Woo.

[TeaDidikai]

Doctrix

It would be, yes. But I have not suggested that reason, and I don't disagree with your positions, that I know of, particularly any of significance to a Wicca FAQ.

Not if the idea is to truly educate people. One of the major problems is that the FAQ only reflects one string of attitudes in BTW, and that narrowness does a disservice to people who are trying to understand and likely get confused and flustered when they meet Wiccans who don't hold the same perspective on things.

[Doctrix]

TeaDidikai

Doctrix

It would be, yes. But I have not suggested that reason, and I don't disagree with your positions, that I know of, particularly any of significance to a Wicca FAQ.

Not if the idea is to truly educate people. One of the major problems is that the FAQ only reflects one string of attitudes in BTW, and that narrowness does a disservice to people who are trying to understand and likely get confused and flustered when they meet Wiccans who don't hold the same perspective on things.

There are two potential issues with the "attitude" of the post. One is the "attitude" is in that it is written with a rude 'tude (with respect to Triste as I miss her wit). The other is that it is written from the "attitude" or point of view that BTW is Wicca. Of course, if I or any other BTW were to write an updated FAQ, we would likely write it from the understanding of the Wicca we know and have been sworn to uphold. So the latter cannot be avoided entirely since our religion is what informs our worldview and we are necessarily biased. The former, however, can be tempered to avoid confusion while still keeping a sense of humour.

[TeaDidikai]

Doctrix

There are two potential issues with the "attitude" of the post. One is the "attitude" is in that it is written with a rude 'tude (with respect to Triste as I miss her wit). The other is that it is written from the "attitude" or point of view that BTW is Wicca. Of course, if I or any other BTW were to write an updated FAQ, we would likely write it from the understanding of the Wicca we know and have been sworn to uphold. So the latter cannot be avoided entirely since our religion is what informs our worldview and we are necessarily biased. The former, however, can be tempered to avoid confusion while still keeping a sense of humour.

Back in the day, even before you were initiated, it was confirmed that not all Initiates view aspects of how Wicca is presented in the same way. Sure, there will be coloring informed by the training you've gone through, but that wouldn't make it impossible for you or anyone else to acknowledge the different perspectives you've seen over the years.

[Doctrix]

TeaDidikai

Sure, there will be coloring informed by the training you've gone through, but that wouldn't make it impossible for you or anyone else to acknowledge the different perspectives you've seen over the years.

True, but that would be beyond the scope of any FAQ and in particularly poor taste if the purpose is honest education, since one Wiccan cannot claim to speak on behalf of all Wiccans. For practical purposes, I would choose to answer authentic frequently asked questions about the Wicca I know. That doesn't mean that I need to spend time discrediting the Wicca I don't know, but it certainly means that I would be wise to omit practices, points of view and beliefs about which I know nothing.

[TeaDidikai]

Doctrix

True, but that would be beyond the scope of any FAQ and in particularly poor taste if the purpose is honest education, since one Wiccan cannot claim to speak on behalf of all Wiccans.

This is the very issue with the current FAQ. It is a single perspective instead of addressing the variety within Wicca and that is what I'm talking about.

Quote:

For practical purposes, I would choose to answer authentic frequently asked questions about the Wicca I know. That doesn't mean that I need to spend time discrediting the Wicca I don't know, but it certainly means that I would be wise to omit practices, points of view and beliefs about which I know nothing.

Wouldn't ask you to discredit that which you've been taught. This isn't a push for one perspective over another, or the kind of BS that could parallel with the Creationists demanding Intelligent Design be taught in Biology along side evolution.

Let's step back for a sec.
It is too easy to turn "this is what I'm taught" into "this is the only way", how does that get avoided when the point of having an FAQ is to have an authoritative reference point but that point of reference isn't uniform among all valid Wiccans?

[Doctrix]

TeaDidikai

Let's step back for a sec.
It is too easy to turn "this is what I'm taught" into "this is the only way", how does that get avoided when the point of having an FAQ is to have an authoritative reference point but that point of reference isn't uniform among all valid Wiccans?

Ah, thank you for framing the question. Perhaps the answer is to say "this is what I was taught was the only way." After all, for something to be uniform among all the Wiccans that is exactly the two sets of circmstances that would have to be present. Christians would encounter the same issues, and could choose to be either abrasive or anthropological about it as well.

[Calelith]

TeaDidikai

?

I thought you wanted nothing to do with Wicca, which would include the current discussion.

"Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Cthulhu R’lyeh wagh’nagl fhtagn."

[TeaDidikai]

Doctrix

Ah, thank you for framing the question. Perhaps the answer is to say "this is what I was taught was the only way." After all, for something to be uniform among all the Wiccans that is exactly the two sets of circmstances that would have to be present.

That's fair.

Quote:

Christians would encounter the same issues, and could choose to be either abrasive or anthropological about it as well.

Can see that, back when it was Cu, Nuri, Deo and I doing most of the discussions, some of the interesting questions were raised when different Wiccans had different opinions about certain things. Granted you can only speak to your perspective as an Elder of your tradition, but I see where the overlap of the two circumstances would help with that.

Calelith

TeaDidikai

?

I thought you wanted nothing to do with Wicca, which would include the current discussion.

"Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Cthulhu R’lyeh wagh’nagl fhtagn."

You do understand there is a huge difference between never wanting to be Wiccan and wanting there to be accurate information as a matter of intellectual honesty, right?

[scorplett]

Doctrix

Perhaps the answer is to say "this is what I was taught was the only way."

QFE
I like that. smile

I thought that the FAQ was, by necessity of the forum rules in M&R, based on independently verifiable fact and not opinions help by persons who may or may not be initiates.

I really don't know what the other perspectives are, because as any initiate knows, we all have the core and without the core we are not of the Wica. Our liturgy and our experiences make that so.

I don't think that the personal opinions of wiccans really has any bearing on what the provable facts are. The Wicca FAQ isn't about the voice of initiates for the very reason that it's the facts and not the initiation that the FAQ is about.

All that said, I do believe that the FAQ does currently state that there are a broad spectrum of personal views among initiates. That's pretty much said in every thread. what with the whole orthopraxy thing if it's not said explicitly its certainly implied as a result of orthopraxy.

Im really lost as to why this discussion is still going on considering M&R isn't a out opinions, it's a out supportable fact. Has that changed or something? Is there some relevance of people's opinions of various issues and do they change any of the facts? (my questions are largely hypothetical)

[Calelith]

TeaDidikai

You do understand there is a huge difference between never wanting to be Wiccan and wanting there to be accurate information as a matter of intellectual honesty, right?

You've already proven you don't care about accurate information or care about being intellectually honest.

Also:

"Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Cthulhu R’lyeh wagh’nagl fhtagn."

[TeaDidikai]

Calelith

TeaDidikai

You do understand there is a huge difference between never wanting to be Wiccan and wanting there to be accurate information as a matter of intellectual honesty, right?

You've already proven you don't care about accurate information or care about being intellectually honest.

"Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Cthulhu R’lyeh wagh’nagl fhtagn."

Of course I do. Don't confuse mindlessly agreeing with "accurate information", and at least make your own graphic.

[Calelith]

TeaDidikai

Calelith

TeaDidikai

You do understand there is a huge difference between never wanting to be Wiccan and wanting there to be accurate information as a matter of intellectual honesty, right?

You've already proven you don't care about accurate information or care about being intellectually honest.

"Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Cthulhu R’lyeh wagh’nagl fhtagn."

Of course I do. Don't confuse mindlessly agreeing with "accurate information", and at least make your own graphic.

Then why have you been bending the truth so it's in your favor?

mainly in reference to this:

Quote:

-snip- back when it was Cu, Nuri, Deo and I doing most of the discussions, -snip-

"Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Cthulhu R’lyeh wagh’nagl fhtagn."

[TeaDidikai]

Calelith

Then why have you been bending the truth so it's in your favor?

mainly in reference to this:

Quote:

-snip- back when it was Cu, Nuri, Deo and I doing most of the discussions, -snip-

"Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Cthulhu R’lyeh wagh’nagl fhtagn."

Don't consider that my favor. What that is in favor of us a kind of process where people are able to explore different ideas, even ones that prove to be wrong. Without that, it's mostly just a lot of baiting questions targeting people who don't get it. Did a fair bit of that myself on both sides as a devils advocate and it didn't do any good as the current state of the discussion can attest to.

[Calelith]

TeaDidikai

Calelith

Then why have you been bending the truth so it's in your favor?

mainly in reference to this:

Quote:

-snip- back when it was Cu, Nuri, Deo and I doing most of the discussions, -snip-

"Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Cthulhu R’lyeh wagh’nagl fhtagn."

Don't consider that my favor. What that is in favor of us a kind of process where people are able to explore different ideas, even ones that prove to be wrong. Without that, it's mostly just a lot of baiting questions targeting people who don't get it. Did a fair bit of that myself on both sides as a devils advocate and it didn't do any good as the current state of the discussion can attest to.

And? I don't see you answering the question anywhere in there...

"Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Cthulhu R’lyeh wagh’nagl fhtagn."

[TeaDidikai]

Calelith

TeaDidikai

Calelith

Then why have you been bending the truth so it's in your favor?

mainly in reference to this:

Quote:

-snip- back when it was Cu, Nuri, Deo and I doing most of the discussions, -snip-

"Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Cthulhu R’lyeh wagh’nagl fhtagn."

Don't consider that my favor. What that is in favor of us a kind of process where people are able to explore different ideas, even ones that prove to be wrong. Without that, it's mostly just a lot of baiting questions targeting people who don't get it. Did a fair bit of that myself on both sides as a devils advocate and it didn't do any good as the current state of the discussion can attest to.

And? I don't see you answering the question anywhere in there...

"Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Cthulhu R’lyeh wagh’nagl fhtagn."

Bolded it for ya.
Calelith, it's time to stop. You want to have an honest conversation about this stuff? Fine. But this isn't the way to go about it with me.