#irreconciliables

[bubbloquacious]

You seem to also enjoy talking about space so here's a question about space.

How do we define space?

Like you can't define a space as a collection of points that follow some rules because no other structure is considered or created that way. When we talk about a triangle we don't talk about the specific triangle and it isn't the set of all things triangular either, it's something with three sides.

So is there any way to define space without referencing what that space contains?

It feels like there should be but I can't find it. Don't think about the question too long or it will never leave. (I'm already too far gone). Thank you.

Great question! And like many great questions one that has a great many different answers, depending on what properties of space you care about.

The standard models of what we consider 'spaces' are the Cartesian Euclidean spaces. These are sets consisting of n-tuples of real number coordinates, where the dimension of the space is however many coordinates its points have. These spaces have a notion of points, of subsets, of lines, of incidence, of length, of angle, of continuity, of boundedness, of smoothness, of intermediacy, of convergence, of volume, of polynomials, of vectors, and many more.

What you want a general 'space' to be is entirely dependent on which of these structures you would like to generalize, and for almost any two of these properties you care about there will exist a kind of space that satisfies one of them and not the other.

Indeed when a mathematician says 'consider a triangle' they are not speaking about any specific triangle, but they are in a sense talking about the set of all triangular things. They are referencing an arbitrary triangle, and they make sure whatever they say about it holds true for any specific example. From a proofs-as-programs perspective, what they're doing is creating a function that takes in a triangle and returns a proof that the given proposition holds for that triangle.

And you can definitely define certain kinds of spaces as certain sets of points satisfying some rules. Most, but not all, of the example of spaces in mathematics, in fact. The concept you'll most often see referred to as a 'general space' is what we call a topological space. These spaces are defined to have only notions of points, subsets, and continuity (which is stated in terms of neighbourhoods of points, or open subsets). From these you can also define incidence and convergence, but not length, or angle, or volume, etc. It is possible to leave out any reference to points, though. This starts with the observation that the inverse image function of a continuous transformation encodes almost every bit of data about the transformation, and you can state the properties of the inverse image function abstractly in algebraic terms. This gets you the kind of 'space' known as a locale, for which you only specify particular kinds of 'subsets', and continuity of transformations between locales.

So the answer to 'is there some way to define space without referencing what that space contains' is yes or no, depending on what you want. Certainly to define some structure, you need to specify what that structure is. In a certain sense this is 'data' that the space 'contains', but it might not always consist of actual points or shapes or whatever that lie in the space.

[anotherradfemlesbian]

I need help but I don’t know how to ask for it and don’t want to be a burden to the few people that care about me and

[s0lemnhypn0s]

(Warning for this post I'm half asleep so I might be incoherent or have disjointed topics. Bare with me, I'm trying to express my thoughts the best I can.)

(and WARNING! i discuss personal paranoias at one point during this, which include the topic of bugs and self harm)

"Billford is ironic we're shipping them ironically" "We don't actually want to see them together" "We don't think theyre a good pair" "its irreconciliably abusive" "its one sided"

ok I'm gonna put forward a take that might be poorly recieved: I think you all are misunderstanding Billford (And each character individually) and just reducing it to "bill abused ford" takes away so much of what makes their dynamic fascinating. And also claiming "Erm its a bit" while engaging in something you "recognize" as abuse only does a disservice to the topic of abuse and how it relates to the mentally ill (I will get into that later). You are treating the relationship as a joke and only acknowledging the abusive aspects when people come at you is just pretty scummy of you. Speaking as someone who experienced a near identical abusive relationship, where my paranoia was preyed upon, causing me to still suffer from the paranoia of being watched by them or that my abuser will eventually send someone after me.

In general, the existence of abuse is a complicated one and abuse is not a catch all, end all term. Not all abuse is built the same. Billford is undeniably abusive, but there is not a period after "abusive", are you picking up what I'm putting down. It's not just "Bill was exerting power over Ford and thats it"

Lets start with: We all recognize Ford is paranoid, but we don't seem to recognize Bill as paranoid in the exact same way, dare I say - Even more paranoid than Ford. I mean, ford got his "Trust no one" quote from Bill directly saying his rule of thumb for trusting people is to just trust no one. He doesn't trust others - He simply doesn't. And this is part of where Bill Cipher's manipulation of SPECIFICALLY Ford comes in.

Now I am going to speak from a personal anecdote of my experience with paranoia and delusions - Me, I will try to "safeguard" against my every little fear and belief that something will, undoubtedly, undeniably, be out to hurt me, and these safeguards are often extreme in nature. They don't make sense to the people around me, but they make sense to me. Sometimes they hurt the people around me. Sometimes, they hurt me. I believe this is the same with Bill Cipher himself. He is taking measures to make sure his worst fears do not come to pass. And because Bill is decidedly not human, only interacts with humans when he deems neccesary, those measures often take the form of something even more extreme than, idk, me shaving my head because I thought bug eggs were in my hair or trying to cut open my skin because I thought something was living in it. They take the form of something abusive (Which is also just... Something that happens with the mentally ill sometimes. I see you guys trying to separate our mental illness from our actions and claim "thats not making you do that". I see you.). Him trying to guard himself from something so terrible(facetious) as Ford's percieved betrayal ultimately becomes a self fufilling prophecy.

Not to mention, if you guys didn't notice. Bill without a doubt projects his own insecurities onto Ford. "I make you feel important" Ford makes Bill feel important. "No one loves you" He was ostracized in his dimension. "Who will miss you" He destroyed his entire home, nobody would mourn Bill, because they were all gone, long gone. "I'm sending someone to steal your eyes" Might be a stretch, but I look towards the silly straw poem "A different kind of eye doctor, who wants to make his patient blind" Obviously the use of "blind" here is metaphorical, but I feel its still in some ways applicable.

Bill very evidently experienced medical abuse and ostracization in Euclydia, something exceedingly common for those labeled as mad. (Which also brings me to the topic of people saying "I'm so glad they didn't make Bill a sympathetic villain in the book of bill" bc. Hi. I'm a guy thats experienced ostracization and medical staff forcibly medicating me in order to fix me. I think he is sympathetic actually). Not only that, Bill Cipher had a trillion years to fester in his resentment and his guilt, and you think that like. Didn't effect him at all. I really and truly beg to disagree.

Not only that: I think Bill felt a kinship with Ford. Ford was ostracized, he was betrayed by the world (and "betrayed" by his brother), he was regarded as a freak for what he was born with, just as Bill was regarded as a freak for his mutation in Euclydia. Bill thought Ford was just like him. Bill thought Ford would understand him, and furthermore would jump at the opportunity to burn the world down with him. And. to his credit. Ford does, in some capacity, understand him. As much as Ford could understand, with Bills lies within lies. Bill craves the intimacy and fears the touch. He uses fear to get Ford to love him, not only because he thinks it will safeguard him from what he fears most, but likely because it is all he knows, all he was taught. Love through fear. Our love is painful, but we only want to help. Pain in love is natural. It's right. It will only hurt a little. This is how you know we love you. He was shocked when Ford rejected him. He thought he did everything right. He had everything planned, for them to be together for eternity.

And bare in mind also that - Bill. Most evidently. Views himself as a monster. When Ford asks about what happened to his dimension, who destroyed it - Bill responds "A monster.", he says "Sixer, it would eat you alive" when Ford offers to help hunt it down. He lets his mask of jovial, mysterious mischief drop just slightly, and we understand just a little bit more of how he feels about the euclidean massacre, how he understands himself through his actions. And what he understands, is that this is just his nature. "I liberated my dimension, Stanford", a lie but not in the way you'd think. He lies, acting like what he did was intentional, as its the only way he could ascribe "reason" to what he did. It couldn't have been an accident. That is just how I am. It wasn't an accident, and I liberated them. (I wish I could go back.) And I come back to the idea of a self fufilling prophecy, because its again- That exactly. Bill decided this was all he could be, he did everything that would make him a "monster" after the accident that caused the euclidean massacre - And so, he was. A sick prognosis that he created and fufilled with his own two hands, he became the monster he and his home dimension envisioned him as.

Abuse is a complicated subject. What Bill did was abuse, yes, but I also distinctly believe it to be a case of abuse between two mentally ill people, one of which is so old, his hate his anger and his regrets, all are ancient and yet so fresh.

I feel another part of the problem is people are taking Bill at face value. Which is exactly what he wants to do because then you dont get at what hes doing all this for and why. You don't get past the exoskeleton to the tender flesh beneath. But stop taking what he says at face value. Read into it more. Analyze the triangle.

Also it might be controversial (hyperbole.) , but I do thing it means /something/ that during Ford's part of the book of bill, where Bill and Ford's relationship is recounted from his perspective, Bill is notably absent, whereas in the rest of the book, he is guiding us through it and constantly maintains a loud presence in it. You could interpret this in a lot of different ways I think, but the way I've chosen to interpret it is as a mix of shame, regret, and an unwillingness to revisit their past together. Perhaps even Bill having enough respect for Ford to not interject his telling of their story together, if you want to get real complicated about it. Paradoxal, if you will.

(Also I find the theraprism to be a most fucked "end" for Bill Cipher due to the medical abuse he experienced as a child. Something something, mad people can never escape the institutions which seek to "fix" them.)

anyway if you read through my mad sleep addled ramblings CONGRATS! i'm probably going to make edits and add to this when I wake up in the morning but i needed to get this out or id forget. billford is abusive but its way more complex than just... abuse. Abuse is a complex subject and it exists on a spectrum, for a lack of better words. and dont twist my words - That isn't saying "this is less bad abuse", this is saying "its complicated and just leaving it at abusive does their relationship a disservice"

[pocketwei]

hii do you perhaps have any dofuwani fics recommendation. I've checked out the the ao3 but I really don't seem to like anything there after scrolling thru the most kudos'd works... I feel like you (and a few other artists) get them and I wanted to read things in a similar tone as your art and so far I'm in the trenches bleeding out. like obviously no offense to any of the writers it's just that all the like modern highschool loving dad croc and etc aus are not for me... OTL I hope I'm not sounding rude and thank you for your time!

