Radio Live Out-Take: The Story of the Lonely Goblin

Lindsay Perigo's picture
Submitted by Lindsay Perigo on Mon, 2010-05-24 02:13

Something I had prepared for Radio Live:

Once upon a time there was a goblin. And only a goblin. There was nothing else in the universe. There was no universe. Just the goblin.

One day after an eternity of solitude the goblin got lonely and bored. He said to himself, stuff this, I’m going to make stuff to play with. So he made the universe and he made living creatures. He made men just so they could hang out with him and tell him how cool he was.

But he didn’t want men saying that just because he wanted them to. He gave them the option of calling him uncool, blowing him off and pissing him off generally. He even created a rival for their affections, an anti-goblin, and injected them with a party drug called Original Sin which made them swoon and succumb to the anti-goblin's attentions.

For those who managed to remain staunch and genuflect to him in spite of how hard he made it to do so, the goblin created a place of eternal, blissful reward. For the billions of men he knew in advance would call him uncool, blow him off, piss him off generally, and go with the anti-goblin, he created a place of terrible, everlasting punishment, to which he would condemn them on a day called Judgment Day, or Great Hissy-Fit Day.

In preludes to Great Hissy-Fit Day, the goblin threw an occasional minor tantrum, for practice. One time he banished men from the cool garden he’d made for them. Many years after that he drowned nearly all of them. Later still, seriously bummed out by now, even though he'd known all along how it would play out, he impregnated a virgin with goblin-seed and had himself born as a man whom he then had tortured and killed as a sacrifice to himself on behalf of all other men who, under the influence of the party drug he'd injected, had succumbed to the anti-goblin he’d created. (Kids, don't even try to make sense of this at home.)

Finally the goblin proceeded to damn most men to his place of everlasting torture, just as he always knew he would.

When asked what was he thinking, why had he gone ahead with the exercise in the first place knowing how it would end, the goblin said, for the hell of it.

Some men were heard to say that it might have been better for all concerned had the goblin simply kept himself to himself, and that such an uncool goblin deserved to be lonely anyway.


It's true

Brant Gaede's picture

Christians have managed to endure gross torture by the strength of their faith.

This is not an argument to be a Christian or to have faith in lieu of reason or to believe in the old white man with a beard in the sky looking down on us all.

--Brant

Yo Grogster

Burnsy's picture

In the meantime perhaps you may also want to read the historically factual accounts of some of Jesus' friends who were prepared to be tortured & martyred (in the true sense of the word - i.e NOT suicide bombing) in the most diabolically means possible. They turned their lives from the overiding Jewish faith to that of Christianity despite the overwhelming pressure and upbringing to remain Jews.

You can also read of the accounts of Christian Allied POW's who also endured torture from the Japanese (These POW's put their victory over their Japanese torturers thanks to their Christian beliefs) so you could enjoy your very own freedom and much vaunted liberty.

if you were born in a muslim country

Burnsy's picture

I'll get back you grogster after I've checked in with some of my fellow Iraqi and Indonesian Christian friends. As they themselves were born in Muslim countries and know me more than you do they would probably be able to better answer your question.
I appreciate your patience in waiting for an answer to such a profound question of yours

Hey Burnsy

gregster's picture

Have you ever given thought to the idea that if you were born in a muslim country, you'd more than likely be as ignorant as each of them there.

Lack the time

Burnsy's picture

That's cool. Rather than going on to score any further points I'm happy to abide by the final whistle and "shake hands"

sorry Burnsy

Damien Grant's picture

I lack the time to play this game any more.

Maybe someone else can play with you.

Be careful you might dig right through to China

Burnsy's picture

Damien.
More Q & A because in the absence of your ability to hold a rational and resonable discussion, you nonethless provide tremendous material for me to chuckle incredulously about and with which I can poke fun at. So I've got to at least commend you for that much. And please do not get all worked up nor take it personally (especially as I know far less about you as you miraculously proclaim to know about me)
1. Who (other than you) says that your own paths to your own beliefs are not relevant in light of your supposed knowledge about my paths to my beliefs?
2. Why should I believe such a remark?
3. Where's the proof to support such your assertion?
4. Is there perhaps some ideological prejudice lurking behind your adamant assertion that keeps you harping on about your imagined delusion (other than the hallucinations you're prone to) that the faith I've chosen for myself was somehow chosen for me by my parents.
5.Even if it is, as so you believe, then where is your proof that they did in fact chose it for me?
6. Your sermon on the role of DNA still begs the question Damien. What evidence is there to support the notion of the "morality gene" or that it is in fact an "evolutionary trait". You are very good at putting forward your own speculative theories without evidence? Therefore I don't know what basis you place your faith on in forming such faith beliefs? I have an open mind if you'd care to share your faith basis &/or evidence with me.
7. Where is the proof of the Christian meme (or any meme)?
8. Last time I checked it revealed that man has free will to chose his own religion, faith or world view. For example children of atheists in a communist regime becoming Christians (one need only to hear Kim Phuc - as I have first hand & I'm sure I was not hallucinating- speak of her almost miraculous conversion to Christianity) to know that despite one's parentage -Hindu or otherwise- or upbringing / DNA + life experiences those with an open mind are free to chose their beliefs.

That the "We = DNA plus our life experiences" equation is truly stunning Damien. Have you ever though about putting it forward to the Nobel Prize judging panel. I'm sure it would scoop the gongs in more than one category. Stephen Hawking's search for the theory of everything pales into oblivion alongside your remarkable equation.

In many ways minds are like parachutes in that they work best when they're open and can save our lives.

I have no problem with you fighting with all your will, armed just with the resources contained within your closed mind. As such I look forward to a time when your ignorance is replaced with a sense of the truth.
While I fully understand that your mind is indeed currently closed Damien, I do nonetheless believe in the grace of God to work on your mind much in the same way it has worked on the minds of others such as Kim Phuc and other arch atheists who have discovered a Christian God.

Q and A

Damien Grant's picture

1. Despite the fact that my parents or those around me chose the same religion as I freely chose, that I still at the end of the day have exercised my very own free will to chose, despite your ingorant cliams otherwise. 2. That there is a perfectly rational reason why

 

Yes: the Christian Meme.

 

3. That in the absense of any supporting evidence that the morality gene exists, or is in fact an evolutionary trait that such a notion of such may be merely speculative mumbo jumbo proposed by atheists as their very own God of the gaps.

Whatever traits we have are genetic. Red Hair, anger, morality, sex drive. We are DNA plus life experience. Morality cannot exist if our DNA did not create the capacity for it. We cannot fly because our DNA does not allow it. We can have morality because our DNA allows this trait to exist.

 

 4. Even though it may be rare for people of our ages (I again am staggered by your claim that we are both of similar ages, but nonetheless you may be guessing right so I can overlook such a claim by you) to change our minds, it nonetheless stands that there are many people who are close to death who do changes their views on whether or not there may be a God. Which goes someway to support my claim that you'd be hard pressed to find an atheist fighting in the trenches of the front line in a battle.

Proximity to death, I assume, causes people to see the world differently and the stress of this must impact on thier thought process. I am not sure what this proves.

 5. That you are so arrogant to assume that I did not chose to become a Christian, anymore than I choose to speak English. If this is the case and IF you spoke English as your 1st language then how come you've become an atheist and I've chosen to become a Christian? (woops sorry Damien, take that back please. I should not be so provocative and cheeky as to question your superior Objectivite brain power that allows you to overcome such speed bumps that appear to be insurmountable mountains to us mere mortals)

Your faith was chosen for you by your parents. If your parents were Hindu, there is a very high chance you would be Hindu. My own path to my beliefs are not relevant. I never said I was objective. 

 

Keeping digging Damien you'll bury yourself sooner or later!

Burnsy's picture

Since you're not open minded (as you yourself claim) then I can see why you are so blind and ignorant to the truth and reality.
Perhaps at the end of the day, Damien you may indeed be one of those people unfortunate enough to not be able to enjoy the liberating joy that comes from having a mind that is open to truth and reality.
In fact I'd go so far as to even agree with you that you'd indeed be the sort of person particularly ripe to experience hallucinations. I can only speculate about what and how many sources would cause your hallucinations.

Now I know why you keep making outlandishly baseless assumptions about who I am and what I represent. I can say they are so wild, because of just how far off the mark your ignorant retorts in fact are.
I'm not sure of one thing however in that I hope you're not asserting that I believe only Christians can be moral.
Is there any chance that your closed mind is blinding you to the following?:

1. Despite the fact that my parents or those around me chose the same religion as I freely chose, that I still at the end of the day have exercised my very own free will to chose, despite your ingorant cliams otherwise.
2. That there is a perfectly rational reason why
3. That in the absense of any supporting evidence that the morality gene exists, or is in fact an evolutionary trait that such a notion of such may be merely speculative mumbo jumbo proposed by atheists as their very own God of the gaps.
4. Even though it may be rare for people of our ages (I again am staggered by your claim that we are both of similar ages, but nonetheless you may be guessing right so I can overlook such a claim by you) to change our minds, it nonetheless stands that there are many people who are close to death who do changes their views on whether or not there may be a God. Which goes someway to support my claim that you'd be hard pressed to find an atheist fighting in the trenches of the front line in a battle.
5. That you are so arrogant to assume that I did not chose to become a Christian, anymore than I choose to speak English. If this is the case and IF you spoke English as your 1st language then how come you've become an atheist and I've chosen to become a Christian? (woops sorry Damien, take that back please. I should not be so provocative and cheeky as to question your superior Objectivite brain power that allows you to overcome such speed bumps that appear to be insurmountable mountains to us mere mortals)

fate

Damien Grant's picture

Ask yourself, Mr Burns, what religion are you? What religion are your parents? What religion are those around you?

Now, as Mr Dawkins points out, if you ask that same question of almost all people, including those with no beliefs, you will find that religion, like language, is an idea we copy from those around us.

You did not choose to be a Christian, any more than you choose to speak English.

You claim to be open minded. I doubt that, in my experience people of your age, similar to my own I suspect, rarely change their mind on their religions and political views.

I am not open minded. I would need my road-to-Damascus experience, (and even then I think I would be more likely to think I was having a hallucination than seeing Jesus) before my mind can be prized open.

Now, you claim that atheists having a morality are hypocrites. Staggering. Only Christians can be truly moral? Or is it perhaps that morality is an evolutionary trait that, because we all possess it, makes our society work better than tribes that lacked the morality gene?

Now, I have work to do. Not exactly god’s work, but work none the less.

Was the 'Atheistic MEME' a design feature as well?

Burnsy's picture

Sorry Damien if I've somehow caused you to get yourself all in a tither and tied up in self righteous knots again.

I only know too well from your previous "contributions" to blogs that you're rather adept at drawing a long bow & jumping to conclusions in order to try and contrive something that I did not state.

I have a better understanding why God would chose the God meme over an Atheistic meme. But that is not to rule out the possibility that God has designed an atheistic meme.

Whether or not the 'Atheistic MEME' exists or in fact if it is or is not a design feature but is something that God in his superior wisdom has allowed, I have no evidence either way. Or perhaps the Atheistic meme is not a deisgn feature because we may have not been designed in the 1st place.

I myself know of some Atheists who I hold in very high regard and who are themselves particularly intelligent, who however are too stubbornly proud and closed minded when it comes to contemplating that there may be a superior God. While I don't think any less of them as people, I can only speculate how they can be so hypocritical by claiming moral values that according to their world view have no basis in reality or truth in the first place.

Moreover - in the face of compelling conflicting evidence I'm happy to concede that perhaps there is no God and Dawkins may be right. I remain open to such evidence. In the meantime I find the evidence overwhelmingly supports my rational belief in a Christian God.

Who knows whether or not there are memes in the first place or perhaps there is only one meme- which is that it's a meme that makes us believe in other meme's.

I for one am open minded enough to being corrected, even by someone who is so stubbornly proud as to be themselves close-minded.

Needless to say that in the meantime I don't feel a particularly strong drive to question God as to whether or not there are in fact memes or if he designed an Atheistic meme.

Perhaps if I was hell bent on making God justify to me why my own ideal world view does not match up with what goes on in the world, then of course the notion of whether or not there is in fact an atheist meme would play a large part in my life.

God meme

Damien Grant's picture

for fricks sake Mr Burns,

was the 'Atheistic MEME' a design feature as well?

do you actually bother to think before you type this stuff?

(NB: First draft of this: exchange frick and stuff for more appropriate colloquialisms)

If you believe what Dawkins

Burnsy's picture

If you believe what Dawkins asserts (& Dawkins is indeed very plausible to many people who have only a superficial undertanding of Christianity), then belief in a super natural creator is somehow the result of the "God MEME" (a sort of mind virus that is passed on between generations and members of society).

Dawkins however carefully evades the following:
1. possibility that there may also be an "Atheistic MEME" or
2. that such a God meme may have in fact be a deliberate design feature built into us by a superior creator.

Interesting

Brant Gaede's picture

I love that "great demotions" quote.

The book "Rare Earth" explains why life, especially conceptually intelligent, or even complex life only, is likely extremely rare in the universe. As Fermi once famously said about life from elsewhere: "Where is everybody?" 95% of the stars are too small to support planets with life. For the planets to be close enough to them to be warm enough they would be in a tidal lock like our moon with only one side facing the sun. We have a moon which stabilizes the planet's precision otherwise the tilt on the axis could be up to 90 degrees. Shortly after the Earth was created it was hit a glancing blow by something as big as Mars tearing off the material that would become the moon. A direct hit would have turned it into an asteroid belt. Then we have Jupiter vacuuming up space detritus like comets and asteroids so we only get killer asteroids tens of millions of years apart, not every 10,000 years. It's in a rare place for a gas giant with a rare circular orbit necessary for this function. Our sun is also far away from other suns and such potentially disruptive influences.

So maybe humanity will take solace in its uniqueness. All that reality out there and only us, as far as we know, to contemplate it.

--Brant
we be as gods!

evil spirits

Damien Grant's picture

Humans, throughout recorded history, have had religion. Is it possible that the need for religion is hard-wired into us?

There may even be an evolutionary advantage for it, a means of instilling certain knowledge (do not eat that type of food, we do not know why but if you do you get sick, might have to do with an evil spirit) over multiple generations, or helping bond a community with an identity (chosen people, divine right of kings, etc).

If this is the case, and I suspect it is, I do not know why a belief in religion is declining, but it would help explain why a belief in religion is so ‘sticky’ given the lack of evidential underpinning.

Experimenting

Jmaurone's picture

Brant: "For the record...I'm a pantheist. God is reality itself, but not a supreme being, just the supreme thing. He is in and of everything. I respect but do not worship."

And

"Please understand that I'm experimenting. I know LP doesn't go with this sort of thing, maybe even violently, metaphorically speaking."

--Brant

Experimenting...hmmm...simply sounds like a variation of the "Gaia Hypothesis," to me, and not unlike Scott Ryan's screed...Oddly enough, I did come across something in my reading, today, that touched on this. I stand by my criticism, but take the following as a more "benevolent" answer to your posts, then:

"Joining this restlessness of place, Sagan suggested, is a new desperation of spirit. For centuries humans took comfort in the knowledge that the Earth sat at the center of the universe, that the Sun and Moon and stars rotated around the Earth, and that God had created humans in His own image. Science devastated those beliefs.

"'Human beings cannot live with such a revelation,' Sagan quoted British journalist
Bryan Appleyard as saying. The great demotions, as Sagan called them, have created a more mature view of nature, but they have also devastated the human spirit. Maturity is painful; it is easier to think like a child. In the past, when humans believed themselves part of a greater purpose, they could accept moral codes passed down from people presenting themselves as the worldly agents of the creater…The apparent insignificance of the Earth in the cosmos weakened those codes. It is difficult for humans to respect strict moral codes when those doctrines are based on patently false cosmologies. The new view of the universe has undermined the leadership of religious and secular authorities and bred a sense of hopelessness.

"Against this sense of desperation, Sagan believed, a new spirit of discovery could arise. The very science that created the sense of despair could create a new state of wonder: 'Once we overcome our fear of being tiny, we find ourselves on the threshold of a vast and awesome Universe that utterly dwarfs--in time, in space, and in potential--the tidy anthropocentric proscenium of our ancestors.'"

From Space and the American Imagination by Howard McCurdy

First, second

Brant Gaede's picture

First I said I'm experimenting, second I'll never like bitch-slapping believers unless they're Muslims. Doesn't mean I won't do it.

--Brant

Who's Bitch-Slapping Who?

Jmaurone's picture

I don't see how pointing out one is atheist is "bitch-slapping." (Or calling reality what it is, for that matter.) That said, there are more than a few believers who could use a good bitch-slapping of their own:

Pastor's 'Beat the Gay Out' Message Draws Criticism

MEMPHIS, TN (abc24.com) - Beat the gay out of your son. That's what Pastor Sean Harris of Berean Baptist Church in Fayetteville, North Carolina told the men in his congregation to do to their sons if they suspect they're gay.

He told the men to "man up, give a good punch," adding, "Dads, the second you see your son dropping the limp wrist, you crack that wrist."

Will Batts is the Executive Director of the Memphis Gay and Lesbian Community Center. He says the message Pastor Harris is sending is troubling.

"It lets people that hear those words think it's ok to actually do the violence," he said. "As a person of faith myself I don't believe that's related to Christianity."

Pastor Harris said his comments were taken out of context.

Uncle Tom Atheists

Jmaurone's picture

Brant: "In any case, I don't care to bitch slap believers by the oh-so upfrontness of 'atheist.'"

I'd say it's another case of "Uncle Tom Objectivism," except that Brant disavows the Objectivist label, so I'll have to settle for "Uncle Tom Objectivist." Jeebus, you can't say "selfish" because it might offend collectivists, you can't say "Islamic terrorist," because it might offend Islamic terrorists, and now you can't say "atheist" because it's too "upfront?" No wonder people like Paul Ryan retreat when the cock crows twice...

I'd be more sympathetic, if, by "bitch-slap," you meant "I'm an atheist, and you're a fucking moron who still believes in god." But if you mean that your atheism is a bitch-slap because the believer is confronted with an challenge to their world view, well, that is on them to handle that, and you do them no service by hiding your own rational light under the proverbial bushel...

“Why do you use the word ‘selfishness’ to denote virtuous qualities of character, when that word antagonizes so many people to whom it does not mean the things you mean?”
To those who ask it, my answer is: “For the reason that makes you afraid of it.”-Ayn Rand.

Wow!

Lindsay Perigo's picture

That Paul Ryan capitulation is *awful*! (I didn't know he'd spoken to TAS.)

The only thing worse is that MSNBC smarmball denouncing him.

If only...

Jmaurone's picture

Brant: "In any case, I don't care to bitch slap believers by the oh-so upfrontness of 'atheist.'"

If only the religious fanatics had the same attitude...

Has anyone noted ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... the ongoing failure/refusal of the Goblians to begin even to try to rebut my depiction of Goblianity?

Youth

gregster's picture

The godless atheists need to capture them young!

The problem of vested interest in nonsense also extends to anti-capitalists. That's why education is in critical need of reform.

Goblins

Damien Grant's picture

The problem with the goblin theory of the universe is that it appears to adherents as internally consistent and any attempt to unravel it is met by the circular but perfect ‘faith’ defence.

You cannot reason a person’s faith away. I have a friend of mine, very bright fellow, successful lawyer, deeply committed to the goblin universe and I cannot dent his conviction in even the tiniest manner. It is like shooting arrows into a cloud.

He enjoys the debate but cannot or will not come to the issue with an open mind.

My view is that once you reach a certain point in your life, if a religious underpinning is central to who you are and how you have chosen to live your live, admitting that this philosophy has as much merit as Zeus and Apollo, then it invalidates almost everything you have done in your life and indeed your own view of yourself.

The cost of adapting your religious view is too high a price to pay for intellectual honesty. Reason will fail against such self-interest.

The godless atheists need to capture them young!

Leonid

Brant Gaede's picture

There's no divinity. I'm a "pantheist" because I dislike "atheist." I am using "God" here and reality interchangeably. I suppose "supreme thing" should be "only thing." This is my way of cutting mono-theistic religion off at the knees, without seemingly mounting a direct assault on what they hold most dear, inviting vicious knee-jerk ad hominem counterattacks. I don't usually explain this this much. I just prefer to say I'm a pantheist and let the irrationalists figure it out. It's sorta like the Founding Fathers being deists. In any case, I don't care to bitch slap believers by the oh-so upfrontness of "atheist." The caveat is this is the way I address adults, not young people like children and teenagers, if I would have the occasion to. I would bluntly tell them I'm an atheist and deal with what questions they might have about that. I was once invited to get involved as a leader with the Boy Scouts. I declined. As I said at the time, they eschew atheism and parents don't want or expect their children exposed to overt atheism in scouting.

Please understand that I'm experimenting. I know LP doesn't go with this sort of thing, maybe even violently, metaphorically speaking.

--Brant
I'm also having a little fun with Burnsy, mostly because I love his name

Brant Gaede

Leonid's picture

How this thing is supreme? If he is in and of everything then of what he supreme? If he Hitler and Stalin, why should I respect him? And if God is simply another name for reality how he is different from it? If he doesn't have any divine features, why he's God?

For the record

Brant Gaede's picture

I'm a pantheist. God is reality itself, but not a supreme being, just the supreme thing. He is in and of everything. I respect but do not worship.

--Brant

Which "Some men..." are you referring to.

Burnsy's picture

"Some men were heard to say that it might have been better for all concerned had the goblin simply kept himself to himself, and that such an uncool goblin deserved to be lonely anyway".

If these "some men" you refer to, were in fact right that "it might have been better for all..... an uncool goblin deserved to be lonely..." then can you please help me understand what's behind this blatantly ironic and self contradictory line in your story.

This is because it now begs the questionn which is:

Why do not the "all concerned" these men refer to (including the men themselves) commit suicide if they were in fact truly serious and sincere in their claim. After-all the "all concerned" were in in fact created by the lonely Goblin in the 1st place - were they not?

By ending their own lives the "all concerned" would get their own way in the end as they would be restoring things as to how they "believe" things should have been in the 1st place. I.e before the lonely goblin indulged himself.

I have a pretty clear idea myself as to why these "some men" fail to see the ironic self contradiction of their own arguments. And I'm not surprised that Linz has yet to reveal his ironic self contradiction himself.

Authority figures

Burnsy's picture

Please excuse me if I am in anyway hitting on a raw nerve with some of you atheists.
But I'm wondering that there may in fact be some truth in the claim that a disproportionately large number of atheists have in fact been pre-conditioned to form an atheistic world view, largely because of their dysfunctional relationships with their own blood father during their formative years. I.e that it results from an overly harsh parenting (or in fact parental absence -either death or separation). As such, the child's skewed world view; of what constitutes a loving father is then projected out to the rest of the world in the same manner that they themselves were treated by their own blood father.

Is it any wonder then, that many atheists are inclined to harshly dismiss the notion that there can in fact be a God who is merciful and loving, when all they themselves, have taken away from the father -child relationship is anger, judgment, spite, hate, harshness and arrogance. While I am concerned for them, I do now have a better understanding as to what motivates many of them (even if they themselves do not truly know why) to form an atheistic world view.

Therefore I can also see how easy it is for many athesits to project their own world view judgement of a Heavenly Father in the sense the atheist believes (even deep down in many cases) that a Heavenly Father too has the same selfish motivations and flaws as his blood father.

