Page 6 of 6 « First<23456
Topic Options
#16914 - 12/25/08 04:36 PM Re: So What's the Difference? [Re: Diavolo]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3935
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
 Quote:

Your ego is a self deceptive fantasy, your consciousness is, your worldview is. If you can't know reality as it really is, there is only a self-deceptive fantasy left to have faith in.


The rest of your post agrees with my position, (even though you begin it with 'not really' as if it doesn't) so let me start here.

How is embracing reality in the only way we are capable of doing so 'self deceptive'? This makes no sense at all to me. Reality as it really is is indistinguishable from reality as we perceive it, for all intents and purposes. It is when you convince yourself into believing things that are incongruous with how you actually experience them that it becomes self deception.

Faith in this context , aka 'religious faith' is defined as belief without evidence..as is necessary to believe in any sort of spiritual bogeyman, be he called Satan, God, or FSM. No such faith is required to enshrine ones own superego, the existence of which is supported by mountains of evidence, both objectively measurable and subjectively experienced. It could and has been argued that the only true axiom is 'I exist'.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#16918 - 12/25/08 06:15 PM Re: So What's the Difference? [Re: Diavolo]
Mike Offline
member


Registered: 09/11/07
Posts: 253
Loc: Farmingdale, NY
Well, everything Diavolo said and this:

It's all about perception. If you believe in Satan as an entity, you are giving it life with your head. For this reason there is no difference between someone who views Satan as a true being or recognizes Satan as his "SuperEgo" as D put it. The only difference is the level of understanding.
_________________________
-Mike, "The Patron Satanic Saint of the Youth"

Top
#16919 - 12/25/08 06:30 PM Re: So What's the Difference? [Re: Dan_Dread]
Mike Offline
member


Registered: 09/11/07
Posts: 253
Loc: Farmingdale, NY
 Quote:
It is when you convince yourself into believing things that are incongruous with how you actually experience them that it becomes self deception.


I wouldn't go as far as to call it self deception, it's more of confusion. Understanding exactly what Satan is to a theistic Satanist, it is easy to see that the identity of Satan is a creation of the sub-conscious mind. When you convince yourself into believing things that differ from how you experience them, it is because you are experiencing them on a level that feels like reality and is perceived as a reality. This is where the confusion comes in. Those who have convinced themselves into believing because of what they have experienced are confused and cannot see the reason why their experience with it has changed and simply accept it as part of their reality, as opposed to one who has come to the realization that the Satan they believe in came into existence through them and exists solely in their perceived reality. Worshiping this entity in either case could technically be considered "self-worship", for the Satan they believe in came from within.
_________________________
-Mike, "The Patron Satanic Saint of the Youth"

Top
#16920 - 12/25/08 06:33 PM Re: So What's the Difference? [Re: Dan_Dread]
Mike Offline
member


Registered: 09/11/07
Posts: 253
Loc: Farmingdale, NY
 Quote:
The difference sir is a difference of faith vs no faith, which is HUGE.


But to a theistic Satanist it isn't a matter of faith because of their experience with the entity. I explained this in my last post. If the person "knows" because of experience, it isn't a matter of faith, it's a matter of truth (to them to say the least).
_________________________
-Mike, "The Patron Satanic Saint of the Youth"

Top
#16921 - 12/25/08 06:50 PM Re: So What's the Difference? [Re: Dan_Dread]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
It could be argued indeed, although in that case 'I think I exist' would be more correct.

Of course we can't but accept reality as we perceive it is but not even this is a constant, as we experience ourselves. At some levels there will be no difference but emotional moods as an example translate reality differently. I'm not going to argue upon a consensus reality, you and I seem to embrace the same one but from an opposing point of view, I do not see much differences between satan as an ideal strive for, whether you call him an entity or not and our SuperEgo. It's form as I have addressed in previous replies. Even in modern ritual this old form is maintained. It's called psychodrama but essentially there is not much difference.

Faith is indeed belief without evidence but we're too hung up upon faith. Every human is having faith at some level or to some degree. Even our striving to become our SuperEgo is an act of faith, it's based upon knowing what we are and our potential but the assumption that we can accomplish our will is an act of faith to a degree. We do not have any evidence we are actually capable. It's an assumption, a plausible assumption maybe but nothing more than that.

