Research and Intuition

Putting together ones life with the modern world.
User avatar
Jiva
Frater
Posts: 515
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 2:13 am

Research and Intuition

Postby Jiva » Wed Oct 08, 2014 3:00 am

I was wondering how people thought about these two approaches to investigating anything occult/esoteric and how people balance them in their lives.

As people might have noticed, I predominantly tend to take an academic approach and actively research things, which accordingly influences whatever I practice. The major exception to this is tarot, which I have steadfastly refused to research in an academic fashion. I've only used the classic Major Arcana, simply because that was what Nefastos used for the White Aspect practice last year. It's been quite odd as I haven't had any objective goal other than a resolve to treat the whole thing as an experiment. Perhaps because of this I haven't set a schedule, timetable, or anything similar which I've considered might be a mistake as everything's been haphazard at best and triggered by random experience and impulses, but then this might also be the point.

There is also the constant temptation to get various interesting books on the subject, such as one I encountered by a psychologist that aligned the tarot with Jungian archetypes, but I've just listed these as something to buy at some point in the distant future.
'Oh Krishna, restless and overpowering, this mind is overwhelmingly strong; I think we might as easily gain control over the wind as over this.'
User avatar
RaktaZoci
Posts: 1429
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:32 pm
Location: Salo

Re: Research and Intuition

Postby RaktaZoci » Wed Oct 08, 2014 11:11 am

Jiva wrote:an academic approach and actively research things,
This is something that would have rang as poisonous in my ears in the past years and I still do get staggered upen the term 'academic research'. This forms kind of a paradox, though, since I do work myself in a similar way, but since I'm not in (direct) contact to the academical world my subconsious tells me its okay.
I do, however, work quite often based on intuition and some things just 'feel right' while others do the opposite. This is a natural way for me to function and it expresses the Red path, naturally.
Jiva wrote: It's been quite odd as I haven't had any objective goal other than a resolve to treat the whole thing as an experiment. Perhaps because of this I haven't set a schedule, timetable, or anything similar which I've considered might be a mistake as everything's been haphazard at best and triggered by random experience and impulses, but then this might also be the point.
You seem to have a quite scientific approach to the subject, which I don't really find appropriate. Maybe others disagree with me(?) As science has a tendency to measure, compare and make statistics of everything, which I find disturbing.
I do make notes myself, atleast when I'm reading a longer text, but these are just words and fragments on paper that help me remember a certain topic or aspect in the text but of which anyone else would find impossible to interpret.
Jiva wrote: There is also the constant temptation to get various interesting books on the subject, such as one I encountered by a psychologist that aligned the tarot with Jungian archetypes, but I've just listed these as something to buy at some point in the distant future.
This can easily happen and since there are thousands of publications one can easily get overwhelmed. I'd take it that it's more reasonable to focus on one text and read it through thoroughly, than to browse million texts and remember nothing of them.
die Eule der Minerva beginnt erst mit der einbrechenden Dämmerung ihren Flug.
-Hegel
Wyrmfang
Frater
Posts: 1108
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 10:22 pm
Location: Jyväskylä

Re: Research and Intuition

Postby Wyrmfang » Wed Oct 08, 2014 10:38 pm

RaktaZoci wrote:As science has a tendency to measure, compare and make statistics of everything, which I find disturbing.
You are here creating a classical false controversy between science and others brances of human life. First of all, there are qualitative sciences, which do not necessarily measure, compare, or at least make statistics of anything. Second, this "everything" denotes as if science would generally try to dominate all branches of life, which is not true at all. There is a residue of positivistic mentality in our society, but usually those who advocate it, are not doing science in their statements. It is the media and some few bad popular philosophers who advocate positivistic worldview.
User avatar
RaktaZoci
Posts: 1429
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:32 pm
Location: Salo

Re: Research and Intuition

Postby RaktaZoci » Wed Oct 08, 2014 11:13 pm

Wyrmfang wrote:
RaktaZoci wrote:As science has a tendency to measure, compare and make statistics of everything, which I find disturbing.
You are here creating a classical false controversy between science and others brances of human life. First of all, there are qualitative sciences, which do not necessarily measure, compare, or at least make statistics of anything. Second, this "everything" denotes as if science would generally try to dominate all branches of life, which is not true at all. There is a residue of positivistic mentality in our society, but usually those who advocate it, are not doing science in their statements. It is the media and some few bad popular philosophers who advocate positivistic worldview.
This must be true. Also, I'm not very knowledgeable (is that a word?) in the ways of science over all so who am I to speak.. This was just something that I've felt, intuitively, or by gut-feeling, in human terms.
Thanks for this correction. :)
die Eule der Minerva beginnt erst mit der einbrechenden Dämmerung ihren Flug.
-Hegel
User avatar
Jiva
Frater
Posts: 515
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 2:13 am

Re: Research and Intuition

Postby Jiva » Thu Oct 09, 2014 12:54 am

Well, I don't think having a scientific approach is inappropriate. As you recently mentioned Pekka Ervast in another thread, the first chapter of The Divine Seed is translated as 'Religion as Science'. I obviously have no idea whether the translation is that great, but the following paragraph is quite representative:
Religion must prove that it is a universal truth, not idle gossip, blind speculation, imaginative hallucinations, or frightening superstitions. If religion is science, it must be founded on factual knowledge. Within a religious context, if various states of consciousness following physical death and the concept of a Supreme Being could be logically founded, there would be no denial. This by no means implies that religious philosophy would be immediately understood by everyone. On the contrary – for in our discussion of astronomy we learned that if human beings desire the truth within any theory, they must be immersed in the learning process. Similarly, we understand that if any religious theory of the universe is founded on knowledge, an individual must methodically investigate its authenticity. Then religious theories based on honest enquiry can be trusted on grounds comparable to astronomers' scientific observations and theories.
There are issues with Ervast's definitions which necessarily effect the way he relates religion to science, for example calling things “scientific facts/truths”, but I don't think it undermines his larger point. He also doesn't refer much to self-analysis etc., but I think that's omitted as it's an implicit part of the scientific method.

And to add to Wyrmfang's comment, I also wouldn't say that statistical analysis is inherently bad, as if it was that would disqualify things like gematria in their entirety. Various occult analyses of letters and numbers are, after all, derived from measuring words (qualitative data) resulting in numbers (quantitative data) which is ultimately to be compared. Aside from gematria, another example is Jung and Wolfgang Pauli's investigation of synchronicity.

At the same time though, I personally don't see it as healthy to have a single approach or avoid things that I don't immediately find an affinity with. I follow various things that could be described as instincts, the sub or unconscious, synchronicity etc. and don't usually keep a record aside from an occasional dream diary. Of course, this is just how I assess my personal circumstance though...
'Oh Krishna, restless and overpowering, this mind is overwhelmingly strong; I think we might as easily gain control over the wind as over this.'
User avatar
RaktaZoci
Posts: 1429
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:32 pm
Location: Salo

Re: Research and Intuition

Postby RaktaZoci » Thu Oct 09, 2014 1:07 am

Jiva wrote:Well, I don't think having a scientific approach is inappropriate.
I was trying to find another word for quite some time to better describe what I wanted to say, but couldn't find one, in my haste. Inappropriate is way too harsch term for this purpose..

But I'm glad that I managed to cause debate. Always a good start for a fruitful conversation.

I hope though that what I was 'trying' to say became obvious.
Last edited by Guest on Fri Oct 10, 2014 10:30 am, edited 2 times in total.
die Eule der Minerva beginnt erst mit der einbrechenden Dämmerung ihren Flug.
-Hegel
User avatar
Nefastos
Frater
Posts: 3414
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 10:05 am
Location: Helsinki

Re: Research and Intuition

Postby Nefastos » Thu Oct 09, 2014 7:30 am

Some biographical stuff coming up, feel free to skip to the last passage if uninterested...

When I was beginning my occult studies, I had an intense longing for the occult research in a tedious, almost academical manner, & had I found Qabbalah - or some other deep plus exact tradition of occultism - by then, it would have made be extremely happy. For some mystical reason I didn't, but spent those years in study of (mostly) theosophy, reading the classics like Blavatsky & Ervast over & over again, spending my life thinking about every possible detail, cloistering at home with just a few social contacts, &c. (I said mystical & I mean it, for this created a foundation for my work that couldn't have been done in other ways without affecting the later course intensely.)

That partial isolation & extreme focusing of thought lead me eventually to a point where every thing became in my experience a part of a huge intellectual patter. That was when I lived the manasic period (years 14-21) so the process was unhindered by realized intuition that came later. But I went through it so fanatically & at the end confronted the world as a completely intellectual model that it was being living in that Asura hell the Tibetan Book of the Dead so aptly describes: every breath, every move became something that was perceived intellectually, that is, registered & analyzed - & a human mind can't (nor should) live like that. There are things that fall under the threshold of waking mind into the subconscious for a reason. The experience collapsed eventually & formed the basis of the intuitional thinking I'm using today, but it left after it a strong disdain for all kind of formal, non-intuitive rationality. Undergoing that change (from kâma-manasic to buddhi-manasic focus) also destroyed much of how my memory works; I practically learned to unlearn, & as a side effect, things that I don't really care about just don't stick anymore. In part I'm grateful for that, but for the academic study I have to do a little bit nowadays that's not helping.

So, one percent of perspiration (research) & ninety nine of inspiration (intuition) would be what I'd choose, had I that luxury. For the data bank for that intuition to work has been collected already - a part that can't be neglected. Pure intuition without anything tangible to work with can't do anything in this world of shapes & events.
Faust: "Lo contempla. / Ei muove in tortuosa spire / e s'avvicina lento alla nostra volta. / Oh! se non erro, / orme di foco imprime al suol!"
User avatar
RaktaZoci
Posts: 1429
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:32 pm
Location: Salo

Re: Research and Intuition

Postby RaktaZoci » Fri Oct 10, 2014 10:32 am

I see science as cold and uncompassionate. Only interested in facts and ruling out the rest. The visions from the concetration camps fill my mind as they were doing 'research' in 'the name of science'.

I am quite aware that my view can be proven wrong by many who are more acquainted with the subject. This is, however, my subjective view. Now don't get me wrong, this doesn't mean that I couldn't/wouldn't want to take critique.

To me science is just very uninspiring and passionless.
die Eule der Minerva beginnt erst mit der einbrechenden Dämmerung ihren Flug.
-Hegel
User avatar
Kenazis
Frater
Posts: 945
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 7:57 pm
Location: Satakunta - Limbo

Re: Research and Intuition

Postby Kenazis » Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:27 am

RaktaZoci wrote:I see science as cold and uncompassionate. Only interested in facts and ruling out the rest. The visions from the concetration camps fill my mind as they were doing 'research' in 'the name of science'.
Today we have research ethics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics, Finnish page has much more information about this, usually it's the other way around.) that's essential part of making good science. Nazis had their own rules and standards.
RaktaZoci wrote:To me science is just very uninspiring and passionless.
This is interesting to hear because for me science and occultism are indeed the most inspiring things. Occultism is maybe more what I could say as "destiny", but science is very inspiring...theoretical physics, astronomy...and of course the humanistic/social sciences like sociology and psychology.
"In darkness let me dwell, The ground shall sorrow be..."
User avatar
RaktaZoci
Posts: 1429
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:32 pm
Location: Salo

Re: Research and Intuition

Postby RaktaZoci » Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:21 pm

Kenazis wrote:
RaktaZoci wrote:To me science is just very uninspiring and passionless.

This is interesting to hear because for me science and occultism are indeed the most inspiring things. Occultism is maybe more what I could say as "destiny", but science is very inspiring...theoretical physics, astronomy...and of course the humanistic/social sciences like sociology and psychology.
I was thinking about this during the day and I realised the point of view changes depending on what is seen as science. There is a huge amount of different types of knowledge that are categorized under sciences compartment. I see science as work that is done by 'the scientist' (I realize this can and will also have numerous possibilities of being (mis)understood), who works in a clinical laboratory enviroment which is very ascetic and cold. Being a part, just a wheel, in the huge machinery.

Maybe this can explain my view a bit?
die Eule der Minerva beginnt erst mit der einbrechenden Dämmerung ihren Flug.
-Hegel

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest