Page 6 of 16 « First<45678>Last »
Topic Options
#48413 - 02/08/11 05:41 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1640
Loc: Orlando, FL
I actually started making my own "stripped down" hardcover Satanic Bible for bookshelf purposes, which was essentially the portions from Might is Right (labeled as such) with the Enochian Keys (in English, and Dee's Angelic script-- with the pseudo-Enochian "Shaitan" suitably replaced with "Choronzon".)

I don't know if I'll ever finish it, but if I do, maybe I could earn a few bucks off of selling a Print-on-Demand version for all the kiddies out there.
_________________________
«Recibe, ¡oh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#48431 - 02/08/11 10:54 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Dimitri]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1126
Loc: Amarillo, TX
 Originally Posted By: Dimitri
I indeed think you haven't read it properly since you still believe that women towards each other should be more "kind".


No, I said that other women are now more dangerous than they used to be. Why is "kind" in quotation marks? Where did I say that? I didn't even say anything remotely like that and you're putting quotation marks around a word I didn't use...

 Originally Posted By: Dimitri
Bitchcraft is not limited towards men only and certain principles can be applied against other women. If I remember correctly there are even strategies to take-out other women in high positions by the use of male attention and jealousy.


Yes, I mentioned this. I swear, it's like I post one thing and you read another. I really get sick of being "corrected" with something I essentially said in the first place.

 Originally Posted By: Dimitri
In other words: why care about the opinions of other women if it is about a personal raising of status?


Simple; sometimes other women can make or break one's status. That was my whole point.

 Originally Posted By: Dimitri
You seem to be still stuck with the premise of "we women"... hand-holding sheep mentality.


I hold nothing of the sort. I said other women can be dangerous to cross. That's hardly promoting some type of lovey-dovey sisterhood.

 Originally Posted By: Dimitri
So far your statement you have improved when you returned to the boards... still seeing no change.


And I see that you still read something completely 180 degrees from whatever it is I type.
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#48432 - 02/08/11 11:17 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: XiaoGui17]
Morgan Offline
Princess of Hell
stalker


Registered: 08/29/07
Posts: 2956
Loc: New York City
"LaVey is right that a woman liked by men will be disliked by other (jealous) women."
This I feel is very true, plus the stronger or more liked the woman is by men, the more she will be hated by certain jealous women.

"But now that many women hold positions of power, it can be dangerous to rouse the ire of the wrong woman."
Irony...

It has always been dangerous to rouse the ire of the wrong woman, just look at Lucrezia Borgia or Pamela Harriman as an example. Some people may just be unaware of the power behind the throne.

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



Top
#48433 - 02/08/11 11:26 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Morgan]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1126
Loc: Amarillo, TX
 Originally Posted By: Morgan
"But now that many women hold positions of power, it can be dangerous to rouse the ire of the wrong woman."
Irony...


I had a certain someone in mind when I wrote that, actually. That's basically most of the lesson I took away from my last run here.
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#48437 - 02/09/11 01:35 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Morgan]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2524
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Wicked Wanda
"But now that many women hold positions of power, it can be dangerous to rouse the ire of the wrong woman."
Irony...

_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#48620 - 02/11/11 02:02 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism Outdated? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Groenoordhallen Offline
stranger


Registered: 07/04/10
Posts: 8
Dr. Aquino wrote: "My inclination is to put everything in proper English, grammar, and composition. That I could do very easily; I am one of those "00%" SAT English freaks."

Dr. Aquino,

I am not that good at writing correct English, so I feel a bit hesitant about mentioning this, but are you sure you care that much about proper English and grammar? I always thought that your English was far from perfect. A good example is your writing the possessive case of "thou" as "thy" where this should have been "thine". You know that it's "thine" before a vowel and "thy" before a consonant. Yet your works are rife with errors in this respect. Right at the beginning of The Diabolicon for instance: "Let thy eyes be touched anew ...", which should have been "Let thine eyes ...".

So maybe you are not the best candidate to cast the first stone at Anton LaVey's English ...

--G

Top
#48623 - 02/11/11 03:19 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Morgan]
manofsteel Offline
member


Registered: 05/08/10
Posts: 153
Loc: Indiana U.S.
I find this too be very true. My wife who has many friends and most of them are not ss good looking as her are constantly trying to find faults with her so they have something to throw back on her. It can be somthing as simple as I might make more money than her friends husbands and that somehow turns into a big deal. Women are definetely very judgemental and critical of others and they will spend countless hours to find something to discredit the other one. It is so much easier as a man, who has the best lookin wife or the biggest dick and we're good to go. If not we beat the shit out of eachother and then we're back to normal. Way to much drama

Edited by manofsteel (02/11/11 03:20 AM)
_________________________
Amongst the sheep emerges a wolf.

Top
#48666 - 02/11/11 11:52 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism Outdated? [Re: Groenoordhallen]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2524
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Groenoordhallen
I always thought that your English was far from perfect. A good example is your writing the possessive case of "thou" as "thy" where this should have been "thine". You know that it's "thine" before a vowel and "thy" before a consonant. Yet your works are rife with errors in this respect. Right at the beginning of The Diabolicon for instance: "Let thy eyes be touched anew ...", which should have been "Let thine eyes ...".

I will cop a plea on the whole thou/thee/thy/thine/thwwhh business; I am reasonably good at Yuggothic [since I made it up myself], and fortunately SAT did not test thwwhhs.

My assumption was:
Thou - 1st person singular subjective: Thou art, thou shalt be, etc.
Thee - 1st person singular objective: This is for thee, etc.
Thy - 1st person active possessive: It is thy widget.
Thine - 1st person passive possessive: The widget is thine.
Hast - 2nd person singular: Thou hast.
Hath - 3rd person singular: He hath.

When thou gettest into plurals, they return to conventional English: We, you (plural), they get [not getteth or gettest]. Etc.

So far in the SB Prologue I just did a quick tweak accordingly, but I would actually prefer to get rid of that stuff completely - not just because it twisteth my [not mine] tongue, but just to keep the whole book consistent.

Verily hast thou made thy point.

In modern American English I am confident of my exactitude. I would be more cautious across the Pond, however, where the British don't write English as correctly as we do. ;\)

I confess to one peculiarity: It's conventional in American writing to always put commas & periods inside close-quotes, no matter what they're punctuating. I put them inside/outside according to what they punctuate. Hence:

Conventional: He said, "Buy me a loaf of bread."
And: This article is entitled "Better Bread."

MAA: He said, "Buy me a loaf of bread."
But: This article is entitled "Better Bread".

None of the above should keep anyone awake at night.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#49333 - 02/21/11 11:33 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
Anton LaVey was not consigned to being a 'Satanist' or any other established system, he was a human being and a great philosopher with empathy in the naturalistic flow of things, to make clear those concepts that we can come to see emerge from our own nature into actuality. These things are very outdated, they will be with us on this Earth always because Satanism is self transcendence, self overcoming and self preservation. In fact Satanism is not by the very fabric of it's concept Satanism at all but simply 'us' as what we are individually without pretending otherwise. The word Satan and any connotations with past paradigms ought to be discarded soon as possible in ones mind and see what lies beneath the aestheticism and rectory faculties of the past, because Satanism is something else now being the same in concept—anti-contemporary society and re valuation of all values. Today's values being different to the 60's we must apply an adaptable mindset to Satanism.
_________________________


Top
#49346 - 02/22/11 01:14 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Hegesias]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



I primarily saw this thread as a challenge to the notion that Dr. LaVey’s work was still relevant by so – called Postmodern Satanist’s.

I would like to briefly address this Postmodern Satanism and make a couple of other points.

One of the first victims of postmodern thinking is the possibility of originality; closely followed by the notion of authorship and the privileging and centrality of the self.

The whole premise of Satanism is based on the privileging and centrality of the self; with originality and authenticity of thinking and practice derived from such a self.

Postmodern Satanism is a contradiction in terms at this level.

A claim may be raised that this Postmodern Satanism is about transcending the so - called limited and historically and culturally specific viewpoint of LaVey by articulating a new ontological position, but postmodern thought itself militates against the whole notion of objectivity, or universal truth. In which case how can one claim that the adversarial or that might is right constitutes a science of being, or essential, or core truth, or reality?

Postmodern Satanism does not work at this level.

I won’t even get into magic and how it is possible within postmodern thinking.

Satanism, in my view, is fundamentally Modern or rather Modernist, to be more precise. And I mean that in a philosophical and aesthetic sense.

To think that the work of LaVey is only a reaction to the Judeo-Christian system is to fundamentally underestimate LaVey and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the wide variety of things he was into and insights he had to make.

To think that LaVey and his work is somehow trapped in the 1960’s and therefore superseded misses the point: LaVey was a man of the 1930’s and 1940’s – his ECI comes from that period of time.

Satanism, in my view, has nothing to do with self – transcendence or self – overcoming.

The re-evaluation of all values is already addressed in LaVey’s work.

To discard the word Satan and any of its connotations with past paradigms means to discard Satanism itself.

Top
#49375 - 02/22/11 12:56 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
I primarily saw this thread as a challenge to the notion that Dr. LaVey’s work was still relevant by so – called Postmodern Satanist’s.


Would you be so kind to explain what exactly you consider "Postmodern" satanists or "Postmodern" Satanism? From your critique I have a hard time imagining what specific group you actually talk about.

D.

Top
#49385 - 02/22/11 04:22 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



I am referring to the book by Jason King called Postmodern Satanism and I am referring to those individuals who are calling themselves Postmodern Satanist's.
Top
#49386 - 02/22/11 04:23 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Ah ok, thanks for the clarification. The idea came to mind but I wasn't sure.

D.

Top
#49414 - 02/22/11 09:50 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
Informative, I am far from an expert on LaVeyan Satanism, I read the book when I was at school, when I went that is. I made connotations with my contemplations of Nietzsche, so I apologise if I have made error here as I am more interested in this topic than to claim to be knowledgeable.

My learnings are of Traditional Satanism. But still I can't see how Satanism could ever be outdated because it never has been, nor will it ever be an established contemporary or otherwise ethos, but a means to progression, in an individualistic way, to take from and progress from, to make ones own.

I'll leave this one for the experts in this field.
_________________________


Top
#49424 - 02/22/11 10:43 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1126
Loc: Amarillo, TX
WARNING: High probability of TL;DR ahead.

I would like to address three things in your post, Matthew: the purpose of this thread, the position of Postmodern Satanism concerning LaVey, and how postmodern thought is mixed with Satanism. One at a time…

 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
I primarily saw this thread as a challenge to the notion that Dr. LaVey’s work was still relevant by so – called Postmodern Satanist’s.


I got the impression that this thread was a challenge to those who claim Satanism is outdated, not those who claim it’s relevant. I also think you’ve misunderstood PS’s position regarding LaVey precisely because you’ve attributed to position described in the original post to PS without qualification.

 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
To think that the work of LaVey is only a reaction to the Judeo-Christian system is to fundamentally underestimate LaVey and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the wide variety of things he was into and insights he had to make.

To think that LaVey and his work is somehow trapped in the 1960’s and therefore superseded misses the point: LaVey was a man of the 1930’s and 1940’s – his ECI comes from that period of time.

The re-evaluation of all values is already addressed in LaVey’s work.


1) Postmodern Satanism never states that LaVey is only a reaction to the Judeo-Christian system.
2) Postmodern Satanism never states that LaVey is trapped in the 60’s. It does state that LaVey’s philosophy is superceded, but it doesn’t attribute it to any particular time period.
3) Postmodern Satanism never denies that LaVey addressed the concept of re-evaluating all values.

It is worth noting that some LaVeyan Satanists can only parrot LaVey’s words without thinking for themselves (think the current CoS). It’s more those who are stuck on LaVey that are being left behind than LaVey himself.

 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
One of the first victims of postmodern thinking is the possibility of originality; closely followed by the notion of authorship and the privileging and centrality of the self.

The whole premise of Satanism is based on the privileging and centrality of the self; with originality and authenticity of thinking and practice derived from such a self.


Satanism is about thinking and evaluating ideas for oneself, not necessarily coming up with novel new ideas. I see Satanism as more about skepticism than originality. Much of what LaVey’s own work was drawn from other sources. There’s nothing wrong with that, but it does shore up the idea that there’s nothing new under the sun.

 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
A claim may be raised that this Postmodern Satanism is about transcending the so - called limited and historically and culturally specific viewpoint of LaVey by articulating a new ontological position, but postmodern thought itself militates against the whole notion of objectivity, or universal truth. In which case how can one claim that the adversarial or that might is right constitutes a science of being, or essential, or core truth, or reality?


“Just as Anton LaVey’s philosophy has been superceded, so too will my own, for such is the nature of the world. No book has the power to codify reality for all times and places…”
-Postmodern Satanism

I think the quote addresses yours.

 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
Satanism, in my view, has nothing to do with self – transcendence or self – overcoming.


I think that depends on how you define self-transcendence. Self-improvement and self-discipline involve transcending one’s current self in order to achieve one’s desired Self. I’d consider such endeavors Satanic.

 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
To discard the word Satan and any of its connotations with past paradigms means to discard Satanism itself.


I didn’t think Postmodern Satanism was trying to do this, either.
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
Page 6 of 16 « First<45678>Last »


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

Generated in 0.029 seconds of which 0.003 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.