XPost: alt.religion.wicca, alt.arts.poetry.comments, alt.magick
From: gadfly@NOSPAMmeow.org
On Wednesday 02 March, Aunty Kreist wrote in rec.arts.poems:
> "Dale Houstman" wrote in message
> news:42262081.7080700@skypoint.com...
>>
>> Jani wrote:
>> > "Dale Houstman" wrote in message
>> > news:4225EB8E.5010008@skypoint.com...
>> >
>> >>Tom wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>"Jane Asher's Vagina" wrote in
>> >>>message
>> >>>news:1w6ghleaieht3$.1e99jreoeamyz.dlg@40tude.net...
>> >>>
>> >>>>On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 22:13:42 +0000, Shez wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>People who practice the art and craft of magick see something in the
>> >>>>>world that you don't see, its that simple..
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Sure is. They make shit up and convince themselves it's real.
>> >>>
>> >>>Let me break it to you gently. You do the same thing. And, just like
>> >>>everybody else, you strongly object to being accused of doing so.
>> >>
>> >>Certainly many people are self-deluded but it pure post-modernist tripe
> to
>> >>insist that all opinions are equal, as tempting as that lazy attitude
>> >>might be nowadays. A person who believes the moon is made of green
> cheese
>> >>may be as wrong as a person who believes it is made entirely of silver,
>> >>but the mistakes are on a different order, and one is closer to some
>> >>version of the truth. Most people delude themselves into thinking the
>> >>universe gives a blue spit about them - and the human race in general -
>> >>but the one who thinks this is due to the Little People is less likely
> to
>> >>be correct than one who believes it is due to some unexplained yet
>> >>probably material connection between "star stuff" and the makeup of the
>> >>human matter. After all, science works upon probabilities, and some
> things
>> >>are simply more probable. Does this mean scuience has all the answers to
>> >>life? Hardly, since human life is full of imaginative abstracts, but
>> >>applying the rule that the truer answer is most likely the simplest
>> >>answer, believing in "magick" - while comforting to the person who
>> >>believes in it (and there is nothing "wrong" sbout seeking a modicum of
>> >>control and comfort in this world) is to believe in something that all
>> >>experience and observation says is most improbable.
>> >>
>> >>The strange thing about - say - the Wicca movement is that they
> celebrate
>> >>and mimic the supposed behavior that was assigned to victims who were
>> >>innocent of that behavior. Of all those "witches" who were condemned,
>> >>tortured, and killed (and there were not as many as Wicca likes to say
>> >>there were) not ONE was a witch, but only the innocent fodder for a
>> >>political or religious porgram fueled by hysteria, rumor, envy, hatred,
>> >>etc. The few who admitted to this "transgression" did so beneath torture
>> >>or because they were mentally incapacitated, which isn't a surprise
> given
>> >>than schizophrenics and other mental "incompetents" were often singled
> out
>> >>as being in league with the devil, or some such.
>> >>
>> >>So the modern identification with these innocetns is based on the word
> of
>> >>their persecutors and their accusers.
>> >>
>> >>In effect, decalring oneself to be a "witch" (as harmless as it is) is
> not
>> >>unlike declaring oneself to be an eater of children based on ancient
>> >>accounts of Jewish (or Christian) behavior. One is playing the role
>> >>assigned by the enemy.
>> >
>> >
>> > Can I just point out that none of the people from ARW who are
> contributing
>> > to this thread are Wiccan.
>>
>> Didn't say they were - only used Wiccan as one example of a modern
>> "magick" movement. There are other forms of course; from the easily
>> amused folks who read the Horoscope to the creepy guy who sells unicorn
>> posters and herbs at the New Age shopping mall. And many in-between:
>> even fundamentalist Christians are believers in magic, although they
>> like to consider them "miracles." No difference all in all.
>>
>> The wider point is that there is no observable manifestation of "magick"
>> in the world, and that the only "proof" of its existence is either
>> heresay, madness, or the mutterings of Spanish Inquisition types. If the
>> "magick" folks have a grasp of history, it seems to be a very slippery
> one.
>>
>> dmh
> I think many people unfamiliar with "magic" have a sort of idea of wizened
> wizards, and Harry Potter type spells. Real magic is more subtle than that.
Philip Pullmann and Ursula LeGuin, for instance, are more subtle than
Harry Potter. So are Circe and Meg Merrilees, if you prefer the
classics.
*Real* magic involves the suspension of disbelief until you put the
book down. Shakespeare was a great magician; turgid drivellers like
Crowley weren't.
> A good example that most non-magicals can identify with....take Reiki, for
> instance. Reiki is a practice of manipulating the body's energies, either
> internally, or sending those energies out. This is actually a form of magic.
Or a form of pseudo-science, to put it another way.
Or a scam, to put it yet another way.
I can't speak authoritatively for Dale, but I don't think you'll
persuade him by citing Eastern superstitions any more than by citing
Western ones.
> There are also many types of martial arts that manipulate and control either
> the body's energies, or the energies around them.
WTF are "energies", and how they be measured in a laboratory where the
"energised" person's sleeves are checked for hidden Aces?
> I do agree with that anyone who claims they can make trees talk, or turn
> someone into a mouse belongs in the nuthatch. ;)
> Magic is simply energy, to make it easy to comprehend to folks.
M = mc˛?
Well, I suppose it beats the kook who was explaining in sci.physics a
while ago that E = mc [sic].
But it's still a ridiculous superstition. Why can't people pay
attention to the real world around them instead of having to invent
tedious "energies" and such stuff? Is reality really too hard for the
human mind to accept?
PJR :-)
--
alt.usenet.kooks award-winners and FAQ:
http://www.insurgent.org/~kook-faq/
[To reply by email, remove "NOSPAM".]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
