A micro-quibble about the origin of this character's surname; at the NCPs blog.
Saturday 13 April 2019
My experience of booking a room in a bureaucratic-totalitarian society...
In the spirit of Vaclav Havel's 'poster test' (complete essay here); I had an illustrative experience about a decade ago trying to book a room for informal weekly meetings.
What Havel showed is that the totalitarianism of our society can be seen many times a day in multiple apparently trivial experiences. However, these experiences are seldom identified; I think because (unlike the Czech society under communism) modern Western societies have been extensively corrupted, and are complicit in their own oppression.
Inspired by The Inklings; I wanted to book a room for evening weekly conversation meetings of a floating, flexible population of some half a dozen people - from my friends and colleagues, and their friends and colleagues. The idea was that we might read and discuss work in progress or half-baked ideas; and follow the conversation wherever it might lead; broken up by cups of tea and coffee...
I found a suitable space in the rooms attached to a nearby nonconformist protestant church, and was asked to meet with the person whose role it was to rent out these rooms (the person was a somewhat motherly elderly woman - a fairly typical nonconformist; she was probably an unpaid volunteer).
I was rather surprised to be asked to meet with someone; but I guessed that it was a screening process, to make sure the rooms would not be let to anyone who might abuse them, or leave them in a bad state. Since I am a 'respectable' person, who has lived locally for decades, and the participants were people such as doctors, professors, Anglican priests... I didn't anticipate any problems.
But there was more to it than that. Before being allowed to rent the room, I was asked exactly who would be attending, and what we would be discussing.
I was stunned by this - but managed to respond that I had no clue, we would simply be having a conversation; I asked for clarification. Then it became clear that the church did not want to be associated with certain types of ideas, being discussed on its premises. These were not defined, were left vague and rather menacing; but it was pretty clear that the concern was with 'right wing' ideas.
So, the implicit situation was, that I was not going to be allowed to rent a room to have conversations, unless the representative of the church could be assured that (vaguely) 'right wing' ideas would be off the agenda.
By this point I had decided not to pursue the matter - but the excessively large amount of money asked for rental gave me an easy excuse to get out of the situation.
My interpretation of this situation is that this is a good example of how totalitarian power works, and the everyday, micro-level.
First: everything nowadays is run by committees - and committees are intrinsically left wing and atheist; because personal responsibility is eliminated, hence there is 'no morality' in committee decisions - which is another way of saying that they are always and intrinsically immoral; which is another way of stating the plain fact that Committees Are Evil.
All committees are evil, and this is how it works...
My understanding is that the church committees (and their representatives) are plugged-into the the church bureaucracies, local and national government bureaucracies (including the bureaucracies that inspect and grant permissions to churches, the national Lottery bureaucracies - which often subsidise/ bribe churches; and the bureaucracies that award prizes, medals and titles).
In other words there is a dense web of regulatory, permissory, and reputational bureaucracy surrounding each and every publicly operating institution. Any of these could trigger an investigative avalanche in response to a few accusatory words from... well, anybody.
All institutions live in fear of mass media bureaucracies; which can initiate and orchestrate and sustain mass hatred against anybody at any time. And the national bureaucracies are linked to the European Union (and its laws, regulations, and potential funding), the United Nations and beyond.
Functionally, all public bureaucracies are parts of a single system. What is the characteristic of this system? They are evil, but in what way? We can (and should!) observe that (whatever individuals may believe and think) all component bureaucracies are in basic, ideological agreement about social priorities and threats - and this includes even such low level outfits as volunteers working for local nonconformist churches.
These are the facts; but the implications are so far-reaching as to be unacceptable to almost everybody. Because if all bureaucracy is evil, then all institutions that engage with the social realm are compelled to become a part of the bureaucratic system, and therefore complicit in evil.
If I had gone ahead and booked the room, then my loose gathering of conversationalists would necessarily have become a public institution, a part of the global totalitarian system; existing only by the grace and favour of this system - which could be withdrawn at any time.
So - here and now, already-existing - all existing and possible public institutions are intrinsically corrupt, since they are part of the primary manifestation of evil in the world. If you are pinning your hope on Any institution.
The only way to avoid this is Not to be a part of the institutional world. Don't rent rooms! All publicly recognised groups are institutions and all institutions are One.
The only exemptions are groups of family and friends whose cohesion is from Love and have no 'official' or organised reality.
And this is precisely why the family and (that rare thing) real friendship are under constant and vicious attack from The System; who constantly try to infiltrate legal concepts into these affectional relations (under excuses such as rights of children, payment for housework, protection against forms of abuse, limitation of freedoms etc) - and to make these primary and definitional.
Things are coming to a point; and the old individual-group compromises which served Christianity (more-or-less well) for two thousand years, are already impossible - and this will get worse. The world of true knowledge gets ever further divided from the pervasive lies of public discourse.
We are already confronted with multiple, daily situations in which our inner, intuitive knowledge is contradicted by institutional authority - and most people, most of the time (including Christians) are coping by denial of this reality; which is simply to side with The System: i.e. the primary manifestation of evil in the world.
Note added: The usual response to something like this is - But what should we do? Where, implicitly, the 'do' implies some 'effective' This-World sociopolitical action.
And with the (usually unconscious) assumption that 'we' already know how things ought-to be, and the only live question is how best to achieve this (within existing constraints of resources and time, given the supposed-probabilities of success and risks of failure... and so on).
The whole thing rapidly becomes absorbed into the question (seldom understood as such, however) of how to activate one part of The System (that we like) and set it against some other part of The System that we don't like - because (we recognise) only The System has the power to compel and punish its errors and evils...
But the lesson we ought to be learning is that this only strengthens The System. It is just office politics, bureaucratic infighting. It is the 'Boromir Strategy' (as advocated by the Secular Right 'Boromirosphere' - "Hey lads, let's use the One Ring to fight Sauron!" - https://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2016/07/the-boromir-strategy-as-advocated-by.html).
We need to see that this is precisely the triumph of bureaucratic totalitarianism. And then realise that the solution of rejecting totalitarianism in toto in a world where totalitarianism is Everywhere and doing Everything... which is something so radical as to be almost unthinkable - yet that is what we must think (or else fail the test).
What Havel showed is that the totalitarianism of our society can be seen many times a day in multiple apparently trivial experiences. However, these experiences are seldom identified; I think because (unlike the Czech society under communism) modern Western societies have been extensively corrupted, and are complicit in their own oppression.
Inspired by The Inklings; I wanted to book a room for evening weekly conversation meetings of a floating, flexible population of some half a dozen people - from my friends and colleagues, and their friends and colleagues. The idea was that we might read and discuss work in progress or half-baked ideas; and follow the conversation wherever it might lead; broken up by cups of tea and coffee...
I found a suitable space in the rooms attached to a nearby nonconformist protestant church, and was asked to meet with the person whose role it was to rent out these rooms (the person was a somewhat motherly elderly woman - a fairly typical nonconformist; she was probably an unpaid volunteer).
I was rather surprised to be asked to meet with someone; but I guessed that it was a screening process, to make sure the rooms would not be let to anyone who might abuse them, or leave them in a bad state. Since I am a 'respectable' person, who has lived locally for decades, and the participants were people such as doctors, professors, Anglican priests... I didn't anticipate any problems.
But there was more to it than that. Before being allowed to rent the room, I was asked exactly who would be attending, and what we would be discussing.
I was stunned by this - but managed to respond that I had no clue, we would simply be having a conversation; I asked for clarification. Then it became clear that the church did not want to be associated with certain types of ideas, being discussed on its premises. These were not defined, were left vague and rather menacing; but it was pretty clear that the concern was with 'right wing' ideas.
So, the implicit situation was, that I was not going to be allowed to rent a room to have conversations, unless the representative of the church could be assured that (vaguely) 'right wing' ideas would be off the agenda.
By this point I had decided not to pursue the matter - but the excessively large amount of money asked for rental gave me an easy excuse to get out of the situation.
My interpretation of this situation is that this is a good example of how totalitarian power works, and the everyday, micro-level.
First: everything nowadays is run by committees - and committees are intrinsically left wing and atheist; because personal responsibility is eliminated, hence there is 'no morality' in committee decisions - which is another way of saying that they are always and intrinsically immoral; which is another way of stating the plain fact that Committees Are Evil.
All committees are evil, and this is how it works...
My understanding is that the church committees (and their representatives) are plugged-into the the church bureaucracies, local and national government bureaucracies (including the bureaucracies that inspect and grant permissions to churches, the national Lottery bureaucracies - which often subsidise/ bribe churches; and the bureaucracies that award prizes, medals and titles).
In other words there is a dense web of regulatory, permissory, and reputational bureaucracy surrounding each and every publicly operating institution. Any of these could trigger an investigative avalanche in response to a few accusatory words from... well, anybody.
All institutions live in fear of mass media bureaucracies; which can initiate and orchestrate and sustain mass hatred against anybody at any time. And the national bureaucracies are linked to the European Union (and its laws, regulations, and potential funding), the United Nations and beyond.
Functionally, all public bureaucracies are parts of a single system. What is the characteristic of this system? They are evil, but in what way? We can (and should!) observe that (whatever individuals may believe and think) all component bureaucracies are in basic, ideological agreement about social priorities and threats - and this includes even such low level outfits as volunteers working for local nonconformist churches.
These are the facts; but the implications are so far-reaching as to be unacceptable to almost everybody. Because if all bureaucracy is evil, then all institutions that engage with the social realm are compelled to become a part of the bureaucratic system, and therefore complicit in evil.
If I had gone ahead and booked the room, then my loose gathering of conversationalists would necessarily have become a public institution, a part of the global totalitarian system; existing only by the grace and favour of this system - which could be withdrawn at any time.
So - here and now, already-existing - all existing and possible public institutions are intrinsically corrupt, since they are part of the primary manifestation of evil in the world. If you are pinning your hope on Any institution.
The only way to avoid this is Not to be a part of the institutional world. Don't rent rooms! All publicly recognised groups are institutions and all institutions are One.
The only exemptions are groups of family and friends whose cohesion is from Love and have no 'official' or organised reality.
And this is precisely why the family and (that rare thing) real friendship are under constant and vicious attack from The System; who constantly try to infiltrate legal concepts into these affectional relations (under excuses such as rights of children, payment for housework, protection against forms of abuse, limitation of freedoms etc) - and to make these primary and definitional.
Things are coming to a point; and the old individual-group compromises which served Christianity (more-or-less well) for two thousand years, are already impossible - and this will get worse. The world of true knowledge gets ever further divided from the pervasive lies of public discourse.
We are already confronted with multiple, daily situations in which our inner, intuitive knowledge is contradicted by institutional authority - and most people, most of the time (including Christians) are coping by denial of this reality; which is simply to side with The System: i.e. the primary manifestation of evil in the world.
Note added: The usual response to something like this is - But what should we do? Where, implicitly, the 'do' implies some 'effective' This-World sociopolitical action.
And with the (usually unconscious) assumption that 'we' already know how things ought-to be, and the only live question is how best to achieve this (within existing constraints of resources and time, given the supposed-probabilities of success and risks of failure... and so on).
The whole thing rapidly becomes absorbed into the question (seldom understood as such, however) of how to activate one part of The System (that we like) and set it against some other part of The System that we don't like - because (we recognise) only The System has the power to compel and punish its errors and evils...
But the lesson we ought to be learning is that this only strengthens The System. It is just office politics, bureaucratic infighting. It is the 'Boromir Strategy' (as advocated by the Secular Right 'Boromirosphere' - "Hey lads, let's use the One Ring to fight Sauron!" - https://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2016/07/the-boromir-strategy-as-advocated-by.html).
We need to see that this is precisely the triumph of bureaucratic totalitarianism. And then realise that the solution of rejecting totalitarianism in toto in a world where totalitarianism is Everywhere and doing Everything... which is something so radical as to be almost unthinkable - yet that is what we must think (or else fail the test).
Friday 12 April 2019
This time of testing
The Western nations are currently being tested for our degree of corruption and collaboration.
The global Establishment seems to believe that the People are Now beaten, the time has come to implement totalitarian surveillance and control systems with greatly accelerated rapidity, and with much less attention to public propaganda, opinion management - much less concern about public opinion and agreement.
I see the arrest of Julian Assange yesterday as one of these tests, because he is supposed to have considerable support among the 'internet community' of expert hackers. If the arrest goes off without a really major and obvious wave of retaliatory internet hacking, massive 'revelations' or the like - then They will know that Anybody can be eliminated without repercussions.
I think that They are correct in assuming that the apparent hacker support for Assange is shallow and lacking in principle and will not deliver on threats - simply because that movement is not religious, is instead just a more libertarian variant of mainstream materialistic leftism. Such movements lack both courage and cohesion.
We are in a spiritual war, and only those who explicitly acknowledge that fact, those who identify the nature and aims of the evil establishment... only those who are fighting the war at the spiritual level, will be effective.
If this happens, if people start awakening to the reality pf their situation; then it will be obvious; because to be effective it must be explicit, conscious and courageous at the individual, personal, real life level.
Internet 'communities' are intrinsically both feeble, and on the wrong side.
The global Establishment seems to believe that the People are Now beaten, the time has come to implement totalitarian surveillance and control systems with greatly accelerated rapidity, and with much less attention to public propaganda, opinion management - much less concern about public opinion and agreement.
I see the arrest of Julian Assange yesterday as one of these tests, because he is supposed to have considerable support among the 'internet community' of expert hackers. If the arrest goes off without a really major and obvious wave of retaliatory internet hacking, massive 'revelations' or the like - then They will know that Anybody can be eliminated without repercussions.
I think that They are correct in assuming that the apparent hacker support for Assange is shallow and lacking in principle and will not deliver on threats - simply because that movement is not religious, is instead just a more libertarian variant of mainstream materialistic leftism. Such movements lack both courage and cohesion.
We are in a spiritual war, and only those who explicitly acknowledge that fact, those who identify the nature and aims of the evil establishment... only those who are fighting the war at the spiritual level, will be effective.
If this happens, if people start awakening to the reality pf their situation; then it will be obvious; because to be effective it must be explicit, conscious and courageous at the individual, personal, real life level.
Internet 'communities' are intrinsically both feeble, and on the wrong side.
Thursday 11 April 2019
Christian evangelism or not?
This blog is mainly about "Christianity" . Originally it was meant to convert atheists of the same general type as I had been, and convert them to some kind of 'orthodoxy' as members of a church that adhered to traditional values.
It changed, under pressure from my Romantic nature, into something much more metaphysical. Trying to get at the fundamental basis of reality, in frame of the fundamental basis of Christianity.
It changed as I understood Mormonism more deeply, and as I engaged with Barfield, Steiner and Arkle.
It is still changing.
I see little scope for evangelism of the kind I began with. In the typical majority modern person, there is a deadly combination of complacency, incomprehension, indifference, boredom and hostility when it comes to Christianity - or indeed any kind of deep thinking.
I am writing, therefore, for a minority of a minority. A collection of individuals who do not form a real or even potential Group.
I currently see my task as being something on the lines of helping such people prepare for the actual or incipient situation in which they live in a wholly hostile sociopolitical environment, without any institutional support.
A lesson I have drawn is that I needed to stop yearning for an external group to which I could subordinate myself, as the basis of Christian living. This was difficult for me, and somewhat against my nature and habits; but the lesson was clear and repeated, and eventually I accepted it.
Further, no method or system can work. Nor will anything good happen unconsciously, naturally or spontaneously.
We each must work out our own specific path in all seriousness and simplicity. I suppose that is the negative 'lesson' of modern evangelism...
To which I would add: be Romantic in a serious and simple way, and keep at it.
It changed, under pressure from my Romantic nature, into something much more metaphysical. Trying to get at the fundamental basis of reality, in frame of the fundamental basis of Christianity.
It changed as I understood Mormonism more deeply, and as I engaged with Barfield, Steiner and Arkle.
It is still changing.
I see little scope for evangelism of the kind I began with. In the typical majority modern person, there is a deadly combination of complacency, incomprehension, indifference, boredom and hostility when it comes to Christianity - or indeed any kind of deep thinking.
I am writing, therefore, for a minority of a minority. A collection of individuals who do not form a real or even potential Group.
I currently see my task as being something on the lines of helping such people prepare for the actual or incipient situation in which they live in a wholly hostile sociopolitical environment, without any institutional support.
A lesson I have drawn is that I needed to stop yearning for an external group to which I could subordinate myself, as the basis of Christian living. This was difficult for me, and somewhat against my nature and habits; but the lesson was clear and repeated, and eventually I accepted it.
Further, no method or system can work. Nor will anything good happen unconsciously, naturally or spontaneously.
We each must work out our own specific path in all seriousness and simplicity. I suppose that is the negative 'lesson' of modern evangelism...
To which I would add: be Romantic in a serious and simple way, and keep at it.
Wednesday 10 April 2019
A tough world for hard cases
We probably have much more agency than is usually supposed. And always have had, including in premortal life.
In premortal life there were many whose agency was not aligned with creation, who were opposed to creation. But as premortal spirits living in proximity to the divine, their behavior was good anyway. Like bad young children in a good home, they behaved pretty well despite themselves.
But in order to develop spiritually, they needed to incarnate, and then their innate badness came out as their agency became apparent.
Our capacity, and God's capacity, to influence the disposition of a bad person is less than often supposed. A person with a bad heart may be influenced to behave well, but the heart stays bad - unless there is change From Within.
The special evil of the Modern West may be due to the nature of the people incarnated. A high proportion of people with bad hearts. Most bad people just are that way, and always have been, from eternity.
They are hostile to creation, hostile to Gods hopes and plans, hostile to Love... Motivated be pride, resentment and spite. In general, they are self centred and hedonically motivated.
The root of this, is that basic materialism, reductionism, cynicism etc which is characteristic of Modern Man. Such shallow hedonism is innate, because premortal.
The only possible cure for such a deep rooted evil is to allow it to be very fully implemented, in its full insanity, incoherence, destruction and inversion. At the individual level and at the group level.
We are mostly hard cases.We are like the Alcoholics Anonymous who must reach rock bottom, by our own choices, before we can repent and be born-again.
That is what is going on here and now, and has been building for several generations. Our best and only collective hope, is to follow and experience the consequences of our evil natures - and to be denied any external help so that we can only be saved from an inner renewal.
We must change our own natures, must find our real selves, must be born again from the divine in each of us.
We are not being guided or cushioned from our own wicked natures by real churches or good social institutions. Instead they are corrupt and evil, and they encourage our own corruption and evil.
Nowadays we cannot merely exchange one form of external guidance for another. We cannot leave a bad job or atheism for a good job and a real church - because all jobs are/ tending evil and all churches are/ tending corrupting.
As innately wicked spirits, we have the chance to be born again in this mortal life, but only by this toughest of tough loves. And only by developing what God most wants us to develop, which is our own inner, divine, intuitive guidance and motivation.
These are the factors that account for the special aspects of our time. This is God's creation, and has been well designed; the Modern West is fit for purpose - and that purpose is to offer the best chance to some of the most intractably evil spirits ever seen.
In premortal life there were many whose agency was not aligned with creation, who were opposed to creation. But as premortal spirits living in proximity to the divine, their behavior was good anyway. Like bad young children in a good home, they behaved pretty well despite themselves.
But in order to develop spiritually, they needed to incarnate, and then their innate badness came out as their agency became apparent.
Our capacity, and God's capacity, to influence the disposition of a bad person is less than often supposed. A person with a bad heart may be influenced to behave well, but the heart stays bad - unless there is change From Within.
The special evil of the Modern West may be due to the nature of the people incarnated. A high proportion of people with bad hearts. Most bad people just are that way, and always have been, from eternity.
They are hostile to creation, hostile to Gods hopes and plans, hostile to Love... Motivated be pride, resentment and spite. In general, they are self centred and hedonically motivated.
The root of this, is that basic materialism, reductionism, cynicism etc which is characteristic of Modern Man. Such shallow hedonism is innate, because premortal.
The only possible cure for such a deep rooted evil is to allow it to be very fully implemented, in its full insanity, incoherence, destruction and inversion. At the individual level and at the group level.
We are mostly hard cases.We are like the Alcoholics Anonymous who must reach rock bottom, by our own choices, before we can repent and be born-again.
That is what is going on here and now, and has been building for several generations. Our best and only collective hope, is to follow and experience the consequences of our evil natures - and to be denied any external help so that we can only be saved from an inner renewal.
We must change our own natures, must find our real selves, must be born again from the divine in each of us.
We are not being guided or cushioned from our own wicked natures by real churches or good social institutions. Instead they are corrupt and evil, and they encourage our own corruption and evil.
Nowadays we cannot merely exchange one form of external guidance for another. We cannot leave a bad job or atheism for a good job and a real church - because all jobs are/ tending evil and all churches are/ tending corrupting.
As innately wicked spirits, we have the chance to be born again in this mortal life, but only by this toughest of tough loves. And only by developing what God most wants us to develop, which is our own inner, divine, intuitive guidance and motivation.
These are the factors that account for the special aspects of our time. This is God's creation, and has been well designed; the Modern West is fit for purpose - and that purpose is to offer the best chance to some of the most intractably evil spirits ever seen.
Tuesday 9 April 2019
The path of romanticism
Perhaps the Romantic impulse has been dominant in my life, since adolescence. For most people this is a phase, or else they stick with their first conviction. For me it has been lifelong, and unstoppable.
Consequently, I invariably trend towards becoming a minority of one, since that is the natural consequence of the individual, inner driven Romantic temperament.
I have, several times tried to draw a line and stay within a group identity, but it is impossible. Intuition always drives me on, because it is self-evident. Hence intuition undermines every other type of evidence.
The movement is always towards beliefs that are all self-evident and intuitive, and whose coherence is also self-evident and intuitive.
By such means I now realise that Christianity is the inevitable - because the only coherent and real and permanent and fully-gratifying - terminus of Romanticism.
But it is very unlikely that you will agree.
Consequently, I invariably trend towards becoming a minority of one, since that is the natural consequence of the individual, inner driven Romantic temperament.
I have, several times tried to draw a line and stay within a group identity, but it is impossible. Intuition always drives me on, because it is self-evident. Hence intuition undermines every other type of evidence.
The movement is always towards beliefs that are all self-evident and intuitive, and whose coherence is also self-evident and intuitive.
By such means I now realise that Christianity is the inevitable - because the only coherent and real and permanent and fully-gratifying - terminus of Romanticism.
But it is very unlikely that you will agree.
Sunday 7 April 2019
Notice: Albion Awakening goes dormant
William Wildblood and I have decided to stop blogging at Abion Awakening, unless or until we believe that there is some sign of a spiritual awakening in England. We shall be continuing at our personal blogs, aiming to work at an individual level; but as of now, neither of us see any realistic prospect of any national or other large scale revival. Quite the opposite...
Saturday 6 April 2019
Jesus gave Men the possibility to become gods
What did Jesus do? The Fourth Gospel tells us that he came to bring Life Everlasting, Eternal Life if we are Born Again, so this lies beyond death.
Also that Jesus enabled Men to become Sons of God.
Also that Jesus ´baptised´with the Holy Ghost, in contrast to John who baptised with water.
What does all this mean?
If we understand repentance to mean a change of thinking, a new way of thinking, then we could see John´s baptism as a ritual transformation (an initiation) by which Men received correct knowledge and understanding - but (signified by water) knowledge subject to mortal life, and only knowledge but not a change in possibility.
The ´baptism´of Jesus was the change he brought-about in Men´s condition - a permanent, objective change in Men´s thinking, because it was a permanent, objective change in Man´s state.
In other words, Jesus enabled Men to become divine, to become gods - this being the meaning of Sons of God´ - these are lowercase-g gods, like Jesus himself - Men who have become divine.
Therefore to receive Life Eternal or Everlasting means to become divine, because only the divine is ever-lasting, only the divine is eternal. Life Eternal or Everlasting is thus a poetic term, a kenning or trope, meaning divine, the term for being a god.
It is the change from being a mortal Man to a Son of God.
The Baptist could not offer this, but only knowledge of it (of water), but Jesus brought the reality for those who chose to believe-on him (baptism of the Holy Ghost, of the ascended Jesus).
So the message of the Fourth Gospel is that Men can become Gods by following Jesus. Jesus was a Man who became a god, and we can do the same by following him (as sheep follow the Good Shepherd) - from mortal life, through death, to divinity as gods.
To do this, we must love (have faith in, trust) Jesus, then he will show us the way.
Also that Jesus enabled Men to become Sons of God.
Also that Jesus ´baptised´with the Holy Ghost, in contrast to John who baptised with water.
What does all this mean?
If we understand repentance to mean a change of thinking, a new way of thinking, then we could see John´s baptism as a ritual transformation (an initiation) by which Men received correct knowledge and understanding - but (signified by water) knowledge subject to mortal life, and only knowledge but not a change in possibility.
The ´baptism´of Jesus was the change he brought-about in Men´s condition - a permanent, objective change in Men´s thinking, because it was a permanent, objective change in Man´s state.
In other words, Jesus enabled Men to become divine, to become gods - this being the meaning of Sons of God´ - these are lowercase-g gods, like Jesus himself - Men who have become divine.
Therefore to receive Life Eternal or Everlasting means to become divine, because only the divine is ever-lasting, only the divine is eternal. Life Eternal or Everlasting is thus a poetic term, a kenning or trope, meaning divine, the term for being a god.
It is the change from being a mortal Man to a Son of God.
The Baptist could not offer this, but only knowledge of it (of water), but Jesus brought the reality for those who chose to believe-on him (baptism of the Holy Ghost, of the ascended Jesus).
So the message of the Fourth Gospel is that Men can become Gods by following Jesus. Jesus was a Man who became a god, and we can do the same by following him (as sheep follow the Good Shepherd) - from mortal life, through death, to divinity as gods.
To do this, we must love (have faith in, trust) Jesus, then he will show us the way.
Friday 5 April 2019
Career advice
I have had more than a few people ask me for career advice over the years; but I have never been able to be much help, I don't think. I can think of many reasons why such a person should Not do such a job, but almost never can I give any positive advice, because I can seldom think of any job worth doing.
Most of my career I was 'an academic' - paid by a university to do some combination of teaching, research and scholarship. Initially this suited me very well. The university ethos was natural and spontaneous to me, I had very positive feelings about the institution and my subject(s); and the actual job offered greater freedom than any other I knew.
The situation combined hope, potential and a fair degree of actual encouragement. And I was good at it. This was fortunate, because I don't know what else I was fitted to get paid-for in life, other than be some kind of academic.
By the time I retired from ill health; the institution and therefore the job had utterly transformed to the point that I was in constant danger of being sacked.
If I had complied fully with expectations, even from twenty years ago, academia would have been as unfree as any ordinary bureaucratic or office job. My chronic non-compliance had gone from being tolerated (even grudgingly respected as an assertion of principle) to impossible.
That process took about thirty years - and over the past thirty years all jobs that I know of, of every kind, in all institutions, have undergone a similar trend. Pretty much all middle class jobs are now qualitatively the same - they are bureaucratic, under omni-surveillance and micro-managed - indeed all jobs are parts of the same, linked system of Global administration.
Everyone is - mostly - a managed-manager; and the distinctive element of the jobs is shrinking and becoming more routine, standard, procedural.
There used to be a fair bit of active resistance to this trend, but now there is none. Even passive heel-dragging inertial negativity is negligible.
So choice of career does not much matter, beyond counsels of expediency.
If you are seriously interested in anything other than being a manager, then don't expect to do it at work; do it as a hobby.
Indeed, it is better Not to try and make a job from your passion - from that which deeply-motivates you. Because then it will almost-certainly be corrupted into generic, externally-managed units.
It has been sad to watch this corruption happen to pretty much everybody in academia, mostly sooner rather than later; and if you try to get paid for doing what you love, then the same will almost certainly happen to you.
Most of my career I was 'an academic' - paid by a university to do some combination of teaching, research and scholarship. Initially this suited me very well. The university ethos was natural and spontaneous to me, I had very positive feelings about the institution and my subject(s); and the actual job offered greater freedom than any other I knew.
The situation combined hope, potential and a fair degree of actual encouragement. And I was good at it. This was fortunate, because I don't know what else I was fitted to get paid-for in life, other than be some kind of academic.
By the time I retired from ill health; the institution and therefore the job had utterly transformed to the point that I was in constant danger of being sacked.
If I had complied fully with expectations, even from twenty years ago, academia would have been as unfree as any ordinary bureaucratic or office job. My chronic non-compliance had gone from being tolerated (even grudgingly respected as an assertion of principle) to impossible.
That process took about thirty years - and over the past thirty years all jobs that I know of, of every kind, in all institutions, have undergone a similar trend. Pretty much all middle class jobs are now qualitatively the same - they are bureaucratic, under omni-surveillance and micro-managed - indeed all jobs are parts of the same, linked system of Global administration.
Everyone is - mostly - a managed-manager; and the distinctive element of the jobs is shrinking and becoming more routine, standard, procedural.
There used to be a fair bit of active resistance to this trend, but now there is none. Even passive heel-dragging inertial negativity is negligible.
So choice of career does not much matter, beyond counsels of expediency.
If you are seriously interested in anything other than being a manager, then don't expect to do it at work; do it as a hobby.
Indeed, it is better Not to try and make a job from your passion - from that which deeply-motivates you. Because then it will almost-certainly be corrupted into generic, externally-managed units.
It has been sad to watch this corruption happen to pretty much everybody in academia, mostly sooner rather than later; and if you try to get paid for doing what you love, then the same will almost certainly happen to you.
Thursday 4 April 2019
For fans of Valentin Tomberg
Valentin Tomberg was one of the greatest Christian mystics of the Twentieth Century. He moved from Russian Orthodoxy, through Anthroposophy to the Roman Catholic Church. He wrote in a strange mode that I find partly compelling (and certainly authentic), but also off-putting due to its highly systematised symbolism and numerology.
Anyway, people regularly keep writing to me and recommending him - so presumably some of this blog's readers are strong admirers. If so, you will want to be aware that William James Tychonievich (the Grand Old Man of commenters at this blog) in part-way-through his own card-by-card analysis of the Tarot - in the spirit of Tomberg's Meditations on the Tarot.
William has always been an outstanding, but frustratingly infrequent, blogger; however the good news is that he is attempting to blog several times per week from now.
Please visit and encourage him in this endeavour by leaving comments!
Anyway, people regularly keep writing to me and recommending him - so presumably some of this blog's readers are strong admirers. If so, you will want to be aware that William James Tychonievich (the Grand Old Man of commenters at this blog) in part-way-through his own card-by-card analysis of the Tarot - in the spirit of Tomberg's Meditations on the Tarot.
William has always been an outstanding, but frustratingly infrequent, blogger; however the good news is that he is attempting to blog several times per week from now.
Please visit and encourage him in this endeavour by leaving comments!
Metaphysical basics
First
there were Beings, Thinking. That is how things were, from always.
Then there was Love.
Love's origin is the primal love of our Heavenly Parents (Father and Mother, Male and Female), which initiates Creation.
Then there was Creation.
Creation is the Thinking of Beings.
Love is the metaphysical principle of cohesion that is fundamental to creation: it is the background, the basis of Creation; because with Love, Creation is harmonised, coordinated, mutually-reinforcing.
Then there was Love.
Love's origin is the primal love of our Heavenly Parents (Father and Mother, Male and Female), which initiates Creation.
Then there was Creation.
Creation is the Thinking of Beings.
Love is the metaphysical principle of cohesion that is fundamental to creation: it is the background, the basis of Creation; because with Love, Creation is harmonised, coordinated, mutually-reinforcing.
Wednesday 3 April 2019
In this Ahrimanic age, Christianity should eschew doubling-down on Ahrimanic responses to the threat of mainstream materialism
I have found a modified version of Rudolf Steiner's schema that evil can be distinguished in two forms - Ahrimanic and Luciferic - to be a valuable tool.
The Luciferic is (roughly) the impulsive, instinctive, self-gratifying, psychopathic kind of evil - as characterised by the frenzied violence and torture of unbridled war; or the greedy lustfulness that drives the sexual revolution. This tended to be the dominant form of evil in ancient times - and of course it still continues.
