Hi guest! As you can see, the new Wizard Forums has been revived, and we are glad to have you visiting our site! However, it would be really helpful, both to you and us, if you registered on our website! Registering allows you to see all posts, and make posts yourself, which would be great if you could share your knowledge and opinions with us! You could also make posts to ask questions!
Is it really that harsh when you consider the tone and arrogance in the OP? It's true that OP is a newbie, and I've taken off some guard rails that are normally afforded to newbies, but I was striving for a realist, fact-of-the matter approach. Especially when it comes to topics like this where cushioning and encouraging can lead to more unhelpful, confusing or nonsensical discourse on an already heavily Dunning-Kruger effect riddled domain.
These discussions will always be allowed on the forum, but my personal stance will always be to nip these in the bud ASAP to avoid pseudo-intellectualising.
Of course, OP (and anyone else) you're free to figure out things by yourself, and study science, and try to make some connections wherever you want, based on how you feel, but remember that even when you're confident that you're right (and you will be) you're probably still a long, long way from understanding these complex topics that you're about to publicly profess are the explanation for magick. Especially, as I've said before, if you don't have a very strong understanding of both math and physics.
In a response to my very first post here on WF Skull recommended that I don't try too hard to combine the theories of magic and science. He was right - it's a good way to run around in circles. I haven't been able to take a single solid step further than I got with the theory that very first day, but it still remains the keystone of my belief. Any time I'm slipping or losing confidence, I shut the grimoires and open a textbook for an evening to freshen my rudimentary understanding of quantum mechanics. It's worked for me every time so far.
If it works for you, and helps you, I really have no problem with it. If your personal internal rhetoric on why magick works for you, actually works for you and helps you get magick done, then that's a positive, and I'm all for that, no matter how misguided or fanciful they are.
My problem is when people profess to know how magick works, and go around spouting - what really, in most cases, is just poorly grasped gibberish - pseudo-intellectual or pseudo-scientific theories, it ends up being damaging to the whole occult ecosystem, especially people who are new and just starting off, who don't have the mental faculty or equipment to understand real maths or science, let alone the stupid pseudo-science that some idiot who read half a textbook is spouting off.
Maybe it's your job to be harsh, and our job to soften the blow a bit so OP gets the bucket of cold water but still feels welcome.
(That was actually how I read Robert's comment - that he was trying to gently step in to soften the vibe for OP rather than defend himself. Which could be me projecting my own intentions)
I would have thought the fact that I didn't tag or quote you would be enough to convey that I wasn't talking to or about you. I was replying to the OP specifically. However, judging by the fact that you didn't even read my post properly, I'm not really surprised.
I specifically stated that if you wanted to research or find out more about magick to improve its effectiveness or to find some deep personal satisfaction, go ahead and do it. Certainly, if you want to study science and quantum physics, do that too. You'll probably be wrong on multiple levels, but someone, somewhere, someday could conceivably make some kind of breakthrough... that's why I specifically said I don't want to discourage anyone from learning and trying.
My issue was when people rush to (especially publicly) profess an understanding of why and how magick works or what exactly it is (scientifically). I said nothing about trying to figure out why you can't predict the results correctly, in fact, my whole post was about unknowability. Personally, I don't think you'd even figure that out, really. But still, studying that would at least yield some insight into concepts of the fundamentally unknowable nature of the underpinnings of our reality.
I'm sure you, specifically, have spent a lot of time studying and thinking about this, but being upset enough to misconstrue and insert yourself into what was a dose of reality for a newbie makes it seem to me that you are either projecting or doubtful of the validity of your own thoughts.
Sometime, I might be up for a discussion with you, but as for reading your book, you're probably right... from how you replied to my post, it doesn't seem like it would be a good use of my time.
I'm really sorry. I realised halfway through that you were specifically talking to the OP, and yeah, he's got the wrong end of the stick and his "experiment" is rubbish.
