Inspired by my reading of the book, Ishmael, by Daniel Quinn
How do we know myths, stories, magic, etc. are not real? Assuming what we know scientifically is true, how does this negate myth, legend, etc? Why are dinosaurs not simultaneously animals and also monsters when they fit what we would have called monsters? Why are overriding social systems not tantamount to a spirit or God when they control our actions and shape our life histories even if they don't act consciously? Are they not what we'd call an egregor, i.e., a presence brought into existence by the actions and beliefs of a large number of people? Is our Sun not a God when it is responsible for all life on Earth? Is the biosphere not some sort of Earth spirit when it encompasses all living things yet influences each individually and can be destroyed through harming the Natural (non-human) World. Are spirits not the electrical currents moving through your brain? Do we not tell history as a story?
In the beginning there was nothing but the One, then the One expanded into the Everything, as the Everything continued to expand soon the beating hearts of the Everything, the Stars began to form from the energy of the Beginning, the stars coalesced into huge interstellar communities, galaxies; in the nuclear core of the stars more building elements were created, and from the stars came the planets; in the deep seas of one planet around one star life formed out of the energy of the planet's iron core, over the course of billions of years life arose in complexity in a way matching the Everything until finally from Life emerged the Someone, a complex arrangement of the Everything capable of consciously perceiving itself.
Why isn't our understanding of the Universe, even being scientifically true, a myth? Myths were once truths, after all.
Maybe you misunderstand
To the Ancients nuclear weapons would be godlike power
To the ancients most of our technology is magic
What truly separates magic from science beyond understanding?
What makes our understanding of reality not mythical in its own right? If gryfins were proven to exist would they stop being magical and mythical? Do we define magic as specifically that which is not real? That would be a redefining of magic then, would it not?
Myths are true in that they are describing historical and other events that likely occurred in some way or the other just with a large amount of metaphor and meaning either instilled into the story or attributed to it.
Magic in the transcendental / Occultic / Ceremonial sense is very real and has existed since at least antiquity the same cant really be said about what would be considered dark magic and so on (Uh I’m gonna carve a sigil to make myself rich! Uhh I’m gonna listen to Succubus ASMR and cum on this envelope to make one visit me! Etc)
But if you actually subscribe a metaphysical understanding of magic like the one described by peter caroll then not only does that legitimise shit like that but also gives legitimacy to the mysticism of the various sects of ceremonial magic
everything that's false contains an element of truth.
My argument is that science is more or less 100% correct and angels, God, etc. do not exist, however, magic does exist and is synonymous with science and the scientific understanding of reality.
Stories of magic and Myth are usually based in real events its just Chinese whispers on top of the fact that nature, and humans, are actually capable of some crazy things, particularly if you discover something before other people, this would look like magic and in some ways, it is
That’s consistent with some traditions that coined themselves as magical. Crowley for instance openly said that he didn’t actually believe in any of the gods he said were “talking through him” and so on actually existed. He said that they were basically just a way for him to mystify his personal philosophies and ideas about psychology and human society so on.
This is what conspiracy threads do to the board, attract this kind of people
From a certain point of view
They ARE fully parts of reality, but only by virtue of their effects on human thought, language and behavior. All myths and stories function of analogies of certain thought-formulas or series thereof. They illustrate specific narratives that can be safely regarded as contingent parts of reality that correspond to the social-material relations that they promote. Furthermore, a human only develops the capacity for full reason after having explored a myriad of fantasies as a child. Reality is approached first through fantasy. Only after that can fantasies be set aside by reason, unless of course one is severely escapistic or psychotic. As adults we learn to distinguish which of our fictions correspond to which things in reality as they exist in conjunction. That's how we come up with more engaging narratives.
Is it possible that you forgot to take your meds this morning?
Perhaps, perhaps not.
All that there was, is and ever will be, is a product of natural phenomena. To ascribe supernatural phenomena upon these natural actions is pure foolishness. This is just another "woah dude, toilet is like a nether portal to hell brah" type discussion that has no value.
There is no difference between the natural and the supernatural
What separates the Sun from an unconscious creator god?
This is what happens when you don't read Marx
And this is what happens when you read Marx poorly. Reread the chapter on commodity fetishism. Magic is materialistic and structural, it has no need for idealism.
Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.
Herein lies the peace of God.”
Perhaps, perhaps not
>>2185>Stories of magic and Myth are usually based
God fragmented itself into numerous pieces so it could be able to die. We are what's left in the process of this decaying God.
>>2179>this graph is totally right lol
The magic was in us all along.
>Ishmael, by Daniel Quinn
literal reactionary drivel
all miracles confirmed by the bible and by the church are true instances of "magic"
jesus says that you cannot put god to the test, no wonder experiments dont turn anything up
based - doing tricks on demand is dehumanizing for people, let alone a deity.
It's the same problem I have with witchcraft zoomers, many of whom acknowledge that spirits and magic don't actually exist when pressed; what purpose does it serve? If I say that Capitalism is a spirit that guides the decisions of the bourgeoisie, how resources are distributed, etc. what does that actually do? It makes for a simple metaphor, sure, but to go beyond that, to try and treat it as a metaphysical force anthropomorphizes it, shifting blame from the owners of capital to an abstract concept that may or may not have intention behind it.
>>10119>witchcraft zoomers, many of whom acknowledge that spirits and magic don't actually exist
Grifters aren't relevant. There are things that defy logical or scientific explanation at times and there are things that are plausible by scientific and mathematical reason, yet do not exist to our awareness.
>If I say that Capitalism is a spirit
No, you're rationalizing it. The "spectre" of communism is a metaphor, it is not meant to be literal. This is not what is being referred to in this thread.
Unique IPs: 7