Does Magic Exist?

Great Debates
81

Czarcasm, I would start by saying that you’d need a better definition of magic. You seem to have restricted it to an almost dungeons and dragons level.

But as a general answer, I’d say that I don’t know of anyone capable of magic, which is not to say that it doesn’t exist, or will not be discovered.

As a counter question, should we discover ways to perform magic, and then discover the ways in which they work - would they stop being magic? An incendiary grenade is cold science to you, but demonic fireballs to a person from the middle ages.

82

Several quite clear definitions have been posted on this thread, and what I want to see is obvious to everyone except those who don’t want to answer the question for personal reasons. I’ve even given examples of what I want to see. Appropriate answers by this time should be either:
1.)I can do something along the lines of what you are asking, or
2.)No, I cannot do the magic as described in this thread.

I refuse to redefine what I mean any further, and I tend to see claims that the goal presented here is rather unclear as disingenuous. If you are looking for a redefinition of magic that includes feeling good, prayer and the like, look elsewhere. The goal here has been defined enough.

83

Actually, grenades were cold science to our ancestors, too.
They knew the concept of throwing flammable material at the enemy. Our medieval ancestors didn’t have our level of technology, but they weren’t idiots, either.

If you could bring John of Salisbury or Roger Bacon, two prominent scholars from the High Middle Ages, into our time, they would be able to figure out how modern technology works. Even though our ancestors had not yet differentiated astrology from astronomy or alchemy from chemistry, they knew the difference between an unknown technology and a conjuration of spirits.

84

Sorry, but I have no personal reasons or interests here. I could just as easily claim that your refusal to redefine the question is disingenuous.

You ask “Does magic exist”. The first response has to be “what do you consider to be magic”. The second response has to be to point out the standard paradox of trying to prove that anything does not or will not exist. Reluctant as I am to query a mod on this, are you sure it shouldn’t have gone in IMHO?

85

Sorry goboy, but I find that very unlikely. Doctor Mirabilis was a great one for experimenting, but I still think he’d be damn terrified if you gave him a demo of a conversation using a cell phone.

86

“Magic” has already been defined in this and other threads. We want to see fireballs thrown from the eyes, spirits summoned from the vasty deep, Czarcasm turned into a toad with a mere twitch of the nose, like Samantha does on Bewitched. You know, magic.

Nonsense. The pagans claimed they could do real magic, the skeptics want them to back up their claims. The burden of proof is on them.

87

The heck with the definitions. Can you levitate that quarter? Can you read minds? Can you tell me what Wednesday night’s lottery numbers are? Do you know anyone who can? What can you do with magic, other than conjure Pit threads and make yourself feel all fuzzy and warm inside?

“Just because I can’t prove it exists doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist” has got to be the most meaningless argument of all time, since the arguer is basically attempting to win a point by claiming there is an infinitesimally tiny possibility that the thing claimed to exist might exist despite massive evidence to the contrary. And monkeys might fly out of my butt, too. (Is there a magic spell for that, and would someone care to demonstrate it?)

This thread is getting more and more depressing, Czarcasm. I’d have thought the pro-magic people would have had enough confidence in their own beliefs to at least attempt a demonstration. Yet we’re still stuck on the same old non-responses.

88

Sorry but proving that one person’s claims of magical ability are complete nonsense hardly disproves there’s no such thing, does it? Hell, even if you could prove that there isn’t a single person on the planet capable of magic, that still wouldn’t prove that there never had been (or would be) people who were.

Unless you look at magic as a religious issue, this has to be an IMHO.

89

How does this sound as a simple definition of Magic:

An act by a practitioner causing a result that is not explainable by science.

This is not to say that magic can never eventually be explained by science, but just that we can’t explain it today.

Levitating a quarter would fit the bill, improving your mood or psyche would not. From all of the various posts I’ve read so far on this subject, none of the magic(k) practitioners have personally claimed to do anything not explainable by science, and I doubt any will.

The reality is that science knows a great deal about our universe, magic spells and rituals are not likely to tap into any currently unknown forces or physical effects. Most likely, any new discoveries will occur in a lab, bypassing any possible magical connotation. Some advances long ago may have been considered magic at the time, I’m thinking herbal medicine type of stuff here, but are now known and well defined by science.

Many of these posts imply that scientists are closed minded about this subject, not true, Believe me, if someone could produce a verifiable result that is unexplainable by science, the scientific community would be overjoyed. They would have something completely new and interesting to poke at and find out how it works, they would welcome the opportunity.

Nobody is going to claim in this thread that they can do anything not completely explainable by science, because they will never be able to back it up. If practicing magic(k) makes them happy, and fulfills their lives, wonderful, don’t let any of us stop you. Only, let’s not claim that your powers defy science, unless of course, you’re willing to back it up.

90

For fecks sake, who’s pro-magic? I’m a card carrying, “believe it when I see it” atheist myself. The whole thing about questioning an item though is that you QUESTION BOTH SIDES EQUALLY.

91

You’re an actual atheist, Gary? The irony is exquisite. Because, of course, you can’t prove that god doesn’t exist, which is the exact same point you’re trying to make about magic.

As for “question both sides equally,” we’ve been questioning and questioning and questioning, yet nobody’s stepped up to the plate to take a shot at demonstrating some magic. All we get is people claiming that maybe, despite the complete and utter absence of any non-anecdotal evidence for the existence of magical powers, there really is such a thing as magic.

Monkeys still might fly out of my butt. However, I’d be a goddamned fool to believe that it’s going to happen.

92

Again, nonsense. The skeptics are not trying to prove that there has never been a functioning magician ever. As you said, that’s an impossible task. However, if a pagan claims he can perform magic, and he can’t back it up with a practical demonstration, then his claim may be dismissed. Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.

In other words,
“Prove to me that you’re no fool,
Walk across my swimming pool”

93

There seems little irony in the fact that I don’t personally believe in any particular god. I also don’t go about telling everyone who does that they’re wrong, you see.

We’ll go through this one more time. And this applies to ** goboy’s** arguments too. I would no more take my personal experience as conclusive proof that magic does not exist then I would argue that all religion must be baloney because no-one can give me concrete proof in the existence of a god. What we are arguing here is purely personal beliefs - there are no absolutes.

You want to prove the lack of existence of a mystery? How can you do that. Let me give you two, rather hackneyed quotes.

“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” - Arthur C Clarke

“The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science.” - Albert Einstein

Or am I the only one who’s a little unsettled at the sheer hubris in saying that magic cannot exist, for we would know about it if it did?

94

A few members of a particular sub category of a particular religion have made unsupportable claims. I don’t know the credentials of these people and so don’t know how well they speak for their chosen path. I don’t know any Pagan who thinks that they can levitate quarters or throw fireballs, etc. I don’t know any Pagan who thinks that there is some grand poobah magic user out there somewhere who can levitate quarters or throw fireballs, etc.

Magic works. I have done it. I have seen it done. It works.

Magic is not an objective practice any more than sculpting or poetry are objective practices.

Magic is subjective.

There is your answer.

I have seen magic change things. Therefore magic works. Can I show you magic working? Not unless those things changed for you.

You watch too many movies and play too many role-playing games. That has colored your ideas about what Pagans think magic is.

I think the number of Pagans who make extravagant claims about being able to create showy effects through magic are very few and tend to not be very serious about the religion. At least that has been my experience.

I don’t tend to do a lot of magic. If you want to see some Pagan magic I suggest you find some Pagans in your area and tell them you want to understand what they are doing. Ask them to explain it. Then watch them do it.

Will you see any results? That is up to you.

Magic is subjective.

95

Details, please. What happened? Were there changes in the material world, or was it subjective and internal?

Gary, you’re not getting it. If people claim they can do magic, but they can’t do it when anybody’s watching, that claim can be dismissed. What part of that don’t you get?

96

I think you are the only one, because we would know about it if it did. “How?” One may ask. Well, it’s simple, I say.
For thousands of years, people claim to be able to do magic. Yet not a single solitary person has offered proof. Why is that? If I had the ability to perform magic, even if it’s on a tiny scale, I’d be doing it all the time! I’d be rich! I’d have Randi’s million, and I’d be inviting everybody on the SDMB to my house for a demonstration, to silence all these nay-sayers and skeptics.
And I really can’t believe that anybody else with the ability to perform real magic(k) would behave differently. Or are only noble, selfless, ungreedy people allowed to know the secret of magic?

97

No, Gary, we are not arguing personal beliefs. You are free to believe that monkeys will fly out of your butt. But when you claim that monkeys will fly out of your butt, I want proof of that claim. And proof is not just saying “You can’t prove they won’t.”

Hubris, scmubris. Either show me flying monkeys or stop telling me they might exist.

98

Sorry goboy, we’ll go through it once more. I have no truck whatsoever with those who either:
[ul]
[li] Claim they can demonstrate an ability, then try to back out offering dodgy reasons like “you’re rude”[/li][li] Attempt to justify their magical ability as a subjective thing[/li][li] Pass off meditation as personal magic[/li][/ul]
And so on. Such claims deserve to be disproved and countered.

But disproving them does not answer the original question of “Does Magic Exist”. The current argument the skeptics are running seems to be “If no-one can give an example of magic, it clearly does not exist”. That is hardly conclusive reasoning.

99

Did you read my post?

Where wasn’t I clear?

100

Sure it is. Let’s say that I claim to have an invisible dinosaur named Fluffy as a pet. Can you prove there is no Fluffy? If you can’t, then you have to admit Fluffy exists.

There is an infinite number of bizarre phenomena people claim to be real: flying saucers, unicorns,the Loch Ness plesiosaur, alchemy, the Jersey Devil, and so on. Do I have to accept that they are all real just because people say so, and I can’t conclusively demonstrate their non-existence?