Page 2 of 2 < 1 2
Topic Options
#504898 - 09/05/17 08:04 AM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Mannyowar]
Isobel Gowdie Offline


Registered: 12/28/15
Posts: 46
If you don’t mind, Dax, I’m going to cut out the first half of your post. Our intercession is starting to become circular, which is completely unproductive, and we seem to both be mishearing each other over the (digital) shouting.

Let’s summarise it like this:

- Equality of opportunity is an appropriate goal, assuming standards are maintained. This is the Satanic root for “meritocracy”.
- “Equality” should not be extended to allow all people to do all things, outside of their physical or mental capability.

Does that sound reasonable?

Originally Posted By: Dax9
I have all the sympathy in the world for unfortunate people who live in oppressed, third world countries. I served a tour of Iraq (hence my avatar) and have no inherent dislike of Middle Easterners or even Muslims. Sadly, the upstanding good folks have to suffer for the actions of the handful of nut cases.

The current President of the United States is no more sane than the people you’re indicting.

Seeing through the fog of propaganda might eventually prove that he’s worse than the likes of Assad, Jong-un or Rouhani; certainly academics like Chomsky believe so, given that the rest of the world considers America the biggest threat to its peace.

The CIA’s history in the Middle East, and Iran in particular, would certainly back up Chomsky’s hypothesis. And even the internal audience of the United States is likely to suffer for the idiocy and narcissism of “the Donald” when this all shakes out; most solely by virtue of the class they were born into.

Originally Posted By: Dax9
Yes, that would be practical, but we both know such a thing would never be legislated. There is an essay in Peter Gilmore's The Satanic Scriptures simply titled "Eugenics" that you may wish to check out if you have not.

Thanks for the recommendation, I’ve read it. I’ve no specific issues with eugenics, really, and imagine that it’d be a potential solution to a lot of problems were it not hindered by Third Reich baggage.

Much like Satanism per se, I suspect.

Originally Posted By: Mannyowar
You admit that people are not equal, that means there are always going to be those who have a head start in life or are disadvantaged, because of the merits (or lack thereof) of their parents. Yes, that means the child who may make the best brain surgeon or astronaut or racing driver may never get the opportunity to develop their talent and people from poorer background will have to work a lot harder than their richer counterparts. Is that fair? No, but life/nature isn't fair!

“Life”, within your current context, is a matter of political will. A series of policies that diverted wealth downward, and concentrated it in education for those disadvantaged, would promote the concept of meritocracy while simultaneously developing the talent pool that the human race could be developing with.

The law of the jungle does not apply to national economies or matters of policy. To suggest otherwise is to misunderstand one, the other, or both.

And I’m going to deliberately ignore your analogy, if you don’t mind; mainly because it’s ludicrous.

Originally Posted By: Mannyowar
When we talk about meritocracy or survival of the fittest we can only talk about general trends.

This is a debate worth having.

When discussing trends, particularly societal trends, it’s probably worth fully defining what you think “meritocracy” should be. The reason I bring up economic orthodoxy is because it’s the absolute opposite of meritocracy, as Dax and I (I hope) defined earlier. Western economic orthodoxy is promoting the upwards movement of wealth via private ownership and inheritance, which is the opposite of what Satanism promotes.

Originally Posted By: Mannyowar
Man-made concepts like fairness and egalitarianism, that have no basis in nature, should not guide our thinking.

It entirely depends on what you want to achieve or, to paraphrase Nemo from above:

“What’s more useful?”

Do we think funnelling wealth upwards to where it has less impact on the economy (via the lower propensity to consume, among other things), while creating an overtly burgeoning underclass, is useful?

Or do we think wealth transfer down the way, concentrated into better education for everyone (and, particularly, the disadvantaged), will end up more useful in the end?

These statements are both crassly oversimplified, but one promotes meritocracy and the other doesn’t.

You might be surprised by which is which.
_________________________
Darkest Auldearn: Raising Hell since 1662
Avatar by Luis Falero

Top
#504899 - 09/05/17 10:23 PM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Isobel Gowdie]
Dax9 Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 10/16/10
Posts: 1003
Loc: near Baton Rouge, LA
Quote:
- Equality of opportunity is an appropriate goal, assuming standards are maintained. This is the Satanic root for “meritocracy”.
- “Equality” should not be extended to allow all people to do all things, outside of their physical or mental capability.

Does that sound reasonable?


Partially. I wonder about that second locution. Society sometimes seems to be lowering standards so as to not "offend" anyone. The "lets give everyone a participation trophy" trend seems to now be the "in" thing!

Quote:
The current President of the United States is no more sane than the people you’re indicting.


Well, first of all most Satanists view politics from an aloof vantage point and see elections and politicians as an amusing circus act. In fact, many Satanists, such as myself, do not even bother to vote. (There are many reasons for this that I don't care to elaborate on at this time.) Considering that I am half Honduran I can't say I appreciate his comments regarding "Mexicans". Still, as a president, I don't feel he is doing any worse than Obama, and I'm sure as hell glad that Hillary didn't get elected. All in all, I think that the US and the world at large will survive the presidency of Donnie boy! laugh

What amazes me the most is how much media attention Trump still gets. CNN never shuts up about him. The last time I saw so much fuss was when David Duke got elected to the Louisiana House of Representatives back in 1989. I remember I was a junior in high school back then, and I actually lived in Duke's district. Let me tell you straight that I have never been one of his supporters, but I still have an old Duke campaign doubloon from back then as a souvenir....

Now this is something you might find amusing: Do you know what was on his campaign doubloon? On the front around the coin was written: Equal Rights For All, Special Privilege For None. On the back the coin said:

1. Workfare not Welfare
2. Save Our Homestead
3. No New Taxes
4. Protect the Environment

...and, my dear, this is why I rarely take anything politicians say seriously! laugh


Attachments
IMG_0782.JPG

IMG_0783.JPG


_________________________
"The difference between the man or woman who's a practicing Satanist, from an identity Satanist is that the practicing Satanist looks at the picture, while the identity Satanist studies the frame."
-- Anton Szandor LaVey

"Anyone without a sense of humor is too pretentious to be a good magician."
-- Anton Szandor LaVey

Life Everlasting

World Without End





Top
#504900 - 09/06/17 06:02 AM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Dax9]
Isobel Gowdie Offline


Registered: 12/28/15
Posts: 46
Originally Posted By: Dax9
Partially. I wonder about that second locution. Society sometimes seems to be lowering standards so as to not "offend" anyone. The "lets give everyone a participation trophy" trend seems to now be the "in" thing!

Perhaps we’re back in the delta between aspiration and reality. I suppose I’m merely trying to ascertain a definition that we both find agreeable, rather than one that happens to be true at this time. Even the concept of the “participation trophy” is something that has validity, depending on what someone does with it; settling for perennial second-best finishes is an ugly consequence, as is celebrating mediocrity, but learning to love what you’re doing irrespective of peer acceptance? That’s probably a happier consequence.

A Satanist may even consider it “Satanic”, as you’re effectively taking collective views out of the mix entirely.

Originally Posted By: Dax9
Well, first of all most Satanists view politics from an aloof vantage point and see elections and politicians as an amusing circus act. In fact, many Satanists, such as myself, do not even bother to vote.

I don’t vote in British General Elections.

I’m not personally interested in the laughable periphery that it would influence. There really are no choices in the United Kingdom, just as there aren’t in the United States, as the system is rigged to only work one way; economic neoliberalism, mixed with interventionist foreign policy. The colour of tie a politician wears in this endeavour makes no difference to me and I actually find the reasons some espouse for their voting history pretty cute.

My husband put me onto a George Carlin video where Carlin pointed out that only those who don’t vote have a right to complain; they’re not responsible for picking those in charge.

Originally Posted By: Dax9
What amazes me the most is how much media attention Trump still gets.

He’s easy copy.

There’s no real journalistic effort required if you’re writing about him, because he self-generates ludicrous content. His other influence is something that would require a whole other topic, and that’s to do with biased journalism, information operations and (his favourite term) fake news.

James Sass wrote an essay in his book, I think it was ”How not to be an idiot”, and that helps people to understand what they’re really being presented with, but then we probably agree that the general person in the street hasn’t the self-awareness to apply that type of rational thinking.

We then end up with social media echo chambers that, like it or not, influence popular opinion and, thus, policy.

This point in history is a reasonable time to reconsider the potential impact of Rupert Sheldrake’s concept of morphic resonance.


Edited by Isobel Gowdie (09/06/17 06:04 AM)
_________________________
Darkest Auldearn: Raising Hell since 1662
Avatar by Luis Falero

Top
#504902 - 09/06/17 05:15 PM Aside on Sheldrake... [Re: Isobel Gowdie]
Nemo Offline
CoS Magister

Registered: 10/06/02
Posts: 13135
Loc: Point Nemo s48:52:31:748, w123...
Quote:
This point in history is a reasonable time to reconsider the potential impact of Rupert Sheldrake’s concept of morphic resonance.


Met him last month in Seattle.

Still as smart as a whip and continues to offer excellent lectures.
_________________________
Magister Nemo's Satanic Offerings:
DISCOVERING THE SATANIC GOD - The heart of Satanism.
THE SEVENTH TOWER OF SATAN - Ritual in virtual reality.
BENEATH THE SEVENTH TOWER OF SATAN - Deeper VR ritual.
THE FIRE FROM WITHIN - My book.

My first audio interview on GREATER MAGIC
My second audio interview by Rev Campbell



Top
#504904 - 09/07/17 12:01 AM Re: Aside on Sheldrake... [Re: Nemo]
Isobel Gowdie Offline


Registered: 12/28/15
Posts: 46
Originally Posted By: Nemo
Met him last month in Seattle.

Still as smart as a whip and continues to offer excellent lectures.

I just wanted to say that I very much enjoyed your essay on morphic resonance (I said so in the review thread for your book, but it didn't post).

While I didn't agree with all of your conclusions, I've found myself thinking a great deal about it recently due to the explosion of social media.

Additionally, I'm quite jealous that you've met Sheldrake. My favourite lecture was one I attended in Lond by another "maverick" scientist that I'm sure you're aware of, Aubrey de Grey.


Edited by Isobel Gowdie (09/07/17 02:28 AM)
_________________________
Darkest Auldearn: Raising Hell since 1662
Avatar by Luis Falero

Top
#504905 - 09/07/17 05:56 AM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Isobel Gowdie]
Mannyowar Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 08/16/09
Posts: 144
Loc: London, England
Originally Posted By: Isobel Gowdie

“Life”, within your current context, is a matter of political will. A series of policies that diverted wealth downward, and concentrated it in education for those disadvantaged, would promote the concept of meritocracy while simultaneously developing the talent pool that the human race could be developing with.

The law of the jungle does not apply to national economies or matters of policy. To suggest otherwise is to misunderstand one, the other, or both.

And I’m going to deliberately ignore your analogy, if you don’t mind; mainly because it’s ludicrous.

Originally Posted By: Mannyowar
When we talk about meritocracy or survival of the fittest we can only talk about general trends.

This is a debate worth having.

When discussing trends, particularly societal trends, it’s probably worth fully defining what you think “meritocracy” should be. The reason I bring up economic orthodoxy is because it’s the absolute opposite of meritocracy, as Dax and I (I hope) defined earlier. Western economic orthodoxy is promoting the upwards movement of wealth via private ownership and inheritance, which is the opposite of what Satanism promotes.

Originally Posted By: Mannyowar
Man-made concepts like fairness and egalitarianism, that have no basis in nature, should not guide our thinking.

It entirely depends on what you want to achieve or, to paraphrase Nemo from above:

“What’s more useful?”

Do we think funnelling wealth upwards to where it has less impact on the economy (via the lower propensity to consume, among other things), while creating an overtly burgeoning underclass, is useful?

Or do we think wealth transfer down the way, concentrated into better education for everyone (and, particularly, the disadvantaged), will end up more useful in the end?

These statements are both crassly oversimplified, but one promotes meritocracy and the other doesn’t.

You might be surprised by which is which.


Whether it's funneling wealth upward or downward, what you are talking about is still social engineering. What I understand by Stratification is the State employs a 'hands off' approach to social engineering and merely concerns itself with maintaining law and order, national security and the country's infrastructure. In his essay Satanism: The Feared Religion Magus Gilmore outlines clearly what stratification entails, in particular you might find the following paragraph illuminating.

"Satanists see the social structure of humanity as being stratified, thus each person reaches a level commensurate with the development (or lack thereof) of their natural talents. The principle of the survival of the strong is advocated on all levels of society, from allowing an individual to stand or fall, to even letting those nations that cannot handle themselves take the consequences of this inability. Any assistance on all levels will be on a “quid pro quo” basis. There would be a concommitant reduction in the world’s population as the weak are allowed to experience the consequences of social Darwinism. Thus has nature always acted to cleanse and strengthen her children. This is harsh, but that is the way of the world. We embrace reality and do not try to transform it into some utopia that is contrary to the very fabric of existence. Practical application of this doctrine would see the complete cessation of the welfare system, an end to no-strings attached foreign aid and new programs to award and encourage gifted individuals in all fields to pursue personal excellence. A meritocracy will replace the practice of such injustices as affirmative action and other programs designed to punish the able and reward the undeserving."

While the Church of Satan is never going to tell you who to vote for in an election, there are certain Satanic doctrines (like Stratification) that would require political changes to be brought into reality, and therefore there are some political positions that are incompatible with Satanism. Trying to marry social justice warrior ethics with Satanic aesthetics just doesn't work, there is already a pseudo-satanic group doing just that who are rightly looked on with derision by real Satanists.

I think a good litmus test of whether Satanism is for you or not is this. Imagine you are going for a night out with a wallet/purse stuffed full of cash that you are just going to blow on frivolous stuff that gives you pleasure, booze, restaurant food, concert merch, whatever. Do you feel a sense of guilt or responsibility when you pass people who are sleeping on the street and begging? Do you feel a sense of resentment when someone drives past in a car that cost several times what your house is worth? If the answer to either of those questions is yes, then I think you need to query your allegiance to Satanism.
_________________________
My Undercroft profile: http://www.satannet.com/profile/Mannyowar1


Top
#504906 - 09/07/17 01:45 PM Re: Aside on Sheldrake... [Re: Isobel Gowdie]
Nemo Offline
CoS Magister

Registered: 10/06/02
Posts: 13135
Loc: Point Nemo s48:52:31:748, w123...
Glad you enjoy being open to those kind of "mavericks" ...since those are generally the ones still actually following the scientific method and do not reject evidence that offends their prior assumptions. grin

And thank you for the positive review of my book even if it did not get posted. I do appreciate it.
_________________________
Magister Nemo's Satanic Offerings:
DISCOVERING THE SATANIC GOD - The heart of Satanism.
THE SEVENTH TOWER OF SATAN - Ritual in virtual reality.
BENEATH THE SEVENTH TOWER OF SATAN - Deeper VR ritual.
THE FIRE FROM WITHIN - My book.

My first audio interview on GREATER MAGIC
My second audio interview by Rev Campbell



Top
#504907 - 09/08/17 12:18 AM Re: Aside on Sheldrake... [Re: Nemo]
Isobel Gowdie Offline


Registered: 12/28/15
Posts: 46
Originally Posted By: Mannyowar
Whether it's funneling wealth upward or downward, what you are talking about is still social engineering. What I understand by Stratification is the State employs a 'hands off' approach to social engineering and merely concerns itself with maintaining law and order, national security and the country's infrastructure.

I think the difference between you and I is that I consider the maintenance of law and order a form of social engineering, because the priorities will always be set by vested economic interests. In other words, the rich make the law and everyone else needs to live by it.

Similarly, a national security policy (or set of policies) requires a certain amount of expenditure to achieve, even when you account for waste. That money needs to come from an economy that works, and will need workers to make it do so.

Practically anything a government does is a form of social engineering. I reckon the erudite ask themselves:

1) Do I agree with this approach?
2) Can I amend this approach?
3) Can I live with this approach?
4) Can I make this approach work for me?

My suspicion is that Satanists and witches should probably start at question four, because a positive answer to that completely invalidates the other three.

Much of society bothers itself too much with question 1.

Originally Posted By: Mannyowar
Trying to marry social justice warrior ethics with Satanic aesthetics just doesn't work, there is already a pseudo-satanic group doing just that who are rightly looked on with derision by real Satanists.

I'm not trying to "marry" social justice into Satanism because I tend to agree that it's ultimately a bad fit. But I'm not a Satanist; I'm disagreeing with your stance, and presenting my reasons for doing so. Social justice can be meritocratic, even by virtue of pure logic, and I think that's a reasonable place to start a discussion.

Originally Posted By: Mannyowar
Do you feel a sense of guilt or responsibility when you pass people who are sleeping on the street and begging? Do you feel a sense of resentment when someone drives past in a car that cost several times what your house is worth? If the answer to either of those questions is yes, then I think you need to query your allegiance to Satanism.

I can only answer personally.

I think homelessness is a problem that needs solved, because it's economically costly to have high levels of it. I don't feel guilty about that, because it's not my governmental policies that contribute to the problem. But not feeling guilty does not equate to ignorance of the problem, or what causes it.

As for the person in the car... Meh, I don't care. What other people have makes no difference to me being happy with what I have. I have pretty simple tastes, really, and the means to ensure I always have a plentiful supply of them.

Originally Posted By: Nemo
Glad you enjoy being open to those kind of "mavericks" ...since those are generally the ones still actually following the scientific method and do not reject evidence that offends their prior assumptions. grin

I recall reading an article a couple of years back, I think authored by Rupert Sheldrake actually, that suggested almost all scientific work has been compromised by bad peer review. There were a great many reasons for this to be the case, some wholly avoidable, but the potential ramifications are terribly ugly.

Then we reach de Grey, an individual who was roundly mocked when the SENS facility was set up, and is now considered one of the world's primary gerentologists.

Originally Posted By: Nemo
And thank you for the positive review of my book even if it did not get posted. I do appreciate it.

I enjoyed it, Nemo. Of particular interest was the commentary on the "Satanic panic", given that I wasn't around for it and strongly dislike the way the Witchcraft community reacted to it. Satanists seemed the most level-headed at the time, and unwilling to effectively say they were really just Christians with a different view of divinity.

LaVey, Shreck, Aquino and the others (I know some of their history; it's... Colourful) acquitted themselves very well.
_________________________
Darkest Auldearn: Raising Hell since 1662
Avatar by Luis Falero

Top
#504932 - 09/24/17 12:09 PM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: DRACV]
Old_Pig Offline


Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3976
Loc: The Deep South
I disagree. I think the world is indeed a meritocracy.

All you need to do is reevaluate the concept of "merit". Today's society defines merit mostly as level of contribution to society, a concept rooted on the Judeo-Christian ideals of charity and altruism. Under those standards, merit would always imply the individual being subservient of the common good.

That's a concept of merit based on religious and moral standards of the majority, which are not necessarily my own as an individual.

If we define merit from a pure biological point of view, then merit should be the ability to survive and thrive in your environment. A strong organism contributes more to its species by devouring the weak than any artificial device that would give the wark a better advantage.

Despite all the artificial rules society imposes to prop up the inferior and hold down the resourceful, at the end nature's rules always prevail, the strong still rules over the weak and the meek have not inherited the Earth.

So seeing it from that point of view, we live in a meritocracy where might is merit.
_________________________
You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both at once.
Robert A. Heinlein


Top
#504938 - 09/25/17 05:25 AM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Old_Pig]
Isobel Gowdie Offline


Registered: 12/28/15
Posts: 46
Originally Posted By: Old_Pig
All you need to do is reevaluate the concept of "merit".

Which we don't get to do.

Words have set definitions for a whole host of very good reasons. Building your own reality, or "total environment", is all well and good - but ignoring the fundamental building blocks of language?

No, thanks.
_________________________
Darkest Auldearn: Raising Hell since 1662
Avatar by Luis Falero

Top
#504942 - 09/25/17 11:23 AM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Isobel Gowdie]
Old_Pig Offline


Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3976
Loc: The Deep South
I was not trying to change the meaning of the word itself, I was pointing at the way the concept is interpreted by society in general versus the way a Satanist would understand it.
_________________________
You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both at once.
Robert A. Heinlein


Top
#504950 - 09/29/17 02:06 AM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Old_Pig]
Isobel Gowdie Offline


Registered: 12/28/15
Posts: 46
Originally Posted By: Old_Pig
I was not trying to change the meaning of the word itself, I was pointing at the way the concept is interpreted by society in general versus the way a Satanist would understand it.

I think we largely covered that in an earlier post; namely, in the way a Satanist or witch would decide whether they can make a society work for them and then not really worrying about whether or not it's "fair".
_________________________
Darkest Auldearn: Raising Hell since 1662
Avatar by Luis Falero

Top
Page 2 of 2 < 1 2


Forum Stats
13166 Members
73 Forums
44451 Topics
407332 Posts

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

hold