Emma Restall Orr, It Took a Druid to Demolish Scientific Materialism |346|

[Alex]

Like all religions it appears hers is rife with contradictions... my favourite, be happy with what you have and minimise your consumption. So there is a truth. No mention of who gets to decide any of this. I mean what if I decide that I "need" that big house, or that bag of chips, or that video game? Am I allowed to determine my own path to happiness or are certain paths just "bad"? And if there are some that are just bad, will action be taken to limit or remove bad elements from the society?

agreed I like and respect Emma, but I got the sense that my push-back to her ideas were totally and completely foreign to her worldview... they just didn't penetrate.

We're used to this in the political arena (everyone talks past each other), but I'm always a little surprised when folks who have thought deeply about spiritual questions have difficulty grokking this.

 

[Max_B]

Melvyn did an 'In or Time' programme about the druids... it seems like we don't know very much about them...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01mqq94

 

[David Eire]

That was a wonderful discussion - thank you Emma and Alex

I was reminded of these lines from the Hobbit...

"Saruman believes it is only great power that can hold evil in check.
But that is not what I have found.
I found it is the small everyday deeds of ordinary folk that keep the darkness at bay.
Small acts of kindness and love."

Gandalf from The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

 

[David Eire]

Alex asked:
Has science ultimately failed us in the balance between good and bad? We can look at our lasers and i-phones and GPS's, but on the other side we can look at the things that we might not like about society, culture or the way things are going, however we slice that. So: has science failed us?

To answer Alex’s question: no, science has not failed humanity
Humanity is failing to be authentically scientific
We are failing at science
Scientific materialism is not science nor scientific

The issues Alex has with science come down to the limited humanity of scientists and the people who employ them.
It is the misuse of science which is the issue; not science per se.

What science is for humanity is a moveable feast; not something set in stone - it changes over time.

We are living through times of extreme materialism and consumerism dominated by capitalist corporations devoted to generating private fortunes for a tiny minority of super-rich individuals.
Most of the scientists in the world today are employed by the corporate elites and are dedicated to using science to increase the wealth and power of those elites.
The corporate elites also control our political systems (campaign funding and lucrative corporate sinecures etc) and our education systems (the elite American universities are run as for-profit corporations).
The same tiny group of elites own all the significant media (5 mega corps own all the significant mainstream media in the US).
The corporate elites thereby control almost everything everyone hears as news or entertainment (is there any difference anymore?) and education.

We are immersed in the mainstream corporate industrial and media cartel matrix from birth. It is a cultural matrix in the same way the ancien regime and religious culture of the medieval period was.
Capitalism and science are being used by the elites - the aristocracies of our times - to control society in a similar way that the ancien regime and religion was used by the medieval aristocracies.

So that is where I see the problem – how and by whom our societies are controlled – not science per se.
And I agree with Emma, it comes down to capital - or access to life support.

I feel the same way about religion and spirituality. It was not the fault of natural human spirituality that religious aristocracies and institutions came to dominate and control human society.
It was the perversion and suppression of real natural human spirituality by power groups that was at fault.
Likewise today it is the misuse of science by the capitalist aristocracies which is at fault.

 

[Alex]

That was a wonderful discussion - thank you Emma and Alex

I was reminded of these lines from the Hobbit...

"Saruman believes it is only great power that can hold evil in check.
But that is not what I have found.
I found it is the small everyday deeds of ordinary folk that keep the darkness at bay.
Small acts of kindness and love."

Gandalf from The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

nice

 

[Alex]

no, science has not failed humanity
Humanity is failing to be authentically scientific
We are failing at science
Scientific materialism is not science nor scientific

brilliant!

 

[David Eire]

brilliant!

Thanks Alex for all the great work you do

 

[Tarquin Rees]

Just catching up on a last batch of shows and listening to this Druid one. Serious problems!!!

I agree and empathise with a lot of what she says - connection to the landscape etc - but her argument is circular and self-defeating. An example: she says she relates to the landscape as a native of it (English landscape) and says she does not relate to Welsh landscape because it is not English. Well it is!!!! The WHOLE OF BRITAIN was only Wales/Ireland/Scotland/whatever for 1000 years before the English arrived from Schleswig Holstein.... that's what it was! There WERE NO English! The English are Teutons and late arrivals - Druids were Celts.

I am wondering (but only half way through so far so could be wrong) whether her rejection of the Druid overlay is actually a manifestation of English Nationalism which is virulent and rampant here right now in 'Occult' circles. In any case, this seems to be not a very well thought out position.

 

[Mishelle]

Argh, Alex, I feel like I'm $#@!ing on your turf, man, and I have to emphasise again that I mean no disrespect - I'm not even sure that in your shoes, I would have satisfied my carping self, but... well, sometimes a guy has to offer a (hopefully respectful) critique.

This is one of the most respectful critiques I've read online! Well-done! You inspire me to up my game.
I loved this interview and just ordered two of her books. But I don't know enough about the topic even to see where the conversation might have gone, according to you, and that helps me in defining some of the underlying questions, so thank you.

And wow, what a voice! I could listen to her for hours. She made me want to curl up in front of the fire and have a good long cry. Also, I have to compliment Alex, because I find it difficult to be at all rational or critical in that extreme of a feminine presence, to hold my own space, so to speak. Still, she was not this over-the-top 'love and light' type and I was so glad to see one of her books was 'Kissing the Hag', which is the one I will read first.