Page 1 of 5 12345>
Topic Options
#4996 - 03/08/08 11:59 AM One Satanism or more Satanisms?
Amina Offline
member


Registered: 03/08/08
Posts: 177
Loc: Denmark
I wrote this text some years ago in danish. The text was translated into english some time ago, and now I would like to share it with some of the enghlish speaking population. As stated in the text people are free to used it as long as the text is used unedited etc.

- Amina

*************************************************************'

One Satanism or More Satanisms

by Amina Olander Lap (www.smwane.dk)

1. Introduction
Satanists with vague or even lacking definitions of their philosophy are not far between. These individuals are often quite willing to accept several definitions of “true Satanism” as equally valid, usually arguing that Satanism is about choosing one’s own philosophy and one’s own norms.

But then why call one’s philosophy Satanism? If all the word implies is an individual approach, then why not just refer to oneself as an independent individualist? It would, after all, remove the confinement of being linked with a concept that most other people scorn. It is tempting to suggest that perhaps their openness to a liberal definition is a sign of apathy, or a sign that their own definition is unclear. If either of these possibilities is the reason for accepting multiple definitions, is it then meaningful to declare oneself a Satanist? This article attempts to answer this question.

2. Isms, Words, and Concepts

The word “Satanism” can be divided into the prefix “Satan” and the suffix “ism.” The suffix indicates ways acting or thinking, or a spiritual or ideological movement originating in a concept of “Satan.” This fact alone does not lead to an interpretation of “Satan,” nor does it indicate which phenomenon “Satanism” covers, however.

A closer look at the word is needed to properly decode its meaning. To begin with, it is of paramount importance to distinguish between two coexisting interpretations that should never be mixed or confused with each other.

1. The word Satanism refers to an imagined subversive, anti-Christian conspiracy that is controlled by, or in league with, the Devil. This definition can easily be dismissed as mere imagination, however, for two evident reasons. Firstly, the definition requires the phenomenon to exist (which it does not), and secondly, the phenomenon is presented in vague and contradictory terms. This definition is thus pure imagination, and does not describe an existing phenomenon.

2. The word refers to a philosophy, ideology or religion that is shared by groups of self-declared Satanists. Various such groups provide different definitions that, to a varying degree, oppose each other. We are thus dealing with several definitions of which some may be classified as philosophies or religions.

With these two commonly confused interpretations properly separated, the definition of the term “Satanism” can be narrowed by examining the integrity of some of the most common statements.

“Anything Is Satanic”

The statement is found among both self-declared Satanists claiming that whatever they happen to be doing is Satanic by definition, and non-Satanists asserting that, e.g., black clothes or role playing games are Satanic.

If Satanism is defined such that anything is Satanic, the term loses defining power. It is meaningless to use a definition if it does not establish a dichotomy, that is, if it does not determine when certain attributes are present or not. For example, it makes no sense to speak about birds unless one is able to explain whether an object is a bird or something else. Hence, the statement “I am a Satanist” becomes meaningless if Satanism means anything. The statement expresses nothing.

“Anything Called Satanism Is Satanism

This statement is redundant, because its predicate is contained by the subject. The statement may be compared to the statement: “all felines are members of the cat family.” While the statement may help explain the word “feline” to a child, the statement does not clarify what precisely a feline is, because knowing that the word “feline” implies “member of the cat family,” the statement provides no new information. In the former statement, “anything called Satanism is Satanic,” term and description are identical, and neither are defined.

The statement dilutes the definition to such a degree that it loses all descriptive power. In addition, the statement focuses entirely on the expressions and ignores—or forgets—its existence. If one were to claim that “anything called birds are birds,” the statement would be evidently wrong (an elephant does not turn into a bird just because someone calls it a bird), and this is obviously also true for the statement “anything called Satanism is Satanism.” If one was to use the word “bird” about anything other than birds, the person doing so would be accused of either not knowing what the word meant or of using it improperly. A term cannot be used in practice unless proper rules exist for valid and invalid uses of the word, because the otherwise the term would be meaningless.

Indicentally, in practice the statement “anything called Satanism is Satanism” and the statement “anything is Satanic” are identical, because virtually everything has been deemed Satanic at some point.

“Anyone Who Calls Himself a Satanist Is a Satanist”

This expression, too, is redundant. No new information is offered with the proclamation that someone that calls himself a Satanist is a Satanist, except perhaps that the person considers himself or herself one.

The statement only explains what the person calls himself or herself, but it does not explain how the person acts or what the person thinks, and can therefore hardly be descriptive as an -ism.

For a definition that is based only on description and not on content, it is just the use of the particular word “Satanist” that makes the difference. This implies that if a parrot was taught to say “I’m a Satanist,” this skill would make the parrot qualify as one. (If one became a physician by just calling oneself a physician, people might think twice before visiting their physician.)

If one choses this definition of Satanism, one must accept the fact that no individual can make particular claim to the title as a Satanist. One may acknowledge the fact that some have better knowledge of various groups and their interpretations of Satanism, but it will not make sense to state that Anton LaVey is better suited for the title than a confused teen-age boy.

The definition also implies that The Satanic Bible has no more importance than grafitti with anti-Christian slogans, and that it is not possible to determine whether homicide, suicide, human sacrifice, theft, rape, and other crime can be linked with Satanism. The only criterion is that just one individual declares that such acts are Satanic. It is also impossible to answer questions about the Satanic philosophy.

3. Criteria for an Objective Definition
Satanism can only be defined meaningfully if the term describes a concept that can be distinguished from other concepts. It means that the definition must be narrow enough to become destinctive. In short, the definition must provide a means of determining when something is Satanism and when it is not.

Objective research imposes a limit on the phenomena that are included within one’s scope. Furthermore, a subdivision into various categories of Satanism may be necessary, unless the initial definition is very exclusive, because it may not always be possible to meaningfully group all the phenomena included in the research together.

Here, too, it is of utmost importance to properly explain the subdivisions and not to mix two subcategories. It is possible to have multiple meanings of a word, but in that case their meanings must be defined independently. A “bat” is both an winged mammal and a wooden club, for example, but a baseball player striking the ball with the animal would probably not bat a home run, and animals are not made of wood. Both uses of the word “bat” are correct, but the uses only make sense when the two meanings are kept separate and the specific meaning is revealed by the context. In most cases it would lead to meaningless and contradictory statements if such different meanings of a word were mixed, as if used to describe the same phenomenon. In the case of Satanism, it is typically Christian myths that must be kept away from existing philosophies and ideologies.


If nonetheless some general statements about Satanism are desired, one should weigh observations according to the sizes of the Satanic groups and which sources are taken seriously by most Satanists. General statements must necessarily be deduced from general tendencies, not sensational anecdotes. Descriptions of Satanism as an existing phenomenon must be derived from those thoughts and actions that can be found among existing Satanists. Accepting Christian myths about Satanism as a self-contained “type of Satanism” is tantamount to considering anti-Semitic statements constituent of a “type of Judaism.”

4. Criteria for a Subjective Definition
If Satanists are to define their own philosophy, the Satanists must determine which key elements distinguish Satanism from other philosophies or religions. In addition, the Satanists must determine which areas of their lives Satanism applies to. Does Satanism include philosophy, religion and politics, or does it apply only to life style or dress code? Do the Satanists choose Satanism as a philosophy or just a cool label? The Satanists must decide whether the term “Satanist” is a word that is used without meaning, or whether it adequately sets the stage for their philosophy. This demand also applies when others call themselves Satanists. If the term does not describe anything tangible, it doesn’t describe anything at all.

Groups that define their own form of Satanism do not necessarily consider everything else un-Satanic. Few concepts are black and white, and the groups could easily find “degrees of Satanism” in other philosophies. Certain elements may be considered irrelevant; for example, one may find Atheism much more relevant for one’s definition than a particular dress code.