I wasn't upset; I felt that regardless of not being aimed at me, it still brought up points that were valid to me. I should have rephrased my second sentence in terms that you had actually used in your post, something like:
"when we perform magick, even if we follow the steps 100% perfectly, we know that we don't achieve success 100% of the time."
So I feel that a useful line of enquiry is to try and find out why it doesn't work 100% of the time.
Please don't judge the quality of my book on one half-assed post
I would really love a discussion with you, and reading the book would save a lot of discussion time
My problem is when people profess to know how magick works, and go around spouting - what really, in most cases, is just poorly grasped gibberish - pseudo-intellectual or pseudo-scientific theories, it ends up being damaging to the whole occult ecosystem, especially people who are new and just starting off, who don't have the mental faculty or equipment to understand real maths or science, let alone the stupid pseudo-science that some idiot who read half a textbook is spouting off.
I totally agree. This is the problem I have. I feel, after a lot of years of study, and constantly asking myself "Am I wrong about any/some/all of this?" I've come out the other end, only to be stuck with the bozos who want "multiple worlds" and "consciousness creates reality" both at once, or whatever they pulled out of their arses. As you say, widespread terrible information screws it up for everyone.
Buddhism has this list of "acintya" or "avyākṛita" which were questions outside the sphere of reason, meaning questions that it is impossible to get an answer to, and that, even if you got an answer, you would have no way of knowing if it was true or not. (Eg "is the universe spatially infinite?" Or "what was there before the Big Bang?" - it literally cannot be observed)
The point of avyākṛita is that the Buddha refused to answer those questions or engage with them at all when followers asked him. His view was that, since it was impossible to ever know the answers, they were just a distraction from the work of ending suffering and becoming enlightened, and he wouldn't give people that distraction.
Of course you can't just throw everything in the avyakrita basket without trying, but it is a very useful and very challenging category to have. Challenging because it's hard to accept i won't get answers to everything. (On a personal note, I have found it useful when paralysed by indecision between two choices that seem equal but different. I have to accept that knowing which option is optimal is avyakrita, and I cannot wait for that information before making a decision)
Shit fuck, I was editing my other post with a long reply to this portion of your post and I accidentally closed the tab. You gotta be shitting me, no draft gets saved when editing a post. Maybe it really is a sign from the occultverse that I am being too harsh.
Basically, I cba to type the whole thing again, but the gist of it is that I subscribe to this idea philosophically but also scientifically.
People have become fairly disenfranchised with scientists and the scientific complex in modern times because, first, education became a business, and then studies became a career. There's a lot of scientists now, and most of them are "career scientists" who, yeah, are doctors and professors, but all they care about is getting the next funding paycheck from the govt/some corp to keep their post doc research center running, put food on their table.
Those kinds of scientists are why we sometimes see conflicting, incorrect, or blatantly misleading studies. In recent times, that's severely degraded the public opinion of science and scientists, to the point that often, people feel like they could do what those scientists are doing.
And to be fair, it's possible. I could see someone who is dedicated, intelligent, and spending an academia-level amount of time studying reaching the level of a career scientists. That's certainly respectable, as far as feats go.
However, when it comes to field-shattering, pioneer, frontier expanding science, stuff that truly changes the way we scientifically think or understand the universe, we're not that guy. And I mean myself too, and everyone here. Unless you're born with prodigal level intelligence, and have been through decades of rigmarole and studying in academia, to impart you with not just an overview, but a deep understanding of all the centuries of amassed human scientific and mathematical knowledge, as well as access to the highest grade of tools, equipment and raw materials... you have no chance. These are 1 in a generation, if not slimmer, odds.
I know that sucks to hear, I know it's depressing, I know no one wants to hear that... but it's true.
Even if it was possible, making a connection between the occult and science in a way that cements our understanding of the occult is something that would change humanity and science so fundamentally, that the chance some random user on WF will ever achieve that level of scientific breakthrough is honestly slimmer than the spontaneous combustion of the whole universe.
