Aswad
Posts: 6909
Joined: 4/4/2007 Status: online
|
Tal Marcus, It might seem we are roughly in agreement; for clarity and commentary: This, I think, is one of those places where it is, perhaps, sad that Norman used the Initiate caste more as a criticism of Earth religion, rather than examining what the original Priest-King caste was about, and envisaging what it might be. Certain people are born with a trait that is occasionally acquired by those who are not born to it, namely the dissociation of what we might liken to Plato's ideal forms, from the hierarchy of their incarnations, presentations and instances. It is intrinsic to a mind that has a certain series of variations in the dopaminergic system, but plasticity makes it acquirable to others whose circumstances present them with a subconscious choice between that mental remodelling and cognitive dissonance. The net result tends to be a unique way of arranging and viewing patterns and combinations thereof, an affinity for abstract thought, and usually above-average intelligence (that is certainly required to get the benefits). One might say abstract thought is a more natural mode for such people, while concrete thought is more natural to the remainder of the population. And, in my experience, it is more common for such people to take a bird's eye view, or at least fully grok it at some point, which is what I think should be the foundation of any actual Initiate caste; a complement that rounds out the whole. As, in my own and many others' assessment, such a person, I am clearly less concerned with Norman and his books, than the ideas he put forth. And those ideas, in turn, are secondary to the larger pattern within which they fit. Insofar as I find ideas of substance in his books, they are generally ones I agree with, although some appear counterfactual in my experience, and others are contingent on assumptions that are pragmatic but fall short of what I think they might be. I would integrate these ideas in my life, if I hadn't already done so from arriving at them via a different route, not because they are Gorean, but because they suit me. As far as I can tell from the books, such would seem to be a path a Gorean might take, and Norman has clearly emphasized his hopes that the books would inspire people to go beyond books and set formulæ in their lives. It has never been very significant to me whether or not I am considered Gorean. Like anyone seeking to live life fully, honestly and with integrity, I am a moving target. At present, it seems that the term does a pretty good job of conveying- in one word- to those who know its meaning, just what general ballpark I am in. Certainly, any distance doesn't seem greater than the internal variation between the cultures presented, at least to me. But as someone not natively thinking in terms of words, labels and symbols, but rather in the arrangement of abstract patterns, concepts and ideas, I couldn't claim to be particularly attached to the label or the books. Insofar as the size and shape of an instrument consisting of a metal digging implement with a pole for leverage is to be called a shovel, I think it would be accurate to call me a Gorean. When said implement needs to be of a particular brand, from a particular store, or otherwise be a specific kind of shovel in order to be called one, it would not be accurate to call me one. My impression of the original post, and your follow-up, was the latter, which is where my reply originated from. If that was correctly interpreted on my part, it stands; else, it does not. I will be what I am, regardless of what I am called. And I have found kinship and people I should like to number among my friends in this place; I do not think it matters more to most of them than it does to me whether I identify- or am identified- with a given label or not. Nobody is getting bent out of shape over it, in any case, methinks. Health, al-Aswad.
_____________________________
"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind. From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way. We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.
|