#philosophy is only thoughts

[pars-cor]

What if…

…everything

in

the Universe;

planets, galaxies, stars..

is just different stages

of ourselves..?

Maybe there’s simply nothing

to find out there?

What if

the simple answer

to all big questions;

…existential, religious, scientific,

evolutionary..

is just a whisper;

“This is all there is.

There’s no gods, no afterlife..

no aliens, no answers…

Sorry if you thought

otherwise.

Are you okay?”

— Pars Cor, sep 16, 2024 at 12:40 AM

[caeslxys]

I’ve mentioned this elsewhere but it feels relevant again in light of the most recent episode. Something that’s really fascinating to me about Orym’s grief in comparison to the rest of the hells’ grief is that his is the youngest/most fresh and because of that tends to be the most volatile when it is triggered (aside from FCG, who was two and obviously The Most volatile when triggered.)

As in: prior to the attack on Zephrah, Orym was leading a normal, happy, casual life! with family who loved him and still do! Grief was something that was inflicted upon him via Ludinus’ machinations, whereas with characters like Imogen or Ashton, grief has been the background tapestry of their entire lives. And I think that shows in how the rest of them are largely able to, if not see past completely (Imogen/Laudna/Chetney) then at least temper/direct their vitriol or grief (Ashton/Fearne/Chetney again) to where it is most effective. (There is a glaring reason, for example, that Imogen scolded Orym for the way he reacted to Liliana and not Ashton. Because Ashton’s anger was directed in a way that was ultimately protective of Imogen—most effective—and Orym’s was founded solely in his personal grief.)

He wants Imogen to have her mom and he wants Lilliana to be salvageable for Imogen because he loves Imogen. But his love for the people in his present actively and consistently tend to conflict with the love he has for the people in his past. They are in a constant battle and Orym—he cannot fathom losing either of them.

(Or, to that point, recognize that allowing empathy to take root in him for the enemy isn't losing one of them.)

It is deeply poignant, then, that Orym’s grief is symbolized by both a sword and shield. It is something he wields as a blade when he feels his philosophy being threatened by certain conversational threads (as he believes it is one of the only things he has left of Will and Derrig, and is therefore desperately clinging onto with both bloody hands even if it makes him, occasionally, a hypocrite), but also something he can use in defense of the people he presently loves—if that provocative, blade-grief side of him does not push them—or himself—away first.

(it won’t—he is as loved by the hells as he loves them. he just needs to—as laudna so beautifully said—say and hear it more often.)

[kacievvbbbb]

I need someone that believes in magic to get ahold of Batman again. He is an overly serious man that runs around in an admitted bat suit fighting a gimmick rouge gallery. And he is doing it because he sincerely believes in a better tomorrow and somewhere along the way we have lost the plot. Batman wasn’t created to punish the guilty that is actually completely antithetical to his beliefs he is not the fucking punisher.

Batman just like wonder woman and Superman primarily wants to save people! sure he doesn’t do it in a sunny way but that is still what drives him. Hell he even goes a step further and actually builds a case he’s not just waiting for criminals to commit the crime he is shutting down smuggling and trafficking rings foiling plots he is a detective! For Christs sake it’s what made him so unique and fun as a superhero.

Also His desire to save people is literally what compels him to adopt Dick, Jason, Stephanie. Cass because he wanted to give these kids a chance, to save them in ways 8year old him wasn’t. Someone who just wants to punish the guilty wouldn’t do that, And now they have turned him into a borderline physically and emotionally abusive absentee parent all in the name of making him an edge lord. Where is the heart! Where is the fucking heart in it all! Where are the kids and the bright colors and the zaniness. Let Batman and Gotham be FANTASTICAL! I’m tired of the greys and the browns.

I’m tired of “grounding a story” meaning sucking all the joy and color out if it. Also superhero stories don’t need to be grounded in your fucking abysmal reality they are literally superheroes they exist outside of reality, let them!

A story does not have to be joyless to have depth and it does not have to be nihilist to be compelling.

I am sick and I am tired of it. 😔

[rustchild]

one of the wild things about people’s stubborn insistence on misunderstanding The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas is that the narrator anticipates an audience that won’t engage with the text, just in the opposite direction. Throughout the story are little asides asking what the reader is willing to believe in. Can you believe in a utopia? What if I told you this? What about this? Can you believe in the festivals? The towers by the sea? Can we believe that they have no king? Can we believe that they are joyful? Does your utopia have technology, luxury, sex, temples, drugs? The story is consulting you as it’s being told, framed as a dialogue. It literally asks you directly: do you only believe joy is possible with suffering? And, implicitly, why?

the question isn’t just “what would you personally do about the kid.” It isn’t just an intricate trolley problem. It’s an interrogation of the limits of imagination. How do we make suffering compulsory? Why? What futures (or pasts) are we capable of imagining? How do we rationalize suffering as necessary? And so on. In all of the conversations I’ve seen or had about this story, no one has mentioned the fact that it’s actively breaking the fourth wall. The narrator is building a world in front of your eyes and challenging you to participate. “I would free the kid” and then what? What does the Omelas you’ve constructed look like, and why? And what does that say about the worlds you’re building in real life?

