[Opinion] Pseudo-Scientific Explanations in Magic

[Robert Ramsay]

So today I had the beginnings of an argument with a male witch I follow on Twitter. He is writing a book about magic, but he keeps pooting forth stuff about "the uncertainty principle" in exactly the scientism way we were talking about. I called him out on it ( I tried to be gentle) and his reply was "What makes you think I'm looking for someone else's arguments?". And then he blocked me
So yeah, "brute forcing one's confirmation bias" indeed!

 

[Xenophon]

So today I had the beginnings of an argument with a male witch I follow on Twitter. He is writing a book about magic, but he keeps pooting forth stuff about "the uncertainty principle" in exactly the scientism way we were talking about. I called him out on it ( I tried to be gentle) and his reply was "What makes you think I'm looking for someone else's arguments?". And then he blocked me
So yeah, "brute forcing one's confirmation bias" indeed!

"Solipsism means never having to say you're sorry."

Post automatically merged: Aug 12, 2024

I ran across an interesting take on quantum-slinging. You know, how anytime a writer on magick wants support from the science he so often deplores, he starts squawking about quantum-this and quantum-that. Sort of a get-out-of-causation-free card. Nasim Nicholas Taleb (in Fooled By Randomness) notes that if you want an example of daunting uncertainty you don't need quantum particles. The behavior of any given selection of stocks from the Dow Jones seems to stump expertise as often as it confirms it. But that just doesn't have the same cachet, does it? "The Will of the Dipshitissimus is unbounded by law and convention! As unbound and as free as this line graph of Startup Inc's fluctuations since the IPO six months ago!" Rhetorically the expected "...unbound as a quantum particle blasting through abysses galactic" just pops more magick wood into a flaccid ritual, no?

Still the quantum-evoking author does well to remember that he is there writing a sort of poetry with scientific verbiage, not actually doing science. No, not even relying on it in any very defensible way.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Pseudo-Scientific Explanations in Magic
SUBTOPIC: An Alternative Approach
⁜→ Xenophon, Robert Ramsay, Shade, et al,
.

I ran across an interesting take on quantum-slinging. You know, how anytime a writer on magick wants support from the science he so often deplores, he starts squawking about quantum-this and quantum-that.
...
Still the quantum-evoking author does well to remember that he is there writing a sort of poetry with scientific verbiage, not actually doing science. No, not even relying on it in any very defensible way.

.
(COMMENT)

In the upper echelons of the cornerstones in science, where the rarefied gases are plenty, these Astro-Physist come in two (generally): 1) The Theorist that grows the great minds whips the data into shape, 2) and, the (classical) Developer scientist.

The internet is buzzing today over new evidence from

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

– an

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

of astronomy at St. Petersburg College, Florida and ex-analyst of the U.S. Department of Defense – suggesting that the famous 1977 Wow! signal was most likely generated by a comet. The Wow! signal was detected on August 15, 1977 at the Big Ear Radio Observatory in Ohio, during a search for signs of extraterrestrial intelligence. The signal was unusual, and, when reviewing the data a few days later, astronomer Jerry Ehman wrote “Wow!” next to it. Since then, for 40 years, some have claimed the signal was made by aliens. Others have said a star caused it. Many people theorized as to what might have caused the signal, but there has been no agreed-upon explanation.

Still the quantum-evoking author does well to remember that he is there writing a sort of poetry with scientific verbiage, not actually doing science. No, not even relying on it in any very defensible way.

(COMMENT)

In the framework of todays' modern-day astrophysicists in the lab where Leptons, quarks, fermions, and the bosons reign supreme just pretend you understand what they are saying. If you listen to them every day, you will begin to piece together fragments about their project. (OH Oh oh I almost forgot the Higgs Particle - they will pry it in somewhere in the standard model.) A quanta is a packet of energy. And do not forget to feed Schrödinger's cat (Max).

I have looked at most of the discussions that have to do with the mysteries of magic and the supernatural entities that buzz around Metaphysical concepts beyond reality. Only a few have umbilical between reality and X.

(∑ Ω)

I liked some of the ideas expressed in the Tarot. Some real questions can make you wonder.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Xenophon]

RE: Pseudo-Scientific Explanations in Magic
SUBTOPIC: An Alternative Approach
⁜→ Xenophon, Robert Ramsay, Shade, et al,
.

.
(COMMENT)

In the upper echelons of the cornerstones in science, where the rarefied gases are plenty, these Astro-Physist come in two (generally): 1) The Theorist that grows the great minds whips the data into shape, 2) and, the (classical) Developer scientist.




(COMMENT)

In the framework of todays' modern-day astrophysicists in the lab where Leptons, quarks, fermions, and the bosons reign supreme just pretend you understand what they are saying. If you listen to them every day, you will begin to piece together fragments about their project. (OH Oh oh I almost forgot the Higgs Particle - they will pry it in somewhere in the standard model.) A quanta is a packet of energy. And do not forget to feed Schrödinger's cat (Max).

I have looked at most of the discussions that have to do with the mysteries of magic and the supernatural entities that buzz around Metaphysical concepts beyond reality. Only a few have umbilical between reality and X.

(∑ Ω)

I liked some of the ideas expressed in the Tarot. Some real questions can make you wonder.

Most Respectfully,
R

Well said. (For some reason, being on probation means you can't say " like" something.)

 

[Shade]

RE: Pseudo-Scientific Explanations in Magic
SUBTOPIC: An Alternative Approach
⁜→ Xenophon, Robert Ramsay, Shade, et al,
.

.
(COMMENT)

In the upper echelons of the cornerstones in science, where the rarefied gases are plenty, these Astro-Physist come in two (generally): 1) The Theorist that grows the great minds whips the data into shape, 2) and, the (classical) Developer scientist.




(COMMENT)

In the framework of todays' modern-day astrophysicists in the lab where Leptons, quarks, fermions, and the bosons reign supreme just pretend you understand what they are saying. If you listen to them every day, you will begin to piece together fragments about their project. (OH Oh oh I almost forgot the Higgs Particle - they will pry it in somewhere in the standard model.) A quanta is a packet of energy. And do not forget to feed Schrödinger's cat (Max).

I have looked at most of the discussions that have to do with the mysteries of magic and the supernatural entities that buzz around Metaphysical concepts beyond reality. Only a few have umbilical between reality and X.

(∑ Ω)

I liked some of the ideas expressed in the Tarot. Some real questions can make you wonder.

Most Respectfully,
R

Well if you come at a scientist with an idea you better have an underlying principle to back it up, same to would a philosopher need to explain an idea to a person in a relatable way. If I were for example to hold the position 1+1 = 3 there is a formula in mathematics that makes this possible. Although you’d need to be seeking that desired result. A philosopher would need to explain it as.. one person and one person get together and have a baby. It’s much harder for a mathematician to break down how 1= 3, you’d need to show your work with (x-y)^2=x^2y^2-2xy the fact that it’s “improbable” doesn’t matter to the theoretical physicist. The fact that’s it’s a possibility using paraconsistent logic is of no consequence to them where as a physicist would have big problems using the same logistical system however with metaphysics it allows a little bit of leeway for them.

the issue is when an average person uses metaphysics to bunny hop wayyy past logic.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Pseudo-Scientific Explanations in Magic
SUBTOPIC: An Alternative Approach
⁜→ @ Shade, et al,

It took me a while to think about your postulation. And then the light came on!

Well if you come at a scientist with an idea you better have an underlying principle to back it up, same to would a philosopher need to explain an idea to a person in a relatable way.

(COMMENT)

I have a Doctorate in Metaphysics. The discoveries in scientific pursuits that enhance understanding and open up the way for new investigations do not interfere with the conceptual views and development in metaphysics. One cannot use either set of developments to overturn or dispute the other. When the 17th Century Robert Turner (1654-1665) translated the Ars Notoria (Notary Art of Solomon) all the technology used toeday (in reality within the universe) would have been outside the known Laws of Physics; but totally inside the realm of "Metaphysics." Calculus (invented by Sir

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

) was just being documented and used to explain and predict gravitational probabilities. And certainly science cannot explain the ratio 1/137 which is a huge discovery that is yet to be explaned.

Take notice: The large print: "

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

."

There is a realtioship between the two view that present themselves in the study of reality. It should prevent the serious scientist from either discipline to "bunny hop wayyy (sic) past logic." And as for many layman, there will probably be a gap in understanding the Scientific and the Metaphysics - and - the roles they play.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Asteriskos]

I have a Doctorate in Metaphysics

@RoccoR,

May I ask where you earned your Doctorate? I've thought about investigating it academically myself. What is fascinating to me is that in principle, it appears to be foundational to "occultism" in general, irrespective of man made artificial tradition/s, et al? Is that a fair approximation?

I have a fairly strong background in math and science, but I get the sense that even in this day and age society views "Metaphysics" as a Gray Area? For example, an "average person in the street" likely has a close to equal perception of Metaphysics and Occultism overall?
Again, would that be a fair approximation? What little of pure Metaphysics that I've exposed myself to has been fascinating, thus this inquiry!

 

[Shade]

RE: Pseudo-Scientific Explanations in Magic
SUBTOPIC: An Alternative Approach
⁜→ @ Shade, et al,

It took me a while to think about your postulation. And then the light came on!


(COMMENT)

I have a Doctorate in Metaphysics. The discoveries in scientific pursuits that enhance understanding and open up the way for new investigations do not interfere with the conceptual views and development in metaphysics. One cannot use either set of developments to overturn or dispute the other. When the 17th Century Robert Turner (1654-1665) translated the Ars Notoria (Notary Art of Solomon) all the technology used toeday (in reality within the universe) would have been outside the known Laws of Physics; but totally inside the realm of "Metaphysics." Calculus (invented by Sir

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

) was just being documented and used to explain and predict gravitational probabilities. And certainly science cannot explain the ratio 1/137 which is a huge discovery that is yet to be explaned.

Take notice: The large print: "

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

."

There is a realtioship between the two view that present themselves in the study of reality. It should prevent the serious scientist from either discipline to "bunny hop wayyy (sic) past logic." And as for many layman, there will probably be a gap in understanding the Scientific and the Metaphysics - and - the roles they play.

Most Respectfully,
R

Lol it will indeed cause a huge bunny hop, they will eventually realize if the ratio 1/137 is eventually solved a new problem will arise, for our system to be self Perpetuating there must be a perfect duality and also a direction in which to harness the dualistic energy. We’ll always have more things to try and understand as sentient physical beings Trying to understand a 3D world, metaphysics Sounds like the next rational step When they get tired of running in circles.