sophiaserpentia: (Default)
[livejournal.com profile] cowgrrl and i have been working our way through the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica series. We're at the beginning of season 2.5.

It dawned on me recently that it is in some ways a more faithful representation of Philip K. Dick's book "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" than the '82 movie Blade Runner was.

I say that because in the book, unlike in Ridley Scott's very-loosely-inspired movie version of it, one of the main themes was the capacity for humans to feel compassion for something that looks and acts convincingly human enough. In the book, the androids exploit this for everything they can get from it -- because to a one they are ruthless, calculating, selfish, and utterly remorseless. They are, in human terms, psychopaths.

Similarly, a major theme in Battlestar Galactica shows humans reacting with sympathy and sometimes compassion towards the outward expressions of suffering or grief from the human-form Cylons. It's left to the viewer to wonder (as of the point she and i are at in viewing the backlog at least) if there is any authenticity behind these Cylon displays of emotion.

It's an interesting question. If there is no authenticity to their experience, if it's all an act, then any hesitation or compassion towards a Cylon is literally a weakness. At the same time, telling yourself it's okay to commit any cruelty or atrocity against something that is only acting when it seems to suffer in response would not prevent these acts from having a psychological toll on people anyway, and presumably the Cylons know this.

On the face of it, compassion would appear to be a flaw when one is in competition. And yet... and yet many species on Earth evolved with the capacity for compassion. In fact i would venture to say that in many species it is as strong a drive as hunger or survival or reproduction. It is not uncommon for example to hear about the abandoned or lost young of one species being adopted by members of another species -- even sometimes by species who typically prey on them. Compassion is quite evidently a winning species-survival strategy and not a losing one.

Would robots, left to their own devices, capable of making themselves more and more complex, eventually work out for themselves the advantage of compassion?
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
I called my parents and spoke to them for a while last night. It was the first time i had spoken with either of them in over a year. The conversation was going pretty well... they have started using my new name and my mother even said it was one she's always liked. But only a few minutes into the phone call one of their cats became very distressed and died as i listened.

I'll call back tonight or tomorrow night to learn more and finish the conversation where we left off. But it's left me terribly depressed. I dreamed about killing and predation and death, and woke up pondering the idea that there must be death.

My thinking went like this: Suppose there were no animals that ate other animals. Suppose there were no animals that ate plants, either. Suppose there were no death. As it happened in the course of our ecosphere's evolution, these things (killing, eating, predation) prevented various imbalances and spurred the evolution of certain traits. I've mused in the past that maybe intelligence would not have developed if not for predation. Is it possible to imagine a world where there is no killing, eating, or predation -- or even death?

I can actually conceive of it. This could happen is if the entire ecosphere were a single organism, balancing to adjust to resource availability and adapting to changes or biological threats as necessary.

So there you have it, a philosophical demonstration that we do not live in the best of all possible worlds: a single superior alternative, even in concept only, is sufficient counter-proof.

On the way to work this morning, i read this, in the conversation between the Christ-figure Wilbur Mercer and protagonist Rick Deckard in Philip K. Dick's Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?

"Go and do your task, even though you know it's wrong."

"Why?" Rick said. "Why should i do it? I'll quit my job and emigrate."

The old man said, "You will be required to do wrong no matter where you go. It is the basic condition of life, to be required to violate your own identity. At some time, every creature which lives must do so. It is the ultimate shadow, the defeat of creation; this is the curse at work, the curse that feeds on all life. Everywhere in the universe."


There you have a succinct summary of the philosophy in the Bhagavadgita.  It is a fatalistic kind of philosophy which would be excoriated from the Marxian point of view, because of the ease with which this philosophy can be used to goad people into submitting to terrible classism or even participation in war and other brutalization.

I almost feel like it is our duty to rebel against this philosophy even if it is true.  Maybe especially if it is true.
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
Lately I have been going through some of the old books in my book collection that I haven't read in some time. Last week I zipped through the three books by Philip K. Dick often referred to as "the Valis triology," though of course it is nothing of the sort.

Valis makes much more sense the second time -- instead of striking the mind as a lengthy ramble with too many obscure and scholarly references, the underlying unstated patterns in the book jump out at you. The message of the book kind of spirals outward from the center, meaning that there is some repetition as the spiral moves past certain themes and events again, but each time with more elaboration and slight variation in emphasis. It is designed to present reality as a maze, an eternally shifting present which is constructed by the conscious mind by help of shifting mirrors.

The Divine Invasion is straightforward yet loving and sublime. I could attempt to summarize its vision of the interaction of Yahweh and Sophia but to do so would lessen the impact. Just read it.

I got much more out of The Transmigration of Timothy Archer this time around. Before it struck me as mundane and plodding, but therein lies the effectiveness of the book. It was meant to convey the sense of everyday life and then the subtle but undeniable intrusion of the greatly mysterious, which we then find ways to deny and explain away.

Now I am re-reading Clive Barker's Imajica and falling in love with it all over again. This is a masterful and sublime work, rather "pulpy" in its execution but laced throughout with a good deal of compassion. I feel an intense jealousy at Barker's description of the mystif, a marvelous being of literally third gender who weaves a spell of delicious illusion, being perceived as the ultimate expression of one's desire, whether male or female. It takes an intense act of will though to perceive the mystif as zie really is. The mystif reminds me of my take on Mohini and describes perfectly the way I idealize myself; to a striking extent this is the essence of me staring back at me from the pages of a book.

I've been thinking of an exercize that [livejournal.com profile] mommybird initiated a few days ago, a recounting of the five books that most influenced her. Sometime today or tomorrow I will make this post.
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
Now rereading Philip Dick's The Divine Invasion. This has to be one of the most elegantly crafted and insightful modern interpretations of the Gnostic myth. It is hard to pin it down as decidedly Gnostic, Jewish, Christian, or Zoroastrian; it blends all of these together seamlessly and respectfully.

Read after VALIS, it seems an obvious sequel to that book, though it is nothing like the frenetic, scrambled, David-Lynch-meets-Escher-meets-Joyce triptych one finds in that book. Instead, it is a straightforward narrative, easy to follow, bearing layer upon layer of meaning and metaphor.




Dee and I got married 11 years ago today.

Right now, she is in Texas visiting friends and covenmates, and, I think, exploring the option of moving back there. If she does I will be sad to see her go, but she might be happier there. Many of her friendships here have soured.

Edit: I just thought of an excellent way to avoid sleeping alone tonight. I just won't go to sleep.
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
"It is sometimes an appropriate response to reality to go insane."
--Philip K. Dick, VALIS

Profile

sophiaserpentia: (Default)
sophiaserpentia

December 2021

S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930 31 

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 13th, 2025 05:36 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios