Academia And The O9A

Posted: October 21st, 2019 | Author: | Filed under: Inner ONA, Labyrinthos Mythologicus, O9A, Order of Nine Angles, Order of the Nine Angles, The Sinister Tradition, The Sinisterly Numinous Tradition | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Academia And The O9A


Academia And The Order Of Nine Angles


° Preface
° The O9A And Academia: Ruben Van Luijk
° The O9A And Academia: Della E. Campion
° The O9A And Academia: Jacob Senholt and Massimo Introvigne


From the Preface:

           The modern Occult sub-culture (or movement) known as the Order of Nine Angles (O9A, ONA, ω9α) has received scant attention from the academic community whose attention, research, and writings hitherto in respect of modern Occult movements such as Satanism and the Western Left Hand Path have been focused on Howard Stanton Levey (alias Anton LaVey) and his Church of Satan, on Aleister Crowley, and on Michael Aquino and his Temple of Set.

With one possible exception, {1} when the O9A has been written about by an academic it is in cursory terms and based on secondary or tertiary and not primary sources; or it reveals that the author or authors have committed a logical fallacy or two; or it is based on assumptions such as that the O9A is indebted to the Satanism propagated by Howard Stanton Levey, indebted to Aquino, indebted to HP Lovecraft; and/or that core O9A traditions, such as the septenary Tree of Wyrd, are merely “a replacement for the Kabbalah” used by all non-O9A Western Occultists.

In other words,

(i) the academic consensus seems to be that the esoteric philosophy and the praxises of the O9A are derived from other modern Occultists, and
(ii) that as a consequence the O9A written corpus – amounting to thousands of pages and distributed between the 1970s and 2019 – does not merit scholarly study, {2} despite the fact that “the ONA has produced more material on both the practical and theoretical aspects of magic, as well as more ideological texts on Satanism and the Left-Hand Path in general, than larger groups such as the Church of Satan and the Temple of Set has produced in combination [which] makes the ONA an important player in the theoretical discussion of what the Left-Hand Path and Satanism is and should be according to the practitioners,” {3} and/or
(iii) that academic standards in modern academia have declined so that the committal of logical fallacies by authors goes either unnoticed or is uncommented on. {4}

We present here several articles – slightly revised since their initial publication to include references to recent O9A texts such as the three hundred page 2019 trilogy Feond, Baeldraca, Tyberness {5} – which articles consider the writings of four academics who have written about the O9A, and which articles thus document the errors, omissions, assumptions made by, and the logical fallacies committed by, such authors.

TWS Nexion
October 2019 ev

{1} The exception is the chapter on the O9A by Connell Monette in the book Mysticism in the 21st Century. Sirius Academic Press, 2nd edition, 2015, ISBN 978-1940964102.

{2} Correctly understood, a scholarly approach means undertaking a meticulous, unbiased, research into a specific subject over a period of some years using, wherever possible, primary sources; formulating an opinion based on such learning, such knowledge, as results from such research, and in respect of writing academic papers and books about the subject providing copious, accurate, references to the source material.

Primary sources include direct evidence such as original documents dating from the period under study, and accounts and works (written, verbal, published or unpublished) by such individuals whose life or whose writings or whose works form part of the research. In addition, if such sources – documents or accounts or writings – are in another language, then it is incumbent upon the scholar to have knowledge of that language and thus be able to translate such documents themselves, for a reliance upon the translations of others relegates such sources from the position of primary ones to secondary ones.

Hence, if the author of an academic book or academic paper writes about a person and/or about their works, or about an event, using only secondary sources – sources containing the opinions, the interpretations, or the conclusions of others – then the opinion, the interpretation, the conclusions of that author about such a person and/or about their works, or about an event, are unauthoritative because unscholarly.

Primary sources in respect of the O9A include the 1980s ,Naos, manuscript, and the 2019 trilogy Feond, Baeldraca, and Tyberness.

{3} Examples are provided of such fallacies in relation to what has been written about the O9A, and which fallacies include the fallacy of Incomplete Evidence, the fallacy of Illicit Transference, and the fallacy of Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, and argumentum ad verecundiam.

{4} Jacob C. Senholt, The Sinister Tradition. Paper presented at the international conference, Satanism in the Modern World, Trondheim, 19-20th of November, 2009. p.26. [Accessed October 2019]

{5} (i) Feond, ISBN 978-1687255624, (ii) Baeldraca, ISBN 978-1689931953, (iii) Tyberness, ISBN 978-1696821742.


Comments are closed.