Argument on Thelema
-
"Get Thee behind me Satan" is a crutch for those who believe that Satan (or "evil days"... or vampiric others... or one's wife) has a power over them.
"Apo Pantos Kakodaimonos" is for those who recognize that the Demons are just as much a part of themselves as are the Angels."
I see what you're saying, but I wasn't at all positing ontology to Satan or demons. Those are all just expressions, not crutches. It's a declaration of power (which is, by definition, empowering), over the stimulus that is distracting you from the Great Work. If something has distracted you from your Will, it has already demonstrated power against you. The best thing to do is to dismiss it. This has nothing to do with Good and Evil -- that's just a picture. Here, evil, Satan, and demons serve merely as a metaphor for that which distracts you from the Great Work.
There's no point living in self-deception by denying that we waste time and let others express power over us. Better to save the time on both counts. Do you spend every minute of every day devoted entirely to the fulfillment of your True Will? If not, then "the days are evil" (remember, it's just an expression). Are you unswayed and undistracted by every earthly stimulus? If not, take heed, lest the swine "turn again and rend you." Answering "no" to either of the above questions means you have "demons" (remember, metaphor, not literal) with which is "exorcise" (still a metaphor).
Maybe I should avoid metaphors next time so I don't pull the topic off course
-
Such Titan-like abilities...
But our minds are obviously bored if we're doing this. I keep getting called back to it, and it's a nothing - semantic rabbit hole explored by two of the same nature.
What's needed?
-
Just how I think...
-
It's a struggle for me, personally. Debating is very gratifying for me. Last year I decided to go a week without correcting people. If someone says something wrong, just to ignore it. It was SO HARD. It's just a natural thing for me to do.
If you have even a cursory knowledge of the world, and an attentive ear, the sheer amount of misinformation you hear each and every day is starting. But the question is WHY does it bug me so much? Why am I so wrapped up in argumentative impulses? Hearing someone say, "did you know we only use 10% of our brain?" makes me shiver. I MUST correct; I MUST educate.
I've gotten better with philosophical and religious things. I remember Crowley, in his commentary on Helena Blavatsky's work, The Voice of the Silence, writes:
"
It is infernally difficult to comment on such a Book. The principal reason for this is that every statement is true and untrue, alternately, as one advances upon the Path of the Wise. The question always arises: For what grade is this Book meant? To give one simple concrete example, it is stated in the third part of this treatise that Change is the great enemy."We've already seen this in this thread, when I was challenged to explain what I meant by the days being evil. At one level, the days are evil. At another, they are good. At another, it's just an expression and makes no sense when applied literally. At another, the days transcend good and evil. At another, there are no days at all.
So, I can often admit philosophical variance. In one way, nihilism is true; in another, pantheism; in another, panentheism; in another, dualism; in other, positivism; in another, phenomenalism.
Jim once told me that he changed his metaphysics roughly once per grade. I'm starting to see how this can happen, and it makes discussion quite a motherfucker. If I say, like Blavatsky, change is the great enemy, someone will undoubtedly challenge me on it. But from what plane am I looking?
But what really gets me is when it's an issue of fact, not philosophy. If someone says that we use 10% of our brain, we KNOW what plane they're talking from. And they're wrong. And I must correct.
-
Daryl Hall?
Wow thanks, that's made my day, they were awesome.
As for Ministry, I totally love their early electro era.
-
I wasn't criticizing, really.
Just. I don't know. I'm bored too. Interaction-wise.
The Flow...
-
I'm probably just sitting here counting my bones and being sad...
Reap, thou, and rejoice!
-
Thanks for the input. I find myself getting caught up into debate all too often. Really though, I didn't debate in this. I just asked for proof, and left it at that. He dropped it, I assume because he realized I am not going to get duped, and he had no actual proof on anything. Anyhow, 93et93.
-
@FraterTeth said
"Thanks for the input. I find myself getting caught up into debate all too often. Really though, I didn't debate in this. I just asked for proof, and left it at that. He dropped it, I assume because he realized I am not going to get duped, and he had no actual proof on anything. Anyhow, 93et93."
The only argument you could use I think is just that Crowley wanted people to believe he might be demonic or satanic as a method of a teaching technique. I forget the biographer, but one of them has a few letters Crowley wrote to students about the 'ordeal of the demon crowley' and in another biography there was a popular 'new age' type periodical whom had an editor who wrote virally about how evil Crowley was while privately writing to others that Crowley was the most interesting man alive and had a private relationship with Crowley. You could also point out Robert Anton Wilson's books about Crowley that spoke of this quite often, explaining how Crowley's technique was intentionally designed to freak everyone out so they could suspend true vs false and learn to navigate the delicate narrative in between.
If that doesn't work - then just tell them that everyone gets the Crowley they deserve, and your version of Crowley it's all a zen joke teaching method and that's the only version of Crowley you're interested in.
Best of luck
-
The guy you (OP) were talking to was just basically cutting and pasting from your run of the mill conspiracy website.
That's not a real discussion.
Waste of time.