Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - idgo

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 29
General LHP Discussion / Re: Some education
« on: October 08, 2020, 09:49:47 pm »
Sutkeh, if you find it enriching or enlightening to justify your decisions about where you wish to affiliate at what time, then by all means continue.

Otherwise, it is entirely justifiable to reject the entire topic several posts ago, even if solely on the grounds of it being described with the same tenor that's used in recruitment to churches and cults.

When you and an organization are ready for each other, you'll know. Others' regrets or lack thereof about joining at a particular time in their own lives can not reliably predict what yours will be. If you aren't certain it's time, it likely isn't, and a tendency to pressure the unsure into joining is unfortunately common to undesirable organizations.

And to be pedantic, if the moment of initiation to a particular group is truly the zenith of one's career in a given pursuit, then tautologically all time spent actually involved with the group would be worse or lower than the initiation in some way. I personally prefer walking paths that appear likely to lead to better things, rather than worse ones.

Journals / Re: idgo forgot its grimoire at home and is using this instead
« on: October 04, 2020, 03:31:18 am »
I'm solidly off on a tangent of interest that's off topic for these fora. I'll be back to generic interests which include things worth saying here at some point.

But in I came across a diagram like, and it gave me some serious deja vu to the assorted pentagonal constructions I was posting here awhile back, so it seemed worth taking note of in this record.

General LHP Discussion / Re: Liminal Spaces in magic
« on: September 30, 2020, 03:17:11 pm »
I find that they amplify my existing mindset.

When I enter such potential spaces preoccupied by concrete events of the past or future, they almost disappear or never exist to me, as recognizing a liminal space as such takes a certain amount of free attention and curiosity/interest.

When I enter them while receptive, curious, or generally looking openly for something, they are sets which can make it easy to see myself as exactly the sort of person I choose to be in that moment. In other words, such "unscripted" locales drop the calculus of "here are this space's clear norms, and here are the reactions which are to be consistently expected from others if one steps outside those norms".

Perhaps by offering an area outside our general expectations, I've noticed that such spaces can be conducive to some of the best conversations with other people.

I'm still on the fence when it comes to TST, I agree with some things but not others, but have decided to be patient since it's a new movement.

To be untactfully blunt, their purpose is to demonstrate the problems with Christian-based religious legislation in the US by exploiting every such law in a directly anti-Christian manner. In doing so, they can sometimes transform Christians from believing "we need religious laws" to "we need to prevent religious laws", which the original founders figured out for themselves hundreds of years ago... but people so selectively ignorant of history often need a more personal reminder.

If TST never leads directly to any personal enlightenment or progress, it will have nevertheless succeeded at its purpose if it manages to hold open the societal door to free thought that certain cults make such an effort to slam shut.

The rituals by TST and related groups tend to be much easier to understand for me and to intuit how and why they would work than the average ritual I encounter in other contexts.

The one linked is no exception.

It might be because they are based on such a simple framework of beliefs that one doesn't first need to initiate into anything really, but I don't think it's just that.

Indeed, many rituals violate what we call logic by exploiting edge cases of the rules of what we think makes sense. TST's rituals, on the other hand, violate pollitical illogic by exploiting edge cases of rule sets that most (especially here) would conclude do not make sense to begin with.

Reading / Re: What are you reading?
« on: July 30, 2020, 07:13:15 pm »
"Your inner fish", by Neil Shubin. Highly approachable, and sets forth a useful framework for conceptualizing the commonalities of all life on Earth. And from those similarities is cut a clearer stencil of humanity's differences.

General LHP Discussion / Re: explaining your system to new people
« on: July 30, 2020, 07:07:37 pm »
Those who learn about my system do so organically, by observing the ways that I think differently from how others do. I have never yet met a situation in which attempting to teach the system which works for me in a top-down manner looked like a good idea.

If someone turns to me for advice and I choose to fulfill that request, 90% or more of the task is listening. Then I might recommend a task or a piece of reading to provide the person appropriate context for whatever piece of advice I have for them, and in the unlikely event that they come back to me after completing it, their question is transformed into something which I can answer.

If someone asks about my system simply to make conversation or because they expect it ought to amuse them, I look for the underlying need and address it with more satisfying stories instead. My beliefs are a toy, yes, but they are my toy, and not for playing with in the ways that others might wish to use them.

Even if I wanted to share every detail of my system, it would likely be impossible to do so, as a listener would require exactly my own life experiences (and no others) to derive the same meaning from my observations that I do. Since it's impossible to share the system perfectly, the question is instead about what level of imprecision is tolerable, and I happen to find that rather low precision generally meets my needs.

General LHP Discussion / Re: over reliance on magic
« on: June 29, 2020, 10:27:45 pm »
Devotion is unquestionably useful in its place. I brought it up only to point out that the devotion-of-desparation, "help, somebody bigger than me please come fix this because I can't" mindset sounds like it may be near where Kapalika is at right now, and it's a bit of a Hotel California of a mindset once you check into it very deeply.

One of my favorite uses of devotion is to build it up pointing at someone or something I believe to be better than myself, then once I'm ready, breaking that illusion of its superiority and pointing all the dangling references left around my head to refer to myself instead.

I think it's worth differentiating between depending on the continued effects of a single cause, vs depending on continued new causes. Some of my everyday practices might be described as magical by an observer, but they're habits that don't cost me a new exertion of effort to continue once they're in place, so I don't regard them as being new workings in any meaningful sense. Choosing to establish such a habit is absolutely a new working, though -- it's quite costly in time, energy, thought, etc. To me, a "big working" usually revolves around identifying and clarifying a particular goal and then evaluating all my habits and amending them to increase the probability of the goal being attained. Then again, I find major changes to feel more like a subtractive process than an additive one, so the closer I get to having the world around me exactly how I want it, the less often I find it appropriate to make high-risk/high-reward modifications.

General LHP Discussion / Re: over reliance on magic
« on: June 29, 2020, 06:20:35 pm »
Where I personally draw that line is between initiating vs maintaining changes. Kinda like with drugs, really -- chemically enhanced insight is great, but then you gotta take it back to improve your everyday life.

"initiating a change" can mean anything from figuring out how to make a big decision to a single attempt to overwrite a bad habit from the brain, but the stuff I'm fine with using magic for are fundamentally one-offs. They're instances where I force an improbable thing to happen once, and get into the timeline where that improbable thing has already happened, and causality takes it from there.

What I'm wary of using magic for are ongoing things that couldn't happen without it. Overriding causality every single day, in order to make something continue happening, is not sustainable. If I leave reality set up such that the things I want stay improbable after I've used "magic", then I've used it wrong.

For instance, money is a popular topic on this forum.

A magical working for money that I'd consider a good idea by my standards would be around qualifying for a higher-paid job, whether that's by rewriring my brain to take more enjoyment of getting work done, or by pushing out a single huge batch of applications, or by setting up some background system of recognizing obscure patterns to make me aware of when it's a particularly opportune time for a change. Basically a working that puts reality into a state with a near-100% chance that I'll get a big paycheck every payday.

By contrast, a working for money that I'd consider a bad idea by my standards would be trying to get a surprise windfall every week to make rent while not even working. Sure, it might work the first time or three, but the inertia of causality doesn't want it to continue to work. And the more you *rely* on magic working, the worse entangled you get into the trap that some call Lust For Result, and the harder it gets to not meddle in ways that make it work worse.

Basically, if you choose to view things through the lens of Probability, the sustainable workings are the ones that make the goal state likely or inevitable. The ineffective workings which just waste energy and effort are those which don't change the likelihood of the world staying the way you want it.

Also, because we're here, I must point out that a mindset from which it seems like doing devotional acts toward a power outside yourself will make everything better gets extremely close to what we tend to call RHP around here. I know delegation is important and all, but be careful not to give up the kind of control that you need and that's hard to get back.

There's a certain commonality between "evils" and "self-cares". Take for instance reneging on a promise due to a change in personal circumstances which makes the promise more difficult than anticipated to fulfill.


The sociocultural virus that some name Colonialism does play itself out in curious ways. It builds castes, and when a member of a lower caste forces its pain upon a member of a higher one, it is condemned for childishness. Yet if a member of a higher caste voluntarily takes on the same pain of a lower caste individual, it is praised wildly for virtue and selflesness. It's true that one group doesn't know the real experience of the other, but often overlooked how this divide cuts both ways. Because the higher castes built by this pathology have had it so long, grown so symbiotic with it, that if it was removed they would have nothing left. The lower castes -- those more newly added to the system -- are within reach of an identity from before, an identity outside of it. It is possible for someone of a group more newly added to Colonialism to reject it... but those of groups which have carried it like that fungus in the wasps so long that everything before is truly erased, might collapse like the empty bug-shell that's left if you pull out its mushroom occupant. I suspect this may relate to the over-representation in LHP of individuals from the groups longest-ridden by the Colonialism meme: LHP was built out of what scraps could be found from what they had before, or grafted in from neighboring cultures. And this might explain that desperation within it, long puzzling to me, to pretend that traditions date back far longer than they do: The newly colonialized hate its shit and turn back to what they distantly remember being better. The oldly colonialized, sick with whatever was had by wherever Rome caught and spread it from, have no such straightforward path out. Can one blame some for seeking to break or build such a way out when it seems available by no other means?

Colonialism is not a perfect name for the phenomenon, but it comes close. It's the "acting white", the culture rather than the color, of which one identical twin could very well accuse another if they deviate from their shared values into its preferred paradigm. It's the social systems which build onto mere biology to create "The Patriarchy" against which some reasonably, and others unreasonably, complain.

Seeing it is like spotting a particular plant in a caucophony of foliage: at first you look at it and it's just a sea of green. But then someone picks out a single leaf or a single blossom, and points out its defining traits and its differences from nearby lookalikes, and the faculties of pattern matching grab the "nature" of the thing and suddenly you're spotting it everywhere, even catching it by its coloration or gestalt from a great distance or when passing it by at great speed. In one way that particular plant has been there all along and the only thing that changed is the viewer's perception; in another and comparably relevant way the plant was effectively absent, unfindable, unusable, until one calibrates one's capacity to pick it out.

this wasn't even planned... I wonder how hard it would be to arrange to get paid half a cent less per pay period

Back on the concept of the societal utility of sin:

Onboarded at a new job recently, which means another batch of mandatory "ethics and code of conduct" training. It's fascinating how their heuristic for whether conduct is "wrong" includes "would it embarrass the company if it was found out publicly?". Seems a very pragmatic use of Pride as a universal constant.

Satanism / Re: anarcho satanism
« on: June 01, 2020, 11:45:05 pm »
why bother with stage one and waste your time and just stay where you already were.

I personally don't bother. The people who do bother seem to do so because they believe it can work, and then by trying to make it work, they learn things about the world that they didn't know previously. By learning new things and improving their ability to predict and influence outcomes, they are more like LHPers than those who never even try.

Satanism / Re: anarcho satanism
« on: May 31, 2020, 05:11:12 pm »
Actually, that set me down a web hole of reading up on how "anarchist communities" actually govern themselves (because they do), which allows me to summarize:

The closest stable state to anarchy is governance through group consensus.

But government by consensus is still government.

To be ruled by oneself is still to be ruled.

This strongly suggests to me that absolute anarchy on all levels may be incompatible with personal development as a Satanist.

However, many stable states adjacent to anarchy can be just fine for it.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 29