Cybermonk 7 a.m.Sunday April 2, 2023
Contents:
- A Telling, Giveaway Quote from Hatsis’ Article
- The Entire Field of Entheogen Scholarship V1 Is Stuck Mis-Focused on the Wrong Debate: “Was There a Secret Christian Amanita Cult?”
- Motivation for this Page: Debating Whether to Cite Hatsis’ Interestingly Poor and All-Too Representative Article “Roasting the Irvin”
- Separation of Concerns: These Are Different Very Interesting Articles; This Very Interesting Article Is Not About These Other Very Interesting, Related Topics
- The Disaster of Samorini’s 1998’s Figure 20: Using Plaincourault Fresco as if a Paradigm to Structure the Entire Field & Mushroom Tree Morphology eg Dancing Man in the “Plaincourault Tree Type” Column
- Ruck’s Faceplant “This One Slam-Dunk Example of a Secret Christian Amanita Cult Mushroom Should Silence the Art Critics: Dancing Man Has a Red and White Cap”
- The 20-pages-of-substance article “Branching-Message Mushroom Trees Explained; v2 of the Field of Entheogen Scholarship” vs. the OTHER, DIFFERENT topic article, “What Went Wrong in the v1 Field of Entheogen Scholarship: The Amanita Primacy Fallacy“
A Telling, Giveaway Quote from Hatsis’ Article
My article:
Branching-Message Mushroom Trees: Psychedelic Eternalism Depicted in Medieval Art as Branching Mushrooms, Handedness, and Non-Branching
Note Nov 29 2024, noting that the title was updated around June 2023 to:
Branching-Message Mushroom Trees: Psychedelic Eternalism Depicted in Medieval Art as Mushrooms, Branching, Handedness, and Stability
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/02/16/branching-message-mushroom-trees-psychedelic-eternalism-depicted-in-medieval-art-as-branching-mushrooms-handedness-and-non-branching/
Hatsis’ article (a non-broken version of it):
Hatsis, Thomas 2013. Roasting the Salamander: Mushroom Cult Theorists Vs. Critical Historical Inquiry. https://web.archive.org/web/20160218214557/http://arspsychedelia.com/uploads/3/2/1/4/3214063/roasting_the_salamander.pdf
Why should my article (my particular article) that presents the successful, clear-thinking explanation of branching-message mushroom trees, cite this Hatsis article (which he ruined and broke and made unusable by scholars) that exemplifies everything wrong with the field of entheogen scholarship?
One of the problems with the Christian Mushroom Cult theory is that many of the supposed “shrooms” in Christian art look less like an Amanita than the tree on fol. 027v. What are we to think when we encounter these lesser-looking mushrooms?
Hatsis, Roasting the Something/Someone, 2013 or 2017
Hatsis thinks, and maybe Irvin & Ruck also mistakenly thinks, that the topic under debate is “the Secret Christian Amanita Cult theory”.
His article thinks it’s in the debate thread, debating “the Secret Christian Amanita Cult theory”.
Maybe Irvin & Ruck think the same.
The field is stunted, stuck in the Amanita Primacy Fallacy, a childish stunted developmental stage.
The Entire Field of Entheogen Scholarship V1 Is Stuck Mis-Focused on the Wrong Debate: “Was There a Secret Christian Amanita Cult?”
They are all participating in THE WRONG DEBATE.
“One of the problems with the Christian Mushroom Cult theory”
But is that even what we’re debating?
I don’t know what you guys think we are doing here, but the correct objective of the field of entheogen scholarship is: Extent Mushrooms Christianity.
To what extent mushrooms in Christianity?
That is (because you are particularly confused what the word ‘mushroom’ means):
To what extent psilocybin mushrooms (and Amanita imagery) in Christianity?
Hatsis continues:
“is that many of the supposed “shrooms” in Christian art look less like an Amanita”
[you just conflated (again) “shroom” with “Amanita” -cm]
“than the tree on fol. 027v. What are we to think when we encounter these lesser-looking mushrooms?”
Why do you measure all “mushroom” imagery and rate it specifically by how closely it “successfully” matches Amanita?
WHY IS PSILOCYBIN TAKEN TO BE “LESSER-LOOKING” THAN AMANITA?
Motivation for this Page: Debating Whether to Cite Hatsis’ Interestingly Poor and All-Too Representative Article “Roasting the Irvin” in my “Branching-Message Mushroom Trees Successfully Explained” Article
Where did my branching-message mushroom trees breakthrough theory and article come from, come up through? The key was Hatsis’ article’s presenting the high-res copy of image https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/04/13/salamander-mushroom-tree-right-side-cut/ –
My Tight Crop (Ludicrous-Res) from Zooming at Bodleian Site
But my article “branching-message mushroom trees” is not a history article about the history of how I decoded branching-message mushroom trees. Out of scope: “how I decoded branching-message mushroom trees” – that’s a different article.
History of Entheogen scholarship Folly Around Dancing Man & the Amanita Primacy Fallacy
Separation of Concerns: These Are Different Very Interesting Articles; This Very Interesting Article Is Not About These Other Very Interesting, Related Topics
My present very interesting article is about:
- Branching-Message Mushroom Trees Successfully Explained by the Theory of Analogical Psilocybin Eternalism Cybernetics
My present very interesting article is NOT about these OTHER, very interesting topics:
- “How I Decoded Branching-Message Mushroom Trees: My Historical Trajectory”
- “History of Entheogen scholarship Folly Around Dancing Man & the Amanita Primacy Fallacy”
The Disaster of Samorini’s 1998’s Figure 20: Using Plaincourault Fresco as if a Paradigm to Structure the Entire Field & Mushroom Tree Morphology eg Dancing Man in the “Plaincourault Tree Type” Column
“Mushroom-Trees” in Christian Art (Samorini 1998)
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/mushroom-trees-in-christian-art-samorini/
What the hell is POINT of Figure 20? The only thing it proves is that your classificiations are so irrelevant that you can’t even find 3 examples of your “Plaincourault [ie Amanita] tree type”.
Calling a new class “the Saint Sauvin tree type” is a TERRIBLE idea!!
You’re taking everything wrong with the the Amanita Primacy Fallacy, and multiplying that error and doubling-down on the failed idea of using Plaincourault’s fresco to serve as the model paradigm of the entire field of entheogen scholarship re: mushroom trees.
Golden Psalter’s Wild Non-Mushroom Mushroom Trees
Are These the Plaincourault Tree Type, or the Saint Sauvin Tree Type?
Are These the Plaincourault Tree Type, or the Saint Sauvin Tree Type? Why Can’t Figure 20’s Classification Scheme Handle This Image? Then What’s the Purpose & Scope of Figure 20’s Classification Scheme? That Attempted (Failed) Scheme Is Irrelevant and Just Misleading into Confusion
The other trees in this same article — eg Dancing Man! — destroy your classification scheme right out the gate. Golden Psalter utterly wrecks the point of this table, I love the carnage wreckage caused by Golden Psalter’s wild non-mushroom mushroom trees.
Ruck crashes his ship on that rock. b/w vs. color image in Figure 20, Ruck is (as usual) basing his argument on the colors red & white — and doing a poor, failed job of that.
Ruck’s Faceplant “This One Slam-Dunk Example of a Secret Christian Amanita Cult Mushroom Should Silence the Art Critics: Dancing Man Has a Red and White Cap”
AHAHAHA Hatsis Did Totally Bust Carl Amanita Promoter Ruck for Taunting Based on WRONG Guess that Salamander Cap Is Red and White
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/03/27/ahahaha-hatsis-did-totally-bust-carl-amanita-promoter-ruck-for-taunting-based-on-wrong-guess-that-salamander-cap-is-red-and-white-%f0%9f%a4%a1%f0%9f%8d%84/
Hatsis’ Retitled/Truncated/Mis-dated article Roasting Foo an Exercise in Tilting at Windmill, All Authors Are Unprofitably Debating the Wrong Thing: “Was there a Secret Christian Amanita Cult?”
