Contents:
- Foreward
- Introduction
- Ancient Language Skills
- Breadth of Data
- Recognize Your Rivals’ Allegiance to Your Designated Villain
- Accuracy of Representing Which Historian Holds Which Position
- Amount of Attention to the Top Historians of Art
- Attention to Chronology
- Sales & Marketing
- Crafting Position Statements and Theory Statements
- Tone of Professional Communication
- Coverage of Rival Teams’ Competing Theories and Membership Lists
- Professional Conduct & Self-Presentation to Represent the Scholarly Field
Foreward
Testimonial transcribed from the Egodeath Mystery Show, Episode 81
I just posted The Thomas Hatsis Guide to Exemplary Historiographical Methodology – a new page at the site! So if you’re interested in professional-level, ideal Historian conduct, how to move the field forward most effectively and collaborate harmoniously with other leading-edge thinkers in the field, be sure to read my page, where I’ve extracted carefully: what makes Hatsis so ideal, such a model of exemplary historiographical methodology?
And I think I’ve got it nailed; I’ve managed to extract and carefully study the ways that Hatsis conducts himself that makes him the paradigm of historiographical methodology of how to reach 100% efficiency at collaborating with others to push the field forward on a sure-footed way, using his water-tight methodologies.
My most valuable thing I’ve ever written was, I extracted Thomas Hatsis’ exemplary historiographical methodology. This really blows away any enlightenment experience I’ve ever had, figuring out Thomas Hatsis’ methodology, which is empowering me far more than any study of Transcendent Knowledge.
– Cybermonk
Introduction
For the benefit of you amateur bloggers, I’d like to unpack how historians adjudicate historical claims, by laying out the criteria we use.
Ancient Language Skills
Botch your latin, while vigorously lecturing everyone at length about your exemplary, excellent, professional ancient language skills.
Breadth of Data
Reject 90% of the data. The more data you discard, the more sound your remaining base of data is.
Instead of text and art evidence for literal, stylized, and altered-state effects description, limit the data base to only literal, textual, explicit discussions of mushrooms in Christian materials.
Only focus on text evidence, because art evidence is wholly dependent on text evidence.
Then, when discussing art, ignore the text that’s in the art, that explicitly says what is depicted. For a great example of this historiographical methodology that we Historians use, at https://grahamhancock.com/brownj1/, find “spear”.
Recognize Your Rivals’ Allegiance to Your Designated Villain
Use your E.S.P. to dictate to others that they hold their position “because Allegro…”
A weak and unprofessional approach is to gather position statements of people in the field, that they have provided.
Instead, a much stronger position, that’s part of the methods that we Historians use, is to dictate that everyone else in the field is all followers of the weakest representative of the field that you can dredge up.
Accuracy of Representing Which Historian Holds Which Position
This isn’t important. Historians should focus on strict historical criteria, and not waste time learning and accurately representing other entheogen historians’ positions.
Claim that you agree with Carl Ruck (even though he is the main promoter of the Secret Amanita thesis). Livestream September 2021 with McKenna, Chris Bennett, & Brian Muraresku: “No, I AGREE with Carl Ruck!”
Then, because your argument requires that someone play the role of villain (other than the Ruck school of contributors to Entheos journal), and Jan Irvin left the field a decade ago, and Allegro died way back in 1988, insist that Dr. Brown holds the Secret Amanita thesis (“Dr. Brown, a follower of Allegro”), and insist that Cybermonk holds the Secret Amanita thesis: “You only hold your position because Allegro…” (personal correspondence).
Even while you market yourself as an exemplary historian, there’s no need to treat, acknowledge, mention, or discuss the main question that John Allegro raises, of the historical origin of the Jesus figure: the conventional big-bang model, versus the gradual-coalescence model, in which the Jesus figure started out as a personification of “the mushroom”, and only afterwards came to be seen as an identifiable historical individual.
Just frame Allegro’s position as “Secret Amanita Cult”, without addressing the historical problems raised by Allegro’s integrated, no-historical-Jesus theory. Leave that question to the historians.
Amount of Attention to the Top Historians of Art
Although you know that the only significant mushroom tree is the Amanita-like tree at Plaincourault, when you make your entire article at Hancock’s site focused on that one instance of a mushroom tree, ignore the top historian of art, who urges that the main factor in interpreting Plaincourault is that it is not unique or special in any way, but is merely one instance of a type, which consists of hundreds of other instances of mushroom trees.
Don’t mention this top interpretive principle that’s specifically about interpreting this particular art instance, from the top historian of art.
Treat Plaincourault as an isolated, unique, special instance, against the urging of the top historian regarding this particular image, who says there’s nothing special at all about this mushroom tree instance. Don’t mention the top historian’s point that the data to be interpreted is an art motif type comprising hundreds of mushroom trees.
Instead, expend your limited word count telling people that it’s important to follow the interpretive principles that are used by the top historians.
Attention to Chronology
Declare Psilocybe in Christian history as “anachronistic”, by fiat.
No need to formulate a complete position statement, just use the word “anachronistic”, and you’re good, and are adhering to the methods that we Historians use to adjudicate historical claims.
Sales & Marketing
First commit to your brand marketing – “the famous debunker of all evidence for mushrooms in Christianity” – and then afterwards, do anything it takes to uphold that brand marketing, no matter how corrupt and garbled the argumentation and wholesale rejection of evidence that’s required to prop up your new rebranding from http://psychedelicwitch.com to “Psychedelic Historian”.
Crafting Position Statements and Theory Statements
Don’t clearly define your position.
By not clearly specifying what your position asserts and does not assert, this allows you to move the goalpost silently from one end of the football field to the opposite end of the field, replacing entire fields of research (mushrooms in Christian history) by a single position that you select & define to be the weakest possible, narrowest position you can possibly come up with (Amanita only + Allegro only + Plaincourault only + secret use only).
This is how we Historians operate.
Tone of Professional Communication
Bully people; make sure to communicate to them at every opportunity, “I am taunting, threatening, and insulting you.”
We Historians are pretty much the same thing as roller-derby coaches.
The professional message that you need to send, to represent refined historiographical methodology, is: I will crush you!
Use the Irvin (Phase 1) vs. Hatsis debate as the ideal model for conversing with, collaborating with, and shit-talking at each other.
Be sure to express yourself in the most explicitly insulting, taunting, offensive manner possible.
That’s how we Historians conduct ourselves, because this is the most efficient mode of collaboration, to move our field of Historical Scholarship forward the fastest – really just think of it the same as coaching girls for a roller derby match.
Attack people personally, threatening to hurt their ego (including the creator of the Egodeath theory) and “send them crying into a corner”.
This is how “we historians”, such as myself, Tom Hatsis, the ideal model of professional methodology, conduct ourselves.
Don’t ally with potential contributors. See Egodeath Mystery Show episode , “Ep70 Anti-Art Historian.mp3”.
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2021/02/19/idea-development-page-12/#Ep70-Anti-Art-Historian
Coverage of Rival Teams’ Competing Theories and Membership Lists
Critique the research coming from other theories, such as the Egodeath theory, without ever spending any time learning what the Egodeath theory asserts and what evidence it has found, interpreted, and organized.
Put low priority on Greek mythic imagery, refer to a cista mystica as a “vat”.
Keep careful track of whether others in the field are currently on your good side today, designated as a “friend”, or whether their status today is “enemy”.
Study 8th-grade girls culture and roller derby for tips on how to keep track of who’s friends & enemies today.
For example, keep careful track of whether Carl Ruck or Chris Bennett is For you or Against you, each day – are you on the inside, today, or outside?
Are you besties today, or sworn enemies who are on the outs?
Your top concern should be the shifting alliances and enmities on a daily basis.
Professional Conduct & Self-Presentation to Represent the Scholarly Field
Spill more ink bragging about your big & girthy historical methodological methodology, berating and chastising your betters, than delivering sound method.
Refer to yourself in an idealized way as the ideal representative of methodology and professionalism in the field: “how historians adjudicate historical claims, by laying out the criteria we use.”
Present this in a pompous and insulting way, to encourage others to enter the field.
Don’t just pose as a professional; sell yourself vigorously as the ideal model of professionalism, the very paradigm of what it means to be a scientific historian.
Good luck with these principles of mine. May you aspire to being an ideal professional Historian like me.
— Thomas “we Historians” Hatsis Amateur blogger, PsychedelicWitch.com
Comments Section
Posted March 19, 2022
Yikes, who is this ass-clown who presumes to represent the field? Keep him well out! “… the methods that we historians use”?! Are you fcking sh*tting me?!
How dare you; GTFO, you embarrassing poser douche! No professional talks that way! You sound like an 8th grade girl putting on airs, gag!
This clown is about as believable and convincing as wearing a t-shirt that reads “Professional Historians Club Member”.
— Dr. J. Smith, Historian
The Egodeath theory 