Scientific Illuminism vs Thelema
-
<deleted>
-
Yes, and also, we've grown up to realize we didn't know anything, so if we should discount religion we should on the same grounds discount science. Therefore the creeds seem perfectly logical to me.
-
@TripleFlower said
"If we discount the reception of the Book of the Law because we can only take Crowleys word that he approached it in a scientific manner, then we must discount ALL SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERIES THAT ARE NOT DIRECTLY OUR OWN."
That's not what I am saying at all. Crowley's concept of Scientific Illuminism was to place the magical tools and techniques in the hands of the student so that he or she could obtain direct experience for themselves. It literally is personal experimentation via the method of science. Crowley's testimony of the reception falls completely outside of that scheme. You only have Crowley's word for what happened and you either have take it or leave it. It is not possible to confirm Crowley's account by personal experimentation. It is a matter of faith.
Also even if the principles within Liber Legis prove to work in practice, it still does not mean that Crowley's account of the reception is true.
Personal experience Personally I find it odd that Thelemites can laugh and pour scorn on other traditions that have equally bizarre accounts of their genesis, but don't even think twice about believing in the notion of a discarnate "Secret Chief" that appears in an Egyptian hotel room on three successive days to dictate a book to Aleister Crowley.
Just to set the record straight. It appears that some people think I object to Crowley deviating from the principles of the motto of the Equinox. I don't. It is merely something that puzzles me and seems to be something that slips below the radar of some people quite often.
-
Heru,
Good points. Well said.
In L.V.X.,
chrys333 -
@Her said
"That's not what I am saying at all. Crowley's concept of Scientific Illuminism was to place the magical tools and techniques in the hands of the student so that he or she could obtain direct experience for themselves."
I wouldn't put it that way at all. "Experience in magick" wasn't per se what it was about at all. That's still means, not end.
I would say that the purpose was to use the empirical (not scientific, actually, but empirical) method - applied, by each individual, to magical and mystical techniques - in order to to attain illumination.
"It literally is personal experimentation via the method of science."
Not by science, really, but by empricism.
And it isn't primarily personal experience to the extent that it doesn't usually start with making stuff up - that is, it doesn't really "start from nothing." It starts with applying known, traditional techniques and keeping a record of the results if any, and under varying conditions. (I make this statement based on the specific assignments within the system.)
"Crowley's testimony of the reception falls completely outside of that scheme."
Not at all. It's history. Sciences starts with history. This is no different than, "I was wondering outside during the rain one night looking for food, and lightning hit a bush and started a fire and killed a rabbit, and when I left the rabbit next to the fire (or so I called it), it became better to eat." That's report is an important foundation of empirical science and a basis for later structured experimentation!
To say it a different way: It's a report of result, not method.
"You only have Crowley's word for what happened and you either have take it or leave it. It is not possible to confirm Crowley's account by personal experimentation. It is a matter of faith."
And - as others have said above - this is true of the anecdotes behind every other scientific discovery.
When a scientist awakes from a dream that has a solution, are we to question the basis of the breakthrough because we can't replicate the dream? Of course not! The real work begins when the scientist applies that dreamt solution and it works. That's exactly what Crowley did.
"Also even if the principles within Liber Legis prove to work in practice, it still does not mean that Crowley's account of the reception is true.
"Still sounds like you have an axe to grind here. (Nor do I really understand what this statement has to do with the original topic or the questions under discussion.)
Something basic to the scientific community is that a scientist's reported work is generally accepted without any reason to presume they are lying.
"Personal experience Personally I find it odd that Thelemites can laugh and pour scorn on other traditions that have equally bizarre accounts of their genesis, but don't even think twice about believing in the notion of a discarnate "Secret Chief" that appears in an Egyptian hotel room on three successive days to dictate a book to Aleister Crowley.
"I suppose it's 20-30 years or so of fruitful communication with discarnate entities that makes it easy for me to accept this story as almost certainly verbatim truth.
"Just to set the record straight. It appears that some people think I object to Crowley deviating from the principles of the motto of the Equinox. I don't. It is merely something that puzzles me and seems to be something that slips below the radar of some people quite often.
"Religion is what it was all about. Scientific methodology (so-called) was just a means to an end. The aim of the whole work was a religious result - the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel - the very kind of result that Crowley documented (in one variation) in the Cairo Working.
-
93
May I suggest, Heru, that it doesn't matter whether you or I believe what Crowley wrote and experienced. What matters, as you point out, is that he left the technique, and described his experience.
And should you follow that technique, don't be surprised if a few years down the line you wake up one morning and find Hadit, Nuit and Ra Hoor Khuit sitting with you by your bedside.
93, 93/93
-
Ye are against the people, O my chosen!
does "tak{ing} refuge in vagueness" actually "warn ...against valuing non-essentials"? I suggest that it does not and that specifying the essentials and comparing these with and contrasting these against the non-essentials (if these be known) will be of greater efficacy in producing lasting progress. in a nascient science operating in subjective regions we may expect a great number of false starts and complete derailments (compare the dead end of phlogiston). in the mean time whatever data was acquired or accumulated must be preserved against loss through time by providing it as an object of veneration or as a feature in cultic operation. this is the state at which we are currently operating outside of strict objective and material applications.
@Her said
"{quoting Liber LXI vel Causae} Should therefore the candidate hear the name of any God, let him not rashly assume that it refers to any known God, save only the God known to himself. Or should the ritual speak in terms (however vague) which seem to imply Egyptian, Taoist, Buddhist, Indian, Persian, Greek, Judaic, Christian, or Moslem philosophy, let him reflect that this is a defect of language; the literary limitation and not the spiritual prejudice of the man P."
here we have the start of a clarified methodology, on an individual basis (without resort as yet to peer review) of the individual mystic."{continuing quote} 24. Especially let him guard against the finding of definite sectarian symbols in the teaching of his master, and the reasoning from the known to the unknown which assuredly will tempt him. ..."
note that this caution is about one's master, not about one's self. in a manner this (if emphasized) would provide for the dedicated student a reason to dispute with and to distance oneself from Crowleyan cults.let me state this more plainly. there are differentiated platforms of exposition being promoted or promulgated in varying ways, at times disjointed, even at cross-purposes. on the one hand we have ideals of scientific scrutiny and advance intended to refine and perfect the methods under consideration (even if these cannot initially be described with precision). this includes frank warnings against inference or manufacture of cultic dogma and speculation without warrant (here classed appropriately as 'superstition' by Heru).
on the other hand we have proliferated cultic embellishment within the same social milieu doing precisely what is warned against. I suggest to you that the reason that this is effected in this manner is so as to pursue what religion tends to be helpful in achieving: the preservation (as in amber) of certain expressions or ideas so as to serve future aspirants with insight and skill. those who preserve may not be scientifically disposed, and this is satisfactory ("...the slaves shall serve").
@Her said
"Q. Is Thelema compatible with Crowley's original ideas of Scientific Illuminism?"
a tricky question. if you mean compatible with what is stipulated in Liber Causae, then Thelema as it proceeds as a cult is not really compatible, no. this is one of the reasons that the Crowleyan cults are doomed by their own myopic stagnation and flagrant, worthless delusions. they will be forever self-selected to a social backwater without any scientific value as long as they persist in thinking they can fuse these modalities or strands of endeavour. they cannot ever do so, and this document explains how they can escape their ongoing problem. it's a hold-over from previous generations struggling to marry religion and science with religious epistemology trumping rationalism, thereby destroying it in the process. this is what both makes the notion of scientific illuminism attractive and pits it adamantly against base-level methodologies with which religious are smitten. (cf. tales of Galileo and the Church of his time in terms of cosmology/astronomy). once one is familiar with both modalities one may be innoculated against its confirmation bias and leading premises (as by Liber Causae), however repugnant this will seem to zealous cultists.@Her said
"...Crowley's concept of Scientific Illuminism was an attempt at constructing a fully testable, non-sectarian system of initiation, with methods stripped of dogma and superstition. Crowley began publishing his methods in the first volume of The Equinox, and up until issue 7 he remains relatively consistent in his promotion of a non-sectarian, scientific system of initiation. (Aha in no.3 and Liber 418 in no.5 being the exceptions.) But in issue 7 of The Equinox, Crowley ...introduc{es} a definite sectarian system with it's own specific symbols - Thelema."
agreed. this has happened many times in the history of science - the scientific method is disrupted and waylaid by the urge to sacrifice it to achieve the delusion of religion's promise. this is why there are competing cults without any reliable means to choose amongst them, and why the method of science is superior insofar as applicable, reliable technology can be gleaned from it.I am asserting not that the Beast was at fault for putting his energies into these twin strands of 'The Current' - merely that those of his students who fall into religious method(s) are helping only with one modality of the cult: preserving the data as such until someone with greater scientific capacity comes along. one may only carry through that for which one is suited. when the Master has no successors of sufficient quality to persist in the illuminating endeavour along scientific lines, then all which may be hoped for is that what was achieved in the way of refinement of methods may be retained, rather than completely discarded by those without eyes to see. he may have even been of two minds on the matter himself. that he left some tools to effect the scientific character of the illuminism he sought to promote should be considered admirable, and we can be grateful for his effort.
@Her said
" ...the main focus of Thelema is a "revealed" text that was dictated to Crowley by a discarnate intelligence.... How does Crowley's claim of the reception, a claim that cannot be independently verified, fit into a sceptical, scientific system of initiation?"
the problem with this kind of a specification is that the term 'Thelema' applies both to natural principle(s) and to social constructs or aggregates. when you seem to be talking about the social aggregate, of course they are obsessed with their Magic Books, yes. this is a longstanding bias amongst human beings. we are hopeful about our new storage technologies.when you regard Thelema as a principle of human nature, then the main focus of Thelema as such is the human will, even the ideal of the True Will which serves to achieve success where cults will fail. more, in response to Heru, below.
Thus ye have star & star, system & system; let not one know well the other!
-
thou hast all in the clear light, and some, though not all, in the dark.
{some reshuffling has occurred, as well as combining of posts}
@Her said
"...the lens of Liber O. "By doing certain things certain results will follow." To me that one sentence is the very core of what I think Scientific Illuminism is."
the certainty of those results are disputed and at issue.@Jim Eshelman said
"...the way that the A.'.A.'. system, in particular, was presented (in contrast to, say, what the A.'.A.'. system inherently is) did change."
@Her said
"Up until now I have viewed the A.'.A.'. system as a kind of road map. To get from A to B do X, but X is only a means to an end and nothing more. With the introduction of Thelema method X suddenly acquires a deeper, more religious meaning that takes it beyond mere technique. ...Crowley was blurring the lines of his own system just to sneak Thelema into it."
I will deal with this in other threads relating to the essence of "what the A.'.A.'. is", particularly outside of any system or culture. suffice it at this time to say that it was made rather plain to me by stipulating it as an extension of "the Great White Brotherhood". since then i have laboured to understand its character in comparison to groups like the Taoist Celestial Masters. Third Order business will inevitably remain half-concealed.@Her said
"
@Jim Eshelman said
"I'm left wondering what the resistance to religion might be."
I have no resistence to religion at all."
then you are not following out Liber Causae's recommendations and will not effect a scientific illuminism. it will be left to others in your stead. those who ask what resistance to religion there might be are insufficiently familiar with both and better suited to the promulgation to the people of cultic standards.@Her said
"To me religion is a very personal thing, but the original motto of the Equinox was The Aim of Religion. The Method of Science. As far as I'm concerned science is both objective and detached. Religion is neither of those two....."
then the matter is somewhat complicated by semantics. effectively the difference between spirituality (which you are calling here 'religion') and religion proper is the number of people involved, the ordinary characteristics established in its pursuit, and the variables concretized within any temporal and geographic zone (complicated by exported or 'universalist' religions and liberated travel/communication due to technological advance).what is not being covered here are the referents to the motto. it is insufficiently clear, within a religio-spiritual context, what 'method of science' might look like (this is nascient), though its principles in a materialistic and objectivist empiricism are fairly well-established (and why those such as Thorndike espouse the notion that magic is primitive science). it is insufficiently clear in general to what "The Aim of Religion" relates. ignoring for the moment any specialized or initiated meanings of this motto implied by its capitalization, not only is there no singular aim for religions, but they are not easily compatible or executed in the same fashion.
it is therefore all well and good to mouth the motto, but without specificity as to what this scientific method will be applied, a diversity of results will be difficult to consolidate into a meaningful set of data. insufficient familiarity with the method and specificity as to the aim leads merely into a replication of cult - quickly squelching any scientific illuminism from arising.
@Her said
"{responding to TripleFlower} ...It is not possible to confirm Crowley's account by personal experimentation. It is a matter of faith.... "
there are several disciplines intersecting here and colliding. some of these collisions occur due to the nature of religious epistemology. where we are talking about history and its relation to specialty events and religious heros your assertion is insufficiently strident by my assessment. not only is it not possible to 'confirm' this account, but it is wholly and completely unimportant to do so except so as to fashion ourselves as cultists downwind of the Beast (because doubt, not faith, is our primary tool of achievement).what may be replicated and explored, experimented, will be the constructs made using these tools, both by instrument and process. when we have replicated the finding of True Will, had K&C of the HGA, and received our own Lawbook, then we can begin to compare notes with the Master. until then we are pawns within the cultic milieu after him, solidifying into dogma the results of his endeavours.
imagine, if you will, that scientists began to revere and worship the data that they have acquired in statistical analysis and record-keeping. preserving it out of holy duty, their ultimately superstitious pursuits might assist some active scientists in the future who will use, refine, and then attempt to apply that data rather than merely emphasize its sacred quality and enforce preservation. By their fruits ye shall know them.
@Her said
" ...I find it odd that Thelemites can laugh and pour scorn on other traditions that have equally bizarre accounts of their genesis, but don't even think twice about believing ...."
I think that I have adequately addressed the divergence of modalities here. allow me to simply note that pouring of scorn and biased emphasis is precisely the Method of Religion.I suggest that, alike to the actions of others, ignoring the contentions within works such as Liber Causae, and further, failing to become specific (or refine to specificity due to study) about this motto damages and ultimately undermines the scientific aspect of scientific illuminism. all of this depends upon philosophic acumen in the realm of epistemology - something with which most involved with scientific illuminism have little to no skill.
as such, and as a contribution of more than irritated criticism with respect to the cults of the Beast, please allow me to provide some rudimentary ideas pertaining to the motto under scrutiny. methods generally may be evaluated by quality, and empiricism in a physical, apparent dimension are sufficiently well-studied so as to be employed in a variety of ways to exploratory effect. the details of employed application thereafter will require peer review to achieve supportable contention.
aims being the fulcrum methodological success, their particulars will need be at least identified as a body, even if these be at odds. I do not agree that a resort to vagueness does anything but support religious agencies and hierarchs. it is obvious by its nomenclature that the primary vector of "success" with respect to aims inherent to this subculture is associated to illumination, the implication being a condition of clarified consciousness whose features have been provided description by numerous cults, including the Buddhist and Gnostic.
the primary challenge in pursuit of replicable success in results is evaluation, and too much latitude left to perception and isolated pockets of "adepts" issuing proclamations about condition, aggrandizing and rewarding candidates ostensibly part of the enterprise will inevitably compromise it and become the focus of social strife (compare politics and economics intending equalitarian or communalistic aims when the reality is in fact that hierarchs and social classes are continuing to operate at odds with its values of implementation).
until such a time as greater empirical methods are developed outside of cultic traditions, it behooves us to simultaneously share as much as we are able from our own Magical Records and to suspend our heavy, emphasized, strong disbelief about the astonishing, miraculous, and supernatural elements included therein. levelled out of humility, those of outstanding condition will learn to fend for themselves without being propped up as idols and issued social power (something featured at least partly as an aspect of Plato's Republic and its Philosopher-Sages).
Behold! the rituals of the old time are black. Let the evil ones be cast away; let the good ones be purged by the prophet! Then shall this Knowledge go aright.
-
Just so you know, this thread was last active seven years ago. The parties are not likely to respond. You may be mostly talking to yourself.