Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9505901" data-attributes="member: 71699">I'm enjoying the discussion, and do not see it as about changing my or my interlocutor's mind. It's simply an exchange of views that may or may not influence the formation of future views. I'm confident that I am on good ground, philosophicallyIt's right that one piece of fiction is no more true than another. It is a fact that &quot;in Doyle's stories there was a consulting detective called Holmes&quot; and an equal fact that &quot;in my imaginary world magic is observable and inexplicable&quot;.

It is right to say that given dualistic metaphysical commitments, something that is inexplicable can also have observable effects in the world. That seems more or less required for some theistic standpoints and ideas about consciousness.
As to whether others agree, so far no one has engaged with my central argument. I've asserted that magic in the real world was inexplicable and unpredictable, not scientific. No one has refuted that. With that premise unchallenged, I go on to say that magic in a game would be more &quot;realistic&quot; were it inexplicable and unpredictable.With regard to [USER=7035894]@Clint_L[/USER]'s objections, I'm not arguing that real world magic had observable effects... I'm arguing that game magic inspired by real world magic can in an imaginary game world have observable effects. I'm saying that magic-as-technology (reliable, predictable) is less like real world magic (i.e. a peculiar form of nonsense) than my proposal would be.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 9505901, member: 71699"] I'm enjoying the discussion, and do not see it as about changing my or my interlocutor's mind. It's simply an exchange of views that may or may not influence the formation of future views. I'm confident that I am on good ground, philosophically [INDENT]It's right that one piece of fiction is no more true than another. It is a fact that "in Doyle's stories there was a consulting detective called Holmes" and an equal fact that "in my imaginary world magic is observable and inexplicable".[/INDENT] [INDENT][/INDENT] [INDENT]It is right to say that given dualistic metaphysical commitments, something that is inexplicable can also have observable effects in the world. That seems more or less required for some theistic standpoints and ideas about consciousness.[/INDENT] [INDENT][/INDENT] As to whether others agree, so far no one has engaged with my central argument. I've asserted that magic in the real world was inexplicable and unpredictable, not scientific. No one has refuted that. With that premise unchallenged, I go on to say that magic in a game would be more "realistic" were it inexplicable and unpredictable. With regard to [USER=7035894]@Clint_L[/USER]'s objections, I'm not arguing that real world magic had observable effects... I'm arguing that game magic inspired by real world magic can [I]in an imaginary game world [/I]have observable effects. I'm saying that magic-as-technology (reliable, predictable) is less like real world magic (i.e. a peculiar form of nonsense) than my proposal would be. [/QUOTE]

Verification