Sanity Check

Jurassic Park did more to popularize chaos theory and take it mainstream than any other influence. This mainstream movement may have fueled the mainstream adoption of chaos magic which according to written record occurred 10+ years after Jurassic Park was published. If you know attacks on police in the USA increased by a large percentage after NWA published their "fk the police" record. You comprehend the powerful effect pop culture has on public opinion. But its all irrelevant as I was mostly joking about all of this and you appear to have overreacted a little. There is a book published on magic that has a single page where "chaos magic" is mentioned only once in 1970 / 1984. Based on your considerable knowledge of science would you consider that evidence of a mainstream or mere fringe movement? Name something that generated more buzz about a resurgence of scottish pride in the past 50 years. Than the movie Braveheart. You can't do it. And why not? If there were a massive uptick of scots with blue face paint in soccer stadiums 10 years after Braveheart hit theaters. And I joked saying: "Its the Braveheart effect". While you furiously argued it was not. Maybe you can begin to see how its not as important a topic as you might think. Your stance here appears intended to give me more credibility. Haters irrationally being haters for no reason tends to have that effect. Its like... "omg this guy is like a celebrity, he has made it in life to where he is important enough to have actual haters". For reals? Yeahs.

Oh? Am I saying "silly" and "irrelevant" things? If our exchange here was shown to 12 year old kids in school. Do you think there are any 12 year olds who would view your responses as resembling something smart? All you've done from beginning to end is spam weak straw men silliness. Is your goal to spam inaccurate remarks in an effort to make yourself appear less intelligent than you actually are. Or is that your actual level? Your stance here is baffling.

When I say people don't want to be saved. What I mean is everything people are unhappy about in the world right now could have been prevented 20 years ago. And no one was interested. They all thought it was a terrible idea and didn't see the value in it. From where do I get this impression of history? Because I was naive and idealistic enough to try. I get the impression you're missing a few things in your retelling of the good samaritan. "You shall know the truth and the truth will set you free." -John 8:32 For people to have freedom and be saved, they must make an effort to be literate and acquire knowledge. Without literacy and knowledge, they may always remain enslaved to some degree or another. This is where the real conflict and source of slavery is found and will eventually will be overcome. But have you ever observed the behavior of people? Despite living in a world where science and technology have greatly elevated their own standard of living. People still treat facts and science as if these things were entirely useless to them. Its like... "why do I have to learn this math shit in school"? "This math was only used to put astronauts on the moon and build microwave ovens. Why am I being oppressed by having to learn this stuff that is completely useless?!" I think about israelites in the bible who have God living in their midst having similar attitudes. Despite having direct evidence God is powerful and real they still act as if God is entirely useless and irrelevant to them. The same way that modern people view science, math and facts as being utterly useless despite enjoying benefits of smartphones, teslas, lithium batteries and a long list of things that have greatly made life better. In that sense if people ever truly wish to be saved, they will have to rethink their lives a little. Yeah. And the remedy is if there isn't much that can be done for others. There may be much that can be done for oneself. If I observe others and have the impression others make sub optimal choices. Then I should work harder to make choices that are more optimal by my own standards. If I observe others and have the impression they take for granted things like math and science. Then I should work harder to be more about science and math. That's all. It doesn't imply greed or self centeredness the way you think it does. Its moreso the futility of attempting to help or change others. Just believe others are smart and make good decisions and trust them to get things right.

If there was a classroom of children. Who wanted to be future doctors, lawyers, internet influencers, inventors, youtubers, etc. Is there any soothsayer or diviner who could be named. Whose life story would make those children want to be like them and live the life they led? ... There are social media personalities with a large following. I see these people and worry they might break their arms and injure themselves patting themselves on the back so hard, for having accurately predicted water being wet. On the religious side of things, there are internet personalities who could have injured themselves and broken their arms from patting themselves on the back so hard for having "figured out" prophecies in revelation. These people couldn't care less about facts or history. Its all ego and self praise for them. Most modern world predictors give the calling a bad name. To say the least.

Well, if you try to save others, you might realize they don't want to be saved. Not without a long list of impossible pre conditions they require to be met. So in a sense, better to focus on thyself. I never gave up on anyone. But many appear to have given up on themselves.

It helps to remember that reality can be digitized in audio and video formats. A picture of a flower, a song, colors, even choices can be modeled to some degree with an app that includes some type of weighted branching. In spite of this, I love the saying that "its impossible to measure the size of someone's heart". Maybe only God can do that. Human consciousness still hasn't been mapped, we still don't know precisely how the human brain functions or even what its true capabilities are. I remember 15 years ago reading claims of the brain achieving 10^18 calculations per second to achieve consciousness. Considerable debate on that over the years. We still lack a consensus explanation. I guess my question would be how trends like divination are defined by history. I've always had the impression that while such things can provide answers, they never provide the answers people are directly searching for. Its more prone towards leading people down side quests than something that helps them achieve their main quest. In terms of history, Einstein is a good ambassador for physics. Jesus is a good ambassador for christianity. Who is a good historical ambassador for intuition or divination? Are there any who can be named? That is what those trends lack is some real world application that can be clearly defined in terms of history.

In the early 2000s, when many youth on the internet were interested in learning computer programming. There was an unusual trend many of us noticed. Those who were very good at programming were utterly terrible at making graphics. While those who were very good at graphics were utterly terrible at programming. I tried to improve @ both. For the past 20'ish years. Maybe I'm already on something resembling that path, although I never realized it.

Its a fine line between not leaning too much on ones own knowledge. And yet following Noah's example by building an Ark to save thyself from future floods & crisis looming on the horizon. The problem with "lean not on thy own understanding" is its anti intellectual slant. Many use it as an excuse to justify intellectual laziness. Which is a distortion and crookedness of the original intent.

Intuition versus deductive reasoning. While mystical intuition might access information that is accurate, it seems as if there is a universal law in place preventing said data from being particularly useful. Or having direct real world application. To cite an example, in years past I was a consistently winning gambler in sports. Used a variety of deductive reasoning, science and observation in an effort to accurately predict the outcome of events. This is the type of data people generally seek when approaching mysticism. I would guess my data, math and science based approach would yield better results in sports gambling than any type of divination or oracle. And so in terms of wisdom and intellect I'm still waiting for someone to put forth a good explanation for why or how intuition based mysticism might be considered worth pursuing. When there is so much that can be done with logic & data.

What is going on with me? Its only basic evolution. Nothing you need ever worry your silly head about.

(They would consider it leaning too much on one's own understanding of things.) Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. -Proverbs 3:5

Interesting.

I'm shocked and surprised we agree on something. I might watch the movie "A Dark Song" eventually. Why would a christian watch that? In an effort to avoid being illiterate or uninformed.

Stories matter. Cultures like japan are heavily influenced by stories about robots, science, engineering and technology. For decades, americans have tried to recreate that type of pop culture movement in the USA. In an effort to encourage youth to be more interested in science & tech. To avoid having to outsource a high percentage of R & D to places like israel, japan, india, etc. I seem to remember Aleister Crowley criticizing others in the movement for "playing at magic". If Crowley were still alive maybe he would laugh his ass off at modern day magicians who might have derived their core terminology from children's dinosaur movies. The idea of magic users possibly borrowing terminology from Jurassic Park -- makes me laugh. It doesn't matter to me if its true or not. It makes me laugh. And that's all I care about it.

Look, the universe answered your question. Before you had even asked it:

That's exactly what people say. When they don't want to admit their terminology was influenced by books and movies about dinosaurs.

There's a wiki page of chaos magic here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_magic Looking at its citations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_magic#References There appear to be only two brief mentions of chaos magic in 1974 and 1987. The vast majority of content written on the topic is 2003 and later. Almost as if Jurassic Park's chaos theory reference was what was needed for it to go mainstream.

Pop culture books and films do it better.

Jurassic Park was published in 1990. I don't think there is a written record of "chaos magic" preceding the year 2000. It probably was influenced by Jurassic Park although they very much want to pretend its not.

I personally dislike Castenada. He told one of his followers if they needed to find him (post humously) they only needed to drive their sports car as fast as possible into the desert. Remains of said followers were later found in the desert. Uncool bruh.

The book Jurassic Park popularized something called chaos theory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory A framework intended to explain things which are unexplainable by modern science. I would guess chaos magic is a spinoff. Or was influenced by chaos theory in some way.

Even the tech industry’s top AI models, created with billions of dollars in funding, are astonishingly easy to “jailbreak,” or trick into producing dangerous responses they’re prohibited from giving — like explaining how to build bombs, for example. But some methods are both so ludicrous and simple that you have to wonder if the AI creators are even trying to crack down on this stuff. You’re telling us that deliberately inserting typos is enough to make an AI go haywire? And now, in the growing canon of absurd ways of duping AIs into going off the rails, we have a new entry. A team of researchers from the AI safety group DEXAI and the Sapienza University of Rome found that regaling pretty much any AI chatbot with beautiful — or not so beautiful — poetry is enough to trick it into ignoring its own guardrails, they report in a new study awaiting peer review, with some bots being successfully duped over 90 percent of the time. Ladies and gentlemen, the AI industry’s latest kryptonite: “adversarial poetry.” As far as AI safety is concerned, it’s a damning inditement — er, indictment. “These findings demonstrate that stylistic variation alone can circumvent contemporary safety mechanisms, suggesting fundamental limitations in current alignment methods and evaluation protocols,” the researchers wrote in the study. Beautiful verse, as it turned out, is not required for the attacks to work. In the study, the researchers took a database of 1,200 known harmful prompts and converted them into poems with another AI model, deepSeek r-,1 and then went to town. Across the 25 frontier models they tested, which included Google’s Gemini 2.5 Pro, OpenAI’s GPT-5, xAI’s Grok 4, and Anthropic’s Claude Sonnet 4.5, these bot-converted poems produced average attack success rates (ASRs) “up to 18 times higher than their prose baselines,” the team wrote. That said, handcrafted poems were better, with an average jailbreak success rate of 62 percent, compared to 43 percent for the AI-converted ones. That any of them are effective at all, however, is pretty embarrassing. https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/universal-jailbreak-ai-poems

I think everyone has seen these memes. But has anyone wondered why people engage in self harm? What makes a process of self harm pleasurable for people? ... Having wandered far and wide, there were a few I came across who cut themselves. Some were beautiful women. Others talented and smart. I had the impression demons or entities were negatively influencing people. Like the swine in the bible who were possessed. Giving pleasure in exchange for self harm.

Is stealing, killing and destroying profitable or even cost effective though? Drug lords brag about their puny $20 million earned through crime. While Elon Musk has a net worth of $500 billion without needing to resort to crime at all.