From: Nightstar Area: Metaphysical To: Drui 1 Mar 94 23:25:18 Subject: request for aid UpdReq In a message between Drui and Any Of All, they were heard to say: D> Now - so OK, I admit it, the wizard is me, there are two D> questions the D> wizard would like help answering, much much more simple than D> quedstions D> about things like how the eco-system of a civilisation helpd D> determine its D> cosmology: D> 1) why do the people think HE (and his friend wizards up in D> the tower) D> are "bigots" because they want to talk about such things, and the D> people D> don't consider themselves equally so for scorning such topics? D> 2) should he climb back up the tower and he and his friends D> just go on D> as they were before he tried coming down? Good questions. I thought this confrence was devoted to those things precisely. Let me tell you a little story about a different wizard. Long ago, there was a sorceress with a magic mirror. And with her magic mirror, she communicated to many other sorcerers and sorceresses who also had magic mirrors. Slowly, other sorcerers and sorceresses were getting magic mirrors and so one said that they should each get three magic mirrors, one so they could talk about mundane things, one so they could talk about magick but not the theoretical, philisophical, or metaphysical things, and one for essays as it were, on the more theoretical or metaphysical things. All agreed and they all got their mirrors. Then this sorceress moved and in the process, lost her beloved magic mirrors. Then, years later, she made herself some new ones to allow her to talk to all her old friends again. Except now her friends were gone, no longer speaking on the magic mirrors. Instead, other people were using the mirrors. But the same three mirrors existed as before and so she connected her mirrors to them magically. Only the "essay" mirror was not being used that way and the other two mirrors were too clutterred to bother with. The sorceress is of course me. I was around when magicknet was one echo and during the discussion that led to the "three-headed monster". I moved and lost my computer access. Now I own my own. This was the place to discuss exactly what you wish to discuss. I got this echo specifically for that reason. However, like internet news-groups and other fido-net echoes, as an unmoderated confrence (at least that's the way it seems), it has fallen into disrepair. I do not think you a snob or bigot because you wish to discuss such things. I admit some here might call me such as well although I only conceed to being an information sponge. Assuming there is a moderator which there's suppose to be, what do you suppose happenned to him that he's no longer doing his job? Do you think he died or something? The others here will hate it if we try to elect another moderator who will enforce the rules instead of letting them go on lacksidaisily. This is PODS after all, not FIDOnet. Do you think we should start a new confrence? In time, unless we keep a firm handle on it, it too will fall to the same fate. However, we might be able to enjoy it until then. After that, we could always start another confrence. If we did start a new confrence, what should we call it? What should the rules be? Who should moderate it? How should we enforce the rules? BTW, I am very interested in how the eco-system of a civilization helps determine the cosmology. I'm currently planning to take a degree in anthropology and this is right up my alley. From out of the darkness, ... Nightstar 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Drui Area: Metaphysical To: Nightstar 2 Mar 94 03:02:02 Subject: snobs 1/ UpdReq Snobs? Oh I get called lots worse than that! When I edited Cainteanna na Luise 1984-1990, people would take out subscriptions and receiving their first issue their reaction would be either: 1) "this is vile elitist trash - cancel me"; or 2) "this is wonderful, I want all the back issues!" Almost nobody was inbetween. I'd get hate mail, and other people wanting multiple subscriptions for their friends. Of course, since the National Library of Ireland was in the "send copies of everything" camp, I have my own opinion about "who was what" in this polarization.... but I admit, I have the habit of doing this. Put it down to my Irish nature: a friend who lives in Ireland has said "in Canada somethings are awful and somethings are wonderful, but most things are in the middle and neither; in Ireland, somethings are absolutely terrible and somethings are totally marvelous and there's NOTHING left in the middle at all!" ('T'is true!) For example, follows a "recorded announceent": Please, when addressing me could you omit the ">quote"s. I remember what I say, even when I exchange letters with several people simultaneously with sometimes months between replies. The ">quote"s make your reply a great deal MORE difficult to read; one has to play leap-frog over them. Besides, if a person can't remember what s/he says, it must not be important (or witty) enough for anyone else to bother with. When I answer others I give them the respect of assuming they had something to say which they thought important and know what they say; I ask only that I be accorded the same respect. Computers can be a great help in developing one's mind, or they can be used just as easily to atrope it, or to brain-wash it into "conventional" ways of mentally reacting. Not remembering what one says is the latter. Every English composition course in existance stresses "avoid repeating". And as for "convention", it qualifies as one of Emerson's "hobgobblins of little minds". We could start a planet-net revolution right here - The Revolt of People Who Know What They Said. All messages could begin-reference with ONLY ">> Continued to next message ___ X SLMR 2.0 X 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Drui Area: Metaphysical To: Nightstar 2 Mar 94 03:02:04 Subject: snobs 2/ UpdReq >>> Continued from previous message Emphasis: a high degree of professionalism (either via academic study or experience, not necessarily both). People on conference should be acquainted with at least basic philosophy, psychology, anthropology and/or have a past experience in techniques of "reality-mechanics". "Mine is best" will not be tolerated, but severe criticisms of others are acceptable IF they are limited to valid theoretical and/or pragmatic points (e.g. ecologists who drive their cars everywhere open themselves to possibly-valid accusations of hypocrasy). PS: this all sounds very "high brow" but there's high-browed pagans too! It will keep us egg-heads roped off in our own little pen (which is where I am sure SOME people wish we would stay...) All would-be satanism-discussions will be theorized to silence on first appearance! - Drui PS: so now you are going to ask my home-base sysop to shove me back under the rock I crawlled out of, or you are goinhg to deluge me with ideas in return. Best find these things out right at the begining! ___ X SLMR 2.0 X 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Drui Area: Metaphysical To: Nightstar 2 Mar 94 03:02:00 Subject: mirrors'n'towers UpdReq Hello again, Seems they divide up long messages on this thing. How can you do essays. One of my standard "no, I'm only weird HERE. At home I'm normal" explanations explains how you ask for the time in Ireland (tho this is yOUR version, I change it each time I tell it): You do not stop someone and ask "Can you tell me the time?" RUDE! You stop them, sorry, you ask if they have a few minuteS, you show them your watch, you tell them where you got it (with luck your grand- father/mother gave it to you so you can tell them all about the dear (wo)man!), then you explain why you forgot to wind it (never carry a battery watch) - maybe you were rushed at breakfast (WHY were you), then you say what you need to do when (see it's iMPORTANT you need the watch working, you are not wasting their time), - ta-da1 THEN you ask them what time it is. Here, they think who is this creep deluging me with a verbal avalanche when al the %^^%E$ he wants to know is the time? In Ireland, they will think you at least an average conversationalist. Our own conference. In the UL I put the 2-part in, I am afraid I have begun - someone said X and I explain that no scholar, no serious researcher, nobody who'd get a footnote in blah blah 'd be listened to saying that. Tho, look, another moderator, whose identity shall remanin for now hidden top proteect him/her from people who have stamps left over after wwriting my hate mail, on her/his conf also sounds like us. We get enough moderators, we can start our own NET! The following is a file I just did (the other moderator, and a partoicular sysop - BLAME THEM - have begun to encourage me to upload files) and rather than ask you to track it down, I'll give it to you right here and asky your reaction. Because to talk like I think (hope) we want to talk, that involves first talking about HOW we want to talk about it. The following isn't specific on that, but for "path" you can substitute "conference topics" and most of it will be appropriate: PATH EVALUATION GUIDE copyright 1994 Cainteanna na Luise A proposed guide to telling "Pop-" from "Neo-"Pagan groups, and evaluating "paths". 1) If the group is based on a non-English culture, is one expected to learn at least some of the language inwhich the culture is based? 2) Is the group PR-ed as things like "Biggest", "Fasted Growing", "Most Popular", or does it stress the would-be joiner's INDIVIDUAL affinity for the path? Does the group actively discourage curiousity seekers and "path- of-the-month types? (This does not mean being "Secret".) 3) Does it draw primarily upon actual verified traditions and the best of archaeology, anthropology, and manuscript studies within its own cultural base, or does it "mix'n'match", bringing in LARGE amounts of material from other paths (i.e. the ancient Mayan who invented their calendar did so by THEIR star-charts, not by those of the Middle-East which have come down to is as "[Western] Astrology", does a so-claimed "Mayan" group use what the Mayans themselves used or does it use Astrology (Tarot, I-Ching, etc) which they would have considered alien? (this does not preclude "modern adaptations" but ONLY when they are to modern things, e.g. jet airplanes, and when they are simultaneously grounded in tradition, e.g. for jet airplanes one probably would need to study chariots, birds, etc.) 4) Do practitioners, money allowing, actually visit the homeland of the path (not merely the "sites" but do they familiarize themselves, in person, with the fauna and flora, the weather (not just in summer), of the place and people who gave birth to the path? 5) Are practitioners expected to be familiar with BASIC (not merely culturally-realted) ontology, anthropology, linquisitics, etc., so they understand HOW paths are created, what stimuli they respond to, what roles they play, and so they can recognize if any path has intrensic coherence or self-invalidation? 6) Is the person expected to give his/her first priority to the path itself and not to the social group, the "organization", or to any "leader"? 7) Is the person expected to change his/her life to fit the path (not, re No.6 the path's other followers), and not use the path to simply "get ahead in life" to attain status (money, sex, fame, etc.)? IF ANY of the above are "No", then the "path" is false. ___----- I think much of that would apply to conferences. Tho i have little (2 weeks!) experience on PODS, I see the equivelent all over it. --- Drui ___ X SLMR 2.0 X 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Drui Area: Metaphysical To: Nightsar 2 Mar 94 03:02:00 Subject: towers UpdReq Me again, Do you get labelled an "elitist"? I should admit now that the topics the tower-wizard listed were simply off the top of my head. Some up to now I've had little interest in, but I'd at least speed-scim any article with those names if I saw one. I don't care about Sumerian Noun Gender (blush, I'm not sure if Sumerian HAS gender in its nouns) itself, but I translate Old Irish and maybe amid the SNG there may be a tidbit I can use in my own stuff. 'Nother example: this friend of mine happened across a book on Taoism. He was vaguely aware of it. A short time later I visit - books and squibbly pages all over his desk. "What are you doing?" ask I. Him: "I liked the book but you can't trust translators, I'm teaching myself to read and write Ancient Chinese." Fate can be fickle and he moved away, last I knew, to a cabin in the BC mountains (he never had a phone or doorbell - they intruded - and I had to throw pebbles at his window). You could talk to him, refering to Kant, Spinoza, Berekely, etc in "short-hand" like most people say "White House" and mean Clinton or up here say "The Hill" and assume you know it's the one parliamnent sits on. We'd have 5-8 hour marathon rap sessions OD-ing on caffine... (If you get a REAL magic mirror, maybe we can try to find where he ended up.) Do you have trouble that reading about him, you think he is "daily normal" (or what you'd want to be so) and then have to remind yourself that he is, by 99% of standards, very weird? Re your mirror being usurped: I only get get nasty when people interlope on my terrority; I don't barge in on Pop-Pagan Picnics, why should they barge in on my (and others', with me) tuft? I don't particularly want to diccuss all these next folks, but they're probably "on the list' (like do you smoke? drink? are you alergic to cats? before you invite somebody to live-chat). Please add any you have red-flags or undying passion for. Some of'em I haven't read since age 14-15 (never MIND, how many decades ago that was, I... think... I still remember): Kant - no, too Plato in Liederho"sen. Spinoza - nice images, nice logic, but I'm not a pan-anything. J.S.Mills - usable images, he'd probably not like my uases. Arsitotle - no. Berkeley - for an X-ain (well he was Irish) - I LIKE this man! Bergson - so-so. Descartes - growl, snarl, hiss, spit, will the children leave the room. Freud - misspelling for "Fraud". Edward Hall - he's mine! I named him first! Castaneda (books 3/4) - it's not fact. It's still true (those who don't instantly recognize the diffeence, please leave.) Sartre - amusing; I can't figure out if he was trying to be anything else. R.D.Laing - a guiding light now gone out. T. de Chartan (or however he spells himself) - nice try, no cigar. Whorf (and Sapir) - yes yes yes. (did you know the Irish language does not have words for "yes" and "no" - this is why we talk so much, a perfect example right here of.... ) Lao Tzu - yes, so far as it goes. B.F.Skinner - CONFLAGRATION is too small a flame. Buddha - a nice man I would enjoy having tea with.... Plato - see Kant. Kierkegaard - I'd like to like him, but I don't. (and lots of other folks I apologize to the ghosts of for them not being a the top of my head) --- Drui ___ X SLMR 2.0 X 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Drui Area: Metaphysical To: Nightstar 2 Mar 94 03:02:02 Subject: hall UpdReq re list of red-flags and passions: Anthropology you say? So, ok, just because I think we might get to be friends, I will SHARE Edward Hall with you. Too bad i respect copyright or we could upload all of his books (please read if you haven't), the man is wonderful, one almost needs invent "cosmo-anthropo-ontology" [ugh] as a new term for what he does. He is almost the only anthropologist who has "classes of X" charts that I can usually find ME on (you may have this trouble too?). --- Drui ___ X SLMR 2.0 X 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718