Humanism

The Book of Rabyd 2:1 – “People are Stupid”

/ Ed Raby Sr / Leave a comment

Happy Sun’s Day

Text:

“People are Stupid” – The Book of Rabyd 2:1

Thoughts and Exposition:

We are with verse one of chapter two moving into a different realm of The Book of Rabyd.  Chapter one is principles I would say are universally or nearly universally true.  Chapter Two is points of wisdom which are more about life guides and coming to a better understanding of the world.  Not hard fast rules in chapter two, but definitely can be seen to be true most of the time.  We start with the simple three word Phrase: “People are Stupid”

One might say this is a pretty pessimistic view of people in general. This is not a statement about people and their morality however, just their nature. Terry Goodkind and his Wizard’s Rules impressed me in their quick way of getting to human nature and laying it out there plainly and bluntly.  I like someone who can take a concept and put it into a simple statement and “People are Stupid” shocks you ,and yet catches your attention, because you know in you heart it is true.  I have tried to put this idea into other terms or phraseology but it never has the force of “People are Stupid.”

Terry Goodkind though really doesn’t stop with just these three words. but in his book Wizard’s First Rule he makes several other points about it:

  1. Given proper motivation people will believe almost anything.
  2. People will believe something because they want it to be true or fear it is true. (Confirmation Bias)
  3. Peoples’s heads are full of things that they think is true but is in reality mostly false. (Cognitive Dissonance)
  4. People rarely can tell the difference between a lie and the truth, but they think they can. (Ego)
  5. Because of all this people are easier to fool.

You will note Terry did not say ALL People are stupid.  His assumption is that by understanding this rule you can rise above it yourself.  First you understand it for yourself that you yourself are stupid.  Once you get this idea that you are stupid, and need analyze your own thinking and beliefs for whether or not they are true, then you are very much on the path to understanding yourself and others better.  Stupidity is part of being a human being and once you get that part, the rest of the wisdom that flows from this foundation becomes easier to swallow.  Truth is found in understanding that even you can be subject to stupidity and that means re-thinking things regularly to make sure you are basing your understandings on the truth and not just what you want to be the truth.

There is tremendous power that you gain when you understand all of this and the challenge for the vitreous person is to not take advantage of it for malevolent purposes.  It gives you an advantage when you realize what makes people, stupid including yourself is Confirmation Bias, Cognitive Dissonance, and Ego. You can use this to help or harm.  lead people to truth to a lie.  Motivate them to great good or evil.

As a leader over the years’, I have come to realize the difficulty of researching and coming to know the factual truth at times, but knowing full well that to motivate people to act on it, requires a great deal of tapping into people’s ‘stupidity’.  Otherwise they will never be motivated to act.  Truth rarely motivates, passion does.  That is the challenge to be motivated by truth as a leader but tap into people’s passions so you don’t on the one hand mislead people, but on the other hand get them to act.

We may see Terry Goodkind again.  I am revising a lot of these points of wisdom and combining some of them so we will see.  However many of the Wizard’s Rules echo in a lot of them.

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

The Pagan Pulpit – The Book of Rabyd 2:1 – “People are Stupid”

/ Ed Raby Sr / Leave a comment

Happy Sun’s Day

Announcements: 

We don’t pray here – we figure God, the gods and goddesses, or whatever powers that be either know already, don’t give a fuck, or are busy with more important matters than our petty stuff. We also kind of assume that they expect us to do stuff that we can do for ourselves, and that we will do them ourselves and not be lazy. We also believe in being good friends, so we don’t presume on our friendship with the powers that be by asking them all the time for stuff while giving them nothing in return.

We also don’t take an offering here.  We figure the powers that be probably don’t need it.  Let’s be honest, offerings are not giving to the divine powers, they are given to an organization to support it.  Just being honest. God, the gods or whatever never see a dime, farthing or peso of that money; it all goes to the church, mosque or shrine.

Opening Song: ‘Radio Ga Ga’ – Queen (Live at Wembly London 1985)

I don’t really need to explain why I open with Queen sometimes do I?

Poem: “We all eat lies” – Dark and Twisted

No photo description available.

Meditation:

Image may contain: one or more people and text

Hard to find the right people.   Why? Because as we will see today – stupidity.

Song of Preparation:  ‘Vengeful One’ – Disturbed

The greatest thing that proves people are stupid is that they believe the media most of the time.  The media knows full well that people are stupid and take advantage of that all the time. They feed people’s’ confirmation bias and into cognitive dissonance all the time.

Text:

‘People are Stupid’ – The Book of Rabyd 2:1

Sermon:

We are with verse one of chapter two moving into a different realm of The Book of Rabyd.  Chapter one is principles I would say are universally or nearly universally true.  Chapter Two is points of wisdom which are more about life guides and coming to a better understanding of the world.  Not hard fast rules in chapter two, but definitely can be seen to be true most of the time.  We start with the simple three word Phrase: “People are Stupid”

One might say this is a pretty pessimistic view of people in general. This is not a statement about people and their morality however, just their nature. Terry Goodkind and his Wizard’s Rules impressed me in their quick way of getting to human nature and laying it out there plainly and bluntly.  I like someone who can take a concept and put it into a simple statement and “People are Stupid” shocks you ,and yet catches your attention, because you know in you heart it is true.  I have tried to put this idea into other terms or phraseology but it never has the force of “People are Stupid.”

Terry Goodkind though really doesn’t stop with just these three words. but in his book Wizard’s First Rule he makes several other points about it:

  1. Given proper motivation people will believe almost anything.
  2. People will believe something because they want it to be true or fear it is true. (Confirmation Bias)
  3. Peoples’s heads are full of things that they think is true but is in reality mostly false. (Cognitive Dissonance)
  4. People rarely can tell the difference between a lie and the truth, but they think they can. (Ego)
  5. Because of all this people are easier to fool.

You will note Terry did not say ALL People are stupid.  His assumption is that by understanding this rule you can rise above it yourself.  First you understand it for yourself that you yourself are stupid.  Once you get this idea that you are stupid and need analyze your own thinking and beliefs for whether or not they are true, then you are very much on the path to understanding yourself and others better.  Stupidity is part of being a human being and once you get that part, the rest of the wisdom that flows from this foundation becomes easier to swallow.  Truth is found in understanding that even you can be subject to stupidity and that means re-thinking things regularly to make sure you are basing your understandings on the truth, and not just what you want to be the truth.

There is tremendous power that you gain when you understand all of this and the challenge for the vitreous person is to not take advantage of it for malevolent purposes.  It gives you an advantage when you realize what makes people, stupid including yourself is Confirmation Bias, Cognitive Dissonance, and Ego. You can use this to help or harm.  lead people to truth to a lie.  Motivate them to great good or evil.

As a leader over the years’, I have come to realize the difficulty of researching and coming to know the factual truth at times, but knowing full well that to motivate people to act on it, requires a great deal of tapping into people’s ‘stupidity’.  Otherwise they will never be motivated to act.  Truth rarely motivates, passion does.  That is the challenge to be motivated by truth as a leader but tap into people’s passions so you don’t on the one hand mislead people, but on the other hand get them to act.

We may see Terry Goodkind again.  I am revising a lot of these points of wisdom and combining some of them so we will see.  However many of the Wizard’s Rules echo in a lot of them.

Closing Song: ‘Holy Diver’ – Dio

Parting Thought:

Image may contain: 1 person, standing and text

You are sovereign over your life.  Never forget that.

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

The Book of Rabyd 1:7 – ‘The Only Proper Use of Aggression is to Protect One’s Rights or the Rights of Others’

/ Ed Raby Sr / Leave a comment

Happy Sun’s Day

Text:

“The Only Proper Use of Aggression is to Protect One’s Rights or the Rights of Others” – The Book of Rabyd 1:7

Thoughts and Exposition:

The Non-Aggression Principle (NAP) is stated many ways but the basic gist of it is a combination of “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” and “love your neighbor as yourself”.  Every major religion in the world has something like this in it, but then all of them turn around and use fraud or even force to control others.

So leaving religion behind, it is simply that people have their rights and no one should use violence or lies to take them away.  If someone or group of someones does use violence to try to take rights away, the NAP simply states that the person whose rights are being threatened or people around them who see that their rights are being threatened have the right then to use violence in return in defense.

Aggression is further defined as the use of physical force, threatening the use of force or fraud.  This is not pacifism as the use of force or even the threat of force is allowable in actions that involve self-defense or the defense of others.  There are other types of force but the NAP is about physical force, threat of physical force or fraud.

This means a lot of other areas where things are about influence, politics and other types of force are not necessarily covered by the NAP.  However, if one thinks on this that means that much of what government does is a violation of this principle.  This really limits how much the government should do and puts it clear focus on the government as the force that protects the rights of its citizens and does not threaten them with force or trick people out of their rights through fraud.

On a personal level, this means that if I were to act in a violent manner, that means the one who I am acting on has made a decision to violate my rights or the rights of another person.  Other than that, it is never right for me to initiate violence and it is certainly never right for me to engage in fraud.  This part is actually more challenging in many ways than gripping about government.  One must always be first concerned that you are following the NAP before you judge others on their following it.  It is more a philosophy of personal responsibility than anything else.

Following the NAP leads to a practical morality.  There is nothing more frustrating on the one hand than people who, because of their politics, religion or other beliefs, think they have the right or force their viewpoint on others through law, violence or fraud. One the flip side, it is also frustrating to watch people stand aside while violence or fraud is perpetrated and they do nothing about it.  The NAP gives us a principle to guide us.  It is not perfect, but it is a lot better all others I have found so far and far more practically useful.

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

The Pagan Pulpit – The Book of Rabyd 1:7 – ‘The Only Proper Use of Aggression is to Protect One’s Rights or the Rights of Others’

/ Ed Raby Sr / Leave a comment

Happy Sun’s Day

Announcements: 

We don’t pray here – we figure God, the gods and goddesses, or whatever powers that be either know already, don’t give a fuck, or are busy with more important matters than our petty stuff. We also kind of assume that they expect us to do stuff that we can do for ourselves, and that we will do them ourselves and not be lazy. We also believe in being good friends, so we don’t presume on our friendship with the powers that be by asking them all the time for stuff while giving them nothing in return.

We also don’t take an offering here.  We figure the powers that be probably don’t need it.  Let’s be honest, offerings are not giving to the divine powers, they are given to an organization to support it.  Just being honest. God, the gods or whatever never see a dime, farthing or peso of that money; it all goes to the church, mosque or shrine.

Opening Song: ‘Paranoid” – Black Sabbath

Considered widely to be the first metal band and this one of the first metal songs.  I start by giving Black Sabbath props for being trail blazers.

Poem: “Unknown” – The Ruined ManImage may contain: one or more people and text

The problem with being real is being hated.  The problem with being fake is you’re a lying coward.

Meditation:

Image may contain: 1 person, text

Song of Preparation: “Non-Aggression Principle” – Liberation Animation 

I love this song,  it is a fun.  It also introduces today’s topic very well.

Text:

‘The Only Proper Use of Aggression is to Protect One’s Rights or the Rights of Others’ – The Book of Rabyd 1:7

Sermon:

The Non-Aggression Principle (NAP) is stated many ways but the basic gist of it is a combination of “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” and “love your neighbor as yourself”.  Every major religion in the world has something like this in it, but then all of them turn around and use fraud or even force to control others.

So leaving religion behind, it is simply that people have their rights and no one should use violence or lies to take them away.  If someone or group of someones does use violence to try to take rights away, the NAP simply states that the person whose rights are being threatened or people around them who see that their rights are being threatened have the right then to use violence in return in defense.

Aggression is further defined as the use of physical force, threatening the use of force or fraud.  This is not pacifism as the use of force or even the threat of force is allowable in actions that involve self-defense or the defense of others.  There are other types of force but the NAP is about physical force, threat of physical force or fraud.

This means a lot of other areas where things are about influence, politics and other types of force are not necessarily covered by the NAP.  However, if one thinks on this that means that much of what government does is a violation of this principle.  This really limits how much the government should do and puts it clear focus on the government as the force that protects the rights of its citizens and does not threaten them with force or trick people out of their rights through fraud.

On a personal level, this means that if I were to act in a violent manner, that means the one who I am acting on has made a decision to violate my rights or the rights of another person.  Other than that, it is never right for me to initiate violence and it is certainly never right for me to engage in fraud.  This part is actually more challenging in many ways than gripping about government.  One must always be first concerned that you are following the NAP before you judge others on their following it.  It is more a philosophy of personal responsibility than anything else.

Following the NAP leads to a practical morality.  There is nothing more frustrating on the one hand than people who, because of their politics, religion or other beliefs, think they have the right or force their viewpoint on others through law, violence or fraud. One the flip side, it is also frustrating to watch people stand aside while violence or fraud is perpetrated and they do nothing about it.  The NAP gives us a principle to guide us.  It is not perfect, but it is a lot better all others I have found so far and far more practically useful.

Closing Song: ‘Dizzy’ – Tommy Roe

I include this song this week because it was the popular song on the radio the day I was born.  My 50th birthday was this last week so this is more nostalgia than anything else. I like the video of a 1960s girl in a short skirt doing the 1960s dancing. Couldn’t fit that era more if you tried.

Parting Thought:

Image may contain: one or more people, text that says 'Do not tame the wolf inside you just because you've met someone who doesn't have the courage to handle you. Belle Estreller'

Be yourself.  If people can’t handle it, that is their problem, not yours.

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

A Skald’s Life – Business Virtues – Realigning Industriousness

/ Ed Raby Sr / Leave a comment

Happy Wooden’s (Odin’s) Day

Journal Entry:

Hitting the Business Virtues is always a struggle because I am changing a lot of who I am and what I do here. It isn’t just about the virtues but something core to every man – who am I?  That said this realignment has been the most helpful here.  Today we look at  Realigning Industriousness.

“Industriousness is the willingness to work hard, always striving for efficiency, as a joyous activity in itself”

No problems here.  I like it as it is written.

Principle: To work with efficiency and with enjoyment for work itself.

A small change to bring in the idea of being efficient which fits the virtue better and my own sense of economics and the need to be efficient.

Goal: Finalize last requirements for my degree – Internship by the end of May 2019.

Industriousness needs something to work and a notion that the work is complete at some point.  My degree is almost finished and represents a lot of work.  Time to hang the degree on the wall and move to whats next.  Just a few more months. Added a time frame to make the goal SMART

Bucket List: Write A Novel and Get it Published.

I needed something that reflects my other industrious point – Being a Writer.  Writing is work, no mater how enjoyable, it is still work. I need to be more industrious about getting to this bucket list item, and so here it will be.

Self-Reliance:

“Self Reliance is the spirit of independence, which is achieved not only for the individual, but also for the family, clan, tribe and nation.”

Principle: To achieve and maintain personal independence and advocate for independence in my family, state and nation.

Goal:  Find a new, better paying job by the end of March 2019 or before.

Bucket List: To own and run my own successful business or company.

Now that I can see the whole picture here it looks like the Goal is the next step toward the Bucket List item. As goals are completed here they should be the next step toward the ultimate goal of ownership o my own business that is successful.  This makes things very clear when it comes to self-reliance.

Industriousness:

“Industriousness is the willingness to work hard, always striving for efficiency, as a joyous activity in itself”

Principle: Work with enjoyment of work itself.

Goal: Finalize last requirements for my degree – Internship by May 2019

Bucket List: Write A Novel and Get it Published.

Goal and Bucket List item are very oriented toward getting something done in a systematic and efficient manner. I suppose it is at this point that I know that I will be asking myself the question of routine.  As in, what routine do I need to add something, so I am doing something every morning, day, evening or week to get a step closer to each goal or bucket list item?  That will be the challenge for next week as I complete the process.

Hospitality:

“Hospitality is the willingness to share what one has with one’s fellows, especially when they are far from home.”

Principle: Be ready to be hospitable to those who truly need it.

As I draw closer to the last week of the month, I know this one has to be expanded as far as the Principle.  The goal and bucket list item are still up in the air. Although true to the business virtues it will probably be about budgeting so that the element of budget will be a part of it. Hospitality is after all about having excess, so you can show compassion to others who need it.

Higher Virtue – Justice:

Justice is a difficult thing.  It becomes more imperative when your viewpoint changes from a person who believed that the Christian god would make everything right in the end to a person who believes it is highly possible that The Divine may demand justice here on earth now.  Or maybe there is nothing at all and we need to have justice here on earth to right wrongs and balance the scale or they will never get balanced a all.  All I know is that I can just make myself act justly when called for and if given the opportunity balance the scales.. Otherwise patience and forbearance might be the only actions I have.

 Daily Routine:

  1. Communication / Cuddle Time
  2. Blogging
  3. Reading / Study – Half-hour per day minimum or until all necessary work is completed.
  4. Clear In Box/ To Do List
  5. Financial Transaction Input
  6. Carb Count – currently two.

There may be some changes here as Goals and Bucket Lists get finalized next week.

Goals: 

  1. Be transparent with my wife to improve communication
  2. In 2019 have  a clear budget and financial plan working by the end of the year.
  3. Keep gym membership going somewhere and lift weights minimum of four times per week and walk minimum four times per week through end of 2019
  4. Be in the best shape I can be by March 18th, 2019 (50th birthday), take pictures.

As you can see this list is getting shorter; and when this process is complete, it too will disappear.  The Goals Achieved thing will make its way to the weekly recap part of the journal posts.

Goals achieved since Summer 2018: 1

Budgeting: 

  1. Basic Emergency Fund – $1000
  2. Debt Snowball
  3. Fully funded Emergency fund
  4. Invest 15% of income into retirement
  5. Pay off Home Early
  6. Build Wealth and Give

Just can report with our tax return we are sitting on number one being done right now so debt reduction is a focus at the moment. I should note, with one of my goals involving budgeting, this section will also disappear and be joined with that.

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

Of Wolves and Ravens – Eastern Philosophy – The Code of Bushido

/ Ed Raby Sr / Leave a comment

Happy Tyr’s Day

Discussion:

Eastern Philosophy is a large subject.  It stretches over several different cultures.  Middle Eastern, Islamic, Chinese, Japanese, etc. all have their philosophical schools and viewpoints.  If there is a commonality to Eastern Philosophy it is focus more on community and oneness with the universe.  In western philosophy people overcome surroundings.  In eastern philosophy, one becomes one’s surroundings if that makes any sense.

I am not going not dive into the metaphysical sea that is eastern philosophy. Today I just want to do a comparison between the Nine Noble Virtues of Ásatrú (NNV) which I follow, and the Code of Bushido (COB).  The Japanese Warrior Code is something I admire, so the purpose of this comparison is not to note superiority of one over the other.  I have a feeling if a samurai and a viking warrior sat down and had a discussion about these things they would walk away from each other with a profound amount of respect. Rather, my main purpose is to learn and grow.  To perhaps see other facets of the jewel known as the NNV by comparing it to another jewel – The COB.

There are similarities – Both have honor.  The difference is that the NNV tries to encompass in honor the idea of respect, where the COB makes that a separate virtue.  Both have Fidelity, but the COB adds the idea of Duty as part of that, although I would say it is part of Fidelity as well.   Honesty lines up very much with Truth. Compassion lines up very well with Hospitality.  Both have Courage. There is a lot of overlap as you can see.  The learning is in the differences.

The COB has Respect as separate from Honor and the Virtue of Integrity. In the case pf respect, looking at this reminds me as a follower of the NNV that Respect is a part of honor.  To me self-worth and respect are two sides of the same coin of honor.  The COB reminds me that I need to remember it is two-sided. Integrity is sticking with one’s decisions and being commuted to them.  I would say in Fidelity we see that but not so much our decisions as being committed to our relationships and making decisions based on those commitment that are loyal and true.  I can change my decisions if a different path suggests I would demonstrate more loyalty to that person or group than my current path.

