Oh my, Heren! Should we let that worm out of the apple again?
Oh well, free will aside (for the moment), an individual shouldn’t make, nor should they be expected to make decisions about censorship in a vacuum. An individual should make such decisions based on debate with people present (including, most importantly, the author as presented in the work being debated), research (debate with people past), and with the desired end in view. The last element opens up a whole other debate about exactly what end should be achieved. People who don’t bear this in mind are destined to make huge mistakes.
Simply put, choice, at least good choice, is informed by the ends. That is where the work lies, knowing and judging the ends.
Of course, if the world is relative, such decisions are inconsequential to begin with (and free will would be an impossibility, anyway). The ends dictate the means, but if the ends are irrelevant, or don’t exist, then the means are irrelevant, or simply a trick of the subjective consciousness. Thus, all decisions are random and trivial and exist only to serve the will of the despotic Dasein.
Quote:
|
It's rather ironic that Tolkien would lament the loss of an "English mythology", when the very religion that he practices fought so hard to erase it.
|
However, don’t ignore the fact that most of our knowledge about these mythologies came from the Christian monks who put them to writing. And, in the end, it was pagans, not Christians who destroyed the wealth of former cultures (a.k.a. viking raids, etc.) In defense of the Judeo-Christian tradition, which you allude to, Birdland, early missionaries strove to assimilate, not to destroy, existing cultures. Evangelism, at least Christian evangelism, fails miserably by the sword, as the crusades demonstrate.