The Real Nature of Magic

           When most people think of the word “magic”, they think of that supernatural force so often portrayed in pop culture and children’s stories.  This version of magic essentially involves forces outside the realm of the scientifically understood order of nature, and the ways in which living creatures are affected by and are able to manipulate them.  This makes for great story telling.  After all, when you’re not limited the normal laws of nature, pretty much anything goes.  But rarely will you meet someone who will admit they actually believe this sort of magic exists in the real world.  In our society its primary function is as a device to help us escape the confines of the real world, if only briefly, for the benefit of entertainment and enjoyment.  Magic has personally never meant anything more than this to me, and I’ve moved away from it even more as I’ve grown older and found more interest in entertainment and art that closely represents real life.  But that doesn’t mean I don’t believe in magic.  That’s because the word “magic” means many things, and has meant many things throughout history.  And I think they all have something in common.

            First, there is, of course, the supernatural implications of “magic”.  15^th century philosopher Giordano Bruno wrote about the many definitions of the term used during his time, many of which related to the perceived ability to perform actions that tapped into a higher order of nature, such as connecting with spirits (Bruno and De Lucca 105).  During his time, the Catholic Church was persecuting individuals based on the unfounded notion that they were performing ritual magic declared as witchcraft that was doing the work of the Devil (Mackay 548).  During the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries, members of the magical society the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, featuring many prominent thinkers of the time, practiced and studied a variety supernatural rituals, including divination and alchemy (Cranmer and Billings).  Many of these historical versions of magic have manifested in the stories and tales of magic we see today.  Despite what many have believed, and what some now still believe, the supernatural aspects of these beliefs have no empirical proof of existence, and have no place in our scientific understanding of the universe.

            However, many of these systems of belief have had deeper meanings behind them that have relevance even if you don’t believe in the supernatural aspects.  Much like many religions throughout history, which have used non-provable claims about the order of nature to advocate for codes of morals, magical belief systems have often used similar claims to represent methods of improving oneself and the universe.  Writer Alice Bailey, for example, used the term white magic to refer to forces that can be utilized by people to aid in personal growth, help extend consciousness in the universe, and lead the world towards an age of peace and enlightenment (Bailey 12).  Whether the practices she outlines to do this actually work may be questionable, but, viewed from the right angle, her version of magic can be helpful in finding inner peace no matter what you believe. 

            Then there’s the fact that “magic” doesn’t always refer to the supernatural.  Bruno referred to what was commonly known as “natural magic” to describe “wondrous things” that can be done simply by manipulating regular powers of nature, such as in chemistry and medicine (Bruno and De Lucca 105).  After all, haven’t we all used the word to describe something that that amazes us or has special meaning to us, even if there’s a perfectly logical explanation for its cause?  Randall Auxier, in his essay on Led Zeppelin and magic, describes the way in which this type of magic can be created by ordinary people.  He uses an example of playing an instrument and getting so into the zone that you are able to improvise incredible combinations of notes without having to think them out.  This type of magic is caused by the will, but is not necessarily logically understood at the time (Auxier 119).   In short, if it amazes you and feels like magic, then it is magic, and we can all be magicians.     

            An underlying aspect of essentially all definitions of magic is that it creates a sense of wonder and amazement that such a force or thing could exist.  For some people this has been found in what they believe to be the supernatural.  For the rest of us who don’t believe in such a thing, there is still plenty of magic in the universe.  From the astounding beauty of Earth’s natural landscape to the small wonders of everyday life, it’s been all around us all along.             

Works Cited

Auxier, Randall. "Magic Pages and Mythic Plants." Led Zeppelin and Philosophy All Will Be                      Revealed. Ed. Scott Calef. Chicago: Open Court, 2009. Print.

Bailey, Alice. A Treatise on White Magic, Or, The Way of the Disciple. Eastford: Martino Fine,    2012. Print.

Bruno, Giordano, and Robert De. Lucca. Cause, Principle, and Unity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge             UP, 1998. Print.

Cranmer, Steven, and Albert Billings. "The Golden Dawn FAQ." The Golden Dawn FAQ. 1 Dec.     1999. Web. 22 Oct. 2015.

Mackay, Christopher S. Malleus Maleficarum. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2006. Print.

The Ethics of Eliciting Information from Living Beings

              In today’s day and age, we see a constant flow and exchange of information like never seen before in history.  Much of this information lies literally at our fingertips.  Questions concerning everything from current events to history and science can often easily and fairly accurately be answered with a quick Google search.  But beyond this general access to hoards of information, our ability to receive information directly from each other has also become oftentimes instantaneous, through email, texting, and similar functions.  But this environment has also created ethical dilemmas, as it is also often possible to receive information from others without their consent.  A controversial topic has become internet privacy, and the ability of strangers, companies, and even the government to access people’s personal information that they may not want to be available.  But the notion that obtaining information from others can be immoral is nothing new.  Throughout history, people have found enumerable ways to obtain information from others, oftentimes through force.  A prime example is the Inquisition, during which the Roman Catholic Church used elaborate techniques of torture and interrogation to attempt to elicit admissions of heresy from suspects (Mackay 548).  Today, certain practices of gaining information from others have incited major controversy, such as the US Government’s use of enhanced interrogation techniques with terrorist suspects, and the NSA’s collecting of people’s private information.  The concept could even be broadened to include obtaining information from creatures other than humans, which can be morally questionable in some forms, such as animal testing.  The examples stated above are, of course, extreme examples of gaining information from living beings, but it’s important to look at these to realize that even they are not black and white in terms of morality.  Therefore, it’s necessary to think more broadly to determine the ethics of related situations that have consequence in our own lives.               

When considering the ethics of eliciting information from people and other creatures, it is first important to understand why the practices involved can be immoral.  Probably the vast majority of the time, it is not immoral. We go about our lives asking people questions multiple times a day, mostly with good intentions, or at least with no result that harms any other beings.  However, there are obvious ways in which eliciting information can quite harmful to others (and I say “information” rather than “truth”, because when someone receives information, there is no way to know for sure that it is true, and though the person may believe it and act as if it’s true, it may be quite far from the actual truth).  Overall, we can say that if an action has a net negative result among all affected parties, it is immoral.  Within this rule, there are two general ways that eliciting information from living beings can be immoral.  The first involves the process itself of eliciting information and any direct harm that results from it.  An obvious example would be torture.  During the “witch hunts” of the Inquisition, inquisitors would seek out women they believed to be carrying out the will of the Devil through witchcraft, and use torture techniques to elicit a confession from them (Mackay 548).  These methods, which were obviously harmful to the women involved, seem quite immoral to us today, especially as experts now say that the accusations of crimes attributed to the women have virtually no truth to them (Mackay 32).  The second way that eliciting information can be immoral involves the results of that information being obtained.  An example might be if an enemy of the US cajoled someone to leak classified documents, which were then used to carry out a terrorist attack.

            There are many more ways that the process or results of eliciting information from a living thing can be immoral, but the morality of these is not always so clear cut.  Even with extreme examples, there are often strong arguments on each side.  In the case of torture, a fair question is, if it prevents more suffering than it causes, then can it be worth it?  The same goes for government spying and animal testing, which can have perfectly good intentions.  Rules should be in place to regulate this type of thing to make sure it is not abused, but there is no overall rule of whether each of these is overall good or bad.  For this reason, the ethics of eliciting information from living creatures should be thought of just like any other ethical dilemma.  Simply put, if there is good reason to believe that the action will do more good than harm, then it makes sense to take that action.  Of course, even the Catholic Church had their own belief that they were doing their part to thwart the plans of Satan during the Inquisition (Mackay 33), but that is the nature of ethics.  We’re all limited by own beliefs of what is good and bad, so we just have to do the best we can.         

Works Cited

Mackay, Christopher S. Malleus Maleficarum. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2006. Print.