Evidence for Thelema.

TheAdversary said:
So no problem believing in an infinity of Multiverses, or believing reality is a Computer Simulation but you do have issues with this?
You do realize that using Multiverse theory, you're almost, but not quite, capable of proving that Lord Xenu exists?
The only reason you prefer those theories is because they're 'sciency', but without a single shred of evidence that means nothing. Just a cultural leftover.
That's already hypocritical, and laughing is just a natural way of getting rid of ideas you don't want to know about in your head. The Gay Science, remember?
But now I'm presenting actual, physical, evidence. Against Materialism mind you, not against the Science of the Physical World.
Let's talk about the evidence, please.
Click to expand...

I do not know what you are responding to here, but the infinity of multiverses AS ONE POSSIBILITY is mathematically established but not real world evidenced in any way so... No, reality is not a computer simulation but some who play with philosophy like to play with it as philosophical. Not my thing. With that kind of idea, why mayn't we all be just dreams in a small egg sitting in the center of an otherwise empty but infinite universe waiting on a late bus?
 
Leaving us to ponder: If the Universe is empty except for the egg and us and infinite then where is the damn bus and why the hell are we wasting time waiting for it. These important things should be being studied. Anyone seen that Crowley kid in here?????
 
fuelair said:
Leaving us to ponder: If the Universe is empty except for the egg and us and infinite then where is the damn bus and why the hell are we wasting time waiting for it. These important things should be being studied. Anyone seen that Crowley kid in here?????
Click to expand...

I think he's in the kitchen with Thelma . . . No wait. . . . sorry . . . that was Dinah . . . nevermind. :o
 
Well, since nobody is able to interpret this Thelema thing, except people who have studied it for a lifetime, perhaps you could enlighten us with exactly how Thelema can be tested to perform better than conventional science?
 
TheAdversary said:
I was saying that the Slave/Master morality theory is easier to understand ... well, that's false. Understanding this theory properly requires
study, submission. Submission to the Universe, that is. First there is the Sacrifice of the Priest, to attain to the Ultimate Power. This basically
means a readiness to be absolutely destroyed. And, from Liber 418 :
Originally Posted by Liber 418
Search, therefore, if there be yet one drop of blood that is not gathered into the cup of Babylon the Beautiful, for in that little pile of dust,
if there could be one drop of blood, it should be utterly corrupt; it should breed scorpions and vipers, and the cat of slime.​

If the smallest assumption remains, you're not truly sceptical. The sacrifice of Blood is the sacrifice of Thought to Scepticism.
The book however hints at some immaterial Purely Sceptical position.

From the Study, comes the Law. And it is because of the Law that Master Morality is just. Otherwise, you get a defective leader. And all throughout
history, that's all we ever saw. This is why the Master is so impopular ...
Click to expand...

I cannot hope to understand the text when I cannot even understand the numbering system. Are you sure you are quoting Liber 418? When I search for your citation, I find Liber 30 - Cry of the 11th Aethyr.

Anyway, you seem very, very happy with your insight into the writings of Mr. Crowley. I am glad for you.

If you can show that this knowledge is helpful or useful in any way, I may take an interest in it. Until then I will just assume that it is a pleasant fiction that many people find enjoyable.
 
Agatha said:
Post #31 seems to discuss paradoxes of maths and geometry. My reading about Thelema (which admittedly has been brief, of necessity) has been much more about free will and Crowley's moral philosophy. I accept that Thelema may well be correct about the maths and geometry, but many religions or philosophies of life have some things correct - that doesn't make everything contained therein correct also.

The thing is, we get this kind of argument quite often. It's often couched in forms like "you believe x, but x is absurd, therefore y is true". Quite often, the x is not something that is held to be true (like multiverse or simulation theory, both of which are hypotheticals), and further and more importantly, disproving x does not advance y at all. The truth or otherwise of y depends on the evidence, and that's what you seem to be lacking so far in this thread.

Saying that Thelema is more plausible than two things which are currently just hypothetical ideas does nothing to advance Thelema.
Click to expand...
Thelema appears to have been an attempt by Crowley to create a cult around his beliefs and support him after his break with the Golden Dawn. Large chunks were copied from other religions and beliefs.
Certainly his later use of the cult was very akin to Hubband and Scientology.
 
TheAdversary said:
This post got moved a couple of times, because the moderators didn't think it was relevant. It is because it contains evidence for the existence
of 'occult' phenomena. The last time I posted it, it was in response to someone who tried to ridicule Thelema, just to show that there's more to
Thelema than 'hogwash'.

I can provide evidence for the 'occult' as well. (Hint : Show me the money!!!)
The point is that there are remarks in this revealed document, Liber 418, that speak of the relation between contradiction and continuity
and Zeno's Arrow Paradox. Much of this knowledge was beyond what was known at the time and certainly beyond Crowley's knowledge, as Crowley himself
acknowledges many times in the Book; The communicating entity also says this over and over. 'utterly beyond thine understanding'
The Book was revealed after the performance of Sex Magick Rituals. The fact that it's communicating knowledge beyond the capabilities of the
receiver proves the communicating entity legit, in this sort of Operation.

Let's start with Achilles and the Tortoise. Achilles is very fast, so the Tortoise is given a head start in their little competition.
Now, whenever Achilles moves, the Tortoise moves as well. Slower maybe, but he still moves. And since there's never a moment where Achilles moves and the
Tortoise doesn't advance his position, from this Zeno concluded that Achilles could never overtake the Tortoise. And since there's obviously no such
problem in the real world, you have a paradox. So what's wrong? Measure is improperly defined. Measure or lenght, area and volume, cannot be defined
by summing points on the real line. A line might be composed of an infinite number of points, you cannot define the length of a line in this way without
running into paradox. A proper measure function, that obeys the rules of summation, needs to be defined. Then the Achilles/Tortoise problem disappears.
There's also another way to remove the paradox using smooth infinitesimal analysis, where a point doesn't have zero measure, (which is the source of the
paradox, that a point has dimension zero,) but infinitesimal measure. And summing points as infinitesimals is an integral, obeying the rules of a proper
measure.
(For those of you interested in my Religious theory, you might want to check out Liber 418 by Aleister Crowley, The Cry of the 5th Aethyr.
The Vision of the Arrow therein described is a version of Zeno's Arrow Paradox, but whereas the paradox can be resolved by relaxing the law of excluded
middle (smooth infinitesimal analysis), the Vision describes a higher problem of the continuum to be resolved by relaxing the law of no contradiction.)

Later in the discussion I wrote this :

The physical sciences are now becoming so nonsensical, they really can't laugh at Scientologists any more. That would be almost, but not quite,
completely hypocritical of them. And now Crowley's system actually has more evidence going for it.
Are there any books about Magical Simulation Programmers talking about interesting Philosophical or Mathematical issues that weren't known before?
(And before you think I believe in Angels or Gods, I don't. I think the further step in understanding the Universe will turn out to require
Aesthetics, so the Deities are like literary devices. I'm presenting a new Logic Theory.)

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

You lost me after the first paragraph. If something communicated doesn't make sense how does that prove it's an entity? It could be unconscious jibberish like people do when they talk in their sleep.


I don't get the point of the Paradox of Achilles and the Tortoise. If the Tortoise is moving slower than Achilles, but always moves when Achilles moves, the Tortoise will never catch Achilles. As for Achilles catching up with Tortoise, nothing in that story said anything about Achilles back tracking. I don't get why it's a paradox at all unless they are both traveling in a circle, which also wasn't mentioned.

What new logic theory are you presenting because I must have missed it.
 
Last edited:
Seems like this talk of Thelema is almost meant to be deliberately obfuscatory from both the quotes I've seen from Crowley's book and TheAdversary's uselessly vague attempts to explain something about them. Seems about as sensible to me as the people who try and extract meaning from Nostradamus's quatrains.
 
Jodie said:
I don't get the point of the Paradox of Achilles and the Tortoise. If the Tortoise is moving slower than Achilles, but always moves when Achilles moves, the Tortoise will never catch Achilles. As for Achilles catching up with Tortoise, nothing in that story said anything about Achilles back tracking. I don't get why it's a paradox at all unless they are both traveling in a circle, which also wasn't mentioned.
Click to expand...

You're right. There's no paradox at all. Zeno didn't understand how infinitesimals summed up. He's describing a situation where Achilles is slowing down as he approaches the tortoise, perhaps because he knows Hector has a blue shell.

I guess you could also make a case that he's describing a function with an upper limit; but it certainly isn't describing a case where Achilles is running at a constant rate. It's not a "paradox", it's just incorrectly understood.

I don't think that's a knock against Zeno given that this is probably the earliest surviving speculation about sums of infinite nonzero numbers, but it's like seeing modern people puzzled by "paradoxes" in a flat-earth cosmos. It's not a paradox; it's an argument the assumptions are incorrect.
 
Jodie said:
.........I don't get the point of the Paradox of Achilles and the Tortoise. If the Tortoise is moving slower than Achilles, but always moves when Achilles moves, the Tortoise will never catch Achilles.......
Click to expand...

You've got that the wrong way around. The "paradox" is that Achilles can never catch the tortoise because it's been set up such that all Achilles can do is halve the gap between himself and the tortoise. In other words, there is no paradox at all, just a word-game. Which, knowing the thread author as we do, should come as no surprise.
 
Last edited:
I think time could be better spent on something a little more concrete. That's 15 minutes of life the OP will never get back.
 
Many some time around 1970, I got a packet of something called "Patriotic Rolling Papers" whose package had stars and stripes on it, and the following legend inside (which I wrote down because even then I had a nose for the ponderous and sententious):

"Love is our law - truth is our worship -form is our manifestation -conscience is our guide - peace is our shelter - nature is our companion - order is our attitude - beauty and perfection is our life."

I wonder if the authors of that little screed were reading Crowley, or the other way around. Roll enough fatties with that stuff and not only won't you catch the tortoise, you won't even remember which way he went. It could explain a lot.
 
I might turn that into a hand embroidered sampler to hand down to my grandchildren.
 
Wow, this whole Thelema claim represents a new standard of word salad. Not only is the claim unclear, the evidence in support of the claim appears to be unrelated to the topic.

Amusing though, but not in a positive way.
 
Help me out people..............have we actually yet seen any of the evidence mentioned in the thread title?
 
John Nowak said:
You're right. There's no paradox at all. Zeno didn't understand how infinitesimals summed up. He's describing a situation where Achilles is slowing down as he approaches the tortoise, perhaps because he knows Hector has a blue shell.

I guess you could also make a case that he's describing a function with an upper limit; but it certainly isn't describing a case where Achilles is running at a constant rate. It's not a "paradox", it's just incorrectly understood.

I don't think that's a knock against Zeno given that this is probably the earliest surviving speculation about sums of infinite nonzero numbers, but it's like seeing modern people puzzled by "paradoxes" in a flat-earth cosmos. It's not a paradox; it's an argument the assumptions are incorrect.
Click to expand...

That's how paradoxes work. It's not that the thing itself is possible or impossible, it's that the logic of the time doesn't work to explain the possibility of it. Zeno didn't have calculus, but still knew that a person could catch up to a tortoise.

The Banach-Tarski paradox is the same way. You can't actually take a sphere and turn it into two identical spheres. Conservation of Mass says so. We just don't have the understanding to mathematically prove that impossibility.
 
So getting back on topic.

If I read your book, and study it as you do, how will my life be different? Will their be any external evidence that I have gained knowledge - will I make better decisions or work toward noticeably different goals? Can I tap into powers I am not yet aware of? What can I expect to get out of Crowley's book?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom