Magic versus Technology

[Syllinia]

Since I have something better to do, I'll use the dictionary.com definiton of magic, rather than make a point by point analysis of your critique. (although I will point out that using the non-scientific definition of science to support your point invalidates that point) Anyway, here are a few of the definitions...

[url=http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/magic]-the art of producing a desired effect or result through the use of incantation or various other techniques that presumably assure human control of supernatural agencies or the forces of nature.

-The art that purports to control or forecast natural events, effects, or forces by invoking the supernatural.

-The practice of using charms, spells, or rituals to attempt to produce supernatural effects or control events in nature.

-Of, relating to, or invoking the supernatural[/url]

Notice that all of these relate to the supernatural, supernatural being defined as:

-of, pertaining to, or being above or beyond what is natural; unexplainable by natural law or phenomena.

Magic works outside of the natural world and laws that bind science, the very thing that science seeks to define/work within. So dictionary.com says that magic =/= science.

[Kether]

Since I have something better to do, I'll use the dictionary.com definiton of magic, rather than make a point by point analysis of your critique. (although I will point out that using the non-scientific definition of science to support your point invalidates that point) Anyway, here are a few of the definitions...

[url=http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/magic]-the art of producing a desired effect or result through the use of incantation or various other techniques that presumably assure human control of supernatural agencies or the forces of nature.

-The art that purports to control or forecast natural events, effects, or forces by invoking the supernatural.

-The practice of using charms, spells, or rituals to attempt to produce supernatural effects or control events in nature.

-Of, relating to, or invoking the supernatural[/url]

Notice that all of these relate to the supernatural, supernatural being defined as:

-of, pertaining to, or being above or beyond what is natural; unexplainable by natural law or phenomena.

Magic works outside of the natural world and laws that bind science, the very thing that science seeks to define/work within. So dictionary.com says that magic =/= science.

I gave the scientific Definition of Science. Since you apparently don't understand that definition. I will explain. It is a methodology. Creating theories based on Facts.

If it is a fact that you have a particular gene and say a word and fire appears. And its experimented on over time.. that's the scientific method.

But by your definition Magic doesn't exist in fantasy because it all works in accordance to natural laws there of. To use it to describe a spell is like me misusing paradigm.


So spells are science, science not of this world but science none the less

[Syllinia]

I don't understand how you can not be getting this. First of all, the closest thing dictionary.com has to the scientific definition is the first one, not the third one. Second of all, if it works within natural laws, then it isn't magic. It's that simple. Once again, just because you claim that magic works within natural laws doesn't stop the fact that it's not true. I have four definitions backing me up, versus you ignoring what everyone else already knows.

[Kether]

I don't understand how you can not be getting this. First of all, the closest thing dictionary.com has to the scientific definition is the first one, not the third one. Second of all, if it works within natural laws, then it isn't magic. It's that simple. Once again, just because you claim that magic works within natural laws doesn't stop the fact that it's not true. I have four definitions backing me up, versus you ignoring what everyone else already knows.

No you are the one ignoring the definition. I am saying by your definition there is no such thing as magic even in fantasy.


Fantasy worlds postulate DIFFERENT NATURAL LAWS.


a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws


That is the first definition


In Slayers Black Magic is a BRANCH of Knowledge or STUDY dealing with negative emotional energy and beings composed there of i.e. Mazoku, it is systematically aranged by which people might learn it, might study new things might discover new principles thus showing the operation of certain laws of the SLAYERS universe.


Are you getting it yet? Sorcery does not violate the NATURAL laws of fictional places since those fictional places include as part of their natural make up spellcraft.


SO if we accept as a premise that Magic requires supernatural actions. And we accept supernatural means something outside the natural order. Then what people practice in fantasy is a Science. They are misusing the word magic as much as I misused Paradigm.

[Syllinia]

First of all, my bad. The scientific definition is closest to the second one, although the proper scientific definition also specifies that it addresses the material/natural. The basis of science is the scientific method, without which there is no science.

Second, fantasy worlds rarely have different laws of physics. Magic generally violates the laws of physics. When this isn't the case, that is when the distinction may get sketchy, but the majority of fantasy assumes the same rules as we do, but add in supernatural elements to allow them to do the impossible.

Now, Lina studies magic, but that doesn't make it science by a long shot. First of all, she doesn't use the scientific method, the main basis of whether or not something is science. Second, to be considered a candidate for science, you would have to be able to test more than just whether or not the spell works. In Slayers, you can't make spells, because it is supernatural, not a science. That is why Lina had to go on a quest for a spell to kill monsters, despite her being one of the world's greatest sorceresses; studying spells merely means you find them in books and learn them.

