A rant : Magic (possibly Spirituality to)

[Epimetheus]

Then why call it magic?

Then we can communicate with those who think the words are literal as well as those who know they're just names. Hopefully, though, the people I'm giving the time of day don't take it so seriously. Then I guess my real reason is, saying I'm a mage sounds super cool.

I don't need to put my foot in a cow pie to know what it is.

I agree. However, cow pies are very useful when applied as fertilizer rather than footwear.

The metaphor's been extended so much I don't know what it means any more. _{(now a 'pataphor)}

[singer]

Then why call it magic?  "Mind Hacks" works better. 

Unless your intent is to watch rational empiricist's heads explode.  Then "magic" works much better.

[NotPublished]

Im not so sure about that, too much fluff attached. In this conversation, its perfect since its been established what exactly is being discussed.
Take it to an academic or some else and you will spend a better part of your time discussing there is no attached supernatural, only think in terms as intent/result.

But they won't let go, though Magic is a good term to use to mess with others.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Then why call it magic?  "Mind Hacks" works better. 

Unless your intent is to watch rational empiricist's heads explode.  Then "magic" works much better.

I don't think our heads explode.

[Kai]

Then why call it magic?  "Mind Hacks" works better. 

Unless your intent is to watch rational empiricist's heads explode.  Then "magic" works much better.

I don't think our heads explode.

Mostly we just rage.

[singer]

Then why call it magic?  "Mind Hacks" works better. 

Unless your intent is to watch rational empiricist's heads explode.  Then "magic" works much better.

I don't think our heads explode.

Mostly we just rage.

potato/potahto.  "rational rage" is still pretty damn amusing, whatever you want to call it.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Then why call it magic?  "Mind Hacks" works better.  

Lack of better term I guess. I like the sound of Mind Hack.

But whether it is called by the name Magic or by the term Mind Hack is irrelevant to the actual practice, all that needs to be kept in mind is the Will/Intent and the Result. Perhaps using it under the name of Magic IS a bad term, it is very easy to associate a term with Mind Hack and we could possibly claim it as our own.

Also, while I don't necessarily agree with Brain Fucking, I find it can be very important (and useful) - confuse the hell out of people, they will crave the truth if they play along, once a version of said truth is fed to them .. Its almost like you've caught them in a trap.

I really do have to read up on Crowley and the likes, I've never touched any of those books.

But IMO, perhaps someone should leave a mark on the term Mind Hack, sounds very BiPish

Mind Hacks is the name of a book  http://oreilly.com/catalog/9780596007799/ on the topic...


As for why call it magic? Why call anything, anything? What sort of question is that?

Magioc, as being discussed here is what "magic practitioners" have been writing about since the days of Abramelin the Mage... we're just tearing off their mysticism and looking at what they were doing... then using symbols and tools to create similar results. Hell, I know some guys that invoke DC Superheros rather than Greek Goddesses.

Moreover, I've found that it is very good for the process to be able to 'believe' whatever it is that your doing, at least for the time you're doing it. Dressing it up with props and labels is very good for the slight of mind (gnosis as described earlier). If you can lose yourself in the ritual its easier to implant the new program.

But, it doesn't fucking matter what its called, Mind Hacking, Magic, Magick, Madjick, self-actualized psycho-analysis, NEuro Linguistic Programming, Memetic Programming, Remodeling You BiP, Changing your Reality Tunnel or Metaprogramming your Imprints... its all the same stuff.

[Epimetheus]

As for why call it magic? Why call anything, anything? What sort of question is that?

"Magic" has supernatural connotations, and don't deny that the ancients (and some modern people) thought it was supernatural. Therefore it is somewhat misleading to use the old supernatural terms, and the question is, why not use more clear and literal terms.


(edit was for clarification)

[NotPublished]

Mind Hacks is the name of a book  http://oreilly.com/catalog/9780596007799/ on the topic...

As for why call it magic? Why call anything, anything? What sort of question is that?
...

But, it doesn't fucking matter what its called, Mind Hacking, Magic, Magick, Madjick, self-actualized psycho-analysis, NEuro Linguistic Programming, Memetic Programming, Remodeling You BiP, Changing your Reality Tunnel or Metaprogramming your Imprints... its all the same stuff.

Exactly, it doesn't really matter. But I would rather work with a clean word.

Moreover, I've found that it is very good for the process to be able to 'believe' whatever it is that your doing, at least for the time you're doing it. Dressing it up with props and labels is very good for the slight of mind (gnosis as described earlier). If you can lose yourself in the ritual its easier to implant the new program.

Thats the truth, that is how I have been attacking my way. Belief is being used as a tool to achieve a goal. If I have a need to dress the part, then I will do it - but I have NEVER had a need to dress up and use the arcane tools - simply because they have no effect on my persona itself.

I see Symbolism as an important thing, but I think this term is being used loosely. I find symbolism in the programs I run, the shoes I wear, the clothes I wear, the food I eat.

When I am working, I will open Dreamweaver and my mind will shift over into the HTML/PHP framework, when I am working in C++/.NET I will open up Visual Studio 2009, my mind will shift to the right places (Haven't touched that for ages thankfully!)

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Magic had supernatural connotations. When I first started looking at I assumed that it had supernatural connotations. However, Crowley, Carroll etc state their intent and their definition of magic up front. So when I'm working with their system I call it magic. IF I'm playing with NLP I call it NLP. When I did the various exercises in "The Book of Atem" I called it memetics.

[NotPublished]

I guess to avoid confusion, best to work with that then.

[Kai]

Magic had supernatural connotations. When I first started looking at I assumed that it had supernatural connotations. However, Crowley, Carroll etc state their intent and their definition of magic up front. So when I'm working with their system I call it magic. IF I'm playing with NLP I call it NLP. When I did the various exercises in "The Book of Atem" I called it memetics.

So, all these system are the same thing essentially, and what is that? Whatever a person wants to call it? So much for communication!

I've used the terms psychosomatics or ch'i work before. These techniques all seem to be formed of the connection between the physical outward actions and the inner workings of the mind, the so called mind-body connection.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Mind Hacks is the name of a book  http://oreilly.com/catalog/9780596007799/ on the topic...

As for why call it magic? Why call anything, anything? What sort of question is that?
...

But, it doesn't fucking matter what its called, Mind Hacking, Magic, Magick, Madjick, self-actualized psycho-analysis, NEuro Linguistic Programming, Memetic Programming, Remodeling You BiP, Changing your Reality Tunnel or Metaprogramming your Imprints... its all the same stuff.

Exactly, it doesn't really matter. But I would rather work with a clean word.

Moreover, I've found that it is very good for the process to be able to 'believe' whatever it is that your doing, at least for the time you're doing it. Dressing it up with props and labels is very good for the slight of mind (gnosis as described earlier). If you can lose yourself in the ritual its easier to implant the new program.

Thats the truth, that is how I have been attacking my way. Belief is being used as a tool to achieve a goal. If I have a need to dress the part, then I will do it - but I have NEVER had a need to dress up and use the arcane tools - simply because they have no effect on my persona itself.

You should do whatever works for you. Magic doesn't require arcane tools, Chaos Magic makes use of modern archetypes or whatever works for the practitioner the specific tools used by the practitioner are unimportant... the mindset and how most reliably to achieve it is what's important. Antero's 'Paratheatrics' uses nothing resembling arcane tools, but its still following the same formulas.

I see Symbolism as an important thing, but I think this term is being used loosely. I find symbolism in the programs I run, the shoes I wear, the clothes I wear, the food I eat.

Yes, so would I.

When I am working, I will open Dreamweaver and my mind will shift over into the HTML/PHP framework, when I am working in C++/.NET I will open up Visual Studio 2009, my mind will shift to the right places (Haven't touched that for ages thankfully!)

Yes... thats a good example of dealing with multiple symbolic systems...

Magic had supernatural connotations. When I first started looking at I assumed that it had supernatural connotations. However, Crowley, Carroll etc state their intent and their definition of magic up front. So when I'm working with their system I call it magic. IF I'm playing with NLP I call it NLP. When I did the various exercises in "The Book of Atem" I called it memetics.

So, all these system are the same thing essentially, and what is that? Whatever a person wants to call it? So much for communication!

I've used the terms psychosomatics or ch'i work before. These techniques all seem to be formed of the connection between the physical outward actions and the inner workings of the mind, the so called mind-body connection.

Well, they're all metaprogramming systems if you use Leary's lingo...

However to say that they're all the same thing is like saying that (to steal the example above) PHP/C#/FORTRAN/Java/Cold Fusion/PERL and BASIC are essentially all the same thing.

Psychosomatic is a decent term to use, or self-psychoanalysis... but ch'i has a whole different set of preconceptions with it. Though, for some purposes, like a martial arts class, it may be the best word for the person to use.

[Captain Utopia]

However to say that they're all the same thing is like saying that (to steal the example above) PHP/C#/FORTRAN/Java/Cold Fusion/PERL and BASIC are essentially all the same thing.

Especially as your favourite programming language today, will likely be the COBOL of tomorrow.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

However to say that they're all the same thing is like saying that (to steal the example above) PHP/C#/FORTRAN/Java/Cold Fusion/PERL and BASIC are essentially all the same thing.

Especially as your favourite programming language today, will likely be the COBOL of tomorrow.

Very true... and there is limited usability for COBAL today... much (IMO) like a lot of traditional magic psychological metaprogramming systems.


(Better?)