>>94343404
Wow, based much?
If your elves believe in magic the same way lesser races do, then you are doing it wrong.

>>94343404
>>94343410
Dumb fucks.

The point is: What is “real” magic to you?

What is magic to one is not necessarily going to be magic to another.

>If your elves believe in magic the same way lesser races do, then you are doing it wrong.
I don’t disagree with this, though. Magic is a bar. An angle. Like religion.

he was so fucking reddit and I never even knew

>>94343404
Weren't the Maiar using divine magic?

>>94343541
It’s not magic or divine to the Maiar, is the point. Does God view His Miracles as truly miraculous? Does the human see themselves as a god to an ant, for that matter? Really, REALLY think about this; so many can’t put themselves in God’s shoes.

>>94343404
Can we stop shilling this retarded meme? Galadriel chastizes the hobbits for not knowing the difference between magic and technology, shes not saying that there is no magic in the world at all. Is gandalf just really really good at the art of throwing burning pinecones at people? Are saruman's wolves just really good at the art of evapourating into mist when they die? Dont be stupid, read the books

>>94343404
Why are you posting this thread again

i hate catholics so much, except Tolkien who was a closet-pagan

>>94343404
And there's no pussy in your life, player

>>94343404
Who cares?
What's the point of spamming these threads?

There is absolutely magic, and Tolkien even used the word to describe it as much.
Saying "it's not magic" is like saying "uhhh, the wizard in Fate/Nasuverse aren't doing MAGIC, they're merely performing MAGE CRAFT which is a totally different thing made up as an arbitrary distinction equivalent to the difference between Linear Magic/Sorcery and Vulgar/True Magic in World of Darkness Mage!"
it's like saying "ummmmm, Jedi are not space wizards, they're using The Force which has nothing magical about it", it's being a willfull retard looking at in-universe semantics to describe an out-of-universe discussion.

Stop being retarded. "Fantasy race uses magic but it's so common to them they don't even consider it magic or supernatural" is one of the most common cliches, a Dragon/Balor/Mind Flayer casting Fireball effortlessly is still fucking magic even if they consider that no different than being able to tie your shoelaces together without looking.
>Anyway, a difference in the use of 'magic' in this story is that it is not to be come by by 'lore' or

spells; but is in an inherent power not possessed or attainable by Men as such. Aragorn's 'healing'
might be regarded as 'magical', or at least a blend of magic with pharmacy and 'hypnotic' processes
"A blend of magic with pharmacy and hypnotic processes" is what fucking Thulsa Doom does in Conan. A Wizard chanting verbal components while waving around literally bat guano because it's alchemical sulfur to cast a fireball is "a blend of magic and pharmacy". Saying there's no Magic in middle earth is like saying a Dungeons and Dragons Sorcerer "doesn't use magic" because their spellcasting is an innate part of their bloodline or being.

Yes, a normal human cannot pick up a tome and learn to cast spells in Middle Earth......but a normal human can't do that in fucking Harry Potter, either. There's plenty of fictional settings where "magic" requires being a special sort of higher being/bloodline (like Aragon being part elf)

>>94343750
>Galadriel chastizes the hobbits for not knowing the difference between magic and technology
No, she doesn't. She's trying to explain that what Hobbits think of as magic is just art taken to a higher level. It's just a fantasy version of “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic” but a few decades before Arthur C. Clarke said it.
>Is gandalf just really really good at the art of throwing burning pinecones at people?
Yes. He encourages the flammability of the pinecones. He's also good at encouraging doors to remain closed, or encouraging the weakness of a stone bridge, etc.
>Are saruman's wolves just really good at the art of evapourating into mist when they die?
Alternatively, his wolves were phantasms.

The whole point of Tolkien's magic is that it's more subtle and advanced than most.

>>94343404
Do we need clickbait threads now? The opening post deliberately misrepresents Tolkien's point, and the accursed sodomite who made this thread certainly know he's baiting.

>>94343750
>>94346340
The whole thing is just a semantic trick. The point is simply that elves don't consider the (blatantly magical) things they do "magic", because they're so commonplace and effortless to them that they don't need a special word for it at all. That's it.

File: He meant what he meant.jpg (47 KB, 500x471)

47 KB JPG

>>94343750
Lol.
Tolkien literally said it, word for word, and you airheads try so hard to misinterpret it.

>>94343410 >>94343424 >>94346340 are right, and magic is just a point (sleight) of view.

Fans of his just aren't satisfied when magic is a nod to basest logic. They want magic to be something specific, like sparkly fossil fuels, not realizing the psychology that goes into it. "Magic", not Magic.
Gandalf isn't a wizard back home in Valinor, and the elves look to the maia(wizards) the same way men and hobbits look to the elves. Magic is a bar--It's higher for the elves, than it is for men.

>>94343404
>There is no magic in middle earth according to Tolkien
....there is, but the elves consider it something different than other races do

>>94346409
>The whole thing is just a semantic trick.
Magic IS semantics, you dolt. It's a soft term inherently. It cannot be hard. It's not agreeable, and never has been. For any instance of magic in the world, there is some counter claim or take on it elsewhere, past or present.
Fucking MATH was treated as magic for thousands of years, all the way back to the Pythagorean numerical cults, and all the way up to Isaac Newton. There is nothing simpler than math... If that can be seen as magic, why not literally anything else?

>blatantly magical
It's not blatantly magical to them, is the point. The wonders of the 21st century would be blatantly magical to people from antiquity.
Why can't you put yourself into the observer's shoes? Oftentimes, the magic isn't magic to the magician, unless they treat it as such.

See, magic is a black box, and poking at the black box will often put yourself into it, becoming an enigma to the outside yourself--and sometimes, a black box is white within, or still black beneath.

>>94346434
So magic is just a psychologically substantiated angle then. It isn't real. It's a sense of wonder, mystery and horror. It exists the same way cold, darkness, and holes, exist.

>>94346426 and >>94346438 are correct

:^)

>>94346409
>The whole thing is just a semantic trick.
Not necessarily. It's supposed to divide between the ideas of summoning some otherworldy force to do impossible things, and the extension of art to including what lesser beings would see as impossible. Making fire from a spark of flint and iron would seem like magic to our early ancestors, for example, but it's just "art".

>>94346439
This. Although, the brain chemistry that leads up to “Omg, are you like, a wizard or something?” is definitely real.

It all starts somewhere. Magic isn’t really magic unless/until you treat it like magic.

>>94346441
That's literally just a a semantic trick. What do you think the pithy quote about "sufficiently advanced" means?

>>94346340
>>94346426
>>94346438
>>94346439
>>94346441
>>94346510
Can you like fuck off

>>94346515
What do you think “magic” is? It’s purely semantics, guy. Magic isn’t Magic, it’s “magic”. Do you really think a sufficiently advanced alien wouldn’t be able to asses and understand your glowing blue goo to the point where it’s no longer “magic”? To the alien, they likely have their own bar for such things. Like the elves do.

How does this relate to the traditional games you play?

The people who want magic to be Magic is some callback to religion, as they want something *more*, even in fiction/fantasy.

I guess they’re unhappy and unsatisfied with the world. This is kind of why Tolkien hated modern man and industrialization.

Magic is everywhere, and yet it’s not—not to humans who take things for granted.

>>94346553
“If your elves believe in magic the same way lesser races do, then you are doing it wrong.”

Tolkien was Reddit, you say?

>>94346561
He’s only “reddit” to people who cannot fathom the logic behind magic.

>>94346568
>magic
>logic

>>94346515
Again, not necessarily. I just tried to explain it to you by giving you an example where you are on the side of magic (i.e. making fire), how did you still not grasp that? The point of Tolkien's magic is that it's just advanced art, it's not like settings where magic is some force you channel.

>>94346524
Not him, but elves seem like magic to lesser beings like hobbits, but elves don't seem like magic to each other or higher beings like maiar. That's because it's art that isn't being understood from bottom up.

Now, let me show you what non-Tolkien magic would be by comparison. Elves do magic, but when advanced aliens turn up, they don't understand what it is elves are doing. They try to, but it doesn't fit the model that aliens have used to become so advanced. Elves still do it, though, because it's not about understanding or enhancing how the world works, it's pooped into reality by literal magic. Aliens might be advanced but it doesn't help them at all figuring out what the elves are doing.

Do you see the difference now?

>>94346606
>Elves do magic, but when advanced aliens turn up, they don't understand what it is elves are doing
Lol. Then they aren’t advanced enough.
>Elves still do it, though, because it's not about understanding or enhancing how the world works
They absolutely understand how nature works. They’re in-tune with it. Everything they do enhances beauty, nature. They’re living with nature.
>it's pooped into reality by literal magic
No. It’s not literal magic. There is no such thing as literal magic in middle-earth, as that sort of logic makes no sense. It’s all just art/nature to them.
>Do you see the difference now?
Please understand how psychology is the birth of magic/religion/etc before claiming to see any sort of “difference”.

>>94346606
Literal magic is just “wow, it’s magic”.

There is no substance to it.

>>94346439 is right.

To Eru and the Maia, it’s all just Song, or Music, the same way physics has been compared to music / an orchestra.

>>94346622
>Lol. Then they aren’t advanced enough.
I just told you they are. Stick with the thought experiment.
>They absolutely understand how nature works. They’re in-tune with it. Everything they do enhances beauty, nature. They’re living with nature.
That's the Tolkien magic model you're talking about, not the non-Tolkien magic model of this thought experiment.
>No. It’s not literal magic. There is no such thing as literal magic in middle-earth, as that sort of logic makes no sense. It’s all just art/nature to them.
I already told you, this is non-Tolkien magic.
>Please understand how psychology is the birth of magic/religion/etc before claiming to see any sort of “difference”.
Completely unrelated, please try to stick with the really simple thought experiment provided.

>>94346625
>Literal magic is just “wow, it’s magic”.
Yes, that's what I'm explaining to the guy who doesn't understand why Tolkien tried to differentiate his "magic" to art.

>>94346633
The other anon’s thought experiment consisted of “to something that understands it, it’s not magic”, reinforcing their views that magic is just an angle.

So yes, magic doesn’t exist for the elves the same way it exists for men.

There is no literal magic other than purest psychology. “Magic”. Magic isn’t some fictional energy. Glowy bloo goo will still hypothetically be de-mystified by some thing.

>>94346635
The only one who is misunderstanding it is you lol. You’re not following. They were already of the same thought patterns, you just felt like arguing. “No, it’s not magic, it’s magic!”. Christ. Topics like these get so trigger happy people can’t recognize what’s transpiring.

>>94346645
Exactly. And that's why Tolkien saw "magic" in Middle-earth as art and not true magic.

>>94346649
No, I didn't just feel like arguing, the guy literally said that magic is just semantics, and it's not. And if it wasn't you, then why are you even posting? Sounds to me you're not following and just felt like arguing. Stop being so trigger happy.

>>94346656
>the guy literally said that magic is just semantics, and it's not
If it’s purely psychological? Yes, yea it is.

That you can’t connect the two is weird.

Magic is 100% a “wandering word” that is subject to the times/culture. It’s subjective perceptions. It’s personal.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/9781405165518.wbeosm004.pub2

>>94346650
Tolkien’s point is “what is magic to you?”.

Just CONSIDERING a thing magic, is a form of art, the same way religion is art.

Science/nature is art, as you cannot truly separate art from such. Artifice and the artificial come from art.

Magic is just a way of looking at a thing. Of course it’s Art. It just doesn’t enchant the elves—unless they really like it.

>>94346656
You don’t know what semantics is or means apparently. That’s semantics.

And yes, Tolkien calls it ‘enchantment’, and compared magic to Greek perception in history. There’s magic that deceives, or enchants, and there is magic that does a thing physically. Both reinforce the other.

The ‘goetic’ (“omg those Zoroastrian folk are legit demon summoners”) magic is of woo woo and superstition—thinking stars are gods, worshiping a tree, etc.

The ‘magia’ (“those Zoroastrian priests really know the alignments of the stars”) magic is, well, actual physical stuff. It is fire starting, or the stars themselves. It is real. But it may not be seen as magic—like how the elves don’t see their magia (arts and crafts) as magic. It enchants (goetia) non-elves only.

Gandalf is the polar of Sauron who lies and deceives to subjugate. Gandalf goes and enchants others as a wizard, as the sagely guide is his role. He *describes* his doings as “spells” and such, but he does not define them as such, and he is no wizard back home in Valinor. He may as well be a wizard in middle-earth.

And by goetia he was referring to the old Greek word for magic, which was quickly displaced by a newer word, as a meaning to include and lump in esoteric and other lesser known knowledge bases (artifice, geometry, astronomy, etc).

The devices of the Greeks (Antikythera mechanism, etc) were seen as the stuff of wizardry. But to the people who built such wonders? Probably not.

Think about it. At its simplest, you had the ancients looking to the stars in the night sky, considering them gods. How is that any different from stage magic? On a much grander scale? With the universe as the acting magician?

They can internet those stars however they wish—which Tolkien compared to goetia/superstition/religion/etc—but the stars are STILL stars that shine and go on to bewilder—which is truth/physics, or that of real nature.

Ignorance outnumbers the truth, and in a sense, magic is more sinister than not. If you don’t treat it sincerely.

>>94346697
>If it’s purely psychological? Yes, yea it is.
Not in the case of Tolkien magic vs magic. That's the point.

>>94346724
Last reply for you from me, you're very clearly just shitposting and have no value.

>>94343404
The point is that elves don't see the stuff they do as "magical" because to them it's simply a more refined form of what other races would consider mundane artifice. They're not really breaking the laws of reality, they just have a better understanding of them and the ability to interact with them in a way men and hobbits can't. It's literally Clarke's law, except instead of having more advanced technology it's about having more advanced skills and understanding that lets them do things that would be considered impossible by races who don't share that level of skill.
From point of view of humans and hobbits it is magic, though, since elves are able to perform feats that to them would be supernatural.

>>94347028
You keep missing the point. Magic does not literally exist, is the point. Only the perception of it does. That’s wha magic is, to begin with. It’s indistinguishable from religion.
>>94347035
Your denial of the obvious is religious. Tolkien was fucking clear as day, and you go out of your way to misinterpret it. You are the same sort of person at Amazon who read “nut brown” and thought that the Harfoots are literally African hobbits. The curtains are fucking BLUE. Pic related in >>94346426, and the stuff >>94346779 said is true too; Tolkien was a major history literature buff. You think the meaning (semantics) of words wasn’t his greatest forte? It was. The curtains are fucking BLUE.

>>94347078
Oh, look, someone who actually gets it.

>>94347087
I literally said that already and you argued against it, you fucking dishonest piece of shit.

>machines aren’t magic!
The stereotypical wizard has much to do with occult artifice and arcane gadgetry—esoteric information in-general.

>the elves are totally magic!
Something can look and act exactly like magic and still not be seen as or treated like magic. Look at Christianity.

>>94347120
Nah. Welcome to the world of semantics.

>>94343651
It's a fair point, but that's still magic at the end of the day. Just because Group A doesn't think what they're doing is magic, it doesn't change the fact that Group A is bending the natural rules of reality when they utilize this force. Your next counter-argument should be something like "So, smart phones are magic?"

Go ahead an explain to me how it bends the physical rules of reality. Everything we do is constrained by physics, but if you can inherently defy or bend those rules, you're committing magic.

ugh

Amazing how much science and technology triggers anons

>>94352686
It's particularly strange in the context of a tabletop game board. Like what games are people running where there aren't rules for how well and how often a wizard can throw around fireballs?
A wizard isn't going to assume people should worship him as a god because he's able to casually 'warp reality', because the wizard understands how his spells work and he knows that it's nothing truly that special. To him it's simply a field of study.

And that tends to be the most functional way for magic to work in a tabletop game, because if a wizard doesn't know how his spells work, it's pretty hard to have wizard PCs. And even in that context, the it would still require the GM to know how magic works well enough to be able to tell people what rolls they'd need to make or how much damage they take from an effect.
The only way I think you could even try to avoid it would be to use one of those '10,000 random magic effects' tables without reading it. And even then you'd still need to come up with rules for how anyone in the game world is able to call upon the table to make some magic happen.

>>94343404
No, you're completely misunderstanding Tolkien's point.

Science and technology are the works of the Enemy, not the Elves. They are the reshaping of the existing world in accordance with the will of the industrialist.

Elves do not reshape, the Elves create. They create Art, for the sake of creating new beauty. It's a continuation of the original Creation of the world. It's not artificial at all.

Lol

>>94350033
>It's a fair point, but that's still magic at the end of the day
Not to the Elves. You’re basically trying to classify it for the Elves. That’s arrogant.
>Just because Group A doesn't think what they're doing is magic, it doesn't change the fact that Group A is bending the natural rules of reality when they utilize this force.
Lol. What do you mean by bending the natural rules of reality? We “bend” nature all the time. We utilize it daily.
>Your next counter-argument should be something like "So, smart phones are magic?"
Lol. To the man from antiquity, they are rather defiant, like plenty of other things we use casually. Your counter-argument should be something like “but we know how it works”, to which I say *
>Everything we do is constrained by physics
* if anything exists, it will have objective information to it. Physics. I don’t care how wibbly wobbly woo it is. Meta-physics is still physics to the physicist. Supernatural phenomena is an oxymoron: as you can’t supersede the natural if it exists. Magic is an angle. Exposure logic.
>if you can inherently defy or bend those rules
It’s not defying anything. They’re bending nature in an artistic way. They make such beautiful wonders that it’s “like magic”.

>>94355813
>if anything exists, it will have objective information to it. Physics. I don’t care how wibbly wobbly woo it is. Meta-physics is still physics to the physicist. Supernatural phenomena is an oxymoron: as you can’t supersede the natural if it exists. Magic is an angle. Exposure logic.
You are still going on about this, then? This probably will go over your head, but your statement that all phenomena are physical is begging the question, which is to say it assumes its conclusion. In other words, there's no reason I have to listen to you, especially when you assume a scientific concensus in favor of physicalism which simply does not exist. But you're doing this to farm replies even though there are easier ways to do it, so I might as well just hide this rubbish thread.

>>94343404
What game is this thread about?

>>94356057
Anon, if you think existence isn’t Material—even fucking space—you’re going to hate the future.

Good lord, why do you try so damn hard to reconcile something so simple?

>>94355432
>No, you're completely misunderstanding Tolkien's point.
Lol. Okay.
>Science and technology are the works of the Enemy, not the Elves
No. You’ve gone and completely missed Tolkien’s point.
>Elves do not reshape, the Elves create.
The Elves live with, and reshape, nature artistically and beautifully. They do not bulldoze it.
>They create Art
Art is inseparable from science. Artificial, artifice, etc, come from art.

Listen. The point Tolkien was making, is that the Elves represent the good polar of what Sauron does.

He has said before that both the Elves and the Enemy make use of the same magic at the end of the day.

“Neither is, in this tale, good or bad (per se), but only by motive or purpose or use. Both sides use both, but with different motives.” - Tolkien

>>94357847
Grabass

File: IMG_3252.png (123 KB, 694x1470)

123 KB PNG

>>94359873
>Good lord, why do you try so damn hard to reconcile something so simple?
Understanding Tolkien is religious at this point, and most who treat themselves as high priests (Tolkien “scholars”) aren’t all that equipped with the proper semantics, or tact for nuance, to understand him the way some do. It’s why you now see black elves, black hobbits, and black dwarves. You have to go out of your way to grossly misinterpret his literature to do that. Very much pic related. These are the people who “know the most”, or those “scholars” Amazon turns to. Absolute total rubbish. Do not fall for this shit. They see phrases like ‘nut brown’ and think “so they are like African right”. Not only is this racist, it’s a complete and utter fucking joke. The image in >>94346426 is fucking hilarious because this is precisely it.

>>94359951
Everything fun and cherished and happy is being raped by people who don’t have fun and don’t cherish anything and aren’t actually all that happy or satisfied in life.

>>94343404
There is a lot of magic in middle earth, magic-users just don't like to call it that and get very pedantic about the forms used to perform it..

File: IMG_0950.jpg (76 KB, 640x635)

76 KB JPG

>>94360033
>There is a lot of magic in middle earth
There’s a lot of magic in real life too.
>magic-users just don't like to call it that and get very pedantic
Just like scientists in real life.

>>94359883
can you post the rules?

>>94359873
Dude, Tolkien is well known for being anti-industrialist in his works. You have to remember that he was a WW1 veteran and he came out of the war believing that the technology that enabled industral warfare was a bad thing.

Science and technology *are* the works of the Enemy in his works. That's why Saruman starts chopping down so many trees to fuel his industry the moment he turns evil, for instance. That's why the Numenoreans had a navy that sounds awfully modern once they turned evil.

>>94360605
>Science and technology *are* the works of the Enemy in his works.

Yes. He hated the War Machine from his time in the world war. He hated the ugly nature of big industry and infrastructure.

He hated modern man’s hatred and war against the beauty, mystery and wonder (and thus magic) in nature.

He truly believed we could be living more closely and in tune with nature, and that is what the Elves represent.

The Enemy represents modern abuse of power. Saruman is a literal representation of this. The Elves represent what living in nature could, should be like.

I don’t know why you’re having cognitive dissonance here. Perhaps you’re just not familiar with how simple, and inseparable art is from science and technology.

Everything the Elves do is science—they understand it and repeat their works. It’s just Artistic. Than value beauty. Saruman and Sauron do not.

File: IMG_3223.jpg (132 KB, 1200x1637)

132 KB JPG

>>94360605
Tolkien knew well the tension of technology and the threat of the machine. Tolkien explains the use of magic in his mythos and how it relates to machinery. Tolkien had thought through, with great clarity, the difference between the magic of the elves and that of Mordor.

He observes that the hobbits do not understand the difference between the magic powers exercised by the elves and that of Sauron: “the Elven queen Galadriel is obliged to remonstrate with the Hobbits on their confused use of the word [magic] both for the devices and operations of the Enemy and for those of the Elves.” Tolkien says the lack of a proper word (other than “magic”) for the work of the elves portrays the same confusion in our own minds and mythologies.

He goes on to explain the difference: “Their [the elves’] ‘magic’ is Art, delivered from many of its human limitations: more effortless, more quick, more complete (product, and vision in unflawed correspondence). And its object is Art not Power, sub-creation not domination and tyrannous re-forming of Creation.”

Tolkien elucidates the dilemmas we face as technology snowballs and threatens to blow up in our face. Put simply, the magic of Mordor is the machinery of murder. It is the pursuit of power for its own sake, and perceives the natural world merely as a raw material to be exploited, distorted, and destroyed. In the films, we see this in full display as the wizard Saruman destroys Fangorn—chewing up the forest to fuel his machines of war. The realms of the Elves, in contrast, at Rivendell and Lothlorien, are havens of harmony, beauty, and peace created by elven magic.

The distinction elucidates our own continued, confused, modern relationship to technology. Do we use our increasingly sophisticated gadgetry and expanding knowledge in an elvish, creative, and artful way to bring light, beauty, and truth to the world, or do we use technology to manipulate, make money, and thus gain more power in the world?

>>94360769
>>94360785
These. I don’t know why it’s so fucking hard to see that science and technology aren’t separate from art. It’s just not. The hideousness of the modern world is “art”, if you appreciate it. Brutalism, etc.

>>94360050
You are a pathetic retard who doesn't play games.

>>94360605
You can be anti-industrialist without being anti-science.
Gunpowder can make bombs used to destroy and kill, or it can make fireworks used to entertain.

I wonder what Tolkien would think of all this slap fighting

>>94361835
He’d take a puff of his pipe and leave.

>>94360605

This is shitlib revisionism trying to strip the "reactionary" elements out of Tolkien's work and claim it for their own political purposes. He does have a romantic view of the green and pleasant land against those dark Satanic mills, and it shows through in the books, but it can't really be called a message.

Saruman is an instructive example. His "mind of gears and metal" isn't what make him a villain. His wanton disregard for Fangorn forest and his later efforts to wreck the Shire aren't either, although they're certainly not shown as good things. Saruman abandoning his purpose in Middle Earth out of pride and desire for power, his rage and spite after being thwarted, and his degeneration and ultimate destruction after repeatedly failing to take the opportunities he was offered to repent of those things are what his character arc is really about. It is something deeply Christian and I can only conclude that the only reason people don't tend to see it that way is either deliberate dishonesty or they've never read anything but Marxoid garbage and literally can't recognize what they're looking at.

>>94362555
>it can't really be called a message.
I feel like you’re downplaying the horrors Tolkien saw in the world war.

>>94362555
I think you're not wholly wrong but you're missing the equally Christian theme in Saruman's fall that he thinks he can do better than nature or God. The pure white light that just naturally exists in creation is more beautiful, but Saruman thinks he's terribly clever by splitting it into many colors to "understand" it. But he that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom.
I have a had time not seeing that as a critique of Enlightenment philosophy and "progress"-for-its-own-sake.

>>94346438
>math was treated as magic until Issac newton
Not only are you historically illiterate, you're gorilla tier retarded.

>>94362629
Yes and that shows through too, especially in the passages about the war in Gondor and the burden of what he endured on Frodo's spirit, but that's not what we're talking about.

>>94362712
Even if true it doesn't really disprove my point. That sort of position (which I'm not entirely sure about in LoTR/The Hobbit, it's been too long since I've actually read them, but I know is definitely present in his letters) is just as alien and repugnant as what I talked about, if not more so, and accordingly just as de-emphasized in modern "scholarship."

>>94359991
but enough about the alt-right

>>94363045
Pythagoras started numerical cults and Isaac Newton was obsessed with Jewish geometry.

What the fuck is your problem?

File: Throw Bottle.jpg (29 KB, 500x361)

29 KB JPG

>>94359951
Not even one talk that isn't poz of the lowest order. This shit can't be put away fast enough.

>>94363110
It's probably right up your alley though.

>>94355813
Finally came back to get my (you).

Emphatically I disagree, because by those definitions, nothing is magic, because magic simply cannot exist. Everything, inherently, is non-magical, because you're convinced it can be dissected to such a state that everything about it is understood as mundane by some participatory or responsible group.

It's a goofy stance to take in a world such as Numenor where very many things are simply not explained beyond "Yeah we don't know anything about those besides the fact that we shouldn't fuck with them."

It's also always farcical to debate your point of view in a setting that will never advance, given that its creator is dead. We could dredge up 6 letters from JR to his the bastard child of his fat star-crossed german lover from ww1 that say one thing or another, but it's all just moot when you, as the reader, cannot explain something beyond the realm of it being magic.

If it's not magic, explain it to me. How did Iluvatar seal away the servants of Morgoth? A demon-banishing device? A matter replicator with a file for mithril? Did he just pick up the mithril and plug it into the holes?

Oh, he just DID it? Because it's... magic? It isn't explained further?

Why were the dwarves able to mine the metal but the servants of Morgoth couldn't? You're telling me their iron picks were stronger than the demonic claws that rent steel and killed every dwarf in the halls? When Glorfindel prophesied the witch-king's death, was that just him getting high on mushrooms and maiar bathsalts?

Damn that's wild.

Anyway, later.

>>94362555
>This is shitlib revisionism
This is what autohypnosis sounds like.

>>94364013
>Everything, inherently, is non-magical, because ... everything about it is understood as mundane by some participatory or responsible group.
>he just DID it? Because it's... magic? It isn't explained further?
These things don't contradict each other, both of them happen to be true in this particular setting.

>>94364013
>Emphatically I disagree, because by those definitions, nothing is magic, because magic simply cannot exist.

That's the point...

...Magic is just a point (sleight) of view...

>Oh, he just DID it? Because it's... magic? It isn't explained further?

He has said before he's intentionally inconsistent and contradictory with the term.

>>94364013
It's magic because you're unexposed, and unfamiliar, you total dipshit. "I don't understand it! He's a wizard or something!"

But do you really think the wizard doesn't know what he's doing? Will it be magic to him?

Magic is the absence of assessment: mystery, wonder, horror, etc

>>94364806
>...Magic is just a point (sleight) of view...
They can’t process this, though. Deep down they want magic to be some literal glowing blue shit.

>>94357892
To the other ones responding to this troll, I would point out that I went to the effort to decisively refute his stupid premise in the last thread he tried this routine in. I think it was a wizard thread, you can refer to it if you want the explanation. Anyways, as you can see his response to the earlier post which is also the same premise from last time is obviously a non-answer as it fails to address anything I said other than saying I'm wrong without serious refutation.

Of course, his only possible response to this will be "you don't understand everything is physical" which again is a non-answer, unless he decides to accept he was wrong which he certainly will not because then he can't use this bait in the future. This was somewhat disjointed but I hope I explained why this guy is a troll who doesn't actually believe in his shitty bait and is just fishing for (You)s, so just stop responding to him and he'll go silent.

>>94365400
Damn. This is some dense ass butthurt.

>>94365400
What are you even mad about?

>>94365597
He doesn’t know.
Anyone who disagrees with him, or goes above his head, is merely a troll fishing for (you)s, you see.

>>94343404
I take it you made the thread again because you got BTFO'd last time.

What tolkien said is that the Elves have a deeper understanding of "magic" in that to them, the power of the enemy, the power of the Vaiar, and their own powers are not undifferentiated things but wholly separate.

To mortals who lack these abilities it is all combined into a morass of "Magic," she even excuses this colloquialism despite it being technically incorrect, but she did NOT say, nor did Tolkien say, that akshually the Elves just had super-science. Rather, the Elves possess a power that is wholly distinct and unrelated to that of Sauron or other dark powers.

It's incredible that people still try to project their 75 IQ Flight of the Dragons atheist shitkissing onto actual literature. Please stop pretending that your cringe modern ideas have any sort of antecedent in the literature of people who actually lived back when people when philosophy was a real discipline. It doesn't. You are an embarrassment.

Mathematics is a philosophic discipline and not a science, btw.

>>94366008
>What tolkien said is that the Elves have a deeper understanding of "magic" in that to them, the power of the enemy, the power of the Vaiar, and their own powers are not undifferentiated things but wholly separate.

Yeah, no. Tolkien said both the Elves and the Enemy use the same magic. They’re using it differently, is all.

Why do you people try so hard to skew what the man said?

>>94366008
>Mathematics is a philosophic discipline and not a science, btw.
Derp alert.

>>94366100
>Why do you people try so hard to skew what the man said?
They are actually retarded and have grade school levels of reading comprehension.

>>94364813
Magic doesn't need to be something not understood. By definition, magic is the practice of causing supernatural phenomena through spells, charms, rituals, etc.
For something to be supernatural, it just needs to be beyond the realm of the natural world, the material plane.
Imagine a ghost. It has literally zero atoms in its composition, so it's not part of the material world, yet it has a will of its own, and can cause material changes to our plane of existence. It's by definition a supernatural being, yet it can be rationalized.

>>94355813
Same thing can be said about physics, which is the study of matter, energy, and the relations between them. A ghost is not matter nor energy, yet it can interact with both. It's a third thing outside the realm of physics.
>B-but we can extend physics to group it together!
Then it's not physics anymore, you created a new supergroup to put together magic and physics, which could be called magiphysics or whatever, but the point is that it's not physics.

>>94366126
Another way to rationalize magic is through karma.
Imagine an universe where karma is a real thing, if you did good things, good things would happen to you, and vice-versa.
In this universe, it's impossible to read karma from a person, as karma is not an energy and has no material aspect.
It's not physics, it's not part of nature, and yet, it exists, but not on the physical plane.

>>94366100
>Hobbits on their confused use of the word (magic) both for the devices and operations of the Enemy, and for those of the Elves
>But the Elves are there to demonstrate the difference
They said that the hobbits called everything magic, but they are different. And what the elves do is called magic, because there isn't a word to describe it accurately.

>>94366126
>For something to be supernatural, it just needs to be beyond the realm of the natural world
Jesus Christ. You are still fucking doing this, lmao.

Listen, to the physicist, meta-physics is still physics. It exists. It has an impact. It’s there. Nature is anything that exists at all. You cannot supersede nature. Biology is applied chemistry is applied physics is applied meta-physics.

Superseding nature is like flying a plane in defiance of what we were capable of in the past. That’s “supernatural” to the man from antiquity. But it’s not truly defiant.

>A ghost is not matter nor energy, yet it can interact with both.
It’s still there. It still exists. There is abject information to it. Sorry. To assume there isn’t, is to assume it doesn’t actually exist. This is why anti-materialist Christians are so stupid—they’re arguing God doesn’t exist without even realizing it, by assuming there is no God-logic to Him.
>It's a third thing outside the realm of physics.
This makes no sense. If something exists, it will have science/physics to it. I don’t give a fuck how weird it is or looks.

Anything that intrudes like that can be chalked up to impossible to assess senses, like higher dimensions. But it’s still there. D’oh!

>>94366217
>but they are different
You’re still not getting it. Tolkien said they both use the same magic, with different purpose. What’s different is how they are used.

Jesus fucking Christ. You people really want magic to be some specific something. Glowy blue energy? What?

Don’t argue with the author, please.

>>94366171
>It's not physics, it's not part of nature, and yet, it exists, but not on the physical plane.
If anything exists at all, it can be seen as a part of nature. Physics. The closest to the unnatural is just the artificial.

The problem you’re having is you have a different understanding of words. I don’t think you know what physics is or entails.

That this is difficult for you to understand is a bit disheartening. Tolkien is rolling in his grave at the state of his fandom.

>>94366126
>It has literally zero atoms in its composition, so it's not part of the material world
What do you think space is lol
>Then it's not physics anymore, you created a new supergroup to put together magic and physics, which could be called magiphysics or whatever, but the point is that it's not physics.
Are you still in high school by chance

>>94366252
>>94366271
>>94366283
They probably binged rings of power don’t pay much attention to them

File: 1726872799203050.jpg (66 KB, 905x829)

66 KB JPG

>>94343404
I know this is a shitpost thread and OP doesn't care but if you want a game similar to Tolkien's actual work there is Sil-Q, a roguelike, in this aspect it doesn't have magic but has songs, taken directly from Tolkien's books. Idk if there is one such tabletop game though

>>94366008
There’s philosophy to math but you’d have to be an idiot to think it isn’t related to science. Like, some argue it’s too pure to be a science, or is the purest science of all, because of the following.

“One plus one always equals two”
“Show me your theory”
“What?”
“What?”

You’d have to bring in autistic geometries to argue against that.

>>94366310
>it’s a shit posting bait thread because I don’t understand basic grade school physics
Holy crap.

>>94366271
>Don’t argue with the author, please.
I literally quoted the author that said he would NOT have used the word magic to describe that the elves do. Now you find and quote where exactly he said that both are magic and it simply differs in how they use them.
I will not reply to anything that isn't a sourced direct quote.

>>94365549
>>94365791
As you can say he answered exactly as I said he would, if you feel that I am not understanding your reasoning, then you should explain it in simpler terms. Of course you clearly cannot do this so you just insult like a teenager

>>94366126
Thank you for the nice explanation, funnily enough I also used an analogy of a ghost when explaining this to him, but he's given up the ghost (heh) by now so he probably will keep ignoring it

>>94366252
>everything is physical because... it just is ok!?
That is a metaphysical statement you clown, and a damn stupid one as there is a reason existence and physical are two different terms. Tell me this: is a fruit in a dream physical?

>>94366126
>By definition, magic is the practice of causing supernatural phenomena
Hmm. I’m not so sure. I guarantee you what three-dimensional lifeforms (yes, humans) take to be ‘supernatural’ isn’t at all supernatural or weird to the sufficiently advanced fifth-dimensional aliens who all look at such things casually, completely. What is supernatural is relative. It’s not at all concrete.

>>94366289
If you passed high school you should know that space is not a perfect vacuum

>>94366339
He calls what the elves do ‘Art’ you mongoloid. He doesn’t use the word as such a word is pointless.

Your reading comprehension is piss.

>>94366340
>Tell me this: is a fruit in a dream physical?

The shit happening in your brain leading up to it is definitely real.

I really don’t think you’re equipped to have this sort of conversation.

>>94366360
Space is a literal thing we are embedded in. It’s definitely there. If that is what you are getting at, good for you. You’re not at all wrong there.

>>94366370
>The shit happening in your brain leading up to it is definitely real.
I am not talking about the neurological processes causing dream, I am asking whether the fruit, which can be interacted in in a lucid dream, is physical

>>94366340
>everything is physical because... it just is ok!?
That’s not really what he’s getting at. You have particles that have no rest mass. It’s the idea that things exist, and are present that makes them “physical”.

File: IMG_0401.jpg (151 KB, 512x512)

151 KB JPG

>>94366375
What do you think a dream is? An actual realm in your head? Holy moly mother of God, I am talking to a moron.

>>94366374
Space is not a perfect vacuum and can not be said to be fully separated from physical laws, while ghosts can

>>94366391
This is an utterly incoherent post. Tell me, if everything that exists is necessarily physical, then why do perceptible objects in dreams lack actual presence?

>>94366384
I understand what he is trying to say, but as I demonstrated this belief means that all objects in dreams can be considered physical, which is a laughable idea

>>94366252
>>94366283
>>94366289
I see the root cause now. You think that nature = existence, when that's not true, but that's not a problem, I can play on this field too.
Let's imagine a fictitious universe where there is a ghost that does not exist, yet it can still affect the universe. And because we created this universe, we can say with 100% confidence that the ghost does not exist.
You could say it's contradictory, but I say it's magic. The ghost both doesn't exist and it affects the world because it's magical. It cannot be studied by science and it's entirely supernatural.

>>94366408
>Space is not a perfect vacuum and can not be said to be fully separated from physical laws, while ghosts can
>while ghosts can
No? That ghosts exists. There is law to it as it occurs. Everything has a background to the foreground, sorry. You are sadly a moron for not seeing this. It’s so fucking simple too. Do you really think a ghost has no information to it? That you can SEE it, means there is information to it.

Just stop posting.

>>94366420
>Everything has a background to the foreground, sorry
So objects in dreams are physical?

>>94366419
I've said this a few times, but this troll is essentially a /pol/tard new atheist, which is one of the funniest combinations imaginable

>>94366415
>but as I demonstrated this belief means that all objects in dreams can be considered physical, which is a laughable idea
And as another said, you have a sort of misunderstanding over what a dream is. The ‘wiring’ in the brain leading up to that apple in the dream is definitely a real thing. Dreams are physical. There’s shit happening in your brain, right now. Every thought you have, is physical. That’s just brain chemistry and electrical signals.

>>94366419
>You think that nature = existence, when that's not true
Lol.
“That ain’t natural!” is an opinion. You’re religiously demented and it shows.

>>94366429
>So objects in dreams are physical?
Do you not know how dreams form? Do you think the idea of an apple isn’t formed in the brain, literally, physically?

You’re just flat out wrong, buddy.

>>94366434
That there is a neurological cause of dreams does not mean objects in dreams are physical
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/descartes-epistemology/
Read the section on the statement cogito ergo sum, this kind of argument has been refuted four centuries ago

>>94366419
>It cannot be studied by science and it's entirely supernatural.
A cellphone couldn’t be studied by a cavemen. Supernatural! “Magic!”

>>94366453
>That there is a neurological cause of dreams does not mean objects in dreams are physical
Lol, I bet you think aphantasia is a real disease. Lmao.

Sorry, pal. That image of an apple is caused by real physical shit happening in your brain.

Is a painted apple a real apple? No, but the paint is real.

Now fuck off.

>>94366448
>Do you think the idea of an apple isn’t formed in the brain, literally, physically?
This apple exists in a dream, but to say an apple is mental processes is a ridiculous statement

>>94366464
This is a non-sequitur, cogito ergo sum is a circular argument as explained by the article

>>94366419
>Let's imagine a fictitious universe where there is a ghost that does not exist, yet it can still affect the universe.

If it can affect the universe, then it doesn’t not exist.

File: IMG_2710.jpg (138 KB, 713x1024)

138 KB JPG

>>94366466
>but to say an apple is mental processes is a ridiculous statement
Dreaming an apple is 100% a mental process.

>>94366441
That's a cool opinion you have.

>>94366459
>>94366476
But what if it doesn't exist. We created this universe, and the axioms given are:
>the ghost doesn't exist
>the ghost can affect the natural world

Imagine being so mind broken because Tolkien more or less compared his elves to sufficiently advanced aliens.

Imagine being so mind broken because Tolkien compared machinery to witchcraft and sorcery and black magic.

>>94366476
>If it can affect the universe, then it doesn’t not exist.
According to what? Physics? Nature? Then I guess it's something outside of those.

>>94366489
The ghost exists because it can affect the world. What the hell is your problem? Are you actually stupid or something?

Non-existent is non-existent, period. It is not doing any existential thing.

>>94366498
So, according to you, the fire conjured by a wizard isn’t actually fire? It’s not at all physics? Okay. Like, you do you, guy.

>>94366507
>The ghost exists because it can affect the world
According to who?

>>94366489
If it doesn’t exist, then it can’t affect the natural world. That’s kind of how it works.
>>94366517
The existent people observing the ghost.

>non-existence can exert existent change
no

>>94366514
According to old D&D, creatures like golems who are immune to magic, are also immune to fire conjured by wizards, but not the fire from a torch.

>>94366496
It’s actually really scary how people will read something and see something totally different from what the author wrote.

>>94366526
>The existent people observing the ghost.
But we are the gods that created this fictional universe, we know better than those people, and we know that the ghost doesn't exist.

>>94366542
And Dee en Dee is a noted bastion of intellectual capacity, is it? Do you also think magic and miracles aren’t the same? What about psionics? Totally not magic right? Because Dee en Dee said so? Lol.

>>94366548
Anon, authors are free to write in to their works freely available ignorance.

An author can write “in my setting, math doesn’t exist!” and it still wouldn’t work.

>>94366517
….anyone? If a ghost KILLS a person, that HAPPENED. Their death exists! The lethal force that killed them exists! How is it not existent?
Maybe you really are a ‘tard.

>>94366496
OP is a genius the more I think about it.

>>94366558
>ignorance
Anon, we created this universe. We know literally anything there is to know about it.
And in this world, we objectively know that there are things that both doesn't exist and can influence things that exists.
How is that possible? Magic.

>>94366550
If we are talking about fictional settings? Yeah, D&D is a very big bastion, even if I don't really like it as a system.

>>94366587
Sorry. Even a pure nothingness becomes a one.

You can’t make a fiction without math. It just cannot be done!

>>94366600
A bastion of intelligence, however? Nope. It doesn’t even get history right.

>>94366587
>How is that possible? Magic.
And, again, the whole point of this thread is that shit like “magic” and “supernatural” are relative figures of speech. Soft terms.

Do you really think the supernatural will remain “supernatural” to the supernatural beings? It won’t. Just like how the magic of the Elves isn’t really magic to them.

If it’s taking you this fucking long to get something so simple…

>>94366486
Sorry, I meant to say physical

>>94366475
Of course the troll doesn't reply to this, even shortly after its conception Cartesianism was considered one of the most mind-numbingly stupid philosophical positions someone could old

>>94366620
That's according to what you understand of physics or nature. But this is magic, it's outside both of those, things that shouldn't be possible become possible.
And it's not just "sufficiently advanced" technology, they are actual contradictions that even beings that knows everything could point to it and say that is a contradiction.

>>94366535
The example the other poster gave of karma is a good example, karma is not a physical property by nature yet it is inextricably tied to our being. Since you are also a joke of an atheist you also keep saying that the God may not interact with the physical plane if he is not physical, but the Christian would say both existence and non-existence are within the power of God, who is beyond categorisation

>>94366702
His variety of physicalism is the lowest variety of the movement, it's impossible for him to give a substantial answer so I would recommend just informing him his argument is circular and leaving it there since much else is unnecessary

>>94366669
The mental is the physical. Psychology is just applied biology. There’s chemistry at foot within the brain.

>>94366720
>karma is not a physical property by nature yet it is inextricably tied to our being
>>>/x/ is that way

File: IMG_1654.jpg (92 KB, 850x400)

92 KB JPG

>>94366720
>Since you are also a joke of an atheist

What? I don’t consider myself an atheist or a theist. I dislike both. They both don’t cancel the other out. They’re both halves of the same coin.

To the physicist, God is some sufficiently advanced higher dimensional alien entity.

To the Christian, God is simply He. Lord and Father. Yahweh. Jehovah. The All. He is a Name.

To the Christian physicist, He is both.

What is a divine, or magic, etc, is a way of looking at something. It all meets in the end.

>>94366720
>Christian would say both existence and non-existence are within the power of God, who is beyond categorisation
> who is beyond categorisation
Are you assuming God is incapable of categorizing Himself? Lol. “Don’t tell God what to do”.

The problem I have with you Christians is that you impose your shortcomings and failures to understand something onto the very God that you worship.

You insist on making Him as human as you are. “Made in His image” can only go so far before it just becomes silly.

>>94366771
I find this interesting, it's a sign of autism. You cannot separate real life from fiction.
You cannot comprehend magic because it doesn't exist in real life, and thus, magic cannot exist as a concept in fictional stories.

>>94366822

>To the physicist
Specify atheist physicist, and a very specific kind of atheist for that matter. And the Christian God is unable to be encapsulated within the distinction of physical as he is both physical and nonphysical

>>94366771
One of the most common philosophical and religious concepts held in the world is /x/-tier to you? By this point you really must understand that your physicalist position is far from self-evident and the majority opinion

>>94366844
>Are you assuming God is incapable of categorizing Himself? Lol. “Don’t tell God what to do”.
I am not Christianin the first place, but ignoring that in accordance to the doctrine of divine simplicity it is simply a mistake to ascribe categories to God beyond the Trinity, that is not a fault of the God himself but of our anthropic thinking.

>>94366844
>You insist on making Him as human as you are. “Made in His image”
The anthropomorphic descriptions of the Christian God have always seemed strange to me, but to the Christian this is not an issue as those manifestations are simply part of his trinitarian nature. Also, the second part is only an issue under a literalist reading of the Hebrew Bible, that phrase is considered figuratively among Christians

>>94366868
>>94366880
Anyways you are digressing from physicalism now, so before you respond explain to me how your argument for physicalism is both self-evident and the majority opinion among intelligent people as you treat it

>>94366845
If you think karma exists outside of the human brain you’re an idiot who belongs on /x/ sorry

>>94366847
Yes. Karma doesn’t exist outside of humans interpreting circumstance in such a way.

Are you coping? Karma is psychological purely. The universe doesn’t give a fuck about you.

>>94366845
>You cannot comprehend magic because it doesn't exist in real life
It doesn’t exist in fiction either, going by Tolkien’s logic. It’s just a point of view.

>>94366924
It's fine if you don't believe in karma, but you have no reason to dismiss it out of hand

>>94366930
>Are you coping? Karma is psychological purely. The universe doesn’t give a fuck about you.
You say incredible misinformed things like this then pretend you aren't an atheist? The universe is not conscious, karma is simply an extension of causation

>>94366936
I have every fight to dismiss it if you’re assuming it exists outside of human perception.

For karma to work, you need judgement. That denotes an intelligence. So what is external to the human perception that is enforcing it? God? Aliens?

Karma, even had it “existed”, wouldn’t be existent the way you think it’d be. It’s the product of intelligence. It’s not a force. It’s a force the same way aliens are a force. “The powers that be”.

>>94366952
>The universe is not conscious
It isn’t. As far as we know. Yes.
>karma is simply an extension of causation
No it’s just humans perceiving a sort of “Hah!”. Causality leads up to it, but with no intelligence to conceive of it, it doesn’t exist, the same way magic (that feeling of “Woah, amazing”) doesn’t exist outside of the human mind (‘s eye).

>>94366954
>For karma to work, you need judgement. That denotes an intelligence. So what is external to the human perception that is enforcing it? God? Aliens?
Karma does not require an intelligent arbitrator, it is once again considered an extension of causality.

>>94366967
>No it’s just humans perceiving a sort of “Hah!”
What does "Hah!" mean? Everything we consider true is the product of our perception, this is an absurd point

>>94366880
>but to the Christian this is not an issue
It should’t be an issue. Religious folk just join a narrative and don’t think much about it. “It’s religion, I don’t gotta explain it”. The Christian wont go and call their god an alien. Not unless they have a sense of logic to go with it. And yet, all of religion has mysticism—or an inner search for truth/understanding. It’s odd.

>>94366977
“Hah!” is all people think of when they hear the word ‘karma’, lmao.
>Everything we consider true is the product of our perception
Sure, but our perceptions are often a lot flawed. Ignorance outnumbers the truth.

>>94366984
>Religious folk just join a narrative and don’t think much about it
This applies to all manners of thought. You, for example, state that all is physical yet are unable to confirm that everything you experience is not a hallucination. However, mentally clouded by atheistic thinking you somehow do not realise this

>>94366968
>Karma does not require an intelligent arbitrator, it is once again considered an extension of causality.
Causality isn’t karmic. It’s just causal, and Karma in the psychology is just, well, circumstance.

>>94366988
>“Hah!” is all people think of when they hear the word ‘karma’, lmao
In your head maybe, but this is an utterly indefensible point in reality.
>Sure, but our perceptions are often a lot flawed. Ignorance outnumbers the truth.
And I'm sure you, who still is unable to explain why your viewpoint is not circular, are the best possibly metric to understand what is true.

>>94366991
>You, for example, state that all is physical yet are unable to confirm that everything you experience is not a hallucination
The thing responsible for that hallucination exists. The variables and parameters that go into the simulation do exist. Cope. We can keep going further.

Also, you keep calling me an atheist when I’m just not. That’s a red flag you’re compromised in the membrane.

>>94366994
>Causality isn’t karmic.
That is obvious, reread what I wrote

>>94367005
>The thing responsible for that hallucination exists
How do you know that?

>>94367003
>In your head maybe
Lol, what do you think karma even is? Things that come around, go around? That is still just causality/circumstance.

>>94367010
>That is still just causality/circumstance
A specific version of it, what is your point?

>>94367009
Um, okay. And karma is causal only by way of humans interpreting causality and thinking “that’s what you get!”.

>How do you know that?
What? You think the thing causing the hallucination is ALSO a hallucination? Let’s fucking go, dude! Simulations all the way up and down!

>>94367021
>A specific version of it
Without causality “karma” wouldn’t “exist” or be interpreted as such at all.

>>94367025
>And karma is causal only by way of humans interpreting causality and thinking “that’s what you get!”.
Once again this applies to most things (here, metaphysical statements), especially your strange insistence that everything must be physical
>You think the thing causing the hallucination is ALSO a hallucination? Let’s fucking go, dude! Simulations all the way up and down!
Just because you cannot conceive an infinite regress does not mean it is not possible. You are clearly only familiar with popular philosophy, but I think this is a well known point even there

>>94366935
>It doesn’t exist in fiction either, going by Tolkien’s logic.
Tolkien never said that magic doesn't exist in fiction. Just in his setting.
Warping other things to match your perspective is also another sign of autism.

>>94367040
>especially your strange insistence that everything must be physical
Replace physical with exist. Something has to exist, to exist.

You want something to exist and not exist at the same time. That can’t be.

>>94367036
>Without causality “karma” wouldn’t “exist” or be interpreted as such at all.
Of course, I already said that karma is a clarified version of causality, which you should probably know given how popular the concept is.

>>94367049
>Replace physical with exist. Something has to exist, to exist.
Explain to me why an infinite regress cannot be possible. Even logically, there is the famous paper with Achilles and the turtle which proves that all discourse devolves to infinite regress

>>94367042
>Tolkien never said that magic doesn't exist in fiction. Just in his setting
Lol. Magic IS just a point of view. If it exists, it can be seen as magic, or not magic. See the anon here >>94366353 scratching his head at your sort of logic.

Like, sorry, what is magic to you probably won’t be magic to the sufficiently advanced alien who *knows* how it all works. What that alien can do will also be seen as magic by the less advanced.

So yes, magic can’t technically exist even in fiction, when it’s just a point of view.

>>94367070
>See the anon here >>94366353 scratching his head at your sort of logic.
Not the one you are responding to, but that was you

>>94367061
Infinite regress is still causal and exists. Sigh. Even a nothing is a something. Sigh. Space is a something—and even Einstein thought this. Although it was dangerously close to ether theory.

>>94367076
Sure.

>>94367077
>Infinite regress is still causal and exists
To call something without a foundation foundational is a contradiction of terms

>>94367084
Don't be sarcastic, you are blatantly samefagging and pretending you aren't since no one agrees with you

>>94367092
Sorry. There’s always going to be a background to the foreground. Don’t cry to me about it. The universe could be expanding back into a Big Crunch. I don’t fucking care.

>>94367104
Sure.

>>94367108
>There’s always going to be a background to the foreground
Going back to my original post, I think I've demonstrated why this poster is a troll, because whenever he is questioned his inevitable response is:
>you don't understand everything is physical
Without justification. I think I've demonstrated quite clearly his retardation now, he really should have been banned a while ago

>>94367104
>since no one agrees with you
He agrees with Tolkien, so Tolkien agrees with him.

>>94367137
All you’re doing is screaming “no! n-nooooo no! no! no! troll! t-troll!”

It’s like a religious person being backed into a corner because he can’t prove why Jonah would survive inside a fish.

>>94367156
Tolkien would obviously not think that everything is physical since he was a Christian, and you really need to control your habit of samefagging

>>94367137
…How is he wrong? Going by simple causal sense, every-fucking-thing should have a lead up, or background, to it.

What the actual fuck is your issue? You are overly, royally in defiance of science.

>>94367171
You must be the densest troll on /tg/, since what you wrote describes in perfect detail all your posts

File: IMG_0403.gif (1.07 MB, 200x200)

1.07 MB GIF

>>94367174
>Tolkien would obviously not think that everything is physical since he was a Christian
He believed God existed, tho? Physical.

>>94367187
>Going by simple causal sense, every-fucking-thing should have a lead up, or background, to it.
Infinite regress cannot by definition have an beginning and end, this is again a contradiction of terms

>>94367193
I honestly cannot fathom how someone like you exists. Oh, wait, I’m on fucking 4chan.
>>94367204
>Infinite regress cannot by definition have an beginning and end
Oh noes. Non-linear time! That’s still causal.

>>94367204
>Infinite regress cannot by definition have an beginning and end
It doesn’t need a beginning or end. It still happens/happened. Shit Happene. D’oh!

>>94367200
See >>94367137

>>94367213
An infinite regress cannot have a cause by definition and must be a causeless chain, this is really not difficult to understand

>>94367230
>An infinite regress cannot have a cause by definition and must be a causeless chain
Then nothing is caused, and nothing happens. Jesus Christ you are hilarious.

And you think I’M the troll?? lmfao

>>94367221
>It still happens/happened
The past tense is not applicable since an infinite regress is constantly active, to view it in the temporal language means you do not even know what infinite means

>>94367239
>Then nothing is caused, and nothing happens
Something happens, but there is no foundation. Returning to my earlier point, there is no reason an infinite regress could not define our existence, so once again you have no basis for your view being self-evident

>>94367244
>>94367255
That’s still causal. You don’t know what causality is.

>>94367314
Infinite regress cannot be causal because there was not a first cause to cause the effect, we only have the effect. The first answer to this internet thread is a good explanation:
https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/6388/is-infinite-regress-of-causation-possible-is-infinite-regress-of-causation-nece

Who created the universe? God. Who created God? God’s God. Who created God’s God? God’s God’s God.

This is all casual.

What causes a cause? Another cause.

Fucking mouth breathers.

>>94367346
>What causes a cause? Another cause.
There cannot be a first cause in an infinite regress model, so anything in the model must necessary be viewed as an effect. This is very simple

>>94367340
It doesn’t need a first cause. LMAO. It’s still causal. I don’t care if time is non linear or not, and there is no beginning.

>>94367359
>it's causal... because it just is ok!?
Sasuga

>>94367355
That’s still a chain of causes, and you’re assuming a first cause could come from no cause. It can’t!

You just have to assume time is a lot weirder outside of the one dimension, because time as we know it is one dimensional.

There, done. You’re not thinking enough.

>>94367370
So nothing is being caused during infinity’s infinity.

Jesus Christ. Just stop.

>>94367355
>There cannot be a first cause in an infinite regress model
There’d actually have to be, since the whole fallacy (yes, it’s a fallacy) is merely another way of assuming something can arise from nothing.

>>94367372
>and you’re assuming a first cause could come from no cause. It can’t!
There is no first cause in the first place, the status of an infinite regress is just being without cause. You clearly do not understand what infinity means. Something infinite simply cannot have a cause, so it is obviously not causal

>>94367396
So you finally conceded and said that infinite regress cannot exist in your model. Well, as the link I shared earlier explained, there is no reason to believe that infinite regress cannot exist, thus proving your bizarre assertion that your view is the only evident one false

>>94367383
No need to say something idiotic like "infinity's infinity", that is just what infinity means

>>94367070
You are thinking that magic is simply something that is hard to understand, as if a cellphone is magic just because some people don't understand it. And that is not the definition used in most settings, since a wizard is able to cast spells, and he still calls it magic. A divine god grants miracles upon their followers, and that god still calls it magic.
Magic is actually something that is by definition, supernatural. To those 5-dimensional beings, it could be easy to understand, but that wouldn't make magic less supernatural.
Like a tesseract, just because you understand what it is, it doesn't make it less supernatural, as it is something that can't exist within our 3-dimensional spatial reality (or at least until someone proves that there is more spatial dimensions).
Until there, a tesseract is supernatural. And if I make a magical 3-dimensional spatial setting where a person can summon a tesseract, that would be magic.

>>94367409
So you’re just falling into the “time is a lot weird” argument to justify it, then. That’s a way to justify the fallacy. Sort of.

>>94367448
No need to give any further explanation, I just formally refuted him since there is a decently large position in the scientific community in favour of an eternal universe, so he has nothing else he can say

>>94367397
>the status of an infinite regress is just being without cause
Then it can’t exist. Nothing comes from nothing. D’oh! Too bad, so sad. Don’t cry to me about it.

>>94367458
I was speaking about infinite regress in general, but yes infinite time is not causal by definition and there is a popular argument in favour of an eternal universe, if that is the example through which you want to understand it.

>>94367463
>there is a decently large position in the scientific community in favour of an eternal universe
Physicists don’t believe something can come from nothing. Lmao. Who the fuck are you trying to fool, here? Yourself?

>>94367465
I mean, even Stephen Hawking said that the universe is infinite and causeless so you've utterly made a fool of yourself
An article on the topic:
https://www.quantamagazine.org/physicists-debate-hawkings-idea-that-the-universe-had-no-beginning-20190606/

>>94367448
>since a wizard is able to cast spells, and he still calls it magic
Then he doesn’t actually understand it well enough, since magic is closer to a proxy than an actual definition, the same way religion is.

>>94367465
>Nothing comes from nothing
And the things that does are called magic. If there is a setting where things comes from nothing, it would be a magical setting.
It would be effect without cause, a foreground without background.
Surely you don't have aphantasia and imagine that like everybody else both outside and inside the scientific community, right?

>>94367481
The scientific consensus by this point I believe is that universe is eternal while time is not

File: IMG_1611.jpg (260 KB, 1080x1096)

260 KB JPG

>>94367493
And I’d agree with him. Everything could be happening all at once.

Stephen Hawking also said ‘philosophy is dead’, which implies he is also retarded, since theoretical (hypothetical) physicists can’t exactly avoid taking philosophical positions.

I’d refrain from appealing to authority, but, since that is what you’re doing…

>>94367496
>understand
This word has nothing to do with magic, if you think so, you don't understand magic enough.

>>94367505
Time and space are the same. Space is a “fabric” that can be folded. Of course it’s not eternal. It’s one dimensional. It goes in one direction, in three dimensions(space), as we know it.

>>94367518
>I’d refrain from appealing to authority, but, since that is what you’re doing…
You have nowhere to talk on this front, but even ignoring his authoritative position, there are at present several theories in physics which while not his outdated argument for an eternal universe still argue for the same thing

>>94367532
That doesn't really matter here, your mistake is that you assumed an eternal, causeless universe cannot exist when it is certainly defensible

>>94367524
Magic and religion are indistinguishable, and religion is flawed understanding at the end of the day. Interpreting nature in a hocus pocus lens. The arrogance of the imagination.

So yes, magic and religion are forms of understanding. Magic is “magic” and you don’t ask a magician for his secrets, the same way you don’t demand God to reveal everything. This starts mysticism.

>>94367545
>That doesn't really matter here, your mistake is that you assumed an eternal, causeless universe cannot exist when it is certainly defensible
When space and time are the same? Of course it matters. What do you mean by causeless, even? That nothing is caused, or that existence wasn’t caused? The former is more absurd than the latter, since existence can be said to always exist regardless. It doesn’t matter how many shapes or hoops it goes through. It is still changing. Causal.

>>94367545
>You have nowhere to talk on this front
Neither do you. Bringing up Hawking like a bitch.

>>94367556
>That nothing is caused, or that existence wasn’t caused
The universe was uncaused, thus your belief that everything can be considered in relationships of causality faulty

>>94367548
>Magic and religion are indistinguishable
It's indistinguishable to you, that is to retarded to understand it. I bet you think that phrases like "Magic is not different from sufficiently advanced technology" actually makes sense, and is not a distortion of the meaning of the word magic.
Sorry to disappoint, but a magician is not actually able to do magic, this is why many of them calls themselves illusionists, which is closer to what they actually do, and why a lot of them calls their magic "magic tricks" because it's actually just trickery, and not magic, just like vegan meat is not actually meat.
Magic does not exist in our reality, or at least we do not perceive it. That doesn't mean we can't imagine worlds where that is true, and also means that people who can't imagine that, might have aphantasia.

Existence cannot he caused since it’s all already existence.

>>94367545
Neil Black Science Man deGrasse Tyson, a cultist of Hawking-esque science, is on record saying he believes existence is just a bunch of simulations within simulations.

>>94367565
It seems you don't even know what the appeal to authority fallacy is, I am not arguing that it is correct because Hawking said it, in fact the article says that his specific theory has been disproven. I simply brought him up as a famous proponent of the theory of an uncaused universe, for which there are many other proponents with different theories

>>94367548
A simple test: Imagine a world where magic exists.
>If you could, congratulations, you have a regularly functioning brain.
>If you couldn't, you have aphantasia
>If you refused to imagine, you might be a religious fanatic that despises the very notion of imagining something that goes against your beliefs and treats physics as your religion

File: IMG_1723.jpg (42 KB, 736x346)

42 KB JPG

>>94367583
>It's indistinguishable to you

Uhhh…

Religion is literally stage magic on a huge scale, with the universe as the magician.

At its simplest, you had the ancients who had looked to the stars in the night sky, considering then gods.

How is that any different from the stage?

Also, religion doesn’t even require truth, like magic, as that defeats the whole faith thing.

Magic is literally a black box, and poking at it will put yourself into it, becoming an enigma to others yourself. Often, what is black on the outside is white within—or still black underneath.

You’re just not seeing it!

Even scientists are blind to the magic. What does the physicist say when they confront something new or bewildering?

“Hmm. That’s weird… I wonder how that works…”

If THAT doesn’t sound familiar to you…

>>94367588
I was mocking your appeal, but I do not actually decry appeals to authority figures. You’re allowed to parrot and compare information. That’s what humans do. The problem is people parrot the wrong information.

>>94367629
Ignoring that, do you understand now that a perfectly defensible argument may be made for a causeless universe?

>>94367622
Now he's broken to the point of posting pasta

>>94367622
It's so sad, such a smart boy unable to differentiate concepts. A sign of autism.

>>94367607
I can imagine a world where magic isn’t magic to the [insert being who grasps it enough to the point where it’s science], because otherwise it’s like an alien using terminologies of an inferior science of a much less developed planet.

Stop enforcing your human perceptions of magic onto beings that have their own perceptions of such things.

Seeing as there's no reason he can deny that theories for an eternal universe exist and he thus was refuted (post this if he ever tries this shitty bait again), I'm going to do something else now. As a last gift for him if he actually tries to disprove it, go ahead and disprove all the models in this lol:
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014PhRvD..90d3520W/abstract

>>94367717
>he thus was refuted
And in case he tries to kvetch about this as well, yes he really was refuted since he said everything can be conceived of in relationships of causality which I explicitly demonstrated was potentially false in the case of the universe. Since this was the basis of this argument, it thus has no more basis and he should never post these atrocious threads again.

