Are Magicians more into just buying downloads and gimmicks these days vs. reading literature?

Sep 29, 2018
94
48
As fun as it is to go in circles with you, I really just don't have the energy today.
Wait...we were playing all these months?

NOBODY EVER TOLD ME! (+_+)

Also, the e-book sales do not take into account the e-books on wattpad and the likes.

1) The vast majority of people doing magic are not serious magicians. Nothing wrong with casual performers, mind you, that's just how it is. Most of them haven't invested the time and energy into seriously studying magi
Now you're just kinda dissing downloads...not fair, is it?

Who cares?
Hopefully the OP.

Which is how most of our conversations go - you make an assumption based on your feelings, and I correct that assumption with facts, then you try to find a way to make it seem like you were correct anyway.
You remember our previous convos on threads, that makes me emotional with happiness...

PS (sorta):- Why this annoyance Sir? I just stated something which I agree wasn't clarified enough (a round of applause for the gallant loser == me. Thank you.) but well, what I really didn't like and made me feel bad about your response claiming how you always do the research and not me (which indicates that you're really secure of your arguments btw, I applaud you for that)...well, I really disliked the fact that...

NOBODY TOLD ME THAT WE WERE PLAYING!!! (+_+) (+_+)
 

RealityOne

Elite Member
Nov 1, 2009
3,744
4,076
New Jersey
All I wanna say is, the downloads and video stuff is on it's way to becoming the modern day library, and if the fact that libraries are closing down or becoming more back dated or deserted not true

I think that libraries have a different problem. Young people (under 30) just don’t use them. My sense is that is because they don’t like to read. Even I (over 30 by a little bit) don’t use them. Why? Because I just buy the book. I’m not talking about magic books - but regular books (currently reading one on the communications among Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt during WWII). I don’t like reading on a Kindle. It just isn’t emotionally satisfying. I prefer parchment and papayrus like in the good old days but have to settle for acid free, fade resistant paper (although The Aretology of Vanni Bossi was a bibliophile’s joy).

However, the wealth of knowledge that is put into books, especially magic books, is tremendous. It is much like the allegory of the cave: looking online you only see a shadow of what truly exists.

Now you're just kinda dissing downloads...not fair, is it?

If someone says ice cream is a nice treat but you can’t live healthy by just eating ice cream, is that dissing ice cream? No. It is just saying that ice cream has its benefits but for substantive nutrition, you need to eat more than ice cream.

Similarly, downloads and videos have their usefulness. However, to become a serious magician you will need to go beyond those downloads. Anyone can learn a bunch of tricks and perform them successfully from downloads and even from YouTube exposure videos (which I strongly disapprove). BUT, to go to the next level , I think you have to follow the advice of my buddy Ludwig:

“Don’t only practice your art, but force your way into its secrets, for it and knowledge can raise men to the divine.”

That knowledge and those secrets are cleverly hidden in books.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CWhite

WitchDocIsIn

Elite Member
Sep 13, 2008
5,877
2,945
It occurs to me there's a really nice library in my city. I was planning to include them in my next round of marketing efforts.

I confess, I bought Aretology because it's a beautiful book, not for the content. Though the content is also quite good. I have several books on my shelves (Separate shelves for fiction, non-fiction, and magic-related) that were purchased because the book itself was just beautiful.
 

Josh Burch

Elite Member
Aug 11, 2011
2,966
1,101
Utah
This is an extremely common misconception. "Visual learner" does not mean "learn from visuals". Someone who is a visual learner is someone who sorts information in their own mind via images, charts, etc. This is opposed to someone who is kinetic - association information with feelings and tangible things - and someone who is auditory - associating information with sounds.

The kicker with all of this is that "visual learners" don't really exist at all. That is to say, we all can learn visually, or with any of the many other ways that our brain takes in information.

Howard Gardner's theory of Multiple Intelligences has largely been misinterpreted and misrepresented, and it is his work that educators point to when they call students "visual" or "kinesthetic" learners. I have a Master's degree in Education and his work on learning styles is constantly misused by educators to explain things that it was never meant to explain.

If you like to learn things from video that's great, but that doesn't make you a "visual learner" and it doesn't mean that you learn "better from video".

Here's Howard Gardner explaining the problems people have had interpreting his theory: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...e-not-learning-styles/?utm_term=.e99900a7fb31

And here's an article in Psychology Today that disputes the same ideas: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...11/the-illusory-theory-multiple-intelligences
 
  • Like
Reactions: JoshL8
Searching...
{[{ searchResultsCount }]} Results