Mainstream occult ideas that you consider really pernicious?

Exploring the Philosophical side of the Occult.

User avatar
Kath
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 301
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:29 am

Re: Mainstream occult ideas that you consider really pernicious?

Post by Kath »

Amor wrote: Wed Nov 11, 2020 9:43 pm > physicality of symbols not having causal power

Think of a symbol as a TV antenna. It has to be the right shape, right materials and right orientation to work.

If a symbol does not literally resonate with (allow ampified access to) some aspect of Reality then it is not a symbol but rather an emblem.
not sure if that was to me, but it may as well have been.
that is an interesting point. definitely something to think about.

it is my own view, that the substance of what is handled in magical practice is fairly (but not entirely) dissociated with physical reality as we currently understand it. "fairly" being the operative word though. its uh... hmmm, honestly I'd feel more comfortable pontificating on this concept if I could actually do intentional telekinesis. When talking about the direct interaction of magical forces and physical objects, we're kinda in territory where I feel a lack of expertise. That's not to say an absence of experience, but I know enough to understand there's plenty I don't know on the subject.

But for the most part, I kinda lean towards the idea that if someone thought they needed a quartz crystal to focus energy... and you gave them a glass fake, as long as they didn't know it would probably work fine, or at least work as well as a quartz crystal would have for them. Similar mindset for herbs. If it doesn't have mind altering properties, i'm not super-convinced it's all that relevant except for the theatrics of belief paradigm. I lean a little more towards the indonesian notion of the manner in which magic infuses objects. The word "taboo" originally comes from that, a system of things not to touch yourself, or not to allow to touch each other, because you may affect or change the magical potential stored within. I don't take it that far, but that is somewhat closer to my sensibilities than the idea that sage would have a different effect than oregano anywhere other than on my taste buds ;-)

User avatar
Amor
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 403
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2020 9:57 pm

Re: Mainstream occult ideas that you consider really pernicious?

Post by Amor »

>at least work as well as a quartz crystal would have

Early on in my experience of such matters I was looking at a crystal in a hill and was surprised to find that its etheric nervous system extended through the galaxy - but not beyond.

Quartz is particularly useful with its very strong communication web.

Just now, testing a drinking glass made of lead crystal, its connections are very largely restricted to the minerals immediately below it, extending quite a few meters. So I suspect that for most energy purposes glass is not interchangeable with quartz crystal.

User avatar
Kath
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 301
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:29 am

Re: Mainstream occult ideas that you consider really pernicious?

Post by Kath »

But that's not a blind test which would rule out placebo effect, OR the capacity for belief to affect magical result.

I'd be more convinced if you had a partner who could fool you on what you're working with, materially, and then draw conclusions from that.

Does quartz function as you say? or is it working more like a sigil, and any facsimile would work equally well so long as you regarded it as that material?

It's not so much that it strikes me as impossible that such a thing could work... but that I've never met ANYONE who approached the topic with even an ounce of clinical reason & scientific curiosity with an equally eager willingness to prove or disprove the idea with rational testing methods. The whole "I want to believe" vibe. Which is really a turn off for me. Similar the astrology thing, I mean, personal validation fallacy is a really potent effect. You'd assume someone who put a lot of time & energy into astrology would at some point cut the dates & signs off of predictions, and let people pick through them to see what gels best with their experiences, without them knowing which thing is intended to be 'for them'. Just to see if there's substance to it. It's not a hard thing to test. But I sense a strong lack of willingness to examine it that closely (not necessarily from you personally, but in general).

Personally, I understand the utility of devoting absolute belief in magical practice to the working. But I always deconstruct my results and analyze them with an open mind, with care to weed out self-taught misconceptions or dogma.

User avatar
Amor
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 403
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2020 9:57 pm

Re: Mainstream occult ideas that you consider really pernicious?

Post by Amor »

>that's not a blind test which would rule out placebo effect

Quite so. I like to look at what I am doing. Then I can invent more experiments to observe.

At one stage I was part of quite a good meditation group and would ask them to observe my/our inner experiments. Often their viewing was slightly different from mine, but usually adding more information that I could then also detect.

So the process started with an observation/belief leading to a theory, to an experiment, to observations and more deductions. Thus the claimed process of material science can be applied to non-material (spiritual) science. (With material science experimental results the first question often is: who paid for it?)

> Similar the astrology thing

Certainly astrologists are better at explaining than predicting.

Nevertheless it is possible for a suitable meditation group to project out into the solar system and beyond and do experiments with interconnections between planets and stars.

>devoting absolute belief in magical practice to the working

That is important in the use of intent to move energy and intelligence. Still, it is good to be able to follow the flows of light to see where they have trouble flowing.

Perhaps I should add that it is important to control the level of consciousness when using inner sight. It is rarely useful to look in the wrong part of the spectrum of Existence.

User avatar
Kath
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 301
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:29 am

Re: Mainstream occult ideas that you consider really pernicious?

Post by Kath »

I wrote an essay for OF a looooong time ago, about "the really real truth"
one of the things I pointed out in that, was that you can have a working theory which is factually incorrect, but is still functional and workable. And further, that having an approach to working which 'does' work, can lead to delusions of 'truth' which may or may not be factually justified.
Amor wrote: Thu Nov 26, 2020 11:29 pm >devoting absolute belief in magical practice to the working

That is important in the use of intent to move energy and intelligence. Still, it is good to be able to follow the flows of light to see where they have trouble flowing.
that's a good way of stating that.

User avatar
Cybernetic_Jazz
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 1202
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 9:12 pm
Location: On a play date with the Universe.

Re: Mainstream occult ideas that you consider really pernicious?

Post by Cybernetic_Jazz »

Kath wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 6:37 pm I wrote an essay for OF a looooong time ago, about "the really real truth"
one of the things I pointed out in that, was that you can have a working theory which is factually incorrect, but is still functional and workable. And further, that having an approach to working which 'does' work, can lead to delusions of 'truth' which may or may not be factually justified.
Curt Jaimungal had Noam Chomsky on for a third interview recently, they stayed on philosophic more than political issues this time and got into an interesting discussion of the Ptolemaic model. Chomsky described the Ptolemaic model as being able to explain absolutely anything with enough adjustment and always had room for further adjustment, just that it was the baroque complexity that people didn't like as well as the inclusions of things that aren't true. I think that goes to what you're saying - ie. that it's difficult to come up with a magical system that's stringent enough not to propose all sorts of things that aren't real, and it takes a lot of trial and error to shake that out.
You don't have to do a thing perfect, just relentlessly.

User avatar
Kath
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 301
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:29 am

Re: Mainstream occult ideas that you consider really pernicious?

Post by Kath »

Cybernetic_Jazz wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 7:01 pm ie. that it's difficult to come up with a magical system that's stringent enough not to propose all sorts of things that aren't real, and it takes a lot of trial and error to shake that out.
that really hits the nail on the head

not sure if i can ever totally shake things out though.
Flatworms have a precursor to eyes, they sense light and dark, with some limited directionality, but they can't really "see". I often feel like humans are metaphysically flat worms, perceiving "something" ill defined, and interacting with it, poorly.
But the "more functional" the working model, the more I assume it's at least somewhat less broken :P

User avatar
Amor
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 403
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2020 9:57 pm

Re: Mainstream occult ideas that you consider really pernicious?

Post by Amor »

One of the difficulties with spiritual science is it is always embedded within greater energy systems.

For example, take a practitioner that has not graduated from the Piscean Age, and who has karmic connections with earth elementals. Then take one with a soul generated before the pralaya who is reluctant to make the transition to being with a god of love. And another that resents being a human and thereby reduces the flow in particular sephiroth.

These practitioners can expect somewhat differing results from the same metaphysical experiment - because they are not independent of the system being experimented upon.

Of course material science has essentially the same problem and this is partially approached with double blind experiments, but the double blind is only dealing with the consciousness of the experimenters and not with the system in which they are embedded.

User avatar
Kath
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 301
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:29 am

Re: Mainstream occult ideas that you consider really pernicious?

Post by Kath »

off topic, but I think i fit 2 of your categories.
I'm not super into being human, and I've nothing against a god of love, but the notion just seems really narrow and reductive in scope.

I think a big part of this issue is that you can give someone tools, and instruction, but you can't give someone artistry. And ineffable artistry is a major part of the way in which we tend to engage the supernatural.

