Forums

Posted: 03-06-2005 04:13 Post subject:

can't argue with that I guess.

Posted: 03-06-2005 04:28 Post subject:

Well, I thought that with this being a discussion of magickal practice that it would be clear my opinion that sigilisation as an isolated technique wasn't enough, would refer to magickal success. Obviously not. As for it being considered in isolation, I do believe that I did qualify the usage of sigils that I was writing about with the sentences on gnosis. If my usage of the term gnosis in this context is unfamiliar to people, then they only have to ask for an explanation.

Posted: 03-06-2005 05:34 Post subject:

Posted: 03-06-2005 05:50 Post subject:

Magickal success would naturally be whether or not your working actually worked. Of course, I realise that we can all learn from mistakes and failures, so I don't discount the value in that, but when you intend for example, to throw a dart at a bullseye but you get a double twenty you might well learn from your mistake to shift your stance, or adjust the force of your throw, but is it a success? I'm not judging anyone, people can judge themselves anyway they want, it's just in my experience, when people set out to achieve a result, their success is usually measured by the achievement of that intended result.

And this - "Really. Considering the use of sigils is what happens after you've finished reading about what other people think, not simply repeating it." - care to elaborate?

Posted: 03-06-2005 06:53 Post subject:

Posted: 03-06-2005 07:36 Post subject:

I don't think that the notion of success as I put it is unhelpful at all. There are countless examples in every day life where success lies in achieving a result. People don't take driving lessons so that can make the constant effort of driving around with an instructor - they take lessons so they can learn to drive on their own. Many individuals take college and university courses in order to achieve a result - that is where the success lies for most students in educational institution. (That is, the ones who are actually there to learn.) I'm sure that telling some kid who has just failed or underachieved in their A' levels isn't going to be consoled for not getting into University by being told "there, there, at least you put in constant effort".

I don't believe that I have made any assumption that anyone else here is less-read on a subject than myself. If you are referring to my earlier comment that if anyone wanted to know more about gnosis in that particular context then they could simply ask. Yes, I could have provided a link, but because I don't assume that anyone here is less-read on a subject than I, I also don't assume that they are unable to use a search engine or a dictionary. I did provide some examples in the form of book titles.

As for evangelising? Are you trying to say that I was evangelising?

Posted: 03-06-2005 09:40 Post subject:

Posted: 03-06-2005 10:12 Post subject:

Well, I don't know that the ultimate aim of a degree course is to produce an original piece of work in the form of a thesis or dissertation. Perhaps that might have been true once upon a time, but not so these days. That might be the goal of a select few students at undergraduate level, but the ability to really progress scholarship in an area is generally only available to postgraduate studies. Broadly speaking, at undergrad level students don't really have the opportunity to make any significant contribution to scholarship beyond the assimilation and regurgitation of existing theories, of course, this is open to criticism as this is not applicable to some areas of scholarship.

Posted: 03-06-2005 10:41 Post subject:

Posted: 03-06-2005 10:48 Post subject:

Posted: 03-06-2005 10:50 Post subject:

Posted: 03-06-2005 10:51 Post subject:

call me thick, but what's your point?

Posted: 03-06-2005 10:57 Post subject:

Hmm, not all courses, especially undergrad courses culminate in a final piece of work. There might be a dissertation component but it is generally in conjunction with other modules that might be assessed by exam or coursework. Many university tasks require the students to display understanding of underlying theories/practices related to the topic, not necessarily posit their own unique view. Personal views, which, it must be added must be supported by credible evidence, may be made at Masters and Doctorate level. On the accusation of plagiarism - for a student to be guilty of plagiarism they must copy verbatim the words of another without sourcing them, or copy the essential theories of another without sourcing them.

So academics are not scholars as well? Although, I don't disagree that learning and mastery of a discipline are exclusively the province of academics.

The books that I pointed out are not useful sources of information? Yes, I could have provide a comprehensive list of relevant URLs and texts, but again, I would expect the learned people of this board to be able to find information on their own, but the information that was provided was for any individuals who may not be overly familiar with the topic. Whilst you have already admonished me for the assumption that people here are less-well read than I, I would respond that there will be people who are very familar and those that aren't. For those already familiar, they can skip my posts - I'm not forcing anyone to read them. For those unfamiliar the summaries that you say are superfluous may well be useful for those looking for further information, as might the book details I provided.