So the Church failed to reform in the 1800’s and were replaced by secular judaism in western garb in the 1900’s, and we are being invaded by muslims in the current era: the church FAILED. Ergo,what NEW religion replaces Democratic secular socialist humanism? Nationalism it seems.
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-02 12:20:00 UTC
“The People Protect the Church like they protect home and school, but not it’s dogma. New and better dogma arises regularly. Preserve the church and change the dogma to sovereignty, truth, duty, reciprocity, and charity and use history instead of fiction.”
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-02 08:52:00 UTC
—“Christianity, historically speaking, has been anything but a unified phenomenon; to get to the bottom of it as a faith in its own right, one must look to its source, to the Bible, which means – one must already accept the Protestant turn. And I strongly suspect that when one does so, one does not find the glory to which the Christian faith has at times lent itself.
When many on the Right defend Christianity, I suspect they are actually defending the Church. But the Church today can hardly be looked to with a great deal of hope.
The Church of Vatican II, of John and Paul, of a Ratzinger who resigns to make way for this Jesuit of a Bergoglio and his pandering to the Third World hordes – what can one expect from this Church, and how is one to seriously anticipate a spiritual shift within it?”—John Bruce Leonard
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-02 08:30:00 UTC
—-“Heidegger posits that modern man is cut off from the sacred via the methods (scientific rationality) which you use to form the basis of your argument.”— Sean Kinney
He is cut off from appealing, harmful, deceptions yes, when he could be otherwise provided with mindfulness by non-harmful means.
—“The overarching externalized context or that which is beyond our understanding is the primary variable.”—
That by which we are self manipulated, and manipulated by others, into submission or denial, rather than enabled into action, creates demand for non-harmful means of producing agency rather than sedation.
—“There is no fundamental cohesive endpoint upon which to deduce your primary assertions: no universal self evident axioms can be identified upon which the initial premises of truth can be established.”—
We never know the Truth (most parsimonious testimony possible) because our knowledge is incomplete. As such we only know that which is false with certainty. Between Omniscience (Truth: most parsimonious possible) and Falsehood (certainty), we merely satisfy demand for decidability necessary for making a choice. For ancestral reasons we conflate this demand for decidability sufficient for choice in the given context, with ‘truth’ proper (decidability), as ‘true enough for me’ (sufficiently decidable for the context).
—“A fundamental Nietzschean and Heideggerian premise.”–
German Authors sought to preserve the german grammar developed by kant (Rationalism), as a formal expression of Rousseau’s counter-reaction against empiricism (Literary Moralism), thereby creating a more formal Rational expression of christianity in the absence of war against the aristocracy, where french had created a literary and moral war restatement of christianity as a war against the aristocracy.
—“The aforementioned authors here point us towards the sacred and mythical characteristics of being which are antithetical to the french pomos.”–
German authors repeatedly try to preserve a secular restatement of germanicized christianity, that is antithetical to anglo rationalism, and antithetical to french anti-aristocracy.
—“Mathematical equations of reality based upon markets are unlikely to summon the masses to action either way.”—
The evidence is that the population pursues self interest at all times and seeks a narrative to rally with in pursuit of it.
—“From a Heideggerian point of view, this appeal to contextual truths simply conceal the Aesthetic wonders of Dasein and conceal the inherent referentiality and mythos which transcend the age in which one is producing intellectual content.”—
Use of various techniques will allow us to produce some degree of mindfulness, and this includes ritual and dance, delusion, drug and alcohol use, hallucinogens, and other forms of physical and mental abuse, such as body, and sexual identity illusions. Individuals who succeed in habituating demand for the delusion demonstrate an addiction response and are undesirable We can change behavior dramatically by changing psychochemistry, both by ritualistic and supplemental means. A docile, sedated population lacking agency is preferable in many cases to a population that competes by greater agency than others. The problem being that demographic distribution and wealth limit the choices of means of providing such sedation vs agency.
