IRE
Hyperborean Celtic Pagan Artist and Tabletop Game Designer
Shop: etsy.com/shop/ireethereal
Accepting commissions - Email: ire.ao@protonmail.com
Shop: etsy.com/shop/ireethereal
Accepting commissions - Email: ire.ao@protonmail.com
TGlist reytingi
0
0
TuriOmmaviy
Tekshirish
TekshirilmaganIshonchnoma
ShubhaliJoylashuv
TilBoshqa
Kanal yaratilgan sanaГруд 28, 2022
TGlist-ga qo'shildi
Трав 25, 2024Muxrlangan guruh
Ire's Chat
19
Rekordlar
23.04.202523:59
481Obunachilar28.05.202423:59
0Iqtiboslar indeksi25.03.202523:59
150Bitta post qamrovi26.04.202523:59
164Reklama posti qamrovi17.04.202523:41
64.71%ER25.03.202523:59
32.40%ERR
Repost qilingan:
The Fyrgen • ᚫᛚᚢ:ᚢᛚᚫ
26.03.202500:30
I'm curious about Pagans who talk about 'winning'. I suspect they would elaborate by saying that they want Paganism to become the dominant religion. Dominant where? Nationally? Among their ethnic kin exclusively? Globally?
And which Paganism, exactly, should 'win'? Germanic? Celtic? Hellenistic? Should Icelandic Heathenry 'win', or should Anglo-Saxon? Mercian or Bernician?
It seems to me that to talk of Paganism 'winning' is to treat it like a political movement rather than an indigenous way of life. The aforementioned are merely questions; my real point is this...
Any 'winning' that comes by the indiscriminate use of technology is of the material kind. For a political movement, that might be okay. But for a religion/indigenous spirituality, equal (if not greater) consideration must be given to the spiritual, philosophical and cultural impact of technologies. Is it any wonder that critics accuse Folkish Paganism of being foremostly political when many Folkish Pagans act more like a political movement by prioritising material victory?
According to official history, in 2600-1500 BC, whilst the people of the Indus Valley were writing scriptures, the proto-Germanic people hadn't even discovered the runes. We were essentially illiterate until Christianity brought to us the technology of writing. Is that because we were so inferior, or did our ancestors choose not to adopt this technology?
Technological adoption can be beneficial, when the material benefits are weighed against the spiritual, cultural and physiological dangers. AI's proponents seem concerned solely with the material impact. That's not surprising in this godless modern age. But it is surprising when self-proclaimed religious people likewise pay no heed to the spiritual, cultural and physiological dangers.
So now you can produce visual propaganda in the blink of an eye. Meanwhile the hand withers, the mind atrophies, imagination fades, the exchange of energies (gift for a gift) principle is overlooked, the very purpose for which the gods gave us this life (to share in the act of creation, to nurture beauty, to forge powerful bonds of kinship, to exercise mind and body) is shunned. Worse still - those who adopt AI technology may be empowering Loki and the þursar (more on that in a future post).
And which Paganism, exactly, should 'win'? Germanic? Celtic? Hellenistic? Should Icelandic Heathenry 'win', or should Anglo-Saxon? Mercian or Bernician?
It seems to me that to talk of Paganism 'winning' is to treat it like a political movement rather than an indigenous way of life. The aforementioned are merely questions; my real point is this...
Any 'winning' that comes by the indiscriminate use of technology is of the material kind. For a political movement, that might be okay. But for a religion/indigenous spirituality, equal (if not greater) consideration must be given to the spiritual, philosophical and cultural impact of technologies. Is it any wonder that critics accuse Folkish Paganism of being foremostly political when many Folkish Pagans act more like a political movement by prioritising material victory?
According to official history, in 2600-1500 BC, whilst the people of the Indus Valley were writing scriptures, the proto-Germanic people hadn't even discovered the runes. We were essentially illiterate until Christianity brought to us the technology of writing. Is that because we were so inferior, or did our ancestors choose not to adopt this technology?
Technological adoption can be beneficial, when the material benefits are weighed against the spiritual, cultural and physiological dangers. AI's proponents seem concerned solely with the material impact. That's not surprising in this godless modern age. But it is surprising when self-proclaimed religious people likewise pay no heed to the spiritual, cultural and physiological dangers.
