From: hiddenpaw	Date: November 14th, 2002 02:35 am (UTC)		(Link)

"It seems to me that the resurgence of interest in native mythologies, and the mysticism of the East, all reflect a widespread yearning for a religious framework based on deep inner experience. Shamanism can certainly help us here."

I think This may be wrong. I think the resurgence in interest may be because acess to these alternate religions is now much easier. Remeber that there have in times past been christian mystics, mostly outside the main stream of the church and indeed condemed by some parts of it. Also as you mention further down Christianity has in europe and america become asociated with "The establishment" and it is almost a matter of course to assume that anything that is part of "the establishment" is corrupt.

"Satanism, realizing the current needs of man, fills the large grey void between religion and psychiatry. The Satanic philosophy combines the fundamentals of psychology and good, honest emotionalising, or dogma. It provides man with his much needed fantasy. There is nothing wrong with dogma, providing it is not based on ideas and actions which go completely against human nature"

The basic premis of there being nothing wrong with dogma I can agree with, but what is not clear is weather or not LaVey or satanisum as a whole deals with the fact that Human nature confilcts with it's self in many places and it is this point where most religions go against one side or another of human nature.

	From: vexen	Date: November 14th, 2002 04:25 am (UTC)		(Link)

Access to all forms of religion, spirituality and materialism is now much easier, it doesn't in itself explain why particular religions have experienced an increase in interest.

Human instinct is self-conflicting sometimes, yes, it would be hard to deny it.

	From: hiddenpaw	Date: November 14th, 2002 04:47 am (UTC)		(Link)

Human instinct is self-conflicting sometimes, yes, it would be hard to deny it.

Given this and LaVey's claim that satanisum "provides man with his much needed fantasy. There is nothing wrong with dogma, providing it is not based on ideas and actions which go completely against human nature" Dose satanisum address this? If so how?

	From: vexen	Date: November 14th, 2002 04:51 am (UTC)		(Link)

The four crown princes are Lucifer, Satan, Leviathan and Belial. This is definately a dogmatic statement. However, it doesn't go against Human Nature because it's pure fantasy and symbolic, they're devices used in ritual and drama.

It would against Human Nature to say "Satanists only have sex on Mondays, and Women are not allowed to touch men, food or the bed for a week after their period".

In areas where Human instinct contradicts itself (for example: We have partial instincts to over eat), Satanism advocates intelligence and self discipline as very important measures of what the correct course of action is.

("Satan respresents indulgence, not abstinence" ... is followed up, in The Satanic Bible, with text on "Indulgence, NOT Compulsion!".

Is that the type of thing you're wondering about?

	From: hiddenpaw	Date: November 14th, 2002 08:38 am (UTC)		(Link)

"The four crown princes are Lucifer, Satan, Leviathan and Belial. This is definately a dogmatic statement. However, it doesn't go against Human Nature because it's pure fantasy and symbolic, they're devices used in ritual and drama."

The problem there of course coming when what one or more of these charaters simbolises conflicts with one side of our personalitys. I must admit to not knowing the Personalitys you atribute to each of these names. Do they conflict with each other in some way? (I would see that as a good thing)

In areas where Human instinct contradicts itself (for example: We have partial instincts to over eat), Satanism advocates intelligence and self discipline as very important measures of what the correct course of action is. of course ceromony normaly tends to wards extreams. do you find that in satanisum?

I think The point at which I find the biggest conflict that religion normaly comes down on one side or the other of is instinct to working to wards the grater good of human socioty and the instinct to look after number one. Christianity normaly comes down on the selfless asistance of socioty side of things. One get's the feeling that satanisum is more dedicated purly to the self.

Of course to truly look after the self one must look after both.

	From: vexen	Date: November 14th, 2002 05:21 pm (UTC)		(Link)

Ah, the conflict between self and society! One of my tag lines is:

"How can you look after other people, if you can't look after yoursef?"

You are right, Satanism is completely self-centered however the conflict comes in when we find that we are social animals, and giving to society is actually a required part of mental health.

I discuss social altruism on part two of:
http://www.dpjs.co.uk/good.html

You are correct when you say that the attributes I give to the four crown princes sometimes conflict, but actually they are too vague and don't lend themselves easily for this type of analysis. Their primary use is symbolic, as such they are referenced as required, so most the time they are not in conflict.

The four crown princes:
http://www.dpjs.co.uk/satan.html

I think that Christianity too (I think all actions are, I don't believe in actual "altruism") is completely self centered, honestly, because any attempt to do good for society is done towards the aim of going to heaven, for the self.

	From: hiddenpaw	Date: November 14th, 2002 04:45 am (UTC)		(Link)

Can I add to this that Although christianity is seen as being part of the establishment this is only true in a few small cases, Christanity being pretty divers to the point of really being several different religions it has to be said that only some parts of christianity have any power as part of "The Establishment" at all and indeed some parts can be described as being Violently opposed to it.

From: (Anonymous)	Date: November 19th, 2002 01:47 am (UTC)		(Link)
?

hi im looking for statistics on the number of religious people. Are they on this site? and i thought Vexen was female? or was i told wrong?

