[Intro] Hi R/ModClub, I am AnarchoHeathen from R/Asatru

You call Aleglad a troll, but he's more like our thyle. If people make outrageous claims, act like dicks, declare something dumb to be the One True Way, he'll call them on it.

This was his reply to me regarding cyclical time -

As for what you are getting wrong, in order to answer that, do you want it in a check list, a numbered list, a long essay, or a simple dismissal of your idiocy? I just need to know how much effort to put into this.

He doesn't sound too intelligent to me, not too friendly either. How many chances does he need to show me the error in my thinking?

https://www.reddit.com/r/asatru/comments/3c4s4h/we_have_a_lurker/csszajg?context=10000

For us the past is a dimension, a perspective that is totally relevant to the present. There are no such things as "past" events until they insert themselves as such in the present. The perspective opened by how we represent these events to ourselves "transforms" our present in exactly the same fashion the meaning we give them by re-presenting them contributes to their own transformation. The "past" necessarily participates then with that characteristic of human consciousness known as temporality, which is neither the "quantity of (measurable) time," as is commonly assumed today, nor the duration evoked by Bergson, which is the property of non-human nature—temporality belongs to man alone. Life as "worry" (Sorge) is extensive of itself as Heidegger put it; therefore, it does not fit into any pre-established temporal framework. Man is nothing but a project. His consciousness itself is a project. To exist is to ex-sistere, to project (to hurl oneself forward). It is this specific mobility of the ex-tensiveness that Heidegger calls the "historizing" (Geschehen) of human existence—a historizing that absolutely marks "the very structure of human life, which, as a transcendent and revelatory reality, makes possible the historicity of a world," Man's historicity stems from the fact that he combines "past," "present," and "future" in the immediate present, which thus form three dimensions that mutually enrich and transform each other. From this perspective, the typically Judeo-Christian reproach of too great an attachment to the past is entirely devoid of any meaning.

-- On Being a Pagan, Alain de Benoist.

I have spent many, many months going over this and studying difficult philosophers, I know this is not easy, but still I don't think I should be met with abusive language and a ban because Aleglad wants to act like a smartass with something that obviously is going over his head.

As for what you are getting wrong, in order to answer that, do you want it in a check list, a numbered list, a long essay, or a simple dismissal of your idiocy? I just need to know how much effort to put into this.

Aleglad, if you read this I'll take the long essay. I have given two sources now from two Pagan philosophers. Both have written books on the about Paganism and both agree with me regarding cyclical time. I look forward to your reply.

/r/modclub Thread Parent