On one hand, the Tenebrous runic-tarot has features familiar to tarot and rune readers. On the other, though, this divination system that I’ve devised also has a number of unique features. Something I therefore wanted to do in my divination series was to provide additional commentary on the system’s omens. I’m continuing this examination with a comparison between the fours – i.e., 4 Attainment, 4 Communion, 4 Strife and 4 Innovation.
A conversation with a fellow Satanist awhile back got me thinking about introversion and extroversion. How do we define these terms, and what are their implications for humans generally and Satanism in particular? The more I thought about this, the more I thought it might make for an interesting blog entry. So here are my thoughts about introversion, extroversion, society, and Satanism.
Adversity is a quality often emphasized in discourse about the sinister path. But what life experiences “count” as adversity? This entry doesn’t aim at a complete answer, but does seek to make two points. Firstly, adversity can take many forms – including forms that many people are unhelpfully trained to dismiss as “not real adversity.” Secondly, certain distinctive elements of the sinister path can be no less relevant to overcoming these forms of adversity than they are to overcoming “harder” kinds of adversity. This entry thus bears upon the question of how Tenebrous Satanism constructively extends the salience of a “sinister” mindset beyond the narrowly-envisioned extremism more typical of Order of Nine Angles (ONA/O9A) practitioners. It also touches quite personally on why I myself have found this path meaningful.
Too often, one finds esoteric Satanists articulating “what is Satan the actual enemy of?” in an unproductive way. Our “enemy” is supposedly some conveniently-identifiable not-us group, e.g., Magians, Nazarenes, Clayborn, etc. Tenebrous Satanism contrarily contends that this fixation on monoliths is counterproductive. Having a “them” to lazily malign blinds us to maladaptive attitudes and behaviors that are the real problem. Instead, Satanists should recognize and oppose said attitudes/behaviors wherever they arise – including among ourselves. I associate these maladaptive attitudes/behaviors with what I call Dogmagianism. This post outlines some of its subtler manifestations.
In the Tenebrous Satanism glossary, I specifically mention “Harboring absurdly strong opinions about books that one has not personally read” as a trait of homo hubris. I thus associate such behavior with maladaptive arrogance, and feel the world would be better off with less of it. In recent years, however, it seems more and more otherwise-intelligent people are treating it as some kind of virtue. This post is about what may be motivating that, and why Satanists should oppose it.