Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General discussions
Forum Description: Discuss any topic at all that is not music-related
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=110589 Printed Date: March 04 2025 at 05:40 Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Magick/Occultism/EsotericismPosted By: Vompatti
Subject: Magick/Occultism/Esotericism
Date Posted: March 23 2017 at 19:09
Any of PA into this stuff? I've been occasionally doing the Star Ruby as an experiment recently even though I don't really know how to visualize the divine principles from the Second Order of the emanationist hierarchy of late Neoplatonism and I think my quality of life has improved slightly. For example last night I had a semi-lucid dream where I lived with a cute dark-haired Romanian schizophrenic (female) who respected me as a person and loved me in an erotic way.
Replies: Posted By: Thatfabulousalien
Date Posted: March 23 2017 at 21:54
I'm interested in Crowley/Thelema and a few mystic philosophers but not in a religious way, no
------------- Classical music isn't dead, it's more alive than it's ever been. It's just not on MTV.
https://www.soundcloud.com/user-322914325
Posted By: CosmicVibration
Date Posted: March 24 2017 at 09:28
I never heard of Emanationism… However, after some brief digging
it seems to be pointing in the right direction.From wiki:
“Emanationism is
a cosmological theory which asserts that all things "flow" from an
underlying principle or reality, usually called the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_%28philosophy%29" rel="nofollow - or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deity" rel="nofollow - .”
I would suggest
that any practice that you may want to try be sure it’s rooted on love; listen
to the heart, not the brain.This does
not mean to mindlessly fall for anything. On the contrary, use your intellect
to its fullest and guide it by your heart.
I would also advocate when asking for help or guidance from
the other side make sure you're summoning only upon the masters.You don’t want send an invitation out to just
any tramp soul.Just like there are many
con artists and low life sociopaths here on the material plane, there are also
many disillusioned low energy beings on the astral plane.
Posted By: Mascodagama
Date Posted: March 24 2017 at 12:25
CosmicVibration wrote:
I would also advocate when asking for help or guidance from
the other side make sure you're summoning only upon the masters.You don’t want send an invitation out to just
any tramp soul.Just like there are many
con artists and low life sociopaths here on the material plane, there are also
many disillusioned low energy beings on the astral plane.
I say to you againe, doe not call up Any that you cannot put downe; by the Which I mean, Any that can in Turne call up somewhat against you, whereby your Powerfullest Devices may not be of use. Ask of the Lesser, lest the Greater shall not wish to answer, and shall commande more than you.
Posted By: CosmicVibration
Date Posted: March 24 2017 at 13:43
Mascodagama wrote:
CosmicVibration wrote:
I would also advocate when asking for help or guidance from
the other side make sure you're summoning only upon the masters.You don’t want send an invitation out to just
any tramp soul.Just like there are many
con artists and low life sociopaths here on the material plane, there are also
many disillusioned low energy beings on the astral plane.
I say to you againe, doe not call up Any that you cannot put downe; by the Which I mean, Any that can in Turne call up somewhat against you, whereby your Powerfullest Devices may not be of use. Ask of the Lesser, lest the Greater shall not wish to answer, and shall commande more than you.
Not
sure what you mean here.. Did you craft this or is it taken from some other
writer?Seems like it may be taken out
of context from something else.
In
any case, by masters I’m referring to self-realized masters that transcended delusion.Mastery of self as well as mastery of nature;
masters of reality.Such as Jesus the
Christ, any of the Buddha’s and many of the saints of all faiths.
Posted By: doompaul
Date Posted: March 24 2017 at 15:07
I enjoy reading about chaos magick but I don't put much stock in it.
Posted By: Icarium
Date Posted: March 24 2017 at 16:15
well this philosophy works neatly alongside the threesome of Rudolf Steiner, Carl Jung and Alistor Crowley.
-------------
Posted By: presdoug
Date Posted: March 24 2017 at 19:00
Crowley was a lowlife, end of story on that one; I steer clear of magic and the occult. The occult is a path that some take that later regret taking, I guess the road to hell is paved with good intention.
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: March 24 2017 at 19:40
hmmmmm
don't much about Magick... sounds like some per-pubecent thing you tend to grow out of... like Rush...
don't know much about Occultism.. sounds like some thing the overly intellectual but ultimately losers all the same get into... like Genesis
Esoterism... WTF is that... sounds like.. oh I don't know... pick any band from the RIO/Avant setion of PA's
I may not know anything about those.. but one I do know and love... Satanic women
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
Posted By: siLLy puPPy
Date Posted: March 24 2017 at 21:29
I loved Samantha on Bewitched. That nose twitching thing is so hot
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: March 24 2017 at 21:36
having spent 10 years married to a witch myself..... she could have used the sexy nose twitch... would have been much more sexy than having pinpoint accuracy in throwing pots and pans...
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
Posted By: Thatfabulousalien
Date Posted: March 24 2017 at 21:39
Are satanist goths generally very good in bed?
------------- Classical music isn't dead, it's more alive than it's ever been. It's just not on MTV.
https://www.soundcloud.com/user-322914325
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: March 24 2017 at 21:44
*spits beer on screen*
I have to plead the 5th on that question...
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
Posted By: Thatfabulousalien
Date Posted: March 25 2017 at 03:19
presdoug wrote:
Crowley was a lowlife, end of story on that one; I steer clear of magic and the occult. The occult is a path that some take that later regret taking, I guess the road to hell is paved with good intention.
I love Crowley, he was a really interesting man and a truly extraordinary writer/novelist/poet. The occult is still too stigmatized in pop culture fantasy witchcraft bull sh*t for the average person to understand at all what it is getting at, which is often far more positive than Christianity or regular Buddhism.
There are though, many/most branches of the occult that make me laugh my ass off. There is a point where fantasy role-playing goes too far
------------- Classical music isn't dead, it's more alive than it's ever been. It's just not on MTV.
https://www.soundcloud.com/user-322914325
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: March 25 2017 at 04:07
I really couldn't give a crap what it's called, having imaginary friends is something I regard with an extremely high degree of scepticism. All branches of the occult would make me laugh if they were harmless, but even the most benign are not without harm. And by that I see all religions and spiritual beliefs as "occult" in the modern definition of the word. Religion merely puts the cult into occult and that is where the real danger lies because everything that anyone calls "spiritual" manifests itself within the mind of the believer and nowhere else and the human mind is a fragile thing that is easily mislead.
------------- What?
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: March 25 2017 at 06:46
When I was about 14 I would hang out in grave yards dressed in black, then write poetry about it afterwards. I was a t**t. Does that count?
------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: March 25 2017 at 06:47
..oh, and me and a freind did hold a couple of seances, trying to contact Bon Scott. Never made contact though. He was sooo rude..
------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: March 25 2017 at 09:29
This thread having been created by the well-known Vompatti, I'm not sure it's intended for a serious discussion. But I could be wrong.
Anyway, I've always suspected everything esoteric/occultist as a vast "swindle", for I think most of esoterical doctrines are built on a mash-up of older religions/cults (especially the mysteries of Ancient cults such as the cults of Mithra, Dionysos, etc...), with some more personal (and weird) ideas from the creators of these doctrines. Reading some articles on Steiner, Blatvatsky and Crowley (not to talk about Julius Evola!) just fuel my skepticism about their theories.
On the other hand, I may have a small interest on Jewish occultism, such as the Zohar or the Kabbalah (QBL), but I'm too much atheist (and I'm goy) to really having the desire to study these matters.
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: March 25 2017 at 09:35
Blacksword wrote:
..oh, and me and a freind did hold a couple of seances, trying to contact Bon Scott. Never made contact though. He was sooo rude..
hah... poseurs..seances... that is why. Bon was nothing but complete hellion when he contacted me after a night of some magic mushrooms, and bottle of Cuervo Gold. In fact he was the one who told me that red dresses didn't match my skin tone and recommended I do black dresses. Best advice I think I ever got... thanks Bon!
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: March 25 2017 at 10:28
micky wrote:
Blacksword wrote:
..oh, and me and a freind did hold a couple of seances, trying to contact Bon Scott. Never made contact though. He was sooo rude..
hah... poseurs..seances... that is why. Bon was nothing but complete hellion when he contacted me after a night of some magic mushrooms, and bottle of Cuervo Gold. In fact he was the one who told me that red dresses didn't match my skin tone and recommended I do black dresses. Best advice I think I ever got... thanks Bon!
------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!
Posted By: presdoug
Date Posted: March 25 2017 at 11:11
Aleister Crowley had a predatory personality, and was known to swindle the fortunes from out of the hands of elderly rich women. He had a manipulative, and magnetic personality, and knew how to draw people into his world very easily.
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: March 25 2017 at 11:13
What do elderly women need money for?
Posted By: presdoug
Date Posted: March 25 2017 at 11:20
Good question, but still, it doesn't excuse Crowley.
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: March 25 2017 at 11:38
A lot of brilliant writers are not nice people.
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: March 25 2017 at 11:52
A lot of not nice people aren't brilliant writers. Crowley falls into that category
------------- What?
Posted By: Tom Ozric
Date Posted: March 25 2017 at 11:59
Deathspell Omega. 'nuff said ! Expect them to.........deliver
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: March 25 2017 at 12:09
He's a bad poet but his philosophical/theoretical writings are
generally fun to read. He has sort of the same trickster-like quality as
Castaneda or Gurdjieff, both of whom I unironically love in an erotic way.
Posted By: infocat
Date Posted: March 26 2017 at 12:07
------------- -- Frank Swarbrick Belief is not Truth.
Posted By: 2dogs
Date Posted: March 26 2017 at 23:55
I like the art in Crowley's Tarot deck although use it in conjunction with a couple of other non-Tarot decks I find easier to understand. They often come up with very interesting ideas but I don't let them override my own decision making. Crowley's deck and book are clearly based on a massive amount of study and knowledge but all that occult philosophical stuff is far too complicated for me, I'm more influenced by a couple of basic scientific truths the Buddha pointed out plus appreciation of the evolving creativity and variety of the universe.
------------- "There is nothing new except what has been forgotten" - Marie Antoinette
Posted By: Thatfabulousalien
Date Posted: March 27 2017 at 00:21
Crowley a bad writer? alright, you can come off your high horse
------------- Classical music isn't dead, it's more alive than it's ever been. It's just not on MTV.
https://www.soundcloud.com/user-322914325
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: March 27 2017 at 01:16
Thatfabulousalien wrote:
Crowley a bad writer? alright, you can come off your high horse
Admittedly it was Vomps that called Crowley a "Bad Poet" while I merely contradicted his implication that Crowley was "a brilliant writer" so technically neither Vomps nor I uttered the phrase "bad writer" so it's difficult to determine who of us needs to dismount from the towering nervous equine that currently bears us. For myself, I quite like it up here, I can see further. Like I can see that there is a world of difference between a bad writer and someone who is not a brilliant writer, a writer can be one or the other, or neither (or if you are William McGonagall, both). Of course understanding the subtleties and nuances of the English language is a prerequisite for anyone volunteering to make a literary assessment of the quality of a writer and their work.
------------- What?
Posted By: Thatfabulousalien
Date Posted: March 27 2017 at 02:19
^^
Well from my perspective, his writing is very evocative of images and emotions and highly intriguing.
From an academic perspective, I find it to be a very complex maze of clever interconnected references.
As I've initially stated and mentioned on multiple forums, I'm an atheist but I do see something very 'je ne sais quoi' in it, there is a large depth to his work but it also depends the context and perspective.
I for one think the whole tarot idea is laughable if taken literally, I don't do rituals. But Sex Magick is actually a powerful idea rooted in psychology and similar initial concepts can be found in other cultures.
But to get back to point, I think he is a brilliant writer and I find his work inspirational and very thought-provoking.
From a religious perspective, whatever is in question; I make my own path, my own philosophy defined by my own experiences. I agree about the "imaginary friend" analogy you mentioned earlier though, "religion" is incredibly bizarre when it comes to that
------------- Classical music isn't dead, it's more alive than it's ever been. It's just not on MTV.
https://www.soundcloud.com/user-322914325
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: March 27 2017 at 03:29
Isn't tarot rooted in psychology as well since it maps to the tree of life?
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: March 27 2017 at 09:36
I don't believe in good or bad or middle gods. But I love to have satanist symbols just to piss off Christians.
-------------
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: March 27 2017 at 10:00
Gods are a convenient way to represent certain aspects of the mind or the collective consciousness k
Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: March 27 2017 at 13:12
I don't know about the occult but this damn web site keeps rejecting my attempts at posting saying some stupid crap about security checks...?
------------- One does nothing yet nothing is left undone. Haquin
Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: March 27 2017 at 13:14
I remember reading a lot about the occult back in the late 70's and into the 80's....I recall Crowley material, Regardie, Gurdjieff, etc...and of course reading The Occult by Wilson... a great summary of the occult through the ages.
------------- One does nothing yet nothing is left undone. Haquin
Posted By: 2dogs
Date Posted: March 27 2017 at 23:11
Vompatti wrote:
Isn't tarot rooted in psychology as well since it maps to the tree of life?
Yes, Crowley included Hebrew letters on the cards to match them up and diagrams in The Book of Thoth. Using a limited number of cards to represent everything in the universe though does make for some very complex symbols as with using the twelve Zodiac signs to represent human personalities (these also match up with cards, as do the planets and elements).
------------- "There is nothing new except what has been forgotten" - Marie Antoinette
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: March 28 2017 at 07:26
Remove the pretension, self-delusion and all-out bollocks and all that remains is an orchestrated confidence trick of smoke and mirrors. In spite of everyone knowing the old adage that "there's a sucker born every minute" the enduring draw of any con is in the showmanship with which it is presented, of which being able to craft a well-written believable patter is merely a tool of the trade that preys on doubts and uncertainties of the subject. For even when the mark knows it is a scam the trick is to make them believe the suckers are the other guys, the ones who aren't as smart as them. No one is too smart to be conned. The scammers spiel is constructed to convince the target that they're not a sucker, that they are smarter than everyone else, including the trickster himself. So their self-belief is skillfully manipulated and their ego is bolstered and flattered into thinking they can beat the con, or at least not be suckered into it; the art of the confidence trick lays in word "confidence", the trickster draws the audience into their confidence while inflating the sense of self-confidence of those who gather round. Everyone knows they are selling snake-oil but what if the snake-oil is as good as they say it is?...
As a child in the 1960s I grew up in a seaside resort town on the east coast of England and in the summer holidays I would cycle down to the seafront to walk among the holiday-makers, watching them feed coins into the slot-machines in the penny arcades along the esplanade (while my hard-earned 2/- a week pocket money remained secure in my pocket) and listening to the calls of the roustabouts on the fairground rides that rang-out over the cacophony of pipe-organ music and blaring top-20 pop tunes blasting out from each pitch. But my favourite of all these attractions were the mock auctions, cornucopias of seemingly high-value goods offered at knock-down prices that drew crowds of people as the "auctioneer" barked out descending values of money for each item held aloft by his assistants until the sea of raised hands waving folded £1 and £5 notes in the air halted the "auction". Where upon those proffered notes would be plucked from willing hands in exchange for plain white boxes in opaque plastic carrier bags that contained perhaps not an exact duplicate of the item being sold, but its close approximation. Not then the prestigious goods sold in upmarket West End stores as promised, but the low quality knock-offs hawked in any street market. As an eight year old, this fascinated me for even at that age I could see this was a con so presumed that all those who waited patiently to snaffle the bargains the "auctioneer" was selling also saw through the subterfuge and knew that these were mock auctions. Yet still they waved their paper money in the air at the prescribed moment his litany of decreasing prices reached the selling price he always intended. I would stand and watch them for hours, then return on another day and watch the show all over again, because that is what it was, a show, carefully scripted and played; over time I noticed that some of the audience were there every day, yet their waved notes where never taken and goods were never exchanged for they too were actors in the show and the "auctioneer" was the star.
The writings of Ted Crowely and Howard Levey et al are the pitch of the fairground huckster, dressed up as philosophy and religion, and shrouded in believable truths and heavily disguised invention. Their words, like all snares, are a trap baited and primed, waiting to be sprung: seeded with tempting morsels that are rooted in truths and received wisdom; extrapolated to plausible half-truths that promise to reveal untold secrets and deeper, hidden truths once the bait is taken. Any dialog that promises something that cannot otherwise be attained is a scripted confidence trick written to ensnare the intended victim. Crowley and Levey were the stars of the show, but it was a show nevertheless, hence their adoption of stage-names to heighten the mystique of their crafty art and the carefully staged publicity photographs. This is the mechanism by which all religions and philosophies work, whether by benign [innocent] intent or malignant [dishonest] design, for even those exponents who proselytise those ideologies as honest belief that they hold to be true are using the same techniques and employing the same psychological hooks, even when they don't know they are or care not to admit it. Even those cut-back, pared-down fundamentalists who dispense with regal dress-me-up of staged ritual and gilded iconography are presenting an "off Broadway" production to engage the congregation...
Tarot reading is another play of this disguised confidence trickery, though differs from other forms of divination because anyone can learn to read the cards themselves. However the interpretation of the lay of the cards follows rules that have to be learnt and applied, and the reading itself bears all the hallmarks of a scripted show, with all the theatre and stage-props that would grace any Amdram production. The rules of the major arcana are the trick, not their interpretation, which is why Ted Crowely adapted those to his own design, bending them to suit his contrived philosophy. All forms of divination uses the technique of cold-reading, where the reader gleans information from the sitter that is used to enforce the belief that what will be revealed will be true. Newspaper horoscopes use a passive form of cold-reading that makes use of vague generalisations that the reader interprets as they will, those who believe will always find a modicum of truth in what they read because of this. Of course in tarot there is little need for cold-reading of the sitter if they interpret the cards themselves, and that's where the psychology comes into effect, tarot is not rooted in psychology but employs it in every turn of the cards and in the theatre of its staging.
------------- What?
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: March 28 2017 at 08:27
Nobody knew healthcare could be so complicated.
-------------
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: March 28 2017 at 08:39
^^ I WOULD reply is m@x would let me
Posted By: 2dogs
Date Posted: March 29 2017 at 00:57
People have always been very good at making up what they don't know, embellishing and extrapolating ideas, and money making deception, in all fields of life. Noticing meaningful coincidences has led me to just experiment for myself e.g. draw a Tarot card plus a card each from my two decks of fact cards then look at all three for common ideas i.e. which bit of the gobbledygook in the Tarot book is the relevant part of the message? I've actually had a lot more success with just the fact cards when doing reading exchanges with other people using various "oracle" decks on a Tarot forum - it's a great buzz when the reading works - but I'd like to have another go in the Tarot section for which I have to use a proper Tarot deck.
------------- "There is nothing new except what has been forgotten" - Marie Antoinette
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: March 29 2017 at 02:55
2dogs wrote:
People have always been very good at making up what they don't know, embellishing and extrapolating ideas, and money making deception, in all fields of life.
This is indeed correct, and that works because people have always been very good at convincing themselves that they can distinguish between what is real and what is deception, that their ideology is the one true ideology and their beliefs are the one true belief. This conviction is the result of connecting the dots between what they know (or believe) to be true and those extrapolated ideas that ought to be true as a consequence, and then drawing conclusions that only have a passing relationship to the original "truth" yet are taken to be (self-evident?) truths.
We can do this because we are very good at pattern recognition yet that can (and does) result in false-positives that in visual and audio pattern recognition psychologists term as pareidolia, and in general terms is known as apophenia. The ability to see apparent patterns in the random distribution of any single set of data points and/or draw false conclusions from the coincidence of two unrelated data-sets is the "downside" of being able to detect tigers hiding in tall grass.
2dogs wrote:
Noticing meaningful coincidences has led me to just experiment for myself e.g. draw a Tarot card plus a card each from my two decks of fact cards then look at all three for common ideas i.e. which bit of the gobbledygook in the Tarot book is the relevant part of the message? I've actually had a lot more success with just the fact cards when doing reading exchanges with other people using various "oracle" decks on a Tarot forum - it's a great buzz when the reading works - but I'd like to have another go in the Tarot section for which I have to use a proper Tarot deck.
I'm not completely sure I follow every word of what you've written because it doesn't follow any of the tarot reading methods I am familiar with, but I think I get the gist of it. There are trigger-phrases in your post like "meaningful coincidences", "look...for common ideas" and "when the reading works" that alert my scepticism here.
------------- What?
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: March 29 2017 at 03:27
The cards are universal enough so you pick one and apply it to any situation and it'll make you think of something you wouldn't have thought on your own. It's the same as picking a random passage from the Bible or a number of random words from a dictionary.
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: March 29 2017 at 03:32
...or just thinking for yourself.
------------- What?
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: March 29 2017 at 03:34
not really because you need the external stimulus k
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: March 29 2017 at 03:40
Vompatti wrote:
not really because you need the external stimulus k
Why? Isn't life an external stimulus?
However, using a tarot deck as a visual prop has nothing to do with magic, occultism or esotericism. It's not even divination or tapping into some mystical stream of subconsciousness.
------------- What?
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: March 29 2017 at 03:53
Dean wrote:
Vompatti wrote:
not really because you need the external stimulus k
Why? Isn't life an external stimulus?
However, using a tarot deck as a visual prop has nothing to do with magic, occultism or esotericism. It's not even divination or tapping into some mystical stream of subconsciousness.
Isn't it though? What would you consider divination?
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: March 29 2017 at 04:16
Vompatti wrote:
Dean wrote:
Vompatti wrote:
not really because you need the external stimulus k
Why? Isn't life an external stimulus?
However, using a tarot deck as a visual prop has nothing to do with magic, occultism or esotericism. It's not even divination or tapping into some mystical stream of subconsciousness.
Isn't it though? What would you consider divination?
I take divination to mean what it is defined as: "the art or practice that seeks to foresee or foretell future events or discover hidden knowledge usually by the interpretation of omens or by the aid of supernatural powers", and that is what tarot card reading purports to do. I would avoid confusing divination with intuition, though there are those who would see them as being one and the same, they're not.
------------- What?
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: March 29 2017 at 04:29
Dean wrote:
Vompatti wrote:
Dean wrote:
Vompatti wrote:
not really because you need the external stimulus k
Why? Isn't life an external stimulus?
However, using a tarot deck as a visual prop has nothing to do with magic, occultism or esotericism. It's not even divination or tapping into some mystical stream of subconsciousness.
Isn't it though? What would you consider divination?
I take divination to mean what it is defined as: "the art or practice that seeks to foresee or foretell future events or discover hidden knowledge usually by the interpretation of omens or by the aid of supernatural powers", and that is what tarot card reading purports to do. I would avoid confusing divination with intuition, though there are those who would see them as being one and the same, they're not.
In that case I've gotten the impression that most tarot readers today don't do divination. Instead of foretelling the future it would seem more common to intuitive suggest actions that would lead to the desired consequences.
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: March 29 2017 at 04:50
Vompatti wrote:
Dean wrote:
Vompatti wrote:
Dean wrote:
Vompatti wrote:
not really because you need the external stimulus k
Why? Isn't life an external stimulus?
However, using a tarot deck as a visual prop has nothing to do with magic, occultism or esotericism. It's not even divination or tapping into some mystical stream of subconsciousness.
Isn't it though? What would you consider divination?
I take divination to mean what it is defined as: "the art or practice that seeks to foresee or foretell future events or discover hidden knowledge usually by the interpretation of omens or by the aid of supernatural powers", and that is what tarot card reading purports to do. I would avoid confusing divination with intuition, though there are those who would see them as being one and the same, they're not.
In that case I've gotten the impression that most tarot readers today don't do divination. Instead of foretelling the future it would seem more common to intuitive suggest actions that would lead to the desired consequences.
I would regard that as window-dressing, same book/different cover or merely an affected euphemism because the definition I quoted also says "or discover hidden knowledge" which is the same thing as you are saying. I said to avoid confusing divination with intuition, and that's what "intuitive suggest actions" (sic) does, divination's secondary meaning is intuitive perception with the emphasis on perception, not intuition.
------------- What?
Posted By: 2dogs
Date Posted: March 30 2017 at 04:55
While discussing this with Mrs 2dogs in the car this morning the randomly playing iPod threw up Nektar's It's All In The Mind. Just whose side is the thing on?
------------- "There is nothing new except what has been forgotten" - Marie Antoinette
Posted By: 2dogs
Date Posted: March 30 2017 at 05:27
This discussion has certainly been very helpful to me. After reading about Olivier Messaien's early aptitude for music last week on Wikipedia I was feeling a bit let down that I didn't have any special skill like that, but this has helped me realise my major characteristic or ability is actually to absorb a little knowledge about a lot of things then use it to see patterns and meanings.
I've just gone on another forum to get the first post of my thread practicing with these cards as an example for you. I remembered two of the cards but I'd completely forgotten the message and now it seems uncannily relevant.
I got my new deck and book and have been pondering the first card for three days - the book is very different and goes into the meaning of ten symbols on each card so is really deep, and drawing a card from my two fact decks has added even more intriguingly relevant information, so this method of study could go on for a very long time. I'm keeping notes on my tablet -
7 of Disks: A book with 7 seals, cracking the code. Saturn in Taurus. Discovering one's unique point of view and mission in life, the personal meaning in things, karma, character through persistent and repeated study of riddles, long experience, one's origins, deeply ingrained characteristics and talents, but avoiding getting lost in the details. Finding oneself and happiness within one's achievements, leaving a legacy. Moondust p72: Gene Cernan, Apollo 17, travelled on Saturn V rocket to valley of Taurus-Littrow. Ingrained in dust which could clog and choke but is full of valuable information and beauty when examined microscopically. Mendelevium p231: Inventor of the Periodic Table, discovered the arrangement of the chemical elements according to groupings of observed characteristics. Very similar images of faces, even headset mirroring bald patch and long hair, and Cernan's red helmet ring matching the rings around the Saturn and Taurus faces. Both historically significant and achievements or footprints will last a very long time.
It's on a public page so here's the link for anyone suspicious I didn't actually post this a year ago - http://www.pagan-heart.net/forum/index.php?topic=3961.msg46904#msg46904
------------- "There is nothing new except what has been forgotten" - Marie Antoinette
Posted By: 2dogs
Date Posted: March 30 2017 at 05:31
Images for the above as I didn't want to lose the entire post....
------------- "There is nothing new except what has been forgotten" - Marie Antoinette
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: March 30 2017 at 06:06
2dogs wrote:
I got my new deck and book and have been pondering the first card for three days - the book is very different and goes into the meaning of ten symbols on each card so is really deep [--]
The Book of Thoth, you mean? DuQuette's Understanding Aleister Crowley's Thoth Tarot is a good supplement.
Posted By: 2dogs
Date Posted: March 30 2017 at 06:22
Oh no, I gave up with those. This one is the horribly mistranslated from German (and horribly mistitled) The Ultimate Guide To The Thoth Tarot - I don't believe in any set occult meanings for the cards .
------------- "There is nothing new except what has been forgotten" - Marie Antoinette
Posted By: 2dogs
Date Posted: March 30 2017 at 23:42
Well there may be set occult meanings but I don't use them or play by fixed rules, I'm more experimental.
As for predicting the future, on the Tarot forum it's generally not done and the focus is more on offering constructive advice on how to deal with situations and behaviours now so as to make the desired outcomes more likely, helping people understand and see things for themselves, not making them dependent on the readings.
------------- "There is nothing new except what has been forgotten" - Marie Antoinette
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: March 31 2017 at 02:01
2dogs wrote:
Well there may be set occult meanings but I don't use them or play by fixed rules, I'm more experimental.
As for predicting the future, on the Tarot forum it's generally not done and the focus is more on offering constructive advice on how to deal with situations and behaviours now so as to make the desired outcomes more likely, helping people understand and see things for themselves, not making them dependent on the readings.
As I said, (twice), divination is not just fortune telling and predicting the future. Using two metal rods or a forked hazel twig to search for water and other hidden material is divination and there is nothing in water divining (aka dowsing) about predicting the future. Feng shui is a form of divination that neither predicts the future nor answers posed questions. There are many other forms of divination that have nothing to do with direct fortune telling and some of those are only used to gain answers to posed questions. Even then, all forms of fortune telling (scrying, astrology, dream interpretation, etc.,) are used to make a desired outcome more likely, or an undesirable one less likely. You can dress it up however you like but tarot reading still divination. [note that Tarot cards themselves are merely pasteboard playing cards with pretty pictures on them, using a tarot deck for divination (cartomancy/tarotology) is a secondary, later application].
The word 'occult' comes from the Latin occultus (meaning "hidden, concealed, secret"), so it means "knowledge of the hidden", which is what any form of divination purports to reveal and is exactly what you and Vomps have described how tarot reading is used.
------------- What?
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: March 31 2017 at 06:35
So why is dowsing considered divination? Because the water is hidden or
because there's supposedly something mysterious about the mechanism used
to find it?
In theory, can't any "occult knowledge" be
discovered by scientific methods and vice versa? Blavatsky says the pre-Vedic Indians
knew the laws of quantum mechanics.
Posted By: 2dogs
Date Posted: March 31 2017 at 07:14
Dean wrote:
The word 'occult' comes from the Latin occultus (meaning "hidden, concealed, secret"), so it means "knowledge of the hidden", which is what any form of divination purports to reveal and is exactly what you and Vomps have described how tarot reading is used.
Yes I'm not disagreeing with you, this is what I find fun about doing it.
------------- "There is nothing new except what has been forgotten" - Marie Antoinette
Posted By: 2dogs
Date Posted: March 31 2017 at 07:20
Vompatti wrote:
In theory, can't any "occult knowledge" be
discovered by scientific methods and vice versa? Blavatsky says the pre-Vedic Indians
knew the laws of quantum mechanics.
Well Democritus thought matter could only be divided so far until you'd eventually come to indivisible bits i.e. atoms, whereas Buddha thought everything no matter how small would still have a front side as opposed to a rear side, but this is all ideas rather than evidence based science backed up with mathematics.
------------- "There is nothing new except what has been forgotten" - Marie Antoinette
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: April 01 2017 at 01:45
Vompatti wrote:
So why is dowsing considered divination? Because the water is hidden or
because there's supposedly something mysterious about the mechanism used
to find it?
Yes
Vompatti wrote:
In theory, can't any "occult knowledge" be
discovered by scientific methods and vice versa?
No
Vompatti wrote:
Blavatsky says the pre-Vedic Indians
knew the laws of quantum mechanics.
Helena Blavatsky? Died 1891
So, that's the glib answers out of the way. How much effort do I need to put into providing more considered answers? As some will note, in all my replies on subjects that confront head-on any alternative view of "science" I strive to be polite and respectful while presenting forceful arguments to why the proposed theories and ideas are perhaps not as correct as the person believes them to be. It's not always easy (being polite that is, refuting most of these ideas is trivial).
Before I start I want to go back to a word I've used twice already: extrapolation. The extrapolation of ideas is a useful tool for stepping beyond what we know but it has to be backed-up by evidence before that extrapolated idea can itself be used to extrapolate the next idea. Similarly, an extrapolation should not over-reach itself because small errors in the point of origin are dramatically magnified the further the extrapolation is from that point. This is exacerbated when one of the points used to extrapolate the new idea is totally wrong or completely unrelated. Take all these into consideration and you have the recipe for a slippery slope argument. The problem with much alternative thinking is that it extrapolates ideas from points that are themselves unproven extrapolations, the logic and reasoning that creates this new idea may appear sound but the root ideas are extrapolations built upon extrapolations built upon extrapolations (yep, it's turtles all the way down) and many of those extrapolations are created from two unconnected and unrelated ideas or pieces of information. Small errors rapidly become very large errors even though the baby-step reasoning that these ideas derive from appears logical and even perhaps rational. The other ingredient to the slippery slope is Interpolation, and that suffers all the same pitfalls as extrapolation. Interpolation is "connecting the dots", interpolated ideas are produced by identifying commonality in two separate points and drawing a line (conclusion) between them - Steve's tarot reading example on the previous page is an example of interpolation rather than the similar sounding 'interpretation' (but I've no inclination to critique his post beyond that).
Ignoring the observation that Helena Blavatsky died before anyone had formulated any of the laws of quantum mechanics, and being generous with the notion, the other thing to take into consideration is that pre-Vedic refers to bronze age and stone age cultures on the Indian subcontinent (we cannot regard "India" of that time as being a unified civilisation because it wasn't).
Vedic culture is named after the Vedas, which are written knowledge texts, so pre-Vedic essentially means "before written text" because (and here's the rub) there are no written texts from pre-Vedic times. This means we actually know very little about the cultures and civilisations that existed then, we have no examples of their writing and we don't even know the languages they spoke so we certainly don't know what they believed or what they knew. All we can do is extrapolate back from Vedic times and make guesses. The Vedic period is from 1500BCE to 500BCE though some claim the Vedas go back over 20,000 years even though there is no evidence to back this up. So basically the Vedic era is some 200 years after the Egyptians abandoned building pyramids (probably because they didn't work) and 500 years after the neolithic tribes of England abandoned placing huge stones in pretty circles (probably because they didn't work either) and the pre-Vedic is everything before then. Observation that the Vedas reveal what Vedic cultures knew (by our interpretation) has lead people to extrapolate the notion that the seeds of that knowledge must have come from pre-Vedic times.
Now, we all admire these ancient cultures because they appeared to be able to do stuff that we would find a challenge. Mostly because we have different skill-sets to them and aren't as adept in the skills they needed to survive yet we continue to apply our modern perspective on ancient vistas and make wildly extrapolated claims as a result. We are slowly eroding the conceit with which we once viewed these ancient cultures so no longer regard them as primitive (by our modern estimation) but some have extrapolated that reassessment further than necessary - they were as smart as us, and by the same virtue they were just as dumb as we have a perpetual habit to be.
Whoever came up with the idea that pre-Vedic "Indians" knew the laws of quantum mechanics (and I doubt that was Blavatsky), has interpolated a connection between an unproven extrapolated idea and an unrelated observation that evidently they didn't understand too well.
We all presume that ancient cultures were good at measuring stuff such as the passage of time because from the motion of the sun they knew what a day was, from the passage of the moon they knew what a month was and they had observed the seasons so knew what a year was. Observing that years were made up from months, and months were made up from days, they could deduce that days can be further subdivided (interpolation) and years could multiplied (extrapolation). However, they really struggled with concepts of time that were beyond the reach of a single human lifespan or human observation, the notion that Noah lived to the ripe old age of 950 or that the cycle of Bramha is 311 trillion years could be examples of that extrapolation creating huge errors in calculation that suggests these extrapolated estimates should not be taken literally. Similarly the subdivisions of time become increasingly harder for them to measure with any degree of accuracy the deeper these interpolations go such that they reach a point that they cannot physically measure even though the 'theory' of subdivision can visualise subdivisions that are far beyond that. For example a truti is an ancient Hindu time interval equal to 1/2,799,360,000,000th of a day (roughly 30.9ns) but it would be unwise to presume that the people who devised the truti could actually measure it.
So... seeing how these ancient cultures extrapolated and interpolated time (and the accuracy problems associated with that), it doesn't take a huge leap of the imagination to see that the same can be applied to measurement of volume. Observing that rock can be split from the earth and then be further divided and subdivided easily leads to the extrapolation that the universe is infinite and all matter can be interpolated into increasingly smaller parts, beyond what can be physically measured (and it's still turtles all the way down). This is not quantum mechanics.
------------- What?
Posted By: Thatfabulousalien
Date Posted: April 01 2017 at 02:42
Quoted directly from Crowley's Magick- Book four:
"Existence as we know it, is full of sorrow. To mention only one minor point: every man is a condemned criminal, only he does not know the date of his execution. This is unpleasant for every man. Consequently every man does everything possible to postpone the date, and would sacrifice anything that he has if he could reverse the sentence.
Practically all religions and all philosophies have started thus crudely, by promising their adherents some such reward as immortality.
No religion has failed hitherto by not promising enough; the present breaking up of all religions is due to the fact that people have asked to see the securities. Men have even renounced the important material advantages which a well-organized religion may confer upon a State, rather than acquiesce in fraud or falsehood, or even in any system which, if not proved guilty, is at least unable to demonstrate its innocence."
------------- Classical music isn't dead, it's more alive than it's ever been. It's just not on MTV.
https://www.soundcloud.com/user-322914325
Posted By: Tom Ozric
Date Posted: April 01 2017 at 04:33
Believing in satan, is just as messed-up as believing in this dweeb named God'. If there was such a thing, I'd have at least 23 kids by now !! No such thing...........
Posted By: 2dogs
Date Posted: April 01 2017 at 07:55
I certainly wouldn't attack genuine investigative science Dean. It's amazing just how much information is available in the physical universe - the composition, movement, temperature and rotation of stars shown by the lines in their spectra, the history of rocks recorded in their crystals, the ages of objects determinable from the proportions of isotopes resulting from radioactive decay, the details of evolution encoded in DNA - and science has enabled people to make sense of all this. Without denying such science though, I'm all for enhancing my life with any extra meaning I might come across, even though I don't have a clue as to the mechanism producing it - or indeed if it might be completely spurious, in which case I suppose I'm creating my own meaning.
------------- "There is nothing new except what has been forgotten" - Marie Antoinette
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: April 02 2017 at 02:39
2dogs wrote:
I certainly wouldn't attack genuine investigative science Dean. It's amazing just how much information is available in the physical universe - the composition, movement, temperature and rotation of stars shown by the lines in their spectra, the history of rocks recorded in their crystals, the ages of objects determinable from the proportions of isotopes resulting from radioactive decay, the details of evolution encoded in DNA - and science has enabled people to make sense of all this. Without denying such science though, I'm all for enhancing my life with any extra meaning I might come across, even though I don't have a clue as to the mechanism producing it - or indeed if it might be completely spurious, in which case I suppose I'm creating my own meaning.
Seeing patterns where no patterns exist (apophenia). That's all I warn against. How, why, where, when, what and who is of interest to me because enquiry has to be testable and that requires the mechanisms that produce the answers (meaning) have to be understood, traceable and most importantly, repeatable. That list of interrogatives are used to test the answer because if the mechanism that produced it cannot be explained then the answer cannot be explained. Arriving at the "right" answer without knowing how it was produced has no value because if you cannot explain or understand that then you have no way of knowing when the same rote produces "wrong" answers - a mechanism that is only right some of the time is useless.
Psychology terms that appear often in discussions such as this are confirmation bias, cognitive bias and selection bias (these are inter-related and not mutually exclusive) because these, together with many other logical biases and fallacies, result in skewing of the observation that the mechanism has produced a favourable (or desired) outcome. The problem therein is that while one side of the argument uses these psychological effects to show that the mechanism fails (whether it produces the "right" answer or not), the other side uses them to justify that it works (when it works).
My previous post (for all it's verbosity) only dealt with the quantisation of matter from which quantum mechanics gets its name. Seeing the laws of quantum mechanics, such as quantisation, superposition, entanglement, uncertainty, wave-particle duality etc., in ancient writings is an example of seeing patterns where no patterns exist using cognitive bias and selection bias to arrive at a fallacious conclusion.
------------- What?
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: April 02 2017 at 07:13
Suppose someone in the distant past had come with the laws of quantum
mechanics, on their own, by some occult method, for example by having a
vision in a meditation and then applying some laws of correspondences
and analogy etc. Suppose that this method of obtaining knowledge is as
reliable to them as the scientific method is to a scientist and they
invariably come up with facts that are hundreds or thousands of years
later confirmed by science. Wouldn't it be correct to say that they knew
the laws of quantum mechanics?
Also, doesn't it seem that
science is currently moving towards territories that in the past would
have been considered occult?
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: April 02 2017 at 23:53
Vompatti wrote:
Suppose someone in the distant past had come with the laws of quantum
mechanics, on their own, by some occult method, for example by having a
vision in a meditation and then applying some laws of correspondences
and analogy etc. Suppose that this method of obtaining knowledge is as
reliable to them as the scientific method is to a scientist and they
invariably come up with facts that are hundreds or thousands of years
later confirmed by science. Wouldn't it be correct to say that they knew
the laws of quantum mechanics?
Presenting a circular argument such as this doesn't do much for me I'm afraid (what you've done here is an example of begging the question).
If they had written the complete works of Shakespeare then we could also say they knew the works of Shakespeare and if they had invented jet airliners some of them would have holidayed in Australia. The problem there is if they had just one word wrong in only one of the 37 plays and 154 sonnets then they wouldn't be the complete works of Shakespeare, and one equation wrong in the occult divination of how to be Frank Whittle, Boeing and Qantus, and those airline passenger's bodies would be scattered over the slopes of the nearest hillside rather than catching a few rays on Bondi beach.
One tiny error in just one of their equations governing quantum mechanics and their entire knowledge of quantum mechanics would be false, so it would have no value or application. Furthermore, because those equations were not derived by mathematical/scientific methods then they would have no way of identifying where the error was, why it occurred or how to fix it.
Science is not about the end result - in fact the end result is for all practical purposes irrelevant, the mechanism of how that result is computed is more important than the solution because we use the mechanism to test the veracity of the answer - and you cannot do that by some occult method. Knowing the laws of quantum mechanics without understanding how they were derived renders them useless.
Now, we can actually estimate the probability of coming up with the laws of quantum mechanics by occult means because experimental observation of occult methods has repeatedly shown that they have very similar statistical probabilities to random chance. This does not mean that they are random chance btw, but I'll not dwell on that - the observations merely show they are not dissimilar. Therefore divining the laws of quantum mechanics by occult means can be simulated by randomly pulling letters out of a Scrabble™ bag for example.
So in the Scrabble™ realm of infinite possibilities where all things are possible by occult means, then there would be a single set of occult-divined laws of quantum mechanics that were identical to our own in every way, and there would be infinite sets of quantum mechanics laws that differed by some detail (small or large) that we would say are 'broken' if only we knew how to recognise law-sets that didn't work from those that did (but as we generated these by the occult we have know way of knowing which is which). And for good measure there would be an even larger infinite number of sets of laws that were not related to quantum mechanics at all, and because this is being simulated by random chance, there would also be the complete works of William Shakespeare and of every other author that ever lived, including that of whoever wrote the route timetable for the No.65 bus that runs between Guildford and Winchester. However even in a realm of infinite possibilities each text takes a finite length of time to formulate and you only have a finite number of occult practitioners to come up with them, so the infinite sets of laws and texts cannot be in existence simultaneously so it would take an infinite length of time to come up with all of them. This means that the probability of deducing the correct set of laws of quantum mechanics by occult means on the first attempt is 1/infinity, which isn't zero but it's close enough. Obviously the more time we allow for this the better our chances become, but as you have set a finite bound on this (in the distant past would equate to 20,000 years tops) which is statistically a small number so our probability remains best buddies with the number zero.
Vompatti wrote:
Also, doesn't it seem that
science is currently moving towards territories that in the past would
have been considered occult?
No.
------------- What?
Posted By: A Person
Date Posted: April 03 2017 at 09:18
Personally I find something dubious about taking random bits of Eastern culture from thousands of years ago and interpreting it through the lens of modern western science.