D.

Top
#16927 - 12/25/08 07:37 PM Re: So What's the Difference? [Re: Mike]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I'm taking the opposing role in my argument with Dan but although you seem to think I'm agreeing with your position, I am not. As I have said before, there is content and wrapping and when I'm discussing another wrapping, I am still discussing the same content.

The position I am taking is not one you'll find often in theistic Satanism because most theistic Satanism is ONLY a construction of reality without having done the required deconstruction first. It's pure wrapping, pure form. I tend to dislike things that are pure form, it's a matter of believing to be while I prefer to be.

D.

Top
#16937 - 12/25/08 08:45 PM Re: So What's the Difference? [Re: Diavolo]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3935
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
 Quote:

It could be argued indeed, although in that case 'I think I exist' would be more correct.

Well, not really. The axiom reads 'I think, therefor I am', and it is axiomatic because there is no way to argue against it without being self contradictory.
Such is the nature of an axiom.
 Quote:

I do not see much differences between satan as an ideal strive for, whether you call him an entity or not and our SuperEgo.

Agreed
Up until the second you actually believe there is an entity out there somewhere called Satan (or anything else). At that point the whole theory goes to shit. You CAN NOT be an autotheist while also believing there is some force out there that must be appeased. I have already explained why not several times.
 Quote:

We do not have any evidence we are actually capable. It's an assumption, a plausible assumption maybe but nothing more than that.

No, there is a mountain of evidence, and it grows every single time I enact my will with success.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#16949 - 12/26/08 12:58 AM Re: So What's the Difference? [Re: Dan_Dread]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1647
Loc: Orlando, FL
If there is an entity called Satan, why worship him? What do you get out of it? In the end you'd still have to be dependent on yourself- not some god.

If you want to believe Satan is some deistic "supernatual force" rather than literally worship it as a god, that makes more sense, but then again having faith in such a thing seems pointless if it has no great consequence in your life.

I too have had "spiritual experiences", but the more I experimented with the ritual arts, the more I realized it was just all in my subconscious. And the more I learned about psychology and human/animal behavior, I found adequate and scientifically sound explanations for what I had previously attributed to "the spiritual". I realized that all my faith-based ideas, while being comforting, were ultimately useless in the face of practicality (and simply being honest with myself)

If faith serves no purpose other than to perpetuate its own existence, then it must be excised and destroyed without hesitation.
_________________________
«Recibe, ˇoh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#16950 - 12/26/08 02:16 AM Re: So What's the Difference? [Re: Diavolo]
Morgan Offline
Princess of Hell
stalker


Registered: 08/29/07
Posts: 2956
Loc: New York City
To D. & General company...

"So I can't come up with anything else but the SuperEgo. Due to the fact that I'm a critical and perfectionist egocentric asshole, I can't be happy and jolly for what I am today, no, there is room to improve, things to change, parts to explore. No stagnation, no mediocrity for me, so I can't glorify what is, I can only glorify what will be. SuperEgo, Satan, what's in a name?"

Yes.


Devil, god, christ, satan, yankees, knicks, and etc worshipping is still the SAME THING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YOU GET ON YOUR KNEES TO A "GOD IDEA".


When you choose to be YOUR OWN GOD, you only get on your knees during sex.

They are two different things.

Either the voices in your head are your own, or you think they come from somewhere else.....

Jeeze people, come on....
Mikey, you should know better by now...


Morg
_________________________
Courage Conquering Fear
Fuck em if they can't take a joke
Don't Like What I Say, Kiss My Ass



Top
#16957 - 12/26/08 04:54 AM Re: So What's the Difference? [Re: Dan_Dread]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
"I think therefor I am" doesn't imply "I" am but I "think" I am. It might be both an argument for existence but the very nature of existence might be different. Nowadays science proved Descartes wrong in his view of the I, the I isn't, the I we think we are is but let's not get too much into that.

To a degree it doesn't matter if we believe something exists or not. if John Wayne is my role model, does it matter if he is:

a) a real person
b) a movie character
c) made up by myself

No, what I believe is irrelevant compared to what I do with this belief. As long as I don't sit on my knees all day long, dressed as a cowboy, burning gunpowder at his statue and praying to become like him, it is irrelevant. If I actively strive to become the SuperCowboy it doesn't matter if this SuperCowboy is a real of fictional character. It's the same with modern Satanism. What is the use of believing in a psychological ideal to strive for, declare myself a satanist and then sit in the couch being what I am for the next 40 years. The approach is what counts and the approach is what makes a difference. Belief or not might only be a stimulus. It doesn't matter much how I call this stimulus, a deity, a dark force, or a psychological ideal.

If ritual is psychodrama and it works for some, why is taking the psychodrama out of the ritual and make it work there suddenly such a despised act?

There is not a mountain of evidence for what you are capable of doing in the future Dan. There is only faith in probabilities. Evidence counts for acts that are and were but not necessarily for acts that will be. Probabilities do and we need to have some faith in those.

D.

Top
#16968 - 12/26/08 12:14 PM Re: So What's the Difference? [Re: Diavolo]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3935
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
 Quote:

"I think therefor I am" doesn't imply "I" am but I "think" I am.

Uhh what? D, sometimes I swear you argue just to argue. You do know what 'therefor' means, right?
But just for shits and giggles, why don't you make an argument against your own existence without contradicting yourself? (hint:to be successful 'you' can not be the one making the argument!)
It remains that our own subjective existence is indeed axiomatic.

 Quote:

To a degree it doesn't matter if we believe something exists or not. if John Wayne is my role model, does it matter if he is:

a) a real person
b) a movie character
c) made up by myself

It doesn't matter one bit. That is unless c is true but you have convinced yourself of a. At that point it becomes all sorts of problematic. I would be more than happy to re-hash why, if you'd like. Unless you suddenly have no problem with self-deception, in which case by all means feel free to believe in whatever your imagination can conceive of, and we will just skip this.

 Quote:

Nowadays science proved Descartes wrong in his view of the I, the I isn't, the I we think we are

No, I'm not gonna let that one fly by either. How has science proven this axiomatic statement incorrect?


 Quote:

No, what I believe is irrelevant compared to what I do with this belief

And that my friend is just it. What you 'do' with beliefs is use them to formulate other beliefs. It's a never ending web. False beliefs just spoil the sauce, and lead you AWAY from bedrock reality. Maybe that doesn't matter to you. It matters to me.

 Quote:

There is not a mountain of evidence for what you are capable of doing in the future Dan. There is only faith in probabilities. Evidence counts for acts that are and were but not necessarily for acts that will be. Probabilities do and we need to have some faith in those.

I once debated a christian that told me I had to have 'faith' that my chair would not disappear or fall apart every time I sat in it. You are presenting the exact same argument. The 3000 times I have sat in the chair before this one count as quite solid evidence that the chair can, indeed, hold my weight.

The thousands of times I have enacted my will with success do, in fact, count as evidence that I will be able to do so in the future.

Just to be clear, when I use the word 'faith' I am talking about religious faith, which is defined as 'belief without evidence or in spite of evidence to the contrary'. Also 'evidence' is not synonymous with 'proof'.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#16971 - 12/26/08 01:00 PM Re: So What's the Difference? [Re: Dan_Dread]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Not really. ;\)

Of course I just argue to argue at times. Getting a bit tired of it now and don't really feel like defending our theistic brothers too long. After all, if they'd be intelligent, they sure could defend themselves.

Personally I feel you get a bit too stressed by the word faith. I don't let it bother me too much. If someone tells me he thinks Satan is the dark force in nature, he's essentially talking shit too. There are no dark forces in nature but as long as that is what he uses to present satan to himself and others and the rest of his ideas are tolerable it is fine to me. It's not because someone has faith in something, he automatically triggers a chaineffect that ends with him thinking he's Napolean.

D.

Top
Page 6 of 6 « First<23456


Moderator:  SkaffenAmtiskaw, fakepropht, TV is God, Woland, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.02 seconds of which 0.002 seconds were spent on 25 queries. Zlib compression disabled.