• the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    I feel like the concept of magic doesn’t become any more credible if you use the archiac spelling “magick”, and differentiating between “spiritual” vs “supernatural” is splitting hairs. It’s close enough to the same exact thing that i don’t believe a person can call bullshit on one without calling bullshit on both. If brooms and cauldrens are fake then so is Beltane.

    • kassiopaea@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      I think that you don’t think that there’s any meaningful difference between “spiritual” and "supernatural " then you’re missing the point.

      I used to be an atheist anti-christian skeptic type that didn’t understand my partner’s beliefs at all, because why have beliefs if you know they aren’t real? sugar_in_your_tea’s above quote from Equal Rites actually fits it really well.

      Your beliefs have an impact on how you act, and your acts have an impact on the world. Therefore I choose to live by a set of guiding principles and interact with the world in a way that fits what I want it to be like. The whole point is that you can only influence what you interact with, but also you never know what you’ll interact with.

      That said, I think that people who claim to be able to influence the lives of others without interacting with them directly are on ego trips.

      However, I also don’t think that anyone can say anything for certain, as we live in a universe driven by probability, where “spooky action at a distance” is an actual scientific phenomenon.

      tl;dr: Spiritual describes how people interact with the world but supernatural describes hypothetical (meta)physical phenomena.