervention. Shortly thereafter she had a dream which showed an image of a perfectly working hip joint. She took this to mean that there was, in fact, nothing wrong with the joint, a fact which was born out in time. (The problem was in fact tension caused by stress and it has been cured.) So, choose a health concern and formulate a question then wait for an answer. It will not necessarily come in a dream. It may be that someone you happen to meet will say something relevant, or you might notice something in a book which is relevant – the answer can come from anywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

To all:

As I said in my post "Some Words of Explanation", I had to go and live in a remote location, isolated from the mainstream of society to do the thinking that went behind all this. You brilliantly show why. You are necromomngers!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

We are beyond the Quew, and are now seated in various positions on the Buws. :yup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

To all:

As I said in my post "Some Words of Explanation", I had to go and live in a remote location, isolated from the mainstream of society to do the thinking that went behind all this. You brilliantly show why. You are necromomngers!!!

Actually, your isolation only demonstrates the limits of your creativity -- The soi disant "fabulous world of Pnatodragon" story has already been anticipated by a Saturday morning cartoon from the mid-90s, called "Reboot." Identical conditions, identical metaphysical implications, etc., etc. Make of it what you will.

However, Reboot was not crippled by the assumption that it was the "truth," that it was the "final vocabulary" of all other vocabularies, like yours purport to be.

Nonetheless -- keep up the good work! :wave:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Was Reboot the thing in the computer, where the every now and then "The User" inserted games which dropped into the world in the form of a huge cube that the heroes entered and had an adventure in? Main guy was called Bob, I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

What's a "necromomnger'? :scratch:

All you've done is come up for a metaphor for God (Qwewe) and for life as a video game, with the living person an avatar in the game, the game written by God, the player the immortal soul. It's just standard-issue stuff given a modern gloss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I think she means Necromonger. Basically, we're the bad guys in The Chronicles of Riddick. :muahaha:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

:eek3:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Brief version:

.

Sorry I did not pick up on what you were on about before – that first sentence of my post, about putting things in a nutshell. I have explored the possibilities of pictures but I always end up drawing diagrams, and that’s not what I want. I want something that ‘speaks’ to people, not something they have to ‘study’ and ‘analyse’ to make sense of.

Also the ‘image’ that best illustrates the world view I have described is that of the video game, which I mentioned but perhaps did not highlight sufficiently. But actually, video games provide me with a lot of the imagery to describe my thinking – about how the world works, how the mind works, spirits and more. I would like to make the rest of my reply into a more general post, so please continue at: The Problem of Reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear! “Just the standard issue stuff”, eh? I can just hear the “yawn” and the “I’m bored ‘cos I’ve seen it all before”. This behaviour is standard issue, straight from that book beloved of lads: The Art of Coarse Teasing. None of you have tried the one-worder “Whatever” yet, or “You’re playing the world’s smallest violin”, or …….. or……..please do try and come up with one I haven’t heard before.

And if you think this is just “the standard issue stuff”, then you only condemn yourselves, only display for all to see the very narrow limits of your education and experience. Get a life!

As to lack of “creativity”, well, you wouldn’t know it if it got up and bit you on the backside. All I hear when I’m on this forum (not to mention every other one I’ve been on) is people who can s**t philsophy books. So your first step to recovery is to get the philosophy books coming out the right end.

Well, all this demonstrates is that dragon can be a lad too, and it’s oh so easy.

PS: Chronicles of Riddick is correct. You fail to understand these myths of our time to your cost.

PPS: A metaphor for God?!!??? You must be bonkers! Do I need to spell it out? Now, then, children, what is God? God is omnipotent. What does omnipotent mean, children? It means all-powerful. What have I been railing against, children? The worship of power…….can you work out the rest for yourselves?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Essay time, class! Analyse the effects of TEAL_DEER_by_kunika.jpg on the epistemological direction of the Huguenots vis-a-vis the history of the Yoruba tribe according to the God of War series of video games. Extra points will be rewarded if one can demonstrate how the quest of Kratos through the main trilogy can be seen as a metaphor for the cultural development of the Yoruba.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hang on earlier I talked about power, and you said this has nothing to do with power. Now it seems as though a tiny part of what you are saying may have a little to do with power of some kind or another. :confused:

Can you elucidate? Is this about power or isn't it?

As to lack of “creativity”, well, you wouldn’t know it if it got up and bit you on the backside. All I hear when I’m on this forum (not to mention every other one I’ve been on) is people who can s**t philsophy books.

You sound annoyed. You might want to relax and have a cup of tea and a spliff before you continue. :yup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

None of you have tried the one-worder “Whatever” yet, ....

:whatever:

...or “You’re playing the world’s smallest violin”,,,

:violin:

The difference with us is, we do it in pictures. :deal:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

:whistle::boink::drama::llama::hat::laser::popcorn::sneaky::seawolf:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

:jetpack:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

So your first step to recovery is to get the philosophy books coming out the right end.

