|
So for a variety of reasons I have closed the D&D Authoritarians thread and have moved it to a much more "hip" (as the kids say these days) forum. (D&D is full of squares and is run by the man, maaaaaaan.) So this is now the thread for discussing the Narrativist Framework or just chilling out or whatever. This is a cool thread full of cool people who want to occasionally write novella-sized posts when they aren't discussing which weed strain goes best with which video game. (9lb Hammer is the superior garnish to an evening of Horizon:Zero Dawn.) So just come in here and chill out, get a feel for the place. and if you feel like making a gigantic effortpost discussing some sort of abstract theory of behavior that loosely ties into politics then there is a pretty good chance that someone will make a cool gigantic effortpost in return. ("Good-faith effortposting is rewarded with good-faith effortposting" is our motto around these parts) If you just want to post TRUMP! and drop a tweet that shows off the latest compaction cycle that is also cool. Effortpopsts from me explaining why the succ dems succ so much should start showing up within a day or two. Till then 
Prester Jane has issued a correction as of 03:28 on Oct 23, 2018 |
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 01:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 07:08 |
|
|
no war but class war i hope this thread ends up being good, welcome to the cool kids club
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 01:38
|
|
|
Picking the discussion up where it left off in the old thread:Prester Jane posted:So a big focus of the new thread is going to be on why established elites are psychologically predisposed to siding with Narrativists over progressives whenever "inequality of access to resources" (income inequality in our particular society) grows to a sufficient extent that it begins to disrupt a substantial portion of the individuals in a given population -and why that cycle is presently holding true in our society. Curiously despite the vast majority of the material I am about to introduce having very little to do directly with pathological individuals or extremists- the overall conclusions of the new thread are going to be (if anything) a good bit darker than this thread was. BOOSness Hammocks posted:The classic answer to this question is that capitalists believe that fascists will leave their wealth and support systems intact while socialism will put those things into the service of the common good, so genocide is a reasonable price to pay for keeping their poo poo (and might even open new markets). Prester Jane posted:My approach to this same subject is going to be largely apolitical- I'm looking at this from the perspective of how lived experience shapes the way the brain processes information, which then in turn shapes both worldview and behavior. The lived experience of an established multi-generational Elite Class selects very heavily for a particular combination of self-replicating behavior pattern- what I call "Structuralist Cooperators". ("Structuralist" being an archetype and "Cooperator" a subtype.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 01:39
|
|
|
To go just a bit further than the last post did- a huge contributing factor to our present situation was the racialy imbalanced way that the New Deal was implemented. The so-called "White expert class" that emerged in the wake of the New Deal was primarily composed of Structuralist Cooperators- and they have been an obstinate obstacle to true progressive reform in this country ever since. In my view this song is a progressive trying to call out the Structuralist Cooperators that existed within the Democratic party of his era. I really strongly encourage everyone who read the last post to listen to every word in this song, because it makes our present situation much more readily understandable*. *also horrible. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u52Oz-54VYw
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 01:43
|
|
|
What about my question about HHS' trans de-recognition thing? I think it might be a good subject to discuss. Glad to be here you nerd. Also all weed is good weed for videogames. Fight me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 01:49
|
|
|
T-man posted:What about my question about HHS' trans de-recognition thing? I think it might be a good subject to discuss. Glad to be here you nerd. In my view it is (logical and sadly predictable) what I would term "opportunistic dehumanization". As compaction cycles continue to play out in Trump's base they become steadily more radicalized- and as raicalization continues eventually compaction cycles evolve from internally focused purity tests into externally focused "violence cycles". That is to say that committing acts of violence becomes the preferred method to resolve Narrative Dysphoria In order to create the social conditions that permit violence cycles to be enacted in public you need to dehumanize a targeted minority sufficiently that the existent authority is likely to give quiet consent to "vigilante" violence enacted against the targeted minority group. For a variety of reasons transpeople (in particular transwomen) are a convenient target for dehumanization at present in our society. The erasure of transgender identities is a necessary step to begin enacting harsher legal and extra-legal harassment of the transgender community. Way back on election night in 2016 I predicted that transwomen would eventually be on watchlists, so to me the HHS thing is just one more step along that path.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 01:58
|
|
|
T-man posted:What about my question about HHS' trans de-recognition thing? I think it might be a good subject to discuss. quote:Also all weed is good weed for videogames. Fight me. idk I suck even more at Fortnite when I'm on a Indica strain because my reaction times go to poo poo
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 01:58
|
|
|
i genuinely feel like you're ricky gervais in The Invention of Lying, except from the opposite end, where you realize because of your extremely hosed-up circumstances that everyone--everyone. EVERYONE!--grows up lying for advantage and then creating grand demi-medical frameworks in order to explain that dishonesty from a hopelessly medicalized personal perspective where truth-telling is considered fundamentally good. there are no "Structuralist Cooperators" there are only smart bullshitters, and ignorant bullshitters. there were bullshitters in one corner, and activists in another corner, thats what phil ochs' song was and is about. there was no highfalutin expert class that emerged from the new deal, only new bureaucrats with new algorithms. there were bureaucrats in the civil war, there were bureaucrats in the gilded age, there were bureaucrats during ww2 and the great society, there are bureaucrats today and there will be next month. i dont even disagree with you on most things, and without starting a referendum on My Bullshit i can kind of appreciate where you're coming from though my nonsense has a couple orders' magnitude less intensity to it, but you trace these grand structures when in fact following straight lines is far more illuminating to the particular process of bullshit. or structural cooperation. or however you'd have it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 01:58
|
|
|
Willie Tomg posted:i genuinely feel like you're ricky gervais in The Invention of Lying, except from the opposite end, where you realize because of your extremely hosed-up circumstances that everyone--everyone. EVERYONE!--grows up lying for advantage and then creating grand demi-medical frameworks in order to explain that dishonesty from a hopelessly medicalized personal perspective where truth-telling is considered fundamentally good. I hear what you are saying and all I ask is that you give me a few months to elaborate on my underlying thinking. I am abbreviating a great deal of complicated material in the above post- partly out of necessity so that I have some sort of frame-of-reference to structure my underlying arguments. My thinking on this starts with a novel model of the subconscious mind and builds layer-upon-layer up from there- with a heavy focus on how childhood influences the subconscious structures that directly impact how a given individual is experiencing reality. I'm not saying that when I'm done your mind will be changed, all I'm asking is for a chance to elaborate on my full theoretical framework
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 02:03
|
|
|
trump?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 02:04
|
|
|
well hot diggity fuckin' dog, I've got something decent to read and think about posting in while at work 
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 02:05
|
|
|
also welcome, d&d thread refugees, to our underground bunker that guards us all from the fishmech-infested surface world please deposit at least one TRUMP per week to cover our operating expenses and feel free to explore our fully featured collection of threads, such as "Jordan Peterson is a gigantic shithead" and "The Jeb Crew" Jazerus has issued a correction as of 02:09 on Oct 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 02:07
|
|
|
Also a clarification on how I view my own work, I label myself an "Outsider Theorist". In that my theories have largely been formed in complete ignorance of the academic world as well as coming at the same problem of human behavior from a very different angle. It is my goal to make my work as interesting, internally consistent, and formally structured as possible. That said I fully recognize that because of my illness there will always be problems in my work and it will never truly be "correct". It is my belief that the full value of my work cna only be realized by formally trained academics using it as a springboard to create something better- bringing my ideas "Inside" if you will. In essence I believe that if I am truly on to something with all this then someday my work will leave my hands and its growth/direction taken over by formally trained scientists. So it is my intent to never attempt to create a formal scientific theory so much as to create a novel conceptual framework that an actual scientist could use to create a formal scientific theory. I accept and acknowledge the limitations that places on my work- but I also believe this the best way for me personally to develop this project. Prester Jane has issued a correction as of 02:12 on Oct 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 02:10
|
|
|
PJ you're claiming your approach is apolitical and from the perspective of personality psychology...and your subject matter is voting blocs and political behaviour. Rethink this from first principles.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 02:12
