can you help me debunk 'magick'?
Posted on: August 22, 2008 - 3:45am
Offline
can you help me debunk 'magick'?
Im talking about the many in the wiccan pagan community believe in 'magick' spelt with a k to differentiate it from stage magic. Essentially can someone give me a good way of explaining that magick does not exist. I mean I need the right way to put my point into words. I can think of the fact that magick as it is often defined on wiccan websites is vague. Can someone give me points to mention about falsifiability, or maybe studies done by science on pagans and there claims of using witchcraft in the modern day?
- Login to post comments
For a case of Rum I would try
Wicca is just more idol worship of a separate god concept from what we are, often a he and she "dual" god thing, basically new age shit .... if my memory is correct. Any atheistic argument against any religion of idol worship will work against silly Wicca ....
Atheism Books.
Why should you need to prove anything net traveller? It is up to the wiccans to prove that their rituals work.
Wasn't there a big price to be won by those who could prove that "the supernatural" exists? Anybody still have a link to the website for that challenge?
They are as effective as prayer. Carlin said his prayers to Joe Pesci, that he formerly offered to God, were being answered at about the same 50% rate. Magick is a ritualized form of prayer, wherein the practitioner believes they are channelling positive energy and/or petitioning one or more gods or goddesses to assist them in affecting the natural world.
Basically, they've established a positive mental attitude, which they then apply towards a goal. Just as with prayer, when part or all of their desired outcome is achieved, their spell "worked".
http://www.randi.org/joom/content/view/38/31/
Just point out that most Wiccans are nerdy, awkward, and physically unattractive people and if there was anything to "magick" they'd be running the show already.
"Faith, Faith is an island in the setting sun,
but proof, proof is the bottom line for everyone."
Proof, Paul Simon
Nothing this hard should taste so beefy.
James Randi Educational Foundation. It's the 'Million Dollar Prize'.
www.randi.org/joom/content/view/38/31/
The beauty of falsifiability is that it's simple. Is there any way I can disprove this hypothesis? If no, then you have something suspicious. For instance, we can test if it's carbon dioxide that attracts mosquitos to to other animals. By falsifying excess nitrogen or other gasses, we can eliminate them. But when the mosquitoes show up in droves to get at the carbon dioxide, then we might be on to something. It turns out that it's true, but it would have been perfectly easy to falsify it if it weren't true.
If, however, we postulate that magick ju-ju voodoo rama rama ding ding is responsible for a vague something-or-other, then we can't falsify it. It's in the realm of charlatanism. If you can falsify it, then you're dealing with a reasonable natural phenomenon, but if you can't, then you're probably dealing with something made up.
Saint Will: no gyration without funkstification.
fabulae! nil satis firmi video quam ob rem accipere hunc mi expediat metum. - Terence
Sorry to nitpick, but it's "rama lama ding dong".
"Faith, Faith is an island in the setting sun,
but proof, proof is the bottom line for everyone."
Proof, Paul Simon
Nothing this hard should taste so beefy.
... doo-wap shoo-wap.
Edit: PS!
A Google ad appears associated with this thread for a Wiccan "reverend" with a graying ponytail. Another really good sign of a total fraud is the gray hippy ponytail. He's lying to himself, so what's stopping him from lying to you?
Saint Will: no gyration without funkstification.
fabulae! nil satis firmi video quam ob rem accipere hunc mi expediat metum. - Terence
The one I see is for psychic readings. Of course as is always pointed out , if someone were really psychic they wouldn't have to charge for readings - they could just predict lottery numbers, sports results and what stocks would make a lot of money.
Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team
There are a lot of problems with debunking majick woo, usually i divided it up into three issues.
1.) Many such rituals are done to influence the meta-physical. The cleansing ritual, which is supposed cleanse the practitioner of residual and harmful 'energies', affects something that has no discernible presence. You can't really 'disprove' that a ritual is affecting something that doesn't exist, that is to say, the ritual is affecting 'nothing' (I know, I know, equivocation, but it is only for the sake of humor).
2.) The physical process of the ritual would achieve the desired effect without the meta-physical baggage. The ritual bath is a perfect example of this. Essentially, the ritual bath is supposed to 'recharge vital energies', leaving the practitioner in a relaxed and alert state of mind. Surprisingly enough, taking a long warm bath with pleasant smelling oils and scented candles is very relaxing and the reduction of stress leaves one feeling very alert, amazing!
3.) The ritual itself is just an aid to things that happen in life anyways. This is the 'jesus won me the big game' phenomenon. If the practitioner does a spell to say... get a pretty girl to talk to them, then part of the spell is to get on with life and forget about the spell itself. So, when a pretty girl does talk to them (which is not an unusual occurrence) the credit for this very normal situation gets chucked over to the spell. It's essentially the same thing that happens with CAM treatments, confirmation bias and the normal everyday process of living in the world are responsible for the 'effect' of the spell.
In short, a sack full of confirmation bias and pocket book of false attribution explain most 'effects' of majick.
-----------------------------
Subvert the Dominant Paradigm
Extraordinary claims call for extraordinary evidence.
Tell them to put up or shut up.
Rinse and repeat…
Hey, now. I've known several female wicca that were pretty hot. The rest I agree with.
"Erecting the 'wall of separation between church and state,' therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society." Thomas Jefferson
www.myspace.com/kenhill5150
Like Bulldog, I've known quite a few Wiccan's that were sexually attractive. More so than not, actually.
And I take offense to the hippy comment. My hair is probably longer than his, but other than the partaking of marijuana I have nothing in common with a hippy.
As for proving it wrong, good luck. Wicca is probably the most victimized religion. So much so that it has only fragments of what it once did, but perseveres regardless. The Wicca of today is not the religion that existed a thousand years ago, no matter what any of them might like to think. It's easy enough to rip apart an established religion that has held power for hundreds of years. Harder to attack something used to hiding in shadows to avoid being burned alive. The damage done is so vast that I highly doubt you could get consensus from every Wiccan alive as to what their beliefs are, which would make disproving them a very tedious task. You could spend years proving Wicca wrong, only to encounter a version of Wicca that is immune to your strategy.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
Yes, I agree, its either Rama Lama Ding DONG, or Shama Lama Ding DONG, I agree. We need to focus on the important details, here. This is a great thread, y'all. The whole new age magicky thingy shows that there is an instinct for prayer even in some of the people who hate trad churches. Its probably hard-wired into us as a healthy way to deal with the survivalist paranoia that kept our species alive this long. I know, it depends on what you call healthy, but I think I've known enough athiests to know what "un-healthy" mental states are. I'm looking for a drug that will induce faith. That way I could pray to something...Because the placebo effects of fear wore off a few years ago.