We believe in determinism because we’re at the mercy of the powerful.
Anything else is wishful or fearful thinking.
PSA: I’m writing to you from Ireland. I curse like a sailor. I’m not mad at anyone, I just don’t speak American.
I don’t know what goes through my cat’s mind, I can’t read it. The same is true for anyone else’s mind: I can’t read it. The only mind I can read is my own. My oracular craft is centered on other skills, not this one.
That being said, if I were to take an educated guess, I’d say he believes certain things are determined and beyond his control — precisely because I have the power, I control these things. This could be why, every morning at a specific time, he waits patiently outside the bedroom for treats. I leave food overnight, but what he really likes is the treats I give every morning. (And no, I don’t sleep with my cat. Judge me).
Human beings operate similarly. Deep down, very deep down, if you really dig into your own psyche with all the eagerness you can muster, you’ll find that this is true: you already know who is controlling and pulling the strings of the events and circumstances which feel “determined” for you. Maybe you’re denying it to protect your pride, maybe you’re ashamed of admitting it, but do you KNOW? Yes, you KNOW. It’s never a mystery, it never requires investigation or mental gymnastics. That’s the point. Above, I gave you an example of a scenario where I am this powerful puppet master. I’m sure you have your own examples to recall. So, no, I’m not adopting a victim mentality here. Power is relative. Sometimes you have it; other times, you don’t.
Following on the same example — bear with me. I know it sounds pedantic, but you’ll be grateful I didn’t kick-start this article by ruffling your feathers. Cats are a pretty innocent allegory. They don’t ring our alarm sirens or prompt us to stop listening. They’re just cute little fluffballs — my cat is unlikely to even try “overthrowing” me from this position of power because we have a social contract going. I provide him shelter, protection, play, a few cosy places to lounge/sleep, food, water, and the treats he’s come to love, and he agrees to follow my rules. Not all of the rules, of course (we all know how cats are temperamental), but at least the very basic ones, such as “don’t attack your owner or chase her out of the house to usurp control of things”. The fact I have control of things is working out pretty well for him, after all. So, this is not about pursuing power for its own sake or purely for symbolic status (and therefore, cats are NOT narcissists. I’ll die on this hill, lol).
This leads us to our second important observation: revolutions where power is overthrown by force are rare, not because they’re difficult to accomplish (not at all! They’re pretty easy actually), but because it’s difficult to convince people that it’s worth it to follow through with the idea. After all, social contracts (however faulty) provide us security. The alternative is a scary unknown.
I could wrap up the article here, in all fairness, since there’s enough food for thought above. However, if you know me, you know I won’t.
Let’s get weirder.
Some people fear oracles. Other people envy them. Others, even, ridicule the craft because they’re in fact afraid but won’t be straightforward and admit it. Now, my question is: have you ever wondered why?
Seriously. Have you ever wondered why nobody seems to shrug or be neutral at the thought of people providing oracle services? Aren’t you curious why the reactions are ALWAYS strong, one way or another?
Like, even among the sceptical and the vocal non-believers, there seems to be… Big feelings. Nobody walks around saying nonchalantly, “yeah, that’s just a belief. I don’t mind the existence of it at all”. Are you curious to know why?
Well, I am. I’ve been curious about it for decades. And today I’m bringing you some of my hypotheses. Here’s the first:
Reason #1: the human love-hate relationship with determinism.
We collectively have a bias against oracles, since we view them as the “spokespeople of determinism” — but at the same time, paradoxically, we also put oracles on a pedestal, because as much as determinism is uncomfortable, we just can’t help wishing that it was real (since it dispels a BIGGER discomfort — the chaos). Both assumptions couldn’t be further from the truth, but that’s the collective bias anyway.
We have decided (although we won’t always admit it — especially those of us who take pride in reason and logic) that if we’re looking into the future at all, it needs to be something pre-determined; Or else, we might as well not bother.
So, you see, this often takes the shape of a projection. It’s not that we truly think anyone who practices oracle IS giving away pre-determined outcomes to people’s inquiries. Deep down, we know that’s not true; But we wish that it was true because we expect the comfort of certainty, so we superimpose the real, complex, existing-out-there image of the person giving oracles with this veil of wishfulness whereby they go from messengers of possible outcomes to messengers of CERTAIN outcomes.
Bear in mind this distinction, it’s very important. We shouldn’t be so naive to say, “oracles dwell in the complete unknown and pitch-black darkness”, because that’s not true either. Any predictions we pursue (even something as scientific as the weather) naturally imply shedding SOME light onto the darkness of the unknown — hence oracular gods often being associated with light, but I digress — however, there’s a catch: this isn’t a “light” of certainty. It’s a “light” of tendency and probability. It reveals the background and the curtains that have already been prepared… But what would be a play without the actors?
As I usually say or imply, “the future is shallow”. It can’t have any depth. The depth that some people look for can’t be there because it’d be taking-up space from our freedom of decision-making. This is often the bigger part of the future —the part we decide by means of taking action — hence the need for a generous amount of emptiness in any prediction. Okay, let’s move on from here, I’m getting nerdy and rambling a bit much.
Some people are so contrarian to this idea of a non-determined future, though (because they’re scared of having to make decisions, but won’t admit that), that they create self-fulfilling prophecies out of sheer stubbornness: “I want such-and-such thing to happen this specific way, because at least I can be certain about it. So I’ll do what it takes”, is what they’d say if they were aware of their unconscious mind. The theatrical analogy to that would be if an actor suddenly decided against saying his lines or improvising or, ya know, doing anything really, and proceeded to “be a tree” in the background.
This brings us to the next reason why we have big feelings about oracles:
Reason #2: we think oracles are authoritarian and to be feared.
This misconception is borne out of propaganda, which dates back to… before Christ, at least. You see, it’s been around for a hot minute. I don’t even blame people for taking it as a truth.
We have a bit of a lobster problem here.
For the unaware, there was a time (especially here in Northern Europe) when lobsters (yes, prepared for consumption and all — not just the raw material from the sea) were dirt cheap. In some parts of Ireland, there are sailors still alive who remember how the poor used to eat them. In Iceland, you can still get them for cheap depending where you go. (Shout out to Íslenski Barinn in Reykjavík ❤️). So… back to our point: lobsters only became expensive as a result of American propaganda in the mid 20th century with the advent of easy transport (by rail) and mass production. But to answer it in a more simplified way: there’s no reason for the prestige other than “rich people became fans, and therefore everyone started associating lobsters with sophistication”.
The same is true for oracular work. Once upon a time in Ancient Greece… Well, you know the story already, so I won’t bore you. But did you know the same exact activity is practiced to this day by African tribes and religions of the Afro diaspora alike? All over the world? Yes, it’s a thing. THAT kind of oracle isn’t overly hyped or put on a pedestal by anyone who is familiar with it — on the contrary, “average Joes” consult it all the time. The difference is, no Emperors, generals, or other high-ranking bureaucrats happened to spread the word about these Bantu and Yoruba ladies who channel messages from spirit. Propaganda didn’t happen to them the same way as in the Classical world. But a lobster is a lobster is a lobster, if you get me.
⚠️ ⚠️ ⚠️ Tangent alert ⚠️ ⚠️ ⚠️
Now I’m wondering “what if” in an alternative universe, rich people never decided to make oracles trendy and cool? Would historians today be calling it an “activity of the lower classes of the time, showcasing a rare instance of a Prehistoric, inidigenous relic surviving intact amid the more civilised polis”? (Quick, someone call Philomena Cunk to voice-over what I just wrote). Bottom line is: either way, oracles just can’t win. They’d end up cancelled by the majority’s prejudice one way or another.
#OraclePride #StopTheDiscrimination
So, that’s prestige out of the way. Now, let’s talk about the perceived religious authority of oracles — something at least a bit more plausible than the prestige assumption.
What’s up with oracles “speaking on behalf of a deity”?
You know, I include every kind of oracle here, not just the channellers (shout out to you — yes, YOU — if you have a tarot deck and use it), tea readers and whatnot. That’s because, if there’s a message, maybe you’re the messenger handling the code, but there must also be a source. Maybe he or she is not possessing you, but we assume their existence for the sake of keeping with logic: every message comes from SOMEWHERE. If you’re a die-hard sceptic, you’ll say it’s the person themselves making it up as they go — but there ya go, there IS a source even in that case (equal to messenger). That’s my point. Anyway, caveat aside, with oracles, a lot of people agree to believe that this source is separate and superior to us mere mortals.
This begs the question: who the fuck do these oracles think they are? Better than other humans? *Insert here a scoffing sound*
Well… no. Not exactly. We’re just working. Ya know, back when we didn’t have computers, phones OR telegraphs, and most messages were delivered via pony mail, the profession of “messenger” was a thing. Did these professionals work for VIP customers who would write messages to be delivered wherever they wanted? Of-fucking-course. Who DOESN’T want a stable career? Surely you can’t survive solely out of love for the craft and a few pennies here and there from the occasional casual author writing to family. That doesn’t automatically make any messenger a snob or a stuck-up idiot with notions, last time I checked.
Apply the same logic to a god and human [professional] relationship, however much suspension of disbelief it might require of you: wouldn’t you prefer to work with a deity if you had to choose between them and… some spirit in the pub down the lane you barely know? Nothing personal, honestly. Scammers abound, even beyond our 5 senses. It’s a more understandable choice to bet on the safer god / higher spirit we already background-checked.
Basically, no, rest assured, oracles aren’t trying to appear important by “hanging out” with important spirits. What do you think we are? Narcissists? I know we’re in the age of selfies and show-offs, but aiming high in this field actually has a security reason: the same way I don’t want unknown people stealing my money, I don’t want unknown spirits stealing my energy.
There’s translation in the mix, too. It ain’t glamorous, I’m telling ya. I fucking wish I were so perfect as to “speak on behalf” of anyone. What I do resembles more a drunk parrot trying to deliver something it overheard in a crowded room. The resulting utterance is seldom untouched or as preciously intact and authoritative as people think. Human error exists in this profession too, like anywhere else.
Reason #3: we think oracles are superhuman or other-than-human, because… Again, determinism (and a sprinkle of unhealthy Christian bias, too).
There’s the common inclination to think of oracles as “chosen ones” — because surely, if you talk to (a) god, you must be above the rest of the congregation? Well, first of all, you can’t believe in oracles and be a monotheist (pick one or the other), and secondly, without monotheism, (you might not realise that but) we can’t exactly have a “fear” of god. It’s downgraded to mere respect and reliance. Polytheists rely on gods like forces of nature. Do you solemny “fear” the sun or a gust of wind? Unlikely.
But there’s another reason why oracles get seen as “chosen ones”: we assume that in order to do this job, you must be born a certain way, which implies you’re somehow special. This parallels the misconception that [insert skill here] doesn’t need to be honed at all and is simply talent. Well, if you’re a diehard naturalist, what can I do? I won’t waste my time arguing with people who don’t believe nurture is a thing. But if you’re willing to hear me out, consider retiring the “chosen one” narrative.
“Chosen one” my arse. I’m not downplaying it, I’m telling you in all honesty, from experience: I didn’t get chosen, I don’t even know what that would be like. I simply offered my service and was accepted. Kind of like (if this translated into verbal language, but let’s pretend it does for the sake of clarity here) — me approaching the god I’m with saying “hey, so, uh, do you want to use me? It’s cool with me. I figured it’s better to be busy with someone I can trust than having to run from all these random creeps who try to do the same”. Casual tone aside, you get the idea. I could have received a “no”. And I bet many others receive a “yes” too. It ain’t special, it’s just that when Christianity is all you know, anything that goes beyond passively listening to a priest makes you mind-blown.
In other words, bringing us back to the whole point of this article — I think it’s very nice to have some aspects of my life “determined” by a deity if that means I get strategic protection. Not that determinism was a given there. I chose it nonetheless.
I mean, sure, there is an element of natural inclination to it if you’re laser-focused on ONE kind of oracle only (the channelling, ritualistic kind), sort of like if you wanna be a perfume maker, it helps to have a functioning nose. The same way there’s a blueprint to what it means to have a human body, but sometimes deviations occur lacking or abounding this-or-that part… This diversity happens with our spiritual bodies too. They aren’t all exactly the same. But allow me to suggest that between acknowledging that, and jumping to the conclusion that “only a rare few” are able to receive spirits, there’s an abyssal leap you’re forgetting to see.
Other oracle systems don’t even require this specific kind of 6th sense — average intuition will do — and they’re just as accurate. Again, why not try tarot. I use it sometimes and like it very much. If you’re scoffing at it now… Well… What can I say? Shadow work helps getting that ego under control. I’m speaking of tools that accomplish a task, and you come full of expectations about showing off or being perceived by others a certain way? Eh. Food for thought.
