G.1.1 Indo-European Studies 1

1. Describe several of the factors that define a culture as Indo-European and how those defining factors are useful in understanding that culture. (minimum 300 words)

The factors that define a culture as Indo-European (IE) are geography, language, mythology and archeology.

The question of geography can be a simple one when viewing the Earth Mother with a telescope from outer space.  When viewing the land mass of Eurasia, a culture that formed on that land mass could be EI. In no other place on the globe could this occur. That is not to say that all cultures that formed from this area are IE  which is why I emphasize the fact that they could be considered IE.

The Proto-Indo-European (PIE) language, the Mother Tongue[1], is responsible for the term Indo-European. The theory that gives the IE hypothesis its validity is largely based on the idea that the vast majority of language spoken by people dwelling on the European continent today can be traces back to the PIE language[2].  I like to use the example of numbers to illustrate this point. The number one in Irish is aon and in Welsh, un and in Latin, unus, in French, un.  This is no coincidence. There are numbing quantities of linguistic tree diagrams scattered throughout the academic world that illustrate the family tree of IE language.

Mythology is one of the determining factors that would lead one to believe that a culture is IE. Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) who is known to be the father of modern sociology[3] first concluded that the pantheons of ancient culture mirrored their social structure.  That is to say that the behavior of the divine was a mirror and an example to be followed.[4]  This then logically leads the discussion to George Dumezil’s tripartation as being a key tool used to validate a culture as IE. Tripartation in a mythic sense is the notion that the sacred usually comes in threes with three distinct functions.  The theory can be further strengthened when you examine what each deity does. This can be found in many IE cultures as a set of basic beliefs and motifs about the divine. It is foung amongst the Greeks, Romans, Germans and the Celts. Some examples of these is  Brahma/Vishnu/Shiva (prior to the breakdown into multiple deities) which can be compared to the Zeus/Poseidon/Hades and then again the three-faced god of the Celts.[5]

2. George Dumezil's theory of tripartition has been central to many modern approaches to Indo-European studies. Outline Dumezil's three social functions in general, and as they appear in one particular Indo-European society. Offer your opinion as to whether you believe Dumezil's claim that tripartition is central to IE cultures. (minimum 300 words)

Dumizil’s three social functions are 1^st, Priests, 2^nd, Warriors and 3^rd, Herders/Cultivators.  Or, as I like to say, they are the Druids, Dragon Slayers and Dirt Diggers.

Although this requirement asks for one particular IE culture, I have included others, but the one culture of focus will be the Celtic. The first function involves sovereignty, both magico-religious and legal.  It was this priestly caste that was responsible for performing sacrifices, keeping religious traditions and interpreting law.  The deities who embody the 1^st function are the Indic Varuna or the Norse Odin or Celtic, Dagda.[6] The first function appears in Celtic society as The Druid.

The second function is the military function of the warrior class. In a divine being there is the war god Indra, Mars and Thor. In Celtic mythology, Cu Chulain, and in Celtic society, the warrior.

The third function deals with herder/cultivators which are aligned with fertility and sustenance. In Celtic society, some say [7] the third function occupants would not have been the producers, nor the laborer, but the land owner and those who were owners of herds.  In the divine realm, they were usually twins and closely associated with the horse, as well as fertility. They are deities like the Norse Frey, Freyr and Njorth, Indic Asvins, the Greek Castor and Pollux with Helen and in Celtic mythology, Rhiannon.   

My opinion as to whether or not tripartition is central to IE culture is that it more than likely is.  The reason I have this opinion is that I tend to reason the matter thusly; contrary to what some argue, IE culture is inherently definable.  Most of what I have read lends itself to the propagation of contention within the IE scholastic community, which in turn, keeps material on the subject flowing.  This is meant as the kindest form of criticism. I really don’t see the logic in contesting what is so plainly obvious. When you consider the duration of time a language takes to drift, the time line of 3000 years[8] seems very reasonable to deduce a common linguist parent which can then be inferred to have the same cultural roots. Some changes occur more rapidly than others due to the change in economic status of a particular class of people that mainstreams it’s vernacular due to its newfound status. In short, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck…….  Which is, by the way, is one of my favorite triparted euphemisms!   

3. Choose one Indo-European culture and describe briefly the influences that have shaped it and distinguish it from other Indo-European derived cultures. Examples include migration, contact with other cultures, changes in religion, language, and political factors. Is there any sense in which this culture can be said to have stopped being an Indo-European culture? (minimum 300 words)

As an exercise to strengthen my personal hearth culture, I will use the IE culture of the Celts as the focus if this essay.  It is widely accepted that the Celtic culture originated in the La Tène region in Switzerland by Lake Nuechatel. Or that is, the discovery of what is now regarded as Celtic artifacts where found in abundance there.  In 1858 the lake receded and revealed what was first thought to be a large votive offering site. But it turned out to be a center of Celtic culture with three definable periods of development.[9] The first is from 600 to 500 BCE, the second is from 450 to 100 BCE and the third dates form 100 BCE until the defeat of the Celts by the Romans in 58 BCE.

The artwork and weaponry found there form the First Period was unique to any other known IE culture.[10] This unique style of, spirals and facial features of exaggerated heads and eyes is still very much in favor with modern Celtic peoples in Ireland and around the world. The influences that shaped the Celtic culture in the 2^nd period is trade throughout the Mediterranean with the Greeks and Etruscans.

The La Tène Celts began to grow in prominence and power as a result of this trade with the Greeks and Etruscans, and by the 3^rd period, they were heavily influenced by the Romans[11] and the bordering Germanic tribes.   

It is distinguished from other IE cultures, most notably, by its lack of a purely Celtic form of the written word.  The continental Celtic language is found inscribed throughout Gaul, and on the Iberian peninsula, but it is written using Greek letters.  It wasn’t until insular Celtic began to develop ogham late in the 2^nd or 3^rd century CE [12] that we see an emergence of uniquely Celtic form of writing. It should be noted that ogham never reach the common use that the Greek alphabet as a system of recording the spoken word.

The Celtic culture could be considered “Stalled” as a wholly IE culture by the dualistic intrusion of modern Judeo-Christian influence. I use the term stalled to relate my optimism that the Celtic culture can one day “re-evolve” or somehow become reconstructed.  I have no such “Nobel Savage” delusions that my ancestors lived in blissful harmony, on the contrary. But tempered with modern technology and our efforts within ADF to return to the old ways, we are in a unique position to learn from the ancient ones and hopefully, learn from their mistakes as well as triumphs.

4. Choose one other Indo-European culture and compare and contrast it to the culture discussed in question 3 above with respect to each culture's Indo-European nature. (minimum 300 words)

The culture I will compare and contrast to the Celts for this essay will be the Norse. The main reason for this choice is geography, their territories butted up against each other, and the other reason is that it is truly different and distinct in its artwork, mythology and language.

In Norse and Celtic mythology, the caldron is featured prominently in both.  In Celtic mythology, the Caldron of Plenty, owned by the God Dagda, from which entire nations could be fed[13]. In Norse mythology the caldron plays an important role as a magical object in the saga of Odhrerir, or the Caldron of Poetry.  Granted the two caldrons served different purposes, but in both cultured the caldron was viewed as a magical object.

Another common element of the Norse and Celts was the Well of Knowledge.  In Norse mythology the Well of Knowledge sits at the base of Yggdrasil, the world tree.  It is called Mimisburnnr or Mimir’s well because it is guarded by the Vanir Mimir. The God Thor gouged out an eye just to have a drink from the well!

In Celtic Mythology, there is a alternate tale of the Fenian Cycle where Finn Mac Cumhail seeks to drink from the Well of Knowledge. Beag, a Goddess of the Tuatha de Danaan and guardian of the Well of Knowledge used her three daughters to fend off Finn. They splash him with water and a drop gets in his mouth, and thus acquires knowledge.

However, a missing mythological component in Celtic lore is the world tree.  The Norse Yggdrasil is well known.  But no such element can be found in Celtic mythology.

Another similar aspect of the mythology of the Norse and Celts is the hierarchal system of deities as it relates to a familial systems. In other words, both mythologies have a family tree associated with their pantheons of gods and goddesses.

5. From its beginnings, ADF has defined itself in relation to Indo-European pagan traditions. What relevance do you think historical and reconstructed IE traditions from the past have in constructing or reconstructing a Pagan spirituality for the present and future? (minimum 600 words)

As our founder says, we are an organization that has one foot in the past and one foot in the future.  I would like to take away from that comment an inference of balance. The idea that the IE cultures from the past are some how relevant today is always a contentious issue.  It can be argued that if they were so bloody relevant, then why aren’t they still around in their modern evolved form?  Why are we in the business of reconstructing them?  That question has been answered by many of us in the neo-pagan movement today.  Simply put, we feel the pull to return to the old ways.  That pull, that attraction, is something that can only be described the person feeling it. 

The IE pagan traditions of the past lend structure to rebuild on. We can know very little about the way the ancients worshiped, the way they felt and the way they conducted ritual.  What little we do know, and what scholars can tell us through their interpretations, lends somewhat of an existing belief structure to go by.  The work of Mircea Eliade goes along way toward giving us a foundation of ancient cosmology which is the foundation of the current ADF cosmology which is still very powerful and very meaningful.

IE culture as we know it today is a system to refine in modern times.  We continue to fine tune elements of ADF liturgy as new information comes to light.  I have never heard a valid point of scholarship be put aside for a modern construct of either cosmology or liturgy.  We are less than one generation old.  There is a lifetime of information to learn and build upon.  The main focus for my lifetime is to begin to solidify what we have now begun, and to begin new traditions based on what we do in ritual. This can happen if we are consistent in our new traditions.  I always stress the continuation of what “Worked” from year to year for that very reason.

Relying on IE culture to build upon gives us a sound beliefs system that connects us to our ancestors.  When we invoke the kindreds, the ancestors in particular, we know that there is a thread that is going back to ancient ones. The more we learn, the stronger that thread becomes. It is that connectedness that appeals to many neo-pagans.  The sense of emptiness that many neo-pagans felt when they were in a dualist system of faith gets erased with the sense that they are truly connecting with the ancients.  The ancestors can be of kin, your genetic ancestors, or they can be of heart, your ancestors you claim as influential in your life and are worthy of your reverence.

When we rely on IE culture as a framework for ADF, I get the sense that our work is valid and can stand up to scrutiny.  There are so many neo-pagan groups who are doing amazing things and have incredibly talented people in them.  But I am cautious to become involved in groups who rely on personality as their foundation.  ADF is not a personality based neo-pagan organization.  Rather the opposite. The scholarship usually comes first, the party second.  If ADF has a reputation of being snobbish and bookish, then we are misunderstood.  We are building an organization that will outlive our opinions, our biases, and our petty differences.

The reliance that ADF has on defining itself in relation to Indo-European pagan traditions gives us the powerful ability to carry ADF on for generations.  I always have to remind myself that I am a first generation member of ADF.  By grounding ourselves in the IE cultures, we assure our longevity.  We can and we will grow in size because of this definition.  There is no easy way to educate our members on the importance of this association with IE culture.  It must me learned through hours of dedicated study. Gradually, as the number of clergy grows, the message will get to those seeking it.

G.1.3 Research & Composition

Students shall submit at least two papers of 1500 words in length, one expository in nature and one which expresses a position or argument; both of which should include a list of works consulted and/or cited. Acceptable submissions may include college level research papers, published articles, or any papers submitted for other requirements in any of ADF.s Study Programs. Papers must demonstrate thorough research techniques, employ reliable sources, demonstrate a clear writing style, be well organized and make use of standard English syntax, usage and grammar.

Positional Paper

The Role and Function of Armed Warriors within ADF

by Jonathan Bollin

It is my position that warriors in ritual in general, as well as in ADF ritual, should not have weapons displayed openly, except for when they are needed as a ritual tool.

I will illustrate this position by presenting the arguments that the open display of weapons is inherently dangerous, it degrades the outward appearance of some ADF members to the status of a lost Renaissance Fair attendee, and it implies the existence of a need for armed security at ADF events, which may or may not exist. It also exposes ADF and all involved to extreme liability due to the fact that the vast majority of such armed warriors do not have the skill, training or authority to properly deploy their weapon should the need arise.

I chose to readdress the essay, Warriors and Their Weapons[1] to provide a matrix of support of my premises.

Ms. Kest opens her essay with a complaint against the member of the Warriors Guild carrying a spear at Wellspring. Now in the first point, one needs to look at what Wellspring is. Is it a Ren Faire? Is it an SCA mock battle? No, it is a gathering of ADF which is a religious organization. Now, I’ll grant Ms. Kest the room to argue that in IE culture the Warrior is a Dumézilian second function of society[2] which she does poorly by saying that the function of a warrior is “to keep dangerous outdwellers at bay.” Thus, using the logic that ADF Warriors’ primary function is to do the same. If that is the case then, by using her logic, we should have armed ADF Warriors posting themselves in strategic locations around the perimeter of the festival in order to properly perform that function.

I cannot begin to express the folly of this notion! The mere implication that this “Function” is somehow sanctioned by ADF exposes our entire organization to the first lawsuit seeker that comes along.  And people who intentionally place themselves in harms way to cash in on a lawsuit are many[3].  In the State of Ohio alone, where Ms. Kest is from, the cost of frivolous lawsuits were estimated to be $ 8,200,323,061 per year.[4]

Her first of five arguments are that sheathed weapons are inherently unsafe and especially dangerous to have in the presence of children. To support her argument she sites SCA’s perfect record of safety. Again, I ask, is ADF the SCA? And to further weaken her argument, she admits to present this evidence as unverified hearsay. This should have been verified with a quick inquiry to the SCA when she would have found that all persons entering an SCA event must sign a wavier.[5] There is indeed an inherent danger to being armed or else they would not require the elaborate waivers. And anyone with a shred of common sense knows that. The sheath can slide off, you can trip, asteroids can fall on your weapon and ricochet it through a baby in a stroller! Now, I departed from sound and rational argument to illustrate the absurdity of the premise. She goes on to say that children can encounter any number of hazards while camping, why should weapons be any different? The answer is, they are different, they are specifically designed to kill, damage and wound people. I have personally been trained in weapons retention by The USMC Police Academy at Lackland Air Force Base, and at the Arizona Law Enforcement Training Academy in Tucson, Arizona as well as many refresher courses taught by the Martial Arts instructors of the Sierra Vista Police Department, while I was employed at that agency.  I can say with some authority that it is very easy to have your weapon take from you and used against you and others nearby. I have personally witnessed it and was fortunate to come away from the experience with only superficial wounds. To have inexperienced and untested people wondering around ADF events armed is very dangerous indeed.

Her second main premise is public image. Granted, it could be argued that pagan festivals do invoke a stereotypical image of hippies howling at the moon in the minds of average non-pagans.  But Ms. Kest again draws the conclusion that SCA events don’t attract negative attention and they carry weapons. In issuing such a statement, one can only conclude that she is correct, which is a classic rhetorical device, meaning; it leaves only one conclusion[6] to a faulty argument, which is again comparing ADF to SCA.

Her third argument is up to this point, her strongest. She says that we have a historic precedence to allow our warriors to carry weapons. A strong case could be made for this when one considers the wide acceptance of the work of George Dumézil within ADF scholarship, meaning that the warrior played an integral part in IE society.

She goes on to talk of killing and that it has a metaphorical place within ADF. This is also widely accepted as a fact of life. As a point of valid argument, she presents the information in this argument within the accepted cosmology of ADF. But she falls short to illustrate that we are a part of modern society, which has 2^nd function warriors in place ready to respond the minute anyone calls 911.

Her fourth main argument is one of geography within the camp that provides a space for the warrior to practice with their weapons and in turn provide a “Safe space” that would weapon free. The only supporting premise given is that those who don’t want to see weapons don’t have to. She completely ignores the concerns previously addressed that would cause the formation of such a zone. She concludes this thought by making demands that the warriors must be given consideration to their needs. An astounding notion to present here given she presents in a previous argument that the notion of the warriors call is to serve!

Her fifth main arguments premise is the right to carry weapons, which she says warriors do not. She gives no supporting facts to support this constitutionally protected right. She then states that by carrying a weapon, the warrior does no actual harm. Simply making people nervous is not causing harm according to Ms. Kest. Nervousness is indeed actual harm and can result in many stress related ailments. I am not saying that the presence of a weapon in the hands of an ADF warrior will cause a nervous breakdown, but it can induce stress in some festival goers. Thus, the argument that warriors do not have the right to carry weapons is false because it is protected by the 2^nd Amendment of The Unites States Constitution. And the sub argument of her fifth argument that it causes no harm is condescendingly presented with no facts to support her premise.

I will conclude this assessment of Ms. Kest’s essay by citing her conclusion which she poetically asserts that the warrior has the right to carry a weapon. In her fifth argument, she states flatly that they have no such right! Again, the contradictions cited in this essay are many, the premises are at times weak, and she cites no supporting evidence to prove her points.

As for the over quality of composition, there were several punctuation and grammatical errors.  In the 10^th paragraph she uses a hyphen between warrior and function, denoting that warrior is an adverb to the noun, function, which neither apply. The possessive apostrophe was misused several times as well when stating warrior’s vs. warriors. In the end of the fifth argument paragraph a period appears in the middle of a sentence.

One of the points that Isaac Bonewits addresses in Essential Guide to Druidism is responsibility[7].  I do accept his assertion that the 1^st function is to oversee the 2^nd. A warrior caste that is not overseen and subordinate to it’s wise ones is destine to do what they do best, rape pillage and burn. Although he does not directly address the existence of a warriors guild within ADF, he is focused on the lessons learned by the Celtic and Norse warriors when the Christian monks and priests relegated the warrior cast to a dualistic system.  This is why I am a strong advocate of an official recognition of this hierarchical necessity by the Mother Grove (MG) of ADF.  We are still small and egos will repair should the MG decide to declare such a common sense pecking order.

I do believe that a grove should, in ritual, recognize the warrior’s duty within ritual to protect and serve.  If a warrior is called upon by the clergy to perform that role, and use a symbolic weapon to do so, then that weapon should be treated as a powerful magical object, part of the “Holy Relics” of the grove. The “Relics” could also include some sort of torc as well.   We at Sonoran Sunrise Grove always have a shared meal at ritual which is a loaf of bread that is ritually sacrifices for this purpose.  The warrior is the one who performs the sacrifice, which is incorrect. The warrior should be protecting the sacrificer and perhaps arming the sacrificer, not performing the actual sacrifice itself, since that was not the function of the warrior in IE Culture. 

In conclusion, I would assert that weapons displayed openly ADF events, rituals, and gatherings is simply and accident waiting to happen.  It is frivolous, and degrades our status as a serious religious organization. It does have a valid function within the Core Order of Ritual, and nowhere else.

G.1.3 Research & Composition

Students shall submit at least two papers of 1500 words in length, one expository in nature and one which expresses a position or argument; both of which should include a list of works consulted and/or cited. Acceptable submissions may include college level research papers, published articles, or any papers submitted for other requirements in any of ADF.s Study Programs. Papers must demonstrate thorough research techniques, employ reliable sources, demonstrate a clear writing style, be well organized and make use of standard English syntax, usage and grammar.

Expository Paper

Defining the Genre of Neo-Pagan Druid Sculpture in the Modern Age

by Jonathan Bollin

In this essay I will attempt to introduce the concept of a new genre, or style of art work, the Neo Pagan Druid Sculpture.  I will begin by commenting on the well known art forms from antiquity to illustrate what constitutes a valid style.  I will then build on those definitions to describe the genre of Neo Pagan Druid Sculpture, and how to disseminate the genre. I will conclude by articulating my motivation for the creation of this new genre.

Know that when defining art from antiquity, there is little documentation to define a particular form that was an indigenous definition. 

Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary[1] defines art as follows:

art n - The conscious use of skill and creative imagination esp. in the production of aesthetic objects; also: works so produced b (1): fine arts (2): one of the fine arts (3): a graphic art.

However, the creators of ancient art work did not define their own style in words, rather, stylistically; the various forms to follow defined themselves.

            Prehistoric Art.  From the prehistoric age of the peoples from the late Paleolithic era are artifacts left within museums and private collections and on cave walls. They have the following identifying characteristics[2]; they were usually confined to some sort of sacred image, often zoomorphic and always stylized, meaning there is no known “Photorealistic” items produced in that ancient age.[3]

          Egyptian Art. The period of Egyptian art produced between 3000 and 500 BCE has a certain sameness that is so familiar to us that it really needs no explanation.  The point I would like to emphasize is the fact that the statuary is rigid and devoid of the sense of motion. It has a sense of timelessness that is uniquely unduplicated in any major art form yet to be produced.

            Aegean Art. The Statuary for the island area surrounding the Aegean sea. This is an important area that lies to the north of the mouth of the Nile in the Mediterranean and includes the Greek islands and the surrounding Cycladic Islands.  The art work from the period of the third and second millenniums BCE, before the Greek civilization proper, is devoid of any temple architecture[4]. There were examples of smaller statues such at the Three Deities in ivory which was only three inches high. It shows two women embracing and a child crawling up the legs of the kneeling women. This piece has a remarkable fluidity and human warmth formerly not know in sculpture.

            Greek Art. The works of art that come from the Greek Islands is worthy of several hundreds of thousands of volumes worth of information and in no way could I do it justice.  I mention this here simply to illustrate that as we progress through time, the styles of art become more familiar. The bank down the street owes it’s façade to the Greeks! The style of sculpture is so recognizable that to duplicate it would be insulting to the endeavor of developing a new style. So, every effort must be made to deliberately depart from any such influence.

            Roman Art. In my mind, the Roman style is simply a progression and perfection of the Greek.  So, for the same reasons as stated earlier, one must be dedicated to the notion of excluding the stylistic imperatives that define Roman sculpture such as the stark photorealistic busts, the layers of cloth rendered frozen in marble and the rounded carved bases.

            Modern Art. We now take a huge leap forward to the modern age.  I am deliberately ignoring the Middle Ages and the Renaissance because as far as sculpture is concerned, no real innovations occurred. (Except Leonardo, but he still followed the Greeks) In fact, sculpture as an art form was in crisis in the modern age due to the still looming sense of inadequacy to produce anything as magnificent as the ancient Greeks. In 1781 Jean Antoine Houdin (1741-1828) produced Voltaire[5]. While owing much to classical style, he carved the philosopher with his skeptical wit and wisdom in tact, thus departing from the classical with grace and integrity. In the modern area it is Auguste Rodin (1840-1917) who revitalized sculpture during Impressionism. [6]

            To define art in modern times, the artist Derek Kerlake[7] wrote that there is a triad, consisting of the object itself, myth, and economics. His premise is based on the fact that this triad only applies to societies that are affluent and capitalistic. I would submit that his triad could be applied to ancient works as well and that unbeknownst to Kerlake, his theory transcends the constraints of society.

His first component is the art itself, the actual piece of work; the sculpture, poem, painting, or song, etc.  He suggests that when viewing a piece of work, one needs to look beyond the end product to fully appreciate the entirety of the piece.

The second component is myth. A very powerful motivator present in all art forms. His central focus in presenting this component is the myth surrounding the artist. When the work leaves the artist’s possession it is left to the docent, collector, or public to faun over the artist and his/her celebrity.  I take this one step further and apply it to works of antiquity. Often times, the artist was not known, yet the power of the subject matter is what is central to the work and not the celebrity of the artist.

His third component is economic. In today’s society, we are capable of producing public art on a massive scale due to the wealth of our culture. Again, if you examine pagan antiquities, the works known to us are a reflection of the economic standing of the culture that produced it.  The same observation, again, transcends time. So by applying Kerlake’s definition, one gains a deeper appreciation for the work, what is symbolizes and the sacrifice needed to create it.

          Neopagan Druid Sculpture. So now we arrive at the crossroads, the birth of a genre. To begin to describe this work, one must first have a basic understanding of the cosmology of ADF, Ár nDraíocht Féin: A Druid Fellowship. In short, the portion of the cosmology the concerns this is the concept of the sacred center.

A horizontal line running through the land, sea and sky is our horizontal axis, and a vertical line running through the heavens (upper world), mid-world and underworld is the vertical axis. Where these two lines meet is the CENTER.

I will now endeavor to describe the concept of the sacred center as it applies to a work of art. For this example I will use the shrine of Bridget. Picture a stone completely elemental and untouched at its base. The base of the stone is, as it was, when it first emerged from the center of the Earth Mother. As your gaze rises from the base of the stone you see symbols carved in stone that represent the Goddess Bridget. A flaming arrow here and Bridget’s cross there. You notice a carving of an anvil that represents the forge also.  As the figure continues to emerge, you follow the shape of the figure higher with your eyes and realize it is the shape of a wise, strong and powerful woman standing within the unformed powers and potential of the Earth. As you gaze upon her face you find no details. This sculptor deliberately left the facial details ambiguous as to allow those who worship Her, the solace of knowing that she still lives within their hearts as they see Her, not as some sculptor carved Her. You realize the Goddess now stands within the sacred center. Her base is grounded in the underworld her body is here in the mid-world and her head, a heavenly vision.

So it will be with shrines created specifically for Druid sacred space. One will be able to recognize a Neo-Pagan druid statue simply by identifying the components of the rough, unformed base, continuing upward through the subject of the work which is mundane, and terminating with an ethereal capital. 

          Decimating the Genre. Like any new idea, getting the word out is simply a matter of repetition, salesmanship and good old fashioned marketing. The more people who see works of art created in this genre the more they will begin to associate and become more familiar with them. There is a great burden on the artists to produce works in this genre that are of exceptional quality. After all our shrines, art work and sculpture should reflect ADF’s motto of Why not excellence?”

          My motivation. There is so little history in the brief life of ADF.  We are a religion yet one generation old. Even though our traditions are rooted with the pre-Christian indo-Europeans, our traditions, art, songs and beliefs are still in their fragile infancy.  It is my goal in life to contribute something to ADF that will transcend time.  You can write all the scholarly tomes you want on the subject of ADF cosmology, only to have them destroyed in a fire or some dreadful electronic calamity. We know what we know today of our ancestors mainly from the artwork they left behind.  Should ADF not sanction the production of some lasting symbols of our faith?  It is my humble opinion that our Artisan’s guild should be focused on creating lasting works, commissioned by the Mother Grove, solely dedicated to the propagation of understanding ADF cosmology. I can promise the reader that this essay will not exist in a thousand years, but the stones I have carved for all past, present and future members of ADF will.

G.1.2 Critical Thinking

1. Discuss what constitutes a good argument, how arguments work and what makes some arguments better than others. (minimum 600 words)

When discussing what constitutes a good argument, I’ll assume that this means a valid argument.  That in itself is an argument, good= valid. Not all good arguments are valid!  Take for instance the argument to conduct strip mining. There are some very valid points that make good economic sense, yet it can be viewed by many to be a complete and total atrocity.  All arguments, good or bad[1], valid or invalid must first be broken down into components that comprise an argument. First of all you have to know what an argument is when you see it.  Arguments occur all the time in ordinary speech and writing. Usually there are indicator words that signal the presence of either a premise or a conclusion of arguments. One key word that will usually indicate the presence of an argument is “therefore” which the introduction of a conclusion is. Other keywords that indicate conclusions are “thus,” “consequently,” “necessarily” and “hence.” Some common terms that indicate a premiss is present are “because,” “since,” and “for that reason.” You cannot assume that just because these words are present means that an argument is present. However, becoming aware of these indicator words can assist you in identifying an argument. As illustrated above, all arguments have components. The main parts of an argument are the premise and the conclusion. Any statement made that supplies evidence is the premise.[2]  An argument can have any number of premisses but only one conclusion. A premise is a statement of fact or supposition made or implied as a basis of argument. [3] For instance, if I were to tell you that all Celts had red hair, because all the Celts I know have red hair, my premise for knowing this my own personal knowledge (however flawed it may be!) and my conclusion is that they indeed do have red hair. Now what makes some arguments better than others is not the conclusion, but rather the premises. What makes a good argument in the context of ADF? In my humble opinion it would be the deductive argument. In a deductive argument if the premises are true conclusion must be true as well.[4] The truth is preserved in this type of argument via deductive reasoning. The key being, in a deductive argument no new information is ever introduced to support the premise. So deductive arguments are truth preserving but they can’t extend factual knowledge. A lot of arguments concerning ethics are oftentimes deductive arguments. For instance “ All deliberate killing of helpless persons is wrong. Euthanasia is a deliberate killing of a helpless person. Euthanasia is wrong.” Here we see, like in all deductive arguments, that if the premises are true then the conclusion must be true as well. What gives the deductive argument its power is the lack of compromise and presenting the premises. The deductive argument can be easily dismantled by disproving any one of the premises. Because the basis of the conclusion relies on the facts premise. Therefore, disprove any premise and you have effectively voided the conclusion. Inductive arguments are arguments where the premises provide some support but not conclusive support for the conclusion.  In this argument all of the premises can be true and can support the conclusion but the conclusion can still be false. Inductive arguments lack the definitive feature deductive arguments, the ability to guarantee the preservation of truth. This is not a bad thing. These types of arguments can extend our factual knowledge. The conclusions contain new information that is not present in the premises of this type of argument. The key difference in deductive arguments versus inductive arguments is the deductive argument gives an all or nothing conclusion. Whereas, the inductive argument may provide varying degrees of support for a conclusion from very weak to very strong. Some things that indicate the presence of an inductive argument are words like “may” and “possibly.” You should also keep the on the lookout for phrases like “almost always” and “highly likely.” When my friends and I are discussing matters of faith in relation to ADF, I find that the inductive argument to be the most thought provoking. The deductive argument can be somewhat limited in its ability to accommodate such things as the almighty unsubstantiated personal gnosis!

2. What is the difference between inference and deduction? (minimum 100 words)

The dictionary[5] says an inference is to derive as a conclusion form facts or premises. And deduction[6] is the deriving of a conclusion by reasoning: the conclusion so reached. So for the purpose of this discussion, let’s discuss matters concerning ADF.  I am a huge fan of The 9 Virtues we all hold dear. They are familiar ground to help illustrate the difference between inference and deduction.  For this illustration, I choose Fertility. Early on we are asked to explain what the virtues mean to us.  When discussing fertility, one can infer  the meaning to be discussing simple matters of reproduction because that’s what some book says it means. We have derived, in other words, sourced out, the meaning.  However, if you were to deduce the meaning of fertility, you would come to any number of conclusions, like growing a grove, cultivating a large circle of friends, etc.

3. What is a fallacy? (minimum 100 words)

Fallacy is a pseudo-argument that appears to provide evidence but does not.[7] For instance, how many times have you heard a friend tell you “Don’t go to that restaurant, this service is terrible. We had to wait two hours for our dinner.” Let’s examine the components of this argument. “don’t go to that restaurant” is the conclusion. The weak evidence provided to support the conclusion regarding the service is highly subjective. Our experience tells us that most people over exaggerate such claims. Oftentimes fallacies appeal to fear and ignorance.[8] One of my favorite fallacy is the false dilemma. The fallacious argument proposes that only two alternatives exist when actually there could be many, such as global warming. All of the inconvenient science in the world still cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that this phenomenon of global climate change is a man caused phenomenon. However fallacious or dubious the science may seem to some, reducing carbon emissions is a good thing.

4. What is the difference between an inference and a premise? (minimum 100 words)

We have a definition for inference in #2 above. A premise is a statement of fact or supposition made or implied as a basis for argument[9]. So, from the dictionary view there is not much difference. An inference is often times more of a hint or a guess, based on what is previously known. An inference must have a source as the definition states; it is derived, whereas a premise IS the major portion of an argument. Some arguments I have read or participated in do indeed base their entire premises on inferences, which does not make them entirely bad, just weak. Inference in argument seems less persuasive as deduction because of its reliance on source. What if the source is wrong? What if the source is a maniac? And it closes the door to new ideas too.

5. Discuss the effect of bias on thought and moral reasoning. (minimum 100 words)

Bias is another way of saying prejudice which is simply a conclusion drawn without basis of fact. The effect of unchecked bias on thought can result in a thought process mired in mediocrity and fallacy. If ones thoughts are drawn form ideas without facts, then what you get is fantastical thoughts and ideas which can be innocuous enough in small doses. When we start talking about the effects of bias on moral reasoning, things become more serious because of the effect ones morals have on the surrounding community. Sadly, there are entirely too many example throughout history that illustrate my point. My conclusion, bias=bad.

6. Take an Indo-European topic essay of a minimum of five pages in length and analyze it for soundness, validity, fallacies, rhetorical devices and overall quality of composition. (Contact the ADF Preceptor for examples and suggestions of papers to critique.) (minimum 600 words)

I chose Warriors and Their Weapons[10] as my Indo-European topic essay for use in this requirement. As far as soundness, meaning prudent and sensible, this essay falls hopelessly short of soundness and presents a basis for validity akin to brining back blood rites.

Ms. Kest opens her essay with a complaint against the member of the Warriors Guild carrying a spear at Wellspring. Now in the first point, one needs to look at what Wellspring is. Is it a Ren Faire? Is it an SCA mock battle? No, it is a gathering of ADF which is a religious organization. Now, I’ll grant Ms. Kest the room to argue that in IE culture the Warrior is a Dumézilian second function of society[11] which she does poorly by saying that the function of a warrior is “to keep dangerous outdwellers at bay.” Thus, using the logic that ADF Warriors’ primary function is to do the same. If that is the case then, by using her logic, we should have armed ADF Warriors posting themselves in strategic locations around the perimeter of the festival in order to properly perform that function.

Her first of five arguments are that sheathed weapons are inherently unsafe and especially dangerous to have in the presence of children. To support her argument she sites SCA’ perfect record of safety. Again, I ask, is ADF the SCA? And to further weaken her argument, she admits to present this evidence as unverified hearsay. This should have been verified with a quick inquiry to the SCA when she would have found that all persons entering an SCA event must sign a wavier.[12] There is indeed an inherent danger to being armed or else they would not require the elaborate waivers. And anyone with a shred of common sense knows that. The sheath can slide off, you can trip, asteroids can fall on your weapon and ricochet it through a baby in a stroller! Now, I departed from sound and rational argument to illustrate the absurdity of the premise. She goes on to say that children can encounter any number of hazards while camping, why should weapons be any different? The answer is, they are different, they are specifically designed to kill, damage and wound people.

Her second main premise is public image. Granted, it could be argued that pagan festivals do invoke a stereotypical image of hippies howling at the moon in the minds of average non-pagans.  But Ms. Kest again draws the conclusion that SCA events don’t attract negative attention and they carry weapons. In issuing such a statement, one can only conclude that she is correct, which is a classic rhetorical device, meaning; it leaves only one conclusion[13] to a faulty argument, which is again comparing ADF to SCA.

Her third argument is up to this point, her strongest. She says that we have a historic precedence to allow our warriors to carry weapons. A strong case could be made for this when one considers the wide acceptance of the work of George Dumézil within ADF scholarship, meaning that the warrior played an integral part in IE society.

She goes on to talk of killing and that it has a metaphorical place within ADF. This is also widely accepted as a fact of life. As a point of valid argument, she presents the information in this argument within the accepted cosmology of ADF.

Her fourth main argument is one of geography within the camp that provides a space for the warrior to practice with their weapons and in turn provide a “Safe space” that would weapon free. The only supporting premise given is that those who don’t want to see weapons don’t have to. She completely ignores the concerns previously addressed that would cause the formation of such a zone. She concludes this thought by making demands that the warriors must be given consideration to their needs. An astounding notion to present here given she presents in a previous argument that the notion of the warriors call is to serve!

Her fifth main arguments premise is the right to carry weapons, which she says warriors do not. She gives no supporting facts to support this constitutionally protected right. She then states that by carrying a weapon, the warrior does no actual harm. Simply making people nervous is not causing harm according to Ms. Kest. Nervousness is indeed actual harm and can result in many stress related ailments. I am not saying that the presence of a weapon in the hands of an ADF warrior will cause a nervous breakdown, but it can induce stress in some festival goers. Thus, the argument that warriors do not have the right to carry weapons is false because it is protected by the 2^nd Amendment of The Unites States Constitution. And the sub argument of her fifth argument that it causes no harm is condescendingly presented with no facts to support her premise.

I will conclude this assessment of Ms. Kest’s essay by citing her conclusion which she poetically asserts that the warrior has the right to carry a weapon. In her fifth argument, she states flatly that they have no such right! Again, the contradictions cited in this essay are many, the premises are at times weak, and she cites no supporting evidence to prove her points.

As for the over quality of composition, there were several punctuation and grammatical errors.  In the 10^th paragraph she uses a hyphen between warrior and function, denoting that warrior is an adverb to the noun, function, which neither apply. The possessive apostrophe was misused several times as well when stating warrior’s vs. warriors. In the end of the fifth argument paragraph a period appears in the middle of a sentence.