Church of Satan

Ahnimus · February 2007

soulsinging wrote:

it's semantics. you call it magic. i don't think there's anything magical about it. in the same sense, ahnimus's description of determinism is indistinguishable from free will to me. it's a distinction in philosophy and terminology only... the practical difference is nonexistent.

There is a practical difference between indeterminism and determinism. A lot of practical differences.

genie · February 2007

Jeremy1012 wrote:

don't get me wrong, I'm no satanist (I'm a dirty godless scumbag ) but I read up a bit on Anton LaVey's Church of Satan out of curiosity and the guy seemed to have a lot of good points, was by no means evil from what I can tell and didn't seem immoral. he viewed satan as an idea, not an entity and said that satanism was the practice of setting yourself free. I was wondering how people perceive this religion? is it considered a lunatic cult as most pagan religions are (because all the major religions seem to have an elitist contempt for all others)?

if paganism is considered a lunatic cult, then why shouldn't we consider christianity and all other religions to be lunatic cults?

i'm just giving ideas for bored minds

Ahnimus · February 2007

genie wrote:

if paganism is considered a lunatic cult, then why shouldn't we consider christianity and all other religions to be lunatic cults?

i'm just giving ideas for bored minds

It is a lunatic cult.

genie · February 2007

Ahnimus wrote:

It is a lunatic cult.

erm, sorry....what is?

Ahnimus · February 2007

genie wrote:

erm, sorry....what is?

Christianity

genie · February 2007

Ahnimus wrote:

Christianity

ok, but to keep everything fair, so is:

Judaism, Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, Shinto, Sikhism, Bahá'í Faith, Jainism....

hmmm....i think that's it....is there more religions? if so, just add them for me

soulsinging · February 2007

Ahnimus wrote:

There is a practical difference between indeterminism and determinism. A lot of practical differences.

not really. you've explained your theories to me and i fail to see how they are distinguishable from my belief that nobody but me can make my choices. you say that if someone had the exact same interactions and experiences as me, then they would make the same choices... but nobody can do that unless they are me becos physically 2 people cannot occupy the same space at the same time to have lived my life identically to me. so my life and my choices will always be unique to me becos it's a practical impossibility to replicate them. thus, for all practical purposes, what difference does it make? if it's determinism or free will? you've still got a person who is acting as only that person can possibly act.

Ahnimus · February 2007

soulsinging wrote:

not really. you've explained your theories to me and i fail to see how they are distinguishable from my belief that nobody but me can make my choices. you say that if someone had the exact same interactions and experiences as me, then they would make the same choices... but nobody can do that unless they are me becos physically 2 people cannot occupy the same space at the same time to have lived my life identically to me. so my life and my choices will always be unique to me becos it's a practical impossibility to replicate them. thus, for all practical purposes, what difference does it make? if it's determinism or free will? you've still got a person who is acting as only that person can possibly act.

Their perception of reality is what is practically different.

Ahnimus · February 2007

Here soulsinging, is an example.

Guy has a sexual attraction to children, if determinism is true, then some factor beyond his control is causing it and we can develop therapy, or treat the illness in a more humane way. If free-will is true, which is the reigning percpet, then we just lock 'em up and toss away the key. That is the practical difference between the two realities, one is self-servant the other is logically understanding.

Ahnimus · February 2007

genie wrote:

ok, but to keep everything fair, so is:

Judaism, Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, Shinto, Sikhism, Bahá'í Faith, Jainism....

hmmm....i think that's it....is there more religions? if so, just add them for me

About 5,995 more yes. They are all crap.

angelica · February 2007

soulsinging wrote:

it's semantics. you call it magic. i don't think there's anything magical about it. in the same sense, ahnimus's description of determinism is indistinguishable from free will to me. it's a distinction in philosophy and terminology only... the practical difference is nonexistent.

The point, though, is that for example I believe it's completely normal to heal from any and all mental illness, too. And yet the mainstream western world does not believe that to be so. Therefore the norm are imprisoned by their lack of vision. So when I wield normal universal forces or energy, it appears miraculous to the average person.

"magic: the art of producing a desired effect or result through the use of incantation or various other techniques that presumably assure human control of supernatural agencies or the forces of nature."

edit: hence I also say the difference is in perception, based on what one's awareness level allows one to comprehend at any given time.

angelica · February 2007

Ahnimus wrote:

Incompatibalist non-determinist

Could you elaborate, please?

soulsinging · February 2007

Ahnimus wrote:

Their perception of reality is what is practically different.

that's what im saying. the only difference in a practical sense is your point of view. i see what happens, and call it free will, you see it and call it determinism. but the fact is, we're both describing the same things.

just like me and angelica. she calls it magic, i call it basic self-motivated leadership skills.