All this autism because anons can’t accept that elves, fucking ELVES, don’t believe in (elven) magic. It’s technology to them.
Good job OP. You really showcase how youngshit this board is.

>>94367755
That just means Tolkien was an idiot lol

>>94367646
It’s only causeless if you assume that everything everywhere is happening all at once.
>>94367666
I bet you’re the type of person who sees a difference between magic and miracles and psionics. Dee en Dee brain rot.

>>94367755
Show me where the elves say they don’t consider it magic. That it isn’t magic. Go on. Show me. I’ll wait.

>>94367827
Literally OP

Checked back in one last time, and yep as expected he samefagged to avoid admitting he was wrong.

>>94367755
Stop samefagging retard, you got your ass handed to you. Well I guess I accept your concession, for my reward never post this shitty bait again.

>>94367819
>It’s only causeless if you assume that everything everywhere is happening all at once.
Very obviously untrue, a universe that is infinite does not have a cause by definition of infinity, that doesn't effect our perception of causality in the universe. Again since I've said enough try and disprove the paper instead from now on, which says nothing to the effect of your point and obviously includes defensible theories, if you're going to try and refute them do them rigorously (I doubt you can, but might as well try) instead of just saying they're wrong or you'll embarrass yourself further

>>94367903
Constantly screaming “troll!” and “samefag” like a demented person doesn’t look good on you. Take it off.

>>94367493
I'm not OP (as far as you know), but I can speak to some of these things.

Hawking was not above making bold claims that he knew would generate press.

“Universe can and will create itself from nothing.” Is a direct quote. And then he describes the dynamics of an existing universe. What he is describing is getting a lot of something from a little bit of something of a different form, not getting something from nothing at all.

Hawking is saying how everything came from the uncertainty principle (at least he does in his books). Hawking recognized that this wasn't an explanation for how "everything" came into existence.

He also says:

“What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe? The usual approach of science of constructing a mathematical model cannot answer the questions of why there should be a universe for the model to describe. Why does the universe go to all the bother of existing?”

I don't think he was engaging in outright sophistry, but I do think he was a singular genius that loved making bold claims that sometimes did not match the results of his research.

This is also only vaguely related to your conversation, my bad.

>>94367903
>very obviously untrue
It might be true. Again not OP.

In The Grand Design, Hawking posits that there were an infinite number of universes created simultaneously at the moment of the big bang.

In his most sincere moments he would readily admit that we do not know how the universe came to exist (see the "breathes fire" quote in my other reply.)

There could be infinities within infinities.

>>94368135
>In The Grand Design, Hawking posits that there were an infinite number of universes created simultaneously at the moment of the big bang.
How would he know? Is he a schizo or something?

>>94343404
So, mechanically how would this work? Elf/Wizard rolls his "art" score and the effect as described happens? Presumably its extraneous compared to a more mundane activities so therefore far more draining. IE like 99% of most generic RPG pen and paper free form systems. Or, like the magic from Ars magica if it's easier than implied but still capable of being tiring.

>>94368183
It’s a fair assumption. Every other universe could be a different hair of time, or possibility. Even stepping with your left foot instead of your right foot.

>>94367448
>And that is not the definition used in most settings, since a wizard is able to cast spells,
Right, most tolkienesque setting have a category of science called "magic". But the thread is about Middle Earth, and no one in Middle Earth uses the word "magic" to describe something that they understand, unless (like Gandalf) they're talking down to someone who doesn't understand it.

>>94367713
So, you have aphantasia. To you, imagining a world with magic is akin to imagining a new color, it's something that you even consider to be impossible.
But it's ok, next time, just frontload us with that and people won't be as mean to you.

>>94368340
>So, you have aphantasia
Lol. Not only does aphantasia not exist, that’s not how it works.

>>94368340
I've read a few of your posts and you're remarkably dumb. I mean you're just bad at words. Please don't post in Tolkien threads anymore.

>>94368366
Then why you can't imagine something that most people can? Both people of science and literal children can imagine that.

>>94368382
You are an idiot and you don't have a point. Please don't post in Tolkien threads anymore.

>>94368380
>>94368415
>denial AND ad hominem
That shit is so funny. I thought you were joking, but you are getting mad because you actually can't imagine it. You are actually unable to do it.
Not only you have been proven wrong on scientific grounds, but we found out why are you so angry at something so basic.

File: FoJHRrzXEAUzz3w.jpg (512 KB, 1500x1059)

512 KB JPG

Magic is a word bogged down by too many modern definitions and expectations. I suspect Tolkien was likewise bogged down in modernist thinking for the term.

In one of it's oldest contexts, magic is a contractual event. You contract a being who's nature allows it to make fire. Now doing it at your behest. For them it is just a function of their being, yes. One, very ill advised, form is binding a demon by force to do a task for you. Magic. There's also any act of trying to contact the dead. Necromancy. There's such things as using 'familiar spirits' to gain information you should not have. This can include fortunetelling as that inherently relies on that. Things can get a bit confusing cause terminology has changed around some acts. When speaking curses becomes forbidden in ancient times, the context of that is old women poisoning you in secret after declaring the curse. Abusing their knowledge of folk remedies and herbs and such. Similarly with voodoo. We really wouldn't recognize such people as witches now. Things are particularly goofy now that we have 'wizards' who are just magical assault rifles in our depictions.

In a vague sense, I suppose you could call magic any use of the spirit world to your own ends. As opposed to science tapping the natural world. Both world have their own workings and denizens and dangers and can be understood. Perhaps even studied. Making the definition kind of academic, but it's enough of a difference to draw a line.

If it sounds like I think I'm talking about real things, it's because I am. Though please note it's been quite some time in human history that anything was willing to work with humans. Likely because of the Lord's intervention. At least to such a direct extent. People have lost sense of how dangerous and real such things can be thanks to charlatans filling the gaps as well. The likes of fake spiritualists able to have their back stage crew whisper anything they need to know in their ear pieces.

>>94368444
I guess that also explain why he is so keen on repeating that magic is just physics not understood (when I have only heard of this idiocy from street "magicians" that thinks that hiding a coin is "magic" or that a smartphone is magic), because he cannot physically imagine that there is something outside of physics.

>>94367713
>I can imagine a world where magic isn’t magic to the [insert being who grasps it enough to the point where it’s science], because otherwise it’s like an alien using terminologies of an inferior science of a much less developed planet.
I'm sure you guys have already hashed this out but I just got here so I'm going to reply to this for fun.
When they hear us use the word "magic" to describe their shit, they'll respond in one of two ways. Either they will say "No, your story-powers aren't real, we are not your story-creatures, now we will use our technology to transport you back to your planet." Or they will say "Yes, this is what you would call magic, we will use our magic to transport you back to your planet." Either they'll think that we are referencing specific elements from our stories and imposing them falsely on the aliens (because they have no reason to think that we have a clear grasp of the difference between fantasy and reality), or they will think that it's a general term for things we don't understand.
I think they can be more advanced and still have a concept of magic. It's just that they probably wouldn't describe their own shit as magical, the word that they use to describe their own shit will not be analogous to the word "magic".

If Numenor got a working computer they'd call it magic at first, and if the Pentagon got a Palantir they'd call it magic at first, but then each side would move on to other descriptive terms once they'd figured out how the thing worked. Conversely, if you brought a computer to Faerun they'd say "Ah, fascinating device, you'll have to show me how it works. Here, let me show you some of my magical devices and explain how they work". Because in Faerun they have a technology called magic, and that's fine, stories can invent new meanings for words. In Ghost in the Shell, "Going into autistic mode" means that your cyberbrain stops sending and receiving signals, on 4chan it means something completely different.

File: phonedog.jpg (14 KB, 358x358)

14 KB JPG

>>94368534
>(when I have only heard of this idiocy from street "magicians" that thinks that hiding a coin is "magic" or that a smartphone is magic)
>He still hasn't read Tolkien
>He still hasn't looked at OP's image

>>94368578
Again, you are just mistaking "magic = not understood", when it's "magic = supernatural". You are not imagining a world where magic exists, you are imagining a world where people call smartphones magic.
You need to imagine something that is categorically impossible. Now imagine that it happened. Something that doesn't exist but exists at the same time, a superposition of contradictions happening together. An effect without cause. Something outside of reality.

>>94368578
>I think they can be more advanced and still have a concept of magic. It's just that they probably wouldn't describe their own shit as magical, the word that they use to describe their own shit will not be analogous to the word "magic".
Is it not both? Magic is much closer to a description than a definition. It’s more like a proxy or a placeholder. “Magic”.

“It’s amazing, wondrous, like magic!”
“It can’t do everything; it isn’t magic.”
“I can’t explain it…. therefore magic.”

There are many avenues to use the word as a sort of description. Or saying. It can be a highly negative pejorative as much as it is a noble honorific. “He’s a wizard at math”. It’s just not a true definition.

I’m reminded of the Bene Gesserit in the Dune novels. They’re called “witches”, as they are known for esoteric ways, abilities and behind-the-scenes agenda.

It’s the same with Gandalf, the “wizard”, who describes his doings as “spells” and “magic”, but he does not define them as such, and he is definitely no wizard back home in Valinor.

A chemist is entirely in his right to see his craft as “magic”, if he appreciates it, and sees the wonder, and mystery, in it. Many do. The magic has become personal.

But there are also chemists who will hate you for using the word. They will flip their shit at you if you say stuff like “If you don’t treat nature as divine, or magical, then you don’t truly love or appreciate nature or science, do you?”, like an old lecturer of mine at university.

A biologist lady chimed in at a different interval later on in the year and agreed that coming cross a new lifeform, even a bug or a deep sea fish, is absolutely this “magical” feeling of wonder. How could it not be? That also pissed him off.

I really, really think humans are terrified of seeing the magic in the world.

>>94368714
>Again, you are just mistaking "magic = not understood", when it's "magic = supernatural"

You are retarded. You’re still failing to see the irony of the supernatural, likely due to you just not wanting to. You don’t want to.

What is supernatural is only supernatural because we fail to understand it naturally.

>>94368714
>You need to imagine something that is categorically impossible. Now imagine that it happened.
If it happened, then it isn’t impossible, not really.
>Something that doesn't exist but exists at the same time
Something can’t exist and not exist at the same time.

File: photo_2023-12-17_02-49-13.jpg (105 KB, 1024x768)

105 KB JPG

>>94366880
>Also, the second part is only an issue under a literalist reading of the Hebrew Bible, that phrase is considered figuratively among Christians

To anyone serious in their pursuit of faith in Jesus Christ, I will leave the strongest possible warning to take all scripture with a dread seriousness.

Note, I didn't say literally. Note I didn't say metaphorically. Nor figuratively. I said seriously. Anyone who takes phrases in the bible as God merely being cute is making a grave, and possibly deadly, error. If God says man was made in His image, God is very serious about that. The problem is merely one of our own shortcomings. If you don't understand what God is telling you, that is a personal problem. Not God's problem. Like it or not, God has veiled certain things even in telling us about them. Take it up the Lord if you have an issue. Though some things are just plain loss of knowledge over time. The keepers of it not relating it on purpose and maliciously to suit their own desires rather than service in God. The vast majority of churches you can find now will be like this. I'd just read scripture yourself these days and pray to God to help you understand. Also people are stupid. And stupid on purpose. And messaging is easy to dilute too much till it becomes useless.

In the specific case of 'made in His image', that phrase was in reference to Adam and Eve. The nuance here is mankind lost that image. Scripture seems to state Adam begat children in his own image after they were ejected from Eden. Not in God's. See the issue?

This is particularly insidious as men love to beat their chest proudly. Yet ask who will owe up to being the greatest of sinners and what scripture says about that and...

>>94368728
>irony of the supernatural
Tell me how something that both exists and doesn't exist at the same time is understandable naturally.

>>94368748
>it can't happen
Not in our universe, but in hypothetical universe it happened. Now what. Are you just going to refute the existence of something that both exists and doesn't at the same time, even though everyone can tell that it both exists and doesn't?

>>94368534
>because he cannot physically imagine that there is something outside of physics.
You cannot physically image or conceive of the irony behind this statement. That’s why they’re calling you an idiot. Because again, to the the physicist, meta-physics is still physics of a kind, if it exists and is exerting a physical influence at all.

>>94368754
>>94366844
As an addition, one of the very points of the Christ is to restore God's image to mankind. Through Christ's sacrifice on the cross, taking on Christ's image is possible for man. And Christ is God. Through faith, God plans to restore His image to us.

>>94368728
>likely due to you just not wanting to
Duh, the whole point is that the supernatural rejects the natural. If you imagine something that is supernatural, it will of course, be something outside of nature. Otherwise you are just imagining something natural.

>>94368791
>the whole point is that the supernatural rejects the natural
Except it doesn’t, because to the natural philosopher, everything is natural. There is nature to everything. Even the artificial. I don’t care how wibbly wobbly woo it is. There is still something *there*. If it was made by something intelligent, then that is STILL physics, the same way an anthill is physics. Or the computer.

Just stop.

>>94368783
>they're calling
Let's just not pretend that you are not samefagging, or it will be even sadder for you.
>meta-physics
It's metaphysics, without the hyphen. You kept writing it wrong throughout the whole thread. And I don't know why are you even bringing it up, when we are discussing meta-metaphysics.

>>94368772
>Not in our universe, but in hypothetical universe it happened
Sorry. Magic is just an opinion. It can’t even exist in fiction, not really. It’s purely a psychologically substantiated angle.

At best, the thing inside the head making you go “wow, magic!” is the one thing that exists, and nothing else.

What is magic to one is not necessarily going to be magic to another. Deal with it.

>>94367200
God is not physical. God made physical reality. Thought the concept of it up. Then spoke it in to being. Before that, God was in eternity.

>>94368814
>It's metaphysics, without the hyphen
A hyphen can suffice. Stop being a pretentious, pedantic twat because you can’t get over yourself failing to understand the mind of a dead man.

This is really embarrassing.

>>94368819
>not magic to another
Then explain the phenomena that both exists and it doesn't.
Surely, to you, it's not magic, right? You can explain within the ream of nature and physics how something both exists and doesn't.

>>94368721
I can see a scenario where they used to think that geothermal power was magic (it was a story they didn't believe in), but then they find out that it's real, and they keep calling it magic forever. Language is not autism-friendly, language is organic.
Generally though, if they describe something as "amazing", "wondrous", miraculous, unexplainable, etc, that usually means that the thing hasn't been around very long. They will slide towards other descriptive terms as they get used to it and accept it as part of their "natural" reality. There have been a number of times in (essentially modern) English where "magic" and "science" were used interchangeably to describe miraculous processes, but as time passes we have increasingly segregated the concepts so that "magic" only refers to the things excluded by science, this isn't arbitrary language drift but is instead related to the essential meanings behind the words. And we still describe new technologies as "magical" or "miraculous" or "like magic".
>>94368714
Once something happens then it is no longer outside of reality. The fact that it happens proves that it was never outside of reality. Dumbass. "Supernatural" is just another word for magic, it has no essential meaning, it only has meaning relative to a given speaker's concept of reality.

>>94368825
You’re assuming God doesn’t exist then. That there is Nothing to Him. That’s bad.

God definitely has God-logic to him. Just assuming he doesn’t, is insane.

>>94368831
>pedantic
No, no. I was just pointing out because I thought it was funny. If you ever picked a book on metaphysics, you wouldn't be writing it wrong. So it kinda shows how much is just you making up shit.

>>94368838
You’re more or less just admitting that magic is anything we cannot naturally assess.

Thanks for your concession. I accept it.

>>94368844
Dude, it’s a fucking hyphen. Are you fifteen?

>>94368857
He has been sperging out the entire thread because he’s mad that the elves are essentially a case of sufficiently advanced aliens. It’s the same with Gandalf, except he actually calls what he does “magic”.

This level of disdain for Tolkien is fucking disgusting. The illiteracy is off the charts. This level of intellect is what causes shit like the Rings of Power on Amazon.

>>94368857
Kek, no. I'm finding it outrageously funny how angry you are over it. Anyone else would have just said nothing and moved on, but you need to prove that your mistake is somehow small or insignificant.
Dude, try not to lecture other people on something you clearly do not know about.

>>94368874
And please stop samefagging, it's sad when you do it, really.

>>94368754
>>94368786
If you're serious in your purist of faith in Jesus Christ then the first thing you need to understand is that all organized religion is made up for political reasons. The trinity was invented by rich romans to cover the plot holes in the jewish povert-cult. They didn't really like the jewish poverty-cult but it had already replaced their stupid state religion so they needed to put themselves in charge of it.

>>94368197
It's clearer in the book. When realizing how great elven rope is, Samwise wants to know how it's made. Not only is it strong, but it comes undone at a tug from atop a cliff just from wanting it to. The elves reply that they could have taught him how to make it if they realized he was interested, but now there's no time. Elves are just really skilled craftsman. You roll the appropriate crafting skill. This is also easier to understand when you realize craftsmen and artisans are words for the same thing.

>>94368841
>There have been a number of times in (essentially modern) English where "magic" and "science" were used interchangeably to describe miraculous processes
There are a lot of books in or around the time of the Renaissance that did this as well. It was much in vogue. A fashion. It died out, of course.

>>94368878
Wow, you’re mad. I win this one.

>>94368848
>naturally assess
Naturally is the keyword here. To the narrow-minded natural philosopher, he cannot imagine that there are things that cannot be naturally assessed, because to him, nature is his religion, for something to be supernatural is preposterous, and for something to be, it needs to be natural first.

>>94368896
Um. No. What the elves do is 100% magic. Fuck you, samefag.

>>94368908
>I win this one
Just because you wrote that, it doesn't mean it happened. Maybe in your head it did.

>>94368914
>he cannot imagine that there are things that cannot be naturally assessed, because to him, nature is his religion
Right. So a plane is supernatural because it cannot be assessed by the caveman.

It doesn’t matter if we cannot assess it or not. The information is still there, lying in wait, for all time. Nature. That’s magic.

>>94368923
Lol, you’re the one feeding me the bigger reaction. How am I not winning. Keep going.

>n-no, the elves magic is different from enemy magic
Tolkien literally says both uses the same shit in different form

>>94368924
>by the caveman
The natural philosopher is the caveman that did not want to put his head outside the cave of reality. To him everything is natural (shadows), and he refuses to look outside, even when other people keep telling him there are more to the natural (shadows), he just refuses because he does not want to think that he is wrong.

File: DOqukVT.jpg (277 KB, 2048x927)

277 KB JPG

>>94368843
God not existing of physical matter is not the same as God not being real. That physical matter needs some other source of sustaining it's existence, and that God does not, makes God more real than you, me, or the dirt under our feet. God is HOLY. That is to say, God is unlike the things of this world in their entirety. This is the difference in pagan ideals and God. Pagans require their idols be made of the same stuff the universe is. At best rising up from the soup before other things did. Just made of a lot of it. God preexisted the cosmos. Made the very concept of it. And requires no part in it.

Another way of putting it is that God has 'necessary being'. We call ourselves beings, but in truth we don't have it. We have 'becoming'. We require outside input and lose energy and shift substance constantly for it. The universe has no sign of self sustenance either.

>>94368893
I will say again. People should read scripture themselves. Even if you don't understand it all, you can at least gain a sense of people leaving things out. Or outright lying to you.

>>94368914
"Nature" doesn't mean what you want it to mean. Most of these words don't mean what you want them to mean. You are an idiot and you don't have a point, please don't post in Tolkien threads anymore.

The amount of cognitive dissonance ITT could be distilled into a thick concentrate

>>94368917
"Magic" is a human word for something which is actually older than the word. Much like "god". Why do you enter a Tolkien thread without knowing anything about Tolkien and then refuse to talk about Tolkien? What are you going through here?

>>94368966
>God not existing of physical matter is not the same as God not being real
We’re about to enter semantics territory. Is matter anything that has rest mass, or anything that’s there? Anything that truly matters? Even space matters. Does God not matter?

I’m going to stop this. There’s a thread about this here /sci/16466501

>>94368987
He’s just going to call you a samefag anon
He is beyond mind broken

>>94368933
Anon, because I pity you, you are the lolcow being milked. You are their chris-chan. The people telling other people to stop replying to you, they are on your side, and they doing it because they pity you too.
To you, everything looks logical, so did Chris-chan, to him, what he was doing was purely logical and made 100% sense, yet he could not understand why people kept "pestering" him, and why people did not understood him, and why people kept doing things when he was telling them not to do it.
I'm telling you this because I like this 4chan where retards meet, but it's no fun when you are just getting bullied here.
Just close this tab, and let it die, it's not worth to keep replying to these people.

>>94368994
Forgot the stupid fucking arrows
>>>/sci/16466501

>>94368966
>Even if you don't understand it all, you can at least gain a sense of people leaving things out.
You can learn a lot more by reading a wikipedia article about the history of abrahamic religion. The scriptures are actively trying to trick you. The people who present the scriptures are actively trying to trick you. You can find personal truths there if you're actively looking for them, the thing is if you're actively looking for personal truths then you can find them anywhere.

>>94369002
*belch*

>>94369019
Just don't do anything harsh. Don't throw a tantrum in real life, or harm anything. Listen to your parents, they are not against you, they love you and they want to help you even if it doesn't look like they are.

>>94343441
In every way possible.

He owed his professorship and publishing and fame to hook-nosed bankers and he went far out of his way to defend them at every opportunity.

If alive today he would be holed up in the English countryside and crying about trump on twitter