I am sorry, but I disagree. Perhaps the problem is not that pagans do not understand the way of academic research. Perhaps is the way back.
I will try to explain my position.
First of all, you talk about the success of Da Vinci Code and Holy Grail´s novels. I don´t think it is relevant here. Every writer knows, as Sol Stein has explained really well, that to attract the mass attention you have to
write something which is different from reality, more desirable or terrible, but something which the reader want to be into. You create fantasy, because reality is more plain, but from a "realistical point of view".
Now, about why pagans prefer Whitmore to Hutton. I cannot explain this particular point, because I am not pagan but I think my case is not very different from pagans, so I will explain myself to ilustrate the point. I am philosopher, five years degree and two years master and doing a thesis about pragmatism. But, primary, I am a magician and astrologer, with ten years practice on my back. And I prefer Reality from Peter Kignsley, an unofficial vision of Parmenides to the official philosophical theories about Parmenides. And, I have to say in my own discredit that I haven´t confirmed the afirmations of Kingsley, although I subscribe his vision. I suspect if I were a Pagan I would prefer Whitmore to Hutton.
So, what is happening to a pragmatic philosopher educated in the Academic Language to prefer a not academic text to an academic one?
Well, is part of the training we receive. There are different resources to understand the world. One of them is reason, other is the written texts. These are very well used by academics and I wouldn´t deny it.
But, as a magician, I have been trained to use imagination to achieve vision and to follow intuition to get knowledge. Most of the time this is nonsense, specially at the beginning of the training. You have a lot of visions which express what you want to get, or the self illusions about yourself. As time pass you are more prepared to appart those things and try to get the knowledge that trascends what you, as an individual person, are or need. Those visions give knowledge, and a kind of knowledge it is impossible to deny. You don´t get to this point because you are a believer, but because you have checked it in ways which are very difficult and extensive to explain now. At certain point you are sure of the epistemological value of this bit of knowledge. I suspect the deep roots of Witchcraft in the past of humanity is part of this revelation, so if there is no written proofs of this, then Witches will wait until it
appeares. If an academic study reveals this, then they will be very proud of academic research.
What is the problem with my assumption, that If academic world does not understand what kind of knowledge I am talking about, then you, as academic, will think I am talking about religion and faith. So, in my opinion, if you get to this conclussion, you are misunderstanding me.
I wait this will be clear. Thank you for helping me to clarify my possition.
Ana B. González.
De: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Para: [log in to unmask]
Enviado: viernes 16 de septiembre de 2011 12:40
Asunto: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Academic Writing 2
Thanks Caroline. Maybe that is something constructive the list members could do from this? Devise a one or two page document under creative commons to clarify how we do research and what makes it academic. Then post it everywhere. Send it to pagan magazines blog it etc and do what we can to make it go viral.
Dave E
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 20:19:33 +1000
Subject: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Academic Writing 2
But then again.. I am not saying that non-academics can’t possibly do research or write good books.... No. I guess my interest is in what_passes_ for history, or archaeology, amidst the general public and how they often do not have the knowledge to know how to question such material, or even that they should.
~Caroline.
