 |
 |
Greetings, Thanks, I'll check it out. But it might not be as far off as you might think. I am especially interested in neurotheology, particularly the debate between such authors as Andrew Newberg and Michael Persinger who argue that the kind of neurological studies of religious practice that they have each done prove (Newberg) or disprove (Persinger) the existence of some kind of non physical component to religion. Personally I think Persinger's argument is weak, on account of him saying 'x happens but we can't see a cause for it, therefore there is no cause". At least Newberg concedes that a non physical, or something that may or may not be a physical thing but we just don't know at this time, may be the source of those things Persinger just calls "spontaneous biogenic stimulations of the temporal lobe structures", aka 'it came out of nowhere'. Regards, Morgan Leigh Ty Falk wrote: > While it's not the most well written and may be slightly off topic, you > might want to thumb through Taylor Ellwood's "Inner Alchemy". It may > give you an interesting take on magic as a technology, specifically how > the ideas of trancendental alchemy can be applied to neurochemical > transmitters in the brain, taking a sort of occult approach to modern > biology. Again, it may be a bit far afield, but you may be able to find > some use in the themes and theories. > > > > On May 9, 2008, at 6:03 AM, Morgan Leigh wrote: > >> Greetings all, >> I have just started a PhD at the University of Queensland, in the >> school of History, Philosophy, Religion and Classics. Having done a >> bit of reading, I am now at the stage of actually, exactly nailing >> down a precise thesis idea. Being as I am very interested in the >> intersection of science and religion, particularly the position that >> magic holds in relation to these two categories, I am thinking of >> doing an analysis of the diaries of Aleister Crowley and Leah Hirsig, >> for such period as the diaries of these two overlap, and considering >> if they support the contention that magic is science. IMHO magic is a >> technology. Moreover the process of learning magic is a scientific >> process, especially when a magical diary is used, to exactly what >> degree being the question. I would be most obliged for any input >> whatsoever any of you wise souls might have regarding my humble yet >> superlative idea, especially vis a vis interesting things to read, >> similar things that have been done before, ideas about where to see >> copies of Hirsig's diaries (I know about the copy in the witchcraft >> museum - Thank you Dave Evans for writing Aleister Crowley and the >> 20th Century Synthesis of Magick). >> >> Regards, >> >> Morgan Leigh