Water Dowsing

[Wirraway]

For the record, I reject all of the above premises that a twitchy stick is either science, engineering, or supernatural. Sometimes a stick is just a stick.

Actually, on second thought…a stick is ALWAYS just a stick.

If someone believes they can find water using a twitchy stick, they are only guilty of divination if they believe that supernatural forces are causing the stick to twitch.

For that matter, if someone wants to follow a twitchy needle in the hope it will lead them north, they are also only guilty of divination if they believe that supernatural forces are directing the needle.

but any fifth grader can explain magnetism. a stick is just a stick, unless its being used for something, e.g, firewood and the process of combustion is well understood; building, and any engineer can explain the tensile strength of wood; or a tool to poke ants out of an anthill with, ask any clever chimp. but to witch water? there’s no connection to anything except Magick, and the practitioner knows it, whether he admits it or not.

 

[Oscarthecat]

but any fifth grader can explain magnetism. a stick is just a stick, unless its being used for something, e.g, firewood and the process of combustion is well understood; building, and any engineer can explain the tensile strength of wood; or a tool to poke ants out of an anthill with, ask any clever chimp. but to witch water? there’s no connection to anything except Magick, and the practitioner knows it, whether he admits it or not.

Sure, in modern society, most people generally accept that magnetism has a scientific basis.

But the ancient greeks and chinese, who discovered natural magnets (lodestones), originally used them for two basic applications.

Initially it was commonly believed that magnetic forces were controlled by spirits, some people based a variety of fortune telling techniques around the use of magnets.

Not much later it was observed that the magnets were naturally oriented in the same direction, they were found to be useful in a variety of construction and navigation applications. Still, some people believed this to be the work of spiritual forces.

It wasn’t until the 1200’s that magnetic properties were studied as a naturally occurring phenomenon.

In both cases, the magnets used were somewhat unreliable because the ancient greeks and chinese had not yet learned how to refine and enhance the magnetic properties of particular ores. Consequently, magnets were also viewed with a degree of skepticism. That is, reasonable people not unlike yourself believed that metal ore had specific, known uses that could not possibly include uniformly pointing toward a specific direction.

Just like the early use of magnets, water dowsing may simply be a crude and unreliable application of a perfectly natural scientifically provable phenomena, and it is not inappropriate for people to engage in it so long as they don’t attribute the phenomena to some spiritual force.

Who knows, maybe someone will discover some kind of interaction between underground water and common compounds in the ground that yields some really useful technology, and was only discovered because of the occurrence of an unpredictable and unreliable event like water dowsing.

 

[thistle]

I agree with Wirraway. A stick is just a stick. Not a magnet or anything else. A person who uses a stick to try to find water is either simply a fake or they believe they have a supernatural ability to use it to find water. In either case it is sinful.

 

[Wirraway]

…
Who knows, maybe …

here’s the problem with that kind of speculation. it leads to undisciplined implausibility:

“who knows, maybe the Cloverfield Monster will come ashore and swipe all the evidence of dowsing …”

“who knows, maybe the water is attracted to sticks”

“who knows, maybe there really is Magick”

thistle, thanks.

 

[Oscarthecat]

I agree with Wirraway. A stick is just a stick. Not a magnet or anything else. A person who uses a stick to try to find water is either simply a fake or they believe they have a supernatural ability to use it to find water. In either case it is sinful.

Before responding, I should probably say again that I don’t think there is any truth to water dowsing, I don’t do it, and I’ve never observed it being done…

And I agree with you that water dowsing is sinful when regarded as a supernatural event, and it is sinful to use it to commit fraud.

But you have to keep in mind that the moral quality of water dowsing depends on the belief and intention of the moral agent.

Some acts are intrinsically immoral, but most are morally neutral. Abortion, for example, is intrinsically immoral because it is cannot occur apart from the destruction of an innocent life. Eating, however, does not carry an intrinsic moral quality, because the act of eating can be oriented toward a moral good (continuing human life), or a moral evil (gluttony).

Therefore, the moral quality of morally neutral acts is derived from the moral agent’s understanding of and intention for the particular act.

Water dowsing is not sinful if the person believes, in good conscience, that water dowsing is a completely natural event that is not supernatural in any way whatsoever then the act is not sinful because it is not a form of divination and it does not meet the conditions for fraud.

 

[Wirraway]

…
Water dowsing is not sinful if the person believes, in good conscience, that water dowsing is a completely natural event that is not supernatural in any way whatsoever then the act is not sinful because it is not a form of divination and it does not meet the conditions for fraud.

and how would one form a good conscience about water witching except by intentionally remaining ignorant of or intentionally ignoring the plethora of valid criticisms about it?

a doctor or engineer who failed to keep current with professional developments in his or her field and maintained an active practice would violate professional ethics, regardless of subjective intention.

 

[Oscarthecat]

and how would one form a good conscience about water witching except by intentionally remaining ignorant of or intentionally ignoring the plethora of valid criticisms about it?

a doctor or engineer who failed to keep current with professional developments in his or her field and maintained an active practice would violate professional ethics, regardless of subjective intention.

Two things,

First, you’re operating on the presumption that the particular practice in question is an obligate form of divination, such that all occasions of this practice are occasions of divination, regardless of the practitioners understanding of the practice.

The problem with this presumption is that in order for something to be an obligate form of divination is that the form, function, and matter of the practice would have to be directly and expressly oriented toward divination. That is, an ouija board is designed for the purpose of divination, it has no other intended function but to engage in divination, and the practice of using an ouija board is unambiguous about the fact that the user is attempting to engage in divination.

Water dowsing does not fit all or any of those criteria, because the matter, form, and function of the practice are sufficiently ambiguous that the only connection to divination is in the mind of the practitioner or observer.

Secondly,

It appears that this conversation is beginning to have less to do with the OP at this point, and more to do with the Church’s teaching on the nature of sin, our culpability for particular sin, and what contributes to a well formed conscience.