Branching-Message Mushroom Trees: Psychedelic Eternalism Depicted in Medieval Art as Branching Mushrooms, Handedness, and Non-Branching
Note Nov 29 2024, noting that the title was updated around June 2023 to:
Branching-Message Mushroom Trees: Psychedelic Eternalism Depicted in Medieval Art as Mushrooms, Branching, Handedness, and Stability
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/02/16/branching-message-mushroom-trees-psychedelic-eternalism-depicted-in-medieval-art-as-branching-mushrooms-handedness-and-non-branching/
The .pdf Archive.org Hatsis citation I’m probably deleting from the above article: It’s a very interesting article to critique – for all the wrong reasons for my branching-message mushroom trees summary article:
Hatsis, Thomas 2013. Roasting the Salamander: Mushroom Cult Theorists Vs. Critical Historical Inquiry. https://web.archive.org/web/20160218214557/http://arspsychedelia.com/uploads/3/2/1/4/3214063/roasting_the_salamander.pdf
There are multiple reasons not to cite that article in this branching-message mushroom trees summary article.
The title of the article is wrong at Hatsis’ later websites. It’s Roasting the Salamander, not Roasting Jan Irvin.
The new title of the article is TOO AMATEUR AND INSULTING TO PUBLISH/CITE. It’s a puerile childish personal attack, even the original title was too insulting.
The date of the article is wrong at Hatsis’ later websites. It’s 2013, not 2017.
I could INSTANTLY pound out a valuable article explaining everything wrong with the field and how that’s reflected in the Ruck / Irvin/ Hatsis thread of argumentation. [took hiatus June 2023 – Nov 2024 instead]
THAT is the article to cite Hatsis — NOT in my article on branching-message mushroom trees. Hatsis contributes nothing but … the exchange and debate between Ruck/ Irvin/ Hatsis , all discussion around Dancing Man image, is nothing but confusion and pulling … in the wrong paradigm of Amanita Primacy Fallacy.
The Ruck/ Irvin/ Hatsis trajectory of treatment of these topics is nothing but an exercise in Amanita Primacy Fallacy.
Note Nov 29 2024: the Secret Amanita paradigm; Amanita-driven entheogen scholarship.
An article would be very interesting, about that, a different article, “WHAT’S WRONG WITH THE PREVIOUS REPLACED QUASI-PARADIGM THAT RUINED THE FIELD OF ENTHEOGEN SCHOLARSHIP”
Hatsis’ article (& the surrounding publications by Irvin/ Ruck/ this field’s confused authors) is INTERESTING AND HISTORICALLY VALUABLE FOR ALL THE WRONG REASONS.
I’m actally having to hold back from spending time writging a very interesting article that’s trying to come out while I write my OTHER article on the OTHER topic: branching-message mushroom trees.
Writing a Pair of Articles
- Branching-Message Mushroom Trees: Psychedelic Eternalism Depicted in Medieval Art as Branching Mushrooms, Handedness, and Non-Branching
- Roasting Entheogen Scholarship: How the Field of Entheogen Scholarship Was Malformed by the Amanita Primacy Fallacy
I recommend the article WHEN we are discussing the folly of the field of entheogen scholarship.
If I write an article about what WAS wrong with the OLD, REPLACED, Ptolemaic, non-theory, where Plainc fresco is mis-treated as defining the paradigm of the field’s explanatory fwk,
if my project in this article is to explain why Samo Figure 20 1998 is a total disaster,
if my article’s purpose is to explain why folk sub-science is garbled harmful confusion, and how the authors are confusing each other in their debate over Phrenology and Wm James’ scientific research in e.s.p., and 1904 theories of Phlogiston, -…
… then I recommend we must discuss the trajectory and revisions of Hatsis’ Roasting the Foo article, where he (eg) deleted the appendixes and says “see appendix”.
And where he changes the date from 2013 to 2017, and what that reveals about this would-be “historian”/”scholar” — and field overall.
The entire field is as dumb as Hatsis’ argumentation, and Panofsky’s.
As is standard in this 3rd-rail non-field of entheogen scholarship, Hatsis’ article delivers 4th-rate argumentation, of the typical-of-the-taboo-field, extremely poor quality of Panofsky’s arguments in his two letters to Wasson: https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/02/05/panofskys-censored-pair-of-letters-to-wasson-revealed/
See Also
Site Map: Find “Hatsis” https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/nav/
Cybermonk 7 a.m.Sunday April 2, 2023
The Egodeath theory 