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

Re: [sl] Myth-Religion in Psychology and Mythology (Jung/Campbell/+)

Expand Messages
  • Barry Carroll
    ... I believe that Terry Alden is simply a former student who took Santanilla s course at MIT years ago. I believe he explains this. He simply wants to keep
    Message 1 of 8 , Jun 17, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      >
      >
      > > For a list of mill keepers
      > > have you been to this website?
      > > http://www.technosophy.com/milltime.htm
      >
      >By Terry Alden (who is this person? why should we believe them?)
      >Copyright 1991

      I believe that Terry Alden is simply a former student who
      took Santanilla's course at MIT years ago.
      I believe he explains this.
      He simply wants to keep the material from Hamlet's Mill
      out on the table via the net. Of course he has added
      his own two cents.

      If I remember, he also thinks the book rambles so much that
      it takes a lot of patience to read it. Because of this, on his
      site he has tried to streamline the main drift of Santanilla and
      Deshend's ideas about the importance of the precession within
      various mythologies and the concept that used to be so shocking
      back in the late '60s----that there might be scientific content in these
      things preserved as oral tradition. Alden tries to simplify and summarize.
      I think that you may be right that his own bias misrepresents the
      material somewhat. He overreaches when he conflates
      Santillana/Dechend with Joseph Campbell and Jung.

      Re his essays:
      Years ago when I first tried to read HM it was way over my head.
      I had to learn to understand the precession, the ecliptic and a bunch of
      other observational astronomy before I even knew what he was talking about.
      The essays, one on the star of Bethlehem and the other about the determintion
      of the correct start date for the Aquarian age, are his own theories.

      i was not as interested in the Star essay as his calculation of the start
      of the next
      precessional age. you read a lot of crap of this subject too.
      However I like his logic on that one.
      "believed to be the same as that of the Magi"
      i would like to know his source on that too

      that is kind of bold without a reference..
      I don't really care about that part tho.
      the reasoning itself is consistant enough to
      stand alone as a good theory.
      if you have any comment on that one i'll have
      to re-read it.

      I got lost farther down in your post.
      Does he really say that the move from old to new is "evil"?
      I did want to say that this whole business of evil as it applies
      to the representatives the forces of decay, along with the idea
      of things "unlucky"--
      like dates and numbers or creature of ill omen. All of them spring
      from widespread cultural bias that favors positivistic ideas.
      Things like newness, sex, life, youth, growth, health,wealth, expansion
      and stuff that symbolizes that, instead of their complimentary opposite
      symbols of decline, decay, old age, etc that we celebrate at Halloween.
      The whole Mill thing provides a cyclical mechanical structure that is given
      dramatic flesh in the gods, heros and characters that personify all its
      aspects.
      Short is better
      that's it for now.












      >




      >I don't surf the web much (don't like browsers and prefer
      >to use the internet as a discussion medium rather than
      >research tool). I'll quote from this page so we can begin
      >such a discussion on myths and the Mill of Time. I think
      >that many areas in this subject are strewn with religious
      >biases and faulty conclusions with insufficient data to
      >support it (the weakness of most modern myth-explanation):
      >
      ># It is ultimately the purpose of this article to provide a
      ># solution to the long-standing mystery of the "Star of Bethlehem"
      ># and, in a closely-related problem, to announce the date of the
      ># beginning of the New Age, the Age of Aquarius, as determined by
      ># a method believed to be the same one used by the ancient Magi
      ># of Chaldea and other astronomical priesthoods in very early
      ># times....
      >
      >i.e. the purpose of the article is a restitution of
      >Christianity from the dustbin of fantasy and lies to
      >which it has been relegated by science's disproof of
      >its miracles and pseudo-history.
      >
      >the first time I heard the 'Astronomical Considerations
      >on the Star of Bethelehem' apology for Christianity, I
      >was in a planetarium in Cupertino, CA, and I was quite
      >amused at the lengths to which astronomers were willing
      >to go beyond science in suggesting a foundation for
      >a subject severely corrupted by religious faith.
      >
      >
      ># The validity of the statements to be made on these subjects,
      ># however, rests on the foundation of the logic and integrity
      ># of the system or method of very-long-term time reckoning
      ># which the Magi and others, it is believed,
      >
      >the "it is believed" here is quite amusing. :>
      >
      ># followed -- a
      ># system based on both planetary and precessional cycles.
      ># Therefore, it is necessary to develop the background or
      ># context in which our more specific later tasks will be seen
      ># to fit before dealing with them individually. This context
      ># turns out to be nothing less than the ancient holistic
      ># world-view or paradigm which Joseph Campbell identified
      ># as the World Monomyth.
      >
      >it "turns out to be". so how many of those who subscribe to
      >the Sacred Landscape List believe in the World Monomyth as
      >described by Joseph Campbell? is its universality-claim
      >really supportable? or are we looking again at
      >Sun-Male/Moon-Female relativism or human predisposition
      >to tell tall tales in similar fashions? are there exceptions
      >to the Monomyth, or should we regard it as Hallowed Truth?
      >
      >the scientific method indicates to me that we should be
      >clearly considering whatever this Monomyth includes (i.e.
      >having it precisely laid out for us in order to develop a
      >testable hypothesis that will assist in determining its
      >truth value). the author of this article (as many, just
      >like most Jungians, who will also be mentioned below)
      >does not do this, and just describes what we are supposed
      >to believe with no references or explanations of either
      >modern scientific support for the proclamations.
      >
      ># ...
      >#
      ># A good indication of the alienation of the modern psyche from
      ># the ways of thought in ancient times is the current connotation
      ># of the term, 'myth.' A myth to us is a fabrication, a made-up
      ># story based solely on imagination, a lie.
      >
      >especially amongst materialists.
      >
      ># Outside of this
      ># 'definition,' most people today have no idea of what a myth
      ># actually is. Myths are metaphors expressing aspects of life
      ># in the natural world of human experience.
      >
      >most people with education (/indoctrination) seem to believe
      >that myths are expressions of some internal genetically-
      >inherited (i.e. human/racialist) unconscious structure that
      >was foisted by Jung onto a willing-to-believe public. there
      >is insufficient evidence for its universality, but it is
      >being believed as if it were the Gospel, post-Christianity.
      >
      ># ...
      >#
      ># Joseph Campbell saw the symbols of myth as universal archetypes,
      >
      >what makes them universal? what evidence is there for their
      >universality?
      >
      ># as did psychologist Carl Jung, which appear again and again in
      ># dreams and are the inspiration for religion and art.
      >
      >does the fact that Jung faked evidence in the Solar-Phallic Man
      >case destroy his reputation? is this contention (of his deception
      >and untrustworthy data; cf. Noll, others) reliable? what kinds
      >of studies support or dispute the Jung-Campbell Paradigm?
      >why can't Jung and Campbell be tested like other theories?
      >
      ># He
      ># interpreted the heroic story of the Monomyth as a metaphor
      ># representing the inner psychological transformations and
      ># spiritual potentialities awaiting every man on his journey
      ># through life.
      >#
      ># Contemporary with Campbell but much less well known is another
      ># investigator who wrote about the universality of the themes of
      ># world mythology and connected them not with the inner life of
      ># man but with his external environment, particularly the
      ># celestial vault. His name is Giorgio de Santillana, and, back
      ># in 1969 when his book, Hamlet's Mill, was first published, he
      ># was a Professor of Humanities at M.I.T.....
      >
      >nice background on prof. Santillana.
      >
      ># It is highly instructive and appropriate that Campbell and
      ># de Santillana, though studying the same body of material,
      ># world mythology, would arrive at what would seem to be two
      ># totally different, even irreconcilable, interpretations of
      ># the significance of the Monomyth narrative.
      >
      >Santillana doesn't claim that all the myth is reliable and
      >therefore universal in character, just that as a body it
      >points toward partcicular astronomical events and cycles.
      >Campbell and Jung both claim universality. for this reason
      >I class the latter two with religion and the former with
      >anthropology and science.
      >
      ># On the one hand,
      ># Campbell emphasized the inner psychological and spiritual
      ># dimensions of the story and had much less to say about any
      ># connections with astronomy.
      >
      >did his emphasis include any proof or demonstrations of his
      >theories? what criteria would be acceptable as such? perhaps
      >the contentions made are so difficult to falsify that they
      >can say anything they like and continue to be believed. at
      >least de Santillana's contentions can be corroborated with
      >astronomical and anthropological/literary observation.
      >
      ># On the other, de Santillana had
      ># little to say on the psychology of the Monomyth story, but
      ># wrote nearly 500 pages connecting it with observational
      ># astronomy.
      >
      >yes, de Santillana approaches the subject from the standpoint
      >of empiricism and repeatability. it is debatable whether the
      >Jungians and Campbellites place such value on their results,
      >and this gets me doubting their reliability (Gnostics?).
      >
      ># In the holistic mode of ancient thought, however, both
      ># perspectives are valid simultaneously.
      >
      >with this level of "validity", it is no wonder Terry Alden
      >wants to justify religious modes of knowledge. what is it
      >that Alden brings to us that ought to convince us of his
      >contentions? because ignorant primitives with "holistic
      >thought" might accept the two theories explaining myths
      >we should too? something's fishy here and it ain't just
      >Pisces!
      >
      ># The ancient dictum,
      ># "As above, so below," is precisely an expression of this
      ># unity....
      >
      >now we can more clearly see from whence Alden is coming
      >(from some Jung-Campbell-Hermetic end of the spectrum that
      >wants to justify the Christ as a astro-psychological event
      >and truth).
      >
      ># ...Sometimes [the Craftsman Creator God] fashions the
      ># Universe by shaping it on a potter's wheel which he spins
      ># with his feet....
      >
      >so here's the contribution you've made to my request, Barry:
      >
      > POTTER'S WHEEL
      >
      ># [nice list of gods WITHOUT mention of their Mill-correllates,
      ># omitted]
      >#
      ># ...Upsetting the divine order and regularity of the cosmos was
      ># an evil factor and this was associated with the phenomenon of
      ># the precession....
      >
      >so moving from old to new is "evil".
      >
      >I don't like the level of credulity most authors bring to the
      >subject of "archetypes", and this page seems to attempt to
      >placate or convert the materialists *and* the Hermetics to
      >some kind of astronomy-recovers-vestiges-of-Christianity
      >paradigm but without much to back it up beyond singing to
      >choirs who have already bitten the Apple of Knowledge (this
      >of The Monomyth or of archetypes) rather than considering
      >whether de Santillana's theory is limited, sporadic, or
      >composed of varying information for which his essay (that
      >being "Hamlet's Mill") is insufficient.
      >
      >in any case it only had one Mill Correllate (Potter's Wheel).
      >interestingly, the only mention I saw of the relative value
      >of the precessional character was 'evil'. this makes any figures
      >associated with the Movement to Pisces (e.g. Jesus and maybe
      >numerous others) Revolutionaries (World-System-Upsetters)
      >at least and 'evil' at worst. from what perspective do they
      >become heroic?
      >
      >thanks, Barry, for pointing out this page. if you know of
      >one that just has a list of Mill Correllates I'd really
      >enjoy looking it over. otherwise I hope that someone will
      >be able to adequately answer my queries above about where
      >the science starts and the psychological and mythological
      >religion (along with 'Monomyths' and 'archetypes') begins.
      >
      >Seyfert-1
      > nagasiva@...
      >
      >-----------------------------------------------------------
      >PS
      >is 'monomyth' just a poor substitute for 'monotheism'?
      >
      >Topics suitable for discussion in this e-list can be found at:
      >http://www.luckymojo.com/sacredland.html
      >
      >To UNsubscribe, send email to:
      >unsubscribe-sacredlandscapelist@yahoogroups.com
      >
      >
      >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    • keith
      I got lost farther down in your post. Does he really say that the move from old to new is evil ? I did want to say that this whole business of evil as it
      Message 2 of 8 , Jun 18, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        I got lost farther down in your post.
        Does he really say that the move from old to new is "evil"?
        I did want to say that this whole business of evil as it applies
        to the representatives the forces of decay, along with the idea
        of things "unlucky"--