In your analysis, you are pointing out exactly why that isn't the real definition of science. If that was the case, then there would be religious science, which does not exist, despite what wanna be scientists claim. Are you in college? If so, tell a science teacher that you think magic in fantasy settings is science. It'll either make him crack up laughing, being such a ridiculous joke, or make him cry that there are really people who think that... or maybe both...

Finally, you are just plain wrong. You're wrong about magic being within the laws of their worlds, you're wrong about it being a science in those worlds. First, look at a college level science textbook, then... well... think? I can't even imagine how to convince you that magic doesn't fall within the realm of the physical when you're this delusional...

[Kether]

First of all, my bad. The scientific definition is closest to the second one, although the proper scientific definition also specifies that it addresses the material/natural. The basis of science is the scientific method, without which there is no science.

Observation, Experimentation. Conclusion. a simplification of the scientific method. Now they may not use the same rigors that we hold to in the modern world but neither did Newton. Was Newton a Scientist?

Second, fantasy worlds rarely have different laws of physics. Magic generally violates the laws of physics. When this isn't the case, that is when the distinction may get sketchy, but the majority of fantasy assumes the same rules as we do, but add in supernatural elements to allow them to do the impossible.

NO all fantasy settings that have some form of sorcery assume different laws of nature. IF something can happen, its natural. IF sorcery happens its a natural part of the world there in. THUS DIFFERENT NATURAL LAWS.

To endow anything with the term supernatural is to misuse the word. Much like your problem with how I used Paradigm.

Now, Lina studies magic, but that doesn't make it science by a long shot. First of all, she doesn't use the scientific method, the main basis of whether or not something is science. Second, to be considered a candidate for science, you would have to be able to test more than just whether or not the spell works. In Slayers, you can't make spells, because it is supernatural, not a science. That is why Lina had to go on a quest for a spell to kill monsters, despite her being one of the world's greatest sorceresses; studying spells merely means you find them in books and learn them.

What she does is essentially archaeology.


in Slayers there are people who can and do develop spells. There are researchers there are laboratories. Someone at one time developed them. Lina is not a researcher she's not a scientist. She's someone who's applying the research done by others.

In your analysis, you are pointing out exactly why that isn't the real definition of science. If that was the case, then there would be religious science, which does not exist, despite what wanna be scientists claim.

It doesn't exist because they are wrong. IF they were right. If the earth was say 6k years old rather than billions or if it was made by the Lord of Nightmares on a sea of chaos Facts are all that matter. But the fact is the earth is billions of years old.

But I do think people should apply the scientific method to religion. I think the world would be a much better place if people had to prove what they believe rather than go with "Well its what I believe"

Are you in college? If so, tell a science teacher that you think magic in fantasy settings is science. It'll either make him crack up laughing, being such a ridiculous joke, or make him cry that there are really people who think that... or maybe both...

I have been out of school quite a while. I am a professional researcher at current. Often I have to pour over notes to disprove commonly held misconceptions about history. But when I was in school, in college. I did not have "Science" class. I had particular sciences. Chemestry, Biology etc.

But asking the people in my professional life who do teach science, one of which is studying to teach in highschool. One of which if faculty in college. They get exactly what I am saying.

Finally, you are just plain wrong. You're wrong about magic being within the laws of their worlds, you're wrong about it being a science in those worlds. First, look at a college level science textbook, then... well... think? I can't even imagine how to convince you that magic doesn't fall within the realm of the physical when you're this delusional...

Maybe you should reread your science books. Not collegic level of course since you don't have the basics down. Perhaps elementary school ones where you can get the CONCEPT of Science rather than this bizare religion you seem to hold.

[Mitera Nikkou]

The very definition of magic means that, regardless of the environment, it's the exception to the rules. So, in a magic-based fantasy setting, where everything exists because of magic, then the real magic in that environment would instead be something else: say, something technological, or anything else achieved outside of using or relying on anything magical.

I don't think that scientific method is all that is required to make something scientific. However, if you can come up with a scientific law, in regard to how magic works, then magic could be science here or there or wherever. Then again, if you did, then it wouldn't be magic anymore, would it? ;p

[Kether]

The very definition of magic means that, regardless of the environment, it's the exception to the rules. So, in a magic-based fantasy setting, where everything exists because of magic, then the real magic in that environment would instead be something else: say, something technological, or anything else achieved outside of using or relying on anything magical.

