From: krikket@meltdown.chi.il.us (D. 'krikket' Krick)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: draft of Taxonomy of Magic
Date: 13 Aug 92 19:44:30 GMT
Organization: The Meltdown - A Team Star BBS

In article <Bsp7np.9nz@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, ba@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (B.A.
Davis-Howe) writes:
>I think you are making some pretty extreme assumptions here.  This is only
>true if spirits don't exist, for example.  If spirits do exist as independent
>entities, there is a very real difference between a shaman going and
>gathering
>a totem (a spirit) for a dispirited person and a mentalist visualising that
>the person is healthy.  The mentalist's visualisations would not be able to
>address the source problem.  Spirits are not the "same stuff" as the mind of
>the ill person.
>
>I think your assumptions invalidate the experiences of a great deal of
>people.  The assumption also attacks the religious beliefs of anyone who
>practises ancestor reverence.
>
>There are other examples besides spirits, but that is the most blatant.

Whoah....  Hold on.  Methinks we're talking about two different things here...
I was >NOT< picking on spiritualists for the sake of picking on 'em.  (I don't
think I was sin giling out ANY group!  Sorry to have stumbled across a pet
peeve here, but try to understand what I'm saying beneath the surface.  Without
THAT, everything falls apart.

>You may feel that trying to classify differences is not useful, but that is
>not the same as telling other folks that their experiences are invalid.  I
>suspect that you may try to argue that you weren't criticising others'
>experiences, but the statement "the same stuff is affected" can only logically
>be interpreted as stating that there are either no spirits, or that all magic
>occurs through spirits.  Either claim invalidates the experiences of large
>number of people.

Whoah...  Another BIGGER gap in applied logic this time...  Trying to classify
the differences in style does get rather useless (to be explained in a later
portion of this message).  But I never said and NO NOT BELEIVE that because the
experience differs, the experience is invalidated!  And I disagree with out
comment about the either/or of spirits too...

<Standard Disclaimer Deleted>

>I wrote this to point out that you have fallen
>prey to one-right-way-ism.  To claim that all magic is identical is
>arrogating
>to oneself the ability to know all possible magical experiences.  It is very
>probable that you have only experienced one sort of "stuff", but that does
>not mean that others will have the same experience.  

I think I've been sorely misunderstood...  Just because person <A> and person
<B> may have different experiences, does not invalidate either experience, or
the beleif system that it/them was derived from!!!

>Please note, I am not describing actions in this taxonomy.  This is not a
>list
>of different external practices.  This is about what people experience as
>happening, not what they do.  It is filtered through human perception, but
>it is an attempt to classify events, rather than actions.

Agreed.  But I ask, are we trying to classify perceptions or something else?

>I hope that this is clear, and that this is not experienced as a flame.  It
>is not my intention to attack you, or anyone else.  My intent is to point out
>the insidious dogmatism of your statements.  Some folks may wonder if I am
>not being
>just as dogmatic, but I will point out that I have clearly said at several
>points that I am expressing *my best understanding*. and would be happy to
>receive corrections.  This was not a correction, but an overall denial of the
>experiences of the people I have been interviewing (informally).

I am not trying to flame either.  Please tack on a "this is this is *my best
understanding* and am hapy to receive corrections as well.  But some basic
logic has to follow through as well....  I merely disagree with you...  Let's
continue at this in good spirits...  :)

-------------------------------------------------------------------

This is my second attempt at posting this, since the first was eaten by the
Amiga Guru Monster (Well, my system did print off a Guru Meditation number... 
:) .)  I origionally did NOT quote any of the above, because I feared it would
be distracting the be below, but I'm trying again, and I hope this works...

First, a disclaimer:  I probably misunderstand what you are refering to when
you say "spiritualist", since I have little experience with this style of
magic....  Therefore all examples below are being pulled out of the great big
randon hat (tm) in hopes of not offending anyone.

Also, when I refer to shaministic methods, I'll state once again, thzat what
I'm calling "shaministic" is the new white-man's version of shaminism.  Odds
are that any Amer. Ind spiritual leader would be offended by my use of the
word, but that's not the intent...  Apologies in advance!

-------------

When a person whoid practicing shaministic magic, and a person who is
practiving occult hermatic magic, and they try to cast a spell that does the
same thing, odds are both spells will work equally effectively.  Odds are that
while they are doing two very different (physical) things in practice, they are
pulling the same "magical cords" (or at least very similiar magical cords...) 
(Forgive me, but I'm inventing terms on the fly.  Stop me if I get
confusing....)

When I said they were doing the same thing, I wa refering to those magical
cords they were pulling, not the physcial work they were doing.  

It's a matter of perception.

1 example>  At DucKon, I helped orginize a "Psychics vs. Skeptics Debate".  One
person brought forth the old concept that there is no such thing as random
chance.  Another person later brought forth the idea that EVERTHING is based on
chance.  Successfully crossing the street is a chance from one viewpoint, but
from another it's a matter of if you stumble, are there cars comming, etc.  
It's a matter of if you accept the odds of a car coming, etc to be pure chance,
or more firmly rooted on some great cosmic unknown.  Both viewpoints are
perfectly valid, and even COMPATIBLE, with the right outlook!  In this case it
was a matter of semantics.

2nd Example>  A friend of mine is CONVINCED that when she dies that Armegeddon
will start.  But once you get into her thought processes, you understand that
we are in Armegeddon NOW, and always will be.  Armegeddon means CHANGE. 
Another example of Semantics at work.

It's a matter of removing those semantics and the thought patterns behing them
to finf out exactly what magic is and does, before you find that "It's all the
same thing."

On many levels any two practicioners are going to be VERY different.  But on
many other levels two practicioners are going to have a LOT in common.

Odds are that when you say you are a techno-pagan, you men something very
different than when I say the same thing.  I'm refeing to using compiled code
for my spellwork, quite often throwing away the source code.  But 99% of other
people are going to find that thought ridiclous...

Hoefully I've begun to closen the gap between us...  If I can answer anything
else, or provide other thought/ comments/ arguments/ etc, yell and I"ll do hat
I cna :)

Krikket               ! krikket@meltdown.chi.il.us ! USnail:3 Danada Square E.
a.k.a Doug Krick      ! Team Star Charter Member   !        Suite 246
Data ph# 708/665-9732 ! #include<std.disclaimers>  !        Wheaton, Il 60187
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Just another commentary on the sad state of affairs on our nation today.
Newsgroups: alt.pagan