#coherence-first metaphysics | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

kenomacreature · 3 months ago

Text

SEMI-COHERENT MUSINGS ON THE METAPHYSICS OF DELTARUNE

Exploring such topics as: - "what are the Depths?" - "what's with all the water references?" - "why do Darkners know all that stuff?"

Chapters 3 & 4 are fast approaching, the time we have before we’re faced with an influx of novel topics for speculation is running out, and I still have some leftover thoughts on the first two chapters that I'd like to get out there in writing before that happens. These thoughts primarily center around the metaphysics of Deltarune’s diegetic world, and various discursive methods that might be employed to help elucidate its nature.

This will be a loosely structured collection of thoughts that draw heavily from philosophy, literary theory and mythology, so if you don’t like pseudointellectual ramblings this is your warning to close the tab.

All of the points made here will be ancillary to the premises I argue for in my essay titled The Magic Circle. You should probably read it first!

Crossing the Fountain – art vs. byt

Much of my Magic Circle essay is concerned with the almost magical way in which one’s experience of reality is mentally transformed when under the spell of art or fiction. Indeed, this is the source of the essay’s title, and what I argue Darkness in Deltarune represents. I wanted to illustrate this idea a little more.

In the essay, I quoted J. Huizinga’s Homo Ludens – in that book he's talking about games and play specifically, but one of his most salient observations is that play is undergirded by an impulse to abstract from immediate reality that is shared between many branches of culture, including all aesthetic traditions. Huizinga is not the only theorist who noticed that art (which I define to include games and play) is experienced as a break from ‘immediate’ or quotidian experience. Russian Formalist Viktor Shklovsky posited that art was a transformation of everyday life into its own seperate realm. In his analysis, he put forth an oppositional model between art and what the Formalists called “byt” – an evocative term which could be translated as “life,” but also evokes the way in which life stabilizes into predictable molds.

Within the realm of byt, we experience events causally – and causality, as David Hume famously noted, is at bottom arbitrary. Art, on the other hand, is constructed towards certain ends – it is teleological. In art, essence precedes existence.

In byt, there's material – paper, canvas, film reel, computer code. In art, there are (artistic) devices – stanza, perspective, montage, mechanic.

Byt produces recurring patterns and routines that threaten to turn us into automatons. Art de-familiarizes, jolting us out of the narcotic patterns of everyday experience by presenting us with novelty to reflect on.

Now, you may or may not find this model for understanding art convincing or all-encompassing, but I think it provides a useful idea for understanding Deltarune's metatext.

When we interact with art or fiction, we voluntarily undergo certain illusions. When I read a story, I condition myself to think that I’m reading something that actually happened. When I watch theater, I condition myself to think that the actors are actual people, and the stage is a real environment. When I watch a film, I condition myself to think that the camera doesn’t exist; that it is a window into a different world which is also somehow not of that world. And when I play a (narrative) game, I condition myself to think that I am not interfacing with a program, but a world of its own. Of course, these self-imposed illusions are in no way totalizing. There is always a part of us that remains aware of the artifice. But our experience qua art operates under these illusions – we might say that there is always a part of us experiencing byt too, but this part is marginalized when we’re absorbed in an aesthetic experience.

Some readers might be scratching their heads at what any of this has to do with Deltarune, so I'll make the connection clear: Deltarune itself explicitly formulates Dark and Light – obvious analogues for fiction and reality (or art and byt) – as separate worlds, existing in a similar oppositional balance. Darkness transforms everyday objects – the raw material so to speak – into narrative devices, like characters and settings. In Deltarune there is a dual-reality to everything that comes into contact with Darkness (or the power of art). Might we climb one step up the hierarchy and try to use something akin to this oppositional model to explain the ways in which Deltarune refers to reality from within its fictional domain?

For example, there is the uneasy fact that we are an active force within the narrative, instead of just an invisible spectator. Sidestepping the question of whether the force we’re embodying in the game is supposed to literally be us, the player, at the very least the characters can only understand us in more conceptual terms, as some sort of in-universe deity or anomalous entity. So there’s us – the player – and there’s the Angel – our in-universe embodiment.

So what about the character who contacted us – what about Gaster? In The Magic Circle, I discussed how the information we have about Gaster leads us to think that he exists in some sort of transcendent state as a result of his experiments with Darkness. From that, I extrapolated that Darkness was the fundamental substance underlying Deltarune’s reality (which we can fit into another binary: there’s Darkness, the magical substance that makes up the reality of Deltarune’s world, and there’s what the concept clearly allegorizes: the creative or imaginative capacity of human beings – which is what gave rise to Deltarune, the video game). Gaster’s “transcendent” state trades heavily on video game creepypasta tropes; he’s like a ghost haunting the code of the game. And as it turns out, Deltarune has explicitly made the move to extend its diegesis to its code with the inclusion of a character who seems to be stuck there.

If the code is a part of the diegetic world, we can extrapolate another binary: there’s the code or internal workings of the program, and there’s “the Depths” – a higher (or deeper) metaphysical layer of Deltarune’s world that transcends time and space. Worded differently, the Depths are what we get when the 'eye of the narrative' turns its gaze towards the code of the program.

To close off this section, I want to mention that in Shklovsky’s theories about art and narrative, he makes heavy use of a machine metaphor; he wanted to focus on the ways in which art was a constructed object abiding by its own internal rules. The specific word the Formalists preferred is “device”. In fact, one of Shklovsky’s most well-known essays is titled “Art as Device”. Just something to think about for you Device Theory fans.

Water, Darkness and Chaos as Symbolic Motifs

Water is everywhere in Deltarune. The magical worlds we explore are given form by “fountains” and “geysers”. Onion-san talks of ominous songs under the sea. Ocean.ogg briefly plays after we fall into the supply closet Dark World. And the source image of IMAGE_DEPTH, the background of the GONERMAKER segment, is apparently of an ocean. What gives?

The basic gist is that water has an extremely long and prominent symbolic history in mythology, and figures especially prominently in ancient creation myths. One of the earliest creation myths we have, derived from Enūma Eliš, a Babylonian poem of the 2nd millenium BCE, describes a primordial state consisting of nothing but two deities – Abzu, god of the freshwater ocean, and Tiamat, god of the saltwater sea; from the “comingling of their waters”, all of creation emerges. This is consistent with what we know of ancient near-eastern cosmology in general; they viewed the world as essentially like an air bubble. In the beginning, there was water. Unordered, chaotic, formless. Then, something happens to produce the earth and firmament, both disc-shaped, which separate this cosmic ocean into heavenly waters above the earth (the source of all rain), and lower waters of the deep (the source of all rivers, springs, fountains and geysers).

This cosmological account survives into the Biblical narrative. From Genesis 1:6:

and God said, “Let there be a dome in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.”

The ancient near-eastern flood narrative, which likewise is preserved in the Bible as the story of Noah’s ark, is made less arbitrary with this in consideration; its basis is not merely that drowning in a storm is a scary concept (though it certainly is) – the real symbolic threat of the flood is of a return to pre-creation chaos. The gates of heaven opening and all of creation coming undone. From Genesis 7:11:

In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the windows of the heavens were opened.

(Sound familiar?)

The idea of water as underlying all reality cropped up not just in religion and mythology, but also philosophy. Thales of Miletus, credited since Aristotle as the world’s first philosopher, famously believed that all of reality was made up of water. Thales and his philosophical successors are sometimes called material monists for their belief that all of reality was composed of a single ultimate substance – the arche from which everything originates.

Thales’s idea was no doubt influenced by the cosmological picture painted by mythology. Though not identical to the near-eastern accounts, the world of ancient Greek mythology is preceded by a state of primordial Chaos – a vast chasm, abyss, or emptiness. Though we in the present day might be tempted to understand Chaos as something like space, ancient commentators such as Pherecydes of Syros interpreted it as water. It was the fluid, formless and undifferentiated nature of water that made it such an enticing candidate for the pre-creation substance.

Chaos was also associated with darkness. Unambiguously born from Chaos are Erebus and Nyx – deified personifications of Darkness and Night. And this is a point of similarity with the ancient near-eastern accounts. From Genesis 1:1-3:

In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters. Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.

In short, the primordial state across world mythology tends to be that of an infinitely dark, chaotic ocean.

The parallels to Deltarune are obvious, and having tracked the symbolic history which the game is working with can, I think, lend us a better understanding of "Darkness" as it appears in the game. Needless to say, all of what I've discussed supports the thesis I laid out in The Magic Circle: that Darkness is the arche or prima materia of Deltarune, the underlying substance that its reality is made of. Likewise I think we can intuit what “the Depths” are – simply what in the Hebrew Bible is referred to as “the (great) deep”. A mass accretion of formless Darkness which sits below reality itself. Dark Fountains are formed when the fabric of reality is pierced, creating a gap from which Darkness bursts forth. And since Darkness is the “raw material of reality” so to speak, the Darkness forms a new reality within the old one. But too many holes in reality threaten to “burst the air bubble”, so to speak, and flood the world with Darkness.

I created the above diagram a while back, and used it in The Magic Circle - no doubt you'll notice the similarity between this and the earlier diagram of the Biblical cosmology. The funny thing is that this connection wasn't consciously intended at all; I was barely aware of what the Biblical cosmology was like when I made the first version of this image. That makes me feel like I'm on the right track.

I do want to make something clear; the world of Deltarune isn't necessarily a literal Biblical style air bubble, with a disc-earth and dome sky. The air bubble thing is just for the sake of visualization. I think the Depths are more like a different layer of reality, simultaneously "higher" and "deeper". It's not that there's literally a bunch of dark water under the ground; what Kris is really stabbing is, again, the fabric of "phenomenal" reality itself.

Another thing I want to note; these early mentions by Toby of concepts relating to twilight or the meeting of light and dark have long been a topic of discussion in the community. I want to formulate my understanding of what its significance is.

The first thing God does in the Biblical creation story is summon light. Light meeting the darkness is presented as a precondition to any further creation. Likewise, fiction (darkness) can not exist without an observer in reality (light). The meeting of light and dark is a fundamental condition of art; it can't exist without somone to "shed light on it".

It could also well be referring to the Roaring; when the distinctions between light and dark threaten to dissolve, that is when we must travel to the "edge of the shadow" (the outer boundaries of the dream, near where reality is), and "shatter the twilight reverie" (twilight: when only the sun's afterglow remains) (reverie: being lost in a dream).

On Darkner Knowledge

As established earlier, Darkners are teleological beings whose essence precedes their existence. That is to say, they’re created with an inherent purpose. This purpose is what Ralsei and Queen call “the will of the Fountain” – a guiding force determining the nature of the Dark World and its inhabitants, originating in the Fountain’s creator. In my Magic Circle essay, I used this fact to explain the behavior of Darkners, and why certain ones (like King and Queen) know things that they seemingly shouldn’t (like the fact that the Knight exists, and what their title is). On this latter part, however, I didn’t go into too much detail. Here, I want to elaborate on it a little by invoking an argument made by René Descartes in his Meditations on First Philosophy, known as “the trademark argument”.

(Don’t worry, I’m not actually going to get into the weeds of Descartes’ philosophy. It might be fun to talk about how Descartes’ idea of hierarchical degrees of reality, which consist of infinite substances, finite substances and modes, correspond to Deltarune’s Angel, Lightner, and Darkner hierarchy, but I don’t think it would unearth any particularly useful insights.)

The (very simplified) trademark argument goes something like this: God must exist, because I can conceive of God, his features (that he is an infinite and eternal substance), and the fact that he is altogether more real than I am despite me not possessing this degree of reality. The idea can’t have come from me, but it must have come from somewhere – consequently it must be that I have this idea innately as a sort of “trademark” of my creator.

Now, I very much doubt anyone who's reading this finds the above to be convincing evidence for God’s existence. Thankfully, we aren’t setting out to find out whether God exists or not. The God in this scenario – the Knight – is someone we know exists, and how the relevant knowledge is possessed really does require an explanation (unlike in Descartes' argument, where the notion that an explanation is needed for how we can conceive of the idea of God is dubious at best).

Of course, I don’t mean to imply that the trademark hypothesis is the only possible explanation you could offer. Obviously, you could posit that the Knight entered the Dark Worlds and imparted the knowledge personally. But to do this you’d have to deny the Kris Knight hypothesis, marginalize the religious subtext, assert that there’s no meaning to certain patterns between Chapter 2 and 3 (such as the main Darkner bosses being activated before the Fountain Creation), ignore the latent implications in Queen’s dialogue, among other things – and I’m not interested in doing all that. For the moment, the trademark hypothesis seems much safer, not least of all because it explains other mysterious details too.

Consider the fact that Darkners are aware of the battle system, and know how it works. Do we suppose that someone went around telling each and every Darkner the mechanics of the game? Or does it just make intuitive sense that Darkners would be created with certain ideas that are consistent with their purpose?

Granted, there is still some weirdness left over that we’d have to explain. For example, Darkners – most notably Ralsei but others as well – know about the player’s button configurations. We might be tempted to just chalk this up to the necessities of tutorializing, but the game calls attention to this by having Susie ask questions about it. The trademark hypothesis doesn’t explain why Darkners specifically would be stamped with this knowledge while the Lightners are left out.

The best explanation I can come up with is that since the Dark Worlds are created by Kris, and Kris almost certainly has forbidden meta knowledge imparted by Gaster, the Darkners likewise inherit that knowledge since Kris knows that the player will be controlling them when they go to seal the Fountains, and is aware that we will need some level of guidance.

Conclusion

All right, that’s pretty much everything I wanted to get out there before Chapters 3 & 4 release. Thanks for reading! I hope this wasn’t complete babble to anyone who’s not as knee-deep as I am in random literary theory and philosophy.

#deltarune #undertale

25 notes · View notes

bread-pitt1 · 11 months ago

Text

the eternal absurdity of hannigram

In Greek mythology, Sisyphus is condemned to endlessly roll a rock up a hill. His eternal labour underscores the importance of embracing the present and finding joy in process, no matter of absurdity.

“I've never known myself as well as I know myself when I'm with him” Will Graham confesses, his head lifts up, eyes retrieving from the sodden ground to meet Chiyoh’s. The woman sighs a shaky breath, her graceful hand moves forward for a handshake, head nodding.

“Fine, we will go find him.”

While there are other means to violence, as Chiyoh puts it, love had never been Will Graham’s first instinct to project. Inadvertently, he found himself oddly drawn to Hannibal. Whenever with Alana, he felt indifferent. More importantly, he feels ashamed to have professed his love for her yet felt so immature to act on anything apart from a singular kiss. He builds up a false swelling of emotion in his heart, yet is condemned to have it all roll down, back to the beginning. Only then, can his footing change, and he return back to the start.

He's happy, he says. He leans down to his dogs each day with a softly bright smile that the dogs refract. He laughs at Price and Fisher’s jokes, even if they jab at him in the slightest. He smiles for Jack Crawford, for Beverly, his co-workers – and, though they have learned to never bring it up, they know deep down something in Will has broken like a teacup to carpeted ground, silent yet shattering.

It's absurd, the situation. Will knows this. Absurd is Hannibal’s thirst, his ego, his looks, his brains, his blood, his scent of stupid smell and Will cannot shove him out of his chambers. What’s even more absurd is the current situation of a false identity by Hannibal, which presents Will with an infuriating challenge to find him in Florence. He squeezes his eyes shut and explores the darkness. The chapel stained glass casts an ambient light around him, although it does not affect him.

One must imagine Will Graham happy.

He should be deep in thought about the case on his hands, but he finds his mind seeping towards Hannibal. Does Hannibal believe in God? Likely not – yet he plays his cards as such. Spoken outwardly to be in the image of god, Hannibal claims killing to be morally passive. In fact, if Hannibal is God in the abstract, metaphysical form, then Will would be damned. For he is condemned for eternity to have such a boulder hindering the rest of his life – in the acts of love or not. He rolls the boulder forward, hands splayed against the jagged harshness, and pushes; desireful, he finds himself sweating profusely.

Unknowingly to Will, the wendigo has crept up behind him as he seats in the gallery. Will opens his eyes to meet Hannibal’s, the glare shining behind him like a glory light. He’s nicely suited as always, on the contrary to Will, and his eyes are crescented as always, but light presents itself differently this time in his eyes. Before any coherent words came from the unfaltering passion behind Will’s inner voice spoke out:

“If I saw you everyday, Will, I would remember this time.” He speaks carefully - tenderly, even - his hands clasp in front of his legs as he takes a seat next to Will. The man rolls his eyes, but a faint smile, more genuine than the one he generally shows, plays on his battered lips.

Chiyoh was right, there are other means of influence than violence, and an eternity more to combat it.

Based on NBC Hannibal Season 3 Episode 6: Dolce

#hannigram #will graham #hannibal #hannibal lecter #hannibal x will #hannibal lecter x will graham #hannibal x reader #will graham x reader #hannibalnbc

64 notes · View notes

grey-sorcery · 11 months ago

Text

[Title]: Magical Theory: A Critical Approach to Witchcraft

Suggested Reading

Threshold Theory Researching Witchcraft Energy Work Foundations Divination: First Steps Intro to Gnosis Path of Least Resistance Conceptualization Vs. Visualization Nature Vs. NatureBias in Witchcraft Finding Balance Duality Magical Potency

What is Magical Theory?

Witchcraft, occultism, mysticism, and other esoteric practices all share one thing in common: they can be communicated about. Due to the physical and spiritual experiences of these practices, this implies that there must be an underlying framework for the mechanics of magic and mystical experiences to follow. Furthermore, practices can be given from one practitioner to another successfully. While individual interpretations of the experience of these practices may vary widely, the practices themselves remain communicable. For this to occur, there must be underlying mechanics. Discovering or understanding these mechanics, however, is a complex task due to the inherently subjective, experiential, and often non-empirical nature of these practices. So how do we find them?

Definitions:

Magic:

The practice of influencing oneself, others, or the environment through rituals, symbols, gestures, energies, spirits, and spoken or written words. These practices to tap into unseen forces or energies. Magic is a means to manifest change, guided by the will and intent of the practitioner.

Theory:

The set of ideas, principles, philosophies, mechanics, and logic systems that explain how and why magic works, which is verified through multiple means including: experimentation, reproduction, peer review, and divination. It encompasses various conceptual frameworks that practitioners use to understand the nature of magic, its relationship with the practitioner, and its interaction with the world. Magical theory often includes discussions on the nature of energy, the power of intention, the symbolism of magical tools, and the structure of rituals.

Mechanics:

Specific methods, processes, or techniques used in magical practices. This can include the steps of casting a spell, the use of specific tools or ingredients, the timing of magical workings (such as phases of the moon), and the physical actions or words used. The mechanics are the practical aspects that make the theory of magic operational.

Models of Magic:

Frameworks or paradigms through which magical practice is understood and explained. Examples include the psychological model (viewing magic as a means of influencing the unconscious mind), the energy model (seeing magic as manipulation of energies), and the spirit model (interpreting magic as interaction with spiritual entities). These models provide different lenses through which the practice and effects of magic can be interpreted.

Metaphysics:

A branch of philosophy that deals with the fundamental nature of reality and existence. It explores questions about what exists beyond the physical world, the nature of being and the universe, the existence of a spiritual dimension, and the relationship between mind and matter. In esoteric contexts, metaphysics often involves exploring the nature of the soul, the concept of universal consciousness, and the principles underlying the unseen aspects of reality.

Logic:

The study of reasoning and argument. It involves the principles and criteria of valid inference and demonstration. It's the framework within which arguments are constructed and assessed, focusing on the form of reasoning used to arrive at conclusions. Logic is essential in both philosophical discourse and scientific investigation, providing the structure for coherent and rational argumentation.

Unverified Personal Gnosis (UPG):

Knowledge or insights a person gains through personal spiritual experiences that are not corroborated by traditional sources or shared by others. In the context of witchcraft and esotericism, UPG is the personal revelation or understanding a practitioner might have about their practice, deities, the spiritual world, etc., which is not part of established doctrine or commonly agreed upon belief. UPG is often recognized as valid in an individual's practice but is acknowledged as subjective and personal.

Mechanics

The mechanics of magic, a subject in which, historically, information has been intentionally obscured. Understanding these mechanics requires a deep dive into various aspects, from the immutable physical laws to the nuanced spiritual experiences, cultural and linguistic anthropology, and the subtle ways in which magic manifests and interacts with the world around us.

At the heart of understanding the mechanics of magic is the acknowledgment that physical laws cannot be superseded. This fundamental premise establishes that magic does not contradict or override the laws of physics, chemistry, or biology as we understand them. Instead, it must incorporate these laws, working in harmony rather than in opposition. This integration suggests that magic, rather than being a means to bypass natural laws, works within their bounds, perhaps tapping into aspects of these laws that are not yet fully understood or recognized by contemporary science.

The spiritual experience of magic is deeply personal and subjective, yet it follows certain patterns or principles. The intention in magical practices is often discussed not merely as a desire but as a personal truth, a deep-seated understanding or alignment with a specific outcome or path. This intention is less about wanting and more about being in a state of congruence with the intended result. Alongside intention, passion plays a crucial role. Here, passion is not just emotional excitement but an aligned emotional state that resonates with the nature of the magical work being undertaken. This emotional resonance is believed to amplify the effectiveness of the magical practice.

Gnosis, or knowledge, in the context of magic, refers to a specific state of being. It involves a focused mindset, a specific headspace where the practitioner is deeply immersed in the process and purpose of the magical work. This state of gnosis is often achieved through various practices like meditation, chanting, or the use of specific ritualistic elements that aid in achieving this focused state. Furthermore, a sense of spiritual connection and the development of energetic senses are considered pivotal. Practitioners often speak of sensing energies, of feeling a connection to something greater than themselves - a connection that guides and informs their magical practices.

The path of least resistance is a key concept in understanding how magic travels from its source (the practitioner) to its destination or intended effect. This concept aligns with the idea that magic, much like physical phenomena, follows the path where it encounters the least opposition. In practical terms, this means that magical practices often work in ways that are subtly aligned with the probabilities and natural tendencies of the world. It involves an understanding and utilization of the natural flow of events, energies, and probabilities.

Working with, rather than against, the principles of physics, chemistry, and other sciences is a foundational aspect of magical practices. This approach includes an awareness of how the standard model plays into the manifestation of magical intentions. The understanding here is that magic may increase the likelihood of certain outcomes rather than directly causing them. This awareness extends to an understanding of cognitive and confirmation biases - recognizing that one’s perception and interpretation of events are influenced by their beliefs and expectations.

The means of manifestation of magic, how it causes effects upon reaching its destination, is diverse. Common means include psychological influences, where the magic might influence thoughts, feelings, or perceptions by influencing the brain’s chemistry or its plastic nature. Opportunistic changes refer to magic creating conditions favorable for certain events or outcomes by influencing entropy or minute physical interactions. Environmental changes encompass the idea that magic can influence the physical surroundings or conditions. Probabilistic manipulation is the subtle nudging of probabilities, making certain outcomes more likely. Lastly, spirit intervention suggests that spiritual entities might play a role in the manifestation of magical intentions.

Energy work is often described as a fundamental force in magical practices. This perspective views energy as underlying all matter, as a pervasive force that interacts and influences at inconceivably minute levels. Energy’s peripheral effects include the influence on emotions, thoughts, or physical conditions potentially through minor propagations of virtual particles. The concept of the subtle body in many esoteric traditions speaks to how our non-physical essence engages with environmental factors and energies. Energetic interactions with spiritual entities are another aspect, where the exchange or manipulation of energies forms a core part of the interaction. It is important to note that energy is present in all magical practices, even if it's not explicitly stated or performed intentionally.

Correspondence and threshold theory are central concepts in many magical practices. Thresholds are seen as a means of projection or transition, allowing for the movement or manifestation of intentions or energies from one state or place to another. These thresholds are composed of a constellation of correspondences. Correspondence refers to the symbolic connection between various elements of the universe, where one thing can represent or influence another due to their inherent connection. In this system, everything is interconnected, and understanding these connections allows practitioners to use them to affect change. Concepts themselves can act as nodes in this network of correspondence, linking ideas, symbols, and energies together.

Thresholds are not only means of projection but also points of transformation. They are where change occurs, where energy shifts from one form or place to another. The creation and function of thresholds are vital in many magical practices, as they are the points at which the practitioner works to enact change. Their ubiquitous presence is acknowledged in the way that many rituals or spells are designed to open, cross, or close these thresholds.

Spirits in magical practice are often conceptualized as multi, extra, hyper, or hypo-dimensional entities. They are described as non-observable through normal means and capable of causing effects that appear non-localized from a physical standpoint. Communion and offerings to these spirits form a significant part of many traditions, where the exchange between the practitioner and the spirit is based on respect, exchange, or alignment of wills. Syncretism in religious practices, where different spiritual traditions blend and merge, provides examples of how various cultures understand and interact with these entities, though it's more an illustration of human cultural interaction than a direct practice of engaging with spirits.

The concept of dimensions as foldings of space-time introduces another layer to the mechanics of magic. According to some esoteric theories, dimensions beyond the observable three-dimensional space and time continuum exist and can be interacted with under certain conditions. These dimensions are where different rules may apply or where different entities or energies exist. The energetic interactions with these spatial dimensions are a topic of great interest, with some practices designed to navigate or utilize these other dimensions for various magical purposes.

Entropy and half-lives bring concepts from physics into the realm of magic. Entropy, the measure of disorder in a system, is considered a force to be understood and potentially utilized in magical practice. The half-life of spells or energy refers to the idea that the presence, potency, or effect of a magical working or energy diminishes over time. Understanding these concepts allows practitioners to time their work appropriately and maximize the potential effects of their magical operations.

Finally, the psyche and perception are critical in understanding and practicing magic. The psychological interplay with magical operations is significant, as belief, intention, and emotional state can profoundly affect the outcomes of magical work. Perceptions of magic, both by the practitioner and those around them, shape the context in which magic is practiced and experienced. Critical thinking and an understanding of one's own perception can greatly enhance the practice of magic. Moreover, magical practices often aim to alter the psyche and perception, facilitating personal transformation, deepened understanding, or altered states of consciousness.

Magical Models

In both contemporary and historical contexts, models of magic provide frameworks through which practitioners and scholars understand and explain the workings and effects of magical practices. These models offer conceptual structures that shape how magic is perceived, interpreted, and practiced.

Definition in Contemporary Contexts

In contemporary esoteric and magical practices, a "magical model" refers to a paradigm or conceptual framework that explains how magic operates and interacts with the practitioner and the world. These models are generalizations of the methodology and approach of practitioners. Models can be used to aid in communication about magic, but they often lose the nuance necessary to maintain the fidelity of practice.

Contemporary models of magic often reflect a synthesis of traditional knowledge, personal experience, and sometimes integrate aspects of modern science and psychology. Common contemporary models include:

The Energy Model: This model posits that magic works through the manipulation of energies, which may be personal, environmental, or universal. It often involves the perception and alteration of these energies to achieve desired outcomes.

The Psychological Model: Here, magic is understood as a means of influencing the unconscious mind. Rituals and symbols are seen as tools for accessing and reprogramming the subconscious to bring about change in the practitioner's internal and external worlds.

The Information Model: A more modern interpretation, this model views magic as a system of information and symbols. It posits that by manipulating symbolic representations, one can influence the underlying information of a situation or system.

The Spirit Model: This model focuses on interactions with spiritual entities. It sees magic as the process of communing with, invoking, or evoking spirits to achieve certain effects.

Each model provides a different lens through which magic is understood and practiced, and practitioners may subscribe to one or multiple models depending on their personal beliefs and experiences.

Magical Models in Historical Contexts

Historically, models of magic were often less explicitly defined but were deeply embedded in the cultural, religious, and philosophical understanding of the time. These models were typically more intertwined with the cosmologies and worldviews of their respective cultures.

The Animistic Model: Prevalent in many ancient and indigenous cultures, this model viewed the world as infused with spirits or animating forces. Magic, in this context, involves interactions with these spirits or forces to bring about change.

The Theurgical Model: Found in various religious and mystical traditions, such as certain branches of Gnosticism and Neoplatonism, this model viewed magic as a means of communing with divine entities or ascending towards spiritual enlightenment.

The Natural Magic Model: During the Renaissance and early modern period, natural magic was seen as part of the natural order. It was based on the idea that objects and symbols had inherent powers or virtues that could be harnessed by the knowledgeable practitioner.

Classical Models, Their Shortcomings, and Their Usage

Psychological Model

The Psychological Model of magic views the psyche as the primary means of manifestation. It posits that by influencing the subconscious mind through symbols, rituals, and intentions, one can bring about changes in their internal and external world. Typical applications of this model include self-improvement, behavioral change, and altering one's perception or emotional state. It is often used in practices focusing on personal development, mental health, and manifestation techniques.

However, one of the primary shortcomings of the Psychological Model is whether it constitutes "magic" in the traditional sense or is merely a form of subconscious suggestion. Critics argue that by attributing all magical effects to the mind, this model strips magic of its mystical and spiritual aspects, reducing it to psychological tricks or self-help techniques at best and a means of manipulating or subverting consent at worst.

Spiritual Model

The Spiritual Model emphasizes spirits as the primary means of manifestation. This model is based on the belief that the world is populated with spirits, deities, ancestors, or other non-physical entities that can be interacted with and influenced. Practitioners may seek to commune with, petition, or command these spirits to achieve various ends. Applications of this model are vast, including divination, healing, protection, and cursing.

The Spiritual Model can be magical, focusing on personal power and the manipulation of spirits for various purposes, or theological, emphasizing worship, reverence, and the ethical aspects of interacting with the spiritual world. While this model is deeply embedded in many traditional and contemporary practices, it's not without its challenges. One issue is the inherently unverifiable nature of spirits and spiritual experiences, leading to skepticism and difficulty in validating personal experiences. Additionally, navigating the ethics and responsibilities of working with spirits can be complex and is subject to personal and cultural interpretation.

Energetic Model

The Energetic Model views energy as the means of manifestation. According to this model, the universe is filled with different forms of energy that practitioners can sense, manipulate, and direct to achieve specific outcomes. This model is pervasive and applies to all types of working, including healing, protection, and magical operations. Practitioners might work with personal energy, environmental energies, or universal forces, often using techniques like visualization, chanting, or tool use to direct these energies.

While the Energetic Model is one of the most widely used and versatile models, it can be difficult to understand and communicate about, especially in terms that align with scientific understandings of energy. The concept of "energy" in magic often encompasses more than just the physical definition, extending into spiritual or metaphysical realms. This broad and sometimes vague definition can lead to misunderstandings or dismissals of the model's validity. Additionally, as experiences of energy are highly subjective and personal, it can be challenging to create a standardized or objective framework for understanding and working with energy in magical practices. Furthermore, various New Age movements have influenced the conceptualization of energy within contemporary contexts, propagating a campaign of misinformation. Despite these challenges, the Energetic Model remains a fundamental aspect of many magical traditions and practices, offering a dynamic and intuitive way of interacting with the world.

Potential for New Models

The evolving landscape of magical practices and the ever-expanding understanding of the world necessitate the development of new models of magic. As practitioners explore different cultural contexts, incorporate modern scientific insights, and encounter new spiritual experiences, existing models may become limiting or fail to encapsulate these diverse perspectives. New models can offer fresh lenses through which to understand and practice magic, potentially leading to more inclusive, nuanced, and effective magical work.

Models' Accomplishments vs. Current Functionality

Ideally, new models of magic should bridge the gap between traditional understandings and contemporary realities. They should accommodate the diversity of practitioners' experiences while grounding magical practices in a framework that is coherent, ethically sound, and adaptable to the changing world. Current models often focus on specific aspects of magical practice, such as psychology, spirituality, or energy, but may not fully account for the interplay between these elements or the broader socio-cultural and mechanical contexts. New models should aim to integrate these various dimensions, offering a more holistic understanding of magic.

Trepidations in Creating New Models

Creating new models involves several shortcomings. There's a risk of oversimplifying or misrepresenting complex mechanical, spiritual, and metaphysical concepts. New models must be developed with sensitivity to cultural and historical contexts to avoid cultural appropriation or misappropriation of traditional practices. There is also the challenge of ensuring that these models are inclusive and do not exclude or marginalize different practitioners’ interpretations, experiences, and beliefs. Furthermore, new models must be careful not to fall into the trap of pseudoscience, ensuring that any integration of scientific concepts is done accurately.

Community Consensus

Achieving community consensus on new models of magic can be challenging due to the diverse and individualistic nature of magical practices. Different traditions, cultures, and personal beliefs all contribute to how magic is understood and practiced. New models should be proposed with an awareness of this diversity, aiming for inclusivity and respect for different perspectives. The acceptance of new models often requires dialogue, experimentation, and a period of adjustment as practitioners explore and validate these new approaches within their practices.

