Skip to content

Xocolatl and the creation of the universe

Last updated on 24 Nov 2022

Xocolatl after a party

Once upon a time, the great god Xocolatl was bored. The party was over, there was a mess in the divine mansion, and nothing was left besides savory snacks and stale beer. Now Xocolatl was a cool god, but he hated being bored and having to clean up after his hosts, so he decided to make something instead, while waiting for the heavenly servants to tidy up.

Xocolatl retired to his Place of Making, and began to mix ingredients. He had sweet things, sour things, savory things (from the party leftovers – Xocolatl was a thrifty deity apart from the mansions and servants) and salty things (also from the party). He mixed them together in a Magic Ratio and they became something he had never had before. It was magical and divine, and since these attributes were of great interest to him, being as he is magical and divine also, he decided he’d make an entire universe in which this substance could become.

Unfortunately, gods are subject to laws, and the laws of existence meant that he could not simply make a universe of this magic and divine ingredient ex nihilo. He had to have this substance, which he named after himself, xocolatl, as the end product of mixing the four substances that comprised it, and which it was more than the sum of. In short, he needed a universe that had as its end and goal, the production of xocolatl.

So he sighed at the wasted space, physics and time, and just got on with it. He made the stars, the galaxies, the nebulae and all the physical processes that produced xocolatl factories, which those who came later called planets. On each xocolatl factory, Xocolatl supervised the evolution of beings that could refine and enjoy the divine and magical substance. The fifth substance was not only the purpose of the universe, but gave these beings their own purposes, morals, standards and rules. Xocolatl had made a moral universe by accident!

Moreover, watching the antics of these beings was a great cure for boredom, he thought as he nibbled on some of his namesake. He then put that on his Book of Face.


  1. DiscoveredJoys DiscoveredJoys

    But who created Xocolatl ? It’s all very well to say that religion answers the ‘why?’ questions, like ‘What is the purpose of life?’ but religion only pushes the explanation back one level.

    What existed before chocolate?

    • What do you mean? The gods and the substances have always existed. You might as well as why there is something and not nothing. It’s a silly question. *Something* has to exist, so it might as well be them.

      In fact every universe that can exist does so, except for those in which carob is a good thing.

  2. Marilyn Marilyn

    He certainly got the T Shirt

    • I suppose I need to start one up, don’t I? Later… When the money starts rolling in.

  3. Brilliant, I am so stealing this!

  4. But who was the evil god who created white chocolate?

    • Patience. As the revelations occur, I shall report them. Even Joseph Smith and Mohammed took time with their holy writings.

  5. So morality is incidental to the human ability to make and enjoy chocolate? I need to consider this.

    • Not incidental. Humans were made for chocolate. Morality is necessary for that purpose. It’s just that Xocolatl didn’t intend morality. He’s not without limitations, you know. No god is.

      • I agree that God is limited by consistency. But I thought humans could immorally enjoy chocolate. Are you sure that they cannot or am I misunderstanding you?

        • I have discussed this under the rubric of Chocolatarianism. No enjoyment of chocolate is en soi immoral, if it does not impede another’s enjoyment of chocolate (or your own).

  6. Jeb Jeb

    “The fifth substance was not only the purpose of the universe, but gave these beings their own purposes, morals, standards and rules.”

    I wondered when this would show up. By chance just started skimming through Bourdieu’s “Distinction” before plunging into it fully, book fell open on a small section on garden gnomes which made me laugh and gave me the inclination to check here.

  7. Jeb Jeb

    Mons. B seems to be addressing in part the nagging question these posts have raised. My own experience with consuming chocolate and the ultimate pleasure in eating is based on a taste for tradition rather than anything else.

    I would appear to be a sucker for a sales pitch from my childhood involving pirates who of course eat a rum flavored foil wrapped cheap chocolate confection.

    The only major annoyance is its now wrapped in plastic (and its not even the same color as the original and has no pictures of a pirate gallon on the front or any references to pirates which is heresy!) so I can’t relive the childhood ritual of opening the bar, or eating a little and carefully wrapping it back up and it is no longer so expensive (was nearly a weeks pocket money for a bar) and a very rare exclusive indulgence. It only recently went back on the market after a long absence in the U.K, which hits the exclusive button and its not available in local stores, so its the difficult to get factor and memory of past experience that seems to provide the pleasure which is intense on eating.

    More intense than with other chocolate that ‘tastes’ better.

  8. Great blog. I just referenced you post on the Ontological fallacy today in my post. This post made me look up and read a bit about Chocolate. Thanx

  9. Jeb Jeb

    I think that whats makes this blog essential reading for me rather than just interesting is that John moves a bit further rather than just identifying fallacy and the errors of thought from which certain traditions form and replicate. As from a non-philosophical ethnographic perspective philosophy is often simply just the start of the story rather than providing a full stop.

    ‘ Its an error nothing to see here move along’

    My fav. fallacy is ‘nitty gritty is a racist term and policemen should be stopped and or punished if they use it.’

    I don’t think the fact you can identify the errors of thought that allows this statement to be reached for, fully explains what gives it legs and allows for wide spread repetition and reception in a community.

    The philosophy is the start position rather than the end.

    I may of course be wrong but a lot of skeptical thought ends far too abruptly for my taste but then dealing with a very different set of interests and objectives.

  10. DiscoveredJoys DiscoveredJoys

    When I was a child I did partake of the Nestles Triple Bar (search YouTube for ‘Nestle’s chocolate ‘Triple Bar’ 1960 TV commercial’ – an Australian commercial). A chocolate bar made of a layer of Dark Chocolate with layers of white chocolate and milk chocolate laid upon it.

    Guide me Great Profit. Other religions talk of three gods being one god at the same time. I tasted it and it was good, but now I am troubled that it may have been an abomination.

    • White chocolate is merely chocolafied sugar and starch, and so is not an evil in itself, only if it replaces actual (dark) chocolate. Also, you are imperfect, as Xocolatl is using methods that satisfy his utility functions, not optimize for them. Seek Endarkenment my gustatory brother!

  11. Cris Cris

    I’m progressive; therefore, I belieb. No telos without Xocolatl.

  12. zackoz zackoz

    Could Xocolatl create so much chocolate that even he couldn’t finish it?

    • Of course not. Everything that is has limits.

      • If that is the case, them what is Xocolatl’s chocolate consumption limit?

        • Only he can tell you, and it might depend on what else happened that day.

  13. I’m testing the site to see if comments still work. I borked the admin dashboard…

Comments are closed.