Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Yes,The Gods Are Archetypal

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Ontario, Canada

    Yes,The Gods Are Archetypal

    Are the gods archetypal? Yes. It would be extremely difficult, if even possible to find a deity that does not fit into a divine archetype. Does this mean that the gods are only archetypes?...

    I like this blog post because I agree, the Gods don't have to be "just" archetypes or not archetypes, they can be both psychological archetypes AND more.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Greencastle IN
    My views are a bit more complex than that.
    I see divinity as a quintessence or quintessential essence.
    On that level i am a deist, i don't see this divinity as directly intervening in anything nor do I ascribe to any given human traits. it is not theo or thea here.
    i see all the various gods of human understanding as emerging from within the human psyche, having filtered invoked divinity.
    that is to say that all the gods we personally know do not exist until known personally, and then a god-form or egregore is created.

    So there is that, but also i see four essences of human experience or pathworking composing this human soul. They are existential themes that work together to create all the stories and experiences of gods and men.
    i work with these more so than the base-elements of fire, water, earth and air that most work with. The scared fire being the sentience or spirit , the fire of the gods in man.

    alright so the levels:

    Quintessence - pure divinity
    Essence - the existential qualia/qualities of a thing.
    substance - the beginnings of moldable and interactive qualities
    pattern - the way these qualities are put together in structure
    form - the conception of that structure
    tangible thing - the structure on the material plane.

    The essence or identity of the thing is philosophical fire - sulfur.
    Then you can think of those qualities as an essential oil or solution which imbues a form or from which a form may arise. Here we are moving from sulfur into mercury.
    patterns emerge, we recognize these patterns and conceptualize a form. The pattern and form together is the archetype.
    Then as above so below we have the physical representation of this on the physical plain. alchemical salt, or salt becoming Earth at that point.
    Tsalagi Nvwoti Didahnvwesgi Ale Didahnesesgi
    (Cherokee medicine practitioner of left and right hand paths) - The Anikutani Tradition

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    The way I see it is that the line of difference between the subjective and the objective is illusory. Neither is more true or false..

    Everything you see around you, including the structure of your own brain if you splice it out, are but "archetypal" representations or it's own concoction of reality. So, much like a fractal, in the world we know, the objective is INSIDE the subjective and vice versa. Do Noumenons exist? Very likely. It would be fallacious to think that everything could be somehow encapsulated by our limited capacity for thinking. Just by deductive thinking alone (just take ants vs humans for example), it is easy to see that it may be possible to have a difference in the capacity to perceive much higher than ours, far more into the Noumenons.

    Therefore, how likely is it that our "brain" or "self" is an extension or "limitation" to some type of Noumenon that exists outside? What's "archetypal" then, could certainly be extensions of something far greater and beyond, presenting to us as anthropomorphized personalities, because a "personality" is how we best relate to and automatically abstract to, even though we ourselves are nothing but a group of cells. Dion Fortune's quote at the end of the article is quite apt. Not just deities, but this is how I tend to see various forms of "lower order spirits also".



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts