OccultForum.org

This is not a trollpost (I'm sure that's exactly, what a troll would say)

But honestly, why are there so many bad books about the occult?

Also and in connection to the first. Why does so many books have the facts scrambled? Even highly respected authors makes inaccurate claims, historical error and such.

And thirdly why are there so many books about the occult like "viking magic", "fairy moon magic", "Native american Tarot", "Abraham Lincoln - Secret Alien" and so on.

To speak to the most general point first, there are bad books in every subject. There were published and scholarly works by scientists saying that rocks cannot fall from the sky and that humans cannot go to the moon. There were monographs on faked fossils that were accepted for years.

Because we have the illusion we are finite beings and limited error is an existential part of this condition.

On the occult specifically, there are many people who make their living writing books and they have no sense of responsibility to the public. For some they may just be in error themselves but there are some like E.A. Koetting who know what they are doing. This is why I always tell newer people to develop a solid intellectual foundation to gain discernment.

As to the older grimoirs, this was on purpose to hide information because that was the society that they lived in. These texts are actually more like Cliff Notes.

Finally, some of these operations may work for some, depending on their own dispositions but not for others. Remember, there is a subjective element in magic. The old saws are reliable for most but even they may not work for some.

Because so much of the occult is speculative and personally shaped by individual experience. Most of the phenomenon is not common and referencable.

Because it sells.

Because it sells.

This.

Profit.There's a lot of money in it,particularly if you market what you are selling towards the most popular/upcoming trends.

Look around online and you don't have to go far to see where the patterns are forming and how to exploit them.

Mostly profit. I know that 'Abraham Lincoln - Secret Alien' is going to be a load of crap, but honestly, with a title like that, I AM probably going to buy it

This is honestly why i hate publishers like Llewellyn, they have very little integrity. Some decent authors get published by them, but they also publish some very, very terrible books and a plethora of other, ridiculous items.

If its New Age enough to be acceptable to a very wide audience and sells, holla holla, get dollar.

manofsands wrote:Because so much of the occult is speculative and personally shaped by individual experience. Most of the phenomenon is not common and referencable.

I was thinking about that as well. but it still does not explain why a writer would say that the tarot cards was invented in tibet or something like that.
If I were to write a book I would at least do some fact checking and preferable include footnotes and documentation of my claims.

But this seems to be a foreign element in the occult world.

Can it have something with the level of education?
Not to many occult have a proper education and many might feel that it is a waste of time to get involved in the scientific community/universities because they selldom have an open mind about the occult.

Then again I read Thomas Karlssons book about kabbalah a couple of weeks ago and it had many errors as well. And from what I understand it he actually as a fairly high education.

Sypheara wrote:Mostly profit. I know that 'Abraham Lincoln - Secret Alien' is going to be a load of crap, but honestly, with a title like that, I AM probably going to buy it

This is honestly why i hate publishers like Llewellyn, they have very little integrity. Some decent authors get published by them, but they also publish some very, very terrible books and a plethora of other, ridiculous items.

If its New Age enough to be acceptable to a very wide audience and sells, holla holla, get dollar.

This brings another question.

Why does that crap sell?

Cuz talk is cheap.

Historic and technical errors are laziness. But in occult systems, sometimes variations in theory and practice come off as "errors" when the author probably wants to slip their stuff through, if they are new, and then gloss it so they sound credible.

I think the main problem is that the so-called occult revival of the 20th century has not evolved into something based on the documented experiences, revelations and creative observations and conclusions of the more dedicated workers of the ideal.

At the same time it is a sad but human tendency to write books on esoteric practice with the attitude: "anybody, can do this", without realizing just what the work of it involves.

Others are more professional, but focused on applications as they know and devise them, and may have a hard time when they find counter-theories in traditional sources. Works of academic scholarship, which are usually in denial of occultism as a reality outside of myth and folklore, are good sources of information, but I would not call them "occult books" in the sense of how-to manuals.

Omnicentrik wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2024 4:30 pmI think the main problem is that the so-called occult revival of the 20th century has not evolved into something based on the documented experiences, revelations and creative observations and conclusions of the more dedicated workers of the ideal.

I agree with what you said there. I personally do a lot of experiments, observations and interviewing of people for my research. If you're interested in my findings, you can download my research book from my post signature.