The NNV has the following virtues that are more emphasized than the COB: Self-Reliance, Industriousness, Discipline and Perseverance.  It is not that the COB doesn’t talk about these things, it is just two some might be seen as expressions of the other virtues.  Discipline as part of Compassion.  To be disciplined one must then display perseverance.  However, I think the concept of ‘face’ kicks in here and failure is far less of an option in the COB as it is in the NNV.  The Viking Warrior after failing, gets up and tries again.  The Samurai might instead to stave of losing face commit ritual suicide.  The thing being that in Eastern philosophy community is far more important that the individual.

This is probably best seen in Self-Reliance and Industriousness. It is not that the COB does not emphasize them, it is just they are always seen as a part of a greater whole.  The problem with this in Viking culture is you can find yourself alone trying to survive and live.  The climate and nature of the Scandinavian world meant you are going to have to face things at times without the community. So you better figure out how to do things yourself and you better work hard or you might die or suffer for relying too much on others or not working hard enough.

To the Wolves and Ravens:

Needs (Geri):

Comparison in philosophical systems is needed to strengthen our own.  It avoids the cranial rectal inversion that some philosophers develop that I am trying to avoid.  Having one’s head up one’s own ass philosophically.  Easter philosophy with its different focus points tends to be quite revealing when you put it side by side western.

Wants (Freki):

I personally want to see aspects of the Code of Bushido expressed in my following of the Nine Noble Virtues. There is a need to remember respect as part of honor for me. To remember community is important when it comes to hospitality and fidelity.  That Integrity is a part of Truth for me. Learning how to fuller understand and express the NNV by looking at how others see the same virtue is something I definitely want.

Reason (Huginn):

I would say reason tells us that codes and virtues might be the same but which ones are going to be more emphasized are going to depend a lot of culture and society.  The Code of Bushido fits its Eastern philosophical world. The NNV virtues make more sense for me because I live in a culture that is more self-reliant and individualistic.  However if I had or do business in Japan, it might do me well, from a rational point of view, to switch while I am there.

Wisdom (Muninn):

Learning to find wisdom where you find it is key.  Wisdom knows no culture or society. It sometimes expresses itself differently depending on society but the concepts of wisdom tend to be the same.

Conclusion:

I have enjoyed this look at the Code of Bushido.  It has made my meditation on the NNV a little more fuller as I consider aspects of the NNV in its light. It has allowed me to see more of my own path and code.  I imagine I will return to it again.

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

 

The Pagan Pulpit – The Book of Rabyd 1:6 – “People Do Not Have The Right to Take Away The Rights of Others”

/ Ed Raby Sr / Leave a comment

Happy Sun’s Day

Announcements: 

We don’t pray here – we figure God, the gods and goddesses, or whatever powers that be either know already, don’t give a fuck, or are busy with more important matters than our petty stuff. We also kind of assume that they expect us to do stuff that we can do for ourselves, and that we will do them ourselves and not be lazy. We also believe in being good friends, so we don’t presume on our friendship with the powers that be by asking them all the time for stuff while giving them nothing in return.

We also don’t take an offering here.  We figure the powers that be probably don’t need it.  Let’s be honest, offerings are not giving to the divine powers, they are given to an organization to support it.  Just being honest. God, the gods or whatever never see a dime, farthing or peso of that money; it all goes to the church, mosque or shrine.

Opening Song: “Stricken” – Disturbed

Poem: “The Scar” by Edward W. Raby, Sr. (Rough Draft) 

See the source image

Time heals all wounds

“Bullshit” I say

I have been down this road before

I have scars that still bleed inside

Internal bleeding of the soul

Seepage of pain within

Toxic soul-blood poisoning

Hidden behind my scars

The scar you left on me

Is like all the others

A covered scab

Hiding a slow bleeding wound

Another scar

A badge of survival

The poison blood inside fuel

The pain inside motivation 

I know this is the second poem I have written for the Pulpit in rough draft form without polishing them later in a Skald’s Tales and Poems but that is coming this week probably.

Meditation:

Image may contain: 1 person, eyeglasses, text that says '"I don't believe the majority always knows what's best for everyone.... Democracy without respect for individual rights sucks. It's just ganging up against the weird kid, and I'm always the weird kid. - -Penn Jillette'

Me too Penn, Me too.

Song of Preparation: “Anthem’ – Rush:

Text: 

“People Do Not Have The Right to Take Away The Rights of Others” – The Book of Rabyd 1:6

Sermon:

The real key here to understanding rights that inalienable is that it means that everyone has them.  Truly understand rights then requires that while we all may have the right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and property; it does not mean that we can exercises those rights at the expense of someone else’s rights.  You must respect the rights of others to truly understand what rights entail.  If you don’t, you have an improper understanding of rights.

It is morally wrong to force another to give up their rights so that you can have yours.  It morally bankrupt; in my opinion, to use any kind of force and power to exalt your rights over another.  This is something that has to be remembered because as much as we say – “I have my rights”,  we also need to say – “they have their rights” in the same breath.   It is this respect of rights as a concept that is just as important as respect of my own rights.  When we do this we are learning to see others as human beings.  It is this issue that if implemented would solve a ton of problems.  As much as I feel I have the right to stand on my rights, I must also allow others to stand on theirs.

This why I find the use of government today so repugnant.  Much of it is one side or the others trying to take power to use on others.  The Republicans try to seize power so they can use it against the Democrats and visa versa.  No one is trying to take government so they can genuinely defend the rights of all.  Libertarianism for me is simply a wonderful philosophy that seeks to actually see  the rights of all protected.  The goal of our politics then would be to stop the government from violating the rights of all individuals.

I have been using the issue of abortion to illustrate the problem when rights collide.  The right to life movement say the right of the child to live is not being respected, the pro-choice folks say the right of the woman to privacy which is connected to her rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness is being violated if she does not have the choice of an abortion.  The problem is we simply cannot play a game of two against one to decided who is right.  A single violated right by force is wrong.  The argument really centers on whether or not the child/fetus is genuinely a human being and thus has rights.  Pro-life folks say yes / pro-choice folks say no.  This is not going to be resolved because the arguments on both sides have problems.  I am not going to get into that because the arguments for both sides are legion as well.  My point is if a single right is being violated on an individual then the action is wrong and should not be allowed.

The problem with abortion is asking a question of personhood and at that point you are getting far more into metaphysics and theology than philosophy.  My personal position is to say I am pro-choice on one hand because I do not feel it is my right to force my viewpoint of when life begins on another, and it is a debatable point.  But I am also pro-life on the other hand, because I would hope that we would recognize our ignorance on when life truly and genuinely begins, and thus choose to err on the side of life because of that ignorance.

My point in all this is the debate is not what our rights are for those that follow the Book of Rabyd. Those are clearly understood.  The debate for me and for my family is to understand and know when rights are being brought into conflict either intentionally or unintentionally and coming up with solutions that both allow one to exercise their rights but not interfere with the rights of others.  This is the challenge of those who follow the Book of Rabyd.

Closing Song: ‘Hurt’ – Johnny Cash:

I include this song at the end because I talked about it with some friends this week.  I suppose it is a simple reminded that all things, including our lives, end.  What legacy we leave is important. Johnny Cash speaks for a lot of people in this song when they near the end.  The regrets you have probably have more to do with hurts received and hurts given.

Parting Thought:

Image may contain: text

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

Odin’s Eye – Deism: The Search for The Rational God

/ Ed Raby Sr / Leave a comment

Happy Thor’s Day

Discussion:

I still very much embrace Deism as the most rational way to approach the subject of the divine.  I think the notion that there is no god is just as irrational as the theist or religion who thinks he/she has god locked down.  The great challenge for me as a deist is to deal with the subject of the divine using only reason and natural revelation as a guide. Heavy emphasis on the reason part because natural revelation is still subject to human interpretation.

Epicurus’ argument against God is pretty well-known and I still have some of the same problems with it as I had as a Christian.  In fact much of my arguments against it have not changed because even back then the defense against philosophy is not theology, it is more philosophy.   Most notably Epicurus assumes his definition of all-powerful, etc. are locked down and cannot be challenged. He seeks basically to win the argument about god through definition which is an argument from authority based on the authority of the definition.  What his argument does do is present the rational contentions about the divine that need to be addressed very concisely and in a logically sound manner.

This is actually one time where the Eye lines up pretty good with each part of Epicurus’ argument. So….

Time to Look Through the Eye:

Faith:

If he is able but not willing?  He is malevolent

I find it interesting that Epicurus engages in faith at this point. He has faith that there is such a thing as malevolence or beneficence and assumes that god must be one or the other.  Such definition really lose their meaning if you dismiss notions of good and evil and realize there might be a rational reason why a supreme being might create and then move on.  As George Carlin points out – God may simply not give a shit.  He may be a creator, but it does not imply that he is malevolent simply because he refuses to do something about ‘evil’.  He may simply also look at humanity and say – “you did this shit to yourselves and you have the capability to get yourself out, take responsibility for the ‘evil’ and suffering you have caused and fix it yourselves.”

I actually think this is the strongest argument for polytheism. That the reason we see so many problems in the world, is it was created by a committee.  Just saying.

My faith is that if there is a god or gods or whatever, that they are creators but not necessarily cosmic babysitters. Like good parents he/she or they want us to grow up and tackle our own problems and we can’t learn how to do that effectively without struggle.

Religion:

If God is neither able or willing, then why call him God?

Actually because the definition of ‘god’ is much broader than “Omni” classifications.  We also use the term ‘god’ to describe beings of great power and use a small ‘g’.  It is religion that paint god as all-powerful in the sense that he can do anything, but there may be laws to the universe that prevent the divine from acting and they may as pointed out above, not give a shit. It doesn’t stop them from being more powerful than anything else and thus deserving the title of ‘god’.

Theology:

If God is wiling to prevent, but not able.  Then he is not omnipotent.

I like to point out at this point that Epicurus does not eliminate god with this statement as some atheists claim.  It just shows that perhaps human conception of the ideas of omnipotent, omniscient, etc. might not be properly defined. So such a god could exist with all the power that actually exists, knowing everything in the way it is knowable and be present in all places that actually exist.  Yes, these ideas create a powerful being worthy of being called god, but there are limits here. Such limits make the normal understanding of omnipotence in need of adjustment, but it doesn’t make such a god not possible or lacking in existence. All this statement really does is point out that our definitions might be in need of change.

Spirituality:

If he is both able and willing? Where does evil come from?

Moral evil is easy to justify if you use freewill as a defense and a god who does not interfere because he wants humanity as a whole to learn and grow. It may not be logically possible to have freewill without suffering. Natural evil is a little harder to justify.  Other than if god is still bound to the laws of the universe, then the laws of physics make natural ‘evil’ simple existent and God may very much be a powerful being who fights these forces but cannot do everything.  Rationally, the god that actually exists might have limits – both because the laws of the universe place those limits or those limits might be self-imposed because it is not always wise to interfere.

Conclusion:

I am not saying Epicurus is wrong.  He may very well be right and God is a figment of human imagination.  I respect the atheist position but I find it personally a little extreme because of human ignorance of the universe. His argument actually forms a lot of rational response for deism as it must address these issues to have a rational reason for belief in the divine’s existence. His argument guides the search for the rational god because the questions are valid.  That said, I do, as a theologian, see the irony of accepting certain theological definitions in order to make your argument against the existence of god, when those definitions themselves can be challenged.

For me the search for the rational God is part of the journey that I walk. But as a pagan, it is not my only criteria.

Continuing to Walk the Path,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

The Book of Rabyd 1:5 – ‘Everyone Has the Right to Property’

/ Ed Raby Sr / Leave a comment

Happy Sun’s Day

Text:

“Everyone Has the Right to Property” – The Book of Rabyd 1:5

Thoughts and Exposition:

This is a new verse for the Book of Rabyd.  Most people don’t realize that the original Declaration of Independence had originally ‘life. liberty and property’.  Later editing changed it to the pursuit of happiness.  But the idea of the inherent right to property to anyone who owns it is something that has not always been recognized in history.  That changed with the Founding fathers as the notion of people having a right to translate their right to pursue their happiness.  As Ayn Rand wisely pointed out this means the right to property.

I would argue that this right is what defends the others as well.  Your Life. liberty and Pursuit of Happiness are yours and now one should be allowed to take them away from you.  This means you also have the right to defend what is yours.  But ownership of property being a right extends to all things that are yours.  The most important of which is ownership of self.  Self-ownership means to take responsibility for yourself and your own destiny instead of leaving in the hands of others.  You need to exercise your right to own private property to do this.

I often wonder if those who try to attack this right realize that what they are doing allows people to basically take away all the others. If my life is not mine, if my liberty is only granted and can be taken away, if my pursuit of happiness requires that someone else give it to me, then they are not rights but privileges.  The right to property is what brings in this concept of ownership of not only my stuff but my rights.

To think otherwise is to have the mentality of the thief and the societal leach. I make no apologies for saying this.  I people have the notion that other people don’t have a right to property, then they are perfectly OK with the notion that such property can be taken away. They also have no problem when people have their property taken from hem through taxation so they can be supported.  In short they envision people can think and work but the results in part belong to them even though they have done nothing to earn them. This justifies their stealing it or letting others do it for them.

See the source image

So we turn again to abortion.  The seeming conflict is that the woman has her right to liberty and pursuit what will make her happy.  The notion being that the fetus is her body and she owns it so she can dispose of it as she sees fit. The opposite side of the coin is that the child has he right to live and pursuit its happiness by living. The real issue is it possible for one person to really own another and I would say that there is some inherent ownership of ones’ self in such a right to property.

For me the question of abortion has long been a sticky one.  As a Christian I had pretty clear guidelines, but it was still troubling at times.  Mostly because reality is that natural abortion happens all the time and with far more frequency than people think.  Most are never known to even exist.

Post-Christian, the issues now falls to whether the fetus is a person.  If not, the nit has no right to ownership of self and all the other rights that go with that.  If yes, then he/she does and they have those rights. I am not sure I can answer the question definitively at this point but I still maintain that liberty and life are important in equal measure.  I hope the choice is life, because I consider abortion a waste of human potential, if nothing else.

The real question for me is should the state be allowed to interfere?  Once again we are still left to determining when a person becomes a person and the answer seems clear. Given all our rights and the notion of self-ownership, if the fetus can be proven to be a person then the answer is yes, but if not we still find ourselves in a controversy.  It seems with all the advances in science, we should be able to determine this. Then the right to property with its concept of self-ownership kicks in.  This still doesn’t give us a clear answer but we have two more principles left so we shall see.

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

The Pagan Pulpit – The Book of Rabyd 1:5 -“Everyone Has the Right to Property”

/ Ed Raby Sr / Leave a comment

Happy Sun’s Day:

Announcements: 

We don’t pray here – we figure God, the gods and goddesses, or whatever powers that be either know already, don’t give a fuck, or are busy with more important matters than our petty stuff. We also kind of assume that they expect us to do stuff that we can do for ourselves, and that we will do them ourselves and not be lazy. We also believe in being good friends, so we don’t presume on our friendship with the powers that be by asking them all the time for stuff while giving them nothing in return.

We also don’t take an offering here.  We figure the powers that be probably don’t need it.  Let’s be honest, offerings are not giving to the divine powers, they are given to an organization to support it.  Just being honest. God, the gods or whatever never see a dime, farthing or peso of that money; it all goes to the church, mosque or shrine.

Opening Song: “Mr. Roboto” – Styx

I was joking this week with my daughter about using this song as a song about my grandson Otto.  All I would have to do is change the words a little to make this song about him.  That said, this actually is a pretty cool song made for a rock opera that dealt with dystopian future where rock and roll as well as other forms of free expression are outlawed.  Styx always was very good and their vocalist has a ton of range in this one.

Poem: “The Storm” by Edward W. Raby, Sr.:

Image result for odin wanderer storm

Wind, grey skies and pouring rain.

The Storm rages in my soul.

Fed by my inner pain.

Will I ever be whole?

Lightning flashes

Thunder rolls

I tighten my grip on the staff of my reality

Knowing only the treading of my feet

Boots grinding through grey mud

Soaked in sorrow, but my heart closed

Numb to the cold of The Grey

I struggle onward, not daring to feel

Lest my tears join the flood

And drown me in the rising tide.

I walk with the hope of seeing sunlight

I walk with the hope of feeling love

But right now, I feel nothing

So I will survive.

Soon, the wolf within will rise

The ravens will caw again

when the light breaks through.

Then I will laugh,

Once again I have become the storm

And I have become stronger

Note: This is still in rough draft form, but it is good enough I think to at least post it.  It needs refining but I like how it captures my struggles with depression at times. I will probably present this poem in it own post when it is more refined.

Meditation:

Image may contain: 1 person, text that says 'WHEN THINKING ABOUT LIFE, REMEMBER: NO AMOUNT OF GUILT CAN SOLVE THE PAST, AND NO AMOUNT OF ANXIETY CAN CHANGE THE FUTURE THEMINDUNLEASHED UNLEASHED'

Song of Preparation: “It’s My Life” – Bon Jovi

Text: 

Everyone has the Right to Property – The Book of Rabyd 1:5

Sermon:

This is a new verse for the Book of Rabyd.  Most people don’t realize that the original Declaration of Independence had originally ‘life. liberty and property’.  Later editing changed it to the pursuit of happiness.  But the idea of the inherent right to property to anyone who owns it is something that has not always been recognized in history.  That changed with the Founding fathers as the notion of people having a right to translate their right to pursue their happiness.  As Ayn Rand wisely pointed out this means the right to property.

I would argue that this right is what defends the others as well.  Your Life. liberty and Pursuit of Happiness are yours and now one should be allowed to take them away from you.  This means you also have the right to defend what is yours.  But ownership of property being a right extends to all things that are yours.  The most important of which is ownership of self.  Self-ownership means to take responsibility for yourself and your own destiny instead of leaving in the hands of others.  You need to exercise your right to own private property to do this.

I often wonder if those who try to attack this right realize that what they are doing allows people to basically take away all the others. If my life is not mine, if my liberty is only granted and can be taken away, if my pursuit of happiness requires that someone else give it to me, then they are not rights but privileges.  The right to property is what brings in this concept of ownership of not only my stuff but my rights.

To think otherwise is to have the mentality of the thief and the societal leach. I make no apologies for saying this.  I people have the notion that other people don’t have a right to property, then they are perfectly OK with the notion that such property can be taken away. They also have no problem when people have their property taken from hem through taxation so they can be supported.  In short they envision people can think and work but the results in part belong to them even though they have done nothing to earn them. This justifies their stealing it or letting others do it for them.

See the source image

So we turn again to abortion.  The seeming conflict is that the woman has her right to liberty and pursuit what will make her happy.  The notion being that the fetus is her body and she owns it so she can dispose of it as she sees fit. The opposite side of the coin is that the child has he right to live and pursuit its happiness by living. The real issue is it possible for one person to really own another and I would say that there is some inherent ownership of ones’ self in such a right to property.

For me the question of abortion has long been a sticky one.  As a Christian I had pretty clear guidelines, but it was still troubling at times.  Mostly because reality is that natural abortion happens all the time and with far more frequency than people think.  Most are never known to even exist.

Post-Christian, the issues now falls to whether the fetus is a person.  If not, the nit has no right to ownership of self and all the other rights that go with that.  If yes, then he/she does and they have those rights. I am not sure I can answer the question definitively at this point but I still maintain that liberty and life are important in equal measure.  I hope the choice is life, because I consider abortion a waste of human potential, if nothing else.

The real question for me is should the state be allowed to interfere?  Once again we are still left to determining when a person becomes a person and the answer seems clear. Given all our rights and the notion of self-ownership, if the fetus can be proven to be a person then the answer is yes, but if not we still find ourselves in a controversy.  It seems with all the advances in science, we should be able to determine this. Then the right to property with its concept of self-ownership kicks in.  This still doesn’t give us a clear answer but we have two more principles left so we shall see.

Closing Song: Amen – Halestorm:

Parting Thought:

Image may contain: text that says 'THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO GET UPSET ABOUT YOU SETTING BOUNDARIES ARE THE ONES WHO WERE BENEFITING FROM YOU HAVING NONE. POBYMAC#SPEAKLFE'

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!