#but mostly I just wanted to have fun spinning my hyperfixation around lol

[stormofdefiance]

True knowledge exists in knowing you know nothing || Dr. Ratio & Socrates

Okay, I legitimately laughed out loud writing that title, but listen. LISTEN.

Ratio's inspirations derive from many sources; from referencing Archimedes's brain-blast in the tub, to being doomed to have his head bonked by Newton's apple ad infinitum in his idle animation, to his ultimate line ('esse est percipi' / 'to be is to be perceived') a direct quote from Berkeley on Idealism - it's apparent that his design nods towards scholars across time periods rather than being a direct parallel to a singular academic.

Nevertheless, just for fun, I've been rotating Ratio and ancient greek philosophers around in my head and have had a great time chewing over how parallels Socrates in particular. I am in no way saying that Hoyo even thought about Socrates while they were designing Ratio, but I thought I'd share my thoughts. I think there are some worthwhile parallels to be drawn that touch on all aspects of Ratio's own philosophy regarding ignorance, the value of knowledge, and his deep appreciation of life. So, let's get into it.

Ratio is interested in humanity and curing 'ill minds with knowledge', that 'to turn a blind eye to the folly of others is not an etiquette, but a wicked worldly practice.' Ignorance is a disease - this is a concept that can be viewed through a Socratic lens. Socrates believed that that virtue and knowledge were impossible to separate from one another, and that virtue could be developed through acquiring knowledge and insight. If knowledge is virtue, then ignorance is vice. In Socrates's mind, no one would rationally choose to do something bad. People might choose to do bad things, but this is rooted in their own perception of the world - as in, someone would only choose to do something bad (for the world, or for themselves) because they believed (erroneously) that it was the right or good thing to do. To Socrates, the cure to this was knowledge: 'There are two kinds of disease of the soul, vice and ignorance.' & 'What does most harm in the world is not sinfulness but ignorance'.

To Ratio, 'If ignorance is an ailment, it is the duty of the scholars to weed it out and heal the universe'. He views his own ignorance as 'filth' that must be cleansed through methods such as reading. He also views knowledge as a method for humans to overcome their problems - 'Another day has passed. If your problem still hasn't been solved, is it possible the problem is you?' & 'You look distressed. Is something troubling you? if so, you can figure it out for yourself.' These statements sound harsh, but they also clue us into Ratio's philosophy - that through self-examination and improvement, one can overcome one's ailments.

Socrates was also known for being a trouble-maker, he was abrupt and tactless and did not care for someone's social standing nor decorum. He was also known for using what is now called the Socratic method, asking a series of questions that ultimately seek to show contradictions in the beliefs of those who posed them, and to move systematically towards a hypothesis free from contradiction. Socrates rarely made assertions himself - after all, he had no wisdom of his own. But he could interrogate others in order to expose their own foibles, much to the embarrassment and annoyance of those around him. He was once described as a 'gnat' chewing on the 'lazy horse of Athens', causing it to wake up and spring to life due to his persistent gnawing and prodding. Ratio also employs the Socratic method - 'I'm asking questions' - and also adopts sophist tactics such as playing devil's advocate and taking opposing sides (with both himself as seen a story quest, and with others as we see with his texts urging us to take up a side so he might debate us). Through questioning and interrogation, upsetting what we consider social convention and norms, we can dispel contradictions and thereby come closer to some form of truth.

To add to this - as highlighted in the replies below - Ratio’s skill ‘intellectual midwifery’ is a reference to the Socratic method. The idea being that Socrates helped those around him give birth to the knowledge that was already within them, rather than treating his students minds as empty vessels for him to fill with his own answers. Again this is beautifully echoed in Ratio - he doesn’t want to tell you how to live your life, he wants you to work out for yourself what it is you need, thus empowering oneself through self-examination and questioning.

Socrates did not believe in writing anything down. He believed that face-to-face communication was a far more effective way of communicating knowledge - which means, unfortunately, what we know of Socrates is primarily derived from secondary sources. Much of what we know about him today comes from Plato's dialogues, and Plato was known for liberally exercising artistic license.

Although Ratio is not dead, I find it interesting that his character story is told exclusively through secondary sources. To quote - '…There are no less than eight documentaries detailing his legendary exploits, and over a dozen memoirs about him. However, despite the plethora of commentaries, none of them seems to provide a compelling perspective.' It's as though there are no surviving fragments penned by Ratio's hand and all we have to go on is through the lenses of other people. This challenges us, perhaps, to try to think about our own interpretation of Ratio since secondary sources cannot be taken as a wholly unbiased account - and once again employing the Socratic method and empowering the reader to come to their own interpretation.

While Socrates left no writing behind, he was interested in spreading knowledge. Socrates spent most of his life in Athens, a city that was, during his lifetime (~470-399 BC), a hotpot of scholars, wisemen and philosophers. Athena, the Greek god of wisdom, was named after the city - her symbol the owl that is also appropriately perched on Ratio’s shoulder. Also in Athens at this time where the sophists. The sophists were a class of intellectuals who were known to teach courses in various subjects - but often for a high fee, and generally centred around the idea that persuasion and the use of knowledge as a tool was more important than wisdom or truth itself. There's some debate about whether Socrates could be characterised as a sophist himself, but, crucially, he is characterised as refusing to take payment for his teachings. He was born a plebeian (perhaps you might describe it as a mundane background.) He was known to dress in rags and go barefoot, speaking to and (often antagonising) people from all walks of life, preferring the marketplace as a center of debate than palaces or courtrooms. I can't help but think of the sophists as similar to the genius society (or at least Ratio's depiction of them in contrast to himself), cooped up in ivory towers and gatekeeping knowledge to the most privileged. He doubts if Herta's talent is always helpful to others, he compares Screwllum to a 'monarch'. Then again, the sophists may in fact be a bit of a parallel to the Intelligentsia Guild - from Ratio, 'when someone is willing to listen to knowledge that is being disseminated and circulated, a price is created'.

Socrates (or at least the Platonic depiction of Socrates) was at one time declared the wisest man in Athens by the Oracle of Delphi. Socrates balks at this assertion - how can he possibly be the wisest man in Athens when he in fact knows nothing at all? This was not a claim made of modesty - he truly believed that he had no wisdom, that he was unsure what 'wisdom' itself even was. Ultimately, Socrates concludes that the only way that the Oracle could be correct is that by actually acknowledging that he knows nothing he paradoxically is the wisest man in Athens. All wisdom, therefore, is rooted in wondering, with wondering only possible if one is open to admitting one's own ignorance.

What I love about all of this in relation to Ratio is that Ratio styles himself as a mundanite. The Intelligensia Guild advocates that 'all knowledge must be circulated like currency' and accepts 'all beings… who seek to learn'. Ratio has no time for the satisfied self-styling of intellectualism, he himself states that 'to speak knowledge, we must first make people realise their own folly.' No one is above criticism in this regard, even himself - again, to quote 'Whenever someone agrees with me, I feel like I must be wrong.' Again, I feel as though he would resonate with Socrates here: 'Smart people learn from everything and everyone, average people from their experiences, and stupid people already have all the answers'. With Aventurine, he is quick to mock his appearance as over-the-top and vapid - once again making it clear his distate for vanity and hollow displays of showiness (albeit he may have been acting for Sunday's sake here. Also, no comment about this coming from a man who runs around in a toga, lmao) Equally, with Aventurine, it is clear that Ratio is willing to learn from him - he apologises when he offends, he abhors his methodology and yet he still relies upon it and trusts in Aventurine's plan, he is drawn to him in some ways precisely because he is so different to himself. Aventurine (at least styles himself) as impulsive to Ratio's slow and steady methodology, Aventurine whose learning has been entirely self-made vs Ratio who has spent his life in classrooms, Ratio who scoffs at Aventurine's favourite games of chance yet adds slot machines to his simulated universe. And to Socrates, the experience of aporia – in all of its discomfort and disruption – is the very catalyst of wonder, and that wonder was not just the root of wisdom but also the way to live a good and happy life. There is something beautiful in this to me, and this extends to Ratio. Ratio fundamentally cares about life. For all his brashness, his lashing out against 'idiots', his harsh demeanour - he wants people to live good lives, he wants to contribute to the good of humanity - all people, even those he is annoyed by, he cares so profoundly and absolutely about life. The entire reason why he is obsessed with wisdom and learning is not to exalt or elevate himself, not as some kind of ritualistic expression of piety towards a deity, but it is instead an expression of devotion towards life itself. Ratio has a strict work out routine not so that he can show off his body, but because living healthily is living well and working out is a component of that. Even the way he fusses and worries about Aventurine, someone he is pointedly irritated by, reveals how deeply his care runs. So so much of his character is centered on caring for life, even if it is not immediately obvious.

Finally, I'd like to highlight some ways in which Ratio is not like Socrates. First of all, Socrates was repeatedly described as 'ugly' by fellow philosophers Plato and Xenophon - this is contrast to Ratio being repeatedly described as 'handsome'. This is an interesting subversion to me (albeit likely an indulgent one) as in both cases both men attempt to distance their physical appearance from the weight of their words. Ratio wears the bust for many reasons, but way to view it is that he is attempting to stop his appearance from bearing any influence in the subject of debate.

Socrates was also said to be blessed by a divine touch, and as we know, this is something that agonises Ratio as Nous has not yet turned THEIR gaze towards him.

Lastly, Ratio has - thankfully - not yet been ordered by the state to drink hemlock for all his trouble-making and blustering. Though perhaps he may someday be put on trial by the IPC if the theories that he is working alongside Aventurine to undermine the corporation are true - we will just have to wait and see.

Thanks for reading my little ramble. I'd be super interested in anyone's thoughts if they'd like to share, but regardless, I'll leave off on some of my favourite wee quotes from the Rat man:

'Even a life marked by failure is a life worth living - it is only in moments of solitude and despair, when help is absent, that fools grasp how to pick themselves up.'

'Do stay alive. I wish you the best of luck.'

[homestuckexamination]

Hey! Just wanted to, years later, say thanks for making the Class quiz. Changed my life, genuinely, in ways I don't think I can even begin to explain. The butterfly that flapped its wings.

Like.

Man.

Anyway, yeah! Appreciate it.

On the topic of an Actual Question. I've been currently obsessed with Homestuck VNs: old, new, PQ-style, unique engine, etc. I rediscovered the blog by googling "pesterquest analysis", lol.

If YOU had the power to make a Pesterquest sequel/rewrite/spinoff, what would it be about/what would you change/what would you do?

Aw, hug! Thank you! The HS VNs are fun and they inspired quite a whole bunch of fan-stuff too which is nice. If you've read Vast Error, PLEASE play Snowbound Blood it's really really good.

Anyway, I actually once planned/intended to do a Pesterquest sort-of Sequel/Spin-off. I may still have my notes around for it, but it involved Fantrolls, the Locked Timeline, and an RGB theme for multiple iterations of MSPAR. It never really went anywhere because uh, waning Homestuck Hyperfixation plus wanting to redirect those creative efforts to something else, but yeah. I just like Meta Fuckery and Fun Characters. So that'd have mostly been my aim. 😌

[lynxalon]

1. Honestly, I'm not sure how you plan on tying this into your story, but I think if you latch onto words and pictures in a certain way? Like, with word associations, establish early on what's associated with what. For me, certain words have very specific connotations and meaning to the point where I can't even make myself use those words in a more 'normal' context because it completely scews the meaning of the sentence and is Wrong. With pictures you could show it as words being tied to specific images. Mentioning a cafe brings up memories of a cafe that a loved one took him to, talking about animals brings up images of going to a zoo, etc. I'm not sure how else to help on this one tbh but I tried!

2. Emotional? Check. Depressed? Check. Drunk? Um... No? Personally, (and I think you're talking about alcohol) I can't drink. Well, I can but don't want to for many reasons. All items are associated with memories for me, so alcoholic drinks bring up memories of my father coming home drunk or the times my mother and her friends were drinking. Plus, alcohol is just gross. I suppose anyone could be an emotional/depressed drunk, but. Not me lol.

3. I actually recognize when I love someone/am in love very easily! Emotions can be pretty intense for me, especially happiness and sadness. When I'm happy I physically can't contain it! I'll flap or jump around until I'm breathless and red, and I kinda think of that as helping me bring my happiness to a normal level so it doesn't feel like I'm about to burst! And sadness causes bad stimming behavior to I try to redirect that into better stims or I write or distract myself. So, now that I've explaines that! Love is kinda like happiness, only it's more. Content? I guess. Instead of my heart racing and feeling like I'm going to burst, it feels like I'm warm and going to cry. It feels nice tbh because I associate crying with tbe friends who have comforted me during those times. So ye, a good feeling!

4. I try to 'make up' for it in other ways, for example hanging out with friends a lot. Spending time with people is really important to me and it also shows how much another person cares, but it's also difficult because I Want to initiate some form of contact, but it's so overwhelming that I can't think when someone's touching me. It's not fun and it's kinda awakward to freeze when friends hug me or something. It makes me sad. Touch is just. Difficult.

5. I've actually never mourned a person before. There are two emotions that I just don't feel: jealousy and grief. Specifically grief related to mourning someone. I have mourned for my pets though. When someone dies it's just logical to me and I think, "Oh, yeah this is a thing that happens." It's not a big deal. If I cry about it, it's usually months or years after the death has occurred. (I consider this the time when it 'hits' and when it hits I usually don't cry about it again unless it's about a pet.)

6. Hyperfixating and special interests are different so I'm not sure which you mean. SpIns (Special Interests) are Good. They help me process my emotions and help keep me happy so I don't fall into a depressive rut too easily. Kinda like in point three, happiness is overwhelming so sometimes I need long breaks from SpIns so I don't tire myself out or have a fall out with that SpIn. Hyperfixating can be good, but for me it's mostly bad. Hyperfixating on a story I'm writing? Good! Fun! I get things done and that makes me happy! Hyperfixating on cleaning? Bad. Not fun. Hurts me because I physically cannot stop and eventually had to be restrained. Once no one could get me to stop and I kept going until I was cleaning the walls and the roof, anything I could get to. By the end of the day I was so exhausted and in so much pain, I felt sick, but I still kept cleaning. It bothers me because people comment on how they wish they could hyperfixate on cleaning and like. No. No it's not good. It gets results but the cost is horrible.

To further elaborate, hyperfixating is like. Okay, y'know Peter Pan? The Disney animation movie? Well Tinkerbell is small and I saw it somewhere that fairies only experience one emotion at a time, so what would be a normal emotion and normal reaction ends up seeming out of proportion. It's kinda like that? Like in that moment exactly One (1) thing matters and that is getting done what you're doing. Sometimes it can be on fixing a cup of coffee. Once I thought about my old writing and proceeding to dig everything out of my closet and reread aaaaaaall of my old stuff, and this was at like 2am. When I'm hyperfixating, it's best to let me run my course unless it's harmful.

7. I'm not sure how well I can answer this one because I'm mostly verbal. If I didn't have my anxiety pushing me to speak (I feel rude if I don't so I often force myself) then I'd probably be almost entirely nonverbal. Things like texting are easier, which is kinda why I write such long paragraphs XD I'm kinda making up for how little I talk irl. I go days without speaking cause there's just no one to talk to. But yeah, there's not much I can add to this one to help.

I hope this helped some and good luck with NaNoWriMo!!! 😊💚

I have some questions about ASD

I have an irl friend with autism who’s been an absolute saint and answered a lot of my questions about autism, but there are some things he can’t/isn’t sure how to answer so I’m turning to the autistic community on here!

The main character of my novel for NaNoWriMo this year is a high-functioning autistic adult male. My irl friend has helped me figure out basic mannerisms and simularities shared by autistic individuals, and I’ve gotten other symptoms from research. However, I still have unanswered questions. This’ll help me out a lot, and it’ll help me do my best to accurately portray someone with autism!

1. The story is in first-person POV. Harrison (that’s his name) thinks in word associations and pictures. He can vividly picture a scene happening in his mind just by being told a few things about it. How do I describe that in writing?

2. Can autistic people be emotional/depressed drunks?

3. What might being in love feel like to an autistic person? How would you (the person with autism) recognize it?

4. What are ways touch-averted autistic people show affection?

5. How would a person with autism mourn the death of a loved one?

6. What is a hyperfixation like?

7. What would cause a previously nonverbal autistic person to speak (Like temple grandin)?