Christian Engström, Pirate MEP

10 januari 2012

A Kopimist Creation Myth

Postat i: English,kopimism — Christian Engström @ 11:31
Tags: ,

Kopimism is Sweden's newest officially recognized religion

The Missionary Church of Kopimism has been recognized as an official religion in Sweden. It is still a very young religion, so there are many aspects of it that need to be developed and defined.

Here is my proposal for a Kopimist Creation Myth (previously published in Swedish):

In the beginning, the world was a stinking mess of ammonia, methane gas, and nasty toxic chemicals. The atmosphere was alight with flashes of pure energy. Something wanted to be born.

In ways and for reasons that remain to be explored, the ribosomes appeared, who could copy. This was the beginning of Life. We therefore see Copying as the first manifestation of the Divine Spirit.

When the ribosomes were there, and could copy both themselves and the proteins necessary to build a cell, this led to cells actually appearing. Exactly why the proteins chose to voluntarily organize into something more complicated is, as we said, not yet fully explored, so we’ll have reasons to come back to this. But we leave that aside for the moment.

The important thing is that the cells appeared. Cells have two properties. First, they can copy themselves, just like the ribosomes before them. Second, they like to cooperate with others to build things that are larger than any of the constituent parts.

From these two properties, the living world that we see around us developed. The giraffe and the parsley, the forest and the shoal of fish, all other living phenomena ever filmed by the BBC.

We Kopimists therefore see Copying as the First Fundamental Principle of the Creation.

We see the Desire to Build Something Larger Together as the Second Fundamental Principle.

From this basis, we want to learn to understand the Divine Spirit and the world we live in. And we want to do it together with others.

Amen.

…………

Others on Kopimism (in English): Rick Falkvinge, Torrentfreak, Torrentfreak, BBC, Then Piratska Argus, Anton Nordenfur, GlobalPost, India Times, Brunei News, Stuff.co.nz, Crave Online, The Daily Activist,

In Swedish: 99, our 68, Dagen, Siewert Öholm, Seglora smedja, SvD Ledarbloggen, Faidros blog, Maths hörna, Hanna Fridén, Magnihasa, Gothbarbie, Deepedition, Värmlandspiraten, Copyriot, Blogge 之乎者也,

21 kommentarer

  1. Kommentar av Anonym — 10 januari 2012 @ 14:58

  2. 1. The Missionary Church of Kopimism has NOT been recognized as an official religion in Sweden. Please don’t spread incorrect facts.

    The swedish state has no opinion whatsoever regarding this religion, it has simply been registered by name and fulfilling some other basic requirements related to the registration. The Missionary Church of Navel Lint would be registered just as easily.

    2. It’s ridiculous to praise copying since this can be either good or bad, just like praising opinion, action, reluctance, smell, rumor, sound

    Copying can be good: Human life through copying of healthy cells, good behavior, good design patterns (model-view-controller…)
    Copying can be bad: Cancer, lethal bacteria or viruses, violence, bad habits

    Kommentar av nejtillpirater — 10 januari 2012 @ 17:26

  3. @nejtillpirater Your intolerance against my religion is a demonstrative example of the prosecution my people have to endure. It is evident that you will never accept my faith or respect my values but I will turn the other cheek and respect you none the less. Copy and seed.

    Kommentar av Kristofer Pettersson — 10 januari 2012 @ 21:24

  4. @Kristoffer

    ”Your intolerance against my religion is a demonstrative example of the prosecution my people have to endure”

    I’m not intolerant, I just wanted to correct Christian regarding the erroneous statement ”has been recognized as an official religion in Sweden”.

    People may believe in whatever they want and I respect every religion in that sense as long as the religion is not transformed into actions that abuse people or deprive them of their lawful rights. It doesn’t matter which religion you believe in, the Swedish law applies to all citizens.

    Kommentar av nejtillpirater — 10 januari 2012 @ 21:49

  5. @ nejtillpirater

    2. It’s ridiculous to praise copying since this can be either good or bad, just like praising opinion, action, reluctance, smell, rumor, sound

    Wow. So according to your personal views it’s ridiculous to praise something that isn’t ”pure good”, which practically includes everything in life…

    Luckily, your personal views that there isn’t something in the world worth praising is completely irrelevant for the discussion. Among the people who should be concerned however is your family and friends, who by your very own definition isn’t worthy of your praise.

    Kommentar av Professor — 10 januari 2012 @ 22:03

  6. @Professor

    ”Wow. So according to your personal views it’s ridiculous to praise something that isn’t ”pure good”, which practically includes everything in life…”

    No, this is your deliberate misinterpretation of my personal view.

    ”Luckily, your personal views that there isn’t something in the world worth praising is completely irrelevant for the discussion.”

    Your deliberate misinterpretation of my personal view is even more irrelevant for the discussion.

    ”Among the people who should be concerned however is your family and friends, who by your very own definition isn’t worthy of your praise.”

    My family and friends are not affected whatsoever of your deliberate misinterpretations.

    Kommentar av nejtillpirater — 10 januari 2012 @ 22:14

  7. @ nejtillpirater

    People may believe in whatever they want and I respect every religion in that sense as long as the religion is not transformed into actions that abuse people or deprive them of their lawful rights. It doesn’t matter which religion you believe in, the Swedish law applies to all citizens.

    Oh the irony. In the former comment you practically ridiculed every religion in the world and their followers just to turn 180 degree in this one to try and convince us that you in fact respect every single one of the religions you just ridiculed.

    Kommentar av Professor — 10 januari 2012 @ 22:25

  8. Please leave the ”Divine Spirit” for other religions. Information is holy in itself.

    Kommentar av Joakim Rosqvist — 10 januari 2012 @ 22:37

  9. @Professor

    You’re obviously trolling here.

    In #2, the ONLY religion mentioned by me was Kopimism.

    And then you try to put words into my mouth regarding my personal view. I didn’t even state my personal view apart from

    ”It’s ridiculous to praise copying since this can be either good or bad, just like praising opinion, action, reluctance, smell, rumor, sound”. Period.

    The rest is only fantasies from your part.

    And then

    ”In the former comment you practically ridiculed every religion in the world and their followers just to turn 180 degree in this one to try and convince us that you in fact respect every single one of the religions you just ridiculed.”

    Again, the ONLY religion mentioned by me was Kopimism. Please name every single religion I just ridiculed…

    You’re completely off-topic and again, I really think that Christian should perform some moderation. My answer, #2, was completely relevant to the discussion whereas #5 and #7 was not.

    Kommentar av nejtillpirater — 10 januari 2012 @ 22:48

  10. ”In #2, the ONLY religion mentioned by me was Kopimism.”

    I’m sorry that I overreacted. I thought you meant that Kopimism wasn’t a religion in Sweden. Now you obviously state that it is. Do you think it other should acknowledge this fact or do you encourage them to deny it or write it off as a joke?

    Kommentar av Kristofer Pettersson — 10 januari 2012 @ 23:21

  11. @ nejtillpirater

    @Professor

    ”Wow. So according to your personal views it’s ridiculous to praise something that isn’t ”pure good”, which practically includes everything in life…”

    No, this is your deliberate misinterpretation of my personal view.

    Eh no? That was exactly what you wrote. You ridiculed the idea of praising something because it, and I quote, ”can be either good or bad”. This simple fact remains regardless of whether you keep track of what you are writing or not.

    ”Luckily, your personal views that there isn’t something in the world worth praising is completely irrelevant for the discussion.”

    Your deliberate misinterpretation of my personal view is even more irrelevant for the discussion.

    Or may it be that your magic ability to look into people’s minds to read their intentions needs a little more tuning?

    ”Among the people who should be concerned however is your family and friends, who by your very own definition isn’t worthy of your praise.”

    My family and friends are not affected whatsoever of your deliberate misinterpretations.

    Not only do you have problem with keeping track of what you have written yourself, but obviously you have problems with understanding other people’s texts as well. You see, I have nowhere implied that your family and friends would be affected by my interpretations.

    On the contrary, I was very clear with pointing out that it was by your very own definition that they weren’t worthy of your praise.

    The interesting part here is that you have still not even attempted to defend or retract your statement. Instead you put focus on the person level with silly low substance arguments.

    Kommentar av Professor — 10 januari 2012 @ 23:29

  12. @ nejtillpirater

    @Professor

    You’re obviously trolling here.

    Eh no? How about substantiating any of your claims instead of dodging the bullet every time by turning away from the actual debate to focus on the persons themselves as soon as someone proves you wrong?

