Sorry, I changed the subject.
>What is gained by placing physical actions (such as typing) and
>psycho/telekinesis (uh, does that really happen...) in the same pot and
>calling it 'magick'?
My point was about the "mind/body problem": seems to me,
quite genuinely, if anything is magic(k)al, then mind/
body interaction is.
>And on a totally philosophical tack, to what extent is there a true
>distinction between mind and body? Why do accept this dualism
>unquestioningly?
I don't! But for those that do, they have to explain
the interaction. And the rest of us have to explain
how come there seem to be minds and bodies, if we say
there ain't. Which is where it really gets interesting,
for me. "It's just an illusion" is not an explanation.
But what is?
>Just wondering.
That's OK -- it was a good question! :-)
-- Robin (the wannabe non-dualist)