Hierarchy as a Religious Concept

Hierarchy is natural, indeed crucial for effective, efficient work. That includes in spiritual settings. I realize that this is a difficult concept for many, especially given that we have so few positive examples but it’s worth considering and discussing. Wayland has contributed a very well thought out article to that discussion.

See the link below:

 

Today, it is time to talk about an important, yet increasingly overlooked part of heathen religious philosophy: hierarchies. Ah, I can hear the outraged howls and lunatic rants of the Righteous Rad…

Read more here: Hierarchy as a Religious Concept

Advertisements

Posted on July 14, 2016, in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. 2 Comments.

  1. I’ve been thinking about hierarchies for a while now. Some thoughts:

    I think that it is possible to simultaneously hold that hierarchies are arbitrary, and also useful and necessary. I think that often the rejection of hierarchy hinges solely on the assertion of arbitrariness, without addressing their basic handiness. I think, also, that charges of artificiality are often used, though these are read herrings, since they generally require an anchoring in something like “natural law”. But just because a thing is natural doesn’t mean that it is right. Further, the determination of what exactly is natural itself is dependent upon the framework that one approaches the world with.

    I think that hierarchies can be recognized as artificial across the board, and this is totally okay, and not a valid objection to hierarchies. To return to the controversial “hierarchy of the forest”, it is perfectly possible to insist that the forest itself, in itself, possesses no hierarchy, no endogenous organizational structure. Any such a structure would not be inherent in the components that compose the forest, nor, even, would it be emergent from the totality of the set of organisms and landscape features that compose it. Each piece could be seen to operate according to its own nature, and the composite term, the forest, is just that, an arbitrary set collecting together an array of parts. The hierarchy is applied externally, a thing that a person must view and categorize. Hierarchy, in this sense, is our way of organizing a world that on its own terms defies categorization. However, the forest itself, even read as a discontinuous array, develops according to particular logic derived from the interplay of the arrayed parts. “Hierarchy” may be an artificial term, but in this reading, so is “forest” and “tree”.

    All hierarchies can be read as matters of convenience and necessity. A person can denounce the power that another holds over them, at which point the hierarchy is shown for what it is, a social convention that allows for the diffusion of power, however such a denunciation makes them utterly vulnerable to the unrestrained exercise of that power upon their person.

    It is, I believe, possible to denounce the power of the Gods, but such a denunciation is not an insulation, but a total surrender of one’s self into the power of the Gods. The recognition of hierarchy, through worship is, also, not an insulation, but the willful, and therefore meaningful, acknowledgement of the power of the Gods’ in action through the world. To denounce them is to collapse oneself into the world, into the demesne of their power.

    Like

  2. The Righteous Rads do have a hierarchy. They just don’t admit to it.

    Like

%d bloggers like this: