Three Seas Forum

the archives

dusted off in read-only

  •  

Jamara Auditor | joined 21 March 2007 | 143 posts


Halos about Kellhus' hands? posted 21 March 2007 in Author Q & AHalos about Kellhus' hands? by Jamara, Auditor

Hi, first time posting.
Here's my oppinion, we cannot not infer whether Kellhus actually saw his own haloes prior to the ending of TTT, but we do know that many saw them. Many that were being deluded. Eventually even Achamian falls under the delussion and sees these haloes. Eventually even Kellhus falls under the dellusion that he is the prophet (i'm not making any judgement calls yet as to whether he is or isn't) and sees the haloes.
So my point is this; if one man is deluded, his delussions are naught but another's lies. If many share the same delussion, it becomes a belief in a lie. If everyone, including the liar, believes the delussion, does it not become Truth? Belief is Truth, or so Moenghus would have us believe.
Reality is fluid, and what is believed by all, is true. If Kellhus is a false-prophet, a manipulator, who convinces everyone (including himself) that he is a prophet, does he not become a prophet. Are his words not Truth? Does not what he says become Truth? He believes it to be the Truth, and everyone believes him, so isn't it? view post


Inchoroi motivations and the quantum mechanics posted 21 March 2007 in Author Q & AInchoroi motivations and the quantum mechanics by Jamara, Auditor

Very interesting!

Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle: We can know where an electron is but not it's speed, and we can know an electron's speed but not it's location. Thus with sorcery you have the Utteral string (speed), and the Inutteral string (location); you know both, which can only be known by "God". And when you can tie both strands together, you can control the quantum reality of somethig/everything, i.e. you can rewrite God's work.

Definitely. I agree that sorcery could conceivably be a manipulation of quantum mechanics, but I also think there is a fantasy aspect Bakker has placed in there just to keep us from quantifying everything. Don't forget about the Daemos. Those demons that are summoned have to come from somewhere. view post


Questions posted 21 March 2007 in Author Q & AQuestions by Jamara, Auditor

The Dollar Bill Theorem:

Gnostic Sorcery represents the idea of currency.
Agnosis represents the idea of barter.
The Dollar Bill itself being the epitomy, "Word of God".

The Gnostic would be more true to the Word of God than the Agnosis. I think this is agreed. But it is also obvious that there are a few steps between currency and the actual dollar. And we witness Kellhus reach one of those closer steps when he combines three strings rather than just two. He becomes something greater than Gnostic sorcery. Something closer to the "Word of God". Working on quantum mechanics from a different thread, one would probably have to work 12 strings in order to be a god. view post


Question for Mr. Bakker. posted 21 March 2007 in Author Q & AQuestion for Mr. Bakker. by Jamara, Auditor

You understand where the guys are coming from . . . don't forget, this was written by a guy . . . view post


Was Cnauir gay? posted 21 March 2007 in The Thousandfold ThoughtWas Cnauir gay? by Jamara, Auditor

Okay, here's how I feel about it, and I don't know if it's already been covered (6 pages of responses was just too much for a newbie), but was Cnaiur gay? Yes. Does that mean he got jiggy with any other men other than Moenghus? Probably not.

The Scylvendi held homosexuality as anethema. Heinous. Which is exactly why Conphas had their captives raped by other men at Kiyuth in order to drive them into attacking. Cnaiur so wanted to follow the Path of the People, which included a high level of homophobia, which is why he supressed it within himself. And when one supresses something like that, they tend to be the greatest homophobes. This is why he would kill an uncle for thinking him a homosexual.

And he was not just seduced into being gay, that doesn't happen (at least not without a lot of beer) <!-- s:wink: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_wink.gif" alt=":wink:" title="Wink" /><!-- s:wink: --> by Moenghus. Moenghus seduced him into abandoning the way of the People, which allowed him, among other things, to enjoy his natural inclinations. He was gay simply from the entry at the end of TTT (stop reading now if it is a spoiler) . . . (I can wait) . . . in which he enjoys the stronger embrace rather than the gentler of a female. He can feel secure in stronger arms, he can submit, he can be dominated sexually and emotionally.

So yes, he was gay. Did he suppress it for thrity years, take many wives and father many children? Yes, but that is the nature of a suppressed society. He did what he was supposed to, and better than most, because that is what was expected of him.

Does Cnaiur being gay mean that he was still not the fiercest of all men, hell no. In fact it gave him a suppressed anger against all his kinsmen which he could feed on when he was tearing out their entrails. Being a gay man does not mean that you can't be a fierce man. view post


Inchoroi motivations and the quantum mechanics posted 21 March 2007 in Author Q &amp; AInchoroi motivations and the quantum mechanics by Jamara, Auditor

So is the Outside space, a series of astral/spiritual planes, or simply alternate dimensions of existence? view post


Life and Death posted 21 March 2007 in Philosophy DiscussionLife and Death by Jamara, Auditor

What is the Will to Live?

In my opinion the will to live is nothing more than instinctual. Our instincts, and every living thing's instincts are to live and procreate. That's it. All the other things which fill our lives, which we fill our lives with, are the selfish drive of sentience. We Need to fill our lives with the belief that we have a purpose. We Need to kill the time between feeding and creating offspring, and we fill it with things we believe give us a purpose. The greatest of these things are religious beliefs. Religious belief gives us the ability to be told what our purpose is. To me it is an easy cop-out.

The curse of sentience is that we are given the opportunity to ask why. Why are we here. To me the answer is simple. To be alive. But to most that is not enough. They feel that there must be a purpose to them being here. Something other than instincts driving them to be alive. I think allot of our problems with coming to grips with sentience is that fact that we are the only sentient beings on this earth. Since we can't ask others, we often create something higher, better, more knowledgable than ourselves whom we can ask and rely on. To me this is the greatest fallicy amongst the followers of organized religion. They have supplanted their ability to reason with doctrines that tell them exactly what to do, how to think, and answer questions that escape us.

That's not to say that there isn't a Human Will. Willpower gives us the ability to supercede those instincts which are meant to protect ourselves and keep us alive. It gives us the ability to run a marathon when our body wants nothing more than to rest. It gives us the ability to go to war and die for causes and beliefs. It gives a monk the ability to end his life to make a statement. But all of these are selfish acts. Running the marathon to win or complete gives a sense of purpose and accomplishment. Fighting the war or dieing for it is selfish because you are fighting for beliefs that give you purpose. The monk immolating himself in protest is selfish because he is fulfilling a purpose that has given him drive. They are filling the void created by sentience with acts that bring them a selfish sense of fulfillment. view post


Drugs posted 21 March 2007 in Philosophy DiscussionDrugs by Jamara, Auditor

Here's a little something I learned. Some people have odd entanglements amongst their neurons. These odd entanglements allow some people to smell textures, or see sounds, or hear colours, etc... Basically the sense processies misfire, though not in a disfunctional way. For example, Hendrix never learned notes or chords, what he did was hear music in colours. He would describe these colours to his manager who would then interprate them into sheet music for the rest of the Band of Gypsies. And statistically, people which such anamolies tend toward artistry.

Wtih that said, I think mind altering drugs might be favored among artists because it alters their already altered state of consciousness. That's just a theory though.

One thing I do know is that when I listen to some great music, I so enjoy it. But when I listen to that same music stoned, I can feel every note. I connect with the artist and what he is trying to tell me. My weed use has always lowered my inhibitions and allowed me to simply experience and connect with what was around me.

But I am always responsible in my drug use, and if I ever do anything I am ashamed of, then that's it for the drug. And I have never tried any drug which I know that the pitfalls far outway any benefit. view post


Scott Bakker ruined it for me. posted 21 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionScott Bakker ruined it for me. by Jamara, Auditor

Martin is about the only thing I find equivalent, though I keep my ears open for news of another good series. I'll probably check out Erickson. But I think it is a maturity issue, not a stylist or content. I love the maturity of actions, writing, consequences, and intrigue. And I have tried and failed to reread the Chronicles, but I just can't.

However, I contradict the statement that a mature audience is the audience to be written for. I don't think I should have read, or would fully have understood Martin, and definitely not Bakker, back when I was in 6th grade. I think that it is just frustrating for us as adults that there isn't more fantasy our there for us.

As far as Harry Potter, I was very leery at first, but it is well written and quite fun! I usually reread all the books while I'm waiting for the next installment of my more serious authors. They are a fun read! view post


Seswatha's dreams. posted 23 March 2007 in The Thousandfold ThoughtSeswatha's dreams. by Jamara, Auditor

Okay, the dream that changed was the dream when Seswatha faces the No-God on the fields of Mengedda. It's the only dream which incorporates the No-God directly.

Now, my gut impression as I was reading the dream was that Kellhus was using the dream somehow in order to retrieve knowledge from Akka.

Somehow, through Gnosis that has yet to be revealed to us, Seswatha trapped his memories within an object, supposedly his own mummified heart. Which kind of makes no sense. The purpose of the heart of course was to supercede one's own dreams and replant in their absence Seswatha's Dreams. Now the only other time that we've seen the interactions within dreams, was during Cants of Calling, in which a sorceror will enter another's dreams and draw them out of them.

Now at the end of TTT, Kellhus uses what would have been a Cant of Calling, but changed it by using a third string into a Cant of Transposing. And he enters the There rather than another Here. A great darkness. So where did he go? He didn't just go to the First Temple, because when he arrived he was wearing a billowing white gown (I could be wrong about the apparel change but it really isn't the point).

He manipulated and changed the only Cant thus far that has been linked to already altering another's dream by supplanting oneself within that dream. I think that he took the voice of the No-God in Akka's last dream in order to learn what Akka saw of the No-God. We know that he is looking for info on Him, Kellhus even asked his father what he had learned on the matter. He wants to learn more about the No-God (to what end is still open for vast debate).

And I think it is quite a literal symmetry of Akka renouncing Kellhus as Seswatha leaving Celmomas, and later returning to him.

And I'm just throwing this out there, but how beneficial would it be for an Anasurimbor of the present that &quot;memories&quot; of the past would foretell his coming as a Harbinger? Would place him in a position of influence without ever even having done anything? How short would it make the path? view post


Is Kellus the No-God? End of TTT and being in the whirlwind. posted 23 March 2007 in The Thousandfold ThoughtIs Kellus the No-God? End of TTT and being in the whirlwind. by Jamara, Auditor

As far as the third trilogy title, I think that it would be less poetic to go from:

Prince of Nothing to No-God

than it would be to go from:

Prince of Nothing to God of All view post


Life and Death posted 26 March 2007 in Philosophy DiscussionLife and Death by Jamara, Auditor

I find it funny that the name atheist was brought up so often. Not once did I ever claim to be an atheist. In fact I am a Pagan. I am against religion, not spirituality. There is quite an extreme difference between the two. The difference being Dogma. I found and formed my own spiritual beliefs that just happen to loosely coincide with others' beliefs. I was never told what to believe, how to believe, how to show my beliefs, or how to celebrate my beliefs. I found them. I questioned, and through my sentience I found what I believed. No one told me how to do it.

I questioned and reasoned and learned.

And as far as the nephew bringing grapes to his aunt, that was instinctual. He was aiding his familial unit. He as aiding his gene pool. And we, like most mammals, have very strong familial instincts.

I never siad that selfish was bad. I only meant that all non-instinctual action is based upon self-fullfilment on some level. There is always some level of self-gratification.

Sentience is a quirk. We don't fully understand how it arose. We do know that because of the reshaping of our cerebellum due to a skeletal change in posture along with the increased functional useage of our hands is what allowed for the cerebral reshaping giving rise to sentience. Sentience is our ability to question and imagine. (I would like to add for future clarification that I am using sentient in the common understanding, basically equating it to consciousness)

And evolution. That is a scientific law. The theory is Darwin's natural selection. Evolution has been recorded and can be recorded. It happens, therefore it is a law. A theory tries to explain that law. view post


Life and Death posted 26 March 2007 in Philosophy DiscussionLife and Death by Jamara, Auditor

Disregard that last portion of my post. At first I misunderstood where you were coming from with the mention of evolution <!-- s:oops: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_redface.gif" alt=":oops:" title="Embarassed" /><!-- s:oops: --> . I get very passionate about it. view post


Life and Death posted 26 March 2007 in Philosophy DiscussionLife and Death by Jamara, Auditor

My reference to the usage of atheists was from everyone's posts, Buchethead, not just yours. In fact I appreciated your inclusion of non-religious people.

And I agree that people who follow religions can be critical thinkers and blah blah blah, and that the vast majority of &quot;christians&quot; are only christians because that's what their daddy was, but still, I can't understand how a critical thinker, someone who has actually flexed the grey matter, could just believe what was written in a book, rewritten, editted, then systematically reformatted. I just see organized religion as a crutch of the masses. view post


The Meaning of Life posted 26 March 2007 in Philosophy DiscussionThe Meaning of Life by Jamara, Auditor

Quote: &quot;TheDarkness&quot;:w2578uz6
We have created civilization, but in turn we have ruined our rule.[/quote:w2578uz6]

Just a point of clarity in an otherwise awesome thread. &quot;We&quot; does not refer to all of humanity, only those taken in by &quot;Civilization&quot;. Which is the vast majority <!-- s:( --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_sad.gif" alt=":(" title="Sad" /><!-- s:( --> And I believe it is Civilization's existence which will ruin the world. The fact that it tried to &quot;rule&quot; the world.

Fans of Daniel Quinn give a whoop whoop!

P.S. Entropic_existence, kudos on your signature! view post


What philosopher suits you most? posted 26 March 2007 in Philosophy DiscussionWhat philosopher suits you most? by Jamara, Auditor

Karl Marx . . . errr . . . In mean Socrates. It's not so much that I loved his arguements, rather, I loved how he argued them.

Quote: &quot;Buckethead&quot;:275ji6ay
(cultural theorists count right?)[/quote:275ji6ay]

If they count, then definitely Daniel Quinn! That bad mudda fukka changed my life. view post


Your First Time posted 26 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionYour First Time by Jamara, Auditor

That's hard. Tolken, C. S. Lewis, and Dragonlance, all got me started, but I really don't think any of them had that hugely emotion changing impact for me. There were two books though that did hit that nail right on the head. Game of Thrones (Martin) and Ishmael (Quinn). view post


Now listening to... posted 26 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionNow listening to... by Jamara, Auditor

Nothing Compares 2 You - Sinead O'Connor
And the Black Snake Moan Soundtrack

Quote: &quot;Warrior-Poet&quot;:1cc45w8y
Bling(Confessions of a King)- the Killers[/quote:1cc45w8y]
Nice view post


Now Reading... posted 26 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionNow Reading... by Jamara, Auditor

Johnny Got His Gun view post


What is your favorite sport? posted 26 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionWhat is your favorite sport? by Jamara, Auditor

Football (grrr...soccer) and hockey. And my friends and I Have decided that they are the same sport, just on a different surface.

And if figure skating is a sport, then ballroom dancing should be a sport. Figure skaters might be athletes, but it's not a sport!!!!!! view post


OK, this is stupid, but... posted 26 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionOK, this is stupid, but... by Jamara, Auditor

Thanks Harrol for the info. As a newbie I wasn't really sure how that worked. view post


Life and Death posted 26 March 2007 in Philosophy DiscussionLife and Death by Jamara, Auditor

&quot;Curethan&quot;:p91kgj48
In the interests of hairsplitting - I think you will find that it is the theory of evolution, as a scientific law must proven by repeatable experiment and empirical data - which you can't do in this case. It certainly is widely accepted and consistent, and no scientificly acceptable theory opposes it, but a theory it remains.[/quote:p91kgj48]

But evolution is change. And it has been recorded. It has been recorded in the genetic changing of the length of Finch beaks. It has been recorded in the bioengineering of man in the breeding of horses, cows, tomatoes, wheat, pigs, dogs, cats, roses, etc... Evolution is the genetic change within a species or population. It happens and can not be denied. And that is all that evolution is. The theory of natural selection summises that through Darwin's Laws of Natural Selection, new species evolved from older species.

Quote:
Having rejected a world view as flawed, you abandon it and declare that any of its adherants are similarly flawed and are either stupid or weak because they cannot see what is clear to you. But perhaps you are wrong,


I never claimed to be right. I only claimed that people who let other people do the thinking for them are . . . Dee Dee Deees

the existence of a goddess,


I view the Goddess as the earth. All the biomass and all it's intrinsic parts. We all come from the Mother, and we all return to the Mother. We are all a part of the Mother. The biomass of the planet remains constant (space programs disregarded)

the soul


I view the soul as the driving force of living things not to decay. What is it that keeps our cells, our highly ordered components from breaking down? What is it that keeps them moving towards remaining alive. The soul. The soul is the unaccountable force which is resisting entropy.

Can you provide a scientific proof for any of these things? Or do you merely see their existance in the same way a christian might feel Jesus in their heart?


Actually it was several ecology and microbiology and genetics courses at Penn State which ultimately filled in the gaps of my beliefs. Seeing the intricacy of the ecological food web and the refinedness of the genetic pathways, and many other tangent nuances is what basically turned me from an agnostic to a pagan.

To judge others because of their beliefs

I'm not judging anyone's beliefs, just the mode by which they gain those beliefs. view post


Who is most offensive. posted 26 March 2007 in Literature DiscussionWho is most offensive. by Jamara, Auditor

I gotta put it out there . . . I don't mind large breasted red heads one iota. In fact, the more the better <!-- s:wink: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_wink.gif" alt=":wink:" title="Wink" /><!-- s:wink: --> view post


Marvel and The Dark Tower posted 26 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionMarvel and The Dark Tower by Jamara, Auditor

Quote: &quot;Buckethead&quot;:2w0am9df
MARVEL will find some way to screw it up.[/quote:2w0am9df]

That's not entirely fair. Stan did give us the X-Men. view post


Eragon posted 26 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionEragon by Jamara, Auditor

Worse than Goodkind? view post


Why Bakker posted 26 March 2007 in Literature DiscussionWhy Bakker by Jamara, Auditor

Because he's not scared to represent real life. He doesn't shy away from the harsh realities of how the world used to be. He doesn't romanticize it. view post


Marvel and The Dark Tower posted 26 March 2007 in Off-Topic DiscussionMarvel and The Dark Tower by Jamara, Auditor

Oh, I definitely agree with you Buckethead, though I do have to give Marvel props for the Krueger/Ross Earth X series. I thought that was fantastic. And mostly I liked the art at Marvel, not so much the stories. Jim Lee, McFarlain, Sam Kieth and many others before their mass Exodus. view post


Life and Death posted 26 March 2007 in Philosophy DiscussionLife and Death by Jamara, Auditor

I often enjoy playing Devil's Advocate to spark lively debate <!-- s:twisted: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_twisted.gif" alt=":twisted:" title="Twisted Evil" /><!-- s:twisted: --> Hope nobody was offended view post


Those flip flopping Nansurs... posted 27 March 2007 in The Thousandfold ThoughtThose flip flopping Nansurs... by Jamara, Auditor

I think that the Nansuri were more than willing to follow their Emperor in opposition of what they considered a False Prophet. It was the False Prophet who usurped the Holy War and then placed a Scylvendi dog to be their jailor. I think it's easy to see how they could be led to detest and attack the Holy War after that.

But then their Emperor allies himself with an ancient enemy. The Fanim. Enemies that many of these men had fought, whom their fathers had fought, and on back through their lines. I think the army was probably very disgruntled to learn that their new allies were a people they hated worse than the False Prophet.

And then to top it off, Achamian begins decimating their ranks. I can easily see how the Nansur soldiers thought they were being punished for their crimes. Perhaps the False Prophet wasn't a False Prophet and that they were facing damnation for allying with Heathens against a True Prophet.

I think they rode with Saubon for redemption. view post


Evolution vs Creation posted 28 March 2007 in Philosophy DiscussionEvolution vs Creation by Jamara, Auditor

Randal, I sort of agree with you, but saying it's 'Trial and Error' is kind of supporting Interlligent Design - &quot;Whoops, that didn't work, let's try something else this time.&quot;

Natural Selection is a mechanism of Evolution, but species often select for or against random mutations or in response to climate and geographical changes over which they have no control (so sort of random in that case, though climatologists and geologists might argue that climatic and geographic changes occur in a pattern rather than just randomly).

Ants being trapped on a log which is randomly taken out to sea where it eventually comes to rest on an isolated island is a random event, and this isolation will most likely cause the rise of a sub species or new species altogether from those original ants.

The Hardy-Wienberg Theorem gives 5 conditions which must be met for evolutionary stasis (or Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium). Evolution usually occurs when one or more of those condiitons is not met (usually because of random, outside occurrences).

Evolution is only ever guided by an Intelligent Design (in my humble opinion) when it is guided by humans. And usually then we're more ignorant and arrogant in our actions than intelligent. I do however believe in a spiritual force driving all living things to be alive, but not in what shape they are or how they do it.

Good topic, Warrior-Poet, I could go on forever. view post


  •  

The Three Seas Forum archives are hosted and maintained courtesy of Jack Brown