More magickal musings.
Regarding metaphysics; perhaps I'm just anal, but I apparently don't use the word in the same way everyone else does- I use dictionary definitions for things (plus my own take- I'm sure, much like anyone). This is how I do it; "is magic real, can it truly affect our reality?" That's metaphysics- speculation upon the nature of reality. "Is there a
( Read more... )
ZOMG! I'm SO going to do that! As soon as I find a girl to impress.
>>Metaphysics is SPECULATION. Magic is something we USE, a tool.
And, the latter is an example of the former. ^_^ But I can't believe you'd call my favorite visual stimulus "just light!" :: has a tantrum. gets over it::
You know who wrote some really great super-polite written smackdown? Hellen Keller. Some newspaper editor who'd met and praised her when she was younger eventually learned that she was touring the country promoting socialism, and wrote extensively about how her defects of perception obviously had lead her to wrong conclusions, yadda yadda. So she fired a letter back, and I can't remember exactly what she said, but she owns him. And so civilly, too. It was, as we say in the video game world, ownage.
>>If our wishes (IE; spells) only affect our perception of reality, then maybe it's just bunk
If our mystical practices affect "only" the constellation of our inner contents, and not the physical world at all, they might be bunk. Or they might be more important than *any* methodology for interacting with the physical world whether directly under the control of consciousness or not.
I'm in the "more important than that," camp.
::messes with your hair::
Reply
If you can explain how a 'tool' can be a phliosophical/metaphysical DISCUSSION, AND have it makes sense, this female WILL be impressed, unlike my reaction to the REM guy. *nuzzle*
As for light- you made no indication of HOW that light was your favourite visual stimulus... *waggles her furry eyebrows, entertaining some nasty thoughts as to what that 'stimulus' is...* Since you used it in your post, I made an example of it to keep my reply at least SOMEWHAT relevent (unlike the light comment)- Nyehhhh *sticks out her lizardy tongue, observing your tantrum, giggling*
Have you been able to find a copy of Keller's letter? I'd love to read it- I seriously respect that woman. Someone who could manage to communicate, and do it so WELL, despite the barriers she encountered (and I don't just mean her physical ones. Prejudice was a huge one, then), then she has earned that respect many times over.
But I'm curious as to why you bring it up- two possibilities come to mind: I was either very polite in my disagreeing with your points, or I need to be nicer. *grins* Which one? Heh.
Hmmm, sounds like you're agreeing with me; "If our mystical practices only affect the constellation of our inner contents, and not the physical world at all, then they might be bunk." We're saying the same things...
"I'm in the 'it's more important' camp."
As am I.
*purrs when you ruffle her mane- she loves a good scritch*
Dreams keep us flying- Albus >:~
Reply
And my light comment wasn't irrelevant-- it goes, haphazardly, to the whole question of whether light hitting my retinas is a metaphysical event. Light hitting my retinas is in some sense a purely physical phenomenon. But it's also the sense we associate with direct, uninterrupted consciousness-- q.v., "Seeing is believing" (however flawed that idea may be in fact, it reflects a common attitude about equating mental states directly with vision.) So then you have the standard metaphysical question, the light hitting Bertrand Russell's wood-grain bureau.
Are you trying to say my mind wanders? Heh!
I'll see if I can find Keller someplace. I brought it up though, because Keller doesn't have metaphysical questions pertaining to light hitting her rods and cones, being sightless and all. Not that that isn't a total nonsequitur too, but that was the meandering course of my thoughts.
>>"If our mystical practices only affect the constellation of our inner contents, and not the physical world at all, then they might be bunk." We're saying the same things...
And then, they might not be. I was saying that to show that it's one of four possibilities: Mystical Practice is:
1. Physical but Bunk
2. Physical and Important
3. Nonphysical and Bunk
4. Nonphysical and Important.
My original deal was, you can NEVER get people to even acknowledge that #1 and especially #4, exist. I subscribe to #4.
So. We got lotsa rain down here. How's the weather in Winnie?
Reply
Not a bad try- but I question whether the light is real or physical, right? But, my consciousness is affected by my other senses, including the 'paranormal' ones (energy sensing, and some of the astral stuff), and I don't ALWAYS believe my eyes. Though I'll give you the point for that one, since I am inclined to trust THEM more than someone else's description of an event.
I'm not familiar with the 'light hitting Bertrand Russel's bureau'... Tell me about it? I have no classical education, whatsoever- poor people don't get stuff like that. I know his name, but not what philosophy he espoused.
And you didn't answer my question; you mentioned Helen Keller's polite smackdown of some press dick... Was I as polite? Or do I need to be more polite? *grins a wide dragony smile, with lotsa teeth*
Does your mind wander? YES! Heh. But this is a good thing- it seems to be the kind that does the inquisitive sort of wandering... That's the best kind.
*looks mildy confused* Don't you mean #2 and #4? Anyway- to me, magic often has a distinct feeling to it, both physical and non-. Most of the time, I agree that it's non-physical. And important to my life. For example, I suspect the recent turn of events may be due to a certain spell I cast...
My original Intent was kinda mixed, because I had a hard time separating my wish for a mate from my lust for a certain male here in Winnipeg (which didn't pan out- he didn't want me. Took me a while to get over it).
Because I'm really adverse to the idea of manipulating the guy into being with me, no matter how subtly, the spell got turned into a 'call in potential mates' to me. Now I have three dragons from the west coast wooing me, two very seriously. It's the last two that I'm truly considering- they're a couple living in LA...
Makes me feel all warm an' fuzzy, like. Heh. We've began sending each other e-mails, at first (we met through a website he maintains), and then, MSN. I'm even seeing about getting a passport so I can go visit them. *blushes, grinning*
And there a few other folk who have been seeking my attention- something that's NEVER happened before. You have NO idea how hard it's been to find someone for me; literally a decade went by once, without even an offer... Sheesh.
So, has the spell worked? I'm beginning to think so... Suddenly, I have prospects, and some decent ones. Hmmm, might need to investigate this some more... See if I can do something as strong along the lines of improving my financial situation. *giggles*
That bear's been dead fer years- poor thing died in a London zoo... He was named after our city. Anyway, we get a fair bit of rain, here too- some real doozies in the rain-storm department. I imagine our weather isn't so different from yours.
So, did your black fertility goddess enjoy her dragon-smooch?
Dreams keep us flying- Albus >:!
Reply
Russell, if I didn't tell you, died almost exactly one lunar phase before I was concieved. He was the father of analytic philosophy, a champion of Freethinking (atheism), a radical leftie, and as I've studied him lately, a lot less coherent than I assumed he MUST be, considering his gigantic reputation.
They also say he was a champion in the bedroom. Another thing he and I have in common.
Anyhow, he opened one of his essays on metaphysics with a long and careful examination of how he percieves his bureau in angled light, as a way of illustrating that perception is not really reality, and raising the whole question of metaphysics.
>> Was I as polite? Or do I need to be more polite? *grins a wide dragony smile, with lotsa teeth*
To paraphrase a dragon talking to me elsewhere recently: I like to be handled rough, at least from time to time.
XD
Really, it hadn't anything to do with your manners, I was just babbling. If you're going to insist on the assumption of relevance in everything I say, you're going going to have to conclude that by Grice's Maxims (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grice%27s_maxims), I'm just a bad communicator.
>>*looks mildy confused* Don't you mean #2 and #4?
No, I really meant I subscribe to #4., Mystical practice is: Nonphysical and Important. I really think it does not directly affect physical reality except through human agency. At all.
I think magic is a name for transformative processes that are way more significant, terrifying, and powerful than nuclear fusion or even orgasms.
That's the thing. I really, really, can never, ever, get people to acknowledge that #4 is a distinct possibility. It's like everybody's a robot programmed to think that importance = physicality.
Not true. Nonphysical things could be (and are) more important.
I'm challenging you and YHVH, here and now, to a witch war. I'm warning you, however, that all the other gods-- the ones that have a sense of humor about not being physically real, have already leagued with me against you.
Fortunately, I'm a gracious winner, and a quite permissive and benevolent conqueror if you're not too cranky about it, though that moody Elohim bastard, meh...
Reply
Damned dyslexia keeps taking over my keyboard...
Reply
Leave a comment