Intuitive Magic: the 'magic' of Final Participation (post 'ritual magic')

The only good magic is Christian magic - i.e. rooted in Christianity and arising from it; but I have often said that traditional 'ritual' or 'ceremonial' magic is inappropriate and ineffective for these times; because it depended on a passive, immersive Original Participation type of consciousness, that has (all-but) disappeared (at least in The West, among adults). 

We are now in an era when Final Participation is the proper way for us to engage creatively with the world - and Final Participation is a consciously chosen, individual activity - done in the realm of 'primary thinking' (a.k.a. heart-thinking).

Yet thinking may be aided by particular activities, and this is where the 'magic' (broadly conceived) comes-in. 

Ritual magic was done using formal ceremonies, words and artifacts; usually by groups; after training; and according to pre-arranged timetables. 

But now, magic ought to have a different form (I would say is destined to have a different form): a very different form, that I propose to call Intuitive Magic.

Intuitive magic depends on intuition, which is individual (not groupish); and cannot be ordered nor elicited on-demand; therefore it must occur spontaneously, in response to the arrangements of divine providence. 

It is a matter of the individual being aware of possible situations emerging (such as synchronicities and unexpectedly striking stimuli), alert to such clues and implications; and being correctly orientated, from a basis in Christianity.  

To amplify; I personally am not able to attain intuitions of the form "What should I do?", but will only receive answers to questions of a dichotomous form, such as: "Is this right (or wrong)?" or "Should I do this (or not)?" or "Should I proceed with my plan (or not?)".

Therefore, when an intuition arises, it must be cast into a Yes/No form; and the second test or check, is to seek guidance on the validity of this specific formulation. 

When a clear and self-validating answer comes, the process is complete; although it may be repeated as often as seems necessary to generate sureness.  

When an answer to this intuitive check is not clear despite genuine commitment to seeking it - or is not forthcoming at all - this is because the question has been incorrectly formulated; being insufficiently precise or rooted in false assumptions. More 'work' is needed. 

Thus, if intuitive Christian magic is regarded as things we might do - material things such as words, actions, meditation, or anything else - to attain goals compatible with the divine will; then a major pre-requisite is patience.  

Ritual magic is done to a timetable; but intuitive magic takes as long as it takes for the individual to be in the right frame of values and mind, awaiting correct intuition, and for providence to arrange circumstances to make it possible. 

Patience, in turn, requires trust; trust in God's personal loving concern for us our-selves, eternally; and trust in God's creative power - that in a world of beings with free agency and whatever the operations of evil: sooner or later the situation will be made to arise in which intuitive magic can be done. 

What then, is this 'intuitive magic'? 

Subjectively and temporarily, it is experienced as a positive change in consciousness. 

But objectively and eternally; it is the operation of our personal creativity in this mortal life, adding to God's creativity: it adds our own creative contribution to the ongoing divine: is an instance of co-creation. 

A metaphysics of creation is not a middle way between Christian monism and chaos - it is the only way that makes sense of what most needs to be explained

The history of philosophy from the Ancient Greeks until now has mostly been an oscillation between - or attempt to find a middle-way, a compromise, between - two extremes; which have various labels but any choice of these two extremes always runs into the same problems. 

One is that this is (or was) a single and unified reality (monism); which has either apparently split into a multiplicity - or else people have the illusion that it has split. Unity is ultimate, variety is merely temporary, or an illusion. One God created everything from nothing, The principle of the universe is order - chaos is contained within order, order will prevail. We Men are pieces of God, seeds, droplets from a divine ocean - but everything we are is Of God. Everything In Total is Good - and evil is temporary, a transitory kind of imbalance. God is omniscient and omnipotent. This mortal life is - by comparison with divine unity - utterly insignificant, and cannot affect anything that is eternal. 

The other extreme is that which supposedly derives from Heraclitus: everything flows, everything changes, order and stasis are temporary and illusory; ultimately chaos rules. All 'understanding' is temporary, contingent, or merely delusional. There is no purpose or meaning to reality - it Just Is. There is no God. This apparent mortal life is everything - but it is nothing, really... a succession of subjective impressions merely. The are no real values: no truth, beauty or virtue - neither good nor evil.  

By my understanding, neither of the above traditional extremes offer any meaning or purpose for this mortal life; nor do they provide a solid basis for our individual freedom or creativity, nor for the reality of both good and evil.

I regard Christianity as having become trapped by the metaphysical assumptions of monism, in opposition to the chaos which it regards as the only alternative. As a result, Christianity - as taught and exemplified by Jesus Christ, and described especially in the Fourth Gospel - has been distorted into a pre-existing monist framework which really does not make sense. Although by complexification and mystification - and by the false dichotomy with chaos (regarded as the only alternative) - an illusion of sense can be made and sustained by diktat, threats and authority.  

Yet there is at least one metaphysical alternative to the above two, and that is the metaphysics to which I have adhered for about the last decade. This begins with the existence of beings in the midst of chaos, and has God as the creator, and creation as the making of a world of harmony between beings, aiming at greater freedom, hence greater consciousness; and always increasing creativity.  

This harmony of beings is love - analogous to the love within an ideal family; and it can be understood as shared creative purposes and the mutual accommodation and help which is the consequence of love. 

Therefore is the two classic and traditional views are monism and chaos; then this third view is rooted in creation. We began with chaos as a background, but with innumerable beings already existing. Creation began with God, and it was God who made possible the cooperation (harmony) between beings that began to change the universe. 

Reality is neither and ultimate order, nor is it disorganized randomness; but reality changes, evolves, develops through time - and towards increasing love, harmony, purpose, meaning. This changes happens by the development of beings, under the influence of God. Initially being can passively be raised towards greater consciousness, by adding to their equipment  

The advantages I find, up-front, are that it explains the origins of evil in chaos, the nature of evil in opposition to the Good; the nature of Good in God's creation - and the movement through time from evil towards Good: as God began with a chaotic universe and then made Heaven, and (since the work of Jesus Christ) began to people heaven with those beings who chose to subscribe to the project of Good. Thus it also explains the work of Jesus Christ, and accounts for his essential role in the divine project.

It accounts for the reality of freedom in our independent eternal origin as beings; the spiritual war whereby beings (such as ourselves) choose either the side of God and divine creation; or else to oppose that. It makes sense of the possibility of beings such as ourselves becoming genuine co-creators (ie, bringing something new, additional to God) in the creation that God began. 

It provides a model for the meaning and purpose of this mortal life - its meaning in love which is working with the divine harmony, and acts of co-creation (even in this mortal life, but more so in resurrected eternal life); and as a time for learning and preparation for immortality to come.  

So far, this metaphysics of creation has proved itself absolutely solid in response to the tests and critiques of my interrogations and life-experiences. 

But this third metaphysics seems not to be understood by the adherents of Christian monism, or chaos; and the reasons is that they do not follow the implications of their metaphysics to their conclusions; but instead introduce 'unprincipled exceptions' or 'auxiliary hypotheses' so as to provide a pseudo-rationalization for (in particular) the meaning of mortal life and the reality of freedom. 

These incoherent elements serve to take away the demand for something different; yet they fail to solve the incoherences that have been evidence for thousands of years, and are so obvious to adherents of the opposite views. I mean, the incoherence of traditional Christian metaphysics is obvious to evil-atheist-'materialists', and vice-versa. 

The metaphysics of creation is only seldom held explicitly and consciously; yet I regard it as essentially the simple, instinctive, innate metaphysics of childhood (and, probably, ancestral hunter gatherers) that has been raised to a higher level of conscious awareness.  

It is the metaphysics of the Fourth Gospel ('John') - and implicitly what Jesus lived and taught - and completed by his opening of Heaven to Men. 

In the post 2020, inverted-world: the means justify the ends...

It used to be a common moral fallacy that the end justifies the means; in other words, that which is (allegedly) aimed-at, justifies evil acts that are necessary to its attainment. 

Soviet communism - including its many upper class admirers in The West - was a vast instance of this kind of thinking. The systematic torture and killing of the masses was justified by the supposed utopia which they were supposedly making possible. 

But for Christians; that which is good and right is only attainable by doing the good and right - every step of the way. 

But the left has evolved over the past century; and has now set aside its utopias. 

The 2022 justifications are oppositional merely - it is being against climate change/ the birdemic, racism-prejudice-exclusion/ the family/ the Fire Nation/ or people who are men/ white/ native - that is now an entirely sufficient justification for the systemic infliction of vast suffering. 

What is boils-down-to is that 'Our' suffering is what morally-justifies Their policies and strategies. It is the doing of specific evil acts that proves how good They are...

The fact that They are prepared and indeed eager to destroy the economy, food production, energy supplies, transport... science, arts, education, law, the police and military... to destroy peace and to promote war...  indeed to destroy anything and everything that performs a useful function or is an actual source of Good - is what justifies any specific act of destruction. 

We no longer even require 'a good world' in the future as our justification for doing present evil. Instead, in an inverted and perverse fashion; it is the actions of bold, unashamed, destruction of Good itself, that provides an action with moral seriousness. 

Such it is to live in a world of value-inversion where purposive evil is in-charge, and the masses generally support it... 

The old communists are still excused their colossal inflictions and murders by their utopian intentions; but their modern successors in the Globalist Establishment simply point at their depredations as evidence of a their 'moral' right to rule.  

Why is this mortal life inevitably and intrinsically unsatisfactory?

Although it was obvious to Men of the past; it is not always (or usually) at all clear to modern Man just exactly why this mortal life is necessarily unsatisfactory. 

Because this is not understood; there have been a couple of hundred years of social and political theorizing and activity based on false (and unconscious) premises - with socio-politics being conceived as the single most important issue in the world - more important than religion, functionality, life and death. 

As of 2022; this view is propagandized and enforced by global government and mass media; and shared by All major/ large/ powerful/ wealthy social institutions, churches, corporations, and organizations - all systematically regard leftist politics as primary and mandatory - and all other aims, morality and functions as secondary, subordinate; ultimately optional.   

Even after the unprecedented and unmatched catastrophes of the utopian atheist left-ideologies of the twentieth century (communism and fascism in Russia, Germany, China, Cambodia etc); even after the collapse of Western leftism into dys-topian, incoherent yet insatiable opposition to all that is Good... 

Nonetheless all of modern Man's hopes are wholly focused on this life. 

Yet, the universal consensus of pre-modern Man, and all Men who have experienced, learned-from, and thought-through life to its foundations, is that biological death is Not 'the end' - but some existence of some sort continues beyond. 

1. The proper understanding is that mortal life is a prelude to... something else, which lasts much longer

2. And therefore the proper question is what happens after death? What is that 'something else?' - What are the possibilities? 

3. But it is not proper to ask 'whether' anything-at-all happens after death. It is illegitimate to assume that a mortal life ending with annihilation can ever, under any imaginable circumstances, be satisfactory.  

The nature of Grey (neither Black nor White) Magic according to Dion Fortune - and a peril of asking God for 'blessings' etc.

From Applied Magic, by Dion Fortune 

One cannot divide magic into white and black by a clear-cut dividing line; there is what may be described as grey magic, which people embark upon out of ignorance or love of sensation. 

One must therefore recognize the grey variety, of which there is a great deal more in the world than either the white or the black; but we must also say this of it; that while white is white, it is only a question of degree for grey to shade into black. 

There is one acid test which can be applied to every variety of operation— in white magic the operation is always designed and carried out with due regard to cosmic law; any operation which takes no account of cosmic law but goes its own way regardless of what the spiritual principles of the matter may be, can be classified as grey; and any operation which deliberately defies cosmic law can be classified as black. 

Let us make this clear by examples. Some people, finding the mental diet of modem life deficient in spiritual vitamins, turn to the inspiration of the ancient pagan gods. This is not [necessarily] black magic...  It is, in fact, a very useful corrective medicine for the modem mind. It is one, moreover, that we take in constant small doses without knowing it, because so much of art and poetry draws its inspiration from the classics...

On the other hand, indiscriminate dabbling in seances, fortune-telling psychism, and suchlike is classified as grey under our definition, because it takes no account of anything save personal desires, and never asks itself what may be the spiritual quality of what it is doing. 

No obvious evil being immediately forthcoming, and in fact a plentiful amount of specious piousness being very much in evidence - a form of piousness wherein God is called upon to bless what is being done, but is never asked whether it is according to His will. 

It is taken for granted that what is afoot is a harmless entertainment, or even actively edifying as tending to raise the mind above materialism, thus reinforcing faith; the after-effects are far-reaching and though they may not necessarily involve moral deterioration in persons of naturally wholesome character... they do cause a marked deterioration in the quality of the mind, and especially of the capacity for logic and judgment. 

Any form of promiscuous psychic or supernormal dabbling is definitely undesirable, in my opinion, and unfits the person who indulges in it for serious work.

**

Comment: The above strike me as wise words, from an often-wise (and always good hearted) esoteric Christian of the early 20th century. 

The principle of 'grey' activity can be applied beyond her theme of formal or ritual 'magic' (which has, anyway, become much less effective and essentially obsolete by now, as a path of Christian living). 

In particular; I was struck by her distinction between the pseudo-spirituality of asking God to bless what one has already-decided to do; in contrast with asking God whether or not it should be done in the first place. 

This could be extended very generally, in terms of prayer. In my experience of intercessory prayers at church, where the congregation is asked to pray for something or another (usually relief of suffering, or cessation of some conflict - typically an item drawn from mass media sources, and interpretations).

Yet the choice of subject often prejudges that such an outcome would (in that particular instance) be in accordance with God's will - when that may well not be the case. 

And - in retrospect - the same also applies to many of my own private prayers. 

Something well worth thinking-about.

Christianity is easy, but... Three reasons why there are so few Christians

Since anybody can become a Christian in an instant, nothing he does can ever sabotage irretreivably that decision, and cannot be compelled to abandon this choice - how come there are so few Christians?

 

One reasons is that non-Christians, including self-identified 'Christians', fail to repent their sins. The devil can usually make us sin, but cannot stop us from repenting - we must do that to ourselves. In any case, everyone sins - so that sin does not matter of itself (Christ came to save sinners). 

Anyone who repents his sins is immune to Satan! But anyway people fail to repent; even though they always could and nothing could stop them. 

They usually fail because they fail to identify sin as sin; and instead regard their sin as either irrelevant or as virtue. Repentance entails recognition - and it is this recognition that is typically lost. 

This is value-inversion, and is dominant in the world today as never before; because top-down, official, propagandized and enforced. 

Anyone determined to follow Jesus Christ to resurrected eternal life in Heaven - and put that as his first priority - cannot be prevented from attaining this by any power on earth, or Hell. 

So what goes wrong so often?  

Typically, that the individual Does Not Want resurrected eternal life in Heaven; but wants something else instead. 

Even among self-identified Christians, it is evident that many do not want what Jesus offered - but either some modification or something else altogether. 

Satan cannot prevent someone who wants resurrection from achieving it, but he may be able to persuade people not to want it - and he does. 

Another reason is the so-called Christian Churches; and the idea that one can only be a Christian if some or another of the Churches gives you the green light (and the idea that if you leave, or break the rules of, that Church - then you are no longer a Christian). 

Yet, as of 2020, the leadership of the major Christian Churches has joined the side of Satan - and most Church members are willing to go along with this. In the spiritual war of this mortal life, the Churches have taken the side against God. 

How come? Partly by decades of cumulative corruption of the concept of 'what it is to be a Christian', such that now the primary and essential requirements include to support strategies of sin...

And partly by pretending to fight the spiritual (and now also material) war for one or another peripherally or partially Christian-compatible reason; when in truth the war is organized against Christ himself. 

This being the 'Antichrist' mode of operation.

 

In sum; Jesus arranged things so that it is easy to become and to remain a Christian - and no earthly power can prevent this. 

But earthly powers can - if you let them - convince you not to want to be a Christian, and/or can persuade you that being-a-Christian is something other than what it is.

The choice is yours.

The Sooty Show and the metaphysics of Being

I recently posted a link to an episode of Pipkins in which the anti-hero Hartley Hare uses a Mr Punch-like glove-puppet called Mike in order to 'be naughty' with impunity - hoping, thereby, to 'get away with' the consequences of his actions by blaming them on the puppet. 

WmJas Tychonievich has since exposed the deep, indeed metaphysical, implications of this drama; when it is considered that a glove puppet called Michael, controlled by a glove puppet called Hartley, is controlled by an actor called Nigel, who is controlled by a director called Michael (after whom the Punch puppet has been named!) - so that one Michael is actually responsible for the other - and in conclusion Hartley is innocent (as he always claimed)! 

Even deeper metaphysical waters are explored by an episode of The Sooty Show. 

This explores what it is that makes an entity alive and 'real'; and does this by means of subtext beneath subtext. There is the primary narrative, and beneath that the awareness of a fictive distinction (the story itself having been written by the puppeteer and participating-actor 'Matthew') between glove puppets accepted as 'real' versus battery-powered automata regarded as 'toys'...

And beneath that already-dizzying multi-layering; lurks a (mostly subliminal and implicit) awareness of the unsatisfactory and inadequate nature of the empirical distinctions that are supposed (in the narrative) to differentiate 'real' from 'toy' (i.e. in the song "This little friend is real" which concludes this episode). 

In the end, the viewer is driven to an almost-opposite conclusion than the explicit 'moral of the story'; which conclusion is that 'everything is alive' (and there are no toys) - because, in regarding existence in every aspect, there is always a being somewhere - always at least one consciousness that lies behind all knowledge, purpose, and even the most mechanical-seeming entity and action. 

Destroy evil By Doing Good: So long as The System survives (i.e. does not collapse) things will keep getting more-evil

The nature of our situation is that The System - which, albeit with ever-decreasing effectiveness - keeps alive the unprecedented world population of about eight billion - is now un-reformably evil. 

All of the major functional sub-systems are orientated towards evil (including major Christian churches), and these subsystems maintain each other in the evil purpose. 

Thus The System acts as a powerful, multi-pronged and continuous means of corruption of 'the masses' of individual men and women.

The System is also purposively self-destructing, overall - again by many means. 

Therefore The System is certainly going to collapse. 

Yet, at the same time - because it is "a system", and this is what systems do and are - The System has an intrinsic tendency to sustain itself, and to grow. 

Thus The System is continually trying to extend into the interstices of all aspects of society (e.g. to bring the family and voluntary relationships into The System), and to extend its penetration into less-systematized nations of the world. 

Also, The System acts to crush dissent and resistance to itself: again both within nations, and also by setting core-System nations to invade (physically and ideologically) the less-systematized nations  (e.g. in the many recent revolutions and wars, initiated and sustained by the Western powers). 

So, the situation is that The System is irredeemably evil; and the longer it continues to exist, the more evil The System will inflict-upon the all-too-easily corruptible (because materialistic, God-rejecting, Christ-rejecting) masses. 

And The System is destroying itself - so that this situation cannot continue indefinitely. 

From which I infer that the longer The System lasts, the worse this will be for the souls of Men. 

This would seem to imply a need actively to destroy The System - and there is some truth in this; so long as the motivation for destruction is Good: i.e. on the side of God and divine creation. 

But the end does not justify the means; so that System destruction can only do good when its methods are good. 

Therefore we need to destroy the system by-means-of doing Good - every step of the way. 

Destroy evil By Doing Good in all our actions. 

That is the ideal. That is how Christians  must proceed. 

It's obvious once stated!

Explicit and chosen belief in Jesus is vital now, in a way that was not the case in ancient times

By my understanding, God has not withdrawn his presence from Modern Man - but Modern Man's minds is now closed from spontaneous and unconscious knowledge of God - in a way that was not the case in ancient times - nor in our own early childhood. 

In other words - as a typical Modern Man reaches adolescence. he enters a state where his consciousness is cut-off from that spontaneous and unconscious knowledge of God (the state of Original Participation, as Owen Barfield termed it); which is what gave ancient people (and still gives children) underlying confidence in the reality and goodness of creation, and hope for their own future beyond death. 

This confidence and hope transcended the official contents of their religions - even when (for example) those religions branded mortal life as suffering merely, and denied life beyond mortal life. 

Yet Modern Man is bereft of those natural supports of the past; and therefore is prone to regard life as futile and despair as realistic. 

The only alternative to such nihilism is that Modern Man makes a conscious choice from his situation of cut-off-ness: the choice to regard Jesus Christ as truly divine, his promise of resurrected Heavenly life eternal as desired, and to 'believe-on' and 'follow' Jesus to this goal. 

Modern Man is on-his-own as never before, because of the nature of his walled-off consciousness; but God is still there - just a choice away; within the soul and all around; ready to commence contact instantly, as soon as our free consciousness wipes the window, opens the door. 

But even a wholly-Good God, and the knowledge that we are members of God's family, does not suffice to justify this mortal life unless it is also understood as a preparation for Heaven. 

Because in this mortal world; entropy rules, all that is Good changes and corrupts with time, and death is the inevitable terminus. 

If the mortal life were everything - in a context of eternity even the 'best' mortal life would be a futile waste of time...

Confidence in a benign creator God is vitally necessary but not enough for Modern Man, in his alienation and isolation. Therefore, unless we are to be drawn to the embrace death, nothingness and hope-less-ness - we must also choose Jesus.  

Beware of developing and following your conscious 'will power', except when you have chosen to align it with divine creation

The development of human consciousness means that strategies that once were (overall) directed towards Good, have now become net-harmful. Will power is one of them. 

This is because (to a nearly complete degree) modern Man's will power is cut-off from the creative purposes of God; and cut-off also from his former immersion in the unconscious mind of other-Men. 

In the past, an individual Man's will arose from a context of other Men and from at least some degree of spontaneous sharing of divine purpose - for example, from some degree of 'automatic' harmony with the natural world. 

But nowadays a Man's free will lacks these former (unconscious, spontaneous, automatic) elements of coherence and direction. 

Therefore any strengthening of will power, of focused concentration upon an inner purpose, will - unless deliberately directed into harmony with divine creation - be directed against God and fellow Men. And nowadays this maldirection does not tend to be corrected 'automatically' by unconscious inner feedback impulses. 

In effect; there is only one Good direction for will to be harmonious with God; and an 'infinite' number of bad/ wrong/ evil directions - in pursuit of which will power is dissonant, disruptive - and ultimately destructive of creative harmony.  

Thus we moderns are more free in our will and thinking than ever before; consequently for us to will in harmony with divine creation is a conscious choice; whereas to will in conformity to divine creation used to be, to some extent - albeit an extent dwindling through recorded history - natural and spontaneous.

Yet nowadays we are confronted with a vast array of options and alternatives among which we must and do choose. 

Given this range of choice; most Men choose to conform by (what they regard as) expediency: i.e. they make their choices for their own best advantage... And, in practice, this usually means they will choose whatever is most powerfully imposed upon them. 

In the modern world; this means that Men typically choose whatever is imposed by saturation (by marination) in the outputs of mass media, state and corporate bureaucracies; and by propaganda from all these plus from (what used to be called) churches, law, science, schools and colleges etc. 

And since 2020; it has been obvious that all these are 'converged' onto a single global program: so (in those matters of core importance to the 'world government', the passive individual experiences a unified external will.

What is the nature and direction of this external pressure that is imposed? It is demonic, purposively-evil; it is a will unified in opposition to God, divine creation and The Good. 

Thus passivity is evil; and the scope of such evil is unbounded - including even nonsensical incoherence and the gross inversion of Good - since modern Man's will power can now 'make' whatever 'reality' it chooses. 

 

But this is not inevitable - it is always a choice. 

In effect, it is often a choice made by the cut-off will power to deny choice. 

It is simply choosing passively to yield to external pressure.  

Yet, all the time, the divine harmony and purpose of God's creation is still there - (as it were); in the background; waiting to be noticed and waiting to be chosen: waiting to have will power directed at it. 

Any Man is free make this choice, but it must be a conscious choice.

 

How can a Man know where this choice lies? 

By the possibility of directly knowing God-within each Man, through directing our attention to our real-divine Self; and by directing our will power to make such choices. 

And from 'externally'; through knowing in our hearts the personal presence of the Holy Ghost; which is the spirit of the ascended Jesus Christ... 

This through love-of, and faith-in, that same Jesus Christ - by making the choice to follow the Good Shepherd to eternal resurrected life.  

A History of White Magic by Gareth Knight (1978)

The prolific author Gareth Knight (a pen name of Basil Wilby) died recently at the age of 91; and this was one of his earlier books. I found it very enjoyable, and spiritually stimulating. 

Knight was himself a Christian ritual magician (initiated in The Society of Inner Light - which was founded by Dion Fortune; and his Christianity is foundational to the argument of this book. It takes a very broad view of 'magic' to include imagination generally, the development of human consciousness; and is indeed a history of these matters from a Romantic perspective. 

Structurally, the book is woven around summaries of a very large number of authors and religious/ spiritual movements across a span of history from the ancient Hebrews and Greeks; through the transformative coming of Christianity, the Middle Ages and Renaissance, and the 18th and 19th centuries; right up to some significant books of the middle 1970s such as Robert M Pirsig's Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. 

Throughout, and particularly in the closing chapters, Knight makes thoughtful analyses and commentaries, in pursuit of a thesis concerning the proper and desirable nature of Good/ White/ Christian magic - and the pitfalls of other kinds. 

In this respect, AHOWM reminded me of Colin Wilson's Outsider series, and his books on the Occult/ Mysteries theme. Anyone who likes Wilson's style of writing philosophy, will probably enjoy this in a similar fashion.  

As I have said elsewhere, reflecting on Knight's and other accounts, I think that ritual magic had been a valid mode of Christian life from the late 19th century and up to the middle of the 20th - but that from around the 1980s it began to cease to 'work'; in a fashion that parallels (and ultimately has the same causes as) the decline in all forms of positive and desirable groups and institutions (including the churches). 

