Making Occult Studies more Accessible

[Placid Dingo]

Also, for clarity, are you saying ECH that putting yourself in life or death situations is the ideal way to find relaxation generally? Or that it's something everyone should do as part of their personal growth? Or

I'm just pointing it out as an example of something that forces you to focus on what's actually important in your life instead of getting hung up on and stressed out by what are, essentially, trivial things.

I think it absolutely CAN be an avenue towards personal growth, but it's certainly not the only one.

Now, for clarity, your previous post seems to come across as some form of implied holocaust denial. I'm asking for clarification because I can't picture you actually thinking that or meaning to have come across in a way that could be interpreted as that.

Awesome. Makes sense.

For my part I just mean that events get turned into narratives and it's important to remember that.

When I say the mythology of the holocaust I mean it in the sense that the reality has been boiled down to a simple narrative that fits neatly in people's heads as a kind of epic poem, rather than the complex messy truth.

So the mythology is "evil Hitler kills Jews and tries to take over the world with the evil Japanese."
The reality is of course, every single thing that happened across the holocaust and ww2 that isn't mentioned in the above simplification.

Same as the mythology that belongs to the left about Bush is "stupid president starts war for oil and ruins economy"
So there's truth in that but it's not the whole complex, messy intricate story.

The truth is wrapped up in there but by recognising that what we popularly refer back to in history (or everyday life) is a series of super complex events boiled down to simple narratives we can train ourself to be intuitively cautious of applying simple versions of events to real situations while still understanding the kind of symbolic or mainstream understanding.

In case Im still lacking clarity, my position is as you assume, that Holocaust denial is horseshit.

[Placid Dingo]

Actually the best way to express my position is to look at the 'Common Walls' thread and imagine if it has been derailed after Cram's Demons Are Everywhere thread by people going 'that's stupid demons aren't real! Why don't you just call them bad ideas!?' we all get it, we all know we get it and we all know we all know we get it.

To me starting a corporate sigils thread or an exploring the good bits of occult thread should be equally possible. Because we all know that's demons aren't physical evil manifestations and we all know sigils don't actually use magic to rewrite someone's brain.

Anyway. That's my ideal world. I'm not the one who cant stand the terminology and I can't make it any more palatable by saying it should be so I might pull away from arguing the point now.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

I'm just going to throw my two cents in here, as far as word usage is concerned.

If words have specific meanings, as we are wont to say when we are ragging righteously on a newb, then we should accept that the jargon that we currently use is going to have to suffice for now. Our interpretations of the jargon may shift over time, but if it is a convenient shorthand, we shouldn't chuck it out based on the fact that there used to be superstition involved with it. To go back, the word yoga is a prime example of that. It used to be crazy swami shit, then it was a way to stretch in the hopes of extending your life span a couple of years, and then it was funny shit that rich people do naked in a room that's hotter than Tucson in July.

Sure, Magic/k may make you cringe because of all of the nonsense that a lot of people have attached to it over the years/centuries. If some spag manages to actually levitate at a thought, we're just going to have to call it Magic until we come up with a nifty name for the particle at work and the process involved.

When I see weird unexplainable shit happening, I'm not afraid to call it a ghost. Does that mean it's a dead soul playing tricks on me? No. It's just a short hand that encompasses a couple of weird unexplainable events that people can immediately relate to. And I've seen/heard really weird shit that I can't explain. We all have, haven't we? I remain agnostic about it. Maybe I used to take acid and don't remember that I did. But I'm pretty sure I never have, so something else must be at work. We need not be so wrapped up in technicalities that a perfectly good linguistic reference need be chucked out because it used to be all poppets and crows feathers.

Prevent used to mean go in front of. Just saying.

Well, that certainly warblesnarf minglefrig poopwattle, blurglevurp?

The more I think about this, the more it seems like intentional pineal fnord.

We all know what we're friggin' talking about here. We're all actually on the same goddamn page. And it seems like you don't want to logically engage something that might be nascent neuroscience because the only language we have available to us is wrapped up in the woo, as LMNO would put it. Well, until we find more comfortable words, who the fuck cares? And you know what? We're supposed to be goddamn Discordians and not looking at shit with our preconceived notions. So if you can't jump into an "occult" thread without looking past the word occult, if you can't separate the wheat from the chaff, maybe you should just stay out of the thread.

With all honest due respect, seriously,
Twid

I take back the bolded. Simply because I thought about how it sounded. My apologies.

  <----at myself

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Magic is real. Magic isn't real. Magic is useful. Magic isn't useful.

Stage magic, for example, is real. Teller, from Penn and Teller, claims that stage magic is the "unwilling(ish) suspension of disbelief". When an audience watches a play, they willingly suspend disbelief, because that's part of the social agreement. When they watch a magic show, they unwillingly suspend disbelief, they WANT to figure out the trick.

This is where Real Magic comes in to play. The hand is not faster than the eye, no matter how many times someone says that. Magic tricks don't work because the magician has fast hands. It works because they magician uses psychology, sociology etc to persuade, cajole and confuse the audience.

A con-man uses that same Real Magic. So does a spy.

Crowley, Hine, Farber, Wilson, Carroll etc ALSO use that same Real Magic. The audience is the conscious brain, the props (cards, wands, etc) are there for the same reason the stage magician uses props, to distract, confuse and misdirect the audience, while the magician completes the trick.

We can discuss a magic show in very specific terms. "Trick one is a card trick and the magician used card palming. Trick two is a ball and cup trick, the magician used everyday, uninteresting motions to slip balls out of his pockets, to place balls under the cups as he moved them etc."

However, that's not the same as watching the magic show, or performing the magic show. In fact, even if you understand exactly HOW the trick works, without lots of repetitive practice and a good foundation in deception and trickery (including some basic psychology and sociology), you won't be very successful with the magic.

The trick you talk about is not the trick performed.

We can say exactly the same about a magic ritual/meditation/etc. The magician is using stuff we can describe in specific terms, much of it involves tricking the conscious or subconscious mind. However, talking about the 'magic' is not the same as doing the magic.

I think everyone is capable of changing their beliefs, perceptions, ideals, programming. Magic is simply a set of processes/tools that have historically been useful to a number of people. If you don't want to use the tools, bully for you.

Personally, I use a sledge hammer to break rocks, not my face.

[Telarus]

Douglas Rushkoff has some interesting things to say on this subject. Rushkoff's specialty field lies in information and internet technologies, but he's hung out with RAW and a few of the other "post-occultists". I'll get back to Rushkoff in a moment.

Now, Roger's right, in a way. Due to the information available on the internet, we live in the "post-occult" realm. And in some ways, it's worse than a constant barrage of post-modernism. Some of the information posted online about occult subjects is purposefully neutered (a key insight is missing, etc, etc). Some of it is absolute Woo crap (time-cube much?).

At other times, concepts are presented in ways that simply do not make intuitive sense to a member of our culture. This could be purposeful manipulation, or it could be accidental. An example:

I recently had a Satori experience (also called 'kensho'). It involved Musashi's Book of the 5 Rings, and a passage that I had given up on understanding a while ago (the ambiguity in the translations simply didn't convey enough context for me to understand wtf Musashi was talking about).

Wikipedia defines satori as "a Japanese Buddhist term for enlightenment, meaning "understanding". In the Zen Buddhist tradition, satori refers to the experience of kensho. Kensho (Japanese) is a term used in Zen traditions meaning "seeing into one's true nature." Ken means "seeing," sho means "nature," "essence." Satori and kensho are commonly translated as enlightenment..."

Wikionary has an even simpler definition (which leaves out a metric fuck-ton of context): "(Zen Buddhism) A sudden inexpressible feeling of inner understanding or enlightenment."

Now, I don't mean that I have achieved some arch-Enlightenment, some End Goal, that I don't have to worry about anymore. This is exactly the "woo bullshit" which we need to cut out of discussions of these topics.

"You should have enlightenment experience again and again and support them with continuous practice." - Suzuki, Daisetz Teitaro (1948), An Introduction to Zen Buddhism

But I know that I had a kenso/satori experience because the sensations which accompanied the flash of understanding fit with the records the Buddhists have kept on kensho/satori experiences. These include the sensation of heat emanating from my abdomen, nervous shaking/jittery feelings, a "floating" feeling, and a spontaneous activation of certain brain networks involved in processing bright light (this I have experience with due to sitting zazen and staring at a white walls, and seperately practicing a mental trick to activate my pineal gland by imagining white light flooding my head). The interesting thing is that scientific research has found these bodily sensations as well:
[Abstract: On the Emergence of Parinatal Symptons in Buddhist Mediations] http://www.jstor.org/pss/1386182

Because I'd done my research, I did not let these sensations trip me into an anxiety state. I had experienced a genuine insight about a topic I had a deep personal interest in, and my nervous system was re-organizing itself in order to make that realization useful. If I had given in to anxiety/fear related thoughts, I may have shut down that process entirely or trapped myself in Makyo (hallucinations) or some other mental crutch. It was serendipity that I didn't need an instructor to calm those feelings and that my nervous system was primed to make use of the random trigger. It was my Discordian mental training which let me recognize this event as a normal mundane consequence of this mental restructuring, and not something supernatural.

Now, I've purposefully left out the CONTENT/MEANING I acquired in this little kensho, so that I could talk a bit about the process. Still, without attempting to communicate my insight, the above sounds very much like woo BS. Just as Musashi recognized, this insight is only worth so much if it stays in my own head, but becomes extremely valuable if I can try to get the basics across to others.

Mushasi knew enough to try to cut the BS as well. Gorin no Sho was written in Hiragani (simplified Japanese). At the beginning of the work Musashi states, "In writing this work I will not borrow from Confucian or Buddhist precepts". The fact of the matter is, if he had used Kanji to write the works it would have immediately caused the reader to relate to either Chinese or Buddhist precepts (as each kanji has deep significant meanings both obvious and hidden and because the very core of education in Japan stems from Buddhism).

As such, I will attempt to lay out my insight in the most mundane terms possible. Maybe this will help some-one else with their kensho.

The specific passages from Musashi's Book of Five Rings comes in the Water and Wind Books. I have bolded the important bits (as I see them):

BOOK OF WATER
The Gaze in Strategy

The gaze should be large and broad. This is the twofold gaze "Perception and Sight". Perception is strong and sight weak.

In strategy it is important to see distant things as if they were close and to take a distanced view of close things. It is important in strategy to know the enemy's sword and not to be distracted by insignificant movements of his sword. You must study this. The gaze is the same for single combat and for large-scale combat.

It is necessary in strategy to be able to look to both sides without moving the eyeballs. You cannot master this ability quickly. Learn what is written here: use this gaze in everyday life and do not vary it whatever happens.

.....

BOOK OF WIND
Fixing the Eyes in Other Schools

Some schools maintain that the eyes should be fixed on the enemy's long sword. Some schools fix the eye on the hands. Some fix the eyes on the face, and some fix the eyes on the feet, and so on. If you fix the eyes on these places your spirit can become confused, and your strategy thwarted.

I will explain this in detail. Footballers** do not fix their eyes on the ball, but by good play on the field they can perform well. When you become accustomed to something, you are not limited to the use of your eyes. People such as master musicians have the music score in front of their nose, or flourish the sword in several ways when they have mastered the Way, but this does not mean that they fix their eyes on these things specifically, or that they make pointless movements of the sword. It means that they can see naturally.

In the Way of strategy, when you have fought many times you will easily be able to appraise the speed and position of the enemy's sword, and having mastery of the Way you will see the weight of his spirit. In strategy, fixing the eyes means gazing at the man's heart.

In large-scale strategy the area to watch is the enemy's strength. "Perception" and "sight" are the two methods of seeing. Perception consists of concentrating strongly on the enemy's spirit, observing the condition of the battle field, fixing the gaze strongly, seeing the progress of the fight and the changes of advantage. This is the sure way to win.

In single combat you must not fix the eyes on details. As I said before, if you fix your eyes on details and neglect important things, your spirit will become bewildered, and victory will escape you. Research this principle well and train diligently.

**Football was a court game in ancient Japan. There is a reference to it in Genji Monogatari.

Like I said, not the best translation. WTF does Musashi mean when he differentiates "Sight" from "Perception"? From my previous research, it involves the concept of Zanshin ("remaining or abiding mind/spirit" is a close translation). But WTF does that mean?

Here's how I pieced it together:

• I have practiced a meditation technique where I "shift" my point of attention away from visual space. Mostly this involved imagining a small ball of light (thus hijacking my visual processing away from my sight), and "moving it" through my body with the basic Zazen technique of observing what happens without clinging to or rejecting the sensations.
  
  


• Our bodily structure causes us to fix the center of our gaze on the things which grab our attention. The previous exercise, along with wall-staring Zazen, helps you realize that you mind's attention doesn't have to follow your gaze, and can be focused independently from your sight or any of your other senses. (This is one of the the pieces I didn't have language for before my kensho experience).
  
  


• I couldn't connect this to what Musashi was writing about in the Water Book until I saw a drawing tutorial that Mark Chong, one of master Glenn Vilppu's students posted on youtube. In this video, he's playing with various techniques, such as drawing while looking at the surface through a camera to match a certain perspective, and another which he calls "Offside Targeting". It was the few comments on Offside Targeting and practicing that technique which triggered the kensho experience. Mark describes a "method of attention" while drawing, in which you focus the center of your gaze on the tip of your pencil, but you focus your attention separately to a point in your peripheral vision you need as a reference. Your PERCEPTION can thus leverage all of your visual field, and your intuition will tell you when a perspective line or an object's scale "feels wrong", when the spacial relations you've put on paper don't match your source material.
  
  


• Thus, in order to draw a straight line, we need to mark 2 points. While marking that second point, you need to have a portion of your awareness fixed on the first dot while your center of gaze follows your pen/stylus. Make the second mark. Now "ghost the line" a few times to get the movement into your muscle memory. While "ghosting" the line (hovering over where you will draw), you MUST shift your peripheral awareness to the point furthest away from the tip of your stylus while keeping the center of the gaze on the tip. Now draw the line with one smooth motion.
  
  


• As I sat and actually did the drawing exercise, concepts began to bubble up. I felt the similarities to the "ball of light" exercise, I relived a few fights-in-the-park, I heard/saw the line from the WATER BOOK about Sight and Perception. Then I remembered a separate term from my Zen studies that I hadn't integrated yet... Zanshin is also refereed to as 'the two-fold gaze', or Ezan no Metsuke (lit, "looking at a far mountain", or directing mindfulness to the peripheral vision by gazing 'as if at a horizon/mountain'). . BOOM "Sight" (the central region of our gaze), which gives us fine-visual detail but is horrible at sensing spacial relationships, is weak. "Perception" (not getting lost in the details directly in-front of you, always keeping part of your mindfulness on your peripheral) is strong!!!!!
  
  
  


• The sudden realization that this 'method of awareness' can improve my skills as an artist AND as a swordsman caused the kensho symptoms to bubble up (I think Burns was in the chat when I started babbling about it). It was a genuine Satori/Kensho experience exactly because I internalized an understanding of how reality (the reality of part of my biology) works at a base level, which I can then apply in any situation.
  
  

-----------------------

Now, that was a lot to chew through, but I promised to get back to Douglass Rushkoff. Here's a great talk which explains the functions at work behind Brands/Sigils:

Douglass Rushkoff: Branding Doesn't Work, So Now What? (part of the "Program or Be Programmed" material)

[East Coast Hustle]

I'm just going to throw my two cents in here, as far as word usage is concerned.

If words have specific meanings, as we are wont to say when we are ragging righteously on a newb, then we should accept that the jargon that we currently use is going to have to suffice for now. Our interpretations of the jargon may shift over time, but if it is a convenient shorthand, we shouldn't chuck it out based on the fact that there used to be superstition involved with it. To go back, the word yoga is a prime example of that. It used to be crazy swami shit, then it was a way to stretch in the hopes of extending your life span a couple of years, and then it was funny shit that rich people do naked in a room that's hotter than Tucson in July.

Sure, Magic/k may make you cringe because of all of the nonsense that a lot of people have attached to it over the years/centuries. If some spag manages to actually levitate at a thought, we're just going to have to call it Magic until we come up with a nifty name for the particle at work and the process involved.

When I see weird unexplainable shit happening, I'm not afraid to call it a ghost. Does that mean it's a dead soul playing tricks on me? No. It's just a short hand that encompasses a couple of weird unexplainable events that people can immediately relate to. And I've seen/heard really weird shit that I can't explain. We all have, haven't we? I remain agnostic about it. Maybe I used to take acid and don't remember that I did. But I'm pretty sure I never have, so something else must be at work. We need not be so wrapped up in technicalities that a perfectly good linguistic reference need be chucked out because it used to be all poppets and crows feathers.

Prevent used to mean go in front of. Just saying.

Well, that certainly warblesnarf minglefrig poopwattle, blurglevurp?

The more I think about this, the more it seems like intentional pineal fnord.

We all know what we're friggin' talking about here. We're all actually on the same goddamn page. And it seems like you don't want to logically engage something that might be nascent neuroscience because the only language we have available to us is wrapped up in the woo, as LMNO would put it. Well, until we find more comfortable words, who the fuck cares? And you know what? We're supposed to be goddamn Discordians and not looking at shit with our preconceived notions. So if you can't jump into an "occult" thread without looking past the word occult, if you can't separate the wheat from the chaff, maybe you should just stay out of the thread.

With all honest due respect, seriously,
Twid

Nope. I will continue to speak my mind in these ridiculous threads and will do so with all of the hostility towards the "occult" that it deserves. Other peoples' inability to let go of the woo and treat the unknown as just that without loading it up with stupid terminology that spits in the face of actual human knowledge is not my problem.

To reframe your cello story with another analogy:

I'm not a mechanic. I'm handy and somewhat mechanically inclined, but I'm woefully undereducated about the workings of internal combustion engines. If my car breaks down in a manner that doesn't make sense TO ME (that part is important), I don't feel the need to say that gremlins are in my engine. I just accept that whatever happened is beyond my experience and/or frame of reference and hope that someone with more knowledge will know how to fix it. And even if, in the end, it appears to be unfixable, I still don't go around saying that gremlins broke my engine because that is fucking ridiculous and makes me sound like a complete moron.

As I type this, it occurs to me that a whole lot of peoples' acceptance of idiocy like this stems from an innate discomfort with saying those three little words that go so far towards achieving biped-hood: I DON'T KNOW.

[East Coast Hustle]

Actually the best way to express my position is to look at the 'Common Walls' thread and imagine if it has been derailed after Cram's Demons Are Everywhere thread by people going 'that's stupid demons aren't real! Why don't you just call them bad ideas!?' we all get it, we all know we get it and we all know we all know we get it.

To me starting a corporate sigils thread or an exploring the good bits of occult thread should be equally possible. Because we all know that's demons aren't physical evil manifestations and we all know sigils don't actually use magic to rewrite someone's brain.

Anyway. That's my ideal world. I'm not the one who cant stand the terminology and I can't make it any more palatable by saying it should be so I might pull away from arguing the point now.

Thanks for the clarification, and I agree with you about narratives tending to lose important nuance.

Now about the bolded bit: "We" may know that if "we" = most of the people at PD.com, but "we" most certainly do NOT know that if "we" = "most of the world". So if your intention is just to engage in mental masturbation on a small niche internet forum, then I will absolutely concede the point. But if the intent is to ever at any point take this dialogue out into the world at large, then using these terms that most of the world cannot separate from the woo inherent in their definitions is just going to obscure the dialogue and perpetuate dangerous superstitious nonsense.

