Monstrous
Witches Brew => Pagan Living => Topic started by: champjklccmk on January 27, 2010, 05:17:45 PM
-
Hi, I am so sorry for the subject title... it was just to attract attention and I mean no disrespect... but it is partly true though...
I am a skeptic, but not close minded... more rather, i just haven't experienced anything magical of any sort... so I'm here to ask about it.. hope you don't mind... can anyone explain to me exactly what magic is? any help would be most appreciated...
-
magic is art creativity every spec of inspirational or moving piece of life that motivates you to live but in a paranormal sense its the manipulation of events or occurences
-
Hello! Thanks for the replies! But, though I don't want to be seen as demanding, can it be specified a bit more? Magic I mean... You see, I'm a man of science, and so I know the potential of it and the flaws... It's provided many answers to many questions, but more often than not, it is only done out of bolstering the ego of the answerer... That's why I'm going for a different route as one would put it... I want to understand the world we live in, know different ideals, see in different perspectives... That's why I want to delve deeper into magic and the first step would be to know as much about it as I can... How it works, how it really works... What are the reasons behind it and how does it affect our surroundings? And as for the falling in love part, I've known it to be the effect when hormones go berserk because of the right kind of pheromones presented to that person... it then triggers the floodworks of endorphines and other such happy hormones which gives the feel of euphoria... it then hinders sound judgement and causes lack of the usual control such as figeting, stuttering and speechlessness.... other than that, I don't know any other way to see it...
-
I suppose.. Hmm, contentment... that's something I haven't felt in a long while... But, isn't magic composed of steps as well? Doesn't it also have principles? Processess? After all, you don't just say a few words and then that's that right? Understanding the world we live in is what science does... I'm inclined to think that magic is the same, isn't it?
-
What kind of magic are you talking about? Do you mean making something appear from out of nothing or are you speaking of magic to protect or influence or draw something to you? the general thinking is that magic is using the power of your will to manifest a need or desire. Most magic practitioners adhere to the Rule of Three which states that any energy positive or negative will come back to you 3 times over.
-
What kind of magic are you talking about? Do you mean making something appear from out of nothing or are you speaking of magic to protect or influence or draw something to you? the general thinking is that magic is using the power of your will to manifest a need or desire. Most magic practitioners adhere to the Rule of Three which states that any energy positive or negative will come back to you 3 times over.
Karma's a lady, ain't it? :banplea:
I keep getting the feeling those answers are all a little vague... I don't know if it was on purpose or not, but I'll try to explain the whole practical part of magic without making our practitioners here angry. (Although I can't make any promises *<:))
Magic, the way I see it, is using spells, like incantations, rituals and all that stuff I'm too lazy to try out myself in order to change something. It can come in many forms, sometimes to harm someone, sometimes to heal, but also sometimes to summon an entity or other such things... It's mostly based a lot on various beliefs from around the world, but can also sometimes be affected by personal belief. I'm not saying some people's belief when it comes to magic are wrong/correct, just pointing out that those who respect and believe int he Rule of Three will often get the reward/punishment that goes with it and those who don't, or those to whom I've spoken at least, usually don't. It could be because it's influenced, like many things, by what the mage/wizard/whatever title the caster fancies believes in... Or maybe they're just lucky; like I said, up 'til now I've been too lazy to try out a full spell. So if you're trying to exorcise a demon and think it would be best if you pray to, say, the Christian God, but don't yourself believe in that entity, it won't work.
In the end, it's causing various phenomena to happen and often revolves around religious or cultural beliefs and symbolism. (Since symbolism is an important part of magic.)
PS: That's from what I understand of it, but I'm no practitioner; the whole religion thing would make me a crappy mage. Of course, there are alternatives, but those aren't called magic, so I won't talk about them here.
-
So in a nutshell, magic is but the drawingup of willful power from within the user, aided by outside factors such as symbols and ingredients... I've read of such things, but most of them seemed too fanciful to me and in no means were they conclusive... I had hoped that I could shavee away the embelishments surrounding it and 'get into the gutter' as one would put it... Trivially, I'd also hoped to someday be able wield it and I'd like to ask if it is mandatory to be birthed with such a gift or is it already within all of us and simply waiting to be accessed?
-
I know the whole hormone thing about love, too! But do you really think about love that way? If you see a girl ( I assume you're male) and your heart starts to beat faster - do you say to yourself "Oh, my hormones react on her pheromones"? Don't you rather say "I like her"?
I think you have to adjust your thinking if you are ever to understand what magic is. Look on it as science not yet explained. Take hypnosis as example. It was considered magic (and bogus) until someone actually put up a plausible theory on how it works. Now it's considered a scientific method. And many modern medicines are based on old herbal lore, the usage of which where once considered magic knowledge.
Most magical methods are worked out by "trial and error" - a method often used by modern day scientists as well.
The difference between the modern day scientist and the magic-worker is that the scientist have this burning urge to explain everything, while the magic-worker usually is content with knowing that the result is the desired. To the magic-worker it's the goal that's important. The scientist put so much of importance in the road he walks that he often forget what the goal actually is.
Sorry, I'm going to have to disagree.
Firstly, the whole "Don't you rather say "I like her"?" What's that meant to mean? Yes, I would say that, but that doesn't make love any less psychological and primal. It is a result of hormones and pheromones and similar things, just because you don't use those words doesn't lend any credibility to your claim that it's magic. Just like how stacking some boxes on top of each other isn't magic just because you don't say "I manipulated the boxes into a position which allowed the earth's gravitational pull to force them together".
Love is only magical in the most metaphorical sense possible. Surely you don't actually believe it's literally supernatural, like a ghost or a wizard?
And honestly, science not yet explained? I'm not quite sure what sort of things you would consider magic, but I definitely don't like that definition. The difference between science and magic is that science is an attempt to determine truth in a way that removes the various logical fallacies inherent to human thought. Magic is not, and is therefore just as likely to be superstitious bollocks as not-yet-proven truth. This means that while science must work for it to be considered science, magic must only appear to work. Sometimes this turns out to be because it legitimately does work (like medicines or hypnotism, as you mentioned), in which case it stops being magic and becomes scientific fact. Other times it doesn't work at all, and only looks like it does to our fallible animal brains.
You say scientists don't consider the consequences of their actions, to which I can only say what the s**t are you talking about. Seriously, please explain this, I'm fairly sure most scientists do. I mean occasionally you find some nutter who says he's going to blow up the world, but they're just looking for publicity. As evidenced by the fact that the world hasn't yet blown up.
And finally, that bit about a "burning urge to explain everything" - I'm not sure that's entirely accurate. Or at least, it's a very negative way of describing what I think is the better option. Scientists simply seek knowledge. Often they don't have a specific goal, and that's not because they're too obsessed with the road they walk on - that's because they don't yet know what will happen, otherwise there'd be no need to experiment. Most technological and scientific advances come from scientists messing about and discovering things, and then realising "s**t, I didn't know that would happen - maybe we could use that knowledge to cure this disease, or build this sort of machine". And I think that's far better than relying on something which by definition is unproven.
-
I know the whole hormone thing about love, too! But do you really think about love that way? If you see a girl ( I assume you're male) and your heart starts to beat faster - do you say to yourself "Oh, my hormones react on her pheromones"? Don't you rather say "I like her"?
I think you have to adjust your thinking if you are ever to understand what magic is. Look on it as science not yet explained. Take hypnosis as example. It was considered magic (and bogus) until someone actually put up a plausible theory on how it works. Now it's considered a scientific method. And many modern medicines are based on old herbal lore, the usage of which where once considered magic knowledge.
Most magical methods are worked out by "trial and error" - a method often used by modern day scientists as well.
The difference between the modern day scientist and the magic-worker is that the scientist have this burning urge to explain everything, while the magic-worker usually is content with knowing that the result is the desired. To the magic-worker it's the goal that's important. The scientist put so much of importance in the road he walks that he often forget what the goal actually is.
Sorry, I'm going to have to disagree.
Firstly, the whole "Don't you rather say "I like her"?" What's that meant to mean? Yes, I would say that, but that doesn't make love any less psychological and primal. It is a result of hormones and pheromones and similar things, just because you don't use those words doesn't lend any credibility to your claim that it's magic. Just like how stacking some boxes on top of each other isn't magic just because you don't say "I manipulated the boxes into a position which allowed the earth's gravitational pull to force them together".
Love is only magical in the most metaphorical sense possible. Surely you don't actually believe it's literally supernatural, like a ghost or a wizard?
And honestly, science not yet explained? I'm not quite sure what sort of things you would consider magic, but I definitely don't like that definition. The difference between science and magic is that science is an attempt to determine truth in a way that removes the various logical fallacies inherent to human thought. Magic is not, and is therefore just as likely to be superstitious bollocks as not-yet-proven truth. This means that while science must work for it to be considered science, magic must only appear to work. Sometimes this turns out to be because it legitimately does work (like medicines or hypnotism, as you mentioned), in which case it stops being magic and becomes scientific fact. Other times it doesn't work at all, and only looks like it does to our fallible animal brains.
You say scientists don't consider the consequences of their actions, to which I can only say what the s**t are you talking about. Seriously, please explain this, I'm fairly sure most scientists do. I mean occasionally you find some nutter who says he's going to blow up the world, but they're just looking for publicity. As evidenced by the fact that the world hasn't yet blown up.
And finally, that bit about a "burning urge to explain everything" - I'm not sure that's entirely accurate. Or at least, it's a very negative way of describing what I think is the better option. Scientists simply seek knowledge. Often they don't have a specific goal, and that's not because they're too obsessed with the road they walk on - that's because they don't yet know what will happen, otherwise there'd be no need to experiment. Most technological and scientific advances come from scientists messing about and discovering things, and then realising "s**t, I didn't know that would happen - maybe we could use that knowledge to cure this disease, or build this sort of machine". And I think that's far better than relying on something which by definition is unproven.
Now,now, no need to be worked up... I didn't start this thread to invite argument you know... So for reason of discretion, I advice anyone who has an opposing opinion to what others post to please write cordially... Now as a man of science myself, I agree of some of the things you pointed out... But you have to agree that plenty of scientists are slaves to progressive competition and rivalries... This then results in faster development industrially, but unfortunately, not morally... fear of being outstripped and loss of recognition thus rendering their efforts shunned fuels the prides of scientists and thus propels them to create more and more creations without regard for the methods... This is fact unfortunately and it was only with fear for mutual destruuction that's kept the world, well not whole, but as it is... That's why I'm going for something as unproven as Magic because it takes a softer take on things... Regardless of what evil it can do, it doesn't do as much harm as science, what with its weapons and all... This is because, from what I understand of it, Magic relies more upon the inner will and spirituality of the user and thus reflects upon that user's character... Do you see? Who we are goes into magic and thus reflects on what we do... The realisation that destructive magic is the result of who we are makes us realize all the sooner of what it is we should be... We allow Science to absorb us so much that, more often than not, by the time we realize our mistakes it is already too late... The world almost ended twice by result of that and now it has taken a lot of effort to rid us of that threat... Doubtless it has provided much to be thankful for, but it's also done much damage... So here's a food for thought: Would the world have been better off had we not discovered Science and instead relied on magic? Just a little something to think about... peace!
-
I'm not worked up, and never have been as a result of any posts on a forum. Just because I swear a bit doesn't mean I'm angry, please try not to read my posts in an angry voice.
And I think if we relied on "magic" rather than science, I just think less would be accomplished. I think if magic works, it's not anything supernatural, it's because someone has accidentally made a discovery, and due to not understanding it has attributed it to something unexplainable. So while this would in all probability mean no weapons of mass destruction or pollution, it would also mean largely ineffective medicine, shorter lifespans, food being harder to grow - basically, we'd be in the dark ages. You could argue we'd be better that way, but I wouldn't.
Although, that's with my own understanding of magic - basically, that it's misunderstood science at best, and pure superstition at worst. A believer in it would have a very different view, I think.
-
I'm not worked up, and never have been as a result of any posts on a forum. Just because I swear a bit doesn't mean I'm angry, please try not to read my posts in an angry voice.
And I think if we relied on "magic" rather than science, I just think less would be accomplished. I think if magic works, it's not anything supernatural, it's because someone has accidentally made a discovery, and due to not understanding it has attributed it to something unexplainable. So while this would in all probability mean no weapons of mass destruction or pollution, it would also mean largely ineffective medicine, shorter lifespans, food being harder to grow - basically, we'd be in the dark ages. You could argue we'd be better that way, but I wouldn't.
Although, that's with my own understanding of magic - basically, that it's misunderstood science at best, and pure superstition at worst. A believer in it would have a very different view, I think.
I have to say, although we wouldn't be better off without science, the rest of the world would be. Look at what technological advancement has done: it's slowly destroying the world in order to make the lives of us humans "better". So, ineffective medicine, crops being harder to grow, etc. The thing is if that's how the world works naturally without us meddling into it and, let's not forget, damaging it, it's to preserve a balance. An ecosystem is an extremely fragile thing and our "better" medicine and "better" crops have shown us just that...
You say magic is when someone makes a discovery and doesn't understand so they call it magic... You're forgetting, though, that magic's been practiced for millenia and that the things practitioners today do are similar if not the same to what they did back then; nobody's discovering anything anymore, they're just using the gathered knowledge to make their magic work.
But of course magic can be explained; it just can't be explained with modern science. Because modern science can't explain the existence of supernatural entities doesn't mean they don't exist, it just means science doesn't understand the world and any scientist worth his salt will agree when I say the most important part of science is acknowledging your own ignorance.
We shouldn't rely on science too much, though. Why? Simply because it's just as unproven and unprovable as religion, magic or anything of the sort. It's based on theories and theories are statements we accept as fact until they've been proven false. A theory is not a fact; it's a supposition we've decided to base our research on, just like the magical practitioner will base his magic on the theories that relate to it. Science has become a full-fledged religion and although most won't acknowledge it, everything we think we know about the world could be false.
Our current greedy society has simply decided that science is the better choice because it brings more progress.
-
So in a nutshell, magic is but the drawingup of willful power from within the user, aided by outside factors such as symbols and ingredients... I've read of such things, but most of them seemed too fanciful to me and in no means were they conclusive... I had hoped that I could shavee away the embelishments surrounding it and 'get into the gutter' as one would put it... Trivially, I'd also hoped to someday be able wield it and I'd like to ask if it is mandatory to be birthed with such a gift or is it already within all of us and simply waiting to be accessed?
Personally, I think it is within all of us & simply needs to be accessed. I do think certain people are born with the ability to access it more easily than others for whatever reason. But in my opinion everyone has the ability to work magic it's just a question of putting in the time to learn.
-
The scientific one, obviously. Science knows exactly the ways in which the human brain is fallable, and the scientific method exists solely to make sure we are not falling victim to them.
And as such, if something was "proven" by magic-workers but disproven by scientists, I think we can blame our cognitive biases for it.
As for your sweeping generalisation about scientists, I don't think you can say that's true either. Scientists are just people interested in discovering things, you can't make enormous generalisations like that. I'm sure there have been plenty of scientists who kept their work secret, the problem is that if they were successful in doing so you'll never have heard of them and can't use them as an example. Similarly, I'm sure if alchemists really did discover how to turn lead into gold or the elixir of life, one of them at least would have made it known.
EDIT: And having said that, no-one has actually explained what they think magic is. There's been a lot of very vague descriptions of it, but nothing that really gives an idea of what you think magic can do. Can you give an example of something you think is literally magical, one practice or ability?
-
Science knows exactly the ways in which the human brain is fallable
\
You couldn't have said something further from the truth... Scientists know only that they don't understand completely how the brain works. That alone makes your statement invalid. And even so, it's all theories, you can't say science disproves anything relating to magic, since science itself can't even be proved.
So the question can't be answered, really. On one side, you have magic users claiming they practice magic, a system based on the belief that supernatural and paranormal phenomena can occur, while one the other you have scientists saying they can't. The problem is none can prove tat their opinion is right or wrong; it all turns out the same: it's just an opinion and even if you back it with millions of theories, it's still just an opinion.
-
Thank you Countess and LadyGriffin! I'll keep your words in mind, although I'm more inclined with the theory than with the practice... Theoretical Magic if you will... You see, It is the many principles of magic relating to nature that attracts me more than the result of it... The respect for the natural order of things for one is for me a lost thought in today's science... But perhaps a little conjuring here and there will help me understand it all the more... Perhaps I can use it in my book as well... Hmm... Yes, I think I will...
Now Fatass, I'm glad that you have refrained from using any swear words... You have my thanks... Thank you also for contributing in my thread, it is greatly appreciated... But never forget that to rely on one thing is to be vulnerable in the event that such a thing were to be dismissed... That goes for all things, including science... After all, it is one of the principles of science to be open-minded... My thanks to all of you... This thread will remain open to anyone wishing to access it... Peace!
-
Science knows exactly the ways in which the human brain is fallable
\
You couldn't have said something further from the truth... Scientists know only that they don't understand completely how the brain works. That alone makes your statement invalid. And even so, it's all theories, you can't say science disproves anything relating to magic, since science itself can't even be proved.
So the question can't be answered, really. On one side, you have magic users claiming they practice magic, a system based on the belief that supernatural and paranormal phenomena can occur, while one the other you have scientists saying they can't. The problem is none can prove tat their opinion is right or wrong; it all turns out the same: it's just an opinion and even if you back it with millions of theories, it's still just an opinion.
That wasn't even a particularly important part of my argument. I'm not saying scientists know everything about the human brain, because they obviously don't. But we do know about various cognitive biases that can explain misconceptions and fallacies. And more importantly, scientists know that human intuition is fallable, and that what's believable is often different to what is true. The whole point of science is to make that irrelevant. The scientific method exists to find physical proof to back up claims, and remove human fallability from the picture.
And there's the problem. If something is proven under laboratory conditions, then it stops being considered magic, and becomes science. Research has gone into a lot of so-called paranormal phenomena and claims of magical ability, and a lot of it hasn't been accepted as science for whatever reason. This is why comparing magic to science is incorrect. If magic relied on empirical evidence as Ladygriffin said, it would be accepted by science. If it isn't accepted by science, there's obviously something wrong with your evidence. There's my point. Magic isn't comparable to science.
-
That wasn't even a particularly important part of my argument.
I know; it just struck me when I read it and had to reply.
I'm not saying scientists know everything about the human brain, because they obviously don't. But we do know about various cognitive biases that can explain misconceptions and fallacies. And more importantly, scientists know that human intuition is fallable, and that what's believable is often different to what is true. The whole point of science is to make that irrelevant. The scientific method exists to find physical proof to back up claims, and remove human fallability from the picture.
True, but there are still things science can neither back up, explain or deny properly. When it comes to this, most scientists will go "[Insert theory here] disproves it." Note that I used the word "theory". Telekinesis is a great example. It completely disregards a few major laws of physics, such as linear momentum.
Nobody's managed to scientifically prove telekinesis, yet it's been researched countless times by scientists because in some cases, it simply could not be explained through bias. They can't explain it and everyone has a different idea as to what could cause it, but they still haven't managed to disprove it either, since they base the denial of telekinesis on theories.
And there's the problem. If something is proven under laboratory conditions, then it stops being considered magic, and becomes science.
Really, now? Magic is not by definition something that can't be proven; it's an arcane art that goes beyond what the common folk would define as the boundaries of a human being. If yu can prove it's humanly possible, all you're doing is pushing the known boundary further, not removing it.
Research has gone into a lot of so-called paranormal phenomena and claims of magical ability, and a lot of it hasn't been accepted as science for whatever reason. This is why comparing magic to science is incorrect. If magic relied on empirical evidence as Ladygriffin said, it would be accepted by science.
I agree with that; magic tends to rely more on belief than proof. Doing that, not taking the time to try and explain it and basing everything on belief is called fluff in the psychic community (don't now about other paranormal communities...) and we all dislike the fluffers.
If it isn't accepted by science, there's obviously something wrong with your evidence. There's my point. Magic isn't comparable to science.
Maybe, but in some cases, it's simply because our current understanding of science can't accept it by following it's current theories. Therefore it bends over time, with research, and we eventually manage to accept those things as science because they can finally be proven. Alchemy is such an example; alchemists thought they could create silver with a certain reaction (I don't remember the involved materials) Now we know that the said reaction is nothing but basic redox involving silver oxide. But at the time, their current scientific system couldn't explain it.
So yes, maybe there's something wrong with the evidence but not "obviously"; the problem could also lie in the scientific part of the equation.
-
Really, now? Magic is not by definition something that can't be proven; it's an arcane art that goes beyond what the common folk would define as the boundaries of a human being. If yu can prove it's humanly possible, all you're doing is pushing the known boundary further, not removing it.
That's an incredibly vague explanation, but surely that's exactly what I said. Once something is proven to exist, the common folk's boundaries (whoever they are) are pushed to accomodate it. Therefore it's no longer beyond the boundaries, and no longer magic.
Making it by definition something that's not proven. Not necessarily unfalsifiable (although I can't imagine disproving something would discourage some people), but certainly not proven to exist.
And as for the last bit, I'd like to think that scientists are rational enough people to acknowledge proof even if they can't yet explain what's happening. That's a fairly common scientific viewpoint, "I don't know what's going on here, but it's definitely going on". It may be a while before someone comes up with a testable theory, but I don't think the scientific community would just be sticking their fingers in their ears saying "nananananananana" up until that point.
-
Hmmm... Hey, you're right, I did just repeat what you said, in a different way... :| Dammit I'm to tired for this XD
You're right, it's certainly not a proven thing and probably won't be for a long time...
Yeah, I like to think most scientists out there have more sense in their heads than to just ignore something like that, but a lot, if not the majority, do so. If you ask a scientist what he/she thinks of magic, they'll probably think you're crazy... If you show them, then maybe. But most people never come in contact with it (Or at least, know when they come in contact with it.)