THE |
|
a cache of usenet and other text files pertaining
to occult, mystical, and spiritual subjects. |
To: alt.magick.tyagi,sci.history,alt.magick,alt.astrology From: Mark NuttallSubject: Re: Science and Occult History (Long) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 15:57:03 +0100 93. George E. Hrabovsky writes: > The categorization of matter as composed of fundamental elements is the > most obvious which comes to mind. In antiquity this was thought to be > earth, water, air, and fire; (which interestingly enough corresponds to the > four states of matter: solid and semisolid, fluid, gas, and plasma). These > four elements were thought to be indivisible. George, please forgive me if I'm mistaken but you give the impression of having missed the point here. The division into four elements - at least to a modern occultist - is a division of {manifest stuff} into more-or-less psychically distinguishable categories. Other possible divisions are possible - I think the Chinese use wood and stone in replacement of a couple of the above. The distinction is made as part of the psychological/psychophysical toolkit which the magician's consciousness becomes. `Air,' `Fire' etc are sets of qualities of consciousness, not to be taken literally. > This lead to ideas about the structure of matter as atoms composed of > electrons, protons, and neutrons which were indivisible. The structure of > the hadrons (neutrons and protons) was then puzzled out as being made up of > up and down quarks, which not only are thought of as indivisible, but > inseparable. Now there are ideas about the structure of quarks, but I think > the point is made. Such `atomist' theories go as you know back to certain tribes of antique Greek philosophers. There are several issues raised here. Firstly: in magickal work, `reality' (such as the word is meaningful) applies both to inner psychic and bioenergetic processes as much as the nature and structure of the `external' universe. `Science' - physics, chemistry, etc etc has gone to great efforts to exclude the nature of subjective, inner experience from its enquiries. `Reality' is to be `explained' through a body of algebraic expressions by which matter and energy may be manipulated. Well and good... but `consciousness' has been ignored as a factor in physical processes. You're a physicist... you know full well that there is No Such Thing as an objective observer, and that a quantum level the very term `structure of matter' does not carry the same meaning as it does at an atomic or molecular level. Physical science is still suffering from a chronic dose of Cartesian dualism. One's thought processes and consciousness may, we are told, be safely excluded from factors determining the results of experiment.. even though Bohr, Heisenberg et al have demonstrated IN OUR OWN LANGUAGE (calculus) that no such dualism applies in actuality. > Are you suggesting that modern science does not inspire? Modern science has a woefully limited field of enquiry. Science can be insprational but (certainly as I was taught) there is little or no room for questioning certain fundamental beliefs about `Reality' .. such as the implications of non-dualistic states of consciousness, Jungian synchronicty and its apparent/potential links with quantum mechanics/Bell's theorem, etc... nor does it investigate practical techniques for producing such states of consciousness. These are the things that truly inspire me now. > Indeed, in my opinion, science is magick at its highest level. This is to elevate the mathematical modelling of physical processes to a level above that of which is the true aim of magickal endeavour. The denote a general term rather than a specific dogma. > All science is, in reality, is a method of study. As a scientist one agrees > to treat as reality that which can be verified by independent experiment or > observation. True. Very true. Problems occur when scientists decide that the methods of other groups are `unscientific' or `superstitious nonsense' or `wholly subjective' and, without further investigation, write off the conclusions of the other groups and often as not refuse to discuss the matter further. This reification of institutionalised ignorance is very common. Let me give you an example: Yoga. This is a body of knowledge well over 5000 years old referring to experiments and observations made by a large number of practitioners over that time. Yoga is a SCIENCE of inner, `subjective' realities. It's approach is one of, Do these exercises and see what happens. Results have a markedly reproduceable nature... after a while folk's perception of `inner' and `outer' realities start changing. Other things happen. Regularly. Yoga talks about the `subtle body.' Nonsense! Howls western science, There's No Such Thing, Kirlian photography notwithstanding. What western science contrives to fail to understand is that if one does the practices provided then one comes to first-hand, experiential contact with the phenomena under discussion. This is just one example of `western science's' blindess to the fetters imposed on legitimate fields of enquiry through it's ``certainty'' of what is ``real'' and what is ``imaginary.'' I have a physics degree, a decent BSc. I have frequent, first hand experiential contact with my `subtle body.' This experience is utterly unlike anything non-practitioners of yoga or any other viable similar technology have ever encountered. Could I get my `results' published? Recall that Wilhelm Reich died in jail. For all that there are many independent observers of these phenomena, they are not acknowledged by ``science.'' Why do you think that is, George? > Science is a community, and the stated facts of the community > are the facts that are agreed upon by the community AS A WHOLE! The > individual can make significant progress only when the individual's results > are reporducable. This does not say anything about the relative value of > beliefs, which by their nature are a leap of faith. In magick this leap is > necessary, in science it can kill people As indicated above, faith is not a prerequisite for magickal practice. It is enough merely to keep an open mind and be open to unfamiliar experience. > Sir, this is patently absurd. As a theoretical physicist I get complaints > all day that I am not dealing with reality. That the mathematical worlds > that I create are far removed from the experiments of my fellows. On the > other hand, as an ordained minister I believe that the spiritual is far more > important than the physical. Do you appreciate that the method of science may be applied with great efficaciousness to the aims of religion? Do you recognise that this has been done in India, China and elsewhere for millenia? Do you accord the knowledge derived from these experiments the same standing as the knowledge of the `external' world developed here in the west? If not, why not? You're an ordained minister: if `the divine' is `real' can one not perform investigations and experiments? The history of such work is the history of the western tradition of magick, known to the profane as `alchemy' and `astrology' among other names. Leibniz and Newton, the founders of Calculus were both dedicated alchemists.. and it was from the alchemical pursuits (most particularly the hebrew Cabala) that their mathematical ideas arose. Einstein also paid great attention to this body of work. Have you repeated their experiments in this field? > Much of what was thought of as magick has been shown to be outdated. Who thought of these things as magick in the first place? Magick's main techniques are geared towards 1. Effecting one's will. 2. Union with , ie, Gnosis. Are these outdated? There's long been all types of pseudo-psychic charlatenry and quackery around the magickal fringes... ignore it. On the other hand, bear in mind the many records of Christian saints levitating. It's not just the Hindus who experience such phenomena. > It is my opinion that there is much to be learned by science and by > the more mystical arts (I do not call them sciences). Incidentally, > stop calling magical arts sciences unless you expect to hold them > to the same standards as REAL sciences (physics, chemistry, ...). Real science starts out with someone saying: I did these experiments, with these parameters, controls, precautions, etc. Other folk try the procedure and either get the same results, or not. If they do, a variety of models may be proposed to `explain' the observations. These models may be tested: they should make predications which may themselves be subjected to experimental verification. George, the magickal arts do indeed in many many ways fit this criteria. They do consist of a body of TECHNIQUE the application of which RELIABLY delivers RESULTS. > The true sciences tell us about the physical world around us. And this from an ordained minister! The above sentence is an arbitrary definition. Might I not as a yogi state The true science leads us to union with God and then refer to `other parts of reality' like those manifest fragments of appearing before us as structured vortices of energy, more commonly termed `matter'? > The magical arts and religious studies tell us about the other parts of > reality, which cannot be measured physically. Since we live in > the physical world, we need to know about it. As a magician it is > stupid to not seek to learn about one's environment. As a > scientist it is stupid to believe that you can measure everything. For all that inner experience is not very usefully measured physically, it is an act of gross stupidity, surely, to assert that `reality is that which is measurable on a recording device' ie Reality is that which is known to the five senses since any instrument is but an extension of one or more senses? This is approaching the saying The spirit is not measurable Reality is measurable The spirit is {not a suitable subject of enquiry/ not real/ illusory} Both the above indented bits are 100% ass-backwards. Manifest energy/matter is measurable, but Reality must be commensurate with Eternity, surely? > My suggestion is to learn some real science. I got a physics degree. > Do not approach it superficially, but really dig into it. You will magick > at its core, the magick of intuition and understanding of the world around > us. My suggestion is to learn some real magick. Not's approach it superficially, but really dig into it. You will find true Science at its core, the true Science of the Gnowledge of the Divine, the real reason and cause of existence, true wisdom and perfect happiness. > Actually, you are, probably on purpose, overlooking the part about > verification by REPEATED experiments. This is the true test of science, as > opposed to philosophy. Remember to keep up your magickal practices for at least a year or so, to make it a true test over repeated experiments. Ensure that you keep a diary to note the changes that occur during your life in this time. `Philosophy' is just talking the talk.. real magick is walking the walk. > Science requires that before anything is accepted as true fact, it be > verified through repeated trials, by different laboratories. Only then do > we get a theory. Your laboratory is your own consciousness. You are the lab and the scientist, the subject and object. Gnow thyself. > There are no occult sciences. A gratuitously ignorant assertion, I'm afraid. `I know of no occult sciences' would have been a statement of Truth.. so near, and yet so far... > A science is a methodical method of studying a collection of phenomen using > the scientific method. True. > If you believe that conjuration or divination is a science, I would > truly be happy to look at your verifiable data (as this would be proof > to show to others). The proof is to be had by repeating the experiments yourself. > The reason they are called pseudoscience (a term a personally find > distasteful) is that the practioners of such arts decry science and then > pretend to be scientists. When did you perform your last controlled magical > experiment that could be repeated precisely by someone else? I do not decry science, only the artificial limits placed on legitimate fields of enquiry by the currently established priesthood. My last controlled magical experiment took place this morning: I performed a Lesser Banishing Ritual of the Pentagram. Instructions for this procedure are widely available. I would recommend its practice perhaps twice daily for a minimum of six months, supplemented with yogic breathing exercises perhaps 10-15 mins daily. Anyone can do these things: but if the results are known before starting to be `a load of pseudoscientific nonsense' rather than `a definite shift in the individual's state of consciousness' then what's the point in starting? > What I know to be true is that as a scientist, am I am hardly the exception, > I find that every time we discover something new (a fairly frequent > occurance) it raises many more questions than it answers. The `human aura' `astral body' `body of light' `chi' `prana' `orgone' is a real phenomena, and may be experienced by each individual that makes a real go at one of the many available practices for activating it. This fact has been known for millenia, and the knowledge has been put to good use for the same period of time. This does indeed raise questions.. like, why is it still a dangerous heresy to say so? > Making broad statements about the inner workings of a field you are > not part of is both malicious and stupid. > There are no occult sciences. George, you made a good effort but still came out sounding at least as opinionated as Tyagi. Did you read > ftp://ftp.hollyfeld.org/pub/Esoteric/Avidyana/Gnostik/l.scire.fn ? What do you make of the document? The bottom line seems to be this: We have a body of technique that produces results, reliably and repeatably. Unfortunately, the results are obvious for the most part only to the practitioner. Your instruments define the limits of your field of enquiry. Simply because we do not give our results in joules, equations and silicon chips should not invalidate the applicability of our results and nowledge within the appropriate field of enquiry, that is, consciousness? Would you agree with that, at least? Mark Nuttall, mpn@doc.ic.ac.uk. Phone (+44) 171 5948237 Fax (+44) 171 5818024 [Dept of Computing,Imperial College, 180 Queensgate, London SW7 2BZ] [93 93/93]
The Arcane Archive is copyright by the authors cited.
Send comments to the Arcane Archivist: tyaginator@arcane-archive.org. |
Did you like what you read here? Find it useful?
Then please click on the Paypal Secure Server logo and make a small donation to the site maintainer for the creation and upkeep of this site. |
The ARCANE ARCHIVE is a large domain,
organized into a number of sub-directories, each dealing with a different branch of religion, mysticism, occultism, or esoteric knowledge. Here are the major ARCANE ARCHIVE directories you can visit: |
|
interdisciplinary:
geometry, natural proportion, ratio, archaeoastronomy
mysticism: enlightenment, self-realization, trance, meditation, consciousness occultism: divination, hermeticism, amulets, sigils, magick, witchcraft, spells religion: buddhism, christianity, hinduism, islam, judaism, taoism, wicca, voodoo societies and fraternal orders: freemasonry, golden dawn, rosicrucians, etc. |
SEARCH THE ARCANE ARCHIVE
There are thousands of web pages at the ARCANE ARCHIVE. You can use ATOMZ.COM
to search for a single word (like witchcraft, hoodoo, pagan, or magic) or an
exact phrase (like Kwan Yin, golden ratio, or book of shadows):
OTHER ESOTERIC AND OCCULT SITES OF INTEREST
Southern
Spirits: 19th and 20th century accounts of hoodoo,
including slave narratives & interviews
|