Definition of Magic for debate

[Unveiled Artist]

Let me ask: Who or what authentic source told you your definition of magic is the correct one? That's like saying one definition of prayer fits all. Magic or prayer is personal and is defined by the individual not as a static definition as a whole.

"Magic is the attempt to either (1) increase and utilize one's free will, or (2) submit ones free will to something viewed as greater."

Magic, to me, sounds like a made up word-something I'd see on Sabrina the Teenage Witch or Charmed.

To me magic is just participating and using your natural environment as a literal and/or symbolic means of prayer (communication and/or petition with whom or whatever that person deem is sacred [or however defined]). It's not supernatural. So, it is natural. It's just that people have stereotypes, phobias, and religious prejudices that define what many magic practitioners call ritual, they may call it summing the devil or something or other.

Everything we do unitize free will. Unless we are forced to do something we don't want to do, picking up a spoon to eat soup can be just as "magical" as knowing you are blessed by the sun (the actual sun) itself. There isn't a difference unless one sees eating as mundane and sun blessings as spiritual. It depends on the person.

The last one "submit ones free will to something viewed as greater", where did you get that one? It's a generalizations. Not all magic practitioners view their practice as doing something they choose for something greater. Others do. It depends on the person. I'm not one of them; and, I practice magic.

1. Why call it magic? Free will is more or less unnatural in itself. Obviously it arose from nature, but it allows us to question nature, manipulate it, counter it and use it as we wish. The definition acknowledges that the mind is something more than and separate from the world around it, and can choose how to act.

1. Free will is natural. Aka Making choices of our own is natural. Who told you it wasn't?

2. Why two definition? As simple as white v. black magic. The white magician seeks to submit to something higher, consciously or not, such as state, church, god, or even something like materialism or determinism. The black magician seeks to isolate itself from these influences rather than submit to them, to become a separate force.

White and black magic? Who told you there is such a thing?

Magic is magic, whether we use it for good or for bad is the intent of the user not the magic itself. That's like calling blessings good and curses bad. There is no such thing as blessings and curses in and of itself. It's defined by the person who acknowledges and defines their existence: one person's curse is another person's blessing.

3. But, do we have free will? The answer seems to be a rather obvious yes. From emotional regulation to modern science, from cognitive therapy to metacognition, it literally all suggests some degree of free will. Perhaps free will is not inherent, no, but the definition accounts for that.

Yes, we have free will. You will probably exercise it in the next hour by choosing to reply to this post. Magic is just another action. That is how I see it in my opinion. I read magic is based on and/or is the intent to use nature in a natural way to achieve a result. I interpret that as prayer. Prayer in and of itself isn't black or white. It' depends on what is prayed for (or what the ritual is for) and the intent of the person doing it too.

 

[wizanda]

yet at the same time, there is less motivation to act.

There isn't the need to act to make things happen; the more we've got to force, the less understanding we have.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

For you, perhaps.

And for most people, IMO.

The term "magic" is polysemantic. Painfully so, IMHO.

Enough to make the term virtually useless, I'd wager.

 

[Quintessence]

Enough to make the term virtually useless, I'd wager.

Yup. Kinda like the words "atheist," "theist," "god," and "religion." They just have to be defined at the start of conversation, which the OP did, so we're good.

 

[QuestioningMind]

"Magic is the attempt to either (1) increase and utilize one's free will, or (2) submit ones free will to something viewed as greater."

1. Why call it magic? Free will is more or less unnatural in itself. Obviously it arose from nature, but it allows us to question nature, manipulate it, counter it and use it as we wish. The definition acknowledges that the mind is something more than and separate from the world around it, and can choose how to act.

2. Why two definition? As simple as white v. black magic. The white magician seeks to submit to something higher, consciously or not, such as state, church, god, or even something like materialism or determinism. The black magician seeks to isolate itself from these influences rather than submit to them, to become a separate force.

3. But, do we have free will? The answer seems to be a rather obvious yes. From emotional regulation to modern science, from cognitive therapy to metacognition, it literally all suggests some degree of free will. Perhaps free will is not inherent, no, but the definition accounts for that.

It sounds as if your definition of magic is to either exercise one's free will or to give up one's free will to what you've decided is a higher power.

If as you claim free will arose from nature how can you then claim that it is unnatural? And how exactly does your definition acknowledge that the mind is something more and separate from the world around it? Please provide an example of a mind that exists outside of the world?

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

As always you address no aspect of the op, instead striking up your own little discussion instead. Good times

According to the thread title, the very definition of "magic" is what is up for debate. You posited one, and it wouldn't be very much of a "debate" if everyone just glad-handed you and agreed with your definition. In other words... what is with the indignance?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yup. Kinda like the words "atheist," "theist," "god," and "religion." They just have to be defined at the start of conversation, which the OP did, so we're good.

Are we? The OP's definition lets us know where the OP is coming from, but that doesn't mean we have agreement.

How many legs does a dog have if you call its tail a leg?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

According to the thread title, the very definition of "magic" is what is up for debate. You posited one, and it wouldn't be very much of a "debate" if everyone just glad-handed you and agreed with your definition. In other words... what is with the indignance?

I find people often pose questions they don't really want answers to.

 

[allfoak]

Focus, will and imagination, with these and an understanding of how the mind works, we can make magic and achieve our desires.

When we were children and we wanted to be or do something we pretended.
The only constraint was our knowledge of what we were pretending to be.
If we knew a lot about what we were imitating, then we would imitate it well.

