Anglo-Saxon witchcraft link

[Init8]

http://www.ealdriht.org/witchcraft.html

This contains the two quotes from Aelfric that Cavalorn used, set within a
wider discussion of the meaning of the term within a North European
context, which seems to lend support to the view that witchcraft was a
pre-existing practice, rather than a myth invented by Christian
theologians.

Init8

[Cavalorn]

Post by Init8
http://www.ealdriht.org/witchcraft.html
This contains the two quotes from Aelfric that Cavalorn used, set within a
wider discussion of the meaning of the term within a North European
context, which seems to lend support to the view that witchcraft was a
pre-existing practice, rather than a myth invented by Christian
theologians.

Can one really consider 'flying in the air' or 'turning into a hare' to
be a *practice*?

Are these things not, rather obviously, the characteristics of
*mythical* beings, comparable to the power of dragons to breathe fire or
of werewolves to turn into wolf or human shape?

There is no reason to suppose that the characteristics of one culture's
myths should not influence another culture's myths. In point of fact,
cultural transference is not always necessary, as discernible
'myththemes' arise in unconnected cultures - see the work of Levi-
Strauss and the role of diachronic as contrasted with synchronic
influence.

Cav

[In The Darkness]

Post by Cavalorn

Post by Init8
http://www.ealdriht.org/witchcraft.html
This contains the two quotes from Aelfric that Cavalorn used, set within a
wider discussion of the meaning of the term within a North European
context, which seems to lend support to the view that witchcraft was a
pre-existing practice, rather than a myth invented by Christian
theologians.

Can one really consider 'flying in the air' or 'turning into a hare' to
be a *practice*?

Depends how much "Good Herbals" one ingests. Shamanic practices,
and even Gaelic, sometimes involved trancing into an altered
state where such things happened "in the Minds Eye"..

Post by Cavalorn
Are these things not, rather obviously, the characteristics of
*mythical* beings, comparable to the power of dragons to breathe fire or
of werewolves to turn into wolf or human shape?

Or, as the one trial demonstrated "He drank from their Elixir,
and he was transported to a place where they danced with the
witches around the devil.."

Evidence that it may have been a Shamanic Journey, rather than
a literal one. Take King Arthur, as a boy, being changed into a fish
by Merlin...

via a magic potion.

Very similar, indeed.

Post by Cavalorn
There is no reason to suppose that the characteristics of one culture's
myths should not influence another culture's myths. In point of fact,
cultural transference is not always necessary, as discernible
'myththemes' arise in unconnected cultures - see the work of Levi-
Strauss and the role of diachronic as contrasted with synchronic
influence.
Cav

[Cavalorn]

Post by In The Darkness

Post by Cavalorn
Can one really consider 'flying in the air' or 'turning into a hare' to
be a *practice*?

Depends how much "Good Herbals" one ingests.

Who would be ingesting the herbals? The person who wrote about what the
'witch' got up to, or the 'witch' themself?

If mediaeval peasants were getting smashed on ergot (or whatever) and
saw flying witches, then we need not take any more notice of reports of
witches than we do of reports of pink elephants. A drug fantasy is a
drug fantasy.

However, if it was supposed to be the 'witches' than took the drugs and
thought they were flying, then why on earth would anyone *else* have
believed that they turned into hares or flew in the air? If someone
takes LSD and tells you he can fly, you are not convinced.

Besides, if 'witches' were zonked on herbs all the time, maybe they
couldn't do magic *either* and only thought they could because they were
so bombed. That reading of history doesn't say much for the powers of
the witch, really, does it! It would explain a lot though... 'Dude, you
just totally turned into a frog, hee hee.' 'Ooo, bummer.'

So, who was supposed to have been the tripping person here?

Post by In The Darkness
Shamanic practices,
and even Gaelic, sometimes involved trancing into an altered
state where such things happened "in the Minds Eye"..

And your evidence for that would be...?

You see, this is the standard response when people look at the myths
from a modern day perspective. Everything's chopped around to fit.

We don't like the idea that witches were in league with the devil, so
let's make them pagans instead, worshipping some 'horned god' figure.

Witches were real, but they can't possibly have been flying in the air,
so let's 'explain' that with reference to some drug experience.

Never mind that these explanations always raise more questions than they
answer...

Post by In The Darkness
Or, as the one trial demonstrated "He drank from their Elixir,
and he was transported to a place where they danced with the
witches around the devil.."

Where did you pick that snippet up from? I'd like to see more.

Post by In The Darkness
Evidence that it may have been a Shamanic Journey, rather than
a literal one. Take King Arthur, as a boy, being changed into a fish
by Merlin...

Good grief, why can't people let *myths* be *myths*?

Why can't it ever be *just* a story? Why do people nowadays always have
to try to make these things *real* in some procrustean way or other?

Cav

[In The Darkness]

Post by Cavalorn

Post by In The Darkness

Post by Cavalorn
Can one really consider 'flying in the air' or 'turning into a hare' to
be a *practice*?

Depends how much "Good Herbals" one ingests.

Who would be ingesting the herbals? The person who wrote about what the
'witch' got up to, or the 'witch' themself?
If mediaeval peasants were getting smashed on ergot (or whatever) and
saw flying witches, then we need not take any more notice of reports of
witches than we do of reports of pink elephants. A drug fantasy is a
drug fantasy.

The catcher would be to add the word "SOME"

If "some" medieval peasants were getting smashed...
and then the answer becomes self evident.

Post by Cavalorn
However, if it was supposed to be the 'witches' than took the drugs and
thought they were flying, then why on earth would anyone *else* have
believed that they turned into hares or flew in the air? If someone
takes LSD and tells you he can fly, you are not convinced.

Until the sucker jumps off the cliff, then -I- will verify he flew
for several seconds, at least.

:)

Post by Cavalorn
Besides, if 'witches' were zonked on herbs all the time,

Here, we move from a Shamanic trance, to "all the time",
this is the very *&%*%* I can't stand when talking to you...

Post by Cavalorn
maybe they
couldn't do magic *either* and only thought they could because they were
so bombed.

Don't confuse Magic, with Magick, Aspirin works, Dude.
Even if you don't believe in the Prayer part....

Post by Cavalorn
That reading of history doesn't say much for the powers of
the witch, really, does it! It would explain a lot though... 'Dude, you
just totally turned into a frog, hee hee.' 'Ooo, bummer.'

See ?

Post by Cavalorn
So, who was supposed to have been the tripping person here?

Members of the Xian church must have got hold of shit more
psychedelic than I can conceive, have you ever -read-
-their- writings ??

OD'ed on Mushrooms with Peyote, at mimimum.

*S*

Jesus floating up into the Sky to Gods right hand,
-had- to involved good stuff.. because,
quite frankly, he would have "popped".

Post by Cavalorn

Post by In The Darkness
Shamanic practices,
and even Gaelic, sometimes involved trancing into an altered
state where such things happened "in the Minds Eye"..

And your evidence for that would be...?

American Indian Shaman practices, wherein
the Shaman takes Peyote, and trances out.

I take it this is *new* information for you ?

If you doubt it, check into it, America even has exceptions
to the drug laws for certain Indian Tribal Shamans.

Oh, and the Sufi, descendants of the Middle Eastern Religions,
(including Judaism, and Muslims) use mild psychedelics as S.O.P.
for "transcending".

It is where we derive the word Hashish, in the English Language.

Post by Cavalorn
You see, this is the standard response when people look at the myths
from a modern day perspective. Everything's chopped around to fit.

Oh,, yes... and all Witches, Siedhe, etc. were strictly fictitious,
even though I visited one of the houses of these "fictitious" women
out in the Pennsylvania Mountains.

The house was mythical, too, eh ?

Felt awful solid under my feet... she had passed on after about
a hundred years of life, leaving behind only the legend.

Post by Cavalorn
We don't like the idea that witches were in league with the devil, so
let's make them pagans instead, worshipping some 'horned god' figure.

Some were, some -didn't-.. the Witches of yesteryear didn't even
have a standardized religion. Their belief varied according to -region-,
as far as I have been able to tell...

Post by Cavalorn
Witches were real, but they can't possibly have been flying in the air,
so let's 'explain' that with reference to some drug experience.

Some explanations this fits... others, were simple hysteria, and more still,
simply fabrications.

Pick your poison, based upon the case.

One size does NOT fit all, no matter how hard you try to lead
us to that posture.

Post by Cavalorn
Never mind that these explanations always raise more questions than they
answer...

Well, that is the problem with reality, instead of fiction,
it does tend to be more complex than we would like it to be.

For example "witch" wasn't an English origin word, and didn't
only have -one- path of evolution, in one country, nor did it
have only one spelling.

All attempts to make that so, are delusional.

Post by Cavalorn

Post by In The Darkness
Or, as the one trial demonstrated "He drank from their Elixir,
and he was transported to a place where they danced with the
witches around the devil.."

Where did you pick that snippet up from? I'd like to see more.

From a link posted into the list..

http://www.ealdriht.org/witchcraft.html

(The poster) Init8 said:
"This contains the two quotes from Aelfric that Cavalorn used, set within a
wider discussion of the meaning of the term within a North European
context, which seems to lend support to the view that witchcraft was a
pre-existing practice, rather than a myth invented by Christian
theologians."

Post by Cavalorn

Post by In The Darkness
Evidence that it may have been a Shamanic Journey, rather than
a literal one. Take King Arthur, as a boy, being changed into a fish
by Merlin...

Good grief, why can't people let *myths* be *myths*?

Because what is Myth, and what is reality, is blurred,
and we seek the truth, not the Church Propaganda (tm) Mirage
which we know has been tampered with...

Post by Cavalorn
Why can't it ever be *just* a story? Why do people nowadays always have
to try to make these things *real* in some procrustean way or other?
Cav

Because many of these events are -based- upon reality, even if
you won't admit it to yourself. We seek the truth, you seem to hide
from it.

GLoS'ing it over, so to speak.

[Init8]

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 11:38:54 CST, Cavalorn

Post by Cavalorn
Can one really consider 'flying in the air' or 'turning into a hare' to
be a *practice*?

Grammatically speaking, a practice just requires a subject and a verb, and
(optionally) an object.

Post by Cavalorn
Are these things not, rather obviously, the characteristics of
*mythical* beings, comparable to the power of dragons to breathe fire or
of werewolves to turn into wolf or human shape?

Any practice which doesn't fit in with a culture's belief system is by
definition 'mythical'.

Post by Cavalorn
There is no reason to suppose that the characteristics of one culture's
myths should not influence another culture's myths. In point of fact,
cultural transference is not always necessary, as discernible
'myththemes' arise in unconnected cultures - see the work of Levi-
Strauss and the role of diachronic as contrasted with synchronic
influence.

Such as...shapeshifting?

Init8

[Romauld]

Recently, a script from Init8 arrived, in which they said:

: Any practice which doesn't fit in with a culture's belief system is by
: definition 'mythical'.

Thankyou for giving me the opportunity to start a slightly different
discussion.

To what extant can 'Science' be viewed as the dominant faith of the
modern western world? Discuss ;)

~R

[Nori Otaku]

Post by Romauld
: Any practice which doesn't fit in with a culture's belief system is by
: definition 'mythical'.
Thankyou for giving me the opportunity to start a slightly different
discussion.
To what extant can 'Science' be viewed as the dominant faith of the
modern western world? Discuss ;)

That depends largely on your definition of 'faith'.

If, as the context seems to imply, you define 'faith' to be synonymous (or
even close to) 'spiritual belief', then Science doesn't count; it's a
system of philosophy (including conclusion based on observation), but not
a 'faith'.

Science does, however, require a certain amount of faith. Unfortunately
for those that would equate Science with Religion, just about *any* system
of beliefs requires faith. I have faith that the Sun wil rise tomorrow
because I have a basic understanding of why it has risen every day for my
entire life; that doesn't mean I have a religion based on the rising of
the Sun.

[Romauld]

Recently, a script from Nori Otaku arrived, in which they said:

: That depends largely on your definition of 'faith'.

Very much so ;)

: If, as the context seems to imply, you define 'faith' to be synonymous (or
: even close to) 'spiritual belief', then Science doesn't count; it's a
: system of philosophy (including conclusion based on observation), but not
: a 'faith'.

Let me expand on my theme a little.

To what extent in modern society can a distinction be drawn between
science (the method of hypothesis, experiment, conclusion), and
Science (the popular, nationally sponsored implantation of the
idea that the nice priest in the white lab-coat Really Does Know
Best)?

It is my observation, partly as an expansion on my comments under
the heading 'Sleight of Mind', that one of the greatest tragedies
of modern education is that people have been taught to think they
understand science, and that somehow 'science' or 'being scientific'
means 'correct'. Science is a method, and the very *root* of it is
reproducibility. But people have been taught to react as thought
science was some form of new Delphic Oracle, to which supplications
in the form of research grants of newspaper column inches need to
be sacrificed in order to gain the desired return, that is patents
or fuzzy warm feelings about how clever we've been.

I completely concur in your observation about actual science.
To what extent does this differ from the public perception of Science?

~R

[janet]

Post by Romauld

Post by Nori Otaku
That depends largely on your definition of 'faith'.

Very much so ;)

Post by Nori Otaku
If, as the context seems to imply, you define 'faith' to be
synonymous (or even close to) 'spiritual belief', then Science
doesn't count; it's a system of philosophy (including conclusion
based on observation), but not a 'faith'.

Let me expand on my theme a little.
To what extent in modern society can a distinction be drawn between
science (the method of hypothesis, experiment, conclusion), and
Science (the popular, nationally sponsored implantation of the
idea that the nice priest in the white lab-coat Really Does Know
Best)?

Very little, I would have said.

There was a survey not too long ago (how "scientific" I don't know) that
showed that a lot of people would believe outlandish things if assured that
"scientists say".

(I have trouble with the survey - you'd deliberately be misinforming
people - what ethics committee is going to go for that?).

We spend a lot of time unpacking this with various student groups, and it's
pervasive.

Authority has gone from the church to the laboratory - because the first no
longer offers universal solutions and the second says it can (in the popular
mind).

(Insert here the discussion of postmodernism - if you really must. We'll
wait. /whistles......). :)

Post by Romauld
It is my observation, partly as an expansion on my comments under
the heading 'Sleight of Mind', that one of the greatest tragedies
of modern education is that people have been taught to think they
understand science, and that somehow 'science' or 'being scientific'
means 'correct'. Science is a method, and the very *root* of it is
reproducibility. But people have been taught to react as thought
science was some form of new Delphic Oracle, to which supplications
in the form of research grants of newspaper column inches need to
be sacrificed in order to gain the desired return, that is patents
or fuzzy warm feelings about how clever we've been.

Which is why I spend time talking about "lies to children" and assign The
Structure of Scientific Revolutions to every group I can get away with
assinging it to....

Post by Romauld
I completely concur in your observation about actual science.
To what extent does this differ from the public perception of Science?

Hugely.

Post by Romauld
~R

--
janet Email : ***@karlsforums.com
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[francis]

Post by janet
Which is why I spend time talking about "lies to children" and assign
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions to every group I can get away
with assinging it to....

Oh dear! Oh dear! Oh dear! Naughty, naughty, naughty. Undermining the
very structure of society. Expecting, nay actually encouraging, students
to think for themselves. Whatever next?

"Is this a dagger I see before me .. "

[janet]

Post by francis

Post by janet
Which is why I spend time talking about "lies to children" and assign
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions to every group I can get away
with assinging it to....

Oh dear! Oh dear! Oh dear! Naughty, naughty, naughty. Undermining the
very structure of society. Expecting, nay actually encouraging,
students to think for themselves. Whatever next?

That's only my level one students.

You should see what I do to the level threes.... :>

Post by francis
"Is this a dagger I see before me .. "

I have no idea.

Is it?

Knowing you, dear, it's more likely to be an athame. :)

((francis)) :)

--
janet Email : ***@karlsforums.com
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[Shez]

Post by janet

Post by francis

Post by janet
Which is why I spend time talking about "lies to children" and assign
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions to every group I can get away
with assinging it to....

Oh dear! Oh dear! Oh dear! Naughty, naughty, naughty. Undermining the
very structure of society. Expecting, nay actually encouraging,
students to think for themselves. Whatever next?

That's only my level one students.
You should see what I do to the level threes.... :>

Post by francis
"Is this a dagger I see before me .. "

I have no idea.
Is it?
Knowing you, dear, it's more likely to be an athame. :)
((francis)) :)
--

Or a bottle of Baileys cream :)

Post by janet
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[francis]

Post by Shez
Or a bottle of Baileys cream :)

Guilty! - and enjoying it. Two capfuls in each cup of coffee. :)}

[Shez]

Post by francis

Post by Shez
Or a bottle of Baileys cream :)

Guilty! - and enjoying it. Two capfuls in each cup of coffee. :)}

Shocking, totally utterly shocking... I will be on your doorstep in
about four minutes Francis, I hope you have enough Baileys to go
round...;)

[francis]

Post by Shez
Shocking, totally utterly shocking... I will be on your doorstep in
about four minutes Francis, I hope you have enough Baileys to go
round...;)
-

700 ml still in its virgin bottle .. from Sainsbury's .. yesterday ..
finished the other one last night! :)}

[Synn]

Post by Shez

Post by francis

Post by Shez
Or a bottle of Baileys cream :)

Guilty! - and enjoying it. Two capfuls in each cup of coffee. :)}

Shocking, totally utterly shocking... I will be on your doorstep in
about four minutes Francis, I hope you have enough Baileys to go
round...;)

Thare and Thare alook. Oh right...I think I had thoo meeny. *plunk*

~*~
Synn
~*~
The art of thinking
Is one I have not mastered
So I contemplate
Forever watching
For that one moment in time
That I would then Know.
~*~

[In The Darkness]

Post by janet

Post by francis

Post by janet
Which is why I spend time talking about "lies to children" and assign
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions to every group I can get away
with assinging it to....

Oh dear! Oh dear! Oh dear! Naughty, naughty, naughty. Undermining the
very structure of society. Expecting, nay actually encouraging,
students to think for themselves. Whatever next?

That's only my level one students.
You should see what I do to the level threes.... :>

Post by francis
"Is this a dagger I see before me .. "

Oh, but you children play with -T-oys.

Nobility, before you, played the same game with Swords.

* G *

[francis]

Post by janet
You should see what I do to the level threes.... :>

Is it anything to do with a Benedictine go spell? :)}

[janet]

Post by francis

Post by janet
You should see what I do to the level threes.... :>

Is it anything to do with a Benedictine go spell? :)}

:P :)

No, I pose the question, "What is the difference between magic and prayer?"

And walk out of the classroom.

For a week.

:)

--
janet Email : ***@karlsforums.com
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[M'Kel]

Post by janet

Post by francis

Post by janet
You should see what I do to the level threes.... :>

Is it anything to do with a Benedictine go spell? :)}

:P :)
No, I pose the question, "What is the difference between magic and prayer?"

Oh, I thought that was obvious, magic comes from within. Prayer is that
which is answered.

Post by janet
And walk out of the classroom.
For a week.

Time is an illusion created for those who fail grasp the *real* all at once.
:)

[Té Rowan]

Post by janet

Post by francis

Post by janet
Which is why I spend time talking about "lies to children" and
assign The Structure of Scientific Revolutions to every group I
can get away with assinging it to....

Oh dear! Oh dear! Oh dear! Naughty, naughty, naughty. Undermining
the very structure of society. Expecting, nay actually encouraging,
students to think for themselves. Whatever next?

That's only my level one students.

Oh, dear... Next thing I hear, you're assigning then "The Science of
Discworld"!

Té Rowan (***@mi.is)

[janet]

Post by Té Rowan

Post by janet

Post by francis

Post by janet
Which is why I spend time talking about "lies to children" and
assign The Structure of Scientific Revolutions to every group I
can get away with assinging it to....

Oh dear! Oh dear! Oh dear! Naughty, naughty, naughty. Undermining
the very structure of society. Expecting, nay actually encouraging,
students to think for themselves. Whatever next?

That's only my level one students.

Oh, dear... Next thing I hear, you're assigning then "The Science of
Discworld"!

Nope - cause the science in it is well beyond me. :)

My lot in March (should it run) will have the Hogfather assigned, though. :)
--
janet Email : ***@karlsforums.com
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[Shez]

Post by janet

Post by Té Rowan

Post by janet

Post by francis

Post by janet
Which is why I spend time talking about "lies to children" and
assign The Structure of Scientific Revolutions to every group I
can get away with assinging it to....

Oh dear! Oh dear! Oh dear! Naughty, naughty, naughty. Undermining
the very structure of society. Expecting, nay actually encouraging,
students to think for themselves. Whatever next?

That's only my level one students.

Oh, dear... Next thing I hear, you're assigning then "The Science of
Discworld"!

Nope - cause the science in it is well beyond me. :)
My lot in March (should it run) will have the Hogfather assigned, though. :)

I would have thought Small Gods would have been quite a good choice,

Hog father is certainly an amusing look at myths, and I still remember
with delight the four huge tuskers in the department store, one of whom
much to the children's delight peed all down the stairs in a yellow
waterfall...:)
Its just the sort of thing I would have enjoyed when I was a kid...

Post by janet
--
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[janet]

Post by Shez

Post by janet

Post by Té Rowan

Post by janet

Post by francis

Post by janet
Which is why I spend time talking about "lies to children" and
assign The Structure of Scientific Revolutions to every group I
can get away with assinging it to....

Oh dear! Oh dear! Oh dear! Naughty, naughty, naughty. Undermining
the very structure of society. Expecting, nay actually
encouraging, students to think for themselves. Whatever next?

That's only my level one students.

Oh, dear... Next thing I hear, you're assigning then "The Science of
Discworld"!

Nope - cause the science in it is well beyond me. :)
My lot in March (should it run) will have the Hogfather assigned, though. :)

I would have thought Small Gods would have been quite a good choice,

Well, the course is myth and magic....

Post by Shez
Hog father is certainly an amusing look at myths, and I still remember
with delight the four huge tuskers in the department store, one of
whom much to the children's delight peed all down the stairs in a
yellow waterfall...:)
Its just the sort of thing I would have enjoyed when I was a kid...

That's the reason for assigning it - not the hogs per se but the whole idea
of myth... :)

Post by Shez
--

janet Email : ***@karlsforums.com
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[Shez]

Post by janet

Post by Shez

Post by janet

Post by Té Rowan

Post by janet

Post by francis

Post by janet
Which is why I spend time talking about "lies to children" and
assign The Structure of Scientific Revolutions to every group I
can get away with assinging it to....

Oh dear! Oh dear! Oh dear! Naughty, naughty, naughty. Undermining
the very structure of society. Expecting, nay actually
encouraging, students to think for themselves. Whatever next?

That's only my level one students.

Oh, dear... Next thing I hear, you're assigning then "The Science of
Discworld"!

Nope - cause the science in it is well beyond me. :)
My lot in March (should it run) will have the Hogfather assigned, though. :)

I would have thought Small Gods would have been quite a good choice,

Well, the course is myth and magic....

Ah, I see.... So when you do religion.... It will be small gods, :)

( only stirring the pot dear )

Post by janet

Post by Shez
Hog father is certainly an amusing look at myths, and I still remember
with delight the four huge tuskers in the department store, one of
whom much to the children's delight peed all down the stairs in a
yellow waterfall...:)
Its just the sort of thing I would have enjoyed when I was a kid...

That's the reason for assigning it - not the hogs per se but the whole idea
of myth... :)

Post by Shez
--

mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[janet]

Post by Shez

Post by janet

Post by Shez

Post by janet

Post by Té Rowan

Post by janet

Post by francis

Post by janet
Which is why I spend time talking about "lies to children" and
assign The Structure of Scientific Revolutions to every group I
can get away with assinging it to....

Oh dear! Oh dear! Oh dear! Naughty, naughty, naughty.
Undermining the very structure of society. Expecting, nay
actually encouraging, students to think for themselves.
Whatever next?

That's only my level one students.

Oh, dear... Next thing I hear, you're assigning then "The Science
of Discworld"!

Nope - cause the science in it is well beyond me. :)
My lot in March (should it run) will have the Hogfather assigned, though. :)

I would have thought Small Gods would have been quite a good choice,

Well, the course is myth and magic....

Ah, I see.... So when you do religion.... It will be small gods, :)

I'm not touching that with a barge pole. At all. :)

Though when I taught religion, belief and culture, it wasn't on the reading
list (but I wasn't supposed to teach nearly as much of that as I ended up
teaching....).

Post by Shez
( only stirring the pot dear )

Who, you?

Nevah.... :>
--
janet Email : ***@karlsforums.com
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[Romauld]

Recently, a script from francis arrived, in which they said:

: "Is this a dagger I see before me .. "

"No, you fool, can't you see it's a lobster?"

The background to that story can only be obtained by pouring at
least one bottle of mead into the storyteller.

~R

[Nuala]

Post by Romauld
: "Is this a dagger I see before me .. "
"No, you fool, can't you see it's a lobster?"
The background to that story can only be obtained by pouring at
least one bottle of mead into the storyteller.

<salts this fact away for future application of same, and remembers that
she has yet to collect two bottles of Moniak from someone...>

~Love and blessings~

[Brock Ulfsen]

Post by francis

Post by janet
Which is why I spend time talking about "lies to children" and assign
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions to every group I can get away
with assinging it to....

Oh dear! Oh dear! Oh dear! Naughty, naughty, naughty. Undermining the
very structure of society. Expecting, nay actually encouraging, students
to think for themselves. Whatever next?

I believe Hemlock traditionally appears as a plot element at
about this point.

...Brock.

[Nuala]

Post by Brock Ulfsen

Post by francis

Post by janet
Which is why I spend time talking about "lies to children" and assign
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions to every group I can get away
with assinging it to....

Oh dear! Oh dear! Oh dear! Naughty, naughty, naughty. Undermining the
very structure of society. Expecting, nay actually encouraging,
students to think for themselves. Whatever next?

I believe Hemlock traditionally appears as a plot element at
about this point.

<humourless grin>

Or sharp pointy things and baths of water, or indeed large posts of wood
and handfuls of nails, or...

~Love and blessings~

[Romauld]

Recently, a script from janet arrived, in which they said:

: Very little, I would have said.

<snipppage>

From the sense of what I snipped, I suspect you meant 'quite a lot?' In

that you observe the same distinction that I do between actual science
and the Cult of Science as constructed by schools and the media?

: Authority has gone from the church to the laboratory - because the first no
: longer offers universal solutions and the second says it can (in the popular
: mind).

But of course any reputable actual practitioner of the scientific method
would not only not claim that of themselves but would tend to subject anyone
who *did* to rigorous peer review, possibly involving irony.

: Which is why I spend time talking about "lies to children" and assign The
: Structure of Scientific Revolutions to every group I can get away with
: assinging it to....

Oh I did *like* reading Science of the Discworld .. ;)

~R

[janet]

Post by Romauld

Post by janet
Very little, I would have said.

<snipppage>

Post by janet
From the sense of what I snipped, I suspect you meant 'quite a lot?' In

that you observe the same distinction that I do between actual science
and the Cult of Science as constructed by schools and the media?

(Can't remember the original context, but...)

But yes, I observe and indeed teach the concept of Lies to Children...

Post by Romauld

Post by janet
Authority has gone from the church to the laboratory - because the
first no longer offers universal solutions and the second says it
can (in the popular mind).

But of course any reputable actual practitioner of the scientific
method would not only not claim that of themselves but would tend to
subject anyone who *did* to rigorous peer review, possibly involving
irony.

Certainly - that's why I said, "the popular mind".

Peer review... (shudder). Research assessment.... twinge...

Post by Romauld

Post by janet
Which is why I spend time talking about "lies to children" and
assign The Structure of Scientific Revolutions to every group I can
get away with assinging it to....

Oh I did *like* reading Science of the Discworld .. ;)

:)

Post by Romauld
~R

--
janet Email : ***@karlsforums.com
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[M'Kel]

Post by janet

Post by Romauld

Post by janet
Very little, I would have said.

<snipppage>

Post by janet
From the sense of what I snipped, I suspect you meant 'quite a lot?' In

that you observe the same distinction that I do between actual science
and the Cult of Science as constructed by schools and the media?

hmmm... you must have gone to different schools than me. My science teachers
always told me there was an answer but that they didn't know it ATM.

Post by janet
(Can't remember the original context, but...)
But yes, I observe and indeed teach the concept of Lies to Children...

Can you clarify this statement?

Post by janet

Post by Romauld

Post by janet
Authority has gone from the church to the laboratory - because the
first no longer offers universal solutions and the second says it
can (in the popular mind).

