Are Runes Inherently Magical?

Fearless_Oil wrote: Are runes inherently magical?… I was wondering if runes are inherently magical. If not, then why do people use them instead of making their own symbols? I wrote: No, they are not. People use them because they’re told to and it’s convenient. Fearless_Oil wrote: So from my personal understanding of magic and consciousness, something only works if you believe it works. Yet when I search this subreddit, people report greater success when using runes. Is this because people feel safer and more confident when using runes, or is it because of the reasons the person above stated? I Read More


Psychokinesis and Biochemistry

zsd23 wrote: …As for paranormal activity, a lot of conditions can underlie it–some may be related to the imagination and hypnotic condition of the viewer(s), including a condition called folie a deux–referring to a shared delusion, some are simply manifestations via the power of belief, some are aspects of telekinetic phenomenon, which even neurologists have acknowledged as being caused by unusual and volatile energy generated by a person (not an otherworldly spirit). There are also infectious and projective aspects of human consciousness and the limitations of perception that are yet unknown that may explain manifestations of paranormal activity as well Read More


Psychic and Magical Teleportation

Spacellama117 wrote: Is teleportation in any form real? If so, resources on it. I Wrote: …It is. To say it very simply, there are harmonics of probability that say you could be somewhere else; however, the probability waves are so spread out you don’t randomly teleport. If you compress those waves, you can make it so the probability of an object being somewhere else is so likely it teleports. Via looking into the future of a thing and manipulating its future, you can teleport it. The mechanics are no different from any other application of magic that shifts future probability… Read More


ESP and Psychokinesis: A Philosophical Examination (Revised Edition)

This work was the first sustained philosophical study of psychic phenomena to follow C.D. Broad’s LECTURES ON PSYCHICAL RESEARCH, written nearly twenty years earlier. The author clearly defines the categories of psychic phenomena, surveys the most compelling experimental data, and traces their implications for the philosophy of science and the philosophy of mind. He considers carefully the abstract presuppositions underlying leading theories of psychic phenomena, and he offers bold criticisms of both mechanistic analyses of communication and psychophysical identity theories.








ˆ Back To Top