Skinner’s Solomonic "Tech" – Is magic just old-school software?

[omangello]

Just finished digging through Skinner’s PhD thesis on Solomonic 'technology' and honestly, it’s a total game-changer for how we look at grimoires. Instead of the usual mystical fluff, he treats the whole system like a literal operating manual—tracing the gear (wands, circles, inks) all the way back to the PGM.

It’s got me thinking: if magic is basically an evolving technology, why are so many people obsessed with keeping it exactly like it was in the 1500s? Is the 'power' in the specific tools or in the protocol itself?

 

[SkullTraill]

I think magick is what amounts to us trying to use the underlying “software” of the universe except it’s language and mechanics can never be known to us like how a 2D ant can never know what a 3D sphere looks like. We throw what we can to see what sticks and we develop advanced throwing techniques, however ultimately we will never understand the true mechanics of the universe and/or magick. We just do our best to make things work.

Im sure skinner’s thesis is a good read, but if he truly figured it all out and wrote a “manual” then magick would be trivialized and become the primary technology of humanity, wouldn’t it?

 

[Riva626]

John Danaher, Stephen Skinner, Michael Raduga, and other great minds I admire all have one great thing in common..... autism! Seriously though, their rigid adherence to systems and systematically attacking their respective fields is remarkable. As a complete, scatterbrained, ADHD, individual, I envy their ability to approach subjects so systematically. It's brilliant.

 

[Robert Ramsay]

I've not read it, but I'll make an educated guess that Skinner has constructed a metaphor and then run with it to its logical conclusion. It is almost certainly self-consistent, but it may not be correct.

Im sure skinner’s thesis is a good read, but if he truly figured it all out and wrote a “manual” then magick would be trivialized and become the primary technology of humanity, wouldn’t it?

This would only be true if magic were 100% reproducible, and it cannot be, although to quote Ben Goldacre: "I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that"

Clarke's Third Law states that "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic". So you could argue that what we have here is a technology that's so advanced, that it is magic

 

[SkullTraill]

This would only be true if magic were 100% reproducible, and it cannot be, although to quote Ben Goldacre: "I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that"

Clarke's Third Law states that "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic". So you could argue that what we have here is a technology that's so advanced, that it is magic

That's literally my point. I'm simply adding on the (what I consider to be a) fact that this "sufficiently advanced technology" is now and forever will be beyond the grasp of human understanding. It's not 100% reproducible because we do not understand it 100%. And we never will because it exists orthogonal to our plane of existence which necessarily confines our capacity to understand. So it may be a technology, it may be the will of beings, it may be anything. It doesn't matter to me what it is. What matters to me is only reproducibility. Which is why I respect Skinner, because whatever his personal goals are, the result of his work directly assists with reproducibility more than probably any other contemporary occult author.

 

[Robert Ramsay]

That's literally my point. I'm simply adding on the (what I consider to be a) fact that this "sufficiently advanced technology" is now and forever will be beyond the grasp of human understanding. It's not 100% reproducible because we do not understand it 100%. And we never will because it exists orthogonal to our plane of existence which necessarily confines our capacity to understand. So it may be a technology, it may be the will of beings, it may be anything. It doesn't matter to me what it is. What matters to me is only reproducibility. Which is why I respect Skinner, because whatever his personal goals are, the result of his work assist with reproducibility more than probably any other contemporary occult author.

Oh I wasn't disrespecting him - I've only heard good things about him; and I guess that my conceit is that I think that magic won't be 100% reproducible even if we did understand it 100%, for good solid physical reasons . As you know, I don't believe that magic is orthogonal to our plane of existence, instead I see it as a combination of the way the universe is structured, and the methods by which we interact with it.

As usual, I'm not claiming any kind of Truth, and Your Mileage May Vary

 

[SkullTraill]

Oh I wasn't disrespecting him - I've only heard good things about him; and I guess that my conceit is that I think that magic won't be 100% reproducible even if we did understand it 100%, for good solid physical reasons . As you know, I don't believe that magic is orthogonal to our plane of existence, instead I see it as a combination of the way the universe is structured, and the methods by which we interact with it.

As usual, I'm not claiming any kind of Truth, and Your Mileage May Vary

Yes of course I remember our fundamental disagreement well. It's perhaps the same reason you believe it would never be reproducible, that I believe it'll never be understood... in some roundabout way.

 

[stratamaster78]

Just finished digging through Skinner’s PhD thesis on Solomonic 'technology' and honestly, it’s a total game-changer for how we look at grimoires. Instead of the usual mystical fluff, he treats the whole system like a literal operating manual—tracing the gear (wands, circles, inks) all the way back to the PGM.

It’s got me thinking: if magic is basically an evolving technology, why are so many people obsessed with keeping it exactly like it was in the 1500s? Is the 'power' in the specific tools or in the protocol itself?

The Power is in the Individual practitioners level of belief.

Some people most likely have a mindset born from conditioning that leads them to believe that using tech from hundreds of years ago is THE Authentic way of doing Magick and it won’t work otherwise or won’t work as effectively or reliably.

Since that is their mindset their subconscious makes sure it becomes their reality.

Another reason the Old School methods work well or can work well is that by going through all the theatrics and using all the different tools and implements and incense and scripts etc etc it’s easier to ‘play act’ and get into the role where the act becomes fully immersive and believable.

In simple terms we have to ‘Fake It to Make It’ in Magick and the Old School methods help get you all lathered up with Belief.

It doesn’t make it a sure fire bullet proof method but you have to believe in what you are doing.

 

[julio]

Skinner’s view, as he has stated several times on social media since 2016 and in various interviews, is that by synthesizing multiple manuscripts one can arrive at a single truth that unlocks the secrets of Solomonic magic. That position is about as persuasive as claiming that by mixing practices from several houses of Vodou one could reconstruct the one “true” Vodou. Anyone within that tradition knows such a notion could only arise in the mind of someone outside it. I would argue that the same logic applies to Solomonic magic.

He has also suggested that the survival of a manuscript across the centuries is evidence of its correctness. History, however, is far more complicated than that. One need only read Foucault’s Pendulum by Umberto Eco to appreciate how manuscripts, interpretations, and the meanings people impose on them can spiral far beyond any supposed original truth.

To those who believe depth in this work can be achieved through superficial synthesis, I wish you the best of luck. It certainly aligns with the contemporary tendency to assume that academics possess hidden formulas, secrets supposedly uncovered by combing through publicly available manuscripts. Perhaps the next book, inevitably presented as indispensable upon release, will finally contain that elusive key.

 

[tranmut3]

Just finished digging through Skinner’s PhD thesis on Solomonic 'technology' and honestly, it’s a total game-changer for how we look at grimoires. Instead of the usual mystical fluff, he treats the whole system like a literal operating manual—tracing the gear (wands, circles, inks) all the way back to the PGM.

It’s got me thinking: if magic is basically an evolving technology, why are so many people obsessed with keeping it exactly like it was in the 1500s? Is the 'power' in the specific tools or in the protocol itself?

i'm following Josephine Mccarthy's Quareia course, and she talks alot about ritual magic as being a combination of keys and filters, which allow a certain kind of energy to flow through into the manifest world.
If you change a key, it's not going to work.
The most powerful magical systems were set up under very different circumstances, one in which magic was deeply rooted in everday society and was believed in and followed by everybody all social castes.
in this way, the most effective magical system were worked out, systems which were very precise and acted in a specific way to allow a flow of power to enter the manifest world.

I largely subscribe to this view, and hence tend to think in terms of magic, older is better.
that said, its clear that as Mark Stavish points out in his book 'egregores' it's very possible to set up something in a contermporary way with a conteporary magic group, and actually establish a new tradition, through the shared power of the created egregore.
howevever, ancient magical systems have been set up and plugged in for thousands of years and so carry more deeper magial power within.

 

[Robert Ramsay]

Yes of course I remember our fundamental disagreement well. It's perhaps the same reason you believe it would never be reproducible, that I believe it'll never be understood... in some roundabout way.

an interesting thought!

Mine is because the sum total of future paths must add up to the average result, so not everyone is going to share every success with you, even though you personally may experience massive amounts of success

I largely subscribe to this view, and hence tend to think in terms of magic, older is better.
that said, its clear that as Mark Stavish points out in his book 'egregores' it's very possible to set up something in a contermporary way with a conteporary magic group, and actually establish a new tradition, through the shared power of the created egregore.
howevever, ancient magical systems have been set up and plugged in for thousands of years and so carry more deeper magial power within.

If you are convinced that older is better, then that approach will prove more successful for you in your work.