.:: The SkullFarmer Manifesto ::.

Abraxas and the condition of Perspective

2008-02-20T10:32:00.000-08:00

Abraxas (correctly 'Abrasax') is an ancient Egyptian God/Demon who is said to have a dual nature in that he represents both good and evil.

Relative to biblical teaching, there is God, who is omniscient and who is perfect. God does no wrong and God creates Satan (evil). God creates Satan to be evil and God does no wrong, therefore God is both good and evil in his creation according to our interpretation of what those words mean, our perspective of them.

It was in this train of thought that I discovered a truth in that we can choose to see good or evil in anything. Also, dependent upon our perspective, anything can be good and anything can be evil. Soldiers, for example, can be seen as a force for good or a force for evil dependent upon which side of the barrel your physical person happens to be located.

I believe that 'good' and 'evil' within the context of society are constructs and/or levers which are pulled at appropriate times to gain control of the populous. This thought has historical precedents but this isn't a history class. If you look toward your history texts while in this thought you will see examples aplenty.

I ask, and continue to ask, for contemplation on the thought of purpose. Why are we here and what is our signifigance? Does it have to do with society? Does it have to do with any of the pettiness that we bring down on ourselves? Think on it, if you will. many minds mulling over the same problems will lead to some sort of revelation.

Have you ever wondered what reality is?

2007-08-28T12:36:00.001-07:00

Have you ever noticed that people refer to reality as if it were a tangible thing? Why is that? Why do people feel that they are able to define what reality is for someone else?
I believe that each living creature is a database, in effect. We gather data from a variety of sources using the tools that we have (5 senses + intangible senses) and we then use that data to define our realities. Individually.
I don't think anyone would argue that each person feels/reacts/etc to stimuli differently. As such we are individual data filters who are exponentially prone to processing data differently from each other. If this is the basis of reality (which we are told it is) then how can we expect each individual's reality to be the same as another's?
I think, instead, that reality is only comprised of the points of existence that we share in common with another individual. Reality, then is the overlap in the Venn diagram. Reality is the inner join of data between two or more relational data points.
I think each of our existences far surpasses what most people call 'reality'.

Take my hand and walk with me, here in the darkness.

Of Mortal Instrumentation

2006-09-14T11:51:00.000-07:00

Everything that man holds as valid data has been labeled as such because it, presumably, has been put to and through a test of science. What does a test of science truly prove? It proves that man, in his quest for knowledge, has tested a theory that in a controlled environment can provide an expected result. What I am interested in is the perception of that result. What man holds true, most commonly, as fact are those things in which he/she can verify with the tools provided to the human body for the express purpose of interaction and physical manipulation of the environment; the five senses.
As a general rule, it seems that man will most often dismiss that which he cannot see, touch, feel, taste or hear. For the purpose of argument, I will include emotions under the category of "feel" because emotion most definitely is registered within the body and causes physical reaction in much the same way as other senses.
If the above is true then the next logical step would appear to be that human kind believes itself (largely) to be the center of the universe. If we believe only in things that we, ourselves, can experience then we also must believe that things that we are not equipped to experience are non existent.
The opposite of a human centric universe would, I propose, be frightening to a great many people. What if, for example, there were many things outside of our realm of ability to interpret (5 senses), existing in the same dimensional plane that mankind exists in, that can see, feel, hear, taste and touch us without our knowing a thing about it? Is it arrogant of us to assume that because we cannot 'sense' something then it does not exist? Is it pointless to argue the possibility because due to our limitations (are they really?) we can never know of them anyways? It can be rather mind boggling to attempt to reconcile the two ideas.

Are we equipped with more senses than five?

Whisperings

2006-06-02T13:45:00.000-07:00

Curse Ye, those foul and fetid winds that have blown my rotted visage unto thine doorsteps. Curse ye, the rolling thunder and the striking lightning for upon their bones and breath do I ride into your arms. Curse ye, the velvet blackness of night, the slithering slickness of shadows, and the icy moon light that now drips upon your breast and brow.

I am silent but you hear me speak. You are blind to me but you see me well with not your eyes.

There is something like the vibration of the spider's web that connects us, somehow.

All the world is a stage. You are the star.