To: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick
From: tyagI@houseofkaos.Abyss.coM (tyagi mordred nagasiva)
Subject: Re: Insane Proposition
Date: Kali Yuga 49941012 
Quoting:  |> others
          |gilliam@rudkin.fccc.edu (Jon Charles Gilliam) 

|>We have such principles.  They are taught (in various guises) by Gurus,
|>Priests, Therapists, 12-step counselors, motivational seminars,
|>diet programs, lecturers on esoteric topics, and kindergarden teachers.  
|>Like Newton's laws of motion, these principles enable us to manipulate 
|>concepts which were here-to-fore to ill-formed to permit productive use.

Sure, but neither Newton's nor Magick's principles are absolute.  They
require a certain context in which to be found true.  Magick's context 
appears to be that which concretizes into personality: time, culture, 
class, etc.


|>Where they differ from Newton's laws is in the difficulty of defining
|>metrics for the problem space and the complexity of the phenomena
|>that are being described.  These result in much vaguer statements with
|>much weaker predictive power.  None-the-less, merely having a taxonomy
|>for discussing the issues is a considerable aid to progress.

I still say that the object of Magick as science isn't 'prediction'.
It is ENJOYMENT or, perhaps, TRANSFORMATION.


|   Here's the rub, I think.  In Science, 'progress' is something that
|groups can come to a consensus about, and can work together to accomplish.

The Church of any religion can bring about a 'consensus'.  All it has to
do is restrict the available resources from those activities which might
lead to a lack of 'progress'.

'Progress' is no more clearly defined within modern Science than it is
in modern Magick.  The difference is that modern Science is simply more
widely accepted, along with its (unproven) axioms and (ultimately 
relative) value scheme.


|   The question is, can groups of magicians come to a consensus about
|what 'progress' is so that they can work together without losing the
|arational, deeper essence behind their rhetoric?  

This is why I say that the standards of 'progress' differ between
Magick and at least modern Science.  Groups of magicians can surely
come to consensus on the value of their rites.  This is what makes
'covens' or 'orders' coalesce: consistent value in combined workings.


|Or does this sort of cabal naturally lead into organized religion?

Of course it does.  Magick which becomes institutionalized IS organized
religion.

tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com
tyagi nagasiva