Talk:Judicial shamanism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. | ||||||||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||||||||
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale. | ||||||||
|
|||||||||
"Every single shaman contributes to writing and amending the Shamanic Bible."
Oh really? This whole thing comes across as pretty retarded. Still, I guess it's encyclopedic enough for inclusion, as it was a tennet of the Crit crowd. - 219.194.176.65 13:33, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
The last paragraph gets rather too quickly obfuscated. Possibly is could be revised. Also, who or what was the "Crit crowd?" Being a student of shamanically based societies I thought I might add something to help make sense of this concept, at least for me. Taking Moses as the main actor in the ur legends of the Pentateuch. elsewhere I have commented on the idea that Moses originated in a shamanic world. The Egyptian hierarchy from which he came essentially made decisions by the use of common shamanic techniques such as the use of psychedelics, cf. the Blue Lotus phenomena, and the belief in the spirits of the after life. Reading the Pentateuch with this in mind we find that Moses, in reaction to the abuses, wanted the law written in stone. The possibly extreme example of the Talmudic scholarship of the last 3000 years is then, as much as possible, an attempt to logically derive the correct answers to all legal and religious situations from these laws. Law as it is currently practiced tends to be a combination of these two techniques of legal decision making, the shamanic and the talmudic logically derived methods. Stretching my point a bit (an assumed function of Wiki talk pages) the very first decision made in Genesis by man is the choice between directly listening to the Lord as later written in stone and accessing the knowledge of good and evil by eating of the Tree's fruit. Amazonian shamanic cultures have stayed with the Tree in decision making. When a crisis appears in the village typically the shaman will mix a brew of vine and leaves that when consumed by either him alone or with his people will yield clarity on the correct path to resolve the issues. I.e. the psychedelic visions give access not only to an enhancement of the five physical senses but also to the moral senses often with the added benefit of seeing more clearly the spirits actually creating the problem in the first place. Often, even without the tobacco or yage elements which represented the spirits of nature, the shamanic talking circle of the plains Indians would result in satisfactory solutions to "legal" issues. The symbology of the "medicine circle" was often as "written in stone" as the laws got in their worlds. One should also keep in mind that the "good or evil" of the various spirits in shamanic cultures should not be measured by reference to the "Ten Commandments." Being nature spirits their concern was with the health of nature, i.e. the environment, not necessarily how many Indian kids got to live another day. Hence a shamanic decision in the old days may have been to leave several out in the forests for jaguar food or, as with the Inuit, to leave Grandma out on an ice flow. Mike Logghe 17:31, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
To 219.194.176.65, I wouldn't call the CLS "retarded" is one of the most contemporary steps in legal thinking, and it holds a dominant position in many elite world universities.
To Mike, A collegaue means by "Crit crowd" the Critical Legal Studies movement. Nowadays many crits prefare to call themselves legal postmodernists. The main idea of the theory of judicial shamanism is that judicial interpretative technics may lead to any answer a judge wants or is ideologically interested to have. Nonetheless, usually such a legal solution is presented as the only possible, correct and sacral. Your insight on Moses', Amazonian and Indian judicial shamanic practices are extremely interesting. Have you published them anywhere? Where could I find more information on this subject?
Contents |
[edit] References
We received some references: 1) L. Barshack, 'Constituent Power as Body: Outline of a Constitutional Theology" in 56 (3) University of Toronto Law Journal 2006 (2) L. Barshack, 'Between Theater and Ritual: Judicial Performance as Paradox' in Oren Perez and Gunther Teubner (eds.) Paradoxes and Inconsistencies in the Law (Oxford, 2006) David.Monniaux 00:42, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Delete plz
This is all completely uncited crap, and reads like a manifesto. --76.223.219.98 19:43, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] References
This theory is suficiently cited. There is an adequat number of scientific publications. Look for example this book: http://www.dav-buchhandlung.de/buchlang.php3?titel_id=56044
[edit] Hmm...
Looking at the history of this page, and the number of references to concepts that only appear on this page and mirrors (Shamanic Bible? Abuse of system-constructing?) I'm thinking this is one person's pet theory, and thus Original Research. It's very interesting, but I have a feeling it's not noteworthy. I'm going to do some checking and then prune or delete. 212.135.238.117 (talk) 15:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- OK, here's the thing: the phrase "Shamanic Bible", when googled, gives exactly 7 results, 3 of which are from this page or copies of the data. I am not a shaman, neo- or otherwise, but I think it's clear to see there is no such thing as a "Shamanic Bible". To say that each shaman contributes to a body of shamaic lore is another matter entirely, but it also doesn't need to be said: anyone with any skill contributes to the body of lore surrounding that skill each and every day they use the skill.JustIgnoreMe (talk) 23:59, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- Right, added some expert needed tags, hopefully someone can come along and give some expert opinion. I'd hate to see this article deleted (mostly because it's such an amazing concept), but it's in serious need of work. I mean, take the bit that says "Such a situation might be called an abuse of system construction"... might be called? Is it called that or isn't it?JustIgnoreMe (talk) 00:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] to Hmm...
"Shamanic Bible" is not the point. The term of "SHAMANIC RITUAL" (while taliking about the contemporary Western thought) was introduced by professor Jean Baudrillard in his book "The System of Objects" on page 48 in 1968. Thus the theory could not be called original. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.100.22.93 (talk) 21:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
- If none of the referenced authors are shaman or experts in shamanism, then what they think shamanism means is irrelevant, surely. Oh, and a simple question: are you Stanislovas Tomas? Your IP recently made changes to the EU vs Microsoft page, and... http://www.cafebabel.com/en/article.asp?T=A&Id=2863 bears a familiar-looking byline.212.135.238.121 (talk) 10:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Delete article as unnotable
The only uses of this term that I can find in academic works are by Stanislovas Tomas (here and in this Google Scholar search). Note that searching for “judicial shamanism” yields no Google Book Search hits. I conclude that this topic is not notable as it is the pet theory of Stanislovas Tomas. Therefore, this article ought to be deleted. Raifʻhār Doremítzwr (talk) 11:17, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Copyvio?
My french isn't parfait, but the opening paragraph of http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=970432 seems awfully familiar. Would that count as copyvio, given that the wikipedia entry is a translation? Of course, if the original contributor was Stanislovas Tomas, then he's entitled to submit it. JustIgnoreMe (talk) 11:10, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
