Why do people even bother to practice magic (magick) if it can't do very much; Why don't they just study up on technology, since it by far has a higher capability then magic (magick) ever will.
2007-03-21 17:06:29 · 28 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Mythology & Folklore
technology my not have given us a flying broom yet (because no one wants to invest in such a thing) but it has given us airplanes.
2007-03-21 17:16:22 · update #1
Not everything science was called magic, in fact the only two sciences that I know of that were once called magic was basic Chemistry and Botany.
2007-03-21 18:04:27 · update #2
How can technology be lost; its like losing the ability to count to ten, if you lose that then you lost everything.
I do believe that technology can help make a person feel good; I always feel good when I learn something new,
2007-03-22 18:33:38 · update #3
well I don't know,...but you have answered well.
2007-03-21 17:08:40 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You're not talking here about stage magic (illusion) I presume, but rather 'real magic'.
Why try to learn sorcery and cast spells when you could go to school for years and become a doctorate of physics, and maybe someday develop a theoretical model that allows you to accomplish all the things magic practitioners claim they can achieve?
Well, I think the answer is obvious. Going the magic route, while it might not make much logical sense or work very well (if at all) entails a lot less effort than figuring out the actual physics and forces involved in our natural surroundings, then figuring out how to manipulate those forces.
I think magic is just a catchphrase for things we don't (yet) understand. Things like ESP, remote viewing, ghost phenomena etc were often referred to as magic. However as more study is poured into these 'magic' subjects, more evidence of how things actually work is uncovered (explanations ranging from the funny ways physics works at very small levels for example in which effect actually comes before cause).
So while I'm not going to say there's no such thing as magic (there are definitely all kinds of forces and phenomena that science cannot yet explain) I believe in a universe which obeys physical laws, and as such I think as knowledge marches forward, more and more 'magic' will be explained.
2007-03-21 17:15:40 · answer #2 · answered by Jon S 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I would say that your thoughts are opinion and not fact.
There is a lot to understand on what 'magick' is and what it is capable of. The easiest way I can explain it is that the mind is a much more powerful computer than any computer on earth. Obviously some are better than others, but even the simplist minded among us can still set their minds to getting something done. I am not sure I really understand the premise of your question but an interesting thought none the less.
2007-03-29 16:27:29 · answer #3 · answered by lllll 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You mustn't know a lot about magick.
Magick works a lot like affirmations do. You send your will and intention out by repeating a phrase over and over again. Your brain responds by eventually believing in what you're saying. Once your brain recognizes this, your actions change. When your actions change, the world changes with you.
Magick can be explained scientifically - and it's much older then modern science and technology.
Perhaps you should study up on some magick.
2007-03-21 17:18:14 · answer #4 · answered by Joa5 5 · 5⤊ 0⤋
well when I was wicca, I made my 1SGT feel quilty, this is a man that never did, and I made a tree blossom with red flowers one time and made a demon infested house quite down for a day or two so I could sleep without being harrassed by a succubus, but it would come back, after my pwn voodoo housekepper couldn't get rid of it, I gave up wicca because I realized were the magic was really coming from. It made me feel powerful, like I was in control. Like I could really help my kids who were having nightmares from the demons in the house, science can't fight demons and my old religion didn't believe in exorcists. I think teens pick it up because of harry Potter and all the cartoons have all that magic in it, ots replaced God, so what can I say, todays TV has sold it to them.
2007-03-22 00:06:23 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Whoa--I AM a magician and whoa. Do I earn the bucks. You know what? I also am in the making of beingg a digital artist. I say both is a pretty good combo. $$$$
Im not into the whole potions and chants if thats what you are talking about. I can put a sword through someone's arm.
2007-03-21 17:11:04 · answer #6 · answered by ARGH! (Usually a sunny person) 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Many people cannot change the world to fit them. However, magic helps the person change themself to fit the world. The change comes from within and helps one adjust to the world in a peaceful way.
Technolgy, no matter what you do with it (other than ECT, even then the electrodes can leave burn marks) can't change what goes on in your head peacefully and without side effects.
2007-03-27 15:39:13 · answer #7 · answered by aggylynn 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It is a matter of believing in magic or not. Magic you would have the ability to transform into something else while technology today we could only dream. So I guess all magic is is dreams.
2007-03-25 11:06:24 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Magic deals with the emotional/spiritual. Technology with the physical
2007-03-26 13:34:59 · answer #9 · answered by Lyle G 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You can benefit more from magical workings, and it comes from within and from a higher self. It disciplines and opens ones mind to see and feel better things in life.
Technology has it's benefits; but how does it make one a better person? And if we lost it then we would have nothing. You can't loose magic. You can stop using it;but you never loose it.
2007-03-22 13:10:19 · answer #10 · answered by twinklestars211 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Magic is more closely related to psychology than so-called "hard" science. Most self-help books employ techniques nearly identical to magic.
2007-03-22 04:14:01 · answer #11 · answered by Absinthia 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