Satanic Monument in OKC

[technomage]

Aligning the Left-Hand Path with competition makes capitalism out to be the most LHP system there is, and I disagree.

Capitalism, like life, is a mixture of LHP and RHP. Yes, there is competition ... but that competition is framed within and limited by the necessary cooperation, with one's vendors, one's employees, even one's competitors. Even the worst, nastiest, "robber baron" capitalist must work to maintain a market.

 

[1137]

You're defining LHP/RHP as conflict vs cooperation?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Capitalism, like life, is a mixture of LHP and RHP. Yes, there is competition ... but that competition is framed within and limited by the necessary cooperation, with one's vendors, one's employees, even one's competitors. Even the worst, nastiest, "robber baron" capitalist must work to maintain a market.

I really don't see it as the right way to look at it. Reminds me too much of LaVey who ripped-off Ayn Rand.

 

[technomage]

You're defining LHP/RHP as conflict vs cooperation?

Nope. Conflict/cooperation is one axis, to be sure ... but it's one of potentially thousands, and I don't feel like listing them all, or like trying to condense an extremely complex topic into a short forum post. Heck, it's already past my bed-time.

 

[Erebus]

Me being a transhumanist and an anarcho-communist leads me to think that the future will be better if humanity stays on a certain track and barring certain negative events. I view humanity as being in a crossroads right now. We have some heavy decisions to make about our future.

I've got to admit, I do like some transhumanist ideals. However, I do see them as ideals, my prediction is that our species has a pretty bleak future. In all honesty I don't see us as having moved all that far beyond beating each other over the head with rocks. We've developed prettier clothes and better tools, but we're still apes deep down.

Still, I've been proven wrong before and I'd hardly complain if I was wrong about this.

Depends on our view of Satanism. Though honestly anything can become the norm in theory.

Certainly. It's an interesting thought anyway. If Satanism becomes the norm, is it still Satanism? As I say, I don't see it actually happening but if it did I don't think I have a satisfactory answer to that question at the moment.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I've got to admit, I do like some transhumanist ideals. However, I do see them as ideals, my prediction is that our species has a pretty bleak future. In all honesty I don't see us as having moved all that far beyond beating each other over the head with rocks. We've developed prettier clothes and better tools, but we're still apes deep down.

Still, I've been proven wrong before and I'd hardly complain if I was wrong about this.

Of course they're ideals. I have hopes that humanity will accomplish certain goals. Like I said, I see humans as being in an inbetween stage. In many ways, we will are primitive apes but we have the potential to be much more than that.

Certainly. It's an interesting thought anyway. If Satanism becomes the norm, is it still Satanism? As I say, I don't see it actually happening but if it did I don't think I have a satisfactory answer to that question at the moment.

That's the problem when you define Satanism as being purely a reaction to the dominant paradigm. I view it as a form of shooting yourself in the foot.

 

[Erebus]

Of course they're ideals. I have hopes that humanity will accomplish certain goals. Like I said, I see humans as being in an inbetween stage. In many ways, we will are primitive apes but we have the potential to be much more than that.



That's the problem when you define Satanism as being purely a reaction to the dominant paradigm. I view it as a form of shooting yourself in the foot.

I'd like to share the hope for humanity you have, but I just don't I'm afraid.

I wouldn't say it's entirely reactionary. The first steps might be, people need something rebellious to get rid of the baggage they were brought up with. As a whole though I see it more as a rejection of convention than a battle against it if that makes sense?

Anyhow, I'm going to see about getting some sleep for now. I'll check back soon

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I'd like to share the hope for humanity you have, but I just don't I'm afraid.

No problem. I understand the difficulty in having hope for humanity. I have my own issues with misanthropy which manifests as a deep disappointment in humanity. But I'm a dreamer, what can I say?

I wouldn't say it's entirely reactionary. The first steps might be, people need something rebellious to get rid of the baggage they were brought up with. As a whole though I see more as a rejection of convention than a battle against it if that makes sense?

Sure. I think that's a better way of putting it. To me, I see the archetype of Satan as being one that encourages the full unlocking of human potential.

Anyhow, I'm going to see about getting some sleep for now. I'll check back soon

Have a good night.

 

[technomage]

I really don't see it as the right way to look at it. Reminds me too much of LaVey who ripped-off Ayn Rand.

Actually, in some respects, it's a rebuttal of Rand, and a demonstration that what LaVey was teaching was "baby steps."

But as I've said, cooperation and competition is but one axis ... and as I should have noted last night, it's most certainly not a perfect comparison. There are aspects of cooperation that fit better into an LHP mindset, and there are aspects of RHP that work with competition ... it's not a perfect parallel, because there IS no perfect parallel.

Later, when I'm awake, I'll try to explain my understanding of LHP, RHP, and why they work together in most (but not all) cases.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Actually, in some respects, it's a rebuttal of Rand, and a demonstration that what LaVey was teaching was "baby steps."

But as I've said, cooperation and competition is but one axis ... and as I should have noted last night, it's most certainly not a perfect comparison. There are aspects of cooperation that fit better into an LHP mindset, and there are aspects of RHP that work with competition ... it's not a perfect parallel, because there IS no perfect parallel.

Later, when I'm awake, I'll try to explain my understanding of LHP, RHP, and why they work together in most (but not all) cases.

Sounds interesting. Yes, I'd like to hear your views on it.

 

[1137]

Sounds interesting. Yes, I'd like to hear your views on it.

Yeah, I'm waiiitttting lol

 

[technomage]

Put it in a new thread: http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/left-hand-path-religions-dir/161490-my-views-lhp.html

 

[Yadon]

Say this is successful, and we get Satanic monument in every state. Over time, people become understanding and tolerant to 'satanists', and satanism becomes just another alternative religion, something that generates no reaction in anyone, just another toe on the line.

Would you people consider that some sort of victory or accomplishment?

I seriously doubt it will become "just another religion" and most "alternative religions" are still treated like ****. If it means more people understand intellectually a Satanist's positions and don't react irrationally and sometimes violently, then all the better because gee, they actually have learned something useful.

If you are working with mainstream ideas, challenging nothing, toeing the line, why even bother? The essence of anything 'satanic' has been lost at this point.

One could argue the Satanicness of Satanism was lost the moment it started. When you really get down to it the Satanic part of most forms of Satanism is just a really bad facade and label lacking any real historical or theological basis. Actually the Satanic Temple's views of what Satan is according to their site, are more in line historically and theologically with some centuries of some religion's interpretations of Satan more so than say Anton LaVey.

Funny enough the origins of Satan in Judaism is more of a title thing that was oriented at times with angels and holy men. Basically at the core a Satan is someone who challenges, and here in the story the Satanic Temple is challenging a variety of notions that people have.

How the **** is that not Satanic?

There are times when challenging the mainstream means playing on their turf, by their rules, and showing them that the rules are illogical. It's not about having a Satanic monument in every state ... it's about challenging the complacency that says "I can have my stuff, but you can't have yours."

This I whole heartidly agree with, it's challenging the double standard to make a point.

If a paradigm shift occurs, then the LHP can become the norm, yes. That's one of the things I'd like to see.

The Left Hand Path can never be the norm since it relies on a dualistic definition of "proper" and "improper" practice. It's like saying "one day the minority will become the majority". In relative terms that might be true but the sides will simply flip when that time comes but maintain their definitions. Hence RHP practices and ideas would become the new LHP, and vice versa.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

The Left Hand Path can never be the norm since it relies on a dualistic definition of "proper" and "improper" practice. It's like saying "one day the minority will become the majority". In relative terms that might be true but the sides will simply flip when that time comes but maintain their definitions. Hence RHP practices and ideas would become the new LHP, and vice versa.

Depends on the definition of LHP you're using.

 

[1137]

Depends on the definition of LHP you're using.

Actually that one is pretty fundamental. The LHP is against the grain, that even dates back to the Eastern concept of LHP. It's like Satan being the adversary - it implies that Christians are satanic to the Satanists, just a whole mess. But what our friend here seems to be pointing out (correctly) is that if what we call the LHP becomes the norm, then all the adversaries will have to become Christians and such. If Satanism replaces Christainity as the norm, Christianity replaces Satanism as the adversary.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Actually that one is pretty fundamental. The LHP is against the grain, that even dates back to the Eastern concept of LHP. It's like Satan being the adversary - it implies that Christians are satanic to the Satanists, just a whole mess. But what our friend here seems to be pointing out (correctly) is that if what we call the LHP becomes the norm, then all the adversaries will have to become Christians and such. If Satanism replaces Christainity as the norm, Christianity replaces Satanism as the adversary.

Not everyone shares the same view. I don't really care about the Eastern concept of the LHP. Nor do I really care that much about the OT's vague notion of S(s)atan(s).

 

[1137]

Not everyone shares the same view. I don't really care about the Eastern concept of the LHP. Nor do I really care that much about the OT's vague notion of S(s)atan(s).

You should care about the origins of words you use to describe yourself. If the LHP isn't about individuality and attempting to separate from mainstream culture, what's your end game?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

You should care about the origins of words you use to describe yourself.

I know the origins of it, but that doesn't mean I don't have my own take on it. As has been pointed out before, the Eastern LHP and the modern Western LHP are not the same things. Also, my conception of Satan is based on Romantic ideals of Satan and not the concept from the Hebrew Bible, which I find to be nearly meaningless due to its vagueness.

If the LHP isn't about individuality and attempting to separate from mainstream culture, what's your end game?

Internal transformation, paradigm shifting and the heralding of a new Age of humanity.

 

[1137]

I know the origins of it, but that doesn't mean I don't have my own take on it. As has been pointed out before, the Eastern LHP and the modern Western LHP are not the same things. Also, my conception of Satan is based on Romantic ideals of Satan and not the concept from the Hebrew Bible, which I find to be nearly meaningless due to its vagueness.



Internal transformation, paradigm shifting and the heralding of a new Age of humanity.

Well stated.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Well stated.

Thanks.

I see Satan as a Promethean archetype of the transformation of the Self to Godhood (which, ironically, is very similar to savior archetypes such as the Christ, but that's another subject), as he rebelled against god (representing stagnation, death, repressive authority, the tyranny of the natural world) in order to create his own paradigm (creating his own heaven in hell; autotheism). When it comes to Jewish writings, I enjoy the stories of the Watchers and the tale of Samael and Lilith because they have parallels to other stories of teaching and wisdom Gods which defied authority in order to give humanity gifts that raise us up to higher endeavors. In regards to Romantic concepts of the Christian Satan, I get from that the the idea of Satan as the muse of art, civilization and scientific inquiry as well as raising one's self up on one's on terms despite resistance, whether internal or external. Basically, it's the reverence of the finest aspects of humanity and human potential. It's life-loving and human-loving.

So my views aren't based on mere adversarialism or rejection of the mainstream, although that is obviously a part of it since the current mainstream paradigm does not reflect my values. But my values would still hold true even if the larger society did accept them, and, I hope that it eventually does because I'm very interested in the progress of the human species to apotheosis. But the change starts from within myself. So my path is primarily a Self religion.