But that does not capture the modern form of evil - which may originate in this kind of 'id'-driven thirst for instant gratification; but which takes this and operationalises it in the form of definitions, laws, regulations, and bureaucracy - enforced by omni-surveillance and micro-control mechanisms. This is the Ahrimanic - a cold, rational, systematic form of evil.
In other words, the distinctive and dominant form of evil of this time, of modern times, is totalitarian. The Ahrimanic is the totalitarian, bureaucratic, strategic...
It is the evil of a whole society organised in pursuit of evil that has been pre-defined as Good. It may be an evil without pleasure; evil as an industrial process - a crushing, icy evil. The modern sexual revolution is presided-over, guided, implemented - not by passion crazed Caligulas - but by stony-eyed officials.
The problem is that almost all the real and serious Christian denominations and churches (I mean the best churches - not those that are liberal, apostate, vaguely-Christianised-leftist organisations) still seem to regard evil as Luciferic; and respond to its threat (or try to respond) by doubling-down on the Ahrimanic aspects of Christianity.
For example, the sexual revolution is seen by Christians as primarily about the Luciferic - to be opposed by better organisation. Whereas the real problem is not the work of lust-crazed individuals seeking pleasure; but the Ahrimanic, incremental, planned strategy of a vast army of drab, cold-eyed, strategising bureaucrats; armed with United Nations mission statements, European Union laws, International consensus definitions, guidelines, terms-of-service, models of best practice etc etc.
All too often the Christian response to the sexual revolution has been along exactly the same lines as the totalitarian bureacrats. An increase in planning, systems, supervision; a greater number and precision of rules; tougher enforcement - and so forth.
This is to fight ice with more ice; to fight Sauron with the One Ring. Such a Christianity presents the individual with what looks like nothing more than a choice of rival bureaucracies - one powerful and growing, the other small and collapsing. A choice of two would-be totalitarian monitoring and control systems. Both alienate, both are evil in form.
One can either be crushed by secular materialism, or crushed by religious practices...
The answer to the dominant Ahrimanic evil cannot be merely a different version of the same. Nor can it be a version of old-fashioned Luciferism; which is, anyway, an impossibility...
The middle sixties saw a massive cultural upsurge in the Luciferic (turn-on, tune-in, drop out - let it all hang out etc.) and that would-be explosion of the id and the instinct, merely fuelled decades of ever-expanding and further-encroaching bureaucracy. Nowadays, the Luciferic 'liberation' serves merely as an excuse for ever-more Ahrimanic constraint.
If evil comes from some combination of the domination of the Genital urges (Luciferic), and the raionalism of the 'Left Brain' (Ahrimanic) - what is needed is the Heart. And that is something new, something untried - but something profoundly Christian.
What Christianity needs cannot be captured in any formula or rule (that is just more Ahrimanic stuff) - in a totalitarian age we cannot expect to protect Christianity, or even to be Christian, by adhering to any principle of truth, or any flow-diagram of validity.
Nor can we fall into the trap of regarding anything other than the systematic as Luciferic, hence evil. There is a third way - the way of Jesus - and that is the only Good way.
We must acknowledge the individual person in relation with God to be the fundamental unit of truth, beauty and virtue. This has been said many times before - but never done. A religion of the heart must be rooted in persons, not abstractions; because only persons can love - yet love is objective, the primary basis of all creation, the heart of Christ's teaching.
The Luciferic is (roughly) the impulsive, instinctive, self-gratifying, psychopathic kind of evil - as characterised by the frenzied violence and torture of unbridled war; or the greedy lustfulness that drives the sexual revolution. This tended to be the dominant form of evil in ancient times - and of course it still continues.
But that does not capture the modern form of evil - which may originate in this kind of 'id'-driven thirst for instant gratification; but which takes this and operationalises it in the form of definitions, laws, regulations, and bureaucracy - enforced by omni-surveillance and micro-control mechanisms. This is the Ahrimanic - a cold, rational, systematic form of evil.
In other words, the distinctive and dominant form of evil of this time, of modern times, is totalitarian. The Ahrimanic is the totalitarian, bureaucratic, strategic...
It is the evil of a whole society organised in pursuit of evil that has been pre-defined as Good. It may be an evil without pleasure; evil as an industrial process - a crushing, icy evil. The modern sexual revolution is presided-over, guided, implemented - not by passion crazed Caligulas - but by stony-eyed officials.
The problem is that almost all the real and serious Christian denominations and churches (I mean the best churches - not those that are liberal, apostate, vaguely-Christianised-leftist organisations) still seem to regard evil as Luciferic; and respond to its threat (or try to respond) by doubling-down on the Ahrimanic aspects of Christianity.
For example, the sexual revolution is seen by Christians as primarily about the Luciferic - to be opposed by better organisation. Whereas the real problem is not the work of lust-crazed individuals seeking pleasure; but the Ahrimanic, incremental, planned strategy of a vast army of drab, cold-eyed, strategising bureaucrats; armed with United Nations mission statements, European Union laws, International consensus definitions, guidelines, terms-of-service, models of best practice etc etc.
All too often the Christian response to the sexual revolution has been along exactly the same lines as the totalitarian bureacrats. An increase in planning, systems, supervision; a greater number and precision of rules; tougher enforcement - and so forth.
This is to fight ice with more ice; to fight Sauron with the One Ring. Such a Christianity presents the individual with what looks like nothing more than a choice of rival bureaucracies - one powerful and growing, the other small and collapsing. A choice of two would-be totalitarian monitoring and control systems. Both alienate, both are evil in form.
One can either be crushed by secular materialism, or crushed by religious practices...
The answer to the dominant Ahrimanic evil cannot be merely a different version of the same. Nor can it be a version of old-fashioned Luciferism; which is, anyway, an impossibility...
The middle sixties saw a massive cultural upsurge in the Luciferic (turn-on, tune-in, drop out - let it all hang out etc.) and that would-be explosion of the id and the instinct, merely fuelled decades of ever-expanding and further-encroaching bureaucracy. Nowadays, the Luciferic 'liberation' serves merely as an excuse for ever-more Ahrimanic constraint.
If evil comes from some combination of the domination of the Genital urges (Luciferic), and the raionalism of the 'Left Brain' (Ahrimanic) - what is needed is the Heart. And that is something new, something untried - but something profoundly Christian.
What Christianity needs cannot be captured in any formula or rule (that is just more Ahrimanic stuff) - in a totalitarian age we cannot expect to protect Christianity, or even to be Christian, by adhering to any principle of truth, or any flow-diagram of validity.
Nor can we fall into the trap of regarding anything other than the systematic as Luciferic, hence evil. There is a third way - the way of Jesus - and that is the only Good way.
We must acknowledge the individual person in relation with God to be the fundamental unit of truth, beauty and virtue. This has been said many times before - but never done. A religion of the heart must be rooted in persons, not abstractions; because only persons can love - yet love is objective, the primary basis of all creation, the heart of Christ's teaching.
Sehnsucht/ Joy may be the guidance of the Holy Ghost
Jesus tells the disciples that the Holy Ghost can teach them everything they need to know - (e.g. John 14: 26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father
will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to
your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.)
This, indeed, is exactly the kind of arrangement that one would expect from a loving God for his children. God would not rely upon merely human arrangements for transmission of vital knowledge.
God would (surely?) ensure that each person had a direct, independent, individual knowledge of the necessities.
The Holy Ghost is equivalent to Jesus: either is Jesus himself (as I believe) or some other conceptualisation of relation; but however explained, the Holy Ghost will bring whatever is necessary to our remembrance, into our thoughts.
But not necessarily under the name of Jesus of the Holy Ghost - perhaps not identified or perhaps misidentified.
Yet the quality of the knowledge is its own evidence - the knowledge has the quality of being self-validating: from our depths we know it is true.
Of course, anyone who has tried will know that it is not easy to receive such knowledge - there are distractions, there are evil motivations, false knowledge, demonic deception... all kinds of obstacles stand in the path.
Yet we are made to know the validity of that which is valid - this 'discerning' capacity is inbuilt, like a divine instinct. We each can - if we will it - discern Good from evil - and indeed if this was not so, then salvation would not be possible for all Men; at best it would be down to the sheer chance of what specific putative knowledge we happened to be exposed-to.
We are able to 'hear' and respond to the Holy Ghost because we are the Children of God, with potential to become gods. When that which is divine in us meets with Jesus in the Holy Ghost; then we can have direct 'access' to sufficient knowledge to live and learn.
Of course, someone who does not know the name or historical identity of Jesus will experience the personal relationship with the Holy Ghost in some other way. And Modern Man who excludes all possibility of the divine or even spiritual, will experience contact with the Holy Ghost in some reduced and 'psychological' way.
Nonetheless, the experience of contact with the Holy Ghost is universal - although individuals vary widely in the intensity and frequency of experience.
One way the necessary knowledge may be experienced is by the Romantic feeling that the Germans dubbed Sehnsucht. This is what CS Lewis termed Joy; and it is that quality of yearning or longing which people may experience from a story, phrase, picture, landscape, poem or encounter with a person or situation.
Sehnsucht is, characteristically, a product of human Imagination; and probably the 'modern' human imagination of the past (?) 250 years especially and increasingly. We imagine some-thing which we then desire to be in, to be part-of - we seek directness: seek to be immersed-in and aware-of and active-doing - all at once.
It is not just found in adults; but in children too (Lewis reported his first experiences during young childhood) - and is sometimes the underlying reason for our deepest , most personal and idiosyncratic likes and preferences, our hobbies and vocations - Lewis's lifelong passion for Northern-ness was triggered and revealed by an apparently innocuous sentence from Longfellow's translation of Tegner's Drapa: Balder the Beautiful is dead, is dead.
An example of Sehnsucht from my experience: In reading about Lothlorien in The Lord of the Rings; I felt a (physical) sense of pulling at my heart, of wanting something about that situation in a more-than-literal way... What I wanted was imprecise, indeed was is hard to imagine the want being satisfied by any imaginable circumstance - but the feeling itself was very characteristic.
(I discuss Sehnsucht and Tolkien in more detail in this essay.)
Such Sehnsucht may be (externally) the Holy Ghost wordlessly sharing - mind to mind, person to person - a partial and distorted picture-knowledge of Heaven; and our-divine-selves responding (internally) with a feeling of yearning to participate in Heaven.
And this - if accepted and valued primarily - may be a sufficient basis from the implicit love of Jesus and desire for his gift of Heavenly Life Eternal. After death, we may then recognise, may know, the Good Shepherd who promises to lead us to that longed-for country.
When most of Life is superficial, routine, when we lack engagement and involvement; when nothing in actual mortal Life truly gratifies us - then Sehnsucht may be a sufficient signpost and motivation to follow Jesus through death into life everlasting.
This, indeed, is exactly the kind of arrangement that one would expect from a loving God for his children. God would not rely upon merely human arrangements for transmission of vital knowledge.
God would (surely?) ensure that each person had a direct, independent, individual knowledge of the necessities.
The Holy Ghost is equivalent to Jesus: either is Jesus himself (as I believe) or some other conceptualisation of relation; but however explained, the Holy Ghost will bring whatever is necessary to our remembrance, into our thoughts.
But not necessarily under the name of Jesus of the Holy Ghost - perhaps not identified or perhaps misidentified.
Yet the quality of the knowledge is its own evidence - the knowledge has the quality of being self-validating: from our depths we know it is true.
Of course, anyone who has tried will know that it is not easy to receive such knowledge - there are distractions, there are evil motivations, false knowledge, demonic deception... all kinds of obstacles stand in the path.
Yet we are made to know the validity of that which is valid - this 'discerning' capacity is inbuilt, like a divine instinct. We each can - if we will it - discern Good from evil - and indeed if this was not so, then salvation would not be possible for all Men; at best it would be down to the sheer chance of what specific putative knowledge we happened to be exposed-to.
We are able to 'hear' and respond to the Holy Ghost because we are the Children of God, with potential to become gods. When that which is divine in us meets with Jesus in the Holy Ghost; then we can have direct 'access' to sufficient knowledge to live and learn.
Of course, someone who does not know the name or historical identity of Jesus will experience the personal relationship with the Holy Ghost in some other way. And Modern Man who excludes all possibility of the divine or even spiritual, will experience contact with the Holy Ghost in some reduced and 'psychological' way.
Nonetheless, the experience of contact with the Holy Ghost is universal - although individuals vary widely in the intensity and frequency of experience.
One way the necessary knowledge may be experienced is by the Romantic feeling that the Germans dubbed Sehnsucht. This is what CS Lewis termed Joy; and it is that quality of yearning or longing which people may experience from a story, phrase, picture, landscape, poem or encounter with a person or situation.
Sehnsucht is, characteristically, a product of human Imagination; and probably the 'modern' human imagination of the past (?) 250 years especially and increasingly. We imagine some-thing which we then desire to be in, to be part-of - we seek directness: seek to be immersed-in and aware-of and active-doing - all at once.
It is not just found in adults; but in children too (Lewis reported his first experiences during young childhood) - and is sometimes the underlying reason for our deepest , most personal and idiosyncratic likes and preferences, our hobbies and vocations - Lewis's lifelong passion for Northern-ness was triggered and revealed by an apparently innocuous sentence from Longfellow's translation of Tegner's Drapa: Balder the Beautiful is dead, is dead.
An example of Sehnsucht from my experience: In reading about Lothlorien in The Lord of the Rings; I felt a (physical) sense of pulling at my heart, of wanting something about that situation in a more-than-literal way... What I wanted was imprecise, indeed was is hard to imagine the want being satisfied by any imaginable circumstance - but the feeling itself was very characteristic.
(I discuss Sehnsucht and Tolkien in more detail in this essay.)
Such Sehnsucht may be (externally) the Holy Ghost wordlessly sharing - mind to mind, person to person - a partial and distorted picture-knowledge of Heaven; and our-divine-selves responding (internally) with a feeling of yearning to participate in Heaven.
And this - if accepted and valued primarily - may be a sufficient basis from the implicit love of Jesus and desire for his gift of Heavenly Life Eternal. After death, we may then recognise, may know, the Good Shepherd who promises to lead us to that longed-for country.
When most of Life is superficial, routine, when we lack engagement and involvement; when nothing in actual mortal Life truly gratifies us - then Sehnsucht may be a sufficient signpost and motivation to follow Jesus through death into life everlasting.
Tuesday 2 April 2019
How can Christianity be personal? A significant problem with Christianity
The problem is that - as usually presented - Christianity is historical. Jesus was someone who lived a long time ago, and we are supposed to learn 'about' him from historical sources (mostly the New testament).
The most important thing is apparently that Jesus a left a set of instructions about how to live, and prohibitions about what not to do - but in a scattered and somewhat confusing form. And again, can we really be sure that all this information is correctly recorded, and the we have understood it correctly?
Can we be sure enough to gamble everything upon the accuracy of what we know?
All this stuff is very remote in time and space, and apparently very tenuous (as is natural for any kind of history, any kind of law, philosophy or other discipline) - really, it is all much too uncertain to pin all of one's hopes on; too uncertain to be the basis for a transformation of life...
Thus one side of the Christian tradition - and one that seems pretty dominant. But there is another side to the story.
Jesus is alive, he is active in the world. And Jesus is personal - we can have an actual, here and now relationship - whoever we are, wherever we are. And this Jesus is concerned with each of us as a specific and unique individual.
According to this other side, in principle, Jesus need not be historical; we need not rely upon the accuracy of the test and our understanding of the text; because there is an active, current, relationship between him and you, me, anybody.
Presumably, by this relationship, Jesus can 'tell' us (in some way which cannot be misunderstood) anything and everything that we need to know.
But for this to happen requires that we have a perspective on life (more exactly, a set of metaphysical assumptions) in which this putative relationship with Jesus is coherent, possible, sufficiently-plausible such that we could seek, recognise, and respond to the personal relationship that he (supposedly) offers.
It is the lack of this perspective, and resistance to it; that so effectively blocks so many people from Christianity.
The most important thing is apparently that Jesus a left a set of instructions about how to live, and prohibitions about what not to do - but in a scattered and somewhat confusing form. And again, can we really be sure that all this information is correctly recorded, and the we have understood it correctly?
Can we be sure enough to gamble everything upon the accuracy of what we know?
All this stuff is very remote in time and space, and apparently very tenuous (as is natural for any kind of history, any kind of law, philosophy or other discipline) - really, it is all much too uncertain to pin all of one's hopes on; too uncertain to be the basis for a transformation of life...
Thus one side of the Christian tradition - and one that seems pretty dominant. But there is another side to the story.
Jesus is alive, he is active in the world. And Jesus is personal - we can have an actual, here and now relationship - whoever we are, wherever we are. And this Jesus is concerned with each of us as a specific and unique individual.
According to this other side, in principle, Jesus need not be historical; we need not rely upon the accuracy of the test and our understanding of the text; because there is an active, current, relationship between him and you, me, anybody.
Presumably, by this relationship, Jesus can 'tell' us (in some way which cannot be misunderstood) anything and everything that we need to know.
But for this to happen requires that we have a perspective on life (more exactly, a set of metaphysical assumptions) in which this putative relationship with Jesus is coherent, possible, sufficiently-plausible such that we could seek, recognise, and respond to the personal relationship that he (supposedly) offers.
It is the lack of this perspective, and resistance to it; that so effectively blocks so many people from Christianity.
Francis Berger celebrates four months of daily blogging
...By discussing his motivations, and the effect that blogging every day has had upon him.
I chime in with congratulations and a comment on why daily is best for bloggers.
I chime in with congratulations and a comment on why daily is best for bloggers.
Exploring in and around Melrose, in the Scottish Borders
The dot at the peak is my wife (click to enlarge), having triumphantly ascended Middle Eildon while I was poking around looking for Merlin
A short account of this visit is at the Ancient Northumbria blog.
On first viewing the Star Wars prequels (The Phantom Menace, 1999; Attack of the Clones, 2002; and Revenge of the Sith, 2005)
I had avoided these movies because I heard they were not very good - but last week I decided to give them a try after watching Keri Ford's video which mentions them.*
My overall impression is that the Star Wars prequels are worth watching, as an honest and good hearted endeavor. In terms of quality, they start badly, and get better - until Revenge of the Sith is a very good movie - with some outstanding world-building and action sequences.
But it is hard to exaggerate how embarrassingly inept The Phantom Menace can be! - considering it is a big budget movie by an experienced director. At times it looks and sounds like a cheap, daytime soap opera; and its plot is clunky and misconceived. At a basic level - in terms of script, directing and editing - it fails to communicate the story clearly. TPM takes considerable determination to wade-through...
What you do get from these prequel movies is, as I said, seriousness of intent and some nobility of vision. This is worth a lot; and stands in contrast to the recent Disney efforts which (aside from Rogue One - which was very good) are aiming to be no-more-than entertaining froth at best; but at worst are often calculatedly subversive of the depiction of Goodness that is an underlying motivation for these movies.
(I did not really appreciate this aspect in my previous Star Wars reviews. My opinion has been changed by re-watching all of the six early movies (1977-2005) in the past month. In early reviews, I considered the Disney additions simply as stand-alone movies - here, in contrast, as putative contributions to Lucas's Star Wars subcreation, his world building; which I now understand and appreciate better than before.)
The prequel is honest, heroic, takes risks, makes mistakes, demonstrates limited competence in the craft of movie-making - but (more importantly) is on the side of Goodness; in stark contrast with being rooted-in an attitude of cynical, or sniggering, subversion of the original Trilogy.
In the end, the Revenge of the Sith comes through with some moving moments; and a significant understanding of the nature of evil and the corruption of a good-but-flawed man; contrasted, as it must be, with depictions of Goodness maintained in the face of similar temptations, and despite errors of judgment.
* Keri comments at my Inklings blog; and intermittently produces rambling, strongly New Zealandish, strangely-compelling videos on all kinds of subjects including Owen Barfield - which is how I discovered him.
My overall impression is that the Star Wars prequels are worth watching, as an honest and good hearted endeavor. In terms of quality, they start badly, and get better - until Revenge of the Sith is a very good movie - with some outstanding world-building and action sequences.
But it is hard to exaggerate how embarrassingly inept The Phantom Menace can be! - considering it is a big budget movie by an experienced director. At times it looks and sounds like a cheap, daytime soap opera; and its plot is clunky and misconceived. At a basic level - in terms of script, directing and editing - it fails to communicate the story clearly. TPM takes considerable determination to wade-through...
What you do get from these prequel movies is, as I said, seriousness of intent and some nobility of vision. This is worth a lot; and stands in contrast to the recent Disney efforts which (aside from Rogue One - which was very good) are aiming to be no-more-than entertaining froth at best; but at worst are often calculatedly subversive of the depiction of Goodness that is an underlying motivation for these movies.
(I did not really appreciate this aspect in my previous Star Wars reviews. My opinion has been changed by re-watching all of the six early movies (1977-2005) in the past month. In early reviews, I considered the Disney additions simply as stand-alone movies - here, in contrast, as putative contributions to Lucas's Star Wars subcreation, his world building; which I now understand and appreciate better than before.)
The prequel is honest, heroic, takes risks, makes mistakes, demonstrates limited competence in the craft of movie-making - but (more importantly) is on the side of Goodness; in stark contrast with being rooted-in an attitude of cynical, or sniggering, subversion of the original Trilogy.
In the end, the Revenge of the Sith comes through with some moving moments; and a significant understanding of the nature of evil and the corruption of a good-but-flawed man; contrasted, as it must be, with depictions of Goodness maintained in the face of similar temptations, and despite errors of judgment.
* Keri comments at my Inklings blog; and intermittently produces rambling, strongly New Zealandish, strangely-compelling videos on all kinds of subjects including Owen Barfield - which is how I discovered him.
Monday 1 April 2019
What does the prependerance of over-promoted middle managers in leadership positions tell us?
The Three Ms of middle managerial mediocrity
The so-called Leaders of (nearly) all Western nations are not leaders at all - but over-promoted middle managers; and this also applies to most major churches, the most famous universities, multinational industrial and media corporations, a multitude of schools, government departments...
Indeed, nowadays, almost everyone in charge of almost every type of major social institution is intrinsically incompetent.
By why? Considering that these people are constitutionally incapable of doing their jobs - why do they keep getting appointed - increasingly and in all situations?
An over-promoted middle manager lacks leadership qualities; and is capable only of following instructions. And that is the clue to why such people are appointed.
The presence of a middle managerial mediocrity in a senior leadership position that they cannot possibly fill - no matter hard they might try, indicates that those who made the appointment wanted to be sure that the individual would do what s/he was told.
It confirms the truth of what 'conspiracy theorists' tell us; which is that the pseudo-leaders of the West are just a fake facade; and the real power, influence, decision-making - the real 'leadership' - lies hidden and behind the scenes.
A further, and synergistic, aspect is that real leaders are never abundant - and are found at an even lower proportion among the affirmative action groups that are favoured and privileged in the West.
And this provides a perfect excuse for placing incompetent but compliant bureaucratic drones into positions that need leaders - or would need leaders if the objective was to optimise social functioning; rather than to create a totalitarian system of universal surveillance and micro-control; to spread and amplify an environment of fear, resentment and despair.
In that sense, middle managerial mediocrities are doing a great job!
We should not seek certainty, but instead do-the-right-thing
In a world where we ought to develop - like a child develops to an adolescent then an adult - the primary importance is not to be certain about some total-truth of things.
Because, how could a child be certain about anything, when he is not yet developed? If, indeed, the child was certain about something - he would almost-certainly be mistaken.
And if we believe that we are ourselves divine and capable of communion with the Holy Ghost; that our destiny is to become more divine, to become Children of God and siblings of Jesus Christ; then this state of non-certainty will continue after biological death.
And if our God is believed to be an open-ended, learning God; whose capacity increases (forever) in response to the growing divine creativity of his Children - then uncertainty is a permanent condition - indeed a desirable condition.
What this reveals is that the quest for certainty is a delusion; an ill-formed question; a self-refuting activity - it makes no sense.
The thing is - we are at present dual beings. Before we were conscious, we were unified - living from instincts and unconsciously; but as our self-awareness developed as an alternative 'self' it took-over as the centre of our being.
So modern Man is a conscious self and a divine self; and our problem is that division.
Our destined future is again to be a divine self- but consciously so. However, since we are located-in consciousness, we begin our quest for re-unification in consciousness - and therefore this future must be consciously-chosen.
The conscious self must yield-up its supremacy, and voluntarily subordinate itself to the divine self - and despite that the conscious self can never know the 'inner-workings' of the divine self; because the divine self is a primary cause (an uncaused-cause), hence a unity and unanalysable.
Our future state of restored integration with our-selves (and The World) is therefore one in which we cause to make conscious choices! - except for the choice to follow the guidance of god-in-us. We will know what we do, but we will not, and cannot know, why we do it.
The conscious self can, if it wishes, model the divine self and make hypothesis why the divine self says such a thing. But any model is selective, simplified and ultimately false; so the conscious self can never be in a position to disprove the divine self - even though the divine self is always incomplete, and with potential to develop further; to become more divine, more comprehensive...
So, instead of seeking certainty of knowledge; we ought to seek always and at all times to think and do The Right Thing in any specific situation. We should seek to live consciously and by choice according to the dictates of the divine self; which will (in communion with the Holy Ghost) guide us to do the right thing in any specific situation, in light of our personal development and circumstances.
We cannot know for certain any particular chunk of knowledge; but we can be certain about what is the right thing for us to do, here and now.
Because, how could a child be certain about anything, when he is not yet developed? If, indeed, the child was certain about something - he would almost-certainly be mistaken.
And if we believe that we are ourselves divine and capable of communion with the Holy Ghost; that our destiny is to become more divine, to become Children of God and siblings of Jesus Christ; then this state of non-certainty will continue after biological death.
And if our God is believed to be an open-ended, learning God; whose capacity increases (forever) in response to the growing divine creativity of his Children - then uncertainty is a permanent condition - indeed a desirable condition.
What this reveals is that the quest for certainty is a delusion; an ill-formed question; a self-refuting activity - it makes no sense.
The thing is - we are at present dual beings. Before we were conscious, we were unified - living from instincts and unconsciously; but as our self-awareness developed as an alternative 'self' it took-over as the centre of our being.
So modern Man is a conscious self and a divine self; and our problem is that division.
Our destined future is again to be a divine self- but consciously so. However, since we are located-in consciousness, we begin our quest for re-unification in consciousness - and therefore this future must be consciously-chosen.
The conscious self must yield-up its supremacy, and voluntarily subordinate itself to the divine self - and despite that the conscious self can never know the 'inner-workings' of the divine self; because the divine self is a primary cause (an uncaused-cause), hence a unity and unanalysable.
Our future state of restored integration with our-selves (and The World) is therefore one in which we cause to make conscious choices! - except for the choice to follow the guidance of god-in-us. We will know what we do, but we will not, and cannot know, why we do it.
The conscious self can, if it wishes, model the divine self and make hypothesis why the divine self says such a thing. But any model is selective, simplified and ultimately false; so the conscious self can never be in a position to disprove the divine self - even though the divine self is always incomplete, and with potential to develop further; to become more divine, more comprehensive...
So, instead of seeking certainty of knowledge; we ought to seek always and at all times to think and do The Right Thing in any specific situation. We should seek to live consciously and by choice according to the dictates of the divine self; which will (in communion with the Holy Ghost) guide us to do the right thing in any specific situation, in light of our personal development and circumstances.
We cannot know for certain any particular chunk of knowledge; but we can be certain about what is the right thing for us to do, here and now.
Why don't we notice contradictions? What is it about us that is insane?
In a comment at The Politically Incorrect Australian, I wrote:
I believe that it is our deep assumptions that are insane, not the surface 'facts'.
(This is actually the way that delusional psychosis mostly works - although there may also be false observations, i.e. hallucinations. Most of the false ideas come from how shared-common data are interpreted.)
So it is the false assumption that groups of men, women, Europeans, African Americans all have 100% identical intelligence ('g') and personality traits; so that people then assume that any and all facts of different accomplishment 'must' be due to irrational prejudice and discrimination (even if that p&d is pretty much invisible).
Even with Anthropogenic CO2-driven global warming; the underlying problem is the false assumptions that 'scientists' can 1. predict and 2. control global climate - when there isn't a shred of a reason to assume that either of these are true (and, in contrast, a zillion reasons to believe that we 1. do not know what will be the future of earth's climate, and 2. could not control it if we did).
So, the problem is much deeper than 'noticing' - because our false/ incoherent assumptions mean even when people do notice, it makes no difference to their understanding.
The Major Issues we are fed by the mass-social media are indeed a distraction; but with nearly all the population plugged-in and addicted 24/7; any specific distractions are overwhelmed by the sheer vast torrent of 'stuff' that takes precedence over our own personal experiences and common sense reasoning.
The root of this is denial of God/ the spiritual realm. (I don't specifically mean Christian - I mean the denial of any divine or immmaterial aspect to life.)
This works at a 'biological' level to destroy our evolved psychological adaptations - in other words we fail to reproduce.
The first generation of godless nihilists functioned OK, because they were brought-up religious; but from then onwards - and as the buffering effect of older generations died-out - the Western Populations have gone deeper and deeper into insanity.
With the gods eliminated, lack any core to our belief systems. Modern beliefs are, consequently, just labile collections of evanescent urges.
We evolved to function with this divine core, without it we are maladaptive - and, of course, all Western populations are going extinct everywhere - amidst abundance, without predators, and with little premature death - going extinct by 'choice'.
On top of this; we do not notice and cannot recognise existantial threats such as Globalist totalitarianism, forcible open-ended mass immigration, or strategic functional destruction of institutions (by universal convergence onto an ever-expanding and contradictory class/ race/ sex/ sexuality agenda).
We are a terminally mentally-sick society; and the root of our sickness is atheism, god-denial, materialism... call it what you will. If we don't 'cure' that, then nothing else matters.
I believe that it is our deep assumptions that are insane, not the surface 'facts'.
(This is actually the way that delusional psychosis mostly works - although there may also be false observations, i.e. hallucinations. Most of the false ideas come from how shared-common data are interpreted.)
So it is the false assumption that groups of men, women, Europeans, African Americans all have 100% identical intelligence ('g') and personality traits; so that people then assume that any and all facts of different accomplishment 'must' be due to irrational prejudice and discrimination (even if that p&d is pretty much invisible).
Even with Anthropogenic CO2-driven global warming; the underlying problem is the false assumptions that 'scientists' can 1. predict and 2. control global climate - when there isn't a shred of a reason to assume that either of these are true (and, in contrast, a zillion reasons to believe that we 1. do not know what will be the future of earth's climate, and 2. could not control it if we did).
So, the problem is much deeper than 'noticing' - because our false/ incoherent assumptions mean even when people do notice, it makes no difference to their understanding.
The Major Issues we are fed by the mass-social media are indeed a distraction; but with nearly all the population plugged-in and addicted 24/7; any specific distractions are overwhelmed by the sheer vast torrent of 'stuff' that takes precedence over our own personal experiences and common sense reasoning.
The root of this is denial of God/ the spiritual realm. (I don't specifically mean Christian - I mean the denial of any divine or immmaterial aspect to life.)
This works at a 'biological' level to destroy our evolved psychological adaptations - in other words we fail to reproduce.
The first generation of godless nihilists functioned OK, because they were brought-up religious; but from then onwards - and as the buffering effect of older generations died-out - the Western Populations have gone deeper and deeper into insanity.
With the gods eliminated, lack any core to our belief systems. Modern beliefs are, consequently, just labile collections of evanescent urges.
We evolved to function with this divine core, without it we are maladaptive - and, of course, all Western populations are going extinct everywhere - amidst abundance, without predators, and with little premature death - going extinct by 'choice'.
On top of this; we do not notice and cannot recognise existantial threats such as Globalist totalitarianism, forcible open-ended mass immigration, or strategic functional destruction of institutions (by universal convergence onto an ever-expanding and contradictory class/ race/ sex/ sexuality agenda).
We are a terminally mentally-sick society; and the root of our sickness is atheism, god-denial, materialism... call it what you will. If we don't 'cure' that, then nothing else matters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)