PDA

View Full Version : Timecube



BareBones
03-09-2009, 05:13 PM
blimey.

http://www.timecube.com/

Mr. Tea
03-09-2009, 05:24 PM
It gives me warm fuzzies to know that this website is still up after all these years. It's like the great-grandpa of all mad conspiracy bollocks.

SomethingAwful did a pisstake which, although quite good, is actually kinda redundant next to the original:

http://www.somethingawful.com/fakesa/learning_triangle/

nomadthethird
03-09-2009, 06:21 PM
Someone I know found a briefcase (on Bedford Avenue) full of loose papers covered in writing very similar to this. He's weird himself so he kept it and framed some of it.

The disorganized thought processes and delusional thinking here are umistakeable markers of paranoid schizophrenia. Graphomania general is common in the advanced stages of schizophrenia and is often co-morbid with a few other mood disorders. You have to feel sorry for someone who is this sick, if indeed it's for real and not just the work of some bored proto-/b/tard.

There are some eclectic bits of religious dogma thrown into the mix along with anti-religious sloganeering and a lot of nice graphs. Also typical.

zhao
03-09-2009, 06:41 PM
He's weird himself

for some reason i find this really funny.

Mr. Tea
03-09-2009, 07:29 PM
The whole thing is a bit Reza Negarestani-meets-Ralph Wiggum, don't you think?

zhao
03-09-2009, 08:03 PM
Reza Negarestani-meets-Ralph Wiggum

haha

swears
03-09-2009, 08:20 PM
I like the way it just goes on forever and ever and then at the bottom: "NEXT PAGE" :D

nomadthethird
03-09-2009, 09:11 PM
The delusions here aren't really about conspiracies, and they're almost never "just nonsense"...

I have no credentials and I haven't examined this person but here's my best guess (based on a hypothetical "real guy" who sincerely typed all that stuff):

1) probably abandoned by female caregiver, when old enough to remember the event-- hence the hostility toward "Queer" ONEism, or a vision of a yang Father God with no yin Mother God. Most likely taken care of by biological or step father who was stern and distant.

2) possibly abused by a priest or clergymember--hence the religion is TEH EVIL.

3) tough time in school, bullied, possibly learning disabled--hence school is TEH EVIL.

4) possible sexual dysfunction/extreme difficulty in interpersonal relationships. Obvs.

zhao
03-09-2009, 09:51 PM
The delusions here aren't really about conspiracies, and they're almost never "just nonsense"...

I have no credentials and I haven't examined this person but here's my best guess (based on a hypothetical "real guy" who sincerely typed all that stuff):

1) probably abandoned by female caregiver, when old enough to remember the event-- hence the hostility toward "Queer" ONEism, or a vision of a yang Father God with no yin Mother God. Most likely taken care of by biological or step father who was stern and distant.

2) possibly abused by a priest or clergymember--hence the religion is TEH EVIL.

3) tough time in school, bullied, possibly learning disabled--hence school is TEH EVIL.

4) possible sexual dysfunction/extreme difficulty in interpersonal relationships. Obvs.

wow. can you do that with my myspace page?

nomadthethird
03-09-2009, 10:26 PM
wow. can you do that with my myspace page?

I can do it with everyone, and I do. In my head, all the time. It's a fun game.

luka
04-09-2009, 01:30 AM
although possibly slightly reductive...

zhao
04-09-2009, 07:58 AM
and surely there is a list to be made based on how much someone enjoys making such lists... or the kind of lists they make about others.

then it gets super meta fun/convoluted! (perhaps akin to 2 mirrors facing eachother)

sufi
04-09-2009, 10:42 AM
me & rewch stumbled on this awesome list just last night;

master list guide (http://www.marvunapp.com/master/earthteaz.htm#numbered)

somebody has collated the parallel earths across the universes of scif-i, starting with both DC & marvel then adding other scifi genres (dr who, luther arkwright, westerns, conan ... who know what else, its's longgggg) to create like a universal list of parallels (sic - logical fallacy) from Earth-00000 to Earth-989192 & onwards

the only universe that seems to be missing is this one (but i guess timecube covers that)

any comments on this collater's brain?? :cool:

Mr. Tea
04-09-2009, 11:04 AM
me & rewch stumbled on this awesome list just last night;

master list guide (http://www.marvunapp.com/master/earthteaz.htm#numbered)


Wow, that page is OCD-licious!

Talk about 'labour of love'...


EARTH-165 - "Ace" Rimmer killed by Neutron Tank
--Red Dwarf

:)

Edit: haha, this one sounds great:


Earth-2532 - X-Men have no powers, but still help others as doctors.
--X-Men: Die by the Sword#3

nomadthethird
04-09-2009, 01:45 PM
and surely there is a list to be made based on how much someone enjoys making such lists... or the kind of lists they make about others.

then it gets super meta fun/convoluted! (perhaps akin to 2 mirrors facing eachother)

Of course there is! Do you think I don't constantly analyze my every thought and action? I'm not exempted from my own games.

I bet if you searched you'd find some good Trekkie pages.

Aren't comic book people and sci-fi people sort of legendarily obsessive-compulsive/autistic? I mean isn't that a prerequisite to really enjoying comic books or am I being mean right now? I have no idea. I like the pictures but I don't own any.

zhao
04-09-2009, 03:11 PM
Of course there is! Do you think I don't constantly analyze my every thought and action? I'm not exempted from my own games.

I bet if you searched you'd find some good Trekkie pages.

Aren't comic book people and sci-fi people sort of legendarily obsessive-compulsive/autistic? I mean isn't that a prerequisite to really enjoying comic books or am I being mean right now? I have no idea. I like the pictures but I don't own any.

do you systematically evaluate your own cognitive biases before approaching an analysis? it seems like subjective perceptual habits would get in the way too much for any kind of accuracy, unless the psychiatrist methodically, as much as is possible, monitors his/her own process.

comics? huh? how did we get to comics? regardless, i think collectors in general, of anything, are obsessive compulsive. where as someone who merely enjoys comics or books or films or music is not necessarily...

i also think ALL artists and creative people are obsessive compulsive to a degree. it just kind of comes with the territory.

nomadthethird
04-09-2009, 05:03 PM
do you systematically evaluate your own cognitive biases before approaching an analysis? it seems like subjective perceptual habits would get in the way too much for any kind of accuracy, unless the psychiatrist methodically, as much as is possible, monitors his/her own process.

comics? huh? how did we get to comics? regardless, i think collectors in general, of anything, are obsessive compulsive. where as someone who merely enjoys comics or books or films or music is not necessarily...

i also think ALL artists and creative people are obsessive compulsive to a degree. it just kind of comes with the territory.

What are you talking about here?

Yes, psychiatrists and psychologists "systematically evaluate" their own biases using the null hypothesis and huge data sets. It's called the scientific method, and at the moment, there are MOUNTAINS of data supporting a correlation between early childhood trauma and the early onset of certain types of mental illness. That, and a huge amount of evidence for hardwired genetic markers/genetic susceptibility.

What exactly here looks like it's a product of my personal biases and not simply the application of a set of principles from a discipline that have very little to do with me personally?

STN
04-09-2009, 05:08 PM
My cousin actually emailed this timecube cove, to tell him he was full of shit (this is years ago), and got an angry reply back, challenging him to public debate, which he declined, thus reaffirming the RIGHTNESS of timecube.

nomadthethird
04-09-2009, 05:09 PM
i also think ALL artists and creative people are obsessive compulsive to a degree. it just kind of comes with the territory.

i also think that NO group is entirely homogenous. Ask any anthropologist.

nomadthethird
04-09-2009, 05:12 PM
My cousin actually emailed this timecube cove, to tell him he was full of shit (this is years ago), and got an angry reply back, challenging him to public debate, which he declined, thus reaffirming the RIGHTNESS of timecube.

OMG...

I mean, the guy is onto something with this whole quadratic fixation, but he's doesn't quite get there...think about it guys...four is better than three...cubing better than triangulation (http://www.goddirect.net/mindemtn/writings/january/psytrang.htm)...

Schizophrenics are good at resisting Oedipalization. But what's funny about this guy is how desperately he seems to long for something like it, but just a new way, a BINARY CUBE of OPPOSITES CREATING.

swears
04-09-2009, 05:22 PM
Aren't comic book people and sci-fi people sort of legendarily obsessive-compulsive/autistic? I mean isn't that a prerequisite to really enjoying comic books or am I being mean right now? I have no idea. I like the pictures but I don't own any.

I loved sci-fi as a teenager (still do a bit), but I was more interested in the "big ideas" than pursuing every last thing in a particular series/genre or collating tons of nose-picking trivia. I couldn't imagine sitting down to read the legions of crummy William Gibson copyists just because I liked Cyberpunk as a concept.

zhao
04-09-2009, 05:32 PM
What are you talking about here?

Yes, psychiatrists and psychologists "systematically evaluate" their own biases using the null hypothesis and huge data sets. It's called the scientific method, and at the moment, there are MOUNTAINS of data supporting a correlation between early childhood trauma and the early onset of certain types of mental illness. That, and a huge amount of evidence for hardwired genetic markers/genetic susceptibility.

What exactly here looks like it's a product of my personal biases and not simply the application of a set of principles from a discipline that have very little to do with me personally?

hey hey, just making conversation here, none of it is about you. and i never said childhood trauman and mental illness are not linked? wha?

nomadthethird
04-09-2009, 05:32 PM
I loved sci-fi as a teenager (still do a bit), but I was more interested in the "big ideas" than pursuing every last thing in a particular series/genre or collating tons of nose-picking trivia. I couldn't imagine sitting down to read the legions of crummy William Gibson copyists just because I liked Cyberpunk as a concept.

I really like sci-fi in theory but in practice I'm usually disappointed by the caliber of the writing, and the high faluting stuff other people pull out of it is not what I usually read on the page. (I feel the same way about jungle, fwiw--I like what everyone says they hear in it conceptually, I just don't hear that same thing when I listen.)

As for psychologizing others...we all play that game. (Lacan called this the realm of fantasy [essentially a form of projection], but I don't agree with him here since we actually have access to the real world and we can test hypotheses.) It's just that some of us have more (and more reliable) data than others to work with.

Mr. Tea
04-09-2009, 06:01 PM
although possibly slightly reductive...

You're saying that because you're afraid you don't live up to your father's expectations, aren't you?

I just know these things.

massrock
04-09-2009, 06:09 PM
Schizophrenics are good at resisting Oedipalization.
Hey nomad, this is probably tiresome but out of interest could you say at all what for you is meant by this? In relatively simple terms? :o

Or anyone with an interpretation of course.

First of all what does 'oedipalization' entail? Presumably there is a value judgement involved, i.e. oedipalizaton = not so good, resistance = desirable. So what is it and how is it resisted by schizophrenia? What can be learned from that, how can it be applied? I guess that's what those books are about eh? But if it's a useful idea can it at least be concisely stated why and in what way without resort to too much specialised language?

Thanx.

massrock
04-09-2009, 06:21 PM
I think I found some OK links to make start so not to worry. Seems fairly central to a lot of stuff that floats around from various bloggers etc. Almost articles of faith among some.

Mr. Tea
04-09-2009, 07:08 PM
Graphomania general is common in the advanced stages of schizophrenia

http://www.dissensus.com/showpost.php?p=201775&postcount=773

nomadthethird
04-09-2009, 07:36 PM
Hey nomad, this is probably tiresome but out of interest could you say at all what for you is meant by this? In relatively simple terms? :o

Or anyone with an interpretation of course.

First of all what does 'oedipalization' entail? Presumably there is a value judgement involved, i.e. oedipalizaton = not so good, resistance = desirable. So what is it and how is it resisted by schizophrenia? What can be learned from that, how can it be applied? I guess that's what those books are about eh? But if it's a useful idea can it at least be concisely stated why and in what way without resort to too much specialised language?

Thanx.

"Value judgments" are made all the time, everyday, in every discipline, in every walk of life, in minds, everywhere, all the time. I'm impatient with anyone who pretends that they somehow avoid making these.

Oedipalization is the process through which a child enters into "adulthood"--i.e. heterosexual genital sexual-orientation--by means of slow inculcation via interaction with the parents in a society where the family unit (the most basic unit of social organization) is based on a system of legal, patriarchical "monogamous" marriage. [There are plenty of societies that don't follow this model. Most of them are non-western bands or tribes.]

And no, nobody says Oedipalization is simply "not so good", but that it's an apparatus of domination in a particular culture. Basically, according to certain psychoanalysts, schizophrenics are one particular group with "pathological" condition in this culture who seem to be a resistant to growing into what Freud calls the "genital" stage of psychosexual development.

Beyond this you'd have to do some reading.

nomadthethird
04-09-2009, 07:37 PM
You're saying that because you're afraid you don't live up to your father's expectations, aren't you?

I just know these things.

Search schizophrenia and childhood trauma on pubmed. I dare you.

For that matter, search google in general, you'll find plenty of studies and literature. You'd probably have to pay for the better stuff, but there are abstracts floating around.

I like how your reaction to Luka's "reductive" charges was to basically flip the script and claim that psychiatry/psychology are inexact sciences, which they aren't. Unless medicine itself is inexact, by some definition of inexact that varies pretty drastically from mine.

Mr. Tea
04-09-2009, 07:53 PM
OK, so Oedipus killed his dad and screwed (married, in fact) his mum, amirite? So Freud had this theory of the Oedipal complex that boys supposedly go through as they grow up. AFAIR there's an analogous complex for girls (the Elektra complex, IIRC). So far, so (reasonably) common knowledge. But what I don't get is how 'Oedipal' seems to have become, in psychoanalysis circles, synonymous with 'anything to do with the traditional family'. At least, that seems to be the way you use it. I'm just kind of curious as to how this usage came about.

nomadthethird
04-09-2009, 08:05 PM
OK, so Oedipus killed his dad and screwed (married, in fact) his mum, amirite? So Freud had this theory of the Oedipal complex that boys supposedly go through as they grow up. AFAIR there's an analogous complex for girls (the Elektra complex, is that right?). So far, so (reasonably) common knowledge. But what I don't get is how 'Oedipal' seems to have become, in psychoanalysis circles, synonymous with 'anything to do with the traditional family'. At least, that seems to be the way you use it. I'm just kind of curious as to how this usage came about.

Yeah, the Freudian idea is that the original cathected object (or object of libidinal desire) for an infant is the mother (or the mother's body), and that it's a long slow process to go from "I'm the center of the universe, mom is magic and makes everything all better" to full-fledged adulthoood, where you're expected to take up a mate and reproduce and start this process over again. Personally, I think the idea that Freud intended something literal with the Oedipus complex and thought that children fantasized about intercourse with their parents is a slight distortion and confusion of the Oedipus complex with the incest taboo--Freud didn't even believe infants/children had "genital" sexuality yet, so he must not have thought they'd direct their libidos toward intercourse.

Basically, today Freud's theory has been generalized to include a lot of things. Now "Oedipal" is shorthand for anything that relates to the ways in which motherhood and fatherhood are endcoded in the broader context of our social institutions-- the strict Freudian interpretation has gone out of favor. Freud did make really good local observations about Vienna at the turn of the century, but nobody thinks we're still living in Victorian Austria.

I will really do anything to procrastinate, won't I?

nomadthethird
04-09-2009, 08:09 PM
Here's an interesting fact: neurologists recently observed infant brains reaching orgasm.

Freud was scientifically right on at least one thing (and many others), then. Before him, nobody believed children felt sexual pleasure or arousal/stimulation.

Another good one: an infant male produces as much testosterone as an adult male.

massrock
04-09-2009, 08:10 PM
Thanks nomad.

I will do some reading and don't mean to impose on you unduly.

Re - value judgements, I wasn't making a negative value judgement about value judgements, merely asking if there were intended implied values attached to the notions of 'resistance' and 'oedipalization'.

massrock
04-09-2009, 08:19 PM
'Oedipal' seems to have become, in psychoanalysis circles, synonymous with 'anything to do with the traditional family'.
Right, that's partly what I wanted to clarify, thanks.

nomadthethird
05-09-2009, 05:14 AM
Can I use this as an opportunity to say most of the people who call themselves 'Lacanians' online are sorely misguided, entirely ignorant of the past hundred years of scientific discovery, and basically stuck in an impenetrable bubble of stupid that's outright dangerous from a medical standpoint?

Edit: Larval Subjects blogger excluded.

luka
05-09-2009, 09:50 AM
i also think ALL artists and creative people are obsessive compulsive to a degree.

I am quite creative.
i am not remotely obsessive. in fact i am the most well balanced sane person i have ever met. this is a fact.

i think what you mean is you are obsessive. i know you are cos i know how much music you download!

nomad, you aren't trying to say its not reductive are you? i mean, we agree i'd asusme. i think everything you said is almost certainly right as far as it goes.

poetix
05-09-2009, 03:53 PM
All artists and creative individuals are coprophiliac, to some degree...

luka
05-09-2009, 03:55 PM
theres certanly some truth in that

luka
05-09-2009, 03:57 PM
i mean
in as far as we're able to generalise

poetix
05-09-2009, 03:59 PM
Also: nomad's psychological profile of Timecube guy = Driving instructor in "Happy-go-lucky".

I attribute my deep psychological scarring to the fact I was raised by Calvinist wolves.

nomadthethird
05-09-2009, 05:37 PM
I am quite creative.
i am not remotely obsessive. in fact i am the most well balanced sane person i have ever met. this is a fact.

i think what you mean is you are obsessive. i know you are cos i know how much music you download!

nomad, you aren't trying to say its not reductive are you? i mean, we agree i'd asusme. i think everything you said is almost certainly right as far as it goes.

As far as science goes, psychoanalysis is way on the far end of the spectrum under "not as hardline reductive". It's more reductive than saying something wistful like "we shall never know everything that's in the heart of man", yeah. But it's nowhere near as reductive as molecular biology.

Everything's moving toward systems biology, anyway, or so I'm told by people who should know and textbooks. Reductionism is called the "basement" now. Funnily enough, we think we've invented this when Earth has been doing systems biology since forever.

I have never seen Happy-go-lucky. Isn't that about someone who is happy all the time to the point that's annoying to everyone, a British pet peeve--don't you dare be too happy, that would be reallly annoyyingg.

nomadthethird
05-09-2009, 05:42 PM
Really, if it weren't for the racism strewn throughout the Timecube manifesto, I'd think it was just too perfect -- and that Victor Vitanza did it for laffs.

Mr. Tea
06-09-2009, 08:25 PM
Here's an interesting fact: neurologists recently observed infant brains reaching orgasm.


Have these guys not read Gravity's Rainbow?

Or did they read and like it a bit too much?

nomadthethird
07-09-2009, 10:17 PM
Probably not... scientists are unfeeling, uncreative, uncultured swine after all.

To go back to the prognosticating for a moment, I would guess a high proportion of Dissensians are 'only children' (= people who don't have any siblings) compared to the proportion within the general population. You can usually pick these out of a crowd pretty easily.