not sure if that was to me, but it may as well have been.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.
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 ;-)