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

...Details?

Expand Messages
  • John the Anti-baptist
    Who said I m picking on you. You made an irrelevant comment in response to my post and I called you on it.
    Message 1 of 5 , Apr 27, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      <<Why pick on me?>>

      Who said I'm picking on you. You made an irrelevant comment in response to
      my post and I called you on it.

      <<I find a sentimentality in your appproach>>

      Sentimentalities are not a bad thing, when used in moderation, and in the
      right context.

      <<which I attribute to your refusal to take the badness of badness
      seriously.>>

      Define "badness". See, this is the problem with such lables; They are vague
      and leave much to be desired.

      <<Satan is a religious figure,>>

      To whom? To which Satan are you refering? Ha Satan from Jewish lore, or the
      Christian concept. They are two different characters, you know. You have to
      be specific about to what you are refering. I'm guessing you mean the
      Christain concept, since the Jewish Satan is a "good guy", so to speak.

      <<and you're putting him on a pedestal>>

      No, I'm putting myself on the pedestal. I'm just using the lable of Satan to
      represent my position in life.

      <<I think this diminishes our collective power to oppose all kinds of murder
      and lying.>>

      No, apathy and irresponsibility are the reason for all this, and so much
      more. The concept of Satan is not needed to oppose the ills of society. All
      that is needed is a conscience and the motivation.

      _________________________________________________________________
      MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page � FREE
      download! http://toolbar.msn.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/
    • John the Anti-baptist
      Who said I m picking on you. You made an irrelevant comment in response to my post and I called you on it.
      Message 2 of 5 , Apr 27, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        <<Why pick on me?>>

        Who said I'm picking on you. You made an irrelevant comment in response to
        my post and I called you on it.

        <<I find a sentimentality in your appproach>>

        Sentimentalities are not a bad thing, when used in moderation, and in the
        right context.

        <<which I attribute to your refusal to take the badness of badness
        seriously.>>

        Define "badness". See, this is the problem with such lables; They are vague
        and leave much to be desired.

        <<Satan is a religious figure,>>

        To whom? To which Satan are you refering? Ha Satan from Jewish lore, or the
        Christian concept. They are two different characters, you know. You have to
        be specific about to what you are refering. I'm guessing you mean the
        Christain concept, since the Jewish Satan is a "good guy", so to speak.

        <<and you're putting him on a pedestal>>

        No, I'm putting myself on the pedestal. I'm just using the lable of Satan to
        represent my position in life.

        <<I think this diminishes our collective power to oppose all kinds of murder
        and lying.>>

        No, apathy and irresponsibility are the reason for all this, and so much
        more. The concept of Satan is not needed to oppose the ills of society. All
        that is needed is a conscience and the motivation.

        _________________________________________________________________
        Watch LIVE baseball games on your computer with MLB.TV, included with MSN
        Premium!
        http://join.msn.com/?page=features/mlb&pgmarket=en-us/go/onm00200439ave/direct/01/
      • louise
        John wrote: (quoting Louise) ... response to ... In my view of life, I am allowed to have feelings. I felt you were picking on me, because
        Message 3 of 5 , Apr 28, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          John wrote:
          (quoting Louise)
          <<Why pick on me?>>
          >
          > Who said I'm picking on you. You made an irrelevant comment in
          response to
          > my post and I called you on it.

          In my view of life, I am allowed to have feelings. I felt you were
          picking on me, because you came back to post after an absence, and
          accused me out of several possible candidates of rambling away from
          the topic of academic existentialism - if that's what you meant; you
          were pretty vague and brief.
          >
          > <<I find a sentimentality in you.

          > Sentimentalities are not a bad thing, when used in moderation, and
          in the
          > right context.
          >
          I believe sentimentality is always a bad and brutal thing, whenever
          it is 'used', rather than given way to.

          > <<which I attribute to your refusal to take the badness of badness
          > seriously.>>
          >
          > Define "badness". See, this is the problem with such lables; They
          are vague
          > and leave much to be desired.

          I commented above on your own vagueness; but pot and kettle doesn't
          excuse me from attempting to answer nonetheless.
          "Badness" is the love of deceit for its own sake.

          > <<Satan is a religious figure,>>
          >
          > To whom? To which Satan are you refering? Ha Satan from Jewish
          lore, or the
          > Christian concept. They are two different characters, you know.
          You have to
          > be specific about to what you are refering. I'm guessing you mean
          the
          > Christain concept, since the Jewish Satan is a "good guy", so to
          speak.
          >
          You just haven't been paying attention. I've made it as clear as I
          could that 'my' 'religious' 'Satan' is a mythic figure based on the
          poetry of Milton and Blake, with especial reference to the first two
          books of 'Paradise Lost', 'The Songs of Innocence and Experience'
          and 'The Marriage of Heaven and Hell'. Then there is the 'Divine
          Comedy' of Dante, and the drawings of Gustave Dore and the etchings
          of Blake himself.

          > <<and you're putting him on a pedestal>>
          >
          > No, I'm putting myself on the pedestal. I'm just using the lable
          of Satan to
          > represent my position in life.

          Exactly. You're hijacking a powerful mythos in order to fulfil your
          own neo-liberal cult of narcissistic fulfilment.

          > <<I think this diminishes our collective power to oppose all kinds
          of murder
          > and lying.>>
          >
          > No, apathy and irresponsibility are the reason for all this, and
          so much
          > more. The concept of Satan is not needed to oppose the ills of
          society. All
          > that is needed is a conscience and the motivation.
          >
          Quite. So why not ditch the 'Satanist' claim, or label, or whatever
          it is. I suppose I'm referring to your profile page, which I have
          consulted from time to time.

          Louise
          _________________________________________________________________
          > Watch LIVE baseball games on your computer with MLB.TV, included
          with MSN
          > Premium!
          > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/mlb&pgmarket=en-
          us/go/onm00200439ave/direct/01/
        • Sexystud69_17@hotmail.com
          Of course you are, and no one is contesting that. I tend to do that. I post when
          Message 4 of 5 , Apr 30, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            <<I am allowed to have feelings.>>

            Of course you are, and no one is contesting that.

            <<you came back to post after an absence,>>

            I tend to do that. I post when the muse strikes me.

            <<accused me out of several possible candidates of rambling away from
            the topic of academic existentialism>>

            This came after you made a vague critique of my response to Bill. I
            didn't ask for unnecessary critique, and I don't want it. When I
            post, I want a response that deals specifically with the topic, and
            not your view of my posting style. If you need to ask questions, feel
            free to do so. But, vague statements about being "explicit" are not
            needed.

            <<I believe sentimentality is always a bad and brutal thing, whenever
            it is 'used', rather than given way to.>>

            I, however, disagree. If one gives way to sentimentality, then they
            obviously have little or no control over their sensibilities, or at
            least it would seem that way. But, someone who uses sentimentality
            would seem to have complete control, as well as, awareness of any
            necessary limitations.

            <<"Badness" is the love of deceit for its own sake.>>

            I believe that deciet is a necessary tool of survival. However, like
            sentimentality, it should be used in moderation and in the proper
            context.

            <<'my' 'religious' 'Satan' is a mythic figure based on the poetry of
            Milton and Blake, with especial reference to the first two books
            of 'Paradise Lost', 'The Songs of Innocence and Experience' and 'The
            Marriage of Heaven and Hell'. Then there is the 'Divine Comedy' of
            Dante, and the drawings of Gustave Dore and the etchings of Blake
            himself.>>

            So, your idea is based on works of fiction. Fine.

            <<You're hijacking a powerful mythos>>

            I'm not hijacking anything. Satanism simply gives the Satan of all
            lores a voice to speak, and properly represent him-/herself. Except
            Satan is merely a manifestation of natural human needs and desires.
            Needs and desires that are erroneously labled as "sinful" by the
            white-light religions.

            <<in order to fulfil your own neo-liberal cult of narcissistic
            fulfilment.>>

            Wrong. Narcissism is extreme love for oneself. Satanism is neither a
            cult nor neo-liberalism. It is a religion focused on many egoistic
            philosophies.

            <<So why not ditch the 'Satanist' claim, or label, or whatever it
            is.>>

            Because it compliments the ideas of Satanism. We are "adversaries" to
            all ideologies, philosophies and religions that look to condemn
            and/or lable humankind as wrong, sinful or evil because they choose
            to live by the laws of nature, as opposed to the assanine laws
            of "God", which are really the laws of man attributed to a god for
            validity purposes.
          • louise
            I find your approach over-intellectual, but you and I are on the same side. If you could find it in you to read Blake and Milton rather than to ignore or
            Message 5 of 5 , May 1, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              I find your approach over-intellectual, but you and I are on the
              same side. If you could find it in you to read Blake and Milton
              rather than to ignore or manipulate them you would come to see that.

              --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Sexystud69_17@h... wrote:
              > <<I am allowed to have feelings.>>
              >
              > Of course you are, and no one is contesting that.
              >
              > <<you came back to post after an absence,>>
              >
              > I tend to do that. I post when the muse strikes me.
              >
              > <<accused me out of several possible candidates of rambling away
              from
              > the topic of academic existentialism>>
              >
              > This came after you made a vague critique of my response to Bill.
              I
              > didn't ask for unnecessary critique, and I don't want it. When I
              > post, I want a response that deals specifically with the topic,
              and
              > not your view of my posting style. If you need to ask questions,
              feel
              > free to do so. But, vague statements about being "explicit" are
              not
              > needed.
              >
              > <<I believe sentimentality is always a bad and brutal thing,
              whenever
              > it is 'used', rather than given way to.>>
              >
              > I, however, disagree. If one gives way to sentimentality, then
              they
              > obviously have little or no control over their sensibilities, or
              at
              > least it would seem that way. But, someone who uses sentimentality
              > would seem to have complete control, as well as, awareness of any
              > necessary limitations.
              >
              > <<"Badness" is the love of deceit for its own sake.>>
              >
              > I believe that deciet is a necessary tool of survival. However,
              like
              > sentimentality, it should be used in moderation and in the proper
              > context.
              >
              > <<'my' 'religious' 'Satan' is a mythic figure based on the poetry
              of
              > Milton and Blake, with especial reference to the first two books
              > of 'Paradise Lost', 'The Songs of Innocence and Experience'
              and 'The
              > Marriage of Heaven and Hell'. Then there is the 'Divine Comedy'
              of
              > Dante, and the drawings of Gustave Dore and the etchings of Blake
              > himself.>>
              >
              > So, your idea is based on works of fiction. Fine.
              >
              > <<You're hijacking a powerful mythos>>
              >
              > I'm not hijacking anything. Satanism simply gives the Satan of all
              > lores a voice to speak, and properly represent him-/herself.
              Except
              > Satan is merely a manifestation of natural human needs and
              desires.
              > Needs and desires that are erroneously labled as "sinful" by the
              > white-light religions.
              >
              > <<in order to fulfil your own neo-liberal cult of narcissistic
              > fulfilment.>>
              >
              > Wrong. Narcissism is extreme love for oneself. Satanism is neither
              a
              > cult nor neo-liberalism. It is a religion focused on many egoistic
              > philosophies.
              >
              > <<So why not ditch the 'Satanist' claim, or label, or whatever it
              > is.>>
              >
              > Because it compliments the ideas of Satanism. We are "adversaries"
              to
              > all ideologies, philosophies and religions that look to condemn
              > and/or lable humankind as wrong, sinful or evil because they
              choose
              > to live by the laws of nature, as opposed to the assanine laws
              > of "God", which are really the laws of man attributed to a god for
              > validity purposes.
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.