Ahnimus · February 2007

soulsinging wrote:

that's what im saying. the only difference in a practical sense is your point of view. i see what happens, and call it free will, you see it and call it determinism. but the fact is, we're both describing the same things.

just like me and angelica. she calls it magic, i call it basic self-motivated leadership skills.

But both perspectives have a different sociological impact.

angelica · February 2007

soulsinging wrote:

that's what im saying. the only difference in a practical sense is your point of view. i see what happens, and call it free will, you see it and call it determinism. but the fact is, we're both describing the same things.

just like me and angelica. she calls it magic, i call it basic self-motivated leadership skills.

Oh, I also call it self-motivated leadership skills. As a matter of fact, I learned much of this magic from books teaching self-motivation and leadership skills.

soulsinging · February 2007

Ahnimus wrote:

Here soulsinging, is an example.

Guy has a sexual attraction to children, if determinism is true, then some factor beyond his control is causing it and we can develop therapy, or treat the illness in a more humane way. If free-will is true, which is the reigning percpet, then we just lock 'em up and toss away the key. That is the practical difference between the two realities, one is self-servant the other is logically understanding.

if free will is true then every person decides for themselves and votes on how to respond to him. if determinism is true, the people dont logically understand it, they simply react in the way they were shaped to.

but the point is, for that guy... he is attracted to kids. and to the kids he sees. nobody else behaves in the exact same way he does becos they are not seeing the same kids at the same time from the same direction. thus, that guy's actions are unique. that's what im saying.

free will doesn't necessarily mean what you portrary it as here. i say free will means the guy had all this input and decided to respond in this way. if certain things had been different, he might have chosen a different way to act towards kids.

soulsinging · February 2007

angelica wrote:

The point, though, is that for example I believe it's completely normal to heal from any and all mental illness, too. And yet the mainstream western world does not believe that to be so. Therefore the norm are imprisoned by their lack of vision. So when I wield normal universal forces or energy, it appears miraculous to the average person.

"magic: the art of producing a desired effect or result through the use of incantation or various other techniques that presumably assure human control of supernatural agencies or the forces of nature."

edit: hence I also say the difference is in perception, based on what one's awareness level allows one to comprehend at any given time.

it's still semantics. i dont think there's anything unusual about recovering from mental illness of bouncing back from addiciton. some would call it magic, some would call it miraculous, some would call it dumb luck. i just dont think it has anything to do with incantations, supernatural occurrences or anythings else. the parts you bolded are precisely what makes me say it isnt magic. cos i simply have a different definition of magic... it's a card game

angelica · February 2007

soulsinging wrote:

that's what im saying. the only difference in a practical sense is your point of view. i see what happens, and call it free will, you see it and call it determinism. but the fact is, we're both describing the same things.

just like me and angelica. she calls it magic, i call it basic self-motivated leadership skills.

That's also how I view all philosophies and religions, from athiesm to Christianity to Satanism--they are different perspectives on the very same natural laws.

It's looking at life and seeing the similarities and the synthesis.

soulsinging · February 2007

Ahnimus wrote:

But both perspectives have a different sociological impact.

not necessarily. there are plenty of free-will believers who would say such people can be reformed and shown the error of their choices. there are also, im sure, determinist people who would say their determinist inputs are so strong they cannot be reformed and should just be locked up.

angelica · February 2007

soulsinging wrote:

it's still semantics. i dont think there's anything unusual about recovering from mental illness of bouncing back from addiciton. some would call it magic, some would call it miraculous, some would call it dumb luck. i just dont think it has anything to do with incantations, supernatural occurrences or anythings else. the parts you bolded are precisely what makes me say it isnt magic. cos i simply have a different definition of magic... it's a card game

I think we're in agreement here. The key point is the point of view or the viewer's perception that shapes what they interpret the phenomena to be. I deliberately bolded the parts that were about natural law, because to me this stuff works as efficiently as gravity. I also believe the supernatural is perfectively integrated with us, naturally, at all times, despite our general obliviousness to it. (for the anal sticklers out here, I am not contradicting myself, I am representing the wholeness of truth with a paradox--natural/supernatural.)

And the same goes for Ahnimus's free will/determinism debate. It's the very same principle looked at differently. I agree.

What it seems you are pointing out is also the part of such theories that necessitate quantum physics principles to give rational backup. And it is why the quantum physics view pulls rank on mechanical deterministic science acknowledging this key, integral point: It takes into consideration that one's perspective is the deciding factor of what one sees. But I'm sure you already get all this.

Church of Satan

Comments

Welcome!

Quick Links

Categories