Also, dream interpretation touches on many of the same issues... when someone dreams of a tree, Freud might say they're dreaming of a phalus, but a wood cutter might view it as material ripe with potential, and a nature lover might view it as a symbol of mother nature, and a blacksmith might view it as fuel, and a bird might view it as real estate, etc. So when some of the books out there which take a stab at dream interpretation make ham fisted symbolism associations, it's DRASTICALLY out of touch with the personal nature of symbolism. So... carrying this idea over to a magical working, interpretation of results or even of the meaning and context of the method, may vary wildly, in a very personalized manner. although I'm sure that to some degree such differences could be ironed out with detailed dialog. But in working magic, the parts which are... not given to describing with words, are difficult to iron out in dialogue.

User avatar
Cybernetic_Jazz
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 1202
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 9:12 pm
Location: On a play date with the Universe.

Re: Mainstream occult ideas that you consider really pernicious?

Post by Cybernetic_Jazz »

I was 'that kid' who was obsessed with dinosaurs, astronomy, chemistry, painting with acyrlics (yes - watched lots of Bill Alexander and bugged my parents till they let me try my hand at landscapes) and at least once every few months I was dragging my parents to a science or natural history museum.

No problem being human or in the world at least as far as that goes. Darwinian game theory, the game where we need to play the game of 'kill all' until only a few people are left standing and everyone else is their footstools, where we worship the divine psychopath, where violence and hatred are holy and where the bully delivers a sacrament onto other children - that's what I don't think I've ever come to terms with and it's questionable whether I'd ever want to.
You don't have to do a thing perfect, just relentlessly.

User avatar
Amor
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 403
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2020 9:57 pm

Re: Mainstream occult ideas that you consider really pernicious?

Post by Amor »

Kath wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 2:15 pm off topic, but I think i fit 2 of your categories.
I'm not super into being human, and I've nothing against a god of love, but the notion just seems really narrow and reductive in scope.
There are global issues with groups of souls from before this solar system. They think/feel differently from the more recent souls. The clash between China and the US is an example.

There are also beings that pass through the human race. For example, tree nature spirits, in order to become greater devas (e.g. landscape angels) apparently need to pass through the human race to learn voice and intent. (Would ritual be a good practice?) Thus passing entities generally do not feel at home being a human but choose work that is similar to their origin. Earth spirits often become geologists when human.

There are also some souls that are precursors of the next solar system and therefore are more oriented to Purpose than to Love.


Kath wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 2:15 pm
Also, dream interpretation touches on many of the same issues... when someone dreams of a tree, Freud might say they're dreaming of a phalus, but a wood cutter might view it as material ripe with potential,.
I find it easy, while meditating, to step back into the dream and ask the parts of the dream what they represent. So far they have always given good answers - often not what I expected.

User avatar
Kath
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 301
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:29 am

Re: Mainstream occult ideas that you consider really pernicious?

Post by Kath »

Amor wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 9:50 pm I find it easy, while meditating, to step back into the dream and ask the parts of the dream what they represent. So far they have always given good answers - often not what I expected.
Oh yes, the person who had the dream has an intimate connection with the meaning within it. Even someone who simply knows them well, or forms a strong connection to them can have good insight into the symbolisms.

I only meant that books which claim to know the meaning of various things which may appear in the dreams (of people the author never even met) are little more than a wild guess at best. And even that, just as a parallel to illustrate how interpretation of results could be difficult to quantify 1:1 between different people.

User avatar
Amor
Forum Member
Forum Member
Posts: 403
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2020 9:57 pm

Re: Mainstream occult ideas that you consider really pernicious?

Post by Amor »

Amor wrote: Thu Dec 31, 2020 9:50 pm... tree nature spirits, in order to become greater devas (e.g. landscape angels) apparently need to pass through the human race to learn voice and intent.


Tree spirits tend to build human bodies that are tall and thin and sexually ambiguous. They often work with the land including as foresters and landscape architects.

I used to have a female assistant who was a short foot-stamper. I traced her to volcanic nature spirit.

When I asked her what she most liked doing she said: Watching things melt

Post Reply

Return to “Reason and Unreason”