Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

John Dee and the occult in California

theparisreview.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 47 posts

Re: John Dee and the occult in California

#21

Post by ianstallings »

kefka wrote: post #15
h1karu wrote: post #3

What does this have to do with technology or "hackers" ? Real wizards code in Lisp.

The history of Queen Elizabeth's court astrologer, John Dee is a very interesting chap. He was well versed in Western Astrology, as well as the joint creator of a symbolic magic called Enochian Magic. He was also considered as Elizabeth's spy. For what there is in the occult, I really am surprised that more technologically minded people don't dabble. Things like Chaos Magic and the like are well suited for applying s…

Magic and science do not mix. That's why I don't dabble or anything else.

Re: John Dee and the occult in California

#23

Post by kefka »

h1karu wrote: post #17
kefka wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The history of Queen Elizabeth's court astrologer, John Dee is a very interesting chap. He was well versed in Western Astrology, as well as the joint creator of a symbolic magic called Enochian Magic. He was also considered as Elizabeth's spy. For what there is in the occult, I really am surprised that more technologically minded people don't dabble. Things like Chaos Magic and the like are well suited for applying s…

I suppose what I mean is that I don't think it's fair that fundamentalist christians don't get to post on HN about how they have a savior who performs miracles but yet it's relatively socially acceptable to have posts about "Magic" which is a reference to the same type of thing as miracles but yet it's considered "esoteric" instead of "religious" and is therefor socially acceptable. I mean lets not forget that with t…

I see you are somewhat versed in Enochian workings. I'm a bit surprised, but the tech community has knowledge extending every direction. Yes, Enochian Magic was created by John Dee in reference to the apochryphal book of Enoch. It entails in working with both positive and negative angels under YHVH (Judeao/Christian/Moslem deity).

That's one of the reasons why I mentioned chaos magic. It is devoid of any deity worship, and is more that of being a sorcerer.Golden Dawn also used Enochian magic, albeit only the second book. And they also involved themselves with YHVH, Egyptian deities and Celtic deities. For no deity workings, perhaps Tantra or Chaos would apply.

Re: John Dee and the occult in California

#24

Post by nwatson »

h1karu wrote: post #17
kefka wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The history of Queen Elizabeth's court astrologer, John Dee is a very interesting chap. He was well versed in Western Astrology, as well as the joint creator of a symbolic magic called Enochian Magic. He was also considered as Elizabeth's spy. For what there is in the occult, I really am surprised that more technologically minded people don't dabble. Things like Chaos Magic and the like are well suited for applying s…

I suppose what I mean is that I don't think it's fair that fundamentalist christians don't get to post on HN about how they have a savior who performs miracles but yet it's relatively socially acceptable to have posts about "Magic" which is a reference to the same type of thing as miracles but yet it's considered "esoteric" instead of "religious" and is therefor socially acceptable. I mean lets not forget that with t…

Fundamentalist Christians are still seen in the U.S. as the "oppressing majority" that want to impose their belief system on others or want at least to make others feel bad for not adhering to their beliefs or not conforming to their moral code. This view is outdated.

The Evangelical+Fundamentalist Christians had their latest political and cultural heyday in the 1980's with the "Moral Majority" movement. They've been in steady decline since, with the book "The Great Evangelical Recession" (http://www.amazon.com/Great-Evangelical-Recession-The-Americ...) arguing that the U.S. population can count only between 7% and 9% as part of the "true believer" Evangelical or Fundamental Christian set. The other 30% to 50% that loosely associate themselves with Christian churches have only limited knowledge of what Christianity teaches.

Politicians, advertisers, tastemakers all are slowly realizing this declining influence and focus of Christian groups. Many "free thinking" folks though still see Fundamentalist Christianity as the big bogey-man. Those dabbling in the occult or most other religions are generally seen as interesting and as having no agenda to impose moral beliefs, and so are much less threatening and downright fun and interesting. The California occult even had raucous sex parties, yay!

Re: John Dee and the occult in California

#25

Post by h1karu »

kefka wrote: post #23
h1karu wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose what I mean is that I don't think it's fair that fundamentalist christians don't get to post on HN about how they have a savior who performs miracles but yet it's relatively socially acceptable to have posts about "Magic" which is a reference to the same type of thing as miracles but yet it's considered "esoteric" instead of "religious" and is therefor socially acceptable. I mean lets not forget that with t…

I see you are somewhat versed in Enochian workings. I'm a bit surprised, but the tech community has knowledge extending every direction. Yes, Enochian Magic was created by John Dee in reference to the apochryphal book of Enoch. It entails in working with both positive and negative angels under YHVH (Judeao/Christian/Moslem deity). That's one of the reasons why I mentioned chaos magic. It is devoid of any deity worshi…

I suppose if the original post had been about chaos magic alone I wouldn't have chimed in to refer to it as religious speech. I would even suggest that there are more and more scientific authors showing up who are helping to bridge the gap between "chaos magic" concepts and hard science (see Rupert Sheldrake, Bruce Lipton, Michael Talbot, and others)

"I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness." – Max Planck. 1931.

