From Consumerium development wiki R&D Wiki
    Revision as of 09:04, 14 July 2004 by Jukeboksi (talk | contribs) (delink, de-trollify, attempt to improve defintions)
    (diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

    An ontology is a statement of "what is", a categorization of states or types of being.

    In Western philosophy, which arrogantly asserts that people trained in it can actually discern types of being or "what is" reliably. This is however stupid, and the people who believe this are vain and arrogant fools: they do not have the God's Eye View required to make such statements other than as their own opinion, and these opinions are arbitrary, unverifiable, and unshared with people outside their own academic discipline. A philosopher is merely a waste of skin.

    In Western theology, the less arrogant assertion is made that God makes states of being that humans must live with and work through: life and the afterlife. Other theologies such as w:Buddhism likewise make claims based on ontological distinctions that they claim are necessary to comprehend and accept the claims. Any imposition of such distinctions is itself persuasive and seductive. The essence of an ontological approach to education is to change the glossary in which people discuss problems, as opposed to the teleological approach which requires that they adopt a particular style of reasoning and argument.

    A compromise view from w:General Semantics as expressed in w:E Prime holds that "is" has no meaning at all, and being must be characterized more exactly as "becomes, remains, or equals". The verb to be is disallowed - it is not part of the language. Becomes clearly refers to what is true in the future, remains to what is true in the past, and equals to what is true only in the snapshot moment - and only this last is subject to mathematic proof or verification of any formal sort at all. This is the advised way for Consumerium Services to proceed - the glossary should be based on this.

    Sysops by contrast attempt to employ their own bastard ontology, "sysopism", in which they too have God's Eye View (actually Sysop Vandal point of view) from which they can discern (magically) the identity and intentions of persecuted people they label (derisively) "trolls". Their amateur psychiatry often includes categories defined in the w:DSM-IV-TR or other textbooks relying on the western scientific tradition of preferring strict methodology to a holistic approach. Because sysops themselves have a world view promoting power structures as almost sole means of governance, this is not an honest attempt to actually "help" the people so classified, but an excuse to do harm to them.

    To fight back, actual trolls self-identify or assert a factionally defined ontology. This provides a basis for argument that transcends mere sysop vandalism as its defining rationale - and creates more of a representative democracy or deliberative democracy, to more correctly organize moral cognition of a wider variety of being - and beings. Including those, like trolls, which aren't human, but deserve great respect.

    The trollist political and cognitive ontology seems to centre around the world tree and the process of gnawing, which trolls do instead of "thinking". By avoiding thought and focusing on unthought (after w:Heidegger) trolls seek to avoid various subject-object problems by making themselves always the object of any process. The trolletariat is the political expression of this class conciousness: as the trolls perceive themselves as an oppressed group, they naturally form categories useful to resist forms of oppression, some of which are in common with other oppressed groups like apes or indigenous peoples. Then all can form a common front against sysopism as merely one aspect of militarism, imperialism, etc..