The Science Of Magick Options

Can science explain magick? Can magick explain science? Or are they entirely independent ideas without any overlapping domain? Is only one real?

Ill try to answer my own question. But i would really like to hear everyone else's answer. Ill start with the easier question and move up from there. Can magick explain science? yes. When boiled down to the essentials magick is nothing more then the execution of will into a material manifestation. Sometimes this involves spirits or angels, but even in those situations some will is trying to be satisfied. You don't always need to be aware of magick in order to perform magick. A child wishing with all his/her heart for snow the next day to get off from school is practicing a simple form of chaos magick. The scientist toiling in his workshop all night trying to come up with proof that his theory works is also performing magick. A mage can conclude that all the big breakthroughs in science aren't a result of the scientific method. The scientist just willed it strong enough to make it a reality. Sometimes these breakthroughs are caused by a group of people wishing for one outcome or another. One might say the current state of science is manifested by our desires and direction.

But now for the harder question. Can science define magick and how can it if magick defines science. Well simply put science can define magick, but that in no way negates my previous statement. Chaos theory and quantum mechanics provide a good explanation of the mechanics of magick. In quantum mechanics a particle can move seemingly without an external force being applied to it. The elementary particles behave very differently then in newtonian physics. A particle completly at rest and with no external influence can leap forward suddently. A particle shot out of a gun can suddently change direction and speed without influence. Science has yet to show any mechanism acting on these particles to explain their sudden unprovoked changes. However studies using radioactive decay powered random generators show that when a person or child exerts their mental will ont hese generators we can cause them to slightly change and output the numbers the person wills them to generate. This bascially shows that these random movements of elementary particles are effected by mental will. This is where chaos theory comes into play. In chaotic system (like quantum mechanics) any small change in an earlier state can result in very large changes in future states. Another words moving a few particles around now may cause you to be a millionair in a week. Since we determined this small changes can be executed by will it would seem to be a solid explanation of magick from a scientific stand point. Although i admit there are still plenty of questions that could be answered on the matter.

So it works both ways. Magick defines science, science defines magick. It might seem contradictory, or a circular argument. You'd be right from a conventional sense. but opposites are in fact more similar then different, i would even go as far to say they are the same thing. from a thelema point of view one would say "0=2". So really i see no contradiction, just points of view. Its all reality, none of it is real, well, to be more accurate, it is only as real as you let it be.

---------------
~~~http://www.cubicpath.org/bb - A wiki and forum for Magick, Occult, and Philosophy.~~~

I read somewhere that occult now is science in 200 years time.



and its really seems true when you think of telepathy and telekinisis stuff etc. i would say more than 200 years.



mystick

It is misleading to ask when "science" will understand magic, since no such body exists. We can, however, approach magic in a scientific manner. My thoughts on this subject are explained in greater detail in the Skeptics and in the Students section of truthaboutmagic.com.

1. Current scientific investigations into magic involve little more than chance-gueessing games and other forms of "testing" that bear no resemblance to actual occult methods or goals. Aside from some credulous few who continue to believe in asinine "telekinesis" videos and other modern table-tippings, the vast majority of us ought to be well aware that you can't make pencils roll about by thinking hard at them... so why do "scientists" continue to run such tests?

2. Any magician can, by defining experimental procedures, make a scientific study of any occult work. If we have the grimoire, we can test it, and see whether or not it actually works. If it says you need fourteen virgin sheep, a black treasure-troll, and a lock of hair from an 80-year old Hippie, you get those things and follow the instructions to see what happens. If scientists aren't willing to follow experimental procedures and actually do the spells and ceremonies the way magicians say they're to be done, then they don't deserve credit as scientists.

3. When evaluating success, try to ascertain whether or not you actually had something remarkable occur. Magic ought to produce wonders, not just convenient coincidences. If you have a technique that appears to work, use it and find out how well it works. Don't be afraid to break your wand using it, and if nothing happens don't concoct some dramatic incident to explain how something else happened instead. just admit that it was a useless technique and move on to something else that does work. We can't look like kooks or no one will ever give us the billions in funding we will demand once we actually can do something impressive.

The bottom line is that scientists need to study and test REAL occultism, and that magicians need to use REAL scientific testing to make sure they aren't full of crap.

This post has been edited by Imperial Arts: Feb 18 2007, 10:28 PM