162 lines
8.6 KiB
Plaintext
162 lines
8.6 KiB
Plaintext
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
|
|
³ MOO-JUICE ³
|
|
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
|
|
The Organ of the International MOOist Conspiracy
|
|
Printed & Published by the Office of the Cardinal Richelieus
|
|
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
|
|
³ Theta-3 ³
|
|
³ February 27th 1993 ³
|
|
ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
|
|
|
|
From: Floyd Gecko Pvt Rec'd
|
|
To: Hellhound >101< Msg #70, 92-11-22
|
|
Subject: Normalcy
|
|
|
|
First thing that I started thinking about was the "purpose" of
|
|
MOO... At least the sort of structure of how we get everyone
|
|
possible to join... That's the connecting of various "levels" of
|
|
normalcy together (the very normal with the very strange, and
|
|
connecting them to each other)...
|
|
|
|
Obviously, I had to invent a definition of normal. So you may
|
|
like to have the rather nice model of normality that I came up
|
|
with... Just to use as a cognitive filter when it's appropriate.
|
|
|
|
1) I thought of "levels" for a moment, then realized that that's
|
|
totally impossible, since it assumes that all abnormality of the
|
|
same "degree" is the same, and even that the "degree" is
|
|
measurable. Our practical experience says this isn't true...
|
|
|
|
2) Next step is seeing the different groups we appeal to (some
|
|
parts are the mystics, some parts are scientific-type oriented,
|
|
some are surrealBLATTT, etceter...) as different physical areas on
|
|
a map type dealy... Well, this is a little more accurate, but
|
|
hardly precise. However, it did open up the question of
|
|
multi-dimensional abnormality... That is to say, being abnormal
|
|
in different directions (so to speak).
|
|
|
|
3) This gave me the clue... Suppose we define a polydimensional
|
|
phase space for a graph... Just lay out axes for now, and I'll be
|
|
more detailed about them later... Then give a sort of "Y-axis", or
|
|
readout axis common to all of them... Of course, this
|
|
multidimensional graph is just that... I'm assuming to quantify
|
|
about 20 basic axes, and maybe throw in a few more which result
|
|
from various facts about them (more on that later) just to make it
|
|
clearer... So don't worry about these many many many components...
|
|
Any reasonable computer could hold a 20 or 30 dimensional array of
|
|
this kind without too much trouble, so there's no need for PEOPLE
|
|
to go around visualizing this thing.
|
|
|
|
4) Okay, so we then define axes for various factors of
|
|
sociopsycholocial significance. I don't really know what all these
|
|
would be... The most obvious would be things like political
|
|
orientation (which might need two or three axes to cope with),
|
|
intelligence (same thing), personal interaction factors (the Leary
|
|
graph suggests some of the axes to use)... A psyhologBLATTT would
|
|
probably give others which aren't obvious to me but would probably
|
|
be more important. No matter. You get the general picture...
|
|
Then for the readout axis, on each of these, plot a normal
|
|
distribution (the bell-curve thing). Once this is plotted, you have
|
|
a phase-type space of normalcy of each person/group on various
|
|
axes...
|
|
|
|
5) Once we have benchmarked all this stuff, and determined which
|
|
axes can be treated as they appear (some might have various
|
|
screwball factors thrown in just to be annoying, like a
|
|
complex-dimensional factor making the whole thing hopelessly
|
|
noneuclidean, but basically we jigger around with it until you can
|
|
treat it numerically with reasonably simple formulas for each axis,
|
|
instead of nasty ones), we can categorize certain points and their
|
|
relations with each other, as below.
|
|
|
|
a) Group normalcy and cohesion can be treated as a social
|
|
dynamic factor which comes into play in certain areas of this
|
|
phase space, where the actual values on our components open up
|
|
certain possbilities. I'm assuming that SOME social
|
|
interactions, at least, can be modelled mathematically, and
|
|
we'd choose our axes to correspond to the variables involved.
|
|
SO in SOME areas of this phase space, groups of people who
|
|
interact who are all mentally in the same area will tend to
|
|
cohere together, to become MORE like each other... That is,
|
|
the distance between the phase-points themselves will grow
|
|
smaller, creating a LOCAL defnition of normalcy... This is
|
|
sort of like comparing global curvature of space with local
|
|
curvature of space (planetary gravity). Local normalcy
|
|
topology may be measured differently (requiring another phase
|
|
space, or at least "reserved" dimensions of our original one,
|
|
to measure it), but it'll likely be FAIRLY similar to the
|
|
global normality topology
|
|
|
|
b) There is a certain nonlocality of social relations... The
|
|
interactions between points that are quite far apart in phase
|
|
space is counterintuitive at first... Like, someone WAY out
|
|
on one axis (say a demented Jim Jones type leader) will
|
|
attract to himself (in REAL space, not sociostatistical phase
|
|
space) followers... This acts like the "gravity" effect
|
|
above, only he actually repels their corresponding mental
|
|
phase-points, to cluster together SOMEWHERE else (docile and
|
|
sheepish, rather than messianic... probably in quite
|
|
different quadrants of the phase space). So reactions would
|
|
have to be computer-modelled to be well understood.
|
|
|
|
c) We CAN define political movements by their coherence on
|
|
certain axes, but not others... basically any group of people
|
|
will have to be treated as a cluster of points somehow (even
|
|
unrelated people will, statistically, have a vector-center
|
|
somewhere other than the "normal", or center of the phase
|
|
space... this accounts for the saying "normal is that which
|
|
nobody is")... The previously stated "goal" of MOO can be
|
|
regarded as linking people in MANY and diverse segments of
|
|
this phase space...
|
|
|
|
d) Okay, so we have this multidimensional phase space of
|
|
normality. It's not very useful... We CAN describe a single
|
|
number (so to speak) or "level" of normality to ANYONE,
|
|
without too much trouble. Depending on the exact topology of
|
|
this space (as in, the distance from the center of the space
|
|
is calculated on a formula... it may not be the same as with
|
|
"flat" space... instead of corresponding, say, to the
|
|
root-of-sum-of-squares for each axis, some axes might have
|
|
squares subtracted, or have extra "weighting" components, or
|
|
various similar things...) we find the distance from the
|
|
center of various points... And knowing the way the points
|
|
are distributed, we can set up a sort of meta-level
|
|
normal-curve (there's that bell curve again... Ask not for
|
|
whom the bell curve tolls... it tolls for thee) based on the
|
|
frequency of distribution. It WON'T correspond EXACTLY to the
|
|
distances, since most people, with all their various
|
|
deviations, will be well more than one standard deviation from
|
|
the mean... But anyway... That's for the pigeonhole buffs,
|
|
who need to have everybody in a little slot... I wouldn't see
|
|
the point, myself.
|
|
|
|
e) There are probably functions for clustering about the
|
|
axes... For instance, when people are very far out on some
|
|
axis or other, there may be a tendency to be very close to
|
|
normal on another (psychotics tend to be very normal people in
|
|
many respects, or so we're told...)... So we can add those
|
|
extra axes I mentioned for how well the poin corresponds to
|
|
those functions, and so on (how well it fits THOSE curves
|
|
gives us MORE curves (I.E. it's not normal to be VERY normal,
|
|
so psychotics tend to be meta-abnormal as well, or
|
|
whatever))... We can add as many of these as are actually
|
|
useful to help define the graph.
|
|
|
|
This idea, of cours, is one highly typical of a certain
|
|
region of that phase space in which I swim about pleasantly..
|
|
There are a few other people there, but I don't know many of
|
|
them... So it's not an idea that most people would find appealing.
|
|
Still, it does provide a useful mental map to refer to when you use
|
|
the word "normal" as applied to people...
|
|
|
|
The purpose of MOO then, or the STRUCTURE of MOO, or the
|
|
[something or other] of MOO, is to unite people in all sorts of
|
|
groups (corresponding to oddly shaped regions of psychosocial phase
|
|
space), and bring their ideas together... Sort of a
|
|
genetic/memetic diversity thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MOO-JUICE
|
|
Organ of the International MOOist Conspiracy
|
|
|
|
Courtesy of the Office of the Cardinal Richelieus |