~hedy's blogroll - BlogFlock

Bookshelves - James' Coffee Blog

2026-07-26T00:00:00.000Z

I woke early — it has been warm lately. It is strange how you can find a burst of energy at 5am, but today it came, for I decided to organise my bookshelves, sorting what books I am ready to donate to the local charity shop.

I picked up books — stories — and thought about the good memories I had with them. I also thought honestly about some books that have been on my shelf for a while. Did I read this? Will I read this? Do I still want to hold onto this? In some cases the answer is yes. There are books I have that I know I am going to be ready to read one day. In other cases the answer is no — to let the dream go means to make room for new dreams.

Having sorted out my books, a dozen or so ready to be donated, I went to the magazines and clippings — the miscellanea. I found the newspaper extracts I have saved: stories I read that were so meaningful I knew I wanted to keep them.

I don’t know whether I found the story that helped me think about something that means a lot to me this morning or it found me. The piece spoke to me and said “it’s okay” in just the way I needed. That must have been why I saved it. Was past James doing future James a favour? Did he know there was more to read in the article — more to see?

Here, now, I am sitting on an uncomfortable metal chair in a bus stop, waiting for my journey of the day — one to which I have been looking forward all week. I hold a warm coffee — with caffeine, for I am tired — between my legs, there being no other place to hold it for I need my two hands to type. Maybe one day I’ll find this clipping from my stream of idle thoughts on the first rainy Sunday in weeks on my bookshelf, ready for me when I need it.

Streams - James' Coffee Blog

2026-07-26T00:00:00.000Z

I wrote this post on Thursday, July 23rd, and reviewed and slightly refined it today. I have left the post as a stream of consciousness – a snippet of my mind as it was on the morning I walked around and saw the world.

Walking among the stream of people; of stories of life — moving forward and watching other people move forward, of the pace being set by those around you, of feeling comfort being surrounded by others; of living in the contrast of silence and activity — of the journey being the moment between those points; when more stories enter the fore and I realise how much energy I get from watching the world, both at a distance and up close. Can you be distant and present at the same time?

The barista wears a golden badge that reads Director of Happiness, written in a decorative font. Yes, I am now the sort of person who recognises the typography and notes it down — how learning helps us notice what is in front of us; how we learn to recognise; how seeing and recognising are discrete. The barista wore colourful sparkly glasses, and asked how I was to which I shared my perspective on the weather — not too warm. Sometimes we need neutral moments in our conversations; when we can take a moment to think and breathe without needing to go further. I feel the energy of all the people walking in and queuing up, like I did. There is a cycle to the coffee shop — of people, patrons and staff, coming and going, on horizons from the daily to the weekly to the eventual day when new horizons happen.

Someone carries a bouquet of the largest sunflowers I have ever seen. Sir Walter Scott holds an upside down traffic cone between his writers’ arms. People sit on the park benches; one woman takes a corner and reads a book under the shade afforded by a row of trees. Friends ready blankets.

I look down and see an engraving in the pavement. I think immediately back to a deeper engraving on a pavement in a city I love far away — the engraving in my memory and the street is so deep it must have been moulded when the stone was being paved. The moments when we see the passage of time — in the traffic lights and the built up traffic, in the stonework and the glass, in the height and girth of the trees; in the grain of the world.

The moment I walked into the bookshop I smelled the books — stacks of stories waiting for everyone who wants to spend a moment in a new world. I carry dried tears on my right hand from the dust in the air from outside. The tears nonetheless show that I can cry.

I see a book cover showing a building in Central Park, New York, a building that has fascinated me as I have walked around on past trips. Standing taller than the other buildings in its avenue, in the centre of the left side of the garden, the building is a landmark that, when seen, helps you see where you are and how far you have come.

Behind me, a person in the bookstore sings “Do you want a house tour? I’ll take you to the second third floor” to a friend – both are perusing books at the entranceway to the fiction floor. Today I learned I am not the only person who makes music in bookshops — the woman who was singing had a much more melodic voice than I, however. I like humming tunes rather than singing, though: bringing music where there is little. (I wish I could sing well.)

As I walk around I notice that even though I stick to the same track there is always a degree of serendipity — of a particular table standing out that I want to peruse, of a book that mentions the concept of the Anti-Hero in its title that makes me think of Taylor Swift. One day I will understand what a friend was trying to communicate by saying things familiar to us stand out more. Which leads me to wonder: how, in a sea of words, do some things stand out to our minds more than others?

I hear the clinks of cups in the distance. A bookmark reads “be kind to your mind” in a bold pink font with a pink flower and golden sparkles.

Θρησκεία και θεολογία με θέμα τον Ελληνικό πολυθεϊσμό - Protesilaos Stavrou: Master feed with all updates

2026-07-26T00:00:00.000Z

Κάποιος φίλος με παρέπεμψε σε άρθρο του CNN που καλύπτει κάποιες από τις θρησκευτικές πρακτικές της Ελλαδικής πολυθεϊστικής ομάδας Λάβρυς: These people say worshiping ancient Greek gods is a route to modern happiness. Υπάρχουν πολλές τέτοιες ομάδες στην Ελλάδα καθώς και στην Κύπρο όπου κατοικώ. Η είδηση αυτή μου δίνει την αφορμή να αναπτύξω τις σχετικές ιδέες μου· ιδέες τις οποίες έχω ήδη δημοσιεύσει σε προηγούμενες αναρτήσεις στα αγγλικά (δεν έχω χρόνο να τα γράφω όλα και στα Ελληνικά).

Πρώτα απ’όλα, το CNN κάνει αναφορά στην πρόσφατη παραγωγή του Χόλιγουντ για την Οδύσσεια. Σε άρθρο στα Αγγλικά τοποθετήθηκα επί του θέματος (about the absence of Greeks from Hollywood’s Odyssey movie (2026-06-03)). Εν ολίγοις, η γνώμη είναι πως (α) να θυμόμαστε πως η τέχνη έχει χαρακτήρα παραπεμπτικό, ώστε να κατανοούμε αυτό το οποίο συμβολίζεται και να μην μένουμε στα σημεία ως ειδωλολάτρες, (β) να απορρίπτουμε συλλήβδην τι βγάζει το Χόλιγουντ καθώς οι τύποι ανθρώπου που προωθεί είναι κατά κανόνα φαύλοι, και (γ) η απουσία Ελλήνων ηθοποιών από την παραγωγή αυτή είναι επουσιώδης.

Τώρα στο θέμα μου περί θρησκείας και θεολογίας. Η θεολογία είναι κλάδος της φιλοσοφίας. Πρόκειται για την έρευνα περί του τι μπορεί να είναι το θείο. Η θεολογία συμπίπτει με την μεταφυσική καθώς αφορά την αφηρημένη δομή του κάθε τι. Ή, με άλλα λόγια, ψάχνει την σταθερά κατά την οποία ο κόσμος της φυσικής εκφαίνεται.

Συνεπώς, για εμένα «θεολογία» και «μεταφυσική» είναι δύο λέξεις που περιγράφουν την ίδια έρευνα. Ωστόσο, δεν έχω πρόβλημα να τις διατηρήσουμε ως ξεχωριστές έννοιες για τις ανάγκες της έμφασης. Για παράδειγμα, να πούμε πως η θεολογία επικεντρώνεται στο θείο ενώ η μεταφυσική ασχολείται μόνο με την αφηρημένη δομή χωρίς να αναφέρεται στην θεότητα. Βέβαια και μόνο το γράφω αυτό το παράδειγμα εντοπίζω την ματαιότητα του έργου, καθώς οι διαχωριστικές γραμμές αυτού του είδους πάντοτε θα τίθενται κατά το δοκούν.