That's why I have such a grim, cynical outlook on it. Not because I hate science, or you, or anything. But it's also what contains my opposition to be specific to those who publicly profess to know the explanation. Internally, do and think whatever you want, if it helps you achieve your goals.
I'm really sorry. I realised halfway through that you were specifically talking to the OP, and yeah, he's got the wrong end of the stick and his "experiment" is rubbish.
I wasn't upset; I felt that regardless of not being aimed at me, it still brought up points that were valid to me. I should have rephrased my second sentence in terms that you had actually used in your post, something like:
"when we perform magick, even if we follow the steps 100% perfectly, we know that we don't achieve success 100% of the time."
So I feel that a useful line of enquiry is to try and find out why it doesn't work 100% of the time.
Please don't judge the quality of my book on one half-assed post
I would really love a discussion with you, and reading the book would save a lot of discussion time
Post automatically merged:
I totally agree. This is the problem I have. I feel, after a lot of years of study, and constantly asking myself "Am I wrong about any/some/all of this?" I've come out the other end, only to be stuck with the bozos who want "multiple worlds" and "consciousness creates reality" both at once, or whatever they pulled out of their arses. As you say, widespread terrible information screws it up for everyone.
Nah, maybe it was me venting. You're good. I won't judge your book, and honestly, I would actually buy and read it if I wasn't so brain-rotted to the point I can't sit down and read a physical book anymore.
It's great to figure out why things aren't working, as long as it's internal to you, or at the very least, not aimed at finding ways to minimize magick not working, because then it becomes a scientific claim of understanding some connection between the occult and magick.
I can just never respect someone's claims to know the scientific underpinnings of the occult, or even the idea that they will ever be able to achieve that knowledge, just because those parts of science themselves are just a symptom or artefact of a deep, deep, lack of understanding of how the universe works.
In my honest opinion, it's part of those unknowable things I discussed in my first reply to this thread. And to be some guy who self-studied their way into what might honestly be a fairly decent knowledge of QM and related topics to be able to profess an even hypothetical explanation for magick and/or the fundamental nature of the universe is so beyond arrogant, self-righteous, conceited and vain that it's just not even worth considering.
Still, this is me maybe being overly critical of you because I'm assuming you're going to come at me with some "Duuude, heisenberg uncertainty principle, yo... the superposition of the wavefunction is why that spell didn't work that one time..." which, I guess, is cynical and condescending, and doesn't give you credit which you may in fact deserve.
So yeah, we'll maybe have a chat about it sometime. Actually, PM me a link to your book, if it's short I might just give it a flip.
Also, I want everyone to know, officially, these discussions are allowed, and accepted on WF. All my posts on this thread are my own thoughts, and not the official position of WF in any way. I moved the thread into the correct section, but otherwise, is it completely within the parameters of allowed discussion on WF.
You are all allowed to disagree with me, call me out, ridicule my position even, and while I may get a little sassy with you, you can rest assured that the fighting stance ends where this thread ends, and you shouldn't expect any repercussions or ill-treatment (unless you break the rules).
I sometimes forget that since I'm the admin of this site, people may be hesitant to engage when things get a little heated, but rest assured it's all good. But really, I'm just a normal guy, with an opinion that should be weighed normally, who's capable of feeling strongly, and potentially having flawed arguments. I love science, and I love the occult, and personally, I don't like to mix the two. But that's just me.
I absolutely could be wrong, so don't feel bad if you disagree with me.
People have become fairly disenfranchised with scientists and the scientific complex in modern times because, first, education became a business, and then studies became a career. There's a lot of scientists now, and most of them are "career scientists" who, yeah, are doctors and professors, but all they care about is getting the next funding paycheck from the govt/some corp to keep their post doc research center running, put food on their table.