Here is the secret of what happens when we "grow up".
We stop pretending and begin conforming.
The imagination is for children we say.
I say... rubbish.
My imagination is still very much intact and it can be used along with my will to overcome any circumstance and achieve what i desire.
Using our imagination as an adult can be a very powerful thing to do.
It is the secret to maintaining our youth, as well as the achieving of one's dreams.
As adults we have the ability to imitate something so well that we can become what we imitate.

Having said all of that, I am aware of how foolish it must sound to many here.
The reason for this is because there are many, many things that prevent us from accepting and putting into practice the things of which i speak.
Trying to re-learn the proper use of imagination as an adult can be very difficult for many.
Just finding it again is difficult enough, the sustained use of it is even harder to maintain without constant practice.

A strong desire to know the truth is a prerequisite since this ability to control one's life also brings with it a great deal of power.
There are built in safe guards that exist that if violated will seriously damage one's soul.
Most never get beyond the basics because of improper motivation.

Most do not have a strong enough constitution to be able to achieve the ability to control the circumstances of one's life.
But once one has experienced the power that comes with this ability, the power can become intoxicating.
It takes a lot to be able to use it properly without using it to directly manipulate others.

The key is to know where the power comes from and how to use it.
Once a proper foundation is built, there are no limits.

 

[David T]

Just an attempt? Not a success?[/QUOTE for muggles anyway. !!

 

[David T]

It's mostly misdirection and various sleight of hand technqiues.

No I completely disagree that's only things done to get sex, the magic is sex, and sometimes the devil appears afterwards in the form of the person you had sex with.

 

[Willamena]

Success is the outcome. Practitioners can fail at magic.

Shouldn't a definition of magic be about a success, rather than a failure?

 

[bobhikes]

I address the OP directly, just not in a way that's convenient for fans of magic.

When something is accepted as physically possible, it ceases to be magic.

Except, Magic can very well play on the placebo effect. Just as a doctor can give you a sugar pill to stop pain. A good magician can say some words and stop your pain.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Except, Magic can very well play on the placebo effect. Just as a doctor can give you a sugar pill to stop pain. A good magician can say some words and stop your pain.

But calling it the placebo effect takes away the magic. It makes the "spell" no more magical than the sugar pill.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

I define "magic" as the application of the energies of consciousness towards the operation of the (usually unseen) laws of nature on its various levels, whether directly, or indirectly (e.g. attempting to manipulate another consciousness to perform an action on your behalf).

This is generally the definition that I utilize as well, only I see it as also the working of or with natural and spiritual energies, the petitioning of deities, or peer into the webs of fate.

I find no use in coloring magic; I find that it only serves to make some feel better about what they do. It's a subjective dichotomy system that is best done away with, lest we end up like Jedi and Sith. I also find absolutely no need to spell it "magick/majick" - if one wants to distinguish from stage magic, then explanation is all that is needed.

 

[1137]

Wouldn't that mean they have more "magic" rather than more "free will?" That is, they are better at utilizing the free will they have?

No, I think we have varying degrees of free will. That free will is attained through methods such as magic.

I address the OP directly, just not in a way that's convenient for fans of magic.

When something is accepted as physically possible, it ceases to be magic.

Fair enough. What do you mean by "physically possible?"

Magic is the ability to accomplish ones tasks without physical intervention. For instance this response it totally and completely without the use of physical devices, I just think what I want to write and say shazam, and it's sent.

Doesn't manic generally require action? Magicians don't tend to believe you can just all for something. Not in my experience, at least.

It sounds as if your definition of magic is to either exercise one's free will or to give up one's free will to what you've decided is a higher power.

If as you claim free will arose from nature how can you then claim that it is unnatural? And how exactly does your definition acknowledge that the mind is something more and separate from the world around it? Please provide an example of a mind that exists outside of the world?

Nature simply created something that then separated. I think of it like a mother and child. If the mind were just another aspect of deterministic nature, it could not question or manipulate nature, could not have metacognition. The definition acknowledges this because free real requires the mind be separate from nature, able to go against it. I'm not sure what you mean by "a mind these exists outside RFD world."

According to the thread title, the very definition of "magic" is what is up for debate. You posited one, and it wouldn't be very much of a "debate" if everyone just glad-handed you and agreed with your definition. In other words... what is with the indignance?

Fair enough.

Shouldn't a definition of magic be about a success, rather than a failure?

Can you elaborate?

Except, Magic can very well play on the placebo effect. Just as a doctor can give you a sugar pill to stop pain. A good magician can say some words and stop your pain.

I've mainly seen it argued that the placebo effect is just a modern view on magic, not the other way around.

But calling it the placebo effect takes away the magic. It makes the "spell" no more magical than the sugar pill.

Yes, which is why our materialistic society called it something different: placebo.

 

[allfoak]

Yes, which is why our materialistic society called it something different: placebo.

It seems the truth about magic is finally being told.
Real magic has the ability to heal the soul.

 

[bobhikes]

But calling it the placebo effect takes away the magic. It makes the "spell" no more magical than the sugar pill.

Really I see it the other way. Science not having an explanation defines magic as a placebo effect. Its not just doctors that can use it. Its probably untaught natural magic happening.

 

[Willamena]

Can you elaborate?

If you fail magic, then there is no magic to define. Magic occurs when its successful.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

If you fail magic, then there is no magic to define. Magic occurs when its successful.

No, it's not so self-fulfilling as that. When I cast four runes into my cash bag for work, to try and draw good fortune for wealth, I am doing magic whether it works or not. Magic is often a gamble, in this manner; a petition of luck, not a sure result.