The reductio ad absurdum is our last ditch defence against evil

We inhabit a world where - on the one hand - Men have, en masse, rejected god/s and eliminated the divine from core consideration and thus become genuinely insane: unable to perceive, think, reason and learn...

And on the other hand; this is a world where all the major social institutions - politics and government at all levels, the mass media, law, major churches, the military and police, education and science, health services... A world where all the major institutions have taken the side of darkness in the spiritual war...

In such a world of both inner passivity-incoherence and outer evil; how does anybody ever awaken to God and the Good; to truth, beauty and virtue? 

It would seem impossible to escape - given that Men are corrupted both within and without. 

Well, there is an escape - but of course it must be recognized and chosen. 

The escape becomes possible when someone's life reaches a reductio ad absurdum: by which I mean, the situation when a person finds-himself thinking, saying or doing something so monstrously wrong that he shocks and awakens himself. 

This shocking and awakening moment has happened to me, more than once; and on a particular occasion which made me recognize that my entire (atheistic) morality must-be evil - since it had led to this situation. 

There was a moment when I realized that if I can think this is right and proper, based-on and derived-from my moral principles; then my moral principles are revealed as rotten - therefore wrong. 

If I was not to be evil, I needed urgently to understand and reject the moral assumptions that led to the immorality of that reductio ad absurdum. 

It seems obvious that many people have gone beyond this point - and that our society as a whole has gone beyond this point. 

As a clear example: when a society has developed explicit and official moral principles that lead to coercively taking children from their loving natural parents and into the institutional horrors of state custody; in order that the children can be poisoned with hormones and surgically-mutilated; in order to enforce a delusion and pretense that they have thereby 'changed sex'... then that society has reached such an extreme stage of depravity that even the grossest and vilest reductio ad absurdum cannot any longer be recognized. 

At an individual level, the success of Alcoholics Anonymous often derives from an individual reaching such a point of personal degradation from drinking, that he wakens-up to the fact that his own rationalizations for drinking are absurd, that he is 'an alcoholic' who cannot deal-with alcohol; and stopping drinking must become the focus of his effort. 

The reductio has awakened him to the need to extract himself from his life as an alcoholic. 

To be effective, this entails not only explicit recognition and repentance; but having a higher reason to stop drinking: in a word God. Alcoholics Anonymous is built from the insight that the alcoholic will not change his life unless there is a higher and stronger motivation than the attainment of short-term pleasure (or the alleviation of short-term suffering). 

In other words, the reductio moment must be followed by a conversion experience. 

And if it is not - then insight will simply lead to despair, or will negate itself with a return to the old patterns. 

The capacity to experience a reductio ad absurdum and to respond by conversion is therefore is a test for save-ability, a test of whether a person is doomed to damnation - or can extract himself from from the downward vortex into self-chosen hell. 

The reductio relies-upon both a residual capacity for moral revulsion And a residual desire for meaning, purpose and coherence that can only come from a life based-around the reality of god/s. 

But when a person (an institution, a nation, a world...) finds himself thinking, saying or doing something monstrous derived-from what he supposes to be true-assumptions and correct-principles - yet having arrived he does not recognize he has arrived at a reductio ad absurdum...

Well, then he is beyond saving...

 

That point, for many individuals - and for all institutions, nations and the world - was reached in 2020. From 2020 the world itself is a reductio ad absurdum. Either one recognizes the fact... or not.  

Self-mistrust is a root of modern Man's evil-subservient gullibility - Christianity the indispensable way-out from it

We are at a profoundly maladaptive stage in the degenerative pathology of modern consciousness; that is to say the Consciousness Soul - in which we experience our-selves as cut-off from the world and other people. 

The subjective experience of the self now regards itself as a meaningless epiphenomenon, a free-spinning cog; with no access to reality, and no validity to its thoughts. 

Therefore, people do not trust their own thinking, do not even trust their own powers of observation and reasoning. They doubt (to the point of paralysis) any conclusions that they may themselves reach - even about the simplest and most obvious of matters. 

Yet people need to live - so lacking anything from-within (anything that they will believe, or can motivate them); they must by default respond to external guidance. 

Consequently, modern people (especially women) have become almost wholly passive and dependent-upon external inputs of facts and values; which mostly come via mass and social media, and from 'official' institutional sources. 

Women are most prone to this passivity and gullibility, since their evolved disposition is to rely on the peer group for life-guidance; and for motivating their behaviour.  

(Or in practice they rely upon whatever modern simulacrum psychologically most-approximates the ancestral peer group: i.e. mass/ social media and the official consensus of those with power) 

The desire to fit-in to the norms of this perceived peer group is very powerful - and when people are lacking any more powerful inner motivation it is overwhelming, irresistible; and people become incapable of learning from experience. 

And as men have become much more behaviourally-feminized (apparently from many contributing reasons); men too have become increasingly helpless against their own perceived (but actually Establishment-manufactured) peer group motivations.  

Consider the birdemic, or any other of the Big Lies such as climate change, antiracism or the sexual revolution. There is, in the first place, no reason At All to believe the mass Media, the official bureaucracy, the corporate PR, the international or national politicians - since they are known to be incompetent and have bad incentives. 

On top of that; they are known habitual and extreme, grossly inconsistent and incoherent in their statements, and show zero capacity to evaluate the consequences of their policies or learn from experience. 

Further; they have now all-but prevented (made impossible, punishable, illegal) all public dissent from the dishonest, manipulative gibberish they spout...

Yet the mass of the public cannot see this, cannot comprehend it, will not think about it, will not question it - and have shown an open-ended and apparently infinite capacity for zealous credulity. The masses regard whatever happen-to-be today's facts and theories as 100% good, true, vital and necessary. 

What this means is that the typical, majority, modern Man ignores that which he knows from his own experience and by his own reasoning (which he believes to be worthless); and therefore, necessarily, thinks and does whatever the dominant external sources tell him to think and do - without limit and regardless of changes and contradictions in this external input. 

This is exactly what we see everywhere around us in the world today. 

It is therefore completely ineffective, therefore futile, to explain and show modern Man the arbitrary, dishonest, and inconsistent behaviour of the Global Establishment/ officialdom and the mass media - because that is an appeal to his own motivation to think, discern, reason and act upon the outcome. So, modern Man will believe powerful external authority regardless...

There is an answer; but it is religious and metaphysical. Modern Man must consciously choose (because that is what the Consciousness Soul requires) to believe in God; and specifically believe-in the Good creator God of Christianity, who is our divine Father - we his children...

And from this modern Man must come to understand and believe that his own thinking is potentially valid: and that his own best discernment of truth is the best possible motivation for life. 

The best motivation - because he is a child of God, who shares in the divine; and the best because his loving God will provide specific and individual guidance for his life. 

Only then can modern Man come to see-for-himself, think-for-himself, and learn from his experiences; and become sufficiently motivated to over-ride the external, pervasive, evil-seeking programming from the Global Establishment.  

Good and bad reasons for Christians to 'ignore' politics.

The good reason is that all politics is corrupt, and that thinking about politics is a deceptive distraction from what Christians ought to be doing. 

This is a perfectly reasonable and sensible motivation - although the consequences are pretty extreme - and include striving for silence and zero opinion on socio-political matters. 

It would mean genuinely-ignoring the mainstream official and media information and interpretations on life; and there are not many people I know of who actually do that (instead, they either accept or reject - but don't ignore). 

The bad reason for 'ignoring' politics is when Christians fail one or more of the 2020-21 Litmus Tests, and want to create wriggle-room by which they can continue to support Leftist causes. 

This is bad, because it is dishonest. Such a person is actually just pretending to ignore politics, covertly; so that they can continue to support the globally-dominant, institutionally-pervasive side of Leftism in the spiritual war - in one or more favoured respects. 

(And as of 2021; Leftism is, in actuality, on the side of purposive evil - Leftism, of course, includes All of the mainstream political parties and groups. And there is No 'political Right' in the West - only Christians (and the majority of self-identified "Christians" are fake - being covert Leftists). The non-Christian or atheist "Right" are merely a species of Leftism - as is becoming ever clearer with each passing week; as they sell-out and take-the-ticket, en masse.) 

The covert-Leftism motivation is bad for at least three reasons: because it is a failure or refusal to make necessary discernments; because it is dishonestly putting socio-politics above Christianity - while pretending to do the opposite; and simply because Leftism (in its many, and mutating, manifestations) is the primary strategy of Satan.  

Note added: Deciding whether someone is motivated by a genuine desire to ignore politics in order to concentrate on Christianity; or is covertly Leftist and is pretending to ignore politics in order to follow the mainstream in some (anti-Christian) respect - is, of course, a matter of judgment. And judgment is based on inference about another person's state of mind, and therefore may be wrong. Yet, judging others is both inevitable and necessary for Christians; and we must act upon our judgments. (No need, then, for Christians to feel guilty or to be evasive about judgment!) Also, we must discern and judge so often in modern life that we cannot afford to be hesitant, conflicted or squeamish about the matter; but on the contrary should strive to be swift, light-hearted and decisive in our judging of others. However, we must also be open to the possibility of our own error, and prepared to repent and revise our judgments in light of further experience.  

What to do? Magic! (i.e. adding my individual creativity to the divine creative work)

Kevin McCall has taken a recent post from this blog, and extended the argument to conclude "Magic, or Bust!" (You need to read that post to see what he, and I, mean by 'magic'.)

So McCall argues that 'white magic' is, or ought to be, one aimed-at goal in these times. Indeed, I cannot think of any more-valuable and more deeply-satisfying thing someone can do than this. 

Valuable because it is a contribution to God's ongoing work of creation; satisfying because that which we contribute is from our unique individuality (exactly which, nobody-else could contribute). 

But how to do it? It is clear that good magic ("white magic") cannot nowadays be done as it was in the past. The modern consciousness has become almost completely cut-off from the divine if there is reliance upon spontaneous and unconscious mechanisms. Also cut-off from the consciousness of other-Men for old methods of aligning our will with the divine. So modern Man experiences himself as alone in a meaningless universe. 

To regain and experience 'participation' in both consciousness and that of other Men; Modern Man needs to attain this in a conscious and chosen fashion, in thinking (i.e. the state of Owen Barfield's Final Participation). 

If this is the "Magic" we need to seek; the how do we seek it? Given that any attempt to compel Magic by will-power can only be ineffective, or lead to 'black' magic. 

Well, first of all we need to be able to 'detect' Magic when it is happening - and when it is not. We need to learn that discernment in ourselves. Simply by knowing and valuing Magic, we will tend to increase its intensity, duration and frequency - as contrasted with someone who does not value Magic who will be more likely to think or do something that dissipates the state. 

Then we can learn in a negative sense what states of mind and conditions are hostile to magic. For most of us that will be situations of distraction, hyper-stimulation, rigidly constrained circumstances (like bureaucracy and form-filling), and passive states of impaired consciousness (including intoxication). 

In general, modern Man tends to seek passive forms of consciousness; seeks to be overwhelmed by external stimuli (such as media inputs; novel or highly-stimulating situations) - but if attained, this blocks any possibility of White Magic. 

Eventually we might learn the kind of activity and situation that is conducive to the sought-after Magical consciousness. McCall mentions art, prayer and meditation - and of course these terms are very broad in themselves. But also there are particular places, 'hobbies', activities (such as walking) - even certain times of day. 

Circumstances will never be causal, but may be conducive - yet even what is conducive will change through time due (for example) to habituation, changing specific situations, and changes in personality - including illness. 

Therefore what helps in attaining the Final Participation state of Magic needs to be discovered for each person; and probably rediscovered as what once worked well, loses its effectiveness. 

 

This is a world where all political activity in opposition to the Satanic Global Establishment is increasingly illegal or impossible. We can interpret this as a further encouragement to do what we, anyway, ought to be doing - which is to stop seeking political Answers to the evil of these times; and instead to focus on a Romantic and Christian response of purposive, individual, spiritual activity.  

The Answer (whatever it is) is neither simple nor straightforward; but to be effective, would need to be massively disruptive

Everyone is pointing-at this broken world - Everyone is doing it including the Global Establishment who actually broke it and who make sure it keeps breaking! 

This is a neat trick practiced by those on the side of evil and against God: David Icke calls it Problem-Reaction-Solution - 'They' create a problem, use Their control of bureaucracies and media to evoke a massive social reaction, then impose Their fake-solution - their 'answer' (for which the problem and reaction were in truth just an excuse). 

That, pretty much, summarizes the entirety of local/ national/ international 'government' here and now. 

But if the answers of the Global Establishment are evil-seeking, then what is is the Real Answer to the problems we see everywhere? 

It is only a partial Answer is that we should stop creating fake-problems and exaggerating them. Even if this was done, there remain many serious problems in the world. 

Even if this was a world of Peace, Prosperity and Comfort, then the real problems would remain unaddressed - because that is merely 'materialism' and leaves-out the spiritual and the divine. 

A 'PPC'-world would still be (and this is the main problem) a world of misery, degeneration, disease and death; and without the spiritual and divine it must be a world of alienation; a purposeless world of of meaninglessness, and transient illusion. 

There can be no material answer to spiritual and religious problems - and this fact used to be widely understood, as recently as the middle 1970s it was mainstream. 

But in context of rapid Christian apostasy, and the materialism and bureaucracy of existent Christianity; this led to a futile hope of salvation in environmentalism, the arts, and utopian social arrangements. 

When (by the late 1970s, early 1980s) it became obvious that these hopes had failed, the West refocused on materialism with a new zeal. 

The difficulty is that (as of 2021) people are apparently no longer capable of discerning what are the real problems, and indeed incapable of basic common sense reasoning. 

The mass of Men are now, by strict definitions, insane - living (by choice) in a manipulated world of delusional abstractions, and aggressively unwilling to awaken or to think. 

From such Men as we have become; we can expect No effective and Good social or political Answers. 

This means that (here and now) we cannot even imagine what the right Answers would be. 

But we can recognize that our problems run so deep - into Men's very thought-processes, their basic assumptions about reality, their deep habits and reflexes - that any effective answer must be extremely 'radical': must cut very deep, at the roots. 

And therefore than the real, true and Good answer to the broken world must be massively disruptive. 

Massive disruption really seems unavoidable. The Global Establishment is telling-us, explicitly, that our lives already have been and will continue to be transformed in ways that are indeed staggeringly radical and disruptive. 

The genuine choice is then between a massive disruption led by the powers of evil and aiming at evil; and one that is a consequence of the spiritual and religious Christian transformation of Men - who will then (only after such a positive transformation) develop a strong and courageous commitment to the side of God. 

What would happen then (after spiritual and religious transformation) cannot be predicted; certainly it cannot be planned - because the Answer is not political. 

Politics will only lead us down, further towards that hell-on-earth envisaged, planned, implemented and already well-advanced by the Global Establishment. 

Our actual situation and what we need to do are therefore very clear and very simple. 

What is neither clear nor simple is to predict what will happen as a consequence... that is not only unknown but unknowable. 

We are therefore required (if we wish to avoid hell-on-earth - which evaluation seems rare) to step into the future with courage, hope and love - sustained only by faith.     

Since (from where we now are) this worldly consequences are certain to be adverse; such a faith must be other-wordly (post-mortal) - based upon knowledge of the resurrected life to come from following Jesus. 

And this we will not get from any of the main 'Christian' churches as they Now are, but must develop - substantially each for himself; from our own resources and direct divine guidance. 

This is absolutely possible and attainable for every individual - but only if he wants it. 

And there is the problem. Someone who wants salvation can be helped to attain it by many and effective means - but for the masses who do not want the gift of resurrected eternal life in Heaven... nothing can be done. 

WmJas Tychonievich has a new Fourth Gospel blog

Readers may know of my special regard for the Fourth Gospel (called 'John' in the Bible) - which I regard as an eyewitness account of the life and teaching of Jesus written by his closest disciple (Lazarus) soon after the ascension. 

Some of my key convictions have been developed over recent years in interaction with William James Tychonievich, who has a similar but non-identical understanding of this greatest of all books. WmJas brings particular and distinctive skills and knowledge to the task of understanding. 

William has now made a new blog where he has collected his scattered analyses and explications of the Fourth Gospel - if you don't already know it, I recommend you take a look.  

How Bad Politics kills Christianity

Supposing you believe you are a Christian, but just fail just one of the 2020 Litmus Tests - for example the commonest failure, which is the birdemic? 

(But an analogous argument applies to all the other Tests, mutatis mutandis.)

But surely (you say) if I self-identify as a Christian, and I want to stay a Christian - why shouldn't I be able to do this? Surely Christianity is one thing and politics is another thing?