[East Coast Hustle]

Magic is real. Magic isn't real. Magic is useful. Magic isn't useful.

Stage magic, for example, is real. Teller, from Penn and Teller, claims that stage magic is the "unwilling(ish) suspension of disbelief". When an audience watches a play, they willingly suspend disbelief, because that's part of the social agreement. When they watch a magic show, they unwillingly suspend disbelief, they WANT to figure out the trick.

This is where Real Magic comes in to play. The hand is not faster than the eye, no matter how many times someone says that. Magic tricks don't work because the magician has fast hands. It works because they magician uses psychology, sociology etc to persuade, cajole and confuse the audience.

A con-man uses that same Real Magic. So does a spy.

Crowley, Hine, Farber, Wilson, Carroll etc ALSO use that same Real Magic. The audience is the conscious brain, the props (cards, wands, etc) are there for the same reason the stage magician uses props, to distract, confuse and misdirect the audience, while the magician completes the trick.

We can discuss a magic show in very specific terms. "Trick one is a card trick and the magician used card palming. Trick two is a ball and cup trick, the magician used everyday, uninteresting motions to slip balls out of his pockets, to place balls under the cups as he moved them etc."

However, that's not the same as watching the magic show, or performing the magic show. In fact, even if you understand exactly HOW the trick works, without lots of repetitive practice and a good foundation in deception and trickery (including some basic psychology and sociology), you won't be very successful with the magic.

The trick you talk about is not the trick performed.

We can say exactly the same about a magic ritual/meditation/etc. The magician is using stuff we can describe in specific terms, much of it involves tricking the conscious or subconscious mind. However, talking about the 'magic' is not the same as doing the magic.

I think everyone is capable of changing their beliefs, perceptions, ideals, programming. Magic is simply a set of processes/tools that have historically been useful to a number of people. If you don't want to use the tools, bully for you.

Personally, I use a sledge hammer to break rocks, not my face.

Thanks, this thread wouldn't have been complete without you muddling it up with your usual schtick.

As for your lame attempt at snark, well, that's why my face is so much tougher than yours.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

I don't think anyone here is arguing that there are gremlins... but rather that there are sometimes ways to figure out whats wrong with the engine (perhaps by listening to the sound it makes to see if a lifter needs adjusted) even if you don't have all the tools and training of a professional mechanic.

The wide category of 'magic' has a lot of useful information. Its often hidden like this:

"If there are Gremlins in your engine, they will tap the inside of the engine. To rid yourself, perform the Adjust the Lifter ritual."

What this thread was about, was not justifying gremlins, but rather getting rid of the gremlin woo and keeping the "listen for a ticking which might indicate a lifter needs adjusted."

I think I mauled that metaphor :-/

[LMNO]

But if the intent is to ever at any point take this dialogue out into the world at large, then using these terms that most of the world cannot separate from the woo inherent in their definitions is just going to obscure the dialogue and perpetuate dangerous superstitious nonsense.

This is an aspect I wasn't thinking of, and it really clarifies part of your position to me.  And I fully understand and agree.

I would suggest however, that this forum would be the best place to discuss the woo, in order to strip it out, and when we're left with the core mechanics, then we can bring it to other places in the world, with no woo.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I don't think anyone here is arguing that there are gremlins... but rather that there are sometimes ways to figure out whats wrong with the engine (perhaps by listening to the sound it makes to see if a lifter needs adjusted) even if you don't have all the tools and training of a professional mechanic.

The wide category of 'magic' has a lot of useful information. Its often hidden like this:

"If there are Gremlins in your engine, they will tap the inside of the engine. To rid yourself, perform the Adjust the Lifter ritual."

What this thread was about, was not justifying gremlins, but rather getting rid of the gremlin woo and keeping the "listen for a ticking which might indicate a lifter needs adjusted."

I think I mauled that metaphor :-/

"We must perform the sacred maintenance rituals, to appease the Machine God.  Consult thou the holy torque spec, and intone the proper prayers while checking the calibration seal on thy most puissiant torque wrench.  Administer the sacred oils.  And then ensure that the proper incantations to the spirit of the Immaculate 68 Chevy are spoken, to waken its glory."

[The Good Reverend Roger]

But if the intent is to ever at any point take this dialogue out into the world at large, then using these terms that most of the world cannot separate from the woo inherent in their definitions is just going to obscure the dialogue and perpetuate dangerous superstitious nonsense.

This is an aspect I wasn't thinking of, and it really clarifies part of your position to me.  And I fully understand and agree.

I would suggest however, that this forum would be the best place to discuss the woo, in order to strip it out, and when we're left with the core mechanics, then we can bring it to other places in the world, with no woo.

Sure.  And we're discussing the woo, now that you mention it.

Should we be discussing it in a different way?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Magic is real. Magic isn't real. Magic is useful. Magic isn't useful.

Stage magic, for example, is real. Teller, from Penn and Teller, claims that stage magic is the "unwilling(ish) suspension of disbelief". When an audience watches a play, they willingly suspend disbelief, because that's part of the social agreement. When they watch a magic show, they unwillingly suspend disbelief, they WANT to figure out the trick.

This is where Real Magic comes in to play. The hand is not faster than the eye, no matter how many times someone says that. Magic tricks don't work because the magician has fast hands. It works because they magician uses psychology, sociology etc to persuade, cajole and confuse the audience.

A con-man uses that same Real Magic. So does a spy.

This is what I've been talking about.  None of the sleight of hand tricks or mindgames used are in any way magickel.  Why call it that, when there's already words for what is actually going on?

[LMNO]

But if the intent is to ever at any point take this dialogue out into the world at large, then using these terms that most of the world cannot separate from the woo inherent in their definitions is just going to obscure the dialogue and perpetuate dangerous superstitious nonsense.

This is an aspect I wasn't thinking of, and it really clarifies part of your position to me.  And I fully understand and agree.

I would suggest however, that this forum would be the best place to discuss the woo, in order to strip it out, and when we're left with the core mechanics, then we can bring it to other places in the world, with no woo.

Sure.  And we're discussing the woo, now that you mention it.

Should we be discussing it in a different way?

Nope.  That comment was directed towards ECH's post which seemed to indicate that using the words at all on this forum was a bad thing, even if the intent was to examine them what's really going on.

"We must perform the sacred maintenance rituals, to appease the Machine God.  Consult thou the holy torque spec, and intone the proper prayers while checking the calibration seal on thy most puissiant torque wrench.  Administer the sacred oils.  And then ensure that the proper incantations to the spirit of the Immaculate 68 Chevy are spoken, to waken its glory."

"STAAART, YOU FUUUCKING BAAAASTAAAARD!"

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Magic is real. Magic isn't real. Magic is useful. Magic isn't useful.

Stage magic, for example, is real. Teller, from Penn and Teller, claims that stage magic is the "unwilling(ish) suspension of disbelief". When an audience watches a play, they willingly suspend disbelief, because that's part of the social agreement. When they watch a magic show, they unwillingly suspend disbelief, they WANT to figure out the trick.

This is where Real Magic comes in to play. The hand is not faster than the eye, no matter how many times someone says that. Magic tricks don't work because the magician has fast hands. It works because they magician uses psychology, sociology etc to persuade, cajole and confuse the audience.

A con-man uses that same Real Magic. So does a spy.

This is what I've been talking about.  None of the sleight of hand tricks or mindgames used are in any way magickel.  Why call it that, when there's already words for what is actually going on?

Because this thread is discussing the occult and how to extract the useful things that are useful.

If the thread were "How to discuss psycho self-therapy without the woo" then I wouldn't say Magic.

I really agree with LMNO's point. Discussing the useful stuff in the context of magic here, for the purpose of demystifying it, seems like a great idea. Getting hung up on the words, seems counterproductive.

If some people here were trying to claim that they could do something supernatural with Magic, then the argument you're making would would have strong merit.