Collarchat.com

Join Our Community
Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

Farce or Athiest


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Gorean Lifestyles >> Farce or Athiest Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Farce or Athiest - 4/25/2017 12:36:49 PM   
Nature417


Posts: 8
Joined: 4/17/2017
Status: offline
I was looking at the book comparison between Lane and Hubbard a second time. I thought it was like comparing apples and oranges at best. Made me wonder about created with the Initiates and the Priest Kings. I always saw it as a creative farce. Thinking how some type of religious view would be good for the stories.

But then I don't really know. I don't recall any views he had in personal faith, nothing I've read but he have it out. Though thanking now that perhaps he could be agnostic or athiest. Not assuming he is but it seems those often create alternative views for lack of it in personal life or denial of a higher power like atheist thmat say, not likely but possibly exists.

Maybe he just did it for fun. Any idea on John's personal views on faith or why he went with what he did?
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Farce or Athiest - 4/25/2017 8:16:43 PM   
Koa


Posts: 328
Joined: 7/27/2005
Status: offline
I can only guess as to the reason he put in the Initiate caste, that being that throughout history man has always had a religious view of some kind or another. It would be hard to believe that this world that he created would be believable without some kind of religious group. I do believe that Lang did not go into any great detail about this caste on purpose. He probably didn't want a religious cult following like other writers have done. The philosophy that he taught in the books was his religion, in a manner of speaking. The philosophy is what was important, not the following of a deity that we had no control over. But a philosophy that empowers you to take control of what you can control, what you do in your daily life.

_____________________________

Lo Koa Bosk

...but to take truth for granted is not to know it. Truth not won is not possessed. We are not entitled to truths for which we have not fought.
(Marauders, p.7)

(in reply to Nature417)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Farce or Athiest - 4/25/2017 9:25:55 PM   
Cell


Posts: 409
Status: offline
It's a sci fi/ fantasy trope in many ways (the corrupt religious order peddling self serving truths, claiming authority and high morality while not being deserving of either) and maybe it's a literary trope in general but I don't have such broad tastes to be able to speak too generally. I suppose you could try and analyse all the things it could mean in the gorean context but I find considering the literary context tends to cut through a lot of the BS. The Priest Kings though are a different kettle of fish.

< Message edited by Cell -- 4/25/2017 9:32:16 PM >

(in reply to Koa)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Farce or Athiest - 4/25/2017 10:59:14 PM   
UllrsIshtar


Posts: 3693
Joined: 7/28/2012
Status: offline
He used the initiates as a literary device to give an illustration to several morals, behaviors, social adaptations, and believe systems he disapproves of.

Based on the negative comment he makes in regards to the initiates, it's not hard to tell that he doesn't have too high an opinion of organized religion.

It's also quite clear that he doesn't oppose spiritual views per say, as long as they're tempered with a healthy dosage of agnosticism, and are defined by the person themselves, instead of by religious leaders.

_____________________________

I can be your whore
I am the dirt you created
I am your sinner
And your whore
But let me tell you something baby
You love me for everything you hate me for

(in reply to Cell)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Farce or Athiest - 4/27/2017 5:28:00 AM   
Nature417


Posts: 8
Joined: 4/17/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Koa

I can only guess as to the reason he put in the Initiate caste, that being that throughout history man has always had a religious view of some kind or another. It would be hard to believe that this world that he created would be believable without some kind of religious group. I do believe that Lang did not go into any great detail about this caste on purpose. He probably didn't want a religious cult following like other writers have done. The philosophy that he taught in the books was his religion, in a manner of speaking. The philosophy is what was important, not the following of a deity that we had no control over. But a philosophy that empowers you to take control of what you can control, what you do in your daily life.


I agree with that on general but Im curious after taking time to think about it and after reading the replies. My next reread I take time to analyze his references and construction of faith. I don't think it farce or that he was influenced by atheism but could be the latter.

(in reply to Koa)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Farce or Athiest - 4/27/2017 5:57:24 AM   
Nature417


Posts: 8
Joined: 4/17/2017
Status: offline
That's what I plan to do, as time permits. As far as myself, I've always had a faith, different then most and for nearly ten years back burnered it long enough that I questioned it. Once my eyes were opened to the points of an atheists beliefs, two things stuck out. Unlike them I do believe a higher power exists and I also believe that while chemistry is powerful, I believe love exists. So in time, I took time to examine my faith and to examine scripture, old and new, and test and reprove it. I think I get my greatest insight by looking at it as, not from a man teaching men, but a higher power using men to express His ideas in ways that humans can grasp.

