Stupid Shit | The Caustic Path

Inside me there's a Lizard and a Monkey. The Lizard is Space Godzilla from the most outer Space and the Monkey is stuck in a Monkey Ball.

So, speaking of using the Glyphs or the Glyph of Global Insight properly ... there would seem to be that issue of 'selecting' the proper channel. So, if I'm just eyeing to the left and the right ... I see a stream of red coming from the south towards me, two white Pylons to either of my sides. In the USA there's like smoking coming from a thing while being otherwise 'dormant wasteland' - and China is almost completely in the dark with some Blue-ish smoke here and there.

Occasionally there's red stuff overlayed ... such and such ... it is what it is and it kind of doesn't make sense. When I look for Squid Activity ... like, specifically, there seems to be none. But if I'm looking for this specific Squid, it seems to have originated from China. If I look for general knowledge I get to the image above and if I look for Government Knowledge then China is essentially blank with the USA being hot on fire.

And that's what I've come to label "Antichristian Zig Zag Logic".

Or some might refer to it as: Hiding behind layers of irony.

With enough Layers, You can send people around a wild goose-chase ... to the point where over time all the different shit overlaps and can be laughed off as conspiratorial nonsense while the solid structures (relationships, associations, every day regularities, implicit chain of command, ...) remain.


And it kind of always gets me too, although I expect as much. That's my Lizard Brain. I big, I stronk and skeri ... ; But a brain barely sufficient for sliding down a hill. And Dark Souls has kind of conditioned me to see Problem Solving as a matter of hindsight.

(Hmm ... I seriously start getting an asymmetric slant in my body ...)

But there's also the thing with Truth. I mean, to ... leave the intricacies of what I mean by 'truth' aside, I'm not stupid. Not by a long shot. But I'm very narrow-minded in my application of it. Ultimately ... I expect there to be a back and forth to build something strong; And assuming that truth is of mutual interest ... that's what I'm invested in.

So to come back to the Magic : The Gathering Discussion - it makes for a perfect example in one way: My Lizard Brain is activated; I have a thing and I plan to smack in on the table. There's a problem within magic that I - and others - have tried to verbalize. The general term thrown around would be 'Power Creep' - and it has not yet sunken in, for quite frankly it's asinine, how that's a good thing. It's perhaps a necessity at some points; An inevitability - and so the other side is like "Badabing Badaboom, end of the discussion". The Monkey landed in the hole and the Lizard is confused.

But so I get to let it sink in ... and eventually I saw a video about Black Holes ... and something started to click. So, "old Magic" was a more slow-paced and turn by turn strategy game; And as I started playing the game, that was still very much ... alive. That was before the phrase "Oh! Interaction!" was thrown about cynically.
And so ... nowadays Magic is a lot more about ... getting Your boardstate to the table as quickly as possible - so all You do is hope for good draw; And I find myself ignoring removal options because they're just dead weight to get to that point. Unless You're playing Shrines or some stupid shit like that, those options are virtually useless.
And so I would draw the comparison to a beam of Light as it approaches a Black Hole. Or maybe speak of asteroids and Planets, it doesn't matter. But so, whether a beam of Light can escape the Black Hole would be ... fun. You have a game, back and forth. At this point the game Logic isn't about Winning or Number go up - but about balance. A balance within which people can have fun.
Power Creep and cheap Super Combos on the other hand ... it's "braggadocio". It's some kind of escapism; Like, fear of competition where what irks me the most is how ... at some point it feels like it's designed that way. That the art of winning is here not about assembling a deck but about printing the cards.

That's at least how I feel when playing against Shrines. "New and Improved! This time with Creatures!".

It is 'funny' - but not fun.

But obviously it is difficult to properly quantize what "the Game" is - and everyone trying to do is running a fool's errand. ("There is no absolute Truth"/"Nobody can know the Truth"). Sure, but You can try to keep cards in line with an overall balance where there is a more or less clear "left or right".

Leaving me with no power to pry the scepter from the hands that'll just ignore the logic and move on anyway.


Lizard ... Touch Down.


Now I get to this weird moment where I feel like there's no argument; I would expect them to just go away and do whatever it is they're doing because ... as stated ... I don't expect much else to come from this ... but; Actually ... they don't. What I feel is like ... pushing and prying.

It's otherwise, I suppose, stuff like talking over someone when they're about to say something important; Taking away the pen when someone's about to jot down something relevant, stepping up acting like You're the one that's falling out of line ... .

The whole "I have no argument therefore let me be very stern and serious with You" type of nonsense.


And so overall I don't feel like I need much Monkey Brain at all ... I just need enough back and forth for the Truth to become unstoppable.

But sometimes a little less stupid ... would be helpful. And I'm sorry that I'm terrible at this.

Like, I only vaguely understand what it even means. The thing is that there's more to the discussion. So, often enough - to me it seems that things just dissipate and I have no more opposition. Monkey in the Hole.
And the mistake would be to argue for something that is in and of itself the "insurmountable truth" - a.k.a. 'the Problem' that the trouble-makers try to circumnavigate. And I wouldn't thin of trying to mount a proper defense or offense on those fronts because ... either I can't (because I'm not many), I run in circles or I just don't see the point. I mean ... 'balance is sacred'. That's the whole point, but so, eventually I found myself way deeper in "hostile territory" than anticipated. I'm not trying to say anything new or revolutionary, I just feel like I have a smart take on the matter. And then it kind of scares me when the argument appears to be with people that want to get rid of the Land Mechanic in the game. Which is like ... the last obstacle to singularity.
I mean, the impression there is that the game is eventually changed into something else entirely; Which is my Rodent Brain trying to figure out what's going on.


And ultimately I guess I don't know what I'd do if I eventually won an argument. I mean, there is no goal ... actually. But to replay or move on to the next slope.

I mean, I suppose I try to be social - participating in "the greater discussion", trying to (carefully) socialize or align with like-minded people ... because overall, to me, that's where the magic happens.

---

Speaking of which: Travelers. The first Season was weak. I'd even call the writing 'clumsy'. The finale with the Laser was just painful to watch. The episode where they got kidnapped was just pointless. But sure, "spoilers", setup for Season two. At first I didn't think much of it. It seemed just as silly, just another Character trying to be as annoying as possible to somehow keep the show rolling. But at all got kind of deep actually, with the finale of Season 3 being to me ... like ... a Home Run of subtle storytelling. I mean, the Moment where Trevor/0027(?) enters the room ... it's just 'Picture Perfect'. So poetic; With nothing said or hinted at ... just a nice pay-off for my little Nerd Brain.

If I'm good at starting things and they are good at ending them - all we're left with is a middle. ...

Anyway ... its weird how the two sides (speaking of Travelers) ... contradict each other and ... right and wrong folds in on itself. And I feel like I was onto something stupid, trying to make my case such that it would work within the Travelers universe.

But ... sure. I mean, most fiction is just ... simple and straightforward. You have a plot, some moral or ethical dilemma along the way and then Characters with their flaws and perks. And so, every other movie or such might serve me as a metaphor or parable, something to lend some vocabulary from or highlight some ideas; But Travelers is kind of different in that regard.
You could say that in essence it is about the runaway effect of tendencies and self-perpetuating nonsense. So, Travelers get sent back in time - eventually someone breaks protocol which creates differences of opinion in the future that lead to a bigger uprising which ... on one hand merely takes the conflicts of the future into the past - while the general self-destructive tendencies of humanity are for the most part ignored. The Travelers that are "Anti Director" may have a point, but coming from a culture in which dissent was virtually non-existent they ended up being even dumber than we are today, thus only making things worse in the short and the long run.

Beyond that there's the question of what Parameters the Director runs on. As it's stated that nothing the Travelers did made any difference; While the missions they're on are clearly focused on avoiding catastrophes; It's relatively clear that nobody understood how to formulate the parameters of 'improving the human condition'.

And I guess I should say: At this point, my case builds itself.
Or maybe it doesn't. I guess it depends on where your mind is.

But the Gnostic Dilemma here manifests on both sides. It is asserted that the Director understands what's best - that's the "Trust me Bro" on that side. But 001 is as much of a God-figure to the Faction, as the Director is to the Travelers. There may be truth and logic in their dissent, but there isn't a solution either. It's in that regard even more nonsensical. It's virtually the same - although the ones just say "nope".

It's weird however, how this logical environment makes me feel and think. I mean, I "get" - in a way - that my case is "debunked" because "Faith Based Evidence is NO Evidence" - which means, it's discarded and not debunked; For once. And that sounds almost like ... "Future Backwards Rationalization Logic".

But I have to say ... when it comes to faith I'm almost the weak link in the chain. Or maybe more than just almost.
I mean, I have 'trust' - but as I kept on stating, I think of myself as a Pragmatist. I suppose that people have a problem with that because my Faith isn't really all that pragmatic either. Which is where my Faith turns out to be kind of weak. But I like things I can do that lead to results based on which I can take further action. To me there's no "turning Faith into a Hammer" because "that's what a Pragmatist would do". So, maybe I need a different word to describe myself.
And maybe there's just a certain fear that's been implanted within me ... when it comes to Faith. I mean, there certainly is that disconnect ... in my mind ... between outward fact based conversation and the internal personal experience of faith. It's kind of like Ouroboros.

But I'm also fairly convinced - and that's part of my Pragmatism based Faith "at Work" ("trust the process") - that the most difficult step is the first one. I mean, if this conversation is taken into the social domain, we're already back at the Gnostic Dilemma. And so, yea, Faith based Evidence is NO Evidence - but internally, individually. And once this first step is made, the problem cancels itself out because, well, we're back where we started - in the pragmatic, fact based world; Just with slightly different beliefs, perhaps values, and associations that are drawn from there.

That's also why I don't like (to hear about) questions regarding what my Faith does or does not allow me to do. I wrote a few lines about Dogma here and there, which in short boils down to: I don't like it. "There is no Dogma in Gnosticism". There's only the facts of the matter. The checkpoints along the personal path to "Enlightenment". Once the Testimony of Christ manifests in You, Baptism should turn into an inevitability. And that's a personal choice nobody should be able to take from You.
And in as far as I'm "breaking" the Gnostic Dilemma by even going as far as this, I don't mean to share my faith or my experience as some kind of Doctrine. I merely share my Testimony as a Christian. Otherwise, so when restating the Gnostic Dilemma as a reason to just "leave You to it" - that would be a dogmatic application of the idea. So yea, maybe there is one Dogma in Gnosticism; And that's that there are none.

But so You might want to think of it as breadcrumbs I left behind me so that others might find "the Way" - or the way I was on ... . And how You want to phrase it out - that to me is neither here nor there. Like I just blurt out any stupid theory that comes to my mind, I also share what I think isn't just a stupid theory. But a better way of presenting it may be to understand that there are many ways, or reasons, to 'investigate' my claims. Like so, I don't know where You're coming from and I don't really need You to be coming from anywhere specific. There may be more optimal ways of looking at it; But none of that is under my control. And thus what I can do, from my own perspective and understanding, is fairly limited.

Like so, I on and off "hear" tidbits of conversations. Stuff the wind carries to my mind; And often devoid of any proper context. Well, if I see that the Character it's coming from is "a bad guy" - I might treat it with caution. If the statement aligns with my personal belief, I might find a way to write about it. And if it's both ... well.
There's the thing of "how smart I am" - or the things I've done. Like, in my understanding I've done what I could - as far as I could stand behind it - but both issues are beside the point. I may be smart - my true intellect may even be impossible to determine - but whether that's comforting or concerning ... that's neither here nor there. And sure enough I would have to say "Trust me Bro" - if You really needed to hear it, but that's like "confused girl in front of burning house" or "woman with math equationy stuff" meme territory for me.

And so I also can't but ... try and relax while waiting for someone to knock on my door. Or feel superiorly high and mighty while watching the world burn as it ignores what I had to say. it is certainly why I feel uncomfortable, or just at all not confident, in taking "the word" to someone with a specific set of demands and expectations. I mean, I don't know how to expect You to do what I would want You to do. Or what to deliver or say to get You there. That would be ... "Eshem's work". To wrap You up in some story to take You down some path where You then end up with weird people and maybe You'll start to feel comfortable there. (Eshem "stands for" sensuality - but in my understanding is just more generally "the antithesis to Wisdom". "Also more generally described as the Mistress of Self-Love and Self-Interest" ... it's an esoteric concept, in my understanding, to speak of the human condition as caught up between this and that (Logic, Reason, Ease of Mind, Social Belonging, Status Quo, ...) which exist apart from "the Demands of Wisdom". So, the ultimate statement here would be that Wisdom demands a degree of Sacrifice in that "Eshem's Work" 'sullies' it through factors that are in and of itself of no true importance to the thing itself. It's ... a philosophy or a philosophical idea.) So, as Morpheus I can only "show You the way" - although I don't really have color-coded Pills to give You. That too would be a bit ... "ungnostic". But to not overload Your mind with things too distant - it's still a somewhat good metaphor.

I mean, oh my, Clarity. I mean, I don't have a safe way to determine which things are and which things aren't ... hinging on the Ninedom. I can only assume. A Gnostic Text on the matter of Clarity would be Allogenes, "for instance". I never fully read it because at the time it didn't make much sense to me. But I've by now written so much about my Clarity, it "all" started to sound very familiar. But so there would be Gnostic Truth, like ... what its implications are for society; Which sure, is a sales-pitch of sorts. But then eventually it gets dragged into the world of Eshem and sullied based on "mortal understandings" of the matter.
I get the picture of ... how do You call it? The ... reflective pattern when light shines into a cup. "Coffee Cup Caustic"? Except in the image I just had in mind, the "path" would continue past the converging point as a thread or yarn - symbolizing the social unity that emerges past "the common point of entry". Although we would still be on our individual paths, there's a shared truth that's holing it all together. Yea, kindof like the AMP; Which ... I've tried to address in my book but I suppose a more thorough rewording might be appropriate.

I mean, I kind of got that while writing "Forsaken and Unforgiven Too" (2026-06-22) - in form of arguments for why Clarity is superior. I mean, there always was something tingling in the back of my head ... and maybe this whole Squid Nonsense was in fact just Nonsense to give me a more visceral understanding of the fears and conditions implied within "the presumed accusation", which would state that Clarity is Brainwashing - or rather the product of it.

And I suppose You could certainly visualize both sides ... either way. How we in Clarity yet steer off into individual directions, or how Eshem would try to steer You away from the path - while both would instill some sense of a "proper path forward" within You.
Both ideas also sport a kind of ... "change" as some kind of "underlying truth" that would give us some kind of purpose or place. But I suppose any argument also kind of sullies "the path". Like, there's no need to argue about "the after"; As the basis of it all comes down to the three "guiding figures" between which You choose. God, Someone Else or 'Yourself within the World'.

Beyond that, the principles of society don't change much - if at all. And so, any argument - either way - could as well be an argument for the other two. And I guess that this wraps it up rather well. I at least don't know what else to say here.