Names, words, titles and meaning.

CuAnnan

There's a status quo within the major pagan subgroup, where anything goes.

Let's face it, words have distinct meanings. Let's take creationism and the agenda that some of its young earth proponents have. Dilute the meanings of the words "theory" and "evolution". Change the context, and you can get it in court such that creationism is being taught as a valid scientific alternative to evolution.

There are countless analogs in the major pagan subgroup. The word "Wicca" now has no real meaning thanks to the ecclectic wicca coopting of the word. The word "Shaman" is being used left right and centre by people who don't practice anything even vaguely mongolian. We have, in Ireland, several people claiming to have been trained in Dakota practices and selling them.

This practice muddies the water. In several, demonstrable, instances it has done harm to peoples by misrepresenting their beliefs; by undermining their right to cultural distinction; by whitewashing history; hells the list of wrongs being done is not short.

My question is, why has this status quo been accepted?

Morag

CuAnnan wrote: »

The word "Wicca" now has no real meaning thanks to the ecclectic wicca coopting of the word.

I can't say that I agree with that statement.

CuAnnan wrote: »

My question is, why has this status quo been accepted?

Has it been?

If I decided in the morning that I am "Queen of the Redcaps" and declare myself as such people will question and laugh and then just think me delusional and for the sake of civility leave me to my delusions.

Shiminay

There are a couple of positive outcomes to this situation. 1) true seekers with good instincts will see it as nonsense and realise there's more to it and that they must look harder for it. 2) it helps you spot the flakes a mile off

The other thing too is that language evolves and is constantly changing and sometimes you just can't stop that.

CuAnnan

Shiminay wrote: »

1) true seekers with good instincts will see it as nonsense

So if you don't have good instincts, tough luck and if you do then you're not a true seeker?
There are entire organisations set up doing this. National and global.

Shiminay wrote: »

2) it helps you spot the flakes a mile off

And those who get burned along the way, hey just a life lesson?

Shiminay wrote: »

The other thing too is that language evolves

I've always hated that statement.

Shiminay wrote: »

and is constantly changing and sometimes you just can't stop that.

All that is needed for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

hogflem

CuAnnan wrote: »

There's a status quo within the major pagan subgroup, where anything goes.

Let's face it, words have distinct meanings. Let's take creationism and the agenda that some of its young earth proponents have. Dilute the meanings of the words "theory" and "evolution". Change the context, and you can get it in court such that creationism is being taught as a valid scientific alternative to evolution.

There are countless analogs in the major pagan subgroup. The word "Wicca" now has no real meaning thanks to the ecclectic wicca coopting of the word. The word "Shaman" is being used left right and centre by people who don't practice anything even vaguely mongolian. We have, in Ireland, several people claiming to have been trained in Dakota practices and selling them.

This practice muddies the water. In several, demonstrable, instances it has done harm to peoples by misrepresenting their beliefs; by undermining their right to cultural distinction; by whitewashing history; hells the list of wrongs being done is not short.

My question is, why has this status quo been accepted?

First and foremost,the words austerity,water&tax,concern me more than theory and evolution,might I suggest the athiest forum for the first paragraph,those blokes will have all the big words and intellectual blither blather you can handle.The word Shaman is an umbrella term not unlike pagan or christian,I don't know about wiccans,so I won't comment there,If you are stupid enough to sit in a teepee out in a field in longford somewhere and listen to a white person calling themselves "Screetching Weasel",or some such thing,and truly believe your not being fleeced,you kinda deserve it!! the last paragraph pretty much describes what christianity did to western/northern europe a thousand odd years ago.Don't let words and labels bother you,you might live longer.

Shiminay

CuAnnan wrote: »

So if you don't have good instincts, tough luck and if you do then you're not a true seeker?
There are entire organisations set up doing this. National and global.

You're putting words into my mouth there. How and ever, I think it's not unreasonable to suggest that being involved with the craft in general and Wicca specifically (as it's the only area under the greater paganism umbrella I have direct experience with) requires a certain level of wit and good instincts and simply put, it's not for everyone.

Let these other organisations off and do their thing, if those involved are getting what they want and need from it, then it's difficult to call it "wrong" purely on the basis of a misinterpretation and misuse of a word.

CuAnnan wrote: »

And those who get burned along the way, hey just a life lesson?

As one of the people burned badly along the way, yes, it is and yes, tough luck on me. You pick yourself up and you move along. All part of the learning process that is life. I learned a hell of a lot from my experiences, I'm thankful for them, but they didn't end well for me and so I move on.

CuAnnan wrote: »

I've always hated that statement.

Doesn't make it any less true though But I concede the point, it's the sort of thing we shouldn't be afraid to stand up and correct and it's something you'll see happen here on this forum quite a bit and it's something I'll personally correct if I hear someone saying it.

CuAnnan wrote: »

All that is needed for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

I agree with the statement, but I think it's slightly over-dramatic for this issue. But then again, you're saying that you've seen instances of it doing harm, in which case a line has most certainly been crossed - do you have examples you can share of this sort of thing?

CuAnnan

hogflem wrote: »

The word Shaman is an umbrella term

The word "Shaman" is a term from Mongolian spirituality.
That it has been decontextualised and coopted by members of the pagan community doesn't make the usage of it alright.

hogflem wrote: »

not unlike pagan

Don't much like that word either. It doesn't describe anything meaningful except your exclusion from the big five.

hogflem wrote: »

If you are stupid enough to sit in a teepee out in a field in longford somewhere and listen to a white person calling themselves "Screetching Weasel",or some such thing,and truly believe your not being fleeced,you kinda deserve it!

Why do you draw the distinction there? Why is it only if you take it to extreme that it becomes "you deserve it" rather than with terms like "shaman" or "druid"?

hogflem wrote: »

Don't let words and labels bother you,you might live longer.

It's integrity and honor that calls this question to my mind.
And as to it making me live a shorter life, I'd rather an integral honorable short life than a long life lacking.

CuAnnan

Shiminay wrote: »

You're putting words into my mouth there.

No, I asked a question in an attempt to clarify your position.

Shiminay wrote: »

I agree with the statement, but I think it's slightly over-dramatic for this issue.

Why?

Shiminay wrote: »

But then again, you're saying that you've seen instances of it doing harm, in which case a line has most certainly been crossed - do you have examples you can share of this sort of thing?

There's no shortage. There are organisations that have set themselves up adding in sex where there should not be any. And by the time you're at that stage, you're lucky if you haven't been mind-raped to the point that you can't critically analyse what's happening.
Let's face it, in the hands of a predator it's a short step from symbolic heiros gamete to rape.
Then there are people who charge two hundred euro a day to come cleanse your house with no guarantee that it will work.
I have seen both of these in Ireland. The first pretending the term Wicca, the second pretending the term Druid.

hogflem

Well I guess there's no telling you anything,best of luck with your quest to make everyone think like you,sorry if you don't like the word "quest",I'll leave you with another word you'll probably dislike,"Gadfly".

CuAnnan

hogflem wrote: »

Well I guess there's no telling you anything

Have you given thought to the idea that, perhaps, the means in which you are trying to tell is flawed?

hogflem wrote: »

sorry if you don't like the word "quest",I'll leave you with another word you'll probably dislike,"Gadfly".

I have no issue with the word quest. You could even have added "quixotic" to the word "quest", and it would have both been alliterative and a better way of condescending to me, and I wouldn't have minded.

What I do mind is your presumption as to how I think.

Unless you mean that I think old fashioned things like "truth", "integrity", "honour" and "honesty" are important in a real and meaningful manner. Because I do.

joseph dawton

You have a fair point about misrepresentation, honesty etc.

People are entitled to flog their wares whether we like it or not, it's misrepresentation (deliberate or sloppiness) that is the biggest problem. This has been a problem for millennia - 'The Golden Ass' has a section within it on corrupt priests and that book is from approx 150AD, possibly borrowed from an earlier Greek source. So this is hardly a new problem but the internet, urban myth and sub-standard publishing makes the job of sifting the wheat from the chaff harder.

We all make mistakes though (and learn from them hopefully). For instance I could pull CuAnnan up on your definition of Shaman- 'priests to Samoyedic- and Tungusic-speaking peoples' which includes the Finns and Siberians, not just the Mongolians. But that's just being really pedantic to stress a point.

My knowledge has holes, is incomplete or is just plain wrong at times. Of course I don't usually realise it until someone points it out or I stumble across a more accurate version of what I thought was the truth!

CuAnnan

joseph dawton wrote: »

For instance I could pull CuAnnan up on your definition of Shaman- 'priests to Samoyedic- and Tungusic-speaking peoples' which includes the Finns and Siberians, not just the Mongolians. But that's just being really pedantic to stress a point.

I'm not sure what point it stresses, though, beyond the self-evident fact that I am not/one is not all knowing. It doesn't undermine the point that it is not an umbrella term and that coopting it from a culture you(generic) don't belong to is not appropriate.