    In #2, the ONLY religion mentioned by me was Kopimism.

    This just proves my point further. Not only did you not mention any religion by name in the quoted text, but what’s more you once again failed to understand simple writings from other people.

    You see, it’s completely irrelevant whether you mention a religion by name or not when you construct arguments that by their very own definitions embrace all religions.

    I hope you are not calling me a troll on the grounds that you simple are unable to understand my writings?

    And then you try to put words into my mouth regarding my personal view.

    What you see as trying to put words in your mouth is in fact simple explanations of the consequences of your arguments. The funny thing here is that instead of debating these consequences, defending your argument or retracting it, you resorted to lame discussions about the person rather than the case, as you are here. Remarkable indeed…

    I didn’t even state my personal view apart from

    ”It’s ridiculous to praise copying since this can be either good or bad, just like praising opinion, action, reluctance, smell, rumor, sound”. Period.

    In case it haven’t occurred to you yet, this is the very same quote on which I have based my arguments on. You can’t blame me if you don’t grasp the consequence of your own writings.

    The rest is only fantasies from your part.

    It would be interesting to see as to what you refer to as the mysteriously ”the rest”.

    And then

    ”In the former comment you practically ridiculed every religion in the world and their followers just to turn 180 degree in this one to try and convince us that you in fact respect every single one of the religions you just ridiculed.”

    Again, the ONLY religion mentioned by me was Kopimism. Please name every single religion I just ridiculed…

    Eh no? You did in fact not mention any religion by name in the quoted text. However, as explained above, it’s completely irrelevant whether you did. Even your request is irrelevant, which you would have known if you actually understood the implications of your own argument.

    You’re completely off-topic and again, I really think that Christian should perform some moderation. My answer, #2, was completely relevant to the discussion whereas #5 and #7 was not.

    On the contrary. I entered a discussion with you and have been on-topic in that discussion ever since the start. I can’t be blamed because I point out and explain the implications of your contradicting arguments, now can I?

    I also fail to see your point regarding that half of your ”#2″ comment was actually relevant to the discussion. Nor do I see any problems with pointing out the implications of your very odd, remarkable, and contradicting statements.

    Also keep in mind that the last time you were having problems with substantiating your claims and turned to Christian for help, he kindly told you what others have said all the time, that it was you who were the problem on this blog and not all the other individuals dodging all of your personal attacks, etc.

    Kommentar av Professor — 11 januari 2012 @ 0:38

  13. Can I propose some more embellishments for the myth:

    In amongst that early, seething soup, the first self-contained metabolizing systems appeared. However, there was no compatibility among them, no capacity to build on each other’s achievements; each was aloof, a proprietary system unto itself. Each one flourished for a while, and then faded, leaving its constituent molecules in the lurch, with no place else to go—an evolutionary dead-end.

    Then the first metabolizing systems appeared that learned how to copy from each other. And so, instead of having to reinvent (or re-evolve) the wheel, they were able to build on each other’s successful mutations. These early open systems replicated and spread, and soon were able to push the closed, proprietary systems into obscurity. And then these single-celled copying systems learned not just to make lots of copies, but to build more complex multicellular systems out of those individual copies. And those more complex multicellular systems in turn learned how to copy themselves.

    And so we see that Copying is the verry essence of Life. The spirit of Copying is integrated, quite literally, into our very DNA. So the preservation of Life compels us to go forth and be Copying, and multiply, and build ever new interesting variations on our Copies, that can in turn be Copied. Because anything that cannot be Copied will die.

    Kommentar av Lawrence D’Oliveiro — 11 januari 2012 @ 3:26

  14. Even some of the pirates are upset about The Missionary Church of Kopimism, due to the association with Ung Pirat, part of the Swedish Pirate Party.

    http://anton.nordenfur.se/?p=1569

    Through Google Translate:

    ”I have already started to hear many say that the PP now gone over completely and become a collection of fanatical anarchists, who now also have to literally worship sharing. We have fought for six years to be deducted from the stamp as a fanatical minority group, and DMK is now helping to drag us back into the dungeon again.”

    DMK = The Missionary Church of Kopimism in Swedish, PP = The Swedish Pirate Party.

    Kommentar av nejtillpirater — 11 januari 2012 @ 7:14

  15. Dear nejtillpirater

    I can really feel your hurt. I don’t know why, maybe you are a monoteistic believer, so any other belief than in your God is hurting you, and you embark on a one-man crusade…

    Nevertheless, The Missionary Church of Kopimism has been recognized as an official religion in Sweden. In the one and only way the secular state that Sweden is, handles those things, by the Kammarkollegium. All formalia for being recognized as a religion by the Kammarkollegium is being followed to the letter.

    Just accept the fact, please.

    Eric

    Kommentar av Anonym — 11 januari 2012 @ 18:05

  16. [...] Det måste ha varit synkat med Anna Troberg och Christian Engström. Både Anna Troberg, Christian Engström och Rick Falkvinge uttrycker sig positivt om [...]

    Pingback av Piratpartiet – en samling fanatiska anarkister? « Nej till pirater och Piratpartiet — 11 januari 2012 @ 18:09

  17. @nejtillpirater

    According to your own criteria Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism and Hinduism do not qualify for the status of being a religion then. This is problematic.

    Or would you say that the stringent criteria of the abrahamic covenant requiring self-mutilation in judaism or the symbolic cannibalism practiced in catholic mass is somehow ”better” than the idea that the copying and communication of information is the central tenet of all sentient life?

    If so, I suggest you clarify your statement accordingly.

    The only real opposition which can be logically voiced against Kopimism is the same one which is applicable to any religion – the doubt that a moral philosophy should be considered a sacrosanct basis for a belief.

    Kommentar av Scary Devil Monastery — 16 januari 2012 @ 12:49

  18. @Scary

    ”According to your own criteria Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism and Hinduism do not qualify for the status of being a religion then. This is problematic.”

    And what criteria is that according to you?

    The religions you’ve listed are – religions – and qualifies…

    Kommentar av nejtillpirater — 16 januari 2012 @ 18:46

  19. ”The religions you’ve listed are – religions – and qualifies…”

    In other words, a religion qualifies as a religion because it is a religion?

    Thank you for those pearls of ”wisdom”. I shouldn’t be surprised to see you actually bringing circular logic to the table.

    As for your criteria:
    ”People may believe in whatever they want and I respect every religion in that sense as long as the religion is not transformed into actions that abuse people or deprive them of their lawful rights. It doesn’t matter which religion you believe in, the Swedish law applies to all citizens.”

    If you provide as a reason for mutilating your infant child by having it circumcised that you are Jewish or a Muslim then you are in fact allowed to demand from a doctor that he perform body modification on your child of the same magnitude as if it were to be fitted with tattoos or piercings. This is quite clearly excempt from any swedish law I have ever heard of. You could try to have your child modified in similar ways for any other than a religious reason and I have no doubt social services would come knocking on your door immediately.

    In Christianity the central thesis is mass. During which, according to catholic dogma, you are literally consuming the flesh and blood of another human being. This may be lawful but I believe that even you should be aware that in ANY other circumstance there would be a very drastic reaction to such rites by the common public.

    Sikhs are exempt from some common laws and regulations regarding dress and hygiene in medical care.

    In other words, ”established” religions very often do carry extreme exceptions both from the common law of the land and from societal moral judgment as a whole. According to your own criteria, Neither Judaism nor Islam qualify as religions. Many portions of the bible quite clearly qualify as ”hate speech” (particularly the old testament).

    So, once again, you are wrong.

    Kommentar av Scary Devil Monastery — 17 januari 2012 @ 10:45

  20. [...] Här är en länk till en kopimistisk skapelseberättelse (även på engelska). [...]

    Pingback av Länk till Kopimistisk skapelseberättelse « Christian Engström, Pirate MEP — 21 januari 2012 @ 10:24

  21. ”Copy, Paste, Reference”
    -It is taught in schools, it is taught in universities, and now it is a Religion…
    http://www.dnaindia.com/lifestyle/report_i-kopi-therefore-i-am_1643163-all

    Kommentar av Neel Gupta — 2 februari 2012 @ 8:01


RSS-flöde för kommentarer till det här inlägget.

Rubric-temat Blogga med WordPress.com.

Följ

Få meddelanden om nya inlägg via e-post.

Gör sällskap med 1 866 andra följare

%d bloggers like this: