I like going to uncomfortable places with my spiritual practice. I'm not sure what this is about but as soon as I get cozy with a point of view I like to begin exploring the opposite view. Especially things that make me uncomfortable seem to hold a perverse fascination for me and I am drawn to jump in there with that feeling and wriggle around in it. Usually I learn from it. Sometimes it gives me the heebie-jeebies and I flee. I think it has something to do with reconciling opposites.
The most interesting states of consciousness have emerged when apparently irreconcilable forces crashed in my inner world, hurling me to the outer limits of what I can conceptually frame. Often catastrophically collapsing everything I thought I knew and then from that rubble something strange and shiny emerges. I have got a huge amount of mileage out of magically jamming God and the Devil like this for instance, to name one dualism that I like to meddle with. The other being the atheist perspective with the theist - which as you may have noticed took the form of this recent controversial posting.
Lately it has been the attempt at reconciling scientific materialistic and animist perspectives. Reconcile is a strong word, I suppose. It really just is two parts of my own experience, both vivid and undeniable, reacting horribly to the utterly alien radiation of the other.
This has taken the form of investigating ideas which scientifically attempt to explain away, well, pretty much everything about magic, spirituality and the paranormal. This glib TED talk hits a nerve in that regard - striking at the heart of what magic and divination are all about: the emergence of meaning from pattern and how we delude ourself in that process. What if our preoccupation with sorcery really just is some cognitive defect - an evolutionary artefact? Check it out and share your thoughts. As occultists, conjurers, card readers - how do you respond to the ideas presented in this lecture?