Jason Louv, A Strange Mix of Scientism and Magick |385|

Discussion in 'Skeptiko Shows' started by Alex, Jul 24, 2018.

  1. Charlie Primero

    Charlie Primero Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2017
    Messages:
    693
    This is precisely why I am a big Skeptiko fan.

    There are literally hundreds of podcasts dedicated to fluffing booksellers in order to generate EZ podcast content.

    Alex's willingness to cut through the fluff and ask the hard root questions without wasting listeners' time is what makes Skeptiko so unique and valuable.
     
    hypermagda and morvern_c like this.
  2. Vortex

    Vortex Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    627
    Well, Steve, you appear to be a honest and consistent anarcho-pacifist (even if you possibly won't describe yourself as such). Very good for you - many self-proclaimed "pacifists" seem badly hypocritical and self-contradicting to me: they are against violence only as long as it is directed against the violent power-structure of the society, but not then it is used to maintain its existence. You are not among them.

    I'm anarchist, yet not a pacifist, myself. While I, personally, not an active anarcho-militant, I'm not against people's armed struggle against oppressive powers, in principle. Will this sincere position of mine put me beyond your circle of friends, even distant / online ones (as we are already)? Would be really sad if it will - we have a lot of things to discuss! And I want to emphasis that I, even disagreeing with your pacifist position, respect it fully. Honest pacifists and sincere militants can both have a positive impact on society.

    Compassion, pity and mercy, on one side; wrath, rage and fury, on the other; tranquility, patience and calm, in the center between: the triunity of the Healer, the Warrior and the Scholar. The paths of the Healer and the Scholar are not unquestionably good; the path of the Warrior is not necessarily evil. All three paths are needed in some situations, and not needed in the other ones. And only in recognising all three paths as a part of the human existence, as a natural and not pathological parts of ourselves, we could reach wholeness, power and lucidity - and, in their triunity, our freedom.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2018
    Steve likes this.
  3. Steve

    Steve Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    1,448
    I try hard to keep open the circle of friends I have. In reality it isn’t one circle though, isn’t it a bunch of concentric circles growing from a small number of loved ones and maybe close friends through other levels including internet friends to an outer ring which consists of people you don’t even know. I have never ‘ignored’ anyone on any forum I’ve been on, I have not unfriended any of my friends or ex colleagues on Facebook, but have unfollowed a few, and been unfriended by others. I don’t easily get offended but I sometimes realise that ‘this is going nowhere’, or “I’m uncomfortable talking to this individual”, which occasionally happens.

    I struggle with putting people in boxes Vortex. I appear to be in your box labelled anarcho-pacifist, I’m not sure what one of those really is? ;) I fear I’m not a true pacifist, if that means what I think it does. If someone attacks my family I would do what I could to defend them, including lethal force if necessary. Live by the sword, die by the sword, seems fair enough to me. The question that arises then is “would you fight in a war?”. Possibly, but not in any recent war I’ve seen, fortunately it’s something that I can ignore in this life, as I approach sixty, as well as being disabled. As I am a fan of Reincarnation, there is a fair chance that I died fighting in the last Great War, and I probably joined up willingly. Who knows, but possibly I’ve grown since then.

    I am as soft as shit when it comes to it though. I avoid killing anything, even mosquitos until they ask for it! Then I carry out God’s will. :)

    Your post last night pressed my buttons, as I think mine did yours. I held back from any egoic extreme, I’m very glad I did. I try, I really do.

    By the way where did you get the quote from. It’s good stuff.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2018
    soulatman, Vortex and Trancestate like this.
  4. Vortex

    Vortex Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    627
    I said how you appear to me, Steve - not who you truly are. And my appearances are as potentially faulty as the ones of others. Only you can decide who you are, Steve, in and by your true will.

    Well, I do kill mosquitoes and gadflies if they try to bite me... Yet I avoid stepping at any insect on a road, if I noticed it before making a step. My moral impulse not to attack anyone who is not attacking me or others work for any living beings, big and small.

    I'm a compassionate person by nature, often giving a few money to beggars, willing to help ones who ask for assistance and to forgive the ones who have wronged me. Yet wrath and fury are not alien feelings to me - I often felt them towards the people who willfully oppress and torment others... especially if they are state-approved actors who pretended that they have a "right" to initiate violence and and to disregard others. I also often feel rage when I encounter some self-proclaimed "pacifists" who are "pacifist" only in regard to the actions of the oppressed against the oppressors - yet simultaneously absolve the oppressors of all responsibility of their initiatory violence. Happily, you are not one of the latter, Steve.

    From my mind - it's my own words (and thoughts)! I used italics just to separate them from the rest of the text.
     
    Steve and Trancestate like this.
  5. Michael Patterson

    Michael Patterson New

    Joined:
    May 1, 2015
    Messages:
    168
    Home Page:
    Hey Steve I just wanted to say how much I get your perspective. When I was recovering from GBS in a rehab ward I met a bunch of people who had strokes. I was grateful I had copped GBS as my huge challenge in life. Its amazing what happen to your take on life, isn't it.
     
    dpdownsouth and Steve like this.
  6. Steve

    Steve Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    1,448
    Thanks for this Michael.

    At the time, I never really considered ‘the stroke’ positively or negatively, my feeling of gratefulness was simply for having survived. I can vividly recall thinking to myself, if all I can do is sit in the back garden and look at the flowers, it’ll be enough.

    Seven years on I’ve achieved more that I or others ever hoped I might. Only last night my wife emotionally sat me down after saying goodnight to a bunch of our friends we had round for her birthday. She looked me in the eye and said how proud she was of me, that I had come so far.

    You might be one of the few people that can really understand what I mean when I can now say that I consider my stroke a blessing in many ways. It opened my eyes.
     
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2018
    dpdownsouth and soulatman like this.
  7. Michael Patterson

    Michael Patterson New

    Joined:
    May 1, 2015
    Messages:
    168
    Home Page:
    I get the impression that Louv has sailed calm seas of indulgent interviews conducted by people whose job it is to make authors flogging their books have a good time. Thank the gods that Alex does not rely on Skeptiko for a living. He can afford to piss people off.

    I think Louv demonstrates one of the persistent perils faced by readers who are innocently looking for a good read. How do you know whether the riveting historic yarn you are reading is (a) the product of really decent research and (b) informed by a balanced POV? As I listened to the Rune Soup interview I thought Louv had done a decent enough job, but then the questions started to form and I was less assured.

    The problem is, David, that people who have limited knowledge or interest can be persuaded that their manipulated POV is valid and worth something - so long as it gels with the author's intent to seem amazingly insightful and erudite. They don't think things that they are not encouraged to question. Louv could have written a book about the nature of magic and consciousness that might have got a reader to struggle into serious questioning thought. He says he is a teacher of magic after all. But he elects a safer path of writing a book that really has no serious contemporary relevance. It will earn him a buck. It will make him seem like he knows stuff and boost his magic school attendance.

    So what Louv does is dull any spirit of inquiry by distracting attention with stuff we hardly need to know. He said magic is about self awareness. I don't agree, but he hasty demonstrated that is his priority. His conduct on Skeptiko suggests a limited comprehension of what self awareness is - and hence what he can or should try to teach.

    Sure, lot of people teach what they have marginal competence in. This is usually because they think a particular intellectual grasp on a subject is sufficient to render them fit to teach. I have to confess to being guilty of the same thing - a long time ago now. It seems to be a popular conceit these days - and a source of income.

    Louv's failure to research Skeptiko is surprising - unless he presumed that he was up to the challenge. I noted that he said he prepared for Rune Soup by reading all of Gordon's books. That is a pretty major commitment for an interview - astonishing actually. Maybe that's why he had not taken the time to sort how to approach his Skeptiko interview? Maybe he simply saw more sales in sucking up to Gordon and thought Alex was a hazard he could ace without too much effort.

    There are a lot of books written on magic and related subjects these days. At best they have useful content that can inform somewhat and maybe stimulate some thinking. But mostly not in my view. There is obvious kudos in being a published author. Publishers guess at what will sell sufficiently to make them money. Authors who return a profit are encouraged to write another book. The readers' interests are not part of the deal. They are customers who buy books and not truth seekers.

    The reader as truth seeker has no status compared to the reader as customer. That is not to say that all books are useless shite and a waste of money. But it is to say that reader must learn discrimination quickly if they are to not waste time and money. Truth seekers are fools (in the noble sense of the innocent) in a very predatory reality of publishing and teaching. The risk of being persuaded by flattery to abdicate the duty of personal discrimination is constant.
     
    dpdownsouth and hypermagda like this.
  8. David Bailey

    David Bailey Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    4,280
    I suppose at a more practical level, a pacifist realises that the horribly deliberate preparations to kill others that you don't even know, and don't have a grudge with, just has to be wrong. I mean people have to solve all sorts of technical problems to make the weapons that now sit in silos ready to burn vast numbers of men, women and children to death - maybe even just because of a technical error! Others have to train to use these weapons. That lunacy has to stop before it is too late.

    David
     
    dpdownsouth and Steve like this.
  9. Vortex

    Vortex Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    627
    The hard and painful question, which no pacifist has answered as yet - HOW would you stop people who possess all these armaments? People being ready to use them because of their training to rely on violence? People being propagandised into certitude of their "moral and legal right" to use these weapons, even if with "significant collateral damage" (read: countless uninvolved bystanders being slaughtered) in the process?

    Is there a way to persuade them, to influence them somehow, to enlighten them so they will become aware of the horror of the global massacre they are so eager to start? And now, with a Cold War 2.0, McCarthyism 2.0 and the renewed confrontation of the nuclear superpowers, the prospect of such masacre is again real and tangible - and it become even more real as mutual hostility on a global scale escalates...

    As for now, I don't know of such a way.

    As I said already, I'm not an active militant myself. Yet - consider it to be an example - a group of armed rebels will violently overthrow a government that is actively striving to ignite a World War III, I won't moralistically condemn them.
     
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2018
    Steve likes this.
  10. David Bailey

    David Bailey Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    4,280
    I don't know, but for example after WWII, Europe seemed to turn its back on state violence. Even now, with the EU messing about and wanting its own army, the place seems very free of potential violence between member states. If the EU breaks up - as I hope and expect it will - I am pretty sure the member states will still be peaceful among themselves. Now if you imagine a larger group of states - the whole world - it seems reasonable that we could get to such a state.

    We might get there accidentally if one bomb were to explode for some reason without setting off anything more. I think the revulsion at what had been done might propel the world into such a state.

    Clearly violence that stopped a nuclear war would be acceptable.

    If we are really lucky, it could just be that the militaries will just get bored with polishing machines that are just too terrible to use.

    David
     
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2018
  11. First Last

    First Last Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2016
    Messages:
    4
    No of course I wasn't just talking about a single statistic. I'm talking about Jason's general attitude and his repeated
    Jason's ideas and conduct speak for themselves and do not warrant further comment. I'm viewing the entire episode as a microcosm of the current era in which members of the general public, overwhelmed and disoriented by contradictory information, have been cuckolded with the existential crisis of an irrelevant media and transformed into fervent guardians of the status quo:

    - "to go backwards would be a tremendous civilizational wide disaster...with people accepting conspiracy theories, fake news, antivaccination stuff, it’s an utter nightmare"
    - "This is what is driving our world back to the Dark Ages..."
    - "...the liberty of human consciousness is at stake right now."
     
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2018
    Charlie Primero likes this.
  12. Charlie Primero

    Charlie Primero Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2017
    Messages:
    693
    The irony of this statement by Louv is simply Epic.

    A clown who doesn't care enough about Truth and Reality to spend 15 minutes investigating his Go-to-War claim accuses us of retarding cognitive liberty.
     
  13. Michael Patterson

    Michael Patterson New

    Joined:
    May 1, 2015
    Messages:
    168
    Home Page:
    It does seem that those who want conflict are in a small minority, but with the power to ignore the majority. In Australia nobody had an appetite for war in Iraq, but our war criminal Prime Minister decided to ignore majority opinion. Then, later, to the eternal disgrace of the Labor Party we were induced to 'support our troops' because, it seemed, they could not engage in an illegal and immoral war without our support for them as sensitive people.

    From a distance we look at the USA as danger, not just because it is cheering more conflict, but because, once begun, there is a sufficient patriotic surge to create the illusion that it is a supported war. I get that this is manipulated, mostly by a now mercifully ex-Australian and horde of crazy Christians hanging out for Israel to be embroiled in the final conflict under to totally insane delusion that Christ will then return. Of course the rich bastards will grow fatter as families grow smaller - person by person or limb by limb.

    The question is - who has an appetite for more brutality? The answer seems to be the morally debased and the religiously deluded. Sadly this small number has the machinery to pretend to a bewildered majority that this is a good thing -and completely ignore opposing sentiment and opinion.

    Frankly I do not think we can stop forces who want conflict in any direct way. But we can loudly insist that such moral outrage is not conducted in our names, and neither do we support any member of the military forces who is prepared to abdicate moral responsibility. Post WW2 the USA in particular made a particular point to refusing the legitimacy of the defence of 'just following orders'. Its called now the Nuremberg Defence. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_orders

    The problem now, is however, a vast integrated problem of economics, politics and culture. The economic power of the US military is staggering. Britain's passion for morally problematic arms sales is well established and now even the half wits in the Australian parliament have contrived to imagine that Australia might become a major arms exporter. Apparently that means jobs etc. Right, and it also means we must encourage armed conflict as a means for addressing problems.

    For me there is something fundamentally morally repugnant about anticipating employment and profit on the good news that somewhere people are precipitating mutual misery and horror - as the only way they can address their disagreements. While the majority our our cultures have grown up and moved closer to civil forms of conflict resolution our governments favour arseholes who manufacture and sell weapons. We need to see that the balance is on our side - and a steady and persistent repudiation of the hideous stupidity of armed conflict must be backed by a vocal reminder to the clowns we have to elect that this garbage is not perpetrated in our names.
     
  14. Mishelle

    Mishelle Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2017
    Messages:
    209
    Home Page:
    Fabulous question! It took me about 2 years to wake my husband up. My friend is still asleep, but she is dealing with a lot of personal stuff and doesn't have time to research and is honestly barely hanging on.
    As for my dad I only started working on him 6 months ago, he spouted the usual rhetoric, he is quite old of course, but he cares, and he listens when it suits him. We will see! I'm a gardener, I just plant the seeds! :)

    There is a great quote, I don't know by whom, it goes something like: "It is rare one will see the truth if his paycheck and pension depends on him not seeing it."

    I can tell you I've spoken to all kinds on this issue over the years, and a few of them can't even see any trails, at all! Their eyes actually can't perceive anything happening in the sky, mind boggling, maybe they lie, I don't know, but it sure makes me wonder about human nature!

    Here's one pilot who was able finally "to see" after ignoring it and his pilot friends also dismissing it all.

     
    soulatman likes this.
  15. Baccarat

    Baccarat New

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2016
    Messages:
    805
    Chaos Magick is postmodern magick. There are many branches of magick: for example traditional magick, ceremonial magick, ritual magick and a few others. It's basically a blends bits and pieces mixed with the practioners own unique magick
     
  16. Baccarat

    Baccarat New

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2016
    Messages:
    805
    Magick is the science of the invisible or as the majority of people call it "supernatural"
    Many of the greatest thinkers and scientists were in to the occult. Issac Newton was one of the more famous ones. It's as scientific as you can get, don't know why people keep asking for a scientific explanation of it. Grab a journal and experiment, we've been through this before.
     
  17. Baccarat

    Baccarat New

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2016
    Messages:
    805
  18. Baccarat

    Baccarat New

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2016
    Messages:
    805
  19. Baccarat

    Baccarat New

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2016
    Messages:
    805
    7d519bc5b70de6ebf1398e5960ebb376--life-after-death-witchcraft.jpg
    Here is some occult science, keep it simple
     
  20. Charlie Primero

    Charlie Primero Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2017
    Messages:
    693
    If one is a Materialist who does not believe any invisible, super-natural realms exist, can they still practice Magick, or would a more honest description of their practice be Psychology?
     
    dpdownsouth likes this.

Share This Page