/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14833015]

How can "neo-pagans" or modern pagans defend themselves against the various philosophies of monotheists, monists, and atheists when it comes to metaphysical systems? Any notable authors, books, essays, etc. that defend paganism effectively enough to challenge mon*ism or atheism (materialism)?

Basically, are there any non-retarded, non-historical-romantic / hisotrical-nationalist defenders of paganism?

[Anonymous No.14833034]

>>14833015
>Basically, are there any non-retarded, non-historical-romantic / hisotrical-nationalist defenders of paganism?
No. That's why all the stuff you mentioned before doesn't matter. Neo-pagansim is a pathetic LARP fueled by childish politics.

[Anonymous No.14833070]

Did you ever ask yourself why didn't Homer or Hesiod write a list of arguments for the existence of Zeus, Hera, and the rest of the pantheon?

You're looking for polytheistic apologetics, but ancestral religions don't proselytize.

[Anonymous No.14833081]

>>14833015
Unironically, I cant think of any. Most of the developed one of greco-rome usually relied on some form of monad; Plato, aristotle, Cicero. And hindu stuff usually centers around Brahman or Atman or pantheism. Likewise with Buddhism which is more pantheistic.

[Anonymous No.14833097]

>>14833081
I couldnt think of any either but you never know what you dont know. Im inclined to agree with >>14833034 and >>14833070 but I'll let the thread cook for a while and see if anything pops up.

[Anonymous No.14833389]

>>14833015
Nice bait thread.
>>14833070
This is one of the main differences. One can say that Christianity relies on faith to the extent that it has lost any sense of natural law, whereas the best science can only fall short of what was already known as a natural force in Greek myth.
The sensual depth of myth goes beyond the moralism and rituals of the political religions, which is partly why they have survived into the modern era while Christianity must abandon all of its laws just to keep converting people. And it does so by entering new territories alongside the modernization/secular process. The moral law of Christianity will likely never be possible again, and this necessitates new means of faith.
The pagan myths, at least the best ones, are much closer to eternal laws and have relevance even to atheists. This is difficult to explain, but the myths essentially do not distinguish between high and low, they continue to hold power even without faith, belief, or the political aspects of religion.

[Anonymous No.14833453]

>>14833389
This.

[Anonymous No.14834101]

>>14833389
any books that expound on this? really interesting write up.

with regards to "relevance even to atheists," what exactly do you mean? Is there value in genuine belief in these myths or does the value come from simple power of storytelling and eternal laws that Christianity has since left behind?

[Anonymous No.14834131]

>>14833389
>whereas the best science can only fall short of what was already known as a natural force in Greek myth
lol retard those guys thought the earth was the center of the universe

[Anonymous No.14834133]

>>14833015
>base your ideology which addresses metaphysics, society, religion, and history on being dependent on the whims of people who don't care about it
you're retarded. also, most of those various philosophies are or are derived from paganism.

[Anonymous No.14834155]

>>14833015
>Charlemange was a kike
incredible

[Anonymous No.14834278]

>>14834131
Does it say that in the myths or the philosophy? That is an important difference, and later on they developed heliocentrism.
I won't make any claims as to the best scientific model, but in relation to being these theories were much better than what we have today. Our own relation to the center of the universe makes a hollow earth of being.

I was speaking of the myths, of which Chaos can be seen as something like that which existed before the Big Bang, and gives rise to it. What the myths lack in exactness and precision they make up for in sense and comprehension. And any sort of material realism was never their purpose, so judging them with scientific standards is to miss the point from the very start.

[Anonymous No.14834378]

>>14834278
>yeah okay sure those theories were totally wrong but they were better because they made me feel better about myself
whatever you say man

[Anonymous No.14834662]

>>14834155
He let jews Northern Europe

[Anonymous No.14834717]

>>14834101
Mostly from my own understanding of the myths. Much of which is from attempting to understand the dominant gods of our era, lots of contemplation of the Carmina Burana. Nietzsche would be similar in some sense, although my position is something like comparative religion and attempting to reconcile them rather than being outright anti-Christian. Junger would be the closest in terms of myth, although I can't say if he goes into what I have discussed here. His idea of dominion is similar to how I understand the gods, and how force is dominant over law.