So now you can produce visual propaganda in the blink of an eye. Meanwhile the hand withers, the mind atrophies, imagination fades, the exchange of energies (gift for a gift) principle is overlooked, the very purpose for which the gods gave us this life (to share in the act of creation, to nurture beauty, to forge powerful bonds of kinship, to exercise mind and body) is shunned. Worse still - those who adopt AI technology may be empowering Loki and the þursar (more on that in a future post).
Repost qilingan:
Thin Hands Coven
25.03.202503:54
All three of us are deeply against AI. I refuse to accept AI generated content as art. It's not. Art comes from human beings, end of.
Hrafna 🌸
Hrafna 🌸
Repost qilingan:
Brehon Academy Channel
28.03.202501:24
Around 800 CE, Ireland had many small kingdoms, tuatha, under a Gaelic system with no central state.
Over 100 existed, each led by a rí túaithe, varying from 80–150 due to shifting borders.
Above them, rí ruirech ruled clusters, with dynasties like Uí Néill (north) or Eóganachta (Munster) as rí cóicid.
The ard rí at Tara was symbolic, per texts like the Annals of Ulster. Uí Néill (split into Cenél Conaill and Cenél nEógain), Connachta (west), Laigin (east), and Munster’s Eóganachta were key, with Dál Riata linking to Scotland.
Kings used cattle wealth and Brehon Law, while monasteries like Armagh grew powerful.
Norse raids hit coasts by 800, but inland kingdoms held.
This kin-based system lasted until Viking and Norman shifts.
Over 100 existed, each led by a rí túaithe, varying from 80–150 due to shifting borders.
Above them, rí ruirech ruled clusters, with dynasties like Uí Néill (north) or Eóganachta (Munster) as rí cóicid.
The ard rí at Tara was symbolic, per texts like the Annals of Ulster. Uí Néill (split into Cenél Conaill and Cenél nEógain), Connachta (west), Laigin (east), and Munster’s Eóganachta were key, with Dál Riata linking to Scotland.
Kings used cattle wealth and Brehon Law, while monasteries like Armagh grew powerful.
Norse raids hit coasts by 800, but inland kingdoms held.
This kin-based system lasted until Viking and Norman shifts.
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 🙏
08.04.202521:08
"Painter's Inspiration" by Jacek Malczewski (1897)
Repost qilingan:
Survive the Jive: All-feed
26.03.202500:35
"Wilt thou do the deed and repent it? thou hadst better never been born:
Wilt thou do the deed and exalt it? then thy fame shall be outworn:
Thou shalt do the deed and abide it, and sit on thy throne on high,
And look on today and tomorrow as those that never die."
Sigurd the Volsung: The Wisdom of Brynhild By William Morris
Wilt thou do the deed and exalt it? then thy fame shall be outworn:
Thou shalt do the deed and abide it, and sit on thy throne on high,
And look on today and tomorrow as those that never die."
Sigurd the Volsung: The Wisdom of Brynhild By William Morris
Repost qilingan:
Wudubearu 🌲
24.03.202519:50
It is imperative that we as Heathens make an argument against AI.
My friend Þorr Siðr makes a great point.
“The Gods are artisans. They shaped and prepared this realm for us, which required struggle and a great deal of violence to do. That was not an easy thing for them to do; what they made for us, was not easy to make. It took time and effort to do so. So, when someone uses this generative art and all its imperfections and imitation of reality, they don’t respect that struggle for creation that the Gods underwent at the beginning. In fact, it mocks their work, and that is why we must reject AI art.”
My friend Þorr Siðr makes a great point.
“The Gods are artisans. They shaped and prepared this realm for us, which required struggle and a great deal of violence to do. That was not an easy thing for them to do; what they made for us, was not easy to make. It took time and effort to do so. So, when someone uses this generative art and all its imperfections and imitation of reality, they don’t respect that struggle for creation that the Gods underwent at the beginning. In fact, it mocks their work, and that is why we must reject AI art.”
Ko'proq funksiyalarni ochish uchun tizimga kiring.