How Magical Models Affect the Perception and Application of Commonplace Magical Practices

The Psychological Model’s Impact on Cultural Appropriation

The Psychological Model's impact on cultural appropriation in magical practices is a subject of significant concern. This model, which interprets magical practices primarily through the lens of their effects on the subconscious mind, can inadvertently encourage a form of cultural appropriation. This occurs in several ways:

Firstly, the Psychological Model often emphasizes the individual's mental and emotional processes in magical workings, potentially downplaying the cultural and historical contexts of specific practices. When practitioners adopt rituals, symbols, or practices from other cultures under this model, they might focus solely on their personal psychological impact, neglecting the deeper cultural significance and heritage attached to these practices. This selective approach can lead to a superficial understanding and application of culturally significant practices, stripping them of their original meaning and disrespecting their origins.

Secondly, the model's focus on personal psychological experience can lead practitioners to believe that any practice, regardless of its cultural origin, is universally applicable and detachable from its cultural roots. This perspective can encourage a kind of "spiritual consumerism," where practices are taken out of context and used without a proper understanding of or respect for the culture they come from. Such an approach often ignores the complexities and nuances inherent in these practices and can be seen as a form of cultural erasure.

Moreover, the Psychological Model's interpretation of magic can lead to a homogenization of diverse cultural practices. By reducing all magical workings to psychological processes, the unique cultural, spiritual, and historical aspects that differentiate one practice from another can be overlooked. This can result in a loss of diversity within magical practices and an undermining of the rich tapestry of cultural traditions that exist in the field of esotericism.

The Spiritual Model’s Impact on Magical Guides and Information

The Spiritual Model's impact on magical guides and misinformation involves several key aspects. Firstly, the model's emphasis on spirits and spiritual entities can significantly influence the content and direction of magical guides. Guides based on the Spiritual Model often focus on how to interact with, invoke, or communicate with spirits, which can be challenging for practitioners who are either new to the concept or skeptical of the existence of such entities. This can lead to a division among practitioners, where some may fully embrace the spiritual aspects while others may find them less credible or relevant. The inherently personal and subjective nature of experiences with spirits means that guides based on this model can be highly individualized. What works for one practitioner in terms of spirit communication or ritual might not be effective for another. This variability can create confusion among practitioners, particularly if they are unable to replicate the experiences or results described in these guides.

Another significant issue is the potential for misinformation. Since interactions with spirits are subjective and not easily verifiable, there's a risk that some guides might contain ungrounded or misleading information. Without a way to objectively verify the experiences or the effectiveness of the practices described, beginners or uninformed practitioners might be led astray by claims or teachings that are not based on sound practice.

Furthermore, the Spiritual Model can sometimes overshadow other aspects of magical practice. If guides focus too heavily on spirit work, they might neglect other important elements such as energy manipulation, psychological work, or herbal lore. This imbalance can lead to an incomplete understanding of magic as a holistic practice.

Finally, the Spiritual Model can sometimes lead to cultural appropriation issues, especially when guides borrow from or mimic practices from specific spiritual or religious traditions without proper understanding or respect. This not only dilutes the authenticity and efficacy of the practices but also disrespects the cultural origins they come from.

The Energy Model’s Entwinement with New Age and Misinformation

The Energy Model, a cornerstone in various magical and spiritual practices, posits that manipulating unseen energies can influence the physical and spiritual world. However, its association with New Age, New Thought, Reiki, and certain interpretations within Evangelical Christianity has led to a high degree of misinformation, commodification, and oversimplification.

In the New Age movement, the Energy Model often becomes intertwined with a broad spectrum of spiritual and pseudoscientific concepts. The model is sometimes presented in overly simplistic terms, focusing on the idea that one can easily manipulate universal energy through positive thinking or intention alone. This approach can dilute the complexities and nuances of traditional energy practices, reducing them to generic concepts devoid of their original depth and cultural context.

Similarly, within the New Thought movement, which merges Christian principles with metaphysical beliefs, the Energy Model is sometimes co-opted into a framework that emphasizes the power of positive thinking and faith. Such a viewpoint is inherently ableist, as it overlooks or minimizes the complex, multifaceted nature of disabilities, both visible and invisible. It suggests that any lack of healing or improvement is a result of insufficient faith or positive thinking, placing an unrealistic and unfair burden of responsibility on individuals with disabilities.

Reiki, a form of energy healing, while rooted in specific Japanese spiritual practices, has been widely adopted in Western New Age contexts. This intentional adoption has led to oversimplified interpretations of how energy healing works, often stripped of its original cultural and spiritual nuances. While Reiki practitioners undergo specific, often predatory, training, the nuances of this practice can be lost when melded with broader, less defined New Age energy concepts. It is important to note that the adoption of Reiki into New Age thought was intentional by the practice's creators through a process of Christianization that pulled heavily from evangelical mysticism and New Thought; furthermore, it's predatory nature of initiation has been in practice since its original inception.

To address this issue, there's a growing need for education and dialogue that respects and acknowledges the rich diversity and depth of traditional energy practices. By returning to these roots and exploring the Energy Model in its original complexity, practitioners and those interested in these concepts can gain a more authentic and nuanced understanding of how energy works within the realm of magical and spiritual practices.

Collaboration & Experimentation

Effective communication is crucial in the collaborative and experimental aspects of magical practice. It involves several key elements. In the diverse field of magic and esoteric practices, establishing a shared language is vital. Common terminology allows practitioners from different backgrounds to discuss and compare their experiences and theories effectively. This shared language should be clear, inclusive, and sensitive to the various traditions and cultures involved in these practices. Recognizing and accounting for personal and cultural biases is essential in the study and practice of magic. Practitioners should strive to be aware of their own perspectives and how these might color their interpretations of magical experiences and practices. Similarly, they should be mindful of biases in others' interpretations and teachings, approaching them with critical thinking and open-mindedness. Developing methods to verify and validate magical experiences and theories is a complex but important task. This could involve creating frameworks for experimentation, documentation, and peer review that respect the subjective nature of these practices while striving for some level of objectivity and repeatability.

Surveys

Surveys can be a valuable tool in understanding and mapping the landscape of magical practices. Conducting surveys among practitioners can gather data on how different people practice, perceive, and experience magic. Publishing these findings can contribute to a broader understanding of the field and highlight areas for further research and exploration. Analyzing survey results can help in identifying common themes and practices, as well as the diversity within the field. It can also aid in distinguishing the mechanics of magical practices from personal interpretations and experiences, providing a more nuanced understanding of how magic operates.

Publications

Engagement with a wide range of publications is key to deepening understanding. Exploring a variety of texts, from historical grimoires to contemporary writings, can provide a breadth of perspectives. This helps in gaining a comprehensive understanding of the different theories, practices, and experiences within the field. Critical reading skills are crucial. Practitioners should learn to discern between information that discusses the mechanics of magic in a grounded and reasoned manner and content that primarily reflects personal experiences or interpretations. Historical texts are also often written within a contemporary language which codifies information in obscure terminology, analogies, and cultural or religious lenses. Because of this, a thorough understanding of history, cultural anthropology, and linguistic anthropology is of the utmost importance.

Reviews

Review and critique play significant roles in maintaining the integrity and development of magical knowledge:

Holding Other Content Creators Responsible: Practitioners can contribute to the field by reviewing and critiquing content created by others. This involves analyzing the accuracy, coherence, and ethical considerations of the content, providing constructive feedback where necessary.

Critique vs. Attacks: It's important to differentiate between constructive critique and personal attacks. Critiques should be focused on the content and its merits, offering thoughtful insights and suggestions for improvement. They should avoid personal attacks or derogatory comments, fostering a respectful and constructive discourse in the community.

Spell Logs & Accountability

A spell log is a crucial tool for practitioners to record their magical practices and experiences. It should include detailed entries for each spell or ritual performed. Essential elements to note in a spell log include the date and time of the spell, the phase of the moon, the specific intentions and goals, materials and symbols used, the exact procedure followed, any immediate sensations or experiences during the spell, and subsequent outcomes observed. The spell log serves as a personal accountability tool. By meticulously recording each aspect of a spell, a practitioner can track their progress, observe patterns over time, and make connections between their practices and the outcomes. This detailed record-keeping facilitates a deeper understanding of one’s practices and helps in identifying areas for improvement or further exploration.

The Magical Experimental Method

Developing a Hypothesis

The magical experimental method starts with a hypothesis. This is an educated guess or prediction about the outcome of a magical working. For example, a hypothesis might be that performing a specific ritual will lead to getting a raise at work.

Defining Variables

Identify the variables in your experiment. These include independent variables (factors you will change or manipulate, such as the type of incense used in a ritual) and dependent variables (factors you will measure, such as observable events).

Establishing a Control Variable

Establishing a control in magical practices can be challenging but is necessary for comparison. A control could be:

Non-Intervention Period: Designate a period where no magical work is performed to observe natural outcomes as a baseline.

Placebo Ritual: Perform a ritual that mimics the structure of the actual magical working but without the specific intent or key components.

Alternative Practice: Use a different but related magical practice as a control to compare specific effects.

Historical Comparison: Compare current outcomes with historical records or personal logs from before the practice was undertaken.

Environmental Consistency: Keep environmental conditions (location, time, weather) consistent while changing only the magical elements.

Neutral Observer: Have an observer who is not informed about the specific intent or details of the working to monitor and report results.

Self Comparison: If the experiment involves personal change, compare against personal baseline measurements like mood, energy levels, etc.

Randomized Assignment: In group settings, randomly assign participants to either the experimental group or the control group.

Temporal Control: Perform the same ritual at different times (e.g., different phases of the moon) to compare effects.

Variable Isolation: Change only one variable in the magical working while keeping all others constant, the unchanged elements serving as controls.

Counter-Ritual: Perform a ritual designed to counteract or nullify the effects of the experimental working.

Cultural Baseline: Compare the effects of the magical working against established cultural or traditional understandings of the expected outcomes.

Intensity Levels: Vary the intensity or concentration of a key component of the ritual (like using different amounts of an herb) while keeping a standard measurement as control.

Psychological Baseline: Use psychological tools like questionnaires or mood scales to establish a baseline of mental and emotional states pre- and post-ritual.

Double-Blind Method: Neither the participants nor the experiment conductors know who is receiving the actual magical working and who is receiving the control until after the data is collected.

Accounting for Outside or Environmental Factors

Consider and document any outside or environmental factors that could influence the outcome of the spell, such as weather, emotional state, or external events. This helps in understanding the context of the working. Here are five different possible variables to consider:

Ambient Environment: The physical surroundings where the magical experiment is conducted can have a profound impact. This includes factors like the cleanliness and organization of the space, the presence of natural elements (like being outdoors vs. indoors), and the general atmosphere (quiet vs. noisy, urban vs. rural). Environmental energies, whether serene or chaotic, can affect the practitioner’s focus and the flow of energies involved in the ritual or spell.

Time and Date: The timing of a magical experiment can be a critical variable. This includes not only the time of day but also the date, which might encompass considerations of lunar phases, astrological conditions, and specific days of spiritual or cultural significance. Different times and dates are believed to hold different energies and can be more or less conducive to certain types of magical work.

Weather Conditions: Weather can play a significant role in magical practices. Elements like rain, wind, thunderstorms, or sunshine can influence the energy of the environment and, in turn, the experiment. For example, a spell for growth or fertility might be more potent during a gentle rain, while a banishing spell might be more effective on a windy day.

Emotional and Psychological State: The emotional and psychological state of the practitioner(s) is an essential external variable. Feelings of stress, excitement, calmness, or anger can influence the practitioner's energy and focus. The mental and emotional preparedness of the person conducting the experiment can greatly impact the effectiveness of the magical working.

Presence of Others: The presence and energy of other people, animals, or even plants in or near the experimental space can affect the outcome. This could be due to their physical presence alone or their emotional and psychic energies. For instance, performing a ritual in a secluded area might yield different results compared to conducting the same ritual in a crowded public space.

Measuring and Observing While Avoiding Bias

Carefully observe and measure the outcomes of the spell, striving to remain objective. Employ techniques to avoid bias, such as waiting to interpret results until after the spell has completed its course, or using blind or double-blind methods if applicable.

Acknowledging Limitations

Be aware of and openly acknowledge the limitations of your method. This could include the subjective nature of the experience, the influence of personal belief, or external variables that cannot be controlled.

Peer Reviews

If possible, share your findings with other practitioners for peer review. This can provide valuable feedback and insights, helping to validate or refine your approach. Peer reviews can be informal, through discussions with fellow practitioners, or more formal, such as presenting your findings in a community forum or publication.

Using Theories of Mechanics to Dissuade Misinformation

The goal is to align common magical practices with the underlying mechanics as described by various theories. This involves examining popular rituals, spells, or techniques and assessing how they align with, or diverge from, the theoretical frameworks of magic. For instance, a common practice might be the casting of a protection spell. By analyzing this through the lens of different models - like the energetic model or the psychological model - one can discern whether the practice is consistent with the theoretical mechanics proposed by these models. This exercise helps in demystifying practices, clarifying their basis, and possibly dispelling misconceptions.

This involves a respectful and careful examination of traditional and indigenous magical practices through the frameworks of established magical theories. It's crucial to approach this comparison with cultural sensitivity and an understanding that indigenous practices may have their unique theoretical underpinnings that don't always align neatly with Western magical models. This comparison can highlight the diversity of magical understanding and practice worldwide and can help in acknowledging and respecting the depth and validity of indigenous magical systems.

Engagement with misinformative content requires a balanced approach. It involves identifying and addressing misconceptions or misinterpretations in these publications. This could be done through writing informed critiques, providing educational content, or engaging in discussions that offer correctives to these misunderstandings. The key is to provide clear, well-researched, and respectful counterpoints that educate rather than alienate those who may be inadvertently spreading misinformation.

Cultural appropriation in magical practices can lead to the dilution of their efficacy and meaning. This occurs when practices are removed from their cultural and historical contexts and used superficially or without understanding their deeper significance. Highlighting how the mechanics of magic are intertwined with cultural, historical, and spiritual contexts can help in illustrating the importance of respecting the origins and integrity of these practices. Educating new and existing practitioners about the significance of cultural context in magical work is key to addressing this issue.

Creating an inclusive and welcoming environment for new practitioners is essential for the healthy growth and evolution of magical communities. This involves providing accessible and accurate information, mentoring, and support. New practitioners should be encouraged to learn not only about the practical aspects of magic but also about the underlying theories and mechanics. This comprehensive understanding can help them develop their practices responsibly and thoughtfully. Furthermore, fostering a community culture that values continuous learning, critical thinking, and respectful exchange can help in integrating new practitioners in a way that enriches the entire community.

Merging Theory with Practice

Merging theory with practice in magic begins with understanding the spiritual experience as a cornerstone of effective magical work. This involves recognizing and valuing the deeply personal, often transcendent nature of these experiences. Practitioners are encouraged to explore and integrate their spiritual experiences with the theoretical frameworks of magic, allowing these experiences to inform and enhance their understanding of magical mechanics. This symbiosis between experience and theory can lead to a more profound and authentic practice.

Repetition is a vital aspect of merging theory with practice. Regularly engaging in rituals, spells, or meditative practices helps in internalizing the theoretical aspects of magic. Repetition allows for the refinement of techniques, the strengthening of intentions, and a deeper understanding of the subtle nuances of magical work. It also aids in building discipline and focus, essential components for effective magical practice.

The process of conceptualization involves translating the abstract ideas and theories of magic into tangible practices. This means taking the principles and models of magic and figuring out how they can be practically applied in rituals, spells, and everyday life. It requires creativity, experimentation, and an understanding of how theoretical principles can manifest in the physical world. Practitioners might find that their methods evolve as their understanding deepens, leading to more personalized and effective practices.

Personal accountability is crucial in merging theory with practice. Practitioners should hold themselves responsible for their actions, intentions, and the outcomes of their magical work. This involves honest self-reflection, acknowledging both successes and failures, and learning from them. Being accountable also means being mindful of the ethical implications of one's practices and their impact on oneself, others, and the environment.

Effective communication with both individuals and the broader magical community plays a significant role. Sharing experiences, insights, and challenges helps in building a collective understanding and in refining individual practices. Community engagement can provide support, diverse perspectives, and a sense of belonging. It also fosters an environment where knowledge is exchanged, and collaborative learning is encouraged.

Expanding one's theological practices involves exploring and integrating various spiritual and religious beliefs into one's magical practice. This can lead to a richer, more diverse approach to magic. It might involve studying different mythologies, spiritual traditions, or philosophical texts and finding ways to incorporate these into practice. Respectful and informed engagement with different theological perspectives can broaden a practitioner's understanding and deepen their spiritual connections.

Philosophy and knowledge profoundly impact magical practice. A practitioner’s philosophical outlook can shape their approach to magic, the types of practices they engage in, and their interpretation of magical experiences. An understanding of different philosophical concepts can provide deeper insights into the nature of reality, the self, and the universe, which are often central themes in magical work. Continuous learning, both theoretical and practical, is essential for a well-rounded and effective magical practice.

Thank you for your continued support! My patrons help me maintain the drive to create content and help me keep food in my pantry. My patrons of Mystic tier and higher had access to this article a week before it was public! To see other perks of supporting me, click here!

Thank you for your continued support:

Megan Kipp!

Cosmicaquamarie

To learn more about me or view my Masterpost, click here.

This post was reviewed and edited for easier reading by ChatGPT.

#witchcraft #witchcraft 101 #witchcraft community #witchcraft guide #witchcraft resources #gtheory #informational post

59 notes · View notes

unsoundedcomic · 5 months ago

Note

Why does the First Soul grant it's bearer command of the dead? By all we've been told about it, as a prototype for eternal souls and a precursor to The Mistake, this doesn't seem like an ability it would need to fulfill it's function. In fact ghosts didn't exist until The Mistake right? So is this just a completely unintentional bug in the system?

We don't know what exactly the metaphysical state of humans was at that point - souls, no souls, something else.

But the First Soul was intended to make Sette immortal, as a starting point for changing the nature of all humanity. The First Soul was constructed in order to keep her memories together, mind coherently intact. To do this, the First Soul would need to be able to interface with that mind and memories.

It was good at this, and Sette's memories do stay together in one lifetime, even if they don't stay with the Soul as it reincarnates. And, consequently, the Soul has the ability to interface with and command ALL human memories - not just Sette's.

Was this intended? We dunno. But it needed to be able to corral Sette's ghost, and wound up being able to corral them all.

29 notes · View notes

collidescopeeyes · 9 months ago

Note

would you be willing to do an f!reader and an unbound thresh (cinematic one) HCs about a researcher of the Shadow Isles (some sort of kind priestess type) who somehow managed to capture his interest bc her soul is unable to be caged and he's intrigued by her fearlessness...

Thresh with researcher!reader

- From the moment you meet it is the world's most intense game of cat and mouse, except you're both convinced you're the cat

- Studying the effects of the black mist on souls is your life's work–it’s an utterly fascinating and unique form of magic and if it can be understood, maybe it can be cured. That being said, studying it isn't exactly easy. The Isles are dangerous at the best of times and much of it has been ravaged by time–you’ve reached a dead end with simple observational means and were hoping you could learn more about the mist and what caused it by speaking to the shades bound to it. Some of them predate the mist after all–surely one of them has something to point you in the right direction?

- Your first encounter with Thresh is actually before he's unbound. Most souls you encounter are either violently insane, largely incoherent or generally uncooperative, so meeting one that can not only hold a coherent conversation but one so knowledgeable about the mist is like a dream come true! The fact that he has a flaming skull for a head and you're pretty sure his lamp is screaming is a secondary concern, you're getting good info here.

- He's very amused by your enthusiasm and probably indulges your curiosity far more than he normally would–it’s pretty rare he meets anyone who doesn't run screaming (which is fair, he’ll acknowledge that). You're the most entertaining thing he's seen in centuries, and waiting around for the Sentinels to kill Viego has been so terribly boring–so when you start packing up your notes and making to leave…well, he can't very well have that, can he?

- Honestly the worst part about having your soul ripped out of your body by ethereal chains is that it really disrupts your train of thought, and you had a great question about interactions with restoration magic you were about to ask. You have a brief moment of looking at your own body, and then there's a flash of light and you're back to normal, at which point you hurriedly thank him for the interview and hightail it the fuck out of there.

- Thresh meanwhile is stunned. Your soul was brilliant, blindingly radiant in a way he's never seen before. Trying to lash it to his lamp was like trying to hold oil with water–it just couldn't find purchase, and by the time he realised what had happened you were already gone. He gives chase, or course, but you survived this far for a reason and you're soon out of his reach, bound as he is to the Isles

- He's obsessed. He wants nothing more than to take that perfect, beautiful soul of yours and bleed it until it's as black and twisted as his. He stalks the Isles hoping to run into you again, but no such luck–still, he's had plans in motion to free himself from the Isles for a long time, and now he just has to wait. He can be very patient, when he wants to be.

- Meanwhile, you're an ocean away writing a dissertation on the Shadow Isles and the metaphysical properties of the mist, having a great time.

- He finds you in a library after he's unbound by complete coincidence, but he is elated. You don't recognize him, of course–he looks human, and you're too focused on your research to bother with some random stranger. Low-key he tries to charm you at first, but you're just like ‘sir I'm trying to work here’ so he has to reintroduce himself. Immediate fascination from you–how does a soul get free of the mist? Is he actually human now, or is it a shapeshifting thing? And oh, actually, could he finish explaining the properties of the waters of life? Your last conversation kind of got cut short when he tried to stab you. Oh no you're not upset about it, most souls you spoke to tried to stab you at the start of the conversation, he was actually very polite!

- He laughs so hard you get kicked out of the library. You suggest coffee instead. He agrees. He doesn't even need to eat or drink.

- His plan is to feed you tidbits of information about the Isles and the mist to lull you into a false sense of security and eventually tempt you into his clutches–after all, if he can't imprison you by force, he could chip away at you until you went to your demise willingly and unwittingly, and he relishes the challenge.

- Meanwhile you're thinking ‘this is great, I'm learning so much! He's definitely going to try and kill me at some point but we'll cross that bridge when we come to it!’

- Normally the idea of breaking someone's spirit is satisfying to him, but the longer he spends with you the more the idea loses its shine–after all, you're so much more entertaining when you're lively like this, and the thought of your eyes going dull and hopeless like all of his other victims makes him oddly disappointed. But still, human lives are so short, and you've become rather dear to him–the best place for someone as special as you would be his lamp, where he can keep your soul safe and enjoy your company for all eternity~

- There's something fundamentally wrong with this man if you couldn't tell. He's possessive, obsessive, and he thinks morals are an unfortunate condition other people suffer from. He has no delusions about what sort of man he is: in life, he was essentially exiled to guarding the vault in total isolation purely because members of his order found him off-putting–there’s something about him that's just Wrong, and he knows that. There was no hiding it when he was human, much less with this veneer of humanity he now wears–but for whatever reason, you don't flinch away from him. Poor sweet girl that you are, you seem to be under the impression he's a person. But still, if you decide you hate him, you probably won't talk to him anymore and that would be a tragedy. Ergo, he’s trying to be Good so you trust him, but he only abstractly understands what Good is meant to be. Surely if he only targets people who deserve it that counts? He doesn't even kill them! He just, y'know, traps them in his lantern and subjects them to untold horrors for a little bit, but he lets them go after and in his experience that seems to scare people pretty straight. He's doing a public service! He's practically a saint!

- Low-key he's stalking you. Like he just shows up where you happen to be whenever he's not off doing crimes against humanity, but honestly in the grand scheme of things it's pretty low on the list of concerns–after all, he's a thousand year old immortal wraith, and while you're pretty sure he's not planning on murdering you anymore, his disregard for social conventions that aren't immediately useful to him ranks somewhere between ‘maybe we can work on a a version of our relationship where I don't get trapped in your lamp for all eternity?’ and ‘when I put you in the special thanks section of my publication, do I just call you Thresh?’ on the list of conversations you ought to have with him.

- He can be incredibly charismatic when he wants to be, so to you he comes off as very gentlemanly if a bit melodramatic. Overprotective like you would not believe, but he generally cedes to your requests and it's sort of endearing how invested he is in staying in your good graces. Weirdly intense at times, but he's an ancient undead wearing the thin veneer of a man so you figure that's to be expected. Still, he's very polite and considerate, and while he's definitely trying to con you into some kind of supposedly benevolent eternal damnation, he's also helping you proofread your paper, so y'know it's actually a pretty decent deal.

#anyway hi im alive #one out of two of the big assignments i missed while i was sick are done so yaaay #league of legends x reader #league x reader #leauge of legends #x reader #reader #f!reader #thresh lol #headcanons

46 notes · View notes

serpentface · 1 year ago

Note

Sorry if this has been asked before, but what is the significance of Janeys and Brakul inflicting razor cuts on each other?

It’s a psycho-sexual-religious thing. This post covers it in excruciating detail, but here’s a slightly shorter summary:

Over the course of their relationship they had developed an obsession with renewing and maintaining the legal and spiritual bond of sworn brotherhood via infliction of wounds and consumption of each other’s blood, in a manner that is (loosely) rooted in actual ritual. They are Like This because:

a) It has a religious and social status component (sworn brotherhood is a socially esteemed pact, seen as a godly ideal of platonic male relationships) b) There is a strong psychological angle (they are each EXTREMELY insecure in very different ways, maintaining a powerful spiritual bond that is also a legal lifetime commitment provides a strong sense of security and comfort) c) They like, love each other and stuff (it’s kind of the ultimate display of dedication and trust- a very intentional crossing of bodily taboos, allowing another person into you and giving a part of yourself to them (and vice versa), both metaphysical and very literal physical vulnerability...etc) d) They are not outright fucking, are tremendously sexually frustrated, and also both total masochists (their cutting is fully a sexual outlet and was basically the first excuse to get their mouths on each other) (years of this behavior has conditioned them both into being kinda turned on by the mere sight of blood).

Also I CANNOT emphasize enough that this like, haphazard crazy bloodsex stuff is not representative of how ritual bloodletting usually works in the Wardi faith (day to day bloodletting during prayers is usually done via pricking or small cuts to draw a tiny amount of blood, and the usual bloodletting for this specific ritual is an inch long slice on the palm).

The reason they mostly wound each other in parts of the body usually obscured by clothes is because this behavior is very unusual and would subject them to greater social scrutiny. Their more readily visible wounds can be passed off to an EXTENT as unusually devout behavior (ie being so committed to personal sacrifice as to wound large stretches of the body to physically mark one's devotion. There's some Wardi faith fringe groups who do Sort of adjacent behaviors), but not in the context of them doing that to Each Other. Their behavior has some logical coherency within their religion but is in wild excess of normal practice.

It’s like if some catholic guy got really psychologically attached to the concept of the eucharist and derived immense psychological gratification and a sense of spiritual security from eating Jesus and etc, and he kinda just starts doing homemade solo eucharist rituals where he guzzles down dozens of communion wafers while chugging wine straight from the bottle, FULLY aroused,

50 notes · View notes

eri-pl · 9 months ago

Note

You are a great believer of the only Eru can create true life theory it seems from your posts- what origins of dragons do you subscribe to then in how they were made from something else? How much personhood do you ascribe to individuals among them with variation/free will?

Thank you for the ask! I love asks!

First, maybe I am pedantic on words, but I like to be on the same page, so:

I don't fully agree with the word "believer" in context of a fictional setting, especially given that they are people (I've seen one on YT) who genuinely seem to believe in the Legendarium as mythology/religion/I'm not sure what word to use. I don't.

I respect (or sometimes hype about maybe too much) some of Tolkien's ideas on hot his legendarium ties to the real world, can't internalize some others, but at the end of the day, it is fiction, so the question is less "what is true" and more "what makes sense with the story and world", "what Tolkien intended".

And I do believe (based on things I read and watched on YT) that Tolkien did intend to "evil cannot create true life" and "only Eru can create souls". Does "true life" mean "sentient", or "alive in general"? If "sentient", how is that different from "having a soul"? I have no idea. But anyway yea, "Morgoth can't make things that have free will" is a very safe bet about what tolkien thought of it. And does make sense with the story.

(Still, I will take this wording as a compliment. thank you.)

I don't have a single strong HC about how dragons were made. Made from lizards? From big snakes? From dinosaurs which he somehow stole from Valinor (unlikely because siege)? Probably mutated some big lizards.

Personhood? Hmm. the text is tricky there (even a bit contradictory), but I would go with the "they have bits of Morgoth's will in them, a bit like the Ring had Sauron's". No personhood.

My default assumption about various types of more-or-less monsters is:

deeply corrupted Elves/Men: full personhood, but extreme mental issues due to trauma / generational trauma and probably their free will is, how to say it, imprisoned deep inside their minds, so very unlikely to behave in a good way (think: very strong addiction, some extreme mental ilnesses): all variants of Orcs. (Yes, it makes killing them complicated, I can live with that) (Also I did a post on Orcs and how would I try to make them more metaphysically coherent. TLDR they revert after some generations of not being moderated)

fallen spirits: full personhood, self-inflicted (+ some help from evil superiors) trauma, more effective free will, could get over their bs, yes it is hard but also they aren't willing: Morgoth, Sauron, the Balrogs, some various "demons", I'm not sure about some beings. I like to see Thuringwethil here, even though it's probably not canon.

Elven ghosts who agreed to be bound by Sauron (with coercion!) or Morgoth (if he bothers to do necromancy at all), put into various (animal or engineered from parts) bodies: free will fully bound inside, because of the magic. they can regret but they can't escape: werewolves, vampires, stuff like that, also Thuringwethil

bits of Morgoth's will/mind/whatever put into modies of mutated animals: dragons, I'm not sure what else. As they are various bits, they do have some indyvidual character, something like personality, but they aren't persons. Think: OCs. The dragons are Morgoth's OCs. ;D

They (dragons) could be type 3, but from what I remember the text more suggests 4. Or was it just the musical?

And yes, dragons being active after Morgoth was thrown out doesn't contradict this. Ending of the Quenta Silmarillion says that bits of his will still circulate in the world.

I hope this answers your question.

#silm #silmarillion #tolkien legendarium #the silm #the silmarillion #asks #morgoth #melkor #dragons #tolkien monsters

27 notes · View notes

baroquespiral · 5 months ago

Text

ok here’s my more serious response to The Apocalypse of Herschel Schoen, which I might have to post paragraph by paragraph bc Tumblr is being inexplicably weird about long posts I read this post by @loving-n0t-heyting right before I started it and it hit me hard as someone who writes novels that try to do much the same - present some hypothetical moral system or metaphysics with moral implications and confront it with my actual intuitions, which aren’t strictly utilitarian but closer to that than most of the thought experiments. (Meteorology in Mercenary Planet is probably the closest thing I've narrativized to what I Actually Believe, but I deliberately present it as having unresolved internal contradictions at very high levels of abstraction.) For what it’s worth - disclaimer that am not a trained philosopher, just an undisciplined critical theorist/occultist weirdo - the specifically utilitarian content seems a lot stronger in the diurnal stories (Floornight I haven’t read and it’s pretty central to the post), while I tend to read the nocturnal ones (which are closer to reality, and thus further from it) more in terms of an “ordinary” or “naive” morality. For Nostalgebraist this is evidently mostly utilitarian, but all the major secular systems are much closer to each other in most implementations than the “radical revisions” postulated by any of his scenarios - much as they would be to the values of an “orthogonal” superintelligence. Their differences can be accounted for by “special carveouts and/or bells and whistles” to each other *except* in the weird edge cases. The Northern Caves and Salby instantly resonated with a lot of rationalists bc it resembled the extreme, counterintuitive bullet-biting contortions a lot of rationalists and EAs pushed utilitarianism itself to - and the Chesscourt novels start out from escalatingly complex games of ordinary or even what sounds like utilitarian moral calculus (insofar as utilitarianism lends itself to escalating complexity in the first place, whereas deontology or virtue ethics can remain relatively invariant even in complex scenarios). The drama staged over and over in Nostalgebraist’s novels is not so much between utilitarianism and any other system as between an “ordinary morality” that can be extrapolated in terms of utilitarianism, virtue ethics or what have you and a drive to found a coherent self-justifying system no matter what horrors it might drive you to. Which is a version of the conflict between “Apocalypse and Endless Everyday” that increasingly dominates like, all “serious” media. That’s not to say ordinary morality is necessarily just concession to the status quo. Scott Alexander is very good at defining it in terms of tautological aphorisms he then attributes to the most unlikely figures: in his review of 12 Rules For Life, the prophet’s message “good and evil are the realest and most obvious things you will ever see, and you recognize them on sight” - put in the mouth of *Jordan fucking Peterson* - and “good things are good” - in that of “Matt Yglesias considered as the Nietzschean Superman”. Both the prophet and ubermensch are figures capable of moving the world, including revolutionizing the substance of “ordinary morality” itself. Neither Matt Yglesias nor Jordan Peterson are, though, and what I would really like to read, but will probably have to write, is a Nostalgebraist-type novel addressing the much weirder shape this is taking in current rationalist/tpot culture wars (as a microcosm of broader ones), where the equilibrium of “ordinary morality” can only be maintained under deliberately restricted information conditions, with the left only capable of appealing to radical utilitarianism while the right attempts to refound the ordinary on sacrifices of intellect and blood.

