|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:00 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:01 pm
 |
|
|
|
Sophist In another thread I've seen argument about the definition or energy and its use within a mundane context and a magical context, and I think it was suggested that it should be called by another name in in the context of things like magic or auras and other such things.
Not entirely. The ability to do work in a magical context would still be called energy. The issue was referring to things that were not just the ability to do work but had actual form and structure, yet lacked mass or other elements expected of matter.
Folk often call that stuff energy, but the word doesn't apply.
Quote: Would the new name depend on what framework you're working in?
Of course.
Quote: How can one explain something that may or may not be verifiable or measurable except by intuition?
Metaphor is usually the best way. It is very difficult though.
Quote: How does your path view this split, if it does exist?
In my situation, empirical and spiritual are not split. There's just a threshold of understanding and testing that science passes and spiritual concerns don't. The physical and spiritual split isn't even really a split at all. There's no physical distance between them, just conceptual distance.
As in, an Essence is in your Mouse right now. There may even be several of them in your Mouse, including some hangers on. Ether's reflections represents two states of things, not really places. The interconnection between the states of things is the distance in the Ether.
Alternately, your Mouse could lack an Essence entirely right now. It could currently be pulling a realignment due to its lack. When those interconnections loosen up completely, the distance becomes infinite and an Essence is considered unaligned. We call it "breaking the mirror" |
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:44 pm
|
|
|
 |
Quote: Would the new name depend on what framework you're working in?
Yes, I tend to think that inevitably everything is "energy" but depending on the framework, or whom I am working with I would probably use multiple definitions based on the type and consistency of the energy.
The different types of energy interact with each other in different ways and aren't very easily mutable so I tend to use different phrases to refer to different types. It generally depends on the person I'm talking to.
Quote: How can one explain something that may or may not be verifiable or measurable except by intuition?
Well I'm pretty sure that it is verifiable but its not verifiable by normal means. Spiritual energy seems to be verifiable and even measurable to some degree but you have to develop different "instruments" to verify it.
As I tend to conceptualize energy as change, or psychic energy by the amount of change or influence that a person has this can be in some ways measured by taking careful observation of the flow of energy through a single point. This though is hard to measure and hard to translate into anything useful. Though in theory quite possible.
It would require alot of effort in learning to differentiate different flows of energy and someone with a decent amount of control as to how much energy they are using etc. I haven't found anyone whose willing to go through this slow tedious process.
Theory though, it might be worth testing. I can get decent approximations that other people can second as long as we can arrive at a standard at which to compare answers (if we agree what a 3 would be, a 4, etc.)
As to how to verify its existence in a dimension which for the most part is only very slightly affected by it is quite difficult. Its pretty difficult to change a physical object to the point where there is a physical difference in the object though not impossible. I would suggest trying to find a medium thats easier to work with or is more maleable
Quote: I am also questioning how this would fit into my own path. The ancient Egyptians did not feel that all supernatural things happened on another plane or in an otherworld. The divine manifested itself in nature all the time, to the point that a statue could be the vessel in which the deity dwells for a time. Natural phenomena could be explained by divine manifestation, such as a storm being the wrath of Amun. In that case there is no split in empirical/spiritual. They exist as a necessary duality that may seem contradictory but actually make up a totality.
My interpretation would be that the Gods would be very skilled and would know how to manipulate the energy here to a point where a difference in compositional framework wouldn't really matter.
Pretty much, they understood what an Atom was. The forces needed to alter them. They had perception of it to the point wherein they could understand the interconnectiong. Thus they could alter forces that we would consider impossible quite easily because they were old, they had a greater knowledge. Also part of the facility with working with physical substance is Due to a connection with the physical substance.
I theorize that this is also why poltergeists get stronger with time. The better you understand a particular substance and how to work with it the easier it is for you to change it. You saturate it with your will.
This explains why certain beings might have a natural affinity for certain substances.
The soul would be a focal point from which change occures. This point would be independent of a body. Thus it could dwell anywhere but there may be paths of change that are easier for the focal point to work with.
Its a complicated framework and takes time to understand but it does a pretty good job of explaining how spirits might work.
Quote: How does your path view this split, if it does exist?
My path views it as an ever widening gap as things become more and more "set" here. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
