123 réponses à ce sujet

[Aren]

This topic is an obviously replacement and a  different  thread to the closed topic of

"Reason why gun is not supposed to be in Dragon Age"

here: http://forum.bioware...-in-dragon-age/

in which it was discussed about the coexistence of technological products and magic.

This topic however will be completely different in it's structure,here i will try to criticize and "understand" where possible the meaning of magic and as it was stated in the derogatory title of the topic ,if science can explain magic,or more likely if magic can be seen into the Dragon age franchise as something that is depositary of a true "methodology".,since it is often tied to religious practices,especially for the ancient elves when as someone said "magic was at it's most"

Science is a way of talking about the universe in words that bind it to a common reality. Magic is a method of talking to the universe in words that it cannot ignore. 

The two are rarely compatible.

The struggle to eliminate “magic mentality” has affected the development of all scientific disciplines.

This process of “de-magification” has been sustained in the use of models created by every discipline.

 

1. The Magician and the Scientist

 

In the Dragon Age mastered by religion and magic, theodosian are in fact submitted to the magic and religious mentality that always re-emerges from its ashes and that is supported by the need of the immediate satisfaction of their wishes. 

What is magic, what has it been for centuries, even if under a false appearance? The presumption that we can go directly from a cause to an effect by means of a short-circuit, without completing the intermediate steps.

For example, you stick a pin in the doll of an enemy and get his/her death; you pronounce a formula and are all of a sudden able to convert iron into gold; you call the angels and send a message through them.

Magic ignores the long chain of causes and effects and, especially, does not bother to find out, trial after trial, if there is any relation between cause and effect.”

An essential difference between the magician and the scientist is that, while the magician dares to give definite answers, the scientist tries hard and humbly to raise questions that will only accept provisional answers.

Whereas scientific theories are tentative models of some aspects of reality, magic expects to catch the whole reality to master and submit it.

Scientific models are only tools (machines) that mediate between scientists –who cannot act directly– and reality.

Magic, on the contrary,claims to act directly on reality through images or representations of it (for instancethe doll that represents the enemy) . 

According to the German sociologist Max Weber, scientific progress can be described as a process of de-magification that has been going on for millennia in Western culture (Weber, 1959). This struggle to eliminate the magic mentality in the explanation of facts has been present throughout history and has become visible in

the periods of emergence and consolidation of all sciences. It is easy to follow the tracks of this struggle at the origins of most of the disciplines: physics, chemistry,biology, medicine, psychology, anthropology, sociology, political science. In all these

cases, “de-magification” has been accompanied by the modelling of ‘a piece of reality’ by means of models that, far from being exact representations, turned out to be “machines” good at producing knowledge about the reality in question. 

It is still usual to find some “magicians” who offer “magic” solutions to the problems of mathematical education

(how to heal,how to freeze,ecc..).

Their proposals come up in terms of general slogans that obviously promise immediate, direct and complete solutions.

On the opposite side, any scientific approach to problems related to the teaching and learning of mathematics needs to elaborate (or to adapt) its own specific models, based on its own primitive terms and basic assumptions, about the domain of reality concerned.

 

 

2. Follow a set of rules,magic itself can be seen as a form of science

"We don't ask that you stay within the bounds of physics, but at least follow the rules you freaking made up."

"Archdemons souls cannot survive to a Grey Warden soul"

"Corypheus soul can survive to a Grey Warden soul"

There is something missing here, did the servant surpassed the master?

Or do i need to follow fan "theory about blood magic?"

http://forum.bioware...pheus-survival/

If so why the Archdemons cannot simply use blood magic to do what Corypheus did?they aren't stupid afterall.

What many Anti-Magic "Scientists" ( i consider myself as to be part of the category)  and Anti-Science Magicians seem to forget is that since most magic systems follow a set of rules, magic itself can be seen as a form of science(though it is often an art instead).

