B1.3) One may think Freyr was a human promoted by polytheists and "demoted" by Christians.
Indeed! Also, much like Freyja, since their "names" just mean "Lord" and "Lady", there's the further possibility that initially distinct figures got merged/conflated/confused at various points.
Thanks for this, I likely ought to have put it together. I suspected she did, but she's even-handed enough in most of her writing to acknowledge folks who don't and what their reasons are without obviously putting them down or calling them wrong. That prayer makes me slightly uncomfortable from a JMG-inspired "get consent for folks you pray for" standpoint.
Correct me if I'm wrong: people don't seem to have found evidence of that, even though it seems to make sense, right?
As far as I know, that's correct, and that's certainly what I was implying. I've been meaning to take another look at comparative evidence from other religions to get a feel for what (if any) worship was given to Beings treated negatively in myths. Of particular interest would be looking at Hades or similar figures from other mythologies to get a handle on whether Hel ought to be worshipped. She's an unusual case in the myths, and the arguments for why to worship her make a certain amount of sense to me, and the arguments for why not worshipping her may be due to a Christian-derived bias are also plausible, but I haven't dug into it enough to have a sense, so for now, I don't actively worship Her, but I also try to be respectful.
C5.1) Yeah - I think the meaning's core for Setians is "individuality".
Ah, okay, then yeah, my understanding of JBP's take would be that he is, indeed, an archetype of individuality, but of all the bad side of individuality, with Horus as the good side (and with both together a full representation of what any given human individual is actually like).
C7.1) I'm not saying this is wrong, but see "later rationalizations".
Indeed. I suppose for myself I'm not quite sure how to handle the alternatives between 1) the idea that myths were inchoate, partially formed intuitions about those later rationalizations versus 2) the idea that myths can mean a lot of things and maybe those rationalizations are one of those things, but they're not exhaustive, versus 3) those rationalizations are the product of different thoughts and a different age that have little to do with what the myths/early stories/early practice meant to the folks telling/doing them. It seems to me like Option 1 (of which JBP is a big fan, via Jung) might often be plausible, but also like applying it universally only makes sense if you believe in Progress.
C7.6) I think he self-describes as classical Liberal, and thus a rather unsubtle Progressive/modernist who objects to the "post-" part (and even then, even I might think original postmodernism was worth paying attention to, and what has no upside at all is "vulgar postmodernism").
Yeah, I think that's fair. I get the impression he has sometimes bumped into the borders of why this worldview might be missing some important stuff, or be mistaken in certain ways, but he still seems pretty committed to it.
D) I didn't mean to make work for you, but you *did* boast you'd write 52 articles this year ... :D
no subject
Indeed! Also, much like Freyja, since their "names" just mean "Lord" and "Lady", there's the further possibility that initially distinct figures got merged/conflated/confused at various points.
C5) https://www.northernpaganism.org/shrines/loki/writings-for-loki/a-prayer-to-loki.html
Thanks for this, I likely ought to have put it together. I suspected she did, but she's even-handed enough in most of her writing to acknowledge folks who don't and what their reasons are without obviously putting them down or calling them wrong. That prayer makes me slightly uncomfortable from a JMG-inspired "get consent for folks you pray for" standpoint.
Correct me if I'm wrong: people don't seem to have found evidence of that, even though it seems to make sense, right?
As far as I know, that's correct, and that's certainly what I was implying. I've been meaning to take another look at comparative evidence from other religions to get a feel for what (if any) worship was given to Beings treated negatively in myths. Of particular interest would be looking at Hades or similar figures from other mythologies to get a handle on whether Hel ought to be worshipped. She's an unusual case in the myths, and the arguments for why to worship her make a certain amount of sense to me, and the arguments for why not worshipping her may be due to a Christian-derived bias are also plausible, but I haven't dug into it enough to have a sense, so for now, I don't actively worship Her, but I also try to be respectful.
C5.1) Yeah - I think the meaning's core for Setians is "individuality".
Ah, okay, then yeah, my understanding of JBP's take would be that he is, indeed, an archetype of individuality, but of all the bad side of individuality, with Horus as the good side (and with both together a full representation of what any given human individual is actually like).
C7.1) I'm not saying this is wrong, but see "later rationalizations".
Indeed. I suppose for myself I'm not quite sure how to handle the alternatives between 1) the idea that myths were inchoate, partially formed intuitions about those later rationalizations versus 2) the idea that myths can mean a lot of things and maybe those rationalizations are one of those things, but they're not exhaustive, versus 3) those rationalizations are the product of different thoughts and a different age that have little to do with what the myths/early stories/early practice meant to the folks telling/doing them. It seems to me like Option 1 (of which JBP is a big fan, via Jung) might often be plausible, but also like applying it universally only makes sense if you believe in Progress.
C7.6) I think he self-describes as classical Liberal, and thus a rather unsubtle Progressive/modernist who objects to the "post-" part (and even then, even I might think original postmodernism was worth paying attention to, and what has no upside at all is "vulgar postmodernism").
Yeah, I think that's fair. I get the impression he has sometimes bumped into the borders of why this worldview might be missing some important stuff, or be mistaken in certain ways, but he still seems pretty committed to it.
D) I didn't mean to make work for you, but you *did* boast you'd write 52 articles this year ... :D
Fair enough!