The Pentagon which is the most powerful war machine that the world has ever known is structured in the form of an inverted pentagram/pentacle with its arms withdrawn, for in the world of the all-pervasive public lie, there are no departments of war, only defense. As such it is a potent source/transmitter of intrinsically destructive black magic.
It is interesting to note that it was built on former swamp-land which was at the time known as Hells Bottom.
The name of the god Pan does not come from the same root as the word παν (as in "everything") but rather something closer to πάομαι < indoeuropean root pa- which has to do with eating, pasture, grazing etc. In greek this is called a paretymology, meaning a folk-etymology which feels correct given a surface level linguistic appraisal, something which has been happening since ancient times so you're not to blame for this. Another interesting example would be ancient greeks thinking that Aphrodite comes from the two roots aphros (froth in greek) and dite (root for entering or emerging from water, diving), while modern lingustics attribute the word to a pre-greek language substratum or simply an imported and then hellenized word from the Near East.
It seems like Lucifer is similar, and Ahriman roughly maps to how I use Satan (control, mechanistic thinking). A difference might be that Steiner gestures at a spiritual vs. material distinction. His two devils are also a form of excess in either direction.
"Meditations on Moloch” both popularized the frame of the egregore, and crowned Moloch as the god of the multipolar trap."
I think there's a distinction to be made in the ontology of egregores.
Some persist primarily through mental representations – implementation via neurons: Jesus, Santa Claus, Leftism, etc. We could call these mental egregores.
Others persist through human-built systems, or they're emergent from interaction dynamics. These often aren't "represented" at all until someone points our their existence. Moloch is like this – a "god" of multipolar traps who didn't take up much modern headspace until Scott Alexander wrote his essay. These might be called system egregores.
One thing I notice in your writing is the subject of players in a game descending to the “worst” behavior (A company being the most willing to employ exploitative practices, etc) because if they didn’t, someone else would come along who would and they would win out.
I’m curious why you think that spiral doesn’t continue until everything is truly awful (What other forces are pushing back on it). And also settings in which that descent has less power compared to other more “pro-social” forces.
Just following those gradients, it would spiral to the worst, that's why it's called a race to the bottom.
There are better attractors and forces pushing back on it, but it's hard to articulate. A previous piece "new game+" is an early attempt, will write more about it.
How does this tendency of evil to create a race to the bottom play out in a grander scale of biological evolution? Is this which we perceive as evil, in actuality, a process of evolution and will, in the end, create a superior species not riddled by susceptibility to these demons?
If this brilliant series of articles doesn’t become a book at some point I’ll never stop believing it should
Roundabout way to say this all needs to be packaged up and released into the world
It’s the clearest, most convincing conceptual framework for understanding why things don’t work that I’ve ever read
thank you, William
This reference provides a very sobering assessment of the human situation in "2026"
http://www.projectcensored.org/ai-war-machine-superorganism
The Pentagon which is the most powerful war machine that the world has ever known is structured in the form of an inverted pentagram/pentacle with its arms withdrawn, for in the world of the all-pervasive public lie, there are no departments of war, only defense. As such it is a potent source/transmitter of intrinsically destructive black magic.
It is interesting to note that it was built on former swamp-land which was at the time known as Hells Bottom.
The name of the god Pan does not come from the same root as the word παν (as in "everything") but rather something closer to πάομαι < indoeuropean root pa- which has to do with eating, pasture, grazing etc. In greek this is called a paretymology, meaning a folk-etymology which feels correct given a surface level linguistic appraisal, something which has been happening since ancient times so you're not to blame for this. Another interesting example would be ancient greeks thinking that Aphrodite comes from the two roots aphros (froth in greek) and dite (root for entering or emerging from water, diving), while modern lingustics attribute the word to a pre-greek language substratum or simply an imported and then hellenized word from the Near East.
Appreciate the correction!
Curious how your ontology compares to the Ahriman vs Lucifer one of Rudolf Steiner
It seems like Lucifer is similar, and Ahriman roughly maps to how I use Satan (control, mechanistic thinking). A difference might be that Steiner gestures at a spiritual vs. material distinction. His two devils are also a form of excess in either direction.
"Meditations on Moloch” both popularized the frame of the egregore, and crowned Moloch as the god of the multipolar trap."
I think there's a distinction to be made in the ontology of egregores.
Some persist primarily through mental representations – implementation via neurons: Jesus, Santa Claus, Leftism, etc. We could call these mental egregores.
Others persist through human-built systems, or they're emergent from interaction dynamics. These often aren't "represented" at all until someone points our their existence. Moloch is like this – a "god" of multipolar traps who didn't take up much modern headspace until Scott Alexander wrote his essay. These might be called system egregores.
I think that's a useful distinction!
Thank you for creating this and sharing it.
Good read!
One thing I notice in your writing is the subject of players in a game descending to the “worst” behavior (A company being the most willing to employ exploitative practices, etc) because if they didn’t, someone else would come along who would and they would win out.
I’m curious why you think that spiral doesn’t continue until everything is truly awful (What other forces are pushing back on it). And also settings in which that descent has less power compared to other more “pro-social” forces.
Just following those gradients, it would spiral to the worst, that's why it's called a race to the bottom.
There are better attractors and forces pushing back on it, but it's hard to articulate. A previous piece "new game+" is an early attempt, will write more about it.
It can't be denied, good or bad
We live in exciting times
How does this tendency of evil to create a race to the bottom play out in a grander scale of biological evolution? Is this which we perceive as evil, in actuality, a process of evolution and will, in the end, create a superior species not riddled by susceptibility to these demons?