• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Does Magick Work?

Re: Tantrum

I'm not going to continue to attempt rational discussion with someone whose problems have become so apparent.
 
For some of us it works, whatever way,some have maybe never tried?.Surely something should be tried before being dissmissed out of hand?.
 
Er...who is anyone saying is a troll? So far, I don't see any evidence of trolling. Some people have said certain things, some take them up on those points. No trolling so far IMHO.
 
A most interesting thread (...in parts)

It was mentioned above, "action at a distance" as part of the 'magic(k)'. I wonder if Einstein's "spooky action at a distance" and modern 'quantum entanglement' play a part; and maybe it's partly due to the quantum nature of the brain's activity which connects 'at a distance' through the multi-dimensional universe.

Any thoughts on this?

regards

Baz
 
Action at a distance was mentioned, yes, but the examples given of magick (drinking, writing, etc) don't seem to use it.
 
At Last

An answer to your questions you may never see, but we should all seek out:

Action at a distance is an illusion; exerting will via action is all there is, the distance is part of the illusion of separation.

But check this movie out, and clamor for it to be shown in your area --


'What the @&*%(*!' is going on
A little movie with some big success


LOS ANGELES, California (Reuters) -- It aims to be the little movie that uses the powers of positive thinking and science to score big at box offices and surprise Hollywood.

If "What the (Bleep) Do We Know" achieves that goal, its independent filmmakers will be saying, "You see, we knew."

After debuting in one theater in Oregon this spring, "What the Bleep" expanded to 114 theaters last Friday, up from 88 the previous weekend. The movie moved up five notches on the weekend gross box office list.

If all goes according to plan, new distributors Samuel Goldwyn Films and Roadside Attractions will place it in more theaters each week if it continues attracting moviegoers.

Based on his experience, director and backer William Arntz thinks that's a no-brainer -- which says something about the film that tells people they can rewire their synapses to perceive a better world around them.

Arntz said, and theater owners agreed, that wherever the film has played it has opened to small crowds. But as people see it and talk about it, lines begin to form at box offices.

"After about five weeks, (theater owners) start going 'What the (bleep) is going on here,' " Arntz said.

So, he tells them.
'I kept wanting bigger things'

Arntz, a corporate scientist dropout turned Buddhist turned software developer turned millionaire software developer turned film director, said he always wanted to make movies.

He even came to Hollywood in 1980, but found the experience daunting. After a spiritual quest and with money in his pocket, his thinking changed. He had the idea of putting together his four loves: science, spiritual thinking, movies and computers.

"It started off like a little, $125,000 documentary," Arntz said. "But I kept wanting bigger things ... it grew from $125,000 to a $5 million movie, much to my surprise."

"What the Bleep" melds quantum physics and metaphysical thinking with an old-fashioned movie story in which a photographer, Amanda (Marlee Matlin), learns to change her life by altering the way she thinks about herself and the world.

The new Amanda comes from a different understanding of the way energy, matter, molecules and atoms work around us. "Most people think the outside world just happens. We're suggesting there's a big connection between what you think inside your mind and what's happening outside," Arntz said.

It's heady stuff for audiences more concerned with munching popcorn, so that's why the filmmakers added Amanda's story.

To explain the science, the fictional tale is interrupted by interviews with scientists such as John Hagelin, who conducted research at the European Center for Particle Physics, and William Tiller, a Stanford University professor who spent nine years in the Westinghouse Research Laboratory.

Dr. Stuart Hameroff, associate director for the Center of Consciousness Studies at the University of Arizona, and Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, a psychiatrist and former president of the C.G. Jung Foundation of New York, cover the neurology.

Metaphysics is discussed by Dr. Miceal Ledwith of the Maynooth College in Ireland and the mystic, Ramtha.
Making an impact

Arntz said he and fellow filmmakers Betsy Chasse and Mark Vicente, tried to persuade major movie studios to distribute the film, but Hollywood's collective mind was closed.

So, in a nod to the best tradition of grass roots marketing not too far from Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ," they contacted spiritual, philosophy and science groups. They put flyers in everything from yoga studios to health food stores.

The filmmakers persuaded their hometown theater to play "What the (Bleep)" and when tickets sold, a theater in Portland, Oregon came aboard. Then came theaters in Arizona, Washington and Los Angeles. Everywhere it has played, audiences line up.

While Hollywood didn't know what to think, Meyer Gottlieb, president of independent film distributor Samuel Goldwyn Films, liked what he saw at a Los Angeles screening.

"I met, literally, 300 people in the theater," Gottlieb said, "and these people told me that, in fact, the movie had an impact on their lives. Many had seen it two or three times."

Critical reviews are mixed, but they were generally mixed on "The Passion of the Christ," too, and that movie is this year's third top-grossing film with $370 million at U.S. and Canadian box offices, behind "Spider-Man 2" and "Shrek 2."

To be sure, all three of those box office hits had a different release schedule. They all opened "wide," as the industry puts it, in over 3,000 theaters.

"What the (Bleep)" started in one theater. But then, 2002 hit indie "My Big Fat Greek Wedding," which pulled in $241 million at domestic theaters, started small too.

Copyright 2004 Reuters. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.



Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/Movies/09/29/leisure.bleep.reut/index.html
 
Vote Early & Often

Great link.

Any chance that any of us have seen the movie, by the way?
 
The filmmakers - William Arntz, Betsy Chasse, and Mark Vicente - are all students of Ramtha, according to the film's FAQ. The reviews I've read mention that J Z Knight, credited as Ramtha, gets her screentime.

In the FAQ, the filmmakers deny that the film is a recruitment ad for the Ramtha School of Enlightenment, though they do acknowledge the possibility that "some people may be inspired to check out RSE".
 
Same Old

The stuff I'm seeing mentioned as the movie's content in these write-ups makes it sound like the same old basic stuff most esoteric groups espouse, once you get near enough the basics.

Which makes sense.
 
:hello:Magick. What is Magick? That is a very good question and one that may have many different answers by many different people. Your best bet is to make your own answer.

Magick to me is simply to achieve my intentions. Therefore my life is filled with magick. If you want to bring something into your life just know that it will happen and it will. At the end of the day if you wish to do a ritual to help you focus on that intention that is great. It doesn't sound fancy and it may be too simple to believe but that is magick. :wow:
 
erm, no, its just confidence and focus... nothing supernatural there. if you believe something will happen you will attempt, either conciously or subconciously to make it happen and take advantage of opportunities... a 'spell' to give you good luck is simply being positive about the world around you and seeing the positive aspects of events. 'Cursing' someone is getting them to believe that they are cursed.. its amazing what the human mind and body will do to itself if it believes enough in something...
 
Basic Mistake

The basic mistake most make is thinking mind is in any way separate from reality or "the world out there". It's not.

All is One, No Separation.

Thought and matter are the same thing in different aspects, and maybe not even in different aspects.

Action at a distance? There is no distance.

Belief does not make it so, and wishful thinking / magical thinking is sad and bogus, but magick is simply a fact, nothing supernatural about it at all although the results often look that way.
 
i agree, but mind is a function of reality, not an equal to it. mind exists because of particular electrochemical structures in the human nervous system, nothing more...

no distance? someones been playing White Wolfs MAGE game... That has a concept called the point of correspondence - that everything and everywhen is one location. I find no evidence or proof of this concept in evidence anywhere... to believe in the concept is just that, belief - a decision that something is true without evidence to corroborate the fact.

if it were possible to manipulate the world external to us purely through belief and will, then there would be evidence of it. every time someone tries to tie down real,solid evidence of supernatural or 'action by will at a distance' the evidence has a bad habit of dissipating in to storytelling and fraud.
 
Agreed

Mind is not equal to reality because it's not separate from reality. It is part of the same one thing.

Your assertion that mind is but electro-chemical is simply not proven.

White Wolf may or may not have a game using the concept of conjugate points but it comes straight out of physics and isn't made up at all.

Further, I was citing Zen-Tao philosophy anyhow.

I state clearly as often as possible over and over repeatedly (redundant, n'est pas?) that belief and wishes and other Buffyisms are bogus and nonsense and not sufficient and not magick. Magick is focused will plus action to bring about desired changes in reality. Nothing supernatural about it at all.

As for action at a distance, there is no distance, and the illusion of distance is all that makes any of this seem counter-intuitive.
 
show evidence that the statement that the mind is just electrochemical.... please. Otherwise any other statement is simply a belief.

Show evidence that distance is an illusion?

Show evidence of anything that is not otherwise explained in terms of matter and energy working in their usual ways...

Belief is not evidence.

to quote:
**
I state clearly as often as possible over and over repeatedly (redundant, n'est pas?) that belief and wishes and other Buffyisms are bogus and nonsense and not sufficient and not magick. Magick is focused will plus action to bring about desired changes in reality. Nothing supernatural about it at all.
**

So, in your own words, 'magic' is focused will plus action. Everything you do in life is focused will and action. that is not magic, it is existing.
 
Well, Well

Seems we have a CSICOP-style debunker whining for evidence again. lol

Rabbit runs by. A few seconds later a dog runs by. Scientists conclude the rabbit causes the dog. -- Ambrose Bierce.

Almost NOTHING most of us do most of the time is focused will, let alone action. Therein lies the flaw in such dismissal.

WAKE UP! -- G. I. Gurdjieff

One instant of cognizance is worth several lifetimes of searching for enlightenment. -- Dalai Lama.

Etc.
 
i am not attempting to debunk.

I just simply wish people would build their view of the world on real evidence, and admit there are areas that they dont understand, and to have no opinion of those areas until evidence becomes apparent.

It appears to be a trait of the human mind to attempt to 'fill in the gaps' in their worldview.. If people dont know what the cause of something is, they will 'make up a story' to explain it so that they have something to fill the gap in their knowledge.

The ONLY things we can know about the world are those things that are supported by evidence of some form. All definitions of how the world works, even those supported by solid evidence, are still only rough simplifications of what is really going on. we cannot percieve reality as it truly is, so we have to use what we can see as effectively as possible to build as clear a view as possible.

filling in the gaps with unsupported theories - stories - based on no actual evidence - does no good in trying to build a clear view of how the world works and only distracts.
 
Atheistic Materialism

It's atheistic materialism leading many astray in their demand for "evidence" -- what they define as evidence is but a tiny part of existence.

It's like defining a woman by one eyelash.
 
:hello:Hi ya guys.

Erm…I hate to interrupt. But I would like to attempt to help explain using scientific facts. Let me first say I don’t’ know everything and there are things that I have trouble understanding. For now though I would like to explain something that I believe I do understand.:grouphug:

It is scientific fact that everything is made up of particles of light (protons, neutrons and electrons). That includes us. We are made of the same thing as your coffee table. So basically everything is energy that vibrates. Some things vibrate at a slower pace, i.e. wood vibrates slower than water, etc. Spiritual people manipulate energy, as it has been for thousands of years (as you will see if you look deep into the practise of the Essenes). Not only that but there have been multiple scientific experiments professionally organised to prove that astral travel and out of body experiences not only exist but are controllable.

Imagine if you don’t separate the world of science and sprit if you combine them as one. Science has proved that they are one but it is not widely publicised or excepted because a lot of scientist don’t want their world tampered with.

Anyway I hope this helps. I’m sorry if I haven’t explained things properly but I hope you see my point in the way it is intended. I’ll shut up now and let you get on with it.:rofl:
 
Batting An Eyelash

Uh, no. An eyelash would have mitochondrial DNA but would have nuclear DNA only if it had a skin tab or "root".

Even then however you perpetuate the basic error. You presume DNA explains all about a person, when in fact it doesn't even let you make another one, only a clone / paternal twin.

If you think the GATTACA strings define a person, let alone all an individual is capable of, you are missing most of the circus.

And yes, many scientists pretty much knows that magick as defined by the ancients and as practiced by such as Uncle Al is legitimate, real, and not supernatural. Look around, though, it's a New Dark Ages, this time with evangelical fundamentalism rampant instead of the Vatican.
 
bringerofbroom said:
filling in the gaps with unsupported theories - stories - based on no actual evidence - does no good in trying to build a clear view of how the world works and only distracts.

Hmm - you have to be careful there. There is no scientific evidence for quite alot of what it is that makes us humans. Does this mean that such things don't exist, because they can't be quantified by science?
 
Mooncat said:
It is scientific fact that everything is made up of particles of light (protons, neutrons and electrons). That includes us. We are made of the same thing as your coffee table. So basically everything is energy that vibrates. Some things vibrate at a slower pace, i.e. wood vibrates slower than water, etc. Spiritual people manipulate energy, as it has been for thousands of years (as you will see if you look deep into the practise of the Essenes).
Not really. Protons, neutrons, and electrons aren't made up of particles of light. The former appear to be made up of quarks and gluons, while the latter seems to be a genuine fundamental particle. (At least before string theory or its bretheren get their hands on it. ;) )

Quantum mechanics (with a bit of particle physics thrown in)frequently gets co-opted to explain spiritual matters, but it isn't really related. The whole interconnectedness thing and "spooky action at a distance" give the appearance of relevance, but I'm afraid that it tends to be a bad mis-reading of it. :(
 
Depends

That's such a cliché to dismiss any points at which physics and mysticsm meet that one must either be specific or move on. Spooky action at a distance is not the same term as Action at a distance; they refer to differnt, specific things.

Fritjof Capra, Heinz Pagels, and even Michael Talbot and many others have explored the interstices and in truth what you're dealing with is different languages describing entirely different things.

The fifth element is mind.
 
in response to jerryb -

the point is, to accept that what we percieve is evidence ( biased, subjective evidence from a limited point of experience i accept ) and to make judgements on only those things we can percieve. anything we cannot percieve is by definition unknowable and therefore we should make no judgement on it. just because we cant see something doesnt mean it doesnt exist, but without at least some form of perception of it, and thus evidence, we have nothing to base a judgement on. we should accept our limitations and move on. if it unpercievable, and does not actually affect us, why should we bother trying to explain it?
 
Perhaps so, but what if something suggests that an effect is taking place? It may still not be readily quantifiable, and perhaps not within our current framework of knowledge. And I'd argue that evidence isn't the one true source of an absolute - after all, evidence can be manipulated or misidentified, etc. (even if it comes under the scrutinty of science).
 
its always worth keeping your eyes out for new evidence. its the anomalies that are best for seeing what is really going on behind the scenes. too many scientists work on the idea of coming up with theories that explain the majority of situations, and ignore the anomalies.

My way of dealing with it is to accept that 'anomalous' events can happen... you make no judgement on them other that to check out the reliability of those reporting them. Eventually, enough anomalies will occur that they can be defined as clear evidence of something happening, in which case theories as to their cause can be derived.

a question - how can you define an absolute? There is no such thing. All you can do is come up with a view that best describes the evidence you have. anything else is storytelling.
 
Back
Top