—(Being cannot be enclosed in a conceptual structure). This is Heidegger: Be that as it may: I assume based upon his later writings that he would appeal to ancestral veneration (blood and soil) as the primary source of inspiration for the masses. Reducing such concepts to the playthings of children or products of the occult however would seem to be destructive from this perspective. )—-
Drug users report the same effects, Religious zealots, those who practice meditation, even the ‘high’ runners experience can produce it. However we can also produce it through self authoring (cognitive behavioral therapy) or what we call ‘stoicism’ producing individual agency and action instead of individual sedation and detachment. We do not need perfect replication of experience to communicate it, we need only sufficient replication of experience, and of experience we need replication we need only those that produce agency not delusion and sedation. So yes, (and we can produce very solid metrics on this) the infant, child, youth, adolescent, young adult, establishing adult, established adult, and reproductive-cycle-complete adult demonstrate very different demands for methods of mindfulness. So yes, it’s not an opinion, that demand for mythos fulfills the needs of the weak, unaccomplished, lacking agency, and of low sexual, social, economic, and political value, and we find that the method of producing mindfulness changes as we increase our network of relationships and command over our destiny (agency). In that we increase our tools (paradigms) as we increase our agency. So yes, children (ignorant, lacking relationships, lacking ability, lacking capital, and lacking power) seek success in their dreams to satisfy their low status, and yes people who have high status do the opposite. Humans are very simple creatures. The strong law (command), the wealthy reciprocity ( trade), the weak storytelling (gossip, rallying). And no amount of postmodern prose will alter those facts. We pursue the narrative (paradigm) that suits our power in order to fulfill our will to power. If you had power able to influence, leaders worth leading, something to exchange, then you would not need a fantasy with which to escape reality. But the weak do not. They tell stories to themselves and others to ‘make it through the day’ given the hard reality of their low status (sexual, social, economic, political market value). hence why I say there is nothing in christianity that cannot be taught as a stoic virtue – without the lies. And nothing good in the search for ‘experience’ (delusion and sedation) that cannot be better provided by agency (truth and training). It is just (a) more expensive to train people in stoic virtues, (b) easier and cheaper to deceive them with sophisms instead, (c) those cheap and easy narratives are methods of deception that prevent the individual from learning how to falsify the OTHER nonsense thrown at him.
ON DEMAND FOR THE SACRED: EUROPEAN MARKET OR SEMITIC MONOPOLY? 1 – Heidegger=german, which is the point of the discussion. Whether the Truth (knowledge, science, history, heroes, evolution) or Wisdom Literature (parables, fictions, myths) are the basis for civic contract (Monopoly). Or whether a hierarchy of graceful failure from the scientific to the religious is the basis of our civic contract (Market) 2 – The sacred can consist of us, ourselves, can be something else (creatures, anthropomorphic, or formless), can be of things (idols), can be of ideas (of books and words), or of anything that we owe a debt. Although, ideas, things, symbols-proxies for leaders, and ourselves is a very close to complete list of the possibilities. 3 – The sacred serves as a proxy between those who are not good enough to submit to one another. 4 – Religion consists of training (education) the intuition (emotions) so that people ‘feel like’ you do by taking advantage of our pre-cognitive biases. 6 – We can measure increase and decrease demand for ‘the sacred’ (proxies) and I am fairly sure the science of it (like that of status) is simply one that generates denialism. That is to to say that such therapeutic measures are unnecessary, but that they are not explicable.In other words, exposing the content and drive behind the ‘sacred’ makes the sacred impossible, thereby removing which is why it is denied. I 7 – So , to some people the scientific truth is sacred, to some of us (american constitutionalists) the constitution and by proxy ‘we, us, our-way’ is sacred. To some religious tradition is sacred. To some of us a monarchy or leader is sacred. To some of us family, tribe, and nation is sacred. To some of us mankind is sacred. To some of us the transcendence of mankind into the gods we imagine is sacred (that would include me). And to some of us we spread, combine, include, or exclude as suits our interests. 8 – Since debts of submission can be created along those and other axis, the behaviors we want to develop in a polity need only be expressible in all those paradigms – or at least, be sufficiently compatible that group persistence survives competition and shocks. 9 – So the question is, (a) what are those rules of group strategy obscured within and created by some sacred debt, (b) what paradigms within each grammar (system of thought) each system of thought which corresponds to a degree of agency and interests, given our age, class, and accumulated relationships and assets. 10 – it is not … challenging … to understand that the occult is an expression of vulnerability or powerlessness, that ritual an expression of mindfulness, that gatherings are an expression of inclusion, and that festival an expression of trust creation is rather simple. That the narrative content of a mythos allows us categories, relations, and values that can be taught to children (or idiots) which allows graceful (simple) calculation and coordination of cooperation is rather simple. 11 – I don’t do via positiva (religion, philosophy, and literature). I do via negativa law. While we differ in what is preferable and good, and we differ in demand for proportionality, and we differ in demand for liberty (opportunity), we do not differ in demand for reciprocity. Instead, we all seek to preserve our advantageous means of parasitism, predation, deception, and self deception. 12 – philosophy religion and literature (via positiva ) is for others (and frankly, for those who need them). I don’t do either. 13 – It is possible that the clash of civilizations between the german continental and the anglo scandinavian (naval) is simply that the british were smarter, better educated, and more evolved, and the germans, who were the “rednecks” of europe for all of her history, were, and remain a more sentimental people. I just don’t know if that’s an advantage or not. What it appears, is that it’s economically and militarily superior to follow the german model of TRUTH, DUTY, PIETY, AND RECIPROCITY.
—-“Heidegger posits that modern man is cut off from the sacred via the methods (scientific rationality) which you use to form the basis of your argument.”— Sean Kinney
He is cut off from appealing, harmful, deceptions yes, when he could be otherwise provided with mindfulness by non-harmful means.
—“The overarching externalized context or that which is beyond our understanding is the primary variable.”—
That by which we are self manipulated, and manipulated by others, into submission or denial, rather than enabled into action, creates demand for non-harmful means of producing agency rather than sedation.
—“There is no fundamental cohesive endpoint upon which to deduce your primary assertions: no universal self evident axioms can be identified upon which the initial premises of truth can be established.”—
We never know the Truth (most parsimonious testimony possible) because our knowledge is incomplete. As such we only know that which is false with certainty. Between Omniscience (Truth: most parsimonious possible) and Falsehood (certainty), we merely satisfy demand for decidability necessary for making a choice. For ancestral reasons we conflate this demand for decidability sufficient for choice in the given context, with ‘truth’ proper (decidability), as ‘true enough for me’ (sufficiently decidable for the context).
—“A fundamental Nietzschean and Heideggerian premise.”–
German Authors sought to preserve the german grammar developed by kant (Rationalism), as a formal expression of Rousseau’s counter-reaction against empiricism (Literary Moralism), thereby creating a more formal Rational expression of christianity in the absence of war against the aristocracy, where french had created a literary and moral war restatement of christianity as a war against the aristocracy.
—“The aforementioned authors here point us towards the sacred and mythical characteristics of being which are antithetical to the french pomos.”–
German authors repeatedly try to preserve a secular restatement of germanicized christianity, that is antithetical to anglo rationalism, and antithetical to french anti-aristocracy.
—“Mathematical equations of reality based upon markets are unlikely to summon the masses to action either way.”—
The evidence is that the population pursues self interest at all times and seeks a narrative to rally with in pursuit of it.
—“From a Heideggerian point of view, this appeal to contextual truths simply conceal the Aesthetic wonders of Dasein and conceal the inherent referentiality and mythos which transcend the age in which one is producing intellectual content.”—
Use of various techniques will allow us to produce some degree of mindfulness, and this includes ritual and dance, delusion, drug and alcohol use, hallucinogens, and other forms of physical and mental abuse, such as body, and sexual identity illusions. Individuals who succeed in habituating demand for the delusion demonstrate an addiction response and are undesirable We can change behavior dramatically by changing psychochemistry, both by ritualistic and supplemental means. A docile, sedated population lacking agency is preferable in many cases to a population that competes by greater agency than others. The problem being that demographic distribution and wealth limit the choices of means of providing such sedation vs agency.
—(Being cannot be enclosed in a conceptual structure). This is Heidegger: Be that as it may: I assume based upon his later writings that he would appeal to ancestral veneration (blood and soil) as the primary source of inspiration for the masses. Reducing such concepts to the playthings of children or products of the occult however would seem to be destructive from this perspective. )—-
Drug users report the same effects, Religious zealots, those who practice meditation, even the ‘high’ runners experience can produce it. However we can also produce it through self authoring (cognitive behavioral therapy) or what we call ‘stoicism’ producing individual agency and action instead of individual sedation and detachment. We do not need perfect replication of experience to communicate it, we need only sufficient replication of experience, and of experience we need replication we need only those that produce agency not delusion and sedation. So yes, (and we can produce very solid metrics on this) the infant, child, youth, adolescent, young adult, establishing adult, established adult, and reproductive-cycle-complete adult demonstrate very different demands for methods of mindfulness. So yes, it’s not an opinion, that demand for mythos fulfills the needs of the weak, unaccomplished, lacking agency, and of low sexual, social, economic, and political value, and we find that the method of producing mindfulness changes as we increase our network of relationships and command over our destiny (agency). In that we increase our tools (paradigms) as we increase our agency. So yes, children (ignorant, lacking relationships, lacking ability, lacking capital, and lacking power) seek success in their dreams to satisfy their low status, and yes people who have high status do the opposite. Humans are very simple creatures. The strong law (command), the wealthy reciprocity ( trade), the weak storytelling (gossip, rallying). And no amount of postmodern prose will alter those facts. We pursue the narrative (paradigm) that suits our power in order to fulfill our will to power. If you had power able to influence, leaders worth leading, something to exchange, then you would not need a fantasy with which to escape reality. But the weak do not. They tell stories to themselves and others to ‘make it through the day’ given the hard reality of their low status (sexual, social, economic, political market value). hence why I say there is nothing in christianity that cannot be taught as a stoic virtue – without the lies. And nothing good in the search for ‘experience’ (delusion and sedation) that cannot be better provided by agency (truth and training). It is just (a) more expensive to train people in stoic virtues, (b) easier and cheaper to deceive them with sophisms instead, (c) those cheap and easy narratives are methods of deception that prevent the individual from learning how to falsify the OTHER nonsense thrown at him.
ON DEMAND FOR THE SACRED: EUROPEAN MARKET OR SEMITIC MONOPOLY? 1 – Heidegger=german, which is the point of the discussion. Whether the Truth (knowledge, science, history, heroes, evolution) or Wisdom Literature (parables, fictions, myths) are the basis for civic contract (Monopoly). Or whether a hierarchy of graceful failure from the scientific to the religious is the basis of our civic contract (Market) 2 – The sacred can consist of us, ourselves, can be something else (creatures, anthropomorphic, or formless), can be of things (idols), can be of ideas (of books and words), or of anything that we owe a debt. Although, ideas, things, symbols-proxies for leaders, and ourselves is a very close to complete list of the possibilities. 3 – The sacred serves as a proxy between those who are not good enough to submit to one another. 4 – Religion consists of training (education) the intuition (emotions) so that people ‘feel like’ you do by taking advantage of our pre-cognitive biases. 6 – We can measure increase and decrease demand for ‘the sacred’ (proxies) and I am fairly sure the science of it (like that of status) is simply one that generates denialism. That is to to say that such therapeutic measures are unnecessary, but that they are not explicable.In other words, exposing the content and drive behind the ‘sacred’ makes the sacred impossible, thereby removing which is why it is denied. I 7 – So , to some people the scientific truth is sacred, to some of us (american constitutionalists) the constitution and by proxy ‘we, us, our-way’ is sacred. To some religious tradition is sacred. To some of us a monarchy or leader is sacred. To some of us family, tribe, and nation is sacred. To some of us mankind is sacred. To some of us the transcendence of mankind into the gods we imagine is sacred (that would include me). And to some of us we spread, combine, include, or exclude as suits our interests. 8 – Since debts of submission can be created along those and other axis, the behaviors we want to develop in a polity need only be expressible in all those paradigms – or at least, be sufficiently compatible that group persistence survives competition and shocks. 9 – So the question is, (a) what are those rules of group strategy obscured within and created by some sacred debt, (b) what paradigms within each grammar (system of thought) each system of thought which corresponds to a degree of agency and interests, given our age, class, and accumulated relationships and assets. 10 – it is not … challenging … to understand that the occult is an expression of vulnerability or powerlessness, that ritual an expression of mindfulness, that gatherings are an expression of inclusion, and that festival an expression of trust creation is rather simple. That the narrative content of a mythos allows us categories, relations, and values that can be taught to children (or idiots) which allows graceful (simple) calculation and coordination of cooperation is rather simple. 11 – I don’t do via positiva (religion, philosophy, and literature). I do via negativa law. While we differ in what is preferable and good, and we differ in demand for proportionality, and we differ in demand for liberty (opportunity), we do not differ in demand for reciprocity. Instead, we all seek to preserve our advantageous means of parasitism, predation, deception, and self deception. 12 – philosophy religion and literature (via positiva ) is for others (and frankly, for those who need them). I don’t do either. 13 – It is possible that the clash of civilizations between the german continental and the anglo scandinavian (naval) is simply that the british were smarter, better educated, and more evolved, and the germans, who were the “rednecks” of europe for all of her history, were, and remain a more sentimental people. I just don’t know if that’s an advantage or not. What it appears, is that it’s economically and militarily superior to follow the german model of TRUTH, DUTY, PIETY, AND RECIPROCITY.
RELIGION: PSYCHOLOGICAL DRUG USERS JUSTIFYING THEIR ADDICTION
—-“Heidegger posits that modern man is cut off from the sacred via the methods (scientific rationality) which you use to form the basis of your argument.”— Sean Kinney
He is cut off from appealing, harmful, deceptions yes, when he could be otherwise provided with mindfulness by non-harmful means.
—“The overarching externalized context or that which is beyond our understanding is the primary variable.”—
That by which we are self manipulated, and manipulated by others, into submission or denial, rather than enabled into action, creates demand for non-harmful means of producing agency rather than sedation.
—“There is no fundamental cohesive endpoint upon which to deduce your primary assertions: no universal self evident axioms can be identified upon which the initial premises of truth can be established.”—
We never know the Truth (most parsimonious testimony possible) because our knowledge is incomplete. As such we only know that which is false with certainty. Between Omniscience (Truth: most parsimonious possible) and Falsehood (certainty), we merely satisfy demand for decidability necessary for making a choice. For ancestral reasons we conflate this demand for decidability sufficient for choice in the given context, with ‘truth’ proper (decidabiilty), as ‘true enough for me’ (sufficiently decidable for the context).
—“A fundamental Nietzschean and Heideggerian premise.”–German Authors sought to preserve the german grammar developed by kant (Rationalism), as a formal expression of Rousseau’s counter-reaction against empiricism (Literary Moralism), thereby creating a more formal Rational expression of christianity in the absence of war against the aristocracy, where french had created a literary and moral war restatement of christianity as a war against the aristocracy.
—“The beforementioned authors here point us towards the sacred and mythical characteristics of being which are antithetical to the french pomos.”–
German authors repeatedly try to preserve a secular restatement of germanicized christianity, that is antithetical to anglo rationalism, and antithetical to french anti-aristocracy.
—“Mathematical equations of reality based upon markets are unlikely to summon the masses to action either way.”—
The evidence is that the population pursues self interest at all times and seeks a narrative to rally with in pursuit of it.
—“From a Heideggerian point of view, this appeal to contextual truths simply conceal the Aesthetic wonders of Dasein and conceal the inherrent referentiality and mythos which transcend the age in which one is producing intellectual content.”—
Use various techniques will allow us to produce some degree of mindfulness, and this includes ritual and dance, delusion, drug and alcohol use, hallucinogens, and other forms of physical and mental abuse, such as body, and sexual identity illusions. Individuals who succeed in habituating demand for the delusion demonstrate an addiction response and are undesirable We can change behavior dramatically by changing psychochemistry, both by ritualistic and supplemental means. A docile, sedated population lacking agency is preferable in many cases to a population that competes by greater agency than others. The problem being that demographic distribution and wealth limit the choices of means of providing such sedation vs agency.
—(Being cannot be enclosed in a conceptual structure). This is Heidegger: Be that as it may: I assume based upon his later writings that he would appeal to ancestral veneration (blood and soil) as the primary source of inspiration for the masses. Reducing such concepts to the playthings of children or products of the occult however would seem to be destructive from this perspective. )—-
Drug users report the same effects, Religious zealots, those who practice meditation, even the ‘high’ runners experience can produce it. However we can also produce it through self authoring (cognitive behavioral therapy) or what we call ‘stoicism’ producing individual agency and action instead of individual sedation and detachment.
WE do not need perfect replication of experience to communicate it, we need only sufficient replication of experience, and of experience we need replication we need only those that produce agency not delusion and sedation.
So yes, (and we can produce very solid metrics on this) the infant, child, youth, adolescent, young adult, establishing adult, established adult, and reproductive-cycle-complete adult demonstrate very different demands for methods of mindfulness.
So yes, it’s not an opinion, that demand for mythos fulfills the needs of the weak, unaccomplished, lacking agency, and of low sexual, social, economic, and political value, and we find that the method of producing mindfulness changes as we increase our network of relationships and command over our destiny (agency). In that we increase our tools (paradigms) as we increase our agency.
So yes, children (ignorant, lacking relationships, lacking ability, lacking capital, and lacking power) seek success in their dreams to satisfy their low status, and yes people who have high status do the opposite.
Humans are very simple creatures. The strong law (command), the wealthy reciprocity ( trade), the weak storytelling (gossip, rallying).
And no amount of postmodern prose will alter those facts.
We pursue the narrative (paradigm) that suits our power in order to fulfill our will to power.
If you had power able to influence, leaders worth leading, something to exchange, then you would not need a fantasy with which to escape reality. But the weak do not. They tell stories to themselves and others to ‘make it through the day’ given the hard reality of their low status (sexual, social, economic, political market value).
hence why I say there is nothing in christianity that cannot be taught as a stoic virtue – without the lies. And nothining good in the search for ‘experience’ (delusion and sedation) that cannot be better provided by agency (truth and training). It is just (a) more expensive to train people in stoic virtues, (b) easier and cheaper to deceive them with sophisms instead, (c) those cheap and easy narratives are methods of deception that prevent the individual from learning how to falsify the OTHER nonsense thrown at him.
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-01 11:05:00 UTC
ON DEMAND FOR THE SACRED: EUROPEAN MARKET OR SEMITIC MONOPOLY?
1 – Heidegger=german, which is the point of the discussion. Whether the Truth (knowledge, science, history, heroes, evolution) or Wisdom Literature (parables, fictions, myths) are the basis for civic contract (Monopoly). Or whether a hierarchy of graceful failure from the scientific to the religious is the basis of our civic contract (Market)
2 – The sacred can consist of us, ourselves, can be something else (creatures, anthropomorphic, or formless), can be of things (idols), can be of ideas (of books and words), or of anything that we owe a debt. Although, ideas, things, symbols-proxies for leaders, and ourselves is a very close to complete list of the possibilities.
3 – The sacred serves as a proxy between those who are not good enough to submit to one another.
4 – Religion consists of training (education) the intuition (emotions) so that people ‘feel like’ you do by taking advantage of our pre-cognitive biases.
6 – We can measure increase and decrease demand for ‘the sacred’ (proxies) and I am fairly sure the science of it (like that of status) is simply one that generates denialism. That is to to say that such therapeutic measures are unnecessary, but that they are not explicable.In other words, exposing the content and drive behind the ‘sacred’ makes the sacred impossible, thereby removing which is why it is denied. I
7 – So , to some people the scientific truth is sacred, to some of us (american constitutionalists) the constitution and by proxy ‘we, us, our-way’ is sacred. To some religious tradition is sacred. To some of us a monarchy or leader is sacred. To some of us family, tribe, and nation is sacred. To some of us mankind is sacred. To some of us the transcendence of mankind into the gods we imagine is sacred (that would include me). And to some of us we spread, combine, include, or exclude as suits our interests.
8 – Since debts of submission can be created along those and other axis, the behaviors we want to develop in a polity need only be expressible in all those paradigms – or at least, be sufficiently compatible that group persistence survives competition and shocks.
9 – So the question is, (a) what are those rules of group strategy obscured within and created by some sacred debt, (b) what paradigms within each grammar (system of thought) each system of thought which corresponds to a degree of agency and interests, given our age, class, and accumulated relationships and assets.
10 – it is not … challenging … to understand that the occult is an expression of vulnerability or powerlessness, that ritual an expression of mindfulness, that gatherings are an expression of inclusion, and that festival an expression of trust creation is rather simple. That the narrative content of a mythos allows us categories, relations, and values that can be taught to children (or idiots) which allows graceful (simple) calculation and coordination of cooperation is rather simple.
11 – I don’t do via positiva (religion, philosophy, and literature). I do via negativa law. While we differ in what is preferable and good, and we differ in demand for proportionality, and we differ in demand for liberty (opportunity), we do not differ in demand for reciprocity. Instead, we all seek to preserve our advantageous means of parasitism, predation, deception, and self deception.
12 – philosophy religion and literature (via positiva ) is for others (and frankly, for those who need them). I don’t do either.
13 – It is possible that the clash of civilizations between the german continental and the anglo scandinavian (naval) is simply that the british were smarter, better educated, and more evolved, and the germans, who were the “rednecks” of europe for all of her history, were, and remain a more sentimental people. I just don’t know if that’s an advantage or not. What it appears, is that it’s economically and militarily superior to follow the german model of TRUTH, DUTY, PIETY, AND RECIPROCITY.
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-01 05:15:00 UTC
HALLOWEEN <- ALL HALLOWS EVE <- SAMHAIN (SAH’-winn)
Samhain is believed to have Celtic pagan origins and there is evidence it has been an important date since ancient times. Some Neolithic passage tombs in Ireland are aligned with the sunrise around the time of Samhain.
It is mentioned in some of the earliest Irish literature and many important events in Irish mythology happen or begin on Samhain. It was the time when cattle were brought back down from the summer pastures and when livestock were slaughtered for the winter. As at Bealtaine, special bonfires were lit.
These were deemed to have protective and cleansing powers and there were rituals involving them. Like Bealtaine, Samhain was seen as a liminal time, when the boundary between this world and the Otherworld could more easily be crossed. This meant the Aos Sí, the ‘spirits’ or ‘fairies’, could more easily come into our world. Most scholars see the Aos Sí as remnants of the pagan gods and nature spirits.
At Samhain, it was believed that the Aos Sí needed to be propitiated to ensure that the people and their livestock survived the winter. Offerings of food and drink were left outside for them. The souls of the dead were also thought to revisit their homes seeking hospitality. Feasts were had, at which the souls of dead kin were beckoned to attend and a place set at the table for them.
Mumming and guising were part of the festival, and involved people going door-to-door in costume (or in disguise), often reciting verses in exchange for food. The costumes may have been a way of imitating, and disguising oneself from, the Aos Sí. Divination rituals and games were also a big part of the festival and often involved nuts and apples. In the late 19th century, Sir John Rhys and Sir James Frazer suggested that it was the “Celtic New Year”, and this view has been repeated by some other scholars.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-30 20:25:00 UTC