The problem of magic—or how gibberish becomes efficacious action (original) (raw)
Related papers
Ritual, the magical perspective; efficacy and the search for inner meaning
A deep study of the magical aspects of ritual, both anthropological, social as wel a psychological. Various models about how rituals works, how the mind deals with magic, how rituals help to overcome time and space limitations, can help in transformation. The importance of rituals as social, transformational, but also as magical acts. New theories about ritual efficacy, the nature of time, and how the mind deals with rituals. Endorsed by prof. Stan Krippner and Prof. Cees Hamelink. 820 pages, totally original vision on ritual.
The Principles of Ritual Logic
International Journal of Criminology and Sociology, 2018
The practice of occultism is an alternative phenomenon in respect of the ordinary modalities of the dominant religious institutions in a given historical period. On occasion, however, this practice is not confined to the context of deviance but can lead to the commission of criminal actions. It is therefore useful to highlight the means of reasoning, even if seemingly incomprehensible, which forms the basis of the accomplishment of magical acts. Contrary to what one may think, the world of occultism is not something improvised and insensate, yet it is characterised by principles that govern what could be defined as a "ritual logic", endowed with its own peculiar internal coherence that guide the actions of those who still practice magic today. Considering primarily the occultist writings and the history of magic, this article seeks to identify such principles in order to begin to comprehend not only one of the most historically representative domains of deviance, but also the motivations of the offenders and victims involved in ritual crimes.
I started with a sceptical mind about the use of the term 'magic' in cultural an-thropology because of its often deprecatory use. The terms 'magic' and 'religion' are ill-defined and of doubtful use for the categorization of observed cultural phenomena. We should, therefore, trace the distinct cultural systems in each cul-ture separately before we impose modern western terms on it. James Frazer's co-lonial view on the difference between religion and magic and Karl Heinz Ratschow's theological view, which proposes a principal distinction between Christian experience of the 'Holy' and other forms of beliefs, are criticised under the focus of Wittgenstein's Remarks on Frazer's Golden Bough and his work On Certainty. Wittgenstein's remark: "A whole mythology is deposited in our lan-guage" leads towards his conception of the world-picture "in which we live and think and act". Some anthropologists' view, that magic is utilitarian and religion is not, led to the proposal of a new theory of magic as Prescientific Science. As such, magic is tied to religion by its central idea of causation by gods or other in-telligent beings. The idea of the cause as will survived even in modern philoso-phy and might be responsible for modern esoteric beliefs.
Ancient Magic: Then and Now, edited by Attilio Mastrocinque, Joseph E. Sanzo, Marianna Scapini , 2020
The paper enters into the long-held scholarly debate over the heuristic value of the rubic “magic” for the study of antiquity. In particular, I deconstruct the recent approaches of David Aune and Bernd-Christian Otto, both of whom (in the spirit of Jonathan Z. Smith) have called for the universal replacement of the rubric magic with more specific terms for ancient religion (e.g., amulet, healing, cursing). Although I fully acknowledge the problems with magic that Aune and Otto identify, I contend that their approaches to religion – including their disaggregating methodology – are likewise susceptible to deconstructive analysis. Contrary to Aune and Otto, I further argue that magic does in fact possess explanatory power for certain research questions pertaining to antiquity. We must thus balance the occasional need for deconstructing magic with the occasional need for depolying magic as a heuristic device. In conclusion, I highlight that this balanced approach will require that we adopt a more flexible stance toward scholarly categories and taxonomies more generally. You can also find a more developed version of my argument in my recent monograph, Joseph E. Sanzo, Ritual Boundaries: Magic and Differentiation in Late Antique Christianity (Oakland, CA: University of California Press, 2024), pp. 8–11 (the entire monograph is available for free online: https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520399181/ritual-boundaries).