mp on Wed, 8 Dec 2021 23:15:43 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: <nettime> The Dawn of Everything (very short review) |
On 08/12/2021 18:02, Joseph Rabie wrote: > > I am really wary of terms like magic, beyond seeing them as a poetic > metaphors (helpful & useful, as such) for things that escape us, or > transcend us, or that are incomprehensible to us, even though they > are clearly there (consciousness, for one). > > Appealing to magic, given our predicament, really seems to me like > grasping at straws. And, given that in current culture magic has come > to be represented by Harry Potter© more than anything else (one Latin > phrase and Voldomor bites the dust), a lot more needs to be known > about magic's eventual agency, before we make it part of a toolkit > for repairing the damage we have done. Harry Potter magic is of course just silly. And "incomprehensible" things, such as consciousness, are not what magic is... ...Things we don't understand are rather potential objects of investigation and can be framed for the purposes of meaning/understanding within any of three - magic, science, religion. You can apply a scientific understanding to magic, for instance, which is what Gosden does (he is after all an Oxford professor and a renowned scholar). Then, whatever is or isn't in the current public imagination of "first world consumers" surely isn't the yardstick for what's worth talking about, or not talking about?! Anyway, for those who might want to get an insight, what to my mind is useful about Gosden's work - apart from, finally, inviting hundreds of millions of indigenous people and peasants to the table of meaning making in the world, as also Graeber/Wengrow in some sense do - is his framing of magic as "participation". Here are some introductory excerpts to peruse before flushing the baby, bathwater and tub and all: Gosden's "...definition of magic emphasizes human connections with the universe, so that people are open to the workings of the universe and the universe is responsive to us. Magic is related to, but different from, the other two great strands of history, religion and science: the former focuses on a god or gods, the latter a distanced understanding of physical reality. Magic is one of the oldest world-views and yet is capable of constant renewal, so that a modern magic can help us to explore our physical and ethical connections to the world in a time of profound ecological crisis" (2020: 1). "...Human beings participate in the universe directly, and the universe influences and shapes us..." (2020: 6) - (Philosophers of technology might recognise this particular feedback loop). ... and it is here that magic unfolds as a practice, in the participatory moment. In the flow of things. In the zone. "...Magic works through human participation in the universe. In religion the primary human relationship is with one god or many gods. Science distances people from the world, taking them out of it, which leads to their observing and understanding physical operations in abstract terms, before applying that knowledge for practical ends" (2020: 7). "...Although apparently very different, magic and science have much in common. Both strive to understand how the world works and the manner in which people can benefit from its workings. Science divides the world into matter and energy and seeks the forces that shape them or the chemical and biochemical dynamics that animate all things. Magic sees spirits in the land, considers how people and animals are related, and tries to understand transformations around birth and death. The forces defined by science find echoes in magic’s insistence that spirits animate the world. Beneath our more superficial thoughts and discussions lie deeper intuitions and desires concerning our relationship with the world. Here magic and science diverge. The practices and philosophy of magic come from a sense of kinship with other living things, the landscape and the heavens. Through magic we can explore mutuality: how we are joined to the rest of the universe and the manner in which we can affect things around us through ways of participating, which have as a central element a set of moral concerns. Scientific understanding derives from abstraction, through the quantification of matter, energy and force by means of mathematics, but also through logical reasoning from elementary starting points, such as Newton’s Laws, towards the true profusion of the world. Science separates people from the world, whereas magic immerses us in it, raising also questions of our moral relationship with the universe in a way that science does not..." (2020: 8). "...The relationship between magic, religion and science concerns the balance of power, raising the question of where power exists in the world. Magic sees a direct human relationship with the world. People’s words and acts can influence events and processes. Religion takes some of the power out of this magical relationship, placing it with the gods but leaving some room for direct human participation, even if often grudgingly. The mechanical universe of science radically repositions people – the universe works on its own with no need for a god or a person in the main. The universe and its forces are indifferent to people, who live in a state of alienation or anomie if they accept the consequences of a mechanical universe. Many have wrestled with the psychological and emotional consequences of an uncaring universe over the last two centuries. Magic holds the promise of a rich mutual set of connections to the world around us, but many would see such a promise as illusory, dangerous or hopelessly romantic..." (2020: 9). /// // / # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected] # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: