Making Occult Studies more Accessible

[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?

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.

Again, we're coming down to definitions.

1.conjuring tricks: conjuring tricks and illusions that make apparently impossible things seem to happen, usually performed as entertainment
2.inexplicable things: a special, mysterious, or inexplicable quality, talent, or skill
3.supposed supernatural power: a supposed supernatural power that makes impossible things happen or gives somebody control over the forces of nature.

Can we all agree to these three definitions of magic?

[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.

Again, we're coming down to definitions.

1.conjuring tricks: conjuring tricks and illusions that make apparently impossible things seem to happen, usually performed as entertainment
2.inexplicable things: a special, mysterious, or inexplicable quality, talent, or skill
3.supposed supernatural power: a supposed supernatural power that makes impossible things happen or gives somebody control over the forces of nature.

Can we all agree to these three definitions of magic?

I can agree with those definitions. I think the intent of this thread was to disassemble the inexplicable, special, mysterious, supernatural bits from 2 and 3 and figure out what might be useful there.

[P3nT4gR4m]

What's the point of using a system to mess about with your own head, maquyixe, nlp, meditation, hipnosis etc..?

it's a system. Most systems (even the crap ones) are better than no system

no system = "I'm depressed - need pills - no pills available - break out the razor blades"

system = "I'm depressed - let's see why - hmm couple of negative feedback loops stemming from this and that event / lower astral entity / wonky chakras - apply solution x - sorted!"

Doesn't matter how hokey your system is, Lo5 doesn't give a fuck but if you don't got a system then, I dunno, hope for the best I guess.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

What's the point of using a system to mess about with your own head, maquyixe, nlp, meditation, hipnosis etc..?

it's a system. Most systems (even the crap ones) are better than no system

no system = "I'm depressed - need pills - no pills available - break out the razor blades"

system = "I'm depressed - let's see why - hmm couple of negative feedback loops stemming from this and that event / lower astral entity / wonky chakras - apply solution x - sorted!"

Doesn't matter how hokey your system is, Lo5 doesn't give a fuck but if you don't got a system then, I dunno, hope for the best I guess.

If it works, then there's value in demystifying it to make it more accessible to others.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

What's the point of using a system to mess about with your own head, maquyixe, nlp, meditation, hipnosis etc..?

it's a system. Most systems (even the crap ones) are better than no system

no system = "I'm depressed - need pills - no pills available - break out the razor blades"

system = "I'm depressed - let's see why - hmm couple of negative feedback loops stemming from this and that event / lower astral entity / wonky chakras - apply solution x - sorted!"

Doesn't matter how hokey your system is, Lo5 doesn't give a fuck but if you don't got a system then, I dunno, hope for the best I guess.

If it works, then there's value in demystifying it to make it more accessible to others.

Looking at the sales figures for mood-altering drugs, we'd better do something.

[P3nT4gR4m]

What's the point of using a system to mess about with your own head, maquyixe, nlp, meditation, hipnosis etc..?

it's a system. Most systems (even the crap ones) are better than no system

no system = "I'm depressed - need pills - no pills available - break out the razor blades"

system = "I'm depressed - let's see why - hmm couple of negative feedback loops stemming from this and that event / lower astral entity / wonky chakras - apply solution x - sorted!"

Doesn't matter how hokey your system is, Lo5 doesn't give a fuck but if you don't got a system then, I dunno, hope for the best I guess.

If it works, then there's value in demystifying it to make it more accessible to others.

Well, yeah but others don't generally seem to be interested. Mainly because of the mystification thing. It's a chicken and egg conundrum 

[The Good Reverend Roger]

What's the point of using a system to mess about with your own head, maquyixe, nlp, meditation, hipnosis etc..?

it's a system. Most systems (even the crap ones) are better than no system

no system = "I'm depressed - need pills - no pills available - break out the razor blades"

system = "I'm depressed - let's see why - hmm couple of negative feedback loops stemming from this and that event / lower astral entity / wonky chakras - apply solution x - sorted!"

Doesn't matter how hokey your system is, Lo5 doesn't give a fuck but if you don't got a system then, I dunno, hope for the best I guess.

If it works, then there's value in demystifying it to make it more accessible to others.

Well, yeah but others don't generally seem to be interested. Mainly because of the mystification thing. It's a chicken and egg conundrum 

Oh, I'm interested, provided the actual mechanics can be demonstrated, minus the jargon and the woo.

[kingyak]

I think a slightly better example than Twid's cello-tipping poltergeist is something like the expression "thank God," which I hear atheists/non-Christians of every stripe say all the time. They don't mean "good thing that magical invisible guy in the sky made it so," they mean something more like "I'm glad that circumstances that I cannot immediately quantify led to a favorable outcome." As long as the audience understands that you don't literally mean the former, it's convenient shorthand and makes you sound like much less of an jagoff than someone who says things like "I'm glad that circumstances that I cannot immediately quantify led to a favorable outcome."

In the case of the OP, I think most of us are smart enough to figure out that talk of making occult studies accessible was not intended to be taken literally because something that's occult is by definition inaccessible. If the OP were about a specific woo thing like yoga, then specific language along the lines of "making yoga more accessible" would have been much better. But since the OP is about finding the meat behind the woo in general, "occult studies" is a handy way of getting the point across. Replacing the word "occult studies" with a long list of things that may have some value when you strip away the woo would have just led to a long thread title and clunky, hard-to-read text and may have unnecessarily constricted the discussion*. Once a specific hunk of meat gets pulled out for discussion, anyone using woo terminology when non-woo terminology exists should, of course, be summarily executed.

*I'm assuming an alternate universe where there was an actual discussion on the topic rather than a multi-page battle over semantics.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Some thoughts on people making big $$$ on the woo.

Those televangelists, if you think about it, are spending the money more wisely than Granny did when she cut them the cheques.  Granny spent it on the vanity of being told an Invisible Man in the Sky is taking care of business, whereas the televangelists spend it on practical things like hookers, liquor, yachts etc.  At least the money is kept circulating.  I can see how a person would be miffed at Granny for foolishly giving away to a bunch of charlatan preachers the family fortune that one might otherwise have inherited, but hey, all that means is that Granny liked what the preachers were telling her more than she liked what family members were telling her.  But you can hardly blame the lying, conniving, fraudulent televangelists.  They are doing exactly what people are gladly paying them to do. They're providing a psychological service to dumbasses, the deeply ignorant, and the truly desperate.

Great.  We'll just punish Granny, too.  AND her fucking offspring.

[P3nT4gR4m]

What's the point of using a system to mess about with your own head, maquyixe, nlp, meditation, hipnosis etc..?

it's a system. Most systems (even the crap ones) are better than no system

no system = "I'm depressed - need pills - no pills available - break out the razor blades"

system = "I'm depressed - let's see why - hmm couple of negative feedback loops stemming from this and that event / lower astral entity / wonky chakras - apply solution x - sorted!"

Doesn't matter how hokey your system is, Lo5 doesn't give a fuck but if you don't got a system then, I dunno, hope for the best I guess.

If it works, then there's value in demystifying it to make it more accessible to others.

Well, yeah but others don't generally seem to be interested. Mainly because of the mystification thing. It's a chicken and egg conundrum 

Oh, I'm interested, provided the actual mechanics can be demonstrated, minus the jargon and the woo.

This reminds me of a Dara O'briain quote about alternative medicine

Herbal medicine has been around for hundreds of years. Sure it has, and then we tested it all, and the stuff that worked became medicine!

Most of the stuff you'll find in Magic has found it's way into mainstream science but it's kinda fragmented. It's not a unified discipline anymore so, depending what you want to achieve, some of the more archaic systems have it all in one place if you can get around the semantic language. The cool kids use the old stuff and the new stuff as a starting point, synthesising their own system by building on these foundations.

Trying to strip as much bullshit from it as I possibly can I'd say that the objective is to come up with a subjective interface of language and symbols you can use to explore and direct parts of your mind that, for most people, go on "behind the scenes". You have an internal monologue which, for english people is generally the english language. Using this as a foundation you can learn to do maths or fly a plane or build a house or whatever but everything is internalised using plain old english language with the addition of some technical jargon which is, essentially just an extension of english, or an upgrade.

Sure, you could work out how to build a suspension bridge just by sitting down and working it out with a bit of trial and error but it's much easier if you know all sorts of engineering shit like tensile strength and the like.

Magic is a bunch of jargon for manipulating the bits of your brain that process language and concepts, moods, emotions and shit like that. the "behind the scenes" shit. It's not really a science, although most of it is described by straightforward science, it's more of an artform. Taking the raw materials of a human mind and rebuilding some parts, ironing out the kinks of others and polishing up the whole thing til it works the way you want it to. If you're good at it and/or you get lucky then you'll end up a vastly improved organism compared to when you started - for a given, and purely subjective, definition of improved (hence the "art" thing) If you suck at it you'll either accomplish nothing or reduce yourself to gibbering basket case in the eyes of your peers.

Just like in the world of non-occult art, most practitioners fall into the latter category.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Ponder also, if you are religious, or have occult leanings, the age-old question posed by Orton Nenslo to the believers:

"Why do the heathens laugh?"

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Magic is a bunch of jargon for manipulating the bits of your brain that process language and concepts, moods, emotions and shit like that. the "behind the scenes" shit. It's not really a science, although most of it is described by straightforward science, it's more of an artform. Taking the raw materials of a human mind and rebuilding some parts, ironing out the kinks of others and polishing up the whole thing til it works the way you want it to. If you're good at it and/or you get lucky then you'll end up a vastly improved organism compared to when you started - for a given, and purely subjective, definition of improved (hence the "art" thing) If you suck at it you'll either accomplish nothing or reduce yourself to gibbering basket case in the eyes of your peers.

Just like in the world of non-occult art, most practitioners fall into the latter category.

Yeah, but since there's nothing supernatural involved, why call it magic?  Magic already has a definition.

Sorry if I can't get away from this...It's the main problem I have with the whole thing.

[East Coast Hustle]

Because if you don't call it "magick" (or some other equally objectionable term laden with supernatural connotation) then how the hell are you supposed to get smelly pagan chicks to touch your penis?

[LMNO]

Magic is a bunch of jargon for manipulating the bits of your brain that process language and concepts, moods, emotions and shit like that. the "behind the scenes" shit. It's not really a science, although most of it is described by straightforward science, it's more of an artform. Taking the raw materials of a human mind and rebuilding some parts, ironing out the kinks of others and polishing up the whole thing til it works the way you want it to. If you're good at it and/or you get lucky then you'll end up a vastly improved organism compared to when you started - for a given, and purely subjective, definition of improved (hence the "art" thing) If you suck at it you'll either accomplish nothing or reduce yourself to gibbering basket case in the eyes of your peers.

Just like in the world of non-occult art, most practitioners fall into the latter category.

Yeah, but since there's nothing supernatural involved, why call it magic?  Magic already has a definition.

Sorry if I can't get away from this...It's the main problem I have with the whole thing.

I still agree with you. 

My intent is to say, "Magic says that if you do X, you get Y.  Is that true, and how does it work?"

I'm coming from a perspective of natural causes dressed up as woo.  If I can understand the natural causes, I can turn it to my advantage in a context that is more effective for me.

For example, I no longer use Tarot.  But I still use the idea of symbolic triggers and concious Lo5 manipulation to try to look at my brain in new ways.

[P3nT4gR4m]

Magic is a bunch of jargon for manipulating the bits of your brain that process language and concepts, moods, emotions and shit like that. the "behind the scenes" shit. It's not really a science, although most of it is described by straightforward science, it's more of an artform. Taking the raw materials of a human mind and rebuilding some parts, ironing out the kinks of others and polishing up the whole thing til it works the way you want it to. If you're good at it and/or you get lucky then you'll end up a vastly improved organism compared to when you started - for a given, and purely subjective, definition of improved (hence the "art" thing) If you suck at it you'll either accomplish nothing or reduce yourself to gibbering basket case in the eyes of your peers.

Just like in the world of non-occult art, most practitioners fall into the latter category.

Yeah, but since there's nothing supernatural involved, why call it magic?  Magic already has a definition.

Sorry if I can't get away from this...It's the main problem I have with the whole thing.

If you don't like the word then pick another one. Coincidentally I'd never describe myself as a "magickian" for exactly the same reason. However, there's some stuff in some of those old books that I find useful and other shit that's interesting to me, purely from an historical viewpoint. When you have an interface built up in your mind sometimes it's more fun to use some archaic, angels-and-demons construct, rather than it's Tim Leary or Pete Carroll counterpart, given that they both achieve identical results if used effectively but that's purely personal taste - 59 chevy v's Nissan GTR, both will get you from point A to point B - how do you want to get there?

Of course maybe you're happy enough where you are, in which case why bother driving at all?