plasmid

Although I'm tempted to just say that "wall" is the answer, these two lines would stick out And I'm the reason wood's forsaken You'd better keep this pudding shaken And a wall wasn't really what I initially had in mind as far as guiding people's steps with I guide the ways that people romp Ergo, the lotus won't get stomped (although it could certainly also work)

Now that's getting super close, but doesn't quite explain the lines about wood being forsaken or needing to be shaken. But I get the feeling you're about to get the answer with the next guess.

That fits quite well with the first ten lines, but not really the last four, and isn't where I was heading.

That's the distractor, not the real answer. (My theme is writing "I'm not a ..." riddles with an obvious answer in the title and a covert answer.) I wasn't heading down that path, just writing a regular What Am I riddle and noticed that a lot of the names could be incorporated in clues. Knowledge about Brainden is not required to answer the riddle (just to get a chuckle at the clues).

Edit: looks like lotus beat me to the post

Yes... but what's the riddle about?

True, and note we've also got Peace*out and fileobrother here But now these names have formed a plot So which way do these clues all steer?

Though you may search for many days You'll find me plain and never glazed Unless a juvie, much like Bart Derides the dean and calls it "art" I'll keep the peace by keeping out All those who aren't your pals, devout If sentenced for the crimes of others Defy me, send a file to brother I guide the ways that people romp Ergo, the lotus won't get stomped And I'm the reason wood's forsaken You'd better keep this pudding shaken Mrs P heads East, as John B West They're well apart (I'll do my best)

Now you've got to admit, that sounds like it would win a lot more converts than "here's something we came up with on a discussion board", even if we don't have any artifacts to prove it. The truth about the meeting in Samarkand has been passed down as an oral tradition, but Phronism did not emerge on the world scene. Those who knew of the faith tried to spread it from time to time, but they were quickly silenced by those in power who went to great lengths to suppress knowledge of the faith. As time passed, Phronism was remembered by only a few who remained in hiding to avoid persecution, and it was not practiced. Although freedom of religion eventually became a reality in modern times, by then Phronism had fallen into such atrophy that it was only remembered as an ancient legend and no serious attempts were made to establish it. Until now, when the Essence stirs again. Chance meetings between people from across the world who had heard similar versions of the old stories made them think it might be a reality. They pieced together what fragments of information they had, and this is what emerged... It does require an Essence that's able to make itself known (at least to the ancients anyway) and has the drawback of potentially being contradicted if archaeological finds can somehow prove that a meeting in Samarkand would have been impossible. Alternatively, we could go with a story where Phronism appears now so it would avoid trouble with the historical record, but it would lack the sheer appeal that this story would have to a religious thinker who believes that the older something is, the more authoritative it is. Looks like we'll have to write parables that could have happened in 500 BC. It seems like the vast majority of stuff in most religions is a collection of old stories which mostly have to do with establishing how powerful their God is, and how you should put complete and unwavering faith in him, and don't want to be on the wrong side of a fight involving him. If we wanted to make something with the "look and feel" of a typical religion, we would just need a bunch of such stories. Preferably stories that teach basic morality instead of obsequious servitude. If we need to, we can rip stuff off from the Gospels, which seems to have the most highly concentrated bunch of actually useful stuff in the entire Bible. Or if we don't want to wade through all that crap, I'm sure we can just look up "morality" in Wikipedia and turn all the things it mentions into parables. If we want to give them a more sort of educational experience than just recounting a bunch of old stories, then along with game theory, efficiency of scale from economics could also teach cooperation. Principles of maintaining a balanced ecosystem from biology could be likened to finding your place in society to play a useful role. Giving real examples of how many people play a role in everything we do: from making and distributing goods to providing services (it really takes an entire infrastructure to do anything in a modern society) would show how interconnected everyone in the world really is and could help build a sense of solidarity. It seems like history lessons could be used in many different ways (although I'm having trouble coming up with examples right now), if nothing else by reinforcing that it's the people who actually accomplish great things who get recorded in the history books. Such stuff would probably not form the core of the philosophy, but could make for a unique trimming that most religions don't have.