I remember watching adverts many years ago that stated '....Millions can't
be wrong'
So I, being an innocent young lad of 6/7, asked 'can't they?'
Never did receive an answer to that question, but observation over the last
30 years has given the answer 'yes, as a matter of fact, they can - and
usually are.'

[News Admin]

Recently, a script from M'Kel arrived, in which they said:

: hmmm... you must have gone to different schools than me. My science teachers
: always told me there was an answer but that they didn't know it ATM.

You were lucky.

:> But yes, I observe and indeed teach the concept of Lies to Children...
:
: Can you clarify this statement?

The concept of Lies to Children is, as far as I know, the outgrowth of
the collaboration between Ian Stewart and Jacck Cohen, a pair of
scientists who wrote, in collaboration with Terry Pratchett, the
"Science of the Discworld".

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0091886570/ref=pd_bxgy_img_2_cp/026-1652984-5621234

The principle works like this.

Imagine mathematics class. You are a student at the level which in the UK
is called Advanced Level (G11-12 in the UK, theoretically). You're being
taught mechanics, and you get taught Newtonian laws of motion, and how to
apply them. The sums work. Everything adds up, it all looks great.

Then you go to University to study engineering. The first thing you're
told is 'Throw away Newton, things *actually* work like *this*.'

Until next year.

Each of these levels is a Lie to Children: a conditional, contrained or
almost-truth, or an allegory, which makes it easier for a person to
understand a basic concept. As their knowledge advances, and as their
analytical and abstractural sophistication advances in step with it, one
can discard the last LtC and provide a new, more complex, often more
accurate or at least more complete, LtC.

Society runs on LtCs. Newspapers make a living off purveying them, even
broadsheets. The entire course of education below, and some might argue
up to, PhD level is one long successions of carefully designed and
chosen LtCs.

Fairy Tales are Lies to Children. Why, in post-CocaCola mythology, does a
fat man give presents to the nice and coal to the nasty? It's an LtC:
behave according to this particular arbitrary set of social acceptable
guidelines, and good things will happen (later on, these turn out to
be 'You will be employable; you will be able to have sex; you will not
be stoned out off the village; etc). If, however, you abrogate these
arbitrary guidelines, nasty things will happen ('You will get syphilis';
'You will starve'; 'You will not be included on the list of This Week's
Extra Special Loyal Customers'... ).

The book above, and it's sequel, are both *brillian*.

~R

[Romauld]

Recently, a script from News Admin arrived, in which they said:
^^^^^^^^^^

No, actually, it was from me. Quite why Demon's news servers decided
to re-attribute me I am unsure, but since I work for them I know who
to ask.

~R

[? the Platypus {aka David Formosa}]

"M'Kel" <***@paradise.net.frog.nz> writes:

[...]

Post by M'Kel
I remember watching adverts many years ago that stated '....Millions can't
be wrong'
So I, being an innocent young lad of 6/7, asked 'can't they?'

"Daddy that man has no cloaths!" said the little boy pointing
to the emperor.

[Wood Avens]

Post by Nori Otaku

Post by Romauld
To what extant can 'Science' be viewed as the dominant faith of the
modern western world? Discuss ;)

That depends largely on your definition of 'faith'.
If, as the context seems to imply, you define 'faith' to be synonymous (or
even close to) 'spiritual belief', then Science doesn't count; it's a
system of philosophy (including conclusion based on observation), but not
a 'faith'.

It strikes me that it's treated as the equivalent of a faith by those
people who, without actually having done any serious scientific study,
apparently believe that "science" has the capacity to find solutions
to human-created problems (global warming comes to mind) and that
therefore no restraint on the causes of such problems is necessary.
"Science" (= God) can handle all that, and we can safely leave the
details to the scientists (= high priests). To that extent, science
can be treated as a faith.

Whether it's the dominant faith of the Western world ... well, I doubt
it. 50% or so of US Americans still adhere to Christianity; and in
Europe the dominant mood is probably deep cynicism, based on bitter
experience, about anything requiring trust in self-appointed experts,
whether they're scientists, politicians or priests.

I can't, however, back this up with any statistics.

bb
Wood Avens

"Subtract the python and think crushed velvet."

spamtrap: remove number to reply
..

[Romauld]

Recently, a script from Wood Avens arrived, in which they said:

: It strikes me that it's treated as the equivalent of a faith by those
: people who, without actually having done any serious scientific study,
: apparently believe that "science" has the capacity to find solutions
: to human-created problems (global warming comes to mind) and that
: therefore no restraint on the causes of such problems is necessary.
: "Science" (= God) can handle all that, and we can safely leave the
: details to the scientists (= high priests). To that extent, science
: can be treated as a faith.

The pontificant in the white lab coat has replaced the pontificant in the
red dress. Yes.

: Whether it's the dominant faith of the Western world ... well, I doubt
: it. 50% or so of US Americans still adhere to Christianity; and in

This I would question. Lots of people give their *religion* as Christianity.
For how many of them, is their actual faith in fact placed in Science and/or
ESPN?

Unquantifiable, I suspect.

: Europe the dominant mood is probably deep cynicism, based on bitter
: experience, about anything requiring trust in self-appointed experts,
: whether they're scientists, politicians or priests.

Unfortunately, large parts of Europe are just as gullible about science.
I would point at the recent, tabloid-created furores over BSE and
GM food.

~R

[janet]

Post by Nori Otaku

Post by Romauld

Post by Init8
Any practice which doesn't fit in with a culture's belief system is
by definition 'mythical'.

Thankyou for giving me the opportunity to start a slightly different
discussion.
To what extant can 'Science' be viewed as the dominant faith of the
modern western world? Discuss ;)

That depends largely on your definition of 'faith'.

Don't say it, just don't.

Oh, go on.

Wittgen.... :P

May I recommend, as always, Midgley, Science as Salvation? She tackles
*just* this problem.

She says science is the dominant faith.

I think she's right.

Post by Nori Otaku
If, as the context seems to imply, you define 'faith' to be
synonymous (or even close to) 'spiritual belief', then Science
doesn't count; it's a system of philosophy (including conclusion
based on observation), but not a 'faith'.

Oh, yes it is.

How many people understand it?

I don't - I haven't a clue how this computer works.

It's a matter of faith to me that it does.

Post by Nori Otaku
Science does, however, require a certain amount of faith.
Unfortunately for those that would equate Science with Religion, just
about *any* system of beliefs requires faith. I have faith that the
Sun wil rise tomorrow because I have a basic understanding of why it
has risen every day for my entire life; that doesn't mean I have a
religion based on the rising of the Sun.

Well put. :)
--
janet Email : ***@karlsforums.com
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[Shez]

Post by janet

Post by Nori Otaku

Post by Romauld

Post by Init8
Any practice which doesn't fit in with a culture's belief system is
by definition 'mythical'.

Thankyou for giving me the opportunity to start a slightly different
discussion.
To what extant can 'Science' be viewed as the dominant faith of the
modern western world? Discuss ;)

That depends largely on your definition of 'faith'.

Don't say it, just don't.
Oh, go on.
Wittgen.... :P
May I recommend, as always, Midgley, Science as Salvation? She tackles
*just* this problem.
She says science is the dominant faith.
I think she's right.

Post by Nori Otaku
If, as the context seems to imply, you define 'faith' to be
synonymous (or even close to) 'spiritual belief', then Science
doesn't count; it's a system of philosophy (including conclusion
based on observation), but not a 'faith'.

Oh, yes it is.
How many people understand it?
I don't - I haven't a clue how this computer works.
It's a matter of faith to me that it does.

Post by Nori Otaku
Science does, however, require a certain amount of faith.
Unfortunately for those that would equate Science with Religion, just
about *any* system of beliefs requires faith. I have faith that the
Sun wil rise tomorrow because I have a basic understanding of why it
has risen every day for my entire life; that doesn't mean I have a
religion based on the rising of the Sun.

Well put. :)
--
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

Considering I give machines names including my computer to help them
work better, I think faith is the operative word :)
Machines are becoming as much tangled up in the spirit of place as our
ancestral belief's that a certain tree or pool or plot of land had its
own distinct spirit
We seem as humans to need to make things personal to give them a life or
their own, to see them as an extenuation of humanity or deity in a
strange sort of way.
Patting the car or the computer has become as normal as telling a rosary
Understanding how the car or computer work or what went into making it,
doesn't seem to make a difference.
The most rational person can be found describing his car or computer in
graphic and irrational terms when it goes wrong...almost as if it could
understand him, Then explaining that he was after all not really talking
to the car or computer, just letting off steam...:)

Scientists cross their fingers for luck as well.

[? the Platypus {aka David Formosa}]

Shez <***@oldcity.f2s.com> writes:

[...]

Post by Shez
Considering I give machines names including my computer to help them
work better, I think faith is the operative word :)

I work proffesionally with computers so the idea that you give them
names is totally normal to me. Though it starts getting like naming
babies after the 15th (and you can't name them the same as the other
14).

Post by Shez
Machines are becoming as much tangled up in the spirit of place as our
ancestral belief's that a certain tree or pool or plot of land had its
own distinct spirit

Undoutably, machines clearly have spirit, there own form of anima.

[...]

Post by Shez
Patting the car or the computer has become as normal as telling a rosary

I've shocked some people by baby talking to the servers when I thourt
no-one was around.

[Jani]

Post by ? the Platypus {aka David Formosa}
[...]

Post by Shez
Considering I give machines names including my computer to help them
work better, I think faith is the operative word :)

I work proffesionally with computers so the idea that you give them
names is totally normal to me. Though it starts getting like naming
babies after the 15th (and you can't name them the same as the other
14).

My son names servers. The LAN server is under my workstation, and he
frequently unnerves visitors by yelling at me "don't kick Holly!", they
think he's referring to one of the cats :)

Jani

[-A.]

