Magic versus Science, round one

[brightlotusmoon]

Dear 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.

Comments

[brightlotusmoon.livejournal.com]

That was the gist of Adam's main argument -- to the magic practitioner, the magic is a science. To the observer to doesn't understand, it is magic. However, he did say that science is also about will, to which I disagreed -- science needs technology and tools to progress, where magic basically just needs an organism to wield it.

Science it's about will.

[seferin.livejournal.com]

The intent or willpower of the practitioner won't affect the result, but in magic it may. Science is cooking, magic is an art. Science doesn't require any will, it may be done by following a recipe, ergo, if the results are written clearly enough, a novice may accomplish the end result.

Magic, which would require the finesse and proper application of will, would require time to learn to focus. Intent isn't enough.

Re: Science it's about will.

[brightlotusmoon.livejournal.com]

*nods* Got it. That's a great way of putting it.