Peat, Blake and the "Satanic"

narouz

Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2012
Messages
4,429
"The idea of a “biological cosmos” seems strange only when it is considered against an ideology which maintains that life is alone in an immense dead universe. The assumption of a dead, unintelligent, randomly moving physical world is the creation of a series of theological ideas, which Blake perceived as essentially Satanic...."


Dr. Ray Peat in Can Art Instruct Science? William Blake as Biological Visionary
http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/william-blake.shtml
 
G

gummybear

Guest
William Blake was just a freemason, or the people we today call Illuminati. His art is so Illuminati it's almost comical.
 
Joined
Sep 24, 2012
Messages
22
Gummybear, what's with the esoteric dribble? Go ahead and explain your position including some context, seriously. Btw care to expand on ray peats ideas being lies?
 

charlie

Admin
The Law & Order Admin
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
14,359
Location
USA

peatarian

Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
313
gummybear said:
William Blake was just a freemason, or the people we today call Illuminati. His art is so Illuminati it's almost comical.

So were Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Louis Armstrong and Kurt Tucholsky.
Please stop using estrogen.
 
G

gummybear

Guest
texas peatatarian said:
Gummybear, what's with the esoteric dribble? Go ahead and explain your position including some context, seriously. Btw care to expand on ray peats ideas being lies?

It is no secret that William Blake's paintings and writings are full of Gnostic symbolism, and coded messages.
 
G

gummybear

Guest
texas peatatarian said:
Ok, but what's the relevant implication? Or is there one?

My implication was that blake was just a person working for different goals that people thought. Satanists believe the dominance of evil is the natural order; good is intrinsically passive, while evil is active. William Blake had the same idea in 'Beyond Heaven and Hell', a book I once admired but now recognize as cabalist.

"Without contraries is no progression. Attraction and Repulsion, Reason and Energy, Love and Hate are necessary to Human existence. From these contraries spring what the religious call Good and Evil. Good is the passive that obeys Reason. Evil is the active springing from Energy. Good is heaven. Evil is hell."
 
OP
N

narouz

Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2012
Messages
4,429
gummybear said:
texas peatatarian said:
Ok, but what's the relevant implication? Or is there one?

My implication was that blake was just a person working for different goals that people thought. Satanists believe the dominance of evil is the natural order; good is intrinsically passive, while evil is active. William Blake had the same idea in 'Beyond Heaven and Hell', a book I once admired but now recognize as cabalist.

"Without contraries is no progression. Attraction and Repulsion, Reason and Energy, Love and Hate are necessary to Human existence. From these contraries spring what the religious call Good and Evil. Good is the passive that obeys Reason. Evil is the active springing from Energy. Good is heaven. Evil is hell."

gummybear--
I think you're oversimplifying and misinterpreting Blake.
Yes, Blake lived at times within a block or so of both Freemasonry temples and Druidic temples,
but there is scant evidence that he belonged to either group.
It is entirely possible he adopted some of their symbols,
but that doesn't mean he believed their ideas.
I'm sure Blake was "cabalistic" in ways during is life,
but not in the Satanic sense you express.
Hard to encapsulate Blake's strange mythology,
but he generally is seen as a sort of radical Christian.
He hated the establishment, organized churches of his era,
and he often presented them as a form of evil in his work.
He also hated (and portrayed as evil) child labor and the British war-making efforts
and war-supporting arsenal industry.
And, more generally, he thought certain forms of rigidified thinking (see the lead quote in this thread)
were evil.
But no experts that I know of consider Blake a "satanist" in the sense you seem to mean.
He did invert a lot of orthodox thinking,
and so forces like the orthodox churches were often portrayed, as I said, in his work
as evil;
whereas people who believed in "free love" and sexual freedom, etc
(there was quite an upsurge of thinking and, yes, cabalistic groups centered around
those kind of ideas at the time Blake was living in London)
were often portrayed as "the good guys."
 

peatarian

Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
313
gummybear said:
My implication was that blake was just a person working for different goals that people thought. Satanists believe the dominance of evil is the natural order; good is intrinsically passive, while evil is active. William Blake had the same idea in 'Beyond Heaven and Hell', a book I once admired but now recognize as cabalist.

"Without contraries is no progression. Attraction and Repulsion, Reason and Energy, Love and Hate are necessary to Human existence. From these contraries spring what the religious call Good and Evil. Good is the passive that obeys Reason. Evil is the active springing from Energy. Good is heaven. Evil is hell."

Your interpretation made me laugh. I seriously doubt you've read "Beyond Heaven and Hell". You certainly didn't understand it. William Blake was as much 'cabalist' as he was a cannibal.

I don't know where you get your definition of satanism, either. When it started in the 1960 it had a lot to do with opposing the oppressing Catholic church and with an admiration for liberating figures like prometheus or lucifer who defied the authorities. In this they might have found Blake interesting. I suggest you read the page you posted (http://www.albion.com), you might learn that Blake used a language he knew his contemporaries would understand -- which was a language coined by the religious believes of its time.

I am sure there are twisted people with perverted believes who call themselves a lot - satanists for one, but many of them 'Christians' I am sure - but I am more worried by this tendency of labeling art and artists as being 'satanic', 'a-moral', 'cabalist' or 'evil' ... In my opinion this mindset leads to burning books -- and burning books leads to burning people.
Maybe you should concentrate on what a book tells you and not what others tell you about a book.
 
G

gummybear

Guest
Narouz, I respect your opinion but I don't agree with you. In fact I think you a terrible wrong.


narouz said:
gummybear said:
texas peatatarian said:
Ok, but what's the relevant implication? Or is there one?

My implication was that blake was just a person working for different goals that people thought. Satanists believe the dominance of evil is the natural order; good is intrinsically passive, while evil is active. William Blake had the same idea in 'Beyond Heaven and Hell', a book I once admired but now recognize as cabalist.

"Without contraries is no progression. Attraction and Repulsion, Reason and Energy, Love and Hate are necessary to Human existence. From these contraries spring what the religious call Good and Evil. Good is the passive that obeys Reason. Evil is the active springing from Energy. Good is heaven. Evil is hell."

gummybear--
I think you're oversimplifying and misinterpreting Blake.
Yes, Blake lived at times within a block or so of both Freemasonry temples and Druidic temples,
but there is scant evidence that he belonged to either group.
It is entirely possible he adopted some of their symbols,
but that doesn't mean he believed their ideas.
I'm sure Blake was "cabalistic" in ways during is life,
but not in the Satanic sense you express.
Hard to encapsulate Blake's strange mythology,
but he generally is seen as a sort of radical Christian.
He hated the establishment, organized churches of his era,
and he often presented them as a form of evil in his work.
He also hated (and portrayed as evil) child labor and the British war-making efforts
and war-supporting arsenal industry.
And, more generally, he thought certain forms of rigidified thinking (see the lead quote in this thread)
were evil.
But no experts that I know of consider Blake a "satanist" in the sense you seem to mean.
He did invert a lot of orthodox thinking,
and so forces like the orthodox churches were often portrayed, as I said, in his work
as evil;
whereas people who believed in "free love" and sexual freedom, etc
(there was quite an upsurge of thinking and, yes, cabalistic groups centered around
those kind of ideas at the time Blake was living in London)
were often portrayed as "the good guys."
 

peatarian

Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
313
Gummybear, I have to say, your reasoning is mind-blowing.
Have you thought of any 'Ray Peat lies' yet?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom