THE ARCANE ARCHIVE
	a cache of usenet and other text files pertaining to occult, mystical, and spiritual subjects.

To: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick,alt.pagan.magick,talk.religion.misc,alt.religion.wicca,alt.skeptic
From: nagasiva 
Subject: Magic and God Proof-Claims
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 02:52:08 GMT

50030324 VII om peace

"Bassos"  gives elaboration on FrAoC's practice:
>>>> Bodily awareness training.

nagasiva:
>> ...not magic in an overt sense

"Tom" :
> What do you consider to be "magic in an overt sense"?  

action that includes symbolism whereby an effect is intended
symbolically toward a result desired. the means by which 
it is to be concluded is part of a rite or spell but has no
direct causal connection (e.g. including one of the various
'Laws of Magic' such as Contagion or Sympathy). this is what
gives the act its specific "magical" character: symbolism,
combined in use to cause effects in the world, indirectly.

> How would that differ from magic in any other sense?

wonderful question. magic in an overt sense would allow us to
analyze its composition, character, elements, see how it will
attempt to manipulate or otherwise influence the cosmos via
symbolic intention and associative impulse (e.g. magic that
uses Contagion would dwell on proximity of objects, dearness
of the objects or personal integrity to the spell's target).
 
>>>>> You're associating dross with something physical?
>>
>> no, quite the contrary. the physical is what makes the dross
>>  possible
>
> ...If the physical is what makes dross possible, 
> then you are definitely associating dross with something physical.  

inasmuch as a seed and tree is necessary for fruit, 
so also is the physical necessary for dross.

> You are associating dross with physicality itself.  

only certain nonessential portions of physicality which needn't
concern us here (excess calories, mostly, and the illusory).

> Yet, can't there be non-physical dross, too?

I'd presume that most of what is dross is non-physical, 
since it is either subjective (and manipulatable) or 
fantastic (presumed fiction unless given rational evidence).

>> basic ambulatory and cognitive functions are the
>>  foundation of anything experiential.

physically fit, capable of basic motor coordination and tracking,
etc.  physical animal function is necessary for any experience,
and therefore will not usually constitute "dross".

> This sort of reductionism is simply the reverse of Aquinas' 
> First Cause argument for the existence of God.  Trace back 
> all effects to their cause far enough and you must arrive 
> at a First Cause, which is God.  In this case, if you reduce 
> matter to smaller and smaller particles, you arrive at Nothing, 
> which is also God.  

wonderful analysis, agreed.

> But, in actuality, you can't arrive at a First Cause or a 
> Nothing.  What you arrive at is a condition where you can no
> longer determine what the previous cause might be or what makes 
> up that tiniest quark.  You simply don't know what comes next 
> in your regression.

Greek essentialists/materialists would complement an understanding
of your criticism. absolute substances and special ultimate agents
are a conceptual solution for a good deal of what we don't know.
I can't affirm their reality, but their appeal is obvious.

> "God" (or "Nothing" or "First Cause") is simply a slippery way 
> of saying "I don't know".

a convenient intellectual tool, indeed.

>>> It is the origin....
>>
>> if there was an origin. some kind of explosion is discernable
>
> Of course, that explosion may simply have obliterated all 
> evidence of what came before it, if anything did. If "before" 
> even has a meaning when applied to that state of affairs.

precisely my criticism elsewhere. the consideration of how an
absence of matter or a negation of it constitutes anything real
(what kind of 'nothing' are we talking about here?) would precede
analysis of the meaning of precedence outside temporal contexts.

>>> It created all things of its own essence, by patterns of its
>>> own chosing; OMNIPOTENT, OMNISCIENT.
>>
>> can it post to this newsgroup?
>
> If he's right, it just did.

establishing collaborated intention, corporate intelligence, 
and limitations of influence for a pansubstantial entity 
could be an exciting adventure. 

the claim, that one's transcendental omnipresent deity has 
demonstrated its existence by this communication, is as 
convincing as those claiming their greatness as magicians 
has been demonstrated in a likewise manner. were it attended
with significant numerological and zodialogical significance,
or something of this import (say, posting a binary oracle in
a binary forum on a binarily apprehendable date -- 01/11/10), 
it would be more interesting to consider.

nagasiva
http://www.luckymojo.com/avidyana/dozen/i.changeoracle.html
-- 
http://www.yronwode.com/sivaworld.html -------------  ACTIONS AGAINST WAR!
http://dmoz.org/Bookmarks/B/boboroshi -------- IN A NEIGHBORHOOD NEAR YOU!
emailed responses may be posted ---------- cc replies if response desired!