Magic vs. prayer

[Perd Hapley]

And Magick is not much different from Prayer.

What similarities do you see?

[Lanius]

Hmm... prayer..

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

funny i've had problems that only prayer fixed

but then again i'm just using experience

[AZRedhawk44]

Arthur C Clarke's 3 laws:

1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

Magic's output is originated by the "magician" or whatever you call him.  He controls the power.  For example, Gandalf called down a lightning bolt to smite the balrog.

Prayer's output is originated by the Deity or Deities targeted by the genuflector.  The power is controlled by the Deity or Deities.  As example, Moses asked God to part the Red Sea.  Moses didn't do it himself.

Prayer is also often used as a means of meditation.  In those cases, it has no correlation to magic at all.  

[230RN]

Sometimes it's easier to define the similarities by first pointing out the differences.

The essential difference in concept between Magick and Prayer, apart from the ritualistic protocols and tools involved, is that in Prayer, one makes requests, and in Magick, one makes demands.  (Or is allowed to.)

The one presumes an external agent to "make things right."  The other is an individual effort to mentally affect natural processes to "make things right."

The candle (and ritualistic behavior) is a tool (among many things) of Magick, just as a Rosary (among many things) is a tool of Prayer.

Both allow you to concentrate on the desired outcome.

Neither is guaranteed to work, since both appear to depend more on influencing probabilities rather than creating certainties.

Paragraphs 4, 5, and 6 above reflect some of the similarities.



With Prayer we often hear, "sometimes the answer to your prayer is 'no.'"

And similarly, sometimes the result of your Magic is a mere shifting of probabilities from, say, 0.5 to 0.51 instead of 0.63 or the desired and rarely-obtained 1.00.

Sometimes that little shift in P is enough to effect the desired outcome. 

Sometimes it isn't, and the "answer" is 'no,' in another sense.

Sorta like "The House" in gambling establishments where "The House" has its small, but overall consistent, advantage.

Even though sometimes someone breaks the bank.

I have respect for both, which is why I used caps for both herein.

Terry, 230RN

[Lanius]

Respect for superstition 

[RevDisk]

What similarities do you see?

Same thing.   Folks read whatever they like into either.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

indeed they do  and both inspire fear in some

[MicroBalrog]

Many people understand prayer in the same way as magic: as a way for them to control the material universe. It's very obvious in, for example, Chassidic Judaism and some other kinds of Orthodox Judaism.

Others understand prayer as a means of spiritual enlightenment - praying for calm, understanding, humility, or faith can be one of these. The former is not like the latter.

[dogmush]

Respect for superstition 

Yes.

Again, that is very often something you learn with experience.

Terry has a pretty decent breakdown there.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

that is very often something you learn with experience.


sadly not always

[230RN]

"Terry has a pretty decent breakdown there."

Thank you.

Those conceptions dawned on me once while I was scrying.

I incorporated them into my class on the Craft by this illustration:

Normally, a penny has a slightly better chance of landing tails up because the head side is slightly heavier.  Five hundred and three tails turn up out of a thousand tosses by long-term testing by minimally-paid undergraduates.

The Magical task is to make 1000 out of 1000 coin tosses come up tails.

A moderately powerful magician may be able to make the tail side come up, say 508 times out of a thousand.

A really powerful magician might be able to make the coins come up tails a whole 516 times out of a thousand.

And whether these magicians used the right eye or the left eye of a newt in their spell-casting doesn't matter.

What mattered was that while they were stirring whichever newt eye into their  potions, they were concentrating on the desired outcome.

It doesn't even matter whether they made potions in the first place or not.

Or even if they said three Rosaries.  The potion-making and the Rosary are both Tools to enhance your concentration.

Which is where the real magic is.  It is not in whirling your cane around and calling forth lightning, like Gandalf.

You will note that 516 out of 1000 coin tosses is not statistically significant, and can't be reported in scientific journals.  But that slight edge might be significant to the Magicians.

Or, if, you will, the Prayerful.

Terry, 230RN

[Perd Hapley]

Sometimes it's easier to define the similarities by first pointing out the differences.

The essential difference in concept between Magick and Prayer, apart from the ritualistic protocols and tools involved, is that in Prayer, one makes requests, and in Magick, one makes demands.  (Or is allowed to.)

