How Rational Minds Embrace Magic and Witchcraft (Tanya Luhrmann's Persuasions of the Witch's Craft)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 тра 2024
- Tanya Luhrmann's, 'Persuasions of the Witch's Craft: Ritual Magic in Contemporary England', offers an in-depth exploration of how individuals in modern, scientifically-oriented societies develop a profound connection with the practices of magic and witchcraft. At the core of our discussion is Luhrmann's intriguing concept of 'interpretative drift,' which describes a gradual yet significant shift in how people perceive and integrate magical beliefs into their rational worldview.
We delve into the intricate process of this shift, examining how factors such as community involvement, ritual participation, and cognitive changes influence the way educated and often sceptical individuals come to embrace magical practices. This exploration is not just a one-sided view; I will also present various counterarguments, providing a comprehensive perspective on the complexities of belief formation within the context of magic and witchcraft.
CONNECT & SUPPORT💖
MY COURSES 👩🏻🎓 drangelapuca.com/courses
WEBSITE & NEWSLETTER 💌 www.drangelapuca.com/#newsletter
BOOK A TUTORING OR A LECTURE 📖drangelapuca.com/services
BECOME MY PATRON! 🎩 / angelapuca
SUPPORT ME ON KO-FI ☕️ko-fi.com/drangelapuca
ONE-OFF DONATIONS 💰 paypal.me/angelasymposium
JOIN MEMBERSHIPS 👥 / @drangelapuca
MY PODCAST 🎙 open.spotify.com/show/2TKoWTG...
MY MERCH 👕 drangelapuca.creator-spring.com/
FOLLOW ME👣
- UA-cam (@drangelapuca)🌟
- Instagram (@drangelapuca) 📸
- TikTok (@drangelapuca) 🎵
- Twitter (@angelapuca11) 🐦
- Facebook (Dr Angela Puca) 👥
REFERENCES 📚
Luhrmann, T.M., 1989. Persuasions of the Witch's Craft: Ritual Magic in Contemporary England. Harvard University Press.
amzn.to/3RK70Rr
James, W., 1902. The Varieties of Religious Experience. Longmans, Green, and Co.
amzn.to/3RPchr6
Stark, R. and Bainbridge, W.S., 1985. The Future of Religion: Secularization, Revival, and Cult Formation. University of California Press. amzn.to/3tF9ade
Festinger, L., 1957. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford University Press. amzn.to/3H7LQYI
Wuthnow, R., 1998. After Heaven: Spirituality in America Since the 1950s. University of California Press. amzn.to/3NPJ2TI
Wuthnow, R., 1988. The Restructuring of American Religion: Society and Faith Since World War II. Princeton University Press. amzn.to/41Kibyi
MY SET-UP 🛠️
- Canon 90D camera 📸 amzn.to/3yQclh0
- Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 📷 amzn.to/3JjU1BS
- Teleprompter 🗒️ amzn.to/3linWCB
- Shure SM7B Microphone 🎙️ amzn.to/3Jm5IYK
- Microphone stand 🎤 amzn.to/3FueJOn
- Lights 💡 amzn.to/3Zdk8k1
- DJI Wireless microphones 📡 amzn.to/3NWAVVQ
00:00 Introduction: Rationalising Magic And Witchcraft
02:09 Tanya Luhrmann and Interpretative Drift
03:20 How can Rational People Embrace Magic and Witchcraft
05:07 Luhrmann’s Argument Explained: Incremental Nature
06:05 Counter-Argument to Incrementalism
07:11 Plausibility Structures
08:23 Counter-Argument to Plausibility Structures
09:58 Cognitive Dissonance & Rationalisation
11:10 Counter-Argument to Cognitive Dissonance & Rationalisation
12:21 Embodied Knowledge and Practice
13:32 Counter-Argument to Embodied Knowledge and Practice
14:33 Community and Belonging
15:38 Counter-Argument to Community and Belonging
17:38 Support Angela’s Symposium
⚠️ Copyright of Dr Angela Puca, in all of its parts ⚠️
Music by Erose MusicBand. Check them out!
WEBSITE & NEWSLETTER 💌 www.drangelapuca.com/#newsletter
BOOK A TUTORING OR A LECTURE 📖drangelapuca.com/services
BECOME MY PATRON! 🎩 www.patreon.com/angelapuca
SUPPORT ME ON KO-FI ☕ko-fi.com/drangelapuca
ONE-OFF DONATIONS 💰 paypal.me/angelasymposium
JOIN MEMBERSHIPS 👥 ua-cam.com/channels/PSbip_LX2AxbGeAQfLp-Ig.htmljoin
MY PODCAST 🎙 open.spotify.com/show/2TKoWTGe6OKRokHN2zUIxM?si=dd9f50a734b14f86
MY MERCH 👕 drangelapuca.creator-spring.com/
This video practically DEMANDS a follow-up about atheist witchcraft! There are many out there (like myself) who have no belief in anything supernatural, but find that rituals derived from occult practices can still prove greatly beneficial. The core difference (in my view) is that instead of performing a ritual to draw power from an external (supernatural) source, atheist witches perform rituals that reinforce their own inner strengths and power.
As I describe it… it’s like mindfulness meditation, but with ⚡️🔮drama🔮⚡️
Dr Puca had a fascinating interview with The Skeptical Witch - Atheistic and Skeptical Witchcraft with @theskepticalwitch6611 ua-cam.com/video/_WONvCEnYic/v-deo.html Also, there are practitioners who describe themselves as atheist who believe in an external magical power or force but not in deities and spirits.
Spirituality isn't only outside supernatural, It comes from with in. Mindness mediation is a spiritual ritual that you explore your own mind to understand your wholeness in your reality. In psychology reality is a perception of the individual.
@@CutenerdywomanMaybe you find mindfulness meditation spiritual, but plenty of non-spiritual people are able to perform mindfulness meditation in a non-spiritual way. Mindfulness meditation has observable benefits and brain scans show its effects on the brain.
This is distinct from crystal healing, or reiki, or praying for healing to a god, which, time and time again, have consistently proven to have NO effectiveness. At best they make the person on the receiving end of these "techniques" FEEL better, which isn't proof of anything except the placebo effect.
Secular/atheist witchcraft dispenses with the "this actually works!" claim and sticks with what can demonstrably be shown to be true - that rituals and other magic/spiritual practices can make you feel "better". And that's all that changes - your feelings and perceptions. This is sufficient for atheist witches, who understand the power of placebo and have their witchy way with it. At the end of the day, they rely on their own inner power, not some external supernatural (and non-existent ) force.
@@Quonzan what is your definition of spiritual? because you argument is proving my point. I think you are confusing spiritual with religion. you are seeing spiritual as a belief in higher power outside of yourself. but, I'm coming for a Psychology point of view, spiritual coming from with in. I don't care what you believe of disbelieve, when MRI studies show mediation effects the part of the brain is believe to where spiritual experiences happens. Mediation also strength parts of the brain, and people who were mediations regarely recover faster the someone who didn't.
✏✒ Growing up in the "Bible Belt" (the American South), I've noticed similar contrasts in the conversion (including de-conversion and denomination-shopping) experiences of a lot of Christians, such that I can't see this as a simple "all or nothing" issue. I've met people who both gradually and suddenly converted; I've met people who tried to bring as much of their old beliefs into the new as possible but also those who rejected any similarities the new might have had with the old; and I've met people who converted mostly in isolation and those who did so to integrate into a group. I have noticed a tendency for those who gradually transition to do so as a result of community involvement and are more likely to bring in their old beliefs; while those who convert rather suddenly usually did so because of a lack of support from old groups and get very angry when you point out any similarities between the new and old affiliations. That said, there's still enough persons who break that trend that I wouldn't say it's a rule.
I think people are becoming disillusioned with the liberal-rationalist view that there is only one truth and that everyone else is wrong. You dont have to think there is only one truth and you can curate your beliefs and understandings. A scientist can feel the power of a spring dawn if they are willing to perceive the circling of the seasons. A lover can feel that they 'loved their beloved before they met them' in biochemical terms as the induced fit between an enzyme and its substrate. It doesnt have to be either/or. It can be both.
