Thank you for pointing out Rhyd’s interesting piece. I feel this whole topic of demons and spirits is very much needing a context and a reflection that is not just leaning on social theory and/or wild-guessing. Bringing some context by way of pagan is good but I feel it is not enough and might be simplistic. I suggest we invite other voices from the ranks of Christian theology - which is our western context and it is from this context that a lot of the discussion is being raised. I do not mean the opinions of some well intended church goer but people who have in-depth knowledge of a whole system or cosmology where these “demons” are just one little part of it. Some of these people are also versed in depth psychology, which is a very important aspect not just to be added but to be integrated in the discussion. I feel the actualisation of ethics and morality in the 21st century is a big thing and yes, bring the esoteric knowledge, but let’s do it with breath and depth.
I'd be very interested in hearing those voices. My own piece was written from a post-Christian perspective, not a Christian one, though. I hope it is obvious that I am sympathetic to Christianity, but I no longer stand within it; and I don't see it as our Western context. Christendom as an overarching social entity has been irreversibly shattered. I suspect the faith itself might thrive in these conditions, once the shock has receded; but I do not see it becoming the context of the West again in the foreseeable future.
On psychology, I would suggest some caution. The entities in question raise foundational questions in the philosophy of science, and the discipline as a whole has (with notable exceptions throughout its history) tended to sideline foundational issues. if you are interested, this article from a couple of years ago summarises some of the psychology's recent troubles and some of the philosophical implications: https://psyarxiv.com/4xcsa/download/?format=pdf None of which is to say that psychology should be ignored, but nor should its authority be left unquestioned.
Yes, I agree that Christendom as an overarching social entity is irreversibly shattered. My main point is that there is a whole background to what constitutes spiritual beings (“angels” and “demons”) in the diverse and complex Christian cosmology that I don’t see being properly recognised (the terms are simply extracted, carrying all manner of implicit, emotional baggage). But a chat box is not really the best medium to press this and related points further.
And yes, I fully agree about what you say regarding psychology. I look forward to reading the text you sent.
As for the voices I mentioned, I notice how they
remain absent from most digital forums of communication. It’s not difficult for me to sympathise with this absence. However, this is also the medium that makes possible to hear and, to a lesser degree, interact with some meaningful voices, such as yours, and enjoy cross pollination.
It wouldn't surprise me if those voices are *somewhere* on the internet, but I have no idea where. The social taboo against taking and thinking in this way is very real, and shouldn't be underestimated. It feels hard to do. That might lead the Christian experts that you are talking about to discuss things in more closed forums that require invitations, even online?
The existence of the taboo is also part of why I chose the visceral, even in a post-Christian context, word 'demon' rather than something that aspires to science, such as 'egregore'. I was quite deliberately targeting the taboo itself, rather than attempting to provide a detailed explanation of what lay behind the taboo.
In terms of social theory, I think analysing the sheer strength of this taboo, compared to the relative tolerance for other concepts that have their origin in religion (eg: meditation) could perhaps tell us something about the emerging post-Christian order, but that is only speculation at this point.
The interesting thing is that we never stop trying. Fairly regularly somebody claims a psychological breakthrough that will increase our productivity and happiness, etc. A paradigm shattering revolution in self-understanding!
And we keep going to the seminars and forking over the cash.
The cynic in me says that it is the idler in us that falls for it every time. Not that I manage any better on that front than anyone else.
The most useful bits of psychological insight are probably the sort of things you might find in Aristotle or Aquinas, or Zhuangzi or Mengzi. You know, the boring, intimidating stuff about slowly fostering good habits and avoiding temptations. It's hard boring work compared to that one easy trick, though!
Maybe it's cynical, but it just seems obviously true. It explains our obsession with "Life Hacks". As if there were any real alternative, as you say, to the hard slog of a virtuous life. We do, indeed, live "After Virtue". To our detriment.
Thank you for pointing out Rhyd’s interesting piece. I feel this whole topic of demons and spirits is very much needing a context and a reflection that is not just leaning on social theory and/or wild-guessing. Bringing some context by way of pagan is good but I feel it is not enough and might be simplistic. I suggest we invite other voices from the ranks of Christian theology - which is our western context and it is from this context that a lot of the discussion is being raised. I do not mean the opinions of some well intended church goer but people who have in-depth knowledge of a whole system or cosmology where these “demons” are just one little part of it. Some of these people are also versed in depth psychology, which is a very important aspect not just to be added but to be integrated in the discussion. I feel the actualisation of ethics and morality in the 21st century is a big thing and yes, bring the esoteric knowledge, but let’s do it with breath and depth.
I'd be very interested in hearing those voices. My own piece was written from a post-Christian perspective, not a Christian one, though. I hope it is obvious that I am sympathetic to Christianity, but I no longer stand within it; and I don't see it as our Western context. Christendom as an overarching social entity has been irreversibly shattered. I suspect the faith itself might thrive in these conditions, once the shock has receded; but I do not see it becoming the context of the West again in the foreseeable future.
On psychology, I would suggest some caution. The entities in question raise foundational questions in the philosophy of science, and the discipline as a whole has (with notable exceptions throughout its history) tended to sideline foundational issues. if you are interested, this article from a couple of years ago summarises some of the psychology's recent troubles and some of the philosophical implications: https://psyarxiv.com/4xcsa/download/?format=pdf None of which is to say that psychology should be ignored, but nor should its authority be left unquestioned.
Yes, I agree that Christendom as an overarching social entity is irreversibly shattered. My main point is that there is a whole background to what constitutes spiritual beings (“angels” and “demons”) in the diverse and complex Christian cosmology that I don’t see being properly recognised (the terms are simply extracted, carrying all manner of implicit, emotional baggage). But a chat box is not really the best medium to press this and related points further.
And yes, I fully agree about what you say regarding psychology. I look forward to reading the text you sent.
As for the voices I mentioned, I notice how they
remain absent from most digital forums of communication. It’s not difficult for me to sympathise with this absence. However, this is also the medium that makes possible to hear and, to a lesser degree, interact with some meaningful voices, such as yours, and enjoy cross pollination.
It wouldn't surprise me if those voices are *somewhere* on the internet, but I have no idea where. The social taboo against taking and thinking in this way is very real, and shouldn't be underestimated. It feels hard to do. That might lead the Christian experts that you are talking about to discuss things in more closed forums that require invitations, even online?
The existence of the taboo is also part of why I chose the visceral, even in a post-Christian context, word 'demon' rather than something that aspires to science, such as 'egregore'. I was quite deliberately targeting the taboo itself, rather than attempting to provide a detailed explanation of what lay behind the taboo.
In terms of social theory, I think analysing the sheer strength of this taboo, compared to the relative tolerance for other concepts that have their origin in religion (eg: meditation) could perhaps tell us something about the emerging post-Christian order, but that is only speculation at this point.
We are a tricky little creature to figure out, ain't we?
Very close to impossible, Jack ;)
Amen, to that.
The interesting thing is that we never stop trying. Fairly regularly somebody claims a psychological breakthrough that will increase our productivity and happiness, etc. A paradigm shattering revolution in self-understanding!
And we keep going to the seminars and forking over the cash.
The cynic in me says that it is the idler in us that falls for it every time. Not that I manage any better on that front than anyone else.
The most useful bits of psychological insight are probably the sort of things you might find in Aristotle or Aquinas, or Zhuangzi or Mengzi. You know, the boring, intimidating stuff about slowly fostering good habits and avoiding temptations. It's hard boring work compared to that one easy trick, though!
Maybe it's cynical, but it just seems obviously true. It explains our obsession with "Life Hacks". As if there were any real alternative, as you say, to the hard slog of a virtuous life. We do, indeed, live "After Virtue". To our detriment.