egocentrism

According to buddhism people don't have souls. This religion says the basic problem of humanity is this misunderstanding; The feeling of a self is an illusion. In reality there's only a continuous changing flux of thought, sensation and emotion. From this perspective it's really stupid to be egocentric. You're trying to cherish something which doesn't exist.

Let's go over this in more detail. First of all, the question whether things like souls exist is rather complex. I'm going to skip it and focus on the introspective part of the story. Every (healthy) human has the idea of a self, of a 'me'. He or she is somebody and this somebody is more or less constant. Sometimes our bodies change, sometimes our opinions, or even our whole emotional life changes. There is one constant factor: it all happens to ourselves. In a certain sense we're still the person we were in our childhood.

Character is a pretty stable thing also. The way we response to other people may be quite comparable to our responses when we were a lot younger. This is very interesting, but there's something which is even more stable than our character. It's the sense of being ourselves. The problem with this is that it's not quite locatable. Also, it's not the same as the ongoing flux of thought, sensation and emotion. One step more subtle is saying: the self is actually the experience of this ongoing flux.

Experiences come extremely fast, but one at a time. Our attention is continuously attracted by all sorts of things. People seem to have a certain 'control center' which decides what thought, sensation or emotion is important enough for a moment of consciousness. The strange thing is, now and then we have awareness of this proces, which is not fragmented (like the experiences) but continuous. In our most conscious moments we seem to be able to follow the functioning of the control center; we are aware of the things which attract our attention. So actually there are two things; experiences, and awareness of experiences. I'd say this awareness ~is~ our sense of self. This is the 'me' who is continuously experiencing all these things. The me is not the same as these experiences.

Back to the main problem. What about this awareness? I think it's strange to say it's an illusion. It's probably not a material thing, nor some soul kind of thing which exists in a metaphysical dimension. The point is, this doesn't make it less real. This awareness can't be denied; It exists. It just doesn't exist as a thing.

From this perspective egocentrism is not so strange anymore. It seems humans have a special faculty which places themselves in the center of all subjective experience. This doesn't seem to go away so easily. We can drink a lot of alcohol, or take drugs, which lessens it strength (and of course, while we are asleep there's not much to be experienced). In a healthy condition the sense of self is strongest. When people are tired or ill they're also less aware. This makes wanting to get rid of this self even more unlogical. Secondly, from a pragmatic point of view it's good to have a strong awareness. If the sense of self is stronger people have also a stronger inclination to do something about their problems.

note I've discussed the rationale of egocentrism on the level of the self. There's also something like egocentrism on the level of character. Please don't confuse these two.

solipsism

The third Satanic Sin is quite difficult to comprehend. Theoretically, but even more so from a practical perspective. Sinning for Satanists really is a bad thing. Not because Satan is going to punish people like the Jewish God would do, but because things will work out negatively. In a way which is counterproductive to the interests of a Satanist.

For Satanists (should I say real Satanists?) the first two sins, stupidity and pretentiousness, are not so hard to prevent. Anton LaVey probably put them on top because the reversion of these two characteristics, intelligence and responsibility, define the elite in a very precise way. These are the basics which set them apart from the crowd. The third sin is much more difficult to prevent because it demands a very strong sense of realism. For a Satanist it is a matter of temporally casting aside all that is great. Solipsism means not being able to see beyond one's personality. Such a person doesn't grasp how low and unexalted some people are. A Satanist who doesn't see this will treat such persons with a sense of respect and courtesy they'll never be able to respond to properly.

A thought provoking aspect of this sin is that it assumes something about Satanists; they're very noble people. Everyone who read a bit about Satanism already knows Satanists don't ritually slaughter babes or cattle, but it's easy to end up with a picture of Satanists as slightly pessimistic and generally unfriendly people. They aren't. Sometimes they do treat people harsh, but that's more out of a sense of self-protection. Satanists are actually the most illustrious, honorable and courteous people walking this earth. Also they are the most realistic beings you'll ever meet.

But then again, there's always room for improvement, so I've thought out a neat exercise. People share each others way of being, but some people have more dignity than others; Live life from a grander perspective. These people set standards for living. This needs to be understood in a very broad sense. Satanists are not the only people who are able to inspire people in such a way, but there's an interesting aspect which sets them apart. Satanists do this continuously.

This observation has grotesque implications. It means Satanists inspire, but never get inspired themselves. They'd have to meet someone who lives life from a truly übermagnificent perspective. A way of being which would be elite among the elite. Satanists are scarce, but such persons just don't seem to exist. The point is, even if they would exist a Satanist would regard that person as another Satanist. Everyone else would instantly look up to such a person (and feel humble). A Satanist isn't used to such feelings and will not respond properly; Will miss a chance to be inspired.

Satanists often focus on the dark side of human nature. Of course, that's what part of this essay is about: comprehending baseness. This comprehension doesn't come automatically. It demands careful experimenting. Not setting a standard feels like losing a great deal of joy, hope and trust you've previously put in somebody. It's like letting them define what's life is like. This is quite hard because they seem to be incapable to do this. You know so much better what life can be like. The point is: you probably don't have a very great influence. They don't know anything other than this way of being (and some weird people continuously trying to cheer them up). It's stupid to suppose your perspective on life will miraculously linger with them all the time you're not there. Only parents and sect leaders have that kind of influence.

A noteworthy aspect of this way of 'experiencing-without-interfering' is learning how to put yourself below somebody. This is a very strange kind of advice; Why would someone deliberately place himself in an inferior position? I've explained this in the second essay about acceptance. It's a quite radical method to gain friendship. The interesting thing about this is that people will show a lot more of themselves if they feel equal to you. The moment they don't look up to you anymore a psychological barrier seems to be removed. They're going to show you their full personalities. You'll discover these people will be even more laughable than they were before. But in a few ways these people seem to be actually more talented than you (some people for example have very strange social skills, which nevertheless work out perfectly in specific situations). For the first time they dare to show themselves: and you'll be amazed. And inspired.

note the nine Satanic sins