by BlisteredWhippet » Sun 20 Jan 2008, 01:59:52
Thanks, I did edit that.
But my point is simply this:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')Authentic shamanism interests me because the focus of the shaman seems to be helping detect food for the tribe and as a kind of healer for the tribe. But many modern day enthusiasts assume that tribal societies structured around shamanism are more noble, more genteel, superior in some way. I wonder if this is so.
I think that is a huge ASSumption, following other huge ASSumptions. I actively disagree that the stories and stereotypes (I doubt the credibility of most cultural anthropologists, maybe, on this point.) I just recognize the timelessness of skepticism, and the obvious way in which it would manifest for anyone espousing cures, explanations, and claiming to see visions, etc. Shamans, in a sense, were more like the village idiot. Harmless to no one but themselves. Most shamans were probably vile people, insinuating themselves in the human social network, rubbing feces into wounds and performing surgery, or whatever. People were probably elated when they finally died.
You talk about "Authentic" shamanism as if it is something contemporary. So I treat it as such. If someone tells me that they can read auras, I say, "Great!! I'll bet that comes in handy! Do good work with that in the world!"
Now fast forward to the lawless realm of post-apocalyptic HELLWORLD:
"Great! Hold still while I blow you away!!!" *BLAMMM *