[jerreeeeeee]

i don’t know if i’m ever gonna write the fic but i’ve been thinking abt like. the eternal stockade. the implications. lup, a lich who was trapped in a dark featureless cell for a decade completely isolated with nothing to keep her sanity but her own mind. she has to put people in the eternal stockade. how many liches does she see herself in. how many liches started out just like her. how many liches are truly too far gone. and the only liches we ever see other than her and barry are edward and lydia. they’re certainly evil, but mad? they seem pretty sane. they’re not, like, tattered echoes of souls, they’re definitely still people. even as much of a grudge as lup surely has against them, wouldn’t they remind her incredibly strongly of herself? do they deserve to be trapped just like she was? for eternity? isn’t eternity what turned john to existential despair in the first place?

[staticrevelations]

i think part of what we just saw was ashton not realizing that their "no one left behind" mantra applies to them too. and that conversely sometimes "leaving people behind" doesn't look like people leaving someone dying on the ground cuz they wouldn't risk their own skin. sometimes it looks like someone recklessly dying and leaving all of the people who loved them behind to carry that unending grief and pain until their final day. 

[scriobh-an-iontas]

Edit: Damn it I meant "morality" fuck

[rawliverandgoronspice]

zelda truly do be one of the only fandoms where you will get dragged by fellow fans for feeling attachment towards the world and the characters

[teotoffee]

havent finished lor yet but i think these two are cute <3

[boyfridged]

i’ve been thinking a lot about what is so unique and appealing about 80s robin jay’s moral standing that got completely lost in plot later on. and i think a huge part of it is that in a genre so focused on crime-fighting, his motivations and approach don’t focus on the category of crime at all. in fact, he doesn’t seem to believe in any moral dogma; and it’s not motivated by nihilism, but rather his open-heartedness and relational ethical outlook.

we first meet (post-crisis) jay when he is stealing. when confronted about his actions by bruce he’s confident that he didn’t do anything wrong – he’s not apologetic, he doesn’t seem to think that he has morally failed on any account. later on, when confronted by batman again, jay says that he’s no “crook.” at this point, the reader might assume that jay has no concept of wrong-doing, or that stealing is just not one of the deeds that he considers wrong-doing. yet, later on we see jay so intent on stopping ma gunn and her students, refusing to be implicit in their actions. there are, of course, lots of reasons for which we can assume he was against stealing in this specific instance (an authority figure being involved, the target, the motivations, the school itself being an abusive environment etc.), but what we gather is that jay has an extremely strong sense of justice and is committed to moral duty. that's all typical for characters in superhero comics, isn't it? however, what remains distinctive is that this moral duty is not dictated by any dogma – he trusts his moral instincts. this attitude – his distrust toward power structures, confidence in his moral compass, and situational approach, is something that is maintained throughout his robin run. it is also evident in how he evaluates other people – we never see him condemning his parents, for example, and that includes willis, who was a petty criminal. i think from there arises the potential for a rift between bruce and jay that could be, have jay lived, far more utilised in batman comics than it was within his short robin run.

after all, while bruce’s approach is often called a ‘philosophy of love and care,’ he doesn’t ascribe to the ethics of care [eoc] (as defined in modern scholarship btw) in the same way that jay does. ethics of care ‘deny that morality consists in obedience to a universal law’ and focus on the ideals of caring for other people and non-institutionalized justice. bruce, while obviously caring, is still bound by his belief in the legal system and deontological norms. he is benevolent, but he is also ultimately morally committed to the idea of a legal system and thus frames criminals as failing to meet these moral (legal-adjacent) standards (even when he recognizes it is a result of their circumstances). in other words, he might think that a criminal is a good person despite leading a life of crime. meanwhile, for jay there is no despite; jay doesn't think that engaging in crime says anything about a person's moral personality at all. morality, for him, is more of an emotional practice, grounded in empathy and the question of what he can do for people ‘here and now.’ he doesn’t ascribe to maxims nor utilitarian calculations. for jay, in morality, there’s no place for impartiality that bruce believes in; moral decisions are embedded within a net of interpersonal relationships and social structures that cannot be generalised like the law or even a “moral code” does it. it’s all about responsiveness. 

to sum up, jay's moral compass is relative and passionate in a way that doesn't fit batman's philosophy. this is mostly because bruce wants to avoid the sort of arbitrariness that seems to guide eoc. also, both for vigilantism, and jay, eoc poses a challenge in the sense that it doesn't create a certain 'intellectualised' distance from both the victims and the perpetrators; there's no proximity in the judgment; it's emotional.

all of this is of course hardly relevant post-2004. there might be minimal space for accommodating some of it within the canon progression (for example, the fact that eoc typically emphasises the responsibility that comes with pre-existing familial relationships and allows for prioritizing them, as well as the flexibility regarding moral deliberations), but the utilitarian framework and the question of stopping the crime vs controlling the underworld is not something that can be easily reconciled with jay’s previous lack of interest in labeling crime. 

[maulfucker]

Yeah yeah jedi Maul au we've all seen him. But what about senator Maul au. Representing Dathomir, a neutral world like Mandalore that is still somewhat hostile to outsiders. Wearing fancy clothes that show a bit too much skin for the cold climate of Coruscant. Falling in hate at first sight with Padmé, the only other senator who brings a gun to the senate floor "just in case". The two of them having a weird rivalry because Maul doesn't trust the Jedi and is neutral in a lot of subjects that Padmé is a vocal defender of.

[fajrydust]

In love, fidelity signifies this extended victory: the randomness of an encounter defeated day after day through the invention of what will endure, through the birth of a world.

Alain Badiou, In Praise of Love

[kacievvbbbb]

But like hypothetically if I decided to make a series of YouTube video breaking down and rambling about how I think the first year trio encompass the full gradient scale of what it means to be “morally good” and how by the end of the series they have grown exponentially but their moral inner workings are so entrenched in who they are they never needed to change they just became more of who they already were.

Because initially Yuuji wants to save the world in that abstract way all heroes do, Megumi is only interested in saving those he can save and Nobara is only interested in those she wants to save. And all these are treated as morally valid by the narrative and not really flaws in need of changing but instead philosophies in need of refining and understanding.

Because Jujutsu Society as a whole encourages and thrives off a moral apathy or superiority, they are in the business of killing curses not saving lives and that ultimately raises the question of if you’re going out there everyday killing curses and inadvertently saving lives does it really matter the reason why? Or the morality behind it? Maybe not to you but to the society, maybe.

So anyway, hypothetically ….would you be hypothetically interested👀

[hadesknockedupintheunderworld]

"But why would Sonic still be friends with them why wouldn’t he denounce them or treat them like the villains they are? Why won't he realize they're just evil?"

First of all, has it perhaps occured to you that Sonic loves/cares for them no matter what they do and doesn't want to hurt them if he doesn't have to? Has it perhaps occurred to you that he doesn't see them like irredeemable villains and it's not because he's a dumb dumb idiot?

Second of all, haha keep talking and I'm gonna unroll my character analysis essay. "They're just evil" yeah that's rich. Bet you thought the ending of the series was about "redeeming" them too, huh?

[pulchrasilva]

Nobody fucking talk to me i just finished rewatching arcane and it was DEVASTATING I need to KILL

[xray-vex]

here are some of my really general a/i predictions, re: art --

techbro types who want to generate bullshit as a get rich quick scheme will saturate the market and nobody will want their worthless shit, they'll get bored and move onto the next get-rich-quick trend. remember nfts? lol

people who got into a/i because they thought it was a legit way to make art will get bored of it because it won't challenge them to do anything & it will not be gratifying in the long term - those types will either: 1.) quit or 2.) start making actual art

people who buy art will get sick of looking at a/i generated shit that essentially all looks the same. real artists making real art will get more interest again because it will seem new and exciting.

same thing with films & stuff too. i definitely think that various actors & creators guilds & other creative industry unions should do everything they can to protect their art & craft against being outsourced to a/i, but i do think that people who watch films will get sick of a/i in films the same way people got weary of CGI overuse in films. a/i in film might not go away completely, but audiences will absolutely be drawn to films that don't use a/i.

i think the basic gist of what i'm trying to say is that human beings need actual art, and the vast majority of people don't fully, actively realize how interwoven art is to literally everything in their lives. on some level they must know, because when it's missing, they miss it. they seek it out. art in general is important to the fabric of society: storytelling, entertainment, community, emotional fulfillment, etc. and people want something real, tangible. they want something created by humans.

****this is why, i'm guessing, that fan art & fan fiction are so popular. most people who create those sort of works are doing them for the actual love of what they're making. and then those works create community. humans have been sitting in groups to tell each other stories and to express themselves visually & dance together with music forever. for literally ever. all of human history. literally all. art is the fucking foundation of society, civilization, human evolution. to make art & to experience art, to some degree, on some level(s). non-negotiable. essential as food and water. i'm dead serious.

a couple of examples of similar times that tech threatened to make the "real thing" obsolete, but failed to do so:

e-readers were supposedly going to make print books obsolete -- they didn't.

streaming music services helped usher in a renewed desire for physical media again.

for awhile, both of those things did kill a lot of brick & mortar music/book stores, but there has been a bit of a resurgence and lots of small businesses.

and no, things will never go back to the way they were, but things would have changed regardless, capitalism being what it is.

it would be nice tho, wouldn't it, if digital tech presented augmentations to our need to have art in our lives constantly, instead of threatening to replace them completely?

i'm just going on pure vibes here & from what i know about art & being an artist for 35+ yrs, some tech & aesthetics philosophy, and from having worked in retail books & music/dvd sales many moons ago. so i could be completely full of shit here.

but i do have some hope that things re: a/i will get better for people -- for real, working artists & authors & musicians & performers & creators. humans need art the way they need food and water. this has always been true for the entirety of human existence.

i'm just sort of in my thoughts & feelings about art tonight and felt like rambling about it.

now i'm gonna make more tea.