In spite of these open borders towards other definitions of Satanism, each Satanist must eventually recognize that he or she is being subjective and considers some definitions better than others. If nothing else, the Satanist has pieced together his or her personal philosophy in a way that is most meaningful to the Satanist. Other definitions will vary from that definition, and compared to those definitions, one’s own definition will (at least subjectively) be considered superior.

5. Which Definition Is Best?
To answer the question of which definition of Satanism is the best one, it is necessary to evaluate its degree of selfcontradiction and its clarity of concepts. If a definition cannot provide a concept that can be distinguished from other concepts, as happens if the definition is too broad, the definition is useless or deficient at best. If the definition involves mutually exclusive constructs, then the concept does not provide any clarification.

Furthermore, if Satanism is to be accepted as a philosophy, it must be defined according to the usual requirements of a philosophy. Among other requirements, Satanism must consider the fundamental philosophical questions, and a philosophical method must be applied in arguments. If these requirements are not met, either the definition does not define a philosophy, or the philosophy is primitive and lacks substance.

Defining Satanism as inverse Christianity or as anything called Satanism does not meet any of the above requirements.

A poor definition does not prevent a group from using the definition, but the group will soon find itself responding to criticism by stating that the critics lack proper understanding or that inconsistencies are part of a larger whole, or by modifying the definition ad hoc to meet the criticism, then claiming that the definition always did.

6. Other “Satan” Groups
It is remarkable that some Satanists that usually imagine themselves as authorities on questions of values and moral are very hesitant to entering a debate when another Satanist considers something “Satanic.” Satanists, in particular, would be thought to question everything, so could it really be that the Devil’s advocates are fooled when the defendant pretends to be like-minded?

There is no reason to trust other groups, just because they refer to themselves as Satanists. Many such groups are so different that they can be either atheistic or theistic, and their paradigms can be quite incompatible.

In practice, Satanism represents a plurality of definitions where “Satanism” is the only common denominator, and where often a Satanic group has more similarities with other religions and philosophies than with other groups claiming to be Satanic.

Comparisons between Satanic groups can be made from symbols and mythology, and from philosophical content. Different Satanic groups sport Christian, Norse, Buddhist, or Egyptian mythology and symbolism, and there are groups that use either Western paradigms or Eastern teachings. Some groups are best classified as religious groups, whereas other groups are better categorized as philosophies or maybe just youth subcultures.

Plurality of definitions under one umbrella religion is a common phenomenon; for example, Christianity alone counts more than 25,000 different interpretations. Yet all of these groups base their ideology on the same one book, the same one mythology, and to a certain extent the same fundamental statements. Satanism does not have such fundamental constraints, however, allowing a much wider plurality. In fact, the odds of agreeing with any arbitrarily selected Satanic group are probably about the same as those of agreeing with any other random religion or philosophic grouping.

Hence, if one adopts a reasonably unambiguous definition of the essentials of Satanism, one is forced to reject certain groups as Satanic, or at least consider them other kinds of Satanists that use the term differently. They must be considered wholly separate phenomena that have no relevance for one’s own definition of Satanism.

7. Corollaries of Definition
When Christians describe Satanism, usually they base the definition of their own religious world-view, which often prompts them to consider other religions, popular culture (such as rock n’ roll music), other Christian groups, political systems, atheists, feminists, vegetarians, homosexuals, etc. to be Satanists. The definitions fit their own world-view, but do not meet the demands of science. Hence, their definitions should be regarded as religious statements that demonize phenomena that are incompatible with their world-views.

A sociological view starts with groups that use the term about themselves and those phenomena that the groups consider covered by the term. The next step is to separate myth from existing groups, and variance from norm. First then is it possible to say anything meaningful. The sociological description of Satanism will influence public opinion, and may be used in a legal context where Satanic connections are postulated, or where fundamental rights of Satanists are violated.

When Satanists describe Satanism, they define their philosophy. It means that they adopt issues that they consider positive or at least rational. Their definitions influence their own understanding of Satanism, but also influence society arround them if they propagate information through interviews or homepages. If one considers the way clearly boundable concepts such as “jews” or “blacks” have been viewed throughout History, it is evident that public opinion has immense importance. Negative prejudice has caused persecution, genocide and slavery.