I don't think that scientific method is all that is required to make something scientific. However, if you can come up with a scientific law, in regard to how magic works, then magic could be science here or there or wherever. Then again, if you did, then it wouldn't be magic anymore, would it? ;p

There in is my point. Fantasy worlds are filled with rules and laws and thousands of "This is how magic works". That makes it their form of technology. That makes it obey Natural laws of that world. There's nothing "magic" about Magic in a fantasy setting.

[Mitera Nikkou]

But fantasy worlds don't automatically have rules for magic, especially since there can't be any rules for magic, so your argument is flawed. And if it were that case, that trees, the ground and the rain, are all possible because of a process of magic, then it's not magic magic. It's just another force/power of government over reality which just happens to have the name "magic."

Besides which, many settings in fantasy, regardless of explanations, don't actually have a magic-based system: instead they tend to have a system that supports magic, called convenience. The trees in such settings would usually be made of wood, which can catch fire with enough heat and/or energy, it's made out of atoms, and it's hard and won't act unlike a tree. The setting is based on a lot of elements in our own setting, reality, and magic is actually magic because it doesn't work like everything else. Just because you need to research and apply magic doesn't make it a science, if it all works outside of the natural order of things.

Let's look at Harry Potter as an example. The ability to make magic potions may seem scientific due to methods of creation, but what about the ingredients that humans have available to them? (And this is just ignoring how the magical community could have somehow monopolized every single thing that was magical.) Is potion-making a science when muggles actually have everything that makes reality possible? Then wouldn't what the witches and wizards have be forms of those same basic elements? See, there's no logic; only convenience in that regard. So, in that case, potions in Harry Potter would be magic magic.

[Kether]

But fantasy worlds don't automatically have rules for magic, especially since there can't be any rules for magic, so your argument is flawed. And if it were that case, that trees, the ground and the rain, are all possible because of a process of magic, then it's not magic magic. It's just another force/power of government over reality which just happens to have the name "magic."

Some fantasy settings do it wholesale.. wood burns because of spiritual pacts.. period.

But that's not really what I am talking about. All the normal rules of generally apply in fantasy, but they add afew others, such as "if guy x says right words FIRE"

Besides which, many settings in fantasy, regardless of explanations, don't actually have a magic-based system: instead they tend to have a system that supports magic, called convenience. The trees in such settings would usually be made of wood, which can catch fire with enough heat and/or energy, it's made out of atoms, and it's hard and won't act unlike a tree. The setting is based on a lot of elements in our own setting, reality, and magic is actually magic because it doesn't work like everything else. Just because you need to research and apply magic doesn't make it a science, if it all works outside of the natural order of things.

That's my point. There's nothing unnatural about someone casting a spell. IT does not work in the real world. It is completely and utterly impossible but if it were some how possible to work in this world then it would be a natural part of how things work.


Since the natural world of fantasy novels are generally created whole cloth by the person who's making them they can add as many new bits of natural as they want.

Let's look at Harry Potter as an example. The ability to make magic potions may seem scientific due to methods of creation, but what about the ingredients that humans have available to them? (And this is just ignoring how the magical community could have somehow monopolized every single thing that was magical.) Is potion-making a science when muggles actually have everything that makes reality possible? Then wouldn't what the witches and wizards have be forms of those same basic elements? See, there's no logic; only convenience in that regard. So, in that case, potions in Harry Potter would be magic magic.

The fact that some people can and cannot do something does not mean what certain people do is magic. There are plenty of blind people in the real world. is seeing Magic? There are plenty of people in the real world who no matter how much you might try to train them they could never program a computer. Is a computer Magic? Me no matter how hard I try there's theoretical math I will just never get, does that make high level math.. magic?

[Mitera Nikkou]

I think I'm beginning to understand how Syllinia felt...

That's my point. There's nothing unnatural about someone casting a spell. IT does not work in the real world. It is completely and utterly impossible but if it were some how possible to work in this world then it would be a natural part of how things work.

If it's natural then what you're doing is destroying the existence of magic entirely. Everything is science in your view, so long as something exists. That is not so. Magic is beyond what is natural, and just because it exists does not mean that it's natural to the extent that it can't deviate from the very substance that makes up reality. If magic was just made up of atoms and all that, and it didn't create something from nothing, then I would agree with you. But since magic by its nature doesn't work like that, I don't agree.

The fact that some people can and cannot do something does not mean what certain people do is magic. There are plenty of blind people in the real world. is seeing Magic? There are plenty of people in the real world who no matter how much you might try to train them they could never program a computer. Is a computer Magic? Me no matter how hard I try there's theoretical math I will just never get, does that make high level math.. magic?

Now you're just being silly. And you missed my point entirely, which was this: that the process of using real things creates unreal effects. See, with humans using the elements to create things, how come they've never had anything funny happen to them? We already know that, in the Harry Potter setting, that just stirring in certain ways can have magical effects. In that universe it's obvious that only certain people (those who can do magic) are able to do this; it's not a matter of who can and can't do it, at least by your standard. Your examples can all be done by any human in typical circumstances; losing one's sight, or not being able to understand something, is a very different matter from being able to use magic or not. Of course, even if someone didn't understand a computer, it could seem like magic to them; it's just a matter of understanding how it works on some level. But that's not real magic (oxymoron, anyone? ;p). Real magic exists outside of the rules, and magic bends or destroys those rules which make up our reality. So, if something that can't fly (like a human), but is able to fly without something that works with the rules, then it is magic and thus not a natural part of the world. If it were natural, wouldn't it need to be the trend and not the exception of a universe? And if it were natural, then it's just not magic.

[Kether]

I think I'm beginning to understand how Syllinia felt...

That's my point. There's nothing unnatural about someone casting a spell. IT does not work in the real world. It is completely and utterly impossible but if it were some how possible to work in this world then it would be a natural part of how things work.

If it's natural then what you're doing is destroying the existence of magic entirely. Everything is science in your view, so long as something exists. That is not so. Magic is beyond what is natural, and just because it exists does not mean that it's natural to the extent that it can't deviate from the very substance that makes up reality. If magic was just made up of atoms and all that, and it didn't create something from nothing, then I would agree with you. But since magic by its nature doesn't work like that, I don't agree.

In the real world creating something from nothing is "against the rules' the reality of a fictional world however does not have to follow the same rules as ours. For example you can concieve of a fictional world where comunism worked. Or where things fell up, no gravity just up. That is not how things work in our world but in these worlds entirely made up by someone these things work.

The fact that some people can and cannot do something does not mean what certain people do is magic. There are plenty of blind people in the real world. is seeing Magic? There are plenty of people in the real world who no matter how much you might try to train them they could never program a computer. Is a computer Magic? Me no matter how hard I try there's theoretical math I will just never get, does that make high level math.. magic?

Now you're just being silly. And you missed my point entirely, which was this: that the process of using real things creates unreal effects. See, with humans using the elements to create things, how come they've never had anything funny happen to them? We already know that, in the Harry Potter setting, that just stirring in certain ways can have magical effects. In that universe it's obvious that only certain people (those who can do magic) are able to do this; it's not a matter of who can and can't do it, at least by your standard. Your examples can all be done by any human in typical circumstances; losing one's sight, or not being able to understand something, is a very different matter from being able to use magic or not. Of course, even if someone didn't understand a computer, it could seem like magic to them; it's just a matter of understanding how it works on some level. But that's not real magic (oxymoron, anyone? ;p). Real magic exists outside of the rules, and magic bends or destroys those rules which make up our reality. So, if something that can't fly (like a human), but is able to fly without something that works with the rules, then it is magic and thus not a natural part of the world. If it were natural, wouldn't it need to be the trend and not the exception of a universe? And if it were natural, then it's just not magic.

This is really simplifying but harry potter uses a common trope of the genre that people with particular blood traits have the ability to do things others cannot. consider them to live in a world of Dislexics or blindmen or whatever handicap you might want to choose. The average person is handicapped by their inability to do what they can do.


There are occurances that are less common in the real world than are the norm they are not unnatural, one can even scientifically prove them. For example your average frog cannot fly. But thanks to proper use of other laws of the universe we have acess to in this case.. Magnetism one can make a frog levitate. This is one law of nature overcoming another. Its not a trend, but its something that can be repeated over and over again.


Now a law that says people don't fly except if they have a certain gene and say the right words does not exist in the real world, but we aren't talking about the real world. We are talking about worlds where someone can and does cast spells. And a natural part of those worlds is the casting of spells.

[Mitera Nikkou]

I give up. You fail to see my point. You keep saying that magic that's not really magic is actually magic. I'll let Syllinia monopolize your time again. ;/

[Kether]

I give up. You fail to see my point. You keep saying that magic that's not really magic is actually magic. I'll let Syllinia monopolize your time again. ;/

I am really willing to accept that every use of the word magic in a fantasy novel is a misuse of the word. That Magic is completely and utterly worthless as a word.

[Mitera Nikkou]

The word itself is not useless because it has meaning. It's just using the right meaning in the right context, and ultimately how people use the word in general. When I don't use the word indiscriminately (for one reason or another), I regard magic as something different from science and technology. I even have a story on a backburner where magic is just another sort of applied science that's kept secret from most people. I'm pretty flexible when I want to be creative, but I hold steadfast as far as official definitions are concerned, and no definition of magic has it as science.