Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q60,69

Main entry

6069. Deltarune is an example of historical existentialism [1] -> the claim that Deltarune broadly (not necessarily super literally) embodies the concept of treating history as something that can always be defied; this claim is blue because an Existentialist also could and would make this claim. to be precise, Deltarune only talks about prophecies and narratives, but whether in reality or fiction history is a narrative, so the claim would be that Deltarune throwing around tropes about prophecies and narratives is significant because these tropes resonate with the way players intuitively want to understand history. you can see a similar thing going on in Wings of Fire: wars in a Europe-like "fantasy World War I" setting should be a matter of history, but again history is being spun solely as a matter of Free Will, especially in the Pantala arc which is literally covering the history of where the earliest wars came from. back to Deltarune: there is a really really common motif people have when talking about it: the only kind of story there can ever possibly be is the story of an individual life, therefore, all discussions about prophecy tropes are appropriate to relate back to a single human life cycle and the fact they all end in death, the "one ending" to life. only.... that is not true. that is not even true. you'd know this if you live in the United States, where some people died slaves and some people died free. that's not the same ending! people genuinely have different endings to their lives because of the fact history exists. it's flat out beneficial to racists to pretend that everyone has the same life cycle and the same ending, because if everybody's life begins and ends the same way they can then act like the era of slavery is totally irrelevant and can be left out of history books just because it's not happening any more. the really sad thing is that progressive Existentialism will put this lesson into the meat grinder too, by claiming that slavery is a deviation from history rather than being part of history, because the only real history is the history created by Free Will, and everything else is fake history, essentially. fake history that bad people concocted the contents of and then enacted but which overall taught people nothing and got in the way of real correct history unfolding that would actually teach people something. but, again, if bad history isn't real history there's a terrifyingly good argument to leave it out of textbooks, because if only Free Will matters in writing the future, wouldn't it be better to leave out everything White supremacists ever did and fill textbooks only with progressive incidents that taught people how to build the future? I hate that idea but I'm just a dumb Communist, I'm not an expert, intelligent postcolonial anarchist Lacanian. so you know, I've gotta stop being such a freedom-hating dictator for just a moment and give the actual "good" ideas a try.

Related

6055. Q6055/Q60,55 Fictional futures come from characters' free will / Fictional futures come from the free will of fictional individuals / (9k)

"In life..."

3499. Q3499/Q34,99

      Life revolves around you

      / All events that occur while a particular person exists occur within that person, as part of "life" / in life... (motif) / in our lives... (motif) / You are the main character of reality / (9k) -> I find it incredibly strange that psychologists can both try to tell you your life "isn't a story" and then speak of our lives like your existence is uniquely yours and you are in fact the main character of reality just by existing and being able to perceive it.

618. "In life" fixes overgeneralizations

     / Add "in life" to make overgeneralizations profound / When you add "in life" to an overgeneralization, and sometimes an additional "should" (ought to, must, is good to, is advisable to), it will not be dismissed as an overgeneralization and sounds falsely profound ->
     

     False statement: all friends stay together. Deepity: In life, friends are crucial because friends stick together. False statement: it's always useful to have a towel. Deepity: In life, a towel comes in handy wherever you go. False statement: you can always know your allies from your enemies. Deepity: In life, it's good to know your friends from your enemies. False statement: nothing is worth fear. Deepity: In life, nothing is to be feared. False statement: everything can be understood. Deepity: In life, everything is to be understood.
     I think most of the time it's the "should" that actually does the heavy lifting

6051. Q6051/Q60,51 Because all biographies have one ending, we can only reinterpret them -> no. is that how people created the underground railroad and slipped out of slavery? reinterpreting how bad they think their situation is and how bad it is or isn't to inevitably die? this is one of the only things worse than saying Free Will explains all history.

Defying history

6045. Q6045/Q60,45 The only explanation of history is the defiance of history (poststructuralism onto postmodernism [?]) / The only explanation of historical patterns is the defiance of historical patterns -> this claim is inherently contradictory because it proposes an explanation of history, which is forbidden by the claim; the claim forbids itself. there is one way to fix it: cross out the word "defiance" and propose that Free Will and The Subject are material phenomena which can themselves be studied by historical materialism and reduced down to a number of partly-predictable patterns. this produces existential materialism.
3042. Q3042/Q30,42 undialectical idealism, historical non-materialism, and class non-analysis / undialectical idealism, historical existentialism, & class non-analysis / (9k)

Ideology codes

• (none)