Hello everyone I’m Angela and welcome back to my channel. Welcome to the Livestream I should say. How are you guys?

Oh, I can see James. Hi, James.

Can you, okay can you hear me okay? Hello, Ron. I’m very happy to see you guys here. Good morning Sam, Bo Mackn.

So I’m happy to announce this lecture is the beginning of a series of Livestream lectures on the philosophical underpinnings of esoteric and occult practices. So the idea is to cover different Philosophers and their philosophical views which basically are underpinning and underlying the practices of magic and different esoteric traditions.

Wait a second. Maybe I need to… Oh, do you still hear the echo? Give me a second.

So let me know if you can hear me better guys. The issue is that there is a lot of delay between when I say things and when you see them. So the feedback I get you from the chat comes like a minute or so later than, yeah. So do let me know in the chat if you’re hearing me okay now. Okay? Great, perfect, thank you, thanks for bearing with me because this is quite new for me, so I need to experiment a bit.

So yeah, as I was saying, I’m happy to announce that the present one will mark the beginning of a series of live stream lectures on the philosophical underpinning of esoteric and occult practices. So the idea is to cover the different philosophers and or philosophical views, to then analyse how can they inform or enrich our understanding of endeavours involving magic. So I’m going to switch between talking about the topic and reading your questions and answering them of course so please when you do have a question, as opposed to a comment, begin your message by typing QUESTION in capital letters so that it sticks out and I can see immediately that it is in fact a question. So on all the notes of the live lectures will be available for my Patrons of Initiate level and above tiers. Yeah, and we will also have further discussion in the Inner Symposium. So this series of live lectures will try to uncover the paradigms, world views and theoretical underpinning which uphold or relate to different magical traditions whether it be Paganism, Wicca, Ceremonial Magic, Left Hand Paths, Shamanism, and so on.

So we are going to start today by talking about worldviews. I will first explain what a worldview is, why is it important for us, to then move on to analysing the world views of different magical or occult traditions. So let’s now move on to the PowerPoint, hopefully, this works. Can you see it? Hopefully, you can.

So let’s start by addressing what is a worldview. I’m using the word worldview because it’s easier, I guess, to catch and understand. But another term that I really relate to the idea of worldview is that of paradigm. So the worldview, basically, is a notion that signifies both an inner conviction and an outlook on the world. So I’d say that the worldview, as we are going to define it in today’s lecture, is both a view of the world and also the premises, the untold, unspoken, underlying premises which uphold that specific view. So yeah, basically, it is also the paradigm or in some cases the paradigms, plural, underlying our perception and interpretation of reality.

I see I have questions.

Yes, Immanuel Kant. Immanuel Kant said that… I’m sorry but I’m having difficulties seeing the chat. Okay, yes Immanuel Kant which is spelled with an ‘I.’ James, thanks for asking.

Okay, so let’s see now. A definition of a worldview based on a peer-reviewed article, of course, all the references are found in the infobox I also have a slide with all the references but, yeah, you will find them in the infobox as usual. So a worldview is cultured, which means related to our culture, not an innate thing, a cultured set of elements, orienting conscious and unconscious behaviour by means of signs/signifiers, abstraction/interpretation, moral/ethical values, group/individual identity, and commitment. So these are all elements that make up a worldview.

So we have signs/signifiers, as I said, for example, in the example of the contract it is a sign, a semantic sign of our idea of an enduring self. Then we have abstraction/interpretation because our worldview, our paradigm affects how we interpret the signals coming from the outside world. And we have also moral and ethical values which are determined by the way we interpret and understand and make up our reality. And the way we make up our reality is basically, essentially determined by the worldview we consciously or unconsciously endorse. Also, we have a group or individual identity which is often linked to a specific worldview or a specific paradigm. You can find that people from the same nationality or same political party or the same religion may endorse a very similar perception of the world and bear in mind that a worldview is not just a chosen way of seeing the world it is, as I was saying, like the premises, the theatres we have whereby we perceive the reality. And then, of course, there is commitment and this can be a voluntary commitment or even an unconscious commitment when we endorse a view of the world, a perception of the word that was given to us.

So why does it matter, why is it important for us to understand the paradigms and worldviews which underlie our perception of reality and our understanding of the world? First, because knowledge is power. You can act on what you see and acknowledge and you are actually acted on by what you cannot see nor acknowledge. So knowledge is the power to change things, I’d say when you know something and you understand it and you acknowledge that it is there, then you have the choice of whether you want to stick with it or not. Whereas, if that aspect of your understanding of reality remains unacknowledged you will never really have a chance because you are just translated by it you are just so immersed and so ingrained in that view of the world that you become the filter you could have chosen to modify and amend.

So yeah, as Alexander and Seidman said, ‘everyone is a philosopher, though in his own way and unconsciously since even in the slightest manifestation of any intellectual activity there is a contained specific conception of the world.’ Every single thought we have underlies a specific conception of the world and acknowledging which one it is, is essential because then we have the choice to either endorse it or discard it or modify it. So, as I wrote in one of my publications, ‘what makes us good philosophers, so the premise here is that we are all philosophers because we are all thinking within a philosophical system whether we acknowledge it or we are just endorsing it unconsciously, so what makes us then good philosophers instead of poor ones is the ability to acknowledge the system of thought underlying mental activities to then gain power over the said system as opposed to being enslaved to its unconscious and unacknowledged effects.’

So let me see if there are questions so far and bearing in mind that there is a delay between when I say things and when you write and when you get the image and my words, so I may be reading comments which are not from now but from two minutes ago.

Oh, James said wow I need to read more Emanuel Kant. Got it!

Yes, he is I think one of my favourite philosophers and I think he is also essential in the turning point which happened in the 20th century and what we can see, even now, with this shift from seeing the reality as something that is out there for us to perceive and understanding our role in the interpretation of the reality.

Yeah, I see that you are… Ron says Paradigm is probably the best word to illustrate a magical belief.

So, moving on. So, now the question. This is a question that I think I got a few times in the comments and many times in person because, as you may tell, I like to defend Magick and Magickal practices.

So once, a few years ago, I had a two hours long discussion with my Professor, the former Supervisor at the university in Italy, where I got my degrees. And I really admire him and I love having discussions with him because they are always very engaging and profound and in this specific case, we had a debate over Magick. And he is in the study of Buddhism and Vedanta. So he has the idea that even from the Buddhist Canon and the Vedas, that you can only reach the Enlightenment which is the spiritual awakening by abandoning the ego. So what he was saying is that Magick is a way of reinforcing the ego and so it keeps you from reaching the Enlightenment and so he gave me this example, this story from the Buddhist Canon where the Buddha encounters a Sorcerer on his way. He encounters the Sorcerer and the Sorcerer said it took me 30 years to finally walk on water and Buddha replied, well you could have just taken a boat. And this was told by my Professor and it was a way of saying that magic is not something that really transforms you but you can achieve those things with other means and in the meantime, you are keeping yourself away from the goal of reaching the enlightenment. What I replied to that was that Sorcerer achieved, in his endeavour, was not just walking on the water to cross the river, what he achieved was a unity with the elements which allowed him to become water, to become earth, to become air, and to become fire, to become at one with the elements, so much that he could overcome certain physical rules. So in my personal view, honestly, and I think that this can be found quite clearly in some magical practices. Magick is not just a way, it’s not a way, it, of course, it depends on the person and it depends on the tradition but it can be, I argue, a way of abandoning the ego, dissolving the ego or however you want to describe the process of enlightenment. Because if you are at one with the with connection you become connected to everything so much that you can enter the fabric of reality to reshape it then I’d say that perhaps the separation between yourself and the outside world is not as stark any more, is it?

Let me see if there are questions or comments now. Oh hi, Dave, nice to see you.

Yes, Ron, gnosis runs along these lines especially how gnosis is conceptualized in Chaos Magick. I think that should make another video on Chaos Magick to address some philosophical concepts that I wasn’t quite able to cover, at length, in my first video. But there are so many things that I always want to say in each and every video. That yeah.

Hi Cipriano.

Ron says I fully believe this hence the practice of meditation and ritual.

Yes and also meditation is also quite practised among esoteric practitioners as well. So, for example, in “Magick” by Aleister Crowley the first half of the book is mainly about yogic practices to enhance our mental abilities.

So yeah, I will move a bit further.

BlueSteel says I dreamed today I can also cite my own papers.

That was a bit self-referential I have to admit it but what can I say. At least there was just one self-reference.

Bartlomiej says which Chaos Magick?

Do you mean that there are different strands of Chaos Magick?

Yes Ron, concentration and focus, that is what you achieve by certain yogic practices. I also need to make a video on Tantrism and Magick because there is a lot to say about it as well. But as I said, I really had to do this full time to cover and even in that case maybe I wouldn’t be able to cover every single thing but we’ve got time, don’t we?

So let’s now move on to an example. So let’s use the example of Atheism. So what is the paradigm or the worldview which underlies or underpins the atheist conception of the world? So, of course, as I also put on my slides these are generalisations, these are all generalisations and will, of course, not apply to each and every member but it is a way of understanding that specific category at large. And it is, yeah, at least for explanatory purposes mainly.

So in Atheism, what we normally find is the Cartesian dualism. So in case you’re not familiar with it Descartes, René Descartes theorised that something that actually took roots in our Western understanding of the world, which is the stark separation between the physical world, what we can touch and measure and the metaphysical world which is everything that cannot be measured, touched and perceived through our five senses. So everything that goes beyond the reach of our five senses falls into the realm of the metaphysical world. So what then happened, later on with positivism, was that positivism took this idea of a dualistic reality where there is something solid and separate and measurable and something which is not solid abstract and unmeasurable. And positivism had started this outlook on reality where only what is measurable and physical, only what belongs in Cartesian terms to the physical world is valuable.

And then a step forward which we find in Scientism which is the belief that science can answer all questions even about the metaphysical world is that only what is physical and measurable and touchable and verifiable for the five senses is real and is true, is ontologically existent. Ontology, in philosophy, is the is a branch of philosophy which studies what exists. So when we say that something is ontologically real it means that it actually exists. And of course, across different philosophers and different views, you can have certain things are believed to exist, whereas other things are not believed to exist. So what happened with positivism onwards and even with some degenerations, I’d say, of a positivist outlook on reality is that only what is physical and perceivable, through the five senses, is believed to ontologically exist, hence be real.

So what also happens here is the so-called ‘disenchantment of the world’ which was theorised by Max Weber. And it means that, basically, the physical world is not infused with consciousness or any sort of vitality. So in our dominant worldview, we don’t usually think that a [computer] mouse or a table is live and sentient. So we can hurt a table but we cannot hurt a person. The very fact that we create a distinction in our actions like that underlies our idea that the table is not a living being and another person is a living being. Even when, I don’t know, I don’t want to open a debate about vegetarianism or veganism but just to analyse the underlying worldview, for example, a vegan who won’t eat animal products because they are living beings and not for other reasons because there are, of course, other reasons to be vegan as well. But if they don’t eat animal products because they are living beings this also implies that they believe that vegetables are not living beings. So every choice that we make underlies a certain understanding of reality, a certain construction of reality. So in this case, as I said, in an atheistic worldview, we have a world of disenchantment. What we see in the manifested world is not infused with power, life, consciousness, it is something, it is a set of inanimate elements with which we can interact but to a certain extent, so we cannot really have a communication like the one we have with our partner or a friend with a plant according to this worldview.

So now let me see if there are questions or comments.

So question, [سلمان قتل] you will cover The Americas, Europe, Africa, Asia, The Middle East?

I don’t understand your question.

[AeriaGl0ris] Well concentration and focus do play a role in magick, right? So to me, it makes sense for meditation to become part of someone’s personal practice, part of their toolkit I guess.

Yes and this is something that is found across different esoteric and occult practices.

James says I would appreciate a video about Tantra from an academic perspective.

Of course, James you will, you’re gonna see that one coming.

Okay, so now I do have a few questions for you. I’m afraid that I might have to wait a minute because I can see that there is a delay between me saying things and you getting them on the live stream but yeah the questions I’d like to ask you are; what’s the worldview underlying magical practices, in your opinion? Is there one or multiple ones and is it tradition dependent? Or is there a main worldview which underlies magic? Let me know, I’m eagerly waiting for your comments in the chat.

So Atomic419 says wasn’t the Sorcerer displaying a Sidhhi in which Hindu and Buddhist Yogis have also been said to attain, I don’t understand Buddha’s criticism.

Well, you don’t have to confuse Hinduism with Buddhism because they are quite different and yeah Buddha actually didn’t even endorse reincarnation, the idea of reincarnation which is core in Hindu traditions which I prefer as a definition to Hinduism.

So Andrew says for me it is Animism but there are several and tradition is an evolving thing.

Yes, many people, many perspectives.

[James Vitale] I would say that the primary worldview of magic is mind affects matter, mind over matter.

Yes, that’s very interesting to highlight, James.

Nocternia Obscura says hey, just tuned in. The question is what’s the worldview underlying the paradigm underlying magical practices.

[Noiseonomicon] Oh hi, nice to hear that you are from Ecuador.

[Fon Fiasco] I believe there are many differing views and traditions in magic many paths exist that allow a personal change.

[jiva65] Castaneda spoke of non-ordinary reality versus ordinary reality and used psychotropic plants to get to altered states.

Yes, and we will cover actually this just in a minute because I will shortly cover a few traditions which involve some kind of magical practice and analyse what is their worldview which upholds those practices.

[AeriaGl0ris] I’d say worldview evolves as human cultures and traditions evolve and even die out.

I will agree with ‘mind affects matter.’ Magic needs no specific tradition but having the structure helps a lot. Thank you Nocturnia.

So I guess we’re now moving on to analysing. [cough] Sorry, as I said, now we are going to analyse a few traditions and how and what their worldviews are.

It is, I guess, it is a philosophical exercise for you to destructure and analyse certain magical traditions. But also a way for me to show you how different practices and traditions, even though they all involve magic, they may have a starting point or premises or an understanding of the world which, of course, is related to how they construct their realities and hence how they construct our understanding of Magic and how it works on their construction of reality. I hope this makes sense.

So in Transcultural Shamanism and I define, not just me but in literature, Transcultural Shamanism is used to define those practices of Shamanism which are not related to one specific culture or tradition but they tend to be based mainly on techniques and they are practised across different cultures. So some of these traditions may be of Western descent so, for example, Core Shamanism is a Western American-born tradition and it is not related to the American culture but it is a set of techniques which are meant to be practised even in different countries and different cultures.

Also, another type of Transcultural Shamanism are the imported Shamanisms. So for example, me as an Italian in Italy practising Lakota or Siberian Shamanism, of course, reinterpreting it according to my belief system as an Italian and to my structure and context as an Italian living in Italy or living in the UK. So it is also a translation and re-adaptation of other imported shamanic traditions. So when we talk about Transcultural Shamanism we have, as a worldview, first a binary understanding of reality. In this case, it’s not physical versus metaphysical, as we have with Descartes but we have the ordinary versus the non-ordinary reality. So the ordinary reality is the one we live in on the everyday basis whereas the non-ordinary reality is the one we enter by altering our state of consciousness, whether it be through the use of psychotropic drugs or through the monotonous sound of drums and rattles.

Also, there is a three-fold cosmology because in Transcultural Shamanism we find the idea that the non-ordinary reality is made up of three levels or three worlds. The lower world, the middle world, and the upper world. And you can travel to these three worlds through Shamanic Journey and in each of these worlds you will find something different and they will be accessed usually for different purposes. Also, a key aspect, which has been highlighted in quite a few texts in literature and I’m very familiar with this topic because it’s part of my doctoral research, is that techniques outweigh cultural belonging.

So in Transcultural Shamanisms you kind of have the idea that what really matters is the technique and whether you practice a ritual in Italy or in an African country or in Ecuador or in the US, you’re supposed to get the same exact results. So it doesn’t matter the performer, it doesn’t matter, it won’t matter the astrological conditions, whether the moon is full or is waning. What matters is truly to them the technique. This is also another way of perceiving and understanding both reality and, as a consequence, how magic or a magical practice can be related to this construction of reality. Then we have Chaos Magick, and yes, I can, I guess, include some Left-Hand traditions. As I said, these are generalisations, so it won’t, of course, apply to each and every person and each and every tradition, but it is a way of understanding this tradition at large. So in Chaos Magick, as we also addressed in the video on Nietzsche and the Left-Hand Path, we find something which is called Active Nihilism.

So Active Nihilism means that nothing in the world has a real existence and this is a view that Nietzsche endorsed and it is the idea Nihilism says that nothing in the world is real, basically, nothing is real. But the Active Nihilism is saying nothing is real and hence I will make my reality. I will make what is real to me and what is real to me at, any given point, is real because there is no absolute reality. Also, there is an instrumental ontology. As we said ontology is the branch of philosophy which tackles whether things exist or not. So an instrumental ontology in Chaos Magick means that what exists, to a Chaos Magickian and some people following some of the practitioners of the Left-Hand Path, what exists, what is deemed to exist is instrumental, so if it serves my purpose then it exists. If I need a deity to battle my inner demons I can instrumentally decide that Buffy the Vampire Slayer exists as a deity to help me with this specific intent and purpose. So this is an instrumental ontology, a way of deciding what actually exists on the basis of how can it serve me, how can that reality, that thing, put into existence by myself, can serve any given purpose that I may have.

Also, there is a rejection of Aristotelian logic, as you may know, if you have watched my video on Chaos Magick (https://youtu.be/QSD7ngyt4bQ), the foundation, well the foundation of our logic in the western world is Aristotle and one of the foundational elements in Aristotelian logic is the ‘law of the excluded middle’ and the ‘law of non-contradiction.’ So the law of non-contradiction means that things cannot contradict themselves. So if I say that A is A, I cannot also say that A is B and if A is A, it means that A is different from B so this is a principle, the principle of non-contradiction is something that Chaos Magickians and some practitioners of the Left-Hand Path won’t accept. So they actually embrace contradictions and they want to shatter completely the Aristotelian logic and our perception of the world through the rules of grammar and logic because they deem them to be a chain to a truer, better, higher understanding of what reality is, beyond the rules created by grammar and language which are not necessarily also the rules of reality.

Let me now see if there are comments or questions. I have to switch a window so…

Oh, hi Nadia, nice to see you in the chat.

So Ron says subjective reality affecting objective reality. Right Ron as above so below.

Yes. Hal Tuberman says “there are no facts only interpretations” by Nietzsche.

[AeriaGl0ris] As within, so without.

[James Vitale] All hail Buffy! Always my hero.

[Nocternia Obscura] I find it interesting and possible that we can basically create a deity by believing in it. That the mind can create beings or cosmos. Well, in a smaller scale, of course.

Yeah, that’s an interesting observation Nocternia.

[Noiseonomicon] I’d love to see more about death cults around the world.

That makes me think that I might interview my friend and scholar Jennifer Uzzell because she’s doing her PhD on death burials and yeah, she’s quite knowledgeable about death cults.

Okay, I guess I can move on. Are there any questions? Is everything clear so far? If you want me to expand more on one element or another please do let me know. So let’s move on then.

So now let’s cover Wicca and here I have put in brackets ‘eclectic,’ Wicca because yeah when it comes to the more ceremonial Wicca which, you know, the Gardnerian or the Alexandrian Wicca. Things may be a bit different. So yeah, in Wicca what we find, for example…

Oh, I think that I have questions. I’m sorry but it’s really difficult because there is a delay of about a minute. So you are actually writing to past Angela. I come back from the future to answer your questions.

So do you consider the Left-Hand Path philosophy damaging and too ego-centrical? Nocturna, asks.

Honestly don’t pass judgement on magical traditions. I just find them fascinating to analyse and they tend to be self-centered for sure. But that is not a judgement on my part. They have, as one of their aims, the self-deification, so to become a god themselves. To ascend to a higher human state but even in that case, we find that idea in nature as well. The idea of the Übermensch – the over human. So yeah, they tend to be self-centered in that they want to ascend to a higher state. But I wouldn’t pass judgement because of that. I think it is just a way of going about their spiritual practice.

So Aeria says everything is clear.

Thank you.

Okay, so I guess I can move on. So, as I was saying, with Wicca if we want to analyse the worldview or paradigm underlying the Wiccan belief system. We have, in this case, a re-enchantment of the world. As we said with the atheist, atheistic, atheist, it’s difficult for me to say, but yeah in Atheism we have a disenchantment of the world and even in our dominant theoretical framework we have the idea that objects and our surroundings is made of inanimate elements, inanimate objects. In Wicca, we have a re-enchantment of the world. This also occurs in Shamanism, of course, and in other practices involving Magic. But in this case, I’m talking about Wicca for explanatory purposes. So we have a re-enchantment of the world, the world and the elements the sun and the moon they are not just planets, they hold some divine elements, they bear divine elements and even the water and the fire, everything which, especially, belongs to the natural world tend to be considered to be infused with divinity again, so it is not inanimate any more.

From an ethical point of view because, as we said at the beginning of the lecture, at the live stream – however, we want to call this, there are some components to the worldview which also affect and in some cases are affected by an ethical understanding of the world and in this case, with Wicca, you have a bi-directional action. So an action that goes both ways so if I do something it is going to return to me. This is shown by the ‘law of three’ which is in Wicca. So the idea that everything you do, both good or bad, it’s going to come back to you three, four times and the very belief in this law underlies the idea that every action has a bi-directional component. So that if I do something it doesn’t end there, it is going to come back somehow and so there is this movement that is perceived as an underlying aspect to each and every action that a human being engages with. Also, there is a dualistic or duo-theistic view of the divine because in Wicca there is a Goddess and the God and a lot of their narrative is shaped around the idea of, I don’t want to really call it dualism in and of itself because it’s not a dualism like the Cartesian dualism, it’s not a stark distinction between things, it is more a dual perception of things. So there is a lot of narrative around the male and the female principle, the projective and the receptive, the Goddess and the God, that all the gods are one god and all the goddesses are one goddess. So there is this kind of duotheistic perception of the deity. So this is, of course, another aspect of the worldview which underlies Wicca and it will, of course, affect how they interact and practice magic.

Then we have the ‘law of attraction’ which some people have it fall under the umbrella of the New Age Movement. I wouldn’t call it that just because now New Age has become a derogatory term, although I think it’s actually still a pretty useful category which scholars use in a non-judgemental way and yeah, the law of attraction has been popularized by the movie “The Secret” and it is interesting because it says that everything that you think… that ‘like attracts the like.’ So if you think certain kinds of thoughts if you visualize certain things they will be attracted to your life. Of course, it’s much more complex than that but I don’t want to spend lots of time discussing what the law of attraction is. Although I may make a future video on it. So what is the underlying assumptions, the underlying paradigm to the idea that the law of attraction works? That thinking something will attract the like of it in your physical world and your physical reality? The first paradigm, the first worldview is philosophical idealism.

I’m told that I have questions so I’m just gonna stop the moment to answer your questions.

So Nocturnia says I’ve read that Wicca is basically pantheistic, that god and goddess is the two aspects of one, the unity. Is this accurate or false?

It is true. As I said, it is a duotheism. Well actually, thank you, Nocturnia, for asking this question because it gives me the chance to expand more on what I said and it actually makes me realize that it could have been misinterpreted because I didn’t explain it quite properly. I don’t think so. Yes, in Wicca it is a form of Pantheism which also underlies a dualistic perception of this Pantheism. So, for example, in Pantheism, everything is believed to be divine but in Wicca there is the adjunct thing that everything is divine in nature and this divinity can be perceived as either female or male as either projective energy or receptive energy. For example, even four elements air, fire, water, and earth they tend to be divided between feminine and masculine elements so there is this kind of dual perception of this, of course, as you rightfully say, pantheistic reality. So yes, that is correct, Nocturnia.

Let me see if I have other questions.

So r123[4233] asks where did the rule of three come from? In Traditional Witchcraft, there is no such idea and the individual practitioner is responsible for his/her actions.

It comes from the Wiccan Rede and it is, yeah, it is kind of a poem, it is a poem that contains aspects of the belief system of Wiccans one of which is the Law Of Three.

Atomic419 asks maybe have a Q&A after each session? That way it doesn’t disrupt the flow. Just a suggestion.

Yeah, I’m actually experimenting with this Livestream. So I will see what works best. But yeah, actually that might be a good idea to wait until the end to reply to the questions especially since I realized that there is quite a big delay between what I say and what you see. And so I would have to wait like a couple of minutes to see what questions you are asking each and every time.

So going back to the slides, going back to the slides.

Yeah, as I was saying, the law of attraction is the belief that the like attracts the like and the content of your thoughts will attract, in your physical reality, whatever it is that you are thinking of. So what this idea underlies is philosophical idealism. So idealism in philosophy is the conception that consciousness outweighs the physical world, so to speak, so that the consciousness, the mind is the forerunner in the perception and construction of reality. So it is, of course, it would be simplistic to say that it is just a form of idealism because in the law of attraction they also have the idea that mind… in some forms of idealism, you do have the idea that everything comes from the consciousness, everything comes from the mind. In the law of attraction, they also have… they don’t have it just as a metaphysical perception of the world, saying that everything that is in front of me is actually a projection of my own consciousness, in their case, there is also the step forward of having the ability to consciously reshape it. So you may have forms of idealism that do say everything is created by the consciousness but then you don’t have necessarily the power to reshape that created world depending on your mind. So based on your mind and what you think and how you utilize your mind.

So yeah, in the law of attraction we also have, as James was saying before, the idea of mind over matter, that mind comes first and matter comes later so that everything that we hold in our mind, well not everything but the things that we hold over and over, that we attach emotions to will be attracted in their like, the likes of them, of our thoughts and our emotions will be attracted in our life. So in this case mind has more power than matter has and we can even say that in this case that matter is still quite seen as an inanimate object, well of course it depends on how the law of attraction is interpreted. But yeah, there is the idea that mind comes first. And also there is a first narrative, I’d say, I argue because when you think that what it is that you think or that you feel you will attract more of in your reality. You are kind of focusing mainly on your own narrative and I wouldn’t say exclude other people but your focus is still kind of a first-person narrative of the world. So the narrative the person creates of the world tends to be more in the first person and even when other people are involved or even encouraged to use the law of attraction it still kind of underlies, at least in my personal view, the perception of multiple first-person narratives rather than a shared communal narrative.

So, another thing that I wanted to address is what happens when paradigms clash and do they really? Yeah, I think it is interesting to see that there are some cases where paradigms may clash and for example, we see this happen when we have a dominant theoretical framework or a dominant worldview which is not in accordance to our personal individually chosen worldview. So, for example, if you believe in practising Magick you are not in accordance with the dominant theoretical framework, which is of a positivist nature and thinks that everything that doesn’t fall under the scrutiny of the five senses is not real and valid and verifiable as the things that we can perceive and evaluate for the five senses.

So what happens with magical practitioners is that in order to somewhat reconcile their individual worldview with the dominant worldview they find a bridge in science. So never, as with magical practitioners and magical communities, the interest in science has been so much key in the, for example, in the book that I’m citing here “The Scientification of Religion” by von Stuckrad. He actually goes through a few esoteric and pagan traditions which were born from the 1950s onward which saw science having a key role in their development and birth or rebirth. So even here in the UK Druidry was able to get their recognition as a religion, which is another thing and it’s pretty complicated to explain but yeah, it was the Druid Order I think, but yeah, there is a Druid community which got the recognition as religion thanks to a scholar who interceded and sent a letter explaining why Druidry can classify as a religion and even with Shamanism. Shamanism was popularized by Carlos Castaneda and he was doing his PhD and that gave him validity somehow. Michael Harner, who founded Core Shamanism, he was an Academic and Anthropologist himself. Also Wicca, Gerald Gardner, when he founded Wicca, he was backing his claim of this tradition thanks to the works of the Egyptologist Margaret Murray which was, at the time, an Academic. So never, as in these kinds of traditions, science and academic work have revealed to be very important to the development and the rebirth and the re-evaluation of these traditions.

And my argument here is that these may be due to the fact that there are two worldviews clashing and somehow science works as a bridge. And it bridges the two paradigms the dominant one which won’t accept magic as existent and the personal, individually-chosen one which is the one endorsed by people who practice magic. In fact what Peter Berger, a famous Sociologist of Religion, said… we tend to think that we live in the age of secularism but actually he argues that we live in the age of pluralism. So it’s not that our age is secular, is that it is pluralist. So now you are not bound to follow the religion of your family or of the country you were born in but you can embrace one or even multiple religious beliefs and yeah, this kind of pluralism also reflects pluralism in worldviews and the fact that people can embrace multiple paradigms and that contradictions may occur and that they are part of the human understanding and perception of the world and as Chaos Magicians would say and even Buddhists would say that, maybe non-contradiction is a rule of language and a rule of our logical deductive reasoning of not necessarily a role of reality.

So yeah I think I finished here and you will find the references in the infobox. Now if you have more questions I’d be happy to reply.

Aeria[Gl0ris] says I venture that the shared communal narrative is almost a collection of multiple first-person narratives. Every individual brings some or all of their narrative into the larger picture on some level.

Yeah, that’s interesting.

[Nocteria Obscura] New Age can maybe considered part of pluralism if I got that right.

Yes, I’d say that every religious belief at the moment is part of a pluralist, yeah, pluralistic society because you know centuries ago every country had their own religion. It wasn’t even allowed, in most cases, I think, to practice something different.

[HalTuberman] Do you plan on streaming regularly?

I haven’t decided yet. I just wanted to see how this went and then decide from it what to do. Would you like me to stream regularly?

Nocternia says this was really interesting. Thank you for the live lecture and discussion. Will the Live be saved?

Yes, the Live will be saved. Actually, YouTube does it automatically but it doesn’t, as I recall, from the only other Livestream that I’ve ever done, it wasn’t immediate. So I saw the Livestream posted the day after the Livestream but yeah it will be on the channel.

Atomic[419] asks which school of magick do you identify with or practice the most.

I don’t share my personal beliefs or practices, I’m sorry.

Yes, more streaming. Nadia is happy with having more streamings. Thanks for letting me know Nadia.

[Nocternia Obscura] Countries around the Mediterranean Sea tended to respect and share their religions right? Like is this how Hermes Trismegistus was created?

Yes and no, it depends. Yet at the time of the Romans, there was more of a trend of including different religious beliefs rather than excluding them which is what is argued by Marc Augé in the book “Génie du paganisme” which, unfortunately, is not translated in English but I talked about it in my video Demons in Paganism.

[reverent tangent] Technically science isn’t objective it’s inter-subjective.

Yeah well, there is plenty of literature on the failed attempt at objectivity by science.

Thomas, hi. Nice to see you. ‘Regular chatting, streaming would be great.’ Yeah and we also have our regular chat and streaming in the Patreon community.

[James Vitale] I want more live streams but I’m feeling a little bad for Angela having to deal with the delay. That must be maddening.

Oh, James, that’s very sweet of you. Thanks for acknowledging that. Yes, it is, it is just it’s difficult for me to interact with you because it feels like I’m interacting live but actually you are interacting with past Angela like one, two minutes in the past.

Andrew says that is what we do in the Inner Symposium.

Yes, the Inner Symposium being the Patreon community.

So yeah, I guess if you don’t have any more questions we can end the live stream here. But next week you will see an interview…

Oh sorry, I was yeah, HalTuberman says would you define pluralism as a different body of interpretations for one spiritual reality? Like John Hicks or something else?

Well, pluralism can be defined in different ways. The way Peter Berger defines it, as I explained, asa pluralist set of religious systems. So the idea that now we don’t have, any more, one religion for each country or each family or each community but every individual chooses according to their own preferences and inclinations.

[intrinsic] Is Plato occult?

I guess there are some esoteric components in ancient Greek Philosophers. That would be another interesting thing to address. Actually, there are so many things. Sometimes people, like friends, people I know, they ask me aren’t you afraid that you will run out of ideas? No, I’m afraid I always run out of time but never out of ideas. There are so many things that can be covered here on the channel and I will be covering, thanks to you guys supporting, supporting my channel.

So yeah I guess that I can end the Livestream here because at least from what I see there aren’t any more questions and hopefully they are not concealed.

[Nocternia Obscura] Favourite Greek philosopher? I’m not sure. Maybe Plato or Pythagoras.

Okay, so I guess we are going to end the Livestream here. Thank you all so very much for coming over. I really appreciate your spending your time with me here and I really hope that this Livestream was fun and educational at the same time, as I like to say Academic fun.

So yeah, don’t forget, both if you are watching the Livestream now or if you are watching the video later, don’t forget to SMASH the like button, subscribe to the channel, activate the notification bell so that you won’t miss a notification when I upload a new video because you want to know, of course, when I do and as always, stay tuned for all the Academic fun.

Bye for now.

REFERENCES
Alexander, J. C. and Seidman, S. (1942) Culture and Society: Contemporary Debates, Cambridge University Press.

Berger, P. L. (1967) The Sacred Canopy, Stated First Edition., Doubleday.
Griffioen, S. (2012) ‘On Worldviews’, Philosophia Reformata, Brill, vol. 77, no. 1, pp. 19–56.

Neville, R. C. (2009) ‘Worldviews’, American Journal of Theology & Philosophy, University of Illinois Press, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 233–243.

Puca, A. (2018) ‘Scientism and Post-Truth. Two contradictory paradigms underlying contemporary Shamanism?’, Journal of the British Association for the Study of Religion (JBASR), vol. 20, pp. 83–99 [Online]. DOI: 10.18792/jbasr.v20i0.30.

von Stuckrad, K. (2014) The Scientification of Religion, Boston, Berlin, De Gruyter.

Wolters, A. M. (1983) ‘On The Idea of Worldview and Its Relation to Philosophy’, in Marshall, P. (ed), Stained Glass [Online]. Available at /paper/On-The-Idea-of-Worldview-and-Its-Relation-to-Wolters/a2cd05ddda031514bcb7bd1fe2c33ac50805eac6 (Accessed 12 September 2020).

First uploaded 21 Sept 2020