Five Misconceptions about Alchemy

[@TheEsotericaChannel]

Make Sure to Subscribe & Consider supporting Esoterica by becoming a monthly Patron - www.patreon.com/esotericachannel or a one time donation - www.paypal.me/esotericachannel Your support is profoundly appreciated!

[@David-jq7wr]

Read and do a video on "The Kybalion"...please.

[@saxonhermit]

Atwood: “Maybe the real transmutation was the wisdom we found along the way.” Alchemist: “…no, I want my freaking gold.”

[@TheEsotericaChannel]

Yes, this.

[@gabrielsmagicktome]

How about both? 😁

[@lapidus9552]

Finally, someone actually talking about alchemy and not just Jung instead.

[@anyoneatall3488]

I am new to this subject what do you mean?

[@ArcAngle111]

Manly p hall is a phenomenal source of knowledge if you haven't heard of him.

[@lapidus9552]

@@ArcAngle111 He's great

[@soronos8586]

They’re the same thing

[@Ezekiel_Allium]

@@soronos8586 Lol, lmao even

[@arodreth]

I've studied chemical engineering, and the work of alchemists has always fascinated me. And I agree with the arguements you bring about the misconceptions, I think it is doing a great injustice to the incredible work done over the millenia, even if we know their understanding of many things were wrong, it is this rigorous work that brought us the science of chemistry we have today. And frankly, at least in some shape or form, the work of the alchemists still live up to this day: in my native language, the layman's term for hydrochloric acid is "the spirit of salt" which is the name given to it by the Arabic alchemists of yore.

[@verumillic1424]

"There is still a lot of philosophical debate about just what science is, though scientists seem perfectly happy to ignore that little detail." I feel called out! There are some who definitely engage/wrestle with the philosophy of science, and history of science, and will definitely agree with your characterization of anachronism and the caricature of the history of chemistry and "the march of knowledge and progress". I know I'm late to the party, but this presentation is really excellent.

[@MetaPhysical369]

Totally agree.

[@beepboop204]

🙂 i love that quote you used: "nonsense is nonsense; the history of nonsense is history"; there are only a couple of other channels which take your approach and are non-gurus; there is a lot of misinformation out there from people which always seems in one way or another to come back to romanticist, nationalist, 19th century European thinking. 🙏

[@moongirl786]

Finally, someone on the internet who speaks English... I try to talk to anyone in my life like this, they look at me like I grew a million heads... I'm really enjoying Angela's Symposium and ReligionForBreakfast too, keep up the fantastic work everyone!!

[@TheEsotericaChannel]

Glad you are enjoying the content - I hope it's useful and interesting!

[@Erdos777]

After watching this video all my lead transmuted into Gold! Absolutely brilliant video. Absolutely brilliant. Bravo!

[@chuckhainsworth4801]

I don't practice alchemy, but I love reading it. The complex imagery, and poetic language make it like catnip to someone with a taste for mystical poetry. Even when studied in English translation it conjures beautiful pictures in the mind.

[@TheEsotericaChannel]

I think you are onto something here - even for the non-alchemist the world they develop is just so alluring for exactly the reasons you mention. I think this is part of the reason they are still read to this day, long after the eclipse of laboratory alchemy.

[@hedgehog3180]

@@TheEsotericaChannel Also why basically every fantasy setting with a rigerous magic system takes inspiration from them.

[@thor1829]

@@chuckhainsworth4801 I have an MSc in chemistry and I love reading about alchemy

[@jacobjames3181]

I must say you have intrigued me. You are very well verse and open to all sides of examination of the important factors behind alchemical processes. This channel has amazing potential. And I support it 100 percent. I believe you will help educate people in a much more beneficial (and time saving) manner, than the process of self educating. Self education on these topics normally takes years of dedication to even begin to graspe most concepts. You are doing a great thing here

[@TheEsotericaChannel]

Thanks so much for saying so - I hope the channel helps both practitioners and just the curious alike!

[@loriallen67]

Thank you for this nuanced presentation. I especially appreciate the illustration of science becoming divorced from ethics as well as just the history of the evolution of chemistry.

[@fraterzigmund]

I am currently reading one of these Jungian alchemy self help books as assigned by my magical curriculum and while it has some interesting ideas, it's hard to take seriously because the history in it is just atrocious! Thank you to Esoterica and all the other academic KZbin channels for educating me!

[@TheEsotericaChannel]

Yep that's why I could never take much of that stuff seriously myself

[@valmarsiglia]

The Rosicrucians of the 17th-century also promoted the idea of alchemy as spiritual metaphor/practice. Plus, alchemy had always had an inescapably spiritual or at least metaphysical side, since everything was believed to have a spiritual connection to the macrocosm and the supernatural realm. Spiritual alchemy was also already well established in Freemasonry before 1850, as can be seen in Masonic works of the period (eg Delaulnaye's "Thuileur de l'Écossisme," first published in the late 18th century).

[@hansfrankfurter2903]

Can you recommned key masonic works that are of a metaphysical or psychological character?

