Original sin?

[Lark]

It's a manipulation of another myth. In Hesiod's "Theogony" and "Works and days" are also listed the myths of the five ages and of Pandora. A very common interpretation is that the first decline of the humankind (age of gold to silver) has been manipulated by christianity as the flight from Eden (and thus Pandora opening the box as Eve committing the original sin).

This is badly resumed, but it's been years since I had to translate those kind of works. I suggest taking a quick read to some steps, some are really fascinating.

I like that book, by Hesiod, though I tend to think its message has been hijacked by the wrong people, the meaning I take form it is pretty different to a lot of the work ethicist conservatives.

 

[Mole]

The intuition of Original Sin comes from an authoritarian child rearing, where the greatest sin is disobedience. And so naturally the original sin was disobedience.

For an authoritarian society to function and flourish obedience is the most important virtue. We see this in functioning and flourishing authoritarian institutions today such as the military, medical hospitals, and some religions and cults.

So obedience was a functional virtue, but times are changing, and now obedience, and its corollary Original Sin, seem old fashioned, a bit dated, even a bit silly, and as we watch, a new social virtue is being born.

 

[Blackout]

We "fell from grace" and thus we started to become ashamed of our bodies and the like. I believe in a sense it's the acknowledgement that we have at some point lost our ability to live more peaceful lives, in tune with nature and thus our original sin was born and it has been a constant struggle to keep balance.


I don't think it's outright a concept that completely seeks to shame others but merely an explanation of an aspect of our natures and to a degree perhaps what motivates us to do things that aren't always necessarily good or in our best interest. I don't think it's so black and white though and it's true "we all sin" we're all human after all, it's completely natural and normal and I think a lot of religious people are a little too extreme with some of their notions; but I suppose often times if you want to escape or know what it is, at least you have some kind of an answer.

The whole condemning thing is a little extreme though, I don't know where that comes from and I suppose that's where I differ because I don't think it's so black and white but I guess it's something to be mindful of. I suppose now I understand why it scares some people.

When you look at more earlier civilizations and societies it's very clear that they lived very natural lives and seems the more we move away from that the more problems it seems to cause as well. Living peacefully and in tune with nature like that is a very beautiful and important thing and I think it would be important to learn from them and keep those traditions alive. I mean, we can't exactly keep going down the path we are heading and destroying nature and other life forms everywhere we go because then we'll have nothing left but a cold and empty barren planet. But some of our 'progress' has benefited us and I think there's some kind of a key in merging this with the old ways of living some how. We know things like exercise are good for us, so you know, it makes it easier to live in balance almost. I guess what I mean is that we can find a way to work with our natures somehow in this way.


*science can make it easier to work with our natures. The problem is not to lose sight of our natures completely. I think science is almost just learning what nature is, not that there is no such thing as "nature" or that it's this evil imprisonment we must battle against.

 

[Mole]

When you look at more earlier civilizations and societies it's very clear that they lived very natural lives and seems the more we move away from that the more problems it seems to cause as well. Living peacefully and in tune with nature like that is a very beautiful and important thing and I think it would be important to learn from them and keep those traditions alive.

Before the Western Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution, for 200,000 years the lives of almost everyone were short, sharp, nasty, and brutish. However the Romantic Movement, in response to the Enlightenment of evidence and reason, romances the horror and ignorance of ordinary life.

The New Age Movement is firmly in the tradition of the Romantic Movement.

 

[Lark]

The intuition of Original Sin comes from an authoritarian child rearing, where the greatest sin is disobedience. And so naturally the original sin was disobedience.

For an authoritarian society to function and flourish obedience is the most important virtue. We see this in functioning and flourishing authoritarian institutions today such as the military, medical hospitals, and some religions and cults.

So obedience was a functional virtue, but times are changing, and now obedience, and its corollary Original Sin, seem old fashioned, a bit dated, even a bit silly, and as we watch, a new social virtue is being born.

I think this is all wrong.

Original since as its described in most RCC commentaries I've read is doubt and disbelief in the face of evidence and revelation, the genesis story illustrates who even if and when mankind was able to have the direct company of God they were inclined to doubt and disbelieve what they knew for a fact as soon as the opportunity arose to indulge it.

 

[Lark]

Before the Western Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution, for 200,000 years the lives of almost everyone were short, sharp, nasty, and brutish. However the Romantic Movement, in response to the Enlightenment of evidence and reason, romances the horror and ignorance of ordinary life.

The New Age Movement is firmly in the tradition of the Romantic Movement.

I think you'll find that the industrialisation process was pretty horrific and directly contributed to life being nasty, brutish and short, especially for the displaced rural poor and working class, for the first time there was unemployment as we know it today in the modern world and the coercion and compulsion to wage slavery, not mitigated until the reform and protest movements which were inspired by the romantic movements you're talking about there.

 

[Blackout]

I think you'll find that the industrialisation process was pretty horrific and directly contributed to life being nasty, brutish and short, especially for the displaced rural poor and working class, for the first time there was unemployment as we know it today in the modern world and the coercion and compulsion to wage slavery, not mitigated until the reform and protest movements which were inspired by the romantic movements you're talking about there.

Yes I would agree, there was certainly at least far more nasty diseases and the like after the industrialize age then before. People were quite happy and content before even if we didn't live notably long lives...

I've also heard accounts of ingenious people (before they were exposed to industrialization and other imperialist cultures) lived very long lives. Disease was also caused my immigration and the like, as the ingenious population generally developed immunities to most bacteria, disease and viruses that existed in the areas they inhabited.

History at times has been known to be told differently depending on who is the one telling it, so this must always be taken into consideration.


In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if long isolated ingenious populations who thrived actually lived long and healthy lives due to the lack of being exposed to other viruses and diseases.

 

[Mole]

Yes I would agree, there was certainly at least far more nasty diseases and the like after the industrialize age then before. People were quite happy and content before even if we didn't live notably long lives...

I've also heard accounts of ingenious people (before they were exposed to industrialization and other imperialist cultures) lived very long lives. Disease was also caused my immigration and the like, as the ingenious population generally developed immunities to most bacteria, disease and viruses that existed in the areas they inhabited.

History at times has been known to be told differently depending on who is the one telling it, so this must always be taken into consideration.


In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if long isolated ingenious populations who thrived actually lived long and healthy lives due to the lack of being exposed to other viruses and diseases.

We only have to read the life spans before the Western Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution to see clearly that life spans and general health vastly improved after the industrial revolution.

Of course it is an article of faith of the Romantic Movement that we were happy and content before the Industrial Revolution. To believe this is a matter of faith and is not based on evidence and reason.

Part of the Romantic myth is Merry England, an utopian myth of an idyllic pastoral way of life. And of course astrology and mbti are part of the New Age, which is part of the Romantic Movement. And none of it, from Merry England to mbti, is based on evidence and reason, but is a pius act of faith. And piety is the last defence of faith.

 

[Typh0n]

As I see it, "Original Sin" is basically waking up to one's capacity to make decisions, to discern between good and evil, to have moral and intellectual choice. From a Right-Hand path Christian PoV, this act of disobedience against God's command not to eat the apple (if we're talking the Genesis myth) was this provoked by Satan/Lucifer who tempted Eve, who in turn tempted Adam, and is thus a bad thing, because we no longer live in ignorance of good and evil. But from a Left-Hand Path perspective, this is good, for the same reason: it awakens humans to moral choice. And not just moral, but intellectual choice. It gives one the power to rebel against God, or whatever spiritual, moral, or intellectual authority you choose.

Just my interpretation of a biblical myth.

 

[Typh0n]

Yes I would agree, there was certainly at least far more nasty diseases and the like after the industrialize age then before. People were quite happy and content before even if we didn't live notably long lives...

How do you know? That seems a lot to assume for someone who wasn't there at the time, not to mention doesn't seem like he's read much on the subject, no offense, this isn't a personal attack but c'mon now.