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:PJ you're claiming your approach is apolitical and from the perspective of personality psychology...and your subject matter is voting blocs and political behaviour. Rethink this from first principles. that is the subject that the framework has generally been applied to, since it originated in a political forum, but it's not limited to that. narrativism is a particular cognitive approach to the world that affects literally every aspect of a narrativist's life - by tying all of those aspects together into a grand unified story instead of the more compartmentalized and analytical cognitive strategy typical of a non-narrativist. the political behavior of a particular narrativist follows from their internal story, yes, but so does literally all of their behavior. the GOP is really good at providing a story that easily slots into the most popular types of personal narratives among narrativists, and the dems are, uh, not, which is why the voting bloc behavior emerges Jazerus has issued a correction as of 02:21 on Oct 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 02:18
|
|
|
basically it's all about modes of thought and how they differ in benign or pathological ways between people
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 02:25
|
|
|
Prester Jane posted:Also a clarification on how I view my own work, I label myself an "Outsider Theorist". In that my theories have largely been formed in complete ignorance of the academic world as well as coming at the same problem of human behavior from a very different angle. It is my goal to make my work as interesting, internally consistent, and formally structured as possible. If you start drawing prepubescent butterfly children being eaten to explain the EU I think the right term would be "Outsider Theorist." Your work is out there, and it isn't given the full analysis it would have if you were some 18th century Rich White Dude, but I'm not sure if isolating your position as one inherently outside any acceptance of cultural norms we practice. Not in the weird quasi-smug Willie Tomg way, just that you are just as much a person of your day and place as any other nerd online. We're always already inside the system, as a drunk gender studies grad would say. e: also I'm already loving this new forum.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 02:27
|
|
|
Prester Jane posted:I hear what you are saying and all I ask is that you give me a few months to elaborate on my underlying thinking. I am abbreviating a great deal of complicated material in the above post- partly out of necessity so that I have some sort of frame-of-reference to structure my underlying arguments. My thinking on this starts with a novel model of the subconscious mind and builds layer-upon-layer up from there- with a heavy focus on how childhood influences the subconscious structures that directly impact how a given individual is experiencing reality. once upon a time i was a self-educated hard and scrappy teen who hosed up a college path, then un-hosed it, because in bumfuck Nowheresville, Vermont, i was the smartest and hardest working dude in the room which isn't that hard to do really now that i've had over a decade of context about the matter. one of the Notions i prided myself on was this thing i thought up while on a shitload of psychedelic mushrooms i grew one autumn; where like cells formed a constituent Body, so too did human beings constitute organs constituting a greater social organism. all within my peer group of loving idiots thought this was no less than pure brilliance. anyway, in my second week of college my intro sociology class began discussing Durkheim and Functionalism, and well, 
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 02:27
|
|
|
Willie Tomg posted:once upon a time i was a self-educated hard and scrappy teen who hosed up a college path, then un-hosed it, because in bumfuck Nowheresville, Vermont, i was the smartest and hardest working dude in the room which isn't that hard to do really now that i've had over a decade of context about the matter. one of the Notions i prided myself on was this thing i thought up while on a shitload of psychedelic mushrooms i grew one autumn; where like cells formed a constituent Body, so too did human beings constitute organs constituting a greater social organism. all within my peer group of loving idiots thought this was no less than pure brilliance. Coming up with a neat idea second doesn't mean you didn't come up with a neat idea. Plus now you can read about the subject and, using the unique way you came to the idea (different time, way, and person) to expand it or provide another way of looking at the idea. As a kid I came up with a bunch of ideas that people kept stealing retroactively. Being sad about it doesn't do anything, so make it your idea using the last person to make it theirs as a background. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 02:31
|
|
|
PJ have you floated this to a Psych or Sociology wing of a university? I'm dead serious: just send out a blast email "Hi, I'm Prester Jane, as part of my overall process I'm writing about right wing authoritarianism, here's what I have so far, does anybody have any papers about things like this?" Humanities careers start and end without someone expressing genuine engagement with the material like that, I'm 110% sure they'd be thrilled to respond in detail.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 02:33
|
|
|
poo poo, are you on twitter? David Neiwert has made his entire career studying the more militant RWAs just blast him a DM being like "hey i'm a PACE survivor, i see a lot of overlap in your work and my experiences, do you have any pdfs or epubs to lay on me?" https://twitter.com/davidneiwert?lang=en
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 02:38
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:PJ you're claiming your approach is apolitical and from the perspective of personality psychology...and your subject matter is voting blocs and political behaviour. Rethink this from first principles. I understand why you think that but I've been primarily using the impacts of these behavior in a political context to both demonstrate their existence as well as describe their function. The underlying theories themselves are completely apolitical in nature. To demonstrate I provide this example of Narrativism occurring in a completely apolitical context. This is a pretty good primer to what is often referred to as the "Final Fantasy 7 House"- a small cluster of tiny cults based around believing oneself was a direct reincarnation of a video game character that literally existed in an alternate universe. Its all here, from compaction cycles to inner narratives to the leadership figures often having obvious Cluster-B personality disorders. (Also appearances by Otherkin.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFRjrLmc_4c Willie Tomg posted:PJ have you floated this to a Psych or Sociology wing of a university? I'm dead serious: just send out a blast email "Hi, I'm Prester Jane, as part of my overall process I'm writing about right wing authoritarianism, here's what I have so far, does anybody have any papers about things like this?" I honestly haven't since I got things somewhat formalized on the website, I tried previously before that there was some interest but I did not have a convenient way to present it to someone who wasn't inactive follower of the D&D thread at the time. I'd be willing to try again though. Do you happen to have any suggestions? T-man posted:If you start drawing prepubescent butterfly children being eaten to explain the EU I think the right term would be "Outsider Theorist." Your work is out there, and it isn't given the full analysis it would have if you were some 18th century Rich White Dude, but I'm not sure if isolating your position as one inherently outside any acceptance of cultural norms we practice. Not in the weird quasi-smug Willie Tomg way, just that you are just as much a person of your day and place as any other nerd online. We're always already inside the system, as a drunk gender studies grad would say. Fair enough. How about we table the issue for a few months until I've had a better chance to explain just how far down the rabbit hole my work goes? Prester Jane has issued a correction as of 09:16 on Oct 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 02:44
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:that is the subject that the framework has generally been applied to, since it originated in a political forum, but it's not limited to that. "The theory applies to political behaviour, but it's not limited to that!" I knew that would be the first response. But we're pretty much only talking about political behaviour.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 02:55
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:"The theory applies to political behaviour, but it's not limited to that!" I knew that would be the first response. But we're pretty much only talking about political behaviour. Please go watch the video on the Final Fantasy 7 house and then revisit this post.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 02:56
|
|
|
Prester Jane posted:
you've already done the truly difficult bit which is putting it in a place that isn't SA. boil your story and ideas down into a *tight* 4-5 paragraph request. less is more. breaking it down: --hi i'm PJ, i've been attempting for a few years to isolate processes of narrativism --i have experience in the PACE program. you're going to have to harden your heart for this bit, because the value of this paragraph is not what happened to you, but to lend a little value to the above and below paragraphs. you observed things like: --a paragraph in the most general possible terms about your conception of outer/inner narratives and compaction cycles etc. --think really hard about a 4th paragraph expounding upon the third. i bet you don't need it! if you do, a link to your blog should go in this paragraph, or the 3rd one. you probably don't need a 4th, though. --i'm trying my best to put these ideas on a more sound academic footing, any help you could offer would be tremendously appreciated. thank you for your time. sincerely, PJ. and you send that out to the soc and psych departments of the three biggest/nearest universities by you, on email, on facebook, hunt down faculty twitters and DM them, whatever you gotta do, the worst that can happen is they ignore you but like i said they probably won't as long as you come correct and ask them some questions instead of tell them some things they already know. it really is that simple. they're academics. they love talking about this poo poo, it's why they became academics. Willie Tomg has issued a correction as of 03:05 on Oct 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 02:58
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:"The theory applies to political behaviour, but it's not limited to that!" I knew that would be the first response. But we're pretty much only talking about political behaviour. All behavior is political.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 02:58
|
|
|
T-man posted:e: also I'm already loving this new forum. Welcome to CSPAM, friends!