The goblin debate ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... has spread to many threads. But I want to reiterate my challenge to goblinites on this one: if my "Story of the Lonely Goblin" misrepresents your favoured version of Goblinianity in any way, rewrite it to make it right.

Ha!

Lindsay Perigo's picture

“It’s time to shame these aesthetic thugs into oblivion. Musical masochism is for consenting adults in private; it shouldn’t be sadistically imposed on unconsenting adults in public. Ideally its perpetrators should follow the logic of one of their number, the Slipknot drummer who, when told his was music to commit suicide by, said, ‘We must be doing something right.’ I would certainly encourage that alien and all its fellows to top themselves and leave the earth to human beings.”

Me, quoting myself in Music of the Gods.

So the one who just topped himself was not the drummer? Damn!

Don't forget....

Marcus's picture

...from the report I posted, they also refer to their audience as "maggots".

Hey Linz, you do have something in common with slipknot! Big smile

Beyond disgusting.

Olivia's picture

"I wanna slit your throat and fuck the wound
I wanna push my face in and feel the swoon." (Lyrics from Slipknot’s Disasterpiece)

"Fuck it all. Fuck this world. Fuck everything that you stand for. Don't belong. Don't exist. Don't give a shit. Don't ever judge me." (Lyrics from Slipknot’s Surfacing.)

"The band has been known for extreme behavior during live performances, including urinating and vomiting on stage, according to biographies."

This is just so sickening. That people would actually pay money to listen to this kind of aural excrement is insanity. Let them die horribly in their own vomit - they deserve it for spreading their putrid pus-filled, diseased sense-of-death around a culture and infecting the masses.

BTW ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Let's not let the goblinites off the hook here by going off on this esthetic tangent, however exercising it may be. Ms. Purchas, Prof. Higgins awaits! Eye

Scott

Lindsay Perigo's picture

You say:

Where we agree is that, for example, Slipknot is thematically a nightmare. It is a tragedy of the artist's metaphysical judgments. Not a celebration of some aspect of man's existence. Not an explication of some important but overlooked part of man's existence. We have had quite enough studies of darkness and perversion. So much so that these sorts of things pervade Art.
And I think we would agree that Art has an effect. As a cognitive being, it matters what you feed your brain. I mean, it REALLY matters, but in the literal and abstract sense.

Then I'm not sure what your problem with my promotion of "lovely music" and denigration of filth really is.

The case I make in Music of the Gods is that Romantic music is the apogee of all music, from a variety of aspects, including what it is feeding into your brain and soul. A couple of messages ago you said I'd failed to make the case. I asked in what respect you felt I failed. I still can't tell from your latest message! Are you sure you've read the bloody thing? Eye


Where we diverge is: I am not ready to write off someone who enjoys Metallica. Nor am I willing to concede that their enjoying that particular music alone makes them suspect. We have lots of reasons for enjoying music, and not always for reasons of aesthetics, but to g int more detail requires psychologizing, and I do not feel like going down that road.

Writing people off is not the point of my argument. It's simply to show that Romantic music is the best there's ever been, that it's one of the crowning glories of Western Civilization. That said, I'd certainly write off folk who routinely, as a sense-of-life thing, enjoyed the kind of filth whose lyrics Curt has just posted here, and strongly encourage them to follow the lead of their icons. Evil

The Pig (#2)

Curt Holmes's picture

A study in contrasts, I guess.

-----

Frontman Corey Taylor said: “The only way I can sum up Paul Gray is love.”

-----

"Fuck it all. Fuck this world. Fuck everything that you stand for. Don't belong. Don't exist. Don't give a shit. Don't ever judge me." (Lyrics from Slipknot’s Surfacing.)

-----

"I love you Paul." (A fellow band member at the press conference following Gray’s death.)

-----

"The band has been known for extreme behavior during live performances, including urinating and vomiting on stage, according to biographies."

-----

“He gave the greatest hugs out of anybody I’ve ever hugged.” (From the press conference.)

-----

"I wanna slit your throat and fuck the wound
I wanna push my face in and feel the swoon." (Lyrics from Slipknot’s Disasterpiece)

-----

"His daughter will remember him for the way he was." (Gray’s wife who is pregnant with their first child.)

-----

"We believe that it's a drug overdose," the employee said of Gray's condition. "There's a hypodermic needle next to his bed here." (911 call from hotel where he died.)

-----

"God bless you." (From the press conference.)

No evidence of suicide?

Marcus's picture

They did say there was 'no foul play'. So we know it must have been by his own hand.

Maybe it was just an accidental overdose ala' Michael Jackson after another plastic surgery binge?

Anyway, it seems there's a lot of this sort of thing going around at the moment:

"Gehlke noted the deaths of heavy metal singer Ronnie James Dio, who performed with several bands including Black Sabbath, last week and singer-bassist Peter Steel last month....'We just had Dio pass away, Peter Steel from Type-O Negative - three pretty significant blows to heavy metal community.'"

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs...

Art

atlascott's picture

"And, if you do agree, listening to Slayer and Slipknot and Rachmaninoff, why do you think music is exempt from such judgment?"

I do, and I don't. Isn't that fairly clear?

Maybe I misunderstand your position here, though that is hard to believe after reading what you've written on it, especially Music of the Gods.

Let me explain a bit. I believe that in context, there are objective standards to judge ANYTHING and EVERYTHING. That includes Art.

I am not trained in the Arts. The limits of my formal education is that I have, in the past, played 3 musical instruments to varying degrees of amateur standard. While not completely UNtalented in this regard, I am neither tone deaf nor a natural talent, and I never had the interest nor invested the time to become particularly good. I was good enough to do a fair job of sight reading music at my best. As to singing, I can carry a tune, and do not have a terrible voice, but neither is a singing voice a particular blessing. I cannot sing in harmony, for example, and have met people who can, immediately and effortlessly.

