For Forum status and technical updates, follow @vonCorax on Twitter X, and @vonCorax@mastodon.social on Mastodon.
Started by Clockwerk Wolf, December 31, 2008, 11:57:02 AM
QuoteOne difficulty I have is that as a practising magician and industrial researcher for over thirty years I have learned that some ideas have a kind of ontological pressure behind them. It is like holding an acorn and asserting that the oak tree exists. A statement of this kind may violate many of the common sense rules of language, but for me this shows that common sense language lacks subtlety of expression, and there are many kinds of useful statement I would like to make without a huge pedagogical preamble. The oak tree does exist in potentia, and the real argument is about how we rank existence in potentia versus bark and bird's nests. It is in precisely this sense that I am prepared to state that the Necronomicon is a real book.This is not the kind of answer that many people want to hear however so I have made the more satisfactory argument that the Necronomicon hinted at from the contextual framework of Lovecraft's fiction is not a book that could have existed in the ancient world. It is an outcome of Lovecraft's modern consciousness of the universe. It has attained a powerful mythic credibility precisely because it squares the circle: in a modern world where no grimoire has authority, the Necronomicon has this awe-inspiring authority while still being a grimoire. It is like the Cretan who stated that all Cretans are liars. An essential aspect of its authority is that it is content free - had Lovecraft provided any substantial content other than the vague hints we have, we would tear it to pieces like any other supposed work of authority.I believe a book like the Necronomicon could not have existed in the past, and cannot exist in the present. It will exist in the future. The reason I believe this is that my radar as a professional researcher tells me that a new enlightenment is in the offing. The first enlightenment transformed our relationship with the universe, so that instead of a living cosmos maintained by a divine hierarchy of being we found ourselves in a dead machine to be investigated using scientific method.The new enlightenment is a non-dualist understanding of matter, life, and human consciousness that transcends to vocabulary of the past, where the key concepts are emergence, simulation and information. The reductive, mechanistic language of mid-twentieth century science will be discarded. The universe will once more become a place of unfathomable mystery and complexity, where life is not a frail accident but one of the most important physical processes, alongside gravity and stellar fusion. It is a new gnosticism without the inherent dualism of the past. In this vast, utterly alien, terrifying, unfathomably complex universe, Lovecraftian protagonists will journey and record their travels and experiences. One thousand years from now someone will be able to read the Necronomicon. Not a spoof, nor a fabrication... it will be the book Lovecraft intuitively grasped.Someone alive today may be its author. In potentia of course.
QuoteShort and rare-ish text dealing with the Kaos aspects of the Lovecraft tradition. Brief but concise and powerful. Arguably more informative than the Simon Necronomicon in dealing with Lovecraftian modalities.
Quote from: Atterton on December 06, 2016, 07:29:26 PMIn this month's edition of Fortean Times, there is an article on window pane ghosts. Images of people showing up within the windows of houses. In some cases said to be people who died in the houses. As this mostly relates to the 1800s, I hoped someone here might have knowledge of it? Apart from windows made from recycled photographic plates, is there anything else that might have caused a window to retain an image? Some kind of "bomb shadow" phenomenon?
Quote from: rovingjack on June 14, 2021, 05:44:53 PMI would say that splitting hairs would result in the point being put forward that without belief in absolutely anything one would do such things as drink drain cleaner, and try to fly from roof tops because they don't believe these are dangerous things.but perhaps more grounded than that, are things like you likely work for somebody on the belief that at a certain point in your future you will be paid for the work, and more specifically paid in some form that is accepted by most everybody around you as payments you can use to meet your needs. If you didn't believe these things then would you do the work?Imbedded in that is a certain belief in certain constants. Gravity will still be here in the next few days, the sun will shed light to produce days that you will experience. The seasons will not suddenly reverse.These things may perfectly be true regardless of your belief in then, but a person who doesn't believe them cannot usually function well enough. It's a severe delussional state that holds absolutely no beliefs.and a great many of us hold some of those beliefs that we hold as basic truths, but are in error.Just some thoughts on the topic. no conflict intended.
Quote from: Athanor on June 14, 2021, 06:05:08 AM...So: I believe nothing. I suspect a great many things; I suspect that some of my suspicions might even turn out to be true, in some sense; or at least, to point towards some kind of truth; but I don't believe in any of them......Athanor, TOAOTAGO 33o
Quote from: rovingjack on June 14, 2021, 05:44:53 PMI would say that splitting hairs would result in the point being put forward that without belief in absolutely anything one would do such things as drink drain cleaner, and try to fly from roof tops because they don't believe these are dangerous things.*SNIP*
Quote from: Sorontar on June 15, 2021, 08:35:49 AMSo if you believe in something, does that make it the truth? Do we need to believe in the truth, or is the truth a fact, independent of whether we believe in it or not?One view of scientific research is to reveal the truth about everything. Another is to reveal the lack of truth in the previous research. One looks for the truth. The other is looking for revolution.We believe in gravity, but is it the truth? In Ancient Greece, the concept of the world being made up of small things (or atoms) was proposed. Rutherford showed the truth was that an atom is actually multiple small things, with the electrons being separate from the nucleus. Since then, the concept of what is in the nucleus and the electrons has been changed a number of times, including protons, neutrons, quarks, etc. Sorontar These are not the only approaches to research, scientific or otherwise
Quote from: Deimos on June 15, 2021, 02:09:11 AMQuote from: Athanor on June 14, 2021, 06:05:08 AM...So: I believe nothing. I suspect a great many things; I suspect that some of my suspicions might even turn out to be true, in some sense; or at least, to point towards some kind of truth; but I don't believe in any of them......Athanor, TOAOTAGO 33oBut you believe that your thoughts exist, that your thoughts (and opinions) are real, do you not? They are real enough that you can express them in the written word, are they not?And since you are expressing them, i.e., writing them down and posting them in this thread, does that not make you real, and not just "suspected" real?After all, a figment cannot do that. And I am reading them and commenting on them; and I am not part of your conditional, "suspected" existence, because other people respond to my posts, so does that not make all of that "suspected" existence objectively real, concrete? Just askin', juneau....