What Quimper is trying to say, I think, is that magic should be magical and fantasy fantastical. Normalizing fantasy and explaining magic sorta kills the point.

Incorrect, it is not. Magic is, at least anthropologically, a system of explaining events or an alternative involving spirits. Even the reverse you stated, "magic is the refutation of science" is false. But I really do not want to get into a thermodynamic and metaphysics argument on here. I merely ask that you take into account not everyone believes science negates magic and vice versa.



Perhaps you should care, because to do otherwise is ignorant. You're expecting us to swallow your definition. And honestly, you're turning this thread into something it wasn't intended to. I set specific guidelines, and you may be talking about the mythos, which is related, but not in a way that is relevant. And don't you think it a little silly not to attempt to look at it in a different way?

It is a fictional universe. No one is denying that. But you can apply some science to explain things unless otherwise stated or expressed to behave differently. Yes, "it's magic" is more than enough an answer. But what if it doesn't explain it? I seriously fail to see why you're so infuriatingly eager, pompously, why you cannot see it is actually rather understandable and perfectly fine to apply what we know works to what we don't know how it works. No one is trying to ruin anything in the TES universe. And some things have already been proven to work exactly like they do in our world. When someone comes up with a theory of something somewhat unknown or even majorly unknown regarding TES Lore, they do so in a manner that is familiar to them and what makes sense -- what works. It is precisely why I made the extraneous comment regarding life inhabiting other planets.

And yes, magic is an alternative physics, lol. And you can even judge magic by science in our world. People already have. People explain it by altering everything magic and giving it a physics equivalent. They're not trying to separate magic, but explain how it could work.



Obviously, TES has an equivalent of gravity. It may not be gravity, but it is an equivalent. This is how we understand things fall down in TES. And no, things don't always fall. This is where magic comes in.

I really ask that you just please calm down and understand that we.. We... Darnit, I yawned and forgot everything I was going to say. And it was so perfect, too. Anyways... I ask that you stop thinking about how wrong something may seem and try understanding all it may be is changing things, whether names or how they work. I am not going to use science to explain the stars in TES. To be honest, I don't know much about them. Now, could I attempt, should I learn about them, to give a rational explanation? Sure. Does it change anything or make it any less fiction if I try to use science to break it down? Not in my opinion. It's like trying to explain how magic works in TES, like a flame touch, or whatever else.

To be honest, I failed quite well in explaining all of this. I am almost 48 hours without sleep, I've been quite sick, class, work, headaches, etc.... The point is, I'm normally a lot better, lol.



I think to the contrary, normalizing it makes it even more exciting to me, as well as more magical. It doesn't take away from the magic, but gives into the wonders that it is.

You have completely misunderstood each of my posts. I am not interested in continuing this conversation, which is an effusion of words already.

Which is to say: Sorry, I'm too busy to make a reply to your post.

Then please help me understand? And I knew what you meant, lol. I'm not uneducated. I didn't need a translation.

But if I misunderstood, then I beg you, or someone, to help me understand what you meant. I know one thing I hate is to be misunderstood. It's aggravating. And I know it can't feel good to have done to you, either.

You can try to apply science. Science however isn't what you think it is. Science is not that which we know about nature but rather an undertaking to develop an understanding of the world, often through testable hypothesis.

Setting up an actual testable hypothesis is impossible as Tamriel is fictional and most scientific endeavours would halt there. However you can still ask yourself questions and see if you can explain them. Which is not a bad way to go about learning.

So we can develop theorems, since we cannot test the hypotheses. And taking your approach the debate, I have no choice but to accept defeat, because that is the actual definition of science. What we do know, though, is based on numerous hypotheses which have been tested. How we approach life in general is a series of experiments, though we are mostly unaware of it. But anyways, what science actually is, is indeed not what I am using it as. It's easier to use the term science than a more lengthy version, as wrong and incorrect as it is.

Love you, Proweler, by the way. Be my Valentine? lol

but I wanted to be your Valentine...

Wikipedia:

Fine. One post.

This point is essential: there is no such thing as "Tamriel." It's all fiction. What this means is that questions about the nature of Tamriel are really misdirected. Let us use a simple question as a model: suppose someone were to ask, "How many inches of rain fell in the Rumare during the last year of the Great Emperor's life?" The triviality of this question demonstrates the absurdity of asking questions about the nature of Tamriel; what is actually being asked is "How many inches of rain do the representations of Tamriel suggest fell in the Rumare during the last year of the Great Emperor's life?" Thus, when wondering if science can apply to "Tamriel," one actually wonders if science can apply to the representations of Tamriel; that is to say, if it has any predictive or explanatory value in describing these representations of Tamriel that we are all actually talking about.

The answer to this question is clearly in the negative. These representations are replete with examples of events that cannot be reconciled into a universe with consistent rules. Pelinal's hand was made of killing light and in his rampage he wiped regions clear from the map, Reman was born of a hillock that was also the Empress Alessia with the Stone of Kings set in his brow, Tiber Septim altered the nature of an entire country with a single sentence. The creator of most of this body of work has made his position on "reality" entirely clear: the mundane explanation is always wrong.

You are welcome to apply "science" as you see fit, but you will gain no insight into the story this forum exists to discuss. I, for one, will not follow you down that particular path.

That is wiki, lol. And I said anthropologically. I gave a definition I was given by professors through numerous years of education in the field of anthropology. At the moment, I am now finishing up some specific chem and bio classes to get into medical school.

Oh, so we're dragging degrees into this now? Wonderful.

Lets take a look at your definition. "A system of explaining events or an alternative involving spirits (the supernatural)." How, pray, does science deal with the supernatural (i.e. "of or relating to things that cannot be explained according to natural laws"). Answer: It doesn't. The supernatural is beyond the natural, meaning beyond what science can and does deal with. You can't quantify the power of God.

Science is not the natural laws. Rather science is the process used to derive those laws. Science also does not explain, rather the process observes and extracts the general behaviour. Science can't explain why the apple falls down, it can only tell you that if it falls here on earth it will fall with approximately 9.81 m/s^2, proportional to the mass of both objects involved with a given inaccuracy for ignoring the rest of the universe).

Now if magic and gods could only be reliably observed then science would be able to deal with it. Which poses the question, if something can't be observed, not even theoretically, does it's existence matter to us? Likewise the fictional magic in a fictional world is a perfect target for fictional science.

On the one hand, I get the idea that no one likes "a wizard did it" as a handwave to narrative. Easy out. Laziness. Clumsy plug.

On the other hand, the left one, the sinastra, I say this: there was a lot (a lot) of work that went into Tamrielic lore creation with the above in mind as anathema to its perceived validity. And so we din't do dat. Any justification to support that claim would just be boring.

Kinda like this thread. Just saying.

Actually, no, I wasn't dragging degrees into it. That was just an extraneous comment. Sorry I made you think it. I still love you, Lady N! <33 -hugs- I wouldn't really ever attempt to insult you. I respect you too much. And I love reading what you have to say, even if I may sometimes disagree on it. I was just clarifying on my definition. The rest of it was, as said, extraneous. And people try to quantify the power of G-D all the time, lol. Not myself, personally. But there are people who try.

The way I see it, magic does not replace science, but supplements it. We can still have physics and chemistry work nearly identically as in the real world along with magic contained within plants and alteration bending the laws of physics. Science can be tweaked, and lore can be wrong, so it all works out.

There's actually a saying about this subject: Every time you drag real-world physics into a fantasy setting discussion, God kills a cat girl. So do it whenever possible.

Or think of the cat girls, depending on where the saying is invoked.

And CP gave the reason why I do like to use science, when possible! Those cat girls are nothing more than the perverse creations of Slaanesh!

On topic, RL science isn't going to work in TES. You have to use TES science in order to understand things. Magic, for example, is pretty much potential to be used, and mages are able to make that potential into something, like throwing a fireball, creating a sound vacuum, bending light, making items lighter, turning off normal biology in order to breath water, and so on.

There's also genetics, which is more of you'll be your mom's race and pretty much most characteristics making one just like your mom's race, with dad's genes subtly impacting you. For instance, a the offspring of a dunmer mom and nord dad will be dunmer for all intents and purposes, but may be slightly stronger. Symachus was thought to have been the son of a nord, due to being quite strong (but I take it more as he worked in the mines quite a lot and got strong because of the heavy physical labor he performed). In real life, you'll likely be 50/50 with mom and dad, but not in TES.

But, there are times when nothing has been really said, and RL science can be used somewhat as a point of reference, like when comparing iron to steel. However, comparing iron to ebony will be different, along with all other fantasy materials.

I believe you may be mistaken. I am not saying that a Wizard cannot do it, but rather in what method does the magic the Wizard use operate, what is the process? I accept "A god waves his hand and it is so", but how did it occur? Things materialize, but in what way?

Porphyric Hemophilia was created by a Daedra, I accept this and all its parts. But that's looking at it as a whole. Yes, it was created by magic, but is it a simple thing, or complex and created by pieces? How does the magic work and affect victims? If I were to create a spell (or w/e) that turns creatures into, say, vampires, it would be a multi-layered magic. And clearly this is a strong magic, P. Hemophilia is.

What I am/was attempted to do, in the terms of the biological process with P. Hemophilia, was describe how the spell might work, which has the side effect of, IMO, dismissing the claims they are undead. It would be as if I tried to describe how a mage created a fireball, or lightning, or any other spell. Yes, it is magic, but we cannot say one thing and then another. How do mages discover new spells? They test things, alter how things work, etc. So already in the lore, we have this process where the mages are doing what I tried to do, but instead of creating new spells, I am describing the magic and how they may do it/have done it.

A mage may describe a spell as having to have (y*z)+(x)=(a) - Y and Z having to be combined perhaps simultaneously to achieve a certain affect, which when added to X produces A. Or it may be even an even more complicated equation. I, personally, do not see anything wrong with trying to use the real world to describe how it may work, despite it being magic. I believe magic really exists. However, that doesn't mean I don't think science cannot be used to explain or it describe it or its effects. And perhaps it's not "magic" but energies, polarities, or that... I forget the term, but it is used in reference to Empaths, poltergeists/hauntings/etc where areas are "strong." Magnetic something, I think. OH! Electro magnetic fields, I believe. If someone uses "magic" to levitate something in our world, I find it fair to use science to describe how. The same for TES, how does levitate work? How does P. Hemophilia work? Etc. etc. etc.

And... sorry for my rambling. I wasn't prepared and everything got jumbled.



I realize this has little relation towards my original post (I completely went opposite of it), but it is similar. And it is more a direct response to the "a wizard did it" quote.

I remembered why I brought up those definitions.

The idea is that when most people say science, they mean non-magical stuff. Natural as opposed to supernatural. The problem with bringing that mentality into TES is that wind is literally the breath of a Goddess, time and space are Dragons who both are and are not the same being, and natural disasters are caused by a formerly-Leaper Demon King. The supernatural explanation is the natural one on Nirn.

In fact, that's one of the funnest parts of fantasy. You have a world that, on the surface, looks much like a stranger version of our own. However, the fundamental rules underlying it are different.

Who's to say that they can't be both?


Yes it's somewhat different. But I don't see the need to completely rewrite everything; physics and thermodynamics work more or less the same as real life, and chemistry works similarly, even if it's overshadowed by magic. I don't see the supernatural, magical, and metaphysical replacing the mundane, but supplementing it.

Science is not physics, thermodynamics or genetics. Science is a process of observing, generalizing and testing. This leads to a body of knowledge, parts of which are categorized as physics, thermodynamics and genetics

If you were living in Tamriel you could apply this process and might come to similar conclusions. However simply taking the knowledge of physics, thermodynamics or genetics we have and assuming they work in Tamriel just because it looks similar is magical thinking.

Which is where the exercise ends, we're not living in Tamriel. There are no paint brushes to drop, no Gaurs to breed. There is no way to build a body of knowledge based on observation and experimentation.

Fortunately there are allot of second hand observations, which allow you to treat the series as if they were history. So while getting an accurate estimate of the number of rain drops that fall in the Niben will be impossible, even to degree, discussing the implications of the spring floods that drown the streets Imperial City is.

But if you all must continue to confuse the process with it's results, then at least take it all the way and http://ymarkov.livejournal.com/270570.html.