Frequently Asked Questions

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Why do you say there isn’t a magical energy, when almost every other book on magic says that there is?

A: I don’t say that there isn’t. I just say that thinking about magic as if it’s energy-driven is one way to think about magic, but there are other ways which are just as valid. Thinking about magic as information – or, if you prefer, messages we send to our deep mind or to God or to the universal consciousness – leads to interesting ideas that thinking about it only as energy does not. Of course, the reverse is also true; thinking about magic as energy leads to conclusions that other models do not. But those conclusions have been adequately explored, while the information paradigm has not. I’m not saying the energy paradigm is wrong and the information paradigm is right – I’m saying clinging so tightly to one paradigm that you can’t see the value in another is probably unwise.

2. If everything is just symbols, as you say, then why should it matter what we do to people? Couldn’t we hurt someone and if they’re just symbols, why would it matter?

A: Saying “everything is just symbols” reflects a misunderstanding. I’m saying everything (that we think, experience, and see) is a symbol referring back to other symbols, and there’s no ultimate thing they all refer to. But that doesn’t mean everything’s “just” a symbol, because the word “just” implies that there’s something that isn’t a symbol to compare it to. Of course treating people well is important, not because you’ll be punished by some ultimate God figure, or because it’s just right, but because the only way to meaningfully exist in this web of symbols is to exist in relationship to other symbols, to look into another person’s eyes and want to know him or her as a person, not just a thing. That’s the basis of my morality, anyway.

3. What is panpsychism, and why do you believe in it?

A: Panpsychism is just a reversal of the dominant attitude, that matter exists first and mind arises from it. A panpsychist argues that there’s no reason to assume that – in fact, there are perfectly good philosophical reasons to assume that the opposite is true, that mind preexists matter. Working under this assumption solves several sticky philosophical problems, such as the mind-body problem. But more importantly, my particular adoption of panpsychism allows – in fact, assumes as a fact of existence – that magic works.

4. Are you a chaos magician?

A: I don’t call myself a chaos magician because I disagree with some of the underlying assumptions of chaos magic – namely, that we can change our beliefs at will. I think anything we believe stays with us, and to blithely imagine that we change our beliefs is self-deception. However, I do like many things that chaos mages do and say: the questioning of dogma is something I agree with heartily. I also admire their willingness to play around with fictional godforms and made-up rituals.

5. Are you a ceremonial magician?

A: At times. I like ceremonial magic, but I like the choice. I like to choose to engrave the holy letters of the Hebrew alphabet in my mind in ritual, or to grab my drum and dance in the woods. I’d hate to imagine being bound up in ceremony, or for that matter, in freestyle shamanism, without the freedom to choose. Of course, I like both . . . other people may be heavily turned off by one or the other and therefore they’d be well advised to avoid it. The aesthetic element of magic is extremely important.

6. Are you a shaman?

A: I do some shamanic type work, and sometimes call myself a freestyle shaman. My anthropologist friends call me a sorcerer, which apparently is a not entirely flattering term in anthropology. I’m not sure I’d call myself a shaman, though, because a shaman is chosen by the spirits to perform some civic function, and I don’t live in a culture where I can perform such a civic function fully. Still, perhaps teaching is a way of manifesting the will of the spirits, and if so, then maybe I am a shaman. Really, though, I don’t like to identify myself as anything that’s not a process: I do ceremonial magic, I do shamanism, I write poetry, I cook stir fry, I read novels. Depends on when you happen to catch me at home.

7. Don’t you contradict yourself when you say X in your book, and then a little bit later say Y?

A: Oh, yeah, probably. The problem is, for some people, X may be true, but other people may find Y more useful. I’m not sure the contradictions go very far when you actually start working, rather than just reading and thinking, because at the end I suspect the experiences are the same. Still, yes, I contradict myself. “I am large,” as Walt Whitman said. “I contain multitudes.”

8. I don’t agree with you about X. Want to argue?

A: Absolutely! But here are the rules: we have to respect each other by making sure, at every turn, that we understand the other person’s arguments, and aren’t just arguing with our own interpretation of their argument. But if you agree to that, let’s argue, by all means.

9. Do you just explain away magic by saying it’s psychological? What’s the difference between the psychological paradigm and your information paradigm?

A: Do I explain away love by saying it’s psychological? No, magic is partially psychological, but of course it is, since it uses the mind and we’re psychological beings. It’s also metapsychological, because it affects the mind of the world. I’d say the largest difference between the information paradigm and the psychological paradigm is the fact that the information paradigm recognizes that magic has an effect on the world. In some ways, you could see the information paradigm, at least as I study it, as the psychological paradigm but looking at the mind of the world, not just the mind of the mage.