A couple recent comments that are related:
>>/lit/thread/S14707598#p14710887
>>/lit/thread/S14749906#p14750549

And if you are interested, a writing on the Theological Turn, how Christianity, paganism, and nihilism relate to the spirit of the age; and the potential difficulties in reconstructing a religion when its means of thought are mostly lost to us.
https://mandalietmandaliet.blogspot.com/2019/10/cult-of-unknown-god.html

As for your question, it is partly answered in the second link. The necessity of faith and ritual can be roughly understood as a means of reconstitution, as if the divine or elemental force has been lost to us and we must reground ourself to it. Otherwise, it may be said that our divine and worldly being are at odds. However, despite our being the force will forever remain the same, it is unchangeable and irreducible.

[Anonymous No.14834720]

>>14834717
There is a seeming contradiction in the mysteries, as if we are returned to the nihilism of being, but this is a judgement of peace and allowing the forces to guide us as fate would. This is very different from ritual, sacrifice, and faith. The Shrine at Delphi is formed of a chasm of the earth, the center of the universe as a force which brings those who worship to frenzy. There is no need of architecture or permanent temples, and one can assume something of an opposite relation to the medieval and early modern fear of nature. To have walls would be to divide one from the center of the universe, and the necessity of temples within the cities an omen of the coming frenzy induced by natural forces. The religious site must be a place of transition, the immaterial walls where worldly laws are determined by heavenly judgement. Having them too close to human settlement would be a danger, and a threat to dominion.

Another way to understand this, Narcissus and Aphrodite are of the same line, as are Actaeon and Artemis. The human comes to the negative form of dominion (for example, beauty in its death) either through his abandonment of the divine laws or even the necessity of their completion. It is a contradiction, the cruelty of fate handed out through judgement by the gods. There is an ineluctable quality which surpasses anything said by religions, its forces will overwhelm even when great sacrifices are made.

In simple terms, the myths are proven, perhaps more than anywhere, in their sovereignty over those who are ignorant of their laws. In psychology this especially became true, the purest atheists found themselves relying on myths to explain what was an entirely human and mental domain. Perhaps there was malevolence in some cases, attempts to recuperate, but mostly this occurred because of the universality of the myths, understandings of laws that surpass time and are applicable to completely different cultures.

To compare Christian and Greek myth would require a lot, but I will say that my basic understanding of Christianity is that in a retelling of Prometheus Bound Zeus would decide to appear. Somewhere I have notes on the fundamental aspects of religion, and where Christianity falls short. I may be able to post them later.

[Anonymous No.14834732]

>>14834378
Note what I say below in terms of sacred places. There is a formative center of the universe as well as the material. They may be opposing poles, of which Tartarus gives us a better telling than anything from science.
Even the most minor material space can be a conduit for infinite forces.

[Anonymous No.14834736]

>>14834732
>below
Kek, which is obviously above this post and below yours >>14834720

[Anonymous No.14834755]

>>14833389
But at that point, is t it indistinguishable from just a story? Is it any different to say, a superhero or Arthur?

[Anonymous No.14834784]

>>14834755
>>14833389

And if this is the case, paganism itself doesn’t have much specifically to it, since we already have stories and legends. High tails of the word wars and Moby Dicks and Don Quixote. Napoleons and brothers Grimm, as well as biblical parabols in itself. Atheists still use turns of phrase like turn the other check or David and Goliath. All this just seems like the general human experience of narrativity rather than anything specifically pagan.

[Anonymous No.14834791]

>>14834717
>>14834720

thanks for the detailed write up and links. this is a fascinating line of thought. if you find those other notes id love to see them as well

[Anonymous No.14834823]