Well, in an abstract, reductionist and theoretical way - yes you can do this; in the sense that it is not rationally-impossible. 

But here and now, as of 2021, you won't do this. If you accept the birdemic narrative, you will not stay Christian. 

Firstly because in believing-in the birdemic, you are believing in The System: you are buying-into the narrative of the Global Establishment, officialdom and the mass media. 

You are passively-accepting your dominant world view from Them. 

Therefore you have already surrendered your conscience and your discernment. 

But even if you somehow manage to negotiate this; the birdemic is tightly-integrated into - is indeed the primary rationale and justification-for, the totalitarian coup of early 2020 and its strategy of Big Lies, omni-surveillance, micro-control; its fake-response of lock-down-social-distancing-masking; its PSYOPS of fuelling compulsory untruthfulness, fear, resentment and despair; its (rotating) single issue mode of thinking where anything and everything can-and-should be sacrificed to the (Establishment defined and propagated) birdemic project. 

Therefore, in actual practice (never mind the abstract logic), if you were a Christian before the birdemic; you will not be a Christian if you fail that Litmus Test. 

You will not be motivated to oppose the permanent prohibition and eradication of all Christian social activities. 

You will not even be able to resist supporting purposive strategic evil in your own mind - since you have placed the choice of following Jesus Christ as a lower priority than the birdemic; you have subordinated Jesus to the Establishment; and the Establishment is evil. ... 

The Establishment is evil in the precise sense of being on the side of Satan against God - indeed, being dominated by Satan and the demons.

(And if you can't perceive this staggeringly obvious and explicit reality - then you are already on the dark side.) 

Hence, by making the wrong political choices, by failing one or more Litmus Tests, you have already made your choice against Him. 

However it may have been in the past or in other places; as of 2021 Bad Politics kills Christianity. 

The definition of virtuosic - Cillian King doing something that ought to be impossible on an Anglo-Concertina

As a sometime squeezebox man (piano accordion and melodeon) - I have been on the lookout for good players over a span of several decades. 

I've seem plenty of remarkable playing, but nothing as remarkable as these two pieces performed by a young Irish folk musician called Cillian King. 

The thing is; his instrument is an Anglo-Concertina, which gives a different note on the push and the pull. This makes it great for some kinds of folk music (since it has a built-in bounce, due to the need to change direction of the bellows so often) - but not for for classical music. 

Furthermore, it is essentially a diatonic instrument designed to play in two major keys (a fifth apart) on two rows of buttons; and various missing 'accidental' notes (needed to play chromatically and in other keys) are distributed in a third row. 

All of which would, I would have thought, made it impossible to pay what this young chap plays below. The fact that he does so with great verve and musical phrasing is a terrific bonus. He actually gets better the long the pieces go on!

First: Moto Perpetuo Opus 11 by Paganini. 

Second: Prelude from Violin Partita No. 3 BWV 1006 by Bach.  

My epitaph?

Of course, it may well be that Christian burials, epitaphs and the like will be gone in the near future; but, given the choice, mine would be:

**

In sorrow we must go, but not in despair. Behold! we are not bound for ever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory.

**

This quote comes from the tale of Aragorn and Arwen, in the Appendices of Lord of the Rings. Coming from an era placed before Jesus, the hope beyond the circles of the world is much less specific than what Christians know as resurrected eternal life in Heaven. 

What these lovely and deep words do, is to balance the fact of sorrow against the hope of better. The one does not negate the other, but both are facts. 

An earlier sentence from Aragorn makes this clear: "I speak no comfort to you, for there is no comfort for such pain within the circles of the world."

The pain of death has no comfort within the circles of the world. Properly understood; the fact of death and its related phenomena of change and loss, pain and disease, degeneration and dying - are unavoidable realities in this world. And if we are bound within the circles of this world, there is no comfort for them - they define the nature of this world in an ultimate sense. 

But... There is comfort beyond the circles of this world, there is a reason for death in that larger context. So we do not despair. 

We are not bound to this world! - but may choose to leave it. 

And there we will find the peace that this-world cannot give; there (and only there) we will find and know the reason for death. 

Ask an abstract question, and you'll get an abstract answer

It has been a problem of theology since the early days of the Christian church; that people ask abstract questions and get abstract answers. 

The problem is that all abstractions are on the one hand 'models' of reality, not reality itself - and consequently they have an unreal and unsatisfying quality about them; so that 'human psychology' remains unsatisfied by abstract explanations, at a deep level*.  

Yet the identity of abstraction is typically un-clear, and the meaning of infinite likewise. So, this is an explanation that does not explain - rather, it layers incomprehension (mystery) upon incomprehension; while apparently explaining. 

What about the power of God? For Christians, God is the creator. Because 'creation' is an abstraction, this, statement invites explanation of what exactly is created - from what? Orthodox theologians say that God creates everything (except God himself) from nothing (termed creation ex nihilo). 

But creation ex nihilo is an assertion of something beyond natural human experience and understanding. Indeed, the concept of a phenomenon of creation ex nihilo seems to have arisen among Greek philosophers, who were abstractly reasoning about ultimate causes. Before this, there was no such concept, and certainly there was no such concept for the ancient tribal Hebrews who wrote the Old Testament. 

Therefore, to explain the abstract property of creation in terms of an abstract ultimate is not to 'explain' but to layer abstractions, and to create intrinsic mystery. If abstraction is regarded as the real-reality, then we get a root un-clarity that becomes definitional; as happened with orthodox Christian theology.

As another example: How great is the power of God? 

Power is an abstraction - and indeed, it is very difficult to provide as satisfactory definition of power. But in trying to explain the scope of God's (undefined) power, the philosopher finds it impossible to conceive of a clear boundary to God's 'power'.

(...Especially if the philosopher is already assuming that God is capable of creation ex nihilo; which seems to suggest that God can make anything thus do anything.) 

So the abstract philosopher then reaches for another abstraction and states that God's 'power' is 'infinite' - i.e. that God is omnipotent. 

This layering of abstractions - which abstractions are then taken as definitional - then creates all sorts of (as I would regard them artifactual) problems. Especially when it comes to explaining the presence of evil in a reality created from nothing by a Christian God axiomatically described as wholly good. 

(In that a wholly-good God, that created everything from nothing, and was of infinite power - would seem to be incapable of creating evil.) 

The apparent conclusion was that there is no evil in reality, that therefore the apparent evil which Men observe must be an illusion... 

And at this point, the philosophers - leaping from abstraction to abstraction, layering one upon another, and taking each abstraction as definitive - have apparently demolished Christianity!  

I am, myself, in search of clarity; and I am not satisfied by explanations that create mystery, and then rationalize mystery on the basis of asserting that ultimates are intrinsically mysterious. 

And, further, rationalize this by asserting than anyone who seeks (or even attains) clarity of understanding is necessarily misguided. 

A clear explanation is then regarded as a false explanation; an over-simplification, an instance of childish, human-sized, perhaps 'anthropomorphic' modelling of reality - on the basis that the philosophers have pre-decided that only abstractions can capture reality.  

For myself, this is an error traceable back to an original prejudice in favour of abstractions; which probably relates to the Platonic assertion that this earthly world of time and change is illusion; and real-reality lies elsewhere in a world of timeless-hence-changeless ideas, of archetypes: that is, a world of abstractions.  

My point here is (as so often!) that we get-out what we put-in, if we start with abstractions, we will end with abstractions; and noticing that primary (i.e. metaphysical) assumptions structure and dictate reasoning and what counts as 'evidence'. 

I believe that these abstractions are essentially alien to the core of Christianity, and have deformed and distorted Christianity since its early years. 

Christianity was originally common sense, simple and clear; as it was taught, explained and exemplified by Jesus - especially in the most-authoritative source of the Fourth 'John' Gospel; was later picked-up and rapidly, but wrongly, inserted-into a framework of pre-existing, not-Christian, philosophical and abstract modes of explanation. 

This led to all kinds of insoluble paradoxes, which were then explained-away (but not actually explained) by further abstractions; and the paradoxes were dealt with by re-labelling incoherence as mystery. 

It is such factors which led me to trying to understand Christianity is a simple, natural, spontaneous, and (so far as possible) non-abstract way - while accepting that language is itself an abstraction. 

So we can only take the process so far as to point-at a direct and intuitive comprehension in non-linguistic thinking. 

By this, I find that clarity is attained only when regarding reality as consisting of Beings in personal relationships (an 'animistic' world view); which is therefore the primary assumption of my own metaphysics.     

*Wittgenstein seems to have noticed this problem with his early (Tractatus) philosophy, and tried to resist it in his late (Philosophical Investigations) philosophy - but without much success!

The owl in the night, age five - memories of residual Original Participation

I have again been thinking-over a clear childhood memory, from approximately age five; about awakening in the night and hearing an owl in the woods. 

This was related to having recently made the move from Devon to Somerset, and finding the new place bigger, stranger and with more unknowns - one of which were the woods visible across the fields and above the house opposite. These seemed large and mysterious, and contained strange noisy creatures such as peacocks cries, donkeys braying and (at night) Tawny Owls hooting and screeching.

I have a very clear picture of being awake in the depth of night, the house silent, and terrified by the repeated calls of an owl. I could not block out the sound - even hearing it through a pillow wrapped around my head and under the blankets. 

In desperation I would utter 'prayers' that were more like spells; multiply-repeated pleading for my safety, as if God was a malevolent tyrant who could (sometimes) be mollified (temporarily) by sufficiently exaggerated and abject grovelling...

But the most significant aspect of this memory is that it captures the residue of Original Participation - that passive, immersive, spiritual way of being that characterizes the youngest children - and the earliest stages of man's cultural development (as nomadic hunter-gatherers).

It is not full Original Participation, because my 'self' was somewhat separate; but the main context was that I felt myself immersed on a spiritual communication with all significant beings in my world. 

The owl out there in the woods, and myself in my bed, were directly aware each of the other - our minds open to each-other - and in a way that could not be blocked.

I knew that the owl knew all about me; including that I was scared, where I was; and the owl knew that what I most feared was that the owl would be perched on the window sill, outside the closed curtains, staring at me through the fabric and waiting for me to get out of bed and pull open the curtains. 

And I feared that I would not be able to resist doing so!

When I consider my earliest childhood memories I am struck by how relatively few of them concern people, human beings; and how many are - like the owl incident - about other Beings - including places. 

I had a personal, mutually mind-reading, relationship with places and 'things': I knew them, they knew me - and I knew that my own fears would be known to Them and would attract exactly what I most feared*.

I took for granted as a basic assumption that the world was alive, had consciousness and intent. 

But also vice versa. At other times I knew that all would be well and all manner of things would be well, because I was immersed-in the sentient world, and therefore - as part of that world - I knew when things would be well. 

I knew that my Mother and Father loved me and would protect me against... every possible threat; I knew this because I knew 'everything' that was relevant to me, all possible threats.

I also knew that, therefore, I was my own worst enemy. There was evil intent in the world, I was protected; but if I was to invite evil then I was vulnerable, and my greatest fear was that I would bring-down the evil upon myself. 

The fear that I might, in a moment of insane weakness or absent-mindedness, go to the window and draw back the curtains and see that owl, sitting and waiting for me. 

 

*Another incident from the same era was when I confronted my fear of the boys outside toilets. The reason for being afraid was obvious - they were located in a dark, smelly and very grimy shed. The urinal was simply a tiled wall with a drain, about seven feet tall, and with a high 'ventilation' gap leading over to the mysterious unknown that was the girl's toilets block. When we went to the toilets as a group of boys, we could laugh in its face; but that only made things worse when I had to go alone into it, as happened one morning during a lesson. But if only I could show the place I was not frightened, then it would not get me. (I took for granted that the toilet was a bully who would pick on the weakest.) So I did this by emulating the big boys, and peeing as high up the wall of the urinal as possible - trying to reach the ventilation gap and spray it over onto the girl's side. Unfortunately, I lost control of things, leaned-back beyond the vertical, and ended-up by showering my-self... This was, of course, deeply humiliating and a source of great amusement for the toilet. From then onward I was a beaten Man, the toilet knew I was a beaten Man; and I became afraid to enter the toilets alone - whatever the consequences (which, of course had the usual, predictable, result...). 

The last leader has gone - what now?

It now seems that the 'moment' has passed, and President Trump's courage failed at the last. 

But I feel grateful for what was done by DT to expose the depth and breadth of evil, in those weeks after the election, and while his courage survived. Very few Men would have done as much. 

And, in consequence, I believe that many tens of millions in the USA had their eyes opened and their hearts convinced of an important reality, during that time. 

A leader can march on ahead, intending to inspire and en-courage support - but unless supporters fall-in behind, then he will simply be walking to his doom. 

If too many hang-back from joining the march - then the leader will look around and find himself isolated inside enemy territory. 

And if DT's courage failed - then, more importantly, so did the courage of the mass of American-dwelling people and of many more people around the world. 

These have failed to take personal responsibility even seriously to consider the vast evidence of vast fraud. They would not look evil in the face when evil was so Big and so very Bad. They would not sustain the Man who tried to hard, for so long, to expose the lies. 

Theirs is a far greater and more significant failure than that of a leader who did not see-things-through.

Others would not discern and act to recognize and support (spiritually) a leader who had bravely risen to respond to perhaps the largest and most blatant evil-motivated conspiracy in history. Too many people feared to 'make a fool of themselves' by backing a flawed leader; they hung-back mistrustfully, waited to see how things turned-out. 

Too many feared to back a losing cause; feared to end-up on the losing side. They lapsed into an affected world-weary cynicism. 

And, of course, by so doing (and by communicating their view and arguing for it) they made defeat certain; passively aided the triumph of evil; and now find themselves arguing that the triumph of evil was maybe, 'for the best', after all... 

In other words, those who failed to discern the spiritual dimension of Trump's weeks-long refusal to submit to fraud; excusing themselves by dishonestly affecting an unworldly detachment (while nonetheless holding and expressing political opinions); have - by their lack of spiritual courage - themselves taken steps towards surrender-to, and embrace-of, the dominant global evil agenda.  

I seem to sense there will be no more leaders: Trump was the last. 

We now know that the world does not want to be rescued from the clutches of Satan; and when a chance comes to follow a leader away from those clutches, the world (for many and various reasons) chose not to follow. Chose indeed to ignore, mock and fight their would-be liberator. 

So now Christians are now each alone, without a real church, and opposed by all the institutions of the world and all the leadership-class (among whom there are no longer any 'leaders'); and this fact must be faced. 

And must means must, because if reality is not faced, but is eluded and denied, then we will fall ever-deeper into evil - by following fake-leaders who serve evil. 

One against the world sounds like impossible odds, but that would be nonsense given that we all are (if we choose - albeit few do so choose) eternal beings; already children of God the creator (ourselves creating-gods in part, and in miniature).

So, "one against the world" actually means One Immortal God against a world of temporary and squabbling, spiteful little devils. 

They can certainly make life nasty, while we inhabit Their territory - but They cannot win unless we choose to allow them to win. 

We are all equipped (if we seek it - a Big 'if') with inner divine guidance, and with the possibility of guidance from the Holy Ghost. 

God creates our lives (you life, mine, everybody's), moment-by-moment; such that there are always possibilities for choosing salvation, and for learning from life's experiences in ways that will be of everlasting benefit. 

This has not changed and will not change - except for those who choose to change it for them-selves.  

The world did not take what was probably the last chance of triggering a counter-revolution against the successful 2020 Satanic coup. 

We are now living in Satan's world, staffed by Satan's willing and devoted servants, and it is exceedingly unlikely that anyone with significant power or influence is again going to try and help us in the slightest degree. 

By rejecting Trump we have made any further optimistic developments much less likely. Even if such a person arises again, he will be a lesser Man, with fewer possibilities, in a more-corrupt world. He will be even-more ignored, ridiculed and opposed than was DT. 

OK, fine; life just got a lot simpler, a lot clearer. 

Since group strategy is off-the-map, we need not consider it further. 

We can legitimately concentrate, and thereby increase the strength of, our scope of activity and aspiration; and the measure of our success will be directly apparent to our-selves.

 

Death and the Dead: the proper work of old age

This is aimed mainly at the elderly among my readership. 

Who are the old? It is approximately the last quarter of life when a Man is 'old'. Since the natural human lifespan is about 70 years, then the last quarter commences at about age 53. 

So, if you are that age or older you just-are Old, and ought to acknowledge the fact because there is work to be done!

What kind of work? If he is wise - a Man's thoughts will (and should) begin to turn towards death. Death is the work. 

The nature of 'work' in old age is provided-for by our natural disposition, and by the waning of other concerns and capacities. Modern people see old age in terms of loss of abilities (and appearance). 

This is because biological ageing does not generate any genuine 'compensatory' increase in other abilities - so the phenomenon seems wholly negative. 

So much for biology... It is  when we include the spiritual as our focus that we can see 'compensatory phenomena'. 

What old age brings is not capabilities but possibilities. There is a spontaneous tendency for a change in patterns of activity, sleep, and interests that are suited to the tasks of old age. 

These tasks are, broadly, a coming to terms with mortal (finite) human life, and the implications for the nature and meaning of death. 

This is why older people are spontaneously interested by the past - especially their own past, and by those who are dead. These natural changes provide clues to the spiritual task of the old. 

I get the impression that very few of today's old people are engaged in these proper and necessary tasks; essentially because they have decided that death will be an end for them and everyone, an annihilation. 

(Probably this is why modern old people are (in general) such a vain, foolish, and selfish bunch of parasites - as revealed so graphically by their terrified, hysterical and resentful response to the birdemic fraud.)

But if we instead assume that death is a transformation, we can begin to work on the nature and implications of that transformation...

The implications for our-selves, for those who have already died (the 'so-called dead', as Rudolf Steiner called them), and for those who love who will (at some point) face that transformation. 

That is (or should be) the primary work of the elderly. And, unlike many activities, it is something that the old are naturally equipped and inclined to do.  

Of course, this work cannot and should not be the whole of life; any more than going-to-school, playing, finding-a-spouse, raising kids, or making-a-living, or any other single activity can be the whole of life in earlier years. 

But it is something we ought to be doing in old age - and if we aren't doing it, then we will almost certainly experience old age as a net-negative phenomenon, a life-phase of overall-loss - and respond with an escalatingly desperate and delusional clinging to the activities and appearances of youth. 

Tolkien nods again - the dwarves are biologically not viable

"Dis" (Fili and Kili's mother) as imagined by Ancalinar - but I suspect she was (even-) less feminine than this, since Tolkien said dwarf-women were indistinguishable from the men. 

The Dwarves' numbers, although they sometimes flourished, often faced periods of decline, especially in periods of war. The slow increase of their population was due to the rarity of Dwarf-women, who made up only about a third of the total population. Dwarves seldom wedded before the age of ninety or more, and rarely had so many as four children. They took only one husband or wife in their lifetime, and were jealous, as in all matters of their rights. The number of Dwarf-men that married was actually less than half, for not all the Dwarf-women took husbands; some desired none, some wanted one they could not have and would have no other. Many Dwarf-men did not desire marriage because they were absorbed in their work. 

From Tolkien Gateway, summarizing the available 'canonical' information from the Appendices of Lord of the Rings and History of Middle Earth Volume 12.

JRR Tolkien clearly wanted his dwarves to be dedicated to their craft; and not interested in sexual relationships; but he went too far in this and inadvertently made dwarves biologically non-viable. 

He describes the 'slow increase' in their numbers; but from the information given dwarf numbers could not increase at all over the long term, but would inevitably decline - since dwarf fertility was far below the minimum rate needed to replace those who died. 

The fact that dwarf women were only about 1/3 of the population means that each woman would need to replace herself, and two men - plus a margin to account for death before the age of fertility. So minimum replacement fertility would be three-point-something. 

But we are also told that not-all the dwarf-women took husbands (and it is implied they did not reproduce at all) meaning that women were effectively less than 1/3 of the dwarves. 

Therefore each dwarf women who did reproduce would need to have considerably more than three-point-something children. For instance perhaps only 1/4 of the dwarves were women who reproduced - meaning that the minimum replacement level would need to be four-point-something children per dwarf women. 

However, we are told that dwarf-women only rarely had as many as four children; and the tone of the passage suggests that four children was an upper limit and the usual number was considerably less.  

Putting this all together; this means that the dwarves fertility was less than the minimum required to replace those who died.  

There could be a modest increase before the first generation of dwarves began to die out. Their 'average' life expectancy was given as 250 years. However, this number did not take account of premature deaths; and it is described in Tolkien's writings that large numbers of dwarves were slain in battle, through all the ages of the world. 

And Tolkien also says that dwarves married later than 90 years old - so only a couple of new generations could be fitted-in before even the first dwarf generation began to die out (even if only a small proportion of these founders were slain prematurely). 

Pretty obviously this was a mistake of Tolkien's - and he would have wanted to revise it had the problem been pointed-out. 

The simplest solution would be to state that those dwarf women who did have children had enormous families. 

Alternatively, we can imagine a tragic scenario where a large first generation of dwarves was created - but after a couple of hundred years, the race began inexorably to go extinct... 

Nothing has changed - what am I waiting for?

Considering that I keep advocating an explicit dependence on intuition, the 'thinking of the heart' I suppose that I should not be too surprised to discover that despite the evil-accelerating potential of 'recent political events in the USA' - my feeling is that nothing has changed. 

Yet. 

This is not a matter of politics, but of the spirit. We can all choose to participate consciously in the spirit of Man; and I am pretty sure that there has been no change there; and also that grounds for spiritual optimism remain, as before - although I cannot be any more precise about how or why.

In other words, I feel that the window of opportunity for the powers of Good remains open (as of this time of writing). 

God has arranged things through 2020 such that some large number of people have found themselves in the best situation when they may chose to 'awaken'; to recognize evil, to become aware of the reality of Good - and to make a choice. 

(God can lead a Man to the water of life  - but cannot make him drink.)

In addition; I believe (over the past weeks, and largely thanks to ?President DT) significant numbers of people have become clearly aware of the two sides in earth's ongoing spiritual war. 

Significant numbers (I think) have chosen to take the side of God.

This means that henceforth these people will become able to discern the presence and activities of evil - and will reject the moral authority of bureaucracy and the media - and will be able to discern the pervasive evil-directed dishonesty of The System. 

It is hard to keep ahold of the solid fact that a single soul who accepts Jesus's gift of eternal life will outlast all the nations of the earth and the earth itself. 

What is good in this earth is that which is in-harmony-with life everlasting; which enhances and contributes to that eternal world. 

Whatever happens from here; there already has been a great opportunity for Good over recent weeks. 

God, with the aid of some men, has been able to do a lot. 

If most people have failed to grasp that opportunity, but have instead doubled-down on their support for the demons, hardened their hearts, and moved further away from repentance; that is their own responsibility, and the inevitable consequences of actively-rejecting salvation will fall upon them.

It is always thus. 

The more clearly that we are able to perceive Good and evil, the clearer and larger the distinction between them -- the clearer then is the choice between them; and the stronger will be the personal commitment to whatever is chosen. 

Those on the side of Good are now more strongly Good; but also vice versa.   

Why are *so many* people affiliated with evil? (And how can you tell those who are affiliated with good?)

Many serious Christians have noticed that they know of extremely few people, as a proportion - and indeed in absolute numbers - who are Not aligned with evil. 

That is the case whether you accept the broad validity of the Satanic litmus tests as an indicator of spiritual affiliation, or if you simply go by those who accept the truthfulness, virtue and authority of the Global Establishment.

But if it is trivially easy to see that most people of whom you know are on the side of the demons; how can you discern those who are on the side of God, Good and creation? 

Well, for a start, there are several things which do Not work:

It does not work to look at what people say about such matters - evil people lie. Whereas - apparently - in the past it was not possible for demons to speak the name of Jesus or recite the Lord's Prayer - that does not apply now. Demon-servants will spout orthodox theology, and swear on the Bible that lies are true. 

And 'good' behaviour is not a useful discriminator either - indeed most of the most well-behaved (law-abiding, decent, kind) people are very obviously on the wrong side. Conversely, God-affiliated Christians will certainly be sinners - and will know they are sinners; having recognized and repented their sins - although we may not know this. Indeed, it is quite likely that those on the side of God will - in worldly terms - be worse-behaved on average than those against God. 

On the other hand; a serious Good-allied Christian will not consistently deny or advocate sin. Yet he may do so when under duress, from weakness, or in dark moods - since mortal Man is a fragile and changeable being... 

In other words, perhaps nobody is on the side of God 24/7 without any doubts or lapses. But this is not a cause for despair, because the fact was perfectly explicit from the very beginning of Jesus's ministry. And, after all, the core of Christianity is about what happens after we die, rather than in this mortal life; so any mortal life behaviours can only be proxy correlates of that spiritual choice.  

How, then, can a Christian tell an ally from a foe? The answer is: by the intuitive discernment of the heart. 

This works very well (if we let it) in real life personal relationships - where we can infer if this particular person really wants (here and now, at the time of evaluation) to follow Jesus through death to immortal resurrected life in Heaven. 

Such a person may change their mind in the future, such is the nature of human agency - but we can know about Now. 

And when it comes to evaluating people we have not met, who are not in our environment; it is (here and now, in 20201) easy to discern that nearly-all such public figures are evil-affiliated - because they make that fact very clear indeed. 

...And will support each other in their evil - while ganging-up to attack and (in some way) destroy any of their own who make any single or slight statement in support of truth, virtue or beauty. 

Yet those who are thus attacked for 'hate facts' are nonetheless nearly-all themselves unrepentantly evil affiliated - so we cannot use that as a way to identify those aligned with Good.

I personally look for the virtue of courage, as a preliminary way of identifying those who are affiliated with God - in particular self-sacrificing courage - so long as that sacrifice is genuine (and not a media trick, as so often). 

In a world of mass demotivation and cowardice, courage stands-out as being possibly sustained by God - so long as this type of courage can be distinguished from psychopathic-selfish recklessness. 

The greatest courage is, perhaps, the courage to behave (by choice) such as to be humiliated and regarded as a dangerous-fool by those with the most power, wealth, status and influence. The greatest, because this is a genuinely dangerous situation. 

Not much can sustain a person in such a situation except that courage which comes from faith in God and trust in Jesus Christ as saviour; therefore it is unlikely that anyone would place themselves in such a situation unless they were on the side of God. 

 

However, even self-sacrificing courage can be simulated for public consumption; so in the end we must rely on the thinking of the heart - on that intuition which combines our own inner divine nature with the guidance of the Holy Ghost. 

We make a discernment (and this may need to be swift): and then make our commitment. 

We must and will judge; and act on our judgment - and be prepared to repent our judgment if it turns-out to be mistaken. 

But let us not feel crushed or intimidated! 

With light and high hearts - with warm hearts - let us embrace the necessity to discern our allies, make the right choices, and accept the consequences with courage.

(...Whatever those consequences may be; and that, Nobody knows.) 

Fear of 'making a fool of myself' blocks creative thought and true insight: "The cursed conceit o' bein' richt that damns the vast majority o' men"

The fool card from Gareth Knight's Tarot

The great Scottish poet Hugh MacDiarmid wrote a profound phrase in his A Drunk Man Looks at the Thistle when he vowed to avoid "The cursed conceit o' bein' richt that damns the vast majority o' men". 

The dialect bein' richt = being right and you see this 'cursed conceit' everywhere; in real life and on the internet. It is what fuels the evil of cynicism (and cynics make the best bureaucrats, all senior managers are recruited from ex-cynics).

It is also the habit that blocks so many Christian conversions. An atheist feels that people would regard him as stupid, naive, gullible if he was to accept an 'obvious' fairy tale ('flying spaghetti monster') like Christianity. 

Supposing, he thinks, I anm wrong about this? What will happen?

Then everybody will think I am a fool, and nobody will ever 'respect' me again! 

For intellectuals, especially, not being thought a fool seems to be the prime motivator. 

Yet, being prepared to be thought a fool is the basis of genius! 

A genius essentially does not care if 'people' think he is a fool - because his motivations and convictions are inner (and divine). 

Being prepared to be thought a fool is also the basis of sainthood. 

Most real saints were widely regarded as fools (or else frauds) - some even courted the status - but they did not allow that fact to stop them doing what they regarded as most important. 

For anyone publicly to affirm the side of God, Good and creation; of truth, beauty and virtue; of spirit, soul and the supernatural - is (nowadays) to be generally regarded as a fool (as well as evil). 

We should not be deterred by the fear of making a fool of ourselves in the eyes of Men - otherwise we have already joined the other-side. 

Nearly everybody I respect as being on the right side in the spiritual war is, or would be, regarded as a fool by most. 

All truth-seekers and truth-speakers must (here, now, 2021) be prepared to make fools of themselves: this is not an option. 

Conversely those who regulate their behaviour so as Not to be regarded as fools (and who advise others to regulate their behaviour likewise) are - by that fact - self-destined for damnation.

"Artificial Intelligence" and "Sustainable" technologies are just money laundering

Untold trillions of dollars are being extracted from tax-payers and poured-into projects that claim to be developing forms of AI (Artificial Intelligence) such as driverless cars and robotics; and 'sustainable' technologies such as bicycle lanes, wind turbines (subsidy-generating mills) and solar panels.

None of them work. None ever will work. They are not intended to work.  

From an engineering perspective these are futile non-solutions to non-problems; and there is nothing more that needs to be said. Don't be duped into arguing the technologies: they are not serious - they are not even intended to work. 

But the real function is to create sufficiently-plausible excuses for channeling massive resources into Establishment funds. (Some small proportion being invested in constructing Potemkin devices illustrated by fake videos pretending to show breakthroughs.)

AI and Green-Tech are merely a rationale for coercive confiscation of enormous amounts of money from productive working people, for use in funding The System. 

'Nuff said.

On tenterhooks...

I feel tense with expectation that we are very near to a crux moment - a moment prepared by destiny. The tension is ramping up and up; in a way that could only happen when the outcome (the direction taken) has not yet been decided. 

As always, the timing of this moment is not knowable - and certainly neither definable nor restrictable by human will. 

The way I think it works; is that God the creator is continually re-making the world (in many tiny details) to push towards a decisive situation - at which point human agency will, as always, decide. 

But that decisive situation is not a pre-decided blueprint - rather it is continually being revised on the basis of human decisions, as they are made. 

On the one hand, God is preparing something thing that is intended to 'put Men on the spot'; and on the other hand, as this 'moment' approaches, human decisions may advance or may retard that moment.

This is why predictions, timings, of decisive moments are never exact and cannot ever be exact; plus, Satanic powers are working to try and delay, blur, keep as brief as possible any 'crucial moment' of clarity and self-knowledge in individual Men's souls. This the situation wavers and sways. 

What I find extraordinarily exhilarating about these days (at the times when I can clear my own mind and rise to this occasion) is the absolute conviction that I personally am involved; that I personally make a difference to what is coming. 

I am a participant, not merely a spectator. 

This is simultaneously a privilege, a necessity and a responsibility - but, on the other hand, I do not find the situation at all difficult to discern. It is terribly obvious which is the side of God, Good and creation - and equally obvious is who is working against the side of Good (and how numerous; how rich, famous and powerful they are). 

The side of evil are out in the open, have taken the field, and are wearing 'uniforms' - displaying identifying armbands (those ideological Litmus Tests) by which they declare themselves: each to the others - and to us.

Although there is a tendency to hold one's breath and to count-down to human-defined deadlines - both are an error. We will know when It Happens - and not before. 

On the plane of self-aware primary human thinking (the thinking of our true and divine self) we need to be active - there is work to be done!. 

And in terms of knowing the moment, when It Happens? - that is something which will be known in our hearts, and not by the clock, nor from being told about it by someone else.      

"Non-judgmentalism" - an anti-Christian ideal; but one where atheistic-leftism joins with Western "oneness" spiritualities

Mainstream modern atheist-leftist discourse has tried (all-too successfully!) to impose non-judgmentalism on Christians - largely by 'proof-texting' with Bible passages, removed from their 'supernaturalist' and salvific context. 

But the truth is that "non-judgmentalism" is a profoundly non-Christian notion; instead it is an anti-Christian - indeed Antichrist - idea, which will first subvert any attempt to lead a Christian life - then ultimately invert Christian values to lead to the ex-Christian actively taking the side of Satan. 

Christians not only can but must judge - as does everybody, all the time - even/ especially those who affect to advocate non-judgmentalism. 

In particular, we must choose either to affiliate-with God, the Good and divine creation and the values of truth, beauty and virtue --- or else (as of 2021, and things having-come to a point) we will (whether passively and unconsciously - or by conscious choice) find-ourselves on the (dominant and pervasive) demonic side, which opposes all of these. 

A neglected aspect of the need for judgment is that those Westerners who advocate an 'Eastern' spirituality of non-judgmental 'oneness' (mostly selectively derived-from Buddhism or Hinduism) have converged-with and joined the mainstream materialistic left-atheists. 

The convergence is not simply due to the intrinsic dishonesty of making the judgment that judgment is wrong - then denying that a judgment has-been made; but is a very fundamental problem deriving from the detachment of an Easter 'spiritual philosophy' from that taken-for granted context of a traditional Eastern way-of-life - within-which all actual Eastern religions (such as Buddhism and Hinduism) have operated. 

This is how it works: Having extracted the ideal of oneness from its real life context of pervasive traditional morality - the advocate must deny anything and everything that discerns (discriminates). In the modern world, this cashes-out as lumping-together every-thing as one-thing; and (most crucial) opposing all who try to detach them-selves from that one-thing. 

Since all serious Christians must detach themselves - spiritually - from that unifying evil which is The System; oneness philosophy always (sooner or later - but nowadays typically sooner) reserves special contempt and condescension for Christianity (any serious form of which, oneness demonizes as 'fundamentalist'). 

In particular Christians are demonized for the sin (but they deny sin!) of being judgmental - for example when Christians recognize the existence evil in the world, and identify those persons who are serving the evil agenda. 

What this means is that - as of 2021, when major church leaders have apparently all joined or support the Satanic Establishment - the serious Christianity of individual persons is all but alone in its opposition to the operation of evil in the world...

Because (pretty much, in The West) only Christians will discern, identity, name, expose and oppose evil. Almost everyone else - whether atheist or Western-Eastern-spiritual - prohibits the discerning judgment that is necessary to know and reject the operations of Satan. 

What is the "group ego" - then, and now?

Yesterday I used the concept of a "group ego" - but I did not clarify what this means. Indeed, the group ego (or collective consciousness) means  something different in the past than it is at present, or potentially in future. 

First, it needs to be clarified that the group ego comes historically (and developmentally) before the individual ego. Developmentally, we may dimly recall that in early childhood we did not recognize our-selves as distinct from the consciousness of others; and we had an innate belief (recognition) that our thoughts were knowable (i.e. experienced) by others, and that we could access the thinking of others. 

This was very similar to the situation in hunter-gatherer tribal people, and - it is assumed - all humans at an early stage of history. This stage of Original Participation was also a time when Men had direct, spontaneous awareness of the world of spirits. 

As of the past couple of centuries (but increasingly for many centuries before that) the individual adult ego separated-out from the group ego - until it reached the point of being utterly cut-off and isolated; with the resulting experience of modern life as alienated both from the spiritual world, and from the consciousness of fellow Men. This modern adult state is termed the Consciousness Soul. 

Thus modern Man regards himself (and all other Men) as a Thing, and not a Being.  

The destined (i.e. divinely intended) future is that modern Man rejoin the collective consciousness; but this time - because it comes from the cut-off-ness of  by free choice; through a recognition of the aliveness and awareness of all 'things'; i.e recognizing that 'things' are - and always have been - really Beings. 

But this 're-joining' of the group ego is Not a return to the earlier state of spontaneous and passive belonging; because Now Men's souls are free and self-conscious - which means that the re-joining needs freely and consciously to be chosen.

In practice this means that modern men experience the group ego in the state of conscious and voluntary thinking.  

In brief; modern Man chooses the nature of that group ego which he joins. Ahrimanic demonic possession happens when Man regards himself as a Thing - living in a 'dead' and non-conscious world of other Things - and surrenders passively to that. 

But the destined state of Final Participation is almost the opposite: a Man who regards himself as a being living in an alive world of Beings, consciously and actively chooses to join-with the thinking of other Beings. 

And that is a joining-with the ongoing 'process' of God's creation.

On the one hand is the demonic, on the other hand the divine; and the choice is ours. 

The nature of giants

A giant helping to build Stonehenge

As I have previously noted; the original inhabitants of Britain were said to be giants; and there is considerable 'documentary' evidence for the reality of giants. 

But if we accept that there once were giants, then of what nature were they? Presumably not gigantic Men - since that seems biologically impossible - but if not that, what were they? 

Bearing in mind that the age of giants was also the age in which magic was a part of everyday life; one interesting idea comes from John Michell in his beautifully-written superbly imaginative New light on the ancient mystery of Glastonbury (1990) - edited excerpts of pages 51-2 follow:

**

The giants of old undoubtedly symbolized natural forces, but we are repeatedly informed by early historians that sometimes they were visible in monstrous and grotesque forms. They belonged, therefore, to the cryptic category of beings which includes the yetis, Sasquatch and Bigfoot.

These creatures are occasionally seen and heard, but essentially they are phantoms. They represent an aspect of the 'genius loci'; the indwelling spirit of certain mountains, lakes and wild places. Their forms are fluid and adaptable, being determined by the collective imagination of local people. 

In traditional societies, magicians and shamans know about such things, and are sometimes able to invoke them. 

It is often easier to produce phantoms than to dissolve them. Like all 'technologies' they had unwanted side effects. In the course of time, they become more solid and may even bleed when wounded. 

Therefore, not all the spirits raised by magicians were properly laid to rest, and some lingered about the countryside to establish a breed of monsters. This may be the origin of the giants which were apparently still to be found in Britain in the second millenium BC. 

**

Ego-denial and the nature of Ahrimanic-demonic possession

Modern demonic possession is qualitatively different from that of the past. For a start it is a mass phenomenon, and enormously more common than in any previous era. And secondly possession nowadays is much less personal, far more abstract, then before...

So much so; that "Ahrimanic-demonic possession" is taken-for-granted as the attribute of a good employee, an obedient citizen; a nice and decent person with all the right opinions. 

Traditional demonic possession was an individual phenomenon. In return for greater power and/or lustful pleasure; the host sets aside his own ego and allows a demonic spirit to inhabit the space. 

In terms of responsibility; an individual refuses to take responsibility for his own choices - and hands-over his will to the demon. 

The consequence is that proud, often brave; spectacularly selfish, violent, sadistic and individualistic evil of the past; which I have termed Luciferic. 

Mass modern evil is very different; and anything-but spectacular: it is the grey evil of grey Men. 

Modern evil is detached, impersonal, cold, grey - bureaucratic. This is Ahrimanic evil. Instead of being short-termist and self-indulgent; Ahrimanic evil is characterized by pathological pseudo-altruism, self-hatred, and a suicidal despair.  

Ahrimanic possession is driven by a self that refuses to be a self; an 'ego' that refuses to take responsibility for its own freedom; and instead hands-over ultimate authority to 'the system' - that is to an abstract 'group mind' which functions by impersonal procedures and processes (such as committees and votes). 

In different words; the individual-ego submits to a group-ego*; and the negated individual passively-absorbs values from the group-ego. 

Or; Ahrimanic possession is a consequence of deliberate surrender of Being, a result of regarding oneself as an acted-upon thing, rather than an intrinsically free Being. 

Mass modern Ahrimanic demonic possession (which is so common as to be statistically-normal in the West: it is indeed the New Normal) can therefore be conceptualized as a form of group-possession.

Ahrimanic possession is when the group-ego is colonized by demons - and the individual ego merely submits to that group ego. 

So, mass modern demonic influence is at one remove and indirect; its motives abstract and procedural; which is probably why the vast and pervasive extent of modern demonic possession is so seldom recognized, so easily denied.

* For more on the group ego, see this post.

What do I look like?

William Wildblood has updated his blog photo, which previously showed a decade-younger self; but added this provocative challenge - squarely directed at people like me:

You might ask why I include a photograph of myself at all. The reason is similar to why I use my real name online. I think people reading the blog should know who they are dealing with, and a person's face does say something about that person. This seems particularly appropriate at the present time when faces and the vital human element they represent are being increasingly banned from public view.

I did not previously post a photo of myself partly because many of the best authors didn't include picture of themselves on their books, so I saw no compelling reason. Also, anyone who wanted to see what I looked like could just go to the Images section of a search engine. 

But suppose that the reader did not already know what I looked like, and just had to guess from the images? What would they discover? What might they infer?

DuckDuckGo Images seems like a reasonable place to start. Leaving out duplicates - which looks most like it would be me?

Well the first chap is too young (it actually is me, but about 13 years ago); the second is too cheerful and fit looking (it is the 'other' Bruce Charlton - a premier US golf course architect); the third is suitably smug and self satisfied, but too 'foreign' looking (it is NN Taleb); the fourth too genuinely 'spiritual' (William Arkle); the fifth is a possibility (but is actually the vlogger Keri Ford); the sixth is too young, handsome and suave (?); and the sixth is too young and red (Ben Stokes, England cricketer). 

So - none of these pictures are suitable. 

If I was forced to choose one of the Images, it would be the following; but - really - I Am Not Worthy to be mistaken for Everard Proudfoot, the archetypal grumpy hobbit...

So, at present, I will leave the picture section a blank...

The press gangs - (sad) Steeleye Saturday

Two sublimely beautiful songs from Steeleye Span about the horrible practice of coercively 'pressing' men into the Royal Navy; both told from the perspective of the woman left-behind. The first song has an implied happy ending, the second is characterized by tragic resignation. 

Both exhibit the special power I find in my native folk music - melodies as poignant as anything by the great composers; lyrics with that distinctive, ambiguous, nuggety, fascinating quality that comes from oral transmission - resulting in something beyond the powers of even poets of genius 

First, Maddy Prior does an unaccompanied, multi-tracked version of Weary Cutters - a song from my part of England (Tyneside) which suffered the Press Gangs more than most, because of the seafaring and fishing traditions. 

This astonishing arrangement is literally hair-raising; I cannot listen to it without tearing-up. 

(Note, the very last chord is slightly spoiled by a too-rapid segue into the next track.)

 

And now, from Steeleye's first album, All things are quite silent, where Maddy Prior's lead is supplemented by alto harmonies from Gay Woods. This magnificent song was, fortunately for us, collected in Sussex by Ralph Vaughan Williams (in 1904). And I cannot imagine anything better than Steeleye's delicate and strong arrangement.  

"Yes, the world is going to Hell - but what can I Do about it?"

"What can I do about X?"

This kind of question is much asked - with much affectation of hand-wringing concern; but without honesty or intent. Because behind such a question lies a framework of assumptions that excuse the asker from doing anything At All. 

One assumption is that there is an It which - if done - would set everything right (or, at least, rolling the the right direction); secondly the assumption that this It could be done by Me. 

So the asker is asking something like: "What single thing ought I to do, that I really could do, that would decisively fix the problems of the world?"

And when they do not receive such an answer - then this is taken to mean that they need do... Nothing. At. All.

(Which means, in practice, never saying or acting in any way that is inexpedient to them over the short term, or might upset anyone who has power to hurt them - or indeed anything that might offend or annoy anyone in their social circle.) 

And here we have the basis of a helpful answer. Because the answer to "What can I do about it?" is that there are innumerable small things that can be done on the side of Good which resist and push-against evil. 

So many things as to be uncountable. And operating at many levels. With many possible good outcomes (but none of them 'guaranteed').  

In fact - the first thing that can be done is to cease actively-supporting the Hell Agenda by innumerable expressions, words and deeds; on a daily/ hourly/ minute-by-minute basis... 

Even though such expressions, words and deeds are socially sub-optimal. 

(That, in itself, is a great deal more than most people are doing.) 

More profoundly and spiritually; try to think with clarity and truth about things. This means noticing, challenging, and working to break your own bad habits of evil-aligned, Satan-supporting thinking.

(For example the practice of constructing excuses for evil; explaining it away, attributing non-evil motives. This behaviour is very, very common; almost automatic for some people - especially women.) 

And make your-self, thereby, a potential conduit for divine help; because God can do good in this world only when there are Men who are open to his guidance. 

Be one of those Men. 

And for modern adults; to seek and be open to God's guidance, with intent to follow such guidance; in those innumerable daily acts by which one aligns either with the divine side, or the demonic side, in the spiritual war of this world.

What can you do? What should you do? 

Make it possible for God to do good through you.

Leaving to God all strategic plans; including The Big Plan of coordinating all his dedicated helpers into an effective force for a good outcome.

You personally cannot fix the world; but you can (in ways that you cannot foreknow) become a vital part of the work by which the world starts getting fixed.  

Crossing the threshold, spiritually... Is it a helpful metaphor?

The idea of crossing the spiritual threshold seems to be associated with such ideas as initiation, enlightenment; and the attainment of higher levels of consciousness. 

Much spiritual teaching of recent generations has been about the satisfactoriness of  typical modern consciousness; and the need, therefore, for us to cross a threshold to a higher level. This need has often been regarded as urgent, and related to the millennium. Failure to attain such a transformation has been linked to many undesirable personal and societal outcomes. 

I broadly accept this analysis. However, while these concepts (threshold, initiation, enlightenment) have value; they can also be misleading: creating false expectations, disappointment and disillusionment. 

Such ideas seem to imply a once-for-all personal spiritual attainment - that by crossing a threshold/ being initiated and becoming enlightened - a person moves into a new way of being. Having attained these; a person is expected to be lastingly-transformed - he (presumably) 'will never be the same again'.  

And yet it is seldom (or never) the case - at least not nowadays, with modern-developed consciousness - that someone has an experience by which he is transformed - qualitatively and permanently - to a higher spiritual state. 

By contrast; in the past (at various times and places), it seems clear that permanently-transforming initiation was a Real Thing; and that a cadre of such persons could be prepared and assembled (i.e. a 'magical' priesthood). 

This was possible when Men's individuality was less and his capacity to immerse into the group was greater; when Men were already half-in (and therefore only half out-of) the spiritual world. 

Under such circumstances; it seems that a suitably sustained effort, prayer and meditation, rituals, learned-symbolism, and extreme physical experiences etc. - could indeed lead to a threshold-crossing that lasted the rest of that persons' life.  

But modern Man has developed such that (from adolescence) he is completely detached from the spiritual, and he experiences himself as an 'alienated' individual - cut-off from the group-mind. 

Such Men as us cannot attain lifelong 'enlightenment' from a single spiritual experience. 

 

Nonetheless; many modern people do have experiences during which (or after which) they believe themselves to have attained a higher state of spiritual being. Those who value such experiences, and are open to them; may have many such - perhaps daily. 

Yet typically, and often very quickly, such states wear-off, and the person reverts to something very similar to what they were before. 

The profound experience becomes just-a-memory (and that memory may be indistinct, and may fade). 

So, if permanent-lifelong higher spirituality/ initiation/ enlightenment is being sought - failure is apparently certain. 

If crossing the threshold is to be judged by remarkable spiritual consequences - then it begins to look as if the whole idea is bogus! 

Are such spiritual experiences - then - illusory, or even delusional? Are such claims mere wishful thinking, or an attempt to manipulate or exploit others? 

My understanding is that such spiritual experiences are potentially valid and indeed vital to modern Man: they ought to be a focus of our lifelong striving. Also that such experiences may be quite usual, even common, among those who value them, are open to them, and consciously seek to live in such a way that they happen. 

The problem lies with the expectation of 'permanent' spiritual transformation. 

This mortal life is characterized by change, and that change is often 'entropic' in nature: a matter of decay, degeneration, disease - and eventually there will be death. 

So it is a mistake to expect the consequences of spiritual experiences to be 'permanent' within mortal life. 

When someone crosses a threshold and attains a higher level of consciousness, the expectation should be that this will not last, and - since human memory is biologically-based - we should not be surprised if memories of such events are insecure. 

I find it valuable to recall that our actual, lived mortal lives are set-up by God for our personal benefit. From which I infer that - overall - we our-selves and this earthly world are such that higher levels of consciousness are not, and should not be, a constant and life-long way of living. 

The inevitable times in-between spiritual experiences (which is most of life) are necessary and of equivalent (albeit different) eternal value... If, that is, we do indeed learn from them those lessons what God intends us to learn.

In sum - we should learn one kind of thing from spiritual experiences; and other kinds of things from our (long!) periods in-between living at a higher level of consciousness. 

This puts the discussion into another framework. We may acknowledge the truth and validity of spiritual experiences - but we should not look for their significance within this mortal life. We should instead look for their significance in the life-to-come: specifically in resurrected, eternal, Heavenly life. 

(This carries the implication that if one has Not chosen to accept Jesus's offer of resurrected, eternal life - if one rejects Christianity; then spiritual experiences are Not of lasting significance: they are merely more or less pleasant, but transient, psychological events.)

To me this is an altogether healthier and more optimistic way of regarding qualitatively-enhanced spiritual experience. 

We need not worry about remembering them, need not worry about communicating them to others (which usually proves impossible anyway) - the thing is to have such experiences: to live in such a way that we value higher spiritual states, and know when we have had such an experience...

And then leave it at that. 

Because: the value is the experience, the value is located beyond death.

Therefore we have done our work by living such as to have a spiritual experiences; after noting which, we move on to living well henceforth in hopes of more of the same.