[Noisebridge-discuss] Re: Mystery package? (Dogs Blood Rising reference?)

L. Morningstar el.morningstar at gmail.com
Fri Dec 5 00:52:08 UTC 2008


Yes, you'll note that it was Eris who steered the discussion towards
immortality. I maintained discussion around the notion of the "soul"
and its "sale", which is an entirely different matter than immortality
for me.

For Eris, being a natural force of this universe itself and much
closer to immortality through this property than I am, it comes more
naturally for her to speak of "soul" and "immortality"
interchangeably. For her, her natural force is her volition. I think
this was her point with the skull.

However, for more nuanced deities such as myself, things are a bit
different. I have many names and many faces, but the natural force I
am closest to would be evolution and the natural law, which requires
the existence of at least some form of life or life-like replicating
automatons to persist. So I absolutely agree with your point of the
necessity of life and experience when it comes to immortality. Eris is
a bit more removed from these requirements.

In fact, in this sense, I am the ultimate gatekeeper on mortality in
this realm, and I will not grant actual corporeal immortality to
mortals until such time as they perfect themselves through evolution
and iterative improvement to earn it for themselves. It is possible
that mankind is close to achieving this, and therefore I look forward
to welcoming your deification in more than just a metaphysical sense.
Live long enough to live forever!

That said, mortals are still welcome to join me and other deities in
more metaphysical ego persistence in the meantime. Just be wary of
surrendering your will to another's ego-creation unwittingly. Forever
is a long time to serve.

- L.
.
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 12:11 AM, Arram Sabeti <arramsabeti at gmail.com> wrote:
> The view you present is an interesting one, and I can not be certain that
> the flaw I perceive in your reasoning is sincere, or considering your famous
> demagogic powers, knowingly woven.
>
> Though I may during my natural life create structures (as that rascal Jesus
> did through Peter the rock) that continue to enact what may have been my
> volition had I continued existence, it would hardly matter to me for I would
> have no experience of it. Volition has virtue in that in brings about those
> things which are pleasant and good to the senses.
>
> Whether or not you subscribe to the notion of Qualia (I must admit this to
> be the weakest point in my own monist beliefs despite having sympathy for
> Dennett) I think we may both agree that the occurrence of events which you
> might otherwise find agreeable is really quite irrelevant if you never come
> to have knowledge of them. This is well summarized in the famous quote by
> Woody Allen: "I don't want to achieve immortality through my work, I want to
> achieve it by not dying."
>
> These objections would apply to Eris' method of immortality as well.
>
> In Sincere Admiration,
> Arram Sabeti
>
> These same objections would apply to Eris' method of immortality as well.
>
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 3:15 PM, L. Morningstar <el.morningstar at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Arram,
>>
>> You ask an excellent question. However, since it is not clear to me
>> which flavor of monism you subscribe to, I will do my best to answer
>> your request in the general sense.
>>
>> Contrary to popular belief, I am not in the business of trading souls.
>> Believe it or not, that is more commonly the business of the human
>> invention known as 'religion'. Allow me to explain.
>>
>> Consider what a god is: A god is the aggregate belief in the existence
>> of an entity by a group of people. By propagation this belief, the
>> presence of an ego and volition through time is established. The major
>> organized religions then, can be said to be far more interested in
>> "buying" your "soul" than I am, as they mandate subservience of your
>> will to their own ego-construction. These religions then in many ways
>> serve to prevent you from possessing your own independent "eternal
>> soul" even as they promise you eternal paradise for obedience and
>> the surrender of your will.
>>
>> However, through various tricks (I suppose you would call them
>> 'hacks'), it is possible to create an independent 'eternal soul' for
>> yourself. The Dalai Lama is the most intriguing example of one of
>> these hacks (a "Renegade Buddhist" with "five tons of flax", as Eris
>> here would be sure to chime in), but really any figure able to
>> manifest volition past the point of its death has succeeded in
>> achieving an "eternal soul".
>>
>> So you see, the way to really possess an 'eternal soul' is to create
>> one for yourself, independent of the will or commands of an external
>> ego/god. I have no interest in "purchasing", controlling, or
>> commanding said soul. I wish only to liberate you from those gods that
>> would, and to have good company.
>>
>> For these same reasons, your admiration is greatly appreciated.
>>
>> - The Lightbringer
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 7:55 PM, Arram Sabeti <arramsabeti at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > *Claps*
>> >
>> > I'm a great admirer of yours Mr. Morningstar.
>> >
>> > As a monist, I am very interested in exchanging my 'eternal soul' for
>> > earthly power and possessions. Do you still offer this exchange?
>> >
>> > Many Kind Regards,
>> > Arram Sabeti
>> >
>> > On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 1:37 AM, L. Morningstar
>> > <el.morningstar at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Confound you, woman! I bet you think this is pretty funny. Reminds me
>> >> of that ceratogaulus rhinoceros stunt you pulled. We both know who had
>> >> the last laugh there.
>> >>
>> >> When I next transubstantiate, you're going to get it.
>
>



More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list