Physical or spiritual

It’s my second my post of the night, but I was wondering, are the Norse worlds, lovecraftian realms, etc physical or spiritual in nature?

1 Like

I would say spiritual. I’m a person of science just as much as I’m a person of the occult. I believe the cosmos as science knows it is correct, but I also think that in many ways, the myths aren’t wrong. The fact that many pre-medieval or tribal people thought the world was literally held up by a living thing (a tree, a giant human, a turtle, a snake) or otherwise made from life that died (Tiamat, Pangu) is significant enough. Also Lovecraft made the otherworldly terrifying by bringing it down to earth… which would suggest the biggest barrier is the lack of exploration. The stories are real, but the characters are created from your mind. The worlds are real, but they are fragments of a larger world. Our fleshy feet are stuck on this dusty wet rock (for now…). But our souls can see beyond the stars. Stories are from the beyond, both the terrible and terrific. Stories are human, but they are also beyond human. The stories we like the most tell the truth in one form or another. They have the face meaning and the philosophical meaning. The latter is more abstract. There is a reason we have fables and metaphors. These are the “occult” meanings. (And by “occult”, I mean the word in it’s original context; hidden).

1 Like

A bit of both.