I'm having trouble defining the difference between black and white magick and I could use some help. Is it merely based on the traditions used or can we see some kind universal pattern of definition of black and white sides within the mechanics of magick?
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Mon, April 4, 2005 - 8:19 AMI have found that this color scale is unneeded. However, as a rule of thumb I still color code some of the work I do (mainly for orginizational purpose). I could lump my research in to these catagories.
White magick is willed magick for ones own self-exploration. Magick designed to help council the will but has no manifested presence. Color Magick is that which is used for self but has manifested qualities. Black Magick is all magick that routes itself to the actions of a third party. This means that I classify even healing magick preformed on a third party as Black. The reason I do this is because I beleive that anytime you bend your will to affect anothers (in this case the person could have healed themself) you risk hampering the natural outcome of the others will.
This hasn't stopped me at all. In fact I have on occasion used magick that most would consider black but, like I said, I pay little attention. Black, White, Color... what does it matter. Thy will will be done. Honoring a stigma like this seems pointless.
Universal pattern?!? Route little pig or starve.
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Mon, April 4, 2005 - 8:26 AMWell, my magic is elemental in nature. So the "black magic" stigma isn't really there in my mind.
That being said, if you fuck with someone elses free will then you're a schmuck in my eyes. I generally abstain from doing that. -
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Mon, April 4, 2005 - 8:57 AMJust as a sidenote Dustin. Language is a weapon. Anyone who summons can tell you that. So when you use phrases like "...if you fuck with someone elses free will the you're a schmuck" you only point that dagger at yourself. Does that phrase not attempt to tell people what they should or should not do?
Just sayin'.
Your probabley a good person (I'm a bad speller). -
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Mon, April 4, 2005 - 11:45 AMYeah, definately. I was being slightly facetious.
That being said, I do feel that if someone were to use their will to affect another person without their concent, then you have crossed a line which I don't feel should be crossed. -
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Mon, April 4, 2005 - 12:21 PMI was just writing about this yesterday in an lj community.
I agree it's a line, but after looking both ways, I'll cross it without much concern.
Consent is useless without informedness and it's rarely possible to give informed consent to magick. I'll happily cast on dead people, unconscious people, sick people, and they can't really consent. I'll also cast on children and that's a debatable point.
Consent is a useful metric, I agree, but in the realm of magick, it's not really a be all end all. My own personal system includes much of the bdsm concept of consent, but with a larger portion of the NLP concept of ecology, and a bit of my own meditation and insight thrown in.
Casting on people is like hitting a moving target usually. And many folks have defenses, unconscious or otherwise. It can be tricky to produce useful results. This, and the fact that nearly anything you cast can be interpreted either as a blessing or a curse seem to be the factors that scare many wiccans away from casting on folks directly. Being aware of these factors, the risks, I consider myself to sometimes be capable of making the choice to cast on people. directly. -
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Mon, April 4, 2005 - 12:44 PMI have to go with teamnoir on this.
I understand that there is a moral issue in this "Black and White" issue (if we can generalize for a moment). But like Teamnoir I have to admit it plays little role in what I do. I prefer a non-inposed role in preforming magick but use the tool for the job. If people would call the tool I'm using "black" and condem me for it I say "What's in your toolbox?" and if I beleive it will work as well or better then I'll use it, otherwise I'm not gonna peel an orange with a chainsaw because people find it least offensive. In the end I answer only to my will. It wouldn't be magick otherwise.
-
-
Unsu...
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Mon, April 18, 2005 - 12:19 AMOoops, My post, the 8th one, was for Dustin's original statements and is way off in order. My bad.
Shadow Walker
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Wed, February 27, 2008 - 7:32 PM"That being said, I do feel that if someone were to use their will to affect another person without their concent, then you have crossed a line which I don't feel should be crossed. "
We do this every day in our mundane life...unless you consume nothing, go nowhere, and don't speak to anyone.
Some of us are just honest about the fact that we do it, magickally or not >wink< -
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Mon, March 3, 2008 - 10:45 PMOctarine! The color of true magick is octarine!
-
-
-
-
Unsu...
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Thu, May 5, 2005 - 11:45 AM"That being said, if you fuck with someone elses free will then you're a schmuck in my eyes. I generally abstain from doing that."
i totally agree, its best to just sticking with things you actually have direct control over(ie. your actions, yourself) You get the max sleight of mind effect with minimal unplanned consequences.
The lines seems pretty clear if you stick to that to me as unless your doing some suicide spell your probly not doing black magic on yourself. -
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Thu, May 5, 2005 - 12:21 PMI can't speak for anyone but myself but I have no problem using, what is generally considered "black magick" upon myself. But then again I do not have a color-code system that I care about. I have used color to describe the type of work I am or have done when talking with others about it, or when getting participants readied. But this is more used to ensure the language and intent do not get muddled, so everyone understands, rather then giving it specific attributes.
But "black" upon myself has been a staple. Same with black upon others. I know this offends some, I make no apology for it. I do my will at every givin moment. I try to harm none. When I have I have done so with as little selfish intent as possible. But it's all muddled so it's hard to tell where one ends and the other begins.
But if telox's quoted statement is beleived; I can be a schmuck. But are... let say... anti-war protesters schmucks for trying to hinded the will of the Bushies? Sometimes you have to stand agaist the will of another. Just make sure you do so with clear intent and reason (better then "cause I can").
That's where I come from on this.
-
-
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Mon, April 4, 2005 - 8:39 AMPersonally, I think black magick is any magick performed with the intent to do harm or with malice. Anything else is gray or white. So if you don't mean anyone any harm, it's all good. (I don't believe in the law of 3, BTW.)
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Mon, April 4, 2005 - 9:34 AMI think that magick is value neutral. The magick itself isn't black or white or any other color any more than computers or software are good or evil all by themselves. Some technologies like guns are difficult to use constructively. Some technologies like blankets are difficult to use destructively. That doesn't necessarily make those technologies either good or evil.
I think that black and white, good and evil, are simply judgements that people place on their experience. What one person might call a white or good application, another person in the same situation may well call a bad application. it's all about perspective.
No matter what you decide to put out into the world, there will be someone who doesn't like it. IMO, the ultimate judgement is whether it works for you and whether you're happy with the result. I'd argue that the more people are happy with the result, the better the work, but that's because I think one of the best secondary measures of results is widespread happiness. You can certainly use any benchmark you like. -
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Mon, April 4, 2005 - 1:20 PMThat's about the most lucid thing I've ever read on this subject Chris...comprehensive and succinct. -
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Mon, April 4, 2005 - 2:21 PMEGGSalient! Thank you for saying so. That is exactly what I usually aim for: comprehensive, succinct, lucid, and insightful. :-)
*preen* -
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Mon, April 4, 2005 - 4:08 PMI agree on many of these things, but say if you were to explain that the magick one is focusing isn't black magic as know to people who believe it to be evil (and indeed what they define as black magic might be evil), how would one go about doing this without bending their definitions?
Also I must say I get really annoyed with people confusing chaos magick with worshipping evil deieties of mass destruction who don't even exist and I'm pondering how I am to go about explaining that there is no such thing. Of course there is such a thing but by them defing my magic as "evil" I am afraid that their negative psychic powers might influence the effect of my sigills. In many ways i think the swedish saying "Måla fan på väggen" (To paint the devil on the wall) can be appropriate to describe my problem. Here is my theory: Christians and other religios groups, with their belief of evil deieties such as satan brings about large amounts of powerfull harmful energies responsible for many of the "waves" of evil occuring in our world from time to time. They do this by shaping their inertia of god-worship into satanism. So in fact, all religios people unaware of the complex world of sigills, godforms and magic are the people giving life to the very evil forces which they wish would dissapear. Yet they call magicians the forces of evil because they belong to sects and their respective leaders need a black sheep. -
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Mon, April 4, 2005 - 5:32 PMWhen I saw Rob Brezny at the LSD-25 celebration, he said something that summed up my feelings on the matter. He said, "People who believe in the devil ARE the devil."
If you believe that you are giving evil the ability to go about uncontrolled destruction, then that is precisely what you are creating. Your belief gives tacit consent, a blind eye if not a wink.
Me, I took "evil" out of my vocabulary for a decade or so just as an experiment. Instead, I looked for synonyms or more descriptive words in any place where previously I might have been tempted to use that word.
I've since added "evil" back into my vocabulary, but it has a very different meaning now. I don't believe in intrinsic evil or intrinsic good. I believe that "evil" is simply a judgement people place on some experiences when they believe that those experiences don't necessarily benefit the social order or the masses in general. "Evil" is, effectively, the opposite of socialism or fascism. People who don't pay their taxes are evil. As are any people who suggest that thinking for one's self is a better plan than blindly following orders. People who make decisions on their own rather than following tradition. Anyone proposing social change at a faster rate than the bulk of society can manage is advocating for evil.
In our current world, anyone who's lives or preferences challenge the nuclear family concept from the 1950's is evil, (and that's nearly everyone these days, yes?)
If you believe that "evil" both exists and doesn't, that "evil" is an artificial construct born of an oversimplified dualism with gross overemphasis on one side, (ie, xtianity vs taoism), then you too are already evil.
Evil is part of the human experience. Attempting to sublimate it doesn't really work. The only thing that works is accepting it and taking responsibility for your own power.
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Mon, April 4, 2005 - 5:36 PMGoran.
Magick is not a religion my friend. Religion is magick. To call people out because of their chosen faith is to ruin what the art of magick is desired for. Some find magick through reason others through faith. Both are correct. If you hold animosity towards another's faith I say slay your ego my friend. Don't worry about definitions. As a rule, if you beleive that what you are doing at any given moment is wrong, stop doing it. If you are skinning a baby whilest calling on the essence of Da'ath to permiate your soul with lust and greed and you don't see a problem with that, then there isn't. I see a problem with that which is why I don't do it. But what right do I have to tell you what your will desires. Who am I to tell you you are wrong because we disagree.
If you are trying to find a way to embrace magick the last thing I would recommend is trying to cage it in words. -
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Tue, April 5, 2005 - 10:47 AMThe poster who wrote about the nuetrality of magick hit the nail on the head IMO.
So why even mess with the whole Black and White thing?
From a chaos magick persective (and also tantric hindu) comes the concept of "Crossing the line" to undo your personality.
I HAD to do "black" magic to undo myself and my pre-programmed attachments to being a good slave of the dominant chrstian-materialst paradigm.
Doing my first curse set ME free--which in some ways felt more important than the results. Leaving the land of pre-programmed morality to journey into the uncharted territory of personal ethics ... metamorphosis at its best.
What annoying characters the "hexmistress" or "hexmeister" ... but how empowered the magician who can bless a freind or curse an enemy with true wisdom and well-considered personal ethics and honor. BTW, I now tend to curse with "learning experiences" };>
--natasya
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Mon, April 4, 2005 - 6:04 PMThere is no black, there is no white. Magic just IS, and the intent of the caster is all that matters.
-
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Tue, April 5, 2005 - 12:03 PMActually I think I am standing on the crossings of all forms of magick and at the same time not standing within any field of magick at all. More like quantum physics and string theory. But as soon as you start waving a wand around or talk about conjuration or whatever people tend to believe I'm sacrifing babies or something which is really getting on my nerves. -
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Tue, April 5, 2005 - 12:28 PMGoran, if that is what people think then edjucate them. Tell them magick is an art not a power. Just because I know 1+1=2 doesn't mean I'm a mathmatician. If I go about adding everything up then I can call myself one. Just because I know how magick works doesn't make me a mage. If I use it then I am.
Magicians are all faiths and all faiths are magicians. Christ is just as powerful to some as monkeys are to others. If you talk down about any faith you take a step backwards from the centre. We are not elite just edjucated from a diffrent text. We are not special only focused in our way. Magick is the method not the outcome. The outcome is something unboundable. It can't have a name because a name would attempt to harness it in form or idea. Magick is the recipe. If a recipe calls for eggs and milk and sugar I still don't have a cookie until I blend them all together. The recipe doesn't do it, I do. Magick calls for "this" and "that" but it is my actions that bring the outcome and the outcome is that which I desire. And when I council my Will one thing is for sure, my desire has no single name, no single point. It is that which drives me forward, that which fuels my imagination, and that which gives meaning to my actions.
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Tue, April 5, 2005 - 1:21 PMPerhaps just considering magick as a form of "power", defined as the ability to do; capacity to act; capability of performing or producing, would be a beginning. As a metaphor you could compare it to electricity which in a chaotic form is often exhibited as lightning. We generally don't consider that form "evil" just an act of nature that is inherently dangerous. If electricity is channeled through a power grid and performs many services for us do we consider it intrinsically "good"? It is still dangerous if caution is ignored. I believe we tend more towards considering it "useful" under those circumstances. Applying aristotelian values and trying to label a force in such a manner tends to be illogical.
Sooo.....is what you are really asking about, application? That probably falls within your personal ethics and how much responsiblity you are willing to take for your actions. Heck, this applies to how you conduct your day to day living. Think about how you drive your car (if you drive) for instance. There are all those options available to you, some that will serve you better than others and some that offer a chance to die. Do you think of these in terms of "good" or "evil"? Then of course there is the matter of intent. This is still personal choice. So what are you willing to be responsible for? Take it from there.
-
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Tue, April 5, 2005 - 2:39 PMI like the electricity metaphor. Take it from a man who studied Critical Thinking. Excellent subject, good read and of good value in this type of enviroment. Good call George.
-
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Tue, April 5, 2005 - 8:30 PMMore often than not, those people who think that you are sacrificing babies will continue to think that you are sacrificing babies no matter if appeared before them with a golden aura in a white robe surrounded by angels and looking like Walter Mercado.
People will believe what they want to believe. The only thing you can say to them is, "I don't kill babies, I don't worship devils. That is pure stupidity."
Once you try looking for a pure definition of white and black magick for yourself, you immediately fall into a trap. You will never reach an absolute definition because there isn't an absolute definition. They are simply constructs, verbal myths, linguistic variables into which we can place whatever we want.
I've seen people say that doing any magick for yourself is black magick. I've seen people say that doing anything without consent is black magick. I've seen people say that white magick is the magick that doesn't work and doesn't do anything.
Really, the definitions of white and black magick are rather useless. It's all a verbal game of politics.
As I usually say to those who jokingly call me "Evil":
"I'm not Evil! I'm just a different kind of Good!" :)
-
-
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Tue, April 5, 2005 - 4:34 PMI think that black & white, good & evil, etc., are just remnants of labels slapped on so long ago by the church. As long as people keep adhering to these blanket statements, then the church/military/corporate/governmetal blah-blah-blah will always have a bank of willing slaves, and Joe Believer will never have to ponder out the ramifications of his actions for himself. Historically, it's been kind of a win-win situation. To oversimplify with a parable, the church might say it's okay to dump mercury in the water, but maybe the evil Berkeley Leftists say it'll hurt the children. Belief in black and white provides a way for you to 'provide for your family' not have to think about the consequences of your actions, sleep at night with a 'clear conscience', and die in so-called 'peace'. I recommend, rather than predefining black, white, or whatever, and assuring onself that events will conform to said definition, that one actually contemplate the ramifications of success or failure of one's actions, and honestly ask oneself if that's what one wants. The attempt to actually be responsible for oneself at this depth frequently leads to a chokehold of guilt and desire, the cause of many a nervous breakdown, which is why most people prefer to hire a priest to do it for them. Probably also why the priesthood is so corrupt as well. -
-
Re: Black and White Magick, where to draw a line...
Tue, April 5, 2005 - 5:27 PMA short message to all muggles out there, subliminally directed ...
Colour my world please ...
40 plus years ago: I remember when Telstar ran the first live telecast between New York and London ... I saw all the fuzzy bits, and as a pre-teen, marvelled at this post-modern age.
A bit later: Having spent nine years of my childhood in hospital, kept in medically controlled isolation, I discovered that my imagination could colour my world.
Later with a plus-one factor: When I grew older and a tad wiser, I realised that colour actually ran with "post-modern" as concept.
Now: You can keep your black-white dichotomy ... this post-modern operator has left the building ...
Su -
-
Re: Magick, Muggles, Colors
Wed, April 6, 2005 - 9:26 AMIn reply to your post about people thinking you kill babies and whatnot, George sure said it ... some people will believe this rot and nothing you say will necessarily change them.
Face it, real power scares people. Even magicians. Surely all of us felt that rush of fear when we realized--Hey, this stuff actually WORKS!
I have noticed in occult cirlces ... those who make a big deal about "White Magic" usually have no real power ... the goddess simply replaces sunday church picnic socials.
Those who make a big deal about black magic make much of seeming dark and scary and hinting that anyone who crosses them gets cursed. How tiresome!
I don't tell most muggles that I do magick at all. At best they might think me odd ... at worst ... evil. Who needs the stress? True Magick is a highly personal affair, anyhow, IMO.
--Natasya -
-
Re: Magick, Muggles, Colors
Wed, April 6, 2005 - 1:26 PMHere's that damb "Muggles" word again. In a post talking about sterotyping people to top the whole thing off.
When it comes to this string and it solution I have to go with Eddie. In the end it is down to edjucating people. Showing them that there is no diference between "the body of christ" being a waffer, the wine "his blood" and that of the tradition of "cakes and ale" wicca use to ground.
I have prayed in the Blue Mosque, the Vatician, the Kostnice, and numerous Buddist temples. I have whirrled with dervishes, danced the spiral, drummed with Shamans and can call myself a Frater. In the end I saw no diffrence in those I encountered. I stayed true to my Will. Everything works for everyone. No rules, no laws other then do your Will. If you can everyone wins!
We are not elite, we are not diffrent, we are not special. We are just those who discouvered Will through reason because we either could not reason faith or took the road less travelled.
We should all slay our egos. -
-
Re: Magick, Muggles, Colors
Wed, April 6, 2005 - 2:55 PMAll the things ou are talking about refer to religon, and this discussion refers to Magick.
They are different things.
-
-
Re: Magick, Muggles, Colors
Wed, April 6, 2005 - 3:45 PMReally?
Are you sure? -
-
Re: Magick, Muggles, Colors
Wed, April 6, 2005 - 7:30 PMMost mages I've met agree with that statement..
There are magickal acts performed in a religous atmosphere or for the glorification of a godform.
I think that some neo-pagan traditions tend to give one the misunderstanding that glorifying a godform is sometype of magick, it's religon just like praising any god. -
-
Magick
Wed, April 6, 2005 - 11:35 PMI offer this.
Magick is Will. Will is that which drives life forward in ways unknown to the conscious mind. It is the driving force behind the primal nature of all beasts, flora, fauna and inspiration. In this Will exist a common thread in which all things become equal, all things become balanced and it is our Will that drives us forward to it point. Our minds react on several measurable layers of thought, notably the conscious and the subconscious mind. These two minds serve to protect and enhance our bodies for all that we encounter in this world; which communicate through our senses.
Will, then, is the driving force which propels these function forward. Will is the desire that these minds are naturally focused upon. It is the conflicting actions of these minds that disturb this rhythm. A conflicted mind is the manifestation of a battled or otherwise unknown will. Do what you will. It is in this phrase the concept manifests.
Magick is the method by which all this is preformed. It is the name given to the active steps and methods in which the practitioner can manifest his or her will to achieve desired results with what would seem to be relative ease. The reason for this appearance is as stated above. The will controls the desires within us all. It is the unstoppable force prey to. It is interpreted by our thoughts in various ways all tuned to affect us.. We slow the wills progress through internal conflict with our conscious and subconscious mind. Frustration, Stress, Depression and Anxiety are all manifestations of this conflict. The natural position of the minds is the mutual truce and when this truce is met the wills progresses unpadded. Magick takes form in methods by which we may begin to act in a conscious manner toward releasing this will and giving it means to manifest.
Magick is not a religion. It has no pantheons. It has no forms. It is a recipe. Religion is Magick. It is tool by which we can seek guidance to understanding our internal will. We can see separations based on methodology between force and philosophy. In force we see manifestations of will released by faith. Through philosophy the will can be released by reason. We see methodology for each offering. We see in trance a connection with will through dulled conscious. In ritual the will is brought forth through belief in the application of formula. In gnosis the deadened senses submit to the will. In meditation the will is given council.
The two minds are by no means slave to will. They participate equally in achieving desire. Addiction, be it physical; common with alcohol, tobacco and drug, or mental, as seen in fear, compulsion and mania, is the result of one of these minds conflicting with the desire of the will, controlling action or thought and driving the brain and body forward in it’s purpose.
Many of these addictions are strong. To overcome them we utilize various methods to aid us in freeing the will. When we have finally overcome these addictions or otherwise conflicting habits and have freed our will the will can begin to utilize these same methods to enhance it’s effectiveness instead of leaving the will to act alone.
-
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: Magick
Thu, April 7, 2005 - 11:11 AMYour definition is parallel to one I use. Substitute "spirit" for "will" and it goes something like this: BEING --> SPIRIT --> DOING In this case "spirit" is the motivating bridge that connects the self to action on every level. Btw, the cycle is a feedback loop. -
-
Re: Magick
Thu, April 7, 2005 - 11:51 AMI have always know language to get a little muddled sometimes (and my spelling sure doesn't help).
To answer your other question, indeed, I used "ego" in the non-Jung term to define egotism or selfish actions. I agree that to slay the Jung ego would be akin to losing yourself to yourself, but in it's other form ego serves to distract and has little value.
I have discouvered, as of late, that the "neo-pagan" (and I truely hate to use the tag) movement is one of self-styled rulership in response to the continued collapse of religious "orders". This is fine and effective but the fact remains that religous orders provide value through preservation of tradition, myths and styles.
But this elitism is not just centered on one sect. I attended a gathering with ArchBishop Tutu and his Holyness the Dali Lama about a year back and on my way into the building I had to cross through a religious protest by "Christians for God" who declared all that attended "heathen" for honoring the presence of his Holyness. I felt no need to square off with them but asked one of banner carriers if this "heathenism" tag was to also apply to the ArchBishop. There was a slight pause and she just simply ignored me from that moment on.
I have found that many have an easier time protesting others faith while not giving note to the common goal that binds us all together. In this case we all, despite our religious backgrounds, had gathered to discuss Moral Responsibility to the World Community. I couldn't understand why anyone, regardless of background, would protest such an event.
But it is easier to destroy then it is to create and it easier to deny the accept. I have watched countless spirits (be they titled mage, shaman, priest, Frater, Rabbi, Iman, ect.) destroy their own will by cutting the strands that connect them with all else, all while preaching the quality of their path.
In the end I found that in acceptance my Will was no longer denied but trusted and it was in this freedom that, to use your language, my "being" opened all the doors for which I had sought keys.
But in the end, and this is classic universal humor, each "Spirit" or "Freed Will" holds a diffrent lamp and the knowledge which is reflected aplied in an equaly unique way. But in the art of what is called Magick "thy will shall be done on earth as it is in heaven". (and I'm not talkin' about winged spirits with harps and good wine.... though that would be nice!)
-
-
Re: Magick
Thu, April 7, 2005 - 12:24 PMHmmm.....Several good points worthy of discussion. I do think though we should start a new topic (thread) as we appear to be digressing from the original question. Do you wish to set that up?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Egos?
Wed, April 6, 2005 - 4:20 PMA short pause here to attempt to define some terms. When I use the word "ego" I am thinking of the conscious aware portion of what is called the self. I have neither the desire or the intent of ever slaying it.
However, if one is using the term meaning egocentric or egotistical which has connotations of being arrogant, conceited, self-centered or selfish that is a different matter. Those aspects of self need to have some limitations applied to them. Because at certain levels I suspect these are "hard wired" into us as basic survival traits doing away with them completely is probably not an option. Still, we should be able to reduce their affect/effect to the level that we can freely operate within a social structure without them imposing a hinderance. Someone without a sense of self worth is usually in trouble so maybe it is more about a matter of degree.
Comments?
-
-
-
-
