Skeptomancy

[Ian Young]

Paul Duggan presents us with a new school of magick...

> Skeptomancy:
> 
> Beliefs are powerful. Other peoples beliefs especially so.
> 	Minor charge: fake a supernatural event so that one person
> believes something unnatural occurred. Or, convince someone that a
> supernatural event has a scientific explanation by presenting at least
six
> pieces of compelling evidence per point of unnatural hardening.
			[...snip...]
> 	Major charge: fake a supernatural event so that a small audience  (10+
> people) believes something unnatural occurred. Alternatively,
> therapeutically or otherwise remove a failed unnatural check by
convincing
> them what they believe has a rational explanation. 

Well, here's where I have a little problem.  The Skeptomancer is walking
both sides of the fence -- he can either fake an event, or expose a fake
event for a charge.  I'm inclined to suggest that, if someone is able to
generate a magickal effect due to his personal obsessions, then he needs to
decide what he's really obsessed with -- pranking or fraud-busting.

> 	Significant charge: fake a supernatural event so that a large
> audience (1000+) is convinced something unnatural occurred.
Alternatively,
> convince an adept of the rational explanation for his powers. Prove the
> Naked Goddess tape is a fake. Convince a clergyman that God doesn't
exist.

Hmm...you're missing a fraud here.  How about my personal favorite, the
Piltdown Man?  A skull and jawbone found in a quarry in Piltdow, England
was long hailed among the scientific community around the globe as "the
missing link" of human evolution -- a human-like cranium with an ape-like
jaw!  Well, as it turns out, it really was just that -- a human skull that
someone had buried along with an ape's jawbone (an orangutan, if I recall
correctly).  Major embarrassment to paleo-anthropology.

> 	Taboo: using magic. Any time you spend charges, all other charges
> you have are immediately lost.

Now, this makes me think of the suggestion of creating a rules set for
stage magicians and technicians who are skilled enough to use mundane means
to create effects rivalling and surpassing those of magickal adepts.  Why
bother building and collecting charges if you don't really need them? 
After all, reality and simple gullibility are your friends!

> 	Potential methods of faking and convincing: hypnosis,
> psychological warfare, administering psychotropic drugs. Brainwashing
> techniques (sleep deprivation, isolation, etc). Don't forget that
personal
> crises, (death of loved ones, etc) can cause someone to revaluate their
> closely held beliefs.

Again, why rely on magick at all?  Please don't take this as a negative
criticism.  I'm simply projecting my own desire to see a non-magickal
"school" of reality-busters out there, dukes whose obesssion is kicking the
collective asses of magickal adepts by up-staging them.  These blokes could
be either world-class frauds and con men, or they could be stage
magician/hoax-killers like Houdini and James Randi.  
(Say, I know Greg was hailing this as a great idea a while back, but who
was it who initially suggested it?  Rick?)

All in all, I really quite like your idea, but I'm not convinced that
skepticism needs to become a magickal path.  If you feel it does, you need
to decide if they are truly skeptics, or if they are spoofers -- I'm fear
that magick is too demanding to embrace conflicting paradigms.

Gone,
Ian