Im keep being so greatful to the great sir that gave me that free membership on your b day, i hope you are well...im watching this tonight ❤
Interesting, in my own case, a large breakthrough for me was reading Isaac Bonowits’ book “real magic “. it managed to answer the question of how all these different religions got results for their followers, by giving a meta-model of spiritual experience, that could be understood and applied in almost any situation, whether religious or magical. It did, however, leave out the transcendent aspect of religion, which is why I am drifting more towards Tibetan, Buddhism, which has its own use of magic, but with the goal of a breakthrough of understanding into the real nature of reality. ✏️
It seems to me that belief formation is a combination interpretative drift and dramatic, spontaneous mystical experiences that alert the experiencer that a deeper understanding is possible.
Rituals are powerful, physical shortcuts that in many ways, allow to us try a belief system on for size, similar to trying on clothing in a retail store. For some mystics/magicians they lean more towards group identity and belonging and for others they lean towards the belief system that matches their own individual experiences.
This is obviously based on their personality and temperament.
This was a stimulating discourse. 😏
🖋️
🖋 Definitely an interesting topic. It always bugs me though that rationality supposedly must be secular. I do believe in science, but I can also believe that there are things science hasn't figured out yet.
Pencil emoji. Strikes me that Luhrman might describe some practioners, there are also a significant number of practioners that don't fit that mold. I'd also recommend Patrick McNamara's works on the neuroscience of religious experience, which (to my mind) reinforces William James's model... Especially significant as he looks at possession experiences that are a part of many practices.
Interpretative drift is such an accurate and 'speaking' concept, thank you for sharing. With regards to rituals, it seems like those too could be reinterpreted and given newer fresher life these days, less so the paraphernalia but the essence of special or revered attitude to selected things and processes could possibly open for some if us more space away from the mundane and the routine. Rediscovering and redefining the concept of rituals could add some more meaning and significance here and there. We tend to wait for the 'meaning' to be revealed or given, but as semiotician I very much like to stress how 'meaning' is something we create and attribute to things. And there is a lot of power in that understanding applied on a daily basis and these times seem to be specifically fit for this type of experiments ❤✒️🖍️
✒️✏️ Very cool video! As someone from a scientific background, mathematics, I have often struggled with how to rationally approach the practice of magick. It has been a slow shift of opening my mind to the possibilities of things beyond my understanding, balanced with observations, personal experiences, and experimentation.
The power of the mind to alter our experience of reality is definitely profound, especially with consistent practice. I tend to believe that conscious experience is a "discussion" occurring between the sensations in our bodies and the mind's interpretation of those sensations. This is one of the ways I believe magick manifests as a practice of expressing language (in this case as the language of sensation between the world and the mind).
🖊️ That's so funny, we are reading Dr. Luhrmann's book for a book club in Thorn Mooney's Discord although I work during our voice chat so I don't get to be a part of the discussion. Thank you for a concise distillation! 🖋️
A curated copy of the transcript was sent to Inner Symposiasts and is now available here www.innersymposium.study/?p=5512 🖋🖊
I find especially interesting the idea that one can curate one's own beliefs. ✏️✒️ I practice chaos majick and one common concept is that you can allow yourself to believe without fully embracing the belief. For example I might pray to or invoke a god that I don't actually believe exists. But I can allow myself to accept the belief in that deity in order to receive the benefit of it, but not allow it to permanently affect my worldview.
It's a skill that takes some developing. Effectively, instead of trying to believe something and suffering they cognitive dissonance one can use that dissonance as a conduit of power.
I feel like your discussion treats belief as if it were like an infection that takes over a person, while I find it more useful to think of it like a tattoo that normally would become a part of you but if you use an alternate method you could apply temporary ones instead.
Interesting! Any chaos majick books you recommend?
@@99baji99 the author Peter J Carroll is the originator of the discipline (I believe). He had a lot of books out and if you see one that calls to you then go for it.
My introduction to chaos majick came through a book called "Condensed Chaos: An introduction to chaos Magic" by Phil Hine and Peter J Carroll. It's an easy read and a good place to start.
The book I know of that mentions what I was talking about here - adopting beliefs on a practical rather than logical basis - is "Liber Null" by Peter J Carroll. It's a much harder read. He rambles a lot and has a haughty writing style.
I've only read three or four books specifically about Chaos Majick. Most of what I do I've picked up from Web contacts and happenstance.
Good luck!
I personally believe that we shouldn't take any belief seriously. The tendency to prioritise the materialist paradigm, that many chaos magicians have nowdays, seems to go against the point of chaos magick entirely.
It's not about "not letting _"other"_ beliefs affect you", but rather about the idea that beliefs are just tools rather than the reality of experience itself.
@@99baji99 my answer to your question seems to have gotten deleted.
I don't know if there are better books out there but my intro was through a book called "Condensed Chaos: An Introduction To Chaos Magic" by Phil Hine and Peter J Carroll. It's easy to read and a good comprehensive overview.
Chaos Magick takes the p155 and then, ironically, takes itself seriously; ignoring its own reflexive absurdity. Reductio ad absurdum. It's essentially Magick for Clowns. I can't take them seriously.
Great episode- thought provoking. I love your work - thank you! ✏️
🖊 Thanks Dr. Puca!
This is the conversation I've been looking for. Thank you for your insight and book references. I'm very logical and scientific, but have had a hard time fully embracing calling myself Wiccan and have always sat comfortably in the larger "Pagan" nomenclature . I appreciate the opportunity to explore my beliefs more deeply.
🖋️I loved this topic! More please!!!
🖋 I love your videos!
Great video 🖊🖋✏
🖋️ great video with compelling counter arguments!
fantastic video!!! ✏
Thank you for the video❤
✏️
✏ thanks for the video
✏✏ Happy to watch this new video of Angela's Symposium! Thank you for such an interesting topic, Dr. Puca! Now I want to read the books that you mentioned! 😃 See you next time! 😃
Thanks again ❤📝
You're welcome 😊
Brava come sempre! ✏️✏️
This video is exactly what I need! My wife if somewhere under the Pagan umbrella. I tend to be skeptical, but have recently begun seeking higher truths. I’ve been trying to learn more about her beliefs.
I forgot to leave the 🖊️.
✏️ Very well said, thank you for the great overview.
Thank you for exploring this topic! As for TM Luhrmann’s argument and the various counter-arguments, I’m inclined to a view that is Both/And rather than Either/Or. For one thing, it is observable that some people’s beliefs and practices are more dependent on socialization, while other people are clearly more independent in developing their beliefs and practices. For another thing, there is abundant global evidence that spirituality can develop both gradually and suddenly--a subject that has long been discussed in various religious milieux. Re: cognitive dissonance, all the strategies you mention are commonly observed in society. As a pertinent aside, I encounter many examples of devoutly religious Hindu scientists. It’s because Hinduism acknowledges multiple levels of reality, which (even though each level has its characteristic science and technology) are known to interpenetrate experientially (i.e., magically or miraculously) on occasion.🎀
Good stuff ✏️
🖊 Fascinating
I agree keep being you angela❤❤❤
Angela, this class was amazing, it's hard to explain how I enjoyed, and I thank you for introducing Tanya's work. By a feeling not rational at all I ended convinced that her work might be interesting. It was very interesting the 'pros and cons', like a virtual debate of ideas. I think the 'cons' don't contradict Tanya's approach at all. In general contradiction of terms are impossible to avoid in any complex human related topic, because it's impossible to agree, except you use the language of mathematics, and even there, there exists two logic: classical and constructivism, the latter logic is not binary, and even in the realm of math there are limits to the logical knowledge, so in science, etc. So I don't think that truth is absolute, so a truth is not enough to destroy other truths, or the truths of others. In my experience both social and personal logic or persuasion, (call it rational or not, it doesn't matter) is an important factor, and they're not contradictory. But if you don't learn a language you can't even think, so I don't think that is possible to believe anything in one second. For me, each time I approach any belief system, the difficulty is not how to believe it, but why not to believe all the others. And I'm not skeptic, that's my belief, it's not scientific, neither rational, but as long as I can't love every people in the world, neither all the ideas written, I choose to love my family and friends the best I can, and I find it not so an easy task to practice.
✒️I really appreciate your work🖋️
✏️✏️✏️ Thank you
🖋 My current beliefs are due to about five months of increasingly blatant events followed by a very intense experience I can only describe in a particular way. It's been absolutely life changing and hasn't stopped. The one time I entertained not believing things got even stranger.
I’m more of a fan of the 🖊️ emoji than the ✏️ emoji so I enjoyed being reminded at the end about them.
🖋🖋🖋🖋🖋Aren't humans wonderful? I believe there are good points on both sides. Thank you for this excellent exposition.🖋🖋🖋🖋🖋
🖌️ very interesting
Thank you for this video ✒️. I'm in this reflection since late 2022, when I discover skeptical thinking : I read that the "rational and logical" system we learn at school is a weak ”belief" because not really explained. The scientific method is a part of the university teaching so not everyone have access to that. So the switch to magic belief is easier if we don't have a strong logical thoughts system. (Works in reverse too).
Also, about the community, internet can be a giant coven. And it's not necessary a personal choice (like all choices could say Spinoza) but more a chance. For me, books and eso corners in book shops are also part of the communities (an author continuing to spread an elder magic idea). In this cases, I think that we highly underestimate the aesthetic around magic and eso. Commercials know how to attract people with imagery. Online communication is based on the same visuals ideas.
Too long message, sorry.
✏️
Very interesting video! As a practitioner of magic, it is very thought-provoking. Thank you very much for your work.
Angela do you know about how to make the drink dionysus gave to his followers
What is mightier? The ✏ or the 🖊? You decide! ;)
I think your video is excellent (as usual!), and you've presented a very good framework for engaging with Luhrmann's thesis, and for understanding what it is that she was arguing.
I can also say, though, that I find her work (and also that of Rodney Stark--but for different reasons in his case) utterly unconvincing for a variety of reasons, the principal one of which is that Luhrmann assumes secularism as a default, and creedalism/creedal structures as primary in religious engagement, when in fact I think modern paganism, magic, occultism, and similar phenomena (as well as most religions that aren't Christianity or Islam and that have existed for the majority of history) are not creedal in their orientation. The interplay between practice and experience is far more important in many of these religious frameworks than actual belief (as it is understood in Christianity, Islam, and secularism); and there's no reason that rationality has to be violated in any of it--which is another manner in which the default of secularist materialism is assumed but not accounted for in engaging with anything "other" in Luhrmann.
Further, some of the methodological issues in Luhrmann's work also shouldn't be forgotten, and the ways in which she did the not-exactly-honest participant/observer thing have been discussed in some circles, and she's even been accused of cultural appropriation in this (by Taylor Ellwood, if I am not mistaken) within particular magical practice communities. I don't know if that is something you'd find useful to mention, or if perhaps that should get its own video; I'm also not entirely sure that arguing with/debating Luhrmann's work from within any alternative religious viewpoint is exactly a game that can be won, or even entered into without a variety of other issues also arising...and that goes for my own critiques (briefly summarized above) just as much as any proposed by others.
In certain situation, I wonder if the easiest way to engage is to refuse to engage, and to "just say no" to particular interpretations that raise far more issues than they do in usefully answering any questions or accurately explaining phenomena (rather than theorizing about it as an outside observer rather than an actual participant...and while that can be difficult to near-impossible in the participant/observer framework, nonetheless doing so without in many ways misconstruing or misappropriating the phenomena involved is extremely tricky; some have done it better than others, and I think Luhrmann is one that almost paradigmatically didn't do it especially well).
I feel like this can apply to other spiritual traditions too
I personally know someone who is a practicing Wiccan who doesn’t believe in the power of the magic she performs. For some people, their practices are just practices for the sake of catharsis or for representing their political values, and their beliefs are something else entirely (though it’s also perfectly fine to believe in magic, provided that one doesn’t instill deep-seated fears in children with said beliefs in the same way that Christians instilled a fear of Hell in me)
I wonder what it is to choose to believe in crystals. I got into the becouse of my mother, but I also think very science-based. Anyway, interesting topic. 🖊
Does it all have to be contradictory? Changes in belief can occur slowly or quickly depending on the person and specific circumstances.
I totally agree. I have witnessed both in different people. Also sometimes in the same, ie.. psychic phenomena is easier to believe in than spellcasting, but the latter comes maybe a month or a year later.
🖋
🖋️ jot that down
🖊
Certainly the case with religious inclinations. There are many of the videos of " Scientist converts to X"
🖋.
Great dialect
🖋️indelible.
🖋️
✏️🖋️ Witchcraft requires effort and if practitioners of magic do not see evidence of ours value and legitimacy in their own lives, if the rituals aren't working, usually they will stop believing. I think that most larger religions don't rely as much on the evidence because society and large communal structures will uphold that belief for the individual. ♥️
🖊️
✏ !
✏️
✏️✏️✏️✏️✏️✏️
🖊️🖊️🖊️
🖊❤
✏
😊😊
Angela, I love your videos, but your intro music always jumpscares me because of how loud it is compared to your mic volume. I feel like it would be much less jarring if it was a tad quieter, but maybe that’s just me.
Thank you for sharing this with us!!
Noted!
✏🖋
✏️✏️✏️
🖋️😊
🖊️🖋️
🖋 ✏
✒️
✒
✏️🙏🏾🕊️
🖋🖊✏
✍✍✍✍✍
🖊️ ✏️
✏✏🖋
🖊✏️✒️🖋🖍😊
🤘🌑 ✒
✏️🖊✏️🖊🐧
✏✏✏
I like your videos, but I kindly ask you to work on your audio quality! The intro was way too loud for my sensitive ears in comparison to the how loud you talk. Also, your voice sounds a little bit muffled despite using a professional microphone. :)
There is no valid reason to divide and separate esoteric beliefs from mainstream religious beliefs when exploring and comparing mechanical materialistic belief systems versus esoteric or spiritual or whatever label of your choice is that are beyond the domain of materialism. The base decision that an individual makes in creating their world view (whether they formally realize it or not) is an epistemological choice about what your criterion is for evaluating the validity of information you receive from a variety of sources. A person that accepts both esoteric and scientific viewpoints does not even necessarily create any cognitive dissonance in many instances. Humans obviously tolerate very high levels of cognitive dissonance anyway without developing serious neuroses. A large portion, if not most of the people that work in scientific disciplines are not pure materialists. A person that IS fully committed to mechanical materialism and logic really cannot have persistent belief in esoteric explanations because at that level the cognitive dissonance would be overwhelming.
The most realistic model for the human population is that there is a wide continuum of beliefs with most people able to function normally with some variable load of cognitive dissonance. This would somewhat flatten out the middle of a bell curve because there would be a lot of variance within an individual. At one end of the continuum you would find religious fundamentalists that believe the earth is a few thousand years old and completely reject all contradicting physical evidence that the earth is billions of years old. At the other end you will find people that fully embrace mechanical materialism and use mathematics, parsimony and other forms of logic to inform their epistemology and reject all supernatural explanations (sensu, non-pejoratively beyond the scope of materialism). There are obviously far more religious fundamentalists than there are fully committed materialists. Children are usually fully indoctrinated into a religious viewpoint long before they have any ability for abstract thought, so that outcome is no surprise.
As a molecular evolutionary biologist I can assure you I met a great many faculty and scientists over the years that were definitely not fully committed to the materialistic philosophy their methods were grounded in. Many were excellent scientists that I would not call hypocritical but fully functional under some load of manageable cognitive dissonance. History and current circumstances amply show that a person can be a well trained and successful practicing scientist even if they do not fully understand or accept the basic epistemological and philosophical ramifications. Most people do not really understand that the scientific method and virtually all scientific practices functionally operate on a layer that is above its philosophical basis. Thus in practicality, a person can operate on a day-to-day basis as a functional scientist while firmly believing in any religion or esoteric system. I would like to add finally that I fully endorse a person's right to formulate their world view in any manner that they choose and I enjoy friends and family across the entire spectrum.
✏️ i have hard time understanding this, can anyone share magical experiences they had? I'll be most grateful!
✏ I can only add that I don't think people are all that rational. There are few that live a life where they only use logic - and I doubt many of those are spiritual seekers. There are logical explanations for almost anything. Not always true explanations, but with some logic at least.
I am rational and have a rational mind....I embrace only truth....nothing more. So don't pull me into the group. 🤘😔
✎ ✐ ✏ 🖊 🖋 🖉
🪡 ✏️
That theory doesnt reflect my experiences at all. All my close people are skeptics and I find a lot of other people with my similar practices to be a bad fit socially in some ways. Im a solitary practicioner who gets my inspiration from people who are long dead. I wanted to not follow my path but the path pursued me, all ways led back to this path so Ive embraced it. The path came looking for me first when I was 10. I feel like the academic who wrote this theory is only aware of one specific kind of occultist.
😂✒🖋🖊
Tbh sounds like Luhrmann is describing cult indoctrination
Consider this a pen emoji
🖋
🖋️
🖊
✏
✏️
🖊️
✏️✏️✏️