OK, I´m going to end tonight´s session somewhat early with a positive picture. Bing AI actually misunderstood my original instruction, which was to generate a pic of a being of light appearing in the kali yuga. Instead, we got a fairly good rendering of...paradise?! But OK, no problemo.
And hey, hey, let´s be careful out there!
I won´t link, but I just learned about "kush" and "tranq". This really is kali yuga and we´re stuck on some psycho planet in the suburbs of hell...
Meanwhile, libertarians want to legalize all drugs, yeah, whatever.
Ännu en undersökning bekräftar att ungdomar (denna gång i Sverige) är mer religiösa än tidigare. Eftersom jag är en ständig motvals borde jag alltså bli stenhård ateist-materialist-nihilist (cuz reasons) men jag känner liksom inte för det...
Notera också att allt fler ungdomar tror att världen kommer att bli (ännu) sämre framöver. Vilket ju är sant. Oklart om det finns en koppling till det ökade intresset för religion, men det kan väl inte uteslutas.
En sak Hübinette inte tar upp är om de religiöst intresserade ungdomarna är invandrare, och vad detta i så fall innebär för "integrationen", et cetera.
The answers to the first two questions are pretty basic, but I suppose it´s interesting that ChatGPT "knows" it, too. But...I also asked the system a third question and the answer might shock you!!! :D
What is the least anthropocentric religion, in your estimation?
That’s a fascinating and difficult question — and one philosophers of religion wrestle with often. "Least anthropocentric" would mean a religion or philosophy that:
Doesn’t treat human beings as the central concern of the cosmos,
Doesn’t see the gods as primarily existing to bless or punish humans,
Frames reality in terms of cosmic processes, laws, or consciousness that would exist whether humans were here or not.
Let’s survey some candidates across traditions:
Why non-anthropocentric?
The Dharma is not “about humans” but about the nature of suffering and its cessation — a law as universal as gravity.
Beings of all types (gods, animals, humans, spirits) are equally subject to impermanence (anicca), suffering (dukkha), and non-self (anattā).
No creator god with human concerns. Even gods (devas) are impermanent and bound by the same laws.
Key idea: Dharma is cosmic law, not human-centered morality.
Drawback: Some interpretations still see human rebirth as the “best chance” for liberation, which is a kind of anthropocentrism.
Why non-anthropocentric?
The only reality is Brahman — impersonal, infinite consciousness.
The human world (and even the gods) are maya, a projection.
Liberation isn’t about human concerns but about realizing impersonal absolute reality.
Key idea: Humans are not central at all, just temporary forms of Brahman.
Drawback: Still frames the purpose of realization in terms of human liberation.
Why non-anthropocentric?
Central concern is the Dao (the Way), the spontaneous order of nature.
Humans are just one manifestation among “the ten thousand things.”
The sage harmonizes with the Dao, not by imposing human will but by non-action (wu wei) and yielding to the flow of nature.
Key idea: Cosmic processes matter more than human ones; the Dao would “flow” whether humans exist or not.
Drawback: Still gives guidance for human flourishing (longevity, balance).
Why non-anthropocentric?
The universe is governed by Logos, a rational, cosmic order.
Humans are rational animals, but their role is just to align with the universal order, not to dominate it.
Key idea: Cosmic order > human desires.
Drawback: Stoics often emphasize human virtue, so anthropocentric in practice.
Actually quite anthropocentric: humans are the battleground between Ahura Mazda (good) and Angra Mainyu (evil).
Many animistic traditions see spirits in rivers, trees, stones, animals, etc.
Why non-anthropocentric? Humans are just one part of the web of beings. The spirits don’t exist for us; they have their own agency.
Drawback: In practice, ritual often centers on human survival (crops, health, hunting luck).
If I had to choose the least anthropocentric religion/philosophy, I’d say:
Advaita Vedānta: Humans and even gods are “maya”; only impersonal Brahman is real.
Theravāda Buddhism: The Dharma applies to all beings equally, human or not.
Classical Daoism: Nature’s way is utterly impersonal; humans are just one current in a greater flow.
Between these, Advaita Vedānta might win, because it outright declares human life, gods, worlds — all appearances, not ultimately real. From that perspective, the universe isn’t “about” humans at all.
👉 Would you like me to make a ranking list of religions from most to least anthropocentric, based on their cosmology and soteriology? That might clarify things.
Great — here’s a ranking of religions/philosophical traditions from most to least anthropocentric, based on their cosmology (what reality is about) and soteriology (how liberation/salvation is conceived).
Abrahamic Monotheisms (Judaism, Christianity, Islam)
God creates the universe for humans, gives humans dominion over Earth, salvation is for humans.
History itself is “human-centered.”
Angels and even creation often exist to serve human destiny.
Zoroastrianism
Cosmic battle between Ahura Mazda and Ahriman plays out through human moral choices.
Humans are the decisive arena of the war between good and evil.
Hindu Bhakti Traditions (Vaishnavism, Shaivism, Shaktism in devotional form)
God or Goddess manifests in forms accessible to humans.
The cosmic līlā (divine play) often revolves around human devotion.
But less anthropocentric than Abrahamics, since gods also play out cosmic dramas beyond humanity.
Mahayana Buddhism
Universal compassion extends to all beings, not just humans.
Bodhisattvas vow to save beings in all realms.
Still, humans are seen as having the best opportunity for enlightenment (more central than animals/gods).
Theravāda Buddhism
Dharma is universal: gods, humans, animals — all subject to impermanence.
Humans are not the center, but rebirth as a human is privileged because it balances suffering and opportunity.
Stoicism (Greco-Roman)
Humans are not rulers of the cosmos but participants in the Logos.
Anthropocentric only in that humans are rational beings who can align with cosmic reason.
Indigenous Animisms
The world is filled with spirits and powers that have nothing to do with humans.
Humans are just one part of a larger network.
But often rituals serve human survival (food, fertility), giving a practical anthropocentric flavor.
Classical Daoism (Laozi, Zhuangzi)
The Dao is utterly indifferent to humans.
Humans are just one ripple among “the ten thousand things.”
Best life is to stop being human-centered and flow with the Dao.
Advaita Vedānta (Shankara’s Nondualism)
Brahman alone is real.
Humans, gods, animals, worlds — all maya (illusion).
Liberation is not about human destiny but about realizing there never was a separate human self.
Nature Mysticism / Deep Ecology (modern spiritual movements)
Humans are one node in a vast, impersonal web of being.
Spirituality is about dissolving human-centeredness into ecological consciousness.
Comparable in spirit to Daoism or Advaita, though much newer.
Most anthropocentric: Abrahamic religions (humans at center of cosmic plan).
Least anthropocentric: Advaita Vedānta and Daoism (humans are just one appearance of the ultimate reality or the Dao, neither of which depends on us at all).
Would you like me to also make a visual spectrum/scale diagram showing these traditions spread from “Human-Centered” → “Cosmos-Centered” → “Impersonal Absolute”?
Excellent question — because both Theosophy (Blavatsky, Besant) and Anthroposophy (Steiner) are cosmic in scope but still very human-centered. Let’s break it down:
Cosmology: Vast cycles of evolution, with hierarchies of beings (devas, masters, etc.).
Anthropocentrism: Humanity is the pivot point of evolution on Earth, but not the only concern. Other planets, other beings, and occult hierarchies also matter.
Goal: The human soul evolves toward divine consciousness, but so do other beings.
Conclusion: Anthropocentric, but at least humanity is seen as one stage among many in a grand cosmic ladder.
Cosmology: Steiner makes Earth and human evolution the central stage of the entire cosmos.
Angels, archangels, and archai exist primarily in relation to human destiny.
Christ event = central moment of all cosmic history — and it happens here, on Earth, for humans.
Goal: Human beings are the meaning of creation. The cosmos itself evolves so that humans can become fully spiritual.
Conclusion: Extremely anthropocentric — perhaps even more than Christianity in its traditional form, because Steiner explicitly says the cosmos exists for human evolution.
Theosophy: Anthropocentric, but not exclusively. Humanity is a cosmic rung among countless beings and worlds.
Anthroposophy: Radically anthropocentric. Humanity is the main reason for the cosmos itself; everything funnels into our development.
✅ So, between the two, Anthroposophy is clearly the most anthropocentric.
It’s actually one of the most anthropocentric spiritual systems ever devised, because it reinterprets the entire universe in terms of human spiritual evolution.
Would you like me to place Theosophy and Anthroposophy on the anthropocentrism ranking I made earlier, so you can see where they fit relative to other religions?
More on Great Tartary c/o ChatGPT. The rabbit hole goes deeper and deeper. I wouldn´t be surprised if these fringe ideas would become the new world religion in the event of a *real* apocalypse...or a Russian global empire (same thing).
Have their been any attempts to combine Great Tartary or the New Chronology with religion?
Yes — quite a few, and they tend to follow predictable patterns.
Whenever Great Tartary or New Chronology gets woven into religion, the goal is usually to:
Claim a hidden “true” origin for a faith.
Paint that faith as the original universal religion of the lost mega-empire.
Use the conspiracy to support a nationalist or cultural revival.
Here’s how it plays out in different contexts:
Fomenko himself flirts with this: in New Chronology, he equates many Biblical events with medieval Russian history.
For example:
Jerusalem in the Bible was actually located in Constantinople or even in Russia.
Jesus lived in the 12th century.
The apostles were tied to Russian or “Tartarian” rulers.
The “Mongol Empire” becomes the Orthodox Christian super-empire, uniting Eurasia before its suppression by the Vatican and Western Europe.
Some fringe channels present Tartary as the true Christian civilization — pure, non-papal, energy-based, and spiritually advanced.
The “mud flood” becomes a deliberate apocalypse to erase true Christianity and replace it with “corrupted” versions.
Tartarian architecture (cathedrals, star forts) is framed as sacred geometry holding divine energy.
In Turkic and Central Asian fringe circles, Tartary is tied to the Golden Horde and described as a Muslim super-empire.
New Chronology-style redating is used to claim that:
Many prophets or Islamic heroes lived in the “Tartarian” timeline.
The mud flood was divine punishment for abandoning true Islam.
Sometimes linked with Mahdist or end-times narratives — Tartary will “rise again” before the final judgment.
In New Age / pseudo-historical communities, Tartary is merged with Vedic civilization:
Tartary becomes the northern branch of the ancient Vedic world.
Its “free energy” tech is identified with Vimanas.
Fomenko’s redating is used to “prove” that Hindu epics describe recent historical events.
This often bleeds into “Aryan homeland” theories, placing it in Siberia or Central Asia.
Popular among YouTube Mud Flood theorists: all major religions were one in Tartary.
They claim symbols like the cross, crescent, swastika, and star were originally Tartarian and only later split into separate religions.
Architecture from different faiths is rebranded as “repurposed Tartarian temples.”
Blavatsky’s Theosophy is sometimes retrofitted to include Tartary:
Tartary is framed as one of the lost root races.
Mud flood is a cataclysm between “root race” cycles.
Avalokiteśvara, Christ, and other figures are merged as “avatars of the Tartarian spiritual tradition.”
In short — yes, religion gets woven in a lot, but always as part of a mythic golden-age narrative where Tartary was the cradle of a pure, ancient faith, later “fragmented” into our modern religions.
If you’d like, I can outline the most common “Tartary was the real Christianity” storyline, which is the one I’ve seen most often in the English-speaking conspiracy sphere. That one gets very creative with Biblical geography and history.
Alright — here’s the “Tartary was the real Christianity” storyline as it circulates in conspiracy subcultures, especially the English-speaking Mud Flood / New Chronology crowd.
There was once a massive Orthodox Christian empire — “Tartary” — stretching from Siberia to Eastern Europe, maybe even into North America.
This empire had pure, original Christianity, untouched by the Catholic Church, Protestantism, or modern Orthodox hierarchy.
Jesus and the apostles supposedly lived far later than the conventional dating — often placed in the 12th–14th century.
Biblical events didn’t happen in ancient Palestine, but in places like Crimea, the Caucasus, or even Moscow.
The huge “Tartarian” cathedrals, monasteries, and star forts found across Russia, Ukraine, and Central Asia are claimed to be:
Built before the biblical events (or during them)
Powered by free energy harnessed through domes, spires, and crosses
“Resonators” for divine or atmospheric energy
Many “church” buildings are said to have been repurposed from Tartarian energy temples after the empire was destroyed.
According to this narrative:
The Vatican and Western European monarchies plotted to destroy Tartary.
They rewrote history to:
Move biblical events thousands of years into the past
Relocate them to the Middle East
Erase Tartary’s role in “true” Christianity
The “Mongol invasions” of the 13th century were supposedly Western propaganda masking the Catholic takeover of Eastern Christendom.
The Mud Flood is interpreted as:
A natural disaster sent by God to punish the usurpers
Or a man-made cataclysm to bury Tartary’s high technology
After the flood, Catholic/Protestant powers took control of surviving cities, rebranded them, and installed their own clergy.
Tartarian Christianity is imagined as:
Simple and direct — no hierarchy, no papacy
Focused on free access to divine energy (“Holy Spirit” as literal electrical ether)
Unified with natural law and architecture
Some even claim Tartary preserved apocryphal gospels that revealed Jesus as a teacher of free energy and anti-usury economics.
If this is true, they argue:
All modern Christian denominations are “corrupted”
To restore “true” Christianity, one must revive Tartarian architecture, energy systems, and liturgy
The West’s entire historical timeline must be rewritten
This storyline borrows heavily from Fomenko’s New Chronology, Orthodox revivalism, and classic anti-Catholic conspiracy theories.
In fringe circles, it’s often blended with:
Flat Earth (Tartary’s tech supposedly proved geocentrism)
Free energy suppression
Biblical literalism re-timed to the Middle Ages
If you like, I can also map how this “Tartary-Christianity” story overlaps with the Russian nationalist reinterpretations of Orthodoxy — that’s where a lot of these ideas started before they spread to the West.
Old Believers & pre-Petrine nostalgia
Since the 17th century, some Russian religious groups (Old Believers, mystical sects) have viewed the West — especially Catholicism — as a corrupter of “true” Orthodoxy.
Post-Soviet re-enchantment
After 1991, many Russians rediscovered Orthodoxy but often mixed it with esotericism, Slavic neopaganism, and conspiracy theories about historical falsification.
Fomenko’s New Chronology
Provided a “scientific”-sounding foundation to say:
Biblical events happened in medieval Rus’.
Jerusalem was in Crimea or the Caucasus.
“Jesus” might have been a prince or tsar of the Russian realm.
In this blend:
Tartary = the true Holy Rus’
An enormous, Orthodox Christian empire united by one faith and moral code, with its capital somewhere in Siberia or near the Volga.
Biblical geography relocated
Jerusalem is not in the Levant; Bethlehem, Golgotha, and Mount Zion are all “misplaced” in Western-dominated maps.
Orthodox liturgy as primal
The rites of Tartary supposedly match the “original” worship given by Christ and the apostles — before Rome’s corruption.
The Vatican, Jesuits, and Protestant reformers are portrayed as a single anti-Christian force.
The “Mongol Yoke” becomes a code for Catholic and Muslim incursions into Orthodox lands.
Peter the Great’s westernization is rebranded as a final betrayal — destroying Tartary’s sacred architecture and free-energy domes.
Church domes, crosses, and iconostases are claimed to be energy-harvesting devices that amplified divine grace physically.
Icons are seen as literal “energy portals” — a belief with some roots in Orthodox mystical theology, but here exaggerated into techno-mysticism.
Pilgrimages to old monasteries are reframed as reconnecting to the energy grid of God.
This Tartary-Orthodoxy mix bleeds into:
Slavic Rodnovery (native faith revival), with Tartary recast as a pagan-Christian syncretic empire.
Cosmist theology (à la Nikolai Fedorov), where spiritual progress is linked to advanced tech, and resurrection is a literal future engineering project.
Neo-Starchild theories — belief that ancient Orthodox saints were advanced beings or “angels” in the flesh.
Gives a grand, proud history for Russia and the East.
Turns Orthodoxy into the center of world Christianity rather than a branch.
Explains geopolitical rivalries as part of an eternal spiritual war between Tartary/Orthodoxy and the West/Vatican.
If you want, I can next chart how these Russian-origin Tartary-Christianity ideas migrated into Western Mud Flood & Flat Earth circles and got reinterpreted for a mostly Protestant or New Age audience — which is quite a twist in the story. That’s when it stopped being just about Orthodoxy and became a kind of “universal lost golden age” theory.
Alright — here’s how Tartary-as-True-Christianity migrated from post-Soviet Russian Orthodox nationalism into Western conspiracy culture and then mutated into something far less Orthodox and much more “New Age / Flat Earth.”
Early English-language Tartary content came from translators of Fomenko and alternative history bloggers.
Russian YouTube channels about “forbidden architecture” got subtitled or mirrored.
Architectural photography of onion domes, massive masonry, and abandoned Siberian cities acted as the “gateway drug” — Western viewers loved the aesthetics without the theology.
In Russian sources, Orthodoxy is central — Tartary was the kingdom of the true Christ, liturgy was pure, saints were literal miracle-workers.
In Western retellings, religion became optional — churches were reframed as:
Free energy plants
Sound resonance healing centers
Ether-powered communication hubs
The Orthodox cross, in Russian versions a sign of the “true faith,” became in Western versions a “geometric antenna” or “ancient sacred tech symbol.”
Flat Earth tie-in:
Western Tartary content often absorbed the FE cosmology — claiming that the Tartarians knew the true shape of the world and mapped the outer lands beyond Antarctica.
Mud Flood tie-in:
The idea that Tartary’s architecture was buried in a global cataclysm fit perfectly into the existing Mud Flood mythos.
Time compression:
New Chronology’s collapse of ancient and medieval timelines got blended with the FE crowd’s claim that “history is only 500–1000 years old.”
In the English-speaking sphere, Tartary now overlaps with:
Free energy / Tesla myths — Tartary supposedly mastered etheric power.
Star forts as “electrical substations.”
Atlantis revivalism — Tartary rebranded as a Eurasian branch of the Atlantean empire.
Biblical reinterpretations — Protestant conspiracists sometimes claim Tartary was the true Christian millennial kingdom after Christ’s return, erased by Satanic forces.
Protestant version: Tartary = post-Resurrection kingdom where Christ reigned physically for 1000 years (premillennialism).
New Age version: Tartary = an advanced civilization of spiritually enlightened beings using “crystal tech” and “ley line energy.”
Occult version: Tartary’s cathedrals = magical portals between realms, destroyed in a war with interdimensional entities.
Most Western audiences have no background in Russian Orthodoxy — so the religious specifics got dropped.
The architectural mystery and anti-mainstream-history vibe translated well into the existing alt-history YouTube ecosystem.
Flat Earth channels were already looking for “evidence” of a lost, technologically advanced past — Tartary fit like a puzzle piece.
If you like, I can map a side-by-side comparison of Russian Orthodox Tartary vs Western Flat Earth / Mud Flood Tartary, so you can see exactly which elements stayed, which were lost, and which were invented along the way. That contrast really shows how the same myth can serve two totally different worldviews.
A Christian mocks pagans for the victory of Christianity over paganism. "If your gods are real, where were they?". Gets owned by a modern pagan asking whether Allah is stronger than Christ since the Muslims conquered large Christian territories and supplanted Christianity with Islam...
Kind of obvious retort, but it seems the Xian debate bro didn´t think of it. But then, I suppose somebody could ask the pagan if *both* Christ and Allah are stronger than Father Jupiter!
Tonight´s ChatGPT essay. The system is malfunctioning this evening, so it´s rather short.
What material factors could have led to the Axial Age and its shift in intellectual climate?
The Axial Age (roughly 800 to 200 BCE) marks a remarkable transformation in human thought, when many of the world's major philosophical and religious traditions emerged independently—Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism, Jainism, Zoroastrianism, early Greek philosophy, and more. Understanding the material factors that may have contributed to this shift in intellectual climate involves looking at changes in social, economic, political, and technological conditions across multiple regions. Here are some key material factors often discussed by scholars:
Growth of large cities and early states created complex societies that required new forms of social organization, ethics, and governance.
The rise of kingdoms and empires (e.g., Persian Empire, Greek city-states, Chinese Warring States) led to increased political centralization and bureaucracies, encouraging intellectual inquiry about law, justice, and human nature.
Urban centers facilitated exchange of ideas among diverse groups, promoting philosophical debate.
Agricultural advances and trade expansion created surplus resources, freeing parts of society (philosophers, priests, scribes) to engage in intellectual and spiritual pursuits beyond mere subsistence.
Specialized classes (scribes, scholars, priests) emerged with the leisure and resources to reflect deeply on ethical, metaphysical, and cosmological questions.
Increased long-distance trade routes (e.g., Silk Road precursors, Indian Ocean trade) connected distant cultures, exposing thinkers to new ideas, beliefs, and technologies.
Interaction between different peoples fostered cross-pollination of religious and philosophical concepts.
The spread and standardization of writing (e.g., alphabetic scripts in Greece, Chinese characters, Brahmi script in India) enabled recording and transmission of complex ideas across generations.
Writing allowed for more abstract thinking, systematic philosophy, and religious texts to be composed and preserved.
Periods of conflict, instability, and moral crisis often provoke reflection on human suffering, ethics, and order. The Warring States period in China or the collapse of older Mesopotamian powers are examples.
Intellectual movements often emerge in response to these crises, proposing new social ideals or spiritual solutions.
Population growth in some regions may have strained traditional kinship-based societies, necessitating new universal ethical frameworks that extend beyond tribe or clan.
Larger, more anonymous societies encouraged ideas of individual moral responsibility and transcendence of local customs.
The Axial Age intellectual flourishing was likely a product of complex interplay between expanding social complexity, economic surplus, political centralization, enhanced communication (trade and writing), and social crises. These material conditions created fertile ground for thinkers to question tradition, seek universal principles, and develop new spiritual and philosophical systems.
If you want, I can also highlight how specific material factors influenced particular Axial Age traditions, such as Confucianism, Buddhism, or Greek philosophy!
Exactly — many of the basic ingredients for the Axial Age (cities, writing, trade, states) already existed in the Bronze Age (c. 3000–1200 BCE), but the intellectual climate was different.
Scholars usually point to several differences between the two eras that help explain why the Bronze Age did not produce the same kind of universalizing philosophies.
Most Bronze Age writing was administrative or mythological, tied to temple cults and legitimizing kings, not abstract ethics or universal philosophy.
Religion was often state-controlled, with gods tied to specific cities or rulers, rather than transcendent, moralizing deities.
Bronze Age civilizations were relatively stable for long stretches. The Late Bronze Age collapse (c. 1200 BCE) shattered that stability, destroying many palace economies.
The Axial Age came after centuries of post-collapse rebuilding, during which people could not take old systems for granted.
Literacy was confined to small scribal classes serving palaces and temples. In the Axial Age, literacy and discourse began to reach broader segments of the elite — merchants, independent scholars, wandering teachers — creating more pluralism of thought.
Iron technology spread widely after 1200 BCE, lowering the cost of weapons and tools, undermining old aristocracies, and making political power more contested.
Expanded coinage and market economies created new social classes (especially merchants) who often sponsored new religious or philosophical movements.
Bronze Age empires were highly centralized; dissenting ideas had little room to flourish.
Axial Age cultures often emerged in competitive states or city-states (Greek poleis, Indian mahajanapadas, Chinese Warring States), where rival rulers competed to attract scholars and new ideas.
Axial thinkers (Buddha, Confucius, Socrates, Hebrew prophets) asked: What is the good life for all humans?
Bronze Age religion tended to ask: How do we please the local gods so the harvest is good and the king’s rule is secure?
In short: the Bronze Age had the hardware for civilization, but the Axial Age had the software update — instability, broader literacy, competitive politics, new technologies, and cultural cross-pollination — that encouraged questioning of tradition and the search for universal truths.
If you want, I can map this as a timeline showing how Late Bronze Age collapse conditions directly seeded the Axial Age. That makes the cause-and-effect even clearer.
