The Science Of Magick

Can science explain magick? Can magick explain science? Or are they entirely independent ideas without any overlapping domain? Is only one real?

I'll try to answer my own question. But I would really like to hear everyone else's answer. I'll start with the easier question and move up from there. Can magick explain science? yes. When boiled down to the essentials magick is nothing more then the execution of will into a material manifestation. Sometimes this involves spirits or angels, but even in those situations some will is trying to be satisfied. You don't always need to be aware of magick in order to perform magick. A child wishing with all his/her heart for snow the next day to get off from school is practicing a simple form of chaos magick. The scientist toiling in his workshop all night trying to come up with proof that his theory works is also performing magick. A mage can conclude that all the big breakthroughs in science aren't a result of the scientific method. The scientist just willed it strong enough to make it a reality. Sometimes these breakthroughs are caused by a group of people wishing for one outcome or another. One might say the current state of science is manifested by our desires and direction.

But now for the harder question. Can science define magick and how can it if magick defines science. Well simply put science can define magick, but that in no way negates my previous statement. Chaos theory and quantum mechanics provide a good explanation of the mechanics of magick. In quantum mechanics a particle can move seemingly without an external force being applied to it. The elementary particles behave very differently then in newtonian physics. A particle completly at rest and with no external influence can leap forward suddently. A particle shot out of a gun can suddently change direction and speed without influence. Science has yet to show any mechanism acting on these particles to explain their sudden unprovoked changes. However studies using radioactive decay powered random generators show that when a person or child exerts their mental will on these generators we can cause them to slightly change and output the numbers the person wills them to generate. This bascially shows that these random movements of elementary particles are effected by mental will. This is where chaos theory comes into play. In chaotic system (like quantum mechanics) any small change in an earlier state can result in very large changes in future states. Another words moving a few particles around now may cause you to be a millionair in a week. Since we determined this small changes can be executed by will it would seem to be a solid explanation of magick from a scientific stand point. Although I admit there are still plenty of questions that could be answered on the matter.

So it works both ways. Magick defines science, science defines magick. It might seem contradictory, or a circular argument. You'd be right from a conventional sense. but opposites are in fact more similar then different, I would even go as far to say they are the same thing. from a thelema point of view one would say "0=2". So really I see no contradiction, just points of view. Its all reality, none of it is real, well, to be more accurate, it is only as real as you let it be.

(so tell me what you think)


What do you think of when you read the term "magick"?Witches performing spells? Medieval ceremonialists in hooded robes? Stage illusionists pulling bunnies out of hats? Special effects from fantasy films? Some force that you believe or don't believe in? Allow me to ask you to set those mythic ideas aside for now. While this discussion may eventually wind its way back to the realm of the remarkable, I'd like to start in a much more familiar place.

The broadest definition of magick was offered in the early 20th Century by the occultist Aleister Crowley who suggested that magick was "the art and science of causing change in conformity with will." (Crowley was also responsible for returning the "K" to the spelling of "magick," to distinguish the mental and spiritual discipline from stage illusion.) For the purposes of our immediate discussion, I'd like to narrow that down a little further and say that magick is the art and science of using ritual technology to cause change. In short, the work of the magician is to do whatever is necessary to create an altered state that results in change and a desired outcome. Sound familiar? From this point of view, the boundary between hypnosis as we know it and magick as we might learn to accept it is somewhat vague. The essential difference that I'll offer here is the concept of a "ritual frame."

We encounter ritual frames every day. Ritualizing seems to be a fundamental human behavior, something we use and experience in many aspects of our lives. For instance, if you choose to have a romantic dinner with someone special, there's a particular ritual that you may use to enhance the situation, create an altered state, and achieve the desired outcome of romance. No "love spell" is necessary to perform this magick - the ritual is simply to ensure that every aspect of the situation is aligned with the goal: the lights are dimmed, the candles lit, the champagne chilled, the food perfect, the music soft and suggestive. If you get that ritual right, then an altered state is produced - a comfortable sharing, perhaps - and your desired outcome - romance - is achieved. This ritual can be repeated with variations to achieve a romantic effect time after time.

Similarly, most of us have rituals that we use to prepare for a day of work. Personally, I shower, meditate for a short while, eat a light breakfast, put on some presentable clothes, and make sure my office is clean and ready. I repeat that ritual each time I want to enter the state of mind necessary to engage in my work as a hypnotherapist. And then there's yet another ritual frame that is created when my client walks through the door - the way I greet him or her, the pre-session talk, any changes in the lighting or music, the invitation to sit in the trance chair, and so on. Formal trance induction and NLP methods also often involve ritual frames that provide a setting for the content of the session. We each develop the ritual frames that work best for us.

Just as the Ericksonian definition of hypnosis suggests that "Trance permits the operator to evoke in a controlled manner the same mental mechanisms that are operative spontaneously in everyday life," we may find that magick is subject to a very similar definition. The mental mechanisms, however, may have a slightly different emphasis, with magick being more concerned with our ability to create ritual frames "in a controlled manner."

The examples I've just given - romance and preparation for work - are common and naturally- occurring uses of ritual. A glance at a medieval grimoire (magical textbook or collection of rituals), however, will offer up rituals that are perhaps not quite so easily understood. Ancient languages form chants and calls that are embellished with symbolic gestures, actions, sounds, and images. One of the explanations for the arcane qualities of these rituals is simply that these ritual actions had more natural meaning in the context of the medieval world. While some of the elements may seem bizarre to those of us living in the 21st Century, they may have been more familiar to the clerics and alchemists of the Dark Ages. There's more, however. Most of the rituals found in old texts like "The Keys of Solomon" or "The Sacred Magick of Abramelin the Mage" had very specific and very intense purposes. The idea was to create altered states of singular depth and utility.

Here's another point of commonality with hypnosis. While some rituals definitely had consciously directed purposes (not unlike the "romance" example above), the forms that were described as "High Magick" were more interested in connecting the conscious mind with that part of the unconscious variously referred to by ritualists of yore as "the high self," "the perfected self," or "the Holy Guardian Angel." Like the "benevolent unconscious" found in some models of hypnosis, the "perfected self" was understood as an intelligence above and beyond the normal ego-consciousness with a much greater understanding of the unique purpose and direction of the individual. Outcomes of ritual work would ultimately be generated from contact with that level of the unconscious. Just as some of the outcomes of hypnotherapy may seem miraculous to the uninitiated, the results of these powerful rituals could definitely seem like... well, magick.

Anyway, the point of all this just now is to introduce some concepts and terms that will come in handy. In the meantime, think about the use of ritual frames in your own life and work and perhaps you'll find a glimpse of magick.

Magick is the realm of causal reality not yet fully explored by our material understanding. Science is litterally knowledge, and specifically it is knowledge that is demonstrable in the material world in one way or another. Science follows a low of observation and hypothesis, which can be applied to magickal exploration as well. However, unlike Science, magick is a science of subtle observation, hypothesis, and experimentation. It is a science, to those who possess the necessary equipment for observation. The same equipment used to observe material reality, but the magician employs those tools, the senses, on the subtle reality rather than the material.

While science and magick are arguably the same, mutually capable - in the long run - of explaining one another, they function on the two sides of the same coin of reality - the gross material, and the subtle astral. Each reaches far into the other, as that division is a spectrum, not an absolute boundary.

Chaos theory, quantum causal fields, etc., are where that overlap is beginning to manifest. While both science and magick will take their respective perspectives on these new understandings, science will never call quantum vibrations magick, any more than a magick will call the astral science. This is one of the most talked about subjects amongst those that have a mind for both subjects.

It is misleading to ask when "science" will understand magic, since no such body exists. We can, however, approach magic in a scientific manner. My thoughts on this subject are explained in greater detail in the Skeptics and in the Students section of truthaboutmagic.com.

1. Current scientific investigations into magic involve little more than chance-gueessing games and other forms of "testing" that bear no resemblance to actual occult methods or goals. Aside from some credulous few who continue to believe in asinine "telekinesis" videos and other modern table-tippings, the vast majority of us ought to be well aware that you can't make pencils roll about by thinking hard at them... so why do "scientists" continue to run such tests?

2. Any magician can, by defining experimental procedures, make a scientific study of any occult work. If we have the grimoire, we can test it, and see whether or not it actually works. If it says you need fourteen virgin sheep, a black treasure-troll, and a lock of hair from an 80-year old Hippie, you get those things and follow the instructions to see what happens. If scientists aren't willing to follow experimental procedures and actually do the spells and ceremonies the way magicians say they're to be done, then they don't deserve credit as scientists.

3. When evaluating success, try to ascertain whether or not you actually had something remarkable occur. Magic ought to produce wonders, not just convenient coincidences. If you have a technique that appears to work, use it and find out how well it works. Don't be afraid to break your wand using it, and if nothing happens don't concoct some dramatic incident to explain how something else happened instead. just admit that it was a useless technique and move on to something else that does work. We can't look like kooks or no one will ever give us the billions in funding we will demand once we actually can do something impressive.

The bottom line is that scientists need to study and test REAL occultism, and that magicians need to use REAL scientific testing to make sure they aren't full of crap.

both of you two are real confusing but make some good sense
@_@
well ummm....more confusion.

thats alot of confusing crap up there about "Magick" (gotta love bad spelling).

if anyone can show me a real magician and not a psychic then i'll put down my bible and pick up a spellbook that describes eternal life (and i am willing to say this becase you will NEVER find a real wizard/magician even if you manage to find someone PRETENDING to be one).

Psychics are another story, i've seen that done and i'm not talking about crap with wires, i'm talking about Hydrokenesis, taking the water straight out of solid objects. Telekenesis can be mildly explained with science, children of this age use up to 11% of their brain capacity while the previous generation only used 10%. this jump in brain power is exponential in nature and is marked by a .3 degree lower body temperature.


Magick and Science only cross in the field of telekenesis and only because Magick otherwise doesn't exist.

@fayt lingod: I'm not talking about magic you're talking about,
I'm talking about magick with a "k" in the end is what I'm talking about this the type
of magic anybody can use without a spellbook. But you can use one if you like,
but the best spells are the ones your family teach you,
I've been doing it since I was 8 yrs old you can use circles too I know a lot of stuff about spells there is magic called "Blood-magic" it's the best I know but you have to use blood :)

I think that science IS magic... In the past all the things that can be expalined by science were called magic, like, for example, alchemy is the start of chemistry... Science just explains magic... Everything that was magic someday in the past is only science nowadays... Though I don't really think that's a good thing because people completely lose their believe in miracles...
And what about that "Blood-magic"of your's Forgotten soul? Could you tell more (at least what it does).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Forgotten soul

@fayt lingod: I'm not talking about magic you're talking about,
I'm talking about magick with a "k" in the end is what I'm talking about this the type
of magic anybody can use without a spellbook. But you can use one if you like,
but the best spells are the ones your family teach you,
I've been doing it since I was 8 yrs old you can use circles too I know a lot of stuff about spells there is magic called "Blood-magic" it's the best I know but you have to use blood :)

---

"Magik"? i still think it's a croc of crap. show me something that talks about it, and not some forum of people who use it. i want a real scientific site about it. Circle and Blood magic? What kind of satanist cult are you in? (and i have [almost] nothing against satanists)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lasura

I think that science IS magic... In the past all the things that can be expalined by science were called magic, like, for example, alchemy is the start of chemistry... Science just explains magic... Everything that was magic someday in the past is only science nowadays... Though I don't really think that's a good thing because people completely lose their believe in miracles...
And what about that "Blood-magic"of your's Forgotten soul? Could you tell more (at least what it does).

---

I agree with your assessment of science. even the alchemy part, as the orriginal goal was to create gold and we can do that today (by spending more money than the gold is worth)