cis friend does witchcraft
-
Embarrass herself by telling people she believes in witchcraft.
As if its any worse than the alternatives
-
As if its any worse than the alternatives
You say that as if you HAVE to believe in magic.
-
You say that as if you HAVE to believe in magic.
It's a lot more fun to believe in magic when you know it's not real than to actually believe in magic.
-
It's a lot more fun to believe in magic when you know it's not real than to actually believe in magic.
True. But it’s still silly.
-
True. But it’s still silly.
So? Ffs have some fun with life before a climate emergency or secret police get to you.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Hmm if she had said "I'll pray for you" we all know what she would have been praying. So witches less shitty than Christians? Or do we need to ask more Christians exactly what they are praying for?
-
Hmm if she had said "I'll pray for you" we all know what she would have been praying. So witches less shitty than Christians? Or do we need to ask more Christians exactly what they are praying for?
to smite all transphobes of course
-
As if its any worse than the alternatives
wrote last edited by [email protected]Is it though...? As stupid as the Abrahamic God is, at least you have a "God of the Gaps" thing going on where all God really has to be is someone with their own agency to grant you what you ask for and to determine where to place you in an untestable "afterlife". Of course there's an obvious cocktail of inherent contradictions when you choose "omniscient", "omnipotent", and "omnibenevolent" at the same time, but then you can appeal to the idea we wouldn't possibly understand the whims of such a god outside of time and space. Again, stupid as fuck, but you can weasel your way out of anything.
But witchcraft? Okay, you're transferring the agency to yourself, a human that exists here, and you're saying you can perform magic, but now you have no evidence you're capable of jack shit and you have no excuse to pawn it off onto. You'll never be able to do magic your entire life because it categorically isn't real, so is the excuse that witches are real but you personally really suck as one? Is the idea that you do what "God" does and take credit for anything that vaguely "works" by sheer coincidence and ignore everything else? Do you only cast "spells" that function as placebos like easing someone's pain or making them feel happy – similar to many prayers?
And of course with God you don't have any way to test where this magic is coming from; it was there before time and is all-powerful, and there's any number of ways with that setup to weasel your way out. But what's the scientifically measurable phenomenon behind witchcraft? There is none, and unlike God where there also is none, this should be easily testable if it exists since it allegedly interacts with the physical world on your command.
So now you've gone from untestable woo like the afterlife and testable but weaselable woo like prayers to woo that you should absolutely be able to test empirically because you're in control of it.
-
Is it though...? As stupid as the Abrahamic God is, at least you have a "God of the Gaps" thing going on where all God really has to be is someone with their own agency to grant you what you ask for and to determine where to place you in an untestable "afterlife". Of course there's an obvious cocktail of inherent contradictions when you choose "omniscient", "omnipotent", and "omnibenevolent" at the same time, but then you can appeal to the idea we wouldn't possibly understand the whims of such a god outside of time and space. Again, stupid as fuck, but you can weasel your way out of anything.
But witchcraft? Okay, you're transferring the agency to yourself, a human that exists here, and you're saying you can perform magic, but now you have no evidence you're capable of jack shit and you have no excuse to pawn it off onto. You'll never be able to do magic your entire life because it categorically isn't real, so is the excuse that witches are real but you personally really suck as one? Is the idea that you do what "God" does and take credit for anything that vaguely "works" by sheer coincidence and ignore everything else? Do you only cast "spells" that function as placebos like easing someone's pain or making them feel happy – similar to many prayers?
And of course with God you don't have any way to test where this magic is coming from; it was there before time and is all-powerful, and there's any number of ways with that setup to weasel your way out. But what's the scientifically measurable phenomenon behind witchcraft? There is none, and unlike God where there also is none, this should be easily testable if it exists since it allegedly interacts with the physical world on your command.
So now you've gone from untestable woo like the afterlife and testable but weaselable woo like prayers to woo that you should absolutely be able to test empirically because you're in control of it.
Prayers and spells are exactly the same behavior, a ritual for asking greater powers to intercede on your behalf. For people who genuinely believe in it there's always some "works in mysterious ways" shit to justify when the thing they asked for never happens so they can keep believing it anyway, and as long as they ask in a vague enough way and on a vague enough timeline something will eventually happen that fits the bill close enough for them to call it a success. For people who don't believe it literally but still participate it's basically just ritualized affirmation, a self pep talk to make them feel more confident or prepared or calm using religious/occult symbolism to psychologically reinforce the effect.
-
You say that as if you HAVE to believe in magic.
You don't have to believe it literally to justify participating, plenty of people who understand rationally that prayer won't instantly get them what they want still pray
-
This post did not contain any content.
If I had to guess I'd say the friend is either boosting the transition because duh, or trying to fuck because why else would you not tell them what the spell is for? Unless there's some rule about spellcasting like for birthday wishes where it doesn't work if you tell
-
Hmm if she had said "I'll pray for you" we all know what she would have been praying. So witches less shitty than Christians? Or do we need to ask more Christians exactly what they are praying for?
"I'll pray for you" but it's a prayer to Lempo, god of fucking from Finnish mythology.
-
Hmm if she had said "I'll pray for you" we all know what she would have been praying. So witches less shitty than Christians? Or do we need to ask more Christians exactly what they are praying for?
There is a large amount of the Queer community that practice witchcraft and other esoterica. It is often seen as a spiritual safe space for people outside of hetero-normative society.
-
This post did not contain any content.
She's going to cast a seduction spell on anon, obviously
-
As if its any worse than the alternatives
The only viable religion is worshiping the sun, since that actually exists.
-
"I'll pray for you" but it's a prayer to Lempo, god of fucking from Finnish mythology.
Frey, brother of Freya, is usually also depicted with a big ol' dick. He's a fertility and agriculture god! Of course you want him to fuck your fields.
-
The only viable religion is worshiping the sun, since that actually exists.
I have said the exact same thing
-
Frey, brother of Freya, is usually also depicted with a big ol' dick. He's a fertility and agriculture god! Of course you want him to fuck your fields.
I knew I knew Freya from somewhere.
-
Frey, brother of Freya, is usually also depicted with a big ol' dick. He's a fertility and agriculture god! Of course you want him to fuck your fields.
Lempo isn't a fertility god, though. His areas are erotic love, sex, and sexual prowess. He is also known by the feminine name Lemmätär or Lemmetär (-tar and -tär being feminizing suffixes). It's not surprising that Christian revisionists turned him into one of the chief demons.
-
Prayers and spells are exactly the same behavior, a ritual for asking greater powers to intercede on your behalf. For people who genuinely believe in it there's always some "works in mysterious ways" shit to justify when the thing they asked for never happens so they can keep believing it anyway, and as long as they ask in a vague enough way and on a vague enough timeline something will eventually happen that fits the bill close enough for them to call it a success. For people who don't believe it literally but still participate it's basically just ritualized affirmation, a self pep talk to make them feel more confident or prepared or calm using religious/occult symbolism to psychologically reinforce the effect.
wrote last edited by [email protected]What I think you missed is that I'm saying there are far fewer excuses for spells than there are for prayers. If we think of a prayer or spell like a transmission, one that starts and ends in our reality but can't be measured by science is (even) dumber than one that starts above our reality by an omnipotent, hyperdimensional trickster set on not revealing itself.
A prayer means that someone else – infinitely wiser and outside time and space – will do this for you if they so choose. From this, you have near-infinite freedom to weasel around why your prayer was or wasn't answered. You've made it unfalsifiable, which is intellectual sludge, but it means you've insulated yourself from being provably wrong.
But for "witchcraft"? Yes, this particular brand of delusion often turns to weasel spells (whereas I used to see a lot more of "I can do concrete, measurable things that couldn't happen otherwise"), but given they're making the action happen or creating a conduit for that action, there ought to be some physically observable explanation behind it. But apparently magic can interface with patterns of candles and lavender and minerals and clockwise tea set up by some early 20s stoner in their parents' basement but can't be measured by science.
They're not "exactly the same behavior" because 1) the locus of control is different and 2) that locus of control effectively being yourself should make this scientifically falsifiable.
