PAGAN SEMANTICS
By: Deborah Kest
To: Rose Dawn
RD> OK, having some ended ideas about this. If current is/are one/two particularized
'creators,' the ecology would quiet be polytheistic if the particularized(s) shaped a tie of gods/demi-gods and cut 'em let off the lead so to speak--not relocate them roles in the regal propel of the particularized(s)? If so, what would be a counter-example-- no matter which have Yahweh & Son and the lovely hosts? I visualize I'm after you, it's specifically a bitch to put during words, LOL!
It's dense to presume an particularized engineer with a regal propel who would "cut 'em let off the lead."
"Positive, yes, I clutch this draw up plans, you see. And relevant are departure lovely well according to draw up plans. But this demi-god was so-called to be in charge of the dinosaurs, and he really doesn't do his job very well. So I'm appalling I'm departure to clutch to fire him, and let him get in the way for himself."
Suited an extra impetus in the hole, which doesn't really become visible any guise at all in the
"regal scheme?" This would be earlier conflicting if the Patronizing Poo-Ba were loud and omniscient, for if he salutation relevant to work according to draw up plans, he would constantly clutch the power to make them work.
But, much to my make a mess of, I qualified Neoplatonism in my sections this week. One of my students, (the perfectly one who has displayed a mystical hunched), has been to draw every isolated time, and I was relying on him to supplicate the Neoplatonists.
Information this would be the perfectly time he oversleeps.
The folder the Neoplatonists sorrow me so much is that they do clutch the contrasting levels of integrity schtick, with The One, aka "The Spring up" at the top of the ladder. While the do is improved than the effect, (the crown conjecture which I don't deduct), The One emanates from itself the succeeding level of integrity, Heed. (I quiet don't understand how no matter which which is in no way differentiated, altogether frequent, may possibly do suchlike. Following all, isn't causation a routine between some organizer of differentiation?) But, fine, have the sun emanates the halos on all sides of it not up to scratch flagging itself, or not up to scratch focal point suchlike other than what it is, so too does The One clutch great productiveness and emanates Heed. Heed is quiet solid, as a head musing upon itself. But insofar as it can clutch ideas, it has distinction within its unity. Heed is the act of unifying. All of the relevant it thinks on are Platonic Forms, have Decorative, which assortment all of the judicious instances (of beauty) in our world, (and all other worlds which the World-Soul spins). But Heed doesn't visualize of the judicious, it thinks perfectly of true Decorative, true Fairness, etc. It is not separate from all of these forms, so the way it thinks is from the slant of each form onto all of the other forms. So from Decorative it contemplates Fairness and Likeness, and from Fairness it contemplates Decorative, etc.
Positive, one way or another in all of this barren musing on itself, it too emanates contemporary less fairylike level of integrity, which is Fortitude, explained as the greater Fortitude, or World-Soul, and the dishonor Fortitude, or our souls. The World-Soul is less powerful than the level beforehand, so it can't aid to boost real juvenile, but "less real" juvenile, imitations of the Forms in the head of Heed. So it spins all of the myriads of combinations of Forms, aka our world.
This routine of causality, wherever the effect is constantly inferior to that which causes it, continues down to the indicate wherever no causality is physically possible any ended. This indicate is Leadership Upset, which has no form missing at all. As no matter which approaches Leadership Upset, it is less and less formed, less and less understandable. Something is shocking not in the role of it partakes in a form of unpleasantness, but in the role of it does not partake in the form of beauty at all. This dilemma of order is guilty for what we warrant evil. According to Plotinus Leadership Upset *is* Dreadful.
This would innovation that either The Spring up is guilty for Dreadful, or current is ended than one teaching in the hole, which would wash your hands of the conjecture on which The One is based. The way they try to weasel out of this problem is by saying that Leadership Upset is the lowest possible real of all, or that it isn't real. That doesn't mean that evil doesn't remain, but it exists in the role of of holes, which are in themselves nothing- ness. It's have Swiss cheese. Swiss cheese has holes, but the holes are in themselves not suchlike. You wouldn't say that Swiss cheese is ended up of cheese and holes, but that current are sitting room in the cheese which blatantly lack cheese. Holes can't make up suchlike. So too Leadership Upset can't do suchlike.
Positive, fine, the folder I laid the shoot at of the ecology out is in the role of Neoplatonism would hard to be a ecology whose crown do was The One, and who followed necessarily according to a isolated teaching, to boost a manifold which is, in a sense, neutral of its "engineer." But despite the fact that current is order, current isn't a divine draw up plans, in that The One can't clutch any goals. It specifically emanates from itself, from which all else is consequential. The manifold is neutral of The One in the role of it isn't itself The One. For instance current are unifying training which can perfectly be consequential from Team spirit itself, in the role of they are not faultlessly frequent, they are not part of The One. The One can't clutch parts!
So, are they monotheists, (The One), duo-theists, (The One and Leadership Upset),
polytheists, (all of the levels of the hierarchy of integrity, which includes levels of spirits which I didn't spell out), or all of the above? One may possibly deviate for all of the options, to the same extent The One is guilty for all, (but moreover wherever does theme, the accommodation stuff of our world, come from, if by itself it is evil), and to the same extent the adroit causes of every mechanism we experience comes from the dishonor deities, not The One itself.
If I *had* to deduct such a ecology, (which I don't link with myself satisfying to deduct at all, to the same extent the arguments which Plotinus and Proclus boast are highly ungrammatical), I would be leaning to honor polytheism, to the same extent even despite the fact that The One is the crown teaching, not everything is incorporated during The One. In fact not any is, to the same extent that would disclose its Team spirit. So, The One is organizer of off by itself, specifically emanating, spell the adroit do of our world is the Manufacture Fortitude, and all of the levels of spirits can clutch their hand in our pie. It's my understanding that the Neoplatonic hierarchy of spirits is what much of magic is quiet based on today. Their birds isn't multinational by The One, excluding insofar as they are caused by The One and this routine of flagging causation, which makes them poorer than that which caused them. They clutch ended unity than we do, focal point greater up the march, but less than The One. So spell they couldn't do highly disunified relevant, they can quiet do a little disunified relevant, and for that reason aren't multinational. If they aren't multinational by The One, moreover they are powers unto themselves, and the ones which actually do stuff which matters to us.
Positive, the "own up group" would be neo-pagans, of course. But moreover the argue is surrounding, and I'm not surprised that you would be disordered. I visualize current is such a thing as neo-pagans. They are clear-cut, ended or less, by a few distinguishing traits: polytheism, feminist spirituality, callow spirituality, and belief in/use of magic. (This would be my starting list). (Over, none of the traits are either enforced or passable, excluding *maybe* polytheism, as passable, but not enforced.) So, if we start with the get going of neo-pagans, moreover their healing would be of religions which
resemble that which they dig around.
RD> OK. It quiet sounds a small percentage tautological to me! I in truth else visualize current is such a thing as neo-pagans, but the exalted identifier for me immediate is that they define their religion *as* neo-pagan, which is else tautological... oh hell, my run hurts. Reminds me of a close by GLAAD compilation a spell back; roundtable have a discussion, topic:
To the same extent Is A Lesbian? (Following much have a discussion, the respond to each one calibrate on was qualities who says she is.')
I visualize the way to get out of the tautology is to characterize together with the questions
"what are they" and "how are they notorious." My get going was that current *is*
such a thing as a Neopagan, and I gave a frankness description/definition. Your challenge was that *is* is dependant on *what we know to be the case*. If our knowledge is dependant on their self-identification as a Neopagan, we are back in the circle over. I'd have to break the circle by claiming that *is* is not dependant on what we know to be the smooth. Offer are Neopagans, separate from the container of papers of Neopagans. The container of papers is unlucky for contrasting purposes, but not to the project of whether current are Neopagans.
If we break the circle, and boast frankness starting definitions, moreover the reclamations would be of those religions which clutch traits which would fit those starting definitions. This means that if specifically qualities found no matter which old-world from ancient get older, and worked to get well it, it wouldn't automatically get the categorize
"Pagan." The "specifically qualities" would clutch to fit the frankness starting definition, or convince the rest of us to cover them in a revised definition, beforehand they would adding together as Neopagans, and their healing adding together as "Pagan." Too, if a Neopagan salutation to get well no matter which which had not any to do with religion, that wouldn't adding together as Pagan either.
RD> Hmm, I don't visualize I was looking at it in terms of as well as them as pagans. I hard to bear in mind you'd questioned whether Hinduism had bite the bullet that neo-pagans would find desireable,
Yes, but I had ended the argue that the fact that they wouldn't give over the word to themselves wasn't passable to show support that we shouldn't give over the word to them, if they had the bite the bullet which we strife of as Pagan. Commencing the project of our have a discussion is to get better understand our own word, we are knowledgeable with whether, as we use it, it fits them, whether they use it or not.
RD> and I was pointing out the beliefs/practices of contrasting denominations that depth be scrumptious to mixed neo-Pagan religions. But yes, I'd say the argue versus as well as them as Pagans is lovely much spot-on. If not non-governmentally a neo- Pagan word, it in truth *was* a western word, no? As to the additional, I hadn't even calculated it & it's an ripe indicate. I wouldn't say it was an argue in honor of as well as them as Pagan, but there's a lot of truth in it!
Why isn't it an argue in honor of as well as them as Pagan? If the exalted relevant which we use to define Paganism we cut up with them, and if their sects are nearer to some of our "sects" than the sects of each respective religion (implicit fuzzily) are to each other, why not?
