Page 3 of 9 <12345>Last »
Topic Options
#67379 - 06/17/12 10:51 PM Re: Dethroning Satan? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



I feel a bit ill-qualified here, so this one may seem a bit awkward.

One of my more favourite books is Madness and Civilisation by Michael Foucault.

The thesis of this book: there had been (and still was, in some sense) a monologue of reason on madness which was used to constitute an object, construct and decorate The Other in acceptable/comfortable terms and used as a justification for action, organisation and exclusion/punishment.

Foucault was going to try to write a book from the position of this Other, unencumbered and somehow outside of this discourse of reasonable power - a difficult task in this particular case.

I personally saw a parallel, though, between LaVey’s Satanic Bible and Foucault’s book.

I mean I saw LaVey’s work as an attempt to speak from the position of The Other unencumbered and somehow outside of the dominant religious discourse which had constructed such an ugly tool/scapegoat in the first place.

I have recently been tracing the literary construction of this Satan during the modern period and I can see that this definition of Satan certainly changed from an ugly object to something quite positive and independent, as people began to adopt the subjectivity of this Other and more or less spoke it, or else just began to be heard for the first time above the din of other voices.

An interesting point and blurry distinction has been raised by this thread, regarding the essence of Satanism I think:

That is, on the one hand, seeing Satanism as a form, or an event, in the history of the manifestation of an Other who in essence continually transgresses, or acts against every form of coercive organised limiting power and draws meaning from that.

Or, on the other hand, to occupy and explore a previously constructed space, initially articulated by the Other against the Christian system, in antinomian style, and then built outward by developing an autonomous culture and set of principles - a set of principles determined by indulgence, I-theism, realism, stratification etc.?

Or are both aspects Satanic and if they are, then how do they interrelate? What is the logic underpinning the Satanic critique of society as opposed to religion and what are its limits? I think probably a desire to criticise monolithic power.

These questions assume that the Other has spoken and has spoken truly.

Top
#67384 - 06/18/12 01:01 AM Re: Dethroning Satan? [Re: ]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Satanism's opposition to religion is the equivalent of organizing a protest march against AIDS. To oppose implies to actually do something about the problem else one just complains.

To understand the issue I'm pointing at, imagine tomorrow you're dropped into, and become part of, a society that is completely oblivious to your culture and history. Regardless the change in habitat you're undergoing, you'll remain a satanist and after some time into this society, you see they do not differ from us as humans and among them are those showing the same qualities and behavior you as a satanist display. But then you try to communicate this to them and explain Satanism as you are used to today. You'll quickly discover that all your cultural archetypes and all the meaning certain symbols or labels have are completely meaningless to them.

The problem you run into has two solutions if you want to effectively communicate Satanism. Either you explain your whole previous culture, its meaning and symbolry, which even then will not have the same meaning to them it has to you, or you explore their culture and use that of theirs which matches yours.

When looking at such a scenario it is quite obvious why an adaptation is needed and what is required to make such effective. Still, the same is fundamentally true within the same culture but during a different period. The difference between 2012 and 1960 might only be some decades but it is a huge difference in regards to the meaning of words, symbols or archetypes.

D.

Top
#67385 - 06/18/12 01:26 AM Re: Dethroning Satan? [Re: Diavolo]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3841
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
OK then, let's stop dancing around it then D.

If you feel that Satanism is dated or obsolete, what do you propose as its successor?Surely you must have something hot in mind, else all this is merely bluster?
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#67386 - 06/18/12 01:55 AM Re: Dethroning Satan? [Re: Dan_Dread]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Come Dan, why give the impression as if I'm ripping the head of your favorite doll? We're arguing about an issue and even when I might take a, to some, dislikable position, it's nothing but an argument.

We are social realists and as realists, we should be rational and effective in about all we do. We should cut the nonsense to a minimum and no longer desire to be the Glam-rock band at a high-school prom. That's really all there is to it.

It's that simple.

D.

Top
#67387 - 06/18/12 02:19 AM Re: Dethroning Satan? [Re: Diavolo]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



So, it seems that we are talking about the nature or the order of the signifier - the culturally generated graphic image/acoustic sound which gives rise to a meaning?

It seems that the signified – concept, or the referent – the material object have sustained/maintained a stable meaning or being?

So Satanism, in itself, has a core being/meaning which remains constant through history and across cultures, but the language used by a particular culture at a particular period of time to talk about this core being or meaning is subject to change and hence misunderstanding can/will arise between us and another culture or historical period?

Oh boy, I am tempted to define Satan here as the differance which undoes the text and the metaphysics of presence underpinning it - there will be slipping and sliding of signs despite the God in the Order of Things.

But no, that won’t do, I think. But this is why I was interested in the distinction briefly described above, between Satanism as an event in the history of antinomianism, or Satanism as a space previously defined by principle and distinction.

It is the signified which is up for grabs here I think, the signifier can be adjusted to produce a meaning, in line with someone’s culture/history, but is the meaning stable at all in the first place or am I being naïve and is the order of the signifier just constituting the object regardless?

Top
#67388 - 06/18/12 02:48 AM Re: Dethroning Satan? [Re: ]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Indeed, we are not as much talking about what we could consider das Ding an sich but about how we effectively communicate our knowledge about it.

Even while we might differ about what qualifies as properties of, in regards to an effective communication, it would fundamentally make no difference.

D.

Top
#67389 - 06/18/12 07:31 AM Re: Dethroning Satan? [Re: Diavolo]
Stick Offline
member


Registered: 06/08/12
Posts: 157
Loc: Benelux
I think to Satanism as an symbol biggest opposition was religion itself but nowadays that has been weakened off quite a bit.
It has been replaced by (social)media, gadgets, fancy toys and pleasant comforting world saving ideas, I see subcultures every were all with their own merchandise.
A typical field which is flourishing right now is the ecological scene, better said the ecological way of living, almost an religion on itself.
The question is, are you gonna oppose this or make money on this or if possible both at the same time. What I am trying to say, the psychology behind organized religion,
shifted over to more economical based subcultures. At this moment I have a hard time to get this on "paper" but please fill me in what your folks
thoughts are on what I am trying to get to.

Top
#67405 - 06/18/12 06:00 PM Re: Dethroning Satan? [Re: Jason King]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
 Originally Posted By: Jason King

Read The Satanic Bible. What is the overarching theme? It's a reactionary text, start to finish.


I would agree that approximately 1/2 of The Satanic Bible is reactionary. The other half is devoted to Satanic ritual magic which is certainly about taking up the gauntlet and seeking to create change in one's life. It's proactive.

The reactionary half isn't without value either as many of life's most important lessons are a direct reaction to something that's happened. Learning to be proactive is born first of a negative reaction. In this way, TSB is absolutely foundational.

By no means, though, do I suggest that TSB is a stopping point. It's an entry point and is a must read for anyone new to the path.
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#67406 - 06/18/12 06:19 PM Re: Dethroning Satan? [Re: Diavolo]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3841
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
Come Dan, why give the impression as if I'm ripping the head of your favorite doll? We're arguing about an issue and even when I might take a, to some, dislikable position, it's nothing but an argument.


Well sir, that is an interesting rhetorical spin, but come now.
From top to bottom, in this thread (and elsewhere) your theme has been 'Satanism is outdated/due for software upgrades/should be discarded' yet no alternative has been offered, no solutions put on the table. I assure you it is without emotional investment when I ask 'where's the fucking beef?' You might as well be bitching about the rain at this point.

 Quote:

We are social realists and as realists, we should be rational and effective in about all we do. We should cut the nonsense to a minimum and no longer desire to be the Glam-rock band at a high-school prom. That's really all there is to it.

It's that simple.

Well sure, but who are these glam rockers? Satanism is, already, to those that get it the path of the very few, bedrock. The fact that most don't and never will get it is completely beside the point.

Does any of this have any purpose other than howling at the wind?
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#67407 - 06/18/12 06:44 PM Re: Dethroning Satan? [Re: Dan_Dread]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Maybe if you'd understood how perfectly fitting Social Realism as an analogy to that movement is in this case, including its period of most importance, you'd understand I'm pointing out we're hopelessly stuck in our Romanticism.

I assume you're a clever boy and can figure the rest out yourself. There's freedom for interpretation but you'll still see the point.

I always provided the alternative, as I do here again, but not a pre-configured package.

D.

Top
#67409 - 06/18/12 08:08 PM Re: Dethroning Satan? [Re: Diavolo]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3841
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
I guess it's just a difference in starting positions then. From where I sit, there is no romanticism, only hard reality. For me the state of some internet scene or who is participating in what or how has no bearing on any of that.

The word, 'Satanism' has only one use..to communicate a certain essence driving certain activity. Up till now the semantics have worked just fine, and I really see no need to change them for the good of some 'internet culture' I have no emotional investment in.

I guess I'm just too busy doing my own thing to care. Best of luck with all that \:\)
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#67415 - 06/19/12 03:54 AM Re: Dethroning Satan? [Re: Diavolo]
Stick Offline
member


Registered: 06/08/12
Posts: 157
Loc: Benelux
I think Satanism at this point is still an useful symbol but the need for heavy filtering is needed, and it is well done over here.
Making the satanic and occult label less profound, and add at the same time an new powerful "symbolic" description, could do the trick.

I like the phrase: "Applied Non Moral Skepticism".
For me it has everything in it, the description of an individual person able to stand on his own feet, non sensitive to morals and being able to come up with his own rational analyses, conclusions and connected actions.
The power of this way of taking care of problems conflicts or everyday actions, is that there is not an centralized thought or moral behind an conclusion or action, you yourself are the strongest and weakest chain, not only a link.

Solving from understanding, individual brain power, not from ready made centralized concepts out of ancient books or concepts.
If more individuals join the arena, a rope can be build out of the strands of the individuals which will not break when one strand snaps.

Top
#67416 - 06/19/12 07:18 AM Re: Dethroning Satan? [Re: Stick]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



Just for fun I thought I might try to create some word and I came up with Oppositionism. Ha.

The problem is that even if this word conveys the essence, if such a thing exists in the first place, then the word used to convey it in this case is too broad I think and too invested with other meanings - built out of historical and cultural elements which obscure that essence.

So for instance, what is it an opposition to, and if it is the status quo, then won't that confuse the issue considering the status quo itself opposes something and could appropriate the name oppositionism for itself and use it against its own enemy?

And does this name require that a political party be formed with a hierarchy and with sets of rules, which each is condemned to conform to, in order that an objective is met?

Is oppositionism against group conformity, if so then how does that tie into past example of opposition to capitalism by the working class based on group solidarity and group consciousness etc?

I still feel that Satanism is a word which is very useful, as it still holds such a strong meaning in the culture. This sign has certainly changed over time and with various historical and cultural sediment, but it still conveys enough for the majority to stop and regard itself as probably against Satanism in some sense. Hence to engage in self-reflection and an analysis of the Other.

I must admit that the historical and cultural sediment which has manipulated and built this sign interests me and is a part of the richness of this sign and its personal value to me beyond an essence. But I tend to be of the opinion that the sediment is the essence.

Top
#67425 - 06/19/12 11:32 AM Re: Dethroning Satan? [Re: ]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
What a subject like this above all does is test the water and discover how others look at it. More than a decade ago it was almost blasphemous to suggest one abandons this memeplex and move beyond. Five years ago one could talk about in closed circles. Nowadays it can be done in public without a moral outcry within the subculture. But it still is obvious the times are not right for a new movement to arise and take Satanism to the next level, regardless of what it will be named.

But it will happen because it must happen. The arrow always points forward.

D.

Top
#67434 - 06/19/12 01:47 PM Re: Dethroning Satan? [Re: Diavolo]
Autodidact Offline
member


Registered: 01/23/10
Posts: 428
I'm still not clear on what exactly you're aiming at. I see "finish line" and "next level" and Social Realism, and it makes me think you're aiming at something large-scale groupish. Honestly, all that stuff is incidental - I don't give a fuck about "where the Satanic subculture is headed" or how popular it is in search engines.

If, on the other hand, you're simply suggesting changes to this website to appeal to a larger audience, then you're putting the cart before the horse, at least as far as a discussion thread goes, because you've provided no real basis for decision-making. Put up some data around members, posts, etc., over time, and allow that to speak for itself.

(For the record, I'm not worried at all about having like-minded individuals to interact with because one of the few things I do have faith in is human nature, and that it doesn't really change. There will always be Satanists, though they might call themselves something else, and they will always be in the (very small) minority, and their ideas and philosophies will always be rejected by society-at-large.)
_________________________
An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?

Top
Page 3 of 9 <12345>Last »


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

Generated in 0.029 seconds of which 0.001 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.