Creed and Ideology Apologists can only be Sophists At Best

Some raw opinions rolling off might head right now:

One cannot be a true philosopher AND an apologist for any confessional creed; especially not a creed featuring a theology which is dependent on a series of hard historical claims. I think it is simply not possible to expound upon pure metaphysics within the narrow confines of a religious doctrine or theology that makes a lot of hard claims on the nature of reality, especially claims that assert truth-exclusivity at the sharp expense of other doctrines, or really just differ a whole lot from the claims other doctrines assert. In my view, even the smartest and most metaphysically competent of apologists and ideologists can only be Sophists at best.

JMG on the Age of Aquarius

John Michael Greer answering a question (from this week's Magic Monday) on what exactly the Age of Aquarius is:

The sign Aquarius is ruled by Uranus, the planet of individuality, eccentricity, high weirdness, revolution, radical change, and mass death. Unity and harmony (as well as madness, mass hysteria, and totalitarianism) are correspondences of Neptune, the ruler of Pisces, the age that ended in 1879. So people who expect the age of Aquarius to bring us another round of Piscean values are barking up the wrong stump. As the age of Aquarius deepens around us, we can expect less unity and harmony (as well as less madness, mass hysteria and totalitarianism), and more people veering off in weird directions without worrying about what other people think. Oh, and lots of localized disasters, political revolutions, and other sudden changes.

Yeah, not at all what people still stick in Pisces mode imagine it to be.