View source for User:RD/9k/Q54,96

{{NextNineThousand|PPPA=Arceus and our sins against it|E=Q54,96|User=RD|Contents=y}}
== Main entry ==
<noinclude>{{HueCSS}}</noinclude><ol class="hue clean">

{{li|start=y|I=Z1/ES|Q=54,96|Q2=54,96| h4 = {{article|The Divine Truth: Arceus and Our Sins Against It}} }} / {{TTS|tts=nickel page|🪙|E=Q54,96/nickel}} {{YouTube|5qJXxH92a7k}}  ->  first of all, this is a wonderful video. it's coded here to showcase that it had real effort and thought put into it. there's nothing I would change about the video. that said? {{em|wow.}} it shows everything "wrong" with {{book|Pokémon}}, or more specifically wrong with the world where people would make it. it is such a good piece of research into things I didn't know needed researching but after seeing it certainly knew then.

</li></ol>

== Motifs in video ==

<ol class="hue clean">

</li><li data-qid="54,93" value="5493" data-remark="arceus" class="field_exstruct" data-dimension="S2">To be good is to live in harmony with metaphysics  ->  explanation of Arceus and the creator Pokémon pantheon and how they function as moral devices for arbitrating karma in <cite>Pokémon</cite> narratives. {{YouTube|5qJXxH92a7k}}

</li><li data-qid="54,94" value="5494" class="field_exstruct" data-dimension="S2">People attack metaphysics because they don't see each other as equals / The opposite of controlling metaphysics is being equals  ->  this bothers the hell out of me because it's outright used to argue against Communism in naïve terms of "utopia" and "forcing equality", yet in explaining why Existentialism will create a moral world people will say the word "equal" about ten times. the hell is up with that equivocation of the word equal?? it's like there is a secret definition of how being equals actually means existing in total mutual exclusion but doing it really really nicely and politely. it's like the definition of being equal was made up by Artisan types and Careerists who believe the way not to be dominated is to break everything apart to exist in individualized mutual exclusion. {{YouTube|5qJXxH92a7k}}

</li><li data-qid="54,95" value="5495" class="field_exstruct" data-dimension="S2">To seek greater life is to take life  ->  I've seen variations of this statement like four different places and hated it each time. Journey to the West / Dragon Ball, FNaF, Fullmetal Alchemist, Pokémon. I found it the least objectionable in an analysis of the metaphysical logic of Pokémon, where because it begins from such a mundane setting and can <em>claim</em> to be about chunk competition it at least felt logical {{YouTube|5qJXxH92a7k}}

</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-qid="55,01" value="5501" data-dimension="S">Arceism (motif)  ->  the motif — or definition of a hypothetical anarchism — where anarchism is portrayed as any arbitrary assortment of individuals in the world spontaneously coming together into "a community" strictly independent of the existence of all governments and nation-states and the simple act of making everyone part of the same countable culture shortly solving everyone's problems potentially including xenophobia, racism, and poverty.

</li></ol>

=== Subjective themes (subtext, etc.) ===

<ol class="hue clean">

</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-qid="54,97" value="5497" data-dimension="S2">Alchemy failed because it is an offense to metaphysics / Alchemy failed to become a science because it is an offense to the metaphysical order  ->  an unexpected but sadly logical interpretation of <cite>Fullmetal Alchemist</cite>, if you've already heard of the Existentialist-Structuralist tradition {{YouTube|5qJXxH92a7k}}

</li><li data-qid="54,98" value="5498" class="field_exstruct" data-dimension="S2">Science without metaphysics is a tool of domination / Scientifically analyzing The Subject is an offense to metaphysics / Studying identity is an offense to metaphysics / Scientifically studying culture is an offense to metaphysics / Too much science is an offense to metaphysics  ->  the sci-fi corollary that seems to apply itself to gender, historical materialism, and misplaced research & development efforts such as "AI". in simple forms, it is asserted that science "without a reason" is morally wrong as the natural order can trivially be expressed in terms of "exceed" and "too much". in more elaborate forms, it is implied that trying to understand how identity, individuals, or culture function and develop must be forbidden. to try to understand the development of countries is to crush the living, breathing nationality and squash or gut under the scary boot of Bolshevism some of the living processes that constitute individuals interacting to produce what is truly Russian or truly Chinese, or truly German. to try to understand the sources of gender and what develops to produce gender is to crush the inherent ability of the transgender individual or "the transgender community" to thrash about, to out-produce, to weave itself into the Filamentocracy, and compel respect. this is why I don't like this axiom. a loud shouting of movements without a science of movements is basically reducing people down to literally out-living others and whoever is powerful enough to stay alive in a cruel world getting to stay around to supposedly tell everyone else how to be nice and good when none of that actually determined who lived and died.

</li><li data-qid="54,95" value="5495" class="field_exstruct" data-dimension="S2">To seek greater life is to take life  ->  (the following motif relates to this one)

</li><li class="field_anarchy" value="5479" data-dimension="S2">Philosophers' stones empower global empire / If philosophers' stones existed in the 1500s, they would be used in service of global empire  ->  probably true, honestly. but you know what? anarchists have absolutely taken the wrong lessons from this concept about what the opposite of it is. what seems like half of all anarchisms boil down to the weird idea of existing and surviving being inherently greedy and specifically seeking to remove the ability <em>to live and exist</em> as much as possible without entirely extinguishing it. and the problem with that is it creates totally powerless civilizations that get crushed and precisely hand control of the earth to fascism and pronounce it canonically correct. after which the surviving fascisms will be as greedy and wasteful as they want to.<br />
that was a very Deng-Xiaoping thing to say. I don't care.

</li><li data-qid="54,99" value="5499" class="field_mdem" data-dimension="S2">[[Ontology:Q5499|Discoveries come from violating metaphysics]]  ->  the 'pataphysics axiom that I like <em>so much better</em> than the way Pokémon appears to see things

</li></ol>

== Four elements ==

<ol class="hue clean">

<li class="field_exstruct" data-tradition="Fy, ES, A" value="5474" data-dimension="S">the four elements lived in harmony / The four elements lived in harmony until the fire nation attacked  ->  <cite>Avatar: The Last Airbender</cite>, <cite>Adventure Time</cite>, <cite>Pokémon</cite>, <cite>Wings of Fire</cite>

</li><li class="field_mdem" value="5475" data-dimension="S2">The four elements were never in harmony  ->  one of those lines from 4.3 that I really liked but didn't think was profound, until. until I realized that fantasy stories almost always use elements to argue this really medieval way of thinking that empire can be stopped with metaphysics, and kingdoms will never conquer each other if they just try really hard to Exist In Moderation. that is not a thing. the opposite of it is not a thing either. it's one of those stupid instances of making up a slider and trying to find the made-up middle.

</li></ol>

== Real-world Arceism ==

<ol class="hue clean">

</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-qid="55,01" value="5501" data-dimension="S">Arceism (motif)  ->  there's a bit more to this than I thought there was. there are several patterns which are identifiable as Arceism.<br/>
A) "garden of Eden" pattern: if you connect everything into Community, there will instantly be no violence<br/>
B) unregulated system regulates itself by mutually-assured destruction / resets: in Pokémon, you see this with Kyogre and Groudon trying to rule the earth. if either of them wins, in concept you'd expect that they also take themselves out somehow, and Rayquaza just shortcuts what is overall the same process. in Liberal-republicanism, you see it about three or four different places.

{{li|I=S1/A|Q=618| h4 = anarchemistry }} ("chemistry" in reference to objects interacting to produce historical events, but also just a tiny bit in reference to the idea relationships have chemistry and you can relate the idea of chemistry to pairings or reproduction) / anarchunking / anariteration / anargrowth / anarreproduction / overpopulation (overshoot; individualist anarchism) / abstract concept of hoarding the ability to produce people and historical events when everbody "[[E:IBE|Should]]" have an equal amount of historical event production, and thus should smash all ability of other groups to produce people or historical events which is over that quantity  ->  the motif of anarchists turning the normal reproductive process of populations into a conspiracy theory and determining that everyone could have prevented war and empire and "colonialism" (cue five different definitions where four are Idealist) by deliberately controlling reproduction and business activity and moving-out-to-new-towns (see: frontier fights, gentrification, "job opportunities", fleeing from Tories to Europe) and all activity that produces any more actions or history or society, specifically as individuals who can control all that as individuals and specifically not as a society. a core value of the "Arceist" category of anarchisms.<br/>
this is one of those "up-there" concepts where even if it's total nonsense you wonder if people believing it does any real-world harm. the answer is... it's complicated. it takes rather specific situations before it becomes a real issue and there come to be right or wrong positions on it. like, you take a situation where Cuba is trying to build something for its people either to enjoy or to pay people a living wage but it would use oil and so the United States is like, {{i|you can't use oil, the world has a finite supply of oil as I actually believe underneath all the lobbyists so I need it all for myself so the world can stay on oil but only I can use it and grow, you damn Cubans, you better just stop being born and be happy with how many people you have because if you have any more people I'll fight a war for oil again and face no consequences for how many people my country is producing}}. in a situation like that anarchemistry can actually become harmful because it oppresses Cuba or oppresses Black people purely by starting at the idea that biological life naturally Uses Resources Politely and Doesn't Take Them From Others and these values come from nature, while when that is applied to the real world the people who are in dominating groups will get to ignore the rule while enforcing it onto every group who is on the bottom, accusing them all of wasting oxygen. how about the concept of "greedy Palestinians who don't know when to stop wanting existence and thus stealing from Israel"? have you ever heard that one come up?<br/>
it is trivially easy to make a moral rule which sounds harmless in the abstract but in real-world conditions with historical contingencies ends up horrifically racist.

</li></ol>

== Ideology codes ==
<!--
<ol class="hue clean compound">
{{HueNumber|Q92|MX / meta-Marxism}}
</ol>
-->

* Fy / fantasy genre
* A / anarculture
* MX / relativistic determinism
* MX / existential materialism


[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]]  <!-- page ends here.  TTS-unfriendly numbers incoming
redirects:   [[User:RD/9k/Q5496]]
duplication hint:   copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN|9k/Q54,96]] -->