I have studied neo-paganism a lot. You have to look at it as part of the New Age to really understand it, and New Agers typically don't give a shit about polemics or outwardly defending their beliefs. That is part of their schtick, even when they are narcissistic cult leaders. Contemporary neo-paganism is just an outgrowth of the New Age cultural milieu, which itself grew out of the Theosophical social spheres of the turn of the 20th century. The only difference between mainstream (i.e. political left and center) neo-paganism and general New Age stuff is that it is flavored by feminist theory, Victorian romanticisations of pre-Christian Europeans, and Margaret Murray's discredited witch cult hypothesis. Basically, they are people who would have gone all-in for Neo-Advaita gurus and UFO cults but liked the witch-y druid aesthetics or just happened to fall into neo-paganism first. The white racialist side of neopaganism traces its roots through the same Victorian romanticism, proto-New-Age stuff like Theosophy, and other such things but is closer in nature to Nazi occultism and the Victorian period neo-paganism that was not a distinctly New Age thing like contemporary neo-paganism. The black racialist neo-paganism in the Western world is a weird mix of influences from both of these spheres, the collective African-American desire to reconstruct their fractured ancestries, and a series of Islamic- and Egyptian-themed scams run in African-American population centers in the early 20th century that gave rise to such things as Moorish Science, Nation of Islam, and Kemeticism.
>books
"Drawing Down the Moon" is a pretty good book on the the non-racist and more New Age feminist side of neo-paganism that grew out of Gardnerian Wicca. Keep in mind that it is written by a feminist New Age lady who is somewhat batshit, but it's a good general history of the political left and center of Anglosphere neopaganism and helps to understand what these people are actually thinking. Just be sure to read between the lines the same way you would read between the lines of any book on a movement written by a member of said movement. On this board there is so much focus on the Neo-Advaita, Theosophical, and racialist neo-pagan/New Age stuff that these more common and influential forms are just ignored.

[Anonymous No.14834952]

>>14833015
First, you're making an error in dividing modern paganism, or paganism in general, from monism. Modern pagans who would actually produce any metaphysical systems would likely do so from a platonic (or rarely Heideggerian) standpoint, citing Proclus, etc.

>>14834823
Generally correct, but I think a bit outdated. Most of the New Age branch of neopaganism has actually become watered down to the point where it plays less of the role of a cult, or an actual spiritual system, and more of a completely aesthetic statement. Very few people under 30 would actually identify with the label of pagan or Wicca, with 'witch' becoming the most prevalent, and being more strongly linked with tarot and other non-communal leisure activities than the sometimes radical eco-feminism of the 70s-2000s. It's slowly being folded completely into the mainstream, and thus had lost many of its separatist/anti-conformist tendencies.

Also I would divide right wing paganism up a bit more. Some types certainly are Neo-Advaita, Nazi Occultist, or broadly Theosophical, but many groups resemble the Christian Identity movement and post-Turner Diarys American white nationalist movement more than any of those, plus Nietzschian/Heideggerian currents still exist, though more commonly outside any organised group

[Anonymous No.14835013]

>>14834823
>>14834952
good generally non-polemic posts.

[Anonymous No.14835068]

>>14834791
>much of the basis for a powerful and truthful religion comes down to the ineffable, cosmological dominion, the chasm of knowledge and belief, and the reconciliation of transcendence and nihilism.
The knowledge/belief one likely needs rephrasing, but I would still say that these are the cornerstones of religion. At least as far as my understanding goes at this point.

[Anonymous No.14835317]

>>14834952
>Generaly correct, but I think a bit outdated. Most of the...and thus has lost many of its separatist/anti-conformist tendencies.
Absolutely correct. I agree 100%. Thanks for making the point!
>Also I would divide right wing paganism up a bit more. Some types...resemble the Christian Identity movement
I have to stop you there. I don't see how Christian Identity is neo-pagan. It is a redux of the Victorians' "British Israelism" with the words swapped around to appeal to white nationalist and supremacists in North America. Black Hebrew Israelites are the same thing, but for black nationalists and supremacists in North America. I would say that rather than being in the same category as neo-paganism (which grows out of New Age/Theosophy/Victorian pagan romanticism/19th century Christian "New Thought"), it is on the fringes of the Abrahamic revivalist sorts who started to become prominent in the 18th and 19th centuries. In particular, I would trace them back to the Anglo-American evangelical sphere that grew out of the Great Awakening and gave rise to distinctly Anglo-American forms of Protestant Christianity that broke away from traditional theological perspectives with influence from people like the Puritans and Presbyterians. I'm talking like Biblical literalists, snake handlers, Pentecostals, tent revivalists, "non-denominational evangelicals," and the charismatic men who eventually morphed into modern televangelists and megachurch pastors. In other Abrahamic traditions, the same period saw analogous developments like Wahhabism, Salafism, Deobandi, religious Zionism, and Hasidism. There is certainly some sharing of ideological developments and outreach strategies between Christian Identity and white racialist neo-paganism but Christian Identity types and white racialist neo-pagans typically rebuke each other with claims of Satanism (sometimes accurate), accusations of worshipping Jews on sticks, and other such things.
>and post-Turner Diarys American white nationalist movement more than any of those
I think that the neo-pagan movements that resemble secular white nationalist political movements are largely secular white nationalist political movements with pagan aesthetics or neo-pagan movements that share the same roots with other neo-pagan movements but derive their membership largely from secular white nationalist movements.
>Nietzschian/Heideggerian currents still exist
I don't know anything about these. Can you offer more information? I know Nietzscheans and Heideggerians are a thing in far right social and political circles, but I didn't know there were such things as Nietzschean or Heideggerian neo-pagans.

[Anonymous No.14835332]

Some Gods are angels i.e created supernatural beings who weave a grand narrative that is incomprehensible for us as humans to see. A selection of Gods who’s wills don’t seem to conflict with each others are just aspects of the eternal uncreated perfect being given different faces but are united in action.

[Anonymous No.14835339]

It's cooler therefore it's immune.
But really, Jung and Eliade.

[Anonymous No.14835340]

Paganism somehow manages to have a more plebian metaphysical ideal than even christianity. If christianity is metaphysics for the common man. Paganism is metaphysics for down syndromes

[Anonymous No.14835345]

>>14833015
They're materialistically-motivated (whether blood worship or hatred of mom and dad or even both) philistines.

[Anonymous No.14835407]

>>14835317
I feel as though its almost a pointless task to try and divide up and categorize neopagans, and especially Germanic neopagans in America, as there is so much cross-pollination of ideas between various strands. Individuals often hold contradictory or non-standard ideas regardless of group, and the vast majority of practitioners probably don't belong to an organised community, and develop their ideas through personal readings and such. I'm almost in favor of using the in-group terminology of 'folkish' vs 'universalist', as they're probably the most common modes of self identification and broad beliefs, but at the same time are almost useless for tracing the genealogy of the movement.

I'll defend my assertion about Christian identity, even if it wasn't the best. I think it's important to distinguish the theological roots of CI from the political roots, though they're definitely linked. You're right in identifying the roots of CI theology in American revival theology (+American curse of ham doctrine, etc.) and British Israelism, but I would hesitate to link it into any larger Abrahamic revival, though all are likely a reaction in some form of emerging modernity. I've toyed around with the idea of Mormonism as a proto-Christian identity movement and such.

But the political roots of modern CI and the post-Turner diaries right are really a bit different. The CI most familiar today really arises primarily out of the militia movement of the late 50s combined with lingering traces of the KKK and the American Nazi Party, and intensifies around the 80s. I think a lot of far-right pagan groups pulled a lot of their ideology from this period of right wing resurgence in the 80s, esp. among anti-gov pagan groups. Ideas like the North West Front and the turner diaries come from this stream as well. I think you're right in classifying this form of neopaganism as primarily a political and not religious movement, but as I said in the first paragraph cross-pollination is so common that you really have to look at it from all angles to see where they're getting their ideas.

That was probably a mess, but whatever it's late. As for Nietzschean strands, most of these would be independent practitioners and not organised groups, and would probably be non-theistic. As for Heidegger, he had a bigger role in European Neopaganism esp. via De Benoist and the Nouvelle Droite, but that's out of my wheelhouse. The only Heideggerian pagan writing for a North American audience in my knowledge is Collin Cleary

[Anonymous No.14835422]

>>14834131
And you believe otherwise simply because someone in a position of power over your told you to believe it.

[Anonymous No.14835430]

>>14835407

[Anonymous No.14835436]

>>14835430
You know which board you're on don't you, you dumb nigger?

[Anonymous No.14835442]

>>14835422
nope some of us actually read

[Anonymous No.14835443]

>>14834755
>>14834784
A good question, and not an easy one to answer. There are minor gods, the goddess of pain, the god of dice. One may say that their line, their genealogy, is that of lesser men. But I think this misses the point, the god of dice may become extremely important in some economic circumstances. I often think of the myth of Arachne, obviously a group of women weaving does not hold the same power as something like war, and yet it becomes an incredibly significant event once Arachne curses Athena and is then in turn cursed. Judgement, or a contest before the gods, can arrive at any moment, and this suggests the great and invisible forces behind all things. In this the gods are all equal, completely of their own dominion yet one in the entire weight of the universe.

Of course, this is a contradiction given that there is often a hierarchy of the gods. Zeus and Fate perhaps being the most well-known examples. The gods are often at war, and the decision of one god may be overturned by another. This may be seen as nonsense by Christians and followers of the other monotheistic religions, but in its most simple sense such contradictions speak to the paradoxes and uncertainties of life. Morality and law are not written in stone, and they may not have the final say. The reality of human dominion is that war with the gods is sometimes inevitable. Humility in its negative form.

Compared to literature the myths are opposite to the archetypes, and closer to the forms. In Justice Themis presides, beyond time she is closer to that of the Fates than anything resembling worldly justice. She is the Lady of Good Counsel, and sees that which will enter the worlds - her advice is based upon this. The universe is not ordered by her, but peace with it allows her counsel over it. Decisions may either be positive or negative to the form. Dike, on the other hand, carries out the certainty of fate as it relates to justice. Nemesis carries out the violent judgement between them.

[Anonymous No.14835447]

>>14835443
That is not as clear as it should be, and would need a lot of work to clarify the territory over which each goddess reigns. A better example is perhaps that of Artemis and Actaeon. At his end, Actaeon appears as a moment of perfection of wildness, all of its forces setting upon themselves, even enacting and extracting themselves from the negative. It is a pure force in which man finds himself becoming mere appearance, the world condemned along with him as the territory becomes a void of divine laws.

Epimetheus as another good example, he is often depicted as foolish, as enacting a mistake for man and gods. However, hindsight in the divine sense entails the entire weight of history, all time leading up to this point. His 'afterthought' or 'mistake' in giving men over to weakness can also be understood as their own birth after the entire weight of the natural world - born of all that which forces weakness but also their strength to overcome it through creation of their own dominion. This implies also the development of strength, a curse of being formed by the gods which will be overcome. Where Epimetheus is tricked with the gift of Pandora he is also playing his part as the entire weight of time in the creation of that moment when the titans, gods, and man will forever be divided. Man will accept his gift and curse, a reflection of what they give to Zeus, the gods will go to war with the titans, and several of the titans will side with the gods or remain neutral. Perhaps more than any other god Epimetheus gives this sense of reigning over a territory rather than being a force of nature or archetypal symbol. The gods have a power beyond that of their domain, they are not determined by it but rule over it and seek to extend their power through it. It is pious because it is the means through which they wield their weapons.

The archetypal stories are thus lesser stories involving lesser laws. The focus is on the human, of which the world of dominion and form lose their sovereignty within the human mind. Tragic heroes reign along with the lesser gods, then their names are forgotten. But this does not lessen the forces in any way. Instead the reflected image becomes reality, overpowering the form only apparently. Hence the total misunderstanding of the myth of Narcissus even as it becomes the law of secular societies. The myths become even stronger from the negative, only the narratives have no possibility of completion.

[Anonymous No.14835671]

>>14835407
Thanks for the info. I see where you're coming from now, looking more at the political side of things than I was. Good talk, anon. It's cool to have real and productive conversations on 4chins.

[Anonymous No.14835848]

>>14834101
>power of storytelling and eternal laws
>Christianity has left behind

[Anonymous No.14836084]

>>14833015
Why would they defend themselves against monists? Monism is pagan and most modern pagans that care at all about philosophy/metaphysics seems to be monists.

[Anonymous No.14837365]

bump

[Anonymous No.14837391]

>>14835848
Are Christianity's laws eternal? A naive answer, but the current state of the world suggests that the Good and Love are not even present, let alone the dominant forms of law. Rather, the law of Sodom reigns, has even taken over the churches, and the Christian God seems powerless to stop it.
The paradox of Christianity is its moralism: reverence for the heavenly but dependent upon worldly sovereignty of its laws. Similarly, knowledge is a form of evil, yet it is entirely dependent upon knowledge to secure faith and maintain its moral law. It is here that the differences between Christianity and secular humanism disappear, as their relation to time, being, and rationalism are one.