• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Consciousness and Magic

Free episodes:

I posted also to the Consciousness thread because I thought it was a good goal to strive for -

If you are in a dialectic - a debate in which you intend to convince another, or in a situation (like in academia) where you must demonstrate certain understandings in a clear way, maintaining the lineage thread of your thinking. I could see this being a task set a student writing an argument, with some modifications in both instances.

As mentioned, I have seen this introduced as the protocol in mediations - and I assume it is something that has emerged out of psychology, like in marriage/couple counseling, etc. I don't know the original source.

In conversation, some people employ some of these techniques. It can be useful, but in my experience it is always a sign of a communication breakdown, or fear. Some level of management is being attempted and I always wonder why. (Politeness is a given).
 
If you are in a dialectic - a debate in which you intend to convince another, or in a situation (like in academia) where you must demonstrate certain understandings in a clear way, maintaining the lineage thread of your thinking. I could see this being a task set a student writing an argument, with some modifications in both instances.

As mentioned, I have seen this introduced as the protocol in mediations - and I assume it is something that has emerged out of psychology, like in marriage/couple counseling, etc. I don't know the original source.

In conversation, some people employ some of these techniques. It can be useful, but in my experience it is always a sign of a communication breakdown, or fear. Some level of management is being attempted and I always wonder why. (Politeness is a given).

Good points: i asked myself WWBD?

"Monks, a statement endowed with five factors is well-spoken, not ill-spoken. It is blameless & unfaulted by knowledgeable people. Which five?

"It is spoken at the right time. It is spoken in truth. It is spoken affectionately. It is spoken beneficially. It is spoken with a mind of good-will."

And decided to delete the post.

Here is the link for continuity & posterity:

How to Criticize with Kindness: Philosopher Daniel Dennett on the Four Steps to Arguing Intelligently | Brain Pickings
 
Where we place our attention is key. Where we place (or focus) our attention, we 'animate'. Like a ray of sunlight focussed through a magnifying glass that stirs the ember and ignites to flame.

The intensity of our focus, our attention, is key, as well. When speaking of manifestation it is so often a case of: 'Oh I tried that, it doesn't work.' Well, in fact it does work - and powerfully. Every instant of our lives we are drawing to ourselves what we focus on. A lifetime - or at least decades - of thinking one is this or that - or the world is this or that - cannot be undone in a day's worth, or a week's worth, of 'attention'. The single most evident quality of those who can manifest consciously is their powerful will forces, coupled with a singularity of purpose/intent, sustained over time. A sanguine frivolity does not work where sangfroid is needed.

It's also not merely a marshaling of mental focus, but of emotional command, as well. All aspects go to sustain the attention. Paradoxically, none of this is in any way strained. Riding bareback is a good example - astride a powerful horse, naked and alive to every nuance - with the ability to command at the merest touch. So like the well-trained mind and emotions. With such command, the door opens - beyond which stands the teacher. Only then can the teacher dispense the higher work. All the preparatory work is now done outside the 'precincts of the temple'. In yonder days the first three initiations took place within the protections and guidance of an actual temple. No longer. We must traverse the conditions of the first three initiations 'on our own' in a manner of speaking. Further work beyond that requires particular guidance - and as the old adage says: 'When the student is ready, the teacher appears.'

EDIT: Be aware that the distinctions between the Left and Right Hand Paths are pertinent here. There are reasons that there are references to White and Black Magic, to a White and Black Brotherhood. The latter is not to be taken literally, but it does refer to a something that does exist in a manner of speaking. Literalism is a problem in this regard and why 'the less said the better' - because inevitably the words will be misunderstood.

If you understand the above you understand why 'phenomena' is a 'blind'. It is on the order of a test. The goal is far loftier - far more significant than a a handful of 'parlor tricks' to entertain the bored or boorish.

"The single most evident quality of those who can manifest consciously is their powerful will forces, coupled with a singularity of purpose/intent, sustained over time. A sanguine frivolity does not work where sangfroid is needed."

