According to the definition of magic, there are a bunch of subtle forces that permeate the cosmos; there is no way of knowing how many of these subtle forces there are and what kinds there are, but one can begin to tap into these subtle forces through a posterior intuition. One cannot know for certain that these forces exist but by trying things in the world they can begin to figure out how it works. This leads to a variety of maneuvers in order to tap into these forces, leading to a variety of black magic, red magic, white magic, and Evola’s favorite: high magic. To present standards it seems as though the positing of these forces are a flagrant denial of Ockham’s razor: positing more entities than is necessary to explain things. However, I’m not so sure. I will now argue that magic is no less plausible than recent scientific theories such as string theory. String theory is regarded by even many leading philosophers to be not simply physics but actually a form of scientific metaphysics. Indeed, the source of the principles is empirical, but what is extrapolated from those principles is beyond empirical verification. One must ask himself what is positing more extravagant entities: string theory or magic? The strings in string theory seem to be even more extravagant of entities than simply a plurality of forces that underly the cosmos.
In order to verify whether anyone is ever able to epistemically justify real magical phenomenon from experience, let’s look at a thought experiment of an extreme hypothetical situation. Lets say someone says I am going to perform a hand maneuver and then after that someone is going to show up at my door at 3:15 PM exactly and there is going to be a little red ink stain on his shirt- and that person has not shown up at your door for three years. And you perform the hand maneuver and then this actually happens. Lets say the next day, you say I am going to perform a hand maneuver and then someone is going to call me on the phone and recite 20 random words that you agree upon ahead of time. And thjen you do that and it happens. The chanc es that there is not magical phenomenon going on at this point is now probably 1 in 1 million or something like that. Let us say that then you do this 300 times over the next year and the results turn up every time. The chances that there is not something magical going on is now 1 in 300 billion or something like that. The logical positivist will now find it very likely to insert false hypotheses in order to maintain that nothing magical is going on such as that you afctually had the idea that the person was going to show up at your door in your subconsious. But the logical postivist simply attadcks the metaphhysician on grounds that are difficult to deefend through second order experience. SWe know in this hypothetical case that not only that that is not the case but that the person has the right to conclude that that is not the case.
Idealism Studies 