Magic versus Science, round one
Sep. 4th, 2009 10:33 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
brightlotusmoonDear Pagans, Writers, and People Who Enjoy Fantasy,
What are your thoughts on magic versus technology, Functional Magic, and Magic Realism as they all relate to each other?
I ask because of a debate Adam and I had about Larry Niven's corollary to Arthur C. Clarke's Third Law, which of course states that "Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology."
Adam fully agrees with this corollary, having been taught this as a teenage magic practitioner. I, however, would like to believe that magic is inherently organic and comes from the person using it, not from a tool or device, because a tool or device would make it technology. Example: Telekinesis. If I were to point at something and make it float, I could call it magic. But if I were to use technology, it would be science, because I wasn't personally involved, having used a machine. Adam counters with the idea of injectible nanotechnology and computers that hook up to people's brains. But, say I, that would still be science, because the scientists are using technology to aid the brain. For me, magic is a pure force, an element beside science, one that is controlled by a person's will. Ah, says Adam, but isn't science? Without people, wouldn't technology be pointless? Both magic and science need someone to wield them!
And now I am left feeling slightly disappointed, because I want magic to be something beyond science and technology, to be... you know, magic. Why wrap a person's broken limb in a cast if you could set the bone with your mind? Why point a gun at someone if you could point your finger and cause a heart attack with your mind? Why use a broom if you could sweep up all the dust with your mind? Etcetera.
And yet, the universe that my novel and other stories are set in use both. Or, more precisely, magic and technology are completely separate. The characters use magic and science whenever one or the other is better applied. Not necessarily Magitech, but I guess maybe technology aids magic and visa versa.
Please offer thoughts, opinions, counterarguments, and suchlike.
What are your thoughts on magic versus technology, Functional Magic, and Magic Realism as they all relate to each other?
I ask because of a debate Adam and I had about Larry Niven's corollary to Arthur C. Clarke's Third Law, which of course states that "Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology."
Adam fully agrees with this corollary, having been taught this as a teenage magic practitioner. I, however, would like to believe that magic is inherently organic and comes from the person using it, not from a tool or device, because a tool or device would make it technology. Example: Telekinesis. If I were to point at something and make it float, I could call it magic. But if I were to use technology, it would be science, because I wasn't personally involved, having used a machine. Adam counters with the idea of injectible nanotechnology and computers that hook up to people's brains. But, say I, that would still be science, because the scientists are using technology to aid the brain. For me, magic is a pure force, an element beside science, one that is controlled by a person's will. Ah, says Adam, but isn't science? Without people, wouldn't technology be pointless? Both magic and science need someone to wield them!
And now I am left feeling slightly disappointed, because I want magic to be something beyond science and technology, to be... you know, magic. Why wrap a person's broken limb in a cast if you could set the bone with your mind? Why point a gun at someone if you could point your finger and cause a heart attack with your mind? Why use a broom if you could sweep up all the dust with your mind? Etcetera.
And yet, the universe that my novel and other stories are set in use both. Or, more precisely, magic and technology are completely separate. The characters use magic and science whenever one or the other is better applied. Not necessarily Magitech, but I guess maybe technology aids magic and visa versa.
Please offer thoughts, opinions, counterarguments, and suchlike.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-09-05 11:22 am (UTC)Well, yes, magic and science/technology are two different things. The key word is "indistinguishable"; that is, to an outside observer, a sufficiently advanced nanosystem (with no visible externals, for instance) and a person actually doing magic with their head look like they've gotten the same result. Maybe they're not the same thing, but it sure looks like it.
There are also two sub-laws of the corollary. One is:
To people of a less technological advanced civilization, advanced technology looks like magic. (This is really where I see people get the most use out of this rule: Star Trek, Enchantress from the Stars by Sylvia Louise Engdahl, the story where an explorer cows the natives into submission with the use of matches and an almanac -- Robinson Crusoe?)
The other is:
Once your tech is sufficiently advanced, you can have all kinds of fun with traditionally magic-type powers and still be an SF writer. (And not be labeled a fantasy writer! The horror!)
no subject
Date: 2009-09-05 06:24 pm (UTC)Adam made the following analogy: Spanish conquistadors on horseback come upon two Mayan natives who have never seen a man on horseback, let alone a soldier with a gun. The leader of the conquistadors points a gun at one of the natives and blows his head off. The other native, terrified, sees this as great magic, as perhaps a godly act, while the soldiers just see it as technology.