hi Jake,
Jake Stratton-Kent <[log in to unmask]>:
> ...thinking like an occultist is not out of place
> on this list.
my impression is that the thought of occultists is
so diverse that it might be difficult to predict. in
part, it would seem to depend on what the occultist
expected in terms of reasoning to conclusion. I've
occasionally seen mention made here of logics employed
within magic, for example, which would not be possible
for academics to take seriously *as convincing argument*.
> Occultism has theoretical and practical considerations
and modalities, i notice. at times these modalities
are symbolic or associative, rather than relying
upon strict rational deduction.
> which academics should be able to address via the
> empathic method.
I've seen mentions of 'etics' and 'emics' and 'empathic'
and i'm not sure that i'm keeping them straight, but if
you mean that academics can be empathic in terms of noting
the practical advantage or displayed character of magic,
without necessarily agreeing as to the same interpretation
of effect or consequence, then i quite agree that this
would be essential and an important area of overlap.
> It is these that primarily supply an arena for discussion
> between academics and occultists, where the willingness
> exists.
I see some others also. the tendency for reflectiveness
on the part of occultists (e.g. to construct what is called
a 'Magical Record' or a documentation of avenues explored)
makes at least a sociological and/or anthropological study
possible from both sides (or the middle, in the case of
participant-observers, academic occultists).
nagasiva yronwode ([log in to unmask]), Director
YIPPIE*! -- http://www.yronwode.org/
-----------------------------------------------------
*Yronwode Institution for the Preservation
and Popularization of Indigenous Ethnomagicology
-----------------------------------------------------
|