Corvidius Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Between my book on Egyptian magical practice and
> the Greek magical papyri, I'm sure I can conjure
> up a spell or two to repel and banish. Might need
> some red pots first. But I'll have to hope that he
> does not start to read the PT as intended as he
> might realize which spells I could use and prepare
> a counter spell. But then, the PT does not contain
> any spells according to him.

Effective magic is pseudoscience.

The PT might just be literal;

868c. Now be still, hear it, this word which is said: "N., (#460)

1746a. To say: Now be still, men, hear --------------------((#618)

521c. Wilt thou cool it with the magic, (#324)

There exists no magic which will affect reality so far as has been shown experimentally. If the ancients really did believe in magic it was most probably impossible to have used it to build pyramids or to affect their "gods" in any way whatsoever. So far as has been shown experimentally no "imaginary consciousnesses" even exist and we lack even a working definition for "consciousness" so this will not change soon.

Indeed, there is no evidence of any sort that even belief of any kind affects reality. Belief affects human perception and cognition and the actions of humans affect reality but there's no evidence that ancient beliefs could have directly affected anything. There's no evidence that our belief that ancients were highly superstitious affects whether they even had beliefs. That their language lacked such words to invent, frame, or communicate beliefs IS prima facie evidence that they had no beliefs. "Pseudoscience" is by definition the pursuit of knowledge derived from unsupported science. It is circular reasoning starting with false assumptions like "ancient man couldn't build pyramids therefore aliens did".

Again this is not to say that Egyptology is necessarily a pseudoscience merely that it is dependent on the work of 19th century scientists and that data are not being systematically and methodically collected and analyzed. It is only through experiment that any modern science gains its ties to reality. It is through the ability to make prediction that shows its accuracy and effectiveness. Currently Egyptology is incapable of making significant prediction which implies it is no science. We can call it "linguistics" or a "social science". We can even marvel at what it has accomplished but it is no science.

It could be scientific because a great deal of "science" is really perspective and the search for anomalies to study. We have great difficulty seeing anomalies because we interpret everything in terms of our beliefs so when we do see an anomaly it's an anomaly. It is round peg that can't be pounded into our square beliefs. The scientific perspective demands we investigate and study it rather than installing a lock to keep people out, dropping the subject like a hot potato, or turning our backs on it. The study of anomalies accounts for most human progress because nobody is smart enough to just "Look and See" reality. We see experiment and we're very lucky we can see anomalies. Refusing to study them, refusing to gather evidence, and refusing to publish results are definitely the hallmark of pseudoscience and do not reflect a scientific perspective.

____________
Man fears the pyramid, time fears man.