What’s the point if a wrong answer blocks you from returning to the right question?
It is funny!
I think this is great, BUT, it seems to be meant as an argument for Atheism???
To me relying on empirism IS the old answers.
Perhaps not as old as many forms of Theism but definatly a lot older than many questions asked by several branches of Philosophy.
To me a cramp like hold, as if life depended on it, to ideas limited to very few Epistemologies and and the resulting Ontologies ARE the old answers.
The thinkers KEEP asking….Atheism is an answer, and one that at lest in my country has been documented at least a thousand years back (there are Atheists in the Norse Sagas).
Is there Divinity or no????
Is there a material universe?
I find it hilarious how Atheists like to quote physicists on matters of religion and philosophy.
As if a physicists knew more about the subject than a janitor or a piano player.
It is just a fancy and utterly pseudo scientific form of name dropping.
Martial och venusiansk sexualitet
Min personliga åsikt är att sexualiteten spelar en stor roll andligt, socialt, fysiskt och känslomässigt, konstnärligt, intellektuellt som går långt bortom (fysisk) fortplantning.
Dessutom så talas det ofta om Qliphoth i Esoteriska sammanhang i väldigt kvalitativa termer snarare än kvantitativa. Det var influx av Ohr (Aur) som spräckte Kelim, kort sagt inflöde av Gudomlig/kreativ kraft spräckte kärlen.
Två av något som balanserar ut varandra och inte generellt överflödar systemet är Sephirothiska.
En kvalitet som tar över och lämnar en obalans i systemet riskerar att bli Qliphothisk.
Detta är väl tämligen “basic” Kabbalah?
Att totalt ägna hela livet åt en enda Mitzvah skulle likt förbannat bli en obalans.
Mycket som i exoteriska sammanhang skulle anses “omoraliskt”, balanserat med sin motsats och i en “dos” lämplig för helheten leder till trancendence bortom båda dessa principer.
Jag känner massvis med bögar, transor, sadister, masochister, voyeourer och exibitionister av de mest varierande slag.
De enda “perversa” jag känner till är de som helt frånsäger sig hela principen eller förfalskar sin egen natur för att glädja en övernaturlig varelse.
Today i just had this feeling of nausea or inertia over the internet with its social medias wich arent really social (duh) and its constant regurgitating state.
On the one hand we have the places like Facebook and i cant stand another second of people posting the trivial minutia of their lives today.
Places like Tumblr wich are really just people spitting out pretty pictures.
Both places…most if not all places on the web mainly made for people with a micro celebrity complex and no interest whatsoever in anyone else (yup, nobody reads your posts…..just like you couldnt care crap about theirs) and an attention span of three seconds.
The entitled generation spewing all over eachother.
Should you actually enter a discussion on anything that could possably be of any interest to anyone older than ten or air an opinion it is all mini trolling, oneupmanship and people with little or no actual existence trying to get the “satisfaction” of “winning” the discussion.
I just dont have the energy to post the same arguments over and over to people who think they are intellectuals who has “gotten it”.
Neither do i have the energy to do so for all the fanatics and fundamentalists out there.
I regard myself as a tolerant guy who can in every way stand people disagreeing with me but in the long run, Atheists trying to “save” people with a rigor i have only seen in the Jehovas Witnesses before, racists who hide behind some make belif “heritage”. Having them constantly rain down their gospels over me is just tiering.
Once upon a time i too belived that the web was a place full of information and the free word.
A place where people could discuss the way grown ups do, with nothing to prove, everything to find and without some obligation to reach a consensus (usually the opinion of the loudest and least educated person).
In reality the internet is to a large part a toy.Nothing more.
Most information is there, but drowned under tons of crap, not that it matters, very few people have any interest anyway.
They are either shallow or pseudo intellectuals passing their pet theories as knowledge.
…..and again, the ones that arent usually have to be DUG up from underneath all the nothingness.
ScienceDaily (July 3, 2012) — How do individuals conceive their world and their place in it? In an attempt to identify the worldview of the Batek tribe, a team of researchers from the Academy of Language Studies at the Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) embarked on a comprehensive study to document the characteristics and elements found in Batek folklore.
Exploring the relationship between superstitions, the supernatural world and culture, the team draw on oral literature, in particular the eighteen stories recounted by Tok Batin Mahad, the head of the Batek tribe in Taman Negara, Pahang, to produce this socio-cultural study.
The study provides an intriguing insight into the diverse elements found in Batek folklore. Twenty three elements including folk botany, traditional narratives, supernatural beings, sorcery and witchcraft, the physical world, the earth, the material world, animal folklore, fire, hypnotism and animal magnetism, the human body, life and death, folk medicine, traditional customs and ceremonies as well as folk sayings form the core of the stories.
The term ethnocentrism was coined by William G. Sumner, upon observing the tendency for people to differentiate between the in-group and others. He defined it as “the technical name for the view of things in which one’s own group is the center of everything, and all others are scaled and rated with reference to it.” He further characterized it as often leading to pride, vanity, beliefs of one’s own group’s superiority, and contempt of outsiders. Robert K. Merton comments that Sumner’s additional characterization robbed the concept of some analytical power because, Merton argues, centrality and superiority are often correlated, but need to be kept analytically distinct.
Just as it may take “deprogramming” to get out of a “cult” (in the modern meaning) it may take some to get into a cult (proper).
A deprogramming of the norm so to speak.
It is very easy to by way of structuralism and ethnocentrism attempt to apply a teaching or way to ones life that is really nothing more than ones original one in other trappings.
I would say that this is true regardless of weather it is a mystery school such as Thelema, Kabbalah or Raja Yoga or if it is a reconstructivist or ethnic path.
I sometimes find myself struggling with sexual ideas, ideals as to what is “sacred” and what is “profane”, the nature of morals, philosophical and cultural ideals and so on that i can clearly see are Christian (despite not having been a Christian for decades), Post-Modern or other strains of philosophy that are part of contemporary mainstream society.
This despite a number of initiations, years of religous practice and study.
This is probably (one reason ) why banishings are so essential to the Ceremonial Magician.
Taking out the trash leaves room for any other work.
Just like when studying another contemporary or ancient culture, the glasses of ones own has to come off.
Paralells that dont exist must be exorcicised and the subject must be studied objectively and with some degree of honesty.
This however also applies to the praxis that might follow.
Just like an ethnocentric antropologist would be more or less studying his own culture, a mystic or reconstructivist stuck in the norm of today would simply be a guy changing robes.
After seeing “Contact” for the (at least) fourth time, i have once again to admit what deapht it has.
It possesses Mystery in the true sense of the word.
The movie is after Carl Sagans story and stars Jodie Foster as Dr Arroway.
Cooks, scientists and religous people
One interesting thing is how it is fully clear that you can exchange the experiences of the characters with eachother.
Arroway is supposedly the one representing science at first (or on surface rather) as oppose to Father Joss (Matthew McConnaughey) representing faith but by the end of the movie, though officially being a scientist and empiricist she rather represents the Mystic (the one with direct experience) as oppose to Father Joss being the one with learning within a particular Theology.
The rather militairistic charachter by James Woods might seem like the champion of rationalism and empiricism but takes on a role just as much in tune with the inquisition.
Arroway even ends up in a trial, expected to prove her experience or at least explain it.
This seems to be the fate of those who believe in non official truths as well as those disbeliving in sanctioned ones through history.
In short, at first Arroway must defend herself against faith, “Do you consider yourself a spiritual person”, “We dont even know if they [the extraterrestials] belive in God” only to at the end have to defend herself against empiricism.
Symbolism and connections
I have sometimes, as an ancestor venerating Heathen, wondered about me asking the psychopomps of my ways to bring those that has gone before me to me what these people would say, considering that they must have been of different or no religions.
Will they wonder or cry out in outrage at Odin or Freya showing them the way to the shrine or do they percieve something else (like Archangel Gabriel or a relative) guiding them?
Before you say anything, i´m fully aware that the question is only relevant within a metaphysical and cosmological field connected to my myths and rituals. Whether there are any psychopomps or ancesteors at all doing anything is another question.
It still leads to religous, cultural and personal symbolism.
When Arroway finally end up in Lira (?) she does so in a place looking like Pensacola, met by her late and much missed father.
One might ask how much of our experience, not only religous, mystical or emotional but even “empirical” that is actually a form of myth, saturated with symbolism.
Near death experiences often have dead relatives greeting and leading the person.
Religous symbolism is usually at least somewhat connected to culture.
Our culture detirmines a lot of how we percieve our “everyday and ordinary” world and interactions in it.
If a more intense experience takes on a “look” of familiarity to make itself accessable (whether a deliberate act of its own or an effect of us being us) i am not at all surprised.
That all of the experience seems to take place in the vessel of Arroways transportation makes it very much a symbol of the cirle that a ceremonial magician can relate to.
The whole thing is a bit “holodeck”, with the landscape being much bigger than the locale in wich it is experienced.
I guess in a way it is just as symbolic of the temple, sweat lodge, synagogue, mosque or any other place wich in itself is very finite but has an infinate experience within it.
Fittingly the vessel is spherical (magical circle) with circles around it making it look like an atom (a symbol of the Atheists) thus in a sense placing Arroway in the center of both myth and science.
Relative or absolute…and does it matter?
The question is not wether Arroway had a mystical experience (she cant prove or share it with anyone) or a physical one (the vessel and whole operation being based on science) or even wether reality is a relative or absolute experience.
The story is about the awe of existence and how we relate to it differently depending on place in life…but at the same time depending on time, personal experience (in a sense mystery and initiation) and view point how the people are exchangeable and thus relative.
That is, some reactions might be more human than connected to what we react to (in a sense the creationists are the heretics of today).
Not only is myth often based on history, history is often based on myth as well.
That is, all being questioned and a true skeptic questioning even empiricism and skepticism itself, life becomes less absolute.
If we knew truth, why would we have to search for it?
Can we search for truth if we do not know what it is?
The humbling answer must be that relative or absolute, absolute knowledge will always be relative.
Det är lustigt hur den trosföreställning som utgör ateism har blivit mer och mer lik Jehovas Vittnen, med samma skitnödiga behov av att frälsa sin korkade omvärld som av någon anledning inte har sett ljuset.
Den glade humanisten (en filosofisk gren med bara ett par hundra år på nacken) vräker i vanlig ordning ur sig felaktigheter i sakfrågor, som att kalla andlighet “vidskepelse per defnition” i förhoppningen att någon skall gå på det.
Religionvetaren (liksom jag) kan naturligtvis skilja mellan att spotta tre gånger över axeln när man ser en svart katt och en hel ontologi, det faktum att rationalism och empirism inte är de enda epistemologierna osv, osv.
I det här fallet så är det snarare humanisten som framstår som vidskeplig i sin övertro på sina favoritdogma vilka inte understöds av filosofisk tänkande (som “helhet”, eftersom det givetvis inte finns någon sådan helhet) och inte på något sätt har med vetenskap att göra (vetenskap befattar sig inte med teologi eller teogoni) vilket ateister gärna låtsas.
Jag vet intre vad det är i mänskan som gör att dom finner en homodox värld lockande, eller har en sådan aversion mot pluralism att dom är beredda att dra till med vilket blaj som helst för att övertyga.
Att dessutom ha fräckheten att kalla någon annan bedragare och jämföra ett trossystem med talande grodor och medicinskt kvacksalveri (är kvällsöppet ett barnprogram?).
När det gäller trams som att “Det finns faktiskt riktiga människor som man kan ge den uppmärksamheten” eller “Människor dör faktiskt på grund av vidskeplighet” så hänvisar jag till den här artikeln som jag skrev på Engelska förra gången ateisterna hade ett större väckelsemöte i media:
Beträffande definitioner på “vidskepelse” kontra “religion” eller “andlighet”: Se närmsta uppslagsverk.
Beträffande vad som “finns” (definiera det tack???): Läs ontologi, metafysik, epistemologi, religionsvetenskap, relgionhistoria, kosmologi och utveckla lite respekt och tolerans.
För tillfället framstår ateismen som en av de mer dogmatiska och fundamentalistska trosföreställningarna (och ge mig inga naiva “Om ateism är en trosföreställning så är flintskallighet en frisyr” popcitat. Materialismen är en monistisk ontologi, och det ÄR faktiskt per definition).
You have probably met him (it is often, not always, a “him”).
The little nitwit with a tie and a title that for some mysterious reason thinks he can teach you something about a subject you obviously know a thousand times more about.
The retard with a title.
I am very aware of what i know.
Iam also very aware of the fact that there is a lot i dont know diddley squat about.
I would never correct anyone on how to repair a car or the rules of hockey.
This kind of person, however, is not REALLY the kind who brings society forward.
He is the kind who upholds it.
The one with the traditions and / or ideals, values, titles.
The CEO, the helper, the boss, in short, the accepted one.
He will never cause a paradigm shift.
I was just in a discussion with one of those tie bearers on operatic singing.
He obviously knows nothing about it, i do…..but he wears a tie so empirical proof means nothing.
He continues to try to convince me that singing in a local church choir is a valid substitution for training as a leggiero tenor (which he doesent even know what it is).
There is formal education / training and informal such, this type of guy usually does not have either or even more usually has formal training but in something completely unrelated and somehow thinks his knowledge “spills over” into everything else.
Physicists discussing theology are an example of this. Then again, so are priests discussing sociology (if they dont happen to have knowledge in those fields too ).
I explained how the vocal chords and the larynx works, i explained the artistic differences…..i explained and i explained but…..as all driven by faith (religous or otherwise) he simply comes back to the same conclusions regardless of presented facts.
Ignorance combined with a title or some similar authority works.
Why mess with it?
I even gave him an example of this put in practice from my own professional life.
I worked as a bartender in Ireland in the 90´s but was replaced (picked out of the bar ) and an 18 year old (Irish….surprise,surprise) boy became bar chief (and thus my “boss”).
This person, being the bar chief AND Irish had to ask me how to make an Irish Coffee (something any Swede could make).
What made him superiour to me was something magical and undefinable, yet to be explained by science called “experience”.
In the restourant business they have this “experience” that seems to be enhanced by big boobs, the right nationality and a few other traits.
It is obviously inert, probably genetic.
It is NOT what normal people call experience since that cant be acquired by doing something you dont know how to do.
“He doesent know any medicine and hasnt studied brain surgery….but he has a lot of experience of performing brain surgery”
In short, i learnt what wines weant with what and what grapes they where made of, i learnt everything about spirits and destillation, hundreds of beers from all over the world, a couple of hundred cocktails by heart and so on….but….i didnt have “experience”.
That was when i learned that knowledge and skills are meaningless.
When i discuss with a retard of the right ilk i get that confirmed.
If someone has a formal education / training in something that usually means he / she has more knowledge / skill in that subject.
It is however not NECESSARILY so.
Just like an amateur can be better at something than a professional, a person with informal education can know more than one with formal.
But a real academic would go by arguments. He or she would look at your thesis and if you are right you are right (“right” being a very relative term here).
The authorative idiot however is driven by ego and agenda.
He has his programme and like a religous person will stick to it regardless of proof or evidence.
Who gets hurt or crushed, or what dreams or futures (including by extension his own) gets dragged through the mud doesent matter.
He wears a tie.
Even some that i respect highly are starting to sound like crackpots.
The whole “occult” scene is looking more and more like Evangelical wingnuts with their psuedo history and pet therories and just like there are those that profess “love” in the name of Christ, but to anyone obviously filled with hate, bigotry and intolerance, esoterics, mystics and magicians often make claims to resisting their lower ego, when anyone can see that the whole “Golden Dawn” war and similar occurances are nothing if not ego based.