----------------------------------------
On Magick and the forces of will
June 05th, 2018
----------------------------------------
christyotwisty [0] asked a question on Mastodon tonight:
(DIR) [0] christyotwisty
Those who use #magick to #manifest a material desire: what is it
about the manifestation that tells you it's magick and not
Baader-Meinhof phenomenon?
There's a lot to unpack in her request and I want to do it
justice, hence why the answer is happening here on gopher rather
than in a 500 character toot.
I want to proceed logically. Taking to heart what Voltaire said,
"If you want to converse with me, first define your terms," I'll
attempt to do that now.
---------- Defining Terms ----------
(TXT) [1] Magick
The addition of the k to the end of magic has long been credited
to Aleister Crowley's Thelema to differentiate the occult practice
from stage magic and illusion. Since he coined the term I'll use
his definition here: "the Science and Art of causing Change to
occur in conformity with Will".
His definition was quite loose, and if you read his works you'll
see he uses the term interchangably to describe mundane acts, such
as like reaching out and picking up a pencil, along side ritual
magic which normally springs to mind. The idea that will can cause
any change in an object that it would be normally capable of in
nature is not surprising, then. With the right effort, anything
can be achieved. This line of thinking conflates and contrasts the
concepts of free will with destiny and leads to some... creative
conclusions.
For the purposes of this post I'm going to narrow Crowley's focus
into just his later category of occult action of will to affect
change. I suspect this is where christyotwisty was going with her
question. As we proceed I'll try to further narrow this definition
and cross-reference it with other, similar concepts.
Frequency illusion
As defined on Wikipedia's list of cognative biases: "The illusion
in which a word, a name, or other thing that has recently come to
one's attention suddenly seems to appear with improbable frequency
shortly afterwards (not to be confused with the recency illusion
or selection bias). This illusion is sometimes referred to as the
Baader-Meinhof phenomenon."
In addition to this specific illusion bias, I'll also try to
address synchronicity and confirmation bias. There's really a host
of mental phenomena which are all interrelated in the context of
the question.
---------- Subject-matter clarification ----------
Before addressing the question directly I think I should say
a word or two about the subject of magick itself. There is
a strong divide between groups of people who entertain the idea of
magick as a serious phenomenon and those who dismiss it as
childish delusion. All too often, the former group is then
stigmatized and preconceived prejudices run wild, which
unfortunately make serious discussion all but impossible.
I want to disuade that behavior by stretching the concept of
magick to include similar practices that fall under more widely
acceptable terminology. Remembering our core definition of
magick--the use of will via occult (or paranormal) means to affect
change--we can find many common practices that fit the mold.
From the East:
(TXT) [2] Qigong
(TXT) [3] Tai Chi
The entire system of Chinese medicine falls into this category,
manipulating unseen energies through will and the use of natural
actions, herbs, and meditation. Falun Gong, Prana, Tao Yin and so
on also fit.
From the West:
(TXT) [4] Laying on of hands
(TXT) [5] Exercism
(TXT) [6] Hypnosis
In the west there are many religious practices deeply rooted in
Christianity which clearly fit the definition of magick we're
using. Between the extremes of popular religious rites and the
ridiculed parlor ritual there is a whole range of activity. Yoga,
reiki, mindfullness medititation, and good old basic prayer all
seek to affect some sort of change through the focus of primarily
mental expressions of will.
As you can see, the question here is not limited to casting spells
in a circle under a full moon. You could reasonably reword
christyotwisty's question:
Those who pray for change: what tells you it's working and not
just your mind playing a trick on you?
---------- Efficacy of Magick ----------
(TXT) [7] Efficacy of Prayer
Using the framework we've established, we can use the more
mainstream magickal practices to explore the scientific
investigations of occult phenomena. In the link above, there is
a wealth of information about the difficulties in statistical
inference and falsifiablity, measurability in general, and
a survey of the types of studies that have been done. I'd strongly
recommend reading that page cover-to-cover with an open mind.
The most striking thing to me about the challenges of study and
the measurability of outcomes is that we must take a sacred
activity and measure it by elements that are profane (to use the
terms of Mircea Elliade). Ultimately the change that should occur
is a profane one, though. It must be concerned with the material
world or else we're using our mind to change our mind, which
doesn't seem to fit our narrow definition of magick. Perhaps using
your mind to change the mind of another could fit, but the method
would be the key deliniation (batting your eyes and winking can
certainly create new thoughts in someone else but is that
magick?).
If our outcomes are limited to the physical then they are
measurable. What comes next is to determine what action of will
can create these effects at a significant rate above a control.
This is a very rigorous way to avoid issues of the Baader-Meinhof
phenomenon or other cognative biases.
So what do studies of that have to say? From the article above,
a "systemic review of intercessory prayer reported inconclusive
results, noting that 7 of 17 studies had 'small, but significant,
effect sizes' but the review noted that the three most
methodologically rigorous studies failed to produce significant
findings". Overall, there's just not a lot of rigorous research
being done. Even if we did have reliable results, prayer
represents only a small fraction of the occult magickal practices
in the world, and prayer itself has thousands of forms and formats
to consider.
So where do we go from there? Let me start by pointing out that
after thousands of years of advancement and the advent of western
medicine, the Chinese still widely practice their traditional
medicine. That alone speaks to its efficacy. The west is bringing
over learnings from China every day.
And that brings me to my next point: occult practices are occult
because they are unknown. The paranormal describes things outside
of normal experience. Occult practices once included metalurgy.
What we don't fully understand is often ignored and denegrated
rather than explored and investigated. There is a staggering
amount of knowledge we have confirmed through science only
hundreds of years of casual practice. As an example, the entire
field of optics existed and flourished for centuries before we
understood the science of shaping glass.
Our understanding of the effects may be limited, but out
understanding of the method is almost completely absent. In one of
the prayer studies there was no significance in those prayed for
vs those not, but there was a lift in those that knew they were
being prayed for. Perhaps when it comes to immune responses we
have a greater power to manipulate the physical in ourselves than
in others through will alone. Perhaps this one of the infinite
varieties of action wasn't the specific one needed.
---------- Narrowing the Scope ----------
Has any of this answered christyotwisty's pertenant question? Not
quite yet. Let's reiterate in case you've forgotten where we're
aiming with all this:
Those who use #magick to #manifest a material desire: what is it
about the manifestation that tells you it's magick and not
Baader-Meinhof phenomenon?
The question does not question that a manifestation has taken
place, but instead seeks to understand how you can confidently
credit it to the magickal act rather than any number of cognative
biases or coincidence. To properly answer this I have to point to
three seminal works in religious study:
The Idea of the Holy (Das Heilige) by Rudolf Otto published in the
early 20th century. It has never gone out of print and it has been
absolutely instrumental in the development of comparative religion
as a field of scholarly study.
The Sacred and the Profane by Mircea Elliade, who I referenced
earlier. Elliade takes up the mantle that Otto laid down and takes
it to the next level. Notably, he discusses how the myths and
stories of a people lead to the creation of their symbols. Those
symbols lead to an experience of hierophany, or a breaking through
of the profane world to glimpse the Sacred and its Mysterium
Tremendum, to feel fascinated, terrified, and infinitely the
"creature" in the midst of creation. This relationship through
culture and symbols to find a common experience of the Sacred
crosses all known boundaries and shares almost identical patterns
in the Eastern Orthodox Church as it does in Aboriginal tribes of
Australia or the Lenape Indians in America.
The Varieties of Religious Experience by William James. This was
a book written from James' lectures in Scotland on the various
types of personal expressions of religious understanding. There
are many, many ways that people relate to the divine or the
Sacred, even if they consider that Sacred an unconscious power and
not a diety. Those experiences have many things in common and fit
into categories that allow for discussion of the experience
without having to dwell on the truth of that experience.
Taken together these books tell a story without a narrative. It is
the story of a people, of all people, and our relationship to
powers beyond our conceptualization that we yearn for in a million
ways and experience in glimpses between breaths. The truth of the
stories that lead to these experiences is not as important as the
fact that we all reach the same experiences once we get there. The
symbols change, but that moment of connection with the divine is
a spark of Truth that rings inside us and overwhelms doubt.
Christy, you ask how you know whether your manifestation comes
from magick. The science is still out, but the experience is
redily accessible. Choose your own pathway and look for the Truth
that resonates deep inside your spirit. Ultimately the confidence
that something comes from a magickal place will come from an
understanding that something has happened that is beyond the
normal world and has pierced that layer separatating the Sacred.
There is a feeling in it that can be communicated and shared.
Ask a priest how they heard the call and watch for that smile.
That's how you know.