postmodern Satanism

single object, g, or even a set ofobjects {g 1 , g 2 , g 3 , . . .}, it in no wayfollows that they are therebydiscoursing on T. In other words, theymay be having a conversation, but it isnot the meta-discussion they probablyboth think it to be. They are notdiscussing the possibility/actuality ofdivinity itself, but rather having alower-level discussion on the merits ofparticular cultural artifacts such as“Zeus” or “Yahweh”. In order toelevate the dialogue, a suitablereplacement must be found for T, onewhich is both well-defined andinclusive. It is only then that thepostmodern Satanist will be able toboth evaluate the question in ageneral way and also to provide arelevant placement for the Masterwithin their own personalmetaphysical schema. To this end, I