Will heathendom (pagandom) bring freedom back to us?

[Arminius]

So if freedom comes back it will be via non-Abrahamic routes.

Or it will be without history as it was more than 6000 years ago.

[Moreno]

So if freedom comes back it will be via non-Abrahamic routes.

Or it will be without history as it was more than 6000 years ago.

Perhaps it will be the history of creative acts, trends and discoveries and not the crap we had to memorize in high school. Crap in the sense of not useful in the form given and crap in the sense that it was generally a history of wars and 'great men', those parts that were true that is.

[phoneutria]

My tentative answer was blocked by moderation and then buried in the thread. I'm quoting it:

And what about the religion? Do we need a religion, and, if yes, which one in order to prevent that choice? Can heathendom help us thereby? Or is just the reverse true?

My two questions again:

How do a heathen live his life?

How has he to live his life?

By loving the words of their fathers.

Look thou character. Give thy thoughts no tongue, 
Nor any unproportion'd thought his act. 
Be thou familiar, but by no means vulgar: 
Those friends thou hast, and their adoption tried, 
Grapple them unto thy soul with hoops of steel; 
But do not dull thy palm with entertainment 
Of each new-hatch'd, unfledg'd comrade. Beware 
Of entrance to a quarrel; but being in, 
Bear't that th' opposed may beware of thee. 
Give every man thine ear, but few thy voice; 
Take each man's censure, but reserve thy judgment. 
Costly thy habit as thy purse can buy, 
But not express'd in fancy; rich, not gaudy; 
For the apparel oft proclaims the man, 
And they in France of the best rank and station 
Are most select and generous, chief in that. 
Neither a borrower nor a lender be; 
For loan oft loses both itself and friend, 
And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry. 
This above all- to thine own self be true, 
And it must follow, as the night the day, 
Thou canst not then be false to any man. 
Farewell. My blessing season this in thee!

I posted Polonius as an example of advice from a loving father, not as intended to be THE way to live.

[Moreno]

By loving the words of their fathers.

So,like,not your words.

Polonius was well-intentioned, but pretty muddleheaded and couldn't follow his own advice.

[phoneutria]

By loving the words of their fathers.

So,like,not your words.

Polonius was well-intentioned, but pretty muddleheaded and couldn't follow his own advice.

Like many parents

A "heathen" may draw his motivation for a good conduct in honoring his ancestry...
To not engage in actions that would shame his name.
To love his parents and grandparents and those that came before so that he wishes to make them proud.
To have self pride and self love from belonging to this lineage/culture, and to wish to preserve it.

[Moreno]

By loving the words of their fathers.

So,like,not your words.

Polonius was well-intentioned, but pretty muddleheaded and couldn't follow his own advice.

Like many parents

A "heathen" may draw his motivation for a good conduct in honoring his ancestry...
To not engage in actions that would shame his name.
To love his parents and grandparents and those that came before so that he wishes to make them proud.
To have self pride and self love from belonging to this lineage/culture, and to wish to preserve it.

What if a serious break from that lineage needs to be made?

And I said, So,like,not your words.
Since I got the impression you are a woman.

[phoneutria]

What if a serious break from that lineage needs to be made?

The only situation in which such a break would occur would be in the case in which the parents failed to... indoctrinate the child with their values, or that the child has broken from his indoctrination, such that his values differ from those of his ancestry.
In this case, one may embrace the values of a different culture and begin a new tradition by passing it along to his children.

If you can't draw motivation from your ancestry, you can draw it from becoming ancestry... for your descendants.

If you don't want to have children, then who cares? Piss on your food and shit on your bed and hope to die soon

And I said, So,like,not your words.
Since I got the impression you are a woman.

From my use of "fathers"?
It is meant as ancestry, think nothing of it.
And from what do you gather I am female? By the "a" at the end of the name, the female form of the word?

[Arminius]

A "heathen" may draw his motivation for a good conduct in honoring his ancestry...
To not engage in actions that would shame his name.
To love his parents and grandparents and those that came before so that he wishes to make them proud.
To have self pride and self love from belonging to this lineage/culture, and to wish to preserve it.

That is what a heathen should do, yes.

Actually it is what all human beings should do, but nihilistic human beings are not able to do.

So the question is not only heathendom versus monotheism, but also heathendom versus nihilism.

[James S Saint]

A "heathen" may draw his motivation for a good conduct in honoring his ancestry...
To not engage in actions that would shame his name.
To love his parents and grandparents and those that came before so that he wishes to make them proud.
To have self pride and self love from belonging to this lineage/culture, and to wish to preserve it.

