IRE
20.04.202505:08
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/ire-ethereal/gaelic-pantheon-art-of-the-gods
Launching tomorrow! ⚡️
Launching tomorrow! ⚡️
08.04.202521:19
Переслав з:
Survive the Jive: All-feed
07.04.202505:20
The conversion of English kingdoms to Christianity began with their kings but did NOT end there.
The last Heathen English king, Arwald, died in 686. Bede was born in 672/3. In Bede’s own land of Northumbria there had been mass reversion to Heathenry in 633 following the death of their Xian king.
The idea that Bede’s account of the goddess Easter can be seen as “faulty history” as some claim, is absurd. He very probably met Heathens as first hand sources! Or even if he was too sheltered in his cloisters to have experienced rural peasant culture, the elder monks around him, and travelling merchants would have FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE of English Heathens. Many of them raised by Heathen parents!
There is absolutely no way he could have made up an imaginary goddess to explain the name of such an important Christian holiday. It would go against all his purposes to do so. This is wishful thinking from certain Christians who want to throw shade on what is an uncontroversial fact among philologists.
The last Heathen English king, Arwald, died in 686. Bede was born in 672/3. In Bede’s own land of Northumbria there had been mass reversion to Heathenry in 633 following the death of their Xian king.
The idea that Bede’s account of the goddess Easter can be seen as “faulty history” as some claim, is absurd. He very probably met Heathens as first hand sources! Or even if he was too sheltered in his cloisters to have experienced rural peasant culture, the elder monks around him, and travelling merchants would have FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE of English Heathens. Many of them raised by Heathen parents!
There is absolutely no way he could have made up an imaginary goddess to explain the name of such an important Christian holiday. It would go against all his purposes to do so. This is wishful thinking from certain Christians who want to throw shade on what is an uncontroversial fact among philologists.
20.04.202518:00
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/ire-ethereal/gaelic-pantheon-art-of-the-gods
It's launched! 🙏⚡️
Any support is greatly appreciated, even just a share. Thank you
It's launched! 🙏⚡️
Any support is greatly appreciated, even just a share. Thank you
08.04.202521:15
"Spring" by Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema (1894)
06.04.202522:49
Sappho by Ferdinand Keller
Переслав з:
The Fyrgen • ᚫᛚᚢ:ᚢᛚᚫ
14.04.202522:13
One of the common arguments from Heathen AI bros is:
"Our ancestors always adopted every new technology."
"The Gods themselves love technology."
A couple of years ago I wrote a short article called Novel Vs. Counterfeit Technologies which seeks to differentiate what I call 'novel' from 'counterfeit' technologies. In it I posit that some technologies actually solve a problem, whilst others merely mimic existing natural human abilities or pre-existing technologies. For example, the blade is a novel technology; the computer is not.
It's a working theory and I'm not here to categorise them all, or to say what should and shouldn't be allowed. The point is that not all technologies are of the same value, or necessarily of any value.
You can talk about Thor wielding his hammer, or Freyja's Brisingamen necklace, or grave-goods, to try and prove the love of tech, but let me ask you this:
Will you be asking for your iPhone to be thrown into your grave with you when you die?
Will you be 3D printing idols of the gods from plastic?
Would you ever depict Odin hunched, scrolling over a smartphone?
Why not?
The answer is instinctually obvious to all of us; these technologies—AI very much included—are profane, cheap, degrading and unholy. Stop trying to compare a hand-crafted sword adorned with the runes of its bearer with digital tech that makes your life easier and cheaper.
"Our ancestors always adopted every new technology."
"The Gods themselves love technology."
A couple of years ago I wrote a short article called Novel Vs. Counterfeit Technologies which seeks to differentiate what I call 'novel' from 'counterfeit' technologies. In it I posit that some technologies actually solve a problem, whilst others merely mimic existing natural human abilities or pre-existing technologies. For example, the blade is a novel technology; the computer is not.
It's a working theory and I'm not here to categorise them all, or to say what should and shouldn't be allowed. The point is that not all technologies are of the same value, or necessarily of any value.
You can talk about Thor wielding his hammer, or Freyja's Brisingamen necklace, or grave-goods, to try and prove the love of tech, but let me ask you this:
Will you be asking for your iPhone to be thrown into your grave with you when you die?
Will you be 3D printing idols of the gods from plastic?
Would you ever depict Odin hunched, scrolling over a smartphone?
Why not?
The answer is instinctually obvious to all of us; these technologies—AI very much included—are profane, cheap, degrading and unholy. Stop trying to compare a hand-crafted sword adorned with the runes of its bearer with digital tech that makes your life easier and cheaper.
08.04.202521:08
"Painter's Inspiration" by Jacek Malczewski (1897)
14.04.202504:37
Rabindranath Tagore by Shannon Ackerson
08.04.202517:15
I'm going to launch a Kickstarter soon to help with the completion of my Gaelic God illustrations. Let's finish this series 🙏
Показано 1 - 24 із 104
Увійдіть, щоб розблокувати більше функціональності.