/edu/ - Education

No

>>2179
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.

>>2182
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

>>2184
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

>>2183
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?

>>2236
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.

>>2266
Go back to your chamber logician, you have no power here ya unimaginative killjoy.

>>2266
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

>>2273
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.”

>>2178
Perhaps, perhaps not

>>2185
>Stories of magic and Myth are usually based
-Sage (2020)

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
ok igno

>>2178
The magic was in us all along.

>>4184
He's right

related: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_House_of_the_Spirits

>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

>>10108
>this
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.

>>4228
And humanity decays with it.

If you delve into the occult you find out that so many of these mythical symbols are actually related literally to the natural world. Whenever you see a group of 7 people, or gods or whatever, that refers to the "7 planets" observed as the "wandering stars" of antiquity. Whenever you see groups of 12, such as the 12 tribes or the 12 olympic gods that refers to the 12 signs of the zodiac that divides the (night) sky.
Lucifer is a good example, whose name literally means "light bringer", and refers directly to the planet venus, "the morningstar", the same name given to jesus in revelation. Venus is the "star of the morn" because it is the last planet visible as the sun rises, and so was seen as the one to bring out the sun.
Jesus also is given much solar symbolism, with his 12 disciples.
Much of the myth and religion of all the world is in fact based on these systems of symbolising the stars. Its called "astrotheology" today.

>>2178
>Myths were once truths, after all.
nope
>>2182
>Myths are true in that they are describing historical and other events that likely occurred in some way or the other
nope
>>2185
>Stories of magic and Myth are usually based in real events
no sage, you're wrong as always

Now I ain't no folklorist but I happen to know that there is a term for this phenomenon: euhemerism. It's a usually fallacious attempt to discern actual history from myths and legends, and this actually goes all the way back to the classical times. Now there seem to be some intricacies to this, such as prominent leaders occasionally being actually deified which would lend credence to the idea that all gods and myths stem from real people and happenings. They don't.

Now I you allow me to armchair a bit, I think this may be related to the contemporary (or perhaps perennial?) idea that somehow every story or lie or whatever must have a kernel of truth in it - after all, no smoke without fire! Completely wrong and a good way to start revving up reactionary populism. After all, all those terrible things people say about [outgroup] must come from somewhere, right?

>>2219
probably right on the money

>>4229
kindly show me a single incident of supernatural powers confirmed by experiment

Reposting from /siberia/. I don't agree with it wholly but it's an interesting post nontheless
A 'god' does not need to exist or be believed in:
- To be pondered: you have an idea of what a god is.
- To have spread that very idea.
- For one to engage with the question of weather or not it could and/or does exist, or that it couldn't and/or not or doesn't exist. These being the same concept with a different value assigned to it.
- To have pondered the concept of 'belief': you have an idea of what belief is
- To do the previous but in terms of belief
- To occupy in part or in full a train of thought. This doesn't need to be your primary train of thought.
- To be associated with other concepts.
- To, in doing the previous, influence how those that do engage with the previous may engage with a subject, not necessarily with the consent of any involved party.
- To do the previous without other parties knowing that one party contributed to a discussion or done something whilst under this influence.
- To have material interests as an active participant as thus established.
- The aforementioned concepts with values assigned to them do not need specific values assigned to them. A 'god' shaped hole would possibly be even more of a threat, since it would no longer bound by the rules that would apply to it if those values were 'true.'
- To have in it's aforementioned material interests the elevation of it's influence regardless what form it would have after as long as the previous stands.

The only "god question" you should be engaging with is how account for this in your threat model, and how to ward off such a threat. I don't know what that would entail though. Best I've managed so far is covering the personal front with a spiritual framework that governs it without affording it an office, but that is purely personal belief, no praxis.

It is distinct from Pascal's Wager / Roko's Basilisk because at no point does it enter or discuss the literal metaphysical/superphysical governing entity of the material domain. Think more like The Javascript Trap but for a cognitovirus.

>>2306
>commodity fetishism is magic
<reading marx poorly

Anon you realize that marx does not mean "fetishism" in a manner that is complementary

He's literally calling it a form of misrecognition

ITT people who are bad at critical thinking attempt to justify irrational beliefs with half-assed epistemological relativism and not enough people smack them down

>>2179
Nothing is supernatural. I hate those terms like metaphysics.

>>20545
>>20546
U Mad lol

"supernatural" is a silly concept, it might as well be synonymous with "fiction"

We don't actually understand the universe that well though and there's still a lot of fundamental physics to figure out. If by "supernatural" you mean "defies our current understanding of physics," then the James Webb telescope keeps finding things that fit that definition. But I guess galaxies having structures that don't make sense to us (yet) isn't as fascinating as laser swords and telekinesis.