Search SJML Archives! (Powered by Google)

Previous Message: Re: Spell research
Next Message: Re: Bomb weight
Month Index: January, 1999


From:     "Downer, Chris" <Chris.Downer@?????????.com>
Date:     Tue, 5 Jan 1999 11:36:52 -0600
Subject:  Re: Magic vs Science
I think what we need here is the definition of Science.

	1.The study and theoretical explanation of natural phenomena.
	2. A systematic activity requiring study and method.
	3. Knowledge, That acquired through experience.

Well now that we have Webster's definition of Science lets see if AD&D Magic
fits into the definition,

             1. Well some of us view magic in the AD&D worlds as Natural
phenomena, and Wizards study it. and since they study it then we can assume
that they have some theoretical explanation of the phenomena.

	2. I would defiantly say Magic in AD&D is a systematic activity that
does indeed require study and Method, at least                	    by the
Mages.

	3. When a Mage studies magic, he is gaining knowledge in it. And
they gain this knowledge through experience.
	    And AD&D magic is repeatable, so the Scientific Method would
apply to spells.

I tend to think of Science as gaining knowledge about the known and the
unknown PERIOD. And Magic would defiantly fall into this category.


Previous Message: Re: Spell research
Next Message: Re: Bomb weight
Month Index: January, 1999

SubjectFromDate (UTC)
Magic vs Science    Paul Westermeyer    31 Dec 1998 07:20:55
Re: Magic vs Science    Avrjoe@???.com    31 Dec 1998 16:43:36
Re: Magic vs Science    steve swenson    31 Dec 1998 20:20:51
Re: Magic vs Science    Paul Westermeyer    31 Dec 1998 22:45:07
Re: Magic vs Science    steve swenson    31 Dec 1998 23:46:26
Re: Magic vs Science    TandemArts@???.com    31 Dec 1998 23:59:07
Re: Magic vs Science    TandemArts@???.com    01 Jan 1999 00:20:16
Re: Magic vs Science    steve swenson    01 Jan 1999 00:29:36
Re: Magic vs Science    S. Wilson    01 Jan 1999 00:40:13
Re: Magic vs Science    TandemArts@???.com    01 Jan 1999 01:30:25
Re: Magic vs Science    TandemArts@???.com    01 Jan 1999 01:32:24
Re: Magic vs Science    S. Wilson    01 Jan 1999 06:14:35
Re: Magic vs Science    Paul Arnold Stetzel    01 Jan 1999 09:10:26
Re: Magic vs Science    Avrjoe@???.com    01 Jan 1999 10:30:53
Re: Magic vs Science    TandemArts@???.com    01 Jan 1999 18:20:53
Re: Magic vs Science    TandemArts@???.com    01 Jan 1999 18:38:07
Re: Magic vs Science    Paul Westermeyer    01 Jan 1999 23:07:27
Re: Magic vs Science    Paul Arnold Stetzel    02 Jan 1999 08:36:52
Re: Magic vs Science    steve swenson    04 Jan 1999 16:26:24
Re: Magic vs Science    TandemArts@???.com    05 Jan 1999 01:40:15
Re: Magic vs Science    TandemArts@???.com    05 Jan 1999 02:13:35
Re: Magic vs Science    S. Wilson    05 Jan 1999 03:45:12
Re: Magic vs Science    TandemArts@???.com    05 Jan 1999 04:50:37
Re: Magic vs Science    steve swenson    05 Jan 1999 14:38:51
Re: Magic vs Science    Downer, Chris    05 Jan 1999 17:36:52
Re: Magic vs Science    Downer, Chris    05 Jan 1999 19:26:29
Re: Magic vs Science    Paul    05 Jan 1999 23:52:25
Re: Magic vs Science    TandemArts@???.com    06 Jan 1999 02:37:19
Re: Magic vs Science    TandemArts@???.com    06 Jan 1999 02:54:22
Re: Magic vs Science    Paul Westermeyer    06 Jan 1999 03:39:12
Re: Magic vs Science    S. Wilson    06 Jan 1999 06:10:56
Re: Magic vs Science    Paul    06 Jan 1999 23:39:27

[ SPJ-L@Cornell.edu ] [ Spelljammer@Leicester.ac.uk ] [ Spelljammer@MPGN.com ] [ Spelljammer-L@Oracle.Wizards.com ]