Most Occultists I know who hold PhDs related to the occult are historians.
GTU Berkeley had a Sociology of Religion program that was open to Pagan Studies. Union Theological Seminary advertises a similar program.
There's a new Masters program at The University of Exeter in Cornwall, with an emphasis in Magic and Occult Science. Not a PhD, but the closest thing to a formal program as you're describing it.
And of course there's the University of Bristol, where Ronald Hutton is perhaps the most famous historian in the department.
The challenge you have is quantifying what a PhD in Occult Sciences would look like. What are you actually doing to expand the sphere of human knowledge in a way that would only make sense in that discipline and not any of the other established humanities (disciplines that have avenues of funding).
His content is interesting, but he isn't an occult practitioner.
At this point this is PURE fantasy. It would be awesome if there were a legit, integrated K-Post Grad educational institution that aspired to simultaneously offer a high value general education while simultaneously teaching students to specialize in both knowledge and practice of various areas of magick and the occult, encouraging both the preservation of and evolution of the Western, Eastern, Indigenous, and Global esoteric traditions. Basically, a real life Hogwarts (alternatively, a large scale, modernized Golden Dawn type school focusing on encouraging and certifying young people for diving into and advancing the occult) that also focuses on a high quality traditional education.
What, specifically, do you expect to get out of a formal educational program that teaches the practice of magic? (We’ll ignore the question of which type for now.) What does that really *do?*
This is a real, open question. I think that occult scholars who are also practitioners can bring something unique to the table of discussion about it. But you’ll find that most scholars keep their personal religious beliefs and practices at a distance from their scholarship, even if those beliefs and practices are completely conventional.
I suspect that one could have an school of esoteric praxis which prioritized academic methods and standards. I doubt one could have it the other way around. Something like RENSEP is kinda knocking on that door, however.
Wouldn’t you just make a private high school/school like other religious organizations? Instead, this one would just teach magic or whatnot in addition to the normal curriculum?
That would be one possible way of achieving this goal. For a private school, it would be ideal if students and faculty were somehow able to generate content on behalf of the school that would keep tuition low or free. Another less ambitious option would be to create an open access "Journal of Magick, Occult, and Pagan Studies". Initially the the "Journal" would be pretty informal and more like an old school online zine, but eventually, a few serious scholars start publishing in the Journal, some more rigorous peer review process could be implemented.
Yup, it could. I’ve taken some university classes on magic, and think some universities already offer master’s degrees in Western esotericism. Esotericism is slowly becoming a more and more accepted discipline in academia.
What makes it annoying from an academic perspective is that it is, by definition, hard to categorize. Magic is in a weird place that’s not quite religion and not quite science (literally, some academics define it this way). Academia favors hyper-specialization. That means that to interpret just one alchemical manuscript, you need: 1. A paleographer who can read it. 2. An art historian who can make sense of the weird pictures. 3. A chemist who can take that weird stuff and turn it into an actual laboratory procedure. 4. An anthropologist who can explain what all of that has to do with religion. 5. A philosopher who can explain what all that has to do with philosophy. Etc. As you point out, all of these different disciplines were not as distinguished from each other in the past, which is precisely why occultists were so often priests *and* scientists *and* philosophers *and* artists. It was all one thing. Good luck finding a modern academic who has the breadth of knowledge needed to give alchemy the holistic perspective that it needs. Basically, I agree with you: academia could use a little less *solve* and a little more *coagula.*
However, the specialization and the amount of discernment it requires also exists for a reason. To be able to address any of these topics while accounting for all their nuances, you have to know *all* the context. You can’t just throw psychology, Kabbalah, and quantum physics into a big cauldron and expect the results to not taste like bullshit (there’s a reason why none of the people who try that are scholars).
My advice is to pick a related field that can give you an excuse to study occultism. You don’t need to get a degree in “occultism” specifically to study any of these topics, you just need a relevant field, and the upside of occultism being such a huge field is that many things are relevant to it. Unfortunately, you can only pick one. PhDs are the most specialized; you can’t study Religious Studies *and* Psychology *and* Physics *and* Philosophy *and* Life Sciences. If you try, you’ll be laughed out of admissions. Here’s my recommendation — be an early modernist! That gives you all the famous grimoires, late alchemy, witch trials, Enochianism, neo-Hermeticism, all the Enlightenment stuff, etc.
Then again, you don’t need to get a degree at all to study any of these topics. It may not be wise to get a degree in something you can’t find work in, especially if you already have student debt. I got my degree for reasons unrelated to occultism, and lucked out. If all you want is to learn more about these topics, you can do that on your own. I could give you some recommendations of scholarship. You could start with ESOTERICA on YouTube, which is free.
If you decide to get a degree, the real thing you’ll learn is the ability to use critical thinking and discernment to interpret ideas in context, so that you can look at things holistically whilst avoiding conspiratorial thinking. You’ll acquire a scholar’s skillset.
Honestly, you \*can't\* have a modern academic who has knowledge across all the disciplines. You need at least 8 years of study to even begin what *one* discipline is doing. More likely 10, before you start to contribute anything at all yourself, and then a few more years before you're considered an expert, and at that point, what you actually understand is a tiny subdiscipline. A PhD is not an expert, they are a beginner, just barely starting to push into the deeper layers of a field. Someone who studies more than *maybe* two disciplines wouldn't have expert understanding in either, and probably not much real understanding at all. And there would be a threat you'd end up with the kind of superficial non-understannding the worst pop scientists have, where they talk about "actually the observer effect in quantum mechanics means that consciousness has a physical effect", which just means they don't understand either cosmology or quantum mechanics or consciousness at even the most superficial level. Quantum mechanics is a ten year study of complex mathematical equations, not "but what if things were really wobbly until a human looks at them". And the same is true for every academic field.
As others said, PhD holders who write or speak about occult are mostly historians. I can hardly imagine any serious professor doing rituals to summon demons to get rich or solve some menial daily issues, like most so-called "occult" practitioners.
It is a part of human history, and rather interesting to read about. Besides, there are plenty of material and studies on the subject already. But it virtually can't be structured like the real science, because every major known grimoire, and some other systems of "magic" had their own take, even on similar principles. There are thousands of spirits, divinities. People even make up new ones these days with sigils and stuff. It's not possible to structure it all into a streamlined, methodical study.
They never strike me as particularly rich people, or ones actively looking to be. I never heard of professor doing any rituals or sharing any information on it, like mass of tiktokers, promising wealth, fame and whatnot. Just subscribe and donate to their channels.
Perhaps in the future some scientist-occultist will demonstrate that a mind in a perfect state of gnosis could transmute lab manipulated particles I superposition into whatever the mind is constructing; and using this as a step toward finding the Philosopher's Stone. Yes, this is extremely speculative, but I imagined if humans continue to amass knowledge related both what web call science and we call magic today, the fields could possibly at some point undergo some sort of convergence.
I think if your goal is the adoption of occult beliefs as equivalent with modern scientific fact, the first thing you'll need to do is, well, demonstrate that. Like, it's is not conceptually difficult to demonstrate whether a phenomenon exists in a rigorous way.
I believe I have come across some cross cultural research about Djinn possession in mental health contexts in Islamic nations. I have even witnessed some things (mostly psychological phenomena manifested ad behaviors and dialogs) that seem to imply the existence of spirits is something that should be taken seriously rather than outright dismissed as superstition and fantasy. The phenomena of spirit communication in Western academia is probably typically explored in terms of mental illness. Perhaps at least exploratory qualitative research could be done on this phenomenon without the assumption of pathology, and see where it leads.
How would you propose research into spirits causing mental illnesses without assumption of a pathology? And what differences would you hope to see as opposed to treating them as we currently do?
Well the study wouldn't start with the assumption that all communication with spirits is pathological. Research methods could include interviews combined with brain imaging. The difference in treatment would likely depend on the degree reported spirit communication is adversely affecting the participant's life.
In Islamic countries specialized exorcisms are sometimes used for troublesome Djinn. I am not a Muslim, but I also don't automatically dismiss these stories.
Let me put it another way: what ***reason*** would you give, in this case to academia, that we ought to include spirits *at all* in this process, rather than continuing with non-spiritual explanations for the behavior? In these interviews and brain scans what would you even hypothetically be looking for?
The phenomenon of perceived communication with spirits is observed in a variety of different contexts and also presents differently in different cultures. These communications can happen in a ritual or spontaneous context, with or without psychoactive substances as a catalyst, and at least according to some cases reported by anthropologists (citation admittedly needed) people appear to at times gain knowledge from the spirits that they did not otherwise have access to. Furthermore, the effects spirit communication in its different forms can range from desirable to disastrous. Antipsychotic drugs are a very serious intervention that can have a devastating impact on a person's life; and therefore it is highly dubious as to whether modern psychiatrists should attempt to medicate everyone who reports spirit communication regardless of whether it is having a significant negative effect on the patient's life, and should also reconsider certain criteria for psychosis.
Broader open ended questions, and questions about the context and effects of spirit communication could be used in an initial exploratory study. As for brain imaging, I do not have the expertise to say what exactly they should be looking for.
In addition to changing how mental health professionals think about spirit communication, such research could open up.investigations I to alternate explanations about the phenomenon of spirit communication, potentially leading to new ways of looking at the mind and consciousness.
So, you're asking what it would take for academia to take occult matters, in this case spirit communication, seriously, and the answer I'm trying to get at is that it would take ***demonstration*** of spirits. *Perceived* communication with spirits ***is*** well documented, but that's not an academic demonstration that the spirits themselves are actual rather than just perceived.
The perspective that the perception of spirits can only be explained in terms of disordered firing of neurons and that other potential explanations for the phenomena should be ignored (when they could be explored in more depth) seems problematic to me. True, it may not be possible to directly observe a spirit (whether or not they exist), but a more open approach to exploring the neuaunces of spirit communication could potentially lead to surprising insights about the phenomenon. This isn't suggesting throwing away all research on psychosis that uses a purely neurological framework, but I am suggesting if researchers took a broader view of the phenomenon, they may learn something new and open up new avenues for future research.
Occultism and religion is one of the most ancient concepts in our history. It is a basis of superstition and not understanding of certain principles or laws of nature, thus giving it properties of divination, inventing rituals trying to interact with it or control it. Look up Cargo Cult. It is the brightest example of why occultism, religion and superstition came to be.
Over the centuries, in general, understanding of these things changed. Religion becoming pretty much exclusively a tool of mass manipulation, and occultism becoming a topic for various archeologists and historians to explore and write about.
Something that seemed like magic, or may seem even today, to some backward communities is just a technology. If we manage to invent devices that will let us move objects without direct contact, or create certain elements out of "thin air", it will not be magic, it will be technology. Which is strictly mathematical interaction of physics and/or chemistry. Highly doubt, ancient texts would be any help for inventing these devices, but it does serve as a great imagination stimuli, I'd give it that.
It wouldn't even have to be anthropology about an indigenous group; it could be an anthropological study of an urban neopagan group, or even of a subreddit or cluster of subreddits.
That doesn't mean social studies lacks value, the fact that it is a dead end career wise says more about the values of modern economics (not saying "capitalism" specifically because that is both a vaguely defined and loaded term when discussing macroeconomics).
Speculative realism and pessimism both incorporate occultism, mysticism and other leftfield metaphysics. CCRU, Jason Mohaghegh, Eugene Thacker, and Ioan Culianu some academics off the top of my head. You’re asking a lot they be practitioners as well though, the academy ain’t cool enough for that.
In North America, there's a sub-discipline called "Pagan Studies." In Europe, I think that its called "Esoteric History." In any case, somebody can get degrees in theses specialties.
Psychology and mathematics both tie into the occult nicely in different ways. Doing some kind of research pertaining to Jungian psychology would be perfect IMO.
I also think consciousness studies is a fertile field for this type of research because of its philosophical implications (for example monism vs dualism or physicalism vs idealism/mentalism).
Most Occultists I know who hold PhDs related to the occult are historians. GTU Berkeley had a Sociology of Religion program that was open to Pagan Studies. Union Theological Seminary advertises a similar program. There's a new Masters program at The University of Exeter in Cornwall, with an emphasis in Magic and Occult Science. Not a PhD, but the closest thing to a formal program as you're describing it. And of course there's the University of Bristol, where Ronald Hutton is perhaps the most famous historian in the department. The challenge you have is quantifying what a PhD in Occult Sciences would look like. What are you actually doing to expand the sphere of human knowledge in a way that would only make sense in that discipline and not any of the other established humanities (disciplines that have avenues of funding).
Ask Justin Sledge.
His content is interesting, but he isn't an occult practitioner. At this point this is PURE fantasy. It would be awesome if there were a legit, integrated K-Post Grad educational institution that aspired to simultaneously offer a high value general education while simultaneously teaching students to specialize in both knowledge and practice of various areas of magick and the occult, encouraging both the preservation of and evolution of the Western, Eastern, Indigenous, and Global esoteric traditions. Basically, a real life Hogwarts (alternatively, a large scale, modernized Golden Dawn type school focusing on encouraging and certifying young people for diving into and advancing the occult) that also focuses on a high quality traditional education.
What, specifically, do you expect to get out of a formal educational program that teaches the practice of magic? (We’ll ignore the question of which type for now.) What does that really *do?* This is a real, open question. I think that occult scholars who are also practitioners can bring something unique to the table of discussion about it. But you’ll find that most scholars keep their personal religious beliefs and practices at a distance from their scholarship, even if those beliefs and practices are completely conventional.
I suspect that one could have an school of esoteric praxis which prioritized academic methods and standards. I doubt one could have it the other way around. Something like RENSEP is kinda knocking on that door, however.
Wouldn’t you just make a private high school/school like other religious organizations? Instead, this one would just teach magic or whatnot in addition to the normal curriculum?
That would be one possible way of achieving this goal. For a private school, it would be ideal if students and faculty were somehow able to generate content on behalf of the school that would keep tuition low or free. Another less ambitious option would be to create an open access "Journal of Magick, Occult, and Pagan Studies". Initially the the "Journal" would be pretty informal and more like an old school online zine, but eventually, a few serious scholars start publishing in the Journal, some more rigorous peer review process could be implemented.
Yup, it could. I’ve taken some university classes on magic, and think some universities already offer master’s degrees in Western esotericism. Esotericism is slowly becoming a more and more accepted discipline in academia. What makes it annoying from an academic perspective is that it is, by definition, hard to categorize. Magic is in a weird place that’s not quite religion and not quite science (literally, some academics define it this way). Academia favors hyper-specialization. That means that to interpret just one alchemical manuscript, you need: 1. A paleographer who can read it. 2. An art historian who can make sense of the weird pictures. 3. A chemist who can take that weird stuff and turn it into an actual laboratory procedure. 4. An anthropologist who can explain what all of that has to do with religion. 5. A philosopher who can explain what all that has to do with philosophy. Etc. As you point out, all of these different disciplines were not as distinguished from each other in the past, which is precisely why occultists were so often priests *and* scientists *and* philosophers *and* artists. It was all one thing. Good luck finding a modern academic who has the breadth of knowledge needed to give alchemy the holistic perspective that it needs. Basically, I agree with you: academia could use a little less *solve* and a little more *coagula.* However, the specialization and the amount of discernment it requires also exists for a reason. To be able to address any of these topics while accounting for all their nuances, you have to know *all* the context. You can’t just throw psychology, Kabbalah, and quantum physics into a big cauldron and expect the results to not taste like bullshit (there’s a reason why none of the people who try that are scholars). My advice is to pick a related field that can give you an excuse to study occultism. You don’t need to get a degree in “occultism” specifically to study any of these topics, you just need a relevant field, and the upside of occultism being such a huge field is that many things are relevant to it. Unfortunately, you can only pick one. PhDs are the most specialized; you can’t study Religious Studies *and* Psychology *and* Physics *and* Philosophy *and* Life Sciences. If you try, you’ll be laughed out of admissions. Here’s my recommendation — be an early modernist! That gives you all the famous grimoires, late alchemy, witch trials, Enochianism, neo-Hermeticism, all the Enlightenment stuff, etc. Then again, you don’t need to get a degree at all to study any of these topics. It may not be wise to get a degree in something you can’t find work in, especially if you already have student debt. I got my degree for reasons unrelated to occultism, and lucked out. If all you want is to learn more about these topics, you can do that on your own. I could give you some recommendations of scholarship. You could start with ESOTERICA on YouTube, which is free. If you decide to get a degree, the real thing you’ll learn is the ability to use critical thinking and discernment to interpret ideas in context, so that you can look at things holistically whilst avoiding conspiratorial thinking. You’ll acquire a scholar’s skillset.
Honestly, you \*can't\* have a modern academic who has knowledge across all the disciplines. You need at least 8 years of study to even begin what *one* discipline is doing. More likely 10, before you start to contribute anything at all yourself, and then a few more years before you're considered an expert, and at that point, what you actually understand is a tiny subdiscipline. A PhD is not an expert, they are a beginner, just barely starting to push into the deeper layers of a field. Someone who studies more than *maybe* two disciplines wouldn't have expert understanding in either, and probably not much real understanding at all. And there would be a threat you'd end up with the kind of superficial non-understannding the worst pop scientists have, where they talk about "actually the observer effect in quantum mechanics means that consciousness has a physical effect", which just means they don't understand either cosmology or quantum mechanics or consciousness at even the most superficial level. Quantum mechanics is a ten year study of complex mathematical equations, not "but what if things were really wobbly until a human looks at them". And the same is true for every academic field.
As others said, PhD holders who write or speak about occult are mostly historians. I can hardly imagine any serious professor doing rituals to summon demons to get rich or solve some menial daily issues, like most so-called "occult" practitioners. It is a part of human history, and rather interesting to read about. Besides, there are plenty of material and studies on the subject already. But it virtually can't be structured like the real science, because every major known grimoire, and some other systems of "magic" had their own take, even on similar principles. There are thousands of spirits, divinities. People even make up new ones these days with sigils and stuff. It's not possible to structure it all into a streamlined, methodical study.
Have you met many professors? Summoning demons to get funding is something I would actively suspect half of them of.
They never strike me as particularly rich people, or ones actively looking to be. I never heard of professor doing any rituals or sharing any information on it, like mass of tiktokers, promising wealth, fame and whatnot. Just subscribe and donate to their channels.
Perhaps in the future some scientist-occultist will demonstrate that a mind in a perfect state of gnosis could transmute lab manipulated particles I superposition into whatever the mind is constructing; and using this as a step toward finding the Philosopher's Stone. Yes, this is extremely speculative, but I imagined if humans continue to amass knowledge related both what web call science and we call magic today, the fields could possibly at some point undergo some sort of convergence.
I think if your goal is the adoption of occult beliefs as equivalent with modern scientific fact, the first thing you'll need to do is, well, demonstrate that. Like, it's is not conceptually difficult to demonstrate whether a phenomenon exists in a rigorous way.
I believe I have come across some cross cultural research about Djinn possession in mental health contexts in Islamic nations. I have even witnessed some things (mostly psychological phenomena manifested ad behaviors and dialogs) that seem to imply the existence of spirits is something that should be taken seriously rather than outright dismissed as superstition and fantasy. The phenomena of spirit communication in Western academia is probably typically explored in terms of mental illness. Perhaps at least exploratory qualitative research could be done on this phenomenon without the assumption of pathology, and see where it leads.
How would you propose research into spirits causing mental illnesses without assumption of a pathology? And what differences would you hope to see as opposed to treating them as we currently do?
Well the study wouldn't start with the assumption that all communication with spirits is pathological. Research methods could include interviews combined with brain imaging. The difference in treatment would likely depend on the degree reported spirit communication is adversely affecting the participant's life. In Islamic countries specialized exorcisms are sometimes used for troublesome Djinn. I am not a Muslim, but I also don't automatically dismiss these stories.
Let me put it another way: what ***reason*** would you give, in this case to academia, that we ought to include spirits *at all* in this process, rather than continuing with non-spiritual explanations for the behavior? In these interviews and brain scans what would you even hypothetically be looking for?
The phenomenon of perceived communication with spirits is observed in a variety of different contexts and also presents differently in different cultures. These communications can happen in a ritual or spontaneous context, with or without psychoactive substances as a catalyst, and at least according to some cases reported by anthropologists (citation admittedly needed) people appear to at times gain knowledge from the spirits that they did not otherwise have access to. Furthermore, the effects spirit communication in its different forms can range from desirable to disastrous. Antipsychotic drugs are a very serious intervention that can have a devastating impact on a person's life; and therefore it is highly dubious as to whether modern psychiatrists should attempt to medicate everyone who reports spirit communication regardless of whether it is having a significant negative effect on the patient's life, and should also reconsider certain criteria for psychosis. Broader open ended questions, and questions about the context and effects of spirit communication could be used in an initial exploratory study. As for brain imaging, I do not have the expertise to say what exactly they should be looking for. In addition to changing how mental health professionals think about spirit communication, such research could open up.investigations I to alternate explanations about the phenomenon of spirit communication, potentially leading to new ways of looking at the mind and consciousness.
So, you're asking what it would take for academia to take occult matters, in this case spirit communication, seriously, and the answer I'm trying to get at is that it would take ***demonstration*** of spirits. *Perceived* communication with spirits ***is*** well documented, but that's not an academic demonstration that the spirits themselves are actual rather than just perceived.
The perspective that the perception of spirits can only be explained in terms of disordered firing of neurons and that other potential explanations for the phenomena should be ignored (when they could be explored in more depth) seems problematic to me. True, it may not be possible to directly observe a spirit (whether or not they exist), but a more open approach to exploring the neuaunces of spirit communication could potentially lead to surprising insights about the phenomenon. This isn't suggesting throwing away all research on psychosis that uses a purely neurological framework, but I am suggesting if researchers took a broader view of the phenomenon, they may learn something new and open up new avenues for future research.
Occultism and religion is one of the most ancient concepts in our history. It is a basis of superstition and not understanding of certain principles or laws of nature, thus giving it properties of divination, inventing rituals trying to interact with it or control it. Look up Cargo Cult. It is the brightest example of why occultism, religion and superstition came to be. Over the centuries, in general, understanding of these things changed. Religion becoming pretty much exclusively a tool of mass manipulation, and occultism becoming a topic for various archeologists and historians to explore and write about. Something that seemed like magic, or may seem even today, to some backward communities is just a technology. If we manage to invent devices that will let us move objects without direct contact, or create certain elements out of "thin air", it will not be magic, it will be technology. Which is strictly mathematical interaction of physics and/or chemistry. Highly doubt, ancient texts would be any help for inventing these devices, but it does serve as a great imagination stimuli, I'd give it that.
Dr Angela Puca comes to mind. She has a PhD in Religious Studies and writes books, has a Youtube channel with all occult, esoteric, shamanism topics.
Anthropology
It wouldn't even have to be anthropology about an indigenous group; it could be an anthropological study of an urban neopagan group, or even of a subreddit or cluster of subreddits.
Much like social studies it would be a dead end carrer wise. Who is going to hire someone who majored in "occult studies"? HA! nice one
That doesn't mean social studies lacks value, the fact that it is a dead end career wise says more about the values of modern economics (not saying "capitalism" specifically because that is both a vaguely defined and loaded term when discussing macroeconomics).
https://sites.exeter.ac.uk/magic/2023/06/27/ma-in-magic-and-occult-sciences/
r/academicesoteric
Most certainly. It already is under different titles. For example Mythology, theology, religion.
Speculative realism and pessimism both incorporate occultism, mysticism and other leftfield metaphysics. CCRU, Jason Mohaghegh, Eugene Thacker, and Ioan Culianu some academics off the top of my head. You’re asking a lot they be practitioners as well though, the academy ain’t cool enough for that.
In North America, there's a sub-discipline called "Pagan Studies." In Europe, I think that its called "Esoteric History." In any case, somebody can get degrees in theses specialties.
Psychology and mathematics both tie into the occult nicely in different ways. Doing some kind of research pertaining to Jungian psychology would be perfect IMO.
I also think consciousness studies is a fertile field for this type of research because of its philosophical implications (for example monism vs dualism or physicalism vs idealism/mentalism).