jess: Wicca is a sore spot with me because of the influences of the Christian religion on it. It 'feels' to me that the religion is just a fewer rules female friend christianity. But I guess most religions are influenced by the ones near them.

LP: I wonder how that might be the case.

And although I am male, I don't begrudge women liking deities made in female likeness instead of male likeness -- it's just another example of Xenophanes's Law.

If by "supports" you they acknowledge it exists, sure. But they often make claims about what is real that just don't hold up to scientific scrutiny. Eg. Magic.




The moment that pagans can use magic and actually have it WORK I'll have more respect for what they have to say about magic in relation to science.




Some, perhaps, but that astrology works is a myth and yet it seems that astrology is taken as factual by a large number of pagans.

ok, maybe we need to stop and define now. By support, I mean that they want (as a whole) more money going into reseach and more time spent teaching it to kids. I think that is a 'normal' level of 'support'. Most Pagans I know love dealing firsthand in science--- from continuing ed. to kitchen experiments--- and a large chunk are in some form of the sciences.

Yes, a 'belief' in magic is contrary to present day science. However, plenty of older magics are accepted by science--- indeed alchemy is the father of chemistry...

The moment they can prove it to you, Randi will give up his 1M$...

However, again, there are a few instances of old 'magic' being 'good science' now--- I will not close off the possibility of it happening again. (Eating seaweed for goiter or taking foxglove for heart problems spring to mind as previously-scoffed-at-magic. Same with washing your hands before surgery or boiling water in iron to 'purify' it.)

I did have a ton of quotes in that sentance. I was talking ore about myths of, like, Odin, rather than about magic and astrology. And call me silly (to my face, I know you already call me that behind my back ) but I would give astrology more of a chance of being real than I would the Christian god...

A great deal of the pagan belief in things like fortune telling et al is more for the psychological benefits than any real concrete reality of it. Any form of meditation, of thinking about yourself, is good--- whether it comes from tai chi or from scrying. Basing important life decisions on fortune telling *when your gut instinct tells you otherwise* is foolish and damaging.

Does that make sense?

ANSIMC

jess wrote:

FBW's have a tendancy to froth at the mouth over Satanism---

jpbrooks:

I don't know whether my Wiccan friend is an FBW, (and she probably wouldn't tell me anyway), but she often says things like, Satanism is responsible for all of the bad things that the "non-pagans" in our society are saying about Paganism in general. My typical response to her is, why do you care so much about society's opinions?

jess wrote:

What resaon would you agree with Z. Budapest?

jpbrooks:

Following on what was said earlier on this issue, the "power" to heal is the same "power" as the "power" to harm.

jess wrote:

quote:

I'm not sure that all Pagans hold such an "eclectic" view of magic.

(Asking before guessing) what do you mean?

jpbrooks:

By "eclectic", (in this context), I meant freely selecting or borrowing "elements" of ritual from other religions.
I know Wiccans, for example, who tend to be "purists" in the area of spells and rituals, and don't consider spells and rituals to be truly Wiccan if they contain "elements" of other religions.

jess wrote:

I like Miss Cleo. She's funny... (I read cards too--- her readings are cool :rolleyes Miss Cleo is a late night card hawker with a big turban and a fake accent whom my MIL hates.

I am thinking of calling her, though. I am a sucker for stuff like that!

jpbrooks:

Why waste your money on her, (especially since you know how to do your own readings)? Why allow yourself to be taken in by advertising "hype"?

jess wrote:

There is an expression in pagan circles 'all magic is science not yet discovered.' (or undiscovered, take your pick.

jpbrooks:

I would agree with the "spirit", (no pun intended), of this claim, but would add that it might involve a (re-) definition of "science" that some people, (like those in this forum, for example), might find unacceptable. From my conversations with people who hold a "magical" view of reality, I get the impression that it involves looking at the world in a way that always takes the observer himself or herself, (eg., the observer's psychological state), into account, even in such areas as (scientific) observation. Many people, (especially those who have been trained in science here in the western world), are not accustomed to viewing reality in that manner. That doesn't mean that people who hold a "magical" view can't appreciate traditional science. They just seem to find traditional science too limited in scope to explain "magic" in a way that doesn't reduce it out of existence. Perhaps it's not possible for science, (as we know it today), to do any more than that.



[This message has been edited by jpbrooks (edited June 01, 2001).]

If all you mean to say is that pagans are as likely as anyone else to support science, I'll tentatively agree.




Whoa! To say that alchemy is the "father" of chemistry is more than a little misleading. Chemistry made alchemy obsolete, since chemistry is falsifiable, and is able to make predictions. Alchemy, unfortunately, never was able to turn lead to gold with a mythical philosophers stone.

This is the same kind of argument believers in Astrology use to defend their "science". Because Astronomy and Astrology are often incorrectly associated with each other, they claim a sort of respect from Astronomy... ...even though Astrology is thoroughly debunked time and time again.




Indeed! I see plenty of claims from Pagans, but suspiciously no evidence that those claims are accurate.




The problem with this is that it's a severe hit and miss method. For every "pagan ritual" that turns out to have some sort of beneficial effect, there are many more that do absolutely nothing. It's inevitable that you'll get a few hits for free.

The problem here is that magic depends upon principles that are demonstrably false. The law of "Sympathy" for example, has no basis in reality.




I would ascribe astrology a LOWER chance of being real, myself. The Christian God is often claimed to be non-falsifiable. This excludes him from testing. Astrology is readily testable, but constantly FAILS, giving no higher a success rate than chance would allow.




Hey, if a pagan tells me they're doing fortune telling because it makes them feel good, I have no problem with that. If they're charging people, or giving them false hope of events "seen in the cards" then I roll my eyes and begin to get annoyed.




Why is it good?

[/q]

I'd go further than that:

Basing even trivial decisions based upon fortune telling is foolish (though not likely to be damaging).

What's more, basing important life decisions on fortune telling *when your gut instinct tells you otherwise* OR *when your gut DOESN'T tell you otherwise* is foolish and potentially dangerous.

Point Blank, fortune telling is a poor method for decision making. If you really wish to be so random, might as well consult the magic 8 ball.

JP:
FBW's generally don't consider themselves such. If she froths about Satanism, odds are she is one, though.

Wicca is a compilation of all other religions. I do not know Wiccans who don't consider spells and rituals to be truly Wiccan if they contain "elements" of other religions. There is even a sect which follows Christ--- would your friend not consider them Wiccan?

Because I would love to hear what she had to say. I went to a 'psychic' with a friend once (who refused to go alone) who told us each the exact same story even though she knew we had come together.

You go to the movies (I assume). I am just debating wasteing my entertainment budget on her...

I think I like your concluding paragraph... not sure I understand it, however...

Val:

I think they are more friendly than the average fundy/ creation-is-legitimate-science/ reading-and-education-is-bad-for-you. They at least support science and education.

I feel like we are argueing in a void here, however. What pagan groups have said they are against science or given a legitimate reson for people to conclude that?

Turning lead into gold was not the only goal of alchemy. One did grow from the other. And today, we can change carbon into diamonds--- not too far off.

Astrology should not ride the coattails of astronomy. That is just plain wrong, but happens. Again, one did come from the other, but the existing connections are far too tenous to say they have anything in common, except the stars...

Even a blind squirrel can find a nut? Agreed. But I won't throw out the murkey bathwater until I seive it, ok? Just in case.

Thanks for the example. BUt I still would have an easier time believing in astrology than in the Christian god.

There is great debate over 'charging' for readings in the pagan community. Many pagans believe you lose your 'gift' if you charge for readings. Some make a living at it.

All hope is false.

I think self-study is always good. It helps you understand what and who you are and helps to focus and relax you. If you do it through therapy or through scrying, makes no difference.

My husband uses dice to pick off of menus. It makes ordering go faster, but is a form of 'fortune telling'. I don't think it is foolish.

Normally, when faced with a life decision, if you are confused and go to a fortune teller, you will either hear something which 'sits well' or something which does not. That is a good push to see what you really want.

And I like Magic 8 balls... I actually have a sarcastic one on my desk right now... lets see...

will Val give any of the above credit?

dumb question, ask another

jess

ANSIMC

I will tentatively agree with this. It's hard for me to say, however, since I have had little contact with Pagans that express any opinions about science and education at all.




Pagan groups? I'm not terribly worried about pagan groups overturning science education, if that's what you mean.

[/q]

Well, if I say I can fly by magic, then point to airplanes, do we say that the magic claims have anything to do with the plane?
Alchemy itself was a flawed methodology, like the "spells" many wiccans are so fond of.




If by "come from" you mean one predated the other and was dealing with similar objects, sure. However, astronomy is so radically different than astrology, anyone who compares the two today would have a hard time pointing to something about astrology that lead to a theory in astronomy.




On what basis?




Well, there has yet to be any evidence to support the claim that there is a 'gift' there in the first place.




Well, it's not much of a decision, either. You've gone to the restaurant and decided to try something at random. If your goal was randomness, so be it. But I think you're trying to evade the point made there.

If you're trying to get to a grocery store you've never been to, do you use a map or tarot cards?

You could do the same thing by just talking to someone about it though. There's nothing special or supernatural about fortune telling, even though those who practice it often claim there IS.

Sure, they're a fun toy, but I don't take them seriously. Why should I take Tarot, Astrology, etc.. seriously?

jess wrote:
     
FBW's generally don't consider themselves such. If she froths about Satanism, odds are she is one, though.

jpbrooks:

Well, she froths about Christianity as well. But she appears to be fairly neutral with regard to most of the other world religions. It seems safe to say that she has little, if any, interest in borrowing from other religions.

jess wrote:

Wicca is a compilation of all other religions. I do not know Wiccans who don't consider spells and rituals to be truly Wiccan if they contain "elements" of other religions.

jpbrooks:

I don't claim to be an expert on Paganism, but aren't there things in Wicca that are exclusive to Wicca, such as reverence for "The Goddess" and "The God" as ultimate forms of the Wiccan pantheon? (Or perhaps you don't see that as being unique to Wicca.) Wicca may contain "elements" that have been "borrowed" from other religions, but those "elements" are put together in a unique way that is distinctive to Wicca. If this were not the case, one would have to conclude that Wicca is internally inconsistent as a world-view.

Furthermore, how would the "eclectic" view of Wicca answer Wiccans/Pagans who claim that it is (contemporary) Christianity, (for example), that is a "new religion" and that itself has borrowed "elements" from earlier (pre-Christian) forms of Paganism
upon which Wicca is supposed to be based?

I believe that you are making a good point here, however, because the majority of Pagans/Wiccans in North America are "eclectics".

jess wrote:

There is even a sect which follows Christ--- would your friend not consider them Wiccan?

jpbrooks:

Really? That is certainly news to me! Though I suppose it does make sense to believe that Pagans can have a great deal of esteem and regard for Christ, (or at least, for what Christ represents to them), without desiring to embrace the Christian religion.
I don't know what my friend would think of such a sect in Wicca, but I would like to ask her about it when I talk to her again. My guess is that she would agree that they are Wiccan, but that they are a very strange sect.


quote:

Why allow yourself to be taken in by advertising "hype"?

jess wrote:

Because I would love to hear what she had to say. I went to a 'psychic' with a friend once (who refused to go alone) who told us each the exact same story even though she knew we had come together.

You go to the movies (I assume). I am just debating wasteing my entertainment budget on her...

jpbrooks:

Well, I probably would have used a different analogy than the movies, but I stand corrected here. Who am I to dictate to you how to spend your entertainment money. So, I will only go as far as to recommend not taking advantage of the services of "Miss Cleo" and her ilk.

jess wrote:

I think I like your concluding paragraph... not sure I understand it, however...

jpbrooks:

I'll sum it up by saying that taking magical views seriously may necessitate adopting a more "inclusive" view of human knowledge than that which is offered by, (what we know as), science. Science, (as we know it), can explain "magical" occurrences, but only in ways that, from a "magical" (or "holistic") point of view, are reductionistic.



[This message has been edited by jpbrooks (edited June 02, 2001).]

No, what I mean is that the 'official' stance of 'pagan groups' is that science is good and should be supported at all times.

On the basis that I think there is the smallest posibility of a kernal of truth in astrology and that the Christian view of their god is impossible--- no chance whatsoever. IOW: The stars exist and 'they' are 'right' part of the time--- even if it is a chance amount of the time.

Don't be silly.

Some people feel there is, and some believe it. And some people like the ritual. Yes, you are basically 'just talking about it'.

No reason. Who said you should? I don't even think there is a reason you shouldn't scoff at them.

yes, if you stretch it. Bridgid, where are you? No, the concept of G&G-dess is not unique. I guess it is the same ingredients in a new recipie.

Could you clarify for me?

They both have elements in common with the Old Ways, neither is a 'rip off' or a 'ressurection'. Wicca has much in common with Christianity, just sweeter and more flexible.

Yes, the Wiccans for Christ group actually has its own symbol: a pentacle with a cross in the middle. <shudder> And it is a pentacle, not a pentagram. A pentagram is more like the US's pentagon. (five equal lines and angles)

I hope there was no slight taken. None was meant.

Thank you both for the great conversation.

jess
ANSIMC

Well, except when it contradicts what they "feel" is right. They don't exactly support the scientific findings that show there is no truth behind such things as astrology (for example). Although some might, a great many don't. They just 'feel' that it works, and that science will 'catch up'. The problem is, science has already demonstrated time and time again that it DOESN'T work.

Part of science is accepting results that just don't fit what you 'feel' is right.




This is basically a statement of "because I want it to be so.". The Christian God has just as much evidence supporting it as Astrology does supporting IT.




But that's not what astrology claims. How many astrologers would agree that astrology doesn't give any more accurate of a result than pure guesswork?




Exactly my point. It IS silly.




But feeling something is true doesn't make it so, otherwise I'd be 'feeling' my way to mind control powers or a billion dollars.