muddi [he/him]

Sounds like you might enjoy people being honest to you rather than enjoying compliments or criticism. Criticism is more blunt when said to someone’s face, but compliments can seem disingenuous, so maybe you don’t believe the compliments subconsciously

Lucifer’s Hebrew name is Helel!

Somewhat unrelated to the news but gave me a chuckle, but the judge ruling in favor of the decision is named Dhananjaya Chandrachud.

The first name translates to “conqueror of wealth” and the first part of the last name is “moon.” So he’s literally Moon-Chud the conqueror of wealth.

Ah yep that triggered the full memory for me…it was a book called Tikki Tikki Tempo: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tikki_Tikki_Tembo

Oh man this is stirring up some memories from early grade school about an English version of this that we used to sing about a boy with a long name and his younger brother.

I always wondered if that was just the moral of the story: don’t give your children long names. Which my parents did to me 😡

I’ll check it out! Thanks for the rec

And about the Indian stories, I think you’ll find a rhythmic pattern. Maybe the translations can ruin it, I can’t confirm or deny this.

I think you’re right, I’m probably missing out on certain contexts and linguistic play reading the English translations. It adds to the melancholy in a way though, knowing there’s more beneath the surface of the words I can only barely grasp

I’m reading the Kathasaritsagara now! Reading those kind of collections of tales makes me feel like I’m living among the ancient/medieval villagers of India, an interesting perspective shift to say the least

I know we are currently in the ___ phase but where is the line drawn? Does this ___ justify genocide? Im not inclined to believe so.

The line is genocide, if nothing else. The blanks don’t matter. Your position on genocide should be 110% against it, the extra 10% (ideally more) being proactive measures to fight fascism to ensure genocide never happens again in history.

There is a baggage associated with the word “cult” now.

It used to mean pretty much a specific practice of a religion. For example, in a polytheistic religion, you can choose a favorite god and perhaps even worship that figure exclusively, even while believing in all the others eg. later Hindu ishtadevata practices

This kind of cult evolved into those around mysteries or mysterious figures (eg. Eleusinia, Mithraism) and real-world figures like monarchs like the Roman emperor. Eventually you have the death cults of the last few decades which cemented the pejorative sense of “cult” and also inspired the sociology around the same. I should also mention, there is a chauvinism in this as well eg. cargo cults

To answer your question, there is this historical context to it. But also the perspective: one can look back through history or across the world to identify “cults” but not recognize that one lives in a culture or participates in cultish behavior themselves

Any biography about some liberal political leader, like that Obama one. I think people buy them just because they trend on the top 10 books to read list. But everyone I’ve met who has it just keeps it on their coffee table to make it seem like they’re into reading now. The only one I know who finishes those biographies is my grandpa who is a little senile and bored now.

Marx didn’t consider human nature so he’s totally wrong

The series is good, idk about the first few books in themselves though

Prasad is offered to the gods to symbolically consume but then it’s given to people to actually consume. You’re not supposed to say no. People even sometimes carry prasad across the country and world so they can give it to others to eat.

Idk why any reasonable Hindu would get angry at someone eating prasad, regardless of who they are.

From what I read, it seems like they took over a year to investigate the cyber attack before making their conclusions public.

Also I thought the party line was communism, not anti-Americanism.

To be honest, this here doesn’t seem that out-of-place in terms of how a sovereign nation would respond to a cyber attack by another sovereign nation.

This is a bizarre reply. What would be the adult response for China after discovering cyber attacks carried out by the US government?

Yeah there are those machines that like instantly cool your soda can or make ice cream instantly supposedly. They just bathe it in ice and salt water for some time basically

Fair point but I think then it just expands the consideration from linguistic (which is already more than spoken or written, it also covers signed, whistled, drummed, danced, in one case I heard about – eye movement) to semiotic.

I think that is a linguistic question ultimately. You could take potentially utter a new sentence never before uttered even with the top 10 most used words in a language.

That is one of the most significant things about the human being. Actually I am quite surprised when people come with definitions for human nature eg. fundamentally good, fundamentally evil, homo sapiens, homo faber, etc. that the linguistic potential to turn a small set of things into infinity is often ignored. No other animal can think and speak like we do.

I guess if getting new data is not allowed, then interpolation or extrapolation would be the next best option. Interpolation would be connecting existing thoughts to form or find new ones in between. Extrapolation would be following a train of thought to its ultimate end. This could be done in either the diffused or focused mental states. I like to draw up diagrams for this so I can see the blank spots to fill or direction things seem to be going.

There is also the semantics of the question. It’s actually quite an ancient topic, where our thoughts come from. What does “original” mean? The thought originating in our mind, or from some higher realm? I won’t go too deep into this, just bringing it up to think about it. The only thing I wanted to say is that maybe our mind is not entirely free and agentive, but actually there is a “darkness that comes before” to reference The Second Apocalypse which we can’t conquer, but are conquered by.

On a lighter note, and from my own experience, it is definitely possible to generate new thoughts outside of that diffuse cloud of repeated thoughts formed on the storehouse of experience accumulated so far in our lives. Following practices of mindfulness, we can learn to recognize the noise of our mind and separate those “thoughts” from what we might call more agentive thoughts that we can control over, wherever they come from. I do meditations in these styles and achieve a mental state beyond the diffuse and focused, kind of inverse to dreaming (cf. turiya for this kind of formulation of a fourth state of mind). In this state, you can come to understand things which you could probably never do in the other mental states. Those thoughts feel “cleaner” as if coming from a true origin rather than bounced around a cloud of repeated thoughts like you mention.

But I feel like maybe these thoughts are not exactly the ones you are looking for. They are removed from our everyday sense of living, and not really invested in disciplines we have come up with socially as humans. It would be like asking if a caveman 500,000 years ago would have come up with the solution to how to fix a bug in the code I just wrote. It would have been an original thought for him sure, but kind of besides the point.

Edit: as an example for the interpolation/extrapolation, consider sentences like “Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo” or actual usages of this sort of thing in literature:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirātārjunīya#Linguistic_ingenuity

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion-Eating_Poet_in_the_Stone_Den

The interesting part is that constrained thinking is what produces this

Think of it dialectically, not in a polar way. So called “good” and “bad” have to come together in one for one to be able to surpass the apparent duality. Any enlightenment, individual or social, should come from the stage after good/bad

This is what the sages will say, on the individual level: it’s not so much good vs bad as useful or not useful (to some end). We need to understand and maybe learn to control what this “end” is. Similar thing with socialism: it’s not class war for the sake of one class winning, but rather abolishing class as a system altogether