Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalIf you read any postmodern philosophy of science then you can't help but recognise the dialectic that underlies Mage... the idea that the truth is not something out there in the world but something that we humans manufacture for ourselves.

But in the fiction of the game, that is explicitly how the world works: the scientific method as we understand it is for the most part rendered invalid by the consensual reality. There are a few cosmological constants which can be studied, but the vast bulk of the universe is quite literally created through belief. Gravity may have always existed, but planes couldn't stay in the air until the majority of humanity was convinced that such a thing was possible. Research shapes the world to conform to the convictions of the researchers.

In the game, science is sorcery: a television operates on the same principles as a fortune-teller's crystal ball. The two are equally valid, and neither of them is inherently oppressive unless someone uses them as tools of oppression: a Technocrat who doesn't actively persecute and execute others for thought crimes isn't "evil" simply because his worldview is built around science. You may not personally enjoy that premise, but that's the position Mage has taken ever since the latter days of the first edition.

Quote from: droogWe know that, comrade. The question is whether the WW writers know that....

From what I hear, the developers of Mage were far more interested in promoting the theme of "technology as potential power for good or ill" than in "technology as a plague upon the Earth".

Quote from: GrimGentA false notion that has no basis in reality, of course, since science is perfectly compatible with spirituality, the concepts of which tend to be non-falsifiable in any case.

  ...Which is why they're not compatible with science.

Quote from: Mr. Analytical...Which is why they're not compatible with science.

No, that is why they lie outside the scope of science, rather, which in the absolute absence of conclusive evidence for or against declines to comment on their veracity. Science is agnostic by nature, not atheistic.

Quote from: GrimGentBut in the fiction of the game, that is explicitly how the world works: the scientific method as we understand it is for the most part rendered invalid by the consensual reality. There are a few cosmological constants which can be studied, but the vast bulk of the universe is quite literally created through belief. Gravity may have always existed, but planes couldn't stay in the air until the majority of humanity was convinced that such a thing was possible. Research shapes the world to conform to the convictions of the researchers.

In the game, science is sorcery: a television operates on the same principles as a fortune-teller's crystal ball. The two are equally valid, and neither of them is inherently oppressive unless someone uses them as tools of oppression: a Technocrat who doesn't actively persecute and execute others for thought crimes isn't "evil" simply because his worldview is built around science. You may not personally enjoy that premise, but that's the position Mage has taken ever since the latter days of the first edition.

Firstly, an in game justification does not really address what was an out of game point.

Secondly, the idea that planes couldn't fly until people believed they could is a logical nonsense.  The way people were persuaded was showing them it worked, not the other way around.

Seriously, at the time flight came in a lot of people thought it impossible, possibly most (particularly when you take in the wider world rather than just the Western world).  It was proved over their doubts, the concept was not first accepted in theory and then developed in the world.

Logically, if the world worked as posited it would not change because for people to be convinced the status quo was flawed they need to see contrary evidence, and no such evidence could exist until they were convinced.  It's circular.

The fact is, the postmodern philosophy of science is factually wrong.  And, incidentally, religion is by and large incompatible with science, which is why the scope of the claims made by religion have been shrinking since the Enlightenment as one claim after another gets falsified.

Quote from: GrimGentNo, that is why they lie outside the scope of science, rather, which in the absolute absence of conclusive evidence for or against declines to comment on their veracity. Science is agnostic by nature, not atheistic.

That's not quite right.

Historically religion made many claims that have been falsified by science, and many religions still make claims that have already been falsified.

The scope of religious claims has shrunk over time as matters have been falsified, but even then there are a lot of claims that are clearly susceptible to challenge.

For one, many Americans believe in literal creationism which is a nonsense.  Many believe evolutionary theory to be deeply flawed, whereas there is tremendous evidence for it.

Quote from: GrimGentNo, that is why they lie outside the scope of science, rather, which in the absolute absence of conclusive evidence for or against declines to comment on their veracity. Science is agnostic by nature, not atheistic.

  Science is what you'd call weakly atheistic.  It doesn't posit the existence of God because God's existence has yet to be proved.

  If religion is outside of the scope of science it's because it's been beaten back time and again as being factually incorrect; from the idea that you don't need to have a source of power for there to be light to the idea that the Earth is only a few thousand years old and that all species were created much as they are now.

Quote from: BalbinusLogically, if the world worked as posited it would not change because for people to be convinced the status quo was flawed they need to see contrary evidence, and no such evidence could exist until they were convinced.  It's circular.

But mages break that pattern, because they can present the required evidence and convince others of ideas that earlier would have gone against the convictions of the majority, which then adapts to the changes. The early attempts at such presentations are always vulgar and prone to Paradox, granted, but once something has been shown as possible, the weight of belief will begin to shift. At first, the Consensus slapped down anyone who tried to create mechanical devices capable of flight. Now, it would slap down anyone who tried to demonstrate that airplanes cannot fly.

Yes... but Mages don't exist.

I need that sign that Father Ted uses to explain to Dougal the difference between dreams and the real world

Quote from: GrimGentBut mages break that pattern, because they can present the required evidence and convince others of ideas that earlier would have gone against the convictions of the majority, which then adapts to the changes. The early attempts at such presentations are always vulgar and prone to Paradox, granted, but once something has been shown as possible, the weight of belief will begin to shift. At first, the Consensus slapped down anyone who tried to create mechanical devices capable of flight. Now, it would slap down anyone who tried to demonstrate that airplanes cannot fly.

So when the Wright brothers flew some mage was nearby making it work?

I don't think as a matter of logic this really works.

Also, the vast majority of the world's population didn't know about the early flights, you're conflating the knowledge of the West with the knowledge of humanity, but I would be surprised if most Indians, Africans or Chinese had any clue what had happened for quite a while yet.

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalScience is what you'd call weakly atheistic.  It doesn't posit the existence of God because God's existence has yet to be proved.

It's because of this that I never seen the point of the religious trying to enforce a mystical explanation for nature. I'm a religious man, but I don't see my spiritual life in any way weakened by the existence of science. Does God have to be powerful because he could wave his hand to make the universe, or is it more incredible that God is the force behind a system that makes its own sense in such a way that we can see and understand it? I've never seen God and science as mutually exclusive.

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalScience is what you'd call weakly atheistic.  It doesn't posit the existence of God because God's existence has yet to be proved.

Neither does it rule out the faint possibility of the existence of the divine being proven at some point. Now, the claims made about the observable and physical universe by the people who believe in such entities are another thing altogether and well within the scope of science.

Quote from: BalbinusSo when the Wright brothers flew some mage was nearby making it work?

I don't think as a matter of logic this really works.

Not really, but for a game about a magical conspiracy, that could be cool.

Quote from: JamesVNot really, but for a game about a magical conspiracy, that could be cool.

I'd like to apply for a job as sex toy mage, please.

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalYes... but Mages don't exist.

In the real world, that's true, but then that has nothing to do with the imaginary state of reality in oWoD.