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 03:11
|
|
|
a narrativist is the sort of person who thinks that when their computer has a glitch it's because the devil is waging spiritual warfare against them their cognitive boundaries are nonexistent - no knowledge or experience is siloed away as its own separate thing with separate causes and effects. all of their experiences tie back somehow to the central narrative, even trivial ones. now, excessive siloing is also a bad analytical strategy - that's why there's been such a push for interdisciplinary science in the past 15 years or so. the world is actually one thing and we divide it up for convenience, and sometimes our boundaries between bodies of knowledge are more of an obstacle than a help. but the narrativist goes to the other extreme, where the world is all one thing and so everything boils down to a simple, human-comprehensible story that completely links everything. a narrativist might have a few silos for things they understand very well - a narrativist electrical engineer is probably not going to view electric circuit behavior through the lens of their story - but life in general just blends together into the story
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 03:18
|
|
|
CSPAM welcomes all refugees.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 03:22
|
|
|
and fwiw there are dem narrativists too, as has been shown rather strikingly in the last two years they're the ones that are still devoted to Mother, the folks who hate bernie more than anyone else because he somehow ruined the grand story of The Triumph of Women by means of the First Woman President, who was the Most Qualified Candidate in History, until those devious bernie bros came along
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 03:28
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:and fwiw there are dem narrativists too, as has been shown rather strikingly in the last two years Also Bob Avakian's little Narrativist cult.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 03:36
|
|
|
McGlockenshire posted:
It's all about matching the particular mental requirements of a given game with the way a given strain of weed impacts your thinking. Obviously fortnite is a little too Twitchy for what it indicate does for you, so let me suggest what I feel would be the perfect match to a generic Indica: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDUKV2U7v94 Prester Jane has issued a correction as of 04:35 on Oct 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 04:05
|
|
|
now is a good time for this thread
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 04:23
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:a narrativist might have a few silos for things they understand very well - a narrativist electrical engineer is probably not going to view electric circuit behavior through the lens of their story - but life in general just blends together into the story On the other hand systematic thought is systematic thought. If one's narrative is about humanity's relationship with symbol and the Real, one might view the nature of models like EE through the lens of thier story.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 05:12
|
|
|
T-man posted:All behavior is political. Prester Jane posted:Please go watch the video on the Final Fantasy 7 house and then revisit this post. quote:Structuralist Cooperators will cooperate with any authority figure that they recognize and find justifications for doing so after the fact. What defines authority in the structuralist cooperated mindset is control over access to "resources"- everything from controlling access to social networking opportunities to food or energy production will make one an authority figure worth being interacted with in the Structuralist Cooperator mindset*. ("Exposure/Attention" is a resource that can make one an authority figure worth respect as well, see noted Cooperator Bill Maher's treatment of Jordan Peterson and Milo Yiannopoulos.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 14:13
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:
There’s always a bedrock of people ready to go fascist and hang others from lampposts, but there have to be causal explanations for why they sometimes sit and stew in the living room and sometimes put on helmets and march around. The nazis out in the streets now we’re pretty much the same people ten years ago. Trump wasn’t just an authoritarian pied piper, though he may well have been that. But this wasn’t his first run for president.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 14:44
|
|
|
Certainly, and something I'm learning from the Trump presidency is that the difference between "mainstream" American conservatism and an explicitly fascist movement is largely a matter of circumstances, and that the mainstream is more open to influence from what we'd consider the fringes than I had ever believed possible. I just don't think that personality psychology is the most useful heuristic for analyzing this, and when the analysis is explicitly "apolitical" that's a red flag to me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 14:53
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:Cool! Let's examine about the authoritarian personality at work, at school, in church, in art, in sport, in service organizations. If this lens is far broader than politics, let's have an analysis that actually goes beyond politics and doesn't rely on video clips of right-wing political activists as evidence or case studies. It demonstrates 100% that Narrativism can occur in completely apolitical situations. The snare to vision is in and of itself inherently a political and can occur in any political context, or even in a non-political context. quote:
Then please explain how the Final Fantasy 7 house was political in nature. Either that or you have to dispute that the Final Fantasy 7 house is a clear-cut example of Narrativism. From my perspective the Final Fantasy house demonstrates quite clearly the inherently apolitical nature of Narrativism and there is no further reason to continue this conversation because I've already clearly established the evidence that backs up my assertions. Unless you're able to somehow dispute that evidence then.... Prester Jane has issued a correction as of 16:27 on Oct 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 16:23
|
|
|
Also let me clarify that my work has basically nothing to do with personality and for the most part ignores personality as it is presently conceptualized in the psychological field. You can be extremely extroverted or introverted and still be a Narrativist for example- "personality" has nothing to do with it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 16:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 07:08 |
|
|
Prester Jane posted:Then please explain how the Final Fantasy 7 house was political in nature. Either that or you have to dispute that the Final Fantasy 7 house is a clear-cut example of Narrativism. From my perspective the Final Fantasy house demonstrates quite clearly the inherently apolitical nature of Narrativism and Look, you've come up with a very useful heuristic for examining the behaviour of authoritarian movements. But these movements do not form because of the number of Operationalist Dogcatchers or Liminal Poststructuralists or whatever the gently caress and their specific personality traits (which is what you are talking about). You have not presented evidence for this. A theory that you can apply to a situation by way of telling a story about it is not evidence. A YouTube clip of someone freaking out is not evidence. Any social science researcher you engage with will tell you this. Halloween Jack has issued a correction as of 16:40 on Oct 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 16:33
|
|