[T]he alternative to religion of lies, is european, history, stoicism (mindfulness), epicureanism (living within your means), ancestor worship (recognition of debts of intergenerational transfer), the play (tragedy), sport(hunt) and festival (feast). No more lies. My exploration of paganism is reducible to the ethnocentric advantage of ancestor worship, the raising of ancestors to archetypes, and the market adaptability of the pantheon of archetypes without the need for altering the group strategy or narrative. In other words, it facilitates the natural hierarchy of abilities, and it eliminates the need for lying that produces anchoring. Like many things our greco roman ancestors had most of the institutions correct – they overextended into civilizational diversity and encountered anceitn primitive people bent on lying.
Theme: Civilization
-
The Consistency of European Natural Religions
The Consistency of European Natural Religions https://propertarianism.com/2020/02/25/the-consistency-of-european-natural-religions/
Source date (UTC): 2020-02-25 13:56:28 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1232303350412169216
-
The Consistency of European Natural Religions
THE CONSISTENCY OF EUROPEAN NATURAL RELIGIONS
—“The transition in Hesiod’s theogony from primordial forces of nature (Titans) through the Titanomachy where the immortals gain mastery over these forces is the same sequence found in the Scandinavian transition from the older Vanir nature gods to the Aesir.”—Scott De Warren
OUR DESTINY IS GOD HOOD
-
The Consistency of European Natural Religions
THE CONSISTENCY OF EUROPEAN NATURAL RELIGIONS
—“The transition in Hesiod’s theogony from primordial forces of nature (Titans) through the Titanomachy where the immortals gain mastery over these forces is the same sequence found in the Scandinavian transition from the older Vanir nature gods to the Aesir.”—Scott De Warren
OUR DESTINY IS GOD HOOD
-
This Conflict that Undermines Our Civilization from Within.
[H]umans evolved at least three sets of faculties: the physical-sensory, the intuitinistic-emotional, and the rational-intellectual. And we evolved ‘grammars’ (paradigms and logics) to express the experience of those faculties. Because those different experiences require different metrics(systems of measurement) and descriptions (analogies) of expression. Scientific experience in scientific testimony, in expressions of empirical natural law (intellectual). Ordinary language for discourse for conduct of daily life (physical). And Mystical experience expressed in poetry, the development of mythical and religious structures that send one down a destination-less path into the ephemeral (intuitionistic-emotional). The question is, must they be coherent compatible and commensurable even if they are expressed in different grammars: deflationary-scientific vs inflationary-poetic. And my answer is yes. There is no reason for conflict. And it is this conflict that undermines our civlization from within.
-
This Conflict that Undermines Our Civilization from Within.
[H]umans evolved at least three sets of faculties: the physical-sensory, the intuitinistic-emotional, and the rational-intellectual. And we evolved ‘grammars’ (paradigms and logics) to express the experience of those faculties. Because those different experiences require different metrics(systems of measurement) and descriptions (analogies) of expression. Scientific experience in scientific testimony, in expressions of empirical natural law (intellectual). Ordinary language for discourse for conduct of daily life (physical). And Mystical experience expressed in poetry, the development of mythical and religious structures that send one down a destination-less path into the ephemeral (intuitionistic-emotional). The question is, must they be coherent compatible and commensurable even if they are expressed in different grammars: deflationary-scientific vs inflationary-poetic. And my answer is yes. There is no reason for conflict. And it is this conflict that undermines our civlization from within.
-
The Revolution of the Ancient World
THE REVOLUTION IN THE ANCIENT WORLD Where are aristotle, plato, socrates, zeno, epicurus, roman law, greek mathematics, and the christian destruction of the ancient world in your narrative? The talmud, bible and koran are not an enlightenment but simply the marxism-socialism- postmodernism-feminism of the ancient world: the counter-revolution against reason.The revolution in the ancient world was reason. It was democritus’ atomism, socratic skepticism (failure), platonic idealism(failure), and the success of aristotelian reason, empiricism, proto-science, stoic and epicurean replacement of conflationary religion, and roman law and administration, creating markets for all peoples – but the semites (the equivalent of ghettos) couldn’t grasp that ‘uncontrolled vision’ and sought to restore controlled (feminine) monopoly and conflation using female methods of deceit, and the female method of undermining from within. The revolution in the modern world starts with aesthetics in italy and makes its way into the legal minds who apply it to science producing the anglo revolution (athens). The germans(spartans) reacted by doubling down on it and becoming the worlds best materialists, and the americans inherited both civilizations for a time when the french and russians instigated the third war of german containment. Weak minds need certainty. Mindfulness doesn’t.
by Martin Štěpán: I’ve been listening to Xenophon’s memorabilia. What Socrates appears to be doing is not so much being skeptical but asking exactly the right questions to get the other to get exactly where he wants him to get. But in this, he’s teaching genuinely good values and makes people think about things they really should be thinking about. I’m not seeing the failure.
In my understanding he invented rhetorical falsification. The scale of this innovation, in retrospect, is … it’s conceptually revolutionary. Because he is not trying to deceive. He is trying to create the habit of inquiry. His ‘failure’ was in producing a systematic work. Plato’s systematic work was a train wreck. Aristotle’s systemic work, at least from my perspective, is a reaction against plato’s. When I read aristotle and plato i get the feeling that I have when reading the Abrahamists – it makes me angry. I think Aristotle might have had a similar reaction.
by Martin Štěpán: I remember some of the passages from the Organon that definitely read like a reaction. Plato’s Socrates in the early works is truly just skeptical and contradicts every interpretation so that at the end, nobody is certain of anything. Whereas Aristotle says we have to enumerate possible meanings (serialize?) and inquire which one applies in the context (disambiguate?). Organon ultimately must have been much more important work than all wrong scientific conclusions he came up with. (I didn’t get to Ethics yet.) And yeah, Plato turned Socrates into proto-Jesus.
-
The Revolution of the Ancient World
THE REVOLUTION IN THE ANCIENT WORLD Where are aristotle, plato, socrates, zeno, epicurus, roman law, greek mathematics, and the christian destruction of the ancient world in your narrative? The talmud, bible and koran are not an enlightenment but simply the marxism-socialism- postmodernism-feminism of the ancient world: the counter-revolution against reason.The revolution in the ancient world was reason. It was democritus’ atomism, socratic skepticism (failure), platonic idealism(failure), and the success of aristotelian reason, empiricism, proto-science, stoic and epicurean replacement of conflationary religion, and roman law and administration, creating markets for all peoples – but the semites (the equivalent of ghettos) couldn’t grasp that ‘uncontrolled vision’ and sought to restore controlled (feminine) monopoly and conflation using female methods of deceit, and the female method of undermining from within. The revolution in the modern world starts with aesthetics in italy and makes its way into the legal minds who apply it to science producing the anglo revolution (athens). The germans(spartans) reacted by doubling down on it and becoming the worlds best materialists, and the americans inherited both civilizations for a time when the french and russians instigated the third war of german containment. Weak minds need certainty. Mindfulness doesn’t.
by Martin Štěpán: I’ve been listening to Xenophon’s memorabilia. What Socrates appears to be doing is not so much being skeptical but asking exactly the right questions to get the other to get exactly where he wants him to get. But in this, he’s teaching genuinely good values and makes people think about things they really should be thinking about. I’m not seeing the failure.
In my understanding he invented rhetorical falsification. The scale of this innovation, in retrospect, is … it’s conceptually revolutionary. Because he is not trying to deceive. He is trying to create the habit of inquiry. His ‘failure’ was in producing a systematic work. Plato’s systematic work was a train wreck. Aristotle’s systemic work, at least from my perspective, is a reaction against plato’s. When I read aristotle and plato i get the feeling that I have when reading the Abrahamists – it makes me angry. I think Aristotle might have had a similar reaction.
by Martin Štěpán: I remember some of the passages from the Organon that definitely read like a reaction. Plato’s Socrates in the early works is truly just skeptical and contradicts every interpretation so that at the end, nobody is certain of anything. Whereas Aristotle says we have to enumerate possible meanings (serialize?) and inquire which one applies in the context (disambiguate?). Organon ultimately must have been much more important work than all wrong scientific conclusions he came up with. (I didn’t get to Ethics yet.) And yeah, Plato turned Socrates into proto-Jesus.
-
TRADITIONAL RELIGION STILL PRACTICED IN AFRICA There are still 100M Africans pra
TRADITIONAL RELIGION STILL PRACTICED IN AFRICA
There are still 100M Africans practicing traditional religion.
The various religious traditions of Africa are united by a basic Animism. The belief in spirits and ancestors is the most important element of African religions. Gods were either self-created or evolved from spirits or ancestors which got worshiped by the people.
Animism
Animism builds the core concept of traditional African religions, this includes the worship of tutelary deities, nature worship, ancestor worship and the belief in an afterlife. While some religions adopted a pantheistic worldview, most follow a polytheistic system with various gods, spirits and other supernatural beings. Traditional African religions also have elements of fetishism, shamanism and veneration of relics.
Ancestor Worship
Every action undertaken by Africans required consideration of the ancestors. Unlike Christianity, in which the dead cannot interact with the living, African religion dictated that the dead, as well as the unborn, are full members of the community. The ancestors were wise spirits whom people could not easily mislead. People who did not fulfill the wishes of the ancestors, who were always watching, could suffer tragedy.
The African Spirit World
Spirits inhabited the world along with the living. It is they that interacted with humans on a daily basis, rather than God, as is true in Christianity. God created the spirits and could use them to achieve purposes on earth. Nature spirits are those that Africans held to live within non-human physical objects. The existence of these spirits helped explained phenomena, such as lightning, floods or droughts.
Polygamy
African religions allowed men to possess more than one wife. Africans saw benefits in the arrangements. First, only wealthy men could marry large numbers of wives because each marriage required presenting a considerable dowry, or wedding gift, to the bride’s father. A man had to consider seriously the women with whom he sought to cohabit. In addition, since these were agrarian societies that considered farming a domestic chore for women, multiple wives actually served to lessen the workload.
Source date (UTC): 2020-02-25 10:33:00 UTC
-
He doesn’t debunk anything. The question is whether it’s an intentional conspira
He doesn’t debunk anything.
The question is whether it’s an intentional conspiracy or the continuation of the abrahamic tradition of undermining without conscious conspiracy.
Source date (UTC): 2020-02-25 01:55:31 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1232121915592060928
Reply addressees: @WinslowFrancke
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1232121394328109057