Acta Deceptio - Why Do We Not Believe?

[S.G]

But is there a way to get the feeling again of when you believed? Can an illusion so amaze you that even though you may know the method it simply does not matter?

What do you think?

L

It won't be the same feeling. Yes, you may get a feeling of wonder, but you certainly won't get the same feeling as if you were really fooled by magic (such as when you were a child).

 

[JasonEngland]

I agree it won't be the same feeling. As you begin to understand an effect methodologically, I think the feeling of having just witnessed the impossible gives way to feelings of nostalgia (for when you first saw the effect) and feelings of respect for the skill of the performer. Those feelings may be similar, but they're not identical.

I love to go see Mac King at Harrah's here in Las Vegas. For a long time, many of his effects fooled me badly in some way (I often had most of a given effect figured out, but not all of it). These days, I've seen Mac so many times (over 10 this year alone) that I am not fooled by anything in the show, yet I still feel that sense of awe at being in the presence of such a great performer and thinker.

I've traded "WTF?!" for "Wow, he does that so well. Isn't that great?", but it isn't the same.

If I only knew now, what I knew then....

Jason

 

[Craig Browning]

As humans, we are prone not to believe. It's within our natural inclinations. There have been many studies on how humans handle situations that are without purpose, lack logical consistency, or are plain simple. We have a desire to make 'sense' of things. When tragedy strikes, we look for a reason behind it. When something abnormal happens, we search for the normal within it. When something simple happens, we make it out to be more complex than it really is. It's a coping mechanism. When it comes to magic, we can't believe in something that defies our understanding. 'Magic' as an explanation, isn't enough for the spectator, no matter how convincing the trick may be. As humans, we wouldn't be able to cope with real magic--hence we dismiss it.

I wanted to be "classic Craig" here, but I'll not slap you that hard, just point out a few flaws in your perspective. . .

By nature humans have a need to believe and this is coming from the sciences of sociology, anthropology and a handful of other ologies out there that have studied the animal known as "Man" and it's 5,000 + year history. What you've outlined here falls more in line to a rationalist trying to write certain things off, and I really hate to word it this way but I've found it to be more true than not; but it tends to come from those that cannot create enchantment when they work -- how do you create a certain feel and sensation within your craft when you can't personally identify with it? It's impossible!

Yes, humans are inquisitive but to act on such things is rare. Most of us accept the very first explanation which, for most of the past 5 Millennia said insight has come by way of a spiritual teachers be it shaman, sage or priest; "Science" and pragmatism have only known the influence and freedom they have today as a "priority" source (at least in the Western Industrial culture) for a bit more than half a century believe it or not.

Take a look into the Scopes Monkey Trial, you'll find that one of the things at issue wasn't evolution but teaching that the Earth was spherical and not flat. . . a concept still seen as heretical by Rome, punishable by excommunication. . . and we're talking the early decades of the 20th century; yet, this was still a mind-set by the single largest religious institution in human history.

How many of you were aware of the fact that even into the early 1970's Human Behavioral Sciences like Psychiatry/Psychology, Hypnosis, etc. were still viewed by religionists as "Satanic" and "of the occult" a.k.a. EVIL?

Granted, if we look at how abused these elements have become in the past couple of decades one might suggest that there is more than one devil in this particular detail. . . man likewise being one with a base nature that can be rather usury, meaning that we will gladly paint things as we require in order to know advantage; this includes the contemporary emphasis on the issue of scholastics or, better stated, the lie that Intellect = Required Atheism (we can ignore the fact that most major scientific break-through over the past 2,500 or so years have almost all come by way of religious scholars; men and women of faith -- a belief in both, magick and miracles)

Yes, I'm a self-appointed advocate for faith/belief and humanity's right to cling to such things and reject the persistence of the analytical/cynical generation and its various gurus. I'm not saying that science is bunk and education "wrong"; rather that the evangelic zeal of the rationalist is the very thing that blinds them when it comes to understanding and witnessing genuine Magick in the world and life, and as the saying goes, "You Cannot Transmit Something You Haven't Got" -- if you can't relate to such fantasiful things as a reality, you simply cannot give your audience such an experience. I really believe this is why so many in the skeptic's community seem to be failed when it comes to a long term career as a working entertainer; they become jaded and cold with time -- calloused and thus, disconnected with the innocence that once was and from which their own enchantment about life, magic, etc. was allowed to simply be.