Odds are captions, evens are drawings. Sign in at any number! Anyone can join just add more numbers to the roster! 1. *reserved* 2. *reserved* 3. scsw 4. GMaster479 5.LIS - caption only 6.No1slight 7.IDNE 8. plasmid 9. Add more numbers! Following IDNE? I'll take that dare.

x--x--x x x--x | | | x--x x x x x | | | x x x--x--x--x | | x--x--x x--x x | | x x x x--x x | | | | | x x x x x--x 3, 9

Well said, octopuppy. As for the origins, I'd still like to come up with something better than "some people came up with this on a discussion forum" if possible. The story we ultimately go with will determine the format that the revised parables will take. For now though, I'm enjoying the weather in California while I'm looking at homes. Internet access will be hit-and-miss.

x--x--x x x--x | x--x x x x x | | | x x x--x--x--x | | x--x--x x x x | x x x x--x x | | | | | x x x x x--x 4, 10

If we're getting rid of stuff that has no real objective basis for being plausible, then how much longer until we get rid of the Essence? After all, is it really necessary? If you wanted to go down that track, you could turn Phronism into atheism, with one important difference. It's unlike pure atheism, where there is not only no God but also no objective set of morals and no ordained purpose in life (not provided from on high anyway) and many would say no particular reason to live (at least as some Christians here on BrainDen and I'm sure many others elsewhere believe) and no community experience. Phronism would head towards becoming more like a philosophy, which supplies a set of moral principles, a feeling of purpose to life, and the whole community experience of traditional religions, just without the God. It just keeps the seemingly useful parts of religion (or at least some of those parts that the OP was getting at as being things the people just seem to need). Then we could sell it like a "religion for grown-ups who don't need a God anymore". The attraction for religious people is that it still carries all the trappings and moral teachings of religions: most Christians in my experience have had trouble distinguishing the concepts of atheist meaning rejecting God but not rejecting morality and community and all the other things that typically go with religion. Phronism would be an extra layer of philosophy on top of atheism that at least tells religious people that Phronists have a core set of values in the common interest of humanity that they stick to, and they're not just people who rejected religion so they could go sin. In practice I guess most Phronist issues would have to deal with the conflict between fulfilling one's own personal base desires and sacrificing to help others out for the greater good of the community. The Sunday (now known as Phronday) services would not be stories from a holy text, but stories from history books. As well as science and logic to some degree: the Prisoner's Dilemma would have to be standard teaching. Granted, that would make it very very similar to secular humanism which, although a beautiful philosophy, doesn't seem to have caught on that well. We would have to find out why secular humanism hasn't caught on and make Phronism behave differently. I suspect (without any evidence) that secular humanism is meant to appeal to people who are already atheists and want a community experience; we would have to make Phronism geared more for people who are currently religious, but deep down feel that religion is a little silly and outdated, but don't want to become outright atheists for the reasons above. That, and secular humanism has way to many syllables, which we have fixed. I'll close it there; the secular humanist version of Phronism route can be explored further if you wish, but for now back to the original Phronism. Actually, part of the plan would be to print out a copy of this thread when we're done and entrust it to some very wise people who would hand it down for posterity to be revealed to the world if Phronism ever starts running completely amok. When people see the bird, the cat, the puppy, and the baby talking about Barack Obama and Chuck Norris starting their religion, that would be the end of it. Ok, that does seem to have a better feel to it. I like it. Oh, yeah, I guess I did just completely change that. um, looks like most of them

Thanks, I really like playing around with the poetic meter. I've modeled mine on Shakeepuddn's style; he hasn't been posting much recently (not since you've joined BrainDen I think) but if you look through the older posts he's got a ton of good ones back there.

Indeed, that's the answer

Thanks, Lotus. Interesting answers, but they don't wear headgear or like you said pay bills.