Η θεολογία/μεταφυσική εντοπίζει το κοινό μεταξύ της πολλαπλότητας όλων των φαινομένων ως το προαπαιτούμενο τους καθώς κι ως το αναπόσπαστο στοιχείο της συγκεκριμένης παρουσίας τους. Στην Ελληνική παράδοση, το πλέον αφηρημένο το ονομάζουμε Λόγο: αυτό που υπερβαίνει και φανερώνεται μέσα από τα πάντα. Δεν είναι ανθρωπόμορφος ο Λόγος, ούτε συγκεκριμένος τρόπος συμπεριφοράς και προτιμήσεων (π.χ. καλόβουλος πατέρας στους ουρανούς). Η ίδια η λέξη «λόγος» σημαίνει τα ακόλουθα, όλα από τα οποία τα χρησιμοποιούμε στην καθομιλουμένη, κι όλα από τα οποία είναι σωστά για την αφηρημένη δομή του κόσμου:

αιτία (ο λόγος που κάτι έγινε)
σκέψη (ο άνθρωπος έχει λόγο)
λαλιά και κατ’επέκταση γλώσσα (ο άνθρωπος έχει λόγο να πει)
ρυθμός ή σταθερά (ο λόγος της αλλαγής)

Επίσης, υπάρχουν λέξεις όπου ο «λόγος» είναι συνθετικό μέρος, όπως τα ονόματα των διαφόρων επιστημών και ερευνών. Και σε αυτές τις περιπτώσεις η λέξη «λόγος» έχει σημασία που συμβαδίζει με τις πιο πάνω έννοιες.

Η παρουσία είναι τάση. Έχει ρυθμό, δημιουργεί δομή. Προκύπτει δια της δράσης και της αντίδρασης, που αποτελούν κύκλους ανάδρασης οι οποίοι είναι ουσιαστικά το ίδιο με την επικοινωνία κι άρα την γλώσσα.

Ο Λόγος είναι αμετάβλητος. Μπορούμε να γράψουμε πως «πάντα είναι» για χάρη της συζήτησης, αλλά δεν υπονοούμε πως έχει χρονικότητα ή τοπικότητα. Δεν υπάρχει πριν ή μετά του Λόγου, ούτε εντός κι εκτός αυτού. Είναι ολόκληρος και τελικός μες την ενότητα των όλων που φαναιρόνονται.

Ο Ησίοδος, αρχαίος ποιητής, ισχυρίζεται πως στην αρχή του κόσμου υπήρχε το Χάος. Αυστηρά ομιλούντες, χάος αναφέρεται στην απουσία της δομής ή της τάξης (κι άρα στα μαθηματικά η «θεωρία του χάους» δεν είναι το ίδιο καθώς μελετά κάτι που εντοπίζεται, άρα έχει τάση, κι εξ ου προκύπτει η θεωρία ως μελέτη του αναγνωρίσιμου στοιχείου). Το αρχέγονο Χάος είναι το είδος της τσαπατσούλικης πρότασης που ενίοτε θέτουν οι ποιητές και που οι φιλόσοφοι οφείλουν να διορθώσουν. Εάν κάτι προκύπτει από υποτιθέμενο Χάος, τότε αυτό έχει την δυνατότητα της δράσης και της αντίδρασης, κι άρα δεν στερείται τάσης και δομής.

Ακόμα και η περιγραφή του κάτι ως «απόλυτη έλλειψη δομής», που θα ήταν το Χάος, κατ’ανάγκη απαιτεί την ύπαρξη μοτίβου, το οποίο αναγνωρίζεται ως τέτοιο. Το να αναγνωρίσεις είναι το να εντοπίσεις, το να εντοπίσεις είναι το να ακολουθήσεις την τάση, το να ακολουθήσεις την τάση, είναι με λίγα λόγια το να βιώσεις μιαν έκφανση του Λόγου. Το αρχέγονο Χάος ίσως είναι χρήσιμο μόνο ως σχήμα μεταφορικό. Αλλά ακόμα κι έτσι μπορούμε να σκεφτούμε πιο αξιόλογες παραβολές (κι εδώ, παρεμπιπτόντως, ο Ησίοδος κάνει μεγάλη ζημιά στην παράδοση μας καθώς εκφυλίζει τους θεούς με πορνογραφικό τρόπο).

Που με φέρνει στο θέμα της τέχνης και της μυθολογίας. Η θεολογία είναι για λίγα άτομα. Όχι γιατί προσπαθούμε να αποκλείσουμε ανθρώπους, αλλά γιατί αυτή είναι η φύση των σχετικών ζητημάτων. Πολλοί λίγοι έχουν την υπομονή να ακολουθήσουν ως το τέλος, καθώς επίσης και την συγκέντρωση που απαιτείται για να σκεφτεί κανείς σε βάθος. Η προσεκτική σκέψη είναι δυνατότητα που αναπτύσσεται με πολυετή αφοσίωση και συνέπεια.

Οι θεοί των Ελλήνων καθώς κι όλη η μυθολογία μας είναι ανθρώπινα έργα, ονοματοδοσίες και καλλιτεχνικές αναπαραστάσεις αρχετύπων, παράγωγα της Ελληνικής παράδοσης που εμπεδώνει Ελληνικές αξίες και που αποτυπώνει την Ελληνική αισθητική. Τους παρουσιάζουμε τους θεούς όπως εμείς κρίνουμε, τους δίνουμε ονόματα και ιδιότητες, και λέμε ιστορίες που σκοπό έχουν να διδάξουν εμάς τους ανθρώπους κάτι χρήσιμο και πρακτικό. Ωστόσο τα φαινόμενα πέραν πολιτιστικής και καλλιτεχνικής έκφρασης είναι αντικειμενικές αλήθειες. Παράδειγμα, υπάρχει η αρμονία στον κόσμο, είτε την ονομάσουμε Απόλλων είτε όχι.

Μιλούμε για πολλούς θεούς διότι ξέρουμε πως το ένα και τα πολλά έχουν ως διαφορά τους την έμφαση, όχι την ουσία, όπως η μια ακτίδα φωτός διαθλάται σε πολλά χρώματα όπου πλέον και το ένα και τα πολλά είναι περιγραφές του κοινού. Η πολλαπλότητα των θεών είναι μέθοδος με μνημονική και διδακτική αξία: ο πολυθεϊσμός είναι πρακτικό εργαλείο. Δια αυτού κατανοούμε φαινόμενα, δίνοντας τους σχήματα και εικόνες που μπορεί να τις θυμάται ο κάθε άνθρωπος για όλη του την ζωή (ενώ, ας πούμε, ξεχνάμε τι ακριβώς ήταν τα νούμερα που μόλις διαβάσαμε σε έκθεση του υπουργείου για την οικονομία—αυτά δεν έχουν μνημονική αξία).

Για παράδειγμα, μιλούμε για την Αθηνά ως την θεά της σοφίας που είναι και σοφή αλλά και αξιόλογη πολεμίστρια. Η παράσταση αυτή κινεί την φαντασία και την περιέργεια, κάνοντας τους ανθρώπους να δώσουν προσοχή στο τι λέμε. Το κοινό θέλει να μάθει γιατί σχετίζουμε την σοφία με (α) μια γυναίκα και (β) μια πολεμίστρια. Γιατί να μην έχουμε κάποιον άνδρα ασκητή που διαλογίζεται μόνος του στα βουνά; Ή κάποιον ειρηνιστή βιβλιοθηκάριο και γραμματιζούμενο; Κι αυτοί οι άνθρωποι έχουν τον ρόλο τους, ωστόσο η Ελληνική συνείδηση έκρινε φρόνιμο να δώσει προτεραιότητα σε κάποια από τα ακόλουθα, θεωρώντας τα άκρως σημαντικά για την κοινωνική συνοχή και κοινωνική αναπαραγωγή των Ελλήνων:

Οι γυναίκες δεν είναι αδύναμες, όπως ας πούμε υπονοεί η συζήτηση περί ασθενούς φύλου. Μάλιστα ο διαχωρισμός των 12 Ολυμπίων θεών σε 6 άνδρες και 6 γυναίκες συμβολίζει την ισότητα των φύλων δια των εγγενών διαφορών τους.
Η ισχύς δεν είναι μόνο θέμα της ρώμης. Η σωστή προσέγγιση έχει περισσότερη ορμή από την γροθιά. Έτσι η Αθηνά δείχνει την δύναμη της και προκαλεί δέος δια της τέλειας της ισορροπίας ως νους ατάραχος.
Η σοφία αφορά την κρίση και τον έλεγχο. Ακόμα κι αν δεσμεύεσαι σε κανόνες που επιτρέπουν την ειρηνική συμβίωση ξέρεις πως σε ορισμένες περιπτώσεις πρέπει να είσαι έτοιμος για βία. Κι εδώ το «σε ορισμένες περιπτώσεις» μας δείχνει την εφαρμογή της κριτικής σκέψης.
Ο οπλίτης που φέρει ασπίδα πολεμά σε σχήμα φάλαγγας στις πρώτες γραμμή σύγκρουσης. Η Αθηνά λοιπόν δείχνει το θάρρος που απαιτείται για να βγει κανείς στο προσκήνιο, που αυτό άλλωστε είναι και η σημασία της παρρησίας (αρετή που είναι απαραίτητη για τον φιλόσοφο—και κάτι που κάνω τώρα δημοσιεύοντας αυτές τις σκέψεις που δυνάμει κοστίζουν για ευνόητους λόγους). Στην φάλαγγα η Αθηνά στέκεται μαζί με τους συναγωνιστές της, κάτι που τονίζει την σημασία του συνόλου και δείχνει πως το άτομο είναι πάντοτε μέρος της ομάδας ή κοινωνίας που το περιβάλλει. Η Αθηνά δεν ασχολείται μονάχα με το εγώ της, όπως κάνει η σύγχρονη φεμινίστρια, καθώς βλέπει την μεγάλη εικόνα κι έτσι εντοπίζει το κοινό καλό.

Μπορούμε να ερμηνεύσουμε τον συμβολισμό όλων των θεών με αυτό τον τρόπο, αλλά δεν θα το αναπτύξω περαιτέρω σε αυτό το άρθρο.

Ο συμβολισμός, λοιπόν, έχει σκοπό να χαράξει στην μακροπρόθεσμη μνήμη τα διδάγματα που εμείς θεωρούμε χρήσιμα για την κοινωνία μας. Τα διδάγματα αυτά τα προσδένουμε στο νοητό πρόσωπο που εμείς εκφράζουμε ως Αθηνά (και τους άλλους θεούς), για να εμπνεύσουμε τον άνθρωπο να δει κάτι το θαυμαστό και μεγαλοπρεπές. Με απλά λόγια, οι θεοί μας είναι τύποι αξιόλογοι, αξιοθαύμαστοι, κι ωραίοι, γιατί αυτό είναι που κινεί τους ανθρώπους.

Οι άνθρωποι κινούνται από την αριστεία και την υπέρβαση. Τις προάλλες όλος ο πλανήτης θαύμαζε τα επιτεύγματα των κορυφαίων ποδοσφαιριστών που έπαιζαν για τις εθνικές τους ομάδες. Ακόμα και στις κατ’όνομα μονοθεϊστικές χώρες υπάρχει ανεξάντλητη ζήτηση για ιστορίες ηρωισμού και ανδραγαθίας, είτε με πραγματικούς είτε με φανταστικούς χαρακτήρες. Πήγαινε όπου θες και θα βρεις εκατομμύρια θαυμαστές του Λιονέλ Μέσι και του Κριστιάνο Ρονάλντο, για παράδειγμα.

Σκέψου πόσα νέα παιδιά έχουν πλέον εμπνευστεί από τους νεότερους αστέρες, όπως τον Κίλιαν Εμπαπέ και τον Λαμίν Γιαμάλ, και πως κάποια από αυτά τα παιδιά θα αφοσιωθούν στην αριστεία δια του αθλητισμού. Ακόμα κι εκείνοι που δεν θα αθληθούν μακροπρόθεσμα θα αναγνωρίσουν την αξία του να κάνεις κάτι το θαυμαστό, κάτι που είναι δύσκολο να επιτευχθεί.

Κι ακόμα κι αυτοί που δεν θα ακολουθήσουν τα βήματα των ινδαλμάτων τους πάλι θα βρουν στοιχεία ηρωισμού που έχουν άμεση εφαρμογή στην καθημερινότητα τους. Λίγοι έχουν, για παράδειγμα, την πειθαρχία και τον αυτοέλεγχο του πρωταθλητή, αλλά όλοι ξέρουν πως έστω και λίγη πειθαρχία είναι ωφέλιμη.

Επίσης, η προσέγγιση του πολυθεϊσμού βοηθά στο να αναγνωρίσουμε και να αποδεχτούμε εκ προοιμίου την διαφορετικότητα μεταξύ των ανθρώπων. Κάποιοι είναι προικισμένοι με συγκεκριμένα ταλέντα κι άλλοι με άλλα προτερήματα. Δεν υπάρχει καλύτερος ή χειρότερος θεός, κατά τον ίδιο τρόπο που δεν υπάρχει άνθρωπος που δεν έχει κάτι να προσφέρει. Όλοι έχουν τον λόγο τους, ακόμα κι αν κάποιες φορές δεν μπορούμε να δούμε ακριβώς ποιος είναι αυτός. Κάποιος μπορεί να είναι πιο κοντά στην Αθηνά ενώ άλλος παραπάνω κινείται σε μήκος κύματος του Διονύσου. Στην πράξη όλοι έχουμε λίγο από τον κάθε θεό. Μαζί σχηματίζουμε σύνολο από το οποίο όλοι μπορούμε να επωφεληθούμε.

Οι φιλόσοφοι σκέφτονται αφηρημένα, αλλά οι παραβολές με μνημονική αξία είναι χρήσιμες για όλους, ειδικά αυτούς που δεν φιλοσοφούν.

Που με οδηγεί στην συζήτηση περί θρησκείας. Σε αντίθεση με την θεολογία, η θρησκεία είναι για όλους. Οι διδασκαλίες της πρέπει να είναι κατανοητές κι εφαρμόσιμες από τον κάθε άνθρωπο. Όλοι πρέπει να νιώθουν πως συμμετέχουν. Οι τελετές πρέπει να ενισχύουν το αίσθημα της συλλογικότητας και την ιδέα τις κοινότητας μεταξύ των θρησκευτών. Να το γράψω αλλιώς: θρησκεία είναι η κοινότητα με σαφές πλαίσιο για κάθε πτυχή της ζωής.

Η θρησκεία χρειάζεται την τέχνη και την μυθολογία διότι αυτά είναι αναγκαία για την ψυχαγωγία, κυριολεκτικά την διδασκαλία της ψυχής. Αναγνωρίζουμε, λοιπόν, πως δια της δημιουργικότητας του ο άνθρωπος αναπτύσσει τις δυνατότητες του και διευρύνει την συνείδηση του γιατί δεν αναλώνεται μόνο στα ζητήματα της καθημερινότητας. Όμως, όπως με κάθε πράξη, έτσι και η ψυχαγωγία χρειάζεται μέτρο ώστε να είναι παραγωγική. Συνεπώς, δεν χρησιμοποιούμε την ψυχαγωγία ως άδεια για τεμπελιά.

Ωστόσο, η θρησκεία δεν δεσμεύεται από τον εκάστοτε καλλιτέχνη. Επειδή το άρθρο του CNN κάνει αναφορά στην Οδύσσεια, να υπογραμμίσω πως ο Όμηρος δεν είναι θρησκεία. Χρησιμοποιεί τους θεούς ως χαρακτήρες για τις ανάγκες του έργου. Το σύγχρονο αντίστοιχό είναι κάποιος υπερήρωας, ή σούπερ σάγιαν, και τα σχετικά. Οι δημιουργοί μπορούν να ερμηνεύουν τους θεούς, αλλά πρέπει να έχουν επίγνωση της δύναμης τους κι άρα της ευθύνης τους έναντι των υπολοίπων: έχουν την δυνατότητα της σύνθεσης συμβόλων, που μένουν χαραγμένα στην συνείδηση για αιώνες.

Η θρησκεία πρέπει να διατηρεί αυτοτελή κλήση προς την παράδοση κι άρα την συντήρηση της. Έτσι μπορεί να σταθεί ως φρούριο που προστατεύει τα μέλη της κοινότητας από απερίσκεπτα ιδεολογήματα ή μόδες που πάνε κι έρχονται.

Η θρησκεία δεν μπορεί να είναι ομαδούλα από χίπηδες. Πρέπει να έχει διαχρονικό χαρακτήρα. Αποσκοπεί στην συνέχεια μεταξύ των γενεών και μένει σταθερή στις μεταπτώσεις και τις σχετικές ακρότητες των διαφόρων ιδεολογιών που είναι αποκυήματα της κάθε εποχής. Αυτό σημαίνει πως στον πυρήνα της θρησκείας βρίσκεται η ξεκάθαρη αντίληψη για την οικογένεια (που στην ελληνική παράδοση είναι η διευρυμένη οικογένεια) καθώς και για την κοινωνική αναπαραγωγή γενικά. «Κοινωνική αναπαραγωγή» αναφέρεται στην βιολογική διαιώνιση (δηλαδή παιδιά) συν την αναδημιουργία του όλου πλαισίου αξιών και νομισμάτων της εκάστοτε κοινωνίας. Όλοι είναι καλοδεχούμενοι, γιατί ο κάθε άνθρωπος έχει την σημασία του, ωστόσο όλοι αναγνωρίζουν πως ο κεντρικός στόχος και η τελική αξία της κοινότητας ευθυγραμμίζονται με την ανάγκη για επιβίωση και αλληλεγγύη μεταξύ των γενεών.

Έτσι λοιπόν, η θρησκεία καθίσταται εθνική υπόθεση (όχι να συγχύζεται με εθνικισμό, ολοκληρωτισμό, και λοιπές ιδεολογίες του σύγχρονου κρατισμού). Η εθνότητα περιέχει τον πολιτισμό και πολιτιστικές ιδιαιτερότητες του κάθε λαού. Είναι το συνεκτικό στοιχείο των ανθρώπων που τους δίνει χαρακτήρα αναλλοίωτο ανά τους αιώνες. Θρησκεία που δεν δέχεται την εθνότητα ως αναπόσπαστο κομμάτι της πάντοτε θα καταλήγει στον πνευματικό αχταρμά και τον πολιτικό ιμπεριαλισμό, που με τη σειρά του θα γεννά τον υλισμό της επιπολαιότητας, τον νεοπλουτισμό, κι άρα την απληστία (κι εδώ να σημειώσω πως ακόμα και θρησκείες που αποσκοπούν στην καθολική ισχύ τους έχουν στην πράξη ξεκάθαρα εθνικά χαρακτηριστικά, όπως η Ελληνορθοδοξία του Χριστιανισμού που δεν μπερδεύει τους Έλληνες με τους Ρώσους για παράδειγμα).

Πνευματισμοί του τύπου «όλοι οι αριθμοί κερδίζουν» δεν μπορούν να σταθούν μακροπρόθεσμα. Βλέπουν την εθνότητα και κατά συνέπεια τις οργανικά αναδυόμενες ιεραρχίες αυτής ως εμπόδιο. Τέτοιοι πνευματισμοί επικεντρώνονται στην βραχυπρόθεσμη καλοπέραση του ατόμου. Δεν μεριμνούν για τις αμετάβλητες διαπροσωπικές σχέσεις και δομές που (α) επιτρέπουν την συνέχεια μεταξύ των γενεών και (β) κρατούν τους ανεύθυνους ανθρώπους μακρυά από αντικείμενα ή ουσίες που οι ίδιοι δεν έχουν την ωριμότητά να διαχειριστούν. Ο αποπλαισιωμένος ατομικισμός είναι η ιδιοτροπία που παριστάνει την θρησκευτικότητα. Εξελίσσεται σε ανεξέλεγκτη τάση για ευχαρίστηση ενώ αγνοεί την ανάλογη ευθύνη που φέρει το άτομο για τις πράξεις του. Συνεπώς, λέω πως, όχι η «σύγχρονη χαρά» (modern happiness) δεν είναι σκοπός όπως υπονοεί ο τίτλος του άρθρου του CNN.

Δεν είμαι θρήσκος για την ώρα διότι δεν ανήκω ακόμα σε σχετική κοινότητα με τα προαναφερόμενα χαρακτηριστικά. Ξέρω από προσωπική εμπειρία καθώς και μελέτη πως ο πολυθεϊσμός ποτέ δεν χάθηκε από την γη των Ελλήνων, ενίοτε ζωντανός σε κλειστούς κι άλλοτε μέσα από οικογενειακές παραδόσεις. Ξέρω βέβαια πως υπάρχουν πολλές ομάδες πλέον που δρουν δημόσια και σκοπεύω να προσεγγίσω μια από αυτές όταν οι συνθήκες θα είναι κατάλληλες. Δεν θα βρω την ομάδα αυτή για να συζητήσω θεολογία, αν κι αυτή είναι μια ενδιαφέρουσα παράπλευρη δραστηριότητα. Θα πάω με στόχο να δημιουργήσω εθνική κοινότητα.

Θα μπορούσα θεωρητικά να γίνω Χριστιανός, αλλά η θρησκεία αυτή δεν είναι επαρκώς εθνική καθώς διατηρεί τις οικουμενικές φιλοδοξίες της καθώς και τις Ιουδαϊκές της βάσεις. Η εθνότητα είναι ο κεντρικός άξονας. Δεν θέλω οι Κινέζοι, οι Γερμανοί, ή οι Άραβες, να γίνουν Έλληνες, αλλά ούτε κι οι Έλληνες να γίνουν κάτι άλλο. Κάθε έθνος έχει τις ιδιαιτερότητες του. Ποικιλομορφία δια της τοπικότητας είναι ένα από τα χαρακτηριστικά του ανθρώπινου είδους. Άνθρωπος από άλλο πολιτισμικό γίγνεσθαι μπορεί εν δυνάμει να ενταχθεί στον Ελληνισμό νοουμένου πως ακολουθεί τα Ελληνικά ήθη και έθιμα και έχει στενές προσωπικές σχέσεις με μέλη της εθνικής κοινότητας.

Μια εθνική θρησκεία δεν πασχίζει να πείσει κανέναν για την ορθότητα των προτάσεων της. Δεν επιτελεί αποστολικό έργο ούτε θα επιβραβεύσει αυτόν που θέλει να αλλάξει πίστη. Το έθνος ως βιολογική και πολιτισμική πραγματικότητα αναπτύσσεται οργανικά.

Έχω θεολογία, ωστόσο αφηρημένες σκέψεις χωρίς θρησκεία δεν οδηγούν πουθενά. Οι στοχαστές που δεν σκέφτονται πρακτικά θα καταλήξουν να ασχολούνται με επιμέρους θέματα ενώ χάνουν την ουσία της θρησκευτικότητας, που είναι η εθνικώς προσδιορισμένη κοινότητα στο βάθος του χρόνου. Εάν δεν έχεις κοινότητα ή αν η υποτυπώδης κοινότητα που έχεις δεν φαίνεται πως θα ζήσει χωρίς εσένα, τότε δεν έχεις θρησκεία.

Στην περίπτωση μου, η εθνότητα μου είναι Ελληνική διότι μεγάλωσα σε Ελληνικό χώρο και έτυχα της Ελληνικής παιδείας/παράδοσης. Το ότι είμαι Έλληνας δεν σημαίνει πως προσδιορίζομαι έναντι άλλων ως, ας πούμε, ανώτερος άνθρωπος. Όχι, η εθνική συνείδηση δεν είναι το ίδιο με την ξενοφοβία. Το ζην Ελληνικώς αφορά τον τρόπο που προσεγγίζουμε τον κόσμο και περιλαμβάνει μεταξύ άλλων και το ιδανικό της Ξενίας, που συμβολίζεται δια του Ξένιου Ζευς (όπως π.χ. στην Ομήρου Οδύσσεια). Εκτιμώ την εθνότητα ως μέσο που συσπειρώνει τους ανθρώπους. Μεταξύ των ομοεθνών υπάρχει η φυσική αλληλεγγύη και το αίσθημα της συλλογικότητας ως συμμετοχή στο κοινό πολιτισμικό αγαθό. Είδαμε πρόσφατα πως εκατομμύρια Ισπανών ένωσαν τις φωνές τους για να γιορτάσουν το συλλογικό τους επίτευγμα στο Παγκόσμιο Κύπελλο ποδοσφαίρου. Είναι η εθνότητα που επιτρέπει αυτόν τον αυθόρμητο κοινοτισμό. Καθήκον μας εμάς είναι να καλλιεργήσουμε το εθνικό αίσθημα ώστε διαρκώς να έχουμε κοινοτισμό στην πράξη.

