Thursday, May 18, 2023

Just another Tuesday?


According to media reports from last year, the United States believes that Ukraine killed Russian ultra-nationalist Darya Dugina in Moscow. Or, more specifically, certain groups within the Ukraine state apparatus. (See *second* link below.)

Interestingly, in a recent interview, the chief of Ukrainian military intelligence Kyrylo Budanov seemingly admits that this is the case. Budanov also claims that a clandestine Russian resistance group supports Ukraine by attacking targets inside Russia! 

Is this true? Or is Budanov claiming these attacks to boost Ukrainian morale? It *does* sound strange that Putin has so little control that Ukraine - the underdog in this war - can carry out daring operations of this kind.  

"We´ve targeted quite a few people"

U.S. believes Ukraine was behind killing of Dugina in Russia

Wednesday, May 17, 2023

Not a very good blog post

 

Not me 



This is not a very good blog post, I think, but the other day I saw a piece called “30 questions for atheists” on an atheist YouTube channel. The questions are taken from a Christian apologetic book I´ve never read, so it could be risky responding to them as they stand, but having nothing else to do, I gave it a shot and wrote short replies to them from my somewhat idiosyncratic perspective…

What is right or wrong? 

An absurdly broad question. How do *you* define “right” or “wrong”? On this plane, what is “right” for one entity is usually “wrong” for another. For instance, what is good for the human hunter and gatherer is bad for the animal hunted and (sometimes) plant gathered.

Right or wrong for humans is based on the instinct of self-preservation, social instincts (both genetic and reciprocal altruism) and compassion (which could be seen as a highly evolved social instinct). Morality is usually a compromise between these three, and there is no simple way to judge exactly what is “right” or “wrong”, certainly not by unimpeccably deriving anything from one single principle or categorical imperative. Even the god of the Bible changes his commandments from time to time, presumably due to changing circumstances!

But sure, it might be possible to arrive at some kind of universal principle of human conduct, something like “Don´t maliciously cause suffering in others, preserve yourself and the community, be indifferent rather than hostile to people or communities you owe nothing according to the rules of genetic kinship and/or reciprocity”. But this would still only be valid for humans (or only for humans civilized enough to understand it), not all “rational beings” on all possible worlds, nor all possible beings. And there will still be conflicting interests, for instance between “don´t cause suffering” and “preserve the community”. Note, btw, that everything we have discussed so far can be explained by evolution.   

How do you explain the presence of evil in the world?

How do *you* explain evil, since the Bible contains different answers, including the notion that God creates both good and evil? Something tells me you don´t want to go there! Also, what´s the difference between what you call “wrong” and what you call “evil”? Is it the same thing, perhaps somewhat amplified in the case of evil, or are they different in kind? At least among humans, “evil” can be seen as active conscious malice. Perhaps it´s an evolutionary strategy to promote the interests of certain individuals or groups (and hence “good” from the viewpoint of these individuals or groups), perhaps it really is an aberration of some sort. Why the world contains so much suffering and imperfection is, I suppose, an interesting question. Was it created by an evil power, perchance…?  

On what authority do you judge good/evil?

Well, on what authority do *you* judge good or evil? Presumably, you mean the Bible (certified Protestant version).

In the Bible, genocide is *commanded* in the Book of Joshua, but in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus says we should love our enemy and don´t resist evil. In Revelation, he kills everyone anyway! In one gospel, divorce is absolutely prohibited, in another its allowed in cases of either party being unfaithful. So which is it? The Decalogue says that God punishes even the descendants of transgressors, while Ezekiel says the opposite. Again, what are we supposed to believe?

Presumably, then, everything God commands at a moment to moment basis is “good”. But why is it so obvious that every command of the hypercosmic creator-god is “good”? What if God is really the Devil in disguise? How would you ever be able to tell the difference if your very *definition* of right/good is “whatever the creator of this world commands”? Would you serve Vishnu, Shiva or Satan if it could be proven that one of them created the universe?

Where did matter come from?

It may indeed have come from God or the Divine, but why do you assume that it must have “come” from somewhere? Maybe it´s eternal.

Can something come from nothing?

I assume you mean “can something come from nothing without a hypercosmic creator-god”? :D

I would go even further and say that something can´t come from nothing, period, so if the Divine exists, pantheism or panentheism is the bottom line, not “classical” theism and creatio ex nihilo.

Besides, most atheists today don´t seem to think that something can come from nothing (the questions were originally intended for atheists), so what´s the point of the question? Why don´t you argue against an eternal universe or multiverse?

What caused the big bang?

The Big Bang never happened, dude. ;-)

Can complexity and mathematical precision come from an explosion?

Where did Cain´s wife come from? Seriously, what makes you think the Big Bang was an “explosion”?

How do you explain non-material thought, logic and reasoning?

I leave this question to the reductionist materialists. But see further below for more on logic.

Apart from God and the Bible, how do you define love and hate?  

This is just silly, I´m sorry. Are you telling me that love and hate don´t exist without the Bible?! And what is the Biblical definition anyway?

How do you explain the fulfilled prophecies of the Scriptures?

How do *you* explain the failed prophecies in the Scriptures, most notably those about the imminent return of Christ?

Explain the resurrection of Christ.

Explain the “rainbow body” resurrection of Nyingma-pa shamans in Tibet. Or the resurrection of Swami Yukteshwar (whose body had been burned), mentioned by Paramahansa Yogananda in “Autobiography of a Yogi”.  

How do you know your worldview is true?

I don´t. And neither do you! Seriously, though…

The bottom line is that all our knowledge comes from our senses (including “the sixth sense”) and is in that sense “empirical”. Even revelation is “empirical” in this sense. But unless you are a very accomplished mystic, you will never receive any revelation, so you have no direct way of confirming your “Biblical” worldview. And if you are a fundamentalist, many empirical facts actually *disproves* your worldview!

What do you do with guilt?

Do you mean guilty people? We punish them, and I believe you do, too. But of course, this is really a theological assertion about the substitutionary atonement of Jesus Christ. So here is a counter-question: Why can´t God just forgive sin without sacrificing his Son? Isn´t he supposed to be all-powerful and all-loving?

What provides the pre-conditions that make reality intelligible?

The shadow of C S Lewis? There is no complete “intelligibility” from a human perspective, since humans are finite. However, the material senses of humans are roughly adequate for their purposes, and can be explained by evolution. There is no mystery here.

Where did the laws of logic come from?

They clearly didn´t come from the Biblical God, who doesn´t strike me as particularly “logical”. In what sense is the Trinity logical, for instance? Or the Incarnation? Or the substitutionary atonement?

Logic is an abstraction created by the human mind, a mind-tool to better understand our world. It´s “derived” from that same world, otherwise it wouldn´t work at all, but an abstraction isn´t the same thing as the actual world, just as a map isn´t the same thing as the terrain it maps (to use a very rough analogy).

As for God, it´s pointless to claim him for logic, since the Divine might very well be trans-rational anyway!

What is the meaning of life?

Why must there be just one “meaning” to something so multifaceted as human existence? That being said, the ultimate meaning is indeed to return to the Divine. This can take countless of lifetimes…

How do you know evolution is true?

By empirical evidence. How do you (supposedly) know that evolution isn´t true? By theological assertion. Which is pointless.

Don´t the presence of moral laws presuppose the presence of an absolute moral code taught by a moral God?

No, it doesn´t. Here´s one for you, though: doesn´t the presence of Leviticus presuppose the presence of a crazy Hebrew priestly writer (known as P)?

How do you know slavery is wrong?

How do *you* know slavery is wrong? Show me where the Bible says that it´s wrong! This is an incredibly weak argument, since the Bible rather strongly implies that slavery *isn´t* wrong, making you a sinner for being an abolitionist!

How do you know torturing people is wrong?

Once again: how do *you* know it´s wrong, since your god supposedly sends billions to Hell for eternity!

Evidence for time + chance = complexity?

I don´t think an atheist would describe his position on evolution (which I suppose this is about) in this way, but regardless, my take is that complexity doesn´t need an explanation. It has always existed. What happens is simply a reshuffling of already existing complexity. The Divine is also “complex”.

Where did the information come from that is programmed into the DNA code?

Clearly, it comes from an ancient Hebrew deity who rode in a chariot accompanied by animal-headed angels. What could be clearer? Now, show me where the Bible mentions DNA.  

Does not the information in the DNA code make evolution impossible?

No idea what this question is supposed to even mean, but then I didn´t read the book the questions are from.

Can atheism have an explanation for the complex moral and ethical issues facing mankind?

Since I haven´t read the book, I´m not sure what this question means either. The “explanation” is obviously that humans are different and hence have different interests, be they individual or communitarian. But that´s so basic bitch, that I suspect the author means “solution”. The preferred solution of fundamentalists is to deny that the issues are complex and then give one-size-fits-all answers supposedly based on the Bible (which is actually quite morally “complex”, too).

Would you think cereal writing a sentence happened by chance?

No, I wouldn´t, but then, for all we know, nothing in the universe happens by “chance”.

Where are the transitional fossils between invertebrate organisms and vertebrate organisms?

A really weird question. I didn´t know vertebrates had been upgraded to a “baramin”!

What use is half a wing?

Well, what do you mean by “half a wing”? Some birds are flightless or bad fliers, yet still have wings, so clearly they have some use. However, this could be the old creationist misunderstanding that transitional forms had *modern* bird wings literally “cut by half”, which would indeed by a hard sell on the evolutionary marketplace!

Can life come from non-life?

In other words: what use is half a life? ;-)

Even if life can´t come from non-life, there are other options than Bible God, for instance vitalism or deism.

If there is no God, and if there are no absolutes, what gives man any more value than rocks, reptiles, trees or termites?

Man (and woman). If there is a god of the kind the author believes in, and this god decides that rocks, reptiles, trees or termites *are* more valuable than humans, the latter presumably can´t protest! We have already discussed the non-existence of “absolutes” in the Bible. 

Can intelligence come from non-intelligence?

Perhaps not, but again there are more options than “intelligence comes from Yahweh”, an Edomite bull god turned into a dyadic cherub in a temple built by Phoenician pagans on the orders of a polyamorous Jewish king. Check up panpsychism, deism or competing monotheisms to yours!

The Green Man´s gaze

Credit: Johannes Otto Först 


An interesting contribution by John Michael Greer on enchantment and disenchantment. Note his take on enchantment: the world of phenomena (or "objects") is experienced as a community of persons. For instance, the sun is experienced as a person. Not "believed to be" a person, but actually *experienced* as such. He never uses the terms "animism" and "animatism", but that seems to be what he is describing. Certainly the latter!

A tie-in to the interview with Iain McGilchrist I linked to earlier is possible here. Note that McGilchrist suggests that the left brain is "materialist" and sees even animate objects as mechanism, while the right brain is "spiritual" and sees even inamimate objects as alive (for instance, the sun). This per scientific experiments in which one half of the brain has been disconnected. 

This raises the question why evolution gave us this peculiar brain to begin with. After all, evolution is supposed to be about adaptation...

When Nature Gazes Back

Tuesday, May 16, 2023

Några hübinetter

Credit: Frankie Fouganthin

Kan inte låta bli att länka till den här snubbens märkliga tankeprodukter. 

Är kanske lite fascinerad över hans dubbelhet i förhållande till adeln. Eller ska vi säga hatkärlek? Å ena sidan anarkist, å andra sidan...ja, vad? Hemlig beundrare? I blogginlägget om den svenska adeln berättar Hübinette att han vid ett tillfälle försökte bli Riddarhusets genealog?! 

Jag har väl också en del lite paradoxala åsikter om olika saker, men det här torde nog överträffa t.o.m. mig under mina mest eklektiska odyséer!  

Reflektioner kring franskhetens och svenskhetens gränser

Kriget i Ukraina är Europas blodigaste sedan 1945

Om den svenska adeln

Trump was innocent, go figure

John Durham in a probing mood



John Durham, a special counsel appointed by Trump´s Attorney General in 2019 finds Trump innocent of all charges in the Russian collusion case. Instead, Durham attacks the FBI.

No surprise there, although I happen to think he´s right. There really is no substantial evidence that Trump colluded with the Russians, and the Steele Dossier was always a piece of burlesque. I wouldn´t be surprised if the dossier was based on Russian disinformation. And that the Clinton campaign run with it anyway. The cynicism and opportunism of these people seem to know no bounds. Remember all the Western businesses that remained in Moscow until the last possible moment in 2022? Or that guy from the Never Trump "Lincoln Project" who attacked Trump for collusion, while himself being a former lobbyist for Gazprom?! 

The problem is that Trump *today* almost sounds like a Russian asset, promising to "end the war in Ukraine in one day" if re-elected, which presumably means cutting off all military aid to Zelensky. But sure, with The Donald you never know. Maybe he actually means nuking Kaliningrad...  

US special counsel faults FBI´s handling of 2016 Trump-Russia probe

What seems to be the problem, prabhu?


Here are "30 Questions for Atheists" I found at some rando atheist (sic) channel on YouTube. They were of course composed by a Christian. And of course I decided to answer them from the perspective of a purely imaginary Left Hand Tantrika. Enjoy!

What is right or wrong? 

What are you even on about? There is no right or wrong. Whatever makes you realize your fundamental unity with Bhairava is “right”. Including rank debauches, necrophagy and anthropophagy. I mean, I thought that was obvious?


How do you explain evil?

What you call “evil” comes from God, who is a three-headed creature dwelling in the charnel ground, surrounded by really hungry dogs!  


On what authority do you judge good/evil?

LOL. Well, on what authority do *you* judge good or evil? Your boy Yahweh was pretty damn based, probably a bhairava who decided to haunt another charnel ground…


Where did matter come from?

Part of God´s play, dude.  


Can something come from nothing?

Absolutely. Everything that exists just spontaneously arises out of the Great Void. That Void is esoterically Kali, the devouring Black Hole in the center of what you call Reality. The materialist scientists don´t know half of it MU-HA-HA!!!


What caused the big bang?

See above, prabhu.


Can complexity come from an explosion?

Ha ha ha, what a silly question. Of course not! Ever tried a “big bang” in your back yard?


How do you explain the immaterial?

Oh, the questions are for atheists! Now I get it. Well, sure, the immaterial definitely exists, but esoterically everything is ONE in the DARKNESS OF THE DEVOURING MOTHER.


Define love/hate without the Bible.

Love is what takes you to Goloka, where Krishna dances with the cowheard girls (and in a more recent woke version, cowboys). Hate takes you all the way to the real divine couple, Bhairava and Bhairavi, the dyadic nature of which is really ONE in KALI.


Explain fulfilled prophecies.

Have you seen the film “Mothman”? John Klein explains it quite well, I think.


Explain the resurrection.

The man you know as “Jesus from Nazareth” was really a Druid initiated in the ancient mysteries of Rama, who is Bhairava´s most faithful servant in the form of the Man-Lion. What do you think Jesus and the Devil were talking about for 40 days in the desert??? MU-HA-HA-HA!


How do you know your worldview is true?

That´s what necrophagy and too much insight meditation does to a man.


What do you do with guilt?

What guilt, brother?


What provides the pre-conditions of intelligibility?

Well, how do you define “intelligibility”? At the esoterick center, “intelligible” questions of this sort will go away, trust me prabhu!


Where did the laws of logic come from?

The biggest scheme the Devil ever pulled. Aristotle fell for it, lock, stock and barrel! Now, listen to my words, prabhu: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS LOGIC.


What is the meaning of life?

When you become enlightened, questions like this will no longer vex your puny little mind.


How do you know evolution is true?

Only Bhairava and Bhairavi could come up with such crazy shit as “evolution”.


Do moral laws mean there is a moral law giver?

Yahweh´s moral law-giving in Leviticus is very interesting, wouldn´t you say, prabhu?


How do you know slavery is wrong?

It´s not wrong. Some people are naturally slaves. That basic dude Aristotle got that one right, at least. Now, show me where the Bible says that slavery is wrong?


How do you know torturing people is wrong?

Who told you it was wrong? Gotta love your take on hellfire, btw.


Evidence for time +chance = complexity?

Why do you obsess about this kind of stuff all the time, LOL. Come and join our orgy at the cremation ground instead!


Where did DNA information come from?

Probably Vishnu. That boring dude always comes up with “order and dharma” like this, I mean, puleeze.


Doesn't DNA info make evolution impossible?

Well, I wasn´t there when it happened, prabhu, but my guess is that Bhairava decided to mess with Vishnu´s little DNA toys!


Can atheism explain complex moral issues?

Can you?


Would you think cereal writing a sentence happened by chance?

Depends on what you mean by “chance”. Or "cereal", for that matter. Everything that exists arises spontaneously from the Void, that Great Shunya in the metaphorical HEART of so-called existence itself, so in that sense, yes, even cereal writing a sentence could happen by “chance”. Again: why do you bother with things like this? Go down in lotus position and chant the sacred AUM, and you won´t care anymore!


Where are the transitional fossils?

In the charnel ground. We have transitional fossils the paleontologists have never seen!


What use is half a wing?

What use is half a brain?


Can life come from non-life?

Depends on how you define these frankly meaningless terms which you seem so obsessed about, but in a certain sense, certainly. In the Tantrik universe, cereal can come ALIVE and WRITE ON THE WALL, that much is certain!


Without god, why are humans valuable?

Hash, maybe?


Can intelligence come from non-intelligence?

Well, now when you say it…probably not, HAH HAH HAH.

Monday, May 15, 2023

Den tantriska gudinnans dans

 



Enligt allvetande amerikanska Wikipedia tar det flera tusen år för det skräckscenario Jeppson nämner att nå sin kulmen. Ja, kanske så mycket som 10.000 år. Vilket ju inte riktigt framgår av hans artikel. Det är ändå ganska anmärkningsvärt, eftersom det innebär att dagens civilisation knappast kommer att finnas kvar om några årtusenden. Ingen fest på Pluto när solen blir en röd jätte, med andra ord!

Från Wiki: "In the next 2000 years the sea level is predicted to rise by 2 - 3 m if the temperature rise peaks at 1.5 Celsius, by 2 - 6 m if it peaks at 2 Celsius and by 19 - 22 m if it peaks at 5 Celsius. If temperature rise stops at 2 Celsius or at 5 Celsius, the sea level would still continue to rise for about 10,000 years. In the first case it will reach 8 - 13 m above pre-industrial level, and in the second 28 - 37 m."






The colonialist gaze

 


A lot of colonialist gazing in this one, tbh. "Cobra Gypsies"? Note the woman at the end who wants her money stat... 

Sunday, May 14, 2023

Kemalism med förhinder?

Soldater vid Kemal Atatürks mausoleum
Credit: Dennis Jarvis (Halifax, Canada)


 

Den av CHP ledda oppositionsalliansen i Turkiet har lovat att godkänna Sveriges NATO-ansökan, men kan få svårt att leverera på den punkten. Detta enligt vissa bedömare. CHP är alltså det "socialdemokratiska" (egentligen kemalistiska) partiet. 

Den andra länken går till en artikel om spelet bakom kulisserna inom NATO, men jag undrar om den inte tonar ner Erdogan-regimens rysskontakter?  

"Fördel oppositionen i rysarvalet"

Därför vägrar Erdogan att godkänna Sveriges NATO-ansökan - egentligen

Spiritually awake

 

Not the West Coast, but the pine forest in Himalaya
where Shiva danced and seduced the sages´ wives

Credit: Sanjoy Ghosh


So I took the free and short Religious Typology Quiz at the website of the Pew Research Center. The Center has developed a typology of religious and irreligious people in which the US population is divided into seven categories: Sunday Stalwarts, God-and-Country Believers, Diversely Devout, Relaxed Religious, Spiritually Awake, Religious Resisters, and Solidly Secular. I´m not American, but took the test anyway just for the hell of it (pun intended).

I´m apparently Spiritually Awake, which I suppose is *almost* true, but it´s funny to note that according to Pew´s survey, the typical person in this category is a White Christian female with New Age beliefs (?!) who is unlikely to vote Republican and may live on the West Coast! Well, I´m apparently an outlier anyway I do it, since a perhaps less serious test I took a few years ago classified me as a Sikh! Rather than, let´s say, a freak.

The survey also contains some other intriguing information, for instance that the Solidly Secular (presumably a close proxy for outright atheism) tend to be White, male, young, liberal, and highly educated. The most conservative groups (Sunday Stalwarts and God-and-Country Believers) have a female majority…

The first link is to the quiz, while the second is to the first page of the survey report. The quiz is presumably much shorter than the questionnaire used during the actual survey. 

Religious Typology Quiz

The Religious Typology