Re: John Dee and the occult in California

#26

Post by benbreen »

anigbrowl wrote: post #20

I hope this was horribly mangled by some chthonian sub-editor, because I hate to think that this rambling disconnected potpourri is considered acceptable output from a PhD candidate as the bio claims.

As the PhD candidate in question, I would have to agree that it is rambling - but I hope you wait to read my actual dissertation before judging my scholarly output as a whole!

I should also add that I have no connection to the O.T.O. or any similar group (and speaking frankly, I find all such contemporary occult groups to be faintly silly). But I do think their intellectual genealogy is super interesting.

Re: John Dee and the occult in California

#27

Post by dragonwriter »

nwatson wrote: post #24
h1karu wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose what I mean is that I don't think it's fair that fundamentalist christians don't get to post on HN about how they have a savior who performs miracles but yet it's relatively socially acceptable to have posts about "Magic" which is a reference to the same type of thing as miracles but yet it's considered "esoteric" instead of "religious" and is therefor socially acceptable. I mean lets not forget that with t…

Fundamentalist Christians are still seen in the U.S. as the "oppressing majority" that want to impose their belief system on others or want at least to make others feel bad for not adhering to their beliefs or not conforming to their moral code. This view is outdated. The Evangelical+Fundamentalist Christians had their latest political and cultural heyday in the 1980's with the "Moral Majority" movement. They've been…

> Fundamentalist Christians are still seen in the U.S. as the "oppressing majority" that want to impose their belief system on others or want at least to make others feel bad for not adhering to their beliefs or not conforming to their moral code. This view is outdated.

No, they're more often seen as an oppressing, politically-powerful minority that wants to do that. Which, while somewhat imprecise (Evangelicals/Fundamentalists and those seeking to impose conservative policies either based on religious motivation or by leveraging others' religious identity aren't identical groups, though there's significant overlap), isn't outdated in any sense.

> twith the book "The Great Evangelical Recession" (http://www.amazon.com/Great-Evangelical-Recession-The-Americ...) arguing that the U.S. population can count only between 7% and 9% as part of the "true believer" Evangelical or Fundamental Christian set. The other 30% to 50% that loosely associate themselves with Christian churches have only limited knowledge of what Christianity teaches.

That's kind of silly, for one thing because it presumes that every Christian who isn't a "true believer" in one of two closely-related subsets of Protestantism is only "loosely associated" with a Christian Church.

Re: John Dee and the occult in California

#28

Post by lotsofmangos »

ianstallings wrote: post #21
kefka wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The history of Queen Elizabeth's court astrologer, John Dee is a very interesting chap. He was well versed in Western Astrology, as well as the joint creator of a symbolic magic called Enochian Magic. He was also considered as Elizabeth's spy. For what there is in the occult, I really am surprised that more technologically minded people don't dabble. Things like Chaos Magic and the like are well suited for applying s…

Magic and science do not mix. That's why I don't dabble or anything else.

Tell that to Newton. There is a fine line separating the various realms of the unknown and inventors are merely the most successful of the insane as they have made flesh of their delusions.

Re: John Dee and the occult in California

#29

Post by benbreen »

ryan33 wrote: post #16

I don't particularly like the OTO because of the distortion of Enlightenment Era groups and Freemasonry. Crowley and some of the esoteric philosophies are interesting but there's not many concrete ideas there. John Fleming wrote a great book related to this called The Dark Side of the Enlightenment: Wizards, Alchemists, and Spiritual Seekers in the Age of Reason . There's a distinction between Freemasonry, philosophy…

Fleming on the Dark Side of the Enlightenment is great, I agree. But I wouldn't say his book is trying to separate the dross of ridiculous belief from the gold of "true" science or philosophy. What I take away from that book is a to me more interesting claim that Enlightenment ideals and methods have always been entangled with varieties of magical beliefs, be they utopian idealism or alchemy or (in a contemporary context) transhumanism. I wrote about this at more length in an article about the history of drugs that appeared in Aeon magazine a few months ago, if you're interested: http://aeon.co/magazine/altered-states/yesterdays-drugs-are-...

Re: John Dee and the occult in California

#30

Post by anigbrowl »

benbreen wrote: post #26
anigbrowl wrote: post #20

I hope this was horribly mangled by some chthonian sub-editor, because I hate to think that this rambling disconnected potpourri is considered acceptable output from a PhD candidate as the bio claims.

As the PhD candidate in question, I would have to agree that it is rambling - but I hope you wait to read my actual dissertation before judging my scholarly output as a whole! I should also add that I have no connection to the O.T.O. or any similar group (and speaking frankly, I find all such contemporary occult groups to be faintly silly). But I do think their intellectual genealogy is super interesting.

It's a great subject, which I think is why I was so disappointed in the article. I was looking forward to a few thousand words on the odd modern history of alchemy and its continuing allure, but I really feel you tried to pour a quart into a pint pot here. I would be delighted to read a scholarly dissertation on this or a tangentially related topic.
Post reply on HN