I’ve formed yet another set of forums. Yes, yet another thing to take time away from my blogging, unfortunately. This one is for those interested in “warrior” spirituality, and the closely related subject of pagan event security. It is found at www.paganstronghold.com. I invite anyone interested in emergency preparedness, martial arts, and security from a pagan point of view to come join us there.

There are actually a few pagan warrior groups out there, but they are all local in scale and are devoted to specific pagan faiths. This forum is intended to be common ground for all of them, and is not associated with any specific pagan religion, faith, or organization. My introduction to the forum reads:

We are modern pagans of various faiths who follow a “warrior path” of spirituality. We find it spiritually fulfilling to serve our communities by preparing ourselves, mentally and physically, to put ourselves in harm’s way should the need arise. This forum offers support to those who want to serve the Pagan community as protectors and where such people can coordinate with each other and with Pagan event organizers.

Modern paganism has reached a point of critical mass at which we have caught the attention of the mass media and the general population. Among many other issues this creates for us is a more evident need for security at our events — a task we still have good reason not to trust to third parties such as off-duty police who may not be sympathetic to our ways. Our public events and large gatherings are attracting more and more unwelcome attention and a wider variety of people in general. This means that altercations, confrontations, accidents and other minor emergencies are more and more likely.

In our member forums, you will find discussions and debates about the finer points of “warrior” pagan spirituality and philosophy, strategy, martial arts, tools and equipment, and event security coordination. If you would be interested in such discussions, or in talking to us about how members might be of assistance with your upcoming event, you are invited to join us.

There seems to be a lot of confusion about the relationship of logic to faith, as if they are somehow inimical to each other. But, in fact, faith is accounted for in logic all the time. A thing that is taken on faith, in the language of logic, is simply called an “axiom.” It is something that which is assumed to be true without proof. It is taken on faith. Every logical argument starts with an axiom or set of axioms. Therefore, every logical construction, every belief about anything, is ultimately based on matters of faith.

When it comes down to it, there is always a reason, a “logic,” even to matters of faith. Nobody just believes something for absolutely no reason. A belief didn’t just spring whole in their mind from absolutely no source whatsoever. And, actually, if it did, that might still be a reason to believe it, I would think.

So, when someone says the believe something, or take it as a matter of faith, there should still be an answer to the question: “why?” Maybe the answer is that it is what they were taught by their parents and they trust their parents, maybe it is for some other reason, but there is always a reason. And reason is exactly what logic is about analyzing.

The way I personally approach it is this: for things that we cannot directly know, pick the explanation that works best. If something comes up that the explanation doesn’t work for, then come up with a new explanation. This is pretty much what science does. A scientist starts with giving a possibly wrong explanation for something that is “unexplainable.” This is called a “hypothesis.” Then the scientist tries to test that explanation. The more the explanation holds up, the more “true” it is considered.

So, faith is integral to logic, and even science. It is not the opposite. What logic is good for, though, is analyzing those assumptions. Are they truly axiomatic? Should they be? We should be very careful in choosing our axioms, and keeping them to a bare minimum. I’m working on narrowing my axioms down to a single, simple one if possible.

Another common misunderstanding is found in what we expect logic to provide or what we hope to gain by discussion. Many seem to think that we (people who are espousing the application of logic to spiritual belief) are looking for objective proof of the truth of what people say they believe. While such is helpful, and would certainly be decisive of a given matter, it’s not really what we should look to logic for. We don’t need abslute proof in something to believe it is true. If we sat around waiting for everything in the universe to be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt before doing anything, we’d never get out of bed in the morning.

We should be looking not so much for objective proof of what is believed, but the reasonableness of the belief. Does the belief make any sense? Does it fit with other beliefs (uphold an internal consistency?) Are their good reasons (including, possibly, objective evidence) to hold the belief as true, and what are they? These questions are easily confused with ones in search of an objective truth for certain claims, but there is a subtle, yet important, difference. Objective proof of the underlying claim cannot be provided, by definition. We are talking about spiritual beliefs, not facts.

Reasons behind a belief, though, those are not impossible to come up with, and should be well thought out and frequently reconsidered.

This should be an interesting experiment.  Starting next week, I’ll be trying to give meditation instruction through a folder on our forums.  I don’t know if it will work, but there seems to be a good bit of interest.  As I say in my sign-up post, this style of meditation, shikantaza, I believe to be the most fundamental of all meditative practices.

Last week, I was tagged for a meme by Ali. The gist of this meme is that I tell folks what my major, ultimate, lifetime, shoot-for-the-moon, spiritual goals are.

Ali writes about her spiritual goals. As I consider this a “spiritual” site, it makes sense for me to do the same. But, I am reminded of Zen’s “goal of goallessness,” so part of me thinks that all goals are fundamentally un-spiritual. Being goal-oriented is counter to being spiritual, to some brands of spirituality. Putting that aside, since Zen really isn’t my model of spirituality anymore anyway, a spiritual goal would have to be something related in some way to my “spirituality” or “path” or “religion,” I suppose, but where does one draw the line? Especially when considering that I don’t, or try not to, make distinctions between the spiritual and the everyday, “spiritual goal” might be a bit redundant.

To the ancient Celts, there was no separate word for “religion,” as we understand it. It was just part of life, interwoven into everything. My spirituality informs how I see the world and shapes my desires and actions in pretty much every aspect. So, I intend to discuss all of my lifetime-dream goals, however spiritual or “un-spiritual” they may seem, but they are, in fact, very spiritual to me. They come right out of my Celtic-based philosophy of life.

1) Financial Security

It seems to be a popular goal. I don’t care much about being rich, but I do want financial security. That is living with no, or very manageable, debt; having sufficient assets to absorb major upsets in our lives and give some degree of flexibility; and having a dependable and steady source of income. Right now, I have a long, long way to go.

The first part, getting out of debt, is pretty self-explanatory. Debt is a chain around your neck — it’s a slavery. The second part, assets, would be to have enough liquidity to live for about three months with no income. The last part, I have fairly well covered by developing multiple useful skillsets. I am an attorney and training to be a firefighter and EMT. Attorneys may be able to make money, but nobody has every heard of a shortage of attorneys or a demand for them. Medical and emergency trained personnel are always in high demand, and would be even moreso in bad times. I’d also like to develop other useful “production” skills. I want to know how to make things. I don’t know exactly what, yet.. just.. you know… “things.”

2) Prepared for Emergencies

I want to be adequately prepared for a major catastrophe. I am talking about the “End of the World as We Know It” kind of emergency preparation. I want to have a year of food and supplies stored, and the ability to defend it. I want to be “off the grid,” having our own electricity and water generation. I want to be an expert at wilderness survival, primitive technology, agriculture, “1890’s” technology, and any other skill I can think of that would help wean us from over-dependence on technological and governmental infrastructures. I don’t have any illusions about being “totally independent,” though. I would want to develop interdependent relationships with a close-knit local community. That’s what kept people alive for thousands of years.

3) Skilled Warrior

I want to be an expert with every weapon I own, and own quite a collection: rifles, shotguns, pistols, crossbows, knives, spears, swords, and anything else that may be useful for defense of my family and is legal to own. I also want to be well proficient in unarmed combat. I have some Kung-Fu training, but I am thinking more along the lines of pragmatic combatives-style training. I don’t care about certifications there, just want to know I can kick ass if I needed to.

4) Ordained “Druid”

I want to be a Druid Priest. Basically, I want some kind of external, objective validification. I think by any functional criteria, I am a “Druid,” but, yes, I want some kind of certificate that says so, too. Call it ego. It is. But I think the drive for community recognition, “glory,” “honor,” is an important drive. It helps us reach for betterment as a people and is an adaptive trait for our survival. When I was a Buddhist, I tried to fight that drive. Now I embrace it. That is probably one of the major differences between my spiritual outlook as a Buddhist and now as a Druid. Now, what kind of certification do I want? Of course, $15 and a stamp will get me an ordination with some “churches.” But, I am thinking ADF. They have a rigor to their standards that would make such a certification mean something to me.

