Magicians Do Not Believe in Magic

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

Actual magicians do not believe in magic, but rather believe in the appearance of it or believe in it as an appearance and use that appearance to their benefit. If they wish to use the belief in it, they must openly revere it so as to support that appearance of the reality of it. They know that it is a trick of the mind utilizing the mind’s tendency to presume. But if they wish to use it, they must support the belief in it.

Similarly, prophets do not worship prophets. That is not to say that they do not believe in what prophets have said, but rather that to be an actual prophet requires an understanding of why what is said must be true. Their belief is not in who said it, else they aren’t actually prophets but rather followers, devotees, and memes. But if a prophet wishes to be revered, he must support the reverence of prophets.

Similarly a philosopher does not worship philosophers. And that is not to say that they do not believe in what philosophers have said, but rather to be an actual philosopher requires and understanding of why what has been said is true. Their belief is not in who said it, else they aren’t actually philosophers, but rather followers, devotees, and memes. And again, if they wish to be revered, they must support the reverence of philosophers.

So what do you think happens when an actual magician sees that the reverence for magic is not wise, the actual prophet sees that the reverence for prophets is not wise, and the actual philosopher sees that the reverence for philosophers is not wise?

He would not gain the reverence of a magician, nor of a prophet, nor of a philosopher. So what is he other than a lone adversary to all those who promote reverence for others, all of the presumptuousness of mankind?

He must promote the seeing itself, not the seers. He must enhance the ability to envision in others, not the blind faith in others. Properly seeing is properly believing. His focus must be on “how to see”, “how to know”, and “how to enhance”.

But what do you call that?

2

As far as I know, there is no word for such a person.

Well said, by the way.

3

Franz Bardon is a magician who believed in his own magic!

4

Try and see.

5

How do you know?

6 
 When a magician is able to convince other's of his magic, then what he has done, is to convince himself.  The reasoning goes as follows:

  1. I am not sure of my magical powers

  2. Beyond this uncertainty, I will try to convince others of my magical prowess

  3. I have successfully convinced everyone. (Or I think I did.)
    4 everyone can not be wrong.
    5.I will retest this hypothesis.(That there may be some hold outs)
    6.A few hold outs mean nothing, it seems statistically overwhelming that everyone except a few hold outs believe of my magical powers.
    7.Therefore I must have magical powers because everyone believes so.

  4. As a consequence, my initial doubts about my self have been neutralised.

  5. I am really, for all practical (and other) purposes a bona fide magician.

  6. Conclusion: it is way more then sleight of hand.

7

Houdini?

8

I take it that you think that he DID believe in magic?

How would you know?
He is going to say and act like he does whether he really does or not.

9

This reminds me of The Grand Inquisitor. Although, he strives in the opposite direction, not concerned with cutting people loose from their blind believing. He is concerned with nurturing that tendency. In leaving it be, as a means in which people have a common bond with one another, and as means in which they can be shaped and manipuated as one. Makes it all the much easier that way. Burn the heretic! He who threatens that bond.

Maybe that’s what you might call your idea - heresy, deviancy! Cup of hemlock for you sir. :wink: