Thread replies: 27
Thread images: 7
Thread images: 7
Is (or was) magic real?
>>
>>2657321
yes
>>
>>2657321
Never.
It's a hangover from childhood when the ego had not yet split off from the world.
>>
>>2657336
>magic is not real
>psychoanalytic theory is real
pffff
>>
File: 1483056618779.jpg (1MB, 3968x1632px) Image search:
[Google]
1MB, 3968x1632px
>evola
why do people still take this fool seriously?
>>
kek is real and he will materialize into human form on new year's day 2020
>>
Nah, but it's neat to think about, it helped people cope with shit, and made life fun.
>>
File: 1490421669090.gif (2MB, 220x242px) Image search:
[Google]
2MB, 220x242px
>>2657321
Eventually technology will be so advanced, that to the unmodified human it will simply be magic.
>>
>>2657321
Magic can never be real, by definition. Are all of you retarded?
>>
The etymology of the term is quite fascinating really. From Wikipedia:
The etymology of the term magic can be traced back to the ancient language of Old Persian, which used the term magu, rendered as maguš ("magician") and mágoi ("magicians").[25] The etymology of this particular Persian term is unclear,[26] although it appeared to refer to some form of religious functionary.[27] A number of ancient Greek authors discussed these Iranian mágoi in their works. Among those to do so was the historian Herodotus, who claimed that the mágoi were one of seven Median tribes and that they served as functionaries at the court of the Achaemenid Empire, where they acted as advisers to the king.[26] According to Herotodus, these Iranian mágoi were also in charge of various religious rites, namely sacrifices and the interpretation of dreams.[26]
During the late sixth and early fifth centuries BCE, the Iranian maguš was Graecicized and introduced into the ancient Greek language as μάγος and μάγείά.[26] In doing so it underwent a transformation of meaning, gaining negative connotations, with the magos being regarded as a charlatan whose ritual practices were fraudulent, strange, unconventional, and dangerous.[26] This change in meaning was influenced by the military conflicts that the Greek city-states were then engaged in against the Persian Empire.[26] In this context, the term makes appearances in such surviving text as Sophocles' Oedipus Rex, Hippocrates' De morbo sacro, and Gorgias' Encomium of Helen.[26]
>>
File: 550px-Circe_Offering_the_Cup_to_Odysseus.jpg (138KB, 550x901px) Image search:
[Google]
138KB, 550x901px
>>2658713
continued...
In the first century BCE, the Greek concept of the magos was adopted into Latin and used by a number of ancient Roman writers as magus and magia.[26] The Roman use of the term was similar to that of the Greeks, but placed greater emphasis on the judicial application of it.[26] Within the Roman Empire, laws would be introduced criminalising things regarded as "magic".[28]
In the first century CE, the idea of 'magic' was then absorbed by early Christian authors, who incorporated it into their developing Christian theology.[28] They retained the Graeco-Roman negative connotations of the term and enhanced them by incorporating conceptual patterns borrowed by Jewish thought.[28] Thus, for early Christian writers like Augustine of Hippo, 'magic' was not merely fraudulent and unsanctioned ritual practices, it was the very opposite of 'religion' because it relied upon cooperation from demons, the henchmen of Satan.[28] Ever since, the idea that 'magic' is something defined in opposition to 'religion' has been pervasive throughout Western culture.[6] Christian theologians believed that there were multiple different forms of 'magic', the majority of which were types of divination.[29] For instance, Isidore of Seville listed geomancy, hydromancy, aeromancy, and pyromancy as forms of 'magic' alongside enchantment and ligatures.[30]
>>
Of course it is. People just stop considering it magic as they start to understand it, because they get caught on the small details and fail to continue grasping the grandeur of the world at large. Here's a neat philosophical lecture on the phenomenon that I found personally enlightening.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-agl0pOQfs
>>
File: steinsgate_004_kurisu.jpg (117KB, 600x600px) Image search:
[Google]
117KB, 600x600px
>>2658723
>For instance, Isidore of Seville listed geomancy, hydromancy, aeromancy, and pyromancy as forms of 'magic'
Wow! Just like in my JRPGs!
>>
>>2659973
That's so poorly balanced though. I mean what's weak to fire? Meanwhile water beats fire and earth. Shit's OP
>>
>>2658605
I wonder if the future technology could do the impossible and turn OP into a straight man.
>>
>>2658652
>trusting definitions of magic written by non-magicians
>>
>>2659973
>>2659985
Traditionally, in RPGs, fire has always been the good 'all-rounder' to use against ALMOST anything. Water, wind and earth magic is used only when the situation calls for it.
For example, wind is used on flying creatures where fire may prove to be ineffective or evaded. Additionally, In this situation, earth is completely useless. Conversely, earth magic is very effective on all ground-dwelling creatures (much like fire), but especially against underground-dwelling creatures, where fire would be easily evaded. Fire magic is useless against water creatures and this why you need water. Of course water magic is supremely effective against fire creatures. But all round, isn't very strong generally. And we come full circle back to fire as the great 'all-rounder'.
The point isn't so much for each type of magic to be 'balanced' against each other, so much as they are supposed to give you options. Most of the time, the experienced RPG player will be using fire on everything and alternating other magic types as need be.
>>
>>2661501
How about I throw a rock at flying creature? Or why couldn't it evade a fireball? See this is why you would be a dog shit mage you lack the creativity and mental capacity required to survive for longer than 5 minutes in a harsh magic world. I bet you're an American as well.
>>
File: darklord pepe.png (391KB, 743x479px) Image search:
[Google]
391KB, 743x479px
Anyone Evolafag here? I mean someone who actually read his books. Let's talk about the World of Tradition.
>>
>>2661537
I only just started reading Introductiuon to Magic but I fail to create a flame in my heart. I have achieved the knowledge of the waters though.
>>
>>2661516
Remember we are talking statistics here. All types of magic can potentially deal damage, its just a matter of 'how much damage' and what is more worthwhile in respect to magic points usage or whatever.
>How about I throw a rock at flying creature?
How big of a rock can you throw? And at what? A dragon lol? Why would a mage throw a rock?
>Or why couldn't it evade a fireball?
My point was that it could, and that wind is much likely to deal greater damage.
>See this is why you would be a dog shit mage you lack the creativity and mental capacity required to survive for longer than 5 minutes in a harsh magic world.
Now this made me laugh. I didn't realise we were discussing video game magic's application in reality.
>I bet you're an American as well.
I'm not, but i don't see what relevance my home country has.
You need to take a breather m'boy.
>>
>>2658583
And you are?
>>
>>2661558
Apprentice Brainlet here,
What does this all mean? Knowledge of waters?
>>
>>2662148
Just read Introduction to Magic, this is not something to be explained in this here format.
Funnily enough, I just found a mega folder on /x/ where this book is uploaded so nothing is keeping you.
https://mega.nz/#F!AE5yjIqB!y7Vdxdb5pbNsi2O3zyq9KQ
It's in the Evola folder obviously.
>>
>>2661537
Nice pepe
Thread posts: 27
Thread images: 7
Thread images: 7