TV: Pluribus (Apple TV)

[epilogue]

Individuality, personal freedom, art. These things make me happy.

[tree_]

Individuality, personal freedom, art. These things make me happy.

Ultimately, nothing about you or your experience is unique or novel. You are holding on to a ghost, an illusion.

[Simple Torture]

I do think it’s an interesting moral problem. Would you give up YOUR individuality to end suffering forever? And if you’re willing to do that, if you think it’s the right thing to do, does that mean it’s a moral imperative required of every other person? (I see you, Kant.) So maybe tree is right that this wouldn’t just feel better but is GOOD in a way no other thing people could do would be good?

(With the caveat, as Carol points out, that no one asked for this.)

[tree_]

What makes you think you would lose what makes you unique anyway? But rather integrating everything that makes everybody unique simultaneously

[Ms Harmless]

something I haven't asked yet, tree: what is your evidence that they're happy?

[Ms Harmless]

jokes and jump-scares are the same thing: tension and release; without the element of surprise there is neither

I can think of another form of tension and release that the hive mind probably won’t need.

that "comes" under joke and jump-scare

[tree_]

something I haven't asked yet, tree: what is your evidence that they're happy?

Probably my best evidence for this is the log line I mentioned earlier. The most miserable person on Earth tries to save the world from happiness.

[epilogue]

I do think it’s an interesting moral problem. Would you give up YOUR individuality to end suffering forever? And if you’re willing to do that, if you think it’s the right thing to do, does that mean it’s a moral imperative required of every other person? (I see you, Kant.) So maybe tree is right that this wouldn’t just feel better but is GOOD in a way no other thing people could do would be good?

(With the caveat, as Carol points out, that no one asked for this.)

That's exactly it. It is such a fascinating thing to explore (and I will tip my hand her a bit and admit that I'm not 100% sure Gilligan is up to the task; I hope I'm wrong). But to me, the most important thing here is consent. As you said, no one asked for this. I just can't understand how anyone supports what the virus is doing in light of the consent of it all.

[epilogue]

Individuality, personal freedom, art. These things make me happy.

Ultimately, nothing about you or your experience is unique or novel. You are holding on to a ghost, an illusion.

That just isn't true. But if you believe that, then I can totally understand why you're take on this show is what it is.

[tree_]

Individuality, personal freedom, art. These things make me happy.

Ultimately, nothing about you or your experience is unique or novel. You are holding on to a ghost, an illusion.

That just isn't true. But if you believe that, then I can totally understand why you're take on this show is what it is.

How is it not true?

[epilogue]

Individuality, personal freedom, art. These things make me happy.

Ultimately, nothing about you or your experience is unique or novel. You are holding on to a ghost, an illusion.

That just isn't true. But if you believe that, then I can totally understand why you're take on this show is what it is.

How is it not true?

My experience is by definition unique. Only I can have my experience. My art is derivative, not unique or novel, sure. But my experience isn't art.

[wease]

What about pre-hive crimes? Uncle Frankie has been molesting 7-year-old Sally. Sally never told anyone. But now little Sally’s mom and dad and hell, the whole world knows about it. Not only they, they have the memories and feelings of her being molested by him and his memories and feelings of molesting her. All at once those experiences are shared by the world. Is he now punished? They can’t do harm to other humans. Whose sense of right or wrong does the collective adhere to? Sally’s or Uncle Frankie? Does the collective accept Frankie’s sense of morality and see no wrong in molesting little kids?

[tree_]

Individuality, personal freedom, art. These things make me happy.

Ultimately, nothing about you or your experience is unique or novel. You are holding on to a ghost, an illusion.

That just isn't true. But if you believe that, then I can totally understand why you're take on this show is what it is.

How is it not true?

My experience is by definition unique. Only I can have my experience. My art is derivative, not unique or novel, sure. But my experience isn't art.

It's a specific recipe, but the ingredients are basically the same. I would argue that the ways in which you are truly unique are trivial, more to the point and to be more clear. But that's a conversation about values and stuff. Maybe not tonight

[epilogue]

Individuality, personal freedom, art. These things make me happy.

Ultimately, nothing about you or your experience is unique or novel. You are holding on to a ghost, an illusion.

That just isn't true. But if you believe that, then I can totally understand why you're take on this show is what it is.

How is it not true?

My experience is by definition unique. Only I can have my experience. My art is derivative, not unique or novel, sure. But my experience isn't art.

I would argue that the ways in which you are truly unique are trivial, more to the point and to be more clear. But that's a conversation about values and stuff. Maybe not tonight

You're welcome to argue the point. But it's an uphill battle. I can't imagine any argument that everyone's experience isn't unique. It isn't trivial at all. But that's the point I've been trying to make this entire time. So, I'm no surprise that you disagree.

[daft twat]

I am pretty surprised that when the yahoos suggested they all go to the Guggenheim, Carol didn’t pick up on the fact that, yeah, art is nice, but once they’re all assimilated, that’s a wrap for the artistic project of mankind. Everyone understanding each other is the death knell for that. I think it’s a stroke of genius making her a romantasy author who churns out slop; when that guy started mansplaining mizzenmasts to her I was lol’ing.

what do you mean by "the artistic project of human kind"? And why can't there still be art when there is one shared consciousness?

Why would anyone make art if there’s no obstacles to connecting with or understanding other people? You don’t have to express yourself and your innermost desires, fears, or anxieties if every other mind on the planet has instant access to your entire consciousness. Carol was feeling so empty before the incident because she knew exactly what her audience wanted and she fed them exactly what they wanted; there was no empathy, no discovery, just checking off boxes. A machine could’ve done what she was doing.

Shit, I wasn’t convinced this show was about AI and now I feel like I talked myself into it. Thanks a lot!

If pain and suffering are necessary for the sake of art, I say fuck art! Why can't art exist without the pain and suffering inflicted by the "other"? If humanity shared one consciousness, surely it still would desire beauty, but of a more elevated kind, difficult for one single mind to imagine.

is there anything left to desire if we have instant access to everything?

There is a great episode of The Twilight Zone called “A Nice Place to Visit.” This gangster gets shot and dies, and he finds himself in casino heaven. Women throw themselves at him and he’s on an endless winning streak. He complains that when he always wins, it isn’t fun, and this is not what he expected Heaven to be like. That’s when he’s told he’s actually in Hell.

Also, how great was Emily Dickinson:

Success is counted sweetest
By those who ne'er succeed.
To comprehend a nectar
Requires sorest need.

Not one of all the purple Host
Who took the Flag today
Can tell the definition
So clear of victory

As he defeated – dying –
On whose forbidden ear
The distant strains of triumph
Burst agonized and clear!

[daft twat]

What about pre-hive crimes? Uncle Frankie has been molesting 7-year-old Sally. Sally never told anyone. But now little Sally’s mom and dad and hell, the whole world knows about it. Not only they, they have the memories and feelings of her being molested by him and his memories and feelings of molesting her. All at once those experiences are shared by the world. Is he now punished? They can’t do harm to other humans. Whose sense of right or wrong does the collective adhere to? Sally’s or Uncle Frankie? Does the collective accept Frankie’s sense of morality and see no wrong in molesting little kids?

I don’t think little Sally’s mom and dad have this knowledge at all. I don’t think they’re occupying those bodies. They’ve been erased or put in hibernation or something. I think collective brought its own moral compass and will act according to that, not to something they learned while watching the molestation home movies they now have access to.

[tree_]

Individuality, personal freedom, art. These things make me happy.

Ultimately, nothing about you or your experience is unique or novel. You are holding on to a ghost, an illusion.

That just isn't true. But if you believe that, then I can totally understand why you're take on this show is what it is.

How is it not true?

My experience is by definition unique. Only I can have my experience. My art is derivative, not unique or novel, sure. But my experience isn't art.

I would argue that the ways in which you are truly unique are trivial, more to the point and to be more clear. But that's a conversation about values and stuff. Maybe not tonight

You're welcome to argue the point. But it's an uphill battle. I can't imagine any argument that everyone's experience isn't unique. It isn't trivial at all. But that's the point I've been trying to make this entire time. So, I'm no surprise that you disagree.

Yes I think this gets to the core of our disagreement and I would like to hash it out sometime. I might learn something

[Ms Harmless]

something I haven't asked yet, tree: what is your evidence that they're happy?

Probably my best evidence for this is the log line I mentioned earlier. The most miserable person on Earth tries to save the world from happiness.

I think the show is all about showing you that she isn't simply *miserable*, and they aren't simply *happy*, in spite of the ironic log line; her despair at her partner dying demonstrated that she had felt happiness with her; the miserable / happy dynamic is merely our hook into a world of immune / infected

[epilogue]

something I haven't asked yet, tree: what is your evidence that they're happy?

Probably my best evidence for this is the log line I mentioned earlier. The most miserable person on Earth tries to save the world from happiness.

I think the show is all about showing you that she isn't simply *miserable*, and they aren't simply *happy*, in spite of the ironic log line; her despair at her partner dying demonstrated that she had felt happiness with her; the miserable / happy dynamic is merely our hook into a world of immune / infected

I love that. Good insight

[tree_]

something I haven't asked yet, tree: what is your evidence that they're happy?

Probably my best evidence for this is the log line I mentioned earlier. The most miserable person on Earth tries to save the world from happiness.

I think the show is all about showing you that she isn't simply *miserable*, and they aren't simply *happy*, in spite of the ironic log line; her despair at her partner dying demonstrated that she had felt happiness with her; the miserable / happy dynamic is merely our hook into a world of immune / infected

He said his goal was to achieve the effect of this logline narratively in comedic, ironic and other creative ways, and how he got there came later. I think we may be thinking too deeply into this. I'm gonna call it a night. Been fun!