Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q5151

Main entry

5151. Q5151/Q51,51

      worldmaking

      -> what the hell is this. I've seen it like five times looking up weird political-agorist garbage. I'm not giving it its own Item number until I know what it is.
      

      world: ????
      make: ????

5151. Q5151/Q51,51worldmaking / concepts related to worldmaking (sense) [1] / studying race (generic) / psychoanalysis and racial identity (Kondo 2018; generic) / theater and media representation (generic) / race and economic forces (generic) / race and institutional hiring practices (generic) / ideologies of artistic transcendence (generic) / race and aesthetic form (generic)

Worldmaking (blog)

618. Q618/Q618Worldmaking [2] -> forgive me for adding this as an Item in an act of pettiness, when I gave the guideline that living people and their video channels shouldn't be coded unless they're prominent figures, but the claims of this blog are gigantic. you make a 'magazine' like this one, and it's actually begging for scrutiny.
     oh. there are no posts on it. well that makes that question moot
618. Q618/Q618Cities, nations (populations? states?), and technological infrastructures (?) are worlds (Damjan Jovanovic)
618. Q618/Q618Worlds organize behavior before people make conscious choices, creating values (required beliefs) through structure rather than proclamation (Damjan Jovanovic) / We live inside worlds we did not choose (generic) -> so, the problem with any idea like this is, how will you ever get anyone to understand worldmaking beyond about 5 people if worlds are always modifying their choices before they can choose to adopt worldmaker theory? how did you ever discover worldmaker theory if you too were born absorbed into a particular world?
618. Q618/Q618Worlds organize behavior ... through structure -> define "structure". I know this is something people have gotten upset with me about too at times, but at least I can give a lengthy list of everything I can possibly think of that counts as a social structure and exactly what kind of structure it is with what kind of role or effect making it either significant or insignificant; when I do it, it's to get people to understand the absolute most fundamental concepts of what a society is outside the boxes of Communist theory and Liberal-republican theory before they make bigger statements.
618. Q618/Q618The inherited worlds of the last century no longer align with the conditions they govern -> how is that possible? you said that worlds are something people simply exist in as structures that capture objects' existences, which would mean there is no actual separation between "inherited worlds" and "what they govern" apart from how badly they mistreat the physical objects inside. like, isn't the point of "worlds" that worlds are conditions?
     all of the examples given seem to suggest the misaligned part is the ultimate results of the worlds, not the conditions they act on which would also be created by them.
618. Q618/Q618Each World contains distinctions of what is Good or Bad (an ethics; a morality; what is rewarded or not rewarded or punished; a set of ground rules), which are crafted through the structure of the World rather than through intentional design; this is to imply that some forms of structure create extractive relationships with nature correlating with the value that nature is a resource; this is to imply that some forms of structure create domination correlating with the value of centers of control; this is to imply that some forms of structure obscure themselves correlating with disorientation; this is to imply that understanding the genesis of Worlds allows creating new worlds and new futures (Damjan Jovanovic) ->
     so, like, is this thing properly meta- or is it not? I genuinely cannot tell. I know how to word it to make it sound smart, but I have no idea if the people who made it understand it that way.
     it sounds like anarchism. these examples are all recycled anarchist talking points.
618. Q618/Q618optimization advances faster than meaning (ontological understanding; orientation) -> again, this is coherent. it's really nothing new but at least it means something.
618. Q618/Q618For much of human history worlds were inherited but now they are designed (Damjan Jovanovic) -> that seems doubtful. I think if there's such a thing they're still inherited a whole lot of the time.
618. Q618/Q618planetary imaginaries -> they defined a word I didn't understand with another new word.
618. Q618/Q618alternative worlds / alternative worlds, historical and emerging / failures of existing worlds (generic) -> so, like, is the Soviet Union considered an alternative world? or do these people just arbitrarily draw the line of what's an alternate world and what's a mainstream world wherever they feel like it?
618. Q618/Q618myth and narrative as technologies / games and simulations as worldmaking systems (generic) / artificial intelligence as a perceptual and cosmological apparatus (generic) / utopias as working hypotheses (generic) -> this is one of the most coherent things I have heard these people say. yes, narratives and representational art in general are technologies that fulfill a purpose.
618. Q618/Q618myth and narrative as technologies / Architecture, games, cinema, design, systems theory, ecology, mythology, and artificial intelligence increasingly address the same structural questions (Damjan Jovanovic) [3] -> well... half of that addresses slightly different things from the other half, but yeah.
618. Q618/Q618Culture now simulates reality / Cultural production used to focus on representing the world through static images of what has existed, but now it operates through constructing operational models of reality, which means that static and interactive media are converging -> I think your understanding changed rather than cultural production changing.
618. Q618/Q618Worlds are narratives / Worlds in "worldmaker theory" and narratives in postmodernism are the same thing
618. Q618/Q618Worldmaking circumvents the impossibility of criticizing unconscious systems by offering structures that can support new forms of thought and action -> I believe the "thought" part but not the "action" part. this sounds like it's trying to say it's better than anarchists spinning up utopias but absolutely hasn't thought it through enough to even be different.