[@valmarsiglia]

​@@hansfrankfurter2903 You know, there is so much Masonic material out there, and everyone's experience of it is so subjective, that I would start with a website like the Pietre-Stone Review of Masonry. The site design is truly terrible, but the information and links are solid, no Illuminati space lizards or other conspiracy claptrap. They host a collection of essays by Masons and Masonic scholars going back to the 18th century, though most seem to be from the 19th-21st centuries. The reason it's hard to recommend anything specific is that Masonry, not being a religion, has no canonical works, so there are literally centuries of often-conflicting information out there, but which are all legitimately Masonic. Plus, in our time, there's a pretty robust Masonic publishing industry, though I've never paid that much attention to that stuff. I'm sure lots of it is good, but there's also a lot of dodgy self-help stuff like "How to Get Ahead in Business using Masonic Principles" and that sort of thing in which I have no interest whatsoever. Happy hunting!

[@hansfrankfurter2903]

@@valmarsiglia That was a solid response. Thanks for taking the time!

[@valmarsiglia]

​@@hansfrankfurter2903 No problem, sorry I couldn't be more specific. If you were to ask a group of Masons (at least American Masons) which authors to read, you'd probably hear the names Albert Pike and Albert Mackey. Thing is though, I'm not a huge fan of either, so it'd be weird to recommend them. To me, Pike is rather longwinded and there's nothing in his works you can't find in other (and to me, more credible) 19th-century occultists and hermeticists; while Mackey promotes a particularly Anglo-Protestant, Victorian view of Masonry. That doesn't mean their writings should be dismissed, of course, they're just not for me. And Mackey's _Encyclopedia_ is still an invaluable general reference work. If you read any other languages, then French, Spanish, German, and Portuguese Masonic writings would help put the Anglo-American version in a broader perspective.

[@jonsey3645]

I am going back over some old stuff and just had to say that you are a brave and true scholar whom I hope is recognized in formal the appropriate circles. Thank you for a much needed discourse.

[@TheEsotericaChannel]

ecclesiastical circles? no chance.

[@jonsey3645]

@@TheEsotericaChannel I corrected myself after thinking and you had already commented. Happy Season and again thank you.

[@charliemopps4926]

Ok, I've watched a bunch of your videos now and have found them interesting and more importantly a refreshingly new perspective on a variety of topics. But this is but far the best video I've seen you produce. I humbly suggest you do more of what you did here, bringing in modern ideas and ancient ideas and better explaining the difference and how the ancients viewed these topics compared to how we do in modernity.

[@tomnaughadie]

The first minute or so of this video is exactly why I was so excited when you started this channel any why I love and appreciate this channel so much.

[@t.j.9226]

It's really refreshing to see someone providing nuanced takes towards positivist dogmatism ánd the exclusivist psychologisation / spiritualisation of alchemy. A lot of channels / individuals seem guilty of having presentist tendencies that support one of them in favour of the other. The misconception that "alchemy is superseded, and thus we cannot learn from it" also reminds me of Paul Feyerabend's idea that concepts from bygone scientific (natural philosophical) paradigms are often forsaken before they actually yield their full potential. It is of course a rather polemical claim, but it's an interesting thought. A lot of concepts, models, etc. that are still in use in chemistry (albeit modified) were once, in their "primordial form" byproducts of alchemy / chymistry; so aside from the historical value of alchemy, I think more people should also appreciate its formative role in a discipline that's overall held in high regard within the "pantheon of science". All in all, it's great to see more well-rounded content on these topics.

[@jonsey3645]

What?

[@hedgehog3180]

@@jonsey3645 They're taling about how alchemy is very important in a history and philosophy of science perspective.

[@corgidoctor1402]

Good quality vid and good information. Hope to see this channel grow!

[@charlie-im]

This video was surprisingly accessible for someone who is new to understanding alchemy! Very excited to start watching my way through your videos, thank you SO much for all this fascinating content!

[@fraktaalimuoto]

This was really educational. Being a professional scientist (astrophysics) with an actual spiritual practice, I find the alchemists interesting in a sense.

[@laurenlove999]

#Goals!!!!

[@actually_a_circle]

I get that. As I was working on my biology degree I began to see patterns in my Christian faith and it lead me to a curiosity about alchemy

[@shawnrossi6364]

I remember finding your channel a little over a year ago and just not having no idea coming from a Christian dogmatic household. About 8 months ago I received an initiation on my way to work which I believe was and Dark Night of the Soul and since then I've been able to understand and have a deep yearning for the esoteric knowledge. That being said thank you for your very thorough information you provide to us folks who just want to understand on our own.

[@briancool7557]

I'm loving the word play in The Sceptical Chymist.

[@1stRiggerChick]

Your closing statements are as though you are summing up this time of living in the World. Thank you for sharing your thoughts, knowledge and concepts. Nice to meet you.

[@marilynflake8271]

Finally had time to come back to the beginning of your videos to learn and take notes as I noticed you did look into (I believe heiser and) the divine counsel stuff recently and related it back. And WOW. It's so great to FINALLY HAVE AN ACADEMIC TAKE THINGS SERIOUSLY. I don't want to divulge too much on here but you really understand what is happening right now and are definitely on the pulse. I appreciate you a lot dude and you have given me more hope to pursue what I am passionate about THANK YOU

[@petesmith2837]

Having just discovered this video, then this channel, then proceeding to binge watch... well, I am now a Patreon supporter. Excellent work Dr Sledge- varied in tone, always buttressed by scholarship, humanely presented.

[@GarGhuul]

Skepticism and Humility as a default “All things in moderation” view does sound like a lovely default.

[@jeannemarie5908]

Oh my gosh! What a great find! Thanks for sharing your thoughts, wisdom and philosophical connections regarding alchemy/chemistry/ethics. I have had these thoughts but certainly not in such a deeply concise manner. I look forward to listening to more of your videos. Again, thanks for sharing .. some of us feel as you do but have not been able to study as in depth as you.

[@artkoenig9434]

A very nicely drawn philosophical history of the way we can misread the past. Your insights shine a needed light on the hubris inherent in the search for knowledge in any age, but most prevalent in our own. Thank you!

[@boneladders]

this is such a cool channel, just found it by total accident today! i can't wait to binge watch and get my brain cogs spinning. thanks for sharing! 💖

[@lauramumma2360]

I just discovered your channel this week and have now watched more than a few videos on various subjects. I wholeheartedly want to say thank you for your content.

[@valeriyaepshteyn1547]

Crash Course on KZbin should lift up this wonderful offering!

[@rebellejacobs777]

So yes

[@SmertDaBaus]

Fantastic. Thank you for your channel and effort. You are wonderful.

[@TheEsotericaChannel]

Thank you too for watching - I really appreciate the comment.

[@longcastle4863]

This subject has been somewhat of a revelation for me -- as I really did not expect to find in my latter years a whole new field of study that speaks (imo) so directly and interestingly to the human condition. I've been tearing through your videos and I just wanted to say thank you. I really appreciate it. The videos are excellent and each one obviously took a lot of work and time to put together.

[@lotusheart625]

I love the analysis of the separation of the modern new age and the scientific interpretations of alchemy, and how there's a spark of the original purpose hidden in each side. The separation, purification, and reunification of both aspects to recapture the true purpose of classical Alchemy is to me is a sort of lovely example of the Alchemical Marriage. Side thought, I think I have a half-read copy of that Atwood book in my library, if memory serves... might have to pull it out and give it another try sometime.

[@steviebeanz1]

this is one of the best channels ive found in a very long time! thank you so much for your work. im starting my deep dive of your channel, and where better then to start from the very beginning!

[@jonsey3645]

You start in the middle and go back to the top of the side... according to The White Album.

[@spiderwizard1032]

You are the best Dr. Sledge! Shining a light on all things esoteric and occult. Really appreciate the work that you do.

[@matthewedgeworth4509]

I've just discovered your channel and want to say thanks for the brilliant content, I've only watched a few videos so far but have plenty to go through. I am a historian by training (of the early modern period), and I have a real interest in philosophy too. This sort of esotericism is something that I find fascinating from a 'history of ideas' point of view, so I am delighted to have found a channel that delivers insights into this topic with real scholarship and an academic mindset, rather than 'wishy washy' new age inspired nonsense.

[@TheEsotericaChannel]

Thanks and most welcome !

[@tr3saved]

Excellent. Thank you for sacrificing your time and effort for the enlightenment of humanity man.. It's appreciated more than you're aware of

[@TheEsotericaChannel]

Thanks for the kinds words and saying so! Hope you enjoy the content.

[@kongjie74]

The buffet approach is also something we struggle with in the Western Daoist community. It is very common even among the most popular and qualified scholars today. Thanks for making this video, it is useful for many reasons.

[@naomiseraphina9718]

Huzzah, Sir! I couldn't agree more!!

[@Anders01]

I'm a beginner when it comes to alchemy but my take is that the first blackening stage is about dissolving the separate self (sin, meaning "missing the mark") into the black sun which represents all of reality. That follows by the white sun lifting up the self into wholeness in the second whitening stage. In the third stage, kundalini (red) rises into the heart (green) and produces "gold" = yellow = red + green. In the last stage kundalini has been completely risen and is therefore called the reddening stage.

[@jamesnomos8472]

What were your thoughts on the videos contents?

[@Anders01]

@@jamesnomos8472 I don't remember. I have watched several videos about alchemy.

[@Strega_del_Corvo]

I just recently found your channel and the work you do (among a few others as well) is invaluable to those of us with occult/esoteric interests. Thank you so much!

[@complimentary_voucher]

This was excellent and succinct and everything anyone needs to know about this whole murky thought-bucket, thank you.

[@mielimedina3146]

I love this channel, thank you!

[@Squirrelmind66]

Top tier presentation and research. I’m glad I found this channel. As an aside, has anyone else noticed how Isaac Newton looks like a 1970s British rock musician?

[@hedgehog3180]

That's actually because in the 70s there was a brief revival of Enlightenment era fashion, though obviously through a modern lense and with modern materials and techniques.

[@kenclarkeis]

Your videos are changing they way I think. I love this. This was a truly fascinating video.

[@TheEsotericaChannel]

Hi Ken - I'm glad the content is interesting for you and thank you so, so much for becoming a supporter of the channel! It really means a ton to me.

[@StockAvuryah]

Great intro, can't wait for you to delve into the subject

[@laraigneesurlaporte9992]

This is so interesting and documented! thank you for bringing this view of alchemy to light

[@jameshitt3263]

Dude, I am so happy I stumbled on this channel.

[@evyberm801]

Sir I can't thank you enough for your channel. I treasure your videos.

[@TheEsotericaChannel]

Thanks so much for saying so and thanks for watching!

[@dennislovinfosse6293]

Thank you for this. It's excellent. Rigorously clear.

[@Sifodias111]

I’m about to binge watch all of your videos in chronological order

[@Ndecline]

This is great. Please keep this channel going.

[@TheEsotericaChannel]

Am going to try - hopefully people find it interesting!

[@AbrahamOfWorms]

Finally went back to the beginning. Going to watch your entire channel from start to current. Thank you for all you do Dr Sledge. You are by far my favorite content on all of KZbin and have helped me immensely in understanding this stuff which has had a huge impact on my own spirituality. I hope you are doing well, and here goes my first total consumption of esoterica content.

[@TheEsotericaChannel]

Be careful, some weird stuff back there :)

[@mathbr27e]

Great content!! Thanks!🏹

[@G8tr1522]

Man, I love the comparisons to modern science. You have no frame of reference on which to criticize modern science if you have no alternatives. This video really convinced me that modern science is not a perfect ending, but is still moving and changing to this day.

[@G8tr1522]

Just to expound on that, I really like learning about Western Esotericism, bc it explores the journey western civilization took to get to modern science and modern philosophies. I think it’s really important to understand how we arrived at modern understanding of the universe. It’s a great disservice to history to exclude this esoteric information. In other words, thanks for the content. You’ve opened my mind to something I used to scoff at.

[@TheEsotericaChannel]

Thanks so much, friend - I think we all have a ton to learn from the past and I hope this channel opens up an avenue to some aspects that not many of us have heard about. Glad you are finding the content interesting!

[@martinwilliams9866]

You mean to say, you can't say that something is wrong for you if you have no alternative, I think that's wrong!

[@FarLandArt]

Thank you for this!! I'd be very interested in a video with your perspective on Jungian alchemy someday. A lot of people recommend Marie-Louise von Franz' Alchemy text to help with understanding Jung. I'm working through it, but I just don't have the historical foundation to separate historical fact from her opinions. But it's interesting, that much can be said! Lol Thanks again for all you do!

[@branchesatzero171]

Greetings. I recently came across your channel and I would like to say thank you for your effort. I do have a question that isn't related to alchemy though. I'm curious, what does the logo icon stand for? It reminds me of the Mayan letters but I could be wrong, and would love to know what it means. If possible. Thanks!

[@Thermiable]

i like your videos, brother! the seriousness and learned nature of your approach is refreshing. i wanna say that 'phylisophical' nature of Alchemy, might have really begun to bloom with the advent of the Golden Dawn, and maybe even earlier in Levi. i like that you notice/speculate that attention and intent matters; there might even by a physical basis for this truth. a basis found in electromagnetism, and the true nature of the mind /bow

[@hedgehog3180]

Electromagnetism is physical so I don't understand what you mean.

[@jamesevans5495]

On this video and several others I notice several technical terms, like chrysopoeia, and there were some others on your magic videos. You always do a great job at highlighting what they mean, but do you happen to have a short list of these you use for your classes you wouldn't mind giving us online?

[@colbyboucher6391]

Three years old I know, but what always fascinates me about practices like alchemy is the process through which such complex theories arose in the first place. In the same way that the process of evolution isn't strictly a "worse to better" affair, these human endeavors seem to be a whole lot of mutation and chaos, with certain ideas sticking to the wall for all sorts of reasons, coalescing into a giant wad of "well, it seems to work" gum. And as you point out in this video, in a way modern science is the same. Just _more_ correct than what came before.

[@hedgehog3180]

Well the fundamental defining feature of modern science is exactly that it isn't that. That it demands that all theories be subjected to rigerous experimentation exactly to avoid them just being accepted because they are the norm. That's why our understanding of nature has rapidly advanced and accelerated in the last two centuries, because science is able to very quickly identify the flaws with any theory and replace it with something better. Like the Aristotilean worldview stuck around for nearly two millenia until it was replaced by Newtonian mechanics but it only took about 400 years before it was replaced by General Relativity and Quantum mechanics, and Quantum mechanics was in turn replaced a few decades afterwards by Quantum Field Theory.

[@aminrodriguez4707]

14:25 this extreme hubris you speak of is the basis of all religioud thought, at least in the Book religions, isn't it? The idea that we are entitled by birthright to differ from all other species, in the fact that the Divinity has a special relationship with us human and gives us the "revelation" that explains the whys and dos and donts of the reality around us.

[@tuzonthume]

I find the validity of Alchemy to be somewhat similar to hypnosis in that those beholding the metaphysical aspects must do so from a viewpoint that excludes skepticism. Faith and/or belief is required.

[@AltrusianGraceMedia]

Recently subbed and working my way through your current content, you are providing a valuable service here as well as a resource. I can see your efforts being rewarded greatly in due time. If I may be of service in any way please let me know, you have a fan and friend over at AGM. Thank you.

[@TheEsotericaChannel]

Thanks so much - I really want produce high quality, scholarly content. These topics are really important and under/mis represented so I'm looking forward to keeping the channel going. Thanks for your support, it means a lot!

[@KeianhhnaieK]

Though they may be few and far between I absolutely adore videos when you speak from the heart. Additionally, I do not support the three bullet points of censorship which highlight how others are expected to interact with the internet, once upon a memory freedom of speech was more than an age-old concept.

[@Hazel_Kave]

thank you for revealing the truth through your work!

[@dasitor]

Thank you for sharing all your knowledge and research. I find it fascinating. Regarding this video, where could I read more about modern recreation of alchemical experiments? Is there any accessible publication? Many thanks!

[@hedgehog3180]

How To Make Everything has probably made some stuff, you can also find chemistry channels that recreate stuff found in old chemistry textbooks which isn't quite alchemy but has a similar vibe, especially since those old textbooks have no regard for safety. You might also be interested in the field of experimential archeology which is just exactly this, experimentially recreating historical processes in order to determine whether sources can be trusted.

[@ancientfae7246]

Grateful for this channel

[@TheEsotericaChannel]

Grateful for your watching!

[@eoghan7949]

Just started working my way through your videos and I find them very interesting, but I wouldn't have found them without the link and recommendation that I was given. I think you should try to make your thumbnails more attractive (Doesn't have to be over the top or click-bate) because if they show up in somebody's recommend section which is filled with Vibrant and loud thumbnails and titles they will be overshadowed by these videos. This is not a complaint, it's just that I would love for you to get more attention and grow your audience in size.

[@TheEsotericaChannel]

Thanks for the advice. I've head this from a few folks and I'm going to do some more research on making the thumbnails work better for the channel! EDIT - Just did a revamp of the thumbnails. Let me know what you think and thanks for the honest criticism!

[@pharoahakhenaten6630]

Magic is real! There's no cutting someone in half then putting them back together. Magic is bending the universe to fit your will, the ability to bend someone else will to fit your own is "magick" Those who don't know anything about the occult should never do incantations . Theres a reason "Occult means hidden". Only do Magick with proven practioner. Ive witnessed people get so scared of what there seeing in front of them they run out of the room and break the circle. There's a VERY fine line between 'white Magick and black magick. The beings that are summoned are indifferent. There not good or bad. We are like rabbits to those powerful beings. Imagine what you would do if you were minding your business and a insignificant rabbit now forced you to do what it wants. Wouldn't you try everything in your power for it to stop? This depends on what you are looking for and wich being you summoned. From my experience weather its a "angel" or a " demon" you summoned there both the same. Extremely frightening and beautiful beings. If a being appeared to you out of nowhere because you summoned him you better make sure the circles don't break and the practioner did everything correctly, if not the being is now in our dimensions free to do what it pleases.

[@jonsey3645]

There is a vast and clearly defined chasm between white and black magic! It is completely, wholly and unmistakably a matter of INTENT.

[@PoorMansChemist]

EXCELLENT video!!! Couldnt have said it all better myself!! 👍👍

[@kaisersose9797]

Brilliant explanation Justin, all you need to do now is convince the "Cult of Quantum" that the Proton is made of light! Good luck!

[@a_lucientes]

The 'English Renaissance Hermeticism' series put out by Garland Publishing has some excellent academic editions including one on alchemical poetry in original translations.

[@robinrobinson6714]

An excellent video Dr. Sledge! Thank you! The purely Scientific approach and the purely Spiritual approach are both dogmatic…, exactly! You even touched on some of the concerns I share about “excessive new ageism”! Carl Jung continues to be a big influence on me though!😊

[@_VISION.]

Are they dogmatic but they say the other approach is not what Alchemy is about?

[@AnthonyRobinsonDeathIsSerious]

You definitely broadened my view on Alchemy and esotericism. I'm going to be watching your videos in the coming years.

[@adamweilergurarye5422]

Thank you very much for the interesting video.

[@cosmiccrunch8591]

Your presentations are always refreshing and thought provoking. I view this work you're doing as of the utmost importance in dispelling the myths and misinterpretations of the Hermetic arts and sciences by modern scientists and academics. Thank you very much for your contributions to this beautiful Art for the seekers of Natural wisdom. I'm looking to advance my understanding of philosophy, as it's something which I, unfortunately, never had an interest in during the earlier phase of my life. Can you recommend a book or two which carries on the spirit of the traditional philosophers, or at least doesn't stray too far outside of the context of Hermetic philosophy and starts from a 101 level to build an adequate foundation for the complete novice? If you know of some works that are not based in the Hermetic tradition, but still of practical use for someone like myself, I would be very grateful for any direction you can offer.

[@hedgehog3180]

Many universities produce compilation works about philisophical traditions which lay out the history of the tradition and it's beliefs in a modern and accessible language so you might want to look into those. I think Oxford, Yale and Havard are all fairly highly respected (duh).

[@NullStaticVoid]

Have to confess, I read a lot of Jung when I was younger because I was trying to keep up with college kids. Me being a precocious high schooler. I think Jung and Campbell do have some things to say about archetypes. But especially in Jungs case, there is a bit of over-reach. But that was the style at the time.

[@williammartinactor]

You see things from such a marvelous Birdseye view! 🤩 (A Crow perhaps?)

[@gregcampwriter]

They gave us distillation. Time for a crossover episode with The Whiskey Tribe.

[@middleburyastrology]

An important talk. Thank you.

[@tedhand6237]

re: point 2+3. I've been banging my head against the wall of "spiritual alchemy" for two decades now and I've come to think that not only is it impossible to establish that Alchemy was always and everywhere the same esoteric tradition, we don't really even find anywhere in the esoteric versions of historical alchemy a story about how Alchemy is really about spiritual transformation. In those occasions when alchemy is used as a metaphor for spiritual growth (for example in medieval Sufism), it's being used deliberately as an analogy rather than framing alchemy itself as spiritual. We often see a story about the spiritual state of the alchemist as being relevant to the success of the process, but one is to attain spiritual methods by the usual methods (prayer, asceticism etc) and not through doing some special Alchemical esotericism. And in those cases it's impossible to avoid that the goal is lab work. I don't think the evidence supports that everywhere we find spiritual interpretations of alchemy, it's a story of lead into gold being an allegory for "spiritual transformation." Most or all spiritual alchemy seems to be doing something different than transmuting the Alchemist. Certainly they don't ever seem to explicitly say that's what they're doing, unless I'm missing something. So I'm curious to hear more about what you think can be salvaged from the concept of "spiritual transformation." I feel like we should be going back to square one if we want to historically reconstruct whatever the spiritual dimension of Alchemy might have been, rather than assuming that "spiritual transformation" was the best way to frame the spiritual goals of the alchemists. Janacek's Alchemical Belief for example throws red meat at the anti-Principe crowd but I think makes a much better case for the religious dimensions relating to the ethical side you mention than the idea that alchemy was essentially an esoteric meditation for spiritually transforming the alchemist.

[@aubreywilt919]

I've only been engaging for a short time now but I believe that the Transformation comes from showing that nature (metals) are being controled and manipulated. Each metal has it's characteristics and attachment and the alchemical process that happens. If we can turn lead into gold then who's to say we can't turn our shadow and our light side into one to become a new better stronger person (spiritual transformation). Now I'm just going off of my VERY LIMITED knowledge and would love some links. But I believe and kinda see that everything is just separated. We are getting no where bc this ONE thing is broken up into 6 other things bc people stopped agreeing and trusting the process. But 3,6,9 is like a formula plug in. Just a eye opener or guide. Frequencies within shapes and within ourselves as well as our shadow and alchemy. The emerald tablet, the dead sea scrolls even seem to touch a piece of each thing we seperated. I also have a theory that the bible is a spiritual guide on these levels but throughout history and disagreements they left the process without a title of alchemy and put stories in there to back up the process's steps but it's beem hidden. The bible is Basic instructions before leaving earth. It could be a manual in ways we never thought of yet. But if this all sounds propostorous I would love to hear you break it down and explain bc like I said I'm new to this but I think I have a level of thinking that breaks the perception of "society" and how it should operate. But you seem very knowledgeable

[@valmarsiglia]

Strictly speaking, the sciences haven't been materialistic since the development of quantum mechanics in the early 20th century. It's true that some scientists can be dismissive of the humanities in general and thus of an academic study of alchemy (though let's be fair: the dismissiveness can run both ways), but that dismissiveness isn't based on a materialist worldview. It's based more on not having much of a concept of what historians and other humanities scholars actually do. That prevents them from seeing why such a field would be highly interesting and how much can be learned from it.

[@hedgehog3180]

Saying that quantum mechanics lead to materialism being discarded isn't really true. Materialism is simply the idea that the world can be described in terms of matter and its interaction and that is still true, it's just that matter is more complicated than it at first appeared and its interactions are really weird.

[@DianaPriceWriter]

What are some good introductory books for Alchemy?

[@carlaraimer718]

Thank you

[@hedgehog3180]

4:58 I think it's probably better to call alchemy pre-scientific, it certainly isn't science because it didn't follow the scientific method but like a lot of other pre-modern and early modern belief systems it did slowly establish the basis for science, even though we basically had to throw everything out and start from scratch. But as everyone knows in science even a failed experiment is worthwhile because it at least tells us what isn't true. 7:50 I feel like this reinterpretation comes from a similar place as the first misconception, basically that people are uncomfortable about accepting that something can both be wrong and have value. So in an attempt to sidestep the issue that alchemy was fundamentally wrong it is rebranded as spiritual rather than a serious natural philosophy and in doing so you can justify the importance of alchemy. We live in a society that places such a huge focus on success that we have a hard time understanding that you can't always be right and failure is also important. Pop culture also tends to present science as some process of great geniuses being always correct rather than a rigerous process of trial and error where most of the time you will fail. 9:35 You are going to drive me mad with these unclosed parenthases (also trying to spell this with dyslexia). Though also this is just like a general issue you encounter with people trying to understand historical people. Either they are dumb and superstitious, or actually just hiding a totally secular worldview behind religion, or ancient wisemen with knowledge lost to our ignorant materialist modern society. All of these interpretations are incorrect and are in some way a way of superimposing a modern worldview onto these people. The best explanation I've seen comes from Eastern Roman history where the explanation basically goes like this “if a house collapses due to termites and kills a man both a Roman and modern observer would agree that the termites are the cause but the Roman would then ask why the house collapsed at that exact moment and killed that exact man. A modern observer would answer that it's essentially random chance but the Roman would find this question vitally important”. Basically pre-modern people didn't ignore material reality but since they lived in a very uncertain world they found these kinds of ontological questions vital and of equal import.

[@hedgehog3180]

In the context of the Roman empire you can really see why they found this so important. Battles are always risky affairs and can be decided by the luck of the draw, at the same time they were constantly faced with enemies that seemingly appeared out of nowhere with almost infinite manpower. Since they didn't have the historical hindsight we have today about the migration period, the processes of the Central Asian Steppe, and the development of Islam these things seemed to have no clear material explanation while also being vitally important. Thus it made rational sense to assume a metaphysical explanation. And this was even more true for other states, all things considered the Roman state was incredibly resilliant with the Eastern Roman empire surviving almost a millenia of near constant war and conflict. Most other pre-modern states were so fragile that a single defeat could spell the downfall of the entire state, thus producing understandable anxiety around these things. I don't think people today understand just how ressiliant and robust modern states are and how exceptional that is historically. A modern industrialized state can always pull back and rebuild after a defeat and total collapse requires nearly total destruction, but in a time before mass media and democracy people didn't feel any particular loyalty to any state if the army left, and rebuilding after a defeat was nearly impossible without industrial prodruction.

[@hedgehog3180]

14:08 I am pretty happy to see that you're drawing a similar conclusion to mine. I also wanted to add that this goes together with something of a fundamental shift that has taken place in fundamental physics following the failure of string theory. Basically idea that we don't actually need a “theory of everything”, that it's fine to just keep developing ever better models for specific things because like ultimately the goal of science isn't to uncover universal truth, it's to gather useful knowledge. If our theories keep enabling us to make better technology then that's mission accomplished, because ultimately the only thing that really matters is improving human lives. And it might also be that a theory of everything simply isn't possible, or that we're far too early to even attempt to develop one, making it our goal might lead us on a wild goose chase just like the alchemists goal of transmuting lead into gold did. Instead we should just continue with the careful application of the scientific model and if along the way room opens up for a theory of everything then that's great and if not that isn't actually a huge problem. Science after all is fundamentally the acknowledgement that we humans a stupid and arrogant and need to have the humility to acknowledge that we don't know something metaphorically beaten into our thick skulls. It's the acknowledgement that no one can ever know everything and no one has a privileged view of reality and is able to divine truth from nothing, we are all limited to our human senses and imperfections so our best hope for checking those is the scientific method. Humility is the most important trait of a scientist and ironically it's usually what the critics of science lack.

[@hedgehog3180]

15:34 You can say Fritz Haber it's okay, he's infamous for a reason.

[@hedgehog3180]

15:52 Also I would like to say that this is very much a thing in modern science. Ethical and safety standards exist for a reason, the 20th century showed that the disregard for them ends up being inherently pseudoscientific. Nazi and Imperial Japanese “scientists” tortured and killed people in their experiments and what useful information did it yield? Nothing because in their disregard for ethics they also disregarded basic scientific rigor, putting malnourished concentration camp inmates in pools and waiting for them to die of hypothermia gives us no useful information because that's not exactly a scenario that'd happen normally. It tells us nothing about how hypothermia in an actual scenario like say a lost mountaineer would progress and also says nothing about how we may treat or prevent it. Injecting ink into a live subject and concluding that they die also gives no useful information, like we didn't need an experiment to figure that out, it was already obvious. Sadism by it's very nature is unscientific because it is motivated towards a specific goal. And to give a much more recent example, the scandal surrounding a South Korean superstar geneticist where he lied about how he acquired his eggs completely invalidated his works because they weren't replicable and if you don't clearly document everything about an experiment it's just not science. And lying once obviously puts everything you've published into doubt. Basically it's impossible to divorce ethics from science, and the people who try to do so often aren't scientists and are really just seeking to justify their own unethical worldview and exploitation. However I'd also like to note that it is equally impossible to try to derive a moral philosophy from science as many have tried to do, this is just a consequence of the famous is/ought distinction. Science can only reveal the is and that might sometimes have implications, like how psychology has often been used to argue in favor of respecting and protecting minorities. But you can't derive an ought from that like some evolutionary psychologists try to do, it's up to us to decide on an ought.

[@natureswrath7665]

I find alchemy to be such an interesting subject from a physical and spiritual standpoint, if we are to ever discover real lost knowledge it would be from them.

[@thomascleveland]

I hope to see some forensic alchemy

[@sephythelark]

I was turned off from Alchemy years ago when I first began purchasing books on “real alchemy” and lo and behold, according to the author, alchemy was actually a big metaphor for spiritual processes going on. It just didn’t make sense to me and didn’t ring true. I tried searching for other books that had a more physical perspective and only came across one book, something like the book of Aquarius or something in which the author was someone engaged in the work personally and thought the prima materia was urine. I dunno if that guy ever got it right but I stopped searching for books on the topic after that.

[@wantanamera]

😂

[@SI-ln6tc]

spagyrics

[@t.b.vwentink516]

Man i wish i had all those books behind you! I,ve been highly obsessed with anything occult for years! What books would you recommend!?

[@HellaQuinn]

I got the latest Splendor Solis hardback from that “doctor” because of the rave reviews. I must say it was a colossal and expensive disappointment. He argues it’s solely chemistry…based on science and not at all spiritual or mystical (and has no correlation to the tarot). I feel like it’s such a waste of all that knowledge and art to go one way or the other completely. I feel like it’s meant to marry the spiritual and scientific as an art…you need each component as they all have value. I feel like he ruined it more than giving it the attention and appreciation it deserved. Love your channel by the way ❤

[@ArachneAnathema]

I am interested in all of the non-gold making transformations in which they did succeed. The origins of everything we have and use today that came from alchemy. Also, as a hobbies baker, is not baking alchemy? I transform flour, sugar, milk and eggs into cake. 😊

[@hedgehog3180]

The most famous alchemical success, though it was unintended, was the discovery of white phosphorous.

[@psukebariah3435]

I don't think it's fair to say that Jung considered the ancient alchemists to be engaged *only* in a spiritual exploration, and certainly not consciously so. Caveat that I am not a Jungian scholar by any means, just someone with an interest who has read his works in English, but what i have read of his works suggests that he believed that the study of Substance ended up revealing more about the student than it ever could about Substance. I just discovered this channel, possibly because of my subscription to Forbidden Histories. I'm not sure if you are familiar with it, but it seems like a good companion channel to this one.

[@louisrobertthompson5211]

Alchemy as Physical, Spiritual, and Ethical art. Who is writing on the art of studying all three and their relation to each other?

[@edgeeffect]

I've recently found a small number of scientists who consider Alchemy as simply part of the history of science, not "ignorant superstition" but "a few steps back on the road" .... And I've also come across a few historians that view (say) Dr. Dee as "a scientist of the spiritual" and have described him as "an Elizabethan Steven Hawking" - interesting to note that some of his "Enochian apparatus" is now in The Museum of The History of Science in Oxford.

[@hedgehog3180]

I think the majority of scientists see it like that but I don't live in the US so maybe things are different there.

[@edgeeffect]

@@hedgehog3180 I wouldn't know.

[@S3Abbas]

While the characterization of alchemy as being personally transformative does diminish from the fact practitioners engaged in real alchemic practices, the use of it as a metaphor for personal transformations is certainly quite old. One quite famous ethico-mystical treatise from the medieval Islamic world by al-Ghazzālī was entitled Kīmyā-yi Saʿādat, or "The Alchemy of Happiness".

[@tedhand6237]

Re: Newton, William Newman makes a good case that Uncle Isaac was trying to do nuclear physics using alchemy. He just didn't have the tools to cut deeply enough. While I agree that alchemists were wrong about the cosmos/nature, it wasn't always necessary for them to have that kind of knowledge to develop technologies, and it must be kept in mind we moderns often underestimate or misconstrue the forms of knowledge that they were indeed working on.

[@hedgehog3180]

To me Newton's conception of alchemy sounds more similar to modern biochemistry. Like he's trying to develop a theory that can explain how both living and dead matter can be made of the same stuff just arranged differently, and integrated with an idea that said matter goes through cycles of being part of living things and dead things. This is conceptually similar to modern biochemistry, which describes life in terms of chemical interactions and describes how the elements that make up life are part of cycles where they spend time both in organic compounds and inorganic ones. Essentially he was on the right track and was working from a sound fundamental assumption but simply lacked the knowledge modern chemists have about organic chemistry and stuff like the carbon, nitrogen and phosphor cycles.

[@ogamiitto999]

Brilliant!

[@M-CH_]

Two more contemporary books to add to the bibliography: 1. Zuber, Mike. Spiritual alchemy from the age of Jacob Boehme to Mary Anne Atwood, 1600-1900. 2. Prinke, Rafał. Zwodniczy ogród błędów. Piśmiennictwo alchemiczne do końca XVIII wieku [The deceptive garden of errors. Alchemical writings until the end of the 18th century]. Unfortunately, at this point only published in original Polish.

[@TheEsotericaChannel]

I have the Zuber text in my queue and it seems very interesting. Is the Prinke text on Polish alchemical texts or does it include more?

[@M-CH_]

@@TheEsotericaChannel The Prinke text is a monster overview of most of alchemical literature up to - but unfortunately excluding - Etteilla. Of course he highlights the text ascribed to Sendivogius, as it's the author in whom he specializes.

[@Moctipotili1]

"Ahh! Scylla and Charybdis! Who hath let you roam from within the halls of ancient history? You dare show yourselves within these halls as well?"

[@noThankyou-g5c]

There is another creator I like (Host of the podcast “pseudoxology”) that claims that a large portion of alchemical works were actually encrypted messages. There this idea that medieval encryption wasnt like modern encryption where you read an encrypted text and cant find any meaning from it / can instantly tell it’s encrypted. And that instead things were encrypted in plain sight. An encrypted text might appear as a letter to a lover, a journal entry, or in the case of alchemy, a recipe/a documentation of an alchemical process. I’d be interested to hear what you (although I doubt you’ll see this message) or other viewers more versed in this think about that. It’s not that there were never any real alchemical experiments, just that feudal intelligence networks and alchemy were deeply intwined with one eachother.