> > But my knowledge of the field ends at the 17th century.
> Mr. Copenhaver seems to stop there also, proclaiming that "the
mechanical philosophy" has
> displaced "the occult philosophy" sufficient that this is the end of
that chapter, at least, of occult
> activities. it is not an uncommon posture to take in academic
evaluations of magic (treating them
> only in the distant past).
I suppose that's a suitable set-up for me, having been on this list for
about a month, to de-lurk. My own attraction to magic has been through
early music; much turn-of-the-17th c. repertoire is laced with
neo-Platonic imagery. So I progressed from Thomas Weelkes and John
Dowland to emblem books, and thence, to use the technical term, "around
the bend".
I have found it odd how quickly, in the mid 17th c., this immanent
magical language disappears from regular use. In England, something
significant happens between, e.g., Robert Fludd, who is totally out, and
Isaac Newton, who is very much in the closet. Though there are surely
political and religious events to account for, that span of time also
happens to be when the mathematics of probability and statistics were
invented.
It was powerful magic in its own right, and it worked: By the end of the
17th c. many northern European municipalities had already begun
supplementing their coffers by selling annuities. It was the discovery
of a stochastic universe, which not only accepted but mathematically
defined the concept of randomness--anathema to Platonism. Coincidence?
I don't think so, but then we
Platonists don't believe in coincidence. There was a crack in the world
at that time, what Gary Tomlinson (I think 'twas he) called the
decoupling of nomos from logos. Why, and why then?
So my question is whether any of you folks out there in the amphitheater
audience is aware of any research on this.
Thanks,
Ken Perlow
|