Cȯsꭑọ ∴ ọꭑƨȯƆ @cosmiccitizen@schelling.pt

Q2. Why do the upright suffer and the wicked flourish?
The upright suffer because the wicked have the power to inflict suffering, and the wicked flourish because of a combination of exploitation and dumb luck. If you'd like things to be different, you're going to have to participate in a large-scale plan to punish the wicked, to redistribute their filthy lucre, and to comfort the afflicted. AND you must also deal with others working the problem from the opposite side.

The satiric, however, still holds that consequence is valid and contingency is valid.

The spirit of contingency:
Q1. Who am I? Why am I here?
You are who you are because of some very particular things that happened for reasons that aren't terribly deep. Accounting for them really shouldn't take up as much of your attention as the larger question of "What are you going to do with these particular things now that they're all that you've got for a raison d'etre?"

III. The satiric emplotment is a kind of trauma liminally suppressed by the romantic view. The romantic view retroductively asserts reason and rule between the contingencies that the satiric view would flatly accept as happenstance and efficient causation.

Yet secretly the satiric view is the view of our elites. We are ruled, really, by patches. They hope for nothing and dread nothing other than the tightly coupled processes. Their prudence is surety of mechanism.

I. The tragic emplotment scandalizes the zeitgeist of the 2020s because there is no place for pleasure. Pleasure is an idiotic preamble to catastrophe. There is no reason to even rebel. Lie flat and rot. At least the fall will be shortest.
II. The comic emplotment is downright unthinkable in this zeitgeist. The beliefs that people hold in the 2020s they hold against each other, as barbs against each other. Beliefs are for exclusion. There is no place for the Other at the end of history.

Three alternative views to this.

I. The tragic emplotment: A thorough description of the world can reduce it to a mechanism with finite variables, from which the inevitable consequence is inescapable catastrophe.
II. The comic emplotment: All shall be reconciled, and in the fullness of time every apparent conflict will be awarded a place in a symphonic expression of organic wholeness.
III. The satiric emplotment: Dumb chance negates the majority of reason. Purpose is local and vulnerable.

Q3. How might we punish the wicked and redeem the upright?
A3. Thou shalt not intervene. Thou shalt not rely on thy own moral judgments. Thou art a speck on the eyelash of a pest of infinitesimally small insight. Thou must surrender to the larger workings of the automatic universal law.
Q4. I suffer pain and terror in my innermost feelings. Wherefrom is this?
A4. You are not wicked. You are actually good. What you lack are the inner formulations by which you can transmute your pain into pleasure

The spirit of the age:
Q1. Who am I? Why am I here?
A1. You are who you are, and you are where you are, because you have caused yourself.
Q2. Why do the upright suffer and the wicked flourish?
A2. The upright do not truly suffer and the wicked do not truly flourish. We must infer from glimpses the universal justice that transcends most appearances: that the rewards to the upright will be revealed to their inmost hearts, and the punishment of the wicked will be revealed to them.

The great emplotment of the 2020s, the rational relation to which all narratives appeal, is a romantic one: it is the great hope of FAFO, of karma. It is the hope that inputs match outputs, or that rules are reconciled to results. We keenly hope that reaping corresponds with sowing.

We hope perhaps more keenly than other ages because we have the unique position of renouncing both compulsion and dependence. We've renounced both our own agency to impose consequences and our own severe contingency

@tootkoTootarov
A beginner will be very sensitive about one's face-holes due to the demands of actively managing breathing.
To simplify this problem, it's best to wear earplugs and tight goggles. They are worth it because this drastically reduces the total number of face-holes to actively manage.
As a side benefit, this also simplifies the required head-movements and contributes to mu-feathering.

@tootkoTootarov
I've been swimming short intervals 2-3 times a week for about three months and I feel like this last weekend I finally broke through to some second level.

I have really appreciated this advice all along, and I've just been musing to myself about "feathering for mu" as I've been watching the pool tiles glide past.

With the benefit of experience, I would add maybe one thing to your first-order prescriptions...

Condensed pragmatism:

The gimmick is to treat life as composed of gimmicks.
Thinking is a gimmick.
Beauty is a gimmick.
Justice is a gimmick.

Sometimes the gimmicks win through, yet often they don't.
Some gimmicks are simple, and some are made out of other gimmicks.

There may be other gimmicks that work better than the gimmicks we have now.

The oldest artifacts that might be beds are about 200k years old. The earliest representational narrative cave art might be about 50k years old.The oldest evidence of ploughing is roughly 5k years old. The photo in this post was taken roughly 5k years after ploughing started. And this photo at this link was taken 78 years after that: <https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/68/Himawari-8_true-color_2015-01-25_0230Z.png>.

The first ones had hair for the cold and shady trees for the heat. They killed their prey by chasing them and then ate the raw flesh.
The in-between ones had no hair and were sheltered by caves. Their dogs chased the prey and they cooked their meat. They knew enemies and hierarchy. They learned of the magic of signs.
The recent ones grew small and lived in homes. They cooked their food in pots and pans. They traded for iron. They learned to gamble.
We know our names and can number our ancestors.