It's my opinion that science can explain away many of the myths that witchcraft or magic can produce.
Most forms of magic call upon the elements and the use of chemicals to 'produce' a spell etc. But through rudimental study of science these same results can be produced if not bettered.
If this is the case, is there a place for magic and witchcraft?
If the answer is yes, I would love to know your views on this.
If the answer is no, are you conforming to scientific beliefs?
I think the role should be a respect on science's part for the role of witchcraft in the development of midwifery and natural medicine. I always felt that the witches and druids of old had it right it in an intuitive way. Many herbs used for cures are now the basis for modern medicines.
Many of the herbs you can find now in a local drug store for cures have been know to witches for a long time.
Pepper, I agree that many of the early herbs were the basis of modern medicine and they may have been know to 'witches' a long time ago, but surely if there is a scientific explanation for their properties then it's hardly 'magic' at work but infact basic science.
well most scientific matters are explained thoroughly and respectfully in regards to basic spells of witch craft and magic but in such circumstances where people who can read minds for example mediums or people using things such as runes or tarot and even crystal balls are only explained minimally so i think some matters of witch craft or spells are explained and others cannot be so its twists n roundabouts really in my opinion not that that counts for much
After years of believing in magic, I realized that it's for those that feel helpless over things/situations and want to look powerful in the eyes of others. It's for those that might feel bullied by life or others and want to scare them into leaving them alone.
The universe has it's own plan, and although we are each a part of it, and have actions to produce to keep it going, lighting candles and saying words won't change the universes grand plan for whether we move or not, or if someone will flourish or die. That isn't in our hands. I just don't see that happening. Not after an honest appraisal of the matter. It's an illusion. Deluding ourselves. If we wish for something and it just so happens, well it was going to happen anyway, and we attribute it to "witchcraft".
themoonlightishome~
good point, but I don't think that mind readers, mediums or tarot card readers consider themself to be withches let alone use magic.
However 'ESP' has always been linked to science.
Jamie~
You have touched on something that I think is essential to both magic and science, and that is the belief that you put in what you do.
Although I am a skeptic I don't think magic can be swept away so easily by saying it has no room in the universe.
Could it not also be said that science and magic are actually batting on the same team?
Yes,LB,I feel they are indeed on the same team...Possibly the same batter under a different aka.As I have stated many,many times.And the more I find,the more I believe it.
Oceanne, I do believe that to be the case too.
But if we bring 'believe' into it are we then looking at yet another entity this time being spiritual!
And thats the little pin prick LB..that spiritual thing.From what I can gather,there is much of witchcraft and "paranormal" which I feel can be explained or explained in the near future..all except that one little aspect..pretty kool really.
My other point was, if magic was the beginnings of science, why do we still have magic and witchcraft today?
because alot of us wont give up on witchcraft and herb healings and nature. We dont want to be a scientific.
More and more, science is grudgingly embracing some elements of the unusual and paranormal. Instead of totally ruling out "otherworldly" aspects of things, they are beginning to be looked at with less than a jaundiced eye.
Perhaps some in the scientific community are quiet pagans..trying to blend both worlds.
Lifeblood, Magick and science approach problems from different aspects. A solution may be reached using both but the philosophy and tools are different. Science has been categorized and codified much more clearly than magick has. Both deal with set rules and laws to explain their behavior. The biggest difference I have found as both a witch and an organic chemist is that witchcraft requires the practitioner to put their will and faith into the accomplishment of the act as this is where the psychic energy required to cause the action to occur is gathered. Science requires no force of will to occur, maybe another form of energy. :)
Michael
I think so.
There are many things science can't explain which would leave open doors for the belief in magick and whatnot. It's peoples upbringing that paves the way to what they think later in life.
Indeed Science has debunked many a magical myth if not most but there is a window there and I feel that the line drawn between the two is small. Although you can concretely say one exists and the other does not. You can prove one and the other you cannot. My daughter would tell you that the proof is in the pudding, I prefer to keep an open mind and if it weren't for magic/witchcraft perhaps Science would not know much of what it does, surely it offers something.
Though I have never practised magic or witchcraft I'm wondering about the personal touch.
What if someone you love is going through hard times ?
Well, science is cold comfort when care and love need to be expressed.
So I guess that's one reason that whichcraft is still around, the personal touch.
temporary2~
whilst I agree with much of what you say I would argue that magic doesn't really have 'set' rules and are not disiplined the way that science is. Science is afterall an exact topic. You touched on psychic energy, this still has no basis of proof.
Petal~
It wasn't so long ago that some scientific experiments were bordering witchcraft so using that logic I guess the same could be said for todays experiments. The difference is that science has grown whereas the rules that goven magic havent really grown.
Sinora~
Are you saying that doctors with their modern medication 'don't care'?
I do agree however that you need both belief in yourself and the product you are pimping.
CarnelianMyst~
You use the term 'grudgingly embracing some elements of the unusual and paranormal',
I would have thought quite the opposite, anything that can be proved scientifically will be welcomed.
I suppose you've got to ask yourself where does magic stop and science begin?? I would think they are all interlinked. After all centuries ago 'witches' were accused of practising the 'dark arts' which was essentially making up remedies for healing using herbs, plants etc which we have since come to know in fact they were just using the natural ingredients found in nature.
From my own personal experience, a simple impression of one's mind can trigger it perform a certain way if one believe's strong enough. The mind itself is mostly responsible for why some things can come off as "magical" esp if one made something to happen from the mental, to reality. The mind itself is our greatest mystery and tool. Not everyone that can do such feats considers themselves "special" or even defines it as "witchcraft" but more a matter of harnessing what is already within.
Lifeblood, you have exaggerated what I said to the point of dismissing the structure of magic and its rules. Here are a few laws that apply to magic and begin to relate the quantum theory in magickal behavior. Science is not exact as you would believe when you step into quantum behavior which can be used to show that there are probabilities for even the most improbable event to occur and that there are many shades of gray in our chaotic universe.
Psychic energy can be shown to effect events in controlled experimental conditions. One example review paper list several examples and methods of study. HERE Other examples are out there if you only open your mind to the possibilities.
Michael
temporary2~
very interesting, I'm aware of Mr Schueler's work, he will admit that he calls on scientific research and results to obtain his theories.
At the end of the day science is only a tool, a large amount of its result come from continuing experimentation to prove theory. Quantum theory is still relatively new as is most forms of chaos theory, but like the title suggests they are all still very much 'theory'.
Again I will agree with you on the gray areas that envelop 'chaos' and the universe, but I think we digress at this point.
The paper on psychic energy does read impressively, but that's just my interpretation .. it's a good read!
With that said, please tell me what you think science can learn from magic.
Well as far as we know whose to say the same if not betterd ways of science performing the spells or rituals is witch craft its self. As maney may know magic,rituals, witch craft, and sorcessery have dated back long befor science. So there is little chance its not real and it has been practiced in maney tribes and indians and so on threw the ages. In away science as dervived off of witch craft and other forms of magic user's to a point with a evovled method of studying abit different but still alike to the practices and studys of magic and how it is preformed.
Well said, Jamie and Oceanne..
My father is a scientist - retired nuclear physicist... there is no grey in his world, just black and white. The thought of witchcraft, of astrology, psychic readings, ghosts just make him cringe and angry and want to spout off equations.
However, being a product of the south, there are remedies and such that do work and shouldn't in the eyes of science, so he will acknowledge such, begrudgingly :P
I really love science, based on the Uncertainty Principle " nothing is real until it is viewed" Magic and spells would be viewed as scientically explainable. Now that said, I also believe that the two are intertwined together, spells and magic are unexplained science. But science is not completely advanced enough to explain everything about spells and magic.
Right, so science is still trying to catch up with what tribal shamans have known for thousands of years.
You've got to ask yourself where does magic stop and science begin??
I think they are all intertwined. After all centuries ago 'witches' were accused of practising the 'dark arts' which was essentially them using the natural elements to make up remedies and even healing herbs etc.
That is all basic science today and as to Magick....., Well it is not explained no more than spirits and ghost are. I am not talking about magic tricks or shows etc.. I mean real spells and VooDoo spells of ancients that have no explaination.. many have used and been exposed to it, has no other explaination other than it is Magick.... Just an opinion is all.
Lifeblood, the important lesson of science is to have an open mind to the unexplained and not dismiss it because it is unexplained. Many discoveries would have been dismissed if the observer closed their mind. Remember, minds and parachutes only work when open. :)
The word "theory" in science is a term that is defined as: A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
You dismiss the term "theory" using the nonscientific common term which is an unenlightened view of science and the scientific method. The nonscientific definition is listed as the last definition in the same dictionary (least accepted one) as: An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.
This definition places a theory with a wild ass guess which it is not. As a scientist and a teacher I could not let this stand without correction. As this definition is not taught or accepted by any scientist or science teacher.
nice, been a long while since a thread appeared that dragged me out of my sarcastic silence....
Magic, and science......very close cousins I have always thought
most of the greater sciences were at one time considered magic, and really what still remains within the realms of magic is simply a science that we haven't been able to codify as of yet, and many of the concepts within quantum physics relate very closely to what magic has long held, enough so that there have been numerous books written on the connections between the two, the most nmotable I have found being "The science of the Craft-by William H.Keith"
at the sub molecular level many things still react in a way reminiscent of magic.
I think that a lot of what was magic yesterday - can be called science today.
But...for myself..I gotta go with science. Being a nurse makes it tough to believe in a lot of things, magic included. Sad but true hehe
I believe they are one and the same actually. For a formula is needed to make things science wise and a ritual is in the same form. You blend it all together and wham bam thank you mame you have yourself a spell of magic or an answer to the science theme.
Magic is the core to adding the right energy same thing with science they just call it the atom more so. lol
Wanting to attach physical properties to metaphysical matter is the intent of most who practice magic, they want physically tangent things to manipulate, that is a far reaching area of magic.
Science is not without their fault as well. They only acknowledge the physical as possible.. yet the meta verse is beyond measure, so they close it out. Yet it is still likely to be there for the individual that separates from the physical universe. Those that perform illusions to create the appearance of metaphysical things seem to be the ones that press the sciences, because science wants answers and actual study able demonstrations(understandable). Something that is usually answered with, "Well you will just have to take our word for it."When actually all they want to see is what has been shown to others (in their controlled gathering places). Three people saw a guru manifest a small statue.. then when a skeptic asked to see him do the same thing.. he was escorted out of the front row. So science has actually found some phenomena in a few things.. grant it it is not as astonishing as what is claimed by such people. But still it shows how people can be lead for a long time on an effect and its variations. So that practice is a science in its own right, studying human nature and how to manipulate the accepted beliefs of people.
Ok, I believe magic exists to an extent. More like miracles. But unfortunately, I spent early years with a delusioned Wiccan, who one night took great panes to "sew a warming spell into her jacket." After she was done and we went to the event, we weren't there 10 minutes before she wanted to go home, complaining about the cold. It's really because of her and the many incidents like the afore mentioned, that make me more inclined to science.
I think there are only so many things about witch craft that can be explained away by science, the herbs and their uses, engery manipulation maybe, but there are some things or spells that are cast and things happen that can not be explained by science, if i cast a spell to prevent someone from talking about me, and I am in my house and they are in theres, but yet the spell still works and that person no longer talks to me or about me, how does science explain that one? just my opinion on the subject
That would be in another study of social context.. though it is good to have the ritual to counter the effects of constantly thinking of a person talking behind your back.. that reenforced with a craft is a good thing.
science is always evolein and give us a better insight to witchcraft. im wondering when witchcraft will become science
"but there are some things or spells that are cast and things happen that can not be explained by science,'
I feel differently,in that Im that "cast " spells are cast using resonance....
Well i think that witchcraft an science are just ahnd in hand , per science we know the make up of plants minerals elements . And to work your craft you must know the properties of each item you are using. So that is where science oviously comes in. Just going back to the fact tha alchemists were the first scientists anyways.... =P
Wanna see magic / the supernatural? Look at what happens at the quantum level, or at relativistic velocities, or in a super massive black hole, or in the dark energy regions between galatic super clusters or even in the E fields under the gate oxides of the transistors that are allowing you to read my words right now. Science is real, witchcraft/religion is pretend.
I think that parts of Witchcraft, and the practice of it, is a combination of many different sciences. There's a mixture of Chemistry, Anatomy and Physiology, Astronomy, Astrology, Pharmacology, Botany and others.
I further believe that the basis for many medical treatments arose from the practice of Witchcraft (and other practices such as Shamanism). In today's society, the rise of acceptance of a "Holistic" approach to healing that Witches and others practiced long ago, is proof that the old ways do have their place in modern medicine and other fields of science.
Magic is used by herbs, incence and candles during rituals. Science and philosophy plays a role in magic, because alchemy was an ancient chemistry and medicine.
Alchemy has been used in many civilizations. The pharaohs, chinese and the romans have used herbs for thousands of years for witchcraft. Magic is like energy, which can be either positive or negitive energy.
Even famous scientists like Newton and Boyle studied alchemy, and Boyle is known to be the father of chemisty. Thousands of years ago they believed that the earth was made up of 4 elements which was Earth (solid), Air (Gas), Water (Liquid) and fire (plasma). They represented the 4 states of matter, and these elements had something to do and was used with ancient magick, and alchemy was'nt around till later on. The pentagram represents the five points of the elements, because the fifth element was the spirit at the top, because they beleived the immortal soul was made up of elements.
well all I can say is until you actually experience something magical and there is really no way to explain it other than magic, or miricale (sp) than you cannot scientifically explain it away.
Myself I have had such experiences and there is no scienctific way to explain it. So I feel it is just how much you actually believe in whatever it is that can be done with witchcraft/blackmagic/voodoo etc. to me.
I would have to say yes. Simply because witchcraft is not just about magick and performing spells. It is communing with nature, using natural methods to heal, etc.
Science has been proven wrong before. And I like to believe there are many mysteries in life that science can't solve.
Just because people will not recognize one or the other doesnt mean they indeed are not the one and the same. Just because science can not explain it doesnt mean there isnt a rhyme or reason behind it. it all comes down to energy and cause n effect.
i believe that both magick and scientific practices have a place,back in old times i have heard that scientist use to use their skills to trick people to fear them to believe they were sorcerers.
Science is never wrong. The mathematics that govern the universe is never wrong. Its the human interpretation/ observation that is 99% in error. Hence the need for the scientific method and peer review.
Imagination is our greatest strength... and greatest weakness...
Hard to make another comment after all the fantastic and in depth insights already posted.
Science is trying to define and recognize many aspects of 'magic' and the unknown - like experiments with ESP and telekinetics - scientific experimentation and that way of looking at what the mind can do... mapping the brain during possible out of body experiences and such.
Alot of magic has to do with faith and the mind that lends itself to a different way than cold science. We are always learning more and finding different solutions to questions.
Even a friend getting a Ph.D in genetics/microbiology is still fascinated by what tarot and palm readings have been in his life and believes in them.... there is a way for both to go hand in hand. Just need open minds for it.
I think that there really isn't any place for witchcraft. Witchcraft goes along the lines of religious beliefs, and I'm an Athiest, so I naturally wouldn't believe the theories of people who study/practice witchcraft. If I were to practice witchcraft, it would be something I did for fun. I wouldn't have any sort of beliefs behind it.
Science was considered black magic when the study began simply because humans fear what we do not understand...simply put. Magic and science, if used together could be an unstoppable force.
During times past magic and science were taught and practiced together without the harsh schism that lies between them today. Unlike today, in the first great civilizations the office of priest was also that of chief scientist. It was recognized that this reality we live in was too layered for either mysticism or science to cover it all by themselves.
I feel its science with prayers. You need to know what your doing. For some things do not mix, others to much causes harm instead of healing. But magic works with "science " and belief to work.
I think there is always a time for magic. That is also because I am a bid beleiver in magic.
Yes there is a place for magic and witchcraft aside from it is what someone believes not only is witchcraft part of wicca but there is other things that tie into magic and witchcraft then just calling on the elements you have to call on the horned goddess and triple goddess.
When science is courted by metaphysical branches, there is an expectancy of procedure, application is sought. Thats the nature of science. For someone to say I have control over some metaphysical thing, and they claim to be able to interact with physical mater with that ability.. just like science must do, so must metaphysical supporters do.
Science, all branches.. have actually found some merit to potions.. salves, and herbs.. yet for some fringe metas' they want the meta mumbo jumbo to take precedence (something that science will not do, at risk of accreditation.)
exactly...in order for witchcraft or magic to be accepted by science, it must have predictable results that can be reproduced again and again. That so far has not happened with magic.
The Rosicrucian Society has often said that their goal is to de-mystify mysticism. Much of their teachings revolve around trying to give you at least an anecdotal evidence that something is happening again and again. Their tests are also somewhat predictable. Unfortunately, they are also somewhat in the range of chance or at least can't be proven to be directly caused by you (at least in early sessions - couldn't say for 4 and 5 years students in the Rosicrucian Order).
terms like Idio-matic, Socio-Dynamic, Transference Effect.. these are all related (by the science, and physics field.) to account for things formerly accepted as mystic forces. It is still a phenomena (one that serves social interaction.)
magic and withcraft are theories based on superstition, science is tested and tested over 100 times befores it becomes fact as stated and researched by a an accumalitive opinion of many scientists, so my point is, science is more realistic but that doesnt mean there cant be some truth to magic or withcraft
Mysticism, and Psi, seek to recognized by science more then science seeks to be validated through metaphyics. What is to be gained by science "validating" meta physic phenomena.. that is the big question.. what is to be gained by Meta physical researchers..? Grant money?
there is a cosmic force in the world that brings us together in this world but whether its science, magic or withcraft is a hard call to make
Science has to be a part of everything. If something cant be proven by Science then it doesnt exist. Witchcraft is a science but science isnt withcraft so my way of thinking you dont need one to have the other.
What I don't understand is why you singled out witchcraft anyway. What's the difference? Some of the things people are practicing now are relatively new taken from many forms of magickal practices that weren't included in the Old Craft handed down through family lines. They are calling it witchcraft. Old family European witches are starting to stand up and say no it isn't witchcraft. This leaves me to wonder why it is given as a separate thing from merely stating magick period. Hoodoo practices here are all about using herbs and roots because it is a mixture of African practices with Native American rootwork. This is sort of how some of the things like smudging got mixed into various practices because that's where it comes from, the Native Americans. Here hoodoo is also referred to as American Folk Magic (k). There are botanicas where you can go and buy all of these roots and herbs, etc. They do healings as well. If they use magick it is magick no matter if there is some sort of religious aspect attached to it and shouldn't be singled out separately over any other magickal system. There is no difference except in how the working is executed. What was thought of as magick in the past and in some cases demonic in nature and dark has now in many cases become what we call science...its all semantics. No one knows these answers unequivocally so anything anyone would have to say on this topic is opinion. The thing is in my "opinion" is the more we branch off into skepticism the more some of our natural abilities that were thought of as commonplace in the past will degenerate and we will no longer indulge nor believe in anything magickal due to that old saying, "I have to see it to believe it," Gurus have been said to materialize things in their hands and some in modern times; magick or a scientific law? Perhaps mass hypnosis, lol.
well why must everything be explained? why cant some things just be the way they are, no one sees the wind but its there and no one questions why because theres no need
I agree with BloodPrey, why has everything have to be explained. We need to put everything into catagories and relate something new with something old. If we dont then we cannot live with the idea that we cannot explain something. I am sure that if you looked both up in the dictionary they wouldnt be the same thing at all.
Everything has to be related back to science. If something cannot be proven by science it does not exist. Why do we need to prove that science is the end of all. Magic and witchcraft has been around much longer then science perhaps there is no place for science. But no this cannot happen as we have become a very smart race and the smarter we get we must dispose of the old and inwith the new.
i believe that the need to explain stuff also is the base of many confusions, such as conflicts with religions, failure to understand human differences and much more, life and everything in it caters to your own take on it but when you burden yourself with the need to explain everything, everything just becomes really confusing
I believe that was why science was first thought of. People got sick of taking things for face value and it was decided that everything must be proven beyond doubt.
Science seems to be largely misunderstood. Science does not produce facts or proofs. It doesn't operate on proofs. Science is a methodology for discovering the nature of reality. It produces laws (things observed always to be true), and theories. There is nothing above theory. Gravity is not a fact, it's a law and a theory. Evolution is not a fact, it is a theory -- one more fully supported than gravity. Every once in a while evidence is missed or less than fully observed, leading to valid theories which turn out to be untrue. The methodology of science incorporates the potential for error as a part of the process.
Witchcraft, spirits, after-lifes, religion, etc., all arise from a lack of understanding. When man couldn't understand the mountain that belched fire, ash and smoke, he assumed the supernatural and gave his mountain a god -- a human-like personality through which he might hold some hope of understanding the mountain and it's actions, and perhaps a means by which to hold a measure of control. He was wrong.
Man was equally wrong when he asserted tsunamis, earthquakes, droughts, floods, hurricanes and disease as being somehow connected to the supernatural. What man cannot understand, he tends to anthropomorphize -- to look upon in human terms and because he cannot cause such events, to see his personifications as magical or supernatural. Both terms, "magical" and "supernatural", are but euphemisms for "I don't know".
We have no credible evidence of witchcraft, spirits, ghosts, gods, demons or dozens of other proclaimed, but unevidenced entities and phenomena. There is nothing to suggest that these assertions and assumptions are other than a lack of understanding, mixed with imagination. Then we have those who will not accept any truth but that which they have already decided to be true. And when science shows them to be wrong, (i.e. heliocentrism, spheroidal Earth, evolution), they demonize science for not siding with them. But science does not choose sides. It is the study of reality, based on evidence to the exclusion of human emotionalism and ignorance.
Science exists. It is without argument, the single most successful method ever developed to gain understanding. Witchcraft is but another myth, kept alive only by those who refuse to learn from tens of thousands of years of affectionately held mythology.
Beastt17
I am not saying that your point of view is wrong, for we all have our opinions.
What I am perplexed about is your definition of Witchcraft. The way I am interpreting Witchcraft, as worded in your post, is sounding more like the term coined some hundreds of years ago by those who called people Witches and their doing Witchcraft when it came to explaining events or situations that they misunderstood or could not explain. Even those who did healing (which today would be considered holistic healing) were considered to be Witches.
There are still those out there today who study and practice the "Craft"--and many call themselves witches. Hense, the term Witchcraft is a valid one. Nothing mythological about that.
I think the term "Witchcraft" has many meanings, but I would not go as far to say that, "Witchcraft is but another myth, kept alive only by those who refuse to learn from tens of thousands of years of affectionately held mythology."
Beast17 - an exquisite post. And dead on.
I am still amazed that with where we are technologically as a species, that delusion and fantasy are still the standard modus operandi for explaining the unusual.
PsiVampire,
All good points, PsiVampire. I was referring, of course, to the more commonly held definition of witchcraft, i.e. summoning demons, casting spells that actually perpetuate or cause certain outcomes and/or contacting people in the "after-life".
If someone wants to read a book, attend some meetings, light some candles, recite some incantations and call themselves a witch, then I have no quarrel with such a reality. If they assert that they can cause things to happen simply through chants, spells, incantations, ceremonies and appeals to any kind of spiritual world, then I ask that they do so for the record and present sound, credible evidence to support the claim.
Science is but theory until someone else comes along and disproves it or shows there are flaws in the theories and comes up with the new and improved theory. They are finding out that man in ancient times had a pretty good grasp on some scientific things long before we came up with it. We didn't even know about them until they were dredged up by archaeologists and now we are amazed trying to understand how they came up with these things long before we thought they could possibly know some of these "so-called scientific methods". Science is just a more modern term for things people thought of as magick in the past. Most start with a theory and prove it by whatever methods they can. Even in quantum physics they don't truly understand many things they just know its what it is but the technical end they just don't understand yet. Why we appear to be solid. We know it relates to vibration and frequency and what we are able to see and touch but that's about it. Science is a so-called rational man's tool to explain the world and it's workings and nothing more. 200 years from now they will probably be saying we were ignorant believing certain "scientific facts." Its all relative to the time period.
Look up Dr. Emoto and Hado, Look up what the Russians are doing with thought and sound in regard to DNA. It all borders on what we would think of as magick. It is just a projection of thought to accomplish an end.
Azuredark,
There are places where I agree with what you've stated and places where I disagree.
Saying that science is "but theory" seems to present a misunderstanding of what a "theory", by science standards, actually is. One starts with a hypothesis. Upon publication, it is subjected to intense scrutiny by people from many fields of science, all hoping to claim the prize of demonstrating a disagreement between some aspect of the hypothesis and any piece of the pertinent evidence. If they all fail after many, many tries, the hypothesis is elevated to theory. And that's where it stops. Science NEVER "proves" a theory. In science there are no "facts" or "proofs". There are hypotheses, laws, theories and the evidence. And once a concept has been dubbed "theory" the reward for demonstrating it to be incorrect rises sharply.
I'm uncertain to what you might be referring when you suggest that we are finding that men in ancient times had a better grasp of certain scientific concepts than do we. Science, as a method, has been around for about 400 - 500 years. That doesn't mean that we couldn't come to hold a proper understanding prior to that time, but I'm unaware of any examples. Might you provide some?
One needn't jump to quantum physics to find things for which science currently holds but a tenuous grasp. We're still trying to explain the missing matter of the universe. And it's no small problem since that missing matter accounts for more than 90% of the matter that evidence and calculations suggest should exist. But that doesn't mean that we can't understand those things we don't yet understand. For instance, just noting that we're aware that we can't account for most of the matter in the universe speaks well of our ability to apply the methods of science and know when there is a problem.
Science is a tool in the form of a methodology. It's one in which human subjectivity is excluded because human subjectivity and the emotionalism which accompanies it are noted almost always to be in error. Objective analysis accounts for the vast majority of our understanding of the world today.
People who want to believe that science is supposed to produce proofs and facts are always going to be disappointed to find out that science is not infallible. Science utilizes that fallibility as a part of the methodology. But when rated for the ability to provide man with useful and meaningful discovery about the nature of the universe, without tripping over subjective assertions, myths and disbeliefs, there is nothing that even comes close.
Certainly we will find some current theories to have been incorrect and science will produce incorrect theories in the future. The point is that when those theories are demonstrated to be incorrect, it will be science providing the demonstration. And as each failed theory falls, science progresses and brings us closer to another truth about reality.
Wow. More than 9 millions people die for the name witchcraft. And we still in the subject.
Is spiritual matter proven still spiritual, is metaphysical practice measured by mass? Some want an interface with the Meta Verse so bad, what is to gain from such a interface? If I agree with the some confidence, that a form of life exist on another planet, there is something to that for me. Yet then there are those that cannot leave it at that.. they want the astonishing (sensational) interaction.. they want to interact with aliens/ghost. The claims and claimed applications of Meta Practices had in their time.. a social application.. behavioral studies have as well. That mixture of religious/clinical/entertainment from the metaphysical camps has been their undoing.. wanting nonprofit status.. for faith based practice.. just like a phycologist needs to go to an accredited school, and clinic for practice.. showing that they have "command" of a skill.
To manipulate materials to Craft an effect.. whether it is to build someones spiritual foundation, or encourage spiritual development (as well as socialization.. is a sacred matter.. when people perform the same thing for profit investigators will come and expose them for fraud under pretense. If people press science for validation, and science (through experimentation based on offered demonstration) shares their findings the average response usually repels further interaction. I question the motive of Uri Geller. I donnot see many Wiccans Pressing science for validation to their tradition and Craft.. it is the Spiritualist, and Psychics that are beating on sciences door.. "Oh yea well prove this doesn't exist.." One Million Dollars.. for simply demonstrating what they claim to do. Wiccan interacts with the spirit, something that actually is (to me) even if we have no alignment with where it goes.. it is still here, and I don't need to see some parlor magic to assure that. I don't need scientific measurement either.
I even know about the hypothsis. That is my other ID and I understand science quite well now at the age of 61 and have seen what has happened with science over the years. I know they use a hypothesis but that is just a fancy way of saying an "idea." Many scientists come up with something and prove it by forcing a proof. if their hypothesis and "proof" isn't in vogue they get ignored for the more favorable viewpoint. Any sort of magick is not viewed as legitimate except by those interested in it. I am not saying there is anything wrong with science but parapsychology is a legitamate field now and is still not accepted by scientists...but what is being asked here is science over witchcraft which is a very specific practice and does not mean magick in general. It is from the Middle Ages definition from what I saw here because in Europe many changed the name to things like Pellars in Wales and other varioius names depending on region. The English used it as a derogatory term and because of this and laws used other names for one specific type of magickal practice that at the time incorporated veneration of gods but not really worship as does Wicca. I don't see how they can be compared. They are entirely two different things...one is based on thought and belief while the other is mostly based on math which was thought up by man and calculus not too long ago. I don't think either could be said to be full proof so it is a matter of which you want to believe and I think for everything one side could say about things of this nature the other could come up with another. I have lived long enough that I really don't count on science much. BUT I think there is room for both.
There are things that the Romans built but they are digging up more items or investigating into ones they know about trying to figure out how they created something or knew certain things about the planet and space and a number of topics we would think they would be blind sided. I have watched documentaries on them and unfortunately I have a recall problem. I have fibromyalgia to tell you the exact things. They could make time mechanisms we didn't even have knowledge of until much into more modern times and they were exact. Many other artifacts but you have to be interested in these unusual things to know about them. If I were to remember everything I was watching and reading I would have to put them on numbered pages because that is what I do is research into the paranormal and unusual. I wasn't planning on giving minute examples. Watch the History channel or Discovery they talk about these things all the time BUT, I write them down and do my own researches because they do put on programs now and again I don't agree with and do my own research. Science has made many errors and quite frankly I think you cannnot compare the two at all. Some things cannot be explained by science and if they could we wouldn't have religion. Some of these same scientists believe a lot of things that are unexplainable. That is why some topics go on and on and on in debate like the energizer bunny.
Lady Mollidew, thank you my dear Covenmate. I will take the baton from you in this relay. :) I am going to try to cut the Gordian knot we are entangled within. (I hope. ) I have taught science especially chemistry at the university level for two decades and practiced magick as time permits for about one decade so I feel I have one foot on each side of the fence.
A hypothesis is nothing more than an explanation for an observation framed within what is scientifically known to be correct at the time. As experimental methods improve hypotheses are refined or scraped and new ones developed. An early hypothesis was the Earth is flat to explain how things could be seen at great distances. Scientific methods improved and it was found the flat Earth hypothesis did not fit the facts and a new hypothesis that the Earth was round was developed. This was definitively proved when men took pictures from the Moon. The round Earth hypothesis still exists as a hypothesis is an explanation that is consistent with knowledge of the time, nothing more. Now it is one with little uncertainty.
Atomic theory had a much longer evolution from the Greeks indestructible atoms to modern quantum theory which uses probability to explain matter and its behavior on the subatomic scale. Several points hypotheses were scraped and replaced with more correct ones as experimental methods improved. The quantum theory is still in development and may yet be scrapped as methods of study continue to improve. The hypotheses of the quantum theory are to some degree a bit uncertain. They and the theory are still useful in predicting much behavior at the subatomic level.
A theory incorporates the small explanations of hypotheses and laws into a broad explanation much like sewing patches together to make a quilt. Now, let's throw in some patches for laws which are explanations of behavior using mathematical relationships such as the gas laws that can be used in predicting behavior of matter, such as why your air conditioner works or doesn't. No deities nor magick yet as we are only looking at science which passionately explains what it can and quickly hides and dismisses what it can't.
Wicca is a religion in modern day that has been so muddled with true witchcraft that they have become synonymous. Wiccans may or may not incorporate in their religious practices any magick. Many Wiccans pray to their deity much like their Christian, Muslim, Hindu, etc. counterparts do, using their own rituals. Some of these prayers have been called spells but are nothing more than a setting up of a scared space followed by a prayer. The same actions a Catholic priest does by passing incense around the church, disbursing Holy Water, and praying for Mary's intersession. (Forgive me in advance I was only married to a Catholic woman a few years.) Do persons of other religion's attack science or are attacked as often as Wiccans and other Pagans? Wiccans and other Pagans have started calling themselves witches as a form of classification. Which unfortunately has made them very easily identified targets with essentially no benefit from this in many cases improper identification.
A "true witch" is a professional who uses magick as a tool not as a part of religion and has faith and belief only in their knowledge and skills. Deity's names are merely words of power to focus energy down the desired pathways for action to occur. Very few true witches exist.
We need to get away from the religion Wicca/Witchcraft and focus on magick and magick users in our discussion as religion is a matter of belief and faith which are both hard to quantify. We must proceed toward understanding magick as collection, storage, and disbursement of focused energy directed toward an action. The action may or may not occur unless the amount of energy sent overcomes the energy of activation for the desired action. The greater the energy requirement to cause an action to occur then the lower the probability for it to occur, unless methods are developed by applied study to enhance collection, storage, and focused application of energy. These very same ideas are used to understand a chemical reaction and refine processes to achieve consistent and positive generation of the desired product. Maybe science and magic are closer than many believe.
Sorry to ramble on but it seems we were missing the point. Science will explain what it can and hide what it can't (Been there and done that.), while magick has yet to be developed to a point that it can be easily compared with science as it is still unstructured and in its developmental infancy.
I belive they are one in the same but brought to other in many ways.
I think this just really depends on the persons beliefs.
Good stuff temp2...
I have to admit... when I strike a plasma in one of the PECVD tools in my lab, and watch it churn,ebb, and flow and watch it pull along the equipotential lines of the magnetic fields in the coils... I still feel like it is magic.
The only difference between magick and the magic of the physical universe is the magic of the physical universe can be explained and modeled mathematically. Since mathematics is the programming language of the universe, if it cannot be modeled mathematically, it is not real. Even imaginary numbers can be modeled mathematically.
This is one of the better discussions I've seen in a while.
I happen to believe in both science and magic. I feel that science derived from mankind's need to understand the magic around him. Many things that were called magic we have now proven through scientific practice. But there is still much of what can be called magical practices that are not explained by science (yet) and this seems to be where the dissension comes into play.
Why must there be only one choice? To accept a science theory as fact requires faith just as it does to believe in magic.
Medicine is a good example of this since as mentioned early herbalists were often accused as witches though today we accept herbalism as a science. But I suspect most of us know of a person whom medical science gave up on curing that faith in whatever religion they chose allowed a recovery. Faith= power and power gets things done.
science and magic co exist in the world but not all magic is related to science. I have see magic that has nothing to do with science but yes they do work together. Science in a way comes from magic. Witch doctors as they were called back in the day. Studied plants and how they can heal. Now it is done in a lab not is a hut and is called science not witch craft.
DeMONic314
I agree for the need for mathematical modeling for magickal laws of behavior. These laws have not been developed for magic as they have been for science. Also hypotheses have not been well developed, but attempts have been made. Hypotheses and laws are the small picture basis for the broader explanations given in a theory, the big picture explanation of how things work. Magic is still where science was in the middle ages in its development due to the lack of positive public feelings toward magickal research from then to current time. How positive for magickal research were /are The Burning Times? Until a theoretical background of how magick works can be developed and disseminated can science and magick be compared. Magick from anecdotal evidence appears to use energy forms not discovered or understood by modern science. Radioactivity and nuclear energy were in this category about 150 years ago and that is a short period of time. Magick and science may not become two halves of the same whole (Yin/Yang) for centuries or maybe never but is not wonderful to be part of a visionary discussion of the possible distant future.
Perhaps these are the "laws" to which you refer?
Laws of Magick
by
Simon Magus
Magick, not unlike physics or chemistry, operates according to certain
laws. These laws, as well as those of the sciences, reside in reality
within the heads of those who use them. However, the analysis of reality
into artificial categories is useful at certain levels of investigation.
It is well to bear in mind, nevertheless, that such categories reflect more
the contents of the human mind than they do of whatever "reality" might be
out there.
For the following analysis we are indebted to REAL MAGIC by P.E.I.
Bonewits. Mr Bonewits, incidentally, holds the first Bachelor of Arts
degree in magic(k) ever awarded. He, much to the chagrin of some of the
faculty of the University of California, was awarded the degree in June,
1970.
LAW OF CAUSE AND EFFECT
Anything done under EXACTLY the same conditions will always be associated
with exactly the same result. This law is taken for granted in the
sciences and in everyday life. The whole concept of causation is now on
shaky ground, thanks to developments in the field of quantum physics. But
for practical purposes, in magick as well as in our everyday lives, we
ignore causality to our own peril. We must assume, at least in dealing
with things the size of human beings, that effects follow causes. Even in
the constantly flowing, changing astral realm we find the law of cause and
effect in full operation.
LAW OF KNOWLEDGE
This law tells us that "understanding brings control," that the more you
know the more powerful you are. If you know all about something, you have
total control over it. "Knowledge is power."
LAW OF SELF-KNOWLEDGE
This is a sub-law of the previous law and follows from it. If you know
yourself, you control yourself. The more you know about yourself, the
better you can control yourself.
LAW OF NAMES
This law is related to the Law of Knowledge and to the Law of Association.
It states if one knows the whole and complete name of a phenomenon or
entity, one has complete control over it. This is one of the reasons the
Mystery Religions (including Christianity) conferred a new name on the
neophyte. His new name was then his true name, but it was known only to
his fellow members of the mystery. The Law of Names also relates to the
Law of Personification which will be explained later. Two premises behind
the present law are: (1) Names are definitions. This is more obvious in
simpler languages, but it is as true of English as of any other. Sometimes
the definition is hidden in the origin of the word, as is often the case
with those derived from Latin or Greek, but it is there. (2) Names are
mnemonic (memory) devices which trigger a range of associations. (See the
Law of Association).
833
LAW OF WORDS OF POWER
This is a sublaw of the Law of Names. It states that certain words trigger
changes in the inner and outer realities of the person saying them. Many
of these words are corruptions of the names of ancient Gods. Words like
"Abraxas," Osorronnophris," "Abracadabra" are examples. They have no
meaning to us today, but THEIR POWER LIES IN THE SOUNDS OF THE WORDS
THEMSELVES.
LAW OF ASSOCIATION
If two things have something in common (anything!), that thing can be used
to control both. Bell's theorem in quantum mechanics indicates that every
particle in the Universe affects every other. The following two sublaws,
which anthropologists think are the basis of "primitive" magick, are more
useful in practice. These are the Laws of Similarity and Contagion.
LAW OF SIMILARITY
Most people have heard of sympathetic magick, which is based on this
principle. Effects resemble causes. To make something fly, put feathers
on it and make chirping noises. Wave it in the air. The example is not
entirely absurd and serves to illustrate the principle. Much of the magick
of "primitive" people is of this nature. For example, rain is made by
(among other actions) sprinkling water on the ground (or by washing your
car -- a modern example of the same principle!).
LAW OF CONTAGION
This is the principle behind doll-sticking and such in "primitive" magick.
This directly relates to Bell's theorem and states that things once in
physical contact continue to influence one another after they have been
separated. This relates more to our consciousness than to things as
they are in the physical world, but defining the two is more difficult than
they appear on the surface. Thinking, feeling, and memory are
associational functions of the human brain. New data are related to
existing knowledge and patterns are established which correlate particular
elements of knowledge. The overall pattern, which includes the
"personality" and the "world view" is the METAPATTERN of all this. This
metapattern we may consider to be made up of the memories, fantasy images,
beliefs, values, techniques, rules of behavior, attitudes, etc. which make
up the individuality of the person.
LAW OF IDENTIFICATION
This law relates to those of Knowledge, Association and Personification.
It states that by complete association between your metapattern and that of
another entity, you can BECOME that entity. You can then examine your own
metapattern from the point of view of that entity. At full identification,
one "becomes" the entity. All idea of distinctness vanishes and you are
empowered with all the attributes of that entity because you ARE that
entity. The danger here is that many people become lost in the new
identity as the stronger metapattern submerges the weaker. Proper
training, practice and guidance will lessen the danger.
834
LAW OF SYNTHESIS
Two opposing ideas or items of data will be resolved into a third idea that
is more valid than the first two. This principle allows you to hold two
seemingly contradictory ideas (such as, "Electrons are particles," and
"Electrons are waves.") at the same time. Reality is as it is, not as we
conceive it (or even as we perceive it, for that matter). The
wave-particle duality in physics is an example. Physicists were nonplussed
to observe in their experiments that light behaved (depending on the
experiment) sometimes like a wave and sometimes like a particle. Light
striking a surface of copper, say, releases electrons from the surface.
This phenomenon, when examined closely, demonstrates that light is made up
of particles (now called photons) which impart energy to the electrons,
allowing them to escape. However, another experiment, in which we direct
a beam of light at some pinholes, "proves" that light is of the nature of
waves. If we direct a beam of light at an arrangement of pinholes:
---------------------------------------
I I I
I I I
I I screen--> I
I I I
I
continued:
---------------------------------------
I I I
I I I
I I screen--> I
I I I
I
(sorry Ascii graphics are getting interpreted as html)
final paragraph
assuming that we have a beam of "parallel" light (a plane wavefront),
we see the light projected onto the screen. If we cover one of the
pinholes, we see a single illuminated spot on the screen. If wwe uncover
the first and cover the second pinhole, we again see a single spot
projected onto the screen. Now, if we uncover both pinholes, what do we
see? Two spots of light? No! We see a pattern of alternating light and
dark bands on the screen. This phenomenon is due to INTERFERENCE between
the crests and troughs of the WAVES of light as they strike the screen.
When two crests occur together, or two troughs, the amplitude is doubled,
and we get a bright area. But when a crest and trough coincide, they cancel
each other, and the result is a dark spot of zero amplitude (no
brightness). The point of all this is that interference is necessarily a
WAVE phenomenon. The experiment demonstrates the wave nature of light.
How do we resolve the dilemma? By realizing that we are dealing with
something that is neither a wave nor a particle, but SOMETHING ELSE.
Ref: http://www.sacred-texts.com/bos/bos192.htm
Sorry... nothing supernatural there...
For most of that, its physics plain and simple...
His final statement, talking about wave particle duality of matter and concluding that it is neither, is completely wrong.
wavelength equals Planck's constant divided by momentum -period. de Broglie figured that one out almost a hundred years ago.
The remainder of these "laws" can be explained or disproven using psychological statistical analysis.
However...
While admitting I am a skeptic and a naysayer with a highly sensitive BS- O'meter to anything we silly primates put on the table... I want to throw out that I am not some socially inept scientist locked away in a cold laboratory saying a "pernicious nonsense" at everything I see. I am very in touch with nature and in fact, I think even more so than most. When I look at a rose, not only do I see its beauty as anyone would, but seeing, in my mind, its cellular structure, its atomic structure, and the Fibonacci sequences they create, allows me to see a beauty beyond belief.
I also believe in the power of thought because I have observed and experienced it for myself, and yes that includes an extrasensory perception that is outside the statistical coincidence range. However, I believe these can be explained and understood, yes mathematically, by some of the exciting new work in theoretical particle physics.
Wanna see some real magic? Check this out...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-theory
all forms of science and technology appear as magic to a less sophisticated, educated or advanced society.