You see, believing that anyone at all is “naturally a certain way, period” points to determinism. It’s the same as saying one does not have free will. Whether you agree or disagree with the belief, you can’t deny its connection to determinism. This article I recently read makes some good points, although I will mention that I disagree with certain arguments in it — for example, the assumption that the Platonic and Neoplatonic schools of thought promote a deterministic worldview, which is… Questionable. It’s not that surface-level interpretations fuelled by an (again!) internalised/unconscious Christian supremacist bias against anything pagan-era related can’t lead to that, but I’m very sceptical that any philosopher at all (Ancient or not) would use “lazy thinking”. Regardless, who am I to comment? Certainly not a philosopher, myself. I’m only mentioning that, because often times when someone vehemently criticises something, there’s at least a tiny bit of projection at play (which isn’t the insult people think it is. It simply happens. It’s a human instinct as common as shitting). Both this author and I are rolling our eyes at the close-minded and rigid, and yet, we have our own rigid boundaries here and there which some people would argue are “too much”.
Anyway.
I like his argument against blind conformity and will cite it here:
We have basic human tendencies, but we can freely choose whether or not to follow those basic human tendencies. Society tells us what to value, but we freely choose to follow or not follow what society tells us.
…And as much as the above words could have been my own, I’ll also add another layer of reasoning to them: “yes, and”… Let’s also take into account the fact our choices take our survival and well-being into consideration. Do some people blindly follow leaders they don’t fully agree with? Sure. But is it my place (or anyone else’s) to feel superior to those people? No. That’s because, simply put, the problem runs deeper than just “stupidity”. It’s also to do with fearing the alternative — the scary, pitch-black chaos of the unknown.
It is precisely because the admissal of responsibility over the *choice* to blindly follow, out of fear of the alternatives, one powerful figure promising certainty, comfort, and reversal to “the good old days” sort of requires a level of maturity a lot of people don’t have… that they revert to pretending, and stating with all the conviction in their hearts, “I have no choice anyway”. No free-will. Determinism is a comfortable shield behind which we can feel protected from societal shame and nagging.
In the end of the day, what I’m saying is: fear can be found underneath a lot of our problems. Let’s all go to therapy. The End.
I’m kidding, of course. We need to keep the following in mind (as Dr Anna so eloquently said in a recent video) —
In case you aren’t a fan of audio/videos: here’s me summarising/paraphrasing the signs that someone is not willing to listen to any kind of new input no matter what:
- The person doesn’t display active reflective listening. Not nodding along or saying “m-hm”, not signaling to you some other way that they’re following your train of thought before replying.
- Their only responses lack depth or a sign they’ve really taken in what you said. Platitudes like “oh no”, “cool”, “I see”, “interesting” and leaving it at that.
- Their response completely disregards what you said; changes the subject for no reason out of nowhere; this becomes “word salad” in extreme cases.
- Using the “broken record method” — no matter what you say, what you add, what you ask or how you frame a question that wasn’t answered (because they’re not listening), they just keep repeating the same message like in a script. It indicates they’re holding on firmly to their own agenda or have a very rigid boundary which they won’t tell you about out loud, but will definitely keep upholding.
- They’re not empathising with your situation; not putting themselves in your shoes.
If you encounter the above (and I do a lot, it’s abundant today, in and out of spiritualist communities), maybe take it as a hint that whoever you’re talking to isn’t ready to talk to you about the chosen topic just yet. This isn’t to say they won’t ever (unless they have some really fucked-up cluster B disorder), maybe it will just take some more time and maturing on their side. It’s best to pretend you “ate-up” their desperate attempts above to evade the conversation, not confront them about it, and leave it at that. In due time, you guys can try again. I’m saying this not as a tangent, but because we need to keep in mind that people who believe firmly in determinism aren’t just gonna apply this belief to philosophical musings; They’ll also apply it to everyday situations and catch you off-guard with it. If you strip it down to its very basics, a belief in determinism is borne out of rigidity fuelled by fear of complexity or fear of the unknown. In either case, the person will be unlikely to open up to “the new” anytime soon.
That said, sure, this modern epidemic of willful deafness isn’t doing our collective society any favours. I’m not saying “ignore it” in that case, too. Instead, may I suggest, we need to begin addressing the dumpster fire with more togetherness, instead of more pointing of fingers. This doesn’t have to be twee or all love-and-light (trust me, I’m a big fan of protests and other “unladylike” pursuits), but on the other hand, in-fighting is ultimately what the oppressors want to see.