	From: vexen	Date: November 19th, 2002 08:48 am (UTC)		(Link)
	Re: ?

Vexen is male.

http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/rib.html

From: katminnaar	Date: December 2nd, 2002 02:39 pm (UTC)		(Link)

As a force for the future, Satanism is an indestructible force on the battle field where the gods of the past have all been declared dead interests, and all religions false.

Okay, if all religions are false then what about the religion of Satanism? ;)

	From: vexen	Date: December 2nd, 2002 04:12 pm (UTC)		(Link)

Will be nothing but an elitist club for indulgent decadents...

From: katminnaar	Date: December 2nd, 2002 05:35 pm (UTC)		(Link)

Heh heh.... okaaaay! Thanks. :)

From: (Anonymous)	Date: February 27th, 2003 04:05 am (UTC)		(Link)

If you are a man who has a desire to cling to the unstuctural form of your beliefs in the hope that you will find your calling or your place within society i think that it is only right to believe in something that you can feed off, and in the opening of doors from within your mind to find, a different level or plane and to elevate you from this simplicity that we call a life.

From: (Anonymous)	Date: May 29th, 2003 08:09 pm (UTC)		(Link)

Love patience hope

Jesus loves you

	From: alynna_serenity	Date: May 31st, 2004 11:40 am (UTC)		(Link)
	Greetings Vexen!

I haven't posted anything on your website in a while, but now I'm here.

So...

... Do you remember that I said I knew of an experiment done by a Dr. Micheal Persinger whose experiment has shown to induce an experience of the supernatural?

>>> his experiment is refered to as the "God Experiment" <<<

>>> and his experiment is performed in the Neurobiology Lab at the University of Laurentian in Sudbury, Ontario, Canada <<<

I've read your essay, which addresses people's need for dogmatic ritual concerning spiritual beliefs. And I agree that people are evolved to be religious -- including that there are some people who are less geared to be spiritual than others.

Now, I know a thing or two about religion (a word which translates to mean *COMMUNITY* --but I'll talk about that later--) along with philosophy, and the superstitious. And it has been in my experience that I know of a Dr. Persinger who has addressed what you've been wondering about. So, this Dr. Persinger has literally set up a scientific experiment to observe whether *god* (the supernatural) is literally in 'your head'. And in your essay, (to extrapolate what you've said) ~science can't yet fully address questions that has been traditionally dealt with by religion and philosophy~. BUT NOW, that case isn't really true anymore since Dr. Persinger has made a 'breakthrough'. So, "Science" (the study of phenomena to understand reality) now has a tool to effectively explore what religion and philosophy first came to do. I can literally say that "Science" is the next step in the evolution of humankind's tool kit to observe, to pick apart, and to understand reality (or the nature of the universe).

... So, guess what?

Dr. Persinger can never conclude that *god* (the supernatural) is in your head -- meaning that god and all that spooky stuff is fictitious -- but he can certainly outline that the *experience* of god (the supernatural) is done in your head. Which religion and philosophy have first pointed out.

Well overall, I know Dr. Persinger's research like I know an acquaintance that I keep in touch with. So, I don't know all the details of Dr. Persinger's research but I'm versed to comprehend what he does. And I know that you also ask the same questions as he does. But he uses different tools than you do. So while you do whatever you see fit, Dr. Persinger's tools involve the Scientific Method and he uses Science as the tool to understand the spiritual [~and don't get his approach confused with Christian Science or Scientology~].

Hmmm, I believe that the human mind has a lot in store that is innate (or built in) -- which means that I think we experience spiritual matters in our heads but the supernatural is built outside ourselves. And I also believe that god (well, whatever you want to call it) is a bit of a mystery along with the fact that answers to age-old questions can be found in our minds. So, I think that our brains are god-granted in design, which then store the software to interface with the supernatural. And what Dr. Persinger does is to show that the humanmind is built to interface with things divine, diabolical, spooky, or all-encompassing spiritual. His experiment stimulates the hardware of the human brain to show its capability. And so far, Dr. Persinger has outlined that the human brain is indeed built for religious experience -- including philosophical orientation.

	From: alynna_serenity	Date: May 31st, 2004 12:17 pm (UTC)		(Link)
	*also* concerning my other post

I never get to chat with you in any form (which is unfortunate) but oh well.

Yet, here is something else for you to read:

***and this is a quotation from Dr. Micheal Persinger***

DR. MICHAEL PERSINGER:

I think one of the most exciting challenges in science is to find the basis, the empirical basis, of why people experience the "God phenomenon." Not belief in God -- that is a different process. But the experience of the "God phenomenon." That of course is tied to the brain itself.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/week510/cover.html

...and what Persinger's experiment involves is...

a helmet (a motocycle helmet) that pulses tiny bursts of electrical activity into the brain

The person (subject) sits alone in an isolation chamber in a comfy chair and then wears a motorcycle helmet which is wired to create a weak electromagnetic field to stimulate their brain (more exactly: their temporal lobes, which are beside the person's ears).

... finally the electrical pulses prove to induce mystical or spiritual experiences in 80% of the subjects.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

...and to give you something further to think about...

[check out my next post]

	From: alynna_serenity	Date: May 31st, 2004 12:30 pm (UTC)		(Link)
	here it is -- < continued from my last post >

GOD ON THE BRAIN

Rudi Affolter and Gwen Tighe have both experienced strong religious visions. He is an atheist; she a Christian. He thought he had died; she thought she had given birth to Jesus. Both have temporal lobe epilepsy.

Like other forms of epilepsy, the condition causes fitting but it is also associated with religious hallucinations. Research into why people like Rudi and Gwen saw what they did has opened up a whole field of brain science: *neurotheology*.

The connection between the temporal lobes of the brain and religious feeling has led one Canadian scientist to try stimulating them. (They are near your ears.) 80% of Dr Michael Persinger's experimental subjects report that an artificial magnetic field focused on those brain areas gives them a feeling of 'not being alone'. Some of them describe it as a religious sensation.

His work raises the prospect that we are programmed to believe in god, that faith is a mental ability humans have developed or been given. And temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) could help unlock the mystery.

History is full of charismatic religious figures. Could any of them have been epileptics? The visions seen by Bible characters like Moses or Saint Paul are consistent with Rudi's and Gwen's, but there is no way to diagnose TLE in people who lived so long ago.

There are, though, more recent examples, like one of the founders of the Seventh Day Adventist Movement, Ellen White. Born in 1827, she suffered a brain injury aged 9 that totally changed her personality. She also began to have powerful religious visions.

Representatives of the Movement doubt that Ellen White suffered from TLE, saying her injury and visions are inconsistent with the condition, but neurologist Gregory Holmes believes this explains her condition.

The first clinical evidence to link the temporal lobes with religious sensations came from monitoring how TLE patients responded to sets of words. In an experiment where people were shown either neutral words/*table*, erotic words/*sex* or religious words/*god*, the control group was most excited by the sexually loaded words. This was picked up as a sweat response on the skin. People with temporal lobe epilepsy did not share this apparent sense of priorities. For them, religious words generated the greatest reaction. Sexual words were less exciting than neutral ones.

If the abnormal brain activity of TLE patients alters their response to religious concepts, could altering brain patterns artificially do the same for people with no such medical condition? This is the question that Michael Persinger set out to explore, using a wired-up helmet designed to concentrate magnetic fields on the temporal lobes of the wearer.

His subjects were not told the precise purpose of the test; just that the experiment looked into relaxation. 80% of participants reported feeling something when the magnetic fields were applied. Persinger calls one of the common sensations a 'sensed presence', as if someone else is in the room with you, when there is none.

"Horizon" introduced Dr Persinger to one of Britain's most renowned atheists, Prof Richard Dawkins. He agreed to try his techniques on Dawkins to see if he could give him a moment of religious feeling. During a session that lasted 40 minutes, Dawkins found that the magnetic fields around his temporal lobes affected his breathing and his limbs. He did not find god.

Persinger was not disheartened by Dawkins' immunity to the helmet's magnetic powers. He believes that the sensitivity of our temporal lobes to magnetism varies from person to person. People with TLE may be especially sensitive to magnetic fields; Prof Dawkins is well below average, it seems. It's a concept that clerics like Bishop Stephen Sykes give some credence as well: *Could there be such a thing as a talent for religion?*
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2003/godonbrain.shtml

...to be continued

[damned section only allows 4300 words -- so look to my next post for the finished article]

	From: alynna_serenity	Date: May 31st, 2004 12:31 pm (UTC)		(Link)
	the finished article

...continued from my last post:

Sykes does, though, see a great difference between a 'sensed presence' and a genuine religious experience. Scientists like Andrew Newberg want to see just what does happen during moments of faith. He worked with Buddhist, Michael Baime, to study the brain during meditation. By injecting radioactive tracers into Michael's bloodstream as he reached the height of a meditative trance, Newberg could use a brain scanner to image the brain at a religious climax.

The bloodflow patterns showed that the temporal lobes were certainly involved but also that the brain's parietal lobes appeared almost completely to shut down. The parietal lobes give us our sense of time and place. Without them, we may lose our sense of self. Adherants to many of the world's faiths regard a sense of personal insignificance and oneness with a deity as something to strive for. Newberg's work suggests a neurological basis for what religion tries to generate.

If brain function offers insight into how we experience religion, does it say anything about why we do? There is evidence that people with religious faith have longer, healthier lives. This hints at a survival benefit for religious people. Could we have evolved religious belief?

Prof Dawkins (who subscribes to evolution to explain human development) thinks there could be an evolutionary advantage, 'not to believing in god', 'but to having a brain with the capacity to believe in god'. That such faith exists is a by-product of enhanced intelligence. Prof Ramachandran denies that finding out how the brain reacts to religion negates the value of belief. He feels that brain circuitry like that Persinger and Newberg have identified, could amount to an antenna to make us receptive to god. Bishop Sykes meanwhile, thinks religion has nothing to fear from this neuroscience. Science is about seeking to explain the world around us. For him at least, it can co-exist with faith.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2003/godonbrain.shtml