The one presumes an external agent to "make things right."  The other is an individual effort to mentally affect natural processes to "make things right."

The candle (and ritualistic behavior) is a tool (among many things) of Magick, just as a Rosary (among many things) is a tool of Prayer.

Both allow you to concentrate on the desired outcome.

Neither is guaranteed to work, since both appear to depend more on influencing probabilities rather than creating certainties.

Paragraphs 4, 5, and 6 above reflect some of the similarities.



With Prayer we often hear, "sometimes the answer to your prayer is 'no.'"

And similarly, sometimes the result of your Magic is a mere shifting of probabilities from, say, 0.5 to 0.51 instead of 0.63 or the desired and rarely-obtained 1.00.

Sometimes that little shift in P is enough to effect the desired outcome. 

Sometimes it isn't, and the "answer" is 'no,' in another sense.

As the original question in the other thread involved Christian churches, my comments concern prayer in the Christian sense. As some have mentioned, there is more to Christian prayer than making requests. It may also consist of worship, thanksgiving, or simply communicating with God for its own sake.

When it comes to the all-request hour of prayer, if a Christian understands prayer as trying to influence the probability of a favored outcome, their understanding is inconsistent with the rest of Christian doctrine. Prayer is not about informing God of what is needed, or telling him what he should do. In Christianity, these ideas do not make sense. It is a matter of the believers' faith in, and fellowship with, God. It is how believers learn to trust in God to solve their problems, or to accept the "no" answers and persevere in faith. Or at least, that is my feeble attempt to explain it.

Lastly, you have described one behavior that asks an omnipotent, omniscient God for an outcome (and ideally includes a declaration of acquiescence to whatever that will may be); and another behavior that seeks to directly affect circumstances through the effort of the practitioner. I see a great deal of difference there, at least as you've described magic. 

I tend to think it is OK to let different belief systems have different beliefs and practices that work in different ways. It seems to make sense that they would. I am not sure why some attempt to reduce all religions to some common denominator, and treat any remaining differences as superfluities. Perhaps it proceeds from the notion that any perceived differences on fundamentals will result in religious hostilities. I don't deny that such potential exists, but I don't think truth should be sacrificed just to prevent discord. Perhaps we can admit that some belief systems are fundamentally opposed, and just learn to live with it?

[Lanius]

@Terry
So, what you are selling is basically the Secret, right.
(groan)

You know that if you can prove magic to James Randi, he will give you a million buck. I'm fairly sure skewing the results of a coin toss, if it could be done repeatedly in a controlled experiment would make Randi institute pay up. 

[Jamisjockey]

I see no difference between the two, as I believe in neither.   

[RevDisk]

Lastly, you have described one behavior that asks an omnipotent, omniscient God for an outcome (and ideally includes a declaration of acquiescence to whatever that will may be); and another behavior that seeks to directly affect circumstances through the effort of the practitioner. I see a great deal of difference there, at least as you've described magic. 

Most folks claiming to do magick (of the religiosity variety, not Penn and Teller variety) often involve deities or spirits, not just on their own accord.  Some claim to do it all themselves, not many.  I'm failing to see how this is substantially different than prayer.  It's asking for supernatural intervention.  Sometimes completely with no desired activity on the practitioners' part, sometimes for assistance with some activity on the practitioners' part, sometimes for guidance on some decision making. 

If there is such a substantial difference, why do I hear variations of "God helps those who help themselves", "Have to meet God half-way", etc on a regular basis?  Is that not at least partially conceding that often some action is required on behalf of the Christian, and not just to expect God to do all of the work?


Honestly, the only folks I've ever seen that expected God to do everything without ANY action/activity/etc is "insha Allah", which is a beautiful art form.  Will the circuit board run?  insha Allah.  Will enough construction workers show up?  insha Allah.  Uhm, shouldn't you do something to ensure it?  Nope.  insha Allah.

[makattak]

Most folks claiming to do magick (of the religiosity variety, not Penn and Teller variety) often involve deities or spirits, not just on their own accord.  Some claim to do it all themselves, not many.  I'm failing to see how this is substantially different than prayer.  It's asking for supernatural intervention.  Sometimes completely with no desired activity on the practitioners' part, sometimes for assistance with some activity on the practitioners' part, sometimes for guidance on some decision making.  

If there is such a substantial difference, why do I hear variations of "God helps those who help themselves", "Have to meet God half-way", etc on a regular basis?  Is that not at least partially conceding that often some action is required on behalf of the Christian, and not just to expect God to do all of the work?

There is a substantial difference, and it comes from the One to whom prayer is directed versus the ones to who magick is directed. Much the same as saying sex is sex, what's the difference if it's with your wife or prostitutes? (Please don't take that analogy beyond saying there is a difference.)

As for the "God helps those who help themselves", that is a theological misconception. We have duties and responsibilities. God is in control, but that does not absolve us of our responsibilities to use His gifts (intelligence, strength, resources, land, etc...) to their intended purpose. Thus, "God helps those who help themselves" is a false "doctrine". God helps whom He will, as He loves all His creations. Some of them can (and do) "help themselves." Some of the cannot (or do not) "help themselves." That is more a matter of their failings rather than His rewards or punishments. (Here's a theologically better concept: "God causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.")

[grislyatoms]

IMO, prayer, meditation, magic, and new age affirmation are all forms of cognitive restructuring. Nothing more.

[230RN]

"So, what you are selling is basically the Secret, right."

(A) Don't put words in my mouth.

(B) It's obviously not a secret.

(C) I'm not selling anything.

(D) The "influencing probabilities through mental effort" is a mere hypothetical construct, developed to explain a lot of things that a lot of people have noticed... both in Prayer and in (Ceremonial) Magic.  Could be right, could be wrong, could be somebody's loaded the pennies, could be just a function of people's tendencies to remember the postive outcomes.  After all, as I have maintained before, all science is ultimately based on anecdotal observation, i.e., the "Gee, that's odd" experience.  The difficulty here is that such things as I discussed as similarities v differences in "Magic v Prayer" rarely reach statistical significance, commonly defined as rejecting the null hypotheses with a confidence level of P<0.05 or P<0.01 (depending on how conservative the researcher is.) 

If, indeed, Gandalf could call down lightning on demand, with a P=1.00, we would not be having this discussion.

And, in my view, science is merely the seeking of knowledge, which, in and of itself, should not be limited by prior art or prior science.

Here's something I like to quote in this regard:

"The  great  field  for  new  discoveries,"  said  a
scientific friend to me the other day, "is always the
unclassified residuum."  Round about the accredited and orderly
facts of every science there ever floats a sort of dust-cloud of
exceptional observations,  of  occurences  minute  and irregular
and seldom met with, which it always proves more easy to ignore
than to attend to.  The ideal of every science is that of a
closed and completed system of truth.  The charm of most sciences
to their more passive  disciples  consists in their appearing, in
fact, to wear just this ideal form.  Each one of our various
"ologies" seems to offer a definite head of classification for
every possible phenomenon of the sort which it professes to
cover, and so far from free is most men's fancy, that,  when a
consistent and  organized  scheme of this sort has once been
comprehended and assimilated, a different scheme is unimaginable.

No alternative... can any longer be conceived as possible.
Phenomena unclassified within the system are therefore
paradoxical absurdities, and must be held untrue.  (From William
James' "Psychical Research," circa 1890

Worth thinking over once or twice, eh?

Terry, 230RN

[Nick1911]

What similarities do you see?

Neither can be shown to have an effect in the material world in any controlled, scientifically rigorousness test.

[seeker_two]

What similarities do you see?

Major similarity:

Both use words.

Major difference:

Prayer is when you ask a higher power for intervention.

Magic is when you manipulate a source of power for an intended result.

Would you rather have an accomplished neurosurgeon perform brain surgery on your child, or would you rather just have access to the surgery tools and figure it out yourself?..... 

[Lanius]

Well.. you're selling the idea that there's something to this.
I say go ahead. Influence coin toss, or poker cards, by wishing hard enough... reveal that in a controlled experiment. Inflame debates. Outrage people. I'd heartily applaud.

[seeker_two]

I'd heartily applaud.

Even if there's no kittens involved?..... 

[RevDisk]

Neither can be shown to have an effect in the material world in any controlled, scientifically rigorousness test.

Bingo.

[Lanius]

Fried kittens may be tasty, but are not necessary condition for my applause.