Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Tosaigh

A Cursory Exploration of Heathen Ethics as a Gothic Heathen influenced by Stoicism

Increasingly, I am seeing people arriving at Heathen spaces with questions our community are seemingly unprepared, unable, and/or unwilling to answer, regarding theology, ethics, aesthetics, linguistics and various other branches of philosophy. Cautiously picking up torches laid down by Sunnareda, Sarenth Odinsson and Marc to strive for progression, I am going to attempt an exploration of ethics as a Heathen, with an awareness that any conclusions may not apply to Heathenry (or Heathendom) at large. As mentioned in the title, so as to lay out significant factors right from the start, I am a Gothic Heathen and member of Sidjus Reidarje Sauilis, and am influenced by ancient Hellenic and Roman Stoicism which I was introduced to by the aforementioned Sunnareda and Marc of Of Axe & Plough. Like Marc, I feel Stoicism fits well and appropriately with Heathenry and helps to fill gaps where Heathenry has them, something I hope to demonstrate in this writing.

It seems apparent that in Heathenry, many beginner sources and materials serving as introductory works consider lists of virtues as suitable replacements for any attempt at a fleshed-out ethical viewpoint. Lists with items such as “Be honest“, “Remain pious“, “Stand up for what is right” not only feel like vague attempts at replacing the Ten Commandments of Christianity with a Germanic veneer, but also feel depressingly reminiscent of the types of things one might encounter on an “Inspirational Thought for the Day” app or book. Such things lack context, examples, or a sense of application, never mind depth, meaning or substance.

To truly consider ethics, some thought about what that means seems necessary.
The word itself comes from the Greek ēthikós (ἠθικός), meaning “relating to one’s character“, which itself in turn comes from the root word êthos (ἦθος) meaning “character, moral nature” (Liddell, 1889).

Contemporary philosophers typically divide ethics into three general areas: metaethics (where our ethical principles come from, and what they mean, e.g. the issues of universal truths, the will of God(s), the role of reason in ethical judgments, and the meaning of ethical terms themselves), normative ethics (moral standards that regulate right and wrong conduct, i.e., the good habits that we should acquire, the duties that we should follow, or the consequences of our behavior on others), and applied ethics (examining specific controversial issues, such as abortion, animal rights, or environmental concerns) (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2012).

This opens up a range of questions, each with varying implications within the context of Heathenry.

  • Where do our ethical principles come from and what do they mean for us, as Heathens?
  • What is right and what is wrong conduct for a Heathen?
  • How do we approach, view and respond to ongoing events and issues as Heathens?
  • How much of this revolves around individuals and one’s own sense of character and morality, and how much is informed by and required for the interpersonal?

I would also like to offer up the question of “How much do we draw from the past here and how much do we need to create ourselves?” at this point. (I shall not go on too much about the importance of moving beyond reconstructionist methodologies or holding on too tightly to identities based on, or pulled wholesale from, historical peoples, cultures, times and regions. For more on that, I would advise reading Of Axe & Plough‘s ““Post-Recon?” What Happens Next?” (Marc, 2020) and “On Identity Generation in Western Polytheism” (Marc, 2022)).

An exact replica looks nice behind glass in a museum. It is not so healthy for a living, adapting, evolving entity. I do not mean to suggest dismissing the past entirely, however, that would, to my mind, be throwing proverbial babies out with their bathwater as well as being highly hypocritical of me.

To return again to what we would consider to be the core tents, the basic foundational criteria of Heathenry may help provide perspective. As laid out on The Longship, a Heathen is considered someone who:

  • possesses a worldview aligned with the cosmological concepts of the Well and the Tree, and accepts wyrd and orlæg as cosmic forces;
  • engages in the gift cycle through reciprocity with appropriate divine figures — the Gods, the ancestors, and the wights; and
  • is animistic, polytheistic, and/or panentheistic. (Angelica, 2018, About Heathenry)

I would suggest each of these both impacts and informs a Heathen’s ethics in both theory and practice. I would also suggest that perhaps each of these carries more weight, meaning, significance and depth than your average Heathen, who subscribes to this definition, may consider or realise.

If wyrd (used interchangeably in this piece with the Old Norse urðr) and orlæg (used interchangeably with ON ørlǫg) are to be understood via Bauschatz’s explanation in his influential The Well and the Tree (Bauschatz, 1982), through the understanding of time being divided into past and non-past, (drawn from his linguistic analysis of Germanic languages and analysis of Beowulf), rather than the common idea of past, present and future, with the past shifting ever forwards, growing as time goes in a cyclical (but not circular.  Newcomers to this concept may perhaps benefit from envisioning a spiral, ever moving forward, but never repeating exactly) manner. To quote Bauschatz:

Thus, the Germanic universe divides temporally into past and non-past. This gives us some important information about some of the ways the Germanic peoples might have felt the passage of time. The past, as collector of events, is clearly the most dominant, controlling portion of all time. Man’s world stands at the juncture of this past and the non-past, that is, at that point, the present, in which events are in the process of becoming ‘past’. The past is experienced, known, laid down, accomplished, sure, realised. The present, to the contrary, is in flux and confusion, mixed with irrelevant and significant details. What we nowadays call the ‘future’ is, within the structure of this Germanic system, just more of the non-past, more flux, more confusion.

(Bauschatz, 1982, pp. 102)

Or as Marc puts it:

“[…] actions compound on themselves in an ever-growing, ever-reaching, ever more powerful cacophony of existence and force, an up- and outward- reaching movement of past events as they involve and shape the present.

(Marc, 2018, De Natura Temporis et Rītuum Germānicōrum)

Bauschatz suggests that this idea of the continual growth of the past, with changes and the interrelation of events, conjures up the notion of weaving (Bauschatz, 1982, pp. 24). In a Norse context, this would mean the weaving of the three Norns (or Nornir), they whose speech operates within the worlds of the Tree (ibid., pp. 89) they who water the roots of the great World-Tree of Yggdrasil whose roots extend deep into the well (Bauschatz does explore the idea of the Tree’s roots extending into three wells but posits that this is reducible to one well, the Well of Urðr, Urðarbrunner (ibid., pp. 87)).

So, the Tree holds the worlds. The Tree grows from the Well and the water runs back down as a cycle forms and continues. The past feeding the present, the present fading into an ever-growing past. The Norns (Urðr, Verðandi and Skuld), in turn, are What has Been, What is Becoming, and What Must Follow (ibid., pp. 16). The Well of Wyrd, ever-filling as the Tree grows so the present feeds it, expanding the past. So, what was on the Tree falls into the Well, and the Well is ever-filling as a result. So past and non-past. Everything is a result of the past and what came prior, so then you get onto wyrd and orlæg. So the factors of the past intertwine to create the present. Present grows out of the past, then the present becomes the past.

It may be worth noting for those familiar with the works of Mircea Eliade, that Bauschatz’ understanding of time for Germanic cultures differs from both classical Christian understanding of time and Eliade’s descriptions of time, as the Germanic peoples did not seek a return to an earlier, primal, purer time but rather they empower and create the non-past, thus the past is growing and becoming more powerful rather than increasingly distant and inaccessible (ibid. pp. 110-111).

I shall attempt to not get too bogged down by this tangent of understanding Germanic ideas of time, and would highly recommend readers peruse both The Well and the Tree and Of Axe & Plough‘s De Natura Temporis et Rītuum Germānicōrum for this.

But where this is relevant to the topic of ethics, is concerning the web of wyrd itself and contemplation of the interconnectedness of all things.

If every word, deed, or act is adding to the ever-growing past, lost to time as we reside in this liminal space of non-past, then the weight, or severity, of what we do becomes something we cannot overlook or dismiss. Suddenly, Eddic lore and myths containing retellings of heroic deeds and the like take on a great significance as they recount history, but also build the non-past (or for the sake of modern-day English-speaking readers, the present). The influence of those who came before us create the structure and foundation of the world we live in, our very existence, our being here, what we are able to do, what we are able to learn, and so on.

This brings us to the second of the three aforementioned criteria for defining a Heathen, that of the gifting cycle through which we honour, engage with, and build relationships with Gods, ancestors and spirits (Angelica, 2018. About Heathenry). As explained on The Longship:

The central mechanism of the gifting cycle is debt. Heathenry teaches that if a person gives you a gift, then you become indebted to them. It is then your responsibility as a good, honourable Heathen to repay the gift — not to fulfil or cancel out the debt, but to “flip” it around so that the other person becomes indebted to you. It is then their responsibility to repay you. In this way, the gifting cycle goes on indefinitely.

(Angelica, 2018, Gifting Cycle)

Again, it would be tangential to go in-depth explaining what the gifting cycle is, and readers are encouraged to look to The Longship’s page on the matter but contemplating the ethical implications of this would be relevant.

Between people, as The Longship mentions, gifting may take on an exploitative or aggressive quality as people give more than they could receive in turn doing harm to others and burdening others with debt. As stated:

If a gift’s material cost is greater than what the recipient can ever hope to repay, that is enslavement, for the recipient is permanently indebted to the giver. If the significance of a gift is offensive to the recipient, that is an insult, and can be viewed as a hostile statement. Historically, such gifts were declarations of war. Therefore, it is important for a modern Heathen to consider the implications of their gifts before they give it.

(ibid.)

It seems highly unlikely that such an act between two people living in the 21st Century would cause war, of course, but nevertheless the notion of harmful gifting is a concept worth some thought.

With regards to the giving of offerings, there seems to be two strands to address: what to give, and how to give it. Then regarding the gifting cycle, I would suggest the question of “How does this differ in practice between humans from how it manifests between human and God/ancestor/spirit?“. It is here that I draw from the Stoics but also here that the third point from our criteria for what constitutes a Heathen (that a Heathen be a polytheist, animist and/or panentheist (Angelica, 2018. About Heathenry)) comes into play.

As Sarenth Odinsson suggests on the interrelation between polytheism and the giving of offerings:

I can believe in the Gods as Beings unto Themselves and give no offerings at all. Belief in the Gods as Beings does not require offerings, it merely says “I believe the Gods are Beings unto Themselves”. In acknowledging the Gods as Beings unto Themselves, I must then treat Them as such, with respect. The giving of offerings comes about due to this understanding, and my place in the relationship with Them. […] In acknowledging the Gods as real, we acknowledge our relationships as real. In acknowledging our relationships as real, we acknowledge that our actions have real effects in those relationships. In acknowledging our actions have real effects we must then acknowledge that the giving of physical offerings has meaning, both in terms of our relationship with the Gods we offer to, and in the offering itself. If this is accepted, then a physical offering will mean something real in a way that is different than a non-tangible offering. A physical offering will mean something different rather than an offering made purely in sentiment, that is, made with feeling or emotion. Likewise, a physical offering made away from the altar will mean something different.

(Odinsson, 2014)

Odinsson goes on to think of performing ritual and the giving of offerings as akin to hosting guests, in such instances as we believe the Gods, ancestors and spirits are very real, giving considerable thought to the notion of hospitality. But his point of offerings being contextual is not to be overlooked. The different forms of offerings, and differing approaches to the gifting of them, may well alter the meaning of them in both effect and significance. This is found within the thoughts of the ancient Stoics.

Epictetus, as recorded by Arrian, in his Enchiridion teaches:

In piety towards the Gods, [… ]the chief element is this, to have right opinions about Them — as existing and as administering the universe well and justly— and to have set yourself to obey Them and to submit to everything that happens, and to follow it voluntarily, in the belief that it is being fulfilled by the highest intelligence. For if you act in this way, you will never blame the Gods, nor find fault with Them for neglecting you. But this result cannot be secured in any other way than by withdrawing your idea of the good and the evil from the things which are not under our control, and placing it in those which are under our control, and in those alone.[…] Wherefore, whoever is careful to exercise desire and aversion as he should, is at the same time careful also about piety. But it is always appropriate to make libations, and  sacrifices, and to give of the first fruits after the manner of our fathers, and to do all this with purity, and not in a slovenly or careless fashion, nor, indeed, in a [miserly] way, nor yet beyond our means.

(Epictetus, Enchridion XXXI)

Epictetus provides us with several points of note here. First, that the Gods both exist and that They are just in their administration of the universe (i.e., that They are good). Second, that it behoves us to leave to Them all that is outside of our control or influence, and focus on that which we can affect ourselves. Third, that the giving of offerings is always a worthy endeavour, that we ought not to overextend ourselves in doing so, but that we should not do so carelessly or without the appropriate reverence.

The first of these is the third criteria for a Heathen as listed by The Longship, with the addition of Their being just administrators of the universe (something hotly debated amongst contemporary Western polytheists).

The second of these seems, I would suggest, we can relate to the notion of the wyrd of the individual. Deeds or actions undertaken by an individual feed into the ever-growing past as explained by Bauschatz (although Bauschatz suggests only ‘significant’ deeds or actions fall within the Well, something I disagree with, viewing all deeds and actions as contributing to the larger web of wyrd), but we cannot directly control the actions of others. Our words, deeds or actions may, (and I firmly believe do), have a rippling effect as they feed into the past, but it is up to the individual to act how they each see fit in a given situation, and to leave others to act how they see fit. I do not see this as a contradiction. To be aware of the impacts of one’s own actions, deeds or words has an impact on the behaviour of the individual towards those around them, whether Divine or otherwise, as much as it sparks an awareness of how we each create our own personal pasts. The webs we weave are not only our own individual webs in our personal pasts, but interweave, intersect and intertwine with the webs others weave as we encounter, interact with and speak to others throughout our lives. But, to place Epictetus’ point in this Heathen context, we may only control how we weave ourselves, we cannot control or be responsible for the weaving of anyone else’s dedinati (wyrd).

The third of Epictetus’ points I take from this excerpt connects to The Longship’s point about debt, Odinsson’s point about the building of our relationships with the Divine, and various points within Of Axe & Plough’s “The Economy of Sacrifice: Thoughts on the Value of Gifted Goods in Heathenry” (Marc, 2018). To build a meaningful relationship, and to maintain it, requires sincerity, love, appreciation, and respect. To overextend oneself financially, emotionally, physically, in the giving of offerings not only increases that notion of debt inherent within our understanding of the gifting cycle, but also hurts oneself which impacts one’s own wyrd negatively as it is then woven into the past by the Nornir.

As stated on The Longship, Wyrd is perhaps best thought of as the threads that connect all things, and the tapestry actively woven by every individual being as each action feeds into the past. As such, each action undertaken by an individual can impact, or influence, the weave of the web. The past is solidified by the non-past as it grows and influences what may be woven back into it. As such, Heathens ought to think of themselves as part of this web connecting all things, beings, humans, animals, plants, the Gods, ancestors, spirits (Angelica, 2018. Wyrd and Orlæg). We may each be tasked with the responsibility of our own weaving but what we have to weave with is impacted by all that has come before. The ever-shifting non-past fading into the ever-growing past within which we reside.

This makes it critical for Heathens to consider the impacts of our words, actions and deeds, for our own sakes as well as for those around us in this interconnected web. To engage with others with a sense of hospitality, a sense of reciprocity and a sense of shared community.

A theory proposed by Bauschatz with this understanding of time, the Well and the Tree, suggests a direction for our ethical concerns:

For all men, clearly, the most significant moment of existence comes at the instant of death, the point at which man joins existence beyond this world.The wise man prepares himself for this instant when his individual life and the power of wyrd will be in closest conjunction; he attempts to place his life most directly in the main current of the flow of wyrd. He must act in accordance with prescribed codes of conduct received from the past; by so doing, he will protect his reputation and insure himself good fame. His actions will be governed by what he knows; therefore, the wise man seeks to discover all he can. The force of past events, which surges so meaningfully into present life, offers him some information about the nature of wyrd itself, but man, as he lives within the realm of the tree, fails in knowing the past fully. As he values himself, however, he will strive to learn. He will attempt to associate himself directly with all he knows to be good and wise. By so doing, he will place himself in the most auspicious light so that he will die well; the moment of death is the moment of greatest significance in all of ordinary life.

(Bauschatz, pp. 28)

If we are to learn from the past, it behoves each of us to add to the past in a meaningful, healthy and positive manner. That at that moment of death we are closest to the weaving of wyrd itself is such a poetic image, but a highly meaningful one. We cease to weave in this life, in this world, and can do little but look back. Others then come in our wake and look back to us, now in the past, and hopefully learn from our words, actions and deeds. That we can never fully know the past seems fitting, just as we can never fully know the Gods, but the impetus is upon us to align ourselves with what is deemed to be good, virtuous and meaningful as we strive to do the best we can and learn all we may. It is not within our control for others to think of us or learn from us, but striving to be good examples for those around us and lead good lives strengthens the relationships we have with our fellow humans, the Gods, ancestors and spirits that they may choose to remember us after we join with the past.

This, perhaps more than any other point, seems most aligned with Stoic thought to my mind. We can also draw from Stoic thought here to contextualise and expand our Heathen ideas thus far.

For the Stoics, the good is to be identified with virtue. Virtues include logic, physics, ethics, wisdom, moderation, justice, and courage. They hold that all human psychological functions are rational in a single, unified sense. For them, all virtues form a unity around the core concept of knowledge. For Stoics, all that is required for happiness is to lead a virtuous life. In this teaching Stoics are addressing the problem of bodily and external goods raised by Aristotle. Their solution takes the radical course of dismissing such alleged goods from the account of happiness because they are not necessary for virtue, and are not, in fact, in any way good at all (Parry and Thorsrud, 2021).

Since possessing and exercising virtue is happiness, happiness does not include such things as health, pleasure, and wealth. Still, the Stoics do not dismiss these assets altogether since they still have a kind of value. These things are indifferent to happiness in that they do not add to one’s virtue nor detract from it, and so they do not add to or take away from one’s possession of the good. One is not more virtuous because healthy nor less virtuous because ill. But being healthy generally conforms with nature’s plans for the lives of animals and plants, so it is preferable to be healthy, and one should try to preserve and maintain one’s health. Health is, then, the kind of value they call a preferred indifferent; but it is not in any way a good, and it makes no contribution to the quality of one’s life as a good or a bad one, happy or miserable.

(ibid.)

As such we arrive at the notion of the indifferents (i.e., neither good nor bad) and the question of what happiness is:

Zeno’s answer was “a good flow of life” […] or “living in agreement,” and Cleanthes clarified that with the formulation that the end was “living in agreement with nature” […]. Chrysippus amplified this to […]“living in accordance with experience of what happens by nature;” later Stoics […] substituted such formulations as “the rational selection of the primary things according to nature.” The Stoics’ specification of what happiness consists in cannot be adequately understood apart from their views about value and human psychology.
[…] [A]ll parties agree that possession of what is genuinely good secures a person’s happiness. The Stoics claim that whatever is good must benefit its possessor under all circumstances.
[…] But the Stoics are not such lovers of paradox that they are willing to say that [a] preference for wealth over poverty in most circumstances is utterly groundless. They draw a distinction between what is good and things which have value (axia). Some indifferent things, like health or wealth, have value and therefore are to be preferred, even if they are not good, because they are typically appropriate, fitting or suitable (oikeion) for us.
[…] Because the Stoics identify the moral virtues with knowledge, and thus the perfection of our rational natures, that which is genuinely good is also most appropriate to us. So, if our moral and intellectual development goes as it should, we will progress from valuing food and warmth, to valuing social relations, to valuing moral virtue. Ideally, we’ll have the recognition that the value that moral virtue has is of a different order to those things that we were naturally attracted to earlier. We then come to see that virtue is the only good.

(Baltzly, 2018)

Bauschatz suggests that for the Germanic peoples, dying well, having led a good, virtuous life was of paramount importance as we join with the past, having strived to learn all we can, live well and serve those around us. The Stoics suggest living virtuously is the only good. I would posit that the ideas of the Stoics here may help ease the minds of those concerned about their inherited orlæg. Whilst one’s orlæg is unalterable and was woven deep in the past by what came before, and impacts things ranging from physical or mental ability to class status, economic standing, natural ability, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, where and when one may be born and so on, this has raised concerns in our communities of what that means for the less able, or disabled; of what it may mean for those struggling with their mental or emotional wellbeing; of what it means for those who are not born into a Germanic family or an English (or other Germanic language)-speaking family and so on. Bauschatz suggests that for the Germanic peoples of old, the true aim was to live well and die well having lived well. The Stoics seem to support this in both Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, referring to such things as indifferents. Whilst physical ability, or speaking English, or having the time or ability to learn Old Norse, or any number of other things may seem preferable, they are not necessarily beneficial in all circumstances, they do not necessarily help one to live a good or virtuous life, nor do they necessarily help one’s piety. Inferred from all of this, it seems clear that it is on those who are more able, more healthy, or otherwise in what may deemed to be preferable circumstances to help, aid or benefit those who are perhaps struggling more. But that is not to say abandoning one’s vocation for permanent charitable work is necessarily the solution, as the Stoics speak of acting in accordance with one’s nature. Much like how we each weave our own individual wyrd, and this has an impact on the wyrd of those around us and the wider universe, each of us acting (or not acting) in accordance to our own nature is ultimately something only we can decide and choose to do individually.

As Bauschatz describes in his examination of Old Norse literature, only the Nornir know what they do. As Epictetus would tell us, the Gods are just and fair in Their administration of the worlds, and we should focus our attention on what it is that we may do ourselves. If living well, living virtuously, means living in accordance to our own nature, and building and maintaining relationships with those around us both Divine and otherwise, we would be wise to support those around us, remain pious towards the Gods, continue the interactivity of the gifting cycle with those around us and the Gods, ancestors and spirits.

The sheer scale of this topic, and my word count this far, necessitates that I draw this to an open-ended close.

To briefly review my earlier questions with suggested answers:

  • Where do our ethical principles come from and what do they mean for us, as Heathens?
    – The past, those who came before. We learn from the mistakes of our predecessors and strive to live good lives for those who come after us.
  • What is right and what is wrong conduct for a Heathen?
    – To build and maintain good, healthy, positive relationships with all beings around us, to live in accordance to our nature and be of benefit to our communities.
  • How do we approach, view and respond to ongoing events and issues as Heathens?
    – Each in their own way, according to ability and nature is tasked with asking themselves what is good in each case and what benefits all involved, with an awareness that the actions of the individual impact the actions of all others.
  • How much of this revolves around individuals and one’s own sense of character and morality, and how much is informed by and required for the interpersonal?
    – Yes. The words, actions, deeds and thoughts of the individual are how we each continue to weave our own wyrd, contributing to the ever-growing past and this in turn impacts the larger web of wyrd as each weaving impacts the weaving of all others.

I hope to return to this in future as my own understanding deepens and further reflections or insights occur to me through both my ongoing research on the questions within this piece, and my practice as a Heathen. I wholeheartedly and eagerly invite others to pick this up and contribute their own thoughts on ethics within Heathenry, drawing upon their own influences and practices, that together we may deepen our practices and further the understanding of our community. I leave you with this from Seneca:

Live among men as if God beheld you; speak with God as if men were listening

Seneca, Letter X

Angelica, 2018. About Heathenry. [online] The Longship. Available at: <https://thelongship.net/about-heathenry/> [Accessed 14 October 2022].
Angelica, 2018. Gifting Cycle. [online] The Longship. Available at: <https://thelongship.net/gifting-cycle/> [Accessed 14 October 2022].
Angelica, 2018. Wyrd and Orlæg. [online] The Longship. Available at: <https://thelongship.net/wyrd-and-orlaeg/> [Accessed 14 October 2022].
Baltzly, D., 2018. Stoicism: 5. Ethics. [online] Plato.stanford.edu. Available at: <https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/stoicism/#Eth> [Accessed 14 October 2022].
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2012. Ethics | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Archived). [online] Available at: <https://web.archive.org/web/20180119084940/http://www.iep.utm.edu/ethics> [Accessed 14 October 2022].
Bauschatz, P., 1982. The Well and the Tree: World and Time in Early Germanic Culture. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
Epictetus, Epictetus, the Discourses as reported by Arrian, the Manual, and Fragments (trans. from Greek by W. A. Oldfather). 3rd ed. London, UK: William Heinemann Ltd., pp.512-515. Available at: <https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Epictetus,_the_Discourses_as_reported_by_Arrian,_the_Manual,_and_Fragments/Manual> [Accessed 14 October 2022].
Liddell, H., 1889. An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon. New York: Harper & Brothers, p.349.
Marc, 2018. The Economy of Sacrifice: Thoughts on the Value of Gifted Goods in Heathenry. [online] Of Axe and Plough. Available at: <https://axeandplough.com/2018/05/21/the-economy-of-sacrifice-thoughts-on-the-value-of-gifted-goods-in-heathenry/> [Accessed 14 October 2022].
Marc, 2018. De Natura Temporis et Rītuum Germānicōrum. [online] Of Axe and Plough. Available at: <https://axeandplough.com/2018/07/12/de-natura-temporis-et-rituum-germanicorum/> [Accessed 14 October 2022].
Marc, 2020. “Post-Recon”? What Happens Next?. [online] Of Axe and Plough. Available at: <https://axeandplough.com/2020/05/23/post-recon-what-happens-next/> [Accessed 14 October 2022].
Marc, 2022. On Identity Generation in Western Polytheism. [online] Of Axe and Plough. Available at: <https://axeandplough.com/2022/03/08/on-identity-generation-in-western-polytheism/> [Accessed 14 October 2022].
Odinsson, S., 2014. Ethics and Animism in Polytheism Part 1. [online] Sarenth Odinsson. Available at: <https://sarenth.wordpress.com/2014/01/02/ethics-and-animism-in-polytheism/> [Accessed 14 October 2022].
Parry, R. and Thorsrud, H., 2021. Ancient Ethical Theory: 8. The Stoics. [online] Plato.stanford.edu. Available at: <https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-ancient/#Stoi> [Accessed 14 October 2022].
Seneca, Epistulae morales ad Lucilium (trans. from Latin by R. M. Gummere, Ph.D.). London, UK: William Heinemann Ltd.. Available at: <https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Moral_letters_to_Lucilius/Letter_10> [Accessed 14 October 2022].


If you like the stuff you’re seeing round here, feel free to help fuel my coffee habit.

Fógrán

Published by snowceadaoin

Haigh, I'm Snow, the wintery, gothic, ghostly, English/Irish one. Sé/É i nGaelainn nó They/Them in English. Bisexual. Gothic Heathen, Kemetic Polytheist, and however many other applicable labels. I like sci-fi, horror, martial arts, gardening, languages, cats and coffee. Níl aon am saor agam. Antifa. Iss die Reichen. Eg drikk mykje kaffi. 𐌲𐌰𐌹𐍃𐌰𐌻𐌰𐌹𐌺𐍃 𐌹𐌼 Is mıse Sneaċta ᛊᚾᚨᛃᚹᚨᚷᚨᛉ ᛊᛁᛁᚱᛖᛖᛞᛁᛃᚨ

2 thuairim ar “A Cursory Exploration of Heathen Ethics as a Gothic Heathen influenced by Stoicism

  1. Really fascinating post and good food for thought. It’s interesting to see how well Stoicism (my main philosophical influence as well) works so well in a Heathen framework, as I think it does with Kemeticism as well. Looking forward to future installments of this topic!

    Molta ag 2 duine

Freagra

Líon amach do chuid faisnéise thíos nó cliceáil ar dheilbhín le logáil isteach:

Lógó WordPress.com

Is le do chuntas WordPress.com atá tú ag freagairt. Logáil Amach /  Athrú )

Peictiúr Twitter

Is le do chuntas Twitter atá tú ag freagairt. Logáil Amach /  Athrú )

Pictiúr Facebook

Is le do chuntas Facebook atá tú ag freagairt. Logáil Amach /  Athrú )

Ceangal le %s

Molann %d blagálaí é seo: