Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
Again, I don't see why magic being a branch of science is a bad thing. Maybe it's just how I see things, but if magic commonplace enough I think its simply human nature to want to scientifically analyze it and learn how to use it properly.
If magic is rare in the setting, then you have a point. However, that type of rarity doesn't always work in every setting. If you're saying that too many settings use "magic is commonplace", then that's a different argument entirely.
^^ Ah, yeah, Mistborn has a pretty neat magic system.
Everest:It can be I suppose, but in a narrative sense magic is always (especially in mythology) treated as something spiritual and not-scientific, which is kind of weird when everyone can practice the same healing spell the same way and get the same result.
Mage had a good compromise with how it used magic what with everyone having their own rationalization for why their magic worked that wasn't objective. It even included a tradition that treated magic as a science called the Sons of Ether.
^^My point is that, common or not, magic should defy scientific examination. It should be a realm that is not confined by the objective.
But the problem with this is that it turns Magic into something like physics, with inner workings and whatnot, which doesn't make sense because magic's supposed to be chaotic and senseless and only be understood by those who are chosen by it to understand it.
that
^^This too. Honestly, I've never liked the idea of 'schools for sorcery' because it pegs magic down to this weird binary system that was put in place by... Conan I guess... where the big beefy men are the fighters and the nerds are wizards. It's a really boring set-up.
Maybe I have different definition of magic than you guys. As I see it, magic is any phenomena that cannot be explained by OUR knowledge of science. Even if magic is commonplace enough where it could theoretically be called something else by that definition IN UNIVERSE, then its still magic by our standards, and STILL magic if they call it that in universe.
LET'S GO TO GOOGLE
^Well its an "or" statement. So both definitions are valid.
That works in the real world where we used to call things like electricity and fire magic, but it hardly does in a fictional setting where you're trying to sell the idea that there are forces beyond our comprehension.
I agree that having schools of magic is kind of boring, and I also agree with the notion that there is chaos inherent in magic, and that there should only be a few who understand it. But from a narrative standpoint, I don't see how it would be more interesting to have magic be so ambiguous and unreliable, or to have it be defined by the caprices of the greater beings/forces who grant magic to humans, or however else magic is granted, based on the setting, and I don't see why people wouldn't attempt to make as much sense out of it as possible and make some sort of progress, or at least establish some basic principles, even if those principles are as simple as "invoke this [insert keyword here], and bad stuff happens". And I don't know if anyone's qualified to talk about magic as it should be, since we don't really know if there's even such a thing as magic; we can only base arguments on historical conceptions, and that itself sort of runs counter to the idea that magic is a mystery.
There's a definition we could go by, but "mysterious or supernatural" doesn't account for degrees.
Yeah, let's go to Dragon Age for example. It works really hard to set up magic as ineffable and its dependence comes from a fucked-up place called the fade which does feature some shenanigans in the first game, but when you play a wizard. Oh look, I call upon fireball with ease. I'm sure Skyrim or other games could also provide me with examples but that'll do for now.
I mean, I like the idea of 'Magic is just science we can't explain' and Jack Kirby did awesome things with it, but when you're definitively able to apply the scientific method to it, magic loses the basis behinds its appeal: the ineffable power and tapping into the world.
Granted, Neo's definition can't be disproven for something that as far as we know doesn't exist, but a magic like he's defined holds very little appeal to me, as I don't see why the wizard just can't have a flamethrower and a tazer instead of fire and lightning spells.
^Because it separates it from the rational world. I can see why people would attempt to apply the scientific method to magic, but I don't think it should work.
^^^Not really. What I'm getting at is that magic doesn't have to incomprehensible, just outside our ability to explain via science. If in-universe it could be describe in scientific terms, it can be something else other than magic, but if it's called magic then its magic.
Because those haven't been invented yet, or those things WON'T be invented since the magic versions have the same niche?
Fair enough.
Granted I don't always go for the "magic is science" angle. If a setting can pull off "magic is mysterious" well, then that's fine too.
I should point out that it depends entirely on what you're looking for to be perfectly honest. If what you want is magic as science, then it's fine, but I don't think it's exactly wrong for magic to be more magical and less sciencey, especially as they're opposites.
Magic is just a word we use to describe the things we do not comprehend, so if we apply such a concept to a fictional setting where this is more than that and it's something palpable, then it should be just as incomprehensible if it wants to be magic.
The fact is, the way magic is played these days, it's either magic or, well, science. But if it's merely another form of science, then it's lost the element of mystery, of forces beyond our comprehension that makes magic magic.
^Again, for me, magic doesn't have to have an element of mystery for it to stay magic.
ok, let's do something:
If you just saw me shooting lightning from my fingers, what would you call it?
Electricity?
^^My first reaction? Magic. If you explained HOW you do it in a way I could understand, then it could be described as something else. If you described that something else as magic, then its magic.
I hope that makes sense.
Or because flamethrowers and tazers can't be instantly powered up with mere, extra mental effort, and such an increase in firepower might be necessary, depending on the setting.
It doesn't have to be any less mysterious, but I feel like . . . well, if magic couldn't be controlled at any level, or explained with even the simplest of non-scientific rationale, you'd only see stupid or desperate people using it, and while desperate characters may be compelling, stupid ones rarely are, especially at what I'll assume is a serious level of storytelling.
When you think about it, though, every science is the same. How much can anyone say they truly comprehend electricity, or physical interactions between matter, or energy? Again, not saying magic can't be mysterious, but it's not interesting if it's a crapshoot, and I'd imagine people would at least try to create rationale for it, and the scientific method would probably be the most logical.
No, that's what I'm producing. But what would you call it? Electromancy, maybe? whatever, my point is that it's something otherwordly you do not see everyday, right? Would you say it's magic?
Depends on how you're doing it.
The idea is that you have no idea whatsoever.
Well, then I'd call it a "magic trick," which isn't quite the same thing as thinking it's magic :P
I don't know. The problem here is, there are probably ways you could do it with technology.
Fair enough, I suppose. But do you think this because of the world you live in, right?
Thread's moving too fast. Have to be up at five. Will respond tomorrow.
Yes. If I lived in a world where we didn't have the technology nor understanding to be able to do that, I would assume it was magic.
Sure. Whether or not you could explain it in scientific terms, I'd call it magic until the scientific method has made it as easy to understand (at least, for those who're meant to understand it) as any other branch of science.
So I guess the study of magic, to me, makes sense, if as a scientific branch, as the study of phenomena that are still significantly difficult to explain and that humans can produce without basis in the most recent science, under seemingly impossible conditions, and if a certain theory can be attributed to a particular act of "magic" (through what is no doubt a tremendous amount of work) that seems to hold up under scrutiny, as a theory should, it's not really "magical" anymore. I hope that makes sense and isn't too rambly.
To be honest, this is another one of those times where I saw a viewpoint I agreed with without thinking that much first, latched onto it, and created my real viewpoint by debating it out.