Okay, this is all right. :heh: If a bit far from the mark, and a little embittered. Nobody who sees life as a video game should be having so little fun with it. :(

Also, you haven’t addressed my post yet. C’mon, take me up on it! Tell me what it was about your experience that makes the interpretation you’ve given it the best one, and why mine is a load of Cambronne. If you don’t, I may start to think that you are purposely denying me the recovery you promised because I claimed that I would find our future conversation enjoyable in that other thread of yours. :scratch:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

So your first step to recovery is to get the philosophy books coming out the right end.

Okay, this is all right. :heh: If a bit far from the mark, and a little embittered. Nobody who sees life as a video game should be having so little fun with it. :(

Also, you haven’t addressed my post yet. C’mon, take me up on it! Tell me what it was about your experience that makes the interpretation you’ve given it the best one, and why mine is a load of Cambronne. If you don’t, I may start to think that you are purposely denying me the recovery you promised because I claimed that I would find our future conversation enjoyable in that other thread of yours. :scratch:

Trust me, you won't get that response. Try rephrasing your post as X square up up left triangle L2 L2 L2 right right left circle X X circle R1 Start. :yup:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

A few words on simulation and simulacra:

In these days, the natural object has lost its credibility, thanks to challenges like structuralism and others. The "code" has mutated simulation to an incredible role in social life. Because the code sanctions reality - as we understood it in the age of production - in order to be bypassed, a strange potential Baudrillard calls "reversibility" emerges. In this reversibility, all finalities are extinguished because nothing is outside of the system.

According to Baudrillard's concept of simulation, there are three types:

  • the counterfeit that dominated during the classical era of the Renaissance
  • the production in the industrial era
  • the simulation of the current era conditioned by the code.

For the counterfeit object, the difference between the real or natural object was made apparent. During industrial production, the difference between the object and the labor process was made explicit. But in the age of simulation, the reproduction of objects, not the production, became tantamount. The principle of reproduction is contained within the code. In this era of simulation, the labor power - i.e., the worker - is also reproduced. Therefore, reproduction includes both sides of the equation that existed during the era of industrialism. The origin of things changed from an original thing to formula, coded signals and numbers. Because the origin in reproduction is the principle of generation itself, rather than the object produced, then complete reversibility is possible.

In other words... the final "original" produced can be perfectly reproduced. This erases the difference between the real and its representation, and the age of simulacra begins. Even death is included in this all-encompassing system, but according to the principle of reversibility, death does not really take place.

If Foucault is right, that power is no longer substantial or has substantive content, for it no longer is something possessed and centralized, then the continued functions of the institutions of centralized power would become a simulation of a type of power relations. In other words, to claim that power has a content is a pretense.

Baudrillard points out that the era of the code has infected the entire social fabric. An outcome of this is that opposites collapse and merge, and "everything becomes undecidable"

  • the beautiful & the ugly in fashion
  • the left & the right in politics
  • the true & false in the media
  • the useful & the useless at the level of objects
  • nature & culture in rhetoric

These opposites have lost their content and become interchangeable in the era of reproduction & simulation.

However, for Baudrillard, this system is potentially a closed one that is on the verge of implosion. Hyperreality has obliterated the difference between the real and the imaginary. This raises the interesting question whether a political intervention that does not become co-opted by the system is at all possible. Baudrillard does recommend a way with his analysis of seduction and fatal strategies. He claims that the object must be privileged over the subject, i.e., the fatal theory determined by the object must be privileged over the banal & critical theory determined by the subject. In order to offset the system's equilibrium, one must move to extremes. E.g., ecstasy, fascination, risk, & vertigo experienced by the object that seduces, all take precedence before the sober reflexivity of banal theory. For Baudrillard, banal theory is always tautological in which the beginning equals the end, or with death & destiny, because there is no end in any teleological import. So seduction is fatal only in the sense that the subject is dominated by the fickle object - the object of fascination. The masses, given their conformity & lack of reflexivity, the model to follow is the depressed revolutionary intellectual. Because the masses give precedence to ecstasy & fascination, and therefore to the object, they converge towards the potential extremities of the system. The strategy of seduction is posed as a foil of the society of the spectacle and the strategy of pataphysics becomes a science of imaginary solutions that will eventually supersede metaphysics entirely. Pataphysics apparently is only way a theory can outsmart a virtual reality of simulation, where radical & unforeseen reversals take place with increasing alacrity.

As long the virtual & symbolic as well as digital techno-culture is utterly dominant, then this "reality" is governed by the code or codes. But this means that the world shifts to the nadirs of predictability, with no room for chance. Ergo, because the world, as in social & cultural reality, is not as Baudrillard claims, crises of theory & crises of predictive sciences take place. A world of nothing but appearances would be trivial to control - but in reality, this media world doesn't exist. Not even in the imagination.

Edited by The Heretic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Dragon has nothing to teach you, Tzela. :yup:

Of course, that's because Dragon is an utter imbecile, writing pieces of rambling nonsense that contain nothing resembling rational thought, all the while using the pretentious act of being some kind of enlightened, all-understanding guru who seeks to teach (but not learn) to avoid dealing with questions, challenges and criticism of his/her naive world view, but let's not let that shatter Dragon's illusion of being an amalgamation of every deity and god associated with knowledge in every pantheon ever imagined by man, woman, and child.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Is it just me or was Dragon's last post, a response to TZV, deleted? :scratch:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0