Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

How to proceed?

Expand Messages
  • Doug Freyburger
    ... Move on to the next course in the agenda and punt on discussing who s in big boat buddhism or small boat buddhism. The various historical religious schisms
    Message 1 of 7 , Jan 13, 2007
      Manny Olds asked:
      >
      > As things stand, how do we proceed? Should we explicitly limit the
      > scope of the endeavor to ... what? Should we try to describe regions
      > of the heathen lanscape we see only at a distance? Any suggestions
      > from the newer people who have been using the existing course?

      Move on to the next course in the agenda and punt on discussing who's
      in big boat buddhism or small boat buddhism.

      The various historical religious schisms like catholic/protestant, zuni/shiia,
      big/small boat took centuries to settle out. We've had three decades.
    • Manny Olds
      ... And yet so many of the information we had thought of covering (magic, wyrd, relation of men to gods, e.g.) would be full of these heathens think this,
      Message 2 of 7 , Jan 16, 2007
        On 1/13/07, Doug Freyburger <dfreybur@...> wrote:
        > Manny Olds asked:
        > >
        > > As things stand, how do we proceed? Should we explicitly limit the
        > > scope of the endeavor to ... what? Should we try to describe regions
        > > of the heathen lanscape we see only at a distance? Any suggestions
        > > from the newer people who have been using the existing course?
        >
        > Move on to the next course in the agenda and punt on discussing who's
        > in big boat buddhism or small boat buddhism.
        >
        > The various historical religious schisms like catholic/protestant, zuni/shiia,
        > big/small boat took centuries to settle out. We've had three decades.

        And yet so many of the information we had thought of covering (magic,
        wyrd, relation of men to gods, e.g.) would be full of "these heathens
        think this, those think that". It would be helpful to the learners if
        we could make "These" and "those" more useful distinctions.

        MAO
      • Karl Donaldsson
        Howdy, Manny! ... Manny, I ve always loved operating in that nebulous space. Probably the reason why I manage to really piss some folks off, have other folks
        Message 3 of 7 , Jan 17, 2007
          Howdy, Manny!

          Manny Olds spake:
          > On 1/13/07, Doug Freyburger <dfreybur@...> wrote:
          >> Manny Olds asked:
          >> >
          >> > As things stand, how do we proceed? Should we explicitly limit the
          >> > scope of the endeavor to ... what? Should we try to describe regions
          >> > of the heathen lanscape we see only at a distance? Any suggestions
          >> > from the newer people who have been using the existing course?
          >>
          >> Move on to the next course in the agenda and punt on discussing who's
          >> in big boat buddhism or small boat buddhism.
          >>
          >> The various historical religious schisms like catholic/protestant,
          >> zuni/shiia,
          >> big/small boat took centuries to settle out. We've had three decades.
          >
          > And yet so many of the information we had thought of covering (magic,
          > wyrd, relation of men to gods, e.g.) would be full of "these heathens
          > think this, those think that". It would be helpful to the learners if
          > we could make "These" and "those" more useful distinctions.

          Manny, I've always loved operating in that nebulous space. Probably the
          reason why I manage to really piss some folks off, have other folks really
          "get" what I mean, and then the large majority of folks see a real
          spectrum of pluses and minuses in my writing.

          Honestly, I don't know what the best way is to reach soem kind of
          undrestanding of a given topic here or there. However, I do feel that one
          method (probably the "brute force" method) would produce results without
          necessarily being the best way: start with a document which is a dartboard
          (not a "springboard," because I dont' feel it will be the correct basis
          from the get-go) which can be posted here or in the files section, and
          then we can offer our discussions abotu it, and then find a person to
          collate and edit the document to accurately reflect what has been
          discussed. I would like to ofer my services for generating the dartboard
          doucment(s) on a number of "spongey" topics, and then have someone else
          with a more crutical and less emotional eye than I have to collate the
          posted views and suggestions, and then edit the document into a final
          form. I've always enjoyed reading the intelligence offered by a number of
          folks here and the even-handedness on a wide variety of topics (you and
          Doug come to mind, as well as Tim, Mike, Tony, Arlie, Arlea (still here?)
          and others), and I have confidence that a focused lens applied afterward
          to my (or others'!) initial sketch would yield a useful result.

          A more efficient use of time could involve a "divide-and-conquer" topic
          generaiton method. This seems more of herding cats (than the usual
          amount), but it could certianly be done.

          Looking through the archives, Tim noted in message 891:

          "There are some things which people will find to disagree with. For
          example, in the section magic, Karl's bilateral division into Agnostics
          and Practitioners will leave out those who believe in the real existence
          of gods and their own magical powers but deny that humans can manipulate
          the universe through their own will. The paragraph on lore might rankle
          those (like me) who find quite a bit of value in "arguing about the
          accuracy of a tale passed down by word of mouth for a few thousand
          years,..." in order to, as Karl says, "allow one to think of things in a
          different light than before...". Also the paragraph on solitary vs. group
          implies that one follows a given path through choice, and not necessity,
          as I believe to be the case with a great many of heathens and potential
          heathens around the world who don't have like-minded people within driving
          distance."

          I think this kind of discussion is quite useful, and with these kinds fo
          feedback, they can be used to edit a document into a more acceptable form.


          Frith upon your house
          Karl Donaldsson
          <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
          hfg@... http://hfg.ravenbanner.com
          Check out the Happy Fat Guy Pottery Studio!
          <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
          Member of the Kindred of Ravenswood
          Zionsville, Indiana USA
          http://www.iquest.net/~chaviland/Rindex.html
          ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
          To Vali! To Vengeance! To Honor! To Kin!
          _______________________________________________
          "Would you know more, or what?"
          Get Asatru education at http://www.asatru-u.org
        • Doug Freyburger
          ... Less emotional? Good luck finding those folks! Each and every document would be living and so would the list of documents. I don t even know what all the
          Message 4 of 7 , Jan 18, 2007
            "Karl Donaldsson" hfg@... wrote:
            > Manny Olds spake:
            >
            > > And yet so many of the information we had thought of covering (magic,
            > > wyrd, relation of men to gods, e.g.) would be full of "these heathens
            > > think this, those think that". It would be helpful to the learners if
            > > we could make "These" and "those" more useful distinctions.
            >
            > I would like to ofer my services for generating the dartboard
            > doucment(s) on a number of "spongey" topics, and then have someone else
            > with a more crutical and less emotional eye than I have to collate the
            > posted views and suggestions, and then edit the document into a final
            > form ...

            Less emotional? Good luck finding those folks! Each and every
            document would be living and so would the list of documents.

            I don't even know what all the dimensions are or what to call them but
            there are a bunch of them:

            1) Folkish vs us (mainstream?). Asatru Free Assembly broke up over it
            into Ring of Troth and Asatru Alliance. Plenty of other divisions since.

            2) Flow of power top-down vs bottom-up? RoT broke off AVA, AA broke off
            Asatru Folk Assembly, Theod broke off the other Saxon folks over it.

            3) Kindred members vs solos by choice. Kindreds joining orgs vs staying
            unaffiliated. Not necessarily about the top-down vs bottom-up issue.

            4) The view that differences are about personality vs finding principles as
            the driver in most conflicts that ended up centering about individuals.

            5) Saxon vs Icelandic vs pan-Germanic. How different are different lineages.

            6) Agnostic vs dieist. Should humanity go extinct, who thinks the Aesir would
            still exist? There have to be a grillion definitions for "exist" in this sense -
            Does Yoda exist? Includes the view that the Aesir are in charge so there
            doesn't need to be organizations.

            7) Magical vs votive or pracitioners or mundanes or whatever. You don't have
            to cast love spells to think there's something to the universe that let's
            people with clearly written goals to acheive them, and that leads us into
            the views of -

            8) Magic as transforming the world or as transforming the self. Does a
            person with clearly written goals draw events to them by intent or filter
            the world through perseption that sees opportunities others do not?

            9) Ceremony as drawing as much as possible from anceint ways versus
            drawing from whatever works in other faiths. Not necessarily the same
            division as the discussion of <Since Norse Wiccans follow the Aesir but
            use a different ritual structure, do they count as Asatru?>

            10) Recruiting vs not and the edges of prostelization vs only accepting
            blood relatives. Includes a discussion of <Are Asatru Hindu because they
            practice an aboriginal faith that extends back far enough to share
            established roots with Hindu?>

            11) Related to mainstream and folkish as well as the recruiting issue is
            whether Asatru is about actions thus allowing anyone to convert or
            about heritage so folks merely return to their ancestral ways without
            calling it conversion.

            12) Does asserting to be Asatru mean you are? There are solo folks who
            never do Blot not even at home, yet they follow the Aesir or the values the
            best they can and are viewed as Asatru by most. Compared with Dirk
            Mahlings "Bedpost Theory of Asatru" which attempted to form a list of
            necessary and sufficient requirements.

            13) What level of politics forms a boundary that becomes inconsistant
            with Asatru such that you're using it as a front and are thus a fundie like
            the Jihadists are parasites on Islam? Starting with the 1993 events that
            only a few here recall - Actual neo-nazi activism in the form of sending
            literature from the same PO Box used for your Asatru org membership,
            being a leader in said org knowing of the activism and calling the perp
            honorable from his activities other than that. Moving to the 2001 events on
            Asatru-in-action or our-meadhall seeing neos having too much influence on
            an org but the org declining to react. Moving to more common occurances
            discovering a member is not an neo activist but is a neo sympathizer and
            ejecting them on discovery or not (linked to thoughts vs actions issues).
            Moving to the more mundane spectrum of Libertarian through the centrist
            parties of most nations through Greens. Moving to HeimdallR Thorfin called
            half the world nazis for disagreeing with his.

            14) Publicly letting folks call themselves Asatru and keeping your opinions
            to yourself versus drawing a line and being public about it. Do folks get to
            call themselves Asatru? Releated to several of the above issues.

            15) Are UPGs for public disbursement or to be kept private? If private then
            how did the Lore evolve?

            If I were willing to spend an hour thinking of the next issue I could probably
            go on for a bunch more but these are the ones I could recall nearly as fast
            as I could type them in.

            Hail Asgard!
            Doug Freyburger
          • Lissa
            It took some time, but I finally figure out what is bothering me about this discussion. It assumes there are right answers. I d feel more comfortable with
            Message 5 of 7 , Jan 21, 2007
              It took some time, but I finally figure out what is bothering me about
              this discussion. It assumes there are right answers.

              I'd feel more comfortable with trying to teach skills and techniques,
              rather than truth. For example, how does one evaluate the accuracy of
              different types of articles or books? Where do you find out how to
              evaluate 7th century Saxon grave goods? Do you evaluate 19th century
              historical sources differently than 20th century authors?

              Trying to map out modern Asatru, or how exactly one does a blot or any
              of that is not really that important. Learning to think critically is.
              If someone gets that down, they can negotiate the rest.

              Be well,
              Lissa

              --

              Disney has deemed irreverence as one of the five core equities of the
              Muppets (humorous, heartwarming, puppet-inspired and topical being the
              other four).

              Disney's vice president of corporate communications for Europe, quoted
              in http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7-1599218_2,00.html
            • Karl Donaldsson
              ... Maybe I missed this assumption. I was hoping that religion didn t have lots of right answers, because that s what I see as dogma. ... Let alone the
              Message 6 of 7 , Jan 22, 2007
                Lissa spake:
                >
                > It took some time, but I finally figure out what is bothering me about
                > this discussion. It assumes there are right answers.

                Maybe I missed this assumption. I was hoping that religion didn't have
                lots of right answers, because that's what I see as "dogma."

                > I'd feel more comfortable with trying to teach skills and techniques,
                > rather than truth. For example, how does one evaluate the accuracy of
                > different types of articles or books? Where do you find out how to
                > evaluate 7th century Saxon grave goods? Do you evaluate 19th century
                > historical sources differently than 20th century authors?

                Let alone the modern life of modern heathens in a modern fashion, which
                seems as varied as any individual to another.

                > Trying to map out modern Asatru, or how exactly one does a blot or any
                > of that is not really that important. Learning to think critically is.
                > If someone gets that down, they can negotiate the rest.

                Of course -- but critical thinking and religion go hand-in-hand as often
                as critical thinking and emotional responses do. Unfortuantely, religion
                for many seems to be one of those "feel" things. No matter how much
                critical thinking one does, this does nothing to teach one how to ride a
                bicycle, surf, or sing. Somethings are not about cogitation, but rather,
                about skill, practice, and subconscious understanding. I suppose it's why
                I've never been successful at things like uitseta or seidhr, because I
                lack the feel, skill, and practice with those things.

                Critical thinking is a keen and serviceable blade, but it doesn't wield
                itself.

                Frith upon your house
                Karl Donaldsson
                <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
                hfg@... http://hfg.ravenbanner.com
                Check out the Happy Fat Guy Pottery Studio!
                <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
                Member of the Kindred of Ravenswood
                Zionsville, Indiana USA
                http://www.iquest.net/~chaviland/Rindex.html
                ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                To Vali! To Vengeance! To Honor! To Kin!
                _______________________________________________
                "Would you know more, or what?"
                Get Asatru education at http://www.asatru-u.org
              • Doug Freyburger
                ... There s a huge range in there. There aren t right answers because religion is an assembly of opinions and people can disagree without being incorrect.
                Message 7 of 7 , Feb 2, 2007
                  "Karl Donaldsson" hfg@... wrote:
                  > Lissa spake:
                  >
                  > > It took some time, but I finally figure out what is bothering me about
                  > > this discussion. It assumes there are right answers.
                  >
                  > Maybe I missed this assumption. I was hoping that religion didn't have
                  > lots of right answers, because that's what I see as "dogma."

                  There's a huge range in there. There aren't "right" answers because
                  religion is an assembly of opinions and people can disagree without
                  being incorrect. Feeling that your opinions are right for you is right.
                  Going to the extreme of wanting to impose your opinions gets into
                  dogma and none here want that.

                  There's also surveys of opinions and statistical analysis of the results.
                  If there are large trends where the error bar is smaller than the range
                  then describing that trend is a "right" answer. But just try expressing
                  that some time and see the reaction. Folks never try comparing data
                  sets, never pull out statistics formulas to figure out error bars, never
                  discuss improving data sets to make them more representative. Folks
                  just disagree and discard any observations by anyone else as
                  invalid.

                  And that's where I start taking Lissa's stance on this - People will find
                  any disagreement they can no matter how the data was collected. They
                  will take their disagreement and view the data as wrong. There simply
                  can't be a right answer that works, no matter what sort of analysis you
                  offer with the data. Therefore it's not a road that's worth going down.

                  > > I'd feel more comfortable with trying to teach skills and techniques,
                  > > rather than truth. For example, how does one evaluate the accuracy of
                  > > different types of articles or books? Where do you find out how to
                  > > evaluate 7th century Saxon grave goods? Do you evaluate 19th century
                  > > historical sources differently than 20th century authors?

                  An academic approach on a site that wants to build towards a university.
                  I agree that this is the way to go for an advanced course. I have no idea
                  if it's the way to go for an intermediate course. It isn't the way to present
                  a beginner's course.

                  > Let alone the modern life of modern heathens in a modern fashion, which
                  > seems as varied as any individual to another.

                  I remember Dirk Mahling's attempt to find a necessary and sufficient
                  set of attributes that ended up with "The bedpost theory of Asatru". I
                  no longer agree that his four points are all necessary but I still can't
                  improve on the process he used to isolate them.

                  > > Trying to map out modern Asatru,

                  The way I see it there's no way that data can even be presented without
                  triggering more problems than it's worth.

                  > > or how exactly one does a blot or any
                  > > of that is not really that important.

                  Some folks love scripted ceremonies. Some love to make their own up
                  from scratch. Some mine assorted written ones. During Yule I offered
                  a simple call that I use as a structure and one kindred decided to use
                  it to supply a structure where they filled in the main parts on their own.

                  To me it's about ranges of options and degree of desired preparation.
                  Offer new folks a wide range of structures and they'll tend to pick and
                  chose per their tastes. Then encouraging non-new folks to innovate
                  within some pattern becomes the next step.

                  > > Learning to think critically is.
                  > > If someone gets that down, they can negotiate the rest.
                  >
                  > Of course -- but critical thinking and religion go hand-in-hand as often
                  > as critical thinking and emotional responses do. Unfortuantely, religion
                  > for many seems to be one of those "feel" things. No matter how much
                  > critical thinking one does, this does nothing to teach one how to ride a
                  > bicycle, surf, or sing. Somethings are not about cogitation, but rather,
                  > about skill, practice, and subconscious understanding. I suppose it's why
                  > I've never been successful at things like uitseta or seidhr, because I
                  > lack the feel, skill, and practice with those things.

                  Yet there are topics that are subject to rational analysis. Runes with
                  good historical background. Surveys of what scholars think of tales
                  in the lore versus what clueless but enthusiatic yahoos like me think
                  of symbolic meanings within the tales of the lore, and why those
                  vierws tend to differ so widely. Stuff that appears to be imported from
                  related cultures like the Kelts, Slavs and so on.

                  > Critical thinking is a keen and serviceable blade, but it doesn't wield
                  > itself.
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.