Another name for that is "Blind Faith".

[phoneutria]

A "heathen" may draw his motivation for a good conduct in honoring his ancestry...
To not engage in actions that would shame his name.
To love his parents and grandparents and those that came before so that he wishes to make them proud.
To have self pride and self love from belonging to this lineage/culture, and to wish to preserve it.

Another name for that is "Blind Faith".

Would you care to elaborate, dear?

[James S Saint]

A "heathen" may draw his motivation for a good conduct in honoring his ancestry...
To not engage in actions that would shame his name.
To love his parents and grandparents and those that came before so that he wishes to make them proud.
To have self pride and self love from belonging to this lineage/culture, and to wish to preserve it.

Another name for that is "Blind Faith".

Would you care to elaborate, dear?

Your proposal was that a "proper heathen" would always simply have pride in his ancestors and/or culture. But inevitably, one discovers that their ancestors weren't quite right about a lot of things. Your suggestion is that they continue to follow the ways of the ancestors regardless of what they learn. That is what we call "Blind Faith". That is what "Christians", Jews, and Muslims are already doing.

[Arminius]

Should we say "heathendom / monotheism / nihilism versus ... (put in the right word) ..."?

[Arminius]

Probably we can't overcome monotheism because it exists and -especially - because we know that it exists. So we can't forget it or it will take a very long time to forget it. A very Long time, although not als long as it takes to forget nihilism and especially the meaning of nihilism.

[James S Saint]

What brings the greatest freedom ever achieved is, in effect, going through monotheism, beyond it. If you were to totally destroy it, it would merely come back again, and probably with a vengeance.

The actual problem with monotheism that inhibits freedom is the presumption of socialism = reaching for too much control over too much and too many. What yields more power, leads to too much power. That is the state that Man finds himself in over and over.

By "working through monotheism", one discovers cooperative distribution of wealth of power. At that point, there is never too much power because the wealth is never concentrated. The concentration of the wealth is the foundation of "too much".

Heathenism merely breaks up power into chaos, reducing the total power and thus allowing for certain freedoms if there had been too much, but also taking away productive power and thus reducing opportunities and thus reducing freedoms. So yes, certain freedoms would return through heathenism. But certain freedoms would also be removed.

Much like Science, the real answers are beyond the current mindset. Merely removing the current accomplishes nothing but temporary chaos while a different regime takes over and reestablishes the same ole story but with new weapons added to ensure that it cannot be defeated again.

Thus in the long run, heathenism brings less freedom, not more because what didn't completely kill it, made it stronger.

[phoneutria]

Your proposal was that a "proper heathen" would always simply have pride in his ancestors and/or culture. But inevitably, one discovers that their ancestors weren't quite right about a lot of things. Your suggestion is that they continue to follow the ways of the ancestors regardless of what they learn. That is what we call "Blind Faith". That is what "Christians", Jews, and Muslims are already doing.

You must have missed my post from Mon Jun 09, 2014 12:06 am.

Similar to a relationship of a boy and a father. The boy becomes a teenager and disagrees with the father, but respects his authority as he lives under his roof. When reaching adulthood, some men break with their fathers completely, while some come to see their father as a sort of a hero. I see this in a way as a sign of the quality of the father/fathering.

[Arminius]

What brings the greatest freedom ever achieved is, in effect, going through monotheism, beyond it. If you were to totally destroy it, it would merely come back again, and probably with a vengeance.

The actual problem with monotheism that inhibits freedom is the presumption of socialism = reaching for too much control over too much and too many. What yields more power, leads to too much power. That is the state that Man finds himself in over and over.

By "working through monotheism", one discovers cooperative distribution of wealth of power. At that point, there is never too much power because the wealth is never concentrated. The concentration of the wealth is the foundation of "too much".

But as we know the monotheisms are not equal. One (Christianity) is weak, the others are strong.

Heathenism merely breaks up power into chaos, reducing the total power and thus allowing for certain freedoms if there had been too much, but also taking away productive power and thus reducing opportunities and thus reducing freedoms. So yes, certain freedoms would return through heathenism. But certain freedoms would also be removed.

Much like Science, the real answers are beyond the current mindset. Merely removing the current accomplishes nothing but temporary chaos while a different regime takes over and reestablishes the same ole story but with new weapons added to ensure that it cannot be defeated again.

Thus in the long run, heathenism brings less freedom, not more because what didn't completely kill it, made it stronger.

Heathendom will bring freedom back only then, if monotheism is completely deleted from the memory. So heathendom has to wait.

[Arminius]

If the heathendom wants to be more successful, it has to become political in order to eliminate the monotheistic memory.

But probably it does not want to be more successful, and probably it is the right decision because of the monotheistic envy and revenge.

[Moreno]

The only situation in which such a break would occur would be in the case in which the parents failed to... indoctrinate the child with their values, or that the child has broken from his indoctrination, such that his values differ from those of his ancestry.

Well, sure. And this will always be the case to some degree, unless one is incapable of being critical or finding one's own way.

In this case, one may embrace the values of a different culture and begin a new tradition by passing it along to his children.

If you can't draw motivation from your ancestry, you can draw it from becoming ancestry... for your descendants.

And both of these will happen consciously or not in most cases, even when the person tries really hard to simply parrot the parents. So I don't really see the need to consciously strive to fit in with a lineage. What one is aligned with, one is aligned with. What one is not, one is not. It would likely be a good subject for mulling on occasion, if one does not already know why one does not continue a line. But other than that I can't see the use of it unless one wants to deindividualize. And let me be clear. This does not entail one throws away everything or starts from scratch.

From my use of "fathers"?
It is meant as ancestry, think nothing of it.
And from what do you gather I am female? By the "a" at the end of the name, the female form of the word?

Well, murderess....sure, though it was more of an intuitive reaction, perhaps with that in there.

[Arminius]

I think, heathendom will as long remain a small religious group of a minority as monotheism remains in the memory.

[phoneutria]

The only situation in which such a break would occur would be in the case in which the parents failed to... indoctrinate the child with their values, or that the child has broken from his indoctrination, such that his values differ from those of his ancestry.

Well, sure. And this will always be the case to some degree, unless one is incapable of being critical or finding one's own way.

In this case, one may embrace the values of a different culture and begin a new tradition by passing it along to his children.

If you can't draw motivation from your ancestry, you can draw it from becoming ancestry... for your descendants.

And both of these will happen consciously or not in most cases, even when the person tries really hard to simply parrot the parents. So I don't really see the need to consciously strive to fit in with a lineage. What one is aligned with, one is aligned with. What one is not, one is not. It would likely be a good subject for mulling on occasion, if one does not already know why one does not continue a line. But other than that I can't see the use of it unless one wants to deindividualize. And let me be clear. This does not entail one throws away everything or starts from scratch.

One must aim for the balance of refining the old, while respecting it.
It is every generation's duty to improve on the previous one, not to deface it.

Well, murderess....sure, though it was more of an intuitive reaction, perhaps with that in there.

It can't be helped.

[Moreno]

One must aim for the balance of refining the old, while respecting it.
It is every generation's duty to improve on the previous one, not to deface it.

Where is this duty coming from? This is usually conceived of a requirment imposed by custom or religion/God. Why not simply see it as a good thing for an organism, person or other, to do its best, something its desire will (or won't) drive it towards. And if it has no desire to do this but does it - or really, tries to conform to the idea of it - due to a conception of duty, how can it work? What does this conception of duty add except perhaps guilt or shame?

It can't be helped.

True, one is generally give one's sex, though nowadays one can choose to change it at least in certain ways.

[Arminius]

One must aim for the balance of refining the old, while respecting it.
It is every generation's duty to improve on the previous one, not to deface it.

Would you mind going into details?

[phoneutria]

One must aim for the balance of refining the old, while respecting it.
It is every generation's duty to improve on the previous one, not to deface it.

Where is this duty coming from? This is usually conceived of a requirment imposed by custom or religion/God. Why not simply see it as a good thing for an organism, person or other, to do its best, something its desire will (or won't) drive it towards. And if it has no desire to do this but does it - or really, tries to conform to the idea of it - due to a conception of duty, how can it work? What does this conception of duty add except perhaps guilt or shame?

This duty comes from the desire to be worthy of your name. A worthy member of your tribe. To let your fame precede you. "You come from a land of great men, and you too are a great man".
This conception of duty adds a motivation to pursue virtue which is not grounded in monotheism.

It can't be helped.

True, one is generally give one's sex, though nowadays one can choose to change it at least in certain ways.

I can set myself as male in my profile, but I cannot make my words come out as though they came from a male brain. Too much clutter in here *knocks*...

[The Golden Turd]

The title of this thread is illogical in its intentions and a oxymoron to boot.

Freedom is a Dualism that supports a quality that is alien to its means of definition. It arouse out of the Platonic, and especially Stoic divide of the Virtues and Vices.... as a formulaic calculas for defining good and bad, health and unhealth, and the etymological foundations of hierarchical being.

By insinuating a Hegelian and then Nietzschean base to your argument of a ideal state that leads to freedom and increased complexity (no, not mentioned yet but will of been mentioned as a tangent in a few more pages) you merely affirm the model that entraps you in a definitional dualism that obstructs actual freedom..... freedom of experience independent of knowing limitations of historic restrictions.

No..... heathenism cannot, nor ever, bring more freedom, just spite and hope, delusions and letdown after decades of busybody work. Word games, linguistic labyrinths, and 19th century german sociological concepts cant save you from youself.

Monotheism has nothing to do with heathenism, in terms of the expression of freedom. A heathen is free, because they just is/are. The monotheist is a excuse, and vice versa the same..... a monotheist is free or enslaved of their own accord.

Hence.... most Cynics were religious, they sought independence, but cared not for the definition. Many were pagan, many were christian..... one even became a patriarch of Constantinople.... but all were free, whereas all you are slaves of your words, and inferior to your own grasp of your situation around you. You find linguistics reasons to affirm, and therefore linguistic reasons to withdrawl.

Freedom exists independent of vice and virtue. It is not always wise, and sometimes fatal, usually moronic. Rarely as beautiful as we like to paint it..... a beautiful system admits to a form of rationality in design or evolution of sorts. Freedom does not..... it is raw and unencumbered IMPULSE.

From a Christian Cynic.

I recommend adopting a formulaic method of debate that strives for more than linguistic muddling around. There is more to the world that the linguistic aspects of our brain. Spells are meaningless, except to a fool entranced with its seeming potential. It has none, its part of a larger cognitive network, and words only matter in how they productively help achieve results in other aspects of the mind.

To find meaning in these kinds of arguments, you have to have either a low IQ, or a very embarrassing lack of education in philosophy. No proper pagan or monotheistic philosopher would have anything to do with these Prussian Circles Arminius is having you run about in. How many more linguistic loops will you jump through to appease him. Will doing it increase your heathen tribes morality? Will you become Overmen raging in health, will to power???? Ha ha ha ha. Hegel's History and Arius Didymus "Stoic Ethics" and you already have Arminius in a nutshell.... actually, you can see BEYOND him.

History has a long shadow, you all are born, and will die in it. In terms of the Monoamine Neurobalance, infact you are defaulted to NEVER have the sense of freedom even Nietzsche desired of a young child, overcomming the camel and lion..... by proclaiming one thing over another. Merely look at the Lovheim Cube for verification of this...... youve managed to biologically neuter your silly selfs by separating your ethos. You gotta coordinate them together in a youthful cascade, not limit in spite, surprise, anger, fear, etc..... which are coincidentally stoic vices and virtues.

Enjoy your labyrinth, your self inflicted torture, your delusions, your sense of self opposed to the sense of the other. Deride the christian.

Booo..... the boogeyman.

And knock the dollar crap off. Its a function of the left dorsal lateral, the left brain also does language, shitty feelings, anger, and idolizes ideals, seeks to link ideas together.... and has that pissed off angry supermodel sense of self. We get it. Try to lateralize with your right hemisphere a bit, and quite mopping around all anti-social like on philosophy forums. Money is not the god of the masses, but your CAPACITY to denouncement clearly does worship it in a vile and twisted way. Knock it off, and move on. Poverty isnt the result of lacking money, but wishing you had more. Just drop the act, your denouncement makes it painfully obvious what you really are.

Enjoy your pagan gods, and your rituals. Nevermind Arminius' rabbithole to the Noumenon of Freedom, and that of any other, and you will be free, whether you seek or desire it, or not. Freedom isnt a ends, but a means.

[The Golden Turd]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unhappy_consciousness

Its all Arminius has going for him at root, minus some minor twist. Nietzsche in fairness better understood the stoics enough to parallel most of his philosophy through them via his philological contact with Stobeaus..... Hegel just sorta sucked here, his timeline blows, more a psychological model than historically accurate. This thread has nothing to do with pagans, heathens, christians, arabs..... just a linguistic maze by a german frustrated they lost the war in WW2, and wants everyone to walk around still legged with pointy hats hailing some great reich leader. Its rather lame. The heathens I know like metal music and Rammstein. They dont care about these silly riddles.