        i read hm in collge, and agree that though i got the gist of it, much of it
        was over my head.

        but recall(plato's?) recounting of the 'ages', associated with metals,
        wherein the condition of man gets worse with each passing age.

        recall also that guy...whats his name...livio stecchini, the metrologist.

        http://www.metrum.org/

        ...who said, in "mapping the earth:"

        "The most important theme of ancient cosmology is a moral one: The condition
        of man is terrible; the world is askew; humanity has decayed from an earlier
        age of bliss. This is the biblical theme of original sin and expulsion from
        the garden east of Eden. But the concept of paradise and the expulsion of
        the human race from it is not peculiar to biblical religion. Ancient
        cosmologies were concerned with the basic problem confronting all religions:
        Why is there evil in the world? This is an imperfect world and the condition
        of mankind oscillates between happiness and sorrow. To this problem, which
        is the greatest question facing mankind, the ancients gave a cosmological
        answer: because the cosmos is not constructed in the right way, because its
        measurements are not what they should be. But there was another explanation
        which went much deeper cosmologically and assumed that what was wrong with
        the world was much more serious: The world in which we live is a crooked
        world because the ecliptic forms an angle with the equator. The ecliptic is
        the great highway of the sky: it is the course not only of the sun, but also
        of the moon and of the five planets. We know today that this results from
        the fact that all the bodies of the solar system move on a single plane,
        except for deviations of a few degrees.

        The two most important points in the world are the points where the ecliptic
        meets the equator, the equinoctial points. Ancient astronomical systems
        considered as the year zero, the year from which the shifts in the position
        of the stars resulting from the precession of the equinoxes begin to be
        counted. According to the basic conception, the happy time prevailed long
        ago when the equinoxes were near the stars a Gemini and g Sagittarii. At
        this time not only the circle of the ecliptic and the circle of the equator
        met at one point, but the circle of the Milky Way as well, which then formed
        a right angle with the circle of the equator.

        At the point where the three circles of the cosmos used to meet there were
        the three Gorgons; their name means "pivot." The Greeks said that two of the
        Gorgons were immortal and one was mortal, for it was no longer true that the
        Milky Way met at one point with the ecliptic and with the equator. But long
        ago, when the three great circles-the Milky Way, the ecliptic, and the
        equator-coincided at the Vernal Equinox, the world was in its right shape
        and the human race lived in a state of eternal spring. Therefore the notion
        was also current that the state of mankind and of the cosmos changes when an
        Equinox becomes a Solstice and inversely; this happens as a result of a
        rotation of 90? caused by the precession. If the Great Year of the
        precession is computed by the round figure of 24,000 years, the happy state
        of mankind existed 6,000 years earlier. This is the reason why one of the
        biblical chronologies computes 6,000 years from Adam to Jesus. Jesus was
        born at the moment in which the sun passed from the constellation of Aries
        to the constellation of Pisces. "


        ...interesting stuff, no? talk about sacred geography: the site is full of
        observations about the ways the ancients viewed their world.










        >




        >I don't surf the web much (don't like browsers and prefer
        >to use the internet as a discussion medium rather than
        >research tool). I'll quote from this page so we can begin
        >such a discussion on myths and the Mill of Time. I think
        >that many areas in this subject are strewn with religious
        >biases and faulty conclusions with insufficient data to
        >support it (the weakness of most modern myth-explanation):
        >
        ># It is ultimately the purpose of this article to provide a
        ># solution to the long-standing mystery of the "Star of Bethlehem"
        ># and, in a closely-related problem, to announce the date of the
        ># beginning of the New Age, the Age of Aquarius, as determined by
        ># a method believed to be the same one used by the ancient Magi
        ># of Chaldea and other astronomical priesthoods in very early
        ># times....
        >
        >i.e. the purpose of the article is a restitution of
        >Christianity from the dustbin of fantasy and lies to
        >which it has been relegated by science's disproof of
        >its miracles and pseudo-history.
        >
        >the first time I heard the 'Astronomical Considerations
        >on the Star of Bethelehem' apology for Christianity, I
        >was in a planetarium in Cupertino, CA, and I was quite
        >amused at the lengths to which astronomers were willing
        >to go beyond science in suggesting a foundation for
        >a subject severely corrupted by religious faith.
        >
        >
        ># The validity of the statements to be made on these subjects,
        ># however, rests on the foundation of the logic and integrity
        ># of the system or method of very-long-term time reckoning
        ># which the Magi and others, it is believed,
        >
        >the "it is believed" here is quite amusing. :>
        >
        ># followed -- a
        ># system based on both planetary and precessional cycles.
        ># Therefore, it is necessary to develop the background or
        ># context in which our more specific later tasks will be seen
        ># to fit before dealing with them individually. This context
        ># turns out to be nothing less than the ancient holistic
        ># world-view or paradigm which Joseph Campbell identified
        ># as the World Monomyth.
        >
        >it "turns out to be". so how many of those who subscribe to
        >the Sacred Landscape List believe in the World Monomyth as
        >described by Joseph Campbell? is its universality-claim
        >really supportable? or are we looking again at
        >Sun-Male/Moon-Female relativism or human predisposition
        >to tell tall tales in similar fashions? are there exceptions
        >to the Monomyth, or should we regard it as Hallowed Truth?
        >
        >the scientific method indicates to me that we should be
        >clearly considering whatever this Monomyth includes (i.e.
        >having it precisely laid out for us in order to develop a
        >testable hypothesis that will assist in determining its
        >truth value). the author of this article (as many, just
        >like most Jungians, who will also be mentioned below)
        >does not do this, and just describes what we are supposed
        >to believe with no references or explanations of either
        >modern scientific support for the proclamations.
        >
        ># ...
        >#
        ># A good indication of the alienation of the modern psyche from
        ># the ways of thought in ancient times is the current connotation
        ># of the term, 'myth.' A myth to us is a fabrication, a made-up
        ># story based solely on imagination, a lie.
        >
        >especially amongst materialists.
        >
        ># Outside of this
        ># 'definition,' most people today have no idea of what a myth
        ># actually is. Myths are metaphors expressing aspects of life
        ># in the natural world of human experience.
        >
        >most people with education (/indoctrination) seem to believe
        >that myths are expressions of some internal genetically-
        >inherited (i.e. human/racialist) unconscious structure that
        >was foisted by Jung onto a willing-to-believe public. there
        >is insufficient evidence for its universality, but it is
        >being believed as if it were the Gospel, post-Christianity.
        >
        ># ...
        >#
        ># Joseph Campbell saw the symbols of myth as universal archetypes,
        >
        >what makes them universal? what evidence is there for their
        >universality?
        >
        ># as did psychologist Carl Jung, which appear again and again in
        ># dreams and are the inspiration for religion and art.
        >
        >does the fact that Jung faked evidence in the Solar-Phallic Man
        >case destroy his reputation? is this contention (of his deception
        >and untrustworthy data; cf. Noll, others) reliable? what kinds
        >of studies support or dispute the Jung-Campbell Paradigm?
        >why can't Jung and Campbell be tested like other theories?
        >
        ># He
        ># interpreted the heroic story of the Monomyth as a metaphor
        ># representing the inner psychological transformations and
        ># spiritual potentialities awaiting every man on his journey
        ># through life.
        >#
        ># Contemporary with Campbell but much less well known is another
        ># investigator who wrote about the universality of the themes of
        ># world mythology and connected them not with the inner life of
        ># man but with his external environment, particularly the
        ># celestial vault. His name is Giorgio de Santillana, and, back
        ># in 1969 when his book, Hamlet's Mill, was first published, he
        ># was a Professor of Humanities at M.I.T.....
        >
        >nice background on prof. Santillana.
        >
        ># It is highly instructive and appropriate that Campbell and
        ># de Santillana, though studying the same body of material,
        ># world mythology, would arrive at what would seem to be two
        ># totally different, even irreconcilable, interpretations of
        ># the significance of the Monomyth narrative.
        >
        >Santillana doesn't claim that all the myth is reliable and
        >therefore universal in character, just that as a body it
        >points toward partcicular astronomical events and cycles.
        >Campbell and Jung both claim universality. for this reason
        >I class the latter two with religion and the former with
        >anthropology and science.
        >
        ># On the one hand,
        ># Campbell emphasized the inner psychological and spiritual
        ># dimensions of the story and had much less to say about any
        ># connections with astronomy.
        >
        >did his emphasis include any proof or demonstrations of his
        >theories? what criteria would be acceptable as such? perhaps
        >the contentions made are so difficult to falsify that they
        >can say anything they like and continue to be believed. at
        >least de Santillana's contentions can be corroborated with
        >astronomical and anthropological/literary observation.
        >
        ># On the other, de Santillana had
        ># little to say on the psychology of the Monomyth story, but
        ># wrote nearly 500 pages connecting it with observational
        ># astronomy.
        >
        >yes, de Santillana approaches the subject from the standpoint
        >of empiricism and repeatability. it is debatable whether the
        >Jungians and Campbellites place such value on their results,
        >and this gets me doubting their reliability (Gnostics?).
        >
        ># In the holistic mode of ancient thought, however, both
        ># perspectives are valid simultaneously.
        >
        >with this level of "validity", it is no wonder Terry Alden
        >wants to justify religious modes of knowledge. what is it
        >that Alden brings to us that ought to convince us of his
        >contentions? because ignorant primitives with "holistic
        >thought" might accept the two theories explaining myths
        >we should too? something's fishy here and it ain't just
        >Pisces!
        >
        ># The ancient dictum,
        ># "As above, so below," is precisely an expression of this
        ># unity....
        >
        >now we can more clearly see from whence Alden is coming
        >(from some Jung-Campbell-Hermetic end of the spectrum that
        >wants to justify the Christ as a astro-psychological event
        >and truth).
        >
        ># ...Sometimes [the Craftsman Creator God] fashions the
        ># Universe by shaping it on a potter's wheel which he spins
        ># with his feet....
        >
        >so here's the contribution you've made to my request, Barry:
        >
        > POTTER'S WHEEL
        >
        ># [nice list of gods WITHOUT mention of their Mill-correllates,
        ># omitted]
        >#
        ># ...Upsetting the divine order and regularity of the cosmos was
        ># an evil factor and this was associated with the phenomenon of
        ># the precession....
        >
        >so moving from old to new is "evil".
        >
        >I don't like the level of credulity most authors bring to the
        >subject of "archetypes", and this page seems to attempt to
        >placate or convert the materialists *and* the Hermetics to
        >some kind of astronomy-recovers-vestiges-of-Christianity
        >paradigm but without much to back it up beyond singing to
        >choirs who have already bitten the Apple of Knowledge (this
        >of The Monomyth or of archetypes) rather than considering
        >whether de Santillana's theory is limited, sporadic, or
        >composed of varying information for which his essay (that
        >being "Hamlet's Mill") is insufficient.
        >
        >in any case it only had one Mill Correllate (Potter's Wheel).
        >interestingly, the only mention I saw of the relative value
        >of the precessional character was 'evil'. this makes any figures
        >associated with the Movement to Pisces (e.g. Jesus and maybe
        >numerous others) Revolutionaries (World-System-Upsetters)
        >at least and 'evil' at worst. from what perspective do they
        >become heroic?
        >
        >thanks, Barry, for pointing out this page. if you know of
        >one that just has a list of Mill Correllates I'd really
        >enjoy looking it over. otherwise I hope that someone will
        >be able to adequately answer my queries above about where
        >the science starts and the psychological and mythological
        >religion (along with 'Monomyths' and 'archetypes') begins.
        >
        >Seyfert-1
        > nagasiva@...
        >
        >-----------------------------------------------------------
        >PS
        >is 'monomyth' just a poor substitute for 'monotheism'?
        >
        >Topics suitable for discussion in this e-list can be found at:
        >http://www.luckymojo.com/sacredland.html
        >
        >To UNsubscribe, send email to:
        >unsubscribe-sacredlandscapelist@yahoogroups.com
        >
        >
        >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



        Topics suitable for discussion in this e-list can be found at:
        http://www.luckymojo.com/sacredland.html

        To UNsubscribe, send email to:
        sacredlandscapelist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com


        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      • Keith
        what gets me about all that hamlets mill stuff is that it must have taken so long to amass that precessional knowledge. i read the other day onna websiite i
        Message 3 of 8 , Jun 20, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          what gets me about all that hamlets mill stuff is that it must have taken so
          long to amass that precessional knowledge.

          i read the other day onna websiite i found
          http://mailbox.univie.ac.at/~muehleb9/index.html
          a critique of graham hancock and robert bauval's work i.e. "fingerprints of
          the gods," and all that. the guy had some good points and a good website
          full of sceptical bubble bursting to boot.

          but while the authors do a great job of picking apart hancocks quackery (and
          it IS a good deal quacked), i feel like hancock got it right in the soul of
          it. the evidence of precessional knowledge all over the world in these
          oldest myths clearly show a deep tradition of intense astronomical
          knowledge. you put that together with maps like the pirir reis, mercator's,
          oronteus fineas, and the like, showing antarctica before its current
          glaciation, and youve got to conclude that SOMETHING was going on way way
          back in the day.

          of course, anyone who speculates on what that "something" is is in for it.
          they are going to look like a fool to SOMEONE.


          my question deals wiith the sphinx and the other features of the giza
          plateau: is bauval right? is this a terrestrial map of orion?

          does the sphinx come from 10,500 bc or so? did it get its weathering pattern
          during the neolithic wet phase?
        • Seyfert-1
          50030620 viii Pisces-Age-Y2006 ... in giving this site a second chance, my first impression is a very bad one. he misquotes A.C. Clarke as if Clarke were some
          Message 4 of 8 , Jun 20, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            50030620 viii Pisces-Age-Y2006

            Barry Carroll <palladin@...> points out during requests for Mills:
            >>> http://www.technosophy.com/milltime.htm

            Seyfert-1:
            ># By Terry Alden (who is this person? why should we believe them?)
            ># Copyright 1991

            Barry Carroll <palladin@...> re "Hamlet's Mill" and T.Alden:
            > If I remember, he also thinks the book rambles so much that
            > it takes a lot of patience to read it. Because of this, on his
            > site he has tried to streamline the main drift of Santanilla and
            > Deshend's ideas about the importance of the precession within
            > various mythologies and the concept that used to be so shocking
            > back in the late '60s----that there might be scientific content
            > in these things preserved as oral tradition. Alden tries to
            > simplify and summarize.

            in giving this site a second chance, my first impression is a
            very bad one. he misquotes A.C. Clarke as if Clarke were some kind
            of Crowleyan (misspelling 'magic' as 'magick', perhaps displaying
            his own Neopagan or Thelemic biases).

            Alden's Mission Statement [ http://www.technosophy.com/mission.html ]
            is admirable excepting certian mechanistic and teleological biases
            which I find irrational, but which are commonly-shared by a good
            number of materialists who can't stomach conventional religious
            hogwash. he was apparently a friend and comrade of Dr. Marshall McLuhan,
            whose work I know little, yet by Alden's description do not impress me
            as particularly scientific. in fact, it seems Alden has confused the
            ideas of science and religion to such an extent that he misunderstands
            the essential amoral status of science vis-a-vis religion and seeks
            some kind of restitution to imagined glories of the distant past.

            I see no other material on Santillana or "Hamlet's Mill" at his
            site beyond what he calls his 'solution' to "the mystery of the
            Star of Bethlehem" and a reconstruction of "the astronomical
            methods of the Babylonian Magi to determine the true date of
            the dawning of the Age of Aquarius (May 10, 2437 A.D.)"!

            needless to say, I find his material less than convincing.

            > I think that you may be right that his own bias misrepresents
            > the material somewhat. He overreaches when he conflates
            > Santillana/Dechend with Joseph Campbell and Jung.

            looking more closely, I'd say his bias is far worse than this.

            > ...you read a lot of crap of this subject too.

            indeed, and I don't usually provide it as a reference.

            > the reasoning itself is consistant enough to stand alone
            > as a good theory. if you have any comment on that one
            > i'll have to re-read it.

            I doubt he originated the Star/Conjunction theory and am
            not really interested in discussing Alden's material further
            except to point out its somewhat common problems.

            > Does he really say that the move from old to new is "evil"?

            here's the text I quoted:
            # ...Upsetting the divine order and regularity of the cosmos was
            # an evil factor and this was associated with the phenomenon of
            # the precession....

            the notion of the Cosmic Balance Upsetter as evil is common,
            and proceeds from dualistic minds more often than those with
            a firm grounding in many theories or from strict monism. this
            is in part why I inquired about whether the figure of Hamlet
            was the Bad Guy (Upsetter of the Table) or the Good Guy (the
            one who makes things right by fixing things). I'm not saying
            it has to be either one, but the bivalence would seem to be
            a complication in the Hamlet/Amlodhi mythos that could serve
            as a reduction of universalist claims. Alden claims universal
            significance in his Mission Statement and elsewhere and for
            this reason I take him less seriously.

            > ...this whole business of evil as it applies to the
            > representatives the forces of decay, along with the idea
            > of things "unlucky"-- like dates and numbers or creature
            > of ill omen. All of them spring from widespread cultural
            > bias that favors positivistic ideas.
            > Things like newness, sex, life, youth, growth, health,
            > wealth, expansion and stuff that symbolizes that, instead
            > of their complimentary opposite symbols of decline, decay,
            > old age, etc that we celebrate at Halloween.

            the bias in the above comment favours the STATUS QUO (i.e.
            the change upsets the fixed image the interpreter wishes
            were the actuality). this is the commonplace religious
            standpoint which tries to set Aries in the East at Spring
            Equinox sunrise and leave it there PERMANENTLY, or hope
            that a 360 degree correlation will mesh with our solar year,
            or any number of other non-natural dreams without basis.

            I am convinced at this point that the existence of the
            unnatural Creator God has been *demonstrated false* by
            the scientific discoveries of the 365.4... day (what a
            calendar!) and the shifting Terran precessional wobble.
            the issue becomes very quickly (cf. "Hamlet's Mill")
            just *when* this science was established and how it is
            that religion DESTROYS OR OPAQUES knowledge it cannot
            deal with in its simplistic and supernatural cosmologies.

            > The whole Mill thing provides a cyclical mechanical
            > structure that is given dramatic flesh in the gods,
            > heros and characters that personify all its aspects.

            the Mill does not tell us from where it came. the Mill
            does not express its origination and commencement of
            grinding out Time. the Mill does not inform us except
            by some anthropomorphic legend who or what set it in
            motion, just that it is turning.

            the story of Amlodhi/Xiwangmu/etc. informs us that the
            Mill is somehow Created, Fucked up, or Repaired. it is
            an indicator that there *is* change, but on its own it
            tells us nothing about how Amlodhi (and sometimes the
            Mill too) came to exist in the first place. for that
            we must move to what is conventionally regarded as the
            content of "mythology".

            religion attempts to usurp this presumed scientific
            knowledge by presenting us with a fixed system that
            is unbalanced or repaired by Cosmic Intercessors.

            religion sets the whole in a context which satisfies
            human desires for control, domination, and changeless
            reliability -- something which Xiwangmu's Grindstone
            and science constantly remind us that we don't have.

            note the focus on CONSTRUCTIONS here (mills, potter's
            wheels, grindstones, etc.), proceeding from the
            teleological fallacies inherent to many (esp. Middle
            Eastern / Western) religions, and due to the limits
            of perception based on light-waves, something which
            modern science cannot dissuade (you don't know how
            many times I've heard people tell me that we've now
            proven that the Big Bang is the Cosmic Beginning).

            this is all anthropocentric and biased thinking that
            has as its eventual result the entry into the exact
            kind of dualism which you mention above. for comparison,
            and in light of this severely limited mentality, we
            may wish to come up with shifting *TERRAN* models
            which grow, change, move, and are not the creation
            of any Cosmic God.

            thanks.

            Seyfert-1
            nagasiva@...
          • Seyfert-1
            # To: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.pagan.magick,alt.mythology,alt.pagan.magick,alt.astronomy,alt.archaeology # From: Doug Weller # Message-ID:
            Message 5 of 8 , Jul 18, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              # To: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.pagan.magick,alt.mythology,alt.pagan.magick,alt.astronomy,alt.archaeology
              # From: Doug Weller <dweller@...>
              # Message-ID: <v8aghv4hus3965jdapmcrng5307037729e@...>
              # References: <ULLRa.2799$dk4.133554@...>

              If anyone wants to read a good review of Hamlet's Mill, try, for
              instance,

              Edmund Leach's
              http://www.nybooks.com/articles/article-preview?article_id=11061

              Or Leeming's:
              http://milloftime.homestead.com/files/Leeming_s_review.doc

              or for the html version:
              http://216.239.37.100/search?q=cache:1pybnx64SkEJ:milloftime.homestead.com/files/Leeming_s_review.doc+leeming+%22Hamlet%27s+mill%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

              Or the one by the Smithsonian astronomer Celia Payne-Gaposchkin
              http://milloftime.homestead.com/files/Payne_Gaposchkin.doc
              http://216.239.37.100/search?q=cache:TS5ozCticOQJ:milloftime.homestead.com/files/Payne_Gaposchkin.doc+PAYNE-GAPOSCHKIN++%22Hamlet%27s+mill%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

              or Jaan Puhvel's
              http://216.239.37.100/search?q=cache:dCvvtZXmJPgJ:milloftime.homestead.com/files/Puhvel_s_review.doc+JAAN+PUHVEL++%22Hamlet%27s+mill%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
              http://milloftime.homestead.com/files/Puhvel_s_review.doc

              or Lynn White Junior's Isis review:
              http://milloftime.homestead.com/files/White_s_review.doc
              http://216.239.37.100/search?q=cache:W5qdDlFuE2AJ:milloftime.homestead.com/files/White_s_review.doc+%22Lynn+White%22++%22Hamlet%27s+mill%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

              I've got copies of all of these -- and was pleased to find just now that
              they were available on the web!

              I also found this comment and list of reviews:
              http://members.optusnet.com.au/~gtosiris/page7.html

              De Santillana, Giorgio. and Von Dechend, Hertha. (1969). Frequent reprints
              but, excepting for the German-language edition by Hertha von Dechend,
              without changes or corrections.). Hamlet's Mill: An Essay on Myth and the
              Frame of Time. [Note: This book has received, and continues to receive, an
              enormous amount of uncritical support. However, it is a poorly organized
              book regarding its material and it presents an obscure and confusingly
              argued case. Its purpose is basically an attempt to revive some of the key
              ideas of Panbabylonism i.e., Mesopotamian establishment of an equally
              divided, 12-constellation zodiac and knowledge of the effects (at least)
              of precession (and the incorporation of such into ancient mythological
              themes) by circa 4000 BCE. The book was basically written by Giorgio De
              Santillana when he was seriously ill (which helps to explain its lack of
              unity and coherence) and the numerous appendices were written by Hertha
              von Dechend. The book clearly shows the influence of Hertha von Dechend's
              teacher Leo Frobenius (who had written several books mirroring some
              Panbabylonian ideas). See the critical (English-language) book reviews by
              Edmund Leach in The New York Review (of Books), February 12, 1970, Page
              36, (Giorgio's De Santillana's protest letter regarding this review
              appeared in "Letters," The New York Review, May 7, 1970); by Jaan Puhvel
              in The American Historical Review, Volume LXXV, Number 6, October, 1970,
              Pages 2009-2010; by Lynn White Junior in Isis, Volume 61, 1970, Pages
              540-541; by Gerald Gresseth in Journal of American Folklore, Volume 84,
              Number 332, April/June, 1971, Pages 246-247; by Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin
              in Journal for the History of Astronomy, Volume 3, 1972, Pages 206-211; by
              Hilda Davidson in Folklore, Volume CXXXV, 1974, Pages 282-283; by David
              Leeming in Parabola, Volume III, Issue 1, 1978, Pages 113-115; and the
              (German-language) book review by Thomas Barthel in Zeitschrift für
              Ethnologie, Band 99, Heft 1 und 2, 1974, Pages 284-287). See also the
              sympathetic (English-language) book reviews by Philip Morrison in
              Scientific American, Volume 221, Number 5, November, 1969, Page 159; and
              by Harald Reiche in The Classical Journal, Volume 69, Number 1,
              October/November, 1973, Pages 81-83.]

              Doug

              --
              Doug Weller -- exorcise the demon to reply
              Doug & Helen's Dogs http://www.dougandhelen.com
              Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.demon.co.uk
              ============
              EOF
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.