>>40789608 (OP)I don't care what others think, so i don't need to cope with that. I have my paradigm, which i don't cultivate with wishful thinking, so the beliefs that come out of it don't act as coping mechanisms.
Besides, there's no science/religion dichotomy, science is a religion. The only dichotomy here is mythos/logos, people nowadays have given "exclusive religious status" to the religions based on mythos, but science is a religion of logos. They're two different paths that converge at the same point at different times. They have their roots in philosophy and both paths converge there cyclically in order to re-calibrate themselves. Mythos religions in time turn into logos religions, and logos religions in time turn into mythos religions, and the cycle repeats.
You can see this with quantum physics for example, they're starting to reach a point where they need to re-calibrate by relying on subjectivity because they can't find a way to understand ineffability through logos. The "occult" is something that emerges from this contrast in the cycles, people mystify, misunderstands it and/or obscures it, but the occult can be expressed both through mythos and through logos, magic and technology, they're the same dog with a different collar. Most people never see the dog, they're only fixated on the collar, that's why friction between both paths emerges. "The scientific communities mock your absence of proof", the proof is the dog.
