ilovefuzz.com

So we've gone from 'has too been tested and shown to work' to 'I just believe it'
Fair enough, but the two things are different. That's a faith-based position, and as such there should be no need to pretend it's not...unless deep down you realise it's nonsense. I don't get why people who reject science try to cloak their positions in scientific language and attempt to give it some kind of credence (mis)using science and then recoil when you suggest testing it (other than they know it's not true.

FWIW, disagreeing with someone is not trolling. I'm just not very good at dancing around and being tactful I guess -- and BTW I don't think it was me that got personal first ("it seems like you just made up a bunch of shit and did little to no research")?

I think made up bullshit and lack of critical thinking skills are dangerous. I'm surrounded by people who just believe homeopathy is a great way to treat illness and vaccines are evil and a host of other new age fluff that have real-world consequences.

devnulljp wrote:I think made up bullshit and lack of critical thinking skills are dangerous. I'm surrounded by people who just believe homeopathy is great and vaccines are evil and a host of other new age fluff that have real-world consequences.

I hear ha on the critical thinking
I also agree on the homeopathy is bullshit. That has been tested to be very false.
You seemed to be getting pretty personal when you start calling things that I hold dear bullshit.

devnulljp wrote:I don't think it was me that got personal first ("it seems like you just made up a bunch of shit and did little to no research")?

This was not personal just an observation. ie. "it seems like" if you have done some research or even a little reading about what Magick is (or any of the other subjects you call bullshit) than correct me thats cool.
Questions are good
Doubts are good
Sweeping statements about what is right and wrong not so good
again no hard feelings

"The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift."

devnulljp wrote:I think made up bullshit and lack of critical thinking skills are dangerous. I'm surrounded by people who just believe homeopathy is a great way to treat illness and vaccines are evil and a host of other new age fluff that have real-world consequences.

Dunno, man, we have been trying to engage in a civil discussion all the while and trying to explain what we think and feel about this stuff. At least for me it was evident that noone around here is lacking critical thinking. We are anyhow insisting that some of the fluff does have real-world consequences in the psychology of humans, as stated by almost everyone that stuck around.

gunslinger_burrito wrote:I choose to occasionally use the Tarot to think about my life in another way.

Derelict78 wrote:Using this type of symbolism HAS been tested Over and over by psychologists like Carl Jung, Dr David Shoemaker ect.

Bassus Sanguinis wrote:Anybody can pursuit natural sciences and still define his person and ethos through alchemy or magickal ceremonies.

And that's somehow where the misunderstandings begin and I feel treated as if I were stupid. See, bcbc made the difference between a theory and a hypothesis clear. In german it's a little different, a theory would be proven, or partially proven, while a hypothesis is something that is proveable but still unproven. What we are discussing here is beliefs. It's no use to try and treat beliefs and theories equally, whoever does so is stupid in my opinion.
Of course you will never have scientific proof of god for instance. But that is the whole point, it might actually be the reason for the power of the belief in god. I went back this thread looking for some other quotes I wanted to have in here, but I got distracted by jfreys logic videos (pg.4). The last one has an example of one reverend Wilson who does a very poor job of speaking about god by calling the concept a self-evident fact, which it clearly isn't. But it IS an extremely powerful metaphor that has helped billions of people through their miserable lives. That it cannot be proven and cannot be proven wrong only adds to the power in my opinion, because you will have to make an effort to actually believe in it. (This is obviously only true for the last 150 years or so)
Thing is that there ARE more things between heaven and earth than can be explained by science alone. And those things happen inside our minds.



Got sidetracked by this:

bigchiefbc wrote:When you said that it had been "tested over and over", I assumed that meant that they had been tested scientifically and shown to actually product testable results. Is that not what you meant? Because alchemy indeed was pursued for probably close to a thousand years, but as far as I am aware, never produced any tangible reproducible results. That's all I was wondering.

Hm, this is the worst of all examples. Alchemy is the one esoteric, mumbo-jumbo discipline that evolved into an actual tested and tried science. A lot of basic chemistry has already been done by alchemists. First link I found about the subject: Sydney Uni. Of course they did not succeed at the "high and noble work of transmutatio" or the making of gold. But most people that study alchemy today see that as a metaphor for personal development anyway. A pretty harsh and not very convincing one in my personal opinion, I'm not a fan of "putrefactio" or cleansing by fire.


PS: To all the people I quoted to prove my point, I hope I haven't misunderstood you.

Derelict78 wrote:This was not personal just an observation. ie. "it seems like" if you have done some research or even a little reading about what Magick is (or any of the other subjects you call bullshit)

I have. I concluded they're bullshit

Derelict78 wrote:again no hard feelings

alexa. wrote:"The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift."

"Death serves intrinsic reality and Love comprehends universal energy. Perceptual reality creates deep knowledge, the unexplainable shapes new space time events, and infinity is rooted in positive self-knowledge"

devnulljp wrote:

alexa. wrote:"The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift."

"Death serves intrinsic reality and Love comprehends universal energy. Perceptual reality creates deep knowledge, the unexplainable shapes new space time events, and infinity is rooted in positive self-knowledge"

srsly?

phantasmagorovich wrote:And that's somehow where the misunderstandings begin and I feel treated as if I were stupid. See, bcbc made the difference between a theory and a hypothesis clear. In german it's a little different, a theory would be proven, or partially proven, while a hypothesis is something that is proveable but still unproven. What we are discussing here is beliefs. It's no use to try and treat beliefs and theories equally, whoever does so is stupid in my opinion.
Of course you will never have scientific proof of god for instance. But that is the whole point, it might actually be the reason for the power of the belief in god. I went back this thread looking for some other quotes I wanted to have in here, but I got distracted by jfreys logic videos (pg.4). The last one has an example of one reverend Wilson who does a very poor job of speaking about god by calling the concept a self-evident fact, which it clearly isn't. But it IS an extremely powerful metaphor that has helped billions of people through their miserable lives. That it cannot be proven and cannot be proven wrong only adds to the power in my opinion, because you will have to make an effort to actually believe in it. (This is obviously only true for the last 150 years or so)
Thing is that there ARE more things between heaven and earth than can be explained by science alone. And those things happen inside our minds.

See, to me, "more things between heaven and earth than can be explained by science" is just the shit that science hasn't figured out yet. The problem is that people point to the fact that science hasn't figured everything out yet as some sort of argument in favor of God, or ghosts, or magic, or whatever supernatural phenomenon you want to substitute in there. But that's just a God of the Gaps, and that is just an argument from ignorance. Or as Dara Briain puts it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMvMb90hem8&t=1m50s

phantasmagorovich wrote:Got sidetracked by this:

bigchiefbc wrote:When you said that it had been "tested over and over", I assumed that meant that they had been tested scientifically and shown to actually product testable results. Is that not what you meant? Because alchemy indeed was pursued for probably close to a thousand years, but as far as I am aware, never produced any tangible reproducible results. That's all I was wondering.

Hm, this is the worst of all examples. Alchemy is the one esoteric, mumbo-jumbo discipline that evolved into an actual tested and tried science. A lot of basic chemistry has already been done by alchemists. First link I found about the subject: Sydney Uni. Of course they did not succeed at the "high and noble work of transmutatio" or the making of gold. But most people that study alchemy today see that as a metaphor for personal development anyway. A pretty harsh and not very convincing one in my personal opinion, I'm not a fan of "putrefactio" or cleansing by fire.


PS: To all the people I quoted to prove my point, I hope I haven't misunderstood you.

I don't know if I would say that alchemy evolved into science; instead I would say that alchemists were trying to accomplish specific goals that they never actually accomplished, but they did invent some useful tools and methods along the way. Yes, some renowned scientists were also alchemists, but there is a reason alchemy faded in the 17th and 18th centuries; because by then Boyle among other people had begun using the principles of the scientific method, which eventually showed that there really was no philospher's stone, and transmutation was just not going to happen. But even though Boyle continued to practice alchemy even after the Skeptical Chemist, he at least believed that it could be proven scientifically, and he tried to do so later in life.

bigchiefbc wrote:See, to me, "more things between heaven and earth than can be explained by science" is just the shit that science hasn't figured out yet. The problem is that people point to the fact that science hasn't figured everything out yet as some sort of argument in favor of God, or ghosts, or magic, or whatever supernatural phenomenon you want to substitute in there. But that's just a God of the Gaps, and that is just an argument from ignorance. Or as Dara Briain puts it:

Exactly! That's why I don't like dubbing it 'paranormal'.

alexa. wrote:

devnulljp wrote:

alexa. wrote:"The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift."

"Death serves intrinsic reality and Love comprehends universal energy. Perceptual reality creates deep knowledge, the unexplainable shapes new space time events, and infinity is rooted in positive self-knowledge"

srsly?

Sure, why not., It's a made up Einstein quote (comes from the Metaphoric Mind: A Celebration of Creative Consciousness by Bob Samples, written in 1976). Mine are made up Deepak Chopra deepities ...

bigchiefbc wrote:See, to me, "more things between heaven and earth than can be explained by science" is just the shit that science hasn't figured out yet. The problem is that people point to the fact that science hasn't figured everything out yet as some sort of argument in favor of God, or ghosts, or magic, or whatever supernatural phenomenon you want to substitute in there. But that's just a God of the Gaps, and that is just an argument from ignorance.

...an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5dSyT50Cs8[/youtube]

devnulljp wrote:

alexa. wrote:

devnulljp wrote:

alexa. wrote:"The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift."

"Death serves intrinsic reality and Love comprehends universal energy. Perceptual reality creates deep knowledge, the unexplainable shapes new space time events, and infinity is rooted in positive self-knowledge"

srsly?

Sure, why not., It's a made up Einstein quote (comes from the Metaphoric Mind: A Celebration of Creative Consciousness by Bob Samples, written in 1976). Mine are made up Deepak Chopra deepities ...

The quote was more of a reference to this:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFs9WO2B8uI[/youtube]

alexa. wrote:[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFs9WO2B8uI[/youtube]

I LOVE THAT. Thanks. It kind of hits the nail on the head for what I've been talking about. At about 5:30 they say something like "it's not reality, but it works better..." which is my point.

I like all of the theory/testing type talk going on. It's an idea of mine that if something like god existed, then eventually we'd be able go meet him/her/it. This was nice, too, I thinks it's basically the same idea:

devnulljp wrote:...an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5dSyT50Cs8[/youtube]

If one day we are able to somehow test and measure the effects of magic (as, I assume, Derelict and myself are talking it...) then it'll just be another branch of science. I doubt it will happen any time soon, if ever, though. But the study of it may lead to new scientific theories and ideas. It's been said that the validity of a scientific theory can be measured by the amount of new ideas and research it produces, even if the theory itself has been proven to be false. That's why I posted the link to the Sleights of Mind people.

Magicians, in the sense of people like Penn and Teller, or even James Randi (if he ever called himself one, I'm not too sure at the moment) would not be able to pull off most of what they do without all the character, trappings, etc. I think I already talked about this in a previous post but I'll reiterate it here. If Penn didn't banter so much, and Randi didn't have a big beard and a "frail old man's appearance," the effects of their tricks either wouldn't work as well, or maybe not even at all. The effects of magicians' banter and character (and sometimes assistants...) serve to divide your attention so you miss what's actually happening, and are consequently fooled.

Now, in the practice of magic as defined by, say, Aleister Crowley or Anton LaVey, the more trappings you use (dressing up in robes, using more props, etc) the better you separate yourself from your everyday life and are able to induce emotional and/or psychological change within yourself. LaVey added an important part to the practice, and that was the "intellectual decompression chamber." Or in other terms, a ritual chamber. A place for you to leave your logical doubts at the door. A dedicated space or room in your house. The brain video alexa posted is cool because it helps to illustrate this principal. I know it's talking about brains and not magic, but it's still talking about the need for BOTH intellectualism and logic, as well as emotion, instinct and imagination, which has been my point all along. Again, if you don't care about it or don't need it, that's fine. And [i]again[i/], there will always be stupid people who believe stupid shit. But there are intelligent ones who have outlandish ways of doing things, too.

devnulljp wrote:...an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5dSyT50Cs8[/youtube]

I seriously LOVE Neil DeGrasse Tyson
dude cracks me the fuck up while he teaches

gunslinger_burrito wrote:LaVey added an important part to the practice, and that was the "intellectual decompression chamber."

not to nit pick but LaVey didn't add this he just came up with the cool wording.

Derelict78 wrote:

gunslinger_burrito wrote:LaVey added an important part to the practice, and that was the "intellectual decompression chamber."

not to nit pick but LaVey didn't add this he just came up with the cool wording.

Yeah, I kinda figured he was elaborating on something that was already "in place," but I didn't feel like scouring the internet at the time. Thanks.