As to the visual arts, I will freely admit I am also not a natural. I had to take college Art courses, which were a nice introduction, and then they went all pomowankery and then didn't make much sense from there. I still never understood who postmodern visual art could be called Art in the same sense as Romantic painting or Classical sculpture. There was never much explanation, and it never made much sense to me.

I like Rand's definition and explanation of Art:

Art is a selective re-creation of reality according to an artist’s metaphysical value-judgments. Man’s profound need of art lies in the fact that his cognitive faculty is conceptual, i.e., that he acquires knowledge by means of abstractions, and needs the power to bring his widest metaphysical abstractions into his immediate, perceptual awareness. Art fulfills this need: by means of a selective re-creation, it concretizes man’s fundamental view of himself and of existence. It tells man, in effect, which aspects of his experience are to be regarded as essential, significant, important. In this sense, art teaches man how to use his consciousness. It conditions or stylizes man’s consciousness by conveying to him a certain way of looking at existence.

Where we agree is that, for example, Slipknot is thematically a nightmare. It is a tragedy of the artist's metaphysical judgments. Not a celebration of some aspect of man's existence. Not an explication of some important but overlooked part of man's existence. We have had quite enough studies of darkness and perversion. So much so that these sorts of things pervade Art.

And I think we would agree that Art has an effect. As a cognitive being, it matters what you feed your brain. I mean, it REALLY matters, but in the literal and abstract sense.

Where we diverge is: I am not ready to write off someone who enjoys Metallica. Nor am I willing to concede that their enjoying that particular music alone makes them suspect. We have lots of reasons for enjoying music, and not always for reasons of aesthetics, but to g int more detail requires psychologizing, and I do not feel like going down that road.

And, different Art is for different purposes and if your context is whether you find something of value in a song I find repugnanat, even if OBJECTIVELY it is poorly performed and garbage thematically, then I afford such choice to listen to a song the same sort of significance as I would if you chose the green shirt over the red or blue.

I hope this is clear, I have to get back to work. But I'll end with this: end of the day, just as we all wonder where the great Objectivist industrialists or billionaires are to support good causes and politicians, we also wonder where the Artists are. It is an interesting question. If Objectivism is really an essential system o fideas for success, how have so many millionaires been created who hold premises which are Objectivism's exact antipode? Question for another day.

Re-posted, in the hope (not) of an answer ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

First of all, good riddance to bad rubbish. Was this the member of Slipknot I often quote who said that if the "music" of his band were indeed "music to commit suicide by," then "we must be doing something right"? Has he topped himself in accordance with his own strictures, as I encouraged him to do? If so, Bravo!!

Second, will the milksops who quail at my depiction of the likes of Slipknot and Slayer as "filth" now acknowledge I am on the money?

Third, will the double-agents like Maurone who pretend to be "Objectivish" while offering apologetics for pomowanking filth of the Slipknot ilk, fess up to their true, pro-filth agenda?

Fourth, will Islam's useful idiots like DeSalvo, who, not coincidentally, attack me for my anti-filth stance as much as they do for my anti-Islam, anti-Christian, anti-goblin, anti-pomowanking stance, admit that I'm right to equate Islamo-Fascist terrorism and goblinism and pomowankery generally with musical terrorism, notwithstanding their philistine ignorance of the connection?

Fifth, will senior Objectivists, finally—and here I mean folk like *you*, Yaron Brook and Leonard Peikoff—come to acknowledge that filth is objectively inferior to Romantic Music, and embrace this fact as a proselytizing tool, as I've been urging since Music of the Gods? Will they educate themselves musically, stop being so esthetically lazy and grow out of the headbanging and meandering jazz that are part of the bankrupt culture we are supposed to repudiate?

I've no doubt the answer to my 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th questions will be a resounding "No!" A "No!" that has the tacit, lumpen endorsement of the ARI, TAS and their sundry bit-playing butt-lickers on obscure vanity-blogs who don't begin to get it and should never go near Objectivism, given that The Romantic Manifesto is gloriously, incontrovertibly real and true!

More for Relativist DeSalvo

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Scott—you say:

My entire position on esthetics is that it is not as 1::1 as you claim. Since you DO believe there is a direct, scientifically demonstrable 1::1 between a person's sense of life and their favorite painting or favorite song, I was wondering whether you could set it out for me, and you cannot.

Would you please tell me in which respect Music of the Gods lets you down in this regard?

Rand accepts that it's possible re a person's favorite painting. Do you agree? And, if you do agree, listening to Slayer and Slipknot and Rachmaninoff, why do you think music is exempt from such judgment? That with painting it's possible but not with song?

To tell the truth here, Scott, it's not you or Maurone or Billy Beck or goblinite Goode who fascinate me so much as the silent butt-lickers of the official Objectivist party-line. I can debate with you. Maurone and Beck are unabashed apologists for headbanging caterwauling and the impossibility of objectivity, and have full-blown Linz Derangement Syndrome. I can't debate with them (or rather, they won't debate with me), but at least I know where I stand with them. Goblinite Goode, of course, is unashamedly Baade, evil incarnate—and we understand each other. He's Moriarty to my Holmes, except he's nowhere near as clever as Moriarty.

But the folk who know better and say nothing ... ???????

Linz

Rosie's picture

Has he topped himself...
Doesn't Tara Smith advocate that suicide can be in accordance with Objectivist philosophy?

Egad! The fellow himself may have been an Objectivist. Perhaps he read Camus and came to the conclusion that non life/suicide was his only rational choice? Or, possibly, he may have topped himself after reading about Objectivism and reached the same conclusion.

Postscript: I see there is no evidence at all that he topped himself in the articles reporting his death. Gah. Random comments. (No pun intended!)

This tangent is your response to the lonely goblin story, is it, Rosie?

Not my only response, 'enry 'iggins.

Just you wait.

No, worse than that

gregster's picture

"God is watching and judging you, right?"

It's an insane, impossible balancing act between appearing Christian, doing more than enough to survive - contra sacrifice being the highest virtue, and second guessing the goblin would I'd say be last on the list. The Christians are ALL hypocrites - because they must live a contradiction.

Reverend...

Marcus's picture

"Paul Gray RIP. My condolences go to his family, and the remaining band members."

You didn't know him personally, nor did you like his music.

So is it your moral duty as a Christian to send strangers and their family members, who do not visit SOLO, messages of condolence?

God is watching and judging you, right?

He's probably up there in heaven right now, strumming a guitar and joyfully screaming together with Jesus out of tune, "I don't care about you! Fuck you!"

Slipknot

Richard Goode's picture

The Reverend B. Goode lost one of his angels yesterday.

Paul Gray RIP. My condolences go to his family, and the remaining band members.

For the record, I'm no fan of Slipknot. (I listened to one of their albums once. I didn't like it at all.)

Celebrate the Death of Filth!

Well, at least that's a step up from celebrating the life of filth.

Gray's a bad boy with a very winning grin, don't you think?

Scott

Lindsay Perigo's picture

I wouldn't say that I attack you. I would say that we have some strident disagreements on the issues, and you do not take well to dissent.
I mean, you ALLOW it on your site, to your credit. But you seem to regard it as a character flaw or evidence of irredeemable evil.

I do not regard good-faith dissent in that way at all. One of the things I hold against Establishment Objectivism is that it doesn't allow good-faith dissent. But you seem to expect to be able to tell me I'm wasting my time with the music thing without incurring a "strident" response. Apart from anything else, that would be frightfully dull. You and I having at it are the best show in town.

In short, your value system is kind of off-kilter. You have a problem with designating most everything as an absolute. Many things ARE absolute, and "black or white" makes up the core of the human decision-making process, but it is a gross oversimplification.

Filth is filth. Objectivists are held back from calling Slipknot filth because of Rand's saying we can't yet judge music objectively. Calling filth filth is part of creating a culture of nobility in which filth would die for want of voluntary sanction.

You have a problem understanding context, and how in any context, there is always A most pressing issue. You still seem not to understand it. You seem to able to accept the lesser of two evils in some contexts, but denounce doing so in others. For example, you would support Sarah Palin over Joe Biden, but would sooner listen to the entire Slipknot discography than consider a man who is 100x the rational person and 1000x times the Objectivist as that same Sarah Palin.

I've already said if it came to Paul vs. Obama I'd vote for Paul, invoking the very thing you mention: context. But to root for Paul at this stage of the game is flat-out crazy.

Now come on, DeSalvo, you big galoot. Leonard has now recognised that socialism is not dead and the biggest danger is not from an imminent Christian theocracy. I'd be stunned, however, if he were to endorse Ron or Rand Paul any time soon. Let's all wait for more candidates to emerge and root for the best one.

In the meantime, I shall continue to wage war on all forms of unreason, including headbanging and goblinism—and I don't need a permission slip from you! Sticking out tongue

A reply

atlascott's picture

Milsop DeSalvo replies:

"...will Islam's useful idiots like DeSalvo, who, not coincidentally, attack me for my anti-filth stance as much as they do for my anti-Islam, anti-Christian, anti-goblin, anti-pomowanking stance, admit that I'm right to equate Islamo-Fascist terrorism and goblinism and pomowankery generally with musical terrorism, notwithstanding their philistine ignorance of the connection?"

For the, like, millionth time: filth is filth. Good is good. Good is better than filth. Great is better than good. Sublime is the cat's meow.

I wouldn't say that I attack you. I would say that we have some strident disagreements on the issues, and you do not take well to dissent.

I mean, you ALLOW it on your site, to your credit. But you seem to regard it as a character flaw or evidence of irredeemable evil.

I think your anti-filth stance is correct. Bad art with shit themes are certainly a symptom of a troubled culture. And I personally find well executed, beautiful art much more gratifying than, for example, sludge like Slayer, Slipknot. It is hard ti imagine how someone can listen to Slipknot or Slayer and feel ennobled by the experience. Instead, it is sort of adolescent anger type bubblegum music with crummy themes. Some impressive technical performance, but as important as that might be, it is not the whole story. Impressive playing of scales tells no story, and a great theme poorly done also fails to inspire.

My entire position on esthetics is that it is not as 1::1 as you claim. Since you DO believe there is a direct, scientifically demonstrable 1::1 between a person's sense of life and their favorite painting or favorite song, I was wondering whether you could set it out for me, and you cannot.

You are utterly pissing in the wind wasting your breath decrying Christianity. This is sort of "college freshman" stuff. And you do it for the same reason that you favor "fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here" (somehow, without any occupation, which is another serious contradiction) and for the same reason that you consider art to be American's greatest and most pressing threat.

In short, your value system is kind of off-kilter. You have a problem with designating most everything as an absolute. Many things ARE absolute, and "black or white" makes up the core of the human decision-making process, but it is a gross oversimplification.

You have a problem understanding context, and how in any context, there is always A most pressing issue. You still seem not to understand it. You seem to able to accept the lesser of two evils in some contexts, but denounce doing so in others. For example, you would support Sarah Palin over Joe Biden, but would sooner listen to the entire Slipknot discography than consider a man who is 100x the rational person and 1000x times the Objectivist as that same Sarah Palin.

You're not perfect. You're still better than about 99.7% of the world's population, which is something.

So cry about it all you want. Your house, your nickle.

But at least the record is a bit straighter now.

Hung himself on a slipknot?

Marcus's picture

"Was this the member of Slipknot I often quote who said that if the "music" of his band were indeed "music to commit suicide by," then "we must be doing something right"?"

I wouldn't know Mr Slipknot from Mrs Slipknot. I seem to vaguely recall you saying it was the drummer, no?

You're the one who should remember! You quoted it enough times!
...................................................................................................

Slipknot: Paul 'the Pig' Gray remembered

The bassist with the masked metalheads, who died suddenly yesterday, was integral to the group's overall aesthetic

http://www.guardian.co.uk/musi...
....................................................................................................

OMG! The delicious irony.

You can almost imagine the priest now...

'Today we pay tribute to 'pig' of slipknot.

Lovingly hated and despised by his friends.

He filled the world with bile-filled joy at his top ten hit, 'I want to kill, kill, kill!'

He sung intoxicating words of beautiful spite to his ever-suffering girlfriend in the memorable, 'I am going to slap my bitch up!'

Yes, we pay tribute...etc..'

Celebrate the Death of Filth!

Lindsay Perigo's picture

First of all, good riddance to bad rubbish. Was this the member of Slipknot I often quote who said that if the "music" of his band were indeed "music to commit suicide by," then "we must be doing something right"? Has he topped himself in accordance with his own strictures, as I encouraged him to do? If so, Bravo!!

Second, will the milksops who quail at my depiction of the likes of Slipknot and Slayer as "filth" now acknowledge I am on the money?

Third, will the double-agents like Maurone who pretend to be "Objectivish" while offering apologetics for pomowanking filth of the Slipknot ilk, fess up to their true, pro-filth agenda?

Fourth, will Islam's useful idiots like DeSalvo, who, not coincidentally, attack me for my anti-filth stance as much as they do for my anti-Islam, anti-Christian, anti-goblin, anti-pomowanking stance, admit that I'm right to equate Islamo-Fascist terrorism and goblinism and pomowankery generally with musical terrorism, notwithstanding their philistine ignorance of the connection?

Fifth, will senior Objectivists, finally—and here I mean folk like *you*, Yaron Brook and Leonard Peikoff—come to acknowledge that filth is objectively inferior to Romantic Music, and embrace this fact as a proselytizing tool, as I've been urging since Music of the Gods? Will they educate themselves musically, stop being so esthetically lazy and grow out of the headbanging and meandering jazz that are part of the bankrupt culture we are supposed to repudiate?

I've no doubt the answer to my 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th questions will be a resounding "No!" A "No!" that has the tacit, lumpen endorsement of the ARI, TAS and their sundry bit-playing butt-lickers on obscure vanity-blogs who don't begin to get it and should never go near Objectivism, given that The Romantic Manifesto is gloriously, incontrovertibly real and true!

Newsflash! Slipknot bass player found dead!

Marcus's picture

Slipknot bass player found dead

Heavy metal band Slipknot's bassist Paul Gray has been found dead in a hotel room.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20...
.............................................................................

I think you're rant was a little too good. The Reverend B. Goode lost one of his angels yesterday. He couldn't face another moment without his angry goblin! Evil

Rosie

Lindsay Perigo's picture

There's been an update. The recording of the shrieking from hell has been shown to be fraudulent, much to the surprise and consternation of dumb Christians (sorry about the redundancy). It's actually a doctored recording of a Slayer concert, though researchers are unable to ascertain if the shrieking is by the performers or the audience or both. They add, however, that it represents a credible simulation of what a hell might be like.

This tangent is your response to the lonely goblin story, is it, Rosie?

More like ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... it should be made into a picture book for adults to be read to by children.

This story...

Olivia's picture

would make great bedtime devotional reading for atheists and christians alike, it should be made into a picture book for children to be read to by adults. Imagine what a good illustrator could do with the pictures.

Oh dear Rosie....

Marcus's picture

...you're going straight to hell for that one! Evil

Linz

Rosie's picture

It would seem that you have something in common with the writer of the article about hell. Eye

Free Will or Fatalism?

Doug Bandler's picture

The problem for theists is to reconcile free will with the Judeo-Christian god's supposed omniscience. If god's omniscience is that described by St. Augustine then there can be no free will. Augustine thought that god was timeless and therefore knew all things past, present and future. That type of omniscience mandates hard fatalistic determinism. If god knows every detail of your life and future then there is no free will and all of god's creation becomes a sick, twisted divine joke. Augustine's god is a psychopath.

So what many theists do is to either 1) redefine omniscience to mean something other than knowing past, present or future. This is often part of a larger argumentative tactic known as the Inherent Properties argument. These are ad hoc rationalizations that are meant to delimit god's actions and keep them in line with the law of logic. So omnipotence can not mean making square circles because that would mean that god is acting against logic and god can't against logic because logic is his nature. You can see the multitude of problems that raises for the Christian god. 2) Theists can also opt for Pelagius' approach to god's nature. For Pelagius, god can not know the future because it hasn't occurred yet. So Pelagius' god is linear. But a linear god is very problematic because this means that god is not timeless or "outside time". Now we have a god that answers to time instead of the other way around. Once again, our Judeo-Christian goblin runs into some serious metaphysical problems.

BTW, special kudos to Lindsay for coming up with the goblin nickname. I used to call the god of Abraham the "flying spaghetti monster" and that has its uses. But the "lonely goblin" is just as cool and less wordy.

Marcus!

Lindsay Perigo's picture

....for the Reverend B. Goode and his Church of Slayer-goers?

And for my friend Lyndsay Freer of the Catholic Goblinites. She listens when I'm on. She's also arranging dinner for herself, me and a priest from the Cathedral over the road. Eye

I had originally included the words, "Depart from me ye cursed into the lake of everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels" in the text. In researching where Jesus said this, I came across:

http://www.av1611.org/hell.html

Here we are told that the everlasting lake of fire is actually blazing away in the middle of the earth right now, and that if you put your ear close to an erupting volcano you'll hear the shrieks of the damned, of which there's a recording. Hahahahaha! There's one born every minute. What's beyond staggering is that there are seemingly intelligent adults stupid enough to believe this and warped enough to believe in such a psychopathic goblin!

Sense of humor

Leonid's picture

"He gave them the option of calling him uncool, blowing him off and pissing him off generally."
That was a dirty game with the loaded dice. Goblin granted free will by permission which is worse then contradiction in terms. This is an absurd. Goblinologians are struggling with this puzzle for the last 2000 years to the goblin's amusement. I'm sure he's having a lot of fun on account of people who take him seriously. At least one cannot deny that he has a sense of humor.

I assume this was written...

Marcus's picture

....for the Reverend B. Goode and his Church of Slayer-goers? Evil

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.