|
Sometimes I think Tom sets up these scenarios that are just vague enough (for crazy obstinate people) to misinterpret, in order to start fights among his fans. Comic art is just his hobby, his real life's work is poking crazy internet people and watching them argue while he laughs. To which I say, well done sir. Also, totally called it.
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 15:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 12:23 |
|
|
JT Jag posted:You guys who were so certain everyone was seeing the same thing and Annie was just Super Naive or something must be feeling kinda silly now!! I'm still not convinced.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 15:55
|
|
|
BobTheJanitor posted:Sometimes I think Tom sets up these scenarios that are just vague enough (for crazy obstinate people) to misinterpret, in order to start fights among his fans. Comic art is just his hobby, his real life's work is poking crazy internet people and watching them argue while he laughs. To which I say, well done sir. You think so? Then I'll start! Notice how when Kat asks a question, he points out that Annie is an afterlife guide and should know, not that Kat does. Kat isn't an afterlife god 
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:You think so? Then I'll start! Or maybe Coat Man also doesn't recognize Kat's symbol, just like Skeleton Greeter Man, so he just defaults to something he knows. ...Wait poo poo we're doing it again nooooo
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 23:13
|
|
|
HoboNews posted:Or maybe Coat Man also doesn't recognize Kat's symbol, just like Skeleton Greeter Man, so he just defaults to something he knows. Next I will discuss how all of Kat's abilities are etheric in nature - she's not a genius, she's just capable of comprehending etheric concepts. But on a serious note, the comments demanding he move on and get to the point are obnoxious, on the official comments. I don't get why people are so impatient.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 01:07
|
|
|
Well, this is the only chapter since chapter 30 that has to do with Jeanne, and that was about four years ago so I can see how some people would be impatient.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 01:57
|
|
|
My inner old man wants to say "You waited four years, what's a few more weeks?" but while I don't feel the frustration myself I don't get what's such a big deal about airing it in one of the few places people will even know what you're talking about so that they can maybe sympathize.
Heavy Zed fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Feb 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 02:04
|
|
|
poo poo, was that really four years ago? I reread huge chunks of Gunnerkrigg from time to time (say, every time someone in this loving thread links a reference stop it you assholes I got poo poo to do) so I sort of lose track of how much time's really passed since Tom wrote a given chapter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 04:49
|
|
|
I have no idea how long it's been since any specific part of GKC really.  Although I really don't care, so it doesn't matter v  v
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 05:59
|
|
|
Dr. Buttass posted:poo poo, was that really four years ago? You know what my favorite page of Gunnerkrigg Court is? This one!
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 08:26
|
|
|
Funny enough, I just checked the first page of this thread and we're talking about CH30 in real time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 08:34
|
|
|
Jon Joe posted:You know what my favorite page of Gunnerkrigg Court is?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 11:38
|
|
|
Tupperwarez posted:This. It's going to be like, a few paragraphs about the wing's brief (but momentous) existence on the first page, and the rest is blank. Yeah, due to lack of use the Realm of the (Robot) Dead just doesn't get the same level of departmental funding as the human realm that Annie and Mort are familiar with. Plastic bats, tacky hangings, cheap robes...they had to cut a lot of corners to make that shoestring soul-budget work.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 16:42
|
|
|
GENUINE CAT HERDER posted:Yeah, due to lack of use the Realm of the (Robot) Dead just doesn't get the same level of departmental funding as the human realm that Annie and Mort are familiar with. Plastic bats, tacky hangings, cheap robes...they had to cut a lot of corners to make that shoestring soul-budget work. I'm sure it's probably just her perception of the ROTD, though. Still, would be a fun idea.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 18:42
|
|
|
Tupperwarez posted:That would be funny if what Kat sees isn't her idea of what the ROTD is like, but rather what the robots think it's like. But they've only sent one guy/piece to the Ether, so their influence is... not impressive. Which makes me wonder: Does something need a mind in addition to organic functions in order to be sent to the Ether?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 20:11
|
|
|
How could Jones be an effective "consultant" or whatever if she has no imagination? It makes no sense she would be totally useless.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 01:40
|
|
|
Unparalleled depth of experience? Why would a consultant need imagination? She's not there to help them come up with stuff.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
Wittgen posted:Unparalleled depth of experience? Why would a consultant need imagination? She's not there to help them come up with stuff. Some kind of imagination is usually thought to be necessary for very basic problem solving. Jones seems to consult the court on a pretty broad variety of poo poo; I find it implausible that she'd be very good at her job with no imagination.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 01:48
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:How could Jones be an effective "consultant" or whatever if she has no imagination? It makes no sense she would be totally useless. If you've already seen everything that this planet and its creatures have to offer, what's left to imagine aside from nonsensical fantasy?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 01:49
|
|
|
Example:
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 01:56
|
|
|
Zero Star posted:Dude, Jones has seen everything first-hand, going all the way back to the Hadean Era. It makes total sense to have her as a consultant - obviously she can't impart knowledge from the past onto the people of the present (case in point: her refusal to tell Annie about the dinosaurs), but she's still got a planet's lifetime's worth of wisdom. Strictly speaking without any imagination she would not be able to string together sentences she hasn't heard before. And learning her first language would be impossible. It's pretty implausible she has no imagination.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 03:33
|
|
|
I don't think she means it so literally when she says she has "little or no imagination". What she's talking about is not having the human propensity to see things that aren't there. Jones can observe what things are and can reason and even invent and predict when she has enough information, but she could never create a myth or guess or speculate. She simply lacks any ambition to use her mind in that way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 06:07
|
|
|
Jones is pretty much full of poo poo when she talks about how inhuman she is. Yeah sure, keeping a scrapbook of everyone you knew and changing your name for them sure seems like no emotions, yep.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 07:30
|
|
|
They're not emotions but an incredible simulation of them
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 07:48
|
|
|
Devil Ed posted:They're not emotions but an incredible simulation of them What's the difference? (serious question)
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 11:54
|
|
|
DontMockMySmock posted:What's the difference? Whether or not they're spontaneous and internally-driven. An extremely good facsimile of emotions would still primarily be for the observer rather than the one emoting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 11:59
|
|
|
Portals posted:Whether or not they're spontaneous and internally-driven. Emotions are behavioral responses to external influences filtered through a brain/endocrine system. They're not "spontaneous" in the sense of coming from nothing; they come from the activity of the brain/endocrine system, whose states in turn arise from external stimuli. And they're not "internally-driven" except in the sense that those external stimuli are internalized before they are reacted to. Jones has a mind, and regardless of the nature of that mind (I doubt it is contained in a brain/endocrine system like a human's), she internalizes stimuli and responds to them with behaviors similar to a human's. I don't really see that you've identified any kind of difference. Portals posted:An extremely good facsimile of emotions would still primarily be for the observer rather than the one emoting. I'm not sure that I buy the idea that emotions are "for" anything.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 12:15
|
|
|
Goons trying to understand feelings in this thread. There's the subjective experience of an emotion, and then there is the objective action which attempts to express the emotion. In humans, the latter is involuntary, and perceiving it often results in the observer experiencing something akin to the same emotion. (This is why it's possible to believe that other people have feelings.) Jones claims to have extensive experience in understanding and falsifying humans' emotional signifiers, and that despite the intentional outward similarity of her behavior to that of a human, the mind from which that behavior originates is different.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 13:21
|
|
|
Faking the display of emotions (like smiling to fake being happy) can often be detected because it will look fake. (Hence why people say that you smile with the eyes, not with the mouth.) Jones' smiles is apparently fake in an uncanny way. And inversely, attempting to prevent your emotions to show through is hard. This is why dedicated poker players may use botox -- not to erase wrinkles and appear younger, but to kill their facial muscles and ensure a constant poker face.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 13:42
|
|
|
DontMockMySmock posted:What's the difference?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 14:50
|
|
|
All Goons are actually robots.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
Beep boop I am a robot
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 18:38
|
|
|
Bongo Bill posted:Goons trying to understand feelings in this thread. None of this is actually clear.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 18:44
|
|
|
Philosophy aside, it's a pretty easy concept to grasp. When you want to fake a smile or a laugh, you generally don't just smile or laugh, you make yourself feel like smiling or laughing. Or at least I do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
Splicer posted:To an observer? Nothing. To the observed? Everything. Exactly. My point is, if there is a difference, which there probably is, it's entirely internal to Jones and we only have her word on that part of it. So there's not really any practical difference, and she should be treated just as if she did have the emotions it looks like she has.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
DontMockMySmock posted:Exactly. My point is, if there is a difference, which there probably is, it's entirely internal to Jones and we only have her word on that part of it. So there's not really any practical difference, and she should be treated just as if she did have the emotions it looks like she has. 1) Jones has some form of motivation, otherwise she would have spent the past several billion years standing perfectly still staring off into the distance. I'm not saying she has a long term plan, but she is not a completely blank slate. Something caused her to wander around amidst the dinosaurs and (eventually) start trying to emulate and fit in with Humans. If she really is just mimicking our social behaviours it begs the question; why bother? 2) Even if the above weren't true, Jones is still a character in a story we are reading. Character motivations in a story are something the reader cares about even if they aren't practically relevant. What's going on in Jones's head does matter, if only because we, the readers, care about it. Splicer fucked around with this message at 22:19 on Feb 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 22:17
|
|
|
So what is our conclusion on Jones? ...Have we reached a conclusion yet? I'm completely lost on this whole conversation 
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
She doesn't have human emotions. That's not the same as not having intentions, only of experiencing intention in a different way than human minds do. One subjective description of her mind that she offered - that of having perfect recall of everything she has ever experienced - is already extremely alien. She intentionally gives the impression of being something like a human in order to gain access to human society, which is useful to her. That includes faking the emotion that is most superficially consistent with her demeanor, which is to say, slightly condescending and dispassionate curiosity. She hasn't perfected the subtleties of emotional expressions she needs less. Humans can - and are eager to - describe the subjective experience of having a human mind, as is Jones of having Jones' mind, so I think she can be trusted when she says they're not the same. However, it's probably the case that, because she's never contacted a mind like hers and seen it, as it were, from the outside, there are things she does not know about her own mind.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 22:40
|
|
|
I don't think there's a conclusion we can reasonably come to, and I feel like that's explicitly the intent. Tom laid out two points of view in The Stone; one from Jones and one from Annie. We can believe one or the other or some mixture, but there is no definitive statement on which is correct. There may be additional evidence in future chapters that sheds light on it, or there might not be. This is one of those things that may be more interesting as a topic of discussion than a settled fact; just look at all the interesting things people have been saying about it for the last couple of pages.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 12:23 |
|
|
Jones exists as a character to get us to think about Mind and the true source of emotions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 23:23
|
|