Post by Jani

Post by ? the Platypus {aka David Formosa}
[...]

Post by Shez
Considering I give machines names including my computer to help them
work better, I think faith is the operative word :)

I work proffesionally with computers so the idea that you give them
names is totally normal to me. Though it starts getting like naming
babies after the 15th (and you can't name them the same as the other
14).

My son names servers. The LAN server is under my workstation, and he
frequently unnerves visitors by yelling at me "don't kick Holly!", they
think he's referring to one of the cats :)

I had a pun about nameservers and naming servers here but I forgot it. Pity.

Post by Jani
Jani

Finally! Confirmation that I am not the only one in the world who names one's
computer(s), talks to them, and occasionally treats them like living beings.

I'm on Thanksgiving break now, otherwise this post would have been sent by
Sally. But I disagree about one thing: you *can* use the same name for multiple
computers provided that you do not own two computers with the same name *at the
same time*. The Sally that currently resides in my dorm/flat is Sally III.
Sally I was a Pentium II, Sally II was an Athlon. Long live Sally III (since I
can't yet afford Sally IV). One of these days, Abulafia will be up to my
standards enough for me to use it for newsgroup posts. And, in case you were
wondering, Sally is named after the computer/AI from the Saturday morning Sonic
the Hedgehog cartoon series (the one *with* the running plot, character
development and depth) and Abulafia is... well I suppose I'll leave that for you
all to find out (it is from an excellent novel but beyond that, I will say no
more).

It has been my experience that naming a computer and treating it like a living
being dramatically increases the probability that it will behave properly and
decreases the probability of a fatal crash.

Blessed Be,
-A.

[francis]

Post by janet
May I recommend, as always, Midgley, Science as Salvation? She tackles
*just* this problem.
She says science is the dominant faith.

I wonder, just wonder, how far from right she is .. Surely the dominant
faith is "I'm alright, Jack, .. Look after number one .. and the Devil
take the hindmost". (Something, too, about God being on the side of the
big battalions - but maybe that's not a matter of faith.)

[janet]

Post by francis

Post by janet
May I recommend, as always, Midgley, Science as Salvation? She
tackles *just* this problem.
She says science is the dominant faith.

I wonder, just wonder, how far from right she is .. Surely the
dominant faith is "I'm alright, Jack, .. Look after number one .. and
the Devil take the hindmost". (Something, too, about God being on the
side of the big battalions - but maybe that's not a matter of faith.)

You could be on to something....

Question for the house - what is the difference between faith and blind
prejudice?




--
janet Email : ***@karlsforums.com
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[Shez]

Post by janet

Post by francis

Post by janet
May I recommend, as always, Midgley, Science as Salvation? She
tackles *just* this problem.
She says science is the dominant faith.

I wonder, just wonder, how far from right she is .. Surely the
dominant faith is "I'm alright, Jack, .. Look after number one .. and
the Devil take the hindmost". (Something, too, about God being on the
side of the big battalions - but maybe that's not a matter of faith.)

You could be on to something....
Question for the house - what is the difference between faith and blind
prejudice?

Empathy. Its hard to be prejudiced against people you empathise with.

Post by janet
--
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[janet]

Post by Shez

Post by janet

Post by francis

Post by janet
May I recommend, as always, Midgley, Science as Salvation? She
tackles *just* this problem.
She says science is the dominant faith.

I wonder, just wonder, how far from right she is .. Surely the
dominant faith is "I'm alright, Jack, .. Look after number one ..
and the Devil take the hindmost". (Something, too, about God being
on the side of the big battalions - but maybe that's not a matter
of faith.)

You could be on to something....
Question for the house - what is the difference between faith and
blind prejudice?

Empathy. Its hard to be prejudiced against people you empathise with.

You know, I'm not so sure?


Sometimes, I think people are MORE prejudiced against people with whom they
*are afraid* they can identify...

Post by Shez

Post by janet
--
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

--
janet Email : ***@karlsforums.com
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[Nuala]

[snip]

Post by janet

Post by Shez

Post by janet
Question for the house - what is the difference between faith and
blind prejudice?

Empathy. Its hard to be prejudiced against people you empathise with.

You know, I'm not so sure?
Sometimes, I think people are MORE prejudiced against people with whom
they *are afraid* they can identify...

Experience, both personal and professional, suggests that you are correct,
janet. Fear defines us, and when there is a great deal of fear, there is
very often a limbic brain hi-jack leading to a fight (eg: "I hate
witches!" because I'm hiding the fact that I am one) or flight (what I
can't see, can't hurt me, so I'll find some way of not seeing this)
response.

~Love and blessings~

[Shez]

Post by Nuala
[snip]

Post by janet

Post by Shez

Post by janet
Question for the house - what is the difference between faith and
blind prejudice?

Empathy. Its hard to be prejudiced against people you empathise with.

You know, I'm not so sure?
Sometimes, I think people are MORE prejudiced against people with whom
they *are afraid* they can identify...

Experience, both personal and professional, suggests that you are correct,
janet. Fear defines us, and when there is a great deal of fear, there is
very often a limbic brain hi-jack leading to a fight (eg: "I hate
witches!" because I'm hiding the fact that I am one) or flight (what I
can't see, can't hurt me, so I'll find some way of not seeing this)
response.
~Love and blessings~

Unfortunately true, and witches did hunt other witches, not a nice
thought but not that unusual.
I remember seeing the Naked civil servant, a play about a gay man years
ago on BBC. One of the points made in that play was that some of those
who hated gays the most and went out of their way to attack them were
those who deep down were afraid they were gay also.
Hiding in plain sight was also quite normal for those who were not
Christian, The Jews did it, and so did witches and pagans, belonging to
or seeming to belong to the strongest local religion is a very old ruse
to cover your tracks,
My Grandmother was Catholic as far as anyone around us knew, and she
actually enjoyed the ritual of the catholic church, She however married
a Baptist and did not raise her children in the catholic faith, She was
in fact thrown out of the church,
It didn't seem to bother her a great deal :) I think she saw the
writing on the wall even then, and realised that the cover of a religion
was not going to be as necessary as it had been for her, and those
before her.
She enjoyed the colour and the social side, but had no belief in the
actual religion.
Slaves brought from Africa, kept their own religion alive by combining
it with the catholic church, and using the Saints names for their gods,

[janet]

Post by Nuala
[snip]

Post by janet

Post by Shez

Post by janet
Question for the house - what is the difference between faith and
blind prejudice?

Empathy. Its hard to be prejudiced against people you empathise with.

You know, I'm not so sure?
Sometimes, I think people are MORE prejudiced against people with
whom they *are afraid* they can identify...

Experience, both personal and professional, suggests that you are
correct, janet.

:) My experience is only personal on this one, but it's strong...

Post by Nuala
Fear defines us, and when there is a great deal of
fear, there is very often a limbic brain hi-jack leading to a fight
(eg: "I hate witches!" because I'm hiding the fact that I am one) or
flight (what I can't see, can't hurt me, so I'll find some way of not
seeing this) response.

Indeed, as the "There is no boy" response is known... :)

Post by Nuala
~Love and blessings~

--
janet Email : ***@karlsforums.com
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[Jani]

Post by janet

Post by Nuala
[snip]

Post by janet

Post by Shez

Post by janet
Question for the house - what is the difference between faith and
blind prejudice?

Empathy. Its hard to be prejudiced against people you empathise with.

You know, I'm not so sure?
Sometimes, I think people are MORE prejudiced against people with
whom they *are afraid* they can identify...

Experience, both personal and professional, suggests that you are
correct, janet.

:) My experience is only personal on this one, but it's strong...

Post by Nuala
Fear defines us, and when there is a great deal of
fear, there is very often a limbic brain hi-jack leading to a fight
(eg: "I hate witches!" because I'm hiding the fact that I am one) or
flight (what I can't see, can't hurt me, so I'll find some way of not
seeing this) response.

Indeed, as the "There is no boy" response is known... :)

What I found worrying about that was not so much "there is no boy", as
"there is no owl". You can take denial a bit *too* far :)

Jani

[M'Kel]

Post by janet

Post by francis

Post by janet
May I recommend, as always, Midgley, Science as Salvation? She
tackles *just* this problem.
She says science is the dominant faith.

I wonder, just wonder, how far from right she is .. Surely the
dominant faith is "I'm alright, Jack, .. Look after number one .. and
the Devil take the hindmost". (Something, too, about God being on the
side of the big battalions - but maybe that's not a matter of faith.)

You could be on to something....
Question for the house - what is the difference between faith and blind
prejudice?

Main Entry: 1faith
Pronunciation: 'fAth
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural faiths /'fAths, sometimes 'fA[th]z/
Etymology: Middle English feith, from Old French feid, foi, from Latin
fides; akin to Latin fidere to trust -- more at BIDE
Date: 13th century
1 a : allegiance to duty or a person : LOYALTY b (1) : fidelity to one's
promises (2) : sincerity of intentions
2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the
traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for
which there is no proof (2) : complete trust
3 : something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially
: a system of religious beliefs
synonym see BELIEF
- in faith : without doubt or question : VERILY

Main Entry: 1prej·u·dice
Pronunciation: 'pre-j&-d&s
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old French, from Latin praejudicium previous
judgment, damage, from prae- + judicium judgment -- more at JUDICIAL
Date: 13th century
1 : injury or damage resulting from some judgment or action of another in
disregard of one's rights; especially : detriment to one's legal rights or
claims
2 a (1) : preconceived judgment or opinion (2) : an adverse opinion or
leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge b : an
instance of such judgment or opinion c : an irrational attitude of hostility
directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed
characteristics
synonym see PREDILECTION

The emphasis is on the word 'blind', which would give 'blind faith'. So that
would extend the defintion in this context of blind to either 'cannot' or
'will not' see.
--
Cheers:)
M'Kel
What we can imagine is possible. What we try can be done. What is, is. What
will be is what we choose. Our Destiny is of Our Making.




begin 666 audio.gif
M1TE&.#EA$ `+`+,``,X`(?___P``````````````````````````````````
M`````````````````````"P`````$ `+```$(C#(&0"@F-HK>=Y>I8&6:'8D
3IT[I>K9=C)*R![L8J&4S.T4`.P``
`
end

[Alan Young]

Post by janet
Question for the house - what is the difference between faith and blind
prejudice?

Faith is based on a decision to believe something that is unprovable
because of its transcendent nature. It's directed toward a clearer
sense of ones one place in the universe.

Prejudice refers to a decision to ignore information about the immanent
world. It's typically directed toward establishing a hierarchy in terms
of how you treat other beings.

[janet]

Post by Alan Young

Post by janet
Question for the house - what is the difference between faith and
blind prejudice?

Faith is based on a decision to believe something that is unprovable
because of its transcendent nature. It's directed toward a clearer
sense of ones one place in the universe.
Prejudice refers to a decision to ignore information about the
immanent world. It's typically directed toward establishing a
hierarchy in terms of how you treat other beings.

de Beauvoir's idea of "othering" - yes....

I still think there may be more of a connection (at times, I hasten to
add...). :}

--
janet Email : ***@karlsforums.com
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[Romauld]

Recently, a script from janet arrived, in which they said:

: You could be on to something....
:
: Question for the house - what is the difference between faith and blind
: prejudice?

The oratorical answer is, of course, that this is one of those
philosophical irregular conjugations. I have faith, you are optimistic,
he suffers from blind prejudice, they are bigotted.

A slightly more serious answer has to do with application, I suspect.
Anyone who has faith in something should be prepared to recognize that
this faith is by definition personal, not universal. People in the grip
of blind prejudice tend to assume universality for their faith for no
better reason than that it works for *them*, doesn't it?

~R

[janet]

Post by Romauld

Post by janet
You could be on to something....
Question for the house - what is the difference between faith and
blind prejudice?

The oratorical answer is, of course, that this is one of those
philosophical irregular conjugations. I have faith, you are
optimistic, he suffers from blind prejudice, they are bigotted.

Thank you, Sir Humphrey. :>

Post by Romauld
A slightly more serious answer has to do with application, I suspect.
Anyone who has faith in something should

Nope - right there, it looses it, because "should" is a judgement about what
SHOULD happen if something exists - it's conditional.

(NB - Romauld will, I hope, take that in the sense it is meant, it looks
harsher, in print, than it is in practice, but the man knows me enough to
know...).

D'you see what I mean?

You're talking about the *results* of faith as it should be, not the results
if it is simply there.

be prepared to recognize that

Post by Romauld
this faith is by definition personal, not universal.

Hmmmm....

Do you mean that the faith itself is personal not universal (with which I
would agree) or that which is believed in is not universal (with which, of
course, I can not agree)?

People in the

Post by Romauld
grip of blind prejudice tend to assume universality for their faith
for no better reason than that it works for *them*, doesn't it?

Hmmm - this is closer to what I meant, yes - that prejudice is, perhaps, a
failure to recognise the validity of other views.

BUT that way lies relativism, which I need to avoid cause I just don't buy
it.

Hmmm.

Post by Romauld
~R

--
janet Email : ***@karlsforums.com
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[Romauld]

Recently, a script from janet arrived, in which they said:

: Thank you, Sir Humphrey. :>

<ppedant> Bernard, actually. </ppedant>

: Nope - right there, it looses it, because "should" is a judgement about what
: SHOULD happen if something exists - it's conditional.

Yes, I understand that. I did wonder about my phrasing afterwards,
and I'm still thinking about what it reflects in my current thought
processes.

: Do you mean that the faith itself is personal not universal (with which I
: would agree) or that which is believed in is not universal (with which, of
: course, I can not agree)?

I mean that any conclusions drawn from it are based on a leap of personal
faith, and should be treated as such. All to many people assume that
because *they* have faith in it, everyone else should too.

: Hmmm - this is closer to what I meant, yes - that prejudice is, perhaps, a
: failure to recognise the validity of other views.
:
: BUT that way lies relativism, which I need to avoid cause I just don't buy
: it.

While we're posing platonic dialogues at each other: what are
the differences, and how do we evaluate, between relativisim and
tolerance?

~R

[Jani]

Post by Romauld
: Thank you, Sir Humphrey. :>
<ppedant> Bernard, actually. </ppedant>
: Nope - right there, it looses it, because "should" is a judgement about what
: SHOULD happen if something exists - it's conditional.
Yes, I understand that. I did wonder about my phrasing afterwards,
and I'm still thinking about what it reflects in my current thought
processes.
: Do you mean that the faith itself is personal not universal (with which I
: would agree) or that which is believed in is not universal (with which, of
: course, I can not agree)?
I mean that any conclusions drawn from it are based on a leap of personal
faith, and should be treated as such. All to many people assume that
because *they* have faith in it, everyone else should too.
: Hmmm - this is closer to what I meant, yes - that prejudice is, perhaps, a
: failure to recognise the validity of other views.
: BUT that way lies relativism, which I need to avoid cause I just don't buy
: it.
While we're posing platonic dialogues at each other: what are
the differences, and how do we evaluate, between relativisim and
tolerance?

Relativism implies a greater level of equality than tolerance?

Jani

[Wood Avens]

On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 01:41:16 CST, "janet"

Post by janet
Hmmm - this is closer to what I meant, yes - that prejudice is, perhaps, a
failure to recognise the validity of other views.
BUT that way lies relativism, which I need to avoid cause I just don't buy
it.

And, er, wanting to avoid something because you just don't buy it
differs from prejudice how, exactly?

Another continuinuinuum, innit?

:-)

bb
Wood Avens

"Subtract the python and think crushed velvet."

spamtrap: remove number to reply
..

[M'Kel]

Post by janet
Do you mean that the faith itself is personal not universal (with which I
would agree) or that which is believed in is not universal (with which, of
course, I can not agree)?

The Creator looks upon the void and thinks to himself, hmmmmm.... I can DO
something with this... sofa here, lounge chair....there and a nice fire
place in the corner, next to the book shelves....

....and so, with a hibbery, jibberey (now where have i seen that) and a hocus
pocus He brings together the five forces of Earth, Wind, Fire, Water and
Spirit...
and as the forces conjoin so the inimical act upon the other, creating a
vast storm that expands to fill the void with howling winds and clashes of
thunder, with flashes of lightning and darknesses deeper than the midnight
sky...
but one of the forces was not inimical to the others and wound between them,
seeking peace, and as this force progressed so to did the storm subside and
the stars form and the planets coalesce...
as this force progressed so it rested upon the occasional warm planet and
upon those planets so too did life arise from the Fires and from the Depths,
supported by the Wind and the Earth...

[Wood Avens]

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 16:31:01 CST, "janet"

Post by janet
Question for the house - what is the difference between faith and blind
prejudice?

"I have a deep, sustaining faith; you have your own ideas about
things; he/she acts from blind prejudice."

In other words, when it comes down to it, not a lot. In each case
it's the adherence to a set of ideas or principles which are
unverifiable. The difference seems to me that we're more inclined to
call it "faith" when it's mainly concerned with the affective and/or
when its practical applications coincide with our own values; the more
it's translated into practical outcomes we disagree with, the more
likely we are to call it prejudice. At least, I suspect I am.

Well, all right, it's a continuum.

bb
Wood Avens

"Subtract the python and think crushed velvet."

spamtrap: remove number to reply
..

[Romauld]

Recently, a script from Wood Avens arrived, in which they said:

:>Question for the house - what is the difference between faith and blind
:>prejudice?
:
: "I have a deep, sustaining faith; you have your own ideas about
: things; he/she acts from blind prejudice."

Do I detect another Yes Minister fan? ;)

~R

[Jani]

Post by Romauld
:>Question for the house - what is the difference between faith and blind
:>prejudice?
: "I have a deep, sustaining faith; you have your own ideas about
: things; he/she acts from blind prejudice."
Do I detect another Yes Minister fan? ;)

Damn, I don't remember that one. I'm obviously a very amateur Hackerite.

Jani

[Romauld]

Recently, a script from Jani arrived, in which they said:

: Damn, I don't remember that one. I'm obviously a very amateur Hackerite.

Bernard explains to Hacker the concept of Whitehall irregular verbs.
Something like:

"I have creative viewpoints, you are eccentric, he is round the twist."
"So in this case?"
"Well, it goes something like 'I give confidential press briefings,
you leak, he is prosecuted under section 2 of the Official Secrets Act.' "

Or something like that.

~R

[Jani]

Post by Romauld
: Damn, I don't remember that one. I'm obviously a very amateur Hackerite.
Bernard explains to Hacker the concept of Whitehall irregular verbs.
"I have creative viewpoints, you are eccentric, he is round the twist."
"So in this case?"
"Well, it goes something like 'I give confidential press briefings,
you leak, he is prosecuted under section 2 of the Official Secrets Act.' "
Or something like that.
~R

LOL! thank you :)

Jani

[janet]

Post by Wood Avens
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 16:31:01 CST, "janet"

Post by janet
Question for the house - what is the difference between faith and
blind prejudice?

"I have a deep, sustaining faith; you have your own ideas about
things; he/she acts from blind prejudice."
In other words, when it comes down to it, not a lot. In each case
it's the adherence to a set of ideas or principles which are
unverifiable. The difference seems to me that we're more inclined to
call it "faith" when it's mainly concerned with the affective and/or
when its practical applications coincide with our own values; the more
it's translated into practical outcomes we disagree with, the more
likely we are to call it prejudice. At least, I suspect I am.
Well, all right, it's a continuum.

Thank you, I think that's what I was getting at! :) Much the same as ~R's
first answer....

Post by Wood Avens
bb
Wood Avens
"Subtract the python and think crushed velvet."
spamtrap: remove number to reply
..

--
janet Email : ***@karlsforums.com
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[francis]

Post by Wood Avens
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 16:31:01 CST, "janet"

Post by janet
Question for the house - what is the difference between faith and blind
prejudice?

"I have a deep, sustaining faith; you have your own ideas about things;
he/she acts from blind prejudice."
In other words, when it comes down to it, not a lot. In each case it's
the adherence to a set of ideas or principles which are unverifiable.

I have faith that if I stand at the bus stop long enough a bus will come
along and take me to the city .. :)}

[francis]

Post by janet
Question for the house - what is the difference between faith and blind
prejudice?

Here's something for starters ..

Pure faith is admirable and comes like a shining light with personal
trial and experience.
Blind prejudice is what has been taught in the nursery, the schoolroom
and the confirmation class.

[janet]

Post by francis

Post by janet
Question for the house - what is the difference between faith and
blind prejudice?

Here's something for starters ..
Pure faith is admirable

Judgement, not definition.

What is pure faith?

Can someone have a pure faith in something to which I do not subscribe?

I shall, this night, introduce students to the concept of Eugenics, in which
Galton had complete faith - can it be a pure faith, when we (most of us) now
so violently disagree with it?

and comes like a shining light with personal

Post by francis
trial and experience.

I can see what you mean and in many ways agree, but this is perception and
judgement, not definition....

Post by francis
Blind prejudice is what has been taught in the nursery, the schoolroom
and the confirmation class.

Ta, Francis - what about the circle and the grove?

Not a chance you can tell me that only my lot are prejudiced.....

--
janet Email : ***@karlsforums.com
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[Lucida]

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 16:31:01 CST, "janet"

Post by janet

Post by francis

Post by janet
May I recommend, as always, Midgley, Science as Salvation? She
tackles *just* this problem.
She says science is the dominant faith.

I wonder, just wonder, how far from right she is .. Surely the
dominant faith is "I'm alright, Jack, .. Look after number one .. and
the Devil take the hindmost". (Something, too, about God being on the
side of the big battalions - but maybe that's not a matter of faith.)

You could be on to something....
Question for the house - what is the difference between faith and blind
prejudice?

Faith, when sincere, can withstand close scrutiny and still be
effective for the person having it. Blind prejudice cannot... Expose
it to the light of reality, and it withers. That is why people who
subscribe to it rarely self-examine.

Blessings,
Lucida

Post by janet
--
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[Romauld]

Recently, a script from janet arrived, in which they said:

: Wittgen.... :P

<mode=facetious>

"Wittgensteiiiiiiiiiiiin, Wittgensteiiiiiiiiin,
He isn't very funny but he earns me lots of MONEY
WIITgenSTEIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIN!!"

~R, who needs to rewatch 'A Knight's Tale', and is well aware that
he is misquoting.

[In The Darkness]

Post by Romauld
: Wittgen.... :P
<mode=facetious>
"Wittgensteiiiiiiiiiiiin, Wittgensteiiiiiiiiin,
He isn't very funny but he earns me lots of MONEY
WIITgenSTEIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIN!!"
~R, who needs to rewatch 'A Knight's Tale', and is well aware that
he is misquoting.

Hey, ever notice his -real- Journey begins when someone in the group
makes some comment -real loud- in the woods... "I don't give a witches tit!"

and our friend "the artist" pops up, trodging along.... out of nowhere,
skyclad.

"Patents of Nobility must be provided.."


:P

[Cavalorn]

Post by In The Darkness
Hey, ever notice his -real- Journey begins when someone in the group
makes some comment -real loud- in the woods... "I don't give a witches tit!"

You might be interested to know that the 'witch's tit' is part of at
least two English sayings.

'Cold as a witch's tit' is used to describe something that is really
very cold indeed.

This has recently been further embellished to 'Cold as a witch's tit in
a brass bra'.

'Dry as a witch's tit' is used to describe a state of extreme thirst,
the idea being that witches (being old hags) were well past the stage
when they could lactate.

On searching for links for you, I came across this gem:

http://www.gettingit.com/article/663

DISCLAIMER: The author of this post is simply presenting colloquialisms
drawn from actual use and intends no offence to persons identifying as
witches. Nor to their tits.

Cav

[In The Darkness]

I am familiar with the expressions, thanks.

Post by Cavalorn

Post by In The Darkness
Hey, ever notice his -real- Journey begins when someone in the group
makes some comment -real loud- in the woods... "I don't give a witches tit!"

You might be interested to know that the 'witch's tit' is part of at
least two English sayings.
'Cold as a witch's tit' is used to describe something that is really
very cold indeed.

Personal Pet theory, Witches, not having the hang up's about Sex,
as most Xians, spent more time in a.... hrmm..
shall we say, "agitated state".

Making it look like it was "cold"...

;)

Post by Cavalorn
This has recently been further embellished to 'Cold as a witch's tit in
a brass bra'.

There is no such thing as a Brass Bra, it is Mythical.

:P

Post by Cavalorn
'Dry as a witch's tit' is used to describe a state of extreme thirst,
the idea being that witches (being old hags) were well past the stage
when they could lactate.

Hey, at least with their primitive medicine/Magick, the witches lived
long enough to be considered "Old Hags"...

BTW, since Witches are Mythical, and they have Tits...

then, doesn't that make Tits mythical, too ?

:D

So, in jolly old England, we can conclude Witches, Tits and
Bras are Mythical... eh, Cav ?

Post by Cavalorn
http://www.gettingit.com/article/663
DISCLAIMER: The author of this post is simply presenting colloquialisms
drawn from actual use and intends no offence to persons identifying as
witches. Nor to their tits.
Cav

[Gale]

In The Darkness wrote:
<snip>

Post by In The Darkness
There is no such thing as a Brass Bra, it is Mythical.
:P

Gee, I have a picture in a rather curious publication of a young lady
wearing one -- I don't think it's mythical, but I'm not certain that it
is at all comfortable, not even in warm weather.
--
Blessed Be,
Gale

We stand outside the wall of Eden
And hear the trees talking together within,
And their talk is sweet in our ears. -- W.B. Yeats

original poetry, fiction at http://www.capjewels.com

modstaff alt.religion.wicca.moderated: http://arwm.net

[Tiliqua]

Following intense negotiations with a potato,

Post by francis
<snip>

Post by In The Darkness
There is no such thing as a Brass Bra, it is Mythical.
:P

Gee, I have a picture in a rather curious publication of a young lady
wearing one -- I don't think it's mythical, but I'm not certain that it
is at all comfortable, not even in warm weather.

When I was still married, my wife had a copper one made, with leather
straps. For costume parties ... ... we went to costume parties, it was
the 70s!

The cold _was_ a factor, but it was defeated by lining the cups with
chamois leather.

There are also Brass Bands, they're not mythical either. I would like
to recommend the Grimethorpe Colliery Band .. but they're now
disbanded.


--

May the Lord and The Lady prosper your ventures

[In The Darkness]

Does the word "facetious" mean much to you two ?

Brass Bra ?

Shoot, I thought he said Brass Balls....

Post by Tiliqua
Following intense negotiations with a potato,

Post by francis
<snip>

Post by In The Darkness
There is no such thing as a Brass Bra, it is Mythical.
:P

Gee, I have a picture in a rather curious publication of a young lady
wearing one -- I don't think it's mythical, but I'm not certain that it
is at all comfortable, not even in warm weather.

When I was still married, my wife had a copper one made, with leather
straps. For costume parties ... ... we went to costume parties, it was
the 70s!
The cold _was_ a factor, but it was defeated by lining the cups with
chamois leather.
There are also Brass Bands, they're not mythical either. I would like
to recommend the Grimethorpe Colliery Band .. but they're now
disbanded.
--
May the Lord and The Lady prosper your ventures

[Tiliqua]

Following intense negotiations with a potato,

Post by In The Darkness
Does the word "facetious" mean much to you two ?
Brass Bra ?
Shoot, I thought he said Brass Balls....

No! No!. Don't shoot at the brass balls!! Never shoot at the brass
balls. Either they're hollow and you'll dent them or they're solid and
you can't predict where the ricochet will go.

In either case you'll have a damnably irritated pawnbroker after you
and many of them have ...connections!



--

May the Lord and The Lady prosper your ventures

[Frenchy]

Tiliqua, disco-slamdancing to Barry Manilow through the newsgroup, got down

Post by Tiliqua
Following intense negotiations with a potato,

Post by francis
<snip>

Post by In The Darkness
There is no such thing as a Brass Bra, it is Mythical.
:P

Gee, I have a picture in a rather curious publication of a young lady
wearing one -- I don't think it's mythical, but I'm not certain that it
is at all comfortable, not even in warm weather.

When I was still married, my wife had a copper one made, with leather
straps. For costume parties ... ... we went to costume parties, it was
the 70s!
The cold _was_ a factor, but it was defeated by lining the cups with
chamois leather.
There are also Brass Bands, they're not mythical either. I would like
to recommend the Grimethorpe Colliery Band .. but they're now
disbanded.

When I was in the SCA, I remember lots of chain mail bras...I never had one
myself, I went for the fur bikini instead. ;)

A lot of the women wore the chain mail bras without any fabric underneath -
I'd have thought they pinched uncomfortably but I was told they were just
fine...it certainly gave the lords something to look for, and I imagine the
tan marks after a week at the Pennsic War must have been artistic. ;)

Frenchy

[Synn]

Post by Frenchy
Tiliqua, disco-slamdancing to Barry Manilow through the newsgroup, got down

Post by Tiliqua
Following intense negotiations with a potato,

Post by francis
<snip>

Post by In The Darkness
There is no such thing as a Brass Bra, it is Mythical.
:P

Gee, I have a picture in a rather curious publication of a young lady
wearing one -- I don't think it's mythical, but I'm not certain that it
is at all comfortable, not even in warm weather.

When I was still married, my wife had a copper one made, with leather
straps. For costume parties ... ... we went to costume parties, it was
the 70s!
The cold _was_ a factor, but it was defeated by lining the cups with
chamois leather.
There are also Brass Bands, they're not mythical either. I would like
to recommend the Grimethorpe Colliery Band .. but they're now
disbanded.

When I was in the SCA, I remember lots of chain mail bras...I never had one
myself, I went for the fur bikini instead. ;)
A lot of the women wore the chain mail bras without any fabric underneath -
I'd have thought they pinched uncomfortably but I was told they were just
fine...it certainly gave the lords something to look for, and I imagine the
tan marks after a week at the Pennsic War must have been artistic. ;)
Frenchy

Hubby does chainmail and I tried one on..other than being cold and
showing a bit tooooo much for my taste, they are comfy.

~*~
Synn
~*~
The art of thinking
Is one I have not mastered
So I contemplate
Forever watching
For that one moment in time
That I would then Know.
~*~

[mist]

Post by Frenchy
A lot of the women wore the chain mail bras without any fabric underneath -
I'd have thought they pinched uncomfortably but I was told they were just
fine...

The pincing is a hair thing said the man with the beard.

[Jani]

"Dry as a witch's tit", at least in Lancashire, doesn't refer to the thirst
of the individual but to the scarcity of liquid refreshment. Sunday opening
in Wales comes to mind, but my father generally applied it to Methodist
gatherings, and particularly funerals. A confirmed agnostic himself, he was
accustomed to the civilised Christian practice of building the village pub
next to the church, and considered it as pushing the envelope to expect him
to attend funerals which didn't take advantage of this.

Jani

Post by Cavalorn

Post by In The Darkness
Hey, ever notice his -real- Journey begins when someone in the group
makes some comment -real loud- in the woods... "I don't give a witches tit!"

You might be interested to know that the 'witch's tit' is part of at
least two English sayings.
'Cold as a witch's tit' is used to describe something that is really
very cold indeed.
This has recently been further embellished to 'Cold as a witch's tit in
a brass bra'.
'Dry as a witch's tit' is used to describe a state of extreme thirst,
the idea being that witches (being old hags) were well past the stage
when they could lactate.
http://www.gettingit.com/article/663
DISCLAIMER: The author of this post is simply presenting colloquialisms
drawn from actual use and intends no offence to persons identifying as
witches. Nor to their tits.
Cav
--
Give me a woman who's taken her knocks,
Who's tasted both gutter and stars.
Give me a lady with holes in her socks.
Give me a princess with scars.

[janet]

Post by Romauld

Post by janet
Wittgen.... :P

<mode=facetious>
"Wittgensteiiiiiiiiiiiin, Wittgensteiiiiiiiiin,
He isn't very funny but he earns me lots of MONEY
WIITgenSTEIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIN!!"
~R, who needs to rewatch 'A Knight's Tale', and is well aware that
he is misquoting.

*******poke********

--
janet Email : ***@karlsforums.com
mwcnbf - esoterrorist
http://www.karlsforums.com/forums/

[Romauld]

Recently, a script from janet arrived, in which they said:

: *******poke********

Welll, how often do you get a beery song about a philosopher
that *isn't* from Monty Python?

~R

[Jani]

Post by Romauld
: *******poke********
Welll, how often do you get a beery song about a philosopher
that *isn't* from Monty Python?
~R

You mean there *is* one?

Jani

[? the Platypus {aka David Formosa}]

Romauld <***@necrotheque.demon.co.uk> writes:

[...]

Post by Romauld
To what extant can 'Science' be viewed as the dominant faith of the
modern western world? Discuss ;)

It can't, its not a faith. For one thing it is highly sceptical of
itself. It may be considered a belief system and it does have a
philosophy but it is quite faithless.

[Romauld]

Recently, a script from ? the Platypus {aka David Formosa} arrived,
in which they said:

:> To what extant can 'Science' be viewed as the dominant faith of the
:> modern western world? Discuss ;)
:
: It can't, its not a faith. For one thing it is highly sceptical of
: itself. It may be considered a belief system and it does have a
: philosophy but it is quite faithless.

Note the distinction between science and Science (which is made
rather more elaborate in later posts in the thread).

~R

[francis]

Post by Cavalorn
Can one really consider 'flying in the air' or 'turning into a hare' to
be a *practice*?

To those who are really aware of the implications, the answer is 'yes'.

[Cavalorn]

Post by francis

Post by Cavalorn
Can one really consider 'flying in the air' or 'turning into a hare' to
be a *practice*?

To those who are really aware of the implications, the answer is 'yes'.

You can embroider history to your heart's content by finding
'implications' in straightforward statements of belief.

So, the witch's habit of flying in the air 'implies' something, does it?

Well, what about other myths? Witches in folk tales eat children. What
does that imply? What does the chinese vampire's habit of hopping
rather than walking imply? What does the fact that Nuckleavee has no
skin imply? What do the eponymous green teeth of Jenny Greenteeth imply?
Why is Black Annis black? What does *that* imply?

What does the belief among some young children that walking on the
cracks in the pavement is dangerous imply?

There is a belief that staring into a mirror and repeating 'Bloody Mary,
Bloody Mary, Bloody Mary' will cause a horrible murderous spectre to
appear; what does *that* imply?

Cav

[francis]

Post by Cavalorn

Post by francis

Post by Cavalorn
Can one really consider 'flying in the air' or 'turning into a hare' to
be a *practice*?

To those who are really aware of the implications, the answer is 'yes'.

You can embroider history to your heart's content by finding
'implications' in straightforward statements of belief.
So, the witch's habit of flying in the air 'implies' something, does it?

<snip>

I suspect you have misunderstood my response and therefore attempted
reductio ad absurdum .. :)}

[Cavalorn]

Post by francis

Post by Cavalorn
So, the witch's habit of flying in the air 'implies' something, does it?

<snip>
I suspect you have misunderstood my response and therefore attempted
reductio ad absurdum .. :)}

More 'expansio ad absurdum', if such a thing exists. :)

Would you mind elaborating your point, in case I did indeed
misunderstand it?

By the way, is the } on your smiley a little beard, or a shirtfront, or
something else?

Cav

[francis]

Post by Cavalorn
By the way, is the } on your smiley a little beard, or a shirtfront, or
something else?

What an exquisite way this is of diverting a thread into another drift.

[Cavalorn]

Post by francis

Post by Cavalorn
By the way, is the } on your smiley a little beard, or a shirtfront, or
something else?

What an exquisite way this is of diverting a thread into another drift.

Eh? It was a passing question! I can hardly see a whole *thread*
resulting from it.

The request to elaborate your point was the important part!

Cav

[In The Darkness]

Post by francis

Post by Cavalorn

Post by francis

Post by Cavalorn
Can one really consider 'flying in the air' or 'turning into a hare' to
be a *practice*?

To those who are really aware of the implications, the answer is 'yes'.

You can embroider history to your heart's content by finding
'implications' in straightforward statements of belief.
So, the witch's habit of flying in the air 'implies' something, does it?

<snip>

Sure, means she had too much Taco Bell for Lunch!

Post by francis
I suspect you have misunderstood my response and therefore attempted
reductio ad absurdum .. :)}

[Synn]

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 12:36:36 CST, Cavalorn

Post by Cavalorn

Post by francis

Post by Cavalorn
Can one really consider 'flying in the air' or 'turning into a hare' to
be a *practice*?

To those who are really aware of the implications, the answer is 'yes'.

You can embroider history to your heart's content by finding
'implications' in straightforward statements of belief.
So, the witch's habit of flying in the air 'implies' something, does it?
Well, what about other myths? Witches in folk tales eat children. What
does that imply? What does the chinese vampire's habit of hopping
rather than walking imply? What does the fact that Nuckleavee has no
skin imply? What do the eponymous green teeth of Jenny Greenteeth imply?
Why is Black Annis black? What does *that* imply?
What does the belief among some young children that walking on the
cracks in the pavement is dangerous imply?
There is a belief that staring into a mirror and repeating 'Bloody Mary,
Bloody Mary, Bloody Mary' will cause a horrible murderous spectre to
appear; what does *that* imply?
Cav

I don't know about the first bunch but my daughter swears by the
Bloody Mary one..I haven't tried it...No thanks.

~*~
Synn
~*~
The art of thinking
Is one I have not mastered
So I contemplate
Forever watching
For that one moment in time
That I would then Know.
~*~

[Wood Avens]

Post by Init8
http://www.ealdriht.org/witchcraft.html
This contains the two quotes from Aelfric that Cavalorn used, set within a
wider discussion of the meaning of the term within a North European
context, which seems to lend support to the view that witchcraft was a
pre-existing practice, rather than a myth invented by Christian
theologians.

Interesting one - thanks for the link.

bb
Wood Avens

"Subtract the python and think crushed velvet."

spamtrap: remove number to reply
..

[francis]

Post by Init8
http://www.ealdriht.org/witchcraft.html
This contains the two quotes from Aelfric that Cavalorn used, set within a
wider discussion of the meaning of the term within a North European
context, which seems to lend support to the view that witchcraft was a
pre-existing practice, rather than a myth invented by Christian
theologians.
Init8

This link is very useful. Thank you.