Thanks for that clarification, Ty; it makes perfect sense. I understand what you mean and why you drew upon Luhrmann's research as a parallel example.  I was thinking more narrowly when I wrote back.

~Sabina

-----Original Message-----
From: Society for The Academic Study of Magic [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ty Falk
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 4:53 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Fwd: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] magic

As I understood it it was not reactive to the surrounding culture, be
it external or internal, but rather an adjustment to the way one
interprets said culture and their place within it. Think of it as
adding more dishes to the cultural buffet, to borrow an example from
Anderson's otherwise awful "Ghosts of Iceland".

There is certainly a Weberian influence, but there is more to it then
institutionalization over time. It's that almost accident nature that
I'm referring to. She even uses this sort of example in "Persuasions
of the Witch's Craft" on 312, when she says that "Developing faith in
God after atheism is an instance of interpretive drift", that the
practitioner doesn't necessarily intend to gain belief, but rather
simply to mimic, "the once-non-magician begins to do what magicians
do, and begins to find magical ideas persuasive". The fostering of
belief is almost an accidental side effect, hence her usage of the
term drift. It seems that applies to much of the discussion and
description that has gone on here, that many rituals were performed
that didn't rely on a foundation of belief, but rather were a means
to an end.

Given that, we can look at many of the practices of the historic and
modern OTO, AA, Golden Dawn, Masonry and so on and see where there
are obvious nods to and adaptations of larger mainstream religious
bodies. Whether they did so intentionally or to survive in an
atmosphere hostile to non-Christianity is debatable, but the point is
they became so good at professing faith that they began to believe it
themselves. As I understand it this was one of the causes of one of
the initial splinterings of the Masonic order, that there were those
who were utilizing it on more of a spiritual level and not just on a
social one. There were accusations that the other members had 'lost
the faith', ironically a faith that they never intended to have to
begin with.


Does that make sense?
Or did i just make a complete ass of myself?
On Jun 11, 2008, at 7:19 PM, Sabina Magliocco wrote:

> Um, I think Luhrmann's concept of interpretive drift is about how
> individuals come to interpret experiences according to the
> surrounding culture.  What you seem to be describing is Weber's
> observation of how religions become increasingly institutionalized
> over a period of time, incorporating social hierarchies.  But I may
> have misunderstood you.
>
> Best,
> Sabina
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Society for The Academic Study of Magic [mailto:ACADEMIC-
> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ty Falk
> Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 1:00 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Fwd: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] magic
>
> At the risk of oversimplification, I should think this serves as a
> great example of Luhrman's interpretive drift. Even before Crowley,
> Thelema and the organizations that came before it, such as the GD,
> the Masons, and the Rosicrucians all had structures that either
> mimicd or out and out integrated existing dogmatic entities, such as
> Christianity. Given that, it is not a stretch at all to see how a
> magic(k)al system with some religious overtones would evolve into an
> full blown magic(k)al religion, especially on the heals of the move
> toward religious tolerance, or at least diversity, in the 19th
> century.
> On Jun 11, 2008, at 8:55 AM, Shya Young wrote:
>
>> I would question the assumption that the system was not
>> 'religious'. My
>> understanding of Crowley's methodology (not extensive) - ceremonial
>> magic - is
>> that it has its roots in theurgy, which, if you define religious as
>> wanting to
>> make contact with, obtain knowledge of, join with the gods, WAS
>> religious at its
>> very core. Think Iamblichus and De mysteriis; Chaldean Oracles.
>> Shya Young
>>
>> ----- Forwarded message from Josephine Cavopol <[log in to unmask]>
>> -----
>>     Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 05:29:54 -0700
>>     From: Josephine Cavopol <[log in to unmask]>
>> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
>>  Subject: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] magic
>>       To: [log in to unmask]
>>
>>
>> yes, lets keep this academic.... so can anyone comment on how
>> something went
>> from a system that was magical but not religious, that was based on
>> pattern and
>> structure, branched off and evolved into a religion with creed?