In philosophy, the word “nature” is usually used to mean “the universe”, or “all of existence”. Within a mainstream western framework, “the supernatural doesn’t exist” is thus circular reasoning; a tautology. We can translate it as “Things from beyond existence don’t exist”. Yeah, duh! It’s an unfalsifiable claim, and Karl Popper would be ashamed of it.
Magic isn’t supernatural, because magic is part of nature. It exists. Nobody will ever be able to prove that the supernatural exists, because it’s oxymoronic. But proving that magic exists? Easy, with a robust and falsifiable definition of magic.
Magic, by definition, has to be supernatural. Otherwise it’s just physics. What we call magic is just things we haven’t figured out in enough detail to explain. Or things we’ve made up and aren’t real. The latter is the supernatural bit.
" God of the gaps" and all that.
I will happily change my mind if you can show me how that’s wrong. Though I would first ask that you give an example of what magic is.
My favourite example of magic is money. See, I define magic as “observable phenomena caused by things that aren’t real”. Now obviously the value of money is a construct imbued with illusory realness by society. But if we’re talking about genuine realness, the value of money is obviously not real. Thus, money is constructed by society as mundane, but if we call bullshit on capitalism, then our perspective changes and money is magic.
You appear to be defining magic as “unexplained phenomena, incompatible with science”. Under this definition, a Wizard casting a fireball spell in the Forgotten Realms isn’t magic, because it’s perfectly explained by science; magic in Dungeons and Dragons is caused by manipulating the Weave, which is a field that projects reality. I think that’s absurd.
And if a fraud psychic who posts on tiktok used your definition, then they would say psychic powers aren’t magic, because they claim to have a perfectly logical and scientific explanation for their psychic powers. It’s bullshit, but the point is that they’re claiming it’s not bullshit, and your definition of magic basically boils down to “bullshit”.
So while your definition is useful for communicating with other nonbelievers (Myself among them in this case), it’s not useful for communicating with believers in psychic powers, and it’s fundamentally illogical. Because it’s circular reasoning. Your conclusion is in your definition. It’s just like you said: if it were true, it would be physics. Believers claim it is physics. There’s a fundamental disconnect.
In philosophy, the word “nature” is usually used to mean “the universe”, or “all of existence”. Within a mainstream western framework, “the supernatural doesn’t exist” is thus circular reasoning; a tautology. We can translate it as “Things from beyond existence don’t exist”. Yeah, duh! It’s an unfalsifiable claim, and Karl Popper would be ashamed of it.
Magic isn’t supernatural, because magic is part of nature. It exists. Nobody will ever be able to prove that the supernatural exists, because it’s oxymoronic. But proving that magic exists? Easy, with a robust and falsifiable definition of magic.
Magic, by definition, has to be supernatural. Otherwise it’s just physics. What we call magic is just things we haven’t figured out in enough detail to explain. Or things we’ve made up and aren’t real. The latter is the supernatural bit.
" God of the gaps" and all that.
I will happily change my mind if you can show me how that’s wrong. Though I would first ask that you give an example of what magic is.
My favourite example of magic is money. See, I define magic as “observable phenomena caused by things that aren’t real”. Now obviously the value of money is a construct imbued with illusory realness by society. But if we’re talking about genuine realness, the value of money is obviously not real. Thus, money is constructed by society as mundane, but if we call bullshit on capitalism, then our perspective changes and money is magic.
You appear to be defining magic as “unexplained phenomena, incompatible with science”. Under this definition, a Wizard casting a fireball spell in the Forgotten Realms isn’t magic, because it’s perfectly explained by science; magic in Dungeons and Dragons is caused by manipulating the Weave, which is a field that projects reality. I think that’s absurd.
And if a fraud psychic who posts on tiktok used your definition, then they would say psychic powers aren’t magic, because they claim to have a perfectly logical and scientific explanation for their psychic powers. It’s bullshit, but the point is that they’re claiming it’s not bullshit, and your definition of magic basically boils down to “bullshit”.
So while your definition is useful for communicating with other nonbelievers (Myself among them in this case), it’s not useful for communicating with believers in psychic powers, and it’s fundamentally illogical. Because it’s circular reasoning. Your conclusion is in your definition. It’s just like you said: if it were true, it would be physics. Believers claim it is physics. There’s a fundamental disconnect.