Jan 24, 2020, 8:11 AM The vast majority of literature in the ancient world was commentary on the Iliad just as the vast majority of literature in the medieval world was on the bible. In fact, the fragments of the library at Alexandria – regardless of how that library was physically constructed – were mostly commentary on the Iliad. (The trials of Achilles)
Theme: Religion
-
The Literature of The Iliad
Jan 24, 2020, 8:11 AM The vast majority of literature in the ancient world was commentary on the Iliad just as the vast majority of literature in the medieval world was on the bible. In fact, the fragments of the library at Alexandria – regardless of how that library was physically constructed – were mostly commentary on the Iliad. (The trials of Achilles)
-
Christian Compatibility
Christian Compatibility https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/25/christian-compatibility/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-25 18:40:15 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264989676361768960
-
Christian Compatibility
Jan 24, 2020, 1:38 PM Yeah, well you know, the faithful need to believe the mythos is true because men said so. We, the rational, only need to understand that Christian love, natural law of reciprocity and the physical laws are written in the structure of the universe regardless of what men said. The difference is between a personal god that they desire, and the impersonal god or nature that we observe. What we can say is that whether you are a supernatural and theological Christian first and Aristotelian second, or an Aristotelian first and scientific Christian second, that the only difference is their need to preserve the social construction of a personal deity and a life after death. Like the empathic female (christians-first), and the analytic male (aristotelians-first), women and men are also compatible – we are just not identical. I don’t know why that’s intolerable other than it leaves them on the defense in creating the social construction of a mythical reality in which they have a greater sense of control than they in fact do. But it is simply true that people who lack agency need more rigid less dynamic rules to live by. Whereas we have greater agency and are comfortable with scientific christian love, scientific natural law, and scientific physical law, because we have ourselves and others of equal agency to trust – and they don’t. So it’s understandable that they want their faith to produce the outcomes. It’s understandable that we don’t need faith in order to produce the same outcome. And it’s rather obvious that these two positions are as compatible as are the male and female.
-
Christian Compatibility
Jan 24, 2020, 1:38 PM Yeah, well you know, the faithful need to believe the mythos is true because men said so. We, the rational, only need to understand that Christian love, natural law of reciprocity and the physical laws are written in the structure of the universe regardless of what men said. The difference is between a personal god that they desire, and the impersonal god or nature that we observe. What we can say is that whether you are a supernatural and theological Christian first and Aristotelian second, or an Aristotelian first and scientific Christian second, that the only difference is their need to preserve the social construction of a personal deity and a life after death. Like the empathic female (christians-first), and the analytic male (aristotelians-first), women and men are also compatible – we are just not identical. I don’t know why that’s intolerable other than it leaves them on the defense in creating the social construction of a mythical reality in which they have a greater sense of control than they in fact do. But it is simply true that people who lack agency need more rigid less dynamic rules to live by. Whereas we have greater agency and are comfortable with scientific christian love, scientific natural law, and scientific physical law, because we have ourselves and others of equal agency to trust – and they don’t. So it’s understandable that they want their faith to produce the outcomes. It’s understandable that we don’t need faith in order to produce the same outcome. And it’s rather obvious that these two positions are as compatible as are the male and female.
-
Parallels and Differences Homeric and Semitic
Parallels and Differences Homeric and Semitic https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/25/parallels-and-differences-homeric-and-semitic/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-25 18:34:34 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264988246443831297
-
Parallels and Differences Homeric and Semitic
Common themes in the Bible and Homer.
adamvoight.wordpress.com By Don Miguel (Must read) You are correct about how fundamental Homer’s work was to the classical worldview. If you read the Platonic dialogue “Ion”, it is clear that the Greeks say Homer as a conduit of divine scripture. My only criticism is that in my view the parallels between the Biblical and Homeric metanarratives are many, strong, adn far more important than the differences. Some of these similarities are discussed in my below-linked blog post. The main difference is that in the Bible, God promises to give the protagonists possession over the land of the antagonists 500 years earlier for no apparent reason and the antagonists are not characters in the drama other than as “the bad guys”. In the Illiad, both sides are seen as good and heroic in their own way and the war is just a by-product of an ultimately meaningless conflict among the gods. In my view, this is the main difference between them. Which of these two are more relevant to our current situation? I think it’s the former, since our enemies have no real claim to equality with us; our conflict with them is not just a misunderstanding or bad luck as it is in the Illiad. Most the Norse myths also lack a villian who is wholly “other”- for example Loki cannot even tell a lie when he is trapped by Thyrm. The giants are just the impersonal forces of nature or chaos. In the Mahabharata, the Pandavas and the Kauravas are both relatives and both end up meeting in heaven. The Canaanites, Philistines, Judas and the Synagogue of Satan are not noble like Priam and Hector. That is the main difference between them in my view. Our struggle at this late point in history is for higher stakes. We are no longer at the level of “may the best man win”. https://adamvoight.wordpress.com/2018/09/21/common-themes-in-the-bible-and-homer/
-
Parallels and Differences Homeric and Semitic
Common themes in the Bible and Homer.
adamvoight.wordpress.com By Don Miguel (Must read) You are correct about how fundamental Homer’s work was to the classical worldview. If you read the Platonic dialogue “Ion”, it is clear that the Greeks say Homer as a conduit of divine scripture. My only criticism is that in my view the parallels between the Biblical and Homeric metanarratives are many, strong, adn far more important than the differences. Some of these similarities are discussed in my below-linked blog post. The main difference is that in the Bible, God promises to give the protagonists possession over the land of the antagonists 500 years earlier for no apparent reason and the antagonists are not characters in the drama other than as “the bad guys”. In the Illiad, both sides are seen as good and heroic in their own way and the war is just a by-product of an ultimately meaningless conflict among the gods. In my view, this is the main difference between them. Which of these two are more relevant to our current situation? I think it’s the former, since our enemies have no real claim to equality with us; our conflict with them is not just a misunderstanding or bad luck as it is in the Illiad. Most the Norse myths also lack a villian who is wholly “other”- for example Loki cannot even tell a lie when he is trapped by Thyrm. The giants are just the impersonal forces of nature or chaos. In the Mahabharata, the Pandavas and the Kauravas are both relatives and both end up meeting in heaven. The Canaanites, Philistines, Judas and the Synagogue of Satan are not noble like Priam and Hector. That is the main difference between them in my view. Our struggle at this late point in history is for higher stakes. We are no longer at the level of “may the best man win”. https://adamvoight.wordpress.com/2018/09/21/common-themes-in-the-bible-and-homer/
-
Dogma vs Myth
Dogma vs Myth https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/25/dogma-vs-myth/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-25 18:27:12 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264986391672434688
-
Dogma vs Myth
Jan 25, 2020, 11:59 AM
“The purpose of dogma is to give the mind an excuse for what the body feels. That’s all. The purpose of MYTH is to provide a group strategy that is persisted by the addiction.”
(religion)