oh anon come rest your head upon my bosom.... I got you anon..... as a fellow slave to canon-compliance I, too, know the pain of sifting through pages upon pages of AUs, not that there's anything wrong with them but I just can't imagine these sickos working a 9 to 5 in a suit...... thank you for thinking my vision of dofuwani is trust-worthy, this is vain on my part but it genuinely means a lot <3 OK rant over here are the goods, in no particular order (always mind the tags but I figure if you asked me for dfwn sacred texts you're probably a fellow sicko):

that was now and this is then. by ghostwit (M): one of my favourite ever, perhaps even my favourite. About a long relationship, about twisting each other inside the skin, about being formative to each other in ways so deep and intertwined that they can't seem to tear one apart from the other. And despite it all* (*the murders and the hatred and the irreconciliable flaws and differences of their Ego (philosophical) and the unbearable, unacceptable vulnerability of understanding), they are, somehow, unforgivably and incomprehensibly, in love. *smashes head against pavement, it cracks open like an egg, spilling millions of dofuwani thoughts everywhere

no better irony by ghostwit (E): shichibukai meeting sidequest...... excellent characterisation like everything Haze writes (it's just The Best dofuwani there is..... read everything he wrote please). I'm so fond of them in that fic in a way that's like. watching stick bugs in a terrarium. You don't understand them and they don't understand you but you're just happy they're having fun. You wouldn't join in for anything in the world though.

like i need a gaping headwound by ghostwit (M): loguetown era dfwn, Haze back at it with formative years and the fresh sprouts of insanity in these two. So so so good.

nothing in this world that's quite prescribable by ghostwit (T): the opening of this fic is perhaps one of my favourite scenes ever. Vulnerability and odd transparence that only drunken disinhibition allows. Which is rare for these two. Absolutely adore this one.

honestly you can and should read everything Haze has written for these two they're just so AUGHHHHHH

black & bloody & rotten & perfect by revolvermonkcelot (M): perfect capture of the fine line between (????love, perhaps) and insanity they walk on. Absolutely fucking insane about this one, the reverence and sacrality of their whole thing, the Indulgence:tm: and permission that can be revoked (for Crocodile is mercurial in his vulnerability), but that is somehow maintained in a delicate and incomprehensible equilibrium. + absolutely incredible undertones of wani (trans)identity crisis, the imperceptible yet meaningful and constant change of the Form... Head in hands

Just a taste by marimoes (M): perfect perfect perfect characterisation, little gestures that betray familiarity. Perfect on all accounts

Swallow by revolvermonkcelot (M): my roman empire. Absolutely perfect Wani characterisation, it's The Wani for me. Exploits perfectly the essential dfwn dichotomy of "one entity tumbling down and the other rising up, meeting halfway through in the eye of the storm, in a singular moment". Classy cannibalism that ties to the no-less essential concept of consumption, to be/become whole again. The reason why they somehow stick together is because of this primordial longing for something, for understanding perhaps, for beauty sometimes, for belonging. Fcuking hell I love them so mucj

A Bird and His Cage by doctornemesis (E): read this one a long time ago but it's in my bookmarks so I trust past me's judgment and tell you it's amazing

From Dressrosa with Love by Sibilans (E, on-going): incredible atmosphere, perfectly depicts the post-golden age rotting glamour of Dressrosa. They are particularly unhinged in this one.

i wanna hurt you just to hear you screaming my name by stealth-black-leg (Kiir_Bee) (E): I'm running out of steam for long meaningful comments but this one has top tier characterisation.

That's it!! Don't forget to comment and leave kudos to give writers the love they deserve <3

[mindshelter]

not to be a downer, i'm not sure exactly where you stand on xinamiguel after that analysis post (which is v good), but after everything miguel has done it just doesn't really feel like xina should be with him at all. do u think there's any scenario where it works or do you think their differences are irreconcilable?

don't be worried about being a downer! you're asking a really good question and we're talking about miguel o'hara's Emporium Of Awful Choices, here. par for the course, and part of the fun.

short answer: things are irreconciliable—at least, they are, at the beginning of the story. alas, sm2099 is about change, and about betterment.

longer answer: yeah, miguel... does not deserve xina. on a similar vein, he doesn't deserve gabriel, either. part of his character growth is that he wants to be someone who does—he wants it so desperately—but they're both fully entitled to telling him to fuck off; if he and xina truly reconcile, it should be entirely on her terms.

so, where's the appeal? (say, aside from the fact that we're rooting for xina and want to drop the hissy, scraggly cat that ran off a while ago back on her doorstep?)

when we look at the original sm2099 storyline as a whole, its thesis (and miguel's thesis, too) states that it's never too late to turn things around and break the cycle. to be better than what the generation before you groomed you to be. the only thing that makes the pain of leaving his blissful ignorance towards a fundamentally unkind world bearable is while the world is not kind and is not loving, the people are.

narratively, xina is completely enmeshed in this idea of self-determination. her personal interests are separate from those of the state. she talks of history that alchemax is supposedly hiding, and is intrigued by the remains of a society that's long gone. she tells miguel he has to stand up for himself. tells him to be brave.

and therein lies the problem: i don't think—for a minute—miguel ever stops being the scared kid in an angry man's house. bravery, in his world, meant broken bones (it meant getting his drink spiked). safety, in his world, meant being the smartest, most powerful person in the room.

it takes a long time... almost too long, for miguel to be brave despite his terror—but he does it. maybe bravery lends to hope, and love, and safety.

and the miguel o'hara xina knows—the best friend that was dragged away from her from right underneath her feet—is someone she recognizes again. the man who snarked at her choice twencen decor comes back, and he gifts her a gumball machine.

[favouritworstnightmare]

Quiero ser libre, aunque me vuelva loca, aunque sufra como nadie, seré libre. Prefiero una libertad árida, empobrecida antes que esta adoración carente de sentido, irreconciliable con la realidad. Cuando uno no quiere amar no ama. Y yo no quiero amar así.

[laufire]

around the time I really started with the dcu dickbabs was A Thing pretty much across the board and I was curious about it. overtime my opinion on it has shifted, and I've become much more restrictive regarding how EYE like my dickbabs shipping lol. basically:

a. she has to be older than him. by a handful of years, at least. the gist of it is that I want her to obviously, visibly have life experience over him. professional experience, in particular (I would be so up for congresswoman!babs back). and also, frankly, I crave more (even just slightly) older woman/younger man ships.

b. she has to be a full-time wheelchair user. full stop. show her as desireable and desiring, as a disabled woman with romantic and sexual appetites and appeal. cowards.

c. those two above are criteria for my preferences on barbara in general, inside or outside dickbabs. regarding dickbabs in particular, I have little preferences re: how I like them depending on where they are in their relationship (pre-dating, I like my barbara a little possessive and dick not-quite-believing where this is going; dating, I like them messy and explicitly incompatible; irreconciliable exes that meant a lot to and influenced each other is my preferred state though). but one thing across the board is that they have to work well as a team, regardless of how good or bad things are between them on an interpersonal level. you have to see how well they know each other and for how long and how easy they read the other and it has to be vaguely creepy. familia in the mafia sense, as helena would put it.

[wendelsae]

I don't like Paradise Lost at all.

it's broken in epic structure, everything in Heaven is utterly hokey & laughable, something like 90% poetic filler, of course I don't agree with the premise. the decent parts are the scenes in Hell that everyone remembers but are basically pointless, and the actual core of Adam's & Eve's relationship.

it would have been better as a tragedy as Milton had initially imagined.

Dante did so much better to make a Christian epic. though of course Dante was semipagan, whereas Milton can't mention a pagan idea without a content warning. Dante knew that IHVH should be on screen as Azathoth, not as a talking man- Milton had to vent his Arianism though- and he knew to focus the poem on the human experience- among many other things he knew. and he also didn't try to mimick the Classical Epic, he wrote something different.

I think that the Classical Epic is an inherently pagan genre; the central awareness that there are men in conflict on the earth and gods in conflict in heaven, with reverence & sorrow for all, is irreconciliable with Christian and post-christian moralizing dualism. Milton doesn't have this at all, whereas Dante is worshipful to even some of the worse damned souls. and of course Milton is trying to fit the types of scenes & structure of the Æneid around a topic that's utterly unsuited to that sort of treatment.

and Dante also doesn't go on & on & on, he has a succinct, vivid, swordly style in the Comedy- less so in the earlier poems- whereas Milton goes on & on & on & on & on with no point save to conform to Poetry, and indeed most of the poem is basically this.

Beowulf is also a better Christian epic, since again it focuses on the individual human experience rather than on the counterfeit divine, has a properly epic topic (while not trying to mimick a Classical Epic, it belongs to a different tradition), and shows praiseworthy sides of Christian virtue, namely Stoic ones.

[profesor-javaloyes]

Grandes polémicas en la Historia finalmente resueltas por el “Método Ponderado Profesor Javaloyes”.-

Queridos niños, requerido por las irreconciliables partes (el que parte y reparte se lleva la mejor parte y partir es morir un poco) para poner fin a una polémica que se ha prolongado durante más de sesenta años, una vez estudiado el enorme expediente y las alegaciones de parte, acompaño la solución que pone fin a décadas de controversia y animadversión mutua.

Cuestión planteada: ¿Quién fue primero, The Beatles o The Monkees?.

Hechos probados, fundamentos de derecho y Sentencia Ponderada:

Sin entrar en fechas, siempre cuestionables, lo importante atendiendo a la teoría de la evolución biológica por selección natural propuesta por el naturalista británico Charles Robert Darwin, con la idea de que las especies cambian a lo largo del tiempo, dan origen a nuevas especies y comparten un ancestro común, afirmamos que,

Partiendo del paradigma de “¿quién fue primero el huevo o la gallina?, aplicado ponderadamente al caso que nos ocupa, la realidad demuestra que "no se pueden explicar los unos sin los otros."

Apéndice:

Acerca de la cuestión planteada sobre quienes de las dos bandas en conjunto eran más “monos”, afirmamos que esa, pequeñas criaturas, es… otra historia.

[brf-rumortrackinganon]

I think royal divorces can only happen after ten years of marriage and attempts at counselling - Peter & Autumn apparently had this, so did Diana & Charles and also David Linley & Serena

It's a good theory, but when you really dig into it, it doesn't hold much weight because it assumes that everyone divorced after only 10 years of marriage, which hasn't happened.

Margaret & Antony: Married 1960, separated 1976 and divorced in 1978 (16 years of marriage and 2 years of separation). They both had affairs but it was Margaret's affair with Roddy Llewellyn being published by News of the World and the scandal it caused in 1976 that forced the separation and ultimately divorce.

Anne & Mark: Married in 1973, separated in 1989, divorced in 1992 (16 years of marriage and 3 years of separation). They didn't intend to divorce (and announced said intentions) despite both being linked to other people (Anne with the man who became her second husband) but in 1991, it was confirmed Mark had fathered a child born in 1985 and there was a lawsuit for child support. Anne filed for divorce in April 1992.

Andrew & Sarah: Married in 1986, separated in 1992, and divorced in 1996 (6 years of marriage and 4 years of separation). They didn't intend to divorce either but Sarah had a series of embarrassing scandals that forced a divorce.

Charles & Diana: Married in 1981, separated in 1992, divorced in 1996 (11 years of marriage and 4 years of separation). By all intent and purpose, everyone was fine to let them remain married by separated but then escalating scandals over Diana's behavior (affairs, tit-for-tat with Charles in the media, culminating in Panorama) forced The Queen to require divorce.

David & Serena: Married in 1993, separated in 2020, and it's unclear when/if the divorce was finalized (26 years of marriage). There's been no reason given for the divorce but a lot of articles about the Snowdons' divorce announcement suggest it might be related to finance/business issues.

Peter & Autumn: Married in 2008, separated in 2019, divorced in 2021 (11 years of marriage and 2 years of separation). No reason given for the separation and divorce. It sounds like irreconciliable differences in the press coverage.

The only thing all of these divorces have in common is that there was a separation before the actual divorce; however, it is not legally required for a couple to separate before they divorce. The only requirement in England is that the couple be married for at least one year before divorcing. So there probably isn't a minimum requirement on a royal marriage - there may have been The Queen's preference, but I'm skeptical that was even a thing because if it was, she wouldn't have allowed Andrew and Sarah to separate after 6 years; she'd have required them to wait 4 more years. (But then one could also argue that Andrew was The Queen's favorite so of course he's different.)

There also isn't really evidence of a requirement for counselling. We know that Charles and Diana were in counselling because there's irrefutable evidence of it. We don't know that any of the other couples received counselling on their marriages. It's certainly plausible there was counselling for all of them because there isn't a whole lot we know about most of the marriages, but it's not something to use as a benchmark.

What we can use as benchmark is that 4 out of these 6 marriages ended because of extramarital affairs and infidelity that embarrassed The Queen and the monarchy. In other words, it's fine for there to be cheating or "being linked to other people" (as it was phrased for Anne and Mark) but it can't be front-page news and it can't be the married-in being "exposed" for breaking vows. That's really the only common thread here.

David's and Peter's divorces are different. Their separations and divorces played out behind closed doors, which prompts a few questions: Did no one care because they're so far down in the line of succession? Maybe. Did they learn to keep their private business quiet? No, because Peter still got busted for breaking COVID lockdown rules. Did they learn to clean up after them? Maybe. Because Peter getting busted for breaking COVID lockdown to see his girlfriend means that if there had been infidelity, the press would've sussed it out. In all likelihood, both of the 2020 divorces are not the result of infidelity or extramarital affairs.

So circling it back to the Sussexes. If we go by precedent, the only way the BRF may try to force a divorce is if Meghan embarrasses Harry with a very public affair. But even then it's not a really good predictor because of how much everything has changed. Harry and Meghan are private citizens now and we have King Charles in charge instead of Queen Elizabeth. And, well, King Charles doesn't quite have the same moral standard as Queen Elizabeth so he can't really make the same kind of demands without appearing hypocritical (and usually that's where Harry tends to get a lot of grace).

So the only thing we can really say about if or whether the Sussexes divorce is that an actual divorce will be preceded by some type of separation during which everyone will be negotiating terms of the divorce, including custody.

[aschenblumen]

Mientras que el pensar hace violencia a aquello sobre lo cual ejerce su síntesis, cede al mismo tiempo a un potencial que reside en aquello que se le enfrenta y obedece sin conciencia a una idea de restitutio in integrum a partir de los fragmentos que él mismo produjo con sus golpes; ese elemento sin conciencia se torna consciente para la filosofía. Al pensar irreconciliable se le une la esperanza de reconciliación, ya que la resistencia del pensar ante lo que meramente es, es la violenta libertad del sujeto, también se refiere a aquello que fue sacrificado en el objeto a través de la constitución del objeto en objeto.

—Theodor W. Adorno, «Sobre la teoría de la experiencia intelectual (extractos)» (lección 11, fr. 13) en Lecciones sobre dialéctica negativa. Fragmentos de las lecciones de 1965/1966. Traducción de Miguel Vedda y edición en español bajo el cuidado de Mariana Dimópulos.

[actnod]

something inside of me has opened up its eyes this thing inside of me, it screams the loudest sound sometimes i think i could burn this whole world down

𝐀 𝐖𝐀𝐑𝐌 𝐏𝐋𝐀𝐂𝐄 ; décimo quinto capítulo.

La pluma del tiempo escribe sus capítulos con la tinta de los vencedores, y en las sombras de la ciudad de Tokyo, la decadencia de la Camarilla no se escapa a su inclemente narrativa.

Para aquellos que observan desde las sombras, este último mes de confrontación entre rivales se despliega como una página más en la crónica interminable de desacuerdos irreconciliables. Una fragilidad que, con astucia, ha sido capitalizada por seres que han forjado su sendero en las sombras con minuciosa dedicación. Sin embargo, nada en este universo de dualidades es sencillo. 

El destino parece haber sido forjado con un sello ominoso para aquella que ha sido tachada como diablerista. Cada detalle en las escenas del crimen, ahora borradas de la memoria de muchos, apunta acusadoramente hacia Aiko, la líder Malkavian. Aunque jure su inocencia y propague relatos maquinados por las mentes bárbaras, sus esfuerzos se desvanecen cuando la condenan a una existencia sin lengua, relegada a algún calabozo olvidado por el conocimiento común. Si no fuera porque sus vidas están impregnadas de eternidad, podría considerarse un acto de misericordia.

Nadie sabe ni se cuestiona por qué los diamantes que le pertenecen han sido encontrados allí, quién los encontró y por qué esto ha tomado tanto tiempo cuando no se les otorga ni un segundo para pensar. 

La segunda cabeza en caer es la de Benno. A pesar de los sacrificios de los guardias, quienes han entregado sus vidas en servicio de una monarquía tambaleante, solo quedan palabras de honor que flotan en el aire, efímeras como promesas que la realidad no puede cumplir. La entereza no es algo que conozca el huído Kiyoshi. 

La marea del Sabbat engulle la ciudad. Después de siglos de codicia por ese territorio maldito, finalmente pueden hinchar sus pechos con un orgullo merecido. Los suyos regresan, y los demás son admitidos a regañadientes. Los independientes son extrañamente abrazados en este nuevo orden impuesto por la oscura sombra del Sabbat.

Un mes después, cuando el órden es común incluso en la vorágine, las celebraciones comienzan.

El “Festival de los Muertos” ocupa la segunda semana de marzo. Todos los Sabbat toman parte, y las manadas nómadas se acercan a la fortaleza más cercana para la celebración. El propósito es deleitarse en la experiencia de ser vampiro, exaltando la inmortalidad y desafiando a la muerte y la descomposición con risas burlonas. En este festín caótico, la muerte y el caos reinan soberanos.

Las festividades son meticulosamente adaptadas a cada manada, lo que resulta en ritos que comparten tantas similitudes como diferencias. A lo largo de la semana, los Sabbat se entregan a la interacción y la ingestión de vitae, mientras que las manadas cazan sin restricciones, mostrándose indiferentes a ocultarse de los ojos mortales. En esta celebración desenfrenada, la comunión entre vampiros y la caza sin reservas dan forma a una danza caótica que desafía las sombras de la clandestinidad.

Sin embargo, la falta de sorpresa es palpable, ya que la impunidad se ha arraigado como norma desde que el Sabbat tomó posesión de Tokyo. La mascarada parece ahora un concepto antiguo, con los miembros del Sabbat más impunes que nunca y tanto humanos como cazadores empezando a percibir la alerta en torno a este límite que los vástagos desafían con su danza macabra. 

Aunque algunos levantan quejas, para el Sabbat cada situación se convierte en una celebración. ¿Y qué es una buena fiesta sin muchos invitados? El último día de festividad, todos los vástagos de la zona son invitados a celebrar en el Templo Nishiarai Daishi. 

¿Creen poder soportar esta nueva modernidad?

𝐀𝐂𝐋𝐀𝐑𝐀𝐂𝐈𝐎𝐍𝐄𝐒 𝐎𝐎𝐂.

¡Bienvenides a la última actividad, murcielaguitos! Antes de tirar el telón, debemos celebrar una última vez: como usuarios y con cada personaje, hemos vivido una gran metamorfosis a lo largo de todo este viaje. Luego del cambio de poder en la ciudad, un mes desde la última actividad, los vástagos de todo el territorio son invitados a formar parte de la celebración final de la semana de los muertos que cada año celebra el Sabbat. Aquí debajo pueden encontrar diversas locaciones y juegos que pueden encontrar a lo largo del predio. 

Las lealtades son puestas a juego por última vez. ¿Será que hay alguna manada para los perdidos shovelheads? ¿Por qué los independientes son tan bienvenidos por el Sabbat? ¿Cómo se sienten los miembros de la Camarilla luego de perder a sus mandatarios? ¿Serían capaces de reorganizarse para reclamar lo propio? ¡Tanto para pensar! Qué difícil ser vástago… 

LOCACIONES: 

Shusse Inari Myojin ( x ): Entrada al Festival. Los Cainitas son recibidos por miembros del Sabbat, quienes les hacen entrega de los antifaces que utilizarán a lo largo del Festival. La variedad es exquisita: colores, tamaños, plumaje, lentejuelas. ¿La designada viene con su atuendo? ¿Con el ánimo que tiene sobre sus hombros esta noche? 

Nishiarai Daishi ( x ): En sus cercanías, tras una muralla de  arbustos, se ubica el laberinto característico del Templo Nezu, lugar que hasta la fecha no había sido compartido con vástagos fuera del Clan. Cuidado con sus caminos que a simple vista se ven tranquilos y fáciles de recorrer; nunca se sabe cuando una pared aparece allí donde no estaba hace tan solo unos segundos. 

Wisteria ( x ): Las afueras de este templo ha sido designado para los juegos. Puestos de festivales y el recordatorio tácito de los cambios está en sus rincones: en su estanque y en los cerezos a punto de desnudarse por el comienzo del otoño. Dispone de bancos y puestos de acceso de vitae en sus distintas formas. En su estanque hay peces koi asomándose a la superficie para ser alimentados. 

Bentendo ( x ): El Festival puede ser abrumador; la presencia de los antiguos y el nuevo orden en la pirámide de la sociedad causa fatiga incluso en aquellos que se mantienen alejados de su humanidad. Este santuario dedicado a Benten cuenta con un amplio estanque en el que nadan peces koi y carpas. Con una flora que parece de una sola tonalidad en la oscuridad, invita a despejar la mente y la introspección. 

Okunoin ( x ): En la eternidad, en el dejar atrás vidas y pasar tantos siglos pisando una misma Tierra, hace que las creencias flaqueen y la sed de poder les mueva. Sin embargo, los chiquillos podrían sentirse atraídos a este santuario para dejar sus deseos y prosperidades. ¿Sus pensamientos alrededor de estos cambios? ¿Compartir quejas de antaño? No parece una mala idea hacerlo en este sitio que parece no fue pisado en décadas. 

JUEGOS:

Lanzamiento de Aros: Los aros están impregnados con vitae, y el objetivo es lanzarlos con precisión sobre estacas sagradas. Cada aro exitosamente atrapado podría representar una conexión simbólica con la esencia vampírica. Además, aquellos que tengan éxito podrían recibir pequeñas dosis de vitae como premio.

Tiro al Blanco: Los participantes utilizan rifles de aire comprimido para disparar a blancos en movimiento o estáticos. Ganar depende de la precisión y puntería. Con tantos cazadores cerca, es mejor que no pierdas tan fácil. ¡Que no te vean los antiguos!

Pesca de Presas: Los jugadores pescan patitos flotantes, pero cada patito representa a un mortal desprevenido. Cada número en el patito podría corresponder a una característica o atributo del humano pescado, como la edad, la salud, la riqueza, etc. Dependiendo de la "calidad" del humano pescado, el jugador puede ganar premios especiales relacionados con el control o la influencia sobre ellos.

Dardos en Globos: Los jugadores lanzan dardos intentando reventar globos para ganar premios. Algunos globos pueden tener premios especiales.

Martillo y Campana: Los participantes golpean con un martillo una base que hace subir una pieza hacia una campana. Ganar implica golpear lo suficientemente fuerte como para hacer sonar la campana. Para destilar todo esa fuerza que han guardado por tanto tiempo.

Laberinto de Espejos: Ni el Sabbat se libra de las bromas de mal gusto, lo que hace la existencia de este puesto aún más retorcida. Quizá sea más difícil encontrar la salida si no te ves.

⦾ Este evento se dará la noche del 20 de Marzo para los vástagos, en el Templo Nishiarai Daishi.

⦾ Se desarrollará a través de starters abiertos. Una vez alcanzadas las notas deseadas, son libres de eliminar la publicación de dicho apartado. No olviden rebloguearlos en el blog de starters. 

⦾ Durante esta actividad, el código de vestimenta será semi-formal debido a la naturaleza del evento y la celebración que significa para el Sabbat. Están invitados a publicar lo que están vistiendo sus personajes y luego rebloguearlo en el blog de ediciones. 

⦾ Queremos recordarles que, a pesar de ser un grupal de temáticas sensibles, nuestra prioridad es la comodidad de todes nuestres usuaries por igual, así que les pedimos tengan cuidado con la manera con la que se abordan estos tópicos en el dash ya que se trata de un espacio compartido y pedirles, por favor, que no hagan caso omiso a la lista de triggers que se encuentra actualizada para que puedan hacer uso correcto de cada etiqueta. 

⦾ La selectividad, rol burbuja o parecidos permanecen estrictamente prohibidos. De sentirse afectade por alguna de estas situaciones, por favor siéntanse libres de acercarse a la administración.

⦾ Para las personas que aun no lo han deshabilitado, les recordamos  que sus buzones deben de permanecer cerrados para los  mensajes anónimos en todo momento y hasta nuevo aviso.

⦾ Tendrán la opción de retomar un máximo de una convo de la actividad anterior en manera de flashback. También, tendrán la posibilidad de realizar un máximo de dos privados por personaje, siempre y cuando sea en un espacio y tiempo diferente al de la actividad actual. Para esto, deberán tener por lo menos seis convos activas en la actividad que se está realizando en este momento.

⦾ Por último y no menos importante, la actividad tendrá una duración de 13 días. El día DOMINGO 17 de MARZO se publicará una importante intervención en el transcurso de la tarde, y el fin de las actividades en su totalidad será el día 22 de MARZO.

[notasfilosoficas]

“Sólo los buenos sentimientos pueden unirnos; el interés jamas ha formado uniones duraderas”

Auguste Comte

Isidore Marie Auguste François Xavier Comte fue un filósofo francés y escritor nacido en Montpellier en enero de 1798. A menudo considerado como el primer filósofo de la ciencia que formuló la doctrina del positivismo.

Estudió en la escuela politécnica de París y mantuvo diferencias irreconciliables con su familia partidaria de la monarquía y de fuertes convicciones católicas.

Después de una juventud cerrada y rebelde, fue contacto de las ciencias exactas y la ingeniería en la escuela politécnica de la ciudad de París.

Disuelta la escuela politécnica en 1816 y contra la opinión de sus padres, continuó sus estudios de forma autodidacta, ganando la vida como maestro de matemáticas.

Fuertemente influenciado por el filósofo y economista teórico socialista y positivista francés Henri de Saint Simón, Comte fue puesto en contacto con la sociedad intelectual de la época y a lo largo de 7 años de trabajo conjunto, decidieron separarse por diferencias irreconciliables entre ambos, entre ellas destaca la intención de Saint-Simon de atribuirse para sí la obra “Plan de trabajo científico pero necesarios para reorganizar la sociedad”.

En 1825 y sin la aprobación de sus padres Comte se unió en matrimonio con Carolina Massin, una joven y cultísima dama de París, y es durante este tiempo (1826-1827), que Auguste Comte sufre su primer acceso de locura, siendo llevado a un hospital de rehabilitación, del cual se iría sin haberse recuperado. 

Aunque fue atendido psiquiátricamente, un año después trataría de suicidarse intentando saltar al río Sena, desde el Pont des Arts.

Comte publicó entre 1851 y 1854 cuatro volúmenes de su obra “Sistema de política positiva” y dos años después, su obra final titulada “La síntesis subjetiva”.

La filosofía de Comte consistió a grandes rasgos en la asunción de la razón y la ciencia como únicas guías de la humanidad, capaces de restaurar el orden social sin apelar a lo que el llamaría oscurantismos teológicos o metafísicos. De hecho esta fue otra de las razones principales de las discrepancias con Saint-Simón.

La idea básica de Comte, era que todas las ciencias formaban una jerarquía en donde en la base figuraban las matemáticas, la mecánica, la física, la química, la biología y por último, encabezando la pirámide de las ciencias se encontraba la Sociología, la ciencia de la sociedad, como la última y mas grande de todas las ciencias. 

Creador de la palabra altruismo, la filosofía de Comte tuvo gran influencia incluso en la fundación de países como es el caso de Brasil, en cuya bandera se lee la frase “Orden y Progreso”, parte de la triada filosófica de Comte (Altruismo, Orden, Progreso).

El exceso de trabajo, su vida agitada, rebelde e intransigente así como el empeoramiento de sus relaciones maritales, impidieron que Comte lograra insertarse en el mundo académico, fue expulsado de la Escuela Politécnica de Paris en 1844 y un año después ya con una nueva relación fue víctima en 1845, de una nueva crisis mental, los cuales se vieron reflejados en algunos de sus trabajos posteriores.

Auguste Comte muere en París en 1857 a la edad de 56 años. Después de su fallecimiento, el positivismo se extendió por toda Europa hallando en el inglés John Stuart Mill a su máximo representante.

Más especulativo, pero entusiasta del progreso como Comte, lo fue el naturalista, filósofo, sociólogo antropólogo y psicólogo inglés Herbert Spencer, figura prominente del evolucionismo filosófico.

Fuentes: Wikipedia, biografiasyvidas.com, www.philosophica.info

[sunder-the-gold]

[MtG] How do disciples of each Color treat weaker disciples?

I covered what drives conflict between disciples of roughly equal strength, before. Now we consider power imbalance.

If there are insufficient resources for White disciples of unequal power, and no clear word from God about to do about it, each will argue that the other needs the resources more. The stronger will cite their responsibility to provide for the weaker, and the weaker will cite their responsibility to support the stronger. But if the two have irreconciliable differences of opinion in doctrines about God or law, the stronger struggles to keep respecting the dignity of the weaker while wanting to impose the ‘correct’ doctrine upon them.

If there are insufficient resources for unequal disciples of Green, the stronger will tend to prioritize its own survival, because it is natural for the strong to feed on the weak. Green makes an exception for family only when the disciple’s species is family-oriented by nature; not all species care for their young and sick. Regardless, signs and omens showing the will of the gods about who lives or dies supersedes all. But if the stronger and weaker have differences of opinion about the nature of the world or the will of of the gods, Green does not share White’s notion of the weaker deserving dignity equal to the stronger; in Green, strength is the manifest favor of the gods. So the weaker will convert to the doctrine of the stronger or suffer, end of story.

Among Red disciples, the strong rule and take whatever they want from the weak, with many human disciples making exceptions for family or lovers. Unlike with Green, Red disciples don’t care what the gods have to say — if the gods disagree, the stronger disciple defies the gods to prove their strength by smiting, or else prove themselves impotent in silence.

Black disciples don’t treat weaklings of any philosophy any better than Red disciples do, and often treat them far worse. A Red disciple might rape someone in a fit of sexual lust, but a Black disciple might rape someone simply out of sadism and ego. At most, a Black disciple might respect a weakling more if they’re also a Black disciple, but at the same time that means the weakling is a bigger threat than other weaklings.

Like White disciples, Blue disciples don’t believe that ‘power’ alone makes one more worthy than the weak. When the power of the stronger Blue disciple comes in more material forms (physical strength, wealth, social standing) than cerebral (intelligence, knowledge, a promising scientific theory), the stronger will sacrifice itself for the weaker in the name of advancing science. If he is a true Blue disciple, a noble-born, undying master of martial arts will sacrifice his life to buy the survival of an untrained urchin student who displayed a level of talent he's never seen before.

However, Blue disciples most often completely disagree about who will make the more meaningful contributions to science. When the only clear power imbalance is material or societal, stronger Blue disciples treat inferiors no differently than a Green disciple treats inferiors, though the Blue disciple will dress it up in very different language. Even the opinions of the gods may be used as last, desperate arguments when all other rhetoric fails.

[yloiseconeillants]

irreconciliation