Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Natural Magick (1584)

faculty.umb.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 58 posts

Re: Natural Magick (1584)

#31

Post by mojomark »

ColanR wrote: post #17
jbattle wrote: post #8

It's slightly shocking to read this and realize how many outright falsehoods these people were being told. It's almost wonderful that knowledge advanced when people were being taught stuff like this by authorities ancient and modern: > Diodorus says, that near to the city Thebais in Egypt, when Nilus overflowing is past, the Sun heating the wet ground, the chaps of the earth send forth great store of Mice in many pla…

The thing is, we don't know what they were describing. There's a lot of strange things old records describe that do turn out to be true; I don't think it's wise for us to be so dismissive.

Agree - this kind of sounds like the description someone might ascribe to a sometype of mudskipper [1] or perhaps tadpoles [2] emerging from a drying creek bed (Re: "[when the] Nilus overflowing is past, the Sun heating the wet ground, the chaps of the earth send forth great store of Mice").

1.) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mudskipper

2.) https://images.app.goo.gl/NFuudEfvAfUoFRhP7

Re: Natural Magick (1584)

#32

Post by tempguy9999 »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #27
tempguy9999 wrote: post #18

This stuff is absolutely fascinating as it gives an insight into a worldview that we (well, many in the west) have lost, and not so long ago either. I wish I had time to read this lot.

It helps with the worldview, but it doesn't give us context as to how it's contemporaries interpreted it - was this a popular book that was accepted and acknowledged, or was it a fringe effort that remains?

At a guess? That this was the way they interpreted the world so they'd read it much as we'd read a science book (those that were literate) - why do you assume it was fringe?

It's easy to forget how different things were. Mathematics was considered a branch of magic, possibly even by newton, and there's evidence that the romans equated magic with mathematics (I have looked before but can't find my original ref, sorry).

Astronomy grew out of astrology. Chemistry grew out of alchemy. It was thought mice were produced abiogenically from the decay of grain - literally rotting grain produced mice (found a ref, gives quite a bit of detail: https://www2.nau.edu/gaud/bio301/content/spngen.htm)

IIRC a cart ran out of control and killed someone. The cart was put on trial, found guilty and hung (edit: for murder). I think that was some medieval times. It's easy to assume one's own worldview is, was, and always will be. That's why I find some history so fascinating.

Re: Natural Magick (1584)

#33

Post by [deleted] »

dr_dshiv wrote: post #2

What is a good definition of magic? Does magic necessarily NOT exist by definition, or do many/most/all forms of it not exist due to empirical results? Does magic that works become science?

[deleted]

Re: Natural Magick (1584)

#34

Post by autoexec »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #10
yters wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd define it as the nonphysical controlling the physical. Math is one obvious example of such magic. Hence why Bacon, who originated modern science by rejecting teleology and promoting math, was an occultist.

Math is an invented tool. It controls nothing.

I wouldn't say math was invented. One thing plus another thing has always been two things, even before we existed to give names to that concept. The names, symbols, etc were invented but the language of mathematics is just how we describe what has always existed.

Re: Natural Magick (1584)

#36

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

autoexec wrote: post #34
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Math is an invented tool. It controls nothing.

I wouldn't say math was invented. One thing plus another thing has always been two things, even before we existed to give names to that concept. The names, symbols, etc were invented but the language of mathematics is just how we describe what has always existed.

One thing and another thing just exist. They don't perform abstract operations on one another. They may engage in physical interaction but that behavior is only modeled by mathematics. There is nothing to do a "plus" without man to account for it. It is not an inherent attribute of the universe.

Re: Natural Magick (1584)

#37

Post by otakucode »

jbattle wrote: post #8

It's slightly shocking to read this and realize how many outright falsehoods these people were being told. It's almost wonderful that knowledge advanced when people were being taught stuff like this by authorities ancient and modern: > Diodorus says, that near to the city Thebais in Egypt, when Nilus overflowing is past, the Sun heating the wet ground, the chaps of the earth send forth great store of Mice in many pla…

I think reading things which were believed in the past, and how they were justified, what 'proof' was held up, etc, is tremendously helpful. We can imagine re-walking their path and understand how they came to believe what they believed, and be confident that those techniques are not reliable. If you see those exact same justification or reasoning being used in modern times, you can know to be suspicious. You always have to account for the fact that a correct conclusion can be happened upon with an entirely wrong reasoning, but in most cases you will also have a head start on know how to disprove the conclusion if it's in doubt. It's surprising how often conclusions are abandoned, but the style of argument that supported them manages to stick around. You would think that if someone says 'clearly X is true because only an evil Creator would make it otherwise, and the Creator is not evil' but X is then thought to be false, that you couldn't justify anything else with the same argument, but its very common that they would just throw out X when it became impossible to ignore its truth, but preserve a whole host of ideas based on the same reasoning.

Re: Natural Magick (1584)

#39

Post by dr_dshiv »

shrimp_emoji wrote: post #6
goto11 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"So then Magick is taken amongst all men for wisdom, and the perfect knowledge of natural things: and those are called Magicians, whom the Latin's call Wisemen, the Greeks call Philosophers ... The Egyptians call them priests; and the Cabalists call them prophets. And so in diverse countries Magick has diverse names." (From chapter I) So it seems in this book it is basically knowledge about the world, with no particu…

>There are two sorts of Magick; the one is infamous, and unhappy, because it has to do with foul Spirits, and consists of incantations and wicked curiosity; and this is called Sorcery; an art which all learned and good men detest; neither is it able to yield an truth of reason or nature, but stands merely upon fancies and imaginations, such as vanish presently away, and leave nothing behind them; as Jamblicus writes…

Beautiful. "The most noble Philosophers that ever were, Pythagorus, Empedocles, Democritus, and Plato, forsook their own countries, and lived abroad as exiles and banished men, rather than as strangers; and all to search out and to attain this knowledge; and when they came home again, this was the Science which they professed, and this they esteemed a profound mystery"

Can't ever learn too much about Pythagoras.

Re: Natural Magick (1584)

#40

Post by dr_dshiv »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #10
yters wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd define it as the nonphysical controlling the physical. Math is one obvious example of such magic. Hence why Bacon, who originated modern science by rejecting teleology and promoting math, was an occultist.

Math is an invented tool. It controls nothing.

Math, maybe, is invented.

But wouldn't you say that arithmetic, geometry and harmonics are intrinsic properties of every universe?

The discovery of these properties seems to produce almost magical effects in our world. As it would for every intelligent society discovering these properties.

Post reply on HN