10. I’ve been using the information paradigm for years, and it looks nothing like what you describe in your book!

A: Excellent. Would you like to tell me about it in detail? My book is just my ideas about the information paradigm, and I’m thrilled to learn other people are using it, and that they have completely different approaches.

11. Could you trace out the history of these ideas a little more clearly?

A: Yes. I didn’t do so in my book because I felt it could bore the reader to dig through dozens of pages of footnotes. But some people have requested that I address some of the history of the ideas that I touch on my book. I’ll do so on a page on this website in the near future.

12. What religion are you?

A: I mostly worship as a pagan, but I feel that Buddhism has a lot of good ideas and consider myself a philosophic Buddhist. I’ve also prayed to Christ, Ganesha, and all manner of other gods. Having only one religion seems, to me, to be a failure of the imagination.

13. Are you trying to start a new “magical current?”

A: Nope. I’m not really qualified to do that, and I’m not even really sure what it means. For a while, it was popular to declare a new Aeon every week, it seemed, and start a new magical current every weekend. I think this tendency reached its peak in the 1980s, when a magical current was declared officially dead several months after it was started. At this point, I’m pretty much uninterested personally in aeonics as an approach to magic.

14. I liked your book, but I think you should have done X . . .

A: Thank you. I appreciate all suggestions. I fully intend to write another book (and another, and another, if the gods are willing and the publisher is accepting), so I hope I’ll have a chance to address some of the “want-to-see.” But on the other hand, I’m only qualified to write what I know and believe, so some things that people might want me to do, I just won’t. I sincerely hope that those people write their own books, because I like nothing better than reading other people’s ideas.

15. Are you going to write another book? What about?

A: Yes. Whether or not it sees print is not really up to me, but I’m working on a book. I’d rather not spill the beans at this point, because of course I don’t know how the writing process will go, and what I think the book will be about today may end up being something very different tomorrow.

16. I’m an atheist. Can I still learn magic?

A: Yes. Magic, contrary to history and expectation, doesn’t really require a particular religious affiliation. Obviously there are similarities to religion and magic, but I’ve known Christian magicians, Buddhist magicians, and, yes, even atheist magicians.

17. Will you teach me magic?

A: No, probably not. Not personally, anyway. I have occasionally taught people magic, who have asked and been willing to do the work, but it requires a commitment of time and energy on both our parts, and so I don’t agree to do it for everyone.

18. Some of your exercises are really simple. I read about them years ago. Can’t you give me something more advanced to do?

A: You read about them . . . or did them? If you haven’t done them, then they’re not all that simple, are they? If you did them, and you got results, then at this point you can make up your own exercises. Complexity in magic is like complexity in anything: it’s built up from the simple.

19. I read on one website that I need to have a double bladed athame, but all I’ve got is a single bladed hunting knife. Can I use that?

A: Whenever confronted with a bit of symbolism, ask yourself why it’s there and you’ll figure out your own answer from first principles. Why might a double-bladed athame have some symbolism that is important in ritual? Do you agree with that symbolism? How does using a single-bladed athame in ritual change it? By the way, my first athame was a single-bladed, huge hunting knife with a plastic handle. Let me tell you, trace a pentagram with that in the air, and the spirits noticed.

20. Would you like to be a guest speaker at my group or organization?

A: Sure. Contact me by email and we’ll arrange a fee and time.

21. I really don’t like what you say about science being irrelevant to magic. Can you defend your opinion?

A: A lot of people disagree with this stance. I don’t think science is completely irrelevant to magic, and I think it’s possible that someday science might find a way to investigate magic in some way. But I don’t think the scientific approach – which is materialistic and monistic – is the best way to approach something that isn’t materialistic in worldview. To apply science to magic requires adopting the assumptions inherent in the scientific paradigm, and those assumptions are pretty different from the ones one adopts in practicing magic . . . or painting a portrait or writing a poem or composing a song, for that matter.

7 Responses to “Frequently Asked Questions”

  1. I just picked up your book. I’m having a great time with it so far. I would love to be able to ask questions once I’m a little further along with it. Thanks.

  2. Black Wolf Says:

    I have finished your book, love it

    trying to figure out pathworking for daath, tarot card and color and entity that i will be talking too can you help me.

    • pomomagic Says:

      Oh, that’s a good question. Da’ath is kind of a complicated thing. I’ll have to do a full post on it. Give me a bit of time.

  3. Hi Patrick!

    I’m currently about halfway through reading “Postmodern”, and I really like your style and content. Your other book has been recommended to me as well, and I’m very much looking forward to digging into it in the near future.

    I’m the manager of a Wiccan/Pagan shop located in Bethlehem, PA, and am looking around for authors who might be interested in coming out to do book signings or guest lectures for us in the future. Would this be something you’d be interested in, and if so, what type of accommodations/compensation would you need?

    Love your writing, will be recommending your books to lots of people!

  4. Hi Patrick,

    This isn’t relevant to this post, but I’m keen to get in touch to say and ask a few things. For one, I’ve really enjoyed your book and found it fascinating and instantly useful. I’d practiced magic in a Wiccan paradigm when I was younger, but your book instantly improved the effectiveness of my magic. As a point of curiosity, I feel like a number of fictional books that I’ve read recently, works of modern fantasy and magic realism with rich symbolism and intertextuality have quickly spread my awareness through the semiotic web, and improved my reach. I feel that, as an English professor, the role of fiction and literature in magic, would interest you.

    Here’s my real question though, something I can’t find information on. I’m dealing with a house-bound egregore that existed long before my family came to live in this house, but is now closely linked to us. The egregore wants to be alone, but is scared that it will die without us. I feel that the spirit of my house overcomes the spirit of my family and has a strong effect on our psychology but I see it’s point – if the group is dispelled, the egregore may die. I wonder, is there any way to assist the house-bound egregore into becoming a unique entity that will survive when we leave the house, and even the possible demolition of the house? I do know this spirit’s name, and can interact with it freely.

    Thank you again for your book. I hope that you enjoy the puzzle that I’ve shared with you.

    Andrew

  5. shaematthews Says:

    Hi Patrick.

    I am reading your book on post modern magick at the moment. I love the ideas you present as they are very close to my heart. I love the postmodern paradigm shifting way of living as it gives such a flexible understanidng of life especially in these crazy information overload times that we live in.

    As a sincere spiritual seeker and forever questioning the models that I use and are presented to me, I wanted to ask a few questions about your views and experiences of posmodern magick systems in comparison to more established traditional systems that seem to produce “masters/adepts”.

    My exposure to western magick has been rather superficial in comparison to the eastern traditions so I’ll stick with eastern examples although I am sure there are parralells in what I am asking.

    In allot of eastern systems masters can show students powerful manifestations of their skills. In the martial arts and internal alchemy world there are many systems available and many levels within these systems. There seems to be lots of ideas and conflict about which systems are the best and most effective as well as how to go about working between different levels.

    As is par for the course different schools and masters often point out eachothers flaws and inadequacies to truely take one to the depths of wisdom attainment and powerful enlightenment.

    When looking at different systems there are varying degrees of abiliaties shown. Some practitioners shirk magick powers as a distraction and say that the most important thing is internal enlightenment and seeking truth, while others demonstrate things like becoming human electric ells(electro kinesis), pushing obects through other objects, telekinesis, pyrokinesis, teleportation, levetation, de and re materialisation feats of great healing and creating weather manipulation or circumstantial manipulation that is uncanny and definate signs of something at work. Others demonstrate skills that are more akin to mentalism, hypnosis and influence but are not “real” magickal acts.

    Many masters and advanced students say that the ability to willfully and repeatedly display skills of super human strenth or capability is a sign that the system being practised is an effective one and that the practitioner is on the way to the end aim of enlightenment as a fully embodied manifest knowing rather than an intellectual or emotional experience. Typically these systems are running from some mixture of energy, spirit and mental paradigms with slightly more or less emphasis in different areas.

    I am curious to know what your experiences are in being able to create bizzare magickal results with post modern magick. Have you directly experienced results as strong as those of more established systems with already existing egragores and masters? If so can you reproduce these things? Or are these manifestations a reflection of the depth and complexity of the paradigms and models being used?

    It seems to me from my time studying and working with post modern magick that is does work but I am yet to see the fantastc level of weirdness and power that seems to exist in other systems. Perhaps this is just my experience so far and I am not committed enough or havnt pushed the envelpe enough I dont know? or perhaps I am missing something here?

    The post modern magick world seems to be an elusive one in that it is so dynamic and also quite small in comparison to more long standing feilds of spiritual and personal development.

    Auston Osman Spare is an example of an individual that displays a high level of attainment and is probably more akin to a postmodern mage than anything else.

    Please let me know what you think. It would be great to have a conversation if possible. cheers

  6. Hello.

    You say, “…I disagree with some of the underlying assumptions of chaos magic – namely, that we can change our beliefs at will. I think anything we believe stays with us, and to blithely imagine that we change our beliefs is self-deception.”

    May I ask, do you mean by this that you feel a person can’t change their beliefs quickly and deliberately?

    If so, what do you make of personal change technologies like NLP, EFT, or The Option Method?

    Thanks for your time.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 101 other followers

%d bloggers like this: