#42029 - 08/18/10 02:05 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Duende]
|
Dimitri
veteran member
Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 1357
|
First a little remark: ever heard of paragraphs? Use them please, it's quite a downer to read such a lap of text without proper structure.
Assuming a link exists between the OU and SU does not in any way imply not going out and taking action in the OU to achieve your goals. Because there are so many SU defining the meaning of the OU, you are just one SU and must direct your GM to affect specific areas of the OU and/or other SU to tweak it/them in the way you desire.
There is a difference between defining and interpretating. I think it has been mentioned many times that for every person the OU can be interpretated in a different way. The OU or pure objective reality is not being defined by different SU's, it is merely being processed differently by different people.
An example: a balloon floats in the sky. One sees the hand of god in letting it floating trough the air, another person who is a physic describes that the air in the balloon is helium which is less heavy then atmospheric air causing the balloon to float, another person sees it as a symbol for freedom. Those are the different SU's. OU would say that a balloon is just floating trough the air. Plain and simple. Or even better yet; "something is floating".
The only thing that needs a definition in the OU would be the naming of things to make it easier to understand and work in the OU.
A group ritual may generate a greater effect on the OU as there are more wills (SU) involved. When this is done consciously, it is called GM. When it is done unconsciously, and a group of SU is being manipulated to alter their perception without their awareness of the process, it is called propaganda.
Do I believe GM may have effects beyond one's skull?
Absolutely. I base my opinion on my personal experiences and those of others who have shared theirs with me. If you don't subscribe to that opinion, that is fine with me.
That's quite a dead-beater. Many other people also have claimed to have experienced "gods grace" trough meditation or a sinless life..
I'll add that your brain and body is capable of deluding itself.
_________________________
You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#42030 - 08/18/10 02:20 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Dimitri]
|
Lucifer Rising
member
Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 146
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
|
It seems just about everyone here accepts that are connections between the OU and SU. That is not where the disagreement lies. Where most of us disagree with you, Duende, is the idea that there is a direct connection between SUs. I accept there is a possibility that such connections exist that are currently unknown to us, however, I strongly advocate against relying on connections that may or may not exist.
The only evidence you are able to give for such connections is personal experience and anecdotes, which is not reliable enough evidence for acceptance. Personal experience can be tainted through bias and other psychological processes. There's better evidence for Bigfoot.
I am not telling you not to believe that there are mysterious forces, I probably have even better reasons to believe in such things than you do. However, I would never suggest that somebody depend on such forces since they are unproven. At best they are unreliable and at worse do not exist and are only products of our imagination.
If you want to convince anyone that such connections exist, I suggest you find some real hard evidence. Until you do, do not expect us just to welcome the idea with open arms.
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#42037 - 08/18/10 08:15 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Duende]
|
Dan_Dread
senior member
Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 2010
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
|
Please don't link LttD here. That is quite disrespectful.
But since you have gone and done it anyway, I encourage you to read the posts made by Nemo and Reprobate, who there have been saying the same things many of us have been saying here all along.
There is no need to see everything in black or white when there are many available shades of gray, or as Anton LaVey called it,taking the Third Side.
Interesting you should mention this. Traditionally, there are those that think magic is an esoteric quasi-science that can directly effect the material universe (as you do), and those that think it is a load of bullshit. The third side of this is truly to whittle away the fluff and esoteric meandering and get straight to the source of what magic is, and how it actually works. The third side is to use the tool without engaging in willful self deception.
I do think that by completely denying any probability of a tenuous link between all SU and the OU, and assuming everything that can be known about consciousness has indeed already been discovered by science, you may be closing yourself to the possibility of a beneficial new experience.
Firstly, not one person in this thread has either denied a link between the subjective consciousness and the objective world around them, nor has anyone claimed that everything about consciousness has been figured out. What thread are YOU reading?
Secondly, as for closing oneself off by not accepting the truth of specious concepts such as you are advancing, the same could be said of prayer. Maybe you are closing yourself off to a relationship with Jehovah by not praying. Or better yet, maybe an asteroid will kill me dead the next time I step out of my front door. I don't expect to lose sleep over any of these possibilities.
_________________________
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#42043 - 08/18/10 11:43 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
|
MatthewJ1
member
Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 529
Loc: Australia
|
To 6,
This Objective Universe in itself, as opposed to our subjective vision or interpretation of it, is matter, energy and is conformable to some sort of scientifc law.
'Actions undertaken by actors under the influence of this particular Subjective Universe, have had, and do have, an effect in the Objective Universe of matter, energy and scientific laws.'
‘GBM is the causing of change to occur in one's SU in accordance with the will. This change in the SU may cause a similar and proportionate change in the OU.’ M.A.A. 600C.
The basic structure of the OU does not change, rather change occurs within the OU, but within accordance with the basic nature or rules of the OU. Matter is and remains, Energy is and remains.
Christian changes within the OU. Some quick examples.
Religious based war - manipulation of matter and the killing of living beings
The Inquisition - the seizing and murder of living organic beings.
Creation of places of worship - manipulation of matter.
There are probably many I cannot think of right now.
Sorry, if you want more fleshing out later. Am in a rush today.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#42044 - 08/19/10 12:24 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: MatthewJ1]
|
6Satan6Archist6
senior member
Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2231
Loc: Oregon
|
This Objective Universe in itself, as opposed to our subjective vision or interpretation of it, is matter, energy and is conformable to some sort of scientifc law.
I am well aware of this.
'Actions undertaken by actors under the influence of this particular Subjective Universe, have had, and do have, an effect in the Objective Universe of matter, energy and scientific laws.'
Christian changes within the OU. Some quick examples.
Religious based war - manipulation of matter and the killing of living beings
The Inquisition - the seizing and murder of living organic beings.
Creation of places of worship - manipulation of matter.
None of those are examples of changes to the "scientific laws" which you did specify as being affected by belief in the Christ myth.
The last example given is a very poor one indeed. The "creation of places of worship" is called construction; it happens all the time and though you prefer to call it "manipulation of matter" there is nothing magical about it. Sure it may change the OU in appearance but that is in no way changing any of the laws the govern the OU.
_________________________
Ultimate Satanic Bad Ass of Ultimate Satanic Bad Assery PhD Esq. LLC Inc.^∞ DCLXVI°
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#42046 - 08/19/10 03:17 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
|
MatthewJ1
member
Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 529
Loc: Australia
|
Hmmm, okay:
• Matter, energy and valid scientific laws define and characterise the Objective Universe in – itself. Matter, energy and valid scientific laws are held a priori; that is, they are necessary and universal and in a sense prior to experience, but can be confirmed empirically, or rather, experience conforms to them.
• Human beings cannot create or destroy the basic nature of the Objective Universe, that is, its most basic material nature and the valid scientific laws which it conforms to. One cannot just wish away matter, like a subjective idealist may try to do.
• Human beings can manipulate the Objective Universe by building, changing and destroying objects in the world; by giving birth, maintaining life and by taking life etc. They can do this, but it is always done within the context of a universe of the basic building blocks of matter, energy and valid scientific laws. If you wish to regard this as changing the appearance of the OU then go for it. I am not casting it in terms of an appearance/essence dualism at this time. One is changing, or possibly more precisely, re-arranging what is already there in place without changing it at its most basic level.
• The Subjective Universe is not only being – for – me, as that which is phenomenologically given, but is also what is read within a discursive field or symbolic or significant universe. I interpret the Objective Universe through the Subjective Universe. I try to make changes to portions of or manipulate the Objective Universe through the Subjective Universe.
• Political philosophy, propaganda, religious metaphysical worldviews, moral dogma, aesthetics, personal opinion etc. etc. are all subjectively generated designs which have been imposed or overlayed or used to camouflage the Objective Universe. They are a tool of interpretation, but also the excuse needed for action and the manipulation of the Objective Universe in line with the dogma, theory or conclusions expounded by the content of the subjectively generated design and by the partisans or constituencies who advocate that design.
‘GBM is the causing of change to occur in one's SU in accordance with the will. This change in the SU may cause a similar and proportionate change in the OU.’ M.A.A. 600C.
To Dr. Aquino: my apologies to you if my interpretation of your definition may be different from your own and may misinterpret your work. It is an important point of departure for me and I try to keep to the spirit of it.
Here is the sum up, and this process is magical from my perspective:
1. I engage in a magical ritual and change my viewpoint or my Subjective Universe in accordance with the wish or desire expressed in the ritual. I henceforth view the world through a freshly articulated subjective vision.
2. I engage in action or practice in the world outside the ritual chamber and that action is animated, directed or situated within a fresh worldview, a Subjective Universe, a subjective vision which I am working towards bringing into being objectively and which I have derived from the ritual chamber.
3. I manage to more or less cause a change in the (appearance, if you like) Objective Universe. This change in the Objective Universe corresponds to the vision, or is similar and proportionate to the Subjective Universe I have articulated. I am therefore magically successful as a result.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#42049 - 08/19/10 06:51 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: MatthewJ1]
|
Diavolo
Moderator
stalker
Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 3773
|
What bothers me about this is that it all sounds so grand while in essence it isn't that exceptional. This is probably because it is rather vague and abstract and might be solved by giving a practical example.
(successful) Manipulation is:
I have an idea – I want that idea realized – I realize that idea.
That's all, there is nothing more to it even when certain steps might be complex or take an awful lot of time and energy.
Let's assume I have a grand new political view, called Tjintjism. Of course I'll go out there and try to install this. I can use several methods or approaches but whatever I do, all is manipulation. Do I change the objective universe in doing so? Hardly.
Matter cares very little about my manipulation and a monkey out there might at best give me a dumb look when he hears me declare my ten point program. When I am using this manipulation I solely work at a memetic/subjective level and due to that, try to affect human society as a whole. Human society is a reality in itself and while its components are part of the reality out there, it is governed by a lot of rules and principles which only exist in this specific reality. As such, I do have very little effect on either the natural or the ontological reality.
What is more important that this is done all the time by numerous people. Look at the course of history and how many people had ideas, tried to put them in practice and succeeded. Now count how many amongst those sat in a ritual chamber and applied Magick. I think it would be safe to say that many, many more managed to do this without magick than with magick.
Does that imply magick doesn't work? Not at all, it only implies there seem to be other techniques which seem to have a higher probability and more frequency in succeeding. And those are used all the time, by the majority of manipulators.
Consider it a bit like going to the woods and making fire. While one rubs two sticks together, the other uses his lighter. In the end, both might succeed in making fire. Still, who do you think is fastest and has the highest probability?
I don't doubt Magick has its uses on developing the self but when it comes to manipulating the other, it is rubbing sticks together.
D.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#42053 - 08/19/10 09:55 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Diavolo]
|
Fnord
active member
Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 717
Loc: Texas
|
(successful) Manipulation is:
I have an idea – I want that idea realized – I realize that idea.
That's all, there is nothing more to it even when certain steps might be complex or take an awful lot of time and energy.
That's exactly where I am on the subject of magic.
Whether it's LM or GM, the object is to use it to achieve a specific result. How it all works, or if it does indeed work, is dependent upon the individual practitioner.
The 'technology', and I purposefully use that word because it can be tested, is yet to be fully understood by anyone (in the OU).
Certainly early man could rub sticks together and make use of the result without understanding exactly what fire is. Such is the position of the modern magician. All explanation is, at this time, incomplete.
_________________________
Scratching Peace Symbols on Your Tombstone
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#43415 - 10/03/10 03:48 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Fnord]
|
Wolflust
stranger
Registered: 11/20/09
Posts: 33
|
I`ve noticed that it may be seen as disrespectful to link directly to the LttD-forums here, so I won`t, unless I learn otherwise. But Magister Nemo (also known as the infamous Vampire Adept) just posted a blog entry where I specifically reacted to this passage:
"All ancient magic relies upon spirit entities in one manner or another. Whether you call them devils, demons, spirits, ghosts, gods, goddesses is not relevant. If you wish to assume that you are actually the sole source of the power and you are merely using imaginary "entities" as an excuse to get past your own self doubts that is fine except that it may not work. It usually doesn't."
Maybe I`m uniformed, but it seems to me that not all of the hierarchy of the C/S is stricly atheistic...
By the way, Im not jugding anything here either way, I just find this interesting.
Regards.
_________________________
It is not my name or my number, its how I use it and what I do.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#43418 - 10/03/10 06:42 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Asmedious]
|
Lamar
member
Registered: 02/03/10
Posts: 226
Loc: Alabama
|
Are you really going to give serious consideration to the opinion of someone who even claims that they believe that ToV bullshit?
One very real and dangerous aspect that I have found in certain Satanic circles is, if a person gets themselves in a position where they are looked upon by a bunch of individuals as a Magus or some Know it All, then eventually they will actually start believing their own line of bullshit themselves.
I have to agree with this post. Although, in Nemo's own essay on the Church of Satan titled "Satanism Needs an Enema!" he is strongly against Theism. Maybe Wolflust mis interpereted it although I have not read this new blog myself.
_________________________
Blast for Satan
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#43431 - 10/04/10 03:54 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Asmedious]
|
daevid777
active member
Registered: 08/30/07
Posts: 951
Loc: Hell's Pisshole, Texas
|
Hahahahaha!
I mean, yeah.
Asmedious, in that statement, you have singlehandedly, and most brilliantly done away with Abraham, Noah, Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, Joseph Smith, Aleister Crowley, L. Ron Hubbard, Anton LaVey, and Michael Aquino!
Nicely done sir!
I'm proud of you this day! Right on brother!
Daeve.
_________________________
Where we're going, we don't need roads.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#43434 - 10/04/10 08:46 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Asmedious]
|
Wolflust
stranger
Registered: 11/20/09
Posts: 33
|
Are you really going to give serious consideration to the opinion of someone who even claims that they believe that ToV bullshit?
One very real and dangerous aspect that I have found in certain Satanic circles is, if a person gets themselves in a position where they are looked upon by a bunch of individuals as a Magus or some Know it All, then eventually they will actually start believing their own line of bullshit themselves.
I understand your point, and I agree, this Nemo doesn`t seem very trustworthy at all. Just wanted to point out that even under Church of Satans strict "Atheist policy" there seems to be differing, and as shown in Nemo`s blog entry, even opposing ideals. I wonder how well he can cover this up with his double-speak.
Even so, it seems to me that there are folks on here with highly different views on magic, so anyone who can educate me or inform me on the matter are welcome to do so, even though it may end up with me calling bullshit on them.
And regarding what you wrote on ass-kissing in certain Satanic circles; I totally agree.
_________________________
It is not my name or my number, its how I use it and what I do.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: Woland, Mercury_Templar, fakepropht, Nemesis, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Morgan, Bacchae, Diavolo, Asmedious, Fist
|
|
