I am the Devils’ Advocate.

[Devils' Advocate]

Hello all,

I am the Devils’ advocate. Note the location of the hyphen. I am not here as a devil’s advocate. Which is someone who takes a stance they may or may not believe, for the sake of discussion.

No I am here as advocate of the Devils of mythology, spirituality, religiosity. The Destroyers, the Deceivers, the Tricksters, the Lords of Chaos, Underworlds & Darkness. Set, Kali, Anubis, Hades, Shinigami, Azrael, Lucifer, Ereshkigal, Morrighan, Whiro, Kisin to name but a few.

Some are revered. Some are reviled. They all have one thing in common. They are the scape goats for the darker side of human nature. They are the stand-in for the blame for the yang we pretend we want no part of, but is just as much a part of us as the yin we are proud of.

We are the devils. Just as much as we are the angels. There is no duality. What makes us what we are is the sum of the range of one extreme to the other. It’s time the human race grew up and embraced that. Quit trying to blame it on some nebulous outside entity that may not even exist.

It is, admittedly, a working theory in progress. Thoughts?

 

[wil]

Is Shiva with ya?

 

[Asiza]

Hello all,

I am the Devils’ advocate. Note the location of the hyphen. I am not here as a devil’s advocate. Which is someone who takes a stance they may or may not believe, for the sake of discussion.

No I am here as advocate of the Devils of mythology, spirituality, religiosity. The Destroyers, the Deceivers, the Tricksters, the Lords of Chaos, Underworlds & Darkness. Set, Kali, Anubis, Hades, Shinigami, Azrael, Lucifer, Ereshkigal, Morrighan, Whiro, Kisin to name but a few.

Some are revered. Some are reviled. They all have one thing in common. They are the scape goats for the darker side of human nature. They are the stand-in for the blame for the yang we pretend we want no part of, but is just as much a part of us as the yin we are proud of.

We are the devils. Just as much as we are the angels. There is no duality. What makes us what we are is the sum of the range of one extreme to the other. It’s time the human race grew up and embraced that. Quit trying to blame it on some nebulous outside entity that may not even exist.

It is, admittedly, a working theory in progress. Thoughts?

I wrote a similar yin yang comparison in a thread just now, lol.... okay, I remember now *bows*

 

[Hermes]

It seems you are advocating the embrace of man's selfish nature. The nature that covets, acquires and feels a pang of jealousy when he/she lacks something. It is a battle that never can be won. The true living, freedom and happiness is beyond that. Or perhaps I am missing of the Devils aim...why take the losing side?

Hello all,

I am the Devils’ advocate. Note the location of the hyphen. I am not here as a devil’s advocate. Which is someone who takes a stance they may or may not believe, for the sake of discussion.

No I am here as advocate of the Devils of mythology, spirituality, religiosity. The Destroyers, the Deceivers, the Tricksters, the Lords of Chaos, Underworlds & Darkness. Set, Kali, Anubis, Hades, Shinigami, Azrael, Lucifer, Ereshkigal, Morrighan, Whiro, Kisin to name but a few.

Some are revered. Some are reviled. They all have one thing in common. They are the scape goats for the darker side of human nature. They are the stand-in for the blame for the yang we pretend we want no part of, but is just as much a part of us as the yin we are proud of.

We are the devils. Just as much as we are the angels. There is no duality. What makes us what we are is the sum of the range of one extreme to the other. It’s time the human race grew up and embraced that. Quit trying to blame it on some nebulous outside entity that may not even exist.

It is, admittedly, a working theory in progress. Thoughts?

 

[Thomas]

Hi DA –

We are the devils. Just as much as we are the angels.

Doesn't mean there aren't devils or angels though ...

There is no duality. What makes us what we are is the sum of the range of one extreme to the other.

I agree, but if I rephrase the angel/devil analogy as enlightenment/ignorance, or truth/illusion ... at any given moment we are the sum of both, but what matters is the direction in which we're headed, surely?

Quit trying to blame it on some nebulous outside entity that may not even exist.

I think you'll find if you look at what religions actually say, they don't do this.

This idea is usually promulgated by those who have a lot to say about what they think 'religion' is and means, rather than informed insight, whether they be inside the tent pissing out, or outside pissing in.

It is, admittedly, a working theory in progress. Thoughts?

I'd still come down on the side of the angels. At least they have my best interests at heart!

 

[Devils' Advocate]

Hermes, you did not follow what I wrote. I am not taking sides. I am saying we have both sides within each of us. Hence my comment from above:

We are the devils. Just as much as we are the angels. There is no duality. What makes us what we are is the sum of the range of one extreme to the other.

My point is that we must own both sides of our nature in order to be complete. When we 'take a side' as you suggest, we are taking one side of our being against another side of our being. How can one take a side against part of oneself? In my opinion, it is not possible. Not that people do not attempt to do it. They do. All the time. And it is my perception that this is the source of a whole lot of the misery in this reality.

 

[Asiza]

Totality .... of self

 

[Devils' Advocate]

Thomas, working from the bottom up.

1. You choose to side with the angels. There are angels on both sides of the divide though. There could not have been a War in Heaven if some angels did not choose to follow God and other angels Lucifer.

But then I never did understand why angels chose to side with Lucifer in the first place. I know the mythology of why Lucifer chose to rebel. But why did the angels side with him. I do not see what they had to gain!

2. You fail to consider when people inside the tent piss into it, and people outside the tent piss outside it. But then I am at a complete loss what all this pissing has to do with anything.

3. The angel/devil analagized as enlightenment or ignorance assumes that the first is always the first, and the latter is always is the latter. I agree we are the sum of both. I do not agree that the angel always stands for enlightenment. Sometimes the enlightenment comes from the darker side of our nature; what you would refer to as the devil side.

If we truly are the sum of both, both sides have something to offer us that has worth. It is the balance of the two that keeps us in the right direction. In my humble opinion.

4. Whether there be actual angels and devils I will leave to wiser minds than my own. I have gone around Sol more than a few times, and never have I found any answer for the yay or the nay.

 

[Thomas]

Hi DA –

I do not agree that the angel always stands for enlightenment.

Then perhaps we have different understanding of angels. Angels are 'creatures of light' as I understand them.

Sometimes the enlightenment comes from the darker side of our nature; what you would refer to as the devil side.

We tend to see that as a 'glamour' – it's an illusion.

If we truly are the sum of both, both sides have something to offer us that has worth. It is the balance of the two that keeps us in the right direction. In my humble opinion.

I see it differently. You speak of 'right direction', as between two things, I see it as light and absence of light, not two things, but one thing, a matter of presence or absence.

For me, it's a matter of entropy – that's a very Augustinian notion of 'sin'.

Light and dark are not two things; light and dark is something and nothing, Truth and illusion, the Real and the unreal. Light and dark are not two contending qualities, it's a matter of light and nothing ...

That's it for me in principle. On the matter or angels and demons, we're into the subjective realms. All I know is demons are deceptive ...

 

[A Cup Of Tea]

Thomas, working from the bottom up.

1. You choose to side with the angels. There are angels on both sides of the divide though. There could not have been a War in Heaven if some angels did not choose to follow God and other angels Lucifer.

But then I never did understand why angels chose to side with Lucifer in the first place. I know the mythology of why Lucifer chose to rebel. But why did the angels side with him. I do not see what they had to gain!

2. You fail to consider when people inside the tent piss into it, and people outside the tent piss outside it. But then I am at a complete loss what all this pissing has to do with anything.

3. The angel/devil analagized as enlightenment or ignorance assumes that the first is always the first, and the latter is always is the latter. I agree we are the sum of both. I do not agree that the angel always stands for enlightenment. Sometimes the enlightenment comes from the darker side of our nature; what you would refer to as the devil side.

If we truly are the sum of both, both sides have something to offer us that has worth. It is the balance of the two that keeps us in the right direction. In my humble opinion.

4. Whether there be actual angels and devils I will leave to wiser minds than my own. I have gone around Sol more than a few times, and never have I found any answer for the yay or the nay.

I think ever person in this thread have different associations to both 'angels' and 'devils'. They seem to exist as both metaphors and actual beings to blame. If it's possible I would like more defined. Define for instance what is associated, for you, with devils and the dark side that is enlightening.

And if we take greed, envy and hatred, do these aspects, which are associated with the devils for me, hold meaningful pursuits?

More words, more words!

 

[wil]

I don't believe in invisible critters... or blaming them for my bad decisions or natural event like hurricanes, or attributing those who have near death experiences as saved by them...

that is me. but... if future information proves me wrong... I've already learned to like the taste of crow...

 

[A Cup Of Tea]

You don't believe in mites wil? I do, I hates them too!

 

[wil]

as I said...when we develop the angelscope or devilmeter...I'll giver another look.

Surgeons used to go from patient to patient with the blood of the last on their hands...because we couldn't see, didn't know about germs...

I don't however need to make up beings to explain the explainable.

 

[A Cup Of Tea]

Phhh! You make up stuff all the time, we all do!

 

[wil]

I'll give you that...

but I don't have to believe in your little imaginary friends...

funny contemplation...many kids have imaginary friends....but they don't often play with other kids imaginary friends....we all have our own? And when we aren't with them, do our imaginary friends play with each other...

the above was all your fault... you devil... I don't even know if you are real...

 

[Devils' Advocate]

Define for instance what is associated, for you, with devils and the dark side that is enlightening. And if we take greed, envy and hatred, do these aspects, which are associated with the devils for me, hold meaningful pursuits?

More words, more words! Tea.

The difference I perceive between the standard definition of 'negative' emotions is that the negativity is how one reacts to the emotion. Not the emotion itself. Take anger for example. One gets angry. What does one do? Obviously there are hundreds of answers; for the sake of discussion let's just talk about two.

Here is a personal example that happened to me when my father had what seemed at the time to be a bout of dementia. Turned out it was a diabetes overdose. But we did not know that till much later.

Anyway, I took my dad to the hospital where they had him over for several days for observation. Then his doctor said he could go home. There is no way my dad was ready to go home yet, he needed some rehabilitation at a professional facility.

I told the doctor this and the doctor said no to any rehab. I got angry. I got very angry. What could I have done with that anger.

1. Go on a rampage screaming and ranting at the doctor for not doing his job. End result my dad would have come home.

2. Take the anger and focus it into a determination to get a positive outcome for my father.

I chose the latter. After much thought and discussion with my brother, I typed up a letter stating that according to the doctor it was safe for my father to go home. I took this letter to his office and asked that he sign it. If he was sure enough of his position he would sign the letter that it was safe for my father to go home.

Lo and behold! I got a call from the doctor a few hours later and he suggested it really might be a good idea to have my dad go into rehab for a few days, just in case.

That is using a 'negative' emotion, furious anger, in a positive way to get the best results for someone I loved.

 

[A Cup Of Tea]

I see! And we see very different things in that situation, which is interesting. What focused you was not your anger but your focused will, it almost spilled over to anger, but you kept your anger in check and chose to follow a more "enlightened" path. So you felt anger but chose reason. Again, just a difference of perspective, I can't open you up and look at your feelings.

EDIT: wil, I think you're stretching the whole imaginary friend = god thing, there might be rhetorical similarities but not actual similarities.

 

[Devils' Advocate]

No you are not correct. Will power was certainly involved. My anger was not kept in check. I used my anger to focus my intent on a result. I'm not a combative guy by nature. Anger often gives me a focus of intent that I do not normally have.

It is not a difference of perspective. At least I do not think so. If you still think it is, I would be interested in further thoughts on why you think so.

As per Wil's comment, a well known author, cannot for the life remember which, famously stated that God is the invisible friend of adults!

 

[A Cup Of Tea]

I just look to my own experiences and I how I define my emotions, I don't think I'm correct, I think this is my perspective.

 

[Devils' Advocate]

So in post #17 what you are saying is that is how my situation would have played out in your mind if it had happened to you. Is that correct? From your point of view anger has to be kept in check in order to act in a more enlightened way? From your point of view anger cannot be used in a positive way; anger is always negative?

If so, that is cool. Everyone works out in their own heads how they are going to react to the world, and how they are going to allow their emotions to react to situations. You have defined anger as always negative and to be avoided. I have defined anger as destructive or constructive depending on how that anger is focused.

If that a fair summation?