…magic is firmly grounded in real life and scary for any ordinary person. I think that people, who are for real sit calmly and go on about thier own magical business, not wasting thier energy on speculations.

Later, you added:

…in-depth study differs a lot from “theoretical speculation”

There is a lot of focus in your comments on what is ‘real’, and you spend some time attacking speculative thought.

Plus there is a practical part to many teachings and things which are to be understood from practice only. It’s like speaking a language.

I am not talking about studying or engaging in a practice, and my question may have been confusing in that regard. I am talking about scrutinising the underlying beliefs of many practices to draw a sense of its essence.

We are not baking bread — we are asking ourselves “What is flour? What is water? What is yeast?” All of these things can be used in many ways, and all the uses look and act differently, but they are still flour, and water, and yeast.

(Of course, the questions we are asking are a bit more complicated than that. We are questing after the very nature of truth itself.)

Will becoming a baker, engaging in the practice of baking, lead you to know what flour is? Certainly… in one way. Becoming a farmer will let you know how to grow grain, becoming a miller will let you mill the grain… but what is the flour? What is the essence of it? What is the “transcendant quality” of it?

Now, you may be happy with being a baker, or a farmer, or a miller. You may not care about the “essence” of it.

Some people do, and many, many more volumes will be written by their likes.

Though perhaps that’s not what you mean when you say “small talk” with a spiritual flavour added.

I got your books in the mail yesterday, thanks a lot!

. /\ .

I find discordians and chaos magicians and such interesting, but not so interesting as to spend a lot of time with them. This site is the closest I come to that stuff, and it suits me fine

Interesting, since I don’t consider myself a Discordian or “chaote”. Hehe. I hate that word. Choads!

Anyway… yes…

Supposing that two sites share a common aim or set of interests, cross-pollination is partly social (you’ll visit sites recommended or hosted by friendlies) and partly image (you’ll post on sites that are safe and encourage discussion). The opposite effects come into play at times - friendlies saying that sites are bad, feuding between personalities, the perception that it isn’t safe to post or discussion isn’t open to anyone.

Though why social systems work the way they do is a very difficult question, and painting the answers in such broad strokes makes me sound like a flakey politician…

…so I skip to my own questions after reading Pam’s comments:

Pam: Do you feel that studying the “philosophy” of any practice is inherently wasteful? Is it a waste of time to worry about what is truth?

so like communities instead of information sites?

Yeah, I guess that’s what I find more interesting is the social aspect of it.

lessee . . . .

well, the old stand-bys: the subgenii and the discordians.

maybe a good place to start would simply be listing them! there’s key23, barbelith, disinfo, etc. i’d bet with the visitors you get here you could have a pretty comprehensive list in no time.

Yeah, I agree. Let’s list the major ones. Those are a good start. What else could we include:

- Otherkin community on LiveJournal
- Pagan community on LJ
- Various gnostics groups on the web, etc

I also should say that I’m more interested in having this be a map of online alt-religion communities - rather than like a historical summary, yadda yadda.

channel null has an excellent (and long) overview of modern Satanic groups and their parapolitical ties, in his series:
Skeleton Keys to the Global Narco-Oil-Pedo-Trafficking Pirate Empire