Even if it was possible, making a connection between the occult and science in a way that cements our understanding of the occult is something that would change humanity and science so fundamentally, that the chance some random user on WF will ever achieve that level of scientific breakthrough is honestly slimmer than the spontaneous combustion of the whole universe.
Such a breakthrough would only change humanity if anyone pays attention to it, and my experience so far is that very few people have even bothered to get to the stage of arguing with me, even if I was right. I'm not just looking for people to buy the book, I'm looking for people to actually talk about it with! I've sold over 1500 copies, and I can count the number of people who have discussed it with me on the fingers of a beer glass.
That's why I have such a grim, cynical outlook on it. Not because I hate science, or you, or anything. But it's also what contains my opposition to be specific to those who publicly profess to know the explanation.
I must emphasise that I do not know all the answers. What I have is yet another model. But, it's a model which meshes up with some of our most successful therories (because I started from the theories and worked backwards) and produces a consistent picture. Consistent with itself, and with the theories that it is an interpretation of.
Still, this is me maybe being overly critical of you because I'm assuming you're going to come at me with some "Duuude, heisenberg uncertainty principle, yo... the superposition of the wavefunction is why that spell didn't work that one time..." which, I guess, is cynical and condescending, and doesn't give you credit which you may in fact deserve.
Like I said earlier, you are correct that all the books I read about this are exactly that kind of bollocks. It is very easy and straightforward to believe that my book is going to be another one of those.
I, on the other hand, believe in the supernatural.
I see it as just something we can't explain through science but since it's part of life then it is as natural as the mundane.
As someone with ADHD I would say that it's more about "being bad at forming good habits" than habits in general.
For example, it took a while for me to get used to drinking the necessary amoung of water daily, but nowadays I drink it almost automatically.
Good habits, those that are good for your health and development, are the ones most difficult to get consistent with.
I think it depends.In my belief, if someone with ADHD gets intensenly into one subject, they'll go down that rabbit hole fast and far.Regular meditation may be hard to accomplish but you can always find other ways to meditate that work well for those unable to sit still and focus.
You learn to focus in other ways.
there are so many things going on under the hood that we are not only oblivious to, but that we will forever be oblivious to, due to them being so completely outside our plane of comprehension.
Despite wanting to learn how reality works, I have to admit that if someone were to suddenly discover "what's under the hood" they would end up bored.The unknown, the "what ifs", the "possibility but not certainty" is what gives one the will to keep pushing forward to learn and understand.But in truth most wouldn't want to know that.If you have nothing more to wonder, to question, then what's there for you?
It kind of reminds me of psychic skills.They have a more "cookie cutter" kind of knowledge where theoretically anyone can do them if they get the "right way", and by knowing that you would always be able to do them with 100% certainty.The problem is that most people don't know what is the right way(or the right way for them).
Funny thing is that this is what most people think of when it comes to "magic in real life", and it is the reason why some end up studying magic(not shaming here, everyone's reason for learning magic is personal and should be respected).
That's my hope for most things in life.After all if we have the things and knowledge we do today it is because someone, somewhere, someday discovered it.
It's an Egg of Columbus in a way.Until someone "figures it out", it seems unreachable or even impossible.But once someone does so, it seems incredibly ridiculous how no one else thought of that before.
However, when it comes to field-shattering, pioneer, frontier expanding science, stuff that truly changes the way we scientifically think or understand the universe
Just a note but it seems that the ones trying to do these are either young scientists, that seek ways to make things better for their communities, or military scientists, that seek ways to dominate the battlefields.
Not at all.The idea that someone here could be "the one to discover x" is indeed tempting and makes one dream of the impossible, but I personally don't feel like it is depressing the fact that "most likely it won't be any of us".On the contrary, that actually feels like a motivation to try harder.
It's just life, we most often than not won't be "the protagonist"(some aren't even the protagonist of their own lives even) but that doesn't mean that we should just twiddle our thumbs and not even try just because of this.The excitement of the "maybe" seems stronger than the certainty of "never".
making a connection between the occult and science in a way that cements our understanding of the occult is something that would change humanity and science so fundamentally
Would it though?I think it would only for those that see the occult through a religious view, but those that see the occult as nothing more than "another knowledge branch used to understand reality" wouldn't make much fuss over it.
the chance some random user on WF will ever achieve that level of scientific breakthrough is honestly slimmer than the spontaneous combustion of the whole universe
Oh but the idea of it even being a possiblity no matter how slim...that's too tempting and too funny to not think about.I'm sure it would be hilarious if it ended up being so.
I, on the other hand, believe in the supernatural.
I see it as just something we can't explain through science but since it's part of life then it is as natural as the mundane.
Yes, that is true of some people, but even the people for whom it is not true seem to be straight-jacketed by their own assumptions and so find it difficult to come up with anything new.
I will say. since I've started my magickal practice there have been a series of highly unlikely events which ultimately have served my best interest. So, something is going on, and it really seems like the magick is huge part of it.
Provable that it's the magick? Doubt it, but it sure as heck looks like it!
So, I have two choices, step back and try to understand it specifically and prove it, or lean into, and appreciate it and use it.
I'm gonna lean in.
Post automatically merged:
I wanted to acknowledge that I had set up a false dichotomy with my post above. They are obviously not exclusive choices. I just meant at this point I'm leaning more toward practice and less toward theory.
I've come to mostly agree with this perspective. The psychological models really are the best we have in understanding how magick really works. Even if we are to go as far as to posit the existence of supernatural forces or entities, the only observable actor in magickal workings is the practitioner themselves. Obviously then we should base our understandings of rmagick on the changes and events observed in the practioner.
Focusing your practice on self discipline and the expansion of your mental abilities, is verifiably productive in its own right.
This is where I don't agree. I hate pseudoscience, but I don't hate unscientific things that aren't trying to be science.
It is actually all the pseudoscience that made me think science was not the right model to apply to magic.
It felt to me like people were insecure in their magical practice and so desperately needed science to legitimise it. And I thought "no, magic is what it is, I'm not insecure in my practice, I don't need external validation". (I don't think so scientific approaches to magic are insecure, but when the science is BAD that's what it looks like. Eg someone quoting a study with four participants that wasn't double blind and has never been replicated as proof that remote viewing works, or whatever - you'd have to be desperate to use that as your source).
I come from an atheist background, and I was not able to practice magic for a long time, even though I found it beautiful and meaningful, because frankly it doesn't stand up to scientific testing, and never has. The only way I was able to become a magician was to decide "okay, scientific rigour is important to me, but it's not the only thing that's important to me. Beauty and meaning are important to me too. I can prioritise them in my life as well". Basically I decided to stop caring that it doesn't stand up to science, I decided it belonged to a different logic, and that opened the door for me.
I'm not criticising people who have a (good) scientific approach to magic, I'm just saying there is another valid approach, which is more about mysticism, ecstasy, beauty, etc.
It's like... If you're expecting a cup of hot chocolate and you take a sip and it's coffee, it'll taste weird and terrible, but there's nothing wrong with coffee. People who have chosen an artistic rather than scientific approach to magic are serving coffee, not bad hot chocolate.
I really strongly agree with part of what you said and moderately disagree with another part.
I don't have anything to add, just nodding vigorously, pseudoscience and in particular bad quantum physics make me so mad. (On the plus side, I now have quite a good understanding of eg quantum entanglement, SOLELY motivated by getting irritated by all the pseudoscience and being like "that's it, I am going to learn exactly how and why you are wrong, I don't care how much it makes my brain hurt." So I guess that's a bonus)
I also really hate pseudohistory - eg some atheists, in their attempt to discredit Christianity, will say Jesus is the same as such-and-such Egyptian god, and then they will tell a bunch of lies about that God to make it fit (eg they will say Horus was born to a virgin on the 25th of December or whatever). But pagans do it too.
This is where I don't agree. I hate pseudoscience, but I don't hate unscientific things that aren't trying to be science.
It is actually all the pseudoscience that made me think science was not the right model to apply to magic.
It felt to me like people were insecure in their magical practice and so desperately needed science to legitimise it. And I thought "no, magic is what it is, I'm not insecure in my practice, I don't need external validation". (I don't think so scientific approaches to magic are insecure, but when the science is BAD that's what it looks like. Eg someone quoting a study with four participants that wasn't double blind and has never been replicated as proof that remote viewing works, or whatever - you'd have to be desperate to use that as your source).
I come from an atheist background, and I was not able to practice magic for a long time, even though I found it beautiful and meaningful, because frankly it doesn't stand up to scientific testing, and never has. The only way I was able to become a magician was to decide "okay, scientific rigour is important to me, but it's not the only thing that's important to me. Beauty and meaning are important to me too. I can prioritise them in my life as well". Basically I decided to stop caring that it doesn't stand up to science, I decided it belonged to a different logic, and that opened the door for me.
I'm not criticising people who have a (good) scientific approach to magic, I'm just saying there is another valid approach, which is more about mysticism, ecstasy, beauty, etc.
It's like... If you're expecting a cup of hot chocolate and you take a sip and it's coffee, it'll taste weird and terrible, but there's nothing wrong with coffee. People who have chosen an artistic rather than scientific approach to magic are serving coffee, not bad hot chocolate.
(That said, everything I'm describing is taking a very thoughtful approach and choosing something else - not just mindlessly not caring, which is what you're talking about)
Post automatically merged:
@Robert Ramsay - I was actually just going to recommend your book, and will do so now.
@Trialectical_Materialist to be more helpful, two people who I think have made very serious attempts at a scientific approach to magic are
Scott Stenwick (creator of operant field theory - not scientific despite the name, but a model of how the LBRP, LBRH etc with together)
Here's part 1 of his series on his theory:
And then also the book Postmodern Magic by Patrick Dunn - Robert would probably say this is more of a model than science but it is nevertheless attempting real rigour and so I think you would appreciate it's approach
I haven't read Robert's book (because of my aforementioned deliberate choice not to involve science in my practice), so I can't directly recommend it, but he comes across on the forums as a grounded and intelligent person who I have never seen spout pseudoscience, so I think it would be worth your while
I should go on to explain I have a very mechanistic understanding of the world. One thing moves another etc.
I understand that magick for most people is an art, and given how absolutely personal a practice can be I wouldn't expect anyone's practice not to be heavily influenced by their personal tastes, struggles, etc.
My gripe came from running across people who will claim that their spells or whatever will have so and so effect without really any serious model as to why that might be the case. Without proper theories to work off of, you'd end up shooting in the dark and emulating others without too much to go off of.
Again as someone just starting to carve up a practice myself, this kinda irks me lol
This type of thought process shows me that you're even less mentally equipped than those you decry.
It is trivial to dismiss your nonsense experiment by saying there is 0 probability or possibility to increase the weight of a piece of matter to any significant degree.
Or simply someone with a good enough scale can measure some nanograms of difference in the 2 pieces of paper and profess that it is a magickal result.
If you want to understand complex topics, you need to put a lot more effort into... well... thinking, than you are right now.
There is a reason we don't see flying mages wielding lightning and shooting balls of gold.
If anything, it defeats your own argument that magick is absolute and all-powerful, instead of just tipping scales (albeit in a way and magnitude that cannot be measured by a kitchen scale)
The "experiment" wasn't a serious proposal at all lmao it was a snarky insult. I wasn't telling them to somehow increase the weight I was telling them to draw lots but turns out I didn't type that or something idk. Don't blame you for the misunderstanding, don't know why I didn't explicitly say I was telling the idiots to draw lots and disprove themselves immediately.
Is it really that harsh when you consider the tone and arrogance in the OP? It's true that OP is a newbie, and I've taken off some guard rails that are normally afforded to newbies, but I was striving for a realist, fact-of-the matter approach. Especially when it comes to topics like this where cushioning and encouraging can lead to more unhelpful, confusing or nonsensical discourse on an already heavily Dunning-Kruger effect riddled domain.
I do think that its noble to pursue understanding of machinations of magick. That being said its not on my radar currently.
Magick that is aimed at manifesting a goal, such as money, a lover, a job, etc, what people call low magick is "play with the odds" for me, much to OP's disgust.
Not that I think its the unchallengable truth™ but it alings with the way I think in the first place. But more importantly, it gives me a sense of leverage. Rest doesn't matter to me.
But lets just theorize since I bothered yapping about it, I see two possible explanations.
A) Every choice is a different branch in multiverse. When a successful magick operation is accomplished, you are locked in to the desired branch. I am guessing this is what @Robert Ramsay talks about all day, and in sleep.
B) A magickal operation somehow stirs up some higher, subtler plane of existence, in the desired result which started as an ever existed (but non-existed) archetype now starts to descend, becomes, then is.
A) Every choice is a different branch in multiverse. When a successful magick operation is accomplished, you are locked in to the desired branch. I am guessing this is what @Robert Ramsay talks about all day, and in sleep.
I resemble that remark!
Seriously though, if you'd discovered something you thought was world-shakingly important, wouldn't you go on about it all the time?
I realise that theory is not for everyone, and indeed can affect the quality of people's belief, which is super important for actially doing magic.
On this forum, I try not to comment on stuff (specific rituals, pathworkings etc.) where I can add no value to the discussion. So it shouldn't be surprising that I pop up when instead, discussions enter my wheelhouse
Why must there be some highly detailed explanation of magical acts?
The Lesser Ritual of the Pentagram balances the elements in the sphere of sensation. The Middle Pillar Ritual pulls divine light down through the body from head to toe.
Just because I cannot give a detailed thesis of the science behind it doesn't mean it did not work.
Why must there be some highly detailed explanation of magical acts?
The Lesser Ritual of the Pentagram balances the elements in the sphere of sensation. The Middle Pillar Ritual pulls divine light down through the body from head to toe.
Just because I cannot give a detailed thesis of the science behind it doesn't mean it did not work.
And everyone has a different 'tractor'. OP is contemptuous when people make no attempt to understand the mechanics of magic; meanwhile someone else is probably contemptuous of OP because they don't jailbreak their phone and just use the out-of-the-box OS. Or because they use premixed spices instead of learning and balancing the different flavours (these are random guesses, I have no idea what OP does and does not break down technically! My point is that we all have something we just accept and work with as-is, and there is always someone out there baffled by the fact that we don't seek a deeper understanding of it. And they themselves have their own thing, etc).
And curiosity killed the cat. Sometimes people want to understand better than others through the mechanical engineering or the physics behind Magick. However, there used to be an alternate term for Magick...what was that word, oh, Mysteries!
Post automatically merged:
But as stated in a few different thread, the LRP comes before the LRH. Why?
If the LRP balances the sphere of sensation, let's say I'm too airy for my own good, and I invoke Luna for the Theoricus Formula before banishing Saturn, I have two problems, nay, three.
Order of operations. An imbalanced Air sphere balancing with invoked Air (Luna), without establishment by the restrictions of Saturn off the plate.
An increase in airyness. Already imbalanced with air, involving Luna leaves us in La La Land. Wonderful if the intent is to astral project. Also, what phase of the moon astronomically and astrologically speaking is it?
Third, not following proper procedure. You are the sun. The planets revolve around you. You are throwing them out of order, leading back to the first problem. If your intent is to become grounded, You've done it all wrong.