In his tower, the wizard Istar casts his fortieth fireball today while his apprentice diligently notes the exact qualities of each. On his workbench are piles of fireball spells yet untested, but Istar plans to catalogue them all. Only then can he begin to study what makes one fireball stronger than another.

While gathering herbs, Granny Annick thinks to herself: everyone says horseshoes are lucky, but how lucky are they? Now if I got ten people from the village to roll dice a few times, and gave them a coin for every number facing once with and once without a horseshoe, I'd only have to count the coins.

Sufficiently Analyzed Magic is a philosophy, whenever you find wizards, witches, sorcerers or mages who decide that lore and intuition is not enough: They want to understand how magic works and will do so through empirical evidence and experimentation. You have the beginnings of Sufficiently Analyzed Magic.

Does it work in Dragon age where magic is strictly tied to a dreams world and where religion is intrinsically bound to magic?

and where we have different degrees of mages?

non-mages

mages

dreamers

super-mages (for one reason or the others they are the dreamers elvesor the so called Evanuris,the best of their world in terms of magic )

The source of magic is the fade,no it is the lyrium,no it is the blood,no it can be also the taint,no they are the titans.

What is magic in Dragon age?

Apparently the selective breeding of mages does it imply that is also related to the blood of the mage 

 

How to detect those rules, if there is a Your Magic's No Good Here complex?

 

Magic is either the Dimension's Natural Law or Not: Depending on which dimension of The Multiverse you are in.

In World A, you can shoot lightning from your fingertips if you know how and gunpowder does not explode; and in World 1, the reverse happens. 

Magic A Is Magic A... but not in Dimension B.

Sometimes characters in a fantasy or superhero setting travel to a different world or a different dimension. Once there, the character finds that his/her magic or super powers don't work the same way as in his/her home world.

Or like in the Golem of Amgarrak where reality was shaped by lyrium in order to make the physical body intangible,between different material state.

There can't be an universal empirical model for such diverse quantity of tangible reality/dimensions.

While different type of models could be made,it's hard to understand as for why all those different realities should have something in common.

 

Conclusion

Speaking of magic and the the fade

all in all i'm still of the opinion that  a dream doesn't become reality through magic; it takes sweat, determination and hard work.

 

 

 

 

[leaguer of one]

Magic in dragon age does not ignore the laws of cause and effect. In fact most magic's in fictions issue is source, not cause and effect. Magic is more of an extra law in the environment with it's own rules which the people use it gain it at a time before understanding the concept of cause and effect. Like how early man would think lighting and fire were from the gods and the stars were soul.

In fact we already have some thing like that in real life. It's called gravity. We know how it work and it's law via trail and error and math but we don't have any real detail about it's source and why it works.

Magic in da has always been shown to be looked at scientifical and mistical.

[Qis]

I am not sure what the writers themselves view on magic, they seems inconsistence. While gameplay programmers just making magic look cool, they also include magic in non-magic stuff but call it something else to buy players.

 

Dragon Age is the only game where we can see inconsistencies in it's premise. They don't really incorporate what have been established in the lore into the graphical world. Even KotOR is consistence, they have set of rules on Force powers, what can be done and what cannot, these rules set by Lucas Art, so we can see Force powers and The Force in the game fit Star Wars universe (not necessarily the movie)

 

Bioware now only focus on "coolness factor", for business. They make Tempest specialization just because of it's look cool and could buy players who love such thing. The programmers don't care if it is magic or science, or it against the premise in the established lore, it just look cool for gameplay and so they make it.

 

Since DA2 it already being worse where rogues and Mages can teleport, though they deny it is teleportation even it look like teleportation. In DA:I it becomes really worse than before. In future games, it is not really matter anymore, there will be no distinction between science and magic, and they don't care...that is why i suggest they should remove guns and advance technology in the game. Let magic flourish and everything is magic

[thats1evildude]

In b4 lock.

[lynroy]

I find it funny you put understand in quotation marks in the OP.

[Aren]

I find it funny you put understand in quotation marks in the OP.

Details...... 

 

Magic in dragon age does not ignore the laws of cause and effect. In fact most magic's in fictions issue is source, not cause and effect. Magic is more of an extra law in the environment with it's own rules which the people use it gain it at a time before understanding the concept of cause and effect. Like how early man would think lighting and fire were from the gods and the stars were soul.

 

To me the term magic is a technique that aims to influence events and to dominate the physical phenomena and the human being with the will; to this end, the "magic" may use gestures, acts and verbal formulas, or appropriate rituals.

The complexity of a concept is not the issue,since you mentioned gravity

(From Newton to Einstein to Higgs ecc..) i was merely arguing about the chains of cause and effect,which is always missed with magic.

Wanna heal this sick girl?

Just call Wynne and she will do that with the act of magic,meaning shape the reality with her will.

Create lighting bolts,fire ore ice from your hands with the will and injury the enemies while at the same time these elemental forces do not provoke any injury to the hands of the mage  who at the end of the act seem distressed because they lost "mana" which is a concept that i would find too contrived to even analyze it.

I mean stamina of warriors it's determined by physical resistance of the body,but what it is mana? What rules are behind that?

Why a mage look tired after having used some spells if the primary component of such magic it was will?

[Qis]

I mean stamina of warriors it's determined by physical resistance of the body,but what it is mana? What rules are behind that?

Why a mage look tired after having used some spells if the primary component of such magic it was will?

 

In previous games, they give the idea that only Mages have mana because they have a strong connection with the Fade, the ones who have mana can cast magic. I also have the impression that magic is actually "illusion made real" because Templar ability in DA:O is Mental Fortress, you need a strong mind to resist magic.Alistair dialogue also indicate that they are trained with mental discipline.

 

Since the Fade is a dream world, so i asume Magic is actually not real, but it become real in mortal plane, only those who have strong mental power or willpower can resist it. And maybe the reason why the Veil is thin when there are so many magic cast is because Mages draw their power from the Fade.

 

So mana is the Fade inside Mages, in short Mages are gateway for two worlds, dream world and mortal world. When you bring dream world into mortal world, thats create magic. At least i understand it this way.

[Serza]

0/10 not scientific enough - IGN.

[Ashagar]

In previous games, they give the idea that only Mages have mana because they have a strong connection with the Fade, the ones who have mana can cast magic. I also have the impression that magic is actually "illusion made real" because Templar ability in DA:O is Mental Fortress, you need a strong mind to resist magic.Alistair dialogue also indicate that they are trained with mental discipline.

 

Since the Fade is a dream world, so i asume Magic is actually not real, but it become real in mortal plane, only those who have strong mental power or willpower can resist it. And maybe the reason why the Veil is thin when there are so many magic cast is because Mages draw their power from the Fade.

 

So mana is the Fade inside Mages, in short Mages are gateway for two worlds, dream world and mortal world. When you bring dream world into mortal world, thats create magic. At least i understand it this way.

 

Keep in mind the fade isn't just a dream world but a connected plane, after all it is possible for people to physically enter and leave the fade which would be impossible if it was simply a dream world and beings from the fade can exist in the material world, something that would be impossible for something that was a mere dream.

[Qis]

The flaw of my theory is the fact that blood can replace mana, why blood can replace mana and how could creature of the Fade know blood can replace mana is never explained. The original story says that Mages learned Blood Magic from demons, and demons are creatures of the Fade, how could creatures of the Fade know mortals can cast magic using blood?

 

It doesn't make sense.

 

I know that Blood Magic is actually a way to "troll" the Templars, it's a standard game mechanic in similar universe (such as Warcraft, DotA), Templars are anti-mage class who drain mana, so the way to counter that is by using health to cast magic. but this mechanic never fully explained in Dragon Age.

 

And you can only drain blood from allies in game mechanic...

[htisscrimbliv]

can science explain magic? no. can magic explain science? yes.

