Believes | Forum

I would posit into this deabte phenomology as the existentialist philosophers argued. Given that the placebo effect is a known  observation does this mean that our subjective universes are real? This assumes that we beleive at a niave level.

Satan archetype has a lot in common with nature. It can as well stand for nature. Just like Satan, nature is adversarial, challenging, raw, savage and beyond good/evil false dichotomy.

AnnaCzerda. Your response is close to the mark but we know that altruism is part of evolutionary survival. Should this also be included in natural?

My understanding of altruism from a scientific viewpoint is that altruistic behaviour can help kin and hence ensure genetic survival. Additionally it can defend a culture or way of life that the individual strongly relates to. This would apply to soldiers fighting wars as their self preservation is surely diminished by being in a war environment ?

I find this "Atheistic Satanism" nonsense tiring. Satan is not a symbol for nature, nor is it representative of nature, it's the adverserial force within nature that governs all life. This adverserial force is observable, but unknowable, placing it on a level that is neither scientifically, nor spiritually based. Subgenres of Satanism are useless and miss the entire point of being a separate paradigm than the norm. I really don't understand where the confusion lies in this basic, fundemental concept. A Satanist is indifferent to any form or theology, aside from personal interest. Why is it so hard to grasp that there's a third side? 1. There is a God(s). (Theism). 2. There is no God. (Atheism) 3. I don't give a shit if there is or isn't a God. (Satanism)

To the point of altruism;
Self-preservation is nature's highest law. The self is often externalized (taking a bullet for a loved one, feeding the ego by feeding the homeless, defending a culture who's blood runs through the vains of the self, etc.) and can be confused with selflessness. There is no such thing as selflessness in nature. Altruism is an egalitarian construct, a tool used for varying social and political ends.

To the original poster:

IMO, the dark force in nature, was explained in depth by Thomas Hobbes in his 1681 book Leviathan as Man's "state of nature": every man at war with ever other man.

Here is a link to a PDF of that book that is posted in the SIN library: https://www.satanicinternationalnetwork.com/social/forum/topic/238

Although I like the symbolism in that book I don't see nature asking the good or evil question before doing anything. Then again the human nature is different to nature it's self so I do not find any conflicts even if the point of view was a shaped by perspective.

Once ingrained with the idea of good and evil a person may try to distance themselves through altruism but the conscious act in doing so will distance it's self from a nature. In the same way a stage magician can pass of a trick as magic yet will always know the twist they played.

Now if a person wanted to really strip away realities and find the nature of things then I would say look to the real applications of the words good and evil and find why they are there to start with in religious and social based ideas.

Let me wade into this debate again. Off course self preservation is a primary urge but altruism is also an extension of that urge. When altruism is applied to humans it becomes complex. An apparent self sacrificing act such as fighting foreign wars to preserve your families way of life doesn't always protect you!( maybe a thread for politics is fighting wars to protect corporate interests?) As for the scientific process this is weaker when applied to psychology in my opinion. This doesn't mean we can avoid ideas that don't fit with our paradigms. Debate is good because it clarifies our thoughts and positions. This is ultimately selfish because it helps us understand ourselves better.

Dimitri

I can not prove that a non selfish act of altruism exists however I have enjoyed the discussions so far. On reviewing some of the hypothesis on this subject the weight of opinion is for altruism with selfish explanations. I still Have difficulty with how an individual can risk their life to help another stranger in need. Any ideas anyone?

Every time I have done it ( risking my life for strangers) , I've just done it without thinking it twice,  all the ones who heard about it  used to say: " Demonio,  you are a very stupid guy, you shouldn't have done it" , then I replied: " yap , but it came spontaneously, and I couldn't have done anything else but risking my life for that person". I can't explain how or why I have done  it neither,  but when the need arrives , I just feel exited to do something which it's in my power to do it,  I've never thought about it,  I've just done it.   I feel great after the situation passes by , and it's over. 

Quote from nikey69 I still Have difficulty with how an individual can risk their life to help another stranger in need. Any ideas anyone?

Dimitri covered a couple of reasons but some of the reasons many don't think of are the adrenaline rush or the simple challenge factor. People climb mountains just because there are there and a challenge and some do this for the same reason.

Quote from luz I guess there are also some elements of martyrdom and/or the notion of one's life having a purpose beyond living.

Behind martyrdom there is a desire to become a part of the greater whole, to lose yourself in something eternal, numinous and glorious. It can be religion, nation, family, posterity and so on. Becoming a part of something greater than yourself is a source of pride and joy, especially if your own individual self is seen as something feeble and meaningless. Dying for the cause then can give a meaning to your existence and a sense of fulfillment, even if only for a short time.

However, I don't think the woman who tried o rescue her dog really wanted to die. Probably, she acted on impulse, not thinking too much about the consequences of her deed. One thing is certain: she must have loved this dog. Sometimes, people treat their pets like their children. They are the valuable part of their lives. By trying to rescue the dog, she tried to rescue some important part of herself. If she hadn't done that, she might have felt terrible. Sometimes death is better than the torment of grief and remorse.

Quote from FraterMoloch the Sumerian Tiamat represents the destructive.

Not really. Tiamat is a goddess of water and primordial chaos out of which the world was created. She was the mother of all gods. When she was slain, the world was formed out of her body. It has nothing to do with destruction but creative power of chaos. Chaos/Tiamat gave birth to the whole world.

Quote from luz I don't see how anything described as a sea serpent or a dragon does not have a destructive face ...

Tiamat got pissed and tried to kill her children but it was she who was finally destroyed. Her death and the division of her body gave birth to the world. Tiamat is chaos, but it's not chaos formed out of destruction of something but primordial chaos, pregnant with seeds of creation. Chaos (a unified whole), when divided, formed a world.

Very interesting all. My next point has nothing to do with the preceding displays of strength. Demonio made a point of acting without apparent thinking. I watched an interesting Horizon programme on BBC two a couple of years ago. Horizon for those who do not know is a popular science programme. It was about individuals when faced with disaster situations acted almost automatically to save themselves. One woman climbed over the heads of fellow passengers to escape a burning aeroplane. Those who remained seated perished. Demonio's experience reminded me of this almost automatic response albeit in a different context. I just throw this into the debate maybe to distract from the power play!

Actually I had another thought which could be an alternative post. As Satanists do we have such strong personalitys that we can't really step outside the comfort of our views of the world? Do we simply try to reinforce ours ideas of ourselves? A thought here for female Satanists and please strike me down if you disagree but is male Satanism too entrenched in individual power play? Can we overcome the fact we have dicks?

luz,

If you are unable to remove the emotional attachment to your views when engaged in an argument, you'll miss all the points presented by your opposition.

For example:

Dimitri,

What is your pansy-ass Atheist view on collective morality.  Where does it come from?  Don't give me that shit about morality being codified by nature.  Evolutionary science won't breast feed you that one. 

(Let's see if he responds emotionally, ignoring the substance, or sees through it and comes up with a comprehensive response.  Mean-spirited or not)