Agreed - but isn't the place, the role of will and ego what separates magic and religion? And I think science (which has a special place for the ego!)

In religion, the will and ego are surrendered (willingly) to something one reveres and in magic the attempt is to amplify personal power by somehow manipulating great forces - with lots of warnings about losing oneself in the process ...

But this is true of science (The Manhattan Project) and the pursuit of political power ... of every human ambition.

So the tragicomedy of ego, of wanting and willing can be answered by philosophy, in a stoic acceptance for example, by religion - Buddhism says suffering is in clinging, Christianity calls for an alignment of your will with God's, in mysticism which is the practice of dissolution and union that the will initiates with an unquenchable longing for the absolute ... or by science which so far has shown an essentially aggressive effect on knowledge and through technology ... or by magic in a process that seems to most directly inflame the will.

In the great chain of being, causation is from greater to lesser with man in the middle - less than angels and subject to great cosmic forces but bearing the burdens of free choice (and the necessity to act) and knowing everything he does matters. This gives man a measure of dignity and a heavy burden.

In science, causality flows from the other direction but man is still in the middle, between the atom and the stars in magnitude - but this time he is denied free will, being causally impinged on from both directions and assured by materialism that his absurd position of being the only thing awake in a dead universe is just an illusion.

Magic, then, is the only path available for the rebel, for the Luciferian impulse - but when one looks far down its path, it may be the most fraught of all.

Of course, one can always choose to be an artist! No one much seems to mind artists ...
 
Stravinsky's "Rites of Spring" ... Jodorowsky's "Fando y Lis" ...

artists have a particular and peculiar ability to outrage ...

that no one much minds an artist is obvious art and artifice on my part (art without talent)

The Marquis de Sade finds sanctuary as Le Sacre Monstre' - base pornographer reformed as humanist philosopher when his God given talent is self-promotion ... much of what is damnable in modernity finds it's Genesis in Justine ...

The film "Amadeus" hits the right note in Salieri, a man of great intelligence (are you paying attention?), envious of an obscene little man in whom God invested his most defining characteristic of creativity ... perversely it seems ... and who can but admire a God who indulges in perversity?

The public recognizes it's need to be outraged and forgives those who trespass against it ... although nowadays we are so confused as to accept the word of the bold as to their talent, hopeful that time will see out the survival of true talent given the least opportunity.

So take heart, Artists - except for the Fool, you have the least choice of your vocation .., the mystic, the priest, the pedant all have a choice ... but you must have the blessing of talent to begin and so have Divine imprimatur in your vocation.
 
So take heart, Artists - except for the Fool, you have the least choice of your vocation .., the mystic, the priest, the pedant all have a choice ... but you must have the blessing of talent to begin and so have Divine imprimatur in your vocation.

You are complex and I do miss our discussions sometimes. Having been an artist to some minor extent, and having studied it to the point of getting a passing grade in my senior level Art Philosophy course, I'm not so sure I would invoke the divine. Any "divine imprimatur" is historically imparted solely on the authority of the church, which IMO is just another pretentious institution ( or is that just the rebel in me talking ) :D.
 
Last edited:
You are complex and I do miss our discussions sometimes. Having been an artist to some minor extent, and having studied it to the point of getting a passing grade in my senior level Art Philosophy course, I'm not so sure I would invoke the divine. Any "divine imprimatur" is historically imparted solely on the authority of the church, which IMO is just another pretentious institution ( or is that just the rebel in me talking ) :D.

Per usual you claim knowledge of an area to try to augment your pov.

I suggest you go onto your own Consciousness thread for these shout-outs to Steve (who in fact cannot hear you anymore because you are on his ignore list). Peddle your brand of tiresome one-trick-pony philosophy on your own Consciousness thread. Your calcified beliefs are harrowingly arthritic and predictable at this point. They bring nothing new to the table and do not further the discussion. We both know why you are on this thread - solely to troll. You behave just like the religious fanatics you claim to abhor - you proselytize your beliefs at the drop-of-the 'spiritual' hat - to the point of abuse.
 
Last edited:
Per usual you claim knowledge of an area to try to augment your pov ...

Better to claim having knowledge than to proclaim nonsense. I presume that you disagree that the church is just another pretentious institution? And BTW, @smcder can open any of my ignored posts quite easily, just like I did with yours. The part that dismays me most is that I did it because @Constance actually agreed with you, so I expected something of substance rather than yet another personal attack. So much for that relationship as well I guess. Your allegations of "abuse" are totally unfounded and the rest of your personal criticism addresses none of the issues raised in any of the videos I posted. Would I find equally weightless comebacks if I were to open the rest of your ignored posts? Probably. So I don't think I'll take that chance and expose myself to still more or your abuse right now. Maybe I'll try again in another six months.
 
Last edited:
Better to claim having knowledge than to proclaim nonsense.
Well, I guess that makes sense. :rolleyes: Not!
I presume that you disagree that the church is just another pretentious institution?
Baiting. Plus the same'ol'same'ol from you. It's an endless tape-loop. I responded to your views over a year ago - why should I continue to do so since you appear to not really absorb another's viewpoint? Besides which, it's not a topic we are discussing. Go to another thread for that - start another thread.
And BTW, smcder can open any of my ignored posts quite easily, just like I did with yours.
You hope. But he's not. He is simply not bothering with you anymore, Randall.
The part that dismays me most is that I did it because Constance actually agreed with you
No, factually wrong. You responded before Constance did her 'Like'.
I expected something of substance rather than yet another personal attack.
We have been asked by the moderators 'not to follow each other around' on the site. We are not suppose to interact. I have not been following you - however, you have been following me. As evidence, you have come on this thread recently in order to troll the thread, to bait me. Please exit the thread, Randall. You have shown that you have nothing to contribute to the topic of this thread.
So much for that relationship as well.
If you mean Constance, more than ever I am comvinced that you have a serious inability to interpret text. Read some of her rebuttal posts to you on the Consciousness threads (both your thread and the Paranormal thread). You need to get some clarity regarding the 'relationship' you and Constance had on this chat site.
Your allegations of "abuse" are totally unfounded
Anyone who has watched this odd dialog between you and I over the last 1-year-plus would have to disagree. While you tend to keep to the safe side of the boundary-line these days, historically you have demonstrated a serious nasty side. Recall it was you who tried to get me banned from this chat site. If there is any nastiness it is from your side, not mine.
and the rest of your personal criticism addresses none of the issues raised in any of the videos I posted.
So you're an 'issues man', are you? :rolleyes: Not quite. The videos you have posted are videos you have posted on other threads. I've posted responses in reference to them on those other threads, why should I continue responding to the same exact un-changing pov? You never really understand the replies.
You take up time, Randall. It's not worth anyone's time to keep responding to you. You're wasting time on this thread - clogging it up with your archive of YouTube videos - because somehow you are offended when someone doesn't think like you do. Poor man. I don't think you have the capacity to articulate your arguments - you just show-and-point and expect the other person to do all the intellectual heavy lifting.
Would I find equally weightless comebacks if I were to open the rest of your ignored posts?
I would suggest you keep to your word and keep me on ignore, okay? Deal's a deal, after all.

While I put no one on official ignore, I don't actually read your posts in detail, Randall, if at all - and I most certainly don't click on your links. I have no interest in arguing your re-tread points again and again. Remember - as you well know - this is 'my thread'. You do recall that you ran me and others off 'your thread' because of 'thread derailment'? You asked us to leave - and we did. Can you do the same here? You are derailing this thread - can you leave? Probably not, because you enjoy being the Troll.
Probably, so I don't think I'll take that chance and expose myself to still more or your abuse right now.
If you address me - as you did here - I will respond. Don't addresss me and you won't get a message from me directed at you. Very simple. But more important - just go away from this thread. We are not discussing what you want to discuss. Start your own thread on the subject you want to discuss. That discussion is not happening here. Is that clear, Randall?
Maybe I'll try again in another six months.
Please don't. Do us both a favor. This is a sufficiently large chat site that you should be able to post happily without ever being obliged to come on this thread. :rolleyes: I think so.

Please note how much time you take up. It's just not worth the bother. You are not worth the bother - at least in this context (not that you are not worth the bother as a human being). 'Nuf said.
 
Last edited:
LINK: The Feynman Lectures are now Online and Free

TEXT: "
The Feynman Lectures are one of the most popular lecture series in physics. They are great for science enthusiasts, students, teachers, they are just fantastic. Well, good news, Caltech and The Feynman Lectures website have collaborated to put these lectures online completely free of cost for you to read. The lectures themselves were first presented at Caltech in the 1960s by the legendary physicist Richard Feynman. The lectures have combined and put into a 3 volume book."

Richard Feynman - The Character of Physical Law - 5 -The Distinction of Past and Future


Love this poster's comment: "Dr. Feynman, suppose you have ten gallons of blue water and every day you drain off one gallon and add a gallon of clear water. You would find that after only seven days, the blueness would be reduced by one-half. This is about what happens in the human body. With the progression of time we inhale and we exhale, we drink and we sweat, and we eat and we excrete. With every heartbeat, the atoms of the brain are being replaced and the ones that were there before have gone away. So where are tomorrow’s memories of yesterday, Dr. Feynman? In the air we will breathe, in the water we will drink, and the food we will eat? C’mon, that’s impossible, Dr. Feynman. It has been postulated if the speed of light were ever exceeded, you would go back in time. It is thought, however, nothing can exceed the speed of light. Could it be our souls are faster than the speed of light? We are souls and we remember. Without the memory of our souls we would not even know a past ever existed. I remember and therefore I was, I am, and I will be."
 
Lived in dreams......everything had within it magic........reality and non-reality were indistinct.........

.......the incomparable Ingmar Bergman........speaking of his boyhood.

 
Last edited:
... and who can but admire a God who indulges in perversity?

The public recognizes it's need to be outraged and forgives those who trespass against it ... although nowadays we are so confused as to accept the word of the bold as to their talent, hopeful that time will see out the survival of true talent given the least opportunity.

So take heart, Artists - except for the Fool, you have the least choice of your vocation .., the mystic, the priest, the pedant all have a choice ... but you must have the blessing of talent to begin and so have Divine imprimatur in your vocation.
enhanced-buzz-13848-1377287262-18.jpg

"Divine imprimatur in your vocation." Jesus, you write so well, & not just sometimes either, and in this post you're nailing something near and dear. Mystical priest poets all tap into a different vein of consciousness when experiencing excited synaptic meditations & creations. It's a good space to be if you can get there. Their prayers and wicked hymns we revisit over and over again. As the favourite film rolls by for the fourth or seventh time, maybe you've lost count how many times you have entered into this cinematic mosque church & temple, you clearly find something of yourself there.

So bless the artists who travel reluctant, thorny, recalcitrant stony roads. It's Hawthorne, Herzog and Jodorowsky, Djuna Barnes, Kathy Acker and Goya. Let's have three cheers for Emir Kusturica - even his name is a proclamation. And Man Bites Dog? Und Der Todesking? I'll never forget the first time I saw Kieslowski's Dekalog and the utter emptiness of the killing of the taxi driver...
WickerMan36-620x330.jpg

For me film, specifically, has a double magic in its actual recreation of the illusion of reality, and it's transformative power for the viewer, who feels their own self catapulted into the ritual of cine. Gina Rowland's and Peter Falk together in Cassavetes' flicks take me into some pretty intense spaces.

Soon comes autumn & I like to watch Edward Woodward as the Fool, and the Sacrifice come freely get burned in the giant wooden effigy as the pagan island folk cheer, and sing arm in arm in the setting sun. These repetitive passion plays are good for the soul, kind of cleansing in some ways.
The-Wicker-Man-006.jpg
 
Last edited:
I like the spirit of your post @Burnt State, but I think you might want to look up what the word "imprimatur" actually means. Like I pointed out the first time, historically in the context of the "Divine", an imprimatur is an official declaration by a Church authority, and if we apply that to the arts, something like what you see below would probably have that stamp of approval. Using it in broadly expressive terms to include pagan festivals and magical meditations is stretching it way beyond the boundaries it was intended for, but what else should I have expected in this thread I guess :rolleyes: .

1355653925_sistine-chapel2.jpg
 
Last edited:
To create is to be godlike, no? And in that process both the creator and those who behold the crelation are changed.

If we leave the "rigors of religion" out of this picture then we can appreciate how art making, meditation and mystical prayer can move us towards transformative spaces. No matter who your 'god' is the process of transformation is upon you.

What I see in the artist divine is the command over their tools and their need to bring up to the surface our deepest entanglements. They live through it so we can conceptualize it better for ourselves in the gallery hallwyas and our living rooms, and more authority to them for giving us such ritualistic practices.

Sometimes, Randal, words are flexible for the user in order to express their creative ideas. This will often conflict with literalism, something I only pay attention to for a portion of the time. It's not a problem I need to address as that can create conflict between people. But anyways, let us not tangle this thread anymore with such talk. It is what it is. Let go.

Or as my kids like to say to me often, "Don't judge."
 
@ufology Randall, you are not respecting my request that you leave this thread.

Using it in broadly expressive terms to include pagan festivals and magical meditations is stretching it way beyond the boundaries it was intended for, but what else should I have expected in this thread I guess. :rolleyes:

We get it, Randall, you have no respect for anyone else. You have been selectively dive-bombing this thread since mid-July. What's the point? Do I need to ask a mod to forcibly remove you from the thread? You don't seem to respond to the polite request - and you are definitely not abiding by the mod's request that you not seek me out on this chat site.

You expect people to take you seriously as a 'ufologist' when you have the internet manners of a Troll?
 
Last edited:
Lived in dreams......everything had within it magic........reality and non-reality were indistinct.........

.......the incomparable Ingmar Bergman........speaking of his boyhood.


I'm re watching Scenes From A Marriage - there are interviews with Bergman, Josephson and Liv Ullmann - Ullman had a child with Bergman and her comments are insightful - she talks about how well he writes women.

This film is extraordinary - it's all dialogue and almost all between two characters in close-up and shot in a few weeks.

It also seemed to have an extraordinary effect on divorce rates in Europe at the time!
 
I'm re watching Scenes From A Marriage - there are interviews with Bergman, Josephson and Liv Ullmann - Ullman had a child with Bergman and her comments are insightful - she talks about how well he writes women.

This film is extraordinary - it's all dialogue and almost all between two characters in close-up and shot in a few weeks.

It also seemed to have an extraordinary effect on divorce rates in Europe at the time!

I have watched many if not most of Bergman's films. The two I love are 'The Magic Flute' and 'Fanny and Alexander'- the latter has extraordinary scenes of life, and in it we see Bergman give form to two of his childhood 'paranormal' experiences. (I will try to find an interview with Bergman where he describes the experience under the table in his grandmother's house). There are also two films that chronicle his parent's marriage and his mother's life - can't recall their titles. Bergman is an example of the artist who penetrates his own reality - and in doing so, becomes the universal human.

Another current director who does the same is - interestingly enough - Robert Redford. No one would equate Redford with Bergman or Kurasawa - yet in fact, it is my opinion that Redford is exactly in their league.
 
ImageUploadedByTapatalk1409596387.883805.jpg

Hence the expression that your ax should be sharp, but not too sharp ... actually this was more a case of flying off the handle ...
 
Back
Top