Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Temple >

Magical Expectations

Page: 1(2)

14:31 / 30.01.06

It would be nice if you at least responded to a single one of the criticisms that myself and various others have offered in response to your ideas. If you post to barbelith, expect to have to defend your position in the face of other perspectives. If your position is valid, it will be able to stand up to criticism. If you are not interested in participating in an ongoing debate that actually goes somewhere, then why bother? "For the kids!" is not a valid answer. Who are these mysterious "younger players" that you are writing this stuff for? (Hello? Are you out there? Are folded's ideas useful to you?)

Are you going to engage with other people's opinions in the way that they are attempting to engage with yours? If the answer is yes, that's fantastic, pick my argument to bits and show me why I'm wrong. If you're not going to engage with any of the other posters here, and just bitch because your ideas haven't been accepted unequivocally and without criticism, then it's not really going to go down too well on here.

14:38 / 30.01.06

Gypsy: "constructing a coping mechanism"

This phrase sounds familiar- perhaps you or someone used this in the thread on "Mental Illness and magick"? (Which I left well-alone).

Gypsy- are you familiar with the technique of "negging"? (ie. giving compliments which are intrinsically negative, giving apologies which reiterate and refine the original insult, constructing statements so as to shape dialogue- ie. my using terms which put anyone who responds in a defensive position). You do this in most of the above posts. Including the last one.

I've engaged as much as I am able Gypsy. I think people may have enjoyed this thread as a whole (there's at least two such indications).

I don't "bitch" when you don't like my ideas. I do, however, get rankled when people get personal again and again and again, pretend to debate when they are also just stating their opinion and want to squabble endlessly. I know your position (I lived it). You now know mine. If you found it useful, great- go and hit the books and read up further on it. Else, I'm sorry you didn't enjoy the thread.

14:40 / 30.01.06

Magick/magic will help you attain a fundamental perspectival shift.
It will do nothing more (or less) than this.

Hmm, what about increasing levels of weird coincidence and synchronicity? Breakthrough behavioural changes? Getting your dream job? (cf. comments on Moore & Morrison above)

Seems to me there are external events beyond a perspective shift that need explaining. How are you going to explain them?

14:41 / 30.01.06

Just like someone starting a discussion by saying "Hey. I think that...." doesn't intend to debate it, defend it, publishing a book or webpage on it etc. etc.

Ummm...

From the Random House Webster's School & Office Dictionary

dis-cuss - to consider or examine by argument, comment, etc.; debate.

14:46 / 30.01.06

I do, however, get rankled when people get personal again and again and again, pretend to debate when they are also just stating their opinion and want to squabble endlessly

Oh dear. There are many fine examples of exactly that behaviour on Barbelith, but that's not what people are doing here. Please address some of the criticisms of what you wrote, rather than analyse the debate or debaters, and we'll all be fine I'm sure.

14:50 / 30.01.06

monk, moon, sun, path:
Yes. I have a dictionary too. I'm sure you can target almost any post in this entire thread and find mis-uses of words, semantic errors and so forth. Your point is?

Quantum:
"Seems to me there are external events beyond a perspective shift that need explaining. How are you going to explain them?"

As to coincidence- I'd say its RAW's "Law of Fives" thing (was it RAW?). That is, start thinking in a certain way and you'll be inundated with examples of it (not because of external changes but simply because you become attuned to watching for certain "signs" etc.)

As to "Breakthrough behavioural changes?" Aren't most of these internally generated? That is, you change your perspective and act on it (also same thing re: dream jobs).

14:55 / 30.01.06

Again, this makes no sense to me. You say "You sound like..." etc. and then say "Not a personal attack". I don't mean to be rude but you don't know me and that's unlikely to change given a few posts here and there.

True, all I have to go on is your posts. You haven't really pinned any of this down with your own experiences, so all I can do is speculate as to what is informing your position from what you have written. Your posts conjure the impression I outlined above. It's not a personal attack, it's how you come across to me in text. If I'm way off the mark, then explain why? Give me a bit more to go on! It's not really enough to say: "This is how it is" about an aspect of magic, without then explaining how you came to that position and engaging with any questions that then arise from your initial statement. Otherwise you just come across as if you're trying to patronise everybody by laying down the law, and aren't prepared to have a conversation about it or entertain any perspective other than your own.

Would you not find it offensive if I said "Gypsy, from your posts I can sense X, and you must have had Y happen to you?"

I might find it annoying, but it would also suggest that I might have failed to communicate what I was trying to communicate - by dint of the fact that someone has formed an opinion of me from my posts that I consider inaccurate and unfounded. But they got it from somewhere, and that somewhere is presumably my posts. So I would attempt to elaborate on my position further and engage with questions raised, which is all you are being asked to do.

14:55 / 30.01.06

I think the "Law of Fives" thing is also often called "confirmation bias". (Psych is not my thing- but I think the gist is that you see the world in a way that confirms your perceptions of it- that is, by unconsciously disregarding info that doesn't fit with your world view *snicker*).

15:01 / 30.01.06

I think the "Law of Fives" thing is also often called "confirmation bias". (Psych is not my thing- but I think the gist is that you see the world in a way that confirms your perceptions of it- that is, by unconsciously disregarding info that doesn't fit with your world view *snicker*).

Which is precisely what you have been doing throughout this thread.

15:01 / 30.01.06

You seem to have plenty of time and energy to throw mud at me, but precious little to engage with my argument in any satisfactory way.

You do this in most of the above posts. Including the last one.

Maybe, but I also remain on topic and try to give considered responses to all of your points and present criticism of your ideas founded on my own experiences. Which is more than you do with any of mine.

15:07 / 30.01.06

My point is that your mis-use of the term "discussion" is quite telling, and that you're doing yourself no favors whatsoever by willfully mis-using a forum meant for discussion.

But I'm tired and pissy, and am sorry if I've upset you further. I'll back away now.

15:26 / 30.01.06

Gypsy- I think all your posts are essentially the same. And I've replied more than once to them. So there it is- that's all you get. (OK, I haven't addressed the minutae of your position, but that's hardly the point is it? Or is it? You can't open a topic up that some bristle at and then not debate it endlessly to the n-th degree? I think I've been pretty clear in what I'm saying. Its all in the first post or so).

Gypsy- well, the simple fact of the matter (which I've tried to avoid putting so indelicately up until now) is that in my experience (which everyone wants me to put on the table. G_d knows why. I don't really see how MY personal experiences help anyone else, nor how descriptions of THEIR personal experience help me. I didn't experience them- its like someone telling me their dreams from last night. Rivetting for them but not so for me)- in my experience, people talking about "external" siddhis/power/results-magick etc. are always full of it or simply deluded (again, my experience with your pull-no-punches approach). I've had transpersonal/mystical/magickal experiences but- as I've said, I'd paint them as ultimately "subjective"- rather than objective. In short, I've often met the guy who said he could fly, but he wouldn't. I've met him many times (or his lesser cousins- the healer, the levitator, the love-spell person etc.). He's often slightly intoxicated or mentally ill (despite having studied magick for aeons and being a Great Master) and pretty much unable to function on what he considers the trivial level of Malkuth. That is my experience, such as it is.

How's this Gypsy: its 4.24am here and I'm going for a quick nap before work. You sit down- map up a nice tight little proposition (not one of mine- because you'll map it via your wonderful "negging" skills, but one of your "own" that you want me to "engage" more fully with) and I'll respond (probably in a few days as next days are hectic) and tell you how it fits into my schema- much like my response to Quantum on dream jobs/synchronicity/etc.

monk, moon, sun, path: Apologies from me too- I'm now tired and pissy also. (Would really like to go back a few hours and not open this whole thread or rephrase it more like I did others I've opened - ie. "here's something, what do YOU think?")

15:45 / 30.01.06

"I know your position (I lived it). You now know mine."

Clearly my whole statement here is inaccurate. You should have quoted the whole thing G. Yes- I practiced magick for a long time- and admit that while I am familiar with being a magician (ie. I lived it), I indeed did not live your life exactly/particularly etc. (That is, I'm not You- in any sense other than the most important one I've been dancing around this whole thread). This is indeed true, you have me there- and a razor sharp indictment on me indeed!

The second part of my statement is also obviously inaccurate. (What me Prison Blimey?)

This has been an interesting exercise in degradation and how to fall into the Pit of Because. Thank you G. for your time and the valuable lessons you have taught me (not to mention confirming my world-view on the wisdom of Silence and what Mark Twain said about telling the truth to people or what my granny said about not fighting for its own sake).

15:52 / 30.01.06

I'm just asking you to elaborate on the thread you started and respond to people's posts in that thread in a non-patronising manner, rather than ignoring it completely and talking about what a terrible person I am instead.

You seem incapable of, or not interested in, debate about magic. You know the one true way and you won't have it any other way, which makes for a very tedious conversation. Your only response to my comments or the comments of anyone else consists of endlessly restating your original position. You just keep saying "You are wrong and I am right!" without showing your working or reasoning behind that.

For instance, Illmatic points out that magic and mysticism are often close bedfellows in many aspects of yoga and tantra. You don't engage with the ramifications of this but simply respond by stating "that doesn't change my basic position." You sound like a politician evading the question. It's irritating. Your responses, if they can be called such, are simply restatements of the same thing without reference to anyone else's thoughts on the matter, as if you have your fingers in your ears. It's actually quite rude.

I can't actually be bothered with you anymore though, as this isn't getting anywhere. Perhaps there is an interesting conversation that can be had around this subject without you though, so thanks for starting the thread.

16:10 / 30.01.06

I'm not fighting for the sake of fighting, I'm fighting for the sake of getting you to respond to the issues raised by your initial post and thereby making this a thread which actually goes somewhere.

If your not prepared to have your ideas looked at under a spotlight, and are incapable of dealing with intelligent criticism, then there is indeed much wisdom in silence. I suggest that you observe it.

16:33 / 30.01.06

[I]n my experience, people talking about "external" siddhis/power/results-magick etc. are always full of it or simply deluded

Perhaps. It's possible that confirmation bias may play a role here, as well.

He's often slightly intoxicated or mentally ill (despite having studied magick for aeons and being a Great Master) and pretty much unable to function on what he considers the trivial level of Malkuth.

(Hardly a "Great Master," if he considers functioning on Malkuth to be "trivial.") It sounds like sampling bias may also be a relevant concern.

For an alternative perspective on Siddhis/powers, in hoodoo (and at least some other folk-magic traditions) things like that are called gifts, and it would be ungrateful at best to turn one's back on them. Thank God for the tools He has granted you (most hoodoos are Christian, fwiw) then get out there and work with them - doing "results-magic."

trouser the trouserian

16:40 / 30.01.06

Some thoughts regarding siddhis -

Whilst the sanskrit siddhi is popularly associated with "magical powers" it can also refer to "accomplishment", "success" or "achievement" in one's goals - whatever one's endeavour. For example 'siddhi' is often encountered in Ayurvedic treatises, denoting a treatment which is deemed to be particularly efficacious, i.e. it works.

The 'problem' of siddhis is further compounded by the fact that there is a great deal of debate about whether textual references to the mahasiddhis should be taken literally or metaphorically. It depends who you read. Vivekananda's translation/commentary of Patanjali's Yoga Sutras clearly seems to posit that Siddhis are "obstacles" - hardly surprising, given Vivekananda's stance as a renouncer and reformer. Yet other translations/commentaries on Patanjali are far more equivocal on this point.

Given that a siddhi that is frequently mentioned in Indian texts is "eloquence" then one might well posit that graphic novelists such as Morrison & Moore, who make their living from their writing could be viewed as accomplished siddhas, in that respect.

16:59 / 30.01.06

I don't really see how MY personal experiences help anyone else, nor how descriptions of THEIR personal experience help me

Strange statement. I find the essence of magic to be personal experience, which so often provides a corrective to what we read or the daft ideas we have. I would like you
to argue from your own personal experience and explain what has given you the certainities of your current viewpoint.

Dude, go back and read the thread. Amongst some initial snipiness from Gypy, I think you'll find some excellently stated points on how he sees "siddhis" and magic and the material world. If these aren't attempts to engage with you position, I don't know what is.

17:31 / 30.01.06

I think the "Law of Fives" thing is also often called "confirmation bias". (Psych is not my thing- but I think the gist is that you see the world in a way that confirms your perceptions of it- that is, by unconsciously disregarding info that doesn't fit with your world view *snicker*). Folded

Wow. From my perspective (Psych is my thing) confirmation bias can be counterbalanced by rigour and external verification.
As a professional Tarot reader I can tell you there is a reliable enough consistent correlation between internal psychological states and apparently unrelated external signifiers (e.g. cards) to be statistically significant to an extent that keeps me in a part time job. I haven't done a two-tailed p-test on the data but I think my sample size is large enough and experiment extended enough to provide some interesting results.

To pre-empt folded's response (if he comes back in the morning)-
It's not the Rorschach effect
I'm not a cold reader
I'm statistically literate
I often reign in querent's desire to believe and have to fight their expectations, despite their burning desire to hear me say You are overworked and underpaid and You will have luck with money this month and Everything will be alright. So it's not pandering to their expectations either.

The rule of fives is not a sufficient explanation for my experience. Here's a quote from Pi to support *your* position though-

"You want to find the number 216 in the world, you will be able to find it everywhere. 216 steps from a mere street corner to your front door. 216 seconds you spend riding on the elevator. When your mind becomes obsessed with anything, you will filter everything else out and find that thing everywhere."

18:23 / 30.01.06

Folded: You very much remind me of a poster called Mike (amongst some other names) who was on here a couple of years ago. I don't think you are him, you just remind of him. You - like him - strike me as someone who has their own personal realisations and now wants to communicate them with others. However, in doing so I think you are rubbing up against people who have very different perspective than yours - also grounded in their own realisations and experience, thus the piss fight ensues (much as it did with Mike).

There are people on this board who have engaged with the practical magical side of things and it works for them to *whatever* degree. It doesn't work for me like that, but I gain other benefits from it, and I'm willing to allow other views to exist. I'd go back and re-read the thread and try and ignore the insults and see what you think.

Page: 1(2)