Nelson Goodman

618. Q618/Q618Ways of Worldmaking (Nelson Goodman 1978) [4] -> oh my gosh did I actually find where it came from
618. Q618/Q618Worlds are constructed through symbols, as in language, science, and art (Goodman) [5] -> yes and no.
618. Q618/Q618Art and science are different worlds / Instead of there being a true world, worlds are plural because there are multiple ontologies of the world; this is to imply that art and science are different worlds where each world is judged by its own standards (Goodman) [6] -> so this is postmodernism. oh my god. he was so close and then he gave up.
     so. are anarchists turning his work inside out and creating a new thing. is that what's going on? otherwise this whole thing doesn't make any sense at all. you can't claim that understanding worlds is useful for changing them if all of them are as good as all the others like Goodman says. but that isn't what the anarchist said.
618. Q618/Q618Art and science are different worlds -> I can prove to you they're not different. the method will be a little crude. why are racist Disney cartoons considered objectively incorrect? they are; that is almost indisputable. art is not just created to "express feelings". there really is representational art, which is objectively incorrect when it doesn't represent correctly. something which is objective in this sense has the same purpose as science. what kind of science it is studying can be a little unclear. but, no, there's such a thing as an anatomically wrong picture of a bluebird (which admittedly can be subjective, if it morphs into something imaginary) and there's such a thing as an objectively wrong portrayal of a demographic (which actually does have solid ranges of correct and incorrect answers).
     this has some very serious consequences if you just go and believe it, because out of 1,000 "worlds" that exist the people in control of the 1,000th can come up with reasons to discard all 999 other ones and render them all with no power to criticize it. the 1,000th world is the world of capital, spatial slot hierarchies, and agoras. all the others scarcely even matter. even climate science. even social justice degrees. even the arts.
392. Q392/Q392Most science is not empirical / A map does not recreate experience but discloses facts that are not obvious (Goodman, Problems and Projects) [7] / (9k) -> okay. that's correct.
392. Q392/Q392Symbols make worldviews possible [8] [9] -> this is. this is a generated page. and I swear it was more coherent than the non-generated ones! oh no.

Related

618. Q618/Q618takeaway (meta-Marxism) / letter to Celestia (meta-Marxism) -> there is a specific reason I have a low opinion of almost all philosophy that exists today and isn't Communism. it's that it never explains what the heck it even refers to. if you're going to introduce your philosophy with a claim that all words are only defined relative to others, fine, that's great. but I still have to be able to take the antagonism of two or three opposites you've presented and find what real-world things they both simultaneously refer to in a bisimilar relationship.
     what is a "narrative"? what is a "world"? what is a "discourse"? are "narratives" the same thing as "discourses"? are "narratives" the same thing as "worlds"? you have to define what the hell you're talking about clearly enough that I can tell whether two different frameworks are or aren't modeling the same thing.
618. Q618/Q618letter to Celestia (meta-Marxism) -> oh gosh you know what. I should, just as a very funny joke with nobody but me, make the 'regular' page for "letter to Celestia", but under that 9k page, I start putting joke summaries of motifs in blue ideologies that are all written as if Twilight is speaking. gosh after anarchism is so unintentionally depressing that might be the only thing that could make me feel better. there are few things funnier than hearing 'Dear Princess Celestia' in the wrong place. that is actually a top-tier joke

Ideologies or fields

618. Q618/Q618MX (pronounced meta-Marxism) / meta-ontology