|
|
Post by Ken (INTJ) on Sept 16, 2018 7:58:27 GMT
Please rank Colloquium posts from 1st to 3rd. The winner of this Colloquium round will have the right to do a roll call for a new research team. Rightist Art will continue until there are no more volunteers for Rightist Art.
|
|
|
|
Post by slotahimself (INTP) on Sept 16, 2018 15:32:47 GMT
1. Ken - I think that was one of the most interesting things I've read in a while and would like multiple rounds of research on it. I was questioning and thinking of that model in the vein of a post-sovereign or post-nation context and think a round or two with you at the helm would really get the ball moving on research.
2. Aarvoll - I think this should be a long-term view for all of us in some way or another. The essay was well written and structured, and I came out of it with questions not due to lack of clarity in your writing, but from my lack of understanding regarding the concepts. I do think your connection with an expanded integralism to the concepts in Langan's CTMU and linking that to whether things are ontologically monadic or not was fascinating as it was, let alone exploring on how to institutionalize or systematize it educationally (if I even understand you correctly here) is worthy of earning a PHD in something big brain.
3. Napoleoff - he conceded that he didn't have anything major enough to be competitive, but I liked his question and I posted about having a more open and loose part of the forum maybe for just some unstructured discourse to float ideas and minor questions around. <tmui style="top:1px; right:1px;"></tmui>
|
|
|
|
Post by Ken (INTJ) on Sept 16, 2018 18:50:11 GMT
1st- Aarvoll. In a way, this was a great response to Slota, because it thoroughly investigated the "problem of constellation" which Slota brought up. This post was extremely important for an understanding of the necessary future direction of any decentralized emergent academic system.
2nd- Slotahimself. The idea of having an overarching theme is important. I view things from a tree model -- we took the seed of an idea, and now we have three branches: Organization, Colloquium, and Rightist Art. With Organization representing the main trunk which supports the entire structure, and Colloquium representing the new shoots which either become new branches or die out, then a project like Rightist Art is our first leaf or flower. Eventually we should like to have hundreds of branches growing out of branches, each one clustered with like kinds. Currently our tree seems unnatural, since it only has one trunk, one branch, and one flower. However, as we grow in size, it should grow to seem more organic.
3rd- Napoleoff.
|
|
|
|
Post by Napoleoff (INTP) on Sept 16, 2018 22:50:37 GMT
1: Aarvoll - His piece advocating "A New Integralism" inspired by Catholic Integralism (the Catholic form of which I was already tangentially-aware and somewhat sympathetic to) is an extremely sophisticated, cogent and imaginative explication of the exact type of system which prior to reading Aarvoll's post I had been vaguely aware of wanting to see established. He gave me in spades what I had already been thinking, which he couched in his most abstruse language so far on this forum which for me as a newcomer to philosophy and certain other of these subjects posed a fun challenge to grasp which I feel helped me to grow a little bit as a thinker myself. Quoting the bouncer Chris Langan and everything, wow. On a serious note, the titular truth-based Integralism and the steps proposed to get there (using a nodal cybernetic super-brain to create a massive multifaceted, aiming at omni-perspectival, diagram which is accessible enough to be used as a pedagogical tool by humans of different competency and engagement levels and which would help create said titular Integralism and fund itself into the bargain) are so out-there, so ambitious and so in tune with my own view that I have to give this piece first place.
2: Admin/Ken - Some fantastic ideas here too, so good that I wasn't sure whether to give my first-place vote to Ken or Aarvoll. Concentric circles of identity, showing how morality is whiteness and vice-versa, the differentiation diagram, his resurrecting of physiognomy and some other points combine to create a set of ideas in my opinion separated by a coin-toss from the first-place post. It was a hard decision, I'll tell you that. In fact it's probably only because Aarvoll's post was so in tune with my own intellectual tendency that I put it first.
3: slotahimself - A couple of interesting and possibly actionable suggestions that I don't have time to write about at present.
Edit: Just to make it clear, I want to see the first and second place ideas implemented in full. Both of them. Synthesized if possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by aarvoll (INTJ) on Sept 17, 2018 22:19:28 GMT
1. Ken
2. Slotahimself
3. Napoleoff
|
|
|
|
Post by Ken (INTJ) on Sept 17, 2018 23:59:44 GMT
Here's the simple tally:
Aarvoll= 2+3+3 = 8
Admin= 3+2+3 = 8
Slota= 2+1+2 = 5
Napoleonoff= 1+1+1 = 3
The winner of the colloquium gains the right to originate or resurrect a research team. Since Admin is already running a research team (and forfeits starting a new one), this tie means that Aarvoll gains the right to do so, but may forfeit that right to Slota if he so chooses.
|
|