5) Physical Fitness

I want to be physically fit. Right now, my method, and measure, of physical fitness is found in the sport of parkour. I want to be able to walk on my hands 10′, run 2 miles in 17 minutes, scale a 10′ wall in 3 seconds, and jump from a one-story roof onto concrete without injury. As incredible as those may sound, I see them as quite do-able. I have already developed a level of skill and fitness I didn’t think possible for me a year ago. I do want to get my bodyweight down to about 210 lbs or less (about 25 lbs to go), but mainly because the other things really aren’t possible with the weight I have now.

6) A Prepared Son

I want my son to be well rounded in his education and highly capable and responsible when it is time for him to make his own way in the world. I want him to have the same outdoor skills I am working on. I want him to be as skilled as an Eagle Scout and knowledgeable as a Rhodes Scholar. He is only four right now, but he is well on his way. I think he is showing more aptitude with numbers and language than I had at his age, and a strong and noble heart.

7) Published Author

I want to write a book. More to the point, I want to have a book I write actually published, and not by some vanity press, either. I am thinking it would be some philosophical work. Maybe it would be styled as a “self-help” book, I don’t know. It seems that’s what it takes to get published: write a self-help book or romance novel, and I don’t see myself doing the latter. Who reads philosophy anymore? But self-help, especially when it has a good dose of pop-philosophy in it, seems to sell. I intend to write for my own benefit, to help me organize my thoughts and ideas. But publishing is about prestige, really, and ego-trippyness.

So, that’s the future idealized me: Fiacharrey, the (in)famous pagan writer, philosopher, outdoorsman, warrior priest. The future, beware!

Oh, right, gotta tag some folks, don’t I? Meh. I don’t feel like it right now. I might tag a few folks and edit this later.

I talk about tribalism here from time to time: about our obligation to our tribe, our need to build strong bonds within our tribe. For our ancient ancestors, it was all about the Tribe. You didn’t stand a chance surviving on your own. What I’ve never really expressed was how to determine the actual extent of one’s tribe. Is it your family? Yes, certainly your immediate family, but what about distant cousins you only see every other Christmas or so? Friends? Yes, but friends have varying degree of closness. Your community? Probably, depending on how expansive one defines that word.

Jack Darkhand of the Bivouac recently suggested something in a post that gives us a very useful and clear definition of the extent of our tribe, and is especially useful from a warrior-path prospective:

“Right, Jack. Suppose somebody was tryin’ to kill you with a gun. Do you have the right to shoot back?”

“Well, yeah: that’s what it’s for, right?”

“Fine. Now what if they were tryin to kill a family member? Say your little sister or brother?”

“I hope I would be able to stop them by shooting them.”

“Okay. Now what about a friend of yours? Would you kill to defend a friend?”

“Hmm. Depends on the friend.”

Sam nods. “Now we’re gettin’ somewhere.”

“I mean, if it’s a close friend I think I would treat them like family, act immediately. But there are some other cases in which I’d wonder, how sure am I that this person is actually innocent? How do I know this person didn’t provoke the attack?”

“But if it was your sister you wouldn’t even ask that question.”

“No, probably not.”

Sam smiled. “You see what’s happening, here? You’re defining the limits of your Tribe.”

“My Tribe?” “Yeah – the people closest to you, the ones you’d defend no matter what.”

Who is it that you will, without thought, take extreme risk to protect or to help, without thinking of the possible consequences? That is your Tribe. It is, or should be, a clear, bright line of demarcation, and a group one should be very careful about letting people into. For me, it is certainly my immediate family and a small number of good friends. But, equally importantly, it shows me how many are not in my Tribe that should be: my neighbors, for example. It shows me the importance of building relationships. Tribe should be as much geographical as it is a list of names. Yet another indicator that I need to get to know my neighbors better.