Nocturna
“I grew a flower that cannot blossom in a dream that cannot come true.”
Theist Manifesto: Page XLIV
Category: Theology
On the nature of Evil [Practical Philosophy]
1. I define Good as that which Plato identified with Beauty, thus leading to my previous Thesis on
1. ~ I won’t go any further.
2. I do not define Evil. For HELL’s sake, I don’t give a hoot on wether your father used to beat you or you straight up lack of empathy: Just “Do NOT be that much of a bastard”.
Thanks for reading.
TS: On Onlotology
Ontology: Primary branch of Philosophy which attempts to study and understand the nature of Being and Existence.
The Thesis identifies with the argumentation:
Parmenides first stated: Being is, and, no-being, is, not.
Plato described a supranatural metaphysical world of Ideas. Objects are shadows of Reality, which are Ideas, and of which the highest expression is the Idea of Good, Beauty, Being or One. It is the same.
Saint Agustín identified the world with the “Mind of God”.
Nowadays Physics state the Universe is “The biggest conceivable physical system.”
But then again, what is its Nature.
The Universe is Existence. Existence is the Being. And Being is God.
Metaphysics barely “unique” inquery is “What is Being”.
I, state Being is God, as the Existence of the Universe, of Totality.
Which is a definition for Reality.
As a not-that-much-of-a-side note, this could easily lead into a pantheistic cosmovision.
Mine. Mine. Which is mine and doesn’t need to be yours, is that God is One and of a Personal Nature, and also intercedes actively in History, both microhistory and Macrohistory.
TS | On Aesthetics, Theology and Art
Thesis:
The ability to emit Aesthetical Judgements understood as Communion with God and learnable through Art.
Aesthetical Judgements allow the perciever to discriminate elements within Reality on a level other than mere abstraction.
Aesthetics have traditionally been reduced to taste. Understood, through taste.
I say everything is touch.
On an outmost elemental Physical Sphere, everything is touch.
Which is another Aesthetical Judgement.
I dare to state this ability is born within communion with God. A relationship.
If this intimidates you too much, just think of what Plato, who believed in intuition as a way to access Knowledge, would have called Beauty, oder Good.
Now only one aspect is open.
Open wide, in fact; How do you teach this?
Through speech, through acts, through expressing our souls, the true Beauty within the heart of each of us…
Which I define, as Art.
Theism as the Great Syncretism: On Haitian Vodoun.
Haitian Vodoun is itself a Syncretism. It merges elements from African Ancient Religious beliefs and some of Christianism and others…
As we can see in the video, the image shows a Cross and a Key.
The rest is pure parafernalia.
Vodoun includes a series of beliefs, of which have a special place:
1. Belief in a Supreme Deity. Which they would call Bondye (from Haiti Crole “Good God”. It is inaccesible.
2. Iwas. Sort of intermediates between us humans and Bondye. A Vudoist is meant to devote their life to one Iwa exclusively.
3. There are guides. Some of them lead us into well-hearted actions; whereas others lead us into Evil.
4. There is no counterpat to the Supreme Goof Entity. What other religions would call a Satán (from Hebrew, Enemy).
Now, let’s make a greater Syncretism.
In THEISTIC SYNCRETISM, we believe:
1. There is a God. One.
2. God has no counterpart, devil*, demon or Satán. Us humans are responsible for each of our actions.
3. Said responsibility is Judged through a “Balance”. Divine Justice may be Eerthen or after our Death.
3.1. God also takes into consideration, not only our actions, but as well the experiences or circumstances which led us into them.
4. God participates actively in human History, in a way or another.
5. Therefor, Vodoun is a way to and consists in a Prayer (id est, talking to God), for the Balance to take place Earthenly.
* A “devil” is nothing but an extremely intelligent human being.
6. Source: Turns out God does be accesible… Surprise…
Theism: On Afterlife
“There do be an afterlife, and it is exactly the part of us that makes us human, that keeps on being.”
–Source: Rick Sánchez.
God and Poetry through Creation
On Determinism vs. Freedom of Choice
Back one year, namely 2015, I wrote, on my very own, this extremely experimental collection in which I introduced Microessay, which I defend to be a whole writing genre.
Said book is called “Contado en una página (Told on one Page)”, and one of its 80-1 microessays goes as follows:
“Determinism, is compatible with freedom of choice, as long as you can accept choices you make are made beforehand.”
Obviosly, things evolve. People, evolve. And I ain’t no exception.
Now I firmly assert Freedom of Choice.
A Freedom of Choice of a divine nature. One of God’s almightiness limits*.
How do I prove it? I just don’t feel like it. 🙃
*Others would be:
- Mathemathical or Logical limits. E.g., making a sphere of 1 side.
- Freedom of Choice, as said, because…
- It happens that God “cannot” do something he doesn’t want to. And it is His rules.
- Cease to exist (…)
On the Existence of God: Theodicy
Theodicy is the arm of Philosophy (of Religion) which historically has attempted to argumentatively prove God’s existence.
These are some of said “attempts” so far:
1. Saint Tomás and Aristotelic Causality:
God is causa sui, id est, cause of Himself.
Everything has a cause. That would have a prior cause, and a prior cause… Ad infinitum.
So he concludes God is the ultimate cause and, cause of Himself.
2. Canterbuty and Ontologic Argument:
The original formulation includes many attacks against athiest and so on… But the argument is neat and follows as goes:
“God is that which bigger cannot be thought. He is also that which bigger cannot be thought, but must exist, for if He didn’t exist there would be a lesser thing, which, for being doted of existence, would be consequently bigger.”
Contraarguments have been made by many, e.g. Inmanuel Kant, but this argument is thought by many to be formally (logically) perfect.
3. Daniel Prior (I got an Ego, hum) and Gnoseologic Argument:
“Consider anything you know. Anything will do. Now consider where you learned it. Now consider where the person that taught it to you learned it.
Necessarily, we’ll come to something which someone knows, but no other person taught them.”
A more poetic formulation is: “All inspiration is of a divine nature.”
