[Opinion] 'Process' vs 'Outcome' magicians

[pixel_fortune]

I read this comment on Reddit a while back that I keep returning to and I think it's really relevant to a lot of the mutual bafflement I sometimes see between magicians on this forum:

"In knitting, we talk about "product knitters" and "process knitters." Product knitters knit because they want the finished item to wear or use. Process knitters knit because they simply enjoy the process of knitting, and may not even care about the finished item. I suppose you could call me a process witch."

That's not the same as thaumaturgy vs theurgy - you can be a process-oriented thaumaturgist or an outcome-oriented theurgist. (I changed 'product' to 'outcome' because we don't really make 'products').

That is absolutely true of many knitters; they love knitting but are like "WTF am I going to do with all these scarves?" If you have gardener friends, you will know that every time you visit they are like "FOR THE LOVE OF GOD TAKE SOME LEMONS HOME WITH YOU" or bakers trying to offload cupcakes. Some motorbike riders just find it an efficient inner-city mode of transport; many love riding and go places they don't care about just for an excuse to ride.

And so eg in this thread, @Vandheer asked @Promise re: Gallery of Magick

I mean if the simple works perfect why would you go for something more complex?

That's an outcome-oriented question. It makes perfect sense if you only care about the outcome - why not do the simplest, quickest magic that gets you there?

But if you enjoy magical ritual for the sake of it, and enjoy learning new techniques, then, assuming there's no pressing emergencies, you will abandon a method that's working to try something new. As a process-oriented magician, sticking with GoM seems really boring to me, whether it works or not.

Similarly we've had threads about using tools. People say "I don't need them" - and that makes sense from an outcome-oriented perspective. Why buy and maintain something you need? But for people who enjoy the process, why would they strip it down to the most minimal elements possible? To me, that attitude to tools is sort of like saying "I don't understand why people go on rollercoasters. It's much quicker to walk."

I'M NOT TRYING TO SAY ONE IS BETTER THAN THE OTHER.

Just trying to help people understand each other, and why another magician's approach might not make sense to you.

And of course it's a spectrum. I'm process-oriented but I wouldn't stick with an interesting method that had no effect, and I'm sure outcome-oriented magicians still have processes they prefer over others, even if they're a little more complex.

Post automatically merged: May 2, 2024

This relates to, but is not the same as, attitudes to spirit relationships: Do you just want the work done, or do you enjoy building a web of relationships?

But within that you can be an outcome magician who wants the simplest possible ritual to summon a spirit, and a process-oriented one who already has a method that works, but goes searching through obscure grimoires for the fun of trying something different.

 

[Xenophon]

"Process is the shibboleth of those who despair of getting acceptable results."---Ernest DeSchoening.

Like usual, Ernie is rather too oracular certain. Still the man has a point. One never heard of "the Middle East peace process" until everyone realized that the conundrum there was fundamentally insoluable. By the same token, magickal process sans results robs me of seeing whether I'm rite-ing away aright. It's like playing music: I need feedback from qualified ears (and palms put together.) Results tell me how my riffs were received in the Aethyrs.

 

[Taudefindi]

I gotta say that that Reddit post and this thread have an interesting argument.

I think there isn't a reason to not think that one person can't do both and use what they learned from each to make something that may even become a middle ground of sorts.Experimenting not only to see what works, but also to see what helps you in any way(be it direct or indirectly).

As someone dealing with magic I tend to focus more on the outcome since I have little time(usually) to do the grander and more time-consuming stuff, but as an actor my focus is more on experimenting techniques so I become more process-oriented.That's to say, I can see the qualities and downsides of each.

Similarly we've had threads about using tools. People say "I don't need them"

I think tools are something that to some may be necessary(for example, to help focus on a ritual), to others it may even hinder them, I don't see it much as an outcome vs. process discussion as it may even be something one feels like they need at first, but later in their practices they might figure out that they don't need to still rely on it.

Although in the case of many I would say that the reason why they don't use tools it's because most tools tend to have a certain cost attached to them, and if you're not good at crafting your own tools then you will spend a lot of money at them.

I feel like I may be a bit disconnected from reality here right now, so excuse me if what I wrote seems like non-sense.In my head it may be one thing but writing may come out as something else.

 

[pixel_fortune]

"Process is the shibboleth of those who despair of getting acceptable results."---Ernest DeSchoening.

Like usual, Ernie is rather too oracular certain. Still the man has a point. One never heard of "the Middle East peace process" until everyone realized that the conundrum there was fundamentally insoluable. By the same token, magickal process sans results robs me of seeing whether I'm rite-ing away aright. It's like playing music: I need feedback from qualified ears (and palms put together.) Results tell me how my riffs were received in the Aethyrs.

Theoretically I can see what you're saying, but when I look at real-world hobbyists, it doesn't bear out.

It's self-evidentially true that there are baking hobbyists who make more extremely delicious cupcakes than they can eat (and are therefore constantly trying to push them onto visitors). I've tasted them: the cupcakes are good, the baker has skill.

And it's a spectrum not a binary: process-oriented magicians care about results, they are just willing to abandon a working system to experiment with different things. An outcome-oriented magician probably still has processes they like and don't like. Eg someone might get accurate results with both tarot and i ching, but just prefer the tone of the i ching and the process of sorting the yarrow stalks.

 

[Xenophon]

Theoretically I can see what you're saying, but when I look at real-world hobbyists, it doesn't bear out.

It's self-evidentially true that there are baking hobbyists who make more extremely delicious cupcakes than they can eat (and are therefore constantly trying to push them onto visitors). I've tasted them: the cupcakes are good, the baker has skill.

And it's a spectrum not a binary: process-oriented magicians care about results, they are just willing to abandon a working system to experiment with different things. An outcome-oriented magician probably still has processes they like and don't like. Eg someone might get accurate results with both tarot and i ching, but just prefer the tone of the i ching and the process of sorting the yarrow stalks.

Actually, is there any hard and fast line between process and results types? I can see maybe a spectrum. The one type loves to cook (and maybe does so even when no one's hungry---I have a neighbor who does that and passes out stuffed dumplings without warning.) The other might think cooking a damned nuisance, but is capable of high-quality results all the same. So yeah. The distinction highlights that which is worth highlighting.

Anyhow, I think I see your point. Some folks get into magick as an activity. Others could write the "I Hate Grimoires Grimoire."

 

[Vandheer]

And so eg in this thread, @Vandheer asked @Promise re: Gallery of Magick

Oooooohhh am I being called out??

Just to expand on the quote, I had a draft that went about how some people look down upon GOM because they made everything so simple, then I have noticed the tendency to put an anti-thesis or an antagonist to my sentences so decided not to. It was meant for an encouragement, in the sense "don't feel ashamed of practicing GOM".

Good thread though, I am just kidding with the calling-out thing.

By the same token, magickal process sans results robs me of seeing whether I'm rite-ing away aright.

I listen to my intiution there, do we have any measure stick? Admittedly, it would be funny if one could channel Mathers' spririt unto the ritual area and then ask him to rate my LBRP performance.

 

[pixel_fortune]

Oooooohhh am I being called out??

Haha no, it's not a criticism! Please re-read my ALL-CAPS DISCLAIMER which I knew, even while writing it, would not be enough.