[Official] Invitation to Witchcraft Psychological Study

[FindingTruth]

"...a powerfull identity"
puuh, I also eat, shit and piss but i don't identify as eater, shitter or pisser.

Whats "positive psychology"?
This post reeks of some kind of phishing and i'd never click th

Lol, I mean, if the demographic they
Are trying to bring to light in a study is those who do call themselves a witch, which means all practices of witchcraft, then it was on point for her study. People who do studies arent usually being thoughtless about their choice of words, quite the opposite. It just means that grouping of data will be "witches". If you were going to do a study on the reflection probability of clouds on lakes you wouldn't be expecting backlash because it excluded the probability of stars reflecting on the lakes in the same study, we'd all understand that the study is for the reflection of clouds.

But it does attract maybe a new data set
Hehe.

as my previous comment illustrated, there are those who were practitioners (females) who are practitioners but did not call themselves "witch" as it was an accusation.

My assumption is that the target demographics is the people who identify with the term "witch". In my experience "witch" in the modern English-speaking word is primarily a neopagan/wiccan-adjacent spiritual/religious identity, and not everyone who identifies as a witch practices witchcraft or any other form of magic (although there is a very significat overlap of course). I guess you could call it a sub-culture.

Also not to attack anyone personally or go on AI witch-hunts (lol) but

While Jane Hornet is known as the last person to be executed for witchcraft in the United Kingdom, I couldn't find any evidence of this book ever existing.

This book appears to only exist on Amazon, edited by one Anthony Harris who is apparently also known for occult-themed and fetish-themed coloring books. I am more than sure this book is fake as well.

1. Address the Logical Fallacy (Ad Hominem & Genetic Fallacy)​

The core of your argument is:

which is a genetic fallacy (judging the merit of a work based solely on its origin or who is associated with it) mixed with an ad hominem attack on the editor's credentials. An editor’s eclectic résumé or background in niche art genres does not automatically invalidate a historical reprint. Independent publishers and niche enthusiasts frequently pick up out-of-print, obscure, or public-domain historical manuscripts that large academic publishers ignore. The editor’s background might explain why they found the subject matter interesting enough to publish, but it is not proof that the text itself is a fabrication.

2. the Lack of Empirical Evidence​

your assumption based on who is editing it and feels "more than sure" it is fake, but feelings are not evidence. Belief is not proof. To declare a text "fake," you needs to provide textual or historical analysis. Have you cross-referenced the text with known historical archives? Have you identified specific anachronisms in the language, or traced the book's contents to a known modern hoax? Dismissing a book's historical validity simply because an Amazon link (which if you have please provide) is elusive or because the publisher is indie is lazy skepticism.

3. Exposing the "Amazon-Only" Misconception​

you claim the book "appears to only exist on Amazon," implying that makes it inherently fraudulent. In the modern era of Print-On-Demand (POD), hundreds of thousands of genuine, obscure historical documents, local court transcripts, and forgotten regional history texts are digitized and sold exclusively via Amazon KDP (Kindle Direct Publishing) or similar platforms. Lacking a traditional distribution deal with major brick-and-mortar bookstores does not mean a text is a hoax; it just means it is a print-on-demand niche title. Furthermore, TOR (the dark web) has

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

/db/ (your personal key), (there are to be no spaces within that link) in which has a massive volumen of informaiton, transcripts, etc on the occult. As how-to manuals on human sacrafice, rituals involving beasts (both real and lore) and child sacrafice are illegal to publish in every single country on earth. The Dark web is the only outlet in which one can dive into these dark practices. Any information to encourage, instruct, etc. harm to humans is illegal, how-to sex with animals is illegal.

4. Academic Pivot​

Anthony Harris is the author of Night's Black Agents: Witchcraft and Magic in Seventeenth-Century English Drama, a highly respected peer-reviewed academic textbook originally published by Manchester University Press (and co-published in the US by Rowman & Littlefield) back in 1980. Yet you would argue he was capable of fooling Manchester University Press, Rowman & Littlefield as well as the entire occult acedemic field simply because he also is an artist who draws coloring books?

Please do not take my response as an attack of any kind, simply arguing the fact if your going to argue something is fake simply because you cannot "find it" anywhere else, you must understand A) the confines in which the law permits publication B) actually investigate to whom the author is, etc. Yet if you have the Amazon Link for the book I would appreciate you providing it as I looked and nothing is coming up.

Post automatically merged: Today at 6:33 PM

as my previous comment illustrated, there are those who were practitioners (females) who are practitioners but did not call themselves "witch" as it was an accusation.

1. Address the Logical Fallacy (Ad Hominem & Genetic Fallacy)​

The core of your argument is:

which is a genetic fallacy (judging the merit of a work based solely on its origin or who is associated with it) mixed with an ad hominem attack on the editor's credentials. An editor’s eclectic résumé or background in niche art genres does not automatically invalidate a historical reprint. Independent publishers and niche enthusiasts frequently pick up out-of-print, obscure, or public-domain historical manuscripts that large academic publishers ignore. The editor’s background might explain why they found the subject matter interesting enough to publish, but it is not proof that the text itself is a fabrication.

2. the Lack of Empirical Evidence​

your assumption based on who is editing it and feels "more than sure" it is fake, but feelings are not evidence. Belief is not proof. To declare a text "fake," you needs to provide textual or historical analysis. Have you cross-referenced the text with known historical archives? Have you identified specific anachronisms in the language, or traced the book's contents to a known modern hoax? Dismissing a book's historical validity simply because an Amazon link (which if you have please provide) is elusive or because the publisher is indie is lazy skepticism.

3. Exposing the "Amazon-Only" Misconception​

you claim the book "appears to only exist on Amazon," implying that makes it inherently fraudulent. In the modern era of Print-On-Demand (POD), hundreds of thousands of genuine, obscure historical documents, local court transcripts, and forgotten regional history texts are digitized and sold exclusively via Amazon KDP (Kindle Direct Publishing) or similar platforms. Lacking a traditional distribution deal with major brick-and-mortar bookstores does not mean a text is a hoax; it just means it is a print-on-demand niche title. Furthermore, TOR (the dark web) has

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

/db/ (your personal key), (there are to be no spaces within that link) in which has a massive volumen of informaiton, transcripts, etc on the occult. As how-to manuals on human sacrafice, rituals involving beasts (both real and lore) and child sacrafice are illegal to publish in every single country on earth. The Dark web is the only outlet in which one can dive into these dark practices. Any information to encourage, instruct, etc. harm to humans is illegal, how-to sex with animals is illegal.

4. Academic Pivot​

Anthony Harris is the author of Night's Black Agents: Witchcraft and Magic in Seventeenth-Century English Drama, a highly respected peer-reviewed academic textbook originally published by Manchester University Press (and co-published in the US by Rowman & Littlefield) back in 1980. Yet you would argue he was capable of fooling Manchester University Press, Rowman & Littlefield as well as the entire occult acedemic field simply because he also is an artist who draws coloring books?

Please do not take my response as an attack of any kind, simply arguing the fact if your going to argue something is fake simply because you cannot "find it" anywhere else, you must understand A) the confines in which the law permits publication B) actually investigate to whom the author is, etc. Yet if you have the Amazon Link for the book I would appreciate you providing it as I looked and nothing is coming up.

massive volume* of information (I just woke up lol)