I mean that the rituals of White Magic seemed to lose objective efficacy, and became instead essentially psychological (therapeutic, or creative-stimulating) in nature - and often explicitly so. The ability of magicians to work formally, and reliably, in institutional groups, and by organizational rules, began to dwindle considerably. 

In his later life, it seems that Knight's 'magical' practice became something ever-more individual, improvisatory, and like meditation - when compared with the formal rituals of his early training. 

As such, this history of magic is a fascinating instance of the 'evolution of consciousness', the innate development of Man's thinking and relationship with the divine - as described by Owen Barfield - who gets a single mention here for Saving the Appearances. 

Indeed, Gareth Knight's The History of White Magic could be regarded as one man's account of the genealogy of Romantic Christianity. 

Note: Later Knight came to know Barfield personally, and wrote insightfully about his ideas in The Magical World of the Inklings (1990, 2010.) 

Irrelevance, lies, fearmongering; and multi-pronged self-destruction: the Daily 'News'

Some people were woken-up and started to learn by means of the events of 2020 - but mostly not. 

For most people, life continues as before, dominated by the issues of today as dictated by the mass media and the state-corporate bureaucracy. 

Whatever actually happened in 2020 and after - which now seems only vaguely recalled - disappeared like a stone plopping into a moving stream; its ripples soon dispersed and swept-away by the daily input of 'news'. 

I surveyed today's news; and all the main stories were at best irrelevant - deliberate distractions and misleading framing; but mostly lies and fear-propagation strategically designed to facilitate mass manipulation by The System...

There is no consistency between the stories, no attempt at consistency - because evil is united only by what it opposes; and so long as things are situated in opposition to God, divine creation or Jesus Christ; against the beautiful, true or virtuous - then all is readily accepted. 

The dominant global mainstream Leftism is merely the alliance of those who oppose one or another of the aspects of Good; and most people are readily persuaded that their own favourite sin is actually an essential and positive aspects of this secular ideology. 

Leftism in 2022 is the expedient pursuit of one's personal sin/s, under the banner of Sinners United. 

Yet a lot of the news, and the most significant aspects; constitutes evidence that System self-destruction is becoming ever more blatant; and the covering veneer of justification for this destruction, ever thinner and patchier. 

Of course, since the events and responses of 2020; it hardly matters how nonsensical and incoherent are the justifications; because the mass of people are locked-into a self-sustaining state of addictive-gullibility such that anything is taken to justify anything - so long as it emanates from the mainstream.

But since 2020, the balance has tipped decisively from System control towards System self-destruction. 

The recent 'sanctions' campaign against the Fire Nation is the clearest possible example. Never in human history has there been such blatantly-inverted nonsense as the idea of 'fighting' a (fake) enemy by means of a vast and sustained program of self-crippling. 

This self-crippling is multi-pronged and must become lethal; because it encompasses the simultaneous destruction of trade, finance, military effectiveness, energy, transportation; and the mandatory choosing of incompetent and anti-functional human beings - at all levels from the national leadership and that of large corporations; down through middle management to the 'coal face' personnel who are supposed to do the actual work of the world.       

 

In the end, it is the systemic self-destruction by inverse personnel selection, employment and promotion (the diversity/ inclusivity/ equality programme - the deliberate choosing of the most-evilly-motivated leaders) that will cause the deepest damage. 

Yet, Christians should be grateful that a System with such extremely evil priorities and aligned against all that is Good; is indeed committing suicide. 

Presumably Christians will mostly go down with The System; but then, as Christians, we must look beyond this mortal life; and recognize that there are much more important things than 'survival'... 

It is very sad to see so much that it good (beautiful, true and virtuous) go down with the evil that is dominant in our world; and very sad to see so many people holding-fast to their choice against God and Heavenly life eternal. So Many actively desiring their own misery, enslavement to demons, or annihilation - often merely in order to hold-onto their favourite sin for a little while longer... 

Yet, in the final analysis, we are witnessing evil destroying itself with an ideology of (slightly-) disguised self-hatred and suicide; led and followed by those who have chosen self-damnation and whose reward will be Hellish: ever sooner in its timing, and ever worse in its consequences...

While those who have chosen salvation, and are willing and eager to learn spiritual lessons from their mortal experiences, are - except temporarily - unaffected.

Two icons were actually One: "Course-you-can" Malcolm, was Hartley Hare!

It is a dislocating experience to discover that two 1970s British Legends were actually The Same! 

The eponymous character in the Vic Sinex advert who gave the nation a catch-phrase that entered common usage for many years - as a generic reassurance for any doubt; was actually The Same as the naughty and nightmare-inducing mammal from popular children's TV show Pipkins... 

(...a show that - for those who experienced it in youth, became the very definition of the term Low Budget). 

 

I admit that Malcolm and Hartley do not look very alike, at least superficially; but recall that we are here dealing with a master of disguise. 

Yet on reflection and fundamentally; the two are clearly one and the same whiny, seedy, camp layabout that so fascinated (and, no doubt, corrupted) Britons young and old - a mere fifty years ago. 

What is the larger and vital issue, of which the "Mandela effect" is supposedly an instance?

I have heard of the Mandela Effect several times; but until yesterday I did not really get what was being proposed - in its full and astonishing scope. 

Vox Day describes the ME as 'supernatural gaslighting' - meaning a demonic activity. In this particular instance the assertion is that everybody who is informed and competent knows that the Bible talks of the Lion laying down with the Lamb - but when somebody nowadays looks-up this reference in a Bible, he finds that it is the Wolf which lays down with the Lamb. 

The basic idea is that supernatural evil has operated to change the Bibles of the world (this happening at a certain point in recent history), has changed what is written in them; so that now our memory conflicts with the 'evidence'. 

And this was done as a Satanic PSYOP; in order to have a disorientating psychological effect - so that people will no longer trust their memories, or their own judgment, and will easily be manipulated by The System (which is itself controlled by the devil). 

(Aside: This proposed mechanism - of a spirit literally re-writing history - reminds me of an ability of the evil god Ruin in Brandon Sanderson's Mistborn Trilogy. Ruin can affect any writing, unless it is inscribed on certain types of metal.) 

The Mandela Effect is therefore is a specific (asserted) instance of a large and vital issue of these times about which I have blogged many times recently; which is whether to believe our inner memories or 'external evidence', to believe our own experience or external authority, to believe what we have worked-out for ourselves or to accept the interpretations of 'experts' - And, for Christians, whether to build our fundamental faith on The Church; or from our personal knowledge-of and relationship-with God and Jesus Christ. 

The difficulty I have with the Mandela Effect is that I am not very sure of my own memory in any of the famously-cited instances. 

For example - the example which gave the name was that apparently many people remember being told that Nelson Mandela died in jail - before he was released and became President; but I don't have any such memory of him dying in jail. 

So, for me to accept that this was an instance of memory conflicting with 'evidence' - would, in fact, merely be an instance of my preferring one form of external evidence over another. 

And, although I certainly agree that everything I have ever heard was about the Lion laying down with the Lion, and never about a Wolf - I do not have any specific memory of words in the Bible where this was supposedly written in the past; because I think I got all the remembered Lion and Lamb examples secondhand.

One aspect of some instances of the Mandela Effect is that it attributes to the demonic power the ability to affect-remotely and to re-write already existing books from a certain time-point - and indeed ancient manuscripts. But this is something that I do not accept: I do not believe that Satan can physically tamper-with all the Bibles of the world. 

But I do believe that Satan can do something of this kind with electronic media and communications; i.e. that demonic spirits can (in some sense) inhabit and interact with these and with computers; and I believe that fact this lies behind the push to put everything online, and to induce us to live virtually via the internet. 

So much so; that nowadays rewriting electronic media would appear almost exactly the same as having re-written all the Bibles of the world. 

As small instances; e-books I have in the past purchased through Kindle have periodically been changed - without informing me or asking permission; simply via my reading device being connected to the internet. 

And it is easy to make a program to search for and change specific words, so that when one views the page of an online newspaper, the text has already been modified as instructed.  

All that is needed is to imagine scaling-up this kind of intervention by intelligent spirits with evil purpose that dwelt within the electronic media. 

...Although, if so, then there would almost certainly also be some good spirits, angels, that were able to do something similar but with opposite intent to the demons. 

Yet it may be that (as Rudolf Steiner intuited) the world of electricity is in a profound sense a demonically-created medium or sub-nature; that may therefore be more conducive to evil than good. 

If so, unless I was myself physically to check an old Bible, and communicate my findings verbally and face to face, or by snail mail; then any electronic communication could (in principle) be intercepted and changed. Everything we found on the internet might (theoretically) have been thus tampered-with. 

This would look exactly as-if all the Bibles in the world had been re-written. 

In conclusion, I accept that the Mandela Effect may, in this modified sense, be a Real Thing; and that it represents yet another challenge for spiritual discernment; in which - to pass the test - we need to believe and live-by that which comes from within and from direct knowledge of the divine; instead of being credulously manipulated by external public media - which nowadays includes everything recently-produced, and anything accessed via the internet, computers, or other electronic phenomena. 

As global Armageddon looms - we are left with only one option

There is no alternative. 

Common sense is flouted, rational argument is ignored, all the normal channels have failed. 

The time has come: 

We must reverse the polarity of the neutron flow...

Academic life - the niche that was, but is no longer

I was brought-up from my latter childhood in an academic environment; and through the teens of my schooldays I was strongly drawn to the idea of being a university teacher and/or researcher. 

I could easily imagine myself in such an environment - and the subject matter was somewhat secondary. 

But at the time I was applying for college and leaving school, I was instead going through a phase in which my idea was to become a clinical doctor - probably a general practitioner - half time, and spend the rest of the day growing my own food, and maybe keeping a few animals on a smallholding. 

Mostly I was drawn to the biological side of science, but I was also interested in economics and politics (from a left wing and 'environmentalist angle). In fact - as I recall - when I had done my pre-university A-level exams, I thought I had somewhat messed-up (objectively so, in a Chemistry practical) and would maybe fail to get-into medical school; which had, at the time, the most competitive entry requirements. 

If I failed; I then had a serious idea to change direction altogether, and to study economics and politics, applying a year later*. I can remember a conversation with a good friend in which I said exactly this. In retrospect it can be seen that I was more drawn to the university life generally, than to any specific subject.  

(In the event, I had done extremely well in my A-levels, and could probably have got in to any university to study anything for which the A-levels were appropriate. I never was able to predict my examination results - five years later I was seriously worried - on what seemed like rational grounds - that I had failed my final exams at medical school - yet again I had done extremely well). 

In a nutshell; I implicitly saw university as a kind of 'ecological niche' in which I might find a suitable environment; and later this implicit understanding became explicit as I realized that I was an unusual kind of person, with unusual motivations in life. I had a sense of 'destiny' but no clear idea of where it led - only that I could tell when I was off the path, and found such a situation intolerable. 

Within two weeks of starting work as a qualified doctor doing clinical practice; I knew I would not be able to function in that environment - and the only question was how best to extract myself from this path and return to my older idea of being an academic. Lack of courage, combined with unclarity of my own objectives, meant this process took two further years. 

I began doctoral research in medical bioscience; and it was rapidly obvious that academia was right for me. I felt at-home, confident; and I knew inwardly and by instinct what was right and wrong in that world. 

I used to say that - compared with medicine - I did a half-time job for half the salary - which 'bargain' provided the 'broad margin' to life that was essential to me. 

But the primary subject matter in which I should 'make a living' was still unclear; because my serious interests still straddled several subjects. 

I began to gravitate towards philosophy (which I had been reading for several years, and doing some evening classes), and got as far as being offered a place to do an accelerated degree in two (instead of the usual three) years at Trinity College, Cambridge. 

But then, as the possibility became concrete; I realized that this was not the right path - for several reasons; and that English Literature was closer to what I wanted or needed. In the end, after finishing my doctorate, I did an MA by research at Durham - which felt very helpful and positive, although did not answer any deep questions. 

By this time, I felt that my unusual combination of interests and abilities made me able to contribute something distinctive to academia. 

I was not doing any genuinely original and creative work - but the combination from my background made my contribution at least novel - and I thought that would suffice, for the time being, anyway... 

In retrospect, unconsciously, I think I was waiting. Waiting partly to mature (which took longer than for most people), and partly to find 'my subject' - a field in which I had aptitude, and that would mobilize my spontaneous and deep motivations; a subject into which I could pour my best mental efforts.  

And while I waited, I worked as an academic; teaching and doing research (and avoiding administration) - and pursuing other interests including journalism. I did not pursue an academic 'career' - because I kept moving 'sideways' and changing subjects; and I would not do more than the minimum necessary administration.

I was seeking a suitable niche rather than climbing a ladder. 

And when I eventually found my subject - and then further subjects; and began to do serious creative work, this academic niche enabled me to do so. 

I did not know of any other job that would have enabled it. 

It is a sadness that the niche which made possible my proper work no longer exists, nor has it been replaced by an alternative. Seriously-motivated and creative work can now only be done unpaid, as an amateur - which means unintegrated with whatever material means of support enables it. 

And the 'community' for which such work is done, has likewise been driven from all professions and exists only among voluntary affiliations of 'friends', rather than among professionals. 

For myself, I am pleased that the niche lasted long enough to enable my period of innerly-driven and intense scientific engagement - which ran from 1994 to 2016. 

By the time I retired, the job of being an academic had only a very superficial resemblance to forty years before, a job that went back in its essence to the Middle Ages. 

By 2019 - in depth and in nature, in its essence - the academic bureaucracy had become integrated into the global establishment with its core ideology of materialism-leftism and its ethic of value-inversion. The job of an academic had been transformed into that of a bureaucratic functionary. 

And, like all traditional institutions, the situation is irrevocable. Real universities and real academics are dead and gone; they cannot be revived, and the attempt should not be made. 

Whatever that is good and possible must start - here-and-now - from the personal and voluntary work of idealistically-dedicated individuals; outside of institutions.  

As for 2022 niches for people like I used-to-be?... well that is their problem, not mine; since my primary interests have changed. 

If someone is serious about his work, and insofar as that work is aligned with divine creation, it will be made possible.

One-off niches will be created for long-enough to enable what needs to be done. 

*I had no idea that university economics had (unfortunately for all of us) become highly mathematical by that time; which would in reality have ruled-out the subject for me; both in terms of aptitude and interest.  

The major test of these times is Fear - the temptation is Safety

We are tested every day by the sin of fear. And the temptation - offering a delusory escape from fear - is safety. 

If we compare our post 2020 world with life a few decades ago; it is clear that we are now controlled primarily by the negative sin of fear (with a side-order of spiteful resentment: the stock-in-trade of socialism, feminism, antiracism and the other leftisms). These are negative sins because they are directed-against. 

By contrast to the fear-dominated present, in the past other, and more 'positive' sins - desires-for-something rather than resistance-to-something - were often more dominant: sins such as power/ conquest, (capitalist) greed and (sexual) lust.

 

It is pretty obvious that nowadays the world is 'managed' primarily by the inculcation of fears; and by attempting to trigger those in fear, to 'escape' by means of fake-solutions that promote the totalitarian-demonic agenda.  

Major examples are the birdemic fear - with totalitarian lockdown/ masking/ social-distancing and the (unnecessary, ineffective, harmful) peck offering pseudo-safety. And global warming as the fear - with world economic destruction with totalitarian control (aka. the 'sustainable' Green Economy) as fake-escape. 

(Non-coincidentally; 'economic suicide' is also the major policy-answer to fear of the recent Fire Nation/ Earth Nation.)  

Fear is also the stock-in-trade of the 'secular Right': fear of mass immigration, violent social breakdown, starvation, civil war, mass poisoning and other health threats... 

The temptations, the fake solutions, on the secular Right include personal survivalism (prepping), a type of rigorous healthism/ body-building, organized aggressive political resistance, a Strong Man leader restoring militaristic patriarchy...

The difference between the left and the non-religious Right; is that secular Right fears are based on broadly realistic threats and potentially effective answers; while the mainstream Left fears are manufactured from very little - or nothing at all; and the proffered 'escapes' from fear make matters worse. 

Also, in general, among those who are living in fear and strategizing to escape; the typical leftist advocates passive and Establishment-obedient responses; while the secular Rightist is more likely to respond to his own fear with (at least verbal) aggression and (at least threats of) defiance. 

Yet, discourse concerning the reality or fakery of the fear, and the effectiveness or counter-productiveness of proposed escapes, are themselves part of the problem. 

Because fear is a sin in and of itself, it compounds the sin to try and escape fear by attempting to eliminate that which is feared. 

In a practical sense; it will not work - because yielding to any fear creates vulnerability to other fears; so that all escapes lead into a positive-feedback loop of fear generating fear. 

Since, on the one hand, the supply of fears is unlimited; whereas, on the other hand, mounting any potentially-effective response to even a single fear is time-, effort- and resource-consuming; constrained by multiple personal, societal and technical factors. 

But in a spiritual sense, matters are simple - fear is a sin and must be identified as such; then repented, then itself defeated. 

The one-and-only appropriate and effective response to any and all fears - and a response that has unbounded scope - is to trust in the power and love of God; and to frame the fears of this mortal life in the context of eternal Heaven. 

The proper spiritual response to fear is to eliminate fear - the sinful delusion is to address the supposed cause of the fear. 

(Whether or not we, personally, should engage in an active or passive attempt to remove the specific source of any specific fear; is a secondary, contingent, pragmatic matter - and thus always contentious.) 

This, therefore, is the nature of the test of these times. On a daily basis we will be assaulted by fears, and probably these assaults will have some effect - and we will experience fear. 

We therefore need to identify 'the latest fear' as always an evil - whether it is real or fake. 

And instead of immediately seeking for 'safety' and escape-from-the-fear in some physical activity (regardless of whether that activity is potentially-effective, or not)...

The proper response is that we need to repent fear (any fear) and bring to mind that God is our loving parent and the ongoing-creator of this world - and that those who desire it, may follow Jesus Christ to everlasting resurrection after this mortal life. 

Fear is the recurring test, and love of God is the proper response. 

Only after fear has been thus conquered, may we attempt to address its supposed cause.  

As such; then testing-times may become learning-times; and every repeated and novel demonic assault and delusion, may be converted to an increase in the strength of our Christian orientation. 

What is the primary form of social organization for a Christian society? Family.

What is the primary form of social organization for a Christian society? 

Certainly not 'democracy' nor a republic - but neither a monarchy, nor a theocracy. 

Not rule-of-law. Not arbitrary rule by a dictator. 

Indeed not anything 'organized' or imposed or abstract. 

Instead a Christian society should be organized by the prime Christian value of love; which means that love of God and Jesus Christ is what makes possible and sustains Christian love of fellow Men; as it generates creation itself...

And the most powerful and lasting form of 'group' Christian love is that which emerges from the fundamental reality and primacy of the family - which ideally means the natural, 'extended' family.

The family is spontaneous, and the ideal family coheres by love. This predates Christianity. 

Then, by free agency, Christianity became possible through the work of Jesus Christ. 

A Man chooses to become Christian. 

When the members of a family become Christian, we get the only form of love-rooted Christian social group.

Christianity is therefore added-to the natural social form that is the family; and because love of God is the first principle; the family cohere by this love of God; and are given purpose and direction by their commitment to follow Jesus Christ to resurrected life eternal in Heaven. 

Families may be extended and joined by Marriage (when marriage is a genuinely spiritual commitment). 

Men and women may move between families by marriage; and 'adoption' into another family - when adoption is a love (not legal) relationship (this is rare - but sometimes happens). 

Or by committed friendship (for example: the love that bound Jesus and his disciples) may become a type of family (albeit genuine loving friendships as strong as family love are rare, and seldom stable - even on a mortal timescale). 

Family is the true and relationship of love; as we each may experience in Heaven (Heaven is 'organized' in families). 

And in this earthly mortal life; the above concept of Christian family is is the partial and intermittent model of the true and mystical church. 

Or, to put matters the other way around; unless a human group is organized on the basis of love; then that group is not primarily a Christian group (even when it calls itself a Church, or a Christian Nation or Empire). 

We are Christians as a spiritual group only in the context of loving familial relations (as defined above). 

Such groups are sufficient for Christian life, and have spiritual priority above all other groupings (Empire, Nation, Church) that lack their origin in love. 

New metaphysical assumptions needed; because "Patriarchy" cannot/ should-not be 'restored'

It can easily be shown that - overall - the world was a more coherent place, with better values, under the system now termed 'patriarchy' than under the current official-bureaucratic-media System of 'feminism'. 

(Accepting what ought - by now - to be obvious: that the rhetoric of 'equality' was a dishonest and evil-motivated deception - and that equality is impossible, as well as wicked.) 

But history is linear, cumulative - people change. Modern Men are far more self-aware than ever before; indeed, it seems that most are trapped within their own awareness (i.e. 'alienated') such that even other people - as well as God, the spiritual realm, and the innate understanding of this as a purpose and meaningful world) - seem unreal, remote, incomprehensible. 

Modern Man's self perception is of looking-out on an alien world - and great efforts are expended to trying to eliminate this awareness by intoxication, immersion in 'media', and seeking novel (overwhelming) stimulation from e.g. sexuality, and indulgence in emotions generally. 

From where we actually are, therefore, any kind of 'restoration' is impossible - including restoration of Patriarchy. 

We are not what we were, cannot want we wanted (as a whole, as the package it was), cannot become what we were by asking. And, therefore as well as being doomed to fail, it is Not Good (anti-Good, evil) to engage in attempted restoration.  

So the first step is to set aside half-baked fantasies of the past, to acknowledge that there are no valid off-the-peg solutions, to begin from our current unprecedented state of being and circumstances; and by means of intuition to seek forward, into uncharted territory - for where a profoundly Christian understanding direct us (which will be somewhere human culture has never yet been). 

Where my intuitions lead me is something I have discussed in many posts over many years. But the point is that this must be discovered each for himself.  

CP Snow on Alan Turing

From CP Snow: an oral biography by John Halperin (1983) page 104. My editorial insertions are in square brackets:

Snow: Intelligence isn't done by spies: that's absurd, romantic conception. It's done by studious young gentlemen in spectacles sitting down... On our side [World War II intelligence] was marvellous... Mind you we had our failures. 

There was Turing [here misspelled Turning], who also had fatal pathological passions for small boys. We got him into the Royal Society, we did everything we could for him, but he killed himself. 

And in fact he was worth to the combined Anglo-American side something like ten divisions [i.e. approximately 160,000 army personnel].

Halperin: Because of the work he was doing?

Snow: Yes. He really understood how to make decoding into a computer science. He was a man of genius. 

**

As well as being a fine novelist; CP Snow was a high-level scientific administrator for the UK during WWII; with a particular role in discovering and directing scientific personnel for projects such as atomic research, radar and code-breaking. 

Snow was therefore certainly in a position to know details concerning Turing's life; and Snow's evaluation of Turing's abilities and importance have been confirmed by others (including myself and Ed Dutton, in The Genius Famine).  

I have read a fair bit about Turing, and seen a movie and some TV documentaries; but most of what I know derives from recent sources - which are therefore filtered by the imperatives of political correctness. 

Perhaps this is why I had not come across any statement concerning the specific nature of this particular "fatal pathological passion" of Turing's? Although, Snow is speaking rather as if it was common knowledge in his circles, at the time: e.g. we did everything we could for him. 

Either some kind of error by Snow; or else it is interesting what details get left-out from history, nowadays. 

Attack the assumptions - not particular abuses. The counter-productive effect of mainstream outrage at *specific* lies and other corruptions

There is a type of lie which implies general truthfulness of discourse by pointing-at, analyzing, outraging-over specific lies. Yet the fact that so much fuss is made over specific lies implies that these specific lies took place against a truthful background.

Thus (for instance) lies about a new (or historical) incident of 'scientific fraud' are indirectly contributing to propaganda that the rest of science - the stuff Not currently being pointed-at - is truthful. Therefore, The System of 'science' is supported, even though parts of The System are attacked. More specifically so when, for instance, some parts of mainstream 'scientific' discourse are used to 'prove' the wrongness of the current outrage. 

But the reality is that 'science' itself is thoroughly, systematically, purposively corrupt. Mainstream, modern - and especially high-status - 'science' neither aims-at nor speaks the truth; but has quite other purposes and reasons. And this has been the case, and increasingly, for several decades. 

So; to isolate and critique some specific aspect of the birdemic-peck narrative or the climate scam; is, in fact, to play-into the hands of the enemy. These are wholly fraudulent discourses, manufactured from the propaganda and control requirements of an evil rulership - and that is all we need to know. 

Getting enmeshed in wrangling over details, sustains the assumption that these agendas are basically genuine; created and sustained by are well-meaning and honest people - people who are truth-seekers that will respond honestly to having their particular 'errors' pointed-out...  

The phenomenon goes beyond lies, to include other forms of social corruption in all the other major social systems. The system of Law is essentially and pervasively unjust: i.e. the Legal System is no longer being about real morality and justice; which would entail acknowledging the reality of God and the choice to serve His purposes). 

The same applies to public administration, education, the arts, health and medicine, the police and military, the mass media... 

...All the major (powerful, wealthy, high-status, officially permitted) sub-systems of the global System are corrupted-away from their supposedly functional concerns, and actually - primarily in active pursuit of the global/ leftist/ materialist agenda directed-against God, Jesus Christ and divine creation. 

And this applies to the major churches (of all denominations). To expose specific anti-Christian activities in the major churches indirectly sustains the assumption that these abuses and corruptions are exceptional and accidental (i.e. not aimed-at) - rather than being primary and structural aspects of these organizations.  

Therefore; all mainstream instances of expose, critique, and policy-reform-suggestions are a part of The System; are enlisted on the side of evil; and operate to sustain Systemic evil. 

...Which is exactly why they are allowed to remain mainstream; and why those persons and organizations who propagate this kind of 'moderate, circumscribed dissent' are supported and sustained. 

Because even when specific critiques happen to be accurate in a circumscribed sense; they are false in their assumptions. And assumptions matter more than anything else - assumptions (i.e. metaphysics) are the framework that determines our experienced reality, our purposes, and our deepest motivations. 

In a world of evil assumptions; when we are not operating at the deep level of exposing and correcting those assumptions - we are then reinforcing those false and evil-motivated assumptions; and actually doing more harm than good. 

Why we must do it for our-selves: Clairvoyance versus Intuition (i.e. Primary Thinking)

'Clairvoyance' implies clear-seeing - and usually means perceiving that which is normally unseen; and it can include being a 'seer' - who can more clearly perceive the future. (I am using the term clairvoyance to include all kinds of perceived experiences - seeing visions, hearing voices, performing divination etc.).

'Seeing' more generally implies perception, and this reflects that clairvoyant-type experiences are necessarily at several removes from reality, indirect. 

In this respect 'clairvoyance' - perhaps surprisingly - can be seen as typical of all the normal, everyday, indirect - including 'official' - forms of knowing. 

Intuition, by contrast, is direct-knowing of the primary level of reality.

Therefore, intuition (in its pure form) must not include anything that renders experience indirect or mediated; e.g. no language or symbolism, nor translation, nor interpretation. 

In this respect intuition (in its essential, original, private form*) can be regarded as categorically different from any other kind of knowing. 

I believe that intuition can best be understood as Primary Thinking; when Thinking is itself the 'primary' (ultimate) reality: such that God and creation are to be understood as (primarily) Thinking. 

This means that when we engage in Primary Thinking, we are directly participating-in ultimate reality. 

There is no 'mediation' - such that in Primary Thinking (and only in PT) we are part-of the ultimate reality of things. 

This means that clairvoyance - because it includes perceptions - is at several removes from reality. 

For instance:

1. If Primary Thinking is ultimate reality... 

2. Reality needs to be translated into symbolism, such as language... 

3. This symbolism needs to be communicated, transmitted...

4. The received communication needs to be interpreted and understood. 

This same, multi-layered indirectness (selectivity, summary, hence distortion) implies to all external sources that are received by the senses - even when it is assumed that the external source is working honestly on the basis of valid knowledge of reality. 

This constraint applies to external personal and institutional authority, to all written (and spoken, and visual) inputs, to all socialization, training, education...

In sum - the above explains why we must ultimately, at the deepest and foundational level of knowledge of reality level know for ourselves.  

No form of external and indirect knowledge can substitute: 

We must do Primary Thinking for ourselves - or it will not be done; and we cannot be grounded in knowledge of reality. 

**

We must do Primary Thinking for ourselves if we want a direct relationship with the world; yet there is no 'method' for doing it; and many or most people probably assume that they cannot do it - and have no idea how to start...

There is no 'method' for Primary Thinking - but there is a 'framework' of sorts; various 'assumptions' which enable Primary Thinking to happen.

For example: to know that Primary Thinking is both real and possible, both necessary and a Good Thing. To knowing that this is a creation we inhabit; that God is the creator; and that God loves us each as his child and desires our salvation - and will therefore ensure that anything we need in this mortal life will be possible. 

And then by wanting to do it: by wanting to know the truth of things, wanting to experience reality - and wanting to participate in reality by Primary Thinking.  

If, then, we experience what seems (on reflection and examination) be be Primary Thinking, then we would be wise to regard it as true (unless or until further intuition modifies it) - because there is no comparably valid source. 

Yet (again I emphasize) we cannot communicate the results of intuition to others, nor should we expect others to be bound by our own Primary Thinking; and in general this 'trying to convince others' ought not to be attempted because public discourse can only use public language/ symbolism/ imagery etc.

On the other hand, intuitive knowing can and should affect public discourse indirectly; as the most important influence for an individual on evaluating public knowledge claims, and discerning between rival claims. 

And - insofar as a intuitions is a valid participation in reality; then another-person's intuition of the same part-of-reality (if indeed, it is the identical part-of-reality that is being considered) will be the same insight - albeit within constraints of ability, time, effort etc. 

But this is only true when mortal Men are living as-if already in Heaven. 

*Note: The commonest criticisms of intuition come from those who focus on secondary and indirect communications of the (alleged) experience of intuition - in other words, the criticisms are directed against those who are regarded as arguing that 'other people' should accept as valid, linguistic interpretations and summaries of experiences that were originally wordless and private. 

Did Radagast the wizard fail in his mission?

The Wizards/ Istari were incarnated Maia (angelic spirits) who were sent to Middle Earth in about the thousandth year of the Third Age to resist Sauron. They were five in number: Gandalf the Grey, Saruman the White, Radagast the Brown and two Blue Wizards named Alatar and Pallando. 

Most of what we know of the Wizards, as a group, can be found in the (mostly unpublished during JRR Tolkien's lifetime) texts collected in the chapter The Istari in Unfinished Tales. These texts include discussions relating to Radagast, and which are somewhat undecided about whether he failed in his mission - by turning aside from engagement with Elves and Men, and becoming 'enamoured' by plants and animals. 

Recently, a further discussion of Radagast, written in 1970, was published in The Nature of Middle Earth edited by Carl F Hostetter, page 193:  

[Gandalf] differed from Radagast and Saruman in that he never turned aside from his appointed mission... and was unsparing of himself. Radagast was fond of beasts and birds, and found them easier to deal with; he did not become proud and domineering, but neglectful and easygoing, and he had very little to do with Elves and Men although obviously resistance to Sauron had to be sought chiefly in their cooperation. But since he remained of good will (though he had not much courage), his work in fact helped Gandalf at crucial moments. Though it is clear that Gandalf (with greater insight and compassion) had in fact more knowledge of birds and beasts than Radagast, and was regarded by them with more respect and affection. (This contrast is already to be seen in The Hobbit 124-5. Beorn, a lover of animals, but also of gardens and flowers, though Radagast a good enough fellow, but evidently not very effective.)

This is somewhat damning of Radagast - as he is depicted as inferior to Gandalf in even his area of special expertise!

However, taking a wider perspective; I think we can make an interpretation of Radagast that gives him a great deal more credit for his activities in resisting Sauron. 

In the first place, it seems likely that when Valar sent five emissaries, it is probable that each one (or pair in the case of the Blue Wizards who are considered as a dyad) - being angelic spirits each was of different nature and abilities; and these characteristic were no doubt chosen with the mission as priority. Even though Radagast was lesser in 'stature' among the Maia than Gandalf (as Gandalf was lesser than Saruman) - this does not preclude Radagast being better suited than Gandalf to Radagast's particular intended role. 

Furthermore, each Wizard was probably affiliated with a different Vala; according to an idea developed by Tolkien in The Istari essay - which suggests that Gandalf was representing Manwe, Sauruman was of the people of Aule, and Radagast was chosen by Yavanna - whose special care was for plants and animals, and who in Middle Earth was represented by the Ents. I think we should infer from this that Radagast - despite his preference for dealing with plants and animals, and lacking confrontational courage - was especially well-suited by his nature and abilities for the task he was sent to perform. 

In other words; although all wizards were intended to resist Sauron, each Wizard had a different specialist sub-mission. I suggest that Radagast's particular task was precisely to work with animals and plants to resist the attempts of Sauron to enlist them in his plans. 

It is - after all - clear from The Lord of the Rings that Sauron had enlisted many birds and beasts in his service; especially as spies: 

[Aragorn]: If the Riders fail to find us in the wilderness, they are likely to make for Weathertop themselves. It commands a wide view all round. Indeed, there are many birds and beasts in this country that could see us, as we stand here, from that hill-top. Not all the birds are to be trusted, and there are other spies more evil than they are... The Riders can use men and other creatures as spies... Soon I became aware that spies of many sorts, even beasts and birds, were gathered round the Shire... Regiments of black crows are flying over all the land between the Mountains and the Greyflood,' he said, `and they have passed over Hollin. They are not natives here; they are crebain out of Fangorn and Dunland. I do not know what they are about: possibly there is some trouble away south from which they are fleeing; but I think they are spying out the land. 

[Elrond]: Soon now his [i.e. Sauron's] spies on foot and wing will be abroad in the northern lands.  

Therefore it is clear that there was value in having a wizard who specialized in building alliances among birds and beasts - and presumably also among trees and other plants - in resistance to Sauron; and in opposition to the attempts of Sauron to enlist ever-more of the natural world in his evil schemes in hostility to Men and Elves. 

And this - I think - was Radagast's special role. 

If so, it is likely that Radagast was at-least somewhat successful; in so far as many (if not most) of the living beings in the North West of Middle earth (where Radagast operated) were Not on the side of Sauron; but cooperated with the powers for Good. The Eagles are one clear example; but most of the nature encountered by The Fellowship seems mostly-uncorrupted.  

In sum: if Radagast is regarded as an emissary of Yavanna, with a mission primarily to the plants, birds and beasts (rather than Men and Elves) - then he may well have stayed true to this mission. 

So much so, that (we are indirectly informed in The Istari essay) Radagast remained in Middle Earth after the defeat of Sauron - presumably because of his deep love for non-human 'nature'; choosing not to return over the sea to dwell in the Undying Lands. 

Maybe, therefore, he is still here!

When, in the past, would you like to have lived? (Being who you now are)... Understanding the evolutionary-development of Mankind

I expect that we have all day-dreamed about living in the past - and when the present is acutely miserable, or when we cannot seriously imagine a good future; then such dreams are more insistent.  

If you are like me; then these pleasant day-dreams are almost like 'snapshots' - holiday photos in reverse - whereby some particularly appealing scene is conjured and entered-into. 

For example, just before I went to sleep at night, I would sometimes imagine myself on a sultry summer's afternoon beside the Concord River or Walden Pond in the 'transcendentalist' era of Ralph Waldo Emerson. I could feel - physically - an idealized sense of repose against an implicit background of close-knit friends and associates, who shared an opening-out of ideas and possibilities.   

After becoming a Christian; I had a mental picture of Constantinople under a crystalline-blue sky; the city and its streets gleaming white, and with bright and rich colour; the music, painting, statuary, mosaics; and dignified ritual of divine liturgy under the vast dome of Hagia Sophia. 

Behind such pictures lay an imagined sense of what it was like to live, immersively, in a society where Christianity permeated the whole of life - a medium into which one was born, and through which one swam. 

This idea of 'immersion' in life; of life as unselfconscious - of living in the world as given and joyfully embraced - was at the back of most of these pleasant, yearning, day-dreams. 

This bears a more-than-coincidental relationship to similar day-dreams of early childhood; where I can remember some of what it was like to be a happy child in a happy family, in the years before I was five. For instance; Christmas day aged three or four was a total and immersive experience of being swept along in colour, warmth, joy and unfolding excitement. My life in early childhood - when it was good - was good without comparison; it was living in the best possible world. 

When, from the late 1990s, I began to read accounts of the life of 'simple', nomadic, foraging, hunter-gatherer societies; it was impossible to miss the similarity with childhood - which was indeed often pointed-out by anthropologists (before the cancer of leftism utterly destroyed their capacity to experience and think). 

Yet, although there was intense nostalgia for states of being; I could seldom whole-heartedly take the inward step of wanting actually to live in any previous state of society - in the sense that I could not imagine me-as-I-am-now, finding life better in any past society as-it-was-then. 

For the daydream to work properly, I would have to be a different person from the modern Man I had become. 

The problem was 'consciousness' - the problem was my modern self-awareness, my modern knowledge of possibilities and comparisons - and of what happened next. For any fantasy of the imagined past to "work" - I would need to leave-behind a lot of myself-in-the-present. 

This leads onto the next question concerning what I would need to leave-behind. Some of the 'modern' stuff about 'the way I think' that would need to be left-behind is evil - and I would be much better rid of it... not just in order to live in the past, but anyway. I have been corrupted by the evils of modernity - and, like any evil, this needs to be recognized and repented.

But... even when I could imagine being cleansed of characteristically modern corruptions of consciousness; there was a residue of 'me-here-now' compared with people of the past that was different in nature - but not evil; and this made it difficult to want to live in the past except by wanting to be a different person: a fundamentally different person. 

To live 'idyllically' as a simple hunter-gatherer in my fantasy past - or even in Byzantium, or in New England circa 1835 - I had to imagine myself as somebody-else; which really does not make sense, if you think about it...

Indeed; this wishing has the same incoherence as transhumanism - which aims to cure the ills consequent on being a human by abolishing humans!

Or, it resembles the Western oneness spiritualities - which offer a cure of the ills of Modern self-consciousness in the abolition of consciousness of the self.  

Or, it resembles the 'spiritual' strategy of intoxication - whereby consciousness is (pathologically) obliterated by (usually temporary) self-poisoning. A person escapes the miseries of self-consciousness by deliberately causing cerebral dysfunction; such that (e.g.) alertness, self-awareness and memory are rendered physically inoperative. When a drug has euphoriant properties, there may also be a state of pleasure or at least painlessness. 

In a sense; such intoxication - with its obliteration of that which causes and enables angst - implicitly aims at a simulation of earlier (or child-like) consciousness in terms of the experience of here-and-now immersion in the here-and-now. Insofar as it can be achieved, such simulation of unselfconscious immersion is necessarily achieved at the cost of significant dysfunction. 

It was such insights that prepared my mind for understanding the insights of Owen Barfield concerning what he terms 'the evolution of consciousness' - evolution being used in a pre-natural-selection sense of purposive change; much like the psychological aspects of development of a human from baby, through childhood and adolescence to sexual maturity (the purpose ultimately coming from God).  

To regard human history as including a change in the nature of Man's thinking, and relationship with the world - a change analogous to (and sharing similar purposes with)  that of the development of a single Man - is to find meaning in the mental differences between myself and the hunter-gatherer or resident of Constantinople in the middle hundreds AD. 

It is to recognize that for me to live in the past in the same spirit as people did then, would require fundamental changes in my consciousness; but to regard at least some of these changes as on the one hand impossible - in the same sense that an adult cannot really, in essence, become a child again; and also undesirable - in the sense that development is not meant to be reversed. 

This is to assume that when a person develops through adolescence to sexual maturity; this is what God wants - and the 'job' of the adult is to deal with the situation - not to try and reverse it. This is our divinely-appointed task - it is our destiny. 

Likewise; when God has enabled his creation of Mankind to develop from hunter gatherer, through agrarian societies into the industrial revolution - in some broad yet essential sense this is what God wants; and our job is to deal with it - starting from where we are; and not trying to reverse the fundamentals of the later situation in search of recreating the earlier situation. 

Of Course we Modern Men must recognize and repent sin; and insofar (and it is very far) that Modern Man is corrupt, and Modern society not only encourages but increasingly enforces such corruption, we are right to desire that this be changed. 

But the consciousness of Modern Man is unprecedented - and cannot lead-to, nor function-in, any previous type of society. 

Just as the adolescent's consciousness is unprecedented in his own experience - and the only way out is forward; no matter how corrupt an individual he has become, the same applies to Modern Society: that the only way out is forward. 

The only way out is forward; because we cannot find solutions to our unprecedented situation in our past. 

Part of this is due to an increase in sin; but part of it is also due to a change in the nature of Men through time - so that even if past social forms could be re-created, Modern men would not function in them, and they could not be sustained in the same way as they once were - they would be unsustainable, and they would not lead to Good. 

We cannot become unselfconsciously immersed in society again; and even if we could, it would be in defiance of God's expressed creative will - and would therefore lead to demonic outcomes. 

Thus, an understanding and acceptance of the development of human consciousness can make a fundamental difference in how we intend and hope to deal with the evils of modern society. 

These evils are seen, to a significant and crucial degree, as due to a failure to deal-with the development of Man's consciousness. 

An analogy might be when the (common) corruptions of adolescence are seen as a failure to deal with the unfolding inner changes in consciousness. That unfolding was itself a necessary, and a good (God-given) thing. 

But development leads to unavoidable challenges and choices - and if the challenges are avoided and the choices are wrong - then there is a turn towards evil that needs repentance.  

We, here, now are living at the end of innumerable failures to acknowledge challenges, and innumerable bad choices by vast numbers of people - an accumulated legacy of evil which is unrecognized and unrepented.   

But behind all this was a development of consciousness, a growing-up of Mankind, which was divinely-intended; and is irreversible. 

Therefore, although we are not supposed to leave history behind (just as we ought to remember, honour and cherish all which was good in our childhoods); nonetheless, but we ought not to seek to recreate our childhood, nor seek childrens' solutions to adolescent problems: they will not work, and they will do harm - even when well-intended. 

Instead; we must seek solutions appropriate to where we are and what we have become; and the right answers will be unprecedented in fundamental ways.

This quest will almost certainly entail trials and errors; so we need both faith and hope, together with a willingness to discern and repent when things do not work-out. 

But we each have divine guidance (of several kinds) to lead us through the maze of options and alternatives, successes and failures. 

That is the nature of our task.