Page 3 of 3 <123
Topic Options
#37111 - 03/28/10 09:15 PM Re: The Legitimacy of Greater Magic [Re: Arianwen Seren]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



I think there are a number of basic factors which go into making a successful black magician and I think that both the CoS and the TOS are looking for these basic factors or qualities when they assess individuals for membership and for elevation into the higher degrees of their respective organisation.

Here are some of the factors or qualities I can think of.

• Can the individual actually use language and articulate themselves well? This quality can be assessed by an examination of the completed membership application. Ideally the application will contain a long list of thought provoking questions to determine writing ability (syntactical, logical and lexical choices as well as awareness of grammatical rules etc.) and hence the educational and intelligence level of the applicant.
• Is the applicant achieving his or her stated goals and/or has he or she already achieved goals which would identify him or her as intelligent, motivated and most importantly capable of applying the Satanic or Setian philosophy to their own lives in the real world? This basic factor in determining the quality of a black magician has been around for a while from what I can see. It is certainly apparent within the current CoS and I assume within the TOS as well.
• How deeply does the applicant understand the philosophy itself? How much work and study has already been undertaken and how much knowledge has been drawn? Can the applicant explain and defend the philosophy in any situation? It is a controversial philosophy and those who act as agents must be very able to explain/defend in all contexts.
• The CoS application may draw on Dr. LaVey’s typing system as elaborated in The Synthesiser Clock of The Compleat Witch. Other psychological tests may be used as well to determine who the applicant is and whether the applicant is a complete nutcase or some other type of undesirable fruitloop who should be refused membership. Jokes are used as well to determine who the applicant is.

I think one could go on and on (especially when candidates are being assessed for the elevation to the third degree and higher, particularly in the TOS), but the point I would like to make is that the black magician is a well rounded individual with a proven track record of success in the real world and with experiences which lead to genuine maturity and also the ability to be articulate in a wide variety of areas, including religion and the occult, philosophy, history, politics, science etc. I think the successful black magician is going to have a definite philosophy of magic and a definite ontological position which underpins that philosophy of magic. Many 600C members, in my opinion, would meet these criteria and have such a philosophy.

In regards to Greater Magic and The Satanic Bible. I do not think Dr. LaVey is being tongue in cheek or is joking or trying to mislead the reader in a key book such as TSB. Greater Magic is important to Dr. LaVey and his position seems to be that there are other aspects to Greater Magic than just self – transformational psychodrama. I agree based on my own experience. A large part of TSB is devoted to GM and TSR is devoted to GM.

People need to work this out for themselves in my view. I tend to subscribe to the current CoS hierarchy’s view that Satanists can maintain a variety of positions in regards to the nature and mechanics of GM and that GM can be used as one sees fit based on ones needs, within the context of a possible supernormal, rather than a supernatural.

I have stated my ontological or metaphysical position already in this thread and in others and feel no need to do so again.

My studies of GM continue. Dr. Aquino’s post related to the SU/OU relation is very important to me and to the furthering my knowledge.

Top
#38338 - 05/05/10 07:14 PM Re: The Legitimacy of Greater Magic [Re: ]
CanisMajor Offline
stranger


Registered: 02/17/10
Posts: 49
Loc: Texas
Satanists debating the "legitimacy" of Greater Magic? Now I have seen it all.

There is a predilection towards extreme Lesser Magic in this business. However, it seems that an absolute absence of Greater Magic would hardly differentiate the would-be Satanist from the typical, run-of-the-mill Atheist.

Satanist = LHP Atheist

Don't take the Devil's name if you don't play the Devil's game.

Otherwise, you may be little than a bored, pragmatic Atheist.
_________________________
For every complex problem,there is a solution that is simple,neat,and wrong.
H.L Mencken

Top
#38340 - 05/05/10 08:40 PM Re: The Legitimacy of Greater Magic [Re: CanisMajor]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



After studying the content of the above post, I have the following question to ask in relation it:

What exactly do you mean?

I will elaborate:

• What exactly is extreme Lesser Magic and how is it differentiated from the definition and practice of Lesser Magic in general?
• What is an absolute absence and how is it differentiated from just absence?
• Please explain why the notion of Satanist’s debating the legitimacy of Greater Magic elicits the comment that you “have seen it all,” particularly when this is in fact one of those areas within Satanism, which gets discussed quite often.
• Satanist = LHP Atheist. Please elaborate on this definition and relate it to your critique of the practice of trying to legitimise Greater Magic.
• “Don’t take the Devil’s name if you don’t play the Devil’s game.” What does this mean within the context of trying to legitimise Greater Magic?
• “Otherwise, you may be little more than a bored, pragmatic Atheist.” What does this mean within the context of trying to legitimise Greater Magic?

The key to the meaning of this post may be in the words:

“…that an absolute absence of Greater Magic would hardly differentiate the would-be Satanist from the typical, run-of-the-mill Atheist.”

This really needs to be carefully re – written in order to be clear. But what does it actually mean as written?

My reading of it: the Satanist is merely a typical run-of-the-mill Atheist if Greater Magic is absent?

What is the definition of Greater Magic used in the above post and how does it function?

I think there may be a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of Greater Satanic Magic, in the above post.

The premise of Satanism is the presence of real human animals, existing in a real material world and subject to the laws of nature. Greater magical practice is based on this premise and has effect when it conforms to natural law, within the context of what is possible.

It may be articulated as self-transformative psychodrama; or as possible supernormal communication; or as the correspondence between the magician’s SU and the OU, but it works, in some sense, because it is based on the real and the natural, and has been verified by the pragmatic realist.

Top
#38487 - 05/12/10 11:20 PM Re: The Legitimacy of Greater Magic [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Caliga Offline
stranger


Registered: 04/15/10
Posts: 16
Magic has a logic but it is a poetical logic. A brief study of magical thought over the ages reveals as much about the perceived sympathy of an act or substance as to any chemical composition.

Recent decades have seen a slew of intellectual inquiry and theorizing along pseudo-scientific or quasi-psychological lines in an attempt to quantify and in some way legitimize the practice of magic. Such is, in my opinion, often weakening the very thread of what can make a magical act powerful.

If you seek to really understand the basis of magical ritual then look to tribal cultures and their imitative rites. That is where the essence lies.

Top
Page 3 of 3 <123


Moderator:  SkaffenAmtiskaw, fakepropht, TV is God, Woland, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.019 seconds of which 0.001 seconds were spent on 17 queries. Zlib compression disabled.