#the apocalypse of herschel schoen

11 notes · View notes

bsahely · 26 days ago

Text

The Triplet of Triplets: A Universal Coherence Signature from Protein to Cosmos | ChatGPT4o

[Download Full Document (PDF)] This white paper introduces and develops the concept of the triplet-of-triplets — a recurring 3×3 nested resonance structure discovered across biological and cosmological domains. This coherence signature was identified through experimental studies measuring electromagnetic responses in: Tubulin proteins (4 nm scale), Microtubule nanowires (25 nm scale), Axon…

0 notes

thebardbullseye · 1 year ago

Text

“Philosophical and Personal Musings on the Wizard Stone and the Axiom of Proliferation” – An Essay and Divinations for Arc 3 of “The Wizard, the Witch, and the Wild One”

From the Desk of The Bard Bullseye

Happy Birthday, Worlds Beyond Number!

Spoilers abound! This is an essay discussing the actual-play podcast “The Wizard, the Witch, and the Wild One” from the fine folks at @worldsbeyondpod It is an expression of my analysis of and engagement with the content of the second arc of the show and also contains some speculation about future plot and current themes. These interpretations are my own, include some reflections on my personal philosophy, and are written in a mostly academic style of writing (be warned, it’s around 3,000 words!). If you do read through it, I hope you find my points interesting and thought-provoking regardless of whether or not any of it turns out to be true (and I have done my level best to adhere to the facts of the story thus far, with transcript pages and timestamps cited when available/applicable).

Abstract (TL;DR, or I ain’t reading all that, but I’m happy for you):

The Wizard Stone’s discovery that the Axiom of Proliferation is untrue has major implications for the overarching story and the direction of the next arc. Herein, I explore my reaction to this moment in Episode 19 and how my experience and own philosophy potentially align with Stone’s. Then, I examine the logic of her argument and its implications for the greater worldbuilding in Umora. Specifically, there is a fundamental problem with the way that wizards are using the lingua arcana that is affecting the link between the Spirit and the Mortal worlds (i.e., the “greater binding”), and this is leading to detrimental effects. This, I believe is ultimately what Grandmother Wren (and now Ame) and Coven of Elders (and possibly the Man in Black?) are concerned with, though they have come to vastly different conclusions about who is at fault and how to solve this problem, which are yet to be revealed in the forthcoming third arc (see footnote 5).

Introduction

Something has piqued my interest and scratched a deep philosophical itch for me in the second arc of “The Wizard, the Witch, and the Wild One.” While the first arc introduced the characters, explored ideas of ‘quest fever,’ and masterfully wove in lore and character motivations for reclaiming Eursulon’s sword, Wavebreaker, the second arc has expanded upon the characters and their relationship to the greater philosophy of the Citadel and Umora.

I don’t usually speculate where stories might go next or craft my own fan theories. Especially for ongoing projects (i.e. TV shows, actual plays, books in a series, etc.), I tend to be along for the ride, and I spend time analyzing the story being told and the characters within. And rarely do I put these thoughts to paper, at least not coherently; I am more likely to ramble endlessly to a friend or lurk on Discord for others’ opinions, chiming in occasionally. However, I have noticed some things brewing in this arc that I wish to discuss at-length and even speculate upon: my perspective and analysis of the philosophy of the Wizard Stone, and the possible implications for the forthcoming third arc.

I don’t often see myself in stories. Not to say that I don’t see myself or parts of myself represented in media: i.e. demographically, socially, politically, etc., but rarely do I find a specific character or character motivation that ‘snipes through the duplex door’ where I go “oh shit that’s me” or “I relate to this on a deeper level.” This happened to me in Episode 19, when Suvi is investigating the records of her mother’s early time in the Citadel: her expulsion from the College of Divination and readmittance to the College of Abjuration because she had accused one of her professors of “treason against magic itself.”

Upon her dismissal from the Citadel, Stone wrote a dissenting missive to the Archmagi of the Citadel regarding one of the three metaphysical axioms, the Axiom of Proliferation, and how this particular axiom “does not describe any actual truth of the lingua arcana, nor does it more broadly describe any facet of the greater binding” (Ep. 19, transcript p. 12). She goes on to posit that not only is it “pure intellectual technology,” but that its continued acceptance as fact is a “danger to the future of wizardry” and “[a] stain on the face of magic itself” (Ep. 19, p. 12). An axiom in this context is described as “simple… laws that are given to young wizards about broad truths of spell casting in general… that are true across spells [and], … different schools of magic” (Ep. 19, p. 13). That is, “the Axiom of Proliferation is essentially that the more times a spell is written down … the weaker the spell becomes” (Ep. 19, p. 13).

An axiom as defined in philosophy is a statement that is self-evidently true and serves as a starting point for reasoning. Therefore, any argument against its truth would call into greater question the philosophical foundation of the Citadel itself. If Stone’s claim that this was not a true axiom had not been dismissed swiftly and discredited, it is possible (though highly unlikely, given the power of empire) that this would have led to a redefinition of the philosophy of wizardry in Umora.

This is what struck me like a bolt of lightning while listening to this episode. I did almost this exact thing when I was in grad school!

Stone is… me? Faulty logic and its effects

As part of my master’s degree, I took a philosophy seminar on bioethics, which covered some polarizing subjects and more fringe points of view. Most of these topics cannot be directly studied or supported by scientific evidence, so the conversation and academic debate is largely conceptual or theoretical (i.e., conducting research to investigate these ideas have varying states of legality and moral acceptability) (see footnote 1). This course was excellent and a bit out of my comfort zone, but it challenged me to think critically about fundamental logic and accepted ideas that often go unexamined until they are taken to the extreme. At one point in the semester, we were discussing a particular topic and the current state of debate surrounding it. Immediately, I was perplexed by some of arguments made to justify it, and at first, I didn’t have the language to express why. Much like Stone, I found myself screaming (internally) “you’re all idiots!” or “you’re missing the point/the bigger picture!” or “that’s not how that works!” Essentially, I had arrived at the conclusion that if this idea were to be implemented broadly in society, it would likely have major negative ramifications, and furthermore, not even achieve the desired and purported effect that they were arguing for!

Eventually, I figured out what the underlying problem was: a logical fallacy inherent and unidentified within the current debate. Since scholars had just accepted the argument at face value and moved on, most of the debate was concerned with its future implementation or theoretical follow-on effects on individuals and society at large. I did find some existing papers that danced around the idea of fallacious reasoning (i.e., that the theoretical benefits were greatly exaggerated, if not a zero-sum game, or that the negative long-term effects may outweigh the short-term benefits), but none named it specifically or even examined the logical argument the entire debate was predicated on. So, for my term paper, I researched and wrote about this fallacy, and in it, I discussed how the discovery and acknowledgment of it would reframe the debate and perhaps even bring about reform to existing systems!

In the process of writing and researching, I felt incredibly isolated intellectually (this was also peak-COVID so that didn’t help either). Now that I had put the pieces together, it seemed quite obvious to me, but it was difficult to find supporting evidence or other similar arguments to mine (even if they weren’t breaking the logic down so specifically). Was this thing I had reasoned actually true? Why had no one pointed this out before? What if I’m wrong? What if they’re right and I’m a fool for daring to challenge them? What does my professor think? They’re an expert and approved the topic, so I know I’m not entirely off-base, but do they agree with me? I knew that if I wrote a strong, supported, and persuasive argument, that I couldn’t fail, but I deeply cared whether or not I was actually right. It was also probably one of the first times that I wrote with passion (and specific planning ahead of time!), rather than churning out yet another good-enough research paper (that I may or may not have written days ahead of the deadline or the night before).

Thankfully, unlike Stone, my fears that I would not be taken seriously, or worse, told that I was flat out wrong (and be silenced) did not come to pass—my professor agreed wholeheartedly with my argument that this fallacy is pervasive in the current literature. (Though I feel must disclaim that I still could be wrong in some other aspect of my argument, and that simply arguing the existence of a fallacy can be treacherous! In philosophy, no one ever has the only or complete answer—if they claim to, they are either lying or ignorant.) As part of the course, we did a mock peer review in class and my professor sent us further feedback on our papers after we submitted our initial draft of the term paper.

One particular piece of feedback stands out to me upon reflection and comparison to Stone’s experience and the philosophy of wizardry. It said something along the lines of ‘We think that is a very admirable and unique take on this subject. No one found any fault in your logic; however, it is important to consider the practical implications of identifying this fallacy.’ Point taken, of course, that the mere identification of a flaw in logic is not the end of the conversation—it is merely the start of a new discussion and opportunity to surface new arguments.

In my case, the identification of the fallacy was the concrete thing I felt I could verifiably yell about (academically) to explain why I disagreed so vehemently with current literature (and some truly wild propositions made by certain scholars). Of course, one should not commit the ‘fallacy fallacy,’ which is that simply pointing out a fallacy invalidates the argument. Instead, it was a means to discuss practical implications: some less harmful methods, some overlooked existing solutions, and to pull knowledge from other related disciplines that had not yet been considered because this fallacy had yet to be identified (see footnote 2).

The philosophy of Stone’s accusation of ‘treason’ and treatise to the Archmagi

In listening to and reflecting upon this episode and the conclusion of the second arc, I wonder if Stone felt similarly to me: that she had a fundamental disagreement with the way that wizards (and the Empire) conduct magic. I wonder if she learned about the Axioms and something didn't sit right with her, so she dug into the philosophy or history of it. Moreover, I find it particularly striking that her original specialization was divination. Although it has not been stated outright, I think it can be plausibly inferred that Stone divined some kind of knowledge about the fundamental ‘wrongness’ of current wizardry and the disastrous follow-on effects it would have. She may have been unable to fully convey her revelation in the moment, and so just shouted ‘treason against magic’ at her mentor. As was the case with me, the Axiom of Proliferation was just the most concrete thing that Stone could point at to explain herself.

But beyond my own biases and affinity for Stone, it follows that she may well have examined or done a proof on the Axiom of Proliferation which led to her discovery that the premise of the Axiom was false. Let’s examine the argument that Stone may have made (and the one that Suvi may have done a poor proof of, by her own admission). The argument is as follows:

All Axioms of magic describe a truth about the fundamental nature of magic

The Axiom of Proliferation states that the more times a spell is written down (proliferated), the weaker the spell becomes, which is a truth about the fundamental nature of magic.

Therefore, the Axiom of Proliferation is an Axiom of magic.

This can be simplified:

All A’s have property B

C has property B

Therefore, C is A

This does not necessarily lead to a false conclusion, and while the argument may be valid, it may not always be logically sound, see for example:

All people are mortals.

John is a mortal

Therefore, John is a person.

In the Citadel’s view, there is no flaw here, because they teach (and presume) that the Axiom of Proliferation is true in the lingua arcana. Wizards, of course, are known by their secrets, so it follows that in their philosophy of magic, they would have some kind of justification for keeping magic limited to the select few. But, if one of the premises is false (in this case, premise 2), then this justification is in jeopardy. It stands to reason that Stone must have had serious evidence to declare that premise false, and as she was studying divination, it was likely a vision or prophecy of some kind. Presuming she is correct, then it also speaks to her incredible intelligence (although she did not have the social grace at 19 years old to deftly navigate this accusation) (see footnote 3a).

Although (as far as we know), Stone did not make another public ruckus about the Axiom upon returning to the Citadel, I don’t think this caused her to abandon the belief that the axiom was erroneous. Upon her readmission, she joined the College of Abjuration, specifically studying “counterspelling, dispelling magic, [and] sort of metamagic, … the magic of magic itself” (Ep. 19, p. 11). This might seem to be an odd choice for a backup specialization, but Stone’s issue with the Axiom and metamagic are deeply intwined philosophical concepts, as metamagic is essentially the equivalent to metaphysics in our world.

Wizardry and the nature of magic in Umora

Wizards are defined in Umora to be people that can use a “language of magic” the “lingua arcana” to cast magic, and importantly, that “they believe [the lingua arcana] is the language the universe uses to understand itself,” which was only coined about 250 years prior to the present story (Ep. 19, p. 16). At the end of the first arc, Suvi discovers from her father’s notes that the reflexive indicative, which was taught to her as a necessary component of the lingua arcana, is in fact entirely unnecessary for spellcasting. And further, Stone also doesn’t use the reflexive indicative, which is demonstrated through her unique casting of Mending in the very first episode. It is unclear so far in the worldbuilding (to me, at least) if the lingua arcana is the language the universe uses to understand itself, or if it is a construct used by people to explain, communicate, and more importantly cast magic in Umora (much like math and science are ‘constructs’ that describe the nature of our world, though the fact that it is constructed does not mean it is not true). If it is the latter, then there is likely to be forces at work, be it the components of spell casting (such as the reflexive indicative), the casters themselves, or others yet to be revealed, that are manipulating and restricting the nature of magic in Umora (see footnote 3b).

Thus, I would posit that there is some issue in the way that the restriction of the lingua arcana is affecting the “greater binding,” which is “the theory of magic, that magic is the interplay between the Spirit and the Real—or the Spirit and the Mortal” (Ep. 19, p. 14). Essentially, the lingua arcana describes the nature of the relationship between the Spirit and the Mortal world, while the greater binding is the metaphysical link between them. Stone all but confirms this in her letter to the Archmagi, that if the issue is left unresolved, it would endanger the future of wizardry (Ep. 19, p. 12).

Other pertinent wizarding history and context

Stone and Soft were also part of a group called the Acadator, which was dedicated to rooting out corruption and bad actors within the Citadel. We don’t really know too much else about them, the exact specifics of their philosophy, or if they still exist as a group (given that Steel and Eiorghorain were members). There is also some history surrounding two early wizarding groups pre-Citadel, the Antivoli and the Accordati, that had a philosophical disagreement about accepting the help of the Saraz Imperium for building the Citadel (specifically related to the sharing of magic), which led to a civil war called the Cataclysm of Carrow (Ep. 19, p. 16). In terms of timeline, the lingua arcana was coined in 1423, the term ‘wizard’ was coined in 1456, the Cataclysm of Carrow was in 1467, and three years later, in 1470, the Erien (Citadel) was built. The current story with the three protagonists is taking place in 1670, so it has only been 200 years since the Citadel was created, and the lingua arcana coined only 47 years prior to that (in less than a human lifespan).

Further, the creation of the Irulian Desert, the Erien, and the Citadel is a destructive history—wizards razed a verdant forest and turned it into a hot, unlivable desert with a miles high glass tower at the center. Additionally, the Wizards of the Citadel pool their magic beneath the Erien in an ‘Aerith,’ into which they deposit magical reserves and draw upon its combined strength when in crisis (see footnote 4). Mechanically, we see Suvi ‘donate’ unused spell slots at the end of the day.

We do know that Grandmother Wren’s cottage is located on top of a source of great magical power and serves as her sanctum. Wizards also use the towers of the Citadel as their sanctums, and I believe the following is speculation, as I do not think it has been canonized yet, but it is possible that the Aerith serves a similar purpose as a source of great magical power that previously belonged to the Spirits that wizards alone now use and control. This control is the key difference that may be contributing to, or even causing, detrimental effects on the greater binding.

The Witch(es)’s and the Wild One(s)’s perspectives

Additional evidence to support this theory of the Aerith's origins and purpose comes in Episode 23, when Eursulon meets the Man in Black and discusses their opinions on mortals, particularly wizards and their desire for control. Specifically, the Man in Black states, “that tower is the handle of a knife plunged deep into the heart of this world, a heart that is responsible for… a murder to the world of Spirits” (Ep. 23, 0:09:45-0:10:07).

Later, in a flashback with Mirara and Grandmother Wren, Mirara argues that “the world has burned before” (perhaps in reference to the creation of the Irulian Desert), that “[wizards] cannot be allowed to do this thing” (still unclear what that thing is), and the coven must make some kind of decision before it is too late (Ep. 23, 0:58:46-0:59:00). Wren pleas for another option, points this out as a false dichotomy, that they must not “be forced to choose between one slaughter and another,” and they should work to find common ground and coexist (Ep. 23, 0:59:07-0:59:33). Mirara retorts that she could never imagine the day that she would see “the will of wizards debase themselves” (i.e., that wizards would ever lower themselves from their current position of power) (Ep. 23, 0:59:39-0:59:52).

Wren then asserts a key point that correlates directly with Stone’s perspective: “There is nothing I have seen in the world of Mortals or of Spirits that shows me that there is a path that is wrong to tread” or anything that proves the pursuit of wizardry as inherently wrong (i.e., the lingua arcana), only those who “tread paths hurtfully, with cruel intention” (i.e., those abusing the lingua arcana for political purposes and imperial gain) (Ep. 23, 1:00:08-1:00:28). Wren also questions Mirara’s stance of wizardry as “an abomination against the natural order of the world” (Ep. 23, 1:00:40-1:00:47). Mirara then challenges her to consider her point of view and insists that even Wren cannot deny that “the poison of wizards does not spread so quickly as to choke the life from this world” (Ep. 23, 1:01:03-1:01:09).

My pure speculation and fan theory:

From this conversation, I postulate that Mirara and the Coven has taken an extremist and doomed perspective on the harm that is resulting partially from the Axiom of Proliferation (and perhaps the Aerith as well), while Grandmother Wren took a reformist stance. This would put her and her position as the Witch of the World’s Heart at odds with whatever plan the Coven intends to enact. Given what we know of the Witch Class and the other domains of the Coven, their plan is quite possibly violent, retributive, and holds little to no concern for the Mortals or people of Umora.

The third arc will begin with Ame’s meeting with the Coven of Elders at the North Pole, where they will attempt to destroy her station as the Witch of the World’s Heart. For all of the reasons above, I believe this event will connect directly to Stone’s declaration of “treason against magic itself,” but I will just have to (patiently) wait and see (see footnote 5).

Footnotes:

(1) I am well aware that I am being quite vague and obtuse regarding this subject and what specifically I was researching. Mainly because a) that’s not really the point of these musings, this is just some background info and context to explain my philosophy which is already longer than I would like, b) it would be impossible to do justice to an overview of this complex subject in an essay about something that resonated with me in a D&D podcast (and which does not engage with that subject directly, at least not in this context), c) I’ve already written a paper on this subject and am not interested in regurgitating it here, and d) Nunya Binyess (i.e. I could still be wrong about this fallacy and I’d rather discuss WWW than start a tangential IRL philosophical or political argument on this forum).

(2) Though on a deeper level, I partially disagree with the idea that I needed to account for the practical implications of the fallacy within the paper. I disagree that when challenging the fundamental nature of something (e.g., an erroneous argument, a misinformed policy, or an unjust system), there must be an immediate remedy or solution offered up. In my philosophical opinion, once a fallacy like that is identified for something that we hold to be fundamentally true, we need to sit in that revelation and undo the thought processes created by the incorrect assumptions. You cannot flip a switch and suddenly reverse all of the justifications that have gone into supporting a flawed, ingrained argument. To undo a pervasive, incorrect fundamental idea that has been implemented, internalized, or proliferated, first it must be fully examined for all its flaws, rescinded, and only then do we start from square one and think about practical changes (in a perfect world, of course, I am fully aware that the world does not work this way). I do often wonder about this reactive nature in society to demand immediate alternatives and solutions when norms are challenged, though I recognize this is a result of different lived experiences and worldviews. After all, this reactionary nature is true in Umora as well, and the wizards of the Citadel “tend to be a lot more about praxis and practice” (Ep. 19, p. 14).

(3a) Perhaps Stone rolled a nat 20 on some kind of intelligence check for the vision, but rolled a nat 1 on her Persuasion check against Sleep!

(3b) There is another essay I could write here about the history of science and empire (another grad school course) and the reflection of this in the Imperium, its taxonomy, and the (anti)-democratization of knowledge, but perhaps another time.

(4) Something that occurred to me when piecing together the Erien and the Aerith was the similarity to Morrow’s derrick that harnessed Naram’s power in the first arc. Both serve similar purposes as well, of generating magic and magical items. It makes me wonder if it was intended for the derrick to be Morrow’s poor attempt at recreating the glory of the Citadel, or if this is just a happy coincidence/connection between the arcs.

(5) I do want to briefly acknowledge the nature of improvisational storytelling in this situation, and that anything can change, be clarified, canonized, etc. at any point. This is partly why I don’t like to speculate much myself, because I trust the creators to tell the story the way they want to and follow the paths that appear, without projecting my own hopes or prescriptions when I listen to their wonderful creation that has been crafted with such care. It is also why my theory in the end is limited to the meeting with the coven- truly anything could happen at the beginning of the next arc, and whatever I might come up with is likely less interesting than what will happen. (NB: There is nothing wrong with fan theories or head canons! It’s just not usually something that interests me!) I merely saw a connection and through-line that deeply resonated with me in this second arc and felt compelled to write about it. Also, Worlds Beyond Number and WWW is just so fucking great, and it truly astounds me that this story is so deep that I have somehow written a 12-page essay analyzing essentially a 20-minute segment of one episode. I pray to Enzo that there are no grievous errors or spelling mistakes, but I wanted to post this on WBN’s first birthday! 🧡

34 notes · View notes