BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Policy & Help >

Moderating the Temple

  
  

Page: 1 ... 7891011(12)1314151617... 35

 
 
electric monk
19:50 / 17.11.06
That reminds me: I never did get my big wig. Has that been mailed out yet?

-------

On a more serious note, I have to disagree with you on the "misleading" nature of the Temple as a place for both magic and religion, sn00p. To start, I'm not quite sure what's "misleading" and how people are being misled. The forum subhead plainly states that the Temple is a space for spirituality of all stripes. I think people know what they're in for if they click the link. If you mean "misleading" in that we're making a connection where there is none...well, no. A thousand times no. People who follow a magical lifestyle and people who follow a religious lifestyle share belief reinforced by experience. Both methods are tools that can be used for the betterment of the individual or can lead to that individual's destruction. Ardent believers on both sides have all the proof they need, and it'd be damn hard to sway them. Both camps have their hucksters and charlatans, as well as happy, well adjusted folk.

For the big picture, I think Tuna Ghost says it best here when ze says:

"I've always thought that the Temple was for things concerning the spirit, for whatever ball of mystical light that animates your skin sack full of bones and goo. Sort of like an all-purpose church or temple where you bring whatever idea of spirit or lack thereof for show and tell."

That's right on, as far as I'm concerned. And I think it's right on because it's inclusive of everyone and everything. No one is excluded. Frankly, I would shit a bird if the Temple were ever carved in two, with Religion off to one side and Magic off to the other.
 
 
ghadis
10:39 / 18.11.06
I have absolutly no idea what you are talking about Snoop. Are you complaining about something? (maybe the lumping of all religion and magical practice topics together?)Are you proposing something? What was the point of your post? A bit of clarification is needeed i feel.
 
 
Quantum
14:16 / 18.11.06
I think it's also misleading to have faith and magic(k) in the same forum. As they're not connected in any positive way. The situation is analogous to Intelligent Designs connection with science.

No it isn't. But since you're against supernatural theism in any way I can see why you'd take that stance. Why not come to the temple and discuss it? We welcome almost all opinions on the relation between religion and magic, and as long as you don't think your opinion is objective fact we'll all get along famously.
 
 
sn00p
17:13 / 18.11.06
Melvin Monk: Well yes, I was saying there is no connection and that putting them in one forum makes them seem as if they are. I don’t really agree with your stance on magic and their connection, but that just probably comes down to semantics, the word obviously has a lot of different meanings. I was referring to magic in the sense of Crowley, Chaos Magic, Morrison Magic and other modern magicians. Yes obviously Faith and Magic have been connected in the past and will probably be connected in the future, but like I said science and faith are also connected in Intelligent Design.

Armed with madness: Sorry about that. Well I was quoted earlier and misinterpreted so I just wanted to clarify my stance. At the same time I was also proposing that you get a lot of tension in the temple because of putting two things together that aren’t necessarily connected. Then I was saying does Barbelith have a purpose, Or is it censored? because to me ‘The Temple’ is just casting this enormous occult disinformative smoke screen, and I was just wondering if whoever runs Barbelith should sit down and think ‘Is this really what I want to do?’. I’m not actually trying to be an ass, I’m genuinely concerned for a scene I love that is just degenerating into sillyness.

Quintum: Thanks, but I probably won’t. I find talking to theists about anything that really matters quite fruitless.

I’m sorry I really don’t want to make a big deal out of this. It was just a suggestion, I’ll drop it.

With thanks,
Sn00p
 
 
Seth
18:00 / 18.11.06
‘The Temple’ is just casting this enormous occult disinformative smoke screen

That's really interesting. Please write more on this.
 
 
Char Aina
18:33 / 18.11.06
i second seth's request.

I find talking to theists about anything that really matters quite fruitless.

why?

are you aware how your opinion on how people conduct conversations you have said you think are fruitless and not to be entered comes across?
why listen to someone's opinions on a discussion they believe is not worth having?

i'm genuinely curious how you feel people should accept your advice, given that you don't consider many of those you address are worth talking to.
 
 
My Mom Thinks I'm Cool
20:03 / 18.11.06
Hmm. I don't want to pull you into an argument you're trying to avoid, but I have to say - if there was a seperate forum for magic and for religion, I don't know where I would have put 90% of my Temple posts.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
21:10 / 18.11.06
Where would something like magick from, say, the Norse tradition (with the gods and the worshipping and all) go then?
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
21:29 / 18.11.06
By which I mean- I'm not really seeing the big divide here.

(Sorry- boss walked past and I panicked and hit POST).
 
 
sn00p
22:00 / 18.11.06
In answer to Seth and tosik, I think what I was saying about disinformation is summed up nicely by 'Release the Stoats'. Where would Norse God worship go? Well if someone actually believed that Wotan created the universe ( I know next to nothing of Norse mythology), and that Thor with his hammer travelled to Earth to have mighty adventures, then that would go in religion. If someone was using Norse iconography to invoke specific complexes of thoughts and feeling then that would go in magic(k). The problem would arise when you mixed the two in the same context, people talking about the actual existence of these entities and the magic methodology of how to experience these non existant entities. The exact same principle applies to Christianity, Islam, Judaism and any other supernaturally based system.

For the other thing, I’ve just given up on it, I just honestly don't think it's worth the time and effort and I was hoping the people I was addressing were not who I was talking about. But apparently so, right? Nevermind.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
22:31 / 18.11.06
Disinformation (noun)-

false information, as about a country's military strength or plans, publicly announced or planted in the news media, esp. of other countries.

Deliberately misleading information announced publicly or leaked by a government or especially by an intelligence agency in order to influence public opinion or the government in another nation: “He would be the unconscious channel for a piece of disinformation aimed at another country's intelligence service” (Ken Follett).

Dissemination of such misleading information. (from Dictionary.com)

I have absolutely no idea what you're on about.
 
 
Char Aina
22:34 / 18.11.06
how to experience these non existant entities.

...

We welcome almost all opinions on the relation between religion and magic, and as long as you don't think your opinion is objective fact we'll all get along famously.

i like what quantum was saying there, and i fear you don't.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
22:35 / 18.11.06
Nope, sorry, I know I'm supposed to be on sabbatical but this is just gettng right on my pecs. No offence.

Well if someone actually believed that Wotan created the universe ( I know next to nothing of Norse mythology), and that Thor with his hammer travelled to Earth to have mighty adventures, then that would go in religion. If someone was using Norse iconography to invoke specific complexes of thoughts and feeling then that would go in magic(k).

Right. Now I don't believe that Odin literally created the world out of bits of a dead Giant, or that thunder is literally caused by Thor racketing around the sky in His goat-cart.* (I don't know a single person who does believe that, by the way. Because not on CRACK.) But I do believe in the literal existance of these entities. I know Them. I love Them. I talk to Them and I want to have a good relationship with Them. To me, they are literally real--living consciousnesses with their own personalities, drives and agendas, with whom I can communicate. I also practice ancestor worship and landwight worship, and I communicate with those beings too. I believe these things because I have sufficient experiential evidence to be easy in my own mind that they are true. I don't expect anyone who hasn't had those experiences to share my beliefs; my experiences, my Gods, my problem.

So, that's my religion, right? I should keep my filthy sticky theistic self the Hel out of your nice clean magic forum.

But my magical practice these days is based wholly around communicating with my Gods and spirits. Aligning my will with Theirs. Petitioning Them for aid. Having the chats. Making the offerings. So that when I need to do something I can approach Them and maybe get Them on board. I'd still call that magic: ritual work designed to bring about change in accordance with my Will. But now I have (hopefully and theoretically) some big pitchers on my side. Friends in high places.

But a lot of heathens and Ásatrúar (people who worship the northern pantheon) would call that magic; there are some who call me names and don't want me putting my nasty sticky witchy fingers on their nice clean religion.

It is, of course, entirely possible to have a religion without magic (for a given value of "magic" that excluded petitionary prayer, for example). And it's perfectly possible to have a purely secular magical practice devoid of religion--I maintained such a practice for years, right up until I had my attack of Gods in April 2005. I don't maintain a secular practice anymore because there doesn't seem much point.

I don't know what you mean by an "occult smokescreen." Nobody in the Temple is trying to conceal or deny anything--nobody there is pretending that you need Gods to perform magic, since most of us are familiar with sorcery of one form or another. People are talking openly and honestly about the magical practices they maintain which happen to be theistic in nature. What, do you think we're all making it up to seduce the unsuspecting reader into our respective belief systems? It seems to me like you're reading these complex, sophisticated and sometimes very emotionally involving accounts and hearing Charlie Brown's schoolteacher, a blank WHAU WHUA WHAU WHUA WHUA of "stuff I don't agree with." I really do not understand where you're coming from.



*Although I do think it would be a lot of fun to complete an
Ásatrú clergy training programme so I could dress up like a Viking and go round schools that teach intelligent design demanding equal representation for the Bits of Dead Giant theory. That would rock.
 
 
illmatic
22:56 / 18.11.06
I was referring to magic in the sense of Crowley, Chaos Magic, Morrison Magic and other modern magicians.

Firstly, nitpicking, you can make a pretty bloody strong case that Crowley quite clearly believed in the existence of Gods, and other entities. See, um, Aiwas?

Secondly, to back up a point from Mordant, ze, myself and several others, have practiced this crazy, newfangled "modern magick" that you're talking about. Quite extensively, in some cases. (I started off doing so). But investigating the territories it threw up caused us to see some of its limitations. And one major, major limitation contained therein is the idea that Gods are all in your head, and it's all psychological. All of us have had experiences that severely challenge this point of view.

And you know what, Snoop? If you keep on practising magic, you probably will do too. If you want to hang on to that aetheistic worldview, better pack it in. Stop trying to construct a magick that's safe for you.

(Oh, and as to where Snoop is coming from, I think he's reading all instances of "religious" magick as exactly the same thing as American evangelical Christianity, just with the names changed. He has an aversion, to this form of religion, presumably based on personal experience. I thought the multiple pages of the God is imaginarythread might have shed some light on this, but oh well.
 
 
illmatic
23:04 / 18.11.06
If you can't be bothered to read the whole thread, at least have a look at this post, and see if it shifts your ideas at all.


Oh, and this has just arrived for you...

NEWSFLASH FOR SNOOP

Not all religion is exactly the same!
 
 
Char Aina
23:20 / 18.11.06
In answer to Seth and tosik

any chance you fancy answering the ones i asked without seth asking first?
 
 
sn00p
09:27 / 19.11.06
Look, I’m really sorry but there isn't enough hours in the day for this. I realise I initiated this, but I thought it would either be taken on board or dismissed, I never thought it would lead to a debate. I also realise that my first post was unclear in a number of ways and I except that and that it's my loss that I structured my argument so casually. While I’m not saying you should stop discussing this, I would prefer if you stopped the condescending attacks on myself when you know I don’t want to reply. If I have severely offended you, or said something that really bugs you and won't go away then message me and I will GLADLY message you back.
 
 
illmatic
10:26 / 19.11.06
Are you talking to me re. being condescending? Well, it's not my intention to attack or insult you, if it was I'd be a lot more direct than I have been. If you look at my comments above, there actually is a point to my criticisms - based on this and your previous posts, I think you are reading all religious practice as pretty much the same thing, and equally dismissable, based on negative encounters with Christianity. If I'm wrong, tell me so, and in this thread, I don't want a PM conversation.

BTW, I'm don't necessarily "believe" in Gods either, though my magical practice has brushed me up against things I can't explain as simple psychology. However, unlike yourself, I'm just not willing to dismiss other people's accounts because they've had different experiences than mine. I used the scare quotes there because I think these things are less about belief and more about experience.
 
 
Char Aina
11:09 / 19.11.06
there are enough hours in the day for you to treat us to your opinion, though, yeah?

i'm asking you fairly simple questions, and i won't PM it. i feel you need to answer my questions in public, so that the people you have described as worthless conversation partners can see your answer.

i havent been condascending that i can see, and i would like you to explain to me why you havent answered my questions, perhaps after answering my earlier questions.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
12:03 / 19.11.06
I would prefer if you stopped the condescending attacks on myself when you know I don’t want to reply.

Dude, you're on the Internet. If you don't want to talk to people then stop writing and don't open the thread.
 
 
Char Aina
12:16 / 19.11.06
with repsect pegs, i'd be quite dissapointed if he didnt come back and finish what he started.

i'd be happy to agreee that sn00p might have been better never starting it, but i feel it is too late for ignoring the the thread now.
 
 
Char Aina
12:35 / 19.11.06
whoops...
that wasnt pegs.
 
 
Quantum
20:49 / 19.11.06
I don’t want to reply. sn00p

Let's respect hir wishes and leave this issue to drop down the page, I think we can all agree that sn00p's opinion is welcome in the Temple but ze doesn't want a discussion involving supernatural theism, so maybe we should leave it in hir head.
Seems to me there's a fundamental misunderstanding about the subjective/objective distinction here, intractable to debate (see the links Pegs provided) which means further prodding will just rot the moderating the temple thread. Let's leave it (sn00p, feel free to PM me if you want to continue the debate).
 
 
Gypsy Lantern
10:36 / 20.11.06
Red mist
 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
17:41 / 20.11.06
Twitching fist
 
 
electric monk
18:22 / 20.11.06
Calmer,
but still kinda pissed.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
18:31 / 20.11.06
I'm still a little dubious on the "raising a subject then deciding you don't want to discuss it and never did being a wish that should be respected" thing, but OK.
 
 
Seth
11:45 / 21.11.06
Agreed, Stoatie. It's really rude behaviour to swing by a thread, drop whatever opinion you like and then state you're not interested in what anyone else has to say if they disagree, especially if you then accuse other people of being condescending.

sn00p: quite apart from your ideas (which you don't seem to have spent very long investigating), the manner in which you've posted to this thread was never going to inspire good reactions from people. Use the responses as feedback, you've set up this situation and this is what you get when you write to people as you have.

This is what message boards do, and people will write whatever they like back to you. If you don't like that then a blog would probably be more your medium.

On the actual subject of what you're posting about: your posts read like you haven't read the Temple forum. Use Mordant and Pegs' replies to you on this thread as a key and then go back and re-read the Temple forum content.
 
 
illmatic
15:15 / 18.12.06
Is it worth locking the aetheism thread? It seems like a pointless and now personal argument that's dragging on forever? I'm not casting any blame here but it is a bit of an open wound.
 
 
electric monk
15:45 / 18.12.06
I had to bail out back around page 6 or so. I've not been keeping up with it, but a quick read of the last couple pages doesn't give me much hope. As much as I hate to say it, I'd be okay with a lock.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
15:47 / 18.12.06
On the plus side, it's a fantastic object lesson disproving the myth of the inherent rationality of the atheistic viewpoint.
 
 
Char Aina
16:25 / 18.12.06
i'lll not go into why(it's hardly necessary), but i don't feel like the thread was an exchange of ideas so much as a contest of sorts towards the end. i was hoping to learn stuff from the thread, but i have since totally given up on it.
i get the feeling everyone else is the same way, and so i'm not sure it needs locked. by the same token, i don't know if anyone would miss it if it was.
 
 
Quantum
17:40 / 18.12.06
It should have finished with me fighting Hitler in a robot suit. But as it is, could we attempt an in-thread poke first? Along the lines of 'this thread is dead, it is a dead thread, please let it expire naturally before it gets one in the back of the head'
 
 
Hallo, Paper Spaceboy
21:35 / 18.12.06
Or you could let it continue and pit it against other, non zombified Temple threads in a veritable CONTEST OF CHAMPIONS.
 
 
illmatic
14:55 / 15.01.07
Okay, so some quick commentary on this thread. The thread title mentions an occult author by name, who also happens to be a long standing member of Barbelith.

Historically, Barbelith has always tried to drive something of a wedge between people's online IDs and their real life identities, largely because of the potential for harrassment by trolls. At least one poster has been the victim an attempted smear via his workplace, and the board's owner has recieved unwanted packages in the mail, both thanks to Barbelith's longest standing troll. There's an added danger if one is writing on the occult - people might think I'm being melodramatic here but Christian smear campaigns ( the "Satanic Panic" - in early 90s led to pagans losing their jobs (and to alleged "devil worshippers" losing their families) and in unforgiving areas of the world (the American midwest?) this might lead to active harrassment. I certainly wouldn't want my spiritual/religious beliefs to become common knowledge in my place of work.

The situation is obviously different if someone is entering the public domain and writing under their own name anyway, but I think Barbelith owes posters the privelge of anonymity, should they desire it. In this instance, the poster in questions is happy for the thread to exist, so I've reversed an early lock.

I think a key point here is that any such thread should be encouraged to discussion of people's ideas, rather than just the gathering of "information" or speculation of a personal nature. Some information should obviously remain private regardless i.e. addresses and so forth.

To close - I'd add that no chastisment of the thread starter is intended here as they weren't aware of this.

Any thoughts or comments?
 
  

Page: 1 ... 7891011(12)1314151617... 35

 
  
Add Your Reply