From the perspective of self-preservation, it is absolutely stupid when some Satanists publicly connect their own philosophy with groups that are criminals or advocate crime, especially if the particular group of Satanists does not itself support such initiatives. It may be fun as a “chock effect” if one is a confused teen, but as an adult with a professional career it is highly disadvantageous. If Satanism were as groups such as “Order of Nine Angels” claim, Satanism would be outlawed, children of Satanists would be forcefully removed, and the Satanists themselves would be given mental treatment. Fortunately, Satanism is not like that, and groups such as “Order of Nine Angels” are a parody at best, and never acted as they claimed. Supporting positions that counteract one’s own position or undermine one’s ability to lead a proper life is self-destructive. If a Satanist supports such groups as “a part of Satanism” in spite of disagreeing with the philosophies of such groups, the Satanist has a confused definition of Satanism and maybe harbors a secret wish for self-destruction. Such Satanists damage not only themselves, but also other Satanists.

8. Conclusion
If a term includes everything, it covers nothing. To use a particular term, the term must be defined in such a way that correct and incorrect use can be determined. This means that the term must be reasonably clearly defined, and if the term has multiple meanings, each meaning must be defined independently of the other meanings. Using definitions such as “anyone that calls himself a Satanist is a Satanist” or “anything called Satanism is Satanism” are not valid definitions, because they are both unclear, self-contradictory and without content.

If an individual wants to meaningfully declare himself or herself a Satanist, the person must decide on a specific meaning of the term. It is possible for the Satanist to respect other uses, but he or she can hardly consider other definitions to be equals or included in his or her own definition, even if they use the same denomination.

***************************************************************

Copyright: this text is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 license. You may use this text for non-commercial purposes provided that the contents are unchanged, that you credit the author by linking to this article at http://www.smwane.dk/content/view/225/36/, and that this copyright note is left intact.

Top
#4999 - 03/08/08 12:28 PM Re: One Satanism or more Satanisms? [Re: Amina]
LUCIFERIFIC Offline
active member


Registered: 02/01/08
Posts: 629
Loc: CA
 Originally Posted By: Amina
If Satanism were as groups such as “Order of Nine Angels” claim, Satanism would be outlawed, children of Satanists would be forcefully removed, and the Satanists themselves would be given mental treatment. Fortunately, Satanism is not like that, and groups such as “Order of Nine Angels” are a parody at best, and never acted as they claimed. Supporting positions that counteract one’s own position or undermine one’s ability to lead a proper life is self-destructive. If a Satanist supports such groups as “a part of Satanism” in spite of disagreeing with the philosophies of such groups, the Satanist has a confused definition of Satanism and maybe harbors a secret wish for self-destruction. Such Satanists damage not only themselves, but also other Satanists.



So what's wrong with the ONA again? Is it ok for "Satanism" to reject and deny religious laws, because its safe to do so without being rejected by the Mob? But doing things and living life your own way, even if it goes against civil laws is "unsatanic" and should be rejected by "True Satanist" because it gives Satanism a bad image? As if we have a proper fluffy image in the first place?

If it weren't for a select few who planned and met in secret, and risked their lives to be outlaws against the British Crown and fight for their freedom to live their lives as they want and not pay ridiculous taxes, their would be no America. If parliamentarians had not collected armies to reject the power and laws of kings, you'd still be a serf and subject of your Queen of Denmark.

Without rebellion there is stagnation. Stagnation breeds disease and leads to eventual death of an organization, religion, or empire. What kind of Satanism instructs its followers to keep themselves subjects of the whims of the mob, and satan forbid, reject and deny their divinely inspired laws of state?
_________________________
Lux Ex Tenebris
Lux Lucet Ex Orientis


~~352~~


Top
#5001 - 03/08/08 01:19 PM Re: One Satanism or more Satanisms? [Re: LUCIFERIFIC]
Amina Offline
member


Registered: 03/08/08
Posts: 177
Loc: Denmark
Lucifer, I do not see you civil name or your picture in your profile. You can see my civil name and my picture. I have given more then 30 public interviews representing Satanism in Denmark and my name and my face has always been visible. Every journalist, schoolboy, Christian fanatic and psychopath can easily find my phonenenumber and my address and give me a call, and often they do.