Προσωπικά, αναγνωρίζω πως ως φιλόσοφος που διέπεται από πειθαρχία έχω τα ταλέντα που απαιτούνται για να εξυπηρετήσω με αποτελεσματικότητα έναν υψηλότερο σκοπό. Τα ταλέντα αυτά δεν είναι για δική μου ιδιωτική χρήση. Δεν είναι για τον πλουτισμό μου ούτε για την τόνωση του εγώ μου. Είμαι το μέσον δια του οποίου αναμεταδίδεται ένα διαχρονικό μήνυμα. Μέσα από τις καθημερινές μου πράξεις αποδέχομαι την ευθύνη που μου αναλογεί: να μιλώ με παρρησία· να εμπνέω τους ανθρώπους να στρέφονται προς τα υψηλά· να σταθώ ως αρωγός και συνοδοιπόρος έναντι όλων, ώστε να τους οδηγήσω εκεί που πρέπει να πάνε, κάποτε δια της παρότρυνσης και κάποτε με αυστηρές παρατηρήσεις.

Thoughts on Snow Country by Yasunari Kawabata - Manuel Moreale RSS Feed

2026-07-25T19:00:00.000Z

This morning I finished reading Snow Country by Japanese writer Yasunari Kawabata. The book was suggested to me by my cousin who, after our most recent dinner together where we talked at length about books, sent me a list of a dozen titles for me to read.

When it comes to books that are suggested to me, I like to know as little as possible about them: I don’t research the author, I don’t read the blurb, I don’t seek reviews. I like to think that if someone suggested a book to me there might be a good reason for it and so I simply pick it up and read it. And that’s exactly what happened with this book. At the beginning of July I ordered 3 books from the list provided by my cousin: Neuromancer by William Gibson (already finished it), Kokoro by Natsume Soseki (started reading it today and I’m enjoying it a lot), and Snow Country.

This morning, after I finished it, E. asked me if I liked it. And as I said to her, I’m not sure I know how to answer that question. It happens a lot with books. And if you were to ask me to describe this one to you, I wouldn’t know where to start. It’s a snapshot of life, suspended in time, left there hanging without what most people would consider a proper conclusion. But at the same time it felt complete, as if nothing more needed to be added.

I don’t know if I enjoyed the book, or if I liked it, but I can for sure say that it left me with something, and that’s more than enough for me.

Thank you for keeping RSS alive. You're awesome.

Connect via email :: Sign my guestbook :: Support for 1$/month

Saturday, July 25, 2026 - Baty.net

2026-07-25T13:15:31.000Z

Fence (2015). M3 testing Tri-X at 1600

Suddenly this morning, my Org Agenda was empty. It should never be empty. Emacs had already been running, idle, so I've no idea how it happened. A restart fixed it, but it was unsettling enough that I created a separate blog script to replace the emacs-dependent parts of my blogging workflow. Now I can do blog journal or blog post or blog cover in a terminal, and it does the right thing, then opens the file in $VISUAL. Feels safer this way. The Emacs functions were 90% just calling out to existing shell scripts anyway, so there's only a small amount of duplication.

I've spent several hours this morning making stuff work on my Mac that already worked fine on Linux, because "what if?". It's exhausting. On the plus side, I'm editing this post in BBEdit, which is always just so damn comfortable.

✍️ Reply by email

The Royal Mile - James' Coffee Blog

2026-07-25T00:00:00.000Z

I wrote the following while standing on the Royal Mile in Edinburgh, listening to music and watching the world.

The joy of closing your eyes and being able to listen to the bagpipes. I look into the distance and see a traffic cone on the head of a statue. I notice how much busier it is than in previous weeks — how a place comes alive at different times, and in different months and seasons. The joy of standing in the busy city and watching the world move around you — people sauntering and thinking and looking and catching and eating and speaking and jumping and being, of the crowds gathering to watch and hear the piper. Of letting the wind blow through my hair while the sun shines and the music plays; standing next to raised beds of flowers // the colours of green and pink and purple and white are soothing.

Friday, July 24, 2026 - Baty.net

2026-07-24T09:40:12.000Z

What I should be doing is creating new things rather than constantly rearranging the things I already have.

Maybe I like to switch between operating systems because it feels like rearranging my office. A fresh view feels good. Today I'm running Dank Linux as my desktop. It's so weird and I dig it.

✍️ Reply by email

Poem: From sea you come - Protesilaos Stavrou: Master feed with all updates

2026-07-24T00:00:00.000Z

From sea you come
to sea you go
on this summer day
as sun and horizon touch
take the initiative
to find your people
and live with the hope
that the dryads
will let you join
the golden dog
on another hike

Neal Stephenson on writing by hand - Baty.net

2026-07-23T19:32:39.000Z

Neal Stephenson: Writing by Hand is Good for your Brain - Here's how to do it:

About twenty-five years ago I stopped composing at the keyboard and switched over to fountain pen on paper. Since then I have written many thousands of pages that way. The manuscript of The Baroque Cycle was a stack of handwritten pages 42 inches high.

Good lord, how cool is that? As a fountain pen using, hand-writing sort, I found this to be a great read.

(h/t Sal)

✍️ Reply by email

Disclosure Day (2026) ★★★★ - Baty.net

2026-07-23T16:10:44.000Z

I've heard so many people complaining about Disclosure Day that I expected to be disappointed. I wasn't. It was a fun ride. It gets a little Spielberg-ey at times, but I didn't mind.

✍️ Reply by email

Thursday, July 23, 2026 - Baty.net

2026-07-23T12:42:56.000Z

My one vice. Speed Graphic. HP5+. New55 Monobath R5

I can hardly be bothered writing things anymore. I get an idea for a blog post and thinking about all the words I'd have to come up with makes it just sort of fizzle out. It's a phase, right?

Mainspring could be handy. "Mainspring reveals the settings macOS hides — as one-click, fully reversible power-ups. Wind it up exactly how you like it; unwind any change just as fast."

I would probably buy it, but it overlaps a lot with Supercharge which I already own.

(via Web Excursions for July 23rd, 2026 - BrettTerpstra.com)

✍️ Reply by email

One newsletter to rule them all - Manuel Moreale RSS Feed

2026-07-23T07:15:00.000Z

This is a PSA post, and the TLDR is this: if you were subscribed to one of my newsletters, you should log into the Buttondown portal and make sure your preferences are correct. Also, I updated the domain name used, and new emails will arrive from thoughts@walks.manuelmoreale.dev, so make sure your email doesn’t treat it as spam.

I mentioned in a previous post that I have done some work on the newsletter side of my digital life. I used to have 4 different newsletters; I’m now down to just one, and I intend to keep it that way. I renamed it “Thoughts and Walks” because those are the two main topics I write about.

The newsletter is the result of the merging of two previous newsletters: my RSS-to-inbox automated newsletter, that was there for the people who enjoy getting the content of my blog in their inbox, and From the Summit, my newsletter about the outdoors. If you were subscribed to one or the other—or both—you are already on the new list, and you are tagged accordingly.

And tags are how I’m going to manage this newsletter moving forward. There are currently three you can choose from by logging into Buttondown’s portal.

Blog Followers is how I tagged my old RSS-to-inbox newsletter. If you select that tag you’ll get all the content I publish here on the site, except for the From the Summit posts. Again, this exists as a convenience for those who prefer to consume content inside their email client.

From the Summit is my old standalone newsletter. If you select this tag you’ll get all the posts that are part of my From the Summit series, where I share my hikes and my random adventures out in nature.

Newsletter Exclusive is pretty self explanatory. This is reserved for content I only share via newsletter. If you prefer to consume content on my blog but don’t want to miss out on what I share via email, just pick this one. I don’t know how many of these I’ll send, maybe a couple a year.

Those are the three currently available tags, but I do not exclude the possibility of adding more in the future.

Important note: if you subscribe now, and do not pick any tag, you’ll receive all the content. So NO TAGS = ALL TAGS. If you care about getting only some of the content, make sure to customise your preferences.

Also, I set up a custom domain name to send these emails moving forward. Rather than using the default domain, I’m now sending from thoughts@walks.manuelmoreale.dev. Why .dev and not .com, you might be wondering. Well, because I don’t want to mess with the email settings of my primary work domain name, and I have a .dev just sitting there so I might as well use that instead. There’s a non-zero chance your inbox might treat this new address as spam, so watch out for that.

Thank you for keeping RSS alive. You're awesome.

Connect via email :: Sign my guestbook :: Support for 1$/month

Attending a rite related to Dioskouri - Protesilaos Stavrou: Master feed with all updates

2026-07-22T00:00:00.000Z

When you act, strange things happen. Yesterday I wrote Religion and theology in light of the Greek gods and now I have the chance to meet relevant people.

This Sunday I will join a group of Greek polytheists (ethnic Greek religion) from Cyprus in a rite related to Dioskouri at a temple overlooking the sea.

My immediate plan is to not record anything from the event, out of respect for other people’s privacy. Though I might take a selfie.

My long-term objective is to form a tightly knit community or otherwise join and contribute to an existing one.

We are what we do, not what we claim.

Tuesday, July 21, 2026 - Baty.net

2026-07-21T19:48:07.000Z

Stella's Lounge (2019)

I must be in a funk because I plugged the Mac Mini back in and I'm typing on it now. I just didn't feel like thinking about the computer and macOS does a better job of being an appliance when I need one. The Linux machine is still plugged in, too, so I'm back to one cable swap away from the other OS any time. It's maddening, but I can't seem to claw my way out of it.

Worse on Purpose | How Corporate Greed Killed Product Quality

What an interesting site! Also rather depressing.

papernews looks right up my alley: "news and articles nicely rendered as calm pdf for readers" but it also looks like a lot of fuss and I just don't have the energy for it right now.

✍️ Reply by email

Religion and theology in light of the Greek gods - Protesilaos Stavrou: Master feed with all updates

2026-07-21T00:00:00.000Z

A friend of mine told me about this CNN article which covers the religious practices of a polytheistic group in Athens. These people say worshiping ancient Greek gods is a route to modern happiness. There are many such groups, including in Cyprus where I live. The news story gives me the pretext to comment on some related topics that I have already covered in one way or the other in previous publications.

First off, they make a reference to the latest film about the Odyssey. I have expounded on my opinion about the absence of Greeks from Hollywood’s Odyssey movie (2026-06-03). The gist is to (i) understand art as symbolic so that you are not an idolater in practice, (ii) ignore Hollywood because the kinds of people it promotes are typically corrupt, and (iii) the absence or presence of Greeks is a distraction.

Now to the topic of religion and theology. Theology is a branch of philosophy. It is what we do to understand what might be the divine. Theology necessarily overlaps with metaphysics, for it pertains to the abstract structure of all that is. Or, to put it differently, it wants to understand what is the pattern or reason by which the world of physics unfolds.

To me, “theology” and “metaphysics” are two words for the same study, though I am content with keeping them conceptually distinct in the interest of communicating different types of emphasis. For example, theology focuses on god while metaphysics is concerned with abstract structure without mentioning god. Though even writing this out makes me notice the arbitrariness of the distinction, but whatever.

What theology/metaphysics does is discern the common in the multitude of all phenomena as that which is both a precondition for them as well as the irreducible factor in their manifestation. In the Greek tradition, god is Logos (Λόγος): that which transcends and permeates all. It is neither human-like, nor agentic, nor disposed a certain way (e.g. as benevolent sky father). Logos literally means all of the following, which we commonly employ in everyday Greek parlance:

reason (the cause of something);
reason (as in reasonableness);
speech (and by extension language);
ratio (and by extension pattern or structure).

Plus there are other common uses, such as the suffix “-logy” that we find in the English name of various fields of study. Those applications are consistent with the aforementioned.

Presence has pattern. It has ratio, it forms structure. It unfolds through cause and effect in what effectively is a feedback loop that is indistinguishable from communication and thus language.

Logos is constant. It is. We may say “it always is” for effect, though we do not imply temporality or locality: there is no before or after it, nor inside and outside of it. It is total and complete in its oneness.

Hesiod, an ancient poet, claims that in the beginning there was Chaos. Strictly speaking, chaos refers to the absence of structure (so “chaos theory” in mathematics is not the same thing because it still is about pattern, for it discerns something to be studied and reasoned about, hence theory). A primordial Chaos is the kind of careless claim that philosophers must remind poets not to mention in passing. If something comes from a putative patternlessness, then that has had in it the capacity for cause and effect, else the capacity for pattern and structure, and, therefore, it was never patternlessness per se.

To even describe something as “patternless” necessarily requires that it exists as patternless, in the state of patternlessness, and is identifiable as such. To identify is to discern, to discern is to trace pattern, to trace pattern is, in short, to recognise an instantiation of Logos. Primordial Chaos is useful only in a loose metaphorical sense. But even then we can think of more apt metaphors (and, by the way, Hesiod does a terrible job with some of his metaphors that debase the gods in what effectively is ancient pornography).

Which brings me to the topic of art and mythology. Theology is for few people. Not because we are elitist snobs, but due to the nature of the topics involved. Few have the patience to follow along, let alone meditate in isolation and build up the requisite capacity.

The Greek gods and all of mythology are human constructs, products of Greek culture that reflect Greek values, all realised as Greek art. We imagine them, depict them in certain ways, and tell stories that are meant to teach something valuable to people.

We speak of many gods with the understanding that one and the many are differences of focus or emphasis, not category, like the one ray of light that is understood as many colours once it is seen through a prism. The multitude of gods is a useful didactic and mnemonic device: polytheism is a practical tool. We can capture phenomena in the world and describe them in memorable ways.

For example, we can speak of Athena as the goddess of wisdom who is at once wise and a formidable warrior. This representation triggers the imagination and has people paying attention. The audience wants to know why do we associate wisdom with (i) a woman and (ii) a warrior. Why not have some male monk meditating in the mountains? Or some pacifist librarian and scholar? Those have their purpose as well, though we do it this way to communicate the following non-exhaustive list of teachings, which we consider more important for social reproduction:

Females are not weak (and actually there are no weak goddesses in the 6 males and 6 females arrangement of the Olympians which represents the equality of the sexes through their innate differences).
Power is not limited to raw physical prowess. The right attitude is mightier than the fist. As such, Athena’s power consists in her perfect poise.
Wisdom is about judgement and control. Even when you are committed to non-violence, you understand that sometimes you have to fight. “Sometimes” is where judicious reasonableness comes in.
As a hoplite (infantry) bearing a shield and wielding a short-ranged weapon, Athena fights from the front lines in a phalanx formation. She thus is fearless to come forth (we have the virtue of parrhesia, after all, which is essential for philosophy—and I am doing now by publishing this otherwise unconventional piece) and will stand shoulder to shoulder with her peers, so she accepts the role of the one as part of the many. She is not self-obsessed and thus sees the bigger picture, which is what wisdom demands.

We can interpret all the gods in this way, but I will not belabour the point.

The symbolism, then, is about reinforcing one’s memory of the teachings by fastening them upon the construct of an awesome figure who has an interesting background and looks cool in what they do. Yes, “cool” and “awesome” to get the people going.

People are inspired by excellence and grandeur. Just the other day the world was admiring the accomplishments of elite footballers playing for their national teams. Even in nominally monotheistic countries there is endless demand for stories of heroes who do something noteworthy, be they actual people or fictional characters. Go anywhere you want and you will find millions of Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo fans, for instance.

Just think of how many kids have been inspired by the likes of newer starts, like Kylian Mbappe and Lamine Yamal, to commit to excellence through the medium of sport. They do it because those footballers are doing something admirable; something incredibly hard to achieve.

And even those who do not emulate their heroes one-to-one still find elements of heroism that are applicable to their own life. Not everyone has the unflinching commitment of an athlete, for example, though everybody acknowledges that even a little bit of restraint and discipline does them good.

Furthermore, the tool of polytheism is a way of recognising the diversity among humans: how some are endowed with certain talents while others have different ones. There is no better or worse god, just as there is not one set of talents that is beneficial for society: everybody counts. One person will feel closer to Athena, for example, and another will relate more to Dionysos. In actuality, every person has a little bit of every archetype. Together we form the collective from which we all can benefit.

Philosophers can talk in abstract terms, but metaphors and such mnemonics are helpful to everyone, especially those who are not philosophising.

Which brings me to the problématique of what is religion. Unlike theology, religion is for everyone. Its precepts must be practical so that every member of society can apply them. Its lessons need to be clear for each individual to feel involved. And its rites must reinforce the sense of togetherness among the practitioners. To put it succinctly, religion is a community equipped with a comphrehensive framework for every facet of life.

Religion benefits from art and mythology because those are essential to human’s need for recreational activities. In Greek, we describe “recreational activities” with a far more significant term: psychagogia (ψυχαγωγία), which literally means “soul-teaching”. As such, we see in recreational activities the potential of growing as a person and of expanding one’s conscience beyond the day-to-day trivia. Like with every teaching though, it cannot be all about studying: one must also be practical, do some work, and generally proceed through action. So psychagogia is not a license for laziness.

Religion, however, is not beholden to the artist in particular. Since the CNN article mentions the Odyssey, I must stress that Homer is not religion. He uses the gods as characters in his stories. The modern equivalent would be some kind of superhero, saiyan, and the like. Artists can interpret the gods, though they have to be aware that they hold a special power for which they are responsible and accountable: the power of formulating symbols.

As such, religion must have a self-contained traditionalism, which strengthens the cohesion of its community over the aeons by providing a bulwark against ill thought ideologies or trends of artistic expression that come and go with the times.

Religion, then, is not a cult for hipsters. It has to stay in place for the long-term. It is intergenerational in outlook and robust to the vicissitudes of fashion. This means that at its core it has to have a clear understanding of the family (which is the extended family in the Greek tradition) and of social reproduction more broadly. “Social reproduction” refers to biological continuity (i.e. children) plus the regeneration of the cultural framing of the given society. Everybody is welcome, yes, as all people matter, though the core objective and ultimate value cannot deviate from the imperative of survival through solidarity between generations.

In this sense, religion is ethnic (not to be confused with nationalist, totalitarian, etc.): it encompasses the culture of a specific people and it functions as the mechanism that keeps those people around throughout the centuries. Religion that does not recognise ethnicity will always degenerate into imperialism, which will then engender materialism and inevitably greed (and even the dominant religions of our planet which claim to be ecumenical still have inescapable ethnic particularities, like Greek Orthodox Christianity which in practice sets the Greeks apart from, say, the Russians as well as all other Christians).

The wishy-washy, all numbers win, kind of spiritual aspiration cannot survive long-term since it treats ethnicity, and by extension organic hierarchy, as an impediment. It does so because it focuses on the short-term wellness of the individual where there are no concerns for the rigid structures that (i) enable intergenerational continuity and (ii) keep irresponsible fellows away from items they are not prepared to handle. This frameless individualism is an expression of caprice masquerading as religiosity. It is unbridled want with the attendant unaccountability. So, no, “modern happiness”, as the CNN piece suggests in its title, is not enough.

I am not religious because I do not belong to a community of the aforementioned kind (not yet, anyway, though I am the kind of person that makes things happen—and I am persistent). I know from personal experience that polytheism has always persisted in Greece, sometimes in closed circles and others through family heritage. I also am aware that there are many groups that are public all over the Greek world. I might, in fact, join one such group in my part of the world, if the conditions are right. I will not do it to discuss theology, though that might be an interesting activity on the side. I will do it to contribute to a community.

I could become a Christian but it is not sufficiently ethnic and, at core, remains ecumenical in its pursuits. Ethnicity is key. I do not want the Chinese, the Germans, the Arabs, to become Greeks or vice versa. Each culture has its own particularities. Diversity through locality is the nice thing of our species. A person from another cultural milieu can become Greek by adopting the Greek customs, for example, though this practically means that such a person commits to the community long-term through interpersonal connections.

An ethnic religion is not trying to convince others of the religion’s merits or the correctness of its theological propositions. It does not carry out missionary work and is not promising any kind of reward to anyone who chooses to convert to it. The ethnic group grows organically.

I have a theology, though that without a religion is what nerds do: interesting, but not interesting enough (and, yes, this is self-criticism). What nerds also do is get distracted by the technicalities, such as how many gods there should be, while missing the bigger picture, which in the case of religion is the presence of ethnically defined community over the long-term. If you do not have a community, and if that community does not outlive you, you do not have a religion.

In my case, ethnicity is Greek simply because it is the one I grew up in and can intuit about. There is nothing inherently better about Greekness, nor is this tacit xenophobia: Greek is a state of mind and, in fact, Xenia (Ξενία) symbolised through Xenial Zeus (Ξένιος Ζευς) is an important ideal, which is also invoked in Homer’s Odyssey, by the way, but I digress. To appreciate ethnicity is to recognise the fact that togetherness is stronger between people with shared cultural associations. When Spain won the World Cup last week, millions of Spaniards, including those who do not like football, came together as one. Ethnicity is a practical consideration of what is the most reliable basis for solidarity and its concomitant collectivism.

At any rate, I recognise that as a philosopher and a disciplined, energetic person I have the talents to serve a higher purpose with great effect. These talents are not mine to keep. They are not for my enrichment, nor to boost my ego. I am the medium through which a timeless message is echoed. Through my daily deeds, I accept the duty to speak my mind in earnest; the duty to inspire people to aspire towards excellence; the duty to be the elder brother or father figure or faithful fellow traveller even vis-à-vis strangers, so that I lead them where they need to be, sometimes with a gentle touch and at others with tough love.

Wonders of Web Weaving, Episode 11 - James' Coffee Blog

2026-07-21T00:00:00.000Z

The eleventh episode of Wonders of Web Weaving is out:

In Episode 11, I chat with flaMEd, the author of flamedfury.com about, among other things, web communities around games and television shows, sharing music interests with a personal website, community in the indie web, and more.

I hope you enjoy the episode!

Wonders of Web Weaving also has an RSS feed you can use to follow along from wherever you get your podcasts.

flaMEd flamedfury.com The eleventh episode of Wonders of Web Weaving is out Wonders of Web Weaving also has an RSS feed

Thoughts on “To Have or to Be” by Erich Fromm - Manuel Moreale RSS Feed

2026-07-20T04:30:00.000Z

As I mentioned in my IndieWeb Book Club post, I first read Fromm’s book more than 20 years ago. I was in my early high school years when I stumbled upon his work and was immediately intrigued by his way of looking at the world. The fact that he was not “just” a philosopher but also a psychologist and a sociologist meant his ideas felt more concrete and applicable in today’s world, even though his book was more than 30 years old at the time and is half a century old now.

In reading To Have or to Be a second time, I was surprised by a couple of things. I remembered quite well the core thesis of the book, this tension between the two fundamental modes of existence, one predicated on the idea of possessing things, while the other is built on the concept of living and experiencing things without feeling the need to have them. It’s a way of looking at the world that felt right in my youth, and it still feels that way now, probably even more so considering the state of the world. But what I didn’t remember was the second half of the book, where Fromm tries to outline what a new human being and a new society could look like if we ditched the first mode—which is basically the pure capitalistic and consumeristic mindset—and embraced the second.

He was certainly very optimistic, and there are passages that made me smile: seeing how convinced he was that the capitalist model was on the cusp of breaking down is heartwarming. But at the same time, there are thoughts in that second part that are shockingly accurate in describing today’s society. His thoughts about news, about the manipulation of people through advertising and propaganda, I was quite surprised to see how well they aged.

Reading the book again made me want to pick up a bunch of his other books I also read in my teens, from Escape from Freedom to The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness, but also made me want to read some of his other books—The Art of Being seems very interesting—and also made me want to read Marx and Spinoza. I might add a bunch of those books to my reading list.

Overall, very happy to have read the book a second time. I’m not a fan of re-reading books, but this was definitely worth it.

Thank you for keeping RSS alive. You're awesome.

Connect via email :: Sign my guestbook :: Support for 1$/month

On the war in Ukraine and social expectations of manhood - Protesilaos Stavrou: Master feed with all updates

2026-07-20T00:00:00.000Z

What follows is a lengthy comment on the unscrupulous interests that benefit from the endless war in Ukraine as well as a critique of certain narratives about masculinity.

Writing for UnHerd, Marta Havryshko comments on Why Ukrainian liberals love conscription.

The process is brutally simple. Draft officers, often accompanied by police, snatch military-age men off the streets, before delivering them to recruitment centres. There, many are pressured through threats, intimidation, and physical abuse to pass military medical examinations and sign draft papers. Men with serious conditions — including HIV, tuberculosis and even cancer — are routinely declared fit for service. Whether they like it or not, the recruitment officers must meet quotas; the only question is who fills them. Yet with Ukraine’s wealthy elite reluctant to heed the call, Kyiv’s recruitment crisis is becoming a class crisis too, one that could cause chaos long after the guns fall silent.

Marta’s account echoes what the BBC is reporting today on the brutalities of “busification”:

Ukraine’s military ombudswoman says such attacks are now “regular” and “a major problem” as the country struggles to mobilise men to fight in the fifth, draining year of Russia’s full-scale invasion.

The EU and the UK are content with an endless war

What happens internally in Ukrainian society is largely enabled by policy-makers in the European Union plus the United Kingdom, with the Americans in the distance. They are the ones who provide pampers to the Zelenskyy regime, in the form of diplomatic support and financial aid.

The money Europeans give to the Ukrainian government pays for the essential operational expenses and the remainder is siphoned back to European industrialists in exchange for arms deals. In other words, the European taxpayers are subsidising the European oligarchs while consigning Ukrainians to the meatgrinder.

The EU-UK tandem does not have a vision for how this war will end, other than Russian capitulation—good luck doing what the military juggernauts of Napoleon and the Third Reich failed miserably at!

Russia is clearly winning this war on the ground. They are making slow yet steady advances in the Donbas region while terrorising other parts of the country. Those gains on the frontier occur at what may seem as snail’s pace because this is the nature of modern warfare: when virtually every apartment can be used as a launching pad for drones, you cannot conduct a blitzkrieg.

Western media wants to create a different impression by exaggerating the impact Ukrainian drone strikes on Russian territory have on the dynamics of the war. Starting fires in civilian infrastructure does not change the realities on the battlefield where Ukraine’s frontlines are falling apart.

The narrative that Ukraine is outsmarting the putative dumb Russians through sheer genius and technical acumen is designed to keep the war on the agenda. At times it feels like Ursula and Kaja only say “Russia, Russia, Russia”. This is beneficial for industrialists and, by extension, financiers who understand warfare as a means of regaining Europe’s lost competitiveness in global markets.

European elites are aware of what is happening in Ukrainian society, including neonazism, and have no scruples about it. They give money and hardware to Zelenskyy on the condition that he brings the meat that feeds the war machine, i.e. the men, which is how we learn of stories such as the aforementioned BBC report or the account of Marta Havryshko.

Looking at the future, Westerners have not been sincere in their intention to sign a permanent peace deal with Putin (and to keep their promises in general, if we go back to NATO’s and the EU’s Easternmost expansion). This means that the Russian regime will likely be emboldened to continue its campaign further south to capture all of coastal Ukraine and potentially connect with Transnistria. They will stop when they want, which is catastrophic for the people of Ukraine and madness for the rest of us.

Yes, this is also costly for Russia. Even the winners of a war, or dominant powers in general, pay a hefty price for their supremacy. Just check the American public debt to get a sense of what that looks like and what sort of odious burden it is for future generations.

Manhood and public pressure

The war shall continue and the poor will keep paying for it with blood and materials. Such are the structures of power in Europe, Ukraine, and beyond, and such is the fate of the peoples who do not control their own politics.

Shifting gears, there is a wider theme about the role of men in society. Taking another quote out of Marta Havryshko’s article (the parenthetic explanation is mine):

This asymmetry [of those who do not fight the war and are shielded from its consequences publicly shaming men who dodge the draft] lies at the heart of growing social tensions. Those who champion moral condemnation often do so from positions of relative safety and freedom. They can cross borders, pursue careers abroad, and retain control over their own lives. The men they shame cannot. From the very first days of the war, Ukraine has cultivated the image of the ideal man: self-sacrificing, strong, courageous, and unfailingly committed to defending his family, his home, his nation. He is prepared, if necessary, to give his life for this cause.

This is an age-old view of manhood which is partially based on biological fact. The average man is substantially stronger and more physically dominant than the average woman. Where biology ends and ideology starts is on the normative implications of this basic reality: what men ought to do and how they ought to feel. That is a matter of culture or opinion more broadly.

Every person needs structure in their life: a framework to keep them present in day-to-day realities and to maintain their readiness for the relevant rigours; an arrangement that helps them direct their life force towards some useful project. Without structure, people are lost. They become wasteful in their actions and self-destructive in their habits.

Structure in life either comes from within, in the form of discipline, or from the social milieu as peer pressure. Discipline, especially the strict kind, is the rare condition, so peer pressure becomes intense and ubiquitous. In our case here, males are expected to do manly activities as determined by culture, such as to serve and to protect and to sacrifice themselves.

The average man needs an outlet for his high capacity for aggression. This will either be some socially agreed upon convention, which has a benign effect on the collective, like work or sport or gaming that is done in moderation, or it shall be expressed as some anti-social form of violence, criminality, terrorism, or self-harm. In plain terms, the good man is the busy man; the best man is the committed man.

All of this covers the positive side of ideology that is layered upon the basic reality of masculine biology: what men ought to do to keep society going.

The negative side occurs once emotional manipulation enters the mix to channel man’s power towards questionable ends. The average man is highly susceptible to questions of his masculinity. That is his weak point: you shout at him, he shouts back, you punch him, he punches back, you doubt he is man enough and he feels something break inside of him. He becomes insecure as soon as you raise doubts about his ability to perform, where performance is once again a cultural construct.

Women who understand this are those who control and micromanage the relationship even in a superficially patriarchical setting. And men who understand this tend to become Internet famous masculinity merchants who belittle other men in order to convert them to paying customers.

Emotional manipulation is how you take a healthy person and convince them that they are fundamentally lacking in some ways which they can only remedy if they take such and such product. Once you brainwash a man to think of himself as a man manqué, you can make him do whatever you want.

It is no coincidence, then, that the public shaming of men in Ukraine is done by plenty of women. This is a super effective form of emotional control. It also reveals the cruel, indeed misandric and oftentimes sociopathic, nature of feminist rhetoric: it hates men, it hates children, it ultimately hates life.

Feminism and its modern masculinist antipode are forms of extremism that equally undermine the moderate expression of egalitarianism. They both have a worldview of structural victimhood, an originary grand conspiracy of sorts, which is in place to suppress the talents of their allied gender. Furthermore, they both cultivate tacit or explicit contempt for their enemy gender and thus both work to tear apart the social fabric.

Both in its positive and negative applications, structure is a matter of control. When public opprobrium happens, it is to enforce the dominant view and to silence any dissenting voices. What one must then look for are the ideocentric underpinnings of the prevailing opinions. Those are never mere biology, even when they are formed around a kernel of scientific truth.

To consider a relevant example, the USA military will start screening its troops for testosterone levels. There is an element of real science there, namely, healthy levels of testosterone are benign for men and too little or too much testosterone becomes harmful. Though the end is purely political: to create the conditions for heightened pressure so as to (i) put men on a leash, while (ii) ramming through other policies under the rubric of health, readiness, “real masculinity”, and so on.

The power apparatus wants to control men at all costs so as to secure for itself a constant supply of soldiers for its endless wars. It is not the nerds congregating think tanks or appearing on TV that will lead the charge, nor the women with plastic all over their face. Those who will be used as fodder for the cannons are men who are impoverished, men who are geographically trapped, men who are emotionally manipulated to die for their masters.

Couched in those terms, we must be extra careful with how we appeal to biology and science at-large. It is easy to see how the gimmick of the “high-T” male is going to be abused as a tool for delegitimising those who oppose stupid wars. They will not take your arguments on its own merits but will instead discern the “biology” between the lines, call you a pussy, and force you into submission.

The use of science to justify ideological ends is not new. The Nazis did it, for instance, to provide credence to their racial theories and attendant eugenics. In more recent times, it was employed in the service of woke tokenistic inclusion and the debasement of skill. US servicemen will soon be pressured to do the functional equivalent of gender affirming care while pretending to only value nature.

Phenomena in Ukraine and beyond exist on a continuum of socially sanctioned values. A useful heuristic in discussions that involve interpersonal affairs is “tell me what you want, without expounding on the science behind it”. There you learn what the goal is and you may begin to appreciate how your wellness is not a factor in their grift.

Music - James' Coffee Blog

2026-07-20T00:00:00.000Z

the direction of music; the music of direction.

Sunday, July 19, 2026 - Baty.net

2026-07-19T11:11:47.000Z

I still have both eyes.

I don't know why I bother trying other tools. I'm just going to end up back in Emacs, anyway.

✍️ Reply by email