Doug M Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sorry, magic is not intellectual. Magic and
> science are two different things. Sure one may
> lead to the other, but they are not the same
> thing.
We aren't talking about now, we're talking about 4500 years ago. Your use of the words "are"" and "is" reflect modern perspectives. That's not the topic.
> Believing I can conjure up some force of
> nature to do my will based on some spoken words is
> magic.
It is one form of magic, yes.
> That is not science in any sense of the
> word and it is certainly not intellectual.
Once again, your use of present tense verbs pulls this conversation out of the proper historical realm.
>
> I agree that the science of today has its roots in
> ancient magical beliefs and practices, but still
> science deals with properties of natural
> substances that have been quantified and verified
> to have certain properties through observation and
> analysis. Magic is all about the power of belief
> not the power of verified fact.
My study of the subject has led me to quite a different conclusion, obviously. You have a belief, for example, that the things you consider to be scientific "facts" upon which your healing magicians base their decisions are actually more true than those "facts" upon which the healing magicians of ancient Egypt based their decisions. Your belief may be right.
Whether or not it is true, however, is irrelevant. The fact is, they both work(ed) within a system that they consider(ed) to be a truth upon which they could build their actions.
Allow me to give a more modern example: astronomy and the heliocentric solar system.
How many scientific observations and studies were made and documented in the attempt to chart the movement of planets and stars in a worldview model that had a geo-centric view of the solar system? The calculations were often enormously complex, and the models that were created to explain the movements of different bodies within the geocentric view were equally complicated. It was then shown that through a far more simple model, they could explain all of it: the sun was at the center of the solar system, not the earth.
Were all the astronomers doing all the calculations and modeling of the solar system being unintellectual? Of course not. Their model's foundation was flawed. Their methods were the exact same methods that were used to later chart planets and other bodies' motions within the heliocentric model, and used more successfully, obviously. That does NOT mean that they were not intellectuals until somebody pointed out the sun was at the center of the solar system, though. They were doing the best they could with what they understood to be the reality of the situation they were investigating.
Egyptian magicians were no different. Their star observations were extraordinarily accurate, and useful for clocks, calendars and other such functions. But, since they thought these stars were the souls of deities moving across a large, sky-bound body of water, does that mean that their observations weren't intellectual? Of course not.
I don't think I can explain this any more clearly. Your superimposition of the championing of modern "science" over ancient magic is a personal choice and a personal belief-driven value judgment of your own. I'll just ask you to respect the efforts of those who did not have the advantage (?) of your modern knoweldge base when engaging in their intellectual pursuits.
Oh, by the way: heavier than air travel and getting light from electricity were also scientific "impossibilities".
> The fact that
> Egyptian priests practiced both magic and science
> does not change that magic is not science and
> science is not magic. Magic is not designed to
> address intellect it is designed to address the
> psyche of an individual based on a belief system.
> That is at the root of all magical practice.
You are incorrect in this assertion.
Anthony
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him think.