 

[IanPolaris]

Geez.  I really, really dislike topics like this.  Science isn't some amorphous thing that weird nerds do at science fair.  Science is an extension of a far older branch of philosophy called Natural Philosophy.  Indeed the highest academic degree any scientists can earn, i.e. PhD MEANS "Doctor of Philosophy".  Science is the application of logic, reason, and controlled observation (including experimentation) to attempt to understand the Natural World.  Nothing more and nothing less.  Assuming the world is coherent, and assuming that what we call "magic" is part of that world, then science should be able to (at least in principle) be able to study magic, and indeed magical study would be just another field of science.

[Illegitimus]

 

This topic is an obviously replacement and a  different  thread to the closed topic of

"Reason why gun is not supposed to be in Dragon Age"

here: http://forum.bioware...-in-dragon-age/

in which it was discussed about the coexistence of technological products and magic.

This topic however will be completely different in it's structure,here i will try to criticize and "understand" where possible the meaning of magic and as it was stated in the derogatory title of the topic ,if science can explain magic,or more likely if magic can be seen into the Dragon age franchise as something that is depositary of a true "methodology".,since it is often tied to religious practices,especially for the ancient elves when as someone said "magic was at it's most"

Science is a way of talking about the universe in words that bind it to a common reality. Magic is a method of talking to the universe in words that it cannot ignore. 

The two are rarely compatible.

The struggle to eliminate “magic mentality” has affected the development of all scientific disciplines.

This process of “de-magification” has been sustained in the use of models created by every discipline.

 

 

Bah.  You are conflating magic and wishful thinking, but if magic was real, it would not be wishful thinking.  Anything that is real and detectable can be studied using the scientific method.  How do you think things like the Tranquil process were developed if not by theory and experimentation?  The scientific approach to the inconsistency between Corypheus and the Old Gods is to try to identify the differences between the two things and then theorize about which of them made the difference.  For example, one difference is that the Arch-demons weren't human.  Another is that they were all isolated at the moment of their death, cut from their link to the darkspawn by the proximity of the Wardens, while Corypheus has the link to his tainted dragon...  All of them died except possibly one, and that one survives if allowed, because he passed through a somewhat tainted warden into a clean shell.  Corypheus survives because he passes through a highly tainted dragon into a somewhat tainted shell.  It's not the same process of course, but there is a degree of similarity

[Ieldra]

Here's my take on the matter:

 

As opposed to historical magical traditions, magic in most fantasy worlds is like science and technology with regard to methods of research and understanding. For that reason, historical analogies and statements about magical traditions by RL scholars mostly do not apply. Most notably, there is no process of "de-magification" since Thedas' understanding of magic owes little to historical magical traditions of our own world.

 

(1) Magic works consistently. Whatever you actually do when you cast a spell, do it ten times the same way and you'll get ten times the same result, with any variations depending on your mental discipline - which means in that case you're not doing it in exactly the same way. 

(2) Magic can be understood and explained. It uses a different conceptualization of the world than technology, but the methods by which you increase your understanding of it are similar, and they give logically consistent results and predictions. Magic is science and technology with a different paradigm.

 

The key difference is that magic is a mental discipline. In order to do magic, you need to be mageborn and you need to have mastered the mental techniques of spellcasting. Meanwhile, in technology only research and development requires a high level of expertise. Once built, most technological items can be used by anyone.

 

Magical understanding and scientific understanding aren't contradictions. Rather, they complement each other. You can attempt to understand the elements of magic - mana, lyrium, The Fade - within a paradigm of science, and come up with "magical technology", items that control elements from the magical paradigm using technological methods. Our Arcanist Dagna understands magic that way. So yes, science can explain magic in a setting like Thedas. Not all settings are similar in that, but these appear to be the most common type.

 

The functional difference between magic and technology in a typical fantasy world is this:

 

(1) Magical powers are innate and depend on mental disciplines to master, and require no tools to work.

(2) Technological powers are acquired and can be mastered by anyone, but require tools to work.

 

From this stem some philosophical associations: Magic gives an individual more autonomy since no tools are required. Mages need only themselves in order to control aspects of their world. Technology gives a society more power but leaves individual autonomy hanging at least somewhat, because usually most complex tools must be made by others. I can use a gun whether I'm mageborn or not, but nobody can make their own gun from scratch. If I'm mageborn I'll be able to cast several damaging spells without requiring any materials, but if I'm not mageborn I have no chance at all.

 

The question of the level of magic and technology in a fictional setting depends on what kind of balance you want between these elements - innate powers and increased individual autonomy, possibly restricted to certain people, versus acquired powers that anyone can use, giving a whole society more power in a more egalitarian way.

 

Beyond that, the difference is flavor.

[Aren]

Geez.  I really, really dislike topics like this.  Science isn't some amorphous thing that weird nerds do at science fair.  Science is an extension of a far older branch of philosophy called Natural Philosophy.  Indeed the highest academic degree any scientists can earn, i.e. PhD MEANS "Doctor of Philosophy".  Science is the application of logic, reason, and controlled observation (including experimentation) to attempt to understand the Natural World.  Nothing more and nothing less.  Assuming the world is coherent, and assuming that what we call "magic" is part of that world, then science should be able to (at least in principle) be able to study magic, and indeed magical study would be just another field of science.

Thank you about the reminder,still some of those words were also arguments discussed and also extrapolated by critics

of Umberto Eco and Francis Bacon (which appear to be two philosophers rather than pseudo nerd scientists on a summer fair ) and readapted to hit particularly the lack of chains of cause and effect that is typically absent with magic, in which reality is shaped by the will of mages  with words and gestures.

Wanting to re-establish the crumbling edifice of knowledge of the setting in a rational and effective way, to create a rational criteria as for why the force of will is  able to shape reality ,someone may intend to tear down the old building whom fundamentals are the mystical and magical to rebuild everything on rational and stable criterias. 

I see something in the magic-rational that is incompatible with the reign of human reason.

The typical idea of ​​the magic of knowledge to power, knowledge designed to have repercussions on the reality can not accept that this knowledge is alien to reason (yes in the setting is often tied to religious and mystical practice) and it is restricted to a narrow elite circle: the magician, the sorcerer and so on. 

Knowledge must be a common good says Francis Bacon, because common to all men is the reason of which all have the same extent:

if someone does most other street is just because the leads done with a better method;  

Knowledge it becomes a common good to all men and the progress is not made by individuals with exceptional skills

(Old gods,Spirits,Evanuris,Golden city), but rather are the result of a systematic teamwork.

 Knowledge should not be transmitted in an unclear as did the magicians(the whispers of the old gods,ancient artifacts , demons ecc), resuming a trend matrix Heraclitus, but must be understood by all and must be expressed in the national language.

 With Francis Bacon we are witnessing a very important event: the passage from magic to science, where working to produce is no longer the individual but the 'team. 

It remains strongly rooted in the idea of ​​knowledge for power which is considered a precursor theorist Francis Bacon. 

Understood the conceptual points of the arguments? 

There is no need of a PhD for that.

 

1)Magic ignores the long chain of causes and effects and, especially, does not bother to find out, trial after trial, if there is any relation between cause and effect.”

We can go directly from a cause to an effect by means of a short-circuit even without study of the process

Hedge magic may provide an example

http://dragonage.wik...iki/Hedge_magic

(whom i personally contributed a bit to improve that page)

 

2)Magic is in it's nature elitist and it works  with a narrow circles mentality  something inherent to  a certain degree of people,like  a pyramid  of power that is able to dictate those who possess superior magical capacity by birthright rather than knowledge.

Example

I can be knowledgable as Solas or Felassan or Feynrel,but i cannot be equals to neither of them because they are  for birthright one of the few Dreamers.

 

 Corypheus survives because he passes through a highly tainted dragon into a somewhat tainted shell.  It's not the same process of course, but there is a degree of similarity

 

 

Forget about Corypheus,it was just an example i posted a link to some reasonable explanations as for why he can be effectively immortal,is not difficult to build something for him.

Actually that was not the focus of the topic.

[Navasha]

Magic is like grammar.   It has rules too, such as, periods at the ends of sentences, which letters to capitalize, and where to put punctuation marks.  

 

Still, even when you violate those rules, we can still kind of make out what the point you are trying to convey.    Magic is exactly that.   They try to teach you proper grammar in school, just as the circles attempt to teach 'proper' magic spells to its students.    They want the students following the 'rules' of magic they set forth.    However, in the real world just as with grammar.    That is rarely the case.   

[Aren]

 

 

The key difference is that magic is a mental discipline. In order to do magic, you need to be mageborn and you need to have mastered the mental techniques of spellcasting. Meanwhile, in technology only research and development requires a high level of expertise. 

 

 

The functional difference between magic and technology in a typical fantasy world is this:

 

(1) Magical powers are innate and depend on mental disciplines to master, and require no tools to work.

(2) Technological powers are acquired and can be mastered by anyone, but require tools to work.

 

From this stem some philosophical associations: Magic gives an individual more autonomy since no tools are required. Mages need only themselves in order to control aspects of their world. Technology gives a society more power but leaves individual autonomy hanging at least somewhat, because usually most complex tools must be made by others. I can use a gun whether I'm mageborn or not, but nobody can make their own gun from scratch. If I'm mageborn I'll be able to cast several damaging spells without requiring any materials, but if I'm not mageborn I have no chance at all.

 

The question of the level of magic and technology in a fictional setting depends on what kind of balance you want between these elements - innate powers and increased individual autonomy, possibly restricted to certain people, versus acquired powers that anyone can use, giving a whole society more power in a more egalitarian way.

 

Beyond that, the difference is flavor.

Which lead to my assumption that magic is in its nature elitist, in the hands of a select group of people with a certain ancestry, intrinsic qualities, or other distinctive attributes that found in mental techniques their core foundation.

Magic is part of a fantasy setting just as Nature is part of the real world,however the former is elitist while the latter is not.

Which means create discrepancies between individuals of the same species solely based on birthright and mental techniques.

Magic however in DA is not something inherent to the mage,since somehow transactions between mages and non mage's were accomplished.

The level of technology in DA is ridiculously primitive and it makes magic completely dominant.

Being able to cast spells shouldn't be something inherent to the mages since the only thing that they do is to drain those forces of the fade.

Being a user of the taint can give others magical abilities,being a spiritual warrior can provide others,being bound to those titans offer others,it is the source that give the possibility to use those supernatural abilities..

[Ieldra]

This is in reply to post #15, not the post immediatly above this one.
 
@Aren;
I'm sorry, but your "reasoning" is anything but. You make associations where none exist:
 
A. The idea that knowledge must be a common good...
(1)...is a moral postulate, not a description of reality, and thus has no bearing on how things are.
(2)...applies to knowledge about magic as much as to any other kind, and in fact on Thedas, everyone can understand magic and its princples - see Dagna. The limitation that you must be mageborn applies only to its use. 
 
B. There is nothing intrinsically egalitarian in the idea of the rule of reason. In fact, I could make a good argument that egalitarianism is non-rational, based on the - rather strange, if you consider it - idea that everyone should have equal weight in politics regardless of personal capability. We have mostly agreed to egalitarianism only because we can't agree about standards for a - much more rational - meritocracy.
 
C. Magic is a toolset. Magical research attempts to understand the world only so far as necessary to make the toolset work - if little understanding is necessary because magic can work with complex concepts without a need to analyse and dissect them, then little understanding will be generated. Technology is exactly the same: applied research limits itself to the useful, and additional understanding is created as a byproduct. Scientific methods can be used in either case and apply to magic and technology in almost the same way. It is possible, for instance, to ask "what is the Veil", and come up with answers based on observation and experiment.
 
D. Mythology and mental manipulation does not equal knowledge transfer. The Old Gods don't want to convey knowledge, they want to manipulate. Also, what they do convey has nothing necessarily to do with the mechanics of magic and magical research.
 
I'll stop here. You can come up with different conclusions than I do, depending on where you start, but your latest contribution to this debate, as well as you OP, is methodically flawed to an extent that it can't be repaired.

[Medhia_Nox]

Just because something follows rules doesn't mean science can grasp it. 

 

All human convention - ALL of which is make-believe - follows rules.  

 

Magic in the DA universe abides - very poorly - by a set of rules that are prone to changing.  

 

Science doesn't change.  The rules are binding. 

 

Also - on Thedas - the "educated" mage is a myth.  There are only a handful of educated mages - Flemeth, Morrigan, Solas, Zathrian and Avernus (let's forget three of them are psychos and one is a craven survivalist).  You can be other things as a mage on Thedas... political (Dorian and Vivienne) - militant (the Saarebas) - a cause-head (Anders).  

 

None of them advanced their research... Dagan, a none mage - was a more educated mage than 95% of all DA mages presented so far.

 

You are born a mage... education has nothing to do with it.  Mastering magic is more akin to a religion (mental discipline, visualization techniques, etc.) on Thedas.  It's ridiculous to think you're "born prone to wanting to be educated".  

 

Also - it is pitifully unreproducable and obeys laws from the LEAST scientific place of them all.  The Fade.  A place of thought, mind, idea.  A totally chaotic irrational place that will never bend to the static categorization required for a scientific discipline to form around it. 

 

[Baaleos]

All Science is magic until it is understood.

We are trying to apply real world understanding to a fictional universe and it doesn't quite work.

 

In our own world - When cave men first saw fire, they most likely thought it was magic.

In Dragon Age Universe- they have people who can shoot fire from their hands.

This would be called magic there, but in our universe - it would be us calling the people 'Mutants' or 'Superheros'

 

In the DA universe, there is another layer of reality called 'The Fade' where magic emanates from.

In our universe we would liken this to an other dimension of space time.

 

Dragon Age universe has chosen to develop magic heavy, and science light - because in that universe - magic is real, so why try to disprove it through science.

Opposed to our universe where we developed science heavy and magic light. (We are a developed culture, and we have explained many of the things that were once considered magic)

 

There are still things in our world that we don't understand, for those things, we have the wonderful...

'Get out of jail free, and not have to explain it' card called - Faith.

(The winning argument in any debate apparently -  Trust me, you try explaining to a religious taxi driver about how dinosaurs did NOT develop sharp teeth, because Eve ate the forbidden apple - then you will know that it is like trying to get blood from a stone.)

 

 

In our universe, yes, Science can eventually explain the things we don't yet understand.

Its basically a question about processing power, effort / time and resources.

 

In DA Universe - the universe kinda integrates scientific study into magical research. Instead of trying to explain magic, they use Magic to explain the world around them.

This inherently results in the answers they derive coming out with a magical skew, instead of a scientific view.

Eg:

Instead of 

'This molten Lava is composed of these atomic elements.'

You get

'This molten lava is composed of the elements of Fire and Earth, with the wrath of the skies to bind them!'

 

Really the DA universe is just magic heavy, because the creators didn't want a science fiction universe.

There are very few games around that go with magic and science at the same time.

(Eg: Realistic Universes with magic)

Two examples spring to mind are : Hellgate London and Secret World.

 

They both have magic - as a rare resource within a science rich universe.

However they don't try to explain the magic - which is kinda odd.

[Medhia_Nox]

Also of note... the placebo effect.  Scientists in our real world know that belief can cause effects in the body... they don't know how, and they've largely dismissed it.  

 

Science cannot explain "magic" - ever.  (Yes, of course it can observe some "rules" about it - that's not "science" though.  Science is a specific form of rule observation.  Some rules aren't observable in this fashion.)

[Aren]

Magic is like grammar.   It has rules too, such as, periods at the ends of sentences, which letters to capitalize, and where to put punctuation marks.  

 

Still, even when you violate those rules, we can still kind of make out what the point you are trying to convey.    Magic is exactly that.   They try to teach you proper grammar in school, just as the circles attempt to teach 'proper' magic spells to its students.    They want the students following the 'rules' of magic they set forth.    However, in the real world just as with grammar.    That is rarely the case.   

How boring.....

Are we going on the aspect of orthography now?

These reflect the aspect of my native language rather than english and some pieces of those sentences are quickly revisioned or translated.

I do not check every single point or comma to fit it better after the translation which obviously  shape the periods of the text.

Can't you see that user like leldra and probably others as well have probably already noticed that and that they flew  such trivialities?

Still we will try to check those periods,since those who are utterly in love with grammar will die as soon as they will see some "monstrosity"

 

[Medhia_Nox]

 

How boring.....

Are we going on the aspect of orthography now?

These reflect the aspect of my native language rather than english and some pieces of those sentences are quickly revisioned or translated.

I do not check every single point or comma to fit it better after the translation which obviously  shape the periods of the text.

Can't you see that user like leldra and probably others as well have probably already noticed that and that they flew  such trivialities?

 

 

Ahh, are you saying you want a specific response specific forum posters will give you? 

 

Cause THAT is also unscientific. 

[Aren]

This is in reply to post #15, not the post immediatly above this one.

 

@Aren;

I'm sorry, but your "reasoning" is anything but. You make associations where none exist:

 

A. The idea that knowledge must be a common good...

(1)...is a moral postulate, not a description of reality, and thus has no bearing on how things are.

(2)...applies to knowledge about magic as much as to any other kind, and in fact on Thedas, everyone can understand magic and its princples - see Dagnat. The limitation that you must be mageborn applies only to its use. 

 

B. There is nothing intrinsically egalitarian in the idea of the rule of reason. In fact, I could make a good argument that egalitarianism is non-rational, based on the - rather strange, if you consider it - idea that everyone should have equal weight in politics regardless of personal capability. We have mostly agreed to egalitarianism only because we can't agree about standards for a - much more rational - meritocracy.

 

C. Magic is a toolset. Magical research attempts to understand the world only so far as necessary to make the toolset work - if little understanding is necessary because magic can work with complex concepts without a need to analyse and dissect them, then little understanding will be generated. Technology is exactly the same: applied research limits itself to the useful, and additional understanding is created as a byproduct. Scientific methods can be used in either case and apply to magic and technology in almost the same way. It is possible, for instance, to ask "what is the Veil", and come up with answers based on observation and experiment.

 

D. Mythology and mental manipulation does not equal knowledge transfer. The Old Gods don't want to convey knowledge, they want to manipulate. Also, what they do convey has nothing necessarily to do with the mechanics of magic and magical research.

 

I'll stop here. You can come up with different conclusions than I do, depending on where you start, but your latest contribution to this debate, as well as you OP, is methodically flawed to an extent that it can't be repaired.

I do not have time right now,still i would try to respond and on evening change this quick response,and you clearly misunderstood what i intended as for "common knowledge" no moral postulate were intended as nature itself does not provide the possibility to do something because you are born with it.

[Ieldra]

Also of note... the placebo effect.  Scientists in our real world know that belief can cause effects in the body... they don't know how, and they've largely dismissed it.

Wrong. They're trying to understand it - I can give you references if you want - and it's occasionally used intentionally in medicine, though that has become difficult due to informed consent laws.
 

Science cannot explain "magic" - ever.  (Yes, of course it can observe some "rules" about it - that's not "science" though. Science is a specific form of rule observation.  Some rules aren't observable in this fashion.)

It is assumed that the workings of mental disciplines can be understood. There is nothing that would intrinsically prevent magic from being understood either. And if you concptualize the Fade as a realm of ideas and dreams, then the tools of psychology can be used to understand it. Problems in applying the scientific method to magic aren't much different from applying it to the human brain: we have limited access and limited ways of experimenting. We still come up with significant knowledge in the field, though progress is naturally slow compared to some other fields.