Page 9 of 10 < 1 2 ... 7 8 9 10 >
Topic Options
#286633 - 11/28/07 11:30 PM Re: Prove it and win the Nobel Prize! [Re: Mr. Obsidian]
Svengali Offline
CoS Magister

Registered: 03/06/03
Posts: 12460
Loc: Florida, U.S.A.
Contrary to accusations that he had "Theistic" leanings, Jung is explicit throughout the collected works that when he refers to "God" it is as a psychological fact, not an objective ontological/existential fact - just a strong facet, or archetype, in some people's mental furniture.

People's God fantasies have to be ignored in some situations just to maintain interpersonal rapport or to get things done, but overall, publicly and impersonally it should be shot down whenever possible. That is why I still think the current pop trend toward atheism is a desirable thing, from a Satanic perspective, in eroding some of the influence of religion over people - even if the atheists for the most part are still bland "humanists" of a quasi-christian ethical bent, at least they are not as inclined to take directions from invisible friends - or prone to be complete fanatics as the religious wackos are.
_________________________
Live and Let Die.
"If I have to choose between defending the wolf or the dog, I choose the wolf, especially when he is bleeding." -- Jaques Verges
"I may have my faults, but being wrong ain't one of them." -- Jimmy Hoffa
"As for wars, well, there's only been 268 years out of the last 3421 in which there were no wars. So war, too, is in the normal course of events." -- Will Durant.
"Satanism is the worship of life, not a hypocritical, whitewashed vision of life, but life as it really is." -- Anton Szandor LaVey
“A membership ticket in this party does not confer genius on the holder.” -- Benito Mussolini
MY BOOK: ESSAYS IN SATANISM | MY BLOG: COSMODROMIUM | Deep Satanism Blog

Top
#286634 - 11/28/07 11:31 PM Re: Prove it and win the Nobel Prize! [Re: Hagen von Tronje]
de_Lioncourt Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 09/18/07
Posts: 528
After reading through some of these posts I will add my two cents.

In my opinion this discussion boils down to two questions:

1). If a God existed would you still be the person you are today?

2). If The Satanic Bible was never written would you still be the same person you are today?

I am myself first and foremost. If it could be proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that there was a God, it would not alter who I am. I would still be the same.

Likewise, if the Satanic Bible never existed, I would still be the same person and think the same way. Like most, I found myself reflected in it's words.

Having said that I am glad that Dr. Lavey put the philosophy together and gave it such a fun name.

In my mind being yourself and being completely comfortable with yourself (without needing validation from anyone else) is the very essence of being a Satanist. When you live your life on those terms you accept whatever is true for you. It makes debate on subjects that would have no effect on your life seem pointless.

Hail Satan!!
_________________________
There is only the mind.

Top
#286638 - 11/28/07 11:57 PM Re: Prove it and win the Nobel Prize! [Re: Svengali]
Majic Offline


Registered: 04/05/06
Posts: 234
Loc: Sagittarius III
Spirits In A Material World

 Originally Posted By: Svengali
You can disagree with materialism and/or atheism all you want, but to argue that Satanism is not a materialistic and atheistic philosophy is completely in contradiction with the philosophy as laid out by Dr. LaVey - that I happen to completely agree with on ALL of these counts.

I'm not suggesting that Satanism isn't materialistic. If anything, I consider materialism to be its foundation, and that such a foundation is indeed quite sound.

I also find Satanism to be refreshingly honest. In fact, I am unaware of any religion more candid than Satanism -- and this despite the accusations of guile for which it is so commonly maligned.

Where I take exception -- and this is based entirely on my authority as me and nothing else -- is when any assertion is made that Satanism requires me to believe anything I do not believe.

That is unacceptable. I won't do it.

And I don't give a rat's ass what anyone else has to say about it.

Ironically enough, despite the fact that I scrupulously leave the door open to my own fallibility, I don't believe in what is commonly understood to be "God" or what might otherwise be reasonably considered superstitious nonsense.

But I also don't presume to know the nature of the universe or what may lie beyond it, nor do I have any truck with those who claim to. Nor will I discount what I have personally witnessed regarding the ways of magic.

And I sure as all fuck will never authorize anyone else to say as much on my behalf.

I've spent too many years of my life wrestling with such specious bullshit to ever adopt it again, whether under the auspices of a pastor, a bishop, a high priest or a magister.

The only honest answer I can give to the question of "God" is I don't know.

If you think you do know, then I don't believe you.

If that's a problem here, then I am indeed in the wrong place.
_________________________
If you expect humanity to disappoint you, you'll never be disappointed.

Top
#286641 - 11/29/07 12:14 AM Re: Prove it and win the Nobel Prize! [Re: Majic]
Svengali Offline
CoS Magister

Registered: 03/06/03
Posts: 12460
Loc: Florida, U.S.A.
 Originally Posted By: Majic
Where I take exception -- and this is based entirely on my authority as me and nothing else -- is when any assertion is made that Satanism requires me to believe anything I do not believe.

That is unacceptable. I won't do it.

.....And I sure as all fuck will never authorize anyone else to say as much on my behalf.


Who wants you to? I certainly don't care what you believe one way or another. So far all you are to me is another one of the thousands of clueless anonymous people who blow through here on a routine basis.

You are tilting at windmills of your own creation. No one here cares whether you agree or not, and I'm sure no one WANTS to speak on your behalf. Why would they?

You probably are in the wrong place, not because anyone wants you to believe something you don't, but because you are too dim to comprehend basic things that have been spelled out. You have not demonstrated that you have followed or comprehended any part of this discussion beyond echoing your own assertions that you "don't know" whether or not something that is obviously absurd to anyone with an IQ over their shoe size is such.

You are in the wrong place if you disagree with fundamental points of the philosophy - none of which are obscure, arbitrary, or unwarranted.

I expect even though I have expressed myself clearly in THIS post that you STILL won't get it.

Don't let the door hit you in the ass.
_________________________
Live and Let Die.
"If I have to choose between defending the wolf or the dog, I choose the wolf, especially when he is bleeding." -- Jaques Verges
"I may have my faults, but being wrong ain't one of them." -- Jimmy Hoffa
"As for wars, well, there's only been 268 years out of the last 3421 in which there were no wars. So war, too, is in the normal course of events." -- Will Durant.
"Satanism is the worship of life, not a hypocritical, whitewashed vision of life, but life as it really is." -- Anton Szandor LaVey
“A membership ticket in this party does not confer genius on the holder.” -- Benito Mussolini
MY BOOK: ESSAYS IN SATANISM | MY BLOG: COSMODROMIUM | Deep Satanism Blog

Top
#286644 - 11/29/07 12:24 AM Re: Prove it and win the Nobel Prize! [Re: Majic]
Svengali Offline
CoS Magister

Registered: 03/06/03
Posts: 12460
Loc: Florida, U.S.A.
 Originally Posted By: Majic
The only honest answer I can give to the question of "God" is I don't know.

If you think you do know, then I don't believe you.



Congratulations. You missed the boat completely.
_________________________
Live and Let Die.
"If I have to choose between defending the wolf or the dog, I choose the wolf, especially when he is bleeding." -- Jaques Verges
"I may have my faults, but being wrong ain't one of them." -- Jimmy Hoffa
"As for wars, well, there's only been 268 years out of the last 3421 in which there were no wars. So war, too, is in the normal course of events." -- Will Durant.
"Satanism is the worship of life, not a hypocritical, whitewashed vision of life, but life as it really is." -- Anton Szandor LaVey
“A membership ticket in this party does not confer genius on the holder.” -- Benito Mussolini
MY BOOK: ESSAYS IN SATANISM | MY BLOG: COSMODROMIUM | Deep Satanism Blog

Top
#286645 - 11/29/07 12:32 AM Re: Prove it and win the Nobel Prize! [Re: Svengali]
Majic Offline


Registered: 04/05/06
Posts: 234
Loc: Sagittarius III
 Originally Posted By: Svengali
Congratulations. You missed the boat completely.

I'm satisfied with the seaworthiness of my own boat.

Fair winds and following seas, mate.
_________________________
If you expect humanity to disappoint you, you'll never be disappointed.

Top
#286646 - 11/29/07 12:35 AM Re: Prove it and win the Nobel Prize! [Re: Svengali]
Mr. Obsidian Offline
CoS Warlock

Registered: 10/29/04
Posts: 3120
Loc: Ohio
 Quote:
People's God fantasies have to be ignored in some situations just to maintain interpersonal rapport or to get things done, but overall, publicly and impersonally it should be shot down whenever possible.


That's precisely the way I see it.

I just don't waste my time getting involved in squabbles or conflict over it, if that can be helped.

I view a hypothetical atheistic world as a spiritual pipe dream, akin to any other "utopian" fantasy. The atheistic movement is fine, but I wouldn't waste my time touring the world circuit and arguing with fanatical fools. The majority of people will always be weak, vacuous shells, seeking fulfillment from something outside of their pathetic selves.
_________________________
~ Mr. Obsidian (JP)

Olio/Etcetera

Flesh and Bones
_______________

“For those who believe in God, most of the big questions are answered. But for those of us who can't readily accept the God formula, the big answers don't remain stone-written. We adjust to new conditions and discoveries. We are pliable. Love need not be a command nor faith a dictum. I am my own god. We are here to unlearn the teachings of the church, state, and our educational system. We are here to drink beer. We are here to kill war. We are here to laugh at the odds and live our lives so well that Death will tremble to take us.”
~ Charles Bukowski


Top
#286649 - 11/29/07 12:54 AM Re: Prove it and win the Nobel Prize! [Re: de_Lioncourt]
StellaMaris Offline


Registered: 11/16/07
Posts: 27
This had been quite an interesting discussion and I do think Nemo has made and clarified his point well-which can be boiled down simply to the distinction between provable and pragmatic atheism.

Much of the basis for disagreement here does seem to be based in semantics. In light of this, I've struggled with deciding on the proper label for my own point of view. I do fit the description of pragmatic atheist, and will use the label depending on context(like in the company of people who see the subtle difference between being without an external god and asserting absolute certainty about the matter). But in many contexts, using the label gives the impression of being a dogmatic, unquestioning type, which I don't find useful, so I often stick with "agnostic".

I actually think good arguments have been made on both sides for whether a Satanist is better served by a doubting, questioning stance(in which one can still strongly oppose or reject conventional ideas of an external god), or by a more definite refusal to consider the possibility. It seems both approaches could be supported by LaVey's own words, and I don't think this discrepancy will be resolved-it comes down to a matter of personal preference. I would think that there has to be some room for this, as complete uniformity in interpretation among individuals seems impossible, so long as the general conclusion is the same(we do not acknowledge an external god as a logical or pragmatic reality).

I also wanted to add that while most conventional definitions of a God seem ridiculous or logically impossible to the extent of not warranting consideration, such as the Christian God who constantly contradicts himself, the idea of a Creator who was something before there was something, etc...(won't rehash all the valid critiques that have been made), there are perhaps other definitions of God which may not seem so improbable, impossible, easy to rule out. One might be that God is universal energy which has no conceivable starting or ending point...or that God is consciousness, a unified point which by nature reflects on/becomes aware of itself and therefore divides into a myriad of potentialities manifested in matter as we know it...or that God is a higher order that could simply be described as the laws of physics, which are constantly being revealed.

I won't continue to ramble along this line of thought, I'm just saying that there are possible definitions which would be completely compatible with what we can observe in nature and understand through science. I don't have a compelling motive to prove that such things are or aren't real and valid...my salvation doesn't depend on knowing, and I don't think answering that question will have a significant impact on my experience in the here and now. It's more an interesting topic to ponder, and doing so can be gratifying in that it brings a sense of expanded perspective and wonder. But for all intents and purposes, I'm still a pragmatic atheist.

Top
#286653 - 11/29/07 01:42 AM Re: Prove it and win the Nobel Prize! [Re: Mr. Obsidian]
Majic Offline


Registered: 04/05/06
Posts: 234
Loc: Sagittarius III
 Originally Posted By: Mr. Obsidian
I just don't waste my time getting involved in squabbles or conflict over it, if that can be helped.

Your wisdom is commendable and a model to be aspired to. ;\)
_________________________
If you expect humanity to disappoint you, you'll never be disappointed.

Top
#286655 - 11/29/07 02:33 AM Re: Prove it and win the Nobel Prize! [Re: Majic]
VictorWolf Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 08/01/07
Posts: 237
I've always preferred terms like "Autotheist" and "Ignostic" to "Atheist." Or Magus Gilmore's "I-Theist" which is free of the Gnostic garbage "Autotheist" has picked up.

I agree with Magus LaVey's assertion in the Satanic Bible. God, if such a thing exists, is more likely a force of nature than a being. Conceptions of God are inventions of man.

I'm technically an Atheist in that I don't accept that some Omnipotent Being exists, controlling the universe. I don't see any evidence of it. Does that mean it doesn't exist? Not necessarily. But so far, personally, my life would be a whole hell of a lot crappier if I tried to live it while believing in some Omnipotent and Sentient Being.

Do I care if God exists? No. Hence the term "Ignostic." Not caring. It doesn't change who I am. Even if it was proved beyond a doubt that God existed and I decided to worship said being, I'd only be taking the pragmatic road in an attempt to insure eternal life.

Do I think God exists? No. Is it possible that he does? Sure, but I'm not going to change my ways or even bother over it unless there's real scientific indication that God exists.

I don't remember who mentioned Occam's Razor, but it applies. God isn't necessary to explain the world, why it exists. So why bother believing in it? Whats the point? Does that change the reality around us? Life is still a struggle, a jungle, no matter how it was made.

So what does that leave? Why, that man created all the gods. They are symbols, personifications of human characteristics. So everybody is in essence, their own God, until they give their Godhood up to symbols. Externalizations. I'll keep it, thank you. Hence "I-Theist."

Can God exist? Possibly. It hasn't been disproved. It can't be, yet. Does it matter? No. God is irrelevant. I am who I am.
_________________________
"It's pretty fun, doing the impossible." -Walt Disney

Top
#286656 - 11/29/07 02:37 AM Re: Prove it and win the Nobel Prize! [Re: Nemo]
Drake_Bamboozle Offline
CoS Reverend

Registered: 06/25/02
Posts: 10565
Loc: England
>> If you can scientifically prove that God does not exist, please do so! <<

So let's get this straight.

What you are saying, Magister Nemo, is:

I accept the possibility that God might exist because it cannot be proved that he does not.

So, for me, the possibilty is there.

God might exist and the constructs of Christianity might be true - Jesus (the miracle working son of God, born of a virgin) might have walked the earth, been killed on the cross, risen from the dead and ascended up into the clouds in front of witnesses.

And one day he (because I cannot prove he won't) might float back down to earth again and say (in a great booming voice that the whole earth can hear) :

"My name is Jesus Christ. Now listen you fuckers, I am the Lord your God and you sorry pieces of shit better get on your knees right now or I'll click my fingers and set your head on fire. And for good measure send a plague of fucking rats round your mom and dad's house. So on your knees you pieces of shit."

And what you are maintaining, Magister Nemo, is that even if this were to happen you still would not worship him.

All this is working within the Christian frame of reference. You are playing by their modes of thought.

It's not so complicated. The whole construct of these religions is madness. Absolute madness. Ludicrous.

Just because I cannot prove otherwise does not stop me seeing that it is bullshit.

I'll reiterate Dr. LaVey's words in The Satanic Bible:

"ALL Gods are the invention of man."

I can understand using certain terminology in discussions for purposes of diffusion in discussions with non Satanists - but to actually suggest that God might exist is in my view completely off kilter.

I am not interested in scientific proof on this matter. The bullshit is plain to see.

Carry on like this and we're going to be seeing some religious conversions in this thread.


_________________________
"Spiral Out: a bleak, page-turning, unforgettable read. Existentialism at its most hardcore" - www.uvray.moonfruit.com





Top
#286666 - 11/29/07 05:33 AM Re: Prove it and win the Nobel Prize! [Re: Drake_Bamboozle]
Taubmann Offline


Registered: 11/26/07
Posts: 123
Loc: Basque Country
Magister Svengali, people who claim Jung had "theistic leanings" always do it in order to justify their own beliefs, a lot of pseudo occultist spanish cults use to do it for example.

And about Gods being the invention of man, I think we should separate two different facts:

1-Archetypes are not creation of man, but the different aspects of human nature. They are very important as they can serve you to fully understand yourself and humanity.

2-Gods are cultural entities based on archetypes. They represent the views of a local culture on a specific archetype, and so they are created by man. They only matter when they can serve you to understand better the archetype they represent.
_________________________
“People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use.”

Kierkegaard

Top
#286671 - 11/29/07 06:27 AM Turning The Tables [Re: Nemo]
Max Faust Offline
Banned

Registered: 09/10/07
Posts: 419
Loc: Ultima Thule
I am not so much concerned with God. Whether or not there is a God is none of my business, because if there isn't a God, then who cares anyway? And if there is, who am I to question the mind and nature of an omnipotent, omniscent entity? I have difficulties enough understanding myself, for fuck's sake!

Perhaps the Pantheistic Animism view is the most sympathetic, being that existence itself is the nature of God, that the will to exist is the will of God, and that all things that are real, as they are, must be understood as "the word of God".

You need not understand beauty to appreciate it.

I find it more interesting to question WHY people invented this sinister God idea in the first place. What kind of need does this idea meet? It is hard to reach any other conclusion that it is the common, human arrogance of thinking that reality (which is by and large unknown to unknowable on a scale) should comply with our ideas about reality (which are by and large reductionistic to insane on a scale), so that we don't have to feel so much fear.

In other words, God is a symbol which is created to scare away fear.

Kind of twisted, really, but then again, this IS the human race.

Top
#286672 - 11/29/07 06:37 AM Re: Turning The Tables [Re: Max Faust]
Taubmann Offline


Registered: 11/26/07
Posts: 123
Loc: Basque Country
The notion of the numinous (or God as you call it) is not only created, developed I would say, to scare away fear but in order to deal with different kinds of alienation and feelings. Being the alienation with nature and feeling there is something GREATER than yourself the main ones.
_________________________
“People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use.”

Kierkegaard

Top
#286676 - 11/29/07 06:52 AM Re: Turning The Tables [Re: Max Faust]
Mr Sam Offline


Registered: 07/18/06
Posts: 776
Loc: Somewhere in the UK.
 Originally Posted By: Max Faust
Perhaps the Pantheistic Animism view is the most sympathetic, being that existence itself is the nature of God, that the will to exist is the will of God, and that all things that are real, as they are, must be understood as "the word of God".


This sounds like a nice notion, but it is entirely meaningless. It is just assigning the name God to things which already have names. All this does is confuse issues in a vague attempt to be sympathetic with God believers.

Top
Page 9 of 10 < 1 2 ... 7 8 9 10 >


Forum Stats
12106 Members
73 Forums
43869 Topics
405521 Posts

Max Online: 197 @ 10/04/11 06:49 AM
Advertisements