Free Will versus Causality

As Satanist I believe in certain kind of meritocracy. Stratification takes care that all of us drop or rise to certain level in the hierarchy of nature. Still we have to accept the fact, that there is no one point where all the men would be equal or have the same changes in life.

There is two factors which ensures this, and those two are the genes in our body and environment which grew us. There is of course also the problem of free will, but that I will hook later on this essay.

Genes. Man has 99% of the same genes than Chimpanzees, but yet the 1% makes us unique and separates us from other primate species. We all have also certain amount of genes we inherit from our parents, and these very much modify us as individual.

What then is the part of the genes in our success?

First, individual may be born as beautiful or ugly. Individual may be born as stubborn or genius. Also one may be born as healthy or with genetic anomaly or disease. This natural diversity between human beings is one of the biggest separating things in life.

If you have been born beautiful princess or natural prom queen, it is quite more possible to make a career as model, actress or even as prostitute than to those who have been born with cross-eyes or visible anomaly. Here the selection of nature does not necessarily prove that success would be meritocratic by it´s nature. It´s just good luck.

Secondly, environment. Environment very much takes care of how human being grows up and sees the reality. If you born in Hollywood as a child of millionaire actor it´s more probable to get everything you wish than those who born as poor black on South Central area only few blocks away. Here only way to see how stratification works in life is not just to follow what somebody owns or how beautiful house they got, but how one manages his or her life in the environment they live, no matter is it ghetto, rich suburbia or even the status of worker in North Korean factory.

Only the way how man grows from the environment he lives can show anything about his character and will.

Now, here´s the main problem of the whole discussion. What is the meaning of will in reaching one´s goal. In philosophy the freedom of will has been under the discussion over centuries, and though I don´t personally take a stance between free will and not free will, I´m still going to point some views about the free will. Nietzsche, well known German philosopher, once said that human beings enjoy to think that everything good they reach comes by their own virtues, but the negative one´s doesn´t. This kind of logic in my eyes shows itself little retard, cause it denies the causality between things. There is always the cause and there is always condition to the cause.

One point of this contradiction between the free will and causality is that accepting the causality would same time demand us to accept that free will is not always the ruling factor in one´s success. Like, if you born as biafran child on Ethiopia and your best change in life is to live two months before you die in diseases and hunger, the free will can do little or nothing to save you. Environment just puts your way too much limitations that you could exist.

Socialdarwinian perspective which is very big part of todays new liberal thinking of economy, basis to idea that we all have the same changes to success in society. This of course is total nonsense which is based more to emotional sentiments than logical conclusion. Fact is, that men rarely are equal in their changes nor either will they start from the same line. Environment, genetic inheritance and will are always in little contradiction which each other, and thus the idea that man can reach everything with purely will, doesn´t count.

Of course, like I earlier mentioned, there is certain stratification in life. Man naturally rises to certain level and stays there. In this sense individual have possibilities to success in his or her life by the frame. By working hard and using all the possible opportunities one can rise very much from nowhere to almost top of the social hierarchy. It´s just how much the free will or freedom of will helps you to reach your level. For all these possibilities just does not exist because of the causality which would propound that will may not cross over the causality and thus free will is only limited amount of freedom by the natural frame.

Now, I am not PhD. Nor Biologist. I am still interested about this dilemma. All the ideas and views are just my five pennies to this discussion which many famous philosopher have definitely been describing more logically than me. To me the problem of causality and free will is the most eventual question in philosophy. Can you make everything happen by the will and forget your genes and environment, or can you leave all to causality and live believing to destiny or karma?

I think neither of these things are complete answer to my question. Reality is not in any extremity, but rather in between them. We Satanists have concept called “Third side perspective” which means that dualist extremities are very often quite limited views so person who want to be free of them may reach more clear view by simply going thorough them and watching things from perspective which is not limited to certain view.

In my case this means going thorough the causality and free will and between the view that environment and genes are so strong we cannot fight against them versus the idea that individual can reach everything one wants simply by believing in oneself.

We of course are ourself responsible of our lives and choices we make. We cannot totally just claim that all the failures in life would be because of causality. Same time we still have to accept that there is no starting line in life which would be same to each and everyone of us, so there is certain causal frame which limits our life. We can still reach a lot and grow over our own limitations. There is always people like Stephen Hawking who have grown over all the limiting physical factors by one´s intelligence and courage.

All in all I would say that by will you can reach much and by working hard get more opportunities to prove your ability than you reach simply with talent and no will. The frame exists, but in one´s own life one can reach the level they are definitely evolved from some point to some point. North Korean factory worker and son of Texan oil millionaire can never reach same level in social hierarchy and outer status, but they can master their own life best they can in the environment they live.

Same time we still have to remember the causality between things and the effect of our personal genes and environment. Handicap child who lives in Russian orphanage thigh to limb restraint and suburbia kid from American middle class neighborhood are never going to get same amount of money, wealth and care in their life, no matter how much will or work one does.

The probable solution to my question is that both free will and causality exists, but neither of them rules completely over each other.

There is an old saying that “we are, what we make our life”, which means that attitude toward the life is the ruling factor in personal grow. Perhaps it´s just that, with right attitude you can take out of your life as much as possible when you don´t compare yourself to someone else or their achievements.

Just live your life fullest and do it for yourself.

Wrote by: Janina

Madness

In the silence of the night my mind is dark like the the darkest night.

Full of pride, ego, I. Darkness in my mind, in my site.

Night crawls over me. It tights it´s cold dark fingers around me.

Who am I, oh, who am I.. Am I she, am I he?

Madness, oh sweet madness. Take me, make me your slave.

Take me oh madness, cause I don´t want to save.

I want to drown to the dark ocean of madness and dreams.

I want to drown to the madness which makes me unseen.

Oh my ego, oh sweet me. Now I can see. Darkness is death,

rebirth and flee.

I am the god of this darkness of night, my mind is the king

of the madness and pride.

Darkness is not dark or cold. It is my best friend and like me,

ancient and old

Wrote: Janina

Vampire in Folklore

Today I will come out with few words about Vampires and Vampire Myths. We all know that creature of night who sucks blood and can take the form of wolf or bat.

In popular culture the Vampire has become a famous character and in few last years even fashion by the success of series like True Blood and Twilight, but before them there was already a robust foothold for these stories and legends. We all remember Buffy, we are all been scared by the dark atmosphere of Dracula and we all saw the Interview With The Vampire which based to Anne Rice story. These stories and many others have made Vampire to be the durable character of popular culture and the horror scene of literature.

What then is the origin of these stories?

In Eastern Europe one can find a rich tradition of myths about demons, blood sucking monsters and undead or living dead beings. Many scholars have been studying the roots of these legends from Romania and Russia back to Greece.

Many ancient cultures had creatures like Vampire. One of the most famous ones was Babylonian Lilu, whom Jews later named Lilith. Egyptian had a goddess Sekhmet who drank the blood and Hindus have a goddess Kali who drinks the blood of her enemies. Many of these demon like female goddesses can be defined Vampire as the Vampire has been defined.

Vampire has few marks which are typical to this certain character. First, they drink the blood aka lifeforce from humans (and sometimes from other animals as well), secondly they can change their form from human character to animals like bats, birds, wolf etc. Third, they are described dead beings who live so they do not have a pulse, heartbeat nor things like that. In eastern Europe area well known Dracula has all these marks though it´s role model Vlad, the Romanian king, had not.

These marks can be found from ancient India from Demon called Rakshasa. Rakshasa was demon who drank blood, had big teeth and changed it´s form to bat. It´s very well known and famous character in Hindu and Buddhist myths of the area. Gypsies of Eastern Europe had their roots in India, their ancestors traveled from Northern India to the area of Eastern Europe and many scholars have been suggesting that nowadays Vampire is actually form of Rakshasa which have been living in the myths and legends of Gypsies centuries before it got popularized.

The word Vampire is English The Oxford English Dictionary dates the first appearance of the English word vampire (as vampyre) in English from 1734, in a travelogue titled Travels of Three English Gentlemen published in the Harleiana Miscellany in 1745. In 1735 English journalist used the word Vampyre in famous Arnold Paole case where Vampyres has told to been sucking the bloods from human beings in Hungary (though the are was actually Serbia). Before this it was already known as the form of Yppur in Slavic languages like Romania, Russia etc.

So it is highly possible that Slavic yppur which nowadays have been called with it´s English name Vampire has it´s origin in Indian continent and traveled from India and Tibet with Gypsies to Europe. Of course we can´t forget and let without notion the fact that etymology knows many Vampire like beings from many area of ancient world, Mesopotamia, Sumeria, Roman empire, Ancient Greek and Hebrew tradition. Still the folklore we know today as a vampire myth is almost certainly originated to Eastern European culture which has many parts of it´s roots on India, though that´s where the gypsies came to Europe first place.

Though Vampire is very mythical being and has it´s roots in ancient civilizations, there is still a quite numerous variety of beliefs and even practices under the name of vampirism today. There is a groups who are enthusiastic with the fetishistic side of vampirism. They makeup goth style, use teeth and suck each others blood. Many of these people get the power by the fetish itself. They dress with leather and PVC and practice many sadomasochistic things under the name.

There is also so called Psychic or Energy vampires who practice the astral energy feeding and things like that. They are usually serious practitioners of vampirism who think the blood sucking as a metaphor of energy drinking. Psychic has been used a lot of these practices, though I personally think, that Energy Vampirism would be more definiable for the practice itself.

Psychic Vampire is a term which Anton Szandor LaVey, founder of Satanism and organization called the Church of Satan, gave to certain type of people who always take from others and use them never giving anything back.

As denouement of this essay I would say that vampires still live and prosper in todays world and todays popular culture. They have last centuries, but their fascinating effect to audience haven´t last a bit during decades and centuries. Many still believe in Vampires, many still practice Vampirism. Many still gets excited of them and many, like me, scholar the issue and writes about these things.

I end my essay with the words of Bram Stoker:

“Do you not think that there are things which you cannot understand, and yet which are; that some people see things that others cannot? But there are things old and new which must not be contemplate by men´s eyes, because they know -or think they know- some things which other men have told them. Ah, it is the fault of our science that it wants to explain all; and if it explain not, then it says there is nothing to explain.”