We'll float like a butterfly, sting like a bee And leave you suckers black and blue Though when we're in action we usually bleed That's who we are, that's what we do We do it for kicks and we do it for thrills When boredom makes you lose your mind But mostly we do it to pay off the bills We hope that you can read the sign Now give us our headgear or give us a punch So we can hang around with you You'd best wear protection alongside our bunch Although you might be called a prude

x--x x x x--x x--x x x x x | | x x x--x--x--x | | x--x--x x x x x x x x--x x | | | | | x x x x x--x 17, 18

I still gotta say that I don't like a name that sounds so close to Phony. If that's how it's pronounced, I'd lean toward Harmonism or Eucredism. That's purely the result of playing around with Gimp and path editing. I would argue that one of the things we need to require from the denominations is that they be able to work and play well with others. Religions are at their worst when they claim a monopoly on Truth and morality, and thereby marginalize others. And we do need to have a system where people are required to go out and actually participate with other denoms every so often to keep the selection process going anyway. That's a good point that the denoms will have vastly different ways of worshiping, so this really can't be a sacred worshiping sort of event. More like the company's annual picnic. Is it time to compile everything so far and see what more we need to put in place? And also think about how this might be presented in the form of a story or documentary? Let the food fights over how to craft the doctrine commence! Concepts to introduce The Actual is what we deduce from reason and scientific study. It is a description of the universe around us, past and present, and the rules by which it operates. Concepts that are part of the Actual must be testable and must hold up to scientific scrutiny. Because it is derived from human understanding, it is both finite and fallible; nevertheless, it represents the most rigorous understanding that we can achieve. Furthermore, humanity's increasing understanding of the Actual has produced tangible results by giving people the power to harness the forces of nature towards desirable ends and to anticipate the course along which events will unfold. The Potential represents concepts that are not part of the Actual, yet do not conflict with the Actual. To the degree that humanity can delineate what parts of the Potential are Actual and which parts conflict with the Actual, a more accurate understanding of the universe will emerge. On some topics, however, there exist no suitable means to investigate with scientific inquiry. Such topics include the purpose of humanity's existence. In order to guide our lives, we are therefore forced to turn from the Actual to the Potential. The Essence is an entity within the Potential that was selected by many of humanity's greatest thinkers (i.e. you ) to provide an answer to questions of purpose that cannot be addressed by the Actual. Like the Actual, the Essence is derived from human understanding and is therefore fallible. However, it also may produce tangible results by guiding humanity's actions toward desirable ends. Most Holy Doctrine. This would likely be something that is said in a short, great speech near the end of the story. Humanity struggles to fulfill our potential as it emanates from the Essence, and much remains to be learned and understood. Connecting with the Essence is an endless quest along a path that will be increasingly revealed as humanity parts the veil of the unknown through reason and sober study. While science reveals the mechanics of nature, it remains silent on our overall purpose, and for this we turn to the Essence. Purpose implies a need to act, and our Acts of Legacy will define our relationship with the Essence. To harmonize with the Essence: Help others, be generous, be reliable. Do not harm others, steal, or lie. Learn throughout your childhood, and fulfill your potential as an adult. Find something that you're good at that will benefit society and do it. Understand at all times that faith is a supplement to, and not a supplanter of, reason; it is a way to see the world that will lead to fulfillment, and its worth is measured by the degree to which it accomplishes this goal. It is fit that there be many denominations of <NAME>, for not all people are alike, and diversity helps humanity flourish. The denominations shall each have their own customs and ways of harmonizing with the Essence. As it is important for people to each find their unique role in the harmony of the Essence, it is imperative for them to visit other denominations from time to time and experience their ways, and thus find their place in the world. As it is important to have many denominations, so it is important to have people outside <NAME> who are most fit to view it objectively and dispassionately. Outsiders that understand the world through mankind's endeavors are to be welcomed, for they offer a unique perspective and often seek to advance humanity as the followers do. But beware if outsiders bring ideas that are based not on reason but on unsubstantiated beliefs such as gods, for these are illusions of human imaginations that may guide the way to decay. We have a smattering of parables that unreality has been keeping up, with the latest compilation here. They cover the denominational system, a couple of vague descriptions of "afterlife" with the Essence, an ethical tale on not stealing, a warning not to worship false gods, one on free will, and a couple on the importance of non-believers' opinions. Should we keep Obama as the messiah, or should we design this such that any old Joe will do? (preferably we'd have someone who's revered, but it seems prudent to have a story that anyone could star in) Do we need some more pieces to weave into the story? Definitely one or two on choosing a denomination based on how much it drives you to accomplish, an unambiguous instruction (not just a parable) saying to visit and participate in other denoms every X years (1-3 or so?), maybe one or two more to give examples of Acts of Legacy determining your existence with the Essence (encouraging artistic and scientific and practical accomplishments). Psychadelic yet vague descriptions of the Essence might also be useful. Then we need to decide what the overall plot of the story is going to be. Maybe have the messiah start off religious, then get fed up and try to be atheist, then decide that his life lacks purpose and meet with some wise men and develop the doctrine. Build up some followers and confront the major religions to point out some of their most egregious shortfallings, and tell them flat out that they don't hold the Truth and no one does, and they need to admit they don't and just do the best they can with what they've got, which ain't perfect but with the sum total of all the advancements of humanity sure ain't nothing either. And he should definitely have a pet bird and cat and puppy and a little baby. Council days: The messiah should probably mention at some point that there will be rules spelled out to guide the governance of the religion, but the details can be spelled out in a separate manual. Because the Essence represents the best that human understanding is able to produce, it should be reviewed from time to time. The council must ensure that the Essence remains within the Potential and does not conflict with the Actual, which will ever be expanding. The council must evaluate whether the Essence truly serves as a useful and effective guide for people's lives. The council must also assess whether each of the denominations is adhering to the principles of the Essence and allowing it to achieve its goals. If a new understanding of the Essence it required, it will be adopted. If denominations need to be altered to harmonize with the Essence, they will be so instructed, or will be excluded from <NAME> if they cannot harmonize. The council will evaluate new denominations and determine whether they harmonize with the Essence, and will admit those that do into <NAME> and allow them to participate in the council. And there are also plans that aren't really part of the doctrine, like offering denoms that are rather similar to the current faiths to get started with the conversion process.

x--x x x x x x--x x x x x | | x x x--x--x x | | x--x--x x x x x x x x--x x | | | x x x x x--x 16, 17

Regarding the origins of Phronism, I had forgotten something very important: if we present the story of the religion in the form of a documentary, then we don't really need to explain the origins at all. If we're telling a story, we can just have the messiah walk onto the scene and start preaching. The universe works the way it does because, well, it just does in the story that we're telling. People are quite used to jumping into a sci-fi story and just kind of figuring out what the rules are as it goes along. That would go double if we use the movie format instead of the stuffy old book format. No need to get into the origins if we don't want to. I'm tempted to say "There's no point in designing Phronism such that it can adapt to the existence of a God. If God were to reveal himself, then He would give the definitive word on religion and that would be the end of it." But there's the slim possibility that some quantum physicist might prove that a God must have existed to observe the big bang or something without revealing anything about him, so I guess we need to make it adaptable to that. You're just trying to get on my good side by calling it DNA, aren't you? But that seems quite consistent with the Phronist doctrine we have so far, I think that it very well could be the basis of a denomination. This brings up a question we haven't really addressed. We've had the idea that there would be a core doctrine that each of the denominations would build on, but we've never really set ground rules on what sorts of things the denoms can and can't do. Certainly holding ceremonies and singing hymns and debating moral issues of the day to decide what constitutes moral behavior is fine, and declaring that there is an omnipotent and rather grumpy God that granted you divine right to occupy someone else's land would be more problematic. Preaching morality is important and should definitely be done, but unless it's done carefully it could demonize people who don't share your views, and such distrust if not outright hatred of outsiders seems to be one of the worst consequences of religion. Where's a good place to draw a line for the denoms and say not to cross it? Certainly some things will be judgment calls that will just need to be made on a case-by-case basis, but what are some good rules of thumb on what's appropriate and what isn't? I think Council Days would be a good idea. I don't know what kind of voting cutoffs we should use to do things like change core doctrine or dissolve a denom though. Oh, yeah, we had been debating a while ago about how memetic selection probably wouldn't end up selecting for the desired attributes if we just let it run on its own. After all, that's been going on for the past few thousand years and has produced what we have now. The best I could come up with was trying to include instructions in a parable to the effect of "pick the denominations that drive you to perform great things". But then that parable got axed. I'd ideally like to find a better solution to drive selection anyway, but haven't been able to come up with one. And finally, as far as a logo, do you mean something sort of simple yet vague and wildly interpretable sort of like this thing that looks sort of like a nose and eyes, and sort of like an angel dress with outstretched wings, and sort of like candles, or will we be going for something that's more readily interpretable?

x--x x x x x x x x x x x | | x x x--x x x | | x--x--x x x x x x x x--x x | | x x x x x x 19, 20