If you are willing to do the same then I would also be willing to discuss our public image, what we can do to change it and why I do not want to fight for a imaginary groups right to postulate human sacrifice as a part of Satanism. It is so easy to speak about rebellion when you hide behind a screenname in your safe satanic internet forum.

- Amina

Top
#5005 - 03/08/08 01:54 PM Re: One Satanism or more Satanisms? [Re: Amina]
LUCIFERIFIC Offline
active member


Registered: 02/01/08
Posts: 629
Loc: CA
I highly doubt satanic forums are my primary outlet of "satanic" self expression. I have my pictures and civil name posted in a more appropriate place. Why would i feel the need to share such information with a bunch of strangers? "Our" public images? Who died and made you little Miss Suzy Q Denmark spokes person of Our Image and Our Satanism? I don't remember ever voting for you to represent me and my Satanism? I'm sure you're doing Your Satanic community a lot of good spreading positive PR to the public 30 times like a super hero should. I'm sure we really need that, god forbid those Christians actually think We worship Satan and all. You also sound like a masochist who enjoys getting random fone calls from christain fanatics and psychopaths. I really can't do much with people on an internet forum, beside appear to easily speak about rebellion. Now if i could use you, abuse you, and slap you silly thru this medium for acting like Miss Satan's Speaker to the world, I would. The ONA thru its writings have had their share of influencing Satanism as much as any satanic writing. What right or authority do you have to pick and choose an aspect of Satanism and call it "true Satanism" while rejecting another and stating that it not Satanism just because of certain "opinions" they might have on established laws? I think "Satanism" is an individualistic tool used by an individual person who subscribes to the basic principles for his or her own personal growth and liberation. If this growth and liberation includes liberation from established law and order, than it is this individual's right as a "Satanist" to believe what he/she wills. You have nothing to do with his/her choosing to define what his/her Satanism should be. Satanism isn't a collectivist "organism," you can't truly believe you are speaking for every other Satanist in the world when you give out your 30 lectures do you?

I vote for King Diamond as my representative and spokes person. He's cool. You need to take a few lessons in Satanism from him. Pick up a sword like you Danish Metal Head do and wack someone with it. Get back in touch with living life, and stop losing your mind in "Isms". Satanism doesn't need a spokes person with an archive of 3 thousand stuff.


Edited by LUCIFERIFIC (03/08/08 02:13 PM)
_________________________
Lux Ex Tenebris
Lux Lucet Ex Orientis


~~352~~


Top
#5008 - 03/08/08 03:16 PM Re: One Satanism or more Satanisms? [Re: LUCIFERIFIC]
Amina Offline
member


Registered: 03/08/08
Posts: 177
Loc: Denmark
King Diamond is danish and a Church of Satan member. We interviewed him for our magazine some years ago. He has been interviewd on Satanism a lot of times and telling by his replays you can see that he do mind the public image of Satanism. He has tried to educate people on Satanism and he has tried to remove some of the misconceptions that the ONA try to hold on to. This is fact.

No one died and made my anything, but the facts are like this: you can say what ever you want about Satanism and go hide if anyone want you to stand up for you beliefs. Talk is cheap when you speak from behind a screenname on a computer. And no, I am not a masochist. No harm have ever come to me only a few odd phone calls. In Denmark the public image of satanisme has changed in the last 15 years and the change has only been to the better because of the active role played by responsible danish satanists. In the US the CoS, the ToS and other organizations have done more or less the same. Try asking some of the old ones like Aquino how it was to live in the days of the Satanic Panic. I am sure they would have a thing or two to tell you about the influence of the ONA.

Regarding ONA, its history and its influence you could try to read some of the academic literature on Satanism. You could start with the book I recommended. I don't know if you view academic writing as fictions or facts, but you could give it a go anyway.

You could also try to read my article again. I do not say that the ONA isn't a satanic group. I point out that the ONA is not representative of modern Satanism (look at the statistics for Satans sake!) and that one needs to be very masochistic (to use your word) if one wants to be viewed in the ligt of the ONA, unless one actually feel a need to sacrifice humans to Satan. Have you ever sacrificed anyone to our dark lord? I haven't, and as far as I know no ONA member have ever killed anyone.

And yes, Satanism is individualistic. Read my article agaian. I do not say what Satanism is and what it isn't. I just point out that some definitions are better then others (like - big surprise - logic isn't my invention), that you need a definition to be able to talk about Satanism (another big, big surprise apparently!) and that the different forms of Satanism are so different that you need to talk about Satanism in plural if you want to say anything about it (notic, I do not define Satanism, but talk about different forms of Satanism - including the ONA). I also point out that some forms of Satanism are more common then others (surprise, surprise), and as you noticed, the ONA is not one of the most common form. You can agree or disagree but that do not change the size of the different organizations.

And no, I do not represent all satanists. I never said so. I represented the CoS years ago but that is ancient history. Today I represent the most common kind of Satanism in Denmark (this is a fact) and I have enough knowledge about the other kinds to weed out common misconceptions. I am educated in the field of history of religion and reed what I collect for my archive. This does not make me a master of Satanism, but it do make me more knowing about the history and sociology of Satanism then most people. You can disagree all you want, but that does not change history or statistics.

Returning to the dickfight. I could ask you: with what authority do you criticize me? Show me what you got or leave me at peace. Change your profile and show me your face, your real name and your real occupation. As I said: talk is cheep. I am no master or hero of Satanism but you get what you see, and see what you get. Now show me what you got...

- Amina

Top
#5010 - 03/08/08 04:45 PM Re: One Satanism or more Satanisms? [Re: Amina]
LUCIFERIFIC Offline
active member


Registered: 02/01/08
Posts: 629
Loc: CA
 Originally Posted By: Amina

Returning to the dickfight. I could ask you: with what authority do you criticize me? Show me what you got or leave me at peace. Change your profile and show me your face, your real name and your real occupation. As I said: talk is cheep. I am no master or hero of Satanism but you get what you see, and see what you get. Now show me what you got...

- Amina
True Dat... Talk is cheap, and you do a lot of it here, with your long winded posts. Isn't all you do is talk? Like when you do your PRs for Satanism? And you're proud of it too. Unless you're dancing on stage while you're teaching people about the positive lovie-dovie side of Satanism; maybe then i'd pay some attention to you. Thats what Satanism needs Stripper Priestesses. You need to reread LaVeys Satanic Witch girl; take of that black goth wardrobe, stick on a pair of cupless bras, high heels, and a mini skirt for us, like I do... i am a slut for satan. The last thing Satanism needs is a "Know-It-All."

I always knew you europeans would end up like this with your hoity-toity "lets all love each other" socialism - welfare-states. It breeds pussies who are afraid to kick ass and go out in the world and exploit people for personal gain and profit like American Capitalism does. Like your kindred the French. My god, they haven't won a war since the revolution. You Danes are headed that way too. We don't need fou fou wimps telling us what the most "Feared religion" is or isn't. You Danes need and the rest of you europeans need to get off your namby-pamby asses, get them into that backwards sandbox in the middle east and help us kill people. Lifes about living it, not about reading on it. Satanism is a reflection of life - Satan represents Vital existence. You need take your head out of your archives, get your ass in that street and live Satanism. Show people what is is through your actions, and not by lecturing and doing a PR campaign. Anyone can talk Anima; anyone can read, and collect archives; but few can make practical use of what they learn of Satanism and live it.

One more thing; i don't know what kind of girls you Vikings are down there, but I don't have a dick to fight with; i got a big cloven hoof. I'll take a pic of it and show you what I got girl, just tell me where to send it; and i want to see yours too.


Edited by LUCIFERIFIC (03/08/08 04:48 PM)
_________________________
Lux Ex Tenebris
Lux Lucet Ex Orientis


~~352~~


Top
#5011 - 03/08/08 04:56 PM Re: One Satanism or more Satanisms? [Re: LUCIFERIFIC]
Amina Offline
member


Registered: 03/08/08
Posts: 177
Loc: Denmark
....and we are still waiting for you to show what you got...

- Amina

Top
#5013 - 03/08/08 05:11 PM Re: One Satanism or more Satanisms? [Re: Amina]
LUCIFERIFIC Offline
active member


Registered: 02/01/08
Posts: 629
Loc: CA
 Originally Posted By: Amina
....and we are still waiting for you to show what you got...

- Amina
"we?" do you have a little demon friend i can't see? So are you challenging me to a debate to see whose the biggest and baddest satanist to safe face? Are you asking me to finger your ego off for you here, since you can't do enough of it yourself? Do i look like a geek who aced Debate Class in High School?
_________________________
Lux Ex Tenebris
Lux Lucet Ex Orientis


~~352~~


Top
#5015 - 03/08/08 05:13 PM Re: One Satanism or more Satanisms? [Re: LUCIFERIFIC]
Amina Offline
member


Registered: 03/08/08
Posts: 177
Loc: Denmark
...still waiting....
Top
#5021 - 03/08/08 06:15 PM Re: One Satanism or more Satanisms? [Re: Amina]
Stag Offline
pledge


Registered: 09/20/07
Posts: 84
A discussion on the nature of Satanism seems incomplete without going into any substantial detail about the nature of Satan Himself. I see you take a very scholarly approach to your Satanism, so perhaps you have this covered elsewhere.

Different approaches to Satanism (many of them mutually incompatible) can be separatetd in terms of how they view their Infernal patron. To the Order of Nine Angles, He is mankind's gateway to the Abyss. To the Church of Satan, a cartoonish mascot.

Stag.

Top
#5031 - 03/08/08 06:49 PM Re: One Satanism or more Satanisms? [Re: Stag]
Amina Offline
member


Registered: 03/08/08
Posts: 177
Loc: Denmark
My article does not try to define the "one and only true Satanism", and it does not try to explain the different kinds of Satanism. It is only a discussion on how to make more or less good objective and subjective definitions of Satanism(s). I have written a lot of other texts in danish but they have not been translated. Some are on different groups, some are on topics like rituals, moral, sexuality etc. and others are more academic writings with a sociological view on Satanism. When I try to explain the difference between groups I usually look at features like these:

Atheism vs. theism
Rationalism vs. occultism
Humanism vs. social Darwinism

Church of Satan would be something like Atheism/rationalism with a twist of occultism/Social Darwinism. I Guess ONA would be something like Theism/Occultism/Social Darwinism.

- Amina

Top
#5035 - 03/08/08 07:55 PM Re: One Satanism or more Satanisms? [Re: Amina]
Morgan Offline
Princess of Hell
stalker


Registered: 08/29/07
Posts: 2956
Loc: New York City
I don't think you really get it.
Perhaps, in your country things are different.
Perhaps, you writings were translated incorrectly.

Satanism is not about a political statement, a dress code, or the old trendy satanic panic of the 1980's.

Here it's more personal.
The thoughts, ideals, personal perspective, and the personal choices and actions.

Yes, to you the ONA may not be "normal or acceptable", but it was a new creative ideal thought out system. Yes, people did go to jail for carrying out their actions based on its writing.
I dont think it was a parady, I thought it was inventive.

There are different types of Satanists. It has a long history beyond the panic, and Lavey writings. Its a matter of growth and acceptance that people with similar ideas can have things in common, yet be different and accepting of each others personal internal summations of belief and universal structure.

I think you should stay around here a while and read things. You might learn some new things and a new perspective. This board is international, and has been around for many years in different incarnations.

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



Top
#5036 - 03/08/08 08:05 PM Re: One Satanism or more Satanisms? [Re: Amina]
Morgan Offline
Princess of Hell
stalker


Registered: 08/29/07
Posts: 2956
Loc: New York City
Having your name and address public is stupid.
You have been lucky.
My is not and I have still had stalkers and people try to find me.
Having a note slipped under your front door is not a nice thing to find.

I have also given interviews, been on tv, and done media about who I am, and my beliefs on german, russian, and british television. I have been on A&E, Comedy central, E!, Playboy and etc.

Its not a big deal being in the media, Its more important who you are when the cameras are off.

I dont care about the being the spokes person for Satanism as a whole. I am the spokesperson for myself, and my own ideas.

For the most part I can honestly say, that I would honestly kill the person who would rope me with the jos or CoS.
Satanism, its various groups, and its branches have philosophy differences. I think you need to be learn that.

Be careful, there are still people in this world who kill others for their beliefs.

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



Top
#5041 - 03/08/08 08:51 PM Re: One Satanism or more Satanisms? [Re: Amina]
LUCIFERIFIC Offline
active member


Registered: 02/01/08
Posts: 629
Loc: CA
 Originally Posted By: Amina
My article does not try to define the "one and only true satanism"... - Amina


 Originally Posted By: Amina


One Satanism or More Satanisms

by Amina Olander Lap (www.smwane.dk)

1. Introduction
Satanists with vague or even lacking definitions of their philosophy are not far between. These individuals are often quite willing to accept several definitions of “true Satanism” as equally valid, usually arguing that Satanism is about choosing one’s own philosophy and one’s own norms.

But then why call one’s philosophy Satanism? If all the word implies is an individual approach, then why not just refer to oneself as an independent individualist? It would, after all, remove the confinement of being linked with a concept that most other people scorn. It is tempting to suggest that perhaps their openness to a liberal definition is a sign of apathy, or a sign that their own definition is unclear.

5. Which Definition Is Best?
To answer the question of which definition of Satanism is the best one, it is necessary to evaluate its degree of selfcontradiction and its clarity of concepts. If a definition cannot provide a concept that can be distinguished from other concepts, as happens if the definition is too broad, the definition is useless or deficient at best. If the definition involves mutually exclusive constructs, then the concept does not provide any clarification.

Furthermore, if Satanism is to be accepted as a philosophy, it must be defined according to the usual requirements of a philosophy. Among other requirements, Satanism must consider the fundamental philosophical questions, and a philosophical method must be applied in arguments. If these requirements are not met, either the definition does not define a philosophy, or the philosophy is primitive and lacks substance.

8. Conclusion
If a term includes everything, it covers nothing. To use a particular term, the term must be defined in such a way that correct and incorrect use can be determined. This means that the term must be reasonably clearly defined, and if the term has multiple meanings, each meaning must be defined independently of the other meanings. Using definitions such as “anyone that calls himself a Satanist is a Satanist” or “anything called Satanism is Satanismare not valid definitions, because they are both unclear, self-contradictory and without content.


So tell me how you aren't trying to define Satanism, when you are trying to define Satanism everywhere in your essay again?
_________________________
Lux Ex Tenebris
Lux Lucet Ex Orientis


~~352~~


Top
#5045 - 03/08/08 09:43 PM Re: One Satanism or more Satanisms? [Re: Amina]
Sordid Archetype Offline
stranger


Registered: 03/05/08
Posts: 28
Loc: Long Island, NY
Well, I must say: your post is certainly loquacious.
I'm glad you are the expert on such matters here. Without your elucidate words I'd be entirely lost.

Tell me though, you stated this in your post:
 Quote:
He or she can hardly consider other definitions to be equals or included in his or her own definition, even if they use the same denomination.

In other words you are the type of individual to believe that "unless you believe in my beliefs you are simply wrong?" I suppose you wouldn't be willing to even indulge in a new perspective, would you? Funny... the inquisitions come to mind off hand.

Your topic subject is "One Satanism or more Satanisms," yet your content suggests something more along the lines of "How a real satanist should define Satanism."

What is it exactly you are trying to accomplish with this thread?
_________________________
The only god I believe in is me. . .

Top
Page 1 of 5 12345>


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

Generated in 0.028 seconds of which 0.002 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.