Magick in the Playground

[Achilles]

To start off, let me say that I am a chaos magician, a chaote, a shaman, whatever you'd like to call me. You don't have to believe it works, but I personally has seen it in action.

Now, I've been curious, are there any other magicians in the playground?

For those of you who want to read more on what chaos magick is, I suggest reading the wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_Magick) and reading around on Chaos Matrix (http://www.chaosmatrix.org/)(aka the best website ever)

[Comet]

I have to say, I've been a bit curious about this particular aspect of culture for a while now. Only in a hypothetical manner and in a fictive context, mind, since I haven't seen anything that could be presented as proof of the supernatural in our own world.

By the way, does this topic count as real world religion? I have a feeling it might and if that's the case we should stop right here as such topics are against the rules.

[Quincunx]

Affect me.

[Dallas-Dakota]

Don't believe in it, but know lots of people who do.

yeaaah, probably closed because of the risk this will go into religion. >.>

[Mx.Silver]

By the way, does this topic count as real world religion? I have a feeling it might and if that's the case we should stop right here as such topics are against the rules.
I also share this concern.


Furthermore, the hideous 'kewl mizpelling' of of 'magic' in the title makes my eyes bleed.

[Zanaril]

Furthermore, the hideous 'kewl mizpelling' of of 'magic' in the title makes my eyes bleed.

I think spelling of magic with a 'k' is usually to distinguish it from stage magic. :smallconfused: And it's not as if spelling it that way is anything new.

[pendell]

While it *could* turn religious, it doesn't have to. We have had a number of similar threads in friendly banter before, and none of them have been locked.

Although I am not personally a chaos magician, being of a more orthodox persuasion, I have firsthand acquaintance with a few magicians and shamans. I also know one former chaote, but that person is extremely reluctant to talk about their past. Painful memories, I suppose. Discussions take place here (http://paganandchristianmoot.co.uk/pcvbforum/), on neutral territory.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Achilles]

I didn't think about how it would most certainly go into religion, so I won't continue.

I don't spell magick like that to make it cool, but to separate it from parlor tricks and illusions.

My last comment before this gets locked is that we as humans only see in three dimensions, there are 11. What is beyond the dimensions we cannot comprehend? Chaos. Magick is just a tool to harness the energy that is all around us, is in us and is us. The conscious has an understanding of the fourth dimension (time) which is why I see that we can harness the energy from higher dimensions with our consciousness via meditation and ritual.

That's all, you can lock this thread now if your afraid it'll go into bad waters.

[quicker_comment]

These beliefs might certainly be classified as religious, but I guess that's a call for the mods to make.

So what sort of magick have you seen in action? Did you subject it to testing? If there's anything to your claim, you can earn an easy million dollars and convince a lot of people that you're not lying in one fell swoop by taking James Randi's challenge (http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html).

As for your use of "dimension" and reference to string theory, I hope there's time for a physicist to arrive to address that. Fuzzy new age usage of scientific concepts that are hard to understand for the general public irritates me, and I have a feeling that this usage is not entirely rigorous.

[Achilles]

I've actually read about the James Randi test in my Psychology course. I definitely couldn't pass it. It's not all about changing the world, flying and shooting lasers from your eyes, it's about the change it brings in yourself, which is mainly what I use it for. This is definitely getting into religion, so I'm stopping.

[Voldecanter]

Don't Worry Magick isn't religious ! And if people think it is , that's a sad misunderstanding . But yes it is a fine Line .

I've Been a Magick User since the Age of ten , which would be Nine Years ago . I was Born a highly Gifted Psychic and have often befriended the Psychic circle in my local area . I've been told to Nurture my Gift , and for 9years I have been . However , I'm better at Energy work than Mediumship , and this can be seen in my grasp of Reiki . I've been a Advanced Second Degree since the age of 14 , I haven't done my third only because , I want to pay for it myself and I want to practice it more widely before going in for the master degree .

[Achilles]

I've been doing it for almost 4 years now. I was also born with a psychick spark. What organization are you talking about? The IOT? I was a member of Thee Temple ov Psychick Youth North America until it changed into Autonomous Individuals Network last year and my interest in it has been declining since.

I also don't see magick as religious because I worship no gods. Sometimes I'll use them to my advantage, but for the most part, I just use my own Psyche. I am mainly a sigilizer.

[Voldecanter]

oh I'm just talking about Some Occult Stores that opened up in a small town not 10 minutes where I lived , they had Psychics owning the store , and it was nice talking to them , they always made for good conversation . I'm talking about Luvdragons www.luvdragons.ca

[Quincunx]

Inciting me to give myself a concussion by repeated /headdesk at human blindness is not Magick.

[Achilles]

I just can't help but notice that you have the term Gnostic in your signature. I use gnostic meditation all the time. I try to do it every day. You will never be convinced because you don't have an open mind, so there is no point in arguing with you. When has an argument ever left someone feeling good. Everyone just leaves hating the other person.

[Green Bean]

What if you're arguing against arguing? :smalltongue:

[Achilles]

Not to get off topic in my own thread, but are you trying to get me to argue that I wasn't arguing against arguing?

You sneaky devil

[pendell]

Don't Worry Magick isn't religious !


Some would argue the point, but not here. PM for further discussion.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[LurkerInPlayground]

I think spelling of magic with a 'k' is usually to distinguish it from stage magic. :smallconfused: And it's not as if spelling it that way is anything new.
Which is an irrelevant distinction because they're still both essentially about showmanship.

I know this sounds unduly snarky, but I really believe there's no real distinction. Magic is about awing yourself or others by what appears, on the surface, to be incredible and strange.

Victimizing yourself with magical thinking is nothing to be proud of. Calling magic by a different name is a sure mark of this self-victimization. It also means a person cannot work their way around some semantics.

True wizardry is the achieving a state where magical thinking is what happens to other people. That's how the word has entered our language. A "wizard" typically used to refer to a person with an uncommon and advanced expertise in a single area (typically technology).

It's really a pitiable state of affairs when our education is bad enough that most people view science as a different flavor of magic. They don't explicitly say so, but it might as well be.

[Myshlaevsky]

I have a real academic interest in such things, and I enjoy the parallel between the apparent mutability of Chaos Magic and a system such as Unseen Armies. However, I do not and never will believe in the existence of magic without definitive, scientific proof - which is likely never, in my opinion.

Still, the whole thing appeals to me in a sort of wacked-out way.

[charl]

A bit of a Chaos magician here, of a decidedly Discordian tradition. To me it's not really about changing anything physical in the world but rather changing your perception of it for your own benefit. Since perception is all we have to interact with the world with it is a bigger deal than what it sounds like.

[PhoeKun]

I just can't help but notice that you have the term Gnostic in your signature. I use gnostic meditation all the time. I try to do it every day. You will never be convinced because you don't have an open mind, so there is no point in arguing with you. When has an argument ever left someone feeling good. Everyone just leaves hating the other person.

That's a very silly line of thought. Debate is the mechanism by which we humans expose ourselves to ideas we hadn't previously considered. By avoiding argument at all cost (hey, a visit from the Assonance Aardvark!), all you're accomplishing is ensuring that whatever supposed benefits and wonder from your magic never reaches that other person.

It's not as though someone with a closed mind can't open it. They will need some convincing. If magic (and no, I will not add the 'k', Middle English is dead and the distinction from illusions is pseudo-academic posturing) is utterly incapable of manifesting before someone who takes the line of 'show me proof', then I'm going to have to believe that there's really nothing there. I refuse to believe something exists that cannot be objectively manifested.

[Achilles]

Charl explained it nicely. I see the world as entirely subjective. To change your own subjectivity takes lots of practice, and that's what I'm doing.

Edit: To answer the ninja, arguing is different from debate in my opinion. When two people have their ideas already and are just butting heads, nothing good will come from it.

[golentan]

I just can't help but notice that you have the term Gnostic in your signature. I use gnostic meditation all the time. I try to do it every day. You will never be convinced because you don't have an open mind, so there is no point in arguing with you. When has an argument ever left someone feeling good. Everyone just leaves hating the other person.

That doesn't follow. I have a very open mind, but won't accept anything as anything resembling truth until I get some sort of concrete proof.

You say the changes are internal? Take an EEG before and after doing something (and show change not accounted for by meditative states). Correctly guess things you can't see at a rate greater than probability would indicate consistently. That will get you an Amazing Randi prize as well.

And I don't have to hate to argue. I don't hate coming out of an argument. The basis of good argument is two sides in disagreement interact, and one is swayed or both are strengthened by the collision.

If your Magick is another way to a beneficial meditative state, then good on you. Whatever helps you get to an autohypnotic place is a useful fetish. But that's all it is, the same way that when I take placebos to stop a headache I don't claim they're not placebos, just that it's good to have sommit to fixate my attention on.

And no, claiming string theory won't work on me. You'd have a better shot with quantum, but even there...

[LurkerInPlayground]

Charl explained it nicely. I see the world as entirely subjective. To change your own subjectivity takes lots of practice, and that's what I'm doing.

Edit: To answer the ninja, arguing is different from debate in my opinion. When two people have their ideas already and are just butting heads, nothing good will come from it.
Become a writer or an artist.

I mean come on. Alan Moore calls himself a magician for this exact reason, but he's being tongue-in-cheek about it.

[Nameless]

Although I don’t believe in this kind of magic, I have found it quite interesting to learn about.
The problem I have is that each time you read about it from a different source, it says something completely different. :smalltongue:

[Achilles]

Chaos Magick is lovely like that. All the sources can say different things. They can even sound contradictory, but they all still work for the person who wrote it. That's what the writings on it are, suggestions. They worked for one person, maybe they'll work for you too.

[LurkerInPlayground]

I also love the "You need to have an open mind" argument. My miracles only work if you believe really hard. Except that believing that gravity doesn't exist as you jump off a cliff doesn't really work.

Never try that on a skeptic. It pisses us off to no end. I shouldn't have to accept every claim out of respect for everybody's beliefs. I can claim a belief in unicorns and pixies, but that doesn't mean that the belief is useful to act upon.

[Erts]

What goletan says.

If magic is real, then I'll need proof. Videos, pictures, scientific research, etc. The same applies to anyone claiming anything.

And yeah, I would worry that this would get into "religious discussion." Not because belief or working in magic is a religon, but it deals with subjects that are religious in nature, the afterlife, the "supernatural," etc.

Example: Say there is someone on these boards who believes that magic is a sin against creation, on a religious basis. They will bring it up, and thus we get even farther into a religious discussion.

[ghost_warlock]

I don't believe in magic, but I do believe in the endless ability of people to convince themselves of any odd nonsense.

The only respectable magic is for entertainment purposes only; anything else is fraud.

[pendell]

Charl explained it nicely. I see the world as entirely subjective. To change your own subjectivity takes lots of practice, and that's what I'm doing.



In that case, what do you think of the following statement:

"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."

I once knew a fellow who believed that the moon would disappear if people stopped believing in it. So what was it doing for the several million years before humans existed?

I don't need to be a magician to change my subjective perceptions. That's what story writing is about, really. Changing *objective* reality in a measurable fashion that impacts the lives of myelf and others .. now that's a different kettle fo fish.

ETA: Has anyone noticed that computer programming is as close as most
people can come to fantasy magic? You can create servitors which will fulfill your every whim, and build quite complicated illusions with them.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[PhoeKun]

Charl explained it nicely. I see the world as entirely subjective. To change your own subjectivity takes lots of practice, and that's what I'm doing.

Edit: To answer the ninja, arguing is different from debate in my opinion. When two people have their ideas already and are just butting heads, nothing good will come from it.

That's not even remotely true. The act of butting heads can jar a thought loose that one or both parties, or even an outside observer, had not considered. Argument, even heated argument, is a useful tool for progress.

We are as reasonable human beings capable of separating the argument from the arguer. Refusal to enter debate on the grounds that bad blood and terrible things are inevitable is incredibly condescending. Give people a little more credit. Share, and defend your ideas.

[Optimystik]

Affect me.

HRRRNNNGG!!!

*gets nosebleed*

...feel anything?

[Achilles]

The reason I don't see the point in arguing here is you either believe it or you don't. Skeptics have always said prove it. In order to more fully explain points, I'd have to go into religious areas, and it's just not appropriate here.

[Berserk Monk]

For those of you who want to read more on what chaos magick is, I suggest reading the wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_Magick) and reading around on Chaos Matrix (http://www.chaosmatrix.org/)(aka the best website ever)

I'm not reading all that! Gotta say, from the looks of it (buy which I mean reading only the intro sentence to the wiki one) it kind of seems like a cult. But what do I know and who am I to judge. I for one want to become a druid. (the the D&D kind, the celtic religion kind)

[Achilles]

Lots of people think we Chaotes are a cult :smallbiggrin:. It's hard to be a cult when there is no actual belief structure. We all pick and choose what we will.

[truemane]

I neither believe nor disbelieve in magic(k). I do think, however, that adding the extra k does bring up what, to me anyway, is the key element of this entire discussion.

What, exactly, IS Magic(k)?

If you're saying that the entire purpose of (Chaos) Magic(k) is to generate changes in one's perception of the known universe, but not necessarily to generate any outward, physical/mental/spiritual changes in it, then how is it any different from therapy? Or trauma? Or any sort of satori-like experience wherein one's experience of the world is changed or altered (either negatively or positively)?

I remember, in my youth, finding an old copy of Roger Ebert's Home Movie Companion on my parents' bookshelf and the week or so I spent reading it changed my view of both the nature of film as well as the nature of what it means to experience it. An enormous change in my perception in the space of six days or so. And the changes it wrought were fundamental and (seemingly) permanent. But there was no outward sign.

Was this (chaos) magic(k)? Is Roger Ebert's Home Movie Companion a Magic(k)al Book? Am I now a Magician? Is Mr. Ebert?

This is not a facetious inquiry.

Magic(k) needs to be defined before we can discuss whether or not it exists.

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff of Moddingham: This topic does seem religious in nature. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJAluN4sTbE)