Esoteric, (Hidden,) Knowledge

i think the difference is that science or math would attempt to explain such a phenomena in a way that you could then explain it to someone else. for example, if "math" was explaining where every individual snowflake would land, it would probably try to come up with a formula or equation that described the snowflakes. the goal of "math" here would be to write down the formula so that knowledge could be passed from mathematician to mathematician - and not just in some circle-jerk fashion....scientists actually believe in trying to reproduce results, and test and re-test hypotheses to see if they can be DISproven.

the way you speak of magick, doesn't make it seem like it follows predictable patterns or formulas, so some of us are failing to see the usefulness of it.

 

And they also study only the things that reflect their world-view, as the video was posted explains, and as I have already tried to explain.

It's not my fault that Science doesn't study Magick, and doesn't have to if it doesn't want to while still claiming to be the top paradigm and approach to reality.

 

The way that the wind blows on any given day doesn't follow a predictable pattern or formula either.

 

One of the biggest points that I have been trying to make this whole time is that modern Science has not existed that long in the grand scheme of evolution and history, and yet most that are part of it assume it to be the only perspective, the most correct perspective, and that anything that came before it or that differs from it now was/is simply an uneducated human being, even though I will emphasize that Writer has already argued that Science is older than Religion itself, which is not true at all, and even if it was true, would imply that Magick, Religion, Philosophy, Shamanism, all equal Science, as he said that Science is simply learning and adapting, which all of those things do in their own way. Science was actually birthed from an evolution of the term "natural philosophy".

So the point is is that Science has easily forgotten its roots and has separated itself as higher than Magick, Religion, Shamanism, Philosophy and the term itself has only existed since the 1800s and so it's entirely reasonable to see why our current paradigm is rather arrogant as being the only paradigm of reality that there is.

If Science is so good at everything then why can't it solve the whole array of problems going on on the planet? Maybe it should expand its horizons a bit, which has been the constant point that I've been trying to make ever since the '2012' thread.

In the video a Scientist actually talks about a new movement (just coincidence that it's right at the very beginning of the new Mayan Cycle) that is underground and running counter to the dogmatic principles and world-views of the arrogant Scientific modern world-view, and begins expanding on the notion of the Universe being intelligent, and that matter has consciousness, which if (more like WHEN) proven, will verify the legitimacy of Magick, and will just so happen to "coincidentally" happen in alignment with the new Mayan Cosmic Cycle.

 

Here is something to expand your horizons. There are no problems on the planet. We have a problem with what we perceive about the planet but we are extremely potent and so we handle it with poor dexterity.

 

You are talking about writing down holy scriptures. It is all the same unfolding of learning. You start with axiomatic principle. Otherwise our consciousness could not expand using the communal elements of perception and knowing.

 

Humans as a whole do?

 

It's your decision to keep revolving on the same issue.

 

I'll make the same point as many times as is needed for the message to get across. I keep being told that everything I say isn't getting to the point.

So let me re-emphasize: SCIENCE AND MATERIALISM IS ARROGANT AND ASSUMES IT KNOWS BETTER THAN EVERYTHING ELSE, and it runs the world and chooses what to and what not to study. All of these threads have shown even within this forum how deep-seated this arrogance actually is. It's become its own dogma, just as I have said and now this video of Rupert Sheldrake has said, and needs to be replaced in the (post-2012 era), as Nagler suggests in that book: 'Mind and Cosmos'. Not replaced as meaning getting rid of Science but replaced in the sense of Materialism being the ultimate world-view. An expansion and a renaissance needs to, is, and will continue to take place IN THE POST 2012 ERA.

 

Who doesn't get it? Name them we will take their statement.

 

Yes they develop a code of conduct. It is the replication of genes.

 

Holy
It has been conceived that holy is a state of perfection that we have yet to attain. Everything is holy in creation, that means without confusion of elements, No distortion, no blemish on the clear mark. That is why to conceive unholiness is an attack on sanity. Holiness on the other hand by axiomatic extension, you can assume.

 

science doesn't actually "claim to know better than everything else."
real scientists are very open to changes within their own field of research - it is actually what keeps them employed. if we already knew EVERYTHING, there wouldn't be a need for scientists.

speaking of this need - if you are violently ill, do you go to the doctor? do you take medicine? in other words, do you trust science when you need it? or do you practice Magick to heal your body??

no scientist i know (i am one myself and i work around them all day) would claim that science can explain everything. but that is essentially what science would like to do. this ultimate goal may very well be un-attainable, but i think it is what science strives to do - explain our surroundings, this universe.

science is in a constant state of flux. if you pick up a biology book from the 90s, a lot of stuff in it might be wrong. but that is because science is very flexible and often corrects it's own mistakes, or welcomes others to do so. individual scientists may be stubborn and stuck on their worldview, but that is a human quality, not one of "science" itself.

 

Weathermen aren't 100 percent accurate. Therefore you can't say why the wind swirls in the exact moment on the exact day at that exact time. It's beyond comprehension. You gave a certain general map about weather and wind but that doesn't mean it can predict exactly when and how much the wind picks up in my back yard in, say, 1 minute from now.

 

Use the Scientific Method to tell me how the wind is going to blow in my or even your own backyard 1 minute from now.

You can't even use Math to make a formula out of that, and if you try to, then I can just as easily try to make a Magickal formula out of it.

 

According to variations in air pressure.

 

What I'm asking is for anyone to tell me how the wind is going to blow 1 minute from now. Use Science to tell me exactly what's going to happen, and specifically.

 

Stop arguing about whether knowledge of peas is better than the knowledge of pods.

 

You guys are the ones arguing with me! I'm the one who said that you can't measure that with Science and to which somebody posted a graph

 

Nor can you tell me exactly what you are going to learn and at what moment.