(in reply to Cell)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Farce or Athiest - 4/27/2017 6:00:55 AM   
Nature417


Posts: 8
Joined: 4/17/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar


It's also quite clear that he doesn't oppose spiritual views per say, as long as they're tempered with a healthy dosage of agnosticism, and are defined by the person themselves, instead of by religious leaders.


You make some good points, especially this one.

(in reply to UllrsIshtar)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Farce or Athiest - 4/27/2017 7:37:25 AM   
Cell


Posts: 409
Status: offline
I think you're wasting your time.

(in reply to Nature417)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Farce or Athiest - 4/30/2017 12:24:51 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30253
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar

He used the initiates as a literary device to give an illustration to several morals, behaviors, social adaptations, and believe systems he disapproves of.

Based on the negative comment he makes in regards to the initiates, it's not hard to tell that he doesn't have too high an opinion of organized religion.

It's also quite clear that he doesn't oppose spiritual views per say, as long as they're tempered with a healthy dosage of agnosticism, and are defined by the person themselves, instead of by religious leaders.

Early in the books (3? 4?), when Tarl learns the truth about the Priest-Kings, he initially wants to reveal this to the Goreans, but there's a discussion about how the bulk of humanity needs an artificial structure like the Initiates, that few are ready for the discipline self-determination requires.

Certainly later, in Marauders, Ivar Forkbeard shows a disdain for clergy, including their possessions, status, and their very lives. Not really a stamp of approval (though the characters and the author need not share views, of course, necessarily).

But that Norman (a pen-name suggesting his affinity with Norse-like characters like Forkbeard) created a fictional world where the gods are actually technologically advanced non-human species, and humans merely part of the food chain (and not at the top), it's unlikely he was a deist. Add to that his reliance on Nietzsche, who, while raised Christian, was harshly critical of Christianity (which may or may not equal atheism on his part), I'd say the odds favor atheist on Norman's part.

(in reply to UllrsIshtar)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Farce or Athiest - 4/30/2017 8:29:09 PM   
UllrsIshtar


Posts: 3693
Joined: 7/28/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery


quote:

ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar

He used the initiates as a literary device to give an illustration to several morals, behaviors, social adaptations, and believe systems he disapproves of.

Based on the negative comment he makes in regards to the initiates, it's not hard to tell that he doesn't have too high an opinion of organized religion.

It's also quite clear that he doesn't oppose spiritual views per say, as long as they're tempered with a healthy dosage of agnosticism, and are defined by the person themselves, instead of by religious leaders.

Early in the books (3? 4?), when Tarl learns the truth about the Priest-Kings, he initially wants to reveal this to the Goreans, but there's a discussion about how the bulk of humanity needs an artificial structure like the Initiates, that few are ready for the discipline self-determination requires.

Certainly later, in Marauders, Ivar Forkbeard shows a disdain for clergy, including their possessions, status, and their very lives. Not really a stamp of approval (though the characters and the author need not share views, of course, necessarily).

But that Norman (a pen-name suggesting his affinity with Norse-like characters like Forkbeard) created a fictional world where the gods are actually technologically advanced non-human species, and humans merely part of the food chain (and not at the top), it's unlikely he was a deist. Add to that his reliance on Nietzsche, who, while raised Christian, was harshly critical of Christianity (which may or may not equal atheism on his part), I'd say the odds favor atheist on Norman's part.


I agree, I wasn't trying to advocate that he himself is agnostic, just that he favors people taking an agnostic and independent approach to their spirituality if they must have one, because he realizes that most people aren't ready to 'let go'. "Opiate of the masses" and all that.

At least, that's my read on what he's putting forward.


_____________________________

I can be your whore
I am the dirt you created
I am your sinner
And your whore
But let me tell you something baby
You love me for everything you hate me for

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Farce or Athiest - 5/1/2017 6:57:32 AM   
Malkinius


Posts: 1814
Joined: 1/9/2004
Status: offline
I see a couple of outright mistakes so far and some things to add to. Norman as a name has nothing to do with Norsemen. The Normans were the Frenchmen who invaded England in 1066. The name became a surname. I do not know why he chose it.

Forkbeard's faking his death and sack of a monastery is a story lifted straight out of the sagas. It has nothing to do with religion per se. The Initiates are based partly on the Pythagorean Mystery Cult. Note the "gorean" in the name. Some of the rituals and practices, such as not eating beans, are direct lifts from that cult...just as the name Gor or gorean may be from there as well. I have also heard that he is at least agnostic if not atheist but I have no direct proof of that.

Malkinius

_____________________________

A questioner by inclination...An Auctioneer for the fun of it
http://www.HouseMalkinius.com    The goal is community.

(in reply to UllrsIshtar)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Farce or Athiest - 5/1/2017 7:23:37 AM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nature417

Any idea on John's personal views on faith or why he went with what he did?

The books seem to me to have little use for organized religion, except perhaps insofar as it may serve to provide a wholesome guide to the superstitious or ignorant. Instead, Norman encourages us to seek within for what we need. Torvald's cave holds only a "Do It Yourself" kit: the War Arrow. In the final analysis, we must face life and the Universe alone. But instead of despair, we are urged to courage: to believe in ourselves. To believe that though we must face the Universe alone, there is something within us that's a match for it. I think that leaves more doors open than closed.

K.

(in reply to Nature417)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Farce or Athiest - 5/2/2017 6:38:24 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30253
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Malkinius
Norman as a name has nothing to do with Norsemen. The Normans were the Frenchmen who invaded England in 1066.

The Normans (Norman: Normaunds; French: Normands; Latin: Normanni) were the people who, in the 10th and 11th centuries, gave their name to Normandy, a region in France. They were descended from Norse ("Norman" comes from "Norseman") raiders and pirates from Denmark, Iceland and Norway who, under their leader Rollo, agreed to swear fealty to King Charles III of West Francia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normans

Etymology

The English name "Normans" comes from the French words Normans/Normanz, plural of Normant, modern French normand, which is itself borrowed from Old Low Franconian Nortmann "Northman" or directly from Old Norse Norðmaðr, Latinized variously as Nortmannus, Normannus, or Nordmannus (recorded in Medieval Latin, 9th century) to mean "Norseman, Viking."

(in reply to Malkinius)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Farce or Athiest - 5/2/2017 6:51:38 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
as the Lombardy area was from the Longobards (the long beards) of Scandinavia. Scandinavians were like the Spanish and mixed in fully with the areas they conquered.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4D3RYJC5KE

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Farce or Athiest - 5/2/2017 7:11:00 AM   
Malkinius


Posts: 1814
Joined: 1/9/2004
Status: offline
By the time the Normans were the Normans who invaded England the Norse had been mixed with the French and they thought of themselves more as French than Norse. Also, Norse are not one group but multiple groups from Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Iceland and to a certain extent other countries around the Baltic Sea. Just as many or more Norsemen went east instead of west and down the rivers to Constantinople they stopped along the way and became the Rus (reds) or the Russians. At the time of the Norman invasion, sorry folks, but they were considered more French than Norman including by themselves. That still doesn't say why he chose the name.

Malkinius

_____________________________

A questioner by inclination...An Auctioneer for the fun of it
http://www.HouseMalkinius.com    The goal is community.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Farce or Athiest - 5/2/2017 7:20:54 AM   
WhoreMods


Posts: 10691
Joined: 5/6/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery


quote:

ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar

He used the initiates as a literary device to give an illustration to several morals, behaviors, social adaptations, and believe systems he disapproves of.

Based on the negative comment he makes in regards to the initiates, it's not hard to tell that he doesn't have too high an opinion of organized religion.

It's also quite clear that he doesn't oppose spiritual views per say, as long as they're tempered with a healthy dosage of agnosticism, and are defined by the person themselves, instead of by religious leaders.

Early in the books (3? 4?), when Tarl learns the truth about the Priest-Kings, he initially wants to reveal this to the Goreans, but there's a discussion about how the bulk of humanity needs an artificial structure like the Initiates, that few are ready for the discipline self-determination requires.

Certainly later, in Marauders, Ivar Forkbeard shows a disdain for clergy, including their possessions, status, and their very lives. Not really a stamp of approval (though the characters and the author need not share views, of course, necessarily).

But that Norman (a pen-name suggesting his affinity with Norse-like characters like Forkbeard) created a fictional world where the gods are actually technologically advanced non-human species, and humans merely part of the food chain (and not at the top), it's unlikely he was a deist. Add to that his reliance on Nietzsche, who, while raised Christian, was harshly critical of Christianity (which may or may not equal atheism on his part), I'd say the odds favor atheist on Norman's part.

Given his outspoken libertarianism, that's another argument in favour of agnosticism or atheism on his part, I'd have thought.

_____________________________

On the level and looking for a square deal.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Farce or Athiest - 5/2/2017 7:24:53 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30253
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Malkinius

By the time the Normans were the Normans who invaded England the Norse had been mixed with the French and they thought of themselves more as French than Norse. Also, Norse are not one group but multiple groups from Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Iceland and to a certain extent other countries around the Baltic Sea. Just as many or more Norsemen went east instead of west and down the rivers to Constantinople they stopped along the way and became the Rus (reds) or the Russians. At the time of the Norman invasion, sorry folks, but they were considered more French than Norman including by themselves. That still doesn't say why he chose the name.

Malkinius

True, who knows why he picked the name.

But your claim was that "Norman" was French and had nothing to do with Norseman.

That's not true. It has quite a bit to do with Norseman.

If we're going to nit-pick history (and I sense that's in the wind), Normandy is a distinct region well into the Baroque era, technically part of France or no, with a distinct culture.

(in reply to Malkinius)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Farce or Athiest - 5/5/2017 3:21:44 PM   
Nature417


Posts: 8
Joined: 4/17/2017
Status: offline
I would think that the Viking, Norman, Normandy discussion had been on a prior thread. Seems like a Viking thread hijack. Maybe a new thread would be better? Its interesting enough my fathers parents came from Norway.

I am research and history buff in assorted areas I including theology. Scandinavians do take credit for the Normandy invasion and the French have never dispuTed that to my knowledge. Also I've noticed that Norwegian and Danish Vikings considered themselves Vikings even after settling in France, England, Ireland and other areas. They also returned to the lands of they were born in. Especially heirs to throne and important families and likely not so important families. In part, sometimes in was a yearning for the old ways they grew up with and shirk the christianity invasion influences Europe had become embedded into. From what I understand, they may have a brand of protestamt faith but most rarely attend a service or prefer studying and worshiping in there own homes, where they can discern for thwmselves. Lots of people all over are taking a harder look at Christianity. A lot of it has to do with so many different varieties, most are noticing something isn't right as catholics taught and what happened a couple hundred years before catholics. Rather like apples and oranges. Or as the Danes say, what is higher, the round tower or the thunder clap?

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Farce or Athiest - 5/7/2017 1:41:43 AM   
Malkinius


Posts: 1814
Joined: 1/9/2004
Status: offline
Sorry....but that is not exactly as true as you think. The Normans were partially descended from the Norse, partly from the French, the Franks and some Celts which were in the area as well plus probably a few other groups here and there. By the time William invaded England, Normandy had been a part of France and subject to the King of France for several generations with lots of intermarriage between the Norse and the French especially at the upper ranks of nobility. As far as I can tell, the ruling families probably considered themselves French rather than Norse and spoke a version of French. Yes, I study history too. That is not to say everyone felt that way but William being considered French was one of, not the only, reasons why the King of England claimed lands in France and eventually claimed to be the King of France. The invading army had Frenchmen from other areas too, not just Normandy. The Saxon English (who used to be German/Danish/Norse) considered them to be French.

So yes, I consider the French as of the time they invaded England. Many areas of Europe were of mixed ancestry. They were united more politically than ethnically. Speaking of which. I found an interesting source on both names and biology of the Normans. http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/normans.shtml

Malkinius

_____________________________

A questioner by inclination...An Auctioneer for the fun of it
http://www.HouseMalkinius.com    The goal is community.

(in reply to Nature417)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Farce or Athiest - 6/21/2017 3:40:04 PM   
ManOeuvre


Posts: 275
Joined: 3/2/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cell

The Priest Kings though are a different kettle of fish.


Don't you mean cuttle of fish?

(in reply to Cell)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Gorean Lifestyles >> Farce or Athiest Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2022
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.283