Request for Sources

[woolysw]

All -

I'm currently in early talks with a Seeker who is asking typical questions but would like not only conversations but also to be pointed to some reading material and I'm having a harder time than normal finding anything appropriate for one specific question.

The Seeker's question (or at the least one I'm asking for help with):

"If you know

Comments

[lordindra]

Plato- The Allegory of the Cave
Rene Descartes- Meditations on First Philosophy
John Locke- An Essay Concerning Human Understanding

I'd start with those.

[mageoflamancha]

It's not an article- though I know it came from a book- by which one is lost.

My favorite means for checking if an image or mental input is my creation or more akin to a daydream. Put a mundane task into the scene- ironing shirts for example- if that new image feels the same, and is as easy to hold as the rest- then the whole scene is more than likely of the same cloth. However, if the image keeps pushing the part you've created as other aside, and it is hard to hold on to the two different tracks- then you are likely getting input that bears studying through a different lens.

The greatest problem I see coming up is that magic covers areas that are not subject to imperial proof. How can you measure how much faster someone recovered with a spell than without- even if you could run tests with twins- there are still too many variables to be a valid test.
I'm a big fan of proof and evidence, but somethings just prove that magic is still much more of an art than a science.

[ouranophobe]

How can you measure how much faster someone recovered with a spell than without- even if you could run tests with twins- there are still too many variables to be a valid test.

Double-blind studies have been performed using patients recovering from issues which have a fairly common healing path, I want to say it was heart attack or some other cardiac issue.

The paper I read about it was focusing on "prayer" for terminology, but included Wiccan healing rituals, as well. I'll see if I can't dig it up.

[ouranophobe]

The Science, Psychology and Metaphysics of Prayer

Blog post, referencing the study done at Duke. Not as solid a reference as the study paper itself, but at the very least, it makes for interesting reading.

[polyranger]

I am not trying to light a fire, but what about faith?

[astraea_sophia]

If your faith can't stand scrutiny, then in my opinion (as well as the opinion of the OP's seeker), it might not be the right path for you. I think it's brave to look for emperical truths in the midst of spirituality. I'm really looking forward to what people are going to suggest as source works for this kind of thing, because I feel like I'm in the same boat that seeker is.

Mods: Deleted and reposted thanks to my OCD regarding spelling mistakes.

[polyranger]

I guess I wasn't very clear. I understand and I applaud anyone who questions their faith. (Had I not, I'd still be a Catholic.) Following something blindly is dumb and can lead to fanaticism, which is never good no matter what the religion. However, at some point you have to believe without the gods physically manifesting for all to see or the [insert desired item] transmuting in front of you.

[blindwebster]

The Sandman series. Seriously. It actually helped me a lot back when I was dating a guy who did everything he could to attack my spirituality.

On magic specifically, I really liked this article by Amy Hale in a recent anthology, Ten Years of Triumph of the Moon. In it, she addresses the study that Tanya Luhrmann did on occultism in the UK: Luhrmann coined a term called "interpretive drift," which is how she describes the way people might interpret evidence in order to conclude that their magic is effective. What Hale points out is that Luhrmann herself concedes that she was herself engaging in a reverse "interpretive drift," in which she made every effort to interpret evidence in order to conclude that magic doesn't work. Bias can go both ways.

Or, you can just tell your friend to interpret everything psychologically. It's very convenient.

[ianphanes]

I have not read the Hale essay, but I've studied the Luhrmann book extensively since shortly after it was published

Re: Request for Sources

[smarriveurr]

Don't get out the boxing gloves...

So we're keeping this bare-knuckle?

Re: Request for Sources

[pierceheart]

I might have to bring that book on my deployment, based on your recommendation, missy.